History of Dor. 87 



also is of no particular historical value, especially in view of the 

 fact that we see the Danites changing their location in the narra- 

 tive contained in the Book of Judges. Both these quotations from 

 Ant. V, 1 : 22 serve to illustrate the use of the plural form Awpa, 

 which Stephan has just referred to (in the preceding quotation 

 from Hecataeus) as the later form of Dor's name. 



The third and fourth quotations from Josephus above are found 

 in Ant. VI, 14:2. The passage deals with the visit of Saul to the 

 witch of Endor, and has nothing whatever to do with Dor. The 

 name should be read (with Naber) "EvSwpos'. These last two cita- 

 tions (i. e. from Ant. VI, 14:2) differ somewhat from our present 

 text. The former reads* dvai n yvvaiov tolovtov Iv ttoXu Awpo*. Here 

 Toioi'Tov has dropped out in some way. In the latter citation, the 

 texts of Naber andNiese read: ^kcv etsr^v Awpov. The variations in 

 Stephan may be due to his carelessness, or more probably to a 

 different reading in the text he had before him. The fact that the 

 MSS. differ in the word preceding rjKev (Xaber writing ovras and 

 Niese avSpas) shows that text-corruption was present here. Stephan 

 apparently has an inferior reading. These last two quotations 

 serve to illustrate for Stephan the use of the form AaJpos. 



' In his critical notes on the passage (vol. II, p. VIII) Naber remarks: 

 " Steph. Byz. urbs appellatur Awpof et consentiunt R O; error est ex duarum 

 urbium confusione." Niese (vol. 2, p. 63) retains the reading Atjpor. 



^ Naber and Niese. 



