| Barnes' Notes on the Bible The verb "were," introduced by the King James Version in this verse should be omitted; and the full stop after Joshua 16:8 replaced by a colon. The purport of Joshua 16:9 is simply to add to the inheritance of Ephraim, defined by the preceding context, "the separate cities" or more properly "single cities" which were allotted to them in addition within the borders of Manasseh. The reasons for granting these additional cities to the Ephraimites can only be conjectured. Perhaps the territory assigned to this numerous tribe proved on experiment to be too small; and therefore some towns, which are named in 1 Chronicles 7:29, were given to them from the kindred Manassites, the latter being recompensed (Joshua 17:11 note) at the expense of Issachar and Asher.
Clarke's Commentary on the BibleAnd the separate cities - That is, the cities that were separated from the tribe of Manasseh to be given to Ephraim; see Joshua 17:9.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire BibleAnd the separate cities for the children of Ephraim,.... The tribe of Ephraim, being much larger than the half tribe of Manasseh, besides the lot that fell to it, described before by its boundaries, had several particular and distinct cities given to it: which were among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh; some that were upon the borders of Ephraim, and within the territory of Manasseh, and it may be where it jetted out in a nook or corner, see Joshua 17:8, all the cities with their villages; not the separate cities only, but the little towns adjacent to them.
Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old TestamentThe tribe of Ephraim also received some scattered towns in the territory of the tribe of Manasseh, in fact all those towns to which Tappuah belonged, according to Joshua 17:8, with the dependent villaGes. (Note: The reason why the Ephraimites received scattered towns and villages in the tribe-territory of Manasseh, is supposed by Calvin, Masius, and others, to have been, that after the boundaries had been arranged, on comparing the territory allotted to each with the relative numbers of the two tribes, it was found that Ephraim had received too small a possession. This is quite possible; at the same time there may have been other reasons which we cannot discover now, as precisely the same thing occurs in the case of Manasseh (Joshua 17:11).)
Geneva Study BibleAnd the {e} separate cities for the children of Ephraim were among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages. (e) Because Ephraim's tribe was far greater than Manasseh, therefore he had more cities.
Wesley's Notes 16:9 The separate cities - That is, besides those cities which were within Ephraim's bounds, he had some other cities, to which all of all their territories were annexed out Manasseh's portion, because his tribe was all here, and was larger than Manasseh's.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary9. separate cities for the children of Ephraim were among the inheritance of Manasseh-(Jos 17:9), because it was found that the tract allotted to Ephraim was too small in proportion to its population and power.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary16:20-63 Here is a list of the cities of Judah. But we do not here find Bethlehem, afterwards the city of David, and ennobled by the birth of our Lord Jesus in it. That city, which, at the best, was but little among the thousands of Judah, Mic 5:2, except that it was thus honoured, was now so little as not to be accounted one of the cities.
Matthew Henry's Whole Bible CommentaryVerses 5-10 Here, 1. The border of the lot of Ephraim is set down, by which it was divided on the south from Benjamin and Dan, who lay between it and Judah, and on the north from Manasseh; for east and west it reached from Jordan to the great sea. The learned, who aim to be exact in drawing the line according to the directions here, find themselves very much at a loss, the description being short and intricate. The report of those who in these latter ages have travelled those countries will not serve to clear the difficulties, so vastly unlike is it now to what it was then; not only cities have been so destroyed as that no mark nor footstep of them remains, but brooks are dried up, rivers alter their courses, and even the mountain falling cometh to nought, and the rock is removed out of his place, Job 14:18. Unless I could hope to solve the doubts that arise upon this draught of the border of Ephraim, it is to no purpose to mention them: no doubt it was then perfectly understood, so as that the first intention of recording it was effectually answered, which was to notify the ancient landmarks, which posterity must by no means remove. 2. Some separate cities are spoken of, that lay not within these borders, at least not if the line was drawn direct, but lay within the lot of Manasseh (v. 9), which might better be read, and there were separate cities for the children of Ephraim among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, because it proved that Manasseh could spare them, and Ephraim had need of them, and it might be hoped that no inconvenience would arise from this mixture of these two tribes together, who were both the sons of Joseph, and should love as brethren. And by this it appears that though, when the tribes were numbered in the plains of Moab, Manasseh had got the start of Ephraim in number, for Manasseh was then 52,000, and Ephraim but 32,000 (Num. 26:34, 37), yet by the time they were well settled in Canaan the hands were crossed again, and the blessing of Moses was verified, Deu. 33:17, They are the ten thousands of Ephraim and they are the thousands of Manasseh. Families and kingdoms are diminished and increased, increased and diminished again, as God pleases. 3. A brand is put upon the Ephraimites, that they did not drive out the Canaanites from Gezer (v. 10), either through carelessness or cowardice, either for want of faith in the promise of God, that he would give them success if they would make a vigorous effort, or for want of zeal for the command of God, which obliged them utterly to drive out the Canaanites, and to make no peace with them. And, though they hoped to satisfy the law by putting them under tribute, yet (as Calvin thinks) this made the matter worse, for it shows that they spared them out of covetousness, that they might be profited by their labours, and by dealing with them for their tribute they were in danger of being infected with their idolatry; yet some think that, when they brought them under tribute, they obliged them to renounce their idols, and to observe the seven precepts of the sons of Noah; and I should think so, but that we find in the sequel of the story that the Israelites were so far from restraining idolatry in others that they soon fell into it themselves. Many famous places were within this lot of the tribe of Ephraim, though not mentioned here. In it were Ramah, Samuel's city (called in the New Testament Arimathea, of which Joseph was, that took care of our Saviour's burial), and Shiloh, where the tabernacle was first set up. Tirzah also, the royal city of Jeroboam and his successors, and Deborah's palm-tree, under which she judged Israel, were in this tribe. Samaria, built by Omri after the burning of the royal palace of Tirzah, was in this tribe, and was long the royal city of the kingdom of the ten tribes; not far from it were Shechem, and the mountains Ebal and Gerizim, and Sychar, near which was Jacob's well, where Christ talked with the woman of Samaria. We read much of Mount Ephraim in the story of the Judges, and of a city called Ephraim, it is probable in this tribe, to which Christ retired, Jn. 11:54. The whole kingdom of the ten tribes is often, in the prophets, especially in Hosea, called Ephraim. |
