Joshua 13:3: Territories not yet Conquered, Part 3

Verse 3:[1] (Jer. 2:18) From Sihor, which is before Egypt, even unto the borders of Ekron northward, which is counted to the Canaanite: (Judg. 3:3; 1 Sam. 6:4, 16; Zeph. 2:5) five lords of the Philistines; the Gazathites, and the Ashdothites, the Eshkalonites, the Gittites, and the Ekronites; also (Deut. 2:23) the Avites…

[From the turbid river, מִן־הַשִּׁיחוֹר[2]] From the Black (Montanus); from Sihor (Jonathan, Junius and Tremellius, Tigurinus, Drusius). Sihor signifies any black, that is, turbid, not clear, river. I might believe that thence Sicoris was named by the Phœnicians in Hispania.[3] Thus he calls the Nile, Jeremiah 2:18. Dionysius Afer, …Σῖρις ὑπ᾽ Αἰθιόπων κικλήσκεται· οἱ δὲ Συήνης Ἐνναέται στρεφθέντι μετ᾽ οὔνομα Νεῖλον ἔθεντι, that is, it is called Siris by the Ethiopians, but, with the name changed, Nile by the inhabitants of Syene.[4] And hence Siris has its name, because the Nile proceeds to settle down there (Grotius). Question: But what river then is the Sihor? Responses: 1. It is the Nile (thus Munster, Pagnine, Vatablus, Masius, Lyra, Menochius, Tirinus, Lapide, Bonfrerius). Concerning which, in Jeremiah 2:18, he does not allow us to doubt. This was called μέλας/black by the Greeks, because of the waters clouded with mud, and thence Egypt was called μελάμβωλος, that is, negrigleba, having black soil (Masius). [2. Others think otherwise.] It is thought to be the river that, flowing past Arabia Petra, runs into the Serbonian Bog, and separates Egypt from the Promised Land. To me it is rather the Rhinocolura,[5] as Epiphanius well says.[6] See on Numbers 34:5 (Junius). To some this is the same as that which is elsewhere called the river of Egypt. Thus Cajetan and the Samaritan Text (Bonfrerius). And Jerome maintains there is a river that separates Egypt from Canaan other than the Nile: but among approved Geographers no mention is made of such a river. Now, Strabo, the most diligent of all, in addition to the great Pelusiac mouth of the Nile[7] makes another small mouth near Mount Casius,[8] unto which mountain he extends Judea, Geography 16, not far from which is the city Rhinocolura, at which Jerome leads his little river into the sea. Pliny also positions Rhinocolura as the last city of Judea.[9] Therefore, I think that it is a little river different from the Nile, but derived from it, and that therefore it retains the name of the Nile (Masius, certain interpreters in Vatablus). It is a rivulet of the Nile, namely, that flows into the Pelusiac sea near Gaza. Objection: But how is the Nile set as the border of Canaan? Responses: 1. Because that torrent of the desert, which is the natural border of the land, is a stream of the Nile (Lapide). 2. Since nothing lies between the Nile and that torrent, or the Rhinocorura, except wilderness, the matter comes to the same thing, whether you define whatever belongs to inhabited land in Palestine by that torrent, or by the Nile, the greater and more famous river (Bonfrerius out of Lapide for the most part). The land is not reckoned useless and uninhabited, neither is there any reason for that (Lapide). They think that it is Hyperbole, when the borders of Judea are extended all the way to the Nile (Masius).

Sihor; a river, of which see Isaiah 23:3; Jeremiah 2:18.

[Which waters Egypt, אֲשֶׁ֣ר׀ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י מִצְרַ֗יִם] Which is on the upper part (or, upon, or on, the face [Pagnine, Montanus, Septuagint]) of Egypt (Munster). Which is before Egypt, or, in view of Egypt (Tigurinus, Junius and Tremellius, Drusius). עַל־פְּנֵי is the same as לִפְנֵי, in view of, before (Drusius).

[Over against the North] Ekron here is placed as the last satrapy of the Philistines toward the North. And so Adrichomius incorrectly places Gath further North than it, from whom for that reason all dissent (Bonfrerius). Ekron appears to have been positioned above Gath Northward, even it today it is commonly thought otherwise (Masius).

[The land of Canaan, which is divided among the five petty kings of the Philistines, לַֽכְּנַעֲנִ֖י תֵּחָשֵׁ֑ב חֲמֵ֣שֶׁת׀ סַרְנֵ֣י וגו״] To the Canaanite (unto the Canaanite [Munster], among the Canaanites [Tigurinus], of the Canaanite himself [Pagnine]) it shall be reputed (Montanus) (it is reputed [Pagnine, Tigurinus], it is reckoned [Munster], to the Canaanites it is assigned [Junius and Tremellius, similarly Masius]), namely, five principalities (or, prefectures [Munster, Castalio], or, satrapies [Tigurinus, Junius and Tremellius], or rather, satraps [Piscator, Pagnine, Dutch, Montanus, similarly Jonathan, Syriac, Arabic]). Something must be understood, and in that place are, or dwell, five, etc. (Vatablus). Now, those words, from Sihor unto the borders of Ekron towards the North it is to be reckoned to the Canaanites, are spoken by way of parenthesis, and contain a πρόληψιν/prolepsis. For they forestall what things might be able to be objected, why these are reckoned to the land promised to the Hebrews, since this nation was not descended from that devoted stock of the Canaanites, but of Mizraim. But, says the Sacred Text, although the Philistines dwell there, that region is to be considered as land of the Canaanites (Masius, Bonfrerius). He alleges not reason for this matter, yet it is able manifestly to be gathered from other Scriptures (Bonfrerius). Because formerly the Canaanites inhabited those places, and were in the end cast out from there by force by the Philistines, or Caphtorim (who, it is certain, were of the race of the Philistines). See Deuteronomy 2:23 (Masius, Bonfrerius), and Genesis 10:14 (Bonfrerius). That סְרָנִים/lords appears to have been a term peculiar to the Philistines, and to signify satraps, princes, or magnates. Now, here it is used by metonymy in the place of the dominions themselves (Masius). But he enumerates six satrapies, while he says that there are five; but that the Avites, or Hivites, are not of the satrapies of the Philistines. Others say that the five more excellent are enumerated; that the Avite is more obscure: which is not approved by the learned (Vatablus).

[And the Hivites] Some transfer these to the following verse. Thus the Latin (so that he might make them diverse from the Philistines), in imitation of the Septuagint, says Masius [with what trustworthiness, let each consider, for in our exemplars of the Septuagint, the matter is otherwise]: thus also some of the Hebrew Doctors (Masius). He rightly transfers that הָעַוִּים, the Avites, into the new sentence, contrary to the Hebrew division,[10] which, while it had promised that it was going to enumerate five, enumerates six (Grotius). [But others refer this to the preceding verse (Septuagint, Jonathan, Syriac, Arabic, Munster, Pagnine, Tigurinus, Masius).] Moreover, in the word עַוִּים/Avites the letter Ain (ע) is put in the place of the letter Heth (ח), as Nahmanides proves with many examples. For they are cognate letters, and are often used interchangeably. Thus we use חַוְיָא and עַוְיָא for serpent in Genesis Rabbah (Masius). [Bochart otherwise:] With the חִוִּים/Hivites I see the הָעַוִּים/Havites confounded everywhere, even by the Hebrews; which has not quite been proven to me: for the names do not agree, neither was their seat the same; for the former were inhabiting Hermon, the latter Philistia (as was here said); having been driven from there by the Caphtorim, Deuteronomy 2:23, they are thought to have crossed Euphrates, and thence they were carried into Samaria by the Assyrians, 2 Kings 17:31. Moreover, they do not appear to have been of the race of the Canaanites (Bochart’s Sacred Geography “Phaleg” 4:36:345). Mention is made here of the Avites because, as it is plausible, many of those, although ignoble and rustic, remained unto the times of Joshua in those places, from which formerly their ancestors were driven by the Caphtorim (Masius).

Which is counted to the Canaanite, that is, which, though now possessed by the Philistines, who drove out the Canaanites, the old inhabitants of it, Deuteronomy 2:23; Amos 9:7; yet is a part of the land of Canaan, and therefore belongs to the Israelites. The Avites, or the Avims, as they are called, Deuteronomy 2:23; who though they were expelled out of their ancient seat, and most of them destroyed by the Caphtorims or Philistines, as is there said, yet many of them probably escaped, and planted themselves in some other place not very far from the former.

[1] Hebrew: מִֽן־הַשִּׁיח֞וֹר אֲשֶׁ֣ר׀ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י מִצְרַ֗יִם וְעַ֙ד גְּב֤וּל עֶקְרוֹן֙ צָפ֔וֹנָה לַֽכְּנַעֲנִ֖י תֵּחָשֵׁ֑ב חֲמֵ֣שֶׁת׀ סַרְנֵ֣י פְלִשְׁתִּ֗ים הָעַזָּתִ֤י וְהָאַשְׁדּוֹדִי֙ הָאֶשְׁקְלוֹנִ֣י הַגִּתִּ֔י וְהָעֶקְרוֹנִ֖י וְהָעַוִּֽים׃

[2] שִׁיחוֹר/Sihor may be related to שָׁחַר, to be black.

[3] The Segre, formerly known as Sicoris, is in the north-eastern part of Spain.

[4] Syene was a Roman frontier town, on the eastern bank of the Nile just below the Lesser Cataract.

[5] The Rhinocolura was the easternmost branch of the Nile.

[6] Against Heresies 46.

[7] The Pelusiac mouth would be the easternmost branch in the Nile Delta.

[8] Casius is a small mountain located near the Serbonian Bog.

[9] Natural History 5:14.

[10] Joshua 13:3:  “From Sihor, which is before Egypt, even unto the borders of Ekron northward, which is counted to the Canaanite:  five lords of the Philistines; the Gazathites, and the Ashdothites, the Eshkalonites, the Gittites, and the Ekronites; also the Avites (וְהָעַוִּֽים׃)…”  The Silluq (ֽ׃) is the strongest disjunctive accent, and stands at the end of each verse.

Joshua 13:2: Territories not yet Conquered, Part 2

Verse 2:[1] (Judg. 3:1) This is the land that yet remaineth: (Joel 3:4) all the borders of the Philistines, and all (Josh. 13:13; 2 Sam. 3:3; 13:37, 38) Geshuri…

That yet remaineth unconquered by thee, and to be conquered by the Israelites, if they behave themselves aright.

[All Galilee, the Philistines] I suspect that there is an error here, and that Galilee crept into the text from the margin. For, 1. Galilee is always called גָּלִיל or גְּלִילָה, never גְּלִילוֹת in the plural number.[2] 2. הַפְּלִשְׁתִּים/Philistines is not able to stand by itself, for it signifies men, not a land, which is called פְּלֶשֶׁת/Philistia. 3. It does not at all appear true that Galilee was not yet subdued, since that war in Joshua 10 was conducted in Galilee (Bonfrerius).

[כָּל־גְּלִיל֥וֹת הַפְּלִשְׁתִּ֖ים[3]] [They take גְּלִילוֹת appellatively, and thus they translate it:] The limits, or boundaries, or confines, or borders (Septuagint, Jonathan, Junius and Tremellius, Montanus, Pagnine, Drusius, Tigurinus, Symmachus in Drusius, Kimchi and Rabbi Salomon in Masius), or, the provinces, of the Philistines (Munster, Castalio). The coasts (Masius), or shores to seas and rivers: which are so called, either, because of the sinuous recesses of shores and banks; or, because waves ebb and flow there and dance billow by billow; or, from the mounds of sand heaped up there (Masius).

[All Geshuri, וְכָל־הַגְּשׁוּרִי] And all of the Geshurite (Vatablus), a singular in the place of the plural, or, of the Geshurites, supply, the borders. Thus Deuteronomy 3:14, the border of the Geshurite[4] (Drusius). Understand this concerning that Geshuri, which was neighbor to Egypt and the Amalekites, not concerning that which was in Syria, Deuteronomy 3:14 (Drusius, Masius, Malvenda). [Others otherwise:] I understand this, not concerning that which was near the Amalekites, but concerning that land which the Geshurites had occupied, that is, on the sea, along the Northern coast next to Syra (Menochius, similarly Bonfrerius). I take this of the region near Hermon towards the Nothern tract across Jordan, concerning which Deuteronomy 3:14. Although that was allotted to the Manassites, Joshua 13:11, it appears that they never possessed it, verse 13. See 2 Samuel 3:3; 13:37, 38 (Bonfrerius). Question: How is Geshuri said not to have been occupied, when Jair the Gileadite is said to have captured it, 1 Chronicles 2:23; but this event Jair had already anticipated, as it is evident from Numbers 32:41; Deuteronomy 3:14? Response: It is to be said that Jair had occupied some of the region of Geshuri, and perhaps the city of Geshur, but that the Canaanites had recovered what was wrested from them: or that whatever was left in that region unoccupied is here called all Geshuri (Bonfrerius).

Geshuri; a people in the north-east of Canaan, of which see Deuteronomy 3:14, as the Philistines are on the south-west.

[1] Hebrew: זֹ֥את הָאָ֖רֶץ הַנִּשְׁאָ֑רֶת כָּל־גְּלִיל֥וֹת הַפְּלִשְׁתִּ֖ים וְכָל־הַגְּשׁוּרִֽי׃

[2] Note the feminine, plural termination (וֹת-).

[3] גְּלִילָה signifies a circuit or boundary, from גָּלָל, to roll.

[4] Deuteronomy 3:14a:  “Jair the son of Manasseh took all the country of Argob unto the coasts of Geshuri (עַד־גְּב֥וּל הַגְּשׁוּרִ֖י) and Maachathi…”

Joshua 13:1: Territories not yet Conquered, Part 1

[1445 BC] Verse 1:[1] Now Joshua (see Josh. 14:10; 23:1) was old and stricken in years; and the LORD said unto him, Thou art old and stricken in years, and there remaineth yet very much land to be possessed (Heb. to possess it;[2] Deut. 31:3[3]).

[Old and of advanced age, זָקֵ֔ן בָּ֖א בַּיָּמִ֑ים] He grew old, and came (or, had proceeded [Masius]) unto days (Vatablus). It is not a tautology. Thus elsewhere, old and full of days.[4] Old signifies age growing heavy; full of days, age more mature and nearly the last (Masius, Drusius). To come into days the Latin express by to be full of years (Vatablus). Moreover, hardly ever are others said to have proceeded unto days, or to be full of days, than those that lived holily, since with respect to them the exact days did not fail, nor were they passed in vain through empty pursuits, but through the excellent deeds of virtue. For the ignoble, etc., pass their days as if in sleep, and therefore, when those have passed by, they suppose that they were as nothing (Masius).

Thou art old, therefore delay not to do the work which I have appointed and commanded thee to do.

[And a very extensive region has been left, which has not yet been divided by lot, וְהָאָ֛רֶץ נִשְׁאֲרָ֥ה הַרְבֵּֽה־מְאֹ֖ד לְרִשְׁתָּֽהּ׃] And a great amount of land has been left to be possessed; that is, a great part of the region remains to be subdued, so that it might afterwards be possessed (Vatablus). The Vulgate does not rightly translate it, divided by lot; for not yet was any of the land at all divided (Masius). It is probable that Joshua thought that all the Canaanites were to be driven out before it would be possible to begin the distribution. Therefore, although the inconveniences of old age were already multiplying, he saw that great provinces remained to be subdued; undoubtedly various thoughts prodded his heart. Therefore, God helps and settles him, restless with concerns: that is to say, Many enemies remain to be conquered, but it is not the case that therefore you ought to delay the distribution, etc. For I will drive out the rest, etc. (Masius).

To be possessed; to be conquered, and so possessed by the people.

[1] Hebrew: וִיהוֹשֻׁ֣עַ זָקֵ֔ן בָּ֖א בַּיָּמִ֑ים וַיֹּ֙אמֶר יְהוָ֜ה אֵלָ֗יו אַתָּ֤ה זָקַ֙נְתָּה֙ בָּ֣אתָ בַיָּמִ֔ים וְהָאָ֛רֶץ נִשְׁאֲרָ֥ה הַרְבֵּֽה־מְאֹ֖ד לְרִשְׁתָּֽהּ׃

[2] Hebrew: לְרִשְׁתָּהּ.

[3] Deuteronomy 31:3a:  “The Lord thy God, he will go over before thee, and he will destroy these nations from before thee, and thou shalt possess them (וִירִשְׁתָּם)…”

[4] See, for example, Genesis 35:29; 1 Chronicles 23:1; Job 42:17.

Joshua 13 Outline

God makes known to Joshua the bounds of the land not yet conquered, 1-6; commands it to be divided among the nine tribes and a half, 7. The inheritance of the two tribes and a half on the other side Jordan, 8-13. The Lord and his sacrifices the inheritance of Levi, 14. The portion of the Reubenites, 15-23; of the Gadites, 24-28; of the half tribe of Manasseh, 29-32.

Joshua 12:9-24: Kings Conquered by Joshua, Part 3

[1451 BC] Verse 9:[1] (Josh. 6:2) The king of Jericho, one; (Josh. 8:29) the king of Ai, which is beside Beth-el, one…

[Jericho] Concerning these cities either mention has been made above, or they shall be found below (Bonfrerius).

[Ai, which is on the side of Beth-el] He shows it in this way because there was another Ai of the Ammonites, Jeremiah 49:3 (Masius).

Which is beside Beth-el: this is added to distinguish it from Ai of the Ammonites, of which Jeremiah 49:3.


Verse 10:[2] (Josh. 10:23) The king of Jerusalem, one; the king of Hebron, one…


Verse 11:[3] The king of Jarmuth, one; the king of Lachish, one…


Verse 12:[4] The king of Eglon, one; (Josh. 10:33) the king of Gezer, one…


Verse 13:[5] (Josh. 10:38) The king of Debir, one; the king of Geder, one…


Verse 14:[6] The king of Hormah, one; the king of Arad, one…


Verse 15:[7] (Josh. 10:29) The king of Libnah, one; the king of Adullam, one…


Verse 16:[8] (Josh. 10:28) The king of Makkedah, one; (Josh. 8:17; Judg. 1:22) the king of Beth-el, one…


Verse 17:[9] The king of Tappuah, one; (1 Kings 4:10) the king of Hepher, one…


Verse 18:[10] The king of Aphek, one; the king of Lasharon (or, Sharon, Is. 33:9[11]), one…

[The king of Sharon (thus Tigurinus); the King of the Sharonim, see 1 Chronicles 27:29 (Junius), מֶ֥לֶךְ לַשָּׁר֖וֹן] The Vulgate determined the ל/l to be a sign of the genitive. The name of the place is indeed Sharon (Masius). Indeed, Sharon is twofold, one on this side of Jordan (Jerome in Bonfrerius); and the other across Jordan, 1 Chronicles 5:16. But nowhere else is mention made of Lasharon (Bonfrerius). Nevertheless, others translate it Lasharon (thus Jonathan, Arabic, Munsters, Pagnine, Masius, Drusius). It is the same as Ἀσσαρὼν/ Assaron in the Acts of the Apostles, near Lydda[12] (Masius).


Verse 19:[13] The king of Madon, one; (Josh. 11:10) the king of Hazor, one…


[1450 BC] Verse 20:[14] The king of (Josh. 11:1; 19:15) Shimron-meron, one; the king of Achshaph, one…


Verse 21:[15] The king of Taanach, one; the king of Megiddo, one…


Verse 22:[16] (Josh. 19:37) The king of Kedesh, one; the king of Jokneam of Carmel, one…

[The King of Jokneam of Carmel, מֶֽלֶךְ־יָקְנֳעָ֥ם לַכַּרְמֶ֖ל] The King of Jokneam[17] (of Jokneam[18] [Junius and Tremellius]) of Carmel[19] (Pagnine), that is, which was near Carmel (Vatablus), of Carmel[20] (Munster, Tigurinus, English), and of Carmel (Syriac), with Carmel (Junius), near Carmel (Jonathan, Dutch).


Verse 23:[21] The king of Dor in the (Josh. 11:2) coast of Dor, one; the king of (Gen. 14:1, 2; Is. 9:1) the nations of Gilgal, one…

[The King of Dor and of the province of Dor, מֶ֥לֶךְ דּ֛וֹר לְנָפַ֥ת דּ֖וֹר] The King of Dor and of Nepheth-dor (Syriac). The King of Dor of Naphath-dor itself (Pagnine). Others: The King of Dor to the tract of Dor (Montanus), or, with the tract of Dor (Junius and Tremellius), or, of the region (or, unto the regions [Jonathan]) of Dor (Munster, Tigurinus), or, of the land, or province, of Dor, that is, which was in the province of Dor (Vatablus). Concerning Dor see Joshua 11:2 (Bonfrerius).

Dor, of which Joshua 11:2.

[The King of the Nations of Gilgal, מֶֽלֶךְ־גּוֹיִ֥ם לְגִלְגָּ֖ל] [They vary.] The King of the nations, or peoples, at, or of, Gilgal (Jonathan, Montanus, Munster). To others, גּוֹיִם/nations/Gentiles/Goyim is a proper name. The King of Goyim (of the Goii [Castalio]) in Gilgal (Tigurinus), or, which was in Gilgal (Pagnine) [as if it were the name of a city]. The King of Gei of Galilee (Septuagint). It is certain that Gilgal here is not the Gilgal where Joshua, with Jordan crossed, fixed camp, for there was no city, no King, in that place. Therefore, Gilgal is the same as Galil (only with the letter ג/Gimel doubled, which is common among the Hebrews), or Galilee (Lapide, Bonfrerius), namely, that which is called the upper (because it moves away into the North), and Galilee of the Nations. Thus it is called, either, because it, being well-provided with harbors and suited for trade, brought in various nations, of which, as it happens, it is likely many men also remained there (Masius): or, because it has Tyre and Sidon as neighbors, and other Nations: or, because in it dwelt various nations of the Canaanites and other peoples mixed together (Tostatus in Lapide): or, because Solomon gave to Hiram, King of Tyre, a Gentile, twenty cities in Galilee[22] (Jerome in Lapide). [This does not satisfy Bonfrerius.] 1. Although the Roman codex of the Septuagint[23] has Γαλιλαίας, of Galilee, yet the other codices has Γέλγελ/Gelgel. But Galilee is not called גִּלְגָּל/Gilgal, as it is found here, but גָּלִיל/Galil. 2. It is said that Galilee was not yet divided, Joshua 13:2.[24] But the King of Gilgal was killed, and the land was occupied. 3. It was not yet called Galilee of the Nations, but afterwards in the time of Solomon, after the twenty cities were given to Hiram (Bonfrerius). But this gift did not originally introduce the name, but rather confirmed the name already introduced (Lapide). See the further discussion on Joshua 13:2 (Lapide, Bonfrerius).

Gilgal; not of that Gilgal where Joshua first lodged after his passage over Jordan; where it doth not appear that there was either king or city; but of another city of the same name, (as was frequent in those parts,) probably in Galilee towards the sea whither divers people might possibly resort for trade and merchandise, over whom this was king, as formerly Tidal seems to have been, Genesis 14:1.


Verse 24:[25] The king of Tirzah, one: all the kings thirty and one.

[Thirty-one] And those were only of the other part, namely, the northern, of the Promised Land (Malvenda). Jerome notes in his Epistle to Dardanus that this land in length, from Dan to Beer-sheba, contains only one hundred and sixty Italian miles, and in breadth, from Joppa to Jordan sixty miles. In which so many Kings and peoples argue that there was formerly a remarkable fertility to that soil (Lapide out of Masius); and show the severe judgment of God, who rendered that land so infertile that instead of milk and honey it could appear to have been sown now with salt (Masius).

All the kings thirty and one: Each being confined to a narrow compass, and being king only of one city, or small province belonging to it, which was by the wise and singular providence of God, that they might be more easily and successively conquered by the Israelites one after another, as they were.

[1] Hebrew: מֶ֥לֶךְ יְרִיח֖וֹ אֶחָ֑ד מֶ֧לֶךְ הָעַ֛י אֲשֶׁר־מִצַּ֥ד בֵּֽית־אֵ֖ל אֶחָֽד׃

[2] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ יְרוּשָׁ֙לִַם֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ חֶבְר֖וֹן אֶחָֽד׃

[3] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ יַרְמוּת֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ לָכִ֖ישׁ אֶחָֽד׃

[4] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ עֶגְלוֹן֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ גֶּ֖זֶר אֶחָֽד׃

[5] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ דְּבִר֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ גֶּ֖דֶר אֶחָֽד׃

[6] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ חָרְמָה֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ עֲרָ֖ד אֶחָֽד׃

[7] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ לִבְנָה֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ עֲדֻלָּ֖ם אֶחָֽד׃

[8] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ מַקֵּדָה֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ בֵּֽית־אֵ֖ל אֶחָֽד׃

[9] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ תַּפּ֙וּחַ֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ חֵ֖פֶר אֶחָֽד׃

[10] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ אֲפֵק֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ לַשָּׁר֖וֹן אֶחָֽד׃

[11] Isaiah 33:9:  “The earth mourneth and languisheth:  Lebanon is ashamed and hewn down:  Sharon (הַשָּׁרוֹן) is like a wilderness; and Bashan and Carmel shake off their fruits.”

[12] Acts 9:35:  “And all that dwelt at Lydda and Saron (Σάρωνα, in the Textus Receptus; Ἀσσάρωνα, in the majority of Byzantine texts) saw him, and turned to the Lord.”  Lydda was of the tribe of Benjamin, about ten miles off of the Mediterranean coast.

[13] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ מָדוֹן֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ חָצ֖וֹר אֶחָֽד׃

[14] Hebrew: מֶ֣לֶךְ שִׁמְר֤וֹן מְראוֹן֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ אַכְשָׁ֖ף אֶחָֽד׃

[15] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ תַּעְנַךְ֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶ֥לֶךְ מְגִדּ֖וֹ אֶחָֽד׃

[16] Hebrew: מֶ֤לֶךְ קֶ֙דֶשׁ֙ אֶחָ֔ד מֶֽלֶךְ־יָקְנֳעָ֥ם לַכַּרְמֶ֖ל אֶחָֽד׃

[17] Latin: Rex Jokneham.

[18] Latin: Rex Joknehami, in an expressly Genitive form.

[19] Latin: Carmeli.

[20] Latin: de Carmel.

[21] Hebrew: מֶ֥לֶךְ דּ֛וֹר לְנָפַ֥ת דּ֖וֹר אֶחָ֑ד מֶֽלֶךְ־גּוֹיִ֥ם לְגִלְגָּ֖ל אֶחָֽד׃

[22] 1 Kings 9:11-13

[23] The Roman or Sixtine Septuagint was published in 1587, under the direction of Cardinal Antonio Carafa and by authority of Pope Sixtus V.  It uses Codex Vaticanus as a base text.

[24] Joshua 13:2:  “This is the land that yet remaineth:  all the borders (גְּלִילוֹת/Geliloth; Galilæa, in the Vulgate) of the Philistines, and all Geshuri…”

[25] Hebrew: מֶ֥לֶךְ תִּרְצָ֖ה אֶחָ֑ד כָּל־מְלָכִ֖ים שְׁלֹשִׁ֥ים וְאֶחָֽד׃

Joshua 12:8: Kings Conquered by Joshua, Part 2

Verse 8:[1] (Josh. 10:40; 11:16) In the mountains, and in the valleys, and in the plains, and in the springs, and in the wilderness, and in the south country; (Ex. 3:8; 23:23; Josh. 9:1) the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites…

The wilderness: this word here and elsewhere in Scripture notes not a land wholly desert and uninhabited, but one thin of inhabitants, as 1 Kings 2:34; 9:18; Matthew 3:1, 3.

[Was the Hittite and the Amorite, etc. (thus Pagnine, Tigurinus, Munster): they refer to these are the kings, verse 7 (Bonfrerius), הַחִתִּי וגו״] The Hittite (Septuagint, Jonathan, Syriac), supply, he gave (Arabic). [They refer to the preceding, he gave for a possession (Septuagint, Jonathan).] Others: the words of the Hittites, etc., are attached to the noun, Kings, which is to be repeated (Masius). Others: the land of the Chittæus (Junius and Tremellius), that is, of the Chittæi (Piscator).

[1] Hebrew: בָּהָ֣ר וּבַשְּׁפֵלָ֗ה וּבָֽעֲרָבָה֙ וּבָ֣אֲשֵׁד֔וֹת וּבַמִּדְבָּ֖ר וּבַנֶּ֑גֶב הַֽחִתִּי֙ הָֽאֱמֹרִ֔י וְהַֽכְּנַעֲנִי֙ הַפְּרִזִּ֔י הַחִוִּ֖י וְהַיְבוּסִֽי׃

Joshua 12:7: Kings Conquered by Joshua, Part 1

Verse 7:[1] And these are the kings of the country (Josh. 11:17) which Joshua and the children of Israel smote on this side Jordan on the west, from Baal-gad in the valley of Lebanon even unto the mount Halak, that goeth up to Seir; which Joshua gave unto the tribes of Israel for a possession according to their divisions…

[These are the kings of the land] Kings, that is, Petty Kings. Formerly the Lords of individual cities were called Kings, as is witnessed by Aristotle in his Politics 3, Strabo in his Geography 16, and Pliny in his Natural History 6:9 (Lapide). Such were these: but unto every city were pertaining towns, villages, and country districts (Masius, Drusius, similarly Lapide, Vatablus).

[From Baal-gad] From the plain of Gad (Vatablus). Thus Jonathan everywhere explains בַּעַל/Baal when it is joined with the name גָּד/Gad (Munster).

[1] Hebrew: וְאֵ֣לֶּה מַלְכֵ֣י הָאָ֡רֶץ אֲשֶׁר֩ הִכָּ֙ה יְהוֹשֻׁ֜עַ וּבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל בְּעֵ֤בֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן֙ יָ֔מָּה מִבַּ֤עַל גָּד֙ בְּבִקְעַ֣ת הַלְּבָנ֔וֹן וְעַד־הָהָ֥ר הֶחָלָ֖ק הָעֹלֶ֣ה שֵׂעִ֑ירָה וַיִּתְּנָ֙הּ יְהוֹשֻׁ֜עַ לְשִׁבְטֵ֧י יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל יְרֻשָּׁ֖ה כְּמַחְלְקֹתָֽם׃

Joshua 12:5, 6: Kings Conquered by Moses, Part 5

Verse 5:[1] And reigned in (Deut. 3:8) mount Hermon, (Deut. 3:10; Josh. 13:11) and in Salcah, and in all Bashan, (Deut. 3:14) unto the border of the Geshurites and the Maachathites, and half Gilead, the border of Sihon king of Heshbon.

[In mount Hermon] Concerning which see Joshua 11:3. It is a part of Libanus on the other side of Jordan toward the East. But Nahmanides asserts (certainly with plausibility) that חֶרְמוֹן/Hermon is not the proper name of a place, but a description of Libanus, ascribed to it from its inhospitality or desolation. For חֶרֶם signifies a thing ruined, and which is of no use. Libanus is certain such, since it lies buried in snow; whence it is also called שָׁנִיר/Shenir, which the Chaldean renders snowy.[2] And Jerome relates that from Hermon snow is wont to flow down to Tyre (Masius). Although this mountain was pertaining to Og, whose dominion the Israelites were already holding, the Canaanites yet possessed some part of it, Joshua 11:17, which Joshua afterwards occupied (Bonfrerius).

[Unto the borders of Gessuri, etc.] Concerning these see what things are on Deuteronomy 3:14 (Malvenda). Moreover, Geshuri and Maachathi were two cities towards mount Hermon, which everywhere, as in Joshua 13:11 and Deuteronomy 3:14, are established as borders of that region (Bonfrerius). The Geshurites and Maachathites were lying in those regions, which were extending to Syria of Damascus: For Absalom also locates Geshur in Syria, 2 Samuel 15:8. Although it is certain that there were also other Geshurites near the Amalekites[3] (Masius). Unto the border: Something is to be understood, in which part it was extending itself unto, etc. (Vatablus).

The Geshurites, of which see Deuteronomy 3:14; Joshua 13:13; 2 Samuel 13:37; 15:8.


Verse 6:[4] (Num. 21:24, 33) Them did Moses the servant of the LORD and the children of Israel smite: and (Num. 32:29, 33; Deut. 3:11, 12; Josh. 13:8) Moses the servant of the LORD gave it for a possession unto the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh.

[Moses, the servant of the Lord] Question: Why is not Joshua likewise called the servant of the Lord here? Responses: 1. When it treats of Joshua as yet living, he was not to be celebrated with a tribute of such absolute excellence. 2. This is attributed to Moses above others; that is to say, as an interpreter and minister of God; namely, because of the Law of God, which he had declared (Masius).

[1] Hebrew:  וּ֠מֹשֵׁל בְּהַ֙ר חֶרְמ֤וֹן וּבְסַלְכָה֙ וּבְכָל־הַבָּשָׁ֔ן עַד־גְּב֥וּל הַגְּשׁוּרִ֖י וְהַמַּעֲכָתִ֑י וַחֲצִי֙ הַגִּלְעָ֔ד גְּב֖וּל סִיח֥וֹן מֶֽלֶךְ־חֶשְׁבּֽוֹן׃

[2] For example, Deuteronomy 3:9:  “(Which Hermon the Sidonians call Sirion; and the Amorites call it Shenir [שְׂנִיר; טֻור תַלגָא, snowy mountain, in the Chaldean])…”

[3] See 1 Samuel 27:8.

[4] Hebrew: מֹשֶׁ֧ה עֶֽבֶד־יְהוָ֛ה וּבְנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל הִכּ֑וּם וַֽ֠יִּתְּנָהּ מֹשֶׁ֙ה עֶֽבֶד־יְהוָ֜ה יְרֻשָּׁ֗ה לָרֻֽאוּבֵנִי֙ וְלַגָּדִ֔י וְלַחֲצִ֖י שֵׁ֥בֶט הַֽמְנַשֶּֽׁה׃

Joshua 12:4: Kings Conquered by Moses, Part 4

Verse 4:[1] And (Num. 21:35; Deut. 3:4, 10) the coast of Og king of Bashan, which was of (Deut. 3:11; Josh. 13:12) the remnant of the giants, (Deut. 1:4) that dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei…

[The border of Og] It was indeed the purpose to enumerate the conquered Kings; but here the kingdom of Og is described instead of the King himself (Masius).

[Of the remnants of the Rephaim[2] (similarly Montanus, Junius and Tremellius, Pagnine, Tigurinus, Drusius, Aquila and Symmachus and Theodotion in Masius)] Others: of the remnants of the giants (Vatablus, Masius, Munster, Syriac), or, of the mighty (Jonathan). The giants descending from Rapha were called Rephaim, just as those descending from Anak were called Anakim[3] (Lapide). Nahmanides [who is Gerundensis in Drusius] thinks it altogether probable that this is a family name of the Hivites, who, as (elsewhere) they were called חִוִּים, that is Hivites, from the serpents that dwell in the hollows of the earth,[4] so (here) they are called רְפָאִים, that is to say, those below, and those abiding under the earth. Thus it is taken in Isaiah 26:14.[5] He maintains that to these were related those that the Sacred history calls חוּרִים/Hurim, that is, τρωγλοδύτας/Troglodytes, cave-dwellers.[6] See on Joshua 11:21 (Masius). Now, that, concerning the remnants, they explain as of the race (Vatablus, Syriac). They are related to the profligate Rephaim near Ashteroth Karnaim, Genesis 14:5. For my part, even if I be unwilling to deny that Og was of their race, nevertheless, inasmuch as he is said to have been a remnant, I assert that it rather has regard the ruin brought upon those giants by the Ammonites, Deuteronomy 2:20, 21. This certainly appears to be signified by that iron bed, which the Ammonites were afterwards showing in their Rabbath, as a monument of the illustrious victory won over the giants; although perhaps Og escaped to the neighboring Amorites, and on account of the singular might and excellence was made King by them (Masius).

[That dwelt in Ashtaroth] Ashtaroth was a city, 1 Chronicles 6:71, not a mountain, as Nahmanides imagines (Masius). Named after Astarte, a form of Diana, or Juno, that is, of Luna, who was worshipped there (Lapide out of Masius): whence also it was called Karnaim,[7] that is, of the two horns,[8] because Luna, while it waxes, is two-horned (Lapide). Now, Ashtaroth here and Ashteroth-Karnaim in Genesis 14 are one and the same place. Thus Jerome and Gerundensis (Masius).

[And in Edrei] This was his other royal city (Bonfrerius). Neither is it strange that Og had two palaces in this most ample and populous kingdom. Edrei appears to me to be the Adra[9] of Ptolemy (Masius).

That dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei: To wit, successively; sometimes at the one, sometimes at the other city; both being his royal mansions.

[1] Hebrew: וּגְב֗וּל ע֚וֹג מֶ֣לֶךְ הַבָּשָׁ֔ן מִיֶּ֖תֶר הָרְפָאִ֑ים הַיּוֹשֵׁ֥ב בְּעַשְׁתָּר֖וֹת וּבְאֶדְרֶֽעִי׃

[2] Hebrew: מִיֶּ֖תֶר הָרְפָאִ֑ים.

[3] See Numbers 13:22, 28, 33; Deuteronomy 9:2.

[4] חויא, serpent in Syriac, has a phonetic similarity to חִוִּי/Hivite.

[5] Isaiah 26:14:  “They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise (רְפָאִ֖ים בַּל־יָקֻ֑מוּ):  therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish.”

[6] See, for example, Genesis 14:6:  “And the Horites (הַחֹרִי) in their mount Seir, unto El-paran, which is by the wilderness.”

[7] Hebrew: קַרְנַיִם.

[8] קַרְנַיִם is composed of קֶרֶן/horn and the dual ending (ַיִם).

[9] Adra was in the northern part of Arabia Petrea.

Joshua 12:3: Kings Conquered by Moses, Part 3

Verse 3:[1] And (Deut. 3:17) from the plain to the sea of Chinneroth on the east, and unto the sea of the plain, even the salt sea on the east, (Josh. 13:20) the way to Beth-jeshimoth; and from the south (or, Teman[2]), under (Deut. 3:17; 4:49) Ashdoth-pisgah (or, the springs of Pisgah, or, the hill[3])…

[And from the wilderness unto the sea of Chinneroth] Here the Northern and Western border of the kingdom of Sihon is described (Bonfrerius).

[וְהָעֲרָבָה] And to the field (Malvenda); and to the fields (Junius and Tremellius); and in the plain (Masius). It is called planities solitudinis, a plain of wilderness, in Deuteronomy 3:17.[4] Evidently this is a plain that runs from East to West (as does also the very torrent through this plain), even unto the sea of Chinneroth, into which the torrent flows, where Jordan erupts from the sea of Chinneroth, and so it is able to be said to flow either into Jordan, or into the sea of Chinneroth: whereby it happens that in Deuteronomy 3 Jordan and the end of the sea of Chinneroth are conjoined (Bonfrerius). Described here is the plain that we are wont to call the plain of the Moabites, which lies between the two seas, the sea of Tiberias and the Dead Sea (Masius).

[Towards the east] Refer this to the plain, which is said to be to the East of the sea of Chinneroth (Bonfrerius). For on the West it is enclosed by that tract of Jordan, where that river, having escaped from the sea of Tiberias, flows into the Dead Sea (Malvenda).

To the sea of Chinneroth on the east; which words describe the situation not of the sea of Chinneroth, which was part of the western border of Sihon’s dominion, but of the plain, which is here said to lie eastward from the sea of Chinneroth, and also eastward from the Salt Sea, as it here follows. And this was indeed the situation of the plains of Moab, which are here spoken of, to wit, that they lay between the two seas, that of Chinneroth and the Salt Sea, and eastward to them both.

[Unto the sea of the desert; or of the wilderness (Syriac, Montanus, Vatablus), וְ֠עַד יָ֣ם הָעֲרָבָ֤ה] To the plain (Jonathan); to the sea of the field, or fields (Malvenda, Junius and Tremellius, Masius, Drusius, Vatablus). Thus it is called, because it stands in a flat and level place (Masius): because a great plain lies next to it (Vatablus).

The sea of the plain; the Salt Sea is so called because it was a famous plain, pleasant and fruitful, before it was turned into a salt sea.

[By the way that leads to Beth-jeshimoth, בֵּ֣ית הַיְשִׁמ֑וֹת] That is to say, a House or place, vast and desolate.[5] The place was in the fields of Moab, Numbers 33:49 (Masius, similarly Junius). See Ezekiel 25:9 (Junius). [To most interpreters it is a proper name; but to Montanus, by way of the house of the wilderness.] This, indeed, it signifies, and the place is thus named, because further towards the Salt Sea nothing else remains but wilderness (Bonfrerius).

From the south, or, on or towards the south.

[Which lies beneath Ashdoth-pisgah, תַּ֖חַת אַשְׁדּ֥וֹת הַפִּסְגָּֽה׃[6]] Under the slopes of the hill (Junius and Tremellius); beneath the outpourings of waters of the hill Pisgah (Pagnine); beneath the springs of the hills (Munster, Tigurinus); under the descent (that is, at the roots) of mount Pisgah (thus the Notes of Vatablus in the Tigurine Bible, similarly Masius). Under the slopes of Pisgah. אַשְׁדּוֹת/Ashdoth signifies the roots of the mountains, and those parts by which those are made steeper. See what things are on Joshua 10:40.[7] He traces here the Southern borders of the kingdom of Sihon, from Jordan or the mouth of Arnon (for these are near to each other), in the opposite direction of the course of Arnon, unto the roots of mount עֲבָרִים/Abarim (part of which is clearly Pisgah,[8] whether it be a proper name, or signify a peak or precipice). We see how accurately fixed borders were set around those possessions of the Israelites. This was done, 1. so that the Israelites settled apart from the profane nations: so that also by this matter it might be made clear to all of what great size God made them. 2. So that the neighboring dominions of Ammon and Moab might be separated from the possessions of the Israelites on all sides (Masius).

[1] Hebrew: וְהָעֲרָבָה֩ עַד־יָ֙ם כִּנְר֜וֹת מִזְרָ֗חָה וְ֠עַד יָ֣ם הָעֲרָבָ֤ה יָם־הַמֶּ֙לַח֙ מִזְרָ֔חָה דֶּ֖רֶךְ בֵּ֣ית הַיְשִׁמ֑וֹת וּמִ֙תֵּימָ֔ן תַּ֖חַת אַשְׁדּ֥וֹת הַפִּסְגָּֽה׃

[2] Hebrew: וּמִתֵּימָן.

[3] Hebrew: אַשְׁדּ֥וֹת הַפִּסְגָּֽה׃.

[4] Thus the Vulgate.

[5] בֵּית signifies house; יָשַׁם, to be desolate.

[6] אֲשֵׁדָה signifies foundation or slope; פִּסְגָּה/Pisgah, hill.

[7] Joshua 10:40:  “So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs (וְהָאֲשֵׁדוֹת), and all their kings:  he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded.”

[8] See Numbers 33:47, 48; Deuteronomy 32:49; 34:1.