And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side Jordan;

And there fell ten portions to Manasses, beside the land of Galaad and Basan beyond the Jordan.

And ten portions fall to Manasseh, apart from the land of Gilead and Bashan, which are beyond the Jordan;

And ten parts were given to Manasseh, in addition to the land of Gilead and Bashan, which is on the other side of Jordan;

And by lot, there fell ten portions to Manasseh, aside from the land of Gilead and Bashan beyond the Jordan.

Et ceciderunt haereditates Manasse decem, praeter terram Gilead et Basan, quae erant trans Jordanem.

And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, etc The children of Manasseh are in this passage classed under seven stems. Machir, the first-born, is placed apart; the other six follow. Here the question arises, How was the inheritance divided into ten parts? Some expositors cunningly disguise the difficulty; [1] others, because they are unable to solve it, indulge in the merest trifling. It is certainly very absurd that four portions should be given to five daughters; and it is not a whit more congruous that their share should be doubled because their father was the first-born. It is beyond all controversy, that Gilead, son of Machir, and great-grandfather of the females of whom we are now speaking, chose his settlement in mount Gilead and Bashan. Therefore, seeing he had already obtained an inheritance by privilege without lot, he ought not to have obtained one by lot in the land of Canaan, unless perhaps he settled only a part of his family beyond the Jordan. For Hepher was one of his sons, but not the only one; and likewise the offspring of five other brothers might be distinguished into several heads according to the number of which the allocation by lot might be made. For it is not known in what degree families whose portion fell in the land of Canaan were taken. And all we read here is, that ten lots were east among the sons of Manasseh in addition to the country which they had formerly acquired for themselves beyond the Jordan. It is thus vain to dispute concerning the number, which cannot be ascertained with certainty from the present narrative, because the first thing necessary to be known is the exact number of families to whom the division was common. Nay, it is not impossible that the daughters of Selophead obtained their patrimony there. They are said, indeed, to have dwelt among the brethren of their father; but the place is not given. Be this as it may, I have no doubt that mutual equity was observed, and that after provision was made for others, the land which had been submitted to lot was distributed among ten families whose names are here omitted.

Footnotes

1 - Latin, "Quidam astute hunc scrupulum dissimulant." French, "Aucuns y vent a la finesse ne faisans nulle mention de ceste difficulte;" "Some have recourse to finesse, making no mention of this difficulty." -- Ed.

Ten portions - i. e. five for the five families descended from the male children of Gilead, and five others for the five daughters of Zelophehad, who represented the sixth family, the Hepherites.

There fell ten portions to Manasseh - The Hebrew word חבלי chabley, which we translate portions, signifies literally cords or cables, and intimates that by means of a cord, cable, or what we call a chain, the land was divided. We have but little account of the arts and sciences of the Hebrews, yet from the sketches which we find in different parts of the Old Testament it appears that their minds were in many respects well cultivated; nor could the division, which is mentioned in this book, have been made without such a measure of geographical knowledge, as we find it difficult to grant them. Suppose even in this case, the land was not measured with a chain, which in some cases would have been impracticable, because the ancient inhabitants still occupied the places which were allotted to certain tribes or families; yet the allusion to this mode of measurement shows that it was well known among them. As there were six sons and five daughters, among whom this division was to be made, there should be eleven portions; but Zelophehad, son of Hepher, having left five daughters in his place, neither he nor Hepher is reckoned. The lot of Manasseh therefore was divided into ten parts; five for the five sons of Gilead, who were Abiezer, Helek, Asriel, Shechem, and Shemida; and five for the five daughters of Zelophehad, viz., Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. Calmet.

And there fell ten portions to (c) Manasseh, beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which [were] on the other side Jordan;
(c) In the land of canaan: five to the males: and other five to the daughters of Zelophehad.

And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side Jordan,.... The lot which fell to the half tribe of Manasseh was divided into ten parts: according to the Jewish writers, the six families before mentioned had six parts, and the daughters of Zelophehad had four parts; one on the account of Zelophehad their father, two on the account of their grandfather Hepher, who they say was the firstborn, and one on account of their uncle, their father's brother, who died in the wilderness without children; so Jarchi and Kimchi relate from the Talmud (k); but the true case seems to be this, there were six portions for the six families, but there being no sons in Hepher's family, his part was divided into five, and given to the five daughters of Zelophehad:
beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side Jordan: which were given to the other half tribe, as before observed, Joshua 13:29.
(k) T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 118. 2. & 119. 1.

Ten portions - Five for the sons, and five for the daughters; for as for Hepher, both he and his son Zelophehad was dead, and that without sons, and therefore had no portion; but his daughters had several portions allotted to them.