the land of giants. Jair, the son of Manasseh, took all the country of Argob unto the coasts of Geshuri and Maacathi, and called them after his own name, Bashanhavoth-jair, unto this day. And I gave Gilead unto Machir.' Machir was a son of Manasseh and father of

"3

4

Gilead, and was the progenitor of that section of the tribe that obtained their possession east of the Jordan, and Jair was also a descendant of Machir by the female line.5 Now it appears that this Jair possessed twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead; but he took besides "Geshur and Aram, with the towns of Jair, with Kenath and the towns thereof, even threescore cities." 6 These passages when viewed in connection, clearly convey the idea that the lastmentioned "threescore cities" conquered by Jair are identical with the "region of Argob," which also contained, as is stated in the first passage, "threescore cities." And farther, it is evident from these statements that the twenty-three cities of Gilead are quite distinct from the threescore cities of Argob. These points, which are of great importance as tending to identify the position of Argob, are fully confirmed by the following passages. In defining the territories of the half-tribe of Manasseh Joshua thus writes: "And Moses gave inheritance unto the half-tribe of Manasseh . . . and their coast was from Mahanaim, all Bashan, all the kingdom of Og king of Bashan, and all the towns of Jair, which are in Bashan, threescore cities; and half Gilead, and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan." This passage, when compared with those above quoted, leaves

3 Deut. iii. 12-15.

5 1 Chron. ii. 21, 22.

4 Ib. 15.

6 Ib. 23.

7 Josh. xiii. 30.

98

it without a shadow of doubt that the "threescore cities of Jair" which are in Bashan are identical with the cities of Argob which Jair conquered and called "Bashanhavoth-jair," that is, "the cities of Jair in Bashan." But again, when Solomon placed twelve officers over the twelve sections of the land of Israel, we read that Geber was appointed to Ramoth-gilead, "and to him pertained the towns of Jair the son of Manasseh, which are in Gilead; to him also pertained the region of Argob, which is in Bashan, threescore great cities, with walls and brazen bars." These towns of Jair situated in Gilead are the "twenty-three cities" above alluded to as having been possessed by Jair before he conquered the sixty cities of Bashan, and which are called in another place Havothjair," the towns of Jair."9 I therefore conclude generally that the "threescore cities" called Bashan-havoth-jair pertained to the land of Argob, which was situated in Bashan; and that the "twenty-three cities" called Havoth-jair were distinct from the former, and situated in Gilead. Eusebius appears to have been aware of this distinction, for he thus writes: "Havoth-jair, this is Bashan (or in Bashan). The towns of Jair, which the half-tribe of Manasseh received, are in Mount Gilead, and they are in the district of Batanca (or Bashan) called Gonea." But Jerome, his translator and commentator, had a theory of his own, and gives a singular and even unintelligible account of these cities.1

8 1 Kings iv. 13.

9 Jud. xxxii. 41.

1 Eusebius's words are:-Ανωθω Ιαειρ, αυτη εστιν ἡ Βασαν. εισι δε κῶμαι Ιαειρ εν τῷ ὄρει Γαλααδ &ς ελαβετο ἡμισυ φυλῆς Μανασση και εισιν εν τη καλουμevn yang тns Baravais. Hieronymus's gloss is as follows:-Avothjair, quod interpretatur auλs Air. Hæc est in Basan, in qua sunt vici

Having thus ascertained that the region of Argob is in Bashan, it remains to be seen whether there is any evidence tending to identify its position. From one of the passages above quoted it appears that the city of Kenath was in Argob, and I have before shown that this city was likewise in Trachonitis. Now, if we add to this fact the arguments already advanced while considering the situation and boundaries of the latter province, it will be seen that we have very strong reasons for concluding that Trachonitis and Argob were identical, or rather that Trachonitis was the Greek rendering of the Hebrew Argob.

3

4

I am quite aware that Eusebius identifies Argob with the castle of Erga or Ragaba, situated fifteen miles west of Gerasa, and only a few miles north of the Jabbok.2 In this he is followed by Reland, Robinson, and Ritter.5 But this Ragaba is manifestly in Gilead, and must besides have been included in the territory of Gad, since it is about fifteen miles south-west of Mahanaim.

I have now completed my sketch of the ancient kingdom of Bashan; and it will be observed that in the minutest particulars my researches bear testimony to the faithfulness of Bible narrative and description. The numerous and extensive ruined cities and villages scattered over its surface tell of its former populousness, and are the present memorials of its ancient strength and greatness. The oak forests still cover its mountain-sides; its sexaginta in Monte Galaad, qui ceciderunt in sortem dimidiæ tribus Manasse: qui locus nunc vocatur Golam in terra Batanea. See Onomasticon, s. v. Avothjair, p. 30.

2 Onomasticon, s. v. Argob, p. 22. 4 Bib. Res. vol. iii., App. p. 166.

3 Palæst. pp. 579, 808, 959.

5 Pal. und Syr., ii. 1041.

pastures are still celebrated for their richness, and its soil is proverbial for its fertility. The ancient names too cling to it yet; and we have Bashan, and Golan, and Kenath, and Salchah, and Bozrah, and Kerioth, and Haurân, and Edrei, but little changed by the lapse of long centuries. Thus does it appear that the more extensive our research, and the more minute our investigations, the more full and accurate will be our illustrations of the Word of God. Every new discovery in this land is a new evidence of the truth of the Bible. And should the day ever come when an advancing Christianity, bearing peace and civilization in its glorious train, shall again people these cities and cultivate these plains-then, from inscribed tablets and ruins now buried, will new and striking evidences be brought to light of the truth of that religion which yet far more strongly evidences itself by the blessings it diffuses.

ITUREA.

There is still another province, which, though not included in Bashan, formed for a time a portion of the territories of Manasseh; and as it lies on the northern border of Bashan, between that kingdom and Damascus, I shall now give a brief sketch of it. The name of this province, Ituræa, occurs only once in the Scriptures in its Greek form, where Luke includes it in the tetrarchy of Philip. In the book of Genesis, however, we find the name Jetur applied to one of the sons of Ishmael; and it is afterwards said that this was the name of the province possessed by him." It was the usual mode in those 7 Gen. xxv. 15, 16.

6

6 Luke iii. 1.

8

early ages for the leader of a tribe to settle in some unoccupied district, and to call it by his name. We learn that long after that period the tribes of Reuben and Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh made war with the Hagarites or Ishmaelites, namely, with Jetur, Nephesh, and Nodab, conquered their territories, and dwelt in their land until the captivity. And in immediate connection with the latter statement it is said that "the children of the half-tribe of Manasseh dwelt in the land, and they increased from Bashan unto Baal-hermon, and Senir, and Mount Hermon." 9 Now this points distinctly to the position of the district previously occupied by Jetur and his brethren. It lay between Bashan and Hermon. It appears, however, that the Ishmaelites merely retired for a time from this province, as Aristobulus king of the Jews, in the end of the second century before Christ, conquered Ituræa, and gave the inhabitants their choice either to embrace the Jewish faith or leave their country. They chose the former.1 Herod the Great afterwards obtained possession of it (B.c. 20).

During all these changes the Ituræans maintained a distinctive nationality. This may probably have arisen in some degree from the position of their country, as they could during troublous times retire to the fastnesses of Hermon, where there was ample pasturage for their cattle, and also some fine land for cultivation. This view is strengthened by the words of Strabo, who observes, when describing the kingdom of Chalcis, that it was a mountainous region inhabited by Ituræans and Arabs.2

8 1 Chron. v. 19-22.

1 Joseph. Ant. xiii. 11, 3.

9 1 Chron. v. 23.

2 Strabo. Geog., xvi. p. 520.