Page:04.BCOT.KD.PoeticalBooks.vol.4.Writings.djvu/874

the sons of Esau occupy the most prominent place; and thirdly, at that time, in the time of Jehoshaphat, as is recorded, an Asaphite, viz., Jahaziël, did actually interpose in the course of events, a circumstance which coincides remarkably with the לאסף. The league of that period consisted, according to 2Ch 20:1, of Moabites, Ammonites, and a part of the מעוּנים (as it is to be read after the lxx). But 2Ch 20:2 (where without any doubt מאדם is to be read instead of מארם) adds the Edomites to their number, for it is expressly stated further on (2Ch 20:10, 2Ch 20:22, 2Ch 20:23) that the inhabitants of Mount Seïr were with them. Also, supposing of course that the “Ishmaelites” and “Hagarenes” of the Psalm may be regarded as an unfolding of the מעונים, which is confirmed by Josephus, Antiq. ix. 1. 2; and that Gebäl is to be understood by the Mount Seïr of the chronicler, which is confirmed by the Arab. jibâl still in use at the present day, there always remains a difficulty in the fact that the Psalm also names Amalek , Philistia , Tyre, and Asshur, of which we find no mention there in the reign of Jehoshaphat. But these difficulties are counter-balanced by others that beset the reference to 1 Macc. 5, viz., that in the time of the Seleucidae the Amalekites no longer existed, and consequently, as might be expected, are not mentioned at all in 1 Macc. 5; further, that there the Moabites, too, are no longer spoken of, although some formerly Moabitish cities of Gileaditis are mentioned; and thirdly, that אשׁור = Syria (a certainly possible usage of the word) appears in a subordinate position, whereas it was, however, the dominant power. On the other hand, the mention of Amalek is intelligible in connection with the reference to 2 Chr. 20, and the absence of its express mention in the chronicler does not make itself particularly felt in consideration of Gen 36:12. Philistia, Tyre, and Asshur, however, stand at the end in the Psalm, and might also even be mentioned with the others if they rendered aid to the confederates of the south-east without taking part with them in the campaign, as being a succour to the actual leaders of the enterprise, the sons of Lot. We therefore agree with the reference of Psalms 83 (as also of Psa 48:1-14) to the alliance of the neighbouring nations against Judah in the reign of Jehoshaphat, which has been already