That [tribe] which, among the more sluggish and remaining seven tribes, first received [its] inheritance by lot, was the Benjaminite tribe. For this is what is said [in] v. 11: “The first lot came up [for] the children of Benjamin.” [It] came up, I say, from the urn of lots — not, however (as [was] thought by Lyra), “from the Jordan.” But the limits are described for this tribe. First: the Northern [limits] (v. 12), where [they] stretch from the Jordan — not, as in the other tribes before, up to the Mediterranean sea itself (which, however, Josephus asserted, bk. 5, ch. 3) — but up to Ataroth-addar. Secondly: the Western [limits] (v. 14), from the already-mentioned city Ataroth-addar up to the Judaean city Cariath-baal, which is also called by another name “Cariath-jearim.” And this [is in] v. 14 and 15: “over against the sea” — that is, from the region of the sea, or from the maritime and western side — as, at the end of this verse, certain books, for the sake of explanation, add. “Over against the south-west [Africus]” — that is, toward the south-west, or toward the South, as the Hebrew has [it]. Thirdly: the Southern [borders are] the same which, [in] ch. 15, were the Northern [borders] for the tribe of Judah — but here [they] are marked in the contrary manner, namely from the west to the east: from the city, I say, Cariath-jearim, up to the Tongue, or Bay, of the Jordan, where [it] flows into the salt sea (v. 15, 16, 17, 18, & 19) — where the Northern limit is [that] of the same sea, [and] the Southern limit [is that] of the Jordan itself; and likewise the extreme of the Southern limit of the Benjamites [is] on the western side. Fourthly: the Eastern limits are from that extreme, ascending from the South toward the North — but not far — up to the eastern beginning of the Ephraimite tribe, concerning which above (ch. 16). But this is not today in the Latin text; yet [it] would be, if — as perhaps [it was] once read — v. 19 [ran] thus: “Which is the limit of that Southern [border], and the Jordan bounds it on the east.” For these words seem to have fallen out: “Southern, and the Jordan bounds it.” For so speaks the Hebrew text, and also the 70 themselves: “ταῦτα τὰ ὅρια ὅτι ἀπὸ λιβὸς, καὶ ὁ Ἰορδάνης ὁριεῖ ἀπὸ μέρους ἀνατολῶν [tauta ta horia hoti apo libos, kai ho Iordanēs horiei apo merous anatolōn]” [“these [are] the borders — [namely] that, from the south-west; and the Jordan shall bound [it] from the part [side] of the east”].
Furthermore, the cities of the same tribe are numbered 26, comprehended in two little sums [subtotals]: of which one contains 12 (v. 25), the other 14 (v. 28). But what the cause is of distinguishing these subtotals [was] said in general in [treating] the tribe of Judah (ch. 15); and with this general answer Abulensis is content in this place too. But [it is] to be noted, first, [that] either some of those cities have also other names, or not all the cities of this tribe [are] here recounted — since below (ch. 21) two [cities], which are thus passed over in silence, are to be named. And indeed, in the catalogues of the other tribes too, certain [cities] are seen [to be] passed over — either because [they] were then less renowned, or for some other cause. 2. The mountain which looks toward the valley of the children of Hinnom (v. 16) is thought by some to be “Hachladema,” which in Acts 1 is called “Aceldama”; by others, another [mountain], from those which were several around Jerusalem (Ps. 124:2). And [some think] this to be [the mountain] on which (1 Kings 11:7) [Solomon], with womanish madness, built the insane shrine of Chamos [Chemosh]
(col. 1187)
[…continued from col. 1186.] built the insane shrine of Chemosh; and [this mountain], which (2 Kings 23) is called “the mount of offense,” Masius thinks [to be the same]. 3. The same place — [treating] of the mountain and of the “valley of the children of Hinnom” — the 70 thus rendered: “καὶ καταβήσεται τὰ ὅρια ἐπὶ μέρους τοῦτο ὅ ἐστι κατὰ πρόσωπον νάπης Σοννάμ [kai katabēsetai ta horia epi merous touto ho esti kata prosōpon napēs Sonnam]” [“and the border shall go down to this part, which is over against the wooded-vale of Sonnam”]. Where, after “μέρους [merous, ‘part’],” [a word] seems — on account of a certain similarity with it — to have been omitted: “ὄρους [orous, ‘of the mountain’].” But why they call the “valley of the children of Hinnom” “νάπην Σοννάμ [napēn Sonnam],” I see no cause other than why they call that valley “νάπην [napēn, ‘a wooded vale’].” For thus either a wooded mountain or valley, or [one] dark and devoid of light, is wont to be called by the Greeks — from the privative particle “νη [nē]” and “φάος [phaos],” that is, “light,” as if “νηφάος [nēphaos]” or “νήφως [nēphōs],” as the Grammarians discourse concerning the name “νάπη [napē, ‘wooded-vale’]” of the same notion and origin. But “Σοννάμ [Sonnam]” is for “ἐννάμ [ennam],” that is, “hinnom” — the letter sigma [being] carried over, as often elsewhere, from the end of the preceding word. Which [valley] otherwise, in the same v. 16, is called “gehinnom,” [and] by the same 70 is written “γαίεννα [gaienna]” — which word comes closest to the Latin [derived] from the same valley, namely, to “gehenna.” 4. Because, in that same place, the interpretation of “gehinnom” itself is added by [the phrase] “that is,” this general admonition is set down by Arias: “The Reader is to be admonished [that] all those words which are marked by an expository phrase (‘that is’) are either indicated thus by the Latin Interpreter for the sake of explanation, or [that they] have crept into the context from the margin.” There is certainly a like account of that usual phrase, “Which is interpreted [translated].” But this admonition has place rather in the Old than in the New Testament — as [in] Gen. 30:35, ch. 32:2, ch. 47:27; but not [in] Rom. 9:8, 1 Cor. 1:18 (although in the Greek here [it] is only “σῳζομένοις ἡμῖν [sōzomenois hēmin, ‘to us who are being saved’]”). So Judg. 1:35, “which is interpreted ‘earthen’”; and ch. 12:6, ch. 15:17; Matt. [1:34?]; but not Matt. 1:23, Mark 5:42, ch. 15:22 & 34, John 1:38, 41, 42, ch. 9:7, Acts 4:36.
5. But for “tumuli [mounds]” (v. 17), in the Hebrew [they] are “geliloth”; and in the Latin translation [they] are retained [untranslated] by Masius and others, but by the 70 [rendered] “γαλιλώθ [galilōth].” And the same Masius, in [his] commentary, thinks [it] to be “Galgala” — but different from those [Gilgals] in which the Israelite camp was for so long — and [that] those are the [places] which (Judg. 3:19) are called “Galgal.” Others [identify] the same from ch. 15:7, and below, ch. 22:13. But since that Hebrew word is derived from rolling and heaping-up, [it] is rightly sometimes rendered “mounds,” and [sometimes] “shores” (as Masius will [have it at] ch. 13:2), but sometimes [it] is retained [untranslated] — as is done here by the cited authors, and by our Interpreter [in] that ch. 13:2, where [it] is called “Galilaea.” 6. “Jerusalem” here (v. 28) is placed in the tribe of Benjamin, but before, in the tribe of Judah (ch. 15:8 & 63). Namely, [it] belonged to both tribes — but synecdochically. For one part, which [was] more northern, pertained to Benjamin; the other, which [was] more southern, to Judah. And [there] are [those] who think these two parts [were] two small, very-close towns, marked with one and the same name, yet girt with different walls — or certainly with single [walls], common and the same, besides those [walls] which were proper to each. But concerning this, something was hinted before, [at] ch. 10, q. 2. But Abulensis here (q. 10) prefers [to say] either [that], by the exchange of another city, the Benjamites yielded this city to the Jews [Judahites], or rather [that], by smallness of spirit and despair — since [they] distrusted [that] the Jebusites could ever be expelled by them. But I prefer the answer which is Lyra’s: that Jerusalem belonged, by right and by possession, to the two tribes, according to [its] two different parts. 7. This Benjaminite portion would seem cramped, were it not established from the aforesaid [that] those narrownesses [are] compensated by the greatest fertility.