as these also do to Joel, Elijah. So 'Ammihud, 'People-Splendour,' = Elihud, 'El-Splendour,' Abihud, 'Father-Splendour,' Akhihud, Brother-Splendour.' And, just as we have Jehoram (Jehovah is High), Malchiram (the King is High), Adoniram (the Lord is High), we have also Abiram (the Father is High), Akhiram (the Brother is High), ‘Amram (the People is High). So, again, 'Ammishaddai (the People is Almighty)=Zurishaddai (the Rock is Almighty),—‘Ammizabad (the People gave) = Elzabad, Jehozabad,—‘Amminadab (the People gave-freely) = Jehonadab, Abinadab, Akhinadab.

And once more Jarob-'am (Jeroboam), which some explain as meaning the people are many,' seems rather to mean 'the People strives,' comp. Jerub-baal, 'the Baal strives,' Jehojarib, 'Jehovah strives'; and Rekhab-‘am (Rehoboam) corresponds to Rěkhab-iah, meaning 'the People (Jahveh) is (wide, large, spacious =) grand or great.'

14. Upon the whole it seems scarcely possible to doubt that the word 'Am, 'People,' is used in Proper Names to express the Deity. May it be because the People was so closely identified with its Deity? Comp. Jer.xlviii.7,46, 1.2, li.44. May it be, in short, that, as the Father is one with His children, so the CovenantGod of Israel was regarded as one with His people? Jahveh was 'with them,' in the midst of them.' Hence, in E.xvii.16, N.xxi.14, Ju.v.23,31,-that is, in David's days, when, as we suppose, these passages were written, the wars of Israel are styled the wars of Jahveh,-the inhabitants of Meroz are cursed, because they came not to the help of Jahveh,'-the enemies of Israel are the enemies of Jahveh,-in short, Jahveh seems to have been identified with Israel.

15. Again, Eben, 'Stone,' seems, like Zur, 'Rock,' to be also used for the Deity in G.xlix.24, 'from thence is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel,' and, therefore perhaps also in the name Ebenezer = Eliezer, Joezer, Abiezer, Akhiezer. It is true, a different explanation of this name is given in 1S.vii. 12, as if it meant merely 'stone of help,' with reference to a memorial-stone then erected by Samuel, who said, 'Hitherto hath Jahveh helped us.' But this may be only a later attempt to explain a name which already existed, 18.iv.1, v.i, (though in these passages the name may be used proleptically,) this sacred stone having been so called before the time of Samuel.

16. Also 'Ezer, 'Help,' appears in Eliezer, Joezer, Azriel, comp. Elizur, Zuriel; and see E.xviii.4, D.xxxiii.7,29, Ps.xxxiii.20, lxx.5(6), cxv.9,(10),11, cxlvi.5, Hos.xiii.9. So Hod, &c. 'Glory,' is found in Elihud, Hodijah, comp. Eliel, Elijah; and see Job xxxvii.22, Ps.xxi.5(6), xcvi.6, cxlv.5, cxlviii. 13, Is.xxxv.2, &c.

And Shem, Name,' in Shemuel, Shemezer, Shemida, Shemiramoth, comp. Eliel, Joezer, Eliada, Jehoram; and see E.iii.15, vi.3, xv.3, xxiii.21, Ps.lxviii.4(5), &c. 17. It is remarkable that several of the above words, used to express the Deity, are used also, uncompounded, as the names of men. Thus we have

Baal, 1Ch.viii.30; Melech, 1Ch.viii.35, ix.41;
Zur, N.xxv.15, xxxi.8, 1Ch.viii.30, ix.36;

Ur, 1Ch.xi.35, comp. Uri, E.xxxi.2, 1K.iv.19, Ezr.x.24;

Abi, 2K.xviii.2;

Akhi, 1Ch.v.15, vii.34, comp. Ekhi, G.xlvi.21, = Akhiram, N.xxvi.38;

Ezer, 1Ch.iv.4, vii.21, xii.9, Neh.iii.19, xii.42;

Hod, 1Ch.vii.37, Hadad, 1K.xi.14,17, &c.

18. Dozy connects the use of 'Rock, 'Stone,' as names for the Deity, with the worship of Jahveh, whose emblem was also a large stone or mass of rock. There may be some ground for this. And it is certainly possible that the idea of using 'Devouring Fire' as a symbol for Jahveh may have originated from the use of this emblem in Sun-worship. But most of the above names seem to be used merely in a metaphorical sense, to express the attributes of the Deity, e.g. 'Lord,'

Father,'' Brother,' 'Help,'' Glory,'' Name,' and, apparently, 'People.'

152. The Age of the Elohistic Narrative.

I. The following reasons (see also VI.App.123) lead us to assign the composition of the Elohistic Narrative (E) in G.i.1E.vi.5 to the age of Saul, and, if this is correct, then most probably to the hand or, at least, the authority, of Samuel (1100-1060 B.C.).

(i) E lays no stress whatever on priestly authority, nor even mentions Priests or sacrifices, though he makes Jacob set up a pillar, after the fashion of primeval times, at Bethel, call it a 'House of Elohim,' and 'pour a drink-offering and oil' upon it' (G.xxxv.14). He recognizes, therefore, the practice of some kind of ritual-in accordance with which anyone, as Jacob, could pour a drink-offering' for himself, without the intervention of a Priest-as existing in those times. But he shows not the least indication of that intense interest in Priests and sacrifices, and the ritualistic system generally, which the LL or E' exhibits in almost every line.

(ii) E makes no mention of houses, jewels, earrings, necklaces, or even of gold or silver, except in G.xxiii.16, where Abraham weighs out to Ephron 400 shekels of silver 'passing current with the trader,' and betrays thus a primitive condition of society as existing at the time of his writing, while the Israelites were as yet a purely agricultural people, before the arts had made any progress among them. In this respect also E contrasts remarkably with E' (E.xxv. &c.).

(iii) E gives only the lineal ancestors of Abraham (v.1, &c., xi.10, &c.), and his descendants by Ishmael (xxv.12, &c.), and Isaac, viz. Edom (xxxvi.9, &c.) and Israel (xlvi.8, &c.); whereas J gives-in addition to the line from Adam through Kain (iv.16, &c.) and the 70 nations sprung from Noah (x)—the collateral races claiming kindred with Edom and Israel, viz. Moab and Ammon, descended from Lot (xix.30-38), twelve tribes from Nahor (xxii.20-24), sixteen from Keturah (xxv.1-6). Since these last were manifestly intended to supplement the former notices, this fact implies that E wrote before J, i.e. before the age of David (App.153).

(iv) The fact that G.v.29 (J) occurs in the midst of the matter of E (v.1-28, 30-32), and vii.16 (J) after v.13-16a (E), and vii.20-22 (J) after v.14-19 (E) and xi.28 (J or D) after v.27 (E),—in all which instances J is unintelligible without the data of E, whereas there are no similar instances of the contrary relation existing between E and J-tends to show that J wrote merely to supplement E. (v) So in xii.1 (J)‘Haran' is not mentioned, but must be understood from E (xi.32, xii.4,5); in xvi.4 (J) ' Hagar' can only be known from E (v.1,3); in xviii.1 (J), and Jahveh appeared unto him,' refers to 'Abraham' in E (xvii.26,27); in xxxiv.1 (J), ‘Dinah the daughter of Leah whom she bare to Jacob,' assumes the fact stated by E (xxx.21).

(vi) E represents Benjamin as born, together with the rest of Jacob's sons, in Padan-Aram (xxxv.24,26); but he says that Rachel died and was buried in the way to Ephrath in the land of Canaan (v.19, comp. xlviii.7); upon which latter statement J bases heedlessly the story of Rachel having died after giving birth to Benjamin (v.16-18), from which again appears the supplementary character of J's work.

(vii) xlix.1a, 28, belongs undoubtedly to E, comp. xxviii.1. But without v.1 J's words in v.1-28a have no introductory clause-in other words, they have been merely interpolated.

(viii) In 1.12 J refers distinctly to xlix.29-31 (E), in which passage only does Jacob charge his sons about his burial, which they carry out in 1.13 (E), without which verse the whole story limps, since there is no other account of the actual burial of Jacob.

(ix) It is only E who gives the births and deaths and burials of Abraham (xi.26,27, xxv.7-9), Ishmael (xvi.15,16, xxv.17), Isaac (xxi.2–5, xxxv.28,29), Jacob (xxv.26, xlix.29-33, 1.13), as well as the death and burial of Sarah (xxiii.2,19) and Rachel (xxxv.19, xlviii.7), and the burial of Rebekah and Leah (xlix.31). In no single instance is the corresponding datum given out of J. In other words, no such data probably existed in J, which was written merely to supplement E.

(x) What 'Compiler,' after inserting the long circumstantial account in J of Jahveh's visit to Abraham, Lot's deliverance, and the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah (xviii, xix), would then have inserted the superfluous statement of E (xix.29), that Elohim remembered Abraham, and sent-forth Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, at his overthrowing of the cities in which Lot dwelt'? In short, xix.29 has all the appearance of being the original statement upon which the more diffuse narrative of J was based.

(xi) On the other hand, such mere scraps of E, as xxxi.18 and 1.13 would hardly have been inserted by a 'Compiler,' but appear to be absolutely needed in the context, because J had no corresponding data, but only supplemented the story of E.

(xii) In xlvii.30a (J or D) 'their burial-place' refers loosely to the notices in E about the cave of Mach pelah having been acquired as a burial-place by Abraham (xxiii, &c.).

(xiii) E says (xxxv.11) that 'a nation, yea, a company of nations,' shall spring out of Jacob's loins, that is to say, he refers to the twelve tribes, a 'company of nations,' forming a nation,' one nation, united therefore under a king, but not forming two nations, 'Judah' and 'Ephraim.' In other words, this passage must have been written before the separation of the two kingdoms.

(xiv) So in xxviii.3, that thou (Jacob) mayest be a company of peoples, and xlviii.4, ‘I will make thee (Jacob) to be a company of peoples,' E means by 'peoples' the twelve tribes, and speaks of them all as one 'company,' writing therefore before the separation of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel.

(xv) On the other hand, in xvii 16 E makes Elohim say of Sarah, I will bless her that she shall become nations, kings of peoples shall be out of her.' And here the reference is, apparently, to separate 'nations,' and to ‘kings of different

peoples,' who should spring from Sarah, viz. the kings of Edom and Israel (xxxvi.31).

(xvi) In xxxvi.31 E speaks of the kings that reigned in the land of Edom before there reigned any king over the land of Israel '-which implies that at the time when this was written there was a king reigning-not over Judah only, butover the land of Israel,' which again points to a time before the separation of the two kingdoms.

(xvii) E nowhere represents any hatred as existing between Edom and Israel, and clearly implies (xxxvi) that the Edomites were in a state of original independence, which shows that he did not write after the time when David had made the conquest of Edom.

(xviii) In xxxvi.39 E mentions Hadar as reigning in Edom, without naming his death and his successor, as he does for each of his predecessors, e.g. 'and Baalhanan the son of Achbor died, and Hadar reigned in his stead '-which implies that Hadar was still living, more especially as E seems to have known something of Hadar's family relations, and the name of his city was Pau, and his wife's name Mehetabel, daughter of Matred, daughter of Mezahab.' If Hadar was still reigning, this passage must have been written before David had put an end to the kingdom, and laid upon Edom the yoke of Israel. Very probably the grandson of this Hadar was that young prince of the same name, who escaped as a mere youth from the massacre of all the males in Edom which Joab executed in David's time, and took refuge with the Pharaoh of the day, whose wife's sister he married, and at last, when David and Joab were dead, returned and headed a successful revolt of his countrymen against Israel in the very beginning of Solomon's reign (1K.xi.15-22).

(xix) E lays remarkable stress upon the fact of Abraham's having bought at Hebron a possession of a field and a sepulchre (xxiii), which is described with almost legal precision (v.17-20), and where Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah, according to him, were buried (xxv.9,10, xxxv.27, xlix.29-32). It is plain that E must have had some special reason for thus commending Hebron to the reverence and affection of his countrymen. Now it would seem that Hebron was originally chosen by David's chief advisers (28.ii.1) --who had probably been instructed on this point by Samuel himself before his death-as the best place for his seat of government, where, in fact, he reigned over Judah for 7 years (2S.v.5), and where Absalom afterwards set up his throne (2S.xv.7,10)-after which it disappears from the history altogether. This appears to point distinctly to the lifetime of Saul (1100-1060 B.C.), as the age in which E must have written this passage; since only a writer in that age could have had sufficient reason for laying such stress on Hebron, and seeking to draw to that city the reverent regard of all Israel-not one who lived after Jerusalem had been made the seat of government, and certainly not a post-exilic writer, when the people had no possession in Canaan at all, except by the will of the king of Babylon.

N.B. For our present purpose it is immaterial whether some of the passages