Joshua 19:39

The tribe of Naphtali occupied eastern Galilee and overlooked the Sea of Galilee. Because a branch of an international trade route from Egypt to Mesopotamia ran through the territory of Naphtali, this tribe enjoyed periods of prosperity when Israel’s kings were strong. The city of Hazor was within Naphtali’s territory, guarding a section of that route. Naphtali is mentioned in Matthew 4:13–16 in connection with the ministry of Jesus in Galilee.

The five small remaining tribes received land on the edges of Israelite territory and had little influence on the nation.

Aznoth-tabor--on the east of Tabor towards the Jordan, for the border ran thence to Hukkok, touching upon that of Zebulun; and as the territory of Zebulun did not extend as far as the Jordan, Aznoth-tabor and Hukkok must have been border towns on the line which separated Naphtali from Issachar.

to Judah upon Jordan toward the sunrising--The sixty cities, Havoth-jair, which were on the eastern side of the Jordan, opposite Naphtali, were reckoned as belonging to Judah, because Jair, their possessor, was a descendant of Judah (1Ch. 2:4-22) [KEIL].

Naphtali lay furthest north of all the tribes, bordering on Mount Libanus. The city of Leshem, or Liash, lay on the utmost edge of it to the north, and therefore when the Danites had made themselves masters of it, and called it Dan, the length of Canaan from north to south was reckoned from Dan to Beersheba. It had Zebulun on the south, Asher on the west, and Judah upon Jordan, probably a city of that name, and so distinguished from the tribe of Judah on the east. It was in the lot of this tribe, near the waters of Merom, that Joshua fought and routed Jabin, Jos 11:1. etc. In this tribe stood Capernaum and Bethsaida, on the north end of the sea of Tiberias, in which Christ did so many mighty works; and the mountain (as is supposed) on which Christ preached, Mat 5:1.

Joshua 19:32-51

32. The sixth lot came out to the children of Naphtali, even for the children of Naphtali according to their families.

32. Filiis Nephtali exivit sors sexta, filiis inquam, Nephtali, per familias suas.

33. And their coast was from Heleph, from Allon to Zaanannim, and Adami, Nekeb, and Jabneel, unto Lakum; and the outgoings thereof were at Jordan:

33. Fuitque terminus eorum ab Heleph, et ab Elon in Saanannim, et Adami, Neceb, et Jabneel, usque ad Lacum: suntque exitus ejus ad Jordanem.

34. And then the coast turns westward to Aznothtabor, and goeth out from thence to Hukkok, and reacheth to Zebulun on the south side, and reacheth to Asher on the west side, and to Judah upon Jordan toward the sunrising.

34. Postea revertitur terminus ad mare ad Aznoth-thabor: et progreditur illinc in Huccoc, et pervenit ad Zabulon a meridie, et ad Aser pervenit ab occidente, et ad Jehuda in Jordanem, ad ortum solis.

35. And the fenced cities are Ziddim, Zer, and Hammath, Rakkath, and Chinnereth,

35. Et urbes munitae, Siddim, Ser, et Hammath, Raccath, et Chinnereth.

36. And Adamah, and Ramah, and Hazor,

36. Et Adamah, et Ramah, et Hasor,

37. And Kedesh, and Edrei, and Enhazor,

37. Et Cedes, et Hedrei, et En-Hasor,

38. And Iron, and Migdalel, Horem, and Bethanath, and Bethshemesh; nineteen cities with their villages.

38. Et Iron, et Migdal-el, Horem, et Beth-anath, et Beth-semes: urbes novemdecim, et villae earum.

39. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Naphtali according to their families, the cities and their villages.

39. Haec est haereditas tribus filiorum Nephtali per familias suas, urbes istae et villae earum.

40. And the seventh lot came out for the tribe of the children of Dan according to their families.

40. Tribui filiorum Dan per familias suas exivit sors septima.

41. And the coast of their inheritance was Zorah, and Eshtaol, and Irshemesh,

41. Fuitque terminus haereditatis eorum, Sorah, et Esthaol, et Itsemes,

42. And Shaalabbin, and Ajalon, and Jethlah,

42. Et Saalabbin, et Ajalon, et Ithlah,

43. And Elon, and Thimnathah, and Ekron,

43. Et Elon, et Thimnathah, et Ecron,

44. And Eltekeh, and Gibbethon, and Baalath,

44. Et Elthece, et Gibbethon, et Baalath,

45. And Jehud, and Beneberak, and Gathrimmon,

45. Et Jehud, et Bene-berak, et Gath-rimon,

46. And Mejarkon, and Rakkon, with the border before Japho.

46. Et Mehajarcon, et Raccon, cum termino contra Japho.

47. And the coast of the children of Dan went out too little for them: therefore the children of Dan went up to fight against Leshem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and possessed it, and dwelt therein, and called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father.

47. Et exivit terminus filiorum Dan ab eis ascenderuntque filii Dan, et pugnaverunt cum Lesem, ceperuntque eam, ac percusserunt eam acie gladii, et haereditate acceperunt eam, habitaveruntque in ea: et vocaverunt Lesem Dan, secundum nomen Dan patris sui.

48. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Dan according to their families, these cities with their villages.

48. Haec est haereditas tribus filiorum Dan per familias suas, civitates istae, et villae earum.

49. When they had made an end of dividing the land for inheritance by their coasts, the children of Israel gave an inheritance to Joshua the son of Nun among them:

49. Quum autem finem fecissent partiendi terram ut possiderent singuli terminos suos, dederunt filii Israel haereditatem ipsi Josue filio Nun in medio sui.

50. According to the word of the LORD they gave him the city which he asked, even Timnathserah in mount Ephraim: and he built the city, and dwelt therein.

50. Secundum sermonem Jehovae dederunt ei urbem quam petivit, Thimnath-serah in monte Ephraim, et edificavit urbem, habitavitque in ea.

51. These are the inheritances, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, divided for an inheritance by lot in Shiloh before the LORD, at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. So they made an end of dividing the country.

51. Istae sunt haereditates quas tradiderunt possidendas Eleazar sacerdos, et Josue filius Nun, et principes patrum tribuum filiorum Israel per sortem in Silo coram Jehova ad ostiam tabernaculi conventionis, et finem fecerunt dividendi terram.

49. When they had made an end of dividing, etc We have here, at length, an account of the gratitude of the people towards Joshua. For although the partition of the land of Canaan, among the posterity of Abraham, behooved to be equitable, yet Joshua, by his excellent virtues, deserved some honorary reward. Nor could any complain that a single individual was enriched at their expense. For, first, in the delay there was a striking proof of the moderation of this holy servant of God. He does not give any heed to his own interest till the commonweal has been secured. How seldom do we find any who, after they have given one or two specimens of valor, do not forthwith make haste to the prey? Not so Joshua, who thinks not of himself till the land has been divided. In the reward itself also the same temperance and frugality are conspicuous. The city he asks to be given to himself and his family was a mere heap of stones, either because it had been demolished and converted into a heap of ruins, or because no city had yet been built upon it.

It is conjectured with probability, that with the view of making the grant as little invidious as possible, the city he requested was of no great value. If any one thinks it strange that he did not give his labor gratuitously, let him reflect that Joshua liberally obeyed the divine call, and had no mercenary feelings in undergoing so many labors, dangers, and troubles; but having spontaneously performed his duty, he behooved not to repudiate a memorial of the favor of God, unless he wished by perverse contempt to suppress his glory. For the grant voted to him was nothing else than a simple testimonial of the divine power, which had been manifested through his hand. Truly no ambition can be detected here, inasmuch as he desires nothing for himself, and does not rashly act from a feeling of covetousness, but seeks in the popular consent a confirmation of the honor which God had already bestowed upon him. To have been silent in such a case, would have been more indicative of heartlessness than of modesty. The statement in the concluding verse of the chapter, that Joshua and Eleazar made an end of dividing the land, points to the perpetuity of the boundaries, which had been fixed, and warns the children of Israel against moving in any way to unsettle an inviolable decree.

Nineteen cities - But if these cities be separately enumerated they amount to twenty-three; this is probably occasioned by reckoning frontier cities belonging to other tribes, which are only mentioned here as the boundaries of the tribe. See on Jos 19:30 (note).

This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Naphtali,.... Which Josephus (o) thus describes;"the country to the east, as far as Damascus the city, and upper Galilee, the Naphtalites took, unto Mount Lebanon, and the fountains of Jordan, which flow out of the mount, reaching the northern border of the city Arce:"

according to their families; which was divided among them, according to the number of their families:

the cities and their villages; before enumerated.

(o) Antiqu. l. 5. c. 1. sect. 22.

The Inheritance of Naphtali. - This fell between Asher and the upper Jordan. It reached northwards to the northern boundary of Canaan, and touched Zebulun and Issachar on the south. In Jos 19:33 and Jos 19:34 the boundary lines are given: viz., in Jos 19:33 the western boundary towards Asher, with the northern and eastern boundaries: in Jos 19:34 the southern boundary; but with the uncertainty which exists as to several of the places named, it cannot be traced with certainty.
Jos 19:33
"Its boundary was (its territory reached) from Heleph, from the oak-forest at Zaanannim, and Adami Nekeb and Jabneel to Lakkum; and its outgoings were the Jordan." Heleph is unknown, though in all probability it was to the south of Zaanannim, and not very far distant. According to Jdg 4:11, the oak-forest (allon: see the remarks on Gen 12:6) at Zaanannim was near Kedesh, on the north-west of Lake Huleh. There are still many oaks in that neighbourhood (Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 386); and on the south of Bint Jebail Robinson crossed a low mountain-range which was covered with small oak trees (Pal. iii. p. 372). Adami hannekeb, i.e., Adami of the pass (Nekeb, judging from the analogy of the Arabic, signifying foramen, via inter montes), is supposed by Knobel to be Deir-el-ahmar, i.e., red cloister, a place which is still inhabited, three hours to the north-west of Baalbek, on the pass from the cedars to Baalbek (Seetzen, i. pp. 181, 185; Burckhardt, Syr. p. 60; and Ritter, Erdk. xvii. p. 150), so called from the reddish colour of the soil in the neighbourhood, which would explain the name Adami. Knobel also connects Jabneel with the lake Jemun, Jemuni, or Jammune, some hours to the north-west of Baalbek, on the eastern side of the western Lebanon range (Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 548; Ritter, xvii. pp. 304ff.), where there are still considerable ruins of a very early date to be found, especially the ruins of an ancient temple and a celebrated place of pilgrimage, with which the name "god's building" agrees. And lastly, he associates Lakkum with the mountains of Lokham, as the northern part of Lebanon on the Syrian mountains, from the latitude of Laodicea to that of Antioch on the western side of the Orontes, is called by the Arabian geographers Isztachri, Abulfeda, and others. So far as the names are concerned, these combinations seem appropriate enough, but they are hardly tenable. The resemblance between the names Lakkum and Lokham is only in appearance, as the Hebrew name is written with ק and the Arabic with כ. Moreover, the mountains of Lokham are much too far north for the name to be adduced as an explanation of Lakkum. The interpretation of Adami Nekeb and Jabneel is also irreconcilable with the circumstance that the lake Jamun was two hours to the west of the red convent, so that the boundary, which starts from the west, and is drawn first of all towards the north, and then to the north-east and east, must have run last of all from the red convent, and not from the Jamun lake to the Jordan. As Jabneel is mentioned after Adami Nekeb, it must be sought for to the east of Adami Nekeb, whereas the Jamun lake lies in the very opposite direction, namely, directly to the west of the red convent. The three places mentioned, therefore, cannot be precisely determined at present. The Jordan, where the boundary of Asher terminated, was no doubt the upper Jordan, or rather the Nahr Hasbany, one of the sources of the Jordan, which formed, together with the Huleh lake and the Jordan itself, between Lake Huleh and the Sea of Tiberias, and down to the point where it issues from the latter, the eastern boundary of Asher.
Jos 19:34
From the Jordan below the Lake of Tiberias, or speaking more exactly, from the point at which the Wady Bessum enters the Jordan, "the boundary (of Asher) turned westwards to Asnoth-tabor, and went thence out to Hukkok." This boundary, i.e., the southern boundary of Asher, probably followed the course of the Wady Bessum from the Jordan, which wady was the boundary of Issachar on the north-east, and then ran most likely from Kefr Sabt (see at Jos 19:22) to Asnoth-tabor, i.e., according to the Onom. (s. v. Azanoth), a vicus ad regionem Diocaesareae pertinens in campestribus, probably on the south-east of Diocaesarea, i.e., Sepphoris, not far from Tabor, to which the boundary of Issachar extended (Jos 19:22). Hukkok has not yet been traced. Robinson (Bibl. Res. p. 82) and Van de Velde (Mem. p. 322) are inclined to follow Rabbi Parchi of the fourteenth century, and identify this place with the village of Yakk, on the north-west of the Lake of Gennesareth; but this village is too far to the north-east to have formed the terminal point of the southern boundary of Naphtali, as it ran westwards from the Jordan. After this Naphtali touched "Zebulun on the south, Asher on the west, and Judah by the Jordan toward the sun-rising or east." "The Jordan" is in apposition to "Judah," in the sense of "Judah of the Jordan," like "Jordan of Jericho" in Num 22:1; Num 26:3, etc. The Masoretic pointing, which separates these two words, was founded upon some false notion respecting this definition of the boundary, and caused the commentators great perplexity, until C. v. Raumer succeeded in removing the difficulty, by showing that the district of the sixty towns of Jair, which was upon the eastern side of the Jordan, is called Judah here, or reckoned as belonging to Judah, because Jair, the possessor of these towns, was a descendant of Judah on the father's side through Hezron (Ch1 2:5, Ch1 2:21-22); whereas in Jos 13:30, and Num 32:41, he is reckoned contra morem, i.e., against the rule laid down in Num 36:7, as a descendant of Manasseh, on account of his descent from Machir the Manassite, on his mother's side.
(Note: See C. v. Raumer's article on "Judaea on the east of Jordan," in Tholuck's litt. Anz. 1834, Nos. 1 and 2, and his Palstina, pp. 233ff. ed. 4; and for the arbitrary attempts that had been made to explain the passage by alterations of the text and in other ways, see Rosenmller's Bibl. Alterthk. ii. 1, pp. 301-2; and Keil's Comm. on Joshua, pp. 438-9.)
Jos 19:35
The fortified towns of Naphtali were the following. Ziddim: unknown, though Knobel suggests that "it may possibly be preserved in Chirbet es Saudeh, to the west of the southern extremity of the Lake of Tiberias (Rob. iii. App.);" but this place is to the west of the Wady Bessum, i.e., in the territory of Issachar. Zer is also unknown. As the lxx and Syriac give the name as Zor, Knobel connects it with Kerak, which signifies fortress as well as Zor (= מצור), a heap of ruins at the southern end of the lake (Rob. iii. p. 263), the place which Josephus calls Taricheae (see Reland, p. 1026), - a very doubtful combination! Hammath (i.e., thermae), a Levitical town called Hammaoth-dor in Jos 21:32, and Hammon in Ch1 6:61, was situated, according to statements in the Talmud, somewhere near the later city of Tiberias, on the western shore of the Lake of Gennesareth, and was no doubt identical with the κώμεε Αμμαούς in the neighbourhood of Tiberias, a place with warm baths (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2, 3; Bell. Judg. iv. 1, 3). There are warm springs still to be found half an hour to the south of Tabaria, which are used as baths (Burckhardt, Syr. pp. 573-4; Rob. iii. pp. 258ff.). Rakkath (according to the Talm. and Rabb. ripa littus) was situated, according to rabbinical accounts, in the immediate neighbourhood of Hammath, and was the same place as Tiberias; but the account given by Josephus (Ant. xviii. 2, 3; cf. Bell. Judg. ii. 9, 1) respecting the founding of Tiberias by Herod the tetrarch is at variance with this; so that the rabbinical statements appear to have no other foundation than the etymology of the name Rakkath. Chinnereth is given in the Targums as גניסר, גינוסר, גּנּוסר, i.e., Γεννησάρ. According to Josephus (Bell. Jud. iii. 10, 8), this name was given to a strip of land on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, which was distinguished for its natural beauty, its climate, and its fertility, namely the long plain, about twenty minutes broad and an hour long, which stretches along the western shore of this lake, from el-Mejdel on the south to Khan Minyeh on the north (Burckhardt, Syr. pp. 558-9; Rob. iii. pp. 279, 290). It must have been in this plain that the town of Chinnereth stood, from which the plain and lake together derived the name of Chinnereth (Deu 3:17) or Chinneroth (Jos 11:2), and the lake alone the name of "Sea of Chinnereth," or "Sea of Chinneroth" (Jos 12:3; Jos 13:27; Num 34:11).
Jos 19:36
Adamah is unknown. Knobel is of opinion, that as Adamah signifies red, the place referred to may possibly be Ras el Ahmar, i.e., red-head, on the north of Safed (Rob. iii. p. 370; Bibl. Res. p. 69). Ramah is the present Rameh (Ramea), a large well-built village, inhabited by Christians and Druses, surrounded by extensive olive plantations, and provided with an excellent well. It stands upon the slope of a mountain, in a beautiful plain on the south-west of Safed, but without any relics of antiquity (see Seetzen, ii. p. 129; Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 78-9). Hazor has not yet been traced with certainty (see at Jos 11:1).
Jos 19:37
Kedesh (see at Jos 12:2). Edrei, a different place from the town of the same name in Bashan (Jos 1:2, Jos 1:4), is still unknown. En-hazor is probably to be sought for in Bell Hazur and Ain Hazur, which is not very far distant, on the south-west of Rameh, though the ruins upon Tell Hazur are merely the ruins of an ordinary village, with one single cistern that has fallen to pieces (Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 80, 81).
Jos 19:38-39
Jireon (Iron) is probably the present village of Jarn, an hour to the south-east of Bint-Jebeil, with the ruins of an ancient Christian church (Seetzen, ii. pp. 123-4; Van de Velde, R. i. p. 133). Migdal-el, so far as the name is concerned, might be Magdala (Mat 15:39), on the western shore of the Lake of Gennesareth, between Capernaum and Tiberias (Rob. iii. pp. 279ff.); the only difficulty is, that the towns upon this lake have already been mentioned in Jos 19:35. Knobel connects Migdal-el with Chorem, so as to form one name, and finds Migdal el Chorem in the present Mejdel Kerum, on the west of Rameh (Seetzen, ii. p. 130; Van de Velde, i. p. 215), a common Mahometan village. But there is nothing to favour this combination, except the similarity in sound between the two names; whereas it has against it not only the situation of the village, which was so far to the west, being not more than three hours from Acca, that the territory of Naphtali can hardly have reached so far, but also the very small resemblance between Chorem and Kerum, not to mention the fact that the accents separate Chorem from Migdal-el, whilst the omission of the copula (vav) before Chorem cannot have any weight, as the copula is also wanting before Zer and Rakkath. Chorem and Beth-anath have not yet been discovered. From the latter place Naphtali was unable to expel the Canaanites (Jdg 1:33). Beth-shemesh, a different place from the town of the same name in Issachar (Jos 19:22), is also still unknown. The total number of towns is given as nineteen, whereas only sixteen are mentioned by name. It is hardly correct to seek for the missing places among the border towns mentioned in Jos 19:33 and Jos 19:34, as the enumeration of the towns themselves is introduced by מבצר וערי in Jos 19:35, and in this way the list of towns is separated from the description of the boundaries. To this we may add, that the town of Karthan or Kirjathaim, which Naphtali gave up to the Levites (Jos 21:32; Ch1 6:61), does not occur either among the border towns or in the list of towns, from which we may see that the list of towns is an imperfect one.