1. Geography and Topography
Moab is the name of a people dwelling east of the Dead Sea and of the land which they inhabited, in Greek times called Moabitis. The
modern Arabic name of the land north of Wadi Mojib is el-Belka,
of the part south of that wadi, Kerak. The western boundary is the Dead Sea, the eastern is the desert; on the south Wadi el-Hasa separates
it from Edom. The northern boundary changed with the history
of the people, but the Wadi Hesban is probably the extreme northern limit. Moab is a high plateau, which continues eastward into the
desert with little change of altitude. The western boundary is an
abrupt line of cliffs, with a somewhat broad shore at their foot in the south which grows narrower toward the north until the
cliffs rise directly from the water. At the mouths of the Wadi bani Hammed and Wadi Kerak a tongue-shaped sandy peninsula stretches
out into the Dead Sea and bears the name al Lisan, “the
Tongue.” The geological formation of the region is at the base Nubian sandstone, covered with
hard limestone on which rests a softer limestone. In various places there are outcroppings of basalt
which has broken through the limestone, often accompanied with hot springs. The altitude of the
plain is 2,500-3,800 feet. The region presents evidences of having been the seat of great convulsions which have made deep rents in its surface. Especially important are the three great wadis, generally beginning in slight depressions in the
eastern part of the land, but rapidly sinking into deep but narrow chasms debouching into the Dead Sea. These are: (1) the Wadi Kerak on the south (the Zared of
Num. xxi. 12,
the Zered of
Deut. ii. 13),
called the Wadi Ain Franji in its
upper course. (2) The Wadi al-Mojib (the Arnon of the Old Testament), formed by the union of several tributaries (cf. "the brooks of the Amon,"
Num. xxi. 14),
the chief of which, Rash Mojib, rises not far from Kerak and in its northerly course becomes the Wadi Lejjun, later uniting with the Wadi al-Sultan, Wadi Balna, Wadi Saida, and finally
with the Wadi Heidan. The third great valley is Wadi Zerka Ma'in, known in the time of Josephus
as the Kallirrhoe. An hour from its mouth is the celebrated hot sulphur spring visited by Herod the
Great. Besides the three great wadis, a number of smaller ones issue from the western portion of the
plain. The northeastern part of the region forms a rolling plain called in the Hebrew
mishor
(
Deut. iii. 10, iv. 43).
Southwest from Hesban rises a range of hills, the western sides of which form the
abrupt drop to the coast beneath, the extreme projection being Rash Siyaja. To the east is a hill
still called Neba, and the Nebo of
Deut. xxxiv. 1
should be sought either in this or in Rash Siyaja,
both of which afford an extensive view to the west and north. Pisgah
(
Num. xxi. 20),
a name in use as late as the time of Eusebius, seems to mean a definite region in the northwestern part of Moab. Peor
(
Num. xxiii. 28)
was not far distant, possibly the present al-Mushakkar. The fortress Machaerus is recalled by the hill Mkaur, the "mount of the
valley" of
Josh. xiii. 19.
Kerak is a fortress on a mountain lying entirely within Wadi Kerak. The plateau is almost treeless, yet the soil is rich and suitable for pasturage or agriculture, especially the region south of Kerak, and many springs are found. A semi-tropical vegetation clothes the wadis as they approach the sea. The sheep is the animal most
kept by the present as by the early inhabitants. Wild animals are the bear, wolf, and rock badger, on the steppe the gazelle and ostrich, while of rodents the rat is especially abundant. The streams abound in fish. The range of temperature is great,
the summer heat being excessive and the winter being cold.
The Old Testament and the Moabite Stone (q.v.) mention a great number of Moabitic cities. Many ruins are to be seen, but the most of them point to Roman occupation. Beth-jeshimoth (Ezek, xxv. 9) is located at Suweme; neither Beth-peor nor Sibma
(Isa. xvi. 8)
have been identified; Elealeh is located at El-'al, east of upper Wadi Hesban; to the south
of this is Heshbon
(Isa. xv. 4),
which still retains its name Hesban; if Neba is the Biblical Nebo, the city of that name must be sought in one of the numerous masses of ruins discovered there; southeast from Neba are the ruins of Madeba, the Medeba (q.v.) of
Isa. xv. 2,
where ruins of several churches exist and an inscription of the year 362 was found;
southwest of this the name Ma'in recalls the Baalmeon of
Ezek. xxv. 9,
and of the Moabite Stone. Between Wadi Zerka Ma'in and Wadi Wa'le are ruins on Mt. Attarus which mark the site of the old 'Ataroth of the Moabite Stone; Kureyat, to the
south, locates the Kiriathaim of
Gen. xiv. 5
(R. V. margin); to the west is a tower with a cistern which marks the celebrated fortress of Machairus, near which must be sought Zereth-shahar
(Josh. xiii. 19).
Between Wadi Wa'le and Wadi al-Mojib is
Dhiban, where the Moabite Stone was found; the excavation of this site is very desirable, since it indicates the Biblical Dibon
(Jer. xlviii. 18);
to the north al-Jumeil is provisionally identified with Beth-gamul of
Jer. xlviii. 23);
Ara'ir, on the north
side of Wadi el-Mojib, suggests the Aroer of
Jer. xlviii. 19.
Along the main road from the Arnon are the important ruins of Rabbath Moab, named by Eusebius. Kir-hareseth
(Isa. xvi. 7)
is probably to be sought in Kerak (compare, however,
the "Kir of Moab" of
Isa. xv. 1).
Eastward from Rabba there are many ruins dating from the Roman period. Southeast from the Dead Sea is to be sought Zoar
(Isa. xv. 5).
Many other places are named in the Old Testament and on the Moabite
Stone the locations of which are not yet found.
The many dolmens and cromlechs point back to a very early period in the history of the land, but no certain knowledge exists of the early population. The Old Testament speaks of the Emim as early inhabitants (Gem. xiv. 5) whom the Moabites superseded.
Gen. xiv. 30
sqq. preserves a tradition which represents historical fact, namely, the close relationship of both Moabitea and Ammonites to the Hebrews, though the history of the wandering in the desert implies that the Moabites were already settled when the Hebrews came upon them, but had lost the territory north of the Amon to the Amorites, who had established there a rich kingdom. The Hebrews were at first regarded as friends by the Moabites, but after the former had retained the district conquered from the Ammonites, this sentiment changed. Of the settlement of Gadites and Reubenites in the region two accounts exist, not entirely concordant
(Num. xxxii. 34-36;
Josh. xiii. 15).
Various accounts in the history of Israel, such as the episode of Ehud (Judges iii.), of Jephtha (Judges xi.), and of Saul
(I Sam. xiv. 47),
imply vigorous contests between the two peoples, though the details are obscure. David's war against Moab
(II Sam. viii. 2)
is historical, though Moab had been a refuge for his family in his time of distress
(I Sam. xxii. 3-4).
The Book of Ruth can hardly be regarded as a basis for historical conclusions, especially since the passage in Samuel says nothing of relationship
with the Moabites. Moab was not made a province of David's kingdom, but tribute was required. Moab's subjection to Israel ceased either under Solomon or under his successor until the time of
Omri, when the northern kingdom began to reconquer the territory north of the Arnon, and the Moabite Stone tells of the progressive success of Israel
until the time of Mesha, who recovered his territory with considerable losses to the Hebrews (cf.
II Kings i. 1, iii. 5).
The story is told in II Kings
iii. of a new attempt to subject Moab made by Jehoram of Israel and Jehoshaphat of Judah, which
was brought to an end by the sacrifice of the Moabitic king's eldest son upon the walls of the stronghold into which the Moabites had retreated, this
bringing about the retirement of the allied forces,
though the exact way in which this operated is not
told (cf.
Moloch, Melech, § 7). It is debated
whether II Chron. xx. details an independent event
or is a restatement of II Kings iii.
II Kings xiv. 25
(cf.
Amos vi. 14)
does not necessitate the renewal
of Israel's hegemony over Moab, and
Amos ii. 1
implies the independence of Moab. During the
Assyrian period Moab figures in the cuneiform inscriptions, sometimes as bringing tribute to the
Assyrians (so in the time of Tiglath-Pileser III.), as
contributing to the materials being gathered for the
erection of Assyrian palaces (so under Esarhaddon),
as joining in combinations against the Assyrian
power (as under Sargon), at another time as relying
upon Assyrian help to repulse the attacks of nomadic Arabs. The hostility of Moab to Judah is
stated in
II Kings xxiv. 2;
Jer. xxvii. 2
involves projected common action by Moab, Ammon, Phenicia,
and Judah against the Babylonians;
Ezek. xxv. 8
suggests national hostility against Judah on the part
of Moab, though
Jer. xl. 11
involves that in Moab
fugitives from Judah found refuge.
In postexilic times little is heard of the Moabites.
Among the foreign wives of -the people whose children did not speak pure Hebrew Moabites are mentioned
(Neh. xiii. 23;
of.
Ezra ix. 1-2),
though
whether Nehemiah's foe Sanballat was a Moabite
is not satisfactorily made out. Quiet
4. History possession by the Moabites of their
after land was disturbed by the Nabatman
586 B.C. migration in the period between Ne-
hemiah and the Maccabean rising. By
the time of Josephus the occupation by the Nabar
taeans of the territory of Moab and the whole district across the Jordan was so complete that he regarded Moabites and Gileadites as Arabs, and cities
once deemed Moabitic were said to be in Arabia.
A Nabatman kingdom was founded with capital at
Petra, and to this the greater part of the territory
east of the Jordan was subject. No important conclusions can be drawn from
Dan. xi. 41
or
Ps. lxxxiii. 6,
since these passages employ the old prophetic terminology. John Hyroanus appears as
the friend of the Nabataeans and as the foe of " children of Bwan " and " children of Jambri "
(I Macc. v. 4-5, ix. 35
sqq.), and this shows a disintegration of the old national forces in the region. Alexander Jannsaus fought against the Nabateeans and
took the old Moabitic fortresses of Medeba, Horonaim, Eglaim and Soar, also Heshbon, which by
this time was a Hellenistic city. Nabataean kings
contemporary with Alexander were Obodas I. and
Rabilos I., both of whom fought Antiochus Dionysius of Antioch. Hyrcanus, son of Alexander,
promised to restore to the Nabatioan Aretas I.,
the cities captured by Alexander, but Heshbon
must have remained Judaic, since it belonged to
Herod the Great. The district of Moabitis, with
the Arnon as the northern boundary, remained in
the possession of the Nabatseans till their rule was
overthrown in 106
A.D.,
when it became a part of
the province of Arabia. Later it belonged to Palmatina tertia. Under Roman rule the land must
have become quite populous, as is attested by the
large number of Roman ruins and the remains of
Roman roads. Christianity entered later, and
among the ruins are those of a considerable number of churches. The first assault of the Mohammedans upon the region was repulsed, but soon
after Mohammed's death the old land of Moab became Mohammedan territory. See
Nabataeans.
The beginnings of Moabitic nationai life were
doubtless not unlike those of their neighbors across
the Jordan. The people came in from the desert
and settled and developed in general along lines
like the Hebrews. One important difference, how
ever, was that the latter were shielded
g. Prod- from the inroads of Arabs, to which
ucts, Cul- the Moabites were constantly exposed.
ture, and The history of the land reflects this
Religion. condition, since there were recurrent
periods when it sank into the position
of the resort of Bedouins. On the other hand, the
native productivity of the soil made it natural to
develop a settled population and the culture which
goes with it. The Moabite Stone and
II Kings iii. 4
imply rich results from pasturage, and this is
corroborated by the reports of Doughty in modern
times;
II Kings iii. 25
and
Ezek. xxvii. 17
involve
also abundant returns from agricultural pursuits;
similarly
Isa. xvi. 8
implies a celebrated wine as
one of the products. Though small in extent, the
land must have had a considerable population.
This fact is corroborated by the large number of
cities mentioned as Moabitic in the Old Testament.
The existence of the Moabitic Stone is rich in im
plications respecting the cultural development of
the people. The art of writing must have been ad
vanced before they could use a material so refractory
as basalt, and culture sufficient to permit the read
ing of it by at least a part of the people is also a
postulate. Moabites knew well how to build for
tresses; commerce was cared for, and provision
made for water supply. Light is thrown upon the
religion both by the Old Testament and the Moab
ite Stone. The chief deity of the land was
Chemosh (q.v.), and the Moabites ascribed to his anger
with his people their subjection to the Israelites.
He was a war deity, before whose altar the foes
were slain. He had high places in at least two
cities, and Mesha's language in the Moabite Stone
involves also an oracle which was consulted. The
inscription speaks also of a deity who must have
been feminine (the form corresponds to Ashtar or
Ishtar) whose character must have been similar to
that of Chemosh. A Baal-peor, "Lord of Peor,"
is mentioned
(
Num. xxv. 1-5),
who may have been
identical with Chemosh or with some other deity.
The name of Nebo attached to a mountain in Moab
itic territory involves also the cult of that deity
in this region. All that is known of the Moabitio
religion implies that it did not rise above the usual
nature religion of the Semites, but the inscription
mentions an
braelitic sanctuary in the land in the
shape of an 'Argil (cf.
Ezek. xliii. 15,
margin).
6. Relations between Moab and Israel.
The Old Testament concerns itself not only with
the relations between Israel and Moab, but it deals
also with the attitude of Moat in universal ethics.
Amos condemned Moab for its breaches
of the
common laws of morality. On the-other hand, Isa. xv.-
xvi., xxv. 9-12; Jer. xlviii.;
Zeph.
ii. 8-9
speak from a national point of
view, though the date of .these pieces
is not entirely
settled. That the attitude toward the Mo,bites in the Old
Testament is not uniformly hostile is
shown by the fact that David had a Moabite in his
train
(
I Chron. xi. 46).
The background of
Deut. xxiii. 4
is intense hostility toward the Moabites,
since admission of a Moabite to the congregation is
forbidden to the tenth generation (cf.
Neh. xiii. 1),
while the Edomites and Egyptians of the third gen
eration are admitted. On the other hand, the
whole atmosphere of the book of Ruth is one of
kindly complaisance
toward Moabites-a book
which may have been written late. The general
attitude of the Chronicler is unfriendly (II Chron.
xx., xxiv. 26). Rabbi Joshua is reported as pro
nouncing favorably upon the admission of an Am
monitic proselyte on the ground that the Ammon
ites had long ceased to exist, a fact which applies
equally to the Moabites.
(F. Buhl.)
Bibliography:
Honord T. P. J. d'Albert, Duke de Luynes,
voyage d'eaploration a la mer ,none, a
Petra, i. 23-182, ii. 81-140, iii.
passim, 3 vols., Paris, 1871-78; C.
Ritter, Comparative
Geography of
Palestine, ii. 148-188, Edinburgh,
1888; H. B. Tristram, Land of Moab, New York, 1873; $. Merrill, East of
the Jordan, ib. 1881; C. R. Conder,
Heth and Moab, London, 1883; C. M. Doughty,
Travels in Arabia Deserts, i. 18-127, ib. 1888;
PEF, Surrey of Eastern Palestine, Memoirs, vol.
i., ib. 1889; F. Buhl, Geographie des aiten Paldstina,
Tübingen, 1898; G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, ahap.
xavi.,
London, 1897; C. Clermont.Ganneau, Recneil diarchMopie orientale, ii. 185-234,
Paris. 1898; L. Gautier,
Autour
de la ma morte, pp. 48-122, Geneva,
1901; R. E. Brannow and A. Domassewski, Die Prosincia Arabia, i. 1-110,
Strasburg, 1904; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire,
parts xxvi.
xxvii., Paris, 1905-08; A. Musil,
Arabia petrasaa, i., Moab,
Vienna, 1907; G. Delman,
Petra And seine Fdsheilipto
tner, Leipsic, 1908;
PEF,
Quarterly Statement 1871, pp.
40-73 (by E. Palmer), 1895, pp. 203-235, 332-373 (by
E. Bliss), 1898, pp. 24-47 (by G. Hill); ZDPY, ii.
2
(1879), 1-12 (by Schick), pp.
124 sqq. (by
Mein), pp. 201 sqq. (by Kereten), xvi
(1893),
162 sqq. (by Schu
mwhw);
DB, iii. 402 113;
EB, iii. 3188-3179.
