Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>]

Jim, 

 

Get a better map. While it's true that Beer-sheba is in a depression and the 
ground does rise to the south, if one goes almost due west, along the Nahal 
(stream/wadi) Beer-sheva, which eventually flows into the Nahal Besor, one 
eventually reaches the Mediterranean near Gaza. As far as I know, water only 
flows downstream. So that if Gerar is anywhere along the Besor or its 
tributaries (one of which is now called Nahal Gerar, but that's not proof of 
anything), which is where Gerar is assumed to be. So yes, anyone going from 
Gerar to Beer-sheba in the Negeb would be going UP.

 

By the way, there is an exception to this rule. Very often, a person leaving 
the land of Israel is referred to as "going down", while coming to the land 
is "going up". This is because of the special status of the land of Israel. 
This is not just a later Jewish convention but appears in the Bible as well. 

 

 

Yigal Levin

 

From: jimstinehart AT aol.com [mailto:jimstinehart AT aol.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 1:54 AM
To: leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il; b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Galilean Bethlehem?

 

Professor Yigal Levin:
 
You wrote:  “‘Going up’ and ‘going down’ are topographical terms, going from 
low ground to high ground and vice versa. Indeed, Gerar, in the western 
Negev, is downstream from Beer-sheba, along the Besor stream, and while 
Beer-sheba is in a basin, it's still higher than any of the candidates for 
Gerar.”
 
40 miles south of Beersheba, Avdat is at an elevation 2½ times that of 
Beersheba.  From a cite concerning Beersheba:  “The Beersheba valley…To the 
south, in the Negev uplands, the land rises….”  
http://www.planetware.com/israel/negev-isr-st-ng.htm  Of perhaps more 
relevance, Shivta, 34 miles southwest of Beersheba, is at an altitude almost 
1½ times that of Beersheba.  “To the southwest [of Beersheba] is the 
Wilderness of Paran (Midbar Paran), part of a plateau….”  So within a 40 mile 
radius or so, the Beersheba valley is the lowest part of the topography, and 
Beersheba itself is at the bottom of the Beersheba valley.  Yes, I understand 
that as one gets more than 40 miles west of Beersheba and closer to Egypt, 
the altitude of the land is much lower.  Yet with Beersheba being the lowest 
spot in about a 40 mile radius or so, which was quite a long distance in the 
ancient world (perhaps longer than a week of travel time, if a large flock of 
sheep and goats was involved), it seems odd that Isaac would be said at 
Genesis 26: 23 to “go up” to Beersheba, if the Beersheba in southern Canaan, 
rather than the Beersheba in the foothills of Galilee, was meant.  And why 
would Isaac stay for many years in the arid surroundings near Beersheba?  
Fertile Galilee makes much more sense for a man of means with a large flock 
of thirsty sheep and goats.
 
The Hebrew verb (LH appears 895 times in the Hebrew Bible.  Though I have not 
looked at every one of those 895 occurrences, to the best of my knowledge 
(leaving aside Genesis 26: 23) not once in the entire Hebrew Bible is anyone 
ever said to “go up” to the bottom of a valley.  Whereas the verb (LH fits 
the Beersheba in the foothills of Galilee perfectly, it is hard to square (LH 
with a reference to Beersheba in the bottom of the Beersheba valley in 
southern Canaan, where the last 40 miles or so of a journey to Beersheba 
(beginning for example at Shivta or thereabouts) would be going “down”, not 
“up”.  Since you tacitly seem to agree that no place with a name similar to 
GRR is attested in ancient non-biblical sources in southwest Canaan, and 
since the Beersheba in southern Canaan doesn’t seem to fit the Hebrew verb 
(LH or the text of chapter 26 of Genesis very well at all, why then aren’t 
you willing to consider a northerly historical locale for these places 
mentioned in the Patriarchal narratives, where everything fits perfectly?
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
 

=