commented upon the whole catalogue, it will not be necessary to do more here than to group together the errors and defects of our text.
Verses 57-60
1Ch 6:57-60 (Hebrew_Bible_6:42-45). The plural המּקלט ערי is incorrect, for only one of the cities thereafter named, viz., Hebron, was a city of refuge for homicides, and in Jos 21:13 it is correctly written מקלט עיר. After יתּיר retfA the usual addition ואת־מגרשׁיה is omitted, 1Ch 6:59. Before Bethshemesh the name Juttah has been lost, and before Geba (1Ch 6:60) the name Gibeon, so that only eleven cities are mentioned, but the sum is rightly given as thirteen. Instead of the name חילן, 1Ch 6:58, there is found in Jos 21:15 and Jos 15:51 חלן; instead of עין, Jos 21:16, we have in 1Ch 6:59 the more correct name עשׁן; and the name עלּמת, 1Ch 6:60, is in Jos 21:18 עלמון.
Verses 61-63
1Ch 6:61-63 (Hebrew_Bible_6:46-48). Summary statements of the number of cities which the remaining Kohathites, the Gershonites, and the Merarites received in the domains of the various tribes, corresponding to Jos 21:5-7. In 1Ch 6:61 occurs a hiatus; between המּטּה and ממּחצית the words “Ephraim and of the tribe of Dan and” have been omitted. In 1Ch 6:48 the words “of the tribe of Manasseh in Bashan” are quite intelligible without חצי, which is found in Joshua.
Verses 64-65
1Ch 6:64-65 (Hebrew_Bible_6:49-50). 1Ch 6:64 and 1Ch 6:65 are not here in their proper place; for their contents show that they should be in the middle of the thirty-ninth verse, after the general superscription, and before the words “for the sons of Aaron.” They are found also in Jos 21:8-9, as a superscription before the enumeration by name of the cities assigned to the priests; but how the confusion has arisen in our text cannot be certainly ascertained. Bertheau thinks “the wish to make mention of the cities of the high-priestly family at the beginning of the enumeration, has induced the author of the Chronicle to communicate the introductory remarks belonging to the lists of cities with other statements as to the tribal domains, only after the enumeration of the cities of the sons of Aaron.” By that supposition the position of 1Ch 6:61 is certainly explained, but not that of 1Ch 6:64 and 1Ch 6:65; for even with the supposed desire, 1Ch 6:64 and 1Ch 6:65 should have been placed before 1Ch 6:61. But besides, this, the clause וגו אהרן לבני in 1Ch 6:54 neither has anything to connect it with the preceding superscription nor a verb; and the subject of ויּתּנוּ, 1Ch 6:55, is also wanting. That which was missed before 1Ch 6:54 and in 1Ch 6:55 is contained in 1Ch 6:64 and 1Ch 6:65; whence it is manifest that 1Ch 6:64 and 1Ch 6:65 ought to stand before 1Ch 6:54, and have by some inexplicable accident
