Genesis 13:7

Gen 13:7 And there was a strife between the herdmen of Abram’s cattle and the herdmen of Lot’s cattle: and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land.

Ver. 7. And there was a strife between.] How oft do servants set masters at variance! But the devil is in it, when good folk fall out especially. He is restless himself, and doth what he can to disquiet others. He loves to fish in troubled waters; and well knows out of his "devilish wisdom," saith St James, that "where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work". {Jas 3:15-16} But what was it that made the herdsmen fall out, but penury of pasture? and what bred penury of pasture, but plenty of cattle? Great riches many times breed great brabbles. This the heathen found, and therefore feigned that Mars was the son of Juno, {a} because Juno is the goddess of riches, which prove the cause of strife and stirs among many.

And the Canaanite and Perizzite dwelled then in the land.] This is added, either as a cause of their being straitened of fit pasture, because the Canaanites possessed the better grounds; or else to set forth how unseasonable and unsavoury it was, for such men to jar, and so to expose themselves to the scandal and scorn of such wicked neighbours as desired no better sport than to see them falling out. This latter is Lyra’s {b} gloss, and I like it well. One of the main scandals the Jews take at this day from Protestants, is their dissensions. Error condonari potest, modo fides adsit in Christum: discordiam, neque si sanguinem fundamus, expiabimus , said reverend Oecolampadius in a letter to the litigious Lutherans of Sueveland. {c}

{a} Natalis Comes.

{b} Nisi Lyra lyrasset &c.

{c} Scultet. Annal. Cyprianus inexpiabilem discordiae maculam martyrii sanguine ablui, et passione purgari negat.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gen 13:7. The Canaanite and Perizzite dwelt in the land — This made the quarrel, 1st, Very dangerous: if Abram and Lot cannot agree to feed their flocks together, it is well if the common enemy do not come upon them and plunder them both. 2d, Very scandalous: No doubt the eyes of all the neighbours were upon them; because of the singularity of their religion, and the extraordinary sanctity they professed; and notice would soon be taken of this quarrel, and improvement made of it to their reproach by the Canaanites and Perizzites.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Who seeing their contention, might blaspheme God and destroy them.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

And there was a strife--Abraham's character appears here in a most amiable light. Having a strong sense of religion, he was afraid of doing anything that might tend to injure its character or bring discredit on its name, and he rightly judged that such unhappy effects would be produced if two persons whom nature and grace had so closely connected should come to a rupture [Gen 13:8]. Waiving his right to dictate, he gave the freedom of choice to Lot. The conduct of Abraham was not only disinterested and peaceable, but generous and condescending in an extraordinary degree, exemplifying the Scripture precepts (Mat 6:32; Rom 12:10-11; Phi 2:4).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 7. The Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land.] That is, they were there at the time Abram and Lot came to fix their tents in the land. See Clarke on Ge 12:6.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

7. And there was a strife. What I hinted respecting riches, is also true respecting a large retinue of attendants. We see with what ambition many desire a great crowd of servants, almost amounting to a whole people. But since the family of Abram cost him so dear; let us be well content to have few servants, or even to be entirely without them, if it seem right to the Lord that it should be so. It was scarcely possible to avoid great confusion, in a house where there was a considerable number of men. And experience confirms the truth of the proverbs that a crowd is commonly turbulent. Now, if repose and tranquility be an inestimable good; let us know, that we best consult for our real welfare, when we have a small house, and privately pass our time, without tumult, in our families. We are also warned, by the example before us, to beware lest Satan, by indirect methods, should lead us into contention. For when he cannot light up mutual enmities between us, he would involve us in other men’s quarrels. Lot and Abram were at concord with each other; but a contention raised between their shepherds, carried them reluctantly away; so that they were compelled to separate from each other. There is no doubt that Abram faithfully instructed his own people to cultivate peace; yet he did not so far succeed in his desire and effort, as to prevent his witnessing the most destructive fire of discord kindled in his house. Wherefore, it is nothing wonderful, if we see tumults often arising in churches, where there is a still greater number of men. Abram had about three hundred servants; it is probable that the family of Lot was nearly equal to it: what then may be expected to take place between five or six thousand men, — especially free men, — when they contend with each other? As, however, we ought not to be disturbed by such scandals; so we must, in every way, take care that contentions do not become violent. For unless they be speedily met, they will soon break out into pernicious dissension.

The Canaanite and the Perizzite. Moses adds this for the sake of aggravating the evil. For he declares the heat of the contention to have been so great, that it could neither be extinguished nor assuaged, even by the fear of impending destruction. They were surrounded by as many enemies as they had neighbors. Nothing, therefore, was wanting in order to their destruction, but a suitable occasion; and this they themselves were affording by their quarrels. To such a degree does blind fury infatuate men, when once the vehemence of contention has prevailed, that they carelessly despise death, when placed before their eyes. Now, although we are not continually surrounded by Canaanites, we are yet in the midst of enemies, as long as we sojourn in the world. Wherefore, if we are influenced by any desire for the salvation of ourselves, and of our brethren, let us beware of contentions which will deliver us over to Satan to be destroyed.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(7) The Perizzite.—We find mention in the Bible both of Perazites, translated villages, in 1Sa_6:18, Est_9:19; and of Perizzites, who are sometimes opposed to the Canaanites, as here and in Gen_34:30, and sometimes described as one of the tribes settled in Palestine (Exo_3:8; Exo_3:17; Jos_17:15; Jdg_3:5). They are not mentioned among the races descended from Canaan, and probably were the earlier inhabitants of the country, who, being a pastoral people, possessed of no towns, were not able to make head against the Hamite settlers, but maintained themselves in the open country. Perazite and Perizzite are probably the same word, and both signify lowlander, though finally they were driven to the mountains (Jos_11:3). As the Canaanites devoted their main strength to a maritime life and trade, they would not attempt to extirpate these natives, but would be content with driving them into the interior. As thus some districts would be occupied by the dominant Canaanites, and others by these aborigines, two such large clans as those of Abram and Lot would find it difficult to discover unoccupied land enough to provide pasture for their cattle. The land must have been very thinly peopled for it to have been possible for them to do this, even when they had arranged to dwell apart.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

7. And there was a strife] The account according to J of the reason for the separation. Disputes were constantly arising between the herdsmen of the two caravans. For other examples of such causes of friction among shepherds and herdsmen, see Gen_21:24-32, Gen_26:15-33.

and the Canaanite and the Perizzite] Cf. Gen_12:6. The introduction of this clause is probably intended to emphasize the danger of dissensions between the Hebrew camps at a time when the native inhabitants, jealous of the wealth of the strangers, might be glad of a pretext for attacking them singly. “The Canaanite” is the indigenous inhabitant (Gen_10:15; Gen_10:19, Gen_12:6) in J.

The Perizzite is mentioned with the Canaanite in Gen_34:30, Jdg_1:4-5, and in the lists of the nations, e.g. Gen_15:20-21. In Jos_17:15 the Perizzites are named with the Rephaim; and in Jos_24:11 with the Amorites. There is no means of determining where they dwelt. Some have supposed that the Perizzites meant the peasantry, or dwellers in villages and unwalled towns, as distinct from the Canaanites who dwelt in walled cities: and that the name is connected with the word perazi, used in Deu_3:5 and 1Sa_6:18.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And there was a strife between the herdmen of Abram's cattle and the herdmen of Lot's cattle,.... Not between the two masters, but between their servants, their upper servants, that had the care of their herds to feed them, and water them; and it is very probable their strife was about pasturage and watering places, the one endeavouring to get them from the other, or to get the best; which is much more likely than what Jarchi suggests, that the herdmen of Lot were wicked men, and fed their cattle in the fields of others, and the herdmen of Abram reproved them for their robbery; but they said, the land is given of Abram, and he hath no heir, but Lot is his heir, and what robbery is this? and to this sense are the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem:

and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelt then in the land; which observation is made by Moses to point to a reason why they could not both of them have a sufficiency for their large flocks and herds, because the country was in the possession of others; and though there was to spare, yet not enough for them both. The Canaanite, though it was a general name for the people of the whole land, yet was given to a particular family in it, and was derived from their first founder Canaan, the son of Ham; the Perizzite was another family or tribe of the same nation, who had their name from "a village"; these being Pagans or villagers, living in huts, or houses, or tents scattered up and down in the fields, and were a rough, inhuman, and unsociable sort of people, and therefore it could not be expected that they would oblige them with much pasturage and water for their flocks: and besides, this may be remarked, partly to show the danger that Abram and Lot were in through the dissension of their herdmen, since those people that were so nigh might take the advantage of their quarrels among themselves, and fall upon them both, and destroy them, and therefore a reconciliation was necessary; and partly to observe the reproach that was like to come upon them, and upon the true religion, for their sakes, should they differ among themselves, which such sort of men would gladly catch at, and improve against them.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

The Canaanite, i.e. the Canaanites, as Gen 12:6, the singular number for the plural, as Psa 78:45; 105:33,40.

Dwelled then in the land, i.e. were the lords and owners of it; and therefore Abram and Lot could not take what pastures they pleased, but such as the others left them, which was not sufficient for their conveniency. It may also be added as a reason of Abram's following motion, because that idolatrous people were present, and diligently observed all their contentions and other miscarriages; and would, doubtless, take occasion thence to disparage the true religion. And it must be remembered, that these are the words not of Abram, but of Moses; who, knowing that the Canaanites were then speedily to be turned out of the land, intimates that the case was otherwise in Abram's days, when the Canaanites were possessed, and were likely to continue the possessors and lords of the land.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

7. A strife between the herd-men — “Such disputes were unavoidable in the circumstances. Neither party had any title to the land. Every body availed himself of the best spot for grazing he could find unoccupied. We can easily understand what facilities and temptations this would offer for the strong to overbear the weak. We meet with many incidental notices of such oppression: Gen_21:25; Gen_26:15-22; Exo_2:16-19.” — Murphy. “The germinal divisions of masters ofttimes reveal themselves clearly in the strifes of their servants and dependents. Even the wives are often in open hostility while their husbands are still at peace. Abram teaches us how to observe these symptoms in the right way.” — Lange.

The Canaanite — Comp. Gen_12:6.

Perizzite — This name, not appearing among the descendants of Canaan in Gen_10:15-17, is supposed to designate some tribe not of Hamite origin. The Hebrew word, which means rustics, or countrymen, may designate them as nomads, or dwellers in the country as distinguished from dwellers in towns and cities. See note on Jos_3:10. They probably occupied the best pastures, and so partly occasioned the strife between Abram and Lot’s herdmen.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And there was a strife (originating doubtless in the scarcity of pasture, and having for its object the possession of the best wells and most fertile grounds) between the herdmen of Abram"s cattle and the herdmen of Lot"s cattle: and the Canaanite the lowlander (vide Gen_9:22 Gen_12:6) and the Perizzite the highlander, or dweller in the hills and woods of Palestine (Josephus, Bochart); in the open country and in villages, as opposed to the Canaanites, who occupied walled towns (Kalisch, Wordsworth; a tribe of wandering nomads (Murphy), the origin of whose name is lost in obscurity (Keil), who, though not mentioned in Ge 10, are commonly introduced with the Canaanites. (Gen_15:20 Gen_34:30; Exo_3:8, Exo_3:17) as dividing the land between them, and are probably to be regarded as the remnant of an early Shemite race displaced by the Hamite invaders of Palestine. Their introduction here is neither a sign of post-Mosaic authorship nor an interpolation, but an explanation of the difficulty of finding pasture the land was occupied (Gen_12:6) dwelt then in the land.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled in the land - This made the quarrel,

1. Very dangerous; if Abram and Lot cannot agree to feed their flocks together, it is well if the common enemy do not come upon them and plunder them both.

2. Very scandalous: No doubt the eyes of all the neighbours were upon them, because of the singularity of their religion, and the extraordinary sanctity they professed; and notice would soon be taken of this quarrel, and improvement made of it to their reproach by the Canaanites and Perizzites.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

ויהי ריב AND THERE WAS A QUARREL because Lot’s shepherds were wicked men and grazed their cattle in other people’s fields. Abram's shepherds rebuked them for this act of robbery, but they replied, “The land has been given to Abram, and since he has no son as heir, Lot will be his heir: consequently this is not robbery”. Scripture, however, states: “The Canaanite and the Perizzite abode then in the land”, so that Abram was not yet entitled to possession (Genesis Rabbah 41:5).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

AND THERE WAS A QUARREL. Rashi wrote, “Because Lot’s shepherds grazed their cattle in other people’s fields, Abram’s shepherds rebuked them for this act of robbery, but they replied, ‘The land has been given to Abram, and he has no [son as an] heir, and so Lot will be his heir. Hence this is not robbery.’ Scripture however states, And the Canaanite and the Perrizite abode then in the land, so that Abram was not yet the legitimate owner.” This is a Midrash of our Rabbis. But I wonder: The gift of the Land declared to Abram was for his children, as it is said above, Unto thy seed will I give this land, so how can Lot inherit it? Perhaps the shepherds heard of the gift and they mistook its meaning, for Scripture states that in the meantime, the land belonged neither to Abram nor to Lot. Accordingly, the verse stating at the outset, for their possessions were great, intended to say that because of their extensive possessions, the land could not support them, and Lot’s shepherds therefore found it necessary to bring their cattle into fields that had owners. This was the cause of the quarrel.By way of the plain meaning of Scripture the quarrel concerned the pasture as the land could not support them both. When Abram’s cattle were grazing in the pasture, Lot’s shepherds would come into their territory and graze their cattle there. Now Abram and Lot were both strangers and sojourners in the land. Abram, therefore, feared that the Canaanite and the Perrizite, who inhabit the land, might hear of the abundance of their cattle, [whose great number was made apparent when Lot’s shepherds encroached on Abram’s land, thereby combining the flocks], and drive them out of the land or slay them by sword and take their cattle and wealth since the mastery of the land belonged to them, not to Abram. This is the purport of the verse, And the Canaanite and the Perrizite. Scripture thus mentioned that there were many peoples dwelling in that land, they and their cattle being innumerable, and the land could not support them and Abram and Lot.From the word oz (then) — [And the Canaanite and the Perrizite abode ‘then’ in the land] — it appears to me that the nations dwelling in the land at that time were those who live in tents and have cattle, some of them converging on one district and grazing there for a year or two and then journeying from there to another district in which they had not previously pastured. And so they continued to do, as is customary among “the children of the east.” The Canaanite and the Perrizite were thus “then” in the land of the south, and in the following years the Jebusite and the Amorite would come there.

Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Tanakh — English translation: “Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

ויהי ריב, we already explained the meaning of the words והכנעני אז בארץ on 12,6. In this verse the tribe פריזי has been mentioned which had not been featured previously. This tribe also resided in the region of Beyt El and Ai.

Radak on the Tanakh — English translations: “Sefaria Community Translation” (CC0 1.0 (public-domain dedication)); “Eliyahu Munk, HaChut Hameshulash” (CC BY 4.0); “Rabbi Mike Feuer, Jerusalem Anthology” (CC BY 4.0); and “R. David Kimhi on the first book of Psalms, Translated by R.G. Finch, London, 1919” (public domain). Text via Sefaria.