(see below) do double duty,—as gen. after (
Hebrew characters) and as
subj. to (Hebrew characters)—a faulty syntax which a good writer would
have avoided (v.i.). The suggestion that the first two names
are gen. and the last two subj.,[1] has the advantage of
putting Kĕdorlā'omer, the head of the expedition (4. 5. 9. 17),
in the place of honour; but it is without warrant in the Heb.
text; and besides, by excluding the first two kings from
participation in the campaign (against 5. 9. 17), it necessitates
a series of changes too radical to be safely undertaken.—2.
The group of five cities (Pentapolis, Wis. 106) is thought
to be the result of an amalgamation of originally independent
traditions.
In ch. 19, only Sodom and Gomorrah are mentioned as destroyed
(1924. 28 [1820]; so 1310, Is. 19f., Jer. 2314 etc.) and Zoar (1917ff.) as spared.
Admah and Ẓeboim are named alone in Hos. 118, in a manner hardly
consistent with the idea that they were involved in the same catastrophe
as S. and G. The only passages besides this where the four are
associated are 1019 and Dt. 2922, although 'neighbour cities' of S. and
G. are referred to in Jer. 4918 5040, Ezk. 1646ff.. If, as seems probable,
there were two distinct legends, we cannot assume that in the original
tradition Admah and Ẓeboim were connected with the Dead Sea (see
Che. EB, 66 f.).—The old name of Zoar, (Hebrew characters) (Destruction?), appears
nowhere else.
The four names in v.1 are undoubtedly historical, although the monumental
evidence is less conclusive than is often represented. (1) (Hebrew characters)
((Greek characters)) is thought to be a faulty transcription of Ḫammurabi
(Ammurab[p]i), the name of the 6th king of the first Bab. dynasty,
who put an end to the Elamite domination and united the whole country
under his own sway (c. 2100 B.C.).[2] The final (Hebrew characters) presents a difficulty
which has never been satisfactorily explained; but the equivalence is
(Greek characters) between the second and third. The reading of the Sixtine ed.
(first two names in gen. coupled by (Greek characters)), which is appealed to in support
of Wi.'s construction, has very little MS authority. "I have little doubt
that both in H. and P. 19 (which is a rather carelessly written MS) and
in 135 the reading is due to a scribe's mistake, probably arising from
misreading of a contracted termination and induced by the immediately
preceding (Greek characters). How it came into the Roman edition, I do not feel
sure."[3]—2. (Hebrew characters)] G (Greek characters), etc.—(Hebrew characters)] G (Greek characters).—(Hebrew characters)] G (Greek characters)—(Hebrew characters)] G (Greek characters),
(Greek characters), [E] (Hebrew characters) ('name has perished'), S (Syriac characters).—(Hebrew characters)] the first
of the 11 instances of this Kethîb in Pent. (see on 212).
