Matthew Henry on Joshua 21:9-42
We have here a particular account of the cities which were given to the children of Levi out of the several tribes, not only to be occupied and inhabited by them, as tenants to the several tribes in which they lay - no, their interest in them was not dependent and precarious, but to be owned and possessed by them as lords and proprietors, and as having the same title to them that the rest of the tribes had to their cities or lands, as appears by the law which preserved the house in the Levites' cities from being alienated any longer than till the year of jubilee, Lev 25:32, Lev 25:33. Yet it is probable that the Levites having only the cities and suburbs, while the land about pertained to th…
Read the whole note in the consoleJamieson-Fausset-Brown on Joshua 21:9
THE CITIES OF THE PRIESTS. (Jos. 21:9-42)
they gave . . . these cities which are here mentioned by name--It was overruled by the unerring providence of the Divine Lawgiver that the cities of the priests lay within the territories of Judah and Benjamin. This was a provision, the admirable wisdom and propriety of which were fully manifested on the schism that took place in the reign of Rehoboam.
Adam Clarke on Joshua 21:12
The fields of the city - gave they to Caleb - This was an exclusive privilege to him and his family, with which the grant to the Levites did not interfere. See the notes on Jos 14:14.
John Gill on Joshua 21:12
But the fields of the city, and the villages thereof,.... Which lay beyond the two thousand cubits:
gave they to Caleb the son of Jephunneh, for his possession; as Moses had promised, and Joshua had confirmed to him; and now the children of Israel gave them to him, and put him in the possession of, Joshua 14:6; and the same is to be observed of all the other cities given to the Levites, that they and their suburbs, extending to such a distance only, were given to them; but the fields and villages, which belonged to them, continued the inheritance of the tribes in which they were.
