These are the inheritances which the children of Israel took in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun, and the heads of the fathers' [houses] of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed to them,
The mention here of the dignitaries who presided at the allotment has been alleged by Morton and others to be an indication of three "different traditions" from as many "sources" brought together here by "a Priestly editor."[5] In our own view, we consider this to be among the MOST RIDICULOUS and unsupportable allegations to be encountered anywhere.  There is only one basis for finding a "Priestly editor" here, and that is the mention of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, and the High Priest of Israel. Since, without any doubt, Eleazar was indeed present at this allocation of the land, that alone is sufficient reason for his being mentioned, and, as John Lilley put it, "If it is admitted that the tribes had a central shrine, and few would deny this, it would have been inconceivable for Joshua to have acted without the priest, or for any Israelite historian to represent him as having done so."[6]  This truth eliminates all grounds for dragging some so-called "editor" into this passage.