27 
on the north of Bethlehem, is beyond dispute. There is some- 
thing to be said about Zelzah, the Plain or Oak of Tabor, and 
the Hill of God or Elohim, with its Philistine garrison ; but, 
having touched upon the essential points of Saul's route, it 
will perhaps be more useful to apply the brief remainder of 
the time at my disposal to another subject. 
In the Book of Joshua the numerous cities of the Tribe of 
Judah are arranged as follows : — 
1. “ The uttermost cities towards the coast of Edom south- 
ward,^ or in the Eejeb. 
2. Three groups “in The Y alley,” or Shephelah. 
3. Three groups in the Philistine Plain encircling Ekron, 
Ashdod, and Gaza. 
4. Five groups in “ The Mountains.” 
5. One group in “ The Wilderness,” or Midbar. 
6. A group in the north of Judah named only in the 
Septuagint. 
Only the northernmost part of the first group falls within 
the present limits of the Survey. The interest attracted by 
the Nejeb, or country of the South, is displayed in the masterly 
work of the Bev. C. Wilton, and we must hope that the Pales- 
tine Fund will be enabled to survey that unknown region. 
The three groups in the second series are said to be in 
“ The V alley,” according to the authorised version ; but the 
Hebrew word is “ Shephelah.” The Shephelah is amply 
discussed in Dr. Wm. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible under 
the Greek form of Sephela. It is there assumed to be a 
“ low-lying flat district ” between the central highlands and 
the Mediterranean. The article quotes the various English 
words by which the same Hebrew word is rendered in the 
authorised version, as “ the vale,” “ the valley,” “ the low 
plains,” and “ the low country.” The article also remarks 
that “ no definite limits are mentioned to the Shephelah, nor 
is it probable that there are any.” The article also asserts 
that “a large number of the towns mentioned in Joshua 
were not in the plain, nor even on the western slopes of the 
central mountains, but in the mountains themselves.” This 
is said “ to seem to show that one district might intrude on 
the limits of another,” or, “which is more probable,” says 
the article, “that the name Shephelah did not originally 
mean a lowland, as it came to do in its accommodated Hebrew 
form.” The article goes on to identify the Shephelah with 
the maritime Plain of Philistia, with what accuracy will be 
presently seen. The article is an example of the keen and 
logical criticism with which it was attempted to penetrate the 
obscurity which had always prevailed, at least, in literature. 
