border: the marked line where one piece of land ends and the next begins, the stone that marks it, and the territory that line encloses
At its heart this word marks where one space ends and another begins. It can name the dividing line itself, the stone set on that line, or the whole stretch of land the line encloses. Hebrew keeps all three in one word because they are one idea seen from different angles: the edge, the thing that marks it, and the ground it holds.
Most of its work is done in the long survey passages that map out the land, where it traces a tribe's allotment point by point, "the border went up," "the border turned," and then names the region that outline contains. A border there was not a line on paper. It was a walkable edge marked by stones standing in a field, which is why quietly shifting one of those stones counted as a serious crime rather than a small dishonesty: the ground it stole was land a family had received as a gift, and the law answers the theft with a curse.
The same word then reaches to the largest scale there is. God is the one who fixes the bound the sea may not cross, and the writers can speak of that limit as a standing decree (חֹק) as easily as a line. The picture holds at every scale:
- the edge of one family's field, guarded by law
- the frontier between one people and the next
- the line the sea is told it may not pass
Because the line was a gift rather than a prize, widening it belonged to God to grant. Israel is promised that God will enlarge its border, and when Amos accuses the Ammonites of butchering pregnant women "in order to enlarge their border," he is turning that promise inside out and using it as the indictment.
Nuances
Whether the princes of Judah in Hosea 5:10 are accused of literally moving boundary markers or of covenant violation described in boundary language.
- contestedThe comparison is one of identity rather than resemblance: the princes actually are boundary movers, annexing Israelite land during the war between Syria, Israel and Judah, and the curse of Deuteronomy 27:17 stands behind the poured-out wrath.; Francis I. Andersen and David Noel Freedman, Hosea (AB 24, 1980), on Hosea 5:10
- contestedThe boundary language is figurative, naming covenant transgression in general rather than a specific land seizure.; Douglas Stuart, Hosea-Jonah (WBC 31, 1987), on Hosea 5:10