1. A city near the waters of lake Merom (Huleh), the seat of Jabin, a powerful Canaanitish king, as appears from the summons sent by him to all the neighboring kings to assist him against the Israelites (Jos 11:1; Jos 5). He and his confederates were, however, defeated and slain by Joshua, and the city burned to the ground (Jos 11:10-13; Josephus, Ant. 5, 5, 1): being the only one of those northern cities which was burned by Joshua, doubtless because it was too strong and important to leave standing in his rear. It was the principal city of the whole of North Palestine, "the head of all those kingdoms" (Jos 10:10; see Jerome, Onomast. s.v. Asor). Like the other strong places of that part, it stood on an eminence (תֵּל, Jos 11:13, A.V. "strength"), but the district around must-have been on the whole flat, and suitable for the maneuvers of the "very many" chariots and horses which formed part of the forces of the king of Hazor and his confederates (Jos 11:4,6,9; Jg 4:3). But by the time of Deborah and Barak the Canaanites had recovered part of the territory then lost, had rebuilt Hazor, and were ruled by a king with the ancient royal name of Jabin, under whose power the Israelites were, in punishment for their sins, reduced. From this yoke they were delivered by Deborah and Barak, after which Hazor remained in quiet possession of the Israelites, and belonged to the tribe of Naphtali (Jos 19:36; Jg 4:2; 1Sa 12:9). Solomon did not overlook so important a post, and the fortification of Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer, the points of defense for the entrance from Syria and Assyria, the plain of Esdraelon, and the great maritime lowland respectively, was one of the chief pretexts for his levy of taxes (1Ki 9:15).. Later still it is mentioned in the list of the towns and districts whose inhabitants were carried off to Assyria by Tiglath-Pileser (2Ki 15:29; Josephus, Ant. 9:11, 1). We encounter it once more in 1 Macc. 11:67, where Jonathan, after encamping for the night at the "water of Gennesar," advances to the "plain of Asor" (Josephus, Ant. 13, 5, 7; the Greek text of the Maccabees has prefixed an n from the preceding word πεδίον; A.V. "Nasor") to meet Demetrius, who was in possession of Kadesh (11, 63; Josephus as above). SEE NASOR. Raumer queries whether it may not have been the ancient town of Naason, which king Baldwin IV passed on his way from Tiberias to Saphet (Will. Tyr. p. 1014); and his reason for this conjecture is that the Vulgate gives Naason for the Asor (Α᾿σώρ) of Tobit 1, 1 (Raumer, Palastinza.s. 114, n.). SEE ASOR.
The name Hazor still lingers in several places around the upper valley of the Jordan (Robinson, B. R. 3, 63, 81, 401). There is one Hazury on a commanding site above Caesarea Philippi, and close to the great castle of Subeibeh. Here Keith (Land of Israel, p. 374) and Stanley (Sin. and Pal. p. 389) would place the ancient capital of Canaan. But the territory of Naphtali hardly extended so far eastward. Another Hasur is in the plain, a few miles west of the site of Dan; but neither does this site quite accord with the Scripture notices (Porter's Damascus, 1, 304; Van de Velde,
Memoir, p. 318). Schwarz (Palest. p. 91) thinks a village which he calls Azur, between Banias and Meshdel (el-Mejel), may be the ancient Hazor; he probably refers to the Ain el-Hazury marked on Zimmerman's Map a little north-east of Banias, which, however, is too far east. There is a place marked as Azur on Zimmerman's Map, a little north-east of Kedes (Kadesh), which unquestionably lay in Naphtali; but M. De Saulcy (Narrat. 2, 406) denies that this can have been the Hazor of Jabin (which he distinguishes from the Hazor of Solomon), and in a long argument (p. 400- 405) he contends that it was situated on the site of some extensive ruins, which he reports at a place called indefinitely el-Khan, on the hills skirting the north-easterly shore of the lake el-Huleh, in the direction of Banias. Van de Velde (Memoir, p. 318) likewise thinks the Hazor of Joshua different from that of Judges (although both were ruled by a Jabin, evidently a hereditary title), and inclines to regard En-Hazor (Jos 19:37) as identical with the latter, and with a ruined Hazur in the middle of Galilee (about two hours from Bint Jebeil); while he seems to acquiesce in the identification of the eastern Hazor with a Hazur (Porter, Danascus, 1, 304) or Kasr Autar (Seetzen), or, as he himself calls it, Tell Haze, covered with remains, and jutting out from Merj Ayun towards the Huleh plain. The Hazor of Jos 19:36, he believes to be Tell Hazur, southeast of Ramah. All this, however, is vague and confused. Mr. Thomson, who visited this region in 1843, believed Hazor may be identified with the present castle of Hunin, north of the Huleh (Biblioth. Sacra, 1846, p. 202). The editor (Dr. Robinson), however, thinks the arguments adduced more plausible than sound (ib. p. 212), and advocates the opinion of Rev. E. Smith, that Tell Khureibeh, at the south end of the plain of Kedes, is better entitled to be regarded as the site of Hazor (Bibliotheca Sacra, 1847, p. 403). Accordingly, in the new ed. of his Researches, after noticing and rejecting several other sites proposed (3, 63, 81, 402), he at length fixes upon this as best agreeing with the ancient notices of this city (ib. p. 365). There are, as the name Khureibeh, "ruins," implies, some ancient ruins on the tell, but they are those of a village. There are still other ruins of an ancient town which occupy a commanding site on the south bank of wady Hendâj, overlooking the valley and lake of Merom, and about six miles south of Kedesh, which is a not improbable site for the ancient Hazor (Robinson, Bibl. Res. 3, 363, 365); and the plain beneath it, stretching to the shore of the lake, might take the name of the city Asur, as Josephus seems to indicate '(1. c.). Ritter (Erdk. 15, 260) — accepts the Hazury proposed by Burckhardt (Trav. p. 44); apparently the inconsiderable ruin on the rocky declivity above Banias (Robinson, Res. new ed. 3, 402). Captain Wilson prefers the isolated Tell Harah, covered with ruins, about two miles southeast of Kedesh (Jour. Sac. Lit. 1866, p. 245). But none of these last cited places retain the ancient name. Finally, Dr. Thomson is confident (Land and Book, 1, 439) that the true spot is Hazere (the above Hazur of Van de Velde, east of a more northern Ramah), in the center of the mountainous region overhanging lake Huleh on the northwest, containing numerous ancient remains, and locally connected by tradition with the Israelitish victory; although Dr. Robinson (incorrectly) objects to this site (Bib. Res. new ed. 3:63) that it is too far from the lake, and within the territory of Asher.
2. A city in the south of Judah (but probably not one of those assigned to Simeon, since it is not named in the list, Jos 19:1-9), mentioned between Kedesh (Kadesh-Barnea) and Ithant (Jos 15:23, where the Vat. MS. of the Sept. unites with the following name, Α᾿σοριωνάν, Alex. MS. omits, Vulg. Asor). We may reasonably conjecture that this was the central town of that name, the other Hazors of the same connection (HazorHadattah, and Kerioth-Hezron or Hazor-Amam) being probably so called for distinction' sake; and in that case we may perhaps locate it at a ruined site marked on Van de Velde's Map as Tayibeh (the et-Taiyib of Robinson, Res. 3 Appendix, p. 114), on a tell around the south-west base of which runs the wady ed-Dheib, emptying into the Dead Sea. See Nos. 3 and 4.
3. HAZOR-HADATTAH (for so the Heb. חָצוֹר חֲדִתָּה, i.e. New Hazor, should be understood; since there is no copula between the words, and the sense in verse 32 requires this condensation; Sept. omits, Vulg. Asor nova), a city in the south of Judah (but not the extreme Simeonite portion), mentioned between Bealoth and Kerioth (Jos 15:25); probably, as suggested in Keil and Delitzsch's Commentary, ad loc. (Edinb. ed. p. 160), the ruined site el-Hudhairah of Robinson's Researches (3, Append. p. 114), south of Hebron, in the immediate vicinity of el-Beyudh (the Beiyudh of Van de Veldes Map, about half way between Kerioth and Arad). See Nos. 2. and 4.
4. HAZOR-AMAM (to be so joined for the same reasons as in No. 2), probably identified with Kerioth-Herzon (in the Heb. the four names stand הַיא חָצוֹר אֲמָם קרַיּוֹת חֶצרוֹן, villages of Chetsron which is Chatsor Amam; Sept. αἱ πόλεις Α᾿σερών [v.r. Α᾿σερώμ], αὕτη ἐστὶ Α᾿σω῎ρ καὶ Αμάμ, [v.r. Α᾿σερωμάμ]; Vulg. Carioth, Hesron, haec est Asor, Amam), a town in the south of Judah (but apparently not in the Simeonite territory), mentioned between Bealoth and Shema (Jos 15:24-26); no doubt (if thus combined) the modern el-Khureyetein, as suggested by Robinson (Researches, 3, Append. p. 114). SEE KERIOTH.
5. (Vat. MS. of Sept. omits; Vulg. Asor.) A city inhabited by the Benjamites after the Captivity, mentioned between Ananiah and Ramah (Ne 11:33); possibly the modern Gazur, a short distance east of Jaffa (for others of the associated names, although likewise within the ancient territory of Dan, are also assigned to Benjamin), since Eusebius and Jerome (Onomast. s.v. Asor) mention a Hazor in the vicinity of Ascalon, although they assign it to Judah, and confound it with those in the south of that tribe (Robinson's Researches, 2, 370, note). From the places mentioned with it, as Anathoth, Nob, Ramah, etc., it would seem to have lain north of Jerusalem, and at no great distance there from. Schwarz thinks it is called Chasor (חסר) in the Talmudical writers (Palest. p. 162). Robinson suggests the identity of Hazor and the modern Tell Asur, a ruin on a little hill about six miles north of Bethel (Bib. Res. i1, 264, note). This, however, appears to be too far from Ramah. Tobler mentions a ruin called Khurbet Arsur, near Ramah, a little to the west, the situation of which would answer better to Hazor (Topogr. 2, 400; Van de Velde, Memoir, p. — 319). The place in question is probably the same with the BAAL-HAZOR SEE BAAL-HAZOR (q.v.) of 2Sa 13:23.
6. A region of Arabia, spoken of as an important place, in the vicinity of Kedar, in the prophetic denunciations of desolation upon both by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 49:28-33). It can hardly be Petra, as supposed by Vitringa (on Isaiah, i, p. 624), nor the Asor placed by Eusebius 8 miles west of Philadelphia (Hitzig, Jesaias, p. 196), but probably is a designation of the confines of Arabia with south-eastern Palestine, inhabited by nomade tribes dwelling in mere encampments. SEE HAZAR.