Footnote 1: _Hofmann_ (_Weissag. u. Erfül._ i. S. 203) has revived the explanation, according to which the valley of Jehoshaphat is to be understood as the valley in which, under Jehoshaphat, judgment was executed upon several Gentile nations. But this locality, the desert of Thekoa, which was about three hours distance from Jerusalem (compare my _Comment. on the Psalms_, in the _Introduction to Ps._ xlvi. xlviii. lxxxiii.), is at too great a distance from the temple, where, according to vers. 16 and 17, the Lord holds His judgment upon the nations. Tradition has rightly perceived that the valley of Jehoshaphat can be sought for only in the immediate vicinity of the temple. In favour of the valley of Jehoshaphat now so called, "at the high east brink of Moriah, the temple-hill" (_Ritter_, _Erdk._ xv. 1, S. 559; xvi. 1, S. 329), is also Zech. vi. 1-8 (compare the remarks on that passage). From the circumstance that there is, first, the mention of the name, and, then, the statement of its signification, "And I gather all nations, and bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and _plead_ with them there," _Hofmann_ infers that the name must have already existed as a proper name. There is, however, an analogy in Num. xx. 1: "And the people encamped at Kadesh;"--but the place received the name Kadesh only because of the event to be subsequently related: previous to that, its name was Barnea. (Compare _Dissert. on Gen. of the Pent._ vol. ii. p. 310 ff.) The two theological names of the place, which arose only from the event recorded in Num. xx., occur even as early as Gen. xiv. 7. The natural name of the valley of Jehoshaphat is, moreover, in all likelihood, _King's Dale_; compare Gen. xiv. 17; 2 Sam. xviii. 18; and _Thenius_ on this passage.
We shall not dwell here for any length of time upon the history of the expositions of this passage. It has been given with sufficient minuteness by _Pococke_ and _Marckius_ among older writers, and by _Credner_ among the more modern. We content ourselves with remarking that the figurative exposition is the more ancient, having been adopted by the Chaldee Paraphrast, and by the Jews mentioned by _Jerome_, and that we cannot by any means, as _Credner_ does, derive it from doctrinal considerations only; for many, with whom such considerations weighed, as _Bochart_, _Pococke_, and _J. D. Michaelis_, do not approve of it; whilst, on the other hand, there are among its defenders not a few who were guided by just the opposite motives, such as _Grotius_, _Eckermann_, _Berthold_ (Einl. S. 1607 ff.), and _Theiner_. Two preliminary questions, however, require to be answered, before we can proceed to the main investigation.