Joshua 17:9

_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:_ 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, and 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 portly to Manasseh-those on the south side being given to the former; these upon the north to the latter (Keil). It appears (Joshua 17:10) that Manasseh was still further interlaced with other neighbouring tribes....

7-13 There was great communication between Manasseh and Ephraim. Though each tribe had its inheritance, yet they should intermix one with another, to do good offices one to another, as became those, who, though of different tribes, were all one Israel, and were bound to love as brethren. But they suffered the Canaanites to live among them, against the command of God, to serve their own ends....

Verse Joshua 17:9. _UNTO THE RIVER KANAH_] Literally, the _river_ or _valley of_ _the reeds_, translated by the Vulgate, _vallis arundintei_. The tribe of Manasseh appears to have been bounded on the north by this _torrent_ or _valley_, and on the south by the Mediterranean Sea....

THESE CITIES ... - The text is possibly corrupt. The intention seems to be to state that the cities lying south of the river, though within the limits of Manasseh, were in fact made over to Ephraim, and were among the “separate cities” Joshua 16:9. On the contrary, the north bank of the river, both land and towns, belonged to Manasseh exclusively....

EXPOSITION JOSHUA 17:1 THERE WAS ALSO A LOT. The preferable translation is, "_and_ _the lot for the tribe of Manasseh—for he was the firstborn of Joseph—was _(_or fell_)_ to Machir the son of Manasseh. _That is to say, the proper possession of the tribe of Manasseh fell to Machir and his descendants only, because of their warlike spirit, and possibly on account of their numbers also. They were sufficient to occupy the land of Gilead and Bashan, extensive and powerful though it was, while the rest of the tribe had a share in the inheritance westward of Jordan (see also Joshua 13:29-6). FOR HE WAS THE FIRSTBORN OF JOSEPH. There has been much discussion why these words were introduced. It is probable that they a

AND THE COAST DESCENDED UNTO THE RIVER KANAH, SOUTHWARD OF THE RIVER,.... The same mentioned in the account of the coast of Ephraim, Joshua 16:8; which was north of that river, as Manasseh was to the south of it: THESE CITIES OF EPHRAIM [ARE] AMONG THE CITIES OF MANASSEH; that is, the cities before mentioned, Asher, Michmethah, Entappuah, and Tappuah; though they were in the tribe of Manasseh, yet they were inhabited by the Ephraimites: THE COAST OF MANASSEH ALSO [WAS] ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE RIVER; of the river Kanah, as well as on the south of it; it had cities there, though possessed by the tribe of Ephraim: AND THE OUTGOINGS OF IT WERE AT THE SEA; the Mediterranean sea....

5. THE PORTION OF MANASSEH CHAPTER 17 _ 1. Their names (Joshua 17:1)_ 2. Their border (Joshua 17:7) 3. The complaint and the answer (Joshua 17:14) Half of the tribe of Manasseh had their inheritance on the other side of Jordan, having joined themselves to Reuben and Gad. The rest of Manasseh are now named according to their families. These are: Abiezer, Helek, Asriel, Shechem, Hepher and Shemida, The son of Hepher, Zelophehad, had no sons (see Numbers 27:1); the names of the five daughters are given here again. They claim now the inheritance which the Lord had given to them. They, too, exhibit the cour

Joshua 17:1, from a Priestly writer, describes the inheritance of Manasseh. In Joshua 17:7 the boundaries are given, but as in the case of Ephraim, no definite boundary line can be drawn from the names given in the text. The only point of interest is the assignment of inheritance to the daughters of Zelophehad in accordance with Numbers 27:1 ff. There Moses ordains that the daughters of a man who has no sons shall take their father's inheritance. This is in opposition to ancient law, which recognised the sons only as heirs. Later feeling was against this, and the writer of Numbers 27:1 ff. gave effect to it by the imaginary instance of Zelophehad and

OUTGOINGS. utmost limits. English idiom....

Boundaries of Western Manasseh 7. _And the coast_ We now have a description of the boundaries of Manasseh. And first (_a_), Joshua 17:7, of the _southern_boundary towards Ephraim; and (_b_), second, Joshua 17:10, of the _northern_and _eastern_boundaries. _was from Asher_ The description of the southern boundary commences at the eastern end. The _Asher_here spoken of is not the tribe of Asher, but a city on the east of Shechem. Eusebius places it on the road from Shechem to Bethshean. "Three quarters of an hour from _Tûbâs_is the hamlet of _Teyâsîr_, which may probably be identified with Asher, a town of Manasseh." Porter's _Handbook_, ii. 348. _to Michmethah_ See ch....