comp. and pitched his tent, Bethel being seaward and Ai eastward, and he built there an altar to Jehovah, and called on the name of Jehovah,' xii.S. (vii) v.3,, in the beginning,' (5.xxix).

*(viii) v.4, ‘call on the name of Jehovah,' (5.xxx).

(ix) v.5, 'Lot who went with Abram'; comp. 'Lot went with him,' xii.4". *(x) v.7, and the Canaanite and Perizzite were then dwellers in the land'; comp. and the Canaanite was then in the land,' xii.6;

'among the dwellers in the land, among the Canaanites, and among the Perizzites,' xxxiv.30;

'the dweller in the land, the Canaanite,' 1.11.

(xi) v.7, ́ dweller in the land,' xiii.7, xxxiv.30, xxxvi.20, 1.11, comp. 'dwellers in the cities,' xix.25.

*(xii) v.8, NN, ‹let not, I pray,' xiii.8, xviii. 3,30,32, xix. 7,18, xxxiii. 10, xlvii. 29. (xiii) v.9, 'is not the whole land before thee?'

comp. 'the land shall be before you,' xxxiv.10;

E has

'the land is broad on both hands before them,' xxxiv.21;

'the land of Egypt is before thee,' xlvii. 6:

'my land is before thee,' xx.15.

*(xiv) v.9,11,14, 777, 'be separated,' (3.x).

*(xv) v.10,14, 'lift-up the eyes and see,' xiii.10,14, xviii.2, xxii.4, 13, xxiv.63,64, xxxi.10,12, xxxiii.1,5, xxxvii.25, xliii.29.

(xvi) v.10, 'Sodom and Gomorrah,' as in x.19, xiii.10; comp. (50.xi):

E never names them, but calls them 'the cities of the circuit,' xiii.12*, xix.29. *(xvii) v.10, at thy going to Zoar,' (50.ix).

*(xviii) v.11, D7p, ‘east,' (3.vi).

*(xix) v.12o,18, "Soy, 'move-tent,' only besides in Is.xiii.20, comp. (59.ix).

(xx) v.12,13, 'Sodom,' (50.xi).

*(xxi) v.14, 77, 'sec,'=' behold!' xiii.14, xxvii.27, xxxi.12,50, xli.41; comp. xxxix. 14.

(xxii) v.15, the land which thou seest';

comp. 'the land which I will make thee to see,' xii.1.

(xxiii) v.15, ‘to thee will I give it and to thy seed,' v.17, 'to thee will I give it,' (59.vii).

(xxiv) v.16, 'I will place thy seed as the dust of the earth, so that if a man shall be able to count the dust of the earth, also thy seed shall be counted';

comp.

'I will surely multiply thy seed, and it shall not be counted for multitude,' xvi.10;

'and I will multiply thy seed,' xxvi.24;

' and thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth,' xxviii.14;

'I will place thy seed as the sand of the sea, which cannot be counted for multitude,' xxxii. 12;

'and they shall swarm-as-fish for multitude,' xlviii. 16;

'and his seed shall be the fulness of the nations,' xlviii.19:

D also has similar expressions (xv.5, xxii.17, xxvi.4).

(xxv) v.17, DIP, kum, 'arise'= set-out, xiii.17, xviii.16, xix.14,15, xxii.3,19, xxiv. 10,54,61, xxv.34, xxvii.43, xxxi.17,21, xxxii. 22(23), xxxv.3, xxxviii.19, xliii. 8,15, xlvi.5:

E has it once (xxviii.2), and E, (xxi.32).

*(xxvi) v.18, 'build an altar to Jehovah,' (45.ii).

64. xiii.6,12, Elohist.

*(i) v.6, and the land did not bear them to dwell together; for their gain was much, and they were not able to dwell together';

(רְכוּשׁ)

comp. for their gain was much, above dwelling together; and the land of their sojournings was not able to bear them because of their cattle,' xxxvi.7. *(ii) v.12, Lot dwelt in the cities of the circuit';

comp: 'when Elohim destroyed the cities of the circuit,' xix.29;

'He overthrew the cities in which Lot dwelt,' xix.29.

N.B. E never mentions Sodom or Gomorrah by name.

65. Both HUPFELD and BOEHMER assign xiii.11b to E; but it seems to belong to J for the following reasons:—

(i), 'be separated,' (3.x).

(ii) 'separated' in v.11' refers back to 'separate' in v.9, and is referred to afterwards in v.14.

66. xiv.1-24.

HUPFELD, p.142, assigns this section to the Jehovist, who thus secures for Abraham a kind of moral claim to a right of citizenship in the land of Canaan,' by delivering it from the inroad of its enemies. But, p.188, he supposes that he may probably have derived it from an older source.'

BOEHMER, p.110,111, gives it to the Second Elohist, who, in his view, did not abstain invariably from the use of the name 'Jehovah,' v.22, though using much more freely the name Elohim.' As this point is one of some importance to our future decisions, we shall here consider BOEHMER's arguments.

HUPFELD ascribes xiv, xv to the Jehovist, [except, perhaps, xv.13-16, which may be a later insertion, HuPF. p.143.] We only agree with him in this, that some part of xv is due to the Compiler,(1) and that both chapters are [generally] due to one and the same author. The connection of these chapters, which is not rightly exhibited by commentators, is this, that Abraham, when he had [in xiv] given a proof of his great unselfishness, and had renounced all reward from the hand of man, receives from God a gift of the whole land of Canaan, whose enemies he had so manfully vanquished. (2) Some phenomena which these two chapters have VOL. III.

in common, as the collective singular 'the fugitive,' xiv.13, comp. ‘the fowl,' 'the vulture,' xv.10,11, and similarly the collective names of peoples, xiv.6,7, xv.20,21, especially the Amorite,' xiv.7, xv.21, and the mention of Damascus, xiv.15, xv.2, (which occurs nowhere else in the Thora,) serve to confirm this connection. (3)

It might not certainly be easy to prove that this narrative is not from the hand of the Jehovist, or not adopted by him from an older source, (as HUPFELD considers to be probable with respect to xiv); since it does not contradict the tenor of his narrative, and is quite permissible in it. For the fact that in xiv. 12, 13, Lot, Abram, and Mamre, seems to be presented to us in such a way as if they had never been named by the writer before, [as in xiii.18,] may be explained by the consideration that just exactly here, where mention is made of warlike events out of the great world-history, the closer description of Abram as 'the Hebrew,' and of Mamre as 'the Amorite,' was quite in place. (4) And, in fact, Laban is called 'the Aramaan' in xxxi.20, although he had been spoken of just before. (5)

But, when on the one hand we consider how readily these chapters may be dispensed with in the J. story, to which even without their notice [in xv.4] there still remains the more distinct promise of the birth of Isaac in xviii.10,14, (6) and when on the other hand we observe that xiv,xv are exactly suited to serve as the commencement of the work of that author, [the Second Elohist,] whose narrative HUPFELD has endeavoured to restore from xx forward, we shall not hesitate to give the preference to the conjecture, which assigns the two chapters in question to E. (7) That the divine revelation in xv.1,4, is introduced with the formula, (which never occurs elsewhere in the Thora,) 'the word of Jehovah came to Abraham,'-a formula applied regularly in this manner to the revelations imparted to the later prophets,--agrees with the fact that in xx.7, and only there, Abraham is expressly called a 'prophet.' (8) With inherit,' xv.4,7,8, comp. xxi.10.(9) Surely, the connection of xiv,xv with E, has only been obscured from HUPFELD by his theory, which regards this writer as exclusively Elohistic. This assumption, however, viz. that the name Jehovah' is never used by him, rests simply upon an incomplete induction. (10) In presence of the other facts, we have rather to assume that E2, no less than E and J, names the Deity, even in the pre-Mosaic times, 'Jehovah' as well as 'Elohim.'(11) Hence there is no reason on this account for ascribing xx.18 to the Compiler, which HUPFELD does finally, (p.202,203, comp. p.49,50,) only because of its containing the name 'Jehovah' (12) In the commencement of a proper work, which should set forth the history of the descendants of Abraham, and specially of the children of Israel, the manner in which this writer, after a general notice about the historical situation of that epoch, introduces Abram, not incidentally, but with a formal preparation, is quite appropriate. (13)

67. To the above reasoning we must reply as follows:—

(1) We shall show (77-83) that not xv.18-21 only, as HUPFELD suggests, but the whole of xv, is a later insertion.

(2) The connection noticed by BOEHMER may exist just as well, if a later writer inserted xv after xiv with a view to the very p int in question.

(5) The first of the examples here produced, 'the fugitive,' is peculiar; but that

does not occur in xv. The others are mere ordinary instances of 'nouns of multitude' or 'national names,' e.g. 'the fowl,' 'the vulture,' Ez.xxxix. 4,17, Ps.viii.9, cxlviii. 10, Is.xviii.6, Jer.xii.9,- Jebusite,' 'Amorite,' &c. x.16-18. The mention of Damascus in both chapters, xiv.15, xv.2, might be of weight, if supported by other corroborative evidence of the unity of authorship in the two chapters. But these are the only phenomena which BOEHMER adduces to prove that a similarity of style exists in them.

(4) The abrupt mention of 'Abram the Hebrew' in xiv.13 would appear to us very strange, if written by the same author who had already written xii, xiii; and the description added 'For he dwelt by the terebinths of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and brother of Aner,' does not sound as if proceeding from the same hand which had only just before written, 'Abram came and dwelt by the terebinths of Mamre,' xiii.18.

(5) This remark is true: but the writer of xxxi.20 was not (in our view) writing an independent narrative, but had before him the formula of E, 'Laban the Aramæan,' xxv.20, under which he is first introduced into the history, and might use it afterwards, or not, as he pleased. Nowhere is Abram called 'the Hebrew' except in xiv.13.

(6) These two chapters may certainly, as BOEHMER allows, be dispensed with from the J. narrative, and do not, as we believe, either of them, belong to it.

(7) But did this writer, the Second Elohist, write, as HUPFELD and BOEHMER suppose, a complete independent narrative? If not,-and the evidence now seems to us convincing that he did not write such a narrative, but wrote only to supplement the story of E, which lay before him,—then the reason for assigning these chapters to E, because they would form a suitable commencement' to his story, (which, however, we do not allow,) falls away altogether.

(8) It will be seen (84) that we believe xv to have been inserted by a later prophet, who in v.1,4, fell naturally into the use of the ordinary prophetical formula. But the fact, that, prophet,' is found in xx.7, shows only that this chapter was probably not written till after Samuel's time, when this word, it would seem, was not yet in use, 18.ix.9.

(9) Observe that w, though occurring in xv.3,4,4,7,8, does not occur at all in xiv; and observe also that it occurs 68 times in Deuteronomy, and 29 times in the Deuteronomistic parts of Joshua, and only 24 times in the rest of the Pentateuch. This, indeed, is one of the grounds on which we assign xv to the Deuteronomist (79.vi): but no such evidence can be produced in the case of xiv.

(10) The progress of our analysis will, as we believe, satisfy the reader that HUPFELD's view is correct on this point, viz. that neither E nor E2, in its original form, contained the name 'Jehovah' before the account of the revelation of that name to Moses.

(11) That is to say, ВоEHMER supposes that the 'Jehovah,' which now appears in xvii.1, was originally due to E, as to which see (90,91).

(12) Our view in xx. 18 is given below (106,107).

(13) HUPFELD's view is certainly exposed to this objection, that xx begins

abruptly, and not at all like the commencement of a complete independent narrative. But the passages recovered for E, appear to us merely as interpolations, intended to supplement the original narrative, and in that case they would need no introduction.

68. If more were needed to disprove the truth of BOEHMER'S theory, it would be the fact, that he is obliged to assign the introductory words in xiv.1, and it came to pass,' to the later Compiler, p.197:

'It is not probable that this independent narrative should have begun with 'and it came to pass'; and there is no ground for assuming that anything has been cancelled before it. Rather, its account opens quite suitably and satisfactorily, with a definition of the time when Abram takes a part for the first time in the great world-history, viz. by his victory over the lord of Shinar and his confederates.

Upon our own view, however, which agrees here substantially with HUPFELD'S, there is no necessity for doing any such violence to this passage. It is merely a fragmentary story, disjoined from all before and after, which has been here inserted -perhaps by the Jehovist, and derived by him, as HUPFELD says, from an older source-as the description of a remarkable passage in the life of Abraham. Only we see no reason to suppose that the writer of this chapter,-whom we shall denote by J, and call the Second Jehovist, though probably in time antecedent to the Jehovist himself,-composed a complete narrative, or wrote any other portion of the present Pentateuch. At all events, his hand has not been traced in any other part of it. And it is just as easy to conceive that the Jehovist may have inserted this chapter by itself—the work, it may be, of a friend-as a separate episode in Abraham's life, for which insertion, however, he has prepared by introducing the notice of xiii.18, that Abram had settled by the terebinths of Mamre.'

69. xiv.1-24, Second Jehovist, except notes in v.2,3,7,8,17. This chapter contains Jehovah' in v.22: but it betrays no special signs of relation to the three writers already known to us-Elohist, Jehovist, Deuteronomist. And it has certain peculiarities of style of its own, which seem to mark it as the