The is undoubtedly obscure ; and Budde (ΖΑ W, 1887, p. 123 ff. = Ri. τὸ, S. 1890, pp. HA pueecning, this explanation of the ‘forest,’ and developing er the opinion already ex- oo by previous scholars (e.g. Ewal ist. ii, 281, 299f.,
, 821, 899..." Wellh., Hist. 445; Stade, ch. i. τὰν that the E. half of was ri
count: Gilead shall be thine,’ ing in support of this view ‘hat id not have complained
afterwards (ΖΑ W, 1888, p. 148, Ri. u. S. pp. 88f., 60, 87) pes the suggestion of Valeton that Nu 3289. 4l. Jos 171418, and described how the permission then given by Joshua was acted upon. The conjecture is an attractive one, but too bold, esp. in the transposition assumed for Nu 328%. 41.42, to be accepted with any confidence: had this, moreover, been the original sense of the passage, some allusion to crossin
the Jordan (‘get thee over’ rather than ‘get thee up’ in v.25, for instance) might have been expected (cf. also HGHL p., 577 n.). Nevertheless, whether Budde’s view of these pas sages be accepted or not, Jg 514 ne the last pa ph of this art.) undoubtedly lends probability to the opinion that the Soa on the E. of Jordan were really immigrants from
e West.
Of the later history of the tribe little specific is known. It played no prominent or distinctive part in the history of the nation. From the wild and exposed character of the district which the E. half of the tribe occupied, it may be inferred that its members were a Frac and hardy race, able to maintain their own in the face of opposition (cf. Jos 17}, Machir a ‘man of war,’ ag Ch 538-22, the narrative of a successful enterprise in which the E. Manassites took common part with Reuben and Gad against the Hagrites and other neigh- bouring tribes). Gideon in W. Manasseh (Jg 615, ef. y.*), and (probably) Jephthah in E. Manasseh (Jg 111, cf. v.%), were brave and distinguished members of the tribe. The strong Israelitish feel- ing which characterized ‘Gilead’ (including E. Manasseh), and the keen sense of common interests which bound it closely together with its brethren W. of Jordan, are well brought out by G. A. Smith (HGHL 578 1). ‘The story of Jephthah throbs with the sense of common interest between Gilead and Ephraim.’ Jabesh-gilead, romantically con- nected with the history of Saul (1S 11. 31), was in all probability in E. Manasseh (about 20 m. S. of the Sea of Galilee). The tribe is specified by name in the Blessing of Moses, though characterized as less numerous than Ephraim (Dt 33", the ‘ten thousands of Ephraim,’ and the ‘ thousands of Man- asseh’). Different districts of Manasseh (both E. and W.) are mentioned in 1 Καὶ 411-18 as supplying provision for Solomon’s court during three months of the year. One city of refuge, Golan, wasin E, Manasseh (Dt 48 al.). The tribe suffered severely during the Syrian wars (Am 15, 2 K 10"; ef. 8 137). It is implied in 2 Καὶ 15*, and stated expressly in 1 Ch 5™, that the E. Manassites were included among the trans-J ordanic Israelites transported by Tiglath- es to different places in the Assyrian empire.
he statements in P respecting the numbers of the
* Jg 124 is, however, an uncertain to rely upon in support of this opinion ; see Moore, ad Too.
MANASSEH
tribe at the time of the Exodus (32,200 at the first census Nu 155, and 52,700 at the second census Nu 26%), and (Nu 2”) its position in the camp (W. of the tabernacle, between Ephraim and Benjamin), and on the march (behind the tabernacle), have no historical value; the numbers of the Manassite warriors who, according to 1 Ch 1951. 88. attended at the time of David’s coronation at Hebron, are equally, unhistorical. For other scattered notices of the tribe, see Is 9", Ps 607-- 1088, 1 Ch 93 (in the post-exilic community) 26°? 27°21, 2 Ch 159 301. 10. 11,18 311,
ii. The borders of the territory occupied by either the W. or the E. half of Manasseh cannot be fixed with precision. Of the W. half, the N. boundary seems to have been epuromamately the imperfectly defined line, where the hills slope down into the plain of Esdraelon, touching Asher and Issachar (Jos 171) ; on the W. the border was the sea; on the S. it began (on the W.) with the Wady Kanah, perhaps (but see KANAH) a wAdy running up from the W. in the direction of Shechem, at about 32° 8’-10' N., then, crossing this widy to the S., it passed along by Tappuah (unknown) and Mich- methath ‘in front of (v.e. E. of) Shechem’ to Asher, according to the Onom. (222. 93), a village 15 miles N.E. of Shechem, on the road to Beth-shean, thence (to judge from 16°-7) it turned back sharply to the S. and ore down by Taanach-shiloh (7 miles S.E. of Shechem) and Naarah (in the Jordan Valley, 5 miles N. of Jericho), as far as Jericho itself ; the E. border was the Jordan. The E. half of the tribe possessed, starting from the border city Mahanaim (ἐδ. vv. *, site uncertain; but near the Jordan, and probably not far N. of the Jabbok Gn 322, cf. vv. =), ‘ half-Gilead’ (Jos 13%), i.e. the half N. of the Jabbok (see above) and all BASHAN —the whole comprising the well-wooded and (espe- cially in its N. part) remarkably fertile tract of country stretching out northwards nearly to Hermon (the ἘΠΕ α of Og, Jos 12-5; cf. 1 ΟἿ