Judges 18:29
And they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their father, who was born unto Israel: howbeit the name of the city was Laish at the first.
Original Language Analysis
Cross References
Historical Context
Ancient Near Eastern conquest regularly included renaming captured cities to assert dominance and erase previous identity. Egyptian, Assyrian, and Babylonian records document this practice. However, biblical usage often preserves original names alongside new ones (Jerusalem/Jebus, Hebron/Kiriath-arba, Bethel/Luz), showing respect for historical memory even when celebrating conquest. This historiographic practice distinguishes biblical narrative from propagandistic ancient Near Eastern royal inscriptions that glorified conquest while suppressing inconvenient details.
Dan's location at Israel's northern extremity made it strategically significant despite its distance from tribal heartland. The city controlled routes from the Mediterranean coast inland toward Damascus and Mesopotamia. Its position near Mount Hermon's foothills provided water from Jordan River headwaters (the name "Dan" became associated with one of Jordan's three source springs). This resource-rich location explains both the original Sidonian settlement and the Danite conquest—the territory was valuable enough to justify migration from distant coastal regions.
Archaeological excavations at Tel Dan have revealed extensive remains from Iron Age I (judges period) through the Hellenistic period. A massive city gate from the Middle Bronze Age (patriarchal period) demonstrates the site's long occupation history. Most significantly, excavations uncovered a large cult center with altar, high place, and religious installations dating to the monarchy period, confirming biblical accounts of false worship established at Dan. The Aramaic "Tel Dan Stele" (9th century BCE) found at the site contains the earliest extrabiblical reference to the "House of David," providing remarkable archaeological confirmation of biblical historicity.
Questions for Reflection
- How does the contrast between external covenant identity ("born unto Israel") and internal covenant betrayal (establishing false worship) warn against presuming on religious heritage?
- What does Scripture's preservation of Laish's original name alongside Dan's conquest teach about honest historical memory versus triumphalistic propaganda?
- In what ways can worldly success and apparent achievement mask spiritual compromise and future judgment?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
And they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their father, who was born unto Israel: howbeit the name of the city was Laish at the first. The Danites renamed their conquered city "Dan" (Dan, דָּן) after their tribal patriarch, Jacob's son born to Bilhah (Genesis 30:6). The Hebrew Dan means "judgment" or "he judged," reflecting Rachel's statement "God hath judged me, and hath also heard my voice" at his birth. This renaming asserted Danite identity and ownership, following ancient Near Eastern conquest patterns where victors imposed their names on captured territories, erasing previous identity and establishing new political reality.
The phrase "who was born unto Israel" (asher yulad le-Yisrael, אֲשֶׁר יֻלַּד לְיִשְׂרָאֵל) emphasizes Dan's legitimate place among Israel's twelve tribes, descended from Jacob/Israel himself. This legitimizing language contrasts ironically with the illegitimate means of conquest and the false worship about to be established (v. 30). External covenant identity doesn't guarantee internal covenant faithfulness—a warning Jesus repeated regarding those who claimed "We have Abraham to our father" while rejecting truth (Matthew 3:9, John 8:39-44). True covenant membership requires heart faithfulness, not merely external genealogy (Romans 2:28-29, Galatians 3:7-9).
"Howbeit the name of the city was Laish at the first" (ve'ulam Layish shem-ha'ir la-rishonah, וְאוּלָם לַיִשׁ שֵׁם־הָעִיר לָרִאשֹׁנָה) preserves historical memory of the conquered city's original identity. This detail demonstrates the narrator's historical accuracy and perhaps subtly critiques the Danite conquest—Laish's peaceful character (v. 7) and violent destruction (v. 27) are remembered even as its name was erased. Scripture frequently preserves such details, honoring historical truth while revealing moral complexity. The conquered city's memorial warns that worldly success built on violence and false worship, though apparently triumphant, carries seeds of eventual judgment (1 Kings 12:28-30, 2 Kings 10:29).