The sons of Manasseh; Ashriel, whom she bare,.... The wife of Manasseh, as distinguished from his concubine in the next clause; though the Targum reads, in connection with that,"whom his Aramitess (or Syrian) concubine bare;''
and then adds:
who also bare Machir the father of Gilead; so that Ashriel and Machir were brethren; from which Ashriel sprung the family of the Ashrielites, Numbers 26:29 as from Machir the Machirites, Numbers 26:29.

OF MANASSEH. (1Ch. 7:14-40)
The sons of Manasseh--or descendants; for Ashriel was a grandson, and Zelophehad was a generation farther removed in descent (Numbers 26:33). The text, as it stands, is so confused and complicated that it is exceedingly difficult to trace the genealogical thread, and a great variety of conjectures have been made with a view to clear away the obscurity. The passage [1-Chronicles 7:14-15] should probably be rendered thus: "The sons of Manasseh were Ashriel, whom his Syrian concubine bare to him, and Machir, the father of Gilead (whom his wife bare to him). Machir took for a wife Maachah, sister to Huppim and Shuppim."

Families of the half-tribe of Manasseh. - The families of Manasseh which dwelt in Gilead and Bashan have already been mentioned in 1-Chronicles 5:23, 1-Chronicles 5:14. Our verses deal with the families of this tribe which received their inheritance in Canaan, on this side Jordan. These were, according to Numbers 26:30, Numbers 26:34, and Joshua 17:2, six families, of which, however, only two are here spoken of - Ashriel, 1-Chronicles 7:14, and Shemidah, 1-Chronicles 7:19; or perhaps three, if Abiezer, 1-Chronicles 7:18, be the same person as Jeezer (Numbers 26:30), who is called Abiezer in Joshua 17:2. The statements of 1-Chronicles 7:14, 1-Chronicles 7:15 are very obscure. At the head of the register of the Manassites stands Ashriel, who, according to Numbers 26:31, belonged to the sons of Gilead the son of Manasseh and the grandson of Joseph (cf. Genesis 50:23), and founded one of the six families of the cis-Jordanic Manassites. But the words which follow are obscure; the words are וגו ילרה אשׁר, "whom his Aramaic concubine bore; she bore Machir the father of Gilead." But since Ashriel, according to this, was the great-grandson of Manasseh, while Machir was his son, the relative clause can refer only to Manasseh, to whom his concubine bore Machir. Movers and Berth. would therefore erase אשׂריאל, as a gloss arising out of a doubling of the following יל אשר. By this expedient the difficultly as to the connection of the relative clause is certainly got rid of, but the obscurities of the following verse (1-Chronicles 7:15) are not thereby removed. The analogy of the other registers in our chapter requires, rather, that immediately after מנשּׁה בּני there should stand the name of a descendant, - a fact which speaks strongly in favour of the authenticity of אשׂריאל. It is therefore a much more probable suggestion, that after the name אשׂריאל, some additional clause, such as בּן־מנשּׁה, has been dropped, or regarded as superfluous by a copyist, and so omitted. To such an omitted מנשׁה בן, the relative sentence, which gives more details as to the descent of Ashriel, would be attacked in a simple and natural manner, since it was known from Numbers 26:30. that Ashriel was descended from Manasseh through Gilead.

She - His wife; his concubine is here opposed to her.