Library / Commentary on Joshua, Volume II

After the Wars: Caput XXI

Question V. Whether the Levites dwelt in other cities [too]?

Not only in these given cities, but in others too, could the Levites dwell — in three ways. First: in that city where [there] was [the place] of sacred

(col. 1237)

[…continued from col. 1236.] [rites], the altar of holocausts, and the tabernacle itself, or the temple. Secondly: if any houses [were] given to them elsewhere by the Israelites, by oblation or vow. Thirdly: if [they] should wish to rent some [other] house in another city, and to dwell there. For certainly [that] the Levites were in other cities by some of those manners, the Scriptures not rarely show — even those [passages] which prescribe that the triennial tithes be eaten with them (Deut. 10 [recte 14], 17, & afterward often). The Jews bring forward also two causes why other cities [were] inhabited by them. One: that they might be present at all the Magistracies and judgments. “Ἐκάστῃ ἀρχῇ [ekastē archē]” [“to each magistracy”], says Josephus (bk. 4, ch. 8), “δύο ἄνδρες ὑπηρέται διδόσθωσαν ἐκ τῆς τῶν Λευιτῶν φυλῆς [dyo andres hypēretai didosthōsan ek tēs tōn Leuitōn phylēs]” [“let two men [as] attendants be given from the tribe of the Levites”]. The other: because, at the beginning, [they] could not possess some of their [own] cities, which were still held by the Canaanites, [and so] others [were] given to them in their stead on loan. And hence the Rabbis, in the Talmud (tractate “On blows” [Makkoth], ch. 2), untie that knot: how not a few names of the Levitic cities here [are] other than [those] in 1 Chron. 6. For here are handed down the cities which were theirs by the right of donation; but there [in Chron.], [those which were theirs] either by the right of donation or of loan. “Cedes,” they say, “while [it] remained a long time in the power of the enemies, the Levites had, in its stead, the neighboring Gamala.” And Masius: “If [it] is true, what I said the Hebrew Doctors opine, perhaps the Levites dwelt in Hucoc, since [they] could not obtain their neighboring Helcath.” And hence again [it] appears how great a convenience and spaciousness of dwelling [was] granted to the Levites, who could have a domicile not only in their own, but even in others’ cities.

Preview of the quotation image

Drag across the words below to colour them in the picture.

To cite this page

Nicolaus Serarius, S.J., “Question V. Whether the Levites dwelt in other cities [too]?,” in Commentary on Joshua, Volume II, English translation, Mind of the Church, https://mindofthechurch.com/works/serarius-joshua-2/323-question-v-whether-the-levites-dwelt-in-other-cities-too/.

Receive the new translations

One email when a new work or note is published — nothing else, ever.