JOSHUA 15 COMME TARYEDITED BY GLE PEASE

Allotment for Judah

1 The allotment for the tribe of Judah, according to its clans, extended down to the territory of Edom, to the Desert of Zin in the extreme south.

BAR ES, "The inheritance of the tribe of Judah is described first by its general boundaries on all four sides Jos_15:1-12; then reference is again made, for the sake of completeness, to the special inheritance of Caleb which lay within these boundaries Jos_15:13-20; and lastly a list of the towns is given Josh. 15:21-63. Consult the marginal references.

CLARKE,"This then was the lot of the tribe of - Judah - The geography of the sacred writings presents many difficulties, occasioned by the changes which the civil state of the promised land has undergone, especially for the last two thousand years. Many of the ancient towns and villages have had their names so totally changed, that their former appellations are no longer discernible; several lie buried under their own ruins, and others have been so long destroyed that not one vestige of them remains. On these accounts it is very difficult to ascertain the situation of many of the places mentioned in this and the following chapters. But however this may embarrass the commentator, it cannot affect the truth of the narrative. Some of the principal cities in the universe, cities that were the seats of the most powerful empires, are not only reduced to ruins, but so completely blotted out of the map of the world that their situation cannot be ascertained. Where is Babylon? Where are Nineveh, Carthage, Thebes, Tyre, Baalbec, Palmyra, and the so far-famed and greatly celebrated Troy? Of the former and the latter, so renowned by historians and poets, scarcely a vestige, properly speaking, remains; nor can the learned agree on the spot once occupied by the buildings of those celebrated cities! Should this circumstance invalidate the whole history of the ancient world, in which they made so conspicuous a figure? And can the authenticity of our sacred historian be impaired, because several of the places he mentions no longer exist? Surely no: nor can it be called in question but by the heedless and superficial, or the decidedly profane. Although some of the cities of the holy land are destroyed, and it would be difficult to ascertain the geography of several, yet enough

remain, either under their ancient names, or with such decisive characteristics, that through their new names their ancient appellatives are readily discernible. It is natural to suppose that the division mentioned here was made after an accurate survey of the land, which might have been made by proper persons accompanying the conquering army of the Israelites. Nine tribes and a half were yet to be accommodated, and the land must be divided into nine parts and a half. This was no doubt done with the utmost judgment and discretion, the advantages and disadvantages of each division being carefully balanced. These were the portions which were divided by lot; and it appears that Judah drew the first lot; and, because of the importance and pre-eminence of this tribe, this lot is first described.

By their families - It is supposed that the family divisions were not determined by lot. These were left to the prudence and judgment of Joshua, Eleazar, and the ten princes, who appointed to each family a district in proportion to its number, etc., the general division being that alone which was determined by the lot.

To the border of Edom - The tribe of Judah occupied the most southerly part of the land of Canaan. Its limits extended from the extremity of the Dead Sea southward, along Idumea, possibly by the desert of Sin, and proceeding from east to west to the Mediterranean Sea, and the most eastern branch of the river Nile, or to what is called the river of Egypt. Calmet very properly remarks, that Joshua is particular in giving the limits of this tribe, as being the first, the most numerous, most important; that which was to furnish the kings of Judea; that in which pure religion was to be preserved, and that from which the Messiah was to spring.

GILL, "This then was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah by their families,.... The land of Canaan was divided by lot to the several tribes, and the tribe of Judah had its lot first; of the manner of casting lots; see Gill on Num_26:55; It seems as if the lot was first cast for the tribes of Judah and Joseph, when the former had the southern, and the latter the northern part of the land for their portion, which was done in Gilgal; after this lots were cast in Shiloh for the other seven tribes, who had the land divided among them, which lay between Judah and Joseph, or between the southern and northern parts of the land, see Jos_18:1, &c. and it seems that not only the land was divided to the tribes by lot, but that the portion of land which belonged to each tribe was divided in the same way to the several families and households belonging thereunto; as is here suggested, with respect to the tribe of Judah, whose lot reached

even to the border of Edom; or Idumea, which lay to the south of the land of Canaan:

the wilderness of Zin southward was the uttermost part of the south coast; the same with Kadesh, and lay upon the borders of Edom; see Num_33:36.

HE RY 1-12, "Judah and Joseph were the two sons of Jacob on whom Reuben's forfeited birth-right devolved. Judah had the dominion entailed on him, and Joseph the double portion, and therefore these two tribes were first seated, Judah in the southern part of the land of Canaan and Joseph in the northern part, and on them the other seven did attend, and had their respective lots as appurtenances to these two; the lots of Benjamin, Simeon, and Dan, were appendant to Judah, and those of Issachar and Zebulun, Naphtali and Asher, to Joseph. These two were first set up to be provided for, it should seem, before there was such an exact survey of the land as we find afterwards,

Jos_18:9. It is probable that the most considerable parts of the northern and southern countries, and those that lay nearest to Gilgal, and which the people were best acquainted with, were first put into two portions, and the lot was cast upon them between these two principal tribes, of the one of which Joshua was, and of the other Caleb, who was the first commissioner in this writ of partition; and, by the decision of that lot, the southern country, of which we have an account in this chapter, fell to Judah, and the northern, of which we have an account in the two following chapters, to Joseph. And when this was done there was a more equal dividend (either in quantity or quality) of the remainder among the seven tribes. And this, probably, was intended in that general rule which was given concerning this partition (Num_33:54), to the more you shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer you shall give the less, and every man's inheritance shall be where his lot falleth; that is, “You shall appoint two greater portions which shall be determined by lot to those more numerous tribes of Judah and Joseph, and then the rest shall be less portions to be allotted to the less numerous tribes.” The former was done in Gilgal, the latter in Shiloh.

In these verses, we have the borders of the lot of Judah, which, as the rest, is said to be by their families, that is, with an eye to the number of their families. And it intimates that Joshua and Eleazar, and the rest of the commissioners, when they had by lot given each tribe its portion, did afterwards (it is probable by lot likewise) subdivide those larger portions, and assign to each family its inheritance, and then to each household, which would be better done by this supreme authority, and be apt to give less disgust than if it had been left to the inferior magistrates of each tribe to make that distribution. The borders of this tribe are here largely fixed, yet not unalterably, for a good deal of that which lies within these bounds was afterwards assigned to the lots of Simeon and Dan. 1. The eastern border was all, and only, the Salt Sea, Jos_15:5. Every sea is salt, but this was of an extraordinary and more than natural saltness, the effects of that fire and brimstone with which Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed in Abraham's time, whose ruins lie buried in the bottom of this dead water, which never either was moved itself or had any living thing in it. 2. The southern border was that of the land of Canaan in general, as will appear by comparing Jos_15:1-4 with Num_34:3-5. So that this powerful and warlike tribe of Judah guarded the frontiers of the whole land, on that side which lay towards their old sworn enemies (though their two fathers were twin-brethren), the Edomites. Our Lord therefore, who sprang out of Judah, and whose the kingdom is, shall judge the mount of Esau, Oba_1:21. 3. The northern border divided it from the lot of Benjamin. In this, mention is made of the stone of Bohan a Reubenite (Jos_15:6), who probably was a great commander of those forces of Reuben that came over Jordan, and died in the camp at Gilgal, and was buried not far off under this stone. The valley of Achor likewise lies upon this border (Jos_15:7), to remind the men of Judah of the trouble which Achan, one of their tribe, gave to the congregation of Israel, that they might not be too much lifted up with their services. This northern line touched closely upon Jerusalem (Jos_15:8), so closely as to include in the lot of this tribe Mount Zion and Mount Moriah, though the greater part of the city lay in the lot of Benjamin. 4. The west border went near to the great sea at first (Jos_15:12), but afterwards the lot of the tribe of Dan took off a good part of Judah's lot on that side; for the lot was only to determine between Judah and Joseph, which should have the north and which the south, and not immovably to fix the border of either. Judah's inheritance had its boundaries determined. Though it was a powerful warlike tribe, and had a great interest in the other tribes, yet they must not therefore be left to their own choice, to enlarge their possessions at pleasure, but must live so as that their neighbours might live by them. Those that are placed high yet must not think to be placed alone in the midst of

the earth.

JAMISO , "Jos_15:1-12. Borders of the lot of Judah.

This then was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah— In what manner the lot was drawn on this occasion the sacred historian does not say; but it is probable that the method adopted was similar to that described in Jos_18:10. Though the general survey of the country had not been completed, some rough draft or delineation of the first conquered part must have been made, and satisfactory evidence obtained that it was large enough to furnish three cantons, before all the tribes cast lots for them; and they fell to Judah, Ephraim, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. The lot of Judah came first, in token of the pre-eminence of that tribe over all the others; and its destined superiority thus received the visible sanction of God. The territory, assigned to it as a possession, was large and extensive, being bounded on the south by the wilderness of Zin, and the southern extremity of the Salt Sea (Num_34:3-5); on the east, by that sea, extending to the point where it receives the waters of the Jordan; on the north, by a line drawn nearly parallel to Jerusalem, across the country, from the northern extremity of the Salt Sea to the southern limits of the Philistine territory, and to the Mediterranean; and on the west this sea was its boundary, as far as Sihor (Wady El-Arish).

K&D, "Boundaries of the inheritance of the tribe of Judah. - Jos_15:1. Its situation in the land. “And there was (i.e., fell, or came out; cf. Jos_16:1; Jos_19:1) the lot to the tribe of Judah according to its families to the frontier of Edom (see at Num_34:3), to the desert of Zin southward, against the extreme south” (lit. from the end or extremity of the south), i.e., its inheritance fell to it, so that it reached to the territory of Edom and the desert of Zin, in which Kadesh was situated (see at Num_13:21), on the extreme south of Canaan.

BI 1-12, "This then was the lot of . . . Judah.

The inheritance of Judah

Judah was the imperial tribe, and it was fitting that he should be planted in a conspicuous territory. Judah and the sons of Joseph seem to have obtained their settlements not only before the other tribes, but in a different manner.. They did not obtain them by lot, but apparently by their own choice and by early possession. Judah was not planted in the heart of the country. That position was gained by Ephraim and Manasseh, the children of Joseph, while Judah obtained the southern section. The territory of Judah was not pre-eminently fruitful; it was not equal in this respect to that of Ephraim and Manasseh. It had some fertile tracts, but a considerable part of it was mountainous and barren. It was of four descriptions—the hill country, the valley or low country, the south, and the wilderness. “The hill country,” says Dean Stanley, “is the part of Palestine which best exemplifies its characteristic scenery; the rounded hills, the broad valleys, the scanty vegetation, the villages and fortresses, sometimes standing, more frequently in ruins, on the hill tops; the wells in every valley, the vestiges of terraces whether for corn or wine.” (W. G. Blaikie.)

CALVI , "1.I have already premised, that I would not be very exact in delineating the site of places, and in discussing names, partly because I admit that I am not well

acquainted with topographical or chorographic science, and partly because great labor would produce little fruit to the reader; (144) nay, perhaps the greater part of readers would toil and perplex themselves without receiving any benefit. With regard to the subject in hand, it is to be observed, that the lot of the tribe of Judah not only falls on elevated ground, the very elevation of the territory, indicating the dignity of the future kingdom, but a similar presage is given by its being the first lot that turns up. What had already been obtained by arms, they begin to divide. The names of the ten tribes are cast into the urn. Judah is preferred to all the others. Who does not see that it is raised to the highest rank, in order that the prophecy of Jacob may be fulfilled? Then within the limits here laid down, it is well known that there were rich pastures, and vineyards celebrated for their productiveness and the excellence of their wines. In this way, while the lot corresponds with the prophecy of Jacob, it is perfectly clear that it did not so happen by chance; the holy patriarch had only uttered what was dictated by the Spirit.

If any are better skilled in places, a more minute investigation will be pleasant and useful to them. But lest those who are less informed feel it irksome to read unknown names, let them consider that they have obtained knowledge of no small value, provided they bear in mind the facts to which I have briefly and summarily adverted — that the tribe of Judah was placed on elevated ground, that it might be more conspicuous than the others, until the scepter should arise from it — and that a region of fruitful vineyards and rich pastures was assigned to his posterity — and, finally, all this was done, in order that the whole people might recognize that there was nothing of the nature of chance in the turning up of a lot, which had been foretold three centuries before. Besides, it is easy for the unlearned to infer from the long circuit described, that the territory thus allocated to one tribe was of great extent. (145) For although some diminution afterwards took place, its dominions always continued to be the largest.

It is necessary, however, to bear in mind what I formerly observed, that nothing else was determined by the lot than that the boundary of the children of Judah was to be contiguous to the land of Edom and the children of Sin, and that their boundary, in another direction, was to be the river of Egypt and the Mediterranean Sea — that those who had been selected to divide the country proceeded according to the best of their judgment, in proportioning the quantity of territory allotted to the number of their people, without extending their boundaries any farther — and that they followed the same method in other cases, as vicinity or other circumstances demanded.

Any error into which they fell, did not at all affect the general validity of their decision. For as they were not ashamed partly to recall any partition that might have been made without sufficient consideration, so the people in their turn, while they acknowledged that they had acted in the matter with the strictest good faith and honesty, submitted the more willingly to whatever they determined. Thus, notwithstanding any particular error, their general arrangements received full effect.

It will be worth while to make one remark on the city Jebus, whose name was afterwards Jerusalem. Although it had been already chosen, by the secret counsel of God, for his sanctuary, and the seat of the future kingdom, it however continued in the possession of the enemy down to the time of David. In this long exclusion from the place on which the sanctity, excellence, and glory of the rest of the land were founded, there was a clear manifestation of the divine curse inflicted to punish the people for their sluggishness: since it was virtually the same as if the land had been deprived of its principal dignity and ornament. But on the other hand, the wonderful goodness of God was conspicuous in this, that the Jebusites who, from the long respite which had been given them, seemed to have struck their roots most deeply, were at length torn up, and driven forth from their secure position.

ELLICOTT, "(1) This then was the lot.—Rather, And the lot came to the tribe of Judah. We might perhaps better begin this section with the last sentence of Joshua 14, and read thus: “And the land had rest from war; and the lot fell to the tribe of Judah (i.e., the tribe of Judah received its allotment), according to their families.”

The question arises at this point how the position of the tribes of Judah, Ephraim, and Manasseh was determined. As to the remaining seven, see ote on Joshua 18:5-10. It is noticeable that Hebron appears to have been promised to Caleb (Joshua 14:12), and Shechem assigned to Joseph by Jacob (Genesis 48:21-22; Joshua 24:32). Did not this necessarily bring the tribe of Judah into the south, the neighbourhood of Hebron, and Ephraim (with his brother Manasseh) into the centre of the country?

WHEDO , "1. Even to the border of Edom — The latter part of this verse should be rendered, to the border of Edom the wilderness of Zin southward from the extremity of Teman. Teman was a district in the land of Edom, and lay, perhaps, not far southeast of the Dead Sea. Its position, however, is unknown. The sense of the whole verse is: Judah’s lot extended into the extreme south, bordering on Edom and the desert of Zin. The Edomites occupied the mountainous region directly south of the Dead Sea, and the wilderness of Zin was the desert tract extending westward from this, in which lay Kadesh. See on umbers 20:1; umbers 33:36.

ORIGI AL LOT OF JUDAH, Joshua 15:1-63.

[The tribe of Judah received the first allotment, and a very disproportionate share of the Land of Promise, for its territory embraced nearly the half of western Palestine. This original lot, however, was afterwards diminished by assigning a part of it to Simeon. Joshua 19:1. The original borders, districts, and cities of Judah are detailed with great minuteness in this chapter, and to a much greater extent than those of any other tribe. Grove suggests that “this may be due either to the fact that the lists were reduced to their present form at a later period, when the monarchy resided with Judah, and when more care would naturally be bestowed on them than on those of any other tribe; or to the fact that the territory was more important, and more thickly covered with towns and villages, than any other part of Palestine.” —Smith’s Bib. Dict. Many and great were the prophetic blessings pronounced on

Judah by his father. Genesis 49:8-12. He was to be the pride and glory of his brethren, the mighty conqueror, whose symbol was the lion, and whose pre-eminence was represented by the sceptre and the ruler’s staff, never to depart “until Shiloh come.” The same prophetic blessing also characterized his section of the Promised Land. “The elevation of the hills and tablelands of Judah is the true climate of the vine, and at Hebron, according to the Jewish tradition, was its primeval seat. He bound ‘his foal unto the vine, and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes.’ Genesis 49:11. A vineyard on a hill of olives, with the ‘fence,’ and the ‘stones gathered out,’ and the ‘tower in the midst of it,’ is the natural figure which, both in the prophetical and evangelical records, represents the kingdom of Judah. Isaiah 5:1; Matthew 21:33. The vine was the emblem of the nation on the coins of the Maccabees, and in the colossal cluster of golden grapes which overhung the porch of the second temple.” — Stanley.

BE SO , "Joshua 15:1. This then was the lot — For the general understanding of this business of casting lots, it must be observed, 1st, That it was transacted with great seriousness and solemnity, in God’s presence, with prayer and appeal to him for the decision of the matter. 2d, That although an exact survey of this land was not taken till afterward, Joshua 18:4-5; yet there was, and must needs be, a general description of it, and a division thereof into nine parts and a half; which, as far as they could guess, were equal either in quantity or quality. 3d, That the lot did not at this time so unchangeably determine the portion of each tribe that it could neither be increased nor diminished, as is manifest; because, after Judah’s lot was fixed, Simeon’s lot was taken out of it, Joshua 19:9. 4th, That the lot determined only in general what part of the land belonged to each tribe, but left the particulars to be determined by Joshua and Eleazar. For the manner of this, it is probably conceived, that there were two urns, into one of which were put the names of all the tribes, each in a distinct paper, and into the other the names of each portion described; then Eleazar, or some other person, drew out first the name of one of the tribes out of one urn, and then the name of one portion out of the other, and that portion was appropriated to that tribe. And with respect to these urns, in the bottom of which the papers lay, these lots are often said to come up, or come forth.

Of Judah — Whose lot came out first by God’s disposition, as a note of his pre-eminency above his brethren. To the border of Edom — Which lay south-east from Judah’s portion. Judah and Joseph were the two sons of Jacob on whom Reuben’s forfeited birthright devolved. Judah had the dominion entailed upon him, and Joseph the double portion. Therefore these two tribes are first appointed; and on them the other seven attended. By their families — The lot, it appears, determined only the right of each tribe to such or such a portion of the general division of the country. Joshua, Eleazar, and the rest of the commissioners, when they had thus given each tribe its province, by lot, did afterward (and it is probable by lot likewise) subdivide those larger portions, and assign to each family its inheritance, and then to each household; which would be better done by this supreme authority, and in a way less apt to give disgust, than if it had been left to the inferior magistrates of each tribe to make that distribution.

COFFMA , "Verse 1This chapter deals with the actual division of the land of Canaan. Judah, as we have seen, was first by right of Jacob's blessing, and here we have an outline of the borders of Judah's territory in ideal terms Joshua 15:1-12), an account of Caleb's occupation of Hebron and Debir (Joshua 15:13-19), and a statistical list of the cities awarded to Judah (Joshua 15:20-63).

OUTLI E OF JUDAH'S TERRITORY

"And the lot for the tribe of the children of Judah according to their families was unto the border of Edom, even to the wilderness of Zin southward, at the uttermost part of the south. And their border was from the uttermost part of the Salt Sea, from the bay that looketh southward; and it went out southward of the ascent of Akrabbim, and passed along to Zin, and went up by the south of Kadesh-barnea, and passed along by Hezron, and went up to Addar, and turned about to Karka; and it passed along to Azmon, and went out at the brook of Egypt; and the goings out of the border were at the sea: this shall be your south border. And the east border was the Salt Sea, even unto the end of the Jordan. And the border of the north quarter was from the bay of the sea at the end of the Jordan; and the border went up to Beth-hoglah, and passed along by the north of Beth-arabah; and the border went up to the stone of Bohan the son of Reuben; and the border went up to Debir from the valley of Achor, and so northward, looking toward Gilgal, that is over against the ascent of Adammim, which is on the south side of the river; and the border passed along to the waters of Enshemesh, and the goings out thereof were at Enrogel; and the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the side of the Jebusite southward (the same is Jerusalem); and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the uttermost part of the vale of Rephaim northward; and the border extended from the top of the mountain unto the fountain of the waters of ephtoah, and went out to the cities of the mount of Ephron; and the border extended to Baalah (the same is Kiriath-jearim); and the border turned about from Baalah westward unto mount Seir, and passed along unto the side of mount Jearim on the north (the same is Chesalon), and went down to Beth-shemesh, and passed along by Timnah; and the border went out unto the side of Ekron northward; and the border extended to Shikkeron, and passaged along to mount Baalah, and went out at Jabneel; and the goings out of the border were at the sea. And the west border was to the great sea, and the border thereof. This is the border of the children of Judah round about according to their families."

Philbeck gives us this approximation of Judah's border:

"It ran from the lower tip of the Dead Sea southwest to Kadesh-barnea, and thence northwest to the Mediterranean Sea. This was the southern border. The northern border followed the line a traveler would normally follow in going from the northern tip of the Dead Sea (where Jordan enters) to the Mediterranean, Judah's land included all the territory between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean as

restricted by the north and south borders. This included all the land of the Philistines. It did not include Jerusalem, but lay south of that city."[1]

"Jabneel, or Jabneed ..." (Joshua 15:11). This is the place where the northern border of Judah met the Mediterranean. "This place is located seven or eight miles south of Joppa.[2]

Of course, Judah did not subdue the Philistines who remained powerful enemies of Israel right down to the times of David and Solomon. As many have pointed out, these boundaries were more ideal than actual, dealing with what God had promised Israel rather than being restricted to what Israel was able to possess. A comparison with umbers 34:3-5 reveals that these are essentially the same boundaries of southern Israel that are mentioned there.

COKE, "Ver. 1. This then was the lot of the tribe of—Judah— In one of the following chapters we see, that the first care of Joshua, Eleazar, and the princes appointed to divide the conquered country, was, to have a plan of the whole drawn out, and to divide it into nine parts and a half, as equally as possible, calculating the extent and goodness of the district. This done, they cast lots in the manner before described, umbers 26:53-56.; and the lot first assigned a portion to the tribe of Judah; as it were, to confirm the pre-eminence which Jacob's famous prediction had promised to him before all the rest.

By their families— It should constantly be remembered, that the lot determined nothing more than the right of each tribe to such or such a portion of the general division into nine provinces and a half. It then remained with Joshua and the other commissioners, to give each family lands proportioned to its situation, without partiality or respect of persons. Thus the district in which each tribe was to be settled was marked out, as it were, by the hand of God; but the bounds of it were fixed by the general and the heads of the people, who, on an estimation of the value of the lands, and the necessity of the families, contracted or extended those bounds according to their discretion. See chap. Joshua 19:9.

To the border of Edom; the wilderness of Zin southward— The tribe of Judah was the most southwardly of all. Its limits took up the south side, from the arm or point of the Salt or Dead sea on the south, along Edom, or Idumea, passing by the mountains of Acrabbim, the desart of Zin, Kadesh-barnea, Hezron, Adar,—Karkaa, Azmon, and the river of Egypt, and so on to the Mediterranean. See the three following verses, umbers 1:5 and Wells's Geogr. vol. 2: chap. 5.

PULPIT, "Joshua 15:1

The lot of the tribe of the children of Judah. The first twelve verses of this chapter define the boundaries of Judah. With it compare umbers 34:3-5, which gives the southern border of the Israelitish territory, corresponding closely with this account of the southern border of Judah. The word tribe here is, as might be expected from the context מטה and not שבט. Even to the border of Edom. The literal translation,

which makes the passage clearer, is, "the border of Edom, the wilderness of Zin towards the dry region ( נגבה ) from the extreme limit of the south תימן. The latter of these words, derived from ימין "right hand," being the position of the south when regarded from the point of view of a man looking eastward, denotes the southward direction (see above, Joshua 12:2). The former word has reference to the physical conditions of the country, its heat and dryness. The LXX. does not attempt to translate the former word and has evidently מקדש for מקצה. The wilderness of Zin. ot to be confounded with the wilderness of Sin (Exodus 16:1; cf. umbers 34:11, 36). This wilderness was on the border of Edom ( umbers 20:1.; umbers 27:14). Thence the border of Judah (which here includes the small portion afterwards allotted to Simeon) extended to the utmost limits of the south (see Joshua 19:1, Joshua 19:9). A wall of mountains extends southwestward from the southern extremity of the Dead Sea, and formed the natural boundary of Judaea.

PI K, "Tribal Portions

We turn now to those chapters (Josh. 15–19) which offer the least scope to the expositor, the presence, of which has probably deterred not a few from attempting to write a connected commentary on this sixth book of the Word. Those chapters contain, for the most part, a geographical description of the different portions of Canaan which were allotted unto Israel’s tribes. They consist largely of a list of places, many of which are never referred to again in the Scriptures, and which cannot now be identified; nor can we be sure, in the majority of instances, of the precise meanings of the names of those towns and villages; though in those cases where such is obtainable the typical and moral significance thereof is more or less apparent. That nothing has been recorded in the Bible without Divine design must be believed by every reverent heart—the genealogies of 1 Chronicles 1–9 not excepted—and that all is of real value to the people of God is not to be questioned; yet, so far as we are aware, the Holy Spirit has not yet "opened" their purport and spiritual contents to the Church. Acknowledging our ignorance and refusing to speculate thereon, we can but single out a few of the more prominent details found in this section, and offer some remarks thereon.

"This then was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah by their families" (Josh. 15:1). The first two of the tribes to have made known to them their allotments were Judah and Joseph: that being detailed here, the other in the next chapter. Upon which Matthew Henry said, "Judah and Joseph were the two sons of Jacob on whom Reuben’s forfeited birthright devolved. Judah had the dominion entailed on him, and Joseph the double portion, and therefore the two tribes were first seated: Judah in the southern part of the land of Canaan, and Joseph in the northern part, and on them the other seven did attend, and had their respective lots as appurtenances to these two; the lots of Benjamin, Simeon and Dan were attendant to Judah, and those of Issachar and Zebulon, apthtali and Asshur to Joseph. These two were first set up to be provided for, it should seem, before there wag such an exact survey of the land as we find afterward [Joshua 18:9].

"It is probable that the most considerable parts of the northern and southern countries, and those that lay nearest to Gilgal, and which the people were best acquainted with, were first put into two portions, and the lot was cast upon them between these two principal tribes, of the one of which Joshua was, and of the other Caleb, who was the first commissioner in this writ of partition; and by the decision of that lot the southern country fell to Judah, of which we have an account in this chapter; and the northern to Joseph, of which we have an account in the two following chapters. And when this was done, there was a more equal dividend (either in quantity or quality) of the remainder among the seven tribes. And this, probably, was intended in that general rule which was given concerning this partition: ‘to the more ye shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer ye shall give the less inheritance: every man’s inheritance shall be in the place where his lot falleth’ ( um. 33:54): that is, ‘Ye shall appoint two greater portions, which shall be determined by lot, to those more numerous tribes of Judah and Joseph, and then the rest shall be lesser portions, to be allotted to the less numerous tribes.’ The former was done in Gilgal, the latter in Shiloh." It should also be pointed out that, as the injunction was given that when Israel were on the march "these [i.e. Judah] shall first set forth" ( um. 2:9), so the assigning of Judah’s portion first was a prophetic intimation of the future pre-eminence of this tribe.

It is to be observed that the description given of Judah’s heritage is broken into at Joshua 15:13, by mention being made of Caleb (who belonged to this tribe) receiving Hebron for his personal portion. This was before us in our last, but a further detail is here recorded which claims our attention. After informing us that he drove thence the three sons of Anak we are told that "Caleb said, He that smiteth Kirjath-sepher, and taketh it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife" (v. 16). This should not be understood as an exhibition of any personal sloth on Caleb’s part, still less of fear, but rather as his affording an opportunity for another to obtain some laurels as well as himself. It is to be borne in mind that in the East the father is regarded as having the right to dispose of his daughter, and it is the regular custom for him to select her husband without consulting her—compare 1 Samuel 17:25. Kirjath-sepher was a fortress of the Anakims, one that was difficult of approach, being situated on a hill (note "went up" in verse 15). The offer made by Caleb was an incentive to bravery: he knew that only a man of faith and courage would attack such a place.

In the above we obtain a further insight into Caleb’s character and see what a well-balanced one it was: he was not only a man of strong faith, an intrepid warrior, but a dutiful father as well. It was not only that he desired to stir up Israel generally to set about the tasks which still required performing (Josh. 16:10, shows that some of them had already become slack in their duty), but that he desired to make sure that his daughter obtained a worthy husband. Caleb’s challenge was accepted by his own nephew, for we read: "And Othniel the son of Kenez, the brother of Caleb, took it" (v. 17). It is noteworthy that, years later, this same Othniel who acted so admirably and valiantly on this occasion became both a deliverer, and a judge in Israel (Judg. 3:9), and, in fact, the first person who presided over the nation after Joshua’s death. "It is good for those who are setting out in the world to begin betimes with that

which is great and good, that, excelling in service when they are young, they may excel in honor when they are old" (Matthew Henry).

"And he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife" (v. 17). It is to be borne in mind that there was nothing in the Mosaic Law which forbade the marrying of cousins. As others before us have suggested, it is highly probable that Othniel was in love with Achsah before her father made this proposal. It is also likely that Caleb was aware of it and looked favorably upon him, but decided thus to put him to the test before finally committing himself. It was both an honor to wed the daughter of the man who was the chief of his tribe and a great privilege for Othniel to marry into a family so marked by faith and piety, and to be united to one who we cannot doubt had been brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord: such a woman is to be desired far above one who is endowed with the riches of this world, or possesses little else than a pretty face.

"And it came to pass, as she came unto him, that she moved him to ask of her father a field: and she lighted off her ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wouldest thou?" (v. 18). Here we behold some of the becoming traits which marked the character of Caleb’s daughter. The "as she came unto him" means to her husband, her father accompanying them from his house where they would be married. First, her meekness appears in the owning of Othniel as her head—desiring that he should be the one to present her request unto Caleb. Apparently Othniel considered that the request would come better from her direct; and though contrary to her own inclination she deferred to her husband’s judgment. Second, her getting down from her mount betokened her respect and reverence for her father (compare Genesis 24:64, where Rebekah did the same when Isaac approached her), which showed that marriage had not "turned her head"; she was as ready to honor her parents now as formerly.

Perceiving that his daughter desired to ask him for some favor, Caleb said to her, "What wouldest thou?" And she answered, "Give me a blessing; for thou hast given me a south-land; give me also springs of water" (v. 19). We do not understand from the first clause that she meant the paternal benediction, or that he should supplicate Jehovah for a blessing upon her, but rather an inheritance over and above what he had already given her. She desired this bounty because it would add to the comfort of her settlement: teaching us thereby that it is no transgression of the commandment "Thou shalt not covet" to desire those conveniences and comforts which may be obtained in an honest and honorable way. Caleb had already given her some land which was much exposed to the sun and poorly watered: having married according to his orders, she felt he would the more readily grant what she now petitioned him for. Her modesty appears in the simplicity of her request, namely some field with springs of water in it. She might have asked for jewels to adorn her person, or servants to make her lot easier in the home; instead, she confined herself to bare necessities, for land without water could not be very productive.

"And he gave her the upper springs, and the nether springs," probably bestowing

upon her more than she had asked. Plain is the celestial lesson illustrated for us here: if earthly parents are ready to bestow upon their children that which is good for them, how much readier is our heavenly Father to give both spiritual and temporal blessings when we ask Him in faith! This is indeed a lovely domestic picture, and each of its features claims our admiration and imitation. Here we see the wife in subjection to her husband, and he declining to take advantage of his authority. When husbands and wives mutually advise and jointly agree about that which is for the common good of the family, the domestic machinery will run smoothly. Here we see a married woman despising not her father when he was old, and she lost not by honoring him. Here we see how wise parents will not deem that lost which they bestow upon their children for their real advantage, especially when they are dutiful ones. "When the character of parents, the education of their children, and the children’s consequent prudent and pious conduct combine, there is the fairest prospect that they will be settled in life to the mutual comfort and advantage of all the parties concerned" (T. Scott).

There is one other detail recorded here of the tribe of Judah, and it is in marked contrast with the above. "As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out: but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day" (Josh. 15:63). It is to be recalled that in the tenth chapter we saw how that the king of Jerusalem persuaded four of his fellow monarchs or chieftains to join him in launching an attack upon Gibeon (which made peace with Israel), and how that Joshua completely vanquished their combined forces, slew the five kings (v. 26), and took all their land (v. 42). Judges 1:8, supplies an additional detail, informing us. " ow the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it, and smitten it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire." However, it would appear that during the next few years, while Israel were occupied in conquering other parts of the country, the Jebusites recovered the fort of mount Sion at least, which remained in their hands till the time of David (2 Sam. 5:7). Matthew Henry suggested: "It may, therefore, be justly looked upon as the punishment of their neglect to conquer other cities which God had given them, that they were so long kept out of this." So today, if the Lord’s people be slack in performing their duties, they need not be surprised if some important centers of Christendom remain under the control of the enemy, having the management of the same—how many of the denominational boards, seminaries, etc., are now governed by modern Jebusites!

"And the lot of the children of Joseph fell from Jordan by Jericho, unto," etc. (Josh. 16:1). The order of procedure among the tribes of Israel was always Judah first, the sons of Joseph second, which is in full accord with that parenthetical but important statement in 1 Chronicles 5:1, 2. " ow the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel (for he was the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel: and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright. For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph’s)." As Ellicott pointed out, "Accordingly, in the division of the land of Canaan under Joshua, there are three successive stages. First, the settlement of the tribe of Judah in the strongholds

in the south of Palestine. Second, the estating of Ephraim and Manasseh in the center of the country, and in some strong positions in the north. Third, the settlement of the remaining tribes, so as to fill up the gaps between Judah and Joseph, and also upon the outskirts of their territory, so as to be, as it were, under the shelter of their wings."

Reuben’s portion was much inferior to that of Joseph, for it lay on the wilderness side of the Jordan (Josh. 13:7, 15-21), separating them from the tribes on the western side, thereby exposing them to be attacked more easily by enemies. As a matter of fact, this tribe, with that of Gad (which adjoined it) was sorely stricken by Hazael (2 Kings 10:32, 33), and afterwards carried into captivity twenty years before the general seizure of the ten tribes by the king of Assyria (1 Chron. 5:26); whereas Joseph and his posterity were highly favored in their lot, for their position lay in the very heart of the land of Canaan, extending from the Jordan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west. It is therefore very striking indeed to note how that on the one hand we behold in Reuben’s heritage and its history a solemn demonstration of God’s "visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate" Him; and on the other hand we see in the case of Joseph’s posterity a blessed exemplification of the Divine promise "showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me and keep My commandments" (Ex. 20:4, 5). The disposings of Divine providence are not capricious or arbitrary, but regulated by moral and spiritual considerations which accord with the principle of sowing and reaping.

"And the separate cities for the children of Ephraim were among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages" (Josh. 16:9). This was because the tribe of Ephraim was now much more numerous than that of Manasseh. Matthew Henry appropriately called attention to the fact that "though when the tribes were numbered in the plains of Moab, Manasseh had got the start of Ephraim in number, for Manasseh was then fifty-two thousand and Ephraim but thirty-two thousand ( um. 26:34, 37); yet, by the time they were well settled in Canaan, the hands were crossed again (Gen. 48:13, 14) and the blessing of Moses was verified: ‘They are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and these are the thousands of Manasseh.’" Since the Ephraimites were much more plentiful than the Manassites, additional cities were given them besides "the lot" which fell to them. Those cities were in the heritage of Manasseh, God having assigned them more than their own needs required. o doubt that was to test them, to afford an opportunity of showing kindness to their brethren, by giving of their abundance to those who lacked. This is one reason why Providence so orders things that "ye have the poor always with you" (Matthew 26:11): note that "always"—sure intimation that Socialism, the Welfare State, will never become universally and permanently established.

"And they drave not out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer" (Josh. 16:10), which marked the boundary of this tribe, and was close to the sea (v. 3). Their failure to do so was much worse than that of Judah to recapture Jerusalem (Josh. 15:63), for they made an attempt to do so, whereas these did not. o specific reason is given for their wanting in duty, whether it was because of cowardice, slothfulness, or something

else; but the fact remains that they disobeyed the commandment in Deuteronomy 20:16. There is no intimation that these Canaanites renounced their idolatry and became worshippers of Jehovah. But the second half of the verse seems plainly to indicate that their disobedience was due to the spirit of greed: "But the Canaanites dwell among the Ephraimites unto this day, and serve under tribute." Since the Ephraimites were strong enough to subject the Canaanites and compel them to play tribute, no excuse can be made for allowing such to live with them. They considered their financial gain more than submission to God or the good of their country, which was in keeping with their general character—compare Hosea 12:8. They soon followed the ways of those heathen, and became idolators themselves (Judg. 17:1-5). The Canaanites continued to dwell in Gezer until the days of Solomon, when the king of Egypt took and gave it to his daughter who had married Solomon (1 Kings 9:16, 17).

TRAPP, " [This] then was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah by their families; [even] to the border of Edom the wilderness of Zin southward [was] the uttermost part of the south coast.

Ver. 1. This then was the lot of the tribe, &c.] The lot came forth, up, or out [Joshua 19:1; Joshua 19:10; Joshua 19:17] of the bosom, lap, [Proverbs 16:33] pot, or some other vessel in use for that purpose; for the manner of this lottery is not expressed: but that it was solemnly done with fasting and prayer premised, is probable; [ 20:26 Acts 1:24] and that it was ordered by a divine providence, is certain. [Proverbs 16:33] And hence it was that Judah’s lot came out first, and fell out in the best part of the land: to show that God had a purpose to exalt that tribe above the rest.

CO STABLE, "Verses 1-633. Judah"s inheritance ch15

The tribe of Judah probably received first consideration in the text, because it was this tribe that had received Jacob"s special patriarchal blessing. It was also the largest tribe.

Ancient ear Easterners used natural landmarks (rivers, mountains, deserts, towns, etc.) to construct borders as well as artificial boundaries that they made by drawing lines between sites. Virtually all nations have used these methods, and they are still common today.

Judah was the southernmost tribe west of the Jordan. Caleb"s family and the Simeonites lived within Judah"s territory. Simeon was the smallest tribe except Levi, and lost its territorial identity within Judah shortly after the conquest (cf. Genesis 49:5-7). For this reason some maps of the tribal allotments do not include Simeon.

EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMME TARY

THE DISTRIBUTIO OF THE LA D.

Joshua Chs. 15-19.

WE come now in earnest to the distribution of the land. The two and a half tribes have already got their settlements on the other side of Jordan; but the other side of Jordan, though included in the land of promise, was outside the part specially consecrated as the theatre of Divine manifestation and dealing. From Dan to Beersheba and from Jordan to the sea was par excellence the land of Israel; it was here the patriarchs had dwelt; it was here that most of the promises had been given; it was here that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had been buried; and here also, though in another tomb, that the bones of Joseph had been laid. This portion was the kernel of the inheritance, surrounded by a wide penumbra of more feeble light and fewer privileges. In due time there arose a holy of holies within this consecrated region, when Jerusalem became the capital, the focus of blessing and holy influence.

ow that the distribution of this part of the country begins, we must give special attention to the operation. The narrative looks very bare, but important principles and lessons underlie it. These lists of unfamiliar names look like the debris of a quarry - hard, meaningless, and to us useless. But nothing is inserted in the Bible without a purpose, - a purpose that in some sense bears on the edification of the successive generations and the various races of men. We are not to pass the distribution over because it looks unpromising, but rather to inquire with all the greater care what the bearing of it is on ourselves.

ow, in the first place, there is something to be learned from the maintenance of the distinction of the twelve tribes, and the distribution of the country into portions corresponding to each. In some degree this was in accordance with Oriental usage; for the country had already been occupied by various races, dwelling in a kind of unity - the Canaanites, Amorites, Hittites, Hivites, Jebusites, Perizzites, and Girgashites. What was peculiar to Israel was, that each of the tribes was descended from one of Jacob's sons, and that their relation to each other was conspicuously maintained, though their dwelling-places were apart. It was an arrangement capable of becoming a great benefit under a right spirit, or a great evil under the opposite. As in the case of the separate states of orth America, or the separate cantons of Switzerland, it provided for variety in unity; it gave a measure of local freedom and independence, while it maintained united action; it contributed to the life and vigour of the commonwealth, without destroying its oneness of character, or impairing its common purpose and aim. It promoted that picturesque variety often found in little countries, where each district has a dialect, or a pronunciation, or traditions, or a character of its own; as Yorkshire differs from Devon, or Lancashire from Cornwall; Aberdeenshire from Berwick, or Fife from Ayr. As in a garden, variety of species enlivens and enriches the effect, so in a community, variety of type enriches and enlivens the common life. A regiment of soldiers clothed in the same uniform, measuring the same stature, marching to the same step, may look very well as a contrast to the promiscuous crowd; but when a painter would paint a striking picture it is from the promiscuous crowd in all their variety of costume and stature

and attitude that his figures are drawn. In the case of the Hebrew commonwealth, the distinction of tribes became smaller as time went on, and in ew Testament times the three great districts Judaea, Samaria, and Galilee showed only the survival of the fittest. A larger individuality and a wider variety would undoubtedly have prevailed if a good spirit had continued to exist among the tribes, and if all of them had shown the energy and the enterprise of some.

But the wrong spirit came in, and came in with a witness, and mischief ensued. For distinctions in race and family are apt to breed rivalry and enmity, and not only to destroy all the good which may come of variety, but to introduce interminable mischief. For many a long day the Scottish clans were like Ishmael, their hand against every man, and every man's hand against them; or at least one clan was at interminable feud with another, and the country was wretched and desolate. Among the twelve tribes of Israel the spirit of rivalry soon showed itself, leading to disastrous consequences. In the time of the judges, the men of Ephraim exhibited their temper by envying Gideon when he subdued the Midianites, and Jephthah when he subdued the Ammonites; and under Jephthah a prodigious slaughter of Ephraimites resulted from their unreasonable spirit. In the time of the kings, a permanent schism was caused by the revolt of the ten tribes from the house of David. Thus it is that the sin of man often perverts arrangements designed for good, and so perverts them that they become sources of grievous evil. The family order is a thing of heaven; but let a bad spirit creep into a family, the result is fearful. Let husband and wife become alienated; let father and son begin to quarrel; let brother set himself against brother, and let them begin to scheme not for mutual benefit but for mutual injury, no limits can be set to the resulting mischief and misery.

Many arrangements of our modern civilization that conduce to our comfort when in good order, become sources of unexampled evil when they go wrong. The drainage of houses conduces much to comfort while it works smoothly; but let the drains become choked, and send back into our houses the poisonous gases bred of decomposition, the consequences are appalling. The sanitary inspector must be on the alert to detect mischief in its very beginnings, and apply the remedy before we have well become conscious of the evil. And so a vigilant eye needs ever to be kept on those arrangements of providence that are so beneficial when duly carried out, and so pernicious when thoughtlessly perverted. What a wonderful thing is a little forbearance at the beginning of a threatened strife! What a priceless blessing is the soft answer that turneth away wrath! There is a pithy tract bearing the title ''The Oiled Feather." The oiled feather has a remarkable power of smoothing surfaces that would otherwise grate and grind upon each other, and so of averting evil. Among Christians it should be always at hand; for surely, if the forbearance and love that avert quarrels ought to be found anywhere, it is among those who have received the fulness of Divine love and grace in Jesus Christ. Surely among them there should be no perversion of Divine arrangements; in their homes no quarrels, and in their hearts no rivalry. They ought, instead, to be the peacemakers of the world, not only because they have received the peace that passeth understanding, but because their Master has said, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God."

2. Again, in the allocation of the tribes in their various territories we have an instance of a great natural law, the law of distribution, a law that, on the whole, operates very beneficially throughout the world. In society there is both a centripetal and a centrifugal force; the centripetal chiefly human, the centrifugal chiefly Divine. Men are prone to cluster together; God promotes dispersion. Through the Divine law of marriage, a man leaves his father's house and cleaves to his wife; a new home is established, a new centre of activity, a new source of population. In the early ages they clustered about the plain of Shinar; the confusion of tongues scattered them abroad. And generally, in any fertile and desirable spot, men have been prone to multiply till food has failed them, and either starvation at home or emigration abroad becomes inevitable. And so it is that, in spite of their cohesive tendency, men are now pretty well scattered over the globe. And when once they are settled in new homes, they acquire adaptation to their locality, and begin to love it. The Esquimaux {eS module note: eskimo} is not only adapted to his icy home, but is fond of it. The naked negro has no quarrel with the burning sun, but enjoys his sunny life. We of the temperate zone can hardly endure the heat of the tropics, and we shiver at the very thought of Lapland. It is a proof of Divine wisdom that a world that presents such a variety of climates and conditions has, in all parts of it, inhabitants that enjoy their life.

The same law operates in the vegetable world. Everywhere plants seem to discover the localities where they thrive best. Even in the same country you have one flora for the valley and another for the mountain. The lichen spreads itself along the surface of rocks, or the hard bark of ancient trees; the fungus tarries in damp, unventilated corners; the primrose settles on open banks; the fern in shady groves. There is always a place for the plant, and a plant for the place. And it is so with animals too. The elephant in the spreading forest, the rabbit in the sandy down, the beaver beside the stream, the caterpillar in the leafy garden. If we could explore the ocean we should find the law of distribution in full activity there. There is one great order of fishes for fresh water, another for salt; one great class of insects in hot climates, another in temperate; birds of the air, from the eagle to the humming-bird, from the ostrich to the bat, in localities adapted to their habits. We ask not whether this result was due to creation or to evolution. There it is, and its effect is to cover the earth. All its localities, desirable and undesirable, are more or less occupied with inhabitants. Some of the great deserts that our imagination used to create in Africa or elsewhere do not exist. Barren spots there are, and "miry places and marshes given to salt," but they are not many. The earth has been replenished, and the purpose of God so far fulfilled.

And then there is a distribution of talents. We are not all created alike, with equal dividends of the gifts and faculties that minister in some way to the purposes of our life. We depend more or less on one another; women on men, and men on women; the young on the old, and sometimes the old on the young; persons of one talent on those of another talent, those with strong sinews on those with clear heads, and those with clear heads on those with strong sinews; in short, society is so constituted that what each has he has for all, and what all have they have for each. The

principle of the division of labour is brought in; and in a well ordered community the general wealth and well-being of the whole are better promoted by the interchange of offices, than if each person within himself had a little stock of all that he required.

The same law of distribution prevails in the Church of Christ. It was exemplified in an interesting way in the case of our Lord's apostles. o one of these was a duplicate of another. Four of them, taking in Paul, were types of varieties which have been found in all ages of the Church. In a remarkable paper in the Contemporary Review, Professor Godet of euchatel, after delineating the characteristics of Peter, James, John, and Paul, remarked what an interesting thing it was, that four men of such various temperaments should all have found supreme satisfaction in Jesus of azareth, and should have yielded up to Him the homage and service of their lives. And throughout the history of the Church, the distribution of gifts has been equally marked. Chrysostom and Augustine, Jerome and Ambrose, Bernard and Anselm, were all of the same stock, but not of the same type. At the Reformation men of marked individuality were provided for every country. Germany had Luther and Melancthon; France, Calvin and Coligny; Switzerland, Zwingle and Farel, Viret and OEcolampadius; Poland, A-Lasco; Scotland, Knox; England, Cranmer, Latimer, and Hooper. The missionary field has in like manner been provided for. India has had her Schwartz, her Carey, her Duff, and a host of others; China her Morrison, Burmah her Judson, Polynesia her Williams, Africa her Livingstone. The most unattractive and inhospitable spots have been supplied. Greenland was not too cold for the Moravians, nor the leper-stricken communities of India or Africa too repulsive. And never were Christian men more disposed than to-day to honour that great Christian law of distribution - "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature."

It was a great providential law, therefore, that was recognised in the partition of the land of Canaan among the tribes. Provision was thus made for so scattering the people that they should occupy the whole country, and become adapted to the places where they settled, and to the pursuits proper to them. Even where there seems to us to have been a mere random distribution of places, there may have been underlying adaptations for them, or possibilities of adaptation known only to God; at all events the law of adaptation would take effect, by which a man becomes adapted and attached to the place that not only gives him a home but the means of living, and by which, too, he becomes a greater adept in the methods of work which ensure success.

3. Still further, in the allocation of the tribes in their various territories we have an instance of the way in which God designed the earth to minister most effectually to the wants of man. We do not say that the method now adopted in Canaan was the only plan of distributing land that God ever sanctioned; very probably it was the same method as had prevailed among the Canaanites; but it is beyond doubt that, such as it was, it was sanctioned by God for His chosen people.

It was a system of peasant proprietorship. The whole landed property of the country

was divided among the citizens. Each freeborn Israelite was a landowner, possessing his estate by a tenure, which, so long as the constitution was observed, rendered its permanent alienation from his family impossible. At the fiftieth year, the year of jubilee, every inheritance returned, free of all encumbrance, to the representatives of the original proprietor. The arrangement was equally opposed to the accumulation of overgrown properties in the hands of the few, and to the loss of all property on the part of the many. The extremes of wealth and poverty were alike checked and discouraged, and the lot eulogised by Agur - a moderate competency, neither poverty nor riches, became the general condition of the citizens.

It is difficult to tell what extent of land fell to each family. The portion of the land divided by Joshua has been computed at twenty-five million acres. Dividing this by 600,000, the probable number of families at the time of the settlement, we get forty-two acres as the average size of each property. For a Roman citizen, seven acres was counted enough to yield a moderate maintenance, so that even in a country of ordinary productiveness the extent of the Hebrew farms would, before further subdivision became necessary, have been ample. When the population increased the inheritance would of course have to be subdivided. But for several generations this, so far from an inconvenience, would be a positive benefit. It would bring about a more complete development of the resources of the soil. The great rule of the Divine economy was thus honoured - nothing was lost.

See Wines on the "Laws of the Ancient Hebrews," p. 388.

There is no reason to suppose that the peasant proprietorship of the Israelites induced a stationary and stagnant condition of society, or reduced it to one uniform level - a mere conglomeration of men of uniform wealth, resources, and influence. Though the land was divided equally at first, it could not remain so divided long. In the course of providence, when the direct heirs failed, or when a man married a female proprietor, two or more properties would belong to a single family. Increased capital, skill and industry, or unusual success in driving out the remaining Canaanites, would tend further to the enlargement of properties. Accordingly we meet with "men of great possessions," like Jair the Gileadite, Boaz of Bethlehem, abal of Carmel, or Barzillai the Gileadite, even in the earlier periods of Jewish history.* There was a sufficient number of men of wealth to give a pleasing variety and healthful impulse to society, without producing the evils of enormous accumulation on the one hand, or frightful indigence on the other.**

* 10:4; Ruth 2:1; 1 Samuel 25:2; 2 Samuel 17:27.

**See the author's essay “An Old Key to our Social Problems" in "Counsel and Cheer for the Battle of Life."

We in this country, after reaching the extreme on the opposite side, are now trying to get back in the direction of this ancient system. All parties seem now agreed that something of the nature of peasant proprietorship is necessary to solve the agrarian problem in Ireland and in Great Britain too. It is only the fact that in Britain

commercial enterprise and emigration afford so many outlets for the energies of our landless countrymen that has tolerated the abuses of property so long among us, -the laws of entail and primogeniture, the accumulation of property far beyond the power of the proprietor to oversee or to manage, the employment of land agents acting solely for the proprietor, and without that sense of responsibility or that interest in the welfare of the people which is natural to the proprietor himself. It is little wonder that theories of land-possession have risen up which are as impracticable in fact as they are wild and lawless in principle. Such desperate imaginations are the fruit of despair - absolute hopelessness of getting back in any other way to a true land law, - to a state of things in which the land would yield the greatest benefit to the whole nation. ot only ought it to supply food and promote health, but also a familiarity with nature, and a sense of freedom, and thus produce contentment and happiness, and a more kindly feeling among all classes. It seems to us one of the most interesting features of the land law recently brought in for Ireland that it tends towards an arrangement of the land in the direction of God's early designs regarding it. If it be feasible for Ireland, why not have it for England and Scotland? Some may scout such matters as purely secular, and not only unworthy of the interference of religious men, but when advocated by them as fitted to prejudice spiritual religion. It is a narrow view. All that is right is religious; all that is according to the will of God is spiritual. Whatever tends to realize the prayer of Agur is good for rich and poor alike: ''Give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me."

4. Lastly, in the arrangements for the distribution of the land among the twelve tribes we may note a proof of God's interest in the temporal comfort and prosperity of men. It is not God that has created the antithesis of secular and spiritual, as if the two interests were like a see-saw, so that whenever the one went up the other must go down. Things in this world are made to be enjoyed, and the enjoyment of them is agreeable to the will of God, provided we use them as not abusing them. If Scripture condemns indulgence in the pleasures of life, it is when these pleasures are preferred to the higher joys of the Spirit, or when they are allowed to stand in the way of a nobler life and a higher reward. In ordinary circumstances God intends men to be fairly comfortable; He does not desire life to be a perpetual struggle, or a dismal march to the grave. The very words in which Christ counsels us to consider the lilies and the ravens, instead of worrying ourselves about food and clothing, show this; for, under the Divine plan, the ravens are comfortably fed, and the lilies are handsomely clothed. This is the Divine plan; and if those who enjoy a large share of the comforts of life are often selfish and worldly, it is only another proof how much a wrong spirit may pervert the gifts of God and turn them to evil. The characteristic of a good man, when he enjoys a share of worldly prosperity, is, that he does not let the world become his idol, - it is his servant, it is under his feet; he jealously guards against its becoming his master. His effort is to make a friend of the mammon of unrighteousness, and to turn every portion of it with which he may be entrusted to such a use for the good of others, that when at last he gives in his account, as steward to his Divine Master, he may do so with joy, and not with grief.

Verses 1-63

CHAPTER XXIV.

THE I HERITA CE OF JUDAH.

Joshua 15:1-63.

JUDAH was the imperial tribe, and it was fitting that he should be planted in a conspicuous territory. Even if the republic had not been destined to give place to the monarchy, some pre-eminence was due to the tribe which had inherited the patriarchal blessing, and from which He was to come in whom all the families of the earth were to be blessed. Judah and the sons of Joseph seem to have obtained their settlements not only before the other tribes, but in a different manner. They did not obtain them by lot, but apparently by their own choice and by early possession. Judah was not planted in the heart of the country. That position was gained by Ephraim and Manasseh, the children of Joseph, while Judah obtained the southern section. In this position his influence was not so commanding at first as it would have been had he occupied the centre. The portion taken possession of by Judah had belonged to the first batch of kings that Joshua subdued, - the kings that came up to take vengeance on the Gibeonites. What was first assigned to Judah was too large, and the tribe of Simeon got accommodation within his lot (Joshua 19:9). Dan also obtained several cities that had first been given to Judah (comp. Joshua 15:21-62 and Joshua 19:40-46). In point of fact, Judah ere long swallowed up a great part of Simeon and Dan, and Benjamin was so hemmed in between him and Ephraim that, while Jerusalem was situated within the limits of Benjamin, it was, for all practical purposes, a city of Judah.

We do not encumber our exposition with a discussion of the extraordinary theory of Wellhausen, to the effect that Judah and Simeon, with Levi, were the first to cross the Jordan and attack the Canaanites; that Simeon and Levi were all but annihilated; that Joshua, who belonged to the tribe of Ephraim, did little more than settle that tribe; and that there was hardly such a thing as united action by the tribes, most of them having acted and fought at their own hand. This theory rests professedly on the ground that 1:1-36 is a more true and trustworthy account of the settlement than the narrative of Joshua. It is a strange proof of the greater truthfulness of Judges that, according to this theory, its very first statement should be a lie - "It came to pass after the death of Joshua!''' The narrative of Judges naturally follows that of Joshua because it is plain that while Joshua secured for his people standing ground in the country, he did not secure undisturbed possession. Joshua set them an example of faith and courage which, if followed up by them, would have secured undisturbed possession; but with few exceptions they preferred to tolerate the Canaanites at their side, instead of making a vigorous effort to dispossess them wholly.

The territory of Judah was not pre-eminently fruitful; it was not equal in this respect to that of Ephraim and Manasseh. It had some fertile tracts, but a

considerable part of it was mountainous and barren. It was of four descriptions -the hill country, the valley or low country, the south, and the wilderness. ''The hill country," says Dean Stanley, "is the part of Palestine which best exemplifies its characteristic scenery; the rounded hills, the broad valleys, the scanty vegetation, the villages and fortresses sometimes standing, more frequently in ruins, on the hill tops; the wells in every valley, the vestiges of terraces whether for corn or wine." Here the lion of the tribe of Judah entrenched himself, to guard the southern frontier of the Chosen Land, with Simeon, Dan, and Benjamin nestled around him. Well might he be so named in this wild country, more than half a wilderness, the lair of savage beasts, of which the traces gradually disappear as we advance into the interior. Fixed there, and never dislodged, except by the ruin of the whole nation, "he lay down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up?" Many parts of Judah were adapted for the growth of corn: witness Bethlehem, "the house of bread." But the cultivation of the vine was pre-eminently the feature of the tribe. "Here more than elsewhere in Palestine are to be seen on the sides of the hills the vineyards, marked by their watch-towers and walls, seated on their ancient terraces, the earliest and latest symbol of Judah. The elevation of the hills and table-lands of Judah is the true climate of the vine. He 'bound his foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes.' It was from the Judsean valley of Eshcol, 'the torrent of the cluster,' that the spies cut down the gigantic cluster of grapes. A vineyard on a "hill of olives'" with the 'fence,' and 'the stones gathered out,' and the tower in 'the midst of it,' is the natural figure which both in the prophetical and evangelical records represents the kingdom of Judah. The 'vine' was the emblem of the nation on the coins of the Maccabees, and in the colossal cluster of golden grapes which overhung the porch of the second Temple; and the grapes of Judah still mark the tombstones of the Hebrew race in the oldest of their European cemeteries at Prague.*

*Stanley's "Sinai and Palestine."

The chapter now before us has a particularly barren look; but if we examine it with care we shall find it not deficient in elements of interest.

1. First, we have an elaborate delineation of the boundaries of the territory allotted to Judah. It is not difficult to follow the boundary line in the main, though some of the names cannot be identified now. The southern border began at the wilderness of Zin, where the host had been encamped more than forty years before, when the twelve spies returned with their report of the land. The line moved in a south-westerly course till it reached "the river of Egypt " and the sea shore. What this "river of Egypt" was is far from clear. aturally one thinks of the ile, the only stream that seems to be entitled to such an appellation. On the other hand, the term translated "river" is commonly though not always, applied to brooks or shallow torrents, and hence it has been thought to denote a brook, now called El Arish, about midway in the desert between Gaza and the Pelusiac mouth of the ile. While we incline to the former view, we own that practically the question is of little consequence; the only difference being that if the boundary reached to the ile, it included a larger share of the desert than if it had a more northerly limit. The Dead

Sea was the chief part of the eastern frontier. The northern boundary began near Gilgal, and stretched westwards to the Mediterranean by a line that passed just south of Jerusalem.

The position of Judah was peculiar, in respect of the enemies by whom he was surrounded. On his eastern frontier, close to the Dead Sea, he was in contact with Moab, and on the south with Edom, the descendants of Esau. On the south-west were the Amalekites of the desert; and on the west the Phillistines, and preeminent among them, until Caleb subdued them, the sons of Anak, the giants. On his extreme north, but within the tribe of Benjamin, was the great fortress of the Jebusites. It was no bed of roses that was thus prepared for the lion of the tribe of Judah. If he should rule at all, he must rule in the midst of his enemies. Hemmed in by fierce foes on every side, he needed to show his prowess if he was to prevail against them. It was the necessity of contending with these and other enemies that developed the military genius of David (1 Samuel 17:50; 1 Samuel 18:5; 1 Samuel 18:17; 1 Samuel 18:27; 1 Samuel 27:8), and made him the fitting type of the heavenly warrior who goes forth "conquering and to conquer." The vigilance that was needed to keep these enemies at bay was one means of preserving the vigour and independence of the tribe. Living thus in the very heart of foes, Judah was the better fitted to symbolize the Church of Christ, as she is usually found when faithful to her high calling. "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves." "We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." As long as the Church is militant, it cannot be otherwise; and it little becomes her either to complain on the one hand, or be despondent on the other, however strong and bitter the opposition or even the persecution of her foes.

2. ext, a little episode comes into our narrative (Joshua 15:13-19), in connection with a special allocation of territory within the tribe. The incident of Caleb is rehearsed, as an introduction to the narrative that follows, Caleb, on the strength of his promise to drive out the Anakim, had got Hebron for his inheritance, and a portion of the country around. ear to Hebron, but on a site now unknown, stood Debir, or Kirjath- sepher, apparently a stronghold of the Anakim. We do not know the circumstances that induced Caleb to put this place up, as it were, to public competition. Whoever should capture it was promised his daughter Achsah in marriage. Othniel, who is called his younger brother, which may perhaps mean his brother's son, took the place, and, according to the bargain, got Achsah for his wife. The capture of Debir is recorded twice, here and in 1:14-15, and in the latter case with the addition of an incident that followed the marriage, as if in both cases it had been copied from an older record. Achsah was evidently a woman who could look well after her interests. She was not satisfied with the portion of land that fell to Othniel. There was a certain field besides, on which she had set her affection, and which she induced her husband to ask of Caleb. This he appears to have obtained. Then she herself turned supplicant, and having gone to Caleb and lighted down from off her ass, and Caleb having said to her, "What wouldest thou?" she said unto her father, "Give me a blessing; for thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water." ["And she said, Give me a blessing (margin, present); for

thou hast set me in the land of the south; give me also springs of water," R.V.] Her request was granted: - ''he gave her the upper springs and the nether springs."

Founding on the expression, "having lighted off her ass," some have thought that she feigned to fall off, and that her father coming to help her in the compassionate spirit one shows in a case of accident, she took the opportunity to ask and obtain this gift. The explanation is far-fetched if not foolish. Her dismounting is explained by the universal custom when one met a person of superior rank. Comp. Genesis 24:64. See Kitto's " Pictorial Commentary."

The incident, though picturesque, is somewhat strange, and we naturally ask, why should it have a place in the dry narrative of the settlement? Possibly for the very reason that what concerns the settlement was very dry, and that an incident like this gave it something of living interest. Those who lived at the time must have had a special interest in the matter, for in 1:14 it is said that Achsah moved Othniel to ask of her father the field {Heb.} implying that it was a particular field, well known to the public. The moral interest of the narrative is the light it throws on the generosity of Caleb. His son-in-law asked of him a field, a field apparently of special value; he got it: his daughter asked springs of water, and she too gained her request. We contrast Caleb with Saul, as we afterwards read of him. In no such fashion was David treated by his father-in-law, after his brilliant victories over the Philistines. So far was he from acquiring field or fountain, that he did not even acquire his wife: - ''It came to pass at the time when Merab, Saul's daughter, should have been given to David, that she was given unto Adriel the Meholathite to wife" (1 Samuel 18:19). Caleb had another spirit with him. He had the heart of a father, he had a genuine interest in his daughter and son-in-law, and desired to see them comfortable and happy. Kindly and large-hearted, he at once transferred to them valuable possessions that a greedier man would have kept for himself. Evidently he was one of those godlike men that enjoy giving, that have more pleasure in making others happy than in multiplying their own store. "The liberal man deviseth liberal things, and by liberal things shall he stand." ''There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, and it tendeth to poverty."

It is no great wonder that an incident which reveals the flowing generosity of a godlike heart, should sometimes be turned to account as a symbol of the liberality of God. All human generosity is but a drop from the ocean of the Divine bounty, a faint shadow of the inexhaustible substance. "If ye that are evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your Father in heaven give good things to them that ask Him?" If in the earthly father's bosom there be that interest in the welfare of his children which is eager to help them where help is needed and it is in his power to give it, how much more in the bosom of the Father in heaven? Why should any be backward to apply to Him - to say to Him, like Achsah, ''Give me a blessing"? It pleases Him to see His children reposing trust in Him, believing in His infinite love. All that He asks of us is to come to Him through Jesus Christ, acknowledging our unworthiness, and pleading the merit of His sacrifice and intercession, as our only ground of acceptance in His sight. After His revelation of His grace in Christ our requests cannot be restricted to mere temporal things; when

we ask a blessing it must be one of higher scope and quality. Yet such is His bounty that nothing can be withheld that is really for our good. " o good thing will the Lord withhold from them that walk uprightly." "Prove me now herewith, saith the Lord; if I will not open to you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it."

3. We leave this picturesque incident to re-enter the wilderness of unfamiliar names. We find a list of no fewer than a hundred and fifteen cities which lay within the confines of the tribe of Judah (Joshua 15:21-32). They fall into four divisions. First, twenty-nine cities belonged to "the south " - the " egeb" of the Hebrews, the part of the country which bordered on the desert, and to some degree partook of its character. Cities they are called, but few of them were more than villages, and hardly any were important enough to leave their mark on the history. There are two, however, having memorable associations with men of mark, the one carrying us back to a glorious past, the other forward to a disgraceful future. Strange association - Abraham and Judas Iscariot! With Beersheba the name of Abraham is imperishably associated, as well as the name of Isaac. And to this day the very name Beersheba seems to emit a holy fragrance. With Kerioth (Joshua 15:25) we connect the traitor Judas - the Iscariot of the ew Testament being equivalent to Ish-Kerioth, a man of Kerioth, of the Old. Our heart fills with a sense of nausea as we recall the association. The traitor was doubly connected with the tribe of Judah, - by his name and by his birthplace. What mockery of a noble name! ''Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise." What contrast could be greater than that between the Judah who surrendered himself to slavery to set his brother free, and the Judah who sold his Lord for thirty pieces of silver! What extremes of character may we find under the same name, and often in the same family! Strange that so few are drawn by the example of the noble, and so many follow the course of the vile!

The next division, ''the valley," the lowland, or Shephelah, embraced three subdivisions - the northeastern Shephelah with her fourteen towns (Joshua 15:33-36), the middle, with sixteen (Joshua 15:37-41), and the southern, with nine (Joshua 15:42-44); to which are added three of the cities of the Phillistines, - Ekron, Ashdod, and Gaza (Joshua 15:45-47). Many of the places in this list became famous in the history. Eshtaol and Zorah were of note in the history of Samson, but in his time they were Danite settlements. Jarmuth, Lachish, Eglon, and Makkedah had been conspicuous in Joshua's great battle of Bethhoron. Adullam and Keilah figured afterwards in David's outlaw history, and Ashdod and Ekron were two of the Philistine cities to which the ark was taken after the battle of Ebenezer and Aphek (1 Samuel 4:1; 1 Samuel 5:1; 1 Samuel 5:10). In later years Lachish and Libnah were among the places attacked by Sennacherib, King of Assyria, in his great raid upon the country (Isaiah 37:8).

The third great group of cities were those of "the mountain," or highlands. These were mostly in the central part of the territory, on the plateau or ridge that runs along it, rising up from the valley of the Dead Sea on the east, and the Shephelah, or "valley," on the west. Here there were four groups of cities: eleven on the south-west (Joshua 15:48-51), nine farther north (Joshua 15:52-54), ten to the east (Joshua

15:55-57), and six to the north (Joshua 15:58-59), along with Kirjath-baal and Rabbah in the same neighbourhood. This group included Hebron, of which we hear so much; also Carmel, Maon, and Ziph, conspicuous in the outlaw life of David. It is remarkable that there is no mention of Bethlehem, which lay in ''the mountain": it probably had not yet attained to the rank of a town. But its very omission may be regarded as a proof of the contemporaneous date of the book; for soon after Bethlehem was a well-known place (Ruth Ch. 1, Ch. 4), and if the Book of Joshua had been written at the late date sometimes assigned to it, that city could not have failed to have a place in the enumeration.

A fourth group of cities were in "the wilderness" or Migdar. This was a wild rocky region extending between the Dead Sea and the mountains of Hebron. "It is a plateau of white chalk, terminated on the east by cliffs which rise vertically from the Dead Sea shore to a height of about two thousand feet. The scenery is barren and wild beyond all description. The chalky ridges are scored by innumerable torrents, and their narrow crests are separated by broad, flat valleys. Peaks and knolls of fantastic forms rise suddenly from the swelling downs, and magnificent precipices of rugged limestone stand up like fortress walls above the sea. ot a tree nor a spring is visible in the waste; and only the desert partridge and the ibex are found ranging the solitude."* This district was in large measure the scene of David's wanderings, and well might he call it “a dry and thirsty land where there is no water " (Psalms 63:1). It was also the scene of the preaching of John the Baptist, at least at the beginning (Matthew 3:1); for when the administration of baptism became common, it was necessary for him to remove to a better watered region (John 3:23). There is some reason to believe that it was also the scene of our Lord's temptation (Matthew 4:1), the more especially because one of the Evangelists has said that " He was there with the wild beasts " (Mark 1:12).

*Conder's " Handbook to the Bible," pp. 213, 214.

Only six cities are enumerated as "in the wilderness" (Joshua 15:61-62), so that its population must have been very small. And of those mentioned some are wholly unknown. The most interesting of the six is Engedi, which derived its name from a celebrated fountain, meaning "fountain of the kid." It is noted as one of the hiding-places of David; Saul pursued him to it, and it was there that David spared his life when he found him in a cave (1 Samuel 24:1-22). Solomon extols its vineyards and its camphire (Song of Solomon 1:14) [henna-flowers, R.V.], Josephus its balsam (Ant., 9:1, 2), and Pliny its palms (v. 17). In ancient times it was the site of a town, and in the fourth century, in Jerome's time, there was still a considerable village; now, however, there is no trace of anything of the kind. Sir Walter Scott, in the ''Talisman," makes it the abode of a Christian hermit - Theodoric of Engaddi. It is situated near the middle of the western shore of the Dead Sea. A rich plain, half a mile square, slopes gently from the base of the mountains to the sea; and about a mile up the western acclivity, four hundred feet above the plain, is the fountain of Ain Jiddy, from which the place gets its name.

Such, then, was the distribution of the cities of Judah over the four sections of the

territory, the south, the Shephelah, the highlands, and the wilderness. It was an ample and varied domain, and after Caleb expelled the Anakim, there seems to have been little or no opposition to the occupation of the whole by the tribe. But ''the crook in the lot" was not wanting. The great Jebusite fortress, Jerusalem, was on the very edge of the northern boundary of Judah. ominally, as we have said, Jerusalem was in the territory of Benjamin, but really it was a city of Judah. For it is said (Joshua 15:63), "As for the Jebusites, the children of Judah could not drive them out; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day."* For some reason Joshua had omitted to take possession of this stronghold after the battle of Bethhoron. The stream of pursuit had gone westward, and the opportunity of taking Jerusalem when the king had been slain and his army cut to pieces, was lost. And just as in modern history, when the opportunity of taking Sebastopol was lost after the battle of the Alma, and a long, harassing and most disastrous siege had to be resorted to, so it was with Jerusalem; the Jebusites, recovering their spirits after the defeat, were able to hold it, and to defy the tribe of Judah, and all the tribes, for many a long year. While the fortress was held by the Jebusites, Jew and Jebusite dwelt together in the city, leading no doubt a comfortless life, neither the one nor the other feeling truly at home.

*A proof that Joshua was written before the time of David.

The moral is not far to seek. There is a crisis in some men's lives, when they come under the power of religion, and feel the obligation to live to God. If they had decision and courage enough at this crisis to break off all sinful habits and connections, to renounce all unchristian ways of life, to declare with Joshua, "As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord," - they would no doubt experience a sharp opposition, but it would pass over, and peace would come. But often they hesitate, and shrink, and cower; they cannot endure opposition and ridicule; they retain religion enough to appease their consciences, but not to give them satisfaction and joy. It is another case of the men of Judah dwelling with the Jebusites, and with the same result; they are not happy, they are not at rest; they bring little or no honour to their Master, and they have little influence on the world for good.

PARKER, "The Distribution of the Land

Joshua 15-19

WE have taken our first survey of the distribution of the land, and noticed several particulars of some consequence to ourselves; other particulars are now to be noticed. The inquiry will be, How far the distribution and the particulars associated with it are true to human nature as we know it. In answering this inquiry we shall soon see whether the Bible is an old book, in the sense of being obsolete and pointless, so far as the conditions and requirements of this day are concerned. The case is a very simple one. The land is to be divided among a given number of people. How they took the distribution or accepted the circumstances is an important inquiry.

We soon come upon a line that might have been written yesterday. It was not enough to have a great general distribution, but there must be some particular and singular allotment, to one person at least. She had a petition to offer; she offered it, and the supplication was answered. She asked through another a request from her father. Her father had received his portion, even Hebron and the region round about, and his daughter Achsah would have a little gift all her own. She would say, "Give me a blessing." That is vague. ot only would she have a benediction, but a portion—quite a little one, but still a portion, belonging, as it were, to herself—a jewel for her own neck, a ring for her own finger. Who does not like to have something particularly his own? It is well to have some general stake in the country, but to have a little private piece of land—one little bubbling, singing, fountain; a corner quite one"s own—is not that the very joy of proprietorship? o doubt there is a general sense of wealth, so general indeed as to be of little particular service under the occasional pressure of necessity: but when the child has six inches of garden-land all its own at the back-door, there Isaiah , after all, a landlordly feeling in the young heart that finds frequent expression. Caleb"s daughter would have" a field:" "she lighted off her ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wouldest thou?" She answered, "Give me a blessing." That she could have in a moment, but said she, Give me more, "give me also springs of water in addition to the south land." "And he gave her the upper springs, and the nether springs" ( Joshua 15:18-19). To whom did she pray? To her father. Have we not a Father to whom we can pray for springs of water? Yes, we have such a Father, and from him we can have the upper springs and the nether springs. The river of God is full of water. It cannot be drained off. It sets a-going all the fountains of creation, and is more at the end than at the beginning—the very fulness of God; a contradiction in words, but a grand reality in experience. The sun lights every lamp, and not a beam the less is his infinite glory. We therefore may have a special portion, a little all our own; yea, a double portion of the Spirit may be ours. Do not let us be content with the general blessing of the Church. That, indeed, is an infinite comfort. But that general blessing is a pledge of particular donations on the part of the Father of lights. Here we can pray without covetousness; here we can be ambitious without selfishness; here we can have great desires, and be enlarged in our generosity by their very operation in the heart. Let each say to the Father, Give me a field; give me a faculty; give me some dear, sweet consciousness of thy nearness and lovingness—something that nobody else can have just as I have it; whisper one word to me that no one in all the universe but myself can hear, and that whisper shall be to me an inspiration, a comfort, a security, a pledge; not that others may not enjoy the same in their own way, but I want something mine own. To that prayer who can measure the reply, if spoken in faith and love and noble unselfishness?

ow another voice is heard. Joshua was not going the right way about the work, in the estimation of some people:—

"And the children of Joseph spake unto Joshua , saying, Why hast thou given me but one lot and one portion to inherit, seeing I am a great people, forasmuch as the Lord hath blessed me hitherto?" ( Joshua 17:14).

"And Joshua answered them, If thou be a great people, then get thee up to the wood country, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, if mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee" ( Joshua 17:15).

Joshua , continuing the high satiric strain, said:—

"Thou art a great people, and hast great power: thou shalt not have one lot only: but the mountain shall be thine; for it is a wood, and thou shalt cut it down: and the outgoings of it shall be thine: for thou shalt drive out the Canaanites, though they have iron chariots, and though they be strong" ( Joshua 17:17-18).

We come now to another set of circumstances. It appears that when all was done up to this point, a good deal still remained to be accomplished. We read of this in chapter Joshua 18:2-7 :—

"And there remained among the children of Israel seven tribes, which had not yet received their inheritance" ( Joshua 18:2).

And has Joshua nothing in all this—the great man himself, so quiet, so gentle? Caleb asked for his portion right boldly, but he asked—as a heroic man should ask—for difficulties. At eighty-five he wanted to prove that he was as young as he was at forty. Joshua might have taken that opportunity of saying, Caleb, I was with you in that matter of the espial of the land; if you want your portion now, I may as well have mine at the same time. othing of the kind. Joshua waited until the very last. So we read:—

"When they had made an end of dividing the land for inheritance by their coasts, the children of Israel gave an inheritance to Joshua the son of un among them: according to the word of the Lord they gave him the city which he asked, even Timnath-serah in mount Ephraim: and he built the city, and dwelt therein" ( Joshua 19:49-50).

A very tender word is found in regard to some of the tribes. "Gad, and Reuben, and half the tribe of Prayer of Manasseh , have received their inheritance beyond Jordan." Sweet words!—" beyond Jordan." By a very legitimate accommodation these words may be applied to many a Christian. Some Christians have but little portion this side of the river; their lot is a small one; their riches could all be hidden in one hand; yet how bright they are!—as radiant as a summer dawn, as songful as a wood in spring-time, when all the birds are swelling their feathery throats with song. Why? Because the refrain of their hymn is "beyond Jordan." The crown is on the other side of the river; the city lies beyond the stream; the great inheritance is at the other end of the valley of the shadow of death: they are "begotten again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away." So their citizenship being in heaven, they have learned in whatsoever state they are, therewith to be content. Blessed are they who are rich in faith; yea, blessed with sevenfold blessing they who

can say that their souls are already in heaven, and the consciousness of the heavenly possession creates contempt for the vanities of time.

Looking at the whole matter practically, let us not forget that the land was given to be cultivated. This is not a mere matter of enjoyment. When Palestine was seized, it had to be brought under agricultural treatment, and men were to enjoy the fruit of their labour even in the Land of Promise. There was fighting to be done, there were trees to be cut down; the centre of the country was a great forest, and the foresters must go into it and bring down the timber and root out the old roots, and make flowers and fruits grow in the old forests of Palestine. Life is given to us to cultivate. We are not called upon to do merely the work—if so it may be termed—of appreciation and enjoyment; we are called to battle, to cultivation, to toil, to service, to disappointment, and to some fruition of our hope and love.

or must we forget that variety did not excite discontent. The lots were not all equal. Judah had twenty-nine cities and the villages thereof; Benjamin, fourteen cities with the villages; Joshua had Timnath-serah, in Mount Ephraim. So it is possible for us now to have variety of lot, and yet a sweet content of heart. The kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called together his servants, and gave to one five talents, to another two, to another one—representing talent and opportunity and capacity. The Lord must distribute as he pleases. The great lesson for us to learn Isaiah , that it is possible for us to have little, and yet not to want more; to be called to a great opportunity, and yet not to boast over those whose limitation is so obvious. This sweet content, this hallowed peace, can only be enjoyed in proportion as we abide in Christ, like living branches in a living vine. This miracle is not a trick of the human hand; it is the miracle of the Holy Ghost.

Selected ote

Eccentric Boundaries of the Tribes ( Joshua 15-19).—Thomson, in "The Land and the Book," writes: "The reason why the boundaries of the different tribes were so eccentric originally, and are now so difficult to follow, was that the "lots" were not meted out according to geographical lines; but lands of certain cities lying more or less contiguous were assigned to each tribe. These cities were the capitals of small principalities or districts, just as Tibnin, and Hunin, and Bint-Jebail are now. The territory of one might extend far to the east of the city, that of the next to the west. It is now absolutely impossible to draw lines around the separate "lots" with any degree of certainty. Their general positions with relation to each other, however, can be ascertained with sufficient exactness for all important purposes in the study of Biblical geography."

PETT, "Chapter 15 The Lot of the Tribe of Judah.

In this chapter we have details given of the boundaries of ‘the lot’ allocated by lot to the tribe of Judah. This is followed by the assignment of Hebron to Caleb, from where he drove out the Anakim, and the assignment of Debir, which was taken by Othniel his nephew, to whom, because of it, he gave his daughter in marriage. She

then made a special request to her father, which was granted. This is followed by an account of several cities by name, which fell to the tribe of Judah. The further advances of Judah would be described in Judges 1.

If the gathering of the twelve tribes around the central sanctuary had not been firmly in place at this stage it would never have survived. At times, when faith was weak, it was only deeply inbuilt custom that held it together. Indeed Judah, with Simeon, went off on their own and were rarely seen working with the other tribes. And yet when the vital call came they were there, both in the affair of Gibeah and in the activities of Samuel. It was rooted in their history, so much so that the idea even survived the seemingly decisive split following the death of Solomon.

Verse 1-2Chapter 15 The Lot of the Tribe of Judah.

In this chapter we have details given of the boundaries of ‘the lot’ allocated by lot to the tribe of Judah. This is followed by the assignment of Hebron to Caleb, from where he drove out the Anakim, and the assignment of Debir, which was taken by Othniel his nephew, to whom, because of it, he gave his daughter in marriage. She then made a special request to her father, which was granted. This is followed by an account of several cities by name, which fell to the tribe of Judah. The further advances of Judah would be described in Judges 1.

If the gathering of the twelve tribes around the central sanctuary had not been firmly in place at this stage it would never have survived. At times, when faith was weak, it was only deeply inbuilt custom that held it together. Indeed Judah, with Simeon, went off on their own and were rarely seen working with the other tribes. And yet when the vital call came they were there, both in the affair of Gibeah and in the activities of Samuel. It was rooted in their history, so much so that the idea even survived the seemingly decisive split following the death of Solomon.

Joshua 15:1-2

‘And the lot for the tribe of the children of Judah according to their families, was to the border of Edom, even to the wilderness of Zin southward at the uttermost part of the south. And their south border was from the uttermost part of the Salt Sea, from the tongue that looked southward.’The lot for the tribe of Judah is detailed in this chapter, giving first its boundaries and then its prospective cities. These were in the south of Canaan. This will be followed in the next chapter by the lot for the children of Joseph, which includes both Ephraim and Manasseh, in the central north. As the two major tribes their portions needed to be settled first in order to establish the nation in the land and because they were so numerous and needed space. The hill country had to be settled and secured before further extension could take place.

Perhaps at this stage we should very briefly consider the geography of Canaan. If we look at it from the south coming from Egypt the first land we come to after the

desert is the egeb, the semi-desert, dependent on oases, and with little rainfall which has to be carefully preserved and utilised. In good times, however it was irrigated by rainwater from the hills. Then as we move northward the land is divided roughly into four types going from west to east, sand dunes along the coast, especially in the south, then the coastal plain, a strip of fertile, comparatively flat ground which commences at the coast to the east of the sand dunes, and varies between three and twenty five miles in width), then as we go eastwards there is the Shephelah, the lowlands, the foothills gently undulating (five to fifteen miles wide) and sloping upwards towards the hill country, and then the hill country itself containing mountains above 950 metres ( 3000 feet) high. On the other side of these mountains continuing eastward is the Jordan Rift valley which contains the Jordan. This descends to well below sea level, with fertile sections in the north and desert in the south. The Sea of Chinnereth is 180 metres (600 feet) below sea level, the surface of the Dead Sea about 427 metres (1400 feet) below sea level.

The hill country (called ‘The Mountain’) goes from south to north split by ravines, and then turns westward to Carmel on the coast, split by ravines and valleys. Large parts of the whole territory were covered by forests. In the plain and the valleys chariots could operate which made conquest by Israel difficult, and cities were numerous. The hill country was relative sparsely populated with fewer cities, shortage of water and rougher land which was harder to cultivate. For this reason it was not so desirable and easier to conquer and control. The remainder of the land was heavily populated with large numbers of cities clustered together, apart from the forests.

The borders of Judah’s allotment were to reach to the border of Edom, that is the south side of the wilderness of Zin, where Kadesh was, taking in the egeb. This was its furthest extent southwards. They are then described in more detail as commencing from the southern tongue of the Dead Sea, its southernmost bay, and going westward. The Dead Sea, or Salt Sea, is the lowest point on earth, well below sea level. It has no outlet and the water therefore disappears by evaporation in the hot sun leaving large residues of salt, which makes the water so buoyant that you can actually sit in the sea. o fish can live in it and no vegetation grows near it.

2 Their southern boundary started from the bay at the southern end of the Dead Sea,

CLARKE,"From the bay that looketh southward - These were the southern limits of the tribe of Judah, which commenced at the extremity of the lake Asphaltites or Dead Sea, and terminated at Sihor or the river of Egypt, and Mediterranean Sea; though some think it extended to the Nile.

GILL, "And their south border was from the shore of the salt sea,.... Sometimes called the dead sea, the sea of Sodom, and the lake Asphaltites, which, as Jarchi observes, was southeast of the land of Israel:

from the bay that looketh southward; or the "tongue", as the Hebrew, which the Targum and Kimchi interpret of a rock or promontory, the point that ran out into the sea, looking to the southeast.

JAMISO , "the bay—Hebrew, “tongue.” It pushes its waters out in this form to a great distance [Robinson].

ELLICOTT, "(2) Their south border.—The southern boundary of Judah is thus described by Conder (Bible Handbook, p. 257):—“The south boundary of Judah is described from east to west, and became afterwards that of Simeon (see Joshua 19:1). Although the points mentioned along the border are not all certainly known, there is no doubt that the great mountain wall which extends from the Dead Sea to the water-shed south of Rehoboth (Er-Ruheibeh) formed the natural and recognised boundary of Palestine, while the river of Egypt (Joshua 15:4) is generally supposed to be the present Wâdy-el’-Arish, the northern boundary between Syria and Egypt. The north branch of this valley ( Wâdy-el-Abiad) rises near ‘Abdeh (Ebodah), south of Rehoboth, and thus carries on the boundary from the mountain rampart. A new identification of importance may be here mentioned, namely, Hezron (Joshua 15:3), the next point to Kadesh-barnea on the west side. Kadesh has been shown to lie probably in the neighbourhood of Wâdy-el-Yemen, and immediately west of that valley is the mountain called Hadîreh, a name radically identical with Hezron.”

WHEDO ,"2. Their south border seems to have fetched a curve or semicircle from the south end of the Dead Sea, sweeping far round by the wilderness of Zin, and thence northwesterly to the Mediterranean.

Salt sea — ow commonly called the Dead Sea, and supposed to cover the ancient vale of Siddim and the destroyed cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. See on Genesis 14:3; Genesis 19:25.

The bay that looketh southward — Literally, the tongue that turneth southward. The southernmost portion of the Dead Sea somewhat resembles a tongue in shape. Compare Isaiah 11:15.]

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:2 And their south border was from the shore of the salt sea,

from the bay that looketh southward:

Ver. 2. And their south border.] See umbers 34:2. Where God doth, as it were, draw a map of Canaan, and showeth the bounds of it on every side.

From the bay that looketh southward.] Heb., From the tongue: some render it from the promontory running out into the sea, in form of a tongue.

PULPIT, "The shore of the salt sea. Literally, the extremity, i.e; the south extremity. From the bay. Literally, tongue. The LXX. translates by λοφία, ridge. The whole southern portion of the sea is cut off from the rest by a peninsula near Kerak, the ancient Kit of Moab. It is called the Lisan. Whoever was the writer of the Book of Joshua, these details prove him to have had an accurate acquaintance with the geography of Palestine. He was no priestly inventor of fables attached to the temple at Jerusalem. Canon Tristram gives a vivid description of the neighbourhood in his 'Land of Israel,' Joshua 15:1-63. The ridge of Jebel Usdum—one large mass of rock salt—on the west of this "tongue" of water, the salt marsh of the Sebkha on the southwest, with its treeless waste—"not a plant or a leaf could be seen save just under the hills"—and its mirage like that of Sahara, the barren outline of the Lisan itself, to the eastward rising to an elevation of from five to six hundred feet, and the fertile oasis of the Ghor-es-Safieh at the southern extremity of the Dead Sea, give an unique character to this remarkable region.

K&D, "Jos_15:2-4

The southern boundary. This was also the southern boundary of the land of Israel generally, and coincided with the southern boundary of Canaan as described in Num_34:3-5. It went out “from the end of the salt sea, namely, from the tongue which turneth to the south,” i.e., from the southern point of the Dead Sea, which is now a salt marsh.

3 crossed south of Scorpion Pass, continued on to Zin and went over to the south of Kadesh Barnea. Then it ran past Hezron up to Addar and curved around to Karka.

CLARKE,"Maaleh-acrabbim - The ascent of the Mount of Scorpions, probably so called from the multitude of those animals found in that place.

Kadesh-barnea - This place was called Enmishpat, Gen_14:7. It was on the edge of the wilderness of Paran, and about twenty-four miles from Hebron. Here Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron, died; and here Moses and Aaron rebelled against the Lord; hence the place was called Meribah-Kadesh, or the contention of Kadesh.

Karkaa - Supposed to be the Coracea of Ptolemy, in Arabia Petraea. - Calmet.

GILL, "And it went out to the south side of Maalehacrabbim,.... Or the ascent of Akrabbim, as it is called; see Gill on Num_34:4,

and passed along to Zin, and ascended upon the south side unto Kadeshbarnea; which perfectly agrees with the southern border of the land, as described in Num_34:4,

and passed along to Hezron, and went up to Adar; which two places being near to one another, as is very likely, are put together, as if one place, and called Hazaraddar, Num_34:4; and mention is made of Hezron, which is Hazor, Jos_15:25; but not of Adar:

and fetched a compass to Karkaa; which Jerom (w) calls Acchara, a village in the wilderness; and if the same with Carcaria, it was according to him a day's journey from Petra in Idumea; but that is not likely; see Jdg_8:10.

JAMISO , "Maaleh-akrabbim—Hebrew, “the ascent of scorpions”; a pass in the “bald mountain” (see on Jos_11:17), probably much infested by these venomous reptiles.

WHEDO , "3. It went out to the south side — Or, on the south side. That is, it started out on its southward course.

Maaleh-acrabbim — The word means ascent of scorpions, and was probably the name of a pass in the bald mountain (Halak) eight miles south of the Dead Sea, described in note, Joshua 11:17. It doubtless derived its name from its scorpions, which abound in all this region.

Passed along to Zin — That is, went along till it joined the edge of the wilderness of Zin, which stretches off to the west and southwest of Mount Hor.

Kadesh-barnea — The modern Ain Gadis. See Joshua 10:41, note. Hezron, Adar, and Karkaa are now unknown. Compare umbers 34:1-5.

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:3 And it went out to the south side to Maalehacrabbim, and passed along to Zin, and ascended up on the south side unto Kadeshbarnea, and passed along to Hezron, and went up to Adar, and fetched a compass to Karkaa:

Ver. 3. To Maalehacrabbim,] i.e., To the ascent of scorpions, or of the mountains that were crooked as scorpions, or that abounded with scorpions. [ 1:36]

Passed along to Zin.] A city whence that wilderness, not the same with that of Sin or Sinai, had its name.

To Hezron, and went up to Adar.] These two places are [ umbers 34:4] called Hazaraddar.

PETT, "Verse 3-4‘And it went out southward of the ascent of Akrabbim, and passed along to Zin, and went up by the south of Kadesh-barnea, and passed along by Hezron, and went up to Addar and turned about to Karka, and it passed along to Azmon and went out at the torrent-wadi of Egypt. And the goings out of the border were at the Sea. This shall be your south border.’For these verses compare umbers 34:4-5. ‘The Ascent of Akkrabim’ is ‘the Scorpion’s Pass’, a mountain pass at the southern end of the Dead Sea ( umbers 34:4; Judges 1:36), between the Arabah (Jordan Rift valley) and the hill country of Judah. It is identified with aqb es-safa. The border then passed along the south of Kadesh-barnea (south of the Wilderness of Zin), and by Hezron, Addar and Karka which are unknown (but compare Hazar-addar in umbers 34:4). Possibly they were well known oases.

It then went along to Azmon and to ‘the torrent-wadi of Egypt’, Wadi el-‘Arish (Joshua 15:47; umbers 34:5; 1 Kings 8:65; Isaiah 27:12), often called the ‘River of Egypt’, until it reached the Great Sea. This long and deep valley, dry except after heavy rain, rises in the middle of the desert of et-Tih in the north of the Sinaitic peninsula and joins the Mediterranean some eighty kilometres (fifty miles) south of Gaza, at el-‘Arish. It has nothing to do with the ile.

“This shall be your south border.” The change to direct speech may be partly due to the fact that it was taken from umbers 34:3; umbers 34:6 where it is in an address by Moses, but it also reminds us that these are directions being given to Judah.

K&D, "Jos_15:3-4

Thence it proceeded “to the southern boundary of the ascent of Akrabbim,” i.e., the row of lofty whitish cliffs which intersects the Arabah about eight miles below the Dead Sea (see at Num_34:4), “and passed across to Zin,” i.e., the Wady Murreh (see at Num_13:21), “and went up to the south of Kadesh-barnea,” i.e., by Ain Kudes (see at Num_20:16), “and passed over to Hezron, and went up to Adar, and turned to Karkaa, and went over to Azmon, and went out into the brook of Egypt,” i.e., the Wady el Arish. On the probable situation of Hezron, Adar, Karkaa, and Azmon, see at Num_34:4-5. “And the outgoings of the boundary were to the sea” (the Mediterranean). The Wady el Arish,

a marked boundary, takes first of all a northerly and then a north-westerly course, and

opens into the Mediterranean Sea (see Pent. p. 358). היה in the singular before the subject in the plural must not be interfered with (see Ewald, §316, a.). - The words “this shall be your south coast” point back to the southern boundary of Canaan as laid down in Num_34:2., and show that the southern boundary of the tribe-territory of Judah was also the southern boundary of the land to be taken by Israel.

PULPIT, "And it went out to the south side to Maaleh-acrabbim. Or, perhaps, and it went to the southward of Maaleh-acrabbim, translated in umbers 34:4, "the ascent of Acrabbim." The literal meaning of Maaleh-acrabbim is Scorpion Rise (see 1:36). Keil thinks that it was a pass in the Mount Halak, or the Smooth Mountain, mentioned in Joshua 11:17, Joshua 12:7. "De Saulcy suggests the Wady Zouara, and testifies to the scorpions found under every pebble". And Ainsworth, 'Travels in Asia Minor,' 2.354, says that some spots are almost uninhabitable in consequence. Knobel supposes it to be the pass es-Sufah on the road between Petra and Hebron. But the border of Judah seems to have gone in a southwesterly direction. To Zin. Rather, in the direction of Zin. On the south side unto Kadesh-barnea. Or, as above, southward of Kadesh-barnea. The exact position of Kadesh-Burnea has not been ascertained. It was between the wilderness of Zin and that of Paran ( umbers 13:26; umbers 20:1). Dean Stanley identifies it with Petra, which was about 30 miles in a northeasterly direction from the Gulf of Akaba on the Red Sea, and close to Mount Her. A more recent traveller identifies it with Ain Gadis, about 60 miles to the westward of Petra, and he claims Winer, Kurz, Kalisch, and Knobel as supporters of his view. The latter founds his view on the discovery of Ain Gadis by Rowlands, and supports it by the authority of Ritter. Ritter, however, as his translator informs us, embodied the results of the investigations of Mr. Rowlands' while his work was preparing for the press, and did not give the matter that full consideration which he was accustomed to do. The chief objection to it is that (see vex. 1) Ain Gadis can hardly be described as on "the border of Edom." The general view is that it lay somewhat to the northeast of Hezron and to the northwest of Petra, at the foot of the range of mountains which form the southern boundary of Judesa. Here the spies brought their report to Moses (Joshua 14:6, Joshua 14:7; umbers 13:26). Here Miriam was buried, and where Moses incurred the wrath of God from his mode of working the miracle which supplied the Israelites with water ( um, 20). It was "a city in the uttermost border" of Edom ( umbers 20:16), and it was some distance from Mount Hor, for we find it described as a journey ( umbers 20:22); and by passing from Kadesh to Mount Hor and thence by the way of the Red Sea, the Israelites "compassed the land of Edom" ( umbers 21:4), a fact which seems to prove that Petra and Kadesh-barnea were not the same place. Kadesh is supposed by M. Chabas to be the "Qodesh of the country of the Amaor," or Amorites, in the monuments of Seti I. and Rameses II. It is depicted as "on a hillside with a stream on one side," and is thus distinguished from Qodesh of the Kheta or Hittites, which is in a flat country beside a lake. Fetched a compass to Karkaa. Rather, was deflected in the direction of Karkaa. othing is known of the places here mentioned. Cf. umbers 34:4, where Karkaa is not mentioned, but the deflection in the neighbourhood of Asmon is.

4 It then passed along to Azmon and joined the Wadi of Egypt, ending at the Mediterranean Sea. This is their[a] southern boundary.

CLARKE,"Toward Azmon - This was the last city they possessed toward Egypt.

The river of Egypt - The most eastern branch of the river Nile. See on Jos_13:3(note). But there is much reason to doubt whether any branch of the Nile be meant, and whether the promised land extended to that river. On this subject it is impossible to decide either way.

GILL, "From thence it passed towards Azmon, and went out unto the river of Egypt,.... In like manner is this coast described, Num_34:5; it is called by Jerom (x)Asemona, and said to be a city in the desert, to the south of Judah, dividing Egypt, and the lot of the tribe of Judah, leading to the sea:

and the outgoings of that coast were at the sea; the Mediterranean sea; or to the west, as the Targum; this was the utmost border of the tribe of Judah this way:

this shall be your south coast; of the lot that fell to the tribe of Judah.

ELLICOTT, "(4) This shall be your south coast.—This phrase does not seem to fit in with the language of the rest of the passage. But it is extremely like a reminiscence of the language of Moses in umbers 34:3; umbers 34:6; umbers 34:9; umbers 34:12. “This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth” was the instruction to Joshua, and in describing the border of Judah, he is really describing also the southern border of all Israel; and he does it throughout in language very like that of Moses in umbers 34. But Moses wrote it in the second person and in the future tense throughout; Joshua wrote it in the third person and in the past tense, with this one exception, in which he seems to have unconsciously adopted the phraseology of the lawgiver instead of the historian.

WHEDO , "Verse 44. Azmon is also unknown.

River of Egypt — Wady-el-Arish. See note Joshua 13:3.

At the sea — The Mediterranean Sea.

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:4 [From thence] it passed toward Azmon, and went out unto the river of Egypt; and the goings out of that coast were at the sea: this shall be your south coast.

Ver. 4. This shall be your south coast.] It is God that "determineth the times before appointed, and the bounds of our habitations"; [Acts 17:26] the walls of his people’s houses are continually before him. [Isaiah 49:16]

PULPIT, "The river of Egypt (see above, Joshua 13:3). "Westward, as far as Egypt, there is a sandy, salt, barren, unfruitful, and uninhabitable waste" (Knobel). The land, he adds, is better near Gaza, but near the sea it is still pure waste. And the goings out of that coast were at the sea. The word coast, derived through the French from the Latin costa, signifies, like it, a side. It is now used only of the border formed by the sea, but at an earlier period it had a wider signification. The Hebrew word is translated "border" in Joshua 15:1. The meaning is that the boundary line of Judah ran as far as the sea. This shall be your south coast. Or, this shall be to you the southern boundary. The historian here quotes the directions given to Moses in umbers 34:1-29; with the evident intention of pointing out that the south border of the children of Israel coincided with that of the tribe of Judah.

5 The eastern boundary is the Dead Sea as far as the mouth of the Jordan.

The northern boundary started from the bay of the sea at the mouth of the Jordan,

CLARKE,"The east border was the Salt Sea - The Salt Sea is the same as the Dead Sea, lake Asphaltites, etc. And here it is intimated that the eastern border of the tribe of Judah extended along the Dead Sea, from its lowest extremity to the end of

Jordan, i.e., to the place where Jordan falls into this sea.

`GILL, "And the east border was the salt sea, even unto the end of Jordan,.... To the place where Jordan fell into it; so that this border was the whole length of the salt sea, which Josephus says (y) was five hundred eighty furlongs; and, according to Pliny (z), an hundred miles:

and their border in the north quarter was from the bay of the sea,

at the uttermost part of Jordan; this northern border began where the eastern ended, at the bay or creek of the sea, where Jordan fell into it.

JAMISO , "the end— that is, the mouth of the Jordan.

ELLICOTT, "(5) Their border in the north quarter.—This can be followed with the Ordnance Survey of Palestine, and is described by Conder in the following way:—“It started from the Jordan mouth, but did not apparently follow the river, as Beth Arabah (unknown) and Beth Hogla (’Ain Hajlah, about two miles west of Jordan—sheet 18) belonged to Benjamin. Passing along the valley of Achor (Wâdy Kelt), it left Gilgal on the north, and ascended the pass to the going up of Adummim (Tal’at-ed-Dumm), the ancient and modern name ‘bloody’ being apparently derived from the brick-red marls here found amid a district of white chalk.” (It is easy to conjecture other reasons.) A line of Roman road on the map is a very fair guide to the boundary here described, and thus far it lies on sheet 18 En Rogel, the next known point (on sheet 17), close to Zoheleth (Zahweileh, 1 Kings 1:9), was evidently the present spring ‘Ain Umm-ed-Deraj, in the Kedron Valley (this may be sought in the separate survey of Jerusalem, which is upon a larger scale). Thence the border ran across the slope (Cataph, Joshua 15:8, “side”), beside the valley of Ben Hinnom (Wâdy Rabâby), south of Jebus, and thus reached the watershed. (Here the boundary-line takes a turn to the northward.) It then apparently passed along the broad vale (Emek, Joshua 15:8) of Rephaim (“valley of the giants”), which Josephus makes to extend towards Bethlehem. This valley is identified with El-Bukeia (sheet 17). The waters of ephtoah are apparently identical with ‘Ain ’Atân, south-west of Bethlehem.

WHEDO , "5. East border was the salt sea — Which formed a boundary line for nearly fifty miles.

End of Jordan — That is, the month of the Jordan; called also in this same verse the uttermost part of Jordan.

Bay of the sea — The northern tongue or extremity of the Dead Sea, at the point where it receives the waters of the Jordan.

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:5 And the east border [was] the salt sea, [even] unto the end of Jordan. And [their] border in the north quarter [was] from the bay of the sea at the

uttermost part of Jordan:

Ver. 5. The salt sea.] The lake of Sodom, into which the river Jordan runneth, and there endeth.

PETT, "Verse 5Joshua 15:5 a

‘And the east border was the Salt Sea, even to the end of Jordan.’The east border of Judah was simple. It went from below the Dead Sea and along its western side up to where the Jordan entered it. At the time that this was written the Sea probably extended a few miles further north. It is slowly getting smaller due to rapid evaporation.

Joshua 15:5-6 (5b-6)

‘And the border of the north quarter was from the bay of the sea at the end of Jordan. And the border went up to Beth-hoglah, and passed along by the north of Beth-arabah, and the border went up to the stone of Bohan the son of Reuben.’We now trace the northern border westward. It begins at the northern tongue of the Dead Sea. Beth-hoglah was near Jericho (Joshua 18:21) and was a Benjamite city. It has been identified with the ruins of Kasr Hajleh, and is four kilometres (three miles) north of the present Dead Sea. Beth-arabah (‘house of the Arabah’) was in the barren, rocky country between the Central Range and the Dead Sea, sometimes called Jeshimon (waste, desert) mentioned in 1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 23:24. In verse 61 it belongs to Judah. In Joshua 18:21 it is a Benjamite border town. As a border town it was probably shared between them, the boundary going through it. It would have lands at both sides, some allocated to one and some to the other.

“And the border went up to the stone of Bohan, the son of Reuben.” Compare Joshua 18:17. This was clearly an important recognised landmark. Bohen means ‘a thumb’. This may refer to a large stone shaped like a thumb, near to an eminence or larger rock called Reuben (not necessarily connected with the patriarch). It is alternatively possible that a famous man Bohan was buried there who was son to an unknown Reuben, or even that it commemorated some famous exploit by a Reubenite who had crossed the river with Joshua. But the impression is of an ancient landmark. The portion of the Biblical Reuben was across the river.

K&D, "Jos_15:5

“The eastern boundary was the salt sea to the end of the Jordan,” i.e., the Dead Sea, in all its length up to the point where the Jordan entered it.

Jos_15:5-11

In Jos_15:5-11 we have a description of the northern boundary, which is repeated in Jos_18:15-19 as the southern boundary of Benjamin, though in the opposite direction, namely, from west to east. It started “from the tongue of the (salt) sea, the end (i.e., the mouth) of the Jordan, and went up to Beth-hagla,” - a border town between Judah and

Benjamin, which was afterwards allotted to the latter (Jos_18:19, Jos_18:12), the present Ain Hajla, an hour and a quarter to the south-east of Riha (Jericho), and three-quarters of an hour from the Jordan (see at Gen_50:11, note), - “and went over to the north side of Beth-arabah,” a town in the desert of Judah (Jos_15:61), afterwards assigned to Benjamin (Jos_18:22), and called Ha-arabah in Jos_18:18, about twenty or thirty minutes to the south-west of Ain Hajla, in a “level and barren steppe” (Seetzen, R. ii. p. 302), with which the name very well agrees (see also Rob. Pal. ii. pp. 268ff.). “And the border went up to the stone of Bohan, the son of Reuben.” The expression “went up” shows that the stone of Bohan must have been on higher ground, i.e., near the western mountains, though the opposite expression “went down” in Jos_18:17 shows that it must have been by the side of the mountain, and not upon the top. According to Jos_18:18-19, the border went over from the stone of Bohan in an easterly direction “to the shoulder over against (Beth) Arabah northwards, and went down to (Beth) Arabah, and then went over to the shoulder of Beth-hagla northwards,” i.e., on the north side of the mountain ridge of Beth-arabah and Beth-hagla. This ridge is “the chain of hills or downs which runs from Kasr Hajla towards the south to the north side of the Dead Sea, and is called Katar Hhadije, i.e., a row of camels harnessed together.”

6 went up to Beth Hoglah and continued north of Beth Arabah to the Stone of Bohan son of Reuben.

BAR ES, "The stone of Bohan - This stone perhaps commemorated some deed of valor belonging to the wars of Joshua (compare 1Sa_7:12). The stone was erected on the slope of a hill (see the marginal reference), no doubt one of the range which hounds the Jordan valley on the west. But its exact site is wholly uncertain.

CLARKE,"Beth-hogla - A place between Jericho and the Dead Sea, belonging to the tribe of Benjamin, Jos_18:21, though here serving as a frontier to the tribe of Judah.

Stone of Bohan - This must have been some remarkable place, probably like the stone of Jacob, which afterwards became Bethel; but where it was situated is uncertain.

GILL, "And the border went up to Bethhoglah,.... A place in the tribe of Benjamin, mentioned along with Jericho, and probably near it, Jos_18:21; Jerom (a)speaks of a place called Betagla, in his time, which was three miles from Jericho, and two

from Jordan, and perhaps is this same place:

and passed along by the north of Betharabah; another city belonged to Benjamin, Jos_18:22; and lay in a as its name shows; or in a plain, as the Targum:

and the border went up to the stone of Bohan the son of Reuben; by whom, or on whose account, it was placed, either as a sepulchral stone, he being buried there, or in memory of some famous exploit done by him there, he being one of those of the tribe of Reuben, that came with Joshua to assist in the war against the Canaanites; or it was set for a sign of the border, as Kimchi thinks, it being the boundary between Judah and Benjamin, Jos_18:17. Bunting says (b) it is near Bahurim, in the valley just in the king's way, and is of an extraordinary greatness, shining like marble.

JAMISO , "Beth-hogla— now Ain Hajla, a fine spring of clear and sweet water, at the northern extremity of the Dead Sea, about two miles from the Jordan [Robinson].

Beth-arabah— “the house,” or “place of solitude,” in the desert of Judah (Jos_15:61).

stone of Bohan the son of Reuben— the sepulchral monument of a Reubenite leader, who had been distinguished for his bravery, and had fallen in the Canaanite war.

WHEDO , "6. Beth-hogla — The modern Ain Hadjla, a fine spring of beautiful sweet water at the north of the Dead Sea, about two miles west of the Jordan.

Beth-arabah — House of solitude: in the desert of Judah, and apparently not far from Beth-hogla. It is mentioned again in Joshua 15:61 and Joshua 18:22, and in Joshua 18:18 is called simply Arabah; first allotted to Judah, then relinquished to Benjamin.

Stone of Bohan — This cannot be located. It was a memorial of a Reubenite warrior slain in the conquest of the land.

COKE, "Verse 6-7Ver. 6, 7. And the border went up to Beth-hoglah— This border, issuing from the north point of the Dead sea, towards the west, was formed by a line which passed by Beth-hoglah, a city in the tribe of Benjamin, above Beth-Arabah, whether we understand by it another city of this name in the same tribe, ch. Joshua 18:21 or that mentioned ver. 61 or, with some geographers, make of these two places only one and the same city, placed on the border of the two tribes. This line went up to the stone of Bohan the son of Reuben, a place famous, no doubt, for some monument which had been erected in memory of a great exploit performed there by Bohan, or because he was there buried. It then went on toward Debir, (ver. 7.) a city unknown, but evidently different from that which stood in the neighbourhood of Hebron, ver. 15.—From the valley of Achor, mentioned before in ch. Joshua 7:24; Joshua 7:26 and so northward, looking toward Gilgal; that is, by the valley of Achor, which had on the north Gilgal, or rather Geliloth, in the tribe of Benjamin, according to Masius, Le Clerc, &c. Calmet is of opinion, that both here and in ch. 18: Gilgal and

Geliloth signify, in general, limits. Gilgal is said to be before the going up to Adummim, in the same tribe of Judah, or perhaps of Benjamin, on the south side of the river, i.e. probably, Kedron. After this it passed on towards the north, constantly inclining from east to west, by the waters of En-shemesh, whence it proceeded to the spring or fountain of En-rogel, near Jerusalem.

PULPIT, "Beth-hogla (see Joshua 18:19). It is still known as Ain Hadjla or Hajla, where, says Keil, a beautiful spring of fresh and clear water is to be found. The place lies about two miles from Jordan. Beth-hogla means "the house of the partridge." "Leaving the probable site of the ancient Gilgal and advancing southward along the pilgrims' route to the Jordan, an hour and a quarter brings us to the spring Kin Hajla, in a small and well-watered grove" (Ritter). He adds, "Robinson and Wilson both recognised in the name Hails the ancient Canaanitish city Beth-hogla." Beth-arabah. Or "the house of the Arabah" or desert. Its site is not known (see Joshua 15:61 and Joshua 18:18, Joshua 18:22). The Beth-arabah in Joshua 15:61, however, must have been another place, since it was in the wilderness of Judaea, not far from the Dead Sea. The stone of Bohan the son of Reuben. All we know of this stone is that it was westward of Beth-arabah. The boundary of Benjamin in Joshua 18:1-28, is mentioned in precisely reverse order, and since here the stone was on the ascent from Beth-araba, and there (Joshua 18:17) it is described as on the descent from Geliloth, it must have been on the side of the declivity. Of Bohan nothing further is known. We must understand here, as in many other places of Scripture, descendant by "son" (cf. Joshua 7:24).

7 The boundary then went up to Debir from the Valley of Achor and turned north to Gilgal, which faces the Pass of Adummim south of the gorge. It continued along to the waters of En Shemesh and came out at En Rogel.

BAR ES, "The going up to Adummim - Rather, “the ascent or pass of Adummim” (compare Jos_15:3, margin), on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. Its name signifies “red” and is explained by Jerome as given because of the frequent bloodshed there by robbers. This road is the scene of the parable of the Good Samaritan. Possibly the name may be due to some aboriginal tribe of “red men,” who held their ground in these fastnesses after the invaders had driven them from the face of the

country elsewhere.

En-shemesh - i. e. “fountain of the sun;” no doubt that now called “the Fountain of the Apostles,” about two miles from Jerusalem, and the only well on the road to Jericho.

En-rogel - i. e. “fountain of the fullers” near the walls of Jerusalem. It was here that Jonathan and Ahimaaz concealed themselves after the rebellion of Absalom, in order to procure tidings for David, and here Adonijah gave a feast to his adherents preparatory to making an attempt on the crown (compare the marginal references). It is probably the modern “Fountain of the Virgin,” the only real spring near Jerusalem, from which the Pool of Siloam is supplied. Others identify it, less probably, with the “Well of Job,” situated where the valleys of Kedron and Hinnom unite.

CLARKE,"The valley of Achor - Debir mentioned in this verse is unknown. The valley of Achor had its name from the punishment of Achan. See the account, Jos_7:24(note), etc.

En-shemesh - The fountain of the sun; it was eastward of Jerusalem, on the confines of Judah and Benjamin.

GILL, "And the border went up towards Debir,.... This was neither the Debir in the tribe of Gad, on the other side Jordan, Jos_13:26; nor that in the tribe of Judah near Hebron, Jos_15:15; but a third city of that name, and was not far from Jericho:

from the valley of Achor; where Achan was put to death, and had its name from thence; which, according to Jarchi, lay between the stone of Bohan and Debir:

and so northward, looking towards Gilgal; not the place where Israel were encamped when this lot was made, but it seems to be the same that is called Geliloth, Jos_18:17,

that is, the going up to Adummim; which, Jerom says (c), was formerly a little village, now in ruins, in the lot of the tribe of Judah, which place is called to this day Maledomim; and by the Greeks "the ascent of the red ones", because of the blood which was there frequently shed by thieves: it lies on the borders of Judah and Benjamin, as you go from Jerusalem to Jericho, where there is a garrison of soldiers for the help of travellers, and is supposed to be the place where the man fell among thieves in his way from the one to the other, Luk_10:30. It was four miles distant from Jericho to the west, according to Adrichomius (d), and was a mountain, and part of the mountains of Engaddi:

which is on the south side of the river; which some take to be the brook Kidron; but that is not very likely, being too near Jerusalem for this place: it may be rendered "the valley", so Jarchi, either the valley of Achor, before mentioned, or however a valley that ran along by the mount or ascent of Adummim, which lay to the south of it:

and the border passed to the waters of Enshemesh: or the "fountain of the sun"; but of it we have no account what and where it was. It might be so called, because dedicated to the sun by the idolatrous Canaanites, or because of the sun's influence on the waters of it. Our city, Bath, is, by Antoninus (e), called "aquae solis", the waters of

the sun; though there is a fountain in Cyrene, so called, for a reason just the reverse, it being, as Mela (f) and Pliny (g) affirm, hottest the middle of the night, and then grows cooler by little and little; and when it is light is cold, and when the sun is risen is colder still, and at noon exceeding cold; and, according to Vossius (h), it is the same with the fountain of Jupiter Ammon; and so it appears to be from Herodotus (i), by whom it is also called the "fountain of the sun", and which he places in Thebes, though Pliny distinguishes them:

and the goings out thereof were at Enrogel; which signifies "the fountain of the fuller"; so the Targum renders it, and probably was a fountain where fullers cleansed their clothes; and was called Rogel, as Jarchi and Kimchi say, because they used to tread them with their feet when they washed them. This was a place near Jerusalem, as appears from 1Ki_1:9; near to which perhaps was the fuller's monument, at the corner tower of Jerusalem, Josephus (k) speaks of, as there was also a place not far from it called the fuller's field, Isa_7:3; according to Bunting (l), it had its name from travellers washing their feet here.

JAMISO , "Achor— (see on Jos_7:26).

Adummim— a rising ground in the wilderness of Jericho, on the south of the little brook that flowed near Jericho (Jos_16:1).

En-shemesh— “the fountain of the sun”; “either the present well of the apostle, below Bethany, on the road to Jericho, or the fountain near to St. Saba” [Robinson].

En-rogel— “the fuller’s fountain,” on the southeast of Jerusalem, below the spot where the valleys of Jehoshaphat and Hinnom unite.

K&D, "Jos_15:7

The boundary ascended still farther to Debir from the valley of Achor. Debir is no doubt to be sought for by the Wady Daber, which runs down from the mountains to the Dead Sea to the south of Kasr Hajla, possibly not far from the rocky grotto called Choret ed Daber, between the Wady es Sidr and the Khan Chadrur on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, about half-way between the two. On the valley of Achor see at Jos_7:24. Then “it turned northwards to Gilgal, opposite to the ascent of Adummim south of the brook.” Gilgal, which must not be confounded, as it is by Knobel, with the first encampment of the Israelites in Canaan, viz., the Gilgal between Jericho and the Jordan, is called Geliloth in Jos_18:17. The situation of this place, which is only mentioned again in Jdg_3:19, and was certainly not a town, probably only a village or farm, is defined more precisely by the clause “opposite to the ascent of Adummim.” Maaleh Adummim,

which is correctly explained in the Onom. (s. v. Adommim) as �νάβασις�πύ��ηων, ascensus rufforum, “was formerly a small villa, but is now a heap of ruins, which is called even to the present day Maledomim - on the road from Aelia to Jericho” (Tobler). It is mentioned by ancient travellers as an inn called a terra ruffa, i.e., “the red earth;” terra russo, or “the red house.” By later travellers it is described as a small place named Adomim, being still called “the red field, because this is the colour of the ground; with a large square building like a monastery still standing there, which was in fact at one time a fortified monastery, though it is deserted now” (Arvieux, Merk. Nachr. ii. p. 154). It is the present ruin of Kalaat el Dem, to the north of the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, or Kalaat ed Domm, near the Khan Chadrur. Gilgal, or Geliloth (circle), was probably the “small round valley” or “field of Adommim,” of which Pococke speaks as being at the foot of the hill on which the deserted inn was standing (viz., ed Domm; see Pococke, Reise ins

Morgenland, ii. p. 46). The valley (nachal, rendered river) to the south of which Gilgal or the ascent of Adummim lay, and which was therefore to the north of these places, may possibly be the Wady Kelt, or the brook of Jericho in the upper part of its course, as we have only to go a quarter or half an hour to the east of Khan Chadrur, when a wide and splendid prospect opens towards the south across the Wady Kelt as far as Taiyibeh; and according to Van de Velde's map, a brook-valley runs in a northerly direction to the Wady Kelt on the north-east of Kalaat ed Dem. It is probable, however, that the reference is to some other valley, of which there are a great many in the neighbourhood. The boundary then passed over to the water of En Shemesh (sun-fountain), i.e., the present Apostle's Well, Ain el Hodh or Bir el Khôt, below Bethany, and on the road to Jericho (Tobler, Topogr. v. Jerus. ii. pp. 398, 400; Van de Velde, Mem. p. 310), and then ran out at the fountain of Rogel (the spies), the present deep and copious fountain of Jobor Nehemiah at the south-east corner of Jerusalem, below the junction of the valley of Hinnom and the valley of Jehoshaphat or Kedron valley (see Rob. Pal. i. p. 491, and Tobler, Topogr. v. Jerus. ii. pp. 50ff.).

WHEDO , "7. Achor — See Joshua 7:24, note. This Debir is not the same with that named in Joshua 10:38, but another, evidently not far from the Valley of Achor. Its site is unknown.

Gilgal — See on Joshua 5:9. It is called Geliloth, Joshua 18:17. [

Adummim — Literally, the ascent of the red ones, and so called because of the frequent effusion of blood there by robbers, (compare Luke 10:30, note,) or else from some early tribe of red men (possibly Edomites) who dwelt there. Keil thinks the name originated in the red colour of the rocks; but Stanley says there are no red rocks here, but the whole pass is white limestone. Adummim was probably at or near the modern ed-Dem, marked on Menke’s map about half way between Jerusalem and Jericho. This is on the south side of Wady Kelt, which is doubtless the river here referred to.]

En-shemesh — The fountain of the sun, usually identified with the Well of the Apostles, below Bethany on the road to Jericho; but Dr. Robinson says, “It may very possibly have been the fountain near St. Saba.”

En-rogel — The fountain of the fuller. The Arabic version of this verse calls it the Well of Job, which is its modern name. [An old tradition and common opinion has identified it with the deep well situated just below the junction of the Valley of Hinnom with that part of the Valley of Jehoshaphat. It is also called the Well of ehemiah. But Dr. Bonar identifies it with the Fountain of the Virgin, and more recently M. Ganneau maintains the same opinion, having discovered a rock Zehwele near this fountain, which he identifies with the Stone of Zoheleth mentioned 1 Kings 1:9.

BE SO , "Verse 7-8Joshua 15:7-8. orthward looking toward Gilgal — Having Gilgal to the north of it. Which is to be understood, not of that Gilgal near Jericho, but of that place called

Geliloth, (Joshua 18:17,) which was distant from thence, as appears by what follows. And the border went up — Properly; for the line went from Jordan and the salt sea, to the higher grounds nigh Jerusalem; and, therefore, the line is said to go down, (Joshua 18:16,) because there it takes a contrary course, and goes downward to Jordan and the sea. By the valley of the son of Hinnom — A famous place on the east side of Jerusalem; and so delightfully shady, that it invited the Israelites to idolatrous worship in it, whereby it became infamous, 2 Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 7:32. Hinnom, in all probability, was some eminent person in ancient times, who was the owner of this valley; for it is sometimes called the valley of the children of Hinnom; which shows his posterity were planted here. After it was polluted by idolatry it became a place where they threw all their filth and dead carcasses; and where there was a continual fire, the Jews say, to burn bones, and such sordid things as were thrown there; from whence they think it became the name for hell fire. The south side of the Jebusites — amely, the city of the Jebusites. The same is Jerusalem —Which is called Jebusi in the last verse of the eighteenth chapter, and Jebus, 19:10, especially that part of it fortified by the Jebusites, which was called mount Sion, and lay on the south of Jerusalem. And the border went up to the top of the mountain —Which is thought to be mount Moriah. The end of the valley of the giants northward — Which mountain had on the north part of it the valley of Rephaim, (as the word is in the Hebrew,) which was in the tribe of Judah, extending itself from mount Moriah as far as Bethlehem, as Josephus informs us.

PETT, "Verse 7‘And the border went up to Debir from the valley of Achor, and so northward looking towards Gilgal, that is over against the Ascent of Adummim, which is on the south side of the river, and the border passed along to the waters of Enshemesh and its goings out were at En-rogel.’This Debir was not the one mentioned in Joshua 13:26; Joshua 15:15 but probably one above the Wadi Debr which is the lower part of the Wadi Mukallik, or near Tughret ed-Debr, south of the Ascent of Adummim. It is also not mentioned in the parallel Joshua 18:17. It was thus clearly not an important place. For ‘the valley of Achor’ possibly we should translate ‘low lying plain of Achor’. El Buqei‘a is suggested as a possibility. It would be seen as an abandoned place, a place to be avoided. This was where Achan was stoned to death (Joshua 7:25).

“And so northward looking towards Gilgal, that is over against the Ascent of Adummim.” At this point the boundary moved northward towards the Ascent of Adummim, towards Gilgal. This would be a different Gilgal from the Israelite encampment. Its name, ‘a rolling’ suggests that some religious activity took place at these sites involved with rolling stones, possibly to set up as altars, or bodies rolling in ecstasy in their depraved sexual rites. Some relate it to stone circles but if it were so we would have expected them to be discovered. It was probably the same as Geliloth (Joshua 18:17).

The Ascent of Adummim was a steep pass on the border of Judah and Benjamin, probably Tal‘at ed-Damm (the ascent of blood). This name was probably given because of the redness of the soil, but it may also have been a place where

murderous robberies were common. This may have been the place in mind where the good Samaritan was pictured as finding the victim of robbery with violence.

“Which is on the south side of the river, and the border passed along to the waters of Enshemesh and its goings out were at En-rogel.” The ‘south side of the river’ must refer to the impressive gorge of the Wadi el-Kelt. The waters of Enshemesh (‘spring of the sun’) is probably the modern ‘Ain Haud, four kilometres (three miles) east of Jerusalem, just south of the Jericho road. ‘Its goings out’ refers to the point at which a line comes to an end (see verses 4 and 11), thus there was now a deviation at En-rogel (‘well of the launderer’). This was just outside Jerusalem (2 Samuel 17:17; 1 Kings 1:9) and is known today as Job’s Well.

PULPIT, "Toward Debir. ot the Debir of Joshua 10:1-43. The valley of Achor (see Joshua 8:26). This is now the Wady Kelt. Gilgal. Keil says that this is not the Gilgal where the Israelites first encamped. It is called Geliloth, or "circles," in Joshua 18:17, where the same place is obviously meant as here. The question is one of some difficulty. If it be not the Gilgal mentioned in Joshua 4:19, which is described as being eastward of Jericho, still less can it be Jiljiliah (see note on Joshua 9:6) which was near Bethel, and therefore on the northern border of Benjamin. In that case the only supposition that will meet the facts in this case is that Gilgal, which signifies a wheel or circle, was the common name given to all the Israelitish encampments. But there seems no reason to doubt that the Gilgal of Joshua 4:19 is meant. This is Ewald's view in his 'History of Israel,' 2:245. Adummim, or "the red (places)," has been identified with Maledomim, i.e. Maaleh Adummim, or Talat el Dumm (Conder), on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. Jerome explains it as "ascensus ruforum sen rubentium propter sanguinem qui iltic erebro a latronibus funditur." Every one will at once call to mind the narrative in St. Luke 10:1-42; which has no doubt suggested this explanation. But at one particular point in the route from Jerusalem to Jericho a "large mass of purplish rock" is found. It was called "terra ruffa," "the red earth," from the colour of the ground, and recent travellers state that it is called the "red field" still, from this cause. Conder tells us the name is derived from "the brick-red marks here found amid a district of red chalk. So Knobel speaks, on the authority of numberless travellers of "der rothen Farbe des dortigen gesteins." And the Quarterly Paper just quoted mentions the "bright limestone and marl." Which is on the south aide of the river. The ahal, or summer torrent, in the original; "the Wady Kelt, south of Riha" (Knobel). The waters of En-shemesh, or the fountain of the sun, supposed to be Kin Hand, or the "Apostles' well," near Bethany. There is an Arak (cave) esh Shems, about two miles off. All these places have been identified on or near the pilgrims' route to the Jordan. Enrogel (see Luke 18:17). It was close by Jerusalem, and was where Jonathan and Ahimaaz lingered to gain tidings for David, and where Adonijah repaired to hold the great feast when he endeavoured to obtain the kingdom. " ow Kin Um ed Deraj in the Kedron Valley" (Conder). Vandevelde supposes it to be Bir Eyub, Joab's well, at the point where the Kedron Valley meets the Gai Hinnom. This seems most probable. The valley of the son of Hinnom. The word here for valley ( גי ) signifies properly a deep cleft in the rock, through which no water flows. The valley of Hinnom has been generally taken to be the deep valley running from west to east,

and lying to the west and south of Jerusalem, described by Tobler as forked at its northwestern end, bending to the southward about its middle, and joining the valley of Jehoshaphat at its eastern extremity. In the Quarterly Paper of the Palestine Exploration Fund for October, 1878, however, it is contended that the now partially filled up Tyropceon Valley, running through the city, is the valley or ravine of Hinnom. The manner in which this is demonstrated reminds the reader somewhat of a proposition in Euclid, and the question arises whether Euclid's method be exactly applicable to a point of this kind. The arguments used are not without force, but no notice is taken of the peculiar position of the valley of Rephaim (see next note but one), which, we learn from the sacred historian, was so placed that its extremity coincided with the mountain which closed the ravine of Hinnom at its western side. If the Tyropoeon Valley answers to this description, it may be accepted as the true valley of Hinnom, but not otherwise. Mr. Birch incorrectly cites Gesenius in favour of his theory; and the most recent discoveries appear to have thrown discredit upon it. The most weighty argument in favour of his theory is that a comparison of Joshua 15:63 with 1:3-8, leads to the supposition that Jerusalem was partly in Benjamin and partly in Judah (see, however, ehemiah 11:30). This valley, called sometimes Tophet, and sometimes, by a corruption of the Hebrew, Gehenna, whatever its situation may have been, is conspicuous in the after history of Israel. This deep and retired spot was the seat of all the worst abominations of the idol worship to which the Jews afterwards became addicted. Here Solomon reared high places for Moloch (1 Kings 11:7). Here children were sacrificed at the hideous rites of that demon god (2 Kings 16:3; 2 Chronicles 28:3; Jeremiah 7:31, Jeremiah 7:32; Jeremiah 19:2, Jeremiah 19:4). It was defiled by Josiah (2 Kings 23:10, 2 Kings 23:13, 2 Kings 23:14), and was looked upon in later times as an abomination (see Jeremiah 19:13). There the carcases of animals were east to be burned, and hence it is used by our Lord (Matthew 5:22) as the type of the utmost wrath of God. It is hardly possible to suppose that there is no allusion to Tophet and its fiery sacrifices in Isaiah 30:33, in spite of the different form of the word, to which some scholars, e.g; Gesenius, assign an Aryan rather than a Semitic origin, and in spite of the fact that the LXX. suspects no such allusion there. St. James alone, beside the writers of the Gospels, mentions it (Joshua 3:6), "set on fire of hell," or Gehenna.

8 Then it ran up the Valley of Ben Hinnom along the southern slope of the Jebusite city (that is, Jerusalem). From there it climbed to the top of the hill west of the Hinnom Valley at the northern

end of the Valley of Rephaim.

BAR ES, "The valley of the son of Hinnom - This valley begins on the west of Jerusalem at the road to Joppa, and turning southeastward round the foot of Mount Zion joins the deeper valley of Kedron on the south of the city. It was in this ravine, more particularly at Tophet in the more wild and precipitous part of it toward the east, that the later kings of Judah offered the sacrifices of children to Moloch (2Ch_28:3; 2Ch_33:6, etc.). After these places had been defiled by Josiah, Tophet and the whole valley of Hinnom were held in abomination by the Jews, and the name of the latter was used to

denote the place of eternal torment Mat_5:22. The Greek term Gehenna (γεέννα geenna)

is in fact formed from the Hebrew הנם 'gay גיא hı$nnôm, “valley of Hinnom.” Hinnom is regarded either as the name of some ancient hero, or as an appellative ( “groaning” or “moaning”), bestowed on the spot because of the cries of the victims here offered to Moloch, and of the drums with which those cries were drowned.

The valley of the giants - Rather “the plain of Rephaim.” This plain, named after an ancient and gigantic tribe of the land Gen_14:5, lies southwestward of Jerusalem, and is terminated by a slight rocky ridge forming the brow of the valley of Hinnom. The valley is fertile Isa_17:5 and broad, and has been on more than one occasion the camping ground for armies operating against Jerusalem 2Sa_5:18, 2Sa_5:22; 2Sa_23:13.

CLARKE,"The valley of the son of Hinnom - Who Hinnom was is not known, nor why this was called his valley. It was situated on the east of Jerusalem; and is often mentioned in Scripture. The image of the idol Molech appears to have been set up there; and there the idolatrous Israelites caused their sons and daughters to pass through the fire in honor of that demon, 2Ki_23:10. It was also called Tophet, see Jer_7:32. When King Josiah removed the image of this idol from this valley, it appears to have been held in such universal execration, that it became the general receptacle of all the filth and impurities which were carried out of Jerusalem; and it is supposed that continual fires were there kept up, to consume those impurities and prevent infection. From the

Hebrew words גי�בן�הנם gei�ben�Hinnom, the valley of the son of Hinnom, and by

contraction, גי�הנם gei�Hinnom, the valley of Hinnom, came the Γεεννα, Gehenna of the

New Testament, called also Γεεννα�του�πυρος, the Gehenna of fire, which is the emblem of hell, or the place of the damned. See Mat_5:22, Mat_5:29, Mat_5:30; Mat_10:28; Mat_18:9, etc. In the East it is common to add the name of the father to that of the son, e.g., “This land belongs to Goborka the son of Kake Prusada.” But this addition is not made till after the father’s death. This custom prevailed also in the west. It is common among the aborigines of both Ireland and Wales.

The same is Jerusalem - This city was formerly called Jebus; a part of it was in the tribe of Benjamin; Zion, called its citadel, was in the tribe of Judah.

The valley of the giants - Of the Rephaim. See the notes on Gen_6:4; Gen_14:5; Deu_2:7, Deu_2:11. On this subject, a very intelligent clergyman favors me with his

opinion in the following terms: -

“The boundary between Judah and Benjamin went up from the valley of Hinnom on the east to the top of the hill southward, leaving Jebusi (or Jerusalem) to the northwest adjoining to Benjamin. This mount (Jebusi) lay between the two tribes, which the Jebusites possessed till the time of David. At the 63d verse here, it is said Judah could not drive out these people; and in Jdg_1:21, the same is said of the Benjamites. Each tribe might have attacked them at various times. There were various mounts or tops to these hills. Mount Zion and Moriah, where the temple stood, was in the tribe of Judah; Psa_78:68, Psa_78:69; Psa_87:2. “In Deu_33:12 it is said of Benjamin, the Lord shall dwell by him, i.e., near him, or beside his borders, between his shoulders; the line might be circular between the two hills or tops so as in part to encompass Mount Zion in the tribe of Judah, on which the temple stood. Benjamin’s gate, (mentioned Jer_37:12, Jer_37:13; Jer_38:7), was the gate leading out of the city, into the tribe of Benjamin. So the gate of Ephraim, (2Ki_14:13), was a gate which led towards the tribe of Ephraim. We give names to roads, etc., in the same way now. “Mount Calvary, (which was on the outside of the gate), seems to have been in the tribe of Benjamin. Query. Whether Calvary or Golgotha was so called from skulls being scattered about there, (as say some), or rather from the figure of the rock being shaped like a man’s skull, with one face of it nearly perpendicular? I incline to this latter opinion. I believe the Jews did not suffer human bones, even of malefactors, to lie about.” - J. C.

GILL, "And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom,.... Which belonged to a man of that name formerly; and was near Jerusalem, placed by Jerom (l)to the east of it; but Reland (m) rather thinks it is to the south. It was infamous for the sacrifices of children to Moloch in it, by burning them, or causing them to pass through fire: hence, in allusion to it, hell fire is often in the New Testament called "Geenna", Mat_5:22 Luk_12:5; this border from the salt sea, and from Jordan, is all along said to "go up", because from hence to Jerusalem was an ascent, that lying on higher ground:

unto the south side of the Jebusite; of the place the Jebusite inhabited:

the same is Jerusalem; which was formerly called Jebus, from the inhabitants of it; yea, Jebusi, as here, and so may intend not the inhabitants, but the place, see Jos_18:28; and here the Jebusites lived, at least in some part of it, until the time of David, 2Sa_5:6,

and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward: which is generally supposed to be the mount Moriah:

which is at the end of the valley of the giants, northward: the valley of Rephaim, as it is called 2Sa_5:18, and here Mount Moriah, as it was to the west of the valley of Hinnom, it was to the north of the valley of Rephaim; which valley, as Josephus (n) says, was not far from Jerusalem, twenty furlongs from it. Some late travellers (o) tell us it lies in the way from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, and is not above two hours' ride from the former. From this account it appears, as Jarchi remarks, that Jerusalem was not within the line, and was not in the border of Judah, but of Benjamin, which tribe lay to the

north of Judah: it seems indeed to have been one part of it in the tribe of Judah, and the other in the tribe of Benjamin; though the Jews frequently say it did not belong to either tribe.

K&D, "Jos_15:8

It then went up into the more elevated valley of Ben-hinnom, on the south side of the Jebusite town, i.e., Jerusalem (see at Jos_10:1), and still farther up to the top of the mountain which rises on the west of the valley of Ben-hinnom, and at the farthest extremity of the plain of Rephaim towards the north. The valley of Ben-hinnom, or Ben-hinnom (the son or sons of Hinnom), on the south side of Mount Zion, a place which was notorious from the time of Ahaz as the seat of the worship of Moloch (2Ki_23:10; 2Ch_28:3; 2Ch_33:6; Jer_7:31, etc.), is supposed there, but of whom nothing further is

known (see Robinson, Pal. i. pp. 402ff.). The plain of Rephaim (lxx γ2�3αφαείν, in 2Sa_

5:18, 2Sa_5:22; 2Sa_23:13 κοιλ8ς�τ9ν�Τιτάνων), probably named after the gigantic race of Rephaim, and mentioned several times in 2 Sam. as a battle-field, is on the west of Jerusalem, and is separated from the edge of the valley of Ben-hinnom by a small ridge of rock. It runs southwards to Mar Elias, is an hour long, half an hour broad, and was very fertile (Isa_17:5); in fact, even to the present day it is carefully cultivated (see Rob.Pal. i. p. 323; Tobler, Topogr. v. Jerus. ii. pp. 401ff.). It is bounded on the north by the mountain ridge already mentioned, which curves westwards on the left side of the road to Jaffa. This mountain ridge, or one of the peaks, is “the mountain on the west of the valley of Hinnom,” at the northern end of the plain referred to.

WHEDO ,"8. Valley of the son of Hinnom — A long-standing and almost unanimous opinion of all explorers of the Holy Land identifies this valley with the deep and narrow ravine that bounds Jerusalem on the west and south. But Capt. Warren, of the Palestine Exploration Company, is convinced that the Hinnom is identical with the Kedron Valley, which is on the east of Jerusalem. In Jeremiah 19:2, the valley is said to be “by the entry of the east gate,” but there the Hebrew is the Charsuth, or Potter’s Gate, and the precise meaning is by no means clear. But Robinson (Bib. Res., vol. i, p.

269) says that several Arabic writers of the twelfth century call the Kedron valley Jehennam. According to Capt. Warren the border of Judah and Benjamin ran over the southern slope of the mount of Olives, “across from the rock Zoheleth in Siloam to the Virgin’s Fount, thence up the Kedron until nearly opposite the south-southeast angle of the noble sanctuary, where it crossed over the hill of Moriah at the southern side of the temple, thence up the Tyropoean Valley to the Jaffa Gate, and so on to Lifta.” But this needs confirmation, and ill agrees with what follows.

South side of the Jebusite — That is, the boundary line ran south of Jerusalem, the city of the Jebusite. The Jebusite citadel, which was taken by David and called the stronghold of Zion, (2 Samuel 5:7,) is commonly supposed to have been on the modern Zion; but Capt. Warren’s topography places the boundary on the north side of the modern Zion.

The mountain that lieth before the valley of Hin-nom westward — This most

naturally indicates the eminence west of Jerusalem which forms the western side or wall of the upper part of what is now commonly called the Valley of Hinnom. The brow of this hill, according to Robinson, is a rocky ridge.

Which is at the end of the valley of the giants northward — This is obscure. What is at the end of the valley? and is this point north of the valley, or the valley north of the point in question? We take the meaning to be, that the mountain (just mentioned) is at the northern end of the Valley of the Giants. The valley of the giants, or of Rephaim, is usually identified with the upland plain to the southwest of Jerusalem. “This plain,” says Robinson, “is broad, and descends gradually towards the southwest until it contracts in that direction into a deeper and narrower valley, called lower down Wady el-Werd, which unites further on with Wady Ahmed, and finds its way to the western plain.” So it is sufficiently enclosed with hills to be called a valley, (emek,) and no other valley or plain so well answers the Scripture notices as this. Here the Philistines encamped when they came to war with David. 2 Samuel 5:18.]

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:8 And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite; the same [is] Jerusalem: and the border went up to the top of the mountain that [lieth] before the valley of Hinnom westward, which [is] at the end of the valley of the giants northward:

Ver. 8. By the valley of the son of Hinnon.] Where with barbarous cruelty they sacrificed their children to Moloch, or Saturn. [2 Kings 23:11] Hence Gehenna for hell.

The same is Jerusalem.] Anciently Jebus, [ 19:11] afterwards Jerusalem; not quasi ιερον σολυµων vel σολοµωντος, as Hegesippus dreameth, but of Jireh, [Genesis 22:14] "he will provide," and Shalom, "peace." The Hebrew here and elsewhere writeth it in the dual form, as it were the double Jerusalem, the higher and the lower town, from which the apostle gathereth an allegory. [Galatians 4:15]

COKE,"Ver. 8. And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom— This valley, which lay to the east of Jerusalem, was so pleasant, and covered with so many groves, that the cruel worshippers of Moloch thought proper to place there the idol of their god, to whom they sacrificed their children. 2 Kings 23:10. Jeremiah 7:32. & al. It is thought to have belonged formerly to the family of some great personage, named Hinnom, and that from the compound word Gehinnom, the valley of Hinnom, is derived the word Gehenne, which is taken in Scripture for hell. Matthew 18:9; Matthew 23:33. When the pious Josiah had taken away the idol of Moloch, this valley continued as a place of execration, into which they threw all the filth of Jerusalem, dung, excrements, carcases, and whatever else is cast off to the lay-stalls; and where, according to the Jewish doctors, they kept continual fires, whether to consume the bones and other combustibles thrown there, or to prevent infection. After this, it is not surprising to find this abominable valley considered as a kind of picture of the place of punishments prepared by divine justice for the

wicked in the life to come. The Jebusite, so called from one of the sons of Canaan, Genesis 10:16 became the capital of his descendants, who possessed the fortress called Sion, till the time of David. Jebus, properly speaking, was in the territory of Benjamin, and Sion, its citadel, in that of Judah. It was afterwards called Jerusalem. See on chap. Joshua 10:13.

And the border went up to the top of the mountain— That is, of Moriah, that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the end of the valley of the giants northward; so that this mountain had on the east the valley of Hinnom, and on the south that of the Rephaim, or giants, which extended as far as Bethlehem, according to Josephus, Antiq. lib. 7: cap. 4. Thus the line, which separated the two tribes, left to that of Benjamin the greatest part of Jerusalem, on which the temple was afterwards built; and the smallest part to the tribe of Judah.

PETT, "Verse 8‘And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom, to the side (shoulder, sloping hillside) of the Jebusite southward, the same is Jerusalem, and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lies before the valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the furthest extent of the vale of Rephaim northward.’The next stage from En-rogel went through the valley of Hinnom (probably, but not certainly, the Wadi al-Rababi) up to the shoulder of the south east hill of Jerusalem (Jerusalem was later built on a south east hill and a south west hill, with a valley in between. This valley would later be partly filled up). The border then went to the height which was to the west of the valley of Hinnom, at the northern end of the valley of Rephaim (see 2 Samuel 5:18). The latter may once have been the dwelling place of that extremely tall race called the Rephaim.

PULPIT, "The south side of the Jebusite. Literally, the shoulder of the Jebusite from (or on) the south. Thus Jerusalem lay to the north of the border, in the tribe of Benjamin. The same is Jerusalem. Formerly called Jebus, from the Jebusites who dwelt there ( 19:11; 1 Chronicles 11:4). The city lay on the borders of Judah and Benjamin (see note on Joshua 10:1). The valley of the giants. Hebrew, Rephaim (see Joshua 12:4). The word here translated valley is עמק . In the former part it is גי (see note on last verse). The word here used signifies originally depth, and is applied to wide valleys embosomed among lofty hills. Such were the valley of Elah (1 Samuel 17:2, 1 Samuel 17:19); the King's Dale (Genesis 14:17; 2 Samuel 18:18); the valley of Siddim (Genesis 14:3), of Jezreel ( 6:33). "The word Emek shows that this was neither a winter torrent nor a narrow, dry ravine, and it is best identified with its traditional site, the shallow basin west of the watershed south of Jerusalem, now called el Bukei'a" (Conder). We read of this valley in 2 Samuel 5:18, 2 Samuel 5:22. From these passages we may gather a confirmation of the view above expressed, that the valley here meant is an open valley, since only in such a valley could the Philistine army take up a position. It gradually narrows towards the southwest. On the south it extends as far as Bethlehem. The range of mountains which lie to the west of the valley of Hinnom from the northern boundary of the plain or valley of Rephaim.

9 From the hilltop the boundary headed toward the spring of the waters of ephtoah, came out at the towns of Mount Ephron and went down toward Baalah (that is, Kiriath Jearim).

BAR ES, "Nephtoab is probably the modern “Ain Lifta”, two miles and a half northwestward of Jerusalem: and Mount Ephron is conjecturally connected with the city Ephrain 2Ch_13:19 or Ophrah Jos_18:23.

CLARKE,"Baalah, which is Kirjath-jearim - This place was rendered famous in Scripture, in consequence of its being the residence of the ark, for twenty years after it was sent back by the Philistines; see 1 Samuel 5:1-7:2.

GILL, "And the border was drawn from the top of the hill,.... Mount Moriah, and went round in a circuit, so Jarchi and Kimchi:

unto the fountain of the water of Nephtoah; which lay at the bottom of it; which, according to the Jewish writers, is the same with the fountain of Etam, from whence a stream flowed to the dipping room in the water gate of the temple, where the high priest for the first time dipped himself on the day of atonement (p):

and went out to the cities of Mount Ephron; Jerom (q) speaks of an Ephron in the tribe of Judah, which was a very large village in his time, and went by the name of Ephraea, and was twenty miles from Aelia or Jerusalem to the north; and which Eusebius better places eight miles from it; and Jarchi observes, that the line went to the north side, and the border enlarged to this place; near to this mountain were cities, and it is not improbable that one of them might have its name from it; but whether this, or what mountain is here meant, is uncertain: some have thought of Ephraim, with its towns, mentioned in 2Ch_13:19; which seems to have been in the tribe of Ephraim; though Reland (r) places it in the tribe of Benjamin:

and the border was drawn to Baalah, which is Kirjathjearim; called Kirjathbaal, or the city of Baal, Jos_15:60; where it is probable there was a temple of

Baal; and when it came into the hands of the Israelites, they changed its name to Kirjathjearim, or the city of the woods, because of the great number of trees which grew about it; for which reason it might have been pitched upon by the Heathens for their idolatrous service; it was one of the cities of the Gibeonites, Jos_9:17; and, according to Eusebius and Jerom (s), it was nine or ten miles from Jerusalem, as you go to Lydda; it is also called Baalah in 1Ch_13:6; and Baale of Judah, 2Sa_6:2.

K&D, "Jos_15:9

From this mountain height the boundary turned to the fountain of the waters of Nephtoah, i.e., according to Van de Velde's Mem. p. 336, the present village of Liftah(nun and lamed being interchanged, according to a well-known law), an hour to the north-west of Jerusalem, where there is a copious spring, called by the name of Samuel, which not only supplies large basons, but waters a succession of blooming gardens (Tobler, Topogr. v. Jerus. ii. pp. 758ff.; Dieterici, Reisebilder, ii. pp. 221-2). It then “went out to the towns of Mount Ephraim,” which is not mentioned again, but was probably the steep and lofty mountain ridge on the west side of the Wady Beit Hanina(Terebinth valley), upon which Kulonia, a place which the road to Joppa passes, Kastalon a lofty peak of the mountain, the fortress of Milane, Soba, and other places stand (Seetzen, R. ii. pp. 64, 65; Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 158). The boundary then ran to Baala, i.e., Kirjath-jearim, the modern Kureyet el Enab, three hours to the north-west of Jerusalem (see at Jos_9:17).

WHEDO , "9. ephtoah is identified by Dr. Barclay with Ain Lifta, a spring three miles northwest of Jerusalem, near a village of the same name. Mount Ephron is probably the range of hills on the west side of the Wady Beit Hanina, the traditional Valley of the Terebinth. Baalah, or Kirjath-jearim, is identified by Dr. Robinson with the modern Kuryet-el-Enab. See Joshua 9:17, note.

PETT, "Verse 9‘And the border was drawn from the top of the mountain, to the spring of the waters of ephtoah, and went out to the cities of Mount Ephron, and the border was drawn to Baalah, which is Kiriath-jearim.’From the mountain at the northern end of the vale of Rephaim the border went to the spring of the waters of ephtoah. This is probably to be identified as Lifta, four kilometres (two to three miles) north west of Jerusalem. From there it went to the cities (cluster of villages) of Mount Ephron. Mount Ephron lies between Jerusalem and Kiriath-jearim. Then on to Baalah, which later became Kiriath-jearim (‘city of forests’). (This was thus first recorded before the change of name -see 1 Samuel 7:1-2). This is probably modern Kuriet el-‘Enab, fourteen kilometres (ten miles) west of Jerusalem on the Jaffa Road. It was one of the cities of the Gibeonites (Joshua 9:17).

PULPIT, "Was drawn. Or, extended. The fountain of the waters of ephtoah. If these be identified with En Etam, as is done by the Rabbis (whom Conder follows), and if we suppose it to have supplied Jerusalem with water by the aqueduct which ran from a point southwest of Betlehem to Jerusalem, we must place it south of Bethlehem, and imagine that the border ran directly south here. Far more probable is the notion of Vandevelde, which places it northwest of Jerusalem, at Ain Lifta. Conder's view is dominated by the situation he has assigned to Kirjath-jearim (see

note on Joshua 9:17). If the view there given in these notes is sound, the border now ran in a northwesterly direction from Jerusalem to within five miles of Gibeon (see also note on Joshua 18:14). Kirjath-jearim. See Joshua 9:17. To the authorities mentioned there in favour of Kuriet el Enab we may add Knobel, Ritter, and Tristram, in his last book, 'Bible Lands.' The view taken above corresponds to the minuteness of detail with which the boundary is given. To place ephtoah south of Bethlehem and Kirjath-jearim at 'Arma would make the boundary far less distinct.

10 Then it curved westward from Baalah to Mount Seir, ran along the northern slope of Mount Jearim (that is, Kesalon), continued down to Beth Shemesh and crossed to Timnah.

BAR ES, "Mount Seir is not the well-known range of Edom. The name ( “shaggy mountain”) is applicable to any rugged or well-wooded hill. Here it probably denotes the range which runs southwestward from Kirjath-jearim to the Wady Surar. Mount Jearim, i. e. “woody mountain,” is through its other name, Chesalon, identified with the modern “Kesla”.

Beth-shemesh - i. e. “house of the sun,” called “Ir-shemesh” or “city of the sun” (Jos_19:41; Compare 1Ki_4:9), a place assigned to Dan, and one of the cities which fell by lot to the Levites Jos_21:16. Beth-shemesh was the first place at which the ark rested after its return from the hands of the Philistines 1Sa_6:12. It was the residence of one of Solomon’s purveyors 1Ki_4:9, and was the spot where at a later date Amaziah was defeated and slain by Jehoash (2Ki_14:11 ff). It is no doubt the modern “Ain Shems”.

Timnah, called also Timnath, and Timnathah, belonged likewise to Dan, and is to be distinguished from other places of like name Gen_38:12; Jos_24:30. Timnah ( “portion”) was evidently, like Gilgal, Ramah, Kirjath, and several other towns, of frequent use in Canaanite topography.

CLARKE,"Beth-shemesh - The house or temple of the sun. It is evident that the sun was an object of adoration among the Canaanites; and hence fountains, hills, etc., were dedicated to him. Beth-shemesh is remarkable for the slaughter of its inhabitants, in consequence of their prying curiously, if not impiously, into the ark of the Lord, when sent back by the Philistines. See 1Sa_6:19.

GILL, "And the border compassed from Baalah westward unto Mount Seir,.... Not that in Idumea, so famous for its being the seat of Esau, which lay remote from hence, but a third of that name near Kirjathjearim; and which Adrichomius (t)places on the borders of Azotus and Ashkelon: this compass is fetched from the north to the west:

and passed along unto the side of the mount Jearim, which is Chesalon, on the north side; that is, on the north side of the mount, which went by both those names; and which Jerom (u) places on the borders of Aelia or Jerusalem; but it seems to be at a distance from thence, and near to Kirjathjearim, and had its name, as that, from the multitude of trees that grow on it:

and went down to Bethshemesh; there were several cities of this name; but this, according to Jerom (w), was a Levite's city in the tribe of Benjamin, and in his day was shown as you go from Eleutherepolis to Nicopolis or Emmaus, ten miles to the east; according to Burchard (x), it was five miles from Kirjathjearim to the south; and Bunting (y) places it four miles from Jerusalem westward, taking it for a city in the tribe of Judah, Jos_21:16,

and passed on to Timnah; which, in Jerom's time, was a large village on the borders of Lydda, as you go to Jerusalem, in the tribe of Judah, or Dan (z); his placed in the tribe of Judah, Jos_15:57; though thought to be afterwards given to Dan; here Judah sheared his sheep; see Gill on Gen_38:12.

K&D, "Jos_15:10

From this point “the boundary (which had hitherto gone in a north-westerly direction) turned westwards to Mount Seir, and went out to the shoulder northwards (i.e., to the northern side) of Har-jearim, that is Chesalon, and went down to Beth-shemesh, and passed over to Timnah.” Mount Seir is the ridge of rock to the south-west of Kureyet el Enab, a lofty ridge composed or rugged peaks, with a wild and desolate appearance, upon which Saris and Mishir are situated (Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 155). Chesalon is the present Kesla on the summit of a mountain, an elevated point of the lofty ridge between Wady Ghurâb and Ismail, south-west of Kureyet el Enab (Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 154). Beth-shemesh (i.e., sun-house), a priests' city in the territory of Judah (Jos_21:16; 1Ch_6:44), is the same as Ir-shemesh (Jos_19:41), a place on the border of Dan, where the ark was deposited by the Philistines (1Sa_6:9.), and where Amaziah was slain by Joash (2Ki_14:11-12; 2Ch_25:21). It was conquered by the Philistines in the time of Ahaz (2Ch_28:18). According to the Onom. it was ten Roman miles, i.e., four hours, from Eleutheropolis towards Nicopolis. It is the present Ain Shems, upon a plateau in a splendid situation, two hours and a half to the south-west of Kesla (Rob. Pal. iii. p. 17; Bibl. Res. p. 153). Timnah, or Timnatah, belonged to Dan (Jos_19:43); and it was thence that Samson fetched his wife (Jdg_14:1.). It is the present Tibneh, three-quarters of an hour to the west of Ain Shems (Rob. Pal. i. p. 344).

WHEDO , "10. Compassed — That is, encompassed; described a curve. Mount Seir must not be confounded with that of Idumea. It is a range running southwest from Kirjath-jearim, between the Wady Aly and the Wady Ghurab. The name still continues in the place called Sairah. Chesalon is the modern Kesla, seen by Dr.

Robinson on a high point of the lofty ridge south of the Wady Ghurab. [He also recognized Beth-shemesh in the modern Ain-shems, just south of the great Wady Surar. The ruins, which consist of many foundations and remains of ancient walls of hewn stone, are “upon and around the plateau of a low swell or mound between the Surar on the north and a smaller wady on the south.” To this place the Ark was brought after its capture by the Philistines. 1 Samuel 6:9.] Timnah, from which Samson fetched his wife, is the modern Tibneh, about two miles west of Beth-shemesh. This Timnah must be distinguished from another place of the same name on the mountains, mentioned at Joshua 15:57.

11. Unto the side of Ekron northward — That is, on the north side of Ekron. This was the most northerly of the five great Philistine cities. Compare Joshua 13:3. It was the last place to which the captured Ark was taken, (1 Samuel 5:10,) and thence it was transported on the new cart to Beth-shemesh. Its site is found in the modern Akir, in a northwesterly direction from Beth-shemesh, and about half way between the latter city and the sea. The site of Shicron is unknown. Mount Baalah is also uncertain, but probably was the name of a range of hills seen from Ekron on the east of Wady Rubin. Jabneel is doubtless the same as Jabneh, which Uzziah took from the Philistines. 2 Chronicles 26:6. The name and site are still found in Yebna, a village situated on an eminence in the midst of a rich plain, two miles from the sea and three from Ekron.

The goings out… at the sea — That is, the northern boundary terminated at the Mediterranean Sea.

PETT, "Verse 10‘And the border turned about from Baalah westward to Mount Seir, and passed along to the shoulder (sloping hillside) of mount Jearim on the north, the same is Chesalon, and went down to Bethshemesh, and passed along by Timnah.’There was a change of direction of the border towards the south west to an unidentified mount Seir, from where it passed along to the northern side of the tree covered mount Jearim, later called Chesalon (Kisla?). These were the ridges south west of Kuriet el-‘Enab.

“And went down to Bethshemesh (‘house of the sun” - a name given to a number of towns probably connected with sun worship), and passed along by Timnah.’ For Bethshemesh in Judah see Joshua 21:16. This was an important city on Judah’s northern border with Dan, situated in a west facing valley of the hill country some twenty four kilometres (fifteen miles) west of Jerusalem, known to Dan as Ir-shemesh (‘city of the sun’ - Joshua 19:41). This is probably the site known as Tell er-Rumeileh, situated on the saddle of a hill spur to the west of the later settlement of ‘Ain Shems. It was a strongly fortified Canaanite city during the middle and late bronze ages. Quantities of Philistine pottery demonstrate Philistine occupation at some stage, showing how far inland they penetrated, but this would be after this time. It was, however, in Israelite hands in 1 Samuel 6 when the Ark was returned there by the Philistines, and it was later strongly fortified under David.

“Passed along by Timnah.” This was another town on the Danite border (Joshua 19:43) but in the lowlands and allocated to Judah (Joshua 15:57), and also possibly to Dan (Joshua 19:43). Whether it was also partially allocated to Dan, like a number of such border areas between tribes, is not certain (it may have been a border marker). In Judges 14:1-2 it had strong Philistine connections. It was where Samson sought a Philistine wife. This may be the Tamna later mentioned in the annals of Sennacherib (c. 701 BC). It is probably Tell Batashi, nine kilometres south of Gezer, although its name is preserved by Khirbet Tibneh.

PULPIT, "Compassed. Or, deflected (see Joshua 15:4). This is in accordance with the view taken above. The border line which had run northwest from Jerusalem now bent backwards in a southwesterly direction, and followed the ridge towards Chesalon (see note on Chesalon). Mount Seir. ot the dwelling place of Esau, afterwards the country of the Edomites (Genesis 32:3; Genesis 36:8), but a range running southwestward from Kirjath-jearim, part of which is still known as Sairah, or Saris, "auf welchem Saris und Mihsir liegen" (Kuobel). Since Kirjath-jearim means the "city of the forests," and Seir means "hairy," we may conjecture that the name was given to the ridge on account of its wooded character. This also is implied by "Mount Jearim." The side of Mount Jearim. Literally, the shoulder (see above, Joshua 15:8). Which is Chesalon. This is identified with Kesia, a point on the summit of the ridge stretching southwest from Kirjath-jearim. The fact that the border passed northward of Chesalon is a confirmation of the view taken above. We learn from Joshua 19:41 (cf. Joshua 19:33 of this chapter), that the border passed by Zorah and Eshtaol in the Shephelah, through a neighbourhood described in Conder's Handbook as "an open corn country." Beth-shemesh. The "house of the sun," identified with the modern Ain (or fountain of) Shems. It is called Irshemesh in Joshua 19:41. It was close to the border of the Philistines, and was the scene of the transactions recorded in 1 Samuel 6:1-21. The propinquity to the Philistines appears to have affected the principles of its inhabitants, and their conduct contrasts most unfavourably with that of the inhabitants of Kirjath-jearim. This was the more disgraceful, in that Beth-shemesh (Joshua 21:16) was a priestly city, and being inhabited by those whose "lips should keep knowledge," might have been expected to set a better example. It was required to furnish Solomon's household with provisions (1 Kings 4:9), it witnessed the defeat and capture of Amaziah (2 Kings 14:11-13; 2 Chronicles 25:21) by Joash, king of Israel. It fell into the hands of the Philistines at the time of the decay of the Jewish power under Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28:18). The name, like Baal-Gad and Ashtaroth-Karnaim, is worthy of remark, as pointing to the character of the early Phoenician worship. Timnah. Sometimes called Timnath in Scripture (see 14:1-6), and Timnatha in Joshua 19:43.

11 It went to the northern slope of Ekron, turned toward Shikkeron, passed along to Mount Baalah

and reached Jabneel. The boundary ended at the sea.

BAR ES, "Jabneel - The modern “Yebna”, about three miles from the coast and twelve miles south of Joppa. It is called Jabneh in 2Ch_26:6, where Uzziah is recorded to have taken it from the Philistines and destroyed its fortifications. The town is repeatedly mentioned with its haven in the wars of the Maccabees (1 Macc. 4:15; 2 Macc. 12:8), and by Josephus under the name of Jamnia. It is described by Philo as a very populous town; and after the destruction of Jerusalem was, for a long time, the seat of the Sanhedrin, and was a famous school of Jewish learning. Its ruins, which are still considerable, stand on the brink of the “Wady Rubin”.

GILL, "And the border went out unto the side of Ekron northward,.... Which was one of the principalities of the Philistines; and which, though it fell to the lot of Judah, Jos_15:45, was not possessed by them:

and the border was drawn to Shicron, and passed along to Mount Baalah; of which places we have no account elsewhere:

and went unto Jabneel; which Masius makes no doubt was one of the Jamnias, and particularly that which was a seaport; which Strabo says (a) was distant from Azotus and Ashkelon about two hundred furlongs, or twenty five miles:

and the goings out of the border were at the sea; the Mediterranean sea; here the northern border ended.

K&D 11-12, "Jos_15:11-12

Thence “the border went out towards the north-west to the shoulder of Ekron (Akir: see at Jos_13:3), then bent to Shichron, passed over to Mount Baalah, and went out to Jabneel.” Shichron is possibly Sugheir, an hour to the south-west of Jebna (Knobel). But if this is correct, the mountain of Baalah cannot be the short range of hills to the west of Akir which runs almost parallel with the coast Rob. Pal. iii. p. 21), as Knobel supposes; but must be a mountain on the south side of the Wady Surar, since the boundary had already crossed this wady between Ekron and Shichron. Jabneel is the Philistine town of Jabneh, the walls of which were demolished by Uzziah (2Ch_26:6), a place frequently mentioned in the books of Maccabees as well as by Josephus under the name of Jamnia. It still exists as a good-sized village, under the name of Jebnah, upon a small eminence on the western side of Nahr Rubin, four hours to the south of Joppa, and an hour and a half from the sea (Rob. Pal. iii. p. 22). From Jabneh the boundary went out to the (Mediterranean) Sea, probably along the course of the great valley, i.e., the Nahr Rubin, as Robinson supposes (Pal. ii. p. 343). The western boundary was the Great Sea, i.e., the Mediterranean.

PETT, "Verse 11‘And the border went out to the sloping hillside of Ekron northward, and the border was drawn to Shikkeron, and passed along to Mount Baalah, and went out at Jabneel, and the goings out of the border were at the sea.’The border then continued north westward to the northern side of Ekron, which was later one of the five-city confederation, with their towns, of the Philistines. If it is to be identified with Khirbet al-Muqanna‘ surface excavations suggest that it was occupied in the early bronze age and then not again until the early iron age (when the Philistines arrived) at which point the walled city covered forty acres, and was characterised by Philistine pottery Thus at the time of allocation it was not at a high level of occupation although prominent enough to be a border marker and have villages connected with it (Joshua 15:45). It was twice captured by the Israelites (Judges 1:18; 1 Samuel 7:14) but not permanently retained (1 Samuel 5:10; 1 Samuel 17:52).

“And the border was drawn to Shikkeron, and passed along to Mount Baalah, and went out at Jabneel, and the goings out of the border were at the sea.” Shikkeron is possibly Tell el-Ful. Mount Baalah is probably the ridge of el-Mughar. Jabne-el (‘God causes to build’) is probably to be connected later with the Philistine city Jabneh (2 Chronicles 26:6), later Jamnia where the Sanhedrin was reformed after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Its modern name is Yebneh.

“And the goings out of the border were at the sea.” Compare Joshua 15:4; Joshua 15:7. The phrase indicates the point where a line ends, in this case at the Great Sea.

So the northern border of Judah turned north west from the shore of the Dead Sea, passed south of Jericho and Wadi Qelt, skirted the southern edge of Jerusalem with a foothold in Jerusalem and possession of the fields to the south, went past Kiriath-jearim and descended via the forested slopes of the Judean hills to Bethshemesh from where it followed the Sorek valley to the sea.

PULPIT, "Ekron. This important Philistine city (see Joshua 13:3) lay close to the northern border of Judah. As a matter of fact, however, the tribe of Judah never succeeded in permanently occupying this territory, which only fell under their yoke during the reigns of David and Solomon. The cities of the Philistines were, it is true, most of them captured ( 1:18), but we soon find the Philistines once more in possession of them (see 1 Samuel 5:8-10). orthward. The border turned sharply northward until past Ekron, when it once more turned westward until it reached the sea.

12 The western boundary is the coastline of the

Mediterranean Sea.

These are the boundaries around the people of Judah by their clans.

GILL, "And the west border was to the great sea, and the coast thereof,.... The western border of the tribe of Judah went along by the Mediterranean sea, which lay west to the land of Canaan; and this border reached from Jabneel to the river of Egypt, where the southern border ended, Jos_15:4,

this is the coast of the children of Judah round about according to their families; but being too large, some part of it was afterwards given to Simeon, and some particular cities of it were given to Dan and Benjamin: it was bounded on the west by the tribes of Simeon and Dan towards the Mediterranean sea, and by the tribe of Benjamin on the north, and by the wilderness of Paran on the south, and by the dead sea and Jordan on the east.

HE RY, "JAMISO , "WHEDO , "12. To the great sea and the coast — That is, the coast of the Mediterranean from Jebneel southward formed Judah’s western boundary.

The writer, having now given the boundaries of Judah, is about to give a list of the cities within these bounds. But before proceeding to do so he enters a brief account of Caleb’s conquest of his portion, which Joshua had allotted him. See Joshua 14:6-15. As Caleb’s possession included the most important city and central seat of the whole tribe of Judah, it is natural that the fact of its conquest should be recorded here.

As Joshua 15:13-19 are nearly identical with Judges 1:10-20, some have supposed that this passage in Joshua was copied from that in Judges; and others, on the contrary, maintain that the passage in Judges was taken from this. Keil, however, urges that both passages were drawn from one common source, a document older than either the Book of Joshua or that of Judges.]

BE SO , "Joshua 15:12. This is the coast of the children of Judah, round about according to their families — That is, thus the lot was bounded on all sides in the first draught of it. Which being afterward found too large, it was contracted into a narrower compass, that more room might be made for the tribe of Simeon, who had part of this lot consigned to them; as some other places were added out of it to the

tribes of Benjamin and Dan, as will afterward appear.

COKE, "Ver. 12. And the west border was to the great sea, &c.— On this side the tribe of Judah had no other limits than from the Mediterranean to the river of Egypt. Such was the portion which fell by lot to the tribe of Judah. But this portion having been found more extensive than was necessary, several pieces from thence were cut off, in order to give to the tribes of Simeon, Dan, and Benjamin.

ote; (1.) It is good to have certain limits fixed to prevent disputes. (2.) They, who have the largest portion to possess, have the largest frontiers to defend: when our advantages and disadvantages are balanced, God's distributions will not be found so unequal as at first sight they may appear.

PETT, "Verse 12‘And the west border was to the Great Sea, and its border. This is the border of the children of Judah round about according to their families.’The west border was the coast of the Mediterranean, the Great Sea. Thus were described the borders of Judah, allocated by lot in accordance with the numbers of their tribe.

13 In accordance with the Lord’s command to him, Joshua gave to Caleb son of Jephunneh a portion in Judah—Kiriath Arba, that is, Hebron. (Arba was the forefather of Anak.)

GILL, "And unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a part among the children of Judah,.... That is, Joshua gave it to him. This account is inserted before the cities in the lot of the tribe of Judah were enumerated, to show what was to be excepted from them, and which had been given to Caleb previous to the lot:

according to the commandment of the Lord to Joshua; for as he had declared this to Moses, Deu_1:36; so it seems he also gave the same order to Joshua, who, it is not improbable, might consult the Lord about it when Caleb made his request, Jos_14:12,

even the city of Arba the father of Anak, which city is Hebron; See Gill on Jos_14:15.

HE RY, "The historian seems pleased with every occasion to make mention of Caleb and to do him honour, because he had honoured God in following him fully. Observe,

I. The grant Joshua made him of the mountain of Hebron for his inheritance is here repeated (Jos_15:13), and it is said to be given him. 1. According to the commandment of the Lord to Joshua. Though Caleb, in his petition, had made out a very good title to it by promise, yet, because God had ordered Joshua to divide the land by lot, he would not in this one single instance, no, not to gratify his old friend Caleb, do otherwise, without orders from God, whose oracle, it is probable, he consulted upon this occasion. In every doubtful case it is very desirable to know the mind of God, and to see the way of our duty plain. 2. It is said to be a part among the children of Judah; though it was assigned him before the lot of that tribe came up, yet it proved, God so directing the lot, to be in the heart of that tribe, which was graciously ordered in kindness to him, that he might not be as one separated from his brethren and surrounded by those of other tribes.

JAMISO , "Jos_15:13-15. Caleb’s portion and conquest.

unto Caleb he gave a part among the children of Judah— (See on Jos_14:6).

K&D, "Jos_15:13

As an introduction to the account of the conquest of Hebron and Debir, the fact that they gave Caleb his portion among the sons of Judah, namely Hebron, is first of all

repeated from Jos_14:13. נתן impers., they gave, i.e., Joshua (Jos_14:13). The words “according to the command of Jehovah to Joshua” are to be explained from Jos_14:9-12, according to which Jehovah had promised, in the hearing of Joshua, to give Caleb possession of the mountains of Hebron, even when they were at Kadesh (Jos_14:12). The “father of Anak” is the tribe father of the family of Anakites in Hebron, from whom this town received the name of Kirjath-arba; see at Num_13:22 and Gen_23:2.

CALVI , "13.And unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh, etc Were we to judge from the actual state of matters, it would seem ridiculous repeatedly to celebrate an imaginary grant from which Caleb received no benefit while Joshua was alive. But herein due praise is given both to the truth of God, and to the faith of his saint in resting on his promise. Therefore, although sneering men, and the inhabitants of the place itself, if the rumor had reached them, might have derided the vain solicitude of Caleb, and the empty liberality of Joshua, the contempt thus expressed would only have proved them to be presumptuous scoffers. God at length evinced the firmness of his decree by the result, and Caleb, though he saw himself unable to obtain access to the mountain, testified that he was contented with the mere promise of God, the true exercise of faith, consisting in a willingness to remain without the fruition of things which have been promised till the period actually arrive. Moreover, this passage, and others similar to it, teach us that the giants who are usually called Enakim, were so named after their original progenitor, Enac, and that the word is hence of Gentile origin. The time when Caleb routed the sons of Enac we shall see in a short time. This passage also shows us that Caleb, when he brought forward the name of Moses, did not make a mere pretence, or utter anything that was not strictly true; for it is now plainly declared, that Moses had so appointed, in

conformity with the command of God.

ELLICOTT, "Verses 13-19(13-19) And unto Caleb . . . This paragraph occurs also in Judges 1:10-15, with some slight variations. Which is its original place? In Judges it is connected with the continuation of the conquest of Canaan by the tribe of Judah after Joshua’s death, and there we read they slew (literally, smote) Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai. If this is the death, and not merely the defeat of the Anakim (the Hebrew word is not absolutely decisive), we have two stages in the conquest of Hebron described—viz., (l) the expulsion of the Anakim sufficiently for Caleb to occupy the place; and (2) their final defeat and death. It seems hardly possible to make the narrative in Judges 1 a mere repetition of an earlier story, because it is presented as a part of that which happened after Joshua’s death. It would seem, then, that the entire conquest of the Anakim was not effected at once, but begun by Caleb and Joshua in Joshua’s lifetime, and completed by the tribe of Judah, under the leadership of Caleb, after Joshua’s death. It is remarkable that Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai are mentioned as apparently living when the twelve spies went up from Kadesh-barnea ( umbers 13:22), forty years before. But it has been thought that the three names were the names of three clans of the Anakim. (See otes on Judges 1:10.)

Upon the whole, it seems most reasonable to conclude that the proceedings by which Caleb secured his inheritance, and fulfilled the promise of Joshua 14:12, have been recorded here for the sake of completeness, though not necessarily belonging to this time.

(15) Kirjath-sepher.—“City of books.”

(17) Othniel the son of Kenaz.—Comp. Judges 3:9.

(19) A south land—i.e., land in the egeb: “a series of rolling hills clad with scanty herbage here and there.” Conder does not identify Debir, but others have taken it to be identical with Dewir-ban, about three miles west of Hebron.

The upper springs, and the nether springs—i.e., the upper and lower “bubblings,” or pools of a rivulet in a valley among the hills in this neighbourhood.

COFFMA , "CALEB POSSESSES HEBRO A D DEBIR

"And unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a portion among the children of Judah, according to the commandment of Jehovah to Joshua, even Kiriath-arba, which Arba was the father of Anak (the same is Hebron). And Caleb drove out thence the three sons of Anak: Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai, the children of Anak. And he went up thence against the inhabitants of Debir: now the name of Debir beforetime was Kiriath-sepher. And Caleb said, He that smiteth Kiriath-sepher, and taketh it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife. And Othniel the son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb, took it: and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife. And it came to pass that when she came unto him, that she moved

him to ask of her father a field: and she alighted from off her ass; and Caleb said, What wouldst thou? And she said, Give me a blessing; for that thou hast set me in the land of the South, give me also springs of water. And he gave her the upper springs and the nether springs."

The first chapter of Judges carries this same episode in almost exactly the same language given here. Plummer affirmed that the author of Judges copied this episode from Joshua, declaring that:

"We may safely regard this quotation of the Book of Joshua in that of Judges as evidence that Joshua was in existence when Judges was written, just as the quotations of Deuteronomy in Joshua may naturally be taken as evidence that Deuteronomy was in existence when Joshua was written."[3]"Thou hast set me in the land of the South ..." Some of the versions use " egeb" here instead of "South," but the true meaning of what Caleb's daughter here said was that, "You have given me a dry or an arid estate."[4] It was for that reason that she requested springs, which her father willingly gave her. From Judges 3:9, it is apparent that Othniel was an able and successful commander. He was, as here stated, a brother of Caleb, and his being called the "son of Kenaz" means that Kenaz was the father of both Caleb and Othniel, hence, his being called Kenezite (Joshua 14:6).

The balance of this chapter is given over to the enumeration of the cities of Judah. There are well over a hundred of these, some of more than one name. And there is a wide disparity in the spelling of most of them, as a glance at the Septuagint (LXX) will prove. A full discussion of all of these would be equivalent to a detailed history of Israel itself, although, of course, we have already given many notes and comments on many of the places mentioned here. A number of commentators have pointed out that this list was complied by a person who was thoroughly familiar with the geography of Palestine. As an old preacher replied, "Why not? God made Palestine; so, of course, he was familiar with it!"

These cities are here classified as to their general location, the first group, composed of 36 cities, lying along the southern border (Joshua 15:20-32). It is of interest that the Sacred Text refers to this group as composed of "twenty-nine" cities, whereas, there are actually 36 names of places mentioned. Longacre cited this as "an error."[5] We do not know if the discrepancy is a simple error, or whether the names of certain "villages" which were not reckoned as cities in some way found their way into the text. Certainly, the "error" if it is that has been there a long time. It also appears in the LXX.[6]

The second group was "in the lowland" (Joshua 15:33) and was composed of fifteen cities (Joshua 15:33-36), and again we have a discrepancy in the summary of these which speaks of them as "fourteen cities" (Joshua 15:36). The Septuagint omitted the reference to "fourteen cities."

The third group, composed of sixteen cities (Joshua 15:37-41) were on the

intermediate plateau called the Shephelah.

A fourth group (Joshua 15:42-44) was composed of nine cities (Joshua 15:44). Apparently, both this group and the following one lay between the Shephelah and the coast. These are the non-Philistines. And, the next group is composed of the Philistine cities.

A fifth group of Philistine cities, Ekron, Ashdod, and Gaza were the westernmost cities of Judah toward the Mediterranean (Joshua 15:45-47). These were three in number.

A sixth group (Joshua 15:48-50) was composed of eleven cities, and they occupied sites in the hill-country.

A seventh group (Joshua 15:52:54) were the northernmost of the hill-country cities, lying just south of Jerusalem. There were nine of these.

An eighth group (Joshua 15:55-57) was composed of ten cities, these cities lying along the plains of Esdraelon.

A ninth group (Joshua 15:58-59) was composed of six cities.

A tenth group (Joshua 15:60-62) tallied eight cities. The reason for two paragraphs in this group is not known.

Joshua 15:63, the final verse in the chapter, has a note about the city of the Jebusites (Jerusalem) which Judah could not take, and which apparently remained independent until the times of David who took the city and made it his capital.

The grand total of cities enumerated here Isaiah 119.

CO STABLE, "Verses 13-19The writer probably included the record of Caleb"s success in driving out the Canaanites in his area to highlight the effect of faith in the settling of the land. Othniel ( Joshua 15:17) was one of Israel"s prominent judges ( Judges 3:9), probably the first whom God raised up in Israel after Joshua"s death. He was Caleb"s younger brother (Heb. "ah, cf. Judges 1:13; Judges 3:9) and bore the spiritual characteristics of his sibling. Some translators and commentators believed Othniel was Caleb"s nephew, but this seems unlikely.

"Acsah"s request for the springs is reminiscent of Rebekah"s meeting with Isaac ( Genesis 24:61-67) in which she also (1) approaches riding on an animal; (2) descends; (3) makes a request; and (4) receives the desired result from the person whom she approaches. Both accounts involve an inheritance of the blessing that God had promised to Abraham. This is probably the reason for the inclusion of this particular note." [ ote: Hess, p245.]

PETT, "Verse 13‘And to Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a portion among the children of Judah, according to the commandment of Yahweh to Joshua, even Kiriath-arba, the father of Anak, the same is Hebron.’The importance given to this first real settlement of the land comes out in that it is repeated three times (Joshua 14:6-15; Joshua 15:13-19; Judges 1:10-15; compare Joshua 11:21-23). It was seen as a highlight, and an indicator of what was to come. It was the first major settlement of the land. Caleb, although a Kennizite ( umbers 32:12), was a recognised prince of Judah ( umbers 13:3; umbers 13:6). We must remember that Israel were made up of many nations (Exodus 12:38), incorporated into the tribal system, something not likely to be invented later. Later the Israelites looked back proudly to their ancestry as children of the patriarchs. For details of the giving of this portion see Joshua 14:6-15.

“Even Kiriath-arba.” This means ‘the city of four’ or ‘city of Arba’ - see Genesis 23:2. LXX described it as ‘the mother-city of the Anakim’. But there is no reason to reject Arba as a name or nickname and it is certainly related to the Anakim in some way, so when we are told here that it was named after a famous ancestor of the Anakim, named Arba, possibly because he had the strength or usefulness of four men (compare Joshua 15:13; Joshua 21:11 - which suggests that LXX translated ‘father’ as ‘mother’ because it related the latter more to a city) it makes good sense. It was the ancient name of Hebron.

“According to the commandment of YHWH to Joshua.” See Joshua 14:13. Joshua would not have acted without YHWH’s command. Compare Deuteronomy 1:26.

PULPIT, "And unto Caleb. This passage, at least from Joshua 15:15, is found with the slightest possible variation in 1:1-36. It has been argued from the variations that the one passage was not copied from the other, but that both were derived from a common document. o such conclusion, however, can be safely drawn from the text. For first, the present narrative deals exclusively with this portion of the history of Caleb. That in Judges, down to verse 12, deals more generally with the subject, including the exploits of Caleb, under the general history of the progress of Judah. But from the time that the history becomes that of Caleb in particular, the agreement between the two narratives is verbal, including the very unusual word we ,תנה לי for הבה לי with one or two most insignificant exceptions. Thus we have ,צנחhave גלית for גליות, and we have ממנו interpolated in 1:13, and Othniel (or Kenez) is spoken of as the younger brother of Caleb. But unless we hold that it was a sacred duty of the writer in Judges to reproduce every single word of the narrative in Joshua, there is nothing whatever that can support the conclusion that the writer in Judges was not copying the earlier narrative. The variations are such as would naturally happen where a writer was transferring, a narrative to his pages with a desire to give the exact sense of the original without tying himself to every particular word. Since the use of inverted commas has been introduced we can find multitudes of instances where a writer, when professing to quote another accurately, has introduced far more variations into his quotation than are to be found here, where

the writer, though quoting the Book of Joshua, and quoting it correctly, does not say that he is doing so. o one doubts that Jeremiah in Jeremiah 48:1-47. is quoting Isaiah 15:1-9; although the passages are not verbally coincident. We may safely regard this quotation of the Book of Joshua in that of Judges, as under all ordinary laws of criticism an evidence that the former book was in existence when the latter was written, just as the quotations of Deuteronomy in Joshua may naturally be taken as evidence that the Book of Deuteronomy was in existence when that of Joshua was composed. The son of Jephunneh. (see Joshua 14:6). A part. Literally, a lot. Among. Rather, in the midst of. Our version is obscure here. Arba the father of Anak, which city is Hebron. (see Joshua 14:6-15). Keil thinks that he was the tribe father, or chief (sheikh, as the Arabs would call him), of the children of Anak.

BI 13-19, "To him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife.

Othniel’s conquest of Debir

I. The spirit which influenced caleb in the disposal of achsah. He sought to unite her to a man—

(1) Honourable for his zeal and energy;

(2) conspicuous for his bravery;

(3) and willing to use his strength in the way of the Lord’s commandments.

(4) It seems likely also that Caleb sought to unite his daughter to one who was in a social station akin to her own.

The promise was not to the man who should first enter Kirjath-sepher. This may have been the nature of the similar promise at the siege of Jerusalem, under David, although it seems by no means certain that, even in this instance, David did not refer to the captain who should first bring his company into Jebus and smite the garrison. He should be chief captain (2Sa_5:8; 1Ch_11:6). However this may have been, Caleb’s promise ran, “He that smiteth Kirjath-sepher, and taketh it, to him,” &c. No man single-handed could “smite and take” a fortified city; and thus the promise probably refers to the leaders of the army who were under Caleb. This view has also the advantage that it does not exhibit to us an honourable man like Caleb putting up his daughter as the object of a wretched scramble, where a mere accident of a stumble or a wound might decide whose she should be. Possibly there were but few of the commanders under Caleb officially qualified to lead one or more divisions of the army against Debit; and of these Othniel might first have volunteered, or he only might have volunteered to lead the attack. Any way, out of regard for Achsah, Othniel was one who offered to conduct the assault, and he succeeded.

II. The harmony between the father and the daughter.

1. Achsah accorded with her father’s will and with the custom of the age. There can be no doubt but that, at this period, a father was held to have an absolute right to the disposal of his daughter’s hand (Gen_29:18-28; Exo_21:7-11; 1Sa_17:25, &c.). It does not follow, however, that a father would not consult his daughter’s wishes.

2. She had confidence in her father’s love, notwithstanding her recognition of his authority. She asked for a larger dowry (Jos_15:19). On leaving her father, to cleave to her husband, we thus find her seeking her husband’s interest.

3. Her father cheerfully responded to her request. The confidence which was bold to ask was met by an affection which was pleased to bestow.

III. The honourable character in which this brief history introduces Othniel. He comes before us as a man of courage, willing to risk his life for the woman he loved. He is seen to perhaps even more advantage in not preferring the request which Achsah prompted him to make. He may have refused to comply with his wife’s wishes. The history does not actually say this; it merely shows that Achsah made her request herself. Othniel was bold enough to fight; he seems to have been too manly to have allowed himself to ask for this addition to what was probably already a just and good inheritance. He was brave enough to do battle against Debir; he was not mean enough to beg. If Achsah needed a larger dowry, such a request would come better from herself. (F. G. Marchant.)

A chance for ability

There begins the test of talent and force and quality in men. The speech is, Come, now I the palm be to the brave, the crown to him who wins it. Up to a certain point all things seem to be appointed, settled, almost arbitrarily distributed; but then there are chances in life that seem to come afterwards, as it were, amongst ourselves, competitions of a personal and social kind. How early this competitive spirit was developed, and how wonderfully it has been preserved through all history! The spirit of Providence seems to say, in homeliest language, now and again, Here is a chance for you; you had something to begin with, to that you can add more, by pluck, bravery, force—to the war! We need such voices; otherwise we would soon slumber off, and doze away our handful of years, and awake to find that the day had gone. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water.

Noble discontent

1. Such noble discontent, such aspiration for higher and better things, should urge us on in the realm of the daily duty. Simply the south land of a measurable and merely respectable discharge of the daily duty should never satisfy us. We should be stirred with a noble discontent far the water springs of the best possible doing it. Thus we transform ourselves from drudges into artists. Thus, too, we compact ourselves in noble character.

2. In the realm of intellectual advance we should be stirred with this noble discontent; we should turn from a merely general and surface and newspaper information toward the springs of water of a thorough and accurate knowledge.

3. In the realm of the best good of the community in which we dwell we should be stirred with a noble discontent. The south land of a merely usual municipal security and order ought not to satisfy us; we should be restless with discontent until the springs of water of a high moral atmosphere and action are predominant.

4. In the realm of Christian experience we ought to be stirred with such noble discontent; we ought to leave behind us the south land of a merely usual and routine experience, and seek the springs of water of the peace and joy and strength of a transfiguring likeness to our Lord (1Co_3:10; 1Co_3:16). (W. Hoyt, D. D.)

The upper springs, and the nether springs.—

The upper and nether springs

I. The upper springs, as they picture forth the joy-sources of the higher nature. “My soul thirsteth for God—the living God!” Nor need we be disappointed. It is pensive to think that some thirsts, and honest thirsts too, must be disappointed, Not to all are given possibilities equal to their desires. Their ideals are above their realisation! But none need be disappointed in God! Christ has opened up a free and full channel of communication. “It pleased the Father that in Him should all fulness dwell.” We have read of waters in the East which, copious at some times, are scarce at others. To-day the waters pour forth their freshening streams, irrigate the land, and satisfy the thirst of man and beast; to-morrow the faithless well is dry. Not so with Christ. In Him the waters dwell. But more than this, Christ is not only the fulness of God, He is the available fulness for us.

1. Take fellowship with God. Inspired words used about this are not the language of poetic fiction or overwrought religious feeling. They are the actual experiences of meditative, devout, earnest, inspired men. “God is the strength of my heart and my portion for ever.”

2. Take likeness to God. Who can conceive of a more magnificent ideal than God-life in the soul? Be ye holy as your leather, &c. Be ye followers of God, &c. Herein consists our true life. Not in the mere culture of art-faculty, but in the growth of the moral likeness to God! We become happier as we become more like Him. Less vexed with trifles, less anxious about losses provided they bring gains to the soul, less conformed to the world, more restful in the love of God!

3. Take the service of God. Christ does not call us to His work merely that we may work, that our moral nature may have something to do; the Lord hath need of us. I say this not only dignifies life, it makes it delightful (Joh_4:34). These are upper springs! Co-workers together with God!

4. Take the friends of God. These are yours! We are made for each other! Church life is designed to draw forth common sympathies and common purposes. We are pilgrims to the same shrine; soldiers in the same battlefield; fruit-gatherers in the same vineyard; children of the same Father. Thoughtful Christian friendship is one of the choicest blessings we can enjoy.

5. Take the future of God’s children. I love to think of them at home there. Upper springs coming from the throne of God and the Lamb: “They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more.” Shall we drink of those upper springs? I hope so! Do we love Christ now? Do we enjoy His service now? If so, when the morning of eternity comes to us, we shall know in a higher sense than we have ever known on earth the meaning of “the upper springs.”

II. The nether springs, as they illustrate the mere satisfactions of the lower nature. Take care lest all life plays upon the surface! Take care lest all life’s drinking be at the nether springs. I am not now speaking of the grossness of sensualism, but of mere sensationalism. It is possible to live a merely surface life. Let us remember that there are eyes and ears within us, that the invisible world, the world which embraces God and judgment and eternity, is always speaking through many voices to our conscience and heart. Mere earthly aims are nether springs. Some people are always drinking at the springs of position and success. They attempt to please men.

14 From Hebron Caleb drove out the three Anakites—Sheshai, Ahiman and Talmai, the sons of Anak.

GILL, "And Caleb drove thence the three sons of Anak,.... Some think this was after the death of Joshua, and is here inserted by some other person divinely inspired, and thoroughly acquainted with this fact, that the gift and the possession of this place might appear in one view; but it rather seems to be done before:

Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai, the children of Anak; the very same giants Caleb saw at Hebron, when he was sent a spy into the land, Num_13:22; for these may as well be supposed to have lived to this time as himself, unless it can be thought that they were the sons of those men, called by their fathers' names; and though they were driven out when Joshua took Hebron, yet while he was engaged in making other conquests, or however before he died, they regained the possession of that city, and of the parts adjacent to it, from whence Caleb, with the help of his tribe, expelled them, conquered, and slew them, Jdg_1:10.

HE RY, "Caleb having obtained this grant, we are told,

1. How he signalized his own valour in the conquest of Hebron (Jos_15:14): He drove thence the three sons of Anak, he and those that he engaged to assist him in this service. This is mentioned here to show that the confidence he had expressed of success in this affair, through the presence of God with him (Jos_14:12), did not deceive him, but the event answered his expectation. It is not said that he slew these giants, but he drove them thence, which intimates that they retired upon his approach and fled before him; the strength and stature of their bodies could not keep up the courage of their minds, but with the countenances of lions they had the hearts of trembling hares. Thus does God often cut off the spirit of princes (Psa_76:12), take away the heart of the chief of the people (Job_12:24), and so shame the confidence of the proud; and thus if we resist the devil, that roaring lion, though he fall not, yet he will flee.

JAMISO , "drove thence the three sons of Anak— rather three chiefs of the Anakim race. This exploit is recorded to the honor of Caleb, as the success of it was the reward of his trust in God.

CALVI , "Here we have a narrative of what plainly appears from the book of Joshua to have taken place subsequent to the death of Joshua; but lest a question might have been raised by the novelty of the procedure, in giving a fertile and well watered field as the patrimony of a woman, the writer of the book thought proper to insert a history of that which afterwards happened, in order that no ambiguity might remain in regard to the lot of the tribe of Judah. First, Caleb is said, after he had taken the city of Hebron, to have attacked Debir or Ciriath-sepher, and to have declared, that the person who should be the first to enter it, would be his son-in-law. And it appears, that when he held out this rare prize to his fellow-soldiers for taking the city, no small achievement was required. This confirms what formerly seemed to be the case, that it was a dangerous and difficult task which had been assigned him, when he obtained his conditional grant. Accordingly, with the view of urging the bravest to exert themselves, he promises his daughter in marriage as a reward to the valor of the man who should first scale the wall.

It is afterwards added that Othniel who was his nephew by a brother, gained the prize by his valor. I know not how it has crept into the common translation that he was a younger brother of Caleb; for nothing in the least degree plausible can be said in defense of the blunder. Hence some expositors perplex themselves very unnecessarily in endeavoring to explain how Othniel could have married his niece, since such marriage was forbidden by the law. It is easy to see that he was not the uncle, but the cousin of his wife.

But here another question arises, How did Caleb presume to bargain concerning his daughter until he was made acquainted with her inclinations? (146) Although it is the office of parents to settle their daughters in life, they are not permitted to exercise tyrannical power and assign them to whatever husbands they think fit without consulting them. For while all contracts ought to be voluntary, freedom ought to prevail especially in marriage that no one may pledge his faith against his will. But Caleb was probably influenced by the belief that his daughter would willingly give her consent, as she could not modestly reject such honorable terms; (147) for the husband to be given her was no common man, but one who should excel all others in warlike prowess. It is quite possible, however, that Caleb in the heat of battle inconsiderately promised what it was not in his power to perform. It seems to me, however, that according to common law, the agreement implied the daughter’s consent, and was only to take effect if it was obtained. (148) God certainly heard the prayer of Caleb, when he gave him a son-in-law exactly to his mind. For had the free choice been given him, there was none whom he would have preferred.

WHEDO , "14. The three sons of Anak — Joshua had cut off the Anakim from the mountains and destroyed their cities, (Joshua 11:21,) but after his army retired northward these three old chieftains had rallied their scattered adherents and repossessed their cities.

BE SO , "Joshua 15:14. Caleb drove thence — That is, from the said territory,

from their caves and forts in it; these giants having either recovered their cities, or defended themselves in the mountains. Caleb did not drive them out by his own power alone, but by the confederate army of the tribes of Judah and Simeon, ( 1:3-9,) in which it is probable he had a principal command, and led on that party which assaulted this city. The three sons of Anak — Either the same whom he had seen forty-five years before, and was not at all affrighted at them; ( umbers 13:22; 1:10;) and so they were long-lived men, as many were in those times and places; or their sons called by their fathers’ names, which was very usual.

PETT, "Verse 14‘And Caleb drove from there the three sons of Anak, Sheshai and Ahinam and Talmai, the children of Anak.’For these three sons of Anak compare umbers 13:22. Their size was one of the main reasons for the fear of the Israelite scouts who surveyed the land of Canaan. They are mentioned here in order to demonstrate YHWH’s final victory over them by one of the two faithful scouts. Joshua 1:10 says that they ‘smote them’. Hebron and its towns, having been originally weakened and ‘devoted’ by Joshua, probably being burned with fire (Joshua 10:36-37), were now to be finally possessed and settled. The Canaanites, once driven out, would not be allowed to return. From now on Hebron belonged to Israel and was a thoroughly Israelite city (1 Samuel 30:31; 2 Samuel 2:1; 2 Samuel 2:3; 2 Samuel 2:11).

Their names suggest a possible Aramaic origin. For Sheshai compare Ezra 10:40. For Ahiman consider ‘brother of Meni’ (Isaiah 65:11 - Meni is ‘Destiny’, the god of fortune). The name Talmai is found among the Geshurites, an Aramean tribe (Joshua 13:13; 2 Samuel 3:3; 2 Samuel 13:7), and in abatean inscriptions from orth Arabia.

K&D, "Jos_15:14

Thence, i.e., out of Hebron, Caleb drove (רשAו, i.e., rooted out: cf. וDי, Jdg_1:10) the three sons of Anak, i.e., families of the Anakites, whom the spies that were sent out from Kadesh had already found there (Num_13:22). Instead of Caleb, we find the sons of Judah (Judaeans) generally mentioned in Jdg_1:10 as the persons who drove out the Anakites, according to the plan of the history in that book, to describe the conflicts in which the several tribes engaged with the Canaanites. But the one does not preclude the other. Caleb did not take Hebron as an individual, but as the head of a family of Judaeans, and with their assistance. Nor is there any discrepancy between this account and the fact stated in Jos_11:21-22, that Joshua had already conquered Hebron, Debir, and all the towns of that neighbourhood, and had driven out the Anakites from the mountains of Judah, and forced them back into the towns of the Philistines, as Knobelfancies. For that expulsion did not preclude the possibility of the Anakites and Canaanites returning to their former abodes, and taking possession of the towns again, when the Israelitish army had withdrawn and was engaged in the war with the Canaanites of the north; so that when the different tribes were about to settle in the towns and districts allotted to them, they were obliged to proceed once more to drive out or exterminate the Anakites and Canaanites who had forced their way in again (see the remarks on Jos_10:38-39, p. 86, note).

15 From there he marched against the people living in Debir (formerly called Kiriath Sepher).

BAR ES, "The name Debir belonged to two other places; namely,, that named in Jos_15:7, between Jerusalem and Jericho, and the Gadite town mentioned in Jos_13:26. The Debir here meant appears (and its site has been conjecturally placed at Dhaheriyeh (Conder)) to have been situated in the mountain district south of Hebron. It was one of the towns afterward assigned to the Levites. Its other name Jos_15:49, “Kirjath-sannah”, i. e. perhaps, “city of palm branches,” or “city of law, or sacred learning,” no less than the two given in the text, would indicate that Debir was an ancient seat of Canaanite learning, for Debir probably is equivalent to “oracle,” and Kirjath-sepher means “city of books.” This plurality of names marks the importance of the town, as the inducement held out in Jos_15:16, by Caleb, to secure its capture (compare 1Sa_17:25; 1Sa_18:17), points to its strength.

CLARKE,"Kirjath-sepher - The city of the book. Why so named is uncertain. It was also called Debir, and Kirjath-sannah. See Jos_15:49.

GILL, "And he went up from thence to the inhabitants of Debir,.... Having conquered Hebron, and got possession of that, Caleb marched to Debir, a city not many miles from Hebron, and seems to have been in the country, and part of the land, which was given him; of which See Gill on Jos_10:38,

and the name of Debir before was Kirjathsepher; or "the city of books"; either a place of literature, a sort of an academy, or where was a public library; the Targum calls it Kirjatharche, or the city of the archives, in which were laid up the public records of the Canaanites; the same is called Kirjathsannah for the like reason; see Gill on Jos_15:49.

HE RY, " How he encouraged the valour of those about him in the conquest of Debir, Jos_15:15, etc. It seems, though Joshua had once made himself master of Debir (Jos_10:39), yet the Canaanites had regained the possession in the absence of the army, so that the work had to be done a second time; and when Caleb had completed the reduction of Hebron, which was for himself and his own family, to show his zeal for the public good, as much as for his own private interest, he pushes on his conquest to Debir,

and will not lay down his arms till he sees that city also effectually reduced, which lay but ten miles southward from Hebron, though he had not any particular concern in it, but the reducing of it would be to the general advantage of his tribe. Let us learn hence not to seek and mind our own things only, but to concern and engage ourselves for the welfare of the community we are members of; we are not born for ourselves, nor must we live to ourselves.

(1.) Notice is taken of the name of this city. It had been called Kirjath-sepher, the city of a book, and Kirjath-sannah (Jos_15:49), which some translate the city of learning (so

the Septuagint Polis�grammaton), whence some conjecture that it had been a university among the Canaanites, like Athens in Greece, in which their youth were educated; or perhaps the books of their chronicles or records, or the antiquities of the nation, were laid up there; and, it may be, this was it that made Caleb so desirous to see Israel master of this city, that they might get acquainted with the ancient learning of the Canaanites.

JAMISO , "Debir— “oracle.” Its former name, Kirjath-sepher, signifies “city of the book,” being probably a place where public registers were kept.

WHEDO , "15. Debir — See on Joshua 10:38.

{We have now, in 16-19, a glimpse of romance in Hebrew history. It was memorable tradition connected with the capture of Debir, and with the history of one of the princely families of the period.

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:15 And he went up thence to the inhabitants of Debir: and the name of Debir before [was] Kirjathsepher.

Ver. 15. And the name of Debir before was Kirjathsepher.] Which signifieth a city of books, as Debir doth a secret and sacred place. Some think it was a University, or at least, that there was a famous library, such as was afterwards the Serapion at Alexandria, furnished with the best books by Ptolomy Philadelph, who was φιλολογωτατος βασιλευς, as Cyril noteth, a great lover of learning.

PETT, "Verse 15‘And he went up from there against the inhabitants of Debir. ow the name of Debir was previously Kiriath-sepher.’The mention of the ancient names may suggest that this record was written shortly after the change of name. Debir or Kiriath-sepher was at the end of the Judean hills. It is also called Kiriath-sannah (city of palm leaf) in Joshua 15:49. Here it is called Kiriath-sepher (city of writing) as in Judges 1:11. Both names connect with scribal activity (palm leaves were writing materials) which suggests it was well known as a scribal city. Thus its ancient local names

K&D, "Jos_15:15-16

From Hebron Caleb went against the Inhabitants of Debir, to the south of Hebron. This town, which has not yet been discovered (see at Jos_10:38), must have been very strong and hard to conquer; for Caleb offered a prize to the conqueror, promising to give his daughter Achzah for a wife to any one that should take it, just as Saul afterwards

promised to give his daughter to the conqueror of Goliath (1Sa_17:25; 1Sa_18:17).

16 And Caleb said, “I will give my daughter Aksah in marriage to the man who attacks and captures Kiriath Sepher.”

CLARKE,"Will I give Achsah my daughter - In ancient times fathers assumed an absolute right over their children, especially in disposing of them in marriage; and it was customary for a king or great man to promise his daughter in marriage to him who should take a city, kill an enemy, etc. So Saul promised his daughter in marriage to him who should kill Goliath, 1Sa_17:25; and Caleb offers his on this occasion to him who should take Kirjath-sepher. Profane writers furnish many similar examples.

GILL, "And Caleb said, he that smiteth Kirjathsepher, and taketh it,.... Which he ordered to be proclaimed through the army that was under his command; and which was done not so much on the account of the difficulty of taking the place, through the number of the inhabitants of it, and its fortifications, which it seems had fallen again into the hands of the Canaanites, since it was taken by Joshua; nor through inactivity, diffidence, and timorousness in himself; but that others, who were officers, and men of valour under him, might gather some laurels as well as himself; and chiefly being under a divine impulse, he ordered this declaration to be made, whereby his brother Othniel, who was to be a judge in Israel, might appear a great man, and fit for such an office; and as an encouragement, he promises as follows:

to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife; and to be married into the family of the chief prince of the tribe of Judah was a very great honour, as well as no doubt a very large dowry might be expected, and was given with her, and very probably the city of Debir was promised that should be taken. This Achsah seems to be a daughter of Caleb by a concubine, 1Ch_2:48.

HE RY, " The proffer that Caleb made of his daughter, and a good portion with her, to any one that would undertake to reduce that city, and to command the forces that should be employed in that service, Jos_15:16. Thus Saul promised a daughter to him that would kill Goliath (1Sa_17:25), neither of them intending to force his daughter to marry such as she could not love, but both of them presuming upon their daughters' obedience, and submission to their fathers' will, though it might be contrary to their own humour or inclination. Caleb's family was not long honourable and wealthy, but

religious; he that himself followed the Lord fully no doubt taught his children to do so, and therefore it could not but be a desirable match to any young gentleman. Caleb, in making the proposal, aims, [1.] To do service to his country by the reducing of that important place; and, [2.] To marry a daughter well, to a man of learning, that would have a particular affection for the city of books, and a man of war, that would be likely to serve his country, and do worthily in his generation. Could he but marry his child to a man of such a character, he would think her well bestowed, whether the share in the lot of his tribe were more or less.

JAMISO , "Jos_15:16-20. Othniel, for his valor, has Achsah to wife.

He that smiteth Kirjath-sepher— This offer was made as an incentive to youthful bravery (see on 1Sa_17:25); and the prize was won by Othniel, Caleb’s younger brother (Jdg_1:13; Jdg_3:9). This was the occasion of drawing out the latent energies of him who was destined to be the first judge in Israel.

WHEDO , "16. Caleb said — The veteran leader finding Debir, perhaps after his previous conquests, a more difficult fortress, arouses his warriors with the promise of a prize.

Smiteth Kirjath-sepher — The old name of the city, as quoting the warrior’s own words.

My daughter to wife — Said in the spirit of the Oriental as well as the Roman rule, by which the parent was absolute lord of his children, and of the Oriental custom of marrying parties without regard to previous affection or even acquaintance. Saul thus promised his daughter to the slayer of Goliath. 1 Samuel 17:25.

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:16 And Caleb said, He that smiteth Kirjathsepher, and taketh it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife.

Ver. 16. To him will I give Achsah my daughter.] Yet with her consent, who as she was not to be forced, [Genesis 24:51; Genesis 24:57] so she might not refuse without reason, and say -

“ on amo te Sabidi, nec possum dicere quare. ” - Martial.

BE SO , "Joshua 15:16. Caleb said — Made proclamation throughout the army which he led against Debir. Achsah my daughter to wife — Which is to be understood with some conditions, as, if he were one who could marry her according to God’s law; and if she were willing; for though parents had a great power over their children, they could not force them to marry any person against their own wills. He might otherwise be an unfit and unworthy person; but this was a divine impulse, that Othniel’s valour might be more manifest, and so the way prepared for his future government of the people, 3:9.

COKE, "Verse 16-17

Ver. 16, 17. And Caleb said, &c.— To encourage his troops to take Debir, Caleb, at the head of the army, declared publicly, that he would give his daughter in marriage to whoever undertook and succeeded in storming that city. Among the Hebrews, fathers had an absolute power over the marriage of their children. Saul exercised this right, as well as Caleb, 1 Samuel 17:25.; and prophane history supplies us with many similar instances. Othniel, Caleb's nephew, the son of his brother Kenaz, offered himself. The Spirit of God, without doubt, incited him, as it afterwards did to deliver his fellow-citizens, Judges 3:9-10. Thus Providence every way rewarded Caleb's virtue, by giving him the country which God had promised him, and by procuring to him the possession of it, by means of the valour of one of the greatest men of the tribe of Judah, who became his son-in-law.

PETT, "Verse 16‘And Caleb said, “He who smites Kiriath-sepher, and takes it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife”.’This was a kind of test of suitability. Chief’s daughters were given to mighty champions to ensure continual strong leadership. Compare Saul’s offer in 1 Samuel 17:25. It is understandable why Saul did not fulfil his promise. When he made it he was expecting a champion not an inexperienced young man. He was not to know what David would become.

17 Othniel son of Kenaz, Caleb’s brother, took it; so Caleb gave his daughter Aksah to him in marriage.

BAR ES, "Othniel was probably Caleb’s younger brother; the expression “son of Kenaz” being only an equivalent for the “Kenezite” Jos_14:6.

GILL, "And Othniel the son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb, took it,.... The relation of Othniel to Caleb is a little intricate, and, as it is understood, occasions objections to the marriage of Caleb's daughter to him; it seems, at first sight, that he was Caleb's own brother, a younger brother, and so uncle to his daughter, and such marriages were forbidden, Lev_18:14. Jarchi thinks he was the brother of Caleb by his mother's side; Kimchi, both by father and mother's side; but not to observe, that besides the word "brother" sometimes signifies only a kinsman, or near relation, and not precisely a brother; it is not Othniel that is called the brother of Caleb, but Kenaz, who

was the father of Othniel; so that Caleb was Othniel's uncle, and Achsah and Othniel were brothers' children, or first cousins, between whom marriage was allowed of:

and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife; according to the tenor of his proclamation, and the promise he made.

HE RY, " The place was bravely taken by Othniel, a nephew of Caleb, whom probably Caleb had thoughts of when he made the proffer, Jos_15:17. This Othniel, who thus signalized himself when he was young, had long after, in his advanced years, the honour to be both a deliverer and a judge in Israel, the first single person that presided in their affairs after Joshua's death. It is good for those who are setting out in the world to begin betimes with that which is great and good, that, excelling in service when they are young, they may excel in honour when they grow old.

JAMISO , "WHEDO , "17. Othniel the son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb — The Septuagint, by mistake, here makes Othniel to be the brother of Caleb, thus making him marry his own brother’s daughter, his niece; a marriage if not unlawful, yet questionable. But the Septuagint corrects itself at Judges 1:13, where all versions agree that Kenaz was Caleb’s brother, and Othniel Kenaz’s son. Othniel therefore married his own cousin.

Gave him Achsah — In being offered as a prize to the warriors it is probable that, in accordance with the spirit of the times, Achsah found a gratification to her feminine pride. The onset of battle was to be made all the more bravely for her beauty, rank, and dower. Of course, all the probabilities of winning lay within the circle of a few well-known heroes, and she would have the assurance of marrying the bravest man of Caleb’s princedom. And her best ambition was gratified, since Providence and Othniel’s bravery gave her the man of her probable choice — certainly the man who raised her from the rank of daughter of the sheikh to that of wife of the ruler of all the united tribes. Judges 3:9.

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:17 And Othniel the son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb, took it: and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife.

Ver. 17. The son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb.] So that Othniel and Achsah were brothers’ children. Hence some infer the lawfulness of such marriages now.

PETT, "Verse 17‘And Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother, took it, and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife.’It was probably Kenaz who was Caleb’s younger brother. The son and daughter were thus cousins. Othniel was probably Caleb’s hope in the first place. ‘Son of Kenaz’ might simply indicate that he too was a Kenizzite, but it is unlikely that Caleb would give his daughter to his younger brother in this way (Leviticus 18:9), and there is no reason why a Kenizzite should not be called Kenaz.

K&D, "Jos_15:17

Othniel took the town and received the promised prize. Othniel, according to Jdg_3:9

the first judge of the Israelites after Joshua's death, is called כלב אחי קנז R, i.e., either “theןson of Kenaz (and) brother of Caleb,” or “the son of Kenaz the brother of Caleb.” The second rendering is quite admissible (comp. 2Sa_13:3, 2Sa_13:32, with 1Ch_2:13), but the former is the more usual; and for this the Masorites have decided, since they have separated achi Caleb from ben-Kenaz by a tiphchah. And this is the correct one, as “the son of Kenaz” is equivalent to “the Kenizzite” (Jos_14:6). According to Jdg_1:13 and Jdg_3:9, Othniel was Caleb's younger brother. Caleb gave him his daughter for a wife, as marriage with a brother's daughter was not forbidden in the law (see my Bibl. Archäol. ii. §107, note 14).

18 One day when she came to Othniel, she urged him[b] to ask her father for a field. When she got off her donkey, Caleb asked her, “What can I do for you?”

BAR ES, "Afield - In Jdg_1:14, “the field,” i. e. the well-known field asked by Achsah and given by Caleb as a “blessing,” i. e. as a token of goodwill, which when the Book of Judges was written had become historical. The “field” in question was doubtless in the neighborhood of Debir, and was especially valuable because of its copious springs. Achsah’s dismounting was a sign of reverence.

CLARKE,"As she came - As she was now departing from the house of her father to go to that of her husband.

She moved him - Othniel, to ask of her father a field, one on which she had set her heart, as contiguous to the patrimony already granted.

She lighted off her ass - vattitsnach, she hastily, suddenly alighted, as if she ותצנחhad forgotten something, or was about to return to her father’s house. Which being perceived by her father, he said, What wouldest thou? What is the matter? What dost thou want?

GILL, "And it came to pass, as she came unto him,.... To her husband, being

conducted from her father's house to his, in order to consummate the marriage, just as we may suppose when she was got to her husband's house, before she lighted off the beast on which she rode:

that she moved him to ask of her father a field; or persuaded him to make such a request to him, or that he would give her leave to make it; that is, Achsah put Othniel her espoused husband upon it, to entreat her father Caleb, or suffer her to use her interest with him to obtain a field of him, over and above, and something better, than what he had already given:

and she lighted off her ass; she leaped or threw herself from it; or bowing herself, she fell off on her feet, as Jarchi interprets it, and in an humble manner made her obeisance to her father; though De Dieu, from the use of the word in the Ethiopic language, gives a different sense, as if she continued on her ass, and did not alight, waiting the success of her husband's request; or that her father, taking notice of this, might ask the reason of it, which would give her an opportunity of asking the favour of him, which she judged was a proper time of doing it; and there are some versions which seem to countenance this sense the Septuagint version is,"she cried from off the ass;''and the Vulgate Latin version,"she sighed as she sat upon the ass:"

and Caleb said unto her, what wouldest thou? what wouldest thou have? what is thy request for he perceived, by the posture she put herself in, that she had something to say to him.

HE RY, " Hereupon (all parties being agreed) Othniel married his cousin-german Achsah, Caleb's daughter. It is probable that he had a kindness for her before, which put him upon this bold undertaking to obtain her. Love to his country, an ambition of honour, and a desire to find favour with the princes of his people, might not have engaged him in this great action, but his affection for Achsah did. This made it intolerable to him to think that any one should do more to win her favour than he would, and so inspired him with this generous fire. Thus is love strong as death, and jealousy cruel as the grave.

JAMISO 18-19, "as she came unto him— that is, when about to remove from her father’s to her husband’s house. She suddenly alighted from her travelling equipage -a mark of respect to her father, and a sign of making some request. She had urged Othniel to broach the matter, but he not wishing to do what appeared like evincing a grasping disposition, she resolved herself to speak out. Taking advantage of the parting scene when a parent’s heart was likely to be tender, she begged (as her marriage portion consisted of a field which, having a southern exposure, was comparatively an arid and barren waste) he would add the adjoining one, which abounded in excellent springs. The request being reasonable, it was granted; and the story conveys this important lesson in religion, that if earthly parents are ready to bestow on their children that which is good, much more will our heavenly Father give every necessary blessing to them who ask Him.

K&D 18-19, "Jos_15:18-19

When Achzah had become his wife (“as she came,” i.e., on her coming to Othniel, to live with him as wife), she urged him to ask her father for a field. “A field:” in Jdg_1:14we find “the field,” as the writer had the particular field in his mind. This was not “the

field belonging to the town of Debir” (Knobel), for Othniel had no need to ask for this, as it naturally went with the town, but a piece of land that could be cultivated, or, as is shown in what follows, one that was not deficient in springs of water. What Othniel did is not stated, but only what Achzah did to attain her end, possibly because her husband could not make up his mind to present the request to her father. She sprang from the ass

upon which she had ridden when her father brought her to Othniel. צנח, which only occurs again in Jdg_4:21, and in the parallel passage, Jdg_1:14, is hardly connected with

,to be lowly or humble (Ges.); the primary meaning is rather that suggested by Fürst ,צנעto force one's self, to press away, or further; and hence in this case the meaning is, to

spring down quickly from the animal she had ridden, like נפל in Gen_24:64. Alighting from an animal was a special sign of reverence, from which Caleb inferred that his daughter had some particular request to make of him, and therefore asked her what she wanted: “What is to thee?” or, “What wilt thou?” She then asked him for a blessing (as in

2Ki_5:15); “for,” she added, “thou hast given me into barren land.” גבWה rendered a) ארץsouth land) is accus. loci; so that negeb is not to be taken as a proper name, signifying the southernmost district of Canaan (as in Jos_15:21, etc.), but as an appellative, “the dry or arid land,” as in Psa_126:4. “Give me springs of water,” i.e., a piece of land with springs of water in it. Caleb then gave her the “upper springs and lower springs:” this was the name given to a tract of land in which there were springs on both the higher and lower ground. It must have been somewhere in the neighbourhood of Debir, though, like the town itself, it has not yet been found.

CALVI , "18.And it came to pass as she came unto him, etc Although we may conjecture that the damsel Acsa was of excellent morals and well brought up, as marriage with her had been held forth as the special reward (149) of victory, yet perverse cupidity on her part is here disclosed. She knew that by the divine law women were specially excluded from hereditary lands, but she nevertheless covets the possession of them, and stimulates her husband by unjust expostulation. In this way ambitious and covetous wives cease not to molest their husbands until they force them to forget shame, modesty, and equity. For although the avarice of men also is insatiable, yet women are apt to be much more precipitate. The more carefully ought husbands to be on their guard against being set as it were on flame by the blast of such importunate counsels. (150)

But a greater degree of intemperance is displayed when she acquires additional boldness from the facility of her husband and the indulgence of her father. ot contented with the field given to her, she demands for herself a well-watered district. And thus it is when a person has once overleaped the bounds of rectitude and honesty, the fault is forthwith followed up by impudence. Moreover, her father in refusing her nothing gives proof of his singular affection for her. But it does not therefore follow that the wicked thirst of gain which blinds the mind and perverts right judgment is the less hateful. In regard to Acsa’s dismounting from the ass, some interpreters ascribe it to dissimulation and craft, as if she were pretending inability to retain her seat from grief. In this way her dismounting or falling off is made an indication of criminality and defective character. It is more simple,

however, to suppose that she placed herself at her father’s feet with the view of accosting him as a suppliant. Be this as it may, by her craft and flattery she gained his consent, and in so far diminished the portion of her brothers. (151)

WHEDO , "18. And it came to pass — We have now full proof that Caleb acted from affection to his daughter and with her confiding love.

As she came — In bridal procession, all riding upon asses, from her father’s house to the house of her bridegroom, by whom she is escorted to his and her future home. See note on Matthew 25:1-6.

She moved him — Her bridegroom, by the side of whom, probably, she rode in procession. She believes the request of Othniel would be with Caleb even more powerful than her own; but he, perhaps silently, declines.

To ask… a field — “Underneath the hill on which Debir stood is a deep valley, rich with verdure from a copious rivulet, which, rising at the crest of the glen, falls, with a continuity unusual in the Judean hills, down to its lowest depth. On the possession of these upper and lower ‘bubblings,’ so contiguous to her lover’s prize, Achsah had set her heart.” — Stanley.

Lighted off — At her bridegroom’s door, where she and her father meet each other.

What wouldest thou — The heart of her father at this melting moment is open to any request, and she seizes the golden chance.}

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:18 And it came to pass, as she came [unto him], that she moved him to ask of her father a field: and she lighted off [her] ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wouldest thou?

Ver. 18. She moved him to ask.] Or, She moved her husband that she might ask another field. Covetousness is never contented, but still craving more, as the horse leeches’ daughters. Othniel hardly yielded to this motion, but she would have it so, and therefore lighted off her ass, either as discontented, or as desirous to present her request.

BE SO , "Joshua 15:18. As she came — Or, as she went; namely, from her father’s house to her husband’s, as the manner was. She moved him — She persuaded her husband, either, 1st, That he would ask: or rather, 2d, That he would suffer her to ask, as she did. She lighted — That she might address herself to her father in an humble posture, and as a supplicant, which he understood by her gesture.

COKE,"Ver. 18. And—as she came unto him—she moved him to ask of her father a field, &c.— As she was conducted from the house of her father to that of her husband, according to the custom of that time, persuaded that Caleb could refuse nothing to the generous warrior who had subdued for him Kirjath-sepher, she

begged of Othniel to ask boldly of him a field which lay conveniently for them; and the latter seeming fearful to do so, she hardly alighted, and placed herself in a suppliant posture, to open her mind to her father herself. Caleb perceiving her uneasiness, prevented it, by asking her what she required; and on Achsah's answering, that she begged him to consider, that, having given to her husband and herself only dry grounds, from which they could raise nothing, it would be proper to add thereto a spot which she pointed out, and which was rendered fertile by the waters of an adjacent spring. Caleb granted her beyond her wishes, and gave her one territory in the mountains, and another in the plain, both of them well watered. Such, according to our version, is the sense of these two verses; which interpreters have explained differently, as to particulars, but have all understood nearly in the same manner. See Poole's Synopsis. We should add, however, that it is uncertain whether this happened before or after the death of Joshua.

REFLECTIO S.—Caleb's portion, though allowed him according to his claim, falls providentially in the midst of the lot of his brethren of the tribe of Judah. And as he must possess it by the sword, we have it for his honour reported, that he conquered it from the sons of Anak. They seem to have fled at his approach, because they felt that resistance was vain: the inhabitants of Debir only stood on the defensive. Though this city had been taken, chap. Joshua 10:39 yet being deserted, the Canaanites, it seems, returned and repaired the fortifications. To animate his troops, therefore, for the attack, he promises his daughter Achsah in marriage to the person who should take the city. Othniel, his brother's son, seizes the glad occasion; to gain the object of his love, he flies to the attack, and signalizes his valour in the capture of the city: an early presage of his future advancement as judge in Israel. ote; They, who in age would be respected, must spend their youth in deeds of virtue. Caleb immediately fulfils his promise, and Othniel is made happy in his beloved Achsah. ote; Among the first of human blessings is the union of their hands in marriage, whose hearts were before united in faithful love. With his wife, Othniel received an inheritance in land: Achsah observing the situation, as a south land, which being exposed to the sun would be parched, moved her husband to ask for another field, in which were springs of water; but Othniel suggesting, probably, that she was more likely to obtain it, in token of respect to her father, she alighted, and asked the blessing or favour of him, to bestow upon her the springs of water in the upper field: but in this he exceeded her expectations, for he gave her both the upper and nether springs. ote; (1.) When parents marry their children, they are in duty bound liberally to supply them with what they need, and themselves can well spare. (2.)

Husband and wife have but one interest, and should have one purse as well as one heart. (3.) We may, without danger of sin, desire the comforts and conveniencies of life, and use lawful means to procure them. (4.) If an earthly father is so kind, shall we not experience greater favours from our Father in heaven when we pray unto him? (5.) They who have nether springs of earthly blessings, and the upper springs of Divine grace, bestowed upon them, have, indeed, abundant reason to be satisfied with, and thankful for their lot.

PETT, "Verse 18-19‘And it happened that when she came to him, she moved him to ask of her father a field, and she lighted from her ass, and Caleb said to her, “What is it you want?” And she said to him, “Give me a blessing, for you have set me in the land of the egeb. Give me also springs of water.” And Caleb gave her the upper springs and the nether springs.’The dowry Othniel requested, at her suggestion, was land, and when his wife discovered where this was, in the egeb, she lighted from her ass (a gesture of maidenly courtesy and submission - compare Genesis 24:64) and approached her father to ensure good water supplies, which were necessary in that region, by asking for permanent springs, which he gave her as a wedding gift. The word translated alighted may mean ‘clap one’s hands’, a signal to a servant to be helped down.

This account is paralleled in Judges 1:11-15. The latter may have been copied from here, but more probably both were taken from an early record made of the wars in Canaan similar to ‘the book of the wars of YHWH’ ( umbers 21:14). For such were looked on as religious events and as covenant documents confirming the covenant, not just as history.

PULPIT, "As she came to him. Whether the bridal procession of the later Jews were already in existence or not, we have no evidence to show. A field. The narrative in Judges has "the field," meaning the particular field mentioned in the passage. Lighted off. Or, sank down; spoken of gradual motion, as of the nail which, when smitten by Jael into Sisera's temples, went down into the ground. So Knobel. Our translation renders it "fastened" there, which is hardly the meaning. This word has been a difficulty to translators. The LXX. renders ἰβόησεν ἐκ τοῦ ὄνου, and the Vulgate still more strangely, "Suspiravit, ut sedebat in asino." The LXX. seems to have read צעק for צנח. The Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic render as our version. What wouldest thou? Or, what is the matter? Literally, What to thee? Achsah's conduct surprised Caleb. It was probably accompanied by an imploring gesture, and occurred before she had reached the house of Othniel, who no doubt had come to meet her; or possibly, according to the later Oriental custom, had escorted her the whole way. A blessing (see 2 Kings 5:15; also Genesis 33:11; 1 Samuel 25:27). The use of the word in the sense of "gift" comes from the fact that to bless is to bestow benefits upon the person blessed (see Deuteronomy 28:1-6, Deuteronomy 28:11, Deuteronomy 28:12).

19 She replied, “Do me a special favor. Since you have given me land in the egev, give me also springs of water.” So Caleb gave her the upper

and lower springs.

BAR ES, "A south land - This term (“negeb”) which is often equivalent to a proper name Jos_15:21, importing the well-defined district which formed the south of the promised land (Num_13:17 note), seems here used in its more general sense Psa_126:4, for a dry or barren land. The rendering of this passage adopted by Septuagint, several versions, and Commentators, etc., “thou hast given me into a south land,” i. e. “hast given me in marriage into a south land” is forced; the construction of the verb “to give,” with two accusatives, is natural and common to many languages.

Springs of water - The Hebrew words מים gûllâh גלה mayı$m are found only here and in the parallel passage, Jdg_1:15. Hence, some take it as a proper name, “Gulloth-maim,” which like Beth-horon Jos_16:3, Jos_16:5, was applied to two distinct but adjoining places - distinguished as “the upper” and “the lower.” The tract in question was no doubt a mountain slope which had springs both on its higher and lower ground; possibly the modern “Kurmul”.

CLARKE,"Give me a blessing - Do me an act of kindness. Grant me a particular request.

Thou hast given me a south land - Which was probably dry, or very ill, watered.

Give me also springs of water - Let me have some fields in which there are brooks or wells already digged.

The upper springs, and the nether springs - He gave her even more than she requested; he gave her a district among the mountains and another in the plains well situated and well watered. There are several difficulties in this account, with which I shall not trouble the reader. What is mentioned above appears to be the sense.

GILL, "Who answered, give me a blessing,.... By which she meant not a paternal benediction, or that he would wish and pray for a blessing on her; nor food, or a maintenance, as Jarchi, that her husband would provide for her; but rather an inheritance or possession, as the Targum; or a gift, as Abendana, a present, or something over and above what he had already given her; or an addition to her portion, as Kimchi: the word is sometimes used for a fish pool, as well as a blessing, and so glances at what she had in view, pools of water, or a well watered land:

for thou hast given me a south land; a dry land, as the Jewish writers (a) generally interpret this word, otherwise all the land belonging to the tribe of Judah was south land, and Caleb could give her no other; but Debir, as Hebron was, was in the hill country, was mountainous and so dry, and wanted watering:

give me also springs of water; she means land in which there were springs of water;

for unless she was possessed of the land in which they were, she would have no command of the springs, and so have little or no use of them:

and he gave her the upper springs, and the nether springs; such as were in the higher grounds, and such as were in the lower ones, that she might have a sufficiency to water all her lands and fields; or as she moved her husband to ask a field, and he put her on doing the same, Caleb gave her a field, in the upper part of which were springs, and also in the lower part; though he seems to have given more than she requested.

HE RY, " Because the historian is now upon the dividing of the land, he gives us an account of Achsah's portion, which was in land, as more valuable because enjoyed by virtue of the divine promise, though we may suppose the conquerors of Canaan, who had had the spoil of so many rich cities, were full of money too. [1.] Some land she obtained by Caleb's free grant, which was allowed while she married within her own tribe and family, as Zelophehad's daughters did. He gave her a south land, Jos_15:19. Land indeed, but a south land, dry, and apt to be parched. [2.] She obtained more upon her request; she would have had her husband to ask for a field, probably some particular field, or champaign ground, which belonged to Caleb's lot, and joined to that south land which he had settled upon his daughter at marriage. She thought her husband had the best interest in her father, who, no doubt, was extremely pleased with his late glorious achievement, but he thought it was more proper for her to ask, and she would be more likely to prevail; accordingly she did, submitting to her husband's judgment, though contrary to her own; and she managed the undertaking with great address. First, She took the opportunity when her father brought her home to the house of her husband, when the satisfaction of having disposed of his daughter so well would make him think nothing too much to do for her. Secondly, She lighted off her ass, in token of respect and reverence to her father, whom she would honour still, as much as before her marriage. She cried or sighed from off her ass, so the Septuagint and the vulgar Latin read it; she expressed some grief and concern, that she might give her father occasion to ask her what she wanted. Thirdly, She calls it a blessing, because it would add much to the comfort of her settlement; and she was sure that, since she married not only with her father's consent, but in obedience to his command, he would not deny her his blessing. Fourthly, She asks only for the water, without which the ground she had would be of little use either for tillage or pasture, but she means the field in which the springs of water were. The modesty and reasonableness of her quest gave it a great advantage. Earth without water would be like a tree without sap, or the body of an animal without blood; therefore, when God gathered the waters into one place, he wisely and graciously left some in every place, that the earth might be enriched for the service of man. See Psa_104:10, etc. Well, Achsah gained her point; her father gave her what she asked, and perhaps more, for he gave her the upper springs and the nether springs, two fields so called from the springs that were in them, as we commonly distinguish between the higher field and the lower field. Those who understand it but of one field, watered both with the rain of heaven and the springs that issued out of the bowels of the earth, give countenance to the allusion we commonly make to this, when we pray for spiritual and heavenly blessings which relate to our souls as blessings of the upper springs, and those which relate to the body and the life that now is as blessings of the nether springs.

From this story we learn, 1. That it is no breach of the tenth commandment moderately to desire those comforts and conveniences of this life which we see attainable in a fair and regular way. 2. That husbands and wives should mutually advise, and jointly agree, about that which is for the common good of their family; and much more should they concur in asking of their heavenly Father the best blessings, those of the upper

springs. 3. That parents must never think that lost which is bestowed upon their children for their real advantage, but must be free in giving them portions as well as maintenance, especially when they are dutiful. Caleb had sons (1Ch_4:15), and yet gave thus liberally to his daughter. Those parents forget themselves and their relation who grudge their children what is convenient for them when they can conveniently part with it.

WHEDO ,"19. A blessing — A special favour, a gift.

Springs of water — As her portion was a field having a southern exposure to blazing suns and sultry winds, she argues the eminent propriety of supplementing the gift by adding a well-watered adjoining tract. He gave her the upper springs and the nether, a tract of hill and dale abounding in water.

The cities of Judah are grouped in four divisions corresponding to the physical geography of Judah’s lot: the EGEB, or south country, Joshua 15:21-32; the SHEPHELAH, or valley, Joshua 15:33-47; the MOU TAI , Joshua 15:48-60; and the WILDER ESS, Joshua 15:61-62. The cities of the Shephelah and the Mountain are enumerated by groups. These cities are nearly all unknown. For an elaborate attempt to identify them, see Wilton’s egeb, Part III, page 70. In the following notes nothing is said on the names of those places of which no modern trace has been certainly discovered.

TRAPP, "Joshua 15:19 Who answered, Give me a blessing; for thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water. And he gave her the upper springs, and the nether springs.

Ver. 19. Give me also springs of water,] i.e., Other lands well watered, whence we may derive water to the rest.

And he gave her the upper springs, and the nether springs.] What can a kind father deny his child? And shall not God give his dear children "upper and nether springs," blessings of both lives, bona throni et bona scabelli? and are they not worthily miserable that will not make themselves happy by asking? How confidently came Esau to his father for a blessing, and the prodigal for a child’s part! ow if men which are evil do give good things to their children that ask them: how much more will your heavenly Father? &c. See what he saith, [Isaiah 45:11] "Ask me of things to come concerning" (or on the behalf of) "my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me." Oh that we did but understand the latitude of this royal charter!

BE SO , "Joshua 15:19. A blessing — That is, a gift, as that word signifies, Genesis 33:11. A south land — That is, a dry land, which was much exposed to the south wind, which, in those parts, was very hot and drying, as coming from the deserts of Arabia. Springs of water — That is, a field wherein are springs of water, which in that country were of great price. Upper and nether springs — Of two

fields, one above and the other below that south and dry ground which she complained of, that by this means it might be watered on both sides.

PULPIT, "A southland. Hebrew, the southland. The word egeb signifies dry (see note on egeb, Joshua 10:40). It must be remembered that it became the word for south, because the south of Palestine was an arid tract. Therefore Achsah must be understood as saying, "Thou hast given me a dry country, give me also a reservoir of water." The Vulgate translates egeb twice over, "australem et arentem" (arentem only 1:15). The LXX. translates both egeb and Gulloth as proper names. But in the parallel passage in Judges egeb is translated "south," and Gulloth appears as λύτρωσιν, as if from גלה to remove. othing can more clearly show that the LXX. translation is the work of Springs of water. גלת different hands. akin to our well and the German quelle, and derived from גלל to roll, from the circular motion observable in springs, as also from the rolling of waves. The Chaldee renders the house of irrigation ( בית שקיא). Knobel translates reservoirs. The upper springs and the lower springs (see note on Debir, Joshua 10:38).

20 This is the inheritance of the tribe of Judah, according to its clans:

GILL, "This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Judah, according to their families. The general description of which is given in the preceding part of the chapter, as the particular cities belonging to it are enumerated in the following part; the account of the gift of Hebron to Caleb, and the taking of Debir by Othniel, with the request of Achsah, and the grant of it, are inserted between them, and stand as it were in a parenthesis.

HE RY 20-63, "We have here a list of the several cities that fell within the lot of the tribe of Judah, which are mentioned by name, that they might know their own, and both keep it and keep to it, and might neither through cowardice nor sloth lose the possession of what was their own.

I. The cities are here named, and numbered in several classes, which they then could account for the reason of better than we can now. Here are, 1. Some that are said to be the uttermost cities towards the coast of Edom, Jos_15:21-32. Here are thirty-eight named, and yet said to be twenty-nine (Jos_15:32), because nine of these were afterwards transferred to the lot of Simeon, and are reckoned as belonging to that, as appears by comparing Jos_19:2, etc.; therefore those only are counted (though the rest are named) which remained to Judah. 2. Others that are said to be in the valley (Jos_15:33) are counted to be fourteen, yet fifteen are named; but it is probable that Gederah

and Gederathaim were either two names or two parts of one and the same city. 3. Then sixteen are named without any head of distinction, Jos_15:37-41, and nine more, Jos_15:42-44. 4. Then the three Philistine-cities, Ekron, Ashdod, and Gaza, Jos_15:45-47. 5. Cities in the mountains, eleven in all (Jos_15:48-51), nine more (Jos_15:52-54), ten more (Jos_15:55-57), six more (Jos_15:58, Jos_15:59), then two (Jos_15:60), and six in the wilderness, a part of the country not so thick of inhabitants as some others were.

II. Now here, 1. We do not find Bethlehem, which was afterwards the city of David, and was ennobled by the birth of our Lord Jesus in it. But that city, which at the best was but little among the thousands of Judah (Mic_5:2), except that it was thus dignified, was now so little as not to be accounted one of the cities, but perhaps was one of the villages not named. Christ came to give honour to the places he was related to, not to receive honour from them. 2. Jerusalem is said to continue in the hands of the Jebusites (Jos_15:63), for the children of Judah could not drive them out, through their sluggishness, stupidity, and unbelief. Had they attempted it with vigour and resolution, we have reason to think God would not have been wanting to them to give them success; but they could not do it, because they would not. Jerusalem was afterwards to be the holy city, the royal city, the city of the great King, the brightest ornament of all the land of Israel. God has designed it should be so. It may therefore be justly looked upon as a punishment of their neglect to conquer other cities which God had given them that they were so long kept out of this. 3. Among the cities of Judah (in all 114) we meet with Libnah, which in Joram's days revolted, and probably set up for a free independent state (2Ki_8:22), and Lachish, where king Amaziah was slain (1Ki_14:19); it led the dance in idolatry (Mic_1:13); it was the beginning of sin to the daughter of Zion. Giloh, Ahithophel's town, is here mentioned, and Tekoa, of which the prophet Amos was, and near which Jehoshaphat obtained that glorious victory, 2Ch_20:20, etc., and Maresha, where Asa was a conqueror. Many of the cities of this tribe occur in the history of David's troubles. Adullam, Ziph, Keilah, Maon, Engedi, Ziklag, here reckoned in this tribe, were places near which David had most of his haunts; for, though sometimes Saul drove him out from the inheritance of the Lord, yet he kept as close to it as he could. The wilderness of Judah he frequented much, and in it John Baptist preached, and there the kingdom of heaven commenced, Mat_3:1. The riches of this country no doubt answered Jacob's blessing of this tribe, that he should wash his garments in wine, Gen_49:11. And, in general, Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise, not envy.

K&D, "Jos_15:20 contains the closing formula to vv. 1-19, i.e., to the description of the territory of Judah by its boundaries (vid., Jos_18:20).

CALVI , "20.This is the inheritance, etc He had formerly, indeed, traced out the boundaries of the children of Judah; but it is now shown for a different reason how large and fertile the territory was which the Lord in his great liberality had bestowed upon them. One hundred and thirteen cities with their towns and villages are enumerated. The number attests not only the populousness, but also the fertility of the country. And there cannot be a doubt that by the divine blessing a new degree of fertility was imparted to it. The goodness of God was, however, manifested in the very nature of the land selected for his people, a land abounding in all kinds of advantages. If we attend to the number of souls in the tribe, we shall find that one half of the country would have been amply sufficient for their habitation. For when eight hundred were allocated in each of the cities, the remainder had the towns and the villages. It is no doubt true that a portion was afterwards withdrawn and given

to the tribe of Simeon. For in this was accomplished the dispersion of which Jacob had prophesied,

“I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.”(Genesis 49:7)

They were accordingly admitted by the children of Judah as a kind of guests.

PETT, "Verse 20‘This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Judah, according to their families.’For this summary description with respect to the tribes compare Joshua 13:23 (Reuben); Joshua 13:28 (Gad); Joshua 15:20 (Judah); Joshua 16:8 (Ephraim); Joshua 18:28 (Benjamin); Joshua 19:8 (Simeon); Joshua 19:16 (Zebulun); Joshua 19:23 (Issachar); Joshua 19:31 (Asher); Joshua 19:39 ( aphtali); Joshua 19:48 (Dan). By this phrase the inheritance of each tribe was summed up.

It is noticeable that the portion of the half tribe of Manasseh in Transjordan was not described in this way but as ‘even for the half of the children of Machir according to their families’ (Joshua 13:31), nor was the other part of Manasseh specifically so, although both did ‘inherit’ - see Joshua 13:32; Joshua 16:9; Joshua 17:4. As the children of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh shared a joint inheritance (Joshua 16:4; Joshua 16:9; Joshua 17:14; compare Deuteronomy 34:2), even though it was in separate lots because they were so large (compare Joshua 14:4; Joshua 17:17). Ephraim also had possessions in the midst of Manasseh (Joshua 16:9). This in itself points to the early date of these records. In the Psalms (Psalms 60:7; Psalms 80:2; Psalms 108:8) Ephraim and Manasseh were totally separate tribes (but see 1 Chronicles 9:3). At this point Levi is still seen as the twelfth tribe, but with no inheritance apart from YHWH (Joshua 13:14; Joshua 13:33; Joshua 14:4), and gradually being replaced among the twelve by Manasseh (Joshua 14:4), who is not, however, at this stage a separate tribe inheriting.

This detailed description of the inheritance of Judah (and later of the other tribes) was seen as important because it demonstrated the fulfilment of God’s promises to His people. He had promised them much land, they received much land. He had promised them cities to dwell in. They received cities to dwell in. Thus did they gain confidence and faith in the One Who fulfilled His promises. We too gain in confidence when we walk with God and receive His blessings. It gives confidence to go on to greater things.

COFFMA , "Verse 20THE CITIES OF JUDAH E UMERATED

"This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Judah, according to their families.

"And the uttermost cities of the tribe of the children of Judah toward the border of Edom in the South were: Kabzeel, and Eder, and Jagur, and Kinah, and Dimonah, and Adada, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Ithnan, Ziph, and Telem, and Bealoth, and Hazor-hadattah, and Keiloth-hezron (the same is Hazor), Amam, and Shema, and Moladah, and Hazar-gaddah, and Heshmon, and Beth-Pelet, and Hazar-shuai, and Beersheba, and Biziothiah, Baalah, and Iim, and Ezem, and Eltolad, and Chesil, and Hormah, and Ziklag, and Madmannah, and Sansannah, and Lebaoth, and Shilhim, and Ain, and Rimmon: all the cities are twenty-nine, with their villages.

"In the lowland Eshtaol, and Zorah, and Ashnah, and Zanoah, and Engannim, Tappuah, and Enam, Jarmuth, and Adullam, Socoh, and Azekah, and Shaharaim, and Adithaim, and Gederah, snd Gederothaim; fourteen cities with their villages.

"Zenan, and Hadashah. and Magdal-gad, and Dilean, and Mizpeh, and Joktheel, Lachish, and Bozkath, and Eglon, and Cabbon, and Lahmam, and Chitlish, and Gederoth, Beth-dagon, and aamah, and Makkedah; sixteen cities with their villages.

"Libmnah, and Ether, and Ashan, and iphtah, and Ashnah, and ezib, and Keilah, and Achzib, and Mareshah; nine cities with their villages.

"Ekron, with its towns and its villages; from Ekron even unto the sea, all that were by the side of Ashdod, with their villages.

"Ashdod, its towns and its villages, Gaza, its towns and its villages; unto the brook of Egypt, and the great sea, and the border thereof.

"And in the hill-country, Shamir, and Jattir, and Secoh, and Dannah, and Kiriath-sannah (the same is Debir), and Ahab, and Estemoh, and Anim, and Goshen, and Holon, and Giloh, eleven cities with their villages.

"Arab, and Dumah, and Eshan, and Janim, and Bethtappuah, and Aphekah, and Humtah, and Kiriah-arba (the same is Hebron), and Zior; nine cities with their villages.

"Maon, Carmel, and Ziph, and Jutah, and Jezreel, and Jokdeam, and Zanoah, Kain, Gibeah, and Timnah; ten cities with their villages.

"Halhul, Beth-zur, and Gedor, and Maarath, and Beth-anoth, and Eltekon; six cities with their villages.

"Kiriath-baal (the same is Keilath-jearim), and Rabbah; two cities with their villages.

"In the wilderness, Beth-arabah, and Middin, and Secacah, and ibshan, and the City of Salt, and Engedi; six cities with their villages.

"And as for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out: but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day."

Due to the classification of these cities having fallen into about 10 groups, critics jump to the conclusion that, "This grouping corresponds to the administrative districts of the kingdom of Judah, probably as represented on an official province list of the ninth century B.C."[7] What an unreasonable criticism! The last verse here (Joshua 15:63) effectively refutes such an error. ote that when this list was written, the Jews did OT control Jerusalem, nor had they ever done so at that time, but in the 9th century B.C., Jerusalem had been in the hands of David and his successors for ages. Many criticisms, in the final analysis, just as in the case here, are flatly contradicted by the Word of God.

Since our task is not that of writing a Bible dictionary, we shall refrain from any city-by-city comment on these 119 towns and cities in the territory of Judah. In the previous chapters, we have already supplied notes and comments regarding many of these towns.

evertheless, we have compiled the following alphabetical list of these towns, and it reveals several towns such as Ziph and Zanoah having sister towns of the same name. Thus, there are two Ziph's (Joshua 15:34,55), two Zanoah's (Joshua 15:34,56), two Ashnah's (Joshua 15:33,43), and two Socoh's (Joshua 15:35,48).

A ALPHABETICAL LIST OF CITIES

AME OF CITY: VERSE:

ACHZIB..............................44

ADADAH..............................22

ADITHAIM............................36

ADULLAM.............................35

AI .................................32

A AB................................50

A IM................................50

AMAM................................26

APHEKAH.............................53

ARAB................................52

ASHA ...............................42

ASHDOD..............................47

ASH AH..............................33

ASH AH..............................43

AZEKAH..............................35

BAALAH..............................29

BEALOTH.............................24

BEERSHEBA...........................28

BIZIOTHIAH..........................28

BETH-A OTH..........................59

BETH-ARABAH.........................61

BETH-DAGO ..........................41

BETH-PELET..........................27

BETH-TAPPUAH........................53

BETH-ZUR............................58

BOZKATH.............................39

CABBO ..............................40

CARMEL..............................55

CHESIL..............................30

CHITLISH............................40

CITY OF SALT........................62

DA AH..............................49

DILEA ..............................38

DIMO AH.............................22

DUMAH...............................52

EDER................................21

EGLO ...............................39

EKRO ...............................45

ELTEKO .............................59

ELTOLAD.............................30

E AM................................34

E GA IM............................34

E GEDI..............................62

ESHA ...............................52

ESHTAOL.............................33

ESHTEMOH............................50

ETHER...............................42

EZEM................................29

GAZA................................47

GEDERAH.............................36

GEDEROTH............................41

GEDEROTHAIM.........................36

GEDER...............................58

GIBEAH..............................57

GILOH...............................51

GOSHE ..............................51

HADASHA.............................37

HALUL...............................58

HAZAR-GADDAH........................27

HAZAR-HADATTAH......................25

HAZAR-SHUAL.........................28

HAZ.................................23

HESHMO .............................27

HOLO ...............................51

HORMAH..............................30

HUMTAH..............................54

IIM.................................29

IPHTAH..............................43

ITH A ..............................23

JAGUR...............................21

JA IM...............................53

JARMUTH.............................35

JATTIR..............................48

JERUSALEM...........................63

JEZREEL.............................56

JOKDEAM.............................56

JOKTHEAL............................38

JUTAH...............................55

KABZEEL.............................21

KAI ................................57

KEDESH..............................23

KEILAH..............................44

KIRIATH-ARBA (HEBRO )...............54

KIRIATH-BAAL (KIRIATH-JEARIM).......60

KIRIATH-SA AH (DEBIR)..............49

KERIOTH-HEZRO (HAZOR)..............25

KI AH...............................22

LACHISH.............................39

LAHMAM..............................40

LEBAOTH.............................32

LIB AH..............................42

MAARATH.............................59

MADMA AH...........................31

MAKKEDAH............................41

MAO ................................55

MARESHAH............................44

MIDDI ..............................61

MIGDAL-GAD..........................37

MIZPEH..............................38

MOLADAH.............................26

AAMAH..............................41

EZIB...............................43

IBSHA .............................62

RABBAH..............................60

RIMMO ..............................32

SA SA AH...........................31

SECACAH.............................61

SHAMIR..............................48

SHAARAIM............................36

SHEMA...............................26

SHILHIM.............................32

SOCOH...............................48

SOCOH...............................35

TAPPUAH.............................34

TELEM...............................24

TIM AH..............................57

ZA OAH..............................34

ZA OAH..............................56

ZE A ...............................37

ZIKLAG..............................31

ZIOR................................54

ZIPH................................55

ZIPH................................24

ZORAH...............................33

( ote this list is longer than the total of 119 given earlier. It has some names of cities not awarded to Judah but appearing in this chapter, for example "Jerusalem").

21 The southernmost towns of the tribe of Judah in the egev toward the boundary of Edom were:

Kabzeel, Eder, Jagur,

BAR ES, "List of the towns of the tribe of Judah. These are arranged in four divisions, according to the natural features of the district; namely,, those of the Negeb or south country Jos_15:21-32; of “the valley,” or “the plain” (“Shephelah”, Jos_15:33-47); of “the mountains” Jos_15:48-60; and of “the wilderness” Jos_15:61-62. Many of the identifications are still conjectural only.

Jos_15:21-32. The Negeb was for the most part rocky and arid, and cannot have been at any time very thickly populated.

Jos_15:21

Kabzeel was the native place of Benaiah 2Sa_23:20, who was famous as a slayer of lions. The Negeb was a principal haunt of these beasts.

GILL, "And the uttermost cities of the tribe of the children of Judah,.... That is, those cities which were the outward part of the tribe of Judah, the southern border of it; for the midland cities are not in this part, of the description reckoned, which reaches from hence to the end of Jos_15:32,

toward the coast of Edom southward: it begins about the dead sea, and goes on in that part of the land of Canaan which bordered on Idumea, and so proceeds on westward towards Gaza, and the Mediterranean sea: the cities in this part of the tribe

were Kabzeel, called Jekabzeel, Neh_11:25; and was the native place of Benaiah, one of David's mighty men, 2Sa_23:20,

and Eder and Jagur; of which we have no mention elsewhere.

JAMISO 21-63, "Jos_15:21-63. Cities of Judah.

the uttermost cities of the tribe of the children of Judah— There is given a list of cities within the tribal territory of Judah, arranged in four divisions, corresponding to the districts of which it consisted - the cities in the southern part (Jos_15:21-32), those in the lowlands (Jos_15:33-47), those in the highlands (Jos_15:48-60), and those in the desert (Jos_15:61, Jos_15:62). One gets the best idea of the relative situation of these cities by looking at the map.

ELLICOTT, "Verses 21-32(21) And the uttermost cities.—The cities of the tribe of Judah are given under four heads: (a) towards Edom; (b) in the Shephêlah, or plain of the coast (Joshua 15:33, &c.); (c) in the mountains (Joshua 15:48); (d) in the wilderness (Joshua 15:61).

Of those in Joshua 15:21-32, the first twenty-nine, Conder identifies only four—viz., Adadah, Joshua 15:22 (Ad’adah); Kerioth Hezron (some see a trace of Kerioth in the sobriquet of Judas Is-cariot, the man of Kerioth), Joshua 15:25 (Hudîreh); Beer-sheba, Joshua 15:28 (Bîr es-seb’a); and Ain Rimmon, Joshua 15:32 ( Umm er-Rumânûn). It is not easy to say precisely how the twenty-nine are to be obtained from the thirty-three, but evidently some of the Hazors are villages attached to the cities.

(31) Ziklag.—It is noticeable that Ziklag became the property of the kings of Judah by the gift of Achish, who bestowed it on David (1 Samuel 27:6). not by the gift of Joshua to Judah. The partial character of the conquest and the division of unconquered territory to the tribes is thus illustrated.

CO STABLE, "Verses 21-32The egev (south land) formed a region between the more fertile parts of Judah to the north and the desert to the south. The writer listed four groups of towns: the first nine ( Joshua 15:21-23), the second five ( Joshua 15:24-25), the third nine ( Joshua 15:26-28), and the fourth13 ( Joshua 15:29-32).

Verses 21-62The towns in Judah15:21-62

The writer grouped the towns in Judah according to that tribe"s four districts. This part of Canaan contained four distinct regions: the southern egev, the lowland plain (Shephelah), the mountains (hill country), and the desert.

PETT, "Verses 21-36The Listing of Cities and Towns, Villages and Encampments of Judah (Joshua 15:21-63). |

The making of lists of places is well testified to in the ancient world, and the cities and towns and encampments of Judah are now listed. We do not know whether these were as first surveyed, or as compiled at the time of the writer himself. They seem to be split into twelve groups, probably representing a theoretical twelve sub-tribes. Twelve seems to have been seen as the number for a confederacy. Thus Judah were setting up an inner confederacy on the pattern of the tribal confederacy, anticipating expanding it into twelve.

First come twenty nine ‘cities’ in the egeb, the grazing lands to the south (Joshua 15:21-32) (thirty six names are mentioned thus the names include ‘villages’); then fourteen in the north of the Shephelah (the lowlands) followed by sixteen in the north west, then another nine in the south (Joshua 15:33-44), followed by three in

the Coastal Plain (Joshua 15:45-47) to the west, possibly representing two ‘districts’ (but see later on Joshua 15:59); and then in the eastern hill country, first eleven in the south west, then nine to the north of these, then ten towards the east, then six to the north of Hebron, then two on Judah’s northern border (Joshua 15:48-60); and finally six in ‘the wilderness’ (the extreme eastern slopes of the hill country which were desert country looking over the steaming Jordan rift valley by the Dead Sea)

Joshua 15:21-32

‘And the uttermost cities of the tribe of the children of Judah toward the border of Edom in the egeb were Kabzeel, and Eder, and Jagur, and Kinah, and Dimonah, and Adadah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Ithnan. Ziph, and Telem, and Bealoth, and Hazor-hadattah, and Kerioth-hezron (the same is Hazor). Amam, and Shema, and Moladah, and Hazar-gaddah, and Heshmon, and Beth-pelet, and Hazar-shual, and Beersheba, and Biziothiah. Baalah, and Iim, and Ezem, and Eltolad, and Chesil, and Hormah, and Ziklag, and Madmannah, and Sansannah, and Lebaoth, and Shilhim, and Ain, and Rimmon. All the cities are twenty nine with their villages.’The list of towns and encampments in the egeb includes a number also found in Joshua 19:1-9, e.g. Beersheba (or Sheba), Moladah, Hazar-shual, Balah (Baalah), Ezem, Eltolad, Hormah, Ziklag, Beth-lebaoth (Lebaoth), Ain, and Rimmon. ot similar are Bethul (although possibly the same as Chesil), Beth-marcaboth, Hazar-susah, Sharuhen, Ether and Ashan. This was because those who surveyed on behalf of Judah included within their count many of the encampments of Simeon which were within their borders, and over which they shared control. ‘Hazor’ (hazar) specifically indicates an enclosure or camp of wandering shepherds and was therefore a common name/name attachment in the area. As camps tended to move on in the egeb the marking of their movements was far from easy. They were a moving city.

Kabzeel, called Jekabzeel in ehemiah 11:25, was the native place of Benaiah, one of David's mighty men (2 Samuel 23:20). Eder and Jagur are unknown. Kinah may be connected with a Kenite encampment. Dimonah may be the Dibon of ehemiah 11:25 (compare Isaiah 15:2 with Isaiah 15:9). Adadah has been posited as ‘Arara, a ruined site twenty five kilometres (fifteen miles) south east of Beersheba, Kedesh as possibly Kadesh-barnea, Hazor as another encampment, and Ithnan is unknown. Ziph is unknown. Telem may be Telaim in the east of the egeb (1 Samuel 15:4), Bealoth the same as Baalath-beer (Joshua 19:8), Hazor-hadattah means ‘new Hazor’, another encampment, and Kerioth-hezron (the same is Hazor) a further encampment.

Amam, Shema, Moladah (the Malatha mentioned by Josephus?), Hazar-gaddah, Heshmon, and Beth-pelet have no details known. Hazar-shual means ‘foxes den’, which may signify human foxes, and Beersheba is ‘the well of the seven’ (or ‘the oath’), abundantly supplied with water and often cited as the furthest extent of the land (‘from Dan to Beersheba’ - Judges 20:1; 1 Samuel 3:20; 2 Samuel 3:10; 2 Samuel 17:11; 2 Samuel 24:2; 2 Samuel 24:15; 1 Kings 4:25; 1 Chronicles 21:2; 2 Chronicles 30:5; Amos 8:14).

Biziothiah, Baalah, Iim, Ezem, Eltolad and Chesil are not known. Hormah means ‘devoted’ and could be any devoted site, but possibly that mentioned in umbers 20:3. Ziklag is probably that mentioned in 1 Samuel 27:6; 1 Samuel 30:1; 1 Samuel 30:14; 1 Samuel 30:26 where David was a Philistine mercenary leader. Madmannah, and Sansannah, and Lebaoth, and Shilhim, are all unknown. Rimmon may be Khirbet Umm er-Rumamin, fifteen kilometres (nine miles) north east of Beersheba on the border of the egeb and the Shephelah, in which case Ain may be the nearby spring of Khuweilfeh.

As will be noted the egeb was in no way an empty place, although its occupation depended very much on where water could be found.

PULPIT, "Coast. Rather, border (see note Joshua 15:4). Southward. The term here used (see above, Joshua 15:19) for "south" is the one which has the signification of dryness. It is, however, occasionally used in a less strict sense, as in Joshua 19:24. Though the south country was in the main an arid region, yet its intersection by numerous wadys, with their attendant streams, provided fertile spots at intervals, where the traveller might rest, cattle might be watered, and corn and other produce raised. The only places of any importance in Scripture history mentioned here are Beersheba (see Genesis 21:31), and Hormah (see umbers 14:45; umbers 21:3; and cf. Joshua 12:14; Joshua 19:4; and 1:17). This last passage explains why the city is mentioned among the cities of Simeon as well as Judah, and is another instance of the remarkable accuracy of our author. Ziklag is famous as the residence of David (1 Samuel 27:6). It is noteworthy that t was given to him by Achish, king of Gath, in whose possession it therefore was at that time. It was burnt by the roving hands of Amalekites (1 Samuel 30:1).

K&D 21-32, "Jos_15:21-32

The towns in the south land. - Negeb (south-land) was the name given to the southernmost district of Canaan in its full extent, from the Arabah, at the southern end of the Dead Sea, right across to the coast of the Mediterranean, and from the southern border of Canaan, as described in Jos_15:2-4, as far north as Wady Sheriah, below Gaza, on the western side, and up to the mountains and desert of Judah on the east, stretching across the wadys of es Seba, Milh, and Ehdeib, above which that part of Palestine commences where rain is more abundant, and to which, as we have already observed at Num_13:17, the Negeb formed a kind of intermediate link between the fertile land and the desert. It was a line of steppe-land, with certain patches here and there that admitted of cultivation, but in which tracts of heath prevailed, for the most part covered with grass and bushes, where only grazing could be carried on with any success. The term which Eusebius and Jerome employ for Negeb in the Onom. is Daromas, but they carry it farther northwards than the Negeb of the Old Testament (see Reland, Pal. Ill. pp. 185ff.). The numerous towns mentioned in Jos_15:21-32 as standing in the Negeb, may none of them have been large or of any importance. In the list before us we find that, as a rule, several names are closely connected together by the copula vav, and in this way the whole may be divided into four separate groups of towns.

Jos_15:21-23

First group of nine places. - Jos_15:21. The towns “from,” i.e., at “the end of the tribe-territory of Judah, towards the territory of Edom.” Kabzeel: the home of the hero Benaiah (2Sa_23:20), probably identical with Jakabzeel, which is mentioned in Neh_11:25 in connection with Dibon, but has not been discovered. This also applies to Ederand Jagur.

22 Kinah, Dimonah, Adadah,

GILL, "And Kinah,.... Of this city we read of nowhere else:

and Dimonah; the second city is thought to be the same with Dibon, Neh_11:25; and Jerom (b) observes, that a place elsewhere was indifferently called in his time Dibon and Dimon;

and Adadah; the last of these cities is nowhere met with.

K&D, "Jos_15:22

Kinah: also unknown. Knobel connects it with the town of the Kenites, who settled in the domain of Arad, but this is hardly correct; for which the exception of Jdg_1:16, where the Kenites are said to have settled in the south of Arad, though not till after the division of the land, the Kenites are always found in the western portion of the Negeb (1Sa_15:6; 1Sa_27:10; 1Sa_30:29), whereas Kinah is unquestionably to be looked for in the east. Dimonah, probably the same as Dibon (Neh_11:25); possibly the ruins of el Dheib, on the south side of the wady of the same name, to the north-east of Arad (V. de Velde, Mem. p. 252), although Robinson (Pal. ii. p. 473) writes the name Ehdeib. Adadah is quite unknown.

23 Kedesh, Hazor, Ithnan,

GILL, "And Kedesh,.... The first of these cities seems to be Kadeshbarnea, which was

to the south of the land, and on the borders of Edom, from whence the spies were sent, Num_32:8,

and Hazor is another city from that which is mentioned, Jos_11:1; and was in the tribe of Naphtali:

and Ithnan, which Jerom (c) calls Jedna, was, according to him, six miles from Eleutheropolis, as you go to Hebron; the Greek version joins this and the former city together, and makes them one.

K&D, "Jos_15:23

Kedesh, possibly Kadesh-barnea (Jos_15:3). Hazor might then be Hezron, in the neighbourhood of Kadesh-barnea (Jos_15:3). Ithnan is unknown.

24 Ziph, Telem, Bealoth,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:24

Telem may be the Telaim of 1Sa_15:4, where Saul mustered his army for the expedition against the Amalekites. It is possibly to be looked for at “El-Kuseir”, a spot where the various routes toward different parts of the Negeb converge, and which is occupied by the Arab tribe the “Dhullam”, a word identical with Telem in its consonants. Bealoth is probably the “Baalath-beer - Ramath of the south” Jos_19:8, and was one of the towns afterward assigned to the Simeonites. It is identified with the modern Kurnub.

CLARKE,"Ziph - There were two cities of this name in the tribe of Judah, that mentioned here, and another Jos_15:55. One of these two is noted for the refuge of David when persecuted by Saul; and the attempts made by its inhabitants to deliver him into the hands of his persecutor. See 1Sa_23:14-24.

GILL, "Ziph,.... Ziph was of the tribe of Judah in the south, on the borders of Eleutheropolis, as Jerom says (d) and was eight miles from Hebron to the east; and in his time a village was shown, where David was hid; but that Ziph seems to be in another part of this tribe near Carmel, and from whence a wilderness had its name; see Jos_15:55,

and Telem is supposed to be the same with Telaim, 1Sa_15:4,

and Bealoth; of this city we read nowhere else.

K&D, "Jos_15:24-25

Second group of five or six places. - Of these, Ziph and Telem are not met with again, unless Telem is the same as Telaim, where Saul mustered his army to go against the Amalekites (1Sa_15:4). Their situation is unknown. There was another Ziph upon the mountains (see Jos_15:55). Knobel supposes the one mentioned here to be the ruins of Kuseifeh, to the south-west of Arad (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 620). Ziph would then be contracted from Ceziph; but the contraction of Achzib (Jos_19:29) into Zib does not present a corresponding analogy, as in that case the abbreviated form is the later one, whereas in the case of Ziph a lengthening of the name must have taken place by the addition of a D. Bealoth, probably the same as the Simeonitish Baaloth-beer (Jos_19:8), which is called Baal simply in 1Ch_4:33, and which was also called Ramath-negeb (Jos_19:8) and Ramoth-negeb (1Sa_30:27). It is not to be identified with Baalath, however (Jos_19:45; 1Ki_9:18), as V. de Velde supposes (Reise, ii. pp. 151-2). Knobel fancies it may be the ridge and place called Kubbet el Baul, between Milh and Kurnub (Rob. ii. p. 617); but Baul and Baal are very different. Hazor Hadatta (Chazor Chadathah), i.e., new Hazor, might be the ruins of el Hudhaira on the south of Jebel Khulil (Rob. Appendix). Kenothwas supposed by Robinson (Pal. ii. p. 472, and Appendix) to be the ruins of el Kuryetein, on the north-east of Arad and at the foot of the mountains, and with this V. de Veldeagrees. Reland (Pal. p. 708) connects the following word Hezron with Kenoth, so as to read Kenoth-hezron, i.e., Hezron's towns, also called Hazor. This is favoured by the Sept. and Syriac, in which the two words are linked together to form one name, and probably by the Chaldee as well, also by the absence of the copula vav (and) before Hezron, which is not omitted anywhere else throughout this section, except at the beginning of the different groups of towns, as, for example, before Ziph in Jos_15:24, and Amam in Jos_15:26, and therefore ought to stand before Hezron if it is an independent town. The Masoretic pointing cannot be regarded as a decisive proof of the contrary.

25 Hazor Hadattah, Kerioth Hezron (that is, Hazor),

BAR ES, "Jos_15:25

And Hezron which is Hazor - In this verse are the names of two towns only, not of four. Two places bearing the common topographical appellation, Hazor (“enclosure”) are here mentioned and distinguished as “Hazor Hadattah” and “Kerioth-Hezron,” otherwise termed Hazor, simply: the former has been identified by some with “El-Hudhera”; the latter is probably the modern “El-Kuryetein”. Kerioth, prefixed to a name, bespeaks military occupation, as Hazor points to pastoral pursuits. The place would therefore seem to be an ancient pastoral settlement which had been fortified by the Anakims, and called accordingly Kerioth; to which name the men of Judah, after they

had captured it, added that of Hezron, in honor of one of their leading ancestors (compare Gen_46:12; Rth_4:18). Kerioth was the home of Judas the traitor, if the

ordinary derivation of Iscariot (= קריות איש 'ı$ysh qerı$yôth), i. e. man of Kerioth) be accepted: Mat_10:4.

GILL, "And Hazor, Hadattah, and Kerioth, and Hezron, which is Hazor.According to the Targum, two cities only are here meant, which reads, "and Hazorhadattah, and Keriothhezron, which is Hazor"; and this reading seems to be right; there were three Hazors in this tribe, one in Jos_15:23, and two more here, which are distinguished; the first is called Hazorhadattah, or new Hazor; of which Jerom says (e), there is a village at this day called Asor, in the borders of Ashkelon, to the east of it, which fell to the lot of the tribe of Judah; the Scripture makes mention of it, calling: it new Asor, to distinguish it from the old; and Keriothhezron is the same with Hezron, Jos_15:3; and had also the name of Hezron. From this place Judas Iscariot is thought to have his name, being Ishceriot, a man of Keriot.

26 Amam, Shema, Moladah,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:26

Moladah is probably the modern “El-Milh”, and like Hazar-shual (“Berrishail” near Gaza) ( “enclosure of foxes”) occurs Jos_19:2-3; 1Ch_4:28, as a town belonging to Simeon, and Neh_11:26-27 as a place occupied by Jews after the captivity.

GILL, "Amam,.... Of Amam we read nowhere else:

and Shema is thought by some to be the same with Sheba, though wrongly, given afterwards to the tribe of Simeon, as was also Moladah, mentioned with it, Jos_19:2,

and Moladah; it is also spoken of in 1Ch_4:28, and seems to be the same with Malathi or Malatis, about twenty miles from Hebron (f).

K&D 26-28, "Jos_15:26-28

Third group of nine towns. - Jos_15:26. Amam is not mentioned again, and is quite unknown. Shema, which is called Sheba in Jos_19:2, and is mentioned among the towns of the Simeonites between Beersheba and Moladah, is supposed by Knobel to the ruins of Saâwe (Sâweh) between Milh and Beersheba (see V. de Velde, ii. p. 148). Molada, which was given to the Simeonites (Jos_19:2; 1Ch_4:28) and was still inhabited by Jews

after the captivity (Neh_11:26), was the later Μάλαδα, an Idumaean fortress (Josephus, Ant. 18:6, 2), which Eusebius and Jerome describe as being twenty Roman miles, i.e.,

eight hours, to the south of Hebron on the road to Aila (Elath). It has been identified by Robinson (Pal. ii. p. 621) in the ruins of el Milh, by the Wady Malath or Malahh.

WHEDO , "26. Moladah, afterwards given to Simeon, is the modern el Milh, about twenty miles south of Hebron. [This place was identified by Dr. Robinson. It has two wells about forty feet deep, and the ruins of a former city cover a space around of nearly half a mile square. It was inhabited again after the exile. ehemiah 11:26. The sides of the wells are, according to Tristram, “of hard marble, polished and deeply fluted all round by the ropes of the water drawers, perhaps for four thousand years. Eight ancient water-troughs stand irregularly around, some oblong, many cup-shaped, and others apparently the scooped pedestals of ancient columns, which have once supported a portico over the well.”]

27 Hazar Gaddah, Heshmon, Beth Pelet,

GILL, "And Hazargaddah,.... The first of these, it is probable, is the same, Jerom (g)calls Gadda, in the tribe of Judah, which was in his day a village in the extreme borders of Daroma to the east, hanging over the dead sea:

and Heshmon is met with nowhere else:

and Bethpalet is in Neh_11:26, where it is called Bethphelet.

K&D, "Jos_15:27

Hazar-gaddah, Heshmon, and Beth-palet have not yet been identified. The last of the three is mentioned again in Neh_11:26, by the side of Molada, as still inhabited by Judaeans.

28 Hazar Shual, Beersheba, Biziothiah,

CLARKE,"Beer-sheba - A city, famous in the book of Genesis as the residence of the patriarchs Abraham and Jacob, Gen_22:19; Gen_28:10; Gen_46:1. See the note on Gen_21:31. It lay on the way between Canaan and Egypt, about forty miles from Jerusalem.

GILL, "And Hazarshual,.... The first of these seems to have its name from an haunt of foxes here, and was given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:3; and is mentioned as here with Beersheba, 1Ch_4:28 Neh_11:27,

and Beersheba was a city well known in the extreme border of the land of Canaan southward; hence the phrase "from Dan to Beersheba", Jdg_20:1, of which Jerom says (h), Bersabee, in the tribe of Judah or Simeon, is at this day a large village, twenty miles from Hebron to the south, in which there is a Roman garrison; and from hence the borders of the land of Judea begin, and go on to Dan, which is by Paneas:

and Bizjothjah, of which mention is made elsewhere.

K&D, "Jos_15:28

Hazor-shual, i.e., fox-court, which was assigned to the Simeonites (Jos_19:3) and still inhabited after the captivity (Neh_11:27), answers, so far as the name if concerned, to the ruins of Thâly (Rob. Pal. iii. App.). Beersheba, which was a well-known place in connection with the history of the patriarchs (Gen_21:14., Jos_22:19, etc.), and is frequently mentioned afterwards as the southern boundary of the land of Israel (Jdg_20:1; 2Sa_17:11, etc.), was also given up to the Simeonites (Jos_19:2), and still inhabited after the captivity (Neh_11:27). It is the present Bir es Seba on the Wady es Seba (see at Gen_21:31). Bizjothjah is unknown.

WHEDO , "28. Beer-sheba — This spot, so much associated with patriarchal history, has been identified with the modern Bir-es-Seba, some thirty miles southwest of Hebron. It afterwards became famous as the southern limit of the Holy Land, in the formula “From Dan to Beer-sheba.” For the origin of the name and history see at Genesis 21:31; Genesis 26:33. Two deep wells are still found there, and a number of smaller ones. The largest well is twelve and a half feet in diameter, and about fifty in depth.

29 Baalah, Iyim, Ezem,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:29-32

Baalah Jos_19:3 is found in the modern “Deir-el-Belah”, near Gaza. Iim, i. e. “ruinous heaps” or “conical hills” (Num_21:11 note) is by some connected with Azem; and the compound name, “Ije Azem”, is traced in El-Aujeh, in the country of the Azazimeh Arabs, in whose name the ancient Azem may perhaps be traced. Eltolad is connected with “Wady-el-Thoula”, in the extreme south of the Negeb. Chesil appears to be the town called Bethul Jos_19:4, and probably the Bethel 1Sa_30:27 situated not far from Ziklag. The name Chesil ( “fool”) was most likely bestowed by way of opprobrium (compare the change of Bethel, house of God, into Bethaven, house of vanity, Hos_4:15). As Chesil signifies the group of stars known as Orion (compare Job_38:31; Amo_5:8), probably it was the worship of the heavenly bodies in particular that was carried on here. Bethel may have been the ancient name, and the spot was perhaps the very one near Beer-sheba where Abraham planted a tamarisk tree Gen_21:33.

The place is probably “El Khulasah”, the Elusa of ecclesiastical writers, situated some fifteen miles southwest of Beer-sheba. Jerome testifies to the fact, that the worship of Venus as the morning star was practiced there, and Sozomen appears to be speaking of

this place, when he mentions a Bethel Βηθελια Bēthelia in the territory of Gaza, populous and famous for an ancient and splendid temple. The site of Ziklag is uncertain. Madmannah and Sansannah correspond to Beth-marcaboth ( “house of chariots”) and Hazar-susah (“horse enclosure”) in Jos_19:5 1Ch_4:31. The latter names point to two stations of passage on or near the high road between Egypt and Palestine, and are represented by the modern “Minyay” and “Wady-es-Suny”, on the caravan route south of Gaza. Shilhim or Sharuhen, Jos_19:6, and Shaaraim 1Ch_4:31 is traced in “Khirbet-es-Seram”, near El Aujeh. Ain and Rimmon were possibly originally two towns, but in process of time became so connected as to be treated as one name Neh_11:29. The place is probably the present “Um-er-Rummamim,” i. e. “mother of pomegranates,” a place about ten miles north of Beer-sheba.

GILL, "Baalah,.... Baalah was given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:3; for Baalah is the same with Balah there, as it is with Bilba, 1Ch_4:29; though according to the Jerusalem Talmud (i) it is the same with Baalah, given to the tribe of Dan, Jos_19:44; and was one of those places whose houses were in Judah and their fields in Dan:

and Azem was also given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:3; it is the same with Ezem, 1Ch_4:29,

and Iim, of which we read nowhere else.

K&D, "Jos_15:29-32

The four groups of thirteen towns in the western portion of the Negeb.

Jos_15:29

Baalah, which was assigned to the Simeonites, is called Balah in Jos_19:3, and Bilhahin 1Ch_4:29. Knobel identifies it with the present Deir Belah, some hours to the south-west of Gaza Rob. iii. App.; Ritter, Erdk. xvi. pp. 41, 42); but it cannot have been so far to

the west, or so near the coast as this. Iim (or Ivvim, according to the Αυεdµ of the lxx) is

probably the ruins of Beit-auwa (Rob. iii. App.). Azem, which was also given up to the Simeonites (Jos_19:3; 1Ch_4:29), is supposed by Knobel to be Eboda, the present Abdeh, eight hours to the south of Elusa, a considerable mass of ruins on a ridge of rock (Rob. i. p. 287), because the name signifies firmness or strength, which is also the meaning of the Arabic name-a very precarious reason.

30 Eltolad, Kesil, Hormah,

CLARKE,"Hormah - A place rendered famous by the defeat of the Hebrews by the Canaanites. See Num_14:45, Deu_1:44.

GILL, "And Eltolad,.... The first of these cities is called Tolad, 1Ch_4:29,

and Chesil seems to be the same with Bethul and Bethuel, Jos_19:4 1Ch_4:30; and here the Greek version calls it Baithel:

and Hormah is the same with Zephath, Jdg_1:17. All these three cities were given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:4.

WHEDO , "30. Hormah — This is doubtless the same city whose king Joshua smote, and whose original name was Zephath. It is located by Robinson and others at the pass es-Sufah, far to the south of Hebron; but Palmer, more correctly, identified it with Sebaita some twenty-five miles southwest of Beer-sheba. See note on Judges 1:17.

K&D, "Jos_15:30-31

Eltolad, which was given to the Simeonites (Jos_19:4), and is called Tolad (without the Arabic article) in 1Ch_4:29, has not been discovered. Chesil, for which the lxx have

Βαιθήλ, is probably, as Reland supposes, simply another name, or as Knobel suggests a corrupt reading for, Bethul or Bethuel, which is mentioned in Jos_19:4 and 1Ch_4:30, between Eltolad and Hormah, as a town of the Simeonites, and the same place as Beth-elin 1Sa_30:27. As this name points to the seat of some ancient sanctuary, and there was an idol called Khalasa worshipped by the Arabs before the time of Mohamet, and also because Jerome observes (vita Hilar. c. 25) that there was a temple of Venus at Elusa, in which the Saracens worshipped Lucifer (see Tuch, Deutsch. Morgenl. Ztschr. iii. pp. 194ff.), Knobel supposes Bethul (Chesil) to be Elusa, a considerable collection of ruins five hours and a half to the south of Beersheba (see Rob. i. p. 296): assuming first of all that the name el Khulasa, as the Arabs called this place, was derived from the Mahometan idol already referred to; and secondly, that the Saracen Lucifer mentioned

by Jerome was the very same idol whose image and temple Janhari and Kamus call el Khalasa. Hormah: i.e., Zephoth, the present Sepata (see at Jos_12:14). Ziklag, which was assigned to the Simeonites (Jos_19:5; 1Ch_4:30), burnt down by the Amalekites (1Sa_30:1.), and still inhabited after the captivity (Neh_11:28), is supposed by Rowlandto be the ancient place called Asluj or Kasluj, a few hours to the east of Zepata, with which Knobel, however, in a most remarkable manner, identifies the Asluj to the south-west of Milh on the road to Abdeh, which is more than thirty-five miles distant (see Rob.Pal. ii. p. 621). Both places are too far to the south and east to suit Ziklag, which is to be sought for much farther west. So far as the situation is concerned, the ruins of Tell Sheriah or Tell Mellala, one of which is supposed by V. de Velde to contain the relics of Ziklag, would suit much better; or even, as Ritter supposes (Erdk. xvi. pp. 132-3), Tell el Hasy, which is half an hour to the south-west of Ajlan, and in which Felix Fabri found the ruins of a castle and of an ancient town, in fact of the ancient Ziklag, though Robinson (i. pp. 389ff.) could discover nothing that indicted in any way the existence of a town or building of any kind. Madmannah and Sansannah cannot be traced with any certainty. Madmannah, which is confounded in the Onom. (s. v. Medemena) with Madmena, a place to the north of Jerusalem mentioned in Isa_10:31, though elsewhere it is correctly described as Menois oppidum juxta civitatem Gazam, has probably been preserved in the present Miniay or Minieh, to the south of Gaza. Sansannah, Knobelcompares with the Wady Suni, mentioned by Robinson (i. p. 299), to the south of Gaza, which possibly received its name from some town in the neighbourhood. But in the place of them we find Beth-marcaboth (i.e., carriage-house) and Hazar-susa (i.e., horse-court) mentioned in Jos_19:5 and 1Ch_4:31 among the towns of the Simeonites, which Reland very properly regards as the same as Madmannah and Sansannah, since it is very evident from the meaning of the former names that they were simply secondary names, which were given to them as stations for carriages and horses.

31 Ziklag, Madmannah, Sansannah,

CLARKE,"Ziklag - The Philistines seem to have kept possession of this city till the time of David, who received it from Achish, king of Gath, 1Sa_27:6; after which time it remained in the possession of the kings of Judah.

GILL, "And Ziklag,.... Ziklag was also given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:5, it was in the bands of the king of Gath, in the times of David, who gave it to him; it bordered on the Amalekites, and is placed by Jerom (c) in Daroma, on the south of the lot of Judah or Simeon.

and Madmannah, according to the same writer (d), was in his time called Menois, a town near the city Gaza:

and Sansannah, of which no mention is made elsewhere.

HE RY, "JAMISO , "CALVI , "

32 Lebaoth, Shilhim, Ain and Rimmon—a total of twenty-nine towns and their villages.

BAR ES, "Jos_15:32

Twenty and nine - The King James Version gives 34 names. The difference is due either to the confusion by an early copyist of letters similar in form which were used as numerals; or to the separation in the King James Version of names which in the original were one (e. g. Jos_15:25).

CLARKE,"All the cities are twenty and nine, with their villages - But on a careful examination we shall find thirty-eight; but it is supposed that nine of these are excepted; viz., Beersheba, Moladah, Hazarshual, Baalah, Azem, Hormah, Ziklag, Ain, and Rimmon, which were afterwards given to the tribe of Simeon. This may appear satisfactory, but perhaps the truth will be found to be this: Several cities in the promised land are expressed by compound terms; not knowing the places, different translations combine what should be separated, and in many cases separate what should be combined. Through this we have cities formed out of epithets. On this ground we have thirty-eight cities as the sum here, instead of twenty-nine.

GILL, "And Lebaoth,.... Whether Lebaoth is the same with Bethlebaoth, given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:6; is not certain:

and Shilhim is nowhere else spoken of:

and Ain seems to be the same with that in Num_34:11; also See Gill on Num_34:11.

and Rimmon, the place Jerom (e) calls Eremmon, which he says was a large village of the Jews, sixteen miles from Eleutheropolis to the south, in Daroma; this and the preceding are joined together as one, and called Enrimmon, Neh_11:29. It is probable they were near to each other, and in process of time the buildings of each might increase, so as to meet and join each other:

all the cities are twenty and nine, with their villages; but according to our version, and as we point them, they are thirty eight; some make them thirty six, others thirty seven; the Jews generally make thirty eight of them, as we do, and account for the difference of number thus; that nine of these cities were given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:1; and these being taken out of the thirty eight, there remain twenty nine; so Jarchi and Kimchi account for it; but as the number of the cities is uncertain, and this account is given before the separation of the nine, and they are all reckoned together, this does not seem to be satisfactory; rather, as Abarbinel observes, the twenty nine of the places enumerated were cities, and the other were villages, unwalled towns, or not of so much note as the twenty nine

K&D, "Jos_15:32

Lebaoth, one of the Simeonite towns, called Beth-lebaoth (i.e., lion-house) in Jos_19:6, and Beth-birei in 1Ch_4:31, has not been discovered yet. Shilchim, called Sharuchen in Jos_19:6, and Shaaraim in 1Ch_4:31, may possibly have been preserved in Tell Sheriah, almost half-way between Gaza and Beersheba (V. de Velde, ii. p. 154). Ain and Rimmon are given as Simeonite towns, and being written without the copula, are treated as one name in Jos_19:7 and 1Ch_4:32, although they are reckoned as two separate towns in Jos_19:7. But as they were also called En Rimmon after the captivity, and are given as one single place in Neh_11:29, they were probably so close together that in the course of time they grew into one. Rimmon, which is mentioned in Zec_14:10 as the southern boundary of Judah, probably the Eremmon of the Onom. (“a very large village of the Judaeans, sixteen miles to the south of Eleutheropolis in Daroma”), was probably the present ruin called Um er Rummanim, four hours to the north of Beersheba (Rob. iii. p. 8). Not more than thirty or thirty-five minutes distant from this, between Tell Khuweilifeh (Rob. iii. p. 8) or Chewelfeh (V. de Velde) and Tell Hhora, you find a large old but half-destroyed well, the large stones of which seem to belong to a very early period of the Israelitish history (V. de Velde, ii. p. 153). This was mentioned as a very important drinking-place even in the lifetime of Saladin, whilst to the present day the Tilâlah Arabs water their flocks there (see Rob. iii. p. 8). To all appearance this was Ain (see V. de Velde, Mem. p. 344). “All the cities were twenty and nine, and their villages.” This does not agree with the number of towns mentioned by name, which is not twenty-nine, but thirty-six; to that the number twenty-nine is probably an error of the text of old standing, which has arisen from a copyist confounding together different numeral letters that resembled one another.

(Note: Some commentators and critics explain this difference on the supposition that originally the list contained a smaller number of names (only twenty-nine), but that it was afterwards enlarged by the addition of several other places by a different hand, whilst the number of the whole was left just as it was before. But such a conjecture presupposes greater thoughtlessness on the part of the editor than we have any right to attribute to the author of our book. If the author himself made these additions to his original sources, as Hävernick supposes, or the Jehovist completed the author's list from his second document, as Knobel imagines, either the one or the other would certainly have altered the sum of the whole, as he has not proceeded in so thoughtless a manner in any other case. The only way in which this conjecture could be defended, would be by supposing, as J. D. Michaelis and others have done, that the names added were originally placed in the margin, and that these marginal glosses were afterwards interpolated by some thoughtless copyist into the text. But this conjecture is also rendered improbable by the circumstance that, in the

lists of towns contained in our book, not only do other differences of the same kind occur, as in v. 36, where we find only fourteen instead of fifteen, and in Jos_19:6, where only thirteen are given instead of fourteen, but also differences of the very opposite kind, - namely, where the gross sum given is larger than the number of names, as, for example, in Jos_19:15, where only five names are given instead of twelve, and in Jos_19:38, where only sixteen are given instead of nineteen, and where it can be shown that there are gaps in the text, as towns are omitted which the tribes actually received and ceded to the Levites. If we add to this the fact that there are two large gaps in our Masoretic text in Jos_15:59-60, and Jos_21:35, which proceed from copyists, and also that many errors occur in the numbers given in other historical books of the Old Testament, we are not warranted in tracing the differences in question to any other cause than errors in the text.)

WHEDO , "32. All the cities are twenty and nine — This does not agree with the names detailed in the text, which are thirty-six at least. To remove this discrepancy the Rabbins assume that the cities given to Simeon are not counted. But there were twelve or fifteen given to that tribe. Others suggest that several of these places were mere hamlets, and were not counted; or that compound names have been separated, or epithets prefixed been made into names; still others, that one place may have had several names, or that there is an error in the numerical letters for twenty-nine. The Syriac reads thirty-six, an evident change in that version to meet the difficulty. It is more probable that several names were added by a later hand after the country was more thickly peopled, possibly to gratify local pride, and the number twenty-nine was not changed.

BE SO , "Joshua 15:32. Twenty-nine — Here are thirty-seven or thirty-eight cities named before; how then are they only reckoned twenty-nine? There were only twenty-nine of them which either, 1st, Properly belonged to Judah; the rest falling to Simeon’s lot. Or, 2d, Were cities properly so called; that is, walled cities, or such as had villages under them, as it here follows; the rest being great, but unwalled towns, or such as had no villages under them.

COKE, "Ver. 32. All the cities are twenty and nine, with their villages— We reckon up in the text thirty-eight; but it may be said, that of this number there were but twenty-nine cities, and that the rest were villages. Of which opinion are many able commentators; or else, with most of the rabbis, it may be urged, that of those thirty-eight cities nine are to be excepted, which were afterwards given to the tribe of Simeon: viz. Beersheba, Moladah, Hazar-shual, Baalah, Azem, Hormah, Ziklag, Ain, and Rimmon. This latter opinion, which yet is not without its difficulties, seems the most probable, because in all the remainder of this enumeration, the villages are no where mentioned. Grotius, Vatablus, &c. subscribe to the same opinion.

PULPIT, "Joshua 15:32

Ain, Rimmon (see Joshua 19:7; 1 Chronicles 4:1-43 :82; ehemiah 11:29). More likely the name of one place Ain-Rimmon, the fountain of the god Rimmon. For Rimmon see 2 Kings 5:18. The word signifying eye, or fountain, is written indifferently Ain or En in our version (see En-shemesh and En-rogel in this

chapter). Bitumen is mentioned in Zechariah 14:10 as "south of Jerusalem." ow Umm er-Rumamin (Conder).

Joshua 15:32

Twenty-nine. There is another of the very common errors of numbers here. The actual number is thirty-six. The error is as old as the LXX. version.

33 In the western foothills:

Eshtaol, Zorah, Ashnah,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:33-47

“The valley” or the Shephelah, is bounded on the south by the Negeb, on the west by the Mediterranean, on the north by the plain of Sharon, on the east by “the mountains” Jos_15:48. It is a well-defined district, of an undulating surface and highly fertile character, thickly dotted, even at the present time, with villages, which are for the most part situated on the different hills. The towns in this district, like those in the Negeb, are classed in four groups.

Jos_15:33-36

First group of fourteen towns: these belong to the northeastern portion of the Shephelah. Eshtaol and Zoreah were afterward assigned to the tribe of Dan, and inhabited by Danites Jdg_13:25; Jdg_18:2, Jdg_18:8,Jdg_18:11. The latter place was the home of Samson Jdg_13:2. It was one of the cities fortified by Rehoboam 2Ch_11:10, and was re-occupied by the Jews after the captivity Neh_11:29. It is probably the modern Surah. (Eshtaol has been identified with Eshua (Conder)). Both places were in later times partly populated by Judahites from Kirjath-jearim; perhaps after the departure of the colony of Danites for Dan-Laish. Zanoah is the present “Zanna”, not far from Surah. Socoh is the modern “Shuweikah”. Sharaim is perhaps to be sought in the modern “Zakariya”. Gederah (“wall” or “fortress”) was a name borne with various terminations by several places.

CLARKE,"Eshtaol, and Zoreah - Here Samson was buried, it being the burial-place of his fathers; see Jdg_16:31. These places though first given to Judah, afterwards fell to the lot of Dan, Jos_19:41.

GILL, "And in the valley,.... In Jos_15:33 are enumerated the several cities belonging to the tribe of Judah which lay in the valley. Jerom (f) says, that now all the plain and champaign country near Eleutheropolis, which verges to the north and west, is called "Sephela", or the valley:

Eshtaol; the two first of these seem to be given afterwards to the tribe of Dan, Jos_19:41; between these two places Samson was born and buried, Jdg_13:2; they were both at the same distance from Eleutheropolis, according to Jerom; of Eshtaol he says (g), it is showed to this day ten miles from Eleutheropolis, to the north, as you go to Nicopolis or Emmaus:

and Zoreah, of which he calls Saara, he says (h) it is a village on the borders of Eleutheropolis, as you go to Nicopolis, about ten miles of it in the tribe of Dan or Judah:

and Ashnah, of which no mention is made elsewhere; there was another place of the same name, but different from this, Jos_15:43.

K&D, "Jos_15:33-47

Towns in the lowland or shephelah. - The lowland (shephelah), which is generally

rendered g�πεδινή in the Sept., rarely τh�πεδιόν (Deu_1:7), but which is transferred as a

proper name g�Σεφηλά in Oba_1:19; Jer_32:44; Jer_33:13, as well as in 1 Macc. 12:38, where even Luther has Sephela, is the name given to the land between the mountains of Judah and the Mediterranean Sea, - a broad plain of undulating appearance, intersected by heights and low ranges of hills, with fertile soil, in which corn fields alternate with meadows, gardens, and extensive olive groves. It is still tolerably well cultivated, and is covered with villages, which are situated for the most part upon the different hills. Towards the south, the shephelah was bounded by the Negeb _(Jos_15:21); on the north, it reached to Ramleh and Lydda, or Diospolis, where the plain of Sharon began, -a plain which extended as far as Carmel, and was renowned for the beauty of its flowers. Towards the east the hills multiply and shape themselves into a hilly landscape, which forms the intermediate link between the mountains and the plain, and which is distinguished from the shephelah itself, in Jos_10:40 and Jos_12:8, under the name of Ashedoth, or slopes, whereas here it is reckoned as forming part of the shephelah. This hilly tract is more thickly studded with villages than even the actual plain (See Rob. Pal. ii. p. 363, and iii. p. 29.) The towns in the shephelah are divided into four groups.

Jos_15:33-36

The first group contains the towns in the northern part of the hilly region or slopes, which are reckoned as forming part of the lowland: in all, fourteen towns. The most northerly part of this district was given up to the tribe of Dan on the second division (Jos_19:41.). Eshtaol and Zoreah, which were assigned to the tribe of Dan (Jos_19:41), and were partly inhabited by Danites (Jdg_13:25; Jdg_18:2, Jdg_18:8,Jdg_18:11) and partly by families of Judah, who had gone out from Kirjath-jearim (1Ch_1:53; 1Ch_4:2), probably after the removal of the 600 Danites to Laish-Dan (Jos_19:47; Jdg_18:1), were situated, according to the Onom. (s. v. Esthaul and Saara), ten Roman miles to the north of Eleutheropolis, on the road to Nicopolis. Zoreah, the home of Samson, who was buried between Zoreah and Eshtaol (Jdg_13:2; Jdg_16:31), was fortified by Rehoboam, and still inhabited by Judaeans after the captivity (2Ch_11:10; Neh_11:29); it has been preserved in the ruins of Surá, at the south-western end of the mountain range which

bounds the Wady es Surar on the north (Rob. ii. p. 341, and Bibl. Res. p. 153). Eshtaolhas probably been preserved in Um Eshteiyeh, to the south-west (Rob. ii. p. 342).

Ashnah is possibly to be read Ashvah, according to the lxx, Cod. Vat. (kσσα). In that case it might resemble a town on the east of Zorea (Tobler, p. 180), as Knobel supposes.

ELLICOTT, "(33) In the valley—i.e., the Shephêlah, or plain of the coast. Of the fourteen that follow in Joshua 15:33-36, Conder identifies ten.

Eshtaol, and Zoreah, were afterwards assigned to Dan (Joshua 19:41).

WHEDO , "33. In the valley — Hebrews, Shephelah, the lowland. See on Joshua 10:40. These cities are enumerated in four groups. A portion of these in the north was afterwards conceded to Dan. Eshtaol and Zoreah afterwards became famous in the tribe of Dan as the scene of Samson’s childhood and first daring exploits, (Judges 13:25,) and also the place of his burial. Judges 16:31. The exact site of Eshtaol is unknown; but Zoreah, or Zorah, still exists in the modern Surah, just below the summit of a sharp-pointed hill on the north side of the Wady Ghurab. The prospect from the top of this hill is extensive and fine.

CO STABLE, "Verses 33-47The Shephelah (lowland) was the area between the Coastal Plain to the west and the hill country of Judah to the east. The egev lay to its south. The writer grouped the towns in this area also. He named14towns in the northern part of the Shephelah ( Joshua 15:33-36): 16 in the northwest ( Joshua 15:37-41), nine in the south ( Joshua 15:42-44), and three in the southwest ( Joshua 15:45-47).

PETT, "Joshua 15:33-36

‘In the Shephelah, Eshtaol, and Zorah, and Ashnah, and Zanoah, and En-gannim, Tappuah and Enam, Jarmuth, and Adullam, and Socoh and Azekah, and Shaaraim, and Adithaim, and Gederah, and Gederothaim. Fourteen cities and their villages.’The Shephelah were the lowlands, the lower, shallower slopes of the hill country. Apart from the Coastal Plain it was the land that offered most, but was vulnerable to attack. As it stands there are in fact in this list fifteen names, but Gederothaim (plural ending) probably represents ‘the villages of Gederah’ thus making one with Gedarah. These fourteen cities were clustered to the north of the area.

Zorah and Eshtaol were on the Danite border (Joshua 19:41; see also Judges 13:25; Judges 18:2; Judges 18:8; Judges 18:11). Judah and Dan may have shared them and their related lands, Dan the land to the north, Judah the land to the south, or it may be that after receiving their lot Judah passed the cities on to Dan. But the probability is that they were settled by both, some looking to Dan and some to Judah. Zorah was mentioned in the Amarna letters as Zarkha and is probably Sar‘a, a Canaanite city twenty five kilometres (fifteen miles) west of Jerusalem, on the north side of the Wadi al-Sarar (the valley of Sorek), with Eshtaol close by. Both places overlook the broad basin of the Wadi, near its entrance into the Judaean highlands.

Ashnah in the north east must be distinguished from Ashnah in the south in Joshua 15:43. Zanoah is Khirbet Zanu‘ ( ehemiah 3:13; ehemiah 11:30), three kilometres south of Bethshemesh, west of modern Zanoah. This is to be distinguished from Zanoah in the hill country (Joshua 15:56). En-gannim means ‘spring of gardens’ and was near Zanoah. Tappuah meaning ‘quince’ was east of Azekah, possibly Beit etif. The place name may derive from a Calebite of Hebron (1 Chronicles 2:43). It was not the Tappuah of Joshua 12:17; Joshua 16:8. The name was a popular one.

“And Enam, Jarmuth, and Adullam, and Socoh and Azekah, and Shaaraim, and Adithaim, and Gederah, and Gederothaim.” For Enam compare Enaim (Genesis 38:14; Genesis 38:21). It means ‘two springs’. It stood on the way from Adullam to Timnah and was where Tamar seduced Judah. Jarmuth was a member of the first confederacy that attacked Gibeon (see on Joshua 10:3). Adullam is identified as Tell esh-Sheikh Madhkur midway between Jerusalem and Lachish. Its king was slain by Joshua (Joshua 12:15). David later hid in a nearby cave when running from Saul (1 Samuel 22:1-2; 2 Samuel 23:13). It was fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:7).

Socoh was south-east of Azekah and was where the Philistines were defeated when Goliath was killed (1 Samuel 17:1). It was later an important administrative centre in the days of Hezekiah, mentioned on inscriptions found in Lachish. There was another Socoh in the highlands (Joshua 15:48). The site of Azekah is unknown but its signal lights could be seen from Lachish in the days of Sennacherib of Assyria as described in inscribed potsherds discovered in the remains of the gatehouse in Lachish, written in Hebrew. For Shaaraim compare 1 Samuel 17:52. It was on the way from Azekah towards the parting of the ways to Ekron and Gath. On the basis of the LXX rendering Sakareim it has been identified with Tell Zakariyeh, north west of Socoh at the entrance of the Wadi es-Sunt. Adithaim is not identified (LXX omits). Gederah is different from Gederoth (Joshua 15:41). It may be the same as Geder (Joshua 12:13). It means a wall or fence. It may be identified with Khirbet Judraya on the north side of the Vale of Elah opposite Socoh. Gederothaim, rendered in LXX ‘and its villages’ was probably a technical name for villages connected to Gederah. These fourteen cities with their villages were in the north eastern part of the Judaean Shephelah.

PULPIT, "The valley. בשפלה (see note on Joshua 9:1; Joshua 10:40). This was the fertile part of Judah, and formed a part of the rich plain which has been described as extending northward as far as Carmel. It was "renowned for the beauty of its flowers" (Delitzsch). With the exception of Zorah and Eshtaol, border towns to the tribe of Dan (Joshua 19:41; 13:25), famous in the history of Samson (see Judges 13-16), and mentioned in 2 Chronicles 11:10; ehemiah 11:29, the cities remarkable in history have been noticed already. It is worthy of remark that the cities of the Philistines were included in this list. But the Philistines, save during the reigns of David and Solomon, retained their independence, and in earlier and later times alike even encroached upon the Jewish territory (see 1 Samuel 13:5; 2 Chronicles 28:18; and note on 2 Chronicles 28:11).

34 Zanoah, En Gannim, Tappuah, Enam,

GILL, "And Zanoah,.... The first of these, Jerom says (i), is in the borders of Eleutheropolis, as you go to Aelia (or Jerusalem); there is at this day a village called Zanua:

and Engannim, which signifies a fountain of gardens, is now (according to the same writer (k)) a village near Bethel:

and Tappuah was a royal city, of which see Jos_12:17. Enaim, in the tribe of Judah, Jerom says (l) in his day was the village Bethenim, about the turpentine tree, or oak of Mamre; but that seems to be the same with Ain, Jos_15:32; of which he says the same under that word, and makes it to be two miles from the oak, and four from Hebron. Masius thinks it is the same with Enam, near to Timnath, of which See Gill on Gen_38:14; it following Tappuah one would be tempted to think with Jarchi it was the same with Entappuah, but that that was on the borders of Manasseh, Jos_17:7,

and Enam; it has an ה prefixed to it, and may be read "that Enam", as pointing out some known and remarkable place, though now unknown.

K&D, "Jos_15:34

Zanoah was still inhabited by Judaeans after the captivity (Neh_11:30; Neh_3:13), and is the present Zanua, not far from Zoreah, towards the east (see Rob. ii. p. 343). Engannim and Tappuah are still unknown. Enam, the same as Enaim (Gen_38:14 : rendered “an open place”), on the road from Adullam to Timnah on the mountains (Jos_15:57), has not yet been discovered.

WHEDO , "Verse 3434. Zanoah is very probably the modern Zanuah, a little to the east of Zorah.

35. Jarmuth was one of the five cities whose kings joined in a league against the Gibeonites, and were defeated in the great battle of Beth-horon. Joshua 10:3. It has been identified with the modern village Yarmuk, about eight miles northeast of Eleutheropolis. It is situated on the crest of a rugged hill, and well named Jarmuth, which means the lofty. Socoh became afterwards distinguished from being associated with the combat between David and Goliath. 1 Samuel 17:1. It was identified by Robinson with the ruins of Shuweikeh, a few miles south of Jarmuth and on the opposite side of the Wady-es-Sumpt.]

35 Jarmuth, Adullam, Sokoh, Azekah,

CLARKE,"Jarmuth - See the note on Jos_10:3.

Adullam - See the note on Jos_12:15.

Socoh - It was near this place that David fought with and slew Goliath, the champion of the Philistines, 1Sa_17:1.

GILL, "Jarmuth, and Adullam,.... The two first of these were royal cities, of which see Jos_10:3,

Socoh; Jerom says (m) there were two little villages in his day of the name of Socho, as you go to Aelia (or Jerusalem), from Eleutheropolis, in the ninth mile on the public way, one in the mountain, and the other in the plain, (the same with this,) both of which were called Socoth: of this place was Antigonus, president of the sanhedrim, and successor of Simeon the just, called in the Misnah (n) a man of Socho:

and Azekah; See Gill on Jos_10:10; it appears to be near to Socoh from 1Sa_17:1, where the Philistines are said to pitch their camp between them.

K&D, "Jos_15:35

Jarmuth, i.e., Jarmûk; see Jos_10:3. Adullam has not yet been discovered with certainty (see at Jos_12:15). Socoh, which was fortified by Rehoboam, and taken by the Philistines in the reign of Ahaz (2Ch_11:7; 2Ch_28:18), is the present Shuweikeh by the Wady Sumt, half an hour to the south-west of Jarmûk, three hours and a half to the south-west of Jerusalem (see Rob. ii. pp. 343, 349). The Onom. (s. v. Socoh) mentions two viculi named Sochoth, one upon the mountain, the other in the plain, nine Roman miles from Eleutheropolis on the road to Jerusalem. On Azekah, see at Jos_10:10.

36 Shaaraim, Adithaim and Gederah (or Gederothaim)[c]—fourteen towns and their

villages.

CLARKE,"Gederah - See the note on Jos_12:13.

Fourteen cities - Well reckoned, we shall find fifteen cities here; but probably Gederah and Gederothaim (Jos_15:36) are the same. See the note on Jos_15:32.

GILL, "And Sharaim,.... Sharaim seems to be the Saara of Jerom, which he describes as a village on the borders of Eleutheropolis, to the north as you go to Nicopolis (or Emmaus), about ten miles from it in the tribe of Dan or Judah (o); there was a place called Bethshaaraim, where the sanhedrim sometimes sat (p), and where R. Judah was buried (q). This seems to be the same with Shaaraim in 1Sa_17:52,

and Adithaim; Jerom observes (r), under the word "Adithaim", that there is a village called Adia, near Gaza, and another Aditha, near Diospolis (or Lydda), to the east:

and Gederah, which seems to be the same Jerom calls Gaddera, in the tribe of Judah (s), now, he says, called a village belonging to the country of Aelia (or Jerusalem), by the name of Gadera, about the turpentine tree.

and Gederothaim, of which we nowhere else read; Kimchi thinks Gederah and Gederothaim were one city:

fourteen cities with their villages; but, upon counting them, it will appear there are fifteen, which may be reduced to fourteen, if with Kimchi we take the two last to be but one, who in this way reconciles it; or with Jarchi make Tappuah and Enam to be one also, called Entappuah, which is the way he takes to solve the difficulty; but perhaps the case is this, that one of the places in the account was not a city, but a village.

WHEDO , "36. Fourteen cities — Fifteen are enumerated, which discrepancy may be explained as that in Joshua 15:32, or by supposing, as is very probable, that the last named city, Gederothaim, is an ancient gloss introduced by some confusion of Gederah with the Gederoth of Joshua 15:41.

K&D, "Jos_15:36

Sharaim, which was on the west of Socoh and Azekah, according to 1Sa_17:52, and is

called Σακαρίµ or Σαργαρείµ in the Sept., is probably to be sought for in the present Tell Zakariya and the village of Kefr Zakariya opposite, between which there is the broad deep valley called Wady Sumt, which is only twenty minutes in breadth (Rob. ii. p. 350). This is the more probable as the Hebrew name is a dual. Adithaim is unknown. Gederahis possibly the same as the Gederoth which was taken by the Philistines in the time of Ahaz (2Ch_28:18), and the Gedrus of the Onom. (s. v. Gaedur, or Gahedur), ten Roman miles to the south of Diospolis, on the road to Eleutheropolis, as the Gederoth in Jos_

15:41 was in the actual plain, and therefore did not stand between Diospolis and Eleutheropolis. Gederothaim is supposed by Winer, Knobel, and others, to be an ancient gloss. This is possible no doubt, but it is not certain, as neither the omission of the name from the Sept., nor the circumstance that the full number of towns is given as fourteen, and that this is not the number obtained if we reckon Gederothaim, can be adduced as a decisive proof, since this difference may have arisen in the same manner as the similar discrepancy in Jos_15:32.

37 Zenan, Hadashah, Migdal Gad,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:37-41

Second group of towns, containing those in the middle portion of the Shephelah, and of which some only Jos_10:3, Jos_10:10 can be identified.

GILL, "Zenan,.... Here begins another list or catalogue of the cities in the valley or plain. Zenan perhaps is the same with Zaanan, Mic_1:11,

and Hadashah was so small a city in Judea in the times of the Misnic doctors, that they say (t) it had but fifty dwellings in it; and Jerom speaks (u) of a place called Adasa, in the tribe of Judah, in his times a village near Guphua; it should be Taphna:

and Migdalgad, of which we nowhere else read; some think it had its name from some famous exploit done here by one of the tribe of Gad, who came over with Joshua to assist in the war, as the stone of Bohan the Reubenite, Jos_15:6.

K&D, "Jos_15:37-41

The second group, containing the towns of the actual plain in its full extent from north to south, between the hilly region and the line of coast held by the Philistines: sixteentowns in all.

WHEDO , "Verses 37-4137-41. This second group of the cities in the Shephelah, sixteen in number, are now nearly all unknown. On Lachish and Eglon, see Joshua 10:3.

PETT, "Verses 37-41‘Zenan, and Hadashah, and Migdal-gad, and Dilan, and Mizpeh, and Joktheel. Lachish, and Bozkath, and Eglon, and Cabbon, and Lahmam, and Chithlish, and

Gederoth, Beth-dagon, and aamah, and Makkedah; sixteen cities with their villages.’These were situated in the north western part of the Judaean Shephelah (lowlands). Zenan was possibly the Zaanan of Micah 1:11. Its site and that of Hadashah are unknown. Migdal-gad, ‘the fortress of Gad’, is possibly Khirbet Mejadil (twenty kilometres) thirteen miles south of Beit Jibrin. Gad was a pagan deity worshipped by the Canaanites as the god of fortune (Isaiah 65:11). Dilan and Jokteel are unknown. Mizpeh means ‘watchtower’ and a number of Mizpehs are known. Possible identifications for this Mizpeh are Khirbet Safiyeh, four kilometres (three miles) north east of Beit Jibrin, or Sufiyeh, ten kilometres (seven miles) north of Beit Jibrin.

Lachish was a major city but was not at this time walled, although its outer houses may have formed a defensive ring. It was surrounded on three sides by the River ( ahal - wadi torrent) Lachish. It was one of the cities earlier taken by Joshua (Joshua 10:32) whose king was slain, but there is no suggestion that he burned it. It was mentioned in the Amarna letters earlier, and we know that it was sacked about 1200 BC, after which there were strong Egyptian connections. It was sacked again about 1130 BC. There is no direct evidence of actual occupation by the Israelites, and it is nowhere claimed in Scripture that it was again captured and occupied by them until the time of the Monarchy. However we must beware of drawing too many conclusions from this kind of evidence. Such identifications are always tentative. Its guilt before God was later seen as responsible for His judgments (Micah 1:13).

For Bozkath compare 2 Kings 22:1. For Eglon compare Joshua 10:34. Cabbon and Chithlish are unknown. Lahmam (or Lahmas) is possibly el-Lahm, four kilometres (three miles) south of Beit Jibrin. For Gederoth compare 2 Chronicles 28:18. Beth-dagon was clearly a shrine to the god Dagon, of which there were a number by this name (e.g. Joshua 19:27). aamah is possibly identical to modern a‘neh, and means ‘pleasant’, ten kilometres (seven miles) south of Lydda. For Makkedah see Joshua 10:28.

38 Dilean, Mizpah, Joktheel,

GILL, "And Dilean,.... Of the first of these nothing is to be said:

and Mizpeh, of which name there were cities in other tribes; this in the tribe of Judah was in the times of Jerom (w) called Mapha, on the borders of Eleutheropolis to the south, as you go to Aelia, or Jerusalem:

and Joktheel, of which nothing is to be said.

K&D, "Jos_15:38

Dilean is unknown; for Bet Dula, three full hours to the east of Beit-jibrin, with some relics of antiquity (Tobler, pp. 150-1), with which Knobel identifies it, is upon the mountains and not in the plain. Mizpeh, i.e., specula, a different place from the Mizpehof Benjamin (Jos_18:26), was on the north of Eleutheropolis, according to the Onom. (s. v. Maspha), and therefore may possibly be the castle Alba Specula, or Alba Custodia of the middle ages, the present Tell es Saphieh, in the middle of the plain and upon the top of a lofty hill, from which there is an extensive prospect in all directions (see Rob. ii. p. 363). Joktheel has possibly been preserved in the ruins of Keitulaneh (Rob. Pal. iii. App.), which are said to lie in that neighbourhood.

39 Lachish, Bozkath, Eglon,

GILL, "Lachish,.... Lachish and Eglon were royal cities, of which see Jos_10:3,

and Bozkath, is called Boscath, of which place was the mother of King Josiah, 2Ki_21:1; some take it to be the same with Bascana, as in the Apocrypha:"And when he came near to Bascama he slew Jonathan, who was buried there.'' (1 Maccabees 13:23)

and Eglon also was a royal city, of which see Jos_10:3.

K&D, "Jos_15:39

Lachish, i.e., Um Lakis (see at Jos_10:3). Bozkath is unknown: according to Knobel, it may possibly be the ruins of Tubakah, on the south of Um Lakis and Ajlan (Rob. ii. pp. 388, 648). Eglon, i.e., Ajlan; see at Jos_10:3.

40 Kabbon, Lahmas, Kitlish,

GILL, "And Cabbon, and Lahmam, and Kithlish. Cities of which we can give no account, not being mentioned elsewhere.

K&D, "Jos_15:40

Cabbon, probably the heap of ruins called Kubeibeh or Kebeibeh, “which must at some time or other have been a strong fortification, and have formed the key to the central mountains of Judah” (v. de Velde, R. ii. p. 156), and which lie to the south of Beit-jibrin, and two hours and a half to the east of Ajlan (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 394). Lachmas: according to Knobel a corruption of Lachmam, which is the reading given in many MSS and editions, whilst the Vulgate has Leheman, and Luther (and the Eng. Ver). Lahmam. Knobelconnects it with the ruins of el Lahem to the south of Beit-jibrin (Tobler). Kithlish(Chitlis) is unknown, unless it is to be found in Tell Chilchis, to the S.S.E. of Beit-jibrin (V. de Velde, R. ii. p. 157).

41 Gederoth, Beth Dagon, aamah and Makkedah—sixteen towns and their villages.

CLARKE,"Beth-dagon - The house or temple of Dagon. This is a well known idol of the Philistines, and probably the place mentioned here was in some part of their territories; but the situation at present is unknown.

GILL, "And Gederoth,.... Gederoth is reckoned among the cities of the low country, and south of Judah, 2Ch_28:18,

and Bethdagon; in it very probably was a temple of Dagon, which was a principal deity of the Philistines, 1Sa_5:2; Jerom says (x) in his time was shown a large village called Capherdagon, between Diospolis and Jamnia; of Naamah, the same writer says nothing, only that it was a city of the tribe of Judah:

and Makkedah; see Jos_10:10; it was a royal city, Jos_12:16;

sixteen cities with their villages; and is the exact number of them, as before enumerated.

K&D, "Jos_15:41

Gederoth, Beth-dagon, and Naamah have not yet been traced. The village mentioned in the Onom. (s. v. Beth-dagon) as grandis vicus Capher-dagon, and said to lie between Diospolis and Jamnia, the present Beit-dejan (Rob. iii. p. 30), was far beyond the northern boundary of the tribe of Judah. Makkedah: see at Jos_10:10.

42 Libnah, Ether, Ashan,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:42-44

Third group; towns in the south of the Shephelah. For Libnah see Jos_10:29. Mareshah is believed to be near Beit-jibrin, the ancient “Eleutheropolis.”

CLARKE,"Libnah - See the note on Jos_10:29.

Ether - From Jos_19:7 we learn that this city was afterwards given to the tribe of Simeon.

GILL, "Libnah,.... Here begins another division or list of the cities of Judah, in the valley or plain. Libnah is the same with Libnah, a royal city; see Jos_10:29,

and Ether was given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:7; and under Ether of the lot of Simeon, Jerom writes (y), there is now a very large village called Jethira, in interior Daroma, near Malatha, twenty miles from Eleutheropolis:

and Ashan also was given to the tribe of Simeon, Jos_19:7; and the above writer relates (z), that there was in his times a village called Bethasan, belonging to Aelia, or Jerusalem, fifteen miles from it.

K&D, "Jos_15:42-44

The third group, consisting of the towns in the southern half of the hilly region: nine towns.

Jos_15:42

Libnah: see at Jos_10:29. Ether and Ashan, which were afterwards given to the Simeonites (Jos_19:7), and are probably to be sought for on the border of the Negeb, have not yet been discovered. The conjecture that Ether is connected with the ruins of Attârah (Rob. iii. App.) in the province of Gaza, is a very uncertain one. Ashan, probably the same as Kor-ashan (1Sa_30:30), became a priests' city afterwards (1Ch_6:44; see at Jos_21:16).

PETT, "Verses 42-44‘Libnah, and Ether, and Ashan. And Iphtah, and Ashnah, and ezib, and Keilah, and Achzib, and Mareshah. ine cities with their villages.’These are not all specifically identifiable to a particular area but are related to the Shephelah. The site of Libnah, a royal city, has not been satisfactorily identified. Its position is generally indicated by the order of events in Joshua 10:28-37. Ether and

Ashan also appear in Joshua 19:7 as Simeonite cities ‘with their villages’, shared with Judah, which demonstrates that they are more to the south. See also 1 Chronicles 4:32; 1 Chronicles 6:59. Iphtah, Ashnah, and ezib are unidentifiable at present.

Keilah is mentioned in ehemiah 3:17-18, and in 1 Samuel 23:1-5 as subject to Philistine invasion resulting in a great victory for David. It is probably the Kelti of the Amarna letters, and may be Khirbet Qila on a hill ten kilometres east of Beit Guvrin which commands the ascent to Hebron south from Socoh, in the valley between the Shephelah and the hills. Achzib is possibly the Chezib of Genesis 38:5 and later conquered by Sennacherib (see also Micah 1:14). Mareshah is a town in the Shephelah covering the road up the Wadi Zeita to Hebron. It is now Tell Sandahanna. The inhabitants claimed descent from Shelah (1 Chronicles 4:21). See also Micah 1:15.

43 Iphtah, Ashnah, ezib,

GILL, "And Jiphtah,.... Jiphtah is nowhere else mentioned:

and Ashnah; there was another Ashnah of this tribe, and which was in the vale also, met with already in Jos_15:33,

and Nezib was in Jerom's (a) times called Nasib, seven miles from Eleutheropolis, as you go to Hebron.

(a) De loc. Heb. fol. 93. I.

K&D,"Jos_15:43

Jiphtah, Ashnah, and Nezib have not yet been traced. Beit-nesib, to the east of Beit-jibrin on the Wady Sur (Rob. ii. p. 344, and iii. p. 13), the Neesib of the Onom., seven Roman miles to the east of Eleutheropolis, does not suit this group so far as its situation is concerned, as it lies within the limits of the first group.

WHEDO , "[43. ezib has been identified by Drs. Robinson and Porter with the ruins of Beit usib, about seven miles east of Eleutheropolis, on the way to Hebron. “It is neither in the mountains nor in the plain, but in the low hilly country which connects the two. The ruins are of considerable extent. The most important are a massive tower sixty feet square, the masonry of which appears to be of the Jewish

type. ear it are the foundations of another great fabric, and the site is strewn with broken columns and large building stones.” — Porter.]

44 Keilah, Akzib and Mareshah—nine towns and their villages.

BAR ES, "Jos_15:42-44

Third group; towns in the south of the Shephelah. For Libnah see Jos_10:29. Mareshah is believed to be near Beit-jibrin, the ancient “Eleutheropolis.”

CLARKE,"Keilah - This town was near Hebron, and is said to have been the burying-place of the prophet Habakkuk. David obliged the Philistines to raise the siege of it; (see 1Sa_23:1-13); but finding that its inhabitants had purposed to deliver him into the hands of Saul, who was coming in pursuit of him, he made his escape. See this remarkable case explained in the note on Deu_32:15 (note).

Mareshah - Called also Maresheth and Marasthi; it was the birth-place of the prophet Micah. Near this place was the famous battle between Asa, king of Judah, and Zera, king of Cush or Ethiopia, who was at the head of one thousand thousand men, and three hundred chariots. Asa defeated this immense host and took much spoil, 2Ch_14:9-15.

GILL, "And Keilah,.... The first of these is a well known city, which David saved from the hands of the Philistines, 1Sa_23:1, &c. In Jerom's time it was a little village to the east of Eleutheropolis, about eight miles from it, as you go to Hebron; in which was shown the sepulchre of the Prophet Habakkuk (b).

And Achzib is said to be on the borders of Asher, Jos_19:29, and is supposed the same with Chezib, Gen_38:5; and the Ecdippa of Josephus and others, and now called Zib; See Gill on Mic_1:14,

and Mareshah; Jerom says (c), only the ruins of it were to be seen two miles from Eleutheropolis:

nine cities with their villages; which is just their number.

K&D, "Jos_15:44

Keilah, which is mentioned in the history of David (1 Sam 23), and then again after the

captivity (Neh_3:17), is neither the Κεελά, Ceila of the Onom., on the east of Eleutheropolis, the present Kila (Tobler, Dritte Wand. p. 151), which lies upon the mountains of Judah; nor is it to be found, as Knobel supposes, in the ruins of Jugaleh(Rob. iii. App.), as they lie to the south of the mountains of Hebron, whereas Keilah is to be sought for in the shephelah, or at all events to the west or south-west of the mountains of Hebron. Achzib (Mic_1:14), the same as Chesib (Gen_38:5), has been preserved in the ruins at Kussâbeh, a place with a fountain (Rob. ii. p. 391), i.e., the fountain of Kesâba, about five hours south by west from Beit-jibrin. Mareshah, which was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch_11:8; cf. Mic_1:15), and was the place where Asa defeated Zerah the Ethiopian (2Ch_14:9), the home of Eliezer (2Ch_20:37), and afterwards the important town of Marissa (see v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 211-12), was between Hebron and Ashdod, since Judas Maccabaeus is represented in 1 Macc. 5:65-68 (where

the reading should be Μαρίσσαν instead of Σαµάρειαν, according to Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, 6) as going from Hebron through Marissa into the land of the Philistines, and turning to Ashdod. According to the Onom. (s. v. Mareshah), it was lying in ruins in the time of Eusebius, and was about two Roman miles from Eleutheropolis-a description which applies exactly to the ruins of Maresh, twenty-four minutes to the south of Beit-jibrin, which Robinson supposes for this reason to be Maresa (Rob. ii. p. 422), whereas Knobelfinds it in Beit-mirsim, a place four hours to the south of Beit-jibrin.

(Note: Knobel founds his opinion partly upon 2Ch_14:9, according to which Mareshah was in the valley of Zephatah, which is the bason-like plain at Mirsim, and partly upon the fact that the Onom. also places Moraste on the east (south-east) of Eleutheropolis; and Jerome (ad Mich. Jos_1:1) describes Morasthi as haud grandem viculum juxta Eleutheropolin, and as sepulcrum quondam Micheae prophetae nunc ecclesiam (ep. 108 ad Eustoch. §14); and this ecclesia is in all probability the ruins of a church called Santa Hanneh, twenty minutes to the south-east of Beit-jibrin, and only ten minutes to the east of Marash, which makes the assumption a very natural one, that the Maresa and Morasthi of the fathers are only different parts of the same place, viz., of Moreseth-gath, the home of Micah (Mic_1:1, Mic_1:14; Jer_26:18). But neither of these is decisive. The valley of Zephatah might be the large open plain which Robinson mentions (ii. p. 355) near Beit-jibrin; and the conjecture that

Morasthi, which Euseb. and Jer. place πρhς��νατολ8ς, contra orientem Eleutheropoleos, is preserved in the ruins which lie in a straight line towards the south from Beit-jibrin, and are called Marash, has not much probability in it.)

WHEDO , "44. Keilah was a walled town not far from ezib. Its inhabitants were delivered from the oppression of the Philistines by David and his men, who afterwards for a time settled in the town. 1 Samuel 23:1-13. “Eight Roman miles from the ancient Eleutheropolis, on the way to Hebron, is a large ruined tower or castle called Kela. It stands on a projecting cliff on the right bank of Wady-el-Feranj. There can be little doubt that this is the long lost Keilah.” — Porter. [Achzib is probably identical with Chezib, (Genesis 38:5,) now Kusaba, fifteen miles southwest of Beit-jibrin. Mareshah is supposed by Robinson and Tobler to be the ruins called Marash, one mile and a half south of Beit-jibrin, on a gently-swelling hill leading down from the mountains to the great western plain. The ruins are not extensive, but Robinson thinks they were used in building the neighbouring Eleutheropolis.]

PULPIT, "Mareshah. One of Rehoboam's fortified cities (2 Chronicles 11:8). Here Asa met Zerah the Ethiopian, or Cushite, and overthrew him (2 Chronicles 14:9). Here lived the prophet who foretold the destruction of Jehoshaphat's navy (2 Chronicles 20:37. See also Micah 1:15). How Marash, close to Beit-Jibrin or Eleutheropolis (Tristram, Conder). If it be the same as Moresheth-Gath in Micah 1:14, this adds additional probability to the identification of Gath with Beit-Jibrin (see note on Joshua 13:3).

45 Ekron, with its surrounding settlements and villages;

GILL, "Ekron, with her towns and her villages. One of the five principalities of the Philistines, which with two more next mentioned, though they fell to the lot of the tribe of Judah, were never possessed by them; for which reason perhaps Gath and Ascalon are not mentioned, and these are put for the rest; see Jos_13:3.

K&D, "Jos_15:45-47

The fourth group, consisting of the towns of the Philistine line of coast, the northern part of which was afterwards given up to the tribe of Dan (Dan Jos_19:43), but which remained almost entirely in the hands of the Philistines (see at Jos_13:3).

(Note: There is no force in the reasons adduced by Ewald, Bertheau, and Knobel, for regarding these verses as spurious, or as a later interpolation from a different source. For the statement, that the “Elohist” merely mentions those towns of which the Hebrews had taken possession, and which they held either partially or wholly in his own day, and also that his list of the places belonging to Judah in the shephelahnever goes near the sea, are assertions without the least foundation, which are proved to be erroneous by the simple fact, that according to the express statement in Jos_15:12, the Mediterranean Sea formed the western boundary of the tribe of Judah; and according to Jos_13:6, Joshua was to distribute by lot even those parts of Canaan which had not yet been conquered. The difference, however, which actually exists between the verses before us and the other groups of towns, namely, that in this case the “towns” (or daughters) are mentioned as well as the villages, and that the towns are not summed up at the end, may be sufficiently explained from the facts themselves, namely, from the circumstance that the Philistine cities mentioned were capitals of small principalities, which embraced not only villages, but also small towns, and for that very reason did not form connected groups, like the towns of the

other districts.)

Jos_15:45

Ekron, i.e., Akir (see Jos_13:3). “Her daughters” are the other towns of the

principality of Ekron that were dependent upon the capital, and חצרים the villages and farms.

PETT, "Verses 45-47‘Ekron, with her towns (daughters) and her villages, from Ekron even to the sea, all that were by the side of Ashdod, with their villages. Ashdod, her towns and her villages, Gaza, her towns and her villages, to the Brook of Egypt and the Great Sea and its border.’We must remember that all these cities, both those mentioned before and those described here, were allotted to Judah for her to possess. (These Philistine cities were specifically stated as not being possessed during Joshua’s lifetime - Joshua 13:3). As with the other tribes mentioned later it was their responsibility under God to go forward and possess them. That they failed in God’s purpose history has revealed, and the Book of Judges makes clear the reason for the failure, loss of impetus, failure to fully observe the covenant and sin, even though in the time of Samuel some of them appear to have been in Israel’s hands (1 Samuel 7:14).

“Ekron, with her towns (daughters) and her villages, from Ekron even to the sea, all that were by the side of Ashdod, with their villages.” The sea is of course the Mediterranean, ‘the great Sea’. Ekron, along with Ashdod and Gaza, was one of the five major Philistine cities. This use of ‘daughters’ is reminiscent of umbers 21:25; umbers 32:42. For ‘and her villages’ compare Genesis 25:16; 1 Chronicles 6:56. The description indicates Ekron’s sphere of influence. It should be noted that it is elsewhere described as one of the cities that had been ‘taken from Israel’ by the Philistines (1 Samuel 7:14). That may be referring to Judges 1:18. It was on the border with Dan (Joshua 19:43).

If Ekron is to be identified with Khirbet al-Muqanna‘ it was occupied in the early bronze age and then not in any density until the early iron age. It was at one stage a walled city of some forty acres.

“Ashdod, her towns and her villages, Gaza, her towns and her villages, to the River ( ahal) of Egypt and the Great Sea and its border.” This boldly makes clear that all Philistine territory was Judah’s by divine right. The River of Egypt was the torrent-wadi of el-‘Arish. The description covers the whole coastal plain within Judah’s boundaries. Ashdod is Tel Ashdod, six kilometres south east of the modern village. It had a principal port (Asudimmu in Akkadian sources) and a temple of Dagon (1 Samuel 5:1). Gaza was the southernmost of the Philistine cities, and it occupied an important position on the trade routes. It would appear that Joshua possibly captured it (Joshua 10:41 - although the reference may only mean that he reached that landmark). The site of the ancient city lies within the modern city. Limited excavation has revealed evidence of both late bronze age and iron age occupation and the presence of Philistine pottery.

PULPIT, "Ekron, with her towns and her villages. Literally, her daughters and her farm hamlets (see note on Joshua 13:28). These cities of the Philistines had, like Gibeon, daughter cities dependent on them, and must therefore have been, like Gibeon, "great cities as the royal cities" (Joshua 10:2). They do not appear to have come under regal government till later times (cf. 1 Samuel 5:8, 1 Samuel 5:11, with 1 Samuel 27:2). "Around it (Gezer) and along the sides were distributed a series of small isolated centres of agglomeration … This disposition to scatter itself, of which Gezer surely does not offer us the only specimen, explains in a striking manner the Biblical phrase, 'the city and her daughters'". This explanation, however, is doubtful (see Joshua 9:17). According to Knobel, this passage cannot have been written by the Elohist, because he confines himself to the description of the cities the Israelites actually possessed. Why a lair writer, writing presumably when Israel's fortunes were at a lower ebb, should have added a description of the territory Israel did not possess, he does not explain.

46 west of Ekron, all that were in the vicinity of Ashdod, together with their villages;

CLARKE,"Ekron - One of the five Philistine lordships; see the note on Jos_13:3.

GILL, "From Ekron even unto the sea,.... The Mediterranean sea, or the west, as the Targum:

all that lay near Ashdod, with their villages; this is the Azotus of the New Testament, Act_8:40, another of the principalities of the Philistines, of which and Ekron See Gill on Amo_1:8 and See Gill on Zep_2:4.

K&D, "Jos_15:46

Judah was also to receive “from Ekron westwards all that lay on the side of Ashdod and their (i.e., Ekron's and Ashdod's) villages.” The different places in this district are not given, because Judah never actually obtained possession of them.

ELLICOTT, "Verse 46-47(46, 47) Ekron, Ashdod, and Gaza are all identified. Observe that the Philistine

territory is assigned to Judah here.

47 Ashdod, its surrounding settlements and villages; and Gaza, its settlements and villages, as far as the Wadi of Egypt and the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea.

CLARKE,"Ashdod - Called also Azotus, Act_8:40.

Unto the river of Egypt - The Pelusiac branch of the Nile, or Sihor. But see on Jos_15:4 (note).

The great sea - The Mediterranean.

GILL, "Ashdod with her towns and, her villages, Gaza with her towns and her villages,.... Gaza was another of the principalities of the Philistines, of which See Gill on Amo_1:7; See Gill on Zep_2:4; See Gill on Act_8:26; these, with the two other principalities not mentioned, Gath and Ashkelon, were in the western border of the tribe of Judah, which reached from Ekron, the first that is mentioned:

unto the river of Egypt; of which see Jos_15:4,

and the great sea, and the border thereof; the Mediterranean sea, called so in comparison of the lesser seas in Judea, the salt sea, and the sea of Tiberias; whose border was its shore, and the cities upon it,

K&D, "Jos_15:47

Ashdod, now Esdûd, and Gaza, now Ghuzzeh: see at Jos_13:3. Also “the daughter towns and villages, unto the brook of Egypt (Wady el Arish: see Jos_15:4), and the great sea with its territory,” i.e., the tract of land lying between Gaza and the coast of the Mediterranean. Gath and Askalon are not mentioned, because they are both of them included in the boundaries named. Askalon was between Ashdod and Gaza, by the sea-coast (see at Jos_13:3), and Gath on the east of Ekron and Ashdod (see Jos_13:3), so that, as a matter of course, it was assigned to Judah.

48 In the hill country:

Shamir, Jattir, Sokoh,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:48-60

This highland district extends from the Negeb on the south to Jerusalem, and is bounded by the Shephelah on the west, and the “wilderness” Jos_15:61-62 on the east. The mountains, which are of limestone, rise to a height of near 3,000 feet. At present, the highlands of Judah present a somewhat dreary and monotonous aspect. The peaks are for the most part barren, though crowned almost everywhere with the ruins of ancient towns, and bearing on their sides marks of former cultivation. Many of the valleys, especially toward the south, are, however, still very productive. The towns here enumerated are given in six groups.

Jos_15:48-51

First group: towns on the southwest. Dannah (is identified with “Idnah” (Conder)). Jattir (“Attir”), and Eshtemoh (“Semua”) were priestly cities Jos_21:14; 1Ch_6:57, and the place to which David, after routing the Amalekites, sent presents 1Sa_30:27-28. Socoh is “Suweikeh.”

GILL, "And in the mountains,.... The hill country of Judea, as it is called Luk_1:39, in which were the following cities:

Shamir: the Alexandrian copy of the Greek version reads Sophir as the name, of the first of these cities; and Jerom says (d) there was a village of this name in the mountainous parts, situated between Eleutheropolis, and Ashkelon in the tribe of Judah; see Mic_1:11,

and Jattir the same writer calls Jether, in the tribe of Judah; and says (e) there was in his time a very large village called Jethira, twenty miles from Eleutheropolis, the inhabitants of which were then all Christians: it was situated in interior Daroma, near Malatha:

and Socoh is different from Socoh in Jos_15:35; that was in the plain, this in the mountain; See Gill on Jos_15:35.

K&D, "Jos_15:48-60

The towns on the mountains are divided into five, or more correctly, into six groups. The mountains of Judah, which rise precipitously from the Negeb, between the hilly district on the west, which is reckoned as part of the shephelah, and the desert of Judah, extending to the Dead Sea on the east (Jos_15:61), attain the height of 3000 feet above the level of the sea, in the neighbourhood of Hebron, and run northwards to the broad

wady of Beit-hanina, above Jerusalem. They are a large rugged range of limestone mountains, with many barren and naked peaks, whilst the sides are for the most part covered with grass, shrubs, bushes, and trees, and the whole range is intersected by many very fruitful valleys. Josephus describes it as abounding in corn, fruit, and wine; and to the present day it contains many orchards, olive grounds, and vineyards, rising in terraces up the sides of the mountains, whilst the valleys and lower grounds yield plentiful harvests of wheat, millet, and other kinds of corn. In ancient times, therefore, the whole of this district was thickly covered with towns (see Rob. ii. pp. 185, 191-2, and C. v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 45ff.).

Jos_15:48-51

The first group consists of eleven towns on the south-west of the mountains.

Jos_15:48

Shamir has probably been preserved in the ruins of Um Shaumerah, mentioned by Robinson (iii. App.), though the situation of these ruins has not yet been precisely determined. Jattir, which was given up to the priests (Jos_21:14), and is mentioned again in 1Sa_30:27, is described in the Onom. (s. v. Jether) as a large placed inhabited by Christians, twenty miles from Eleutheropolis, in interiori Daroma juxta Malathan, -a description which suits the ruins of Attir, in the southern portion of the mountains (see Rob. ii. p. 194; called Ater by Seetzen, R. iii. p. 6). Socoh, two hours N.W. of this, the present Shuweikeh (Rob. ii. p. 194), called Suêche by Seetzen (R. iii. p. 29), a village about four hours from Hebron.

WHEDO , "48. Mountains — The highlands of Judah were bounded by the lowlands on the west, the wilderness adjacent to the Dead Sea on the east, the egeb on the south, and a line touching Jerusalem on the north. At Hebron the land is three thousand feet above the level of the sea. Many fruitful valleys, whose lower declivities are clothed with verdure, wind into the mountain from the lowlands between rugged chalk cliffs. The cities of this district are enumerated in five groups, or, if we accept the text of the Septuagint between Joshua 15:59-60, we have six groups. Jattir Robinson identifies with the ruins of Attir, ten miles south of Hebron. Socoh must be distinguished from Socoh on the plain. See on Joshua 15:35. Robinson recognized it in Shuweikeh, (the diminutive of Shaukeh,) a little northwest of Jattir.

CO STABLE, "Verses 48-60Five groups of cities stood in the mountainous hill country of Judah north of the egev, east of the Shephelah, and west of the wilderness of Judah. This area became home to a large number of Judahites. Eleven towns stood in the southwest section ( Joshua 15:48-51) and nine to the north of these (near Hebron, Joshua 15:52-54). Ten more stood to the east of both former groups toward the desert wilderness ( Joshua 15:55-57), six to the north of Hebron ( Joshua 15:58-59), and two on Judah"s northern border ( Joshua 15:60).

PETT, "Verses 48-51‘And in the hill country Shamir, and Jattir, and Socoh, and Dannah, and Kiriath-sannah, the same is Debir, and Anab, and Eshtemoh, and Anim, and Goshen, and Holon, and Giloh. Eleven cities with their villages.’

The hill country (literally ‘the mountain’) signifies the central mountain range west of Jordan. It was divided up on the basis of the tribes occupying it (Joshua 20:7) into the hill country of Judah (Joshua 21:11), the hill country of Ephraim (Joshua 17:15-18) and the hill country of aphtali (Joshua 20:7). But they recognised that it composed a single mountain range, even though interrupted by ravines and the Plain of Esdraelon. Thus they called it ‘the mountain’ (Joshua 9:1; Joshua 10:40; Joshua 11:16). This was where Judah initially settled and carved out its territory, establishing itself securely in the hill country before expanding.

The hill country of Judah is broken up into grey limestone hills, generally bare of vegetation, but not altogether unfruitful, for olives and terraced vineyards are found on their slopes, and in the valleys small patches of cultivable soil. There are no perennial streams and few springs, the water supply depending chiefly on the winter rains stored in pools and cisterns.

Shamir is perhaps Khirbet Somerah, twenty kilometres (thirteen miles) south west of Hebron and 650 metres (2,100 feet) up. Jattir is Khirbet Attir on the south west escarpment of the hill country of Judah, twenty one kilometres (fourteen miles) from Hebron. It was offered as residence to the priests (Joshua 21:14). David shared the spoils of the Amalekites with its inhabitants (1 Samuel 30:27). Socoh is probably Khirbet Suweike, three kilometres (two miles) east of Dhahriya, not the same as Socoh in verse 35. Danna is not known.

Kiriath-sanna (‘city of palm leaf’ - palm leaves were writing materials) is the ancient name of Debir. Compare verse 15 and Judges 1:11 where it is Kiriath-sepher (‘city of writing’). It would thus appear to have been a scribal city. The use of the names demonstrates the age of the sources. Debir was probably Khirbet Rabbud, thirteen kilometres (eight miles) south west of Hebron, a strong position overlooking the River Hevron. Anab (Joshua 11:22) was a small city which is now a ruin but still called ‘Anab, and was eight kilometres (five miles) south of Debir. It is mentioned as Kart-‘anabu in Papyrus Anastasi I and in the Amarna letters. For Eshtemoh compare Eshtemoa, one of the priests’ towns (Joshua 21:14; 1 Chronicles 6:57). It is now es-Semu‘a and still inhabited, fourteen kilometres (eight miles) south south west of Hebron at a height of 680 metres (2200 feet).

Anim may be el-Ghuwein, four kilometres (three miles) south of es-Semu‘a. Goshen is not specifically identified, but is probably connected with the Judaean ‘country of Goshen’ (Joshua 10:41; Joshua 11:16), the area of which is not yet known. Holon was a priestly town (Joshua 21:15 - compare Hilen (1 Chronicles 6:58)). Giloh was the home of Ahithophel, David’s adviser (2 Samuel 15:12; 2 Samuel 23:34), possibly grandfather of Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11:3 with 2 Samuel 23:34). ‘Eleven cities with their villages,’ possibly looking to Debir as their centre.

PULPIT, "The mountains. Compare the expression, "the hill country of Judaea" ( τῇ ὀρεινῇ, the same as here in the LXX), Luke 1:65. It extends northwards from near Debir to Jerusalem, attaining at Hebron a height of about 2,700 feet. The physical characteristics of the country are vividly described in Deuteronomy 8:7,

Deuteronomy 8:8. Dean Stanley descants on the home-like character of the scenery and vegetation to an Englishman, and remarks on the contrast between the life, activity, and industry displayed there, as contrasted with the desolation of the greater part of Palestine. A later traveller, who would not, of course, be so struck with the resemblance to English scenery, speaks of the fertility of the ground as a matter of possibility, rather than of fact. The rocky soil, when broken up by the combined influences of heat, rain, and frost, is, like the soil of other rocky districts, extremely susceptible of cultivation when laid out in terraces. He remarks how the signs of ancient cultivation in this manner are to be seen on all sides, and laments the misrule which has converted the "land flowing with milk and honey" into a wilderness (see Bartlett, 'Egypt and Palestine,' Deuteronomy 19:1-21; and note on Joshua 10:40). The time has not yet come for the Jews, now asserting their ancient greatness in statesmanship, literature, and art in every country in the civilised world, to return to their own land. ot till then, it is to be feared, will the prophecy in Isaiah 35:1-10. be fulfilled, and "the desert rejoice, and the wilderness blossom as the rose, while waters break out in the wilderness and streams in the desert, the parched ground becoming a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water."

49 Dannah, Kiriath Sannah (that is, Debir),

GILL, "And Dannah,.... Dannah is not mentioned elsewhere:

and Kirjathsannah, which is Debir; Kirjathsannah had three names, this and Debir, and Kirjathsepher; See Gill on Jos_15:15; all which are of much the same signification; for "Sanna" with the Arabs (f), and so with the Phoenicians, signifies law, doctrine, and manner of life; and with the Mahometans the secondary law to the Koran, and answers to the Jewish Misnah; and the Greek version interprets this name "the city of letters". Jerom (g) calls it Daenna, and seems to confound it with Dannah.

WHEDO , "49. Kirjath-sannah — The English reader will be assisted in his understanding of many of these names if he remembers that Kirjath means city. The word following completes the sense, as Kirjath-sannah, city of literature.

Debir — See on Joshua 10:38.

K&D, "Jos_15:49

Dannah (Sept., Syr., Renna) is unknown. Knobel imagines that Dannah should be Danah, for Deanah, plur. Deanoth, which would then be suggestive of Zanute, the last inhabited place upon the mountains, five hours from Hebron, between Shuweikeh and

Attir (see Rob. ii. p. 626; Seetzen, iii. p. 27, 29). Kirjath-sannah, or Debir, has not been traced (see at Jos_10:38).

50 Anab, Eshtemoh, Anim,

GILL, "And Anab,.... Of Anab; see Gill on Jos_11:21,

and Eshtemoh Jerom calls (h) Astemech, a village in the tribe of Judah, and belongs to the Jews in Daroma, and is to the north of a place called Anem, perhaps the same with Anim here;

and Anim Jerom says is the village Anea, near another of the same name; which he places to the south of Hebron, as he does this to the east, the inhabitants of which in his time were all Christians.

WHEDO , "50. Anab is still existing northwest of Socoh, without change of name. Eshtemoh is probably the modern Semua, “a considerable village, with remains of a wall, built of stones more than ten feet in length.” — Robinson.

K&D, "Jos_15:50

Anab, on the north-east of Socoh (see at Jos_11:21). Eshtemoh, or Eshtemoa, which was ceded to the priests (Jos_21:14; 1Ch_6:42), and is mentioned again in 1Sa_30:28; 1Ch_4:17, 1Ch_4:19, is the present Semua, an inhabited village, with remains of walls, and a castle of ancient date, on the east of Socoh (Rob. ii. pp. 194, 626; Seetzen, iii. 28; and v. Schubert, R. ii. p. 458). Anim, contracted, according to the probable conjecture of Wilson, from Ayanim (fountains), a place still preserved in the ruins of the village of el Ghuwein, on the south of Semua, though Robinson erroneously connects it with Ain(Jos_15:32 : see Rob. Pal. ii. p. 626).

51 Goshen, Holon and Giloh—eleven towns and their villages.

CLARKE,"Goshen - See the note on Jos_10:41.

Giloh - The country of the traitor Ahithophel, 2Sa_15:12.

GILL, "And Goshen,.... Of Goshen in the land of Canaan; see Gill on Jos_10:41,

and Holon, of which there is no other mention:

and Giloh was the city of Ahitophel, 2Sa_15:12,

eleven cities with their villages; the number agrees; this is the first division of cities in the mountains; a second follows.

K&D, "Jos_15:51

Goshen, Holon, and Giloh, are still unknown. On Goshen, see at Jos_10:41. Holon was given up to the priests (Jos_21:15; 1Ch_6:43); and Giloh is mentioned in 2Sa_15:12 as the birth-place of Ahithophel.

ELLICOTT, "(51) Goshen is thought by some to give a name to the land of Goshen in Joshua 10:41, but the place is insignificant, and not identified; and to take the land of Goshen as frontier or border land seems a very much more reasonable interpretation.

Giloh—the home of Ahithophel the Gilonite, David’s and Absalom’s counsellor (2 Samuel 15:12, &c).

WHEDO , "51. Giloh, perhaps identical with the modern Rafat, a little south of Eshtemoh, was the birth-place of Ahithophel, and the scene of his suicide. 2 Samuel 15:12; 2 Samuel 17:23.

52 Arab, Dumah, Eshan,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:52-54

Second group of nine towns, situated somewhat to the north of the last mentioned. Of these Dumah is perhaps the ruined village “Ed Daumeh,” in the neighborhood of Hebron; and Beth-tappuah, i. e. “house of apples,” “Teffuh,” a place which has still a good number of inhabitants, is conspicuous for its olive groves and vineyards, and bears on every side the traces of industry and thrift.

GILL, "Arab,.... Arab is the same Jerom (i) calls Ereb, and was in his time a village in the south, and was called Heromith:

and Dumah; Duma, Jerom says (k), was a large village in the south, also on the borders of Eleutheropolis, seventeen miles from it:

and Eshean, of which we have no account.

K&D, "Jos_15:52-54

The second group of nine towns, to the north of the former, in the country round Hebron.

Jos_15:52

Arab is still unknown; for we cannot connect it, as Knobel does, with the ruins of Husn el Ghurab in the neighbourhood of Semua (Rob. i. p. 312), as these ruins lie within the former group of towns. Duma, according to Eusebius the largest place in the Daromas in his time, and seventeen miles from Eleutheropolis, is probably the ruined village of Daumeh, by the Wady Dilbeh (Rob. i. p. 314), which is fourteen miles in a straight line to the south-east of Eleutheropolis according to the map. Es'an (Eshean) can hardly be identified with Asan (1Ch_4:32), as Van de Velde supposes, but is more likely Korasan(1Sa_30:30). In that case we might connect it with the ruins of Khursah, on the north-west of Daumeh, two hours and a half to the south-west of Hebron (Rob. iii. p. 5). As the

Septuagint reading is Σοµά, Knobel conjectures that Eshean is a corrupt reading for Shema (1Ch_2:43), and connects it with the ruins of Simia, on the south of Daumeh (Seetzen, iii. 28, and Rob. iii. App.).

WHEDO , "52. This next group of cities was north of the last named, in the vicinity of Hebron.

Dumah — Robinson passed the ruins of Ed-Daumeh six miles southwest of Hebron, which are probably the remains of this place.

PETT, "Verses 52-54‘Arab, and Dumah, and Eshan, and Janim, and Beth-tappuah, and Aphekah, and Humtah, and Kiriath-arba, the same is Hebron, and Zior. ine cities with their villages.’For Arab compare 2 Samuel 23:35. Perhaps er-Rabiyeh, eleven kilometres (seven miles) south west of Hebron. Dumah is probably ed-Domeh, five kilometres (three miles) west of Arab, a site of considerable ruins. Eshan and Janim are unknown. Beth-tappuah (‘house of apples’) is probably Teffuh, five kilometres (three and a half miles) north west of Hebron in a district which abounds in fruit trees. Apheka is south west of Hebron and possibly Khirbet ed-darrame or Khirbet Kana‘an. Humtah is unknown. For Kiriath-arba/Hebron see Joshua 14:15. Zior is perhaps Sa‘ir, seven kilometres (four and a half miles) north of Hebron. ‘ ine cities with their villages’. This was the second group of towns in the hill country, possibly looking to Hebron as their centre.

53 Janim, Beth Tappuah, Aphekah,

CLARKE,"Beth-tappuah - The house of the apple or citron tree. Probably a place where these grew in great abundance and perfection.

Aphekah - See the note on Jos_12:18.

GILL, "And Janum,.... Under the word "Janum", Jerom writes (l), there is a village called Janua, three miles from Legion to the south, but seems not to be what is written:

and Bethtappuah is by Jerom called Bethaphu (m), and said to be a village in the tribe of Judah, fourteen miles beyond Raphia, as you go to Egypt, which is the border of Palestine:

and Aphekah; Jerom speaks (n) of a large castle in his time called Apheca, near the town of Palestine; there were several places of the name of Aphek; See Gill on Jos_12:18. As for Bethtappuah, it seems to be a place which was dedicated to a deity to which apples were sacred, in memory of the apple by which mankind was seduced; there was in later times a goddess called Pomona from hence.

K&D, "Jos_15:53

Janum is still unknown. Beth-tappuah has been preserved in the village of Teffuh, about two hours to the west of Hebron (Rob. ii. p. 428). Apheka has not been discovered.

WHEDO , "53. Beth-tappuah, five miles west of Hebron, is now called Teffuh. It is well peopled, and stands in the midst of olive groves and vineyards, with marks of thrift. Portions of an old wall and fortress are visible among the houses. Aphekah is probably the same as Aphek. See on Joshua 12:18.

54 Humtah, Kiriath Arba (that is, Hebron) and Zior—nine towns and their villages.

GILL, "And Humtah,.... Of Humtah we nowhere else read:

and Kirjatharba, which is Hebron; of Kirjatharba we read frequently; See Gill on Jos_14:15,

and Zior; Jerom says (o), that in his time there was a village shown by the name of Sihor, between Aelia (or Jerusalem) and Eleutheropolis, in the tribe of Judah:

nine cities with their villages; which is exactly their number, as expressed; here ends the second division, or of the cities in the hill country of Judea; a third follows.

K&D, "Jos_15:54

Humtah is also unknown. Kirjath-arba, or Hebron: see at Jos_10:3. Zior has also not been traced; though, “so far as the name is concerned, it might have been preserved in the heights of Tugra, near to Hebron” (Knobel).

55 Maon, Carmel, Ziph, Juttah,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:55-57

Third group; lying eastward of the towns named in the last two, and next to “the wilderness.”

Jos_15:55

The four towns retain their ancient names with but little change. Maon 1Sa_23:24; 1Sa_25:2, the home of Nabal, is to be looked for in the conical hill, “Main,” the top of which is covered with ruins. It lies eight or nine miles southeast of Hebron Carmel 1Sa_25:2, the modern “Kurmul,” is a little to the north of “Main.” The name belongs to more than one place Jos_12:22. Ziph gave its name to “the wilderness” into which David fled from Saul 1Sa_23:14.

CLARKE,"Maon - In a desert to which this town gave name, David took refuge for a considerable time from the persecution of Saul; and in this place Nabal the Carmelite had great possessions. See 1Sa_23:24, 1Sa_23:25; 1Sa_25:2.

Carmel - Not the celebrated mount of that name, but a village, the residence of Nabal. See 1Sa_25:2. It was near Maon, mentioned above, and was about ten miles eastward of Hebron. It is the place where Saul erected a trophy to himself after the defeat of the Amalekites; see 1Sa_15:12.

Ziph - See on Jos_15:24 (note).

GILL, "Maon, Carmel,.... Maon was the dwelling place of Nabal the Carmelite, whose possessions were in Carmel, and were not far from one another, 1Sa_25:2. It gave name to a wilderness near where David hid himself from Saul, 1Sa_23:25; Jerom (p) places it to the east of Daroma, who also informs (q) us, that there was in his time a village that went by the name of Carmelia, ten miles from Hebron towards the east, and where was a Roman garrison.

and Ziph, according to the same writer (r), was eight miles from Hebron to the east; and there was a village shown in his time where David was hid; this gave name to a wilderness also, 1Sa_23:14,

and Juttah, which Jerom calls (s) Jeshan, was in his time a large village of the Jews, eighteen miles from Eleutheropolis, to the southern part in Daroma. Reland (t)conjectures that this was the native place of John the Baptist; and that, instead of "a city of Judah", it should be read "the city Juta", Luk_1:39.

K&D, "Jos_15:55-57

The third group of ten towns, to the east of both the former groups, towards the desert.

Jos_15:55

Maon, the home of Nabal (1Sa_25:2), on the border of the desert of Judah, which is here called the desert of Maon (1Sa_23:25), has been preserved in Tell Maîn, on a conical mountain commanding an extensive prospect, east by north of Semua, three hours and three-quarters to the S.S.E. of Hebron (Rob. ii. p. 193). Carmel, a town and mountain mentioned in the history of David, and again in the time of Uzziah (1Sa_15:12; 1Sa_25:2.; 2Ch_26:10). In the time of the Romans it was a large place, with a Roman garrison (Onom.), and is the present Kurmul, on the north-west of Maon, where there are considerable ruins of a very ancient date (Rob. ii. pp. 196ff.). Ziph, in the desert of that name, to which David fled from Saul (1Sa_23:14., 1Sa_26:2-3), was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch_11:8), and has been preserved in the ruins upon the hill Ziph, an hour and three-quarters to the south-east of Hebron (Rob. ii. p. 191). Juttah, which was assigned to the priests (Jos_21:16), and was a vicus praegrandis Judaeorum in the time of the fathers (Onom. s. v. Jethan), was eighteen Roman miles to the south (south-east) of Eleutheropolis, and is the present Jutta or Jitta, a large Mahometan place with ruins, an hour and three-quarters to the south of Hebron (Seetzen, iii. p. 8; Rob. ii. p. 191, 628).

WHEDO , "55. The third cluster of mountain cities lies east of the other two, toward the desert.

Maon, modern Main, nine miles south-southeast of Hebron, is conspicuously situated on a conical hill. The summit is crowned with ruins, foundations of hewn stone, a square enclosure, and several cisterns. The view is fine. Many towns of Judah are in sight.

Carmel, now called Kurmul, is a few miles northwest of Maon. Robinson says that

here he found more extensive ruins than he had yet anywhere seen, unless perhaps at Beth-el. The city was built in a semicircular amphitheatre shut in by rocks, in which there is an artificial reservoir one hundred and seventeen by seventy-four feet. The ruins consist chiefly of foundations and broken walls, scattered in every direction, and thrown together in mournful confusion and desolation.

Ziph, modern Zif, five miles southeast of Hebron, is in ruins. Twice did its treacherous people attempt to betray David, the youthful outlaw, into the hands of his persecutor, Saul. 1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1.

Juttah is in the vicinity of Ziph, at the southwest, and is now called Yutta. Robinson describes it as having the appearance of a large Mohammedan town, on a low eminence, with trees around. He agrees with Reland that this is the city Juda, (Luke 1:39,) the residence of Zacharias and Elizabeth, and the birthplace of John the Baptist. The pronunciation is softened in the ew Testament.

PETT, "Verses 55-57‘Maon, Carmel, and Ziph, and Jutah, and Jezreel, and Jokdeam, and Zanoah. Kain, Gibeah and Timnah. Ten cities with their villages.’The towns of this group were situated south of Hebron. Maon lay on the edge of the wilderness of Judah, known in this neighbourhood as the wilderness of Maon, signifying rough pasture land. It was here that David took refuge from Saul (1 Samuel 23:24-25) and where the churlish abal lived (1 Samuel 25:2). It is probably Khirbet el-Ma‘in, fourteen kilometres (nine miles) south of Hebron. Carmel is sited at present day Khirbet el-Karmil, twelve kilometres (eight miles) south south east of Hebron in a rolling pastoral region ideal for flocks. abal’s wife was a Carmelitess.

PULPIT, "Maon, Carmel, and Ziph. These, as Dean Stanley reminds us, still retain unaltered their old names. "That long line of hills was the beginning of the 'hill country of Judaea,' and when we began to ascend it the first answer to our inquiries after the route told us that it was 'Carmel,' on which abal fed his flocks, and close below its long ranges was the hill and ruins of Ziph," close above the hill of Maon, Wilson also ('Lands of the Bible,' 1.380) makes the same remark. Maon is to be remembered as David's hiding place from the enmity of Saul (1 Samuel 23:24-26), and as the home of abal (1 Samuel 25:2). Carmel (not the famous mountain of that name) meets us again in the history of Saul and of David (1 Samuel 15:12; 1 Samuel 25:2, 1 Samuel 25:5, 1 Samuel 25:7, 1 Samuel 25:40). The neighbourhood of Ziph was also one of David's hiding places, and is described as a "wilderness" in which there was a "wood" in 1 Samuel 23:15, 1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1, 1 Samuel 26:2. See also the prologue to Psalms 54:1-7. Another Ziph is mentioned in Joshua 15:24.

56 Jezreel, Jokdeam, Zanoah,

GILL, "And Jezreel,.... This Jezreel in the tribe of Judah is different from that which was once a royal seat of some of the kings of Israel, and from whence the famous valley of Jezreel or Esdraelon had its name: of this we have no other account elsewhere:

and Jokdeam; of which we have no other mention:

and Zanoah is a distinct place from the city of the same name in the valley, Jos_15:34.

K&D, "Jos_15:56

Jezreel, the home of Ahinoam (1Sa_25:43; 1Sa_27:3, etc.), a different place from the Jezreel in the plain of Esdraelon, has not yet been discovered. This also applies to Jokdeam and Zanoah, which are only met with here.

WHEDO , "56. Jezreel cannot be located. It was the country of Ahinoam. 1 Samuel 25:43. It must not be confounded with the city in the plain of Esdraelon. Joshua 15:57.

Gibeah, meaning hill, is identified by Robinson with Jebah, a village upon a detached hill in Wady-el-Mu-surr, ten miles southwest of Jerusalem.

Timnah is a different place from that near to Adullam, (Joshua 15:10; Joshua 15:35,) though some have confounded them.

57 Kain, Gibeah and Timnah—ten towns and their villages.

CLARKE,"Timnah - A frontier town of the Philistines; it was in this place that Samson got his wife, see Judges 14:1-15:20.

GILL, "Cain,.... Cain, or Hakain, "that Cain", we nowhere else read of; whether the name was given it by the old Canaanites, in memory of Cain, the son of Adam, is not certain:

Gibeah; there were other places that went by the name of Gibeah; there was a Gibeah in Benjamin, Jdg_20:4, and another in the same tribe called Gibeah of Saul, 1Sa_11:4, to

distinguish it from that; but this was in the tribe of Judah. Masius conjectures it is the same with that in 1Sa_23:19 which was near Ziph; and not amiss. Jerom (u) makes mention of Gabaha and Gabatha, little villages to the east of Daroma; and of another Gabatha, near Bethlehem, in the tribe of Judah; but whether either of these are meant it is doubtful:

Timnah, of this city; see Gill on Jos_15:10,

ten cities with their villages; the number agrees with the names of them.

K&D, "Jos_15:57

Cain (Hakkain) is possibly the same as Jukin, on the south-east of Hebron (Rob. ii. p. 449). Gibeah cannot be the Gabatha near Bethlehem, mentioned in the Onom. (s. v.Gabathaon), or the Gibea mentioned by Robinson (ii. p. 327), i.e., the village of Jeba, on a hill in the Wady el Musurr, as this does not come within the limits of the present group; it must rather be one of the two places (Gebaa and Gebatha) described as viculi contra orientalem plagam Daromae, though their situation has not yet been discovered. Timnah, probably the place already mentioned in Gen_38:12., has not been discovered.

ELLICOTT, "(57) The four first and the four last of these are all found. Maon, Carmel, and Ziph became famous in David’s wanderings (see the story of abal, 1 Samuel 25); and the Ziphites have covered themselves with infamy by their repeated efforts to betray him to Saul, who sought his life (1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1).

58 Halhul, Beth Zur, Gedor,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:58, Jos_15:59

Fourth group. Towns north of the last mentioned, of which Beth-zur and Gedor are represented by “Beit-sur” and “Jedur.”

CLARKE,"Gedor - See the note on Jos_12:13. In this place the Alexandrian MS. of the Septuagint and the Codex Vaticanus add the eleven following towns: Theca, and Ephratha, (that is, Bethlehem), and Phagor, and Etan, and Kulon, and Tatam, and Thebes, and Karam, and Galam, and Thether, and Manocho; eleven cities and their villages. St. Jerome, on Mic_5:1, mentions them, so that we find they were in the copies he used. Dr. Kennicott contends that they should be restored to the text, and accounts

thus for their omission: “The same word וחצרויהן vechatsreyhen, and their villages, occurring immediately before this passage and at the end of it, the transcriber’s eye passed from one to the other by mistake. A similar accident has caused the omission of two whole verses, the 35th and 36th of Joshua 21.” See the note on Jos_21:35, Jos_21:36.

GILL, "Halhul,.... Here begins a fourth division, or list, of the cities in the mountains. Halhul Jerom calls Ehul, and says (w) there was in his time in the country belonging to Aelia (or Jerusalem) a village by the name of Ahula, near Hebron; and

Bethzur, Jerom says (x), was then called Bethseron, a village as you go from Aelia to Hebron, in the twentieth mile, near which was a fountain at the bottom of a mount, where it is said the eunuch was baptized by Philip: he makes mention of another village called Bethsur in the tribe of Judah, a mile from Eleutheropolis. In the Apocrypha:"So he came to Judea, and drew near to Bethsura, which was a strong town, but distant from Jerusalem about five furlongs, and he laid sore siege unto it.'' (2 Maccabees 11:5)it is said to be but five furlongs from Jerusalem, but it must have been at a greater distance:

Gedor, of this city; see Gill on Jos_12:13.

K&D, "Jos_15:58-59

The fourth group of six towns, on the north of Hebron or of the last two groups. -Halhul, according to the Onom. (s. v. Elul) a place near Hebron named Alula, has been preserved in the ruins of Halhûl, an hour and a half to the north of Hebron (Rob. i. p. 319, ii. p. 186, and Bibl. Res. p. 281). Beth-zur, which was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch_11:7), and is frequently mentioned in the time of the Maccabees as a border defence against the Idumaeans (1 Macc. 4:29, 61, etc.), was twenty (? fifteen) Roman miles from Jerusalem, according to the Onom. (s. v. Beth-zur), on the road to Hebron. It is the present heap of ruins called Beit-zur on the north-west of Halhûl (Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 276-7; Ritter, Erdk. xvi. pp. 236, 267-8). Gedor, the ruins of Jedûr, an hour and a half to the north-west (Rob. ii. p. 338; Bibl. Res. pp. 282-3).

WHEDO , "58. Halhul still retains its name, and is found four miles north of Hebron. Here is a ruined mosque, the reputed sepulchre of the prophet Jonah, “looking,” says Robinson, “much like the church of a ew England village.” Beth-zur, house of the rock, is five miles north of Hebron, and is still called Beit-zur, the exact Arabic of the Hebrew name. “Its principal ruin is the tower, of which only one side is now standing. There are hewn stones and fragments of columns scattered about, and many foundations of buildings.” — Robinson. The tradition that Philip baptized the Eunuch here is improbable, since it is not on the route from Jerusalem to Gaza. Gedor is identified by Robinson with the modern ruins called Jedur, about eight miles north of Hebron.

PETT,"Verse 58‘Halhul, Beth-zur and Gedor, and Maarath, and Beth-anoth, and Eltekon. Six cities with their villages.’This is the fourth section of cities and townships in the hill country, lying to the north of Hebron. Halhul survives as the name of a village seven kilometres (four miles) north of Hebron. Two kilometres (a mile or so) further on are the ruins of Beth-zur, ‘house of rock’. This once strong fortress with its massive defence walls on the slope of the mound was destroyed by the Egyptians when the Hyksos were driven from Egypt (early sixteenth century BC) and remained largely abandoned until the arrival of the Israelites. In the twelfth and eleventh centuries BC it became

a flourishing city once again, but declined somewhat in the tenth century, although ‘fortified’ by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:7). Its site is Khirbet et-Tubeiqah.

Gedor is Khirbet Jedur, two kilometres west of Beit Ummar and five kilometres (three miles) north of Beth-zur, just off the central ridge. It is possibly the Beth-gader of 1 Chronicles 2:51. Maarath and Eltekon are unknown. Beth-anoth means ‘house of Anath’, probably having a shrine to the goddess Anath. A number of places would be so named (see Joshua 19:38; Judges 1:33). It is modern Beit ‘Anun, six kilometres (three miles or so) north north east of Hebron. ‘Six cities with their villages’.

ote Re a Possible Twelfth Group.

Up to this point we have had eight specific groups or districts mentioned, together with Ekron and her towns and villages, specifically distinguished from Ashdod, and Ashdod/Gaza with their towns and villages, both larger conurbations than elsewhere described. It may well be that these were intended to represent two districts. ote that there is no final statement conjoining them as with the other districts. With the two groups yet to come that would make up twelve groups or districts. As twelve appears to have been an important number in tribal confederacy this would appear a reasonable supposition. It was an act of faith, for not all the territory was even partially possessed. But such large views are held by men at times when faith is strong.

However at this point in the text LXX has a further group included in the text which reads generally as follows. ‘Tekoa, and Ephrath, the same is Beth-lehem, and Peor, and Etam, and Kolon, and Tatam, and Sores, and Kerem, and Gallim, and Bether, and Manahath. Eleven cities and their villages.’ This may have been a later addition in order to introduce Bethlehem-judah which was of later significance (Judges 17:7; Judges 19:1). Otherwise the non-mention of the Bethlehem district is strange, although it may be that the mentioning of Jerusalem was originally seen as covering this section (Joshua 15:63). It may thus be that it was in the original text and dropped out accidentally in copying. The reference to Bethlehem as Ephrath (compare Genesis 35:19; Genesis 48:7) would support the age of the addition.

Tekoah was the home of the prophet Amos (Amos 1:1) and is now Tekua, ten kilometres (six miles) south of Bethlehem. It was from there that Joab later sought a wise woman to seek to reconcile David and Absalom (2 Samuel 14). The neighbouring land to the east was called ‘the wilderness of Tekoa’ (2 Chronicles 20:20). Ephrath was the ancient name of Bethlehem (Genesis 35:19; Genesis 48:7; 1 Chronicles 4:4) and often added (Micah 5:2) to distinguish it from Bethlehem in Zebulun (Joshua 19:15). It was at one stage garrisoned by the Philistines (2 Samuel 23:14). Bethlehem was the birthplace of Boaz, David, and supremely Jesus. Some of the other cities have tentative identifications.

59 Maarath, Beth Anoth and Eltekon—six towns and their villages.[d]

GILL, "And Maarath, and Bethanoth, and Eltekon,.... Of these cities we have no account elsewhere; only mention is made of Eltekeh, in the tribe of Dan, Jos_19:44,

six cities with their villages; these were all in the mountainous part of Judea, as were the two following.

K&D, "Jos_15:59

Maarath and Eltekon have not yet been discovered. Beth-anoth (probably a contraction of Beth-ayanoth) has been discovered by Wolcott in the ruins of Beit-anum, on the east of Halhûl (Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 279; cf. Pal. ii. p. 186).

Between Jos_15:59 and Jos_15:60, the fifth group of towns given in the Septuagint is wanting in the Masoretic text. This group lay to the north of the fourth, and reached as far as Jerusalem, It comprised a district in which even now there are at least fifteen places and ruins, so that we have not an arbitrary interpolation made by the lxx, as Jerome assumed, but rather a gap in the Hebrew text, arising from the fact that an

ancient copyist passed by mistake from the word וחצריהן in Jos_15:59 to the same word at the close of the missing section. In the Alexandrian version the section reads as

follows in Cod. Al. and Vat.: Θεκώ�καo�pφραθά,�αrτη�sστo�Βαιθλέεµ,�καo�Φαγώρ�καo�Αuτ8ν�

καo�Καολhν�καo�Τατ8µ�καo�Θωβvς (Cod. Al. Σωρwς) καo�Καρέµ�καo�Γαλxµ�καo�Θεθwρ (Cod.

Al. Βαιθ2ρ) καo�Μαµοχώ,�πόλεις�zνδεκα�καo�α{�κ9µαι�α|τ9ν. - Theko, the well-known Tekoah, the home of the wise woman and of the prophet Amos (2Sa_14:2; Amo_1:1), was fortified by Rehoboam, and still inhabited after the captivity (2Ch_11:6; Neh_3:5, Neh_3:27). It is the present Tekua, on the top of a mountain covered with ancient ruins, two hours to the south of Bethlehem (Rob. ii. pp. 181-184; Tobler, Denkbl. aus Jerus. pp. 682ff.). Ephratah, i.e., Bethlehem, the family seat of the house of David (Rth_1:1; Rth_4:11; 1Sa_16:4; 1Sa_17:12.; Mic_5:2), was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch_11:6), and is a place frequently mentioned. It was the birth-place of Christ (Mat_2:1.; Luk_2:4), and still exists under the ancient name of Beit-lahm, two hours to the south of Jerusalem (Seetzen, ii. pp. 37ff.; Rob. ii. pp. 159ff.; Tobler, Topogr. v. Jerus. ii. pp. 464ff.). Bethlehem did not receive the name of Ephratah for the first time from the Calebite family of Ephrathites (1Ch_2:19, 1Ch_2:50; 1Ch_4:4), but was known by that name even in Jacob's time (Gen_35:19; Gen_48:7). Phagor, which was near to Bethlehem according to the Onom. (s. v. Fogor), and is also called Phaora, is the present Faghur, a heap of ruins to the south-west of Bethlehem (Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 275). Aetan was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch_11:6), and has been preserved in the Wady and Ain Attan between Bethlehem and Faghur (Tobler, Dritte Wand. pp. 88, 89). Kulon, the present village of Kulomeh, an hour and a half west by north from Jerusalem on the road to Ramleh (see Rob. ii. p. 146; Bibl. Res. p. 158: it is called Kolony by Seetzen, ii. p. 64). Tatam cannot be traced. Sores (for Thobes appears to be only a copyist's error) is probably Saris, a small village four hours to the east of Jerusalem, upon a ridge on the south of Wady Aly

(Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 154-5). Karem, now Ain Karim, a large flourishing village two hours to the wets of Jerusalem, with a Franciscan convent dedicated to John the Baptist in the middle, and a fountain (Rob. ii. p. 141; Bibl. Res. p. 271). Galem, a different place from the Gallim on the north of Jerusalem (Isa_10:30), has not yet been discovered. Baither, now a small dirty village called Bettir or Bittir, with a beautiful spring, and with gardens arrange din terraces on the western slope of the Wady Bittir, to the south-west of Jerusalem (Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 266). Manocho, possibly the same place as Manachat(1Ch_8:6), has not been found.

WHEDO , "[59. Bethanoth is found in the ruined village Beit-ainun, about three miles northeast of Hebron. “The principal ruin is a building eighty-three feet long and seventy-two broad. The remains of the town lie on a gentle slope north of this edifice. The foundations remain, and the streets and forms of the dwellings can still be traced.” — Robinson.] Between the 59th and 60th verses the LXX in the Codex Alexandrinus and Vaticanus insert another group of eleven cities, namely, Tekoah, Ephratha or Bethlehem, Phagor, Aitan, Khulan, Tatam, Thobes, Karem, Galem, Thether, and Manocho. Whether these cities have been added by the LXX without authority, or were really found in the earliest MSS. of this book, is a question which is not easy to determine. Hengstenberg maintains the former opinion and Keil the latter. Some find a motive for the erasure of the whole group from the Hebrew text in the desire of the Jews to deny that Jesus sprang from the tribe of Judah.

60 Kiriath Baal (that is, Kiriath Jearim) and Rabbah—two towns and their villages.

CLARKE,"Kirjath-baal - The same as Baalah. See on Jos_15:9 (note).

GILL, "Kirjathbaal, (which is Kirjathjearim,),.... Of Kirjathbaal, and its several names; see Gill on Jos_15:9,

and Rabbah, of which we nowhere else read; for this is a very different city from the Rabbah of the children of Ammon, 2Sa_12:26,

two cities with their villages; why these are rec

K&D, "Jos_15:60

The sixth group of only two towns, to the west of Jerusalem, on the northern border of the tribe of Judah. - Kirjath-baal, or Kirjath-jearim, the present Kureyet el Enab; see at Jos_15:9, and Jos_9:17. Rabbah (Ha-rabbah, the great) is quite unknown.

PETT, "Verse 60‘Kiriath-baal, the same is Kiriath-jearim, and Rabbah, two cities with their villages.’Kiriath-baal (city of Baal) or Kiriath-jearim (city of the forests) was on the Judah-Benjamite border. It is first shown as belonging to Judah (Joshua 15:60) and then to Benjamin (Joshua 18:28). This is not unlikely. Many border cities would be jointly possessed because of the land on each side of the border. Its alternative name Kiriath-baal suggests that it was an old Canaanite high place. It is possibly to be identified with modern Kuriet el-‘Enab (Abu Ghosh). Beeroth means ‘wells’. This may be el-Bireh where there are several wells and ruins. It is eight kilometres (five miles) north east of Gibeon. Rabbah is possibly the Rubute of the Amarna letters, also mentioned in the inscriptions of Tuthmosis III. It lay in the region of Gezer. ‘Two cities with their villages.’ This district was on the Benjamite border.

PULPIT, "Kirjath Baal. Before these words the LXX. insert the names of eleven more cities, among which Tekoah and Bethlehem are included. For the former see 2 Samuel 14:2; 2 Chronicles 11:6; 2 Chronicles 20:20. The prophet Amos was one of its herdsmen (Amos 1:1). We learn from 1 Macc 9:33, etc; that it was near Jordan, and had a waste district in its vicinity. It has been identified with Teku'a, two hours south of Bethlehem. Of Bethlehem itself, the home of Ruth and David, the birthplace of Jesus Christ, it is unnecessary to speak. But the incidents related concerning Bethlehem in 17:1-13; 19:1-30. (which seem to indicate that the author of the book had special information about Bethlehem), as well as the narrative of the Book of Ruth, lead us to suppose that the verse inserted here by the LXX. is genuine, since Bethlehem was, in early times, a town of sufficient importance to be noticed in a list like this, and that its omission in the Hebrew text is due to the mistake of some transcriber.

61 In the wilderness:

Beth Arabah, Middin, Sekakah,

BAR ES, "Jos_15:61, Jos_15:62

This district, including the towns in “the wilderness,” the scene of David’s wanderings (1Sa_23:24; Psa_63:1-11 title), and of the preaching of the Baptist Mat_3:1, and perhaps of our Lord’s temptation Matt. 4, extended from the northern limit of Judah along the Dead Sea to the Negeb; it was bounded on the west by that part of “the mountains” or highlands of Judah, which adjoined Bethlehem and Maon. It abounds in limestone rocks, perforated by numerous caverns, and often of fantastic shapes. It is badly

supplied with water, and hence, is for the most part barren, though affording in many parts, now quite desolate, clear tokens of former cultivation. It contained only a thin population in the days of Joshua.

GILL, "In the wilderness,.... The wilderness of Judea, which was not a desert and uninhabited but had many cities and villages in it, those that follow:

Betharabah; the first of these seems to be in the borders of Judah and Benjamin, and so is ascribed to both; see Jos_15:6,

Middin, and Secacah; of the two last we read nowhere else, only in Jdg_5:10; what we translate "ye that sit in judgment", Kimchi interprets, "ye that dwell by Middin", and says it is the name of a place in Joshua, and mentions this passage.

K&D, "Jos_15:61-62

The towns in the desert of Judah, which ran along the Dead Sea from the northern border of Judah (Jos_15:6, Jos_15:7) to Wady Fikreh on the south, and reached to the districts of Maon, Ziph, Tekoah, and Bethlehem towards the west. This tract of land is for the most part a terrible desert, with a soil composed of chalk, marl, and limestone, and with bald mountains covered with flint and hornstone, and without the slightest trace of vegetation on the side bordering on the Dead Sea (see v. Schubert, Reise, iii. pp. 94, 96; Rob. ii. pp. 202, 475, 477). Yet wherever there are springs even this desert is covered with a luxuriant vegetation, as far as the influence of the water extends (Seetzen, ii. pp. 249, 258); and even in those parts which are now completely desolate, there are traces of the work of man of a very ancient date in all directions (Rob. ii. p. 187). Six towns are mentioned in the verses before us. Beth-arabah: see at Jos_15:6. Middin and Secaca are unknown. According to Knobel, Middin is probably the ruins of Mird or Mardeh, to the west of the northern end of the Dead Sea (Rob. ii. p. 270).

WHEDO , "61. The wilderness — The wild and rugged territory along the west side of the Dead Sea. Only six cities are mentioned as belonging to this entire district.

PETT,"Verse 61-62‘In the Wilderness, Betharabah, Middin, and Secacah, and ibshan, and the City of Salt, and En-gedi. Six cities with their villages.’The Wilderness of Judah was the barren rocky country, also called Jeshimon (‘devastation’ - 1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 23:24). It lay between the Central Range and the western side of the Dead Sea. It was a violent and devastated area, barren and waterless, and exceedingly hot, not enjoying the more abundant rains of the western side of the Central Range. Existence in it was hard, only made possible by a few springs, the careful preservation of water in cisterns and a hardy nature. Yet in this area such hardy people eked out an existence.

Beth-arabah, (house of the Arabah), as its name suggests was connected with the Arabah (the Jordan Rift Valley) near the Dead Sea and was on the border of Judah and Benjamin. They appear to have shared a number of cities on their borders. Middin is possibly Khirbet Abu Tabaq, Secacah, possibly Khirbet es-Samrah, and

ibshan is possibly Khirbet el-Maqari. They would later become fortified sites in 9th century BC controlling irrigation work. But at this stage they were small and insignificant, with their villages. The City of Salt was south of them and a frontier post near the Dead Sea, probably to be identified with Khirbet Qumran. An iron age fortress would later be built there. En-gedi, (‘spring of the kid’), was an important oasis and fresh water spring west of the Dead Sea. David hid there at one stage (1 Samuel 23:29; 1 Samuel 24:1 on), its rugged terrain and provision of necessities making it an ideal hiding place. It was famous for aromatic plants and perfumes (Song of Solomon 1:14). Later it was another fortress city. ‘Six cities with their villages.’ But a tough and hard existence.

PULPIT, "The wilderness. מדבר ; This was the eastern part of the territory of Judah, bordering on the Dead Sea. Here David took refuge from the pursuit of Saul (Psalms 63:1), here St. John the Baptist prepared the way of Christ. It is described by Tristram as "a wilderness, but no desert." Herbage is to be found there, but no trees, no signs of the cultivation formerly bestowed upon the hill country (see above, Joshua 15:48). And the fewness of the cities in early times is a proof that its character has not been altered by time. The hills, says Canon Tristram, are of a "peculiar desolate tameness," and are intersected by the traces of winter watercourses, seaming the sides of the monotonous round-topped hills. Other writers describe this country in less favourable terms, denying it even the scanty herbage found there by Canon Tristram.

62 ibshan, the City of Salt and En Gedi—six towns and their villages.

BAR ES, "Jos_15:62

“The city of Salt” is not mentioned elsewhere, but was no doubt connected with “the valley of salt” 2Sa_8:13. The name itself, and the mention of En-gedi (Gen_14:7 note) suggest that its site must be looked for near the Dead Sea.

CLARKE,"The city of Salt - Or of Melach. This city was somewhere in the vicinity of the lake Asphaltites, the waters of which are the saltest perhaps in the world. The whole country abounds with salt: see the note on Gen_19:25. Some suppose that it is the same as Zoar, the place to which Lot escaped after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

En-gedi - The well of the kid: it was situated between Jericho and the lake of Sodom

or Dead Sea.

GILL, "And Nibshan,.... Of Nibshan no mention is made elsewhere:

and the city of Salt some take to be Zoar, so called because near the salt sea, or where Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt, Gen_19:22; but rather this city might be so called, because salt was made here.

and Engedi, or Engaddi, is a well known place, near the salt sea; See Gill on Eze_47:10. Jerom says (y), there was a very large village of Jews in his time called Engaddi, near the dead sea, from whence comes the opobalsam; the same place is called Hazazontamar, from the palm trees which grew there, 2Ch_20:2. It was famous for vineyards also, Son_1:14; it lay, according to Josephus (z), three hundred furlongs or about forty miles from Jerusalem:

six cities with their villages; the sum total agrees with the particulars.

K&D, "Jos_15:62

Nibsan, also unknown. The city of salt (salt town), in which the Edomites sustained repeated defeats (2Sa_8:13; Psa_60:2; 2Ki_14:7; 1Ch_18:12; 2Ch_25:11), was no doubt at the southern end of the Dead Sea, in the Salt Valley (Rob. ii. p. 483). Engedi, on the Dead Sea (Eze_47:10), to which David also fled to escape from Saul (1Sa_24:1.), according to the Onom. (s. v. Engaddi) a vicus praegrandis, the present Ain-Jidi, a spring upon a shelf of the high rocky coast on the west of the Dead Sea, with ruins of different ancient buildings (see Seetzen, ii. pp. 227-8; Rob. ii. pp. 214ff.; Lynch, pp. 178-9, 199, 200).

WHEDO , "62. Engedi is the modern Ain Jidy, on the western shore of the Dead Sea. Here is a rich plain, half a mile square, where are found foundations and heaps of stone. Its vineyards were celebrated by Solomon, its balsam by Josephus, its palms by Pliny.

[63. The Jebusites — The hardy and warlike mountaineers who inhabited Jerusalem. They occupied the strongest natural fortress in the country, and it was not until the time of David that they were dispossessed of this their ancient seat. 2 Samuel 5:6-10.

Judah could not drive them out — Their inability arose from a decay of heroism and perseverance. They failed to meet the condition on which all their successes depended. “Be strong and of good courage.” It seems that the united army under Joshua made no direct attempt on Jerusalem after king Adonizedek was slain at Makkedah. And when Joshua, by reason of age, ceased to go to war, and the several tribes were left, like Caleb, to subdue and possess their own allotted territory, Judah’s courage and faith failed, and the Jebusites continued to dwell among them. They succeeded, however, at one time in capturing and burning the lower city, (Judges 1:8, note,) but the old mountaineers held the high citadel. Benjamin also tried, but ineffectually, to drive them out. Judges 1:21.

Unto this day — This shows that at the time of the writer David had not yet dislodged the Jebusite from his stronghold, and we must date this book before his day.]

PULPIT, "The city of Salt. Probably near the valley of Salt (2 Samuel 8:13; 2 Kings 14:7; 1 Chronicles 18:12), which must have been near the border of Edom, and in close proximity to the Dead Sea (see note on Joshua 3:16). En-gedi. The "fountain of the kid." Here David took refuge from Saul (1 Samuel 24:1). This place, now Ain Jidy, is situated in "a plain or slope about a mile and a half in extent from north to south". Here the ruins of the ancient city of Hazezon Tamar, or "the felling of the palm trees" (Genesis 14:7), are to be found, a city perhaps "the oldest in the world," may still be seen. "The cluster of camphire" (or rather of henna, the plant with which Oriental women stained their nails—So Joshua 1:14) may still be found there, and its perennial torrent dashes still into the Dead Sea. In later times than those of the Old Testament the Essenes planted their headquarters here.

63 Judah could not dislodge the Jebusites, who were living in Jerusalem; to this day the Jebusites live there with the people of Judah.

CLARKE,"The Jebusites dwell - at Jerusalem unto this day - The whole history of Jerusalem, previously to the time of David, is encumbered with many difficulties. Sometimes it is attributed to Judah, sometimes to Benjamin, and it is probable that, being on the frontiers of both those tribes, each possessed a part of it. If the Jebusites were ever driven out before the time of David, it is certain they recovered it again, or at least a part of it - what is called the citadel or strong hold of Zion, (see 2Sa_5:7), which he took from them; after which the city fell wholly into the hands of the Israelites. This verse is an additional proof that the book of Joshua was not written after the times of the Jewish kings, as some have endeavored to prove; for when this verse was written, the Jebusites dwelt with the children of Judah, which they did not after the days of David; therefore the book was written before there were any kings in Judea.

It is very likely, not only that many cities have by the lapse of time changed their names or been totally destroyed, (see the note on Jos_15:1), but that the names of those in the preceding catalogue have been changed also, several of them repeated that should have been mentioned but once, and not a few confounded with the terms by which they are described. But we must not suppose that every repetition of the name is through the carelessness of copyists; for there are often two places which bear the same name, which

is frequently the case in England. But besides this, villages are mentioned as being apparently in the tribe of Judah, which afterwards appear to have been in an other tribe. The reason appears to be this: many towns are mentioned which were frontier towns, and when the limits of a tribe are pointed out, such places must necessarily be mentioned, though allotted to a different tribe. This consideration will serve to remove several difficulties which occur in the reading of this and the following chapters.

GILL, "As for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem,.... From whom the city was called Jebus, Jdg_19:10. The Jews say, that these Jebusites were not those of the seven nations; but there was a man whose name was Jebus, and he was of the Philistines, of the seed of Abimelech, and the place was called by his name Jebus; and the men of that family that dwelt at Jerusalem, their names were called Jebusites, having their descent from him; so Araunah, the Jebusite, was king of that place: and the fort of that place was Zion, which was at Jerusalem: so Kimchi relates from their Rabbins, and with whom Jarchi agrees, but without any foundation; there is no doubt to be made of it, that these Jebusites were Canaanites:

the children of Judah could not drive them out; according to the above Jewish writers they could have done it, but it was not fit and proper they should, because of the oath of Abraham to Abimelech, from whom they suppose these Jebusites sprung; but the case was this; though Joshua slew the king of this place, and took his land with the rest, Jos_10:1; and though the men of Judah retook it after his death, it having been got into the hands of the Jebusites again, Jdg_1:8; yet either the fort of Zion was never taken by either of them, or if taken, the Jebusites got possession of it again, and held it until the times of David; see 2Sa_5:6,

but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day; the one in the fort of Zion, and the other in the city of Jerusalem, properly so called, and thus they continued unto the writing of this book; by which it should seem, that the Jebusites were not dispossessed of their fort, or a part of the city, by Joshua; or this might be added and inserted by some inspired man afterwards; or however it must be done before the times of David: and from the whole it appears, that the city of Jerusalem, at least a part of it, belonged to the tribe of Judah, as another part did to that of Benjamin, to which it is ascribed, Jos_18:28; see Jdg_1:21.

K&D, "Jos_15:63

In Jos_15:63 there follows a notice to the effect that the Judaeans were unable to expel the Jebusites from Jerusalem, which points back to the time immediately after Joshua, when the Judaeans had taken Jerusalem and burned it (Jdg_1:8), but were still unable to maintain possession. This notice is not at variance with either Jos_18:28 or Jdg_1:21, since it neither affirms that Jerusalem belonged to the tribe of Judah, nor that Judah alone laid claim to the possession of the town to the exclusion of the Benjamites (see the explanation of Jdg_1:8).

CALVI , "63.As for the Jebusites, etc This furnishes no excuse for the people, nor is it set down with that view; for had they exerted themselves to the full measure of their strength, and failed of success, the dishonor would have fallen on God himself, who had promised that he would continue with them as their leader until he should

give them full and free possession of the land, and that he would send hornets to drive out the inhabitants. Therefore, it was owing entirely to their own sluggishness that they did not make themselves masters of the city of Jerusalem. This they were not able to do; but their own torpor, their neglect of the divine command from a love of ease, were the real obstacles.

This passage is deserving of notice: we ought to learn from it to make vigorous trial of our strength in attempting to accomplish the commands of God, and not to omit any opportunity, lest while we are idly resting the door may be shut. A moderate delay might have been free from blame; but a long period of effeminate ease in a manner rejected the blessing which God was ready to bestow. (152)

ELLICOTT, "(63) Could not drive them out.—It is observable that the failure of the three great tribes of Judah and Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) to clear the inheritance assigned to them is specially noticed in the Book of Joshua—viz., Judah in this place, and Ephraim and Manasseh in Joshua 16:10; Joshua 17:11-12. A list of the failures of all the tribes is given in Judges 1.

BE SO , "Joshua 15:63. The Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem — Jerusalem was in part taken by Joshua before this; but the upper and stronger part of it, called Zion, was still held by the Jebusites, even till David’s time. And, it is probable, they descended from thence to the lower town, called Jerusalem, and took it; so that the Israelites were obliged to win it a second, yea, and a third time also. For afterward it was possessed by the Jebusites, 19:11; 2 Samuel 5:6. 7. The children of Judah could not, &c. — A part of Jerusalem was in the tribe of Judah, namely, the tower of Zion, mount Moriah, with some of the south parts adjacent; the rest of it was in the tribe of Benjamin, namely, the greatest part of the city itself. So that it was inhabited promiscuously by them both. They could not drive them out because of their unbelief; as Christ could do no mighty work because of the people’s unbelief, Mark 6:5-6; and because of their sloth, cowardice, and wickedness, whereby they forfeited God’s help. The Jebusites dwell at Jerusalem unto this day — When this book was written, whether in Joshua’s life, which continued many years after the taking of Jerusalem, or after his death, when this clause was added, as others were elsewhere in this book, by some other man of God, which must have been done before David’s time, because then the Jebusites were quite expelled and their fort taken.

COKE, "Ver. 63. As for the Jebusites—the children of Judah could not drive them out— The children of Judah remained in the city, and the Jebusites in the citadel, on mount Sion, till David forced the latter to quit the place, 2 Samuel 5:6-7.

REFLECTIO S.—In Judah's lot alone lay a hundred and fourteen cities. o mention is made of Bethlehem, though so distinguished in after-times; it seems not to have been yet built, or to have been among the villages. Some also of these cities they never possessed; and Jerusalem itself was yet in the hands of the Jebusites: through sloth, or weariness of the war, or unbelief, they suffered them to remain among them till the reign of David. ote; Sloth and unbelief are dangerous enemies in our Christian warfare: how much more could we have done for God and our

souls, had we a heart to trust him, and zeal to serve him.

CO STABLE, "Even though the Israelites defeated the king of Jerusalem ( Joshua 10:1-27), they were not able to exterminate the Jebusites who lived there. This city remained an island of Canaanite domination on the northern border of Judah.

PETT, "Verse 63‘As for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem to this day.’The Jebusites were safe in their mountain fortress and Judah could not displace them. Yet we note that Judah at one stage did capture Jerusalem (Judges 1:8). This was probably because, with Benjamin, they captured one of its hills and its lower city but could not capture the hill of the citadel. Alternately it may be that they did at an early stage capture the citadel but had to move on, leaving it to be re-established by the Jebusites who had escaped (or been away on an expedition -compare David at Ziklag in 1 Samuel 30:1) and then returned. Later when Benjamin could have captured the citadel (note ‘did not’ not ‘could not’ - Judges 1:21) they allowed the Jebusites to remain rather than driving them out. Jerusalem was a mirror of Canaan, -- ‘could not’, then ‘partly did’, then ‘could have’, then ‘failed to fully obey God’ and finally ‘allowed the inhabitants to remain’.

Thus the triumphant passage ends with a note of caution. ot all was success, for Israel were not fully obedient to YHWH. As they settled down and relaxed so did their obedience. The maintaining of a high level of trust and obedience requires great vigilance and much prayer.

It is important to note that there is no suggestion that Joshua himself captured Jerusalem. He defeated her confederacy and slew her king (Joshua 10:1-27), but he did not take the city. That he left for others who finally failed in obedience.

PULPIT, "As for the Jebusites. This passage, compared with 1:8, 1:21, and 2 Samuel 5:6, implies that the people of Judah took and set on fire the lower city, but were compelled to leave the stronghold of Zion in the hands of the Jebusites (see note on Joshua 10:1). Origen and Theodoret see in the Jebusites the type of the nominal members of Christ's Church, who are not His disciples indeed. The former refers to Matthew 13:25. Unto this day. A clear proof that this book was written before David became king.