1–15 The boundaries of Canaan described in these verses roughly correspond to the area comprising modern Israel, the West Bank, southern Lebanon, and southeastern Syria. This area was slightly smaller than the area promised to Abraham in Genesis 15:18, which was to extend northward to the great river,the Euphrates. Only during the reigns of David and Solomon did the territory controlled by Israel extend that far (2 Chronicles 9:26). However, the boundaries outlined here did not include the conquered areas east of the Jordan River, where the two and a half tribes were planning to settle. Canaan proper, therefore, would be distributed only among the remaining nine and a half tribes.105
16–29 These verses provide a list of leaders from each of the nine and a half tribes who were to assist Eleazar and Joshua in assigning the land of Canaan to the various tribes. Their work was to be carried out after the conquest of Canaan was completed; the assigning of the land is described in Joshua Chapters 14–19.
1. And the Lord spake unto Moses. God here undertakes the office of a prudent and careful father of a family, in fixing the boundaries of the land on every side, lest their right to posses it should ever be called in question. He begins on the southern side, where it must be observed that the district of Bashan is included in it, and all that the Israelites had acquired before their passage of the Jordan, so that this addition was approved of by God. He extends this part as far as the wilderness of Sin, and the borders of Edom, and brings it round from Kadesh-barnea to Addar, and the passage of Azmon, and, finally, to the stream which washes (228) the city of Rhinocorura, in the immediate vicinity of Egypt; for by “the river of Egypt” the Nile is by no means to be understood, the course of which was not at all in that direction. The southern boundary, therefore, was from the Mediterranean Sea towards Arabia. On the western side the land was washed by the Mediterranean Sea, which is here called “the Great Sea,” in comparison with the Lake of Gennesareth, and the Salt Sea, by which name the Lacus Asphaltires is here meant. The beginning of the northern boundary was the promontory of Hor, for it would not accord to suppose that the mountain is here referred to in which Aaron died, and which was far away, and situated on the opposite side of the land. It extended from hence to Epiphania in Syria, which is called Hamath; for I agree with Jerome in thinking that there were two cities of this name, and it is undoubtedly probable that Antioch is called “Hamath the great” by the Prophet Amos (Amo 6:2,) in comparison with the lesser city here mentioned, the name of which was given it by that wicked and cruel tyrant (Antiochus) Epiphanes; whether, however, the greater Antioch was formerly called Hamath and Riblab, as Jerome states, I leave undecided. It then passed on to Zedad and Ziphron, and its extremity was the village of Enan. The eastern boundary passed from thence through Shephan, Riblah, and Ain, until it reached the Lake of Gennesareth, a lake sufficiently well known, and here called the Sea of Chinnereth. Thus the eastern boundary pointed from Arabia in the direction of Persia, and Babylon was situated to the north-east of it.
(228) There has been much discussion amongst the commentators on this point. The conclusion to which Dr. Kitto comes, after due examination of the opposite theory, is, that “the river of Egypt,” when mentioned as a boundary, cannot mean the Nile. “The present ‘river of Egypt’ (he adds) probably denotes a stream which formed the extreme boundary of the country eastward of the Nile, which Egypt, even in these early times, professed to claim, and which derived its name from that circumstance. It was probably not far from El-Arish, to which, under the name of Rhinocorura, it is expressly referred by the Septuagint. That it was a stream somewhere between the southern frontier of Palestine and the Nile we are deeply convinced.” — Illustr. Com., in loco.
13. And Moses commanded the children of Israel. Though this is a repetition, yet it is not a superfluous one; for he contrasts the new allotment of the nine tribes and a half with the former grant; (229) for the exception, which is immediately added, as to the lands beyond Jordan, given to the Reubenites, and Gadites, and half tribe of Manasseh, does not exclude them from their part of the promised inheritance was if they were disinherited, and therefore banished beyond the boundaries prescribed by God — but only from being subject to the casting of lots, because they had by special privilege obtained from their brethren what would else have been included in the common inheritance. Not that this had been revealed from the beginning, but because God in His indulgence had complied with their request, whereby they enlarged the boundaries of the land. And assuredly it would have been absurd that no place should be given them among their brethren in the promised land, as if they were cast off from the family of Abraham. We have lately seen that this part, which seemed to be separated from the others, was included in the limits laid down by God. Moses, therefore, merely wished to declare that what remained was to be divided by lot.
(229) “La donation qui avoit este desia faite de la region de Basan;” the grant which had been already made of the district of Bashan. — Fr.
16And the Lord spake unto Moses. The question here arises, if the Israelites were to divide the land among themselves by lot, wherefore was the authority of the judges required, as if there was anything for them to decide? But if we consider what has been lately shown, that reference was to be had, in the distribution of the land, to the numbers in every tribe, it was requisite for two purposes, — first, that God might show by His decree the districts respectively assigned to them; and, secondly, that their dimensions might be proportionate to the number of their occupants. For the casting of lots was still necessary, because many would have been averse to the sea-coast, or would have preferred the center of the land to its extremities, or would have been unwilling to be banished to the mountains; in short, they would have contended with each other beyond measure in murmurings and strife. On this account the lots were cast, by the decision of which God placed the several tribes in whatever position He pleased, although the judges, together with the High Priest and Joshua, had before divided the land into ten portions. But after it was declared in what district the several tribes were to dwell, as if God had there designated their abodes, the determination of men was again necessarily had recourse to, as to how far, and in what direction, the boundaries of the greater tribes were to extend; otherwise the lesser tribes would have refused to be cooped up in a less convenient position. And although the supreme authority was justly vested in Eleazar and Joshua, lest God should expose them to calumny and ill-will, He associated with them a council, in which also there was a prudent precaution against rivalry, for each of the twelve tribes contributed its judge to preside over the distribution, so that none might complain of being aggrieved. Moreover, inasmuch as it was of great importance that the possession, once established, should be secured to posterity, first of all the names of the princes are recorded, in order to give certainty to the history; and, secondly, as had been stated at the beginning of the chapter, so also it is repeated at the end that they were chosen by God, from whence the Israelites learnt that the boundaries then fixed could not be altered without overthrowing the authority of God Himself.
Num 34:1. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying- Having given, in the foregoing chapter, a strict charge to the Israelites, how they should treat the inhabitants of the land of Canaan; the Lord proceeds to describe to them the bounds of the land, as it had been promised to Abraham; thereby to let them know where to stop their conquests, and to prevent them from making any encroachments upon their neighbours. This chapter would have begun more properly at the 50th verse of the last; a division which, in future times, may be made, more consistently with the 1st verse of that chapter. There is no way by which the sacred geography can be well understood, but by the inspection of a correct and proper map; and none, perhaps, will be found superior to those of Calmet, who has accurately considered the subject. See his Comment and Dictionary.
Num 34:3. Then your south quarter shall be from the wilderness of Zin- Though by the land of Canaan is sometimes understood the whole land of promise possessed by the twelve tribes; yet the signification is here and commonly restrained to the country west of Jordan. Moses himself has made this distinction, Deu 2:29. The south bounds were to end at the east point of the Salt or Dead Sea, running by the borders of Idumea, to the most northern point of the river Nile, (Num 34:5.) and so to the Mediterranean Sea westward, and along by the wilderness of Zin, (Num 34:4.) meeting the eastern bounds towards the river Jordan. See Gen 14:3. Jos 15:2.
Num 34:4-5. To the ascent of Akrabbim- Or to Maaleh-akrabbim, as it is rendered, Jos 15:3 which signifies, according to Bochart, the mount of scorpions; so called from the multitude of those creatures found there. See Deu 8:15 and Hieroz. lib. 4: cap. 29. Hence that tract adjoining to Idumea is called Arabatine, 1Ma 5:3. Hazar-addar is, in the Vulgate, the village of Addar; which seems justified by Jos 15:3 where it is simply called Addar. The river of Egypt means, as we have explained it, Num 34:3 the Nile; as the sea means the Mediterranean sea, called Num 34:6-7 the great sea. It is certain, that the Jews never did extend their territories so far as the Nile; the present is to be considered only as a permission to do so. The words in Num 34:4 and the going forth thereof shall be from the south to Kadesh-barnea, Dr. Waterland renders, and its utmost limits on the south shall be Kadesh-barnea.
Num 34:6. The great sea- The Jews call the Mediterranean the great sea, in opposition to the lake of Gennezareth, and the Asphaltic lake, called, the one, the sea of Galilee, the other, the Salt or Dead Sea.
Num 34:7-9. From the great sea ye shall point out-mount Hor- The north bounds reached from the north end of the Mediterranean along by the mountains Libanus and Anti-Libanus, as far as the two heads of the river Jordan, taking in the several towns, Hamath, Zedad, &c. By Hor, here, is not to be understood that mount where Aaron died; (ch. Num 33:38-39.) for that was on the south of Canaan, whereas this was diametrically opposite, on the north of it; and therefore by Hor, in this place, we are, probably, to understand Hermon, or some part of Mount Libanus, which bounded Canaan on the north; for we find Lebanon and Hermon joined with the entrance of Hamath, Jos 13:5.) as mount Hor is here. Now Hermon was certainly a part of Lebanon, by some called Sirion, by others Shenir, Deu 3:9 and by others Sion, Deu 4:48. Respecting Hamath, see chap. Num 13:21. Ziphron is no where else mentioned in Scripture. St. Jerome takes it for Zephirium in Cilicia. Hazar-enan, Chitraeus renders the village of the source, namely, of Jordan, which took its rise in that tract. See Dr. Shaw, vol. 2 Chronicles 1 p. 267.
Num 34:11. The coast shall go down from Shepham to Riblah- The eastern bounds ran from the head of Jordan, along the whole course of that river, taking in the lake Cinnereth, or the sea of Galilee, or Tiberias, and so to the Dead Sea, till it meets with the south bounds, in the borders of Edom. Shepham and Riblah were two places near Jordan, along which river the eastern limits went. By Shepham, some of the Jewish interpreters understand Apamea, a city of Mesopotamia; and by Riblah, Daphne of Syria, in the suburbs of Antioch. But Bochart shews, that the land of Canaan never extended to these places. See his Can. lib. 1: cap. 16. Ain signifies a fountain, i.e. of Jordan, for this river had more sources than one. It seems to have been thus understood by the LXX and the Vulgate. The lake Cinnereth was so called, according to Chitraeus, from the Hebrew cinnor, a harp, or lute, because it was in that shape; but Reland derives the name from a canton or village of the same name, situated upon this lake, and in the tribe of Naphtali. See his Palaest. illust. tom. 1: cap. 39. We have been but brief upon this subject, as we shall have occasion to speak more fully respecting the Holy Land, its boundaries and division among the tribes, upon the fourteenth and following chapters of Joshua. In the mean time we refer our readers to Bochart's Canaan, the Univ. Hist. vol. Num 2:8 vo. p. 381 and to Dr. Shaw's Travels.
Num 34:13. This is the land which ye shall inherit by lot- The land of Canaan, properly so called, was bounded on the south by the high mountains which separated it from Arabia, and screened it from the burning winds that blow from that quarter, after having traversed the desarts; on the west, by the Mediterranean sea, whence blew refreshing gales; on the north, by mount Libanus, which guarded it from the cold northern blasts; and on the east, by the fine champaign countries watered by the Jordan, particularly about Jericho, abounding with palm-trees, and a prodigious increase. See Lowman on the Civil Government of the Hebrews, p. 38, 39. It is repeated here, that this is the land which they should inherit, that they might not extend their desires beyond the bounds of God's gracious grant to them.
Num 34:16-29. And the Lord spake unto Moses, &c.- To make the foundation of the Hebrew government solid and lasting, the wisdom of their lawgiver declared, as an essential branch of their constitution, that the territory should be equally divided; so that the whole six hundred thousand should each have a full property in an equal part of it; and that every man should hold his estate as a freehold in chief, immediately from God himself, without any tenure of service to any great man whatsoever; and that this tenure should be unalienable from the family in which it was originally settled, and should descend by an indefeasible entail in perpetual succession. Lowman, p. 41. Though this division of the land was to be made by lot, Num 34:13 yet it was fit that there should be some persons to oversee the business; the management of it, therefore, is ordered, with great propriety, to be in the hands of the high-priest, the governor or chief general, and a principal officer chosen out of each tribe as its representative in the affair; and it was under the immediate eye of God, and at the door of his sanctuary, that the business was transacted, as will be seen upon Joshua, chap. 18: and 19: At present we only observe, that Moses names not the tribes in such order as they were at their first and second numbering, chap. 1: and 26: but according to the situation which they afterwards had in the land of Canaan: a proof that Moses, animated by the spirit of God, did nothing but by the direction of that spirit.
REFLECTIONS.-Though they had not yet possessed one foot of Canaan, God will have them look upon the conquest as certain, and the land accordingly is divided among the remaining nine tribes and half. Eleazar and Joshua are the chief commissioners, and types of Jesus, the priest and king of his people, who will divide among them his eternal inheritance. A prince of each tribe is joined with them, to take care of the interests of his people, and to avoid all suspicion of partiality in the distribution. It is not enough to do right; we should take care to have our just dealing evident to all men.
