Numbers 26:46

Who seems to be here mentioned because she was a woman of masculine wisdom, or courage, or other virtue.

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

ושם בת אשר שרח AND THE NAME OF THE DAUGHTER OF ASHER WAS SERAH — Because she still remained alive after all these long years (Sotah 13a) it exceptionally mentions her here (Seder Olam 9).

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 THE NAME OF THE DAUGHTER OF ASHER WAS SERACH. “Because she was still alive [at the end of Israel’s period of bondage in Egypt, and after forty years in the desert, and was one of the seventy people mentioned in Genesis 46 who went down to Egypt with Jacob], Scripture mentions her here.” This is Rashi’s language. And Onkelos translated [the verse as follows]: “and the name of the daughter of Asher’s wife, was Serach.” By this he intended to say that she was a daughter that possesseth an inheritance [in the Land in her own right], and therefore Scripture mentions her here just as it mentions the daughters of Zelophehad, for she [Serach] is included amongst [those referred to in the verse], Unto these the Land shall be divided. Now had she been the daughter of Asher himself, she would not have inherited [a portion in the Land], since he had male children [as stated in Verse 44]. But she [Serach] was the daughter of his [Asher’s] wife from another man [namely Asher’s wife’s first husband], who did not have a son; therefore his inheritance [in the Land] passed to his daughter. In that case, the reason [why Scripture uses the phrase] and Serach their sister. Ramban here is pointing out that the verse avoids calling her Asher’s daughter, and describes her especially as the sister of his sons, because she was in actual fact not his daughter at all, but only their half-sister. is because she was a [half-]sister to Asher’s sons, but was not his daughter. And therefore it says [here], And the name of the daughter of Asher was Serach, and it does not say “and Asher’s daughter [was Serach],” because [the intention of the verse] is to say that her name was [i.e., she was known as] “Asher’s daughter,” and she was [actually] called Serach. the person known as ‘the daughter of Asher’ was Serach.” Now if she were still alive [at the end of the period of Israel’s sojourn in the desert], as Rashi explained, then she was like the daughters of Zelophehad as regards [receiving] an inheritance [in the Land in her own right], but if she had died [by then, Scripture mentions her here to indicate that] her family received [a portion in the Land] because of her [since she was amongst those who went down to Egypt].According to the simple meaning of Scripture, Serach had a large family which was called by her name, and she is included in the phrase, These are the families of the sons of Asher according to those that were numbered. Scripture, however, did not want to trace their ancestry to a woman, by saying: “Of Serach, the family of the Serachites,” but instead alluded to this matter [briefly].

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.