The list of towns highlights what settling involved: securing population centers (“fortified towns”) and supporting a herding economy (“folds for sheep”). It also shows that possessing land was not only about winning battles; it required administration, rebuilding, and naming places.

Where interpretation differs

Two questions get most of the attention.

First, what does “built” mean here? Some read it as founding new Israelite towns. Others think it mainly means repairing and reoccupying existing towns after warfare, with strengthening and expansion.

Second, what is meant by “their names being changed,” and why mention it? Some take it as a broad note that several towns received new names under Reuben. Others think it applies especially to places whose existing names were tied to other gods (the text names Nebo and Baal-meon), implying a deliberate effort to reshape public identity.

Why the disagreement exists

The passage is brief and “register-like.” It states that towns were built and names were changed, but it does not specify the extent of construction, the precise list of renamed places, or the motives for renaming. Also, ancient towns often had long histories and multiple names, so “built” can overlap with “rebuilt” in ordinary language.

What this passage clearly contributes

• It explicitly records Moses granting the former realms of Sihon and Og to Gad, Reuben, and half of Manasseh (a formal, public allocation).
• It explicitly ties the grant to concrete geography: specific towns and their borders.
• It explicitly portrays settlement as both defensive and economic: fortified sites and livestock infrastructure.
• It explicitly notes Reuben’s role not only in rebuilding places but also in altering place-names, showing that control included reshaping how the land was described and remembered.