would come and bless them in every place where he records his name' implies that as yet the attempt had not been made to draw the hearts of all Israel towards the Tabernacle or Temple at Jerusalem.

(xxiv) The use of the word 'Hebrew 'in E.xxi.2 implies an early time before the glory of David's reign, and when the Israelites were still familiarly known as 'Hebrews' 'those who had crossed' the Great River (Euphrates) in their migration towards the West,- -a term probably applied to other peoples also who had similarly migrated, comp. Shem the father of all the sons of Heber,' G.x.21. Accordingly the word is used of the Israelites in a natural manner in the history of Saul (1S.iv.6,9, xiii.3,7,19, xiv.11,21, xxix.3), but not afterwards, except in D.xv.12, Jer.xxxiv.9,14, referring to E.xxi.2, and in the fiction of Jonah (i.9).

(xxv) The phrase 'bring (come) unto Elohim,' E.xxii.8,9, comp. xxi.6, implies a time like that when Samuel went in circuit to Bethel, Gilgal, Mizpah, and Ramah (1S.vii.16,17)—all sacred places, where, no doubt, he judged the people 'before Jahveh,' i.e. before the altar or within the chapel of the high-place, with some solemn reference to Jahveh's presence. It would hardly have been used at a time when David or Solomon administered justice either in person (1K.iii. 28, vii.7) or by their officers (2S.viii.15, xv.2–6).

(xxvi) The command 'a witch thou shalt not let live' (E.xxii.18) corresponds to Saul's time (1S.xxviii.3,9), when the king, who had evidently no personal horror of witchcraft, as appears from his going to seek the Witch of Endor, had, probably at the instigation of Samuel, carried out a law like this.

In

(xxvii) The use of the phrase 'Month of Abib (Green-Ears)' in E.xxiii.15— which probably refers to a passage in J after xiii.2, for which D has substituted his own words (v.3-10)—implies an early time, when the old agricultural names Abib,' Zif,' Ethanim,' were still used as the names for certain months. Solomon's time, as we may gather from 1K.vi. 1,37,38, viii.2, written apparently by a contemporary, these old names were still used; but afterwards they appear no more in the history.

(xxviii) The names of the agricultural Feasts (E.xxiii.16), ‘Feast of Harvest,' Feast of Ingathering,' which were afterwards changed to Feast of Weeks,' 'Feast of Tabernacles,' as D calls them (E.xxxiv.22, D.xvi. 16), point to a very early time, e.g. that of Samuel, before the higher civilization of Solomon's reign or even of David's.

(xxix) In N.xxiv.7 the reference to Agag as a mighty potentate, as also the prediction of the overthrow of Amalek (v.20), points to a time not very far distant from the event in question, when the power of Agag was still fresh in the memory or in the talk of living men; as the statement, his king shall be higher than Agag and his kingdom shall be exalted,' implies that there was a king in ‘Jacob * -one king over 'all Israel'—at the time when these words were written. Moreover the agreement in language between 18.xv.29, written (Kuenen) 'not very long after the facts stated' (155.iii), with N.xxiii.19 suggests that both passages are due to the same writer.

(xxx) N.xxiv. 17-19 refers undoubtedly to David and his conquests over Moab

and Flom (2S.viii.2,14). But David smote in an equally memorable manner the children of Ammon (2S.xii.26-31), and elsewhere Moab, Edom, and Ammon, or Moab and Ammon, are named constantly together (D.ii.4,9,19, xxiii.3,7, 18.xiv. 47, 1 K.xi.1, &c., comp. Moab and Ammon, G.xix.37,38, Ju.iii.12,13, x.6, xi.15, 2S.viii. 12, 1K.xi.7,33, 2K.xxiii.33, xxiv.2, &c.). It seems impossible that any later writer, recounting the triumphs of David's time, should have mentioned his victories over Moab, Edom, and even Amalek, and not alluded in any way to Ammon. It would seem, therefore, that this prophecy must have been written between the conquests of Moab and Edom and that of Ammon, when David was still on friendly terms with the Ammonites (2S.x.2), that is, about 1040 B.C.

(xxxi) The fact that Balaam's prophecy stops short with the conquests of David, that it makes no allusion to the Temple and says not a word about the glory of Solomon, the division of the kingdom, or the later fortunes of Israel, is a very decisive reason for placing the composition of this section in the age of David, and not afterwards.

(xxxii) In J.ix the story of the Gibeonites, who were made servants for the altar of Jahveh even unto this day' (v.27a), may point to a time when the services of these people were called out by David for the Tabernacle or by Solomon for the Temple, comp. 'Solomon's servants,' 1K.ix.21, Ezr.ii.58, Neh.vii.60.

(xxxiii) In J.xv.8, xviii.28*, Jerusalem is still spoken of as the 'Jebusite' city, which fact seems to indicate a time not long subsequent to the conquest of Jebus by David, comp. 28.v.6, &c. And, though J.xv.63, which speaks of the Jebusites as dwelling with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day,' comes from D, yet the real meaning of such a statement is that the Jebusites lived in Jerusalem long after Israel took possession of the land of Canaan. But in making such insertions D throws himself, of course, as much as possible into the age of the narrative which he is engaged in supplementing; and therefore this statement also points either to the age of David, when Araunah the deposed Jebusite king, and doubtless other Jebusites, still lived in Jerusalem (2S.xxiv.16), or to an age yet earlier, as that in which (according to D's view) the OS was written.

(xxxiv) J.xvi.10 (D) speaks of the Canaanites as still dwelling in Gezer; whereas 1K.ix.16 tells us that Pharaoh 'went-up and captured Gezer, and burnt it with fire, and slew the Canaanites that dwelt in the city, and gave it as a present to his daughter, Solomon's wife.' To this passage, therefore, the remark in (xxxiii) applies, viz. that it means to state merely the fact that Canaanites lived on in Gezer long after the entrance of Israel into Canaan, and that, in saying they dwell there unto this day,' D points to the age in which he supposed J's story to have been written, and this must have been before the time of Solomon. (xxxv) The only tribes, whose boundaries are fully and accurately given in the book of Joshua,* are Judah (xv.1-12) and Benjamin (xviii.11-20), those of the

* Some critics assign these chapters (xiii-xix) in their original form to LL But, besides other signs of J's hand, we have in xv.51 -, ‘eleven,' an' older form (G.xxxii.22, xxxvii.9, &c.), whereas LL uses always (E.xxvi.7,8, xxxvi.

other tribes being given loosely in general terms. Of course, the boundaries of Judah and Benjamin would be better known to a writer of David's age than those of any of the other tribes, who were always more or less disinclined to bow to the House of David (2S.xv.6,13, xvi.15, comp. xvii.24,25, xviii.6,7, xix.8, 1K.xii.16). And after Solomon's time, when Benjamin was one of the Ten Tribes which revolted from Jeroboam (1K.xi.13,32,36)-N.B. xii.21-24 is an insertion of the LL (165)—a writer living in Jerusalem would have little inclination, even if he had the ability, to describe minutely the boundaries of Benjamin. And the very idea of Joshua sending men to go through the land and 'describe it by cities in a book' (J.xviii.4,5,8,9) may have been suggested by David having sent out Joab, with the captains of the host, to go through all parts of the land and number the people, 'from Dan even unto Beersheba,' 2S.xxiv.2,5-8.

(xxxvi) Finally the prediction of the subjection of Edom to Israel (N.B. not to Judah), and then of its regaining its independence (G.xxvii.37,40), corresponds with the time when Edom had been subdued under David and had thrown off again the yoke of Israel at the very beginning of Solomon's reign.

14,15, N.xxix.20), which is a later form (1Ch.xxiv.12, xxv.18, xxvii.14).

154. Remarks upon the Synoptical Table.

The variations in the subjoined Synoptical Table from that given in Part VI are the results of continued study during the last seven years, with the aid of recent writers, of the question of the Composition of the Hexateuch. These variations appear chiefly in the separation of the portions due to the 'Second Elohist' (E) in Exodus and Numbers from those due to the 'Jahvist' (J), which in Part VI are combined as forming together the Original Story' (OS), and the insertions of the Deuteronomist in Numbers and Joshua, which I find to be much more numerous than I had formerly supposed.

6

Wellhausen says (Jarhb.f.D.T. 1876, p.425) that ' J and E are almost inextricably bound together into one work of truly almost homogeneous character; only when the different Divine names afford a striking criterion are we able to recognize clearly the double stream.' This difficulty arises from the very great similarity in tone of thought, and style, and phraseology between the two writers, which may perhaps be due (V.84,85) to E being only J in an earlier stage of his literary activity. I cannot, however, at present detect any certain traces of E after the prophecies of Balaam (N.XXIV), and from this point I include under J any passages which may possibly belong to the 'Second Elohist' = Wellhausen's 'Elohist' or Schrader's Theocratic Narrator.'

In like manner under D will be here included, not only the 'Deuteronomist' properly so called, but any Deuteronomistic Editor or Editors, including Jeremiah, who on our view himself wrote the Book of the Law and most of the two Books of Kings, and retouched the whole from Genesis to 2Kings.

And so the Later or Levitical Legislation (LL) will comprise insertions made by various writers during and after the Captivity, including Ezekiel, who followed Jeremiah's example in making additions to the existing work.

I shall now state the grounds on which these modifications are based, referring to Parts V and VI for the evidence in respect of the rest of the Hexateuch.

(4) GENESIS.

(a) XI.28-30 is probably from D, not from J, having been inserted to explain why Terah took with him his grandson Lot (v.31), and not his son Haran, Lot'

VOL. V.

father; v.29 has been written with reference to xxii.20, v.30 with reference to xvi.1, but enters prematurely.

(i) v.28, 'land of his kindred,' xxiv.7, xxxi.13, Jer.xxii.10, xlvi.16, nowhere else, except Ez. xxiii.15, R.ii.11, comp. ' my land and my kindred' (b.1).

(ii) v.28, Ur of the Chaldees,' from v.31 (E), repeated by D in xv.7.

(b) XII.1-4, 6-8, appears to have been interpolated by D.

(i) v.1, 'thy land and thy kindred,' comp. xxiv.4, xxxii.9o, N.x.30, also G.xxxi.3 (a.i).

(ii) v.1, the land that I will make-thee-see,' comp. D.xxxiv.1, J.v.6.

(iii) v.2, I will make ('asah) thee a great nation,' comp. E.xxxii.10, N.xiv.12*, D.ix. 14.

N.B. In G.xlvi.3 the verb is sim, comp. xxi.13,18, in xvii.20 it is nathan.

་

(iv) v.2, ' and I will bless thee,' comp. xxii.17, xxvi.3,24.

(v) v.2, 'I will make thy name great,' comp. D.xx.19, and for the idea see (Bv.xiv), giddel, 'make-great,' comp. J.iii.7.

(vi) v.3, 'I will bless them that bless thee, &c.,' not the same expression as in xxvii.3, N.xxiv.6,9.

(vii) v.3, and by thee shall all families of the ground bless-themselves,' comp. xviii. 18, xxii. 18, xxvi.4,24, xxviii.14, Jer.iv.2.

(viii) v.6, the terebinth of Moreh,' comp. D.xi.30, the Canaanite was then in the land,' comp. xiii.7 (Bb.xv).

(ix) v.7, ‘and Jahveh appeared unto Abram,' comp. xxvi.2,24, ‘unto thy seed will I give this land,' refers to v.1 (d.ii).

(x) v.7,8, and there he built an altar unto Jahveh,' comp. xxvi.25a, D.xxvii.5, J.viii.30, Ju.vi.24,26, 1S.vii.17; v.7, 'who appeared unto him,' comp. xxxv.1; v.8, and he called upon the name of Jahveh,' xiii.4, xxvi.25a.

(c) XII.9-20 is also from D, perhaps one of his later interpolations, based upon E's story in xx.1-17, which latter was perhaps meant to be cancelled, and replaced by this of D, as more in accordance with the age and circumstances of the Patriarch (V.293, &c.).

(i) v.13, that so it may be well for me,' comp. D.v.16,29, vi.18, xii.25,28, xxii.7, Jer.vii.23, also D.iv.40, vi.3, 2K.xxv.24, Jer.xl.9, xlii.6, and especially Jer.xxxviii.20, 'that so it may be well for thee and thy soul shall live,' as here, nowhere else.

(ii) v.13, because (biglal) of thee,' xxx.27", xxxix.5, D.i.37, xv.10, xviii.12, 1K.xiv.16, Jer.xi.17, xv.4, nowhere else, except Mic.iii.12.

(iii) v.15, halal, 'praise,' nowhere else in Hex., but see Jer. xx.13, xxxi.7. (iv) v.16, he did good to Abram,' comp. xxxii.96,12, N.x.32, D.viii.16, xxviii.63, xxx.5. J.xxiv.20, Jer.xviii. 10, xxxii.40,41.

(v) v.17, and Jahveh plagued Pharaoh,' comp. 2K.xv.5.

(vi) v.17, 'plague (nega'),' E.xi.1 D.xvii.8, xxi.5, xxiv.8, 2S.vii.14, 1K.viii. 37,38.