Commentary on Joshua - Keil & Delitzsch - David Cox

Keil and Delitzsch <strong>Commentary</strong> on the Old Testament
was taken thence to Ekron (1 Sam 5:7-10). David was the first to wrest it from the
Philistines (1 Chron 18:1). In the time of Solomon it was a royal city of the
Philistines, though no doubt under Israelitish supremacy (1 Kings 2:39; 5:1). It was
fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chron 11:8), was taken by the Syrians in the time of Joash
(2 Kings 12:18), and was conquered again by Uzziah (2 Chron 26:6; Amos 6:2); but
no further mention is made of it, and no traces have yet been discovered
(Note: According to the Onom. ( s. v. Geth ), it was a place five Roman miles from Eleutheropolis
towards Diospolis, whereas Jerome (on Mic 1) says: "Gath was near the border of Judaea, and on the
road from Eleutheropolis to Gaza; it is still a very large village;" whilst in the commentary on Jer 25 he
says: "Gath was near to and conterminous with Azotus," from which it is obvious enough that the
situation of the Philistine city of Gath was altogether unknown to the Fathers. Hitzig and Knobel suppose
the Baitoga'bra of Ptolemy (5:16,6), Betogabri in Tab. Peuting. ix. e. (the Eleutheropolis of the Fathers,
and the present Beit Jibrin , a very considerable ruin), to be the ancient Gath, but this opinion is only
founded upon very questionable etymological combinations; whereas Thenius looks for it on the site of
the present Deir Dubban , though without any tenable ground.) (see Rob. ii. p. 420, and v. Raumer , Pal.
pp. 191-2). "And the Avvites (Avvaeans) towards the south." Judging from Deut 2:23, the Avvim appear
to have belonged to those tribes of the land who were already found there by the Canaanites, and whom
the Philistines subdued and destroyed when they entered the country.
They are not mentioned in Gen 10:15-19 among the Canaanitish tribes. At the same
time, there is not sufficient ground for identifying them with the Geshurites as Ewald
does, or with the Anakites, as Bertheau has done. Moreover, it cannot be decided
whether they were descendants of Ham or Shem (see Stark. Gaza, pp. 32ff.).
miteeymaan (OT:8486) ( from , or on, the south ) at the commencement of v. 4
should be attached to v. 3, as it is in the Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate, and joined
to haa`auwiym (OT:5757) (the Avvites). The Avvaeans dwelt to the south of the
Philistines, on the south-west of Gaza. It gives no sense to connect with the what
follows, so as to read "towards the south all the land of the Canaanites;" for
whatever land to the south of Gaza, or of the territory of the Philistines, was still
inhabited by Canaanites, could not possibly be called "all the land of the
http://207.44.232.113/~bible/comment/ot/k&d/josh/jos77.html (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 01:18:15 p.m.]