Waheb in Suphah, the Forgotten “Town in the Stream”

Describing the Israelites crossing the Arnon Stream into Amorite territory, the Torah quotes the Book of YHWH’s Battles that speaks of “Waheb in Suphah,” a phrase that appears nowhere else in the Bible. Many creative explanations have been given, but based on a survey on the ground we can identify it as the “Town in the Stream,” an ancient biblical town whose name had long been forgotten.

Dr.

David Ben-Gad HaCohen

Dr.

David Ben-Gad HaCohen

Categories:

Chukat

Waheb in Suphah, the Forgotten “Town in the Stream”

Crossing the Arnon: From Moabite to Amorite Territory

As the Israelites head north in the Transjordan,^[1] they leave the Moabite wilderness and cross over to the north side of the Arnon River, into the territory of the Amorites:

^{במדבר כא:יג} מִשָּׁם נָסָעוּ וַיַּחֲנוּ מֵעֵבֶר אַרְנוֹן אֲשֶׁר בַּמִּדְבָּר הַיֹּצֵא מִגְּבוּל הָאֱמֹרִי כִּי אַרְנוֹן גְּבוּל מוֹאָב בֵּין מוֹאָב וּבֵין הָאֱמֹרִי.

^{Num 21:13} From there they set out and encamped beyond the Arnon, that is, in the wilderness that extends from the territory of the Amorites. For the Arnon is the boundary of Moab, between Moab and the Amorites.^[2]

This crossing is a momentous. Until now, the Israelites travelled in the wilderness east of Moab, whom, like the Edomites, they did not engage in battle. This E-source account in Numbers forms the basis for Deuteronomy’s retelling of this leg of the journey:

^{דברים ב:ח} ...וַנַּעֲבֹר דֶּרֶךְ מִדְבַּר מוֹאָב. ^ב:ט וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הוָה אֵלַי אַל תָּצַר אֶת מוֹאָב וְאַל תִּתְגָּר בָּם מִלְחָמָה כִּי לֹא אֶתֵּן לְךָ מֵאַרְצוֹ יְרֻשָּׁה כִּי לִבְנֵי לוֹט נָתַתִּי אֶת עָר יְרֻשָּׁה.

^{Deut 2:8} … and we marched on in the direction of the wilderness of Moab. ^2:9 And YHWH said to me: “Do not harass the Moabites or provoke them to war. For I will not give you any of their land as a possession; I have assigned Ar as a possession to the descendants of Lot.”

The area north of the Arnon, which they now enter, is Amorite—the very people who live in the Cisjordan, and whom Israel is supposed to conquer. As the text later recounts, the Amorite king Sihon gathers his army to attack the Israelites as they travel through his territory, and the Israelites defeat him and settle his land.^[3] Thus, this crossing divides between the story of peaceful travel through the wilderness and southern Transjordan, and the conquest—first of the northern Transjordan,^[4] and then, in Joshua, of the Cisjordan.

The Book of YHWH’s Battles

As noted, the itinerary notes here emphasize that the Arnon is the border between the Moabites and the Amorites. At this point a quote from סֵפֶר מִלְחֲמֹת יְ־הוָה the Book of YHWH’s Battles^[5] is introduced:

^כא:יד עַל כֵּן יֵאָמַר בְּסֵפֶר מִלְחֲמֹת יְ־הוָה:

^21:14 Therefore the Book of the YHWH’s Battles tells of:

אֶת וָהֵב בְּסוּפָה וְאֶת הַנְּחָלִים אַרְנוֹן. ^כא:טו וְאֶשֶׁד הַנְּחָלִים אֲשֶׁר נָטָה לְשֶׁבֶת עָר וְנִשְׁעַן לִגְבוּל מוֹאָב.

Waheb in Suphah and the Arnon streams. ^21:15 And the slope of the streams stretching along the settled country of Ar hugging the territory of Moab.

The quote, which begins mid-sentence, is enigmatic. It seems to be a list of toponyms following the Hebrew word את, the sign for the accusative case (i.e., a direct object). Given that the subject and verb that preceded the direct object are absent, we don’t know what the book of YHWH’s Battles was telling us about these places.^[6] We can, however, identify the places to which most of the toponyms refer.

The Arnon Streams and the Settled Country of Ar

Arnon is the biblical name for Wadi el-Mujib, which flows into Dead Sea. Numbers 21:14, however, refers to it with the unusual locution וְאֶת הַנְּחָלִים אַרְנוֹן, “and the Arnon streams,” in the plural. This makes some sense, since the Arnon River has multiple tributaries:

Wadi al-Haydan (northeast),
Wadi an-Nukhayla/el-Meheires (southeast),
Wadi as-Saide (east).

The “Arnon streams” would thus refer to the Arnon River plus one or more of these tributaries.^[7] Others understand the mem at the end of the word not as the plural marker, but as an enclitic mem (i.e., an “extra” mem that strengthens the previous word) and thus only one stream is meant.^[8]

In either case, context clarifies further, as the text continues with וְאֶשֶׁד הַנְּחָלִים אֲשֶׁר נָטָה לְשֶׁבֶת עָר וְנִשְׁעַן לִגְבוּל מוֹאָב, “and the slope of the streams stretching along the settled country of Ar hugging the territory of Moab.” Ar refers to the sparsely settled grazing land east of Wadi an-Nukhayla, under the nominal control of Moab, whose cities lay to the west of this wadi.^[9]

Border of Moab according to the Book of YHWH’s Battles

Therefore, the quote describes the northern border of Moab, and the Arnon Stream or Streams refers to the Wadi Mujib and its eastern tributary, Wadi as-Saide, which marks this border. The phrase “Waheb in Suphah,” however, is enigmatic.

Waheb in Suphah: Alternative Translations

Neither Waheb nor Suphah appears anywhere else in the Bible. Some translations ignore Waheb altogether—which is not really a solution—and interpret the word Suphah as a reference to Yam Suph, the sea which YHWH split to save the Israelites from the pursuing Egyptians. But this interpretation is problematic.

First, Suphah is not Suph. Second, why would this body of water be referenced here, in a story about crossing the Arnon? To make sense of referencing Yam Suph here, exegetes who have used this translation also fill in extra words to create a meaningful sentence.

For instance, the mid-first millennium Aramaic Targum Onkelos, who understands the words מלחמות י־הוה as part of the quote and not the name of the (unnamed) book, translates:

קְרָבִין עֲבַד יְיָ עַל יַמָּא דְּסוּף וּגְבוּרָן עַל נַחֲלֵי אַרְנוֹן

YHWH fought battles at the Sea of Rushes and did wonders at the Arnon streams.^[10]

Jerome, in his 4^th century Latin translation, the Vulgate, understands this half verse as a prayer, asking God to make the Israelite crossing successful:

As he did at the Red Sea so may He do at the Arnon Streams.^[11]

Other pre-modern attempts at creative solutions include the Peshitta’s rendering, שלהביתא בעלעלא (ܫܠܗܒܝܬܐ ܒܥܠܥܠܐ), “a fire in the storm,” likely reflecting the Hebrew את להב בסופה , and R. Yehudah HeChasid’s את יהב בסופה, “[we took] the loot speedily.”^[12]

Modern scholars have been equally creative. One particularly popular suggestion was put forward by Duane L. Christensen (1938–2013) of William Carey International University. He sees והב as a corrupt form of the Tetragramatton and the word את as reflecting the Aramaic verb אתא, “to come,” and reconstructs the opening phrase as אתא י־הוה בסופה, “YHWH came in a whirlwind.”^[13] This would fit storm theophany language used of YHWH elsewhere (e.g. Isa 66:15), but is too radical an emendation to be accepted.

Naphtali Tur-Sinai (1886–1973), an Israeli Bible scholar whose commentary on the Bible, פשוטו של מקרא, focuses on emendations, suggests that והב is a corruption for רהב “Rahab,” the Ugaritic god of the sea, and claims that the verse is taken from an epic poem describing YHWH fighting Rahab at Yam Suph and at the Arnon Streams.^[14]

The Story of Et and Heb: Crushing the Ambush at the Mountains

The Babylonian Talmud reads this poem midrashically as describing a miracle that occurred when Israel crossed the Arnon River (b. Berachot 54b, MS Munich 95):

תנא: את והב—שני מצורעין היו והיו מהלכין בסוף מחנה ישראל

It was taught: “Et Waheb”—There were two people [Et and Heb] afflicted with skin disease, and they were walking behind (soph) the Israelite camp.^[15]

The text understands את (Et) and הב (Heb) as personal names, and the vav (וָ; wa) as the conjunction “and.” It is further parsing the term suphah (“rushes” or “storm”) as sopha (“end”), yielding “Et and Heb were behind [the camp].” The rabbis creatively connect this passage to the law mandating that people afflicted with skin disease are not allowed to be in the camp (Lev 13:46).

The text continues with their story:

וכי הוו ישראל מחלפי אתו אמוראי [ט]שו^[16] להון בנחלי ארנון ועבדי להו [נקירותא]^[17] ויתיבו בהון אמרי כי חלפי ישראל הכא נקטלינון ולא הוו ידעי דארון מסגי קמי ישראל דהוה ממך להו טורי.

And when the Israelites were passing through, Amorites [from Sihon’s northern polity] hid in the [dry] streams. They made hollowed out areas and sat in them. They said [to themselves]: “When the Israelites pass by here, we will kill them. But they didn’t know that the ark, which was travelling before the Israelites, would crush mountains.

כיון דאתא ארונא אידבקו טורי בהדי הדדי וקטלינון חזו דמא דקא נפיק מביני טורי אתו את והב ואמרו להו אתו ישראל ואמרו שירה והיינו דכתי' ואשד הנחלים וגו'

When the ark arrived, the mountains were jointed together (collapsing the hollowed-out areas) and killed them. When they saw the blood coming out of the mountains, Et and Heb came and told them. The Israelites went and sang a song, and this is what is written (Num 21:15): “and the slope of the streams…”

This crushing of the mountains is building upon how, according to the verse, the slope of the streams (=one mountain) turned to the settled area of Ar (=another mountain), understanding this as a description of how the two mountains were joined miraculously, thereby crushing those hiding inside the dry streambed.^[18]

This creative midrash, with its fanciful names and creative gap-filling, cannot be what the text meant originally. This exposition does highlight, however, how difficult exegetes have found interpreting this phrase.

Putting aside the creative emendations or re-readings, Waheb in Suphah appears to simply be a toponym. While neither term appears anywhere else in the Bible, the narrative context and the other toponyms can help us identify this place.

Another Crossing Point

As noted above, as the Israelites headed northward in this itinerary, they are travelling in the eastern wilderness of Moab. The Arnon typically would have been crossed toward the west, on the King’s Highway, which runs through Moab proper, but this could not be the spot envisioned in the E itinerary, since the Israelites are travelling on a more eastern route.

In the summer of 1998, I explored Wadi el-Mujib and its eastern tributary, looking for any evidence of a crossing point that would have been part of an eastern road.^[19] At one point, as I was I heading towards the spot along Wadi as-Saide where the section of Wadi es-Sawaqa, with its soft slopes, turns into Wadi as-Sefai, I realized that I was walking on an unknown Roman road.^[20] Often, Roman roads were built upon more ancient routes, and it seemed worthwhile to check further, to see if any evidence of an older road remained.

So, in June 2000, I returned to the Roman road with a group of Israeli scholars, led by Professor Chaim Ben-David of Kinnerot Academic College.^[21] There we discovered that the Roman serpentines going down to the riverbed cut an older, probably biblical-period road.

The Roman road goes mostly over the more ancient one, covering it up, but, as the two roads take a slightly different path, a few spots remain where the biblical road pops out on the side of the Roman road. This more ancient road is likely the Moabite Wilderness Highway of the E itinerary, and the spot where this road crosses the Arnon is likely the spot envisioned for the crossing in Numbers 21:13.^[22]

Not far to the west of this spot, where Wadi as-Saide is fed by Wadi as-Saliya, stands a high hill with steep slopes. On its summit sits the ruins of an ancient town, known nowadays as Khirbet el-Mudayna as-Saliya (or just Mudaynet as-Saliya),^[23] the closest town to this crossing area.

Mudaynet as-Saliya: The Town in the Stream

The site has a unique look. Wadi as-Saliya hugs the site on its northern and western sides, and Wadi as-Saide runs on its southern side. On its eastern side, the site is separated from the southern rim of Wadi es-Saide by a narrow, deep, and steep saddle.^[24] Looking at Mudaynet as-Saliya from the north or east, it looks like an isolated hill in the midst of the wadi.

This unique appearance suggested to the Czech explorer Alois Musil (1868–1944) and the French geographer Félix-Marie Abel (1878–1953) that Mudaynet as-Saliya should be identified with the biblical “Town in the Stream,”^[25] mentioned in Deuteronomy and Joshua. In describing the conquest of Sihon, Deuteronomy notes:

^{דברים ב:לו} מֵעֲרֹעֵר אֲשֶׁר עַל שְׂפַת נַחַל אַרְנֹן וְהָעִיר אֲשֶׁר בַּנַּחַל וְעַד הַגִּלְעָד לֹא הָיְתָה קִרְיָה אֲשֶׁר שָׂגְבָה מִמֶּנּוּ...

^{Deut 2:36} From Aroer on the edge of the Arnon Stream, including the town in the stream itself, to Gilead, not a city was too mighty for us…

Similarly, in the description of Israel’s southern border in the Transjordan in Joshua, “the town in the stream” follows “Aroer on the edge of Arnon valley”:

^{יהושע יג:ט} מֵעֲרוֹעֵר אֲשֶׁר עַל שְׂפַת נַחַל אַרְנוֹן וְהָעִיר אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹךְ הַנַּחַל וְכָל הַמִּישֹׁר מֵידְבָא עַד דִּיבוֹן.

^{Josh 13:9} From Aroer on the edge of the Arnon Stream and the town in the middle of the stream, the entire mishor from Medeba to Dibon.

And it appears again in this chapter, as a description of the southern border of the tribe of Reuben:

^{יהושע יג:טז} וַיְהִי לָהֶם הַגְּבוּל מֵעֲרוֹעֵר אֲשֶׁר עַל שְׂפַת נַחַל אַרְנוֹן וְהָעִיר אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹךְ הַנַּחַל...

^{Josh 13:16} And their border was from Aroer on the edge of the Arnon Stream, and the town in the middle of the stream…^[26]

Aroer (modern Khirbet Arair)^[27] lies on the northern rim of the Arnon Stream, adjacent to the ancient “King’s Highway” (דרך המלך) crossing in the west.^[28] The Town in the Stream is situated similarly, at the crossing point of the Moabite Wilderness Highway.

This may even be the town where Balak meets Balaam, who was travelling to Moab from the north:

^{במדבר כב:לו} וַיִּשְׁמַע בָּלָק כִּי בָא בִלְעָם וַיֵּצֵא לִקְרָאתוֹ אֶל עִיר מוֹאָב אֲשֶׁר עַל גְּבוּל אַרְנֹן אֲשֶׁר בִּקְצֵה הַגְּבוּל.

^{Num 22:36} When Balak heard that Balaam was coming, he went out to meet him at the town of Moab which is on the Arnon border, at its farthest point.

Here again, we are told of a city that is still considered to be in Moab, which is literally on the border, thus in the Arnon streambed.

Waheb: The Town in the Stream

I suggest that this ancient town was Waheb, and the nearby stream was Suphah. Notably, the western part of Wadi as-Saide, from Wadi as-Saliya to Wadi an-Nukhayla is also known as Wadi Sefai (سفي);^[29] Arabic names often preserve ancient toponyms.^[30] Waheb in Suphah (Sefai) is mentioned because it is just west of the spot where, in the E text, the Israelites cross into Sihon’s territory in the north.^[31]

What Happened to the Name?

Why is the name Waheb preserved only in Numbers 21? Mudaynet as-Saliya was inhabited in Iron 2, the period of the United Monarchy.^[32] This, I believe, was the period in which the book of YHWH’s Battles was written. Years later, when the book of Deuteronomy was written, the site had already been abandoned and its name lost, so it was called by the vague “the town in the stream.” The original name is preserved only in this snippet from the ancient and now lost work, YHWH’s Battles, quoted in the book of Numbers.

TheTorah.com is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
We rely on the support of readers like you. Please support us.

Published

July 2, 2020

Last Updated

November 1, 2024

Previous in the Series

Next in the Series

Before you continue...

TheTorah.com needs your support. A generous friend has offered to match end-of-year donations. Every contribution makes a difference.

Please Donate

Footnotes

View Footnotes

Published

July 2, 2020

Last Updated

November 1, 2024

[1] This paper is based on the latter half of my article: David Ben-Gad HaCohen, “'והב בסופה' ו'שבת ער': הערות למסלול מסע בני ישראל במואב” ['Waheb in Suphah' and 'The Settled Country of Ar': Comments on the Route of the Israelites in Moab], Cathedra 95 (2000): 7–24.

[2] I am discussing here only the itinerary as it appears in E. For a division of the itineraries in this chapter into their respective sources and narrative strands (E, J, and P), see my, “Ironing Out Israel’s Itinerary through the Transjordan,” TheTorah (2015).

[3] For more on this battle, see my “War at Yahatz: The Torah Versus the Mesha Stela,” TheTorah (2015).

[4] To further emphasize the point that Israel did not take territory away from Moab, the text tells us how it was Sihon who took this territory away from Moab:

^{במדבר כא:כו} כִּי חֶשְׁבּוֹן עִיר סִיחֹן מֶלֶךְ הָאֱמֹרִי הִוא וְהוּא נִלְחַם בְּמֶלֶךְ מוֹאָב הָרִאשׁוֹן וַיִּקַּח אֶת כָּל אַרְצוֹ מִיָּדוֹ עַד אַרְנֹן.

^{Num 21:26} Now Heshbon was the city of Sihon king of the Amorites, who had fought against a former king of Moab and taken all his land from him as far as the Arnon.

Some scholars have argued that Sihon and his Amorite kingdom are an entirely fictional creation, invented so that Israelites can claim that they did not conquer Moabite territory in the Transjordan, even if they did. See Rachel Havrelock, “Inventing the Mythic Amorite Kingdom of Sihon,” TheTorah (2015). Nevertheless, other scholars argue for the historicity of Sihon, though placing him later in time. See Israel Finkelstein and Thomas Römer, “North Israelite Memories of the Transjordan and the Mesha Inscription,” TheTorah (2018).

[5] This is Ed Greenstein’s preferred rendering; it is classically translated as “the Book of the Wars of the Lord.” For a discussion of what this book may have been, see Ed Greenstein “What was the Book of the Wars of the Lord?” TheTorah.com (2017). In contrast to the Masoretic pointing, the Greek LXX and the Aramaic Targum Onkelos think that the word “YHWH’s Battles” is not the name of the book but part of the quote.

[6] Some commentators suggest that our quote was cut from the poem of the bards (21:27–30). This is the assumption of Nahmanides and of Abarbanel (Num 21:13); Benjamin W. Bacon, The Triple Tradition of the Exodus: A Study of the Structure of the Later Pentateuchal Books (Hartford: Student Publishing Co., 1894), 211; Manfred Weippert, “The Israelite ‘Conquest’ and the Evidence from Transjordan,” in Symposia celebrating the seventy-fifth Anniversary of the founding of the American Schools of Oriental Reserch (1900-1975), ed., Frank Moore Cross (Cambridge: ASOR, 1979), 15-34 [p. 21]. Specifically, I would place it at the end of v. 28 and before v. 29, but this requires some revisions to make it work and is very speculative.

[7] See: George B. Gray, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Numbers, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986; reprint of 1903), 286; Israel Ben-Shem, כיבוש עבר הירדן: עיון מקראי [The Conquest of Transjordan: A Biblical study] (Tel Aviv: Student Union of Tel Aviv University, 1972), 13, 58.

[8] On the enclitic mem see: Horace D. Hummel, “Enclitic Mem in Early Northwest Semitic, especially Hebrew,” JBL 76 (1957): 85–107; Chaim Cohen, “The Enclitic-mem in Biblical Hebrew: Its Existence and Initial Discovery,” in Sefer Moshe – The Moshe Weinfeld Jubilee Volume, ed. Chaim Cohen, et al. (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2004), 231‒260. See also the section titles “Enclitic mem in Hebrew and Ugaritic” in Gary Rendsburg, “Boaz Married Ruth at the Threshing Floor: A Grammatical Solution to Ruth 4:5,” TheTorah (2020).

[9] For more on Ar, see my “‘Waheb in Suphah’ and ‘The Settled Country of Ar,’” 9–16.

[10] As noted earlier, Onkelos understands the words מלחמות י־הוה as part of the quote, and thus translates: קְרָבִין עֲבַד יְיָ עַל יַמָּא דְּסוּף וּגְבוּרָן עַל נַחֲלֵי אַרְנוֹן “YHWH fought battles at the Sea of Rushes and did wonders at the Arnon streams.” The latter is a reference to the midrash we will look at shortly.

[11]

sicut fecit in mari Rubro sic faciet in torrentibus Arnon.

For his sicut fecit (as he did), it is possible that Jerome is somehow reading את והב as one word, reflecting a variation on the Aramaic reflexive form אתיהב meaning “to be given,” but this is a stretch.

[12] The full comment reads:

והב—פי' יהב, וי"ו מתחלף ביו"ד. והב משמע כמו (תהלים נה:כג) "השלך על יי יהבך." וזהו שלל שכתיב שם (דברים ג:ד) שלא היתה קריה אשר לא לקחנו מאתם ששים עיר כל חבל ארגוב, והרבה כי האי גוונא שם.

Waheb—meaning yaheb, vav being exchangeable with yod. The meaning of waheb is like (Ps 55:23) “cast your burden (yaheb) on the LORD.” [In the context of the book of YHWH’s Battles] this refers to booty, for it says that (Deut 3:4) “there was not a town that we did not take from them: sixty towns, the whole district of Argob.”

בסופה—לשון סופה וסערה, ופי' בסופה לא צרנו זמן ארוך על הכרכים, כ[י] א[ם] במהרה כיבשנו ושללנו.

“Be-Suphah”—the language of whirlwind and storm, meaning, [we took it] in a whirlwind, we did not lay siege on the cities for a long time, but we conquered them quickly and plundered them.

See: Isaak Samson Lange, פירושי התורה לר' יהודה החסיד [The Commentaries on the Torah by Rabbi Judah HeChasid], (Jerusalem: Daf Chen, 1975), 184.

[13] See: Duane L. Christensen, “Num 21:14–15 and the Book of Wars of Yahweh,” Catholic Bible Quarterly 36 (1974): 359-360 [p. 360].

[14] Tur-Sinai follows the Greek LXX and the Aramaic Targum Onkelos in reading the words “YHWH’s Battles” as part of the quote and not the name of the book. See: Naphtali H. Tur-Sinai, “כלום היה ספר מלחמות ה' בידי כותבי התורה?” [Did the Authors of the Torah Have a Book of the Wars of YHWH?] Yediot 24 (1959–60), 144–148 [p. 148]; reprinted in, פשוטו של מקרא [The Simple Meaning of Scripture] (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher, 1967), 1.167–169. The LXX itself translates the phrase as “setting fire in Zoab” (τὴν Ζωοβ ἐφλόγισεν). Jacob Licht and John Wever both suggest that for Waheb the LXX’s Vorlage had זהב “gold,” though whether a reference to the metal or a place name (like Di-zahab) is unclear. For סופה, Licht suggests that LXX is somehow reading שריפה, but he puts a question mark after the suggestion. See Jacob Licht, פירוש על ספר במדבר [A Commentary on the Book of Numbers] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1991), 2:228–229; John W. Wevers, Septuaginta III1, Numeri, (Gottingen 1982), 257.

[15] The context of this baraita is as follows: Mishnah Berachot 9:1 says that a blessing must be recited when one sees a place where miracles were performed for Israel. The Babylonian Talmud then quotes a baraita (a tannaitic source not found in the Mishnah) which lists such places, including the spots where Israel crossed the Sea, the Jordan River, and the Arnon River. The Talmud then asks what miracle happened at the Arnon River, and answers by quoting the Waheb text:

מעברות נחלי ארנון מנלן דכתי' על כן יאמר בספר מלחמות יי את והב בסופה ואת הנחלים ארנון

“The crossing points of the Arnon Streams,” from where do we know [that a miracle happened here]? For it is written (Num 21:14): “Therefore the Book of the YHWH’s Battles speaks of: Waheb in Suphah and the Arnon streams.”

After this comes the baraita quoted above.

[16] The MS actually says תשו but this is almost certainly just a phonetic misspelling of טשו, which is what appears in all other versions.

[17] The MS reads נהורת, but “light” makes little sense in context and all other versions read נקירותא.

[18] This is not the only midrashic reading of the verse in the Talmud. An alternative reading, in b. Kiddushin 30b, reads the text together with a creative translation of the name of the book, yielding the point that people who “from the book [of the Torah] fight the battles of LORD (אתאהב בסופה) will love each other in the end.”

[19] On this trip, I did not search Wadi Sawaqa, with its soft limestone, that forms neither cliffs nor caves. The midrash quoted previously, which mentions tunnels dug into the rock, inspired me to look in a place with hard rock as opposed to soft limestone (which by a riverbed would be too soft to support a tunnel). In any event, I didn’t really expect to find any tunnels—and alas, I did not.

[20] A detailed description of the Roman road appears in my “‘Waheb in Suphah’ and ‘The Settled Country of Ar,’” 17.

[21] Other scholars in this group were Yoram Zafrir, Zev Meshel, Amos Kloner, Eli Raz and Gideon Peli.

[22] See: David Ben-Gad HaCohen, “ויה לימס ערביקוס” [Via Limes Arabicus], Cathedra 98 (2001): 159.

[23] Khirbet el-Mudayna/Medeineh (خربة المدينه) in Arabic just means “city ruins” and there are six of them in Jordan. To distinguish between them, archaeologists use a geographical marker, such as the name of the wadi it is near. See: J. Maxwell Miller, “Six Khirbet el-Medeinehs in the Region East of the Dead Sea,” BASOR 276 (1989): 25–28; Chaim Ben David, “אתרי 'מדינה' על יובלי הארנון—'מדיין שבצד מואב'?” [The Mudayna Sites in Moab—Do they Preserve the Name of Biblical Midian?] in בהר ובשפלה ובערבה (יהושע יב, ח): עיונים ומחקרים מוגשים לאדם זרטל בשנת שלשים לסקר הר מנשה [In the Hill-country, and in the Shephelah, and in the Arabah (Joshua 12,8), Studies and Researches Presented to Adam Zertal], ed. Shay Bar (Jerusalem: Ariel University Press, 2008), 78–88.

[24] This refers to a geomorphological formation: a hill with two peaks and a lower area in between. From the side, it looks like a horse’s saddle.

[25] See: Alois Musil, Arabia Petraea (Vienna: Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1907), 1.247, 328–330, 332; Félix-Marie Abel, Geographie de la Palestine (Paris: Lecoffre, 1933–1938), 2.351.

[26] One text that problematizes this identification is the description of Joab’s census of Israel in 2 Samuel 24. In describing the beginning of the census in the Transjordan, it states:

^{שמואל ב כד:ה} וַיַּעַבְרוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן וַיַּחֲנוּ בַעֲרוֹעֵר יְמִין הָעִיר אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹךְ הַנַּחַל הַגָּד וְאֶל יַעְזֵר.

^{2 Sam 24:5} They crossed the Jordan and encamped at Aroer, south of the town which is in the middle of the Wadi of Gad, and to Jazer.

According to this, the Town in the Stream is north of Aroer and not east of it, and can be found not in the eastern tributary of the Arnon, Wadi es-Saide, but in its northeastern tributary, Wadi el-Walla. For this reason, other scholars have suggested identifying the town in the stream with Khirbet Iskander, which is in Wadi el-Walla, in the territory of Gad. Nevertheless, this verse is likely corrupt. The ending “to Jazer” implies they were travelling north from Aroer, but the only verb we have is “to camp.” In his commentary on Samuel, Henry Smith notes that camping makes little sense here, and points to the Lucianic recension of the LXX, which reads not ויחנו בערוער “and they camped in Aroer” but ויחלו מערוער, “and they began at Aroer” (καὶ ή̓̕ρξαντο ἀπὸ Αροήρ). In line with this, I would argue that ימין “south” is likely a corruption for ומן “and from” and suggest reconstructing the verse as follows:

^{שמואל ב כד:ה} ויחלו בערוער ומן העיר אשר בתוך הנחל אל הגדי ואל יעזר.

^{2 Sam 24:5} And they began at Aroer, and from the town which is in the stream, towards the Gadites and Jazer.

This makes perfect sense, since they started at the two southern border towns and headed north. It also works well with the other mentions of this town surveyed above.

[27] The identification of Khirbet Arair with Aroer and of Wadi el-Mujib with the biblical Arnon is accepted by all scholars. See: Gerald L. Mattingly, “Arnon,” in Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 1.399.

[28] The King’s Highway pass is almost certainly where the Priestly Text envisions the Israelites crossing. In February 2018 I joined a group led by Chaim Ben David, walking ancient roads in Jordan. On our first hiking day we walked south on the King’s Highway, from Arair/Aroer through the pass and down to Khirbet el-Balua.

[29] See the Jordanian topographical map in Dept. of Lands, Trans-Jordan, Sheet 6A Diban, Amman 1934. In other sources it is written صافي, with Ș. See: Musil, Arabia Petraea, 1.246; Abel, Geographie de la Palestine, Map X; John Lewis Burckhardt, Travels in Syria and the Holy Land (New York: AMS Press, 1983; repr. of: London: John Murray, 1822), 373.

[30] I will further note that H. Tristram used a similar indication to suggest that Suphah should be identified with an area named el-Tzafi (صافي), next to the southeastern corner of the Dead Sea. See: Henry B. Tristram, The Land of Moab: Travels and Discoveries on the East Side of the Dead Sea and the Jordan (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1873), 65. Such an identification, however, separates Suphah from the Arnon and the route of the Israelites, and thus cannot be accepted.

[31] According to this suggestion, the quote from the Book of YHWH’s Battles has a clear geographic logic: The sites are listed from north to south. First comes Waheb in Wadi Suphah. The site is next to the Arnon which runs adjacent to Waheb, on its south. Then we have the southern slope of Wadi el-Mujib, Wadi es-Saide, that is tilted to the settled area of Ar on its top and its baton serves as the border between Moab and the Amorite kingdom of Sihon. This goes against the view of Miller who claims that the verses have no geographical logic. See: J. Maxwell Miller, “The Israelite Journey through (around) Moab and Moabite Toponymy,” JBL 108 (1989): 577–595 [p. 585]. The direction of the description, from north to south is against the direction of the Israelite itinerary that goes the opposite direction. There is no way that verses 14–15 describe the Israeli itinerary. This goes against Graham Davies, who sees the quote as part of the Israeli itinerary. See, Graham I. Davies, “The Wilderness Itineraries and the Composition of the Pentateuch,” Vetus Testamentum, 33.1 (1983): 1–13 [7–8]. In fact, the order of the sites from north to south supports the possibility, mentioned in a note above, that this quote was once part of the bard’s song about Sihon’s conquest.

[32] See: Ben David, “The Mudayna Sites,” p. 79.