Joshua 16 covers the subject matter of the second tribe to receive an inheritance in Israel. That would
be Joseph. Abravanel, in a lengthy question, asks about Joshua’s conduct concerning Joseph, deeming it
highly problematic. Our chapter implies that Ephraim had not received his own lottery. Either did
Manasseh. Instead, Joshua combined them, both subsumed under Joseph, their father.
“And the lot for the Children of Joseph went out from the Jordan at Jericho, at
the waters of Jericho on the east, going up from Jericho through the hill-country
to the wilderness, even to Beth-el.”
Abravanel continues. After Joshua cast a single lot for Joseph, he let Ephraim and Manasseh divide
Joseph’s territory, as they saw fit. “And the Children of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim, took their
inheritance.” In short, Joshua grouped both sons together, letting them divvy up property according to
their respective families and clans. Accusingly, Abravanel chooses coarse words: How could Joshua pull
such a rotten maneuver? If Jacob purposely gave firstborn rights to Joseph, entitling him to a double
portion (via Ephraim and Manasseh), why didn’t Joshua honor the patriarch’s express wishes?
Moreover, Abravanel charges, Moses repeatedly counted Ephraim and Manasseh as two bone fide
tribes. That is, the prophet had not thrown them into one pot, per se. Why, then, had Joshua
contravened Jacob’s will? Why had Joshua done differently than Moses, his mentor, who acted
according to the Maker’s dictate? Thus, Abravanel expresses profound surprise that Joshua would
handle matters so ‘poorly.’
In closing his question, he cites Ephraim and Manasseh’s gripe: “And the Children of Joseph spoke unto
Joshua, saying: Why have you given me but one lot and one part for an inheritance, seeing I am a great
people, forasmuch as the LORD has blessed me thus” (Joshua 17). Well, what was Joshua thinking?
“And the lot for the Children of Joseph went out…” Abravanel learns that Joshua 16 details the metes
and bounds of the two tribes comprising Joseph. Seemingly incidental to the main idea, “Beth-el” in our
lead verse does not refer to the same Beth-el, where centuries earlier, Jacob called out to God. This is
inferred because Jacob’s Beth-el had another name: Luz. The very next verse proves Abravanel’s point:
“And it went out from Beth-el to Luz, and passed along unto the border of the Archites to Ataroth.”
Now to Joseph’s territory, per the lottery. “And the Children of Joseph – Manasseh and Ephraim – took
their inheritance.” Regarding Ephraim’s realm, it says: “And the border of the Children of Ephraim
according to their families was thus; even the border of their inheritance eastward was Atroth-addar,
unto Beth-horon the upper.” Next, we read that Ephraim gets a chunk from Manasseh’s territory:
“Together with the cities which were separated for the Children of Ephraim in the midst of the
inheritance of the Children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages.” (Manasseh’s land will be
discussed in Joshua 17.)
Abravanel explains what transpired. Joseph’s sons’ tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh, inherited land next to
each other. That had emerged from the casting of their lots, which proclaimed their respective borders.
To be clear, Joshua 16 does not speak of a division of territory. Instead, it relates to the cities that
Joseph’s two sub-tribes took possession of. So, when Joshua cast a lot for Ephraim and Manasseh –
separately – it identified their respective territories, as Joseph’s.
“Together with the cities which were separated for the Children of Ephraim in the midst of the
inheritance of the Children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages.” It teaches that in addition to
the cities mentioned here – cities deeded to Ephraim – there were more areas within greater Manasseh
that also became Ephraim’s possession. Call these cities, territorial carve-outs within Manasseh lands.
This becomes explicit in Joshua 17. Thus, Abravanel explains Joshua’s conduct is in accord with Moses’ and
Jacob’s guidance.