In this week's parashah, Hashem commands Moshe:
"Take Yehoshua son of Nun... and place your hand upon him." (Numbers 27:18)
This raises a question.
Why was Yehoshua not anointed as king?
The Rambam writes:
"A king is appointed only by the authority of the Sanhedrin of seventy-one elders and a prophet, as in the case of Yehoshua, whom Moshe Rabbeinu and his court appointed."
If Yehoshua indeed held the status of a king, why was he not anointed?
This can be understood by first considering the Midrash.
The Midrash relates that Moshe asked Hashem that his own sons inherit his position.
Hashem responded:
"He who guards the fig tree shall eat its fruit."
"Your sons remained at home and did not devote themselves to Torah. Yehoshua, however, served you with all his strength. Therefore, he is worthy to lead Israel."
The Megaleh Amukos raises an obvious question.
If Moshe's sons had not devoted themselves to Torah, what was Moshe thinking when he requested that they inherit his position?
He explains that Moshe envisioned two separate forms of leadership.
One leader would guide the people in Torah, while another would lead them in warfare.
This is reflected in Moshe's request for a leader:
"Who will go out before them and come in before them, who will lead them out and bring them in."
Hashem answered that such an arrangement was impossible because:
"Two kings cannot wear one crown."
However, this itself requires explanation.
In later generations there were, in fact, two leaders:
the king and the head of the Sanhedrin.
How is that different?
The answer lies in another teaching of the Rambam.
In describing the chain of transmission of the Oral Torah, the Rambam writes that every sage received the Torah from his predecessor and his court.
The Torah was transmitted from many to many, not merely from one individual to another.
Yehoshua is the unique exception.
Regarding him, the Torah emphasizes that he received the Torah directly from Moshe himself.
Ordinarily, the Nasi is the head of the Sanhedrin, yet he remains one member of the court.
His leadership is therefore fundamentally different from the independent authority of a king.
Consequently, the king and the head of the Sanhedrin do not constitute "two kings wearing one crown," because the Nasi's authority is of a different nature.
Yehoshua, however, occupied a unique position.
Since he received the Torah directly and exclusively from Moshe, his Torah leadership itself possessed an unparalleled singular authority.
That unique leadership could not be divided between two separate individuals.
For that reason, "two kings cannot wear one crown."
One might still ask:
Torah leadership and military leadership are two different functions. Why could they not be divided?
The explanation is that the role of the king is actually an extension of the mission of the Great Sanhedrin.
As the Rambam writes, the king's purpose is:
"To uphold the true religion."
Only in governing the nation does the king possess independent authority, answering to no one but Hashem.
Thus, the king and the Sanhedrin together represent a single crown of Torah-based leadership.
This also explains why Yehoshua was not anointed despite being a king.
Yehoshua combined two forms of leadership.
He served both as the nation's Torah leader and as its king.
However, his primary identity was that of Moshe's successor in transmitting Torah.
His kingship flowed naturally from that greater role.
Royal anointing is reserved for a king whose primary function is kingship.
Yehoshua's principal role, however, was Torah leadership.
Therefore, he received semichah rather than anointing.
This is fitting, because semichah is specifically associated with the transmission of Torah authority.
Indeed, regarding Torah leadership, the Sages describe the authentic chain of transmission as:
"Ordained person from an ordained person" (semuchin ish mi'pi ish).