Charles Ellicott Commentary Joshua 16

The lot of the children of Joseph. —The order of precedence among the tribes of Israel was always Judah first and the sons of Joseph second. In the words of 1 Chronicles 5:2, “Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph’s.” Accordingly, in the division of the land of Canaan under Joshua, there are three successive stages: first, the settlement of the tribe of Judah in the strongholds of the south of Palestine; secondly, the establishment of Ephraim and Manasseh in the centre of the country, and in some strong positions towards the north; thirdly, the settlement of the remaining tribes, so as to fill up the gaps left between Judah and Joseph, and also upon the outskirts of their territory, so as to be, as it were, under the shadow of their wings.

In the inheritance of Ephraim and Manasseh we observe some features which distinguish this description from that of Judah’s inheritance in Joshua 15. The boundaries of the territory are given, but there is no catalogue of cities. There is also another peculiarity: the tribe of Ephraim is interlocked with the tribe of Manasseh, and the tribe of Manasseh again with Issachar and Asher, by the possession of cities in the territory of these other tribes.

Compare to Joshua 18:12-14. The south border of Joseph was the north border of Benjamin. (See Conder’s Bible Handbook, p. 260, and Ordnance Map, sheets 14, 15, and 18)

• Archi is ’Ain ’Arîk (sheet 14).
• Ataroth is Ed-Dârieh (sheet 18).
• Japhleti is not identified.
• Beth-horon is Beit ’Ur.
• Gezer is Tell Jezer.

(Joshua 16:5–8) The border (of Ephraim’s inheritance) on the east side. — The words “on the east side” are not easy to understand. If Ataroth-addar is rightly identified as Ed-Dârieh, and Mickmethah as the plain of Mukhnah, then the line from Ataroth-addar and Beth-horon to Michmethah is a line running due north, and separating the territory of Ephraim on the east from that of Dan on the west. The line from Michmethah to Taanath-shiloh (Tana, sheet 12) and Janohah (Yânûn, south of T’ana, sheet 15), and so to Jordan, is a line running from north-west to south-east.

The brook Kanah is (roughly) continuous with this line, but in a westerly direction, and leads us towards the sea. We thus obtain for the territory of Ephraim four boundary-lines—namely:

1. The plain of Jordan on the east;
2. The line of hills bordering the Shephelah on the west;
3. The brook Kanah, and the line passing through Taanath-shiloh and Janohah to Jordan on the north;
4. The north border of Benjamin (Joshua 16:1–3, and Joshua 18:12-14) on the south.

The separate cities for the children of Ephraim were among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh; and Joshua 17:10-11: “Manasseh had in Issachar and in Asher, Beth-shean,” etc. This fact would clearly tend to produce a solidarity among the several tribes, and to prevent disunion by creating common interests. The interest of the stronger tribes would be served by completing the conquest of the territory assigned to the weaker. And the general formation thus produced would resemble what was known by the name of the testudo, or tortoise, in Roman warfare.

When a body of soldiers approached the wall of a town which they intended to assault, they sometimes held their shields over them, overlapping like scales, each man’s shield partly sheltering his own, and partly his neighbor’s body, so that no missile could penetrate. Thus, it can be said not only of Jerusalem, but of all the tribes in the land of their possession, that they were built as a city that is compact together, and at unity in itself: united by joints and bands, so that if one member of the body politic should suffer, all the members must suffer with it. For a further illustration of the same topic, see the discussion on the inheritance of Benjamin (Joshua 18:11) and of Simeon (Joshua 19:1).

They drave not out. —The failure of Ephraim here is noticed, as was the failure of Judah above (Joshua 15:63).