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.

Could not drive out, etc. - They had neither grace nor courage to go against their enemies, and chose rather to share their territories with those whom the justice of God had proscribed, than exert themselves to expel them. But some commentators give a different turn to this expression, and translate the passage thus: But the children of Manasseh could not (resolve) to destroy those cities, but the Canaanites consented to dwell in the land. And as they were willing to pay tribute, and the others chose to tolerate them on those terms, they agreed to dwell together: but this paying of tribute seems not to have taken place till some time after, when the children of Israel were waxen strong, etc.

Yet the children of Manasseh could not drive out the inhabitants of these cities,.... Mentioned in Jos 17:11; they had not strength at first to do it, or either were negligent and slothful, and suffered them to dwell among them, and did not take the advantage they might have done; and afterwards it was too late, they became too strong and numerous for them, at least for a time:

but the Canaanites would dwell in the land; whether they would or not.

CANAANITES NOT DRIVEN OUT. (Jos 17:12-13)

Yet the children of Manasseh could not drive out those cities--probably due to indolence, a love of ease. Perhaps a mistaken humanity, arising from a disregard or forgetfulness of the divine command, and a decreasing principle of faith and zeal in the service of God, were the causes of their failure.