Exodus Chapter 14 verse 2 Holy Bible

Pulpit Commentary

Pulpit CommentaryVerse 2. - Speak unto the children of Israel that they turn. Kalisch translates "return" - i.e., "retrace their steps," and supposes that Etham lay far south of Pihahiroth, on the west coast of the Gulf of Suez. But the Hebrew word means either "turn back" or "turn aside," and is translated here ἀποστρέψαντες and not ἀναστρέψαντες by the LXX. Dr. Brugsch supposes that the turn made was to the north, and the "sea" reached the Mediterranean; but all other writers, regarding the sea spoken of as the Red Sea (compare Exodus 13:18), believe the divergence from the previous route to have been towards the south, and place Pihahiroth, Migdol, and Baal-Zephon in this quarter. Pihahiroth. The exact position is nnknown. Neither the Egyptian remains nor the writings of the Greeks or Romans present us with any similar geographic name. If Semitic, the word should mean "the entrance to the caves," but it is quite possible that it may be Egyptian. Migdol. There was undoubtedly a famous Migdol, or Maktal, on the eastern frontier of Egypt, which was a strong fortified post, and which is often mentioned. Hecataeus called it Magdolos (Fr. 282). In the Itinerary of Antonine it is said to be twelve Roman miles from Pelusium (p. 76). But this is too northern a position for the Migdol of the present passage; which must represent a "tower" or "fortified post" not very remote from the modern Suez. Over against Baal-Zephon. The accumulation of names, otherwise unknown to the sacred writers, is a strong indication of the familiarity possessed by the author of Exodus with the geography of the country. No late writer could have ventured on such local details. A name resembling "Baal-Zephon" is said to occur in the Egyptian monuments. Dr. Brugsch reads it as "Baal-Zapuna." He regards it as the designation of a Phoenician god, and compares "Baal-Zebub." Others have compared the "Zephon" with the Graeco-Egyptian form "Typhon," and have supposed "Baal-Zephon" to be equivalent to "Baal-Set" or "Baal. Sutech" - a personification of the principle of evil.

Ellicott's Commentary

Ellicott's Commentary for English ReadersXIV.THE PURSUIT BY PHARAOH AND THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA.(2) Speak unto the children of Israel, that they turn.--The march of the Israelites had been hitherto almost due south-east. They had reached the edge of the desert (Exodus 13:20), near the head of the Bitter Lakes. If this direction had been maintained, their next day's march would have taken them out of Egypt into the "wilderness of Etham"--a desolate tract, in which there was no water, and probably scarcely any herbage. The Bitter Lakes would have been upon their right hand, and, so far as the Egyptians were concerned, they would have been in safety. But at this point an express command was given them to "turn." Kaiisch, Rosenmller, and others understand this as a command to "return," or "retrace their steps;" but this is clearly not what was intended, since their march was to bring them to "the sea," which they had not reached previously. The question arises, What sea? Brugsch suggests the Mediterranean; but it is against this that the Mediterranean has not yet been mentioned in Exodus, and that, when mentioned, it is not as "the sea," but as "the sea of the Philistines" (Exodus 23:31). "The sea" of this verse can scarcely be different from "the Red Sea" of Exodus 13:18, the only sea previously mentioned by the writer. To reach this sea it was necessary that they should deflect their course to the right, from south-east to south, so keeping within the limits of Egypt, and placing the Bitter Lakes on their left hand.Pi-hahiroth . . . Migdol . . . Baal-zephon.--These places cannot be identified. They were Egyptian towns or villages of no importance, near the head of the Gulf of Suez, situated on its western shores. The names nearest to Pi-hahiroth in Egyptian geography are Pehir and Pehuret. Migdol would, in Egyptian, be Maktal; and there was an Egyptian town of that name near Pelusium, which, however, cannot be intended in this place. Baal-zephon was probably a Semitic settlement, which had received its name from some worshippers of the god Baal. Eastern Egypt contained many such settlements. The accumulation of names indicates an accurate acquaintance with Egyptian topography, such as no Israelite but one who had accompanied the expedition is likely to have possessed.