Beth-Horon, The Battle Of – Bethbasi

Beth-Horon, The Battle Of

1. The Political Situation

2. Joshua's Strategy

3. Joshua's Command to the Sun and Moon

4. The Astronomical Relations of the Sun and Moon

5. The "Silence" of the Sun

6. "Yahweh Fought for Israel"

7. The Afternoon's March

8. The Chronicle and the Poem Independent Witnesses

9. Date of the Events

10. The Records Are ntemporaneous with the Events

1. The Political Situation:

The battle which gave to the Israelites under Joshua the command of southern Palestine has always excited interest because of the astronomical marvel which is recorded to have then taken place.

In invading Palestine the Israelites were not attacking a single coherent state, but a country occupied by different races and divided, like Greece at a later period, into a number of communities, each consisting practically of but a single city and the cultivated country around it. Thus Joshua destroyed the two cities of Jericho and Ai without any interference from the other Amorites. The destruction of Jericho gave him full possession of the fertile valley of the Jordan; the taking of Ai opened his way up to the ridge which forms the backbone of the country, and he was able to lead the people unopposed to the mountains of Ebal and Gerizim for the solemn reading of the Law. But when the Israelites returned from this ceremony a significant division showed itself amongst their enemies. Close to Ai, Joshua's most recent conquest, was Beeroth, a small town inhabited by Hivites; and no doubt because in the natural order of events Beeroth might look to be next attacked, the Hivites determined to make terms with Israel. An embassy was therefore sent from Gibeon, their chief city, and Joshua and the Israelites, believing that it came from a distant land not under the Ban, entered into the proposed alliance.

The effect on the political situation was immediate. The Hivites formed a considerable state, relatively speaking; their cities were well placed on the southern highland, and Gibeon, their capital, was one of the most important fortresses of that district, and only 6 miles distant from Jerusalem, the chief Amorite stronghold. The Amorites recognized at once that, in view of this important defection, it was imperative for them to crush the Gibeonites before the Israelites could unite with them, and this they endeavored to do. The Gibeonites, seeing themselves attacked, sent an urgent message to Joshua, and he at the head of his picked men made a night march up from Gilgal and fell upon the Amorites at Gibeon the next day and put them to flight.

2. Joshua's Strategy:

We are not told by which route he marched, but it is significant that the Amorites fled by the way of Beth-horon; that is to say, not toward their own cities, but away from them. A glance at the map shows that this means that Joshua had succeeded in cutting their line of retreat to Jerusalem. He had probably therefore advanced upon Gibeon from the south, instead of by the obvious route past Ai which he had destroyed and Beeroth with which he was in alliance. But, coming up from Gilgal by the ravines in the neighborhood of Jerusalem, he was exposed to a great danger, for the Amorites might have caught him before he had gained a footing on the plateau, and have taken him at a complete disadvantage. It was thus that the eleven tribes suffered such terrible loss at the hands of the Benjamites in this very region during the first inter-tribal war, and probably the military significance of the first repulse from Ai was of the same character; the forces holding the high ground being able to overwhelm their opponent s without any fear of reprisals.

It would seem possible, therefore, that Joshua may have repeated, on a larger scale, the tactics he employed in his successful attack upon Ai. He may have sent one force to draw the Amorites away from Gibeon, and when this was safely done, may have led the rest of his army to seize the road to Jerusalem, and to break up the forces besieging Gibeon. If so, his strategy was successful up to a certain point. He evidently led the Israelites without loss up to Gibeon, crushed the Amorites there, and cut off their retreat toward Jerusalem. He failed in one thing. In spite of the prodigious efforts which he and his men had made, the greater part of the Amorite army succeeded in escaping him and gained a long start in their flight, toward the northwest, through the two Beth-horons.

3. Joshua's Command to the Sun and Moon:

It was at this point that the incident occurred upon which attention has been chiefly fixed. The Book of Jashar (which seems to have been a collection of war songs and other ballads) ascribes to Joshua the command: + `Sun, be thou silent upon (be) Gibeon (compare Revised Version margin); And thou, Moon, in (be) the valley of Aijalon. And the Sun was silent, And the Moon stayed, Until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies' (Joshua 10:12,Joshua 10:23). - And the prose narrative continues, "The sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."

4. The Astronomical Relations of the Sun and Moon:

In these two, the ballad and the prose chronicle, we have several distinct astronomical relations indicated. The sun to Joshua was associated with Gibeon, and the sun can naturally be associated with a locality in either of two positions: it may be overhead to the observer, in which case he would consider it as being above the place where he himself was standing; or on the other hand, he might see the locality on the skyline and the sun rising or setting just behind it. In the present instance there is no ambiguity, for the chronicle distinctly states that the sun was in "the midst of heaven"; literally, in the halving of the heaven, that is to say overhead. This is very important because it assures us that Joshua must have been at Gibeon when he spoke, and that it must have been noonday of summer when the sun in southern Palestine is only about 8 degrees or 12 degrees from the exact zenith. Next, the moon appeared to be associated with the valley of Aijalon; that is, it must have been low down on the horizon in that direction, and since Aijalon is Northwest of Gibeon it must have been about to set, which would imply that it was about half full, in its "third quarter," the sun being, as we have seen, on the meridian. Thirdly, "the sun hasted not to go down," that is to say, it had already attained the meridian, its culmination; and henceforward its motion was downward. The statement that it was noonday is here implicitly repeated, but a further detail is added. The going down of the sun appeared to be slow. This is the work of the afternoon, that is of half the day, but on this occasion the half-day appeared equal in length to an ordinary whole day. There is therefore no question at all of the sun becoming stationary in the sky: the statement does not admit of that, but only of its slower progress.

5. The "Silence" of the Sun:

The idea that the sun was fixed in the sky, in other words, that the earth ceased for a time to rotate on its axis, has arisen from the unfortunate rendering of the Hebrew verb dum, "be silent," by "stand thou still." It is our own word "dumb," both being onomatopoetic words from the sound made when a man firmly closes his lips upon his speech. The primary meaning of the word therefore is "to be silent," but its secondary meaning is "to desist," "to cease," and therefore in some cases "to stand still. "

From what was it then that Joshua wished the sun to cease: from its moving or from its shining? It is not possible to suppose that, engaged as he was in a desperate battle, he was even so much as thinking of the sun's motion at all. But its shining, its scorching heat, must have been most seriously felt by him. At noon, in high summer, the highland of southern Palestine is one of the hottest countries of the world. It is impossible to suppose that Joshua wished the sun to be fixed overhead, where it must have been distressing his men who had already been 17 hours on foot. A very arduous pursuit lay before them and the enemy not only had a long start but must have been fresher than the Israelites. The sun's heat therefore must have been a serious hindrance, and Joshua must have desired it to be tempered. And the Lord hearkened to his voice and gave him this and much more. A great hailstorm swept up from the west, bringing with it a sudden lowering of temperature, and no doubt hiding the sun and putting it to "silence."

6. "Yahweh Fought for Israel":

And "Yahweh fought for Israel," for the storm burst with such violence upon the Amorites as they fled down the steep descent between the Beth-horons, that "they were more who died with the hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword" (Joshua 10:11). This was the culminating incident of the day, the one which so greatly impressed the sacred historian. "There was no day like that before it or after it, that Yahweh hearkened unto the voice of a man" (Joshua 10:14). It was not the hailstorm in itself nor the veiling of the sun that made the day so remarkable. It was that Joshua had spoken, not in prayer or supplication, but in command, as if all Nature was at his disposal; and the Lord had hearkened and had, as it were, obeyed a human voice: an anticipation of the time when a greater Joshua should command even the winds and the sea, and they should obey Him (Matthew 8:23–27).

7. The Afternoon's March:

The explanation of the statement that the sun "hasted not to go down about a whole day" is found in Joshua 10:10, in which it is stated that the Lord discomfited the Amorites before Israel, "and he slew them with a great slaughter at Gibeon, and chased them by the way of the ascent of Beth-horon, and smote them to Azekah, and unto Makkedah." The Israelites had of course no time-keepers, no clocks or watches, and the only mode of measuring time available to them was the number of miles they marched. Now from Gibeon to Makkedah by the route indicated is some 30 miles, a full day's march for an army. It is possible that, at the end of the campaign, the Israelites on their return found the march from Makkedah to Gibeon heavy work for an entire day. Measured by the only means available to them, that afternoon seemed to be double the ordinary length. The sun had "hasted not to go down about a whole day."

8. The Chronicle and the Poem Independent Witnesses:

Joshua's reference to the moon in connection with the Valley of Aijalon appears at first sight irrelevant, and has frequently been assumed to be merely inserted to complete the parallelism of the poem. But when examined astronomically it becomes clear that it cannot have been inserted haphazard. Joshua must have mentioned the moon because he actually saw it at the moment of speaking. Given that the sun was "in the midst of heaven," above Gibeon, there was only a very restricted arc of the horizon in which the moon could appear as associated with some terrestrial object; and from Gibeon, the Valley of Aijalon does lie within that narrow arc. It follows therefore that unless the position assigned to the moon had been obtained from actual observation at the moment, it would in all probability have been an impossible one. The next point is especially interesting. The ballad does not expressly state whether the sun was upon Gibeon in the sense of being upon it low down on the distant horizon, or upon it, in the sense of being overhead both to Joshua and to that city. But the moon being above the Valley of Aijalon, it becomes clear that the latter is the only possible solution. The sun and moon cannot both have been setting--though this is the idea that has been generally held, it being supposed that the day was far spent and that Joshua desired it to be prolonged--for then sun and moon would have been close together, and the moon would be invisible. The sun cannot have been setting, and the moon rising; for Aijalon is West of Gibeon. Nor can the sun have been rising, and the moon setting, since this would imply that the time of year was either about October 30 of our present calendar, or about February 12. The month of February was already past, since the Israelites had kept the Feast of the Passover. October cannot have come; for, since Beeroth, Gibeon and Jerusalem were so close together, it is certain that the events between the return of the Israelites to Gilgal and the battle of Beth-horon cannot h ave been spread over several months, but must have occupied only a few days. The poem therefore contains implicitly the same fact that is explicitly stated in the prose narrative--that the sun was overhead--but the one statement cannot, in those days, have been inferred from the other.

9. Date of the Events:

A third point of interest is that the position of the moon gives an indication of the time of the year. The Valley of Aijalon is 17 degrees North of West of from Gibeon, of which the latitude is 31 degrees 51 minutes North. With these details, and assuming the time to be nearly noon, the date must have been about the 21st day of the 4th month of the Jewish calendar, corresponding to July 22 of our present calendar, with a possible uncertainty of one or two days on either side. The sun's declination would then be about 21 degrees North, so that at noon it was within 11 degrees of the zenith. It had risen almost exactly at 5 AM and would set almost exactly at 7 PM. The moon was now about her third quarter, and in North latitude. about 5 degrees. It had risen about 11 o'clock the previous night, and was now at an altitude of under 7 degrees, and within about half an hour of setting. The conditions are not sufficient to fix the year, since from the nature of the luni-solar cycle there will always be one or two years in each cycle of 19 that will satisfy the conditions of the case, and the date of the Hebrew invasion of Palestine is not known with sufficient certainty to limit the inquiry to any particular cycle.

10. The Records Are Contemporaneous with the Events:

It will be seen however that the astronomical conditions introduced by the mention of the moon are much more stringent than might have been expected. They supply therefore proof of a high order that the astronomical details, both of the poem and prose chronicle, were derived from actual observation at the time and have been preserved to us unaltered. Each, therefore, supplies a strictly contemporaneous and independent record.

This great occurrence appears to be referred to in one other passage of Scripture--the Prayer of Habakkuk. Here again the rendering of the English versions is unfortunate, and the passage should stand: + `The sun and moon ceased (to shine) in their habitation; At the light of Thine arrows they vanished, And at the shining of Thy glittering spear. Thou didst march through the land in indignation, Thou didst thresh the nations in anger' (Habakkuk 3:11,Habakkuk 3:12). - E. W. Maunder

Beth-Jeshimoth

beth-jesh'-i-moth (beth ha-yeshimoth; Codex Vaticanus, Haisimoth; Codex Alexandrinus, Asimoth, and other variants (see DB, under the word)): Mentioned as the point in the south from which the camp of Israel stretched to Abel-shittim in the plains of Moab (Numbers 33:49). In Joshua 12:3 the way to Beth-jeshimoth is described as South of the Arabah, near the Dead Sea. It was in the lot assigned to Reuben (Joshua 13:20), At what times and how long it was actually held by Israel we do not know; but it appears in Ezekiel 25:9 as belonging to Moab. It may be identical with Khirbet es-Suweimeh, where there are some ruins and a well, about 3 miles East of the mouth of the Jordan.

W. Ewing

Beth-Leaphrah

beth-le-af'-ra (beth le`aphrah; Septuagint ex oikou kata gelota, "house of dust"): The name of a place found only in Micah 1:10. From the connection in which it is used it was probably in the Philistine plain. There seems to be a play upon the name in the sentence, "at Beth le-`apharah have I rolled myself in the dust," `aphrah meaning "dust," and possibly another on Philistine in rolled, hith-palldshithi (see G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets, called Minor, in the place cited.).

Beth-Lebaoth

beth-le-ba'-oth, beth-leb'-aoth (beth lebha'oth; Baithalbath, "house of lionesses"): A town in the territory of Simeon (Joshua 19:6). In 1 Chronicles 4:31 the name is given as Beth-birei: the Revised Version (British and American) BETH-BIRI (which see).

Beth-Lehemite

beth'-le-hem-it (beth ha-lachmi): An inhabitant of Bethlehem, a town in Judah, 5 miles South of Jerusalem. Jesse is so named in 1 Samuel 16:18; 1 Samuel 17:58, and Elhanan in 2 Samuel 21:19. The children of Bethlehem are referred to in Ezra 2:21; Nehemiah 7:26; 1 Esdras 5:17.

Beth-Lomon

beth-lo'-mon (Baithlomon; Codex Vaticanus, Rhagethlomon): The inhabitants of this city are mentioned as returning with Zerubbabel from Babylon (1 Esdras 5:17). It is the city of Bethlehem in Judah, the modern Beit Lachm (Ezra 2:21).

Beth-Maacah

beth-ma'-a-ka.

See ABEL-BETH-MAACAH.

Beth-Marcaboth

beth-mar'-ka-both (beth ha-markabhoth; Baithmachereb, "the house of chariots"): Mentioned along with Hazar-susah, "the station of horses" (Joshua 19:5; 1 Chronicles 4:31) as cities in the Negeb near Ziklag. It is tempting to connect these stations with "the cities for his chariots, and the cities for his horsemen" which Solomon built (1 Kings 9:19; compare 1 Kings 10:26). The site of Beth-marcaboth has not been identified, but Guerin (La Terre Sainte. Jerusalem et le Nord de la Judee, II, 230) suggests Khan Yunas , Southwest of Gaza, as a suitable chariot city.

E. W. G. Masterman

Beth-Meon

beth-me'-on: A city of Moab (Jeremiah 48:23), identical with BAAL-MEON (which see).

Beth-Merhak

beth-mer'-hak (beth ha-merchaq; en oiko to makran, literally "a place (house) that was far off" (2 Samuel 15:17 the Revised Version, margin "the Far House")): A place mentioned in the account of David's flight from Absalom. No town of this name is known on the route which he followed. Some scholars think the name denotes simply the outermost of the houses of the city.

Beth-Millo

beth-mil'-o.

See JERUSALEM.

Beth-Nimrah

beth-nim'-ra (beth nimrah, "house of leopard," Numbers 32:36, but in verse Numbers 32:3 it is simply Nimrah): In Joshua 13:27 the full name appears. In Isaiah 15:6 the name appears as Nimrim, identified as Tell Nimrim, between Jericho and the mountains on the east, where there is a fountain of large size. The city was assigned to Gad. In the 4th century AD it was located as five Roman miles North of Livias. Eusebius calls it Bethamnaram (SEP, I, Tell Nimrin).

Beth-Palet

beth-pa'-let.

See BETH-PELET.

Beth-Pazzez

beth-paz'-ez (beth patstsets; Bersaphes, Baithphrasee): A town in the territory of Issachar, named with En-gannim and En- haddah (Joshua 19:21). The site has not been discovered; it probably lay near the modern Jenin.

Beth-Pelet

beth-pe'-let (beth-peleT; Baithphaleth, "house of escape"; the King James Version Beth-palet; Joshua 15:27, Beth-phelet, the King James Version Nehemiah 11:26): One of "the uttermost cities of the tribe of the children of Judah toward the border of Edom in the (Negeb) South" (Joshua 15:21,Joshua 15:27). Site unknown.

Beth-Peor

beth-pe'-or (beth pe`or; oikos Phogor; in Joshua (Vaticanus), Baithphogor, or beth-): "Over against Beth-peor" the Israelites were encamped, "beyond the Jordan, in the valley," when Moses uttered the speeches recorded in De (Deuteronomy 3:29; Deuteronomy 4:46). "In the valley in the land of Moab over against Beth-peor" Moses was buried (Deuteronomy 34:6). Beth-peor and the slopes of Pisgah (the King James Version "Ashdoth-pisgah") are mentioned in close connection in Joshua 13:20. According to Eusebius, Onomasticon, Beth-peor was situated near Mt. Peor (Fogor) opposite Jericho, 6 miles above Livias. Mt. Peor is the "top" or "head" of Peor (Numbers 23:28). Some height commanding a view of the plain East of the river in the lower Jordan valley is clearly intended, but thus far no identification is possible. "The slopes of Pisgah" are probably the lower slopes of the mountain toward Wady `Ayun Musa. Somewhere North of this the summit we are in search of may be found. Conder suggested the cliff at Minyeh, South of Wady Jedeideh, and of Pisgah; and would locate Beth-peor at el-Mareighat, "the smeared things," evidently an ancient place of worship, with a stone circle and standing stones, about 4 miles East, on the same ridge. This seems, however, too far South, and more difficult to reach from Shittim than we should gather from Numbers 25:1 ff.

W. Ewing

Beth-Phelet

beth-fe'-let.

See BETH-PELET.

Beth-Rapha

beth-ra'-fa (beth rapha'; B, ho Bathraia, Bathrepha): The name occurs only in the genealogical list in 1 Chronicles 4:12. It does not seem possible now to associate it with any particular place or clan.

Beth-Rehob

beth-re'-hob (beth-rechobh; ho oikos Rhaab) : An Aramean town and district which, along with Zobah and Maacah, assisted Ammon against David (2 Samuel 10:6,2 Samuel 10:8, Rehob). It is probably identical with Rehob (Numbers 13:21), the northern limit of the spies' journey. Laish-Da (probably Tell el-Kadi) was situated near it (Judges 18:28). The site of the town is unknown. It has been conjecturally identified with Hunin, West of Banias, and, more plausibly, with Banias itself (Thomson, The Land and the Book (2), 218; Buhl, Geog., 240; Moore, ICC, Jgs, 399).

C. H. Thomson

Beth-Shean; Beth-Shan

beth-she'-an, beth'-shan (beth-shan, or [beth-she'an]; in Apocrypha Baithsan or Bethsa): A city in the territory of Issachar assigned to Manasseh, out of which the Canaanites were not driven (Joshua 17:11; Judges 1:27); in the days of Israel's strength they were put to taskwork (Judges 1:28). They doubtless were in league with the Philistines who after Israel's defeat on Gilboa exposed the bodies of Saul and his sons on the wall of the city (1 Samuel 31:7 ff), whence they were rescued by the men of Jabesh , who remembered the earlier kindness of the king (1 Samuel 31:7 2 Samuel 21:12). In 1 Kings 4:12 the name applies to the district in which the city stands. It was called Scythopolis by the Greeks. This may be connected with the invasion of Palestine by the Scythians who, according to George Syncellus, "overran Palestine and took possession of Beisan." This may be the invasion noticed by Herodotus, circa 600 BC (i.104-6). Here Tryphon failed in his first attempt to take Jonathan by treachery (1 Macc 12:40). It fell to John Hyrcanus, but was taken from the Jews by Pompey. It was rebuilt by Gabinius (Ant., XIV, v, 3), and became an important member of the league of the "ten cities" (BJ, III, ix, 7). The impiousness of the inhabitants is painted in dark colors by Josephus (Vita, 6; BJ, II, xviii, 3); and the Mishna speaks of it as a center of idol worship (`Abhodhah Zarah, i.4). Later it was the seat of a bishop.

It is represented by the modern Beisan, in the throat of the Vale of Jezreel where it falls into the Jordan valley, on the southern side of the stream from `Ain Jalud. The ruins of the ancient city are found on the plain, and on the great mound where probably stood the citadel. Between the town and the stretch of marsh land to the South runs the old road from East to West up the Vale of Jezreel, uniting in Esdraelon with the great caravan road from North to South.

W. Ewing

Beth-Shemesh

beth-she'-mesh, beth'-shemesh (beth-shemesh; Baithsamus, "house of the sun"): This name for a place doubtless arose in every instance from the presence of a sanctuary of the sun there. In accordance with the meaning and origin of the word, it is quite to be expected that there should be several places of this name in Bible lands, and the expectation is not disappointed. Analysis and comparison of the passages in the Bible where a Beth-shemesh is mentioned show four places of this name.

1. Beth-shemesh of Judah:

The first mention of a place by this name is in the description of the border of the territory of Judah (Joshua 15:10) which "went down to Beth-Shemesh." This topographical indication "down" puts the place toward the lowlands on the East or West side of Palestine, but does not indicate which. This point is clearly determined by the account of the return of the ark by the Philistine lords from Ekron (1 Samuel 6:9–19). They returned the ark to Beth-shemesh, the location of which they indicated by the remark that if their affliction was from Yahweh, the kine would bear the ark "by the way of its own border." The Philistines lay along the western border of Judah and the location of Beth-Shemesh of Judah is thus clearly fixed near the western lowland, close to the border between the territory of Judah and that claimed by the Philistines. This is confirmed by the account of the twelve officers of the commissariat of King Solomon. One of these, the son of Dekar, had a Beth-shemesh in his territory. By excluding the territory assigned to the other eleven officers, the territory of this son of Dekar is found to be in Judah and to lie along the Philistine border (1 Kings 4:9). A Philistine attack upon the border- land of Judah testifies to the same effect (2 Chronicles 28:18). Finally, the battle between Amaziah of Judah and Jehoash of Israel, who "looked one another in the face" at Beth-shemesh, puts Beth-Shemesh most probably near the border between Judah and Israel, which would locate it near the northern part of the western border of Judah's territo ry. In the assignment of cities to the Levites, Judah gave Beth-shemesh with its suburbs (Joshua 21:16). It has been identified with a good degree of certainty with the modern `Ain Shems.

It may be that Ir-shemesh, "city of the sun," and Har-cherec, "mount of the sun," refer to Beth-shemesh of Judah (Joshua 15:10; Joshua 19:41–43; 1 Kings 4:9; Judges 1:33,Revelation 1:10). But the worship of the sun was so common and cities of this name so many in number that it would be hazardous to conclude with any assurance that because these three names refer to the same region they therefore refer to the same place.

2. Beth-shemesh of Issachar:

In the description of the tribal limits, it is said of Issachar (Joshua 19:22), "And the border reached to Tabor, and Shahazumah, and Beth-shemesh; and the goings out of their border were at the Jordan." The description indicates that Beth- shemesh was in the eastern part of Issachar's territory. The exact location of the city is not known.

3. Beth-shemesh of Naphtali:

A Beth-shemesh is mentioned together with Beth-anath as cities of Naphtali (Joshua 19:38). There is no clear indication of the location of this city. Its association with Beth-anath may indicate that they were near each other in the central part of the tribal allotment. As at Gezer, another of the cities of the Levites the Canaanites were not driven out from Beth- shemesh.

4. Beth-shemesh "that is in the Land of Egypt":

A doom is pronounced upon "Beth-shemesh, that is in the land of Egypt" (Jeremiah 43:13). The Seventy identify it with Heliopolis. There is some uncertainty about this identification. If Beth-shemesh, "house of the sun," is here a description of Heliopolis, why does it not have the article? If it is a proper name, how does it come that a sanctuary in Egypt is called by a Hebrew name? It may be that the large number of Jews in Egypt with Jeremiah gave this Hebrew name to Heliopolis for use among themselves, Beth-shemesh. being a translation of Egyptian Perra as suggested by Griffith. Otherwise, Beth- shemesh. cannot have been Heliopolis, but must have been some other, at present unknown, place of Semitic worship. This latter view seems to be favored by Jeremiah's double threat: "He shall also break the pillars of Beth-shemesh, that is in the land of Egypt; and the houses of the gods of Egypt shall he burn with fire" (save place). If Beth-shemesh were the "house of the sun," then the balancing of the state ment would be only between "pillars" and "houses," but it seems more naturally to be between Beth-shemesh, a Semitic place of worship "that is in the land of Egypt" on the one hand, and the Egyptian place of worship, "the houses of the gods of Egypt," on the other.

But the Seventy lived in Egypt and in their interpretation of this passage were probably guided by accurate knowledge of facts unknown now, such as surviving names, tradition and even written history. Until there is further light on the subject, it is better to accept their interpretation and identify this Beth-shemesh with Heliopolis.

See ON.

M. G. Kyle

Beth-Shemite

beth-she'-mit beth-shimshi (1 Samuel 6:14,1 Samuel 6:20): An inhabitant of Beth-shemesh in Judah (compare BETH-SHEMESH 1).

Beth-Shittah

beth-shit'-a (beth ha-shiTTah, "house of the acacia"): A place on the route followed by the Midianites in their flight before Gideon (Judges 7:22). It is probably identical with the modern ShuTTa, a village in the Vale of Jezreel, about 6 miles Northwest of Beisan.

Beth-Tappuah

beth-tap'-u-a (beth-tappuach; Beththapphoue, "place of apples" (see however APPLE)); A town in the hill country of Judah (Joshua 15:53), probably near Hebron (el Tappuah, 1 Chronicles 2:43), possibly the same as Tephon (1 Macc 9:50). The village of Tuffuch, 3 1/2 miles Northwest of Hebron, is the probable site; it stands on the edge of a high ridge, surrounded by very fruitful gardens; an ancient highroad runs through the village, and there are many old cisterns and caves. (See PEF, III, 310, 379, Sh XXI.)

E. W. G. Masterman

Beth-Zacharias

beth-zak-a-ri'-as (Baith-zacharia): Here Judas Maccabeus failed in battle with Antiochus Eupator, and his brother Eleazar fell in conflict with an elephant (1 Macc 6:32 ff; the King James Version "Bathzacharias"). It was a position of great strength, crowning a promontory which juts out between two deep valleys. It still bears the ancient name with little change, Beit Zakaria. It lies about 4 miles Southwest of Bethlehem (BR, III, 283 ff; Ant, XII, ix, 4).

Beth-Zur

beth'-zur (beth-tsur; Baith-sour, "house of rock"; less probably "house of the god Zur"):

(1) Mentioned (Joshua 15:58) as near Halhul and Gedor in the hill country of Judah; fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:7). In Nehemiah 3:16 mention is made of "Nehemiah the son of Azbuk, the ruler of half the district of Beth-zur." During the Maccabean wars it (Bethsura) came into great importance (1 Macc 4:29,61; 6:7,26,31,49,50; 9:52; 10:14; 11:65; 14:7,33). Josephus describes it as the strongest place in all Judea (Ant., XIII, v, 6). It was inhabited in the days of Eusebius and Jerome.

(2) It is the ruined site Belt Cur, near the main road from Jerusalem to Hebron, and some 4 miles North of the latter. Its importance lay in its natural strength, on a hilltop dominating the highroad, and also in its guarding the one southerly approach for a hostile army by the Vale of Elah to the Judean plateau. The site today is conspicuous from a distance through the presence of a ruined medieval tower. (See PEF, III, 311, Sh XXI).

E. W. G. Masterman

Bethabara

beth-ab'-a-ra beth`abharah; (Bethabara, "house of the ford"): According to the King James Version (following Textus Receptus of the New Testament) the place where John baptized (John 1:28). the Revised Version (British and American) (with Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in Greek following Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Ephraemi) reads BETHANY. It is distinguished from the Bethany of Lazarus and his sisters as being "beyond the Jordan." The reading "Bethabara" became current owing to the advocacy of Origen. Various suggestions have been made to explain the readings. G. A. Smith (HGHL) suggests that Bethany ("house of the ship") and Bethabara ("house of the ford") are names for the same place. Bethabara has also been identified with Bethbarah, which, however, was probably not on the Jordan but among the streams flowing into it (Judges 7:24). It is interesting to note that LXXB reads Baithabara for Massoretic Text Beth-`arabhah, one of the cities of Benjamin (Joshua 18:22). If this be correct, the site is in Judea.

Another solution is sought in the idea of a corruption of the original name into Bethany and Bethabara, the name having the consonants n, b and r after Beth. In Joshua 13:27 (Septuagint, Codex Vaticanus) we find Baithanabra for Bethnimrah (Massoretic Text), and Sir George Grove in DB (arts. "Bethabara" and "Beth-nimrah") identifies Bethabara and Beth-nimrah. The site of the latter was a few miles above Jericho (see BETH-NIMRAH), "immediately accessible to Jerusalem and all Judea" (compare Matthew 3:5; Mark 1:5, and see article "Bethany" in EB). This view has much in its favor.

Then, again, as Dr. G. Frederick Wright observes: "The traditional site is at the ford east of Jericho; but as according to John 1:29,John 1:35,John 1:43 it was only one day's journey from Cana of Galilee, while according to John 10:40; John 11:3,John 11:6,John 11:27 it was two or three days from Bethany, it must have been well up the river toward Galilee. Conder discovered a well-known ford near Beisan called Abarah, near the mouth of the valley of Jezreel. This is 20 miles from Cana and 60 miles from Bethany, and all the conditions of the place fit in with the history."

See also BETHANY (2).

S. F. Hunter

Bethany

beth'-a-ni (Bethania):

(1) A village, 15 furlongs from Jerusalem (John 11:18), on the road to Jericho, at the Mount of Olives (Mark 11:1; Luke 19:29), where lived "Simon the leper" (Mark 14:3) and Mary, Martha and Lazarus (John 11:18 f). This village may justifiably be called the Judean home of Jesus, as He appears to have preferred to lodge there rather than in Jerusalem itself (Matthew 21:17; Mark 11:11). Here occurred the incident of the raising of Lazarus (John 11:1–57) and the feast at the house of Simon (Matthew 26:1–13; Mark 14:3–9; Luke 7:36–50; John 2:1–8). The Ascension as recorded in Luke 24:50–51 is thus described: "He led them out until they were over against Bethany: and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them. And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he parted from them, and was carried up into heaven."

Bethany is today el `Azareyeh ("the place of Lazarus"--the L being displaced to form the article). It is a miserably untidy and tumble-down village facing East on the Southeast slope of the Mount of Olives, upon the carriage road to Jericho. A fair number of fig, almond and olive trees surround the houses. The traditional tomb of Lazarus is shown and there are some remains of medieval buildings, besides rock-cut tombs of much earlier date (PEF, III, 27, Sheet XVII).

(2) "Bethany beyond the Jordan" (John 1:28; the King James Version Bethabara; Bethabara, a reading against the majority of the manuscripts, supported by Origen on geographical grounds): No such place is known. Grove suggested that the place intended is BETH-NIMRAH (which see), the modern Tell nimrin, a singularly suitable place, but hard to fit in with John 1:28; compare John 2:1. The traditional site is the ford East of Jericho.

E. W. G. Masterman

Betharam

beth-a'-ram (beth haram).

See BETH-HARAM.

Bethasmoth

beth-az'-moth (the King James Version Bethsamos; Baithasmoth (1 Esdras 5:18); corresponds to Beth-azmaveth in Nehemiah 7:28): A town in the territory of Benjamin, and may be identified with the modern el-Hizmeh.

See AZMAVETH.

Bethbasi

beth-ba'-si (Baithbasi): The name may mean "place of marshes" = Hebrew beth-betsi. According to G. A. Smith there is a Wady el-Bassah East of Tekoa in the wilderness of Judea. The name means "marsh," which Dr. Smith thinks impossible, and really "an echo of an ancient name." Jonathan and Simon repaired the ruins of the fortified place "in the desert" (1 Macc 9:62,64). Josephus reads Bethalaga, i.e. Beth-hoglah (Ant., XIII, i, 5). Peshitta version reads Beth-Yashan (see JESHANAH), which Dr. Cheyne thinks is probably correct. Thus the origin of the name and the site of the town are merely conjectural.

S. F. Hunter