Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Judges 1:29
Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer; but the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them.
29. Cf. Jos 16:10.
Gezer ] An ancient Canaanite city mentioned in the list of Thothmes III, in the ‘Israel Inscription’ of Merenptah (see Ency. Bibl. 1242), and as Gazri in the Amarna tablets (163 etc.), situated on the S.W. border of Ephraim (Jos 16:3), near the Philistine territory (2Sa 5:25). It remained Canaanite until conquered by Pharaoh Shishak, who gave it to his daughter, Solomon’s wife (1Ki 9:16). Solomon rebuilt the city as a frontier fortress against the Philistines (1Ki 9:15; 1Ki 9:17). It was an important place during the Maccabaean wars (Gazara, 1Ma 4:15 ; 1Ma 9:52 ; 1Ma 14:34 ; 1Ma 15:28 ; 1Ma 15:35 etc.). The site, = the mod. Tell el-Jezer, a little S. of the Jaffa-Jerusalem road and 13 m. from Jerusalem, was recovered by Clermont-Ganneau in 1871. Several bilingual inscriptions in Hebr. and Gk. have been found near the Tell containing the words “boundary of Gezer [Hebr.]: of Alkios [Gk.],” supposed to refer to the sabbatic limits and the local governor who thus defined them. See Cl.-Ganneau, Rec. d’arch. Orientale iii. 25, 47. The excavations recently conducted on the site have thrown much light on the past history of Canaan; seven strata of successive occupations have been ascertained; the area of the Canaanite temple or high place, much pottery, and, in the Israelite stratum, the bones of infants built into the foundations of houses (cf. 1Ki 16:34), and what has been identified as Solomon’s work of fortification, are among the most important discoveries; see Palest. Explor. Fund Qtly. Statements for 1903, and Driver, Schweich Lecture s, pp. 46 59.
in Gezer among them ] Jos 16:10 b reads ‘in the midst of Ephraim unto this day and became subject to forced labour,’ probably representing the original form of J; cf. Jdg 1:28 ; Jdg 1:30 ; Jdg 1:33 ; Jdg 1:35.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 29. Neither did Ephraim] See the notes on the parallel passages, Jos 16:5-10.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Which they possessed till Solomons time.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer,…. Not so much as made them tributaries, but made a covenant with them, it is probable, contrary to the express will of God:
but the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them; the Ephraimites agreeing to it, and here they dwelt to the times of Solomon;
[See comments on Jos 16:10]; where indeed they are said to be under tribute; but that seems to respect some later time, and not when they were first admitted to dwell among them, since no mention is made of it here.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Ephraim did not root out the Canaanites in Gezer (Jdg 1:29), as has already been stated in Jos 16:10.
Jdg 1:30 Zebulun did not root out the Canaanites in Kitron and Nahalol.
Jdg 1:31-32 Asher did not root out those in Acco, etc. Acco: a seaport town to the north of Carmel, on the bay which is called by its name; it is called Ake by Josephus, Diod. Sic., and Pliny, and was afterwards named Ptolemais from one of the Ptolemy s (1 Macc. 5:15, 21; 10:1, etc.; Act 21:7). The Arabs called it Akka, and this was corrupted by the crusaders into Acker or Acre. During the crusades it was a very flourishing maritime and commercial town; but it subsequently fell into decay, and at the present time has a population of about 5000, composed of Mussulmans, Druses, and Christians (see C. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 119; Rob. Bibl. Res.; and Ritter, Erdk. xvi. pp. 725ff.). Sidon, now Saida: see at Jos 11:8. Achlab is only mentioned here, and is not known. Achzib, i.e., Ecdippa: see at Jos 19:29. Helbah is unknown. Aphek is the present Afkah: see Jos 13:4; Jos 19:30. Rehob is unknown: see at Jos 19:28, Jos 19:30. As seven out of the twenty-two towns of Asher (Jos 19:30) remained in the hands of the Canaanites, including such important places as Acco and Sidon, it is not stated in Jdg 1:32, as in Jdg 1:29, Jdg 1:30, that “the Canaanites dwelt among them,” but that “ the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, ” to show that the Canaanites held the upper hand. And for this reason the expression “they became tributaries” (Jdg 1:30, Jdg 1:35, etc.) is also omitted.
Jdg 1:33 Naphtali did not root out the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh and Beth-anath, two fortified towns, the situation of which is still unknown (see at Jos 19:38); so that this tribe also dwelt among the Canaanites, but did not make them tributary.
Jdg 1:34-35 Still less were the Danites able to drive the Canaanites out of their inheritance. On the contrary, the Amorites forced Dan up into the mountains, and would not suffer them to come down into the plain. But the territory allotted to the Danytes was almost all in the plain (see at Jos 19:40). If, therefore, they were forced out of that, they were almost entirely excluded from their inheritance. The Amorites emboldened themselves (see at Deu 1:5) to dwell in Har-cheres, Ajalon, and Shaalbim. On the last two places see Jos 19:42, where Ir-shemesh is also mentioned. This combination, and still more the meaning of the names Har-cheres, i.e., sun-mountain, and Ir-shemesh, i.e., sun-town, make the conjecture a very probable one, that Har-cheres is only another name for Ir-shemesh, i.e., the present Ain Shems (see at Jos 15:10, and Rob. Pal. iii. pp. 17, 18). This pressure on the part of the Amorites induced a portion of the Danites to emigrate, and seek for an inheritance in the north of Palestine (see Judg 18). On the other hand, the Amorites were gradually made tributary by the powerful tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, who bounded Dan on the north. “ The hand of the house of Joseph lay heavy,” sc., upon the Amorites in the towns already named on the borders of Ephraim. For the expression itself, comp. 1Sa 5:6; Psa 32:4.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(29) Neither did Ephraim.See Jos. 16:10. Gezer.This town was not won from the Canaanites till its capture by Pharaoh, who gave it as a present to his daughter, the wife of Solomon (1Ki. 9:16).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
29. Gezer See Jos 10:33, note.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘ And Ephraim did not drive out the Canaanites who dwelt in Gezer, but the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them.’
Gezer was in the hill country and easier to subdue. It was on the road from Jerusalem to Joppa, on the most northern ridge of the Shephelah, overlooking the Ayyalon valley. But when they captured it Ephraim allowed the Canaanites to remain among them and set them to taskwork (Jos 16:10). Pharaoh Merenptah later boasts of capturing it, (he also claimed to have destroyed Israel!), and archaeological evidence suggests it was later taken by the Philistines. But the Ephraimites and the Canaanites would have lived side by side under the Philistines, with the inevitable results to the purity of their religion and their lives.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jdg 1:29. Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites So far from it, they suffered them to enjoy among them all the privileges of a free people, even as if they had been allied; which is the meaning of the expression, to dwell among them, see 2Ki 4:13.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
dwelt: i.e. in friendly relations. Psa 133:1. 2Ki 4:13. See note on 1Ki 9:16, 1Ki 9:17.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Jos 16:10, 1Ki 9:16
Reciprocal: Jos 10:33 – Gezer Jdg 3:5 – dwelt 1Sa 27:8 – the Amalekites 1Ki 9:15 – Gezer
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jdg 1:29. Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites So far from it, that it appears they did not so much as exact any tribute from them, but made a covenant of friendship with them, which was a still greater crime. The Canaanites dwelt in Gezer Which they possessed till Solomons time; 1Ki 9:6. And to dwell among a people often signifies to have a quiet settlement, as 2Ki 4:13.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The writer mentioned Ephraim again here, because he was emphasizing the Israelites’ treatment of the Canaanites, as well as the failure of each tribe.