PART I. CHAPTERS 1–2

After the title (Amos 1:1), and exordium (Amos 1:2), describing graphically the withering effects of Jehovah’s voice, as it peals forth from Zion, Amos proceeds to take a survey (Amos 1:3 to Amos 2:5) of the principal nations bordering upon Israel—Damascus, the Philistines, Tyre, Edom, the Ammonites, Moab, Judah—with the object of shewing that, as all these have offended against some common and universally recognized principle of morality, for which they will not escape the judgement decreed by Jehovah, so Israel, for similar or greater sins (Amos 2:6-8), aggravated indeed in its case by ingratitude (Amos 2:9-12), will not be exempt from the same law of righteous retribution: great as had been Israel’s military successes under Jeroboam II. (2 Kings 14:25), a dire disaster should ere long overtake the nation, and its bravest soldiers should flee panic-stricken and helpless (Amos 2:13-16).

Amos 1:1. The Heading

The words of] The same title as Jeremiah 1:1; Ecclesiastes 1:1; Proverbs 30:1; Proverbs 31:1; Nehemiah 1:1.

among] i.e. one of, of: see (in the Heb.) 1 Kings 2:7; Proverbs 22:26.

herdmen] naḳad-keepers. The word (nôḳçd) is a peculiar one: its meaning appears from the Arabic. In Arabic naḳad denotes a species of sheep, found especially in the province of Baḥreyn, small and stunted in growth, with short legs and ill-formed faces (whence an Arabic proverb, “Viler than a naḳad”), but esteemed on account of their choice wool (see Bochart, Hierozoicon ii. xliv., p. 442 f., who cites the saying, “The best of wool is that of the naḳad”; or Lane’s Arabic Lexicon, p. 2837). In Arabic naḳḳâd is a shepherd who tends sheep of this kind; and the Heb. nôḳçd is a word of similar import. It may be inferred from this passage that there was a settlement of such naḳad-keepers at Tekoa: the occupation was perhaps hereditary in particular families (comp. the families following hereditary trades in 1 Chronicles 2:55; 1 Chronicles 4:21; 1 Chronicles 4:23). The word occurs once besides, of Mesha, king of Moab, 2 Kings 3:4.

Tekoa] now Teḳû‘a, on the high ground of Judah, 12 miles S. of Jerusalem, and 6 miles S. of Bethlehem, from which, as Jerome (Comm. on Jeremiah 6:1) remarks, it is visible (“Thecuam quoque viculum in monte situm … quotidie oculis cernimus”). The ruins—dating principally from early Christian times—lie on an elevated hill, not steep, but broad on the top, and cover some four or five acres. South, west, and north the view is blocked by limestone hills; but on the east the prospect is open, though desolate; the land slopes away for nearly 18 miles to the Dead Sea, lying some 4,000 feet beneath, dropping first “by broken rocks to slopes spotted with bushes of ‘retem,’ the broom of the desert, and patches of poor wheat,” then to “a maze of low hills and shallow dales,” clad with a thin covering of verdure, the Wilderness or Pasture-land of Tekoa (2 Chronicles 20:22; 1Ma 9:33), afterwards to a “chaos of hills,” with steep and rugged sides, leading down rapidly to the shore of the Dead Sea (G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets, p. 74 f.). The northern half of this sea is visible from Tekoa, the level mountains of Moab forming the horizon beyond. Jerome (Pref. to Amos) speaks of Tekoa as abounding in shepherds with their flocks, the soil being too dry and sandy to be cultivated for grain. It was the home of the ‘wise woman,’ whom Joab employed to intercede with David on Absalom’s behalf (2 Samuel 14:2; 2 Samuel 14:4; 2 Samuel 14:9).

saw] beheld: not the ordinary Hebrew word for seeing (râ’âh), but ḥâzâh, a word which is sometimes merely a poetical synonym of râ’âh (e.g. Psalm 58:8; Psalm 58:10), but elsewhere is applied in particular to beholding, or gazing in prophetic vision: Numbers 24:4; Numbers 24:16, Isaiah 30:10 “which say to the seers (rô’îm), See not; and to the gazers (ḥôzîm). Gaze not for us right things, speak unto us smooth things, gaze deceits” (i.e. illusory visions of peace and security), Ezekiel 12:27; of false prophecies, Ezekiel 13:6-9; Ezekiel 13:16; Ezekiel 13:23; Ezekiel 21:29; Ezekiel 22:28, Lamentations 2:14, Zechariah 10:2; and, as here, in the titles of prophecies, Isaiah 1:1; Isaiah 2:1; Isaiah 13:1; Micah 1:1; Habakkuk 1:1). The vision, especially in the earlier history of prophecy, appears often as a form of prophetic intuition: comp. ḥôzeh, “gazer,” Amos 7:12 (see note): ḥâzôn, vision (1 Samuel 3:1; Isaiah 1:1, &c.; Ezekiel 7:26; Lamentations 2:9), more rarely ḥizzâyôn (2 Samuel 7:17; Isaiah 22:1; Isaiah 22:5), ḥâzûth (Isaiah 21:2; Isaiah 29:11), or maḥǎzeh (Genesis 15:1; Numbers 24:4; Numbers 24:16). An interesting passage, illustrating the early frequency of the vision, is Hosea 12:10 : comp. also Amos 7-9. As the vision was once the predominant form of prophetic intuition, ḥâzôn becomes a general designation of “prophecy,” or “revelation”; and ḥâzâh, “to behold,” is even applied inexactly to word or utterance (Isaiah 2:1; Isaiah 13:1; Micah 1:1; Habakkuk 1:1), as here to words. See further on Amos 7:1.

concerning Israel] i.e. the Northern kingdom, which Amos expressly visited (Amos 7:15), and to which his prophecies are almost entirely addressed, Judah being referred to only incidentally (Amos 2:4 f., Amos 6:1; Amos 7:12), or implicitly (Amos 3:1, ‘the whole family’; perhaps Amos 9:8-9), and in the final promise of future restoration (Amos 9:11-12).

in the days of Uzziah king of Judah, &c.] On the date implied in these words see the Introduction, p. 98.

two year before the earthquake] Earthquakes are not unfrequent in Palestine, particularly on its Eastern and Western borders (see on Amos 4:11). The earthquake referred to here must have been one of exceptional severity: for not only is Amos’ prophecy dated by it, but the terror occasioned by it is alluded to long afterwards, Zechariah 14:5, “yea, ye shall flee—viz. through the rent made in the Mount of Olives, Amos 1:4—like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah, king of Judah.”

Amos 1:2. The Exordium

2. The Lord] Jehovah,—or, strictly, Yahwèh,—the personal name by which the supreme God was known to the Hebrews. The name—whatever its primitive signification may have been—was interpreted by them (see Exodus 3:14) as signifying He that is (or He that will be), viz. not in an abstract sense, He that exists, but He that comes to be, i.e. He whose nature it is ever to express Himself anew, and to manifest Himself under fresh aspects to His worshippers, but who at the same time is determined only by Himself (“I will be that which I will be”), and who is therefore self-consistent, true to His promises, and morally unchangeable[112].

[112] See more fully an Essay by the present writer on the Tetragrammaton, in Studia Biblica, vol. i. (1885), p. 15–18; Schultz, Theol. of the O. T. ii. 138.

Jehovah will roar from Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem] The words recur verbatim, Joel 3 :(4) 16, and with a modification of the thought, Jeremiah 25:30 (“Jehovah will roar from on high, and utter his voice from his holy habitation”). The temple on Zion is Jehovah’s earthly abode; and from it the manifestations of His power over Israel or the world are conceived as proceeding. By the use of the term roar, the prophet shews that he has the figure of a lion in his mind (see Amos 3:8; and cp. Hosea 11:10; also Isaiah 31:4; Hosea 13:7-8); and as the ‘roar’ (shâ’ag, not nâham) is the loud cry with which the animal springs upon its prey, it is the sound of near destruction which the prophet hears pealing from Zion. In utter (lit. give) his voice the roar of Jehovah’s voice is compared further with the rolling thunder (cf. Psalm 18:13; Psalm 46:6; Psalm 68:33; Joel 2:11; Isaiah 30:30): it was the Hebrew idea that in a thunderstorm Jehovah descended and rode through the heavens enveloped in a dark mass of cloud: the lightning-flashes were partings of the cloud, disclosing the brilliancy concealed within (Psalm 18:9-13; Job 36:29-32; Job 37:2-5); and the thunder was His voice (comp. the common expression voices for thunder, Exodus 9:23; Exodus 9:28-29; Exodus 9:33-34; Exodus 19:16; Exodus 20:18; 1 Samuel 12:17-18; Job 28:26; Job 38:25; and see also Psalm 29:3-9).

and the pastures of the shepherds] not habitations; for they are spoken of as ‘springing with young grass’ (Joel 2:22; cp. Psalm 23:2), as ‘dropping’ (with fertility) Psalm 65:12, and as being ‘dried up’ Jeremiah 23:10 : at most, if the text of Psalm 74:20 be sound (see Cheyne and Kirkpatrick), ne’ôth will be a word like homestead, including both the farm and the dwellings upon it. Even, however, if this be the case, habitations is a bad rendering, being much too general. The term is a pastoral one; and Amos, in using it, may have thought primarily of the pastures about his own native place, Tekoa.

shall mourn] partly in consternation (Amos 8:8, Amos 9:5), as they hear the peal of Jehovah’s thunder, partly on account of the desolation, which (see the next clause) that thunder is conceived as producing. A land, when its vegetation is dried up, or destroyed (Jeremiah 12:11), is said poetically to ‘mourn’: for mourn and be dried up, as here, in parallelism, see Jeremiah 12:4; Jeremiah 23:10; comp. mourn and languish (of the land, or its products) Isaiah 24:7; Isaiah 33:9; Joel 1:10.

the top of Carmel] Jehovah’s judgment does not stop at Tekoa; it sweeps northwards, and embraces even the majestic, thickly-wooded headland of Carmel. Carmel—in the Heb. usually with the art., the Carmel, i.e. the garden-land—is the bold, bluff promontory, one of the most conspicuous of the natural features of Palestine, formed by a ridge of hills, some 18 miles long, and 1200–1600 feet high, stretching out far into the Mediterranean Sea, and forming the S. side of the Bay of Acre. It still bears the character which its name suggests. “Modern travellers delight to describe its ‘rocky dells with deep jungles of copse’—‘its shrubberies thicker than any others in central Palestine’ (Stanley)—‘its impenetrable brushwood of oaks and other evergreens, tenanted in the wilder parts by a profusion of game and wild animals’ (Porter), but in other parts bright with hollyhocks, jasmine, and various flowering creepers” (D.B[113][114] s.v.). The luxuriant forests of Carmel are often alluded to in the O.T.: ch. Amos 9:3 (as a hiding-place), Isaiah 35:2 (‘the majesty of Carmel’), Micah 7:14; and (poetically) as shaking off their leaves, or languishing, Isaiah 33:9, Nahum 1:4.

[113] .B. … Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ed. 1, or (from A to J) ed. 2.

[114] … Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ed. 1, or (from A to J) ed. 2.

shall be dried up] as the blood runs cold through terror, so Amos pictures the sap of plants and trees as ceasing to flow, when Jehovah’s thunder is heard pealing over the land. Cf. Nahum 1:4. In Joel 3:16 the effects of His thunder are that “the heavens and the earth shake.”

3. For three transgressions of Damascus, and for four] Similarly Amos 1:6; Amos 1:9; Amos 1:11; Amos 1:13, Amos 2:1; Amos 2:4; Amos 2:6. The numbers are of course to be understood not literally, but typically, a concrete number being chosen for the sake of assisting the imagination: three would be a sufficient number, but they are augmented by a fourth, conceived implicitly as an aggravation of the three; the measure of guilt, in other words, is not merely full, it is more than full. “The three transgressions stand for a whole sum of sin, which had not yet brought down extreme punishment; the fourth was the crowning sin, after which God would no longer spare” (Pusey). For similar examples of “ascending enumeration,” in which the second number expresses usually something (as the case may be) more complete, or sufficient, or severe, than the first, see Psalm 62:11, Job 33:14; Job 40:5 (once, twice); Job 33:29 (twice, thrice); Hosea 6:2, Sir 23:16; Sir 26:28; Sir 50:25 (two and three); Proverbs 30:15; Proverbs 30:18; Proverbs 30:21; Proverbs 30:29, Sir 26:5 (three and four); Proverbs 6:16, Job 5:19 (six and seven); Micah 5:5, Ecclesiastes 11:2 (seven and eight); Sir 25:7 (nine and ten).

transgressions] in the English word, the metaphor is that of overstepping a line or law; in the Hebrew, as the use of the corresponding verb, in 1 Kings 12:19, 2 Kings 1:1 al. clearly shews, it is that of rebellion against authority. So always in this word. ‘Transgress’ represents etymologically ‘âbhar, to go beyond, overstep, in Deuteronomy 17:2; Joshua 7:11; Numbers 22:18; Proverbs 8:29, and occasionally besides; but a subst. “transgression” (‘abhçrâh) is found first in post-Biblical Hebrew.

I will not turn away the punishment thereof] lit. I will not turn it back,—the object denoted by the pronoun being, as is sometimes the case in Hebrew poetry, understood from the context: comp. Numbers 23:20, Isaiah 43:13 (both with the same word), Isaiah 48:16. Here, the object to be supplied is the destined punishment, or doom.

because &c.] introducing a typical example of the “transgressions” of Damascus, sufficient to justify the penalty threatened.

threshed] trodden. Our modes of ‘threshing’ are so different from that alluded to here that the use of the same term conveys a very inaccurate idea of what is intended. The primitive method of threshing—still, indeed, in use in the East—was to tread out the corn by the feet of animals (Deuteronomy 25:4; Jeremiah 50:11; Micah 4:13 “Arise, and thresh (tread), O daughter of Zion; for I will make thy horn iron, and thy hoofs I will make bronze”); and the same verb was still used, even when instruments, such as those described in the next note but one, came to be employed.

Gilead] the rough and rugged, but picturesque, hill-country, extending from the deep glen of the Jarmuk on the North, to the valley of Heshbon—or perhaps even to the Arnon—on the South. Lying, as it did, on the debateable border-line between Syria and Israel (cf. Genesis 31:44-53), it was naturally the first to suffer in the Syrian incursions.

with sharp threshing-boards of iron (or of basalt)] boards some 7 ft. long by 3 ft. broad, armed underneath with jagged stones, and sometimes with knives as well, which, being weighted and drawn over the corn by oxen, chop up the ears, and separate the grain from the chaff. Iron may be meant literally; or (as in Deuteronomy 3:11) it may denote the hard black basalt which abounds in the volcanic region East of Jordan: this is even at the present day called ‘iron’ by the natives, and is also used for the teeth of threshing-boards. See further the Additional Note, p. 227. The reference is, no doubt, to cruelties perpetrated by Hazael, when he invaded Gilead during the reigns of Jehu and Jehoahaz, c. 842–802 b.c.: comp. 2 Kings 8:12 (Elisha’s prediction to Hazael of the cruelties which he would perpetrate against Israel); 2 Kings 10:32 f. (which states how, in the days of Jehu, Hazael smote “all the land of Gilead, the Gadites, the Reubenites, and the Manassites, from Aroer that is by the Wady of Arnon, and Gilead and Bashan”); and 2 Kings 13:7 (where he is said to have left Jehoahaz only “fifty horsemen, and ten chariots, and ten thousand footmen; for the king of Syria had destroyed them, and made them like dust in respect of threshing (treading).” The Syrians (if the present passage is to be understood literally) had during these wars dragged instruments of torture, such as are here alluded to, over their Israelitish prisoners. But even if the expression be meant figuratively, cruel and inhuman conduct will still be denoted by it.

Additional Note on Chap. Amos 1:3 (the threshing-board)

Two principal forms of threshing-instrument are in use at present in the East. (1) A threshing-board (or -drag), usually about 7 ft. long by 3 ft. broad, consisting of two oblong planks, in Damascus generally of walnut-wood, fastened together by two wooden cross-pieces, slightly curved upwards in front (in the direction in which the instrument would be drawn), and set underneath crosswise with sharp pieces of hard

A Modern Syrian Threshing-board (from Nowack’s Hebräische Archäologie, 1894, i. p. 233).

stone or basalt (such as is common in the volcanic region E. of Jordan): the driver stands upon it; and being drawn round the threshing-floor[205] by a yoke of oxen it not only shells out the grain, but grinds the straw itself into chaff[206]. This is in use in Syria and Palestine: in Syria it is called el-lôaḥ, “the plank,” or el-lôaḥ el-muḥajjar, “the stoned plank”; in Jerusalem it is called nauraj[207], a name nearly the same as that borne by the Hebrew implement (môrâg) in Isaiah 41:15, 2 Samuel 24:22[208]. (2) A threshing-wagon, consisting of a low-built oblong wagon-frame, moving upon three parallel rollers, each armed with three or four circular iron blades with toothed edges; a seat upon the frame is arranged for the driver, and the instrument is drawn similarly by oxen. Jerome describes an instrument like this in his Comm. on Is. 25:20, “Sunt autem carpenta ferrata, rotis per medium in serrarum modum se volventibus, quae stipula conterunt, et comminuunt in paleas”; similarly on Isaiah 28:27, and on the present passage (“genus plaustri, quod rotis subter ferreis atque dentatis volvitur”). This is not used in Palestine, and is rare in Syria (except in the north); but it is the usual instrument in Egypt, where it is called by the same name that the threshing-board bears in Palestine, nauraj[209]. Both instruments are alluded to in the O.T.: the drag (or board), under the same name ḥârûtz (properly something sharpened) which it has in Amos 1:3, in Isaiah 28:27, “For not with a sharp threshing-board is Nigella-seed [Tristram, N. H. B. p. 444] trodden out; nor is the wheel of a (threshing-) wagon turned about upon cummin,” Job 41:30 (Heb. 22), “he (the crocodile) spreadeth a ḥârûtz upon the mire” (i.e. he leaves by his sharp scales an impression upon it, as though a sharp threshing-board had been there), 2 Samuel 12:31 (ḥârîtz[210]); and under the name môrâg in 2 Samuel 24:22, Isaiah 41:15 (where ḥârûtz qualifies it as an adj.), “Behold, I make thee (Israel) as a sharp new threshing-drag (מורנ חרוץ חדש), possessing edges[211]; thou shalt thresh (tread) mountains and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff[212]”; the wagon in Isaiah 28:27 (just quoted), 28 (where read “the roller of his (threshing-) wagon” for the obscure “wheel of his cart” of the English Versions), Proverbs 20:26.

[205] This consists of a circular piece of ground, in which the earth has been firmly trodden down (הדררך, Jeremiah 51:33) by the feet; in the centre the ears and stalks of corn are piled up in a large heap (kedís,—the Heb. גדיש, Exodus 22:5 (6); Jdg 15:5; Job 5:26); at threshing-time the ears and stalks are pulled down from this heap, to form a ṭarḥa, or layer (the stratum of the Romans), round it, some 7 feet broad by 2 feet deep; over this the threshing-drag is drawn, and the mingled mass of corn chaff and straw which remains when the process is completed is thrown into a new heap to be ready for winnowing. See the illustration in Thomson, The Land and the Book, 1881 (South Pal.), p. 150 f.; Smith, D.B.2 I. 66.

[206] This was the Greek τρίβολα (2 Samuel 12:31, LXX.), the Lat. tribulum, or “rubber”; Vergil’s trahea, or “drag,” must have been a similar instrument: cf. G. 1.164 (“tribulaque traheaeque”).

[207] Among the common people mauraj (corresponding to the old Hebrew form) is also heard (P.E.F.Q.St. 1894, p. 114).

[208] The threshing-drag is still called by the same name (môräg) in the Ḳalamûn mountains about Ma‘lûlâ: but Wetzstein never heard this word in Syria, nor is noreg (or nauraj) in use there.

[209] Lane, Mod. Egyptians5, 11, 28; Arab. Lex. p. 2783. See more fully Wetzstein’s very instructive essay on “Die Syrische Dreschtafel”, in Bastian’s Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 1873, p. 271 ff.; and Anderlind, “Ackerbau und Thierzucht in Syrien,” in the Ztsch. des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins, IX. (1886), pp. 41, 44.

[210] R.V. harrows. It is, however, uncertain whether the text here really imputes to David the cruelty implied by the English Versions: see R.V. marg., and the present writer’s Notes on the Hebrew Text of Samuel, ad loc.

[211] Lit. mouths (as of a sword, Psalm 149:6).

[212] LXX. represent môrâg by τροχοὶ (in Isaiah 41:15; τροχὺς ἁμάξης ἀλοῶντας καινούς), thinking of the wheels of the threshing-wagon. The Syr. גרגרא (from gârar, to drag along) denotes both instruments: see the descriptions of the Syriac lexicographers quoted by Payne Smith, Thes. Syr. col. 767: it is mentioned as an instrument of torture by Bar Hebraeus, Chron. p. 142.

Amos 1:3 to Amos 2:5. The sins of Israel’s neighbours

3–5. Damascus. The first denunciation lights upon the Syrian kingdom of Damascus, the best-organized and most formidable of Israel’s neighbours, with whom, shortly before, during the 80 years of the ‘Syrian wars’ (c. 880–800 b.c.), the dynasties of Omri and Jehu had had many a severe struggle. The specific sin with which the Syrians are taxed is the cruelty practised by them in their wars with the trans-Jordanic Israelites. Damascus is situated in the midst of a broad and fertile plain, which stretches from the foot of Hermon far off towards Palmyra: it lies picturesquely embosomed in the deep green of encircling orchards and cornfields, fertilized by the cool waters of the Barada (the Pharpar of 2 Kings 5:12), which descend in a copious volume from Hermon, and flow straight along the North of the city, till they lose themselves in an inland lake about 15 miles to the West. It owed its importance to the natural advantages of its site. Its soil was fertilized by the Barada; the surrounding orchards formed a defence difficult for an invader to penetrate: it lay on the best route from the interior of Asia to Palestine and the Mediterranean Sea. The Syrians of Damascus are first mentioned as an important military power in the time of David (2 Samuel 8:5-6), who made them tributary, and planted Israelite officers in their territory.

Under Solomon, Rĕzôn, who had been a subject of Hadadezer, king of Zobah, established himself in Damascus, and used his position for the purpose of harassing Israel (1 Kings 11:23-25). Ben-hadad I., king of Damascus, was in alliance first with Baasha, king of Israel, then with Asa, king of Judah (1 Kings 15:18-20): his successes against Israel, under Omri (b.c. 887–877), are alluded to in 1 Kings 20:34. The more varied fortunes of his son Ben-hadad II., in his conflicts with Ahab (876–854), and Jehoram (853–842) are recounted in 1 Kings 20, 22; 2 Kings 5:1-2; 2 Kings 6:8 to 2 Kings 7:20. Benhadad II. was assassinated by his general Hazael, who after he had established himself upon the throne, gained numerous victories over Israel, during the reigns of Jehu (842–815), and Jehoahaz (815–802), ravaged the whole Israelite territory East of Jordan, besieged and took Gath, and was only induced to abstain from attacking Jerusalem by the payment of a heavy ransom (2 Kings 8:7-15; 2 Kings 8:28-29; 2 Kings 10:32-33; 2 Kings 12:17-18; 2 Kings 13:3; 2 Kings 13:22; 2 Kings 13:25). At this time, Israel was reduced to the lowest extremities (2 Kings 13:4; 2 Kings 13:7; cf. 2 Kings 14:26-27), and continued in the same condition to the end of Hazael’s reign, as well as through the early years of his son and successor Ben-hadad III. (2 Kings 13:3). In the course of Ben-hadad III.’s reign, Jehoash (802–790) recovered from Syria the cities which his father had lost (2 Kings 13:14-19; 2 Kings 13:25; cf. 2 Kings 13:5; cf. 2 Kings 13:23); and Jeroboam II. (790–749) not only restored the border of Israel to its old limits (2 Kings 14:25), but even, as it seems (2 Kings 14:28), re-established the authority of Israel over Damascus itself. (On the dates here, see above, p. 8.)

4. But I will send a fire into the house of Hazael, and it shall devour the palaces of Ben-hadad] The same refrain (only the names being varied), Amos 1:7; Amos 1:10; Amos 1:12, Amos 2:2; Amos 2:5, and (with kindle for send) Amos 1:14. Hosea (Hosea 8:14) adopts it from Amos (“And I will send a fire into his cities, and it shall devour the palaces thereof”); and it recurs also (with kindle for send, as Amos 1:14) in Jeremiah 17:27; Jeremiah 21:14; Jeremiah 49:27; Jeremiah 50:32. By fire is meant the flame of war, which, partly by literal conflagrations, partly by other destructive operations, works devastation far and near: cf. Numbers 21:28. The house of Hazael is the family or dynasty founded by him (2 Kings 8:15): ‘Ben-hadad’ stands in the parallel clause either as the name of Hazael’s successor, who would still be remembered as the second of Israel’s recent oppressors, or, possibly, as the name of the monarch reigning when Amos wrote.

4–5. The punishment.

5. And I will break the bar of Damascus] Damascus will be powerless to resist the besieger. The allusion is to the ‘bars’ of bronze or iron by which the gates of every fortified city were secured (see Deuteronomy 3:5; 1 Kings 4:13), and which, when a city is captured, are spoken of as ‘broken’ (Lamentations 2:9; Jeremiah 51:30), or ‘hewn’ asunder (Isaiah 45:2).

and cut off the inhabitant] better, perhaps (note the parallel clause, him that holdeth the sceptre), as R.V. marg. him that sitteth (enthroned): yâshab (‘to sit’) has sometimes this force, even when standing alone; see Isaiah 10:13 R.V.; Psalm 2:4; Psalm 22:3 (R.V. marg.).

from the plain] Biḳ‘âh (from bâḳa‘, to cleave) is a broad ‘cleft,’ or level (Isaiah 40:4) plain, between mountains: it is applied, for instance, to the plain of Jericho, Deuteronomy 34:3, of Megiddo, Zechariah 12:11, 2 Chronicles 35:22, of Lebanon, Joshua 11:17, i.e. Coele-Syria, the flat and broad plain between the two ranges of Lebanon and Hermon, which is still called (in Arabic) el-Beḳâ‘a, and is probably the plain meant here.

of Aven] or of idolatry. The reference is uncertain. The common supposition is that Amos alludes to the worship of the Sun, carried on at a spot in the plain of Coele-Syria, called by the ancients Heliopolis, and now known as Baalbeḳ,—some sixty miles N.N.E of Dan,—where are still, in a partly ruined state, the massive walls and richly decorated pillars and architraves, of two magnificent temples. These temples, dedicated respectively to Jupiter and the Sun, are not of earlier date than the 2nd cent. a.d.,—the temple of Jupiter having been erected as a wonder of the world, by Antoninus Pius (a.d. 133–161); but the massive substructures are considered to date from a much earlier period, and to bear witness to the fact that a temple of the Sun had stood there from a distant past. According to Macrobius (Sat. 1:23) and Lucian (de Dea Syria § 5—both quoted by Robinson, Bibl. Researches, iii. 518) the worship of the Sun as carried on at Heliopolis in Syria was derived from Heliopolis in Egypt; and upon assumption of the correctness of this statement, it has been supposed that, with the worship of the Sun, the Egyptian name of Heliopolis, Aûnû (Heb. On, Genesis 41:45; Genesis 41:50; Genesis 46:20) may have been brought from Egypt; and further that, as the Egyptian On (און) is punctuated in Ezekiel 30:17—by way of contempt—אָוֶן Aven (i.e. idolatry), so here the Syrian On may have been called, whether by Amos himself, or by the later scribes, Aven. These suppositions are however, mere conjectures. The statements of Macrobius and Lucian may be nothing more than inferences from the fact of two celebrated temples being dedicated to a similar cult; and there is no independent evidence that On was a name of the Syrian Heliopolis. (The LXX. rendering here τὸ πεδίον Ὦν is not proof of it: for they represent On in Gen. and Ezek. by Ἡλιούπολις.) In view of the double fact that Coele-Syria was a biḳ‘âh, or broad vale, and that Baalbek, in this vale, was the old-established seat of an idolatrous worship of the Sun, it is not improbable that Amos may mean to allude to it; possibly, also,—though there is no proof that the place was called On,—the designation ‘Plain of Aven (idolatry)’ may have been suggested to him by the thought of the Egyptian On, just as the nickname Beth-Aven for Beth-el (Hosea 4:1; Hosea 4:5; Hosea 5:8; cf. on ch. Amos 5:5) may have been suggested by the place Beth-Aven in the neighbourhood, a little to the east of Beth-el (Joshua 7:2; Joshua 18:12; 1 Samuel 13:5; 1 Samuel 14:23). But the identification cannot be regarded as certain: Wellhausen doubts even whether in the time of Amos Heliopolis was an Aramaic city.

him that holdeth the sceptre] the σκηπτοῦχος βασιλεὺς of Homer (Il. II. 26; Od. ii. 231): comp. the corresponding Aramaic expression (חטראחז) in the Hadad-inscription (8 cent. b.c.) of Zinjirli, lines 15, 20, 25 (see D. H. Müller, Die altsemitischen Inschriften von Sendschirli, 1893, p. 20 sq., or in the Contemp. Review, April, 1894, p. 572 f.).

from the house of Eden] or from Beth-eden. Another uncertain locality. Interpreted as a Hebrew word, ‘Eden—vocalized ‘eden, not ‘çden, as in the ‘garden of Eden’—would signify ‘pleasure.’ Of the identifications that have been proposed, relatively the most probable are, perhaps, either the modern Ehden, a village situated attractively in a fertile valley about 20 miles N.W. of Baalbek or Bît-Adini, a district mentioned in the Assyrian Inscriptions and lying some 200 miles N.N.E. of Damascus, on the Euphrates. The place intended may have been a summer-residence of the kings of Damascus, or the seat of some king who held his position in dependence upon the king of Damascus. See further the Additional Note, p. 228.

Syria] Heb. Aram, the name borne regularly in the O. T. by the people (and country) whom the classical writers, through a confusion with Assyrian, knew as Syrians and Syria. (See Nöldeke in Schenkel’s Bibel-Lex. s. v. ‘Aram, or in Hermes Amos 1:3, p. 433 ff., and Z.D.M.[115]. 1871, p. 115.) The people calling themselves Aram were very widely diffused over the regions N.E. of Palestine; their different divisions were distinguished by local designations as ‘Aram of Damascus’ 2 Samuel 8:5 f. (also, as the most important branch, called often, as here, ‘Aram’ simply), ‘Aram of Zobah,’ 2 Samuel 10:6; 2 Samuel 10:8; ‘Aram of Maachah,’ 1 Chronicles 19:6; ‘Aram of Beth-Rĕḥôb,’ 2 Samuel 10:6; ‘Aram of the two Rivers’ (i.e. probably between the Euphrates and the Chaboras), Genesis 24:10 : there were also many other tribes which were reckoned as belonging to ‘Aram,’ Genesis 10:23; Genesis 22:20-24. The language spoken by this people is called “Aramaic”; it exists in many dialects, corresponding to the different localities in which it was spoken, as the Palestinian Aramaic of Ezra and Daniel, the Palmyrene Aramaic, the dialects (not all the same) of the various Targums, the Aramaic of Edessa (commonly known as “Syriac,” par excellence), &c. From Amos 9:7 it appears that recollections of the migrations of some of these tribes were retained, and that Aram—i.e., it may be presumed, ‘Aram of Damascus’—came originally from Kir.

[115] .D.M.G … Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft.

shall go into captivity] Rather into exile. Though in a passage such as the present there is no appreciable difference between the two ideas, yet gâlâh, the word used here, expresses properly migration from a home, exile; and it is better, where possible, not to confuse it with hâlakh bash-shebî, to go into captivity, or nishbâh, to be taken captive.

unto Kir] In Amos 9:7 stated to have been their original home, which Amos accordingly here declares will be also their place of exile. 2 Kings 16:9 shews how within less than a generation the prophecy was fulfilled. The result of the combined attack of Pekah king of Israel and Rezin king of Damascus upon Judah (2 Kings 16:5 ff.; Isaiah 7) was that Ahaz applied for help to Tiglath-pileser, who, responding to the appeal, attacked Damascus, slew Rezin, and carried away the people into exile to Kir.

The brief notice of the book of Kings may be supplemented by the details given in the annals of Tiglath-pileser. From these we learn that in his 13th year (b.c. 733), the king laid siege to Damascus, and that in (probably) the following year (b.c. 732), after ravaging the surrounding country, he took the city, and carried large numbers of its inhabitants into exile. The place to which they were deported is not, however, mentioned in the existing (mutilated) text of the Inscriptions. The situation of Kir is very uncertain. A people of the same name is mentioned in Isaiah 22:6 beside Elam, as supplying a contingent in the Assyrian army. It is generally supposed to have been the district about the river Kur, which flows into the Caspian Sea on the N. of Armenia; but (Schrader in Riehm, H.W.B., s.v.) this region does not seem to have formed part of the Assyrian dominions in the time of either Tiglath-pileser, or Sennacherib; the k in the Assyrian Kurru (Kur) is also not the same as the ḳ (q) in ḳir. Others (as Furrer in Schenkel’s Bibel-lex.; Dillm. on Isaiah 22:6) think of the place called by the Greeks Cyrrhus (now Kuris) about 30 miles N.E. of Antioch, which gave to the surrounding region the name of Cyrrhestica. Some region more remote from Damascus itself appears however to be required by the allusions in Amos; Cyrrhus, moreover, there is reason to suppose (Schrader, l.c.), was only so called by the Greeks after a place of the same name in Macedonia.

Additional Note on Chap. Amos 1:5 (‘Eden)

The following are the principal identifications that have been proposed for ‘Eden (or Beth-‘eden). (1) ‘Edçn, as it is called in Syriac, or ’Ehden, as it is called in Arabic, a village some 20 miles N.W. of Baalbek, on the opposite (N. W.) slope of Lebanon, attractively situated on the side of a rich and highly-cultivated valley, near the cedars, described by Amira—the author of the first Syriac grammar published in Europe (1596, p. 59), whose native place it was—as “loci situ, aquarum copia, terrae fertilitate, aeris temperie, in toto Libano praestantissima; unde non immerito tali nomine est nuncupata” (quoted by Payne Smith, Thesaurus Syriacus, col. 2810). The accounts given by modern travellers fully bear out this description: Lord Lindsay, for instance (cited by Dr Pusey) speaks of the slopes of the valleys about it as “one mass of verdure,” with “the springs of Lebanon gushing down, fresh, cool, and melodious, in every direction.” The place is said to be at present a favourite summer resort for the wealthier inhabitants of Tripoli. (2) Bêt-jenn, at the foot (E.) of Anti-Libanus, about 12 miles N.E. of Banias, and 25 miles S.S.W. of Damascus, watered by the Nahr-jennâni, which, flowing down from Anti-Libanus, forms one of the two sources of the A‘waj (the Pharpar), the second great river near Damascus (Porter, Damascus, ed. 2, p. 117 sq.). (3) Jubb ‘Adin, a village situated in the hills, about 25 miles N.E. of Damascus, and 20 miles S.E. of Baalbek. (4) The place called by the Greeks Paradisus, identified by Robinson (B.R[213] III. 544, 556) with old-Jûsieh, far up the valley of Coele-Syria, near Riblah, some 30 miles N.E. of Baalbek—a spot described as being now, at any rate, remarkably “dreary and barren” (Porter, Handbook to Palestine, p. 577). (5) The ‘Eden of Ezekiel 27:23, 2 Kings 19:12 (= Isaiah 37:12), which Schrader (K.A.T[214][215] p. 327) is disposed to identify with the Bît-Adini, often mentioned in the Inscriptions of Asshurnazirpal and Shalmaneser II., a district lying on both sides of the Euphrates, in the middle part of its course, between Bâlis and Biredschik, some 200 miles N.N.E. of Damascus.

[213] .R. … Edw. Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine (ed. 2, 1856).

[214] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[215] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

None of these identifications can be regarded as certain: and the grounds upon which some of them have been suggested are very insufficient. The name Bêt-jenn, for instance, was formerly supposed to be Bêt el-janne, i.e. “house, or place, of the garden (Paradise),” which bore the appearance of being an Arabic translation of Beth-‘eden; but this supposition appears not to be correct[216]. The Greek—or ultimately Persian—word Paradisus, again, does not mean a ‘Paradise,’ in our sense of the term, but merely an enclosed park. Jubb ‘Adin would seem to be a place of too little note to have been signalized by the prophet in such a connexion. On the whole, either (1) or (5) appears to be, relatively, the most probable. Bît-Adini (5) might indeed be thought to be too distant from Damascus; but it has been observed that thirty-two kings are mentioned as being in alliance with Ben-hadad (I.), in 1 Kings 20:1; 1 Kings 20:16, and twelve ‘kings of the land of the Hittites,’ or of the coasts of the Mediterranean Sea, are mentioned as allies of the same king by Shalmaneser II. (K.A.T[217][218], pp. 202, 203); hence the allusion may not impossibly be to one or other of the subordinate kings who held rule under the suzerainty of the king of Damascus, and who, the prophet declares, will be involved with him in his fall. Perhaps there were various Aramaean settlements in Coele-Syria and Mesopotamia governed in this way; and the “plain of Aven” and “Eden”—whether this be the Syrian ‘Edçn, or Bît-adini—may have been mentioned as representing these. Others have supposed the allusion to be to a summer residence of the kings of Damascus themselves. It is impossible to speak more definitely for lack of the necessary data. We must be content to know that some place or other, connected politically with Damascus, and, no doubt, prominent at the time, is intended by the prophet.

[216] See Robinson, B.R. iii. 447; Porter, Damascus, l. c.; Socin in Bädeker’s Palästina und Syrien, ed. 2, p. 283; all of whom write Bêt-jenn.

[217] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[218] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

6. For three transgressions of Gaza, and for four &c.] The form of expression as in Amos 1:3, where see note. Gaza was the southernmost city of the Philistines: it lay on and about a hill, rising 100 feet out of the plain, at three miles distance from the sea, and some 50 miles S.W. of Jerusalem. “Fifteen wells of fresh water burst from the sandy soil, and render possible the broad gardens, and large population,” which is said to number now about 18,000 souls. Gaza owed its importance to its position. It was a fertile spot on the edge of a great desert; and it commanded the route between Egypt and Syria. It became in consequence not only important strategically: it was also “an emporium of trade on the border of the desert, with roads and regular caravans,” on the one hand, to Jerusalem, Damascus, Tyre, &c., on the other hand, to “Petra and Elath on the gulf of Akabah, both of them places in Edom, and depots for the traffic with Arabia” (comp. G. A. Smith, Geogr., p. 184; The Twelve Prophets, p. 126). This explains why Gaza is specially selected for blame: she was pre-eminently the centre of the slave-traffic.

because they carried into exile entire populations] i.e. the entire population of the places attacked by them: as Ewald paraphrases, whole villages (R.V. the whole people). Lit. an entire exile (=exiled company: see in the Heb. Jeremiah 24:5; Jeremiah 28:4, Obadiah 1:20). The reference appears to be not to warlike incursions (such as we read of in the times of Saul and David), but to raids made upon the villages of Judah without the excuse of war, for the purely commercial purpose of procuring slaves for the trade with Edom.

to deliver them up to Edom] viz. as slaves, whether for service among the Edomites themselves, or, more probably, to be re-sold by them—for instance, amongst the tribes inhabiting the Arabian peninsula. The same charge of selling their captives to the Edomites is brought against the Tyrians in Amos 1:9. For Edom as a trading nation, see Ezekiel 27:16 (reading with mss. Aq. Pesh., and many moderns, Edom [אדם] for Syria [ארם]). In Joel 3:4-6, also, the Philistines (and Phoenicians) are reproached with selling Judahites into slavery.

6–8. The Philistines. The second denunciation is directed against the Philistines, the old and troublesome enemies of Israel, on the S.W. Four representative cities are mentioned; the sin with which they are taxed being that of trafficking in slaves with Edom.

7. But I will send a fire &c.] The verse is framed exactly as Amos 1:4. Wall, with allusion to Gaza’s being a stronghold.

8. the inhabitant] See on Amos 1:5.

from Ashdod] Another of the five chief Philistine cities (Joshua 13:3; 1 Samuel 6:17 f.) is here specified, Ashdod, about 21 miles N.N.E. of Gaza, and 3 miles from the sea-coast. It was a strong fortress, and served also as a half-way station on the great caravan-route between Gaza and Joppa. According to Herodotus (ii. 157), when attacked by Psammetichus king of Egypt (c. 650 b.c.), it sustained a siege of 29 years, the longest on record: how severely it suffered on this occasion may be inferred from the expression ‘remnant of Ashdod’ used shortly afterwards by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 25:20). But it recovered from this blow: it is alluded to as a place of some importance in the time of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 4:7); and it is mentioned frequently afterwards.

and him that holdeth the sceptre] as Amos 1:5. The independent kings of the different Philistine cities are often mentioned in the Assyrian Inscriptions (cf. below).

from Ashkelon] a third chief Philistine city, situated actually on the coast, in a rocky amphitheatre, about half-way between Gaza and Ashdod. In the Middle Ages it became the most considerable of all the Philistine fortresses, its position on the sea constituting it then the key to S.W. Palestine. In ancient times little that is distinctive is recorded of it; though it may be reasonably inferred to have been already important for purposes of marine communication with the West.

turn mine hand against] Isaiah 1:25; Zechariah 13:7; Psalm 81:14.

Ekron] a fourth chief city of the Philistines, situated inland, about 12 miles N.E. of Ashdod, and nearer the territory of Judah than any of the cities before mentioned. Ekron was the seat of a celebrated oracle, that of Baal-zebub (2 Kings 1:2); but otherwise it does not appear in the Old Testament as a place of great importance. Gath, the fifth chief Philistine city, is not named: either, as some suppose (see on Amos 6:2) it was already destroyed, or it is included implicitly in the expression ‘remnant of the Philistines,’ immediately following.

and the remnant of the Philistines shall perish] i.e. whatever among them escapes the destruction announced in the previous clauses shall perish by a subsequent one: ‘remnant’ (she’çrith), as Amos 5:15, Amos 9:12 &c. The rendering rest, i.e. those unmentioned in the previous enumeration (Jeremiah 39:3; Nehemiah 7:72), is less probable. The verse declares that the whole Philistine name will be blotted out.

saith the Lord God] the Lord Jehovah (אדני יהוה), Amos’ favourite title for God, occurring in his prophecy twenty times (Amos 1:8, Amos 3:7-8; Amos 3:11, Amos 4:2; Amos 4:5, Amos 5:3, Amos 6:8, Amos 7:1-2; Amos 7:4; Amos 7:4-6, Amos 8:1; Amos 8:3; Amos 8:9; Amos 8:11, Amos 9:8; and followed by God of hosts, Amos 3:13). It is likewise a standing title with Ezekiel, who uses it with great frequency. It is employed sometimes by Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Deutero-Isaiah, as well as here and there by other prophets; and also occurs occasionally in the historical books (as Genesis 15:2; Genesis 15:8; Joshua 7:7).

Successes, of at least a temporary character, gained against the Philistines by Uzziah and Hezekiah, are recorded in 2 Chronicles 26:6 f. and 2 Kings 18:8; but the foes from whom they suffered more severely were the Assyrians. Gaza was attacked by Tiglath-pileser (c. b.c. 734); its king Hanno was compelled to take refuge in Egypt; much spoil was taken, and a heavy tribute imposed (K.A.T[116][117] p. 256). In 711, Azuri, king of Ashdod, refused his accustomed tribute: the result was the siege by the Assyrian ‘Tartan,’ or general-in-chief, alluded to in Isaiah 20, which ended in the reduction of the city and exile of its inhabitants. Ten years later, in 701, Ashkelon and Ekron joined the Phoenician cities and Judah, in revolting from Sennacherib, and were both punished by the Assyrian king[118]. It seems, however, that though the power of the Philistines must have been seriously crippled by these blows, it was by no means destroyed: the kings of Gaza, Ashkelon, Ekron, and Ashdod are all named as tributary to Esarhaddon and Asshurbanipal (K.A.T[119][120] 356); oracles are uttered against the Philistines by several of the later prophets; their cities are mentioned as places of importance in the times of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 4:7, Nehemiah 13:23 f.) and the Maccabees. The passages in which other prophets foretell disaster for the Philistines—chiefly at the hands of the Assyrians or the Chaldaeans—should be compared: see Isaiah 11:14 (a picture of united Israel’s successes against them in the ideal future), Isaiah 14:29-32; Jeremiah 25:20; Jeremiah 47; Zephaniah 2:4-7; Ezekiel 25:15-17; Zechariah 9:5-7.

[116] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[117] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[118] See K.A. T.2 pp. 397 ff., 291 ff.; or the writer’s Isaiah, pp. 45, 67 f., 73.

[119] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[120] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

9–10. Tyre, the great commercial city of the North, next receives her doom from the prophet’s lips. Tyre, as the most important of the Phoenician cities, is taken as representing Phoenicia generally. For defensive purposes Tyre was strongly fortified; but the Phoenicians were not an aggressive people: they were devoted to commerce: Tyre was a ‘mart of nations’ (Isaiah 23:3), a centre of trade by land as well as by sea (see the striking picture of the variety and extent of Tyrian commerce in Ezekiel 27); hence her relations with the Hebrews, as with her neighbours generally, were peaceful. The Tyrians were also celebrated for skill in artistic work: Hiram, king of Tyre, sent Tyrian workmen to build a palace for David; a formal treaty was concluded between Hiram and Solomon; Tyrian builders prepared timber and stones for the Temple; and a Tyrian artist designed and cast the chief ornaments and vessels of metal belonging to it (2 Samuel 5:11; 1 Kings 5:1-12; 1 Kings 5:18; 1 Kings 7:13-45).

because they delivered up entire populations to Edom] The charge is similar to that brought against the Philistines, Amos 1:6; the Tyrians however are not accused of taking captives, but only of delivering them to others, i.e. of acting as agents for those who actually took them. For the Tyrians taking part in the trade of slaves, cf. Ezekiel 27:13; and see on Joel 3:6. What ‘exiled companies’ are alluded to does not appear; they need not necessarily have consisted of Israelites; the reference may be as well to gangs of slaves procured with violence from other nations.

and remembered not the brotherly covenant] lit. the covenant of—i.e. between—brothers: this forgetfulness was an aggravation of the offence, which is not mentioned in the case of Gaza, Amos 1:6. The allusion is commonly supposed to be to the league, or ‘covenant,’ concluded between Hiram and Solomon, 1 Kings 5:12 (for ‘brother’ used figuratively of one joined in amity to another, see 1 Kings 9:13; 1 Kings 20:32); but it is scarcely likely that the crowning offence of Tyre should be forgetfulness of a treaty entered into nearly 300 years previously; more probably the reference is to the way in which, repudiating some alliance formed with other Phoenician towns, the Tyrians were the means of procuring slaves from them for Edom. As Amos 2:1 shews, Amos does not restrict his censure to wrongs perpetrated against Israel: it is the rights common to humanity at large, which he vindicates and defends.

Isaiah (ch. 23), Jeremiah, at least incidentally (Jeremiah 25:22), Ezekiel (ch. 26–28), Zechariah (Zechariah 9:3 f.), all foretell the ruin of Tyre; but it was long before it was accomplished. The Tyrians, it seems, escaped as a rule the hostility of the Assyrians by acquiescing in a condition of dependence and by timely payment of tribute. Thus Asshurnazirpal (b.c. 885–860) boasts of marching with his army as far as the “great sea of the West,” and receiving tribute from Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvæd; but he claims no conquest by arms (K.A.T[121][122], p. 157; R.P[123][124] iii. 73 f.). Shalmaneser II. receives tribute in his 18th and 21st years (b.c. 842, 839) from Tyre and Sidon (K.A.T[125][126], p. 207, 210; R.P[127][128] iv. 44 f.),—in the former year, together with that of Jehu, Hiram, king of Tyre, pays tribute to Tiglath-pileser in 734 (ib. p. 253). Shalmaneser IV. besieged Tyre for five years, but it does not appear that he took it. Both Esarhaddon and Asshurbanipal name “Baal of Tyre” among their tributaries (K.A.T[129][130], p. 356). Tyre sustained a long siege—according to Josephus one of 13 years—at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar; but it is not stated whether he captured it,—Ezekiel, in his allusion (Ezekiel 29:18), implies that he did not. In the subsequent centuries the greatest blow which befel Tyre was its capture, after a seven months’ siege, by Alexander the Great, when 30,000 of its inhabitants were sold into slavery. It recovered itself, however, and continued for long afterwards to be an important naval and commercial city: Jerome (c. a.d. 400) describes it as Phoenices nobilissima et pulcherrima civitas, and says that mercantile transactions of nearly all nations were carried on in it. The final blow was not given to Tyre till a.d. 1291, when it was taken by the Saracens; and since then the site of the once populous and thriving city has been little more than a barren strand.

[121] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[122] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[123] .P. … Records of the Past, first and second series, respectively.

[124] … Records of the Past, first and second series, respectively.

[125] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[126] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[127] .P. … Records of the Past, first and second series, respectively.

[128] … Records of the Past, first and second series, respectively.

[129] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[130] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

11. because he did pursue his brother with the sword] Edom and Israel are frequently spoken of as ‘brethren’ (Deuteronomy 2:4; Deuteronomy 23:7; Obadiah 1:10; Obadiah 1:12; cf. Genesis 27:40-41): they were more closely related to each other than was either to any of their other neighbours: and the unbrotherly attitude assumed too often by Edom towards Israel is the head and front of his offence. Cf. Obadiah 1:10 (of the behaviour of Edom at the time when Jerusalem was taken by the Chaldaeans; see Amos 1:11-14), “For the violence done to thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever.”

and did cast off all pity] and corrupted (or destroyed) his compassion, i.e. suppressed, or stifled, the natural instinct of tender regard which a person would normally cherish towards a brother, and which would render it impossible for him to ‘pursue’ him ‘with the sword.’

and his anger did tear perpetually] For the figure, see Job 16:9. Edom’s anger against his brother was ever raging, tearing (Psalm 7:2) or rending its victims, like some wild animal. But the parallelism of the following clause makes it possible that we ought to read ‘and retained his anger’ (ויטר for ויטרף): see Psalm 103:9; Leviticus 19:18; Nahum 1:2 (parallel with avenge); and, as here, parallel with keep (שמר), Jeremiah 3:5 (so Pesh. Vulg. Gunning, Wellhausen and others).

and he kept his wrath for ever] i.e. nursed, cherished it: instead of letting time dissipate it, he cherished it, in a spirit of revenge, till a fresh opportunity arose for displaying it in act. This revengeful temper of Edom displayed itself especially, not in malicious words only, but also in deed, at the time when Jerusalem was taken by the Chaldaeans: see Obadiah 1:10-14; Ezekiel 25:12-14; Ezekiel 35 (where it is made, as here, the ground of predictions of desolation); cf. also Isaiah 34:5-17; Jeremiah 49:7-22; Lamentations 4:21 f.; Malachi 1:4; Joel 3:19; Psalm 137:7.

11–12. Edom. The home of the Edomites was S. of the Dead Sea, immediately on the E. of the deep depression, which extends from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Akabah, in ancient times the S. part of the ‘Arábah (comp. on Amos 6:14), now the valley of the ‘Arăbah. The capital of Edom was Sela (Petra), remarkably situated in a hollow, shut in by mountain-cliffs and accessible only through two narrow defiles (cf. Robinson, B.R[131] ii. 128 ff.; Sinai and Palestine, p. 87 ff.; Hull, Mount Seir, p. 85 ff.; Pusey, Minor Prophets, on Obadiah, p. 235). Though now desolate, and inhabited only by wandering Bedawin, Edom was in ancient times fertile and prosperous; and its people were quite one of the more considerable and powerful of Israel’s neighbours. Much jealousy and rivalry, breaking out at times into open hostilities, prevailed between the two nations: this is prefigured in the story of their ancestors, both at the time of their birth (Genesis 25:22 f.), and subsequently (ib. Genesis 27:41, cf. Genesis 32:7 ff.), and is often alluded to in the Old Testament, especially in its later parts. David subdued Edom, ruling it by means of Jewish ‘deputies,’ or governors (2 Samuel 8:13 f.; 1 Kings 11:15 f.; cf. 1 Kings 22:47); and this state of dependence appears to have continued until, some two centuries afterwards, under Jehoram (849–842 b.c.), it successfully revolted (2 Kings 8:20-22). Amaziah (801–792) gained a victory (2 Kings 14:7), which so weakened Edom that his successor, Uzziah (ib. 2 Kings 14:22), was able to plant Jewish colonists in Elath, on the Red Sea; but it was never again permanently subject to Judah.

[131] .R. … Edw. Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine (ed. 2, 1856).

12. upon Teman] According to Eusebius and Jerome (Onomastica, ed. Lagarde, pp. 156, 260), a district of the chiefs (‘dukes’ [duces]) of Edom in Gebal, but also, they add, a village about 15 (Jerome 5) miles from Petra, and the station of a Roman garrison. From Ezekiel 25:13, where it is implied that Teman was in an opposite quarter to Dedan, it may be inferred that, as Dedan was the name of a tribe on the S.E. of Edom, Teman was in the N. or W. part of Edom. It is mentioned elsewhere in the O.T., as synonymous with Edom, Jeremiah 49:7; Obadiah 1:9; Habakkuk 3:3, or in poetical parallelism with it, Jeremiah 49:20 : cf. Genesis 36:34. Eliphaz, Job’s friend, is described as a Temanite (Job 2:11 &c.) In Genesis 36:11; Genesis 36:15 Teman is a grandson of Esau (= Edom), the relation of the particular clan to the whole nation being represented genealogically: the name must thus have been that of an Edomite clan, as well as of the region inhabited by it.

Bozrah] A town of Edom, mentioned also Genesis 36:33, Jeremiah 49:13; and in poetical parallelism with Edom, Isaiah 34:6; Isaiah 63:1, Jeremiah 49:22. From the manner in which it is named in most of these passages, it is clear that it must have been an important place. It is in all probability el-Buṣaireh (a diminutive of Boṣrah), about 35 miles N. of Petra, and 20 miles S.E. of the Dead Sea, with (Roman) ruins, first visited by Burckhardt in 1812 (Syria, 1822, p. 407: cf. also Rob. ii. 167; Doughty, Arabia Deserta, i. 31, 38).

Edom is mentioned as paying tribute to Rammân-nirâri III. (K.A.T[132][133] p. 190; K.B[134] i. 191), Tiglath-pileser III. (K.A.T[135][136] p. 258), Sennacherib (ib. p. 291), Esarhaddon, and Asshurbanipal (ib. p. 355). Afterwards, like its neighbours, it fell under the rule of Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 27:3 f.). During, and after, the Captivity, the Edomites extended their dominions W. of the Arabah, and ultimately transferred themselves thither altogether (the later ‘Idumaea’ being the southern part of Judah); Malachi (Amos 1:3-4) describes Edom as desolate in his day, though how it became so, we do not know; and in b.c. 312 the Nabataeans, an Arabian tribe, are found located in Edom, where they maintained themselves for many centuries. The cities of Edom finally fell to ruin after the Mohammedan conquest in the seventh century, a.d.

[132] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[133] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[134] .B. … Eb. Schrader, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek (1889 ff.).

[135] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[136] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

The authenticity of the oracle against Edom is doubted by Wellhausen, and at least suspected by G. A. Smith (p. 129 f.); the former supposes it to be an addition to the original text of Amos, dating from the Chaldaean age. Not only is there in the earlier prophets and historical books no other evidence of such animus against Edom as here displays itself, but Edom, when Amos wrote, had been for two centuries under the yoke of Judah; its first subjection had been accomplished with great cruelty (1 Kings 11:16); Amaziah, also, more recently (801–792 b.c.), had severely smitten Edom (2 Kings 14:7). Even, therefore, although Edom had shewn itself unfriendly, “was the right to blame them Judah’s, who herself had so persistently waged war, with confessed cruelty, against Edom? Could a Judaean prophet be just in blaming Edom and saying nothing of Judah?… To charge Edom, whom Judah had conquered and treated cruelly, with restless hate towards Judah seems to fall below that high impartial tone which prevails in the other oracles of this section. The charge was much more justifiable at the time of the Exile, when Edom did behave shamefully towards Israel” (G. A. Smith, p. 130). The argument is a forcible one, and the conclusion to which it points may be the true one: our ignorance, as the same writer proceeds to point out, prohibits our endorsing it absolutely: we do not for instance know the particulars of the revolt under Jehoram or what may have happened to provoke Amaziah’s attack upon Edom, or indeed what, generally, may have been Edom’s behaviour towards Judah during the century before Amos: there may have been occurrences during this period known to Amos and sufficient to justify the words used by him.

13. because they have ript up the women with child of Gilead] A barbarity probably not uncommon in ancient warfare, at least among more cruel or uncivilized combatants: see 2 Kings 8:12 (Hazael), 2 Kings 15:16 (Menahem); Hosea 13:16; cf. Hosea 10:14 : comp. the similar cruelty of dashing children in pieces (2 Kings 8:12; Hosea 13:16; Nahum 3:10; Isaiah 13:16; Psalm 137:9). “In the embittered border-feuds between Arabian tribes the same ghastly barbarity is often mentioned; Ibn Athir iv. 256. 1, 258. 6, 260. 60, 262. 11 sqq.; Kitâb al-’Aghani, xix. 129. 12 sq., xx. 128. 13; Tabari ii. 755. 19” (Wellh.).

that they might enlarge their border] Such cruelty was not perpetrated in self-defence, but in cold blood, simply from a desire to augment their territory, at the expense of their Israelitish neighbours on the N. and W. (cf. at a later date Jeremiah 49:1).

13–15. The Ammonites. The Ammonites occupied the district E. of Jordan bounded by the Arnon on the S., and by the territory of Reuben and the upper course of the Jabbok, on the W. Their capital was Rabbah, mentioned in Amos 1:14. They were closely related to their neighbours on the S., the Moabites, being reckoned as a brother-nation (Genesis 19:37 f.); but (cf. D.B[137] s.v.), to judge from allusions in the O. T., they seem to have been less settled and civilised: their inhumanity in warfare appears from Amos 1:13, and the proposal in 1 Samuel 11:2; and a suspicious discourtesy towards allies is evinced in 2 Samuel 10:1-5. David reduced the Ammonites to the condition of tributaries (2 Samuel 8:12; cf. 2 Samuel 12:31); but it does not seem that they continued in this condition for long. Various examples of their hostility towards Israel are recorded in Jdg 10:7 ff. (their oppression of the trans-Jordanic Israelites, which was put an end to by Jephthah, ib. Jdg 11:33); 1 Samuel 11; 2 Kings 24:2; Jeremiah 40:14; Nehemiah 2:10; Nehemiah 4:3; Nehemiah 4:7; comp. also Zephaniah 2:8, Jeremiah 49:1, Ezekiel 21:28; Ezekiel 25:2; Ezekiel 25:6, which shew now they evinced a malicious satisfaction in Israel’s troubles, and sought to turn them to their own profit.

[137] .B. … Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ed. 1, or (from A to J) ed. 2.

14. But I will kindle a fire] Varied from I will send of the other cases: see on Amos 1:4.

in the wall of Rabbah] The capital city of the Ammonites, and indeed the only Ammonite city mentioned in the O.T.: named elsewhere, 2 Samuel 11:1; 2 Samuel 12:27; 2 Samuel 12:29 (1 Chronicles 20:1); Joshua 13:25; Jeremiah 49:3; Ezekiel 25:5; called more fully ‘Rabbah of the Ammonites,’ Deuteronomy 3:11; 2 Samuel 12:26; 2 Samuel 17:27; Jeremiah 49:2; Ezekiel 21:25 (Heb. 20). From Ptolemy Philadelphia (b.c. 287–245) it received the name of Philadelpheia: in the Middle Ages it was known as ‘Ammân, a name which it still bears. It was situated about 25 miles N.E. of the N. end of the Dead Sea, in the valley forming the upper course of the Jabbok, now called the Wâdy ‘Ammân. The stream is perennial, and is well-stocked with fish: one of its sources, the ‘Ain ‘Ammân, is a little above the city, to the W. The present remains are chiefly of the Roman period, comprising a fortress, theatre, odeum, baths, a street of columns and gate, mausolea, &c. The fortress stands upon a hill, which rises on a triangular piece of ground on the N. of the stream to a height of some 300–400 ft., the city lying in the valley to the South. This lower city, situated on the banks of the ‘Ammân, is probably the “city of the waters” stated to have been taken by Joab in 2 Samuel 12:27. There is a full description, with plan and views, of the existing ruins, in the Survey of Eastern Palestine (published by the Palestine Exploration Society) 19–64: see also D.B[138]1 s.v. (with a view).

[138] .B. … Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ed. 1, or (from A to J) ed. 2.

with shouting in the day of battle] The ‘shouting’ is the battle-cry of the advancing foe: cf. Job 39:25; Jeremiah 4:19; Jeremiah 49:2 (A.V., R.V., ‘alarm’), &c., and the corresponding verb, Jdg 7:21; 1 Samuel 17:52.

with a tempest in the day of the whirlwind] A figurative description of the onslaught of the foe: it will level all before it, like a destructive hurricane.

15. And their king shall go into captivity, &c.] into exile (Amos 1:5). The verse is borrowed by Jeremiah, with slight changes, in his prophecy against the Ammonites (Jeremiah 49:3), “For their king shall go into exile, his priests and his princes together”—where the addition of ‘priests’ makes it probable that for malcâm ‘their king,’ we should read, with most of the ancient versions, Milcom, the name of the national God of the Ammonites (1 Kings 11:5, &c.).