Joshua 17:10

This general description of Manasseh’s southern border with the land given to the tribe of Ephraim provides more detail than the description of Ephraim’s northern border in 16:8.

As with the tribe of Ephraim, Manasseh’s territory was defined by a general description of its borders.

the coast descended unto the river Kanah, southward of the river--The line which separated the possessions of the two brothers from each other ran to the south of the stream. Thus the river was in the territory of Manasseh; but the cities which were upon the river, though all were within the limits of Manasseh's possessions, were assigned partly to Ephraim, and partly to Manasseh; those on the south side being given to the former; those upon the north to the latter [KEIL]. It appears (Jos 17:10) that Manasseh was still further interlaced with other neighboring tribes.

We have here a short account of the lot of this half tribe. It reached from Jordan on the east to the great sea on the west; on the south it lay all along contiguous to Ephraim, but on the north it abutted upon Asher and Issachar. Asher lay north-west, and Issachar north-east, which seems to be the meaning of that (Jos 17:10), that they (that is, Manasseh and Ephraim, as related to it, both together making the tribe of Joseph) met in Asher on the north and Issachar on the east, for Ephraim itself reached not those tribes. Some things are particularly observed concerning this lot: - 1. That there was great communication between this tribe and that of Ephraim. The city of Tappuah belonged to Ephraim, but the country adjoining to Manasseh (Jos 17:8); there were likewise many cities of Ephraim that lay within the border of Manasseh (Jos 17:9), of which before, Jos 16:9. 2. That Manasseh likewise had cities with their appurtenances in the tribes of Issachar and Asher (Jos 17:11), God so ordering it, that though every tribe had its peculiar inheritance, which might not be alienated from it, yet they should thus intermix one with another, to keep up mutual acquaintance and correspondence among the tribes, and to give occasion for the doing of good offices one to another, as became those who, though of different tribes, were all one Israel, and were bound to love as brethren. 3. That they suffered the Canaanites to live among them, contrary to the command of God, serving their own ends by conniving at them, for they made them tributaries, Jos 17:12, Jos 17:13. The Ephraimites had done the same (Jos 16:10), and from them perhaps the Manassites learned it, and with their example excused themselves in it. The most remarkable person of this half tribe in after-time was Gideon, whose great actions were done within this lot. He was of the family of Abiezer; Cesarea was in this lot, and Antipatris, famed in the latter ages of the Jewish state.

Joshua 17:1-10

1. There was also a lot for the tribe of Manasseh; for he was the firstborn of Joseph; to wit, for Machir the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead: because he was a man of war, therefore he had Gilead and Bashan.

1. Fuit quoque sors tribui Manasse (ipse enim fuit primogenitus Joseph) ipsi Machir primogenito Manasse patri Gilead (ipse enim fuit vir bellicosus), fuit inquam, ei Gilead et Basan.

2. There was also a lot for the rest of the children of Manasseh by their families; for the children of Abiezer, and for the children of Helek, and for the children of Asriel, and for the children of Shechem, and for the children of Hepher, and for the children of Shemida: these were the male children of Manasseh the son of Joseph by their families.

2. Fuit item filiis Manasse reliquis per familias suas, filiis Abiezer, et filiis Abiezer, et filiis Helec, et filiis Hepher, et filiis Semida. Isti sunt filii Manasse, filii Joseph mares per familias suas.

3. But Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, had no sons, but daughters: and these are the names of his daughters, Mahlah, and Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah.

3. Porro Selphead filio Hephner, filii Gilead, filii Machir, filii Manasse non fuerunt filii sed filiae: quarum ista sunt nomina, Mahala, et Noa, Hogla, Melcha, et Thirza.

4. And they came near before Eleazar the priest, and before Joshua the son of Nun, and before the princes, saying, The LORD commanded Moses to give us an inheritance among our brethren. Therefore according to the commandment of the LORD he gave them an inheritance among the brethren of their father.

4. Hae accesserunt in conspectum Eleazar sacerdotis, et in conspectum Josue filii Nun, atque in conspectum principum, dicendo, Jehova praecepit Mosi ut daret nobis haereditatem in medio fratrum nostrorum. Itaque dedit eis juxta sermonem Jehovae, haereditatem in medio fratrum patris earum.

5. And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side Jordan;

5. Et ceciderunt haereditates Manasse decem, praeter terram Gilead et Basan, quae erant trans Jordanem.

6. Because the daughters of Manasseh had an inheritance among his sons: and the rest of Manasseh's sons had the land of Gilead.

6. Filiae enim Manasse sortitae sunt hereditatem in medio filiorum ejus: terra autem Gilead fuit filiis Manasse reliquis.

7. And the coast of Manasseh was from Asher to Michmethah, that lieth before Shechem; and the border went along on the right hand unto the inhabitants of Entappuah.

7. Fuit autem terminus Manasse ab Aser ad Michmethah, quae est coram Sechem, et pergit terminus ad dextram ad habitatores Enthappua.

8. Now Manasseh had the land of Tappuah: but Tappuah on the border of Manasseh belonged to the children of Ephraim;

8. Ipsius Manasse fuit terra Thappua: ab Thappua quae erat ad terminum Manasse, est filiorum Ephraim.

9. And the coast descended unto the river Kanah, southward of the river: these cities of Ephraim are among the cities of Manasseh: the coast of Manasseh also was on the north side of the river, and the outgoings of it were at the sea:

9. Descenditque terminus ad torrentem arundinis ad meridiem ipsius torrentis: civitates istae tribus Ephraim sunt in medio civitatum Manasse: at terminus Manasse est ab aquilone ipsius torrentis, suntque exitus ejus ad mare.

10. Southward it was Ephraim's, and northward it was Manasseh's, and the sea is his border; and they met together in Asher on the north, and in Issachar on the east.

10. Ad meridiem est ipsius Ephraim, et ad aquilonem ipsius Manasse, estque terminus ejus, et in Aser occurrunt inter se ab aquillone, et in Issachar ab oriente.

The historian returns to the tribe of Manasseh with the view of confirming what we formerly saw with regard to the daughters of Selophead. For though it was a novelty for females to succeed indiscriminately with males, yet as five of them had survived their father, they proved it to be equitable that they should be admitted to a portion, lest while he was innocent he should lie under the reproach of having died childless. God had replied to Moses by his oracle, that in regard to succession they should be counted as one head. They now demand that the decision thus given by the mouth of the Lord shall be carried into effect. As to the name of first-born, still given to Manasseh, it must be understood so as not to be at variance with the prophecy of Jacob; or rather his primogeniture is here in a manner buried, and his dignity restricted to the past. Here, however, it is to be observed, that men are so tenacious and so much devoted to their own interests, that it seldom occurs to them to give others their due. The daughters of Selophead had obtained a portion by a heavenly decree; nor had any one dared to utter a word against it; and yet if they had remained silent no regard would have been paid to them. Therefore, lest the delay should prove injurious to them, they apply to Joshua and Eleazar, and insist that they shall not be deprived of their legitimate succession. No delay is interposed by Joshua to prevent their immediately obtaining what is just, nor is there any murmuring on the part of the people. Hence we infer, that all were disposed to act equitably; but every one is occupied with his own interest, and too apt carelessly to overlook that of others.

5. And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, etc The children of Manasseh are in this passage classed under seven stems. Machir, the first-born, is placed apart; the other six follow. Here the question arises, How was the inheritance divided into ten parts? Some expositors cunningly disguise the difficulty; [155] others, because they are unable to solve it, indulge in the merest trifling. It is certainly very absurd that four portions should be given to five daughters; and it is not a whit more congruous that their share should be doubled because their father was the first-born. It is beyond all controversy, that Gilead, son of Machir, and great-grandfather of the females of whom we are now speaking, chose his settlement in mount Gilead and Bashan. Therefore, seeing he had already obtained an inheritance by privilege without lot, he ought not to have obtained one by lot in the land of Canaan, unless perhaps he settled only a part of his family beyond the Jordan. For Hepher was one of his sons, but not the only one; and likewise the offspring of five other brothers might be distinguished into several heads according to the number of which the allocation by lot might be made. For it is not known in what degree families whose portion fell in the land of Canaan were taken. And all we read here is, that ten lots were east among the sons of Manasseh in addition to the country which they had formerly acquired for themselves beyond the Jordan. It is thus vain to dispute concerning the number, which cannot be ascertained with certainty from the present narrative, because the first thing necessary to be known is the exact number of families to whom the division was common. Nay, it is not impossible that the daughters of Selophead obtained their patrimony there. They are said, indeed, to have dwelt among the brethren of their father; but the place is not given. Be this as it may, I have no doubt that mutual equity was observed, and that after provision was made for others, the land which had been submitted to lot was distributed among ten families whose names are here omitted.

Footnotes:

[155] Latin, "Quidam astute hunc scrupulum dissimulant." French, "Aucuns y vent a la finesse ne faisans nulle mention de ceste difficulte;" "Some have recourse to finesse, making no mention of this difficulty." -- Ed.

They met together in Asher on the north - The tribe of Asher extended from the Mediterranean Sea to Mount Carmel, Jos 19:26, and the tribe of Manasseh extended to Dor and her towns, (see the following verse, Jos 17:11 (note)), which were in the vicinity of Carmel; and thus it appears that these two tribes formed a junction at the Mediterranean Sea. This may serve to remove the difficulties in this verse; but still it does appear that in several cases the tribes were intermingled; for Manasseh had several towns, both in Issachar and in Asher, see Jos 17:11. In like manner, Judah had towns in Dan and Simeon; and Simeon had towns in Judah; and what is spoken of the boundaries of the tribes, may be sometimes understood of those towns which certain tribes had within the limits of others. For, in several cases, towns seem to be interchanged, or purchased, by mutual consent, so that in some instances the possessions were intermingled, without any confusion of the tribes or families.

Southward it was Ephraim's, and northward it was Manasseh's,.... As Ephraim lay to the south of Manasseh, Manasseh lay to the north of Ephraim:

and the sea is his border; the Mediterranean sea was their boundary on the west:

and they met together in Asher on the north; that is, on the northwest towards the Mediterranean sea, as, at Mount Carmel:

and in Issachar on the east; towards Jordan.

His border; either,

1. Manasseh’ s, whose portion is here described, and whose name was last mentioned. Or,

2. Ephraim’ s and Manasseh’ s, both expressed in the foregoing words, and implied in the following,

they.

In Asher, i.e. upon the tribe of Asher; for though Zebulun came between Asher and them for the greatest part of their land, yet it seems there were some necks or parcels of land, both of Ephraim’ s and of Manasseh’ s, which jutted out farther than the rest, and touched the borders of Asher. And it is certain there were many such incursions of the land of one tribe upon some parcels of another, although they were otherwise considerably distant one from the other. See . And you must not judge of these things by the present maps, which are drawn according to the opinions of late authors, which many times are false; and they are to be judged by the Scripture, and not the Scripture by them: but that part of Manasseh did reach to Asher, appears from hence, that Dor, a city of Manasseh, , was, as Josephus witnesseth, near Carmel, which belonged to Asher, .

The inheritance of Manasseh on this side of the Jordan was on the north of Ephraim.
Jos 17:1-6
Before proceeding to the more detailed description of the inheritance, the historian thinks it necessary to observe that the Manassites received a double inheritance. This remark is introduced with the words "for he was the first-born of Joseph." On this account, in addition to the territory already given to him in Gilead and Bashan, he received a second allotment of territory in Canaan proper. With the word למכיר (for Machir) the more minute account of the division of the Manassites commences. וגו למכיר is first of all written absolutely at the beginning of the sentence, and then resumed in לו ויהי: "to Machir, the first-born of Manasseh ... to him were Gilead and Bashan assigned, because he was a man of war," i.e., a warlike man, and had earned for himself a claim to the inheritance of Gilead and Bashan through the peculiar bravery which he had displayed in the conquest of those lands. By Machir, however, we are not to understand the actual son of Manasseh, but his family; and הגּלעד אבי does not mean "father of Gilead," but lord (possessor) of Gilead, for Machir's son Gilead is always called גלעד without the article (vid., Jos 17:3; Num 26:29-30; Num 27:1; Num 36:1; Ch1 7:17), whereas the country of that name is just as constantly called הגּלעד (see Jos 17:1, the last clause, Jos 17:5; Jos 13:11, Jos 13:31; Num 32:40; Deu 3:10.). "And there came, i.e., the lot fell (the lot is to be repeated from Jos 17:1), to the other descendants of Manasseh according to their families," which are then enumerated as in Num 26:30-32. "These are the male descendants of Manasseh." הזּכרים must not be altered, notwithstanding the fact that it is preceded and followed by הגּותרים; it is evidently used deliberately as an antithesis to the female descendants of Manasseh mentioned in Jos 17:3.
Jos 17:3-6
Among the six families of Manasseh (Jos 17:2), Zelophehad, a descendant of Hepher, left no son; but he had five daughters, whose names are given in Jos 17:3 (as in Num 26:33; Num 27:1; Num 36:10). These daughters had petitioned Moses for a separate portion in the promised land, and their request had been granted (Num 27:2., compared with Josh 36). They therefore came before the committee appointed for dividing the land and repeated this promised, which as at once fulfilled. Consequently there were ten families of Manasseh who had received portions by the side of Ephraim, five male and five female. "And (Jos 17:5) there fell the measurements of Manasseh (as) ten," i.e., ten portions were assigned to the Manassites (on the west of the Jordan), beside the land of Gilead, because (as is again observed in Jos 17:6) the daughters of Manasseh, i.e., of Zelophehad the Manassite, received an inheritance among his sons (i.e., the rest of the Manassites).
Jos 17:7-11
Boundaries and extent of the inheritance of the ten families of Manasseh. - Jos 17:7-10, the southern boundary, which coincides with the northern boundary of Ephraim described in Jos 16:6-8, and is merely given here with greater precision in certain points. It went "from Asher to Michmethah, before Shechem." Asher is not the territory of the tribe of Asher, but a distinct locality; according to the Onom. (s. v. Asher) a place on the high road from Neapolis to Scythopolis, fifteen Roman miles from the former. It is not to be found, however, in the ruins of Tell Um el Aschera (V. de Velde) or Tell Um Ajra (Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 310, 327), an hour to the south of Beisan, as Knobel supposes, but in the village of Yasir, where there are magnificent ruins, about five hours and ten minutes from Nabulus on the road to Beisan (V. de Velde, Mem. pp. 237, 289; R. ii. p. 295). Michmethah, before Shechem, is still unknown (see Jos 16:6). Shechem was founded by the Hivite prince Shechem (Gen 33:18), and is frequently mentioned in the book of Genesis. It stood between Ebal and Gerizim, was given up by Ephraim to the Levites, and declared a free city (city of refuge: Jos 21:21; Jos 20:7). It was there that the ten tribes effected their separation from Judah Kg1 12:1.), and Jeroboam resided there (Kg1 12:25). In later times it was the chief city of the country of Samaria, and the capital of the Samaritans (Joh 4:5); and the name of Neapolis, or Flavia Neapolis, from which the present Nabulus or Nablus has come, was given to it in honour of Vespasian (see v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 161ff.). From this point the boundary went אל־היּמין (i.e., either "to the right side," the south side, or to Yamin), "To the inhabitants of En-tappuah." Whether Yamin is an appellative or a proper name is doubtful. But even if it be the name of a place, it is quite certain that it cannot be the village of Yamn, an hour to the south-east of Taanuk (Rob. iii. pp. 161, 167, etc.), as this is much too far north, and, judging from Jos 17:11, belonged to the territory of Asher. In the case of En-tappuah, the inhabitants are mentioned instead of the district, because the district belonged to Manasseh, whilst the town on the border of Manasseh was given to the Ephraimites. The situation of the town has not yet been discovered: see at Jos 16:8. From this point the boundary ran down to the Cane-brook (see Jos 16:8), namely to the south side of the brook.
"These towns were assigned to Ephraim in the midst of the towns of Manasseh, and (but) the territory of Manasseh was on the north of the brook." The only possible meaning of these words is the following: From Tappuah, the boundary went down to the Cane-brook and crossed it, so that the south side of the brook really belonged to the territory of Manasseh; nevertheless the towns on this south side were allotted to Ephraim, whilst only the territory to the north of the brook fell to the lot of the Manassites. This is expressed more plainly in Jos 17:10: "To the south (of the brook the land came) to Ephraim, and to the north to Manasseh." In Jos 17:10 the northern and eastern boundaries are only briefly indicated: "And they (the Manassites) touched Asher towards the north, and Issachar towards the east." The reason why this boundary was not described more minutely, was probably because it had not yet been fixed. For (Jos 17:11) Manasseh also received towns and districts in (within the territory of) Issachar and Asher, viz., Beth-shean, etc. Beth-shean, to the wall of which Saul's body was fastened (Sa1 31:10.; Sa2 21:12), was afterwards called Scythopolis. It was in the valley of the Jordan, where the plain of Jezreel slopes off into the valley; its present name is Beisan, a place where there are considerable ruins of great antiquity, about two hours from the Jordan (vid., Seetzen, ii. pp. 162ff.; Rob. iii. p. 174; Bibl. Res. p. 325; v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 150-1). This city, with its daughter towns, was in the territory of Issachar, which was on the east of Manasseh, and may have extended a considerable distance towards the south along the valley of the Jordan, as the territory of Manasseh and Ephraim did not run into the valley of the Jordan; but Asher (Yasir) is mentioned in Jos 17:7 as the most easterly place in Manasseh, and, according to Jos 16:6-7, the eastern boundary of Ephraim ran down along the eastern edge of the mountains as far as Jericho, without including the Jordan valley. At the same time, the Ghor on the western side of the Jordan below Beisan, as far as the plain of Jericho, was of no great value to any tribe, as this district, according to Josephus (de Bell. Jud. iv. 8, 2, and iii. 10, 7), was uninhabited because of its barrenness. The other towns, Ibleam, etc., with the exception of Endor perhaps, were in the territory of Asher, and almost all on the south-west border of the plain of Esdraelon. Ibleam, called Bileam in Ch1 6:55 (70), a Levitical town (see at Jos 21:25), was not very far from Megiddo (Kg2 9:27), and has probably been preserved in the ruins of Khirbet-Belameh, half an hour to the south of Jenin; according to Schultz, it is the same place as Belamon, Belmen, or Belthem (Judith 4:4; 7:3; 8:3). With דאר ואת־ישׁבי the construction changes, so that there is an anacolouthon, which can be explained, however, on the ground that ל היה may not only mean to be assigned to, but also to receive or to have. In this last sense ואת is attached. The inhabitants are mentioned instead of the towns, because the historian had already the thought present in his mind, that the Manassites were unable to exterminate the Canaanites from the towns allotted to them. Dor is the present Tortura (see at Jos 11:2). Endor, the home of the witch (Sa1 28:7), four Roman miles to the south of Tabor (Onom.), at present a village called Endr, on the northern shoulder of the Duhy or Little Hermon (see Rob. iii. p. 225; Bibl. Res. p. 340). Taanach and Megiddo, the present Taanuk and Lejun (see at Jos 12:21). The three last towns, with the places dependent upon them, are connected more closely together by הנּפת שׁלשׁת, the three-hill-country, probably because they formed a common league.
Jos 17:12-13
The Manassites were unable to exterminate the Canaanites from these six towns, and the districts round; but when they grew stronger, they made them tributary slaves (cf. Jos 16:10).