Cornell Alniversity Libvary

BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME
FROM THE

SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND

THE GIFT OF

Henry W. Sane

1891

 

 

 
| GAH TOC

ee DATE DUE
itp
Se

LUNG Phe L4&

oe

ITY LIBRARY

wii iit
THE DOCUMENTS OF

THE HEXATEUCH
THE DOCUMENTS OF

IDE. Jaleo ICE ET

TRANSLATED AND ARRANGED

IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER

WITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

By W. E. ADDIS, MLA.

<
OF BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD

PART I.

The Oldest Book of Hebrew History

NEw YorK: G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
Lonpon: D. NUTT

1893

g

CB

K
eee

en een
7 CORNELL
UNIVERE ITY
\ LIBRARY 9

i ee

 

  
 
 
TO
THOMAS GRAVES LAW
OF THE SIGNET LIBRARY
IN HAPPY MEMORY OF

HIS LONG AND GENEROUS

FRIENDSHIP
PREFACE

A NEW book on the well-worn subject of the Hexateuch
needs justification, and perhaps my best course will be
to explain the motives which led me to undertake my
present task. In German and Dutch we have an
abundance, indeed a superabundance, of works on the
criticism of the Hexateuch, and the best results of recent
inquiry are set before the English student in Mr.
Wicksteed’s excellent translation of Kuenen’s masterly
work. It seemed to me, however, that a book like
Kuenen’s, which is the best of its kind, could only appeal
to a very limited circle of readers. At least I found that
I had constantly to spend many hours over a single page.
Each note is crowded with references, and till the reader
has made himself familiar with them, and weighed the
evidence which they give, he cannot follow Kuenen’s
clear and consecutive argument. Moreover, just because
the argument is consecutive, he must burden his memory
with a mass of facts and of inferences already established :
otherwise he is not prepared to take the succeeding step.
Manifestly it is only scholars with time at their command
who can give themselves to such a course of study.
lv PREFACE

The burden of toil is aggravated if we proceed to
compare the conclusions presented by Kuenen with those
of other critics. Probably most students find themselves
compelled to underline the text of the Hexateuch with
various colours, indicating the different documents from
which the Hexateuch has been compiled. In this way
they are enabled to take a general view of the ground,
and to see how it lies, to compare, to test and amend, the
results of criticism. A good many years ago, before
Kuenen’s book had appeared, I had for my own guidance
marked an unpointed Hebrew text in the manner indicated
above, and as time went on I added notes and corrections.
Out of this first attempt the book now offered to the
public grew.

It seemed to me that the separation of the Hexa-
teuch into its component documents would justify itself
if these documents were printed separately. Of course,
for the settlement of many points the reader must go to
the more elaborate investigations of Old Testament
critics. Nevertheless, the main division of the documents
only needs presentation to become self-evident. Moreover,
even when we have been thoroughly convinced that the
methods of modern criticism are sound, we shall, I think,
experience something akin to surprise at the striking
manner in which the results of this criticism stand out
clear and consistent, when exhibited as a whole and set
before the eye. I also hope that the theologian and the
student of history will find it convenient to have the
documents apart and be able to consult them readily.
For the time is past when we can speak of the theological
PREFACE v

and historical ideas contained in the Pentateuch or in the
book of Joshua. A wide gulf of time and of the changes
time brings, separates the Jahvist from the Deuteronomist,
the Deuteronomist from the ‘Priestly Writer.” Such is
the main purpose of my work. Despite its manifold
imperfections, it will, I hope, serve some useful purpose.
I have had no predecessors in the same field. We have
several translations of the documents in Genesis, and one
of these is carefully and skilfully done, but no one, so far
as I know, has extended his labours to the whole of the
Hexateuch.

The plan followed is meant to distinguish between
that which is certain and admitted on the one hand—that
which is, and to some extent perhaps always will be,
disputable, on the other. Thus, it is often hard to dis-
tinguish the Jahvist from the Elohist. But we very
rarely find any difficulty in distinguishing the Jahvist and
Elohist, considered as a unity, from the other documents.
It is admitted that the Jahvist and Elohist are closely
allied in thought and language; and, though not univer-
sally admitted, it can, I think, be shown that they were
combined in one book before they were united with the
other documents of the Hexateuch. Accordingly, I have
endeavoured to reproduce this book. I have called it
‘The Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’ ze. the oldest
relatively to the rest of the Hexateuch, and I have not
attempted to distinguish the Jahvist from the Elohist,
except in cases where the evidence appeared to be strong.
The introduction explains the steady and orderly pro-
gress of criticism, and fixes the attention of the reader on
vi PREFACE

the results attained and the points which are still in
debate. The notes accent the distinguishing marks of the
documents, and afford some imperfect illustration of their
religious attitude and their historical data. In translating,
it has been my habit to make my own translation of each
verse, and then to adapt it as closely as I could to that
of the Revised English Version. If the opportunity be
afforded me, I hope to complete the documents of the
Hexateuch in another volume. The main difficulties are
now over, for the disputes on the text of the other docu-
ments are few and unimportant, at least by comparison.

Sometimes I have had to tread on dangerous ground,
and I have not concealed my agreement with the school
of Graf and his eminent disciples, on the whole. At the
same time, if I have failed to give the arguments on the
other side the weight which is their due, that has arisen
from want of power, not from lack of will. I am unable
to follow Dillmann’s conclusions, but I have read and
re-read his great commentary on the Hexateuch, and
always with increasing admiration for its profound and
varied learning and its astonishing accuracy.

It only remains to thank the friends upon whose
counsel and kind encouragement I could always rely. I
may be permitted to mention in particular Sir George
Grove, who is so well known to all lovers of the Bible by
his articles in Smith’s Bzble Dictionary. Mr. Haas, of the
firm of David Nutt, has softened the pains of exile by
supplying me with the Old Testament literature of the
Continent. To the friend whose name stands in the
Dedication I owe my first knowledge of the subject, my
PREFACE vii

first real interest in the Bible ; and the trouble he has taken
in arranging for the publication and correcting the proofs
is but one of many benefits continued through a long

course of years.
W. E. ADDIS.
MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA,
September 1891.

The following list of the chief works which I have used
zs appended for the convenience of the reader.

For the Hebrew text and ancient versions.—The ordinary Hebrew
Bible of Van der Hooght, with the text in Stier and Theile’s Poly-
gtotten-Bibel, which is based on the fourth stereotyped edition of the
Hebrew text as given by Hahn. In Genesis I was able to use the
critical edition of Baer (1869). For the various readings (seldom of
much value) I have consulted Kennicott’s Hebrew Bible (1776), and
De Rossi’s Variae lectiones (1784 seg.). For the Samaritan copy of
the Hebrew text I have used Kennicott’s Hebrew Bible. The
Septuagint has been read in the edition of Swete (Cambridge, 1887) ;
the Peshitto (usually quoted as ‘Syr.’) in the edition revised by Dr.
Lee for the Bible Society ; the Targum of Onkelos in the edition of
Berliner (1884) ; the Jerusalem Targums in the text of the London
Polyglott ; the Latin Vulgate in the text of Stier and Theile ; the
Arabic version of Saadia Gaon in the London Polyglott; the frag-
ments of Greek versions other than the LXx. in Field’s Origenis
Hexaplorum quae supersunt (1875). Add Geiger’s Urschrift und
Uebersetzungen (1857). Of commentaries, I have read Keil on the
Pentateuch and Joshua, Knobel and Kalisch on the same books ;
Tuch on Genesis, in the edition of Merx (1871); Delitzsch on
Genesis (fifth edition, 1887) ; Spurrell on Genesis (1887). But I have
been chiefly indebted to the commentary of Dillmann on the Hexa-
teuch (Genesis, in the fifth edition, 1886). Dillmann’s great work
really supersedes all others.?

1 Where reference has been made to Rabbinical commentators, I have used

Berliner’s edition of Rashi (1866), and the texts as given in Buxtort’s Rabbinical
Bible.
Vili PREFACE

For the general criticism of the Hexateuch I have used the intro-
ductions of Eichhorn (fourth edition, 1823); De Wette (edited by
Schrader, 1869) ; Bleek (edited by Wellhausen ; fifth edition, 1886) ;
Strack (1888); Riehm (1889) : also Colenso on the Pentateuch (1862-
1879), Graf, Geschichtliche Biicher des A.T. (1866) ; Néldeke, Unter-
suchungen zur Kritik des A.T. (1869); Wellhausen, Composition des
Hexateuchs (1885) ; Kuenen, Onzderzoek (in the second edition of 1885,
which is really a new book) ; Robertson Smith, 0.7. 2% the Jewish
Church (1881); Reuss, Geschichte d. hetl. Schrift d. A.T. (second
edition, 1890) ; Dillmann’s essay in the last volume of his commentary
of the Hexateuch (second edition, 1886); Delitzsch’s Critical Studies
on the five books of Moses ;* the introduction to Kittel’s Geschichte
der Hebrier (1888); and Stade’s Geschichte des Volkes Israel (1887-8).
Great use has been made of a long series of essays on the criticism
of the Hexateuch, published by Kuenen in the Leiden Theologisch
Tijdschrift (beginning in vol. xi. 1877), and of many articles of dis-
tinguished scholars in the Zecéschrif/t fiir A.T. Wrssenschaft (1881,
and still in progress).

The language of the ‘ Priestly Document,’ as a criterion of its age,
has been specially examined by Ryssel, De Elohistae Pentateuchict
sermone (1878); by Giesebrecht in 2.4.7. W. for 1881; and by Pro-
fessor Driver (in the Journal of Philology, No, xxii.).

For particular portions of the Hexateuch I have had the help of
Ilgen, Urkunden des ersten Buchs von Moses (1798) ; Ewald, Com-
position der Genests (1823); Bertheau, Szeben Gruppen mosaischer
Gesetze (1840); Hupfeld, Quellen der Genests (1853) ; Riehm, Gesetz-
gebung im Lande Moab (1854); Kayser, Das vorexilische Buch der
Uregeschichte Israels (1874), Albers, Quellenberichte in Joshua i.-xii.
(1891); Budde, Brblische Urgeschichte (1883); and Richter und Samuel
(1890, containing an investigation of the Jahvist document in Joshua).

The history of Hebrew religion has been treated, in connection
with the documents of the Hexateuch, and the questions which they
raise, by Vatke, Religion des A.T. (1835); George, Die alteren jiidischen
Feste (1835); Kuenen, Godsdienst van Israel (1869) ; Konig, Haupt-
probleme der altisraelitischen Religion (1884); Baudissin, Geschichte
des A.T. Priesterthums (1889).

1 They appeared in Luthard’s Zedtschrift (1880), but are only available to
me through the Dutch translation (1883).
PREFACE ix

Use has been made in dealing with the connection between the
religion and history of Israel and those of foreign nations, speci-
ally the Egyptians and Assyrians, chiefly of such works as Smith’s
Chaldean Genesis, with the notes and additions of Frederic Delitzsch
(1876); Ebers’ Eeypten und die Biicher Mosis, Baudissin’s Studien zur
semitischen Religionsgeschichte (1876), Robertson Smith’s lectures
on The Religion of the Semites (1889), Schrader’s Cunezform Inscrip-
tions and the O. T. (English translation by Whitehouse, 1885), Bath-
gen’s Bettrdge zur semitischen Religiongeschichte (1888), many
articles in Riehm’s Bzblisches Handwirterbuch (1884), and various
parts of the Records of the Past (1873, second series now in progress).
Brugsch’s Steinschrift und Bibelwort (1891) came to hand too late
for use in this part.

Of course use has been made of many other works on Oriental
history besides commentaries on other parts of the Old Testament and
Biblical theologies, a list of which need not be given here. Works
like Smend on Ezekiel, or again Duhm’s Theologie der Propheten may
be said to deal directly with the criticism of the Hexateuch.

I have passed over books like the Azstory of Israel by Seinecke
and that by Renan, because they do not, so far as I can judge, really
help the progress of criticism. Their views, when original, are purely
fantastic, and the same may be said of essays by Havet and Maurice
Vernes.

To the translation of Genesis by Kautzsch and Socin, who distin-
guish the documents by variety of type, my obligations are very great.
The only other work of the same kind which I have used is that of
Lenormant (English translation, 1886), but it is of little value.

In references to foreign works of which an English translation has
appeared, I have consulted the convenience of the English student
by referring to the chapters, etc., not to the pages. For the dates of
Hebrew history I have taken advantage of the chronological table in
the second volume of Kuenen’s Onderzock (new edition, 1889).

I defer the mention of other books, because, though they have
been used incidentally already, their names will be given with greater
fitness in the second part of this work.

P.S.—Since these pages were in type three important
x PREFACE

works have reached me, viz.:—Dr. Driver’s /ntroduction
to the O. T., Cornill’s Eznleitung in das A. T., and the
German Translation of the O. T., with marks in the margin
to distinguish the documents of the Hexateuch by
Kautzsch and a committee of other scholars. My regret
that I did not receive these works in time for use is out-
weighed by the solid satisfaction of finding my conclusions
confirmed by these great and independent authorities. I
never for a moment doubted that the principles followed
in this little work are sound and sure. Still the uniform
agreement between Kautzsch’s edition of the Hexateuch
documents and my own on all important points, the
constant agreement even in minute detail, has, I own,
surprised and delighted me.

I hope to issue Part I1., which will complete the whole
work, early next year; meantime let the reader observe
that the most difficult and important division of the
labour is already before him. The ‘Oldest Book’ is a
composite work, in which it is a difficult and often hope-
less task to disentangle the Jahvist and Elohist docu-
ments. The Deuteronomical code and narratives are
written in a style comparatively uniform. About the
Priestly history and code there is little room for diver-
gence of opinion. They stand out clear, consistent, uni-
form in style, complete. No man who sees the results
can doubt that he is dealing with an independent
document.

MELBOURNE, June 1892,
TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE,
INTRODUCTION,
I. THE HISTORY OF OPINION ON THE ORIGIN AND DATE
OF THE HEXATEUCH,
§ 1 What the Hexateuch says of itself,
§ 2. Pre-critical Opinion,
§ 3. Critical Investigation—

(a) The Severance of the Documents,

(6) The Date of the Documents and of the Hexa-

teuch as a whole,

II. POSITIVE RESULTS AND THE REASONS FOR THEM
§ 1. The Hexateuch is composed of several Documents,

§ 2. Contents and Characteristics of the Documents—
(2) The Oldest Book of Hebrew History,

(6) The Deuteronomical Code and the Deutero-

nomical Historians,

(¢c) The Priestly Writer,

PAGE
ili

. Xili-xciv

xiii

XV

XVii

XXXIV

xlii

lii

lvii

lxvi
Xi TABLE OF CONTENTS

§ 3. The Date of the Documents,

(a) The Deuteronomical Code first written about
the eighteenth year of Josiah, zc. about

621 B.C,

(6) The Date of the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew
History,’

(c) The Date of the ‘ Priestly Writer,’

(d) The Final Redaction of the Pentateuch,

THE TEXT OF THE ‘OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY,

PAGE

Ixxiv

xxix

Ixxxii

xcii

1-235
INTRODUCTION TO THE DOCUMENTS
OF THE HEXATEUCH.

 

I.—THE HISTORY OF OPINION ON THE ORIGIN
AND DATE OF THE HEXATEUCH.

The word Pentateuch (3 revrdzevyos Bios) means literally
‘the book in five volumes.’ It is the title given to the first five
books of the Hebrew Bible. It was adopted by the Jews who
spoke Greek, and passed from them first to the Greek, and then
to the Latin Christians. It corresponds to the name current
among the Jews who continued to read their Scriptures in the
original Hebrew, viz., ‘The five fifths of the law.’ The name
Pentateuch implies two things, first, that the writings so called
contain a connected history, beginning with the creation of the
world and ending with the death of Moses: secondly, that the
history falls into five divisions, generally known among Christians
by the names which they bear in the Greek translation, viz.,
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and among
Jews by the Hebrew words with which each separate book opens.
We cannot say for certain when first these books were regarded
as a whole divided into five parts. The division was known to
Josephus (born 37 or 38 a.D.), but is probably much older than
his time. The principle of the division is natural and obvious :
it seems to have served as a model to the unknown scribe who
completed the collection of Psalms, which are also divided into
five books, and it is quite possible that the arrangement in five
books dates from the time when the final editor united the various
documents of which the Pentateuch is composed into one, and so

b
xlv INTRODUCTION

gave to the text that form which it has retained substantially ever
since.

Nevertheless, it is necessary for critical purposes to speak, not
of the Pentateuch, but of the Hexateuch—z.e. not of the five, but
of the six books. The reason is that a critic cannot investigate
the origin of the Pentateuch apart from that of the book of Joshua.
It will be shown afterwards that the Pentateuch consists of
several documents originally independent of each other, but
finally, with various omissions, additions, and alterations, pieced
together so as to form one continuous history. Now, it has long
been seen, and the fact is acknowledged by all who admit the
composite character of the Pentateuch, that these primary docu-
ments did not close with the death of Moses. They related the
conquest of Canaan and the settlement of the Israelites in the
territory west of the Jordan. We are able to distinguish the
documents of the Pentateuch by divergences of vocabulary and
literary style, by their different and frequently contradictory views
of history and religion, by the fact that we find the same state-
ment made or the same story told twice over; and are therefore
driven to the inference that we are dealing with more than one
narrator, and that the superficial appearance of unity is fallacious.
Precisely the same phenomena recur in the book of Joshua. Not
only so; when we have separated and studied the documents in
the Pentateuch, we become familiar with their peculiarities of
thought and style. These same peculiarities are continued in
Joshua: there are, moreover, verses in Joshua which are scarcely
intelligible without verses in Genesis, and verses in Genesis
which are incomplete without verses in Joshua. Hence we are
obliged to extend our inquiries, and to speak, not of the Penta-
teuch, but of the Hexateuch. It is the object of this Introduc-
tion to point out the way in which we can distinguish the various
documents out of which this Hexateuch has arisen and can
determine with more or less probability their relations, their
origin, and their dates. It will be best to begin by tracing the
history of opinion.
INTRODUCTION xV

, es :
d

§ .—WHAT THE HEXATEUCH SAYS OF ITSELF. |

First, with regard to the Pentateuch. It nowhere claims
either directly or indirectly to be the work of Moses. In Exod.
xvii. 14, Moses is told to write an account of the war with
Amalek ‘in a book,’ but not the least hint is given that this book
is the book of the law. In Exod. xxi., xxii, XxilL., we have a
little code consisting of ‘judgments’ or legal enactments given t to
Moses by God. Moses writes these in a book called ‘ the book
of the covenant’ (Exod. xxiv. 7); but it need scarcely be said that
this book cannot by any possibility be identified with our present
Pentateuch. Similarly, in Exod. xxxiv. 27, Moses is directed. to
write certain ‘words’ contained in the same chapter, and which
were the basis of a covenant between Yahweh and Israel.. . Again,
in Num. xxxiii. 2, the writing of a list of stations in “Israel’s
march from Egypt to Canaan is ascribed to Moses. , Finally, the
code which forms the central part of the book of. Deuteronomy
was given by Yahweh to Moses; and accordingly we read in
Deut. xxxi. 9, that ‘Moses wrote the words of this law,. and ae
it to the priests the sons of Levi,’ and to the elders. Eyery
seventh year, at the Feast of Tabernacles, this law was to be
read before the people. Here Moses is said to have written - the
Deuteronomical code, neither more nor less. So much is plain,
not only because Deuteronomy habitually describes itself as, ‘the
words of this law written in this book’ (xxviii. 58), ‘ the book, of
this law ’ (xxviii. 61, xxix. 20), ‘this book’ (xxix. 19, 26), this book
of the law’ (xxx 10); but also because Moses, in xxvii. 1, 3, iden-
tifies ‘this law’ with ‘the commandment which. I command you
this day.’ The law, therefore, which Moses is said to have
written in a book cannot include the legislation contained in

1 ‘Ina book.’ The translation ‘in the book’ implies a misunderstandiiig
of a common Hebrew idiom. Cf. 1 Sam. x. 25; Jer. xxxii, 10;' Job
Kid. 2g, :
Xv INTRODUCTION

Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, and given at Sinai nearly forty
years before. Nay, in xxviii. 69, ‘the words of the covenant’ made
in the land of Moab, ze. the Deuteronomical code, are expressly
distinguished from the covenant made at Horeb. It follows that
a very small part of the Pentateuch claims to have been written
by Moses. It is only two or three chapters in Exodus, a chapter
in Numbers, and the legislative portion of Deuteronomy of which,
according to the Pentateuch itself, Moses is the author. Besides
this, we are told that the decalogue was written by God during
the lifetime of Moses on tables of stone. But the witness of the
Pentateuch concerning itself is not purely negative. The fact
that the portions which Moses did write are carefully noted
creates a strong presumption that he was not regarded as the
author of the whole Pentateuch. Moreover, the references to
Moses in the Pentateuch never imply that he himself was the
writer, but, on the contrary, are most unnatural on any such
theory. (See Exod. vi. 26, 27, xi. 3; Num. xii. 3.)

The book of Joshua is strictly anonymous. From first to last
it gives no hint that it was written either by Joshua or by any
other witness of the events recorded. True, in v. 1. the Hebrew
text runs thus : ‘Yahweh had dried up the waters of Jordan, until
we were passed over.’ Here, however, the margin of the Hebrew
text has preserved another reading, viz. ‘until they were passed
over.’ This second reading is adopted by all the ancient versions,
and seems to have been the only one known at the time they
were made.! In xxiv. 26, Joshua is said to have written the
words of a speech which he addressed to the children of Israel
‘in the book of the law of God.’ We cannot tell what is meant
by this ‘book of the law. The reference may be to some code
of law now lost, or to the Deuteronomical code to which

1 Even if the alternative reading of the Hebrew text be retained, it need
not imply the authorship of a contemporary. The writer, whenever he lived,
might very well think of himself as one with the Israel of the past, just as an
Englishman of to-day might speak of ‘our deliverance from the Spanish
Armada,’ ‘ our glorious revolution,’ etc.
INTRODUCTION xvii

part of our book of Joshua may have been added as an appendix.
In any case the writer of the words in question cannot have
called the book of Joshua, which is historical and not legal, ‘the
book of the law,’ and the passage says nothing at all about the
origin of that book.

§ 1I.—PRE-CRITICAL OPINION.

We have seen that the authorship of the Deuteronomical code
is ascribed in the code itself to Moses. When, however, the five
books of the Pentateuch were bound into one, and the whole
compilation was called ‘the law’ because the legal enactments
formed its more important part, it was very natural that the
passages in Deuteronomy should be misunderstood and taken
to mean that Moses wrote the whole law, ze. the entire Penta-
teuch.!_ And this, in fact, was for many centuries the accepted
and almost unquestioned opinion among Jews and Samaritans,
Christians and Mohammedans. It is the view taken for granted
by the writers of the New Testament on the one hand, on the other
by the Jewish writers Philo and Josephus, and by the Talmud.
Thus the Talmud (Baba Bathra, fol. 14>, quoted by Bleek) states
that Moses wrote ‘his book,’ ze. the Pentateuch, except eight
verses, viz., the last eight verses in Deuteronomy, which contain
the account of his death and burial. There were, moreover,
distinguished writers who were not disposed to make even this
exception. Philo (de Vit. Moys. iii. 39) and Josephus (Axfig.
iv. 9) maintain that Moses wrote the account of his own death
in the spirit of prophecy. Among the Christian Fathers, Origen
(¢. Ceds. ii. 54) does not shrink from this extreme consequence,

1 Josephus (Antig. iv. 8, 12) seems to have understood the words ‘this
law,’ etc., in Deuteronomy, as including the whole Pentateuch. But the
Mishnah and Sifre (a rabbinical commentary on Numbers and Deuteronomy
ascribed by Weber to the third century A.D.) still take the words in their
proper and limited sense. For references see Kuenen (Onderz. i. § 2, 6).
AVill INTRODUCTION

and it is represented, like the more moderate view mentioned
above, in the Talmud. Not a letter, we are told, was lacking in
the book of thé law which Moses gave to the priests. ‘As far as
the word. “died” [in Deut. xxxiv. 5] the holy one, blessed be
he, had uttered the words first, and Moses repeated them
after him and wrote them ; but from this word “died” [to the end
of Deuteronomy] the holy one spoke and Moses wrote weeping.’
(Bathra, 15%; Menachoth, 30*; quoted by Delitzsch.)

During the early and middle ages there were Gnostic and
Manichean sects who denied the Mosaic authorship of the
Pentateuch. But, they were led to do so by their antipathy to
the contents of the law (e.g. to the sacrificial precepts, the use of
animal food, etc.) rather than by critical reasons.!_ Traces, but
only traces, of a more rational spirit appear among the rabbinical
scholars of the middle ages. In commenting on Genesis xxxvi.
31, ‘These are the, kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before
there reigned any king over the children of Israel,’ Eben Ezra
mentions a certain Isaac, meaning, apparently, Isaac ben Jasus,
a rabbi of the eleventh century. This Isaac held that the section
which contains the list of Edomite kings must have been written
as late as the time of King Jehoshaphat. Eben Ezra (died 1167)
rejects this view with scorn and horror. Yet he himself evidently

1 Ptolemy, a Valentinian Gnostic of the second century, maintained that
the Mosaic law had been interpreted by ‘the elders’ (Zp. ad Flor. apud
Epiphan. Haer. xxxiii. 4). So an ascetic sect called Nazaraei rejected part of
the Pentateuch because they would not believe that the patriarchs had sacri-
ficed and eaten flesh (Epiphan. //aer. xviii., Joann. Damase. 1, xix.), Late
in the middle ages the Bogomili held that the Pentateuch was inspired by
Satan ; they may, however, have believed that it was the authentic work of
Moses. The Clementine /omzlies, which are generally assigned to the latter
part of the second century A.D., represent a kindred view. They assert that
the law attributed to Moses was written against his will; they add, however,
the objection from common sense that Moses cannot have written the account
of his own death (om. iii. 47). Still, the heretics on the whole rejected the
Pentateuch, or parts of it, on purely uncritical grounds. The judgment of the
Emperor Julian is more sober. He affirmed that the Pentateuch was chiefly
the work of Moses, but that ‘Ezra had added some things out of his own
head’ (Cyril. Alex. quoted by Delitzsch, Gen. p. 15).
INTRODUCTION XIX

felt misgiving about the Mosaic authorship of certain verses in
the Pentateuch besides the last eight verses of Deuteronomy.
He hints at doubts about the Mosaic authorship of xii. 6, xxii. 14,
Deut. i. 1, iii. 11, and the whole of xxxiv. He also makes it
quite plain why he does not express himself more decidedly.
Writing on the text Gen. xii. 6, ‘The Canaanite was then in the
land,’ he says, ‘The meaning may be that the Canaanites took
the land of Canaan from others [viz, the aborigines], and if that
be not the sense, there is a mystery in the words, and the prudent
man will be silent.’ He expresses himself with more freedom
when he comes to the words, ‘beyond Jordan’ (Deut. i. 1), which
seem to imply that the writer lived to the west of Jordan and
could not, therefore, be Moses. Here Eben Ezra repeats the
passages given above (Gen. xii. 6, etc.) adding that if the reader
understands them he will ‘ understand the truth.’

Some advance was made at the time of the Reformation.
Carlstadt, Luther’s contemporary, speaks of the opinion that
‘Moses did not write the Pentateuch’ as at least defensible.
Masius, a learned Catholic who died in 1573 after writing an
excellent commentary on Joshua, was of opinion that Ezra or
some other inspired man must have reduced the Pentateuch to
its present form.! The Pentateuch, says Hobbes (Leviathan,
c. 33), seems rather to be ‘about Moses than by Moses, though
Moses may have written the “book of the law,”’ ze. Deut.
xi-xxvii. In 1670 Spinoza, who refers to Eben Ezra in his
Tractatus Theologico-politicus, examines much more fully than his
predecessors the passages in the Pentateuch which are incom-
patible with Mosaic authorship. His own theory is that the five
books were written by Ezra, but that the text had been much
corrupted after his death. A few years later the French Oratorian,
Simon, published his critical history of the Old Testament. In

+ Carlstadt and Masius are only known to me by the quotations in modern
authors. Strack refers to Carlstadt, Lzbe//us de Canon. Scriptur. § 85, in the
Wittenberg edition of 1520, and to the commentary of Masius on Joshua,
Praef., and on Josh. xix. 47 in the edition of 1574.
xx INTRODUCTION

one sense Simon is far less bold than Spinoza. He does not
impugn the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch as a whole,
though he admits that particular verses must be of much later
date. He prefers, with the Jesuit Bonfrére, to think that additions
have been made, rather than to be ‘always passing off Moses as
a prophet.’ But the point to be observed is that Simon, unlike
Spinoza, shows a genuine faculty for criticism. He refers to the
endless repetitions of the same thing in different words, to the
fact that Genesis gives two independent accounts of the creation
and mingles together two stories of the flood. He argues from
difference of style to difference of authors. In fact, Simon is
rightly called the father of Old Testament criticism, and in him
we see the pre-critical passing into the critical stage of opinion on
the Hexateuch.!

§ 11].—CRITICAL INVESTIGATION.
(2) The Severance of the Documents.

The criticism of the Hexateuch in the strict sense of the
word began with Astruc, a French physician, whose memorable
book (Conjectures sur les Mémotres originaux dont il paroit que
Moyse sest servi pour composer le livre de la Gendse) was published
at Brussels in 1753. A new epoch began with Astruc, because
he pointed to a mark, definite and easily recognised, by which
the documents of Genesis could be separated from each other
and assigned to different authors. Simon, as we have seen,
called attention to the fact that we have two distinct accounts of
the creation. The one extends from Genesis i. 1 to ii. 4*: the
second begins at ii. 4°, and reaches to the end of chapter iii.
Each account is complete in itself: each differs from the other
in religious spirit and on matter of fact. In the former account,

1 Simon, “ist. Critique du Vieux Testament, 1680, bk. 1. ch. v.-vii.
INTRODUCTION Xxi

for example, man’s creation comes last, in the latter it comes
first ; in the latter the woman is created from the man’s rib, in
the former ‘male and female’ are created together. It is simply
inconceivable that one and the same author wrote two complete
accounts of the same thing in the same book, placing the one
immediately after the other: much less could he have written
two contradictory accounts, and set them side by side. But
Astruc’s point was that the author of the former account always
speaks of Elohim (God), the latter just as persistently uses the
personal or proper name Yahweh, or at least Yahweh Elohim.
Hence Astruc distinguished two documents, one Jahvistic, and
another to which we shall give no name for the present, but
which uses the word Elohim. The investigations of Astruc were
continued in 1779 by Eichhorn, a dry German rationalist, a man
of acute mind and an Oriental scholar of great learning. He
confirmed Astruc’s conclusion, by showing that the use of Elohim
on the one hand or of Yahweh on the other was accompanied
by other divergencies in the use of words. Take the two
accounts of the creation already mentioned. The author who
speaks of Elohim says that God ‘created’ (x13), he speaks of
‘beasts of the earth,’ whereas the Jahvist uses the words ‘made’
or ‘formed’ (nwy. 43°), ‘beast of the field,’ ‘plant of the field.’
Eichhorn made a list of the words peculiar to the Jahvist and to
the other author who uses the word Elohim, and divided Genesis
and the two first chapters of Exodus between the two documents.
Thus he supplied a sound basis for investigation.! Were we
limited to the distinguishing marks supplied by the words Elohim
and Yahweh, mistakes must needs arise. In the section where
neither name occurs we should be left without help. Next, there
are occasions in which the Jahvist himself has to use the word
Elohim. He does so in the dialogue between Eve and the

’ Eichhorn published the first edition of his ‘Introduction’ in 1779. He
lived to publish a fourth edition in 1823. It is this last edition which has
been used for the sketch of Eichhorn’s view of the Pentateuch given above.
But his theory seems to have remained the same in substance.
XXli INTRODUCTION

serpent. Why? Because Yahweh was a proper name which the
Israelites gave to their own God. Its use, therefore, would have
been out of place in conversation with those who were not wor-
shippers of Yahweh or where the matter turned, not on the
qualities of Yahweh as a particular person, but upon the divine
nature as such. Thirdly, a copyist might by a very natural
inadvertence substitute one name for the other. Indeed,
differences in this point occur not infrequently between the
Masoretic or received Hebrew text, the Samaritan copy of the
same text, and the ancient versions, chiefly the Greek version
known as the Septuagint, and the Peshitto or old Syriac version.
Hence the capital importance of the fact that there are abundant
marks of difference between the two documents with which we are
concerned, and each chapter, when once its authorship is fixed,
supplies us with new marks; though, of course, great caution is
required. It is only when we find the Jahvist and his com-
panion author using different words for the same thing that we can
safely add to the stock of words which we take as distinguishing
marks. Besides these tokens derived from style and language,
there are others, of which a specimen has been given already,
which depend on the different views of religion and of fact which
belong to each writer. It may be well to add here that the
writer, who throughout Genesis and in the first chapters of
Exodus refrains from using the name Yahweh, does so not by
accident but of set purpose. This scarcely needs proof, but
decisive proof is to be had. For in Exod. vi. 2, 3, he writes
thus: ‘God spoke to Moses and said to him, “Tam Yahweh, and
I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai, but
by my name Yahweh I did not make myself known to them.”
Surely this passage demonstrates that it is an altogether different
writer who makes Eve exclaim, ‘I have gotten a man from
Yahweh,’ who represents the public worship of Yahweh as be-
ginning in the time of Enosh, Adam’s grandson (Gen. iv. 25),
who puts the name Yahweh in the mouths of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob (e.g. Gen. xxiv. 3, xxvi. 22, xlix. 18), who represents
INTRODUCTION xxiii

God as saying to Jacob, ‘I am Yahweh, the God of thy father
Abraham and the God of Isaac’ (Gen. xxviii. 13).

The attempt to sever the documents of which the Hexateuch
is composed began with Astruc and Eichhorn, and is continued
with unabated ardour at the present day. A great number of
scholars have been employed upon it, and theory has succeeded
theory. In one sense it is quite true that no one of these
theories has held its ground; there is still serious dispute: it is
easy to exhibit the contradictions between the hypotheses which
have replaced each other and to produce the impression that
critics have set themselves an impossible task, so that the last
theory is as worthless and unstable as the last fashion. Nothing,
however, could be more false than such a view. We only need
some real knowledge of the course which criticism has followed
to perceive that the genuine knowledge of the documents which
compose the Hexateuch has been gaining ground step by step.
More than this, there has been an amazing growth of unanimity
among critics—a fact to be carefully noticed, for German critics
(and most of the critics have been Germans) are far more apt to
differ than to agree without sufficient reason. It is indeed mislead-
ing to speak of one theory as succeeding another. Among the
multitude of writers who have taken the matter in hand a certain
allowance must be made here, as in every other subject-matter,
for mere extravagance which has perished in the birth, or which
has had its day and been forgotten. Nevertheless, we constantly
find that succeeding theories are but the expansion and modifica-
tions of theories which went before. A theory is an attempt to
account for known facts, and a satisfactory theory does so account
for them. If, then, new facts come to light, the theory must
undergo change. The solution which it gave was true so far,
but it must be expanded to meet the new facts. It may seem
strange that new facts can appear in writings which have been
before the world for thousands of years. But it must be remem-
bered that till times comparatively recent the books of the Bible
were regarded as sacred, and were withdrawn from free and
XXiv INTRODUCTION

rational investigation. Moreover, historical criticism in general is
of comparatively recent date. What new light has been thrown,
e.g., on Roman history by Niebuhr and his successors! Once
more, the real investigation of the phenomena presented by any
set of ancient documents is a work which needs time and the
labour of many competent scholars. We shall see that the work
is very far from being ended now. Meantime, returning to the
point from which we digressed, I shall try to make it plain that
the investigation of the Hexateuch has been fruitful in assured
results. It has been continued without intermission for more
than a century. A multitude of important points has been
established one by one, and never abandoned since. Each point
has been established by a critic who called attention to facts of
language or historical contents which had been passed over
previously, or at least not seen in their full significance. In the
list which follows, strictly chronological order has been aban-
doned for the sake of clearness. This defect is compensated for
in some degree by the dates appended in brackets.

In the early years of the century De Wette in a special
dissertation (1805), and in his Contributions to Old Testament
Introduction (1806), pointed out the peculiar style and character
of Deuteronomy, and proved that it must be considered apart
from the rest of the Pentateuch.!

In 1822 Bleek? showed that the book of Joshua is the
natural continuation of the history which begins in Genesis. The
death of Moses, as he says, marks, no doubt, an epoch in the
history, but cannot be regarded as its close. For Genesis looks
forward to the settlement of Abraham’s descendants in the land

? De Wette’s Jntroduction to the Old Testament appeared in 1817. An
eighth edition, revised by Schrader, was published in 1869.

2 Bleek’s /utroduction to the Old Testament was revised by Wellhausen,
and published as a fourth, and then in 1886 as a fifth, edition of the original
work, As early as 1792, Geddes wrote in the preface to his Holy Bible,
Translated with Critical Remarks ; ‘To the Pentateuch I have joined the book
of Joshua, because I conceive it to have been compiled by the same author’
(vol. i. p. xxi).
INTRODUCTION XXV

of Canaan, whereas at the end of Deuteronomy, when Moses
dies, only two and a half of the tribes have got fixed abodes, and
these are to the east of the Jordan, not in Canaan proper. This
becomes still more evident, if we remember, ¢.g., that Joseph, in
Gen. |. 25, makes the children of Israel swear that they will ‘carry
up his bones from hence,’ z.e. from Egypt to Canaan; that in
Exod. xiii. 1g Moses does take Joseph’s bones with him ; and that
in Josh, xxiv. 32 we learn that these bones were actually buried
at Shechem, in ‘the parcel of ground which Jacob bought of the
sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred kesitahs.’
The words just quoted are an obvious reference to, and verbal
repetition of, Gen. xxxili. 19. This, however, is but one sample
of the evidence. ‘The real strength of that evidence depends on
the fact that the documents found in the Pentateuch recur in
Joshua with the same peculiarities of thought and style, each
document displaying the same consistency with itself, the same
divergence from the other documents with which it has been
united. But this evidence could not be given here without undue
anticipation.

The Hexateuch, then—ze. the Pentateuch and Joshua, not the
Pentateuch alone—was to be henceforth the field of investigation.
And here Deuteronomy, or rather the chief part of Deuteronomy,
formed a document by itself. What of the other documents?
Astruc had given a mark by which at least two documents could
be distinguished, viz., that of a writer who used the name Yahweh
and that of a writer who down to Exod. vi. 2. used the name
Elohim. It is the enduring merit of Ewald! that he traced the
existence of these documents throughout the whole Hexateuch.
With better knowledge of the single documents came better

 

1 Ewald’s views were, I believe, first stated in the Studien und Kritiken
(1831). They are given at length in his story of /srael (vol. i.). Ewald’s
theory differs from the criticism of his time much more in appearance than
reality. Tis tone is rather that of a teacher than inquirer ; he introduces a
good deal of fanciful and arbitrary matter, but in the main he recognises
under other names the documents generally recognised when he wrote. See
Merx, in his edition of Tuch’s Genesis, p. cxvii seg.
XXV1 INTRODUCTION

knowledge of the Hexateuch as a whole. The discovery that the
book of Genesis could not have been written by one author led
to the theory that it was made up of fragments various in origin
pieced together. This ‘ Fragment theory’ was right in its affirma-
tion of various origin: it was wrong in its denial of unity. Real
unity of plan may consist with diversity of origin. The writing
which uses the word Elohim down to Exod. vi. 2 has been made
the basis of the Hexateuch. It is the frame into which all else
has been fitted. It forms by far the greater part of the Hexateuch.
Beginning with creation, it gives a short and dry history of the
patriarchs, furnishing an elaborate chronology, noting the progress
of revelation, and giving with great fulness the Mosaic law delivered
on or beneath Mount Sinai. This unity of the Hexateuch was
put prominently forward by Stahelin (1830), Ewald, and Tuch (in
his edition of Genesis, 1838). Tuch called the document in ques-
tion the ‘Grundschrift’ or ‘Fundamental Writing;’ Ewald called
it the ‘ Book of Origins ;’ Schrader, the ‘ Annalistic Writer;’ others
‘The Elohist,’ a name altcred, for reasons which will appear
presently, into that of the ‘ First Elohist ;’ Wellhausen, the ‘ Book
of the Four Covenants,’ because it relates the so-called covenant
with Adam, the covenant with Noah, that with Abraham, and
finally that with Moses, the last covenant involving an elaborate
system of ritual religion. Kuenen and others have called it the
‘Priestly code.’ I have ventured to modify this title, and speak
in this book of the ‘Priestly Writer.’ This name is meant to
express the purpose and animating idea of the document.
It, and it alone, among all Old Testament writings, gives an
elaborate system of ritual legislation. According to it, Israel
centres in the priesthood, the priesthood centres in the
High Priest. The peculiar characteristic of this document
is that it vindicates the exclusive rights of the priests who
claimed descent from Aaron, and that it makes much of the
High Priest, an official who is not even mentioned in the rest
of the Hexateuch.
INTRODUCTION XXVIi

The ‘Fragment Theory,’ then, was gone.!. The unity of the
Hexateuch was acknowledged, and this unity was rightly placed
in the position occupied by the ‘Priestly Writer,’ whose work
stretches throughout the whole Hexateuch, giving a certain order
and unity to the whole, except where that unity is broken by the
intrusion of the code contained in Deuteronomy. But what was
to be thought of the Jahvist? It was supposed that the Jahvist
sections had been added to supplement the narrative of the
‘Priestly Writer.’ This view was put forward by Stahelin in 1830.
It was adopted by Tuch, Bleek, Schrader, etc., who believed that
the Jahvist had taken the Priestly Document in hand and had
supplemented it by additions of his own. This view was known
as the ‘Supplement Theory’ (Erganzungshypothese). It held
the field for a long time. In its assertion of unity which under-
lies the Hexateuch it is universally accepted now, and has an
indestructible foundation of fact. But, so far as it saw in the

 

1 The ‘ Fragment theory’ was in some respects an advance upon Astruc
and Eichhorn. It extended the investigation from Genesis and the beginning
of Exodus to the whole Pentateuch, and ceased to assume that the only
documents in the Pentateuch were documents used by Moses. It argued,
with justice, that the Pentateuch is composed of sections, some of which had
no original connection with each other, and that even the documents which
use the word Elohim or Yahweh may be, and are, of various origin. It failed
to see that the supposed ‘fragments’ might, on closer inspection, form them-
selves into two or three connected documents. If two maps, A and B, be cut
into sections, all will appear a set of unconnected fragments so long as we
compare sections of A with sections of B. Let us, however, discover that A
is the map of England, and B the map of France, and then, instead of mere
‘fragments,’ we by dint of patience obtain two connected wholes. This
illustration is, of course, far from perfect ; for one great document has been
made the framework of the Hexateuch, and all the documents form a unity
so far as this, that all are fitted into one general plan. To this fact also the
advocates of the ‘Fragment’ theory were blind. This theory was first put
forward anonymously in Henke’s Magazine (so Ewald, Kompos d. Genesis,
p- 123): it is the theory of Geddes, and was adopted by Vater, who translated
much of Geddes’ work, and incorporated it in his commentary on the Penta-
teuch (1802-5). With Vater’s name it has been chiefly connected. Ewald’s
early work on the Comfosition of Genesis, though it fails, as the author soon
acknowledged, to prove that Genesis is the work of one author, powerfully
exposes the defects of the ‘ Fragment’ theory.
XXVili INTRODUCTION

Jahvist sections mere supplements to the work of the ‘ Priestly
Writer,’ it is entirely antiquated.1

The change was due to a brief but masterly work of Hup-
feld on the Sources of Genesis (Quellen der Genesis). It was
published in 1853, and introduced a new element into the dis-
cussion. Hitherto critics had been dealing with the ‘Priestly
Writer’ and the Jahvist. They regarded the use of the word
Elohim as the primary characteristic of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ So
it is, if we merely compare him with the Jahvist. But it is not
inconceivable that two writers should have used the word Elohim
instead of Yahweh, and Hupfeld demonstrated that this was the
actual case. Here are one or two of the instances on which he
relied. A writer who uses the word Elohim, viz., the ‘ Priestly
Writer,’ explains the origin of the name Bethel (Gen. xxxv. 9-15) by
relating that on Jacob’s return from Mesopotamia God appeared
to him there: ‘So Jacob named the place where God had spoken
with him Bethel,’ ze. ‘House of God.’ According to another
writer, who also uses the name Elohim (Gen. xxviii. 11-22), God
appeared to Jacob when he was—not returning from, but—just
setting out for his long stay in Mesopotamia. It was then that
Jacob undertook to make the spot a ‘ House of God,’ and hence

1 Among living scholars Schrader still advocates a modification of the
‘Supplement’ theory. In his edition of De Wette’s /ntroduction to the Old
Testament, § 202, he maintains (1) that the ‘ Priestly Writer’ and the Elohist
wrote independent works; (2) that the Jahvist united these two documents
together, adding supplementary matter of his own. Schrader, however,
published the book to which we refer in 1869, and since then he has been
known by his fruitful labours in Assyrian research rather than as a Biblical
crilic.

? Tupfeld had been to some extent anticipated long before by Ilgen in his
Orkunden dis Ersten Buchs von Moses, published in 1798. Ilgen’s remarks
are often excellent, and he treats the history of Joseph, in which Jahvist and
Elohistic narratives are combined, with a critical insight which makes this part
of his book interesting still. But his work is dishigured by bad taste, fanciful
theory, and arbitrary alterations of the text, so thal we cannot wonder that it
fell into neglect. Hupfeld had almost forgotten its existence till his own
work was nearly complete. In his preface he gives a just and generous
estimate of its merits and defects.
INTRODUCTION xxix

God appearing again to the patriarch while he is still in Meso-
potamia begins with the words, ‘I am the God of Bethel, where
thou didst anoint a pillar, where thou didst vow a vow to me’
(xxxi. 13). According to the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ Jacob is sent to
Mesopotamia by his father that he may take a wife there from
his own kindred and not from the Canaanites. Jacob, therefore,
leaves home in quite a peaceable manner (xxviii. 1-8); on his
return he helps Esau to bury Isaac (xxxv. 29); afterwards Esau
goes to Seir or Edom, leaving Jacob in Canaan, because Canaan
does not afford pasture enough for the herds and flocks of both.
Contrast with this story that told by the other writer, who also uses
the word Elohim, and whom we shall now call the Elohist. He
represents Jacob as fleeing to Mesopotamia at his mother’s sug-
gestion (not his father’s). She sends him forth, not that he
may take a wife, but that he may escape the vengeance of
Esau whom he has cheated of his father’s blessing (xxxv. 1-4;
comp. the Elohistic portions of xxvii. as given below in the ‘ Oldest
Book of Hebrew History’). When Jacob returns to Canaan, he
finds that Esau (who is apparently already settled in Seir or
Edom) is advancing against him, and he succeeds in appeasing
his wrath by rich gifts (xxxii. 14>, 22; xxxiii. 11).

By these and many other instances Hupfeld convinced in-
quirers that not two but three documents have been used in the
compilation of Genesis—viz., that of the ‘Priestly Writer,’ of the
Elohist, and of the Jahvist. He also showed that, although the
Elohist agrees with the ‘Priestly Writer’ in the use of the word
Elohim, he stands in style and spirit much closer to the Jahvist
than to the ‘Priestly Writer.’ Moreover, having acquired a much
better knowledge of the documents than had been possible to his
predecessors, he made it plain that each of these documents had
once been an independent work. Therefore the ‘Supplement
Theory’ came toa natural end. It was no longer sufficient to
account for the facts. Each document was seen to form a
consistent whole. It is simply inconceivable that the Jahvist or

Elohist should have ‘supplemented’ the ‘Priestly Writer’ by
c

aX
XXX INTRODUCTION

making additions which sometimes directly contradict him. At
the same time, an editor who lived in an age when all the three
documents enjoyed a considerable prestige might well attempt
the task of piecing them together. He took the Priestly docu-
ment for his basis and made large extracts from the other two.
Fortunately for us, he did his work in a conservative spirit.
Almost always he lets the documents speak for themselves. He
was content to establish a superficial unity, and it is possible after
so long a time to undo his labour and to separate again the
materials which he has joined. True, the documents, or at least two
of them, that of the Jahvist and of the Elohist, have been muti-
lated in no small degree by the compiler. He could not allow the
same fact to be repeated without variation, and he had to remove
contradictions which even in his judgment could not be reconciled
by the utmost violence of interpretation. Still he had that faith in
a process of harmonising able to reconcile everything and anything
which still subsists among some interpreters of Scripture, and he
left his documents untouched whenever he thought it possible to
do so. Subsequent scholars have continued Hupfeld’s work, and
tried to distinguish the various documents through the whole of the
Hexateuch. In particular, Noldeke, writing in 1860,' attempted to
determine the parts of the Hexateuch which belong to the ‘Priestly
Writer.’ His results have been generally accepted: indeed, allowing
of course for differences in detail, we may feel confident that this
part of the critical work has been done by Noldeke once for all.
Since then there has been no decided advance in the severance
of the documents, and it only remains to sum up the results
attained and universally, or all but universally, accepted.

1 Néldeke’s arguments and results are exhibited in his Uvtersuchungen
aur Kriwk des A.T. pp. 1-144. The first essay is entitled Die s.g. Grund-
schrift des Pentateuchs. Noldeke di-tinguishes (1) The Grund-chrift or
‘Priestly Writer’; (2) The Jahvist, who used the work of the Elohist and made
large extracts from it ; (3) The Editor or Redactor, who united the ‘ Priestly
Writer’ and the Jahvist. Noldeke gave far too subordinate a position to the
Elohist, but this does not detract from his merit in accuratcly distinguishing
the work of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’
INTRODUCTION XXxl

The Hexateuch, then, must be considered as a unity. The
book of Joshua is part of a whole, the Pentateuch forming another
part of the same whole. This whole is arranged on a continuous
plan.

This whole, however, is composed of various documents which
at one time formed independent books. These documents are
known as the work of the Jahvist, the Elohist, the Deuteronomist,
and the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ Besides this, each document may have
had—to some extent they admittedly have had—a history, each
being expanded and altered before it was united with the others.
Moreover, a document might adopt fragments of poetry or even
of legislation from older sources. We have instances of this in
Gen. xlix., Num. xxi. in Deut. xxxil., xxxiii., and in Josh. x. 12, 13;
probably also in the Decalogue and in the book of the Covenant
(Exod. xx. 22—xxiii. 33).

The Jahvist and Elohist are closely akin in religious ideas, in
the subject-matter of which they treat, and in their general style.
Very often their accounts ran closely parallel to each other, and
only differed in detail. For this reason the editor who united
them together was obliged to make constant omissions from one
or other of his documents, otherwise he would have had to tell
the same story twice over. For the same reason, it is sometimes
not only hard but impossible to say what belongs to the Jahvist
and what to the Elohist. In Genesis the compiler sets a piece of
the Jahvist document after a piece of the Elohist. The result is
a mosaic, and we can take his work to pieces again with toler-
able success. We have, e.g., admirable specimens of the Jahvist
and Elohist in the history of Joseph. In other books of the
Hexateuch, the Jahvist and the Elohist are rather fused than
pieced together, and discrimination between the two documents
is often impossible. Nearly always, however, when uncertain
whether a section belongs to the Jahvist or Elohist, or in what
way the two documents have been mixed, we have still ground
for perfect confidence that the section belongs to the united work
of the Jahvist or Elohist. That the Jahvist and Elohist docu-
XXXII INTRODUCTION

ments have been united together s certain ; and the ‘Oldest Book
of Hebrew History’ which forms the first part of this work
exhibits all that is certainly either Jahvist or Elohist. The
reader will perceive that we get in this way a continuous and
nearly complete work, so that it seems impossible to escape from
the conclusion that a compiler united the Jahvist and Elohist
documents into one book, which first existed apart, and then was
united with the rest of the Hexateuch. The weight of critical
opinion favours this view. The opinion, however, is not held by
all, and the mode in which Jahvist and Elohist were united is still
a vexed question. The ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ is
almost wholly narrative. At the same time it contains a code of
law already referred to as the ‘ Book of the Covenant.’

Our next document is that of the Deuteronomist, which was
originally a legal code, not a history. It probably began with the
superscription, iv. 44: ‘This is the law which Moses set before
the children of Israel. These are the testimonies and the statutes
and the judgments, etc. We have a long hortatory introduction,
extending from vi. to xi. 32. This is followed by the code in the
strict sense, xii—xxvi., and by the promises and blessings in xxviii.,
with which the Deuteronomical code, like the ‘ Book of the Cove-
nant,’ appropriately ends. On the basis of this law, Israel becomes
the people of Yahweh, xxvii. 9, ro, and Moses writes the laws, which
he has spoken in the hearing of the people, in a book which he
delivers to the Levites, xxxi. 9-13. Thus far, critics are all but
unanimous, though Wellhausen argues that the hortatory introduc-
tion (v.-xi.) has been added later by an author who was imbued
with the manner and spirit of the original Dcuteronomist. It is
also admitted that the speech of Moses (i. 1—iv. 43), in which he
recounts the history of Israel from their encampment at Horeb
to their arrival at the eastern bank of the Jordan, did not belong
to the original plan of the book, though it is written in the
Deuteronomical style. A more complete list of those secondary
passages in the book of Deuteronomy which, though they did
not come from the original Deuteronomist, still proceed from his
INTRODUCTION XXXII]

school, will be given in the second part of the work, in which the
Deuteronomical history and legislation will be printed and
annotated apart. Meantime, the reader must observe that the
Deuteronomical writing extends throughout the book of Joshua.
When the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ was united to the
Deuteronomical code, the editor wished to depict Joshua as a
pious hero who prospered because he observed the Deuterono-
mical law. Accordingly, we find that in Joshua the ‘Oldest Book
of Hebrew History’ has been coloured by the Deuteronomical
style and spirit, and even that large sections have been written
—not by the Jahvist or Elohist, but—by a Deuteronomist. The
hortatory style of the Deuteronomist, with the same phrases and
turns of expression constantly recurring, can be easily recognised.
Hollenberg, in 1874, set himself to determine the Deuteronomical
element in Joshua, and it is generally admitted that he has solved
the problem.

Lastly we have the ‘Priestly Writer,’ whose dry annalistic history,
which prepares the way for an elaborate ritualistic code, extends
from the first verse of Genesis almost to the end of Joshua. As
has been already said, his work is easily distinguished, and the
extent of it has on the whole been finally settled by Noldeke.
Further, it is admitted that additions were made from time to
time to this Priestly code, additions which were inevitable in a
practical system of law. They correspond to the xovel/ae or
additions to the codex of Roman law. It is also allowed on all
hands that we have the germ of the Priestly legislation in Lev.
xvii.-xxvi. We shall see hereafter that these chapters are more
or less complete in themselves, and, though they are in the
“Priestly ’ style and spirit, have marked peculiarities of their own.
This code, like the ‘Book of the Covenant’ and that of the
Deuteronomist, ends with blessings and curses.

These documents are usually represented, for the sake of
brevity, by letters of the alphabet. Kuenen, whose symbols have
become widely recognised, uses J for the Jahvist, E for the
Elohist, JE for Jahvist and Elohist combined into one book, D
XXX1V INTRODUCTION

for the Deuteronomist, P for the ‘Priestly Writer.’ Using these
symbols here, we may state the points of argument and difference
thus. There is general agreement as to the contents of JE, D, P.
There is much difference of opinion on the contents of J and E
considered separately ; the problem becomes more difficult when
we pass beyond Genesis to the later books of the Hexateuch, and
to a great extent the problem may prove insoluble. There are,
moreover, various theories as to the various strata in the docu-
ments, those strata being generally marked as D1, D?, J}, J%,
etc. Finally, there is difference of opinion on the way in
which J was united with E, Dillmann being opposed to the
common view that J and E were united together before they were
united with the rest of the Hexateuch ; and there is much wider
difference of opinion on the way in which JE came to form one
with D, and JED with P. Of course the number of editors or
redactors assigned must vary with theories on the mode in which
the component documents were united. The letter R is gene-
rally used to denote an editor or redactor, and so we have R’* for
the editor who is supposed to have united J and E, R* for the
editor who united the whole Hexateuch, etc. etc. These symbols
have been used here to supply short formulae which may help the
reader's memory, but they have been avoided throughout the rest
of the present work.

CRITICAL INVESTIGATION—(continued).
(6) The Date of the Documents and of the Hexateuch as a whole.

The discovery that the Hexateuch is composed of various
documents, must in the end affect the traditional views of Mosaic
authorship. So long indeed as attention was confined to Genesis,
it was possible to believe with Astruc that Moses himself was
the compiler of the documents, and in that sense the author of
Genesis as we have it. Eichhorn occupied much the same position :
he thought that the separate documents which he perceived in
INTRODUCTION XXXV

Genesis could not be traced beyond the two first chapters of
Exodus, and he was therefore ready to acquiesce in the old
opinion that the Pentateuch, if we allow for a few interpolations, is
the work of Moses, or at least of Moses and his contemporaries.
Such a theory, however, became impossible when it was seen
that these documents extend through the whole Pentateuch—nay,
that they are continued in the book of Joshua. This becomes
still more evident if the mutual relations of these documents be
examined. Let him who will suppose with Eichhorn that Moses
wrote journals of his life. We can hardly, however, be asked to
believe that he wrote contradictory accounts of his life in dif-
ferent styles, and that after his death each of these styles was
studiously imitated. Besides, when the difficulty from the frag-
mentary or documentary character of the Pentateuch made itself
felt, it was natural that the historical difficulties stated, eg., by
Spinoza, should revive with redoubled force. So it proved. As
early as 1792 Dr. Geddes! saw that the Hexateuch was the work
of various hands, and also that a great part of it must have been
written long after Moses. Geddes writes thus in the preface to
his translation of the Bible with critical notes :—‘ From intrinsic
evidence three things seem to me indubitable: 1, the Pentateuch
in its present form was not written by Moses; 2, it was written
in the land of Canaan, and probably at Jerusalem: 3, it could not
be written before the time of David, nor after that of Hezekiah.

1 Dr. Geddes was born of Catholic parents in Banffshire, went to the
Scotch College at -Paris, and studied Hebrew with brilliant success under
Ladvocat, a professor in the Sorbonne. After officiating for many years as a
Catholic priest in his native land, and in London, he published two volumes,
containing an annotated translation of the Bible from Genesis to the end of
Chronicles (1792 and 1797), followed by a third volume of Critical Remarks
in 1800. In consequence he was suspended from his ecclesiastical functions,
and denounced by Protestants as an infidel. In fact, he was a man of blame-
less life, and a sincere Christian, but his countrymen could not or would not
understand him. His works, despite their faults of style, show real learning,
and he understood far better than the dry rationalists, who then ruled in the
German universities, the spontaneous origin and the naive simplicity of
Hebrew myth and legend.
XXXVi INTRODUCTION

The long pacific reign of Solomon is that to which I would refer
it’ Later on he says: ‘To the Pentateuch I have joined the
book of Joshua, because I conceive it to have been compiled by
the same author. It is right to add that Geddes believed
the Pentateuch to have been compiled from documents which in
part were really Mosaic. The ‘Critical Remarks’ of Geddes
were partly translated into German, partly developed by Vater in
his commentary on the Pentateuch (1802),

In 1806 De Wette in his Contributions to Old Testament
Introduction (Bettrage sur Einlettung in das A.T.), argued that
the legislative code of Deuteronomy cannot be much older than
the time in which, according to 2 Kings xxii., it was discovered,
viz. the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign, about 621 B.c. De
Wette put the investigation on a sound basis, and his conclusions,
in the main, have gradually obtained universal acceptance. Some
eminent critics (Ewald, Riehm,! Bleek, etc.) have placed its
composition nearly a century earlier, under the reign of Manasseh.
The point is not of capital importance, and involves no difference
of principle. The principle by which the date is determined is
this: The book of Deuteronomy constantly insists that sacrifice
is to be offered only at one central shrine, to the exclusion of the
local shrines of ‘high places.’ Now, down to the time of Heze-
kiah, prophets like Elijah, the most pious kings such as Asa,
Jehoshaphat, did sacrifice on the ‘high places,’ nor do the literary
prophets down to that date (Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, etc.) make the
least protest against their practice. Hezekiah is said (2 Kings
xviii. 4) to have ‘removed the high places,’ but no reference is
made to any legal code as the ground and justification of his

1 Riechm gave his opinion on Deuteronomy as early as 1854, in a clear and
interesting little treatise, Dre Gesetagebung Mosis im Lande Moab. There he
places the date of composition in the second half of Manasseh’s reign, between
667 and 640 B.c. In his posthumous /xtroduction to the Old Testament, the
date of composition is put further back, viz., to the rcign of Hezekiah.
Kleinert’s Deuter onomium und acr Deuteronomiker is only known to me from
quotations. But his opinion that Deuteronomy was written by Samuel only
deserves notice as a curious eccentricity.
INTRODUCTION XXXViI

reform. For these and other reasons, to be given in detail here-
after, critics are nearly unanimous in their belief that the
Deuteronomical code was published for the first time in the
eighteenth year of Josiah. On the length of time which elapsed
between writing and promulgation critics differ, but their differ-
ences are not very grave.

Thus the date of Deuteronomy was settled first. This was
natural, for the legal code of Deuteronomy stands by itself, and
has its marked peculiarities of style and thought. It was then
comparatively easy to consider it apart, and to determine its date.
With the other documents it was different. They do not stand
by themselves, but have to be separated by patient labour. Till
the contents of a document were ascertained, it was vain to
dispute about its date. Critics, then, were chiefly occupied in
the severance of the documents, and since De Wette’s essay on
the age of Deuteronomy much time passed before any consider-
able progress was made with regard to the dates of the other
documents. It has been said above that for long the Jahvist was
supposed to have ‘supplemented’ the ‘ Priestly’ document. This
exploded theory exercised a bad influence on the question of
date. The inquirer began with the erroneous prejudice that the
Jahvist must be later than the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ The general view
on the dates of the documents stood thus as late as 1866. It
was usually assumed that the Deuteronomist was the latest, the
‘Priestly Writer’ the oldest of the authors. The ‘Priestly Writer’
was assigned to very different ages—De Wette, ¢.g., placing him in
the reign of Jehoshaphat, about 970 (?), Bleek much earlier, under
Saul. It was thought that this ‘ Priestly Writing’ was united later
with the Jahvist and Elohist documents. This process, according
to Knobel, was completed in the reign of Hezekiah. Finally,
the composite work, consisting of ‘ Priestly Writer,’ Jahvist, and
Elohist, was united with the Deuteronomical code.

All this was little better than guess-work, the only fixed
quantity being the date of Deuteronomy. In 1866 Graf set the
great problem of date which has been discussed ever since. Like
XXXVI INTRODUCTION

De Wette, Graf connected the criticism of the Hexateuch with
the general history of Hebrew religion. We have seen that
Deuteronomy cannot be older than the reign of Hezekiah, be-
cause it assumes that sacrifice must be offered in one place only.
Similarly, Graf argued that the priestly legislation must be later
than the Exile, in B.c. 586, because whereas Deuteronomy and
all Hebrew literature identify Priests and Levites, the ‘ Priestly
Writer,’ following Ezekiel, sharply distinguishes between the two.
He confines priestly acts to the sons of Aaron, and makes the
rest of the Levites subordinate ministers in the sanctuary. Even
Ezekiel, however, speaks of this distinction as a novelty which is
to hold good for the future. The ‘Priestly Writer,’ on the contrary,
represents the distinction as one of primitive antiquity, and carries
it back to the time of Moses and the legislation at Mount Sinai.
Graf strengthened his position by a number of other arguments,
some of which will be given later on.?

For nearly twenty years the debate has turned chiefly on the
question raised by Graf, viz., the relation and absolute date of

1 Graf's book is entitled Deze geschichtlichen Biicher des A. 7., and only the
former part (113 pages) deals directly with the Hexateuch, and with the histo-
rical hooks from Judges to Kings. Graf directed his chief attention to the laws
inthe Hexateuch. He found the oldest legislation in Exod. sii., xx-xxiii, (the
‘Book of the Covenant’). Next he placed the Deuteronomical code in the reign
of Josiah: last came the ‘ Priestly’ legislation, which was drawn up after the
Exile. Graf's criticism depended on his view of legal and religious develop-
ment, to the neglect of the tests afforded by literary style. In this way he came
to separate the ‘ Priestly ’ legislation from the ‘ Priestly ’ narrative : he believed
that the ‘ Priestly’ narrative belonged to the earliest, the ‘ Priestly’ legisla-
tion to the latest portions of the Hexateuch. It was easy for Riehm to show
that any such separation was utterly untenable. The common style, which is
exceedingly marked and uniform, besides the fact that the narrative constantly
has the legislation in view, prove that both belong to the same age and are in
the main from the same hand. Indeed Graf, before his death in 1869, acknow-
ledged his error ; but, instead of going back at Riehm’s invitation, he went
forward, and placed the ‘Priestly’ document asa whole, both its narrative
and legislative portions, after the Exile. This is the view held and defended
by Kuenen, Wellhausen, Reuss, Kayser, Robertson Smith, and many others,
and opposed by Noldeke, Dillmann, Kittel, Baudissin (see his 1. 7. Priester-
thum, 18%9), etc.

To some extent Graf had been anticipated. Vatke, in his A’e/igion des 1. T.
INTRODUCTION XXXIX

the Priestly Writers. The following propositions will, it is hoped,
give a clear idea of the state in which matters stand at present.

It is admitted that the Deuteronomical code belongs to the
time of Josiah’s reform, B.c. 621, or at all events is not much older.

The Jahvist and Elohist documents which compose the
‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ are much older than Deutero-
nomy. All critics who belong to the school of Graf—and we shall
see how numerous and powerful that school is—recognise in this
‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ the most ancient part of the
Hexateuch. But even critics opposed to Graf on the main issue
still incline to believe in the greater antiquity of the Jahvist and
Elohist as compared not only with the Deuteronomist but also
with the ‘Priestly Writer.’ Dillmann, for example, admits that
the Elohist is older than the ‘Priestly Writer,’ while Delitzsch
perceives that the ‘Priestly Writer’s’ account of the creation is
less antique than that of the Jahvist.!. There is also an approach
to agreement as to the dates of the Jahvist and Elohist. They
must have been written some time before the destruction of the
northern kingdom in 722. Again, it is admitted that the Elohist

(1835), has some clear and excellent remarks (p. 533 seg.), in which he shows
that the ‘ Priestly’ code is posterior not only to Deuteronomy but also to
Ezekiel. Unfortunately, Vatke’s book is written in accordance with the ideas
and the terminology of the Hegelian philosophy, and his theory repels by its
appearance of having been constructed @ priord. A similar theory was sug-
gested by Von Bohlen (Genes¢s historisch-kritisch erlaiitert, ch. xxiii.), and
admirably applied to the legislation on the feasts by George (/iidischen Feste
mit einer Kritik der Gesetzebung). Excellent as George’s remarks are, they
were premature. He did not see, for example, that the mention of the
seventh day in Gen. i. belongs to the same document as the ‘ Priestly ’ legisla-
tion, and so he falls into the inconsistency of putting the ‘ Priestly ’ narrative
early, the ‘ Priestly’ legislation late. It is curious that Vatke, Von Bohlen,
and George all wrote in 1835.

1 Dillmann agrees with other modern critics (Kuenen, Wellhausen, etc.)
in the belief that in Lev. xvii.-xxvi. we have fragments which are older than
the rest of the ‘ Priestly’ code, and that fragments belonging to the same
earlier stratum of law may be found elsewhere—e.g., in Lev. xi., Num. xv.
38-41. Kuenen calls this earlier stratum ‘ P},’ because in thought and style it
is allied to the ‘ Priestly’ code, others the ‘ Holiness laws,’ because this
earlier legislation rings the changes on the holiness required of the Israelites,
xl INTRODUCTION

wrote in Northern Israel: where the Jahvist wrote is disputed,
and there is also much contention on the time and the manner
in which the Jahvist and Elohist documents were first united.

The date of the ‘ Priestly’ document is, as has been said, the
chief point in debate. According to Wellhausen, Kayser, Kuenen,
Stade, Smend, Robertson Smith, Budde, and many others, it was
gradually composed in and after the Exile, and incorporated with
the rest of the Hexateuch about the time of Ezra, ze. about 444
B.c., though even after that date important additions were made.
About the brilliant reasoning, the acuteness and learning, with
which this view has been maintained, there can be no manner of
question. The school of Graf embraces probably most of the
younger scholars, though it also numbers veteran critics such as
Kuenen and Reuss among its leaders, and it seems to be con-
tinually gaining ground. Still it must be remembered that
scholars of great name—Dillmann, the best commentator on the
Hexateuch, Noldeke, perhaps the very greatest of Semitic scholars
now living, Bredenkamp, Baudissin, Kittel, etc.—still hold to the
conservative view, and place the substance of the ‘Priestly’ history
and code long before Deuteronomy, and therefore, of course, long
before the Exile. We may take Dillmann as perhaps best fitted
to represent this view. He places the ‘Priestly Writer’ about
800 h.c., but supposes that he used still older materials.

Here, no doubt, we have an important difference. Still we
may well be thankful that, after nearly a century and a half of
critical labour, so large a measure of unanimity should have been
attained. The contention has been reduced to one point of
capital moment. Even here the difference, great though it

while Dillmann calls it S (=Sinaitic Law), because it is said (Lev. xxvi.) to
have been given ‘in Mount Sinai.’ But how much earlier than the rest of the
‘Priestly’ code is this P!, this ‘ Sinaitic legislation’? Dillmann gives no
definite answer, though, placing the ‘ Priestly’ code as early as 800, he must
of course give a still higher antiquity to the ‘Sinaitic Laws.’ On the other
hand, Graf and all his school (Kuenen, Wellhausen, etc.), place even this
carliest sketch of the ‘ Priestly’ code in or after Ezekiel’s time.
INTRODUCTION xli

certainly is, is not so great as it seems. Dillmann places the
composition of the ‘Priestly’ document some three centuries
before the date given by Kuenen and Wellhausen. But Dillmann
himself admits that it was altered during the Exile, and ampli-
fied with priestly laws which were then first written down. He
conjectures that this work was done by priests who remained
behind at Babylon when their brethren returned to Judzea in 536
B.c. But it is really of greater moment for the history of Israel
to know when the ‘ Priestly’ law was promulgated and came into
force rather than the time at which it was actually written. Now
Dillmann does not dream that the ‘Priestly’ code was promul-
gated nearly as earlyas 800. Far from it. ‘It is,’ he says, ‘ self-
evident that the document was, and remained at first, private,
without royal or public sanction, and was for the most part only
handed down in priestly circles.’ We shall have to inquire
whether this theory is likely, or even consistent with the most
obvious facts. Meantime, it is well to note the point at which
the opposing theories touch each other. It is worth while also
to quote the words of Kittel in his Wstory of Lsrael. His critical
views are much the same as Dillmann’s, but he generously ac-
knowledges that the defence of Graf’s theory by Wellhausen and
Kuenen has been not only ‘ brilliant’ but also ‘thorough,’ and he
acknowledges that their arguments are ‘real’ and ‘sometimes
weighty.’ ;

In this brief history of criticism no reference has been made
to the opinion that the whole Pentateuch is the work of Moses.
Such an opinion is not critical : it may be held, and is held, on the
authority of the Roman Catholic Church, the early Church, and
of words attributed to Jesus Christ. It cannot be obtained from
an examination of the Pentateuch itself and the historical evidence
which can be brought for the Mosaic authorship. In Germany,
where inquiry has long been free, the traditional view that Moses
wrote the Pentateuch seems to be extinct among Protestants.
Keil, who died in 1888, was probably the last representative of
xlii INTRODUCTION

the old opinion.’ The learned Delitzsch found himself forced
to make larger and larger concessions to criticism till, in the last
edition of his commentary on Genesis (1887), he adopted a
position much like that of Dillmann. In England the prevalence
of conservative views on the Pentateuch is accounted for by the
fact that Old Testament learning had fallen into entire neglect.’
During the last thirty years there has been a revival of Hebrew
study, and English scholars investigate the history of the Hexa-
teuch in the spirit and method which used to be called ‘German,’
but which are simply the spirit and method of criticism as such,
the very spirit and method long familiar to English scholars when
applied to the history of Greece or Rome.

II.—POSITIVE RESULTS AND THE REASONS
FOR THEM.

§ I.—THE HEXATEUCH IS COMPOSED OF SEVERAL DOCUMENTS.

The view of the Hexateuch accepted among critics and fol-
lowed in this book may well seem strange at first to a reader
whose ideas have been derived from the literatures of Greece and

1 See Strack’s Zinlettung in das A.T., p. 29, where he mentions Keil as
the only ‘Old Testament scholar of repute’ in Germany who held to the tradi-
tional view. Of course, Roman Catholic scholars like Kaulen are bound to
do so. Even among modern Roman Catholics, the French Orientalist Le-
normant tried to make some use of the criticism of the Pentateuch. His
book was placed on the Index.

? See Colenso on the Pentateuch, Pt. 1v. p. x. seg. Here it may be well
to explain why so little notice has been taken of Dr. Colenso’s work in the
introductory essay. He made little direct contrilution to the criticism. His
critical views changed, as his work progressed, and for the most he does but
reproduce the theories of others. But he demon-trated probably wit greater
completeness than any of his predecessors, the unhi-torical character of the
documents. And so indirectly he contributed to criticism. Kuenen observed
that it was just the ‘ Priestly’ document which suffered most fiom Colenso’s
examination, and for this, among other reasons, he was led to inquire whether
that document might not be the latest rather than the earliest portion of the
Hexateuch.
INTRODUCTION xiii

Rome, or of modern Europe. Classical historians did, no doubt,
use earlier documents, but they do not, except in case of formal
quotation, copy them verbally : they express the facts which they
have learned from other sources in their own words and in their
own way, and hence their works present one style and one plan
throughout. Is it likely that a Hebrew writer should have
followed a method which may seem at first sight very artificial ?
To answer this question we must remember that all extant
records of Hebrew history written before the Exile, and many
written after it, were anonymous. The historian did not, like
Herodotus or Thucydides, assert his own personality: it was
lost behind the history of his people. It was therefore very
natural that one document should be enriched by additions from
another, and that an author or compiler who wished to give
the history of his people with all fulness should unite the docu-
ments of reputation which lay at hand and feel no desire to write
afresh what had been written well enough already.!. The Hebrew
historians, like the Arabic writers of a later day, had easy notions
on historical evidence, and a compiler suffered discordant ac-
counts to stand side by side. If the contradiction was startling
even to men of his age, he removed it or softened it, but it never
occurred to him that the credit of one or other of the contra-
dictory documents must be impaired. That Hebrew writers did
go to work in this way is not a matter of conjecture, but of
demonstration. The books of Chronicles, for example, contain
sections which agree verbally with corresponding sections in the
books of Samuel and Kings. In the book of the prophet Isaiah

1 Arabic histories are not, as a rule, anonymous. The reason is that
extant Arabic literature, making allowance for a few exceptions in the form of
poetry, begins with Mohammed. The early histories were written when the
Moslem empire embraced a vast extent of territory and many countries.
Among the Hebrews a writer simply gave the traditions current among his
people, and more or less familiar to all his readers. An Arabic historian
related events which had happened at a great distance, in lands little known
to many of his readers, so that the personality of the writer and his sources of
information necessarily assumed greater prominence.
xliv INTRODUCTION

we find long historical sections which again agree, for the most
part word for word, with the narrative in the second book of
Kings. Here, of course, chance resemblance is out of the
question. Either the author of one book copied without
acknowledgment from the other, or both copied without acknow-
ledgment from a third document. The book of Ezra, as we have
it, is even partly in one language, partly in another, for the com-
piler, when an Aramaic document suited his purpose, did not take
the trouble to translate it into Hebrew, the language in which
most of his work is written. The examination of the book known
as ‘Third Ezra’ (First Esdras in the English Apocrypha) is
peculiarly instructive. It may be divided into eight sections.
The first is extracted from Chronicles, the second and third from
the canonical Ezra, the fourth is original or from some unknown
source, the rest are from various parts of the canonical Ezra and
Nehemiah. The compiler has transposed and arranged his ex-
tracts with great freedom, but he transcribes as a rule faithfully,
though here and there he allows himself to abridge or paraphrase.
The compilation has a superficial unity, and does not profess to
be borrowed. Many other parallels might be produced from
Arabic and from early Christian literature. So far, we have been
showing that the Hexateuch might be composed of various
documents. That it is so composed is abundantly evident from
the divergences in matters of fact and in style, and critics are
able to separate document from document with such success that
the process justifies itself.

Let us begin with the legislation. We have three distinct
codes of law. Of these the Book of the Covenant was given
at Mount Sinai, and is contained in Exod. xx. 22—xxiii. 33. It
ends with promises of divine blessing in cases of obedience. We
have another code, also given at Mount Sinai, contained in Levi-
ticus xvii.-xxvi., and this also ends with promises, but chiefly with
terrible threats. Closely allied in thought and style to this
second code are a number of enactments which form a great
part of Exodus and Numbers, and extend through the whole of
INTRODUCTION xlv

Leviticus except the chapters just mentioned. These laws were
mostly given at Mount Sinai, but some of the enactments were
promulgated nearly forty years later, just before the death of
Moses, when the Hebrews were on the east of Jordan. Thirdly,
we have in the book of Deuteronomy a code given on the east of
Jordan shortly before the death of Moses, and also ending with
divine threats and promises. Not one of these codes makes the
slightest reference to either of the other two. Is it not incredible
that one author should, without the least explanation, have repre-
sented one and the same legislator as acting in this way?

Still less is it reasonable to think that the same writer ascribed
three contradictory codes to the same legislator, especially if the
contradictions are striking and important. Some idea of the
contradictions may be formed from the following samples. Accord-
ing to the ‘Book of the Covenant’ sacrifice may be offered at many
shrines, and the altar may be either of earth or of unhewn stone
(Exod. xx. 24). According to the Deuteronomical code, liberty
in this respect had been allowed for a season, but when the
Israelites were settled in Canaan they were to sacrifice only at
one shrine specially chosen by God, and this central shrine was
to be the one place of sacrifice for all the tribes (Deut. xii. 1 seg. ;
xiv. 23 seg.; xvi. 2 seg. et passim). According to the ‘Priestly’
code, sacrifice began in the wilderness at Sinai; it could be
offered only at one place, viz., the altar of the tabernacle, so that
there could be no question of offering sacrifice except at one
place. Moreover, the Israelite had no choice as to the form of
the altar. Its exact form and measurement were prescribed by
Yahweh, and it was to be neither of earth nor stone, but of acacia
wood covered with brass (Exod. xxvii. 1-8 ; Lev. xvii. ii. 1-5 ; i. 3).
Nor does the ‘Priestly’ code, like that of Deuteronomy, insist
that sacrifice may be offered at one place only. Rather, it takes
this for granted, and pre-supposes it in every sacrificial ordinance.
The ‘ Book of the Covenant’ mentions no priestly race. Deu-
teronomy limits the priesthood to the Levites, but assumes that

all Levites are priests. It speaks habitually of ‘the priests the
d
xlvi INTRODUCTION

Levites,’ or ‘the priests the sons of Levi’ (Deut. xvii. 9, 18 5 xviii.
1; xxi. 5 ; xxiv. 8 ; xxvii. 9; xxxi. 9), and, in terms so express that
no ingenuity can evade them, extends the priesthood to the whole
tribe of Levi. ‘The priests and Levites, the whole tribe of Levi,
shall have no portion or inheritance of Israel; the fire sacrifices
of Yahweh and his inheritance shall they eat’ (Deut. xviii. 1, 2).
In direct opposition to this, the ‘ Priestly Writer’ limits the priest-
hood to a particular family of Levites, viz., ‘the sons of Aaron.’
He does not let us think that the priesthood, originally common
to all Levites, was gradually limited to the sons of Aaron. On
the contrary, the sons of Aaron were first appointed by Yahweh
to the priesthood (Exod. xxviii.). Afterwards, the Levites were
‘separated’ from the rest of the nation, that they might perform
subordinate functions under the priests (Num. viii.), but they were
forbidden under pain of death to approach ‘the vessels of the
sanctuary and the altar’ (Num. xviii. 1-3). In Deuteronomy the
tithes are to be taken from vegetable produce, and consumed at
the central shrine in feasts to which the Levites are to be invited
(Deut. xii. 17 seg. ; xiv. 22-29). Every third year, however, the
tithes are to be bestowed on the Levites and the poor (Deut. xxvi.
12-15). As to the ‘Priestly’ code, it recognises in one stratum
vegetable tithes only (Num. xviii. 21-32); In another and, no
doubt, later section it requires tithes to be taken from animals as
well as from vegetables (Lev. xxvii. 30-33) ; but in each case the
tithes are to be given entire to the Levites, and they in their turn
are to hand over a tithe of their tithe to the priests (Num. xvii.
21-32.)! Further, the ‘Priestly ’code assigns forty-eight cities, with

 

1 The oldest rabbinical tradition as stated in the book of Tobit (i. 7 and
8), Joseph. Antig. iv. 8, 22, and the Jerusalem Targum on Deut. xxvi. 12,
13, held that a Jew was bound to pay two tithes every year, viz., one to the
Levites, another for sacrificial feasts at Jerusalem, besides a third tithe for the
poor payable every third year. This theory might suit Jewish traders well
enough, because it left those who did not till the land or feed cattle completely
free. But such an enormous impost for religious purposes could not have been
exacted from an agricultural people. The Talmud generally takes for granted
that in the third ycar the tithe for sacrificial feasts was in abeyance. See
Geiger, Urschrift, p. 176 seq.
INTRODUCTION xlvii

a large extent of surrounding pasture, to the priests and Levites
(Num. xxxv. 1-8): of these priestly possessions Deuteronomy
knows nothing. Had it known anything, it could not have failed
to mention them in the list of Levitical perquisites (Deut. xviii.
1-5), nor could it have placed the Levites and the poor in constant
connection, or spoken of ‘the Levite in thy gates.’ This phrase
is, of course, in perfect harmony with the Deuteronomical view
that the Levites have no inheritance in Israel except their share
in the sacrifices, but quite inconsistent with the representation of
the ‘Priestly’ code that they were supported by tithes, animal
and vegetable, and held besides considerable domains. Once
more, in the ‘Book of the Covenant’ we have (Exod. xxii. 29)
the general statement that first-born sons belong to God, and that
the first-born of sheep and oxen are also to be given to him, and
with this we may compare the law given in an allied document,
the ‘Words of the Covenant,’ that the first-born sons and first-
born males of cattle belong to Yahweh ; the first-born sons are to
be redeemed, the firstling of an ass is to be redeemed with a
lamb, or else to have its neck broken (Exod. xxxiv. 19, 20). The
law in Deuteronomy is much the same, so far as animals fit for
sacrifice are concerned, and the sense in which the first-born
of cattle belong to Yahweh is explained. They are to be eaten
“before Yahweh thy God,’ and this, as the Deuteronomist is
careful to add, ‘in the place which Yahweh shall choose’ (Deut.
xv. 19-23). Thus the Israelite really profited by the first-born of
his flocks and herds. He and his consumed the greater part of
their flesh in sacrificial feasts. Whereas in the ‘Priestly’ code
the flesh of the firstlings belongs absolutely to the priest, after the
blood and fat have been offered on the altar; if the firstlings
be unfit for sacrifice, then they may be redeemed for a sum of
money or sold, the money in either case falling to the priest.
Here the firstlings pass away from the original owner altogether
(Num. xviii. 15-18 ; Lev. xxvii. 26, 27). ‘Thou shalt eat thereof,’
says the Deuteronomical code to the layman ; ‘the flesh is thine,’
says the ‘ Priestly ’ code to the priest in the person of Aaron. In
xlvili INTRODUCTION

Deuteronomy the Passover sacrifice may be taken from the flock
or from the herd, and may be boiled (Deut. xvi. 1-8, especially 2
and 7): in the ‘ Priestly ’ code the victim must be a lamb or kid,
and the Israelites are told in so many words that it is not to be
‘boiled in water’? but to be roasted! The last instance of
contradiction shall be taken from civil affairs. According to the
‘Book of the Covenant’ (Ex. xxi. 2-6) the Hebrew slave is to go
free after six years’ service. If he brought a wife and children,
they are to go out with him; if his wife was given to him in
slavery, they are to remain as the property of his master. If the
slave prefers to remain with his master, the master is to take him
‘to God ’—c.e. to a local sanctuary—and, placing him at the door-
post, to pierce his ear with an awl. In Deut. xv. 12-18, the law
is much the same, except that it is more mild and generous. But
the Deuteronomist recognised no local sanctuary: he could not
well require the master to travel to the temple at Jerusalem, and,
therefore, if the slave prefers to remain in bondage, the master is
not required to take him ‘to God,’ but simply has to bore the
slave’s ear in his own house. The ‘ Priestly’ law on this point is
widely different. The Hebrew slave is to go free, not in the
seventh year, but in the year of jubilee—ve. in the fiftieth (Lev.
XXV. 39-43):

The same phenomena recur when we turn from the legislative
to the narrative portions of the Hexateuch. We have two con-
tradictory accounts of the Creation. According to the ‘ Priestly
Writer’ (Gen. iii. 4*) the order of creation is,—light, the firma-
ment, the separation of land and water, and the growth of trees,
etc., the heavenly bodies, fish and birds, the animals, and, last of
all, man, who is created male and female. According to the
Jahvist (Gen. ii. 4>-25) the order is,—man, plants, the lower
animals, woman. We have two distinct accounts of the flood

‘ It is possible that bya without the addition of 93 may mean to
‘cook,’ and not necessary to ‘cook by boiling.’ But in any case the Deutero-
nomist evidently regards the mode of cooking as indifferent ; the ‘ Priestly
Writer’ lays the greatest stress upon it (Exod. xii, 9).
INTRODUCTION xlix

which are mingled together, but which admit of easy separation.
According to the Jahvist, Noah took seven pair of clean, one pair
of unclean beasts: according to the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ he took one
pair of each species: and this is but one from a series of diver-
gences (Gen vi.-vii.). We have discordant traditions to account
for the origin of the names Beersheba (Gen. xxi. 31; xxvi. 33),
Israel (Gen. xxxii. 28 seg. ; xxxv. 10), Bethel (Gen. xxviii. 18, 19 ;
Xxxv. 15). Two accounts of Joseph’s history, closely parallel on the
whole, but discordant in important details, have been mingled to-
gether, as may be seen in the first part of this work. According to
the Jahvist the name Yahweh was known even to Eve (Gen. iv. 1)
and was quite familiar to the patriarchs ; according to the Elohist
(Exod. iii. 14 seg.), it was revealed to Moses during his exile
among the Midianites ; according to the ‘Priestly Writer,’ it was
revealed to Moses on his return to Egypt (Exod. vi. 2 seg.), and
this writer is careful to note that this sacred name was unknown
to the patriarchs. The father-in-law of Moses was, according to
one writer, Jethro or Jether (Exod. iii. 1; iv. 18); according to
another, Reuel, or Hobab son of Reuel (Exod. ii. 18; Num. x. 29).
According to the Elohist, ‘the tent of meeting ’ stood outside of
the camp, Joshua, an Ephraimite, being its minister and guardian
(Exod. xxxiii. 7 seg.; Num. xi. 24-26; comp. Deut. xxxi. 14 seg.).
According to the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ the ‘tent of meeting’ stood in
the centre of the camp; it is hedged round by a double cordon
of sacred ministers, consisting of, first the Levites and then the
priests. Even the Levites may not enter it, much less a mere
layman like Joshua (Lev. xxvi. 11 ; Num. xviii. 3 ; xvii. 28 [13]).
In Exod. xvi. we have an account of the sending of the manna
and the quails; in Num. xi. the sending of the quails is related
at a later period of the wanderings in the wilderness, and here the
manna is described at length plainly by an author who is men-
tioning it for the first time. Num. xiii. contains two accounts of
the sending of the spies which have been mixed together: ac-
cording to one account the spies do not go further than Hebron
and Eshcol in the south, they extol the goodness of the land, but

+
1 INTRODUCTION

terrify the people by their report of the giants that inhabit it.
According to another, here the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ the twelve spies
travel over the whole land from the Wilderness of Sin in the south
to Rehob in the extreme north, and they report that the land, so
far from being good, ‘devours its inhabitants’ (comp. Ps. cvi.
24). In Num. xvi-xvii. three distinct accounts have been united.
According to the first, the Reubenites, Dathan and Abiram, rebel
against the civil authority of Moses (see e.g. xvi. 12-14) ; accord-
ing to the second, Korah rebels against the authority of the
Levites, and vindicates the sanctity of the whole congregation
(see xvi. 2-72; xvii. 16-28, [1-13], in which last it is ‘the rod of
Aaron for the house of Levi’ which buds): according to the
third, Korah, a Levite, rebels against the exclusive priesthood of
the sons of Aaron, and asserts the priesthood of all Levites (so
e.g. xv. 7, 8-11, 16, 17).

These instances are very far from exhausting the list of con-
tradictions in the Hexateuch, and not so much as an attempt has
been made to give an idea of the endless repetitions in the same
narrative, or of the way in which many a story, having reached a
certain point, begins over again. But the samples given warrant
the following inferences.

The Hexateuch is the work of several authors. True, a

‘ writer may contradict himself, and we cannot from the fact of
inconsistencies in the //ad or in plays of Shakespeare decide at
once that there has been diversity of authorship. But no one
author could contradict himself so often, and in such a striking
manner, as we have found the Hexateuch to do. Above all, no
author contradicts himself habitually on the same page.

This argument is clinched by the variety of style. We cannot
imagine a wilder theory than this, that the same author wrote two
stories, similar, but more or less contradictory in detail; that he
wrote each story in a distinct style and with a distinct vocabulary,
and then welded them into one, but without much verbal altera-
tion. The severance of the documents is justified by its results.
One has only to read the first two volumes of Colenso to see
INTRODUCTION li

what absurdities are involved if we take the Pentateuch as it
stands and treat it as one book. There is no end to the chrono-
logical monstrosities which meet us at every turn. If the attempts
to explain these difficulties away were a hundred times more suc-
cessful than they are, we should still have to suppose that the
narrator expressed himself with the utmost awkwardness and
with perverse choice of the expressions most likely to confuse and
mislead. Now, the writers of the Hexateuch do not shrink from
the marvellous, and their canons of credibility are very different
from ours. But the Hexateuch is a far nobler book than the
apologists would make it. The Hebrews, like the Arabs after
them, had the gift of telling a vivid story, and the Jahvist in
particular is a prince of narrators. If we part the documents we
obtain consistency of style, with a reasonable degree of con-
sistency in fact. When, e.g., we separate the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ with
his dry narrative and chronological system, from the ‘Oldest Book
of Hebrew History,’ we get two histories of the patriarchs, each
perfectly intelligible. We can read the life-like story of Jacob’s
love for Rachel, and need no longer mar it by reflecting with
Rashi that Jacob was 84 years old at the time of his marriage.
We find, moreover, that the differences between the documents
are not accidental but necessary. We find, for example, that the
Jahvist represents Noah as sacrificing when he left the ark, while
the ‘Priestly Writer’ makes no mention of any such sacrifice. The
reason is that the latter could not have done so. In the first
place, while the Jahvist makes Noah take seven pairs of all clean
animals, according to the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ he only took one pair
of each species, and was, therefore, scarcely in a position to
diminish his scanty stock by sacrifice. Secondly, the ‘ Priestly
Writer’ knows nothing of sacrifice by the servants of God before
Moses. To the older writers religion is a natural growth. To
the ‘Priestly Writer’ it is a matter of positive institution by God.
Just as Adam is told by God that he may eat herbs, and Noah
that he may eat flesh; just as Abraham receives from God the
covenant of circumcision, unknown before, but to be observed
hii INTRODUCTION

ever after by his descendants, so sacrifice to the God of Israel,
and the distinction between clean and unclean animals, begin
with the revelation to Moses on Mount Sinai.

§ 2—CONTENTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DOCUMENTS.
(a) The Oldest Book of Hebrew History.

This composite document is preserved almost entire. Its
object is to relate the myths and legends of Hebrew history from
the Creation to the final settlement in Canaan and the death of
Joshua. In one important respect the work differs from the
sacred histories of other peoples. The whole book is imbued
with the spirit, not, indeed, of Monotheism, but of monolatry—z.e.
though there is no definite theory that only one God exists, it is
always assumed that only one God might be lawfully worshipped
by the Israelites or by their ancestors in the direct line. Again,
the religion of the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ is ethical.
Other nations, such as the ancient Germans, had religious feeling
and also much sound morality. There was, however, little con-
nection between the two. But the Hebrew God was a righteous
God, though it is true that the Hebrew notion of righteousness
must often seem very imperfect to Christians. An excellent
illustration of the way in which this moral element predominates
is supplied by the story of the flood. The myth has been
borrowed from the Babylonians ; but while the flood, according
to the Babylonians, resulted from a whim of the gods, it was, in
the eyes of the Hebrew writer, the penalty of sin. For the rest,
the style of the narrative in the book as a whole, and its leading
ideas, are of a very simple kind. We have a view of God which
is often grossly anthropomorphic, and the morality, sometimes at
least, is of a rudimentary kind. Abraham passes off his wife as
his sister, and his duplicity does not, in the mind of the narrator,
diminish his glory as a prophet or forfeit the protection of his
God. Mingled with these older and lower ideas of religion and
INTRODUCTION hii

morality, we have much which reminds one of the literary
prophets, and comes, no doubt, from their school. But Kuenen’s
name for the book with which we are dealing, viz., the ‘Prophetic’
narrative, is scarcely happy. Some of its most remarkable
elements are, as Kuenen himself points out, pre-prophetic.
Further, the purpose of the book is to magnify Israel, and to tell
the glory of her heroes. The growth of institutions and the
origin of religious usages, so far as they are noticed at all, hold
quite a subordinate place. Very little is said of formal ritual, and
the ‘Book of the Covenant’ incorporated in the ‘ Oldest Book of
Hebrew History’ is a civil much more than a religious code.
Priests are only mentioned incidentally, and the government has
no resemblance to a theocracy. The religious observances of
the patriarchs are connected with the old places of sacrifice, with
Shechem, with Bethel, with Hebron, with Beersheba. But these
places, once, in all probability, Canaanite shrines, are brought
into connection with the patriarchs and the God of Israel.

It is more difficult to describe the two independent books,
that of the Jahvist and that of the Elohist, which compose our
‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ Much has perished in the
process of union, so that we are very far from having either book
in its complete and original form. Besides, the two books
evidently proceeded in parallel lines of narrative, and it is often
hard—nay, impossible—to say whether a particular section of the
Hexateuch belongs to the Jahvist or the Elohist. The following
points, however, are well established.

The Jahvist uses the divine name Yahweh from the very
outset. He interests himself in moral questions, and speculates,
though in a form which is mythological rather than philosophical,
on the origin and growing power of evil. Thus it is he who tells
us the story of Eden and Adam’s fall, of the corruption of man-
kind and the flood which was its consequence, of the pride which
manifested itself in the building of the tower at Babel, and the
punishment which followed, viz., the confusion of tongues. At
the same time we find in him an anthropomorphism which is the
liv INTRODUCTION

most pronounced in the Hexateuch. Yahweh walks in Eden
during the cool of the evening (Gen. iii. 8); he closes the door
on Noah as he goes into the ark (vii. 16); he is jealous and
apprehensive of the men who build the Tower of Babel, and
“goes down’ to confound their speech (xi. 6, 7); he appears in
human form to Abraham, and eats with him ; he goes to make
inquiries about the iniquity of Sodom (xviii. seg.) ; he wrestles
with Jacob (xxxii. 24-32); he meets Moses, and is on the point of
killing him, without any apparent reason except that he devours
naturally, like fire (Exod. iv. 24-26). The Jahvist also notes the
agency of natural causes, where this feature has been obliterated
in the form of the legends given by later writers. This trait
shows itself strongly in his account of the Egyptian plagues. It
is, for instance, an east wind which brings the locusts, and a west
wind which sweeps them into the Red Sea. Indeed, the marvel
of the plagues lies not so much in the events themselves, which
are natural, as in the facts of their rapid succession, their pre-
diction by Moses, and the way in which they attack the Egyptians
and leave the Israelites unscathed. So, also, it is an east wind
which blows all night, drives the Red Sea back, and enables the
Israelites to cross. The Jahvist displays a large-hearted interest
in the myths and sacred places both of northern Israel and of
Judah. He speaks of Abraham’s sojourn at Shechem and Bethel,
but places his fixed abode at Hebron in Judah (Gen. xiii. 18 ;
xviii. 1). He enters (Gen. xxxviii.) into the details of Judzan
genealogy. Joseph, the father of the two great northern tribes,
Ephraim and Manasseh, is his hero, but he gives the next place
after Joseph, not to Reuben, but to Judah.

The Elohist differs from the Jahvist, first because he always
speaks of Elohim and never of Yahweh, till he relates the
theophany in the burning bush (Exod. iii.) ; and as even after this
turning-point the name Elohim occurs, we may infer with Dill-
mann and other critics that the Elohist continued the use of that
word till the very end of his history, although after Exod. iil. it
has been usually altered by later hands into ‘Yahweh.’ The
INTRODUCTION lv

Elohist has more elevated notions of the Godhead than the
Jahvist. The God of whom he writes appears in dreams (Gen.
XX. 33 xxxi. 24; Num. xxii. 9, 20), or acts through the ministry
of angels (Gen. xxi. 17; xxii. 11 5 xxviii. 12; XXxi. TT; XXxii. 2 ;
xlviii. 16; Exod. iii. 2). Closely connected with this finer view
of religion, is the presentation of Abraham as a prophet and
intercessor (Gen. xx. 7), and the mention of Jacob’s putting away
the strange gods and amulets from his household (Gen. xxxv. 4)
before he builds the altar to God at Bethel. He shows what may
be called an antiquarian interest: it is in him we find the old
word for a piece of money, viz., Kesitah (Gen. xxxiii. 19) ; it is he
who notes the Aramzan origin of the teraphim (Gen. xxxi. 19 seg. ;
Xxxv. 2 seg.); he is well informed about Egyptian matters, and in
general he has given a number of concrete facts and names which
are not to be found elsewhere. Although, as has been said above,
he removes God further from men, he gives increasing prominence
to the supernatural. Thus he makes Moses bring the plagues by
the use of his magical rod. Finally, his stories of the patriarchs
all centre round the shrines and sacred places of northern Israel,
such as Shechem, Mahanaim, Jabbok, Peniel, Gilead, etc. No
doubt he has much to say of Beersheba in the extreme south,
but this is just one of the exceptions which prove the rule. For
Beersheba was a place of pilgrimage highly esteemed in the
northern kingdom (Amos viii. 14). Hence, though there is much
dispute about the place in which the Jahvist wrote, there is a
general consensus of critics that the Elohist belonged to the
northern kingdom.

The points of difference between the Jahvist and Elohist in
vocabulary and style are numerous and interesting. They are
recounted by Dillmann in the third volume of his Commentary
on the Hexateuch, pp. 617, 623 seg. Only a few specimens can
be given here. The Jahvist uses the name Yahweh throughout :
the Elohist never before Exod. iii. The Jahvist calls Jacob in
the latter part of his life ‘Israel’; the Elohist retains the name /
‘Jacob.’ The Jahvist speaks of ‘Sinai,’ the Elohist of ‘Horeb’
lvi INTRODUCTION

or ‘the Mount of God.’ The Jahvist calls the aborigines of
Palestine ‘Canaanites,’ the Elohist ‘ Amorites.’. The Jahvist calls
a female slave or concubine 7nbY, the Elohist invariably 7px.
The Jahvist uses 135 and its derivatives for the ‘ hardening’ of
of the heart, etc., the Elohist uses the hiphil of prn. The Jahvist
calls a bag or sack nnnnrx, the Elohist pw. It must be remem-
bered that these are only samples from a mass of characteristic
differences. Some of them depend on grammatical peculiarities
and turns of phrase. The Jahvist sometimes uses the emphatic
ending in 4, and constantly prefers the pronominal suffix to the
separate accusative with nx. The Elohist, on the other hand,
sometimes construes Elohim with the plural (Gen. xx. 13 ; xxxv.
7; Josh. xxiv. 19), and such forms of address and answer as ‘And
he said to him, “Abraham, Abraham,” and he said “‘ Here am I,”’
are characteristic of him (Gen. xxii. 1; in LXx. 11; xlvi. 2; Exod.
iii. 4).

We cannot consider the way in which the Jahvist and Elohist
documents were united without anticipating to some extent a
question which has been reserved for separate examination, viz.,
the date of the documents which compose the Hexateuch. More-
over, several theories are still held on the manner in which, and
the time at which, the Jahvist and Elohist became one book.
Dillmann holds that they remained separate till they fell into the
hands of the final editor, who united all the documents of the
Hexateuch together. Kittel inclines to think that the union of
Jahvist and Elohist was not effected till both were united with
Deuteronomy. Others (Wellhausen, Kuenen, etc.) believe that
Jahvist and Elohist were made into one book before they were
joined to any other part of the Hexateuch. The last view is, as
I venture to think, the only tenable one, and for these reasons :
The Jahvist and Elohist were still separate when the Deutero-
nomist wrote, for in his summary of the previous history he
almost always follows the Elohist, and few will adopt the unlikely
hypothesis that he took the pains to separate the Elohist elements
and assimilated them. Afterwards the Jahvist and Elohist docu-
INTRODUCTION lvii

ments were made into one book. The process involved con-
siderable mutilation, besides an interpolation here and there in
the interests of harmony. Now, while we find Jahvist and Elohist
constantly—often, indeed, inextricably—united, they both stand,
with few exceptions, quite apart from the ‘ Priestly’ document.
Again, till we come to the book of Joshua we scarcely ever find
an historical trace of that Deuteronomical colouring which is so
marked, and therefore so easy to detect. Once more, a writer of
the Deuteronomical school enriched the Deuteronomical code
with a preface (Deut. i-iv. 44). Why should he have done so if
the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’ compiled from the Jahvist
and Elohist, already stood before the Deuteronomical law? Ac-
cordingly, we conclude that the Jahvist and Elohist were united
by an editor who belonged neither to the school of the Deutero-
nomist nor the ‘Priestly Writer,’ who had no direct concern
either with the Deuteronomical or the ‘Priestly’ code, but who
wrought independently.

(6) Zhe Deuteronomical Code and the Deuteronomical Historians.

The Jahvist and Elohist, with differences in detail, breathe
the same spirit. The book of Deuteronomy introduces us to a
different world. The first and most evident distinction is that
the Jahvist and Elohist are historians. The book of Deuteronomy
is chiefly legal. It justly claims to rank as a book of law, and
this is still more apparent if we take the original code by itself.
It professes to give a series of enactments which were to be the
basis of a covenant between Yahweh and Israel. If we read
Deut. iv. 45—xxvi. ; xxvii. 9, 10; xxviii. ; xxxi. 9-13 together, we
have a connected and consistent whole. c

First, in iv. 45-49 we have the title of the code, ‘These are
the testimonies and the statutes and the judgments which Moses
spoke to the children of Israel,’ etc. This is followed in v.-xi. by
a long hortatory address. Moses goes back nearly forty years to
the time when the law which he now promulgates was first com-
Ivili INTRODUCTION

municated to him on Horeb. The decalogue which Yahweh
proclaimed to the people there is repeated here, and, although
Moses is always on the point of beginning to give the code of
laws which he is now to publish, he pauses again and again: he
enlarges on the dangers of disobedience, on the need of divine help,
and he reminds the people of their sin in the worship of the golden
calf. Undoubtedly this long introduction is trying to the reader’s
patience ; but it never loses sight of the law which it introduces.
Moreover, this rhetorical manner reappears in the law itself. The
Deuteronomist turns the principles of the prophets into a code,
and therefore retains much of the prophetic style. The stream
is coloured by the soil from which it sprang. The Law proper
begins with the twelfth chapter. On the whole, order and con-
nection are well maintained. After a denunciation of Canaanite
idolatry, the eating of blood, and the offering of sacrifice except
at the one central shrine, we have laws against false prophets who
seduce the people to idolatry, laws on the destruction of idolatrous
cities and the avoidance of all contamination, with positive enact-
ments on tithes of vegetable produce, the consecration of the
firstlings of cattle, the year of release, the manumission of Hebrew
slaves, and the three great feasts. This set of laws directly
religious (xii.-xvi. 17) is followed by civil ordinances (xvi. 18—xx.)
on ‘judges and officers,’ and particularly on the king, on cities of
refuge, on removal of landmarks, on witnesses, on war. Even
here the religious interest of the legislator betrays itself, and laws
against the idolatrous ‘pillars’ and sacred trees, on offering
victims without blemish or flaw, on stoning idolaters, are intruded
in this second division. Still, we have, perhaps, as much order
as can be looked for in an Oriental code ; and it is to be remarked
that the digression on the stoning of idolaters is, after all, con-
nected with the context by its reference to the law concerning
witnesses. In the third division (xxi.-xxv.) we have a number of
laws, chiefly short ones, enumerated on no clear system, the
reason being that the Deuteronomist has taken over material from
other sources. In chap. xxvi. the lawgiver returns to his favourite
INTRODUCTION lix

themes—the central sanctuary, the firstlings, the tithes, the Leviti-
cal priests. The law being now given, a covenant is concluded
on that basis between Yahweh and Israel (xxvi. 16-19). The
people are told that they are now Yahweh’s people (xxvii. 9, 10) ;
blessings and curses are appended as the sanctions of the law
(xxviii.) ; and, finally (xxxi. 9-13), Moses writes the law down,
gives a copy of it to ‘the priests the sons of Levi,’ and orders the
whole code to be read to the whole people once every seven
years at the feast of tabernacles.

We may now proceed to note the chief points of contrast be-
tween the Deuteronomical code and the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew
History.’ The most evident contrast is that between a code and
a book of history. Even between the code which the ‘Oldest
Book of Hebrew History’ does contain, and the code of the
Deuteronomist, the contrast is very great. The smaller code,
viz., the ‘ Book of the Covenant,’ may have been intended origin-
ally for the private use of those who sat in judgment. It makes
no claim to be Mosaic, much less to have been spoken by God.
True, the Elohist does make these claims for it, and asserts that
it was the basis of a covenant between God and Israel. Yet even
he neither asserts that it was a popular book, nor does anything
appear to give it this character. But Deuteronomy does claim
to be a sacred book, and a book for the people. It is that or
nothing. It is given by Yahweh: it is placed in the keeping of
the priests who bear the ark : it is to be read periodically to men,
women, and children. The king is to provide himself with a copy
of ‘this law,’! and to ‘read therein all the days of his life.’
National prosperity depends on the observance of this law. In
short, Deuteronomy is a sacred scripture, and, if the Jews had
never had any other sacred writing, Mohammed might still have
called them Ahl Ulkitab, ‘The people of the book.’

1¢A copy of this law,’ Deut. xvii. 18. The false and ungrammatical
translation of the LXx., 7d devrepovducov Tobro, has led (1) to the current name
of the book, (2) to the erroneous belief that Deuteronomy professes to stand in
relation to some other law.
Ix INTRODUCTION

This book is a law, but much more than a code of law in the
ordinary sense, first because it subordinates everything to religion
and really aims at a theocracy, next because the religious enact-
ments themselves are means to one great end. On the one
hand, the author would save his people from relapse into
heathenism, on the other inspire them with an absolute devotion
of the heart and soul to Yahweh. His tone is, and could not
but be, that of a preacher quite as much as that of a legislator.
For him, all truth centres in one truth: ‘ Hear, O Israel, Yahweh
thy God is one Yahweh ’—?.e. unique in nature and character, and
so utterly unlike the gods of the heathen. All particular laws
centre round the one commandment, ‘Thou shalt love Yahweh
thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy
might.’ This supreme duty of loving Yahweh is constantly on
the lips of the Deuteronomist (x. 12; xi. 1, 13, 223 xiii. 4). No
other writer in the Hexateuch mentions it ; and it is very doubtful,
though here we are anticipating the question of date, whether any
Hebrew writer prior to the Deuteronomist had ever spoken of
the love of God or Yahweh.! From the idea of this love of
Yahweh, this entire devotion to him, the peculiar enactments of
the Deuteronomist flow. The Jahvist and Elohist make much of
the old shrines, though they are careful to connect them with the
history of the Patriarchs and the apparition of Yahweh or his

1 In only three passages which can possibly be prior to Deuteronomy is
the love of God mentioned. These are Exod. xx. 6; Ps. xviii. 2; Judges
v. 31. The first of these is from the Decalogue. The Decalogue exists in two
recensions, viz., that in Exodus and that in Deuteronomy. Now that one recen-
sion should be interpolated from the other is precisely what the slightest ac-
quaintance with analogous cases in literature would lead us to expect. That
this interpolation has taken place in the Decalogue as given in Exodus is
evident and admitted. Curiously enough, of Ps. xviii. we also have another
recension, viz., in 2 Sam. xxii. In the latter, the opening verse, ‘I will love
thee, O Yahweh, my strength’ is omitted, and rightly. The Aramaism
Jone for ‘I will love thee,’ is inexplicable in a psalm which otherwise bears
the marks of early date, and, besides, the parallelism is destroyed by the
intrusion of the clause. The only instance left is from Deborah’s Song, the
oldest remnant of Hebrew literature. Here the mention of love to Yahweh
comes at the end of the song, which is perfect without verse 31. But no
positive proof can be alleged against it.
INTRODUCTION lxi

angels. The Elohist mentions the pillars or obelisks set up by
Jacob, and the house of God where tithes were to be offered at
Bethel (Gen. xxviii. 18-22; xxxi. 13, 45). We also read in the
‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ of sacred trees such as the
terebinth with its oracle at Shechem, the tamarisk which Abraham
planted in obvious connection with the worship of Yahweh, etc.
(Gen. xii. 6; xxi. 33).1 But the Deuteronomist will make no such
terms with old Canaanite usage. ‘Ye shall surely destroy all the
places wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their
gods, upon the high mountains and upon the hills, and under
every green tree, and ye shall break down their altars, and dash
in pieces their pillars, and burn their Asherim with fire’ (Deut.
xii. 2, 3). The Jahvist and Elohist considered the pillar and the
sacred tree so innocent that they ascribed their origin to Israel’s
saints and represented Joshua as erecting a stone under ‘the oak
which was in Yahweh’s sanctuary.’ On the other hand, the Deu-
teronomist says, ‘Thou shalt not plant thee an Asherah of any
kind of tree beside the altar of Yahweh thy God... Neither
shalt thou set thee up a pillar which Yahweh thy God hates’
(Deut. xvi. 21, 22). Besides this, the Deuteronomist is never
weary of repeating that no sacrifice may be offered save at the
one place which Yahweh is to choose from all the tribes of Israel
(Deut. xii. 5, , 14, 18, 21, 26; xiv. 23-25; xv. 20; xvi. 2, 6
$€q.. II, 15 Seg.; xvil. 8, 10; xviii. 6; xxvi. 2). Here again, in
the expression ‘the place which Yahweh thy God shall choose,’
we have a phrase constantly repeated by the Deuteronomist and
his school, but never found in any passage which is not Deutero-
nomical. The system is completed by the limitation of the

1 ‘And Abraham passed through the land to the place of Shechem to the
terebinth of the instructor’ (Gen. xii. 6). The ‘instruction’ (7\m) was given
by oracles probably derived from the rustling of the sacred tree, which is called
in Judges ix. 37, ‘the terebinth of the augurs.’ The sacred character of the
‘place ’ appears from the legends that Jacob buried there the idols and amulets
(Gen. xxxv. 4), that Joshua set up a stone in the sanctuary there (Josh. xxiv.
26), and that Abimelech was made king ‘ by the terebinth of the pillar that
was in Shechem.’

é
Ixii INTRODUCTION

priesthood to one tribe, viz., to the sons of Levi, and by pro-
viding them with a share in the sacrifices (viz., the shoulder, the
two cheeks and the maw), the firstfruits of corn, wine, and oil, and
‘the first of the fleece’ (Deut. xviii. 1-5). As there was to be
only one place of sacrifice, the Levites, who lived chiefly on the
sacrifices and had no land, were likely to be badly off. Accord-
ingly, the Levites are constantly mentioned with the poor and the
strangers, and commended to the charity of the Israelites with a
kindliness which runs through the whole of the Deuteronomical
code, and is extended to all who are not idolaters (Deut. xii. 18,
19; Xiv. 27-29; Xvi. II, 143 XXVi. II-13).

The style and language of the Deuteronomical law are so
marked that they can scarcely escape an intelligent reader of the
English version. Riehm enumerates sixty-four words or phrases
characteristic of the Deuteronomist. Their significance lies, first
in the fact that they express obvious ideas, and are not names
for special objects which force a writer to use peculiar words ;
secondly, in the fact that most of them are habitually repeated.
Indeed, the monotonous repetition of certain stereotyped phrases
is a striking feature in the Deuteronomical style. Thus we have
‘a holy people’ (wy? DY) five times in Deuteronomy and nowhere
else: ‘Yahweh thy God’ constantly (more than 180 times) in
Deuteronomy, never in Leviticus or Numbers: exhortations to
‘love’ God as the sum of all religion nine times in Deuteronomy,
nowhere else in the Pentateuch except in Exod. xx. 6, where it
has been probably interpolated: ‘Cleave to Yahweh’ (Deut. x.
20; Xi. 223 Xili. 5; xxx. 20), nowhere else in the Pentateuch:
‘The place which Yahweh thy God will choose’ eighteen times
in Deuteronomy, nowhere else in the Pentateuch: ‘Hear, O
Israel’ four times in Deuteronomy, nowhere else in the Penta-
teuch: ‘Observe to do’ without repetition or change of subject,
twelve times in Deuteronomy, nowhere else in the Pentateuch :

1 Riehm’s Lvzletr. 2n das A.7., i. p. 234 seg. Unfortunately the list is

far from accurate. Kuenen, Onders. 1. § 7, 4, enumerates forty peculiarities
in the language of Deuteronomy.
INTRODUCTION Ixili

‘That it may go well with thee’ or ‘with them’ as a result of
obedience to the law, seven times in Deuteronomy, nowhere else
in the Pentateuch: ‘The stranger, the orphan, and the widow’
eight times in Deuteronomy, nowhere else in the Pentateuch :
‘Thou shalt put away’ (rather ‘exterminate’) ‘the evil from the
midst of thee,’ or ‘from Israel’—a solemn formula repeated nine
times by the Deuteronomist and peculiar to him : ‘In thy gates,’ as
equivalent to ‘in thy cities,’ twenty-seven times in Deuteronomy, no-
where else in the Pentateuch except Exod. xx. 10, where, as is gener-
ally admitted, the words are an interpolation from Deuteronomy :
‘Which I command thee’ or ‘you’ (T1¥9°3IN+ DINN MY *D38)
thirty-three times in Deuteronomy, and once only in the rest of the
Pentateuch, viz., in Exod. xxxiv. u. Incomplete as these examples
are, their force to prove the separate authorship is simply over-
whelming. They are taken exclusively from the code in the
proper sense, and therefore form a very short document. A writer
may occasionally use peculiar expressions: he must do so in dealing
with peculiar subject-matter. But let any one consider how simple
and natural the expression ‘which I command thee’ is, and how
easily it might have been used in the laws of Leviticus or Numbers.
Let him remember further that it never occurs in these, and
does occur at every turn in Deut. v.—xxvi. Can he help believing
in the independent authorship of Deuteronomy ?

If, then, the author of the Deuteronomical law had a style so
marked, so full of stereotyped phrases, we can easily imagine that
other writers, who were his contemporaries or lived a little later,
would consciously or unconsciously imitate him. Nay, the rise
of a Deuteronomical school was almost inevitable, for the original
Deuteronomist was a great religious reformer. He set himself to
abolish the old worship of Israel, which he regarded as half
heathenish, and a man can hardly succeed (the Deuteronomist, as
we shall see, did succeed) in work like this without arousing
Opposition on the one hand, attaching adherents on the other.
We know how prone a religious school is to catch up favourite
phrases of the master. Now, we have writings left which clearly
lxiv INTRODUCTION

belong to this Deuteronomical school. Of these the first instance
is furnished by the long historical introduction contained in Deut.
ii—iv. 44. This section is clearly a later edition. Deuteronomy
proper claims to be a code of law, not an historical work, and to
this law an abundant introduction is supplied by the hortatory
address in v.—xi. But we are not left to consideration of likelihood.
In iv. 45-49, we have the superscription of the law: ‘These are
the testimonies, and the statutes, and the judgments, which Moses
spake to the children of Israel, when they came forth out of
Egypt, beyond Jordan, in the valley over against Beth-peor, in
the land of Sihon king of the Amorites, who dwelt at Heshbon,
whom Moses and the children of Israel smote, when they came
forth out of Egypt; and they took his land in possession, and the
land of Og the king of Bashan, the two kings of the Amorites who
were beyond Jordan toward the sunrising ; from Aroer which is
on the edge of the ravine of Arnon to Mount Sion (that is
Hermon), and all the Arabah beyond Jordan eastward to the sea
of the Arabah, under the slopes of Pisgah.’ Taking the book of
Deuteronomy as it stands, we could comprehend this long super-
scription, if it occurred at the beginning of chapter i., and described
the book as a whole from its more important, #e. its legislative
part. We could also comprehend it, if it stood at the beginning
of chapter xi., where the legislation in the strict sense opens. But
between a long historical speech of Moses, and another long
speech which is hortatory and partly historical, the superscription
is clearly out of place. Let us suppose that it was written before
the addition of i.—iv. 44 to the rest of Deuteronomy, and all is
natural. Again, the superscription gives details of place, and ex-
plains how Israel got the territory east of Jordan. The writer
would have seen no need for this if the historical introduction
i.—iv. 44 had stood before his eyes, for there the whole story of
the conquest is told at length. Further, while the view taken in
the introduction closely follows the main ideas of the original
Deuteronomist, it differs in detail. The writer of the historical
introduction lays great stress on the fact that the generation which
INTRODUCTION Ixv

came out of Egypt rebelled against Yahweh, and consequently
was to perish, with some exceptions, in the wilderness (i. 26
seg.). The original Deuteronomist holds very different language
on this head. ‘Yahweh our God made with us a covenant on
Horeb. Not with our fathers did Yahweh make this covenant,
but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day’ (v. 2,
3). ‘Your eyes have seen all the great work of Yahweh’ (ie.
from Egypt onwards, xi. 3-7). So, in the introduction (ii. 29), we
are told that the Moabites sold food and water to the Israelites :
in the kernel of Deuteronomy this is denied, at least by impli-
cation: ‘an Ammonite and a Moabite shall not enter into the
assembly of Yahweh, . . . because they met you not with bread
and water in the way’ (xxiii. 3, 4). The introduction (iv. 41-43)
speaks of three cities east of the Jordan which Moses separated,
‘that the manslayers might flee thither’: the original law of
Deuteronomy (ch. xix.) also mentions three such cities, but they
are to be provided after the conquest of west Canaan and three
more are to be added, if Yahweh enlarges the territory of
Israel: it makes no allusion to cities already provided east of
Jordan. An examination of the language confirms the conclusion
that Deut. i.miv. 44 is by a later Deuteronomist. Kuenen has
pointed out (Oxderz. i. § 7. 16) that the resemblances in lan-
guage and thought are many and close, but that they are accom-
panied by considerable differences, and that the younger writer is
inferior to his master in originality and vigour.

When the text of the Deuteronomical writings is given, it will
be shown that, at the end of the book of Deuteronomy and
throughout the book of Joshua, the later Deuteronomists have
been at work. We shall find the characteristic phrases which
make it easy to detect the Deuteronomical style. We shall also
find that conception of a sacred law to which the Deuteronomist
gave a new prominence, asserting itself with undiminished
strength. It is the standard by which all the history of Israel is
judged. The charge to Joshua in the first chapter of the Book of
Joshua strikes the key-note of the history as revised by the
Ixvi INTRODUCTION

Deuteronomists: ‘Only be strong and very courageous to ob-
serve to do according to all the law which Moses my servant
commanded thee: turn not from it to the right hand or to the
left, that thou mayest have good success, whithersoever thou
goest. This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth,
but thou shalt meditate therein day and night,’ etc.

(¢) Lhe ‘ Priestly Writer,

The Jahvist and the Elohist were historians, or rather collectors
of national myths and legends, which passed for history. The
Deuteronomist is the apostle of law, warmed and animated by
the spirit of prophetic piety. The ‘Priestly Writer’ is at once
historian (if we consent to use the word in its widest and lowest
sense) and legislator. But his history is all constructed with a
view to the legislation: sometimes, indeed, his stories are mere
pegs on which a law is hung. And his legislation is almost
wholly religious. His code is not adapted for a nation with its
varied interests, but for a ‘congregation,’ or, as we should now
say, ‘achurch.’ Lastly, his religion consists, not of course wholly,
but still in a large degree, of ritual: the ritual requires a priest,
and to the priests he gives an eminence and importance utterly
unknown to the other documents in the Hexateuch.

His history from the creation to the settlement of Jacob and
his family in Egypt runs parallel with that of the ‘Oldest Book.’
But how different is his narrative! For natural growth, we have a
systematic order and chronology. The subject-matter is arranged
in ten sections, marked off by the words, ‘These are the genera-

1 It is generally admitted, notwithstanding Wellhausen’s objections, that
Deut. v.—xi., and the purely legislative portion xii. seg., are by the same
hand, though perhaps v.—xi. may be a later addition ly the author of xii. seg.
On the other hand, although Dillmann attributes the greater part of i.—iv. 44
to the original Deuteronomist, he allows that in their present form these
chapters are not his work.
INTRODUCTION lxvii

tions,’! viz., of ‘the heavens and the earth,’ of Adam, of Noah,
of Noah’s sons, of Shem, of Terah (Abram’s father), of Ishmael,
of Isaac, of Esau, of Jacob. In this history, as compared with
that of the Jahvist and Elohist, we lose much where the loss may
in a certain sense count for gain. We miss the gross anthropo-
morphism ; we miss those particulars in the lives of the patriarchs
which offend the moral sense. Abraham and Isaac do not, by
their cowardice, place the honour of their wives in peril: we hear
nothing of Sarah’s cruel jealousy against Hagar, of the strife be-
tween Leah and Rachel, of the incest of Lot’s daughters or of
Tamar, of Dinah’s dishonour. There is peace in the patriarchal
families: Abraham and Lot, Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau,
part on friendly terms. At the same time all that is life-like and
pathetic is gone also; instead of flesh and blood we have dry
bones. In place of myth and legend we have systematic plan.
The author begins with the origin of mankind, and gradually parts
with extraneous elements till he fixes our attention on the chosen
line. He has an elaborate scheme of chronology: he tells us
how old a patriarch was when he begot his eldest son, how old he
was when he died, and the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt is
summed up as 430 years. Throughout, the author has his eye
on the gradual process of revelation. Nothing grows: all comes
by direct institution on the part of God. The patriarchs do not
know the name of Yahweh: much less do they offer sacrifice.
How could they? God had not taught them the appointed
rites. And where were they to sacrifice? There was no ‘tent

1 Or (once) ‘This is the book of the generations’ (Gen. v. 1). The
form recurs Num. iii. 1, ‘These are the gencrations of Aaron.’ Thus, we
have the ‘generations ’ of the heavens and the earth, of Adam, of Noah, of
the sons of Noah, of Shem, of Terah, of Ishmael, of Isaac, of Esau, of Jacob,
and finally of Aaron. The omission of Abraham’s ‘generations’ is re-
markable. Probably, the ‘Priestly Writer’ did give the ‘ generations’ of
Abrabam in Gen. xii., but the title was omitted by the final editor of the
Hexateuch, who at the beginning of Gen. xii. abandons the ‘ Priestly Writer’
and follows the narrative of the Jahvist. (So Ewald, Knobel, Dillmann,
Wellhausen. )
Ixviil INTRODUCTION

of meeting,’ no ark. They are, however, instructed little by little,
the very lights are set in the heavens for ‘times’—z.e. that they
may, when the occasion comes, determine the Jewish nyo or
sacred times. So also the seventh day is sanctified by God from
the first: he rests on the seventh day from the work of creation.
Then the process of instruction begins. Adam is allowed to eat
grain and fruits. Noah (Gen. ix. 1-17) is allowed to eat flesh,
but the prohibition against eating blood is introduced. A cove-
nant is made with him on these conditions. Another covenant
is made with Abram, and the sign of it is circumcision—a sign
so indispensable that he who neglects it is to be ‘cut off from his
people’ (Gen. xvii.). Where the dry chronological scheme is ex-
panded into anything like narrative, the object is to explain the
divine origin of Israel’s holy institutions.!_ Side by side with this
stands an account of the way in which God separates the holy
seed and keeps it pure, and provides for its still distant future.
Isaac is not to take a Canaanite wife (Gen. xxviii. 1-9), and his
father Abraham buys a piece of land from the children of Heth ;
it is but a family tomb; yet it inaugurates the settlement of the
chosen people in the land of promise (Gen. xxiii.).

The writer naturally speaks with greater fulness, when he
reaches the centre of his subject, in the divine commission of
Moses. The sacred name of Yahweh, unknown to the fathers, is
revealed to him ; and this is followed a little later by the institution
of the Paschal rite, which saves Israel from the destroying angel
and preserves it as the people of Yahweh (Exod. vi. 3-123 vil.
1-7; xii. 1-20, 28, 37°, 40, 41, 43-51). On their way to Sinai
the people are prepared for the future observance of the Sabbath

1 This point deserves special attention. Had the ‘ Priestly’ document
been no more than a manual for priests, we might believe with Dillmann that
it ‘remained as a matter of course in private hands without royal or public
sanction, and only in sacerdotal circles.” But really the ‘Priestly Writer’
strives to establish his own idea of the theocracy, and the private circulation
of his book among the priests would not have served his purpose. This aim
of the book is well stated by Wurster, Zur Charakteristik u. Geschichte da.
Priestercodex u. Heiligheitsgesetzes, Z.A.T.W. 1884, p. 112 seg.
INTRODUCTION lxix

by the miracle of the manna; it falls in double quantity on the
sixth day, and not at all on the seventh. At Sinai, Yahweh de-
clares his mind fully by the promulgation of the law. First, a
place of sacrifice is provided by the long and minute instructions
which Yahweh gives on the construction of the tabernacle and
its furniture, the making of the priestly vestments, etc., besides
directions for the consecration of Aaron and his sons to the
priesthood (Exod. xxv.—xxx.). Then, with intolerable pedantry,
though it is the successors of the ‘ Priestly Writer’ and his school,
rather than the ‘ Priestly Writer’ himself, who are responsible for it
—the same details are repeated, mostly word for word, and we are
told in Exod. xxxv.—xl. how Moses carried out the directions of
Yahweh. The tabernacle is built, and the glory of Yahweh fills it.

After a series of laws on the different kinds of sacrifice (Lev.
i—vii.) we have in Ley. viii.—ix. the consecration of Aaron and his
sons. They offer the first lawful sacrifices, and Yahweh manifests
his acceptance of them by sending fire from heaven upon the
altar. The story of Nadab and Abihu follows in Lev. x., as a
warning against any deviation from the appointed ritual. The
order of thought is now interrupted bya series of laws (Lev. xi.—xv.)
on uncleanness, unclean food, sexual uncleanness, leprosy of the
body, of garments, of houses, etc., and by the institution of the
Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi.). Additional interruption arises from
the fact that in Lev. xvii.—xxvi. we have a separate code, the ‘ Law
of Holiness,’ so called because it puts special stress on the ‘ holi-
ness’ required of Israel. This little code agrees with the spirit of
the ‘Priestly Writer,’ but agrees with differences. It begins, e.g.,
by requiring the flesh of all oxen, sheep and goats to be offered
at the sanctuary, whereas the ‘ Priestly Writer’ regards the eating
of flesh without sacrifice as lawful, and sanctioned by Yahweh in
the covenant with Noah. Besides, this little code repeats laws
already given by the ‘Priestly Writer’ in an earlier part of the Penta-
teuch, and the conclusion, in ch. xxvi., with threats and blessings
shows that it once stood by itself, though it has been edited and
altered by the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ who took it as his model and in-
lxx INTRODUCTION

corporated it in his own fuller work. The thread of connection is
resumed in Num. i.—x. 28. This is not the place to discuss the
primary sections and the later additions in these chapters. This
much is plain. The ‘Priestly Writer’ had related the erection of
the tabernacle, the consecration and first sacrifices of the priests.
He had not spoken of the subordinate ministers in the sanctuary.
This he now does. The people are numbered and the Levites
are chosen. They are to camp round the tabernacle, and so to
avert Yahweh’s wrath from the rest of the Israelites. They are
to serve the priests ; their duties are carefully regulated, and they
are consecrated to their office. The absolute separation of the
common Israelites from Levitical duties and of the Levites from
all priestly office is enforced by the story of Korah and his revolt
(Num. xvi—xvii.). Provision is made (Num. xviii.) for the sup-
port of priests and Levites. Aaron dies, and his son Eleazar is
installed in his place (Num. xx. 22-29), while Phinehas, Eleazar’s
son, is rewarded for his zeal against the Midianites by the ‘ cove-
nant of an everlasting priesthood’ (Num. xxv. 6-15). Afterwards
we have provision for the law of inheritance in defect of male
heirs, for the appointment of a successor to Moses, and for the
division of Canaan. Moses dies, and Joshua is confirmed in his
place as the civil leader and ruler of Israel (Num. xxvii. ; parts of
xxxii., xxxiv.; Deut. xxxiv. 8, 9).

The ‘Priestly Writer’ assumes, as he might have been ex-
pected to do, that the land was wholly and completely subdued
under Joshua: of the more historical view found in the Jahvist,
that the conquest was gradual, and that the tribes of Israel fought
separately, because national union was still unknown, he has not
the faintest idea. But over and above this, he is faithful here, as
throughout, to the priestly idea. The land is divided to the tribes
by lot. The lot is cast at Shiloh, where the sanctuary rests for
the time, and the matter is directed by Eleazar the priest and
Joshua and by the heads of the tribes, Eleazar’s name standing
first (Josh. xviii. 1; xiv. 1-5). Besides the cities of refuge, we
have in xxi. 1-40 the list of the priestly and Levitical cities.
INTRODUCTION lxxi

We may now turn to the most salient points of difference
between the ‘Priestly’ law and the other codes.

In the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ there are many
places of sacrifice, and these places, or at least some of them, were
hallowed by the sacrifices of the patriarchs. The Deuteronomical
code leaves the past alone, but insists with reiteration that after the
settlement in Canaan sacrifice may be offered at one place only,
and that a place specially chosen by Yahweh. The‘ Priestly Writer’
does not (except in the ‘Laws of Holiness,’ Lev. xvii—xxvi.)
insist on one place of sacrifice. He takes it for granted. He
carries back this one place of sacrifice to the beginning of national
life under Moses, and does not admit that the patriarchs sacri-
ficed at all. Sacrifice pleasing to Yahweh was impossible till the
tabernacle was set up.

The ‘Priestly Writer’ prescribes an elaborate ritual for the
offering of sacrifice, and he gives great prominence to the sin and
trespass offerings, which are never mentioned in the rest of the
Hexateuch.

In the ‘ Book of the Covenant’ and in Deuteronomy we have
three annual feasts; in the ‘Priestly’ code (Lev. xxiii.; Num.
xxviii.) we have seven ‘holy convocations,’ the Sabbath, New Moon,
Passover, with the feast of unleavened bread, Feast of Weeks,
New Moon of the seventh month, Day of Atonement, Tabernacles.
These feasts are accompanied by public—some of them by most
elaborate public—sacrifices, and the annual feasts are fixed for
certain days of the month. The other legislators do not make
the least reference to the day of atonement. It should also be
observed that the year of jubilee with its elaborate regulations
(Lev. xxv.) is peculiar to the ‘Priestly’ code. The ‘Priestly
Writer’ makes the sharpest distinction between ‘the priests the
sons of Aaron’ and the Levites, and regards any intrusion of mere
Levites into the priestly office as the most appalling sacrilege.
Such a priesthood is unknown to the rest of the Hexateuch. The
Deuteronomist speaks habitually of ‘the priests the Levites,’ ‘the
priests the sons of Levi,’ and Deut. xviii. 1 proves that he regarded
Ixxii INTRODUCTION

all Levites as priests. The name and conception of the ‘ High
Priest’ are also peculiar to the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ who clothes him
with a sanctity and a dignity of the most distinctive character.
The common priests minister ‘in his presence’ (Num. iii. 4). He
alone wears the mysterious Urim and Thummim (Exod. xxviii.
30; contrast Deut. xxxiii. 8); he alone may enter the Holy of
Holies and offer incense there (Lev. xvi.) ; his trespass brings
guilt on the whole people, and is removed by the same sacrifices
which are offered for the people collectively (Lev. iv. 3 seg., 13
seg.). He is anointed like a king, wears the purple and the
diadem (Lev. iv. 3, 5, 16; Exod. xxviil.), and his death marks
the close of an epoch, and is therefore an occasion of amnesty
for past transgression (Num. xxxv. 28).

The ‘ Priestly’ code makes large provision for the income of
the priests and Levites, and here also it stands alone. Instead
of being consumed by the offerer in sacrificial feasts to which the
Levites are merely admitted as guests, instead of being distributed
every third year among the needy, of whom the Levites form only
one class, the tithes of vegetable (Num. xviii. 21-32) and of
animal (Lev. xxvii. 32 seg.) produce are given over absolutely to
the Levites, who in turn must give a tithe of their tithe to the
priests (Num. xviii. 21-32). The priests are to receive the first-
born of animals fit for sacrifice: they and their families are to eat
the flesh, after the blood has been sprinkled and the fat burnt on
the altar: in the case of animals unfit for sacrifice, they are to
have an equivalent in money, besides a redemption fee for the
firstborn of men (Num. xviii. 15-18; Lev. xxvii. 26, 27). The
priest has a right to the skin of burnt-offerings (Lev. vii. 8), the
right thigh and the breast of private thank-offerings (Lev.
vii. 30 seg.; contrast Deut. xviii. 3), the whole flesh of public
thank-offerings (Lev. xxiii. 20), and the whole flesh of sin and
trespass offerings (Lev. vi. 18—vii. 7), save in a few exceptional
cases. These enactments, to which others might be added, pro-
vide for the priests and Levites with a liberality far beyond that
of the Deuteronomist. But this is not all: whereas the Deu-
INTRODUCTION Ixxili

teronomist represents the Levitical priests as wholly dependent
on their share in the sacrifices and the charity of the Israelites,
the ‘Priestly’ code gives the clergy fixed territorial possessions.
The priests and Levites own forty-eight cities with pasture land
round each, measuring 2000 ells each way. If sold, the possession
of the Levite in his own city must be restored at the year of
jubilee (Num. xxxv. 1-8; Josh. xxi. 2-42; Lev. xxv. 32-34).

The language of the ‘ Priestly Writer’ is exceedingly marked,
and is always easily recognised. For example, he says, ‘Paddan
Aram,’ not, like the other writers, ‘Aram of the two rivers’

p77) ON) ; to establish or to give a covenant’ (O°pn or n 3 4N3)
never N72 M73, which latter form means literally to ‘cut a cove-
nant.’ He loves such formule as, ‘according to their generations,’
‘in the self-same day,’ ‘according to their kinds’ (on2"95) etc. ‘land
of their sojournings,’ ‘to be fruitful and multiply.’ He uses vin
for ‘beget,’ not 75°, he speaks of ‘male and female’ (nap2 131 not
mw) wR), he calls ownership of land FINS (not mon) or mw), he
uses ‘humbling the soul’ as a periphrasis for ‘fasting.’ He uses
the technical word ‘create’ instead of ‘make’; he avoids speak-
ing of God’s wrath by the old Hebrew phrase ‘his nose was
inflamed’ (18 n7n), but simply says that God ‘was angry’ (YP).
Like the Deuteronomist he recognises cities of refuge for the
involuntary homicide ; but whereas the Deuteronomist describes
their purpose at length, the ‘Priestly Writer’ has a technical ex-
pression and calls them ‘cities of refuge’ (opr sy). He employs
the formula, ‘that soul shall be cut off from its people,’ which in
him corresponds to the Deuteronomical phrase, ‘Thou shalt put
away [or exterminate] the evil from the midst of thee.’ Of course
this scanty selection gives a most imperfect idea of the strong
peculiarities in the style of the ‘Priestly Writer.’ Yet even these
examples, when carefully examined, would suffice to establish his
literary independence. The phrase, ‘That soul shall be cut off’
etc., occurs in him fifteen times ; we meet with it in Genesis (xvii.
14) as well as in those portions of the ‘ Priestly’ document which
form the ‘ Priestly’ code of law in the strict sense: it is not found
Ixxiv INTRODUCTION

once in Deuteronomy, or indeed in the rest of the Hebrew Bible.
He calls a tribe 7D more than 140 times: the Deuteronomist
never uses this word but employs one quite different. The
‘Priestly Writer’ uses INN for ‘possession’ about forty times,
yun ‘to expire’ ten times, v7 ‘the pasture round a city’ sixty-
two times, nytdin ‘ generations’ twenty-nine times, {37 ‘ sacrificial
oblation’ about eighty times, M4y ‘the congregation’ about 100
times. These are words for common notions, and no one can
suppose it to be accidental that they occur so often in the ‘Priestly
Writer’ and never at all in the Deuteronomist. So marked is the
‘Priestly’ style that there is seldom any difficulty in recognising
it. For instance, the continuity of the ‘Priestly’ document as it
stands in the Pentateuch is broken by the insertion of Deuteronomy
with its long speeches and rhetorical legislation. However, at
the end of Deut., viz., in xxxil. 48-52, we find verses which form
the natural sequel of the ‘ Priestly’ document in Numbers and are
evidently connected with it (compare especially Num. xxvii. 12-14).
If, then, we are induced by consideration of the subject-matter to
refer this little section to the ‘Priestly Writer,’ we may expect to
find the stamp of his style. This is just what we do find. In
these few verses we have ‘that self-same day,’ 7INN for ‘posses-
sion, ‘this mountain of Abarim to mount Nebo’ (not Pisgah, as
in the Deuteronomist).

§ 3—-THE DATE OF THE DOCUMENTS.

(a) The Deuteronomical Code first written about the eighteenth
year of Jostah, t.e. about 621 B.C.

This date, as at least approximate, is now accepted by all com-
petent critics, and is the fixed point from which all other points in
the chronology of the Hexateuch must be determined. The date
of Deuteronomy is ascertained chiefly on the following grounds.

In 2 Kings xxii., xxiil. we are told that in the eighteenth year
of Josiah’s reign (B.c. 621 or 622), Hilkiah the priest said to
INTRODUCTION lxxv

Shaphan the chancellor, ‘I have found the book of the torah
[z.e. ‘instruction,’ and so ‘law’] in the house of Yahweh.’ Shaphan
carried the book to the king, and read it in his hearing. The king
was deeply moved, so much so that he rent his clothes. He then
read it before the whole people, and on the terms of this ‘book of
the covenant’ (2 Kings xxiii. 2), king and people made a cove-
nant with Yahweh, ‘to walk after Yahweh and to keep his
commandments and his testimonies and his statutes with all his
heart and all his soul.’ Thereupon Josiah inaugurated a religious
reform. He purified the temple of the vessels that were made,
‘for Baal, for the Asherah, and for all the host of heaven,’ and
‘put down’ the priests connected with sun and star worship.
Next, he destroyed all the shrines of Yahweh except the temple
at Jerusalem, and in particular he devastated the Bamoth or high
places where Yahweh was worshipped, including the old sanc-
tuary of Yahweh at Bethel. Thirdly, he kept a passover, ‘as it
was written in this book of the covenant.’ No such passover,
says the historian, had been held under previous kings.

What was this book called ‘the book of the law,’ and again,
‘the book of the covenant,’ to which Josiah gave public authority?
It cannot have been the whole Pentateuch. It would have been
a sheer impossibility to read the Pentateuch or even the legal
portions of the Pentateuch through, aloud, in one day: much less
could it have been read twice in one day. Besides, the Penta-
teuch as a whole never calls itself a ‘book of the covenant.’
Nor, again, can the ‘ Book of the Covenant’ contained in Exod.
xx. 22—xxiii. be that meant. That book recognises freedom of
sacrifice at many places (Exod. xx. 24-26), says no word about
the unlawfulness of the ‘high places,’ and could not, therefore,
supply the programme for Josiah’s reform. But the kernel of
Deuteronomy (¢.e. Deut. iv. 45—xxvi., or possibly xii.—xxvi.; xxvil.
9, 10; xxviii. ; xxxi. 9-13) exactly meets the required conditions.
It could be read through aloud in between three and four hours
at most: it expressly claims to give ‘ the words of the covenant’
between Yahweh and Israel (xxviii. 69 ; compare v. 1, 2; xxvi.

NS

a
Ixxvi INTRODUCTION

17-19): it insists, as no other document does, on the wicked-
ness of offering sacrifice except at the one chosen place, so that it
alone explains the character of Josiah’s reform. Josiah burnt the
.\sherahs and sacred pillars ; abolished sun and star worship, and
the practice of passing children through the fire: he rid the land
of sorcery and witchcraft. All these things are denounced in
Deuteronomy (xii. 2-6; xvi. 21, 22; xviii. 9-15; xvii. 3). The
king, we are told, rent his garments, and, indeed, the awful threats
in Deut. xxvii. might well make him tremble. Evidently, too,
the historian in the book of Kings understood that it was the
Deuteronomical law which was read to Josiah and which pro-
duced so remarkable a revolution. For he describes the covenant
by which the people pledge themselves to ‘walk after Yahweh’
etc. (see above) in phrases which occur over and over again in
the book of Deuteronomy itself (e.g. vi. 5 ; viii. 6, 11; x. 12, 13).

In its main features the story told in Kings is quite credible,
and we shall see presently that it is corroborated by independent
evidence. But if the Deuteronomical code was found in Josiah’s
reign, when was it written? Had it been long lost, and was it
only recovered in B.c. 621?

On the face of the matter such loss is wellnigh inconceivable.
How could a book claiming divine authority, a rule of national
religion, which was to be read in the ears of the assembled people
every seven years, and on which the king was to meditate con-
tinually, perish out of sight? And howcomes it that the historian
gives no account of the book’s former history, no hint that Josiah,
or even Hilkiah, had ever heard of it before?

But we need not dwell on mere probabilities. A chief object
of the Deuteronomist is to insist on the one place of sacrifice.
Now we can imagine that such a law, had it existed, might have
been neglected by heretical or self-willed Israelites. But how can
we explain the fact that the best servants of Yahweh are ap-
parently quite ignorant of the law in question? Samuel offers
sacrifice at Mizpah (1 Sam. vii. 9), builds an altar at Ramah
(1 Sam. vii. 17), holds a sacrificial feast on a ‘high place’ there
INTRODUCTION xxvii

and later at Bethlehem (1 Sam. ix. 12; xvi. 4 seg.) ; sacrifices are
offered in Samuel’s presence at Gilgal (1 Sam. xi. 15), and there
Saul sacrifices at Samuel’s bidding (1 Sam. x. 8; xiii. 9) ; David's
family sacrifice at Bethlehem (1 Sam. xx. 29), and Absalom with
David’s leave at Hebron (2 Sam. xv. 7); Solomon early in his
reign sacrifices at Gibeon, where there was a ‘great high place’
(1 Kings iii. 4) ; and the kings of Judah, not excepting the most
pious, Asa (1 Kings xv. 14), Jehoshaphat (xxii. 44), Joash (2 Kings
xii. 3, 4), Amaziah (xiv. 4), Uzziah (xv. 4), Jotham (xv. 34, 35),
Ahaz (xvi. 4), maintained the ‘high places.’ Elijah sacrificed at
Carmel, and Yahweh, so the legend ran, instead of disapproving,
sent fire from heaven to consume the sacrifice (1 Kings xviii. 38).
The literary prophets of the eighth century, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah,
Micah,’ make no protest against the worship on the ‘high places,’
At last, Hezekiah (B.c. 725-697, or, according to Kamphausen,
714-686) is said (2 Kings xviii. 4) to have ‘removed the high
plates.’ The statement may be founded on fact (compare xviii.
22); but Hezekiah, so far as we learn from the book of Kings,
made no appeal to a written law, and thus the fact, if it be a fact,
is proof that he had never heard of Deuteronomy.

Deuteronomy everywhere limits the priesthood to the tribe of

+ The prophets earlier than Jeremiah denounce image-worship, and
regard all the sacrificial worship coldly, but they make no objection to the
high places as such. Micah i. 5 may seem to be an exception: ‘ What is
the transgression of Jacob? Is it not Samaria? And what are the high places
of Judah? Are they not Jerusalem?’ So the passage stands in the common
text, but the latter part of it is senseless. We can understand that Samaria
the capital was responsible for the sins of the northern kingdom. But it is
hard to make any sense of the statement that Jerusalem was identical with the
rival shrines in the rest of Judah. The true reading as retained in the Lxx.,
the Peshitto, and the Targum, has some slight support in the Hebrew mss.,
and at once commends itself as sense and poetry :

‘Through the transgression of Jacob is all this,
And through the sins of the house of Israel.
What is the transgression of Jacob? Is it not Samaria?
And what are the sins of Judah? Are they not Jerusalem ?’
See Roorda’s Commentary, and, on the other side, Ryssel Zextgestalt u.

Echtheit des Buches Micha, f
Ixxvill INTRODUCTION

Levi. No doubt, from ancient times (Judges xvii. 13) Levites
were the favourite priests. But priestly functions, and even the
priestly office, were by no means limited to them. The heroes
of Israel, whatever their tribe, offered sacrifice throughout the
whole period of the judges. Samuel, the minister of the sanc-
tuary, was in the strictest sense a priest (see particularly 1 Sam.
vii.), yet he was not a Levite but an Ephraimite (1 Sam. i. 1) ; Saul
(1 Sam. xiii. 9), David (2 Sam. vi. 17; xxiv. 18 seg.), Solomon
(1 Kings iii. 4 ; viii. 62-64) offered sacrifice as a matter of course,
and in their place as head and representative of the nation.
David’s sons were priests, and Ira, not a Levite, but from the
clan of Jair in Manasseh, was a royal chaplain at David’s court
(2 Sam. viii. 18; xx. 26).

A number of details confirm the conclusion that Deuteronomy
cannot have been written long before 621. In Deut. xvii. 8-13
reference is made to a supreme court ‘at the place which Yahweh
thy God shall choose,’ z.e. at Jerusalem. There justice was to be
administered by a [secular] judge and a board of Levites. No
such court is known in the early history of the kingdom, but the
chronicler (2 Chron. xix. 8) ascribes the institution of a similar
court to Jehoshaphat. The Deuteronomist warns the people
against star-worship (Deut. xvii. 3). This form of idolatry was
introduced under Assyrian and Babylonian influence during the
eighth century B.c. (2 Kings xvii. 16 ; xxiii. 5,12). It was strong
when Josiah began his reform, and it is the prophets of Josiah’s
time, Zephaniah (i. 5), and Jeremiah (viii. 2; xix. 13; vii. 18;
xliv. 17), who denounce it. This star-worship is never mentioned
in any other portion of the Hexateuch, or in any Hebrew author
older than those just quoted. No author earlier than Josiah
shows any acquaintance with Deuteronomy: after that date proofs
of such knowledge abound. The Hebrew is, as Dillmann and
' others have shown, that of the seventh century, and the style, no
less than the theology, of the Deuteronomist closely resembles
that of Jeremiah. It is no less certain that the Deuteronomist lived
some considerable time before the Babylonian exile of B.c. 586.
INTRODUCTION Ixxix

Otherwise he would not have threatened the Israelites with exile
in Egypt (xxviii. 68). Here we have a genuine attempt at pre-
diction—an attempt which failed. The examination of the later
additions to Deuteronomy will be reserved for the second part of
this work in which the text of Deuteronomy will be given. Kuenen
distinguishes (1) additions made while the Deuteronomical code
formed a book by itself, viz. Deut. imiv. 40 [? 44], xxxi. 1-8, and
perhaps xxix., xxx. ; (2) additions made in the Deuteronomical
spirit and style after the Deuteronomical law was united with
the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ The former were written,
as he thinks, at least as late as the beginning of the Babylonian
captivity, in B.c. 597. The latter he is inclined to place some
time before the return from the Exile in B.c. 536. But of this
more hereafter.

(0) The Date of the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History.

No one doubts that the Jahvist and Elohist wrote long before
the Deuteronomist, ze. before 621. The proofs of this priority
are not far to seek. We have seen that Deuteronomy was the
programme of a religious reform, one prominent feature of which
consisted in the destruction of the ‘ high places’ and the limitation
of sacrifice to the temple at Jerusalem. Now, neither the Jahvist
nor the Elohist has so much as a presentiment of this revolution
for which history had been silently preparing the way long before
621. Both dwell with enthusiasm on the old shrines of Israel,
and the legends by which they were hallowed in the mind of the
pious Israelite. They show no sign of acquaintance with any
other view. Moreover, as will appear later, the Deuteronomist “’
derives his knowledge of Israel’s legendary story chiefly from the
Elohist ; and his code is often no more than an expansion and
amendment of the laws contained in the ‘ Book of the Covenant.’
To this book he makes no explicit reference, but he borrows from 5
it none the less, and that with great freedom.
Ty

Ixxx INTRODUCTION

We are compelled, then, to carry the Jahvist and Elohist back
before 621 B.c. How much further back may we go? No cer-
tain and precise answer can be given. Still we may fix the limit
approximately. Prophecy is an old institution in Israel, but the
early prophets made, so far as is known, no use of the pen. The
earliest literary prophet is Amos, who began his work between
760 and 750 z.c. It is probable that Amos marks the beginning
of prose literature among the Hebrews. We say ‘ probable,’ for
we cannot, of course, be certain that Hebrew historians did not
write at an earlier date. On the whole, however, it seems reason-
able to suppose that the earlier prophets, Elijah, Elisha, and even
Jonah,} did not write, because the thought of prose composition

7 was strange to them. In that case the oldest literature of the

eS

Hebrews consisted, like the literature of most other nations, in
songs, some of which are preserved in their ‘Oldest Book of
History.’ Accordingly, we may place the work of the historians
themselves in the beginning of the eighth century B.c. or there-
abouts.

How much further back than 621 B.c. must we go to fix
the dates of Jahvist and Elohist? Here signs of acquaintance
with the Jahvist or Elohist in the prophets would be the surest
criterion. However, great caution is needed. Nothing, for ex-
ample, can be built on the fact that Amos refers (ii. 10; v. 25)
to the forty years of wandering in the wilderness or reproaches
Edom (i. 11) because he has ‘pursued his brother with the
sword . . . and kept his rage continually.’ Here, no doubt, we
have allusions which prove that certain legends were current in
the eighth century 1.c., and were familiar both to Amos and to the
early historians. We have no warrant for any further inference.

It is different with Hosea. In xii. 4 seg., 13 seg., he writes
thus: ‘In the womb he [Jacob] took his brother by the heel, and
in his manly strength he strove with Cad: yea, he had power

1 Jonah, it must be remembered, is an historical character, though the
book which goes by his name is of very late origin. He lived under Jero-
boam 11., 786-746 B.C. (2 Kings xiv. 25).
INTRODUCTION lxxxi

over the angel and prevailed. . . . He found him at Bethel, and
there he spoke with him [read wy]. . . . Jacob fled to the field
of Aram and Israel served for a wife.’ The resemblance not only
to the ideas but to the language of the Jahvist excludes all
reasonable doubt that Hosea had read his work. Compare Gen.
xxv. 26%, xxvii. 43, xxxii. 25-33 (Jahvist passages) and xxix.
18 (Elohist). We may be sure, then, that Hosea was acquainted
at least with the Jahvistic work, and consequently that work ex-
isted before Hosea wrote-—z.e. at least before 735 8.c. This point
being fixed, it is of less importance that in Hosea ix. 10 there
may be an allusion to Num. xxv. 1-5; that Isaiah (iii. 9) followed
an account of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah similar to
that of the Jahvist (Gen. xix. 4 seg.) ; and that a prophecy which
goes under the name of Micah (vi. 4 seg.) ; but which is attributed
with better reason to the age of Manasseh, shows, apparently,
knowledge of Num. xxii. 2—xxiv. It is scarcely possible to make
the result already obtained with regard to the date of the Jahvist
either more certain or more definite by examining the historical
allusions which occur in his work. Sometimes these historical
allusions are themselves doubtful, sometimes they are found in
passages which may belong either to the Jahvist or Elohist. It
seems, however, safe to see in Gen. xxvii. 4o seg. an allusion to the
rebellion of the Edomites against Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat.
(2 Kings viii. 20). This would prove the Jahvist’s familiarity with
events which happened about the middle of the ninth century z.c.,
and so far confirms the opinion given as to his own date.

It is absolutely certain that the Elohist wrote before 722 B.c. =

In that year the northern kingdom fell, whereas the Elohist pre-
supposes the existence of the northern kingdom, to which, as has
been said, he clearly belonged, and in which he manifests ex-
clusive interest. For the rest, we have but scanty data for
determining the Elohist’s date. We may compare him with the
Jahvist, and inquire which bears marks of earlier origin. Unfor-
tunately, however, this is still one of the most vexed questions in
the criticism of the Hexateuch. If we consider the much grosser

Ww
\xxxii INTRODUCTION

anthropomorphism of the Jahvist, the more refined views of the
Elohist, and the greater prominence which he gives to prophecy
and prophetic ideas, the scale seems to turn in favour of the
Jahvist’s priority. Again, the Elohist’s theory that the name
Yahweh was revealed at a special time looks less simple, more
learned, less antique than the Jahvist’s assumption that the name
was always known. No doubt we may argue, with Dillmann and
others, that the Elohist wrote in the north, which was the cradle of
Hebrew literature, and that the legends were modified by the
Jahvist, a Judean, in the interest of Judah. But then it may be
held with just as much plausibility that the Jahvist was a northern
Israelite, with a large-hearted interest—an interest which is quite
conceivable—in the Hebrew race as a whole. In that case, the
Elohist may have altered the legends with a view of suiting them
better to the taste of his countrymen in the north.

From what has been said, the reader will perceive that we are
fairly well informed about the date of the Jahvist, and have to fix,
if we can fix, the date of the Elohist by his relations to the
Jahvist, which relations are keenly disputed. Yet, after all, the
margin left to conjecture is not very wide. We may claim a
general consensus of critics for the view that both Jahvist and
Elohist wrote between 850 and 750 B.c.!

.

(c) Zhe Date of the ‘ Priestly Writer.

The Book of Nehemiah viii.—x. relates that in 444 B.c. Ezra
the scribe ‘brought forth’ the book of the law. It was read in
the assembly of the people at Jerusalem, and they pledged them-
selves to observe it. It would take more space than we can

1 Stade and Dillmann may be fairly taken as representing the extremes of
radical and conservative criticism, Stade places the origin of the Jahvist
between 850 and 800 B.c., and that of the Elohist about 750 Bc, Dillmann
places the Elohist in the former half of the ninth century B.C., and the Jahvist
about the middle of the eighth.
INTRODUCTION Ixxxili

afford, to prove the credibility of this account, nor need we do so,
for that is now generally granted. It is also clear that the law to
which the people bound themselves included the chief part of the
‘Priestly’ document. The people kept the feast of Tabernacles
for eight days (Lev. xxiii. 39; contrast Deut. xvi. 13-15) ; they
undertook to provide for the ‘continual burnt offering,’ sin offer-
ings, the shewbread : tithes were to be collected by the Levites
under the supervision of ‘the priest the son of Aaron,’ and the
Levites in turn were to pay tithe to the priests. In all these par-
ticulars the reform of Ezra implies the ‘ Priestly’ law, and is un-
intelligible unless that law be presupposed. In short, the reform
of Ezra and Nehemiah stands to the ‘Priestly’ law, precisely as
Josiah’s reform stands to the law of Deuteronomy. Therefore as
early as 444 B.c. the ‘ Priestly ’ legislation and the narrative por-
tions of the Hexateuch which are indissolubly connected with it
were accepted by the mass of the Jews as the law given by God
to Moses.

This much is not controverted. But when was the law, en-
forced by Nehemiah and Ezra, written? Here it is that Biblical
scholars of the present day differ most widely. Dillmann and
others contend that the ‘ Priestly’ document is much older than
Deuteronomy, and may belong to the middle of the ninth century
Bc. The school of Graf (Kuenen, Wellhausen, Stade, etc.), on
the contrary, believe that the ‘Priestly’ law is much later than
Deuteronomy, and may be assigned to the time of Ezra or there-
abouts. The following, among other reasons, demonstrate, as I
think, the correctness of the later date.

The ‘Priestly Writer,’ in Lev. xvii. 3-9, represents Yahweh
as charging the Israelites to bring all their sacrifices to ‘the door
of the tent of meeting.’ He who offers sacrifice anywhere else
is to be ‘cut off from his people.’ Elsewhere it is taken for
granted that there must be, and always has been, one only
place of sacrifice. Now it is the great object of Deuteronomy to
insist that Yahweh will have only one place of sacrifice. No-
thing could have served his purpose better than a reference to

N
Ixxxiv INTRODUCTION

the fact that a similar law had existed from the beginning.
Instead of this, he admits that, while in the wilderness, the Israel-
ites did what they pleased in this respect, but that after their
settlement in Canaan they were to sacrifice only ‘in the place
which Yahweh your God shall choose to cause his name to
dwell there.’ Evidently the Deuteronomist had never heard of
the ‘Priestly’ law. He is striving to secure unity in the place
of sacrifice. When the ‘Priestly Writer’ took pen in hand, this
unity was an accomplished fact, and he could without misgiving
place its origination in Mosaic times, and make it coeval with the
institution of sacrifice itself.

The ‘ Priestly Writer’ makes the sharpest distinction between
the ‘priests the sons of Aaron’ and the Levites. The latter may
not enter the sanctuary or touch the sacred vessels ; much less
may they act as priests by offering sacrifice. Deuteronomy
absolutely identifies priests and Levites. The distinction must
be later than the Deuteronomist, because no hint of it appears
in any writer previous to the Exile! Ezekiel, however, throws
a light on the whole matter which enables us to trace the way
in which the exclusive rights of the Aaronical priests arose.
Ezekiel writing in the Exile, when his people, as he believed, were
paying the penalty of their past idolatry, framed a law of ritual
which was to protect his country against such aberrations for

1 Two passages may be quoted to show that the distinction between priests
and Levites was recognised at least towards the close of the Exile. In one case
the text is certainly, in the other (which belongs at earliest to the very close
of the Exile) probably, corrupt ; and thus, instead of weakening, they greatly
strengthen the belief that the distinction between priests and Levites was
unknown before the Exile. The passages in question are 1 Kings viii. 4,
Isaiah Ixvi. 21. It will perhaps be best to quote two learned and candid
scholars, both strongly opposed to the view advocated in the text, and free,
therefore, from all suspicion of bias. ‘The Book of Kings,’ says Baudissin
(A. 7. Priesterthum, p. 213) ‘speaks only once of Levites [as distinct from
priests] viz. in Book i. viii. 3, 4: ‘‘ And all the elders of Israel came, and the
priests took up the ark. And they brought up the ark of Yahweh and the tent
of meeting, and all the holy vessels that were in the tent, and the priests and
Levites brought them up.” But it has been justly remarked that ver. 4 excites
suspicion of being interpolated, because (apart from the mention of the tent
INTRODUCTION lxxxv

the future. This law, which in many details and in its general
spirit, anticipated the ‘ Priestly’ legislation, was never carried out,
but it has fortunately been preserved in Ezek. xl.—xlviii. Ezekiel,
like the Deuteronomist, still holds to the form ‘the priests the
Levites,’ but he adds a qualification which changes the whole
matter, ‘the priests the Levites who are of the seed of Zadok,
who are near to me, to minister to me’ (xliii. 19). A little earlier
(xl. 46) he had said: ‘The chamber which faces north is for the
priests who keep the charge of the altar: these are the sons of
Zadok, who draw near from among the sons of Levi to Yahweh
to minister to him.” Why does Ezekiel make this difference
between the family of Zadok and the other Levites? He gives
us the reason with all possible clearness. He says (xliv. 10-16)
that the Levites generally ‘ went astray,’and ‘became a stumbling-
block of iniquity to the house of Israel.’ ‘Therefore I have
lifted up my hand against them; it is the oracle of the Lord
Yahweh, and they shall bear [the punishment of] their iniquity :
and they shall not come near to me to perform the office of priest
to me, or to come near any of my holy things, the things that are
most holy, and they shall bear their shame. . . I have appointed
them keepers of the charge of the house for all its service.’ This,
then, was the later history of the Levites. The Deuteronomist
recognises the inherent right of all Levites to the priestly office.
Still, by abolishing the local sanctuaries, he did as a matter of fact

 

of meeting) the last words ‘‘and the priests and Levites brought them up” are
both awkward and superfluous, and because the mention of the Levites should
have been made in ver. 3, since, according to the ‘ Priestly Writer’ (Num.
iii, 31), it was just the office of the Levites to bear the ark.’ In Isaiah Ixvi.
21, the words of the received Hebrew text are, ‘And of them also will I take
for priests for Levites,’ or rather perhaps for [¢.e. as servants for] the priests
for the Levites. Whichever rendering be adopted, the expressions ‘ priests ’
and ‘ Levites’ are here synonymous. The ancient versions and most of the
best Hebrew mss. read ‘for priests and levites,’ but both Dillmann (/saiah,
P- 542) and Baudissin (p. 249 seg.) rightly regard this reading as the correction
of a scribe familiar with the later distinction. No motive can be suggested
for altering the words ‘for priests and Levites,’ if they stood in the primary
text.
Ixxxvi INTRODUCTION

deprive the many Levites who ministered at the local sanctuaries
of their bread. He does indeed, with kindly forethought, main-
tain the right of the country Levite to a share in the work
and emoluments of a priest, if he ‘come with all the desire of
his soul to the place which Yahweh shall choose’ (Deut.
xviii, 6-8). This scheme, however, was impracticable. ‘The
priests of the high places came not up to the altar of Yahweh at
Jerusalem’ (2 Kings xxiii.g). It could not well be otherwise :
the temple was already occupied by the family of Zadok, who
had been established as royal chaplain under Solomon. Ezekiel
abrogates the concession of Deuteronomy. For the future the
Levites are to be degraded from the priesthood, and this, the
prophet thought, was only a fit punishment for their past sins.
The priests of the local sanctuaries were less subject to the pro-
phetic influence, which was often strong at Jerusalem ; and in any
case Ezekiel regarded the worship of Yahweh at the local shrines
as no better than idolatry. After the Exile the family of Zadok
had it all their own way. Very many priests who claimed to be
sons of Zadok, very few of the mere Levites, returned with
Zerubbabel and Ezra (Ezra ii. 36-40; viii. 15-20). Indeed, it
was only by strong pressure that Ezra could induce any of the
common Levites to return. Why should they return, if they
were merely to perform those lower offices in the sanctuary
formerly intrusted to heathen? (Ezek. xliv. 6-9.) The Levites
who did return must have been completely under the power of
the Jerusalem or Zadokite priests ; their number grew, probably
because many new families were associated with them by those
fictitious genealogies which commend themselves to the Semitic
mind. Hence, the ‘Priestly Writer’ could transport the origin
of the priestly families at Jerusalem back from Zadok in the time
of Solomon to Aaron in the time of Moses. He could represent
the distinction between priests and Levites as primitive, despite
the fact that it was a novelty. He could speak of the subordi-
nate ministry as a lofty honour given them by Yahweh, though
Ezekiel a century before had considered it a degradation. ‘They
INTRODUCTION Ixxxvii

shall bear their iniquity,’ says the prophet. ‘Is it but a small
thing to you,’ says the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ ‘that the God of Israel
has separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you
near to himself, to do the service of the tabernacle of Yahweh ?

. and seek ye the priesthood also?’ The reader must
remember that Ezekiel was a priest of the temple, and must there-
fore have known well how things stood in his own day. So, too,
the Deuteronomist had the warmest interest in the temple at
Jerusalem, and had therefore no conceivable motive for con-
cealing the sole right of the sons of Zadok or of Aaron to the
priesthood.?

The ‘high-priest’ is, in the document before us, the head of
the theocracy, and has a sacrosanct character which gives him
an unparalleled eminence and dignity. Such a functionary was
utterly unknown before the Exile. No doubt, the priests were
not all on one level. Jeremiah, himself a priest, recognises
certain elders or sheikhs of the priests, and even speaks of the
‘the priest,’ ze. ‘the chief officer’ of the temple (Jer. xix. 1;

1 The statement of Ezekiel is so explicit that one can hardly see how its
force can be evaded by any possible ingenuity. I prefer to quote Dillmann’s
own words (Zxod. und Levit. p. 461): ‘The assertion that Ezekiel first brought
up the distinction between priests and Levites, and so forms the bridge between
Deuteronomy and the Priestly Code, is false. For Ezekiel in xl. 45 seq.,
xlii. 13, xliii. 19, presupposes this distinction as a matter of course; and in
chapter xliv., where he speaks of the matter ex professo, he only intends to
restore the original order.’ Exactly the same position is taken by Kittel,
Baudissin, etc., and I venture to think that a position must be desperate if
men so able and learned can devise no better defence. For (1) Ezekiel does
regard the radical and essential distinction between priest and mere Levite as
new. ‘They shall not come near to me to execute the office of a priest to me.’
(2) He makes not the least allusion to Aaron, or to the view of the ‘ Priestly
Writer,’ that the distinction between priest and Levite was primeval. (3) He
does not charge the Levites with presumption or sacrilege for arrogating to
themselves the priestly office. Their crime lay in their connivance at idolatry.
(4) He expressly represents the subordinate position of the Levites as a
punishment and degradation : the ‘ Priestly Writer’ no less expressly repre-
sents it as a high honour. To Ezekiel the Levites are degraded from the
priesthood : according to Num. viii. they are elevated from the mass of the
laity.
Ixxxvill INTRODUCTION

XX. I; xxix. 25-26). But this natural dignity, required by order
and convenience, is a wholly different thing from the mysterious
‘high-priest’’ of the ‘Priestly’ code. The late origin of the latter
is clear from the fact that Ezekiel, in his elaborate scheme of
ritual, takes no notice of the high-priest. The temple at Jerusalem
was originally, like the sanctuaries at Bethel and Dan, a royal
chapel, and the power of the chief priest was overshadowed by
the king. Even Ezekiel acknowledges the prince’s right of re-
ceiving the sacred offerings and providing for the temple service.
When the memory of kingly power had faded away, when the
Jews, having ceased to be a nation, had become a church, and
concentrated their thoughts on ritual religion, then, and not till
then, was there room for the office of high-priest, as conceived
by the ‘Priestly Writer.’

There is no reason to think that the ‘Priestly’ rules on the
income of the priests and Levites existed before the Exile. Ezekiel
is silent about the offering of tithes and the firstborn of beasts to
the priests and Levites. Plainly, he had never heard of priestly
and Levitical cities. For he makes a provision in land, for the
priests and Levites, without alluding to any previous arrangement.
Ezekiel’s plan is clear and practicable ; the Levitical cities, on the
contrary, never were and never could have been more than a theo-
cratic dream. In such a country as Palestine, which consists
mostly of hills pressed together and separated by narrow ravines,

1 Tt is quite possible that the title ‘high-priest’ (S95 joDn -es 3)
may be older than the Exile. But the high-priest of earlier times was not the
high-priest of the ‘Priestly’ code. Baudissin (p. 289) admits that ‘in the
prophet Zechariah, who wrote after the Exile, we see the high-priest Joshua
appearing as head of the people as no previous high-priest of Judah had done.’ ,
Under David there were two chief priests (2 Sam. viii. 17; xx. 25), and
Solomon ‘drove out’ one of them on political grounds (1 Kings ii. 26, 27).
In fact, Solomon, as has been shown above, offered sacrifice in person, and
probably all the carly kings were themselves in the truest sense the high-priests
of the nation. This was just what analogy would lead us to expect. We
know that the Roman kings were chief priests. Hence, even when the very
name of king was hateful, the title was perpetuated in the vex sacrorum.
There scems to have been no room, and no occasion for a Pontifex Maximus
till republican times.
INTRODUCTION Ixxxix

no mortal power could set apart forty-eight cities surrounded
by a pasture land of 2000 ells square.

The Deuteronomist fixes attention on the God to whom
sacrifice is to be offered, and on the place at which sacrifice
should be offered. The ‘Priestly Writer’ has little to say on
either of these points, which he regards as matters already settled,
but he enlarges on the manner in which sacrifice is to be offered—
in other words, on the sacrificial ritual. Now Jeremiah, priest as
he was, declares (vii. 22) that Yahweh ‘spake not to your fathers,
nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the
land of Egypt concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices,’ thereby
showing complete ignorance of the whole ‘ Priestly’ legislation at
Sinai. Ezekiel has the ritualistic spirit which was distasteful to
the earlier prophets, and takes great pains to regulate the manner
of sacrifice. Had he known the ‘ Priestly’ legislation, it would
have suited him exactly. As it is, he had to codify the sacrificial
ritual for himself. His requirements, too, are less exacting, and
his ritual less splendid on the whole, than that in Leviticus and
Numbers, so that the priority seems to be on his side. It is cer-
tain that he had never heard of the solemn day of atonement
prescribed in Lev. xvi. for the tenth day of the seventh month.
Had he done so, he would not have had to devise two days of atone-
ment, one as each half of the year begins (Ezek. xlv. 18-20), and
this with ceremonies so simple that one is obliged to look upon
them as the mere germ of the elaborate and impressive ritual en-
joined in Lev. xvi. It is just the same with the sabbatical year and
the year of jubilee. No trace of them appears before the Exile.

In short, the history of Israel, and in particular the history
of prophecy and ritual, are unintelligible unless we place the
‘Priestly Writer’ after the Exile, in which case all becomes clear.

 

1 Smend (Zze&éel, p. 377) exhibits the differences in comparative tables,
and carefully investigates the whole question.

2 Ezek. xlvi. 17 mentions a ‘year of release.’ He refers, however, not to
the fiftieth but to the seventh year. For Jeremiah (xxxiv. 8, 15, 17) uses the
same expression (477), and leaves no room for doubt that he is referring to

the law in Deut. xv.
\\

XC INTRODUCTION

The Deuteronomist follows the ‘ Book of the Covenant,’ and the
‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ chiefly the Elohist : he shows
not the least sign of acquaintance with the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ The
same is true of all writers before the Exile.!_ But if we turn to the
Chronicler, who compiled his work about 250 B.c., we are at once
struck by the difference. In the first or genealogical part of his
work he makes free use of the whole Hexateuch, including the
‘Priestly’ document. He distinguishes carefully, and almost
habitually between priests and Levites, mentions again and again
the Levitical cities and their pasture lands (1 Chron. vi. 39-66,
etc.) ; he refers to the altar of burnt offering (1 Chron. xvi. 40), to
the morning and evening sacrifices, and the sacrifices for the
feasts, ‘as it is written in the law of Yahweh’ (2 Chron. xxxi. 3),
the tithes from the flocks and herds (xxxi. 5, 6), the holy trumpets
(1 Chron. xv. 24, etc.,as Num. x. 1-10). The author of the book
of Kings tells us (1 Kings viii. 65-66) that Solomon kept the feast
of Tabernacles seven days, and sent the people away on the eighth.
This was the author’s idea of legal observance as enjoined in Deut.
xvi. 13. With the Chronicler it was otherwise. He knew that the
‘Priestly ’ law (Lev. xxiii. 39) marked the eighth day as a pinay or

1 Here again it will be best to let Dillmann speak for himself. ‘It has
been shown that the Deuteronomist’s acquaintance with historical and legal
portions of the ‘‘ Priestly Writer” is, although it cannot be proved with full
certainty, still probable: also in respect to language signs are not wanting
which point in the same direction’ (/exatezch, vol. iii. p. 668). Weadd a
complete list of all references to the ‘ Priestly’ document which Dillmann
produces from Hcbrew literature anterior to the Exile :—(1) 2 Kings xi. 12:
‘Then he brought out the king’s son [Joash], and put the crown upon him and
the testimony,’ the Hebrew word for ‘testimony’ ny4y being a common
synonym in the ‘ Priestly Writer’ for the decalogue: (2) resemblances of lan-
guage in Isa. i. 13, iv. §; Amos ii. 7; Hos. vi. 9, the only instance cited by
Dillmann being the use of x41 ‘ convocation’: (3) Amos, like the ‘ Priestly
Writer,’ represents the Israelites as wandering forty years in the desert. (4)
Amos vii. 4 speaks of ‘the great deep,’ as Gen. vii. rt. (5) Isaiah xi. 6 sey.,
in his ideal of the Messianic time, portrays conditions attributed by the
© Priestly Writer’ (Gen. i. 29 seg.) to man’s original state. About the first
instance, Dillmann himself seems doubtful. It is impossible to extract any
meaning from the statement that Jehoiada ‘put the crown and the testimony
upon Joash,’ if ‘testimony’ be a synonym for ‘decalogue.’ Indeed, early Jewish
INTRODUCTION xci

‘solemn rest.’ Accordingly, for the words ‘On the eighth day
he sent the people away,’ he substitutes (2 Chron. vii. 9), ‘On the
eighth day they held a solemn assembly.’ The chronicler adopts
the same technical term (Mm>¥y) which the ‘Priestly Writer’ had
used in the same connection. We are now able to understand
the promises and threats which close the earliest nucleus of the
‘Priestly’ law (Lev. xvii—xxvi.). ‘It is striking,’ says Dillmann,
‘that many expressions occur which seem somewhat modern,
inasmuch as they appear first in the seventh and sixth centuries
B.c.’ The threats occupy far more space than the promises : ‘the
sad circumstances of the Exile are portrayed in lively colours, and
in accordance with experience.’ If, however, unlike Dillmann,
we grant that even the earliest written sketch of the ‘Priestly’
law was written in or after the Exile, these striking facts receive
rational explanation, and to this conclusion all the evidence leads.

tradition was puzzled by the words. The Peshitto translates ‘crown of the
testimony,’ the Arabic in the London Polyglott has ‘ crown of the kingdom,’
and the Jerusalem Targum (Lagarde, Prophet. Chaldaice, p. 24) develops from
the enigmatical words the strange conceit, that the crown was itself a ‘ testi-
mony’ or test: it was so heavy that no one except the lawful heir could bear it.
Even Rashi gives this view as the older one, though he supports the ungram-
matical interpretation adopted in the English version that Jehoiada put the
crown on the king’s head and gave him the ‘testimony,’ z.e. the book of the
law. The text needs emendation, and we must read ‘the crown and the
bracelets’ (mypy comp. 2 Sam. i. 10 with Driver’s note), or ‘the crown and
the insignia’ (“qy. See Klostermann ad J/oc.). The other passages may be
safely left to the judgment of the reader. I may add here that the Deutero-
nomist in chap. xiv. (on clean and unclean food) has one or two peculiarities
of language which remind us of the ‘ Priestly’ style. This shows that certain
technical terms were commonly used in priestly circles and adopted both by
the Deuteronomist and the ‘Priestly Writer.” It must be allowed also that
the Deuteronomist was in this chapter following a written source, used both
by himself and by the ‘ Priestly Writer’ in Lev. xi. Otherwise, it does not
seem possible to account for such a form as yd which the Deuteronomist
uses here and nowhere else.

1 The examination of the language of the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ and its date,
has been examined by Ryssel, De Elohiste Pentateucht Sermone (1878), by
Giesebrecht (Z. 4. 7, 1881), and in a cautious and instructive essay by Prof.
Driver (Jour. of Philology, xxii). Rysselcontends for the pre-exilic, Giesebrecht
for the post-exilic date ; Professor Driver’s position is somewhat negative ;
Kuenen sums up very moderately and reasonably (Onderz, i. § 15, 11).
xcli INTRODUCTION

It does not of course follow that because the ‘Priestly’ law,
as a whole, was written down after the Exile, all the usages which
it embodies date from so late a time. This is the case with some
of the most important among them, but by no means with all.
The priests at Jerusalem, as elsewhere, must have had a number
of religious customs handed down by tradition in their clan
and corporation. But the call to write them down need not
have been felt while the temple-worship continued. A young
priest learnt the sacred rites by seeing them, just as even a
Catholic priest learns the rites of mass much more by instruction
from his elders than by study of books. When the temple was
destroyed by the Babylonians, and sacrifice was suspended, the
need of writing made itself felt. Laws such as those on clean
and unclean animals, or leprosy, are, no doubt, connected with
the beginnings of Hebrew life, and go back beyond it. The
ordeal of the ‘bitter water’ (Num. v. 11. seg.) has its analogon
among savage races, and may justly claim immemorial antiquity.
The ‘Priestly’ document unites the monotheism and morality of
the prophets with ancient superstition and priestly assumption of
later date. In its adaptation to the circumstances of the time and
in its mixed character lay the secret of its success.

(2) The final Redaction of the Pentateuch.

In 444 B.c. the people at Jerusalem bound themselves to the
observance of the law, and this law included the ‘ Priestly’ legis-
lation as a whole. Yet this can only be accepted as a general
statement which requires modification in detail.

In the first place, the ‘Priestly’ document received impor-
tant additions after Ezra’s time. These later accretions will
be pointed out in the proper place, when the text of this docu-
ment is given. Here it is enough to mention the day of atone-
ment, the tithe from flocks and herds, the half shekel for the
support of the temple, as examples of ordinances which were not
INTRODUCTION xCili

yet instituted even in the middle of the fifth century B.c. Further,
long after Ezra’s time the text of the law was treated with a
certain degree of freedom. Many changes were made by the
scribes, and hence the Samaritan copy and the Greek version of
the Septuagint have preserved numerous readings which com-
mend themselves on critical grounds as more ancient than those
which met with the final approval of Jewish scholars, and are
retained in the present text of our Hebrew Bibles. These differ-
ences are not always confined to minutize. The chronology of
the patriarchal epoch is constructed on different systems in the
Masoretic text, in the Samaritan copy, and in the Septuagint.
The common Hebrew text and the Septuagint differ materially
in the account of the erection of the Tabernacle (Exod. xxxv.—xl.)
In fact, the formation of the present Hebrew text has been the
work of centuries after Ezra.

Secondly, there is reason, though not perhaps decisive reason,
to think that ‘the book of the law of Moses’ to which Ezra
and Nehemiah bound the people, did not merely consist of
the ‘Priestly’ document, though that was the part to which
attention was chiefly directed, but comprised (with the exceptions
just mentioned) the whole of our present Pentateuch. The
people, if the account in Neh. viii—x. be accurate, entered into
an engagement to abstain from intermarriage with ‘the peoples “
of the land’—a point prominent in Deuteronomy (vii. 2 seg.), and
ignored, or at least not clearly mentioned, in the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ ,
So also the people promised to ‘forego the seventh year and the
exaction of every debt ;’ and here again both the substance of the
engagement and the words used (2. 1° Nv) inevitably recall
Deut. xv. 2 seg. In Ezra’s time Deuteronomy, now united with
the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’ enjoyed a quasi-canoni-
cal authority. The readiest way of securing respect for the
‘Priestly ’ document was to weld it into one with that nucleus of
a Bible which the Jews already possessed. In this way danger of
rival authority was avoided, and the ‘Priestly’ legislation would
be taken as the supplement of and commentary on the earlier

S
xciv INTRODUCTION

and simpler legislation of Deuteronomy. Certain it is that, early
- in the third century B.c., the Pentateuch was separated from
. Joshua, and divided, as at present, into five books. Of this, the
Samaritan text and the version of the Septuagint afford sufficient
evidence.

Here this introductory sketch must end. Unless it has
wholly failed in its object, it will enable those who had little
previous acquaintance with the subject to see the divergence
between critical results and the traditional view of the Hexateuch.
It is not the work of one hand, but of many. If we put aside a
few fragments of ancient song, the earliest document cannot be
much earlier than the ninth century before Christ, and is therefore
posterior by many centuries to the time of Moses. True, we have
at least four witnesses instead of one. But the earliest of these
witnesses is anonymous and late; the witnesses on the one hand
copy each other, on the other hand contradict each other ; the

~ oldest among them proceeds on unhistorical assumptions ; each
in his order displays an increasing taste for the marvellous, and

«. wanders further from the fact. We cannot out of such material
construct the early history of Israel. We may feel sure that
Israel’s sojourn in Goshen, the deliverance by Moses, the tempo-
rary union of the Hebrews and the beginning of a higher religion
under his influence, are facts which cannot be shaken. We can
lay the finger here and there on precious fragments which enable
us to form some idea of the way in which the Hebrews conquered
Canaan. That is about all. Even the noble narrative of the
Jahvist is not sober history. Yet, in another and a very real
sense the Hexateuch becomes in the hands of scholars a history
of unique interest. It is not indeed the history of Abraham and
Jacob, of Moses and Joshua. Itis the history—a history which
cannot deceive any more than the history deciphered by geo-
logists on the rocks can deceive—of religious ideas. And to
Christians the history of that religion which prepared the way for
Christ has, and must have, supreme value.
THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY
NOTE

Throughout Genesis the text in ordinary type belongs to the
Jahvist. In cases where the Jahvist authorship is un-
certain, attention is called to this in the notes.

The text in italics belongs to the Elohist, thus :—

And the angel of God said to me in u dream, ‘Jacob, and T
satd, ‘ Here am I.

Words added by the compiler, chiefly to harmonise the
Jahvist and Elohist, have been placed in round
brackets, thus :—(_).

Words which are not in the text, but have been added to
explain the sense, have been placed in square brackets,
thus :-—[ .

The numeration of verses and chapters follows that of the
Masoretic text. The English reader will find that the
cases in which this numeration differs from that familiar
to him are noted in the margin of the Revised Version.

For the arrangement of type from the beginning of Exodus
to the end of Joshua, see note, p. 106.
THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW
HISTORY

—_——~+>——

Gen. II, 4%. When! Yahweh made earth and heaven—s. now
no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the
field had yet sprung up: for Yahweh had not caused it to rain
upon the earth and there was not a man to till the ground: 6.
but there went up a mist from the earth and watered the whole

lit qb—xi. 9. Juventus Mundi, or the History previous to the Call of
Abraham. Two facts with regard to this section of the history are generally
acknowledged. It is admitted that the narrative given below comes from a
book of Hebrew history which is easily and clearly distinguished from that
of the ‘ Priestly Writer’ with which we shall have to deal Jater. On the other
hand, it is no less certain that the compiler of this history has drawn his
material from more than one source. Wellhausen (Compos. des Hexat. xxi.
p- 399 seg.), Kuenen (Onderz. 1. § 13, 26; and more fully Zheol. 77u. xviii.
p- 158 seg.), and Budde (Urgeschichte) have called attention to the palpable
contradictions of the narrative, and have tried to distinguish its original form
from later accretions. Scholars of a very different school have acknowledged
that this method is at least partly justified by the facts. ‘ Differences,’ says
Riehm (Zin/ezt. A. T. 1. p. 298), ‘exist, though they are not so marked as
those critics suppo-e ;? and Dillmann speaks much to the same effect. Let us
see what the certain differences are. After Cain has murdered his brother,
Yahweh drives him forth ‘from the face of the ground’ (z.e. from the culti-
vated land), and he becomes ‘a wanderer,’ z.e. anomad. Immedia'ely after
this, a section follows (Gen. iv. 17-24) in which we find Cain building a city,
while the chief arts of life are said to have been invented by his descendants.
The inference is almost inevitable that the author of Gen. iv. 17-24 did not
know, or at least did not recognise, the story of Cain’s crime and its penalty.
We can now go astep further. In Gen. iv. 17-24, one of Cain’s descendants
was the ‘ father ‘ of shepherds, another the ‘ father’ of all musicians. The word
‘father’ cannot be pressed. Nevertheless, we may be sure that an author
who traced the arts of life to Cain is not the author who represented the con-
tinuity of the human race as entirely broken by a flood which exterminated
the race of Cain and left only the descendants of Seth. We may then

A
2 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. ITs 7

face of the ground—: 7. then Yahweh formed man of the dust
of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life ;
and man became a living soul. 8. And Yahweh planted a gar-
den in Eden in the east, and placed there the man whom he
had formed. 9. And Yahweh made every tree that is pleasant
to the sight and good for food to spring from the ground; the

separate the flood-myth from the main body of the narrative as a secondary
growth. Again, in Gen. x. we have a list of nations, with separate kingdoms
and cities. Here, too, we have a later stratum ; for the story of the tower of
Babel (Gen. xi.) describes all mankind as still living together and speaking
one language. This story of the confusion of tongues at Babel makes no
allusion to the flood or to Noah and his descendants. The difficulty of the pro-
blem is aggravated by the fact that on the whole there is a marked uniformity
of literary style and thought in the sections we have assigned to an earlier
and later date (see Dillmann, Ge. p. 89). This agreement and divergence
are accounted for by Dillmann on the supposition that the Jahvist used older
materials, which he altered, and into which he infused his own style and spirit.
Budde distinguishes three Jahvists, working after each other. These theories,
as it seems to me, go much further than anything which our knowledge
justifies. But we may with tolerable confidence accept Kuenen’s discrimina

tion of the older from the later strata. According to him, the story of the
garden of Eden and the fall (Gen. ii. 4*—iii.), of Cain’s descendants (iv. 1,
2; 16%—24), of the sons of God and the daughters of men (vi. 1-4), of the
crime and curse of Canaan (ix. 20-27), of the tower of Babel (xi. 1-9) belong
to the original form of the history. The story of Cain’s fratricide was added
later. This being done, the belief was no longer endurable that mankind,
the Hebrews included, were descended from a murderer. Hence, the table
of Seth’s descendants was added to that of Cain’s. Finally, the Hebrews
borrowed the story of the flood from the Assyrians, and by this means
accounted for the disappearance of Cain’s progeny.

‘Yahweh.’ In our present text we find ‘Yahweh God’ generally used
in the Jahvist story of the Creation and the Fall. According to Delitzsch this
strange collocation occurs twenty times in Gen. ii., iii, whereas elsewhere
in the Ifexateuch we only meet with it in Ex. ix. 30, and in the rest of the
Old Testament only in 1 Chron, xvii. 16 seg. (twice), 2 Chron, vi. 41 seg.
{three times), 2 Sam. vii. 22-25, Ps, Ixxxiv. 9 and 12. The original
narrator can have had no reason for departing from his usual habit of calling
God by his personal name Yahweh. When, however, an editor united our
earliest book of Hebrew history with another account of creation in which the
deity was simply called God, he wished to indicate that in each case the
same divine being was intended, and so for some time added ‘God’ to the
word Yahveh which stood before him in his document. A much more
elaborate theory has been stated by Budde, p. 233 seg., and another by Reuss
(Geschichte des -1. 7, § 218) ; but neither theory has found acceptance.
Il. 17] CREATION OF MAN AND HIS FALL 3

tree of life also in the midst of the garden and the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil.1 10. And a river went out of
Eden to water the garden. And thence it was parted and became
four arms. 11. The name of the first is Pishon : that is it which
compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12.
and the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the
onyx stone. 13. And the name of the second river is Gihon:
the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Cush. 14. And
the name of the third river is the Tigris: that is it which goeth
in front of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.”
15. And Yahweh took the man and put him in the garden of
Eden to till it and to guardit. 16. And Yahweh laid a command
upon the man, saying, ‘Of every tree in the garden thou mayest
freely eat. 17. But as to the tree of the knowledge of good
and eyil,? thereof thou shalt not eat: for when thou eatest

 

1 §The tree of the knowledge of good and evil.’ This is awkwardly intro-
duced, perhaps because it is the original element which the Hebrew writer
contributed to the story. The rest of the myth is much like other myths on
the golden age. But neither in Assyrian inscriptions nor elsewhere has any
parallel to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil been found. There is
a cylinder from ancient Babylon, and now in the British Museum, which
contains the figures of a man with horns and a woman with a serpent behind
her. The man and woman are seated with a tree between them. But it is
only the fancy of Assyriologists which connected the figures with Genesis.

°* The Euphrates.’ This passage belongs toa time when the geographical
knowledge of the Hebrews was in its infancy. The writer had heard of the
Tigris and the Euphrates, but knew so little of their upper course that he
thought they rose from one source and flowed at first together. It is in vain
to seek the identification of the two other rivers. Possibly the writer may
have had some dim idea of two other great streams such as the Indus and the
Nile. But these of course have no connection with the Tigris and Euphrates.
Further, Pishon and Gihon being mentioned first cannot (as Fr. Delitzsch has
supposed) be meant for mere canals of the Euphrates.

3 The author can scarcely have meant that Vahweh called the tree by this
name in addressing the man. Later on, Eve speaks of it simply as ‘ the tree
in the midst of the garden,’ and learns the effect of eating its fruit from the
serpent. But having added this ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil’ to
the ‘tree of life’ which belonged to the original myth, and which was also in
the midst of the garden, the author was obliged to make Yahweh speak of the

former by its proper title in order to prevent confusion (Kuenen, Zheol. Tijd.
xviii. p. 136).
4+ THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. ur. 18

thereof thou shalt surely die.’ 18. And Yahweh said, ‘It is not
good that man should be alone: I will make him an help
corresponding to him.’ 19. And Yahweh formed out of the
ground every beast of the field and every fowl of the heaven ;
and brought them to the man to see what he would call them :
and whatsoever the man called them, viz., each living creature,
that was to be its name. 20. And the man gave names to all
cattle and to the fowl of the heaven and to every beast of the
field; but for a man he did not find a help corresponding to
himself, 21. And Yahweh caused deep slumber to fall on the
man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs and closed up
the flesh in its place. 22. And Yahweh built the rib which he
had taken from man into a woman; and he brought her to the
man. 23. And the man said, ‘This at last is bone from my
bones and flesh from my flesh: this shall be called woman
because this was taken from man.’ 24. Therefore a man leaves
his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife so that they
become one flesh.1 25. And they were both naked, the man
and the woman, but they were not ashamed.

III. 1. Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of
the field which Yahweh made. And he said to the woman, ‘ Can
it really be that God ? has said “Ye shall not eat of any tree of
the garden” ?’ 2, And the woman said to the serpent, ‘Of the

1 ©One flesh.’ Here, aselsewhere, the myth turns metaphor into physical
tact, supposed connection of words into connection of things. ‘Thou art my
bone and my flesh’ was a proverbial Hebrew expression for close alliance
(see Genesis xxix. 14, Judges ix. 2). Therefore the first woman being most
closely allied to man must have been literally taken from the flesh and bone
of the first man. The Arabic phrase ‘ huwa lizki,’ ‘he is my rib’ (?.e. ‘my
close iriend’), points still more nearly to the bone from which Eve was formed.
The myth also appeals to the likeness of sound between the Hebrew words
for ‘man’ and ‘ woman’ (‘ish’ and ‘isshah’) though in reality they come from
different roots; and man himself is supposed to have been made from the
ground, because another word for man—Adam—resembles the word for
ground ‘ Adamah.’ In fact, ‘Adam’ is not derived from Adamah, any more
than ‘homo’ is derived from ‘humus.’

2 “God has said.’ The personal name Yahweh, on account of its sanctity,
is not put in the serpent’s mouth, or used by Eve in talking to the serpent.
Ill. 16] CREATION OF MAN AND HIS FALL 5

fruit of the tree of the garden we may eat: 3. but of the fruit of
the tree which is in the midst of the garden God has said, ‘Ye
shall not eat of it and shall not touch it, lest ye die.’ 4. And the
serpent said to the woman, ‘Ye shall by no means die: 5. for
God knows that when ye eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened
and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil.’ 6. And the
woman saw that the tree was good to eat and that it was a
delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable in order to
become wise, and she took of its fruit and ate; and she gave also
to her husband with her, and he ate. 7. And the eyes of both
were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they
sewed fig leaves together and made themselves girdles. 8. And
they heard the sound! of Yahweh walking in the garden in the
cool of the day: and the man and his wife hid themselves from
the face of Yahweh in the midst of the trees of the garden. 9.
And Yahweh called to the man and said to him, ‘Where art
thou?’ ro. And he said, ‘I heard the sound of thee in the
garden and I was afraid because I was naked ; and I hid myself.’
11. And he said, ‘ Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou
eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst
not eat?’ 12. And the man said, ‘The woman whom thou
gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree and I did eat.’ 13.
And Yahweh said to the woman, ‘ What is this thou hast done?’
And the woman said, ‘The serpent beguiled me and Late.’ 14.
And Yahweh said to the serpent, ‘ Because thou hast done this
thing, cursed shalt thou be above all cattle and beasts of the field ;
upon thy belly shalt thou go and dust shalt thou eat all the days
of thy life; 15. and I will put enmity between thee and the
woman and her descendants and thy descendants: they shall
bruise thy head and thou shalt bruise their heel.’2’-16. To the

1 «The sound of Yahweh,’ z.e. the sound of his steps.

? The meaning of the word translated ‘ bruise’ is most uncertain. But the
sense of the passage is plain. The serpent is manifestly a literal and ordinary
serpent, though it must be remembered that primitive peoples are apt to
regard animals, and especially noxious animals like the snake, as demoniacal.
6 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN. Ht. 17

woman he said, ‘I will greatly multiply thy distress in pregnancy ;
in pain shalt thou bear children ; and unto thy husband shall be
thy desire? but he shall rule over thee.’ 17. And to the man?
he said, ‘Since thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife and
hast eaten of the tree, concerning which I commanded thee
saying, “ Thou shalt not eat of it,” cursed shall the ground be for
thy sake, in distress shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy
life. 18. Thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to thee; and
thou shalt cat the herb of the field;*® 19. in the sweat of thy
face shalt thou eat bread, until thou return to the ground, for out
of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art and to dust shalt thou
return.’ 20. .\nd the man called his wife’s name Eve ; because
she was the mother of all living. 21. And Yahweh made coats
of skin* for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22. And
Yahweh said, ‘Behold, the man is become as one of us, so as
to know good and evil. And now lest he put forth his hand
and take also of the tree of life and live for ever!’® 23. And

This serpent speaks as Balaam’s ass afterwards spoke, induces mankind to
disobey Yahweh, and is punished by having to crawl on his belly and eat
dust, and by the future enmity between the race of serpents and men. The
snake is to attack man’s heel, man is to attack the serpent’s head.

1 ¢Thy desire.’ The desire is part of the curse. Woman is to desire man’s
society notwithstanding the pain and subjection which are the result.

2 ¢ And to the man.’ The most correct Hebrew texts read ‘ LeAdam,’ ze.
‘to Adam ’—not ‘La-Adam,’ z.e. ‘to the man.’ As, however, this vowel-
pointing only represents a late, though valuable tradition, and as it is unlikely
that the writer suddenly changed the word ‘ Adam’ into a proper name, I
have followed Dillmann (against Delitzsch, Socin-Kautzsch, etc.), in trans-
lating ‘ the man’ till iv. 25, when both the consonants and the sense require
the translation ‘Adam.’ Of the ancient versions Onkel., Symm., Theodot.,
Saad., render the Hebrew word as a proper name even in ii. 7, ‘and Yahweh’
(or ‘and the Lord’) ‘made man of dust from the ground.’ The LXx. intro-
duce the proper name at ii. 16: ‘The Lord commanded Adam, saying’ ; the
Latin Vulgate later still, at ii. 19 : ‘The Lord God brought them [the animals]
to Adam.’

3 «The herb of the field,’ ze. grain, which needs careful tillage, rather than
fruit, on which man had fed hitherto.

4 * Coats of skin.’ Onkelos has ‘ garments of glory on the skin of their
flesh,’ thus softening the grossness of the anthropomorphism,

5 * And live for ever.’ Man was not made immortal. But he had learnt
Iv. 4] CAIN’S CRIME AND ITS PENALTY ye

Yahweh sent him forth from the garden of Eden to till the
ground whence he was taken. 24. And he drove the man
out; and set at the east of the garden of Eden the cherubim
and the flame of the waving sword! to keep the way to the
tree of life.

IV. 1. And the man knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and
bare Cain, and she said, ‘I have gotten a man with the help of
Yahweh.’2 2, And again she bare his brother Abel. And Abel
was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. 3.
And in process of time it came to pass that Cain brought of the
fruit of the ground an offering to Yahweh. 4. And Abel, he
also brought of the firstlings of his flock, that is to say, of their

wisdom by eating the forbidden fruit, and had become Yahweh’s rival.
Hence Yahweh was afraid that man, having learnt to distinguish (physical)
good from evil, would eat of the tree of life and so ward off death and decay
for ever. Yahweh is far from omniscient, and he is also envious. The same
idea of the divine jealousy is prominent in Herodotus: e.g. i. 32, 70 Octo» mav
POdvepsy Te kal rapaxGdes—‘ the divine nature is altogether envious and prone
to cause trouble’—and so Herod. ili. 40, vii. 10, 46, 56.

1 ©The cherubim and flame of the waving sword.’ The cherubim are
mentioned in Ps. xviii. 11, where they seem to be the mythical personification
of storm-clouds, as the seraphim are the personification of the lightning. In
Ezek. xxviii. 11 seg. the cherub is brought into connection with heathen
mythology, for he is described as dwelling not only in the garden of Eden,
but also ‘in the holy mountain of God’ or of the gods, and walking amidst
precious stones. From 1 Kings vi. 27 it is clear that the cherubim had
wings. The derivation of the word is still uncertain, but on an amulet
discovered in 1874 the Assyrian word ‘ Ki-ru-bu’ appears as the name of the
winged bulls and lions with human faces which guarded the entrance to
Assyrian palaces. The idea of the cherubim, which in any case belongs to
Semitic mythology, was probably therefore borrowed by the Hebrews from
the Assyrians (see Schrader, ad Joc. ; Riehm, art. CHERUBIM).

2 «T have gotten a man.’ The writer plays on the likeness between the
Hebrew word for ‘ to get,’ viz. ‘quanah,’ and the name ‘ Quain’ (Cain). He
assumes that Eve spoke Hebrew. So Adam must have spoken Hebrew or an
allied tongue when he called his wife ‘Chavva’ (Eve), z.e. ‘life.’ In reality
Cain means ‘spear.’ This, and the fact that Abel means ‘ breath,’ ‘ nothing-
ness,’ may have occasioned the story of Abel’s murder by Cain, The same
word ‘ Cain,’ though differently spelt in our English Bible, is in Judges iv. 11
the name of a nomad tribe, neighbours of the Hebrews, and this may be the
origin of the wandering life ascribed to Cain.
8 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN. Iv. 5

fat pieces. And Yahweh looked with favour on Abel and on his
offering. 5. But on Cain and his offering he did not look with
favour. And Cain was very wroth and his face fell. 6. And
Yahweh said to Cain, ‘ Why art thou wroth and why has thy face
fallen? 7. If thou doest well, shall it not be lifted up? And if
thou doest not well, sin croucheth at the door and unto thee is
its desire; but thou shouldst rule over it. 8. And Cain said to
Abel his brother, ‘Let us go into the field’! And it came to
pass when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel
his brother and slew him. 9g. And Yahweh said to Cain, ‘Where
is Abel thy brother?’ And he said, ‘I know not: am I my
brother’s keeper?’ 10. And he said, ‘What hast thou done?
The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth to me from the ground.
11. And now thou art driven by a curse from the ground,? which
has opened its mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy
hand. 12. When thou tillest the ground it shall no more yield
to thee its strength ; a wanderer and a fugitive shalt thou be in the
earth.’ 13. And Cain said to Yahweh, ‘The punishment of mine
iniquity is too great to bear. 14. Behold, thou hast driven me
out this day from the face of the ground and from thy face I
shall be hidden,? and I shall be a wanderer and a fugitive in the
earth : and it shall come to pass, that whosoever findeth me shall
slay me.’ 15. And Yahweh said to him, ‘Therefore, if any one
kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken seveniold.’ And Yahweh set
a mark on Cain, lest any finding him should smite him. 16.

| «Let us go into the field.’ Wanting in our Hebrew text, but necessary
to the sense, and attested by Samar., L.XXx., and Syr.

* “From the ground:’ z.e. from the cultivated and inhabited land to the
desert. Comp. ver. 14.

° ¢From thy face I shall be hidden.’ For Yahweh only dwells in a
Particular part of the earth. So David (1 Sam. xxvi. 19) assumes that if he
is driven out of Yahweh’s land, he will have to serve other gods.

4 “Whosoever findeth me.’ Adam, according to the story as it stands,
was the only other man in existence. Either, therefore, we must attribute
this inconsistency to the simplicity of the narrator or adopt Dillmann’s sug-
gestion, that the story of Cain and Abel belonged at first toa later stage in
the history of mankind.
Iv. 25] CAIN’S DESCENDANTS 9

And Cain went out from the face of Yahweh and dwelt in the
land of Nod, in front of Eden.

IV. 17. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bare
Enoch. Now he [Cain] was building a city, and he called the
name of the city after the name of his son Enoch. 18. And to
Enoch Irad was begotten: and Irad begat Mehujael: and
Mehujael begot Methushael: and Methushael begat Lamech.
1g. And Lamech took to himself two wives: the name of the
one was Adah, and the name of the second Zillah. 20. And Adah
bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents and have
cattle! 21. And the name of his brother was Jubal: he was the
father of all such as handle the harp and the pipe. 22. And
Zillah also bare Tubal Cain, [the father of] all such as work in
copper and iron:? and the sister of Tubal Cain was Naamah.
23. And Lamech said to his wives,

‘ Adah and Zillah,’ hear my voice,
Ye wives of Lamech, give ear to my speech:
Surely, I slay a man for wounding me,
And a young man for bruising me:
24. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,
Then Lamech seventy and sevenfold.’

25. And Adam knew his wife again ; and she bare a son and

1 ‘The father of such as dwell in tents and have cattle.’ One of many
signs (see above) that the author of this § knew nothing of the shepherd Abel.
Kuenen ( 7%eol. Tijd. xviii. p. 147) supposes that a word has fallen out of the
Hebrew text here. But the construction ‘ dwell in tents and [among] cattle,’
though hard, is not impossible. The words ‘father,’ ‘son,’ etc., are used
loosely in Semitic languages, and do not imply kindred. Thus in Arabic, ‘a
son of the merchants’ means simply ‘ merchant.’

2 «Work in copper and iron.’ This rendering involves a slight change in
the Hebrew text, which is generally admitted to be corrupt.

° ‘Adah and Zillah,’ etc. This is ‘the song of the sword,’ Lamech,
exulting in his son’s skill as an armourer, declares that if Cain, without
weapons of metal, could avenge a wrong sevenfold, he with these weapons
can avenge it seventy and sevenfold. There is no allusion to ii. 15, for Cain
here is not a murderer, but simply ready to revenge a blow. But ii. 15 may
have sprung from a misunderstanding of this song.
10 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. IV. 26

called his name Seth: for, ‘God has appointed me other seed
instead of Abel, since Cain has slain him.’ 26. And to Seth, to
him also a son was born, and he called his name Enosh: then
they began to call upon [God by] the name of Yahweh.?. . .

V. 29.7 And he called his name Noah, saying, ‘This same
will comfort us for our work and the sore labour of our hands,
which comes from the ground which Yahweh has cursed.’

VI. 1. And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on
the face of the ground and daughters were born unto them, 2.
that the sons of God® saw the daughters of men that they were
fair, and they took them wives of all that they chose. 3. And
Yahweh said, ‘My breath will not rule * in man for ever: . .
he is flesh; therefore let his days be an hundred and twenty
years.’ 4. The giants were on the earth in these days and also
after the time when the sons of God went in to the daughters of
men, and they bare children to them. These are the mighty men,

1 © To call upon,’ z.e, to worship God by the name of Yahweh. Perhaps we
should read ‘he began’ (zeh héchél). There is a difficulty in reconciling this
statement with the foregoing account, in which Cain and Abel sacrifice and
that (by implication) to Yahweh.

2 ver. 29 seg. This a fragment from the genealogy of the Sethites. The
editor of the Hexateuch omitted the rest because he gave instead the table of
the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ The authorship of this verse is apparent from the use
of the name Yahwch, the reference to the cursing of the ‘ground’ (not earth),
and the explanation of the name Noah (‘ rest’), explanation of names by their
supposed etymology being a constant habit of the Jahvist. The LXx., which
have ‘ will give us rest ’ instead of ‘will comfort us,’ make the play on the
word still more obvious.

5 «The sons of God,’ 7.2. the angels, as Jobi. 6, ii. 1, xxviii. 7; comp. Ps.
xxix. I, Ixxxix. 7. From this union of gods and men the giants were born.
Ancient nations (e.g. the Greeks) delighted in tracing noble houses to such
unions, and the Ilebrew myth once had much more to say on such a point,
as may be gathered from the phrase ‘ men of renown.’ When, however, this
narrative was written, the Hebrew tendency to monotheism and awe of the
Supreme made such stories hateful. The narrator passes quickly from the
subject, and indicates that these unnatural unions were a source of moral
corruption.

4 *Rule.’ The sense of the Hebrew word ‘ yaddn’ is very doubtful.
Kuenen proposes to read ‘ yaliin,’ ‘dwell.’ A word which follows ‘beshaggim’
has been left untranslated. Its meaning is doubtful, and it is almost certainly
a corruption of the text.
vi. 7] THE FLOOD II

who were celebrated of old. 5. And Yahweh saw! that the
wickedness of man was great on the earth and that every device
of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6. And
Yahweh repented that he had made man upon the earth, and he
was distressed in his heart. 7. And Yahweh said, ‘I will blot

1+ And Yahweh saw,’ etc. Since the investigations of Hupfeld (1853),
completed and corrected by Schrader a few years later, there has been no
room for doubt in distinguishing the Jahvistic story of the flood. It is only
in a few matters of detail that there is any difference of opinion. But
questions still unsettled have been raised by the discovery of a Chaldean flood-
myth. Thirty years ago our authority for this part of the Chaldean mythology
consisted in fragments of Berosus, a Babylonian priest, who lived from 330-
260 B.C. Towards the close of 1872 George Smith published his version of
a flood-myth, which he had discovered on the Assyrian bricks of the British
Museum. This account, as it stands on the bricks now in London, was
copied for the library of Assurbanipal (B.c. 668-626) ; but the original from
which it was ‘taken must have been very much older, and is placed by
Assyriologists as early at least as the 17th century 8.C. (see Dillmann, Gev. p.
134). It is, however, the relations of the Jahvist to the Assyrian (originally
Babylonian) account with which we are here concerned. Are we to believe,
with Lenormant, that both Babylonians and Hebrews borrowed from a
primitive tradition common to both nations? or, with Schrader, Kuenen,
and Kosters, that the Hebrews before their exile derived the myth from the
Assyrians? or, with Fr. Delitzsch, Haupt, and others, that even the Jahvist
borrowed the myth from the Assyrians or Babylonians after the Exile? The
following points seem to be clear:—(1.) The accounts cannot be inde-
pendent ; nay, they are too closely allied to admit of the explanation that
each comes from a common source. In each, a favourite of heaveri is saved
in a ship; and, while all other men and beasts are destroyed, he takes with
him into the ship or ark a number of his dependants and specimens of the
various kinds of animals. In each the fluod is sent by God or the gods. In
each the hero of the story sends out birds, and in particular a raven and a
dove, to learn how far the flood had abated. In each he offers a sacrifice after
returning to land. One has only to compare the flood-myths of the Indians
or the Greeks to see that there is no parallel to such minute resemblance in
myths which may have sprung from one source, but which have existed long
apart. The matter is clinched by the fact that the resemblance between the
Chaldean and Hebrew accounts extends even to words and phrases. The
most striking points of contact are given below from Schrader’s translation of
the Assyrian text. (2.) The Jahvist borrowed from the Assyrian story, not
zice versd. The Jahvist is the first Hebrew writer known to us who
mentions the flood. Apart from him the second Isaiah (liv. 9), who wrote at
the close of the Exile, is the first Hebrew writer who refers to the flood. This
may be accidental. Butit is no accident that the Babylonian myth abounds
12 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. vi. 8

out men whom I have [made]! from the face of the ground, since
I repent that I have made them.’ 8. But Noah found favour in
the eyes of Yahweh. VII. 1. And Yahweh said to Noah, ‘Come
thou and all thy house into the ark;? for thee have I seen
righteous before me® in this generation. 2. Of every beast that
is clean thou shalt take seven pairs, the male with his wife ;4 and
of the beasts which are not clean one pair, the male with his
wife ; 3. also of the birds of the sky seven pairs, [the male and
his wife] to keep seed alive on the face of all the earth. 4. For
after seven days*® I will send rain upon the earth forty days and
forty nights ; and every existing thing that I have made will I

in the local colouring of Mesopotamia. It mentions canals, it speaks of a
ship (not an ark or box), and of a steersman. In the Hebrew myth these
traits natural to a people familiar with shipping are left out, and on the other
hand there is no local colouring to remind one of Palestine. (3.) There is no
reason to suppose that the Jahvist who borrowed the Assyrian flood-myth
lived after the Exile. Long before that period there were relations, and these
not always unfriendly, between Judah and Babylon or Assyria. Consider
the embassy of Merodach-Baladan of Babylon to Hezekiah (Isaiah xxxix. 1)
about 703 B.C., and the fact that Judah was a vassal-kingdom of Assyria for
some thirty years previous to that date. (4.) When the Jahvist writer
borrowed the Babylonian myth, he improved its moral and religious tone.
He substitutes one God for many gods. He makes the flood the punishment
of sin—not, asin the Babylonian myth, the result of divine caprice. No
doubt, the hero of the Babylonian myth is a pious man ; and one of the gods,
Hea, insists that the guilty must perish. But another god, Bel, is reproached
for making no difference between good and bad, and the gods are subject to
a kind of fate. The dissertations of Kosters, Zheol, 7ijd. xix., treat the
whole subject admirably.

1 *Made.’ The Hebrew text has ‘created,’ a word peculiar to the
‘Priestly Writer.’ Here, as in other instances, the editor of the Hexateuch
has introduced the word peculiar to the one document into the other.

2 « Ark’ or box. The Hebrew word ‘tébah’ only occurs in the story of
the flood and in Exod. ii. 3, 5. It is of doubtful, possibly of Egyptian, origin.

3 «Righteous before me.’ The name of the Babylonian Noah, viz.
Hasis-Hadra, means ‘ pious and wise.’

4¢The male with his wife.’ The Hebrew words, which are the same as
those for ‘husband’ and ‘wife,’ have been so translated to distinguish them from
the wholly different words ‘male’ and ‘ female’ which belong to the ‘ Priestly
Writer,’ though they have been thrust into verse 3 of the narrative before us.

5 © After seven days.’ In the Babylonian account we have an introductory
period of seven days, the flood lasts seven days, and is drained off in seven
days.
vill. 9] THE FLOOD 13

blot out from off the face of the ground.’ 5. And Noah did
according to all that Yahweh commanded him. to. And it came
to pass after seven days that the waters of the flood came upon
the earth. 7. And Noah went in and [his house]! into the ark
[for safety] from the waters of the flood. 8. Of clean beasts and
of beasts which are not clean and of birds, . g. there went
in for Noah into the ark as Yahweh? commanded Noah. 16°.
And Yahweh shut [the door] after him. 12. And a torrent of
rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. 17. And the
flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased
and bare up the ark, and it was lifted up above the earth. 22.
All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, of all
that was on the dry land, died. 23. And he [Yahweh] blotted
out every existing thing which was on the face of the ground ;*
and Noah only was left and they that were with him in the ark.
VIII. 2». And the torrent of rain was restrained from the heaven.
3%. And the waters returned from the earth more and more. 6.
And it came to pass at the end of forty days that Noah opened
the window of the ark which he had made. 7. And he sent
forth a raven and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were
dried up from the earth. 8. And he sent forth a dove from him,
to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground.
9. But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot > and she
returned to him in the ark, for waters were on the face of the

1 «His house,’ z.e. his family. We have restored this phrase, which the
Yahvist uses instead of ‘ and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives,’ which
comes from the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ An attempt has also been made to restore
the original order of the narrative.

* The Hebrew text has ‘God ;’ but the Samar., Onkel., Vulg., and the
Bodleian Ms. of the Lxx. (E) read ‘Yahweh.’ In vv. 8 and 9 there is a con-
fusion of the Jahvist with the priestly document.

3 «Shut the door after him.’ Observe the anthropomorphism. In the
Chaldean tablets a voice says to the Babylonian Noah, ‘ Go into the ship and
shut your door.’

4 ©On the face of the ground.’ Here a few words have been added from
the ‘ Priestly Writer.’

5 «The dove found no rest for the sole of her foot.” Compare the cuneiform
14 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. VIII. 10

whole earth : and he put forth his hand and took her and brought
her to himself in the ark. 1o, And he stayed yet other seven
days ; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark ; 11. and
the dove came to him at eventide ; and, lo, in her mouth a fresh
olive leaf: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off
the earth. 12. And he waited yet other seven days and sent
forth the dove; and she did not return to him any more. 13°.
And Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and, lo,
the face of the ground was dry. 20. And Noah built an altar
to Yahweh,' and took of every clean beast and of every clean
fowl and offered burnt offerings upon the altar. 21. And Yahweh
smelt the sweet fragrance, and Yahweh said in his heart, ‘I will
not again curse the ground any more on account of nian, since
the device of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I
again smite every living thing, as I have done. 22. While the
earth remains, seed-time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and
winter, day and night, shall not cease.’

Ix. 18. And the sons of Noah who went forth from the ark
were Shem, Ham, and Japheth; and Ham was the father of
Canaan.? 19. These three were the sons of Noah: and from
these the whole earth was overspread. 20. And Noah the

account :—‘ At the dawn of the seventh day, I took out a dove and let it fly.
The dove flew hither and thither; because however there was no resting-
place there, it returned.” On the whole the Babylonian record seems to be
here more original and consistent than the Hebrew. In the former Hisis-
Hadra (= Noah) after seven days sends out a dove, then a swallow, which
flies hither and thither and returns ; lastly a raven, which wades in the water,
now become shallow, and does not return.

2 And Noah built an altar to Yahweh.’ Compare the cuneiform account :—
‘I offered sacrifice, I erected an altar on the top of the mountain peak.’ As
in the Hebrew account, Yahweh smells a sweet fragrance, so in the cuneiform
we read that the ‘gods inhaled the savour, the gods inhaled the fragrant
savour. Like flies the gods gathered over the sacrifice.” Here, however, the
contrast between the coarseness of Assyrian polytheism and the relative
sobriety of Hebrew religion is plain.

2 «Jam was the father of Canaan.’ This story belongs, as has been said
above, to the oldest stratum of the Jahvistic record. It has no natural
connection with the flood-myth, but follows naturally the history of the arts
x. 8] NOAH’S DESCENDANTS 15

husbandman began and planted a vineyard: 21. and he drank
of the wine and became drunk: and he was uncovered within
his tent. 22. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father’s
nakedness, and told his two brethren without. 23. And Shem
and Japheth took a garment and laid it on both their shoulders
and covered the nakedness of their father, going backwards with
their faces turned backwards, so that they did not see the naked-
ness of their father. 24. And Noah awoke from his wine and
knew what his youngest son had done to him. 25, And he said,

‘Cursed be Canaan,

The meanest slave let him be to his brethren.’
26. And he said, ‘ Blessed be Yahweh the God of Shem ;

And let Canaan be their slave.

27. God enlarge Japheth,
And let him dwell in the tents of Shem,
And let Canaan be their slave.’
... X. 81 And Cush begot Nimrod:? he began to be a

 

(Gen. iv. 17-24). Husbandry and the making of wine are the steps in advance
noted here. But throughout, impiety grows with civilisation. The knowledge
of good and evil was gained by disobedience. Violence and polygamy accom-
pany the invention of metal weapons : here husbandry introduces wine, wine
drunkenness on Noah’s part, with irreverent indecency on the part of his
youngest son, Whereas, however, in the original narrative Noah’s sons were
Shem, Japheth, and Canaan, a later hand has changed the order and names
into Shem, Japheth, and Ham, and has prefixed ‘Ham the father of’ to the
name of Canaan here and in ver. 22. This appears from the facts that the
irreverence is ascribed to Noah’s ‘ youngest son,’ and that the curse falls upon
Canaan. The alteration may have been caused by unwillingness to regard the
hated Canaan as immediately descended from Noah, the father of a renewed
humanity. Shem is the father of the Hebrews, Canaan of the Canaanites.
But who was Japheth, and how did he ‘dwell in the tents of Shem’? Budde
suggests that Japheth represents the Phoenicians. They were, unlike the
Israelites, a seafaring people. They bought Israelite corn, balsam, etc., and
from David’s time there was a natural friendship between the two nations.
Unfortunately this ingenious conjecture cannot be supported by evidence.

18 seg. This list of nations shows much more geographical knowledge
than belonged to the author of the story of the garden of Eden. It is incon-
sistent with the story of Babel which follows, and describes mankind as still
living together.

a

2 «Nimrod.’ The name cannot be identified on the cuneiform monuments,
16 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. xX. 9

mighty man on the earth. 9. He was a mighty hunter before
Yahweh, wherefore the saying goes, ‘Liké Nimrod a mighty
hunter before Yahweh.’ 10. And the beginning of his kingdom
was Babel and Erech and Accad and Calneh in the land of
Shinar. 11. From that land he went forth to Assyria and built
Nineveh! and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah 12. and Resen between
Nineveh and Calah; the same is the great city. 13. And Misraim?
begot the Ludim and the Anamim and the Lehabim and the
Naptuhim 14. and the Pathrusim and the Casluhim, whence
went forth the Philistines and the Caphtorim. 15. And Canaan
begot Sidon, his first-born, and Heth 16. and the Jebusite
and the Amorite and the Girgashite 17. and the Hivite and the
Arkite and the Sinite 18. and the Arvadite and the Zemarite and
the Hamathite: and afterward were the clans of the Canaanites
spread abroad. 19. And the border of the Canaanite was from
Sidon, as thou comest towards Gerar, as far as Gaza, as thou
comest towards Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim
unto Lasha. 21. Also to Shem the father of all the sons of Eber,

“A mighty hunter before Yahweh,’ is merely a popular phrase fora very great
hunter. Compare Jon. iii. 3, Acts vii, 20, The hunting exploits of the
Assyrian kings are often represented on the monuments. The text correctly
states that culture travelled north from Babylonia to Assyria. Shinar is
identical with the native name of South Babylonia. The sites of Babel and
Erech are known, and Accad was, if not the name of a town, at least that of
a district. It is, however, very doubtful whether there was any connection
between Babylonia and Cush, z.e. the Kus of the cuneiform monuments, who
dwelt south of Egypt. It has been supposed that Asiatic Cushites may
have been settled on the Persian Gulf, whence they emigrated to Babylonia,
while Schiader explains the statement in the text as a confusion between
the African Cush or Kus and the Babvlonian Kashshu, a wholly different
people.

1 * Nineveh’ was certainly from the former half of the ninth century B.c.,
probably as early as r1c9 B.c., the residence of the Assyrian kings, Our
author makes no mention of the old capital Ashur, which had fallen into
obscurity when he wrote.

2 Misraim ’ is simply the name given by Semitic races (Assyrians, Hebrews,
Syrians, and Aiabs) to Egypt. Observe the naive way in which the foreign
name of a country (or rather the two divisions of a country) is transformed
into the name of a man,
XI. 9] THE TOWER OF BABEL 17

the elder brother of Japheth, were sons born. 25. And to Eber
two sons were born: the name of the one was Peleg, for in his
days was the earth divided ; and his brother’s name was Joktan.
26. And Joktan begot Almodad and Sheleph and Hazarmaveth
and Jerah 27. and Hadoram and Uzal and Diklah 28. and
Obal and Abimael and Sheba 29. and Ophir and Havilah and
Jobab: all these were the sons of Joktan. 30. And their
dwelling was from Mesha as thou comest to Sephar, towards the
mountain of the east.

XI. 1. And the whole earth had one speech and one sort of
words. z. And it came to pass as they journeyed in the east
that they found a deep plain in the land of Shinar and they dwelt
there. 3. And they said, one to another, ‘Go to, let us make
bricks and burn them thoroughly.’ And the brick served them
as stone and the bitumen as mortar. 4. And they said, ‘Go to,
let us build us a city and a tower with its top in the heaven, and
let us make us a name; lest we be scattered over the face of the
whole earth.’ 5. And Yahweh went down to see the city and the
tower which the sons of men built. 6. And Yahweh said, ‘Lo,
they are one people and have all one speech ; and this is [only]
the beginning of their plan: and now they will be debarred from
nothing! which they purpose to do. 7. Go to, let us go down
and confound their speech, that they may not understand one
another’s speech.’ 8. So Yahweh scattered them abroad from
thence over the face of the whole earth: and they left off to
build the city. 9. Therefore was the name of it called Babel,?
because Yahweh did there confuse the speech of the whole earth ;

1 ¢ And now they will be debarred from nothing.’ Here we have the same
jealousy which we noticed in the story of the garden of Eden. Here, too,
Yahweh is far from omnipresent and omnipotent. He has to ‘go down’ and
adopt the device of confounding their speech. The myth may have arisen
from the sight of one of the tower-shaped Babylonian temples which had
fallen into ruin.

2 «Therefore was the name of it called Babel.” The name means ‘gate of
God.’ Our author connects it by one of his fanciful etymologies with the
Hebrew verb dd/al, ‘to confuse.’

B
18 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [cEN. XI. 28

and from thence Yahweh scattered them on the surface of the
whole earth.
XI. 28. And Haran‘ died in the presence of Terah his
father, in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees. 29.
And Abraham and Nahor took them wives: the name of
Abraham’s wife was Sarah, and the name of Nahor’s wife was
Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah, and the
father of Iscah. 30. And Sarah was barren: she had no child.
XII. 1. Now Yahweh said to Abraham, ‘Get thee out from
thy country and from thy kindred and from thy father’s house
to a land which I will show thee: 2. and I will make of thee
a great nation, and I will bless thee and make thy name great,
and thou shalt be [a source of] blessing. 3. And I will bless
them that bless thee and curse him that curseth thee, and in
thee shall all the families of the earth bless themselves.’ ?
4°. And Abraham went, as Yahweh had spoken to him, and Lot
with him. 6. And Abraham passed through the land to the place

1 «And Haran died.’ The following §, vv. 28-30, was generally assigned
to the ‘ Priestly Writer’ (so e.g. Noldeke, A7vitzh des 4. T. p. 17). But ver. 29
is connected with Gen. xxii. 20, which admittedly belongs to the ‘ Oldest
Book of Hebrew History.’ 28 is proved by its language to belong to the
same source, and Dillmann, Kuenen, Kittel, etc., are inclined to assign the
whole section to our document. Dillmann, however, supposes that ‘ Ur of
the Chaldees’ is an interpolation. ‘Ur’ is identified with Uru of the monu-
ments, a city in South Babylonia, whereas our document seems (Gen.
xxiv. 4, seg. 7, 10) to place Abraham’s native land much further north in
Mesopotamia. But our document is in too fragmentary a state for any certain
inference on this point, nor is the identification of Ur certain. I have restored
throughout Abraham for Abram and Sarah for Sarai. It is not our author,
but the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ who mentions the change of name from Abram to
Abraham.

2 Bless themselves :’ z.e. use thy name as a form of blessing, wishing that
they may be as happyas Abraham. This is a possible rendering, and (in such
early Hebrew) it is the only possible rendering of another form (with hithpael
instead of niphal as here) which occurs, apparently as an equivalent, in Gen.
xxii. 18, xxvi. 4. So Rashi, quoting Gen. xlviii. 20, ‘In thee (or by thee)
shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh.’ He
is followed by Dillmann and Delitzsch. The other rendering, ‘be blessed in
thee,’ is that of Onkelos and the Vulgate.
XIL 13| THE HISTORY OF ABRAHAM 19

of Shechem to the terebinth of the revealer.1. And the Canaanite
was then in the land. 7. And Yahweh appeared to Abraham
and said, ‘To thy seed will I give this land ;’ and he built an
altar there to Yahweh, who appeared to him. 8. And he removed
thence to the mountain country on the east of Bethel and pitched
his tent, having Bethel on the west and Ai on the east; and he
built there an altar to Yahweh, and he called on the name of
Yahweh. 9g. And Abraham journeyed, going on still towards
the Negeb.

io. And there was a famine in the land:? and Abraham
went down to Egypt to sojourn there ; for the famine was heavy
in the land. 11. And it came to pass, as he drew near to enter
into Egypt, he said to Sarah his wife, ‘Behold, now T know that
thou art a fair woman to look upon. 12. And it shall come to
pass when the Egyptians see thee that they shall say, “This is
his wife :” and they will kill me while they will save thee alive.
13. Say, I pray thee, that thou art my sister, that it may be well

1 <The terebinth of the revealer.” It is called in Judges ix. 37 ‘the
terebinth of the soothsayers,’ and must have been the seat of a Canaanite tree
oracle. The rustling sound of the tree was its voice, which the soothsayer
interpreted (2 Sam. v. 24). Our author gives « new character to these
Canaanite sanctuaries by connecting them with the legends of the patriarchs.
See on the whole question of sacred trees, Robertson Smith’s Religion of the
Semites, lecture v. In much the same way MJnammed connected the heathen
sanctuary at Mecca with the legends of his own monotheism.

2 © And there was a famine in the land.’ It need not surprise us to find a
similar story told of Sarah’s adventure with the ‘ing of Gerar (Gen. xx.), be-
cause there we clearly have a different narrator, who uses the word God
(Elohim), not Yahweh. It is, however, strange to find a writer who uses the
name Yahweh telling a story of Rebekah’s adventure with the king of
Gerar (Gen. xxvi.), which is a mere variant of the story told here. It is
noteworthy also that this section omits all mention of Lot, and that a little
further on we find Abraham at Bethel, where he was before. Hence Kuenen
regards the section before us as a later addition to the history. An editor
of the Jahvist document substituted the more famous names Abraham and
Pharaoh for Isaac and Abimelech of Gerar. Still the story told in Gen. xxvi.
has one mark of later origin, for there Rebekah is not actually taken into the
harem, so that her honour is saved. Dillmann and Kittel accept our story as
part of the original document, but believe that it stood at first after the
separation of Abraham and Lot.
20 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XII. 14

with thee on my account, and that my soul may live because of
thee. 14. And it came to pass that, when Abraham was come
into Egypt, the Egyptians saw the woman that she was very fair.
15. And the princes of Pharaoh saw her and praised her to
Pharaoh: and the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. 16.
And he treated Abraham well for her sake: and he got sheep
and cattle, and he-asses, and male and female slaves, and she-
asses and camels.t 17. And Yahweh plagued Pharaoh with
great plagues, along with his household? because of Sarah, Abra-
ham’s wife. 18. And Pharaoh called Abraham and said, ‘ What
is this thou hast done to me? Why didst thou not tell me that
she was thy wife? 19. Why didst thou say “ She is my sister”?
so that I took her to myself as a wife: now therefore behold thy
wife: take her and go.’ 20. And Pharaoh appointed men to
escort him with his wife and all that he had.

XIII. 1. And Abraham went up from Egypt, he and his wife
and all that he had, and Lot with him,’ into the Negeb.* z. And
Abraham was very rich in cattle, in silver and in gold. 3. And he

+* Camels.’ An anachronism. No pictures of camels appear on Egyptian
monuments, nor are they mentioned in the older literature. According to
Ebers (Art. ‘Egypten’ in Riehm’s 8:47. #.-T¥.) camels were scarcely in-
troduced into Egypt before the third century B.c.

2 Along with his household.” Awkwardly translated to represent the
greater awkwardness of the Hebrew. Probably interpolated from the
parallel story, Gen. xx. (Kautzsch-Socin).

3*And Lot with him.’ There is no allusion to Lot in the story of
Abraham’s sojourn in Egypt. Dillmann therefore regards these words and
vv. 3, 4 as additions by the editor. It is more likely that the whole of
xiii. 1-4 is due to the hand which added the story of Abraham’s stay in
Egypt, and felt the need of connecting it with the rest of the history.

4¢The Negeb.’ Usually translated ‘south,’ but originally the word,
which is connected with the Syriac verb Negab, ‘to be parched,’ had nothing
to do with any point of the compass. Negeb means—(1) the dry land which
extends from Judah southwards to Arabia Petraea: (2) the south generally,
just as the Hebrew word for the sea came to mean the west, and the Arabic
word Kibla, 7.e. the direction towards which the Muslim turned in prayer,
came to mean the south, when most Muslims lived north of Mecca. This
second usage of Negeb is common in later literature, ¢.g. in the ‘ Priestly
Writer,’ but is rare in the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew Ilistory.’ The Lxx.
here render ‘desert ;’ all other ancient versions ‘south.’
XV. 1] ABRAHAM AND LOT 21

went by stages from the Negeb to Bethel, to the place where his
tent had been at the beginning between Bethel and Ai; 4. to
the place of the altar which he made there at first: and Abraham
called there on the name of Yahweh. 5. And Lot also, who went
with Abraham, had sheep and cattle and tents. 7. And there
was strife between the herdmen of Abraham’s cattle and the
herdmen of Lot’s cattle: and the Canaanites and the Perizzites
were then dwelling in the land. 8. And Abraham said to Lot,
‘Pray, let there be no strife between me and thee, and between
my herdmen and thy herdmen ; for we are brethren. 9. Is not
all the land before thee? Pray, separate thyself from me: if
thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if
thou take the right hand, then I will go to the left.’ 10. And
Lot lifted up his eyes, and saw the whole circle of the Jordan
that it was well-watered everywhere, before Yahweh destroyed
Sodom and Gomorrah, like the garden of Yahweh, like the
land of Egypt, as thou goest to Zoar.! 11%. So Lot chose for
himself all the circle of the Jordan, and Lot journeyed east, . .
12”, and moved his tent as far as Sodom. 13. Now the men
of Sodom were wicked, and sinners against Yahweh exceedingly.
14. And Yahweh said to Abraham, after Lot was separated from
him, ‘Lift up thine eyes now, and look from the place where
thou art to north, south, east, and west: 15. for all the land
which thou seest, to thee will I give it and to thy seed for ever.
16. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth ; so that if
a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also
be numbered. 17. Arise, walk through the land in its length and
breadth ; for to thee will I give it.’ 18. And Abraham went and
moved his tent, and dwelt by the terebinths of Mamre at Hebron,
and built there an altar to Yahweh.

XV.2.1. After these things the word of Yahweh came to

1 © As thou goest,’ etc.: 7.¢. the depression on each side of the Jordan as jar
south as Zoar on the Dead Sea was fruitful as Paradise or Egypt.

2 XV. The composition of this chapter presents problems of great, perhaps
insuperable difficulty. The following points seem clear:—(1.) Two stories
22 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [cEN. XV. 2

Abraham in a vision, saying, ‘Fear not, Abraham: I am thy
shield, and thy reward shall be exceedingly great.’ 2. And
Abraham said, ‘O Lord Yahweh, what wilt thou give me, seeing
that I go childless, and the possessor of my house is Eliezer.’+
3. And Abraham said, ‘ Behold, to me thou hast given no seed,
and one who belongs to my household is mine heir.’ 4. And
behold, the word of Yahweh came to him, saying, ‘This man
shall not be thine heir ; but he that shall come forth out of thine
own bowels shall be thine heir” 5. And he brought him forth
outside, and he said, ‘ Look now towards heaven and count the
stars, if thou canst count them:’ and he said to him, ‘So [nu-
merous] shall thy seed be.’ 6. And he trusted Yahweh, and
Yahweh reckoned it to him as [a proof of] righteousness.
7. And he said to him, ‘I am Yahweh who brought thee out
from Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it. 8.
And he said, ‘Lord Yahweh, wherein shall I know that I shall
inherit it?’ 9. And he said to him, ‘Take me an heifer of three
years old, a she-goat of three years old, a ram of three years
old, a turtledove and a young pigeon.’ 10. And he took him all
these and divided them in the midst, and he laid each part over
against the other: but the birds he did not divide. 11. And
the birds of prey came down on the carcases, and Abraham drove

have been welded together : the author who makes God appear in a vision
and show Abraham the stars, cannot be the same who makes Yahweh appear
(ver. 7 sey.) some time before sunset ; especially as in each case God makes a
promise separate and complete in itself. The writer who mentions the
vision by night is probably the Elohist, of whom more shortly. (2.) The
statement that the descendants of Abraham were to be 4oo years in Egypt,
ver. 13, is at least in apparent contradiction to that of ver. 16 that ‘the fourth
generation’ would return. (3.) The Hebrew word which we have rendered
‘substance’ is unknown to the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’ but is con-
stantly used by the ‘Priestly Writer.’ The expression ‘ good old age,’ ver. 15,
is employed by him xxv. 8 : while the phrase ‘come forth out of thine own
bowels’ closely resembles his language in xxxv. 11, xlvi. 26, Exod. i. 5.
These facts point to alterations by the final editor of the Ilexateuch. More-
over, the list of the nations, vv. 19, 20, is the most complete and probably
the latest of all.

1«Tliezer.’’ The Hebrew text has ‘ Damascus Eliezer,’ which is senseless.
XVI. 2] THE COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM 23

them away. 12. And when the sun was going down, a deep
slumber fell on Abraham; and behold terror, great darkness
falling upon him! 13. And [Yahweh] said to Abraham, ‘ Know
of a surety that thy seed shall be strangers in a land which is
not theirs, and shall serve them :’ and they shall afflict them four
hundred years. 14. And also that nation whom they shall serve
will I judge: and afterwards will they come out with great sub-
stance.’ 15. But thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou
shalt be buried in a good old age. 16. But in the fourth genera-
tion shall they return hither: for the iniquity of the Amorite is
not yet full.’ 17. And it came to pass that when the sun went
down and it was dark, behold, a smoking furnace and a flaming
torch that passed between these pieces. 18. In that day Yahweh
made a covenant! with Abraham, saying, ‘To thy seed will I give
this land from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river
Euphrates; 19. the [land of the] Kenites, the Kenizzites, the
Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim ; 20. the
Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.’
XVI. ... 2. And Sarah said? to Abraham, ‘Behold now
Yahweh has restrained me from bearing; go in I pray thee
to my handmaid; it may be that I shall be built up from her.

1*Made a covenant.’ I have retained the usual rendering, ‘ covenant.’
But the Hebrew word means no more than a solemn engagement or promise
(see the recent editions of Gesenius, and Frederic Delitzsch’s Hebrew and
Assyrian, p. 49). Further, the word translated ‘made’ means literally to
‘cut.’ It is generally supposed that the victims were cut in two, and that the
person who made the engagement passed between the pieces, and so prayed
that he might be cut in pieces if he broke his word. Another explanation of
the rite is given by Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 461 seg. In
any case, this story represents Yahweh as subjecting himself to the barbarous
ceremonies which set the seal to engagements between man and man, and
must belong to an early stage of religious thought. Contrast the conclusion of
the story with which the chapter opens: ‘Abraham trusted Yahweh, and
Yahweh reckoned it to him as [a proof of] righteousness,’ ver. 6. Here our
document uses much later material.

2 © And Sarah said.’ Our ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ is composed of
two documents—that of the Jahvist and the Elohist. The story here comes
from the Jahvist. He gives a legend which arose from the name of an Arab
24 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XVI. 4

And Abraham hearkened to Sarah’s voice. . . . 4. And he went
in to Hagar and she conceived: and when she saw that she had
conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes. 5. And Sarah
said to Abraham, ‘ My wrong be upon thee: I gave my handmaid
into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I
was despised in her eyes; let Yahweh judge between me and
thee.’ 6. But Abraham said to Sarah, ‘ Behold, thine handmaid
is in thine hand; do to her that which is good in thine eyes.’
And Sarah dealt hardly with her, so that she ran away from her.
7. And the angel? of Yahweh found her by the spring of water
in the desert, by the spring on the way to Shur. (8. And he said
to her, ‘Hagar, Sarah’s handmaid, whence comest thou and
whither art thou going?’ And she said, ‘I am fleeing from my
mistress Sarah.’ 9. And the angel of Yahweh said to her, ‘ Return
to thy mistress and submit thyself beneath her hands.’ 10. And
the angel of Yahweh said to her, ‘I will greatly multiply thy seed,
that it shall not be numbered for multitude.’) 11. And the
angel of Yahweh said to her, ‘Behold, thou art with child, and
shalt bear a son and shalt call his name Ishmael, because Yahweh
has heard [the cry of] thine affliction. 12. And he shall be a
wild ass of a man; his hand shall be against every man and
every man’s hand against him, and he shall dwell to the east of
all his brethren.’ 13. And she called the name of Yahweh that
spoke to her, ‘Thou art a God that sees;’ for she said, ‘Even

tribe, ‘ Hagar’ being connected with the common Arabic ‘ hagara,’ ‘ to flee,’
whence the English loan-word ‘ Hegira,’ the flight of the prophet, and from
another tribal name, viz., Ishmael, meaning ‘God hears.” Hagar quits her
mistress for ever, and bears Ishmael in the wilderness. As, however, the
compiler meant to insert another story of Hagar’s flight written by the
Elohist, he was obliged to add the verses in brackets, viz., 8, 9, 10, and
make Hagar return for a time to Sarah. This fact is generally acknowledged,
though Dillmann inclines to believe that these verses also belong to the
Jahvist, and Kittel expresses himself doubtfully.

1* Angel of Yahweh.’ The Hebrew word ‘mal’ak’ means ‘sending.’ In
the Jahvist it keeps its original sense, and indicates the manifestation of
Yahweh, not a concrete personality. Hence—(1) there is one ‘ mal’ak’ of
Yahweh and not many ; (2) this ‘ mal’ak’ is identified with Yahweh himself.
XVIII. 14] THE PROMISE OF ISAAC’S BIRTH 25

here? have I looked after him that sees me?’ 14. Therefore the
well is called the ‘ well of the living one that sees me ;’ behold, it
is between Kadesh and Bered.

... XVIII. 1. And Yahweh appeared to him by the
terebinths of Mamre, as he sat by the tent-door in the heat of
the day. 2. And he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three
men stood over against him: and when he saw them he ran to
meet them from the tent-door, and bowed himself to the earth.
3. And he said, ‘O Lord, if now I have found favour in thy
sight, pass not now away from thy slave. 4. Let now a little
water be taken and wash your feet, and recline under the tree: 5.
and I will take a morsel of bread, that ye may comfort your
heart : afterwards ye may pass on: forasmuch as ye are come to
your slave.’ And they said, ‘So do as thou hast said.’ 6. And
Abraham hastened into the tent to Sarah and said, ‘Make ready
quickly three seahs? of fine meal, knead it and make cakes.’ 7.
And Abraham ran to the herd, and he took a calf tender and
good, and he gave it to the servant and he hastened to dress it.
8. Then he took curdled milk and sweet milk and the calf which
he had dressed and set it before them; and he stood by them
under the tree while they ate. 9. And they said to him, ‘ Where
is Sarah thy wife?’ And he said, ‘ Behold, in the tent.’ 10. And
he said, ‘I will certainly return to thee this time next year, and,
lo, Sarah thy wife shall havea son.’ And Sarah heard in the
tent-door, which was behind him. 11. Now Abraham and
Sarah were old, well stricken in age; it had ceased to be with
Sarah after the manner of women. 12. And Sarah laughed within
herself, saying, ‘After I am withered shall I have pleasure, my
lord being old also?’ 13. And Yahweh said to Abraham, ‘Why
then did Sarah laugh, saying, “Shall I indeed bear a child, now
that Iam old?” 14. Is anything too hard for Yahweh? At the

1 «Even here :’ z.c. even in the desert, where she did not expect Yahweh’s
presence. What follows is translated from the Hebrew text, which, how-
ever, is probably corrupt.

? Three seahs=1 ephah=rather more than a bushel.
26 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [cEN. XVIII. 15

set time I will return to thee this time next year, and Sarah
shall have a son.’ 15. And Sarah denied, saying, ‘I did not
laugh ;’ for she was afraid. And he said, ‘Nay, but thou didst
laugh.’

16. And the men arose thence and looked towards Sodom, ana
Abraham went with them to bring them on the way. 17. And
Yahweh said, ‘Shall I hide! from Abraham that which I do; 18.
seeing that Abraham will surely become a great and mighty
nation, and all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves in
him? sg. For I have chosen him that he may command his
sons and his household after him, that they may keep the way of
Yahweh to do righteousness and judgment, that Yahweh may
bring upon Abraham that which he has spoken concerning him.’
zo, And Yahweh said, ‘The cry concerning Sodom and Gomorrah
is indeed great, and their sin is indeed very heavy. 21. I will go
down now and see whether they have done altogether according
to the cry concerning it which has come to me; and if not, I
will know.’ 22. And the men turned thence and went to Sodom,

1 « And Yahweh said, Shall I hide,’ etc. Verses 17-19 are meant to prepare
the way for that part of the story in which Yahweh remains behind with
Abraham, who intercedes for Sodom, viz., 22®—33°. Dillmann and Kittel
maintain the unity of authorship; Socin and Kautzsch admit that vv. 17-19 are
a later addition, being doubtful) about 22—33. But Wellhausen and Kuenen
assign both 17-19 and 22'—33% toa secondary stratum of the Jahvist docu-
ment. Their reasons, which seem to me convincing, are chiefly these :—(1.)
According to these verses, Yahweh stays behind with Abraham, the two
‘angels’ go to Sodom, nor is it said that Yahweh went there afterwards.
But, according to the original narrative, xviii. 21, Yahweh announces his in-
tention of going to Sodom, and his presence there is implied xix. 21. (2.) In
xviii, 22>—33° Yahweh has already determined the fate of Sodom, whereas,
according to the older narrative, he has first to go and see whether the report
of its guilt be true, xviii. 21, (3.) The Yahweh who eats and drinks and goes
to Sodom for information is very like the Yahweh who walks in the garden
of Eden, and goes down to see the tower of Babel. But the Yahweh of xviii.
22b— 33%, ‘the judge of the whole earth,’ who must do right, before whom
Abraham is ‘dust and ashes,’ is a very different being. (4.) When the two
verses in question have been removed, not only is the narrative still connected,
33° attaching itself naturally to 22%, but it becomes smooth and consistent.
Only in xix. 1, ‘the three men’ must be restored instead of ‘the two angels,’
which has been substituted for it.
XIX. 1] SODOM AND GOMORRAH 27

and Abraham was still standing before Yahweh. 23. And
Abraham drew near and said, ‘Wilt thou then consume the
righteous with the wicked? 24. Perhaps there are fifty just men
within the city: wilt thou then consume and not forgive the
place for the fifty righteous that are in it? 25. That be far
from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with
the wicked, that so the righteous should be as the wicked;
that be far from thee: shall not the judge of the whole earth
execute justice?’ 26. And Yahweh said, ‘If I find in Sodom
fifty righteous within the city, I will forgive all the place for their
sake.’ 27. And Abraham answered and said, ‘Behold now, I
have undertaken to speak to the Lord, although I am dust and
ashes: 28. perhaps there shall lack five of the fifty righteous:
wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five?’ And he said, ‘I
will not destroy if I find there forty-five.’ 29. And he spoke to
him yet again and said, ‘ Perhaps forty shall be found there.’ And
he said, ‘I will not do it for the forty’s sake.’ 30. And he spoke
to him yet again and said, ‘Let not now the Lord be angry and
I will speak: perhaps thirty will be found there.’ And he said, ‘I
will not do it if I find thirty there.’ 31. And he said, ‘ Behold
now, I have undertaken to speak to the Lord: perhaps twenty
shall be found there.’ And he said, ‘I will not destroy for the
twenty’s sake.’ 32. And he said, ‘ Let not now the Lord be angry
and I will speak only this time: perhaps ten shall be found
there.’ And he said, ‘I will not destroy for the ten’s sake.’ 33.
And Yahweh went his way when he had finished speaking to
Abraham, and Abraham returned to his place.

XIX. 1. And the two angels went to Sodom in the evening, as
Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. And Lot saw them, and

 

1*And Abraham was still standing before Yahweh.’ Here the later §
begins, and hence these words can only be reconciled with the former half by
taking ‘the men’ to mean ‘two of the men,’ which cannot have been the
meaning of the original writer. A Jewish tradition asserts that the second
half of the verse ran ‘ Yahweh was still standing before Abraham,’ and was
altered by the scribes from motives of reverence. See Geiger, Urschrift,
p- 331. But the Masoretic text is supported by all the ancient versions.
28 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (CEN, XIX. 2

rose up to meet them, and bowed down with his face to the earth.
2. And he said, ‘ Behold now, my lords, turn aside now to your
servant’s house, and tarry the night and wash your feet ; and ye
shall rise up early and go on your way.’ And they said, ‘ Nay,
but we will tarry the night in the street.’ 3. And he urged them
greatly, and they turned in to him and entered into his house ;
and he made them a feast and baked unleavened bread, and they
ate. 4. But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men
of Sodom, surrounded the house, young and old, the whole people
without exception; 5. and they called to Lot and said to him,
‘Where are the men that came to thee to-night? Bring them
out to us that we may know them.’ 6. And Lot went out to
them to the entrance and shut the door after him. 7. And he
said, ‘Now, my brethren, do not so wickedly. 8. Behold, now,
I have two daughters who have not known man: let me now
bring them out to you and do ye to them as is good in your eyes ;
only to these men do nothing ; for to this end! are they come
under the shadow of my roof.’ 9. And they said, ‘Stand back.’
‘This one fellow,’ they said, ‘came in to sojourn, and he must
needs play the judge: now will we deal worse with thee than with
them.’ And they pressed sore upon the man Lot and drew near
to break the door. 10. But the men put forth their hand and
brought Lot into the house to them and shut the door. 11. And
they smote the men who were at the door of the house with
blindness, both small and great, so that they strove in vain to find
the door. rz. And the men said to Lot, ‘Hast thou here any
besides? Son-in-law and thy sons? and thy daughters and
whomsoever thou hast in the city, bring out of the place: 13.
for we will destroy this place, for the cry concerning them is great
before Yahweh ; and Yahweh has sent us to destroy it.’ 14, And
Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law who were to marry

 

 

1*To this end :” viz., to ensure their protection.

2 *Son-in-law and thy sons.’ Nothing more is said of Lot’s sons, and
‘son-in-law’ instead of ‘thy sons-in-law’ is strange. Dillmann conjectures
‘thy sons-in-law,’ omitting ‘sons.’
XIX. 27] LOT’S DELIVERANCE 2y

his daughters, and said, ‘ Up, get you out of this place, for Yahweh
is about to destroy the city.’ And he was one who mocked
in the eyes of his sons-in-law. 15. And as the dawn rose, the
angels hastened Lot, saying, ‘Up, take thy wife and thy two
daughters who are here; lest thou be consumed through the
guilt of the city.’ 16. And he lingered, and the men took hold
of his hand and his wife’s hand and the hand of his two daughters
through the mercy of Yahweh towards him: and they brought
him forth and set him without the city. 17. And it came to pass
when he! had brought them forth without, that he said, ‘ Escape
for thy life ; look not back, neither stay thou in all the circle [of
the Jordan]; escape to the mountain lest thou be consumed. 18.

And Lot said to them, ‘Ah, no, Lord: 19. behold, now, thy
slave has found grace in thine eyes, and thou hast magnified thy
mercy which thou hast shown me in saving my life, and I cannot
escape to the mountain: for fear that the evil overtake me so
that I die. 20. Behold, now, this city is near to flee unto, and
it isa little one: let me now escape thither—is it not a little one ?
—and my soul shall live.’ 21. And he said, ‘ Behold, I have
accepted thee in this thing also that I will not overthrow the city
of which thou hast spoken. 22. Haste thee, escape thither, for
I cannot do anything till thou be come thither.’ Therefore the
name of the city was called Zoar.2 23. The sun had risen on
the earth when Lot came to Zoar. 24. Then Yahweh rained
upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh out
of heaven ;® 25. and he overthrew those cities and all the circle
and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew from
the ground. 26. But his wife looked back behind him, and
she became a pillar of salt.t 27. And Abraham rose early in

1°He:’ ze, Yahweh, who is present in, or is one of, the three men.

2¢Zoar:’ z.e. ‘littleness,’ a name to which that part of the legend which
occupies vv. 19-22 owes its origin,

3¢From Yahweh.’ Probably an antique expression, meaning ‘from the
sky,’ like éx Alos : ‘out of heaven’ is explanatory, and may be a later gloss.

4¢A pillar of salt.’ ‘I have seen it,’ says Josephus (dws. I. ii. 4) ‘for it
remains even now ;’ while Irenzeus (iv. 31. 3 ; 33. 9) assures us that the pillar
3° THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XIX. 28

the morning to the place where he had stood before Yahweh :
28. and he looked down towards Sodom and Gomorrah and the
whole land of the circle, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the
land arose like the smoke of a smelting furnace.

30. And Lot went up? out of Zoar and dwelt in the moun-
tain, and his two daughters with him; for he was afraid to dwell
in Zoar, and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters with
him. 31. And the first-born said to the younger, ‘ Our father is
old, and there is not a man to come in to us after the manner of
all the earth. 32. Come, let us make our father drink wine and
we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed from our father.’
33. And they made their father drink wine that night, and the
first-born went in and lay with her father ; and he did not know
when she lay down or when she rose. 34. And it came to pass
on the morrow that when she rose, the first-born said to the
younger, ‘ Behold, I lay yesternight with my father; let us make
him drink wine this night also, that we may preserve seed from
our father.’ 35. And they made their father drink wine that
night also: and the younger arose and lay with him: and he
knew not when she lay down, nor when she rose. 36. Thus
were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. 37.
And the first-born bore a son, and she called his name Moab: he
exhibited clear signs of life. As a matter of fact the winter rains wear the
salt rock of the Hagar Usdum on the south of the Dead Sea into pyramids
and cylinders. See the striking woodcut of the rock called ‘ Lot’s Daughter’
in Riehm’s B72. H.-W. p. 926.

1¢ Lot went up.” The hideous story which follows is ascribed by Dillmann
Kittel, Kautzsch-Socin, etc., to some other writer than the Jahvist. It bears
however, the marks of his style (as in the Hebrew words for ‘ preserve seed,’
used by him in vii. 3), and he can scarcely have left Lot in Zoar without ex-
plaining how he came to the territory occupied by his descendants. ‘ Moral
are not,’ as Wellhausen rightly says, ‘ critical objections.’ The Jahvist indeed
speaks of Lot with respect, but, though he did not invent, he may have
borrowed a story current in Israel. This story is inspired by hatred of Moab
and Ammon, and is based on two fanciful etymologies. These are ‘ Moab’

=‘from a father, or ‘aqua, z.e. semen patris,’and ‘Ammon’=ben ‘ammi’
=‘son of my people.’ The Lxx. clinch the matter, reading, ‘ She called his

name Moab, saying ‘‘ from my father”’;’ ‘ She called his name Ammon, ‘‘ the

son of my clan.””’
xx. 8] SARAH AND ABIMELECH 31

is the father of the Moabites to this day. 38. And the younger,
she also bore a son, and she called his name Ben-ammi: he is
the father of the children of Ammon to this day.

XX. 1. And Abraham! journeyed thence to the land of the
Negeb, and dwelt between Kadesh and Shur ; and he dwelt [also]
in Gerar. 2. And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, ‘She is my
sister ;’ and Abimelech, hing of Gerar, sent and took Sarah. 3.
But God came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, and said to
him, ‘ Behold, thou art a dead man, because of the woman whom
thou hast taken, for she is married to a husband’ 4. Now
Abimelech had not come near her: and he said, ‘ Lord, wilt thou
slay even a righteous nation? 5. Did not he himself say to me,
“She is my sister”? And she, she also, said, “He is my
brother :” in the integrity of my heart and the tnnocency of my
hands have I done this.” 6. And God said to him in the dream,
‘LT also know that in the integrity of thy heart thou hast done this,
and I also withheld thee from sinning against me; therefore I did
not suffer thee to touch her. 7. And now restore the man’s wife,
for he is a prophet, and he will intercede for thee and thou shalt
live: but if thou restore not, know that thou shalt surely die, thou
and all that is thine’ 8. And Abimelech rose up early in the
morning and called all his servants, and told all these things in

1“ And Abraham,’ etc. The ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ has been
chiefly compiled from two documents, that of the Jahvist and that of the
Elohist. In this chapter we meet for the first time with a connected narration
from the Elohist’s hand. Here all critics are at one—Ilgen, Hupfeld, Knobel,
Ewald, Schrader, Kayser, Wellhausen, Kuenen, Kittel, Delitzsch. The
Elohist speaks of God (Elohim), and does not use the personal name Yahweh ;
and this is no accident, for according to him the personal name was first
revealed to Moses (Exod. iii. 13-15). This mark of authorship is accompanied
by others. Some of these are linguistic, and will be found in any good commen-
tary, e.g. ‘amah’ for ‘shiphchah’—‘maid-servant,’ here probably ‘concubine.’
Again, it is only the Elohist who represents Abraham ‘as a prophet,’ ver. 7 ;
it is he who in ver. 13 makes Abraham agree with Sarah that they are to pass
for brother and sister when they leave their original home, whereas according
to the Jahvist in xii. 11 Abraham forms this plan when about to visit Egypt.
Further characteristics of the Elohist will appear in the subsequent portions
of the Hexateuch which are certainly his. They are printed in italic type.
32 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [cEN. XX. 9

their ears: and the men were sore afraid. 9. Then Abimelech
called Abraham and said to him,‘ What hast thou done to us?
And wherein have I sinned against thee that thou hast brought upon
me and on my kingdom great sin? Deeds which are not to be done,
hast thou done to me. 10. And Abimelech said to Abraham,
‘ What hadst thou in view, that thou hast done this thing?’ 11.
And Abraham said, ‘ Because I thought surely there is no fear of
God tn this place, and they will slay me for my wife's sake. 12.
And moreover she is indeed my sister, the daughter of my father,
but not the daughter of my mother ; and she became my wife. 13.
And it came to pass, when God? caused me to wander from my
father's house, that I said to her, ‘ This ts the kindness which thou
shalt do to me; at every place to which we shall come, say of me
“He ts my brother”’ 14. And Abimelech took sheep and oxen,
and slaves and handmaidens, and gave them to Abraham, and
restored him Sarah his wife. 15. And Abimelech said, ‘ Behold,
my land is before thee: dwell where it pleases thee” 16. And to
Sarah he said,* Behold, I give thy brother a thousand stluer pieces :
behold, in this thou hast that which will make all who are with

1 “Daughter of my father.’ Marriage with a half-sister who had the same
father but a different mother was permissible among many ancient nations,
and may be a survival of times when kinship was only traced through the
female line. To confine ourselves to the Semites, marriage with a half-sister,
not uterine, was lawful among the Phcenicians, the Arabs during ‘the ignor-
ance,’ z.e. before Mohammed, and the Hebrews at least as late as David
(2 Sam, xiii. 13). It existed in Ezekiel’s time, though he condemns it
(xxii. 11) ; and it is also condemned by the Deuteronomist (xxvii. 22), and
the ‘Priestly Writer’ (Lev. xviii. 9). See Robertson Smith’s Avzship and
Marriage in Early Arabia, ch. vi.

2 When God.’ Here, asin xxxv. 7, the Elohist connects the word for God,
plural in form but usually singular in sense, with a pluraljverb. At first
Elohim may have meant ‘ objects of fear’ (Arab. aliha, ‘to be terrified’), the
spirits of a place considered collectively. Hence, when the animistic stage
of religion was passed, it might mean either the one god whom the Hebrews
worshipped or the many gods of the heathen. The etymological connection
of the word is, however, very doubtful. The view given is that of Fleischer
and Delitzsch; others, e.s. Dillmann and Bathgen connect it with El, and
that again is of uncertain meaning. For the usage of the words El, Elohim,
and the singular Eloah, which never occurs in the Hexateuch except in Deut.
xxxii., see Bathgen, Semitische Religionsyeschichte, pp. 270-310.
XXI. 14] ISAAC BORN—ISHMAEL EXPELLED 33

thee close their eyes [to the dishonour done to thee], so ¢hat thou
art justified before all’ 17. And Abraham interceded with God,
and God healed Abimelech and his wife, and his maidservants, so
that they bore children. 18, (For Yahweh? had closed every womb
in the house of Abimelech because of Sarah, Abraham’s wife.)
XXI. 14. And Yahweh ? visited Sarah as he had said.. 23. And
Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age. 6.
And Sarah said,‘ God has prepared laughter for me: every one
that heareth will laugh at me.’ 7. And she said, ‘Who would
have said to Abraham that Sarah would give children suck, for I
have borne him a son in his old age?’ 8. And the child grew
and was weaned: and Abraham made a great feast on the day
that Isaac was weaned. 9. And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the
L£ygyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, playing. 10, And she
said to Abraham, ‘ Drive forth this maidservant and her son: for
the son of this maidservant shall not inherit with my son, with
Lsaac’ 11. And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight,
because of his son. 12. And God said to Abraham, ‘ Let it not be
grievous in thine eyes because of the boy and because of thy maid-
servant ; tn all that Sarah says to thee, hearken to her voice; for
it is through Isaac that there will be any mention of thy descend-
ants” 13. And also of the son of the maidservant will I make a
nation, for he is thy seed. 14. And Abraham rose up early in the

1¢Thou art justified before all.’ This translation involves a slight change
in the Masoretic pointing.

2¢For Yahweh,’ etc. This verse is an addition by the editor who united
the Jahvist and Elohist documents. He (1) says ‘Yahweh’ instead of
‘Elohim’; (2) misunderstands the Elohist document which he used; he
forgets that Abimelech had been struck with sickness, and leaves the impres-
sion that the barrenness was merely in the women.

3 ‘And Yahweh,’ etc. The Jahvist, Elohist, and ‘Priestly Writer’ must all
have mentioned Isaac’s birth, and hence it is difficult*to decide on the author-
ship of verses 1, 2, 6, 7. I have adopted Dillmann’s division, but without
much confidence that the Elohist in these verses can be always distinguished
‘from the Jahvist. From ver. 8 onwards the hand of the Elohist is clear and
undoubted. This is proved by the use of ‘Elohim,’ ‘amah,’ etc., and still more
by the fact that the Jahvist has already given his version of the story in ch. xvi.

Cc
34 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN. XXL 15

morning, and took bread and a bottle of water, and gave tt to
Hagar, and placed the child upon her shoulder? and sent her away,
and she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba.
15. And the water in the bottle was spent, and she cast down the
child under one of the bushes. 16. And she went and sat down
apart at the distance of a bowshot: for she said, * Let me not look
at the child's death :' therefore she sat apart, and the child lifted up
its voice and wept. 17. And God heard the cry of the boy, and the
angel of God called to Hagar from the heaven, and said to her,
‘ What ails thee, Hagar? fear not, for God has heard the boy’s cry,
where he ts. 18. Arise, lift up the boy and take hold of him, for
Twill make hima great nation? 19. And God opened her eyes,
50 that she saz a well of water ; and she went and filled the bottle
with water, and gave the boy drink. 20. And God was with the
boy, and he grew up. and he durelt tn the wilderness and became a
shooter,> (an archer). 2t. And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran,
and his mother took a wife for him out of the land of Egypt.

22. And it came to pass* at that time that Abimelech and Phicol
the captain of his host spoke to Abraham, saying, ‘God ts with thee
in all that thou doest. 23. Now therefore swear to me here by
God, that thou wilt not deal falsely with me, nor with my offspring,
nor with my posterity ; but according to the kindness which I have

 

1 «Placed the child upon her shoulder.” The Masoretic text makes
Abraham simply give the child to Hagar. I have followed the LXX. reading.
The Masoretic text has been ltered to bring this chapter, which is by the
Elohist, into harmony with the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ according to whom, ver. 25,
Ishmael would now be about fourteen, and so much too old for his mother to
carry. That, however, the Flohist had a very different view of Ishmael’s age
is plain from ver. 15, where, according to the Masoretic text itself, Hagar
‘casts down the child.”

° © The child lifted up,’ etc., LXX.

® A shooter.’ This is one of the unusual words of which the Elohist is
fond. The common word ‘archer,’ which is added, is probably an old gloss.

4 And it came to pass,’ etc. What follows (22-31) is admittedly from the
Elohist ; and the arguments of Kautzsch and Socin, that there is some mixture
of documents, are not convincing. In ver. 28 Abraham is said to take ‘ ¢he
seven lambs,’ although they have not been mentioned before, because the
sacredness of the number seven, which may refer to the seven planets, was
XXI. 34] ABRAHAM AND BEERSHEBA 35

done to thee, shalt thou do to me and to the land in which thou
hast sojourned” 24. And Abraham said, ‘I will swear” 25.
But Abraham reproved Abimelech because of the well of water
which Abimelech’s slaves had taken by violence. 26. And Abime-
lech satd, ‘I do not know who has done this thing : netther didst thou
tell me, nor did I hear of it till to-day” 27. And Abraham took
sheep and oxen, and gave them to Abimelech, and they two made a
covenant. 28. And Abraham set the seven ewe lambs of the flock
by themselves. 29. And Abimelech said to Abraham,‘ What mean
those seven ewe lambs which thou hast set by themselves?’ 30. And
Abraham said,‘ The seven lambs shalt thou take from my hand,
that it may be a witness for me that T have dug this well’ 31.
Therefore this place is called Beersheba: because there they sware
both of them.

32. And they made! a covenant in Beersheba : and Abimelech
rose up, and Phicol the captain of his host, and returned to the land
of the Philistines. 33. And he planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba,
and called there on the name of Yahweh, the everlasting God. 34.
And Abraham sojourned in the land of the Philistines many days.

widely acknowledged among the Semites. The common Hebrew word for
‘swear’ meant originally ‘to come under the influence of the number seven.’
Beersheba means ‘seven wells,’ and was, with Dan—where also there was a
fountain—a chief place of pilgrimage for the northern Israelites. See Amos
viii. 14. Here, as elsewhere, the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ purifies
the old heathen shrines by connecting them with the history of the saints and
heroes of Israel, the worshippers of ‘God’ or ‘Yahweh.’ The story told
here has grown from the connection in sound and sense between the Hebrew
words for ‘ seven,’ and for ‘ to swear,’ ‘oath,’ etc.

1 “And they made.’ The origin of vv. 32-34 is disputed and uncertain.
33 must belong to the Jahvist. Ituses the name Yahweh, and assigns another
reason than that given by the Elohist for the sanctity of Beersheba. Nor can
32> belong to the Elohist. He regards Abraham while at Beersheba as a
settler in Philistia. Here Abimelech and his marshal leave Philistia
apparently to meet Abraham and then return thither. 324 is generally
assigned to the Elohist, but seems superfluous in him, as he has already men-
ticned the covenant at Beersheba. 34 may bea fragment from some other
narrative now lost. It is out of all connection here. Thus I assign 32, 33 to
the Jahvist, and give no opinion on 34.
36 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN. XXiI. I

XXII. 1. And it came to pass’ after these things that God
proved Abraham, and said to him,‘ Abraham,’ and he said, ‘ Here
am TI? 2. And he said, ‘ Take now thy son, thine only son, whom
thou lovest, Isaac, and get thee to the land of . . . ,* and offer him
as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell thee
of? 3. And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled
his ass, and took his two servants with him, and Isaac his son,
and he cleft the wood for the burnt offering, and went to the place
of which God had told hin. 4. On the third day Abraham liftea
up his eyes and saw the place ufar of. 5. And Abraham said to
his servants, ‘ Stay ye here with the ass: and [ and the boy will
go yonder, and will worship and come again to you.’ 6. And
Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and laid it on Isaac
his son, and he took in his hand the fire and the knife; and they
two went together. 7. And Isaac spoke to Abraham his father,
and said, ‘ My father ;’ and he said,‘ Here am I, my son? And

1“ And it came to pass,’ etc. (xxii. 1-19). Here the story of Abraham’s
sacrifice, xxii. 1-13, 19 is admittedly by the Elohist. Notice the use of the
divine name; the angel who calls from heaven here (ver. I1) as in the former
Elohist chapter (xxi. 17); the reference in the words ‘only son’ to the
former Elohist chapter, which tells (xxi. 14) how Ishmael had been sent away,
so that only Isaac was left; etc. etc. But in 14-18 we have a § which can be
separated from the rest without impairing the sense, and there ‘ Yahweh’
occurs four times and Elohim never. These verses must have been added by
one who wished to amplify the promise to Abraham and add to its solemnity.
Who was the author? Not the Jahvist. He, to dismiss all difficulties from
the relative dates of the Jahvist and Elohist, would not have left the name
‘Elohim’ or ‘God’ unaltered in the rest of the narrative. The addition, then,
must have been made by the editor who united the Jahvist and the Elohist
documents. The words, ‘Itis the oracle of Yahweh,’ ver. 16, only occur in one
other passage of the Pentateuch, and that a very late one, viz. Num. xiv, 28.
The purpose of the whole story is to show that human sacrifices, common
among the Semites generally, and by no means unknown in Israel, were not
approved by God.

° «The land of...’ Our present Hebrew text has ‘ the land of Moriah.’
This is intended to glorify the mount of the Temple, but so the Elohist did not
write. For (1) there was a mountain, but no land, of Moriah; (2) the name
Moriah only occurs 2 Chron. iii. 1, and Baudissin (Sted. ii. p. 25222.) is pro-
bably right in supposing that the name Moriah was first given in allusion to
the story before us. It is vain to conjecture what the Elohist wrote.
XXIL 20] ABRAHAM’S SACRIFICE OF ISAAC 37

he said, ‘ Behold the fire and the wood: but where ts the sheep for
the burnt offering?’ 8. And Abraham said, ‘God will provide him-
self a sheep for the burnt offering, my son” So they went both of
them together. 9. And they came to the place whith God had told
him of ; and Abraham built the altar there, and laid the wood in
order, and bound Isaac his son, and placed him on the altar over
the wood. 10. And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the
knife to slay his son. 11. And the angel of God" called to him from
the heaven and said, ‘Abraham, Abraham: and he said, ‘Here am I?
12. And he said, ‘Stretch not forth thine hand agatnst the boy, netther
do thou anything to him: for now I know that thou fearest God,
since thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from me. 13.
And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and behold, a ram behind® [him]
was caught in the thicket by its horns ; and Abraham went and
took the ram, and offered tt up for a burnt offering instead of his
son. 14. And Abraham called the name of that place ‘Yahweh
will see :’ so that it is said at this day, ‘On the mountain where
Yahweh is seen.’ 15. And the angel of Yahweh called to Abraham
the second time from the heaven; 16. and he said, ‘ By myself
I swear,—it is the oracle of Yahweh,—because thou hast done
this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only one: 17.
that I will bless thee abundantly, and will multiply thy de-
scendants as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand on the
sea-shore ; and thy descendants shall possess the gate of their
enemies; 18. and in thy descendants shall all the nations of
the earth bless themselves ; because thou hast obeyed my voice.’
19. And Abraham returned to his servants, and they arose and
went together to Beersheba; and Abraham dwelt in Beersheba.

20. And it came to pass ° after these things, that it was told

1 ¢ Angel of God.’ Hebrew text, and all versions except Syr., ‘ angel of
Yahweh,’ which must be due to an editor or the carelessness of a scribe.
2* A ram behind.’ Some Hebrew mss., Sam., LXx., Syr., read ‘one ram,’
meaning that, while rams are usually found with the flock, this ram was alone.
5 ‘And it came to pass.’ The notice of Nahor’s family probably comes
from the Jahvist, because it prepares the way for ch. xxiv., whichis admittedly
by him. So Budde, followed by Dillmann, Kittel, Delitzsch. But ‘after
38 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXII. 27

Abraham, saying, ‘ Behold, Milcah, she also has borne children
to Nahor thy brother.’ 21. Uz his firstborn, and Buz his brother,
and Kemuel the father of the Arameans; 22. and Chesed,
Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph, and Bethuel. 23. And Bethuel begot
Rebekah: these eight Milcah bore to Nahor the brother of
Abraham. 24. And his concubine, whose name was Reumah,
she also bore Tebah, Gaham, Tahash, and Maacah.

. XXIV. 1. And Abraham was old, stricken in years, and
Yahweh had blessed Abraham in everything. 2. And Abraham
said to his slave, the overseer of his house, who managed all that
he had, ‘Put now thy hand beneath my thigh; 3. and I will
make thee swear by Yahweh the God of heaven and the God of
the earth, that thou shalt not take a wife for my son from the
daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell: 4. but thou
shalt go to my land and to my kindred, and take a wife for my
son Isaac.’ 5. And the slave said to him, ‘ Perhaps the woman
will not be willing to come after me to this land: must I needs
bring thy son again to the land from whence thou didst go forth?’
6. And Abraham said to him, ‘Beware of bringing my son
thither again. 7. Yahweh the God of the heavens who took me
from my father’s house and from the land of my kinsfolk, and
that spoke to me and swore to me, saying, ““To thy descendants will
I give this land,”—he will send his angel before thy face, and thou
shalt take a wife for my son from thenec. 8. And, should the
woman be unwilling to go after thee, then thou shalt be clear
from this oath to me: only thou shalt not bring my son thither
again.” g. And the slave put his hand under the thigh of Abra.
ham his lord, and swore to him concerning this thing. ro. And
the slave took ten camels from the camels of his lord,! having all

 

these things’ is a phrase of the Elohist, and, though it does not justify Well -
hausen in assigning the section to him, it proves that there has been admixture
of documents. The Aramzans or Syrians are here divided into twelve tribes,
an arrangement of which the Semites were fond. See Reuss (Gesch. d. A. 7.
Pp. 43 seg.), and Stade (Gesch. sr. i. p. 145 seg.)

1 «The camels of his lord.’ The Hebrew awkwardly adds ‘and went,”
which is omitted in the LXxx.
XXIV. 25] REBEKAH 39

goodly things of his lord’s in his hand: and he arose and went
to Aram of the two rivers, to the city of Nahor. 11. And he
made the camels kneel down outside the city by the well of
water at evening time, the time that the women go out to draw
water. 12. And he said, ‘Yahweh, God of Abraham my lord,
send me, now, good speed to-day, and show kindness to Abraham
my lord. 13. Behold, I stand by the fountain of water, and the
daughters of the men of the city come forth to draw water: 14.
and let it come to pass that the damsel to whom I shall say, ‘“ Let
down thy pitcher, pray, that I may drink,” and she shall say,
“Drink, and I will give thy camels drink also ;” let the same be
she whom thou hast appointed for Isaac thy slave ; and thereby
shall I know that thou hast shown kindness to Abraham my
lord.’ 15. And it came to pass, before he had done speaking,
that, behold, Rebekah came out who was born to Bethuel the
son of Milcah, the wife of Nahor, Abraham’s brother, with her
pitcher on her shoulder. 16. And the damsel was very fair to
look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her: and she
went down to the fountain and filled her pitcher and came up.
17. And the slave ran to meet her and said, ‘Pray, give me a
little water to drink from thy pitcher.’ 18. And she said, ‘ Drink,
my lord ;’ and she made haste to let down her pitcher on her
hand, and gave him drink. 19. And when she had done giving
him drink, she said, ‘I will draw for thy camels also, till they
shall have done drinking.’ 20. And she made haste to empty
her pitcher into the trough, and she ran again to the well to draw,
and drew for all his camels. 21. And the man gazed at her in
silence to know whether Yahweh had prospered his way or no.
22. And it came to pass when the camels had done drinking,
that the man took a nose-ring of gold, weighing half a shekel, and
two golden bracelets for her hands, weighing ten shekels. 23.
And he said, ‘Whose daughter art thou? pray tell me. Is there
room in thy father’s house for us to spend the night there?’
24. And she said to him, ‘I am the daughter of Bethuel the son
of Milcah, whom she bore to Nahor.’ 25. And she said to him,
4o THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXIV. 26

‘We have both straw and fodder enough, room also to pass the
night there.’ 26. And the man inclined and bowed down to
Yahweh. 27. And he said, ‘Blessed be Yahweh the God of
Abraham my lord, who has not failed in his kindness and truth
to my lord: as for me, in the way has Yahweh led me to the
house of my lord’s brethren.’ 28. And the damsel ran and told
her mother’s household! what had happened. 293. And
Rebekah ? had a brother, and his name was Laban. 30%. And
it came to pass when he saw the nose-ring and the bracelets on
his sister’s hands, and when he heard the words of his sister
Rebekah, saying, ‘Thus spoke the man to me,’ 29%. that
Laban ran out to the man at the fountain. 30. And he came
to the man, and, behold, he was standing by the camels at the
fountain. 31. And he said, ‘Come in, thou blessed of Yahweh :
why standest thou without ? For I have prepared the house and
room for the camels.’ 32. And the man came into the house,
and he [Laban] ungirded the camels, and gave straw and fodder
for the camels, and water to wash his feet and the men’s feet who
were with him. 33. And he set meat before him ; but he said,
‘T will not eat till I have told mine errand.’ And he said, ‘Speak
on. 34. And he said, ‘I am Abraham’s slave. 35. And Yahweh
has blessed my lord exceedingly, so that he has become great,
and has given him sheep and cattle, and silver and gold,
and male and female slaves, and camels and asses. 36. And
Sarah, my lord’s wife, bore my lord a son after she was old;
and he has given him all that he has. 37. And my lord made
me swear, saying, “Thou shalt not take a wife for my son from
the daughters of the Canaanites in whose land I dwell. 38. But
thou shalt go to my father’s house and to my clan to take a wife
for my son.” 39. And I said to my lord, ‘‘ Perhaps the woman
will not follow me.” 40. And he said to me, ‘ Yahweh, before

1“ Mother’s household ;’ z.e. she told it in the women’s quarters, the harem.

2 *And Rebekah,’ etc. Verses 29 and 30 as they stand in the Masoretic
text are in confusion. The true order was restored in 1798 by Ilgen (Urkund.
@. Gen. p. 49), and his correction is now generally accepted.
XXIV. 53] REBEKAH 41

whose face I have walked, will send his angel with thee to prosper
thy way, so that thou shalt take a wife for my son from my clan
and my father’s house. 41. Then shalt thou be clear of the
oath to me, when thou comest to my clan: and if they give her
not, then shalt thou be clear of the oath to me.” 42. And I
came this day to the fountain, and said, ““O Yahweh, God of
my lord Abraham, if now thou meanest to prosper my way, which
Igo; 43. then, as I stand at the fountain it shall be thus: the
[first] maiden that comes out to draw water, to whom I shall say,
“Give me, pray, a little water to drink from thy pitcher,” 44.
and who shall say to me, ‘ Both drink thou, and I will also draw
for thy camels,” she shall be the wife whom Yahweh has
appointed for my lord’s son.” 45. And, before I had done
speaking with my heart, Rebekah came out with her pitcher on
her shoulder, and went down to the fountain and drew: and I
said to her, “ Pray, give me to drink.” 46. And she made haste
to let down her pitcher from her shoulder, and said, “ Drink, and
I will give drink to thy camels also.” And I drank, and she gave
drink to my camels also. 47. And I asked her, and said, ‘‘ Whose
daughter art thou?” And she said, “I am the daughter of
Bethuel the son of Nahor, whom Milcah bore him.” And I put
the ring on her nose and the bracelets on her hands. 48. And
I inclined and bowed down to Yahweh, and blessed Yahweh
the God of my lord Abraham, who had led me in the right way
to take the daughter of my lord’s kinsman for his son. 49. And
now, if you will deal kindly and truly with my lord, tell me; and
if not, tell me; that I may turn right or left.” 50. Then Laban
and Bethuel answered and said, ‘The thing proceeds from
Yahweh: we cannot speak good or evil! to thee. 51. Behold,
Rebekah is before thee; take her and go, and let her be a wife
to thy lord’s son, as Yahweh hath spoken.’ 52. And it came to
pass, when Abraham’s slave heard their words, that he bowed
down to tne earth unto Yahweh. 53. And the slave brought

1*Good or evil:’ ze. Yahweh has decided. Nothing, for or against,
depends on us.
ae THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXIV. 54

forth jewels of silver and of gold, and garments, and gave them
to Rebekah: he gave also costly gifts to her brother and mother.
54. And they ate and drank, he and the men that were with him,
and stayed all night: and they rose up in the morning, and he
said, ‘Send me away to my lord.’ 55. And her brother and
mother said, ‘ Let the damsel stay with us some days, say ten:
after that thou canst go.’ 56. And he said to them, ‘ Do not
keep me back, now that Yahweh has prospered my way: send
me away that I may go to my master.’ 57. And they said, ‘We
will call the damsel, and inquire at her mouth.’ 58. And they
called Rebekah, and said to her, ‘Wilt thou go with this man?’
And she said, ‘I will go. 59. And they sent away Rebekah
their sister, and her foster-mother, and Abraham’s slave with his
men. 60. And they blessed Rebekah, and said to her, ‘O our
sister, mayest thou become thousands of myriads, and may thy
descendants possess the gate of them that hate them.’ 61. And
Rebekah arose, and her damsels, and they rode on the camels
and followed the man: and the slave took Rebekah and went.!

62. But Isaac had come from... to Beer-lahai-roi,?
and he was dwelling in the district of the Negeb. 63. And
Isaac went out to meditate [?] in the field in the early evening,
and he lifted up his eyes and saw, and, behold, there were camels
coming. 64. And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she
saw Isaac she lighted off the camel. 65. And she said to the

1 “And the slave took Rebekah and went.’ This is out of place, because
Rebekah has already started. Further, Wellhausen has pointed out that
Abraham suddenly disappears from the story. The slave leaves Abraham,
and sets out for ‘ Aram of the two rivers.’ He returns not to Abraham but to
Isaac, not to Hebron or Beersheba, but to Beer-lahai-roi. Of various ex-
planations given, the simplest is to suppose that the Jahvist mentioned here
Abraham’s death. The slave, finding him dead, went to Beer-lahai-roi, where
Isaac was now living with a house of his own. The final editor of the
Hexateuch was obliged to mutilate the Jahvist account, because he gave the
notice of Abraham's death in the words of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’

2 “Tsaac had come,’ etc. The Masoretic text is corrupt. I have followed
Kautzsch and Socin. See Dillmann,who proposes two other emendations,
one based on the LXx. and Sam,
xxv. 6] ABRAHAM MARRIES KETURAH 43

slave, ‘Who is yonder man that walks in the field to meet us?’
And the slave said, ‘It is my lord:’ and she took her veil and
covered herself. 66. And the slave told Isaac all the things that
he had done. 67. And Isaac brought her into the tent}... and
she became his wife and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted
after his father’s death.

XXV. 1. And Abraham took another wife,? and her name
was Keturah. 2. And she bore him Zimran, Yokshan, Medan,
Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah. 3. And Yokshan begot Sheba and
Dedan: and the sons of Dedan were the Asshurim, Letushim,
and Leummim. 4. And the sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher,
Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the children of
Keturah. 5. And Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac. 6.
And to the sons of the concubines whom Abraham had, Abraham
gave gifts; and he sent them away, while he yet lived, from Isaac
his son, eastward to the east country.

1 “Into the tent.’ The Masoretic text adds ‘of Sarah, his mother.’ But
these words cannot be construed as they stand in the sentence, and are rightly
rejected by Dillmann and Wellhausen. In the last verse I follow many critics
in substituting ‘father’s death’ for ‘mother’s death.’ For the reason, see note
on ver. 61.

2 “And Abraham took another wife,’ etc. The sixverses at the beginning
of this chapter are very puzzling. Hupfeld (Queen d. Gen.) argued, and, as
I think, proved, that they cannot belong to the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ He assigned
them to the Jahvist, and it is now generally agreed that they at least in sub-
stance belong to the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ So Schrader (Z7z/ezt.
p- 278), Wellhausen (xxi. 417), Budde (p. 225), Kittel (p. 138), Delitzsch.
The views of Kuenen (§ 16, 12) and of Dillmann do not differ substantially,
though Kuenen speaks as if the editor of the Hexateuch had here borrowed
from some unknown source (but see § 6), and Dillmann assigns ver. 6 to
an editor, (1.) The verses must come substantially from the ‘ Oldest Book of
Hebrew History.’ Observe the Hebrew word for ‘ begot,’ ya/ad, not holid as
in the ‘ Priestly Writer’ ; the verb to express repetition (wazyoseph), common in
our document, never used by the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ the summing up ‘all these
were the children,’ etc., in ver. 4, as before in x. 29. (2.) The verses as they
stand cannot be entirely from the Jahvist, who in x. 28 attributes a different
origin to Sheba. The mention of ‘ concubines’ in the plural is also suspicious.
(3-) The § must be out of its proper place. No author, having dilated on
Abraham’s extreme age and Isaac’s marvellous birth, would go on to speak of
his subsequent marriage and children, as if all had been a matter of course.
44 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. xxv. 11>

XXV. 115. Now Isaac dwelt by Beer-lahai-roi.! . 18.
And they dwelt from Havila to Shur, which is east of Egypt, as
thou goest to Assyria: eastward of all his brethren did he come

21. And Isaac entreated Yahweh for his wife, because she
was barren, and Yahweh was intreated of him, and Rebekah
his wife conceived. 22. And they thrust against each other
within her, and she said, ‘If it be so, why do I live?’ And she
went to consult Yahweh. 23. And Yahweh said,

‘Two nations are in thy womb,

And two peoples shall be separated from thy bowels:

And one people shall be stronger than the other,

And the elder shall serve the younger.’
24. And her time to bear was complete, and, behold, there were
twins in her womb. 25. And the first came forth ruddy, all
over like a hairy garment, and they called his name Esau.? 26°.
And after that came forth his brother, with his hand holding
Esau’s heel, and they called his name Jacob. 27. And the boys
grew, and Esau was a skilful hunter, a man of the field, and
Jacob was a quiet man, dwelling in tents. 28. But Isaac loved
Esau, because game was to his taste, but Rebekah loved Jacob.
29. Now Jacob boiled pottage, and Esau came from the field
and he was faint. 30. And Esau said to Jacob, ‘Feed me, pray,
with the red stuff, that red stuff there, for I am faint:’ therefore
they called his name Edom.’ 31. And Jacob said to Esau, ‘ First

1 Now Isaac dwelt by Beer-lahai-roi,’ etc. xxv. 11> and 18 are mere

fragments from our document, possibly altered ; 11° is clearly connected with
xvi. 14; 18 with xvi. 12.
° “Esau.’ Supposed to be born hairy, because the name suggests this ;
compare Arabic ’A’tha. ‘Ruddy’ is suggested by another name of the nation,
viz. Edom. As, however, the Jahvist gives a different explanation of the
word ‘Edom’ in ver. 30, there must be some admixture in the text. The
author also uses the Hebrew word ‘Se’ar,’ ‘hair,’ in allusion to ‘Se’ir,’ the
mountain-land of the Edomites, and connects the name of Jacob with ‘ akev,’
“a heel.’

3 Another attempt to explain the national name Edom, viz. from ‘adom,’
‘red.’
XXVI. 9] REBEKAH AND ABIMELECH 45

sell me thy birthright’ 32. And Esau said, ‘Behold, I must
die sooner or later: and what good then will the birthright do
me?’ 33. And Jacob said, ‘First, swear to me.’ And he swore
to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob. 34. And Jacob gave
Esau bread and lentil pottage, and he ate and drank, and arose
and went his way: so Esau made light of his birthright.

XXVI. 1. And there was a famine in the land (besides the
first famine! which took place in the time of Abraham), and
Isaac went to Abimelech king of the Philistines to Gerar. 2.
And Yahweh appeared to him and said, ‘(Thou shalt not go down
to Egypt: dwell in the land of which I shall tell thee:) 3.
sojourn in this land (and I will be with thee and will bless thee,
for to thee and thy descendants will I give all these lands, and
I will establish the oath which I sware to Abraham thy father.
4. And I will multiply thy descendants, as the stars of heaven,
and to thy descendants will I give all these lands, and in thy
descendants shall all the nations of the earth bless themselves ;
5. because Abraham listened to my voice and kept my charge, my
commandments, my statutes, and my law.) 6. So Isaac dwelt in
Gerar. 7. And the men of the place asked about his wife, and
he said, ‘She is my sister,’ for he feared to say, ‘She is my wife,’
‘lest’ [said he] ‘the men of the place slay me because of Rebekah,
since she is fair to look upon.’ 8. And it came to pass, when he
had been there a long time, that Abimelech king of the Philis-
tines looked out of the window and saw, and, behold, Isaac
was sporting with Rebekah his wife. 9. And Abimelech called
Isaac, and said, ‘So then, she is thy wife: and how saidst thou

1° Besides the first famine.’ Dillmann points out that 25, ‘dwell in the
land I shall tell thee of,’ is inconsistent with 32, ‘sojourn in this land.” The
words in brackets bear all the marks of amplification bya later hand, and ver. 5
closely resembles the style of the Deuteronomist, e.g. in Deut. xi. 1. Verses
15 and 18 are clearly additions by the compiler of the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew
History,’ and are meant to connect this story told here by the Jahvist with
the narrative of the Elohist, xxi. 25 seg. The whole story, xxvi. I-11, must
have had a different place in the original history. The Jahvist can scarcely
have made Rebekah’s beauty so dangerous after she was the mother of grown
men,
46 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN. XXVI. 10

“She is my sister”?’ And Isaac said to him, ‘ Because I said,
“Lest I die because of her.”’ 10. And Abimelech said, ‘ What is
this thou hast done to us? One of the people might easily have
lain with thy wife, and thou wouldst have brought guilt upon us.’
11. And Abimelech charged all the people, saying, ‘He that
toucheth this man or his wife shall surely be put to death.’

1z. And Isaac sowed in that land, and found in the same
year a hundredfold, for Yahweh blessed him. 13. And the man
waxed great and grew more and more, till he became very great ;
14. And he had possession of flocks and herds and a great body
of slaves, so that the Philistines envied him. 15. (Now all the
wells which his father’s slaves had dug in Abraham’s time, the
Philistines had stopped them and filled them with earth.) 16.
And Abimelech said to Isaac, ‘Go from among us, for thou art
become much too mighty for us.’ 17. And Isaac went thence
and encamped in the torrent-bed! of Gerar and dwelt there.
18. (And Isaac dug again the wells of water which they had dug
in the time of Abraham his father, and the Philistines had stopped
them after Abraham’s death, and he called their names after the
names which his father had called them.) 19. And Isaac’s slaves
dug in the torrent-bed, and found there a well of springing water.
zo. And the herdmen of Gerar strove with Isaac’s herdmen,
saying, ‘The water is ours:’ so he called the name of the well
‘Contention,’ because they contended with him. 21. And they
dug another well, but they strove about it also; so he called its
name ‘Enmity.’ 22. And he removed thence, and dug another
well, and about it they did not strive; so he called its name
‘Rehoboth,’? for he said, ‘ Yea, now has Yahweh made space for
us, that we may be fruitful in the land.’ 23. And he went up
thence to Beersheba. 24. And Yahweh appeared to him the
same night and said, ‘I am the God of Abraham thy father: fear
not, for I am with thee, and I will bless thee and multiply thy

1 ¢Torrent-bed.’ See Stanley’s Stvaz and Palestine, p. 496.
” Rehoboth = ‘ open spaces.’
XXVIII. 3] ISAAC AT BEERSHEBA 47

descendants because of Abraham my servant.’ 25. And he
built an altar there, and called on Yahweh, and pitched his tent
there. And there Isaac’s slaves bored a well.

26. Then Abimelech went to him from Gerar, with Ahuzzath
his counsellor and Phicol the captain of his host. 27. And Isaac
said to them, ‘Why have you come to me, seeing that you hate
me, and have sent me away from you?’ 28. And they said, ‘We
have seen plainly that Yahweh was with thee, and we said, “‘ Let
there be now a compact on oath between us and thee, and let us
make a covenant with thee, 29. that thou wilt do us no hurt, as
we have not touched thee, and as we have done thee nothing but
good, and have sent thee away in peace: thou art now blessed
of Yahweh.”’ 30. And he made them a feast, and they ate and
drank. 31. And early in the morning they swore to each other,
and Isaac sent them away, and they departed from him in peace.
32. And it came to pass the same day that Isaac’s slaves came
and gave him an account of the well which they had dug, and
said to him, ‘We have found water.’ 33. And he called it
Shibah :1 therefore the name of the city is Beersheba to this day.

XXVII. 1. And it came to pass” that when Isaac was old and
his eyes were too dim to see, that he called Esau his eldest son
and said to him, ‘ My son,’ and he said to him, ‘Here am I.’ 2.
And he said, ‘Behold, now, I am old; I know not the day of my
death. 3. And now, pray, take thy weapons, thy quiver and thy

1 Shibah=oath. Contrast the Elohist in xxi. 28 seg., and see note on p. 34.

2 * And it came to pass,’ etc., xxvii. 1-45. A popular myth to explain the
fact that Edom, an older nation of the same stock as Israel, occupied the
mountainous and mostly barren land between the Dead Sea and the AZlanitic
Gulf. In this wild country a settled kingdom could not have arisen but for
the wealth got from the caravans which bore the wares of India and South
Arabia through Edom northwards to Palestine, Syria, and Phoenicia. (See
Stade, Gesch. Isr. i. p. 122 seg.) The myth shows low conceptions of morality
and religion. Isaac’s blessing has a purely magical effect, and the Israelites
felt no shame of the deceit by which they supposed it was got. Possibly,
however, the Hebrew historian meant to raise the moral tone of the myth by
relating the subsequent struggles of Jacob. The § is most interesting from a
critical point of view. The following points are clear and admitted :—(1.) It
48 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXVII. 4

bow, and go out to the field and get for me a head of game:
4. and make me savoury meat such as I love, and bring it to me
that I may eat; that my soul may bless thee before I die.’ 5.
And Rebekah heard when Isaac spoke to Esau his son, and
Esau went to the field to hunt game and bring it home. 6. And
Rebekah spoke to Jacob her son, saying, ‘Behold, I heard thy
father speak to Esau thy brother, saying, 7. ‘“ Bring me game
and make me savoury meat, that I may eat and bless thee before
Yahweh ere I die.” 8. Now, therefore, my son, obey my voice
in regard to that which I command thee. 9. Go now to the
flock, and fetch me thence two goodly kids of the goats, that I
may make them for thy father into savoury meat such as he
loves. ro. And thou shalt bring it to thy father, that he may
eat ; in order that he may bless thee before he dies.’ 11. And
Jacob said to Rebekah his mother, ‘Behold, Esau my brother is
a hairy man and I am a smooth man. 12. Perhaps my father
will feel me, and I shall seem to him a mocker and I shall bring
on myself a curse and not a blessing.’ And his mother said to
him, ‘On me be thy curse, my son; only obey my voice and go
fetch me them.’ 14. And he went and fetched and brought them
to his mother; and his mother made savoury meat, such as his
father loved. 15. And Rebekah took the goodly raiment of Esau
her elder son, which were with her in the house, and put them
on Jacob her younger son; 16. and she put the skins of the kids

is a combination of a Jahvist and Elohist account. The name Yahweh occurs
in 7,20, 27, and there are many marks of the Jahvist style. The word
Elohim is mentioned once, viz. in 28, but there are also marks of the Elohist
style—e.g. in 16, 18, the form ‘ and he said ‘‘ Here am I,”’ as before in xxii.
1,7, 11. (2.) The matter of the narrative witnesses to double authorship.
Thus in 21-23 Isaac feels Jacob’s arms, finds them hairy, and, taking him for
Esau, gives his blessing. In 24-254 the story begins over again. Isaac believes
Jacob to be Esau because of the smell of his garments, and accordingly gives
him the blessing. Compare also the two halves of wv. 30, 33, 34 with
35-38; the end of 44, ‘until thy brother’s fury turn away,’ with the first words
of the next verse, ‘until thy brother’s anger turn away.’ (3.) Itis impossible
to make any complete severance between the Jahvist and the Elohist. Each
has adopted and told substantially the same story.
XXVIL 30] ISAAC’S BLESSING 49

of the goats on his hands and the smooth of his neck; 17. and
she gave the savoury meat and the bread she had made into the
hand of Jacob her son. 18. And he went to his father and said,
‘My father ;’ and he said, ‘Here am I: who art thou, my son?’
19. And Jacob said to his father, ‘I am Esau thy first-born ; I
have done as thou didst bid me: rise now, sit and eat of my
game, that thy soul may bless me.’ 20. And Isaac said to
his son, ‘How then hast thou found it so quickly?’ And he
said, ‘Because Yahweh thy God brought it in my way.’ 21. And
Isaac said to Jacob, ‘Come near now that I may feel thee, my
son, whether thou be my son Esau or no.’ 22. And Jacob went
near to Isaac his father, and he felt him and he said, ‘ The voice
is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are Esau’s hands.’ 23. And he did
not recognise him, for his hands were hairy like his brother Esau’s
hands: so he blessed him. 24. And he said, ‘Art thou then my
son Esau?’ And he said, ‘I am.’ 25. And he said, ‘ Bring it
near to me that I may eat of my son’s game, to the end that my
soul may bless thee :’ and he brought it near to him and he ate,
and he brought him wine and he drank. 26. And his father
Isaac said to him, ‘Come near now and kiss me, my son.’ 27.
And he drew near and kissed him, and he [Isaac] smelt the smell
of his garments and blessed him, and said, ‘See, the smell of my
son is as the smell of a field which Yahweh has blessed.
28. ‘And God give thee of the dew of the heavens
And of the fatness of the earth,
And plenty of corn and wine.
29. ‘Let peoples serve thee,

And nations bow down to thee ;

Be thou a lord over thy brethren,

And let thy mother’s sons bow down to thee ;

Cursed be every one that curses thee,

And blessed be every one that blesses thee.’
30. And it came to pass as Isaac had made an end of blessing
Jacob, and it came to pass that Jacob had just gone out from the

presence of his father Isaac, and Esau his brother came in from
D
50° THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN. XXVIL. 31

his hunting. 31. And he also made savoury meat and brought
it to his father, and said to his father, ‘Let my father rise and eat
of his son’s venison, in order that thy soul may bless me.’ 32.
And his father Isaac said to him, ‘Who art thou?’ And he said,
‘I am thy son, thy first-born, Esau.’ 33. And Isaac trembled with
trembling great beyond measure, and said, ‘Who, then, was he
who took game and brought it to me, so that I ate of all before
thou camest, and blessed him? yea, and he shall be blessed.’
34. When Esau heard his father’s words, then he cried with a cry
great and bitter beyond measure, and said, ‘ Bless me, me also,
my father.’ 35. And he said, ‘Thy brother came with guile and
took thy blessing.’ 36. And he said, ‘Is it because they have
called his name Jacob that he has supplanted me this twice? He
has taken my birthright, and, behold, now he has taken my
blessing.” And he said, ‘Hast thou not reserved a blessing for
me?’ 37. And Isaac answered and said to Esau, ‘Behold, I
have set him as lord over thee, and all his brethren have I given
him for servants, and with corn and wine have I sustained him:
and what, then, can I do for thee, my son?’ 38. And Esau said
to his father, ‘Is this blessing thine only one, my father? Bless
me, me also, my father:’ and Esau lifted up his voice and wept.
39. And Isaac his father answered and said to him,
‘Yea, far from the fatness of earth be thy dwelling,
And far from the dew of the heavens from above :
40. ‘And by thy sword shalt thou live, and thy brother shalt thou
serve ;
But it shall come to pass, when thou strivest, [?]
That thou shalt break his yoke from off thy neck.’ +

41. But Esau watched for revenge against Jacob, because of the
blessing wherewith his father blessed him ; and Esau said in his

1 “Break his yoke from off thy neck.’ Edom was subject to Israel under
David ; rebelled under Joram of Judah (2 Kings xiv. 7, compare viii. 20
seq.), @.e. in the former half of the ninth century B.c. ; was again subdued by
Amaziah (2 Kings xiv. 7), B.c. 801-773 ; and finally won its freedom under
Ahaz, B.C. 734-726 (2 Kings xvi. 6, LXx. text). The author of this verse
must in any case have lived as late as Joram, probably much later.
XXVIII. 13| JACOB’S FLIGHT 51

heart, ‘The days of mourning for my father are at hand; then
will I slay my brother Jacob.’ 42. And the words of Esau her
elder son were told to Rebekah ; and she sent and called Jacob
her younger son, and said to him, ‘Behold, Esau thy brother
will sate his vengeance against thee by slaying thee. 43. And
now, my son, listen to my voice; and arise, flee thou to Laban my
brother in Haran; 44. with him must thou tarry some days,
until thy brother’s fury turn away; 45. until thy brother’s anger
turn away, and he forget what thou hast done to him: then will
I send and take thee thence: why should I be bereft of both? of
you in one day ?’

XXVIII. 10. And Jacob went out? from Beersheba and went
towards Haran. 11. And he lighted on the [holy] place and
tarried there all night because the sun was set, and he took one of
the stones of the place and set it under his head, and slept in that
place. 12. And he dreamt, and, behold, u ladder set upon the
earth, and tts top reached to the heavens, and, behold, the angels of
God going up and down upon it. 13. (And Yahweh stood beside
him and said, ‘I am Yahweh, the God of Abraham thy father,
and the God of Isaac. The land on which thou liest, to thee

1 *Bereft of both.” Of one by murder, of the other by blood-revenge
(Gen. ix. 6).

2 © And Jacob went out,’ etc., 10-22. There can be no doubt that the
verses in italics belong to the Elohist, and on this all areagreed. The name
Elohim, the revelation in dream (as in xx. and often), the language, are
decisive. Moreover, only when these verses are read by themselves is the
story intelligible. Jacob comes to a holy place, and finds that it is holy by
a vision in which the angels of God ascend and descend on a ladder. On
waking, he promises to recognise the sanctity of the place and pay tithes, if
the God of this place protects him. The interpolated verses, in which Yahweh
promises him the land, throw the story into confusion, and are never alluded
to in the sequel. Some part of these verses may be from the Jahvist, and the
naive statement that Yahweh ‘stood beside Jacob’ is in his manner. But
the Jahvist has already mentioned Bethel in xii. 8 as a place where Abraham
lived, and Kuenen seems right in assigning 13-16 (except the words ‘and
Jacob awoke from his sleep,’ in 16, which may belong to the Elohist), with the
latter half of 21, to the editor of the Jahvist and Elohist documents. The
gloss at the end of 19 may be still later.
52 ‘THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXVIII. 14

will I give it, and to thy descendants. 14. And thy descendants
shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad
westward and eastward, northward and southward, and all the
tribes on earth shall bless themselves in thee and thy descend-
ants. 15. And behold, I shall be with thee and will keep thee,
whithersoever thou goest, and I will bring thee back to this land,
for I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have
spoken to thee of.’ 16. And Jacob awoke from his sleep and
he said, ‘Truly, Yahweh is in this place, and I knew it not.’) 17.
And he was afraid, and he said, ‘How dreadful is this place!
This is none other but the house of God, and thts is the gate of the
heavens. 18. And early in the morning Jacob took the stone
which he had put under his head, and set it up fora pillar} and
poured oil on the top of it. 19. And he called the name of that
place Bethel |=house of God], (but the name of the city was Luz
at the first). 20. And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, ‘If God will
be with me and will keep me on this way that [ go, and will give
me bread to eat and raiment to puton, 21. and if I return in
peace to my father’s house, then (Yahweh will be my God, 22. and)
this stone which I have set up as a pillar shall be a house of God,
and of all that thou shalt give me I will faithfully give thee a
tithe. *

XXIX. 1. Then Jacob ® went on his journey, and came to the

1¢A pillar.” The Hebrew word ‘ massébah’ is technical, and means a sacred
pillar, corresponding in sense and etymology to the Arab. ‘niisitb,’ pl. ‘ansab.’
Such stones—(1) marked out a place as sacred ; (2) were thought to be chosen
by the god as his special abode; (3) were, therefore, anointed by the wor-
shipper, who by this act anointed the god, just as the host anointed his guest
at a feast. Such ‘anointed stones’ were familiar to all Semitic nations. Our
author elevates this ancient rite by connecting it with Yahweh and the
history of the patriarchs. We shall find later that the Deuteronomist (Deut.
xvi. 22) repudiates the pillar-worship altogether. So the Koran, Sur. v. 92,
repudiates the ansab.

2 «Tithes,’ not, as in the later legislation, for the priests, but for the main-
tenance of the sanctuary, ‘the service of the god of the land’ being ‘a burden
on the land.’ See Amos iv. 4, R. Smith, Semzztic Religion, p. 229.

3 ¢Then Jacob,’ etc. In ch, xxix. (Jacob’s marriage with Leah and
Rachel, the birth of four sons by Leah), I have not attempted to separate
XXIX. 13] JACOB AND RACHEL 5

land of the sons of the east. 2. And he looked, and, behold, a
well in the field, and, behold, three flocks of sheep lying there
beside it; for from this well they watered the flocks; but the stone
on the well’s mouth was great. 3. And, when all the flocks were
gathered there, then they rolled the stone from the well’s mouth,
and watered the sheep, and put back the stone on the well’s
mouth in its place. 4. And Jacob said to them, ‘My brethren,
whence are you?’ And they said, ‘We are from Haran.’ 5. And
he said to them, ‘Do you know Laban the son of Nahor?’ And
they said, ‘We do.’ 6. And he said, ‘Is it well with him?’
And they said, ‘It is well : and, behold, Rachel his daughter comes
with the sheep.’ 7. And he said, ‘Lo, it is yet high day,
neither is it time for the cattle to be gathered together: water
the sheep and go, take them to the pasture.’ 8. And they said,
‘We cannot, till all the flocks be gathered together, and they roll
the stone from the well’s mouth; then we water the sheep.’ 9.
While he yet spoke with them, Rachel came with her father’s
sheep, for she tended them. 10. And it came to pass, as Jacob
saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the
sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, that Jacob drew near, and
rolled back the stone from the well’s mouth, and watered the
sheep of Laban his mother’s brother. 11. And Jacob kissed
Rachel, and lifted up his voice and wept. 12. And Jacob told
Rachel that he was her father’s kinsman and Rebekah’s son, and
she ran and told her father. 13. And it came to pass, when
Laban heard the tidings of Jacob his sister’s son, that he ran to
meet him, and embraced him, and covered him with kisses, and
brought him in to his house; and he recounted to Laban all that

the Elohist from the Jahvist document. In 31-35, where the name Yahweh
occurs four times, we have admittedly the work of the Jahvist. For the rest
Dillmann rightly observes that in ver. 16 Rachel is mentioned as if for the first
time. Accordingly, he attributes on linguistic grounds, xxix. 2-14 or 153, 26
(where the Hebrew words for ‘ younger’ and ‘ first-born’ are those used by the
Jahvist in xix. 31, xxv. 23 seg.), and of course 31-35 to the Jahvist ; xxix. 1,
15 or 15%—23, 25, 27, 28, 30 to the Elohist. With Dillmann, Kittel and
Kautzsch-Socin agree substantially.
54 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN. XXIX. 14

had happened. 14. And Laban said to him, ‘Surely thou art
my bone and my flesh.’ And, when he had lived with him a full
month, 15. Laban said to Jacob, ‘ Because thou art my kinsman,
shalt thou serve me for nought? ‘Tell me what thy wages are to
be.’ 16. Now Laban had two daughters: the name of the elder was
Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. 17. And Leah
had dull eyes, but Rachel was beautiful in form and beautiful in
face. 18. And Jacob loved Rachel, and he said, ‘I will serve
thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.’ 19. And
Laban said, ‘It is better that I give her to thee than that I should
give her to another man: dwell with me.’ 20. And Jacob served
for Rachel seven years, and they were in his eyes as a few days
for the love he had to her. 21. And Jacob said to Laban, ‘Give
me my wife, for my time is fulfilled, that I may go in to her.’
22. And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and
made a feast. 23. And it came to pass in the evening, that he
took Leah his daughter, and brought her in to him ; and he went
in to her. 25. And it came to pass in the morning that, behold,
it was Leah; and he said to Laban, ‘ What is this thou hast done
to me? Did not I serve with thee for Rachel? And why hast
thou beguiled me?’ 26. And Laban said, ‘It is not so done in
our place to give the younger before the first-born. 27. Complete
the [bridal] week with this one, and we will give thee the other
also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet other seven
years.’ 28. And Jacob did so and completed her [bridal] week,
and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife. 30. And he went
in also to Rachel, and he loved Rachel also more than Leah ; and
he served with him yet other seven years.

31. Now Yahweh saw that Leah was slighted ; so he opened
her womb, but Rachel was barren. 32. And Leah conceived, and
bore a son, and she called his name Reuben, for she said, ‘ Yea,
Yahweh has looked on my affliction,! for now will my husband

1 «Has looked on my affliction.’ The Jahvist seems to have connected the
name Reuben with ‘ ra’ah be’onyi ’=‘has looked on my affliction’! For his
derivation of the other names, see margin of the English Revised Version.
XXX. 3] JACOB'S CHILDREN 55

love me.’ 33. And she conceived again, and bore a son, and
said, ‘Yea, Yahweh has heard that I am slighted, and has given
me this one also;’ and she called his name Simeon. 34. And
she conceived again, and bore a son, and said, ‘ Now at last will
my husband cleave to me, since I have borne him three sons.’
Therefore she called? his name Levi. 35. And she conceived
again, and bore a son, and said, ‘Now do I praise Yahweh.’
Therefore she called his name Judah: and she left bearing.
XXX. 1. And when Rachel saw? that she bore Jacob no
children, Rachel was jealous of her sister ; and she said to Jacob,
‘Give me children or else I die” 2. And Jacob's anger was
kindled against Rachel, and he said, ‘Am I in the place of God,
who has kept back from thee the fruit of the womb?’ 3. And she
said, ‘Behold my maid-servant Bilhah,; go in to her, and she
will beget on my knees,? and I also may be built up from her.’

1 “She called.’ I follow the reading of Sam., LXx., Syr.

2 «And when Rachel saw,’ ch. xxx. 1-43. Here vv. 25-43 belong almost
wholly to the Jahvist, because the Elohist in xxxi. gives a different account
of Jacob’s business relations with Laban. In 1-24 the Jahvist and Elohist
documents are mixed, but may generally be distinguished. For (1) we have
the recurring use of Yahweh in one verse or half-verse, Elohim in the other.
(2.) This difference of language is accompanied by others, ¢.g., the Jahvist
calls a female slave ‘ shiphchah’ (translated ‘ handmaid’), the Elohist ‘amah’
(translated ‘maidservant’). (3.) We constantly find two accounts of the
same thing placed together; sometimes e.g. two etymologies of the same
name.

® *Beget on my knees.’ This is the expression of the Elohist, who repeats
it in ch. 1. 23. And to this is added the parallel expression of the Jahvist, ‘I
will be built up from her,’ as in xvi. 2. Among the Germans, placing on the
knees was the symbol of adoption, and there are traces of a similar rite among
the Greeks (Od. xix. gor seg.; J. ix. 455 seg.); and among the Bedouins.
Stade (Zettsch. A. T. Wiss. vi. p. 143 seg.) supposes that originally the wife
actually bore the child on her husband’s knee, a custom known to have been
widely spread, and that taking a child on the knees at a later period of its life
was a means of acknowledging paternity in the case of illegitimate offspring,
and also a symbol of adoption. Just as the father made the child his own by
allowing it to be born on his knees, so Rachel by the same process makes
Bilhah’s child her own. Stade refers to Grimm’s Deutsche Rechtsalterthiimer,
Pp. 464 seg., to Ploss, Lage und Stellung der Frau wihrend der Geburt, and to
Mayeux, Les Bédouins.
56 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN, XXX. 4

4. And she vave him Bilhah her handmaid as a wife: and Jacob
went in toher. 5. And Bilhah conceived, and bare Jacob a son.
6. And Rachel said, ‘ God has decided for me, and has also heard
my voice, and has given mea son. Therefore she called his name
Dan. 7. And Bilhah, Rachel’s handmaid, conceived again, and
bore Jacob a second son. 8. And Rachel said, ‘In wrestlings
[for the favour] of God have I wrestled with my sister, and have
prevailed :’ so she called his name Naphtal.

9. When Leah saw that she had left bearing, she took Zilpah
her handmaid, and gave her to Jacob for a wife. 10. And Zilpah
Leah’s handmaid bore Leah a son. 11. And Leah said, ‘Good
fortune!’ And she called his name Gad.t 12. And Zilpah
Leah’s handmaid bore Jacob a second son: 13. and Leah said,
‘T am in luck! For daughters [of men] must needs call me
lucky :’ and she called his name Asher.

14. And Reuben went in the days of wheat harvest and found
love apples ? in the field, and brought them to his mother Leah.
And Rachel said, ‘Give me, pray, some of thy son’s love apples.’
15 And Leah said, ‘Is it a small matter that thou hast taken
away my husband? And wouldst thou take away my son’s love
apples also?’ And Rachel said, ‘Therefore, he shall lie with
thee to-night in exchange for thy son’s love apples.’ 16. And
Jacob came from the field in the evening, and Leah went out
to meet him, and said, ‘Thou must come in to me, for I have
surely hired thee with my son’s love apples.’ And he lay with
her that night.

1 *Gad.’ Leah says, ‘In luck,’ or, according to another reading, ‘ Luck
has come.’ Gad (in Syriac, a common word for ‘luck’) was the god of
fortune. He is mentioned in Isa. lxv, 11, and his memory was preserved
in the name of a place south of Hermon, viz., Baal Gad, ze. ‘ Baal considered
as good fortune,’ Josh. xi. 17, xii. 7. His worship was widely spread in
Syria, and was known to the Pheenicians, possibly also to the Babylonians.
See Cheyne on Isa. Ixv. 11, and Payne Smith, Zhesaur. Syr. col. 649.
The connection of Asher with a supposed goddess of luck, viz., Ashera, is
much more doubtful. See Robertson Smith, Semztze Religion, p. 171 seq.

* “Love apples.’ ‘The Jahvist must have related how Rachel became
fruitful by means of these love apples,’ Wellhausen xxi. 427.
XXX. 26] JACOB’S CHILDREN 57

17. But God heard Leah, and she conceived, and bore Jacob a
Jifth son. 18. And Leah said, ‘God has given me my hire, because
L gave my handmaid 4o my husband :’ so she called his name
Lssachar. 19. And Leah conceived again, and bore Jacob a sixth
son. 20. And Leah said, ‘God has presented me with a good
Present :* now at last will my husband honour [?] me, because
I have borne him six sons:’ so she called him Zebulun. 2r.
And afterwards she bore a daughter, and called her name Dinah.

22”. And God heard Rachel, and opened her womb. 23. And
she conceived, and bore a son, and said, ‘God has taken away?
my reproach, 24. And she called his name Joseph, saying, ‘ May
Yahweh add to me another son.’

25. And it came to pass,? when Rachel had borne Joseph, that
Jacob said to Laban, ‘Send me away that I may go to my place
and to my country. 26. Give me my wives and my children for
whom I have served thee, that I may go; for thou knowest the

1 © A good present.’ The Elohist connects the name Zebulun with ‘zabad,’
‘to present,’ the Jahvist with ‘zabal,’ ‘to dwell,’ or, according to Friedrich
Delitzsch (Prolegom. Hebr. Aram. W.-B. p. 65), ‘to exalt.’

2 *God has taken away.’ The Elohist derives the name Joseph from
‘asaph,’ ‘to take away,’ the Jahvist from ‘ yasaph,’ ‘to add.’

3 ¢ And it came to pass,’ etc., 25-43. This §, as has been said, belongs
to the Jahvist asa whole. But in 25-28 we have clear instances of doublets,
z.é. of parallel statements from two documents, and in 29-43 the text is
obscure and probably corrupt. Jacob apparently agrees to take as his hire
the abnormal sheep and goats which should be born in the future. Laban
removes the abnormal sheep and goats, z.e. the sheep which instead of being
white were black, the goats which instead of being dark, as Syrian goats
generally are, were patched or spotted with white. He separates them at a
distance of three days’ journey, so that all the young in the future might have
the normal colour, and be his, not Jacob’s. Thereupon Jacob (1.) makes
the flock conceive before parti-coloured rods ; (2.) turns the faces of the flock
at the time of conception tu the parti-coloured sheep and goats. This second
device, mentioned in ver. 40, is inconsistent with the statement of ver. 36,
that Laban had already put these parti-coloured animals far out of sight, and
cannot belong to the original narrative. In ver. 31 the words ‘will keep it’
must be an addition by another hand. In ver. 32 I have avoided absolute
contradiction by translating with Dillmann (against the accents). Even then
the sense obtained is unnatural. For it is not the parti-coloured animals
removed by Laban, but those born in time to come, which Jacob is to have.
58 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXX. 27

service wherewith I have served thee.’ 27. And Laban said to
him, ‘If now I have found favour in thine eyes, [tarry]: I have
observed the omens, and Yahweh has blessed me for thy sake.’
28. And he said, ‘ Appoint me thy wages, and I will give it.’ 29.
And he said to him, ‘Thou knowest how I have served thee,
and how thy cattle has fared with me. 30. For it was little
which thou hadst before I came, and it has spread itself abroad
to a multitude, and Yahweh has blessed thee wherever I went :
and now, when shall I also provide for my household?’ 31.
And he said, ‘ What shall I give thee?’ And Jacob said, ‘Thou
shalt not give me anything; if thou wilt do this thing for
me, I will again feed thy flock, and keep it. 32. I will pass
through all thy flock to-day, removing thence every spotted and
patched one: and every black one among the sheep, and the
patched and spotted among the goats, shall be my hire. 33. And
my own righteousness shall witness against me:! hereafter when
thou shalt come to inspect my hire, which shall be before thee,
every one that is not spotted and patched among my goats or
that is not black among the lambs, is to count for stolen.’ 34.
And Laban said, ‘ Good, let it be according to thy word.’ 35. And
on that day he removed the he-goats that were striped and
patched, and all the she-goats that were spotted and patched,
every one that had white in it, and all the black ones among the
sheep, and gave them into the hand of his sons; 36. and he
set three days’ journey between himself and Jacob: and Jacob
fed the rest of Laban’s flock. 37. And Jacob took him rods of
fresh storax and of almond and plane tree, and made white streaks
in them, laying bare the white which was in the rods; 38. and
placed the rods which he had peeled in the gutters, in the
water-troughs where the flocks came to drink over against the
flocks. And they coupled when they came to drink. 39. And
the flocks coupled before the rods and the flocks bore striped,

1 ©\y own righteousness shall witness against me’: ¢.e. I shall be self-
condemned,
XXxI. 8] JACOB’S FLIGHT FROM LABAN 59

spotted, and patched young. 40. And Jacob separated the lambs
and set the faces of the flocks towards the striped and all the
black in Laban’s flock : and he put his own droves apart, and did
not put them with Laban’s flock. 41. And it came to pass that
whenever the stronger of the flock coupled, Jacob put the rods
before the eyes of the flock in the troughs, that they might couple
before the rods: 42. but when the flock were feeble he did not
put them in: so the feebler were Laban’s and the stronger
Jacob’s. 43. So the man increased exceedingly, and had large
flocks, and maidservants and slaves, and camels and asses.
XXXI. 1. And he heard the words! of Laban’s sons, saying,
‘Jacob has taken away all that was our father’s, and of that which
was our father’s has he made all this wealth. 2. And Jacob
beheld Laban’s countenance, and, behold, it was not toward him as
beforetime. 3. And Yahweh said to Jacob, ‘ Return to the land
of thy fathers, and to thy kindred, and I will be with thee.” 4.
And Jacob sent and called Rachel and Leah to the field to his flock.
5. And he said to them, ‘I see your father’s countenance that tt ts
not to me as beforetime, but the God of my father has been with
me. 6. And ye know that with all my strength I have served your
Jather: 7. and your father has deceived me, and has changed my
wages ten times; but God did not suffer him to hurt me. 8. If
he said thus, “ The spotted shall be thy wages,” then all the flock

 

1 © And he heard the words,’ etc. Jacob flees, and is overtaken by Laban,
xxxil, I-45. Here, as Kuenen remarks, there is almost complete agreement
among critics. The narrative, except a verse here and there, comes from the
Elohist. We have the word ‘ Elohim’ in 24, 42; the word for female slave,
concubine, viz., ‘amah,’ peculiar to the Elohist; in 33 the form of address
and answer in II, as ¢.g. in xxii. 11; ‘the way of women’ in 35, for which the
Jahvist in xviii. 11 has quite a different expression. Here, as elsewhere, the
Elohist, less of an anthropomorphist than the Jahvist, makes Yahweh appear
in a dream, employing in ver. 24 the very words with which he introduced a
similar dream in xx. 3. Finally, the Elohist’s account of the relations between
Laban and Jacob is different from that given in the former chapter by the
Jahvist. Here Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times, and Jacob grows
vich, not by magical tricks (as in the Jahvist), but by the direct blessing of
God.
60 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXXI. 9

bore spotted ; and if he said thus,‘ The striped shall be thy wages,”
then all the flock bore striped. 9. Thus God carried off the cattle
of your father, and gave it tome. 10, And it came to pass at the
time when the flock coupled that I lifted up my eyes, and saw in a
dream, and, behold, the he-goats which mounted on the flocks were
striped, spotted, and speckled. 11. And the angel of God said to
mein a dream, “ Jacob,” and I said,“ Here am I” 12. And he
said, “ Lift up now thine eyes and sec, all the he-goats that mount
on the flock are striped, spotted, and speckled ; for I have seen all
that Laban is doing to thee. 13. [am the God of Bethel, where
thou didst anoint a pillar, where thou didst vow a vow to me: now
arise, go forth from this land, and return to the land of thy birth.”
14. And Rachel and Leah said to him, ‘ Have we still any portion
or inheritance in our fathers house? 15. Are we not counted
strangers by him now that he has sold us, and has consumed long
since the money he got for us? 16. For all the riches which God
has carried off from our father belongs to us and to our children ;
and now do all that God has said to thee.’ 17, Then Jacob arose,
and set his sons and his wives on the camels; 18°. and led off all
his cattle. 19. Now Laban was gone to shear his flock, and
Rachel stole her father’s teraphim.2 20. And Jacob outwitted
Laban the Syrian by not letting hin know that he was fleeing.
21. So he fled with all that was his, and arose and crossed the
river [Euphrates], avd set his face toward the mountain-district of
Gilead.

22. And tt was told Laban on the third day that Jacob was

\

1 Sold us.’ Not said in reproach. The ‘mohar’ (Arab. ‘ mahr,’ Syriac

*mahra’), or price paid for a bride to her family, was a recognised institution
in all Semitic nations, and this marriage by purchase succeeded the savage
marriage by capture. Only having (quite rightly) sold his daughters, Laban
had no further claim on them. They belonged to their ‘ba‘al,’ ze. owner or
husband, The ‘mohar’ is mentioned Gen. xxxiv. 12, Ex. xxii, 16, 1 Sam,
xviii. 25.
° *Teraphim.’ A word of doubtful etymology, meaning household gods.
Their images were in human form (1 Sam. xix. 13), and were used for
divination (Judges xviii., xix. ; Hos. iii. 4). From them Laban might get
‘the omens’ mentioned above (xxx. 27).
XXXI. 36] LABAN OVERTAKES JACOB 61

Jied. 23. And he took his kinsmen with him, and pursued after
him seven days’ journey, and overtook him in the mountain-district
of Gilead. 24. And God came to Laban the Syrian in a dream
by night, and said to him,‘ Take heed to thyself that thou speak
not to Jacob either good or bad.” 25. And Laban came up with
Jacob. Now Jacob had pitched his tent in the mountain-district
of! . and Laban had pitched his tent in the mountain-district
of Gilead. 26. And Laban said to Jacob,‘ What dost thou mean
by overreaching me, and leading away my dauxhters, as tf they had
been captives of the sword? 27. Why didst thou flee secretly and
deceive me, and not let me know, that I might send thee forth
with mirth and songs, with tabret and harp: 28. and hast not
suffered me to kiss my sons and my daughters? Now hast thou
done foolishly. 29. It is in the power of my hand to do you hurt,
but the God of thy father? spoke to me last night, saying, “ Take
heed to thyself that thou speak not to Jacob either good or bad.”
30. And, if thou must needs go because thou pinest for thy father’s
house, why hast thou stolen my gods?’ 31. And Jacob answered
and said to Laban, ‘Because I was afraid; for I said,‘ Lest thou
shouldst take thy daughters from me by force.” 32. With whom-
soever thou shalt find thy gods, he shall not live: before our
hinsfolk, discern thou what ts thine with me, and take it to thee.
for Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen them. 33. And
Laban went into Jacol’s tent, and into Leah’s tent, and into the tent
of the two maidservants, and did not find them. And he went out
Jrom Leah’s tent, and entered into Rachel's tent. 34. Now Rachel
had taken the teraphin, and put them in the camel’s saddle, and sat
upon them, and Laban felt about all the tent and found nothing.
35. And she said to her father, ‘Let not my lord be angry that
T cannot rise up before thee, for the way of women ts upon me. And
he searched, and found nothing. 36. And Jacob was angry, and
reproached Laban; and Jacob answered and said to Laban, ‘What

1 *Mountain-district of.’ A proper name has fallen out, for the story
implies that Laban and Jacob encamped in different places.
2 God of thy father.’ So Sam., Lxx.: the Hebrew has ‘ your father.’
62 ‘THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY GEN. XXXI. 37

is my transgression? What ts my sin, that thou hast hotly pursued
after me? 37. Since thou hast felt about all my furniture, what
hast thou found in all the furniture of my house? Set it here
before my kinsfolk and thy hinsfolk, that they may decide between
us. 38. This twenty years have T been with thee. thy ewes and
thy she-goats have not miscarried, and the rams of thy flock have I
not eaten. 39. That which was torn of beasts [did not bring to
thee; 1 bore the loss of it; from my hand didst thou require it,
whether stolen by day or stolen by night. 40. Thus I was ; in the
day the heat consumed me, and the frost by night, and sleep fled from
my eyes. 41. These twenty years have I been in thy house ; four-
teen years I served thee for thy two daughters, and six years for
thy flock ; and thou hast changed my wages ten times, 42. Unless
the God of my father, the God of Abraham and the awful God of
LIsaa, had been with me, surely now thou hadst sent me away
empty. God has seen my affiiction and the labour of my hands, and
gave his decision last night? 43. And Laban answered and said
to Jacob, ‘ The daughters are my daughters, and the children are
my children, and the flocks are my flocks, and all that thou seest
is mine, and what can I do this day to these my daughters, and to
their children whom they have borne? 44. And now, come, let us
make a covenant, I and thou ; and let it be for a witness
between thee and me. 45. And he [Jacob] took a stone,? and set

 

 

1 “Let it be.’ What is intended by ‘it’? Not the covenant. That
needed an external sign or witness, and could not be itself a witness. Besides,
the word ‘ covenant’ is feminine, the verb ‘let it be’ masculine. A proposal
to set up a pillar must have fallen out, which pillar was to be the sign of the
covenant. But then the rules of [lebrew grammar would require the change
of the verb into the feminine.

2 «And Jacob took u stone,’ 45-54. ere the accounts of the Jahvist
and Elohist are intermingled. The Jahvist takes the name Gilead (really
connected with Arabic ‘Gal’ad,’ ‘hard’) to mean ‘gal ‘ed,’ ze. ‘a cairn is
witness.’ This gal or cairn is set up as a sign of Jacob’s compact that he will
not ill-treat Laban’s daughters. According to the Elohist it is a masseba or
pillar which is set up to mark the boundary between the Hebrew and Syrian
(Aramzan) nations. The writer has in his mind the struggle between these
two races, which seems to have begun under Ahab in the former half of the
ninth century B.c., and continued for more than a hundred years. Ahab lost
XXXIL 2] GILEAD 63

it up for a pillar. 46. And Jacob said to his kinsfolk, ‘Gather
stones ;’ and they took stones and made a cairn, and they ate
there on the cairn. 47. (And Laban called it Yegar sahadutha,!
and Jacob called it Galed.) 48. And Laban said, ‘This cairn is
a witness between me and thee this day ;’ therefore he called its
name Galed 49. (and Mizpah,? for he said, ‘May Yahweh
watch between me and thee) when we are out of each other’s
sight. 50. If thou shalt afflict my daughters, and if thou shalt
take wives beside my daughters, no man is with us [as witness or
judge]: see, God is with us between me and thee.” 51. And
Laban said to Jacob, ‘ Behold this cairn, and behold the pillar
which I have set up between me and thee. 52. This cairn be
witness, and ¢he pillar be witness, that Lam not to pass over this
cairn fo thee, and that thou art not to pass over this cairn and this
pillar to me for harm. 53. The God of Abraham and the God of
Nahor be judges between us, (the God of their father.)’? And
Jacob swore by the awful God of his father Isaac. 54. And Jacob
offered a sacrifice in the mountain, and called his kinsfolk to eat
bread ; and they ate bread and spent the night in the mountain.
XXXII. 1. And early in the morning Laban* kissed his sons and
his daughters and blessed them; and Laban went away and
returned to his place. 2. And Jacob went on his way, and the

his life fighting for this very territory of Gilead (1 Kings xxii.). ‘Jacob took
astone’ must have been originally ‘Laban took a stone,’ as appears from
ver. 51.

a fe And Laban called it Yegar sahadutha,’ the Syriac for ‘ gal ‘ed.’ This
verse is due to the pedantry of a later hand. For the Jahvist, and even the
Elohist, though the latter calls Laban ‘the Syrian,’ make Leah and Rachel
speak pure Hebrew when they name their children.

2 “And Mizpah.’ Mizpah has not been mentioned before. But Mizpah
in Gilead was well known, and a later hand may have substituted it here for
“masseba,’ ‘a pillar.’ The Lxx. have ‘may God watch’ instead of ‘may
Yahweh watch.’

3 «God of their father :” wanting in Lxx. and in some Hebrew Mss. A
manifest interpolation.

4 © And early in the morning Laban,’ etc., ch. xxxii. In this chapter
1-3 is by the Elohist. The name of the town, Mahanaim (‘camps’), is made
64 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXXIL 3

angels of God met him. 3. And Jacob said when he saw them,
‘ This is the camp of God ;’ so he called the name of this place
Mahanaim.

4. And Jacob sent messengers before him to Esau his brother,
to the land of Seir, the field of Edom. 5. And he commanded
them, saying, ‘Thus shall you say to my lord Esau ; “Thus says
Jacob thy slave, “I have sojourned with Laban and tarried till
now: 6. and I got oxen and asses, sheep, and slaves and
handmaids; and I have sent to tell my lord, that I may find
"”> 7. And the messengers returned to Jacob,
saying, ‘We came to thy brother Esau, and, moreover, he is on
the way to meet thee, and four hundred men with him.’ 8. Then
Jacob was greatly afraid, and was distressed: and he divided the
people that were with him, and the flocks, and the cattle, and the
camels into two bands; 9g. and he said, ‘If Esau come to the
one company and smite it, then the company which is left shall

favour in thy sight.

the basis of a myth that Jacob there met the ‘angels of God,’ of which
the Elohist has already spoken in xxviii. 12. Accordingly, the § 4-142
cannot be by the Elohist, and belongs in substance to the Jahvist. Here
Jacob sends messengers to Esau, These return with the news that Esau is
at hand with 400 men, whereupon Jacob takes the precaution of dividing his
people and flocks into two bands (‘mahanaim’); and this, according to the
Jahvist, is the origin of the name Mahanaim. Jacob spends the night at
Mahanaim. Notice ‘shiphchah,’ ‘handmaid,’ as elsewhere in the Jahvist.
The next §, 14%—22, is substantially from the Elohist. Jacob sends rich
presents to his brother, and passes the night at Mahanaim. This is the
natural continuation of 1-3, and the Elohist in ver. 22 leaves us at the same
point of time and place as the Jahvist in 14%. There is much more difficulty
and difference of opinion about Jacob’s wrestling with God in the form of an
angel. The use of ‘ Elohim’ is, as Delitzsch admits, not decisive. The general
manner of the narrative is much more that of the Jahvist than of the Elohist.
We have already seen, and shall see more fully, that by far the greater
number of the gross anthropomorphisms belong to him ; moreover, it is the
Jahvist who from this point calls Jacob ‘Israel.’ See the excellent remarks
of Kuenen (Orders. §§ 13, 23, and 18). So Wellhausen, Kuenen, Kittel,
Kautzsch-Socin, ete., against Dillmann. Here again the myth is etymological.
The river Jabbok is fancifully connected with ‘neavak,’ ‘to wrestle ;’ Peniel
or Penuel is taken, with better right, to mean ‘face of God.’ Israel really
means ‘God will strive,’ not, as here, ‘ one who strives with God.’
XXXII. 25] JACOB AND ESAU 65

escape.’ 10. And Jacob said, ‘O God of my father Abraham
and God of my father Isaac, Yahweh, who didst say to me,
“Return to thy country and thy kinsfolk, and I will do thee
good:” 11. I am unworthy of all the mercies and the faithfulness
which thou hast shown to thy servant; for with [nothing but]
my staff I passed over this Jordan, and now I am become two
bands. 12. Pray, deliver me from the hand of my brother, from
the hand of Esau; for I fear him, lest he come and smite me,
the mother with the children. 13. And thou didst say, “I will
surely do thee good, and I will make thy descendants as the
sand of the sea which cannot be numbered for multitude.’” 14.
And he spent that night there. And he took of that which he
had with him a present for his brother Esau; 15. two hundred
she-goats and twenty he-goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams,
16. thirty milch camels and their colts, forty heifers and ten
bultocks, twenty she-asses and ten foals. 14. And he gave them
into the hand of his slaves, each drove apart, and he said to his
slaves, ‘ Fass over before me, and leave a space between drove and
drove. 18. And he commanded the foremost, saying, ‘When Esau
my brother meets thee, and asks thee, saying, “ To whom dost thou
belong? and whither goest thou? and to whom do these [beasts]
belong that are before thee?” 19. then thou shalt say, “ They
belong to Jacob thy slave , it is a present sent to my lord Esau. and,
behold, he also is behind us.”’ 20. And he commanded also the
second, and the third, and all that followed the droves, saying, ‘In
this manner shall ye speak to Esau when you find him. 21. And
ye shall say, “ Behold, also, thy slave Jacob is behind us ;”’ for he
said, ‘I will appease'him with the present that goes before me, and
afterwards I will see his face; perhaps he will receive me. 22.
So the present crossed before him, while he himself passed that
night in the encampment.

23. And he rose that night, and took his two wives and his
two handmaids and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of
the Jabbok. 24. And he took them and sent them over the

torrent-bed, and he sent over that which he had. 25. And Jacob.
E
66 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN, XXXII. 26

was left alone, and a man wrestled till the break of day. 26. And
when he [the man] saw that he could not overpower him, he
touched the hollow of his thigh, and the hollow of Jacob’s thigh
was dislocated, while he wrestled with him. 27. And he said,
‘Let me go, for it is daybreak :’ but he said, ‘TI will not let thee
go unless thou bless me.” 28. And he said to him, ‘ What is thy
name?’ And he said, ‘Jacob.’ 29. And he said, ‘Thy name
shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel, since thou hast
striven with God and with men, and hast prevailed.’ 30. And
Jacob asked and said, ‘Tell me, pray, thy name:’ and he said,
‘Why is it that thou dost ask after my name?’ And he blessed
him there. 31. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel,
‘for,’ [said he,] ‘I have seen God face to face, and have escaped
with my life. 32. And the sun rose on him as he passed
Penuel, and he limped because of his thigh. 33. Therefore the
children of Israel+ do not eat the sinew of the hip, which is on
the hollow of the thigh, to this day; because he touched the
hollow of Jacob’s thigh in the sinew of the hip.

XNNIII. 1. And Jacob lifted up? his eyes and looked, and,
behold, Esau came, and with him four hundred men; and he
apportioned the children to Leah, and to Rachel, and to the two
handmaids: 2. and he set the handmaids and their children
foremost, and Leah and her children after, and Rachel and
Joseph in the rear. 3. And he passed before them, and bowed
down to the ground seven times, till he came near to his brother.
4. And Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his
neck, and kissed him: and they wept. 5. And he lifted up his

1 «Therefore the children of Israel,’ etc. This verse is generally supposed
to be a gloss.

2 ¢ And Jacob lifted up,’ etc., ch. xxxiii. Itis clear that here the main
thread of the story comes from the Jahvist, not only because of the language,
but also because the story takes no notice of Jacob’s presents to Esau, of
which the Elohist gives an elaborate account in xxxii. 1g4¢>—22. Tere and
there the compiler has adopted a few words from the parallel narrative
of the Elohist. In 18-20 the use of ‘ Elohim’ again indicates the presence of
the Elohist.
XXXII. 18°] JACOB AND ESAU 67

eyes, and saw the women and the children, and said, ‘Who are
these with thee?’ And he said, ‘ Zhe children with whom God
has favoured thy slave’ 6. Then the handmaids came near,
they and their children, and bowed down. 7. And Leah also and
her children came near, and bowed down ; and afterwards Joseph
and Rachel came near, and bowed down. 8. And he said, ‘ What
meanest thou with all this company which I met?’ -And he
said, ‘To find favour in my lord’s sight.’ 9. And Esau said,
‘I have enough: keep, my brother, what thou hast.’ 1o. And
Jacob said, ‘Not so, I pray, if now I have found favour in thy
sight, then receive my present at my hand, for I have seen thy
face as one might see the face of a god, and thou didst receive
me graciously. 11. Zake now the gift which has been brought
thee, for God has been gracious to me and I have plenty’ And he
urged him, and he took it. 12. And he said, ‘Let us break up
and go, and I will go before thee.’ 13. And he said, ‘My lord
knows that the children are tender, and I must think of the sheep
and cattle that give suck, and, if I overdrive! them one day, all
the flocks will die. 14. Pray, let my lord pass on before his
slave, and I will go easily, according to the pace of the cattle that
is before me and according to the pace of the children, until I
come to my lord at Seir.’ 15. And Esau said, ‘Let me at least
leave with thee some of the people? who are with me.’ And he
said, ‘What need of this? Let me find grace in the eyes of my
lord.” 16. So Esau returned that day.on his way to Seir. 17.
And Jacob moved on to Succoth, and built him an house, and
made booths for his cattle: therefore the name of the place was
called Succoth. 18> .... And he encamped before the city.

1 «Tf IT overdrive.’ So Lxx., Sam., Syr. The Hebrew has, ‘If they
overdrive.’

2 «Leave with thee some of the people :’ z.e. for protection.

3 “And he encamped before the city.’ What city? Probably Shechem.
But the name has been given in the words of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ For
‘altar’ we should read, with Wellhausen, ‘pillar;’ the Hebrew verb trans-
lated ‘set up’ requires the latter word.

2
68 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXXIII. 19

19. And he bought the portion of ground where he had pitched his
tent from the sons of Hamor for a hundred kesitas. 20. And he
set up an altar there, and called it El the God of Israel.

XXXIV. . .. 3. And his soul 4 [Shechem’s] clave to Dinah
the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the damsel, and spoke
kindly to the damsel, 2. and humbled her. 7.... He had
wrought folly in Israel in lying with Jacob’s daughter, which
thing ought not to be done. 13. And Shechem said to her
father and her brothers, ‘Let me find grace in your eyes, and
what ye shall say to me I will give. 12. Impose upon me ever
so great a price [for the bride], and ever so great gifts, and I will
give them as ye shall bid me: but give me the damsel to wife.’

1 “And his soul,’ etc., ch. xxxiv. It is often hard to distinguish the
Jahvist and Elohist elements in the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’ but
this is one of the few cases in which there is considerable difficulty in parting
off the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’ as a whole, from later documents.
Still the thread of the early narrative may be seen clearly enough, though it
is broken here and there, and sometimes entangled with a later version of the
story. (1.) In the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ Shechem seduces
Dinah, and wishes to marry her. The sons of Jacob consent on certain con-
ditions. What these conditions were, we cannot say. But they had nothing
to do with circumcision. So far from making the patriarchs feel any horror
of marriage with the uncircumcised, our author represents Moses as leaving
his son uncircumcised (Ex. iv. 24-26), and implies that the Israelites became
acquainted with this rite in Egypt (Josh. v. 2, 3, 8, 9). Simeon and Levi
avenge their sister’s honour by assassinating Shechem. With this the rest
of the family have nothing to do, and Jacob strongly condemns the act of
violence. (2.) This account belongs to the Jahvist. The Elohist (in xxxvii.
12-14) represents Jacob’s sons as peacefully feeding their flocks close to
the scene of the outrage. He seems, from Josh. xxiv. 32, to have had quite
a different view of Jacob’s relations to Shechem. The Jahvist, on the other
hand, is in harmony with the old poem, xlix. 5, 6. In the arrangement of
the text, I have mostly followed Wellhausen and Kuenen, which last has
published an admirable treatise on the subject in the Zheol. Tijdschr. xiv.
p. 257-281. Dillmann assigns to the Jahvist 2, 3, 5, 7, 11-13, some words
in 14, 25 (in part), 26, 30, 31. Kittel and (less closely) Delitzsch agree with
him on the whole. Thus the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’ as recon-
structed by them, makes circumcision the condition of intermarriage. The
objections to this view have been given already. Add, that it makes our
narrator use twice at least the word ‘timme,’ ‘defile,’ which, according to
Delitzsch himself, is only found in Ezekiel and the ‘ Priestly Writer.’
XXxv. 8] SHECHEM AND DINAH 69

1g. And the young man deferred not to do the thing, because he
had delight in Jacob’s daughter; and he was honoured above
all the house of his father. 25. And two of [Jacob’s sons], Simeon
and Levi, Dinah’s brothers, took each man his sword; 26. and
slew Shechem with the edge of the sword, and took Dinah from
Shechem’s house, and went forth. 30. And Jacob said to Simeon
and Levi, ‘You have troubled me to make me stink among the
inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites ;
and, I being few in number, they will gather themselves together
against me and smite me: and I shall be destroyed, I and my
house.’ 31. And they said, ‘Should he deal with our sister as
with a harlot?’

XXXV. 1. And God said to Jacob,‘ Arise, go up to Bethel,
and dwell there ; and make there an altar to the God who appeared
to thee, when thou fleddest from the face of Esau thy brother,” 2.
And Jacob said to his household, and to all that were with him,
‘ Put away the foreign gods that are with you, and purify yourselves,
and change your garments:+ 3. and let us arise and go up to
Bethel, that I may make there an altar to the God who answered
me in the day of my distress, and was with me on the way which I
went. 4. And they gave Jacob all the foreign gods which were in
their hands, and the rings which were in théir ears, and Jacob
buried them under the terebinth which is by Shechem. 6. And
Jacob came to Luz,? which is in the land of Canaan, the same is
Bethel, he and all the people that were with him. 7. And he
built an altar there, and called the place the God of Bethel, because
God had revealed himself to him there, when he fled from his
brother's face. 8. And Deborah Rebehah's foster-mother died, and

1 “Change your garments.’ Common garments were changed lest they
should carry impurity into the sanctuary, priestly vestments being the natural
development of this usage, when a special priesthood was instituted, The
‘rings’ mentioned in ver. 4 were amulets. The Aramaic word for ear-ring
is ‘kedasha,’ z.e. ‘a holy thing,’ and this is the word actually used here in
the Syriac version, and in the Targum of Onkelos.

2 © And Jacob came to Luz.’ This verse is generally regarded as a gloss.
Probably the Elohist simply wrote, ‘ And Jacob came to Bethel.’
7° THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXXV. 16

was buried below Bethel underneath the oak ; and its name was
called ‘the oak of weeping” 16. And they moved on! from Bethel,
and, when there was still some way to come to Ephratah, Rachel
was in labour, and her labour was hard. 17. And it came to pass
that as she was in hard labour the midwife said to her, ‘Fear
not, for now thou shalt have another son.’ 18. And it came to
pass, as her soul was departing, for she died, that she called his
name Benoni; but his father called him Benjamin. 19. And
Rachel died, and was buried on the way to Ephrath: the same is
Bethlehem.? 20. And Jacob set up a pillar on her grave: the
same is the pillar of Rachel’s grave to this day. 21. And Israel
moved on, and pitched his tent beyond Migdal-eder. 22. And
it came to pass, while Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went
and lay? with Bilhah his father’s concubine : and Israel heard . .
XXXVII. 2. [Joseph] was tending the flock * with his brothers,

1 ¢ And they moved on.’ The § 16-22 must belong to the ‘ Oldest Book
of Hebrew History,’ for, according to the ‘ Priestly Writer’ (xxxv. 24, 26),
Benjamin was born in Mesopotamia. Verses 16-20 may be from the Elohist.
In 21, 22 the name ‘Israel’ and the Hebrew word for ‘ concubine’ remind
one of the Jahvist.

2 <The same is Bethlehem’: probably an erroneous gloss. The place
known as Rachel’s grave was much further north (1 Sam. x. 2, Jer. xxxi.
15), and it is most unlikely that any early tradition should have placed the
tomb of Rachel, the mythical ancestress of the great northern tribes, in the
territory of Judah.

3 Reuben went and lay.’ In its original form the legend would regard
Reuben’s marriage with his father’s concubine as quite in order. Among
Semitic nations the eldest son naturally succeeded to his father’s property,
including his concubine (see R. Smith’s Marriage and Kinship in Early
Arabia), and the same idea prevailed in Israel (2 Sam. iii. 7, xvi. 22 3 1 Kings
ii, 22; cf. 15, 16). These unions, however, were disapproved by the stricter
morality of the prophetic religion, as by the Koran iv. 26, though it adds
that ‘ what is past may be allowed.’

+ “Joseph was tending the flock.’ The chapters which give the history
of Joseph are, from a critical point of view, singularly interesting and satis-
factory. They are interesting because they furnish us with long sections from
those Jahvist and Elohist documents which compose our ‘Oldest Book of
Hebrew History.” The comparison shows (1.) that these documents are
independent in style, substance, and authorship ; (2.) that in style and sub-
stance they closely resemble each other; (3.) that they have been welded
together by an editor who made free use of these documents, but added little
XXXVII. 3] JOSEPH AND HIS BRETHREN 7I

while yet a lad (with the sons of Bilhah, and with the sons of
Zilpah, his father’s wives), and Joseph brought evil report about
them to their father. 3. Now Israel loved Joseph more than all

of his own or from other sources. The consideration of these chapters is
satisfactory because the severance of the documents is exceedingly easy on
the whole, and there is a general agreement among critics. Indeed, the
main points of divergence in the composite narrative were clearly stated by
Ilgen in 1795, and the legitimate inference with respect to the nature of the

documents was well put by Hupfeld in 1853.

If we confine ourselves here to

chapters xxxviii., xxxix., xl., z.¢. to Joseph’s history previous to his elevation
as Pharaoh’s chief minister, we may compare the two narratives thus :—

ELOHIST.

1. Joseph’s brothers hate him
because he tells tales and has dreams
which predict his superiority over
them and his: parents.

z. Joseph goes to visit his breth-
ren, who are with their flocks. They
resolve to kill him and then fling
him intoacistern, eden persuades
them not to kill, but merely to
throw him into an empty cistern.
He means to take him out secretly,
and give him safe back to his father.
Meanwhile Joseph is stolen by
Midianites, and when Reuben re-
turns, he finds to his despair that
Joseph is gone.

3. The Midianites sell Joseph to
Potiphar, one of Pharaoh’s exnuchs,
who as ‘chief of the executioners’
was in command of the prison. There
Joseph is not a prisoner, but a slave
of the governor of the prison, and,
as such, is appointed to wait on two
distinguished prisoners. He inter-
prets their dreams, and begs one of
them (the chief butler) to remember
him before Pharaoh on attaining
freedom and favour. He tells this
chief butler that he has been ‘stolex’
from the land of the Hebrews.

JAHVIST.

I. Joseph’s brothers hate him
because he is his father’s favourite.
His father made him a long-sleeved
robe, such as princes wore (cf.
25am, xili, 18),

2. Joseph goes to visit his
brothers, who are with their flocks.
They resolve to kill him. But
Judah persuades them to se// him to
a caravan of Jshmaelites for twenty
pieces of silver.

3. The Ishmaelites sell Joseph to
a private person in Egypt, whose
name is not given, and who was
married. Yahweh is with Joseph,
and blesses the house of the Egyptian
for his sake. Joseph is traduced by
the Egyptian’s wife, and cast into
prison. But there also Yahweh is
with him, and makes him a favourite
with the governor of the prison.

Here then we have two stories, each consistent with itself and inconsistent

with the other.

Nor is there any difficulty in determining the authorship of
72 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXXVII. 4

his other sons, because he was the son of his old age; and he
made him a long garment with sleeves. 4. And his brothers saw
that their father loved him more than all his brothers, and they
hated him, and could not speak peaceably to him. 5. And
Joseph dreamt a dream, and told it to his brothers, (and they hated
him yet more). 6. And he said to them, ‘Hear now this dream
which I have dreamt: 7. for, behold, we were binding sheaves in
the field, and, behold, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright; and,
behold, your sheaves came round about, and bowed down to my
sheaf’ 8. And his brothers said to him, ‘ Shalt thou indeed reign
over us, or have dominion over us?’ (And they hated him yet
more, because of his dreams and because of his words.) 9. And
he dreamt yet another dream, and told it to his brothers, and said,
‘ Behold, T have dreamt another dream, and, behold, the sun and
the moon and eleven stars bowed down to me?” 10. (And he told
his father and his brothers.) And his father rebuked him, and
said to him, ‘What ts this dream that thou hast dreamt? Shalt J,
and thy brothers, and thy mother indeed come to bow down to the
earth before thee?’ 11. And his brothers envied him; but his
Sather kept the matter in nuind.

12. And his brothers went to feed their father’s flock in
Shechem. 13. And Israel said to Joseph, ‘ Are not thy brothers
feeding the flock in Shechem? Come, and I will send thee to

each narrative. The author of the story in the right-hand column uses the
name Yahweh wherever he has occasion to speak of the supreme being (the
name occurs seven times in ch. xxxix.). The only exception is that he makes
Joseph use the word ‘ Elohim’ in talking to a heathen, here following his
general rule in such cases. He calls Jacob ‘Israel,’ a name which he has
previously accounted for (xxxii. 29): he gives special prominence to Judah
(as in ch. xxxviii.), On the other hand, the Elohist here, as elsewhere, lays
great stress on dreams (as in xx., xxi. 12, xxviii, 12, xxxi, 11, 24) ; he makes
Reuben, not Judah, the leader, which is in accordance with his general habit
of only mentioning places in or connected with northern Israel. Each
narrator has a vocabulary, and even grammatical peculiarities of his own.
The two narratives have been united, and in some instances harmonised. In
the division of documents throughout the history of Joseph, I have followed
the arrangement of Kautzsch and Socin. Critics differ only on matters of
detail, some of which are uncertain,
XXXVII. 25] JOSEPH AND HIS BRETHREN 73

them.’ And he said to him,‘ Heream TI’: 14. And he said to
him, ‘Go now, see whether it be well with thy brothers, and well
with the flock; and bring me word again. So he sent him from
the vale of Hebron,? and he came to Shechem. 15. And a
certain man found him, as he was wandering in the field: and the
man asked him, saying, ‘What seehest thou?’ 16. And he said,
‘It is my brothers that I seek: tell me, pray, where they are feeding
the flock” 17. And the man said, ‘ They have moved on from this
place, for I heard them say, “ Let us go to Dothan:”” so Joseph
went after his brothers, and found them in Dothan. 18. And they
saw him afar off ; and before he came near them they conspired
against him to put him to death. 19. And they said one to
another, ‘ Behold, this dreamer is come. 20. And now, come, let
us slay him, and cast him into one of the cisterns, and we will say,
“A wild beast has devoured him,” and we shall see what will
become of his dreams” 21. And [Judah] * heard it, and delivered
him out of their hand, and said, ‘Let us not take his life.” 22.
And Reuben said to them, ‘Shed no blood: cast him into this
cistern which is in the wilderness, but lay no hand upon him)
meaning to deliver him out of their hand, that he might restore him
to his father. 23. And it came to pass, when Joseph was come
to his brothers, that ¢hey stript Joseph of his garment, (the long
garment with sleeves that was on him,) 24. and they took him
and cast him into the cistern: now the cistern was empty, there
was no water in it. 25. And they sat down to eat bread, and
they lifted up their eyes and looked, and, behold, a caravan of

1 © And he said to him, ‘‘ Here am I.”’ These words do not suit the rest
of the verse. No doubt, the full text of the Elohist ran, ‘ And Jacob said to
Joseph, ‘‘ My son,” and he said ‘‘ Here am I.”’ This is a characteristic turn
in the Elohist narrative. Cf. xxii. 1, 7, IT, xxvii. 1, xxxi. II.

? ‘Hebron,’ ‘ We do not,” says Kuenen (Onderz. 1. p. § 13, 7), ‘expect to
find Jacob at Hebron either in the Jahvist or Elohist narrative.’ Probably the
name has been altered by a very late hand in favour of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’

3 * And Judah.” The text has Reuben. But ver. 22 is obviously from
the Elohist. Then ver. 21, a parallel to it, must be from the Jahvist, and
necessitates the correction of ‘ Reuben’ into Judah.
74 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [CEN. XXXVIIL. 26

Ishmaelites was just come from Gilead, with their camels bearing
tragacanth-gum and balsam and ladanum, going to carry it down
to Egypt. 26. And Judah said to his brothers, ‘ What profit is
it, if we slay our brother and conceal his blood? 27. Come, and
let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon
him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.’ And his brothers
listened to him. 28. Axd there passed by Midianite traders who
drew [Joseph out of the cistern]. And they [¢.e. his brothers]
lifted up Joseph out of the cistern, and sold Joseph to the
Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver, and brought Joseph to
Egypt. 29. And Reuben returned to the cistern, and, behold,
Joseph was not in the cistern, and Reuben rent his clothes. 30. And
he returned to his brothers, and said to them,‘ The boy ts gone:
and L, whither shall I go?’ 31. And they took Joseph’s garment,
and killed a he-goat, and dipped the garment in the blood. 32. And
they sent the long garment with sleeves and brought it to their
father, and said, ‘This have we found: know, now, whether it be
thy son’s garment or not.’ 33. And he knew it, and said, ‘It is
my son’s garment: a wild beast has devoured him: Joseph is
without doubt torn in pieces.’ 34. And Jacob rent his clothes, and
put sackcloth on his loins, and mourned for his son many days. 35.
And all his sons and all his daughters rose to comfort him, but
he refused to be comforted, and said, ‘ Mourning will I go down
to my son in Sheol:’ and his father wept for him. 36. And the
Midianites sold him into Egypt to Potiphar, one of Pharaoh’s
eunuchs, the chief of the executioners.!

XXXVIITI. 1. And it came to pass at that time? that Judah

1 «Chief of the executioners.’ Potiphar (=pe-et-e-ph-ra, ‘he who is of
Ra,’ z.e. he who belongs to Ra, the sun-god) was captain of the royal body-
guard, and, as such, chief executioner and governor of the prison. See xl. 3.

? *And it came to pass at that time.’ Judah and Tamar, ch. xxxviii.
This chapter (clearly by the Jahvist) enforces the obligation of taking the
widow of a brother who had died childless, and raising up children to bear his
name. Onan sinned by selfish greed, not by lust. Under a legendary form,
the story gives genuine historical recollections. Judah, which is not mentioned
in Deborah’s song (Judges v.), and was not united with the northern tribes till
XXXVIII. 14] JUDAH AND TAMAR 75

went down from his brothers, and turned in to a certain Adul-
lamite, whose name was Hirah. 2. And Judah saw there the
daughter of a certain Canaanite, whose name was Shuah; and he
took her, and went in to her. 3. And she conceived, and bore
a son, and she called! his name Er. 4. And she conceived
again, and bore a son, and called his name Onan. 5. And she
bore another son, and called his name Shelah: and he [Judah]
was at Chezib when she bore him. 6. And Judah took a wife
for Er his first-born, and her name was Tamar. 7. And Er,
Judah’s firstborn, was evil in the sight of Yahweh: so Yahweh
killed him. 8. And Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to thy brother’s
wife, and do the duty of a husband’s brother to her, and raise
up seed to thy brother.’ 9. And Onan knew that the seed
should not be his, and it came to pass, when he went in to his
brother’s wife, that he spilt it on the ground, lest he should give
seed to his brother. 10. But that which he did was evil in the
sight of Yahweh: so he killed him also. 13. And Judah said
to Tamar his daughter-in-law, ‘Remain a widow in thy father’s
house till Shelah my son be grown up:’ for he said, ‘Lest he
also die like his brothers.’ So Tamar went and dwelt in her
father’s house.

12. Now, after a long time, Shuah’s daughter, the wife of
Judah died: and when Judah was comforted, he went up to his
sheepshearers, he and Hirah the Adullamite his friend, to Timnah.
13. And it was told Tamar, saying, ‘Behold, thy father-in-law
is going up to Timnah to shear his flock.’ 14. And she put off
from her the garments of her widowhood, and covered herself

David’s time, contained a large admixture of Canaanite blood. From this
mixture five clans arose. Of these Er and Onan dwindled away (cf. 1
Chron. iv. 21, where Er appears as a sub-division of Shelah, and 1 Chron.
ii. 26, where Onam isa subordinate to Ram), of the other three Shelah, Perez,
and Zerah, Perez was at first superior and then inferior in strength to Zerah.
See Stade, Gesch. des Volkes Israel, i. p. 158.

1 The common Hebrew text has ‘he called.’ The better reading ‘she’
is supported by four Hebrew ss. (see De Rossi ad Joc.), by Sam., Arab.,
and Targ. Jon. A similar correction of the text has been made in 29 and 30.
76 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XXXVIIL 15

with a veil, and muffled herself up, and sat at the entrance to
Enaim which is on the road to Timnah ; for she saw that Shelah
was grown up, and she was not given to him as a wife. 15. When
Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot, for she had
covered her face. 16. And he turned aside to her by the road,
and said, ‘Come, now, let me go in to thee:’ for he did not
know that she was his daughter-in-law. And she said, ‘What
wilt thou give me that thou mayest come in tome?’ 17. And
he said, ‘I will send a kid of the goats from the flock :’ and she
said, ‘If thou wilt give a pledge until thou send it” 18. And
he said, ‘\What is the pledge which I shall give thee?’ And she
said, ‘Thy signet-ring and cord, and the staff that is in thine
hand.’ And he gave them to her, and came in to her, and she
conceived by him. 19. And she arose, and went away, and put
off her veil from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood.
zo. And Judah sent the kid of the goats by the hand of his
friend the Adullamite, that he might get the pledge from the
woman’s hand; but he did not find her. 21. And he asked the
men of her place, saying, ‘Where is the consecrated woman ! that
was at Enaim, by the road-side?’ And they said, ‘There has
been no consecrated woman here.’ 22. And he returned to
Judah, and said, ‘I have not found her, and also the men of the
place, said, ‘‘There has been no consecrated woman here.”’ 23.
And Judah said, ‘Let her keep it [the pledge] lest we be put to
shame :2 behold, I sent this kid, and thou hast not found her.’
24. And it came to pass after about three months, that it was

1 “Consecrated woman’: z.e. consecrated to Astarte, the Semitic Venus,
her prostitution being a religious act. According to Movers (Phév7zter, i.
680), quoted by Delitzsch, the kid was the offering usually made to one of these
votaries of Astarte. Note also that the sheepshearing was an occasion of
feasting (1 Sam. xxv., 2 Sam, xiii. 23 sey.), and that such a feast, like that of
the first sheaf, harvest, vintage, etc., must have had a religious character in
the nature-worship of Canaan, Astarte was primarily the goddess of flocks
and herds (see R. Smith, Semztéc Religion, p. 292), so that the presence of
“consecrated women’ at the sheepshearing would be quite in order.

2

2 ¢Put to shame,’ z.e. for not paying the woman her hire.
XXXIX. 6] JOSEPH IN EGYPT 17

told Judah, saying, ‘Tamar thy daughter-in-law has played the
harlot, and moreover, behold, she is with child by whoredom.’
And Judah said, ‘Bring her forth that she may be burnt.’ 25.
She was being brought forth when she sent to her father-in-law,
saying, ‘By the man to whom these things belong am I with
child:’ and she said, ‘ Discern, I pray thee, whose are these, the
signet-ring and cords and the staff.’ 26. And Judah acknow-
ledged them, and said, ‘She is more righteous than I, forasmuch
as I did not give her to Shelah my son.’ But he did not cohabit
with her any more. 27. And it came to pass at the time of her
delivery, that, behold, there were twins in her womb. 28. And
it came to pass in her delivery, that, behold, one put forth a hand,
and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread
saying, ‘This one came out first.’ 29. And it came to pass as
he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out, and
she said, ‘Why hast thou made a rent for thyself?’ and she called
his name Perez. 30. And afterward came out his brother who
had the scarlet thread on his hand, and she called his name
Zerah.

XXXIX. 1. And Joseph was brought down to Egypt and
(Potiphar, Pharaoh’s eunuch,+ chief of the executioners) an
Egyptian bought him from the hand of the Ishmaelites, who had
brought him down thither. 2. And Yahweh was with Joseph,
so that he became a prosperous man, and he was in the house of
his master, the Egyptian. 3. And his master saw that Yahweh
was with him, and that Yahweh made all that he did prosper in
his hand. 4. And Joseph found favour in his sight, and he
ministered to him, and he made him overseer over his house, and
all that he had he put into his hand. 5. And it came to pass,
from the time that he made him overseer in his house and over
all that he had, that Yahweh blessed the Egyptian’s house for
Joseph’s sake, and the blessing of Yahweh was on all that he
had in house and field. 6. And he left all that he had in Joseph's
hand, and he took no thought of anything that was with him, save
of the bread that he ate.
78 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [cEN. XXXIX. 7

Now Joseph was of comely figure and comely face. 7. And
it came to pass after these things that his master’s wife cast her
eyes on Joseph, and said, ‘Lie with me.’ 8. But he refused, and
said to his master’s wife, ‘Behold, my master takes no thought of
anything that is in the house with me, and he has put all that
he has into my hand. 9g. He is not greater in this house than
I; neither has he kept back anything from me except thee,
because thou art his wife: how then can I do this great evil and
sin against God?’ ro. And it came to pass as she spoke to
Joseph day by day that he did not listen to her, to lie with her
(to be with her). rz. And it came to pass about this time that
he went into the house to do his work; and there was none of
the men of the house there within. 12. And she caught him by
his garment, saying, ‘ Lie with me:’ and he left his garment in
her hand, and fled and went out. 13. And it came to pass, when
she saw that he had left his garment in her hand, and had fled
forth, 14. that she called to the people of her house, and spoke
to them, saying, ‘See, he has brought us in a Hebrew to have his
sport on us: he came in to me to lie with me, and I cried with
a loud voice. 15. And it came to pass that when he heard me
raise my voice and cry, he left his garment with me, and fled and
went out.’ 16. And she laid his garment by her, till his master
came home. 17. And she spoke to him according to these
words, saying, ‘The Hebrew slave whom thou hast brought us,
came in to me to have his sport on me. 18. And it came to
pass when I raised my voice and cried, that he left his garment
with me, and fled out. 19. And it came to pass when his
master heard his wife’s words which she spoke to him, saying,
“After this manner did thy slave to me,’ that his wrath was
kindled. 20. And Joseph’s master took him, and put him into
the prison (the place where the king’s prisoners were bound), and
he was there in the prison. 21. But Yahweh was with Joseph,
and brought him into favour, and gave him favour in the sight

of the governor of the prison. 22. And the governor of the .....

prison committed to Joseph’s hand all the prisoners that were
XL. 13] JOSEPH IN EGYPT 79

in the prison: and whatsoever they did there, he was the doer
of it. 23. The governor of the prison looked not to anything
that was under his hand, because Yahweh was with him: and
that which he did, Yahweh prospered.

XL. 1. And it came to pass after these things, that the butler
of the king of Egypt and his baker offended their lord the king
of Egypt. 2. And Pharaoh was angry with his two eunuchs, with
the chief of the butlers and the chief of the bakers. 3. And he put
them in ward in the house of the chief of the executioners, into the
prison, the place where Joseph was bound. 4. And the chief of
the executioners appointed Joseph to be with them, and he waited
on them, and they were in ward for a time. 5. And they dreamt
a dream both of them, each man his dream, in one night, each man
having a dream with a special meaning—the butler and the baker
of the king of Egypt who were bound in the prison. 6. And
Joseph came to them in the morning, and saw them, and, behold,
they were sad. 7. And Joseph asked Pharaoh’s eunuchs that were
with him in ward in his master’s house, saying, ‘Why do you look
so troubled to-day?’ 8. And they said to him,‘ We have dreamt a
dream, and there is none to interpret it? And Joseph said to them,
‘Do not interpretations belong to God? Pray, tell it me.” 9. And
the chief of the butlers told his dream to Joseph, and said to him, ‘In
my dream, behold, a vine was before me. 10. And in the vine
were three branches, and it was as though it budded, and tts
blossoms shot forth, and its clusters brought forth ripe grapes. 11.
And Pharaoh's cup was in my hand, and T took the grapes and
pressed them into Pharaoh’s cup, and I gave the cup into Pharaoh's
hand? 12. And Joseph said to him, ‘ This is the interpretation of
it: the three branches are three days: 13. within three days
more shall Pharaoh lift up thy head, and restore thee to thy place ;
and thou shalt give Pharaoh's cup into his hand after the former

1 ¢ Chief of the executioners.’ Joseph, according to the Elohist, is with
the same master to whom he was sold (xxxvii. 36) at first. The difference
between this and the Jahvist story has been pointed out above.
80 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XL. 14

manner when thou wert his butler. 14. But have me in thy
remembrance when it shall be well with thee, and, pray, show
kindness to me, and make mention of me to Pharaoh, and bring me
out of this house: 15. for indeed I was stolen away from the
land of the Hebrews, and here have I done nothing that they
should have put me in the dungeon.’ 16. And when the chief
of the bakers saw that he had given a cheering interpretation, he
said to Joseph, ‘fT also was tn my dream, and, behold, three baskets
of white bread were on my head. 17. And in the uppermost
basket there was all manner of meats for Pharaoh, such as the
baker makes ; but the birds ate them from the basket on my head.
18. And Joseph answered and said, ‘ This is the interpretation of
it: the three baskets are three days; 19. within three days more
shall Pharaoh lift up thy head from off thee, and hang thee (i.e. thy
corpse] oz a pole, and the birds shall eat thy flesh from off thee.
20. And it came to pass on the third day, which was Pharaoh's
birthday, that he madea feast for all his servants, and he lifted up
the head of the chief of the butlers and of the chief of the bakers in
the midst of his servants. 21. And he restored the chief of the
butlers to his butlership, so that he gave the cup into Pharaoh's
hand. 22. But he hung [the corpse of] the chief of the bakers, as
Joseph had interpreted to them. 23. Yet the chief of the butlers did
not remember Joseph, but forgot him.

XLI. 1. And it came to pass? at the end of two full years that
Pharaoh dreamt, and, behold, he stood by the Nile. 2. And,
behold, there came up from the Nile seven cows, well-favoured and
Jatfleshed ; and they fed in the reed-grass. 3. And, behold, seven

1 ¢ And it came to pass,’ etc. Ch. xli. is almost wholly from the Elohist.
We find ‘Elohim’ in 51 seg., where the use of this word instead of ‘ Yahweh’
cannot be explained as in 16, 25, 32, 38 sey., from the fact that Joseph is
speaking to heathen, and in this chapter Joseph is not, as in the Jahvist’s
account, a prisoner, but a slave to the governor of the prison (so ver. 12).
Here and there the compiler seems to have made insertions from the parallel
account in the Jahvist. Thus ver. 41 simply repeats what has been said
already ; in 49 the words ‘as the sand of the sea’ are used by the Jahvist,
XXxil, 13.
XLI. 19] JOSEPH IN EGYPT 8:

other cows that came up afler them, ill favoured and lean-fleshed,
and stood by the other cows on the bank of the Nile. 4. And the
wWlfavoured and lean-fleshed cows ate up the well-favoured and
Jatfleshed. So Pharaoh awoke. 5. And he slept, and dreamt a
second time, and, behold, seven ears of corn came up on one stalk,
ears fat and good. 6. And, behold, seven ears, thin and blasted
with the east wind, sprung up afler them. 7. And the thin ears
swallowed up the seven fat and full ears. And Pharaoh awoke,
and, behold, it was a dream. 8. And it came to pass in the
morning that his spirit was troubled, and he sent and called all the
scribes of Egypt and all its wise men: and Pharaoh told them his
dreams, but there was none that could interpret them to Pharaoh.
9. Then the chief of the butlers spoke to Pharaoh, saying, ‘I must
make mention of my faults this day: 10. Pharaoh was wroth
with his servants, and put me in ward in the house of the chief
executioner, me and the chief of the bakers. 11. And we dreamt
a dream in one night, I and he, each u dream with «u special
meaning. 12. And there was with us there a Hebrew youth, slave
to the chief of the executioners, and we told him, and he interpreted
to us our dreams: to each man according to his dream did he
interpret. 13. And it came to pass, as he interpreted to us, so it
was: me they restored to my place, and him they hanged’ 14. And
Pharaoh sent and called Joseph, and they brought him quickly out
of the dungeon; and he shaved himself, and changed his raiment
and came to Pharaoh. 15. And Pharaoh said,‘ I have dreamt
a dream, and there ts none who can interpret it: and I have heard
say of thee, that when thou hearest a dream thou canst interpret
it. 16. And Joseph answered Pharaoh, saying, ‘lt ts not in me:
God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace” 17. And Pharaoh
related to Joseph: ‘in my dream, behold, L stood on the bank of
the Nile: 18. And, behold, there came up from the Nile seven
cows, fatfleshed and of goodly form, and they fed in the reed-grass.
19. And, behold, seven other cows came up after them, poor, and

1 «His dreams.’ So Sam. : the Hebrew has ‘his dream.’
F
82 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (GEN. XLI. 20

of very ugly form and lean-fleshed, such as I never saw in all the
land of Egypt for badness: 20. and the lean and ugly cows ate
up the first seven fat cows: 21. and when they had eaten them up,
it could not be known that they had eaten them up, and they were
still illfavoured, as at the beginning. So I awoke. 22. And I
saz in my dream, and, behold, seven ears came up on one stalk,
Jull and good: 23. and, behold, seven ears withered, thin and
blasted with the east wind, sprung up after them: 24. and the
thin ears swallowed up the seven good ears: and I told it to the
scribes, and there was none that could declare it to me” 25. And
Joseph said to Pharaoh, ‘The dream of Pharaoh is one: what
God ts about to do, he has declared to Pharaoh. 26. The seven
good cows are seven years, and the seven good ears are seven years:
the dream is one. 27. And the seven lean and ugly cows that
came up after them are seven years, and the seven empty ears
blasted with the east wind shall be seven years of famine. 28.
That is the thing which I spoke to Pharaoh , [viz., that] what God
ts about to do, he has shown to Pharaoh. 29. Behold, there come
seven years of great plenty through all the land of Egypt: 30. and
there shall arise after them seven years of famine, and all the plenty
shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt, and the famine shall
consume the land: 31. and the plenty shall not be known in
the land, because of that famine which follows, for it shall be very
grievous. 32. And as to the dream being doubled to Pharaoh and
coming twice, it is because the matter ts settled with God, and God
makes haste to dott. 33. Now, therefore, let Pharaoh look out a
man discreet and wise, and set him over the land of Egypt. 34.
Let Pharaoh take measures to set overseers over the land that he
may exact a fifth of the produce of the land of Egupt in the years
of plenty. 35. And let them gather all the fruit of these good years
that come, and lay up corn under the control of Pharaoh, for food
in the cities, and let them keep tt. 36. And the food shall be a
store to the land against the seven years of famine which shall be
an the land of Egypt, that the land perish not of famine? 37. And
the thing cwas good in the eyes of Pharaoh and in the eyes of all
XLI. 50] JOSEPH IN EGYPT 83

his servants. 38. And Pharaoh said to his servants, ‘Can we
find such an one as this,a manin whom the spirit of God is?’
39. And Pharaoh said to Joseph, ‘ Now that God has revealed all
this to thee, there is none so discreet and wise as thou: 40. thou
shalt be over my house, and according to thy word shall all my
people dispose themselves: only in respect of the throne will I be
greater than thou.’ 41. And Pharaoh said to Joseph, ‘See, I
have set thee over all the land of Egypt.’ 42. And Pharaoh took
off his signet ring from his hand, and put it on Joseph's hand, and
arrayed him in garments of fine white cotton, and put the golden
collar on his neck: 43. and he made him ride in the second
chariot whith he had, and they cried before him Abrekh So they
set him over all the land of Egypt. 44. And Pharaoh said to
Joseph, ‘T am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his
hand or foot in all the land of Egypt” 45. And Pharaoh named
Joseph Zaphenath-paneah,* and he gave him to wife Asenath the
daughter of Poti-phera priest of On. 47. And in the seven
plenteous years the land brought forth by handfuls. 48. And he
gathered all the produce of the seven years whith were in the land
of Egypt, and laid up food in the cities: he laid up within each
city the produce of the land round about it. 49. And Joseph laid
up corn as the sand of the sea, in great quantity, 77 he /eft
numbering, for it was past number. 50. And to Joseph were born
two sons before the year of famine came, which Asenath® the

1 ¢Abrekh.’ Various explanations of this word have been given by
Egyptologists. The word to a Hebrew would mean ‘ bow the knee’ (infin.
absol. hiph., as ‘ashkem,’ Jer. xxv. 3), and probably the Elohist had heard
some Egyptian word of similar sound, and explained it from his own language.
The Coptic ‘abork,’ ‘cast thyself down,’ offers the most plausible suggestion.
The attempt of Fr. Delitzsch to connect the word with the title of the chief
minister of state in Assyria (abarrakkatu) has found little favour, and seems
to have been abandoned by himself.

2 «Zaphenath-paneah.’ Perhaps ‘ sustainer of life’; but here again there
is no agreement among Fgyptologists.

3 «Which Asenath,’ etc. Kautzsch and Socin regard the latter half of this
verse beginning from these words as an interpolation. There seems to be
no reason why the Elohist should not have written them. On the other hand,

I have omitted the last words in the Hebrew of ver. 45. They are absent in
the LXx. and are probably corrupt.
84 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [cEN. XLI. 51

daughter of Poti-phera the priest of On bore to him. 51. And
Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh, ‘for, [said he]
‘God has made me forget all my toil and all my fathers house?
52. And the name of the second he called Ephraim, ‘for, [said he]
God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction? 53. And
the seven years of plenty that was in the land of Lgypt came to an
end. §4. And the seven years of famine began to come, as Joseph
had said; and there was famine in all lands, but in all the land of
Egypt there was bread. 55. And when all the land of Egypt was
Jamished, the people cried to Pharaoh Jor bread, and Pharaoh said
to all the Egyptians, ‘ Go to Joseph: what he Says to you, do” 56.
And the famine was over all the face of the earth, and Joseph
opened all the [storehouses] wherein was [grain], and sold to the
Egyptians: and the famine was sore in the land of Egypt. 57.
And all the world came to Joseph to buy corn, because the Samine
was sore in all the earth.

XLU. 1. Now Jacob* saw that there was corn in Egypt, and
Jacob said to his sons,‘Why do you keep looking at each other?’

1 “And the famine,’ etc.
corrupt.

? “Now Jacob saw,’ etc., chapters xlii.-xliv. The two parallel narratives
still continue. Their differences are exhibited in the following table :—

THE ELOHIST. THE JAHVIST.

The sons of Jacob go down to
Egypt. Joseph remembers his dreams
(xlii. 9); he treats his brothers harshly
and charges them with being spies.
They of their own accord mention

The Hebrew text of this verse is hopelessly

o
Joseph directly, and of his own

that they have a brother at home.
After imprisoning them all for three
days, he lets them go, but vefazns
Simeon as a pledge that they will
return with Benjamin, and so prove
their story true. Aewden reminds his
brothers how he pleaded with them
in vain for Joseph, and tells them that
now the divine vengeance has over-
taken them. Joseph puts the money
they have paid for the corn back, and

accord, asks the sons of /srae/ whether
their father is alive, and whether they
have another brother. They mention
Benjamin, and Joseph tells them they
shall have no more corn unless they
bring Benjamin with them (xliii. 1-7).
XLII. 9] JOSEPH IN EGYPT 85

2. And he said, ‘ Behold, I have heard that there is corn in Egypt:
get you down thither, and buy for us from thence, that we may live
and not die’ 3. And Joseph's ten brothers went down to buy corn
Srom Egypt. 4. But Benjamin, Joseph's brother, Jacob did not
send with his brothers, for he said, ‘ Lest, perhaps, mischief befall
him.’ 5. Then among the rest came the sons of Israel to buy
corn, for there was famine in the land of Canaan. 6. And Joseph
was governor of the land ; he it was who sold to all the people of
the world: and Joseph’s brothers came and bowed down to him
with their faces to the earth. 7. And, when Joseph saw his
brothers, he knew them ; but he made himself strange to them,
and he said to them, ‘Whence come you?’ And_ they
said, ‘From the land of Canaan, to buy grain’ 8. And
Joseph recognised his brothers, but they did not recognise him.
9. And Joseph remembered the dreams which he dreamt con-

Surnishes them with provision, so that They find their money, which
they do not need to open their sacks Joseph has put in their bags, at ¢he
on the way. At home they tell their —_és¢ station on the way back (xliii. 21).
story to Jacob. They are horrified to It is Aznger (not, as in the Elohist,
Jind their money intheir sacks. Jacob the detention of Simeon) which im-
at first refuses to let Benjamin go. pels them to go to Egypt again, tak-
Reuben tries to persuade him. ing Benjamin with them (xliii. 1, 2).
Judah takes the lead in the matter, and
persuades /srae/ to let Benjamin go.

The rest of the Jahvist’s story follows with scarcely any interpolation in
the rest of ch. xliii., pure and unmixed in ch. xliv.

Here and there the editor has mutilated one account or inserted a state-
ment from the other, in order to soften the most palpable of the contradictions.
Thus he allows the Jahvist (xlii. 27) to tell us how one of the brothers found
his money on the way back, but cuts the story short before we learn that all
doso. Yet he leaves xliii. 21 unaltered, so that we have no difficulty in
seeing that this was the way the Jahvist told his story. Again in the middle
of the Jahvist story as told in ch. xlili. he interpolates a statement in ver. 23
that Joseph brought Simeon out to his brothers on their second visit to Egypt.
But the interpolation is easily recognised, for the rest of the Jahvist story pro-
ceeds without reference to Simeon’s imprisonment when such reference would
have been inevitable had it formed any part of the story. These conclusions,
certain of themselves, are confirmed by differences of style, ¢.g. the Elohist
says ‘Jacob,’ the Jahvist ‘Israel’; the Elohist speaks of ‘the sack’ (Heb.
*saq’), the Jahvist of ‘the bag’ (Heb. ‘amtachath’), etc.
86 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [cEn. XLII. 19

cerning them, and he (spoke harshly with them and)? sazd to
them, ‘You are spies; to find out the weak place in the land are
yecome” 10. And they said to him, ‘ Nay, my lord, but to buy
grain are thy slaves come. 11. Weare all the sons of one man:
we are true men, thy slaves are no spies’ 12. And he said to them,
‘Nay, but to see the weak place in the land you are come. 13. And
they said, ‘Ie thy slaves are twelve brothers, the sons of one man
in the land of Canaan , and, behold, the youngest ts this day with
our father, and one ts gone. 14. And Joseph said to them, ‘ It ts
just as I told you, saying, “You are spies.” 15. Hereby shall you
be proved: by the life of Pharaoh, you shall not go out hence except
your youngest brother come hither. 16. Send one of you, and let
him fetch your brother, and you shall be bound, that your words
may be proved, whether there be truth in you: or else by the life of
Pharaoh, verily you are sptes” 14. And he put them together into
ward three days. 18. And Joseph said to them the third day,
‘This must you do, to live; for 1am a God-fearing man: 19. if
you are true men, let one of your brothers remain bound in your
prison-house: but go, take home corn for the hunger of your houses:
20. and bring your youngest brother to me; so shall your words be
verified, and you shall not die’: (and they did so.)? 21. And they
said one to another, ‘We are verily guilty concerning our brother,
in that we saw the distress of his soul, when he besought us, and
did not listen: therefore ts this distress come upon us? 22. And
Reuben answered them, saying, ‘Did not L speak to you, saying, “Do
not sin against the child,” and you would not listen: therefore also,
you see, reckoning ts made for his blood’ 23. And they did not
know that Joseph understood them, for there was an interpreter
between them. 24. And he turned away from them and wept: and
he returned to them, and took Simeon from among them, and bound
him before thetr eyes. 25. Then Joseph commanded that their
baggage should be filled with corn, and that each man’s money should

1 The words in brackets have been transferred from ver. 7.
° ©And they did so.’ The words will not bear Dillmann’s interpretation,
‘they agreed to this.”. Taken in their natural meaning they disturb the sense.
XL. 38] JOSEPH IN EGYPT 87

be restored to his sack, and that provision should be given them for
the journey: and thus was it done to them. 26. And they loaded
their asses with their corn, and departed thence. 27. And as one
of them opened his sack to give his ass provender in the lodging-
place, he beheld his money, and, behold, it was in the mouth of
his bag. 28. And he said? to his brothers, ‘My money is
restored, and behold, too, it is in my sack:’ and their heart
failed them, and they turned trembling one to another, saying,
‘What is this that God has done tous?’ 29. And they came to
Jacob their father in the land of Canaan, and told him all that had
happened to them, saying, 30. ‘ The man, the lord of the land,
spoke with us harshly, and took us for spies of the land. 31. But
we said to him, ‘‘We are true men, we are no spies. 32. We are
twelve brothers the sons of our father: one is gone, and the youngest
7s this day with our father in the land of Canaan.” 33. And the
man, the lord of the land, said to us, “ Hereby shall I know that
you are true men: leave one of your brothers with me, and take corn
Jor the famine of your houses, and go. 34. But bring your youngest
brother to me: then shall T know that you are no spies, but that
you are true men: so will I deliver you your brother, and you can
traffic in the land.”’ 35. And it came to pass, as they emptied
their sacks, that, behold, every man’s bundle of money was in his
sack: and when they and their father saw their bundles of money,
they were afraid. 36. And Jacob their father said to them, ‘ Me
have you bereaved of my children: Joseph is gone, and Simeon
zs gone, and you would take Benjamin away: all this is come upon
me.” 37. And Reuben spoke to his father, saying, ‘My two sons
mayest thou kill if I do not bring him back to thee: commit him to
my hand, and I will bring him back to thee again’ 38. And he
said, ‘My son shall not go down with you, for his brother is

1 And he said,’ etc. Verse 28 belongs as a whole to the Jahvist, and it
is probably by an oversight that Kautzsch and Socin have assigned it to the
Elohist. The last words, ‘What is this that God has done to us?’ are of
course from the Elohist, and may have stood originally at the end of ver. 35.
88 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XLII. 1

dead, and he only is left: if mischief befall him by the way you
go, then shall you bring down my grey hairs with sorrow to
Sheol.’

XLII. 1. And the famine was sore in the land. 2. And
it came to pass when they had eaten up the corn which they
had brought out of Egypt, that their father said to them, ‘Go
again, buy us a little food.’ 3. And Judah spoke to him, saying,
‘The man did solemnly protest to us, saying, “You shall not
see my face, except your brother be with you.” 4. If thou wilt
send our brother with us, we will go down and buy thee food;
5. but if thou wilt not send him, we will not go down: for the
man said to us, “Ye shall not see my face, unless your brother
be with you.”’ 6. And Israel said, ‘ Why have you brought sorrow
upon me by telling the man whether you had another brother ?’
7. And they said, ‘The man asked closely concerning ourselves
and concerning our kindred, saying, “Is your father yet alive ?
Have you another brother?” And we informed him according
to the tenor of these questions. Could we in any wise know
that he would say, “ Bring your brother down” ?’ 8. And Judah
said to Israel his father, ‘Send the lad with me, and we will
arise and go, that we may live and not die, both we and thou,
and also our little ones. 9g. I will be surety for him; from my
hand shalt thou require him: if I bring him not to thee and set
him before thee, let me bear the blame for ever: 10. for unless
we had lingered, surely now we might have [gone and] returned
twice over.’ 11. And Israel their father said to them, ‘If it
must be so, do this: take of the fruits of the land in your
baggage, and carry down the man a present, a little balm and a
little grape-syrup, gum-tragacanth and ladanum, pistacia nuts and
almonds: 12. And take double money in your hand, and the
money that was returned in the mouth of your bags carry again
in your hand; perhaps it was an oversight: 13. and take your
brother, and arise, go again to the man. 14. And [God] give
you mercy before the man, that he may let your other brother go
with you, and also Benjamin: and as for me, tf Lam to be bereaved,
XLUI. 27] JOSEPH IN EGYPT 89

I am to be bereaved.’ 15. And the men took that present, and
they took double money in their hand, and Benjamin; and they
rose up, and went down to Egypt, and stood before Joseph. 16.
And when Joseph saw Benjamin with them, he said to the
steward of his house, ‘Bring the men into the house, and slay
and make ready, for the men shall eat with me at noon.’ 17.
And the man did as Joseph bade, and the man brought the men
into Joseph’s house. 18. And the men were afraid, because they
were brought into Joseph’s house; and they said, ‘Because of
the money that was returned in our sacks at the first time, are
we brought in, that he may cast himself upon us, and fall upon us
and take us for slaves, and seize our asses.’ 19. And they drew
near to the steward of Joseph’s house, and spoke to him at the
door of the house, 20. and said, ‘O my lord, we came indeed
down at the first to buy food: 21. and it came to pass, when
we came to the lodging place, that we opened our bags, and,
behold, every man’s money was in the mouth of his bag, our
money in full weight: and we have brought it again in our hand.
22. And other money have we brought down in our hand to buy
food: we know not who put our money in our bags.’ 23. And
he said, ‘Peace be to you, fear not: your God and the God of
your father has given you treasure in your bags: I had your
money.’ And he brought out Simeon to them. 24. And the man
brought the men into Joseph’s house ; and he gave them water,
and they washed their feet, and he gave their asses fodder. 25.
And they made ready the present for the time that Joseph would
come at noon, for they heard that they should eat bread there.
26. And when Joseph came home, they brought him the present
which was in their hand into the house, and bowed themselves
down before him to the earth. 27. And he asked them of their
welfare, and said, ‘Is your father well, the old man of whom you

 

1 ¢ And [God]... bereaved.’ This verse is in substance from the Elohist,
as appears from the sudden allusion to Simeon, ‘the other brother.’ But ‘El
Shaddai’ at the beginning of the verse has been interpolated by a late hand.
It is only the ‘ Priestly Writer’ who uses this name of God in ordinary prose.
go THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XLII. 28

spoke? Is he yet alive?’ 28. And they said, ‘Thy servant our
father is well, he is yet alive.’ And they bowed the head, and
made obeisance. 29. And he lifted up his eyes and saw Benjamin,
his brother, his mother’s son, and said, ‘Is this your youngest
brother of whom you spoke to me?’ And he said, ‘God be
gracious to thee, my son.’ 30. And Joseph made haste, for his
heart burned for his brother, and he sought where to weep; and he
entered into his chamber, and wept there. 31. And he washed his
face and came out; and he restrained himself and said, ‘Set on
bread.’ 32. And they set on for him by himself, and for them by
themselves, and for the Egyptians who ate with him by themselves ;
because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews, for
that is an abomination to the Egyptians. 33. And they sat before
him, the firstborn according to his birthright, and the youngest
according to his youth ; and the men looked in wonder at each
other. 34. And messes were brought from his place to them, but
Benjamin’s mess was five times as much as any of theirs. And
they drank, and were merry with him.

XLIV. 1. And he commanded the steward of his house,
saying, ‘ Fill the men’s bags with food, as much as they can carry,
and put every man’s money in his bag’s mouth. 2. And put my
cup, the silver cup, in the bag’s mouth of the youngest, and his
corn money.’ And he did according to the word that Joseph
had spoken. 3. As soon as the morning was light, the men were
sent away, they and their asses. 4. And when they were gone
out of the city, and were not yet far off, Joseph said to his
steward, ‘ Up, follow after the men, and when thou dost overtake
them, say to them, “Why have you returned evil for good ?1
5. Is not this that in which my lord drinks, and whereby he
indeed divines? Ye have done evil in so doing.”’ 6, And he

1 «Why have you returned evil for good?’ The LXxx. add, ‘ Why have
you stolen from me the silver cup?’ The Syr. (as printed in the London
Polyglott) has, in ver. 5, ‘And you have stolen this cup in which my lord
drinks,’ etc. ; and the Latin Vulgate, ‘The cup which you have stolen is the
same in which,’ etc.
XLIV. 21] JOSEPH IN EGYPT gt

overtook them, and spoke to them these words. 7. And they
said to him, ‘Why does my lord speak such words as these? Far
be it from thy slaves to do such a thing. 8. Behold, the money?
which we found in our sacks’ mouths we brought again to thee
out of the land of Canaan: how then should we steal out of thy
lord’s house, silver or gold? 9. With whomsoever of thy slaves
it be found let him die, and we also will be my lord’s bondsmen.’
to. And he said, ‘Now also let it be according to your words:
he with whom it is found shall be my bondsman; but you shall
be clear.’ 13. Then they hastened, and took down every man
his sack to the ground, and opened every man his sack. 12. And
he searched : he began at the eldest, and left off at the youngest:
and the cup was found in Benjamin’s bag. 13. And they rent
their garments, and loaded every man his ass, and returned to the
city. 14. And Judah and his brothers came to Joseph’s house:
now he was still there; and they fell before him to the ground.
15. And Joseph said to them, ‘ What is this that you have done?
Do you not know that such a man as I can indeed divine?’ 16.
And Judah said, ‘What shall we say to my lord? What shall we
speak? And how shall we justify ourselves? God has found
out the iniquity of thy slaves: behold, we are my lord’s bonds-
men, both we and he also in whose hand the cup has been found.’
17. And he said, ‘ Far be it from me to do such a thing: the man
in whose hand the cup has been found, he shall be my bondsman:
but as for you, you may go up in peace to your father.’ 18. Then
Judah came near to him, and said, ‘O, my lord, let thy slave, I
pray thee, speak a word in my lord’s ears, and be not angry with
thy slave; for thou art even as Pharaoh. 19. My lord asked his
slaves, saying, “Have you a father or a brother?” 20. And we
said to my lord, “We have a father, an old man, and a child of
his old age, a little one, and his [full] brother is dead, and he
alone is left of his mother, and his father loves him. 21. And
thou saidst to thy servants, “Bring him down to me, that I may

1 ©The money.’ So Sam. : the article is wanting in the Masoretic text.
92 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XLIV. 22

set my eyes upon him.” 22. And we said to my lord, “ He cannot
leave his father, for, if he should leave his father, his father would
die.” 23. And thou saidst to thy slaves, “ Except your youngest
brother come down with you, you shall see my face no more.”
24. And it came to pass, when we went up to thy slave my father,
that we told him my lord’s words. 25. And our father said, “Go
again, buy us a little food.” 26. And we said, ‘We cannot go
down : if our youngest brother be with us, then we will go down:
for we may not see the man’s face, except our youngest brother
be with us.” 27. And thy slave my father said to us, “ You know
that my wife bore me two sons. 28. And the one went out from
me, and I said, “Surely he is torn in pieces,’ and I have not seen
him since: 29. and if you take this one also from me, and
mischief befall him, you shall bring down my grey hairs in sorrow
to Sheol.” 30. Now, therefore, when I come to thy slave my
father, and the lad be not with us; seeing that his life is bound
up in the lad’s life; 31. it shall come to pass, when he sees that
the lad is not with us, that he will die, and thy slaves will bring
down the grey hair of thy slave our father with sorrow to Sheol.
32. For thy slave became surety for the lad to my father, saying,
“Tf I bring him not to thee, then shall I bear the blame to my
father for ever. 33. Now, therefore, let thy slave, I pray thee,
remain instead of the lad a bondsman to my lord; and let the
lad go up with his brothers. 34. For how shall I go up to my
father, and the lad be not with me? O that I may not see the
evil that shall come on my father !’

XLV. 1. And Joseph could not? restrain himself [as it was

 

 

1 “And Joseph could not,’ ete., ch. xlv. This chapter in the main is from
the Elohist. (So Wellhausen, Dillmann, Kittell, Kautzsch and Socin, against
Delitzsch.) This appears from the language, e.g. ‘Elohim’ in 5, 7, 8, 9, ‘Jacob’
(not ‘ Israel’) in 25, and ina number of Hebrew words and phrases which the
Elohist has used before, e.g. ‘provision for the journey’ in 21, as before in
xlii. 25 ; ‘bar’ for ‘corn’ in xlv. 23, a word constantly used by the Elohist, xli.
35, 49, xlil. 3, 25, and never by the Jahvist (who uses ‘shever’ and ‘ okel’) ;
‘ta'an’ for ‘load’ in ver. 17, for which the Jahvist in xliv. 13 has ‘‘amas‘al’ ;
a peculiar phrase in ver. 5 meaning ‘to be angry,’ and used before by the
Elohist in xxxi. 35. Further we shall see that this chapter forms one con-
XLy. 11] JOSEPH IN EGYPT 93

necessary to do] with regard to all those that stood by him: and
he cried, ‘Cause every man to go out from me.’ And there stood
no man with him, while Joseph made himself known to his brothers.
2. And he wept aloud, and the Egyptians heard, and Pharaoh’s
household heard! 3. And Joseph said to his brothers, ‘fam
Joseph: ts my father still living?? And his brothers could not
answer, for they were terrified at the sight of him. 4. And Joseph
said to his brothers, ‘ Come near me, I pray you. And they came
near. And he said, ‘1 am Joseph your brother, whom you sold
into Egypt. 5. And now, be not grieved, and de not angry with
yourselves that you sold me hither: for God sent me before you to
preserve life. 6. For these two years has the famine been in the
land, and there are still to be five years in which there shall be
neither ploughing nor harvest. 7. And God sent me before you to
preserve your race upon the earth, and to save you alive till you that
have escaped grow to a great company. 8. So now it was not you
that sent me hither, but God: and he has made me a father to
Pharaoh, and lord of all his house, and ruler over all the land of
Lgypt. 9. Make haste, and go up to my father, and say to him,
“ Thus says thy son Joseph, ‘God has made me lord of all Egypt:
come down to me, do not tarry: 10. and thou shalt dwell in the
land of Goshen? and ¢hou shalt be near me, thou and thy sons and
sons sons, and thy flocks and thy herds, and all that thou hast:
11. and there will I nourish thee; for there are yet five years of
Samine , lest thou come to poverty, thou and thy household, and all
tinuous whole with a sequel in xlvi. and xlvii., where the language is also that
ofthe Elohist. On the other hand, this chapter admittedly contains an ad-
mixture from the Jahvist. For (1.) we find the same thing said twice over
(compare 13,14 with 9). (2.) We have the statement in 4, 5%, that Joseph
was ‘sold,’ which agrees with the Jahvist but not with the Elohist story.
(3.) Here, as always, divergence of language accompanies divergence in fact,

e.g. ‘Israel’ for ‘Jacob’ in 28. Of course it is impossible to be sure of every
detail, but there is a general and very close agreement as to the severance
94 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [GEN. XLV. 12

that thou hast.”” 12, And, behold, your eyes see, and the eyes of
my brother Benjamin, that it is my mouth that speaks to you. 13.
And you shall tell my father of all my glory in Egypt, and all
that you have seen; and you shall make haste to bring my father
down hither.’ 14. And he fell on his brother Benjamin’s neck,
and wept, and Benjamin wept upon his neck. 15. Avd he hissed
all his brothers, and wept upon them , and after that his brothers
talked with him. 16. And the report was heard in Pharaoh's
household, saying, ‘Joseph's brothers are come’ and it pleased
Pharaoh well and his servants. 17. And Pharaoh said to
Joseph, ‘Say to thy brothers,‘ Do this: load your beasts, and
50, get you to the land of Canaan: 18. and take your father
and your households, and come to me, and I will give you the best
that the land of Egypt has, and you shall eat the fat of the land.
(19. And do thou bid them,! [saying,] ‘Do this: take wagons
out of the land of Egypt for your little ones and your wives, and
bring your father, and come. 20. Also do not grudge to leave
your furniture, for the best that all the land of Egypt has is yours.’
21. And the sons of Israel did so; and Joseph gave them wagons,
according to Pharaoh’s commandment, and gave them provision
for the way.) 22. To every one of them he gave costly robes, but to
Benjamin he gave three hundred pieces of silver, and five costly
robes. 23. And to his father likewise he sent ten asses laden with
the good things of Egypt, and ten she-asses laden with corn and
bread and victual for his father by the way. 24. So he sent
his brothers away, and they departed, and he said to them,
‘See that you fall not out by the way? 25. And they went
up from Egypt, and came to the land of Canaan to Jacob their
Sather. 26. And they told him, saying, ‘Joseph is yet alive, and he

2 “And do thou bid them.’ So the Lxx. The Hebrew text has ‘ And
thou art bidden,’ which is scarcely intelligible and probably corrupt. Dillmann
rightly regards 19-21 as an interpolation. The words ‘and they did so’ are
out of place, anticipating 23 seg.; the Elohist does »ot speak of ‘sons of
Israel,’ as here, ver. 21, and the expression ‘do not grudge to leave,’ literally
‘let not your eye sparc,’ is not used in the Pentateuch except by the
Deuteronomist. The verses are only given here because they contain words
and thoughts of the Elohist and Jahvist.
XLVI. 29] ISRAEL IN EGYPT 95

is ruler over all the land of Egypt” And his heart grew cold, for
he did not believe them. 27. And they told him all Joseph's words
which he had said to them: but when he saw the wagons which
Joseph had sent to carry him, the spirit of Jacob their father revived.
28. And Israel said, ‘Enough. My son Joseph is yet alive: I
will go and see him before I die.’

XLVI. 1. And Israel moved! with all that he had (and came
to Beersheba), and offered sacrifices to the God of his father Isaac.
z. And God spoke to Israel in the visions of the night, and said to
him, ‘Jacob, Jacob.” And he said,‘ Heream I” 3. And he said,
‘Tam God, the God of thy father: fear not to go down to Egypt, for
(I will there make of theea great nation). 4. / wél/ go down with
thee to Egypt, and I will also surely bring thee up again, and Joseph
shall close thine eyes. 5. And Jacob rose up from Beersheba, (and
the sons of Israel carried Jacob their father, and their little ones,
and their wives, in the wagons which Pharaoh sent to carry them.)

28. And he sent Judah ? before him to Joseph, that he [Joseph]
might come to meet him [?]? at Goshen. And they came to the
land of Goshen. 29. And Joseph made ready his chariot, and
went up to meet Israel his father at Goshen. And he presented

‘And Israel moved,’ etc., xlvi. 1-5. This § belongs to the Elohist, of whom
both the name ‘Elohim’ (repeated three times, besides ‘El’ once) and ‘the
visions of the night’ are characteristic. Butit is hard to see why Jacob should
have to move to Beersheba instead of waiting for Pharaoh’s wagons in his
home. Dillmann suggests that the Elohist may have made Jacob (like
Abraham and Isaac) live at Beersheba, and therefore took that to be his
starting-place for Egypt; that the Jahvist made him live at (xxxvii. 14) and
therefore start from Hebron ; and that the account here of his moving from
Hebron to Beersheba is due to the compiler, who thus harmonises the Elohist
with the Jahvist. The use of the name ‘Israel,’ while the Elohist says ‘ Jacob,’
indicates admixture of documents. In ver. 5 ‘Israel’ occurs again, and the
language closely resembles that of xlv. 19-21. See the note there.

2 ©And he sent Judah.’ What follows, down to xlvii. 6>, bears clear

marks of the Jahvist ; e.g. Judah is prominent, Jacob is called ‘Israel,’ etc.
Traethae wehanane tha Biahict in vliy 1t@ renrecante Dharanh ac nffarine af Lin
96 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (cEN. XLVI. 30

himself to him, and fell on his neck and wept on his neck, a long
time. 30. And Israel said to Joseph, ‘Now let me die, since I
have seen thy face, that thou art yet alive.’ 31. And Joseph said
to his brothers and to his father’s household, ‘I will go up and
tell Pharaoh, and will say to him, “ My brothers and my father’s
household, who were in the land of Canaan, have come to me;
32. and the men are shepherds (for they are keepers of cattle),
and they have brought their flocks and their herds and all that
they have.” 33. And it shall come to pass, when Pharaoh shall
call you, and shall say, “What is your occupation?” 34. that
you shall say, “Thy slaves have been keepers of cattle from our
youth till now, both we and our fathers:” that you may dwell in
the land of Goshen, since every shepherd is an abomination to
the Egyptians.’ XLVII. 1. And Joseph went and told Pharaoh,
and said, ‘ My father and my brothers, and their flocks and herds,
and all that they have, are come from the land of Canaan, and,
behold, they are in the land of Goshen.’ 2. And from among
his brothers he took five men, and presented them to Pharaoh. 3.
And Pharaoh said to his brothers, ‘What is your occupation?’
And they said to Pharaoh, ‘Thy slaves are shepherds, both we
and our fathers.’ 4. And they said to Pharaoh, ‘To sojourn in
the land are we come, for there is no pasture for the flocks which
belong to thy slaves, for the famine is grievous in the land of
Canaan ; now, therefore, we pray thee, let thy slaves dwell in the
land of Goshen.’ 5. And Pharaoh spoke to Joseph, saying, 6°.
‘Let them dwell in the land of Goshen, and if thou knowest any
able men among them, make them chief-shepherds over my
cattle.’ 12. And Joseph: nourished his father and his brothers,
and all his father’s household, with bread, according to the number
of their little ones.

1 « And Joseph,’ etc. Verse 12 is connected in thought and language (the
uncommon word translated here ‘nourished’ being common to both) with
xly. 11. It comes, therefore, from the Elohist. As for the rest of the chapter,
the use of the name Israel and a series of other linguistic marks vindicates
27-31 for the Jahvist. In 13-26 the language, as Dillmann shows, points to
the Jahvist on the whole. But there are signs of admixture and interpolation.
XLVII. 23] THE EGYPTIANS SELL THEMSELVES TO PHARAOH 97

13. And there was no bread in all the land, for the famine
was very grievous, so that the land of Egypt and the land of
Canaan fainted by reason of the famine. 14. And Joseph gathered
up all the money that was found in the land of Egypt, and in the
land of Canaan, for the corn which they bought, and Joseph
brought the money into Pharaoh’s house. 15. And when the
money was all spent in the land of Egypt and in the land of
Canaan, all the Egyptians came to Joseph and said, ‘Give us
bread : for why should we die in thy presence? For the money
is atan end.’ 16. And Joseph said, ‘Give your cattle and I will
give you bread! for your cattle, if money is at an end.’ 17. And
they brought their cattle to Joseph, and Joseph gave them bread
in exchange for the horses and for the flocks and for the herds
and for the asses, and he provided them with bread in exchange
for all their cattle during that year. 18. And when that year was
over, they came to him the second year and said to him, ‘We
will not conceal from my lord, that if our money is spent and the
herds of cattle are my lord’s, there is nothing left for my lord
except our bodies and our lands. 19. Why should we die before
thine eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for
bread and we with our land will go into Pharaoh’s service: and
give us seed, that we may live and not die and the land may not
be desolate.’ 20. And Joseph bought the whole land of Egypt
for Pharaoh ; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, for the
famine was strong upon them ; and the land became Pharaoh’s.
21. And as for the people, he made them serfs* from one end
of the border of Egypt to the other. 22. Only he did not buy
the land of the priests, for the priests had a portion from
Pharaoh, and ate their portion which Pharaoh gave them : there-
fore they did not sell their land. 23. And Joseph said to the
people, ‘Behold, I have bought you this day and your land for
98 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [xLvu. 24

Pharaoh : here is seed for you that you may sow the land. 24.
And it shall come to pass at the ingatherings that you shall give
a fifth part to Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for
seed of the field, and for your food and for those of your
households (and for the food of your little ones).!' 25. And they
said, ‘Thou hast saved our lives: let us find favour in the sight
of my lord and we will be Pharaoh’s serfs.’ 26. And Joseph
made it a statute concerning the land of Egypt to this day that
Pharaoh should have the fifth part, except that the land of the
priests alone did not fall to Pharaoh. 27. And Israel dwelt in
the land of Goshen.

29. And the time drew near that Israel should die, and he
called his son Joseph and said to him, ‘If now I have found
favour in thine eyes, put now thy hand beneath my thigh and
deal kindly and truly with me: bury me not, I pray thee, in
Egypt. 30. But I would sleep with my fathers, and thou shalt
carry me from Egypt, and thou shalt bury me in their grave.’
And he said, ‘I will do as thou hast said.’ 31. And he said,
‘Swear to me,’ and he swore to him. And Israel bowed down
on the bed’s head.

XLVIII. 1. And tt came to pass? after these things, that one
said to Joseph, ‘Behold, thy father ts sick:’ and he took with him
his two sons Manasseh and Ephraim. 2. And one told Jacob, and
said, ‘ Behold, thy son Joseph ts come to thee. And Israel collected

1 ¢For your little ones’: wanting in LXXx., and probably interpolated.
Their natural place would be before the words, ‘for those of your house-
holds.’

? * And it came to pass,’ etc. The verses of ch. xlviii. which follow have
been assigned to the Elohist by critics generally from Hupfeld to Wellhausen.
The reason for this is obvious. Not only does the style of the Elohist run
through the chapter (‘ Elohim’ 9, 11, 15, 20, 21 seg.), but also the narrative
makes a fresh start unconnected with the Jahvist verses at the end of xlvii.
There the Jahvist makes Joseph leave his father bedridden and at the point
of death ; here the Elohist makes Joseph hear, evidently for the first time,
that his father is sick. But the whole of xviii, 8-22 cannot have come from
the Elohist or from any one author. Joseph brings Manasseh and Ephraim
twice over (9 and 13) to Jacob for his blessing. Kuenen (Onderz. 1. § 8, 5)
XLVIII. 18] JACOB BLESSES EPHRAIM AND MANASSEH 99

his strength and sat on the bed. 8. But Israel beheld the sons
of Joseph, and he said, ‘Who are these?’ 9. And Joseph said to
his father, ‘ They are my sons whom God has given me here.” And
he said, ‘Bring them, I pray, to me and I will bless them.’ 1o.
Now the eyes of Israel were dim with age so that he could not
see. And he brought them near to him and he kissed them and
embraced them, 11. And Israel said to Joseph, ‘I had not thought
to see thy face, and, lo, God has let me see thy seed also” 12. And
Joseph brought them out from between his knees and Joseph bowed
himself with his face to the earth. 13. And Joseph took both of
them, Ephraim in his right hand towards Israel’s left hand, and
Manasseh in his left hand towards Israel’s right hand, and he
brought them near to him. 14. And Israel stretched out his
right hand and laid it upon Ephraim’s head, although he was the
younger, and his left hand on Manasseh’s head, crossing his
hands ; for Manasseh was the first-born. 15. And he blessed
Joseph and said, ‘ The God before whom my fathers Abraham and
Isaac walked, who fed me all my life long to this day, 16. the
angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads, aud let my
name be continued in them and the name of my fathers Abraham
and Isaac, and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the
earth. 17. And when Joseph saw that his father was placing his
right hand on Ephraim’s head, it displeased him and he held up
his father’s hand to remove it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh.
18. And Joseph said to his father, ‘Not so, my father, for this

explained all this on the theory of interpolation in the Elohistic narratives.
Dillmann, however, has shown that we have the remains of two independent
versions. According to the Elohist Jacob is delighted to know that Joseph’s
sons are present, he embraces them, blesses Joseph in them, and promises him
the possession of Shechem. The central point in the Jahvist story is the
exaltation of Ephraim over Manasseh, and it is not Joseph but his sons who
receive the blessing. Dillmann’s results have been accepted by Kittel, and
100 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (XLVIII. Ig

is the first-born : put thy hand on his head.’ 19. But his father
refused and said, ‘I know, my son, I know: he also shall be-
come a people and he also shall be great: nevertheless, his
younger brother shall be greater than he, and his descendants
shall be a very multitude of nations. 20. And he blessed them
that day, saying, ‘Through thee shall Israel bless, saying, “ God
make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh.”’ And he set Ephraim
before Manasseh. 21. Amd Israel said to Joseph, ‘Behold, I am
dying, but God will be with you and will bring you back to the
land of your fathers. 22. Moreover, I give thee one mountain-
slope’ above thy brothers, which I took out of the hand of the
Amorite with my sword and with my bow.’

XLIX. 1. And [Israel] said,? ‘Gather yourselves together
that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the latter days.

1 “One mountain-slope,’ Heb. ‘Shekem,’ in evident allusion to Shekem
(Shechem), the famous city in Ephraim. But how did Jacob win it by his
sword and bow? The Elohist says nothing of any such conquest by violence,
and what he does say of Shechem (xxxiii. 19, Jos. xxiv. 32), points in quite
another direction, The origin of the verse (generally assigned to the Elohist)
cannot be determined.

2 And Israel said,’ etc. The so-called blessing of Jacob (xlix. 2-27)
contains a description of the twelve tribes partly from a geographical, partly
from an historical point of view. It takes the form of a prediction which is
put into Jacob’s mouth, and is a poem, which may have existed separately or
as part of a poetical collection. Considering the depreciatory language
used of Reuben, it cannot owe its place in our history to the Elohist. On
the other hand, the use of the name ‘ Yahweh’ and the connection between
the curse pronounced on Simeon and Levi with the story told in xxxiv. make
it likely that the Jahvist gave it a place in his history. As to its date the
following points are to be noted :—(1.) It must have been written long before
Levi was regarded as the one priestly tribe, 7c. in any case long before
Josiah’s reform in 621. See vv. 5-7. (2.) It must have been written after the
time when the tribes, including Judah, were supposed to form a national
unity. There is no trace of such a view before David’s time. Deborah’s
Song does not mention Judah. (3.) It must have been written after the rise
of the northern kingdom, founded by Jeroboam in 937, for in ver. 26 Joseph
is said to be ‘a prince among his brethren.’ (4.) The hostility which is said to
beset Joseph, and his success against it, probably refers to the long struggle be-
tween the kingdom of northern Israel and the Aramzans or Syrians of Damas-
cus. Thereis no allusion to danger from the Assyrian Empire. Thus the poem
might very well have arisen under Ahab, 878-857. This is the date suggested
XLIX, 9] THE BLESSING OF JACOB IOI

2. Assemble yourselves and hear, ye sons of Jacob,
And hearken to Israel your father.
3. Reuben, thou art my first-born, my strength, and the first-
fruits of my vigour,
Excelling in dignity and excelling in might.
4. Boiling over like water, excel not thou ;
Because thou wentest up to thy father’s bed:
Then didst thou defile it:—He went up to my couch!
5. Simeon and Levi are brothers,
Weapons of violence are their sabres [?]:
6. Let not my soul come into their council,
Let not my honour be united with their assembly ;
For in their rage they slew men,
And in their wantonness houghed oxen.
7. Cursed be their rage, for it was strong,
And their wrath, for it was cruel:
I will divide them in Jacob,
And scatter them in Israel.
8. Judah,—thee shall thy brethren praise ;
Thy hand is on the neck of thine enemies ;
Thy father’s sons shall bow down to thee.
g. Judah is a lion’s whelp,
From the prey, my son, thou art gone up;
He stooped down, he crouched as a lion,

by Stade (Gesch. /s7. I. p. 150), while Wellhausen (Gesch, Js7. p. 373), and
Kuenen (Onderz. 1. §§ 13, 16), come to a like conclusion. At the same time
there are passages in the poem which favour a much earlier date. Certainly
Dan is spoken of as an independent tribe, fighting in the common interests
of Israel, but still separately and of his own free will. Again, if we may
trust the old record contained in Judges xvii, xviii, Levites even in the time of
the Judges had a preferential, though not an exclusive claim to the priesthood,
and it is strange that the poet, if he lived so late as Ahab, should say nothing
102 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [XLIX. 10

And as a lioness ;—who shall rouse him up?
to. The sceptre will not depart from Judah,
Nor the leader’s staff from between his feet ;
Until he come to Shiloh,! [?]
And the peoples are subject to him.
11. He bindeth his foal to the vine,
And his ass’s colt to the choice vine:
He hath washed his garments in wine,
And his vesture in the blood of grapes.
12. Dark flash his eyes with wine,
And white are his teeth with milk.
13. Zebulun shall dwell at the sea-beach,
And he himself shall be a haven for ships ;
And his flank shall lean on Sidon.
14. Issachar is an ass, strong of bone,
Crouching down between the sheep-folds.
15. And he found that rest was a good thing,
And that the land was pleasant,
And he bowed his shoulder to bear,
And was {brought down] to the task-work of a serf.
36, Dan shall secure the rights of his people,
As one of the tribes of Israel.
17. Dan shall be a serpent by the way,
An adder by the path,
That biteth the horse’s heels,
So that his rider falleth backwards.
18. I have waited for thy salvation, O Yahweh.
19. Gad,—a troop shall press upon him,
But he shall press upon their heel.
zo. Asher,?—his bread is fat,
And he shall yield royal dainties.

1 ©Until he come to Shilo.’ For the numerous variants and emendations
of this clause, which is probably corrupt, see the commentaries.

2 €Their heel, Asher.’ The translation involves a slight change in the
division of the Hebrew words which is generally accepted.
L. 1] THE BLESSING OF JACOB 103

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

Napthali! is a tall terebinth tree

Putting forth beauteous branches.

Joseph is a young fruit tree,

A young fruit tree by a fountain ;

His branches run over the wall.

The archers harassed him

And shot at him and lay in wait for him.

But his bow abode in strength

And nimbly moved the hands on his arms.

By the hands of the mighty one of Israel,

From thence is the shepherd of the stone of Israel,?

From the God of thy father, so may he aid thee!’

And from God* the Almighty, so may he bless thee !

With blessings of heaven above,

Blessings of the deep that coucheth beneath,

Blessings of the breasts and the womb.

The blessings of thy father were stronger than the ancient
mountains +

Than the delights of the eternal hills.

Let them come on the head of Joseph,

On the crown of the prince among his brethren.

Benjamin is a ravening wolf ;

In the morning he devours the prey

In the evening he divides the spoil.

33 a8. And he gathered up his feet into the bed. L. 1. And

Joseph fell on his father’s face and wept upon him and kissed

1 *Napthali,’ etc. The reading followed here is supported by the Lxx.

2 “From thence is shepherd of the stone of Israel.’ Compare xxviii. 18.
A slight change has been made in the pointing, but even with this change the
text really defies translation.

3 © And from God.’ So LXXx., Sam., Syr., and some Hebrew mss.
104 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [L. 2

him. 2. And Joseph commanded the physicians who served him
to embalm his father; so the physicians embalmed Israel. 3.
And forty days were fulfilled for him, for so are fulfilled the
days of embalming: and the Egyptians wept for him seventy
days.

4. And when the days of weeping for him were past, Joseph
spoke to Pharaoh’s household, saying, ‘If now I have found
grace in your eyes, speak, I pray you, in the ears of Pharaoh,
saying, 5. ‘“‘My father made me swear, saying, Behold, I am
dying: in my grave which I have dug for myself in the land of
Canaan, there shalt thou bury me.” Now therefore let me go up,
I pray thee, and bury my father and I will come again.’ 6. And
Pharaoh said, ‘Go up and bury thy father, according to the oath
he exacted from thee.” 7. And Joseph went up to bury his
father, and with him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the
elders of his court and all the elders of the land of Egypt, 8.
And all the household of Joseph, and his brothers and his father’s
household: only their little ones and their flocks and their herds,
they left in the land of Egypt. 9. And there went up with him
both chariots and horsemen, and it was a very great company.
to. And they came to the threshing floor of Atad, which is
beyond Jordan, and there they lamented with a very great and
sore lamentation, and he made a mourning for his father seven
days. 311. And when the Canaanites the inhabitants of the land
saw the mourning in the floor of Atad, they said, ‘This is a

continuation of the Jahvist story in xlvii. 29-31. But the origin of verses 1-3
isobscure. It might very well come in substance from the Elohist, who always
shows a strong interest in, and fairly accurate knowledge of, Egyptian usages.
There cannot be the least doubt that 15-26 is from the Elohist. We have the
frequent use of Elohim, the peculiar word for ‘nourish’ (as in xlv. 11, xlvii.
12) ; the question ‘ Am I in the place of God?’ (as in xxx. 2); ‘to be born
on the knees’ (as in xxx. 3). Verse 20 aptly sums up the Elohistic view of
Joseph’s history, and the Elohist refers back to this chapter in Exod. xiii. 19,
Josh. xxiv. 32. Some have doubted whether the statements about Joseph’s
age in vv. 22 and 26 belong to the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’ but see
Dillmann,
Li 26] JOSEPH’S GENEROSITY AND HIS DEATH 105

grievous mourning to the Egyptians ;’ wherefore the name of it
was called Abel-Mizrain, which is beyond Jordan. 14. And
Joseph returned to Egypt, he and his brothers and all that went
up with him to bury his father.

15. And when Joseph's brothers saw that their father was
dead, they said,‘ What tf Joseph turn to be our enemy and fully
requite us for all the evil which we did him.’ 16. And they sent
a message to Joseph, saying,‘ Thy father did command before he
died, saying, 17. “ Thus shall you say to Joseph, Forgive, f pray
thee, now the transgression of thy brothers and their stn, for that
they did thee evil, and now, we pray thee, forgive the transgression
of those who serve thy father’s God.’ And Joseph wept when they
spoke to him. 18. And his brothers also went and fell down
before him and said, ‘ Behold, we are thy slaves” 19. And Joseph
said to them, ‘ Fear not; for am Tin the place of God? 20. And
as for you, you meant evil against me: God meant it for good that
he might do, as you see done this day, that he might preserve a great
multitude in life. 21. Now therefore fear not ; I will nourish you
and your little ones. So he comforted and encouraged them.

22%, And Joseph dwelt in Egypt, he and his father’s house,
and Joseph lived one hundred and ten years. 23. And Joseph saw
LEphraim’s children of the third generation: the children also of
Machir the son of Manasseh, were born on Joseph's knees. 24.
And Joseph said to his brothers, ‘Iam dying, but God will surely
visit you and bring you up out of this land to the land which he
promised with an oath to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob. 25.
And Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel, saying, ‘ God
will surely visit you and you shall bring up my bones hence.’ 26.
So Joseph died, being a hundred and ten years old, and they em-
balmed him and he was put in a coffin in Egvpt.
NOTE

From the beginning of Exodus to the end of Joshua
ordinary type indicates simply that the words belong to
the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ In this case the
question of Jahvist or Elohist authorship is left undeter-

mined.

The text in heavy type belongs to the Jahvist, thus :—

Thou still exaltest thyself against my people, that thou wilt
not let them go.

The text in italics belongs to the Elohist, thus :—

And Moses stretched forth his staff over the land of Egypt.

Round brackets thus ( ) have been used occasionally to
indicate harmonistic glosses by the editor who com-
piled the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ from the

Jahvist and Elohist documents.
EXOD. I. 6] OPPRESSION OF THE ISRAELITES IN EGYPT 107

Exodus. I.! 6. And Joseph died and all his brothers and all
that generation. 7..... and they multiplied and grew strong.
8. And there arose a new king over Egypt who knew not Joseph.
9. And he said to his people, ‘ Behold, the people of the children of
Lsrael are more and mightier than we; 10. Come, let us deal
wisely with them, lest they multiply and it come to pass that when
war happens to us,? they also join themselves to our enemies and
fight against us and get them up out of the land. 11. So they set
over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens, and they
built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and Raamses. 12. But the
more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and the more they
spread abroad, and they were troubled about the children of Israel
14. [And they made them work| at mortar and bricks and all
manner of labour tn the field. 15. And the king of Egypt said to
the Hebrew midwives, the name of the one being Shiprah and the
other Puah: 16. and he said, ‘ When you do the office of a mid-
wife to the Hebrew women, look [while they are still] on the dirth-
stool: if it be a son, kill him, and tf it be a daughter, let it live.’
17. But the midwives feared God and did not do as the king y
Lgypt commanded them but saved the male children alive. 18.
And the king of Egypt called the midwives and said to them,‘ Why
have you done this thing, and have saved the male children alive?’
19. And the midwives satd to Pharaoh, ‘ Because the Hebrew are
not like the Egyptian women, for they are lively and are delivered

’ Exodus, chapters i., ii. In chapter i. the § 15-21 must on account of
the repeated use of Elohim belong to the Elohist and with these verses the
§ 8-12 is connected in sense. In ver. 22 we probably have in the briefer
words of the Jahvist the story already told by the Elohist. So far there is a
pretty general agreement among critics. As to chapter ii. it is safest to say
with Wellhausen and Kuenen that we have a mixed text without attempting
to say how much comes from the Elohist, how much from the Jahvist. Ac-
cording to Dillmann, 1-14 is mostly from the Elohist, 15-23% mostly from
the Jahvist. In ver. 18 the father-in-law of Moses is called Reuel. Now in
xviii. 1 (the Elohist) the name is Jethro or Jether as in iii. 1, iv. 18. On the
other hand in Num. x. 29, the name is Hobab son of Reuel, and in Judges
iv. 11, Hobab, Probably here, in ii. 18, we should read Hobab, son of Reuel.

This then is the name given by the Jahvist, Jethro that given by the Elohist.
2 «Happens to us.’ So Sam., and all versions.
108 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXOD. I. 20

before the midwife comes to them” 20. And God dealt well with
the midwives ; and the people multiplied and grew very strong.
21. And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that he
built up families for them. 22. And Pharaoh charged all his
people, saying, ‘Every son that is born you shall cast into the
Nile, and every daughter you shall save alive.’

II. 1. And there went a man of the house of Levi and took
to wife! the daughter of Levi. 2. And the woman conceived
and bore a son, and when she saw that he was a goodly child,
she hid him three months. 3. And when she could no longer
hide him, she took an ark of bulrushes and daubed it with bitu-
men and with pitch, and she put the boy therein and laid it in
the flags by the bank of the Nile. 4. And his sister stood afar
off to know what would be done to him. 5. And the daughter
of Pharaoh went down to bathe by the river and her maidens
walked along by the river-side ; and she saw the ark among the
flags and sent her maidservant to fetch it. 6. And she opened
it and saw the child, and, behold, the babe wept: and she had
pity on him and said, ‘This is one of the Hebrews’ children.’ 7.
And his sister said to Pharaoh’s daughter, ‘Shall I go and call
thee a nurse of the Hebrew women, that she may give suck to
the child for thee?’ 8. And Pharaoh’s daughter said to her,
“Go. So the girl went and called the child’s mother. 9. And
Pharaoh’s daughter said to her, ‘Take this child away and give it
suck for me and I will give thee thy wages.’ And the woman
took the child and suckled it. 10. And the child grew up and
she brought him to Pharaoh’s daughter and he became a son to
her: and she called his name Moses, and said, ‘ Because I drew
him out of the water.’

11. And it came to pass in these days that Moses grew up
and went out to his brethren and looked on their burdens: and

1 The name of the wife has been omitted, perhaps because the name given
here was different from that mentioned by the ‘ Priestly Writer’ in vi. 20.
The Revised Version conceals the difficulty by translating ‘a daughter of Seir.
It is very doubtful if the grammatical construction will permit this rendering.
EXOD. III. 1] THE FLIGHT OF MOSES TO MIDIAN 109

he saw an Egyptian smiting a Hebrew, one of his brethren. 12.
And he looked this way and that, and when he saw that there was
no man, he smote the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. 13. And
he went out on the second day and, behold, two men of the
Hebrews strove together and he said to him that did the wrong,
‘Why smitest thou thy fellow?’ 14. And he said, ‘Who made
thee a prince and a judge over us? Thinkest thou to kill me, as
thou didst kill the Egyptian?’ And Moses was afraid and said,
‘Verily, the thing is known.’ 15. Now when Pharaoh heard this
thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from before
Pharaoh and he dwelt in the land of Midian and he sat by the well.
16. Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters, and they came
and drew water and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock.
17. And the shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses stood
up and helped them and watered their flock. 18. And when
they came to Reuel their father, he said, ‘ How is it that you are
come so soon to-day?’ 1g. And they said, ‘An Egyptian de-
livered us from the hand of the shepherds, and moreover he drew
water for us and watered the flock.’ 20. And he said to his
daughters, ‘And where is he? Why is it that you have left the
man? Call him, that he may eat bread.’ 21. And Moses was
content to dwell with the man, and he gave Moses Zipporah his
daughter. 22. And she bore a son and he called his name
Gershom, for he said, ‘I have been a sojourner in a strange land.’
23°, And it came to pass in the course of those many days, that
the king of Egypt died.

III. 1! Now Moses was keeping the flock of Jethro his father-

1 Exod. iii, 1-15 must, as a whole, belong to the Elohist, because it
centres in the revelation of the name Yahweh, whereas that name has been
known according to the Jahvist from the first, and was used publicly by
Enosh (Gen. 4. 26). Notice also the names Jethro and Horeb, both unknown
to the Jahvist, also the Elohist turn of expression, ‘he said Moses, Moses,
and he said, Here am I’ (4>=Gen. xxii. 11, xlvi. 2). But a Jahvist narrative
has been mixed by the compiler with that of the Elohist. We have the name
Yahweh in 2, 4% and 7, and hence we find that 9 merely repeats 7 and 8
in other words. Dillmann assigns the rest of the chapter to the Elohist in
IIo THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. Ill. 2

in-law, the priest of Midian, and he led the flock to the back of the
wilderness to the mountain of God, to Horeb1 2. And the angel
of Yahweh affeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of the
thorn bush: and he looked and, behold, the thorn bush burned with
Sire, but the thorn bush was not consumed. 3. And Moses said, ‘T
will turn aside now and see this great sight, why the thorn bush ts
not burnt up. 4. And Yahweh saw that he turned aside to see,
and God called to him from the midst of the thorn bush and suid,
‘ Moses, Moses” And he said,‘ Heream I? 5. And he said,
‘Draw not nigh hither, put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the
Place whereon thou standest is holy ground? 6. And he said, ‘I
am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac,
and the God of Jacob” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid
lo look upon God. 7. And Yahweh said, ‘I have surely seen the
affliction of my people which is in Egypt, and I have heard their
cry because of their oppressors, since I know their sorrow.? 8.
And I am come down to deliver it from the hand of the Egyp-
tians and to bring it up out of that land into a good and wide
land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the
Canaanite and the Hittite, and the Amorite and the Perizzite, and
the Hivite and the Jebusite. 9. And now, behold, the cry of the
children of Israel is come to me, and moreover I have seen the
oppression, wherewith the Egyptians oppress them. 10. And now
go, I send thee to Pharaoh, and bring forth my people, the children
of Israel, from Egypt. 11. And Moses said to God, ‘ Who am J,
that I should go to Pharaoh and that T should bring forth the

the main, while Wellhausen’s judgment is exactly opposite. Kittel on the
whole follows Wellhausen, but the question cannot be settled in detail.

1 ¢Foreb’ is the name which the Elohist (e.g. in xvii. 6, xxxiii. 6) always
gives to the mountain which the Jahvist and the ‘ Priestly Writer’ call Sinai.
The Deuteronomist adopts the Elohist usage. Notice that Horeb is from the
outset ‘the mountain of God.’ Therefore God appears and the legislation
is given there, not vce versd. Because it is already ‘the mountain of God,’
the children of Israel go to serve him there. It has this sacred character in
Deborah’s Song, the most ancient fragment of Hebrew literature (Judges v.
4, 5, comp. 1 Kings xix. 8).

2 Sorrow.’ So LXX., Sam., Syr.; the Masoretic text has the plural.
EXOD. Ill. 20] THE CALL OF MOSES III

children of Israel out of Egypt?’ 12. And he said, ‘ Certainly,
Twill be with thee, and this shall be the token to thee that I have
sent thee: when thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt,
you shall serve God on this mountain” 13. And Moses said to
God, ‘ Behold, when I come to the children of Israel, and shall say
to them, “ The God of your fathers has sent me to you,” and they
shall say to me, “ What is his name?” what shall I say to
them?’ 14. And God said to Moses, ‘I will be what I will be,
And he said, ‘ Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, “ Iwill
be has sent me to you.”’ 15. And God said further to Moses,
‘ Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, “ Yahweh, the God
of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the
God of Jacob has sent me to you:” this ts my name for ever, and
my memorial from generation to generation. 16. Go and gather
the elders of Israel together, and say to them, “‘ Yahweh, the God
of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, has
appeared to me saying, ‘I have surely looked to you and to that
which is done to you in Egypt:” 17. and I said, “1 will bring
you up from the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanite
and the Hittite, and the Amorite and the Perizzite, and the

ivite and the Jebusite, to a land flowing with milk and honey.”
18. And they shall hearken to thy voice, and thou shalt come,
thou and the elders of Israel, to the king of Egypt, and thou shalt
say! to him, “‘ Yahweh the God of the Hebrews has met with us,
and now let us go, we pray thee, three days’ journey into the
wilderness, that we may sacrifice to Yahweh our God.” 19. And
I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not by a
mighty hand.2 20. And I will put forth my hand and smite
Egypt with all my wonders which I will do in the midst of it, and

1 ¢Thou shalt say.?- So LXN., Vulgate, and some Hebrew mss.

2 ©No, not by a mighty hand.’ The xx. has ‘save by a mighty hand.’
This suits the context, but it is a rendering which the Hebrew will not bear.
It is true that for a time Pharaoh resisted even the mighty hand of Yahweh.
Still, the same hand which wrote ver. 20 can hardly have written the clause
here, and Dillmann may be right in regarding the words as a gloss by a late
writer who was thinking of the first nine plagues.
112 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. Il. 21

after that he will send you forth. 21. And I will give this people
favour in the eyes of the Egyptians ; and it shall come to pass
that when you go, you shall not goempty: 22. but every woman
shall ask of her neighbour and of her that sojourneth in her house
jewels of silver and jewels of gold, and raiment, and you shall put
them on your sons and on your daughters : and you shall spoil the
Egyptians.’ IV. 1.1 And Moses answered and said, ‘ But, behold,
they will not believe me nor hearken to my voice, for they will
say, ‘‘ Yahweh has not appeared tothee.”’ 2. And Yahweh said
to him, ‘What is that in thine hand?’ And he said, ‘A staff.’
3. And he said, ‘Cast it on the ground.’ And he cast it on the
ground and it became a serpent, and Moses fled from before it.
4. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Put forth thine hand and take
it by the tail’—and he put forth his hand, and laid hold of
it, and it became a staff in his hand—s. ‘that they may believe
that Yahweh the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the
God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob has appeared to thee.’ 6.
And Yahweh said to him further, ‘Put now thine hand into
thy bosom.’ And he put his hand into his bosom, and,
when he took it out, his hand was [white] as snow with
leprosy. 7. And he said, ‘Put back thine hand into thy bosom’
—and he put his hand back into his bosom, and when he took

 

liv, a. The § iii. 16—vi. 1 is admittedly composite. (i) In iv. 10, 12,
when Moses complains that he is no orator, Yahweh answers by promising to
confer the gift of speech upon him. This tallies very well with the subse-
quent account in vii. 8—xi., where Moses is the principal speaker, where
Aaron only appears to disappear, and where his name is probably a mere
interpolation. But it does not tally with iv. 14-16, where Yahweh says that
Aaron is to speak for Moses. (2) In iii.-iv. 18 God appears to Moses, and
gives him detailed instructions about his return to Egypt and his mission.
Accordingly, Moses asks Jethro’s leave to go, and gets it. Suddenly, as if
nothing had been said of all this, we read in iv. 19, ‘ Yahweh said to Moses
in Midian, go, return to Egypt, for all the men who sought thy life are dead.’
(3.) In iv. 21-23, Moses is told to threaten Pharaoh at once with the death
of his first-born. This disagrees with iii. 18-20, where he is told simply
to ask leave of brief absence for the people, that they may sacrifice in the
wilderness, the vengeance of Yahweh following the king’s refusal, and with
the subsequent story in vil. sey. While, however, the fact is certain that the
Iv. 17] THE CALL OF MOSES 113

it out of his bosom, behold, it was turned again like [the rest
of] his flesh.—8. ‘And it shall come to pass if they will not
believe thee, and will not hearken to the voice of the first
sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. 9.
And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe even these two
signs and will not hearken to thy voice, that thou shalt take
of the water of the Nile and pour it on the dry land, and the
water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood
on the dry land. 10. And Moses said to Yahweh, ‘O Lord, I
am not eloquent, neither in former days nor since thou hast
spoken to thy slave, for I am slow of speech and of a slow
tongue.’ 11. And Yahweh said to him, ‘Who made man’s
mouth? Or who makes dumb, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is
it not I, Yahweh? 12. Now therefore go, and I will be with thy
mouth, and I shall teach thee, what thou shalt speak.’ 13. And
he said, ‘I beseech thee, O Lord, send by means of any one [else]
thou wilt.’ 14. And the anger of Yahweh was kindled against
Moses and he said, ‘Is there not Aaron thy brother the Levite ?
I know that he can speak. And, behold, he goes forth to meet
thee and, when he sees thee, he shall rejoice in his heart. 15.
And thou shalt speak to him and put words in his mouth: and I
will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and I will teach you
what to do. 16. And he will speak for thee to the people : and
it shall come to pass that he will be to thee for a mouth, and
thou shalt be to him fora God. 17. And thou shalt take in thy
hand this staff with which thou shalt do the signs.

compiler has used different documents, the attempts made by Dillmann,
Jiilicher, and Nittel to separate the original elements of the composite
narrative cannot be considered successful. They differ considerably from
each other, and perhaps no certain result can be attained. Henceforth the
Elohist also is free to use the name Yahweh which has now been revealed to
Moses, But besides, the method of the compiler seems to have changed.
Hitherto he has pieced together fragments of the Jahvist and Elohist, as in a
mosaic. Here he seems to have fused them into one. We find, however,
in the staff of Moses, and in the signs which he works, a criterion which may
be safely used to distinguish the Elohist from the Jahvist. This will be
explained when we come to the plagues in ch. vii. seg.
H
Iq THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (Exon. Iv. 18

18. And Moses went and returned to Jether his father-in-law
and said to him, ‘Let me go, I pray thee, and return to my
brethren who are in Egypt and see if they are still alive.’
And Jethro said to Moses, ‘Go in peace.’ 19. And Yahweh said
to Moses in Midian, ‘Go, return to Egypt, for all the men are
dead who sought thy life.” 20, And Moses took his wife and
his son! and made them ride on an ass, and he returned to the
land of Egypt: and Moses took the staff of God in his hand.

. And Yahweh said to Moses,‘ Now that thou art going back
to hans see all the wonders which I have put in thine hand,—
these shalt thou do before Pharaoh, and I will make his heart
jirm, so that he will not let the people go. 22. And thou shalt say
to Pharaoh, “ Thus says Yahweh, Israel is my first-born son:
23. And I have said to thee, Let my son go, that he may worship
me, and thou hast refused to let him go: behold, I will slay thy
Sjirst-born son.””

24. And it came to pass? on the way at the lodging place
that Yahweh met him and sought to kill him. 25. Then
Zipporah took a flint and cut off the foreskin of her son, and
cast it at his feet, and she said, ‘Surely a bridegroom of blood
art thou tome.’ 26. So he [Yahweh] let him alone. Then she
said, ‘A bridegroom of blood [art thou] because of the circum-
cision.’

27. And Yahweh said to Aaron, ‘Go to meet Moses in the
wilderness ;’ and he went, and met him in the Mountain of God,
and kissed him. 28. And Moses told Aaron all the words of

 

1 “His son.’ So Dillmann and many others, for the plural ‘sons’ which
stands in the Hebrew text. According to this narrator, Moses had, at this
time, only one son, viz. Gershom. According to the Elohist, Moses had
two sons. But he left them behind in Egypt. See xviii. 2.

2 ¢And it came to pass,’ etc. Here we have one of the oldest § § in the
Hexateuch. Vahweh tries to kill Moses, The reason for this does not lie
in the fact that Moses had neglected to circumcise his son. Circumcision
has not even been mentioned hitherto, much less has a law of circumcision
been imposed. The explanation seems to be that the Yahweh of the early
Hebrews devours like the element of fire, not for moral reasons but by a
necessity of nature. He is appeased by the blood of circumcision and
Vv. 8] MOSES BEFORE PHARAOH. OPPRESSION OF ISRAELITES I15

Yahweh wherewith he had sent him, and all the signs wherewith
he had charged him. 29. And Moses and Aaron went and
gathered all the elders of the Children of Israel; 30. and Aaron
spoke all the words which Yahweh had spoken to Moses, and
did the signs in the sight of the people. 31. And the people
believed : and they heard that Yahweh had visited the children
of Israel and seen their affliction, and they bowed their heads
and worshipped.

V. 1. And afterwards Moses (and Aaron) came and said to
Pharaoh, ‘Thus says Yahweh, the God of Israel, ‘‘ Let my people
go that they may keep a feast to me in the wilderness.”’ 2. And
Pharaoh said, ‘Who is Yahweh, that I should hearken to his
voice? I have no knowledge of Yahweh, and, moreover, I will
not let Israel go.’ 3. And they said, ‘The God of the Hebrews
has met with us: let us go, pray, three days’ journey in the
wilderness, and sacrifice to Yahweh our God, lest he fall on us
with pestilence or the sword.’ 4. And the king of Egypt said to
them, ‘Why do you, Moses (and Aaron), loose the people from
their works? Get you to your burdens.’ 5. And Pharaoh said,
‘Behold, the people of the land are now many, and will you stop
them from their burdens?’ 6. And the same day Pharaoh
commanded the taskmasters of the people and their overseers,
saying, 7. ‘You shall give the people no more straw to make
bricks, as heretofore: let them go and gather straw for them-
selves. 8. And the tale of the bricks, which they made hitherto,

Zipporah calls Moses ‘a bridegroom of blood,’ z.e. a husband whose life she
has saved by sacrificing the blood of her son. Thus circumcision is regarded
here as ‘an offering of blood for the propitiation of Yahweh.’ See Kuenen,
Godsd. v. Israel, ch. iv., also Réville, Relig. des Peuples Non-civilisds,
particularly vol. i. p. 177, with reference to the circumcision of the Caffres.
Réville thinks circumcision was a sacrifice of the part, offered in lieu of the
whole. This theory seems to be borne out by the passage before us, though
circumcision may also have been in early times a mark of adoption into the
clan which enabled the circumcised person to participate in its sacred rites
(Stade, Gesch. Israels, i. p. 423), or again a qualification for marriage and
the other prerogatives of perfect manhood (Robertson Smith, Religion of
the Semites, p. 310).
116 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. v. 9

you shall lay upon them: you shall not diminish it, for they are
lazy ; therefore they cry, saying, “ Let us go and sacrifice to our
God.” 9. Let heavier labour be laid on the men, and let them
work at it, and let them not regard lying words.’ 10. And the
taskmasters of the people and its overseers went forth and spoke
to the people, saying, ‘Thus saith Pharaoh, “TI will not give you
straw. 11. Go yourselves, get you straw where you can find it,
for your labour shall not be diminished at all.”’ 12. So the
people were scattered through all the land of Egypt to gather
stubble for straw. 13. And the taskmasters were urgent, saying,
‘Complete your works, the daily task on the day, as when there
was straw.’ 14. And the overseers of the children of Israel
whom Pharaoh’s officers had set over them, were beaten, while
question was put, ‘Why have you not completed your task both
yesterday and to-day in making brick as heretofore?’ 15. Then
the overseers of the children of Israel went and cried to Pharaoh,
saying, ‘Why dealest thou thus with thy slaves? 16. No straw
is given to thy slaves and they say to us, “ Make bricks,” and
behold, thy slaves are beaten, and thou sinnest against thy
people.’! 17. And he said, ‘ You are idle, you are idle, therefore
you say, “Let us go and sacrifice to Yahweh.” 18. Go, there-
fore, now, and work ; for there shall no straw be given you, yet
shall ye deliver the tale of bricks.’ 19. And the overseers of the
children of Israel found themselves in evil case, since they had
to say, ‘You shall not make any diminution in your bricks, from
the day’s task on the day.’ 20. And they came on Moses (and
Aaron) standing to meet them as they came forth from Pharaoh.
21. And they said to them, ‘Let Yahweh look upon you and
judge, because you have made our odour to be abhorred in the
eyes of Pharaoh and in the eyes of his servants, so as to puta
sword into their hand to slay us.’ 22. And Moses returned to

 

1 ¢Thou sinnest against thy people.’ The Hebrew text is neither
grammatical nor intelligible. The true reading is retained in LXN. and Syr.
See Dillmann and Gesenius by Kautzsch, § 74 1.
VII. 15] THE NILE TURNED TO BLOOD 117

Yahweh and said, ‘O lord, why hast thou done evil to this
people? Why is it that thou hast sent me? 23. For since I came
to Pharaoh to speak in thy name, he has done evil to this people
and thou hast by no means delivered thy people’ VI. 1. And
Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Now shalt thou see what I will do to
Pharaoh, for [compelled] by a strong hand he will let them go,
and [compelled] by a strong hand shall he drive them out of
his land.’

.... VIL 14.1 And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Pharaoh’s
heart is heavy: he refuses to let the people go. 15. Go to
Pharaoh in the morning; behold, he goes forth to the water,

1 vii. 14, xi. 8. The Plagues of Egypt. Here again two documents have
been fused together, but the fusion is much less perfect than in the preceding
chapters, and sometimes the compiler has given one or other document pure
and unmixed. The following table gives the distinctive features in the two

narratives. The clear light we have here is reflected to some small extent on

chap. iv.-vi. :—
JAHVIST.

Moses is enabled to perform three
marvels in order ¢hat he may satisfy
the children of Israel of his mission.
His shepherd’s staff is changed into
a serpent, his hand becomes leprous
and is restored in a moment, he
changes water into blood. Observe
that the staff has no magical power :
it is the subject, not the instrument
of miracle, iv. 1-12. Moses works
no wonder before Pharaoh. He
merely predicts punishments which
Yahweh will send on the next day,
and afterwards intercedes for the
king on his promise of amendment.
In the plague of flies, viii. 16-28,
and the cattle-plague, ix. 1-7, we
have the Jahvist narrative pure and
simple. The author says that
Pharaoh’s heart was heavy or dull,
ix. 7; that he made his own heart
heavy or dull, viii. 28, zot chat
Yahweh made tt so.

 

ELOHIST.

Moses is to do the signs with a
magic rod or staff which is called
the staff of God, iv. 17, 20%. Moses
is to do wonders with it before
Pharaoh.

We have the account of the
Elohist pure and unmixed in the
account of the three days’ darkness,
x. 21-29. There is no stress laid
on prediction, nor any occasion to
do so. Moses at Yahweh’s bidding
stretches out his hand and the pre-
ternatural darkness begins.

Yahweh makes Pharaoh's heart
strong or firm (the Hebrew word
being quite different from that used
by the Jahvist).
118 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop, vu. 16

and thou shalt stand by the river’s brink to meet him, and the
staff which was turned to a serpent shalt thou take in thy hand.
16. And thou shalt say to him, ‘‘ Yahweh the God of the Hebrews
has sent me to thee, saying, Let my people go, that they may
worship me in the wilderness: and, behold, hitherto thou hast
not hearkened. 17. Thus says Yahweh, In this shalt thou
know that I am Yahweh: behold, I will strike with the staff that
ts in my hand on the waters which are in the Nile, and they
shall be turned into blood. 18. And the fish that is in the Nile
shall die, and the Nile shall stink, and the Egyptians will try in
vain to drink water from the Nile.”’ 20 af. And he lifted up the
staff and struck the waters that were in the Nile in the sight of
Pharaoh and in the sight of his servants, and all the waters that
were in the river were turned to blood. 21*. And the fish that
were in the river died, and the river stank, and the Egyptians
could not drink water from the river. 24. And all the Egyptians
dug round about the Nile for water to drink, for they were not
able to drink of the water of the Nile.

25. And when seven days were complete, after Yahweh had
struck the Nile, 26. Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Go to Pharaoh
and say to him, “‘Thus says Yahweh, Let my people go that
they may worship me. 27. And, if thou refuse to let them go,

We have in x. 13, 14 an excellent illustration of the way in which the
compiler has often mingled the two accounts. The Jahvist writes, ‘ Yahweh
brought an east wind upon the land all that day and all the night, and when
it was morning the east wind brought the locusts’ (13¥.) The Elohist
writes, ‘ Yahweh said to Moses, ‘‘ Stretch out thine hand over the land of
Egypt for the locusts that they may come up,”’ etc. (12.) And Moses
stretched out his rod over the land of Egypt (13*), and the locusts went up over
all the land of Egypt’ (14). Two distinct accounts have been united. In
one Yahweh brings the locusts gradually by an east wind, in the other Moses
summons them by stretching out his hand with the magic wand. The
account which makes the ‘wand of Elohim’ so prominent may with great
probability be assigned to the Elohist ; the other account is marked throughout
by the vocabulary and style of the Jahvist (see Dillmann, Zxod. p. 65). But
it is not always possible to disentangle the two narratives, and the compiler
has added something of his own. The name of Aaron, as has been said, is
intruded without any obvious reason. He is mentioned and then ignored.
VIII. 18] PLAGUE OF FROGS AND OF THE GADFLY 11g

behold, I will plague all thy territory with frogs. 28. And the
Nile shall swarm with frogs which shall go up and come into
thy house and into thy bedchamber and upon thy bed, and into
the house of thy servants and of thy people,! and into thine
ovens and thy kneading troughs. 29. And the frogs shall come
up both on thee and upon thy people,and upon all thy servants.’”
-... VIII. 4, And Pharaoh called for Moses (and Aaron) and
said, ‘Entreat Yahweh, that he take away the frogs from me
and from my people, and I will let the people go that they may
sacrifice to Yahweh.’ 5. And Moses said to Pharaoh, ‘Have
thou this glory over me: for what time shall I entreat in thy
behalf, and for thy servants, and for thy people, that the frogs
be destroyed from thee and thy houses, and remain only in the
Nile?’ 6. And he said, ‘For to-morrow.’ And he said, ‘Be it
according to thy word, that thou mayest know that there is
none like Yahweh our God. 7. And the frogs shall depart from
thee and from thy houses and from thy servants and from thy
people: only in the Nile will they be left.’ 8. And Moses (and
Aaron) went out from Pharaoh and Moses cried to Yahweh
about the agreement concerning the frogs which he had made
with Pharaoh. 9. And Yahweh did according to the word of
Moses, and the frogs died out of the houses, out of the courts,
and out of the fields. 10. And they gathered them together in
heaps, and the land stank. 11*. But when Pharaoh saw that
there was a respite, he made his heart heavy.

16. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Stand before Pharaoh early
in the morning ; behold, he comes forth to the water, and say
to him, ‘Thus says Yahweh, Let my people go that they may
worship me. 17. Else if thou wilt not let my people go, behold,
I will send the gadfly upon thee and thy servants and thy people
and into their houses, and the houses of the Egyptians shall
be full of the gadfly and also the ground on which they are.
18. And I will sever in that day the land of Goshen in which

1 “Of thy people.’ So Lxx.
1.2/0) THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXopD. VIII. 19

my people dwell, that no gadfly may be there, that thou mayest
know that I Yahweh am in the midst of the land. 19. And I
will make redemption [by distinguishing] between my people
and thy people. By to-morrow shall this sign be.”’ 20. And
Yahweh did so; and there came grievous swarms of gadflies
into Pharaoh’s house and into his servants’ houses and in all
the country of Egypt the land was destroyed because of the
gadfly. 21. And Pharaoh called for Moses (and for Aaron) and
said, ‘Go, sacrifice to your God in the land.’ 22. And Moses
said, ‘It is not fitting to do so, for we shall offer sacrifices to
Yahweh our God, which the Egyptians abominate: lo, we shall
offer sacrifices which the Egyptians abominate ! before their eyes,
and will they not stone us? 23. Let us go three days’ journey
into the wilderness and sacrifice to Yahweh our God, as he shall
bid us.’ 24. And Pharaoh said, ‘I will let you go, that you may
sacrifice to Yahweh your God in the wilderness: only you shall
not go very far away: entreat for me.’ 25. And Moses said,
‘Behold, I go out from thee and I will entreat Yahweh that the
gadfly may depart from Pharaoh and from his servants and from
his people to-morrow: only let not Pharaoh deal deceitfully any
more, in not letting the people go that they may sacrifice to
Yahweh.” 26. And Moses went out from Pharaoh and en-
treated Yahweh. 27. And Yahweh did according to the word
of Moses and he removed the flies from Pharaoh, from his
servants and his people, not one was left. 28. And Pharaoh
made his heart heavy this time also, and he did not let the
people go.

1X. 1. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Go in to Pharaoh and

 

1 © Sacrifices which the Egyptians abominate,’ z.e. the Hebrews sacrificed
certain animals which the Egyptians considered unfit for the purpose. The
Egyptians, according to Herod. ii. 45, only sacrificed bulls, calves, and
geese, and even these must possess certain qualities and be declared pure by
the priests, Herod. ii, 38. The priest after scrupulous examination affixed
his seal to a piece of byblus wrapped round the bull’s horn: ‘and for one
sacrificing a victim without this seal, the penalty is death’
IX. 20] MURRAIN AND HAIL 121

tell him, ‘Thus says Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, Let my
people go, that they may worship me. 2. For if thou refuse to
let them go and still keep hold of them, 3. behold, the hand of
Yahweh will be upon thy cattle which is in the field, upon the
horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the herds and
upon the flocks; [there will be] a very grievous murrain. 4.
And Yahweh shall sever between the cattle of Israel and the
cattle of Egypt, and there shall nothing die of all that belongs
to the children of Israel.”’ 5. And Yahweh appointed a set
time, saying, ‘To-morrow Yahweh will do this thing in the
land.’ 6. And Yahweh did that thing on the morrow and all
the cattle of Egypt died, but of the cattle of the children of
Israel, not one died. 7. And Pharaoh sent and, behold, there
was not so much as one of the cattle of Israel dead. But the
heart of Pharaoh was heavy, and he did not let the people
go.

13. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Stand before Pharaoh early
in the morning and say to him, ‘‘ Thus says Yahweh, the God of
the Hebrews, Let my people go that they may worship me.
(14. For I will this time send all my plagues upon thy heart and
upon thy servants, and upon thy people, that thou mayest know
there is none like me in all the earth. 15. For now I had put
forth my hand and struck thee and thy people with pestilence,
and thou hadst been cut off from the earth: 16. but in very
deed for this cause have I let thee stand, to shew thee my
strength, and that my name may be declared in all the earth.)
17. Thou still exaltest thyself against my people, that thou
wilt not let them go. 18. Behold, to-morrow about this time
I will cause it to rain a very grievous hail, such as has not been
in Egypt from the day it was founded, until now. 19. Now
therefore send, hasten in thy cattle, and all that thou hast in
the field; every man and beast which shall be found in the
field and shall not be brought home,—the hail shall come down
on them and they shall die.”’ 20. He that feared the word of
Yahweh among Pharaoh’s servants made his slaves and his
122 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXOD. IX, 21

servants flee into the houses, 21. but he that did not regard
Yahweh's word, left his slaves and his cattle in the field. 22.
And Vahweh said to Moses, ‘Stretch forth thy hands towards
heaven, that there may be hail tn all the land of Egypt, on man
and beast, and on every herb of the field throughout all the land
of Egypt.’ 23. And Moses stretched out his staff to the heaven, and
Yahweh sent thunder, and hail and fire ran down to the earth,
and Yahweh rained hail on the land of Egypt. 24 And there
was hail and continuous fire in the midst of the hail, very griev-
ous, such as had not been in all the land of Egypt, since it
belonged to a nation. 25. And the hail struck throughout all
the land of Egypt all that was in the field, both man and beast,
and the hail struck all the herb of the field and broke every tree
of the field. 26. Only in the land of Goshen in which the
children of Israel were, there was no hail. 27. And Pharaoh sent
and called for Moses (and Aaron) and said to them, ‘I have
sinned this time: Yahweh is righteous, and I and my people are
wicked. 28. Make entreaty to Yahweh: enough of God’s
thunderings and hail, and I will let you go and you shall not tarry
any longer.’ 29. And Moses said to him, ‘ As soon as I am gone
out of the city, I will spread out my hands to Yahweh; the
thunderings shall cease, neither shall there be any more hail, that
thou mayest know that the earth is Yahweh’s. 30. But, as for
thee and thy servants, I know that you will not yet be afraid of
Yahweh.’! 31. And the flax and the barley were struck, for the
barley was in ear and the flax in flower. 32. But the wheat and
the spelt were not struck, for they grow up late. 33. And Moses
went out of the city and spread out his hands to Yahweh, and
the thunders and hail ceased, and the rain was not poured out on
the earth. 34. And when Pharaoh saw that the rain and the
hail and the thunders were ceased, he sinned yet more and made

1 Yahweh. So Ltxx. The Hebrew has ‘ Yahweh-God,’ a collation
which never occurs in the Hexateuch except in Gen. ii. iii. Probably some
mss. tead Yahweh, others Elohim, from the union of which the ‘ conflate’
reading of the Masorelic text arose.
x. 10] LOCUSTS 123

his heart heavy, he and his servants. 35. And the heart of
Pharaoh was firm, and he did not let the children of Israel go,
as Yahweh had spoken by Moses.

X. 1 And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Go in to Pharaoh .. .
for I have made his heart heavy and the heart of his
servants, that I might set my signs in the midst of them,! 2.
and that thou mayest tell in the ear of thy son and of thy son’s
son, how I have mocked the Egyptians and the signs which I
have set amongst them, that you may know that I am Yahweh.’
3. And Moses (and Aaron) went in to Pharaoh, and said to him,
‘Thus says Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, How long wilt
thou refuse to humble thyself before me? Let my people go,
that they may worship me. 4. Else if thou refuse to let my
people go, behold, to-morrow will I bring locusts into thy
territory: 5. and they shall cover the face of the earth, so
that one shall not be able to see the earth, and they shall eat
the residue of that which is escaped, which remains to you from
the hail, and shall eat every tree which grows for you out
of the field, 6. and thy houses shall be filled and the houses
of all thy servants, and the houses of all the Egyptians; as
neither thy fathers nor thy fathers’ fathers have seen, from the
day that they were upon the ground to this day.’ And he
turned and went outfrom Pharaoh. 7. And Pharaoh’s'servants
said, ‘How long shall this fellow be a snare to us? Let the men
go, that they may worship Yahweh their God: knowest thou not
yet that Egypt is destroyed?’ 8. And Moses (and Aaron) were
brought back again to Pharaoh and he said to them, ‘Go worship
Yahweh your God; but who are the persons that shall go?’ 9.
And Moses said, ‘We will go with our young and with our old,
with our sons and with our daughters, with our flocks and with
our herds will we go, for we have a feast of Yahweh to
keep.’ 10. And he said to them, ‘May Yahweh be with you

1 “In the midst of them.’ So Lxx., Syr. The Hebrew, ‘in the midst of
him,’ or ‘it,’ is unintelligible.
124 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. xX. I

as surely as it is sure that I shall let you and your children go :+
look to it, for you have mischief in view. 11. Not so: go now,
you that are men, and worship Yahweh, since that is what
you desire:’ and they were driven from Pharaoh’s presence.
12. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Stretch out thine hand over the
land of Egypt for the locusts,? that they may come upon the land
of Egypt and eat every herb of the land, all that the hail has left,
13. And Moses stretched forth his staff over the land of Egypt,
and Yahweh brought an east wind on the land all that day
and all the night, and when it was morning the east wind
brought the locusts, 14. And the locusts came upon the whole
land of Egypt, and rested in all the territory of Egypt—very
grievous ; before them there were no such locusts as they,
neither after them shall be such. 15. And they covered the
face of the whole earth, so that the land was darkened, and
they ate every herb of the land and all the fruit of the trees
which the hail had left, and no green thing was left, either tree
or herb of the field through all the land of Egypt. 16. Then
Pharaoh called in haste for Moses (and Aaron), and said, ‘I
have sinned against Yahweh your God and against you. 17.
Now, therefore, pray forgive my sin only this once, and
entreat Yahweh your God, that he may take away from me
only this death.’ 18. And he went forth from Pharaoh and
entreated Yahweh. 19. And Yahweh turned an exceeding
strong west wind, which took up the locusts and drove them
into the Red Sea: not one locust remained in all the border
of Egypt. 20. And Yahweh made Pharaoh’s heart firm, and
he did not let the children of Israel go.

21. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Stretch forth thy hand to the
heavens, that there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, a

1 © As it is sure,’ ete, ze. Let your chance of Yahweh’s blessing be equal
to your chance of getting from me the leave you ask. In other words, the
chance be no chance at all.

2 ¢¥For the locusts.’ This is no doubt the sense, but in the Hebrew the
construction is intolerably hard, and the text probably corrupt.
XI. 7] THREE DAYS’ DARKNESS. DEATH OF FIRST-BORN 125

darkness whith may be felt” 22. And Moses stretched forth his
hand to the heaven and there was a thick darkness in all the land
of Egypt for three days; 23. they did not see one another, neither
did any one rise from his place during three days, but all the
children of Israel had light in their dwellings. 24. And Pharaoh
said to Moses,‘ Go, worship Vahweh ; only let your flocks and
herds be left behind: let your little ones also go with you. 25.
And Moses said, ‘ Thou must also give into our hand sacrifices and
burnt-offerings, that we may sacrifice to Yahweh our God. 26.
Our cattle also shall go with us; there shall not an hoof be left
behind, for thereof must we take to worship Yahweh our God ;
and we do not know with what we shall worship Vahweh until
we come thither” 27. But Vahweh made Pharaoh’s heart firm,
and he was not willing to let them go. 28. And Pharaoh said to
him, ‘Get thee from me: beware of seeing my face again, for in
the day thou seest my face thou shalt die.” 29. And Moses said,
‘Thou hast spoken well: I will not see thy face any more.’

XI. 1. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Yet one plague more
will I bring upon Pharaoh and upon Egypt: afterwards he will
let you go hence: when he shall let you go completely, he shall
even drive you out hence. 2. Speak now in the ears of the
people and let them ask, every man of his neighbour, and every
woman of her neighbour, jewels of silver and jewels of gold.’ 3.
And Yahweh gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians,
moreover, the man Moses was very great in the sight of Pharaoh’s
servants and in the sight of the people. 4. And Moses said,
‘Thus says Yahweh, At midnight I will go out in the midst
of Egypt. 5. And all the first-born will die in the land of
Egypt, from the first-born of Pharaoh that sits upon his throne
to the first-born of the handmaiden that is behind the mill ;
and all the first-born of cattle. 6. And there shall be a great
cry throughout all the land of Egypt, the like of which has not
been, and the like of which shall not be again. 7. But against
all the children of Israel not a dog shall whet its tongue,
against man or beast, that you may know how Yahweh dis-
126 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. xi 8

tinguishes between the Egyptians and the children of Israel.
8. And all these thy servants shall come down to me and shall
bow down to me, saying, “Get thee out and all the people that
follow thee,” and after that I will go out.’ And he went out
from Pharaoh in hot anger. XII. 29. And it came to pass at
midnight that Yahweh smote all the first-born in the land of
Egypt, from the first-born of Pharaoh that sat on his throne, to
the first-born of the captive that was in the dungeon, and all the
first-born of cattle. 30. And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he
and all his servants and all the Egyptians, and there was a great
cry in Egypt, for there was no house where there was not one
dead. 31. And he called for Moses (and for Aaron) and said,
‘Rise up and get you forth from among my people, both you
and the children of Israel, and go, worship Yahweh, as you have
said. 32. Take both your flocks and your herds, as you have
said, and go: and bless me also.’ 33. And the Egyptians were
urgent upon the people, to send them out of the land in haste,
for they said, ‘We are all dead men.’ 34. And the people took
their dough before it was leavened, their baking dishes being
bound up in their clothes on their shoulders. 35. And the
children of Israel did according to the word of Moses, and they
asked from the Egyptians jewels of silver and jewels of gold, and
raiment. 36. And Yahweh gave the people favour in the sight
of the Egyptians, so that they let them have what they asked,
and they spoiled the Egyptians. 37. So the children of Israel
journeyed to Succoth with . men! on foot besides children.
38. And also a mixed multitude went up with them, and flocks and
herds, very much cattle. 39. And they baked the dough which
they brought out of Egypt into unleavened cakes, for it was not

1 «With... men,’ The text, as it stands, has with 600,000 men, and
this is the number given repeatedly and with great detail by the ‘ Priestly
Writer.’ Kittel seems to be justified in expunging it from the ‘Oldest Book
of Hebrew Ilistory.’ For (1) this verse is admittedly interpolated in the
spirit of the ‘Priestly Writer.’ (2) \lthough the vast number occurs again
apart from the ‘ Priestly Writer’ in Num. xi. 21, still this chapter has been
XIv. 5] THE EXODUS 127

leavened ; for they were driven out of Egypt and could not
tarry, neither had they prepared for themselves any victual.

XIII. 17. And it came to pass! when Pharaoh had let the
people go, that God did not lead them by the way of the land of the
Philistines, though that was near, for God said,‘ Lest the people
repent when they see war, so that they will return to Egypt. 18.
But God turned the people round in the direction of the desert
towards the Red Sea and the children of Israel went up armed out
of the land of Egypt. 19. And Moses took Joseph’s bones with
him, for he had made the children of Israel swear, saying, ‘God
will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones away hence
with you. 21. And Yahweh went before them? ina pillar of
cloud by day to lead them on the way, and by night in a pillar
of fire to give them light, that they might go by day and by
night: 22. the pillar of cloud by day, and the pillar of fire by
night, did not depart from before the people.

XIV. 5. And it was told the king of Egypt that the people
were fled, and the heart of Pharaoh and of his servants was

much altered by the editor of the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ (3)
It seems unlikely that any author, however naive, should mention the
enormous number of the Israelites, and add immediately that they might
have been afraid of the petty Philistine states. It is possible that the
number here may be due to the editor who united the Jahvist and Elohist
documents, but it is at least as likely that the number was inserted by the final
editor of the Hexateuch.

1 “And it came to pass.’ In this § 17-19 there can be no doubt as to
authorship. ‘Elohim’ occurs three times, and ver. 19 is distinctly connected
with an earlier portion of the Elohist narrative, viz. Gen. 1. 25.

2 “And Yahweh went before them,’ xiii. 21—xiv. 31. Here the narrative
is mostly from the Jahvist. Pharaoh finding that the Hebrews, instead of
merely taking the leave given to worship Yahweh in the wilderness, are gone
altogether, pursues them with an army. Yahweh in the pillar of cloud stands
between the hosts and prevents the Egyptians from overtaking the fugitives.
During the night Yahweh by a strong east wind drives the sea back, so that
both armies cross dry-shod to the opposite shore. There the battle begins :
but Yahweh from the cloud strikes the Egyptians with panic : they flee in
confusion : the sea returns to its former bed and Pharaoh and his soldiers are
all drowned. There is scarcely anything here which claims to be miraculous,
the retreat of the sea is a natural occurrence, although, like other natural
occurrences, caused and directed by Yahweh. The close resemblance here
128 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXoD. XIV. 6

changed! towards the people, and they said, ‘What is this we
have done, that we have let Israel go from being slaves to us?’
6. And he made ready his chariots and took his people with
him: 7. And he took six hundred chosen chariots and all the
chariots of Egypt, and captains [?] over all of them. 9. And
the Egyptians pursued after them, all the chariots and horses of
Pharaoh and his army. 10. And when Pharaoh drew nigh, the
children of Israel lifted up their eyes and, behold, the Egyptians
marched after them, and they were sore afraid. 11. And they
said to Moses, ‘Was it because there are no graves in Egypt
that thou hast taken us away to die? What is this that thou
hast done to us, to bring us forth out of Egypt? 12. Is not
this the word that we spoke to thee in Egypt, saying, Let us
alone, that we may be slaves to the Egyptians? For it were
better for us to be slaves to the Egyptians than that we should
die in the wilderness.’ 13. And Moses said to the people,

to the Jahvist’s account of the plagues is evident; there too the Jahvist
makes Yahweh act as a rule through ordinary and natural causes. The
authorship of the Jahvist becomes more certain when we find traces of
another hand, viz., that of the Elohist. According to him it is ‘the angel of
God’ (19#), not the pillar of the cloud, who comes between the Israelites and
Egyptians. It is not a natural cause, such as the east wind, but a super-
natural one which turns sea into land. Moses raises his staff, the very staff
with which, according to the Elohist, he brought the plagues. Unfortunately
the Elohist account closely resembled that of the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ and it is
only here and there that we have a fragment of the Elohist narrative. Still,
‘the magic rod’ seems to be, in spite of Kuenen’s objection, from the
Elohist. Thus, according to the Jahvist, the sea was driven back gradually
by the strong east wind ; according to the Elohist the miracle was done, of
course instantaneously, by the rod of Moses; according to the ‘ Priestly
Writer’ by the hand of Moses. True, one who raises his rod may also be
said, and is said, to raise his hand. But in xiv. 16 the redundancy of expres-
sion, ‘Raise thy staff and stretch out thine hand,’ makes it likely that we
have a fragment of the Elohist mingled with the story as told by the ‘ Priestly
Writer.’

1 ©The heart of Pharaoh and of his servants was changed.’ Quite naturally,
because, according to the ‘Oldest Book of Ilcbrew History,’ the Ilebrews
had never asked more than leave of absence for the purpose of sacrifice and
for a short time.
XIV. 31] THE EGYPTIANS DROWNED IN THE RED SEA 129

‘Fear not: stand still and see the salvation of Yahweh which
he will work for you to-day, for as you have seen the Egyptians
to-day, you shall not see them any more for ever. 14. Yahweh
will fight for you and you shall hold your peace.’ e463.
And do thou raise thy staff... 19. And the angel of God who
went before the children of Israel removed and went behind them,
and the pillar of cloud removed from before them and stood
behind them: 20. and it came between the camp of Egypt and
the camp of Israel . . . .1 and the one came not near the other
all the night. 21>. And Yahweh drove the sea back with a
strong east wind all the night, and made the sea dry land. 24.
And it came to pass in the morning watch that Yahweh looked
forth upon the host of the Egyptians, in the pillar of fire and
cloud, and threw the host of the Egyptians into confusion. 25.
And he took off their chariot wheels and made them drive
heavily ; and the Egyptians said, ‘Let us flee from the face of
Israel, for Yahweh fights for them against the Egyptians.’ 27».
And the sea returned to its former state when the morning
appeared, and the Egyptians fied towards it, and Yahweh
whirled the Egyptians together in the midst of the sea: 28”.
there remained not so much as one of them. 30. And Yahweh
saved Israel on that day from the hand of the Egyptians, and
Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the sea shore. 31. And the
people feared Yahweh, and they believed in Yahweh and in his
servant Moses.

1 * And it came between the camp of Egypt and the camp of Israel.’ . . .
In the Hebrew text the next words are, ‘And there was the cloud and the
darkness, and it gave light by night.’ They do not give any sense, for the
luminous qualities of the cloud would not keep the armies apart but the
contrary. The words are generally taken to mean that the cloud was
luminous on the side of the Israelites, dark on that of the Egyptians. This
interpretation, however, does not get a meaning out of the text, but puts a
meaning into it. The LXxx. has, ‘There was darkness and cloud and the
night passed,’ which shows that the Greek translators had a different text
before them. Evidently our text is corrupt: the versions afford no help and
conjectural emendations have not mended the matter.

I
130 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXoD. XV. 1

XV. 1. Then Moses and the children of Israel sang this
song! to Yahweh and spoke, saying,
‘T will sing to Yahweh for he has raised himself high ;
The horse and his driver has he thrown into the sea.
2, Yahweh is my strength and my song,
\nd he has brought me victory ;
This is my God and I will praise him,
My father’s God and I will exalt him.
3. Yahweh is a man of war,
Yahweh is his name.
4. The chariots of Pharaoh and his army he cast into the sea,
And his chosen captains [?] are sunk in the Red Sea.
5. The deeps cover them ;
They went down into the depths like a stone.
6. Thy right hand, Yahweh, is glorious in strength ;
Thy right hand, Yahweh, dashes in pieces the enemy.
7. And in the greatness of thine eminence thou overthrowest
them that rise up against thee ;
Thou sendest forth thy burning fury, it consumes them as
stubble.

1 «This song.’ It is generally admitted that the song is post-Mosaic. It
must indeed have been written centuries after his time, for it implies not only
that the Israelite tribes were settled in Canaan and gathered into national
unity, but also that they had one central shrine (ver. 17). This central
shrine could only be Solomon’s temple, for the tabernacle set up at Sinai and
finally placed at Shiloh is the late fiction of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ On the
other hand, the song must have been written long before the exile, since its
exultant tone would be unnatural in a time of political dissolution and decay.
It gives an account of the crossing of the Red Sea which is substantially
natural and credible, and so far confirms belief in the reality of the event.
Ver. 19 is not a part of the song but an explanatory rubric, and may have
been taken like the song itself from some poetical collection, or else was
added by the final editor of the Hexateuch. Unlike the song and the
Jahvist, it makes Israel walk through the sea. There is a distinct quotation
from the song in Isaiah xii. 2, but the authorship and date of this chapter of
Isaiah are quite uncertain. Verses 20, 21 are probably from the Elohist,
who mentions Aaron and Miriam in Num. xii. and speaks of Abraham as a
prophet, Gen. xx. 7.
XV.

Io.

It.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

18] THE SONG OF TRIUMPH 131

. And with the blast of thy nostrils the waters were piled up,

The floods stood upright as a heap,
The depths were congealed in the heart of the sea.

. The enemy said, ‘I will pursue, I will overtake,

I will divide the spoil, my lust shall be satisfied upon them,

I will draw my sword, my hand shall destroy them.”

Thou didst blow with thy wind, the sea covered them ;

They sank as lead in the mighty waters.

Who is like thee, Yahweh, among the gods?

Who is like thee, glorious in holiness?

Fearful in praises 1 doing wonders.

Thou didst stretch out thy right hand,

The earth swallowed them.

Thou in thy kindness hast led the people which thou hast
redeemed,

Thou hast guided them in thy strength to thy holy dwelling.

The peoples have heard, they tremble ;

Pangs have taken hold on the inhabitants of Philistia.

Then were the dukes of Edom amazed,

The rams of Moab—trembling takes hold of them,

All the inhabitants of Canaan melted away.

Terror and dread falls upon them,

By the greatness of thine arm they are still as a stone,

Till thy people pass ovér, O Yahweh ;

Till thy people pass over, which thou hast gotten.

Thou bringest them in, thou plantest them in the mountain
of thine inheritance,

The place, O Yahweh, which thou hast made for thee to
dwell in,

The sanctuary, O Yahweh,? which thy hands have established.

Yahweh shall reign for ever.

1 ‘Fearful in praises,’ z.e. fearful, because of the attributes for which thy
servants praise thee.
2 ©Vahweh.’ So Sam. and some Hebrew mss.
132 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXoD. XV. 19

19. For Pharaoh’s horses went with his chariots and riders
into the sea and Yahweh brought again the waters of the sea
upon them, but the children of Israel walked on dry land in the
midst of the sea.’

zo. And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a
timbrel in her hand, and all the women went out after her with
timbrels and dances. 21. And Miriam answered them,

‘Sing to Yahweh, for he has raised himself high,
The horse and his driver he has cast into the sea.’

22. And Moses led Israel onward from the Red Sea and they
went out into the wilderness of Shur ; and they went three days in
the wilderness and found no water. 23. And when they came to
Marah, they could not drink of the waters of Marah, for they were
bitter : therefore tts name was called Marah: 24. And the people
murmured against Moses, saying,‘ What shall we drink?’ 25.
And he cried to Vahweh, and Yahweh showed him a tree and he
cast tt into the waters, and the waters were made sweet. There he
made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved
them. 26. And he said, ‘If thou wilt diligently hearken to the
voice of Yahweh thy God, and do that which is right in his eyes,
and give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I
will put none of the diseases upon thee which I put upon the
Egyptians, for I am Yahweh who heals thee.’

XVII. 1.’ And the people had no water to drink.
2. And the people strove with Moses and said, ‘Give us water
that we may drink.’ And Moses said to them, ‘Why do you

 

1 © There he made for them a statute and an ordinance.’ These words recur
in the narrative of the Elohist (Josh. xxiv. 25), so that the connected verses
22-25 are generally assigned to him. Ver. 26 is in the style of the Deutero-
nomist, and has been probably added by an editor.

2 xvii. 1>-8, Tere 3-6 must be in the main from the Elohist, as is
shown by the mention of the magic staff or rod and the reference to its use in
Egypt. But 1> and 2 are clearly a parallel from another hand, possibly that
of the Jahvist, and 7 is connected with 2, because it gives the name Massa,
derived from the ‘tempting’ of Yahweh mentioned in 2, The mention of
Horeb in ver. 6 is surprising, as the people had not yet got so far. It may
be an interpolation.
XVII. 14] WATER FROM THE ROCK. AMALEK 133

strive with me? Why do you tempt Yahweh?’ 3. And the
people thirsted there for water and the people said, ‘ Why hast thou
brought me out of Egypt to kill me and my children and my cattle
with thirst?’ 4, And Moses cried to Yahweh, saying, ‘ What
shall I do to this people? They are almost ready to stone me.’ 5.
And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Pass before the people and take with
thee some of the elders of Israel, and take in thy hand thy staff
with which thou didst strike the Nile and go. 6. Behold, [ wit
stand before thee there on the rock in Horeb, and thou shalt strike
the rock and water shall come out of it, that the people may drink.’
And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel. 7. And he
called the name of the place Massah and Meribah, because of
the striving of the children of Israel, and because they tempted
Yahweh, saying, ‘Is Yahweh among us or not?’

8.1 And Amalek came and fought with Israel at Rephidim.
9g. And Moses said to Joshua, * Choose out men for us and go out,
Jight with Amalek: to-morrow I will stand on the top of the
hill with the staff of God in my hand. 10. And Joshua did, as
Moses had said to him, and fought with Amalek, and Moses,
Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. 11, And tt came
to pass whenever Moses raised up his hand,? that Israel prevailed,
and whenever he let down his hand, that Amalek prevailed. 12.
But Moses hands were heavy ; and they took a stone and put it
under him and he sat on tt, and Aaron and Hur supported his
hands, the one on the one side and the other on the other, and his
hands were steadied, till the going down of the sun. 13. And
Joshua laid Amalek and his people low by the edge of the sword.
14. And Yahweh said to Moses,‘ Write this for a memorial in a

1 xvii. 8-16. Another story about the magic rod and therefore from the
Elohist, who, however, refers in ver. 14 to an older document from which he
may have drawn. We have another sign of the Elohist in the mention of
Hur, who is only mentioned here and in xxiv. 14, which is also by the
Elohist.

2 «Raised up his hand,’ z.e. his hand with the magic rod. Comp. viii. 1,
ix. 22 seg., x. 12 seg. There is no allusion to prayer.
134 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXop. XVII. 15

book and rehearse tt in the ears of Joshua, for T will utterly blot
out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heavens” 15. And
Moses built an altar and called its name,‘ Yahweh is my banner.’
16. And he said, [I swear it] with the hand [raised] to the throne
of Vahweh: Yahweh will have war with Amalek from generation
to generation.

XVIII! 1. Mow Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-
in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for Israel
his people, that Yahweh had brought Israel out of Egypt. 2. And
Jethro, Moses father-tn-lax, took Zipporah Moses wife (after he
had sent her away), 3. avd her two sons, of whom the name of
the one was Gershom, for he said, ‘I have been a sojourner in a
strange land? 4. and the name of the other was Eliezer, for [he
said], ‘ Zhe God of my father has been my help and has delivered
me from Pharaoh's sword? 5. And Jethro, Moses father-in-law,
came with his sons and his wife to Moses, into the wilderness where
he was encamped, the mount of God. 6. And he said to Moses,
‘TL, thy father-in-law Jethro, am come to thee, and thy wife and her
two sons with her” 7. And Moses went out to meet his father-in-
law and bowed down and kissed him, and they asked each other
of their welfare and they came into the tent. 8. And Moses told
his father-in-law all that Yahweh had done to Pharaoh and the
Egvptians for Israel’s sake, all the travail that had overtaken

1 Chapter xviii. : Undoubtedly by the Elohist. Observe (1) the frequent
use of Elohim. (2) The name Jethro, whereas the Jahvist calls the father-
in-law of Moses Reuel, or rather Hobab, son of Revel. See the note
on Eyod. ii. 18. (3) Jethro here brings with him the wife and sons of
Moses. According to the Jahvist, Muses had taken them with him on
his return to Egypt. However, 2» is an addition by the compiler who
awkwardly attempts to harmonise the Elohist with the Jahvist, and the
interchange of the names Yahweh and Elohim with the repetitions or
parallels in 1, 5, 9, and still more in 10, point to some admixture of Jahvist
material. It is generally supposed that the Elohist must have placed this
story later in connection with the legislation at Horeb. Even verses which
contain some admixture of the Jahvist have becn marked as Ilohistic, these
additions being slight, immaterial, and not to be distinguished with certainty.
But we can hardly err in assigning 1” to the Jahvist.
XVIII. 21] JETHRO’S VISIT. APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES 135

them on the way, and how Yahweh delivered them. 9. And
Jethro rejoiced because of all the goodness which Yahweh had done
to Israel, in that he had delivered them out of the hand of the
Egyptians. 10. And Jethro said, ‘ Blessed be Yahweh who has
delivered you from the hand of the Egyptians and from the hand of
Pharaoh, who has delivered the people from under the hand of the
Egyptians. 11. Now T know that Yahweh ts greater than all
gods, yea, in the thing wherein they dealt proudly against them.
12. And Jethro, Moses father-in-law, took a burnt offering and
sacrifices for God, and Aaron came and all the elders of Israel to
eat bread with Moses father-in-law before God. 13. And it came
to pass on the morrow that Moses sat to judge the people, and the
people stood about Moses from morning till evening. 14. And
when Moses father-in-law saw all that he did to the people, he
sata, ‘ What is this thing which thou doest to the people? Why
dost thou sit alone and all the people stand about thee from morn-
ing to evening?’ 15. And Moses said to his father-in-law, ‘ Be-
cause the people come to me to inquire of God: 16. when they have
a matter, they come to me,? and T judge between a man and his
neighbour, and I make known the statutes of God and his laws.
17. And Moses father-in-law said to him, ‘ The thing that thou
doest is not good. 18. Thou wilt surely wear away both thou and
the people that is with thee, for the thing ts too heavy for thee:
thou art not able to perform it thyself alone. 19. Listen now to my
voice, I will give thee counsel, and God be with thee: be at the
people's service in relation to God and do thou bring the causes to
God: 20. and thou shalt teach them the statutes and laws,
and shalt show them the way in which they shall walk and
the work that they must do. 21. Moreover, thou shalt provide out
of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating

1 «Vea, in the thing.’ So the English Revised Version, but it is very
doubtful if this meaning can be extracted from the Hebrew text. Dillmann
translates ‘for by that wherein they dealt proudly against them [he destroyed
them],’ supposing that the word in brackets has been omitted by mistake.

2 «They come to me.’ Text corrected from LXx.
136 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXOD. XVIII. 22

unjust gain, and place such over them to be rulers of thousands,
rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. 22. And
let then judge the people at all seasons, and it shall be that every
great matter they shall bring to thee, but every small matter they
themselves shall judge: and make tt easter for thyself and let them
dear [the burden] with thee. 23. Lf thou shalt do this thing, and
God command thee so, then shalt thou be able to endure, and all
this people also shall go to its place in peace.’ 24. And Moses
listened to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that he had
said. 25. And Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made
them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds,
rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. 26. And they judged the people
at all seasons: the hard cases they brought to Moses, but every small
matter they judged themselves. 27. And Moses let his father-in-law
go, and he went his way to his own land.

XIX. 21 And Israel encamped there before the mount. 3.
And Moses went up to God and Yahweh called to him from the
mountain, saying, ‘Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob

1 xix. 2b-xaxiv. 28. (The Decalogue, the ‘ Book of the Covenant,’ etc., etc.)
This narrative abounds in difficulties, one of which affects its whole structure
and may be discussed here. From Sinai God proclaims the *Ten Words’ or
Decalogue in the hearing of the people. The people are terrified, and after
that Moses alone approaches God and receives a code of laws (ax. 23-xxiii.).
Moses reads this code to the people; they promise to obey it, and on these
terms enter into a solemn covenant with Yahweh (xxiv. 3-8). In these verses
which relate this solemn engagement into which the people enter, there is no
allusion to the Decalogue. Indeed although the Decalogue was given before
the ‘Book of the Covenant,’ the people as yet have not bound themselves to
the former at all, itis simply ignored. Next, Moses ascends the mount again,
stays there forty days and nights, and receives two tables of stone inscribed with
the Decalogue which had been previously uttered by God, both the tables and
their inscription being the work of the divine hands. Meantime the people
fall into idolatry : Moses in his vexation breaks the tables, hews out others,
and again ascends the mount for forty days, during which God writes the
Decalogue anew on the tables. And now, as if no ‘Book of the Covenant’
had existed, the Decalogue is called ‘ the words of the covenant.’ ‘And he
(Yahweh) wrote on the tables the words of the covenant, the ten words.’
Thus, there is no allusion to the ‘ Book of the Covenant,’ just when such allu-
sion would seem inevitable, viz., in the long story of Isracl’s fall and restoration
XIX. 11] THE REVELATION ON THE MOUNT 137

and tell the children of Israel; 4. You have seen what I did to
the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagle’s wings and brought
you to myself. 5. And now, if you will obey my voice indeed,
and keep my covenant, then you shall be to me a peculiar
treasure from among all peoples, for all the earth is mine, 6.
and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.
These are the words which thou shalt speak to the people of
Israel.’ 7. And Moses came and called for the elders of the
people and set before them all these words which Yahweh com-
manded him. 8. And all the people answered together and said,
‘ All that Yahweh has spoken we will do.’ And Moses reported
the words of the people to Yahweh. g. And Yahweh said to Moses,
‘Lo, I come to thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear
when I speak to thee, and may also believe thee for ever.’ And
Moses told the words of the people to Yahweh. 10. And
Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Go to the people and sanctify them to-day
and to-morrow, and let them wash their garments, 11. and let
them be ready for the third day, for the third day Yahweh will
come down in the sight of all the people on Mount Sinai.

(xxxii.-xxxiv.). Now of course a writer might describe a covenant made on a
double basis, viz., on that of the Ten Words and on that of the ‘ Book of the
Covenant,’ or he might describe two covenants, one on each basis. It is not,
however, conceivable that the same writer should put the text of the Deca-
logue and the ‘ Book of the Covenant’ together, and then write sometimes as
if the Decalogue, sometimes as if the Code or ‘ Book of the Covenant,’ were
the sole basis of union between Yahweh and his people.

Wellhausen’s theory, if it could be accepted, would afford an easy explana-
tion. According to him the Decalogue with its story belongs to the Elohist,
the ‘ Book of the Covenant’ with its story to the Jahvist. This theory, how-
ever, may be confidently dismissed. The ‘ Book of the Covenant’ no less than
the Decalogue betrays unmistakable marks of the Elohist’s style. Such are
the frequent use of ‘Elohim,’ the repeated use of Amah for ‘ maidservant’
(not Shiphchah as in the Jahvist), the mention of sacred pillars erected by
Moses at the conclusion of the covenant (such pillars being mentioned in
Genesis at least four times and never by the Jahvist).

The difficulty then can only be met by supposing with Dillmann (vol. iii.
p. 616) and Kuenen, whose arguments are stated fully in the Theol. Tijdschr.
xv. p. 164 seg., that there has been some change made in the original order of
the narrative. Kuenen calls attention to the fact that the Deuteronomist,
138 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop, XIX. 12

12. And thou shalt set bounds to the people round about, and take
heed to yourselves, that you go not up to the mount or touch the border
of it; whosoever touches the mount shall surely be put to death:
13. 20 hand shall touch him, but he shall surely be stoned or shot
through , whether it be beast or man, it shall die: at the blast of
the rants horn they shall come up to the mount. 14. And Moses
went down from the mount to the people and sanctified the people
and they washed their garments. 15. And he said to the people,
‘ Hold yourselves ready for three days; come not near a woman,
16, And it came to pass on the third day, when it was morning,
that there were thunders and lightnings and thick cloud on the
mountain, and the voice of a trumpet; and all the people that
were in the camp trembled. 17. And ALoses brought forth the
people from the camp to meet God, and they stood at the base of the

who, as is admitted on all sides, was familiar both with the Decalogue and
the ‘ Book of the Covenant,’ recognises the Decalogue alone as promulgated
at Mount Horeb. At the same time, he states that God communicated to
Moses on Mount Horeb ‘the commandments, the statutes, and the judg-
ments’ which he was to teach at some future time to the people (Deut. v. 28).
Accordingly, Kuenen believes that the Elohist related the promulgation of
the Decalogue by God on Mount Horeb, that he placed the promulgation of
the ‘Book of the Covenant’ by Moses to the people at some much later
period, perhaps in the ‘ steppes of Moab’ shortly before his death. In that
case, the editor who united the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ with the
Deuteronomical Code, would be obliged to displace the ‘ Book of the Cove-
nant,’ in order to make room for the Deuteronomical Code, which also pro-
fessed to have been promulgated in the ‘steppes of Moab.’ This hypothesis,
though only an hypothesis, accounts for the facts. If with Dillmann we place
the ‘ Book of the Covenant’ between Exod, xxiv. 12%, 13 seg. and xxxi. 18>,
zc. between the time when Moses goes up the mount to receive the tables
inscribed with the Decalogue and the actual reception of these tables by him,
the silence of the Deuteronomist about the promulgation of the Book of the
Covenant is not explained. Nor can it be seen on this theory why the ‘ Book
of the Covenant’ in ils present place remains without any proper introduction.

Although both the Decalogue and the ‘ Book of the Covenant’ come to us
from the Elohist, Ido not mean to say that the Jahvist had no hand in the
narrative before us. The traces of his authorship are however extremely
uncertain till we reach xxxiv., and I have contented myself with indicating
the passages which may be assigned with at Icast a high degree of probability
to the Elohist.
XX. 2] THE DECALOGUE 13!

mountain. 18. And Mount Sinai was altogether on smoke
because Yahweh went down on it in fire, and its smoke went uj
like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain tremblec
exceedingly. 19. And when the voice of the trumpet grev
louder and louder, Moses spoke and Yahweh answered him witl
a voice. 20. And Yahweh came down on Mount Sinai to thi
top of the mount, and Yahweh called Moses to the top of th
mount and Moses went up. 21. And Yahweh said, ‘Go down
charge the people, lest they break through to Yahweh to gaze, anc
many of them fall dead. 22. And let the priests+ also who drav
near to Yahweh sanctify themselves, lest Yahweh break forth up
on them.’ 23. And Moses said to Yahweh, ‘The people canno
come up to Mount Sinai, since thou hast charged them, saying
“Set bounds about the mount and sanctify it.”’ 24. Anc
Yahweh said to him, ‘Go, get thee down, and thou shalt com:
up, thou, and Aaron with thee, but let not the priests and thi
people break through to come up to Yahweh, lest he break fortl
upon them.’ 25. And Moses went down to the people and saic
tothem?....

XX. 1.2 And God spoke all these words, saying :

2. ‘Lam Yahweh, thy God, who brought thee out of the lan
of Egypt, out of the house of slaves.

1 <The priests.’ Note that this author takes the existence of priests fo
granted before and independently of all legislation. Almost all critic
(Wellhausen, Dillmann, Jiilicher, Kittel) attribute the verse and those con
nected with it (at least 20, 21, 25) to the Jahvist. In that case the sam:
author assumes that the name Yahweh, the distinction of clean and uncleai
animals, the institution of the priesthood, were familiar from time immemorial
It was only later writers who professed to determine the precise times a
which these things were introduced by definite legislation.

2 And said to them.’ What? Evidently the narrative has been muti
lated.

8 xxi. 17, The Decalogue. We have no means of determining the age o
the Decalogue. It must have arisen long after the Israelites had passed fron
a nomad to a settled life. It is the ‘house,’ and not, as in Arabic, the ten
(Ahl= Heb. Ohe/), which stands for a man’s familia or household, and the
Sabbath implies the settled life of agriculture. An agriculturist needs res
140 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. XX. 3

3. ‘Thou shalt have no other gods beside me. 4. Thou shalt
not make for thyself a graven image of any form that is in the
heavens above or that ts in the earth beneath or which ts in the
waters under the earth: 5. thou shalt not bow thyself down to
them or serve them, for I, Vahweh thy God, am a jealous God,
visiting the intguity of the fathers upon the children, to the third
and the fourth generation of them that hate me, 6. (and showing
kindness to thousands of them that love me? and keep my com-
mandments).

7. ‘Thou shalt not utter the name of Yahweh thy God for a
vain cause, for Vahweh will not hold him guiltless, who utters his
name for a vain cause.

8. ‘Remember the Sabbath-day to sanctify it. 9. Stix days
shalt thou labour and do all thy work: 10. but the seventh day
zs a sabbath to Vahweh thy God; [in it] thou shalt not do any
work, thou, or thy son, or thy daughter, thy man-servant, or

and can rest from tillage. A nomad’s life is usually so idle that no day of
rest is needed, while, on the other hand, such work as the nomad does,
driving cattle, milking them, etc. cannot be remitted on one day recurring
every week. Moreover, if the second ‘word’ be an integral part of the
whole, the Decalogue must have arisen after the worship of Yahweh in the
form of an ox was considered unlawful. To this mode of worship neither
Elijah nor Elisha seems to have made any objection, and it is very doubtful
whether any protest was made against it before the reiterated and energetic
protest of Hosea. We may then conjecture that the Decalogue arose in the
eighth or, perhaps, seventh century before Christ. The reasons appended to
the earlier ‘words’ are certainly later than the ‘ words’ themselves. This
appears from the fact that the reasons appended to the fourth and fifth vary
in the Decalogue as repeated in Deuteronomy v.; while further it is just in
these expansions that we find expressions manifestly borrowed from later
writers. The ‘ words’ were originally short precepts like those in the ‘ Book
of the Covenant,’ and thus the disproportion in bulk between the precepts of
the first and second table disappears.
1 “Of any form.’ Text corrected by aid of the reading in Deut. ». 8.

* ©Them that love me.’ Verse 6 is (in spite of Dillmann’s objections)
almost certainly an addition from the Deuteronomist. The love of God is
constantly mentioned in Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomical portions of
Joshua, but nowhere else in the Hexateuch. See an instructive essay by
Winter, Z. A. 7: for 1889, p. 211.
XX, 2 THE DECALOGUE 141
4

thy maid-servant, or thy cattle (nor thy stranger that is within
thy gates).!

12. ‘Honour thy father and thy mother (that thy days may be
long on the land which Yahweh thy God gives thee).

13. ‘ Zhou shalt do no murder.

14. ‘ Thou shalt not commit adultery.

15. ‘Zhou shalt not steal.

16. ‘ Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

17. ‘ Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house,* thou shalt not
covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his matd-ser-
vant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that ts thy neighbour's.’

18. And all the people saw the thunderings and the lightnings
and the voice of the trumpet and the mountain smoking ; and when
the people saw, they were moved, and stood far off. 19. And they
said to Moses, ‘ Speak thou with us and we will hear, but let not
God speak with us, lest we die’ 20. And Moses said to the people,
‘ Fear not, for God ts come to prove you, and that his fear may be
before you, that you may not sin.” 21. And the people stood far
off, and Moses drew near to the thick darkness where God was.
22. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Thus shalt thou say to the
children of Israe/: “You have seen® that I have spoken with you
from the heavens. 23. You shall not make with me gods of
silver ; and gods of gold you shall not make to you. 24. Ax altar

 

+ ‘Within thy gates’ is a characteristic expression of the Deuteronomist,
and so is the Hebrew phrase translated ‘that thy days may be long.’ It con-
stantly occurs in Deuteronomy, and nowhere else in the Hexateuch except
Josh. xxiv. 31, which is by the Deuteronomist.

2 *House.’ The ‘house’ includes a man’s household property, of which
his wife, no less than his ox, forms a part. Contrast the recension of this
precept in the Deuteronomist, who takes a more humane view of marriage.
The prohibition of an internal fault such as ‘coveting’ surprises one in such a
code. Possibly intrigue and plots to secure unjust possession may be meant.
Compare the use of the word in xxxiv. 24.

3 ©You have seen,’ etc. These words to the end of 23 do not form any
part of the Book of the Covenant. There (except when additions have been
made to the text) the form of address is always in the singular, ‘Thou shalt,’
not ‘ You shall.’
142 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXopD. XX. 25

of earth) shalt thou make to me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy
burnt-offerings and thy peace-offerings, thy sheep and thine oxen:
in every place where I cause my name to be remembered, [ will come
to thee and bless thee. 25. And if thou make me an altar of stones,
thou shalt not build it of hewn stones, for tf thou lift up thy tool
upon it, thou hast polluted it.2 26. And thou shalt not go by steps
to my altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.”

XXI. 1. ‘Vow these are the judgments? which thou shalt set
before them.

2. ‘IVhen thou buyest a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years,
and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. 3. Tf he come
in by himself he shall go out by himself ; of he be married, then his
wife shall go out with him. 4. Lf his master give him a wife and
she bear him sons and daughters, the wife and the children shall be
her master’s, and he shall go out by himself. 5. But if the slave

1 * An altar of earth.’ The writer knew nothing of the Deuteronomical
reform which limited sacrifice to the single altar at Jerusalem, still less of the
law in the ‘Priestly’ code, which assumed that even in the wilderness sacrifice
was offered only at the altar of the tabernacle. Wherever the worshipper
feels impelled to remember Yahweh, he is to erect an altar, which may be
either of earth or unhewn stone. The Syr. has instead of ‘Where I cause
my name to be remembered,’ ‘ Where thou shalt cause my name to be remem-
bered,’ ze. celebrate it. Kuenen may be right in preferring this reading.

* «Thou hast polluted.’ For the early superstitions which forbade the use
of iron, see Frazer’s Golden Bough, i. pp. 172-178.

3 «These are the judgments.’ Here we have (putting aside a few verses in
xxxiv.) the oldest Hebrew code in existence, the only one contained in the
‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ The antiquity appears (1) in the freedom
of worship. There is no thought of confining it to a central sanctuary. (2) In
the prominence given to civil relations. Religion is not all in all. Israel is
a nation and not a church. (3) In the antique character of the language. It
begins (as was pointed out in 1840 by Bertheau in his Steden Gruppen mosat-
schir Gesetse, p. 21) with ten laws on Hebrew slaves, divided into two sets of
five each, relating to male and then to female slaves. Each pentad or set of
five is introduced by the word ‘when,’ and the four laws which follow in
each case by the word ‘if.’ This arrangement of the laws in two pentads
recurs in the laws on bodily injury, xxi. 18-32, and in the laws referring to
litigation, xxiii. 1-3, 6-9. The arrangement is identical with that of the
Decalogue, and is probably ancient. At the same time the ‘ Book of the
Covenant’ implies throughout a settled agricultural life and the moral
XXI. 18] THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT 143

shall plainly say, “I love my master, my wife, and my children , [
will not go out free:” 6. then his master shall bring him to God
and shall bring him to the door or to the door-post, and his master
shall bore his ear with an awl, and he shall be a slave to him for
ever. 7. And when a man sells his daughter to be a maid-servant,
she shall not go forth as slaves do. 8. If she please not her master
who designated her [as a concubine] for himself, then he shall
suffer her to be bought free: he shall have no power to sell her toa
Soreign people, because he has dealt unfaithfully with her. 9. And
if he designated her for his son, he shall deal with her according to
the right of daughters. 10. Lf he shall take another woman for
himself, he shall not diminish her fiesh-meat, her clothing, and her
cohabitation. 11. And if he do not these three things to her, then
shall she go out for nothing, without money.

12. ‘He that strikes a man, so that he die, shall surely be put
to death. 13. But tifa man lie not in watt, but God caused it to
happen to his hand, [ will appoint thee a place to which he shall
fice? 14. But when a man comes wickedly against his neighbour,
to slay him with guile, thou shalt take him from my altar, that he
may die. 15. And he that strikes his father and mother shall
surely be put to death. 17. And he who curses his father or his
mother shall surely be put to death. 16. And he that steals a man,
one of the children of Israel whether he sell him or whether the
stolen man be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

18. ‘And when men contend and one strikes the other with a

precepts correspond to those of the prophets in the eighth century B.c. It is
vain to attempt any precise determination of date. The code throughout
uses the singular form of address, but here and there there are evident inter-
polations, betrayed by the use of the plural form, the severance of connection
and the hortatory tone.

1 *To God,’ z.e. to the local sanctuary.

2 © A place to which he shall flee,’ z.e. the altar of the local sanctuary, as
appears from the following verse.

3 *One of the children of Israel.” This clause, which has a genuine ring,
is preserved in the LXx. It is the rights of the Hebrew slave and the Hebrew
freeman over which the legislator watches. He is not awake to the rights of
man, asman. The LXN. have also preserved the true order in verses 16, 17.
144 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXoD. XXII. 1g

stone or with his fist, and he die not, but keep his bed: 19. if he
rise and walk abroad on his staff, then he that struck him shall be
guit, only he shall pay for the loss of his time, and shall cause him
to be thoroughly healed. 20. And when a man strikes his slave or
his maid-servant with a stick and he dies under his hand, vengeance
shall surely be taken. 21. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day
or two, no vengeance shall be taken, for he ts his money. 22. And
if men strive together and hurt a woman with child, so that her
children come forth but no [other] mischief follow, he shall be surely
fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon him, and
he shall pay, as the judges shall determine. 23. But if [further]
mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24. eye for eye,
tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25. burning for
burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. 26. And when a
man strikes the eye of his slave, or the eye of his female slave and
destroy it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. 27. And
if he smite out the tooth of his slave or the tooth of his female slave,
he shall let him go free for the sake of hts tooth. 28. And when an
ox goresa man or awoman that they die, the ox shall surely be
stoned, and tts flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the ox
shall be quit. 29. But if the ox were wont to gore in time past
and it has been notified to its owner, and he has not kept him tn,
and it shall kill a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and its
owner also shall be put to death. 30. Lf there be laid on him a
ransom, then he shall give for the redemption of his life whatsoever
ts laid upon him. 31. Or if it has gored a son or a daughter,
according to this zudgment shall tt be laid upon him, 32. Lf the
ox gore a male or female slave, he shall pay their master thirty
shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.

33. ‘And when a man shall open a pit or when aman shall dig
a pit and shall not cover tt, and an ox or an ass fall therein, 34.
the owner of the pit shall make it good, he shall make restoration
in money to its owner and the dead [beast] shall be his. 35. And
when one man’s ox gores anothers, so that it dies, then they shall
sell the live ox and divide the price of tt and the dead onc also
XXIL. 10] THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT 145

shall they divide. 36. Or if it be known that the ox was wont to
gore in time past and his owner did not keep it in, he shall surely
pay ox for ox and the dead [beast] shall be his own. 37. When a
man steals an ox or a sheep, and shall kill it or sell it, he shall pay
five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep. XXII. 1. Sf the
thief be found breaking in and be struck, so that he die, he {i.e. the
slayer] shall not incur the guilt of bloodshed. 2. If the sun be risen
upon him, he shall incur the guilt of bloodshed: he (i.e. the thief]
shall surely make restitution: uf he have nothing, then he shall be
sold for his theft. 3. If the theft be found in his hand alive,
whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep, he shall pay double. 4. When a
man shall cause [his own] field or vineyard to be eaten, and shall let
his beast loose, so that it feed in another man’s field, he shall surely
make restitution from his own field in proportion to its produce ;
but if he shall cause the whole field (of his neighbour] fo be eaten,
rom the best of his own field and the best of his own vineyard shall
he make restitution. 5. When fire breaks out and catches in thorns,
so that the shocks of corn or the standing corn or the field be con-
sumed, he who kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.

6. ‘When a man shall give his neighbour money or goods to
keep and they shall be stolen from the man’s house, if the thief be
found, he shall restore twofold. 7. Lf the thief be not found, the
owner of the house shall draw near to God [to see] whether he
have not put his hand on his neighbours property.

8. ‘For every matter of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass,
jor sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, whereof one
says, “ This ts tt,” the cause of both parties shall come before God ;
he whom God shall condemn,? shall restore twofold to his neighbour.
9. When a man shall give his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a

1 ‘When aman.’ The text of this ver. has been restored from Sam. and
Lxx. If, in depasturing his own field, a man lets his beast stray on his neigh-
bour’s land, restitution must be made in proportion. If the stray beast con-
sumes all that is in the field, the quality of the crop cannot be known, hence
the owner of the stray beast must restore from the best of his own crop.

2 ©Shall condemn.’ Probably by the sacred lot or by a priestly oracle. The
Hebrew word for ‘priest’ is the same as the Arabic Kahzx, ‘soothsayer.’
K
146 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. XXII. II

sheep, or any beast to keep and it dies or ts hurt or driven away,
no man seeing tt, 10. the oath of Yahweh shall be between them
both, whether he has not put his hand on his neighbour's property,
and the owner of tt shall accept [the oath], and [the other] shall
not make restitution. 11. But of it be stolen from him, he shall
make restitution to its owner. 12. Lf it be torn in pieces, let him
bring it as a witness: he shall not make good that which is torn.
13. And if a man borrow [a beast] from his neighbour and it be
hurt or die, the owner thereof not being with it, he shall surely
make restitution, 14. If its owner be with it, he shall not make tt
good: if it was hired, [the loss] és reckoned in its hire. 15. And
when a man shall entice a virgin who ts not betrothed and shall lie
with her, he shall pay a dowry for her to be his wife. 16. Lf her
Sather utterly refuse to give him to her, he shall pay money
according to the dowry of virgins.

17. ‘Zhou shalt not suffer a sorceress to live. 18. Whosoever
lies with a beast, shall surely be put to death. 19. He who sacri-
Jices to any god save to Yahweh alone, shall be put under the ban.
20. And a sojourner shalt thou not wrong, neither shalt thou
oppress him (for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt. 21.
You shall not oppress any widow or orphan); 22. if thou afflict
them in any wise, verily, if he cry to me, I will surely hear his
cry, 23. (and my wrath will grow hot and I will slay you with
the sword and your wives shall be widows and your sons
orphans). 24. lf thou lend money to one of my people with thee
that ts poor, thou shalt not be to him as a creditor (you shall not
lay upon him usury). 25. Lf thou at all take thy neighbour's
garment to pledge, thou shalt restore it to him by sundown: 26. for
that ts his only covering: wherein shall he sleep? And it shall come
to pass that he will cry to me and Twill hear, for 1 am gractous.

1 “Under the ban,’ 2c. not only killed, but killed for the honour of
Yahweh. The ‘cherem’ or ban was applied in the case of a besieged city.
If Yahweh enabled the Israelites to conquer, then all living things were con-
secrated to him by destruction, and the place left desolate. Compare 1 Sam.
xv. especially 33; Judges ix. 453 Josh. vi. 26.
XXIII. 12] THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT 147

27. ‘Zhou shalt not revile God or curse a ruler of thy people.
28. Thou shalt not delay [the offering from] thy fulness and thy
sap: the firstborn of thy sons thou shalt give to me. 29. So shalt
thou do with thine oxen and thy sheep: seven days shall it be with
its dam ; on the eighth day thou shalt give it to me. 30. (And you
shall be holy men to me: therefore you shall not eat any flesh
that is torn of beasts in the field; you shall cast it to the dogs.)

XXIII. 1. ‘Zhou shalt not take up a false report: put not thy
hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. 2. Thou shalt
not follow a multitude to do evil, neither shalt thou bear witness in
a cause to turn aside after a multitude to wrest judgment: 3.
neither shalt thou favour a poor man* in his cause. 4. If thou
meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely
bring it back to him again. 5. Lf thou see the ass of him that
hateth thee lying down under its burden, thou shalt refrain from
Leaving it to him alone; thou shalt loose it with him. 6. Thou
shalt not wrest the right of thy poor neighbour in his cause. 7.
Keep far from a false matter, and the innocent and righteous slay
thou not ; for I will not justify the wicked. 8. And thou shalt not
take a gift, for a gift blindeth those that see and perverts the cause
of the righteous. 9. And a sojourner thou shalt not oppress (for
you know the heart of a sojourner, since you were sojourners in
the land of Egypt).

10. ‘And six years thou shalt sow thy land and shalt gather in
the increase thereof: 11. but the seventh year* thou shalt let it
vest and leave it, that the poor of thy people may eat, and what they
leave the beast of the field shall eat: so shalt thou do with thy
vineyard and with thine oliveyard. 12. Six days shalt thou do
thy work and on the seventh day thou shalt rest, that thine ox and
thine ass may have rest, and the son of thy matdservant and the

1 ‘Neither shalt thou favour a poor man,’ etc. z.e. from party spirit. Pro-
bably some warning against the greater danger of undue favour to the rich

has been omitted. In verses 4 and 5 the text is corrupt and really cannot be

translated into sense.
3

? “The seventh year,’ which was not the same for all, but might vary in
each individual case, so that the precept was practical.
148 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. XXII. 13

sojourner may be refreshed. 13. (And in all things that I have
said to you take heed, and make no mention of the name of other
gods, neither let it be heard out of your mouth.) 14.1 Three
times thou shalt heep a feast to me tn the year. 15. The feast of
unleavened bread shalt thou keep ; seven days thou shalt eat un-
leavened bread, as I commanded thee at the time appointed in the
month Abib, for init thou didst come forth from Ezypt, and none
shall appear before me empty: 16. and the feast of harvest, the
Jirstfruits of thy labours, of that which thou sowest in the field,
and the feast of ingathering at the end of the year when thou
gatherest in thy labours out of the field. 17. Three times in the
year all thy males shall appear before the Lord Vahweh. 18.
Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread,
and the fat of my feast shall not remain all night till the morning.
19. The firstlings, the firstfruits of thy ground thou shalt bring
into the house of Yahweh thy God. Thou shalt not boil a kid in
its mothers milk.

20." ‘Behold, I send an angel before thee to keep thee by the way
and to bring thee to the place which I have prepared. 21. Take
heed of him and hearken to his votce, and be not rebellious against
him, for he will not pardon your transgresstons, since my name 1s in
him. 22. But tf thou shalt indeed hearken to his voice and wilt
do all that T speak, then [will be an enemy to thine enemies and

1 14-19. This section has been altered, as appears from the imperfect con-
nection. Still the original character of the feasts which was natural and
agricultural is preserved. The Israelites keep the feast of the beginning of
harvest in Abib, the month of the full ear, of the completed harvest and of
the vintage. Only in the case of the first feast an historical reference to the
Exodus has been added. ‘Seething a kid in its mother’s milk’ must have
been a practice of heathen idolators. But no trustworthy information on the
subject survives.

2 20-33. The code ends like later codes with promises and blessings. This
section witnesses strongly to the antiquity of the code, for not only is all allusion
to exile absent, but it retains a genuine historical recollection of the fact that
the Israelites were at first few, and dispossessed the Canaanites little by little.
The interpolations which represent the Canaanites as driven out and destroyed
by Yahweh, and inculcate implacable hostility to them, are easily recognised.
XXIV. 1] THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT 149

an adversary to thine adversaries. 23. (For mine angel shall go
before thee and bring thee to the Amorite, and the Hittite, and
the Perizzite, and the Canaanite, the Hivite and the Jebusite:
and I will cut them off. 24. Thou shalt not bow down to their
gods, nor serve them nor do after their works, but thou shalt
utterly overthrow them and break in pieces their pillars.) 25.
But you shall serve Vahweh your God and he shall bless thy bread
and thy water, and I will keep sickness far from thy midst. 26.
There shall none cast her young or be barren in thy land, the num-
ber of thy days will I complete. 27. I will send my terror before
thee and will throw into confusion all the people to whom thou shalt
come, and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs to thee. 28.
And I will send the hornet before thee which shall drive out the
Livite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite from before thee. 29. [ will
not drive them out from before thee in one year, lest the land be-
come, desolate and the beast of the field multiply against thee. 30.
by little and little, I will drive them out before thee, until thou be
increased and inherit the land. 31. And I will set thy border
Srom the Red Sea to the Sea of the Philistines and from the wil-
derness to the river [Euphrates], (for I will deliver the inhabitants
of the land into your hand, and thou shalt drive them out before
thee. 32. Thou shalt make no covenant with them or with their
gods. 33. They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee
sin against me).

XXIV. 1. And he said to Moses, ‘Go up to Yahweh, thou

1 “And he said to Moses, Go up to Yahweh.’ Moses had gone up long ago
(xx. 21), and had just received the ‘Book of the Covenant.’ Therefore this
verse and 2, 9-11, which go with it, have no connection with the ‘ Book of the
Covenant,’ but are connected with xix. 13%, 20-25. These verses are a
fragment of a story according to which not only Moses but also the elders
and priests ascended the mountain and partook of a meal provided by
Yahweh, whom they saw. How offensive this anthropomorphism was to a
later age appears from the manner in which the Lxx. have altered the verse in
question, and from the flat contradiction of them in Deut. iv. 12, 15. It is
impossible to say in what connection these fragments originally stood. On
the other hand, we have in 3-8 the conclusion of the covenant in immediate
connection with chapter xxiii.
150 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXoD. XXIV, 2

and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu and seventy of the elders of Israel,
and you shall bow down afar off: 2. and Moses alone shall come
near to Yahweh, and they shall not approach, and the people shall
not coup with him. 3. And Moses came and told the people all
the words of Yahweh and al the judgments, and all the people
answered with one voice and said,‘ All the words which Yahweh
has spoken we will do. 4. And Moses wrote all the words of
Yahweh, and earl in the morning he built an altar under the
mountain, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of
Israel. 5. And he sent young men' of the children of Israel and
they offered burnt-offerings and sacrificed peace-offerings of oxen to
Yahweh. 6. And Moses took half the blood and put it in basins and
half the blood he sprinkled on the altar. 7. And he took the book
of the covenant and read in the ears of the people, and they said,
‘All that Yahweh has spoken will we do and be obedient’ 8.
And Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people and said,
‘Behold, the blood of the covenant which Vahweh has made with
you on the basis of all these words. 9. And Moses and Aaron,
Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up,
to. and saw the God of Israel, and there was under his feet as it
were a paved work of sapphire stone and as the very heaven for
clearness. 11. But upon the nobles [?] of the children of Israel he
did not lay his hand, and they saw God and ate and drank. 12.
And Yahweh said to Moses, * Come up to me to the mountain and
be there, and [ will give thee the tables of stone (and the law and
the commandment which I have written to teach them.)? 13.
And Moses rose up and Joshua his minister, and Moses went up to

1 ©Young men.’ So that the author of this verse seems to have believed
that then there were no official priests. Contrast xix. 22, 24 (probably by
the Jahvist).

2 €And the law and the commandment which I have written to teach
them.’ What were ‘the law and the commandment’ here distinguished from
the tables of stone? Not the ‘ Book of the Covenant,’ which was written by
Moses, not by Yahweh. Dillmann rightly refuses to regard the clause as
any part of the original text. Much is to be said for Kuenen’s theory that
we have the original form of the clause in Deut. v. 27: ‘Stand thou
XXXII. 5] THE MOLTEN CALF I5t

the mountain of God. 14. And he said to the elders,1 ‘Do you
tarry here for us, till we return to you, and, behold, Aaron and
fur are with you: whosoever has a cause, let him come near to
them. 15. And Moses went up to the mountain. 16. And
Moses was in the mountain forty days and forty nights. XXXI.
18. And he gave to Moses the two tables, tables of stone written
with the finger of God.

XXXII? 1. And when the people saw that Moses delayed to
come down from the mountain, the people gathered themselves
together to Aaron, and said to him. ‘ Up, make us a god who shall
go before us ; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out
of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of him. 2.
And Aaron said to them, ‘ Break off the golden rings which are in
the ears of your wives, your sons and your daughters, and bring
them to me. 3. And all the poople broke off the golden rings which
were in their ears and brought them to Aaron, 4. And he re-
ceived it at their hand and fashioned it with a graving tool and
made it a molten calf: and they said, ‘ This is thy God, O Israel,
who brought thee forth from the land of Egypt’? 5. And when

here by me and I will speak to thee, all the commandments and the statutes
and the judgments which thou shalt teach them.’ Thus we understand why
Moses had to tarry on the mount so long a time as forty days. He received
the ‘judgments’ which compose the ‘Book of the Covenant’ on Mount
Horeb, though he did not impart them to the people till much later.

1 “Elders.? Some critics, e.g. Kittel, conjecture that we should read
‘people.’ Certainly it seems strange to take for granted that strife would
break out among the elders.

? xxxii. The idolatry of the people and its punishment. The fact that
we have here a composite narrative is not questioned. Further, it is agreed
that 15-20 (at least with slight exceptions) must on linguistic grounds be
assigned to the Elohist. (See Kuenen, Onderz. 1. § 8. 13.) Kuenen seems to
be right in holding that 1-6 and 35 are connected in sense with 15-20.
According to these verses, Moses and Joshua, as they are coming down from
Mount Horeb, hear the tumult of the people. Joshua thinks the sound is the
shout of war, but Moses divines its real meaning, breaks the tables in his
indignation, and afterwards destroys the calf which Aaron has made. Yahweh
destroys 3000 of the people. This story cannot well be earlier than the reign
of Hezekiah, and points indeed to a date later than 722, when Samaria was
destroyed. Then the old worship of Yahweh under the form of a calf, long
152 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. XXXII. 6

Aaron saw [this], he built an altar before it and Aaron made pro-
clamation and said, ‘ To-morrow ts a feast of Yahweh. 6. And
early on the next day they offered burnt-offerings and brought peace-
offerings, and the people sat down to cat and drink and rose up to
play.

7. And Yahweh spoke to Moses, ‘Go get thee down, for thy
people, which thou broughtest up out of the land of Egypt, have
done corruptly. 8. They have turned aside quickly out of the
way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten
calf and they have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it, and
have said, “‘This is thy God, O Israel, who brought thee forth
from the land of Egypt.”’ g. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘I have
seen this people, and, behold, it is astiffnecked people. 10. And
now let me alone, that my anger may be hot against them and
that I may consume them, and I will make of thee a great nation.’
11. And Moses besought Yahweh his God and he said, ‘ Why, O
Yahweh, is thine anger hot against thy people which thou hast
brought forth from the land of Egypt with great power and with
a mighty hand? 12. Why should the Egyptians speak, saying,
“For evil did he bring them forth to slay them in the mountains
and to consume them from the face of the ground. Turn from
the heat of thine anger and repent of the evil against thy people.
13. Remember Abraham, and Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to

maintained by kings and Levitical priests (Judges xviil. 30) received its
death-blow, and the prophetical doctrine that Yahweh was to be worshipped
without images prevailed. This story being complete in itself, it follows that
7-14, in which Yahweh tells Moses on the mountain that the people have
fallen into idolatry, and in which Moses obtains pardon for them, is an inter-
polation. It is inconsistent with the fact that in 15-20 Moses and Joshua
discover the sin of the people, evidently for the first time, by the evidence of
their senses, and with the vengeance of Yahweh in ver. 35. The story of the
massacre of the idolaters by the Levites and the consequent consecration of
the Levites to the priesthood (21-29) is a still later interpolation. The
author wished to vindicate the character of the priestly order, and in doing so
fell into hopeless variance with the original story that their chief was respon-
sible for the idolatry, and that Yahweh himself undertook the punishment.
He also ignores the former interpolation (7-14), according to which the sin
had been already forgiven.
XXXIL 27] THE MOLTEN CALF 153

whom thou didst swear by thyself and didst say to them, “I will
multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens, and all this land
that I have spoken of I will give to your seed, and they shall in-
herit it for ever.”’ 14. And Yahweh repented of the evil which
he said he would do to his people.

15. And Moses turned and went down, with the two tables in
his hand, tables that were written on both their sides ; on this side
and on that were they written. 16. And the lables were the work
of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven on the
tables. 17. And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they
shouted, he said to Moses, ‘ There is u noise of war in the camp.
18. And he said, ‘It is no sound from the voice of them that pre-
vail, and no answering sound from the voice of them that are beaten
down: it is the sound of singing that I hear? 19. And it came to
pass that when he came near the camp, that he saw the calf and
the dancing ; and Moses’ anger grew hot, and he cast the tables out
of his hands, and broke them beneath the mountain. 20. And he
took the calf which they had made and burnt it with fire, and
ground it to powder, and strewed it on the water, and made the
children of Israel drink. 21. And Moses said to Aaron, ‘ What
has this people done to thee, that thou hast brought a great sin
upon them?’ 22. And Aaron said, ‘Let not the anger of my
lord grow hot : thou knowest the people that it is [sunk] in evil.
23. And they said to me, ‘Make us a god who shall go before
us ; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the
land of Egypt, we know not what has become of him.” 24. And
I said to them, “‘ Whosoever has any gold, let them break it off :”
so they gave it to me, and I cast it in the fire and there came out
this calf.’ 25. And when Moses saw that the people were broken
loose ; for Moses had let them loose for a derision among their
enemies ; 26. then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and
said, ‘Whoso is on the side of Yahweh, [let him come] to me.’
And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together to him.
27. And he said to them, ‘Thus says Yahweh the God of Israel,
“Put you every man his sword on his thigh, and go to and fro
154 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXop. XXXII. 28

from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his
brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neigh-
bour.”’ 28. And the sons of Levi did according to the word of
Moses, and there fell of the people that day about three thousand
men. 29. And Moses said, ‘Fill your hand to-day [with an
offering] to Yahweh, for every man has been against his son
and against his brother; and [do this] that a blessing may be
bestowed on you this day.’ 30. And it came to pass on the
morrow that Moses said to the people, ‘You have sinned a great
sin, and now I will go up to Yahweh: perhaps I shall make
atonement for your sin.’ 31. And Moses returned to Yahweh
and said, ‘ Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made
themselves a god of gold. 32. Yet now if thou wilt forgive their
sin ; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of the book which
thou hast written.’ 33. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Whosoever
has sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. 34. And
now go, lead the people to [the place] of which I have spoken to
thee: behold, mine angel shall go before thee, but in the day
when I visit,! I will visit their sin upon them.’ 35. Aud Yahweh
smote the people because they made the calf which Aaron made.
XXXII. 1.2 And Yahweh spoke to Moses, ‘ Depart, go up
hence, thou and the people which thou hast brought up out of the
land of Egypt, to the land of which I sware to Abraham, to Isaac,
and to Jacob, saying, To thy seed will I give it: 2. and Z will

 

1 “In the day when I visit.’ This may refer to the fall of Samaria in B.C. 722.

% xxxili. 1-6. Wellhausen, Dillmann, Kuenen, Kittel, all see traces
of the Elohist here. According to Dillmann’s excellent analysis, the
narrative of the Elohist ran thus: God calls the people to leave Horeb for
Canaan, and promises to send his angel (so LXx. in ver. 2) according to his
promise in xxiii. 20. The people mourn because they are to leave the
mountain of God, and put off their ornaments in which they have kept feast
before the ark and ‘tent of meeting.’ An interpolator has expanded the
text (comp. 2° with xxxii. 13, also an interpolation); and in ver. 3, which
breaks the connection and even the grammar, he has introduced an entirely
foreign idea. Instead of identifying the ‘angel’ with the presence of Yahweh,
he distinguishes between the two, and in the teeth of xxiii. 20 he represents
the presence of the angel as a punishment connected with the fall into idolatry.
XXXII. 11] THE TENT OF MEETING 155

send my angel before thee, and he will drive out! the Canaanite,
the Amorite and the Hittite, and the Perizzite and the Hivite
and the Jebusite: 3. to a land flowing with milk and honey ;
for I will not go up in the midst of thee, for thou art a stiffnecked
people, lest I consume thee in the way.’ 4. And when the
people heard these evil tidings, they mourned, and no man put
his ornaments uponhim. 5. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Say to
the children of Israel, You are a stiff-necked people: if I go up
into the midst of thee for one moment, I will consume thee; there-
fore now put off thine ornaments from thee, that I may know what
to do to thee.’ 6. And the children of Israel stripped themselves
of their ornaments from Mount Horeb and onwards.

7.2 Now Moses used to take the tent and to pitch it for him?
without the camp, far off from the camp ; and he called it the tent
of meeting. And it came to pass that every one who inquired of
Yahweh went out to the tent of meeting which was without the
camp. 8. And it came to pass that as Moses went out to the tent
that all the people arose and stood, every man at his tent-door, and
gazed after Moses, till he was gone into the tent. 9. And it came
to pass, when Moses entered into the tent, that the pillar of cloud
descended and stood at the door of the tent and spoke with Moses.
10. And all the people saw the pillar of the cloud stand at the door
of the tent, and all the people rose and bowed down, every man at
his tent-door. 11. And Vahweh spoke to Moses face to face, as a
man speaks to his friend. And he returned to the camp ; but his
minister Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, did not depart out
of the tent.

1 ¢He will drive out.’ So Lxx.

2 xxxill. 7-11. The erection of the tent of meeting. Undoubtedly a
fragment of the Elohist. He no doubt also mentioned here the making of
the ark, to which he refers shortly afterwards. Observe that his notions of
worship are in contrast to those of later times. The tent of meeting is out-
side the camp, it is not guarded by Levites, much less by the sons of Aaron
but by Joshua, ‘the minister’ of Moses (comp. for the same phrase, which is
characteristic of the Elohist, xxiv. 13).

3 ¢ For him,’ 7.e. for Yahweh ; or perhaps ‘ for it,’ ze. for the ark.
156 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [EXOD, XXXIII.12

12.1 And Moses said to Yahweh, ‘See, thou sayest to me,
Bring up this people: and thou hast not let me know whom thou
wilt send with me. Yet thou hast said, I know thee by name,
and thou hast also found grace in my sight. 13. Now, therefore,
I pray thee, if I have found grace in thy sight, teach me now thy
ways, that I may know thee, in order that I may find grace in thy
sight : and consider that this nation is thy people.’ 14. And he
said, ‘My presence shall go, and I will give thee rest.’ 15. And
he said to him, ‘If thy presence go not, carry us not up hence.
16. For, wherein now shall it be known that I have found grace
in thy sight, Iand thy people? Is it not in thy going with us,
so that we be distinguished, I and thy people, from all the people
that are on the face of the earth?’ 17. And Yahweh said to
Moses, ‘I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken, for thou
hast found grace in my sight, and I have known thee by name.’
18. And he said, ‘Shew me now thy glory.’ 19. And he said,
‘T will make all my beauty pass before thee, and IJ will proclaim
the name of Yahweh before thee, and I will deal graciously with
him to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on him to
whom I will shew mercy.’ 20. And he said, ‘Thou canst not
see my face, for man cannot see me and live.’ 21. And Yahweh
said, ‘ Behold, there is a place beside me, and thou shalt stand on
the rock: 22. and it shall come to pass, while my glory passes
by, that I will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cover thee
with my hand, till I have passed by, 23. and I will take away
my hand, and thou shalt see my back; but my face shall not be
seen.’

XXXIV. 1.2 And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Hew for thyself

1 12-23. In this section two accounts are confused ; (1) the desire of
Moses that Yahweh himself will go with the Israelites ; (2) the desire of
Moses to see Yahweh. Dillmann assigns the whole section to the Jahvist,
allowing, however, for transposition. There are really no sure signs of
authorship. Of account (2) xxxiv. 2, 6-8 seem to form a part.

2 xxxiv. 1-27. Here, at least in 10-27, a new element enters. The
Decalogue and the Book of the Covenant have been given, and Moses has
gone up the mount merely that Yahweh may renew the writing of the
XXXIV. 10] THE WORDS OF THE COVENANT 157

two tables of stones like the first, and I will write on the tables
the words which were on the first tables which thou didst break.
2. And be ready by the morning, and come up in the morning to
Mount Sinai and present thyself there to me at the top of the
mountain. 3. And no man shall come up with thee, neither let
any man be seen throughout all the mountain, neither let the
flocks or herds feed before all that mountain’ 4. And he hewed
two tables of stones like the first, and early in the morning Moses
went up to Mount Sinai, as Yahweh had commanded him, and
took in his hand two tables of stones. 5. And Yahweh de-
scended in the cloud, and he stood with him there and called on
the name of Yahweh. 6. And Yahweh passed by before him,
and proclaimed, ‘Yahweh, Yahweh, a compassionate and
gracious God, slow to anger and plenteous in mercy and truth,
7. keeping kindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and trans-
gression and sin, but one that will by no means clear [the guilty],
visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the
children’s children to the third and fourth generation.’ 8. And
Moses made haste to incline himself and bow down. 9. And he
said, ‘If now I have found grace in thine eyes, my Lord, let my
Lord go, I pray, in the midst of us, for it is a stiffnecked people :
and pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for thine inheri-
tance.’ 1o. And he said, ‘ Behold, I make a covenant; before all
thy people I will do marvels, such as have not been created in all
the earth nor in any nation; and all the people in the midst of

Decalogue. Instead of this, Yahweh makes a covenant without the slightest
reference to any former one, and the ‘ words of the Covenant,’ which follow,
closely resemble the ritual portions in the ‘ Book of the Covenant.’ Now, as
the Decalogue and ‘ Book of the Covenant’ come to us from the Elohist, it is
natural to assign the ‘words of the Covenant’ to the Jahvist. Moreover,
many critics (e.g. Wellhausen), adopting a suggestion of Goethe, have tried to
disentangle ten ‘words of the Covenant,’ answering to the ‘ten words’ or
decalogue of the Elohist. This, however, is mere guesswork, and we must
content ourselves with the probability that we have fragments of the Jahvist
here. Of course Wellhausen, who attributes the ‘ Book of the Covenant’ to
the Jahvist, is forced to imagine a third author for the ‘words of the Covenant.’
158 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [Exop. XXXIV. II-27

which thou art, shall see the work of Yahweh, for it is a terrible
thing that I do with thee. 11. Observe thou that which I com-
mand thee this day: behold, I drive out before thee the Amorite
and the Canaanite and the Hittite, and the Perizzite and the Hivite
and the Jebusite. 12. Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a
covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest :
13. but you shall break down their altars and dash in pieces their
pillars and cut down the Asherahs:! 14. for thou shalt bow
down to no other god, for Yahweh, whose name is jealous, is a
jealous God. 15. See that thou make not a covenant with the
inhabitants of the land, so that they go a whoring after other
gods, and sacrifice to their gods, and one call thee and thou eat
of his sacrifice: 16. and thou take of their daughters for their
sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods and cause
thy sons to go a whoring after their gods. 17. Thou shalt not
make for thyself molten gods. 18. The feast of unleavened
bread shalt thou keep: seven days shalt thou eat unleavened
bread, as I commanded thee at the appointed time in the month
Abib, for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt.
1g. All that opens the womb is mine, and all thy male cattle,?
[namely,] the firstlings of cow and sheep. 20. And the firstling
of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb, and, if thou wilt not
redeem it, thou shalt break its neck.

21. ‘Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh day thou

1 Asherahs, wooden poles erected like the ‘ pillar’ of stone by the side of
the altar, and sometimes apparently (1 Kings xv. 13) carved into an image.
It is generally assumed (e.g. by Bathgen, Semz¢. Relig., p. 218) that this
symbol was proper to the goddess Astarte. But of this no proof has been
given. Still less can it be taken for granted (with Riehm, Bid/. H.-I1,-B.,
p- 112; Baudissin, S¢ad. ii. p. 212) that Asherah was the name of a goddess.
The symbol may have been common to many deities, and the resemblance
between the words Asherah and Astarte may be accidental. For an inde-
pendent derivation of Asherah, see Robertson Smith, Set. Relig., p. 172.
At the same time Asherah is certainly treated as a divine name in Judges iii.
7, 1 Kings xviii. 19. But the former passage is of late date, the other is
interpolated (see Budde, Richter u. Sam., p. 933 Stade, Gesch. Isr., i. 526).

2 «Male cattle.’ The usual correction of the text has been accepted.
NUM. X. 29-32] MOSES ASKS HOBAB TO ACT AS GUIDE 159

shalt rest: in ploughing and in harvest thou shalt rest. 22. And
thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat
harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the turn of the year. 23.
Three times in the year shall all thy males appear before the
Lord Yahweh, the God of Israel. 24. For I will cast out nations
before thee, and enlarge thy border; and no man will desire thy
land, when thou goest up to appear before Yahweh thy God three
times in the year. 25. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my
sacrifice with leavened bread, and the sacrifice of the feast of
Passover shall not be left till the morning. 26. The first-
lings, the firstfruits of thy ground, shalt thou bring to the house of
Yahweh thy God: thou shalt not boil a kid in its mother’s milk.’

27. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Write thou these words, for
according to the tenor of these words I have made a covenant
with thee and with Israel.’ 28. And he was there with Yahweh
forty days and forty nights, he neither ate bread nor drank water :
and he wrote on the tables the ten words, the words of the
covenant.

Numbers X. 29.1 And Moses said to Hobab, son of Reuel,
the Midianite, Moses’ father-in-law, ‘We are journeying to the
place of which Yahweh said, I will give it you: come thou with
us and we will do thee good, for Yahweh has spoken good con-
cerning Israel.’ 30. And he said to him, ‘I will not go, but I
will depart to my own land and to my kindred.’ 31. And he
said, ‘Leave us not, I pray thee, for thou knowest how we are
to encamp in the wilderness, and thou shalt be to us instead of
eyes. 32. And it shall be, if thou wilt go with us, it shall be
that the good which Yahweh shall do to us, we will do to
thee. . .

1 Numbers x. 29-32 is by the Jahvist. It is he who calls Moses’s father-
in-law Hobab (see note on Exod. i. ii.), whereas the Elohist calls him Jethro
or Jether. Here as elsewhere, e.g. in the history of the plagues, the Jahvist
leaves large room for natural causes. The Jahvist must have represented
Hobab as consenting at last to go with the Israelites, for a clan claiming
descent from him settled among the Israelites (Judges i. 16, iv. 11)!
160 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. X. 33

33.1 And they journeyed from the mountain of Yahweh three
days ; and the ark of the covenant of Yahweh went before them
during a journey of three days, to spy out a resting-place for
them. 34. And the cloud of Yahweh was over them by day
when they set forward from the camp. 35. And it came to pass,
when the ark set forward, that Moses said—

‘ Arise, Yahweh, and let thine enemies be scattered,
And let them that hate thee flee before thee.’
36. And when it rested, he said—

‘Return, Yahweh, to the myriads of the thousands of Israel.’

XI. 1.2 And the people were as murmurers over evil in the ears
of Yahweh ; and when Yahweh heard it, his anger was kindled ;
and the fire of Yahweh burnt among them, and devoured at the
end of the camp. 2. And the people cried to Moses, and Moses
prayed to Yahweh, and the fire abated. 3. And the name of that
place was called Taberah, because the fire of Yahweh burnt
among them.

4. And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a
lusting and the children of Israel also wept again and said,
‘Who will give us flesh to eat? 5. Weremember the fish which

 

1 33-36. The verses which are quoted here contain the ancient view of
the ark. In it Yahweh lived, so that when the ark went out to war, it was
Yahweh himself who went out to fight; when the ark returned, Yahweh
returned. Comp. especially 1 Sam. iv.

2 Ch. xi. It is clear and admitted by Dillman, no less than by Kuenen,
that this chapter, from ver. 4 to the end, is not by one hand. We have A,
the story of the quails. The people, weary of the manna, cry out for flesh.
Yahweh sends it, but is angry and destroys the Israelites by plague. So
4-13, 30-33: B, the story of the subordinate officers appointed to help Moses,
and endowed with the spirit of prophecy—so 14, 16, 17, 24>-30. Kuenen
attributes A to the Jahvist, B to the Elohist ; 18-24% being a later expansion
of A by the editor, who united the Elohist with the Jahvist document.

This theory has weighty arguments in its favour. With regard to A, the
prominence of natural causes, and particularly of the wind, speak for the
Jahvist. Compare his story of the locusts, Exod x. 13, 19, and of the passage
of the Red Sea, Ex. xiv. 21. An examination of the language tells in the
same direction, and Dillmann is at one with Kuenen, at least as to the author-
ship of 4-6, 10-13. With regard to B, the stress laid on the prophetic dignity
XI. 15] THE CRAVING FOR FLESH MEAT 161

we ate in Egypt for nothing, the cucumbers, and the melons, and
the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic,’ 6. but now our soul is
dried away : there is nothing at all: we have only this manna
to look to. 7. And the manna was like coriander seed, and its
appearance as the appearance of bdellium. 8. The people went
about and gathered it, and ground it in mills, or beat it in mor-
tars, and boiled it in pots and made it into cakes; and its taste
was like the taste of cakes baked with oil. 9. And when the
dew fell on the camp by night, the manna fell with it. to.
And Moses heard the people weeping throughout their families,
every man at the door of his tent, and the anger of Yahweh was
kindled greatly, and in the eyes of Moses it was evil. 11. And
Moses said to Yahweh, ‘Why hast thou done evil to thy slave?
and why have I not found grace in thy sight, that thou layest
the burden of all this people on me? 12. Havel conceived all
this people? or have I brought them forth, that thou shouldst
say to me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing-father carries
the sucking child, to the land which thou swarest to their
fathers? 13. Whence should I have flesh to give to all this
people? For they weep to me, saying, Give us flesh, that we

of Moses (comp. Gen. xx. 7), the ‘tent of meeting’ and its position (comp.
Exod. xxxiii, 7-11, and Num. xii.), testify to Elohist authorship. Here,
however, the difficulty arises, that the Elohist has already in Exod. xviii.
accounted for the appointment of subordinate officers. There the account is
far more simple and natural. They are appointed at the suggestion of Jethro.
Here they are endowed with the prophetic spirit, and Moses wishes that all
Yahweh’s people were prophets. This conception was strange to earlier
times, for Saul’s prophesying was thought extraordinary, but it is in harmony
with a conception which appears at the end of the seventh or beginning of
the sixth century B.c., viz., in Jeremiah xxxi. 31-33; Ezek. xi. 19 seg., and
still later in Joel iii. 1. Consequently Kuenen attributes B to a later editor
of the Elohist document, who supplemented it when it was still a separate
book. Lastly, in 18-24%, we have a later addition to A. In this§ the people
are to eat flesh till they loathe it. In the sequel they do nothing of the kind,
but are killed by Yahweh before they can chew the flesh which he gives
them. Dillmann assigns 4-29 (except 7-9), ze. the whole of B, save one
verse, and much of A to the Jahvist, and suggests that two stories of his on
the quails and on the seventy elders have been pieced together by an editor.
L
162 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XI. 14

may eat. 14. 7am not able to bear all this people alone, for it is
too heavy for me. 15. And if thou deal thus with me, Kill me,
I pray thee, out of hand, if I have found grace in thine eyes.’

16. And Vahweh said to Moses, ‘ Gather to me seventy men of
the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people,
and officers over them, and thou shalt bring them to the tent of
meeting, that they may stand there with thee. 17. And L will come
down, and talk with thee there ; and Iwill take of the spirit which
ts upon thee, and will put it on them, and they shall bear the
burden of the people with thee, that thou bear tt not thyself alone.’

18. ‘And to the people thou shalt say, Sanctify yourselves for
to-morrow and you shall eat flesh, for you have wept in the ears
of Yahweh, saying, ‘‘ Who shall give us flesh to eat ? for it was well
with us in Egypt.” Therefore Yahweh shall give you flesh, and
you shalleat. 19. You shall not eat one day, or two days, or five
days, or ten days, or twenty days, 20. but a whole month, till it
come out at your nostrils, and is loathsome to you, because you
have rejected Yahweh who is among you, and have wept before
him, saying, “ Why did we come forth from Egypt?”’ 21. And
Moses said, ‘The people among whom I am are six hundred thou-
sand footmen and thou hast said, I will give them flesh, that they
may eat a whole month. 22. Shall flocks and herds be slain for
them, to suffice them? or shall all the fish of the sea be gathered
together for them, to suffice them?’ 23. And Yahweh said to
Moses, ‘Is the hand of Yahweh shortened? Now shalt thou see
whether my word will come to pass or no.’ 24. And Moses
went out and told the people the words of Yahweh.

And he gathered together seventy men of the elders of the people,
and set them round about the tent. 25. And Yahweh came down
in the cloud and talked to him, and took of the spirit that was
upon him and put tt upon the seventy elders: and it came to pass
that when the spirit rested on them, they prophesied, but did so no
more. 26. But there remained two men in the camp, the name of
the one was Eldad, and the name of the second was Medad: and the
spirit rested on them; now they were of them that were written, but
had not gone out to the tent: and they were prophesying in the
XI 5] ELDAD AND MEDAD. THE QUAILS 163

camp. 27. And there ran a young man and told Moses, and
said, ‘ Eldad and Medad are prophesyiug in the camp.” 28. And
Joshua the son of Nun who ministered to Moses from his youth,
answered and said, ‘My lord Moses, forbid them. 29. And
Moses said to him,‘ Art thou jealous for me? Would that all
Vahweh’s people were prophets, that Vahweh would put his spirit
upon them! 30. And Moses got him to the camp, he and all the
elders of Israel.

31. And there went forth a wind from Yahweh, and brought
quails from the sea, and let them fall by the camp about a day’s
journey on this side and a day’s journey on the other side,
round about the camp, and above two cubits above the face of
the earth. 32. And the people rose up all that day and all the
night, and all the next day, and gathered the quails: he that
gathered least gathered ten homers, and they spread them all
abroad for themselves round about the camp. 33. While the
flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the anger
of Yahweh was kindled against the people and Yahweh smote
the people with a very great plague. 34. And they called the
name of that place Kibroth-hattaavah, because there they buried
the people that lusted. 35. From Kibroth-hattaavah the people
journeyed to Hazeroth, and they abode at Hazeroth.

XII. 1.1 And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because
of the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had married
a Cushite woman. 2. And they said, ‘Has Yahweh indeed
Spoken only with Moses? Has he not spoken also with us? And
Yahweh heard. 3. Now the man Moses was very meek above all
the men that were on the face of the earth. 4. And Vahweh said
suddenly to Moses and to Aaron and to Miriam, ‘Come out,
you three, to the tent of meeting” And they three came out. 5. And
Yahweh came down in a pillar of cloud, and stood at the door of

1 xii, I-15. Itis generally admitted that this § comes substantially from
the Elohist document. The reflection on the nature and grades of prophecy
mark a late date, and, like xi. 24-30, it belongs to a secondary stage of that
document. It is at least doubtful, however, whether the statement in ver. I
about the Cushite wife of Moses has anything to do with the rest of the story.
164 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY  [NUM. XII. 6

the tent, and called Aaron and Miriam and they both came forth.
6. And he said,‘ Hear now my word: if there be a prophet among
you, T will make myself known to him ina vision, [will speak to
him in a dream. 7. Not so my servant Moses: he ts faithful in
all my house. 8. IVith him will I speak mouth to mouth, openly,’
and not in dark speeches, and the form of Yahweh shall he behold.
Wherefore then were you not afraid to speak against my servant
Moses? 9. And the anger of Yahweh was kindled against them,
and he departed. to. And the cloud removed from over the tent,
and, behold, Miriam was white as snow with leprosy ; and Aaron
looked on Miriam and, behold, she was leprous. 11. And Aaron
said to Moses,‘ O my lord, lay not, J pray thee, upon us the penalty
of a sin, wherein we have done foolishly and which we have com-
mitted. 12. Let her not, I pray, be as one dead, of whom the flesh
ts half consumed when he comes out of his mothers womb. 13. And
Moses cricd to Vahweh, saying, ‘ Not so,? I beseech thee: heal her, I
beseech thee. 14. And Vahweh said to Moses, ‘If her father had
but spit in her face, should she not be put to shame seven days?
Let her be shut up without the camp seven days and after that she
shall be brought in again. 15. And Miriam was shut up without
the camp seven days, and the people journeyed not till Miriam was
brought in again.

16. And afterwards the people journeyed from Hazeroth, and

pitched in the wilderness of Paran.
. . XIII. 17.e4 And he said to them, ‘Go up into the

1 «J will make myself known.’ The teat, as it stands, is ungrammatical,
and Dillmann’s correction of it has been adopted.

2 “Openly.” This sense can only be justified,fif we follow the reading
of Lxx., Syr., Onkelos, But the text, which is confused, seems to need further
emendation.

3 © Not so.’ Read ‘al na’ for ‘ El na,’

4 xiii. 17>-xiv. 45. From Kadesh Moses sends spies into the Negeb or
southern district of Canaan, They go as far as Hebron, a few miles south
of Jerusalem, and bring back grapes and pomegranates as proof of the fertility
of the soil. But they also report that the inhabitants are numerous, and of
giant stature, so that Israel cannot hope to overcome them. Caleb alone
encourages the people. Yahweh in his anger bids the people return towards
XIIL 24] THE HEBREW SPIES 105

Negeb, and go up into the mountain district: 18. and see the
land what it is, and the people that dwells there, whether they
be strong or weak, whether they be few or many: 19. and what
the land is that they dwell in, whether it be good or bad; and
what cities they are that they dwell in, whether in camps or in
strongholds; 20. and what the land is, whether it be fat or lean,
whether there be wood in it or not. And take courage and bring
of the fruit of the land.’ Now the time was the time of the first
ripe grapes. 22. So they went up into the Negeb and came to!
Hebron. And Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, the children of
Anak, were there. Now Hebron was built seven years before
Zoan in Egypt.? 23. And they came to the torrent-bed of
Eshcol, and cut down from thence a branch with one cluster of
grapes and carried it on a pole between two: [they brought] also
some of the pomegranates and the figs. 24. That place was

the Red Sea. They repent, and attack the Canaanites, but the ark of Yahweh
is not with them, and they are defeated. Afterwards the brave Caleb wins
Hebron, and conquers the gigantic foes of whom the other spies had been so
much afraid. (Judges i. 10, 20; Josh. xv. 13; comp. Num. xiii. 23.)

Attempts have been made to separate the component documents, especi-
ally by Wellhausen, Dillmann, Kosters (Aistorie-beschowing van den Deut.,
p- 40, seg), and Meyer (Z. A. 7. for 1881, p. 139 seg.). But the task seems to
be hopeless, and there is nothing like agreement as to results. The follow-
ing points, however, seem to be clearly established, and with respect to these
there is general agreement—(1) The narrative cannot be from one hand. The
repetitions, ¢.g., in 17-20 prove this. At the same time each narrator must
have told almost exactly the same story in similar words. Possibly one nar-
rator may have made the spies go to Eshcol, another to Hebron, but for more
important differences (e.g., for the supposition of Dillmann and Kittel that the
Jahvist made Joshua one of the spies) there is no evidence or even probability.
(2) The vocabulary is on the whole that of the Elohist. (3) The dialogue
between Yahweh and Moses, xiv. 11-25, is a later addition to the original
narrative. Observe the citation from Exod. xxxiv. 6, and the formal reflec-
tion on the character of Yahweh, just as in the interpolated section in Genesis
xvii. 17-33. See note there.

1 Heb. ‘he came,’ but all ancient versions except Onkel. have the plural.

2 “Now Hebron was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt.’ The origin
of the statement is puzzling. Tanis, or Zoan, on the east borders of Lower
Egypt, must have been founded long before the time of the Hyksos, for its
existence is testified by monuments of the sixth and twelfth dynasty. (Brugsch.
Gesch, Algypt, p. 94, p. 132.)
166 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XIII. 26

called the torrent-bed of Eshcol because of the cluster which the
children of Israel cut down from thence. 26.1 (And they went]
to Kadesh and brought them back word, and showed them the
fruit of the land. 27. And they told him and said, ‘We came
into the land whither thou didst send us, and certainly it flows
with milk and honey, and this is the fruit of it. 28. Howbeit
the people that dwell in the land are strong, and the cities are
fortified and very great; and moreover, we saw the children of
Anak there. 29. Amalek dwells in the land of the Negeb, and
the Hittite and the Jebusite and the Amorite dwell in the
mountain district, and the Canaanite dwells by the sea and along
the side of the Jordan.’ 30. And Caleb stilled the people before
Moses and said, ‘ Let us go up at once and possess it, for we are
well able to overcome it.’ 31. But the men that went up with
him said, ‘We are not able to go up against the people, for they
are stronger than we; 32.> and all the people that we saw in it
are men of great stature. 33. And there we saw the Nephilim,
the sons of Anak who come of the Nephilim ; and we were in
our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.’
XIV. 1.> And the people wept that night, z. [and said], ‘Would
that we had died in the land of Egypt! or would that we had
died in this wilderness!’ 4. And they said to one another, ‘ Let
us appoint one to be head, and let us return to Egypt. 8. [And
Caleb said], ‘If Yahweh is pleased with us, he will bring us
to this land and give it us, a land which flows with milk and
honey. 9g. Only rebel not against Yahweh, neither fear you the
people of the land, for they are our bread: their shadow has
departed from them and Yahweh is with us: fear them not.’

11- And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ How long will this people
despise me, and how long will they not believe in me for all the
signs which I have done among them? 12. I will smite them
with the pestilence and disinherit them, and I will make of thee

1 26. The text gives the fragments of this verse which belong to the ‘Oldest
Book of Hebrew Ilistory.’
XIV. 40] ISRAELITES EXCLUDED FROM CANAAN 167

a nation greater and mightier than they.’ 13. And Moses said
to Yahweh, ‘But the Egyptians will hear it, because thou
didst bring up this people in thy might from among them; 14.7
nay, all the inhabitants of this land have heard that thou,
Yahweh, art in the midst of this people ; for thou, Yahweh, art one
who has been seen eye to eye, and thy cloud stands over them,
and thou goest before them in a pillar of cloud by day, and in a
pillar of fire by night. 15. Now, if thou shalt kill this people as
one man, then the nations which have heard the fame of thee will
speak, saying, 16. ‘‘ Because Yahweh was not able to bring this
people to the land, which he sware to them, therefore he slew
them in the wilderness.” 17. And now, I pray thee, let the power
of my Lord be great, according as thou hast spoken, saying, 18.
“Yahweh is slow to anger and plenteous in mercy, forgiving
iniquity and transgression, and that will not let [the guilty] go
wholly free, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to
the third and to the fourth generation.” 19. Pardon, I pray
thee, the iniquity of this people according to the greatness of thy
mercy, and according as thou hast forgiven this people from Egypt
until now.’ 20. And Yahweh said, ‘I have pardoned according
to thy word. 21.-But as surely as I live, and as surely as the
whole earth will be filled with my glory, 22. so surely none of
the men who saw my glory and my signs which I did in Egypt
and in the wilderness, and yet have tempted me these ten times,
and have not hearkened to my voice, 23. shall see the land which
I sware to their fathers, neither shall any of them that despised
me see it; 24. but my servant Caleb, because he had another
spirit and has followed me fully—him will I bring to the land to
which he came and his seed shall. possess it. 25. Now, the
Amalekite and the Canaanite dwell in the valley: to-morrow
turn and get you into the wilderness by the way of the Red Sea.’
39. And Moses told these words to all the children of Israel and
the people mourned greatly. 40. And early in the morning they

1 14. The construction is involved, and the translation given uncertain.
168 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XIV. 41

went up to the top of the mountain, saying, ‘ Behold, we are here,
ready to go up to the place that Yahweh has promised ; for we
have sinned.’ 41. And Moses said, ‘Why now do you trans-
gress the commandment of Yahweh, seeing it shall not prosper ?
42. Go not up, for Yahweh is not among you, that you be not
struck down before your enemies. 43. For there the Amalekite
and the Canaanite are before you, and you shall fall by the
sword, forasmuch as you have turned back from following
Yahweh: therefore Yahweh will not be with you.’ 44. But they
presumed to go up to the top of the mountain: nevertheless the
ark of the covenant of Yahweh and Moses did not move from the
camp. 45. Then the Amalekite came down and the Canaanite
who dwelt in the mountain, and smote them and beat them down
as far as Hormah.

XVI. 1.1 Now there rose up Dathan and Abiram, sons of
Eliab, son of Pallu, son of Reuben, 2. men of renown, under
the eyes of Moses. 12. And Moses sent to call Dathan and
Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and they said, ‘We will not come up.
13. Is it a small thing that thou hast brought us up out of a land

1 xvi. I-34. Dathan and Abiram, both Reubenites, rebel against the
secular authority of Moses. The earth opens and swallows them up with all
that is theirs. The narrative is clear and consistent. Kuenen attributes the
narrative to the Elohist, and it undoubtedly presents close resemblances to
his style, but there are, as Kuenen admits, traces of another hand. Here and
there also there is some difficulty in separating the narrative before us from
that of the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ to which it is united. Verse 1 is corrupt. We
have the verb ‘took’ without any object to follow it, so that the sentence
is unintelligible. The emendation ‘arose’ is generally accepted. In the
same verse On is mentioned, though nothing is said of him in the sequel.
The emendation of Graf (Gesch. Biicher., p. 89). viz. : ‘Dathan and Abiram,
sons of Eliab, son of Pallu’ (comp. Gen. xlvi. 9; Ex. vi. 14; Num. xxvi.
5,83 1 Chron. v. 3) is followed by most critics, and is given in the text.
In vw. 1, 2, I have followed Noldeke in determining the precise words
which belong to our narrative, and in ver. 26 I have substituted ‘ children
of Israel’ for ‘congregation.’ The latter word is characteristic of the
‘Priestly Writer,’ and its presence in this verse must be due to the final
editor of the Pentateuch. Making allowance for a few doubtful words,
the text undoubtedly gives the story as told in the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew
History,’ and read by the author of Deut. xi. 6.
XX. 34 DATHAN AND ABIRAM REBEL 169

flowing with milk and honey to kill us in the wilderness, but thou
must also make thyself a prince over us? 14. Moreover, thou
hast not brought us into a land flowing with milk and honey, nor
given us inheritance of fields and vineyards. Wilt thou put out
the eyes of these men? We will not come up.’ 15.% [And
Moses said], ‘I have not taken one ass from them, neither have I
hurt one of them.’ 25. And Moses rose up and went to Dathan
and Abiram, and the elders of Israel followed him. 26. And he
spoke to the [children of Israel], saying, ‘Depart, I pray you,
from the tents of these wicked men and touch nothing of theirs,
lest you be swept away because of all their sins.’ 27. And
Dathan and Abiram came out and stood at the door of their
tents, with their wives and their sons and their little ones. 28.
And Moses said, ‘ Hereby shall you know that Yahweh has sent
me to do all these works, that [I have] not [done them] out of
my own mind. 29. If these men die the common death of all
men, or if they be visited after the visitation of all men, then
Yahweh has not sent me. 30. But if Yahweh create a new thing
and the ground open its mouth and swallow them up and all
that they have, and they go down alive into Sheol, then you shall
know that these men have despised Yahweh.’ 31. And it came
to pass, as he made an end of speaking all these words, that the
ground was cleft under them. 32% And the earth opened its
mouth and swallowed them and their households. 33. And they
and all that they had went down alive into Sheol, and the earth
closed upon them. 34. And all Israel that were round about
them fled at the cry of them, for they said, ‘Lest the earth
swallow us up.’

XX.1_ 1%, And the people abode in Kadesh, and Miriam
died there, and was buried there. 3%. And the people strove

1 xx. 1-13. Here we have one of the few instances in which the docu-
ments of the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ have been inextricably
entangled, not, as is often the case, with each other, but with the narrative
of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ Both narratives have suffered in the process, and

we can only guess at their full meaning. Apparently the earlier narrator’s
story ran thus. The people murmured at Kadesh for want of water. Moses,
170 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NuM. XX. 4

with Moses, and said, 4. ‘Why hast thou brought the assembly
of Yahweh into this wilderness, that we should die there, we and
our cattle? 5. And why hast thou made us come up out of
Egypt, to bring us into this evil place? It is no place of seed,
or of vines, or of pomegranates; neither is there any water to
drink.’ 7. And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, 8. ‘Take [thy]
staff and assemble [the people], and bring forth water for them
from the rock and give the [people] and their cattle drink.’ 10>.
And he said to them, ‘ Hear now, ye rebels; shall I bring you
forth water out of this rock?’ 1z. And Moses lifted up his
hand and struck the rock with his rod, and water came forth
abundantly, and the [people] drank and their cattle. 13. These
are the waters of Meribah, because the children of Israel strove
with Yahweh, and he showed himself holy among them.

14.1 And Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the hing of
Ldom, ‘ Thus says thy brother Israel: “ Thou knowest all the
travail that has befallenus: 15. how our fathers went down to
Egypt, and we dwelt in Egypt a long time, and the Egyptians
treated us and our fathers ill: 16. and when we cried to Yahweh,
he heard our voice and sent an angel and brought us forth out of
Egypt, and behold, we are in Kadesh, a city at the edge of thy

at the bidding of Yahweh, struck the rock with his rod and supplied their
want. This story has been mixed up with another in which the people
murmur against Moses and Aaron, and in which the latter, in some way
which cannot be clearly ascertained, offend Yahweh. The text is based
on the careful analysis of Dillmann. It involves the change of a plural
verb into the singular, in vv. 4, 5, besides the excision of the word ‘con-
gregation,’ which has been borrowed by the final editor from the ‘ Priestly
Writer.’ The ‘rod of Moses,’ and the language on the whole, point to
the Elohist. In that case he must have adopted two variants of the same
legend, one here, the other in Exod. xvii. 3-6, just as, e.g., St. Mark, the
earliest evangelist, gives two variants of the miraculous feeding of the multi-
tude by Jesus.

1 14-21. The linguistic arguments for assigning this § to the Elohist are
decisive (see Dillmann, or Kuenen, Onderz. 1. § 8, 14); and the opinion of
Wellhausen that it was written by the Jahvist, may already be considered anti-
quated. Possibly, however, the final words of verse 20 may be from the
Jahvist.
4] ISRAELITES ASK LEAVE TO CROSS EDOM 171

tory: 17. let us pass, I pray thee, through thy land: we
‘not pass through field or vineyard, neither will we drink of
water of the wells: we will go along the kings way, we
not turn aside to the right nor to the left, until we pass
nad thy territory” 18. And Edom said to him, ‘ Thou shalt
pass through me, lest T go out with the sword to meet thee.’
And the children of Israel said to him, ‘We will go up by
high way, and if we drink thy water, [ and my cattle, then
TL give the price of it: only—it is no [great] matter, let me
‘through on my feet” 20. And he said,‘ Thou shalt not pass
ugh:’ and Edom went out to meet him with a numerous
ole and with a strong hand. 21. Thus Edom refused to let
el pass through his territory, and Israel turned away from

XXI. 1.1 Now the Canaanite the king of Arad, who dwelt
ihe Negeb, heard that Israel came by the way of Atharim,
he fought against Israel and took some of them captive. 2.
n Israel vowed a vow to Yahweh, and said, ‘If thou wilt
ed deliver this people into my hand, then will I put their
»s under the ban.’ 3. And Yahweh listened to the voice of
el, and delivered up the Canaanites into their hand,? and
7 put them and their cities under the ban, and the name of
place was called Hormah [7.c. under the ban].

4. And they made a journey by the way of the Red Sea to go
1d the land of Edom,’ and the soul of the people was impatient

xxi. 1-3. Assigned with practical unanimity to the Jahvist. It is he who
‘Canaanite’ as a general name for the earlier inhabitants of Palestine (e.g.,
xil. 6 3 xxiv. 3, 373 xxxiv. 303 xxxvill. 2), while the Elohist uses the
‘ Amorite’ (Gen. xlviii. 22). Besides, the Elohist has already, in Num.
45, mentioned Hormah asa name in use. The Jahvist on the contrary
ies that the name arose from the incident given here.
‘Into their land.” So Lxx. Sam. Syr.
“To go round the land of Edom,’ z.e. because they were not allowed to
hthrough it. This § therefore, z.e. 4-9, is immediately connected with
4-21 (see especially 21). Now as we have in this latter § further instances
lohistic language (e.g. ‘Elohim’ in ver. 5) our conclusions (1) that xx.
t is, (2) that xxi. 1-3, which violently breaks the thread of narrative, is
Tlohistic, are confirmed.
172 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XXII. 5

because of the way. 5. And the people spoke against God and
against Moses, ‘Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die
tn the wilderness? For there ts no bread and no water ; and our
soul loathes this light bread? 6. And Yahweh sent fiery serpents
among the people, and they bit the people, and much people of
Israel died. 7. And the people came to Moses and said, ‘We have
sinned, because we have spoken against Yahweh and agatnst thee:
pray to Yahweh that he may take away the serpents from us.” And
Moses prayed for the people. 8. And Yahweh said to Moses,
‘Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it up on a standard, and it
shall come to pass, that every one who is bitten, when he sees tt,
shall live. 9. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and set it on
the standard ; and tt came to pass, that tf a serpent had bitten
any man, when he looked to the serpent of brass, he lived.

12.2 From thence they journeyed and encamped in the torrent
bed of Zered.

13. From thence they journeyed and encamped on the other side
of the Arnon that ts in the wilderness, which springs from the terrt-
tory of the Amorite, for the Arnon ts the boundary of Moab, between

1 «The serpent of brass.’ The serpent, partly because it casts its skin,
and so seems to renew its youth, was taken as a symbol of health, and
worshipped among Egyptians and Greeks. It was also worshipped, possibly
under the same aspect, by Phcenicians, Babylonians, and Assyrians (Baudiss.
Studien, i. p. 258 seg.). Further, it was worshipped in Judah and apparently
from very ancient times (2 Kings xviii. 4). Just as the Book before us
endeavours to render the old Canaanite shrines harmless not by abolishing
them, but by connecting them with Hebrew monotheism, so here with the
old serpent-worship. The brazen serpent is no longer an object of worship.
It represents Yahweh’s power to make evil as harmless as the brazen image,
it reminds the dying Israelite of his sin and its penalty, and then Yahweh
gives him life.

2 xxi, 12-32. The § 21-30 must be by the same hand as xx. 14-21, the
resemblance of style and structure being so obvious that they cannot be
missed even in an English version. The account, therefore, of Israel’s embassy
to and defeat of Sihon, xxi. 21-30, must be by the Elohist, who, as we saw
above, narrated the embassy to Edom, xx. 14-21. Further, the list of
stations, xxi. 12-20, prepares the way for the incursion into Sihon’s territory,
and both §§ quote old poems in a manner closely similar. It is true that
Israel entered Sihon’s territory the moment he crossed the Arnon, whereas
XXL. 25] CONQUEST OF SIHON’S LAND 173

Moab and the Amorites. 14. Therefore it ts said in the book of
the ‘Wars of Yahweh, [We passed]

‘Waheb in Suphah, and the torrents (that feed] the Arnon,
15. And the slope of the torrent beds that inclines towards the

site of Ar,
And leans on the border of Moab.’

16. And from thence to Beer: that is the well of which
Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Gather the people together and I will give
them water” 17. Then Lsrael sang this song—

‘ Spring up, O well: sing ye to tt,

18. Zhe well which the princes dug, the nobles of the people delved,
With the sceptre, with their staves.’ +

And from Beer* to Mattanah: 19. and from Mattanah to
Nahaliel: and from Nahaliel to Bamoth: 20. and from Bamoth
to the ravine that is in the field of Moab, on the top of Pisgah,
which looks down on the desert.

21. And Israel sent messengers to Sthon, king of the Amorites,
saying, 22. ‘Let me pass through thy land: we will not turn
aside into field or vinevard ; we will not drink of the water of the
wells; we will go by the king’s way until we have passed thy
border” 23. And Sthon would not suffer Israel to pass through
his territory, but Sihon gathered all his people together, and went
out to meet Israel in the wilderness, and came to Jahaz and fought
against Israel. 24. And Israel smote him with the edge of the
sword, and possessed his land from Arnon to Jabbok, [and] as far
as the children of Ammon, for Jazer® was the boundary of the
children of Ammon. 25. And Israel took all these cities, and

 

the list of stations from 18> onwards places us north of that river. But the
Elohist was probably copying from an older document, and might very well
finish the list of places which he extracted from it, returning afterwards to the
conquest of Sihon. So Kuenen followed as regards 12-30 by Kittel. Dill-
mann assigns only xxi. 12-184, 21-24 to the Elohist.

1 “With their staves.” The princes, holding their sceptres, superintended
the digging. They did not dig the well with their sceptres and staves, for a
spring so near the ground that it could be thus dug would yield little water.

2 «From Beer.’ So LXx. 3 Jazer, So LXX.
174 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XXI. 26

Lsrael dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon and all
its dependencies. 26. For Heshbon was the city of Sthon, king of
the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and
had taken all his land out of his hand, as far as Arnon. 27.
Therefore the mocking poets+ say—
“Come ye to Heshbon,
Let the city of Sthon be built up and established :
28. For a fire is gone out of Heshbon,
A flame from the city of Sihon.
Lt has devoured Ar of Moab, .
The lords of the heights by the Arnon.
29. IVoe to thee, Moab!
Thou art undone, O people of Chemosh :
fe has given his sons as fugitives,
And his daughters to captivity,
To Sihon, king of the Amorites.
30. And we shot at them ; FHleshbon is perished even to Dibon.

 

1 ¢The mocking poets.’ Masha, is either a didactic or a satirical poem
(Mic. ii. 4, Hab. ii. 6, Isaiah xiv. 4); here of course the latter. The poem
itself is taken from the ‘Book of the Wars of Yahweh,’ but of this book we
know nothing. Sihon also is mentioned only here and in other passages
such, e.g. as Judges xi. 13, 1 Kings iv. 19, which are based on the narrative
before us. Probably Sihon was a Moabite king. We know from Mesha’s
stone how hard Israelites and Moabites fought in the ninth century B.c., and
if we omit the words ‘To Sihon, king of the Amorites,’ in ver. 29, the song
may be taken as a song of the triumphant Israelites who have pressed in from
the north and devastated Moab. In this way the poem becomes consistent
and intelligible. The Israelites have set fire to the Moabite city Heshbon,
thence the ruin has spread over the whole country. Chemosh the Moabite
god has abandoned his children, and the Israelites invite each other to build
up Heshbon once more, now that they have made it theirown. The devasta-
tion passes from Heshbon on the north of the Arnon to Dibon, and Ar Moab
on the south of it ; so that the song really contradicts the Elohist’s account,
according to which the Israelites, under Moses, attacked Sihon from the
south. While, however, the Elohist transferred events which may have
happened in the ninth century B.C. to the Mosaic period, he need not be held
responsible for the additional fiction that Sihon won his territory north of the
Arnon from the Moabites. The Elohist placed the Amorites (with him a
general term, the equivalent of ‘ Canaanite’ in the Jahvist) not only west but
also east of the Jordan ; and ver. 26, which has the appearance of a gloss,
{XIL 3] OG, KING OF BASHAN 175

And we laid waste as far as Nophah,
With fire’ to Medeba.

31. Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites. 32. And
Woses sent to spy out Jazer, and they took its dependencies and drove
ut the Amorites that were there. 33.2 And they turned and
vent up in the direction of Bashan, and Og king of Bashan went
yut to meet them, he and all his people to battle at Edrei. 34.
\nd Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Fear him not, for I have delivered
um into thy hand, and all his people and his land, and thou
halt do to him as thou didst to Sihon king of the Amorites, who
lwelt in Heshbon.’ 35. So they smote him and his sons and all
uis people, till they left him none remaining, and they possessed
us land.

XXII. 2.3 Mow Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel
tad done to the Amorites. 3. And Moab was sore afraid of the
veople because they were many, azd Moab was distressed because

aay be an attempt to reconcile this with the general and correct view, that for
ime out of memory the territory north of Arnon had been Moabite, so far as
t was not Israelite. See, for the view taken here, Meyer, Z.1.7:, 1881,
. 118 seg. ; Stade, Gesch. [sr. p. 117 seg. and, on the other side, Kuenen,
Theol. Tijd. xviii. p. 479 (answered by Meyer, Z.4.7. 1885, p. 36 seg.)
Inderz, i. § 13, 133 Dillmann, ad loc.

1 « Fire.’ Text, which here and in the preceding line is very uncertain,
mended from LXx.

* 32-35. This § (conquest of Og, king of Bashan) is admittedly a late
iterpolation. It was unknown to the author of xxii. 2, differs in grammatical
tructure from the preceding verses, and is meant to round off the legends of
re conquest east of Jordan. Dillmann even supposes that this § may have
een interpolated from Deut. iii. 1-3, in which case it would of course form
o part of the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’

3 xxii, 2-xxiv. 25. The prophecies of Balaam. In xxii. 2-20, Balak,
ing of Moab, sends messengers to Balaam, who lived at Pethor on the
Tpper Euphrates, that he may come and curse Israel. Balaam refuses,
eing told to do so by God. A second embassy is sent to him, and this time
rod appears in a vision by night and tells Balaam to go, but only to speak
ie words which God puts in his mouth. Accordingly, Balaam sets out
ccompanied by the princes of Moab. So far all is consistent. But in 22-34
'e have the episode of the speaking ass, which contradicts the previous
‘ory. Here we find Balaam accompanied, not by the princes of Moab, but
mply by two attendants. Instead of consenting to his journey, the angel of
176 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (NUM. XXII. 4

of the children of Israel. 4. And Moab said to the elders of
Midian,! ‘Now shall this multitude? lick up all that is round
about us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field.’ Now Balak,
the son of Zippor, was king of Moab at that time. 5. And he
sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor, to Pethor, which is by
the river [Euphrates], to the land of the children of Ammon,? ¢o
call him, saving, ‘ Behold, there ts a people come out from Egypt:
behold, they cover the face of the earth, avd they abide over against
me. 6. And now, pray, come, curse me this people, since they are
too mighty for me: perhaps L may prevail, that we may smite

 

Yahweh meets him with a drawn sword and would have slain him, had not
Balaam’s ass seen the apparition and insisted on avoiding it. Balaam con-
fesses his sin and receives leave to go with the direction to speak only
according to the inspiration of Yahweh, which, according to the other narrator,
he had received before setting out at all. Further, in 2-21 the narrator,
when he is not quoting the words of others, habitually speaks of Elohim,
while the author who tells the story of the speaking ass habitually speaks of
Yahweh. The § 2-21 must belong substantially to the Elohist, 22-35 to the
Jahvist. The correctness of this division is confirmed by the fact that ver. 36
is the immediate and natural sequel of ver. 20. Thus the Elohist document
is continued in xxii. 36-41 and xxiii. 1-26. Throughout we have the word
Elohim in the narrative as distinct from the speeches. Moreover, an examina-
tion of the authorities for the text makes it highly probable that originally
the name Elohim was used in the speeches also, the name Yahweh being
substituted to remove any doubt as to ‘he source of Balaam’s inspiration, We
have also the ‘princes of Moab,’ as in the earliert part of the Elohist docu-
ment. Dillmann and Kittel find the continuation of the Jahvist narrative in
xxiv. I-19, containing the third and fourth prophecies of Balaam, which have
special reference to Judah. But here no decisive evidence presents itself. If
Dillmann be right, then xxii. 18, to which there is a distinct reference in
xxiv, 13, must also be by the Jahvist. Elsewhere in the Elohist document
there are clear signs of interpolation. In ver. 3, for example, the same thing
is said twice over, and the end of ver. 4 conveys the impression that Balak
had not been mentioned before.

1 “Elders of Midian,’ According to Dillmann the mention of the Midian-
ites here and in ver. 7 comes fiom the Jahvist. According to Wellhausen
and Kuenen, the words have been added by the final editor to reconcile the
* Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ with the ‘ Priestly Writer.’

2 ¢This multitude.” So Sam., Lxx., Syr.

® © Ammon.’ So Sam.,, Syr., Vulg., and some Hebrew Mss. (The variation
in the Hebrew text first occurs in a Ms, of the thirteenth century, and is
found in more than a dozen copies. See Kennicott, vol. ii., Dzss. Genz. p. 77
note; De Rossi, vol. ii. p. 15.)
I. 22] BALAK AND BALAAM 177

m, and drive them out of the land, for [ know that he whom
nu blessest ts blest, and he whom thou cursest is cursed’ 7. And
2 elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the
vards of divination in their hand, and they came to Balaam and
rhe to him the words of Balak. 8. And he said to them, ‘ Lodge
ve this night, and I will bring you word again, as Yahweh shall
ak to me?” And the princes of Moab abode with Balaam. 9.
2a God came to Balaam and said, ‘Who are these men with thee ?’
. And Balaam said to God, ‘Balak son of Zippor, king of
oab, sent to me, [saying], 11. Behold, the people that is come out
Lgypt covers the face of the earth: now, come curse me them:
rhaps I shall be able to fight against them and to drive them
4” 12. And God said to Balaam, ‘Thou shalt not go with
rm, thou shalt not curse the people, for they are blessed. 13.
wd early in the morning Balaam said to the princes of Balak,
ro away to your own land, for Vahweh has refused to let me go
th you. 14. And the princes of Moab rose up and went to
uak and said, ‘Balaam has refused to go with us” 15. And
wak sent once more princes more numerous and more honourable
mm the others. 16. And they came to Balaam and said to him,
“hus says Balak son of Zippor, “ Let nothing, [ pray thee,
wder thee from coming to me: 17. for I will promote thee to
ry great honour, and all that thou sayest to me I will do: come,
srefore, I pray thee, curse me this people.”’ 18. And Balaam
swered and said to the servants of Balak, ‘If Balak were to
ve me his house full of silver and gold, I cannot go beyond the
xd of Yahweh my God, to do less or more, 19. And now, L
ay you, tarry ye also here this night, that I may know what
we Yahweh will speak to me. 20. And God came to Balaam
night and said to him, ‘Tf the men are come to call thee, arise,
with them, but only the word that I shall speak to thee, that
Zt thou do” 21. And Balaam rose in the moring and
Idled his ass, and he went with the princes of Moab. 22.
id the anger of Yahweh! was kindled because he went,

1 © Yahweh.’ So Sam.
M
178 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XXIL. 23

and the angel of Yahweh placed himself in the way for an
adversary against him. Now he was riding on his ass, and his
two servants were with him. 23. And the ass saw the angel
of Yahweh standing in the way, with his sword drawn in his
hand, and the ass turned aside out of the way and went into
the field, and Balaam struck the ass, to turn her into the way.
24. Then the angel of Yahweh stood in a hollow way between
the vineyards, a fence being on this side, and a fence on that.
25. And the ass saw the angel of Yahweh, and she thrust her-
self to the wall and crushed Balaam’s foot against the wall ;
and he struck her again. 26. And the angel of Yahweh went
further, and stood in a narrow place, where there was no room
to turn either to the right hand or to the left. 27. And the
ass saw the angel of Yahweh, and she lay down under Balaam,
and Balaam’s anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with his
staff. 28, And Yahweh opened the mouth of the ass and she
said to Balaam, ‘What have I done to thee, that thou hast
struck me these three times?’ 29. And Balaam said to the
ass, ‘Because thou hast mocked me, I would there were a
sword in my hand, for now I would have killed thee.’ 30. And
the ass said to Balaam, ‘Am I not thine ass, on which thou
hast ridden all thy life long to this day? Was I ever wont to
do so to thee?’ And he said, ‘No.’ 31. Then Yahweh opened
the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of Yahweh standing
in the way, with his sword drawn in his hand, and he bowed
his head and fell on his face. 32. And the angel of Yahweh
said to him, ‘Why hast thou struck thine ass these three times?
Behold, I am come out as an adversary, for thy way is evil!
before me. 33. And the ass saw me and turned aside before
me these three times: unless? she had turned aside from me,

 

? «Ts evil.” The Hebrew text may mean, ‘ Thy way is headlong against
me,’ But it is doubtful whether this or any other sense can be derived from
it. The translation given is based on an emendation suggested by Sam.

2 <Unless.’ Read ‘lilé,’ ‘unless,’ for ‘liilai,’ ‘perhaps,’ which is
senseless,
XII. 7] BALAK AND BALAAM 179

ely now I had slain thee and left her alive.” 34. And
alaam said to the angel of Yahweh, ‘I have sinned, for I did
yt know that thou stoodest in the way against me; and now,
it displease thee, I will get me back again.” 35. And the
igel of Yahweh said to Balaam, ‘Go with the men: but only
1e word that I shall speak to thee, that shalt thou speak.’
nd Balaam went with the princes of Balak. 36. And Balak
ard that Balaam had come, and he went out to meet him at Ir-
foab, which is on the border formed by the Arnon, at the furthest
art of the border. 37. And Balak said to Balaam, ‘ Did I not
wnestly send to thee to call thee? Why camest thou not to me?
'm I not able indeed to promote thee to honour?’ 38. And
‘alaam said to Balak, ‘Lo, Lam come to thee: have I now any
ower at all to speak anything? The word that God puts in my
‘outh, that will I speak. 39. And Balaam went with Balak,
nd they came to Kiriath-huzoth. 40. And Balak sacrificed oxen
nd sheep, and he sent [portions] to Balaam and to the princes
zat were with him. 41. And tt came to pass in the morning that
talak took Balaam and “brought him up to Bamoth-baal, and
tence he saw the [nearest] end of the people.

XXIII. 1. And Balaam said to Balak, ‘ Build me here seven
ltars, and prepare me here seven bullocks and seven rams.’ 2. And
talak did as Balaam had spoken, and Balak and Balaam offered
% every altar a bullock and a ram. 3. And Balaam said to
ralak, ‘ Stand by the burnt-offering and I will go: perhaps God}
ll come to meet me, and whatever he shews me, I witl tell thee?
ind he went to a bare height, 4. and God met Balaam: and he
uid to him, ‘I have prepared the seven altars, and T have offered
2 a bullock and a ramon every altar. 5. And God? put a word
2 Balaam’s mouth and said,‘ Return to Balak and thus shalt
tou speak. 6. And he returned, and lo, he stood by his burnt-
fering, he and all the princes of Moab. 7. And he began his
hythm and said—

1 ©God.’ So Sam., LXx. 2 ¢God.’ So Lxx.
180 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XxIII. 8

‘From Aram has Balak brought me,
The king of Moab from the mountains of the East.
Come, Curse me Jacob,
And come, rage against Israel.
8. How shall IT curse, whom Vahweh has not cursed?
And how shall I rage against him, with whom Yahweh is not
enraged ?
9. For from the top of the rocks I see him,

And from the hills I behold him :

Lo, it ts a people that dwells alone,

And does not reckon itself among the nations.
10. Who has counted the dust of Jacob,

Or numbered the fourth part of Israel?

Let me die the death of the upright,

And my posterity be like his.

11. And Balak said to Balaam, ‘ \Vhat hast thou done to me?
L took thee to curse mine enemies, and, behold, thou hast blessed them
altogether. 12. And he answered and said, ‘Must I not take
heed to speak that which Yahweh puts in my mouth? 13. And
Balak said to him, ‘Come, I pray, with me to another place,
whence thou mayest see them; thou shalt see but the [nearest]
end of them, but the whole of them thou shalt not see:! and
curse me them from there. 14. And he took him to the field of
Zophim, to the top of Pisgah, and built seven altars and offered up
a bullock and a ram on every altar. 15. And he said to Balak,
‘Stand here by thy burnt-offering while T go to meet him there.
16. And God? met Balaam and said,‘ Return to Balak and thus

 

1 “Thou shalt see but the [nearest] end of them,’ etc. Before his first
prophecy Balaam had only seen the fringe of the Israelite host. Now by
changing his position to a place from which he can see the whole host, he
hopes for better success in cursing them. But another writer in xxiv. 2
introduces a prophecy of Balaam with an account which gives the impres-
sion that Balaam is taking his first view of the people. Therefore an editor
inserted a gloss to reconcile the Elohist with the author (probably the
Jahvist) who gave the prophecies and the narrative connected with them in
chapter xxiv. But in doing so he sets the Elohist at variance with himself.
2 *God.’ So LXx. and some Hebrew Mss,
XIII. 28] THE PROPHECIES OF BALAAM 181

talt thou speak. 14. And he came to him, and, lo, he stood by
's burnt-offering, and the princes of Moab with him. And Balak
ud to him,‘ What has Yahweh spoken?’ 18. And he began his
wythm and said—
‘Rise up, Balak, and hear,
Fearken to me, thou son of Zippor.
19. God ts not a man, that he should lie,
Or the son of man, that he should repent.
fe has said, and shall he not do,
Or has he spoken, and shall he not make it good ?
20. Behold, I have received [commandment] ¢o déess,
And I will bless, and I will not reverse it.
21. Vo calamity ts beheld in Jacob,
Or trouble seen in Israel.
Yahweh his God ts with him,
And the shout of a king is among them.
22. God brings them forth out of Egyfi,
He has, as tt were, the horns of a wild ox ;
23. For there ts no divination in Jacob,
Or sorcery in Israel,
At the due season it shall be said of Jacob and of Israel,
What has God wrought !
24. Behold, the people rises up as a lioness,
And as a lion does he lift himself up:
Fle shall not lie down till he devour the prey
And drink the blood of the slain,

25. And Balak said to Balaam, * Neither curse them at all nor
ess them atall? 26. But Balaam answered and said,‘ Did L
ot tell thee, saying, All that God? speaks, that must I do?’ 27.
nd Balak said to Balaam, ‘Come now, I will take thee to
iother place ; perhaps, it will please God that thou mayest curse
e them from thence.’ 28 And Balak took Balaam to the top

1 “T will bless.” So Sam., Lxx., Onkel.
2 *God.’ So Sam., Lxx.
182 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XXIII. 29

of Peor, which looks down on the desert. 29. And Balaam said
to Balak, ‘Build me here seven altars and prepare me seven bul-
locks and seven rams.’ 30. And Balak did as Balaam had said,
and offered up a bullock and a ram on every altar, XXIV. 1.
And when Balaam saw that it was good in the eyes of Yahweh
to bless Israel, he went not, as at the other times, after enchant-
ments, but he set his face to the desert. 2. And Balaam lifted
up his eyes and saw Israel dwelling according to their tribes, and
the spirit of God! came upon him. 3. And he began his rhythm
and said—
‘The oracle of Balaam, the son of Beor,
And the oracle of the man whose eye is closed [?]:
4. The oracle of him who hears the words of God,
Who sees the vision of the Almighty,
Falling down and having his eyes open:
5. How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob!
Thy tabernacles, O Israel!
6. Like ravines which stretch out,
As gardens by the river-side,
As lign-aloes which Yahweh has planted,
As cedar-trees beside the waters.
7. Waters flow from his buckets,
And his seed is on many waters :
And his king shall be higher than Agag,
And his kingdom shall be exalted.
8. God brings him forth out of Egypt,
He has, as it were, the horns [?] of a wild ox:
He shall devour the nations his adversaries,
And shall crunch their bones ;
And he shall smite his oppressors ? [?].
9. He couched, he lay down, as a lion,

1 “Spirit of God,’ ze, ‘a divine spirit. So that the word Elohim is here
no mark of authorship. Comp. Exod. xxi. 3, xxxv. 31 in the ‘ Priestly
Writer.’

9

* «Oppressors.’” A conjectural emendation of the Hebrew text.
XxXIv. 18] THE PROPHECIES OF BALAAM 183

And as a lioness ; who shall raise him up?
Blessed is every one who blesses thee,
And cursed is every one that curses thee.’
ro. And Balak’s anger was kindled against Balaam, and he
struck his hands together, and Balak said to Balaam, ‘I called
thee to curse my enemies, and, behold, thou hast blessed them
these three times. 11. Therefore now flee thee to thy place: I
thought to promote thee to great honour, and, behold, Yahweh
has kept thee back from honour.’ 12. And Balaam said to
Balak, ‘Did I not speak also to thy messengers whom thou
sentest to me, saying, 13. “If Balak would give me his house
full of silver and gold, I cannot go beyond the word of Yahweh to
do either good or bad of my own mind: what Yahweh speaks, that
will I speak. 14. And now, behold, I go to my people: come,
I will counsel thee concerning that which this people will do to
thy people in the latter days”?’ 15. And he began his rhythm
and said—
‘The oracle of Balaam, the son of Beor,
And the oracle of the man whose eye is closed [?].
16. The oracle of him who hears the words of God,
And knows the knowledge of the exalted one,
Who sees the vision of the Almighty,
Falling down and having his eyes open.
17. I see him, but not now,
I descry him, but not near:
A star has come forth from Jacob,
And a sceptre has risen from Israel,
And shall smite through the sides of Moab’s face,
And the head! of the sons of tumult,
18. And Edom shall be a possession,
And Seir, his [i.e. Israel’s] foes, shall be a possession,
And Israel wins might.

1 « Head,’ properly ‘ back of the head.’ So Sam. The author of Jerem.
xlviii, 45 seems to have had this reading in his text.
184 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NuM. XXIV. IQ

1g. And one shall rule from Jacob,
And destroy the remnant from the city.’

20.1 And he saw Amalek, and he began his rhythm and said—
‘ Amalek is the first of nations,
But his latter end shall be destruction.’

21. And he saw the Kenite, and began his rhythm and said—
‘Strong is thy dwelling-place,
And thy nest is set in the rock.
22. Nevertheless Kain shall be wasted.
How long? Assyria shall carry thee away captive.’

23. And he began his rhythm and said—
‘ Alas, who shall live, when God does this ?
24. But ships [shall come] from the coast of Kittim,
And they shall afflict Assyria and shall afflict Eber,?
And he also shall come to destruction.’

25. And Balaam rose up and went and returned to his place,
and Balak also went his way.

XXV. 1. And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began
to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. 2. And they
called the people to the sacrifices of their god, and the people ate
and bowed down to their god. 3. And Israel joined himself to
Baal Peor, and the anger of Yahweh was kindled against Israel.
4. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Take all the chiefs of the people

1 20-24. It is generally admitted that these verses have been interpolated
by a later hand. Hitherto we have had general description of Israel’s glory
and the splendour of David’s dynasty ; here we have three prophecies relating
to Amalekites, Kenites, and Assyrians. The last prophecy enters most into
detail. Cyprus (Kittim) had been subject to the Assyrian kings, Esarhaddon
and Assurbanipal (z.e. in the seventh century B.c.); and the author expects that
from this very quarter a fleet will come and land an army for the destruction
of Assyria itself. The particular event to which he alludes is unknown. The
Assyrian empire fell at the end of the seventh century B.c., and the author of
the interpolated prophecies can scarcely have written long before this event.
In his time the dependencies of Assyria seem to have been rising in revolt.

* Eber, probably not a proper name. The word means ‘across,’ z.c. the
people across ‘ the river’ [Euphrates].
XXXII. 22>] GAD AND REUBEN SETTLE E. OF JORDAN 185

and impale them? {?] for Yahweh before the sun, that the heat of
Yahweh’s anger may turn away from Israel.’ 5. And Moses said
to the judges of Israel, ‘Slay ye every one his man, that have
joined themselves to Baal Peor.’

XXXII. 1.2 Now the children of Gad and Reuben had a very
great multitude of cattle, and when they saw the land of Jazer
and the land of Gilead that, behold, the place was a place for
cattle, 2.* the children of Gad and the children of Reuben came
and spake to Moses, [saying], 3. ‘Ataroth and Dibon and
Jazer and Nimrah and Heshbon and Elealeh and Sebam and
Nebo and Beon, 4.> is a land for cattle, and thy servants have
cattle.’ 5. And they said, ‘If we have found grace in thy sight,
let this land be given to thy servants: bring us not over Jordan.’
zo. And Moses said to them, ‘If you will do this thing, if you
will arm yourselves to go before Yahweh to the war, 21. and if
every armed man of you will pass over Jordan before Yahweh,
until he has driven out his enemies from before him, 22. then
afterward you shall return and be guiltless towards Yahweh and

1 ‘Tmpale them.’ ‘Hanging, though a mode of suicide, was not a mode
of execution in antiquity, either in the East or in the West.’ See Frazer,
Golden Bough, i. p. 222.

? xxxii. I-41. A difficult chapter, because it supplies another of the few
instances in which the final editor has mingled the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew
History’ with the ‘Priestly’ record. Still the main features of our narrative
are quite distinct from those of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ It speaks of Gad and
Reuben (not like the ‘Priestly Writer’ of Reuben and Gad). It knows
nothing of Eleazar the priest or the half tribe of Manasseh (33). The
‘Priestly Writer’ describes Moses as simply bestowing the vacant territories
of Sihon and Og on the two and a half tribes. The ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew
History,’ on the contrary, has preserved genuine historical recollection. It
represents Machir and Jair, sons of Manasseh, as conquering the northern
territory west of the Jordan, nor does it say that this happened in the lifetime
of Moses. The geographical notices of the territory occupied by Gad and
Reuben differ from those of the ‘ Priestly Writer’ in Josh. xiii. 15 seg., and as,
according to the ‘Priestly Writer,’ Machir was the only son of Manasseh
(xxvi. 29 seg.), it cannot be he who makes ‘the children of Machir’ settle to
the east of Jordan, for in this case he would have contradicted the notorious
fact assumed by himself no less than by the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History,’
viz., that the Manassites had settlements on both sides of the river. The
account before us represents the settlements of the Israelites east of Jordan
186 THE OLDEST ROOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [NUM. XXXII. 23-42

Israel, and the land shall be yours before Yahweh. 23. But if
you will not do so, behold, you have sinned against Yahweh, and
be sure your sin will find you out. 24. Build yourselves cities
for your little ones, and enclosures for your flocks, and do that
which has proceeded out of your mouth.’ 25. And the children
of Gad and the children of Reuben spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Thy
servants will do, as my lord commands. 26. Our little ones,
our wives, our flocks and all our cattle, shall be there in the cities
of Gilead, 27. but thy servants will pass over, every man that is
armed for war, before Yahweh to battle, as my lord says.’

34. So the children of Gad built Dibon and Ataroth and
Aroer 35. and Atroth-Shophan and Jazer and Jogbehah 36.
and Beth-nimrah and Beth-haran, fortified cities and enclosures
for sheep. 37. And the children of Reuben built Heshbon and
Elealeh and Kiriathaim, 38. and Nebo and Baal-Meon! and

in the time of the kings, perhaps from that of Solomon to that of Omri.
Deborah’s Song speaks of Gilead (7.c. Gad) and Reuben as settled east of the
Jordan and Mesha’s Stone (about 900 B.C.) states that Gad had ‘dwelt from
of old in the land of Ataroth.’ On the other hand, Deborah’s Song (Judges
v. 14) speaks of Machir as still living west of the Jordan, Probably they
went east of the Jordan, when Gad and Reuben were pressing south in the time
of the early kings and extended their domain by conquest. But the statement
that Gad, Reuben, and the Manassites assisted the other tribes in conquering
the land west of Jordan, rests on the late fiction that Israel won Canaan in
a single generation, and formed a national unity under Moses and Joshua.

In determining the text of the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ in this
chapter, I have adopted the conclusions of Stade (Gesch. Js. i. p. 148 seg.).
With him Dillmann agrees on the whole, except that he adds 6-15, which is,
as Kuenen has shown (TZheol. Tijd. xi. p. 559 seg.), @ late interpolation.
Dillmann himself allows that it has been seriously tampered with. In ver. 1
I have restored ‘Gad and Reuben’ for ‘ Reuben and Gad,’ and have removed
expressions which have been admittedly interpolated by the final editor
who borrowed the characteristic words and phrases of the ‘ Priestly Wtiter.’
There must, of course, be considerable doubt as to the details. Verses 39,
41, 42 are almost certainly by the Jahvist, and should be read between
Joshua xvii. 14-18, and xiii. 13. But ‘ Amorite’ seems to have been substituted
for ‘Canaanite,’ and the parentage of Nobah omitted.

1 ¢Nebo and Baal-Meon.’ A late gloss is here added, viz., ‘their names
being changed.’ This was meant to remove the scandal that ‘Nebo’ and ‘Baal’
are both names of gods. The scribe who showed such monotheistic zeal did
not know that Gad also was a deity, viz., the god of luck, worshipped all over
Syria. See Cheyne on Isaiah Iyv. 11, and Bathgen, Sew7/, Relig. p. 76 seg.
DEUT. XXXI. 14-18] | THE LAST DAYS OF MOSES 187

Sibmah, and they gave other names to the cities which they
built. 39. And the children of Machir the son of Manasseh,
went to Gilead and took it, and dispossessed the Amorites
which were init. 41. And Jair the son of Manasseh went and
took their tent-villages, and called them the tent-villages of
Jair. 42. And Nobah! went and took Kenath and its depen-
dencies, and called it Nobah, after his own name.

Deut. XXXI. 14.2 And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Behold, the
time draws near that thou shouldst die: call Joshua and present
yourselves in the tent of meeting that I may give him a charge.’
And Moses and Joshua went and presented themselves in the
tent of meeting. 15. And Yahweh appeared in the tent in a
pillar of cloud, and the pillar of cloud stood by the door of the
tent. 16. And Yahweh said to Moses, ‘ Behold, thou shalt sleep
with thy fathers and this people will rise up and go a whoring
after the strange gods of the land, whither they go to be among
them, and will forsake me and break my covenant which I have
made with them. 17. Then my anger shall be kindled against
them in that day, and I will forsake them and hide my face from
them and they shall be devoured and many evils and troubles
shall come upon them, so that they will say in that day, ** Are not
these evils come upon us, because our God is not in the midst of
us?” 18. And I will surely hide my face because of all the evil

1 Deut. xxxi. 14-23. It is clear, and has been pointed out long ago (see
¢.g., Knobel’s commentary on the passage), that this section in the Book of
Deuteronomy does not belong to the original structure of the book. The
Deuteronomist, as Dillmann points out, never speaks of ‘ the tent of meeting,’
‘the pillar of cloud,’ ‘ breaking the covenant,’ ‘ strange gods,’ ‘ to go a whoring
after,’ ‘imagination’ (yeser), etc., and all these expressions are so many signs
that we have the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History’ before us. The section
has been compiled from two sources. Verses 14, 15, 23 refer to the appoint-
ment of Joshua in place of Moses. The intermediate verses are the introduc-
tion to the ‘Song’ in chap. xxxii. Hence the obscurity in ver. 23. The
subject is evidently ‘Yahweh,’ and all is in order, if we read ver. 23 imme-
diately after ver. 15. But in ver. 22 Moses is the subject, and when we come
to read ver. 23 in its present position, we are obliged to supply a new subject
in the most unnatural way.
188 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [DEUT. XXXI. 19

they have done, in that they have turned to other gods. 19. And
now write this song for yourselves, and teach thou it to the
children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that this song may be
a witness for me against the children of Israel. 20. For when I
shall have brought them to the land which I sware to their
fathers, flowing with milk and honey, and they shall have eaten
and filled themselves and grown fat, then will they turn to other
gods and serve them and despise me and break my covenant.
21. And it shall come to pass when many evils and troubles are
come upon them, that this song shall testify before them as a
witness ; for it shall not be forgotten out of the mouths of their
seed ; for I know their imagination which they go about even
now, before I have brought them to the land which I sware to their
fathers.’ 22. So Moses wrote this song the same day and
taught it to the children of Israel. 23. And he [Yahweh] com-
manded Joshua the son of Nun and said, ‘ Be strong and of good
courage, for thou shalt bring the children of Israel to the land
which I sware to them: and I will be with thee.’
XXNXII. 1.2 ‘Give ear, ye heavens, and I will speak,
And let the earth hear the words of my mouth:
2. My doctrine shall drop as the rain,
My speech shall distil as the dew ;

1 © To their fathers,’ added from Sam., LXX.

2 xxxii. ‘The Song of Moses.’ This poem depicts the calamities of the
Hebrews under foreign invasion, which has reduced them to the point of
extinction, but from which Yahweh promises them final deliverance. To
what period does the poet refer? Three answers have to be considered.
Dillmann attributes the poem to a poet of the northern kingdom who lived
about the time of Elijah and Elisha, z.e. in the ninth century B.C., when
Israel suffered much from the Aramaans of Damascus. Others (e.g. Reuss,
Gesch. § 226) refer the poem to the period preceding the taking of Samaria
by the Assyrians in B.c. 722. Lastly, Kuenen and others are inclined to
believe that the foes intended are the Babylonians, in which case the poet must
have written shortly before the final catastrophe of 586 3.c., which was the
date of the exile. The strength of Kuenen’s argument lies in his list of the
words and phrases (Ovders. i. § 13, 30) which occur in the poem, but are
never found even in writers of the eighth century B.c. In language and style
the poem ‘stands on one line with Jeremiah and Ezekiel.’ This argument is
snanenaae vy 40D SUNG Ur MUSES Idg

As the small rain on the tender grass,
And as the showers upon the herb:
3- For I will proclaim the name of Yahweh,
Ascribe ye greatness to our God.
4. The rock, his work is perfect,
For all his ways are judgment :
A God of faithfulness and without iniquity,
Just and right is he.
5. His sons have become corrupt, a blot is upon them! [?],
They are a perverse and crooked generation.
6. Do you thus requite Yahweh,
O foolish people and unwise?
Is he not thy father that has made thee ?
He has made thee and established thee.
7. Remember the days of old,
Consider the years of many generations :
Ask thy father and he will show thee,
Thine elders and they will tell thee.
8. When the exalted one gave to the nations their inheritance,
When he separated the children of men,
He set the boundaries of the peoples,
According to the number of the children of Israel,?

not met by Dillmann: indeed he unconsciously confirms it. He admits, e.g.
that ‘zarim’ in ver. 16 for ‘strange gods’ is only found in late writers, such
as Jeremiah and the second Isaiah, that it is only late writers such as Jeremiah
who call heathen gods ‘ vain things’ (A‘valim, so ver. 21), or use the singular
form ‘Eloah’ for God (ver. 15). Add to this the formal and explicit
monotheism, and the fact that the annihilation of Israel’s life seems to be
imminent, unless Yahweh interpose, so that the whole language suggests a
worse and more complete calamity than even the conquest of the northern
kingdom by the Assyrians. We cannot wonder, then, that even Kittel,
usually the faithful adherent of Dillmann, abandons him here. But if
Kuenen be right, we must suppose that our ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew,’
though compiled from ancient documents, did not exist as a completed whole
till shortly before the exile.

1 ©A blot is upon them.’ So Dillmann emends the text.

° “ According to the number of the children of Israel,’ z.e, Yahweh allotted
their territories to the nations in such a manner that the fit place should be
Igo THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [DEUT. XXXII. 9

9. For Yahweh’s portion is his people,
Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

to. He found him in a land that was wilderness,
In a waste howling desert :
He compassed him about, he cared for him,
He kept him as the apple of his eye.

11. Asan eagle that stirs up its nest,
That flutters over its young,
He spread abroad his wings, he took them,
He bore them on his pinions.

12. Yahweh alone did lead him,

And there was no strange god with him.

13. He made him ride on the high places of the land,
And made him eat! the increase of the field,
And made him suck honey from the rock,

And oil out of the flinty rock ;

14. Curdled milk from the herds, and fresh milk from the flocks,

With fat of lambs and rams,

The breed of Bashan and goats,

With the fat of the kidneys of wheat,

And the blood of the grape didst thou drink as wine.

15. Then Jacob ate and was filled,”

Jeshurun * grew fat and kicked ;

reserved for Israel. The LXX. reading, ‘according to the number of the sons
of God,’ implies that God committed the nations to the angels, and himself
retained the care of Israel. But this idea of angel guardians presiding over
the nations is late (Sit. xvii. 17; Dan. x. 13, 20 seg.), ‘and is inconsistent’
with the contemptuous attitude of the ‘Song’ to heathen gods.

1 ‘Made him eat.” So Sam., LXN., Syr.

2 Jacob ate and was filled.’ So Sam., LXx.

3 <Jeshurun,’ ‘the upright one,’ » name given to Israel, here, in the
‘Blessing of Moses’ (Deut. xxxiii. 5, 26), and in the second Isaiah (xliv. 2).
Possibly, as Bacher (2.4.7. W., vol. v. p. 161 seg.) suggests, the name may
have been chosen as an escape from the unpleasant idea conveyed by the name
Jacob. ‘Jacob’ is connected with the idea of ‘supplanting’ (Gen. xxvii. 36),
Jeshurun with that of ‘the upright,’ ‘the straight,’ ‘the honest.’ In Isa. xl. 4
the two roots are expressly contrasted.
XXXII. 25] THE SONG OF MOSES Igt

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

Thou wert grown fat and thick and sleek ;

And he forsook God who made him,

And dishonoured the rock of his salvation.

They provoked him to jealousy with strange gods,

Vexed him with abominations.

They sacrificed to demons, which were no god,

To gods whom they knew not,

To new gods that came up of late,

Whom their fathers dreaded not.

The rock that begot thee thou didst neglect,

And forget the God that gave thee birth.

And Yahweh saw it and abhorred them

Because of the provocation of his sons and daughters.

And he said, I will hide my face from them,

I will see what their end shall be,

For they are a perverse generation,

Children in whom is no faithfulness.

They have made me jealous with that which is not god,

They have vexed me with their vanities ;

And I will make them jealous with that which is not a people,

With a foolish nation will I vex them.

For a fire is kindled in my nose,

And it burns to the nethermost Sheol,

And devours the earth with her increase,

And sets the foundations of the mountains aflame.

I will heap mischiefs upon them,

I will spend my arrows upon them ;

[When they are] wasted with hunger and consumed with
burning heat,

And with bitter plague,

The teeth of beasts I will send upon them,

With the venom of things that crawl in the dust.

Without shall the sword bereave,

And in the chambers terror ;

[It shall destroy] both young man and virgin,
192

26.

27.

20.

30.

31.

33.

33:

34.

35°

36.

37:

THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY (DEUT. XXXIL 26

The suckling with the grey-haired man.

I would say, I will blow them away,

I would make the remembrance of them cease from among
men,

Were it not that I feared the provocation of the enemy,

Lest their adversaries should misunderstand ;

Lest they should say, Our hand has been exalted,

And it is not Yahweh who has done all this.

. For they are a nation void of counsel,

And there is no understanding in them ;

If they had been wise, they would understand this,
They would think of their end.

How should one chase a thousand,

And two put ten thousand to flight,

Except their rock had sold them,

And Yahweh delivered them up!

For their rock is not as our rock,

Even our enemies [themselves] being judges.
For their vine is from the vine of Sodom,

From the fields of Gomorrah ;

Their grapes are poisonous grapes,

Clusters of gall are theirs,

Their wine is the venom of dragons

And the cruel poison of asps.

Is not this laid up in store with me,

Sealed up in my treasuries,

For the day of vengeance and recompence,

For the time when their foot shall slide?

For the day of their calamity is near,

And the things that are to come upon them make haste.
For Yahweh will decide for his people,

And will repent concerning his servants

When he sees that their power is gone,

And there is none over, shut up or left at large.
And he shall say, Where are their gods,
XXXIIL 1] THE SONG OF MOSES 193

The rock in which they took refuge,
38. Who ate the fat of their sacrifices,
And drank the wine of their drink-offering ?
Let them rise up and help you,
Let them be your protection.
39. See now that I, I am he,
And there is no God with me ;
I kill, and I make alive,
I have wounded, and I will heal:
And none can deliver from my hand.
40. For I lift up my hand to the heavens,
And say, As [I live for ever,
41. If I whet my gleaming sword,
And my hand take hold of judgment,
I will render vengeance to my adversaries,
And will recompense them that hate me.
42. I will make my arrows drunk with blood,
And my sword shall devour flesh ;
With the blood of the slain and the captives,
From the head of the leaders of the enemy.
43. Praise his people, ye nations,
For he will avenge the blood of his servants,
And will make expiation for the land of his people.!
44. And Moses came and spoke all the words of this song in
the ears of the people, he and Joshua ? the son of Nun.
XXXIII? 1. And this is the blessing, with which Moses the

1 ‘The land of his people.’ So Sam., Lxx., Vulgate.

2 «He and Joshua the son of Nun.’ This is a late, possibly a very late,
interpolation. According to xxxi. 22, Moses alone writes and teaches the
song. In xxxi. 19 Dillmann supposes that ‘write for yourselves’ has been
substituted instead of ‘ write for thyself.’

3 xxxill. ‘The Blessing of Moses.’ It is plain (1) that this poem was
written after the separation of Judah from the northern kingdom. The
poet prays (ver. 7) that Judah may be brought back to his people, which
implies the complete union of the tribes under David and Solomon, and
their subsequent separation under Jeroboam and Rehoboam. (2) It is no
less plain that the poet belonged to the northernkingdom. This appears from

N
194 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [DevT. XXXII

man of God blessed the children of Israel, before his death.
And he said—
‘Yahweh came from Sinai,
And rose from Seir upon them,
He shone forth from the mountains of Paran,
And he came from Meribah of Kadesh [?]1
At his right hand were... .?
3. Yea, he loves his people ;?
All his holy ones are in thy hand :
And they sat down [?] at thy feet ;
[Every one of them] receives of thy words,

the words already quoted. Judah is to ‘come’ to the people, not the peo
tohim. The poet says little of Judah, nothing of Simeon. It is of the no
tribes, and particularly of Joseph, ‘the prince among his brethren,’ that

speaks at length and with enthusiasm. (3) The poet must have written lo
before the final exile, long even before the capture of Samaria in 722 B
The ‘myriads of Ephraim,’ ‘the thousands of Manasseh’ dwell in peace a
plenty, and all Israel is ‘victorious through Yahweh.’ It is more difficult
fix the exact date. Schrader (in his edition of De Wette’s Adnlectur
§ 234) pleads for the period shortly after the separation of the two kir
doms (975-950 B.C.), and his opinion is followed by Dillmann. The reas
given is, that the desire for restoration of unity was still vigorous. T°
argument, however, is too weak to be of any account, for such passages
Hos. ii. 2, iii. § ; Mich. ii. 12 seg.; Ezek. xxxvii. 16, show how enduring t
hope of complete national unity was. On the other hand, Graf (Seger Mos
p. 81) has pointed out that at the time when the poet wrote northern Isr:
was ‘victorious’ and prosperous. The time of Jeroboam II. (786-746) alc
satisfies the requisite conditions. Israel had been ruled by insignific
kings; next was engaged in a long and disastrous struggle with the Syric
of Damascus. At last in Joash, and still more perfectly in Jeroboam

Yahweh gave Israel a ‘victorious’ leader (2 Kings xiii. 5, xiv. 27):

restored the old boundaries, ‘and the children of Israel dwelt securely in th
tents as in former days.’ This date may be accepted as approximatk
accurate, and is so accepted by Reuss (Gesch. § 213, 216); Kuenen (Gods.
ch. i. note 43 Onders. i. § 13, 16); Stade (Gesch. i. p. 145-173).

1 From Meiibah of Kadesh.’? The IIcbrew has ‘from holy myriad
But the parallclism requires the mention of a place, and this is supplied byt
reading of the LXX., viz. ‘Kadesh.’ ‘ Meribah’ is a conjectural emendation

2 © At his right hand were’ or ‘was.’ The words which follow are hor
lessly corrupt.

% €Tlis people.’ So Lxx.
XXXII. 8] THE SONG OF MOSES 195

4. (Moses commanded us a law) }
The assembly of Jacob [received] a possession.
5. And he became king in Jeshurun,?
When the heads of the people were gathered,
All the tribes of Israel together.
6. Let Reuben live not die,
So that his men should be few.
7. And this is [the blessing] of Judah ; and he said,
Hear, O Yahweh, the voice of Judah,
And bring him to his people.
With thy hands strive for him,?
And be thou a help against his adversaries.
8. And of Levi he said,
Thy Thummim and Urim belong to the people of thy
devoted one.

1 *Moses commanded us a law.’ Clearly an interpolation. For (1) the
use of ‘Torah’ for a legal code was not, as Dillmann points out, known
before the publication of Deuteronomy: (2) the interpolation destroys the
grammatical construction of the context. Israel ‘received’ the words of
Yahweh and his possessions in Canaan. The one verb governs both objects.

2 ‘He became king in Jeshurun,’ or ‘there was a king in Jeshurun,’ viz.
Saul or David.

3 «With thy hands strive for him.’ This is Stade’s emendation (Gesch.
p. 160).

4 *To the people of thy devoted one,’ z.e. probably the men who claim
descent from Moses, the servant of Yahweh. We find froma much older
poem, the so-called blessing of Jacob, Gen. xlix. 5-7, that the Levites were
at first a purely secular tribe. They were like the Simeonites, notorious for
violence, and if we compare Gen. xlix, 5-7 with the older narrative in Gen.
xxxiv., we see how this violence displayed itself. To a great extent the
Hebrews acquired possession of Canaan by peaceable means. They settled
among the Canaanites and intermarried with them. But the Simeonites
and Levites made a murderous and treacherous attack on the people of
Shechem. This violence did them no good. The Simeonites wandered
southwards and became of little account; the Levites were homeless
wanderers. The latter, however, hada great destiny. Tradition, very likely
an accurate tradition, made Moses a Levite, and the idea arose that a Levite
was specially fitted to act as priest. We have an instance of this feeling in
Judges xvii. ‘Then said Micah, Now I know that Yahweh will do me good,
seeing I have a Levite for my priest.’ For a long time the Levite priesthood
subsisted side by side with the older and more natural priesthood. David’s
196 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [DEUT. XXXII. 9

Whom thou didst prove at Massah,

For whom thou didst strive at the waters of Meribah,
g. To those who said of their father and of their mother,

I have not seen him,

Neither did they acknowledge their brethren,

Or know their own children,

For they have observed thy word

And keep thy covenant.
to. They shall teach Jacob thy judgments,

And thine instruction to Israel,

They shall put incense in thy nose,

And the full offering upon thine altar.
11. Bless, O Yahweh, his might,

sons were priests (2 Sam. viii. 18), and till late in the regal period laymen
offered sacrifice without the least scruple or scandal. The Hebrew priest-
hood was for long much like the priesthood among the Greeks. Sacrifice in
general was offered by all, but sacrifice at the great temples and shrines was
limited to a special class. Even the special priests were not necessarily Levites,
for an old tradition makes Joshua, the Ephraimite, the minister of Moses in
the ‘tent of meeting’ (Exod. xxxiii. 11). However, at the sanctuary of the
Danites in the north, there were Levitical priests claiming descent from
Moses (Judges xviii. 30), and the priests of Shiloh seem to have done so also
(1 Sam. ii. 27). Gradually, by a process which cannot be traced in detail,
a fictitious genealogy was invented for all priests. All were supposed to be
Levites, and to these Levites at the end of the regal period the right of
sacrifice was limited absolutely. The derivation of the word Levi is uncer-
tain. The theory that ‘ Levite’ is derived from ‘lawah,’ and meant originally
not « tribe but an office, viz. : ‘one attached to the sanctuary,’ has been
revived in the recent work of Baudissin (A/étest, Prvesterthum, p. 264), but
cannot be held in the face of Gen. xlix. 5-7. For fuller information see
Wellhausen (Gesch. I. p. 145 seg.), Kuenen (Azbbert Lectures, p. 77 seg.),
and Baudissin’s work to which reference has just been made. Of course the
Israelite priest did more than sacrifice. He decided cases by the sacred lot,
cases which, as the ‘ Book of the Covenant’ puts it (Exod. xxii. 7, 8), were
brought before God. It may have been these claims which provoked the
resistance alluded to in ver. Ir, and hence perhaps the praise of the Levites
as impartial judges who did not recognise the closest ties of blood (Graf,
Segen Moses, p. 34). As to Meribah and Massah the poet must have followed
some lost tradition, different from that in Exod. xvii. 2-7, Num. xx. 3-13,
where it is the people who murmur against (:od and tempt him by striving
with Moses.
XXXII 18] THE SONG OF MOSES 197

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

And accept the work of his hands,

Smite them that rise up against him in the loins,

And them that hate him, so that they rise not again.

Of Benjamin he said,

The beloved of Yahweh dwells in safety.+

He [Yahweh] covers him all the day long

And dwells between his shoulders.

And of Joseph he said,

Blessed of Yahweh be his land

With the precious gifts of the heavens, with the dew,

And with the deep that crouches beneath,

And with the precious fruits of the sun,

And with the precious growth of the moons,

And with the chief things of the ancient mountains,

And with the precious things of the everlasting hills,

And with the precious things of the land and its fulness,

And the goodwill of him that dwells in the thorn-bush :

Let [the blessing] come on the head of Joseph

And on the crown of his head that is a prince among
his brethren.

The first-born of his bull,—majesty is his,

And his horns are the horns of a wild-ox ;

With them he shall gore the nations, all of them,

[Yea] the ends of the earth.

Such? are the myriads of Ephraim,

Such are the thousands of Manasseh.

And of Zebulun he said,

Rejoice, Zebulun, because of thy going out,

And Issachar, because of thy tents.

1 *Dwells in safety.’ The Hebrew adds ‘with him’ or ‘by him,’
Omitted in Sam., Lxx., Syr., and some Hebrew mss. Yahweh dwells
“between the shoulders’ or ridges of Benjamin, z.e. at some popular shrine
such as Gibeon (1 Kings iii. 4 seg.)

2 Such.’ So Sam., LXx., Syr. The Hebrew has ‘and such.’
198 ‘HE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [DEUT. XXXIII. 19

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

They call peoples to the mountain,

There they offer righteous sacrifices,

For they suck the abundance of the seas

And the hidden treasure of the sands.

And of Gad he said,

Blessed be he that enlarges Gad ;

As a lioness he has settled down,

And tears the arm, yea, the crown of the head.
And he provided the first part for himself,

For there the portion of a leader was reserved ;
And he came with the heads of the people,!
He executed the justice of Yahweh,

And his judgments with Israel.

And of Dan he said,

Dan is a lion’s whelp

That leaps forth from Bashan.

And of Naphtali he said,

O Naphtali, satisfied with favour,

And full of the blessing of Yahweh,

Possess thou the lake and the south.?

And of Asher he said,

Blessed above sons be Asher,

Let him be the accepted one among his brethren,
And let him dip his foot in oil.

Thy bars are iron and brass,

And long as thy days may thy strength last. [?]

1 “Call peoples to the mountain,’ z.e. to some sacred mountain such as
Carmel where Elijah offered sacrifice. The feast was used as an occasion for
trade. Similarly, the people of Mecca held a market during the feast at
Mina, and Catholic feasts have often been used for the same purpose.

* «And he came with the heads of the people.” The text is corrupt and
the meaning uncertain. Perhaps ‘came as the head of a people’ or ‘host’
would be a tolerable emendation,

3 «The lake and the south,’ 7.c. the Sea of Chinnereth (Lake of Tiberias)
with its west shore.
XXXIV. 10] THE SONG OF MOSES: HIS DEATH 199

26. There is none like the God of Jeshurun,!
Who rides on the heavens for thy help,
And on the clouds in his excellency.

27. The God of the olden time is a dwelling-place,
And beneath are everlasting arms,
And he drove out the enemy before thee,
And he said, “ Destroy.”

28. So Israel dwelt securely,
The fountain of Jacob [dwelt] alone
In a land of corn and must,
Yea, his heavens drop down dew.

29. Happy art thou, O Israel :
Who is like thee, a people victorious through Yahweh,
The shield of thy help
And he that is the sword that sets thee high!
And thine enemies shall come fawning to thee,
And thou shalt tread on their high places.

XXXIV. 1.52 [And Moses went up] to the top of Pisgah
and Yahweh showed him all the land. 4. And Yahweh said to
him, ‘ This is the land which I swore to Abraham to Isaac and to
Jacob, saying, To thy seed will I give it: I have caused thee
to see it with thine eyes, but thou shalt not pass over thither.’
5. So Moses the servant of Yahweh died there in the land of
Moab according to the word of Yahweh. ... 7.» his eye
was not dim nor his freshness gone. 10. And afterwards there

1 ¢God of Jeshurun.’ This is the pointing followed by Sam., Syr., Onkel,
Vulgate.

2 xxxiv. 1.> seg. The verses following belong as a whole to the ‘ Oldest
Book of Hebrew History.’ But here, as in the book of Joshua, we have to meet
special difficulty because a Deuteronomical writer has edited and expanded an
older text. In ver. 42 we havea verbal repetition of Exod. xxxiii. 1. and the
Deuteronomist does not write ‘he swore, saying, I will give’ but ‘he swore
to give.’ Compare for similarity of idea and language ver. 10 with Gen.
xviii. 19, Exod. xxxiii, 11, Num. xii. 8.

3 *His eye was not dim,’ etc. These words cannot come from the
Deuteronomist who in Deut. xxxi. 2 makes Moses say, ‘I am a hundred and
twenty years old this day ; I can no more go out and come in.’
200 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. I.

arose no prophet in Israel such as Moses, whom Yahweh knew
face to face.

Joshua. I. 1.1 And it came to pass after the death of Moses,
the servant of Yahweh, that Yahweh spoke to Joshua, the son of
Nun, the minister of Moses, saying, 2. ‘Moses my servant is
dead ; now therefore arise go over the Jordan, thou and all this
people, to the land which I give them.’ 10. And Joshua com-
manded the overseers of the people, saying, 11. ‘Pass through
the midst of the camp and command the people, saying, “ Prepare
victuals for yourselves, for within three days you are to pass over
this Jordan [to] the land which Yahweh gives you.”’

II. 1.2 ‘And Joshua the son of Nun sent out of Shittim two
men as spies, secretly, saying, ‘Go view the land and Jericho.’
And they went and came into the house of a harlot whose name
was Rahab and lay there. 2. And it was told the king of Jericho,
saying, ‘Behold, there came men in hither of the children of
Israel to search out the land.’ 3. And the king of Jericho sent
to Rahab, saying, ‘Bring forth the men that are come to thee,

1 Joshua i. 1, 2, 10, 11. These verses belong in the main to the ‘ Oldest
Book of Hebrew History.’ But henceforth, as has been said, we have peculiar
difficulties to contend with, for the older history has been, in Joshua, and
especially in i.-xii., expanded and altered by a Deuteronomical writer.
Kuenen holds that the substance of these verses has been taken from the
‘Oldest Book,’ and with this opinion Dillmann agrees in the main. At least
he points out that it is the Elohist only who speaks of Joshua as ‘ the minister
of Moses’ (Exod. xxiv. 13, xxxiii. 11, Num. xi. 28), and that in 10, 11, there
may be a substratum from the Elohist or the Jahvist. Albers (Que//enbericht
in Jos. i.-xii. 1890) has proved how exactly the language of these verses
corresponds with that of the Elohist. This careful writer, who has had the
advantage of writing last, will be often referred to till we reach the end of
Joshua xii. In ver. 2 I have followed the Lxx. in omitting the superfluous
gloss ‘to the children of Israel.’ I have also (after Albers) removed the
Deuteronomical additions from ver. 11. This done, it is in exact con-
formity with ver. 2.

2 ii. The visit of the spies to Jericho. Here all critics are agreed
that the chapter as a whole belongs to the ‘Oldest Book,’ and it is also
plain that vv. 10, 11, have been added by the Deuteronomist (so e.g.
Kuenen, Dillmann, Albers). But the chapter cannot have been written, or
at least put in its present place, by the author who wrote i. 11, ili, z. In
1. 16] RAHAB AND THE SPIES 201

who have entered thy house, for they are come to search out all
the land.’ 4. And the woman took the two men and hid them,
and she said, ‘Indeed the men came to me, but I did not know
whence they were. 5. And it came to pass, about the time of
the shutting of the gate when it was dark that the men went out:
I do not know whither the men went : pursue after them quickly,
for you can overtake them.’ 6. But she had brought them up to
the roof and hid them with the stalks of flax which she had laid
in order on the roof. 7. And the men pursued after them on
the Jordan road to the fords ; and as soon as they who pursued
after them were gone, they shut the door. 8. And before they
had lain down, she came up to them on the roof, 9g. and she
said to them, ‘I know that Yahweh has given you the land, and
that the terror of you has fallen upon us, and that all the inhabi-
tants of the land melt away before you. 12. And now, I pray
you, swear to me by Yahweh, since I have dealt kindly with you,
that you also will deal kindly with me and my father’s house—
and give me a sure token— 13. and that you will save alive my
father and my mother and my brothers and sisters and all that is
theirs, and that you will deliver our souls from death.’ 14. And
the men said to her, ‘Our life for yours, if you utter not this our
business ; and it shall be, when Yahweh gives us the land, that
we will deal kindly and truly with thee.’ 15. Then she let them
down by a cord through the window, for her house was upon the
town wall and she dwelt on the wall. 16. And she said to them,
‘Go to the mountain country, lest the pursuers light upon you,
and hide there three days, till the pursuers be returned, and

i. 11 the Israelites are to cross the Jordan within three days, and in iti. 2
they begin to do so, when this time has elapsed ; whereas in chapter ii. the
spies go on the first day to Jericho (ver. 1). take refuge for three days in the
mountains (vv. 16-22), return next day with their news to Joshua (ver. 23),
and it is only on the day after that, that the Israelites begin their march
towards the Jordan (iii. 1), actually crossing it on the seventh day (iii. 5).
Evidently the words ‘after three days’ in iii. 2 have the same meaning as in
i. 11, In other words, the author of these verses did not know the story of
Rahab and the spies.

'
202 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. Il, 17

afterwards you can go on your way.’ 17. And the men said to
her, ‘ We will be guiltless of this thine oath which thou hast made
us swear. 18. Behold, when we come into the land, thou shalt
bind this line of scarlet thread in the window which thou didst
let us down by, and thou shalt gather to thee in the house thy
father and thy mother and thy brothers and all thy father’s house-
hold. 1g. And it shall be, that whosoever shall go out of the
doors of thy house into the street,—his blood shall be on his
head and we shall be guiltless, and whosoever shall be with thee
in the house,—his blood shall be on our head, if a hand be
raised against him. 20. But if thou utter this our business, then
we will be guiltless of thine oath which thou hast made us swear.’
21. And she said, ‘ According to your words, so be it.’ And she
sent them away and they departed, and she bound the scarlet line
in the window. 22. And they went and came to the mountain
country and abode there three days, till the pursuers had re-
turned ; and the pursuers sought them through all the way but
did not find them. 23. Then the two men returned and de-
scended from the mountain country and crossed over and came
to Joshua the son of Nun and told him all that had befallen them.
24. And they said to Joshua, ‘ Yahweh has delivered all the land
into our hands, and moreover all the inhabitants of the land melt
away before us.’

III.1 1. And Joshua rose up early in the morning and they
removed from Shittim and came to the Jordan, he and all the
children of Israel ; and they lodged there before they passed over.
2. And it came to pass after three days that the officers went

1 jii.-iv. The waters of the Jordan miraculously divided and the
transit of the people. Wellhausen has shown (and his opinion has been
generally accepted) that two accounts have been intermingled in this section
of the ‘Oldest Book.’ According to one, stones were erected (probably by
the people) at Gilgal, the first station of the Israelites on the west of the
Jordan. According to the other account the stones were placed in the middle
of the Jordan itself by twelve men chosen from the twelve tribes. It is because
two accounts have been mixed together that the story, as it stands, is so con-
fused. Thus in iii, 12 Joshua tells the people to chose twelve men; no ex-
Ill. 1 1] THE PASSAGE OF THE JORDAN 203

through the midst of the camp. 3. And they commanded the
people, saying, ‘When you see the ark of the covenant of Yahweh
and the priests bearing it, then you shall remove from your place
and go after it. 4. Yet there shall be a space between you and
it, about two thousand cubits by measure: come not near it, that
you may know the way by which you must go, for you have not
passed this way heretofore.’ 5. And Joshua said to the people,
‘Sanctify yourselves, for to-morrow Yahweh will do wonders
among you.’ 6. And Joshua spoke to the priests, saying, ‘Take
up the ark of the covenant and pass over before the people.’
And they took up the ark of the covenant and went before the
people. 8. [And Yahweh said to Joshua], ‘Thou shalt command
the priests that bear the ark of the covenant, saying, ‘‘ When you
are come to the brink of the waters of the Jordan, you shall
stand still in the Jordan.”’ 9g. And Joshua said to the children
of Israel, ‘Come hither and hear the words of Yahweh.’! 10.
And Joshua said, ‘Hereby you shall know that a living God is
in the midst of you, and that he will without fail drive out from
before you the Canaanite and the Hittite, and the Hivite, and
the Perizzite, and the Girgashite, and the Amorite, and the
Jebusite.? r1. Behold, the ark of the covenant? passes over

planation of the reason for choosing them is given, and the verse is in complete
isolation. But in iv. 1-5 Yahweh commands Joshua to choose the twelve
men, and this time the reason is given, viz. that they may carry the stones. In
iv. II we read that the people and priests have both passed over, though even
this single verse contains a contradiction and makes the priests both the last
and the first to cross. But in iv. 15 the priests are commanded to come up
from the Jordan, as if they had not done so already. There are also
numerous repetitions of the same thing. Comp. e.g. iii. 17 with iv. Io.

1 *Vahweh.’ The text has ‘Yahweh, your God,’ a turn of expression
characteristic of the Deuteronomist, and therefore added here by him.

2 ¢The Canaanite and the Hittite,’ etc. Here we have seven nations, a
complete number peculiar to the Deuteronomist (Deut. vii. 1; comp. Josh.
xxiv. 11), so that there has been in all likelihood some alteration here by the
hand of an editor.

3 ©The ark of the covenant.’ The text adds, ‘of the Lord of the whole
earth,’ words which in Hebrew destroy the grammatical construction, and are
a manifest interpolation.
204 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. Ill. 12

before you into the Jordan. 12. Now, therefore, take you twelve
men out of the tribes of Israel, for every tribe a man. 13. And
it shall come to pass, when the soles of the feet of the priests
that bear the ark of Yahweh! shall rest in the waters of Jordan,
that the waters of Jordan shall be cut off, [/.e.] the waters that
come down from above, and shall stand in one heap.’ 14. And
it came to pass, when the people removed from their tents, to
pass over Jordan, the priests bore the ark? being before the
people: 15. and when they that bore the ark were come to
Jordan, and the feet of the priests that bore the ark were dipped
in the Jordan—for the Jordan overflows all its banks all the
time of harvest, 16. that the waters which came down from
above, stood and rose up in one great heap, a great way off at
Adam, the city that is beside Zarethan: and those that went
down to the salt sea* were wholly cut off: and the people passed
over right against Jericho. 17. And the priests that bore the ark?
stood firm on dry ground in the midst of Jordan, and all Israel
passed, until all the nation were passed clean over Jordan. IV. 1.
And it came to pass, when all the nation were passed clean over
Jordan, that Yahweh spoke to Joshua, saying, 2. ‘Take you
twelve men out of the people, out of every tribe a man, 3. and
do you command them, ‘‘Take you hence out of the midst’ of
Jordan, out of the place where the priests feet stood firm, twelve
stones, and carry them over with you, and lay them down in the
quarters, where you are to pass the night.”’ 4. Then Joshua
called the twelve men, whom he had appointed from the children
of Israel, out of every tribe a man, 5. and Joshua said to them,
‘Pass over before the ark of Yahweh ® into the midst of Jordan,
and take you ‘up every man of you a stone on his shoulder,

1 ©The ark.” The text again adds, ‘ the Lord of the whole earth.’

2 «The ark.’ The text adds, ‘ of the covenant,’ which is ungrammatical.

% ¢Salt sea.’ The text adds, ‘Sea of the ‘‘Arabah,”’ or plain, which is
the equivalent name with the Deuteronomist.

4 «Bore the ark.’ The words ‘of the covenant of Yahweh’ have been
added in defiance of grammar.

5 «The ark of Yahweh.’ The Deuteronomist adds, ‘ your God.’
Iv. 18] THE MONUMENT OF TWELVE STONES 205

according to the number of the tribes of the children of Israel,
6. that this may be a sign in the midst of you, that when your
children ask in time to come, saying, ‘‘ What mean you by these
stones?” 7. then you shall say to them, “Because the waters
of the Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of
Yahweh ; when it passed over Jordan, the waters of Jordan were
cut off: and these stones shall be a memorial for the children of
Israel for ever.”’ 8. And the children of Israel did as Joshua
commanded, and took up twelve stones out of the midst of
Jordan, as Yahweh spoke to Joshua, according to the number of
the tribes of the children of Israel, and they carried them over
with them to their quarters, and laid them down there. 9. And
Joshua set up twelve stones in the midst of the Jordan in the
place where the feet of the priests that bore the ark of the cove-
nant, stood ; and they are there to this day. 1o. For the priests
who bore the ark stood in the midst of the Jordan until every-
thing was finished that Yahweh commanded Joshua to speak to
the people, according to all that Moses commanded Joshua :1
and the people passed over in all haste. 11. And it came to
pass when all the people were clean passed over, that the ark of
Yahweh passed over and ‘the priests before the people.? r2. And
the children of Reuben and the children of Gad, and the half
tribe of Manasseh, passed over armed before the children of
Israel, as Moses spoke to them. 15. And Yahweh spake to
Joshua, saying, 16. ‘Command the priests who bear the ark of
the covenant 3 that they come up out of Jordan.’ 17. And Joshua
commanded the priests, saying, ‘Come up out of Jordan.’ 18.
And it came to pass, when the priests who bore the ark of the

1 © According to all that Moses commanded Joshua.’ Omitted in Lxx.,
and possibly an interpolation.

2 <The priests before the people.’ The LXxx. has ‘the stones before the
people,’ which may be correct.

3 ©The ark of the covenant.’ The text has ‘the ark of the testimony,’ a
phrase peculiar to the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ We need not however attribute the
whole verse to him, as Dillmann does. A comparison of the LXx. text shows
how easily a scribe might make such an alteration.
206 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. IV. 20

covenant of Yahweh were come up out of the midst of Jordan,
and the soles of the priests’ feet were lifted up to the dry ground,
that the waters of Jordan returned to their place, and went over
all its banks, as before. 20. And those twelve stones which they
took out of Jordan, Joshua set up at Gilgal. V. 1.1 And it
came to pass, when all the kings of the Amorites who were
beyond Jordan,” and all the kings of the Canaanites who were
by the sea, heard that Yahweh had dried up the waters of the
Jordan from before the children of Israel till they passed over,®
that their heart melted, neither was there spirit in them any more
because of the children of Israel.

2.” At that time Yahweh said to Joshua, ‘ Make thee knives
of flint, and circumcise the children of Israel. 3. And Joshua
made him knives of flint, and circumcised the children of Israel

vy. 1, Dillmann attributes this verse to the Deuteronomist, and certainly
it is closely allied to ii, 10, 11, which are from his hand. But the priority may
be on the side of the verse before us : it forms a natural conclusion to ch. iii.
4, and the mention of the Amorites and the Canaanites west of Jordan may
be due to the combination of words from the Elohist, who calls the inhabi-
tants west of Jordan Amorites, with those of the Jahvist, who calls them
Canaanites.

2 Jordan.’ The Hebrew text adds, ‘ westward,’ which is absent in
TK

3 © Till they passed over.’ So Hebrew marginal reading and all the other
versions, including even the Targum and the Arabic of the London Poly-
glott.

4 vv. 2, 3, 8, 9. According to the author of these verses, circumcision had
been usual among the Egyptians, but was not practised by the Hebrews, who
bore the scorn or reproach of Egypt on this account. This view is allied to,
though different from, that of the Jahvist, who traces the beginning of Hebrew
circumcision to the family of Moses (Exod. iv. 24 seg.). But it is at variance
with the later view of the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ who represents God’s covenant
with Abraham, as resting on the circumcision of his male descendants (Gen.
xvii.), and regards circumcision as ‘the sign of the covenant,’ and therefore
anything rather than a following of Egyptian custom. Hence, an editor or
collector has interpolated in ver. 2 the words ‘again’ and ‘the second time.’
This interpolation appears to be of late origin, for it is wanting in the Vatican
Ms. of the Lxx., which has simply, ‘sit down’ (‘shev’ for ‘shuv’) ‘and
circumcise the children of Israel.’ Next, vv. 4-7 have been added to ex-
plain the scandal that the children of Israel had been hitherto uncircumcised.
It is said that this applied only to the children of the men who left Egypt.
v. 14] THE REPROACH OF EGYPT 207

at the hill of the foreskins. 8. And it came to pass that when
they had done circumcising all the nation that they stayed in their
places in the camp till they were well. 9. And Yahweh said to
Joshua, ‘This day I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from
off you.’ So the name of that place was called Gilgal to this
day.

13.1 And it came to pass when Joshua was by Jericho that
he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man
over against with his sword drawn in his hand; and Joshua went
to him and said to him, ‘ Art thou for us or for our adversaries ?’
14. And he said, ‘Nay, but as prince of the host of Yahweh am
I now come.’ And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and
bowed down and said to him, ‘What says my lord to his slave?’

Fortunately the interpolation is so clumsy that its character is easily seen.
Joshua is said to have circumcised the children of Israel ‘a second time.’
When on any supposition had he done so before? Why were not the children
of Israel born in the desert circumcised according to the terms of the covenant
on the eighth day? How could the Israelites incur ‘the reproach of Egypt,’
or rather ‘ of the Egyptians,’ if they were circumcised so long as the Egyptians
knew them, and uncircumcised only when they had passed utterly from the
knowledge and interest of the Egyptians? The original document in the
verses before us was first pointed out by Hollenberg, whose results have been
adopted by Wellhausen, Kuenen, Dillmann, Kittel, etc. The objection of
Albers rests on an impossible interpretation of the words, ‘ reproach of Egypt.’
Finally, observe that the old legend is connected, like so many others, with a
meaning given to the name ofa place. The ‘hill of foreskins’ was no doubt
so called from its shape. So Gilgal probably means ‘ cairn’ or ‘ cromlech,’
but the writer fancifully connects it with ‘ galal,’ to ‘roll.’ It did not occur
to him that the thing rolled away was the chief point which the popular name,
had it been given as he thought, must before all things have expressed. As
to the use of flint, comp. the note on Exod. xx. 25; see also Exod. iv, 25,

1 13-15. The appearance of the angel to Joshua may have meant to
explain the sanctity of the ‘high place’ at Gilgal. We know that it was a
popular place of devotion (Am. iv. 4, v.53 Hos. ix. 15, xii, 12), and the
*Oldest Book’ constantly connects the old Canaanite shrines with divine or
angelic appearances, and so with the worship of Israel. At the same time it
is doubtful whether we have the story in its original form. We should expect
Gilgal to be mentioned rather than Jericho, which, to be sure, was near
Gilgal. Again, it is only late writers who mention the ‘ host’ or ‘army of
Yahweh’ (Ps. ciii. 20; cxlvill. 2; comp., however, I Kings xxii. 19), and
it is not before Daniel (x. 13) that an angel is called ‘a prince.’ See Kuenen,
Onderz. 1. § 13, 21.
208 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JOSH. V. 15

15. And the captain of the host of Yahweh said to Joshua,
‘Draw thy shoe from off thy foot for the place on which thou
standest is holy.’ And Joshua did so.

VI.! 1. Now Jericho was straitly shut up because of the
children of Israel: none went out and none camein. 2. And
Yahweh said to Joshua, [‘See, I have given into thy hand Jericho
and its king and ?] the mighty men of valour. 3. And you shall
compass the city, all the men of war, going about the city once;

+ vi. The taking of Jericho. Wellhausen, whose results have been as
a whole universally accepted, first clearly showed that two accounts have
been united in the chapter. According to the first and simpler account, the
Israelites march round Jericho once on seven successive days. The first six
days they march silently : on the seventh, at a word from Joshua, they shout,
and the walls of the city fall. So vv. 3, 74, 10, part of 11, 14, in 15? the
words ‘and it came to pass on the seventh day that they compassed the city
after the same manner,’ 15>, in 20 the words, ‘and the people shouted,’
According to the other account, the Israelites march round the city seven times
in one day, in their midst is the ark accompanied by seven priests carrying
horns. In the seventh march round the city the priests sound the horns ; at
this signal the people shout, and the walls of Jericho fall. So part of ver. 4,
vv. 5, 7°, 8, 9, part of 13, part of 15, 162, 20%. The editor has welded the
two accounts together, and added something of his own, but has failed to
make the two accounts into one consistent story. Thus in ver. 20 we read,
‘So the people shouted, and they blew with the trumpets; and it came to pass,
when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, that the people shouted with
a great shout,’ etc. Here the fact that the people shouted is mentioned twice
in the same verse. First they shouted without hearing the trumpet, although
ver 16° distinctly implies that the shout is to begin after the sound of the trum-
pet. And how are we to understand the words, ‘and they blew with the
trumpets.’ Who are ‘they’? The English version, like the LXX., supposes
the priests to be intended, but the priests have not been named since ver. 16.
The words of ver. 20 become intelligible when we remember that, according
to ver, 10, the people were to shout when Joshua gave the command, according
to 5 when the priests blew a long blast on the trumpets. Both accounts are
mixed up in ver. 20. The conclusion of the former account ran thus : ‘Joshua
said to the people, Shout, for Yahweh has given you the city (16°). So the
people shouted and blew with the trumpets’ (20 at the beginning), The
latter ran thus: ‘And it came to pass, at the seventh time, that the priests
blew with the trumpets (16), and it came to pass, when the people heard the
sound of the trumpet, that the people shouted with a great shout, and the
walls fell down,’ etc.

2 «See, Ihave given,’ etc. The words in brackets betray the style of the
Deuteronomist.
vi. 16] THE WALLS OF JERICHO 209

thus shalt thou do six days. 4. And seven priests shall bear
seven trumpets of rams’ horns before the ark, and the seventh day
you shall compass the city seven times, and the priests shall blow
with the trumpets. 5. And it shall be that when they make a
long blast with the ram’s horn, and when you hear the sound of
the trumpet, all the people shall shout with a great shout, and the
wall of the city shall fall down flat, and the people shall go up
every man straight before him. 6. And Joshua the son of Nun
called the priests and said to them, ‘Take up the ark of the
covenant, and let seven priests bear seven trumpets of rams’ horns
before the ark of Yahweh.’ 7. And he said to the people, ‘ Pass
on and compass the city, and let the armed men pass on before
the ark of Yahweh.’ 8. And it was so, that when Joshua had
spoken to the people, the seven priests bearing the seven trumpets
of rams’ horns before Yahweh passed on, and blew with the
trumpets, and the ark of the covenant of Yahweh followed them.
g. And the armed men went before the priests that blew the
trumpets, and the rearward went after the ark, [the priests] blow-
ing with horns as they went. 10. And Joshua commanded the
people, saying, ‘You shall not shout nor let your voice he heard,
neither shall any word go out of your mouth, till the day I bid
you shout; then shall you shout. 11. So he caused the ark of
Yahweh to compass the city, going about it once: and they came
into the camp, and spent the night there. 12. And Joshua rose
early in the morning, and the priests took up the ark of Yahweh.
13. And the seven priests, carrying seven trumpets of rams’ horns
before the ark of Yahweh, went on continually, and blew with the
trumpets ; and the armed men went before them, and the rearward
came after the ark of Yahweh, [the priests] blowing with the
trumpets as they went. 14. And on the second day they com-
passed the city once, and returned to the camp: so they did six
days. 15. And it came to pass, on the seventh day, that they
rose early at the dawning of the day, and compassed the city after
the same manner seven times: only on that day they compassed
the city seven times. 16. And it came to pass at the seventh
oO
210 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. VI. 17

time, when the priests blew with the trumpets, Joshua said to the
people, ‘Shout, for Yahweh has given you the city. 17. And the
city and all that is in it shall be devoted to Yahweh ; only Rahab
the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house,
because she hid the messengers that you sent. 18. And do you,
in any wise, keep yourselves from the devoted thing, lest you
covet! and take of the devoted thing, and so make the camp of
Israel devoted,” and trouble it. 19. And all the silver and gold
and vessels of brass and iron are holy to Yahweh; they shall
come into the treasury of Yahweh.’ 20. So the people shouted,
and they blew with the trumpets ; and it came to pass, when the
people heard the sound of the trumpet, that the people shouted
with a great shout, and the wall fell down flat, and the people
went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they
took the city. 21. And they devoted all that was in the city,
both man and woman, both young and old, and ox and sheep
and ass, with the edge of the sword. 22. And Joshua said to the
two men that spied out the land, ‘Go into the harlot’s house, and
bring out thence the woman, and all that is hers, as you swore to
her.’ 23. And the young men the spies went in, and brought out
Rahab, and her father, and her mother, and her brothers, and
all that was hers, all her kindred also they brought out, and they
set them without the camp of Isra 24. And they burnt the
city with fire and all that was in it: only the silver and the gold
and the vessels of brass and of iron they put into the treasury of
the house of Yahweh. 25. But Rahab the harlot, and her father’s
household, and all that she had, Joshua saved alive ; and she dwelt
in the midst of Israel to this day, because she hid the messengers
whom Joshua sent to spy out Jericho. 26. And Joshua charged

1 “Lest you covet.” So Lxx.

2 «Devoted.’ The city and its people were ‘consecrated’ to Yahweh by
destruction. Then the thing or person put under the ‘cherem’ or ban was
at once sacred and accursed, and he who appropriated anything so consecrated
became in his turn consecrated or accursed. Compare the use of ‘sacer’ in
Latin.
Vil. 2] CURSE ON RESTORERS OF JERICHO—MARCH ON AI 211

them with an oath at that time, saying, ‘Cursed be the man!
before Yahweh who shall arise and build the city of Jericho: at
the cost of his firstborn shall he lay its foundation, and at the cost
of his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it.

VII. 2.2 And Joshua sent men to Ai, which is beside

» ‘Cursed be the man.’ We are told in r Kings xvi. 34 that in Ahab’s
reign Hiel rebuilt Jericho, and paid the penalty by the loss of his eldest and
youngest son, ‘according to the word of Yahweh which he spoke by Joshua.’
The curse in this verse implies, as Dillmann remarks, acquaintance with the
story, though not of course with the record of it in the Book of Kings. Many
ancient nations (see e.g. Job xv. 28) thought it unlucky to rebuild ruins.
Kuenen (Oxderz. i. § 13, 15) suggests that probably Hiel sought to avert the
wrath of his God by sacrificing two of his sons. On the ‘old custom of
immuring a living person in the walls or crushing him’ under the foundation
stone of a new building, see Frazer, Golden Bough, i. p. 144.

* vii. 2-26. Here with one notable exception the narrative runs smoothly.
Achan takes the devoted thing: the Israelites are defeated by the people of
Ai: Yahweh indicates the cause of his anger: the guilty person is discovered
by lot: he is stoned, and a cairn is raised over his corpse. But in ver. 25>
we find the greatest confusion. It runs thus: ‘ All Israel stoned them with
stones, and they burned them with fire and stoned them with stones.’ The
stoning is mentioned twice. The first mention of the stoning must be excluded
on linguistic grounds, for the word used (‘ragam’) is characteristic of the
‘Priestly Writer.” Even when this late interpolation has been removed, we
naturally ask how the same persons could be burned and stoned. It has been
answered that Achan and his family were stoned, and their corpses burned.
There is, however, no hint of such a thing in the text, and why is the burning
mentioned first? Besides, who are ‘they’? In ver. 26 it is over Achan
alone that the cairn is raised. Accordingly, we are led to adopt the solution
given by Albers. He supposes that a Deuteronomical editor has introduced
the mention of burning in deference to the enactment in Deut. xiii. 16, 17, so
that not only 25» but also 14, 15 are from his pen. The Deuteronomist has
made his alteration awkwardly. The law (Deut. xiii. 16, 17) required that the
inhabitants of a devoted city should be slain by sword and their goods burned.
The interpolator has left the death by stoning as it stood in the older account,
and interpolated the mention of fire so clumsily that the whole narrative has
become obscure and confused. The theory of Albers is confirmed by an
examination of ver. 24. ‘And Joshua took Achan the son of Zerah (and the
silver, and the mantle, and the wedge of gold, and his sons and his daughters,
and his oxen and his asses, and his sheep and his tent, and all that he had),
and all Israel with him, and they brought them up into the valley of Achor.’
Here the words, ‘and all Israel with him,’ where they stand make no sense ;
and we have no right to transpose them, as has been done in the English
version. If, however, we regard the words in brackets as an interpolation,
the sense is restored: the two subjects, ‘Joshua’ and ‘all Israel with him,’
212 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. VIL. 3

Bethel,! saying, ‘Go up and spy out the land.’ And the men went
up and spied out Ai. 3. And they returned to Joshua and said to
him, ‘ Let not all the people go up, but let about two or:three thou-
sand men go up and smite Ai; make not all the people toil thither,
for they are but few. 4. So there went up thither of the people
about three thousand men; and they fled before the men of Ai.
5. And the men of Ai smote of them about thirty-six men, and they
chased them from before the gate to Shebarim, and smote them at
the declivity: and the hearts of the people melted and became as
water. 6. And Joshua rent his clothes and fell to the earth upon
his face before the ark of Yahweh until the evening, he and the
elders of Israel, and they put dust on their heads. 7. And Joshua
said, ‘Ah, my Lord Yahweh, why hast thou at all brought this
people over Jordan, to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, to
cause us to perish? Would that we had been content and dwelt
beyond Jordan! 8. Oh Lord, what shall I say, after Israel has
turned his back upon his enemies? 9. For the Canaanites and
the inhabitants of the land shall hear of it, and shall compass us
round and cut off our name from the earth: and what wilt thou
do for thy great name?’ 10. And Yahweh said to Joshua, ‘Get
thee up: wherefore art thou thus fallen on thy face? 11. Israel
has sinned: yea, they have even transgressed my covenant which
I commanded them: yea, they have even taken of the devoted
thing, and have also stolen and have also dissembled, and have
even put it among their stuff. 12. Therefore the children of

are no longer separated by an intolerable interval. Further, in ver. 26, the
words ‘And Yahweh turned from the fierceness of his anger’ are borrowed
without change from Deut. xiii. 18, and interrupt the connection. In 12, in
which Joshua, instead of being addressed singly, is suddenly identified with
the rest of Israel, we have the language of the Deuteronomist ; as also in the
words ‘God of Israel,’ interpolated in verses 13, 19, 20. The language of
the ‘ Priestly Writer’ is found, as has been said, in ver. 25, and also in ver. 1
(‘ma‘al’ and ‘ matteh’ for tribe instead of ‘shevet’) and in 18,

1 “Which is beside Bethel.’ So Lxx. The present Hebrew text has
altered Bethcl, ‘house of God,’ into Bethaven, ‘house of iniquity,’ in its zeal
to show that Bethel was not a lawful sanctuary. A still later scribe misunder-
stood this, and took Bethaven for an independent place, so that we have
“beside Bethaven, on the east side of Bethel.’
vil. 26] ACHAN’S TRESPASS 213

Israel cannot stand before their enemies, they turn their backs
before their enemies, because they are become a thing vowed to
destruction: 13. Up, sanctify the people, and say, Sanctify your-
selves for the morrow: for thus says Yahweh, There is a devoted
thing in the midst of thee, O Israel: thou canst not stand before
thine enemies.’ 16. So early in the morning Joshua brought
Israel near by their tribes, and the tribe of Judah was taken: 17.
and he brought near the families! of Judah: and he took the
family of the Zerahites: and he brought near the family of the
Zerahites by households,? and Zabdi was taken. 18. And he
brought near his household man by man, and Achan was taken.
1g. And Joshua said to Achan, ‘ My son, give, I pray thee, glory
to Yahweh, and give him praise, and tell me now what thou hast
done : hide it not from me.’ 20. And Achan answered Joshua and
said, ‘ Of a truth I have sinned against Yahweh, and thus and thus
have I done. 21. When I saw among the spoil a goodly Baby-
lonish mantle, and two hundred shekels of silver, and a wedge of
gold of fifty shekels weight, then I coveted them and took them ;
and, behold, they are hid in the earth in the midst of my tent,
and the silver under it.’ 22. So Joshua sent messengers, and they
ran to the tent ; and, behold, it was hid in his tent, and the silver
under it. 23. And they took them from the midst of the tent
and brought them to Joshua and to all the elders? of Israel, and
they laid them down before Yahweh. 24. And Joshua took
Achan, [he] and all Israel with him; and they brought him up
to the valley of Achor. 25. And Joshua said, ‘Why hast thou
troubled us? Yahweh shall trouble thee this day :’ and they
stoned him. 26. And they raised over him a great heap of
stones to this day. Therefore the name of that place was called
the Valley of Achor to this day.

‘Families.’ So LXx., Vulg., and some Hebrew mss.
‘ By households.’ So Syr., Vulg., and some MSS.
‘Elders of Israel.” So Lxx. Comp. ver. 6.
4 They stoned him.’ The text has, ‘and they stoned them with stones.’
The number of the object has been changed from plural to singular for the

Cr
214 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. VUI. I

VIII. 1.1 And Yahweh said to Joshua, ‘Take all the people
of war with thee and arise, go upto Ai. 2% .... Set thee an
ambush for the city behind it.’ 3. So Joshua arose, and all the
people of war, to go up to Ai: and Joshua chose out thirty thou-
sand men, the mighty men of valour, to go up to Ai, and sent
them forth by night. 4. And he commanded them, saying,
‘Behold, you shall lie in ambush against the city, behind the city :
go not very far from the city, but be you all ready: 5. And I

reason given at the beginning of this chapter, and the last words, viz., ‘ with
stones,’ have been omitted, because ‘to stone with stones’ is a phrase
peculiar to the Deuteronomist.

1 viii. 1-29. The taking of Ai. In this section the hand of the Deuteronomi-
cal editor is easily traced. Thus, from ver. 1, I have omitted ‘ Fear not, neither
be thou dismayed’ (comp. Deut. i. 21, xxxi. 8), and ‘See, I have given into
thy hand the king of Ai and his people, and his city and his land’ (comp.
Deut. iii. 2, and note on Joshua vi. 2); from ver. 2 the former half (comp.
Deut. ii. 34 seg. iii. 6, xx. 14); from ver. 8 the words, ‘ According to the
word of Yahweh shall you do’ (they refer to the words excluded from ver. 2) ;
from ver. 18 the words, ‘For I will give it into thy hand’ (see above on
ver. I) ; lastly, the whole of ver. 27, which is inseparable from 2%.

These additions by the Deuteronomist (and possibly the list given should
be increased) do not affect the substance of the narrative. But it has been
long seen (e.g. by Knobel and Schrader) that this narrative, purified from
Deuteronomical additions, is still drawn from two sources. It is composite,
and therefore confused : so confused that the Lxx. have taken great liberties
with the text in the endeavour to make it consistent. The chief points of
divergence are these :—

Joshua leads the Israelites against Joshua leads the Israelites to battle
Ai. with the people of Ai and Bethel
(see ver. 17, where Bethel is men-

tioned for the first time).

Joshua despatches over-night 30,000
(perhaps a clerical error for 3000)
men to form an ambush behind Ai
(ver, 3).

The men in ambush are told to
seize Ai when its inhabitants have
deserted it in pursuit of the Israelites
(ver. 7).

Joshua in the daytime, and appar-
ently in the morning, despatches
about 5000 men to form an ambush
at the west of Ai (ver. 12).

The men in ambush take the city,
when Joshua, by command of
Yahweh, raises the javelin in his
hand. (This javelin is first mentioned
in ver, 18.) The people of Ai find
themselves between the chief force
of the Israelites and the ambush,
and so are cut to pieces.
VIII. 12] THE TAKING OF AI 215

and all the people that are with me shall approach the city: and
it shall come to pass, when they come out against us, as at the
first, that we shall flee before them. 6. And they will come out
after us till we have drawn them away from the city, for they will
say, They flee before us, as at the first: so we will flee before
them. 7%. And you shall rise up from the ambush and take
possession of the city. 8. And it shall be, when you have seized
upon the city, that you shall set the city on fire: see, I have
commanded you.’ 9. And Joshua sent them forth; and they
went to the ambush, and stayed between Bethel and Ai, on the
west side of Ai; but Joshua spent that night among the people.!
to. And early in the morning Joshua mustered the people and
went up, he and the elders of Israel, before the people to Ai. rr.
And all the people” that were with him went up, and drew near
and came before the city, and encamped on the north side of Ai:
now there was a valley between him and Ai. 12. And he took

The Israelites draw the men of Ai The Israelites are at first actually
from the city by a feigned flight defeated (ver. 15). Apparently,
(verses 5-7). they recover themselves by the magi-

cal effect of Joshua’s outstretched
spear. In any case, some magical
effect is attributed to the spear, for
Joshua holds it out till ‘he had
utterly devoted all the inhabitants of
Ai.’ Compare the effect of the ‘ rod
of God’ in the hand of Moses during
the battle between Israel and Amalek
(Exod. xvii. 8-16).

1 “Among the people.’ The ingenious emendation of Ewald has been
generally adopted. He reads ‘b*thok ha‘emeq’ for ‘b*thok ha‘am,’2.e. ‘in the
midst of the valley ’ for ‘in the midst of the people.’ Joshua spent the night
in the valley immediately tu the north of Ai. Had he sent on the ambush,
and remained behind with the people at Gilgal, time would have been lost,
and the ambush exposed to the risk of discovery. Still, the reading ‘among
the people’ may be, and probably is, due to the compiler who used two
documents for his ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ For in verses 10 and 11
he draws from his other document, according to which Joshua does not set
out for Ai till next morning. Then also he sends off the ambush, so that a
contradiction is still left.

2 ©All the people.’ An interpolator has added ‘of war,’ which makes
the Hebrew text ungrammatical.
216 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. VIII. 13

about five thousand men, and set them in ambush between Bethel
and Ai, on the west side of the city. 13. So they set the people,
all the host that was on the north of the city, and their liers in
wait that were on the west of the city; and Joshua went that
night into the midst of the valley. 14. And it came to pass, when
the king of Ai saw it, that they hasted and rose up early ; and the
men of the city went out against Israel to battle, he and all his
people, at the time appointed,! before the Arabah, but he did not
know that there was an ambush against him behind the city. 15.
And Joshua and Israel were beaten ? before them, and fled by the
way of the wilderness. 16. And all the people that were in the
city were called forth to pursue after them ; and they pursued after
Joshua, and were drawn away from the city. 17. And there was
not a man left in Ai or Bethel that went not out after Israel: and
they left the city open and pursued after Israel. 18. And Yahweh
said to Joshua, ‘Stretch out the javelin that is in thy hand
towards Ai.’ And Joshua stretched out the javelin that was in
his hand towards the city. 19. And the ambush rose quickly
out of their place, and they ran as soon as he had stretched out
his hand, and entered into the city and took it: and they hasted
and set the city on fire. 20. And when the men of Ai looked
behind them, they saw, and behold, the smoke of the city
ascended up to the heavens, and they had no power to flee this
way or that way: and the people that fled to the wilderness
turned back on the pursuers. 21. And when Joshua and all
Israel saw that the ambush had taken the city, and that the smoke
of the city ascended, then they turned again and slew the men of
Ai. 22. And the others came out of the city against them: so
they were in the midst of Israel, some on this side, and some on

 

1 © At the time appointed.’ No mention has been made of any appointed
time or place. The words belong to one of the documents which has been
mutilated in its combination with the other.

2 ‘Were beaten.’ The English translation (Revised) has ‘ made as if they
were beaten,’ which would remove one of the contradictions due to the com-
posite character of the narrative. But Kimchi rightly remarks that this transla-

tion would require another grammatical form (‘ hithpael ’ instead of ‘ niphal’).
1x. 3] AI DESTROYED 217

that side: and they smote them, so that they let none of them
remain or escape. 23. And the king of Ai they took alive, and
brought him to Joshua. 24. And it came to pass, when Israel
had made an end of slaying all the inhabitants of Ai in the field,
in the wilderness wherein they pursued them, and they were all
fallen by the edge of the sword till they were consumed, that all
Israel returned to Ai, and smote it with the edge of the sword.
25. And all that fell that day, both of men and women, were
twelve thousand—all the men of Ai. 26. And Joshua drew not
back his hand wherewith he stretched out the javelin, till he had
devoted all the inhabitants of the city. 28. So Joshua burnt Ai
and made it a heap for ever, a desolation to this day. 29. And
the king of Ai he hung ona tree till the eventide ; and at the
going down of the sun Joshua commanded, and they took his
corpse down from the tree, and they cast it down at the entering
of the gate of the city, and raised thereon a great heap of stones
to this day.

IX. 3.1 Now when the inhabitants of Gibeon heard what

+ ix. 3-27. The treaty with the Gibeonites. Here there is general
agreement on the following points :—(1) Verses 1, 2, ver. 9 from ‘ because
of the name’ to the end, verses 10, 24, 25, in ver. 27 the words ‘in the place
which he should choose,’ belong to the Deuteronomical editor. They are not
necessary to the context, and contain a number of characteristic phrases taken
verbally from Deuteronomy. It is also admitted that 17-21, and ‘ the princes
of the congregation,’ ‘the congregation,’ in verses 15 and 27, belong to the
‘Priestly Writer.’ (2) In the text thus purified we have two inconsistent
accounts united. In the one the Gibeonites go to ‘ the men of Israel,’ deceive
them, and make their treaty with them. Joshua, after the treaty has been
made, saves the Gibeonites from the rage of the Israelites, when the latter
find they have been outwitted. So verses 7, 12-14, 16, 22, 23, 25. According
to another account, the Gibeonites go directly to Joshua, so ver. 8; while in
other verses the two accounts have been welded together. Budde (Richter
zu. Samuel, p. 50 seg.), with whom Kittel is inclined to agree, denies that two
documents are to be found here; but he restores unity by emending the text
(see, in defence of its original duality, Wellhausen, Dillmann, Albers). (3)
The signs of Jahvist authorship in the one account, viz., that in which the
Gibeonites, called by the author Hivites, treat directly with the men of
Israel, are clear, and recognised by all critics.

Further, the story of the Gibeonites has a peculiar interest, because we
218 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. IX. 4

Joshua had done to Jericho and Ai, 4. they also dealt deceit-
fully, and went and took provisions,’ and took old sacks for their
asses, and wine-skins old and rent and bound up, 5. and old
and patched shoes on their feet, and old garments upon them, and
all the bread of their provision was dried into crumbs. 6. And
they went to Joshua to the camp at Gilgal, and said to him, and
to the men of Israel, ‘We are come from a far country: now
therefore make a covenant with us.’ 7. And the men of Israel
said to the Hivites, ‘Perhaps you dwell among us; and how
shall we make a covenant with you?’ 8. And they said to
Joshua, ‘We are thy slaves.’ And Joshua said to them, ‘Who
are you? and whence do you come?’ 9g. And they said to him,
‘From a far country thy servants are come. 11. And our elders
and all the inhabitants of our country spoke to us, saying, Take
provision in your hand for the journey, and go to meet them, and
say to them, We are your slaves: and now make a covenant with

can fix approximately the date at which the legend was formed. In the times
before the monarchy there was a girdle of independent Canaanite towns,
viz., Jebus or Jerusalem (2 Sam. v. 6 seg.), Kiriathjearim, Chephira, Beeroth,
Gibeon (Josh. ix. 17), Aijalon, Shaalbim (Judges i. 35), and Gezer (Judges
i. 29) which stretched right across the country from east to west, completely
parted Judah from the northern tribes, and made national union impossible.
Hence in Deborah’s song Judah is not even mentioned, though the aspiration
for the united action of the other tribes is the dominant idea of the song.
Some time before Saul’s reign a treaty was made between Israel and Gibeon,
and in this way the obstacle to co-operation between Judah and the northern
tribes was partly removed, especially as Aijalon and Shaalbim had been
already reduced to vassalage (Judges i. 35). Gibeon still, though with heavy
loss, maintained its independence against Saul, and David from motives of
superstition treated it as an independent power, even after the fall of Jeru-
salem. (2 Sam. xxi. See particularly ver. 2, ‘The Israelites had sworn unto
them,’ z.¢. they had made a treaty with them ; ‘Saul sought to smite them ;’
he would not of course try to smite his own vassals, much less his bondsmen.
The words can only mean that he attacked them in spite of the alliance.) At
last Solomon reduced the Canaanites generally, and therefore the Gibeonites
among them, to bondage (1 Kings ix. 21). Accordingly the legend before us
is in its origin later than Solomon, especially as the Gibeonites in it become
slaves to the ‘house (not tent) of Yahweh,’ ze. to the temple Solomon built.
Moreover, the legend must have arisen so long after Solomon’s time that the
true history of the Gibeonites was forgotten.
1 «Took provisions.’ So all the versions, even the Targum.
Xx. 3] THE COVENANT WITH THE GIBEONITES 219

us. 12. This our bread we took hot for our provision out of our
houses on the day we came forth to go to you; but now, behold,
it has become dry and is turned into crumbs. 13. And these
wine-skins which we filled were new, and, behold, they are rent ;
and these our garments and our shoes are become old by reason
of the very long journey.’ 14. And the men took of their pro-
vision, but they did not ask counsel at the mouth of Yahweh.
15. And Joshua made peace with them, and made a covenant
with them to let them live. 16. And it came to pass at the end
of three days after they had make a covenant with them, that
they heard that they were their neighbours, and that they dwelt
among them. 22. And Joshua called for them and spoke to
them, saying, ‘Why have you beguiled us, saying, We are very
far from you, when you dwell among us? 23. Now therefore
you are cursed; there shall never fail to be of you bondsmen,
both hewers of wood and drawers of water for the house of my
God.’ 26. And so he did to them, and delivered them out of the
hand of the children of Israel, so that they did not slay them.
27. And Joshua made them hewers of wood and drawers of
water for the altar of Yahweh to this day.

X. 1.1 Now it came to pass, when Adoni-Zedek king of Jeru-
salem heard how Joshua had taken Ai and had devoted it,? and
how the inhabitants of Gibeon had made peace with Israel,? 2.
that they feared greatly, because Gibeon was a great city, as one
of the royal cities, and because it was greater than Ai, and
because all its men were mighty. 3. So Adoni-Zedek king of
Jerusalem sent to Hoham king of Hebron, and to Piram,

1 x, 1-11, 16-27. The student should begin by reading these verses
together. They form a continuous history of the battle of Gibeon. Ver. 25,
however, is admittedly a later addition. The style of the Deuteronomist is
evident at a glance. Comp. Deut. 1. 21, xxxi. 8, Josh. i. 9, vili. 1. The
same holds good of ver. 8.

2 © And devoted it.’ The words which follow, ‘ As he did to Jericho and
its king, so he did to Ai and its king,’ break the connection, and are almost
certainly an interpolation. So Dillmann.

3 ‘Had made peace with Israel.’ The Hebrew text adds, ‘ and were in
the midst of them.’ They are absent in the LXX.
220 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JOsH. Xx. 4

king of Jarmuth, and to Japhia king of Lachish, and to Debir
king of Eglon, saying, 4. ‘Come up to me and help me, and
smite Gibeon, for it has made peace with Joshua and the chil-
dren of Israel.’ 5. So the five kings of the Amorites, the king
of Jerusalem, the king of Hebron, the king of Jarmuth, the king
of Lachish, the king of Eglon, gathered themselves together, and
went up, they and all their hosts, and encamped against Gibeon,
and made war against it. 6. And the men of Gibeon sent to
Joshua to the camp at Gilgal, saying, ‘Slack not thy hand from
thy servants ; come up to us quickly, and save us, and help us:
for all the kings of the Amorites ! are gathered together against us.’
7. So Joshua went up from Gilgal, he and all the people of
war with him, and all the mighty men of valour. 9. Joshua
therefore came on them suddenly, for he went up from Gilgal
all the night. ro. And Yahweh threw them into confusion
before Israel, and he slew them with a great slaughter at Gibeon,
and chased them by the way of the ascent of Beth-horon, and
smote them to Amekah and to Makkedah. 11. And it came to
pass, as they fled before Israel, while they were in the descent of
Beth-horon, that Yahweh cast down great stones from the heavens
upon them as far as Azekah, so that they died: there were more
that died with the hailstones than those whom the children of
Israel slew with the sword.

12. Then? spoke Joshua to Yahweh, and said in the sight of
Israel—

‘Sun, stand thou still on Gibeon,
And thou, Moon, in the valley of Aijalon.

1+ All the kings of the Amorites.’ The text adds, ‘that dwell in the
hill country.’ Most of the kings dwelt in the Shephelah or lowlands, so that
the words are an unsuitable interpolation. Comp. Deut. i. 44.

2 12-15. The sunand moon stand still at Joshua’s prayer. Plainly this
§ cannot be from the same hand which wrote the rest of the chapter. Yahweh
has already done the best that could be done for the Israelites, for he has
destroyed their foes by a miraculous shower of hailstones. Besides, according
to this § the miracle of the lengthened day closes the scene. Joshua (ver.
15) returns to the camp at Gilgal ; whereas in ver. 16 the pursuit of the
Amorite kings is still continued. On the other hand, the § 12-15 can scarcely
x. 22] THE SUN AND MOON STAND STILL : 221

13. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed,

Till the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies.’
Is not this written in the Book of the Upright?! And the
sun stayed in the midst of the heavens, and made no haste to go
down about a whole day. 14. And there was no day like that
before it or after it, that Yahweh listened to the voice of a man,
for Yahweh fought for Israel.

15. And Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, to the
camp.

16. And these five kings fled and hid themselves in the cave
at Makkedah. 17. And it was told Joshua, saying, ‘The five
kings are found, hidden in the cave, at Makkedah.’ 18. And
Joshua said, ‘ Roll great stones to the mouth of the cave, and set
men by it to keep them: but stay not you, 1g. pursue after
your enemies and smite the hindmost of them: suffer them not
to enter into their cities.2. 20. And it came to pass, when Joshua
and the children of Israel had made an end of slaying them with
a very great slaughter, till they were consumed, and the remnant
that were left had entered into the fortified cities, 21. that all
the people returned to the camp to Joshua at Makkedah in peace ;
none sharpened his tongue against the children of Israel. 22.
Then said Joshua, ‘Open the mouth of the cave and bring forth

come, as Dillmann supposes, from the Deuteronomist. The style of 13>, 143,
is, as Wellhausen points out, wholly unlike his. Still, here as elsewhere,
we have at least one phrase interpolated by a Deuteronomical editor, viz. :
‘On the day that Yahweh delivered up the Amorites before the children of
Israel’ (comp. Deut. i. 8, 21; ii 24, 31, ete. : the expression in this sense
occurs nine times in Deuteronomy, and nowhere else in the Pentateuch).

1 «Book of the Upright.’ ‘The Book of the Brave’ would perhaps be a
better translation if our word ‘brave’ had, like the German ‘ brav’ or the
French ‘ brave,’ the double sense of ‘honest’ and ‘courageous.’ The ‘ Book
of the Upright’ seems to have been a book of poems, for in 2 Sam. i. 18, the
only other place in which it is mentioned, a poem is also quoted from it.
Possibly, we have another poetical quotation from this book in the Lxx. text of
1 Kings viii. 53. See Robertson Smith, 0.7. zn Jewish Church, p. 403 seq.

2 Suffer them not to enter into their cities.” The Deuteronomical editor
has added, ‘for Yahweh your God has delivered them into your hand.’
Comp. vi. 2, viii. 1.
2272) THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. X. 23

these five kings to me out of the cave.’ 23. And they brought
him forth ! those five kings out of the cave: the king of Jerusalem,
the king of Hebron, the king of Jarmuth, the king of Lachish, the
king of Eglon. 24. And it came to pass, when they brought
forth these kings to Joshua, that Joshua called for all the men of
Israel, and said to the chiefs of the men of war that went with
him, ‘Come near, put your feet on the necks of these kings.’ And
they came near and put their feet upon their necks. 26. And
Joshua smote them,? and put them to death, and hanged them on
five trees: and they were hanging on the trees till the evening.
27.° And it came to pass, at the time of the going down of the
sun, that Joshua commanded, and they took them down off the
trees, and cast them into the cave wherein they had hidden them-
selves, and laid great stones on the mouth of the cave to this day.

28.4 and Joshua took Makkedah on that day, and smote it
with the edge of the sword, and its king: he devoted it.

29. And Joshua passed from Makkedah, and all Israel with
him, to Libnah, and fought against Libnah. 30. And he smote
it with the edge of the sword.

1 © And they brought forth.’ The words, ‘ And they did so,’ with which
the verse begins in the Hebrew, disturb the sense, and are absent in the Lxx.

2 ‘And Joshua smote them.’ The Hebrew text has ‘smote them after-
wards,’ but the word ‘afterwards’ from its awkward position in the sentence
seems to be an interpolation occasioned by the insertion of the Deutero-
nomical verse, 25.

3 27, The taking down of the corpses at sun-down accords with Deut.
xxi. 23. But the resemblance between the two passages is not verbal. And
the custom may well have been older than the enactment in Deuteronomy.
Accordingly, there is no need to assign this verse, or viii. 29, to a Deutero-
nomical editor.

4 28-39, 43. The origin of these verses is very doubtful. They accord
with the unhistorical view of the Deuteronomist that Joshua swept the older
inhabitants of Canaan away and made the land a ¢adwla rasa for the settle-
ment of Israel. Certainly, too, Deuteronomical phrases recur frequently,
viz.: ‘Ie left none remaining,’ in 28, 30, 33, 37, 393 ‘Delivered into
the hand of,’ 30, 32. Indeed, we have in this § language later still,
viz.: ‘All the souls that were therein’ (28, 30, 32, 35, 37), for it is only
the ‘ Priestly Writer’ who uses ‘soul’ for ‘person.’ Still, there is probably
in this § a substratum older than the Deuteronomist. For in 37 we are told
that Joshua killed the king of Hebron, whereas according to 23 seg. he had
XL 1] SUBJUGATION OF THE SOUTH 223

3t. And Joshua passed from Libnah, and all Israel with
him, to Lachish, and encamped against it and fought against it,
32. and he took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge
of the sword.

33- Then Horam king of Gezer came up to help Lachish,
and Joshua smote him and his people.

34. And Joshua passed from Lachish, and all Israel with him,
to Eglon; and they encamped against it and fought against it:
35. and they took it on that day and smote it with the edge of
the sword, and he devoted [it].

36. And Joshua went up from Eglon, and all Israel with him,
to Hebron, and they fought against it. 37. And they took it and
smote it with the edge of the sword, and its king and all its
cities : he devoted it.

38. And Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, to Debir,
and fought against it, 39. and took it, and its king and all its
cities, and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and
devoted [them]. 43. And Joshua returned, and all Israel with
him, to the camp at Gilgal.

XI. 1.1 And it came to pass, when Jabin king of Hazor heard
of it, he sent to Jobab king of Madon and to the king of Shim-

been killed already. Therefore, we seem to have in 28-39, 43, the work of
a writer who had not read 16-27. His work passed through the hands of the
Deuteronomist, who expanded it after his own fashion, and removed diver-
gences from 16-27, leaving the slaughter of the king of Hebron in ver. 37 by
a fortunate oversight.

1 xi, I-10, 13. Joshua’s victory over Jabin king of Hazor and his
allies. It is generally agreed that 1-10, making allowance for some altera-
tions and additions (viz., vv. 2, 3, the first words in 8, 8>) by the Deutero-
nomical editor, belong to the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ So also
ver. 13 is clear from any marks of the Deuteronomist’s style. Albers may be
right in his belief that it is possible to discover an older substratum even in
the rest of the chapter. But in any case this original matter has been altered
and expanded by the Deuteronomist, and I have thought it safer to refrain
from any attempt to separate the older foundation from the Deuteronomical
superstructure.

It must be remembered, however, that at the best we are dealing here
with the newest and most worthless elements in our ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew
History.’ Not only was that book compiled from two documents, but when
224 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JOSH. XI. 4

ron and to the king of Achshaph. 4. And they went out, they
and all their hosts, a great multitude, as the sand that is on the
sea-shore for number, with very many horses and chariots. 5.
And all these kings met: and they came and encamped together
at the waters of Merom, to fight with Israel. 6. And Yahweh
said to Joshua, ‘Be not afraid because of them, for to-morrow at
this time I will deliver them up all slain before Israel: thou shalt
hough their horses and burn their chariots with fire. 7. So
Joshua came, and all the people of war with him, against them by
the waters of Merom suddenly, and they fell upon them. 8%. And
they smote them, and chased them to the great Sidon and to
Misrephothmaim and to the valley of Mizpeh eastward. 9. And
Joshua did to them as Yahweh bade him: he houghed their
horses and burnt their chariots with fire... . 13. But as for
the cities that stood on their mounds, Israel burnt none of them
save Hazor only: that did Joshua burn.

so compiled, and before it was united to Deuteronomy, it underwent much
alteration and addition. In its later parts it displays the tendency, further
developed by the Deuteronomist (1) to represent the conquest of Canaan as
the single act of the united tribes, whereas it was effected gradually by Judah
and Simeon, by the tribes of Joseph, by the northern tribes all acting inde-
pendently (see Judges i.) ; (2) to make Joshua the leader of united Israel,
and to attribute the deeds of subsequent heroes to him. Thus, in chapter x.,
we find Joshua making a clean sweep of the Canaanites in the south. Among
other cities he takes Hebron and Debir. But according to an older and far
more credible story, Judah and Simeon separate from the other tribes, to
conquer the south, and it is Caleb not Joshua under whose leadership Hebron
and Debir are taken (Joshua xv. 13-19, Judges i. 10-15). Again, in this
chapter Joshua follows up his campaign in the south by another against Jabin
and the kings of the north, and once more makes a clean sweep of the
original inhabitants. But from Judges i. 27 seg. it is plain that for long
after Joshua’s time much of the north remained in Canaanite hands; and
according to an older legend (Judges iv.) it was not Joshua but a later hero,
Barak, who won a victory over Jabin king of Hazor. (With regard to
Jabin in Judges iv., comp. Bertheau, Richter u. Ruth, p. 83, with Kuenen,
Onderz. i. p. 345, and Budde, Richter w. Samuel, p. 105 seg.) It need
scarcely be said that the story of the conquest as told in those later sections
of the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew Ilistory’ is impossible on the face of it.
Joshua takes Jericho and Ai, then conquers the kings in the centre, then the
kings in the south, then the kings in the north, while no attempt is made at
a general combination against the common foe.
xv. 15] THE PROWESS OF CALEB AND OTHNIEL 225

.... XITI. 13.1 And the children of Israel did not drive
out the Geshurites nor the Maacathites, but Geshur and Maacath
dwelt in the midst of Israel to this day.

XV. 13.2 And to Caleb the son of Kenaz a portion was
given among the children of Israel, as Moses had spoken, namely
Hebron. Then Caleb went up against the Canaanites who
dwelt in Hebron—now the name of Hebron in former times was
Kiriath-Arba. 14. And Caleb drove out thence the three sons
of Anak : Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai. 15. And he went up

1 xiii. 13. IHenceforward we have but fragments from the ‘ Oldest Book.’
It has been displaced by the later and unhistorical accounts of the ‘ Priestly
Writer’ and the Deuteronomist, who attribute to Joshua a systematic dis-
tribution of the whole land west of the Jordan among the nine and a half
tribes. I have confined myself to those fragments about the origin of which
there is little doubt. xiii. 13 is such a fragment, for (1) it agrees in form with
Judges i., an account of the conquest which is admittedly ancient and almost
certainly by the Jahvist : (2) it does not belong to the context in which it
stands, since it directly contradicts the statement in ver. 11, that the
Israelites did conquer the territory (border) of the Geshurites and Maacathites
—a statement made in the teeth of history ; comp. 2 Sam. iii. 3; x. 6, 8;
xii, 37 seg. 5 xiv. 23, 32; xv. &: (3) it also contradicts the Deuteronomist,
who (Deut. iii. 14, Joshua xii. 5) speaks of Geshur and Maachah as the
boundaries of Israel, not as enclosed in the territory of Israel.

2 xv. 13-19. Conquests of Caleb the Kenizzite. This is beyond all
doubt a fragment from the ‘Oldest Book of Hebrew History ;’ and not only
so, it belongs to the oldest and most precious portions of that history, and is
assigned by most critics to the Jahvist. The conception of the conquest is in
marked contrast to that which prevails throughout the book of Joshua, and
here we have genuine historical tradition. The conquest of the south is
effected by isolated efforts: the fiction of » united Israel fighting under
Joshua is absent. The hero of the conquest is not even an Israelite or
Judaean. He belongs to the Kenizzites, an Edomite clan (Gen. xxxvi. 11,
15, 42), and even in David’s time the families who traced their descent
to Caleb were distinct from Judah (1 Sam. xxx. 14). Later writers,
especially the ‘ Priestly Writer,’ have obscured this connection of Edomites
and Calebites, but the fact that Calebite clans had Edomite names appears
even from the genealogical lists of the Chronicler (comp. 1 Chron. iv. 15
with i. 52 seg., and ii. 52 with i. 40). Jerachmeel, another non-Israelite
clan, was connected with Caleb, and was like Caleb one of the heterogeneous
elements from the later unity of which Judah arose (1 Sam. xxvii. 10, 30, 29.
comp. ii. 9, 25, 41). Note the importance of the fact that Hebron, the
capital of Judah, was a Calebite city. The origin of the Judaean families has
been ably investigated by Wellhausen (De Gentibus et Familiis Judaets).—

P
226 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JOSH. XV. 16

thence against the inhabitants of Debir : now the name of Debir
in former times was Kiriath-Sepher. 16. And Caleb said, ‘He
that smiteth Kiriath-Sepher and takes it—to him will I give
Achsah my daughter to wife. 17. And Othniel the son of
Kenaz, the younger brother of Caleb, took it: and he gave him
Achsah his daughter to wife. 18. And it came to pass when
she came to him, that he moved her to ask field-land from her
father: and she alighted from her ass, 4nd Caleb said to her,
‘What wouldst thou?’ 19. And she said, ‘Give me a present ;
for thou hast set me in the land of the south; give me also
springs of water.’ And he gave her the upper and nether
springs. .

63.1 And as for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of
Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out, but
the Jebusites dwelt with the children of Judah at Jerusalem, to
this day.

XVI. 1.? And the boundary of the children of Joseph

In the text of this fragment I have adopted the emendations of Meyer and
Budde. We have two recensions of the Hebrew text, one in the book of
Joshua, the other in Judges i. 10-15, 20; and the original text has to be
reconstructed by a comparison of the two recensions. For ver. 13 comp.
Judges i. 20, 10. For ‘Caleb, son of Jephunneh’ I have substituted ‘ Caleb,
son of Kenaz,’ because Othniel, Caleb’s brother (his ‘younger’ brother, to
account for his marriage with Caleb’s daughter) is said in ver. 17 to be ‘a
son of Kenaz.’ In ver. 18 we should read ‘he moved her’ with the LXX. text
of Judges i.

1 xv. 63. We have another recension of this verse in Judges i. 21, where,
however, we have ‘the children of Benjamin’ for ‘the children of Judah.’
Undoubtedly, the book of Joshua has preserved the original form of the text.
The theory of later writers (Joshua xviii. 28) reckoned Jerusalem to Benjamin.
But in fact the city remained in the hand of the Canaanites till it was taken by
David and the Judaeans. The later theory may have arisen from the fact that
many Benjamites settled at Jerusalem (2 Sam, v. 6 seg., and 1 Kings xii. 21).

2 xvi. 1-3. A fragment of the ‘Oldest Book’ (Wellhausen, Dillmann,
Kittel). It is plainly from another hand than that which wrote the rest of
the chapter, viz.: the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ For ver. 4 starts afresh: ‘And the
children of Joseph, Manasseh, and Ephraim took their inheritance.’ Here
the ‘children of Joseph’ are regarded as one tribe. But the words of the
fragment have been altered in the style of the ‘Priestly Writer.’ At the
beginning of ver. 1 the Lxx. reading has been adopted.
XVII. 2] THE SETTLEMENT OF THE TRIBES 227

was from the Jordan at Jericho at the waters of Jericho on the
east, along the wilderness which goes up from Jericho through
the hill country to Bethel; 2. and it went out from Bethel
to Luz and passed along to the border of the Archites to Ataroth ;
3. and it went down westwards to the border of the Japhletites,
to the border of the lower Bethoron, as far as Gezer and its
goings out were at the sea.

. 10.1 But Ephraim did not drive out the Canaanites who
dwelt at Gezer, and the Canaanites dwelt in the midst of Ephraim
to this day, still they were reduced to forced service. . .

.... XVII. 1.2 As for Machir the first-born of Manasseh,
the father of Gilead, because he was a man of war, therefore he
had Gilead and Bashan. 2. And [territory came] to the rest of
the children of Manasseh according to their families, to the
children of Ebiezer, and to the children of Helek, and to the
children of Asriel, and to the children of Shechem, and to the
children of Hepher, and to the children of Shemida: these were

1 yo. The words recur, Judges i. 29. Notice the word ‘drive out,’ the
phrase ‘ forced service’ (literally ‘the forced service of a labourer’) which
is only found here and in Gen. xlix. 15, also a very antique passage. Even
in Solomon’s time Gezer was independent of the Israelites, for his Egyptian
father-in-law took it, slew the inhabitants, and handed over the city to the
Hebrew king (1 Kings ix. 16). The slaughter of the inhabitants need not be
pressed too far. Probably the remnant passed into the state of serfdom
described here, while the city retained its non-Hebrew character.

® xvii. 1-13. Here the fragments of the ‘Oldest Book’ are easily dis-
tinguished. According to the ‘ Priestly Writer’ (Num. xxvi. 29), Machir
was the only son of Manasseh, here he is merely his first-born. Moreover,
the account of the conquest here is natural, and at least by comparison his-
torical. Machir obtains territory, because he is able to fight for it, separately
and with his own hand, not because Joshua first subdues the whole land and
then allots a certain portion of it to him. Note also in vv. 11-13 that a belt
of towns stretching from the Jordan to the Mediterranean divided the north
tribes from the house of Joseph, just as another belt (see note on ix. 3-27)
divided Joseph from Judah. The national unity of the Hebrews was not
possible before the conquests of David. In ver. 2 I have adopted the
emendation, ‘the rest of the children of Manasseh’ for ‘male children of
Manasseh.’ The text of verses 11, 12 has been restored with the help of the
parallel text in Judges i, 27.
228 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. xvi. 8

the rest of the children of Manasseh, the son of Joseph, according
to their families. .

... 8. The land of Tappuah belonged to Manasseh, but
[the city of] Tappuah on the border of Manasseh belonged to the
children of Ephraim... . 9. These cities belonged to Ephraim
in the midst of the cities of Manasseh. .. . .

. 10.” And they reached to Asher on the north and to
Issachar on the east. 11. 12. And Manasseh could not drive
out [the inhabitants of] Beth-shean and its dependencies, nor
of Taanach and its dependencies, nor the inhabitants of Dor
and its dependencies, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam and its
dependencies, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and its depen-
dencies : but the Canaanites maintained their place in that land.
13. And it came to pass that when the children of Israel were
stronger, they reduced the Canaanites to serfdom, but they
did not drive them out utterly.

14.! And the house of Joseph spoke to Joshua, saying, ‘Why

1 14-18. Evidently a very antique fragment. Joshua appears as the
leader of the house of Joseph, not of all Israel. He gives the children of
Joseph a ‘lot,’ only in the sense that he directs them to win land for them-
selves. The superiority of the lowland Canaanites to the Israelites is admitted
or rather taken for granted.

I have given the text in its present form, except in two particulars. I
have substituted ‘house of Joseph’ for ‘children of Joseph.’ The Hebrew
text retains ‘house of Joseph’ in ver. 17: the Lxx. have changed it into
‘sons of Joseph’ even there. But the singular pronouns (‘why hast thou
given to me?’ etc.) prove that ‘house of Joseph’ should be read throughout.
In ver. 15 I have with the Lxx. omitted the gloss ‘in the land of the
Perizzites and the Rephaim.’

But these restorations are obviously insufficient. The house of Joseph
complains that it has only one lot. Joshua evidently means to meet their
wishes and yet leaves them after all with a single lot. He promises that
the hill country shall be theirs, as if Joseph were not already in the hill
country and complained that it was too little for him. Budde’s restoration of
the original text seems to be as satisfactory as it is brilliant. According to
this, Joshua does not say, ‘ the hill country shall be thine,’ which is senseless,
but ‘the hill country by Gilead shall be thine.’ In immediate connection
followed Num, .xxxii. 41, 42, relating how Jair and Nobah, the Manassites,
won Gileadite territory and called it after their own names, Finally
came Joshua xiii. 3, which mentions the places in Gilead, viz.: Geshur
XVIII. 4] THE HOUSE OF JOSEPH 220

hast thou given me but one lot and one part for an inheritance,
seeing I am a great people, forasmuch as Yahweh has blessed
me hitherto?’ 15. And Joshua said to them, ‘If thou bea
great people, get thee up to the forest and cut down for thyself
there, since the hill country of Ephraim is too narrow for thee.’
16. And the house of Joseph said, ‘The hill country is not
enough for us: and all the Canaanites that dwell in the valley
have chariots of iron, both they who are in Beth-shean and its
dependencies and they who are in the valley of Jezreel.’ 17.
And Joshua spoke to the house of Joseph, to Ephraim and
Manasseh, saying, ‘Thou art a great people, and hast great
strength: thou shalt not have one lot only: 18. but the hill
country shall be thine; for though it is a forest thou shalt cut
it down, and the goings out of it shall be thine: for thou shalt
drive out the Canaanites, for they have chariots of iron, for
they are strong.’

XVIII. 2.1 And there remained among the children of Israel
seven tribes which had not yet divided their inheritance. 3. And
Joshua said to the children of Israel, ‘ How long are you slack to
go in to possess the land, which Yahweh has given to you? 4.
Appoint for you three men for each tribe: and I will send them
and they shall arise, and walk through the land and describe
it according to their inheritance; and they shall come to me.

and Maachah, which were not subdued by the Manassites. When a later
tradition put the conquest of Gilead back to the time of Moses, alterations,
mutilations, and displacements of texts were inevitable.

1 xviii. 2-6, 8-10. A late §, probably due to the editor who united the
Elohist and Jahvist documents. It represents Joshua as allotting the re-
maining divisions of the conquered land to seven tribes. The ‘ Priestly
Writer’ expands this into the theory that Joshua and Eleazar, the high
priest, allotted their territory to all the tribes who settled west of Jordan
(Josh. xiv. 1-5). Ver. 7 is clearly by the Deuteronomist, and probably the
phrases ‘ Yahweh, the God of your fathers,’ ‘Yahweh your God (vv. 3, 6)
have been amplified by him. The mention of Shiloh (vv. 8, 9, 10) is probably
due to the final editor who wished to harmonise the account here with that
of the ‘Priestly Writer.’ Note that in this § the word for ‘tribe’ is shevez,
not matteh, as in the ‘Priestly Writer.’
230 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. XVIII.

5. And they shall divide it into seven portions :- Judah shall abide
in his territory on the south, and the house of Joseph shall abide
in their territory on the north. 6. And you shall describe the
land into seven portions and bring [the description] hither to me,
and I will cast lots for you here before Yahweh.’ 8. And the
men arose and went: and Joshua charged those that went to
describe the land, saying, ‘Go and walk through the land and
describe it, and come again to me and I will cast lots for you
before Yahweh.’ 9. And the men went and passed through
the land, and described it according to cities in seven portions
in a book, and came to Joshua at the camp. 10.* And Joshua
cast lots for them before Yahweh.

XIX.! 1. And the second lot came out for Simeon... .
8.* And all the villages that were round about these cities to
Baalath-beer, Ramah of the south. 9. Out of the part of the
children of Judah was the inheritance of the children of Simeon,
for the portion of the children of Judah was too much for them :
therefore the children of Simeon had inheritance in the midst of
their inheritance.

to.* And the third lot came up for the children of Zebulun.

15. And Kattath and Nahalal and Shimron and Idalah
and Beth-lehem : twelve cities with their villages.

17.* The fourth lot came out for Issachar. . 25. And

1 xix. 1-46. The fragments which follow from this chapter are the con-
tinuation of xviii. 2-6, 8-10 in the ‘ Oldest Book of Hebrew History.’ The
chapter as a whole is by the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ But (1) we find plain traces
of double authorship in the headings of the divisions: e.g. ‘the second lot
came out for Simeon, for the tribe of the children of Simeon,’ and so through-
out. (2) The use of ordinal for cardinal numbers (e.g. ‘ third lot’ for ‘lot
three’) is contrary to the use of the ‘ Priestly Writer.’ (3) The names of
towns often break the connection (see ¢.g., 25 where we expect boundaries,
not a list of towns): in some cases these names cannot come from the
‘Priestly Writer,’ for in ver. 41 cities are reckoned to Dan which that author
(xv.-xxi.) counts with Judah. On the other hand, to give an account of
the cities occupied by their tribes, instead of describing them by the
boundaries of their territory, exactly corresponds to the plan of the ‘ Oldest
Book,’ as stated in xviii. 9.
XIX. 47] THE SETTLEMENT OF THE TRIBES—DAN. 231

their territory was Helkath and Hali and Beten and Achshaph,
26." and Alammelech and Amad and Mishal, 28. and Ebron and
Rehob and Hammon and Kanah, as far as great Zidon, 30. and
Ummah and Aphek and Rehob, twenty-two cities with their
villages.

32. The sixth lot came out for the children of Naphthali.....
35. And the fenced cities were Ziddim, Zer and Hammath, Rak-
kath and Chinnereth, 36. and Adamah and Ramah and Hazor,
37. and Kedesh and Edrei and En-Hazor, and Iron and Mig-
dalel, Horem and Bethanath and Beth-shemesh, nineteen cities
with their villages.

40. The seventh lot came out for the children of Dan. 41.
And the territory of their inheritance was Zorah and Eshtaol
and Ir-shemesh, 42. and Shaalabbin and Ajjalon and Ithlah,
43. and Elon and Timnah and Ekron, 44. and Eltekeh and
Gibbethon and Baalath, 45. and Jehud and Bene-berak and
Gath-rimmon, 46. and Me-jarkon and Rakkon with the territory
over against Joppa.....

47.) But the Amorites forced the children of Dan
into the hill country, for they would not suffer them to come

147. Of this antique fragment we have again another recension in
Judges i. 34, and a comparison of the Lxx. shows that originally the two
recensions resembled each much more closely than they do in the received
Hebrew text. Budde has restored the original sequence by uniting Judges
i. 34 to Joshua xix. 47* (in the Lxx.), Joshua 47> and Judges i. 35 (comp. the
continuation of Joshua 475in the Lxx.). The fragment belongs to the Jahvist.
Compare ‘ contrived to dwell’ with Joshua xvii. 12, ‘became tributary’ with
Joshua xvii. 10, etc. Only the name ‘Amorite’ must have been, for some
unknown reason, substituted for ‘Canaanite? The account here given
is, as Budde says, credibility itself, None of the tribes were completely
successful against the Canaanites. Joseph and Zebulun had to leave
Canaanites dwelling in their midst (Judges i. 27-30). Asher and Naphtali
dwelt in the midst of the Canaanites (Judges i. 30-33), ze. they were in the
minority. Dan was completely hemmed in by the enemy, and was obliged
to seek new territory in the far north. Judges xiii. seg., xvii. seg. abundantly
illustrate and confirm the text before us. Lesham is a lengthened form of
Laish as ‘Etam of ‘Ait, ‘Enam of ‘Ain (see Wellhausen, De Gentibus et
Familits Judaeis, p. 37-)
332 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. XIX. 49

down to the valley, and they made their territory too narrow
for them. So the children of Dan went up and fought against
Lesham and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword,
and possessed it, and dwelt therein, and called Lesham Dan,
after the name of Dan their father. But the Amorites contrived
to dwell in mount Heres, and Aijalon, and Shaalbim: yet the
hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became
tributary.’

. . 49.1 So they went to take possession of the land
according to their territory, and the children of Israel gave an
inheritance to Joshua the son of Nun in the midst of them: 50.
according to the word of Yahweh they gave him the city which
he asked, Timnath-serah in the hill country of Ephraim, and he
built the city and dwelt in it.

XXIV. 1.2 And Joshua gathered all the tribes of lsrael to

149, 50. These verses interrupt the context, which is by the ‘ Priestly
Writer,’ and on the other hand bear no marks of the Deuteronomical style.
at the beginning of 49 the LXx. reading has been adopted.

* xxiv. This chapter belongs in substance to the Elohist, and is
assigned to him by Néldeke, Hollenberg, Wellhausen, Dillmann, Kuenen,
etc., and this for cogent reasons. It is the Elohist who speaks of the
sanctuary at Shechem and the tree which grew in it (Gen. xxxv. 4, and here,
e.g. Yand 25). This sympathy with the old Bamah or ‘ high place’ would
have been offensive at a later stage of Hebrew development, and it is signi-
ficant that in vv. I and 25 the LXX. have altered ‘ Shechem’ into Shiloh which
was sanctified according to the ‘ Priestly Writer’ by the presence of the ark
and tabernacle (Joshua xviii. 1-10). The service of other gods attributed
here (2, 14 seg.) to the family of Abraham tallies with the statements of the
Elohist (Gen, xxxi. 19, 53; xxxv. 4). The burial of Joseph’s bones at
Shechem (ver. 32) is the natural and necessary completion of the Elohist
legend in Gen. 1. 25; Exod. xiii. 19. Further, the language is that of the
Elohist. We have Elohim in ver. 1, also Elohim construed with the plural
(here a plural adjective) as elsewhere in the Elohist document (ver. 19 : comp.
Gen. xx. 13, xxxv. 7); ‘strange gods’ (ver. 23: comp. Gen. XXxv. 2):
‘Not with thy sword or with thy bow’ (a phrase used perhaps by the Elohist,
if, as most critics think, Gen, xlvili 22 be his), ‘set them a statute and an
ordinance’ (ver. 25, comp. the Elohist, Exod. xv. 25), the use of ‘ Amorite’
for the original inhabitants of Palestine (as elsewhere in the Elohist), The
chapter has passed through the hands of a Deuteronomical editor who has
amplified it in his rhetorical manner. Ver. 31 is wholly his (the Hebrew
xxiv. 8] JOSHUA’S FAREWELL 233

Shechem, and they presented themselves before God. 2. And Joshua
said to all the people, ‘ Thus says Yahweh, Your fathers dwelt of old
beyond the river [Euphrates], Zerah the father of Abraham and the
Sather of Nahor: and they served other gods. 3. And I took your
Jather Abraham from beyond the river and led him through all the
land} and multiplied his seed and gave him Isaac. 4. And I gave
to Isaac Jacob and Esau, and I gave to Esau mount Seir to possess
wz: and Jacob and his children went down to Egypt. 5. And I
sent Moses and Aaron, and I plagued the Egyptians with the signs
which L did among them :* and afterwards I brought you out 6.
from Egypt, and you came to the sea. 7. And [God] put darkness
between you and the Egyptians, and brought the sea upon them and
covered them, and your eyes saw twhat L did to the Egyptians: and
you dwelt in the wilderness many days. 8. And T brought you
into the land of the Amorites who dwelt beyond Jordan, and they

words translated ‘outlived,’ literally ‘lengthened their days after,’ are
adapted from Deut. xiv. 26: ‘the work of Yahweh’ occurs also Deut. iii.
24, xi. 3, 7: ‘had known’ in the sense of ‘had experienced’ in Deut. xi.
28; xiii, 3, 7, 145 xxviii. 33, 36, 64). It recurs in Judges ii. 7, and contains
the point of view from which the Deuteronomist regarded all the
history of Israel. In ver. 1 the words, ‘and called for the elders of Israel
and for their heads and for their judges and their officers,’ are also Deutero-
nomical (comp. Deut. xxix. 9 ; Josh. xxiii. 2): so too are the words ‘I would
not hearken to Balaam’ (comp. Deut. xxiii. 6), and the phrases ‘God of
Israel,’ ‘destroyed them from before you’ (ver. 8, comp. Deut. ii. 21, ete,),
“servant of Yahweh’ (ver. 29, comp. Deut. xxxiv. 5). A still later hand has
made additions in vv. 6 and 7, and has corrected Joshua's statement that God
brought the people whom he is addressing out of Egypt by adding, ‘I brought
your fathers out of Egypt.” The same hand has inserted details relating
to the Exodus, and taken from our present complex text in the book of
Exodus. The list of nations in ver. I1 is also a late interpolation. It is
meaningless in the context and inconsistent with the language of the Elohist,
who calls all the inhabitants of Palestine ‘Amorites.’ Consequently ‘all
the peoples’ in ver. 18, must likewise be an interpolation. Note that it is
just when linguistic signs point to interpolation, that we are able to cut out
the words, not only without injury to the text, but to the manifest improve-
ment of the sense. See e.g. ver. 18.

1 ©All the land.’ Hebrew has ‘all the land of Canaan,’ the two last
words being omitted in LXX.

2 ¢With the signs that I did among them.’ So Lxx.
234 THE OLDEST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. XXIV. QO

Sought with you, and I gave them into your hand, and you possessed
their land. 9. Then Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, arose
and fought against Israel, and he sent and called Balaam the son
of Beor to curse you. 10. But he blessed you still, and I delivered
you out of his hand. 11. And you went over Jordan and came to
Jericho, and the men of Jericho fought against you, and I delivered
them into your hand, 12. And TI sent the hornet before you, which
drove them out before you, [namely,] the twelve hings of the Amor-
ites, not with thy sword and not with thy bow. 14. Now therefore
fear Yahweh, and serve him in sincerity and truth, and put away
the gods whom your fathers served beyond the river [Euphrates],
and in Exypt, and serve Yahweh. 15. And if it seem evil to you to
serve Yahweh, do you choose this day whom you will serve, whether
the gods whom your fathers served that were beyond the river
[Euphrates], ov the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell,
but as for me and my house we will serve Yahweh. 16. And the
people answered and said, ‘ Far be tt from us that we should for-
sake Yahweh to serve other gods: 17. nay', Yahweh ts our God,
who brought us and our fathers up out of the land of Egypt," and
preserved us tn all the way wherein we went, and among all the
peoples through the midst of whom we passed ; 18. and Yahweh
drove out before us the Amorites who dwelt in the land: therefore
we also will serve Vahweh, for he is our God! 19. And Joshua
said to the people, ‘ You cannot serve Yahweh, for he is a holy God,

1 *The twelve kings.” So LXxx. The Hebrew has corrected this state-
ment, which is inconsistent with the history given from other sources in the
Hexateuch, into ‘two kings,’ meaning Sihon and Og. The corrector forgot
that the verse refers to the fortune of the Israelites west of the Jordan, and
he has left a statement wholly inconsistent with the previous history, as given
in the book of Joshua.

2 «Out of the land of Egypt.’ So Lxx. The Hebrew text has added,
‘from the house of bondage, and that did those great signs in our sight.’

3 © You cannot serve Yahweh, for he is.’ Probably, as Dillmann thinks,
some words have fallen out here, such as ‘you cannot serve Yahweh and
other gods, for he is a holy God,’ etc. The original meaning of the Hebrew
word for ‘holy,’ is ‘that which is cut off,’ ‘ separate from common use.’ See
Baudissin, Stud. Sem. Keligionsgesch., ii. passén, but especially 19-40.
XXIV. 32] JOSHUA’S DEATH 235

he ts a jealous God: he will not forgive your transgression or your
sins. 20. Ifyou forsake Yahweh and serve strange gods, then he
will turn and do you evil and consume you, after that he has done
you good. 21. And the people said to Joshua, ‘ Nay, but we will
serve Yahweh” 22. And Joshua said to the people, ‘ You are
witnesses against yourselves, that you have chosen you Yahweh to
serve him. 23. Now therefore put away the strange gods that
are among you, and incline your heart to Yahweh” 24. And the
people said to Joshua, ‘ Yahweh our God will we serve, and to his
voice will we hearken. 25. So Joshua made a covenant with the
people that day, and set them a statute and an ordinance in
Shechem.

26. And Joshua took? a great stone and set it up there under
the terebinth that was in the sanctuary of Yahweh. 27. And
Joshua said to all the people, ‘ Behold, this stone shall be a witness
against us, for it has heard all the words of Yahweh which he
Spoke to us: it shall be therefore a witness against you, lest you
deny your God. 28. So Joshua sent the people away every man
to his inheritance.

29. And it came to pass after these things, that Joshua the son
of Nun died, being a hundred and ten years old. 30. And they
buried him tn the territory of his inheritance in Timnath-serah,
which ts in the hill country of Ephraim, on the north of the moun-
tain of Gaash, 32. ind the bones of Joseph, which the children
of Israel brought up out of Egypt, they buried in Shechem, in

 

1 *Chosen Yahweh to serve him.’ The Hebrew (not the LXxx.) adds
‘and they said, We are witnesses.’ The addition is superfluous, and, without
further addition, ungrammatical.

2 © And Joshua took,’ etc. The verse, as it stands, begins with the clause,
‘And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God.’ These words
are supposed by many to refer to the book formed by the union of our
‘Oldest Book’ with Deuteronomy, the whole being called ‘the law of God’
because the Deuteronomical code formed its chief part. In this case the
clause would of course be an interpolation. See, however, Kuenen, § 8, 16.
He believes that the words come from the Elohist, and refer to a ‘book of
law’ otherwise unknown.
236 THE OLDFST BOOK OF HEBREW HISTORY [JosH. XXIV.

the piece of ground which Jacob bought of the sons of Hamor the
Sather of Shechem for a hundred kesitahs, and gave it to Joseph for
his portion’ 34. And Eleasar the son of Aaron died, and they
buried him in the hull of Phinchas his son, which was given him
in the hill country of Ephraim.

' “Gave it to Joseph for his portion.’ So Lxx.

Printed hy T. and A. ConstTas_e, Printers to Her Majesty,
at the Edinburgh University Press.
    

 

ee a ae eer a ee caer eee ae Ke

rr

 

Fe a ana