Summary

Stanley Arthur Cook 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, Volume 18… (1911)

But Israel remained a great power in religious history while Moab disappeared. It is true that Moab was continuously hard pressed by desert hordes; the exposed condition of the land is emphasized by the chains of ruined forts and castles which even the Romans were compelled to construct. The explanation of the comparative insignificance of Moab, however, is not to be found in purely topographical considerations. Nor can it be sought in political history, since Israel and Judah suffered as much from external movements as Moab itself.
Source: Wikisource

Stanley Arthur Cook 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, Volume 18… (1911)

The national traditions of Israel recognize a close relationship between Moab and Ammon, “sons” of Lot, and the “brothers” Esau (Edom) and Jacob (Israel) , and Moab is represented as already a powerful people when Israel fled from Egypt (Exod. xv. 15) . The detailed narratives, however, give conflicting views of the exodus and the conquest of Palestine. It was supposed that Moab, having expelled the aboriginal giants, was in turn displaced by the Amorite king Sihon, who forced Moab south of the Arnon (Wadi Mōjib, a natural boundary) and drove Ammon beyond the Jabbok.
Source: Wikisource

Stanley Arthur Cook 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, Volume 18… (1911)

Although Moab and Ammon were “brothers,” their history was usually associated with that of Judah and Israel respectively, and naturally depended to a considerable extent upon these two and their mutual relations. Jephthah (q.v.) , one of the Israelite “judges,” delivered Gilead from Ammon, who resumed the attack under its king Nahash, only to be repulsed by Saul (q.v.) . Ehud (q.v.) of Benjamin or Ephraim freed Israel from the Moabite oppression. To the first great kings, Saul and David, are ascribed conquests over Moab, Ammon and Edom.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature