Numbers 21:26

26–30. The writer explains that Heshbon used to belong to the Moabites, but that Sihon had taken it from them. He quotes an ancient poem with which he was acquainted, having heard it from the lips of ‘those that speak in proverbs’ (see on Num_21:27).

The interpretation of the song is somewhat doubtful, and Num_21:30 is corrupt and almost untranslateable. The word ‘wherefore’ (Num_21:27) suggests that the poem is quoted in order to explain Num_21:26; the writer, as in Num_21:14, illustrates by an ancient song a statement which he has just made. This statement is that Moab had been previously conquered by the Amorites; and the song is a taunt to the Amorites whose capital Israel has destroyed. The taunt is, in effect, ‘Why do you not come and rebuild your fallen capital, for you shewed prowess enough in the past when you conquered Moab!’ All the verbs in Num_21:28 f. must therefore be rendered as aorists—‘a fire went out,’ ‘it devoured,’ ‘thou wast undone,’ ‘he gave.’ Another interpretation of the song will be mentioned after the notes on Num_21:30; but the above is much the more probable.

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.

Num 21:26. Heshbon was the city of Sihon — This is added as a reason why Israel took possession of this land, because it was not now the land of the Moabites, but in the possession of the Amorites. The former king — The predecessor of Balak, who was the present king. See the wisdom of God’s providence, which prepares long before for the accomplishment of his purposes in their season! This country, being designed for Israel, is beforehand put into the hand of the Amorites, who little think they have it but as trustees, till Israel comes of age. We understand not the vast schemes of Providence: but known unto God are all his works!

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

21:26 King Sihon of the Amorites had taken the area north of the Arnon from the Moabites, who earlier controlled it. After Israel occupied this region for several hundred years, it was reclaimed by King Mesha of Moab (see 2 Kgs 3:4-27) through a campaign described in detail around 830 BC on the Mesha Inscription (also known as the Moabite Stone). • Heshbon is usually identified with Tell Hesban, which has not yielded evidence of Late Bronze Age occupation; see study note on Num 21:1.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

For if it had been the Moabites, the Israelites might not have possessed it, Deut. 2:9.

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

Heshbon-- (Sol 7:4) --situated sixteen English miles north of the Arnon, and from its ruins it appears to have been a large city.

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 26. For Heshbon was the city of Sihon, &c.] It appears therefore that the territory now taken from Sihon by the Israelites was taken from a former king of Moab, in commemoration of which an epikedion or war song was made, several verses of which, in their ancient poetic form, are here quoted by Moses.

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

(26) And taken all his land . . . —i.e., the land between the Arnon and the Jabbok, as it is explained in the last clause of the verse.

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

Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone,.... The whole country ruined, or likely to be so:

O people of Chemosh; which was the name of their idol, who is called the abomination of the Moabites, Kg1 11:7,

he hath given his sons that escaped; that is, the idol Chemosh had given his sons, the men of the country that worshipped him, who escaped the sword of the Amorites, these:

and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon king of the Amorites; who took captive what he slew not, or would do so, Chemosh their god not being able to preserve them, but obliged to deliver them up: thus the composers of this song insult the god of the Moabites, as it was usual for conquerors so to do; see Isa 10:10, though some think these are the words of the Israelites, making their observations upon the above song, which ends at verse twenty eight, and scoffing at the idol of the Moabites.

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

Arnon. Hence this territory, which formerly belonged to Moab, being taken in a just war, the Moabites could not lawfully retain it, as they attempted to do under Jephte, Judges xi. 13. (Grotius, Jur. iii. 6.) --- Hesebon, or Esbus, was the capital, and lay over-against Jericho, twenty miles from the Jordan.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

The city of Sihon: this is added as a reason why Israel took possession of this land, notwithstanding God’s prohibition of meddling with them or their land, Deu 2:9, because it was not now the land of the Moabites, but had been some time since taken from them, and in the possession of the Amorites.

The former king of Moab, i.e. the predecessor of Balak, who was the present king.

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

All his land. This is qualified by what follows: "even unto Arnon". (cf. Jud 11:13-19)

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

Was the city of Sihon - This is added as a reason why Israel took possession of this land, because it was not now the land of the Moabites, but in the possession of the Amorites. The former king -The predecessor of Balak, who was the present king. See the wisdom of providence, which prepares long before, for the accomplishing God's purposes in their season! This country being designed for Israel, is before-hand put into the hand of the Amorites, who little think they have it but as trustees, till Israel comes of age. We understand not the vast reaches of providence: but known unto God are all his works!

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

והוא נלחם AND HE (SIHON) HAD FOUGHT [AGAINST THE FORMER KING OF MOAB] — Why is it necessary that this should be written? Because it is said (Deuteronomy 2:9), “Harass not Moab”, and Heshbon belonged to Moab (and therefore should not have been attacked), it (Scripture) tells us that Sihon had taken it from them, and through him it (Heshbon) became permissible to Israel as an object of attack (Chullin 60b; Gittin 38a).

מידו means FROM HIS POSSESSION (Bava Metzia 56b).

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.

FOR HESHBON WAS THE CITY OF SIHON THE KING OF THE AMORITES. That is to say, now when Israel waged battle against it, it was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, meaning to say the city of the royal residence, for he had fought against ‘melech harishon’ (the first king) of Moab, [meaning the one] who had ruled over them before any king reigned, or harishon [may mean] “the one before Balak,” who was the king of Moab at that time, and Sihon had taken all his land out of his hand, even unto the Arnon. Now Heshbon marked the border at which this conquest [of Sihon] began; therefore it was considered the Amorites’, and Israel was only prohibited [from capturing] that land of Moab and Ammon which was land that was in their possession at the time of the Divine command [not to capture any of the lands of Moab and Ammon]. And Scripture brings a proof that Heshbon was the city of Sihon, for those that speak in parables [as explained above in Verse 13] say, come ye to Heshbon etc., for when Sihon fought against the king of Moab, he captured at first the city of Heshbon, and the city was destroyed, and afterwards he rebuilt it as his royal abode. This is the meaning of [the phrase], who dwelleth in Heshbon. And similarly it is said in the Book of Joshua, Sihon king of the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon. Thus those who spoke in parables would say to the Amorites: “Come to Heshbon, and settle therein; let the city of Sihon, over which he has become king, be built and established after its destruction.” And after Sihon had established himself in Heshbon, he assembled his army therein and captured from the border of Moab until Arnon, including Arnon itself. Arnon itself” is not found. Other scholars have also commented that the reading should be: “excluding Arnon itself.” This is undoubtedly correct, as Ramban himself expressly states above in Verse 13. Therefore they that speak in parables said, that a fire is gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon wherein he dwells; and it has devoured Ar of Moab, and the lords of the high places which belong to Arnon. For Sihon has captured from Moab unto Arnon, and all the high places of the land and the lords of the high places, this being similar [in meaning to]: even the ancient high places are ours in possession. He [Sihon] also took from the children of Ammon [the territory] from the Arnon to the Jabbok, as it is said in [the Book of] Joshua, And Moses gave unto the tribe of Gad etc. Jazer, and all the cities of Gilead, and half the land of the children of Ammon unto Aroer, this being the land which the king of Ammon claimed from Jephthah, as he said, Because Israel took away my land, when he came up out of Egypt, from the Arnon even unto the Jabbok, and unto the Jordan.

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.