Gozan
Go'zan (Heb. Gozan', גּוֹזָן according to Gesenius, quarry; according to Furst, ford; Sept. Γωζάν [v.r. Γωζάρ and Χωζάρ), the tract to which the Israelites were carried away captive by Pul, Tiglath-Pileser, and Shalmaeneser, or possibly Sargon (2Ki 17:6; 1Ch 5:26). It is also mentioned as a region of Central Asia, subject to the Assyrians (2Ki 19:12; Isa 37:12), situated on the Habor (2Ki 17:6; 2Ki 18:11). Ptolemy, in his description of Medias, mentions a town called Gauzania (Geogr. 6:2, 10), situated between the Zagros mountains and the Caspian Sea. Bochart (Opp. 1:194) and others (so Rosenmüller, Bibl. Geogr. I, 2:102) have attempted to identify this town with Gozan. Rennell further states that the river Gozan (1Ch 5:26) is the modern Kizl Ozon, which rises near Sinna, in the eastern part of the Zagros chain, and, after a winding course, joins the Sefid-rud, which flows into the Caspian (Geography of Herodotus, 1:521, 2d ed.; see also Ritter, Erdkundt 8:615; Ker Porter, Travels, 1:267; Kinnier, Memoir on the Persian Empire, page 121; Morier's Second Journey, 1:267). This theory, however, places Gozan too far east for the requirements of the Scripture narrative. Dr. Grant supposes that the word Gozan signifies "pasture," and is the same as the moderna Gozan, the name given by the Nestorians to all the highlands of Assyria which afford pasturage to their flocks. He thinks that the ancient province of Gozan embraced the mountainous region east of the Tigris, through which the Khabuar and the Zab flow (Vestorian Christians, page 125 sq.). A close examination of the notices in Scripture, and a comparison of them with the Geography of Ptolemy and modern researches, enable us to fix, with a high degree of probability, the true position of Gozan. It appears from 2Ki 17:6 (also 2Ki 18:11), that Gozan was in Assyria, which is there distinguished from Media; and that Habor was a "river of Gozan." There can be little doubt that the Habor is identical with the Khabur of Mesopotamia. SEE HABOR. Gozan must, therefore, have been in Mesopotamia. The words of 2Ki 19:12 appear to confirm this view, for there Gaozan and Haran are grouped together, and we know that Haran is in Mesopotamia. The conjunction of Gozan with Haran or Harran in Isaiah (Isa 37:12) is in entire agreement with the position here assigned to the former. As Gozan was the district on the Khabor, so Haran was that upon the Bilik, the next affluent of the Euphrates. SEE CHARRAN. The Assynrian kings, having conquered the one, would naturally go on to the other. In 1Ch 5:26, Gozan is, by an erroneous rendering in the A.V., called a siver, and is distinguished from Habor. The true explanation seems to be, that in this passage Habor is the name of a district, probably that watered by the lower Khabur; while the upper part of the same river, flowing through the province of Gozan, is called נהִר גּוֹזָן, the river of Gozan. Gozan seems to be mmentioned on the cuneiform. inscriptions (q.v.). Ptolemy states that Gauzantis (Γαυζανιτῖς) was one of the provinces of Mesopotamia adjoining Chalcitis (Geograph. 5:18, 4). The same province Strabo calls Mygdonia. (16:1, 27), which may probably be, as suggested by Rawlinson, another form of the same name (Ancient Monarchies, 1:245), מ; being prefixed and rendered into δ. As we find Haahe, Habor, and Haran grouped together in Mesopotamia; as we find beside them a province called Gauzanitis; and as in Scripture Gozan is always mentioned in connection with the above places, we may safely conclude that Gozan and Gauzanitis are identical. Gauzanitis lay along the southern declivities of Mons Malius, and extended over the region watered by the upper Khabur and Jerujer rivers to the ranges of Sinjar and Hamma. The greater part of it is an undulating plain, having a poor soil and scanty vegetation (Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, page 275). On the other hand, Mr. Layard describes the tract iminediately along the Khabur as one of remarkable fertility (ib. page 227) SEE CAPTIVITY.
