Joshua 15:59

After this verse, the Greek Old Testament lists another district with 11 cities. These cities are:

• Tekoa,

• Ephrathah (that is, Bethlehem),

• Phagor,

• Etam,

• Kulon,

• Tatam,

• Saris,

• Karem,

• Gallim,

• Bether, and

• Manoch.

Each city also had surrounding villages.

Including this district explains why Bethlehem appears in the list. Without this district, Bethlehem would be missing, which would be unexpected. It is possible that an early copyist of the Hebrew text accidentally left out this twelfth district.

We cannot identify all of these locations with certainty. Many are unknown except for their mention in this and other lists. Some are briefly mentioned in other texts.

The description of Judah's allotment of tribes is more detailed than that of the other tribes. The failures of Judah's older brothers positioned him to lead (Genesis 34:25–31; 35:22). As a result, the tribe of Judah received a central location among the tribes, guaranteeing its leadership in the nation (Genesis 49:8–12; Deuteronomy 33:7).

CITIES OF JUDAH. (Jos. 15:21-63)

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 15:61-62). One gets the best idea of the relative situation of these cities by looking at the map.




Next: Joshua Chapter 16

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 (Kg2 8:22), and Lachish, where king Amaziah was slain (Kg1 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, Ch2 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.

Joshua 15:14-63

14. And Caleb drove thence the three sons of Anak, Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai, the children of Anak.

14. Expulit inde Caleb tres filios Enac, Sezadi, et Ahiman, et Thalmai qui fuerunt filii Enac.

15. And he went up thence to the inhabitants of Debir: and the name of Debir before was Kirjathsepher.

15. Ascenditque inde ad habitatores Debir, cujus nomen antea fuit Ciriath-sepher.

16. And Caleb said, He that smiteth Kirjathsepher, and takes it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife.

16. Dixitque Caleb, qui percusserit Ciriath-sepher, et ceperit eam, dabo ei Achsa filiam meam in uxorem.

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

17. Cepit autem eam Othniel filius Cenas fratris Caleb: deditque ei Achsa filiam suam in uxorem.

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 would thou?

18. Fuitque quum veniret ipsa suasit illi, ut peteret a patre suo agrum, et descendit de asino, dixitque ei Caleb, Quid tibi est?

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

19. Illa respondit, Da mihi benedictionem: quandoquidem terram aridam dedisti mihi, da mihi fontes aquarum. Et dedit ei fontes superiores, et fontes inferiores.

20. ? This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Judah according to their families.

20. Ista est haereditas tribus filiorum Jehuda per familias suas.

21. And the uttermost cities of the tribe of the children of Judah toward the coast of Edom southward were Kabzeel, and Eder, and Jagur,

21. Fuerunt autem urbes in extremitate tribus filiorum Jehudae juxta terminum Edom ad meridiem, Cabseel, et Eder, et Jagur.

22. And Kinah, and Dimonah, and Adadah,

22. Et Cina, et Dimona, et Adada,

23. And Kedesh, and Hazor, and Ithnan,

23. Et Cedes, et Hasor, et Ithnan,

24. Ziph, and Telem, and Bealoth,

24. Ziph, et Telem, et Bealoth,

25. And Hazor, Hadattah, and Kerioth, and Hezron, which is Hazor,

25. Et Hasor in Hadatha, et Cerioth, Hesron, ipsa est Hasor,

26. Amam, and Shema, and Moladah,

26. Amam, et Sema, et Molada,

27. And Hazargaddah, and Heshmon, and Bethpalet,

27. Et Hasar-gadda, et Hesmon, Beth-phelet,

28. And Hazarshual, and Beersheba, and Bizjothjah,

28. Et Hasar-sual, et Beerseba, et Bizjotheja,

29. Baalah, and Iim, and Azem,

29. Baala, et Iim, et Asem,

30. And Eltolad, and Chesil, and Hormah,

30. Et Eltholad, et Chesil, et Horma,

31. And Ziklag, and Madmannah, and Sansannah,

31. Et Siclag, et Madmannah, et Sensannah,

32. And Lebaoth, and Shilhim, and Ain, and Rimmon: all the cities are twenty and nine, with their villages:

32. Et Lebaoth, et Silhim, et Ain, et Rimon: omnes urbes viginti et novem, et villae earum.

33. And in the valley, Eshtaol, and Zoreah, and Ashnah,

33. In planitie Esthaol, et Sora, et Asnah,

34. And Zanoah, and Engannim, Tappuah, and Enam,

34. Et Zanoah, et Engannim, et Taphuah, et Enam,

35. Jarmuth, and Adullam, Socoh, and Azekah,

35. Jarmuth, et Adulam, Socoh, et Azecah,

36. And Sharaim, and Adithaim, and Gederah, and Gederothaim; fourteen cities with their villages:

36. Et Saaraim, et Adithaim, et Gederah, et Gederothaim: urbes quatuordecim, et villae earum.

37. Zenan, and Hadashah, and Migdalgad,

37. Senam, et Hadasa, et Migdalgad,

38. And Dilean, and Mizpeh, and Joktheel,

38. Et Dilan, et Mispeh, et Jocteel,

39. Lachish, and Bozkath, and Eglon,

39. Lachis, et Boscath, et Eglon,

40. And Cabbon, and Lahmam, and Kithlish,

40. Et Chabbon, et Lahmam, et Chithlis,

41. And Gederoth, Bethdagon, and Naamah, and Makkedah; sixteen cities with their villages:

41. Et Gederoth, Beth-dagon, et Naamah, et Makeda: urbes sexdecim, et villae earum.

42. Libnah, and Ether, and Ashan,

42. Libna, et Ether, et Asan,

43. And Jiphtah, and Ashnah, and Nezib,

43. Et Jeptha, et Asna, et Nesib,

44. And Keilah, and Achzib, and Mareshah; nine cities with their villages:

44. Et Cheila, et Achzib, et Maresah: urbes novem et villae earum.

45. Ekron, with her towns and her villages:

45. Ecron, et oppida ejus et villae ejus.

46. From Ekron even unto the sea, all that lay near Ashdod, with their villages:

46. Ab Ecron, et ad mare, omnes quae sunt ad latus Asdod, et villae earum.

47. Ashdod with her towns and her villages, Gaza with her towns and her villages, unto the river of Egypt, and the great sea, and the border thereof:

47. Asdod, oppida ejus, et villae ejus: Azza, oppida ejus et villae ejus usque ad torrentem AEgypti, et mare magnum, et terminus,

48. And in the mountains, Shamir, and Jattir, and Socoh,

48. Et in monte, Samir, et Jathir, et Sochoh,

49. And Dannah, and Kirjathsannah, which is Debir,

49. Et Dannah, et Ciriath-sannah, ipsa est Debir,

50. And Anab, and Eshtemoh, and Anim,

50. Et Anab, et Eshtemoh, et Anim,

51. And Goshen, and Holon, and Giloh; eleven cities with their villages:

51. Et Gosan, et Holon, et Giloh: urbes undecim, et villae earum.

52. Arab, and Dumah, and Eshean,

52. Arab, et Dumah, et Esan,

53. And Janum, and Bethtappuah, and Aphekah,

53. Et Janum, et Beth-thappuah, et Aphecah,

54. And Humtah, and Kirjatharba, which is Hebron, and Zior; nine cities with their villages:

54. Et Huntha, et Ciriath-arba, ipsa est Hebron, et Sior: urbes novem, et villae earum.

55. Maon, Carmel, and Ziph, and Juttah,

55. Mahon, Carmel, et Ziph, et Juttah,

56. And Jezreel, and Jokdeam, and Zanoah,

56. Et Jezrael, et Jocdean, et Zaura,

57. Cain, Gibeah, and Timnah; ten cities with their villages:

57. Cain, Giba, et Thimna: urbes decem, et villae earum.

58. Halhul, Bethzur, and Gedor,

58. Hal-hul, et Beth-sur, et Gedor,

59. And Maarath, and Bethanoth, and Eltekon; six cities with their villages:

59. Et Maarath, et Bethanoth, et Elthecon: urbes sex, et villae earum.

60. Kirjathbaal, which is Kirjathjearim, and Rabbah; two cities with their villages:

60. Ciriath-baal, ipsa est Ciriath-jearim, et Rabba: urbes duae, et villae earum.

61. In the wilderness, Betharabah, Middin, and Secacah,

61. In deserto, Beth-arabah, Middin, et Sech-acha,

62. And Nibshan, and the city of Salt, and Engedi; six cities with their villages.

62. Et Nibsan, et urbs salis, et Engedi: urbes sex, et villae earum.

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 unto this day.

63. Porro Jebusaeos habitatores Jerusalem non potuerunt filii Jehuda expellere: itaque habitavit Jebusaeus cum filiis Jehuda in Jerusalem usque ad diem hanc.

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.

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. Not 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]

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.

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]

Footnotes:

[146] If we are to indulge in conjectures on the subject, this question might be answered by another, How do we know that Caleb had not consulted her inclinations, and instead of resting satisfied with the vague imaginings here ascribed to him, actually obtained her consent to the proposal which he was about to make? It may not have been, as Calvin supposes, a sudden thought which struck him in the heat of battle, but a calm resolve formed before he set out on his expedition against Debir, and intended to reward the most valiant of those who had assisted him in his war against the giants. And it is even not impossible that both he and his daughter, to whom Othniel, from his near relationship, must have been well known, had no doubt from the prowess he had previously exhibited, that he would outstrip all his competitors and carry off the prize. These, of course, are mere conjectures, but they are at least as plausible as those indulged in by other expositors, who, after raising the question, appear to have given themselves much unnecessary trouble in attempting to solve it. -- Ed.

[147] French, "Pource qu'un tel partie et condition si honorable ne pouvoit estre refusee honnestement et sans impudence;" "Because such a party and so honorable a condition could not be refused honestly (honorably) and without impudence." -- Ed.

[148] In other words, Caleb promises his daughter not absolutely to the man who should take the city, but to the man who, in addition to the prowess exerted in taking it, should also have the address to gain the daughter's consent. It is difficult to believe that the promise made was either so meant by Caleb, or so interpreted by his followers. He very probably and, as the event showed, justly judged that his influence as a parent would either win or command his daughter's consent. -- Ed.

[149] French, "Pour un salaire exquis et precieux;" "As an exquisite and precious recompense." -- Ed.

[150] Latin, "Foeminae tamen magis praecipites feruntur." French, "Les femmes sont beaucoup plus bouillantes, et se laissent transporter plus aisement. Et d'autant plus sogneusement les maris se doyvent donner garde, de peur que par leurs conseils importuns, qui sont comme des soufflets, ils ne soyent embrasez;" "Women are much more fervid, and allow themselves to be more easily carried away. And so much the more carefully should husbands be on their guard, lest by their importunate counsels, which are like bellows, they be blown into flame." -- Ed.

[151] French, "Quoy qu'il en soit, cette femme attira a soy par astuce et flatteries le droit d'autruy, et par ce moyen, la part et portion de ses freres en fut d'autant amoindrie;" "Be this as it may, this woman attracted to herself by craft and flattery the right of another, and by this means the part and portion of her brothers was so far lessened." The censure here passed upon Achsah is rather more severe than the circumstances seem to warrant. It ought to be remembered, that in cases of succession the preference given to males is only conventional, and that by natural law her brothers' title was not a whit better than her own. -- Ed.

[152] Some of the Jewish expositors, unwilling to admit the cowardice and sluggishness of their countrymen, fable that the Jebusites were permitted to remain in possession because they were descendants of Abimelech, and in consequence of the covenant made between him and Abraham, (Genesis 21:22, 32,) could not be lawfully expelled. -- Ed.

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.

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, Joshua 19:44,

six cities with their villages; these were all in the mountainous part of Judea, as were the two following.

In vv. 21-63 there follows a list of the towns of the tribe of Judah, arranged in the four districts into which the land was divided, according to the nature of the soil, viz., the south-land (negeb), the lowland (shephelah) on the Mediterranean Sea, the mountains, and the desert of Judah.
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 (Sa2 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 Eder and Jagur.
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 (Sa1 15:6; Sa1 27:10; Sa1 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.
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.
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 (Sa1 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 Ch1 4:33, and which was also called Ramath-negeb (Jos 19:8) and Ramoth-negeb (Sa1 30:27). It is not to be identified with Baalath, however (Jos 19:45; Kg1 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). Kenoth was 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 Velde agrees. 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.
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 Sawe (Sweh) between Milh and Beersheba (see V. de Velde, ii. p. 148). Molada, which was given to the Simeonites (Jos 19:2; Ch1 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.
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.
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 Thly (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; Sa2 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.
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 Bilhah in Ch1 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 Αυεἴμ 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; Ch1 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.
Jos 15:30-31
Eltolad, which was given to the Simeonites (Jos 19:4), and is called Tolad (without the Arabic article) in Ch1 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 Ch1 4:30, between Eltolad and Hormah, as a town of the Simeonites, and the same place as Beth-el in Sa1 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; Ch1 4:30), burnt down by the Amalekites (Sa1 30:1.), and still inhabited after the captivity (Neh 11:28), is supposed by Rowland to 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, Knobel compares 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 Ch1 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.
Jos 15:32
Lebaoth, one of the Simeonite towns, called Beth-lebaoth (i.e., lion-house) in Jos 19:6, and Beth-birei in Ch1 4:31, has not been discovered yet. Shilchim, called Sharuchen in Jos 19:6, and Shaaraim in Ch1 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 Ch1 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 Zac 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 Tillah 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 Hvernick 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.)
Jos 15:33-47
Towns in the lowland or shephelah. - The lowland (shephelah), which is generally rendered ἡ πεδινή in the Sept., rarely τὸ πεδιόν (Deu 1:7), but which is transferred as a proper name ἡ 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 (Ch1 1:53; Ch1 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 (Ch2 11:10; Neh 11:29); it has been preserved in the ruins of Sur, 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). Eshtaol has 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. (Ἄσσα). In that case it might resemble a town on the east of Zorea (Tobler, p. 180), as Knobel supposes.
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.
Jos 15:35
Jarmuth, i.e., Jarmk; 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 (Ch2 11:7; Ch2 28:18), is the present Shuweikeh by the Wady Sumt, half an hour to the south-west of Jarmk, 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.
Jos 15:36
Sharaim, which was on the west of Socoh and Azekah, according to Sa1 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. Gederah is possibly the same as the Gederoth which was taken by the Philistines in the time of Ahaz (Ch2 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.
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: sixteen towns in all.
Jos 15:37
Zenan, probably the same as Zaanan (Mic 1:11), is supposed by Knobel to be the ruins of Chirbet-es-Senat, a short distance to the north of Beit-jibrin (Tobler, Dritte Wand. p. 124). Hadashah, according to the Mishnah Erub. v. vi. the smallest place in Judah, containing only fifty houses, is unknown, and a different place from the Adasa of 1 Macc. 7:40, 45, and Joseph. Ant. xii. 10, 5, as this was to the north of Jerusalem (Onom.). - Migdal-gad is unknown. Knobel supposes it to be the small hill called Jedeideh, with ruins upon it, towards the north of Beit-jibrin (V. de Velde, R. ii. pp. 162, 188).
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 Mizpeh of 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.
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.
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. Knobel connects 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).
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.
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 Attrah (Rob. iii. App.) in the province of Gaza, is a very uncertain one. Ashan, probably the same as Kor-ashan (Sa1 30:30), became a priests' city afterwards (Ch1 6:44; see at Jos 21:16).
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.
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 Kussbeh, a place with a fountain (Rob. ii. p. 391), i.e., the fountain of Kesba, about five hours south by west from Beit-jibrin. Mareshah, which was fortified by Rehoboam (Ch2 11:8; cf. Mic 1:15), and was the place where Asa defeated Zerah the Ethiopian (Ch2 14:9), the home of Eliezer (Ch2 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 Knobel finds it in Beit-mirsim, a place four hours to the south of Beit-jibrin.
(Note: Knobel founds his opinion partly upon Ch2 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 πρὸς ἀνατολὰς, 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.)
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 shephelah never 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.
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.
Jos 15:47
Ashdod, now Esdd, 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.
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 Sa1 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 Suche by Seetzen (R. iii. p. 29), a village about four hours from Hebron.
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).
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; Ch1 6:42), and is mentioned again in Sa1 30:28; Ch1 4:17, Ch1 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).
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; Ch1 6:43); and Giloh is mentioned in Sa2 15:12 as the birth-place of Ahithophel.
Jos 15:52-54