Commentaria in Josue
AND MAARA OF THE SIDONIANS.—More recent writers take Maara not as a proper name but as a common noun, and translate with Masius, as far as the meadows or fields of the Sidonians. Hence also from verse 6 it is clearly plain that Sidon, as well as Tyre, was comprehended within the boundaries of Chanaan, and belonged to the land promised to the Jews, although the Jews through their sloth never occupied it. Our version better kept Maara as a proper name. For Maara in Hebrew signifies a cave; as the Chaldean, Pagninus and others translate here; which exists near Sidon, and is a wonderful and impregnable stronghold, which afterwards was called the Cave of Tyre, which in the year 1167 after Christ the Christian garrison soldiers, bribed with money, delivered to the Saracens, says Tyrius, book 16 of the Holy War, chapter 11, and from him Adrichomius.
5. AND ITS CONFINES.—In Hebrew ve-ha-arets ha-gibli, which more recent writers with Masius and Vatablus take as a proper name, and translate, and the land of the Gebalites, that is, of the Byblians. For Byblus is a city in Phoenicia not far from Sidon. Whence the Septuagint translate, and all the land of Gabi. But our version, on account of the article, with other points reads ha-gebuli, that is, the boundary land, that is, the borders or confines of the land. For the article among the Hebrews is more often added to common than to proper nouns: although both versions come to the same. For Byblus was a neighbour to Sidon, as I said.
TILL YOU ENTER INTO EMATH.—Emath was twofold, says St. Jerome on Amos 6, near the beginning: namely the greater, which was afterwards called Antioch from Antiochus; and the lesser, which is called Epiphania: both are in Syria. The latter is placed in Scripture as the boundary of the Holy Land promised to the Jews toward Syria, but exclusive; whence it is added, “at the entrance of Emath.” For Judea reached almost as far as Epiphania.
7. AND NOW DIVIDE THE LAND IN POSSESSION TO THE NINE TRIBES, AND TO THE HALF TRIBE OF MANASSES.—For to the other half of the tribe of Manasses, as to the two other tribes Ruben and Gad, Moses has already given their lot and portion of Chanaan on this side of the Jordan. There remain, therefore, nine tribes with the half tribe of Manasses, to whom thou, O Josue, art to divide the Chanaan lying beyond the Jordan. Whence it follows:
8. WITH WHOM RUBEN AND GAD HAVE POSSESSED THE LAND WHICH MOSES THE SERVANT OF THE LORD DELIVERED TO THEM.—“With whom,” namely the half tribe of Manasses, not that which with the nine tribes shall receive their seats beyond the Jordan by thy lot, but the other, which is joined to the Rubenites and Gadites on this side of the Jordan. For these are not the words of God here, but of the author of the book, pursuing his history. For here end the words of God commanding that Chanaan beyond the Jordan be distributed by Josue to the nine tribes with the half of Manasses, and begin the words of the author narrating historically how Moses had already before distributed their portions of land on this side of the Jordan to the other part of the tribe of Manasses, together with the Rubenites and Gadites, so as in like manner to narrate of the other tribes distributed by Josue; whence for “with whom” the Hebrew is immo, that is, as Vatablus explains, with the other half tribe of Manasses, as if to say: Do thou, O Josue, divide the land beyond the Jordan to the nine tribes and to the half tribe of Manasses, because Moses has already divided the land on this side of the Jordan to the other half tribe of Manasses and the two remaining tribes (for the tribes are twelve in number), namely Ruben and Gad: so it will come about that all twelve tribes occupy their part and lot in Chanaan. For the Hebrews speak confusedly and roll many things together, which they leave to the reader to unfold, separate and distinguish from the circumstances, or from things said elsewhere, or known from other sources. Moreover these lots distributed by Moses to the Gadites, Rubenites and Manassites are recounted in Numbers 32:33; but here the same are repeated and explained more minutely.
13. AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WOULD NOT DESTROY GESSURI.—Not as though Moses with his people, commanded by God to destroy them, refused to do it, since he himself was most obedient to God; but because for settling first in the region on this side of the Jordan the two tribes and a half there were then lands and towns enough, and he had to cross with the whole army into the promised land beyond the Jordan to storm it. For this reason those two nations of Chanaan, namely the Gessurites and Machatites, were left to posterity to be conquered.
21. AND ALL THE CITIES OF THE PLAIN, AND ALL THE KINGDOMS … WHOM MOSES SLEW WITH THE PRINCES OF MADIAN?—Verse 21, all the cities, belonged to the kingdoms of Sehon; he does not therefore mean to say that the Rubenites alone occupied all the kingdoms of Sehon.
HEVI, AND RECEM, AND SUR, AND HUR, AND REBE, CAPTAINS OF SEHON, INHABITANTS OF THE LAND.—Moses first smote Sehon king of the Amorrhites, Numbers 21:24; then he smote these five princes, Hevi, Recem, Sur, Hur and Rebe in the Madianite war, Numbers 31. For they were themselves Madianites; here, however, they are called captains of Sehon, because they were his tributaries or stipendiaries, and therefore brought him aid against the Hebrews, but he being slain they returned to Madian, where a little after they also were slain by Moses.
25. AND HALF THE LAND OF THE CHILDREN OF AMMON,—This seems to conflict with Deuteronomy 2:19, where it is said: “I will not give thee of the land of the children of Ammon.” I answer with Abulensis that Sehon, a warlike king, had taken from the Ammonites by war part of their dominion, which, Sehon being routed with his other cities, the Israelites claimed for themselves by the right of war, and therefore, Judges 11:13, the king of the Ammonites remonstrated with Jephte, wishing it to be restored to him, but unjustly; for God had granted and given to the Hebrews all the kingdoms which obeyed the Amorrhites, among which were these also. For in that place of Deuteronomy he excepts only those places which the Ammonites then ruled; for these he wills to be left to them. He only forbids the Hebrews to invade the Ammonites and contend with them in war, and that in favour of Lot their father, a just man, who was nephew of the Patriarch Abraham. This region of the Ammonites, therefore, Sehon had subdued, whose dominion the Gadites possessed in one half, and the Rubenites held the other half.
WHICH IS OVER AGAINST RABBA,—that is, which is opposite or over against the city of Rabba, which was afterwards called Philadelphia from Philadelphus.
30. AND ALL THE KINGDOMS OF OG KING OF BASAN,—which were three: Argob, Basan, and part of Galaad. Yet Og is more often called king of Basan, and under Basan the other two are understood. See Deuteronomy 3:13 and following.
31. AND HALF GALAAD,—namely Moses gave it to the Manassites; for the other half he gave to the Gadites. Moreover the conjunction “and” is explanatory; for it explains what the kingdoms of Og king of Basan were, and says that among them the chief were half Galaad, Astaroth and Edrai.
TO THE HALF OF THE CHILDREN OF MACHIR.—Machir alone, as the sole son of Manasses, survived his father; wherefore he alone was heir of his father Manasses: yet Jair, his grandson by a daughter, was added to Machir, though otherwise Jair by his father belonged to the tribe of Juda: whence the descendants of Jair dwelt in Galaad with the descendants of Machir, 1 Paralipomenon 2:21 and following.