Since Asor was the city ruling over all the kingdoms of the Northern Canaanites (as the 70 said above), Jabin, King of Asor, stirred up and called out all those Kings too to war against the Israelites. But they are enumerated by name, indeed, [as] three; summarily, [as] very many.
The first, Jobab King of Madon — concerning whom Masius candidly notes [that] he has found out nothing. But the 70 read μαρῶν [marōn], because — as St. Jerome notes (on Isaiah, chs. 8, 38, 41, and 44) — they often interchanged those two letters ד and ר [daleth and resh] on account of their very great similarity. And I point out something similar in 2 Kings [2 Samuel], ch. 21, v. 20, where a giant, who in the Hebrew is called “Madin” or “Mado,” is rendered by our Interpreter [as] “lofty [excelsus].”
The second is the King of Semeron; and [it] is commonly understood [to be] Samaria, that most celebrated city, which both gave [its] name to the whole dominion, and was afterward called “Sebaste” by Herod, in honor of Augustus, as Josephus witnesses (bk. 13, ch. 17; bk. 15, ch. 10). But when this book was first written, that city was not yet called by that name, since it was so called from “Schemer” [Shemer], who sold it to Amri [Omri] King of Israel (3 Kings [1 Kings] 16:24). Then, since the 70, in the already-cited 3rd [book] of Kings, call [it] now σεμερῶν [semerōn], now σαμαρείαν [samareian], here and in the following chapter they render [it] Συμοών [Symoōn] — though with a different accent in the following chapter, Συμόων [Symoōn]. Thirdly: the Hebrew, in the following ch. 12, v. 21, calls [it] not precisely “Schimron” or “Semeron,” as [in] this ch. 11, but “Schimron meron.” On that account it seems [it] must be said, either [that] this Samaria is a different [one], which was much earlier than that other so celebrated [one], and for the sake of signifying that, was called in the following chapter “Semeron meron”; or [that] the name here was put by some later [writer] for the older [name], which perhaps was “Meron.” But I incline more to the former.
The third [is] King Acsaph — in the 70, ἀζίφ [aziph] — which some place between Ptolemais and Tyre. Where, however, [it is] not “Acsaph,” but “Achziph,” or “Ecdippa,” as it is called by Ptolemy (Geography, bk. 5),
(col. 1059)
Eusebius (in the book On Places) writes [that] it [Achsaph] was at the foot of Mount Tabor, eight miles from Diocaesarea or Sipphoris, in the traces of which stood the village Chasalus. But indeed this city stretched rather toward the North, as appears below (ch. 19); and the same [Eusebius], in the same book, places the village Chasalum in the tribe of Issachar, in that place where the city Achaseluth had been.
The other Kings, summarily [named], are [in] v. 2. First: the Kings of the North, “who dwelt in the mountains” — namely of Libanus (concerning whose ridge, above, ch. 1) — as Josephus shows, and [as] is gathered from the situation of the places, and from v. 17 below. But for “the North [Aquilo],” the 70 — not from a corruption of the reading, as Masius reckons, but on purpose, that they might show paraphrastically what was signified — put here, from v. 8, the Kings κατὰ Σιδῶνα τὴν μεγάλην [kata Sidōna tēn megalēn, “toward great Sidon”].
Secondly: the Kings “in the plain over against the south of Ceneroth,” or in the southern plain of Ceneroth. For “plain,” the 70 retain the Hebrew ἀραβά [araba]. And “Cenereth” — below (ch. 19, v. 35) [it is] a city, so called perhaps from some cithara [harp], which in Hebrew [is] “cinor” [kinnor], by [its] likeness, use, or invention — which afterward, enlarged with buildings by Herod the tetrarch in honor of Tiberius, was called “Tiberias” (concerning which Josephus [treats] many [things], [in] bk. 18, ch. 3; the Captivity, ch. 31 and 32; and the Greek Life; and, briefly, not long ago, a little book whose inscription [is] “Herod,” ch. 20; “the Jews,” [Josephus] says, in Eusebius, Animadversions 11, p. 170). Scaliger [and others] say they call [it] to have been formerly named רקת [rakkath]; and from which [in] John 6 and 21 [it is] “the Sea of Tiberias” — which [in] Num. 34, Deut. 3 is called “the Sea of Cenereth”; and thence the name γεννησὰρ [gennēsar] and “Genesara,” and the lake and “water of Genesar” (1 Macc. 11:67; and Josephus, bk. 3 of the Captivity, ch. 32 and 35, in Greek), and “Genesareth” (Mark 6:53; Luke 5:1) — “toward the western part of which,” Pliny says (bk. 5, ch. 15), “is the city Tiberias” (although in some of Ptolemy’s tables [it is] otherwise). Hence [it is] also called “the land of Genesar” (Matt. 14:34). But “why here in the plural, ‘Ceneroth’?” Masius reckons [it] a numeral enallage [change of number] (below, ch. 19). Eusebius (in the book On Places) reckons [that] there are two [places called] “Cenereth.” But Radak reckons [that] it was done so that here not only the fields adjacent to the lake are signified, but even [those] a little more remote — yet fertile with an equal goodness of soil.
Thirdly: the Kings “in the level places also, and [in] the regions of Dor by the Sea” — or, in the tracts or regions of the city of Dor, on the West. For [that] this means [what] in the Hebrew is “from the sea” was said in ch. 1. But the corrected Greek codices, as the royal [ones], retaining almost the Hebrew word for “tracts” or “regions,” which is “naphoth,” say ναφὲθ δώρ [napheth dōr]; for which in the [ordinary] 70 [is], corruptly, φιναὲδ δώρ [phinaed dōr]. And Dor is [the city] which to Stephanus [is] “Dorus,” to Ptolemy (bk. 5) “Dora,” to Pliny (bk. 5, ch. 19) “Dorum”; at whose ruins — [the ruins] of a city once most powerful — blessed Paula wondered, as St. Jerome writes in her Epitaph.
Fourthly: (v. 3) the Kings of the Canaanites “on the East and West.” Fifthly: of the Amorites. Sixthly: of the Hittites. Seventhly: of the Pherezites. Eighthly: of the Jebusites “in the mountains.” Ninthly: of the Hevites, “who dwelt at the foot of Mount Hermon [Germon], in the land of Maspha.” And Hermon is twofold: one, of which [is spoken] here, a part of Libanus toward the West, on the authority of Adrichomius; [or] rather toward the East, from v. 8, on the authority of Masius (fol. 213); and it is otherwise called “Baal-Hermon, Sanir; Sirion,” or “Sarion and Siron,” or “Saren”; in the 70, ἀερμὼν [aermōn]. The other is by the torrent Kishon [Chison], not far from Mount Gelboe [Gilboa]. And we read “Hermonite Hevites” also [in] Judg. 3:3, so that it may be clear [that] they differ from the “Gabaonite Hevites.” Moreover, Maspha — which is interpreted “a watchtower [specula]” — is fourfold. The first, in the tribe of Judah (below, ch. 15, v. 38), of which Radak most ineptly understands this passage. The second, in the tribe of Benjamin (below, ch. 18, v. 26). The third, Moabitic (1 Kings [1 Samuel] 22:3). The fourth, the Lebanese [Maspha], joined to Gilead [Galaaditis] (Gen. 31:49; Judg. 11:29). For here, for the guarding of the region, [there] was some watchtower at the very entrance of Libanus above the Jordan; and of this [is] the discourse here.