1. And these are the countries which the children of Israel inherited in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed for inheritance to them.
1. Haec sunt quae in haereditatem acceperunt filii Israel in terra Chanaan, quae illis tradiderunt in haereditatem Eleazar sacerdos, et Josue filius Nun, et capita tribuum filiorum Israel.
2. By lot was their inheritance, as the LORD commanded by the hand of Moses, for the nine tribes, and for the half tribe.
2. Per sortem haereditatis eorum, sicut praeceperat Jehova per manum Mosis, ut daret novem tribubus, et dimidiae tribui.
3. For Moses had given the inheritance of two tribes and an half tribe on the other side Jordan: but unto the Levites he gave none inheritance among them.
3. Dederat enim Moses duabustribubus, et dimidiae tribui citra Jordanem: Levitis autem non dederat haereditatem in medio eorum.
4. For the children of Joseph were two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim: therefore they gave no part unto the Levites in the land, save cities to dwell in, with their suburbs for their cattle and for their substance.
4. Fuerunt enim filii Joseph duae tribus Manasse et Ephraim: ideo non dederunt partem Levitis in terra praeter urbes ad habitandum, et suburbana earum pro armentis et gregibus ipsorum.
5. As the LORD commanded Moses, so the children of Israel did, and they divided the land.
5. Quemadmodum praeceperat Moses sic fecerunt filii Israel, et diviserunt terram.
6. Then the children of Judah came unto Joshua in Gilgal: and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite said unto him, Thou knowest the thing that the LORD said unto Moses the man of God concerning me and thee in Kadeshbarnea.
6. Accesserunt autem filii Juda ad Josuam in Gilgal, dixitque ad eum Caleb filius Jephune Kenisaeus, Tu nosti verbum quod loquutus est Jehova ad Mosen virum Dei de me, et de te, in Cades-barnea:
7. Forty years old was I when Moses the servant of the LORD sent me from Kadeshbarnea to espy out the land; and I brought him word again as it was in mine heart.
7. Quadragenarius eram quando misit me Moses servus Jehovae de Cades-barnea ad explorandam terram, et retuli ei rem sicuti erat in corde meo.
8. Nevertheless my brethren that went up with me made the heart of the people melt: but I wholly followed the LORD my God.
8. Et quum fratres mei qui descenderant mecum dissolverent cor populi, ego perseveranter sequutus sum Jehovam Deum meum.
9. And Moses swear on that day, saying, Surely the land whereon thy feet have trodden shall be thine inheritance, and thy children's for ever, because thou has wholly followed the LORD my God.
9. Et juravit Moses illo die, dicendo, Si non terra quam calcavit pes tuus, tua erit in haereditatem et filiis tuis in aeternum, quia perseveranter sequutus es Jehovam Deum meum.
10. And now, behold, the LORD has kept me alive, as he said, these forty and five years, even since the LORD spoke this word unto Moses, while the children of Israel wandered in the wilderness: and now, lo, I am this day fourscore and five years old.
10. Nunc autem Jehova concessit mihi vitam sicuti dixerat. Jam quadraginta quinque anni sunt, ex quo tempore pronunciavit Jehova hanc rem Mosi, ex quo ambulavit Israel per desertum: et nunc quidem hodie sum quinque et octoginta annorum.
11. As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me: as my strength was then, even so is my strength now, for war, both to go out, and to come in.
11. Et adhuc sum hodie vegetus ut eo die, quo misit me Moses: quantus erat tunc vigor meus, tantus, hodie est vigor meus ad praelium, et ad exeundum, et ad ingrediendum:
12. Now therefore give me this mountain, whereof the LORD spoke in that day; for thou heardest in that day how the Anakims were there, and that the cities were great and fenced: if so be the LORD will be with me, then I shall be able to drive them out, as the LORD said.
12. Nunc ergo da mihi montem istum, ut loquutus est Jehova eo die. Tu enim audivisit eo die quod Anakim sint ibi, et urbes magnae et munitae: forte Jehova erit mecum, et expellam eos quemadmodum dixit Jehova.
13. And Joshua blessed him, and gave unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh Hebron for an inheritance.
13. Et benedixit ei Josue, deditque Hebron ipsi Caleb filio Jephune in haereditatem.
14. Hebron therefore became the inheritance of Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite unto this day, because that he wholly followed the LORD God of Israel.
14. Idcirco fuit Hebron ipsuis Caleb filii Jephune Kenisaei, in haereditatem, usque ad diem hunc, eo quod perseveranter sequutus est Jehovam Deum Israel.
15. And the name of Hebron before was Kirjatharba; which Arba was a great man among the Anakims. And the land had rest from war.
15. Nomen autem Hebron antea fuit Ciriath-arba, qui Arba homo magnus inter Anakim fuit: et terra quievit a bello.
Here a difficult question arises. How can it be said that the distribution of the land was made by Joshua, Eleazar, and the princes, if lots were cast? For the lot is not regulated by the opinion or the will or the authority of man. Should any one answer, that they took charge and prevented any fraud from being committed, the difficulty is not removed, nay, this evasion will be refuted from the context. It is to be known, therefore, that they were not selected simply to divide the land by lot, but also afterwards to enlarge or restrict the boundaries of the tribes by giving to each its due proportion. That this business could not be accomplished by a naked lot is very apparent. For while, according to human ideas, nothing is more fortuitous than the result of a lot, it was not known whether God might choose to place the half tribe of Manasseh where the tribe of Judah obtained its settlement, or whether Zebulun might not occupy the place of Ephraim. Therefore they were not at liberty at the outset to proceed farther than to divide the land into ten districts or provinces. In this way, however, the space belonging to each would remain indefinite. For had an option been given to each, some would have chosen to fix themselves in the center, others would have preferred a quiet locality, while others would have been guided in their choice by the fertility of the soil, or the climate and beauty of the scenery. But the lot placed the tribe of Judah, as it were, at the head, while it sent that of Zebulun away to the seashore, placed the tribe of Benjamin adjacent to that of Judah, and removed that of Ephraim to a greater distance. In short, the effect of the lot was that ten divisions fell out from Egypt towards Syria, and from the north quarter to the Mediterranean Sea, making some neighbors to the Egyptians, and giving to others maritime positions, to others hilly districts, to others intervening valleys.
This being understood, the office remaining for the rulers of the people was to trace out the boundaries on all sides in accordance with the rules of equity. It remained, therefore, for them to calculate how many thousand souls there were in every tribe, and to assign more or less space to each, according to the greatness or the smallness of their numbers. For in conformity to the divine command, a due proportion was to be observed, and a larger or narrower district was to be assigned, according as the census which was taken had ascertained the numbers to be. (Numbers 26) To the judgment of the princes was it in like manner left to shape the territories, regulating the length and breadth as circumstances might require. It is necessary also to bear in mind what is said in Numbers 26, that the ten who are here called heads of families were appointed to execute this office, not by the suffrages of men, but by the voice of God. Thus each tribe had its own overseers to prevent either fraud or violence from being committed. Then it would have been impious to have any suspicion of those who had been nominated by God. Such is the manner in which Joshua may be said to have distributed the land, though it was portioned out by lot.
I am not clear why the surname of Kenite was given to Caleb. He is so called also in Numbers 32. I am not unaware of the conjecture of some expositors, that he was so surnamed from Kenas, because either he himself or some one of his ancestors dwelt among the Kenites. But I see no solid foundation for this. What if he gained this title by some illustrious deed, just as victors sometimes assume a surname from the nations they have subdued? As the promise had not been inserted into any public record, and Joshua was the only witness now surviving, he makes his application to him. And it is probable that when the ten spies made mention of the names of the Anakim, with the view of terrifying the people, Caleb, to refute their dishonesty, answered with truth, that when he beheld them on Mount Hebron, they were so far from being terrible, that he would attack them at his own hand, provided that on their expulsion he should succeed to their lands; and that on these conditions Moses ceded to him a habitation in that locality which he should have acquired by his own prowess.
Let us learn from this passage, first, that unless the last part corresponds to the first, good beginnings vanish away; secondly, that constancy is deserving of praise only when we follow God.
He next adds the other offices and actions of his life. For to go out and in is equivalent in Hebrew to the observance and execution of all parts of our duty. And this Caleb confirms by fact, when he demands it as his task to assail and expel the giants. He is not, however, elated by stolid pride to a confident assurance of victory, but hopes for a prosperous event from the assistance of God. There seems, indeed, to be an incongruous expression of doubt in the word Perhaps, as if he were begirding himself fortuitously for the fight.1 Those expositors who think that he is distrusting himself from a feeling of modesty and considering his own weakness, say something to the point, but do not say the whole. They certainly omit what is of principal import, viz., that this Perhaps refers to the common feelings which men would entertain on taking a view of the actual state of matters.
The first thing necessary is duly to consider what his design is. Had he asked the gift of a mountain, which he could have seized without any great exertion, it would have been more difficult to obtain it. But now when the difficulty of the task is plainly set forth, he gains the favor of Joshua and the princes, because in assenting to his prayer, they grant him nothing but the certainty of an arduous, doubtful, and perilous contest. Knowing, then, that the children of Israel trembled and were in terror at the very name of the giants, he speaks according to their opinion as of a matter attended with doubt and uncertainty. As regards himself, the words clearly demonstrate how far he was from viewing that which had been said to him with a dubious or vacillating mind. I shall drive them out, he says, as the Lord has declared. Shall we say that when he utters the declaration of God, he is in doubt whether or not God will do what he promised? It is quite plain that he only reminded them how dangerous the business was, in order that he might the more easily obtain their assent. Although it is not uncommon in Hebrew to employ this term to denote difficulty merely, without meaning to imply that the mind is agitated by distrust or disquietude. How very difficult it was to drive out the giants from that fastness,2 may be inferred from the fact that the death of Joshua took place before Caleb ventured to attack them.
It is plain that Caleb, in making the request, had not been looking to present ease or private advantage, since he does not aspire to the place that had been given him till many years after. Wherefore it was no less the interest of the whole people than of one private family, that that which as yet depended on the incomprehensible grace of God, and was treasured up merely in hope, should be bestowed as a special favor. A grant which could not take effect without a wonderful manifestation of divine agency could scarcely be invidious.
A question, however, arises. Since Hebron not only became the portion of the Levites, but was one of the cities of refuge, how could the grant stand good? If we say that Caleb was contented with other towns, and resigned his right to the Levites, it is obvious that the difficulty is not solved, because Caleb is distinctly appointed owner of that city. But if we reflect that the right of dwelling in the cities was all that was granted to the Levites, there will be no inconsistency. Meanwhile, no small praise is due to the moderation of Caleb, who, in a locality made his own by extraordinary privilege, did not refuse an hospitable reception to the Levites.3
1 French, "
2 Latin, "
3 According to the explanation here given, the Levites held Hebron only by a kind of precarious tenure, dependent on the good will of Caleb, who gave them an hospitable reception, but might have declined it. It would seem, however, from other passages, and more particularly from Joshua 20:7, and Joshua 21:9-13, that their right to Hebron was as complete and absolute as that which they possessed to any of their other cities. Moreover, as these cities were allocated by lot, or in other words, by divine arrangement, no injustice was done to Caleb, and it would have been strangely inconsistent with all that we have previously learned of his conduct and character, had he on this occasion offered any remonstrance. -- Ed.