Judges 1 commentary

The Israelites were convinced that the war against the Canaanites was to be continued; but they were in doubt as to the manner in which it was to be carried on after the death of Joshua. In these respects they inquired of the Lord. God appoints service according to the strength he has given. From those who are most able, most work is expected. Judah was first in dignity, and must be first in duty. Judah's service will not avail unless God give success; but God will not give the success, unless Judah applies to the service. Judah was the most considerable of all the tribes, and Simeon the least; yet Judah begs Simeon's friendship, and prays for aid from him. It becomes Israelites to help one another against Canaanites; and all Christians, even those of different tribes, should strengthen one another. Those who thus help one another in love, have reason to hope that God will graciously help both. Adoni-bezek was taken prisoner. This prince had been a severe tyrant. The Israelites, doubtless under the Divine direction, made him suffer what he had done to others; and his own conscience confessed that he was justly treated as he had treated others. Thus the righteous God sometimes, in his providence, makes the punishment answer the sin.

The Canaanites had iron chariots; but Israel had God on their side, whose chariots are thousands of angels, Ps 68:17. Yet they suffered their fears to prevail against their faith. About Caleb we read in Jos 15:16–19. The Kenites had settled in the land. Israel let them fix where they pleased, being a quiet, contented people. They that molested none, were molested by none. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

The people of Israel were very careless of their duty and interest. Owing to slothfulness and cowardice, they would not be at the pains to complete their conquests. It was also owing to their covetousness: they were willing to let the Canaanites live among them, that they might make advantage of them. They had not the dread and detestation of idolatry they ought to have had. The same unbelief that kept their fathers forty years out of Canaan, kept them now out of the full possession of it. Distrust of the power and promise of God deprived them of advantages, and brought them into troubles. Thus many a believer who begins well is hindered. His graces languish, his lusts revive, Satan plies him with suitable temptations, the world recovers its hold; he brings guilt into his conscience, anguish into his heart, discredit on his character, and reproach on the gospel. Though he may have sharp rebukes, and be so recovered that he does not perish, yet he will have deeply to lament his folly through his remaining days; and upon his dying bed to mourn over the opportunities of glorifying God and serving the church he has lost. We can have no fellowship with the enemies of God within us or around us, but to our hurt; therefore our only wisdom is to maintain unceasing war against them.

THE BOOK OF JUDGES.

Commentary by Robert Jamieson

CHAPTER 1

Jud 1:1-3. The Acts of Judah and Simeon.

1. Now after the death of Joshua--probably not a long period, for the Canaanites seem to have taken advantage of that event to attempt recovering their lost position, and the Israelites were obliged to renew the war.

the children of Israel asked the Lord--The divine counsel on this, as on other occasions, was sought by Urim and Thummim, by applying to the high priest, who, according to Josephus, was Phinehas.

saying, Who shall go up for us against the Canaanites first--The elders, who exercised the government in their respective tribes, judged rightly, that in entering upon an important expedition, they should have a leader nominated by divine appointment; and in consulting the oracle, they adopted a prudent course, whether the object of their inquiry related to the choice of an individual commander, or to the honor of precedency among the tribes.

2. the Lord said, Judah shall go up--The predicted pre-eminence (Ge 49:8) was thus conferred upon Judah by divine direction, and its appointment to take the lead in the ensuing hostilities was of great importance, as the measure of success by which its arms were crowned, would animate the other tribes to make similar attempts against the Canaanites within their respective territories.

I have delivered the land into his hand--not the whole country, but the district assigned for his inheritance.

3. Judah said unto Simeon his brother, Come up with me ..., that we may fight against the Canaanites--Being conterminous tribes (Jos 19:1, 2), they had a common interest, and were naturally associated in this enterprise.

Jud 1:4-21. Adoni-bezek Justly Requited.

5-6. Bezek--This place lay within the domain of Judah, about twelve miles south of Jerusalem.

found Adoni-bezek--that is, "lord of Bezek"--he was "found," that is, surprised and routed in a pitched battle, whence he fled; but being taken prisoner, he was treated with a severity unusual among the Israelites, for they "cut off his thumbs and great toes." Barbarities of various kinds were commonly practised on prisoners of war in ancient times, and the object of this particular mutilation of the hands and feet was to disable them for military service ever after. The infliction of such a horrid cruelty on this Canaanite chief would have been a foul stain on the character of the Israelites if there were not reason for believing it was done by them as an act of retributive justice, and as such it was regarded by Adoni-bezek himself, whose conscience read his atrocious crimes in their punishment.

7. Threescore and ten kings--So great a number will not appear strange, when it is considered that anciently every ruler of a city or large town was called a king. It is not improbable that in that southern region of Canaan, there might, in earlier times, have been even more till a turbulent chief like Adoni-bezek devoured them in his insatiable ambition.

8. Now the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it--The capture of this important city, which ranks among the early incidents in the war of invasion (Jos 15:63), is here noticed to account for its being in the possession of the Judahites; and they brought Adoni-bezek thither [Jud 1:7], in order, probably, that his fate being rendered so public, might inspire terror far and wide. Similar inroads were made into the other unconquered parts of Judah's inheritance [Jud 1:9-11]. The story of Caleb's acquisition of Hebron is here repeated (Jos 15:16-19). [See on Jos 15:16.]

16. the children of the Kenite, Moses' father-in-law, went up out of the city of palm trees with the children of Judah--called "the Kenite," as probably descended from the people of that name (Nu 24:21, 22). If he might not himself, his posterity did accept the invitation of Moses (Nu 10:32) to accompany the Israelites to Canaan. Their first encampment was in the "city of palm trees"--not Jericho, of course, which was utterly destroyed, but the surrounding district, perhaps En-gedi, in early times called Hazezon-tamar (Ge 14:7), from the palm-grove which sheltered it. Thence they removed for some unknown cause, and associating themselves with Judah, joined in an expedition against Arad, in the southern part of Canaan (Nu 21:1). On the conquest of that district, some of this pastoral people pitched their tents there, while others migrated to the north (Jud 4:17).

17-29. And Judah went with Simeon his brother--The course of the narrative is here resumed from Jud 1:9, and an account given of Judah returning the services of Simeon (Jud 1:3), by aiding in the prosecution of the war within the neighboring tribes.

slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath--or Zephathah (2Ch 14:10), a valley lying in the southern portion of Canaan.

Hormah--destroyed in fulfilment of an early vow of the Israelites (see on Nu 21:2). The confederate tribes, pursuing their incursions in that quarter, came successively to Gaza, Askelon, and Ekron, which they took. But the Philistines seem soon to have regained possession of these cities.

Now after the death of Joshua - How long after the death of Joshua this happened we cannot tell; it is probable that it was not long. The enemies of the Israelites, finding their champion dead, would naturally avail themselves of their unsettled state, and make incursions on the country.

Who shall go up - Joshua had left no successor, and every thing relative to the movements of this people must be determined either by caprice, or an especial direction of the Lord.

The Lord said, Judah shall go up - They had inquired of the Lord by Phinehas the high priest; and he had communicated to them the Divine counsel.

Come up with me into my lot - It appears that the portions of Judah and Simeon had not been cleared of the Canaanites, or that these were the parts which were now particularly invaded.

And they found Adoni-bezek - The word מצא matsa, "he found," is used to express a hostile encounter between two parties; to attack, surprise, etc. This is probably its meaning here. Adoni-bezek is literally the lord of Bezek. It is very probable that the different Canaanitish tribes were governed by a sort of chieftains, similar to those among the clans of the ancient Scottish Highlanders. Bezek is said by some to have been in the tribe of Judah. Eusebius and St. Jerome mention two villages of this name, not in the tribe of Judah, but about seventeen miles from Shechem.

Cut off his thumbs - That he might never be able to draw his bow or handle his sword, and great toes, that he might never be able to pursue or escape from an adversary.

Threescore and ten kinds - Chieftains, heads of tribes, or military officers. For the word king cannot be taken here in its proper and usual sense.

Having their thumbs and their great toes cut off - That this was an ancient mode of treating enemies we learn from Aelian, who tells us, Var. Hist. l. ii., c. 9, that "the Athenians, at the instigation of Cleon, son of Cleaenetus, made a decree that all the inhabitants of the island of Aegina should have the thumb cut off from the right hand, so that they might ever after be disabled from holding a spear, yet might handle an oar." This is considered by Aelian an act of great cruelty; and he wishes to Minerva, the guardian of the city, to Jupiter Eleutherius, and all the gods of Greece, that the Athenians had never done such things. It was a custom among those Romans who did not like a military life, to cut off their own thumbs, that they might not be capable of serving in the army. Sometimes the parents cut off the thumbs of their children, that they might not be called into the army. According to Suetonius, in Vit. August., c. 24, a Roman knight, who had cut off the thumbs of his two sons to prevent them from being called to a military life was, by the order of Augustus, publicly sold, both he and his property. These are the words of Suetonius: Equitem Romanum, quod duobus filis adolescentibus, causa detractandi sacramenti, pollices amputasset, ipsum bonaque subjecit hastae. Calmet remarks that the Italian language has preserved a term, poltrone, which signifies one whose thumb is cut off, to designate a soldier destitute of courage and valor. We use poltroon to signify a dastardly fellow, without considering the import of the original. There have been found frequent instances of persons maiming themselves, that they might be incapacitated for military duty. I have heard an instance in which a knavish soldier discharged his gun through his hand, that he might be discharged from his regiment. The cutting off of the thumbs was probably designed for a double purpose:

1. To incapacitate them for war; and,

2. To brand them as cowards.

Gathered their meat under my table - I think this was a proverbial mode of expression, to signify reduction to the meanest servitude; for it is not at all likely that seventy kings, many of whom must have been contemporaries, were placed under the table of the king of Bezek, and there fed; as in the houses of poor persons the dogs are fed with crumbs and offal, under the table of their owners.

So God hath requited me - The king of Bezek seems to have had the knowledge of the true God, and a proper notion of a Divine providence. He now feels himself reduced to that state to which he had cruelly reduced others. Those acts in him were acts of tyrannous cruelty; the act towards him was an act of retributive justice.

And there he died - He continued at Jerusalem in a servile and degraded condition till the day of his death. How long he lived after his disgrace we know not.

Had fought against Jerusalem - We read this verse in a parenthesis, because we suppose that it refers to the taking of this city by Joshua; for as he had conquered its armies and slew its king, Jos 10:26, it is probable that he took the city: yet we find that the Jebusites still dwelt in it, Jos 15:63; and that the men of Judah could not drive them out, which probably refers to the strong hold or fortress on Mount Zion, which the Jebusites held till the days of David, who took it, and totally destroyed the Jebusites. See 2Sam 5:6-9, and 1Chr 11:4-8. It is possible that the Jebusites who had been discomfited by Joshua, had again become sufficiently strong to possess themselves of Jerusalem; and that they were now defeated, and the city itself set on fire: but that they still were able to keep possession of their strong fort on Mount Zion, which appears to have been the citadel of Jerusalem.

The Canaanites, that dwelt to the mountain - The territories of the tribe of Judah lay in the most southern part of the promised land, which was very mountainous, though towards the west it had many fine plains. In some of these the Canaanites had dwelt; and the expedition marked here was for the purpose of finally expelling them. But probably this is a recapitulation of what is related Jos 10:36; Jos 11:21; Jos 15:13.

And Caleb, etc. - See this whole account, which is placed here by way of recapitulation, in Jos 15:13-19 (note), and the explanatory notes there.

The children of the Kenite, Moses' father-in-law - For an account of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, see Exodus 18:1-27 (note); Num 10:29 (note), etc.

The city of palm trees - This seems to have been some place near Jericho, which city is expressly called the city of palm trees, Deu 34:3; and though destroyed by Joshua, it might have some suburbs remaining where these harmless people had taken up their residence. The Kenites, the descendants of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, were always attached to the Israelites: they remained with them, says Calmet, during their wanderings in the wilderness, and accompanied them to the promised land. They received there a lot with the tribe of Judah, and remained in the city of palm trees during the life of Joshua; but after his death, not contented with their portion, or molested by the original inhabitants, they united with the tribe of Judah, and went with them to attack Arad. After the conquest of that country, the Kenites established themselves there, and remained in it till the days of Saul, mingled with the Amalekites. When this king received a commandment from God to destroy the Amalekites, he sent a message to the Kenites to depart from among them, as God would not destroy them with the Amalekites. From them came Hemath, who was the father of the house of Rechab, 1Chr 2:55, and the Rechabites, of whom we have a remarkable account Jer 35:1, etc.

The city was called Hormah - This appears to be the same transaction mentioned Num 21:1 (note), etc., where see the notes.

Judah took Gaza - and Askelon - and Ekron - There is a most remarkable variation here in the Septuagint; I shall set down the verse: Και ουκ εκληρονομησεν Ιουδας την Γαζαν, ουδε τα ὁρια αυτης· ουδε την Ασκαλωνα, ουδε τα ὁρια αυτης· και την Ακκαρων, ουδε τα ὁρια αυτης· την Αζωτον, ουδε τα περισπορια αυτης· και ην Κυριος μετα Ιουδα. "But Judah Did Not possess Gaza, Nor the coast thereof; neither Askelon, nor the coasts thereof, neither Ekron, nor the coasts thereof; neither Azotus, nor its adjacent places: and the Lord was with Judah." This is the reading of the Vatican and other copies of the Septuagint: but the Alexandrian MS., and the text of the Complutensian and Antwerp Polyglots, agree more nearly with the Hebrew text. St. Augustine and Procopius read the same as, the Vatican MS.; and Josephus expressly says that the Israelites took only Askelon and Azotus, but did not take Gaza nor Ekron; and the whole history shows that these cities were not in the possession of the Israelites, but of the Philistines; and if the Israelites did take them at this time, as the Hebrew text states, they certainly lost them in a very short time after.

And the Lord was with Judah, and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron - Strange! were the iron chariots too strong for Omnipotence? The whole of this verse is improperly rendered. The first clause, The Lord was with Judah should terminate the 18th verse, and this gives the reason for the success of this tribe: The Lord was with Judah, and therefore he slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, etc., etc. Here then is a complete period: the remaining part of the verse either refers to a different time, or to the rebellion of Judah against the Lord, which caused him to withdraw his support. Therefore the Lord was with Judah, and these were the effects of his protection; but afterwards, when the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim, etc., God was no longer with them, and their enemies were left to be pricks in their eyes, and thorns in their side, as God himself had said. This is the turn given to the verse by Jonathan ben Uzziel, the Chaldee paraphrast: "And the Word of Jehovah was in the support of the house of Judah, and they extirpated the inhabitants of the mountains; but afterwards, When They Sinned, they were not able to extirpate the inhabitants of the plain country, because they had chariots of iron." They were now left to their own strength, and their adversaries prevailed against them. From a work called the Dhunoor Veda, it appears that the ancient Hindoos had war chariots similar to those of the Canaanites. They are described as having many wheels, and to have contained a number of rooms. - Ward's Customs.

They gave Hebron unto Caleb - See this whole transaction explained Jos 14:12 (note), etc.

The Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin - Jerusalem was situated partly in the tribe of Judah, and partly in the tribe of Benjamin, the northern part belonging to the latter tribe, the southern to the former. The Jebusites had their strongest position in the part that belonged to Benjamin, and from this place they were not wholly expelled till the days of David. See the notes on Jdg 1:8. What is said here of Benjamin is said of Judah, Jos 15:63. There must be an interchange of the names in one or other of these places.

Unto this day - As the Jebusites dwelt in Jerusalem till the days of David, by whom they were driven out, and the author of the book of Judges states them to have been in possession of Jerusalem when he wrote; therefore this book was written before the reign of David.

The house of Joseph, they also went up against Bethel - That is, the tribe of Ephraim and the half tribe of Manasseh, who dwelt beyond Jordan. Beth-el was not taken by Joshua, though he took Ai, which was nigh to it. Instead of בית יוסף beith Yoseph, "the house of Joseph," ten of Dr. Kennicott's MSS. and six of De Rossi's have בני יוסף beney Yoseph, "the children of Joseph;" and this is the reading of both the Septuagint and Arabic, as well as of two copies in the Hexapla of Origen.

Beth-el - the name of the city before was Luz - Concerning this city and its names, see the notes on Gen 28:19.

Show us - the entrance into the city - Taken in whatever light we choose, the conduct of this man was execrable. He was a traitor to his country, and he was accessary to the destruction of the lives and property of his fellow citizens, which he most sinfully betrayed, in order to save his own. According to the rules and laws of war, the children of Judah might avail themselves of such men and their information; but this does not lessen, on the side of this traitor, the turpitude of the action.

The land of the Hittites - Probably some place beyond the land of Canaan, in Arabia, whither this people emigrated when expelled by Joshua. The man himself appears to have been a Hittite, and to perpetuate the name of his city he called the new one which he now founded Luz, this being the ancient name of Beth-el.

Beth-shean - Called by the Septuagint Σκυθωνπολις, Scythopolis, or the city of the Scythians. On these towns see the notes, Jos 17:12-13 (note).

Neither did Ephraim - See the notes on the parallel passages, Jos 16:5-10 (note).

Neither did Zebulun drive out - See on Jos 19:10-15 (note).

Neither did Asher - See on Jos 19:24-31 (note).

Accho - Supposed to be the city of Ptolemais, near to Mount Carmel.

Neither did Naphtali - See the notes on Jos 19:32-39 (note).

The Amorites forced the children of Dan, etc. - Just as the ancient Britons were driven into the mountains of Wales by the Romans; and the native Indians driven back into the woods by the British settlers in America.

The Amorites would dwell in Mount Heres - They perhaps agreed to dwell in the mountainous country, being unable to maintain themselves on the plain, and yet were so powerful that the Danites could not totally expel them; they were, however, laid under tribute, and thus the house of Joseph had the sovereignty. The Septuagint have sought out a literal meaning for the names of several of these places, and they render the verse thus: "And the Amorites began to dwell in the mount of Tiles, in which there are bears, and in which there are foxes." Thus they translate Heres, Aijalon, and Shaalbim.

Akrabbim - Of scorpions; probably so called from the number of those animals in that place.

From the rock, and upward - The Vulgate understands by סלע sela, a rock, the city Petra, which was the capital of Arabia Petraea.

The whole of this chapter appears to be designed as a sort of supplement to those places in the book of Joshua which are referred to in the notes and in the margin; nor is there any thing in it worthy of especial remark. We everywhere see the same fickle character in the Israelites, and the goodness and long-suffering of God towards them. An especial Providence guides their steps, and a fatherly hand chastises them for their transgressions. They are obliged to live in the midst of their enemies, often straitened, but never overcome so as to lose the land which God gave them as their portion. We should learn wisdom from what they have suffered, and confidence in the protection and providence of God from their support, because these things were written for our learning. Few can be persuaded that adversity is a blessing, but without it how little should we learn! He, who in the school of affliction has his mind turned towards God, "Finds tongues in trees, books in the running brooks,

Sermons in stones, and good in every thing."

NOW after the death of Joshua , it came to pass, that the children of Israel asked the LORD , saying, Who shall go up for us against the Canaanites first , to fight against them?

Not long after it, because Othniel, the first Judge, lived in Ioshuah's time.

Being assembled together at Shiloh, they enquired of the High-priest by the Urim and Thummim. See Numb. 27. 21. Iudg. 20. 18. 1 Sam. 23. 9.

Being sensible that the Canaanites are troublesome to them, and expected great advantage against them by their heedless condition, and finding their People to encrease and multiply exceedingly, and consequently the necessity of enlarging their Quarters, they renew the War. They do not enquire who shall be the Captain General to all the Tribes; but (as appears by the answer) What Tribe shall first undertake the Expedition, that by their success the other Tribes may be encouraged to make the like attempt upon the Canaanites in their several Lots.

2 And the LORD said, Judah shall go up: behold, I have delivered the land into his hand.

Not a person so called, but the Tribe of Iudah, as is manifest from v. 3, 4, 8, 9. which is chosen for the first enterprise, because they were both most populous, and so most needing enlargement; and withal most Valiant, and therefore most likely to succeed: for God chuseth fit means for the work which he designs; and because the Canaanites were numerous and strong in those parts, and therefore were in time to be suppressed, before they grew too strong for them.

3 And Judah said unto Simeon his brother , Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites , and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him.

As nearest to him both by relation, being his Brother by both Parents, which few of them were; and by habitation, as appears from Ios. 19. 1, 2.

Specially so called, because they are distinguished from the Perizzite, v. 4.

4 And Judah went up, and the LORD delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand, and they slew of them in Bezek , ten thousand men.

Not in the City, for that was not yet taken, v. 5. but in the Territory of it, or near to it; as in Hor is taken, Numb. 33. 37. And in Iericho, Ios. 5. 13.

5 And they found Adoni-bezek , in Bezek , and they fought against him , and they [illegible: 1+ letters]lew the Canaanites, and the Perizzites.

The Lord or King of Bezek, as his Name signifies

Whither he fled, when he had lost the Field.

i. e. Against the City wherein he had Encamped himself, and the rest of his Army.

6 But Adoni-bezek fled, and they purfued after him, and caught him, and cut off his thumbs, and his great toes .

That he might be disenabled to fight with his Hands, or to run away upon his Feet. And this they did, either by the secret instinct and direction of God, or upon notice of his former Tyranny and Cruelty expressed upon others, in this manner, as it follows: either way it was a just requital.

7 And Adoni-bezek said, Threescore and ten kings , having their thumbs and their great toes cut off, gathered their meat under my table : as I have done▪ so God hath requited me : and they brought him to Jerusalem q, and there he died.

Which is not strange in those times and places: for these might be either, First, Kings successively, and so there might be divers of those Kings in one place, and so in others: Or, Secondly, Contemporary Kings▪ For it is well known, that anciently each Ruler of a City, or great Town, was called a King, and had Kingly Power in that place; and many such Kings we meet with in Canaan: and it is probable, that some years before, Kings were more numerous there, till the greater devoured many of the less.

That so their hands might be unable to manage weapons of War.

An act of Barbarous Inhumanity thus to insult over the miserable, joyned with abominable Luxury.

He acknowledgeth the Providence and vindictive Justice of God, which also Pharoah did, and others too, without any true sense of Piety.

They carried him in Triumph as a monument of Gods righteous Vengeance.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word]. [illegible: 1 word] thumbs [illegible: 1 word] their [illegible: 1 word], and of [illegible: 1 word] feet.; Or, [illegible: 1 word]

8 (Now the children of Judah had sought against Jerusalem, and had taken it , and smitten it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire.)

To wit, in Ioshuah's time; which though done before, may be here repeated, to shew why they brought Adonibesek to Ierusalem, because that City was in their hands, having been taken before; as may be gathered from Ios. 15. 63. And the taking of this City may be ascribed to the children of Iudah, rather than to Ioshua, because the City was not taken by Ioshua, and the whole Body of the Army in that time when so many Kings were destroyed, Ios. 10. and 12. (for there is mention made of the destroying of the King of Ierusalem, Ios. 10. 23. and 12. 10. But not a word of the taking of Ierusalem, as there is of the taking of [illegible: 1 word], and Libnah, and other Cities belonging to the Kings there mentioned, Ios. 10. 28, &c.) but by the Children of Iudah after they had received their Lot, when at the desire, and with the consent of the Benjamites, in whose Lot Ierusalem fell. Ios. 18. 28. they assaulted and took it, and thereby, as it seems acquired the right of Copartnership with the Benjamites in the possession of that City. Though some think Ierusalem was twice taken, once in Ioshua's Life-time; and being afterwards recovered by the Canaanites, was now retaken by the Children of Iudah.

10 And Judah went against the Canaanites that dwelt in Hebron, (now the name of Hebron before was Kirjath-arba) and they slew Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai.

Under the Conduct of Caleb, as it is recorded Ios. 15. 14, &c. for that relation, and this here following, are doubtless one and the same Expedition and War, as appears by all the circumstances; and it is mentioned either there by anticipation, or here by repetition. Of this and the following Verses, see the Notes there.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word]. 15. 13.

16 ¶ And the children of the Kenite, Moses father in law , went up out of the city of palmtrees t, with the children of Judah, into the wilderness of Judah, which lieth in the south of Arad , and they went and dwelt among the people .

i. e. of Iethro, so called from the people from whom he descended, Numb. 24. 21, 22. And, whatsoever he did, it is evident, that his Posterity came into Canaan with the Israelites, and were there seated with them. See Iudg. 4. 11. 17. and 5. 24. 1 Sam. 15. 6. 1 Chron. 2. 55.

i. e. From Iericho so called, Deut. 34. 3. not the City, which was utterly destroyed; but the Territory belonging to it, where it seems they were seated as in a most pleasant, and fruitful, and safe place, according to the promise made by Moses to their Father, Numb. 10. 31, 32. and whence they might remove, either to avoid the Society or Molestation of the Neighbouring Canaanites; or out of love to the children of Iudah, whom they went to; or to avoid temptations to Luxury, and exercise themselves in self-denial, and contempt of the present evil World, and the Lusts thereof; as may be thought from Ier. 35. 6, &c. Or for some other cause unknown to us at this distance.

In the Southern part of the Land of Canaan, where Arad was, Numb. 21. 1. u i. e. Some of them, for others of them dwelt in the contrary quarter, in the most Northern part of the Land.

Heb. that people, to wit, those Children of Iudah that lived there.

17 And Judah went with Simeon his brother , and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it (and the name of the city was called Hormah) .

According to his Promise, v. 3. and the Laws of Justice and Gratitude.

Either 1. The same place so destroyed and called, Numb. 21. 3. and so what was there Vowed, [illegible: 1+ letters], here Executed: Or 2. Some other place called by the same Name upon the like occasion, which was frequent among the Hebrews: This seems more probable, 1. Because this was but one City; that, divers Cities, Numb. 21. 2, 3. 2. Because that seems to have been done in Moses his time, though Interpreters generally think otherwise; of which see my Notes there.

18 Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof .

The principal Cities of the Philistines. Qu. How could this be, when among the people le[illegible: 1+ letters]t to try Israel, are the five Lords of the Philistines, Judg. 3. 3? Ans. It is onely said that they took the Cities, and probably contented themselves with making them Tributary; but it is not said that they slew the people, as they ought to have done; and as it is said of the other Cities here, v. 5, 8, 17, 25. And the people being thus spared, did by Gods Just Judgment, recover their strength, and expel the Iews out of their Cities, as we find afterwards: It is further observable, that Ekron here taken, was one of Dan's Cities, Ios. 19. 43. and it was attempted and taken here by Iudah and Simeon, partly out of love to their Brother Dan, and partly to secure their new Conquests, and other adjoining Territories, from such potent Neighbours.

19 And the LORD was with Judah, and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain, but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had charets of iron.

Because of their unbelief, whereby they doubted and distrusted Gods power to destroy those who had Chariots of Iron, and so gave way to their own fear and sloth, whereby God was provoked to withdraw his helping hand from them, and so they were really made impotent, as they were unwilling. See Ios. 17. 16.

Marginal references: Or, he [illegible: 1 word] the mountain.

20 And they gave Hebron unto Caleb, as Moses said: and he expelled thence the three sons of Anak .

Above mentioned, v. 10.

Marginal references: Numb. 14. 24. Josh. 14. 9, 13. and 15. 13.

21 And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem: but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day.

See on Ios. 15. 36.

22 ¶ And the house of Joseph , they also went up against Bethel: and the LORD was with them.

i. e. The Tribe of Ephraim, as appeaars from their opposition to the Tribe of Manasseh, v. 27.

24 And the spies saw a man come forth out of the city, and they said unto him, Shew us, we pray thee, the entrance into the city , and we will shew thee mercy.

On which side it is weakest, that we may best invade and take it.

Marginal references: Josh. 2. 12, 14.

25 And when he shewed them the entrance into the city, they smote the city with the edge of the sword: but they let go the man and all his family .

Together with his Estate, as the following Verse manifests.

26 And the man went into the land of the Hittites , and built a city, and called the name thereof Luz: which is the name thereof unto this day.

Where the Hittites seated themselves after they were driven out of Canaan, which seems to be Northward from Canaan, and near unto it. See 1 King. 11. 1. 1 Chron. 1. 17.

27 ¶ Neither did Manasseh drive out the inhatants of Beth-shean , and her towns, nor Taanach , and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor , and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam, and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo , and her towns: but the Canaanites would dwell in that land.

i. e. That half of this Tribe which dwelt in Canaan.

A place near Iordan, Ios. 17. 11.

Of which see Ios. 1[illegible: 1+ letters]. 21. and 17. 11.

A great City with large Territories. See Ios. 11. 2. and 12. 23. and 17. 11.

A Royal City. See Ios. 12. 21. and 17. 11.

Marginal references: Josh. 17. 11, 12, 13.; Heb. daughters.

29 ¶ Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites, that dwelt in Gezer: but the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them.

Which they possessed till Solomons time, 1 King. 9. 16.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1+ letters]sh. 16. 10.

33 ¶ Neither did Naphtali drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh, nor the inhabitants of Bethanath, but he dwelt among the Canaanites the inhabitants of the land: nevertheless, the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh , and of Beth-anath, became tributaries unto them.

A place differing from that Bethshemesh, Ios. 15. 10.

34 And the Amorites forced the children of Dan into the mountain: for they would not suffer them to come down to the valley .

i. e. Into the Plain Countrey; which was the occasion of that Expedition for the getting of new quarters; of which we read Ios. 19. and Iudg. 18.

35 But the Amorites would dwell in mount Heres in Ajalon and in Shaalbim: yet the hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tributaries.

i. e. Of the Ephraimites, who helped their Brethren the Danites against the Amorites, and that with good Success.

Marginal references: Heb. was heavy.

36 And the coast of the Amorites was from the going up to Akrabbim , from the rock and upward.

Which was in the Southern part of Canaan, Ios. 15. 2, 3. from whence it went up towards the North. This is added to shew the great power and large extent of this people.

Marginal references: Or Maaleakrabbim.

The Book of Judges

Introduction

Contents, and Character, Origin and Sources, of the Book of Judges

The book of Judges, headed Shophetim in the Hebrew Bibles, and Κριταί in the Alexandrian version, and called liber Judicum in the Vulgate, contains the history of the Israelitish theocracy for a period of about 350 years, from the death of Joshua to the death of Samson, or to the time of the prophet Samuel. It may be divided according to its contents into three parts: (1) an introduction (Judg 1-3:6); (2) the history of the several judges (Judg 3:7-16:31); and (3) a twofold appendix (Judg 17-21). In the Introduction the prophetic author of the book first of all takes a general survey of those facts which exhibited most clearly the behaviour of the Israelites to the Canaanites who were left in the land after the death of Joshua, and closes his survey with the reproof of their behaviour by the angel of the Lord (Jud1:1- Jos 2:5). He then describes in a general manner the attitude of Israel to the Lord its God and that of the Lord to His people during the time of the judges, and represents this period as a constant alternation of humiliation through hostile oppression, when the nation fell away from its God, and deliverance out of the power of its enemies by judges whom God raised up and endowed with the power of His Spirit, whenever the people returned to the Lord (Judg 2:6-3:6). This is followed in the body of the work (Judg 3:7-16:31) by the history of the several oppressions of Israel on the part of foreign nations, with the deliverance effected by the judges who were raised up by God, and whose deeds are for the most part elaborately described in chronological order, and introduced by the standing formula, “And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord,” etc.; or, “And the children of Israel again did evil (added to do evil),” etc. They are arranged in six historical groups: (1) the oppression by the Mesopotamian king, Chushan-rishathaim, with the deliverance from this oppression through Othniel the judge (Jdg 3:7-11); (2) the oppression by the Moabitish king Eglon, with the deliverance effected through Ehud the judge (Judg 3:12-30), and the victory achieved by Shamgar over the Philistines (Jdg 3:31); (3) the subjugation of Israel by the Canaanitish king Jabin, and the deliverance effected through the prophetess Deborah and Barak the judge (Judg 4), with Deborah’s song of victory (Judg 5); (4) the oppression by the Midianites, and the deliverance from these enemies through the judge Gideon, who was called to be the deliverer of Israel through an appearance of the angel of the Lord (Judg 6-8), with the history of the three years’ reign of his son Abimelech (Judg 9), and brief notices of the two judges Tola and Jair (Jdg 10:1-5); (5) the giving up of the Israelites into the power of the Ammonites and Philistines, and their deliverance from the Ammonitish oppression by Jephthah (Judg 10:6-12:7), with brief notices of the three judges Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon (Jdg 12:8-15); (6) the oppression by the Philistines, with the account of the life and deeds of Samson the judge, who began to deliver Israel out of the power of these foes (Judg 13-16). To this there are added two appendices in Judg 17-21: viz., (1) the account of the worship of images by the Ephraimite Micah, and the transportation of that worship by the Danites to Laish-Dan (Judg 17-18); and (2) the infamous conduct of the inhabitants of Gibeah, and the war of revenge which was waged by the congregation of Israel against the tribe of Benjamin as a punishment for the crime (Judg 19-21). Both these events occurred in the earliest part of the period of the judges, as we may gather, in the case of the first, from a comparison of Jdg 18:1 with Jdg 1:34, and in that of the second from a comparison of Jdg 20:28 with Jos 22:13 and Jos 24:33; and they are merely placed at the end of the book in the form of appendices, because they could not well be introduced into the six complete historical tableaux; although, so far as the facts themselves are concerned, they are intimately connected with the contents and aim of the book of Judges, inasmuch as they depict the religious and moral circumstances of the times in the most striking manner in two pictures drawn from life. The relation in which the three parts stand to one another, therefore, is this: the introduction depicts the basis on which the deeds of the judges were founded, and the appendices furnish confirmatory evidence of the spirit of the age as manifested in those deeds. The whole book, however, is pervaded and ruled by the idea distinctly expressed in the introduction (Jdg 2:1-3, Jdg 2:11-22), that the Lord left those Canaanites who had not been exterminated by Joshua still in the land, to prove to Israel through them whether it would obey His commandments, and that He chastised and punished His people through them for their disobedience and idolatry; but that as soon as they recognised His chastening hand in the punishment, and returned to Him with penitence and implored His help, He had compassion upon them again in His gracious love, and helped them to victory over their foes, so that, notwithstanding the repeated acts of faithlessness on the part of His people, the Lord remained ever faithful in His deeds, and stedfastly maintained His covenant.

We must not look to the book of Judges, therefore, for a complete history of the period of the judges, or one which throws light upon the development of the Israelites on every side. the character of the book, as shown in its contents and the arrangement of the materials, corresponds entirely to the character of the times over which it extends. The time of the judges did not form a new stage in the development of the nation of God. It was not till the time of Samuel and David, when this period was ended, that a new stage began. It was rather a transition period, the time of free, unfettered development, in which the nation was to take root in the land presented to it by God as its inheritance, to familiarize itself with the theocratic constitution given to it by the Mosaic law, and by means of the peculiar powers and gifts conferred upon it by God to acquire for itself that independence and firm footing in Canaan, within the limits of the laws, ordinances, and rights of the covenant, which Jehovah had promised, and the way to which He had prepared through the revelations He had made to them. This task could be accomplished without any ruler directly appointed by the Lord. The first thing which the tribes had to do was to root out such Canaanites as remained in the land, that they might not only establish themselves in the unrestricted and undisputed possession and enjoyment of the land and its productions, but also avert the danger which threatened them on the part of these tribes of being led away to idolatry and immorality. The Lord had promised them His help in this conflict, if they would only walk in His commandments. The maintenance of civil order and the administration of justice were in the hands of the heads of tribes, families, and households; and for the relation in which the congregation stood to the Lord its God, it possessed the necessary organs and media in the hereditary priesthood of the tribe of Levi, whose head could inquire the will of God in all cases of difficulty through the right of Urim, and make it known to the nation. Now as long as the generation, which had seen the wonderful works of the Lord in the time of Joshua, was still living, so long did the nation continue faithful to the covenant of its God, and the tribes maintain a successful conflict with the still remaining Canaanites (Judg 1:1-20, Jdg 1:22-25). But the very next generation, to which those mighty acts of the Lord were unknown, began to forget its God, to grow weary and lax in its conflicts with the Canaanites, to make peace with them, and to mix up the worship of Jehovah, the jealous and holy God, with the worship of Baal and Astarte, the Canaanitish deities of nature, and even to substitute the latter in its place. With the loss of love and fidelity to the Lord, the bond of unity which formed the tribes into one congregation of Jehovah was also broken. The different tribes began to follow their own separate interests (vid., Jdg 5:15-17, Jdg 5:23; Jdg 8:5-8), and eventually even to oppose and make war upon one another; whilst Ephraim was bent upon securing to itself the headship of all the tribes, though without making any vigorous efforts to carry on the war with the oppressors of Israel (vid., Jdg 8:1., Jdg 12:1-6). Consequently Israel suffered more and more from the oppression of heathen nations, to which God gave it up as a chastisement for its idolatry; and it would have become altogether a prey to its foes, had not the faithful covenant God taken compassion upon it in its distress as often as it cried to Him, and sent deliverers (מושׁיעים, Jdg 3:9, Jdg 3:15; cf. Neh 9:27) in those judges, after whom both the age in question and the book before us are called. There are twelve of these judges mentioned, or rather thirteen, as Deborah the prophetess also judges Israel (Jdg 4:4); but there are only eight (Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah and Barak, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson), who are described as performing acts by which Israel obtained deliverance from its oppressors. Of the other five (Tolah, Jair, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon) we are merely told that they judged Israel so many years. The reason for this we are not to seek in the fact that the report of the heroic deeds of these judges had not been handed down to the time when our book was written. It is to be found simply in the fact that these judges waged no wars and smote no foes.

The judges (shophetim) were men who procured justice or right for the people of Israel, not only be delivering them out of the power of their foes, but also by administering the laws and rights of the Lord (Jdg 2:16-19). Judging in this sense was different from the administration of civil jurisprudence, and included the idea of government such as would be expected from a king. Thus in 1Sa 8:5-6, the people are said to have asked Samuel to give them a king “to judge us,” to procure us right, i.e., to govern us; and in 2Ki 15:5 Jotham is said to have judged, i.e., governed the nation during the illness of his father. The name given to these men (shophetim, judges) was evidently founded upon Deu 17:9 and Deu 19:17, where it is assumed that in after-times there would be a shophet, who would stand by the side of the high priest as the supreme judge or leader of the state in Israel. The judges themselves corresponded to the δικασταί of the Tyrians (Josephus, c. Ap. i. 21) and the Suffetes of the Carthaginians (qui summus Paenis est magistratus, Liv. Hist. xxvii. 37, and xxx. 7), with this difference, however, that as a rule the judges of Israel were called directly by the Lord, and endowed with miraculous power for the conquest of the enemies of Israel; and if, after delivering the people from their oppressors, they continued to the time of their death to preside over the public affairs of the whole nation, or merely of several of its tribes, yet they did not follow one another in a continuous line and unbroken succession, because the ordinary administration of justice and government of the commonwealth still remained in the hands of the heads of the tribes and the elders of the people, whilst occasionally there were also prophets and high priests, such as Deborah, Eli, and Samuel (Jdg 4:4; 1Sa 4:18; 1Sa 7:15), in whom the government was vested. Thus “Othniel delivered the children of Israel,” and “judged Israel,” by going out to war, smiting Chushan-rishathaim, the Aramaean king, and giving the land rest for forty years (Jdg 3:9-11); and the same with Ehud and several others. On the other hand, Shamgar (Jdg 3:31) and Samson (Judg 13-16) are apparently called judges of Israel, simply as opponents and conquerors of the Philistines, without their having taken any part in the administration of justice. Others, again, nether engaged in war nor gained victories. No warlike deeds are recorded of Tola; and yet it is stated in Jdg 10:1, that “he rose up after Abimelech to deliver Israel (את־ישׂראל להושׁיע), and judged Israel twenty-three years;” whilst of his successor Jair nothing more is said, than that “he judged Israel twenty-two years.” Both of these had delivered and judged Israel, not by victories gained over enemies, but by placing themselves at the head of the tribes over whom Gideon had been judge, at the termination of the ephemeral reign of Abimelech, and by preventing the recurrence of hostile oppression, through the influence they exerted, as well as by what they did for the establishment of the nation in its fidelity to the Lord. This also applies to Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon, who followed Jephthah in direct succession (Jdg 12:8-15). Of these five judges also, it is not stated that Jehovah raised them up or called them. In all probability they merely undertook the government at the wish of the tribes whose judges they were; whilst at the same time it is to be observed, that such cases as these did not occur until the desire for a king had begun to manifest itself throughout the nation (Jdg 8:22-23).

But if all the judges did not fight against outward enemies of Israel, it might appear strange that the book of Judges should close with the death of Samson, without mentioning Eli and Samuel, as both of them judged Israel, the one forty years, the other for the whole of his life (1Sa 4:18; 1Sa 7:15). But Eli was really high priest, and what he did as judge was merely the natural result of his office of high priest; and Samuel was called to be the prophet of the Lord, and as such he delivered Israel from the oppression of the Philistines, not with the sword and by the might of his arm, like the judges before him, but by the power of the word, with which he converted Israel to the Lord, and by the might of his prayer, with which he sought and obtained the victory from the Lord (1Sa 7:3-10); so that his judicial activity not only sprang out of his prophetic office, but was continually sustained thereby. The line of actual judges terminated with Samson; and with his death the office of judge was carried to the grave. Samson was followed immediately by Samuel, whose prophetic labours formed the link between the period of the judges and the introduction of royalty into Israel. The forty years of oppression on the part of the Philistines, from which Samson began to deliver Israel (Jdg 13:1, Jdg 13:5), were brought to a close by the victory which the Israelites gained through Samuel’s prayer (1 Sam 7), as will be readily seen when we have determined the chronology of the period of the judges, in the introductory remarks to the exposition of the body of the book. This victory was not gained by the Israelites till twenty years after Eli’s death (comp. 1Sa 7:2 with 1Sa 6:1 and 1Sa 4:18). Consequently of the forty years during which Eli judged Israel as high priest, only the last twenty fell within the time of the Philistine oppression, the first twenty before it. But both Samuel and Samson were born during the pontificate of Eli; for when Samson’s birth was foretold, the Philistines were already ruling over Israel (Jdg 13:5). The deeds of Samson fell for the most part within the last twenty years of the Philistine supremacy, i.e., not only in the interval between the capture of the ark and death of Eli and the victory which the Israelites achieved through Samuel over these foes, which victory, however, Samson did not live to see, but also in the time when Samuel had been accredited as a prophet of Jehovah, and Jehovah had manifested himself repeatedly to him by word at Shiloh (1Sa 3:20-21). Consequently Samuel completed the deliverance of Israel out of the power of the Philistines, which Samson had commenced.

The book of Judges, therefore, embraces the whole of the judicial epoch, and gives a faithful picture of the political development of the Israelitish theocracy during that time. The author writes throughout from a prophet’s point of view. He applies the standard of the law to the spirit of the age by which the nation was influenced as a whole, and pronounces a stern and severe sentence upon all deviations from the path of rectitude set before it in the law. The unfaithfulness of Israel, which went a whoring again and again after Baal, and was punished for its apostasy from the Lord with oppression from foreign nations, and the faithfulness of the Lord, who sent help to the people whenever it returned to Him in its oppression, by raising up judges who conquered its enemies, are the two historical factors of those times, and the hinges upon which the history turns. In the case of all the judges, it is stated that they judged “Israel,” or the “children of Israel;” although it is very obvious, from the accounts of the different deliverances effected, that most of the judges only delivered and judged those tribes who happened to be oppressed and subjugated by their enemies at a particular time. The other tribes, who were spared by this or the other hostile invasion, did not come into consideration in reference to the special design of the historical account, namely, to describe the acts of the Lord in the government of His people, any more than the development of the religious and social life of individual members of the congregation in harmony with the law; inasmuch as the congregation, whether in whole or in part, was merely fulfilling its divinely appointed vocation, so long as it observed the law, and about this there was nothing special to be related (see the description given of the book of Judges in Hengstenberg, Diss. on the Pentateuch, vol. ii. pp. 16ff.).

Lastly, if we take a survey of the gradual development of Israel during the times of the judges, we may distinguish three stages in the attitude of the Lord to His constantly rebelling people, and also in the form assumed by the external and internal circumstances of the nation: viz., (1) the period from the commencement of the apostasy of the nation till its deliverance from the rule of the Canaanitish king Jabin, or the time of the judges Othniel, Ehud, and Shamgar, Deborah and Barak (Judg 3-5); (2) the time of the Midianitish oppression, with the deliverance effected by Gideon, and the government which followed, viz., of Abimelech and the judges Tola and Jair (Judg 6-10:5); (3) the time of the Ammonitish and Philistine supremacy over Israel, with the judges Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon on the one hand, and that of Samson on the other (Judg 10:6-16:31). Three times, for example, the Lord threatens His people with oppression and subjugation by foreign nations, as a punishment for their disobedience and apostasy from Him: viz., (1) at Bochim (Jdg 2:1-4) through the angel of the Lord; (2) on the invasion of the Midianites (Jdg 6:7-10) through the medium of a prophet; and (3) at the commencement of the Ammonitish and Philistine oppression (Jdg 10:10-14). The first time He threatens, “the Canaanites shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare to you” (Jdg 2:3); the second time, “I delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of all that oppressed you; I said unto you, I am Jehovah, your God; fear not the gods of the Amorites: but ye have not hearkened to my voice” (Jdg 6:9-10); the third time, “Ye have forsaken me and served other gods: wherefore I will deliver you no more; go and cry unto the gods which ye have chosen; let them deliver you in the time of your tribulation” (Jdg 10:13-14). These threats were fulfilled upon the disobedient nation, not only in the fact that they fell deeper and deeper under the oppression of their foes, but by their also becoming disjointed and separated more and more internally. In the first stage, the oppressions from without lasted a tolerably long time: that of Chushan-rishathaim eight years; that of Eglon the Moabite, eighteen; and that of the Canaanitish king Jabin, as much as twenty years (Jdg 3:8, Jdg 3:14; Jdg 4:3). But, on the other hand, after the first, the Israelites had forty years of peace; after the second, eighty; and after the third, again forty years (Jdg 3:11, Jdg 3:30; Jdg 5:31). Under Othniel and Ehud all Israel appears to have risen against its oppressors; but under Barak, Reuben and Gilead, Dan and Asher took no part in the conflict of the other tribes (Jdg 5:15-17). In the second stage, the Midianitish oppression lasted, it is true, only seven years (Jdg 6:1), and was followed by forty years of rest under Gideon (Jdg 8:28); whilst the three years’ government of Abimelech was followed by forty-five years of peace under Tola and Jair (Jdg 10:2-3); but even under Gideon the jealousy of Ephraim was raised to such a pitch against the tribes who had joined in smiting the foe, that it almost led to a civil war (Jdg 8:1-3), and the inhabitants of Succoth and Penuel refused all assistance to the victorious army, and that in so insolent a manner that they were severely punished by Gideon in consequence (Jdg 8:4-9, Jdg 8:14-17); whilst in the election of Abimelech as king of Shechem, the internal decay of the congregation of Israel was brought still more clearly to light (Judg 9). Lastly, in the third stage, no doubt, Israel was delivered by Jephthah from the eighteen years’ bondage on the part of the Ammonites (Jdg 11:8.), and the tribes to the east of the Jordan, as well as the northern tribes of the land on this side, enjoyed rest under the judges Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon for thirty-one years (Jdg 12:7, Jdg 12:9,Jdg 12:11, Jdg 12:14); but the Philistine oppression lasted till after Samson’s death (Jdg 13:5; Jdg 15:20), and the internal decay increased so much under this hostile pressure, that whilst the Ephraimites, on the one hand, commenced a war against Jephthah, and sustained a terrible defeat at the hands of the tribes on the east of the Jordan (Jdg 12:1-6), on the other hand, the tribes who were enslaved by the Philistines had so little appreciation of the deliverance which God had sent them through Samson, that the men of Judah endeavoured to give up their deliverer to the Philistines (Jdg 15:9-14). Nevertheless the Lord not only helped the nation again, both in its distress and out of its distress, but came nearer and nearer to it with His aid, that it might learn that its help was to be found in God alone. The first deliverers and judges He stirred up by His Spirit, which came upon Othniel and Ehud, and filled them with courage and strength for the conquest of their foes. Barak was summoned to the war by the prophetess Deborah, and inspired by her with the courage to undertake it. Gideon was called to be the deliverer of Israel out of the severe oppression of the Midianites by the appearance of the angel of the Lord, and the victory over the innumerable army of the foe was given by the Lord, not to the whole of the army which Gideon summoned to the battle, but only to a small company of 300 men, that Israel might not “vaunt themselves against the Lord,” and magnify their own power. Lastly, Jephthah and Samson were raised up as deliverers out of the power of the Ammonites and Philistines; and whilst Jephthah was called by the elders of Gilead to be the leader in the war with the Midianites, and sought through a vow to ensure the assistance of God in gaining a victory over them, Samson was set apart from his mother’s womb, through the appearance of the angel of the Lord, as the Nazarite who was to begin to deliver Israel out of the power of the Philistines. At the same time there was given to the nation in the person of Samuel, the son for whom the pious Hannah prayed to the Lord, a Nazarite and prophet, who was not only to complete the deliverance from the power of the Philistines which Samson had begun, but to ensure the full conversion of Israel to the Lord its God.

With regard to the origin of the book of Judges, it is evident from the repeated remark, “In those days there was no king in Israel, every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Jdg 17:6; Jdg 21:25; cf. Jdg 18:1; Jdg 19:1), that it was composed at a time when Israel was already rejoicing in the benefits connected with the kingdom. It is true this remark is only to be found in the appendices, and would have no force so far as the date of composition is concerned, if the view held by different critics were well-founded, viz., that these appendices were added by a later hand. But the arguments adduced against the unity of authorship in all three parts, the introduction, the body of the work, and the appendices, will not bear examination. Without the introduction (Judg 1:1-3:6) the historical narrative contained in the book would want a foundation, which is absolutely necessary to make it intelligible; and the two appendices supply two supplements of the greatest importance in relation to the development of the tribes of Israel in the time of the judges, and most intimately connected with the design and plan of the rest of the book. It is true that in Judg 1, as well as in the two appendices, the prophetic view of the history which prevails in the rest of the book, from Jdg 2:11 to Jdg 16:31, is not distinctly apparent; but this difference may be fully explained from the contents of the two portions, which neither furnish the occasion nor supply the materials for any such view-like the account of the royal supremacy of Abimelech in Judg 9, in which the so-called “theocratical pragmatism” is also wanting. But, on the other hand, all these portions are just as rich in allusions to the Mosaic law and the legal worship as the other parts of the book, so that both in their contents and their form they would be unintelligible apart from the supremacy of the law in Israel. The discrepancies which some fancy they have discovered between Jdg 1:8 and Jdg 1:21, and also between Jdg 1:19 and Jdg 3:3, vanish completely on a correct interpretation of the passages themselves. And no such differences can be pointed out in language or style as would overthrow the unity of authorship, or even render it questionable. Even Stähelin observes (spez. Einl. p. 77): “I cannot find in Judg 17-21 the (special) author of Judg 1-2:5; and the arguments adduced by Bertheau in favour of this, from modes of expression to be found in the two sections, appear to me to be anything but conclusive, simply because the very same modes of expression occur elsewhere: לשׁבת יואל in Exo 2:21; חתן in Num 10:29; בּיד נתן, Jos 10:30; Jos 11:8; Jdg 6:1; Jdg 11:21; לאשּׁה נתן, Gen 29:28; Gen 30:4, Gen 30:9; Gen 34:8, etc.; חרב לפי הכּה, Num 21:24; Deu 13:16; Jos 8:24; Jos 10:28, Jos 10:30, Jos 10:32, etc. Undoubtedly בּי שׁאל only occurs in Jdg 1:1 and the appendix, and never earlier; but there is a similar expression in Num 27:21 and Jos 9:14, and the first passage shows how the mode of expression could be so abbreviated. I find no preterites with ו, used in the place of the future with ו in Judg 1; for it is evident from the construction that the preterite must be used in Jdg 1:8, Jdg 1:16, Jdg 1:25, etc.; and thus the only thing left that could strike us at all is the idiom בּאשׁ שׁלּח, which is common to both sections, but which is too isolated, and occurs again moreover in 2Ki 8:12 and Psa 74:7.” But even the “peculiar phrases belonging to a later age,” which Stähelin and Bertheau discover in Judg 17-21 do not furnish any tenable proof of this assertion. The phrase “from Dan to Beersheba,” in Jdg 20:1, was formed after the settlement of the Danites in Laish-Dan, which took place at the commencement of the time of the judges. נשׁים נשׂא, in Jdg 21:23, is also to be found in Rth 1:4; and the others either occur again in the books of Samuel, or have been wrongly interpreted.

We have a firm datum for determining more minutely the time when the book of Judges was written, in the statement in Jdg 1:21, that the Jebusites in Jerusalem had not been rooted out by the Israelites, but dwelt there with the children of Benjamin “unto this day.” The Jebusites remained in possession of Jerusalem, or of the citadel Zion, or the upper town of Jerusalem, until the time when David went against Jerusalem after the twelve tribes had acknowledge him as king, took the fortress of Zion, and made it the capital of his kingdom under the name of the city of David (2Sa 5:6-9; 1Ch 11:4-9). Consequently the book was written before this event, either during the first seven years of the reign of David at Hebron, or during the reign of Saul, under whom the Israelites already enjoyed the benefits of a monarchical government, since Saul not only fought with bravery against all the enemies of Israel, and “delivered Israel out of the hands of them that spoiled them” (1Sa 14:47-48), but exerted himself to restore the authority of the law of God in his kingdom, as is evident from the fact that he banished the wizards and necromancers out of the land (1Sa 28:9). The talmudical statement therefore in Bava-bathra (f. 14 b and 15 a), to the effect that Samuel was the author of the book, may be so far correct, that if it was not written by Samuel himself towards the close of his life, it was written at his instigation by a younger prophet of his school. More than this it is impossible to decide. So much, however, is at all events certain, that the book does not contain traces of a later age either in its contents or its language, and that Jdg 18:30 does not refer to the time of the captivity (see the commentary on this passage).

With regard to the sources of which the author made use, unless we are prepared to accept untenable hypotheses as having all the validity of historical facts, it is impossible to establish anything more than that he drew his materials not only from oral tradition, but also from written documents. This is obvious from the exactness of the historical and chronological accounts, and still more so from the abundance of characteristic and original traits and expressions that meet the reader in the historical pictures, some of which are very elaborate. The historical fidelity, exactness, and vividness of description apparent in every part of the book are only to be explained in a work which embraces a period of 350 years, on the supposition that the author made use of trustworthy records, or the testimony of persons who were living when the events occurred. This stands out so clearly in every part of the book, that it is admitted even by critics who are compelled by their own dogmatical assumptions to deny the actual truth or reality of the miraculous parts of the history. With regard to the nature of these sources, however, we can only conjecture that Judg 1 and 17-21 were founded upon written accounts, with which the author of the book of Joshua was also acquainted; and that the accounts of Deborah and Barak, of Gideon, and the life of Samson, were taken from different writing, inasmuch as these sections are distinguished from one another by many peculiarities. (Further remarks on this subject will be found in the exposition itself.)

Of these two judges no particular deeds are mentioned, no doubt because they performed none.

Jdg 1:1-2

With the words “Now, after the death of Joshua, it came to pass,” the book of Judges takes up the thread of the history where the book of Joshua had dropped it, to relate the further development of the covenant nation. A short time before his death, Joshua had gathered the elders and heads of the people around him, and set before them the entire destruction of the Canaanites through the omnipotent help of the Lord, if they would only adhere with fidelity to the Lord; whilst, at the same time, he also pointed out to them the dangers of apostasy from the Lord (Josh 23). Remembering this admonition and warning, the Israelites inquired, after Joshua’s death, who should begin the war against the Canaanites who still remained to be destroyed; and the Lord answered, “Judah shall go up: behold, I have delivered the land into his hand” (Jdg 1:1, Jdg 1:2). בּיהוה שׁאל, to ask with Jehovah for the purpose of obtaining a declaration of the divine will, is substantially the same as האוּרים בּמשׁפּט שׁאל (Num 27:21), to inquire the will of the Lord through the Urim and Thummim of the high priest. From this time forward inquiring of the Lord occurs with greater frequency (vid., Jdg 20:23, Jdg 20:27; 1Sa 10:22; 1Sa 22:10; 1Sa 23:2, etc.), as well as the synonymous expression “ask of Elohim” in Jdg 18:5; Jdg 20:18; 1Sa 14:37; 1Sa 22:13; 1Ch 14:10; whereas Moses and Joshua received direct revelations from God. The phrase אל־הכּנעני יעלה, “go up to the Canaanites,” is defined more precisely by the following words, “to fight against them;” so that עלה is used here also to denote the campaign against a nation (see at Jos 8:1), without there being any necessity, however, for us to take אל in the sense of על. בתּחלּה עלה signifies “to go up in the beginning,” i.e., to open or commence the war; not to hold the commandership in the war, as the Sept., Vulgate, and others render it (see Jdg 10:18, where להלּחם יחל is expressly distinguished from being the chief or leader). Moreover, מי does not mean who? i.e., what person, but, as the answer clearly shows, what tribe? Now a tribe could open the war, and take the lead at the head of the other tribes, but could not be the commander-in-chief. In the present instance, however, Judah did not even enter upon the war at the head of all the tribes, but simply joined with the tribe of Simeon to make a common attack upon the Canaanites in their inheritance. The promise in Jdg 1:2 is the same as that in Jos 6:2; Jos 8:1, etc. “The land” is not merely the land allotted to the tribe of Judah, or Judah’s inheritance, as Bertheau supposes, for Judah conquered Jerusalem (Jdg 1:8), which had been allotted to the tribe of Benjamin (Jos 18:28), but the land of Canaan generally, so far as it was still in the possession of the Canaanites and was to be conquered by Judah. The reason why Judah was to commence the hostilities is not to be sought for in the fact that Judah was the most numerous of all the tribes (Rosenmüller), but rather in the fact that Judah had already been appointed by the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:8.) to be the champion of his brethren.

Jdg 1:3

Judah invited Simeon his brother, i.e., their brother tribe, to take part in the contest. The epithet is applied to Simeon, not because Simeon and Judah, the sons of Jacob, were the children of the same mother, Leah (Gen 29:33, Gen 29:35), but because Simeon’s inheritance was within the territory of Judah (Jos 19:1.), so that Simeon was more closely connected with Judah than any of the other tribes. “Come up with me into my lot (into the inheritance that has fallen to me by lot), that we may fight against the Canaanites, and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him,” i.e., joined with Judah in making war upon the Canaanites. This request shows that Judah’s principal intention was to make war upon and exterminate the Canaanites who remained in his own and Simeon’s inheritance. The different expressions employed, come up and go, are to be explained from the simple fact that the whole of Simeon’s territory was in the shephelah and Negeb, whereas Judah had received the heart of his possessions upon the mountains.

Jdg 1:4-7

“And Judah went up,” sc., against the Canaanites, to make war upon them.

The completion of the sentence is supplied by the context, more especially by Jdg 1:2. So far as the sense is concerned, Rosenmüller has given the correct explanation of ויּעל, “Judah entered upon the expedition along with Simeon.” “And they smote the Canaanites and the Perizzites in Bezek, 10,000 men.” The result of the war is summed up briefly in these words; and then in Jdg 1:5-7 the capture and punishment of the hostile king Adoni-bezek is specially mentioned as being the most important event in the war. The foe is described as consisting of Canaanites and Perizzites, two tribes which have been already named in Gen 13:7 and Gen 34:30 as representing the entire population of Canaan, “the Canaanites” comprising principally those in the lowlands by the Jordan and the Mediterranean (vid., Num 13:29; Jos 11:3), and “the Perizzites” the tribes who dwelt in the mountains (Jos 17:15). On the Perizzites, see Gen 13:7. The place mentioned, Bezek, is only mentioned once more, namely in 1Sa 11:8, where it is described as being situated between Gibeah of Saul (see at Jos 18:28) and Jabesh in Gilead. According to the Onom. (s. v. Bezek), there were at that time two places very near together both named Bezek, seventeen Roman miles from Neapolis on the road to Scythopolis, i.e., about seven hours to the north of Nabulus on the road to Beisan. This description is perfectly reconcilable with 1Sa 11:8. On the other hand, Clericus (ad h. l.), Rosenmüller, and v. Raumer suppose the Bezek mentioned here to have been situated in the territory of Judah; though this cannot be proved, since it is merely based upon an inference drawn from Jdg 1:3, viz., that Judah and Simeon simply attacked the Canaanites in their own allotted territories-an assumption which is very uncertain. There is no necessity, however, to adopt the opposite and erroneous opinion of Bertheau, that the tribes of Judah and Simeon commenced their expedition to the south from the gathering-place of the united tribes at Shechem, and fought the battle with the Canaanitish forces in that region upon this expedition; since Shechem is not described in Josha as the gathering-place of the united tribes, i.e., of the whole of the military force of Israel, and the battle fought with Adoni-bezek did not take place at the time when the tribes prepared to leave Shiloh and march to their own possessions after the casting of the lots was over. The simplest explanation is, that when the tribes of Judah and Simeon prepared to make war upon the Canaanites in the possessions allotted to them, they were threatened or attacked by the forces of the Canaanites collected together by Adoni-bezek, so that they had first of all to turn their arms against this king before they could attack the Canaanites in their own tribe-land. As the precise circumstances connected with the occasion and course of this war have not been recorded, there is nothing to hinder the supposition that Adoni-bezek may have marched from the north against the possession of Benjamin and Judah, possibly with the intention of joining the Canaanites in Jebus, and the Anakim in Hebron and upon the mountains in the south, and then making a combined attack upon the Israelites. This might induce or even compel Judah and Simeon to attack this enemy first of all, and even to pursue him till they overtook him at his capital Bezek, and smote him with all his army. Adoni-bezek, i.e., lord of Bezek, is the official title of this king, whose proper name is unknown.

In the principal engagement, in which 10,000 Canaanites fell, Adoni-bezek escaped; but he was overtaken in his flight (Jdg 1:6, Jdg 1:7), and so mutilated, by the cutting off of his thumbs and great toes, that he could neither carry arms nor flee. With this cruel treatment, which the Athenians are said to have practised upon the capture Aegynetes (Aelian, var. hist. ii. 9), the Israelites simply executed the just judgment of retribution, as Adoni-bezek was compelled to acknowledge, for the cruelties which he had inflicted upon captives taken by himself. “Seventy kings,” he says in Jdg 1:7, “with the thumbs of their hands and feet cut off, were gathering under my table. As I have done, so God hath requited me.” מקצּצים  ...  בּהנות, lit. “cut in the thumbs of their hands and feet” (see Ewald, Lehrb. §284 c.). The object to מלקּטים, “gathering up” (viz., crumbs), is easily supplied from the idea of the verb itself. Gathering up crumbs under the table, like the dogs in Mat 15:27, is a figurative representation of the most shameful treatment and humiliation. “Seventy” is a round number, and is certainly an exaggerated hyperbole here. For even if every town of importance in Canaan had its own king, the fact that, when Joshua conquered the land, he only smote thirty-one kings, is sufficient evidence that there can hardly have been seventy kings to be found in all Canaan. It appears strange, too, that the king of Bezek is not mentioned in connection with the conquest of Canaan under Joshua. Bezek was probably situated more on the side towards the valley of the Jordan, where the Israelites under Joshua did not go. Possibly, too, the culminating point of Adoni-bezek’s power, when he conquered so many kings, was before the arrival of the Israelites in Canaan, and it may at that time have begun to decline; so that he did not venture to undertake anything against the combined forces of Israel under Joshua, and it was not till the Israelitish tribes separated to go to their own possessions, that he once more tried the fortunes of war and was defeated. The children of Judah took him with them to Jerusalem, where he died.

Jdg 1:8

After his defeat, Judah and Simeon went against Jerusalem, and conquered this city and smote it, i.e., its inhabitants, with the edge of the sword, or without quarter (see Gen 34:26), and set the city on fire. בּאשׁ שׁלּח, to set on fire, to give up to the flames, only occurs again in Jdg 20:48; 2Ki 8:12, and Psa 74:7. Joshua had already slain the king of Jerusalem and his four allies after the battle at Gibeon (Jos 10:3, Jos 10:18-26), but had not conquered Jerusalem, his capital. This was not done till after Joshua’s death, when it was taken by the tribes of Judah and Simeon. But even after this capture, and notwithstanding the fact that it had been set on fire, it did not come into the sole and permanent possession of the Israelites. After the conquerors had advanced still farther, to make war upon the Canaanites in the mountains, in the Negeb, and in the shephelah (vv. 9ff.), the Jebusites took it again and rebuilt it, so that in the following age it was regarded by the Israelites as a foreign city (Jdg 19:11-12). The Benjaminites, to whom Jerusalem had fallen by lot, were no more able to drive out the Jebusites than the Judaeans had been. Consequently they continued to live by the side of the Benjaminites (Jdg 1:21) and the Judaeans (Jos 15:63), who settled, as time rolled on, in this the border city of their possessions; and in the upper town especially, upon the top of Mount Zion, they established themselves so firmly, that they could not be dislodged until David succeeded in wresting this fortress from them, and make the city of Zion the capital of his kingdom (2Sa 5:6.).In this way we may reconcile in a very simple manner the different accounts concerning Jerusalem in Jos 15:63; Jdg 1:8, Jdg 1:21; Jdg 19:11., 1Sa 17:54, and 2 Sam 5-6, without there being the slightest necessity to restrict the conquest mentioned in this verse to the city that was built round Mount Zion, as Josephus does, to the exclusion of the citadel upon Zion itself; or to follow Bertheau, and refer the account of the Jebusites dwelling by the children of Judah in Jerusalem (Jos 15:63) to a time subsequent to the conquest of the citadel of Zion by David-an interpretation which is neither favoured by the circumstance that the Jebusite Araunah still held some property there in the time of David (2Sa 24:21.), nor by the passage in 1Ki 9:20., according to which the descendants of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites who still remained in the land were made into tributary bondmen by Solomon, and set to work upon the buildings that he had in hand.

Jdg 1:9-15

After the conquest of Jerusalem, the children of Judah (together with the Simeonites, Jdg 1:3) went down to their own possessions, to make war upon the Canaanites in the mountains, the Negeb, and the shephelah (see at Jos 15:48; Jos 21:33), and to exterminate them. They first of all conquered Hebron and Debir upon the mountains (Jdg 1:10-15), as has already been related in Jos 15:14-19 (see the commentary on this passage). The forms עלּית and תּחתּית (Jdg 1:15), instead of עלּיּות and תּחתּיּות (Jos 15:19), are in the singular, and are construed with the plural form of the feminine גּלּות, because this is used in the sense of the singular, “a spring” (see Ewald, §318, a.).

Jdg 1:16

The notice respecting the Kenites, that they went up out of the palm-city with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah in the south of Arad, and dwelt there with the Judaeans, is introduced here into the account of the wars of the tribe of Judah, because this migration of the Kenites belonged to the time between the conquest of Debir (Jdg 1:12.) and Zephath (Jdg 1:17); and the notice itself was of importance, as forming the intermediate link between Num 10:29., and the later allusions to the Kenites in Jdg 4:11; Jdg 5:24; 1Sa 15:6; 1Sa 27:10; 1Sa 30:29. “The children of the Kenite,” i.e., the descendants of Hobab, the brother-in-law of Moses (compare Jdg 4:11, where the name is given, but קין occurs instead of קיני, with Num 10:29), were probably a branch of the Kenites mentioned in Gen 15:19 along with the other tribes of Canaan, which had separated from the other members of its own tribe before the time of Moses and removed to the land of Midian, where Moses met with a hospitable reception from their chief Reguel on his flight from Egypt. These Kenites had accompanied the Israelites to Canaan at the request of Moses (Num 10:29.); and when the Israelites advanced into Canaan itself, they had probably remained as nomads in the neighbourhood of the Jordan near to Jericho, without taking any part in the wars of Joshua. But when the tribe of Judah had exterminated the Canaanites out of Hebron, Debir, and the neighbourhood, after the death of Joshua, they went into the desert of Judah with the Judaeans as they moved farther towards the south; and going to the south-western edge of this desert, to the district on the south of Arad (Tell Arad, see at Num 21:1), they settled there on the border of the steppes of the Negeb (Num 33:40). “The palm-city” was a name given to the city of Jericho, according to Jdg 3:13; Deu 34:3; 2Ch 28:15. There is no ground whatever for thinking of some other town of this name in the desert of Arabia, near the palm-forest, φοινικών, of Diod. Sic. (iii. 42) and Strabo (p. 776), as Clericus and Bertheau suppose, even if it could be proved that there was any such town in the neighbourhood. ויּלך, “then he went (the branch of the Kenites just referred to) and dwelt with the people” (of the children of Judah), that is to say, with the people of Israel in the desert of Judah. The subject to ויּלך is קיני, the Kenite, as a tribe.Remaining Conquests of the Combined Tribes of Judah and Simeon. - Jdg 1:17.Zephath was in the territory of Simeon. This is evident not only from the fact that Hormah (Zephath) had been allotted to the tribe of Simeon (compare Jos 19:4 with Jos 15:30), but also from the words, “Judah went with Simeon his brother,” which point back to Jdg 1:3, and express the thought that Judah went with Simeon into his territory to drive out the Canaanites who were still to be found there. Going southwards from Debir, Judah and Simeon smote the Canaanites at Zephath on the southern boundary of Canaan, and executed the ban upon this town, from which it received the name of Hormah, i.e., banning. The town has been preserved in the ruins of Sepâta, on the south of Khalasa or Elusa (see at Jos 12:14). In the passage mentioned, the king of Hormah or Zephath is named among the kings who were slain by Joshua. It does not follow from this, however, that Joshua must necessarily have conquered his capital Zephath; the king of Jerusalem was also smitten by Joshua and slain, without Jerusalem itself being taken at that time. But even if Zephath were taken by the Israelites, as soon as the Israelitish army had withdrawn, the Canaanites there might have taken possession of the town again; so that, like many other Canaanitish towns, it had to be conquered again after Joshua’s death (see the commentary on Num 21:2-3). There is not much probability in this conjecture, however, for the simple reason that the ban pronounced by Moses upon the country of the king of Arad (Num 21:2) was carried out now for the first time by Judah and Simeon upon the town of Zephath, which formed a part of it. If Joshua had conquered it, he would certainly have executed the ban upon it. The name Hormah, which was already given to Zephath in Jos 15:30 and Jos 19:4, is no proof to the contrary, since it may be used proleptically there. In any case, the infliction of the ban upon this town can only be explained from the fact that Moses had pronounced the ban upon all the towns of the king of Arad.

Jdg 1:18-21

From the Negeb Judah turned into the shephelah, and took the three principal cities of the Philistines along the line of coast, viz., Gaza, Askelon, and Ekron, with their territory. The order in which the names of the captured cities occur is a proof that the conquest took place from the south. First of all Gaza, the southernmost of all the towns of the Philistines, the present Guzzeh; then Askelon (Ashkulân), which is five hours to the north of Gaza; and lastly Ekron, the most northerly of the five towns of the Philistines, the present Akîr (see at Jos 13:3). The other two, Ashdod and Gath, do not appear to have been conquered at that time. And even those that were conquered, the Judaeans were unable to hold long. In the time of Samson they were all of them in the hands of the Philistines again (see Jdg 14:19; Jdg 16:1.; 1Sa 5:10, etc.). - In Jdg 1:19 we have a brief summary of the results of the contests for the possession of the land. “Jehovah was with Judah;” and with His help they took possession of the mountains. And they did nothing more; “for the inhabitants of the plain they were unable to exterminate, because they had iron chariots.” הורישׁ has two different meanings in the two clauses: first (ויּרשׁ), to seize upon a possession which has been vacated by the expulsion or destruction of its former inhabitants; and secondly (להורישׁ, with the accusative, of the inhabitants), to drive or exterminate them out of their possessions-a meaning which is derived from the earlier signification of making it an emptied possession (see Exo 34:24; Num 32:21, etc.). “The mountain” here includes the south-land (the Negeb), as the only distinction is between mountains and plain. “The valley” is the shephelah (Jdg 1:9). להורישׁ לא, he was not (able) to drive out. The construction may be explained from the fact that לא is to be taken independently here as in Amo 6:10, in the same sense in which אין before the infinitive is used in later writings (2Ch 5:11; Est 4:2; Est 8:8; Ecc 3:14 : see Ges. §132-3, anm. 1; Ewald, §237, e.). On the iron chariots, i.e., the chariots tipped with iron, see at Jos 17:16. -  To this there is appended, in v. 20, the statement that “they gave Hebron unto Caleb,” etc., which already occurred in Jos 15:13-14, and was there explained; and also in Jdg 1:12 the remark, that the Benjaminites did not drive out the Jebusite who dwelt in Jerusalem, which is so far in place here, that it shows, on the one hand, that the children of Judah did not bring Jerusalem into the undisputed possession of the Israelites through this conquest, and, on the other hand, that it was not their intention to diminish the inheritance of Benjamin by the conquest of Jerusalem, and they had not taken the city for themselves. For further remarks, see at Jdg 1:8.

The hostile attacks of the other tribes upon the Canaanites who remained in the land are briefly summed up in Jdg 1:22-36. Of these the taking of Bethel is more fully described in Jdg 1:22-26. Besides this, nothing more is given than the list of the towns in the territories of western Manasseh (Jdg 1:27, Jdg 1:28), Ephraim (Jdg 1:29), Zebulun (Jdg 1:30), Asher (Jdg 1:31, Jdg 1:32), Naphtali (Jdg 1:33), and Dan (Jdg 1:34, Jdg 1:35), out of which the Canaanites were not exterminated by these tribes. Issachar is omitted; hardly, however, because that tribe made no attempt to disturb the Canaanites, as Bertheau supposes, but rather because none of its towns remained in the hands of the Canaanites.

Jdg 1:22-23

Like Judah, so also (“they also,” referring back to Jdg 1:2, Jdg 1:3) did the house of Joseph (Ephraim and western Manasseh) renew the hostilities with the Canaanites who were left in their territory after the death of Joshua. The children of Joseph went up against Bethel, and Jehovah was with them, so that they were able to conquer the city. Bethel had indeed been assigned to the tribe of Benjamin (Jos 18:22), but it was situated on the southern boundary of the tribe-land of Ephraim (Jos 16:2; Jos 18:13); so that the tribe of Joseph could not tolerate the Canaanites in this border town, if it would defend its own territory against them, and purge it entirely of them. This is a sufficient explanation of the fact that this one conquest is mentioned, and this only, without there being any necessity to seek for the reason, as Bertheau does, in the circumstance that the town of Bethel came into such significant prominence in the later history of Israel, and attained the same importance in many respects in relation to the northern tribes, as that which Jerusalem attained in relation to the southern. For the fact that nothing more is said about the other conquests of the children of Joseph, may be explained simply enough on the supposition that they did not succeed in rooting out the Canaanites from the other fortified towns in their possessions; and therefore there was nothing to record about any further conquests, as the result of their hostilities was merely this, that they did not drive the Canaanites out of the towns named in Jdg 1:27, Jdg 1:29, but simply made them tributary. יתירוּ, they had it explored, or spied out. תּוּר is construed with בּ here, because the spying laid hold, as it were, of its object. Bethel, formerly Luz, now Beitin: see at Gen 28:19 and Jos 7:2.

Jdg 1:24-25

And the watchmen (i.e., the spies sent out to explore Bethel) saw a man coming out of the town, and got him to show them the entrance into it, under a promise that they would show him favour, i.e., would spare the lives of himself and his family (see Jos 2:12-13); whereupon they took the town and smote it without quarter, according to the law in Deu 20:16-17, letting none but the man and his family go. By “the entrance into the city” we are not to understand the gate of the town, but the way or mode by which they could get into the town, which was no doubt fortified.

Jdg 1:26

The man whom they had permitted to go free, went with his family into the land of the Hittites, and there built a town, to which he gave the name of his earlier abode, viz., Luz. The situation of this Luz is altogether unknown. Even the situation of the land of the Hittites cannot be more precisely determined; for we find Hittites at Hebron in the times of Abraham and Moses (Gen 23), and also upon the mountains of Palestine (Num 13:29), and at a later period on the north-east of Canaan on the borders of Syria (1Ki 10:29). That the Hittites were one of the most numerous and widespread of the tribes of the Canaanites, is evident from the fact that, in Jos 1:4, the Canaanites generally are described as Hittites.

Jdg 1:27

Manasseh did not root out the Canaanites from the towns which had been allotted to it in the territory of Asher and Issachar (Jos 17:11), but simply made them tributary. וגו בּית־שׁאן הורישׁ לא, considered by itself, might be rendered: “Manasseh did not take possession of Bethshean,” etc. But as we find, in the further enumeration, the inhabitants of the towns mentioned instead of the towns themselves, we must take הורישׁ in the sense of rooting out, driving out of their possessions, which is the only rendering applicable in Jdg 1:28; and thus, according to a very frequent metonymy, must understand by the towns the inhabitants of the towns. “Manasseh did not exterminate Bethshean,” i.e., the inhabitants of Bethshean, etc. All the towns mentioned here have already been mentioned in Jos 17:11, the only difference being, that they are not placed in exactly the same order, and that Endor is mentioned there after Dor; whereas here it has no doubt fallen out through a copyist’s error, as the Manassites, according to Jos 17:12-13, did not exterminate the Canaanites from all the towns mentioned there. The change in the order in which the towns occur, - Taanach being placed next to Bethshean, whereas in Joshua Bethshean is followed by Ibleam, which is placed last but one in the present list, - may be explained on the supposition, that in Jos 17:11, Endor, Taanach, and Megiddo are placed together, as forming a triple league, of which the author of our book has taken no notice. Nearly all these towns were in the plain of Jezreel, or in the immediate neighbourhood of the great commercial roads which ran from the coast of the Mediterranean to Damascus and central Asia. The Canaanites no doubt brought all their strength to bear upon the defence of these roads; and in this their war-chariots, against which Israel could do nothing in the plain of Jezreel, were of the greatest service (see Jdg 1:19; Jos 17:16). For further particulars respecting the situation of the different towns, see at Jos 17:11. Dor only was on the coast of the Mediterranean (see at Jos 11:2), and being a commercial emporium of the Phoenicians, would certainly be strongly fortified, and very difficult to conquer.

Jdg 1:28

As the Israelites grew strong, they made serfs of the Canaanites (see at Gen 49:15). When this took place is not stated; but at all events, it was only done gradually in the course of the epoch of the judges, and not for the first time during the reign of Solomon, as Bertheau supposes on the ground of 1Ki 9:20-22 and 1Ki 4:12, without considering that even in the time of David the Israelites had already attained the highest power they ever possessed, and that there is nothing at variance with this in 1Ki 4:12 and 1Ki 9:20-22. For it by no means follows, from the appointment of a prefect by Solomon over the districts of Taanach, Megiddo, and Bethshean (1Ki 4:12), that these districts had only been conquered by Solomon a short time before, when we bear in mind that Solomon appointed twelve such prefects over all Israel, to remit in regular order the national payments that were required for the maintenance of the regal court. Nor does it follow, that because Solomon employed the descendants of the Canaanites who were left in the land as tributary labourers in the erection of his great buildings, therefore he was the first who succeeded in compelling those Canaanites who were not exterminated when the land was conquered by Joshua, to pay tribute to the different tribes of Israel.

Ephraim did not root out the Canaanites in Gezer (Jdg 1:29), as has already been stated in Jos 16:10.

Jdg 1:30

Zebulun did not root out the Canaanites in Kitron and Nahalol.

Jdg 1:31-32

Asher did not root out those in Acco, etc. Acco: a seaport town to the north of Carmel, on the bay which is called by its name; it is called Ake by Josephus, Diod. Sic., and Pliny, and was afterwards named Ptolemais from one of the Ptolemys (1 Macc. 5:15, 21; 10:1, etc.; Act 21:7). The Arabs called it Akka, and this was corrupted by the crusaders into Acker or Acre. During the crusades it was a very flourishing maritime and commercial town; but it subsequently fell into decay, and at the present time has a population of about 5000, composed of Mussulmans, Druses, and Christians (see C. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 119; Rob. Bibl. Res.; and Ritter, Erdk. xvi. pp. 725ff.). Sidon, now Saida: see at Jos 11:8. Achlab is only mentioned here, and is not known. Achzib, i.e., Ecdippa: see at Jos 19:29. Helbah is unknown. Aphek is the present Afkah: see Jos 13:4; Jos 19:30. Rehob is unknown: see at Jos 19:28, Jos 19:30. As seven out of the twenty-two towns of Asher (Jos 19:30) remained in the hands of the Canaanites, including such important places as Acco and Sidon, it is not stated in Jdg 1:32, as in Jdg 1:29, Jdg 1:30, that “the Canaanites dwelt among them,” but that “the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites,” to show that the Canaanites held the upper hand. And for this reason the expression “they became tributaries” (Jdg 1:30, Jdg 1:35, etc.) is also omitted.

Jdg 1:33

Naphtali did not root out the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh and Beth-anath, two fortified towns, the situation of which is still unknown (see at Jos 19:38); so that this tribe also dwelt among the Canaanites, but did not make them tributary.

Jdg 1:34-35

Still less were the Danites able to drive the Canaanites out of their inheritance. On the contrary, the Amorites forced Dan up into the mountains, and would not suffer them to come down into the plain. But the territory allotted to the Danytes was almost all in the plain (see at Jos 19:40). If, therefore, they were forced out of that, they were almost entirely excluded from their inheritance. The Amorites emboldened themselves (see at Deu 1:5) to dwell in Har-cheres, Ajalon, and Shaalbim. On the last two places see Jos 19:42, where Ir-shemesh is also mentioned. This combination, and still more the meaning of the names Har-cheres, i.e., sun-mountain, and Ir-shemesh, i.e., sun-town, make the conjecture a very probable one, that Har-cheres is only another name for Ir-shemesh, i.e., the present Ain Shems (see at Jos 15:10, and Rob. Pal. iii. pp. 17, 18). This pressure on the part of the Amorites induced a portion of the Danites to emigrate, and seek for an inheritance in the north of Palestine (see Judg 18). On the other hand, the Amorites were gradually made tributary by the powerful tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, who bounded Dan on the north. “The hand of the house of Joseph lay heavy,” sc., upon the Amorites in the towns already named on the borders of Ephraim. For the expression itself, comp. 1Sa 5:6; Psa 32:4.

Jdg 1:36

In order to explain the supremacy of the Amorites in the territory of Dan, a short notice is added concerning their extension in the south of Palestine. “The territory of the Amorites was,” i.e., extended (viz., at the time of the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites), “from the ascent of Akrabbim, from the rock onwards and farther up.” Maaleh-Akrabbim (ascensus scorpiorum) was the sharply projecting line of cliffs which intersected the Ghor below the Dead Sea, and formed the southern boundary of the promised land (see at Num 34:4 and Jos 15:2-3). מהסּלע, from the rock, is not doubt given as a second point upon the boundary of the Amoritish territory, as the repetition of the מן clearly shows, notwithstanding the omission of the copula ו. הסּלע, the rock, is supposed by the majority of commentators to refer to the city of Petra, the ruins of which are still to be seen in the Wady Musa (see Burckhardt, Syr. pp. 703ff.; Rob. Pal. ii. pp. 573ff., iii. 653), and which is distinctly mentioned in 2Ki 14:7 under the name of הסּלע, and in Isa 16:1 is called simply סלע. Petra is to the southeast of the Scorpion heights. Consequently, with this rendering the following word ומעלה (and upward) would have to be taken in the sense of ulterius (and beyond), and Rosenmüller's explanation would be the correct one: “The Amorites not only extended as far as the town of Petra, or inhabited it, but they even carried their dwellings beyond this towards the tops of those southern mountains.” But a description of the territory of the Amorites in its southern extension into Arabia Petraea does not suit the context of the verse, the object of which is to explain how it was that the Amorites were in a condition to force back the Danites out of the plain into the mountains, to say nothing of the fact that it is questionable whether the Amorites ever really spread so far, for which we have neither scriptural testimony nor evidence of any other kind. On this ground even Bertheau has taken ומעלה as denoting the direction upwards, i.e., towards the north, which unquestionably suits the usage of מעלה as well as the context of the passage. But it is by no means in harmony with this to understand הסּלע as referring to Petra; for in that case we should have two boundary points mentioned, the second of which was farther south than the first. Now a historian who had any acquaintance with the topography, would never have described the extent of the Amoritish territory from south to north in such a way as this, commencing with the Scorpion heights on the north, then passing to Petra, which was farther south, and stating that from this point the territory extended farther towards the north. If ומעלה therefore refers to the extension of the territory of the Amorites in a northerly direction, the expression “from the rock” cannot be understood as relating to the city of Petra, but must denote some other locality well known to the Israelites by that name. Such a locality there undoubtedly was in the rock in the desert of Zin, which had become celebrated through the events that took place at the water of strife (Num 20:8, Num 20:10), and to which in all probability this expression refers. The rock in question was at the south-west corner of Canaan, on the southern edge of the Rakhma plateau, to which the mountains of the Amorites extended on the south-west (comp. Num 14:25, Num 14:44-45, with Deu 1:44). And this would be very appropriately mentioned here as the south-western boundary of the Amorites, in connection with the Scorpion heights as their south-eastern boundary, for the purpose of giving the southern boundary of the Amorites in its full extent from east to west. War with Benjamin on the Part of All the Other Tribes. - The expectation of the Levite was fulfilled. The congregation of Israel assembled at Mizpeh to pass sentence upon Gibeah, and formed the resolution that they would not rest till the crime was punished as it deserved (Jdg 20:1-10). But when the Benjaminites refused to deliver up the offenders in Gibeah, and prepared to offer resistance, the other tribes began to make war upon Gibeah and Benjamin (Jdg 20:11-19), but were twice defeated by the Benjaminites with very great loss (Jdg 20:20-28). At length, however, they succeeded by an act of stratagem in taking Gibeah and burning it to the ground, and completely routing the Benjaminites, and also in putting to death all the men and cattle that they found in the other towns of this tribe, and laying the towns in ashes, whereby the whole of the tribe of Benjamin was annihilated, with the exception of a very small remnant (vv. 29-48).

Judges

This is called the Hebrew Shepher Shophtim, the Book of Judges, which the Syriac and Arabic versions enlarge upon, and call it, The Book of the Judges of the Children of Israel; the judgments of that nation being peculiar, so were their judges, whose office differed vastly from that of the judges of other nations. The LXX. entitles it only Kritai, Judges. It is the history of the commonwealth of Israel, during the government of the judges from Othniel to Eli, so much of it as God saw fit to transmit to us. It contains the history (according to Dr. Lightfoot's computation) of 299 years, reckoning to Othniel of Judah forty years, to Ehud of Benjamin eighty years, to Barak of Naphtali forty years, to Gideon of Manasseh forty years, to Abimelech his son three years, to Tola of Issachar twenty-three, to Jair of Manasseh twenty-two, to Jephtha of Manasseh six, to Ibzan of Judah seven, to Elon of Zebulun ten, to Abdon of Ephraim eight, to Samson of Dan twenty, in all 299. As for the years of their servitude, as were Eglon is said to oppress them eighteen years and Jabin twenty years, and so some others, those must be reckoned to fall in with some or other of the years of the judges. The judges here appear to have been of eight several tribes; that honour was thus diffused, until at last it centred in Judah. Eli and Samuel, the two judges that fall not within this book, were of Levi. It seems, there was no judge of Reuben or Simeon, Gad or Asher. The history of these judges in their order we have in this book to the end of ch. xvi. And then in the last five chapters we have an account of some particular memorable events which happened, as the story of Ruth did (Ruth i. 1) in the days when the judges ruled, but it is not certain in which judge's days; but they are put together at the end of the book, that the thread of the general history might not be interrupted. Now as to the state of the commonwealth of Israel during this period, I. They do not appear here either so great or so good as one might have expected the character of such a peculiar people would be, that were governed by such laws and enriched by such promises. We find them wretchedly corrupted, and wretchedly oppressed by their neighbours about them, and nowhere in all the book, either in war or council, do they make any figure proportionable to their glorious entry into Canaan. What shall we say to it? God would hereby show us the lamentable imperfection of all persons and things under the sun, that we may look for complete holiness and happiness in the other world, and not in this. Yet, II. We may hope that though the historian in this book enlarges most upon their provocations and grievances, yet there was a face of religion upon the land; and, however there were those among them that were drawn aside to idolatry, yet the tabernacle-service, according to the law of Moses, was kept up, and there were many that attended it. Historians record not the common course of justice and commerce in a nation, taking that for granted, but only the wars and disturbances that happen; but the reader must consider the other, to balance the blackness of them. III. It should seem that in these times each tribe had very much its government in ordinary within itself, and acted separately, without one common head, or council, which occasioned many differences among themselves, and kept them from being or doing any thing considerable. IV. The government of the judges was not constant, but occasional; when it is said that after Ehud's victory the land rested eighty years, and after Barak's forty, it is not certain that they lived, much less that they governed, so long; but they and the rest were raised up and animated by the Spirit of God to do particular service to the public when there was occasion, to avenge Israel of their enemies, and to purge Israel of their idolatries, which are the two things principally meant by their judging Israel. Yet Deborah, as a prophetess, was attended for judgment by all Israel, before there was occasion for her agency in war, ch. iv. 4. V. During the government of the judges, God was in a more especial manner Israel's king; so Samuel tells them when they were resolved to throw off this form of government, 1 Sam. xii. 12. God would try what his own law and the constitutions of that would do to keep them in order, and it proved that when there was no king in Israel every man did that which was right in his own eyes; he therefore, towards the latter end of this time, made the government of the judges more constant and universal that it was at first, and at length gave them David, a king after his own heart; then, and not till then, Israel began to flourish, which should make us very thankful for magistrates both supreme and subordinate, for they are ministers of God unto us for good. Four of the judges of Israel are canonized (Heb. xi. 32), Gideon, Barak, Samson, and Jephtha. The Learned bishop Patrick thinks the prophet Samuel was the penman of this Book.

This chapter gives us a particular account what sort of progress the several tribes of Israel made in the reducing of Canaan after the death of Joshua. He did (as we say) break the neck of that great work, and put it into such a posture that they might easily have perfected it in due time, if they had not been wanting to themselves; what they did in order hereunto, and wherein they came short, we are told. I. The united tribes of Judah and Simeon did bravely. 1. God appointed Judah to begin, ver. 1, 2. 2. Judah took Simeon to act in conjunction with him, ver. 3. 3. They succeeded in their enterprises against Bezek (ver. 4-7), Jerusalem, ver. 8. Hebron and Debir (ver. 9-15), Hormah, Gaza, and other places, ver. 17-19. 4. Yet where there were chariots of iron their hearts failed them, ver. 19. Mention is made of the Kenites settling among them, ver. 16. II. The other tribes, in comparison with these, acted a cowardly part. 1. Benjamin failed, ver. 21. 2. The house of Joseph did well against Beth-el (ver. 22-26), but in other places did not improve their advantages, nor Manasseh (ver. 27, 28), nor Ephraim, ver. 29. 3. Zebulun spared the Canaanites, ver. 30. 4. Asher truckled worse than any of them to the Canaanites, ver. 31, 32. 5. Naphtali was kept out of the full possession of several of his cities, ver. 33. 6. Dan was straitened by the Amorites, ver. 34. No account is given of Issachar, nor of the two tribes and a half on the other side Jordan.

Judah Attacks the Canaanites; The Punishment of Adoni-bezek. (b. c. 1425.)

1 Now after the death of Joshua it came to pass, that the children of Israel asked the Lord , saying, Who shall go up for us against the Canaanites first, to fight against them? 2 And the Lord said, Judah shall go up: behold, I have delivered the land into his hand. 3 And Judah said unto Simeon his brother, Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites; and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him. 4 And Judah went up; and the Lord delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand: and they slew of them in Bezek ten thousand men. 5 And they found Adoni-bezek in Bezek: and they fought against him, and they slew the Canaanites and the Perizzites. 6 But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued after him, and caught him, and cut off his thumbs and his great toes. 7 And Adoni-bezek said, Threescore and ten kings, having their thumbs and their great toes cut off, gathered their meat under my table: as I have done, so God hath requited me. And they brought him to Jerusalem, and there he died. 8 Now the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it, and smitten it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire.

Here, I. The children of Israel consult the oracle of God for direction which of all the tribes should first attempt to clear their country of the Canaanites, and to animate and encourage the rest. It was after the death of Joshua. While he lived he directed them, and all the tribes were obedient to him, but when he died he left no successor in the same authority that he had; but the people must consult the breast-plate of judgment, and thence receive the word of command; for God himself, as he was their King, so he was the Lord of their hosts. The question they ask is, Who shall go up first? v. 1. By this time, we may suppose, they were so multiplied that the places they were in possession of began to be too strait for them, and they must thrust out the enemy to make room; now they enquire who should first take up arms. Whether each tribe was ambitious of being first, and so strove for the honour of it, or whether each was afraid of being first, and so strove to decline it, does not appear; but by common consent the matter was referred to God himself, who is the fittest both to dispose of honours and to cut out work.

II. God appointed that Judah should go up first, and promised him success (v. 2): "I have delivered the land into his hand, to be possessed, and therefore will deliver the enemy into his hand, that keeps him out of possession, to be destroyed." And why must Judah be first in this undertaking? 1. Judah was the most numerous and powerful tribe, and therefore let Judah venture first. Note, God appoints service according to the strength he has given. Those that are most able, from them most work is expected. 2. Judah was first in dignity, and therefore must be first in duty. He it is whom his brethren must praise, and therefore he it is who must lead in perilous services. Let the burden of honour and the burden of work go together. 3. Judah was first served; the lot came up for Judah first, and therefore Judah must first fight. 4. Judah was the tribe out of which our Lord was to spring: so that in Judah, Christ, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, went before them. Christ engaged the powers of darkness first, and foiled them, which animates us for our conflicts; and it is in him that we are more than conquerors. Observe, The service and the success are put together: "Judah shall go up; let him do his part, and then he shall find that I have delivered the land into his hand." His service will not avail unless God give the success; but God will not give the success unless he vigorously apply himself to the service.

III. Judah hereupon prepares to go up, but courts his brother and neighbour the tribe of Simeon (the lot of which tribe fell within that of Judah and was assigned out of it) to join forces with him, v. 3. Observe here, 1. That the strongest should not despise but desire the assistance even of those that are weaker. Judah was the most considerable of all the tribes, and Simeon the least considerable, and yet Judah begs Simeon's friendship, and prays an aid from him; the head cannot say to the foot, I have no need of thee, for we are members one of another. 2. Those that crave assistance must be ready to give assistance: Come with me into my lot, and then I will go with thee into thine. It becomes Israelites to help one another against Canaanites; and all Christians, even those of different tribes, should strengthen one another's hands against the common interests of Satan's kingdom. Those who thus help one another in love have reason to hope that God will graciously help them both.

IV. The confederate forces of Judah and Simeon take the field: Judah went up (v. 4), and Simeon with him, v. 3. Caleb, it is probable, was commander-in-chief of this expedition; for who so fit as he who had both an old man's head and a young man's hand, the experience of age and the vigour of youth? Josh. xiv. 10, 11. It should seem too, by what follows (v. 10, 11), that he was not yet in possession of his own allotment. It was happy for them that they had such a general as, according to his name, was all heart. Some think that the Canaanites had got together into a body, a formidable body, when Israel consulted who should go and fight against them, and that they then began to stir when they heard of the death of Joshua, whose name had been so dreadful to them; but, if so, it proved they did but meddle to their own hurt.

V. God gave them great success. Whether they invaded the enemy, or the enemy first gave them the alarm, the Lord delivered them into their hand, v. 4. Though the army of Judah was strong and bold, yet the victory is attributed to God: he delivered the Canaanites into their hand; having given them authority, he here gives them ability to destroy them—put it in their power, and so tried their obedience to his command, which was utterly to cut them off. Bishop Patrick observes upon this that we meet not with such religious expressions in the heathen writers, concerning the success of their arms, as we have here and elsewhere in this sacred history. I wish such pious acknowledgments of the divine providence had not grown into disuse at this time with many that are called Christians. Now, 1. We are told how the army of the Canaanites was routed in the field, in or near Bezek, the place where they drew up, which afterwards Saul made the place of a general rendezvous (1 Sam. xi. 8); they slew 10,000 men, which blow, if followed, could not but be a very great weakening to those that were already brought so very low. 2. How their king was taken and mortified. His name was Adoni-bezek, which signifies, lord of Bezek. There have been those that called their lands by their own names (Ps. xlix. 11), but here was one (and there has been many another) that called himself by his land's name. He was taken prisoner after the battle, and we are here told how they used him; they cut off his thumbs, to disfit him for fighting, and his great toes, that he might not be able to run away, v. 6. It had been barbarous thus to triumph over a man in misery, and that lay at their mercy, but that he was a devoted Canaanite, and one that had in like manner abused others, which probably they had heard of. Josephus says, "They cut off his hands and his feet," probably supposing those more likely to be mortal wounds than only the cutting off of his thumbs and his great toes. But this indignity which they did him extorted from him an acknowledgment of the righteousness of God, v. 7. Here observe, (1.) What a great man this Adoni-bezek had been, how great in the field, where armies fled before him, how great at home, where kings were set with the dogs of his flock; and yet now himself a prisoner, and reduced to the extremity of meanness and disgrace. See how changeable this world is, and how slippery its high places are. Let not the highest be proud, nor the strongest secure, for they know not how low they may be brought before they die. (2.) What desolations he had made among his neighbours: he had wholly subdued seventy kings, to such a degree as to have them his prisoners; he that was the chief person in a city was then called a king, and the greatness of their title did but aggravate their disgrace, and fired the pride of him that insulted over them. We cannot suppose that Adoni-bezek had seventy of these petty princes at once his slaves; but first and last, in the course of his reign, he had thus deposed and abused so many, who perhaps were many of them kings of the same cities that successively opposed him, and whom he thus treated to please his own imperious barbarous fancy, and for a terror to others. It seems the Canaanites had been wasted by civil wars, and those bloody ones, among themselves, which would very much facilitate the conquest of them by Israel. "Judah," says Dr. Lightfoot, "in conquering Adoni-bezek, did, in effect, conquer seventy kings." (3.) How justly he was treated as he had treated others. Thus the righteous God sometimes, in his providence, makes the punishment to answer the sin, and observes an equality in his judgments; the spoiler shall be spoiled, and the treacherous dealer dealt treacherously with, Isa. xxxiii. 1. And those that showed no mercy shall have no mercy shown them, Jam. ii. 13. See Rev. xiii. 10; xviii. 6. (4.) How honestly he owned the righteousness of God herein: As I have done, so God has requited me. See the power of conscience, when God by his judgments awakens it, how it brings sin to remembrance, and subscribes to the justice of God. He that in his pride had set God at defiance now yields to him, and reflects with as much regret upon the kings under his table as ever he had looked upon them with pleasure when he had them there. He seems to own that he was better dealt with than he had dealt with his prisoners; for though the Israelites maimed him (according to the law of retaliation, an eye for an eye, so a thumb for a thumb), yet they did not put him under the table to be fed with the crumbs there, because, though the other might well be looked upon as an act of justice, this would have savoured more of pride and haughtiness than did become an Israelite.

VI. Particular notice is taken of the conquest of Jerusalem, v. 8. Our translators judge it spoken of here as done formerly in Joshua's time, and only repeated on occasion of Adoni-bezek's dying there, and therefore read it, "they had fought against Jerusalem," and put this verse in a parenthesis; but the original speaks of it as a thing now done, and this seems most probable because it is said to be done by the children of Judah in particular, not by all Israel in general, whom Joshua commanded. Joshua indeed conquered and slew Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. x.), but we read not there of his taking the city; probably, while he was pursing his conquests elsewhere, this Adoni-bezek, a neighbouring prince, got possession of it, whom Israel having conquered in the field, the city fell into their hands, and they slew the inhabitants, except those who retreated into the castle and held out there till David's time, and they set the city on fire, in token of their detestation of the idolatry wherewith it had been deeply infected, yet probably not so utterly as to consume it, but to leave convenient habitations for as many as they had to put into the possession of it.

Conquests of Judah. (b. c. 1425.)

9 And afterward the children of Judah went down to fight against the Canaanites, that dwelt in the mountain, and in the south, and in the valley. 10 And Judah went against the Canaanites that dwelt in Hebron: (now the name of Hebron before was Kirjath-arba:) and they slew Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai. 11 And from thence he went against the inhabitants of Debir: and the name of Debir before was Kirjath-sepher: 12 And Caleb said, He that smiteth Kirjath-sepher, and taketh it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife. 13 And Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother, took it: and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife. 14 And it came to pass, when she came to him, that she moved him to ask of her father a field: and she lighted from off her ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wilt thou? 15 And she said unto him, Give me a blessing: for thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water. And Caleb gave her the upper springs and the nether springs. 16 And the children of the Kenite, Moses' father in law, went up out of the city of palm trees with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which lieth in the south of Arad; and they went and dwelt among the people. 17 And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah. 18 Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof. 19 And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. 20 And they gave Hebron unto Caleb, as Moses said: and he expelled thence the three sons of Anak.

We have here a further account of that glorious and successful campaign which Judah and Simeon made. 1. The lot of Judah was pretty well cleared of the Canaanites, yet not thoroughly. Those that dwelt in the mountain (the mountains that were round about Jerusalem) were driven out (v. 9, 19), but those in the valley kept their ground against them, having chariots of iron, such as we read of, Josh. xvii. 16. Here the men of Judah failed, and thereby spoiled the influence which otherwise their example hitherto might have had on the rest of the tribes, who followed them in this instance of their cowardice, rather than in all the other instances of their courage. They had iron chariots, and therefore it was thought not safe to attack them: but had not Israel God on their side, whose chariots are thousands of angels (Ps. lxviii. 17), before whom these iron chariots would be but as stubble to the fire? Had not God expressly promised by the oracle (v. 2) to give them success against the Canaanites in this very expedition, without excepting those that had iron chariots? Yet they suffered their fears to prevail against their faith, they could not trust God under any disadvantages, and therefore durst not face the iron chariots, but meanly withdrew their forces, when with one bold stroke they might have completed their victories; and it proved of pernicious consequence. They did run well, what hindered them? Gal. v. 7. 2. Caleb was put in possession of Hebron, which, though given him by Joshua ten or twelve years before (as Dr. Lightfoot computes), yet being employed in public service, for the settling of the tribes, which he preferred before his own private interests, it seems he did not till now make himself master of; so well content was that good man to serve others, while he left himself to be served last; few are like-minded, for all seek their own, Phil. ii. 20, 21. Yet now the men of Judah all came in to his assistance for the reducing of Hebron (v. 10), slew the sons of Anak, and put him in possession of it, v. 20. They gave Hebron unto Caleb. And now Caleb, that he might return the kindness of his countrymen, is impatient to see Debir reduced and put into the hands of the men of Judah, to expedite which he proffers his daughter to the person that will undertake to command in the siege of that important place, v. 11, 12. Othniel bravely undertakes it, and wins the town and the lady (v. 13), and by his wife's interest and management with her father gains a very good inheritance for himself and his family, v. 14, 15. We had this passage before, Josh. xv. 16-19, where it was largely explained and improved. 3. Simeon got ground of the Canaanites in his border, v. 17, 18. In the eastern part of Simeon's lot, they destroyed the Canaanites in Zephath, and called it Hormah—destruction, adding this to some other devoted cities not far off, which they had some time ago, with good reason, called by that name, Num. xxi. 2, 3. And this perhaps was the complete performance of the vow they them made that they would utterly destroy these cities of the Canaanites in the south. In the western part they took Gaza, Askelon, and Ekron, cities of the Philistines; they gained present possession of the cities, but, not destroying the inhabitants, the Philistines in process of time recovered the cities, and proved inveterate enemies to the Israel of God, and no better could come of doing their work by the halves. 4. The Kenites gained a settlement in the tribe of Judah, choosing it there rather than in any other tribe, because it was the strongest, and there they hoped to be safe and quiet, v. 16. These were the posterity of Jethro, who either went with Israel when Moses invited them (Num. x. 29) or met them about the same place when they came up from their wanderings in the wilderness thirty-eight years after, and went with them then to Canaan, Moses having promised them that they should fare as Israel fared, Num. x. 32. They had at first seated themselves in the city of palm-trees, that is, Jericho, a city which never was to be rebuilt, and therefore the fitter for those who dwelt in tents, and did not mind building. But afterwards they removed into the wilderness of Judah, either out of their affection to that place, because solitary and retired, or out of their affection to that tribe, which perhaps had been in a particular manner kind to them. Yet we find the tent of Jael, who was of that family, far north, in the lot of Naphtali, when Sisera took shelter there, ch. iv. 17. This respect Israel showed them, to let them fix where they pleased, being a quiet people, who, wherever they were, were content with a little. Those that molested none were molested by none. Blessed are the meek, for thus they shall inherit the earth.

The Israelites Mixed with the Canaanites. (b. c. 1425.)

21 And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day. 22 And the house of Joseph, they also went up against Bethel: and the Lord was with them. 23 And the house of Joseph sent to descry Bethel. (Now the name of the city before was Luz.) 24 And the spies saw a man come forth out of the city, and they said unto him, show us, we pray thee, the entrance into the city, and we will show thee mercy. 25 And when he showed them the entrance into the city, they smote the city with the edge of the sword; but they let go the man and all his family. 26 And the man went into the land of the Hittites, and built a city, and called the name thereof Luz: which is the name thereof unto this day. 27 Neither did Manasseh drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shean and her towns, nor Taanach and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: but the Canaanites would dwell in that land. 28 And it came to pass, when Israel was strong, that they put the Canaanites to tribute, and did not utterly drive them out. 29 Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer; but the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them. 30 Neither did Zebulun drive out the inhabitants of Kitron, nor the inhabitants of Nahalol; but the Canaanites dwelt among them, and became tributaries. 31 Neither did Asher drive out the inhabitants of Accho, nor the inhabitants of Zidon, nor of Ahlab, nor of Achzib, nor of Helbah, nor of Aphik, nor of Rehob: 32 But the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: for they did not drive them out. 33 Neither did Naphtali drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh, nor the inhabitants of Beth-anath; but he dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: nevertheless the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh and of Beth-anath became tributaries unto them. 34 And the Amorites forced the children of Dan into the mountain: for they would not suffer them to come down to the valley: 35 But the Amorites would dwell in mount Heres in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim: yet the hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tributaries. 36 And the coast of the Amorites was from the going up to Akrabbim, from the rock, and upward.

We are here told upon what terms the rest of the tribes stood with the Canaanites that remained.

I. Benjamin neglected to drive the Jebusites out of that part of the city of Jerusalem which fell to their lot, v. 21. Judah had set them a good example, and gained them great advantages by what they did (v. 9), but they did not follow the blow for want of resolution.

II. The house of Joseph,

1. Bestirred themselves a little to get possession of Beth-el, v. 22. That city is mentioned in the tribe of Benjamin, Josh. xviii. 22. Yet it is spoken of there (v. 13) as a city in the borders of that tribe, and, it should seem, the line went through it, so that one half of it only belonged to Benjamin, the other half to Ephraim; and perhaps the activity of the Ephraimites at this time, to recover it from the Canaanites, secured it entirely to them henceforward, or at least the greatest part of it, for afterwards we find it so much under the power of the ten tribes (and Benjamin was none of them) that Jeroboam set up one of his calves in it. In this account of the expedition of the Ephraimites against Beth-el observe,

(1.) Their interest in the divine favour: The Lord was with them, and would have been with the other tribes if they would have exerted their strength. The Chaldee reads it here, as in many other places, The Word of the Lord was their helper, namely, Christ himself, the captain of the Lord's host, now that they acted separately, as well as when they were all in one body.

(2.) The prudent measures they took to gain the city. They sent spies to observe what part of the city was weakest, or which way they might make their attack with most advantage, v. 23. These spies got very good information from a man they providentially met with, who showed them a private way into the town, which was left unguarded because, being not generally known, no danger was suspected on that side. And here, [1.] He is not to be blamed for giving them this intelligence if he did it from a conviction that the Lord was with them, and that by his donation the land was theirs of right, any more than Rahab was for entertaining those whom she knew to be enemies of her country, but friends of God. Nor, [2.] Are those to be blamed who showed him mercy, gave him and his family not only their lives, but liberty to go wherever they pleased: for one good turn requires another. But, it seems, he would not join himself to the people of Israel, he feared them rather than loved them, and therefore he removed after a colony of the Hittites, which, it should seem, had gone into Arabia and settled there upon Joshua's invasion of the country; with them this man chose to dwell, and among them he built a city, a small one, we may suppose, such as planters commonly build, and in the name of it preserved the ancient name of his native city, Luz, an almond-tree, preferring this before its new name, which carried religion in it, Bethel—the house of God.

(3.) Their success. The spies brought or sent notice of the intelligence they had gained to the army, which improved their advantages, surprised the city, and put them all to the sword, v. 25. But,

2. Besides this achievement, it seems, the children of Joseph did nothing remarkable (1.) Manasseh failed to drive out the Canaanites from several very considerable cities in their lot, and did not make any attempt upon them, v. 27. But the Canaanites, being in possession, were resolved not to quit it; they would dwell in that land, and Manasseh had not resolution enough to offer to dispossess them; as if there was no meddling with them unless they were willing to resign, which it was not to be expected they ever would be. Only as Israel got strength they got ground, and served themselves, both by their contributions and by their personal services, v. 28, 35. (2.) Ephraim likewise, though a powerful tribe, neglected Gezer a considerable city, and suffered the Canaanites to dwell among them (v. 29), which, some think, intimates their allowing them a quiet settlement, and indulging them with the privileges of an unconquered people, not so much as making them tributaries.

III. Zebulun, perhaps inclining to the sea-trade, for it was foretold that it should be a haven for ships, neglected to reduce Kitron and Nahalol (v. 30), and only made the inhabitants of those places tributaries to them.

IV. Asher quitted itself worse than any of the tribes (v. 31, 32), not only in leaving more towns than any of them in the hands of the Canaanites, but in submitting to the Canaanites instead of making them tributaries; for so the manner of expression intimates, that the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, as if the Canaanites were the more numerous and the more powerful, would still be lords of the country, and the Israelites must be only upon sufferance among them.

V. Naphtali also permitted the Canaanites to live among them (v. 33), only by degrees they got them so far under as to exact contributions from them.

VI. Dan was so far from extending his conquests where his lot lay that, wanting spirit to make head against the Amorites, he was forced by them to retire into the mountains and inhabit the cities there, but durst not venture into the valley, where, it is probable, the chariots of iron were, v. 34. Nay, and some of the cities in the mountains were kept against them, v. 35. Thus were they straitened in their possessions, and forced to seek for more room at Laish, a great way off, ch. xviii. 1, &c. In Jacob's blessing Judah is compared to a lion, Dan to a serpent; now observe how Judah with his lion-like courage prospered and prevailed, but Dan with all his serpenting subtlety could get no ground; craft and artful management do not always effect the wonders they pretend to. What Dan came short of doing, it seems, his neighbours the Ephraimites in part did for him; they put the Amorites under tribute, v. 35.

Upon the whole matter it appears that the people of Israel were generally very careless both of their duty and interest in this thing; they did not what they might have done to expel the Canaanites and make room for themselves. And, 1. It was owing to their slothfulness and cowardice. They would not be at the pains to complete their conquests; like the sluggard, that dreamed of a lion in the way, a lion in the streets, they fancied insuperable difficulties, and frightened themselves with winds and clouds from sowing and reaping. 2. It was owing to their covetousness; the Canaanites' labour and money would do them more good (they thought) than their blood, and therefore they were willing to let them live among them, that they might make a hand of them. 3. They had not that dread and detestation of idolatry which they ought to have had; they thought it a pity to put these Canaanites to the sword, though the measure of their iniquity was full, thought it would be no harm to let them live among them, and that they should be in no danger from them. 4. The same thing that kept their fathers forty years out of Canaan kept them now out of the full possession of it, and that was unbelief. Distrust of the power and promise of God lost them their advantages, and ran them into a thousand mischiefs.