Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Joshua 12:18
The king of Aphek, one; the king of Lasharon, one;
18. Aphek ] A royal city of the Canaanites, probably the same as the Aphekah of Jos 15:53.
Lasharon ] Only mentioned here. The site is unknown.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 18. Aphek] There were several cities of this name: one in the tribe of Asher, Jos 19:30, another in the tribe of Judah, 1Sa 4:1; 1Sa 29:1; and a third in Syria, 1Kg 20:26, and 2Kg 13:17. Which of the two former is here intended cannot be ascertained.
Lasharon] There is no city of this name known. Some consider the lamed in the word lashsharon to be the sign of the genitive case, and in this sense it appears to have been understood by the Vulgate, which translates rex Saron, the king of Sharon. This was rather a district than a city, and is celebrated in the Scriptures for its fertility; Josh 33:9; Josh 35:2. Some suppose it was the same with Saron, near Lydda, mentioned Ac 9:35.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The king of Aphek, one,…. There was a place called Aphekah in the tribe of Judah, Jos 15:53; and an Aphek that was on the border of the Amorites, Jos 13:4; and another in the tribe of Asher,
Jos 19:30; but Adrichomius n places this Aphek in the tribe of Issachar, whose king Joshua smote, and takes it to be the same place where the Philistines in the times of Samuel and David brought their armies against Israel, 1Sa 4:1; and where the king of Syria fought against Israel, 1Ki 20:26; and says that its ruins were now shown in the great plain not far from Gilboa to the east of Mount Carmel, and five miles from Tabor:
the king of Lasharon, one; which, according to the Vulgate Latin version, is the same with Saron, which, in Ac 9:35, in some copies is called Assaron; so Adrichomius o, who places it in the tribe of Ephraim, and takes it to be the same Sharon Isaiah speaks of,
Isa 33:9; and of which Jerom says p, to this day there is a country between Tabor and the lake of Tiberias called Saronas, and also that from Caesarea of Palestine to the town of Joppa, all the land that is seen bears that name.
n Theatrum Terrae Sanct. p. 35. o Ib. p. 30. p De loc. Heb. fol. 94. M.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
18. Aphek This can hardly be the Aphek of the tribe of Asher (Jos 19:30) which is mentioned in Jos 13:4, but it was probably identical with the Aphek not far from Jezreel, where the Philistines gathered their forces before the fearful battle of Gilboa. 1Sa 29:1. Its site has not been certainly identified. Lasharon is mentioned here only and is now unknown. Some think the first syllable is not an integral part of the name, but would read king of Sharon. But this is unlikely.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Ver. 18. The king of Aphek In the country conquered by Joshua, there were at least two cities of this name; one in the tribe of Judah, chap. Jos 15:53 the other in the tribe of Asher, chap. Jos 19:30. But we cannot venture to determine which of the two is here spoken of.
The king of Lasharon There is no city of this name now known. Modern interpreters, following the Vulgate, consider the letter l, in the Hebrew, as a mark of the genitive, and translate of Sharon, as it stands in the margin of our Bibles. The place now in question, we should apprehend to be that city of Saron which was near Lydda, (Act 9:35.) and whose delightful and fertile plains are so often celebrated in other parts of Scripture. Isa 33:9; Isa 35:2. There was also a Sharon to the east of Jordan, in the tribe of Gad, which some think to be mentioned, Isa 65:10. Eusebius and St. Jerome say, that the whole country from Cesarea to Joppa went by the name of Joppa, as well as the plains which extended from mount Tabor to the lake of Gennesareth. Perhaps it is this district, not a city, that is here intended by the sacred writer. Reland asserts, that the name of Sharon was given only to the country situated between Joppa and Cesarea, and that there was no city of this name in the tribe of Gad; but that the people of this tribe sent their flocks to the rich pastures of Sharon. Indeed, in 1Ch 5:16 it is only said, that the children of Gad dwelt in all the suburbs of Sharon; but why in the suburbs, and not in the cities, if the country had belonged to them? It was in the suburbs that the beasts were lodged; Num 35:3. Jos 14:4. And the law allowed the sending them from one place to another, in the pastures belonging to the suburbs dependant on cities of a tribe to which they did not belong.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Makkedah. Compare Jos 10:28.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Aphek: Jos 19:30, 1Sa 4:1
Lasharon: or, Sharon, Isa 33:9