(2) The meaning is obscure. Kalneh, the Kalno of Isaiah 10:9, the Assyrian Kulunu (comp. Genesis 10:10), is here probably mentioned first because it is most easterly. It is identified by Kiepert with Holwan, but its position is uncertain, though generally regarded as lying in the neighbourhood of the Greek Ctesiphon, on the Tigris. Hamath is the ancient Hittite city in the valley of the Orontes, and it had felt the strong hand of Jeroboam II. (2Kings 14:28). We have no reason for believing that at this period the Assyrian power had destroyed the importance of these places, though the prophet may have regarded that issue as imminent. Hamath the Great (or Rabba; comp. Joshua 11:8), according to the inscriptions, sustained defeats from Salmanassar II. about 850 B.C. It was finally overthrown by Sargon in 720 B.C., who in his own boastful language "swept over its land like a flood." Gath, the home of Goliath, had probably lost its original importance. Uzziah destroyed it. Were Calno, Hamath, Gath, more important than Zion or Samaria? Then, says the prophet, do not expect in your opulence and self-satisfaction immunity from a worse doom.

Verse 2. - Pass ye. Go and compare your condition with that of other countries, from the furthest east to the north, to your own neighbours - has not God done more for you than for them? Nothing is said about the destruction of the three capitals, nor is Samaria threatened with similar ruin. Rather the cities are contemplated as still flourishing and prosperous (though by this time they had suffered at their enemies' hands), and Israel is bidden to remember that she is more favoured than they. Calneh, one of the five great Babylonian cities, is probably the Kul-unu of the inscriptions, a town in Southern Babylonia, whose site is unknown. In Genesis 10:10 and Isaiah 10:9 the LXX. call it Chalanne or Chalane; in the present passage they mistake the Hebrew, and render, διάβητε πάντες, "pass ye all by" (see Schrader, 'Die Keilinschriften,' p. 442). St. Jerome identifies it with Ctesiphon, on the east bank of the Tigris. Others (see Rawlinson, 'Herodotus,' 1, p. 490, 2nd edit.) find in it Nopher or Nipur, the modern Niffer, some sixty miles southeast of Babylon. As one of the oldest cities in the world, ranking with Babel, Erech, and Aecad, it was well known to the Israelites. Hamath the great; Septuagint, Ἐματραββά. This was the principal city of Upper Syria, and a place of great importance. In after years it was called Epiphania, after Antiochus Epiphanes (Genesis 10:18; Numbers 34:8; Isaiah 10:9). It fell in Sargon's reign, B.C. 720; afterwards it lost its independence, and was incorporated in the Assyrian empire. Oath of the Philistines. One of their five chief cities, and at one time the principal (1 Chronicles 18:1). The site is placed by Porter at Tell-es-Safi, an isolated hill; standing above the bread valley of Elah, and "presenting on the north and west a white precipice of many hundred feet." Dr. Thomson ('The Land and the Book,' p. 215, etc.) considers Gath to be the same city as Betogabra, Eleutheropolis, and the modern Beth Jibrin, which is some few miles south of Tell Safi. He thinks the site of Tell Sift is not adapted for the seat of a large city, and he saw few indications of ancient ruins there; whereas Beit Jibrin has in and around it the most wonderful remains of antiquity to be found in all Philistia. It had probably declined in importance at this time (see note on ch. 1:6), but its old reputation was still remembered. It was taken by Uzziah, but seems not to have remained long in his possession (2 Chronicles 26:6). In the year B.C. 711 Sargon reduced Ashdod and Garb, which he calls Gimtu Asdudim, i.e. Gath of the Ashdodites. Be they better? Have they received more earthly prosperity at God's hands than you? Is their territory greater than yours? No. How ungrateful, then, are you for all my favours (comp. Jeremiah 2:5-11)! Schrader and Bickell regard the verse as an interpolation, grammatically, metrically, and chronologically inadmissible; but their arguments are not strong, and Ames makes no mention of the fate of these cities.

6:1-7 Those are looked upon as doing well for themselves, who do well for their bodies; but we are here told what their ease is, and what their woe is. Here is a description of the pride, security, and sensuality, for which God would reckon. Careless sinners are every where in danger; but those at ease in Zion, who are stupid, vainly confident, and abusing their privileges, are in the greatest danger. Yet many fancy themselves the people of God, who are living in sin, and in conformity to the world. But the examples of others' ruin forbid us to be secure. Those who are set upon their pleasures are commonly careless of the troubles of others, but this is great offence to God. Those who placed their happiness in the pleasures of sense, and set their hearts upon them, shall be deprived of those pleasures. Those who try to put the evil day far from them, find it nearest to them.Pass ye unto Calneh, and see,.... What is become of that city, which was in the land of Shinar, an ancient city, as early as the days of Nimrod, and built by him, and was with others the beginning of his kingdom, Genesis 10:10; it belonged to Babylon, and is by Jarchi here interpreted by it, being put for Babel, as he supposes. According to Jerom (g), it is the same city, sometimes called Seleucia, in his days Ctesiphon; very probably it had been lately taken by the king of Assyria, and therefore made mention of; see Isaiah 10:9; where it is called Calno;

and from thence go ye to Hamath the great; the same with Antiochia, as Jarchi and Jerom; called the great, to distinguish it from Hamath the less, sometimes called Epiphania; or from Hamathzobah, near Tadmor, or Palmyra, in the wilderness, 2 Chronicles 8:3; though it might be so called with respect to its own grandeur and magnificence; as Sidon is called "Sidon the great", though there was no other, Joshua 11:8; for it was a royal city; we read of Toi, king of Hamath, in the times of David, 2 Samuel 8:9. It is placed by Josephus (h) on the north of the land of Canaan; and so it appears to be, and to be between Damascus and the Mediterranean sea, from Ezekiel 47:15. Abu'lfeda (i), a learned prince, who reigned in Hamath, and should know its situation, places it on the Orontes, between Hems and Apamea, that river surrounding it on the east and north. The learned Vitringa (k) thinks that neither Antiochia nor Epiphania are meant, but the city Emissa; which Ammianus Marcellinus (l) makes mention of along with Damascus, as a famous city in Syria, equal to Tyre, Sidon, and Berytus: and of the same opinion was Theodoret (m) among the ancients, and so Calmet (n) of late. And so Hamath and Damascus are mentioned together as recovered by Jeroboam, 2 Kings 14:28; very probably the kingdom of Hamath became subject to the kings of Damascus; see Jeremiah 49:23; but, be it what place it will, it is very likely it had been lately spoiled by the king of Assyria; see Isaiah 37:13.

then go down to Gath of the Philistines; one of their five principalities, and a chief one, so called to distinguish it from other Gaths, as Gathhepher, Gathrimmon. It stood about five or six miles south of Jamnia, about fourteen south of Joppa, and thirty two west of Jerusalem. A village of this name as shown, as Jerom (o) says, five miles from Eleutheropolis, as you go to Diospolis or Lydda, and is taken to be the same place. It is famous for being the birthplace of Goliath; and is called in 2 Samuel 8:1; compared with 1 Chronicles 18:1, Methegammah, or the bridle of Ammah, or Metheg and her mother; that is, Gath and her daughters. Reland (p) thinks Gath is the city Cadytis of Herodotus (q), who says it is a city of the Syrians, called Palestines or Philistines, and speaks of the mountains of it; and this city was not far from the mountainous country of Judea: now this city had been taken by Hazael, king of Syria, and its wall was broke down by Uzziah, king of Judah, 2 Kings 12:17;

be they better than these kingdoms? or their border greater than your border? that is, do Calneh, Hamath, and Gath, excel in dignity and grandeur, in wealth and strength, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah? or are they of a larger circumference, and exceed them in length and breadth? no, they did not; and therefore the more ungrateful were Israel and Judah to sin against the Lord as they had done, who had given them such rich and large kingdoms, and therefore might expect to be taken and spoiled as well as they: though some think there is a change of number and persons in the text, and that the sense is, are you better than these kingdoms, or your border greater than theirs? and, if not, you may expect to fare as they; see a like expression in Nahum 3:8.

(g) Quaest. in Gen. fol. 66. M. (h) Antiqu. l. 9. c. 10. sect. 1.((i) See the Universal History, vol. 2. p. 316. (k) Comment. in Jessiam, c. 10. 9. (l) Lib. 23. (m) Comment. in Jer. ii. 15. and xlix. 23. (n) Dictionary, in the word "Hamath". (o) De locis Hebr. fol. 92. A. (p) Palestina Illustrata, tom. 2. l. 3. p. 669. (q) Euterpe, sive l. 2. c. 159. & Thalia, sive l. 3. c. 5.