Joshua 12:11

The king of Jarmuth, one; the king of Lachish, one;

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

12:7-24 We have here the limits of the country Joshua conquered. A list is given of the kings subdued by Israel: thirty-one in all. This shows how fruitful Canaan then was, in which so many chose to throng together. This was the land God appointed for Israel; yet in our day it is one of the most barren and unprofitable countries in the world. Such is the effect of the curse it lies under, since its possessors rejected Christ and his gospel, as was foretold by Moses, De 29:23. The vengeance of a righteous God, inflicted on all these kings and their subjects, for their wickedness, should make us dread and hate sin. The fruitful land bestowed on his chosen people, should fill our hearts with hope and confidence in his mercy, and with humble gratitude.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

The names of the kings are given in the order of their actual encounter with Joshua. Those enumerated in Joshua 12:10-18 either belonged to the league of the southern Canaanites (Joshua 10:1 ff), the power of which was broken in the battle of Beth-horon, or were at any rate conquered in the campaign following that battle. Those mentioned in Joshua 12:19-24 were in like manner connected with the northern confederates (Joshua 11:1 ff), who were defeated at the Waters of Merom.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

Jos 12:7-24. The One and Thirty Kings on the West Side of Jordan, Which Joshua Smote.

7. Baal-gad … even unto … Halak—(See on [188]Jos 11:17). A list of thirty-one chief towns is here given; and, as the whole land contained a superficial extent of only fifteen miles in length by fifty in breadth, it is evident that these capital cities belonged to petty and insignificant kingdoms. With a few exceptions, they were not the scenes of any important events recorded in the sacred history, and therefore do not require a particular notice.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

No text from Poole on this verse.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

The king of Jarmuth, one,.... Whose name was Piram, a third of the five kings before observed, Joshua 10:3,

the king of Lachish, one; another of them, whose name was Japhia, Joshua 10:3.

Geneva Study Bible

The king of Jarmuth, one; the king of Lachish, one;

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Joshua 12:11

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

The different kings are given in the order in which they were defeated: Jericho (Joshua 6:1); Ai (Joshua 7:2); Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon (Joshua 10:3); Gezer (Joshua 10:33); and Debir (Joshua 10:38). Those given in Joshua 12:13 and Joshua 12:14 are not mentioned by name in Joshua 10. Geder, possibly the same as Gedor upon the mountains of Judah (Joshua 15:58), which has been preserved under the old name of Jedur (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 186, and Bibl. Res. p. 282). Hormah (i.e., banning) was in the south of Judah (Joshua 15:30), and was allotted to the Simeonites (Joshua 19:4). It was called Zephath by the Canaanites (Judges 1:17; see at Numbers 21:3), was on the southern slope of the mountains of the Amalekites or Amorites, the present ruins of Septa, on the western slope of the table-land of Rakhma, two hours and a half to the south-west of Khalasa (Elusa: see Ritter, Erdk. xiv. p. 1085). Arad, also in the Negeb, has been preserved in Tell Arad (see at Numbers 21:1). Libnah (see at Joshua 10:29). Adullam, which is mentioned in Joshua 15:35 among the towns of the plain between Jarmuth and Socoh, was in the neighbourhood of a large cave in which David took refuge when flying from Saul (1 Samuel 22:1; 2 Samuel 23:13). It was fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:7), and is mentioned in 2 Macc. 12:38 as the city of Odollam. The Onomast. describes it as being ten Roman miles to the east of Eleutheropolis; but this is a mistake, though it has not yet been discovered. So far as the situation is concerned, Deir Dubbn would suit very well, a place about two hours to the north of Beit Jibrin, near to a large number of caves in the white limestone, which form a kind of labyrinth, as well as some vaulted grottos (see Rob. Pal. ii. p. 353, and Van de Velde, Reise, pp. 162-3). Makkedah: possibly Summeil (see at Joshua 10:10). Bethel, i.e., Beitin (see Joshua 8:17). The situation of the towns which follow in Joshua 12:17 and Joshua 12:18 cannot be determined with certainty, as the names Tappuach, Aphek, and Hefer are met with again in different parts of Canaan, and Lassaron does not occur again. But if we observe, that just as from Joshua 12:10 onwards those kings'-towns are first of all enumerated, the capture of which has already been described in Joshua 10, and then in Joshua 12:15 and Joshua 12:16 certain other towns are added which had been taken in the war with the Canaanites of the south, so likewise in Joshua 12:19 and Joshua 12:20 the capitals of the allied kings of northern Canaan are given first, and after that the other towns that were taken in the northern war, but had not been mentioned by name in Joshua 11:there can be no doubt whatever that the four towns in Joshua 12:17 and Joshua 12:18 are to be classed among the kings'-towns taken in the war with the king of Jerusalem and his allies, and therefore are to be sought for in the south of Canaan and not in the north. Consequently we cannot agree with Van de Velde and Knobel in identifying Tappuach with En-Tappuach (Joshua 17:7), and looking for it in Atf, a place to the north-east of Nablus and near the valley of the Jordan; we connect it rather with Tappuach in the lowlands of Judah (Joshua 15:34), though the place itself has not yet been discovered. Hefer again is neither to be identified with Gath-hepher in the tribe of Zebulun (Joshua 19:13), nor with Chafaraim in the tribe of Issachar (Joshua 19:19), but is most probably the capital of the land of Hefer (1 Kings 4:10), and to be sought for in the neighbourhood of Socoh in the plain of Judah. Aphek is probably the town of that name not far from Ebenezer (1 Samuel 4:1), where the ark was taken by the Philistines, and is most likely to be sought for in the plain of Judah, though not in the village of Ahbek (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 343); but it has not yet been traced. Knobel imagines that it was Aphek near to Jezreel (1 Samuel 29:1), which was situated, according to the Onom., in the neighbourhood of Endor (1 Samuel 29:1; 1 Kings 20:25, 1 Kings 20:30); but this Aphek is too far north. Lassaron only occurs here, and hitherto it has been impossible to trace it. Knobel supposes it to be the place called Saruneh, to the west of the lake of Tiberias, and conjectures that the name has been contracted from Lassaron by aphaeresis of the liquid. This is quite possible, if only we could look for Lassaron so far to the north. Bachienne and Rosenmller imagine it to be the village of Sharon in the celebrated plain of that name, between Lydda and Arsuf.