Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Joshua 11:13
But [as for] the cities that stood still in their strength, Israel burned none of them, save Hazor only; [that] did Joshua burn.
13. the cities that stood still in their strength ] Rather, the cities which stood each on its own hill, or mound, “the citees that weren in the hillis, and in the hillockis set,” Wyclif. Comp. Jer 30:18, “and the city shall be builded upon her own heap” (“ little hill ” margin). With the exception of Hazor, Joshua did not burn the cities, but left them standing, each on its own hill, the ordinary site for cities in Canaan. Comp. Mat 5:14.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Render: But the cities standing each on its own hill (compare Jer 30:18). The meaning is simply that, with the exception of Hazor, Joshua did not burn the cities, but left them standing, each on its former site. This site is spoken of as a hill, because such was the ordinary site chosen for cities in Canaan (compare Mat 5:14).
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 13. The cities that stood still in their strength] The word tillam, which we translate their strength, and the margin, their heap, has been understood two ways.
1. As signifying those cities which had made peace with the Israelites, when conditions of peace were offered according to the command of the law; and consequently were not destroyed. Such as the cities of the Hivites; see Jos 11:19.
2. The cities which were situated upon hills and mountains, which, when taken, might be retained with little difficulty. In this sense the place is understood by the Vulgate, as pointing out the cities quae erant in collibus et tumulis sitae, “which were situated on hills and eminences.” As the cities of the plain might be easily attacked and carried, Joshua destroyed them; but as those on mountains, hills, or other eminences, might be retained with little trouble, prudence would dictate their preservation, as places of refuge in any insurrection of the people, or invasion of their adversaries. The passage in Jeremiah, Jer 30:18, Jerusalem shall be builded on her own heap, tillah, if understood as above, conveys an easy and clear sense: Jerusalem shall be re-established on her OWN HILL.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
In their strength, Heb. with (for so this preposition is oft used, as Exo 35:12; Lev 2:2; Eze 16:37, &c.) their fence or fences, walls or bulwarks, i.e. which were not utterly ruined together with their walls in the taking of them.
Save Hazor only; which though taken by the Israelites, was not so much destroyed as other places were.
That did Joshua burn, because this city began the war; and being the chief and royal city, might renew the war, if the Canaanites should ever seize upon it.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
13. as for the cities that stoodstill in their strengthliterally, “on their heaps.”It was a Phoelignician custom to build cities on heights, natural orartificial [HENGSTENBERG].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
But as for the cities that stood still in their strength,…. Whose walls were not demolished when taken, as Kimchi and Jarchi interpret it, or that “stood upon their heaps” y; upon an eminence, being built on hills and mountains:
Israel burned none of them; but reserved them for their own habitations, being well fortified, and having no need of new walls being built to them, or being in a very agreeable situation:
save Hazor only, [that] did Joshua burn; because it was the chief city where the scheme was formed, and the combination against Israel was made, and was the rendezvous of the confederate forces against them: the Jews have a tradition z, that God said to Moses, and Moses said to Joshua, that he should burn it, and that only.
y “super tumulum eorum”, Montanus; “quae erant in collibus et in tamulis sitae”, V. L. z Bereshit Rabba, sect. 81. fol. 71. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
10.
Why were some cities spared? Jos. 11:13
The cities which were spared were described as those which stood still in their strength. This may be an indication of the fact that they had not entered into the coalition and had remained at home. The original text, however, indicates that they were cities which were on heights which rose above the plain where the battle was fought. These were probably walled cities and therefore very difficult to take, Joshua did not have time in his campaign to destroy completely all of the cities. This was to be the task of the Israelites who settled the land. It was enough for Joshua and the men whom he was leading to break the backbone of resistance and to make it possible for the thousands to come in, finish up the conquest, and settle in the Promised Land.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(13) The cities that stood still in their strength.Literally, that stood on their mounds (querant in collibus et in tumulis sit.Vulg.). Comp. Jos. 11:20. We may fairly suppose that Jericho and Ai committed themselves to hostile measures against Israel, though they were not able to send forth armies against Joshua before they were attacked. Those who stood still in their strength are those who remained absolutely neutral in the war. The men of Jericho fought against you (Jos. 24:11).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
13. The cities that stood still in their strength, that is, on mounds or eminences, (Hebrews , on their hill,) were retained, since they could be easily defended, while the cities on the plains were razed. But Hazor, the head of the confederacy, though in a strong position, must fall, as a penalty for the past and a security for the future.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘ But as for the cities that stood on their tells, Israel did not burn any of them except Hazor only. That Joshua did burn.’
The saving of all these cities, as he had saved the others in the South, was probably in the hope that when Israel eventually occupied them they would find cities in good condition for living in as YHWH had promised (Deu 6:10). Joshua was an idealist. He could not believe that Israel would finally disobey God and that these cities would therefore be turned against them. Some suggest that the writer was saying that he took all the cities of the kings apart from the ones that stood on their tells and were thus walled, inaccessible, heavily defended and would require long sieges to take them. This is not, however, what the surrounding picture suggests, and it would surely have said that he did not ‘take’ them.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Ver. 13. But as for the cities that stood still in their strength, &c. The Hebrew is al tillam, which may signify a foot, or standing; and then the sense would be, that Joshua preserved all those cities which had yielded, without having obliged him to besiege them, to make breaches in their walls, or to demolish their fortifications. This sense is preserved by the LXX, Onkelos, ours, and the French version, and by several interpreters; but nothing hinders us from translating, with the Vulgate, and Joshua burned none of the cities, which were situated on high places; or, as our margin renders it, on their heap. Bochart, who prefers this exposition, thinks that Thelassar, 2Ki 19:12 and Thelabib, Eze 3:15 two cities well known, took their name from the word tel, thus understood. See his Canaan, lib. 1: cap. 29. We should also conceive, that instead of translating Jer 30:18 thus, Jerusalem shall be built on her own heap, the Hebrew might be very well rendered, shall be rebuilt upon her height, or high hill. It was certainly easier for Joshua to keep cities which were situate on high places, and well-defended spots, than the cities of the plain.
Note; (1.) God is just in all his judgments. (2.) It becomes us to give no more quarter to the least of our sins than did the Israelites to the infant Canaanite.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Jos 11:13 But [as for] the cities that stood still in their strength, Israel burned none of them, save Hazor only; [that] did Joshua burn.
Ver. 13. That stood still in their strength. ] Heb., On their heap: i.e., that prepared to have stood out a siege, but yet repented and did not; or that had not their walls and bulwarks yet rased and dismantled in the fury of war.
That did Joshua burn.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
in their: Heb. on their heap, The Vulgate, Syriac, Onkelos and Waterland render al tillom, “on their hills.” As the cities of the plain might be easily attacked and carried, Joshua destroyed them; but as those on mountains, hills, or other eminences, might be retained by him with little trouble, prudence would dictate their preservation. Jer 30:18
Reciprocal: Jos 24:13 – cities 2Ki 15:29 – Hazor
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jos 11:13. In their strength Hebrew, with their fence, walls, or bulwarks, that is, which were not ruined with their walls in taking them. Save Hazor Because this city began the war, and, being the chief and royal city, might renew the war, if the Canaanites should ever seize upon it: which in fact they did, and settled there, under a king of the same name, Jdg 4:2.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
11:13 But [as for] the cities that stood still in their {g} strength, Israel burned none of them, save Hazor only; [that] did Joshua burn.
(g) Which were strong by situation and not hurt by war.