Chapter Nineteen

1–9. The inheritance of the tribe of Simeon. 10–16. That of Zebulun. 17–20. That of Issachar. 21–30. That of Asher. 32–39. That of Naphtali. 40–48. That of Dan. 49–51. The inheritance of Joshua son of Nun.

Joshua 19:1. The second lot came out for Simeon, the tribe of the sons of Simeon, according to their clans; and their inheritance was in the midst of the inheritance of the sons of Judah. The second lot came out in the time of the gathering of the people at Shiloh for the tribe of Simeon, which according to the last census (Num 26:1-2) contained only 22,200 men of military age, considerably fewer than each of the other tribes. Its inheritance was not in a separate region but “in the midst of the inheritance of the sons of Judah,” that is, a portion from the territory of the latter was allotted to it, which, as appeared from an inspection of the land of Canaan conducted by representatives from 7 tribes (Josh 18:4), “was too large” (Josh 19:9) for the tribe of Judah: it contained, as is evident from Josh 15:21-62, more than 120 cities, in addition to villages.

Joshua 19:2. And in their inheritance were: Beersheba or Sheba, Moladah, Since the inheritance of the tribe of Simeon was within the bounds of the inheritance of the tribe of Judah, and the borders of the latter had already been described in Josh 15, the borders of the tribe of Simeon are not indicated separately but only the cities allotted to it are listed. They had already been named in Josh 15:26-32; they are listed again in 1 Chr 4:28-32. Almost all of them were in the southern part of the inheritance of Judah and only two (Ether and Ashan) on the plain (Josh 19:6). There are, however, differences in the names of these cities as compared with those given in Josh 15, on which see in the appendix to this chapter.

Joshua 19:10. The third lot came out for the sons of Zebulun according to their clans, and their territory extended to Sarid; The description of the lot, that is, the inheritance of the tribe of Zebulun, begins with the southern border, on which as a midpoint from which it goes “to the sea,” that is, westward (Josh 19:11) and eastward (Josh 19:12), Sarid is indicated. According to some, it was at Tell Shadub on the northern side of the Plain of Jezreel, to the southwest of Nazareth.

Joshua 19:11. And their border goes up to the sea and to Maralah and adjoins Dabbesheth and adjoins the stream that is before Jokneam; The cities mentioned here, Maralah and Dabbesheth, on which the western side of the southern border of the tribe of Zebulun went from Sarid, are unknown in their location. By “the stream that is before Jokneam” (regarding the location of this city see Josh 12:22), is probably meant the stream Kishon, flowing at a distance of about a mile and a half east of the hill on which Jokneam stood, or Wadi el-Milya, located at the foot of the hill on its western side.

Joshua 19:12. From Sarid it goes back to the eastern side, to the east of the sun, to the border of Chisloth-Tabor; from there it goes to Daberath and goes up to Japhia; On the other side of Sarid the southern border of the tribe of Zebulun turned eastward to the region of Chisloth-Tabor, indicated by Eusebius (Αχεσελωφ) as 8 Roman miles east of Diocaesarea (Sepphoris, the present-day Sefurah), to which corresponds the village of Ikshal, west of Mount Tabor (now Jebel et-Tur). From there the border went to Daberath, which according to Eusebius (Δαβειρα) was positioned on Mount Tabor; at present the village of Daburiyeh is at the foot of Tabor on its northwestern side. As for the following boundary city Japhia, the village of Yafa, situated half an hour’s journey from Nazareth, could correspond to it, but it is west of Daberath, not east or northeast as it should be if the boundary line ran eastward, on account of which the identification of this city with Yafa raises doubt.

Joshua 19:13. From there it goes eastward to Gath-Hepher, to Ittah-Kazin, and goes to Rimmon, Methoar, and Neah; Gath-Hepher, through which the border continued, the birthplace of the prophet Jonah (2 Kgs 14:25), is usually indicated at the site of the present village of el-Meshhed, an hour’s journey to the northeast of Nazareth. The location of Ittah-Kazin is unknown. “Rimmon” was at the site of the village of Rummaneh, 2.5 hours north of Nazareth. The following Methoar and Neah are likewise unknown in their location. The first of these names (according to the Hebrew text “hammethoar”) is taken by modern Hebraists not as a proper name but as a participial form of the verb “taar,” meaning “to go round, to extend,” employed repeatedly in the book of Joshua in describing borders, though in other forms. With this understanding the final words Josh 19:13 in the Hebrew text have the sense: “extending to Neah”; the location of the latter has not been determined.

Joshua 19:14. And the border turns from the north to Hannathon and ends at the Valley of Iphtah-el; Here the northern border of the tribe of Zebulun is indicated; it went to Hannathon (in the Slavonic Bible Ennathoph), the location of which is indicated (by English investigators of Western Palestine) at Der-Hanna, west of the northern end of the Sea of Galilee; according to others, Hannathon corresponds to Cana of Galilee, situated much farther south, 2.5 hours north of Nazareth. The following boundary point, the Valley of Iphtah-el (in the Slavonic Bible Gai Ieffail), serves to mark one of the valleys found near present-day Dje-Fata, the Judean Jotapata, 2.5 hours’ journey north of Sepphoris.

Joshua 19:15. And further: Kattath, Nahalal, Shimron, Idalah, and Bethlehem: twelve cities with their villages. Of the cities named here, Kattath, Nahalal, and Idalah are not known with certainty as to their geographical location; regarding Shimron see Josh 11:1; Bethlehem was at the site of the village of Beit Lahm, located 2 hours’ journey to the southwest of Sepphoris. The total number of cities of the tribe of Zebulun indicated by the present Hebrew text is 12, which exceeds the number of city names given in the text by 7. Such discrepancy, observed also later in Josh 19:30, is ordinarily explained by the fact that the Hebrew text has not been fully preserved, that an omission was made in it in ancient times. This explanation cannot be denied a high degree of probability in view of the omissions indicated in Josh 13:8, as well as because in Josh 21:34-35 two cities are mentioned as belonging to the tribe of Zebulun: Kartha and Dimna, which do not appear here among its cities. On clarifying the causes of the phenomenon in question, however, there is no particular reason for us to dwell, since in the Vatican and Alexandrian manuscripts of the Greek translation the foregoing total is not read. The words πόλεις δώδεκα καὶ αἱ κῶμαι αὐτῶν – “twelve cities and their villages” were absent initially in the LXX translation; they were brought into it by Origen, as is evident from the asterisk preserved in some manuscripts, by which they were marked in his Hexapla. And if in the initial LXX translation there were no such words, if in the form in which they are conveyed by the present Hebrew text they raise perplexity, then it is possible that they could also be absent in our national translation.

Joshua 19:18. Their territory was: Jezreel, Chesulloth, and Shunem, The description of the inheritance of the tribe of Issachar begins with an enumeration of the cities contained in it, which are as follows: Jezreel (in the Slavonic Bible “Jezrael”), which was the capital of Ahab, named by Eusebius “the well-known settlement of Bedraila, lying in the great plain between Scythopolis and Legio” (Megiddo); it was at the site of the present poor village of Zerain, on a high hill, with a fine view, covered with ruins, on the eastern side of the extensive valley, called in ancient times the Plain of Jezreel, in later times Esdralon (Jdt 1:8), and at present Menjib-Amir. Chesulloth, which is ordinarily identified with that named in Josh 19:12 Chisloth-Tabor. Shunem was located, according to Eusebius (Σουβημ), 5 Roman miles south of Tabor; at present the village of Sulem is at its site, north of Zerain.

Joshua 19:19. Hapharaim, Shion, and Anaharath, Hapharaim (in the Slavonic Bible Afararim), according to Eusebius (Αιφραιμ), was 6 Roman miles from Legio (Megiddo); at present it is indicated (by English investigators of Western Palestine) at the site of Khirbet el-Fariyeh, to the northwest of Megiddo, 4 kilometers south of Jokneam (Josh 12:22). Shion (in the Slavonic Bible Sian), indicated by Eusebius (Σιων) near Mount Tabor, is placed at the site of the village of Khirbet-Shain with a spring and ruins, north of Tabor. Anaharath, to which in the Slavonic Bible, in accord with the Greek manuscripts, there correspond two names: [Renath] and Anahaharev, is indicated at En-Naura on the eastern slope of the Little Hermon.

Joshua 19:20. Rabbith, Kishion, and Abez, The geographical location of the three cities named here is not determined.

Joshua 19:21. Remeth, En-Gannim, En-Hadda, and Beth-Pazzez; Of the 3 cities mentioned here, only the location of En-Gannim is known, which was at the site of the present city of Jenin, located on the southern side of the Plain of Jezreel, where the road from Nazareth to Jerusalem begins to climb the mountainous upland.

Joshua 19:22. And the border adjoins Tabor and Shahazumah and Beth-Shemesh, and the border ends at the Jordan: sixteen cities with their villages. The eastern border of the tribe of Issachar described in the words of this verse is determined by the indication of three cities and the Jordan, at which it ended; by Tabor is meant here not a mountain but a city of the tribe of Zebulun (1 Chr 6:77), the location of which, like that of Shahazumah and Beth-Shemesh, is not determined. The total number of cities of the tribe of Issachar indicated then is 16, which, if the last two cities are included with those named in Josh 19:18-21, exceeds the number of enumerated cities by 1; in the Vatican and Alexandrian manuscripts it, like in Josh 19:15, is not read.

Joshua 19:25. Their territory was: Helkath, Hali, Beten, and Achshaph, Joshua 19:26. Alammelech, Amad, and Mishaal; and the border adjoins Carmel on the west and to Shihor-Libnath; The location of the cities named here is unknown or not determined with certainty. It is clear, however, that the inheritance of the tribe of Asher on its southern end adjoined Carmel “by the sea” (according to the Hebrew text “hayam”). By Shihor-Libnath is understood by modern commentators a stream, in which sense the Hebrew “shihor” is used in Josh 13:3; here, in distinction “from Shihor, which is before Egypt,” the name is completed by the word “libnath,” meaning “white.” By this name is probably designated the Nahr Zerka, emptying into the Mediterranean south of Dor (Josh 11:2).

Joshua 19:27. Then it turns back eastward to Beth-Dagon, and adjoins Zebulun and the Valley of Iphtah-el on the north, [and enters the territory of Asaph] to Beth-Emek and Neiel, and goes to Cabul on the left; From Shihor-Libnath (Josh 19:26) the border of the tribe of Asher turned eastward; the cities and regions through which it passed while touching the border of the inheritance of Zebulun remain at present unknown in their location, with the exception of Cabul (in the Slavonic Bible Chavol), which was at the site of the present village of Kabul, located to the southeast of Acco, 4 hours’ journey away. The words “[and enters the territory of Asaph]” serve as a rendering of the Slavonic translation “[and shall enter the territory of Asaph]”. In the Alexandrian manuscript, to which they correspond, we read καὶ εἱσελεύσεται τὰ ὅρια Ασαφθα – “and the boundary of Asapha shall go” (in the Vatican manuscript the corresponding word is Σαφθαιβαιθμε). In the present Hebrew text there are no words corresponding to them, as a result of which, according to this text, the grammatical connection of the following names Beth-Emek and Neiel is considered unclear by commentators, because these names appear too disconnected and not related to the preceding words, wherefore these commentators bring into the Hebrew text, on the basis of the LXX translation, the words “and the border goes.” From this it is evident that the foregoing words of the Greek-Slavonic translation serve as a rendering of an expression that was read in the original Hebrew text but has not been preserved in the present one. As for the last of the cited words, “asapha” or “saffe,” it remains obscure.

Joshua 19:28. And further: Ebron, Rehob, Hammon, and Cana, until great Sidon; The locations of the first three cities are not determined with certainty; the fourth, Cana, was at the site of the present village bearing the same name and located to the southeast of Tyre, 2.5 hours’ journey from Tyre. Regarding great Sidon, see Josh 11:8.

Joshua 19:29. Then the border turns back to Ramah and to the fortified city of Tyre, and the border turns to Hosah, and ends at the sea in the place Achzib; From the region of Sidon the border turned to Ramah, situated at the site of the present village of Rameh, to the southeast of Tyre, an hour’s journey away. The fortified city of Tyre, the famous city of Phoenicia, at the site of which at present exists a small town with remains of ancient structures, retaining the former name. The location of Hosah, to which the border further went, is unknown. The border ended by the sea in the region of Achzib (from “uzah” in Achzif in the Slavonic Bible, or from that which is marked by “uzah,” that is, field or property in general). Achzib, known among Greco-Roman writers by the name Ekdippa, was 3 hours’ journey north of Acco (Judg 1:31), at the site of the present village of Zib on the seashore with surviving ruins.

Joshua 19:30. And further: Ummah, Aphek, and Rehob: twenty-two cities with their villages. The three cities enumerated in this verse are not determined as to their location. The total number of cities of the tribe of Asher is 22, which corresponds to the number of cities enumerated in Josh 19:25-30 if we do not include Shihor-Libnath as the name of a stream, Asaph as a name remaining unclear in meaning, and Neiel as identical with Neah in Josh 19:13. This sum is not read in the Vatican manuscript of the Greek translations; but it is found in the Alexandrian and many other manuscripts. And here too in some of the manuscripts there is preserved the mark (asterisk) by which Origen marked in his Hexapla the words brought into the LXX translation πόλεις εἴκοσι δύο καὶ αἱ κῶμαι αὐτῶν – “twenty-two cities and their villages.”

Joshua 19:32. The sixth lot came out for the sons of Naphtali, for the sons of Naphtali according to their clans; Joshua 19:33. Their border went from Heleph [and] from the oak in Zaanannim, to Adami-Nekeb and Jabneel, to Lakkum, and ended at the Jordan; The description of the borders of the tribe of Naphtali begins “from Heleph, from the oak in Zaanannim.” The location of Heleph is not determined, and the oak in Zaanannim according to Judg 4:11 was located near Kedesh, to the northwest of Lake Merom (Josh 12:22). The location of Adami-Nekeb is not determined with certainty. Jabneel was probably the Jamnia in Upper Galilee, of whose fortification Josephus speaks in his biography and which was given to the tetrarch Philip, but whose location remains unknown. Lakkum, indicated by Eusebius within the territory of Naphtali, remains unknown.

Joshua 19:34. From there the border turns back westward to Aznoth-Tabor and goes from there to Hukkuk, and adjoins Zebulun on the south, and adjoins Asher on the west, and Judah at the Jordan on the east. Although the cities named here are unknown as to their location, the border designated by them was nonetheless the southern border of the tribe of Naphtali; this is indicated particularly by the fact that it “adjoined Zebulun,” that is, touched its northern border. From Eusebius it is known that Aznoth-Tabor (Αξανωθ) was in the inheritance of Naphtali and was situated on a plain within the bounds of Diocaesarea (Sepphoris). The final words of the verse, which indicate the end of the border, read in the present Hebrew text: “to Judah at the Jordan on the east,” constitute a most difficult place to explain in view of the distance of the inheritance of the tribe of Judah from that of Naphtali and the unknown relocations of the former in ancient times to the northern Canaan. The perplexity occasioned by these words prompted western Christian biblical scholars to offer many various explanations, none of which at present is recognized as truly resolving this perplexity. We have neither the need to expound nor to evaluate these explanations, because the expression read here in the present Hebrew text “and to Judah” (“u biyohudah”) does not belong to the original biblical text, as is shown by the earliest manuscripts of the LXX translation. In the Vatican and Alexandrian manuscripts the final words Josh 19:34 read with the omission of this expression καὶ ὁ Ιορδάνης ἀπ ἀνατολῶν ἡλίου – “and the Jordan from the east of the sun”; the word τῷ Ιουδα – “to Judah” or “Judah” was brought into the LXX translation by Origen, as is shown by the mark (asterisk) preserved in some of the Greek manuscripts, by which words brought into the translation from the Hebrew text or other Greek translations were marked in Origen’s Hexapla. “To Judah” was not read here either in the ancient manuscript Slavonic translation; these words were first brought into the Slavonic translation by the editors of the Ostrog Bible on the basis of the Complutensian Polyglot and the Aldine Bible, and from the Ostrog Bible they passed into the present Slavonic Bible. The double testimony of the LXX translation and the earliest Slavonic translation serves, it seems, as a sufficient basis for regarding the expression “to Judah” in this place as not belonging to the original composition of the biblical text.

Joshua 19:35. The fortified cities are: Ziddim, Zer, Hammath, Rakkath, and Chinnereth, The first two cities, Ziddim (in Hebrew Hatziddim) and Zer (Tirian, Tyre in the Slavonic Bible according to the Greek manuscripts) are not determined. According to Eusebius the first corresponds to Λοεβειμ, the second to Τύρος, of which it is only stated that the cities bearing these names were in the tribe of Naphtali. Hammath was at the site of el-Hammam, as the warm springs on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee are called, not far from Tiberias. Rakkath is ordinarily placed, on the basis of a Talmudic account, at the site of later Tiberias, the present-day Tabariyyeh. Chinnereth, bearing a name identical to that of the sea in ancient times (Josh 11:2), was on the northwestern shore of the latter, in the most fertile plain, bearing in New Testament times the name “the land of Gennesaret” (Matt 14:34 and others), and now called el-Guwair.

Joshua 19:36. Adama, Ramah, and Hazor, The location of the city of Adama (in the Vatican manuscript Αρμαιθ, in the Alexandrian manuscript Αδαμι) is not determined with certainty; by English investigators of Palestine it is indicated at Damieh, to the southwest of Tiberias. “Ramah” was at the site of Er-rame, to the northwest of the Sea of Galilee. Regarding Hazor, see Josh 11:1.

Joshua 19:37. Kedesh, Edrei, and En-Hazor, Regarding Kedesh, see Josh 12:22. Edrei and En-Hazor are unknown as to their location.

Joshua 19:38. Irem, Migdal-El, Horem, Beth-Anath, and Beth-Shemesh: nineteen cities with their villages. Irem (Yarion in the Slavonic Bible) is indicated at the site of the village of Yaron with ancient ruins, west of the southern end of Lake Merom. Migdal-El and Horem are not geographically determined; in the Vatican manuscript both names are combined into one: Μεγαλααρειμ (Megalaarim); in the Alexandrian manuscript it corresponds to: Μαγδαλιη Ωραμ – Magdaliil, Oran in the Slavonic Bible. This Megalaarim is indicated (by English investigators of Palestine) at Medjdel Islim, to the northwest of Kedesh (Josh 12:22). Beth-Anath is identified with the present village of Anita, about 9 kilometers also to the northwest of Kedesh. The location of Beth-Shemesh of the tribe of Naphtali is unknown.

Joshua 19:40. For the tribe of the sons of Dan, according to their clans, the seventh lot came out; In describing the seventh inheritance, allotted by lot to the tribe of Dan, its borders are not indicated separately, since it was composed of portions from the inheritances of the tribes of Judah and Ephraim, whose borders have been described, and only the cities allotted to this tribe are enumerated. The inheritance of the tribe of Dan was located between the inheritances of the tribes of Judah, Ephraim, and Benjamin, closer to the shore of the Mediterranean Sea.

Joshua 19:41. The territory of their inheritance was: Zorah, Eshtaol, and Ir-Shemesh, The first two cities named here originally belonged to the tribe of Judah (Josh 15:20). Ir-Shemesh – “city of the sun”; the Vatican manuscript πόλεις Σαμμαυς; the Alexandrian manuscript πόλεις Σαμες – “the city Sames” (in the Slavonic Bible) is merely another name, differing only in the beginning, from Beth-Shemesh (Josh 15:10) – “the city of the sun,” on which account these names are ordinarily taken as designating one and the same city located south of Zorah.

Joshua 19:42. Shaalabbin, Aijalon, and Ithlah, Shaalabbin (in the Slavonic Bible Salamim) was probably at the site of the present village of Salbith, in the time of Eusebius (Σαλαβειν) called Salava. Aijalon (Josh 10:12) was, according to Jerome (Aialon), not far from Nicopolis, at the site of the village of Alus, at present this village is called Malo; it is located about 9 kilometers southwest of Lower Beth-horon (Josh 16:3) on the slope of a mountain, near the large, fertile Valley of Aijalon. The location of Ithlah (in the Slavonic Bible Iefla) is not determined with certainty; by some it is indicated in Wadi Atalla to the northwest of Aijalon.

Joshua 19:43. Elon, Timnath, and Ekron, The location of “Elon” is unknown. Regarding Timnath, see Josh 15:10; regarding Ekron, see Josh 13:3.

Joshua 19:44. Eltekeh, Gibbethon, and Baalath, The location of Eltekeh (in the Slavonic Bible Elpheco, in cuneiform monuments Altaku) is not determined with certainty; by English investigators it is indicated at the village of Beit Likia, to the northeast of Beit Nuba, located west of Gibeon (Josh 9:3). The location of Gibbethon (in the Slavonic Bible Gavatho) is indicated by the same investigators about 5 kilometers north of Modein, located east of Lydda. Baalath (Γεβεελαν, Βααλων, Vaatho in the Slavonic Bible) is indicated by the same scholars at Belaim about 7 kilometers to the northeast of Modein.

Joshua 19:45. Jehud, Bene-Berak, and Gath-Rimmon, Jehud (in the Slavonic Bible Iuf) was probably at the site of the present village of Yihudah, north of Lydda. Bene-Berak (in the Slavonic Bible Vanivarok) was at the site of the present village of Ibn-borak, about 8 kilometers east of Jaffa. Gath-Rimmon was indicated by Eusebius at 12 Roman miles from Lydda on the way to Eleutheropolis; the location itself has not been established at present.

Joshua 19:46. Me-Yarkon and Rakkon with a border near Joppa. And the territory of the sons of Dan proved too small for them. Joshua 19:47. And the sons of Dan went up and fought against Leshem and took it and struck it with the sword and took possession of it and settled in it, and called Leshem Dan after the name of Dan, their father. [The Amorites remained to live in Helem and Salamim, but the hand of Ephraim prevailed against them, and they became tributary to him.]

Joshua 19:48. This was the inheritance of the tribe of the sons of Dan according to their clans; these were their cities and their villages. In explaining the initial words of this verse, the LXX translation has special significance, in which according to the Vatican and Alexandrian manuscripts we read καὶ ἀπὸ θαλάσσης Ιερακων ὅριον πλησίον Ιόππης – “and from the sea Yerako is the boundary near Joppa.” From this translation it is evident that in the name Me-Yarkon (in Hebrew “umesaiyarkon”), which begins Josh 19:46, the Hebrew “me” was not considered by them as part of the name Yarkon but as a separate word (“miyam”), meaning “from the sea”; it is also evident that they did not read the second name homologous with the preceding one, Rakkon (according to the Hebrew text “harakkon”), which homology of the two names standing side by side raises doubt as to the correctness of the present Hebrew text in this place among those who are guided by it predominantly. On the basis of the LXX translation the first half of this verse has the sense that from the sea, or from the west, Yerako or Yarkon was the boundary of the tribe of Dan, situated near Joppa. The location of Yarkon is not precisely known: some indicate the city (properly Rakkon) at the site of Tell-ech-Rekkeyit on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea, 3 kilometers north of Joppa, others – Oyun Kara in the Sharon Plain, about 5 kilometers to the southeast of the same city. In any case the region near Joppa, and in view of Judg 5:17 (“and what has Dan to fear with ships”) and the city Yerako itself, belonged to the tribe of Dan. The further words “and the territory of the sons of Dan proved too small for them,” which constitute a rendering of the present Hebrew text, were not initially read in the LXX translation, as is evident from the Vatican and Alexandrian manuscripts, in which there are no corresponding words καὶ ἰσηλθεν τὸ ὁρῶν υἱῶν Δαν ἀπ αὐτῶν – “and the territory of the sons of Dan went out from them” according to the present Slavonic Bible. They were brought into the text by Origen in his Hexapla and marked with an asterisk, preserved in some manuscripts; in later Greek manuscripts (for example, Lucianic) they are read like the rest of the text; from editions based on these later manuscripts, such as the Complutensian and Aldine, they were brought into the Slavonic translation – first – in the Ostrog Bible, where they are rendered: “Here did not the territory come to completion for the sons of Dan.” In the ancient pre-Ostrog Slavonic translation they were not found. The double testimony – the LXX translation according to the earliest manuscripts and the ancient Slavonic translation – of the absence of these words in the biblical text has, undoubtedly, high significance for us both in itself and in view of the fact that these words, as they are read in the Hebrew text, are very unclear, as is evident, for example, from the translation of blessed Jerome: et ipso fine concluditur – “and by the very boundary it is concluded” – or from the rendering in the Ostrog Bible cited above. After the words constituting the first half of Josh 19:46, in the LXX translation according to the earliest Greek manuscripts there immediately follows what constitutes Josh 19:48: “This was the inheritance of the tribe of the sons of Dan... and their villages,” while according to the Hebrew text and the Latin translation, with which the Slavic-Russian translation agrees here, what is contained in Josh 19:47 follows, which speaks of the campaign of the Danites against Leshem. The greatest harmony in the order of the narrative adopted in the LXX translation is evident from the fact that after the enumeration of the cities allotted to the tribe of Dan, there ordinarily follows an epilogue (Josh 18:28 and elsewhere), which here is represented by the words Josh 19:48, which according to this order adopted by the biblical writer should follow after Josh 19:46. The placing before this epilogue of what is said in Josh 19:47 appears incongruous also in that the Leshem-Dan conquered by the Danites did not belong to the inheritance which this tribe initially received. After the epilogue there immediately follows in the earliest manuscripts of the Greek translation what in Josh 19:48 is placed in brackets as transferred from the Slavonic Bible: “and the Amorites did not drive out... the sons of Dan...” These words, absent in the present Hebrew text, were not, it must be supposed, brought into the text by the Greek translators on the basis of Judg 1:34, but were originally present in the Hebrew text, as they are found elsewhere in the book in similar indications of the failure of the tribe of Judah to drive out the former inhabitants (Josh 15:63). The inclusion of this indication in the description of the inheritance of the tribe of Dan was prompted here by the fact that the retention of the Amorites in its inheritance served as the direct cause of the event described equally in both the Greek translation and the Hebrew text, consisting in the campaign of the sons of Dan against Leshem. Since the Amorites remaining in the inheritance of the tribe of Dan did not allow them to descend into the valleys, which constituted the most fertile part of the inheritance, the Danites therefore decided to acquire yet another place for settlement, the struggle for which was less difficult than the struggle with the Amorites in their own inheritance. This event is described in more detail in Judg 18. Thus, the events contained in Josh 19:47-48 are described in the Greek translation with greater fullness and consistency. In this narrative, the special brief and unclear indication given by the Hebrew text in Josh 19:46 of the insufficiency of the inheritance allotted to the Danites appears superfluous. Leshem, in Judg 18:7 Laish, named Dan, was at the source of the middle tributary of the Jordan (the Leddan) on a high hill, at the site of the present village of Tell-el-Kadi (this Arabic name means the same as “Dan,” that is, “judge”). The words placed in brackets “[The Amorites remained to live in Helon and Shaalabbin... tributary to him,]” not read in the Hebrew text, are found in the earliest manuscripts of the LXX translation (in Lucianic manuscripts as well as in the translation of blessed Jerome they are absent). Elom and Salamin correspond to Elon and Shaalabbin named in Josh 19:42-43. These additional words in their content are similar to what is said, according to both the Hebrew text and the LXX translation, in Judg 1:35, with the difference that in this latter place the event is described with greater detail, consisting in the indication of the hill of Heres, and instead of Helon, Aijalon is named, which is read also in Josh 19:42, next to Shaalabbin.

Joshua 19:50. By the command of the Lord they gave him the city of Timnath-Serah, which he asked for, in the hill country of Ephraim; and he built the city and lived in it. The city given to Joshua son of Nun, Timnath-Serah (Vatican manuscript – Θαιμαρχαρης, Alexandrian manuscript – Θαμνασαρα, Slavonic Bible – Timnath-Serah) was “in the hill country of Ephraim, on the north of the mountain of Gaash” (Josh 24:31). According to Eusebius (θαμ ναθσαρα) “the city of Joshua son of Nun, in which his tomb is to this day found” is named Thamneh, thus identified with the city of this name mentioned in Josh 15:10. In modern times, following the research of the French scholar Guerin and Abbot Richard, it has been accepted by Western biblical scholars to locate Timnath-Serah at the site of the ruins of Tibneh (Khirbet Tibne), located about 15 kilometers (16 kilometers) to the northwest of Bethel. The most important basis for this identification was that in the necropolis of present-day Tibneh, among several tombs hewn in rock, to the south of a hill with ruins, a particularly remarkable tomb (Kubr-el-Anbiah) was found, distinguished by its spaciousness, architectural skill, and stone knives found in it, of which Josh 21:42 speaks according to the LXX translation. An examination of the necropolis at Tibneh, conducted by our national scholar (Prof. A. A. Olesnitsky), did not convince him of the correctness of identifying the Anbiah tomb with the tomb of Joshua son of Nun, wherefore he began to seek another location for the city of Joshua. It was found by him to the north of Khirbet Tibneh, “to the left of the main road from Jerusalem to Nablus, at a distance of half an hour to the west of Lebbenah,” in an area where there are two villages, Hareth and Kefar (meaning village) Hareth, with remains of ancient buildings made of roughly worked stones. The bases for identifying the biblical Timnath-Hares (in the book of Judges), or Thimarcharisth according to the Vatican manuscript, with Khefor-Hareth are: first, the testimony of Hebrew travelers of the thirteenth and sixteenth centuries, who pointed out the tomb of Joshua son of Nun in Kefar-Hareth; second, the fact that the name Hareth “throughout the whole region of Ephraim” is preserved only in the names of these villages; third, the fact that in the cemeteries of both villages there are ancient tombs, “but of the simplest, primitive construction, without any ornamentation.” Among them particularly remarkable is one tomb in Kefar Hareth, distinguished by special antiquity and also by the fact that a Muslim chapel stands by it – “a sign of popular respect for the place,” and fourth, that the mountain screening the villages of Hareth and Khefor-Hareth from the south to this day bears a name consonant with the biblical Mount Gaash, namely Garsh (the letter “p,” which is not in the Hebrew Gaash, entered because of Aramaic pronunciation, as Damascus – Damask). Western investigators of Palestine have also arrived at the same understanding of the location of Timnath-Serah. Appendix to verses 2–8 concerning the cities of the tribe of Simeon.

Joshua 19:2. After Beersheba according to the Hebrew text Beer-Sheva is read and Sheba (in the Vatican and Alexandrian manuscripts Σαμαα, in later Greek manuscripts Σαβεε – Sabee in the Slavonic Bible). In Josh 15:26-32 there is no city by the name of Sheba; here is read another name, close in sound composition to it, Shema (Josh 15:26), differing from the former only in the penultimate letter “m,” which could have been changed in the Hebrew text to the letter “b” under the influence of the preceding name Beer-Sheva, but preserved in its original form by the earliest manuscripts of the LXX translation, in which Semaa is read; such a form (Σαμαα) has the name Shema also in the Alexandrian manuscript (in the Vatican – Σαλμαα). Some confirmation of the idea of the identity of the two names is the fact that both Shema and Sheba precede in both places the name Moladah. As for the dissimilarity of the initial sound in these names (“sh” and “s”), it has no significance, since the Hebrew letters “shin” and “sin” originally expressed the same sound. In view of this it seems probable that the Sheba named in this place was a separate city, distinct from Beersheba, but not different from the city named in Josh 15:26 Shema. The city of Sheba is indicated (Knobel) at the site of the ruins of Saave to the northeast of Beersheba or, in accord with the form of this name in the earliest Greek manuscripts, at Selyameh. Josh 19:4. The city of Bethul named here is not indicated in Josh 15 among the cities of the tribe of Judah. There is, however, a basis for identifying it with the city named in this chapter (Josh 15:30) Chesil. This consists in the fact that, first, just as the latter is placed between Eltholad and Hormah, so Bethul in this place is found between these same cities; and, second, in the fact that in the ancient Vatican and a few later manuscripts instead of Chesil Βαιθηλ is read, altered in other Greek manuscripts under the apparent influence of the Hebrew text into Χασειρ or Χασιλ: the latter form is accepted in the Slavonic Bible. The name Bethel preserved by the manuscripts of the LXX translation, belonging to a city of the tribe of Judah, deserves attention also in view of the indication of other Old Testament books on the existence of a city with this name in the inheritance of this tribe; thus, in 1 Sam 30:27 it is said that David sent gifts from Ziklag to a city of Bethel, in 1 Chr 4:30 among the cities of the tribe of Simeon is indicated equally Bethuel (in Hebrew Betuél). These biblical indications give grounds to think that in the southern part of Canaan before the settlement of the Israelites in it, there was a city bearing the name Bethel – from a heathen sanctuary probably located in it. And, since the names Bethel and in Josh 15:30 according to Greek manuscripts Bethul are identical in their composition and meaning (“bet” – house, “El” – God), it is on this basis possible to see in them the designation of one and the same city. The origin of another name used in Josh 15:30 according to the present Hebrew text, Chesil, which means “fool,” is probably explained by the fact that it was given to the Bethel of the tribe of Simeon in a later time, in disgrace of it as a city that had formerly been a place of idol worship; the same thing probably happened to the Bethel of the tribe of Benjamin, which in the prophet Hosea (Hos 4:15) is called Bev-Aven, that is, “house of nothingness,” as it became a place of worship of the golden calf. The name Chesil (Josh 15:30) entered the Hebrew text, as the Vatican manuscript disposes one to think, after the LXX translation was made. The location of this Bethel-Chesil is conjecturally indicated at the present el-Halyasa, or Elyusa, of the Greek writers, in which there was a temple of Venus. Halyasa with the remains of a former flourishing city is located 5.5 hours’ journey south of Beersheba. Josh 19:5. The cities named here (and also in 1 Chr 4:31) Beth-Markaboth and Hazar-Susah are also not listed among the cities of the tribe of Judah enumerated in Josh 15:26-32. The opinion that these names serve to designate the cities indicated in Josh 15:31 Madmannah and Sansannah has only a presumptive character. It is presumed, namely, that Madmannah and Sansannah in subsequent times received new names or epithets because of their particular significance on the trade route between Egypt and Syria, near which they were located: the first – Madmannah – received the name Beth-Markaboth, which means “house of chariots,” and the second – Sansannah – Hazar-Susah, which means “horse court,” since in the first there was a storehouse of chariots and in the second – a court for horses in the process of selling them. The existence of such cities among the Israelites is confirmed by a reference to the “cities for chariots” and for horsemen that belonged to Solomon (1 Kgs 9:19; 2 Chr 8:6). Since military chariots among the Canaanites existed during the time of Joshua, such storehouses or stations for them could certainly exist at this time already, as well as courts for horses on the great road from Egypt, from where those and others were obtained in Palestine (1 Kgs 10:26-29), and thus, understandably, the cities in which these stations were located could also bear special names. The book of Joshua presents other examples of dual names borne by some of the cities (Kiriath-Jearim, Hebron). That Madmannah and Sansannah were located near the great road between Egypt and Damascus, however, does not constitute a generally accepted position. Some indicate them in regions adjacent in general to Gaza, whereas others find no grounds for precisely determining their location. On the other hand, some investigators of biblical geography indicate Beth-Markaboth and Hazar-Susah in different regions than those assigned to Madmannah and Sansannah. The LXX translation also does not present special data for clarifying the mutual relationship of those and other cities. Thus, the question of which cities of the tribe of Judah are meant by the cities Beth-Markaboth and Hazar-Susah named in this place remains at present without proper resolution.

Joshua 19:6. Beth-Lebaoth (in the Slavonic Bible Vefalbath, in accord with the Alexandrian manuscript, in the Vatican Βαθαρωθ) corresponds to the city named in Josh 15:32 Lebaoth, the geographical location of which is not determined. Sharuhen corresponds, it seems, to that indicated in Josh 15:32 Shilhim, as well as to the Sherukhanu mentioned in Egyptian monuments of the eighteenth dynasty, which was located on the road from Egypt to Gaza. In the Greek-Slavonic translation that corresponds to Sharuhen is οἱ ἀγροὶ αὐτῶν – “and their villages” (Slavonic Bible); Greek translators took the Hebrew word corresponding to this name as an appellative. Moreover, in the Greek-Slavonic translation the cities indicated in Josh 19:2-6 were 13, as is indicated in the total number, read equally in the Hebrew text and ancient translations, whereas according to the Hebrew text together with Sherukhanu there are 14 of them; and so here, as in Josh 15:32, a numerical inaccuracy has crept in. Joshua 19:7. Ain and Rimmon, which are united in Nehemiah Neh 11:29 (in En-Rimmon) under one name, as here and in the Vatican manuscript (Ερεμμων), constituted two cities, as is evident from Josh 15:32, where their names are connected by the conjunction “and,” and in the Alexandrian manuscript, with which the Slavonic translation agrees (Ain and Remmoph). Rimmon, indicated by Eusebius (Ερεμβων) as 16 Roman miles from Eleutheropolis, was at the site of the ruins of Umm-Rummanim, 3 hours’ journey north of Beersheba; closer to the latter, half an hour to the north, is a well (in Hebrew “ain”) with remains of buildings that existed around it (bearing the name Chuelite), which could have been the location of the city of Ain. As being located close to each other, Ain and Rimmon in later times were considered as one city and their names were joined together, as is shown by the text of the book of Nehemiah. The following two cities, Ether and Ashan, which were on the plain (Josh 15:42), are not determined in their geographical location. Josh 19:8. The location of Baalath-Beer, or southern Ramah, is also not determined. * * * Tristram. Bible’s places, 214. Regarding Daburiyeh, see The Holy Land, 2:425. A description of Tell-Jefateh, see The Holy Land, 2:410. In the Moscow Greek Bible these words, contrary to the Alexandrian manuscript, are read. Field. Origen’s Hexapla... Prof. A. A. Olesnitsky identifies En-Gannim with Bethulia in the book of Judith. The Holy Land, 2:385. Dillmann. The Books of Numbers... and Joshua, p. 560. Is this word not, however, a rendering of the Hebrew “tsaphonah” – “northward,” which was read here in the original Hebrew text and left untranslated by the LXX? With this presumption it would be understandable also why these words were omitted in the Hebrew text, as having happened because in it there were consecutive sentences with the word “tsaphonah” (וּבְגֵי יִפְתַּח־אֵל צָפוֹנָה וְעֶבְרֹן הַגְּבוּל צָפוֹנָה – and the valley of Iphtah-el northward and Hebron the boundary northward); having written the first “tsaphonah,” the scribe inadvertently passed directly to what followed after the second “tsaphonah,” omitting what was between them. The sense of the words preserved here by the LXX translation would be as follows: “and the border goes northward to Beth-Emek...” According to the Hebrew text “mehevel,” “hevel” means, among other things, “a strip of land, a region.” Among the special names which it bears in Greek manuscripts, it deserves attention that the city Ummah is named in the ancient Vatican manuscript Αρχωβ, and in a significant number of others – Ακκωρ, Ακκωβ or Ακκω, which names suggest the idea of Ummah as identical to Acco, which according to Judg 1:31 belonged to the tribe of Asher. Field. Origen’s Hexapla. In the Slavonic Bible “Meeleph.” To the words “in Zaanannim” corresponds in the Vatican manuscript Βεσεμιειν, in the Alexandrian Βεσενανιμ – Slavonic “Vesenani”, which shows that the Greek translators took the Hebrew “betsa’anannim” as one word, not separating “be” in the sense of the preposition “in.” On the basis that Heleph in the Vatican manuscript is named Μοολαμ, English investigators of Palestine indicate its location at Aulam to the southwest of the southern end of the Sea of Galilee. Philo Josephus Life, 37. His same work. Concerning the Jewish War, II, VI, 3. See for example, Kühler. Textbook of Biblical History, 1, 491–492, or Dillmann. Numbers-Joshua, 563. In the Moscow Greek Bible, however, contrary to the Alexandrian manuscript, there is read καὶ τῷ Ιουδα ὁ Ιορδάνης ἀπ ἀνατολῶν ἡλίου – “and to Judah the Jordan from the east of the sun” (Slavonic Bible). Field. Origen’s Hexapla. V. K. Lebedev, 368. The Greek translation agrees with the ancient Slavonic translation “from the sea Yerakohnskaya... near the boundary of Joppa” (V. K. Lebedev, 173–174). The present Slavonic translation “and from the sea Yerakonska, and Irakkon, boundary near Joppa” follows the later Greek text (and the Complutensian Polyglot in the Lucianic manuscripts), into which, in accord with Origen’s “Hexapla,” the words καὶ’Ιρεκκων, which were not read in the earliest manuscripts, were brought in. Dillmann. Numbers-Exodus. Oettli. Deuteronomy. Joshua to this passage. Some of the Western biblical scholars recognize the name Me-Yarkon as an appellative word, in which “me” is the Hebrew word “water,” and “yarkon” is the Hebrew “yerakon” – “yellow color,” wherefore this name is translated “yellow water” or “yellow river,” for which Nahr el-Audja is recognized, emptying into the Mediterranean 6 kilometers north of Joppa, and Tell ech Rakkoyat is recognized as the biblical Rakkon. This explanation may count in its favor correspondence to the present Hebrew text, in which “narkon” as an appellative name is placed with the article (“hal”) and apparent correspondence to the location. The LXX translation has an advantage before it by virtue of its foundation on an ancient text. Oettli. Ibid. Tristram. Bible’s places, 51. In the Moscow Greek Bible these words are read (Josh 19:47) contrary to the Alexandrian verse. Field. Origen’s Hexapla. V. K. Lebedev, 364. The words of the Hebrew text in question, by literal translation, mean “and the territory of the sons of Dan went out from them.” A clearer sense is achieved by Hebraists through so-called conjecture, that is, through changes of certain words of the Hebrew text into others, namely – the change of “was contracted, restricted” and “from them” into “for them,” whereby the translation “and the territory of the sons of Dan was narrow for them” is obtained. Such a composition of the words of the Hebrew text in this place, not giving a definite sense without alterations, naturally occasions distrust of itself, and in connection with the fact that these words were not translated in the LXX, leads to the idea that they constitute a later insertion into the text, as is expressed by the more forthright of Western biblical scholars (Oettli in the commentary named above). In the pre-Ostrog Slavonic translation, the order of narrative indicated by the earliest manuscripts of the LXX translation was adopted. V. K. Lebedev, p. 403. In Judg 2:9 this city is named according to the Hebrew text Timnath-Hares, in the Russian translation – Timnath-Serah. A detailed analysis of the indicated bases is given in the repeatedly named work “The Holy Land,” vol. II, 307–328. Ibid., p. 311, 329–331. Prof. A. A. Olesnitsky’s “The Holy Land” was published in 1878. The English edition The Survey of Western Palestine, where the foregoing representation of the location of Timnath-Serah is set forth, appeared in 1881. Cook. Commentary, II, 79. On this see, for example, in Keil, Joshua, p. 127. In this case the location of Madmannah is indicated at Maanlunes about 4 hours’ journey south of Gaza or at El-Minjaj east of the latter (Riehm. Handbook... 936). The location of Sansannah is indicated at the village of Semsim to the northeast of Gaza (ibid., 1368). Riess. Bible Atlas, 1887. Thus Beth-Markaboth is indicated at the site of the ruins of Mirkib, 4.5 hours’ journey west of the southern end of the Dead Sea (Riehm. Ibid., 182) or 21 kilometers south of Arad (Riess). Hazar-Susah is indicated at the site of the ruins of Susiseh to the northeast of Eshtemoa (Riehm. Ibid., 582; regarding Eshtemoa, the present-day Semuah, see Josh 15:50). If Madmannah in the ancient Vatican manuscript bears the name Μακαρειμ, consonant with Markaboth, then in other Greek manuscripts it is replaced by others, such as Βεδεδηνα in the Alexandrian manuscript or Μεδεμηνα in other manuscripts. Sansannah in the Vatican manuscript Σεθεννακ, in the Alexandrian manuscript Σανσαννα; Hazar-Susah in the Vatican manuscript (Σαρσουσειν), in the Alexandrian manuscript Ασερσουσιμ. Between these names there is obviously little similarity. In the ancient manuscript Slavonic translation the words “and their villages” were not read. V. Lebedev, 356. In the translation of blessed Jerome it was taken as a proper name and translated: Sarohen. “Baalferierrammopha” in the Slavonic Bible, in accord with the Alexandrian manuscript (Βαρεκ according to the Vatican manuscript). “Iameph” in the Slavonic Bible in accord with the Alexandrian manuscript (Βαμεθ in the Vatican manuscript).