Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Numbers 13:21 - 13:21
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Journey of the Spies; Their Return, and Report. - Num 13:21. In accordance with the instructions they had received, the men who had been sent out passed through the land, from the desert of Zin to Rehob, in the neighbourhood of Hamath, i.e., in its entire extent from south to north. The “Desert of Zin” (which occurs not only here, but in Num 20:1; Num 27:14; Num 33:36; Num 34:3-4; Deu 32:51, and Jos 15:1, Jos 15:3) was the name given to the northern edge of the great desert of Paran, viz., the broad ravine of Wady Murreh, which separates the lofty and precipitous northern border of the table-land of the Azazimeh from the southern border of the Rakhma plateau, i.e., of the southernmost plateau of the mountains of the Amorites (or the mountains of Judah), and runs from Jebel Madarah (Moddera) on the east, to the plain of Kadesh, which forms part of the desert of Zin (cf. Num 27:14; Num 33:36; Deu 32:51), on the west. The south frontier of Canaan passed through this from the southern end of the Dead Sea, along the Wady el Murreh to the Wady el Arish (Num 34:3). - “Rehob, to come (coming) to Hamath,” i.e., where you enter the province of Hamath, on the northern boundary of Canaan, is hardly one of the two Rehobs in the tribe of Asher (Jos 19:28 and Jos 19:30), but most likely Beth-rehob in the tribe of Naphtali, which was in the neighbourhood of Dan Lais, the modern Tell el Kadhy (Jdg 18:28), and which Robinson imagined that he had identified in the ruins of the castle of Hunin or Honin, in the village of the same name, to the south-west of Tell el Kadhy, on the range of mountains which bound the plain towards the west above Lake Huleh (Bibl. Researches, p. 371). In support of this conjecture, he laid the principal stress upon the fact that the direct road to Hamath through the Wady et Teim and the Bekaa commences here. The only circumstance which it is hard to reconcile with this conjecture is, that Beth-rehob is never mentioned in the Old Testament, with the exception of Jdg 18:28, either among the fortified towns of the Canaanites or in the wars of the Israelites with the Syrians and Assyrians, and therefore does not appear to have been a place of such importance as we should naturally be led to suppose from the character of this castle, the very situation of which points to a bold, commanding fortress (see Lynch's Expedition), and where there are still remains of its original foundations built of large square stones, hewn and grooved, and reminding one of the antique and ornamental edifices of Solomon's times (cf. Ritter, Erdkunde, xv. pp. 242ff.). - Hamath is Epiphania on the Orontes, now Hamah (see at Gen 10:18).
After the general statement, that the spies went through the whole land from the southern to the northern frontier, two facts are mentioned in Num 13:22-24, which occurred in connection with their mission, and were of great importance to the whole congregation. These single incidents are linked on, however, in a truly Hebrew style, to what precedes, viz., by an imperfect with Vav consec., just in the same manner in which, in 1Ki 6:9, 1Ki 6:15, the detailed account of the building of the temple is linked on to the previous statement, that Solomon built the temple and finished it;
(Note: A comparison of 1 Kings 6, where we cannot possibly suppose that two accounts have been linked together or interwoven, is specially adapted to give us a clear view of the peculiar custom adopted by the Hebrew historians, of placing the end and ultimate result of the events they narrate as much as possible at the head of their narrative, and then proceeding with a minute account of the more important of the attendant circumstances, without paying any regard to the chronological order of the different incidents, or being at all afraid of repetitions, and so to prove how unwarrantable and false are the conclusions of those critics who press such passages into the support of their hypotheses. We have a similar passage in Jos 4:11., where, after relating that when all the people had gone through the Jordan the priests also passed through with the ark of the covenant (Jos 4:11), the historian proceeds in Jos 4:12, Jos 4:13, to describe the crossing of the two tribes and a half; and another in Judg 20, where, at the very commencement (Jdg 20:35), the issue of the whole is related, viz., the defeat of the Benjamites; and then after that there is a minute description in Jdg 20:36-46 of the manner in which it was effected. This style of narrative is also common in the historical works of the Arabs.)
so that the true rendering would be, “now they ascended in the south country and came to Hebron (וַיָּבֹא is apparently an error in writing for וַיָּבֹאוּ), and there were הָעֲנָק וְלִידֵי, the children of Anak,” three of whom are mentioned by name. These three, who were afterwards expelled by Caleb, when the land was divided and the city of Hebron was given to him for an inheritance (Jos 15:14; Jdg 1:20), were descendants of Arbah, the lord of Hebron, from whom the city received its name of Kirjath-Arbah, or city of Arbah, and who is described in Jos 14:15 as “the great (i.e., the greatest) man among the Anakim,” and in Jos 15:13 as the “father of Anak,” i.e., the founder of the Anakite family there. For it is evident enough that הָעֲנָק (Anak) is not the proper name of a man in these passages, but the name of a family or tribe, from the fact that in Num 13:33, where Anak's sons are spoken of in a general and indefinite manner, עֲנָק בְּנֵי has not the article; also from the fact that the three Anakites who lived in Hebron are almost always called הָעֲנָק וְלִידֵי, Anak's born (Num 13:22, Num 13:28), and that הָעֲנָק בְּנֵי (sons of Anak), in Jos 15:14, is still further defined by the phrase הָעֲנָק וְלִידֵי (children of Anak); and lastly, from the fact that in the place of “sons of Anak,” we find “sons of the Anakim” in Deu 1:28 and Deu 9:2, and the “Anakim” in Deu 2:10; Deu 11:21; Jos 14:12, etc. Anak is supposed to signify long-necked; but this does not preclude the possibility of the founder of the tribe having borne this name. The origin of the Anakites is involved in obscurity. In Deu 2:10-11, they are classed with the Emim and Rephaim on account of their gigantic stature, and probably reckoned as belonging to the pre-Canaanitish inhabitants of the land, of whom it is impossible to decide whether they were of Semitic origin or descendants of Ham. It is also doubtful, whether the names found here in Num 13:21, Num 13:28, and in Jos 15:14, are the names of individuals, i.e., of chiefs of the Anakites, or the names of Anakite tribes. The latter supposition is favoured by the circumstance, that the same names occur even after the capture of Hebron by Caleb, or at least fifty years after the event referred to here. With regard to Hebron, it is still further observed in Num 13:22, that it was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt. Zoan - the Tanis of the Greeks and Romans, the San of the Arabs, which is called Jani, Jane in Coptic writings - was situated upon the eastern side of the Tanitic arm of the Nile, not far from its mouth (see Ges. Thes. p. 1177), and was the residence of Pharaoh in the time of Moses. The date of its erection is unknown; but Hebron was in existence as early as Abraham's time (Gen 13:18; Gen 23:2.).