Jeremiah 49:23 - Joseph Benson’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Concerning Damascus “Damascus was the capital of the kingdom of Syria: and had seemingly at this time swallowed up all the other petty sovereignties of that country. Isaiah had before uttered a prophecy concerning it, of a calamitous import, (chap. 17,) which had been fulfilled by Tiglath-pileser's taking it, and carrying the people captive to Kir, 2 Kings 16:9. Amos also had foretold the same event, Amos 1:3-5. But it had recovered itself after the fall of the Assyrian empire, and is here doomed to suffer again the like calamities from the resentment of Nebuchadnezzar, probably about the same time with the other neighbouring nations: see note on chap. Jeremiah 48:1. Hamath is confounded, and Arpad Hamath and Arpad are elsewhere joined together: see 2 Kings 18:34; 2 Kings 19:13; Isaiah 10:9. Hamath was the capital of a part of Syria. bearing the same name, and which formed once an independent kingdom. It was situate on the northern frontier of the land of Israel, Whence we find frequent mention of the entrance of Hamath, Numbers 34:8, &c. The city of Hamath, Josephus tells us, was that which the Macedonians afterward called Epiphania: Ant., lib. 1. cap. 6. And Jerome, in his commentary on Isaiah 10:9, says the same. Hemath, quam Syri usque hodie Epiphanium vocant Aphad, or Arvad, is with good reason held to be the island of Aradus, in the Mediterranean sea; as those who are called הארודי, Genesis 10:18, are by the LXX. rendered Αραδιοι, in the Vulgate, Aradii. This island was not far from the shore, and nearly opposite to Hamath.” Blaney. They heard evil tidings Tidings of the approach of a hostile army; they are faint-hearted Their courage fails them. Their sorrow is on the sea Or, as on the sea, namely, when a storm arises and the sea is tempestuous. Houbigant reads, They fluctuate as the sea; they cannot be at rest: compare Isaiah 57:20-21. But Blaney renders נמגו נים דאגה, They are melted into a sea of solicitude: observing, “This is a literal translation of the text; and appears to me preferable in sense to any of the interpretations I have hitherto met with.”