The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Dan’s Inheritance
Joshua 19:40–48 — Dan’s Inheritance. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
40The seventh lot came out for the clans of the tribe of Dan:
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
haš·šə·ḇî·‘î hag·gō·w·rāl yā·ṣā lə·miš·pə·ḥō·ṯām lə·maṭ·ṭêh ḇə·nê- ḏān
Literal — word-for-word from the original
For the tribe of the sons of Dan, according-to-their-clans, came-out the seventh lot.
Where the English smooths the original
Dan was the most numerous tribe, next to Judah, in each census taken during the exodus. (See Numbers 1, 26) This tribe had also had a post of honour in being commander of the rear-guard during the march. A similar post is here assigned to Dan in Palestine, viz., next to Judah, on the side of the Philistine territory.
This fell to the west of Benjamin, between Judah and Ephraim, and was formed by Judah giving up some of its northern towns, and Ephraim some of its southern towns, to the Danites, so as to furnish them with a territory proportionate to their number.
the seventh lot ] came out to the smallest of all the tribes, that of Dan, descended from the fifth son of Jacob.The Cambridge editors call Dan "the smallest" by territory even while Ellicott calls it the most numerous by census — a deliberate juxtaposition the text itself sets up.
It lay on the west of Benjamin and consisted of portions surrendered by Judah and Ephraim. Its boundaries are not stated, as they were easily distinguishable from the relative position of Dan to the three adjoining tribes.JFB notes what every commentator on this unit observes: Dan alone among the tribes is given no boundary survey, only a city-roll — because its lines simply followed the borders of the three tribes that hemmed it in.
41The territory of their inheritance included Zorah, Eshtaol, Ir-shemesh,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
way·hî gə·ḇūl na·ḥă·lā·ṯām ṣā·rə·‘āh wə·’eš·tā·’ō·wl wə·‘îr šā·meš
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And was the territory of their inheritance: Zorah, and Eshtaol, and Ir-shemesh,
Where the English smooths the original
From Judah the families of Dan received Zorea and Eshtaol (see at Joshua 15:33 ), and Ir-shemesh, also called Beth-shemesh ( 1 Kings 4:9 ), on the border of Judah (see Joshua 15:10 ); but of these the Danites did not take possession, as they were given up by Judah to the Levites ( Joshua 21:16
the steep, hard, rocky hills, their wildernesses of mastic, clear springs, and frequent caves and precipices, are the fastnesses in which Samson was born, and from which he descended into the plain to harry the Philistines
Irshemesh signifies the city of the sun, as the Targum interprets it, and was so called very probably from a temple in it, dedicated to the idolatrous worship of the sun
Their inheritance; which is here described only by its cities, not by its borders, which are in part the same with Judah’s; and their inheritance is in good part taken out of Judah’s too large portionPoole names the structural oddity of Dan's section — cities, not borders — and the reason: Dan's land was largely carved out of Judah's over-large allotment (cf. Joshua 19:9, where Simeon's portion is taken from Judah for the same reason).
42Shaalabbin, Aijalon, Ithlah,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·ša·‘ă·lab·bîn wə·’ay·yā·lō·wn wə·yiṯ·lāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
and Shaalabbin, and Aijalon, and Ithlah,
Where the English smooths the original
Shaalabbin ] = “ the place of foxes ;” comp. the story of Samson, Jdg 15:4 . It appears in 1 Kings 4:9 as the home of one of David’s “mighty men.”
and Ajalon is famous for the standing still of the moon in its valley while Joshua pursued his enemies
Ajalon, which was also not taken from the Canaanites ( Judges 1:35 ), was assigned to the Levites ( Joshua 21:24 ; 1 Chronicles 6:54 ). It is mentioned in the wars with the Philistines
43Elon, Timnah, Ekron,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’ê·lō·wn wə·ṯim·nā·ṯāh wə·‘eq·rō·wn
Literal — word-for-word from the original
and Elon, and Timnah, and Ekron,
Where the English smooths the original
Ekron was one of the five principalities of the Philistines, and never possessed by the Israelites; it first fell by lot to the tribe of Judah, and afterwards given to the tribe of Dan
Elon ] The site of this place is still undiscovered. For Thimnathah see above, ch. Joshua 15:1 ; for Ekron , Joshua 13:3 .
44Eltekeh, Gibbethon, Baalath,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’el·tə·qêh wə·ḡib·bə·ṯō·wn ū·ḇa·‘ă·lāṯ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
and Eltekeh, and Gibbethon, and Baalath,
Where the English smooths the original
Eltekeh and Gibbethon, which were allotted to the Levites ( Joshua 21:23 ), have not yet been discovered. Under the earliest kings of Israel, Gibbethon was in the hands of the Philistines ( 1 Kings 15:27 ; 1 Kings 16:15 , 1 Kings 16:17 ). Baalath was fortified by Solomon ( 1 Kings 9:18 ).
of these two last cities, the Talmudists (w) say that their houses belonged to Judah, and their fields to DanGill's citation is to T. Hieros. Sanhedrin; the divided houses-and-fields image is rabbinic, not a claim of the biblical text.
45Jehud, Bene-berak, Gath-rimmon,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wî·huḏ ū·ḇə·nê- ḇə·raq wə·ḡaṯ- rim·mō·wn
Literal — word-for-word from the original
and Jehud, and Bene-berak, and Gath-rimmon,
Where the English smooths the original
Beneberak signifies sons of lightning; see Mark 3:17 . Jerom (x) speaks of tills as the name of two places, Bane in the tribe of Dan, and Barach in the same tribe
Jehud has probably been preserved in the village of Jehudieh (Hudieh), two hours to the north of Ludd (Diospolis), in a splendidly cultivated plain
Gath-rimmon we find (ch. Joshua 21:24 ) given to the Levites, but the site is unknown.
46Me-jarkon, and Rakkon, including the territory across from Joppa.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ū·mê hay·yar·qō·wn wə·hā·raq·qō·wn ‘im- hag·gə·ḇūl mūl yā·p̄ōw
Literal — word-for-word from the original
and Me-jarkon, and Rakkon, with the territory over against Joppa.
Where the English smooths the original
Me-jarkon, i.e., aquae flavedinis, and Rakkon, are unknown; but from the clause which follows, "with the territory before Japho," it must have been in the neighbourhood of Joppa (Jaffa). "The territory before Japho" includes the places in the environs of Joppa. Consequently Joppa itself does not appear to have belonged to the territory of Dan
The name signifies "beauty," though Joppa does not seem to be distinguished above all other places in Palestine by the beauty of its situation. But according to Hovers, Japho signifies in Phoenician, "high place."
where Jonah took ship to flee “from the presence of the Lord” ( Jonah 1:3 ); ( d ) where Jonathan Maccabæus met Ptolemy ( 1Ma 11:6 ); ( e ) where St Peter had the vision on the housetop of Simon the tanner ( Acts 10:9-18 ).
47(Later, when the territory of the Danites was lost to them, they went up and fought against Leshem, captured it, and put it to the sword. So they took possession of Leshem, settled there, and renamed it after their father Dan.)
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ḡə·ḇūl- bə·nê- ḏān mê·hem way·yê·ṣê ḇə·nê- ḏān way·ya·‘ă·lū way·yil·lā·ḥă·mū ‘im- le·šem way·yil·kə·ḏū ’ō·w·ṯāh way·yak·kū ’ō·w·ṯāh lə·p̄î- ḥe·reḇ way·yir·šū ’ō·w·ṯāh way·yê·šə·ḇū ḇāh way·yiq·rə·’ū lə·le·šem kə·šêm ’ă·ḇî·hem dān dān
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And the border of the sons of Dan went out from them; so the sons of Dan went up and fought against Leshem, and captured it, and struck it with the mouth of the sword, and took possession of it, and settled in it, and called Leshem Dan, after the name of Dan their father.
Where the English smooths the original
The words “too little” are not in the original; and it seems better to translate literally: And the coast of the children of Dan went out from them — i.e., their territory was partly re-conquered by the Philistines.
no more can fairly be inferred, than that, in after times, Ezra, or some other, thought good to insert this verse here, in order to complete the account of the Danites’ possessions.Benson raises, then limits, the authorship question — granting the verse narrates events after Joshua's death without conceding the book is non-Joshuan.
the Danite expedition (see the marginal reference), which surprised the Sidonion inhabitants of Leshem, an unwarlike and peaceable race, exterminated them, and annexed their city and territory to the portion of Dan.
Went out too little for them, Heb. went out from them , to wit, out of their hands or possession; for so this Hebrew word is used concerning those lands, which in the year of the jubilee are said to go out , Leviticus 25:28
48This was the inheritance of the clans of the tribe of Dan, including these cities and their villages.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
zōṯ na·ḥă·laṯ lə·miš·pə·ḥō·ṯām maṭ·ṭêh ḇə·nê- ḏān hā·’êl·leh he·‘ā·rîm wə·ḥaṣ·rê·hen
Literal — word-for-word from the original
This was the inheritance of the tribe of the sons of Dan, according-to-their-clans — these cities and their villages.
Where the English smooths the original
The dying Jacob had said of the tribe ( Genesis 49:16 ): “Dan shall judge his people, As one of the tribes of Israel. Dan shall be a serpent by the way , An adder in the path, That biteth the horse heels , So that his rider shall fall backward;”Cambridge here quotes Genesis 49:16-17 (Jacob's blessing) and Deuteronomy 33:22 (Moses' blessing) to read Dan's small, fierce, frontier character into its allotment.
We read little of Dan in the after history of Israel. Samson is the only hero this tribe produced, and his exploits were limited to a very narrow area, and his influence apparently to his own tribe.
This tribe was bounded by Ephraim on the north, by Judah on the east, by Simeon on the south, and by the Mediterranean sea on the west.
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
The unit opens with a paradox the commentators cannot miss. The seventh and final lot (hag·gō·w·rāl, H1486 — properly a thrown pebble) falls to Dan, and Cambridge calls it "the smallest of all the tribes." Yet Ellicott insists from the census lists that "Dan was the most numerous tribe, next to Judah," and notes its "post of honour in being commander of the rear-guard during the march." The most populous tribe draws the least land. Keil & Delitzsch explain the geography: Dan's portion "was formed by Judah giving up some of its northern towns, and Ephraim some of its southern towns" — a tribe wedged, in Ellicott's phrase, between "the powerful tribes of Judah and Ephraim, the unconquered Philistines, and the sea." The placement is strategic, not accidental: the two strongest tribes guard the Philistine frontier. The text does not editorialize; it simply lets the number "seventh" and the smallness sit beside the greatness of the tribe.
Unlike the other tribes, Dan is described "not by its borders, but by its cities" (Matthew Poole; Gill). And the city-roll is honest to the point of self-indictment. Several towns — Zorah, Eshtaol, Ir-shemesh, Ekron — "had been originally assigned to Judah" (Ellicott), so that Dan's inheritance is in part Judah's surplus. More tellingly, the list names places Dan never held: Ekron, says Gill, "was never possessed by the Israelites"; of Ir-shemesh and others Keil writes plainly, "the Danites did not take possession." The names themselves carry buried meaning the BSB transliterates away — Ir-shemesh, "city of the sun" (Gill, the Pulpit Commentary: "another sign of sun-worship"); Shaalabbin, "the place of foxes" (Cambridge); Bene-berak, "sons of lightning" (Gill); Japho, "beauty" (Cambridge, Pulpit). The roll closes at the sea, "the territory before Joppa" — and even there Keil concludes "Joppa itself does not appear to have belonged to the territory of Dan." The deed is generous; the possession is partial.
The hinge of the unit is a single verb. The KJV's "the coast of the children of Dan went out too little for them" rests on words that, as a chorus of commentators agree, are simply not in the Hebrew. Ellicott: "The words 'too little' are not in the original." Benson: "The words too little are not in the Hebrew, where there is nothing that corresponds with them." Cambridge and the Pulpit Commentary say the same; the Hebrew reads only way·yê·ṣê (H3318) — "the border of the sons of Dan went out from them." And the bare verb is genuinely ambiguous. Poole reads it as loss — the land "went out... out of their hands or possession," on the model of jubilee land that "goes out" (Leviticus 25:28). Barnes reads it as the opposite — "the children of Dan enlarged their border." The unit refuses to flatten the ambiguity, because the narrative bears both: pressed out of the valley by the Amorites (Judges 1:34), Dan goes out from its allotted coast to seize Leshem in the far north. What follows is told in the conquest-formula of Joshua's own wars — they "struck it with the mouth of the sword" (lə·p̄î ḥe·reḇ) — yet Barnes notes the victims were "an unwarlike and peaceable race," the "quiet and secure" people of Judges 18:7. The renaming "after the name of Dan their father" repeats, almost verbatim, the formula of Judges 18:29.
The closing formula "this is the inheritance" (zōṯ na·ḥă·laṯ) seals a portion fourteen miles long that Cambridge calls "one of the most fertile tracts in the land, the cornfield and garden of southern Palestine." But Cambridge reaches past the land to the patriarchal word, quoting Jacob's blessing: "Dan shall judge his people... Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels" (Genesis 49:16-17), and Moses' "a lion's whelp" (Deuteronomy 33:22). The character fits the allotment: a small, fierce, frontier tribe "to lie in wait for the invader from the south or from the north." Yet the Pulpit Commentary records the cost soberly: "We read little of Dan in the after history of Israel. Samson is the only hero this tribe produced." The same tribe that names a city for its father will, at that very Leshem-now-Dan, become the site of Jeroboam's golden calf (1 Kings 12:29 — so Keil). The serpent in the path was also a serpent in Israel's own house.
Reading this dry city-list under Sola Scriptura — letting it test itself against the rest of the canon — what stands out is the gap between deed and possession. Twice the text frames Dan's portion as na·ḥălâh, "inheritance" (vv. 41, 48): a settled, granted estate. Yet the same passage names Ekron, Gibbethon, Aijalon, Shaalabbin as towns Dan never cleared, and v. 47 shows Dan's own border "going out from them." The land is fully given and only partly taken. This is not a contradiction the text hides; it is the text's own theology of inheritance — the gift is secure in God's word and incomplete in Israel's hand. The tragedy is not that Dan received too little, but that, squeezed and impatient, it abandoned the frontier it was placed to hold and carved out a new home by the sword against "a people quiet and secure" — and then enshrined idolatry there. The smallest inheritance was not the failure; the restless refusal to wait on the giver was. The land was always enough; the heart was not.
Dan's portion was given in full and held in part — the gap between the deed and the dwelling is the whole drama of the tribe. (An interpretive line from the synthesis layer, not a verse of Scripture.)
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
Joshua 19:44's "Eltekeh, Gibbethon, Baalath" re-appears almost intact in the Levitical-city roll of Joshua 21:23, where Eltekeh and Gibbethon are set apart for the Kohathites. The decisive link is ’Eltᵉqêʼ (H514), a place-name found in only two verses of the entire Hebrew Bible — these two — joined by Gibbᵉthôwn (H1405, only five verses). The extreme rarity makes this a genuine verbal dependence, not a thematic coincidence: the same near-unique names are deliberately carried from Dan's allotment into the Levitical apportionment. The Verifier returns this pairing on those shared rare lexemes.
Joshua 19:44 · Joshua 21:23
basis: shared rare lexemes H514 ʼEltᵉqêʼ (2 vv) and H1405 Gibbᵉthôwn (5 vv) — Verifier-computed; freq-2 lexeme confirms verbal link, not theme
The first two towns of Dan's inheritance, Zorah and Eshtaol (Joshua 19:41), reappear together as the birthplace and burial-region of Samson (Judges 13:25; 16:31) and as the launching-point of the Danite migration (Judges 18:11). The link rests on two rare place-names shared verbatim: ʼEshtâʼôl (H847, 7 verses) and Tsorʻâh (H6881, 10 verses). The Pulpit Commentary already draws the line on this very verse, naming these hills "the fastnesses in which Samson was born." The one deliverer Dan produced rises from the two towns that head its allotment — and from those same towns the 600 warriors march north to Leshem.
Joshua 19:41 · Judges 13:25 · Judges 16:31 · Judges 18:11
basis: shared rare lexemes H847 ʼEshtâʼôl (7 vv) and H6881 Tsorʻâh (10 vv) — Verifier-computed; low-frequency place-name pair confirms verbal link
Joshua 19:42 deeds Shaalabbin and Aijalon to Dan; Judges 1:35 reports that "the Amorites would dwell in mount Heres in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim" — the very towns Dan could not take. The verbal tie is the shared place-names Shaʻalbîym (H8169, 3 verses) and ʼAyâlôwn (H357, 10 verses). Keil & Delitzsch note on this verse that both "remained in the hands of the Canaanites (Judges 1:35)." This is the canon's own footnote to the unit's central tension: the inheritance list and the conquest record disagree, and Scripture preserves both.
Joshua 19:42 · Judges 1:35
basis: shared rare lexemes H8169 Shaʻalbîym (3 vv) and H357 ʼAyâlôwn (10 vv) — Verifier-computed; the freq-3 name confirms a verbal link
Gath-rimmon, the last of the inland towns in Dan's roll (Joshua 19:45), recurs in the Levitical-city catalogue of Joshua 21:24 (and again 1 Chronicles 6:69), where it is assigned to the Kohathite Levites. The tie rests on the rare compound place-name Gath-Rimmôwn (H1667), which occurs in only four verses of the entire Hebrew Bible. Cambridge draws the line on this verse: "Gath-rimmon we find (ch. Joshua 21:24) given to the Levites, but the site is unknown." Like Eltekeh and Gibbethon, this is a town Dan holds on the deed only to surrender it again — here not to Canaanites but to the Levites, who have no tribal inheritance of their own. The low frequency makes this a genuine verbal dependence, the same near-unique name carried from Dan's list into the Levitical apportionment.
Joshua 19:45 · Joshua 21:24 · 1 Chronicles 6:69
basis: shared rare lexeme H1667 Gath-Rimmôwn (4 vv) — Verifier-computed; freq-4 place-name confirms a verbal link, not a theme
Baalath (Joshua 19:44) — a town whose very name carries the Canaanite divine title Baʻal, "lord/owner" — reappears among the store-cities Solomon fortified (1 Kings 9:18; 2 Chronicles 8:6). The link is the rare place-name Baʻălâth (H1191), found in only three verses of the Hebrew Bible. Keil & Delitzsch note on this verse that "Baalath was fortified by Solomon," identifying it with Josephus's "Baleth in the neighbourhood of Geser." The Verifier returns the pairing on this single rare lexeme. The thread quietly tracks a pagan-named place from the inheritance-roll into Israel's own royal building program — the name of the Canaanite "lord" surviving inside the cities of the king who would later build high places for foreign gods.
Joshua 19:44 · 1 Kings 9:18 · 2 Chronicles 8:6
basis: shared rare lexeme H1191 Baʻălâth (3 vv) — Verifier-computed; freq-3 place-name confirms a verbal link
Joshua 19:47 tells, in compressed form, the conquest of Leshem and its renaming "Dan, after the name of Dan their father" — the event narrated at full length in Judges 18, where the city (there called Laish) is renamed in nearly identical words (Judges 18:29). The renaming-formula shares qârâʼ (H7121, "call"), shêm (H8034, "name"), ʼâb (H1, "father") and Dân (H1835), and the conquest is told in the shared "mouth of the sword" formula (Joshua 19:47 ↔ Judges 18:27: chereb H2719, peh H6310, nâkâh H5221). These are common lexemes, so the link is structural, not a rare-word quotation — and the provenance is genuinely debated. Benson grants the verse records events "after Joshua's death" and may have been "inserted... by Ezra, or some other... to complete the account"; Gill and Barnes agree it postdates Joshua. Because the relationship between this verse and Judges 18 (priority, authorship, insertion) is contested in the sources themselves, this thread is flagged.
Joshua 19:47 · Judges 18:27 · Judges 18:29
basis: shared lexemes H1835 Dân, H7121 qârâʼ, H8034 shêm, H1 ʼâb (renaming-formula) and H2719 chereb / H6310 peh / H5221 nâkâh (conquest-formula) — all common; tier flagged because the verse's authorship/insertion and its relation to Judges 18 are disputed in the PD sources (Benson, Gill, Barnes)
Dan's territory runs to "the border before Joppa" (Joshua 19:46). The same port, Yâphôw (H3305, only 4 verses in the Hebrew Bible), recurs as the harbor whence Jonah fled "from the presence of the LORD" (Jonah 1:3) and whither cedar was floated for the second temple (Ezra 3:7; 2 Chronicles 2:16). The shared place-name is a verbal link within the Hebrew canon. Cambridge and the Pulpit Commentary extend the line into the New Testament to Acts 10 — Peter's rooftop vision at Joppa — but that link cannot rest on a shared Strong's number, since it crosses from Hebrew to Greek; it is structural/thematic only.
Joshua 19:46 · Jonah 1:3 · Ezra 3:7 · 2 Chronicles 2:16
basis: shared rare place-name H3305 Yâphôw (4 vv) across the Hebrew references — Verifier-computed; this rare lexeme is the real fingerprint (the Verifier also lists the common preposition H5973 ʻim, freq 919, which carries no weight). The Acts 10 resonance is cross-Testament (Greek↔Hebrew), cannot rest on a shared Strong's number, and is named as thematic/typological only
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
Matthew Henry, on this whole section (19:17-51), reads the pattern of allotment-before-possession as a figure of Christ: "Our Lord Jesus came and dwelt on earth, not in pomp but poverty, providing rest for man, yet himself not having where to lay his head... Nor would he enter upon his inheritance, till by his obedience to death he secured the eternal inheritance for all his people; nor will he account his own glory completed, till every ransomed sinner is put in possession of his heavenly rest." The very gap this unit exposes — land fully given yet not fully held — is, in Henry's reading, answered in Christ, who secures an inheritance that cannot "go out from" His people (1 Peter 1:4). This is a widely-held typological reading, not a claim that the Danite text predicts Christ; it is the PD commentator's own figural application.
Joshua 19:41 · Joshua 19:47 · Joshua 19:48
Jacob's blessing names Dan "a serpent by the way, an adder in the path" (Genesis 49:16-17), and Cambridge draws the whole arc of the tribe out of that word on this very unit. The patriarchal blessing carries a Christward seam: in the midst of the serpent-saying Jacob cries, "I have waited for thy salvation, O LORD" (Genesis 49:18) — read by the ancient church as the longing of the old covenant for the Savior. Dan's own history runs the other way: the city renamed "Dan" in v. 47 becomes (so Keil, on 1 Kings 12:29) the seat of Jeroboam's golden calf, and Dan is conspicuously absent from the sealed tribes of Revelation 7. The tribe whose name means "judge" and whose father's blessing breathes salvation becomes a byword for idolatry — a dark foil that throws the true Judge and true Salvation (Joshua/Jesus, "Yahweh saves") into relief. The Genesis-to-Dan link is verbal (shared H1835); the Christ-application is a novel synthesis offered here for testing, not an ancient consensus.
Joshua 19:47 · Genesis 49:16 · Genesis 49:18 · Deuteronomy 33:22
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
One thread is flagged on purpose. The Leshem-renamed-Dan link (Joshua 19:47 → Judges 18:27-29) is tiered flagged — verify source — not because the connection is doubtful (it is plainly the same event) but because the provenance of the verse is debated in the very PD sources of this unit. Benson, Gill, and Barnes all note that v. 47 narrates events occurring after Joshua's death and may have been inserted by a later hand "to complete the account"; the direction of literary dependence between Joshua 19 and Judges 18 is genuinely contested. We record the link and the dispute rather than resolving it.
On the translators' "too little." The KJV/older "went out too little for them" (v. 47) rests on words absent from the Hebrew; the BSB's "was lost to them" is one defensible reading of the bare verb yā·ṣā ("went out"), Poole's reading, while Barnes reads the same verb as "enlarged." We have flagged this divergence rather than choosing a side, because the Hebrew sustains both and the narrative needs both.
On cross-Testament links. The Joppa thread's Hebrew references (Jonah 1:3, Ezra 3:7, 2 Chronicles 2:16) are tied to Joshua 19:46 by the rare place-name Yâphôw (H3305, only 4 verses), a true rare-lexeme verbal fingerprint. But the New Testament resonance (Acts 10, Peter's vision) that Cambridge and the Pulpit Commentary note crosses from Hebrew to Greek; it cannot rest on a shared Strong's number and is recorded as thematic/typological only, never "verbal."
On the city-roll. Many notes lean on place-name etymologies (Ir-shemesh = "city of the sun," Bene-berak = "sons of lightning," Japho = "beauty"); these are drawn from the cited PD commentators (Gill, Cambridge, Pulpit) and from the Strong's roots in the parse, not invented. Several identifications (Eltekeh, Ithlah, Me-jarkon, Rakkon) remain unlocated in the sources, and we say so rather than guessing.
Note (Matthew Poole on v. 40). Poole's printed commentary has no note on Joshua 19:40, 19:42–46, or 19:48; his single substantive note in this unit falls on v. 47, which is why his voice appears there and not on the bare city-list verses.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)