All Israel
Opinion Blog / Guest Columnist
ALL ISRAEL NEWS is committed to fair and balanced coverage and analysis, and honored to publish a wide-range of opinions. That said, views expressed by guest columnists may not necessarily reflect the views of our staff.
opinion

Israel: From Dan to Beersheba

 
Mt. Hermon viewed from the Golan Heights (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

The phrase "from Dan to Beersheba" appears multiple times throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, serving as the standard biblical expression to describe the full extent of Israelite territory from its northernmost to its southernmost point. This geographic designation defined the complete heartland of the ancient Israelite nation and would later play a significant role in shaping modern political boundaries in the Middle East.

Biblical References

Three particularly significant biblical passages employ this phrase. In Judges 20:1, Scripture records: "Then all Israel from Dan to Beersheba and from the land of Gilead came together as one and assembled before the LORD in Mizpah." This verse demonstrates how the phrase functioned to describe the complete national assembly of the Israelite tribes. In 1 Samuel 3:20, we read: "And all Israel from Dan to Beersheba recognized that Samuel was attested as a prophet of the LORD," showing how Samuel's prophetic reputation spread across the entire nation. Perhaps most evocatively, 1 Kings 4:25 states: "Judah and Israel lived in safety, from Dan even to Beersheba, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, all the days of Solomon." This passage describes an ideal state of national peace and prosperity under Solomon's reign, with the phrase encompassing the totality of the kingdom. In each instance, "from Dan to Beersheba" served as shorthand for the complete territory of the Israelite people, from the city of Dan in the far north to Beersheba in the south.

The Danite Migration and the Philistine Threat

The city of Dan was not the tribe's original territorial allotment. According to the Book of Joshua, the Danites were initially assigned a portion along the Mediterranean coast, adjacent to the Philistines. This area corresponds roughly to the modern Gaza Strip region. However, as recorded in Judges 18, the tribe found this territory impossible to possess. The primary cause was unrelenting conflict with the Philistines.

The Philistines were a powerful confederation of warriors who originated from the Aegean region, often identified as part of the "Sea Peoples" who disrupted the eastern Mediterranean world around 1200 BCE. They established a pentapolis of five formidable city-states along the southern coastal plain: Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath. Possessing advanced iron-working technology and superior military organization, they presented a major challenge to the Israelite tribes attempting to settle the coastal areas.

Pressured by this powerful neighbor and unable to secure their allotted land, the Danites sought a new territory. A group of scouts traveled north and discovered the city of Laish, described as a peaceful and isolated settlement. Following this reconnaissance, a force of 600 Danite men and their families migrated north, conquered Laish, and rebuilt it as their new capital, renaming it Dan. This event, occurring during the period of the Judges, shifted the northern border of Israelite settlement and cemented the phrase "from Dan to Beersheba" as a national descriptor for generations to come.

Christian Zionism and the Balfour Declaration

Centuries later, this biblical phrase took on profound political significance through the movement known as Christian Zionism. Early Christian Zionists, particularly in nineteenth-century Britain, held a literal interpretation of biblical prophecy concerning the restoration of the Jewish people to their ancestral land. For them, "from Dan to Beersheba" was not a historical abstraction but a precise map of the territory God had promised to the Israelites.

This scriptural understanding directly shaped British political thinking. Prime Minister David Lloyd George's Zionist convictions stemmed from a convergence of religious ideals and imperialist objectives. Through his Welsh Chapel upbringing, Lloyd George had been steeped in the history of the Jewish people. He saw Palestine as "a historic and sacred land, throbbing from Dan to Beersheba with immortal traditions." This exact phrase, quoted from Lloyd George himself, demonstrates how biblical geography directly influenced his support for Zionism. Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, raised in evangelical Bible-reading culture, shared this perspective. His resulting interest in the Jewish people made his conversion to Zionism a natural progression. These biblical convictions culminated in the Balfour Declaration of November 1917, which committed Britain to "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."

San Remo and the Mandate for Palestine

The principles established in the Balfour Declaration were carried forward into the post-World War I settlements. At the San Remo Conference in April 1920, the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers formalized the allocation of mandates over former Ottoman territories. The San Remo Resolution explicitly recognized the Balfour Declaration and appointed Britain as the Mandatory for Palestine. Critically, the original territorial definition of this Mandate included the northern lands that constitute today's Golan Heights. The city of Dan, the very landmark of the northern boundary in the ancient biblical phrase, was within the mandated territory. This inclusion reflected the historical and biblical understanding that had informed the initial political promises.

The Franco-British Boundary Convention of December 1920 initially defined the border between the British Mandate of Palestine and the French Mandate of Syria. This technical demarcation had a significant consequence: it placed portions of Mount Hermon and the Golan region within the territory of the British Mandate for Palestine. Legally and cartographically, Mount Hermon was part of Palestine once more, resurrecting the ancient biblical boundary for the modern era.

Colonial Trade-offs and the Loss of Territory

However, the final borders were not determined by scripture but by imperial realpolitik. Through the Paulet-Newcombe Agreement of 1923, negotiated by French Lieutenant Colonel N. Paulet and British Lieutenant Colonel S. F. Newcombe, the border between the British Mandate of Palestine and the French Mandate of Syria was adjusted. The agreement left the entirety of the Golan Heights under French control while ensuring that the Sea of Galilee and its water resources remained with Palestine.

This territorial adjustment was heavily influenced by broader British and French interests in the region, particularly oil. The Mosul region in what became British-controlled Iraq contained substantial oil deposits. Under the original Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916, Mosul had been allocated to France. Britain demanded that the Mosul area be attached to Mesopotamia under British control. France agreed to cede Mosul in exchange for a share of the oil profits. The Cadman-Berthelot Agreement, signed at San Remo in April 1920, gave France 25 percent of the profits from the Mosul oil field. Additionally, France received British support for pipeline routes from Mosul through French-controlled Syria to the Mediterranean. These negotiations also involved accommodating local leaders, including Sultan al-Atrash, a Druze leader whose influence in the region required diplomatic consideration.

The British ceded the Golan territory to maintain positive relations with France and to protect these wider strategic and economic interests in the Levant. This act severed the biblical and historical northern anchor of "Dan to Beersheba" from the territory designated for the Jewish national home. The adjustment was not based on historical, archaeological, or demographic considerations but was a product of colonial trade-offs.

Mount Hermon and the Mandate

In the biblical narrative, Mount Hermon consistently served as a majestic frontier marking the northern extent of Israel's conquests. Deuteronomy 3:8-9 records that the Israelites took territory "from the Arnon Gorge as far as Mount Hermon," and Joshua 13:11 explicitly includes "all Mount Hermon" within the allocation to the tribe of Manasseh east of the Jordan. The Franco-British Boundary Convention of 1920 technically placed portions of Mount Hermon's southern and western slopes within the British Mandate territory. However, the British, focused on administering more populous areas, never effectively governed the mountain region. The French exercised de facto control, and the subsequent Paulet-Newcombe adjustments formalized this arrangement.

Conclusion: The Rightful Place of the Golan

This historical chain of events supports the position that the Golan Heights, including Mount Hermon, are rightfully part of Israel. The area was intentionally included within the original international legal framework for the Jewish homeland under the Mandate for Palestine at San Remo. Its removal was not based on historical connections or demographic realities but was a product of colonial arrangements centered on oil concessions and Franco-British diplomatic negotiations. The city of Dan, for millennia the symbol of Israel's northern extent, was excised from its national territory in a political arrangement that served European imperial interests rather than historical justice.

Israel's presence in the Golan, secured after the 1967 Six-Day War, can be viewed as a restoration of a boundary that was previously recognized under international law at San Remo. The strategic high ground of the Golan and the water sources of Mount Hermon are vital for Israel's security. Given that the original Mandate included this territory and that its transfer to Syria was an administrative decision divorced from the land's deep historical and biblical connections, a strong case exists that Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights is both legally grounded in the foundational documents of the Middle East state system and a necessary condition for the nation's security. The phrase "from Dan to Beersheba" should once again describe the complete extent of the Jewish homeland, with Dan restored to its rightful place within Israel's sovereign territory.

Want to help more people find our reporting from Israel? Leave a quick Google review of our website here.

Aurthur is a technical journalist, SEO content writer, marketing strategist and freelance web developer. He holds a MBA from the University of Management and Technology in Arlington, VA.

Popular Articles
All Israel
Receive latest news & updates
    A message from All Israel News
    Is ALL ISRAEL NEWS' faithful reporting important to you? Be part of it — help us continue by becoming a $5/month supporting partner.
    Donate to ALL ISRAEL NEWS
    Latest Stories