Full text of “The Book of Genesis; with introduction and notes by S.R. Driver“

See other formats

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2008 with funding from

IVIicrosoft Corporation

http://www.archive.org/details/bool<ofgenesisnotOOdrivuoft

ESTMINSTER COMMENTARIES

^ w ««'

Edited by Walter Lock D.D.

IBELAIID PROrSSSOB. OF THE! BXBOSSI8
or HOLT SOKIPTUKS

THE BOOK OF GENESIS

xHE BOOK OF GENESIS

WITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

S. R. DRIVER, D.D.

RBOITJS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD.

HON. D.LITT. DUBLIN, HON. D.D. GLASGOW,

aXAMININO CHAPLAIN TO THE LATE BISHOP OF SOUTHWBIJ..

FELLOW OF THE BRITISH ACADEMT.

FOURTH EDITION

- '•'/>

METHUEN & CO.

36 ESSEX STREET W.C.

LONDON

■ ^

1233

{'^05

First Published . . January igo4

Second Edition . . March 1904

Third Edition . . October 1904

Fourth Edition . . ^PS

\
\

PEEFATORY NOTE BY THE GENERAL EDITOR.

THE primary object of these Commentaries is to be exe-
getical, to interpret the meaning of each book of the
Bible in the light of modern knowledge to English readers.
The Editors will not deal, except subordinately, with questions
of textual criticism or philology ; but taking the English text
in the Revised Version as their basis, they will aim at com-
bining a hearty acceptance of critical principles with loyalty to
the Catholic Faith.

The series will be less elementary than the Cambridge Bible
for Schools, less critical than the International Critical Com-
mentary, less didactic than the Expositor's Bible ; and it is
hoped that it may be of use both to theological students and to
the clergy, as well as to the growing number of educated laymen
and laywomen who wish to read the Bible intelligently and
reverently.

Each commentary will therefore have

(i) An Introduction stating the bearing of modern criticism
and research upon the historical character of the book, and
drawing out the contribution which the book, as a whole, makes
to the body of religious truth.

(ii) A careful paraphrase of the text with notes on the
more difficult passages and, if need be, excursuses on any points
of special importance either for doctrine, or ecclesiastical or-
ganization, or spiritual life.

But the books of the Bible are so varied in character that
considerable latitude is needed, as to the proportion which the

VI NOTE

various parts should hold to each other. The General Editor
will therefore only endeavour to secure a general uniformity in
scope and character : but the exact method adopted in each
case and the final responsibility for the statements made will
rest with the individual contributors.

By permission of the Delegates of the Oxford University
Press and of the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press
the Text used in this Series of Commentaries is the Revised
Version of the Holy Scriptures.

THIS Commentary will be found to differ in some respects
from the previous volumes of the series, but the differences
are of a kind which arise necessarily from the subject-matter of
the book.

Greater attention is paid to matters of archaeology, ancient
history, and modern science, especially in estimating the histo-
rical and scientific value of the earlier chapters of the book ;
and more notice has been taken of literary criticism and of
the analysis of the sources out of which the book has been
composed.

Both of these points have been found necessary; for the
Book of Genesis touches science, archaeology, and history at
more points than any other book of the Old Testament, and
it is essential that in a Commentary for educated readers
these points should be freely illustrated and discussed. Much
study has also been bestowed during recent years on the literary
analysis of the book, and many conclusions have been reached
which have commended themselves to a large number of scholars,
and these it would be unfair to withhold from the general
reader.

There is too another reason why a fuller treatment of such
subjects has been found necessary in the present volume than, for
instance, in the Commentary on Job. That book also touches
many points of science, but they are there presented in a form
obviously poetical ; here the form is apparently that of sober

NOTE VII

history, and the book has often been treated as though it were
a manual of scientific fact and of exact history. But, as such,
it must be submitted to the ordinary tests which apply to
scientific and historical knowledge. That must be the first
step in the interests of truth and in the reverent attempt to
define Inspiration, whatever considerations we may feel have
afterwards to be added to supplement it. The scientific student
is therefore free to say, or rather bound to say, at times, in the
light of modern knowledge, " This is not science, its value must
be found elsewhere " ; and the historical student is free to say,
or rather is bound to say, "This is pre-historic ; this has not
adequate contemporary support ; if I found it in another litera-
ture, I should not venture to build upon this as ascertained
fact ; the value of the book must be found elsewhere." Such
a frank discussion will be found in this Commentary. There
will also be found a very strong insistence on the evidence
which the moral and spiritual tone of the book ofibrs of its
Inspiration.

These are the two surest starting-points. There are other
points that lie beyond. Thus, while the editor of this Com-
mentary has urged various historical arguments (pp. xliii. fl\,
Ivii.) in support of the general trustworthiness of the patriarchal
narratives, many readers may feel that one or all of the
following considerations strengthen his position. (1) The extra-
ordinary truthfulness to human nature and to Oriental life
creates an impression in favour of such trustworthiness ; (2) the
consistency of this book with the subsequent history and re-
ligious thought of later Judaism helps to confirm this impression ;
(3) the fact of Inspiration, once admitted on the higher level of
moral and spiritual tone, may well carry its influence over into
details of fact, and turn the balance, when otherwise uncertain,
on the side of trustworthiness. For the truest historian is not
the accumulator of the largest number of ascertained facts,
but the best interpreter of the spirit of the age which he
describes, he who is best able to pick out the thread of purpose
in the tangle of details. In other words, the ultimate decision
on the value of the book has to be based on its context, and on
its connexion with the whole of Holy Scripture.

VIII NOTE

These, however, are considerations which will appeal differ-
ently to different minds : the first steps necessary are a careful
test of the book by the ordinary canons of scientific and historical
investigation, and a tracing of the clear marks of a higher spirit
in its religious tendency. It is because both of these steps
are taken so steadily and securely here, that I feel that tliis
Commentary will meet a very real need of the present day.

WALTER LOCK.

PREFACE.

THE present Commentary is an expansion of lectures which
I have given for some years past to students reading for
the School of Theology at Oxford. Its aim is firstly to explain
the text of Genesis, and secondly to acquaint readers with the
position which, in accordance with our present knowledge, the
Book holds, from both a historical and a religious point of view.
The most recent English Commentary upon Genesis, of any
considerable size, appeared in 1882; and since then many dis-
coveries have been made which have a bearing upon the Book,
much fresh light has been thrown upon it, and new points of
view have been gained, from which, if its contents and the place
taken by it in the history of revelation are to be rightly under-
stood, it must be judged. It has been my endeavour, while
eschewing theories and speculations, which, however brilliant,
seem to rest upon no sufficient foundation, to place the reader,
as far as was practicable, in possession of such facts as really
throw light upon Genesis, and in cases where, from the nature
of the question to be solved, certainty was unattainable, to
enable him to form an estimate of the probabilities for himself.

In the explanation of the text, while I have not been able
entirely to avoid the use of Hebrew words, and of technical
expressions belonging to Hebrew grammar, I have endeavoured
so to express myself that the reader who is unacquainted with
Hebrew may nevertheless be able to follow the reasoning, and
to understand, for instance, why one rendering or reading is
preferable to another. The margins of the Revised Version —

X PREFACE

where they do not merely repeat the discarded renderings of the
Authorized Version — very frequently contain renderings (or
readings) superior to those adopted in the text: hence they
always deserve careful attention on the part of the reader ;
and though the instances in which this is the case are not so
numerous in Genesis as in some of the poetical and prophetical
books of the Old Testament, I have made a point, where they
occur, of indicating them in the notes. Hebraists are, moreover,
well aware that, superior as the Revised Version is to the
Authorized Version in both clearness and accuracy, it does not
always, either in the text or on the margin, express the sense of
the original as exactly as is desirable ; and I have naturally,
in such cases, given the more correct renderings in the notes.

The field of knowledge with which, at one point or another,
the Book of Genesis comes in contact is large ; archoeology,
ancient history and geography, modern travel and exploration,
for instance, all in their turn supply something more or less
substantial to its elucidation. Naturally, where the subjects
are so varied and wide, and the period concerned so remote
from that at which we at present live, points of interest or
difficulty occur, which I should have been glad to explain or
discuss more fully than my limits of space permitted me to do,
and on which therefore I have been obliged to content myself
with brief statements of fact or probability, as the case might
be^ ; I have, however, in such cases nearly always added references
to some standard work in which the reader will find further
information or discussion. I have found Hastings' Dictionary
of the Bible, and the Encyclopcedia Bihlica particularly useful
for this purpose ; but naturally other works have often been
referred to as well. I have in some cases multiplied references
in the hope that readers who might not have access to one book
that was mentioned might be able, if they desired it, to refer to
another.

1 See, for instance, many of the notes on ch. x.

PREFACE XI

The critical and historical view of the Book of Genesis — which
extended to Scripture generally, appears to me to be the only
basis upon which the progressive revelation contained in the
Bible can be properly apprehended \ and the spiritual authority
of the Bible ultimately maintained — has been assumed through-
out : but a minute discussion of critical questions has not seemed
to me to be necessary ; and I have confined myself as a rule
to brief statements of the general or principal grounds upon
which the more important of the conclusions adopted rest.
There are of course some points, on which — the data them-
selves being ambiguous, or slight — divergent conclusions may
be, and have been, drawn : in such cases I can only say that
I have endeavoured to decide as well as my knowledge and
judgement permitted me.

The Commentaries in the present series are not intended to
be homiletic or devotional ; but I have always endeavoured, as
occasion ofifered, to point out the main religious lessons which
the Book of Genesis contains, and the position taken by it in the
history of revelation. There are parts of the Book in which,
judged by the canons of historical method, it must be evident
that we are treading upon uncertain ground : but that in no
degree detracts from the spiritual value of its contents ; and
the presence in the writers of the purifying and illuminating
Spirit of God must be manifest throughout. In view of the
many problems which, to modern readers, the Book of Genesis
suggests, it will be a satisfaction to me if I may have succeeded
in making my volume a contribution, however slight, to that
adjustment of theology to the new knowledge of the past, which
has been called a * crying need ' of the times \

Among the Commentaries upon Genesis which I have con-
sulted, I feel bound to record my special indebtedness to that

1 Compare the paper read by the Bishop of Winchester at the Bristol
Church Congress, 1903 {Guardian^ Oct. 21, 1903, p. 1590).

2 The Guardian, Dec. 19, 1900, p. 1784.

XII PREFACE

of August Dillmann, an admirable scholar, whose writings were j
always distinguished by learning, ability, and judgement. It has
been translated into English; but it can hardly be said to be
well adapted to the ordinary English reader, as it contains much
technical matter, which, though interesting and valuable to
special students, is superfluous for the general reader, while,
on the other hand, it does not always contain the kind of
information which an English reader would expect to find in
a Commentary. I have only, in conclusion, to acknowledge my
obligations to the Warden of Keble College, the editor of the
series, who has taken much trouble in reading all the sheets,
and who has on many occasions given me the benefit of his
judgement, and ofifered suggestions to which I have very grate-
fully given effect.

S. R. D.

Christ Church, Oxford,
October 6, 1903.

CONTENTS.

PAOB

Addenda XV

Principal abbreviations employed XVIII

Note on the Chronology XXI

Chronological Table XXII

j Introduction

§ 1. Structure of the Book of Genesis, and Characteristics of

its component parts . . i

§ 2. The Chronology of Genesis xxy

§ 3. The Historical Value of the Book of Genesis :

a. The prehistoric period (chaps, l — xl) . . . xxxi

&. The patriarchal period (chaps, xii. — l.) , . xliii

§ 4. The Religious Value of the Book of Genesis . . . Ixi

/Text and Commentary 1—401

Additional Notes

The Cosmogony of Genesis 19

The Sabbath 34

On the narrative ir. 4*> — iil 24 61

The site of Paradise 67

The Cherubim 60

On chap, iv ... 71

On Enoch 78

On the figures in chap, v 79

On the Names in chaps, iv. and v., and their possible Babylonian

origin 80

The Historical Character of the Deluge 99

Noah's judgement on his three sons Ill

Nimrod and Babylon 122

The Tower of Babel 136

XIV CONTENTS

PAGE

Ur and the Hebrews 142

On Melchizedek 1G7

The Vale of Siddim and the Dead Sea. The probable site of

the Cities of the Kikkar 168

The Historical Character of the narrative contained in Gen. xrv. 171

The Angel of Jehovah 184

Circumcision 189

The destruction of the Cities of the Kikkar .... 202

Lot .205

The Sacrifice of Isaac 221

The Cave of Machpelah 228

The 'Hittites' in Hebron 228

The Ishmaelite Tribes 243

Stone-worship 267

Gilead and Laban 290

Jacob's struggle at Penuel 296

On the sites of Mizpah, Mahanaim, Penuel, and Succoth . 300

The narrative of Jacob's dealings at Shechem (chap, xxxiv.) . 306

Famines in Egypt. The date of Joseph 347

Land-tenure in Egypt 374

The Character of Joseph 400

Excursus L The Names of God in Genesis . . . .402

Excursus II. On Gen. xlix. 10 ('Until Shiloh come') . 4io

Index 4i6

ADDENDA,

Pp. xlii. n. 2, 24 n. 2 (second paragraph). I rejoice to see substantially the
same criticisms made independently by the Rev. G. S. Streatfeild on pp. 15—17
of his pamphlet cited below (p. Ixviii).

P. 3, on i. 1. With a language as largely unknown in England as Hebrew
is, it is possible for an amateur or theorist to perform extraordinary feats.
Thus Mr Fenton, in a work called The Bible in Modern English, translates
the first verse of Genesis in this way, ' By Periods God created that which pro-
duced the Solar Systems; then that which produced the earth.' To say nothing
about the rest of this rendering, what, we may ask, would be thought of a
Latin scholar who, having before him the words In principio, gravely informed
his readers that principium was a plural word, and meant ' periods ' ? Yet
this would be an exact parallel to what Mr Fenton has done. Other parts of
the Old Testament are translated in the same fashion : thus Dt. xxxiii. 20, 'Let
the horseman (!), Gad, be blest ! ' and Daniel becomes (Daniel iv. 9) ' Chief of
the Engineers ' I

P. 34 n. 2. Of. R. D. Wilson in the Princeton Theol Review, Apr. 1903,
p. 246, where statistics will be found supporting this statement.

P. 34 n. 3. In a recently discovered lexical tablet, the name is given to
the 15th day of the month, i.e. the day of the full moon (Zimmem, ZDMG.
1904, p. 199 ff.).

P. 51 ff. See further, on Gen. iii., the very full discussion in Tennant, The
Sources of the Doctrines of the Fall and Original Sin, 1903 (including the
history of these doctrines in later Jewish and Christian hands).

P. 52 n. 4. But see R. C, Thompson, as cited in the Bxp. Times, Nov.
1903, p. 50 f., who contends that no sacred garden is here referred to at all.

P. 72. With the views respecting Cain here referred to, comp. Foakes-
Jackson, The Biblical History of the Hebrews (1903), pp. 7, 363 f.

P. 131, note on x. 29, 1. 8. This identification, which was originally Lassen's,
is suggested by the fact that * algum,' and the Heb. words for ivorg, apes^ and
peacocks, are apparently Indian : see Max Miiller, Lectures on the Science of
Language, first series, ed. 1864, p. 208 ff. (who accepts it). It is objected
(Keane, The Gold ofOphir, 46 f.) that Abhira is not the name of a people, but
means simply a region where the Abhirs, a widespread caste of ' cowherds,'
were settled. Still Ptolemy mentions a district Aheria in precisely the same
locality : and Josephus {Ant. viii. 6. 4) identified 2(o(f)eipa [lxx. for * Ophir ' has
in 1 K. ix. 28 Sta^j^pa] with Chryse (i.e. Malacca), * which belongs to India.'

P. 131 n. 4, on x. 29, Ophir. It should have been stated that Prof. Keane,
though he identifies Ophir with Dhofar on the S. coast of Arabia, considers
that the *gold of Ophir' was found in Mashonalaud, and only brought to
'Ophir 'as an emporium. Dr Carl Peters discusses the question of Ophir
at great length in his Eldorado of the Ancients (1902), pp. 289 — 369. Peters,
however, distinguishes between the Ophir of Gen. x. 29 and the Ophir of
Solomon, whence the gold came : for the Ophir of Gen. x. 29 he follows
(p. 293) the view adopted by Glaser (below, p. 131 n. 4), upon grounds developed

XVI ADDENDA

with much learning, but not cogent, that it was on the Arabian coast of the
Persian Gulf; the Ophir of Solomon he finds (p. 341 f.) in Mashonaland between
the Zambesi and the Sabi. There certainly were anciently very extensive
gold-workings in Mashonaland, as Bent {The Ruined Cities of Mashonaland,
1892), and especially Hall and Neal {The Ancient Ruins of Rhodesia^ 1902),
have abundantly shewn. It is contended by Peters that the ruins of the great
Zimbabwe (= 'House of Stone') and other places in Rhodesia are of a
character shewing that they were constructed by Phoenicians and Sabaeans
(p. 353 flF., 364 ; cf. Keane, The Gold of Ophir, p. 160 ff., where the same view
is maintained). Keane places even the Havilah of Gen. ii. 11 in Rhodesia, the
Pishon being, seemingly, the Zambesi (p. 194) ; and identifies the Tarshish of
1 K. X. 22 with Sofala (20° S.). The grounds on which all these positions
rest require to be carefully tested : but as it is not affirmed by either
of these writers that the Ophir of Genesis was in Mashonaland, a con-
sideration of their arguments lies beyond the scope of the present com-
mentary. The hypothesis of two Ophirs should clearly be only a last resort.
In view of the connexion in which Ophir stands in Gen. x., * the burden of
proof,' as Mr Twisleton said long ago (Ophir, in Smith, DB. ii., 1863, p. 640),
'lies on anyone who denies Ophir to have been in Arabia' : at the same time
difficulties undoubtedly arise, partly from the apparently Indian origin of the
Heb. words referred to above, partly from the fact that Arabia does not seem
to have been a country capable of producing gold in such quantities as
Solomon (even allowing for some hyberbole) appears to have obtained from it
(1 K ix. 28; cf. x. 14 ffi). Hence the view that Ophir, though in Arabia, was an
emporium for gold brought to it from elsewhere; though even so, as Palestine
was a comparatively poor country, it is difficult to think what commodities
Solomon would have had to ofl'er in exchange for the gold obtained by him, and
the inference has accordingly been drawn that the Israelites must have mined
the gold themselves (Keane, p. 67 f.). This inference, if correct, would seem to
imply that it was procured from some country other than Arabia. See further
E7icB. a. V. ; Budge, Hist, of Egypt j ii. 132-4 ; Glaser, Zwei Pvllikationen
[those of Keane and Peters] iiber Ophir (1902).

P. 156 w. 5. See also now the full and instructive discussion of this Code
in S. A. Cook, The Laws of Moses and the Code of Hammurabi.

P. 157 n. 3. The uncertainty of the reading arises from the * polyphony ' of
the cuneiform script, i.e. from the remarkable, but well-established fact that
the same character may denote different sounds^. In the three inscriptions
referred to, the name which has been supposed to correspond to Chedorla'omer
is written in characters which, read phonetically, would give

(1) KU-KU-KU-MAL

(2) KU-KU-KU-MAL

' (3) KU-KU-KU-KU-

The last character in (3) is obliterated. Mr King, having stated these
facts, continues, 'The three names are said to be identical, and to be a
fanciful way of writing Chedorla'omer. Assuming that (3) is to be restored from
(2), which is by no means certain, we get two forms of the name, one

1 See Evetts, New Light on the Bible (1892), pp. 119 ff., 452-4.

ADDENDA XVII

beginning with KU written three times, the other with it written four times.
As the character has also the value dur^ and Kudur is a well-known com-
ponent of Elamite names, the second occurrence in each name is probably to
be transliterated dur, so that the names can be reduced to Kv^dur-ku-mal, and
Ku-dur-ku-ku-mal. In order to get the names more like that of Chedor-
la'oraer, it was suggested by Mr Pinches that the character in question had on
its third occurrence the value lah or la§, and the names were transliterated
by him as Ku-dur-la^-mal and KiL-dur-la^-gitrmal, the former being de-
scribed by him as " defectively written." But there is little justification for
assigning the new value lah or Idg to the character used ; and, though Ku-
dur-ku-ku-mal is styled a king of Elam, there is no reason for supposing him
a contemporary of ^ammurabi. He might have occupied the throne at any
period before the 4th century b.o. Although however Chedorla'omer's name
has not yet been identified in any Babylonian inscription, there is no reason at
all why it should not be found in one.' Mr King then proceeds to point out
(cf below, p. 157 f.) that Chedorla'omer is in form a purely Elamite name,
Kudur- Lag amar, and that a joint expedition, such as that described in
Gen. xiv., might have taken place, consistently with what we know of the
politics of the age, in the early part of ^ammurabi's reign. Thus ' it would not
be surprising if the name Chedorla'omer should be found as that of a king of
Elam in an inscription of the Old Babylonian period. Up to the present time,
however, no such discovery has been made.' Comp. Johns in the Expositor,
Oct., 1903, pp. 282-7, whose conclusion (p. 286) is, *The cuneiform originals
suggested for the names in Gen. xiv. are therefore only ingenious conjectures.
They may all be right, but as yet not one is proved.'

P. 383, 1. 16 f. Kur, to dig, is, however, an uncertain root {Lex. 468''); and
it would form not m'kherdh, but m'khordh. M'kherdh must come from
kdrar, prob. to turn round ; hence Dillm. suggests a curved knife, or sabre.

P. 392, on xlix. 24^ In view of the names by which it has been supported
the interpretation of this difficult clause obtained by vocalizing nrh for Hyi
ought not perhaps to have been left unmentioned. Adopting this vocalization,
Ewald (Hist. 1. 409), Tuch, and Dillm ann render the clause, * From there (where
is) the Shepherd of the Stone of Israel,' i.e. from heaven, whence the Shepherd-
God [' Shepherd's God' in Ewald, I. c. n. 2, is a mistranslation] (Gen. xlviii. 15,
Ps. xxiii. 1, Ixxx. 1), revered at the sacred stone of Bethel (ch. xxviii. 21),
stretches out His hands to support Joseph in the battle. The * Shepherd of
the Stone of Israel,' if this reading of the passage is correct, will thus be
virtually a synonym of the ' God of Bethel ' (xxxi. 13). Gunkel, combining this
reading with that of the Peshitta, mentioned on p. 392, renders 'By the
name of the Shepherd of Israel's Stone,' understanding the expression to
mean the Divine Shepherd, who was regarded, at least originally (cf. pp. 267,
268), as dwelling in the sacred stone of Bethel. Prof. G. F. Moore {EncB.
HI. 2977, n. 14) proposes, ' By the arm {or arms) of the Stone of Israel '
(y'">!P or ^?'"itP for ny-l DC'D) : this would form a good parallel to ' hands' in
clause c ; but would hardly be possible, unless the ' Stone of Israel ' had come
to be a mere title of Yahweh, the figure of the * stone ' being forgotten.

i>. h

LIST OF PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS EMPLOYED.

AHT. Fritz Hommel, Ancient Hebrew Tradition (1897).

BR. {or Rob.). Edw. Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine and the
acljacent regions: a Journal of Travels in the years 1838 and 1862
(ed. 2, 1866).

CIS. Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum (Parisiis 1881 flF.).

DB. (except when preceded by 'Smith'). A Dictionary of the Bible, edited
by J. Hastings, D.D. (4 vols., 1898 — 1902; a fifth, supplementary volume
is announced for 1904).

Del. Franz Delitzsch, Neuer Commentar vber die Genesis^ 1887 (Engl, tr., in
2 vols., Edinb., 1888-9).

Dillm. {or Dl). Aug. Dillmann, Die Genesis erkldrt, ed. 3, 1892 (Engl, tr., in
2 vols., Edinb., 1897). Ed. 1 (1875) appeared as the third edition, for
the most part rewritten, of Knobel's Commentary (see below).

E. See p. xii.

IJHH. A. H. Sayce, The Early History of the Hebrews (1897).

EncB. Encycloposdia Biblica, ed. by the Rev. T. K. Cheyne, M.A., D.D., and
J. Sutherland Black, M.A., LL.D. (4 vols., 1899—1903).

EW. English Versions (used in cases where A.V. and R.V. agree).

Exp. Times. Expository Times (a monthly periodical on Biblical and
Theological subjects, ed. by J. Hastings, D.D.; T. and T. Clark, Edinb.).

G.-K. Gesenius* Hebrew Grammar^ as edited and enlarged by E. Kautzsch,
Professor of Theology in the University of Halle. Translated from the
26th German edition by the Rev. G. W. Collins, M.A., and A. B. Cowley,
M.A. (Oxford, 1898).

Gunk. Hermann Gunkel, Genesis iihersetzt und erkldrt (1901).

HG. G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land (ed. 4, 1896).

Holz. H. Holzinger, Genesis erkldrt (1898).

J. See p. xii.

KAT.^ Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament. Von Eb. Schrader
(ed. 2, 1883). Translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions
and the O.T. by Owen C. Whitehouse, 1885, 1888. The references are to
the pages of the original, which are given on the margin of the English
translation.

KAT* Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament. Neu bearbeitet von
Dr H. Zimmem und Dr H. Winckler (1903). Not a revised edition of
KAT.\ but a completely new work. Contains a very large amount of
fresh material, but does not entirely supersede KA T.^

KB. Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek (transliterations and translations of Baby-
lonian and Assyrian inscriptions, by various scholars, under the editorship
of Bb. Schrader). Six volumes have at present [1903] appeared, vols, i — in

LIST OF PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS XIX

(1889 — 92) containing inscriptions of Babylonian and Assyrian kings, vol. iv.
(1896) contract-tablets, &c., vol. v. (1896) the Tel el-Amarna correspondence,
and vol. vi., Part i (1900-1) mythological poems (including the Creation-
aud Deluge-epics). Extremely valuable.

Knob, (or Kn.). Aug. Knobel, Die Genesis erkldrt (ed. 2, 1860).

L. & B. The Land and the Book ; or Biblical illustrations drawn from the
manners and customs, the scenes and scenery of the Holy Land, By
W. M. Thomson, D.D., forty-five years a missionary in Syria and Palestine.
Three large volumes. Southern Palestine and Jerusalem (1881), being
referred to 2i& L. & B. i.; Central Palestine and Phoenicia (1883) as
L. & B. 11. ; and Lebanon^ Damascus, and Beyond Jordan (1886) as
L. & B. ni. There is also an edition in 1 vol. (718 pp. small 8vo., 1898,
1901, &c.), the title-page of which differs from that of the larger edition
only in having 'thirty years' instead of 'forty-five years.' This is
apparently a reprint of the original edition (in 2 vols.) published in
1859 at New York, Much — perhaps most— of the matter contained in
it is incorporated in the 3 vol. edition.

Lex. A Hehrevs and English Lexicon of the Old Testament based on the
Lexicon of William, Gesenius. By Francis Brown, D.D., with the
co-operation of S. R. Driver, D.D., and C. A. Briggs, D.D. (Clarendon
Press, Oxford). Not yet complete. Eleven Parts, reaching as far as "ob,
at present [Dec. 1903] published.

LOT. S. R. Driver, Introduction to the Literature qf the Old Testament^
1891, ed. 7, 1898.

Masp. I. G. Maspero, Th^ Dawn of Civilization. Egypt and Chaldasa (1894,
ed. 4, 1901).

Masp. IL G. Maspero, The Struggle of the Nations (1896).

Masp. III. G. Maspero, The Parsing of the Empires 850 b.c. to 330 b.o. (1900).
These three large and brilliantly-written volumes are at present the

standard authority on the ancient history of Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, and

neighbouring countries.

Mon. A. H. Sayce, The ^HigJier Criticism,' and the Verdict qf the Monu-
ments (1894).

NHB. H. B. Tristram, The Natural History of the Bible, ed. 2, 1868.

Onrnri. Onomastica Sacra, ed. by P. de Lagarde, 1870, ed. 2, 1887. Contains
Eusebius' Glossary of the names of places mentioned in Scripture, with
descriptions of their sites (p. 207 ff.), together with Jerome's translation^
(p. 82 ff.). The references are to the pages of ed. 1, which are repeated
on the margin of ed. 2.

P. See p. iv.

Parad. Friedrich Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies? (1881). Important, not
on account of the theory of the site of Paradise advocated in it (which has
not been generally accepted by scholars), but on account of the abundant

1 See the Dictionary of Christian Biography, n. 336.

XX LIST OF PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS

information on the geography of Babylonia and adjacent countries collected
in it from the Inscriptions.
Pesh. Peshitta (the Syriac Version of the O.T.).
PEFM. Palestine Exploration Fund. Memoirs of tfie Survey (i. — iii.

Western Palestine; iv. Eastern Palestine).
PEFQS. Palestine Exploration Fund. Quarterly Statements.
PSBA. Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology.
R. Redactor (or compiler). See p. xvi f.

Ret Sem. W. Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites^ 1889, ed. 2, 1894.
RVm. Margin of the Revised Version.
S. & P. Sinai and Palestine in connexion with their history. By A. P.

Stanley, D.D., F.R.S. (ed. 1864).
Tuch. Fr. Tuch, Gommentar iiber die Genesis, ed. 2, 1871.
TW. Tent Work in Palestine. By C. R. Conder, R.E. (ed. 1887, in 1 vol.).
ZA TW. Zeitschrift filr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft (from 1881).
ZDP V. Zeitschrift des Deutschen PaloMtina- Vereins.

A small 'superior' figure, attached to the title of a book (as KAT?), or
author's name, indicates the edition of the work referred to.

In citations, the letters * and ^ (or a and 6) denote respectively the first and
second parts of the verse cited. Where the verses consist of three or four
clauses (or lines) the letters «» b, c, d (^^ ^^ j^ ^^ ^) 2xq employed sometimes to
denote them similarly.

A dagger (f), appended to a list of references, indicates that it includes all
instances of the word or phrase referred to, occurring in the Old Testament.

It has been found diflBcult to preserve entire consistency in the translitera-
tion of foreign names ; but it is hoped that the reader will not be seriously
misled in consequence. It has seemed sometimes worth while to distinguish
the Hebrew letters which are commonly confused in English (as h and A,
t and /) ; but even this has not been done uniformly, and in the case of some
very familiar proper names, not at all. Where distinctions have been made,
'=N; *=y, p; gh- b^\ h=T\i ^; ch (in Arabic words)=^»-; dh=^ ; ^ = p;
? or |?=Vj ^=tD.

NOTE OlSr THE CHRONOLOGY.

The Chronological Table on the next page is added for the convenience of
readers. Alternative dates are in some cases given, in order that the reader may
be aware of the amount of agreement and difference between diflFerent authori-
ties. The following are the principal authorities on which the Table is based : —
For Babylonia, Hilprecht, The Babylonian Expedition of the University of
Pennsylvania, L ii. (1896), pp. 24, 43; Rogers, Hist, of Bah. and Ass. (New
York, 1900), I. 312 ff., 336 f., 349 flfl ; the authorities mentioned below, p. xxxii. w.;
Sayce, Early Israel (1899), p. 280 f.; on Hammurabi, Maspero, ii. 27 (2287—2232),
Rogers, i. 388 (2342—2288), King, EncB. i. 445 (c. 2285 B.O.), Sayce, I.e. p. 281,
Exp. Times, x. (1899), p. 211 (Hommel). For Egypt, Petrie, Hist, of Egypt,
I. 233, 252, II. 29, 97, &c., and Lecture reported in the daily papers of Oct. 17,
1903; Sayce, I.e. pp. 158^, 160, 276 f., Egypt of the Hebrews, pp. 89, 101, 308 f.,
316; Budge, Hist, of Egypt (1902), i. Ill ff. (where the general subject of
Egyptian chronology is discussed), 160 f., ii. 21 ff,, &c. Budge's dates (which
are based upon those of Brugsch) are, as he expressly states (i. 161), only
approximate; but as far back as the beginning of the 18th dynasty 'no greater
error than 50 years is possible.' Where no dates are given in the Egyptian part of
the Table, the authorities quoted do not appear to have expressed themselves.

The First Dynasty of

Babylon ^

LIST OP KINGS

CHBONICLE

Sumu-abu

years

Sumula-ilu

Zabum

)•

Apil-Sin

Sin-muballit

Hammurabi

»1

>»

Samsu-iluna

Abeshu'

[?2]8

Ammiditana

Ammizaduga

[unfinished]

Samsuditaua

1 The 669 (i.e. 518 + 151) years assigned here to the Hyksos rule are based
upon Erman's reconstruction (Masp. n. 73 n.) of the figures of Manetho as reported
by Julius Africanus (Budge, i. 185) : see the paper cited p. 347 n. According to
Manetho, as reported by Josephus (c. Ap. i. 14), their rule lasted 511 years, being
followed by a ' long and great war ' of ' insurrection.'

2 From King's Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi, iii. (1900), p. Lxxf. The
first column gives the regnal years of the several kings according to the List of
Kings published by Mr Pinches in 1880 (see Records of the Past, second series,
vol. I. pp. 3, 13); the second gives their regnal years according to the recently
discovered Chronicle of the First Dynasty, which is based upon two contemporary
documents dating from the reign of Ammizaduga. The Chronicle itself is trans-
lated in extenso in King, op. cit. pp. 213—253.

CHRONOLOGICAL TABLED

First appearance of man

Diffusion of mankind over the earth

Gradual growth of racial distinctions

Formation of principal families of languages

Palaeolithic age

Earlier part of Neolithic age, and development of
civilization to the level reacned when the earliest
historical monuments appear in Babylonia and
Egypt (cf. p. xU f.)

(Not determinable In years B.C.; but
< must have extended over many
( milleimia before b.o. 6—5000

Babylonia

Estimated date of foun-
dation of Temple of Bel
at Nippur (Hilprecht)

before 6000

Egypt

Remains of predynastic civili-
zation in Egypt

B.O.

before 5000

Menes, first king of

Petrie

Sayce

Budse

Many vases, inscriptions,
&c. in the British Mu-

Egypt mentioned

seum e. 4500

4777

C.4400

Lugal-zaggisi, king of
TJruk (p. xxxii) c. 4000

Fourth dynasty

8998—
3721

C. 8733—
3566

Cheops, builder of the

Sargon of Agadd (pp.

Great Pyramid

3969-

xxxii, 173 n.) 8800

3908

Many kings of Lagash,
Ur, and TJruk c. 2800

Twelfth dynasty

2778—
2566

C.2466-
2200

First dynasty of Babylon (Sayce 2478-2174

(Maspero 2416-2082
(Hommel) 2231—1941

Hammurabi (6th king of

• First dynasty) (Sayce) 2376-2333

(Johns) 2285-2242

(Hommel) 2130-2087

The Kasshite dynasty (p.

Rule of the Hyksos

2098-

22e&-

120) (Sayce) 1786-1211
(Hommel) 1688-1113

1687

1600

—1760

Eighteenth dynasty

1587—

1327

1503-

1600—

c. 1700-

1400

c. 1683-

Thothmes m.

1503-

1449

1500

Bumaburiash; Tel el-

Amenhotep 331.

1414-

c. 14.50—

Amama correspondence c. 1400

1383

1430

AmenhotepIV. (Khu-

1383-

c. 1430-

n-aten)

1365

1400

Nazi-murudash (p. 122) c. 1350

Nineteenth dynasty

1327—
1181

C. 1400-
1200

Ramses EC

1275-

1348-

C. 1333-

1208

1281

1300

Merenptah (probably
the Pharaoh of the

Exodus)

1208-
1187

1281-

c. 1300-
1270

Twentieth dynasty

1181—

1060

1180-

Nebuchadrezzar I <j. 1140

Eamses m.

1230-

c. 1233-

1148

1200

Assyria does not come into prominence during the period covered by this Table : the following
dates, may, however, be mentioned : —

Ishmi-dagan, patesi, or priest-king, of Nineveh c. 1820.

Asshur-bel-nisheshu, jfirst king of Assyria at present known . c. 1460.
Shalmaneser I., the builder of Calah (Gen. x. 11) c. 1300.

For the authorities ujwn which this Table is based, see the preceding page.

INTRODUCTION.

§ 1. The Structure of the Booh of Genesis, and characteristics of
its component parts.

The Book of Genesis is so called from the title given to it in the
Lxx. Version, derived from the Greek rendering of ii. 4* avr-q -q ^i^\o%
y ev ear e<jis ovpavov kol y^9. It forms the first book in the Hexateuchy —
as the literary whole formed by the Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua
is now frequently termed^ — the general object of which is to describe
in their origin the fundamental institutions of the Israelitish theocracy
(i.e. the civil and the ceremonial law), and to trace from the earliest
past the course of events which issued ultimately in the establishment
of Israel in Canaan. The Book of Genesis comprises the introductory
period of this history, embracing the lives of the ancestors of the
Hebrews, and ending with the death of Joseph in Egypt. The aim
of the book is, however, more than merely to recount the ancestry
of Israel itself : its aim is, at the same time, to describe how the earth
itself was originally prepared to become the habitation of man, to give
an outline of the early history of mankind upon it, and to shoi^v how
Israel was related to other nations, and how it emerged gradually into
separate and distinct existence beside them. Accordingly the narrative
opens with an account of the creation of the world ; the line of Israel's
ancestors is traced back beyond Abraham to the first appearance of
man upon the earth ; and the relation in which the nations descended
from the second father of humanity, Noah, were supposed to stand,
both towards one another and towards Israel, is indicated by a genea-
logical scheme (ch. x.). The entire book may thus be divided into
two parts, of which the first, chs. i. — xi., presents a general view of

^ The Book of Joshua is composed of three well-marked distinct strands ; and
the literary affinities of each of these are with corresponding strands running
through part or all of the five preceding books. The literary affinities of Joshua
with the books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings are much less strongly marked.

ii INTRODUCTION [§ 1

the Early Histm-y of Mankind, as pictured by the Hebrews, inchiding
the Creation (ch. i.), the origin of evil (ch. iii.), the beginnings of
civilization (ch. iv.), the Flood (chs. vi. — ix.), the rise of separate
nations (ch. x.), and the place taken by the Semites, and particularly by
the Hebrews, among them (xi. 10 — 26); while the second, chs. xii. — 1.,
beginning with the migration of the Terahites, comprehends in par-
ticular the History of Israel's immediate ancestors, the Patriarchs,
viz. Abraham (xii. 1 — xxv. 18), Isaac (xxv. 19 — xxxvi.), and Jacob
(xxxvii. — 1.).

The narrative of Genesis is cast into a framework, or scheme,
marked by the recurring formula, These are the generations (lit. he-
gettings) of\... This phrase is one which belongs properly to a
genealogical system: it implies that the person to whose name it is
prefixed is of sufficient importance to mark a break in the genealogical
series, and that he and his descendants will form the subject of the
section which follows, until another name is reached prominent enough
to form the commencement of a new section.

The formula appears ten times in the Book of Genesis : viz. iL 4* (the
generations of heaven and earth), v. 1 (of Adam), vi. 9 (of Noah), x. 1 (of the
sons of Noah), xi. 10 (of Shem), xi. 27 (of Terab), xxv. 12 (of Ishmael), xxv. 19
(of Isaac), xxxvi. 1, cf. 9 (of Esau), xxxvii. 2 (of Jacob). In ii. 4* it is applied
metaphorically; and as it clearly relates to the contents of ch. i., it is very
possible that it stood originally before i. 1 (see p. 19). In the other cases, it
introduces each time a longer or shorter genealogical account of the person
named and of his descendants, and is followed usually by a more detailed
narrative about them.

With which of the component parts of Genesis the scheme thus
indicated was originally connected will appear subsequently. The
entire narrative, as we now possess it, is accommodated to it. The
attention of the reader is fixed upon Israel, which is gradually dis-
engaged from the nations and tribes related to it : at each stage in the
history, a brief general account of the collateral branches having been
given, they are dismissed, and the narrative is limited more and more
to the immediate line of Israel's ancestors. Thus after ch. x. (the
ethnographical Table) all the descendants of Noah disappear, except
the line of Shem, xi. 10 fF. ; after xxv. 12 — 18 Ishmael disappears, and
Isaac alone remains; after ch. xxxvi. Esau and his descendants dis-
appear, and only Jacob and his sons are left. The same method
is adopted in the intermediate parts : thus in xix. 30 — 38 the relation

1 Once (v. 1), This u the book of the generations of....

§ 1] COMPOSITE STRUCTURE OF GENESIS iii

to Israel of the cognate peoples of Moab and Ammon is explained ; in
xxii. 20 — 24 (sons of Abraham's brother, Nahor), and xxv. 1 — 4 (sons
of Abraham's concubine, Keturah) the relation to Israel of certain
Aramaean tribes is explained.

The unity of plan thus established for the Book of Genesis, and
traceable in many other details, has long been recognized by critics.
It is not, however, incompatible with the use by the compiler of
pre-existing materials in the composition of his work. And as soon
as the book is studied with sufficient attention, phaenomena disclose
themselves, which shew that it is composed of distinct documents
or sources, which have been welded together by a later compiler
(or * redactor ') into a continuous whole. These phaenomena are very
numerous ; but they may be reduced in the main to the two following
heads: (1) the same event is doubly recorded; (2) the language, and
frequently the representation as well, varies in different sections.
Thus i. 1 — ii. 4* and ii. 4^ — 25 contain a double narrative of the origin
of man upon earth. No doubt, in the abstract, it might be argued
that ii. 4^^ if. is intended simply as a more detailed account of what
is described summarily in i. 26 — 30; but upon closer examination
differences reveal themselves which preclude the supposition that both
sections are the work of the same hand: the order of creation is
different, the phraseology and literary style are different, and the
representation, especially the representation of Deity, is different^
In the narrative of the Deluge, vi. 9 — 13 (the wickedness of the earth)
is a duplicate of vi. 5 — 8; vii. 1 — 5 is a duplicate of vi. 18 — 22, — with
the difference, however, that whereas in vi. 19 (cf. vii. 15) two animals
of every kind, without distinction, are to be taken into the ark, in vii. 2
the number prescribed is two of every unclean animal, but seven of
every clean animal: there are also several other duplicates, aU being
marked by accompanying differences of representation and phraseology,
one group of sections being akin to i. 1 — ii. 4% and displaying through-
out the same phraseology, the other exhibiting a different phraseology,
and being conceived in the spirit of ii. 4^ — iii. 24*. In xvii. 16 — 19
and xviii. 9 — 15 the promise of a son for Sarah is twice described, —
the terms used in xviii. 9 — 15 clearly shewing that the writer did not
picture any previous promise of the same kind as having been given to
Abraham, — with an accompanying double explanation of the origin of
the name Isaac. The section xxvii. 46 — xxviii. 9 differs appreciably
in style from xxvii. 1 — 45, and at the same time represents Rebekah
* See particulars on p. 85 f. ^ ggg jjje notes, p. 86 ff.

iv INTRODUCTION [§ 1

as influenced by a different motive from that mentioned in xxvii.
42 — 45 in suggesting Jacob's departure from Canaan*. Further, in
xxviii. 19 and xxxv. 15 we find two explanations of the origin of
the name Bethel \ in xxxii. 28 and xxxv. 10, two of Israel j in xxxii. 3
and xxxiii. 16 Esau is described as already resident in Edom, whereas
in xxxvi. 6 f. his migration thither is attributed to causes which could
not have come into operation until after Jacob's return to Canaan.
In short, the Book of Genesis presents two groups of sections,
distinguished from each other by differences of phraseology and style,
and often also by accompan3dng differences of representation, so marked,
so numerous, and so recurrent, that they can only be accounted for by
the supposition that the groups in which they occur are not both the
work of the same hand.

The sections homogeneous in style and character with i. 1 — ii. 4*
recur at intervals, not in Genesis only, but in the following books to
Joshua inclusive ; and if read consecutively, apart from the rest of the
narrative, will be found to form a nearly complete whole, containing
a systematic account of the origines of Israel, treating with particular
fulness the various ceremonial institutions of the Hebrews (Sabbath,
Circumcision, Passover, Tabernacle, Sacrifices, Feasts, &c.), and dis-
pla3ring a consistent regard for chronological and other statistical data,
which entitles it to be considered as the framework of our present
Hexateuch. The source, or document, thus constituted, has received
different names, suggested by one or other of the various characteristics
attaching to it. From its preference, till Ex. vi. 3, for the absolute use
of the name God Q Elohim ') rather than Jehovah (* Yahweh '), it has
been termed the Elohistic narrative, and its author has been called the
Mohist; but these names are not now so much used as they were
formerly ; by more recent writers, on account of the predominance in
it of priestly interests, and of the priestly point of view, it is commonly
called the priestly narrative, and denoted, for brevity, by the letter P
(which is also used to denote its author).

The following are the parts of Genesis which belong to P: — ^

i. 1 — ^ii. 4» (creation of heaven and earth, and God's subsequent rest upcm * ' '
the sabbath); v. 1 — 28, 30 — 32 (the line of Adam's descendants through Seth
to Noah); vi. 9—22, vii. 6, 11, 13—16% 17% 18—21, 24, viii. 1—2% 3^—5, 13%
14—19, ix. 1—17, 28—29 (the story of the Flood); x. 1—7, 20, 22—23, 31—32
(list of nations descended from Japhet, Ham, and Shem) ; xi. 10 — 26 (hne of
Shem's descendants to Terab); xi. 27, 31 — 32 (Abraham's family); xii. 4^ — 5,

^ See p. 262.

§ 1] THE PRIESTLY NARRATIVE (P) v

xiii. 6, 11^ — 12* (his migration into Canaan, and separation from Lot); xvi. 1»
3, 16 — 16 (birth of Ishmael); xvii. (institution of circumcision); xix. 29
(destruction of the cities of the Kikkar); xxi. 1^ 2^—5 (birth of Isaac);
xxiii. (purchase of the family burial-place in Machpelah); xxv. 7—11* (death
and burial of Abraham); xxv. 12—17 (hst of 12 tribes descended from
Ishmael) ; xxv. 19—20, 26^ (Isaac's marriage with Rebekah) ; xxvi. 34—36
(Esau's Hittite wives) ; xxviL 46— xxviii. 9 (Jacob's journey to Paddan-aram) ;
xxix. 24, 28^ 29, xxx. 22* (perhaps), xxxi. 18^ xxxiii. 18* (Jacob's marriage
with Rachel, and return to Canaan); xxxiv. 1—2*, 4, 6, 8—10, 13—18, 20—24,
25 (partly), 27—29 (refusal of his sons to sanction intermarriage with the
Shecbemites) ; xxxv. 9—13, 15 (change of name to Israel at Bethel); xxxv.
22^—29 (death and burial of Isaac); xxxvi. in the main (Esau's migration into
Edom; the tribes and tribal chiefs of Edom and Seir); xxxvii. 1—2*, xli. 46
(Joseph's elevation in Egypt); xlvi. 6—27, xlvii. 6—6% 7—11, 27^ 28 (migration
of Jacob and his family to Egypt, and their settlement in the Mand of
Rameses'); xlviii. 3—6, 7 (Jacob's adoption of Ephraim and Manasseh);
xlix. 1*, 28^ — 33, 1. 12 — 13 (Jacob's final instructions to his sons, and his burial
by them in the cave of Machpelah).

For convenience of reference, and also in order to enable the reader
to judge of the character of the source as a whole, a synopsis of the
parts of Ex. — Josh, belonging to it is here added : —

Exodus i. 1—5, 7, 13—14. ii. 23^—25. vi. 2— vii. 13. vii. 19— 20*, 21^— 22.
viii. 5—7, 15^—19. ix. 8-12. xi. 9—10. xii. 1—20, 28, 37*, 40—41, 43—51.
xiii. 1—2, 20. xiv. 1—4, 8—9, 16—18, 21*, 2P— 23, 26—27*, 28*, 29.
xvi. 1—3, 6—24, 31—36. xvii. \\ xix. 1—2*. xxiv. 15—18*. xxv. 1—
xxxi. 18*. xxxiv. 29 — 36. xxxv. — xl.

Leviticus i. — xvi. xvii. — xxvi. (these ten chapters embodying considerable
excerpts from an older source, now generally called, from its leading principle,
the * Law of Holiness ')^ xxvii.

Numbers i. 1— x. 28. xiii. 1—17*, 21, 25—26* (to Paran), 32*. xiv. 1—22,
5—7, 10, 26—30, 34—382. xv. xvi 1*, 2^—7% (7^—11)', (16—17)3, 18—24, 27%
32^ 35, (36—40)3, 41—50. xvii. xviii. xix. xx. 1* (to month\ 2, 3^—4,
6—13, 22—29. xxi. 4* (to Hor\ 10—11. xxii. 1. xxv. 6—18. xxvi.— xxxi.
xxxii. 18 — 19, 28 — 32*. xxxiii. xxxiv. — xxxvi.

Deuteronomy i. 3. xxxii. 48 — 52. xxxiv. 1**, 5'', 7 — 9.

Joshua iv. 13, 19. v. 10—12. vii. 1. ix. 15^ 17—21. xiii. 15—32. xiv.
1—5. XV. 1—13, 20-^4, (45—47)3, 48—62. xvi. 4—8. xvii. 1*, 3—4, 7, 9%
9°— 10*. xviii. 1, 11—28. xix. 1—46, 48, 51. xx. 1—3 (except *[and]
unawares'), 6* {U) judgement), 7 — 9^ xxi. 1 — 42. (xxii. 9—34)'.

^ The groundwork of P's narrative in Genesis is *a series of inter-

1 See the writer's Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, p. 43 ff.
(ed. 6 or 7, p. 47 ff.).

2 In the main.

' The parentheses indicate later additions to P (there are probably others as
well; but it is not necessary to indicate them in the present synopsis).
* With traces in xxxii. 1—17, 20—27. ^ See LOT. 106 (112).

Ti INTRODUCTION [§ i

connected genealogies — viz. Adam (v. 1 — 28, 30 — 32), Noah (vi. 9 — 10),
Noah's sons (x. 1—7, 20, 22—23, 31—32), Shem (xi. 10—26), Terah
(xi. 27, 31—32), Ishmael (xxv. 12—17), Isaac (xxv. 19—20, 26^),
Esau (xxxvi.), Jacob (xxxv. 22^ — 26, xxxvii. 2). These are constructed
upon a uniform plan : each bears the title, "This is the genealogy of..." ;
each often begins with a brief recapitulation connecting it with the
preceding table (see on vi. 10) ; the method is the same throughout.
The genealogies are made the basis of a systematic chronology; and
short historical notices are appended to them, as in the case of Abraham
and Lot, xii. 4^—5, xiii. 6, 11^—12% xvi. 1*, 3, 15—16, xix. 29' (Moore,
EncB. n. 1670 f.). The narrative is rarely more detailed, except in
the case of important occurrences, as the Creation, the Deluge, the
Covenants with Noah (ix. 1 — 17) and Abraham (ch. xvii.), or the
purchase of the family sepulchre at Hebron (ch. xxiii.). Nevertheless,
meagre as it is, it contains an outline of the antecedents and patriarchal
history of Israel, sufficient as an introduction to the systematic view
of the theocratic institutions which is to follow in Ex. — Nu., and which
it is the main object of the author of this source to exhibit. In the
earlier part of the book the narrative appears to be tolerably complete ;
but elsewhere there are evidently omissions (e.g. of the birth of Esau
and Jacob, and of the events of Jacob's life in Paddan-aram, pre-
supposed by xxxi. 18). But these may be naturally attributed to the
compiler who combined P with the other narrative used by him, and
who in so doing not unfrequently gave a preference to the fuller and
more picturesque descriptions contained in the latter. If the parts
assigned to P be read attentively, even in a translation, and compared
with the rest of the narrative, the peculiarities of its style will be
apparent. Its language is that of a jurist, accustomed to legal particu-
larity, rather than that of a historian, writing with variety and freedom ;
it is circumstantial, formal, and precise. The narrative, both as a
whole and in its several parts, is articulated systematically^; a formal
superscription and subscription regularly mark the beginning and close
of an enumeration^ Particular words and expressions recur with
great frequency. Sentences are also cast with great regularity into the
same mould: as Mr Carpenter has remarked, 'when once the proper
form of words has been selected, it is unfailingly reproduced on the

1 E.g. i. 5b, 8^, 13, 19, 23, 31"; v. 6—8, 9—11, 12—14 &c.; xi. 10—11,
12—13 &c.

2 'These are the generations of...' (above, p. ii.); i. 5^ 8^ 13 &c. ; x. 6 [see
the note], 20, 31, 32, xxv. 13», 16, xxxvi. 29*, 30*', 40", 43»» &c. (see below, p. x.,
No. 26) : cf. also vi. 22 (see p. ix., No. 12), comp. with Ex. vii. 6 &c.

§ 1] LITERARY STYLE OF P vii

next occasion'.' In descriptions, emphasis^ and completeness^ are
studied; hence a statement, or command, is often developed at some
length, and in part even repeated in slightly different words*. There is
a tendency to describe an object in full each time that it is mentioned**;
a direction is followed, as a rule, by an account of its execution, usually
in nearly the same words*. It will now, moreover, be apparent that
the scheme into which (p. ii.) the Book of Genesis is cast, is the work
of the same author, — the formula by which its salient divisions are
marked constituting an essential feature in the sections assigned to P.
Here is a select list of words and expressions characteristic of P, —
most, it will be observed, occurring nowhere else in the entire OT.,
though a few are met with in Ezekiel, the priestly prophet (who has
moreover other affinities with P), and a few occur also in other late
OT. writings. Only words and expressions occurring in Genesis are
cited; the list would be considerably extended, if those characteristic
of the parts of Ex. — Josh, belonging to P were included as well'.

The dagger (f), both here and elsewhere, indicates that all passages of the Old
Testament, in which the word or phrase quoted occurs, are cited or referred to ;
and the asterisk (*) indicates that all passages of the Hexateuch, in which the
word or phrase quoted occurs, are cited or referred to.

1. God^ not Jehovahy Gen. 1. 1, and uniformly, except xvii. 1, xxi. 1^, until
Ex. vi. 2, 3.

It is the theory of P, expressed distinctly in Ex. vi. 3, that the name
'Jehovah' was not in use before the Mosaic age : accordingly until Ex. vi. 2 — 3,
he consistently confines himself to God. J, on the other liand, uses Jehovah
regularly from the beginning (Gen. ii. 4^ 6, 7 &c.). In the OT. generally,

1 Oxf. Hex. I. 125 (ed. 2, p. 235). Mr Carpenter instances the use of the
migration formula, Gen. xii. 5, xxxi. 18, xxxvi. 8, xlvi. 6, and the description of
Machpelah, xxiii. 19, xxv. 9, xlix. 30, 1. 13 : cf. also xii. 4'', xvi, 16, xvii. 24, 25,
xxi. 5, xxv. 26^ xii. 46»; Ex. vii. 7.

2 Comp. Gen. i. 29, vi. 17, ix. 3.

' Notice the precision of description and definition in Gen. i. 24, 25, 26^ 28^,
vi. 18, 20, vii. 13—14, 21, viii. 17, 18—19; x. 5, 20, 31, 32, xxxvi. 40; xxiii. 17;
xxxvi. 8, xlvi. 6 — 7 ; Ex. vii. 19 &c.

*■ Gen. ii. 2—3, ix. 9—11, 12—17, xvii. 10—14, 23—27, xxiii. 17—20, xlix. 29—
30, 32 ; Ex. xii. 18 — 20 &c. In this connexion, there may be noticed particularly
an otherwise uncommon mode of expression, producing a peculiar rhythm, by
which a statement is first made in general terms, and then partly repeated, for the
purpose of receiving closer limitation or definition: see, for instance, Gen. i. 27
' and God created man in his own image ; in the image of God created he him : male
and female created he them,' vi. 14 (Heb.), ix. 5, xxiii. 11 'the field give I thee &c. ;
in the presence of the sons of my people give I it thee,' xlix. 29'' — 30 ; Ex. xii. 4, 8,
xvi. 16, 35, xxv. 2, 11, 18, 19, xxvi. 1 ; Lev. xxv. 22 ; Nu. ii. 2, xviii. 18, xxxvi. 11—
12 (Heb.), &G.

'^ Comp. Gen. i. 7 beside v. 6, v. 12 beside v. 11, viii. 18 f. beside viii. 16 f.

« See Gen. i. 6—7; 11-12; 24—25; vi. 18—20 and vii. 13—16; viii. 16—17
and 18—19 ; Ex. viii. 16—17; ix. 8—10 &c.

7 See LOT. pp. 126—8 (ed. 6 or 7, pp. 133—5).

viii INTRODUCTION [§ 1

Jehovah is much more common than God ; and to this fact is due no doubt its
having been accidentally substituted for an original God in the two passages,
Gen. ivii. 1, xxi. 1^

The statement in Ex. vi. 3 that God appeared to the patriarchs as El
Shxiddai is in agreement with the use of this title in xvii. 1, xiviii. 3, xxxv. 11,
xlviii. 3. The following words, ' but by my name Jehovah I was not known
unto them,' are additional proof, — if such be needed, — that Gen. xv. 7, xxviii.
13, as also the numerous passages in Gen. in which the patriarchs make use of
this name, cannot have been written by the same author.

2. Kind (pD): Gen. i. 11, 12 Us, 21 Us, 24 Us, 25 ter, vi. 20 ter, 7, 14
quater ; Lev. xi. 14, 15, 16, 19 [hence Deut. xiv. 13, 14, 16, 18], 22 quater, 29 ;
Ez. xlvii. lOf.

3. To swarm (pK^): Gen. i. 20, 21, vii. 21, viii. 17; Ex. vii. 28 [hence
Ps. cv. 30] ; Lev. xi. 29, 41, 42, 43, 46 [see p. 12 n.] ; Ez. xlvii. 9. Fig. of men :
Gen. ix. 7 ; Ex. i. 7 (EW. increased abundantly) f.

4. Swarming things (^t!^) : Gen. i. 20, vii. 21 ; Lev. v. 2, xi. 10, 20 [hence
Deut xiv. 19], 21, 23, 29, 31, 41, 42, 43, 44, xxii. 5 [see p. 12 n.]f.

5. To hefruifful and multiply (nmi HIS): Gen. i. 22, 28, viii. 17, ix. 1,
7, xvii. 20 (cf. vv. 2, 6), xxviii. 3, xxxv. 11, xlvii. 27, xiviii. 4; Ex. i. 7; Lev.
xxvi. 9 : also Jer. xxiii. 3; and (inverted) iii. 16, Ez. xxxvi. llf-

6. To creep (l^C>n) : Gen. i. 21 (EVV. moveth), 26, 28, 30, vii. 8, 14, 21,
viii. 17, 19, ix. 2; Lev. xi. 44, 46 (EVV. moveth), xx. 25. Also Deut. iv. 18*

7. Creeping things, reptiles (5^??): Gen. i. 24, 25, 26, vi. 7, 20, vii. 14, 23,
viii. 17, 19, ix. 3 (used here more generally : EVV. moveth)*.

8. For food {rh:ivh): Gen. i. 29, 30, vi. 21, ix. 3; Ex. xvi. 15; Lev. xi 39,
XXV. 6 ; Ez. XV. 4, 6, xxi. 37, xxiii. 37, xxix. 6, xxxiv. 5, 8, 10, 12, xxxix. 4t.
(In Jer. xii. 9 rh:iVi^ is an infin.)

9. Generations (nnbiri} lit. hegettings) :

(a) in the phrase Tliese are the generations of...: Gen. ii. 4% v. 1 {This is
the hook of the generations of..), vi. 9, x. 1, xi. 10, 27, xxv. 12 [hence 1 Ch. i. 29],
19, xxxvi. 1, 9, xxxvii. 2; Nu. iii. 1; Ruth iv. ISf-

(&) in the phrase their generations, by their families: Nu. i. 20, 22, 24 &c.
(12 times in this chapter) f.

(c) in the phrase according to (^) their generations { = their parentage, or
tlieir ages): Gen. x. 32, xxv. 13; Ex. vi. 16, 19, xxviii. 10 (d); 1 Ch. v. 7, vii. 2,
4, 9, viii. 28, ix. 9, 31, xxvi. 31.

10. To expire (yia): Gen. vi. 17, vii. 21, xxv. 8, 17, xxxv. 29, xlix. 33;
Nu. xvii. 12, 13, xx. 3 bis, 29 ; Josh. xxii. 20 f. (Only besides in poetry: Zech.
xiii. 8 ; Ps. Ixxxviii. 16, civ. 29 ; Lam. i. 19 ; and 8 times in Job.)

11. With thee (him &c.) appended to an enumeration : Gen. vi. 18, vii. 7,
13, viii. 16, 18, ix. 8, xxviii. 4, xlvi. 6, 7; Ex. xxviii. 1, 41, xxix. 21 bis; Lev.
viii 2, 30, X. 9, 14, 15, xxv. 41, 54; Nu. xviii 1, 2, 7, 11, 19 bis*. Similarly
after you {thee &c.) appended to seed: Gen. ix. 9, xvii 7 bis, 8, 9, 10, 19,
xxxv. 12, xiviii. 4 ; Ex. xxviii 43 ; Nu. xxv. 13.

§ 1] LITERARY CHARACTERISTICS OF P ix

12. And Noah did (so); according to &c.: Geu. vi. 22 : exactly the same
form of sentence, Ex. vii. 6, xii. 28, 50, xxxix. 32^ xl. 16; Nu. i. 54, ii. 34,
viii. 20, xvii. 11 (Heb. 26) : cf. Ex. xxxix. 43 ; Nu. v. 4, ix. 6.

13. This selfsame day (ntn DVH DVy): Gen. vii. 13, xvii. 23, 26 ; Ex. xii. 17,
41, 61 ; Lev. xxiii. 14, 21, 2S, 29, 30 ; Dt. xxxii. 48 ; Jos. v. 11, x. 27 (not P :
probably the compiler) ; Ez. ii. 3, xxiv. 2 bis, xl. 1 f.

14. 4fter their families (DH^-, DninaK'D'?): Gen. viii. 19, x. 5, 20, 31,
xxxvL 40 ; Ex. vi. 17, 25, xii 21 ; Nu. I (13 times), ii. 34, iii.— iv. (15 times),
xxvi. (16 times), xxix. 12, xxxiii. 54; Jos. xiii. 15, 23, 24, 28, 29, 31 ; xv. 1, 12,
20, xvi. 5, 8, xvii. 2 bis, xviii. 11, 20, 21, 28, xix. (12 times), xxi. 7, 33, 40 (Heb.
38) ; 1 Ch. V. 7, vi. 62, 63 (Heb. 47, 48 : from Josh. xxi. 33, 40). Once in J,
Nu. xi. 10 ; and once also in one of the earlier historical books, 1 S. x. 21 f.

15. An everlasting covenant: Gen. ix. 16, xvii. 7, 13, 19; Ex. xxxi 16;
Lev. xxiv. 8; cf. Nu. xviii. 19, xxv. 13*.

16. Exceedingly (nxD n«»3 [not the usual phrase]): Gen. xviL 2, 6, 20;
Ex. i 7; Ez. ix. 9, xvi. 13t.

17. Substance, goods (tJ'IDl): Gen. xii. 6, xiii. 6% xxxl 18^ xxxvi. 7, xlvi. 6;
Nu. xvi. 32 end, xxxv. 3. Elsewhere (not P) : Gen. xiv. 11, 12, 16 bis, 21, xv. 14 ;
and in Chr. (8 times), Ezr. (4 times), Dan. xi. (3 times) f.

18. To amass, gather (fi5^D"i — cognate with 'substance'): Gen. xlL 6, xxxi.
18 biSf xxxvi 6, xlvi. 6 (RV. had gotten) f.

19. Soul (&J>Q3) in the sense of person: Gen. xii. 6, xxxvi. 6, xlvi. 15, 18,
22, 25, 26, 27; Ex. i. 5, xii. 4, 16 (RV. man), 19, xvi. 16 (RY . persons) ; Lev.
ii. 1 (RV. any one), iv. 2, 27, v. 1, 2 ; and often in the legal parts of Lev. Num.
(as Lev. xvii. 12, xxii. 11, xxvii. 2); Nu. xxxi. 28, 35, 40, 46; Josh. xx. 3, 9 (from
Nu. xxxv. 11, 15). See also below, No. 24 a. A usage not confined to P, but
much more frequent in P than elsewhere.

20. Throughout your {their) generations {nynUP, Dnih^) : Gen. xvii. 7,
9, 12 ; Ex. xii 14, 17, 42, xvi. 32, 33, xxvii. 21, xxix. 42, xxx. 8, 10, 21, 31,
xxxi. 13, 16, xl. 15; Lev. iii. 17, vi. 11, vii. 36, x. 9, xvii. 7, xxi 17, xxii. 3,
xxiii. 14, 21, 31, 41, xxiv. 3, xxv. 30 (his) ; Nu. ix. 10, x. 8, xv. 14, 15, 21, 23, 38,
xviii. 23, xxxv. 29 f.

21. Sqjournings (DniSD): with land. Gen. xvii 8, xxviii. 4, xxxvi. 7,
xxxvii 1 ; Ex. vi 4 ; Ez. xx. 38 ; with days, Gen. xlvii. 9 bis. Only besides
Ps. cxix. 54 : and rather differently, Iv. 15 (sing.) ; Job xviii. 19 f.

22. Possession (HjnX): Gen. xvii 8, xxiii. 4, 9, 20, xxxvi 43, xlvii 11
xlviii. 4, xlix. 30, L 13 ; Lev. xiv. 34, xxv. 10—46 (13 times), xxvii. 16, 21, 22
24, 28 ; Nu. xxvii 4, 7, xxxii 5, 22, 29, 32, xxxv. 2, 8, 28 ; Dt. xxxii 49 ; Josh
xxi. 12, 41, xxii 4 (Deuteronomic), 9, 19 bis. Elsewhere only in Ezekiel
(xliv. 28 bis, xiv. 5, 6, 7 bis, 8, xlvi 16, 18 te7% xlviii 20, 21, 22 bis); Ps. ii 8

1 Ch. vii 28, ix. 2 ( = Neh. xi 3), 2 Ch. xi. 14, xxxi If.

23. The cognate verb to get possessions (TPIi^J), rather a peculiar word
Gen. xxxiv. 10, xlvii 27 ; Nu. xxxii 30, Josh. xxii. 9, 19 f.

X INTRODUCTION [§ 1

24. Father's kin (D''ttV), — a peculiar usage (see on Gen. xvii. 14):

(a) that soul (or that man) shall he cut off from his father's kin: Gen.
xvii. 14; Ex. xxx. 33, 38, xxxi. 14; Lev. vii. 20, 21, 25, 27, xvii. 9, xix. 8,
xxiii. 29 ; Nu. ix. ISf.

(6) to he gathered to on^s father^ s kin: Gen. xxv. 8, 17, xxxv. 29, xlix. 33
(of. on V. 29) ; Nu. xx. 24, xxvii. 13, xxxi. 2 ; Dt. xxxii. 50 his\.

25. Sojourner (BVV.), better settler (3K^in): Gen. xxiii. 4 (hence fig.
Ps. xxxix. 13, 1 Ch. xxix. 15); Ex. xii. 45; Lev. xxii. 10, xxv. 6, 23 (fig.), 35,
40, 45, 47 his-, Nu. xxxv. 15 ; 1 K. xvii. 1 (but read rather as RVm.)t.

26. The methodical form of subscription and superscription : Gen. x. [5,]
20, 31, 32, xxv. 13% 16, xxxvi. 29% 30% 40% 43% xlvi. 8, 15, 18, 22, 25 ; Ex. i. 1,
vi. 14, 16, 19, 25, 26 ; Nu. i. 44, iv. 28, 33, 37, 41, 45, vii. 17, 23, 29 &c., 84,
xxxiii. 1 ; Josh. xiii. 23, 28, 32, xiv. 1, xv. 12, 20, xvi. 8, xviii. 20, 28, xix. 8, 16,
23, 31, 39, 48, 51 [cf. Gen. x. 31, 32], xxi. 19, 26, 33, 40, 41—42. (Not a
complete enumeration.)^

27. As those acquainted with Hebrew will be aware, there are in Heb.
two forms of the pron. of the 1st pers. sing, 'am and ^anbki, which are not by
all writers used indiscriminately : P now uses 'am nearly 130 times (^dnokl
only once. Gen. xxiii. 4: comp. in Ezekiel 'dm 138 times, 'dnoki once,
xxxvi. 28). In the rest of the Hexateuch 'dnokl is preferred to 'dnl, and in
the discourses of Deut. it is used almost exclusively.

28. For hundred P uses a peculiar grammatical form {m'^ath in the
constr. state, in cases where ordinarily mSdh would be said) : Gen. v. .3, 6, 18,
25, 28, vii. 24, viii. 3, xi. 10, 25, xxi. 5, xxv. 7, 17, xxxv. 28, xlvii. 9, 28;
Ex. vi. 16, 18, 20, xxxviii. 25, 27 ter-, Nu. ii. 9, 16, 24, 31, xxxiii. 39. So
besides only Neh. v. 11 (probably corrupt : see Ryle ad loc), 2 Ch. xxv. 9 Qr^,
Est. i. 4. P uses miSdh in such cases only twice. Gen. xvii. 17, xxiii. 1.

29. For to heget P uses regularly Ti^in, Gen. v. 3—32 (28 times), vi. 10, xi.
10 — 27 (27 times), xvii. 20, xxv. 19, xlviii. 6 ; not 1^% which is used by J, Gen.
iv. 18 ter, x. 8, 13, 15, 24 his, 26, xxii. 23, xxv. 3.

30. For the idea of making a covenant, P says always D^jpn (estahlish),
Gen. vi 18, ix. 9, 11, 17, xvii. 7, 19, 21, Ex. vi. 4 (so Ez. xvi. 60, 62) f; not
n!l3 (lit. cut, EVV. make: see on xv. 18), as in Gen. xv. 18, xxi. 27, 32, xxvi. 28,
xxxi. 44, and generally in the OT.

31. To express the idea of Jehovah's being in the midst of His people, P
says always "jini (13 times: Ex. xxv. 8 &c.), JE 21p2 (13 times: Ex. iii. 20 &c.).

32. Hebron is denoted in P (except Josh. xxi. 13) by J^iriath-arha^ (said
in Josh. xiv. 15 = Jud. i. 10 [J] to have been its old name): Gen. xxiii. 2,
xxxv. 27 ; Josh. xv. 13, 54, xx. 7, xxi. 11. So Neh. xi. 25 f.

1 The subscriptions in J are much briefer : ix. 19, x. 29, xxii. 23, xxv. 4.

§ 1] LITERARY CHARACTERISTICS OF P xi

The following geographical terms are found only in P :

33. Machpelah: Gen. xxiii. 9, 17, 19, xxv. 9, xlix. 30, L ISf.

34. Paddanaram : Gen. xxv. 20, xxviii. 2, 6, 6, 7, xxxi. 18, xxxiii. 18^,
XXXV. 9, 26, xlvi. 15 ; cf. xlviii. 7 {Paddan alone). J says Aram-naharaim,
Gen. xxiv. 10 : so Dt. xxiii. 4, Jud. iil 8, Ps. Ix. title\.

Some other expressions might be noted; but these are the most
distinctive. If the reader will be at the pains of underlining them in
all their occurrences, he will see that they do not occur in the Hexateuch
indiscriminately, but that they are aggregated in particular passages,
to which they impart a character of their own, different from that of
the rest of the narrative \ The literary style of P is very strongly
marked : in point of fact, it stands apart not only from that of every
other part of the Hexateuch, but also from that of every part of Judges,
Samuel, and Kings ^ — whether the strictly narrative parts, or those
which have been added by the Deuteronomic compiler ; and has sub-
stantial resemblances only with that of Ezekiel.

The parts of Genesis which remain after the separation of P have
next to be considered. These also shew indications of not being
homogeneous in structure. Especially from ch. xx. onwards the
narrative exhibits marks of compilation; and the component parts,
though not differing from one another in diction and style so widely
as either differs from P, and being so welded together that the lines
of demarcation between ^them frequently cannot be fixed with certainty,
appear nevertheless to be plainly discernible. Thus in xx. 1 — 17 the
consistent use of the term God is remarkable, whereas in ch. xviii. —
xix. (except xix. 29 P), and in the similar narrative xii. 10 — 20, the
term Jehovah is uniformly employed. The term God recurs similarly
in xxi. 6 — 31, xxii. 1 — 13, and elsewhere, particularly in chs. xL — ^xlii.,
xlv. For such a variation in similar and consecutive chapters no
plausible explanation can be assigned except diversity of authorship'.
At the same time, the fact that Elohim is not here accompanied by
the other criteria of P's style, forbids our assigning the sections thus

1 After Ex. vi. 2 Elohim for Jehovah disappears; but a number of even more
distinctive expressions appear in its place. It is a serious mistake to suppose, as
appears to be sometimes done, that the use of Elohim for Jehovah is the only
criterion distinctive of P.

2 For points of contact in isolated passages, viz. parts of Jud. xx. — xxi., 1 S.
ii. 22^, IK. viii. 1, 6, see LOT. p. 136 (ed. 7, p. 143 f.).

^ It is true that Elohim and Yahweh represent the Divine Nature under
different aspects, viz. as the God of nature and the God of revelation respectively;
but it is only in a comparatively small number of instances that this distinction
can be applied, except with great artificiality, to explain the variation between the
two names in the Pentateuch. -

xii INTRODUCTION [§ 1

characterized to that source. Other phraseological criteria are slight ;
there are, however, not unfrequently differences of representation,
which point decidedly in the same direction (e.g. the remarkable ones
in ch. xxxvii.). It seems thus that the parts of Genesis which remain
after the separation of P are formed by the combination of tvjo
narratives, originally independent, though covering largely the same
ground, which have been united by a subsequent editor, who also
contributed inconsiderable additions of his own, into a single, con-
tinuous narrative. One of these sources, from its use of the name
Jahweh^ is now generally denoted by the letter J ; the other, in which
the name Elohim is preferred, is denoted similarly by E ; and the work
formed by the combination of the two is referred to by the double
letters JE. The method of the compiler who combined J and E
together, was sometimes, it seems, to extract an entire narrative from
one or other of these sources (as xx. 1 — 17, xxi. 6 — 31 from E;
ch. xxiv. from J); sometimes, while taking a narrative as a whole
from one source, to incorporate with it notices derived from the other
(as frequently in chaps, xl. — xlv.); and sometimes to construct his
narrative of materials derived from each source in nearly equal pro-
portions (as chaps, xxviii., xxix.).

The passages assigned to B in the present volume are : xv. 1 — 2, 5, xx.,
xxi. 6—21, 22—32% xxii. 1—14, 19, xxviii, 11—12, 17—18, 20—22, xxix. 1,
15—23, 25—28* 30, xxx. 1—3, 6, 17— 20''», 21—23, xxxi. 2, 4—18% 19—45,
51—55, xxxii. 1, xxxiii. 18^—20, xxxv. 1—8, xxxvii. 5—11, 19—20, 22—25%
28*-", 29—30, 36, xl. — xlii. (except a few isolated passages), xlv. (with similar
exceptions), xlvi. 1—5, xlviii. 1—2, 8—22, 1. 15—26.

It may suflSce to indicate the principal longer passages referred to J :
ii. 4^— iii., iv. ; the parts of vi. — x. not referred above to P ; xi. 1 — 9 ; and
(except here and there a verse or two, — rarely, a few verses more, — belonging
to E or P) xii., xiii., xv., xvi., xviii.— xix., xxiv., xxv. 21 — 34, xxvi., xxvii. 1 — 45,
xxix. 2 — 14, xxix. 31 — xxx. 24 (the main narrative), xxx. 25 — 43, xxxii., xxxiii.,
xxxiv. (partly), xxxvii. (partly), xxxviii., xxxix., xliii., xliti, xlvi. 28 — 34, xlvii.,
xlix., L 1— 11, 14. 1^

The criteria|flistinguishing J from E are fewer and less clearly
marked than those distinguishing P from JE as a whole; and there
is consequently sometimes uncertainty in the analysis, and critics,
interpreting the evidence differently, sometimes differ accordingly in
their conclusions. Nevertheless the indications that the narrative is
composite are of a nature which it is not easy to gainsay; and the
difficulty which sometimes presents itself of disengaging the two
sources is but a natural consequence of the greater similarity of style

§ 1] CRITERIA DISTINGUISHING J AND E xiii

subsisting between them, than between JE, as a whole, and P*. At
the same time the present writer is ready to allow that by some critics
the separation of J from E is carried further than seems to him to be
probable or necessary: no doubt, the criteria which are relied upon
exist; the question which seems to him to be doubtful, is whether
in the cases which he has in view they are sufficient evidence of
different authorship. But the general conclusion that the narrative
here called * JE ' is composite does not appear to him to be disputable :
and the longer and more clearly defined passages which may reasonably
be referred to J and E respectively, have been indicated by him accord-
ingly throughout the present volume. In important cases, also, the
grounds upon which the distinction rests have generally been pointed
out in the notes.

The following are^some examples of words or expressions characteristic of
E, as distinguished from J. E prefers God (though not exclusively) and angel
of God where J ^^retem Jehovah and angel of Jehovah) E uses Amorite as the
general name of the pre-Israelitish inhabitants of Palestine, while J uses
Canaanite ; B uses Horeh^ J Sinai ; in E the name of Moses' father-in-law is
Jethro, in J it is Hohah\ for hondwoman E prefers dmdh, J prefers shiph/idh;
B speaks of God's coming in a dream (xx. 3, xxxi. 24; Nu. xxii. 9, 20), — an
expression not found at all elsewhere ; B also uses sometimes unusual words,
as D^Jb times Gen. xxxi. 7, 41 f, kesifah (a piece of money) xxxiii. 19, Jos. xxiv. 32
(only besides Job xlii. ll)t, mn to rejoice Ex. xviii. 9 (otherwise rare and
poet.), nrn to see, V. 21 (very uncommon in prose), n^)hn weakness xxxii. 18,
DH^Dpl nVDti''? for a whispering among them that rose up against them
(poet.) V. 25, n'3 in a local sense ('here,' not, as usually, *thus'); and he has
peculiar forms of the inf., Gen. xxxi. 28, xlvi 3, xlviii. 11, 1. 20. Of expressions
characteristic of J, we can only notice here Behold^ noWy Gen. xii. 11, xvi. 2,
xviii. 27, 31, xix. 2, 8, 19, xxvii. 2'; to call with the name of Jehovah, iv. 26,
xii. 8, xiii. 4, xxi. 33, xxvi. 25^; he (was) the father of..., iv. 20, 21, xix. 37, 38^
(cf. ix. 18, X. 21, xi. 29, xiii. 21^; observe also (NIH) Kin D3 in the same
contexts, iv. 22, 26, x. 21, tix. 38, xxii. 20, 24) ; to find favour in the eyes of
(14 times in Gen.); forasm,uch as (p"7y"''D, a peculiar expression), xviii. 5,
xix. 8, xxxiii 10, xxxviii. 26, Nu. x. 31, xiv. 43^; the land of Goshen (see on
xlv. 10); a preference for Israel (as the personal name of Jacob) after
XXXV. 22 (cf. p. 353 ; B prefers Jacob throughout) ; nnnOi< (peculiar word for
sack, 15 times in xlii. 27 — xii v. 12 ; not elsewhere).

^ In a harmony of the four Gospels, the parts belonging to the Fourth Gospel
would, as a rule, be separable from the rest without difficulty: but those belonging
to the First and Second, it would often be scarcely possible to distinguish. J and
E differ from P in having stylistica|ly a considerable general resemblance (though
there are differences: see, for instanq^, LOT. p. 174 f., ed. 6 or 7, p. 184 f.) to
the narratives (apart from the •Deutei-onomie' additions) of Judges, Samuel, and
the earlier parts of Kings.

* Not elsewhere in the Hexateuch. #

c2'

xiv INTRODUCTION [§ l

For longer lists of characteristic expressions, reference must be mad© to
the Oxf. Hex. i. 186 — 192 (in the reprint of vol. i., p. 384 flf.). The expressions
quoted there are not indeed all of equal value ; and some may occur in short
passages assigned to J or E (as the case may be) upon slight grounds ; but
when all deductions have been made on these accounts, the reader who will be
at the pains of examining the two lists attentively will find that J and B shew
each a decided preference for particular expressions, which, though not so
strongly marked as the preferences shewn by P, nevertheless exists, and is a
reality. It is also to be borne in mind that words and expressions, which may
be insignificant in themselves, nevertheless, when they recur repeatedly^ may
be evidence of the line of thought along which a given writer moves most
familiarly, or of the subjects in which he is chiefly interested.

Of all the Hebrew historians whose writings have been preserved
to us, J is the most gifted and the most brilliant. He excels in the
power of delineating life and character. His touch is singularly light :
with a few strokes he paints a scene, which impresses itself indelibly
upon his reader's memory. In ease and grace his narratives are un-
surpassed: everything is told with precisely the amount of detail
that is required ; the narrative never lingers, and the reader's interest
is sustained to the end. He writes without effort, and without
conscious art.

* That some of his narratives are intentionally didactic can hardly
be questioned: the first man, the woman, the serpent, and Yahweh,
all play their part in the Eden drama with a profound purpose under-
lymg it: yet the simplicity of the story and the clearness of the
characterization are un marred. But there are others, like the account
of the mission of Abraham's steward in Gen. xxiv., which have i^'
such specific aim, and are unsurpassed in felicitous presentation,
because they are unconsciously pervaded by fine ideas. The dialogues
especially are fall of dignity and human feeling; the transitions in
the scenes between Abraham and his visitors in ch. xviii., or between
Joseph and his brethren, are instinctively artistic; for delicacy and
pathos, what can surpass the intercession of Judah (xliv. 18 ff.), or
the self-disclosure of Joseph (xlv. Iff.)? The vivid touches that call
up a whole picture, the time-references from daybreak through the
heat to evening cool and night, the incidents that circle round the
desert wells, the constant sense of the place of cattle alike in the land-
scape and in life, the tender consideration for the flock and herd, —
all these belong to a time when the pastoral habit has not ceased,
and the tales that belong to it are told from mouth to mouth. The
breath of poetry sweeps through them; and though they are set in

§1] . LITERARY STYLE OF J AND E xv

a historic frame that distinctly implies a reflective effort to conceive
the course of human things as a whole, they have not passed into
the stage of learned arrangement; they still possess the freshness of
the elder time\'

' E in general character does not differ widely from J. But he does
not as a writer exhibit the same rare literary power, he does not
display the same command of language, the same delicacy of touch,
the same unequalled felicity of representation and expression. His
descriptions are less poetical; and his narratives do not generally
leave the same vivid impression. As compared with P, both J and E
exhibit far greater freshness and brightness of style; their diction is
more varied; they are not bound to the same stereotyped forms of
thought and expression; their narratives are more dramatic, more life-
like, more instinct with feeling and character.

The question of the dates of the sources of which the Book of
Genesis is composed, cannot be properly answered from a consideration
of this book alone, as many of the most important criteria upon
which the answer depends are afforded by the subsequent parts of
the Pentateuch. There are indeed passages in Genesis which cannot
reasonably be supposed to have been vnritten until after Israel had
been settled in Canaan, as xii. 6, xiii. 7; xiv. 14 ('Dan'); xxi. 32, 34
and xxvi. 1 (the Philistines, if what is stated on x. 14 is correct, were
not in Palestine till the age of Bamses III., considerably after the
Exodus); xxxvi. 31 (a verse which obviously presupposes the existence
of the monarchy in Israel); xl. 15 (Canaan called the 'land of the
Hebrews'); and ch. xlix., — at least if the considerations advanced on
p. 380 are accepted: but these are isolated passages, the inferences
naturally authorized by which might not impossibly be neutralized
by the supposition that they were later additions to the original
narrative, and did not consequently determine by themselves the date
of the book as a whole. The question of the date of the Book of
Genesis is really part of a wider question, viz. that of the date of the
Pentateuch, — or rather Hexateuch, — as a whole; and a full considera-
tion of this wider subject obviously does not belong to the present
context. It must suffice, therefore, here to say generally, that when
the different parts of the Hexateuch, especially the Laws, are com-
pared together, and also compared with the other historical books of
the Old Testament, and the prophets, it appears clearly that they

1 Carpenter, The Oxfvrd Hexateuch, i. 102 f. (ed. 2, p. 185 f.).

xvi INTRODUCTION [§ l

cannot all be the work of a single man, or the product of a single
age : the different strata of narrative and law into which, when closely
examined, the Hexateuch is seen to fall, reveal differences of such a kind
that they can only be adequately accounted for by the supposition that
they reflect the ideas, and embody the institutions, which were character-
istic of widely different periods of Israelitish history. The general con-
clusions to which a consideration of all the facts thus briefly indicated
has led critics, and which are adopted in the present volume, are that
the two sources, J and E, date from the early centuries of the monarchy,
J belonging probably to the ninth, and E to the early part of the
eighth cent. B.c. {before Amos or Hosea); and that P, — at least in its
main stock (for it seems, as a whole, to have been the work of a school
of writers rather than of an individual, and particular sections, espe-
cially in Exodus and Numbers, appear to be of later origin), — belongs
to the age of Ezekiel and the Exiled Chap. xiv. is clearly not part
of either J, E, or P, but belongs to a special source. There is, how-
ever, no sufficient foundation for the idea that it is of foreign origin, —
whether translated from a cuneiform original, or based upon an ancient
Canaanitish source; for the narrative is genuinely Hebraic in style and
colouring. Its date is uncertain: but it has some points of contact
with P; and, as Prof. G. F. Moore remarks {EncB. n. 1677), the
impression which the contents and style of the chapter make as a
whole is of aflinity with the later rather than with the earlier Heb.
historical writing. It will scarcely be earlier than the age of the
Exile.

The Book of Genesis assumed its present form, it is probable, by
two main stages. First, the two independent, but parallel, narratives
of the patriarchal age, J and E, were combined into a whole by a com-
piler, who sometimes incorporated long sections of each intact (or
nearly so), and at other times combined elements from each into
a single narrative, introducing occasionally in the process short ad-
ditions of his own (e.g. in xxvi. 1 — 5, xxxix. 1, xl. 1, 3, 5). The whole
thus formed (JE) was afterwards combined with the narrative P by
a second compiler, who, adopting P as his framework, accommodated
JE to it, omitting in either what was necessary to avoid needless

1 On the general question of the date of the Hexateuch, and for a fuller
statement of the grounds on which these conclusions rest, see F. H. "Woods' art.
Hexateuch in DB. (cf . also the art. Law in OT.) ; the present writer's Introduction
to the Lit. of the OT. pp. 115—150 (ed. 6 or 7, pp. 122—169) ; or the very compre-
hensive discussion of the subject by J. E. Carpenter in the Oxford Hexateuch, vol. i.
passim (ed. 2, under the title The Composition of the Hexateuch^ 1902).

§ 1] DATE OF GENESIS xvu

repetition, and making such slight redactional adjustments as the
luiity of his work required. One chapter (xiv.), the literary style of
which distinguishes it from both JE and P, he incorporated from
a special source. The Book of Genesis is not a conglomerate of dis-
connected fragments; the three main sources, or documents, of which
it consists, once formed independent wholes, and the portions selected
from each have been combined together in accordance with a de-
linite plan.

It remains to consider the other leading characteristics of the
several sources. Here also, as in their literary features, J and E have
many similarities, though there are at the same time differences;
while P displays marked contrasts to both. J and E may be regarded
as having reduced to writing the traditions respecting the antecedents
and beginnings of their nation, which were current in the early
centuries of the monarchy. In view of the principles and interests
which predominate in both these narratives, and in contradistinction
to those which determine the form and contents of the priestly narra-
tive (p. iv.), JE, treated as a whole, may be termed the prophetical
narrative of the Hexateuch : the ideas and points of view which are
so conspicuous afterwards in a more developed form in the writings
of the great prophets appearing in it in germ, and the general religious
spirit being very similar.

Among the characteristics of J, one that is very prominent is his
tendency to trace back to their beginnings, even in the primitive
history of mankind, many existing customs, institutions, or facts of
life and society. Thus in ii. 4^ — iii. he explains the origin of the
distinction of the sexes, the institution of marriage, the presence of sin
and toil in the world, the custom of wearing clothing, the gait and
habits of the serpent, the subject condition of woman, and the pain of
child-bearing. As, however, is pointed out on p. 36, the explanations
offered of these facts are not historical or scientific explanations, but
explanations prompted by religious reflection upon the facts of life.
In ch. iv. he describes, in accordance with the beliefs current among
the Hebrews, the origin of pastoral life and agriculture, of city-life,
polygamy, music, metallurgy, and the public worship of Yahweh ; in
ix. 20 — 26 that of the culture of the vine ; and in x., xi. 1 — 9 that of
the division of mankind into different nations, and of diversities of
language. He explains the origin of a common proverb or sa)dng in
X. 9 and xxii. 14, of a remarkable pinnacle of salt overlooking the
Dead Sea in xix. 26, of the custom of not eating a particular part of

xviii INTRODUCTION [§ 1

an animal in xxxii. 32, of the Egyptian system of land-tenure in
xlvii. 26, and of a great many names of persons^ and places^ at least
according to the etymologies current at the time. Explanations of the
last-named kind are also found in E ; but much less frequently than
in J^ J explains also, in accordance with contemporary beliefs, the
origin of various nations and tribes, especially of those which were
more or less closely related to Israel, as x. 8 — 12, 13 — 19, 24 — 30;
xix. 37f. (Moab and Ammon), xxii. 20 — 24 (the Nahoridae), xxv. 1 — 4
(the Keturaean tribes), xxv. 21 — 26* (Edom). By prophetic words
attributed, in most cases, to their respective ancestors, he accounts for
the character and political position of many of the peoples of his own
day, ix. 25 — 27 (Canaan), xvi. 12 (Ishmael), xxv. 23, xxvii. 28 f.,
39, 40 (Edom and Israel), ch. xlix. (the twelve tribes) : cf. in E xlviii.
14, 19 (Manasseh and Ephraim), 22 (Shechem). In other respects
also J loves to point to the character of nations or tribes as fore-
shadowed in their beginnings (ix. 22 — 24, xvi. 12, xxv. 25 f., 33 ; and
perhaps xix. 30 — 38, xxxv. 22 [see the notes] : cf. also xlix. 3 — 4, 5 — 7).
In J the knowledge and worship of Jehovah go back to primitive
times : Cain and Abel already make their ' presents * to Him (iv. 3),
which may be either of the fruits of the ground or of the firstlings of
the flock. Under Sheth (Gen. iv. 24) men begin, — it may be supposed,
in some more formal and public manner, — to *caU with the name of
Jehovah.' A distinction between * clean' and 'unclean' animals is
recognized under Noah (vii. 2), who also builds an altar, and offers
* clean' animals as burnt offerings to Jehovah (viii. 20). The same
usages prevailed during the whole patriarchal period : the patriarchs
are repeatedly spoken of as building altars, and ' calling with the name
of Jehovah ' (see pp. xix, xx)*.

1 Eve (iii. 20), Cain (iv. 1), Seth (iv. 25), Noah (v. 29), Peleg (x. 25), Ishmael
(xvi. 11), Isaac (xviii. 12 — 15, but not explicitly), Moab and Ammon (xix. 37, 38),
Esau, Jacob, and Edom (xxv. 25, 26, 30), most of the names of Jacob's sons in
xxix. 31 — XXX. 24, Israel (xxxii. 28), Ben-oni and Benjamin (xxxv. 18), Perez and
Zerah (xxxviii. 29, 30) ; cf. ii. 7 (' man '), 23 ('woman '), xli. 45 (Zaphenath-Pa'neah).

' Enoch (iv. 17), Babylon (xi. 9), Beer-lahai-roi (xvi. 14), Zo'ar (xix. 22), Yahweh-
yir'eh (xxii. 14), the wells 'Esek, Sitnah, andKehoboth (xxvi. 20, 21, 22), Beer-sheba'
(xxvi. 33), Bethel (xxviii. 19), Gilead and Mizpah (xxxi. 48, 49), Penuel (xxxii. 30),
Succoth (xxxiii. 17), Abel-mizraim (1. 11), Ma'rah (Ex. xv. 23) : cf. also the allusions
to Seir xxv. 25, Mahanaim xxxii. 7, 10, Jabbok xxxii. 24, and Penuel xxxiii. 10.

3 Isaac (xxi. 6),* Dan (xxx. 6), Issachar (xxx. 18), Zebulun (xxx. 20*''=), Joseph
(XXX. 23), Manasseh and Ephraim (xli. 51 f.); Beer-sheba' (xxi. 31), Bethel (xxviii.
17, 22), Mahanaim (xxxii. 2), and Allon-bachuth (xxxv. 8): cf. also xxxiii. 20,
xxxv. 7. The meaning of 'Ishmael' is alluded to in xxi. 17.

* This is J's representation : but it can scarcely be doubted that in his use of the
name Jehovah (Yahweh) he in reality merely transfers, without conscious reflection,
the usage of his own age to primitive, if not also to patriarchal times. The total

§ 1] CHARACTERISTICS OP J AKD E xix

♦— E, however, seems to describe a threefold stage of religious develop-
ment. What picture, indeed, he had formed of the primitive history
of mankind we do not know : though Gen. xx. 13, Josh. xxiv. 2
appear to shew that he carried back the story of Abraham to his
ancestral connexions in Haran, the first traces of his narrative which
remain are to be found in ch. xv. But Israel's ancestors, he declares,

* beyond the River' (i.e. in Haran), were idolaters (Josh. xxiv. 2, 14, 15);
Jacob's wives accordingly bring their * foreign gods ' into Canaan with
them (Gen. xxxv. 2 — 4) ; and Rachel in particular steals her father's
teraphim (xxxi. 19). By what means Abraham learnt the higher
truth, the existing narrative does not state. But he appears as a
consistent monotheist (xx. 11, 17, &c.) ; and Jacob, though his mono-
theism, at least in xxviii. 20 — 22, is of an immature and rudimentary
t)rpe, still calls upon his family and household to bury their * foreign
gods ' under the terebinth at Shechem (xxxv. 4). The name Yahweh
is in this source first expressly revealed in Ex. iii. 14 f.

In the Book of Genesis, both narratives deal largely with the
antiquities of the sacred sites of Palestine. Thus an altar is built by
Abraham, as soon as he enters the country, at Shechem, close to tha

* Directing Terebinth ' (xii. 7), another between Bethel and Ai (xii. 8
cf. xiii. 4), a third at Hebron, by the terebinths of Mamre (xiii. 18),
and a fourth on (apparently) the site of the later Temple (xxii. 9) :
other altars are built by Isaac at Beer-sheba (xxvi. 25) and by Jacob
at Shechem (xxxiii. 20 ; but perhaps ' pillar ' should be read here : see
the note), and at Bethel (xxxv. 1, 3, 7) : Jacob also sacrifices at Beer-
sheba on his way to Egypt (xlvi. 1). A sacred standing-stone, or

* pillar,' is set up and anointed by Jacob at Bethel on his journey from
Canaan in E (xxviii. 18, 22 : cf. xxxi. 13), and on his return to Canaan
in J (xxxv. 14) ; perhaps also he sets one up at Shechem (xxxiii. 20 :
see the note) : by another pillar he marks Rachel's grave (xxxv. 20) ;
a pillar, also, marking a boundary, is erected by Jacob and Laban in
Gilead (xxxi. 45, 51, 52) ; on the last-mentioned occasion, moreover,
Jacob offers sacrifice, and a sacred meal, accompanying the sacrifice, is

absence of proper names compounded with Yahweh in the patriarchal period makes
it probable that, though not absolutely new in Moses' time (cf. p. xlvii), it was still
current previously only in a limited circle, — possibly, as has been suggested, in the
family of Moses (Ewald, ii. 158; Wellh. Hist. 433; Konig, Hauptprobleme, 27), or
among the Kenites (Stade, Gesch. i. 130; Budde, The Religion of Israel to the
Exile, 1899, pp. 17—25). Even till the age of Samuel such compounds are rare
(Jochebed, Joshua, Joash, Jotham, Jonathan, Jud. xviii. 30); see Gray, Heh. Pr.
Names, 257—9 (on Ahijah, 1 Ch. ii. 25, see ibid. p. 36). (The time is hardly ripe
yet for drawing inferences from the facts mentioned on p. xlix.)

XX INTRODUCTION [§ 1

said to have been partaken of by him and Laban {v. 54). An oracle,
perhaps at Beer-sheba, ajjpears to be alluded to in xxv. 22. Sacred
trees (mostly terebinths), which, it may be supposed, were pointed to
in the narrators' own times, are mentioned at Shechem (xii. 6, xxxv. 4 ;
cf. Jos. xxiv. 26), Hebron (xiii. 18, xviii. 1 ; cf. xiv. 13), Beer-sheba
(xxi. 33 ; a tamarisk), and near Bethel (xxxv. 8)\ Abraham is further
described as 'calling with the name of Jehovah' by the altar near
Bethel in xii. 8, xiii. 4, and by the tamarisk tree at Beer-sheba, xxi. 33 ;
and Isaac as doing the same by the altar at Beer-sheba (xxvi. 25).
The passages just cited may be taken to give a picture of the forms of
worship which, as tradition told, the patriarchs had been accustomed
to use'. In several cases, also, like many of those cited in footnotes "
and * on p. xviii, they seem to embody traditional explanations of the
origin of the places, or objects, held sacred at the time when the
narratives in question were written, though in a later age, when religion
became more spiritualized, they fell into disrepute : they were con-
secrated by theophanies, or they commemorated other incidents in the
lives of the patriarchs.

It is characteristic of J that his representations of the Deity are
highly anthropomorphic. He represents Jehovah not only (as the
prophets generally, even the latest, do) as expressing human resolutions
and swayed by human emotions (e.g. being pained, or repenting, vi. 6 f ,
swearing, xxiv. 7, &c.), but as performing sensible acts. Thus in
ii. 4^ — iii. Jehovah moulds man out of the clods of the ground,
breathes into his nostrils the breath of Hfe, plants, places, takes, sets,
brings, builds, closes up, walks in the garden in the cool of the day,
makes coats of skin ; elsewhere He shuts Noah into the ark (vii. 16),
smells the savour of a sacrifice (viii. 21 : cf. 1 S. xxvi. 19), cojnes down
for various purposes — to examine the tower built by men (xi. 5), and
again (v. 7) to frustrate their purpose, to investigate on the spot the
truth of the report about the sin of Sodom (xviii. 21), or to deliver
Israel from its bondage (Ex. iii. 8), — visits Abraham and Lot in a
human form, and performs before them the actions of ordinary men
(xviii. — xix.), wrestles with Jacob (xxxii. 24 f ), meets Moses at his
lodging-place, and seeks to slay him (Ex. iv. 24 f ), and takes off the
chariot wheels of the Egyptians (xiv. 25). f Such anthropomorphic
representations are not found in E. In E, Elohim does not perform
sensible acts, or visit the earth in personal form : He only ' comes '

1 Cf. Jud. iv. 11, vi. 11, 19, ix. 6, 37, 1 S. x. 3, xxii. 6, xxxi. 13.

3 The iabbath is not mentioned, though J uses the term 'week,' xxix. 27, 28.

5 1] CHARACTERISTICS OF J xxi

and 'speaks' in a vision or a dream (xv. 1, xx. 3, 6, xxi. 12 [see the
note], xxii. 1 [notice v. 3*], xxxi. 11, 24, xlvi. 2, Nu. xxii. 9 [see w. 8,
13], 20) ; or His angel calls out from heaven (xxi. 17, xxii. 11) : even
in Jacob's dream at Bethel, while in J the patriarch sees Jehovah
standing beside him, in E angels ascending and descending are the
medium of communication between heaven and earth.
I— In J the prophetical element is particularly prominent. His
narratives, more than those of any other historical writer of the
Old Testament, are the vehicle of moral and religious teaching. He
explains the origin of evil in the worid, and expounds the moral
significance of human labour and suffering (cL iiL). In his narratives
of Eve and Cain, he presents, in a few but effective strokes, two typical
examples of the manner in which temptation assails, and too often
overcomes, the soul. He depicts the growth of evil which accompanies
progress in the arts of life (iv. 17 ff.) ; he calls attention to the ' evil
imagination' inherent even in the descendants of righteous Noah
(viii. 21) ; and notices the growth of wickedness and arrogance, and
the depravation of manners (vi. 5, ix. 22, xi. 4, xiii. 13, xix. 4 ff., 31 ff.).
He depicts the patriarchs not indeed as men without fault, but never-
theless as, on the whole, maintaining a lofty standard of faith, con-
stancy, and uprightness of life, both among the heathen in whose
land they dwelt, and also amid examples of worldly self-indulgence,
duplicity, and jealousy, afforded sometimes by members of their own
family. The shades, — sometimes dark shades, — on the characters of
Lot and Laban, Rebekah, Jacob, and Rachel, throw into clearer relief
the more noble and unselfish personalities of Abraham, Isaac, and
Joseph. The patriarchs are men, chosen by God (xii. 1, xxiv. 7), and
trained and educated under His providence, firstly to live as godlike
men themselves, and then to teach their families to follow in their
steps, that so in the end a holy people of God may be established on
the earth (xviii. 18 f.). The patriarchal history is, in his hands,
instinct with the consciousness of a great future : Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob, are vouchsafed in succession glimpses of the divine plan :
their descendants are to be as countless as the sand of the sea, or the
stars of heaven ; they are to possess the land which in the patriarchs'
own days the * Canaanite and the Perizzite ' occupy (xiii. 7 ; cf xii. 6,
xxiv. 3) : the spiritual privileges enjoyed by them are to attract the
envy of all the nations of the world (xxii. 18, xxvi. 4), even if their
actual extension to them is not contemplated (xii. 3, xviii. 18, xxviii.
14, see the note on xii. 3). Though the actual words are not used, —

xxii INTRODUCTION [§ 1

Jehovah is first described as 'choosing' Israel in Deuteronomy
(iv. 37a/.), — J has thus a clear consciousness of Israel's 'election'
and ' vocation.' He is further ' penetrated by the thought of Jehovah's
mercifulness, long-suffering, and faithfulness ' (Gen. vi. 8, viii. 21 f.,
XV. 6, xviii. 23 ff., xxiv. 7, xxxii. 12; cf. Ex. xxxii. 9 — 14, xxxiii. 12 if.) ;
and frequently by his narratives, if not in express words (cf. xxvi.
2, 24), he illustrates the providence with which Jehovah watches over
and protects His faithful worshippers. The latter is however a thought
which is perhaps more frequently and distinctly expressed in E (comp.
XX. 7, xxi. 12, 17 — 20, xxxi. 5, 7 — 9, 11, 24, 42, xxxii. 1, xxxv. 3,
xli. 39, xlv. 5, 7, 8, xlvi. 3, xlviii. 15, 21, 1. 20, 24).
,^ P is in method and point of view hardly less different from both
•/and E than he is in style. P is not satisfied to cast into a literary
form what may be termed the popular conception of the patriarchal
and Mosaic ages : his aim is to give a systematic view, from a priestly
standpoint, of the origin and chief institutions of the Israelitish
theocracy. For this purpose, as was remarked above (p. vi.), an outline
of the history is sufficient : the narrative of P becomes detailed only at
important epochs, or where the origin of some existing ceremonial
institution has to be explained. The length of a period, if not marked
by events of any consequence, is indicated by a genealogy (ch. v.,
xi. 10 — 25). Similarly in the Mosaic age, the commission of Moses,
and events connected with the exodus, are narrated with some fulness ^ :
but only the description of the Tabernacle and the ceremonial system
(Ex. XXV. — xxxi., xxxv. — xl. ; Lev. ; much of Numbers) can be termed
comprehensive : even of the incidents in the Wilderness many appear
to be introduced chiefly on account of some law or important con-
sequence arising out of them.

In the arrangement of his material, system and circumstantiality
are the guiding principles ; and their influence may be traced both in
the plan of his narrative as a whole, and in his treatment of individual
sections. From first to last the narrative is constructed with a careful
and uniform regard to chronology : the days of Creation, the ages of
the patriarchs, both in chaps, v. and xi., and subsequently, at each
important event of their lives (p. xxvi f.), the dates of the rise and fall
of the waters of the Flood (vii.6, 11, 24, viii.3^ 4, 5, 13% 14), and in
the Mosaic age the dates of the principal events of the exodus, are all
exactly noted. Moreover, the history advances along a well-defined

^ See the passages in the synopsis on p. v.

§ 1] CHARACTERISTICS OF P xxiii

line, marked by a gradually diminishing length of human life ; by the
revelation of God under three distinct names, Elohim, El Shaddai
(Gen. xvii. 1), and Jehovah (Ex. vi. 2, 3); by the blessings of Adam and
Noah (Gen. i. 28 — 30, ix. 2 — 6), each with its characteristic conditions;
and by the covenants with Noah, Abraham, and Israel, each with its
special * sign,' the rainbow, the rite of circumcision, and the Sabbath
(Gen. ix. 12 f., xvii. 11, Ex. xxxi. 13, 17). In P's picture of the
Mosaic age the minute description of the Tabernacle, sacrifices, and
other ceremonial institutions, the systematic marshalling of the nation
by tribes and families, and the unity of purpose and action which in
consequence regulates its movements (Nu. i. — ^iv., x. 11 — 28, &c.),
are the most conspicuous features. Wherever possible, P seeks to set .
before his readers a concrete picture, with definite figures and pro-
portions : observe, for example, his exact account of the dimensions of
the ark, of the height to which it rose above the highest mountain-
tops (vii. 20) ; and afterwards, the care taken by him to particularize
the exact dimensions of the Tabernacle, sacred vessels, and other
furniture belonging to it, the exact numbers of the various tribes
(Nu. i., xxvi.), and the precise amount of spoil taken from the
Midianites (Nu. xxxi.). It is probable that in this systematized
picture of antiquity there is a considerable artificial, or ideal, elements
The same desire to produce a concrete picture is no doubt a con-
tributory cause of the consistent regard to chronology displayed by P,
as also to other statistical data : comp. for instance the lists and
enumerations in Gen. xlvi. 8 — 27, Ex. vi. 14 — 27, Nu. i. — iv., vii.,
xiii. 1 — 15, xxvi., xxxiii., xxxiv.

P's treatment of the entire period covered by the Book of Genesis
is very difterent from that of either J or E. He evinces scarcely any
interest in the explanation either of names, or of the facts and in-
stitutions of human life and society^ No inventions are attributed by
him to the antediluvian patriarchs : they form a mere list of names
and ages. He narrates the leading events in the lives of the patriarchs,
but, except at a few crucial points, as mere facts : on the conflicts of
interest and feeling which led Abraham, for instance, to acquiesce in
the expulsion of Ishmael, or Rebekah and Jacob to outwit Isaac, he is

1 Compare Ottley's Bampton Lectures for 1897 (on 'Aspects of the Old Testa-
ment'), pp. 120 — 5, where this feature of P's narratives is well described and
illustrated.

* In Genesis the only names of which the origin is stated or explained by P,
are Abraham, Sarah, and Isaac (xvii. 5, 15, 19, see v. 17), Israel (xxxv. 10), and
Bethel (xxxv. 15): of. the allusion to the meaning of 'Ishmael' in xvii. 20.

.^xir INTRODUCTION [§ 1

silent; the dramatic movement, and the ahimdance of incident and
colloquy, which are such conspicuous features in the narrative of J and
even in that of E, are almost entirely lacking in those of P\ There is
also a singular absence of geographical detail. Abraham dwells * in the
land of Canaan,* Lot * in the cities of the Klkkdr ' (xiii. 12 ; cf xix. 29) ;
but the various places visited by the one, the particular city whjch was
the home of the other, are not indicated. The altars, well^^, sacred
trees, and stones, the centres of so many picturesque $jlenes in J[ ^,nd E,
are unnoticed in P : one place only, Mamre, or Hebron, is nairfed with
repeated emphasis on account of the adjacent family sepulchre of
Machpelah (p. xi, No. 33) ; Bethel also is referred to once (xxxv. 15).

In his religious theory of the patriarchal age, P differs also
markedly from both J and E. The name Yahweh is unknown : it is
first revealed in the age of Moses (Ex. vi. 2 £). Altars, sacrifices,
sacred pillars are equally unknown; the only ceremonial institutions
recognized by him as pre-Mosaic are the Sabbath (observed by God at
the end of the week of Creation, but first enjoined upon Israel in the
Mosaic age), the prohibition to eat blood (ix. 4 f.), and circumcision :
no act of worship seems to be thought of till the appropriate place has
been constructed, and the right persons appointed, for its performance ;
accordingly, the first sacrifice recorded is that of Aaron and his sons in
Lev. viii. Primitive humanity is represented by P as subsisting wholly
on vegetable food (Gen. i. 29) ; animal food is first permitted after the
Flood, coupled however with the restriction against eating the blood ;
permission is also given at the same time for capital punishment to be
inflicted upon the murderer (ix. 3 — 6). In this view of primitive
history, — as in the other instances referred to above (p. xxiii), — there is
a large artificial element: it is the embodiment not of a genuine
historical tradition, but of an ideal. The promises given to the
patriarchs (see on xii. 2 f.), unlike those of J (see ibid.)^ are limited to
Israel itself: they do not embrace other nations. The substance of
these promises is the future growth and glory (' kings shall come out
of thee ') of the Abrahamic clan ; the establishment of a covenant with
its members (in J mentioned in Genesis once only, and in very different
terms, xv. 18), implying a special relation between them and God
(xvii. 2 — 21 (repeatedly), Ex. ii. 24, vi. 4 f ), and the confirmation of
the * land of their sojournings ' as their possession. The writer's ideal,

1 And so {<3, the particle of entreaty, I beseech thee, or now (enclitic), so common
in colloquy, which occurs 110 times in JE in the Hexateuch, is found but twice in
P (Nu. xvi. 8, Josh. xxii. 26).

§ 2] CHARACTERISTICS OF P ^^^^

however, the theocracy, is not reached in Genesis ; and the culminac
promise, declaring the abiding presence of Jehovah with His people^ i^
only found in Ex. xxix. 43 — 46, attached to the directions for the
construction of the Taberaacle.

P's representations of God are far less anthropomorphic than those
of J, or even of E. No visions or dreams are mentioned by him : no
angel either calls from heaven, or walks on earth. God is indeed
spoken of as * appearing ' to men, and as * going up ' from them (xvii. 1,
22 f, XXXV. 9, 13, xlviii. 3, Ex. vi. 3), at important moments of the
history : but no further description of His appearance is given ; nor
is He ever represented as assuming a personal form : usuallx.^e
jev^lation of God to man takes the form of simple * speaking ' to them
(i. 29, vi. 13, viii. 15, ix. 1, 8, Ex. vi. 2, xii. 1 al). So in the account
of Creation, in P God is represented simply as ' speaking ' ; the reader
cannot localize Him : He acts as a spirit ; and the creative word
realizes itself : in J, on the other hand (ii. 4^ ff.), the reader pictures
Jehovah as walking upon the earth, and He is represented as per-
forming a series of sensible acts (p. xx f.) : in other words, P's j.
representation of the Deity is far more * transcendent ' than that of J. K
Anthropomorphic expressions are indeed in general either avoided^
by P, or * reduced to these harmless figures without which it is hardly
possible to speak of a personal God at all ' ; and anthropopathisms are
almost uniformly eschewed by him.

§ 2. The Chronology of Genesis.

Under this head two questions have to be considered : (1) is the
chronology of Genesis consistent with itself? and (2) if, and in so far
as, it is consistent with itself, is it consistent with such external data
as w| possess for fixing the chronology of the period embraced in the
Book?

(1) The first of these questions need not detain us long. It is
shewn, in the notes on xii. 11, xxi. 15, xxiv. 67, xxxv. 8, and pp. 262,
365 n., 368, that there are a number of points in the Book at which
the statements made about one or other of the patriarchs in J or E are
not consistent with the ages or families ascribed to them in P : in other
words, that in several instances J and E pictured the patriarchs as
being aged differently from what they must have been, if the ages
noted in P are correct, and that consequently the chronology of P is
not consistent with that presupposed by J and E.

-xir INTRODUCTIOlSr [§ 2

siler^"^) In the Book of Genesis the only systematic chronology is that
^^>f P. It is true, there are in J and E occasional notes or other
indications of time* ; hut they are not sufficient to form a continuous
chronology : they authorize no inference as to the length of the ante-
diluvian period ; and as to the patriarchal period, though they state
that Abraham and Sarah had both reached a great age when Isaac was
born, they do not mention what their ages were; and they contain
nothing to suggest that the period from the birth of Abraham to the
death of Jacob was materially in excess of what it would be if measured
by the ordinary standards of human life : in other words, all that they
suggest about it is that it embraced some 180 years, instead of ex-
tending, as the figures of P give it, to 307 years. And the data
contained in J and E include, at least in Genesis, no synchronism with
external history : they contain nothing, for instance, enabling us to
infer with what Babylonian or Egyptian kings, Abraham, Isaac, or
Jacob was contemporary.

In P however there is a systematic chronology running through
the Book from the beginning almost to the end, so carefuUy and
methodically constructed, that every important birth, marriage, and
death, has its assigned place in it. This chronology may be thus
summarized :

Heb. text Sam. LXX.

From the Creation of man to the Flood

(Gen. v., vii. 11) 1656 1307 2262^

From the Flood to the Call of Abraham

(Gen. xi. 10—26, xii. 4) 365 1016 1145'

From the Creation of man to the Call

of Abraham 2021 2322 3407

In the rest of Genesis P has the following notes* :

75 Age of Abraham at call (xii. 4).

[85] „ „ „ marriage with Hagar (xvi 3).

86 „ „ „ birth of Ishmael (xvi. 16).

99 „ „ „ promise of Isaac (xvii. 1). [Sarah 89, xvii. 18.]

100 „ „ „ birth of Isaac (xxi. 5).

[137] „ „ „ death of Sarah, aged 127 (xxiii. 1).

175 „ „ „ death (xxv. 7).

1 See XV. 13, 16; xxxi. 38, 41; xii. 1, 47, 53, 54, xlv. 6; 1. 22, 26; and such
notices as that Isaac, Joseph, and Benjamin were, respectively, born in their fathers'
'old age' (xxi. 2; xxxvii. 3; xliv. 20).

2 See particulars of this period on p. 79.

2 See p. 138. The 'two years' of Gen. xi. 10 are disregarded: see v. 32, vii. 11.
* The figures enclosed in brackets are not actually stated, but inferred.

§ 2] CHROKOLOGY OF GENESIS xxvii

13 Age of Ishmael at circumcision (xvii. 25X
137 „ „ „ death (xxv. 17).

40 Age of Isaac at marriage (xxv. 20).

60 „ I, ), birth of Jacob and Esau (xxv. 26).

[75 „ „ „ death of Abraham.]

[100] „ „ „ marriage of Esau, aged 40 (xxvi, 34).

180 „ „ „ death (xxxv. 28). [Jacob would be now 120.]

130 Age of Jacob at arrival in Egypt (xlvii. 9).
147 „ „ „ death (xlvii. 28).

17 Age of Joseph when sold (xxxvii. 2).

30 „ „ „ promoted in Egypt (xll. 46).

Taking account of those notices only which give the length of the
period, we get :

From the Call of Abraham to the birth of Isaac 25 yeara

Age of Isaac at birth of Jacob and Esau 60 „

Age of Jacob when he went down into Egypt 130 „

The period of the patriarchs' sojourn in Canaan was thus 215 „

We obtain accordingly, for the number of years from the Creation
to the Exodus :

From the Creation of man to the Call

of Abraham
The period of the patriarchs' sojourn in

Canaan
The period of the Israelites' sojourn in

Egypt according to Ex. xii. 40, 41 (P)

From the Creation of man to the Exodus 2666 2752 3837

Now, 1 K. vi. 1 equates the fourth year of Solomon, the year in
which the Temple was founded, with the 480th year from the Exodus.
Accepting, then, Ussher's date for the reign of Solomon, b.o. 1014 —
975, — it ought probably, the chronology of the kings being corrected
from Ass3rrian data, to be really 40 or 50 years later '^j — we get B.c. 1491
for the Exodus, and so we obtain the following Table of the principal
earlier Biblical dates, in years B.C. :

1 Sam. and lxx. read in Ex. xii. 40 'The sojourning of the children of Israel in
the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan^ was 430 years,' reducing the period of
the sojourn in Egypt to half of that stated in the Hebrew text (cf. Gal. iii. 17;
Jos. Ant. II. 15. 2).

' See BB. i. 401; and cf. the writer's Isaiah^ hi$ life and times, p. 13.

Heb.

Sam.

LXX.

2021

2322

3407

215

216

215

430

215^

2151

xxviii mTRODUCTIOlSr [§ 2

Heb.

Sam.

LXX.

Creation of man*

41572

4243

5328

The Deluge

2501

2936

3066

Call of Abraham

2136

1921

Jacob's migration into Egypt

1921

1706

The Exodus

1491

It follows from what is said on pp. 79, 138, that the higher dates in the
LXX. for the Creation of man, and the Deluge, are chiefly a consequence of
the fact that in the lists in Gen. v. and xi. 10—26, the age of each patriarch at
the birth of his firstborn is in the lxx. in many cases 100 years more than it
is in the Hebrew text

It is impossible now that these figures, — or, at least, the majority
of them, — can be historical. (1) As will be shewn in the following
section, it is certain that man existed upon the earth long before either
B.C. 4157 or (lxx.) 5328'. (2) The ages to which the several patriarchs,
in the two lists of Gen. v. and Gen. xi. 10 — 26, lived, and at which, at
least in the majority of cases in Gen. v., their eldest sons are stated to
have been born, are incompatible with the constitution of the human
body; and could only have been attained if that constitution had differed
from what it now is, to an extent which we are entirely unwarranted
in assuming to have been the case (cf. p. 75). (3) We possess no
independent information as to the date of the local inundation in
Babylonia, which, if the assumption made on p. 108 is correct, will
have formed the basis of both the Babylonian and the Biblical
narratives of the Flood: in the abstract, either 2501, 2936, or 3066 b.c.,
would be possible for it. (4) The question of the dates of Abraham
and the Exodus, and of the interval between them, is a more difficult
one, and must be considered at greater length. The date of Ham-
murabi, king of Babylon, cannot at present be fixed exactly ; but there

1 Here and elsewhere the expression 'creation of man' has been used designedly
in order to leave open the possibility that the 'days' of Gen. i. denote periods.
There is however little doubt that the writer really meant ' days ' in a literal sense,
and that Pearson was right when he inferred from the chapter that the world was
represented as created '6000, or at farthest 7000,' years from the 17th cent. a.d.
(cf. pp. 19, 20—22, 26).

2 Ussher's date, as is well known, is B.C. 4004 : but he (1) interpolates, most
unnaturally, 60 years in Gen. xi. 26 (see the footnote, p. 142) ; and (2) he adopts in
Ex. xii. 40 the computation implied in the reading of Sam. and lxx., which the
rendering of AV., forced and artificial though it is, seems to make possible even for
the Hebrew (contrast RV.). And 4157 + 60 - 215 = 4002 (the odd 2 years are the two
neglected in Gen. xi. 10, p. xxvi, footnote ^).

3 Or, calculating back from the probable actual date of the Exodus, c. 1277 b.c.
(see p. xxix), b.o. 3943 or (lxx.) 6114.

§2] CHRONOLOGY OF GENESIS xxix

is a consensus of Assyriologists (see p. 156) that his reign began
between b.c. 2376 (Sayce) and 2130 (Hommel)— say, c. 2250 B.C. : if,
therefore, he is the Amraphel of Gen. xiv. 1, and {/*, further, the roU
assigned to Abraham in this chapter is, at least substantially, historical,
this fixes Abraham's date to c. 2250 b.c. Can, now, the date of the
Exodus be determined upon external grounds? (a) The Tel el-
Amarna letters shew that, at the time when they were written, —
which, from the names of the kings mentioned in them, viz. Amen-
h6tep III. and IV. of Egypt, and Bumaburiash of Babylon, Egyptologists
and Assyriologists agree, must have been c. 1400 B.C., — Palestine was
still an Egyptian province, under the rule of Egyptian governors : the
entry of the Israelites into Canaan could not, consequently, have taken
place till after b.c. 1400. (6) It is stated in Ex. i. 11 that the
Israelites built in Egypt for the Pharaoh two store-cities, Pithom and
Ra'amses. The excavations of M. Naville have, however, shewn that
Ramses II., of the 19th dynasty, was the builder of Pithom ; and the
name of the other city, though it is still not certainly identified, is
sufficient evidence that he was its founder likewise. Egyptian chrono-
logy is unfortunately imperfect; but Sayce's date for Ramses II.,
B.C. 1348 — 1281, is in substantial accord with that fixed by nearly
aU recent authorities \ But if Ramses II. was the Pharaoh of the
oppression, the Pharaoh of the Exodus may be naturally assumed
(cf Ex. ii. 23) to have been his successor, i.e. Merenptah II. ; and
so Prof. Sayce's date for the Exodus is B.c. 1277. Thus, according to
the best available authorities, the interval between Abraham and the
Exodus wiU be some 900 years, — it may even (Sayce) have been
1000 years. It is however evident that even the shorter of these
periods is inconsistent with the Biblical figures, — whether the 645 of
the Heb. text, or the 430 of the Sam. and lxx.* (5) There is no

That the probable absolute date of the Exodus differs from the Biblical
date, B.C. 1491, is not a serious diflaculty: the date 1491 rests essentially upon
the 480 (lxx 440) years of 1 K vi. 1, which is open to the suspicion of not
being really traditional, but as having been arrived at by computation (e.g. of
12 generations of 40 years each), and is rejected, for instance, even in the
Speaker's Commentary.

1 Budge, Hist, of Egypt (1902), v. 120, 127; cf. i. xix, 161, EncB. n. 1241.

^ Hommel's endeavour {Exp. Times, Feb. 1899, p. 210 ff.) to harmonize the

Biblical figures with the date now (after many changes) adopted by him for

Hammurabi involves the questionable assumption that the entry into Canaan took

place while Palestine was still an Egyptian province, besides arbitrary alterations

> m the text of Ex. i. 11.

XXX INTRODUCTION [§ 2

external evidence enabling us to fix the date of Jacob's migration into
Egypt : the personal name of the Pharaoh with whom Joseph and
Jacob had to do is not mentioned ; and there is nothing in the Book
of Genesis which enables us either to conjecture his identity or even
to judge of the dynasty to which he belonged. All that we can say is
that, if the Exodus took place under Merenptah, and if further the
Israelites were 430 years in Eg3rpt, and Professor Petrie is right in
assigning the Hyksos domination to b.c. 2098 — 1587, the Pharaoh of
Joseph will have been one of the Hyksos kings. (6) The 430 years
of Ex. xii. 40, 41 (Heb. text) are in substantial agreement with the
400 years of Gen. xv. 13. If however (see 4) a period as long as
900 years intervened between Abraham and the Exodus, it is evident
that the Israelites must have been in Egypt for much more than the
430 years of the Heb. text, — to say nothing of the 215 years of the
Sam. and Lxx. And the * fourth generation' of Gen. xv. 16 cannot
even embrace as much as 400 years ; for though (cf. the note, and
Ex. vi. 16, 18, 20, vii. 7, in P) it might perhaps have been assumed that
a generation in the later patriarchal period equalled 100 years, it is not
credible that it should have done so in reality^.

The only conclusion which the facts thus summed up justify is
that the chronology of the Book of Genesis, — which is, in effect, P's
chronology, — in spite of the ostensible precision of its details, has no
historical value. The sole value which it possesses is that it sets before
us the manner in which the author himself viewed the chronology of
the period, and the perspective in which he placed the various person-
ages who figure in it. It is an artificial system, which must have been
arrived at in some way by computation ; though the data upon which
it was calculated have not at present been ascertained*. For the
entire period, the only synchronisms with external history which we
at present possess, are those of Abraham with Amraphel (supposing
the ordinary view of ch. xiv. to be accepted), and of the building of
Ra'amses and Pithom with Eamses II. And if, as there seems no
sufficient reason for doubting, the dates assigned to these kings are
approximately correct, and there is an interval between them approach-

1 It is remarkable that P's genealogies (see on xv. 16) should assign just four
generations for the same period (Levi, Kobath, •Amram, Moses; Levi, Kohath,
Izhar, Korah; Keuben, Pallu, Eliab, Dathan and Abiram: the somewhat longer
one in Nu. kxvi. 28 — 33, xxvii. 1, Jos. xvii. 3, including Gilead, the name of a
country^ must be artificial: of. p. liv). It is possible that the 'fourth generation,'
though incorrect in fact, had nevertheless, when the actual period had been
forgotten, acquired a conventional currency in tradition.

^ For a conjecture as to part of it, see below, p. 80.

§ 3] CHRONOLOGY OF GENESIS xxxi

ing 1000 years, the period between Abraham and Moses must be far
greater than is allowed for by the chronology of the Pentateuch^

§ 3. The Historical Value of the Booh of Genesis,
a. Hie prehistoric period (chs. i. — xi.).

On the Biblical narrative of the Creation (Gen. i.) enough has been
said on pp. 19^ — 33. It has been there shewn that while the progress
of scientific discovery in modern times has left the theological value of
this sublimely-conceived narrative unimpaired, it has made it evident
tiiat it possesses no claim to contain a scientific account of the origin
of the world, or to describe, — even in popular language, — the process
by which actually the universe was constituted in its present order,
and the earth was gradually adapted to become the home of its
wondrous succession of ever-progressing types of life. For our know-
ledge of the stages, so far as they can be determined, advancing with
slow and measured steps through unnumbered ages, by which in the
providence of God these effects were produced, and of the movements,
on the one hand of colossal magnitude, on the other of far more than
microscopic minuteness, by which the existing fabric of the universe
has been marvellously built up, we must go to the mathematical and
physical sciences, not to the Bible.

It remains now to consider the historical value of the statements of
Genesis, so far as they relate to the early history of mankind. And
as we have seen, the date fixed by them for the creation of man is
equivalent to B.a 4157, or (according to the higher figures of the lxx.)
B.C. 5328. It is however certain that man existed upon the earth long
before even the earKer of these dates, and that the vicissitudes through
which the human race passed have been far more diversified, and must
have occupied a far longer period to accomplish, than is allowed for by
the Biblical narrative.

The great antiquity of man upon the earth is apparent from the
following considerations.

1. It is the unanimous opinion of Assyriologists that in Babylonia
the beginnings of civilization are to be found long before B.C. 4000.
Thus Professor R. W. Rogers, a most cautious and guarded American

1 Cf. Sayce, EHH. 143 — 146, who, after a discusi3ion of the subject, arrives at
ttie conclusion that the chronology of the OT. is of no value until we reach the
time of David.

xxxii INTRODUCTION [§ 3

Assyriologist, writesS * If we call up before us the land of Babylonia,
and transport ourselves backward until we reach the period of more
than 4000 years before Christ, we shall be able to discern here and
there signs of life, society, and government in certain cities. Civiliza-
tion has already reached a high point, the arts of life are well
advanced, and men are able to write down their thoughts and deeds
in intelligible language and in permanent form. All these presuppose
a long period of development running back through millenniums of
unrecorded time.' And he proceeds to give particulars of some of the
kings at this early date, — for instance, of Lugal-zaggisi, who at about
B.C. 4000 made Uruk (the Erech of Gen. x. 10) his capital, whose
inscriptions engraved on vases have been found among the debris of
the temple at Nippur (50 m. SE. of Babylon), and who claims to have
been invested with the 'kingdom of the world,' and to have ruled
* from the lower sea of the Tigris and the Euphrates to the upper sea '
(the Mediterranean Sea). Sargon of Accad, who (p. 173 n.) conquered
the 'land of the Amorites,* lived, according to Nabu-na'id, the last
native king of Babylon (b.c. 555 — 538), 3200 years before himself',
i.e. at about b.c. 3800. The kings of Lagash — now Telloh, about
80 miles SE. of Nippur — have left monuments of themselves, —
sculptured stones, with inscriptions, — belonging substantially to the
same age. Mr Boscawen', upon the basis of M. de Morgan's excava-
tions, concludes that civilization began in Susa before B.C. 5000 ; and
after citing part of an inscription of more than 2000 lines, carved on
the four faces of a granite obelisk found at Susa, and containing an
account of payments made by a king called Manishtu-irba, in con-
nexion with certain estates, remarks upon the striking evidence
afforded by it of the antiquity of civilization in these parts : * Here,
in an inscription more than 6000 years old, we have a complete system
of commerce, land estimated at corn value, and a currency and system
of weights based on the sexagesimal scale. This alone is proof of long
and continued usage.' It must indeed be evident that, if empires
were founded, public buildings constructed, and writing, — even in the
difficult cuneiform script, — and other arts familiarly practised, as early

1 Hist, of Bah. and Ass. (New York, 1900), i. 349 f.

2 The correctness of this statement has been questioned ; but it is accepted by
most Assyriologists (e.g. Sayce, Exp. Times, x. 25; L. W. King, EncB. i. 437;
Maspero, i. 599 n.; cf. Rogers, i. 318 f., 337).

8 Asiatic Quarterly Review, Oct. 1901, pp. 333 f., 350, 352. The inscriptions
found by M. de Morgan are published, with translations, in Scheil's Textes JSlamitea-
Semitiquee, ii. (1900),

§ 3] THE ANTIQUITY OF MA:^ xxxiii

as B.o. 4000, the beginnings of civilization in Babylonia must have
preceded this date by a period which, if impossible to estimate pre-
cisely by years, must nevertheless have been very considerable. It is
also to be noticed that already at this early date two distinct races,
speaking two distinct languages, meet in Babylonia : the old Sumerian
population of the country, and the Semitic immigrants, who are
gradually superseding them\

The same lesson has been taught by exploration in Eg3^t. Menes,
the founder of the first of the 31 dynasties enumerated by Mangtho,
is assigned by Petrie to b.c. 4777, and by Brugsch and Budge to
c. B.C. 4400 ^ But in 1897 the tomb of Menes was discovered by
M. de Morgan at Nak^da, about 30 miles N. of Thebes ; and the
objects of art, — incised ivory, vases, statuettes, &c., — and hiero-
glyphics, found in it', shew that the civilization of Egypt was already
far advanced. The huge and skilfully-constructed pyramids of the
fourth dynasty, — beginning b.c. 3928 (Petrie), or B.c. 3733 (Budge)—
and the remarkable finish of the sculptures, paintings, and other works
of art^, belonging to this dynasty, support the same conclusion. Nor
is this all. Between 1894 and 1901 excavations, carried on principally
by Petrie, Am^lineau, and de Morgan, in the tombs at Nak^da and
Gebel^n (in the same neighbourhood) have brought to light remains of
a * pre-dynastic ' period (i.e. of a period preceding Menes), when the
Valley of the Nile was inhabited by a race, probably of Libyan origin,
difiering both in physical character and in civilization from that
commonly known as Egyptian. This race had not developed the
arts possessed by the 'Egyptians' who succeeded them; but they
were great workers in flint, and possessed a marvellous skill in
fashioning this material into weapons, tools, and implements of all
kinds ; they were also clever in the manufacture of pottery, although

1 Other authorities give similar dates for the earliest known kings of Babylonia,
as Hommel, BB. i. 224 (before b.c. 4000), King, EticB. i. 442; Pinches, OT. in the
light, etc. p. 124 (cf. 150). In the galleries of the British Museum, many objects
and inscriptions are marked with a date 4500 b.c. See also the very instructive
shilling Guide to the Bab. and Ass. Antiquities of the Brit. Museum (1900), pp. xi,
3, 80, 124.

2 On the difficulties attaching to Egyptian chronology, see Budge, Hist, of
Egypt, I. xiv.— XX, 111 ff., 158—161.

3 See Masp. i. ed. 4 (1901), pp. 232 b, 233; Budge, Hist, of Eg. i. 171,
177—192.

* See in Masp. i. 359 — 379 illustrations of the pyramids, and contemporary
diorite statues, of the kings of this dynasty.

xxxiv INTRODUCTION [§ 3

the potter's wheel was unknown to them'. The flint implements be-
long to the * neolithic' stage of civilization (of which more will be
said presently) : it is even possible that implements belonging to the
earlier * palaeolithic ' age have been found in Egyptl Sir John Evans,
the leading authority in England upon archaic stone implements, after
a review of the evidence, concludes that the * neolithic* age came
to its close in Egypt at about b.o. 5000, * fully a thousand years
before the date which many of us in our childhood were taught to
assign for the Creation of the Universe*.* And the perfection of work-
manship, shewn by the flaked and fluted flint knives, would seem to
indicate that this age must have begun in Egypt long previously*.

2. The evidence afibrded by the differences of language and race
points to the same conclusion, and shews indeed that the antiquity of
man upon earth must extend far beyond even the dimmest beginnings
of either Babylonian or Egyptian civilization. As is shewn on p. 133 f.,
the narrative of the,. Tower of Babel cannot give an historically true
account of the origin of .different languages : for (l) we possess in-
scriptions of a date greatly earlier than that at which the confusion of
tongues is placed, — in fact as early, at least, as B.C. 4000, — written in
#Ar^g entirely distinct languages, the pre-Semitic Sumerian, the Semitic
Babylonian, and the Egyptian ; (2) to take but one of these languages,
the Babylonian : as Prof. J. F. McCurdy points out'', it has already
at this date assumed the form which it exhibits 3000 years later ;
i.e. it exhibits signs of 'advanced phonetic degeneration,* and differs
from Hebrew, Aramaic and the other Semitic languages almost exactly
as it does afterwards : how many thousands of years must we con-
sequently go back beyond b.c. 4000, before we reach the time when the
common ancestors of all the Semitic peoples lived together, and spoke
a common language ! (3) radical differences of language, — i.e. not such
differences as have developed by gradual differentiation from a com-
mon parent-tongue, but differences distinguishing languages entirely
unrelated to each other (as, for instance, Latin and Chinese), are

1 Budge, I. 49 fE., 84 ff., 92 ff., 101 f. (with illustrations): comp. p. 102 ff. (the
contents of their graves). The flint implements (with other objects) are found
interred with the dead, — no doubt with the idea, widely prevalent among peoples of
primitive culture, that they would be of use in a future life.

a Budge, i. 87 f., Ill f.

' The Antiquity of Man, with especial reference to the Stone Age in Egypt (an
Address delivered in the Town Hall, Birmingham, Oct. 25, 1899, before the
Birmingham and Midland Institute), pp. 13, 14.

* Ibid. pp. 10. 11. » DB. V. 88.

§ 3] THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN xxxv

dependent upon diifferences of race, which are not accounted for by
the Biblical narrative.

Something like 100 families of language are known, all entirely unrelated to
each other, i.e. all so diflfering from each other that none could have arisen out
of any of the others by either development or decay, and each comprising
mostly a variety of individual languages or groups of languages ^ Languages
belonging to diflferent families, now, differ from each other not only radically
in vocabulary and grammar, but also, very frequently, in a manner which it is
more difficult for those, like ourselves, familiar with only one type of language,
to realize, viz. * morphologically,' or in the manner in which ideas are built up
into a sentence. Different races do not think in the same way; and con-
sequently the forms taken by the sentence in the languages spoken by them
are not the same. The five main morphological types of language are the
' inflectional ' (W. Asia and Europe), the * agglutinative ' (Turkey, Central Asia,
Pacific Islands, many parts of Africa), the * incorporating ' (Basque), the
'isolating' (E. Asia), and the *polysynthetic' (America)'. These morphological
types are characteristic of particular races: thus the different families of
language spoken in America, though utterly unrelated to each other, are
nevertheless all * polysynthetic* It will follow, also, from what has been said
respecting the nature of * families' of language, that they must either have
arisen independently, in virtue of the faculty of creating language possessed
by man (below, p. 55), at different centres of human life^, or more probably,
perhaps, have been developed gradually, at the same time that races were
developed, out of some very primitive, inorganic type of speech*.

Comparative philology thus teaches that radical differences of
language depend upon, and presuppose, differences of race. Differences
of race, however, " are^ not explained by the Biblical narrative; for
though Gen. x. is ostensibly an explanation of the origin of different
nations, and though Gen. xi. 1 — 9 might conceivably be understood as
such, if it could be supposed that at the dispersion there described
small groups of men, speaking the different languages which then
arose, migrated into different quarters of the earth, and so became the
founders of different nationalities, yet (as will appear directly) no
adequate explanation is thereby obtained of the racial differences
exhibited by mankind, which must, in point of fact, have had their
starting-point in an age vastly anterior to that at which either Gen. x.
or Gen. xi. is assigned by the Biblical chronology.

3. The consideration of differences of race leads to the same
conclusion. It is impossible here to particularize details ; but it may

^ See Sayce, Science of Language (1880), n. 33 — 64.

2 See further particulars in Sayce, op. cit. i. 118—132, 374 ff., ii. 188 ff.

' Sayce, iUd. ii. 322, 323.

* Keane, Ethnology (Cambridge, 1901), pp. 159, 195, 197 f., 209—215.

xxxvi INTRODUCTION [§3

be mentioned generally that differences of race include many distinct
features — the colour of the skin, the physical structure and arrange-
ment of the hair, the stature and proportions of the body, the shape
of the skull, the contour of the face, the mental capabilities and
character. They are also in many cases, as hardly needs to be pointed
out, strongly marked : .we are all familiar with the differences between
the Chinaman, the Negro, and ourselves ; and there are many other
races which, though they may be less familiarly known, are not less
markedly distinguished from each other — ^for instance, the chocolate-
coloured Australians, the light-brown Maoris, the reddish-brown native
tribes of America, the yellow-hued Mongolians of Central Asia and
China, the tall Patagonians, and the diminutive Bushmen of South
Africa \ With the schemes that have been proposed for classif3dng
these and the other races, or sub-races^ of mankind we are not here
concerned*: what more concerns us is the great permanence of type
which, so far as we can. observe them, these racial varieties mostly
exhibit : as depicted on the Egyptian monuments, Egyptian and Negro
differed 4000 years ago as they differ now; races transplanted into new
climates retain their r former physical characteristics practically un-
changed; while conversely physically different races, such as the
Negros and Bushmen ill Africa, shew no tendency to approximate to
each other, even under the influence of the same climate and the same
general physical surroundings.

It has, now, been much debated among ethnologists whether man
appeared originally upon the globe at one centre or at many centres.
The former of these alternatives is preferred by modern scientific
authorities. Thus Mr Darwin, after reviewing the arguments on both
sides, sums up in its favour — upon the ground, stated generally, that
the resemblances, physical and mental, between different races are such
that it is extremely improbable that they should have been acquired
independently by aboriginally distinct species or races ^. But, which-

1 See Sayce, Races of the OT. 14 — 24; or, in greater detail, Tylor, Anthropology,
chap. III., Keane, Ethnology, chaps, viii. ('Physical criteria of race'), and ix.
(' Mental criteria of race'). There are reasons for thinking that the colour of the
skin in primitive man was yellowish (Keane, p. 237).

2 See Keane, p. 163 £P.

8 Darwin, Descent of Man, vol. i. ch, vii. (pp. 231—233, ed. 1871). The argu-
ment of course assumes that Man is the result of an evolutionary process, not of a
special creation. The same conclusion is expressed by Lyell, Principles of Geology^^
(1875), II. chap. 43; Huxley, Collected Essays, vii. 249 ff.; Tylor, art. Anthropology
in the Encycl. Brit.^, and in his volume Anthropology (1895), p. 6; and Keane,
ch. VII. (' The specific unity of man'), who however considers the existing races of
mankind to have developed not from a single human pair, but from a single pair of

§ 3] THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN xxxvii

ever of these alternatives be adopted, it must be evident that differences
of race are not accounted for in the Biblical narrative : the case of the
several primary races originating independently at different centres, is
not contemplated in it at all : if, on the other hand, racial differences
were gradually developed by thq play of natural selection upon the
descendants of a single pair, mi^ating into new climatic and other
physical conditions,- then the growth of these differences is neither
explained by the Biblical narrative, nor, in fact, reconcileable with it.
For, taking account only of the simplest and most obvious division of
mankind into the white, the yellow, the reddish-brown, and the black
races ^ even Gen. x., with the single exception of Gush (Jer. xiii. 23), —
and, possibly, of Magog (if by this are meant the Scythians), —
enumerates only tribes and nations belonging to the white race ; while
from the observed persistency of racial types, as noticed above, it
seems clear that, if tl^e four mentioned races, with the many sub-races
included in each, all differing very materially from each other, have
been developed from a single original pair, the process must have
occupied a greatly longer period of time than is allowed by the Book
of Genesis, even though we adopt the view that the Deluge was a
merely local inundation, and place the starting-point of the growth
of racial distinctions at the Biblical date for the creation of man,
B.C. 4157, or (lxx.) B.a 5328^

4. The high antiquity of man is attested also by evidence, which
cannot be gainsaid, from another quarter. During the last half-century
or so, relics of human workmanship have been found, chiefly in England,
Belgium, and France, but also in other parts of the world, including
America, shewing that man, in a rude and primitive stage of develop-
ment, ranged through the forests and river- valleys of these continents,
in company with mammals now extinct, at an age which cannot
indeed be measured precisely in years B.C., but which, upon the most
moderate estimate, cannot be less than 20,000 years from the present

anthropoid ancestors, standing much further back in the evolutionary pedigree
(pp. 223—5, 229, 239 f.; cf. the diagrams, pp. 19, 38, 224).

1 Corresponding in general to the Caucasian, the Mongol, the native American
and the Negro races. See in detail Keane, chap. x. {' The main divisions of the
Hominidae'), chaps, xi. — xiv. (the survey of each group in particular).

2 Comp. Sir W. H. Flower, Encycl. Brit.^ xv. 445 ( = Flower and Lydekker,
Hist, of Mammals, 1891, 741, 742 f.), who speaks of the 'vast antiquity of man,'
and of the 'long ante-historic period, during which the Negro, the Mongolian, and
the Caucasian races were being gradually fashioned into their respective types ' j
and Sayce, Races of the OT, p. 87, who expresses himself similarly.

xxxvin

INTRODUCTION

[§3

day*. Here is an enlarged Table of the * Cainozoic * age, embracing
the periods numbered 11 and 12 on p. 21*:

1. Eocene. Orders and families of mammals now living
(e.g. ancestral forms of the horse, the deer,
and the hyaena) represented, but not living

Tertiary -{ genera or species.

2. Meiocena Genera of mammals now living represented,
but not species.

3. Pleiocena Living species of mammals begin to appeal-,
but are still rare : extinct species abundant.

/4. Pleistocene. Living species more abundant. Man appears.
Extinct species rarer.
Post-Tertiary 6. * Prehistoric' Living species (including Man) abundant,
or < Animals domesticated, and fruits culti-

Quaternary vated. Only one extinct species of mam-

mal (the Irish elk).
,6. Historic. No extinct species. Historical records.

In the first four of these periods the geography and climate of
Europe both underwent many changes. Thus in the Eocene period the
British Isles were probably united with the present Continent of Europe
on the one side, and with the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland on
the other ; and there was a partially enclosed sea extending from about
the coast of Dorsetshire to Denmark. The climate of Britain was then
tropical : the sea just spoken of teemed with sharks, rays, sea-snakes,
&c., alligators and turtles abounded on the banks of the Thames, and the
land was covered with a luxuriant vegetation. In the Pleiocene period
the climate becomes colder : the elephant now appears in France, and
the first living species of mammal, the common hippopotamus, is found
in the same country and in Italy. The Pleistocene period is remarkable
on account of the alternations of climate by which it was marked. At
first there was severe cold : and thick beds of glaciers covered most of
Scotland, Ireland, the NW. parts of England and Wales, as also the
greater part of N. and central Europe. Then, as many think, came
a submergence, reducing Britain to clusters of glacier-covered islands
rising out of the sea, and surrounded by icebergs, till after a while the
climate grew warmer and the glaciers disappeared. After this a period

1 The late Sir Joseph Prestwich, a geologist not addicted to rash or extreme
opinions, assigned, as a 'rough approximate limit,' a period of from 20,000 to
30,000 years from the present time {Geology, 1888, ii. 534).

a The following statements are made on the authority of Boyd Dawkins, Early
Man in Britain (1880), pp. 9f., 12, 18 f., 81, 115 £f., 150 ff., 257, <fec.: but statements
to the same effect will be found in any recent manual of geology, — e.g. Geikie's
Glass-book of Geology (1902), pp. 394 ff., 404 ff. See also Keane's Ethnology, ch. iv.

§ 3] THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN xxxix

of cold supervened : the glaciers and icebergs reappeared ; the British
Isles again rose above the sea, — this time, however, no longer united
to Greenland, though still forming part of a large N.-Westerly ex-
tension of France, Holland and Denmark : finally, the climate again
became temperate. Thus there were in Britain two * glacial ' periods,
and an intervening warmer 'inter-glacial' period. Similar climatal
changes took place in what is now the Continent of Europe : in the N.
and central parts there are still numerous marks of the former presence
of glaciers.

Indubitable traces of man first become abundant in the later
Pleistocme period \ On the slopes of river- valleys such as those of the
Ouse or the Somme, 50 or 100 ft. above the present river-banks, there
are beds of what is called drift-gravel, deposited by the river when
it flowed at a much higher level than it does at present; and
in this drift-gravel, side by side with the remains of various extinct
mammals, have been found numerous rude implements of flint chipped
by the hands of men, sometimes into flakes, sometimes into pear-
shaped, or pointed, hatchets, or scrapers''. Geology shews that these
drifb-gravels were deposited during the middle and later Pleistocene
period. The animals with whose remains these implements are found
appear to shew that on the Continent of Europe man was pre-glacial
and inter-glacial (i.e. that he advanced from the S. northwards in the
warmer inter-glacial periods mentioned above), but that in England,
at least N. of the Thames, he was only post-glacial (i.e. that he
appeared in this country only after the ice had finally left it). And
so in this remote age, palaeolithic man, or the * river-drift hunter,' as
he has been called, lived a rude hunter's life in the lower valley of the
Thames, side by side with vast herds of reindeer, bisons, horses, and
uri, the woolly rhinoceros and the elephant, the hippopotamus and
the lion, and many other creatures, now entirely unknown in this

1 Some authorities (among whom was Sir J. Prestwich) think that traces of a
yet earlier race of men have been found in the 'eoliths,' or flints, very rude in shape,
and but slightly chipped, occurring in older gravels and at yet higher levels. Others,
however, maintain these to be natural forms.

2 On the question whether these are really implements of human workmanship,
see Lord Avebury (Sir J. Lubbock), Prehistoric Times, ed. 6 (1900), p. 328. No
geologist doubts that they are. Similar implements are made at the present day
by savages such as the native Australians (Tylor, Anthropology, p. 186) and
Tasmanians (Keane, p. 293). For further particulars on the subject, see Sir
J. Evans, The Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons, and Ornaments of Great Britain^
(1897), (on their antiquity, pp. 703 — 9). In one of the galleries of the British
Museum, there is a large collection of these implements, both of the earlier and
later Stone age, arranged as far as possible chronologically : see descriptions, with
illustrations, in the shilling Guide to these antiquities (1902).

xl INTRODUCTION [§ 3

island \ And there is evidence that he lived under similar conditions
in other parts of central and southern England, in France, Belgium,
and elsewhere on the Continent. In particular, in a cave in Dordogne,
in the valley of the Vez^re, a little E. of Bordeaux, there has been
found the drawing of a mammoth — a huge kind of elephant, which has
left many remains of itself, but has now been long extinct — incised by
human hands upon a piece of its own ivory, which must date from the
same period I Marks of the presence of man in the same age have
also been found in Africa, Palestine, and India: the diffusion of the
same stage of culture over countries so widely separated from each
other is an indication that it must have been of long duration'.

Whether, however, even palaeolithic man is rightly termed * primitive ' is
doubted by Dr Tylor. ' The life which the men of the mammoth-period must
have led at Abbeville or Torquay, shews on the face of it reasons against its
being man's primitive life. These old stone-age men are more likely to have
been tribes whose ancestors while living under a milder climate gained some
rude skill in the arts of procuring food and defending themselves, so that
afterwards they were able by a hard struggle to hold their own against the
harsh weather and fierce beasts of the Quaternary period' {Anthropology ^
p. 33).

In the later part of the palaeolithic period, a somewhat higher
stage of culture appears, represented by the Cave man^ belonging, it
may be, to another race, perhaps (Dawkins) allied to the Eskimos.
Relics of the workmanship of the Cave man are found, for instance, in
caves in a valley between Derby and Nottingham, in Kent's Hole, near
Torquay, and in different parts of Belgium, France, Germany, &c.
Improved flint implements, bone needles and awls, harpoon heads of
antler, and especially drawings of horses, reindeer, and other animals,
testify to the advance in culture of the Cave man, as compared with
the river-drift hunter of the earlier part of the palaeolithic age*.

The Pleistocene period, says Mr Dawkins, was of ' vast duration ' ;
and the river-drift man ' probably lived for countless generations before
the arrival of the Cave-men, and the appearance of the higher culture '
(pp. 231, 233).

The 'prehistoric' period is marked by the advent of neolithic
man, i.e. of man belonging to the newer stone period, in which his
stone implements were often polished, and in other respects also

1 Dawkins, pp. 137, 155 f., 172 f.

2 See Dawkins, p. 105 ; Tylor, p. 31 ; Lyell, Antiquity of Man, ed. 4, p. 139.

3 Dawkins, pp. 165—7, 172 f.

* On Palaeolithic man, see also Keane, ch. v. (with illustrations).

§ 3] THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN xH

display a higher type of workmanship. In the course of this period,
culture considerably advanced : the soil was cultivated, animals were
domesticated, wood was cut with stone axes fixed in wooden handles,
spears, arrows, &c. were manufactured, and clay was moulded into
rude cups and other vessels : the dead began also now to be buried in
barrows or cairns. It is to this period that at least the earlier of the
famous pile-dwellings, constructed in some of the Swiss lakes, belong :
the inhabitants of these lake-villages cultivated many seeds and fruits
familiar to ourselves. The neolithic men appear to have belonged to
a different race from their predecessors, the Cave men, and entered
Europe, it is generally agreed, from the East or South. The duration
of the neolithic civilization varied in different countries : it main-
tained itself, for instance, in northern and central Europe long after it
had yielded to a higher culture in Greece and Italy, and also, it may
be added, till long after highly organized empires had been established
in Egjrpt and Babylonia \

The neolithic period was followed by the Bronze age, during which
iron either was not known, or could not be worked, and when all
weapons and cutting instruments were made of bronze, — the only other
metal known being gold, which was used for ornaments. Most nations
have passed through a Bronze age, though not all at the same time :
the Spaniards, for instance, when they conquered Mexico and Peru,
found the natives working in bronze with some skiU, but knowing
nothing of iron.

The Bronze age was succeeded by the Iron age, which began with
the first introduction of iron for the manufacture of weapons and
cutting instruments, and which has continued, — with of course immense
developments in every direction, — to the present day.

The general conclusion to which the facts mentioned in the pre-
ceding pages point can hardly be better summed up than in the words
of Dr Tylor : * It is true that man reaches back comparatively little
way into the immense lapse of geological time. Yet his first appear-
ance on earth goes back to an age compared with which the ancients,
as we call them, are but moderns. The few thousand years of recorded
history only take us back to a prehistoric period of untold length,
during which took place the primary distribution of mankind over the
earth and the development of the great races, the formation of speech
and the settlement of the great families of language, and the growth of

* On Neolithic man, comp, also Keane, ch. vi.

xlii INTRODUCTION [§ J

culture up to the levels of the old world nations of the East, the fore-
runners and founders of modem civilized life\'

In what light, then, in view of this conclusion, are we to view the
representation contained in the early chapters of Genesis ? The facts
cannot be denied : yet the narrative of Genesis takes no account of
them, and, indeed, leaves no room for them. The great antiquity of
man, the stages of culture through which he passed (comp. the note
on iv. 17 — 24), and the wide distribution of the human species, with
strongly marked racial differences, over the surface of the earth are
all alike unexplained, and inexplicable, upon the historical system of
Gen. i. — ^xi. No doubt. Gen. x. and xi. 1 — 9 explain ostensibly/ the
distribution of man * over the face of the whole earth ' ; but after what
has been said, it will be evident that they do not do so in reality : the
dispersion is placed too late to account for the known facts respecting
both the distribution of man and the diversity of races. To say that
the Biblical writers spoke only of the nations of whom they knew is
of course true: but the admission deprives their statements of all
historical or scientific value: * palaeolithic ' and * neolithic' man, and
the various distinct races inhabiting Central and Eastern Asia,
Australia, America, &c., all existed ; and any explanation, purporting
to account for the populations of the earth, and the diversity of
languages spoken by them, must take cognizance of them. An ex-
planation not taking account of the facts to be explained can be no
historically true account either of the diffusion of mankind, or of the
origin of different races. We are forced therefore to the conclusion
that though, as may be safely assumed, the writers to whom we owe
the first eleven chapters of Genesis, report faithfully wJiat was cv/rrently
believed among the Hebrews respecting the early history of mankind, at
the same time, as is shewn in the notes, making their narratives the
vehicle of many moral and spiritual lessons, yet there was much which
they did not knowy and could not take cognizance of: these chapters,
consequently, we are obliged to conclude, incomparable as they are in
other respects, contain no account of the real beginnings either of the
earth itself, or of man and human civilization upon it^.

1 Anthropology, p. 34.

' Mr Capron {Gonfiict of Truth, 270 — 85) has deyised an extraordinary method
(cf. below, p. 24 n.) for 'reconciling' the great antiquity of man with the statements
of Genesis: man, he supposes, may have existed long before as a natural being;
Genesis describes only his elevation into a spiritual being by the super-adding of
spiritual faculties. But it is surely the intention of Genesis to describe both the
beginningt of man, and also his beginnings as a complete being; one can hardly

§ 3] THE PATRIARCHAL NARRATIVES xliii

b. The patriarchal period (chs. xii. — L).

It remains to consider the historical character of Gen. xii. — ^1., the
naiTatives of the patriarchal period. Here it must at the outset be
frankly admitted that these narratives do not satisfy the primary
condition which every first-class historical authority must satisfy: they
are not contemporary (or nearly so) with the events which they purport
to relate : even if Moses were their author, he lived many centuries
after Abraham — according to Ussher's chronology 400 years, in reality
(p. xxix), — if we adopt for Abraham's date the only fixed datum that
we possess, the synchronism with Hammurabi (p. 156), — 900 or
1000 years; and upon the critical view of the date of these narratives,
the -interval is of course still greater, — in fact, between Abraham
and J, something like 1300 years. The supposition that the writer
(or writers) of Genesis may have based his (or their) narratives upon
written documents, contemporary with the events described, does not
alter the case : there is no evidence, direct or indirect, that such
documents were actually used as the basis of the narrative ; and upon
a mere hypothesis, for the truth of which no positive grounds can be
alleged, and which therefore may or may not be true, it must be
apparent that no further conclusions of any value can be built. It is
not denied that the patriarchs possessed the art of writing; but the
admission of the fact leads practically to no consequences ; for we do
not know wliat they wrote, and there is no evidence that they left any
written materials whatever behind them.

These facts, it is evident, must seriously diminish the confidence
which we might otherwise feel as regards the historical character of the
patriarchal narratives. A narrative committed to writing for the first
time, so far as we know, 1000 years or more after the events related
in it occurred, would be regarded under ordinary circumstances as
destitute of historical value ; we could have no guarantee that during
such a long period of oral transmission it had not in many details
become materially modified, — sometimes accidentally, through failure
of memory, sometimes, it may be, intentionally, by the addition, for
instance, of embellishing traits. Are there however any considerations
which might tend to modify this unfavourable conclusion in the case

believe one's eyes when one reads (p. 279) that human nature is to be divided into
four parts, and that Gen. ii. describes the beginning of two of these (material form
and vitality), and Gen. i. the beginning of the other two (inteUectuality and
spirituality) ! The explanation of the Fall, proffered on p. 321 f., is not less out of
the question. Eeconciliations of the Bible with science which depend upon forced
iexegesis can never be sound ones.

P. 6

xliv INTRODUCTION [§ 3 i

of the patriarchal narratives of Genesis ? "We can never indeed regard |
them as historical authorities in the strictest sense of the word : but I
that, be it observed, is a claim which they never make themselves ;
they nowhere claim, even indirectly, to be the work of eye-witnesses ;
and there may be circumstances connected with them which may at
least shew the position to be a tenable one that, though they cannot
be placed in the same rank with, for example, the history of Thucydides,
their contents are nevertheless substantially authentic.

1. In nations possessing no written records, the memory is more
exercised, and more tenacious than it is with us ; and popular stories
once enshrined in the memory of a nation may have been transmitted
substantially unaltered, from father to son, for many generations. The
tenacity of the memory, under such circumstances, is greater than we
can readily imagine ; and there are many surprising instances on record
of its power*. And the memory might be expected to be exceptionally
tenacious, in the case of national records, or accounts of ancient
worthies whose memories were cherished on the part of a nation,
which held itself aloof from its neighbours, and was proud of its
ancestry.

2. The critical analysis of Genesis furnishes an argument of some
weight in favour of the general trustworthiness of the narrative.
Disregarding P (which appears not only to contain in parts artificial
elements, but also to be later than the other sources, so that by the
side of J and E it can hardly claim to represent an independent
tradition), we have two narratives of the patriarchal period, one
written, in all probability, in Judah, the otlier in the Northern
Kingdom ; and these, though they exhibit discrepancies in detail, still
on the whole agree : though they may contain, for instance, divergent
representations of the same events, they do not present two entirely
contradictory traditions ; in other words, they shew that on the whole
the traditions current in the N. and S. Kingdoms agreed with one
another. They thus bear witness to the existence in ancient Israel of
a * firm nucleus of consistent tradition ' (Kittel). * The value of this
nucleus is by no means small, for it supplies the fundamental condition

1 *One of the most noted Bawis [reciters], Hammad by name, is said to have
been able to recite 3000 long poems, all of the time before Mohammed'
(A. B. Davidson, Bibl. and Literary Essays, 1902, p. 268). See also Grote,
Hist, of Greece, i. 526 — 30, 532 n. (ed. 1862), — with reference to the oral preservation
of the Homeric poems; and Max Muller, Hibbert Lectures (1878), 153, 156 f., on the
oral preservation of the Big- Veda.

§ 3] THE PATRIARCHAL NARRATIVES xlv

of a real history. If the traditions were confusedly intermixed, this
would stamp them as arbitrary creations, or the products of popular
fancy. Their not being so, though far from proving them positively to
bo historical, justifies the presumption that we may perhaps succeed in
finding a historic core in the patriarchal narratives'.'

3. The patriarchal narratives are marked by great sobriety of
statement and representation. There are no incredible marvels, no
liintastic extravagances, no surprising miracles : the miraculous hardly
extends beyond manifestations and communications of the Deity to the
earlier patriarchs, and in the case of Joseph there are not even these ;
the events of his life move on by the orderly sequence of natural cause
and effect. There is also great moderation in the claims made on
behalf of the patriarchs. Only once, in a narrative taken evidently
from a special source (ch. xiv.), is Abraham represented as gaining
successes in war ; only once also (ch. xxxiv. ; cf. xlviii. 22) does Jacob
come into hostile collision with the native Canaanites : elsewhere, the
patriarchs live peaceful, quiet lives, neither claiming nor exercising
any superiority over the native princes ; and sometimes even rebuked
by them for their moral weakness. There is also another consideration,
of considerable weight, urged by Ewald. *Ewald reminds us,' says
Kittel, *that whilst all the accounts agree in representing it as the
Divine purpose that Abraham and the other patriarchs shall provision-
ally take possession of the land of Canaan, they are never represented
as actually possessing the whole. They confine themselves to particular
small districts in the South (Abraham and Isaac) and centre (Jacob) of
Canaan, and these, for the most part, of minor importance. If the
patriarchs had never actually lived in Canaan, if their abode there and
their very personality had belonged merely to the realm of legend, it
might have been confidently expected that the later legend would have
provided a firmer and more lasting foundation for the Israelites' claim
to the whole land than this mere partial possession by their fathers ^'
The moderation of the prophetic outlooks (ch. xii. 2 — 3, &c.) into the
future fortunes of Abraham's descendants, at least in J and E, — for
only P (see on xvii. 6) speaks of 'kings' to be sprung from him, —
might be taken also as an indication that these narrators were keeping
themselves within the limits of a tradition which they had received,
rather than freely creating ideal pictures of their own.

1 Kittel, Gesch. der Hebrder (1888), i. 152 (Eng. tr. i. 168).

2 Kittel, I. 154 (Eng. tr. i. 170 f.). See Ewald, Hist. i. 305 f.

xlvi INTRODUCTION [§ 3

4. Do the patriarchal narratives contain intrinsic historical im-
probabilities ? or, in other words, is there anything intrinsically
improbable in the lives of the several patriarchs, and the vicissitudes
through which they personally pass? In considering this question a
distinction must be drawn between the different sources of which these
narratives are composed. Though particular details in them may be
improbable (e.g. xix. 31 ff.), and though the representation may in
parts be coloured by the religious and other associations of the age
in which they were written (cf. p. Iviii ff.), it cannot be said that the
biographies of the first three patriarchs, as told in J and E, are,
speaking generally, historically improbable : the movements, and per-
sonal lives, of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are, taken on the whole,
credible. It is true, the chronology of Genesis cannot, as it stands, be
maintained (see p. xxx) ; but the inconsistencies in it arise out of the
combination of JE with P ; and the critical conclusion that the
narrative of P was originally entirely distinct from that of JE, and
that its chronology is artificial and late, leaves the narratives of J and
E fi-ee from difficulty upon this score. Chapter xiv. belongs to a
special source ; so that, whatever verdict be ultimately passed upon it,
our estimate of J and E would remain unaffected.

It is true, of course, that in parts of J and E we have what seem to
be different versions of the same occurrence ; but this is a fact not in-
consistent with the general historical character of the narrative as a
whole. Only the Joseph-narratives stand in some respects in a position
by themselves. On the one hand, it cannot be denied that improba-
bilities attach to some of the details of these narratives, especially
(p. Ix) to some of those relating to the famine : but these, again, do
not affect the substance of the narratives. It also might be felt by
some that the Joseph-narratives contain more dramatic situations than
are likely to have happened in real life : both Joseph and his brethren
pass through a series of crises and adventures, any one of which might
easily have closed the drama, though all, in fact, lead on happily to
the final denoument. On the other hand, truth is proverbially stranger
than fiction ; and Joseph's biography may not have been more remarkable
than many other biographies in history. The changes in Joseph's
fortunes are of a kind quite natural in Oriental countries : in the general
fact of a foreigner, by a happy stroke of cleverness, winning the favour
of an Eastern despot, and rising in consequence to high power, there
is nothing unprecedented ; and in the case of Egypt in particular the
monuments supply examples of foreigners attaining to positions of

§ 3] THE PATRIARCHAL NARRATIVES xlvii

political distinction (see p. 344). It is also worthy of notice that the
biography is in itself entirely free from anything which would tempt a
reader to regard it as legendary : no Deus ex machind appears at any
point of it; if the hand of God is an overruling power in the back-
ground, human motives and human actions are the only overt agencies
by which the web of incident is woven. Of course, in view of the fact
that the Joseph-narratives are plainly not the work of a contemporary
hand, but were, so far as we know, only committed to writing many
hundred years afterwards, these considerations afford no guarantee of
their being a literal record of the facts ; particular episodes or details
may, for instance, have been added during the centuries of oral
transmission : but they do supply reasonable grounds for concluding
that the narratives are in substance historical.

5. As Wellhausen has observed, it cannot be doubted that to
Moses Jehovah was the God of Israel, and Israel the people of Jehovah;
and also that this truth, though it assumed in Moses' hands a new
national significance, was not promulgated by him for the first time*.
'The religious position of Moses stands before us unsupported and
incomprehensible unless we believe the tradition (Ex. iii. 13 E) that
he appealed to the God of their fathers. Moses would hardly have
made his way amongst the people, if he had come in the name of a
strange and hitherto unknown god. But he might reasonably hope for
success, if a fresh revelation had been made to him by the God of
Abraham, who was still worshipped in some circles and still lived in
the memory of the people.' We may also ask, Why, unless there had
been positive historical recollections forbidding it to do so, did not
Israelite tradition concentrate all the glory of founding the national
Church and State upon Moses ? If, in spite of the great deliverance
undoubtedly achieved by Moses, Israelitish tradition nevertheless goes
back beyond Moses, and finds in the patriarchs the first roots not only
of the possession of the land, but also of the people's higher worship of
God, this can only be reasonably accounted for by the assumption that
memory had retained a hold of the actual course of events'.

1 Wellhausen, Hist, of Isr. 433.

* With this paragraph, comp. Kittel, p. 174. The undeveloped character of the
patriarchs' religious beliefs — their childlike attitude towards God, for instance, the
freedom and familiarity with which they are represented as approaching Him, their
absence (till xxxix. 9) of a clear sense of sin, or of the need of penitence, and the
fact that such truths as the unity of God, the love of God to man and of man to
God, and the holiness of God, though throughout implied, are not exphcitly taught
—has also been pointed to (Watson, The Book Genesis a true History, 1892,

xlviii INTRODUCTION [§ n

These are virtually all the considerations of any weight which
(apart from theological grounds) can be alleged in favour of the
historical character of the patriarchal narratives. Probabilities of
greater or less weight may be adduced : but with our present know-
ledge, it is impossible to do more\ The case would of course bo
different, if there existed contemporary monumental corroboration of
any of the events mentioned in Genesis. But unfortunately no such
corroboration has at present been discovered. With the exception of
the statement on the stel^ of Merenptah that * Israel is desolated,' —
which may indeed be the 'Egyptian version' of the Exodus, but certainly
does not 'confirm' the Hebrew account of it, — the first event con-
nected with Israel or its ancestors which the inscriptions mention or
attest is Shishak's invasion of Judah in the reign of Rehoboam, and
the first Israelites whom they specify by name are Omri and his son
Ahab^. Upon the history and civilization of Babylonia, Egypt, and
to a certain extent of other countries, including Palestine, in the
centuries before Moses, the monuments have indeed shed an abundant
and most welcome light; but nothing has hitherto been discovered
sufficiently specific to establish, even indirectly or inferentially, the
historicity of the patriarchs themselves. Thus contemporary inscrip-
tions, recently discovered, have shewn that there were Amorite settlers
in Babylonia, in, or shortly after, the age of Hammurabi, and that
persons bearing Semitic names identical, or nearly so, with those of
some of the patriarchs were resident there in the same age : but these
facts, interesting as they are in themselves, are obviously no corro-
boration of the statements that the particular person called Abraham
lived in Ur and migrated thence to Haran and afterwards to Canaan,
as narrated in Gen. xi. 28, 31.

On the ' Amorite quarter' in Sippar (80 m. NW. of Babylon), in the reipP
of Ammi-zaduga, the fourth successor of Bfamraurabi, see the footnote, p. 142;
and on the mention of Amorites in Bab. contract-tablets of the same age.
Pinches, OT. in the light of the records of Ass. and Bab. (1902), 157, 170. On
a contract-tablet of the reign of Abil-Sin, the second predecessor of Hammurabi,

p. 105 ff.), as tending to establish the historical character of the patriarchal
narratives, at least of J and E. Just as Dr Watson's characterizations are,
however, it may be doubted whether his argument proves more than that these
narratives reached their present form at the time supposed by critics (p. xvi),
which, it will be remembered, was before the age at which the canonical prophets,
Amos, Hosea &c., began to emphasize and develope beliefs and truths such as those
referred to.

1 Cf. Kittel's Bab. Excavations and Early Bible History (1903), p. 37.

* See Hogarth's Autliority and Archaeology, pp. 87 f., 89, 93.

§ 3] ARCHAEOLOGY AND GENESIS xlix

a witness is mentioned bearing a name almost the same as Abram, viz.
Abe-ramu, who is described further as the father of Sha-amurri, ' (the man)
of the Amorite god^' ; and in other contract- tablets of the same period there
occur the names YaUpvib ( = Jacob), and Ya'JcKh-ilu ( = Jacob-el)2, as well as
others of Heb. or Canaanite form ; according to Sayce, also, the name Ishmael
occurs on a marble slab from Sippar, which is as early as about 4000 B.C. The
persons bearing these names appear to possess all the rights and privileges of
Babylonian citizens 3. The names are interesting as testifying to the inter-
course between Babylonia and the West at this era-ly date, and also as shewing
that persons of apparently either Hebrew or Canaanite extraction were settled
then in Babylonia, but they obviously prove nothing as to the historical
character of Abraham or the other patriarchs.

It is remarkable that a proper name — if not three proper names — com-
pounded, apparently, with the Divine name, Yahweh, has been found recently,
dating from the period of Hammurabi. The writer of a letter now in the British
Museum bears the name Ya-u-um-ilu^ the other names are Ya-cH-ve-ilu
and Yorve-ilu, — all apparently meaning *Yah is God' ( = *Joel,' at least as
usually explained). The names are not Babylonian, and must therefore have
belonged to foreigners, — whether Canaanites, or ancestors of the Hebrews.
See Sayce, Exp. TimeSj Aug. 1898, p. 522, Relig. of Anc. Eg. and Bab.
(1902), 484—7, Delitzsch, Babel und Bibel (1902), 46 f. (Eng. tr. 71, and esp.
133 — 141). The names are at present, however, too isolated for inferences to
be drawn from them with any confidence: though they mighty for instance,
indicate that the Heb. ' Yahweh ' was already worshipped, they still would not
tell us what character or attributes were associated with him. Mr C. H. W.
Johns, of Queens' College, Cambridge, permits me to add, ' The reading of the
names has been questioned without sufficient ground. The interpretation
is open to question, as YaH-ilu or Ya^ve-ilu may mean "God is, or does,
something"' (see further his art. in the Expositor^ Oct. 1903, p. 289 ff.; and
cf. KA T.^ 468 n.).

The monuments, again, as is pointed out on p. 172 f., though they
have thrown some light on the kings' names mentioned in Gen. xiv. 1,
and have shewn that it would be no impossibility for a Babylonian or
Elamite king of the 23rd cent. B.C. to undertake an expedition to
the far West, make no mention of the particular expedition recorded
in Gen. xiv. : they consequently furnish no independent corroboration
of it ; nor do they contribute anything to neutralize the improbabilities
which, rightly or wrongly, have been supposed to attach to details of
it (p. 171 f ). They thus fall far short of demonstrating its historical

^ Abu-ramu itself { = Abram), 'the father is exalted' (cf. on xvii. 5), is found as
the name of the Ass. official who gave his name to the fifth year of Esarhaddon
(B.C. 677) : Pinches, p. 148; KAT.^ p. 479 ; KAT.^ p. 482.

2 A name of the same form as Ishmael, * May God hear I ' Jerahmeel, * May God
be compassionate!' &c. : cf. pp. 182, 295.

' Pinches, pp. 148, 157, 183, 243; Sayce, Babylonians and Assyrians, pp. 187 —
190.

1 INTRODUCTION

character'. And still less do they demonstrate that the role attribul
to Abraham in the same chapter is historical. The evidence for both
these facts rests at present solely upon the testimony of the Book of
Genesis itself. Upon the same testimony we may believe Melchizedek
to have been a historical figure, whose memory was handed down by
tradition : but no evidence of the fact is afforded by the inscriptions
(see p. 167 f ).

The case is similar in the later parts of Genesis. The argument
which has been advanced, for instance, to shew that the narrative of
the purchase of the cave of Machpelah (ch. xxiii.) is the work of a
contemporary hand, breaks down completely : the expressions alleged
in proof of the assertion are not confined to the age of Hammurabi ;
they one and all (see p. 230) occur, in some cases repeatedly, in the
period of the kings, and even later : they consequently furnish no
evidence that the narrative was written at any earlier date. There is
no antecedent reason why Abraham should not have purchased a plot
of ground near Hebron from the native inhabitants of the place : but
to suppose that this is proven, or even made probable, by archaeology,
is completely to misinterpret the evidence which it furnishes. As
regards the Joseph-narratives, it is undeniable that they have an
Egyptian colouring : they contain many allusions to Egyptian usages
and institutions, which can be illustrated from the Eg3^tian monu-
ments. Moreover, as Kittel has pointed out, this colouring is common
to both J and E: as it is improbable that two writers would have
added it independently, it may be inferred that it was inherent in
the common tradition which both represent. This is a circumstance
tending to shew that in its origin the Egyptian element was consider-
ably anterior to either J or E, and increases the probability that it
rests ultimately upon a foundation in fact. On the other hand the
extent of the Egj^tian colouring of these narratives must not be over-
estimated, nor must the conclusions drawn from it be exaggerated.
The allusions are not of a kind to prove close and personal cognizance
of the facts described : institutions, officials, &c. are described in
general terms, not by their specific Egyptian names ^ Egypt, it must
be remembered, was not far distant from Canaan; and, as the
prophecies of Isaiah, for instance, shew, there was frequent intercourse

1 Mr Grote long ago pointed out the fallacy of arguing that because a given
person was historical, therefore a particular action or exploit attributed to him by
tradition was historical likewise (Hist, of Greece, Part i., ch. xvii., ed. 1862, vol. i.,
p. 391 f., with reference to legendary exploits attributed to Charlemagne).

=* Contrast the long lists of specific titles in Brugsch's Aegyptologie, pp. 206—232.

§ 3] ARCHAEOLOGY AND GENESIS U

between the two countries during the monarchy : Isaiah, in the single
chapter (xix.) which he devotes to Egypt, shews considerable acquaint-
ance with the peculiarities of the country. It is a complete illusion to
suppose that the Joseph-narratives can be shewn by archaeology to be
contemporary with the events recorded \ or (as has been strangely
suggested) translated from a hieratic papyrus : the statement^* that the
Egj^t which these narratives bring before us is in particular that of
the Hyksos age is destitute of foundation*.

Among the names of the places in Palestine conquered by Thothmes III.
of the 18th dynasty (Petrie and Sayce, b.o. 1503—1449; Budge, c. 1533—1500),
which are inscribed on the pylons of the Great Temple at Karnak, there occur

1 Notice in this connexion the absence of particulars in the narrative, which a
contemporary would almost naturally mention, such as the personal name of the
Pharaoh, and the place in Egypt at which he held his court. The names Potiphar,
Poti-phera*, Zaphenath-Pa'neah and Asenath can hardly be genuine ancient
names: see the note on xli. 45.

The Hebrew of the Joseph-narratives is perfectly idiomatic and pure, and shews
no traces whatever of having been translated from a foreign original. It contains
(besides proper names) four or five Egyptian words; but they are all words which
were naturalized in Hebrew ; they occur in other parts of the Old Testament, and
consequently afford no clue as to the date of the narratives in which they are found.
They are Pharaoh (see on xii. 15); t/«'or, xli. 1, 2, 3, 17, 18, the common Heb. name
for the Nile (Is. vii. 18, and frequently); dhu, 'reed-grass,' xli. 2, 18 (also Job
viii. 11) ; shesh, 'fine linen,' xli. 42 (also Ex. xxv. 4, and often in Ex. xxvi. — ^xxviii.,
XXXV. — xxxix. [all P], Ezek. xvi. 10, 13, xxvii. 7, Prov. xxxi. 22); perhaps also
sohar, the name of the prison into which Joseph was cast (see on xxxix. 20), and
hartummim, 'magicians' (see on xli. 8); and possibly rabid, 'chain,' xli. 42 and
Ezek. xvi. 11 (see on this word the note * in DB. n. 775'*: it is quite uncertain
whether it is really Egyptian).

2 Sayce, EHH. p. 90; cf. p. 93.

» Egyptian institutions were of great fixity; and there is no allusion in these
narratives to any institution or custom known to be characteristic of the Hyksos
age, and not to occur in any later age. Gomp. the judgment of Ebers, as cited in
EncB. II. 2594.

Prof. Sayce, it is to be observed, though he comes forward ostensibly as an
enemy of criticism, nevertheless makes admissions which shew that he recognizes
many of its conclusions to be true. Thus he not only asserts the compilatory
character of the Pentateuch {EHH. 129, 134, 203), but in Genesis he finds
(p. 132 f.) two groups of narratives, and 'two Abrahams,' the one 'an Abraham
born in one of the centres of Babylonian civilization, who is an ally of Amorite
chieftains, and whom the Hittites of Hebron address as a "mighty prince'" [the
Abraham of Gen. xiv. and of P], the other 'an Abraham of the Bedawin camp-fire,
a nomad whose habits are those of the rude independence of the desert, whose wife
kneads the bread while he himself kills the calf with which his guests are enter-
tained' [the Abraham of J and E]. The former narrative he considers, though
upon very questionable grounds, to have been based upon contemporary documents,
the latter to have been ' like the tales of their old heroes recounted by the nomad
Arabs in the days before Islam as they sat at night round their camp-fires. The
details and spirit of the story have necessarily caught the colour of the medium
through which they have passed' (p. 62). All the principal details of the patriarchs'
lives are contained in J and E : but if these narratives were handed down for
generations by 'nomad reciters' round their camp-fires, what better guarantee of
their historical truth do we possess than if their memory had been preserved in the
manner supposed above ?

lii INTRODUCTIOK [§ 3

(Nos. 78 and 102) the names Y-^-k-b-d-ru and Y-s7i-p-d-ru; aa the Egyptian I
stands also for r, these names would represent a Canaanitish or Hebrew
Yakob-el, and Yoshep-el; and we learn consequently that places bearing these
names 1 existed in Palestine, apparently in the central part 2, in the 16th or
15th cent. b.o. The name Jacob itself is thought by many to be an elliptical
form of Jacob-eP; but whether that be correct or not, it is at least remarkable
to find a place-name, including the name of the patriarch Jacob, in Palestine
at this date. But the information which the name brings us is too scanty to
enable us to found further inferences upon it: if Jacob was a historical person,
his name may have clung to this place in Palestine; on the other hand, the
name may have arisen independently of the patriarch altogether, in which
case it would obviously have no bearing on the question whether he was a
historical person or not ; there are also other conceivable ways in which the
name of the patriarch (whether that of a real person or not) might have been
connected with the place. In Yoshep-el, the sibilant does not properly
correspond to that in Joseph: so that it is doubtful here whether the names
are really the same. However, W. Max Miiller allows the identification to be
'possible'^: if it is correct, it is certainly a singular coincidence to find the
names of both patriarchs embodied in place-names in Palestine, though it may
be difficult to determine with confidence how the fact is to be explained.

In lists of towns in Palestine belonging to the age of Seti I. and his
successor, Ramses II. (the Pharaoh of the oppression), mention is made of a
'mountain of User' or 'Aser,' between Tyre and Shechem, and between
Kadesh (on the Orontes) and Megiddo, and approximately, therefore, in the
position occupied afterwards by the tribe of Asher". W. Max Miiller, Sayce,
and Hommel, accordingly, do not doubt that the tribe of Asher, — or at least
what was reckoned afterwards as the tribe of Asher, — was settled in Palestine
before the other tribes of Israel had even left Egypt. The statement hardly
has a bearing on the historical character of Jacob's son Asher; though it
ought not to surprise us, if it should ultimately prove that the number of the
sons of Jacob (some of whom, as individuals, play no part in the patriarchal
narratives, and are really nothing more than mere names) was artificially
raised to twelve, because there were in historical times twelve tribes of Israel,
and also that the immigration of the entire nation into Canaan was accom-
plished in reality a good deal more gradually than is represented as having
been the case in Nu. xxxii., Dt. i. — iii., and Joshua i. — xii.

^ Cf. for the form (compounded with El, 'God') the place-names Jezre^el,
Jabne'el, Jos. xv. 11 { = Jabneh, 2 Ch. xxvi. 6), Jiphtah-el, Jos. xix, 14, 27, 'God
sows, builds, opens,' respectively; see also Gray, Heb. Pr. Names, 214 f.

2 W. Max Miiller, Asien u. Europa nach Altagypt. Denkmdlern (1893), pp. 159,
161 f.

3 In which case, 'el would be the subject of the verb, and the real meaning of
the name would be May God follow (or search out) ! or May God reward ! or May
God overreach (sc. our foes)/ — according as the sense of the root in Aramaic, Arabic,
or Hebrew be adopted.

■* Op. cit. pp. 159, 162 f. ; and as cited in EncB. 11. 2581—2.

» W. Max MuUer, op. cit. 236—9; Sayce, Monuments, 244, Patr. Pal. 219,
EHH. 78 f. ; Hommel, AHT. 228, 266. Cf. Authority and Archaeology^ p. 69 f.
(with the references) ; and Asher in En^iB.

§ 3] ARCHAEOLOGY AND GENESIS liii

The accuracy of the topography, and the truthfulness of the
descriptions to Eastern life even in modern times, have also some-
times been appealed to as confirmatory of the historical character of
the patriarchal narratives. But the argument, as a little reflection
will shew, is inconclusive. The exactness in these respects of the
narratives of Genesis is only what would be naturally expected from
the circumstances under which they were written. The relative
situations of places do not alter from age to age ; and manners and
customs in the East remain unchanged from generation to generation.
The narratives of Genesis, upon the view taken of them by critics, were
\vritten by men, whose own home was Canaan, who were acquainted
personally with its inhabitants, and familiar with the customs, for
instance, of tent-life and of travel in the desert ; and such men would
as a matter of course describe correctly the relative positions and
situations of places in Palestine mentioned by them, and represent
their characters as adopting the manners and customs which were
usual at the time. The narratives of Genesis are wonderful photo-
graphs of scenery and life ; but they carry in themselves no proof that
the scenery and life are those of the patriarchal age and not those of
the age of the narrators'.

Prof. G. A. Smith, in his Modern Criticism and the Preaching of the
Old Testament, expresses conclusions substantially identical with those reached
in the preceding pages. Thus, after illustrating the nature of the light thrown
by archaeology on the ages before Moses, he continues (p. 101), 'But, just as
we have seen that in all this archaeological evidence there is nothing to prove
the early date of the documents which contain the story of the patriarchs, but
on the contrary even a little which strengthens the critical theory of their
date, so now we must admit that while archaeology has richly illustrated the
possibility of the main outlines of the Book of Genesis from Abraham to
Joseph, it has not one whit of proof to offer for the personal existence or
characters of the patriarchs themselves.' Formerly, the world in which the
patriarchs moved seemed to be almost empty; now we see it filled with
embassies, armies, busy cities, and long lines of traders, passing to and fro
between one centre of civilization and another : ' But amidst all that crowded
life we peer in vain for any trace of the fathers of the Hebrews : we listen in
vain for any mention of their names. This is the whole change archaeology
has wrought : it has given us an atmosphere and a background for the stories
of Genesis ; it is unable to recall or certify their heroes^.'

1 To the same effect, G. A. Smith, HG. 108 ; Modern Criticism <&c. 67—70.
^ 2 The results proved by archaeology have, in their bearing upon Biblical
criticism, been greatly exaggerated, especially by Prof. Sayce. See Hogarth's
Authority and Archaeology, 143 ff., 149 f.; G. B. Gray, Ex^positor, May 1898,
p. 337 ff. ; and G. A. Smith, op. cit. p. 66 ff.

liv INTRODUCTION [§ 3

It is remarkable how in Genesis, as also, sometimes, in other parts
of the Old Testament, individuals and tribes seem to be placed on the
same level, and to be spoken of in the same terms, and how, further,
individuals seem frequently to be the impersonation of homonymous
tribes. Thus Bethuel is mentioned as an individual (Gen. xxii. 23,
xxiv. 15, &c.), but his brothers * Uz and Buz are tribes (see on xxii. 21).
Keturah, again, is spoken of as Abraham's second wife (xxv. 1) ; but
her sons and grandsons are tribes (xxv. 2 — 4). In Gen. x. nations are
quite manifestly represented as individuals : the same chapter also
illustrates well the Hebrew custom of representing the tribes dwelling
in, or near, a given country, as * sons ' of a corresponding homonymous
ancestor (as v. 12 the Ludim, *Anamim, &c. 'begotten' by Mizraim,
i.e. Egypt; v. 16 the Jebusite, Amorite, &c. * begotten' by Canaan).
So Machir, in Gen. 1. 23 an individual, but in Nu. xxxii. 40 a clan, in
Nu. xxvi. 29 ' begets ' (the country) Gilead (cf. the note on 1. 23) ; and
in Jud. xi. 1 Gilead (the country) * begets ' Jephthah. Again, Canaan,
Japheth, and Shem, in Noah's blessing (Gen. ix. 25—27), represent
three groups of nations ; Ishmael (xvi. 12) is in character the personi-
fication of the desert tribes whose descent is traced to him ; Esau ' is
Edom ' (xxv. 30, xxxvi. 1, 8, 19), and Edom is the name of a people, as
'Esau' also is in Ob. 6, Jer. xlix. 8. Jacob and Israel, also, both
names of the patriarch, are likewise national names, the latter a
standing one, the former a poetical synonym (Gen. xlix. 7 ; Nu. xxiii.
21, 23 ; Am. vii. 2, 5, and frequently) : Isaac and Joseph are some-
times national names as well, — Isaac in Am. vii. 9, 16, and Joseph in
Am. V. 15, vi. 6, Ps. Ixxx. 1, Ixxxi. 5, and elsewhere^ TWs peculiarity
is, at least largely, a consequence of the fact that in the Semitic
languages, the names of nations and tribes are very frequently not, as
with ourselves, plurals, but singulars, — Asshur (Is. x. 5 RVm.), Israel,
Moab, Edom, Midian, Aram (Gen. x. 22 : see the note), Kedar (xxv.
13), Sheba, Cain or Kain (Nu. xxiv. 22, Jud. iv. 11, RVm. : cf. p. 72),
Judah, Simeon, Levi, &c. : all these are names of nations or tribes,
but they might be, and in some cases actually also are, the names of
individuals'.

1 So in 1 Ch. vii. 20—24 'Ephraim,' though spoken of as if an individual, must
be in reality the tribe ; cf . Bebiah in DB.

2 When it is desired to speak of the individual members of a tribe or nation,
•sons' ('children') is commonly used, as in 'children of Israel.' Some tribes are
also designated by gentilic adjectives, as Hiwwi, the 'Hivite,' 'Emori, the 'Amorite,'
Yebusi, the ' Jebusite,' &c.

It is in agreement with the usage explained in the text that the singular
pronoun (generally concealed in E VV.) is used often of a nation : as Ex. xiv. 25,

§ 3] TRIBES REPRESENTED AS INDIVIDUALS Iv

The question arises, How far this principle of tribes and nations
being represented as individuals is to be extended ? Can it be applied
in explanation of the patriarchal narratives ? and if so, in what sense ?
It is the opinion of many modern scholars that it can be so applied.
According to many modern scholars, nearly all the names in the
patriarchal narratives, though they seem to be personal names, repre-
sent in reality tribes and sub-tribes : a woman, for example, representing! !
a smaller or weaker tribe (or clan) than a man ; a marriage representing'
the amalgamation of two tribes, if the wife be a slave or a concubine, I
the tribe represented by her being of foreign origin or otherwise \
inferior, the birth of a child representing the origin of a new family
or tribal subdivision, the firstborn being the one which acquires supre-
macy over the rest, and an early death, or unfruitful marriage,
representing the disappearance of a family : the movements, changes
of fortune, and mutual relations, of tribes and sub-tribes being thus
expressed in a personal and individual form. This was Ewald's view.
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent the successive migratory move-
ment of Hebrew tribes from the original common home of the Hebrew
and Aramaean nationalities in Aram-naharaim across the Euphrates.
Jacob's father, Isaac, was already settled in Canaan: his mother was
an Aramaean (Gen. xxv. 20) ; he marries two Aramaean wives : after a
long contest with his uncle (and father-in-law) Laban, * the Aramaean '
(xxv. 20, xxviii. 5, xxxi. 20, 24), he ultimately comes to terms with
him, returns to Canaan with great wealth, and finally gives his name
to the people settled there : this means that a new and energetic
branch of the Hebrseo- Aramaic race migrated from its home in Aram-
naharaim, pushed forward into Canaan, amalgamated there with the
Hebrews ('Isaac') already on the spot (becoming thereby Isaac's
*son'), and, in virtue of the superior practical abilities displayed by
it, acquired ultimately supremacy over all its kin; the contest with
Laban ' represents the struggle which continued, probably for centuries,
between the crafty Hebrews on the opposite banks of the Euphrates,
showing how in the end the southern Hebrews gained the upper hand
and the northern were driven oif in derision ' : Edom was a branch
(' son ') of the tribe represented by * Isaac ' ; ' Jacob,' becoming fused
with this tribe, is Esau's ' brother,' but at the same time his younger

*And Egypt said, Let me flee,' Nu. xx. 18, 'And Edom said (sing.) to him (Israel),
Thou shalt not pass through me, lest I come forth to meet thee with the sword,'
Josh. xvii. 14, Jud. i. 3. So Israel (the nation) and Edom, for instance, are
spoken of as each other's * brother,' Am. i. 11, Nu. xx. 14 al.

Ivi INTRODUCTION [§ 3

brother, as arriving later in Canaan, though, as he became afterwards
the more powerful nation, he is described as having wrested from him
his birthright ; similarly Jacob's wives and sons represent the existence
of different elements in the original community, and the growth of
tribal distinctions within it\ Evvald, however, held at the same time
that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were historical characters, prominent
leaders of the nation at successive stages of its history'. In the same
way, Joseph (who was likewise a real person) was a leader or dis-
tinguished member of a portion of the nation consisting of the two
tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (which afterwards separated) : these
tribes migrated into Egypt before the rest ; Joseph there rose to power,
and conferred great benefits both upon his own people and upon the
country, and in the end also attracted the remaining and stronger part
of his people to the Eastern frontier of Egypt. Joseph's personality
was a remarkable one : and in after ages it was transfigured in the
memory of his people ; under the influence of the religion of Israel it
became an ideal of filial and fraternal afiection, a high example of good-
ness, devotion to duty, sincerity, and love^ The views of Dillmann
and Kittel are similar to that of Ewald*. Other recent scholars have
however gone further, and denied the presence of any personal element
in the patriarchal narratives ^ the narratives represent throughout, —
even, it is sometimes said, according to the intention of the narrators, —
tribal movements and tribal relations : the patriarchs and most of the
other figures in Genesis are the eponymous ancestors of corresponding
tribes, created after Israel had become a united nation and was settled
in Canaan ; and the bistories about them partly express phases in the
early history of Israel and its neighbours, and are partly reflections of
the circumstances and relations of the same tribes in the age in which
the narratives themselves originated ''.

1 Ewald, Hist. i. 273 f., 287, 309—317, 338, 341—344, 346, 348—350, 3i
371_376, 378—381.

2 Pp. 301, 305 f., 340, 342, 345.
8 Ewald, Hist. i. 363, 382, 405, 407—9, 412—20.

* Dillmann, Alttest. Theologie, 77 — 81 (the patriarchs were the leaders of large
migratory bodies of Semites, pressing forward from Haran into Canaan, where
Moab and Ammon, the Ishmaelites, the Keturaean tribes (Gen. xxv. 1 — 4), and the
Edomites branched off from them ; the Hebrews in the narrowest sense of the term,
i.e. the Israelites (corresponding to 'Jacob'), being the latest arrival among them),
Gomm. on Gen. pp. 218, 219, 316, 403 (Engl. tr. ii. 2—5, 190, 353) ; Kittel, Hist, of
the Hebrews, i. 153, 157, 168 f. (Engl. tr. i. 170, 174 f., 186—8). Cf. Ottley, Hist.
of the Hebrews, 49—52; Wade, OT. Hist. 81 f.

f^ See further on this view Keuss, L'Hist. Sainte et la Lot (1879), i. 98 flf. ;
Stade, Gesch. 28—30, 127 f., 145 ff.; Wellh. Hist. 318 ff.; Gornill, Hist, of Isr.
(1899), p. 29 ff.; the commentaries of Holzinger and Gunkel; Guthe, Gesch. des
Volkes Israel (1899), pp. 1—6, 25, 41 f., 47—9, 55 f., 161—8; and the articles

§3] HISTORICITY OF THE PATRIARCHS Ivii

No doubt Ewald's theory rests upon the observation of real facts, |
and is also, within limits, true ; but applied upon this very compre-
hensive scale, it cannot be deemed probable. An unsubstantial figure,
such as Canaan (Gen. ix. 25 — 7), might be an example of a personified
group of peoples ; there are also no doubt other cases, especially those
occurring in genealogies, in which what seem to be individuals stand
for tribes, and there are besides (cf. p. lixf.) particular cases in which
the relations or characteristics of a later age appear to have been
reflected back upon the patriarchs: but the abundance of personal]
incident and detail in the patriarchal narratives as a whole seems to
constitute a serious objection to this explanation of their meaning :
would the movements of tribes be represented in this veiled manner
on such a large scale as would be the case if this explanation were the
true one ? Moreover, as the Canaanites actually remained in the land
till a much later period than that at which the patriarchs {ex hyp.)
lived, it is difficult to understand how large bodies of immigrants, such
as Ewald's hypothesis postulates, could have swept across it, or found
room to settle in it, without many hostile conflicts with the natives, of
which nevertheless the patriarchal narratives, — except in the isolated
case of Shechem (ch. xxxiv. ; xlviii. 22), — are silent : individuals, with
a relatively small body of retainers, would be more likely than large
tribes, to pass unmolested through the land, and find a home in it.
It is also much more difficult to think of Joseph as a tribe rising to
power in Egypt, than of Joseph as an individual. The explanation i
may be adopted reasonably in particular instances (pp. liv, Ix) ; but
applied universally, it would seem to create greater difficulties and)
improbabilities than it removes.

Although, however, as has been shewn (p. xliii f.), the evidence for
the historicity of the patriarchs is not such as will satisfy the ordinary
canons of historical criticism, it is still, all things considered, difficult
to believe that some foundation of actual personal history does not
underlie the patriarchal narratives \ And in fact the view which on
the whole may be said best to satisfy the circumstances of the case is
the view that the patriarchs are historical persons, and that the
accounts which we have of them are in outline historically true, but

on the names of the Israelitish tribes in EncB. It is criticized by Konig
in Neueste Prinzipien der AT. Kritlk (1902), pp. 36—69, and in an art. in the
Sunday School Times (Philadelphia), Dec. 14, 1901 (see a summary in the Exp.
Times, Mar. 1902, p. 243 f.). There being no tribe corresponding to Abraham,
Cornill (pp. 21, 34), and Guthe (pp. 164, 167), regard Abraham as a historical
person, with a definitely marked religious character.
1 So also G. A. Smith, Modern Criticism &c., p. 106 f.

Iviii INTRODUCTION [§ 3

that their characters are idealized, and their biographies not un-
frequently coloured by the feelings and associations of a later age.
* J,' says Mr Ottley\ and his remarks are equally true of E, 'describes
the age of the patriarchs as in some essential respects so closely similar
to later periods, that it can only be regarded as a picture of primitive
life and religion drawn in the light of a subsequent age. We have
here to do with the earliest form of history — traditional folk-lore about
primitive personages and events, worked up according to some pre-
conceived design, by a devout literary artist.* The basis of the
narratives in Genesis is in fact popular oral tradition : J and E give
us pictures of these traditions as they were current in the early
centuries of the monarchy ; in P, it can scarcely be doubted, we have
a later and more artificial form, by no means so directly and freshly
transcribed from the living voice of the people. Popular tradition
being, however, what it is, we may naturally expect it to display in
Genesis the same characteristics which it does in other cases. It may
well include a substantial historical nucleus, even though we may not
always be in a position to ascertain precisely how far this extends : for
details may readily be due to the involuntary action of popular in-
vention or imagination, operating during a long period of time : from
a religious point of view the characters and experiences of the
patriarchs may have been accommodated to the spirit of a later age ;
while in the form, also, something will be due to the narrators who
cast the traditions into their present literary shape.

How far, in the existing narratives, the original historical nucleus
has been modified or added to by the operation of each of these three
causes, it is of course impossible to determine exactly : an objective
criterion is seldom attainable ; and subjective impressions of what is
probable or not are mostly all that we have to guide us. There are
however some narratives in which the feeling that we have before us
the record not of actual historical fact, but of current popular belief,
forces itself strongly upon us. As has already been pointed out
(p. xvii fF.), one very conspicuous interest in these narratives is the
explanation of existing facts and institutions^ — for instance, many
names of persons and places, the sanctity of Bethel and its famous
monolith, the origin of the great border-cairn in Gilead, a current
proverb or custom, the ethnological or political relations subsisting
between Israel and its neighbours, or the characteristics of different

1 Bampton Lectures, p. 209.

§3] IDEAL ELEMENT IN GENESIS lix

peoples, the Ishmaelites, Edom, &c. In some of these cases, — notably
in xix. 30 — 38, — it is next to impossible that we can be reading
accounts of the actual historical origin of the names or facts referred
to, and not rather explanations due to popular imagination or suggested
by an obvious etymology : other cases it is but consonant with analogy
to regard as similar ; in some instances, also, it will be remembered,
we find duplicate and inconsistent traditions respecting the same
occurrence. Uncertainty on subordinate points of this kind need
not however affect our general estimate of the narrative as a whole.

Another respect in which the histories of the patriarchs have
probably been coloured in the course of oral transmission is by later
tribal relations being imported into them : the patriarchs and their
descendants, though it is going too far to say that they are mere
reflections of the tribes descended, or reputed to have been descended,
from them, do nevertheless appear upon occasion invested with the
characteristics of these tribes ; and it is even possible that sometimes
episodes of tribal life are referred back to them in the form of incidents
occurring within the limits of their own families. Ishmael, for instance,
in xvi. 12 may be the personal son of Abraham : but if he is this, he
is also something more ; he impersonates the Bedawin of the desert.
Jacob and Esau, in their struggles for supremacy, are more than the
twin sons of Isaac; they impersonate two nations; and the later
relations subsisting between these two nations colour parts of the
representation, — especially, for instance, the terms of the oracle in
:v. 23, and of the blessings in xxvii. 28 f., 39 f Jacob and Laban,
when fixing on the mountains of Gilead the border which neither will
pass, seem likewise to be types of the later Israelites and Aramaeans
who often in the same region contended with one another for mastery.
It is extremely difficult not to think that, as a whole, the narratives
about Joseph are based upon a personal history : at the same time, it
is quite possible that they have been coloured in some of their details
by later events, and even that particular episodes may have originated
in the desire to account for the circumstances and relations of a
later age.

The hostility of the brethren to Joseph, the leadership in one narrative (B)
of Reuben, in the other (J) of Judah, the power and pre-eminence of Joseph,—
like that of the double tribe (especially Ephraim) descended from him,— as
; compared with his brothers, the fact that Benjamin, afterwards the smallest
tribe, is the youngest brother, the adoption of Joseph's two sons by Jacob
(ie. their elevation to the same rank as his own sons), and the priority so

Ix INTRODUCTION [§ 3

pointedly bestowed by him upon the younger, are, for instance, points at which
it is at least possible that popular imagination has been at work, colouring or
supplementing the historical elements of the Joseph-tradition by reference to
the facts and conditions of later times. The improbabilities which certainly
attach to some of the details connected with the famine, and the measures by
which it was relieved, may be accounted for in the same way : popular tradition
magnifies the achievements of the famous heroes of antiquity, and the Oriental
mind loves hyperbole K

It is also not impossible that episodes or movements of tribal life,
sometimes belonging to the patriarchal period itself, sometimes re-
flected back into it from the later history, are occasionally narrated in
the form of events in the lives of individuals, as in eh. xxxiv. (Shechem
and Dinah : see p. 307 £), xxxviii. (Judah and Tamar : see p. 331 f.),
and in different tribal genealogies, as xxii. 20 — 24, xxv. 1 — 4, 12 — 16,
ch. xxxvi. (Edom), &c. ; cf. on xi. 29.

The biographies of the patriarchs seem, thirdly, to have been
idealized from a religious point of view. In the days of the patriarchs,
religion must have been in a relatively rudimentary stage ^; there are
traces of this in the idea, for instance, of the revelations of deity being
confined to particular spots, and in the reverence paid to sacred
trees and pillars : but at the same time the patriarchs often express
themselves in terms suggesting much riper spiritual capacities and
experiences, and in some cases indeed borrowed evidently from the
phraseology of a much later age. It is difficult here not to trace the
hands of the narrators, who were men penetrated by definite moral and
religious ideas, and who, while not stripping the patriarchs of the
distinctive features by which they were traditionally invested, never-
theless unconsciously coloured their pictures of them by the feelings
and beliefs of their own age, and represented them as expressing the
thoughts, and using the phrases, with which they were themselves
familiar^. To the narrators, also, will be due the literary form of the

^ In Gen. xli. 47 — 9, 54, 56, 57, for instance, there must be some exaggeration;
and in xlvii. 14 — 26, though the system of land-tenure described undoubtedly
existed in the age of the narrator, yet, as Dillm. remarks, the details, such as the
connexion with the seven years of famine, the exhaustion of the Egyptians' money,
the sale of their cattle &c., will be due to the naivetS of the tradition.

2 Cf. Wade, OT. History, p. 84 ff.

3 It is thus possible that both the * call,' and the other religious experiences of
Abraham may have been less definite and articulate than they are represented as
being in the existing narrative; they may have taken, for example, in his con-
sciousness, the form of religious dissatisfaction with his surroundings, a sense that
God was directing his steps elsewhere, and a presentiment borne in upon him that
his adopted country would in time become the home of his descendants. Oomp.
Bruce, Apologetics, p. 199; Ottley, Bampt. Led. p. 111.

§4] IDEAL ELEMENT IN GENESIS Ixi

patriarchal narratives — the delicacy of expression and charm of style
characteristic of J (especially) and of E, not less than the very
differently constructed phrases and periods of P. The narratives of P
we shall hardly be wrong in regarding, even in details, as far more the
author's own creation than those of J or E.

§ 4. The Religious Value of tJie Book of Genesis.

Our survey of the contents and historical character of the Book of
Grenesis is ended. We have analysed it into the main sources of which
it is composed, we have considered the leading characteristics of each
9f these sources, and we have done our best to estimate the historical
7alue of the narratives contained in them. We have found that in
the first eleven chapters there is little or nothing that can be called
historical in our sense of the word : there may be here and there dim
recollections of historical occurrences ; but the concurrent testimony of
Ideology and astronomy, anthropology, archaeology, and comparative
philology, is proof that the account given in these chapters of the
creation of heaven and earth, the appearance of living things upon the
3arth, the origin of man, the beginnings of civilization, the destruction
Df mankind and of all terrestrial animals (except those preserved in
the ark) by a flood, the rise of separate nations, and the formation of
different languages, is no historically true record of these events as
bhey actually happened. And with regard to the histories contained
in chs. xii. — L, we have found that, while there is no sufficient reason
for doubting the existence, and general historical character of the
biographies, of the patriarchs, nevertheless much uncertainty must be
allowed to attach to details of the narrative : we have no guarantee
that we possess verbally exact reports of the events narrated; and
there are reasons for supposing that the figures and characters of the
patriarchs are in different respects idealized. And, let it be observed,
not one of the conclusions reached in the preceding pages is arrived at
upon arbitrary or a priori grounds : not one of them depends upon any
denial, or even doubt, of the supernatural or of the miraculous ; they
are, one and all, forced upon us by the facts ; they follow directly from
a simple consideration of the facts of physical science and human
nature, brought to our knowledge by the various sciences concerned,
from a comparison of these facts with the Biblical statements, and from
an application of the ordinary canons of historical criticism. Fifty or

'ixii INTRODUCTION [§ 4

sixty years ago, a different judgment, at least on some of the points
involved, was no doubt possible : but the immense accessions of know-
ledge, in the departments both of the natural sciences and of the
early history of man, which have resulted from the researches of
recent years, make it impossible now : the irreconcil^ability of the
early narratives of Genesis with the facts of science and history
must be recognized and accepted. To be sure, particular points might
probably be found, at which, by the adoption of forced interpretations
of the words of Genesis, such as are both unnatural in themselves, and
also obviously contrary to the intention of the writer, the conclusion in
question could, in appearance, be evaded : but this method is at once
unsound in principle and ineffectual : a forced exegesis is never
legitimate; passages remain to which the method itself cannot be
applied; nor, probably, has anything done more to bring the Bible
into discredit than the harmonistic expedients adopted by apologists,
which by those whom they are intended to satisfy and convince are
seen at once to be impossible'. And to turn for a moment to another
consideration, it is realized now, more distinctly than it was by a past
generation, that a historical document, if it is to lay claim to credibility,
must be contemporary, or virtually so, with the events described in it ;
this is a primary principle of modern historical science. But the Book
of Genesis, whatever view be taken of its authorship, does not satisfy
this condition : none of the documents of which it is composed either
claims to be, or has as yet been shewn to be, contemporary with the
events narrated in it.

It follows that the Bible cannot in every part, especially not in its
early parts, be read precisely as it was read by our forefathers. We
live in a light which they did not possess, but which it has pleased the
Providence of God to shed around us ; and if the Bible is to retain itf
authority and influence among us, it must be read in this light, and
our beliefs about it must be adjusted and accommodated accordingly.
To utilize, as far as we can, the light in which we live, is, it must hi
remembered, not a privilege only, but a duty. And to take but u
single example of the gain to be derived from so doing : it is certain
that an infinitely more adequate conception of the astonishing breadth
and scope of creation, and of the marvellously wonderful and compre-
hensive plan by which the Creator has willed both to organize an(]
develope life upon the earth, and afterwards gradually to civiHze and

1 Comp. the just remarks of Kautzsch in his lecture on Die bleibende Bedeutun^
des ATs. (1902), p. 9 ff.

5 4] RELIGIOUS VALUE OF GENESIS Ixiii

jducate human beings upon it, can be obtained from a study of the
jciences of astronomy, geology, and antliropology than from the early
chapters of Genesis : on the other hand, these chapters of Genesis do
eize and give vivid and forcible expression to certain vital and funda-
nental truths respecting the relation of the world and man to God
^hich the study of those sciences by themselves could never lead to ;
bhe Bible and human science thus supplement one another : but we
nust go to human science for the material facts of nature and life,
md to the Bible for the spiritual realities by which those facts are
lluminated, and (in their ultimate origin) explained. The only science
md early history known to the Biblical writers were both imperfect :
Dut they made a superb use of them ; they attached to them, and en-
shrined in forms of undying freshness and charm, the great spiritual
truths which they were inspired to discern. It is impossible, if we
3ompare the early narratives of Genesis with the Babylonian narratives
jfrom which in some cases they seem plainly to have been ultimately
derived, or with the pictures of prehistoric times to be found in the
literatures of many other countries, not to perceive the controlling
Dperation of the Spirit ot God, which has taught these Hebrew writers
to make a right use of the materials which came to their hands, to
'take the primitive traditions of the human race, to purify them from
their grossness and their polytheism, and to make them at once the
foundation and the explanation of the long history that is to follow^'
Our duty, then, is to recognize this double aspect of these narratives ;
and to read them accordingly in such a way as to seize and retain the
spiritual truths of which they are the expression, while discarding, at
least as an object of intellectual belief, the material fabric which was
once necessary to give them substance and support, but which is now
seen to have in itself no value or reality ^

The position that the Book of Genesis may contain statements not
historically true may appear to some readers surprising and question-
,fable. It must, however, be remembered that the doctrine that the
Bible contains nothing but what is historically true is one for which
there is no foundation either in the Bible itself, or in the formularies
of our Church. This doctrine is intimately connected with, if not
directly dependent upon, a particular theory of inspiration. As is

1 Kirkpatrick, The Divine Library of the Old Testament, p. 97.

' On the distinction between the external form, and the inner or spiritual
substance, of a narrative, see also the Bishop of Eipon's excellent Introduction to
(the Tem:ple Bible, pp. 17, 18, 42—46.

Ixiv INTRODUCTION [§ 4

well-known, the Church of England has formulated no definition of
inspiration : nevertheless, a theory has hecome prevalent, both within |
and without the pale of our own communion, which conceives of in-
spiration as operating mechanically, and maintains accordingly the
verbal exactitude of every statement contained in Scripture, — on
points, for instance, of science, or history, or psychology, not less
than on points of spiritual doctrine and duty. The present is not
the place to discuss at length the subject of inspiration^ : it must
suffice therefore to point out that such a theory is entirely without
scriptural authority: we read indeed (2 Tim. iii. 16) that 'every
scripture inspired of God* is * profitable* for certain moral and
spiritual ends, but nothing is said, either there or elsewhere, of the
other conditions to which an ' inspired ' book must conform ; nor is
any claim to immunity from error made on its behalf in any part
of Scripture. The doctrine of the verbal inspiration and verbal
exactitude of Scripture is in fact an a priori theory, framed not upon
the basis of any warrant contained in Scripture itself, but upon an
antecedent conception of what an * inspired ' book must necessarily be.
It is however a complete mistake of principle and method to frame
first an a priori theory of inspiration, and then to insist that the
Bible must conform to it : the Bible is the only * inspired ' book that
we know of; and as no independent definition of inspiration exists,
the only sound method is to study the facts presented by the Bible,
and to formulate our theory of inspiration accordingly. If, then, in
the course of our inquiry we should find in the Bible statements, or
representations, which, after an impartial survey of the facts, should
prove to be unhistorical, our only legitimate conclusion would be that
the existence in it of such statements or representations is not in-
compatible with its inspiration, and the cb priori definition, which
would exclude them, must be modified accordingly.

A consideration which has no doubt been largely responsible for the
reluctance of theologians to admit the presence of unhistorical elements in the
Bible is apprehension of the consequences to which the admission may lead,
especially with regard to the historical character of the Gospel records. It is

^ The writer has dealt with it more fully in the seventh of his Sermons on the
Old Testament (p. 143 ff.) ; eomp. also the preceding Sermon (p. 119 ff.) on ' The
Voice of God in the Old Testament,' with particular reference to the different kinds
of literature represented in the OT. And see besides Sanday's Bavipton Lectures
for 1893 (on 'Inspiration'), p. 155 ff., and Lect. viii.; Kirkpatrick's Divine Library
of the OT. (1891), Lect. iv.; Farrar, The Bible, its meaning and supremacy, passim;
Watson, The Book of Genesis, pp. 256—265; and the Bishop of Bipon's Introd. to
the Temple Bible, pp. 83—101.

§ 4] INSPIRATION Ixv

difficult not to think that such apprehensions are groundless. We must trust,
as we do in all other histories, to the application of sound historical methods.
It is however certain that the historical character of the Gospel records is far
more endangered by their credibility being made to depend upon the axiom
of the exact and equal historical truth of every part of Scripture, than by this
axiom, as such, being unconditionally abandoned, and the credibility of the
Gospel narratives being left to be established by the historical evidence which
they themselves afford, interpreted in the light of the indirect testimony
supplied by other parts of the New Testament, by the early Church, and by
tlie Old Testament, regarded generally (apart from the exact and equal
historical value of every part of it) as a preparation for Christ. No competent
student of the Old Testament can deny that there are elements in it which,
though they may have a high value religiously, are not historical; they
describe, for instance, not things as they actually happened, but things as they
were viewed, in an idealized form, by writers living long afterwards ; but to
rest the truth of Christianity upon an axiom as baseless as the one referred
to above, is the height of unwisdom. Nothing therefore is lost that can be of
service to Christianity, nothing is given up which forms a real bulwark of the
faith, when that axiom is abandoned. It is a responsibility which, if they
realized it, few would surely take upon themselves, to weight Christianity with
a view of the Old Testament, which has no authority or support either in the
Bible itself or in the formularies of the Church, which will not bear examina-
tion, but on the contrary, when confronted with the facts, is at once seen to be
refuted by them.

The nemesis on doctrines of verbal inspiration is not far to seek.
Mr Laing, in chap. viii. of his Modern Science and Modern Thought^
lays it down that an inspired book is one * miraculously dictated by an
infallible God, and therefore absolutely and for all time true*; and
then proceeds to refer to some of the statements contained in the early
chapters of Genesis, which are now known to be not historically true :
the conclusion follows, — and from the premises respecting the nature
of inspiration follows logically and necessarily, — that the Bible is not
inspired, and consequently has no claim to contain a revelation to man.
But where is it anywhere said in the Bible that the historical state-
ments made in it are 'dictated' by God? The whole conception of
inspiration implied in the words quoted is a figment, — a figment, no
doubt, devised in the first instance for the purpose of supporting and
fortifying a good cause, but not the less, as a result of the progress of
knowledge, capable of being employed with disastrous effect to ruin
and destroy it. But, if we modify our conception of inspiration, and
by making proper allowance for the human element cooperating with
the Divine, bring it into agToement with the phaenomena to be ex-
plained, then all those facts which are fatal to the authority of the

Ixvi INTRODUCTION [§ 4

Bible upon the theories referred to above are adequately accounted for,
and the Bible becomes a consistent whole, inspired throughout, though
not ' dictated,' and with its authority firmly established upon a sound
and logical basis.

See further, on the same subject, the very pertinent remarks of Prof
G. A. Smith, in his Modern Criticism and Preaching oj the Old Testament^
where, after commenting (pp 26 — 28) upon the often disastrous effects of the
dogmas of a verbal inspiration and of the equal validity of all parts of
Scripture, and of the refusal to accept what is legitimately involved in the
truth of a ' progressive Revelation,' he describes what he learnt from a perusal
of the correspondence of the late Henry Drummond, who was often consulted
upon religious difficulties : his correspondents, he says, ' one and all tell how
the dogma that the entire Bible stands, historically and morally, upon the
same level — the faith which finds in it nothing erroneous, nothing defective,
and (outside of the sacrifices and Temple) nothing temporary— is what has
driven them from religion.'

In the Book of Genesis we have to do with scientific and historical,
more than with moral difficulties. And certainly it can occasion little
surprise that, when a man of scientific culture is told, — for this, though
not the Church's teaching, and though many individual teachers have
of course abandoned it, is nevertheless still the current theological
teaching of the day, — that an acceptance of the literal truth of the
early chapters of Genesis is an integral part of the Christian faith, he
shonld turn with repugnance from a creed which seems to him to be
thus associated with a series of beliefs which his own studies prove to
him to be impossible. But, as was said before, with a better-grounded
theory of inspiration, all these difficulties disappear; and the man of
science who gives due weight to the religious instincts of his nature
will be ready to recognize the religious truthfulness, — as distinct from
the scientific truthfulness, — of these narratives of Genesis \

Nor, upon antecedent grounds, can any valid objection be raised
against the view that the Bible may contain elements more or less
unhistorical. We are dealing confessedly in Genesis with narratives

1 It ought assuredly to be possible so to teach the historical parts of the OT.
to those who have reached the age of 15 or 16 that, when they enter into manhood,
they may have nothing to unlearn on the ground of either science or history.
Comp. a paper by the present writer on ' The Old Testament in the Light of
To-day' in the Expositor, Jan. 1901, p. 45 flf. ; and on the often lamentable conse-
quences of failing to do this, Archdeacon Wilson in the Contemp. Rev., March,
1903, p. 303 f . The danger of teaching as practically de fide things which are
directly contradicted by what may be learnt from any Encyclopaedia or other work
oi secular information has been felt also by thoughtful Koman Catholics in France:
see Alb. Houtin, La Question Biblique chez les Catholiques de France au xix^ siecle
(1902), pp. 189 f., 2G6 if. Cf. also the Guardian, Oct. 14, 1003, p. 1523".

§4] SCOPE OF INSPIRATION Ixvii

committed to writing long after the events narrated took place, and
in some cases relating to periods so remote that it is certain no
genuine historical recollections could have been handed down from
them. Why should narratives relating to such a more or less distant
past not exhibit among the Hebrews characteristics similar to those
which narratives written down under similar circumstances among
other nations would unquestionably exhibit? The former do indeed,
on their spiritual side, exhibit very diflPerent characteristics ; but these
are accounted for by the inspiration of their authors : why, however,
should they be different, on their material side ? "We should naturally
expect them on their material side to exhibit the work of the
imagination, and display an element of legend, filling up a gap in
the past with a web of fancy, and presenting the dimly-seen heroes of
antiquity as ideal figures. Where nothing is defined as to the nature
or limits of the inspiring Spirit's work, have we the right to limit it
by arbitrary canons of our own ? Many — perhaps all — forms of the
national literature of Israel are represented in the Bible, and made
channels through which *in many parts, and in many modes' (Heb.
i 1) God manifested Himself to His people : upon what principle, or
by what right, is a form of narrative which is common to almost every
nation, and which appeals with peculiar force to the comprehension of
men in particular stages of national development and intellectual
growth, to be excluded ? ^ The imagination, as all must allow, is an
instrument of extraordinary efficacy for instruction and edification ; it
has exerted in the past, and it exerts still, a powerful influence in
education : why, then, should it be deemed incapable of consecration
to the service of God ? If the poems of Homer were an educational
force in ancient Greece, why should it be deemed incredible that
legends of primitive history, and idealized traditions of national heroes,
only inspired by a higher and purer religious spirit, and exemplifying
not the conflicts and jealousies of gods and goddesses, but the purposes
and character of the One God, and His dealings with His children, —
especially when moulded as they are into forms of singularly impressive
dignity and^grace, — should exert a similar power in Israel, and should
be incorporated by the prophets and teachers of the nation as a
treasured heirloom in their sacred books?

^ Comp. the late Archbishop Benson, as cited by Kirkpatrick, The Divine
Library of the OT. p. 104 ; and Bishop Westcott, who says {Life, 1903, ii. 69),
* I never could understand how any one reading the first three chapters of Genesis
with open eyes conld believe that they contained a literal history, yet they disclose
to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere.' Cf. Westcott's Qosvel of Life,
p. 187 f.

IxYiii INTRODUCTION [§ 4

See further, in this connexion, in the Bibl Sacra^ Jan. 1901, p. 103 ff., an
address by Prof. Ives Curtiss, of Chicago, on /The Book, the Law, and tlic
People; or Divine Revelations through ancient Israel,' delivered after a visit
of some length to the Holy Land, where it is pointed out that while on the
one hand observation of Oriental character makes it impossible to believe that
the Bible is a merely natural product of the Oriental mind, on the other hand
it warns us that we have no right to theorize ct priori upon the ways in which
God could or could not speak through it; a revelation addressed to an Oriental
people would naturally be clothed in forms of thought and expression with
which they were familiar. ' The Oriental is least of all a scientific historian.
He is the prince of story-tellers : narratives, real and imaginative, spring from
his lips, which are the truest portraiture of composite rather than individual
Oriental life, though narrated under forms of individual experience.* Comp.
also a paper by R. Somervell on 'The Historical Character of the OT.
narratives' in the Ba^p. Times, Apr. 1902, p. 298 ff. ; and the many admirable
words spoken by the Rev. G. S. Streatfeild in A Parish Clergyman's Thoughts
about the Higher Criticism (Midland Educational Co., Birmingham; reprinted,
with additions, from the Expositor, Dec. 1902), p. 11 ff., on the interpretation
of the early chapters of Genesis, and on the value of a critical and historical
appreciation of the Old Testament, in illuminating many parts of it, and in
removing diflBculties. Cf. Westcott, Lessons from. Work, pp. 32 f., 178, 179.

If, now, upon the basis of the considerations advanced in the
preceding pages, we proceed to the question which after all is of the
most immediate interest not only to the theologian in the technical
sense of the word, but also to the man of general religious sympathies,
we shall find that the religious value of the narratives of Genesis, while
it must be placed upon a different basis from that on which it has
hitherto been commonly considered to rest, remains in itself essen-
tially unchanged. It is true, we often cannot get behind the narratives, —
in chaps, i. — xi., as we have seen, the narratives cannot be historical,
in our sense of the word, at all, and in chaps, xii. — 1., there are at
least many points at which we cannot feel assured that the details are
historical : we are obliged consequently to take them as we find them,
and read them accordingly. And then we shall find that the narratives
of Genesis teach us still the same lessons which they taught our fore-
fathers. The drama which begins with the tragedy of Eden and ends
with the wonderful biography of Joseph is still enacted before our eyes
as vividly as ever. Eve and Cain still stand before us, the immortal
types of weakness yielding to temptation, and of an unbridled temper
leading its victim he knows not whither ; Noah and Abraham are still
the heroes of righteousness and faith ; Lot and Laban, Sarah and
Rebekah, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, in their characters and experiences,
are still in diflerent ways tvttoi ly/xwr, and still in one respect or another

§ 4] IlSrSPIRATION OF GENESIS \x\±

exemplify the ways in which God deals with the individual soul, and
the manner in which the individual soul ought, — or ought not, — to
respond to His leadings. And what, if some of these figures pass
before us as on a stage, rather than in real life? Do they on that
account lose their vividness, their truthfulness, their force ? On the
contrary, not only do they retain all these characteristics unimpaired,
but, if it be true that the figures in Genesis, as we have them, are
partly, — or even, in some cases, wholly, — the creations of popular
imagination, transfigured in the pure, *dry' light which the inspired
genius of prophet or priest has shed around them, the Book of Genesis
is really more surprising than if it were even throughout a literally
true record of events actually occurring. For to create such characters
would be more wonderful than to describe them. The Book of Genesis
is a marvellous gallery of portraits, from whatever originals they may
have been derived. There is no other nation which can shew for its
early history anything in the least degree resembling it. There is
nothing like it in either Babylonia, or Egypt, or India, or Greece.
The mythology of Greece, — especially as it stands before us in the
two great epics with which Greek literature opens, and as particular
episodes of it are made the vehicles of splendid lessons in the great
tragedies of a later age, — is indeed a wonderful creation of the human
mind, and an abiding monument of the intellectual genius of the
nation which produced it : but the Book of Genesis stands on a
different plane altogether; and even though it be not throughout
what our fathers understood it to be, a verbally exact record of actual
fact, this very difference, which distinguishes it so strikingly from
the corresponding literature of any other nation, remains still the
strongest proof of the inspiration by its authors : the spirituality of
its contents, the spiritual and moral lessons which are continually
exemplified by it, and which, though they are often expressed in a
simple and even childlike external garb, are nevertheless to all intents
and purposes the same as those taught afterwards by the great prophets,
constitute a cogent ground for inferring the operation of a spiritual
agency differing specifically from that which was present when the
mythology of Egypt or Babylonia, of India or Greece, was in process
of formation. St Paul does not point his readers to the Old Testament
Scriptures for instruction in science or ancient history, but he says
that they are profitable 'for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction which is in righteousness' (2 Tim. iii. 16); and the Book
of Genesis, even though it be understood in parts as

Ixx INTRODUCTION [§ 4

rather than as history, is most assuredly * profitable' for all these
purposes.

Let us endeavour, then, to sum up in outline the religious value of
Genesis. On the first eleven chapters little can be added substantially
to what has been said in the notes'. From the beginning the history is
penetrated with religious ideas. The narrative of the Creation sets
forth, in a series of dignified and impressive pictures, the sovereignty
of God; His priority to, and separation from, all finite, material
nature ; His purpose to constitute an ordered cosmos, and gradually
to adapt the earth to become the habitation of living beings ; and His
endowment of man with the peculiar, unique possession of self-
conscious reason, in virtue of which he becomes capable of intellectual
and moral life, and is even able to know and hold communion with his
Maker. In chs. ii. ^ — iii. we read, — though again not in a historical,
but in a pictorial or S3nnbolical form, — how man was once innocent,
how he became, — as man must have become, whether in 'Eden' or
elsewhere, at some period of his existence, — conscious of a moral law,
but how temptation fell upon him, and he broke it. The Fall of man,
the great but terrible truth, which history, not less than individual
experience, only too vividly teaches each one of us, is thus impressively
set before us. Man, however, though punished by God, is not forsaken
by Him, nor left, in his long conflict with evil, without hope of victory.
In chap, iv., the increasing power of sin, and the fatal consequences to
which, if unchecked, it may lead, is vividly portrayed in the tragic
figure of Cain. The spirit of vindictiveness, and of brutal triumph in
the power of the sword, is personified in Lamech. In the narrative of
the Flood, God's just wrath against sin, and the divine prerogative of
mercy, are alike exemplified : Noah is a standing illustration of the
truth that * righteousness delivereth from death ' ; and God's dealings
with him after the Flood form a striking declaration of the purposes
of grace and goodwill, with which He regards mankind. The narrative
of the Tower of Babel (xi. 1 — 9) emphasizes Jehovah's supremacy over
the world ; and teaches how the self-exaltation of man is checked
by God.

In passing to chaps, xii. — 1. we may notice first the teaching about
God. If in chaps, i. — xi. God appears chiefly as the Creator and
Judge of the world, in chaps, xii. — 1. He appears more particularly

1 On these chapters the small but helpful volume by Professor (now Bishop)
Ryle, called The Early Narratives of Genesis (which has been several times quoted
in the notes), is much recommended to the reader.

§ 4] RELIGIOUS TEACHING OF GENESIS Ixxi

as One who has a care and love for men. Naturally, He hates and
punishes sin (xiii. 13, xv. 16, xviii. 20 f., xix., xxxix. 9, xliv. 16;
cf. XX. 6, 11, xlii. 21, 28); but these chapters contain principally
revelations of His regard for man, not only in the promises disclosing
His gracious purposes towards the patriarchs and their seed (see on
xii. 2 f ), but also on many other occasions : for instance, in the
manner in which righteousness receives His approval and blessing
(xxi. 22, xxiv. 1, 27, 35, xxv. 11, xxvi. 28, 29 end, xxxix. 2, 21, 23,
and indirectly elsewhere), in the regard shewn by Him to the solitary
Hagar in the wilderness (xvi. 9 ff., xxi. 17 ff.), to Lot in Sodom (xix.),
to the heathen, but guileless, Abimelech (xx. 6), to Jacob in his
soHtude at Bethel (xxviii. 12 ff. : cf. p. 268), or in a foreign land
(xxxi. 3, 5, 13, 24, 42, xxxv. 3, xlviii. 15 f.), and to Pharaoh (xli. 25,
32). His mercy is also illustrated by xviii. 23 ff., xix. 16 ; His
providence, overruling the events of life for good, by xxiv., xlv. 5, 7,
1. 20, and other passages ; and His justice is appealed to in xvi. 5,
xviii. 25, XX. 4, xxxi. 49, 50, 53. In ch. xxii. the meaning of 'pro-
bation,' and the nature of the sacrifice which is pleasing in God's sight,
are both strikingly exemplified \

In the sphere of human conduct, the drama of an entire life takes
in chaps, xii. — 1. the place of the single, isolated episodes characteristic
of chaps, i. — xi. ; and principles and motives find accordingly fuller
and more vivid expression. The patriarchs vary considerably in
character; there is no monotony in the delineation. Nor are they
without their faults, especially Jacob, and the subordinate characters
(as Lot and Laban) : the women, in particular, are often jealous,
imperious, and designing. All have more or less a t3rpical character.
Abraham is not only conspicuous for such virtues as courtesy,
hospitality, high-mindedness, generosity ; he is also the primary Old
Testament example of obedience, and devotion to God ; spirituality of
thought and aim, not austere, but attractive and winning, is the
leading motive of his life. He is *an historic personage, but he is
also a spiritual type : he is the ideal representative of the life of faith
and of separation from the idolatries of an evil world : he prefigures
the ideal character and aims of the people of God^' Isaac lives a
quiet, uneventful life : he is the ideal son : he * impersonates the
peaceful, obedient, submissive qualities of an equable trust in God,
distinct alike from the more heroic faith of Abraham, and the lower

* See also above, p. xxi f. ^ Ottley, Bampton Lectures^ p. 125 f.

Ixxii INTRODUCTION [§ 4

type which in Jacob was learned through discipline and purged of
self-wiir.' Jacob is a mixed character : he possesses the good qualities
of ambition and perseverance, though he employs them at first, with
great unscrupulousness, for selfish and worldly ends : after his great
spiritual struggle at Penuel, however, his lower self is left behind, and
in his old age his character %)pears still further mellowed by the
discipline of trial and bereavement. Joseph is an example of a stable,
upright character, faithful to his trusts, proof against temptation, led,
under God's providence, through many perils and many sorrowful and
discouraging experiences, to a situation of exaltation and dignity, in
which he employs his talents to promote the welfare of his fellow-men,
and in which he displays an even Christian spirit of magnanimity and
forgiveness towards those who once had bitterly wronged him. The
biographies of the patriarchs present to us spiritual types, — repre-
sentative examples of the varied experiences, the hopes and fears, the
disappointments and the pleasures, the sorrows and the joys, the
domestic trials and successes, which may be the lot of any one of us ;
and they exemplify the frame of mind, — the trust, or resignation, or
forbearance, or gratitude, — with which, as the case may be, they should
be received, and the countless ways in which, under God's hand, the
course of events is overruled for good*.

There is also another point of view from which we ought not to
omit to regard the Book of Genesis. It was a primary function of the
Hebrew historians not merely to narrate facts as such, but also to
interpret them, and in particular to interpret their religious signi-
ficance, and to shew their bearing upon the religious history of Israel
as a whole. This aspect of the work of the Hebrew historians is
particularly conspicuous in Genesis. Be the details history or legend,
or be they, as in some cases it is quite possible that they may be, an
intermixture of both, all are subordinated to this point of view.
Historically, the narrators may have been on some points imperfectly
informed; but nevertheless what they all aim at shewing is how
'throughout the period of obscure beginnings God was forming a
people whose destiny it was to give to the world the true religion.'
From Gen. iii. 14 onwards a redemptive purpose irradiates the entire
narrative, shining forth at certain definite epochs with particular

1 Eyle, DB. s.v. (ii. 484^).

2 The typical religious value of the patriarchal narratives, even with the
admission that they contain ideal elements, is well brought out by Mr Ottley,
Bampt. Led. p. 126 f. See also Kautzsch, Bihelwissenschaft und Religiontunter-
richt (1900), p. 41 f., and Die bleibende Bedeutung des ATs., p. 24 ff.

§ 4] RELIGIOUS VALUE OF GENESIS Ixxiii

brightness, and of course continuing to display itself in subsequent
parts of the Old Testament. This is one of the features which gives
the narrative its unique character and unique value. The history of
the beginnings of the earth and man, and the story of Israel's ancestors,
might both have been told very differently. They might have been
told from a purely secular point of view. The narratives might have
been impregnated with foolish superstitions. The legends respecting
the beginnings of other nations are sometimes grotesquely absurd.
But in the hands of Israel's inspired teachers the Hebrew legend is
from the beginning suffused with pure and ennobling spiritual ideas ;
and they trace in it the beginnings of the same Providential purposes
which they find also in the Hebrew history into which afterwards it
insensibly merges.

Nor, finally, in estimating the religious value of the Book of
Genesis should we forget the character of the age to which it relates,
and the intellectual and spiritual capacities of those to whom in the
first instance it was addressed. In the Bible we have the record of a
progressive revelation, in each stage of which the measure of truth
disclosed is adapted to the mental and spiritual level which has been
reached by those who are to be its recipients. The Book of Genesis
gives a picture of the infancy and childhood of the world : it was also
primarily, at least in its principal and larger part (J and E), addressed
to men who, though far from uncivilized, and enjoying the advantages
of settled life and organised government, were nevertheless in many
respects spiritually immature : the teaching of Amos and Hosea, Isaiah
and Jeremiah, for example, was still unknown to them. In contents
and style alike it is accordingly naturally fitted to the comprehension
of those for whose use and instruction it was primarily designed. In
an artless but attractive dress, and in forms adapted to impress and
delight those who read them, the story of Israel's ancestors is told in
it. Without any conscious moral purpose pervading the narrative,
elementary lessons about right and wrong, and God and man, are
taught through the simple experiences and vicissitudes of four .
generations in an Eastern home. In Genesis, more than in any other
part of the Bible, God talks with men, as a father with his child.
Need we be surprised, therefore, that there should in this book be
some accommodation to the habits and modes of thought with which
children are familiar ? From tales a child may learn many a lesson,
without stopping to ask either himself or his teacher whether every
particular tale is true or not. And the tales of Genesis, whether

bmv INTRODUCTION [§ 4

history or parable, are in either case inimitable, and full of lessons.
Truths and duties, especially those belonging to the ' daily round and
common task,* snch as we all need to learn, and continually through
our lives have occasion to practise, are illustrated and enforced in it
by anecdotes and narratives, which the youngest can understand, from
which the oldest can still learn, and which never cease to fascinate and
enthral those who have once yielded themselves to their spell. * The
power of the Patriarchal narratives on the heart, the imagination, the
faith of men can never die : it is immortal with truthfulness to the
realities of human nature, and of God's education of mankind \'

^ G-. A. Smith, Modern Criticism and the Preaching of the OT. p. 109. Prof.
Smith's estimate of the historical character of the narratives of Genesis is sub-
stantially the same as that adopted in the preceding pages. Comp. also, on
the general question of both the historical and the religious value of the narratives
of Genesis, the very useful Introduction to Dr Wade's Book of Genetis (1896),
pp. 37 ff., 49 ff., 61 If.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS.

PART I. THE PREHISTORIC PERIOD.
CHAPTERS I.— XL

The Book of Genesis begins with an account of the creation of the universe,
and of the early history of man upon the earth. It describes, in accordance
with the beliefs current among the Hebrews, the process by which the earth
assumed its present form, and was adapted to become the habitation of man
(cb. i.) ; the situation of man's original dwelling-place, .find the entrance of sin
and trouble into the world (ch. ii. — iii.); the beginnings of civilization (ch. iv.);
the growth of population (ch. v.) ; the increasing prevalence of wickedness, and
destruction of the whole human race, with the exception of a single family, by
a flood (ch. vi. — ix.) ; and lastly the re-peopling of the earth, and the rise of
separate nations, and of the Hebrews in particular, out of the descendants
of this family (ch. x. — xi.).** Though in parts of these chapters there may be
dim recollections of historical occurrences, the narrative, as a whole, cannot
be regarded as an historical record of actual events. The reasons for this
conclusion will appear more fully in the sequel : it must, however, be almost
self-evident that trustworthy information respecting periods so remote as those
here in question could not have been accessible to the Biblical writers ; and it
is also certain that there are statements in these chapters inconsistent with
what is known independently of the early history of the earth, and of mankind
upon it. The narrative of tliese chapters consists rather of ' a series of infer-
ences relating to times which are pre-historic. It represents the explanations,
arrived at in ways that it is now impossible to trace, which reflection furnished
of the many questions spontaneously occurring to a primitive race respecting
themselves and their surroundings V Similar narratives are found in the early
literature of many other peoples. The nearest parallels to the Biblical records
are aff'orded (as will shortly become apparent) by Babylonia, a country with
which the Hebrews were once closely connected ; and recent discoveries have
shewn 'that certain common beliefs concerning the beginnings of the earth
and of man must have prevailed in the circle of nations to which both Baby-
lonians and Hebrews belonged I' The distinguishing characteristics of the
Biblical narrative are however the lofty religious spirit by which it is dominated,
and the spiritual lessons of which it is the expression : these remain, even
though the seemingly historical narratives with which they are associated
should prove to be no record of actual events, but to represent merely the
course of the past as it was pictured by the Biblical writers. To us, the
principal value of the narrative consists in the spiritual teaching thus implicit
in it ; and this it will be an object of the following commentary to point out.

1 Wade, Old Test. Hist. (1901), p. 37. 8 jjj^.

D. 1

2 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

Chapters I. 1— II. 4*.

The Creation of the World,

The Book of Genesis opens with a sublime and dignified narrative, describ-
ing the creation of heaven and earth, and the stages by which, as the narrator
pictured it, the latter was gradually fitted to become the habitation of man.
Starting with a state of primaeval chaos, in which the earth is represented as
enveloped in a huge mass of surrounding waters, shrouded in darkness, yet
brooded over by the Spirit of God, the writer describes successively (1) the
production of light; (2) the division of this mass of primaeval waters into
two parts, an upper and a lower, by means of a 'firmament'; (3) the emergence
of the dry land out of the lower waters ; (4) the clothing of the dry land with
grass, herbs, and trees ; (5) the creation of sun, moon, and stars ; (6) the pro-
duction of fishes and birds ; (7) the appearance of terrestrial animals ; (8) the
creation of man ; (9) God's rest after His work of creation. There are thus
eight distinct creative works, which, with God's rest at the close, are adjusted
with remarkable symmetry to the week of seven days. The six days of creation
fall into two sections of three days each ; and the third and the sixth days have
each two works assigned to them. The first three days, moreover, are days of
preparation, the next three are days of accompHshment. On the first day
light is created, and on the fourth day comes the creation of the luminaries
which are for the future to be its receptacles ; on the second day the waters
* below the firmament,* and (as we should say) the air, appear, and on the fifth
day fishes and birds are created to people them ; on the third day the dry land
appears, and the earth is clothed with vegetation ; on the sixth day terrestrial
animals and man are created, who are to inhabit the dry land, and {vv. 29, SO)
to live upon food supplied by its vegetation. In the order in which the different
creative works are arranged there is an evident gradation, each work as a rule
occupying the place in which it might be naturally regarded as the condition,
or suitable forerunner, of the work next following, and in the case of livhig
things, there being an obvious ascent from lower to higher, the climax of the
whole being formed by man.

^ The narrative belongs to the Priestly source of the Hexateuch (see p. iv),
the literary characteristics of which it displays in a marked degree. It will
be sufficient to notice here the use throughout of the name God (not Jehovah)^
and the methodical articulation of the narrative into sections, each marked by
the recurrence of stereotyped formulae. Thus each creative act is introduced
by the words And God said {vv. 3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26); and it was so is
found six times {vv. 9, 11, 15, 24, 30) ; the mark of Divine approval, and God
saw that it was good, is repeated seven times (in lxx. eight times, once after
each work), vv. 4, 8 (lxx.), 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31 (the last time, with a significant
variation) ; and the close of each day's work is marked by the standing
formula, and evening came, and morning came,. ..day (vv. 5, 8, 12, 19, 23, 31).

On some general questions arising out of the narrative, see p. 19 fl^

1. 1,.] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 3

I. 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the P
earth. 2 And the earth was waste and void ; and darkness was

1. 1. Introduction. The verse (as rendered in EW.) gives
a summary of the description which follows, stating the broad general
fact of the creation of the universe ; the details of the process then
form the subject of the rest of the chapter \

In the beginning. Not absolutely, but relatively : at the begin-
ning of the order of things which we see, and in the midst of which
human history unfolds itself (Perowne, Expositor , Oct. 1890, p. 248).

God. On the Heb. word, see the Excursus at the end of the volume.

created. The root signifies to cut (see, in the intensive conjug.,
Josh. xvii. 15, 18 ; Ez. xxiii. 47) : so probably the proper meaning of
N"in is to fashion by cutting, to shape. In the simple conjugation,
however, it is used exclusively of God, to denote viz. the production
of something fundamentally new, by the exercise of a sovereign
originative power, altogether transcending that possessed by man.
Although, however, the term thus unquestionably denotes a super-
human, miraculous activity, it is doubtful whether it was felt to
express definitely the idea of creatio ex nihilo^; and certainly, as
Pearson (On the Creed, fol. 52) points out, this doctrine cannot be
established from it. The word is very frequent in the Second Isaiah
(as xl. 26, 28, xlii. 5, xlv. 7, 12, 18). In Ps. civ. 30 it is used of the
ever-recurring renovation of life upon the earth. Its figurative ap-
plications are also noticeable : as of the formation of a nation by
Jehovah, Is. xliii. 1, 15 ; and of the production of some surprising
or striking efi"ect, or of some new condition or circumstances, beyond
the power of man to bring about, as Ex. xxxiv. 10 (RVm.); Nu. xvi. 30
(RVm.) ; Jer. xxxi. 22 ; Is. xlv. 8, Ixv. 17.
I the Jieamn and the earth. I.e. the universe, as it was known to the
Hebrews, in its completed state.

2. The writer now turns at once to the earth, in which, as the
future home of man, and the theatre of human activity, he is more
particularly interested; and proceeds to describe what its condition
was when God 'spake,' as described in v. 3.

the earth. As the sequel shews, the term here denotes the earth,
not as we know it now, but in its primitive chaotic, unformed state.

was without form and void. Heb. toha wd-bohu — an alliterative
description of a chaos, in which nothing can be distinguished or
defined. Tohu is a word which it is difficult to express consistently
in English : but it denotes mostly something unsubstantial , or (fig.)

1 Many modern scholars, however (including Dillmann), construe vv. 1 — 3 in
this way : *In the beginning of God's creating the heaven and the earth, — now the
earth was without form, &c. [v. 2], — God said. Let there be light,' &c. So already
the celebrated Jewish commentator Eashi (a.d. 1040 — 1105), and similarly Ibn
Ezra (1092—1167).

2 ^^ ovK ovTuv, 2 Mace. vii. 28. Cf. the Shepherd of Hermas, i. i. 6 with the
parallels from Ecclesiastical writers collected in the note in Gebhardt and Harnack's
leditiou. On Heb. xi. 3, see Westcott's note.

1—2

4 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [i. .

unreal^; cf. Is. xlv. 18 (of the earth), *He created it not a tohu, he
fashioned it to be inhabited,' v. 19 'I said not, Seek ye me as a tohu
(i.e. in vain).' Bohu (only twice besides), as Arabic shews, is rightly
rendered empty or void. Comp. the same combination of words to
suggest the idea of a return to primaeval chaos in Jer. iv. 23, and
Is. xxxiv. 11 ('the line of tohU and the plummet of boku'y.

upon the face of the deep. Heb. fhom. Not here what the *deep'
would denote to us, i.e. the sea, but the primitive undivided waters, the
huge watery mass which the writer conceived as enveloping the chaotic
earth. Milton (P. L. vii. 276 ff.) gives an excellent paraphrase :

The earth was formed, but, in the womb as yet
Of waters, embryon immature, involved,
Appeared not, — over all the face of earth
Main ocean flowed.

In the Babylonian cosmogony, also, as reported by Berossus (see DB.
I. 504^; or KAT.^ (1902), p. 488), all things began in darkness and
water; and fhom recalls at once the Bab. Tidmat (see p. 28).

the spirit of God &c. In the OT. the 'spirit' of man is the
principle of life, viewed especially as the seat of the stronger and more
active energies of life; and the 'spirit' of God is analogously the
Divine force or agency, to the operation of which are attributed
various extraordinary powers and activities of men, as also super-
natural spiritual gifts (see e.g. Gen. xli. 38; Ex. xxxi. 3; Num. xi. 17;
1 S. xi. 6, xvi. 13; Mic. iii. 8; Is. xi. 2, xlii. 1, lix. 21, Ixi. 1 ; Ez. xxxvi.
27); in the later books of the OT., it appears also as the power which
creates and sustains life (cf. Ez. xxxvii. 14; Is. xliv. 3f. ; Job xxxiii. 4;
Ps. civ. 30^). It is in the last-named capacity that it is mentioned
here. The chaos of v. 2 was not left in hopeless gloom and death ;
already, even before God 'spake' (v. 3), the spirit of God, with its
life-giving energy, was ' brooding ' over the waters, like a bird upon its
nest, and (so it seems to be implied) fitting them in some way to
generate and maintain life, when the DiYine fiat should be pronounced*.

1 The following are its occurrences (besides those noted above) : Is. xxix. 21
'that turn aside the just [from their right] with a thing of nought^' i.e. by baseless
allegations, xl. 17 'are counted by him as made of nothing and tohu (RV. vanity),''
23 (RV. vanity, \\ nothing), xli. 29 (RV. confusion, \\ icind), xliv. 9 {vanity, marg.
confusion), xlix. 4 for nought {=in vain), lix. 4 vanity (i.e. moral unreality,
falsehood) ; Job xxvi. 7 (RV. empty space) ; 1 S. xii. 21, of idols (RV. vain things) ;
Is. xxiv. 10 (RV. confusion). It is also used sometimes poetically of an undefined,
untracked, indeterminable expanse, or waste : Dt. xxxii. 10, Job vi. 18 RV.,
xii. 24 = Ps. cvii. 40. The ancient Versions usually render it by words signifying
emptiness, nothingness, vanity (as Kevbv, oiMv, ixo^raiov, inane, vacuum, vanum).

2 Lxx. render here doparos Kai aKaracrKedaa-Tos. Cf. Wisd. xi. 17 (18) 7/ irayrodOvafids
ffov X'^'-P '^'^^ KricracTa top KOfffjLov e^ dfibpcpov vXrjs.

3 Comp. in the NT. John vi. 63 ; 1 Cor. xv. 45 ; 2 Cor. iii. 6 ; and in the Nicene
Creed to Kvpiov Kal ^uoiroiovp.

* Comp. Milton (P. L. vii. 233 ff.) : — ' Darkness profound

Cover'd the abyss ; but on the watery calm [see 1. 216]
His brooding wings the Spirit of God outspread,
And vital virtue infus'd, and vital warmth,
Throughout the fluid mass.'

..-5] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 6

upon the face of the deep : and the spirit of God ^ moved upon P
the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be hght :
and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was
good : and God divided the li^t from the darkness. 5 And

^ Or, was brooding upon

moved. Was brooding (PvVm.). The word occurs besides only
in Dt. xxxii. 11, where it is used of an eagle (properly, a griffon-
vulture) Jiovering over its young. It is used similarly in Syriac.

It is possible that its use here may be a survival, or echo, of the
old belief, found among the Phoenicians, as well as elsewhere (Euseb.
Praep. Ev. i. 10. 1, 2 ; Arist. Aves 693 ff. : Dillm. pp. 4, 7, 20), of a
world-egg, out of which, as it split, the earth, sky, and heavenly bodies
emerged; the crude, material representation appearing here trans-
formed into a beautiful and suggestive figure.

3 — 5. The First Day, and the first work. Light.

Light is the first work, because it is the indispensable condition of
all order, all distinctness, all life, and all further progress.

3. And God said. So at the beginning of each work of creation,
— including the two providential words of vv. 28, 29, ten times in all
(hence the later Jewish dictum, 'By ten sayings the world was created,'
Ahoth V. 1). As Dillm. has pointed out, in the fact that God creates
by a word, there are several important truths implicit. It is an
indication not only of the ease with which He accomplished His work,
and of His omnipotence, but also of the fact that He works consciously
and deliberately. Things do not emanate from Him unconsciously,
nor are they produced by a mere act of thought, as in some pantheistic
systems, but by an act of will, of which the concrete word is the
outward expression. Each stage in His creative work is the realization
of a deliberately formed purpose, the 'word' being the mediating
principle of creation, the means or agency through which His will
takes effect. Cf. Ps. xxxiii. 6, 9; also cvii. 20, cxlvii. 15, 18, in which
passages the word is regarded as a messenger between God and His
creatures. This usage of the OT. is a preparation for the personal
sense of the term ' The Word ' which appears in the NT. (John i. 1),
— though doubtless this usage is in part, also, dependent upon Philo.

4. that it was good. The Divine approval is signified seven times
in the chapter, after each work, except the second — where, however,
the Lxx. have it {v. 8). The formula used marks each work as one
corresponding to the Divine intention, perfect, as far as its nature
required and permitted, complete, and the object of the Creator's
approving regard and satisfaction.

and God divided &c. Light and darkness are henceforth to have
each its separate sphere, and special time of appearance (v. 5). The

And (i. 19 S.) :—

' Thou from the first
Wast present, and, with mighty wings outspread
Dove-like, sat'st brooding on the vast abyss,
And mad'st it pregnant.'

6 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [1.5,6

God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night, p
And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

6 And God said, Let there be a ^firmament in the midst of

* Heb. expanse.

origin of darkness, like that of chaos, is not mentioned : chaos dis-
appears by being converted gradually into an ordered cosmos ; darkness,
though neither called into being by a creative word, nor described as
' good,' is nevertheless by this act of separation recognized as having
equally with light its place in the ordering of the world.

In this * separation' of the light from the darkness there seems,
however, to be something more involved than their mere alternation, or
successive appearance, by day and night. Not only is light created
before the luminaries (v. 16), but in Job light and darkness seem to be
represented as having each its separate and distinct dwelling-place
(xxxviii. 19 'Where is the way to the dwelling of light, And as for
darkness, where is the place thereof?' 20 ; xxvi. 10 *He hath circum-
scribed a boundary [the horizon] upon the face of the waters, Unto the
confines of light and darkness [i.e. the border between them]'). It
seems thus that, according to the Hebrew conception, light, though
gathered up and concentrated in the heavenly bodies, is not confined
to them (Perowne) ; day arises, not solely from the sun, but because
the matter of light issues forth from its place and spreads over the
earth, at night it withdraws, and darkness comes forth from its place,
each in a hidden, mysterious way (Dillm.). An idea such as this may
seem strange to us : but the expositor has no right to read into the
narrative the ideas of modern science ; his duty is simply to read out
of it the ideas which it expresses or presupposes.

5. And God called &c. God designed the distinction to be
permanent, and therefore stamped it with a name. An indirect way
of saying that a distinction which all men recognize, and express in
language, was part of the Divine purpose and a Divine ordinance
(similarly w. 8, 10). The alternation is a beneficent one ; and already :
the future adaptation of the earth to the needs of men and animals is '
in view (see Ps. civ. 20 — 23).

And evening came, and morning came [= iy4v€To, not ^v], one day.
The chaotic darkness is antecedent to all reckoning : the creation of
light marks the beginning of the first day, so the first full day closes
with the following morning. This is indicated by saying, in accordance
with the distinction just established between 'Day' and 'Night,' that
first evening came, and then morning came.

6 — 8. Second Day, and second work. The division of the primitive
chaotic waters into two parts, an upper and a lower, by means of a
'firmament.'

6. a firmament. Nvlg. firmamentum, from the lxx. o-Teptw/Aa, i.e.
something made solid. The Heb. is rdkia\ something pressed down
firm, and so beaten out (the cogn. verb means to stamp, Ez. vi. 11';

1 In the Syriac Version of Lk. vi. 38 it stands for Tremeafjiivoy, 'pressed down.*

1.6-8] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 7

the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And P
God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were
under the firmament from the waters which were above the
firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament

applied to metals, to heat out (Nu. xvi. 39 ; Jer. x. 9), fig. of the earth,
Is. xlii. 5, xliv. 24 [RV. spread abroad], Ps. cxxxvi. 6), i.e. a firm and
solid expanse* capable of supporting the masses of water confined
above. The dome or canopy of heaven, which we, of course, know
to be nothing but an optical illusion, was supposed by the Hebrews
to be a solid vault (cf Job xxxvii. 18 ' Canst thou like him beat out the
Bkies, which are strong as a molten mirror V and Prov. viii. 28*),
supported far off by pillars resting upon the earth (Job xxvi. 11 ;
Amos ix. 6 ; cf. 2 S. xxii. 8)' : above this vault there were vast
reservoirs of water, which came down, in time of rain, through opened
sluices {v. 7, vii. 11 ; Ps. civ. 3 *who layeth the beams of his upper-
chambers in the waters'; 13 *who watereth the mountains from his
upper-chambers'; Am. ix. 6 'whobuildeth his upper-chambers in the
heaven, and hath founded his vault upon the earth ') ; and above these
waters Jehovah sat enthroned. The present verse shews how this was
supposed to have been brought about. By the Divine word, a solid
* firmament ' was created, which separated the huge mass of primitive
waters enveloping the earth into two parts, one being above the
firmament, and the other below it.

let it divide. More exactly, 'let it be dividing/ the participle
denoting that the division is to be permanent.

the waters from tlie waters. I.e. the waters below the firmament
firom the waters above it.

7. the waters which were above the firmament. Cf. Ps. cxlviii. 4.
and it was so. The clause is apparently misplaced. According to

the analogy of the other cases in which the words are used {vv. 9, 11,
15, 24, 30), and in which they immediately follow the woras spoken
by God, they should stand at the end of v. 6, where the lxx. actually
have them.

8. And God called &c. Cf v. 5. LXX. add here (as the Heb.
text does at the conclusion of all the other works, w. 4, 10, 12, 18, 21,
25, cf V. 31) 'And God saw that it was good.' It is true, the words
may have dropped out here accidentally ; on the other hand, it has
also been supposed that they were not placed here by the original
writer, because the separation of the waters by a firmament was only a
preliminary and imperfect stage in what was completed only on the
Third Day, viz. the gathering together of the lower waters into seas
and the emergence of dry land.

^ EVm. 'expanse ' (alone) suggests a false sense : the word means an expanded
or extended tldng.

^ Homer speaks gimilarly of the heaven as of bronze {Od. xv. 329 al.) or iron
{II. xvn. 425)

8 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [i. s-io

Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a j
second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered
together unto one place, and let the dry land appear : and it J
was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth ; and the j
gathering together of the waters called he Seas : and God saw

And evening came, and morning came &c. As v. 5.

9 — 13. Third Day; third and fourth works. The emergence of
the dry land out of the lower waters; and its being clothed with
vegetation.

9, 10. The part of the chaotic waters, which remained below the
* firmament,' and for the present still enveloped the earth, is now
gathered into ' seas ' — the plural referring probably to the aggregate of
waters which the ancients generally (cf the Gk 'OKcavos) pictured as
encircling the earth — and the surface of the earth appears. The idea
is that, whether by the earth rising, or by room being made around and
under it, the waters flowed away from its surface, and the dry ground
appeared. It must be remembered that to the Hebrews the earth was
not a large globe, revolving through space round the sun, but a
relatively small flat surface, in shape approximately round, supported
partly, as it seemed, by the encircling sea out of which it rose, but
resting more particularly upon a huge abyss of waters underneath,
whence hidden channels were supposed to keep springs and rivers
supplied, and also the sea (cf Dt. viii. 7 [read deeps for depths] ; Pr. iii.
20^ ' by his knowledge the deeps were cleft open ' — with allusion to the
formation of these channels) \ These vast subterranean waters are
often alluded to, as vii. 11, xlix. 25 (see the notes) ; Ex. xx. 4 ('the
waters under the earth') ; Job xxxviii. 16 ; Pr. viii. 28^ ; Ps. xxxiii. 7^
xxxvi. 6 ; cf Ps. xxiv. 2 'For he hath founded it upon the seas, And he
maketh it fast upon the streams') cxxxvi. 6 'To him that spread abroad
the earth upon the waters.* There is a graphic poetical description of
this part of the Third Day's work in Ps. civ. 6 — 8 :

Thou coveredst it with the deep [Le. with the primitive waters] like as
with a vesture;

The waters stood above the mountains:
At thy rebuke they fled,

At the voice of thy thunder they sped in alarm —
The mountains rose, the valleys sank —

Unto the place which thou hadst founded for them.

Confining the sea within its barriers is spoken of as a work of Divine
omnipotence also in Jer. v. 22, Job xxxviii. 8 — 11.

10. And God called &c. Cf on v. 5.

Earth. The word is used here in a somewhat different sense from
«. 2 : there it denoted the chaotic earth, enveloped in water, Milton's

^ See the iUustratioa in DB, i. 503.

r. 10-14] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 9

lliat it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth put forth P
grass, herb yielding seed, and fruit tree bearing fruit after its
kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth : and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, herb yielding seed after
its kind, and tree bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after
its kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And there was
evening and there was morning, a third day.

14 And God said. Let there be lights in the firmament of the

*embryon immature'; here it denotes the land, as we know it, in
opposition to the sea.

11, 12. The clothing of the earth with vegetation. Three of the
more conspicuous descriptions of vegetable produce are mentioned,
which may be regarded as representing the whole.

11. grass. Heb. deshe\ often rendered tender grass (i.e. young,
fi-esh grass, such as appears after rain (2 S. xxiii. 4 ; Job xxxviii. 27) ;
and so used suitably of the fresh young verdure, which the narrator
pictured as first brought forth by the earth.

herb. I.e. larger plants, especially such as vegetables and cereals :
cf V. 29, iii. 18; Ps. civ. 14.

yielding seed. I.e. possessing the means of self-propagation, and
also furnishing products often useful for man.

fruit tree. The writer thinks more particularly of trees producing
food for man.

after its kind.^ Rather, after its kinds (the word being collective),
i.e. according to its various species : so vv. 12, 24, 25. The addition
calls attention to the number and variety of the different species
included under each head. The point is one often emphasized in the
technical enumerations of 'P' : see the Introduction, p. viii : and cf. vi.
20, vii. 14; Lev. xi. 14—16, 19, 22, 29.

wherein is the seed thereof I.e. containing in itself the means of
self-propagation. The object of the v. is to shew how all vegetation
originated in the command of God, how the earth produces its multitu-
dinous species by His appointment, and how further these species
contain within themselves the means of continuous reproduction.

14 — 19. Fourth Day, and fifth work. The creation of luminaries
in heaven.

14. lights. Heb. nf'droth, places (or instruments) of light, i.e.
luminaries.

in the firmament of the heaven. I.e. fastened to it (cf. v. 17), and
below the ' waters above the firmament ' of v. 7. The Hebrews were
unconscious of the immense (and varying) distances by which the
heavenly bodies are separated from the earth; and supposed them
to have their positions, and courses, in some way assigned to them
m the solid 'firmament,' which seems to the spectator to extend, as
a huge cupola, above him.

10 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [i. 14, 15

heaven to divide the day from the night ; and let them be for p
signs, and for seasons, and for days and years : 16 and let them
be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon

The luminaries are described as subserving three purposes :

1. to divide the day from the night — or (v. 18) to divide the light
from the darkness, and to rule over the day and over tJie night — i.e. to be
the permanent regulators of the distinction laid down in vv. 4, 5 ; the
sun serving to distinguish the day from the night, and by the splendour
and potency of its rays 'ruling' over it; and the moon, though of
course equally visihle by day, being more conspicuous by night, and
so, with the stars, serving to distinguish it from the day, and ' ruling '
over it by imparting to it a character of its own.

2. to be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years,
(a) for sig?is, e.g. as helping to fix what we should call the points
of the compass, or by their appearance betokening the future state
of the weather, perhaps also, by extraordinary phenomena, as eclipses,
portending (as antiquity believed) extraordinary occurrences \ (b) for
seasons, i.e. not the four seasons of the year (though these may
be included), but fixed times (Heb. mo'adim, from yd'ad, to fix,
appoint), whether secular or sacred : as months and weeks, deter-
mined Dy the moon (cf Ps. civ. 19 'he made the moon for fixed
times'), periods of human occupation, as agriculture and navigation^,
or of animal life (cf. Jer. viii. 7 'the stork in the heaven knoweth
her fixed time,' viz. for migration), or of the flowering and seed-time
of plants, and similarly the fixed periods of the year which we call
* seasons ' ; and also sacred seasons — the festivals and other sacred
occasions in the Jewish calendar being fixed for definite days in the
week, month, or year (see esp. Lev. xxiii.), and the same word mS^ddim
being frequently applied to them (see ibid., where ten such mo'ddlm^
are enumerated), (c) for days and years, determining their length, and
regular succession.

3. to give light upon the earth (v. 15). A necessary condition of
life, and progress ; and essential for the existence and development of
the human race. The various functions assigned here to the heavenly
bodies have all, it is to be noticed, reference to the earth — and especially
to the earth as a habitation for living beings : in Job xxxviii. 33 they
are summed up in the expression, * the dominion of the heavens over
the earth.' For darkness and night, as having their place in the
Divinely-appointed economy of nature, see Ps. civ. 20.

^ Comp. the manner in which the prophets sometimes represent extraordinary i
darkeninga of the heavenly bodies as accompanying great political catastrophes j
(Am. viii. 9 ; Ez. xxxii. 7 ; Is. xiii, 10) ; see also Joel ii. 31, Luke xxi. 25. How- |
ever, an undue regard to such ' signs of heaven ' is condemned in Jer. x. 2.

2 Determined often in ancient times by the heliacal risings and settings of the
fixed stars : see Astkonomia in Smith's Diet, of Antiquities.

3 RV. set feasts (RVm. appointed seasons) ; elsewhere also appointed feasts, as
Is. i. 14; Hos. ii. 11 (RVm.). (The word rendered 'feast' simply, and meaning
properly a. pilgrimage (Ex. xxiii. 14 — 17 al), is quite different.)

I. i5-ao] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 11

the earth : and it was so. 16 And God made the two great P
lights ; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light
to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set
them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the
earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to
divide the light from the darkness : and God saw that it was
good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a
fourth day.

20 And God said. Let the waters ^ bring forth abundantly the

1 Heb. swarm with swarms of living creatures,

16 — 18. The manner in which God gave effect to His command.
The luminaries are first 'made' {v. 16), and then 'set' {y, 17) in the
firmament.

16. And God made. 'And,' following the command of i?v. 14, 15,
is equivalent virtually to Thus, or 8o. Similarly w. 21, 25.

to rule &c. Hence Ps. cxxxvi. 7 — 9. Cf also Jer. xxxi. 35.

he made the stars also. The stars hold a subordinate place, because,
so far as the earth and life upon it are concerned, they are of less
importance than the sun or moon. The Hebrews had no idea that the
'stars' were in reality, at least in many cases, far vaster and more
wonderful in their structure than the sun. Even the questions in
Job xxxviii. 31, 32, have a far fuller meaning to us than they had
to the poet who framed them.

17. set them in the firmament. Cf. on t>. 14 (p. 9).

' This whole description of the creation of the heavenly bodies is
written from the ancient geocentric standpoint : and it is vain to
attempt to bring it into scientific agreement with the teachings of
modern astronomy. But the object of the writer is a religious one ;
and for the religious point of view it is sufficient to know that the
heavenly bodies are marvels of the creative power of God, and in
other respects to consider them according to what they are for us.
They subserve human needs, in accordance with God's ordinance, in
the manifold ways indicated in the narrative ; and they are thus a
means of filling our minds with a profound sense of the wonderful
harmony of the universe, and of the might and wisdom of the Creator
(cf Pss. viii., xix., civ.) ' (Dillm.). There is at the same time a tacit
opposition to the wide-spread belief of the ancients that the heavenly
bodies were themselves divine, and to be treated as objects of worship
(Dt. iv. 19 &c.; Job xxxi. 26 ; Wisd. xiii. 2).

20—23. Fifth Day and sixth work. The water and air peopled
with living beings.

20. Let the waters swarm with swarming things, (even) living
souls. ^ The RV. here, unfortunately, fails entirely to give the reader
a clear idea of what is intended ; and even EVm. only partially supplies

12 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [i..o,2i

moving creature that hath life, and let fowl fly above the earth P
Mn the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created the
great sea-monsters, and every living creature that moveth, which
the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kinds, and
every winged fowl after its kind : and God saw that it was good.

1 Heb. on the face of the expanse of the heaven.

the deficiency. * Swarming things' (Heb. sherez) is a technical ex-
pression, and is applied to creatures that appear in swarms — whether
(as here) those that teem in the waters (both fishes and other small
aquatic creatures) \ or those which swarm on the ground or in the air
(i.e. creeping and flying insects, small reptiles, and small quadrupeds,
as the weasel and the mouse: see Lev. xi. 20 — 23, 29 — 31)^

(even) living souls, A ' soul ' (nephesk) in the psychology of the
Hebrews is not peculiar to man ; it is the principle of life and sensibility
in any animal organism, and is then transferred to the sentient organism
itself. The rendering * creature ' obliterates a distinctive characteristic
of Hebrew thought. Here the term denotes all kinds of aquatic
organisms, including even the lowliest. Comp. Ez. xlvii. 9 ' all soul that
swarmetk,' of fish ; and of other sentient things, ch. i. 21, 24, ix. 10,
12, 15, 16 ; Lev. xi. 10, 46, &c. (RV. each time, 'creature'), xxiv. 18
(Heb. 'he that smiteth the soul of a beast,' and then *soul for soul'),

fowl. Or, flying things. As Lev. xi. 20, 21, 23 (Heb.) shews, the^
term may include insects.

in front of the firmament of heaven. I.e. in the air, in front ^the
firmament, as a spectator standing upon the earth looks up towards it.
The RV. is incorrect, the Hebrew words not admitting of the renderinff|
given ; and the firmament, moreover, according to Hebrew ideas, noit|
being anything of which ' open ' could be predicated. The Lxx. adds^
at the end of this verse * And it was so' (as vv. 9, 11, 15, 24, 30).

21. The creatures thus produced specified somewhat more par-
ticularly.

sea-monsters. Heb. tannin, a long reptile, applied sometimes toi
land-reptiles (Ex. vii. 9 [see RVm.], 10, 12; Dt. xxxii. 33 [EVV.;
dragon\ ; Ps. xci. 13 [RV. serpent ; PBV. dragon]) ; but usually
denoting the crocodile (Is. xxvii. 1, li. 9 ; Ez. xxix. 3, xxxii. *2 ;
Ps. Ixxiv. 13 [EW. in all, dragon]), or other aquatic monster (Jer. li.
34; Ps. cxlviii. 7 [see RVm.] ; Job vii. 12 [RV. sea-monster]). Here,
it means sea- (and river-) monsters generally.

and every living soul {v. 20) that creepeth [or glideth], where- j

1 So Lev. xi. 10 (read 'swarm' for 'move') ; Ez. xlvii. 9.

a So vii. 21 (see EVm.), Lev. v. 2 (EV., unhappily [see on vv. 21, 24], 'creeping
things'). See especially Lev. xi. 20—23, 29—31, 41—44, 46: the reader who
desires to understand properly the distinctions referred to in this chapter should
mark on the margin of his Revised Version 'swarm,' 'swarmeth,' 'swarming'
against 'creep,' 'creepeth,' 'creeping' each time in these verses (as also against
'move' in v. 10), and 'creepeth' against 'moveth' in vv. 44, 46.

1.22-24] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 13

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and P
fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
24 And God said. Let the earth bring forth the living

creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of

with the waters swarm {v. 20). I.e. fishes, as well as other aquatic
creatures, which either glide through the water, or creep along its bed.
The word rendered 'creep' is used mostly of land-creatures (see on
V. 24) : it is used of aquatic creatures, as here, in Lev. xi. 46 ;
Ps. Ixix. 34 (read 'creepeth,' or 'glideth,' for RV. moveth)\ cf. the
corresponding subst. in Ps. civ. 25 ('wherein are things creeping
innumerable ').

22. As animate beings, the creatures just produced receive, not
only the customary mark of Divine approval {v. 21 end), but a blessing,
the terms of which shew that it is part of the Divine plan that they
should increase and multiply in the earth. The purpose was similar in
the creation of plants {v. 11) ; but no such permission is addressed to
them, their growth and movement being spontaneous, and not controlled
by a conscious will, as is the case, in a greater or less degree, with
animate beings.

Be fruitful, and multiply. A combination characteristic of P :
cf. V. 28, viii. 17, ix. 1, 7, xvii. 20 al. (see the Introd. p. viii, No. 5).

24 — 31. The Sixth Day ; the seventh and the eighth works. The
creation of land-animals, and of man.

24. bring forth the living creature. Bring forth living soul
(collectively) : see on v. 20.

hind (twice). Kinds : so u 25. In this, and the next verse, three
prominent classes of terrestrial animals are specified, as representing
the whole (cf. -y. 11).

cattle. Heb. ¥hemdh (lit., as Eth. shews, that which is dumb), i.e.
large quadrupeds, sometimes (esp. when opposed to ' man ') including
wild animals (as vi. 7, 20, vii. 23) ; but often, as here, referring more
particularly to domestic animals (cf. xxxiv. 23, xlvii. 18).

creeping thing. Heb. remes, i.e. things which 'move along the
ground either without feet, or with imperceptible feet' (Dillm.), i.e.
reptiles (lizards, snakes, &c.), a class of animal very abundant in the
East, and small creatures with more than four feet. So vv. 25, 26, vi.
7, 20, vii. 14, 23, viii. 17, 19 ; 1 K. iv. 33 ; Hos. ii. 18 al. ; cf. the cognate
verb. Lev. xi. 44 (read 'creepeth' for RV. movethy, xx. 25 (RVm.).

beast of the earth. Lit. ' living things (= C^ja) of the earth,' i.e.
which roam on the wide earth, = wild ajiimals : so vv. 25, [26], 30,
ix. 2, 10; 1 S. xvii. 46 ; Ps. Ixxix. 2 al. In ii. 19, 20, iii. 1, 14, the
expression used is 'beast (living thing) oi th.G field.'

1 But RV. 'creep' in Lev. xi. should throughout be 'swarm': see the footnote
on p. 12 ; and cf. Creeping things in DB,

14 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [i. .4-^6

the earth after its kind : and it was so. 25 And God made the P
beast of the earth after its kind, and the cattJe after their kind,
and every thing that creepeth upon the ground after its kind :
and God saw that it was good. 26 And God said, Let us make
man in our image, after our likeness : and let them have

25. How God gave effect to His coramand. The verse is related
to V. 24, as V. 21 to v. 20, vv. 16 — 18 to vv. 14, 15, and v. 7 to v. 6.

26, 27. The creation of man. The creation of man is introduced
with solemnity : it is the result of a special deliberation on the part of
God, and man is a special expression of the Divine nature.

Let us make man. The plural in God's mouth (which occurs other-
wise in the entire OT. only xi. 7 ; Is. vi. 8 — for ch. iii. 22 is evidently
different) is remarkable and has been variously explained. (1) The
general Jewish interpretation, and also that of some Christians (notably
Delitzsch), is that God is represented as including with Himself His
celestial court (1 K. xxii. 19 f ; Is. vi. 8 ; Ps. Ixxxix. 5, 6, &c.), and
consulting with them, before creating the highest of His works, man\
The words of the text seem however clearly to imply that those who
are included in the 1st pers. pi. are invited to take part in the creation
of man, which, if they are angels, is not probable : Delitzsch's
argument that it is not their co-operation, but only their sympathy,
which is invited, implies a strained limitation of the expression used.
(2) Others, especially the Fathers, have regarded the plural as ex-
pressing a plurality of persons in the Godhead, and so as suggesting, at
least by implication, the doctrine of the Trinity. But this is to
anticipate a much later stage in the history of revelation. (3) Hebrew
possesses what is called a 'plural of majesty' : the words for 'lord,'
'master,' even when applied to a single person, are often, for instance,
plural (see e.g. xxxix. 20 ; Ex. xxi. 29, 34 ; Is. xix. 4), for the purpose
of conveying the ideas of dignity and greatness ; the usual Hebrew word
for ' God ' ('EloMm) is similarly, as a rule, plural (indicative, no doubt,
of the fulness of attributes and powers conceived as united in the
Godhead) : hence (Dillm., Perowne) it might well be that, on a solemn
occasion like this, when God is represented as about to create a being
in His own 'image,' and to impart to him a share in that fulness of
sovereign prerogatives possessed by Himself, He should adopt this
unusual and significant mode of expression.

in our image, after our likeness. Of the two words used, ' image '
(1 S. vi. 5 ; Dan. iii. 1, &c. ; but not used elsewhere in the sense of
'resemblance,' except in the parallels, v. 27, v. 3, ix. 6) suggests,
perhaps, more particularly the idea of material resemblance, ' likeness '
(Ez. i. 5, 10, 13, 16, &c. ; and ch. v. 1, 3), that of an immaterial

1 Cf. Pesikta 34* (ed. Buber), 'God took counsel with the ministering angels,
and said unto them, Let us make,' &c. : similarly in the Targ. Ps.-Jon. on this
verse. Comp. the later Jewish saying (Edersheim, Life and Times, n. 749), 'God
never does anything, without first consulting the family above.'

I. ,6] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 15

dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, P
and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every

resemblance : but the distinction cannot be pressed^ : both words refer
here evidently to spiritual resemblance alone ; and the duplication of
Bynon3ans is intended simply to emphasize the idea of resemblance
(cf. the duplications in x. 5, 20, 31, 32, xxv. 16).

What however is meant by the * image of God,' which man is thus
said to bear ? It is (1) something which evidently forms the ground
and basis of his entire preeminence above animals ; (2) it is something
which is transmitted to his descendants (v. 1, 3, ix. 6), and belongs
therefore to man in general, and not solely to man in a state of
primitive innocence ; (3) it relates, from the nature of the case, to
man's immaterial nature. It can be nothing but the gift of self-
conscious reason^ which is possessed by man, but by no other animal.
In all that is implied by this, — in the various intellectual faculties
possessed by him ; in his creative and originative power, enabhng him
to develop and make progress in arts, in sciences, and in civilization
generally ; in the power of rising superior to the impulses of sense, of
subduing and transforming them, of mounting to the apprehension of
general principles, and of conceiving intellectual and moral ideals ; in
the ability to pass beyond ourselves, and enter into relations of love
and S3niipathy with our fellow-men ; in the possession of a moral sense,
or the faculty of distinguishiDg right and wrong ; in the capacity for
knowing God, and holding spiritual communion with Him, — man is
distinguished fundamentally from other animals ^ and is allied to the
Divine nature ; so that, wide as is the interval separating him from
the Creator, he may nevertheless, so far as his mental endowments are
concerned, be said to be an ' image,' or adumbration, of Him. From
the same truth of human nature, there follows also the possibility
of God being revealed in man (John i. 1 — 14). Comp. in the NT.
1 Cor. xi. 7, Jas. iii. 9 ; and the application of the same figure to the
spiritual formation of the 'new man,* Col. iii. 10 (cf Eph. iv. 24).
See also Ecclus. xvii. 3 ff. ; Wisd. ii. 23.

and let them have dominion &c. In virtue of the powers implied in
their being formed in God's * image,' all living beings upon the earth
are given into their hand. Cf Ps. viii. 5 if., * For thou hast made him
lack but Httle of (being) God [viz. by the powers conferred upon him],
and thou crownest him with glory and state : Thou makest him to rule
over the works of thy hands ; thou hast put all things under his feet.'

and over all the earth. Pesh. * and over aU the beasts of the earth '

^ Notice in v. 27, ix. 6 'image' alone, and in v. 1 'likeness' alone, lxx.,
inserting koL, accentuate the distinction unduly, and led some of the Fathers to
endeavour fruitlessly to distinguish ekwv from 6fioi(v<ns. Cf. Oehler, Theol. of OT.
§ 68.

2 It is true, some of the faculties mentioned are possessed, in a limited degree,
by animals : but in none of them are they coupled with self-conscious reason j and
jhence they do not form a foundation for the same distinctive character.

16 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [1.26-30

creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 And God 1
created man in his own image, in the image of God created he
him ; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed
them : and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth, and subdue it ; and have dominion over the
fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living
thing that ^moveth upon the earth. 29 And God said. Behold,
I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the
face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of
a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat: 30 and to
every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to
every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is ^life,

1 Or, creepeth * Heb. a living soul.

(v. 25). The word (n'^n) has probably dropped out accidentally (Del.,
m\m.al)\

28. The Blessing on man. The blessing is analogous to the one
in V. 22 (see also ix. 1 — 7), but ampler in its terms : man may not^ooly -
'be fruitful and multiply/ but, in accordance with the Creator's
purpose (v. 26), 'subdue^ the earth, and subject to himself its living
inhabitants.

replenish. Fill, — which indeed was the meaning of * replenish ' in
Old English, and is what is intended here. In the Heb. the word is
exactly the same as the one rendered 'fill ' in v. 22. So ix. 1.

subdue. The word (kdbash, — properly t^^ead down) is used of the
subjugation of a conquered territory, Nu. xxxii. 22 ; Josh, xviii. 1.

29, 30. Provision made for the food of men (v. 29), and other
terrestrial animals and birds (v. 30) : men are to have as food the seed
3i>nd fruit of plants; terrestrial animals and birds are to have the leaves.
The food of men and animals is thus part of a Divine order. The
details are however given in only the broadest outline ; nothing for
instance is said respecting the food of aquatic animals, or of milk and
honey ; the aim of the verse is simply to define, with reference to
V. 11 f., how the different kinds of plants there mentioned may be
utihzed for food.

29. for meat. For food. 'Meat' in Old English was not re-
stricted, as it is with us, to the flesh of animals ; it meant food in
general. The archaism has been sometimes elsewhere retained in KV.,
as 1 K. xix. 8 ; Ps. Ixix. 21 ; Is. Ixii. 8 ; Joel i. 16.

30. life. A living soul. See on v. 20.

1 Ovid's description of the creation of man {Met. i. 76 ff.) is worth quoting : —
♦Sanctius his animal mentisque capacius altae Deerat adhuc, et quod dominari in
caetera posset..,. Finxit in effigiem moderantum cuncta deorum. Pronaque quum
spectent aniraalia caetera terram, Os homini sublime dedit ; caelumque videre
lussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus.'

1. 30, 31— n. I, ^] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 17

I have given every green herb for meat : and it was so. 31 And P
God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth
day.

II. 1 And the heaven and the earth were finished, and all
the host of them. 2 And on the seventh day God finished his

every green herb for meat. Rather, all the green of herbs (i.e.

*'0 leaves) /or food.

The condition of things presupposed in v. 30 is inconsistent with
i iie evidence of palaeontology, which makes it certain that carnivorous
animals existed upon the earth long before the appearance of man, and
that these * preyed upon one another, precisely as the same species or
tlieir successors do now.' The truth is, the writer portrays an ideal.
'Animal food can only be had at the cost of animal life, and the
taking of animal life seemed to him to be a breach of the Divine order,
which from the beginning provides only for the continuance and main-
tenance of life' (Perowne, Expositor^ Feb. 1891, p. 129). Hence he
represents both men and animals as subsisting at first only on vegetable
food (animal food, according to the same writer, is first permitted to
man in ix. 2)^

31. The closing verdict on the entire work of creation. The work
of each particular day is good : the combination of works, each dis-
charging rightly its own function, and at the same time harmonizing as
it should do with the rest, is characterized as wry good. As has
been remarked, a note of Divine satisfaction runs through the whole
narrative, and it reaches its climax here ; but the severe simplicity and
self-control of the writer does not allow it to find any stronger ex-
pression than this. Contrast the more exuberant tone of Ps. civ. 31.
&. 1 Tim. iv. 4 (' for every creature of God is good,' &c.).

II. 1—3. The Seventh Day. The rest of God.

1. host. The word means an army (xxi. 22 &c.) ; and the ex-
pression 'host of heaven' occurs frequently, denoting sometimes the
stars (Dt. iv. 19), sometimes the angels (1 K. xxii. 19), both being
conceived as forming an organized and disciplined body. The term is
used here, exceptionally, with reference to the earth, by a species of
attraction. The * host ' of heaven and earth means all the component
items of which they consist, — whether mentioned expressly or not in
eh. i., — conceived as constituting an organized whole.

2. finished. The 'finishing ' is regarded as a separate, substantive
act, and assigned accordingly to a separate day : God formally brought
His work to its close by not continuing it on the seventh day, as He
had done on each of the preceding days.

1 The idea that in the 'Golden Age' the first men lived only on vegetable food is
found also in classical writers: see e.g. Plato, Legg. vi. 782 o; Ovid, MeU 1. 103 — 6,
3tv. 96—103, Fasti iv. 895 fif.

18 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [ii. 2, 3

work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh dayi
from all his work which he had made. 3 And God blessed the
seventh day, and hallowed it : because that in it he rested from
all his work which God had created and made.

his worh which he had made [twice]. Better, his business which
he had done, — i.e. the work of creation which He had set Himself.
M^ldcMh means work appointed, or imposed (e.g. Nu. iv. 3) ; it is the
word used regularly of the *work' or 'business' forbidden on the
sabbath (Ex. xx. 9, 10, xxxv. 2 ; Jer. xvii. 22, 24, al).

rested. Better, desisted. Bhahath means (see viii. 22 ; Is. xiv. 4
to desist, cease (c£ Arab, sabata, to cut off, interrvpt) : so that what
the verse predicates of God is not the positive 'rest' of relaxation
(Heb. nuah) but the negative 'cessation' from activity \ The former
idea is however found elsewhere in the same connexion, as in the
Decalogue (Ex. xx. 11), 'and rested on the seventh day,' and Ex. xxxi. 17
(P), 'and on the seventh day he desisted and was refreshed [lit. took
breathy In the verb used (shahath) there is an evident allusion to
the 'sabbath' (properly shabbdth).

3. blessed... and hallowed it. Distinguished it from ordinary days
(Sir. xxxiii. 7 — 9), by attaching special blessings to its observance,
and by setting it apart for holy uses. Cf Ex. xx. 8, 11^; Jer. xvii.
22, 24, 27 ; Is. Iviii. 13. The remark is made in view of the later
institution of the sabbath (Ex. xx, 8 — 11 &c.) as a day sacred to
Jehovah ; for there is no indication or hint of its being observed as
such in pre-Mosaic times.

because that in it he desisted from all his business, in doing
which God had created, i.e. which he had creatively done. The ex-
pression characterizes God's work as a creative work.

The formula which marks the close of each of the first six days is
absent in the case of the seventh day ; and hence it has been sometimes
supposed that the 'rest' of the seventh day was to be regarded as ex-
tending indefinitely through the whole of history. It is doubtful however
whether this view is correct. The ' day,' to which in v. 2 the ' rest ' is
distinctly assigned, will be understood naturally in the same sense as ,
in the case of the six preceding ' days,' and the work from which God |
is represented as 'resting' or 'desisting' is not work in general, but !
only creative work. The idea of the writer seems to have been that |
God's sabbath intervened between the close of His work of creation |
and the commencement of what, in modern phraseology, is usually j
termed His sustaining providence. The sabbath by which God is said j
to have closed His work of creation is thus a type of the weekly |
recurring sabbath of the later Israelites. The truth that God's
sustaining providence is operative on the sabbath, not less than on

1 Cf. Ex. xxiii. 12 (E) 'On the seventh day thou shalt desist, that thy ox and thy
ass may rest, and the son of thy bondwoman, and thy sojourner [resident foreigner], 1
may be refreshed [lit. may take breath] ' ; xxxiv. 21 (both times ♦ desist ').

1. 4] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 19

4 These are the generations of the heaven and of the earth p
(vlicn they were created,

)tlier days (Jn. v. 17), is of course tacitly presupposed by the writer,
)ut he does not explicitly refer to it. — See further on the Sabbath
). 34 f

4*. These are.. .created. The subscription to the preceding nar-
ative, — supposed by many critics to have originally stood, perhaps
vithout * when they were created,' as the superscription to i. 1, and to
lave been transferred here by the compiler of the book\ See further
liG Introd. pp. ii, vi, viii (No. 9).

generations. Lit. begettings (quite a different word from the one
ised in xvii. 7, 9, &c.) ; hence (successive) generations^ especially as
inanged in a genealogy (v. 1, x. 1, xi. 10), also, somewhat more
';Qi\QXd^\[Y J particulars about a man and Ms descendants (vi. 9, xi. 27,
:xv. 19). Here the word is applied metaphorically to 'heaven and
iaith ' ; and it will denote, by analogy, particulars respecting heaven
md earth and the things which might be regarded metaphorically as
rroceeding from them^ — i.e. just the contents of ch. i.

The student should examine, and compare with the preceding narrative,
>ther passages of Scripture containing thoughts or lessons suggested by the
eligious contemplation of nature : for instance, Am. iv. 13, v. 8, ix. 6 ; Jer.
;xxii. 17 ; II Isaiah xl. 12—14, 21—2, 26, 28, xlii. 5, xlv. 7, 12, 18 ; Jer. x. 12 f.;
^8. viii., xix. 1 — 6, xxxiii. 6 — 9, cii. 25, civ. (the * Poem of Creation *), cxxxvi.
>— 9, cxlviii. ; Pr. iii. 19 f., viii. 22—31 ; Job ix. 8 f., xxvi. 5 — 13, and especially
he two magnificent chapters, xxxviii. — xxxix. ; Wisd. xiii. 3 — 6 ; Jn. i 1 — 5 ;
lorn. i. 20; Col. i. 16 ; Heb. 1. 2, 3, xi. 3 ; Rev. iv. 11.

The Cosmogony of Genesis^.

It remains to consider some important questions to which the cosmogony
fhich we have just been studying gives rise. "We have to ask, namely,
I) Does the picture which it afi'ords of the past history of the world agree
dth that which is disclosed by science 1 (ii) What is the origin of the
osmogony? and (iii) What is its true value and import to us?

(i) Those who have read Pearson On the Creed may remember how at the
nd of his exposition of Art. i. (fol. 68) he says that heaven and earth were created
most certainly within not more than six, or at farthest seven, thousand years,'
rom the age in which he was writing. That was the 17th century. But since
*earson's time geology has become a science, and has disclosed, by testimony

^ ♦ These ' may point indifferently forwards (as x. 1) or backwards (as x. 32) ;
ut the corresponding formula stands everywhere else as the superscription to the
ection which follows (see v. 1, vi. 9, x. 1, xi. 10, 27, &c.).

2 The following pages are adapted in the main, with some abridgment, from an
(Tticle contributed by the present writer to the Expositor, Jan. 1886, pp. 23 — 45.

2—2

20 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

which cannot bo gainsaid, the immense antiquity of the earth. The earth, as
we now know, reached its present state, and acquired its rich and wondrous
adornment of vegetable and animal life, by a gradual process, extending over
countless centuries, and embracing unnumbered generations of living forms.
Those white cliflfs which rise out of the sea on our southern coasts, when
examined by the microscope, are seen to consist mostly of the minute shells of
marine organisms, deposited at the rate of a few inches a century at the bottom
of the ocean, and afterwards, by some great upheaval of the earth's crust, lifted
high above the waves ^ Our coal measures are the remains of mighty forests,
which have slowly come and gone upon certain parts of the earth's surface,
and have stored up the energy, poured forth during long ages from the sun,
for our consumption and enjoyment 2. These and other formations contain
moreover numerous fossil remains ; and so geologists have been able to
determine the order in which, during the slowly passing ages of their growth,
higher and higher types of vegetable and animal life were ever appearing upon
the globe. Nor is this all. Astronomers, by the study and comparison of the
heavenly bodies, have risen to the conception of a theory explaining, by the aid
of known mechanical and physical principles, the formation of the earth itself.
The solar system — i.e. the sun, earth, and other planets with their satellites —
existed once as a diffused gaseous mass, or nebula, of immense dimensions,
which gradually condensed, and became a rotating sphere ; and from this in
succession the different planets were flung off, while the remainder was more
and more concentrated till it became what we call the sun. One of these
planets, the earth, in process of time, by reduction of temperature and other
changes, developed the conditions adequate for the support of life 3. The time
occupied by all these processes cannot of course be estimated with any
precision ; but it will in any case have embraced millions of years : a recent
work on astronomy places the time at which the moon was thus flung off from
the then liquid earth, at about 57,000,000 years ago*.

Is now the teaching of geology and astronomy on the subjects referred to
in the preceding paragraph consistent with what we read in Gen. i. ?

Obviously it is not consistent with it, if by 'day' is meant a period of
24 hours. It is, however, conceivable that the writer, in spite of his regular
mention of 'evening' and 'morning,' may have used the word in a figurative
sense, as representing a period, aware indeed that the work of the Creator
could not be measured by human standards, but at the same time desirous of
artificially accommodating it to the period of the week. Let us, now, at least
provisionally, grant this metaphorical use of the term 'day': the following
questions will then arise. Do the 'days' of Genesis correspond with well-
defined geological periods ? and does the order in which the different living
things and the heavenly bodies are stated to have been created agree with the

^ See Huxley's striking lecture 'On a Piece of Chalk' in his Lay Sermons (re-
printed in his Collected Essays, vol. viii.).

2 Comp. two fine passages on the * Slowness of the Creative Process ' in
Pritchard's Analogies in the Progress of Nature and Grace, 1868 (the Hulsean
Lectures for 1867), pp. 11 ff., 19 ff.j also Bonney's Old Truths in Modern Lights,
p. 89 ff.

« See Sir B. S. Ball's The Earth's Beginnings (1901), esp. p. 246 flf.

* Prof. H. H. Turner, Modern Astronomy (1901), p. 277.

THE COSMOGONY OF GENESIS

facts of geology and astronomy ? To both these questions candour compels
the answer, No. Here is a table of the succession of life upon the globe, taken
(with some modification of form) from Sir J. W. Dawson's Chain of Life in
Geological Time^ : —

Eozoic

Palaeozoic

' 1. Laurentian.

2. Huronian.

3. Cambrian.

4. Silurian.

5. Devonian.

6. Carboniferous,

Mesozoie

Cainozoio

^ 7. Permian.

8. Triassic.

9. Jurassic.

10. Cretaceous.

I'll. Tertiary.

12. Post-Tertiary.

ANIMAL LirB.

Eozoon Canadense^.

Age of Protozoa (low-
liest marine animals).

Invertebrata : Age of
mollusks, corals, and
crustaceans. In 4
fishes begin.

Fishes abundant (but
no modern species).

Earliest insects*.

Amphibians begin (spe-
cies allied to frogs,
newts, and water -
lizards, some of the
last large crocodile-
like creatures).

Insects (spiders, beetles,
cockroaches, &c.).

Earliest true reptiles.

Earliest marsupial
mammals.

Age of monster reptiles
and of birds.

Age of extinct mam-
mals. First living
invertebrates.

Age of modern mam-
mals and man.

VEGETABLE LIFE.

Doubtful^.

Indications of plants
not determinable.

Marine plants (sea-
weeds, &c.).

Earhest land plants.

Coal plants ; chiefly
tree-ferns and large
mosses (flowerless
plants), pines, and
cycads.

Earliest modern trees.

Age of palms and dicoty-
ledonous vin^fiosjjerms.

The earliest organic forms appear in the remains belonging to the period
first named, marked, as its name implies, by the * dawn of life.'

In Genesis the order is : —

Third Day. Gi-ass, herbs (i.e. vegetation more generally), trees.

(Fourth Day. — Luminaries.)

Fifth Day. — Aquatic animals, both small (yi^, 'swarming things') and
great (D^i^jn, 'sea-monsters'), and winged creatures (birds; also probably
such insects as usually appear on the wing).

Sixth Day.— Land animals, both domesticable and wild, and creeping
things (small reptiles; perhaps also creeping insects). Man.

The two series are evidently at variance. (1) The geological record con-
tains no evidence of clearly defined periods, such as {ex hyp.) are represented

1 Ed. 3 (1888). See the Table opposite to p. 1 ; and (on No. 6) pp. 142-
Cf. the same writer's Relics of Primaeval Life (1897), p. 2.

-157.

^ If this be of organic origin, a question on which geologists still differ. Comp.
Geikie's Text Book of Geology (1893), p. 694 f.; Bonney, Qeol. Mag. 1895, p. 292.

3 Perhaps to be assumed from the large quantity of graphite (carbon) present in
^■,,-these rocks : see Geikie, p. 696, with note 1 ; Prestwich, Geology (1888), ii. 21 f.
nik * E.g. a kind of May-fly, as well as other forms {Chain of Life ^ p. 139 ff.).

22 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

by the * days ' of Genesis. Tliis, however, may perhaps be considered a minor
discrepancy. (2) In Genesis vegetation is complete two 'days,'— i.e. two
periods,— before animal life appears: geology shews that they appear
simultaneously— even if animal life does not appear first. The two are found
side by side in humble forms; and they continue side by side, advancing
gradually till the higher and more complete types are reached : one does not
appear long before the other. (3) In Genesis fishes and birds appear together
(Fifth Day), and precede all land-animals (Sixth Day); according to the
evidence of geology, birds appear long after fishes, and they are preceded by
numerous species of land-animals (including in particular ' creeping things ').

The second and third of these discrepancies are formidable. To remove
them, harmonists have had recourse to different expedients, of which the
following are the principal.

(1) It has been supposed that the main description in Genesis does not
relate to the geological periods at all, that room is left for these periods
between v. 1 and r. 2, that the life which then flourished upon the earth was
brought to an end by a catastrophe the results of which are alluded to in v. 2,
and that what follows is the description of a second creation, immediately
preceding the appearance of man. This, implying as it does a destruction and
subsequent restoration, is called the ' restitution-hypothesis.' It labours under
most serious difficulties. The assumption of an interval between v. I and v. 2,
wide enough to embrace the whole of geological time, though in the
abstract exegetically admissible, is contrary to the general tenor of the
opening verses of the narrative ; the existence of the earth, together with the
whole flora and fauna of the geological periods, prior to the creation of light
and formation of the sun is scientifically incredible ; and the existing species
of plants and animals are so closely related to those which immediately
preceded man, that the assumption of an intervening period of chaos and ruin
is in the last degree improbable. Arbitrary in itself, and banned by science,
the restitution-hypothesis, though advocated in the last century by Kurtz and
Dr Chalmers, has otherwise been seldom adopted by modern apologists.

(2) The vision-theory. Upon this view the narrative is not meant to
describe the actual succession of events, but is the description of a series of
visions^ presented prophetically to the narrator's mental eye, and representing
not the first appearance of each species of life upon the globe, but its
maximum development. The ' drama of creation,' it is said, is described not
as it was enacted historically, but optically, as it would present itself to a
spectator, in a series of pictures, or tableaux, embodying the most character-
istic and conspicuous feature of each period, and, as it were, summarizing in
miniature its results. The Third Day is identified with the Carboniferous
period (No. 6 in the Table), the marme life of the preceding periods, copious
though it was, being suj^posed to be not visible in the tableaux, and con-
sequently disregarded. This theory was attractively expounded in Hugh
Millei-'s Testimony of the Rocks (1857), a work which was for many years
extremely popular in this country. The objections to it are enumerated by
Delitzschi. The revelation of the unknown past to a historian, or even to

1 Comm. iiber die Genesis, ed. 4 (1872), p. 18 f.

THE COSMOGONY OF GENESIS 23

a prophet, by means of a vision, is unexampled in the OT., and out of analogy
with the character and objects of prophecy ; the narrative contains no indica-
tion of its being the relation of a vision (which in other cases is regularly noted,
e.g. Am. vii. — ix.; Is. vi.; Ez. i. &c.); it purports to describe not appearances
(°And I saw, and behold...'), but facts {'Let the earth... And it was so'), and
to substitute one for the other is consequently illegitimate ; the resemblances
between Gen. i. and other cosmogonies — especially the Babylonian — shew that
the writer has before him * not a vision, but a tradition.' There is also the
material difficulty that, while marine animals, small as well as great, were not
hidden from view in the tableau of the Fifth Day, the fishes so characteristic
of the Devonian period (which precedes the Carboniferous period) are not
described : in accordance with the hypothesis itself, these should have been
noticed before the vegetation of the Third Day. Indeed this last difficulty
may be stated more generally: if the past was expressly revealed in the form
of a vision, is it likely that the picture as a whole would be so widely diflFerent
from the reality as it unquestionably is ?

(3) Sir J. W. Dawson 1, a distinguished Canadian geologist of the last
century, rejecting (p. 193) the hypothesis of Hugh Miller, as Hugh Miller
before him had rejected that of Kurtz, adopted another method of reconcilia-
tion, assigning nearly the whole of the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic periods (Nos. 4
to 9 in the Table) to the Fifth Day, and supposing Nos. 2 and 3 to contain such
relics as survive of the work of the Third Day. The objections to this scheme
are : (a) it brings together fishes and birds, which nevertheless are in reality
widely separated (Nos. 4 and 9 in the Table) ; (&) Genesis places the appear-
ance of * creeping things ' on the Sixth Day, while in fact they appear in what
Sir J. W. Dawson assigns to the Fifth Day (Nos. 6 and 7)^; (c) in Genesis
vegetation, including trees, is complete on the Third Day, whereas prior to the
Silurian period (No. 4) nothing but the humblest forms of marine vegetation
is observable. Sir J. W. Dawson is conscious of the last difficulty ; and he
allows that the existence before the Silurian period of vegetation that would
satisfy the language of Genesis still awaits proof. He is sanguine himself that
in time this proof may be forthcoming; but the fact that vegetable life is
admitted to have advanced progressively from lower to higher forms is not
favourable to the expectation, and it is certain that no other geologist
shares it\

1 Origin of the World according to Revelation and Science^ (1886), pp. 192 — 5.

2 To escape this difficulty Sir J. W. Dawson {Expositor, Apr. 1886, p. 297)
limits remes (see on i. 24) to ' small quadrupeds ' ; but the limitation is arbitrary ;
for it is impossible to exclude reptiles from the expression.

8 The harmony represented as existing between Gen. i. and science, in the
Table facing p. 1 of Sir J. W. Dawson's Modern Science in Bible Lands^ (1895) is
purely illusory: 'vegetation,' for instance, in the Biblical column means entirely
land-plants, whereas the ' Protogens in graphite beds ' which correspond ostensibly
in the column headed 'Vegetable life' consist entirely of marine plants, to the
exclusion of land-plants ; and reptiles actually appear long before birds, not
simultaneously with them, as they are represented as doing in the column headed
•Animal life.' The Table on p. 353 of the Origin of the World is illusory also upon
similar grounds.

The reader of Sir J. W. Dawson's works should be aware that his statements on

Biblical matters, especially where questions relating to science or criticism are

involved, are to be received with much caution and distrust.

24 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

(4) Professor Dana*, accepting the nebular hypothesis of the origin of the
solar system, begins by seeking to accommodate it to the first five verses of
Gen. i. Accordingly, following substantially Prof. Guyot^, he considers that the
terms 'earth* and 'waters' in v. 2 do not denote anything which we should call
by those names, but matter in that unimaginable condition in which it was not
yet endowed with force or the power of molecular action : the creation of
Might' {v. 3) was in reality the endowment of this 'inert' matter with these
capacities; vv. 6 — 8 (the Second Day) describe the making of the earth,
* water' there not denoting what the Hebrews knew as water, but the
attenuated 'substance of the universe, while yet diflfused, in a nebulous or
vaporous form, tlirough space, and v. 7 describing the separation of the earth
from this diffused matter; and when it is said that on the Third Day the
earth brought forth grass, herbs, and fruit-trees, the meaning really is, that it
brought forth different species of sea-weed, and the lowest, seedless types of
land-vegetation (these being all the forms of vegetation which geology recog-
nizes before fishes, which are assigned by Genesis to the next day : see Nos. 3,
4 in the Table). Prof. Dana was a most eminent geologist ; but the fact that,
in order to harmonize the cosmogony of Genesis with the teachings of science,
he was obliged to have recourse to such extraordinary and unnatural interpre-
tations of the words of Genesis, is the best proof that the two are in reality
irreconcilable 3.

So much for the geological difficulties of the cosmogony of Genesis. Let
us now consider the astronomical difficulties presented by it. (1) The creation
of the sun, moon, and stars, after the earth. The formation of the heavenly
bodies after the earth is inconsistent with the entire conception of the solar
system — and indeed, if we think also of the stars, with that of the whole

1 In the BihUotheca Sacra, April, 1885, p. 201 ff.

* Creation (1884), p. 36: 'The Heb. word maim does not necessarily mean
waters, but applies as well to a gaseous atmosphere' (!). And * earth ' is similarly
explained as denoting (pp. 35, 38) a formless sphere of gas — the * primordial cosmic
material,' out of which the universe was ultimately formed.

The solution of the discrepancies proposed recently by Mr Capron {The Conflict
of Truth, 1901, pp. 170 fif., 194), viz. that the text speaks only of the order in which
the creative words were uttered, not of that in which the resulting effects were
produced, yields a sense which is contrary to the obvious intention of the writer.
Mr Capron argues also (p. 205 ff.) that by 'earth' and 'water' in Gen. i. 1, 2
is denoted gaseous matter; but the sense which he supposes to be expressed by
these two verses (pp. 136 ff., 213) is not credible {v. 2 ' And matter was then in
a gaseous condition; for it was formless, homogeneous, and invisible, and the
Spirit of the Almighty agitated with molecular vibrations the fluid mass ').

' When therefore Prof, Dana's authority is quoted for the opinion that Gen i. is
in harmony with science, it must be carefully remembered hoio this harmony was
obtained by him, viz. by imposing upon the words of Genesis meanings which it is
simply impossible that they can ever have been intended to convey.

See further, on Prof. Dana's theory of reconciliation, the critique of the
present writer in the Andover (U.S.A.) Review, Dec. 1887, pp. 641 — 9; and
President Morton's articles referred to below (p. 33). Comp. also Prof. T. G.
Bonney at the Norwich Church Congress {Report of the Norwich Church Congress,
p. 311; or in the Guardian, Oct. 16, 1895, p. 1588): 'The story of Creation in
Genesis, unless we play fast and loose either with words or with science, cannot
be brought into harmony with what we have learnt from geology.' Canon Bonney
permits the writer to add that the statements on geological Bubjects contained in
the preceding pages are in his opinion correct.

THE COSMOGONY OF GENESIS 25

celestial universe— as revealed by science. Both the stars in their far-distant
courses, and the planetary system with which this globe is more intimately
connected, form a vast and wonderfully constituted order, so marked by
con'elation of structure, by identity of component elements (as revealed by the
spectroscope), and by unity of design, as to forbid the supposition that a
particular body (the earth) was created prior to the whole, of which it is
a single and subordinate part (2) The commonly accepted theory (Laplace's)
of the formation of the solar system by the gradual condensation of a nebula,
does not permit the consolidation of the earth, the appearance upon it of water,
and the growth of vegetation, before the sun was 'made,' i.e. while the substance
of the sun was still in a diffused gaseous state. At such a period, it is doubtful
if the earth itself would not also have been in a gaseous state; certainly, it
\vould not have cooled sufficiently for water to exist upon it, and trees to
grow*. The solution usually offered of these difficulties is that be in «?. 14
means appear, and made in v. 16 means not formed, but either (Dana) made to
appear, or (Dawson) appointed, viz. to their office and work : the luminaries,
it is argued, may thus have existed long previously, but it was only on the
Fourth Day that they ' appeared ' (the thick vapour around the earth having
previously concealed them), and were * appointed' to the functions enumerated
in vv, 14 — 18. But this explanation is quite untenable. Hebrew is not such
a poverty-stricken language as to have no word expressing the idea of 'appear'
(see V. 9) ; and had the writer intended * appear,' it may be safely affirmed that
he would have said so. The sense attached to 'made' is also illegitimate : in
the very few passages where T\^V means appointed, either this sense is at
once apparent from the context 2, or the word is followed by a specification of
the office or function intended^ : used absolutely, it can be only a synonym of
'formed*.' Verses 14 — 18 cannot be legitimately interpreted except as implying
that, in the conception of the writer, luminaries had not previously existed ;
and that they were ' made,' and * set ' in their places in the heavens, after the
separation of sea and land, and the appearance of vegetation upon the earth
ivv. 6 — 8, 9 — 13). No reconciliation of this representation with the data of
science has as yet been found.

One discrepancy more, of a different kind, remains still to be noticed.
From the injunction in v. 30 it is a legitimate inference that the narrator
considered the original condition of animals to be one in which they subsisted
solely on vegetable food. This is not merely inconsistent with the physical
structure of many animals (which is such as to require animal food), but is

1 Cf. Prof. Pritchard, late Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, Expositor,
Jan. 1891, p. 49 f. : 'The existence of water [on the earth] before the concentration
of the sun into the form of a sun is inconceivable with a competent knowledge of
the facts of nature. So too is the existence of grass and fruit trees, antecedent to
the same, or even under the condition of the invisibility of the sun as a sun ' (cf.
p. 53). To the same effect, Occasional Notes of an Astronomer, p. 262 f.

* As, * He made priests from among all the people ' (1 K. xii. 31) ; 2 S. xv. 1
and 1 K. i. 6 (where 'prepared' is lit. made); 2 K. xx.i. 6 (BVm.). But really in
these passages 'made' means more than 'appointed'; it means instituted,
organized, i.e. it is merely a metaphorical application of the proper sense of 'made.'

* As Ps. civ. 4 ; 1 S. viii. 16.

* As V. 26, V. 1 ; Am. v. 8 ; Job ii. 9 ; Ps. cxv. 15, and regularly.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS

contradicted by the facts of palaeontology, which afford conclusive evidence
that animals preyed upon one another long before the date of man's appearance
upon the earth.

From all that has been said, only one conclusion can be drawn. Rend
without prejudice or bias, the narrative of Gen. i. creates an impression
at variance with the facts revealed hy science : the efforts at reconciliation
which have been reviewed are but different modes of obliterating its character-
istic features, and of reading into it a view which it does not express. The
harmonistic expedients adopted by Sir J. W. Dawson and Prof. Dana are in
reality tantamount to the admission that, understood in the natural sense of
the words — and we have no right to impose any other sense upon them — ^it
does not accord with the teachings of science. While fully bearing in mind
the immediate design of the writer, to describe, viz. in terms intelligible to
the non-scientific mind, how the earth was fitted to become the abode of man,
it is impossible not to feel that, had he been acquainted with its actual past,
he would, while still using language equally simple, equally popular, equally
dignified, have expressed himself in diff"erent terms, and presented a different
picture of the entire process. It will also, farther, be now apparent that the
admission, granted provisionally above (p. 20), that 'day' might be interpreted
as representing a period, is of no avail for bringing the narrative into harmony
with the teaching of science ; and that consequently there is no occasion to
understand the word in any but its ordinary sense.

(ii) What then may we suppose to have been the source of the cosmogony
of Genesis ? In answering this question, we must bear in mind the position
which the Hebrews took among the nations of antiquity. In the possession of
aptitudes fitting them in a peculiar measure to become the channel of revela-
tion and the exponents of a spiritual religion, the Hebrew nation differed
materially from its neighbours ; but it was allied to them in language, it shared
with them many of the same institutions, the same ideas and habits of thought.
Other nations of antiquity made efforts to fill the void in the past which begins
where historical reminiscences cease, and framed theories to account for the
beginnings of the earth and man, or to solve the problems which the observation
of human society suggested. It is but consonant with analogy to suppose that
the Hebrews were conscious of the same needs ; and either formed similar
theories for themselves, or borrowed those of their neighbours. Thus many,
perhaps most, nations, where they had no knowledge of science to guide them,
have given the reins to their imagination, and framed cosmogoniesK These
cosmogonies reflect partly the impressions made upon the nation framing it by
the physical world, partly the general mental characteristics of the nation,
partly the conception of deity current in it. That the physical element in such
cosmogonies was usually erroneous, and often grotesque, was a natural conse-
quence of the ignorance of physical science possessed by those who constructed
them. The theological element varied according as the conceptions of deity
current in a particular nation were more or less spiritual : where, for instance,
polytheism prevailed, places had to be found in the process for the various
divine beings, and the cosmogonies consequently became often thOogonies.

1 See particulars in the art. CosMoaoNY in the Encyel. Britannicaf ed. 9.

THE COSMOGONY OF GENESIS 27

The cosmogony of Genesis seems, in its arrangement, to have been deter-
;iied ultimately by the observation that there is a rank and order in natural

•ducts, and by the reflexion that one part of nature is in various ways
pendent upon, or supported by, another.

The more immediate source of the Biblical cosmogony, however, there can
bo little doubt, has been brought to light recently from Babylonia. Between
1872 and 1876 that skilful collector and decipherer of cuneiform records, the
late Mr George Smith, published, partly from tablets found by him in the
British Museum, partly from those which he had discovered himself in Assyria,
a number of inscriptions containing, as he quickly perceived, a Babylonian
account of Creation. Since that date other tablets have come to light ; and
though the series relating to the Creation is still incomplete, enough remains
not only to exhibit clearly the general scheme of the Cosmogony, but also
to make it evident that the cosmogony of the Bible is dependent upon it.
The tablets themselves come from the Library of Asshurbanipal (668—626 b.o.)
at Kouyunjik (Nineveh); but Asshurbanipal's Library is known to have
included many transcripts of earlier texts ; and Assyriologists entertain no
doubt that the contents of the tablets are much more ancient than the 7th
cent. B.C., and are probably (Sayce) as old as the 22nd or 23rd cent. B.C.

There is no occasion to give here a translation of the whole of the tablets
which have been discovered ^ ; but the reader cannot properly estimate their
bearing upon the Biblical narrative without having the characteristic parallels
placed before him, and being made acquainted with the general outline of
their contents. It should only be premised that some particulars of the
Babylonian cosmogony were known before these discoveries from extracts
which had been preserved from Berossus — a Babylonian priest, who lived
about 300 B.O., and compiled a work on Babylonian history — and Damascius
(6th cent. A.D.); and the accuracy of these particulars (apart from certain
textual corruptions) has been fully established by the inscriptions 2.

The inscriptions preserved on these tablets are written in a rhythmical
form ; and form in reality a kind of epic poem, the theme of which is the
glorification of Marduk (Merodach, Jer. 1. 2), the supreme god of Babylon,
declaring how, after a severe conflict, he had overcome the powers of chaos
and dai'kness, and had so been enabled to create a world of light and order.
The poem is conceived polytheistically ; but this fact does not neutralize
the underlying resemblances with Gen. i The first tablet (of which only

1 A translation may be found in Ball's Light from the East (1899), pp. 2 — 18;
in KB. VI. 3—39 (by Jensen), with notes, p. 302 ff.; and asp. in L. W. King, The
Seven Tablets of Creation (1902), i.;3 ff. [vol. 11. has cuneiform texts only], containing
many important new fragments. See also the chapter on the ' Cosmology of the
Babylonians' in Jastrow's Religion of Bab. and Ass. (Boston, U.S.A., 1898),
pp. 407—453; and Zimmern in KAT.^ (1902), p. 491 ff., 584—6.

2 See the Greek text of Damascius in KAT.^ p. 490, or in Jensen's Kosmologie
der Bab. p. 270 ; and translations in G. Smith, Chald. Gen. p. 49 f., Lenormant,
Origines de Vhistoire^ (1880), i. 493 f., Gunkel's Schopjung und Chaos (1895),
p. 17 ; KAT.^ I.e.: cf. also KAT."^ p. 12. It is parallel to the first extract from the
Creation epic, cited below. For the Greek text of Berossus, see Miiller, Fragm.
Hist. Graec. n. 497 f., KAT.^ 488 — 90 ; King, pp. xlv, liv— lvi; and lor translations,
■G. Smith, op. cit. pp. 40—42, Lenormant, p. 506 f., Gunkel, pp. 17—20, DB. i. 504^
KAT.^ 1.0. : cf. KAT.^ pp. 6—9, 12—14, EncB. art. Creation, § 15.

28 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

a fragment is preserved) describes how, before what we call earth or heaven
had come into being, there existed a primaeval watery chaos {Tldmat, corre-
sponding to tlio Hob. fhonii the 'deep' of Gen. i. 2), out of which the
Babylonian gods wore evolved: —

When aboye | the heaven was not yet named,

And the land beneath | yet bare no name.

And the primaeval Apsii (the abyss), | their begetter,

And chaos (?), Tiamat, | the mother of them both —
5 Their waters | were mingled together,

And no field was formed, | no marsh was to be seen ;

When of the gods | still none had been produced.

No name had yet been named, | no destiny yet [fixed] ;

Then were created | the gods in the midst of [heaven ?]
10 Lachmu and Lachamu | werfe produced,

Long ages passed ....

Anshar and Kishar | were created, and over them ....

Long were the days, then there came forth ....

Anu, their son ....
15 Anshar and Anu ....

And the god Anu ....

Ea, whom his fathers, [his] begetters < i . •

Difi'erent Babylonian deities thus gradually came into being. Tiamat, or
the deep, represents * a popular attempt to picture the chaotic condition that
prevailed before the great gods obtained control, and established the order of
heavenly and terrestrial phaenomena ' : in the sequel she is personified as a
gigantic monster. The belief that the world originated out of water was a
consequence, As.syi-iologists hold, of the climatic conditions of Babylonia.
During the long winter, the Babylonian plain, flooded by the heavy rains, looks
like a sea (Bab. tiamtu^ tidmat). Then comes the spring, when the clouds and
water vanish, and dry land and vegetation appear. So, thought the Babylonian,
must it have been in the first spring, at the first New Year, when, after a fight
between Marduk and Tiamat, the organized world came into being\

The subsequent parts of the first tablet describe how Apsu, disturbed at
finding his domain invaded by the new gods, induced Tiamat to join with him
in contesting their supremacy : he was, however, subdued by Ea ; and Tiamat,
left to carry on the struggle alone, provides herself witli a brood of strange and
hideous allies 2.

The second, third, and fourth tablets, describe how the gods, alarmed at
Ti&,mat's preparations, having taken counsel together, appointed Marduk
as their champion, and how Marduk equips himself with winds and lightnings
for the fray. The account of the combat, in the fourth tablet, is told with
dramatic force and vividness. Armed with his weapons, Marduk advances;
he seizes Tiamat in a husre net, and transfixes her with his scimitar. The

1 Jastrow, op. cit. pp. 411 f., 429 f., 432 f.j Zimmern, Creation (§ 4) in EncB.

2 Alluded to also in the extract from Berossus (see DD. i. 504'' ; and cf. Jastrow,
pp. 414, 419). They are a further symbol of the disorder which ruled in chaos,
and which had to be overcome before an ordered world could be produced.

THE COSMOGONY OF GENESIS 29

carcase of the monster he split into two halves, one of which he fixed on high,
to form a firmament supporting the waters above it : —

i;n He cleft her like a flat(?) fish | into two parts,

The one half of her he set up, | and made a covering for the heaven,

Set a bar before it, | stationed a guard,
1 10 Commanded them not | to let its waters issue forth.

He marched through the heaven, | surveyed the regions thereof,

Stood in front of the abyss, | the abode of the god Ea.

Then BeU measured | the structure of the abyss,

A great house, a copy of it, | he founded E-sliarra;

5 The great house E-sharra, | which he built as the heaven,
He made Anu, Bel, and Ea, | to inhabit as their city.

*It is evident that the canopy of heaven is meant. Such is the enormous

7.0 of Tislmat that one-half of her body, flattened out so as to serve as a

rtain, is stretched across the heavens to keep the "upper waters" — the

waters above the firmament" as the Book of Genesis puts it — from coming

down ' ( Jastrow) ^. The * abyss ' was the huge body of waters on which the earth

was supposed to rest (cf. on vv. 9, 10). E-sharra (' house of fulness or fertility,'

Jensen) is a poetical designation of the earth, which was conceived by the

Babylonians as a hollow hemisphere, similar in appearance to the vault of

heaven, but placed beneath it (with its convex side upwards), and supported

upon the * abyss ' of waters underneath (Jastrow, p. 431).

The fifth tablet (still incomplete) describes the formation of the sun and
moon, and afterwards the appointment of years and months : —

1 He made the stations | for the great gods.
As stars resembling them | he fixed the signs of the zodiac,
He ordained the year, | defined divisions,
Twelve months with stars, | three each, he appointed.

6 After he had .... the days of the year | . . . . images,

He fixed the station of Nibir (Jupiter), | to determine their limits.
That none (of the days) might err, | none make a mistake.
8 The station of Bel and Ea, | he fixed by his (Jupiter's) side.

12 He caused the moon-god to shine forth, | entrusted to him the night;
Appointed him as a night-body, | to determine the days.

The opening lines of tablet VII., where Marduk is hailed as the * Bestower
of planting/ and * Creator of grain and plants, who caused the green herb to
spring up,' shew that the poem mentioned the creation of vegetation ; and it is
probable that this was recorded in the lost parts of tablet V. (King, p. l).

The sixth tablet (the opening and closing lines of which have been
recovered by Mr King) describes the creation of man : —

1 I.e. Lord, a title of Marduk (cf. Is. xlvi. 1 ; Jer. li. 44).

2 According to Berossus, the other half of the monster's carcase was made into
the earth. However, that is not stated in the present tablet.

30 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

When Marduk heard the word of the gods,
His heart prompted him and he devised [a cunning plan].
He opened his mouth, and unto Ea [he spake],
[That which] he had conceived in his heart he imparted [unto him]:
6 *My blood^ will I take, and bone will I [fashion],
I will make man, that man may ....
I will create man who shall inhabit [the earth 1],
That the service of the gods may be established, and that [their] shrines
[may be built] 2.'

The seventh tablet consists of a hymn, addressed by the gods to Marduk,
celebrating his deeds and character, and representing him as all-powerful,
beneficent, compassionate, and just^ (cf. King, pp. lxiii fF., lxxxix).

The diflferences between the Babylonian epic and the first chapter of
Genesis are suflficiently wide : in the one, particularly in the parts not here
repeated, we have an exuberant and grotesque polytheism; in the other,
a severe and dignified monotheism : in the one, chaos is anterior to Deity, the
gods emerge, or are evolved, out of it, and Marduk gains his supremacy only
after a long contest ; in the other, the Creator is supreme and absolute from
the beginning. But, in spite of these profound theological difi'erences, there
are material resemblances between the two representations, which are too
marked and too numerous to be explained as chance coincidences. The outline,
or general course of events, is the same in the two narratives. There are in
both the same abyss of waters at the beginning, denoted by almost the same
word, the separation of this abyss afterwards into an upper and a lower ocean,
the formation of heavenly bodies and their appointment as measures of time,
and the creation of man. In estimating these similarities, it must further be
remembered that they do not stand alone; in the narrative of the Deluge
(see p. 104 f ) we find traits borrowed unmistakably from a Babylonian source ;
so that the antecedent difficulty which might otherwise have been felt in
supposing elements in the Creation-narrative to be traceable ultimately to the
same quarter is considerably lessened. In fact, no archaeologist questions
that the Biblical cosmogony, however altered in form and stripped of its
original polytheism, is, in its main outlines, derived from Babylonia. Nor
ought such a conclusion to surprise us. The Biblical historians make no
claim to have derived their information from a supernatural source : their

1 Cf. Berossus, I.e. The emendation adopted in EncB, i. 946 n. 4 is seen uovr
to be unnecessary (King, pp. lvi, lvii).

2 The passage cited in Auth. and Arch. 13 does not belong here (King, 202 f.).

* There seem also to have been some points of contact between the Heb. and
the Phoenician cosmogony. The Phoenician cosmogony (as reported by Eus. Praep.
Ev. I. 10. 1, 2), placed at the beginning of all things an dTj/) ^o^ibSrjs Kal irvev/xardj-
5r)s and a x<^o^ doXepbv ipe^udes, both being direipa; after an indefinite period of
time, the TrveO/Aa, acting upon the x<»os, gave rise to Mwr — i.e. perhaps (see
Creation in EncB., § 7) rb Mwr= niDhn, the deeps— a watery, muddy mass {IMs),
containing the germs of all subsequent existence (^ao-a a-vopd, Krityem), which
assumed the form of a huge egg. See further Dillm. ; Lenormant, i. 532 ff. ; EncB,
I.e. (also on the Phoen. Baau [=hohu\, said in Eus. § 4 to mean 'night,' and to
be the mother of AlCiv (the world?) and II/)wt67oi'os) ; JOB. i. 604^.

THE COSMOGONY OF GENESIS 31

Diaterials, it is plain (cf. Luke i. 1 — 4), were obtained by them from the
best human sources available; the function of inspiration was to guide
them in the disposal and arrangement of these materials, and in the use to
which they applied them. And so, in his picture of the beginnings of the
world, having nothing better available, the author has utilized elements derived
ultimately from a heathen source, and made them the vehicle of profound
religious teaching.

We have said * derived ultimately ' ; for naturally a direct borrowing from
tbe Babylonian narrative is not to be thought of: it is incredible that the
monotheistic author of Gen. i., at whatever date he lived, could have borrowed
any detail, however slight, from the polytheistic epic of the conflict of Marduk
and Tia,mat. The Babylonian legend of Creation must have passed through a
long period of naturalization in Israel, and of gradual assimilation to the spirit
of Israel's religion, before it could have reached the form in which it is presented
to us in the first chapter of Genesis. How, or when, it was first introduced
among the Hebrews, must remain matter of conjecture. Its introduction may
reach back to the time when the ancestors of the Hebrews lived side by side
with the Babylonians in Ur (xi. 28)\ or when they * dwelt beyond the River'
(the Euphrates), in Mesopotamia, and 'served other gods' (Jos. xxiv. 2).
Since, however, the Tel el-Amarna letters {c. 1400 B.C.) have shewn how strong
Babylonian influence must have been in Canaan, even before the Israelitish
occupation, this has been thought by many ^ to have been the channel by which
Babylonian ideas penetrated into Israel ; they were first, it has been supposed,
naturalized among the Canaanites, and afterwards, — as the Israelites came
gradually to have intercourse with the Canaanites, — they were transmitted to
the Israelites as well. But, whether one of these or some other explanation is
the true one, the fact remains that we have in the first chapter of Genesis the
Hebrew version of an originally Babylonian legend respecting the beginnings
of all things. But in the Biblical narrative, the old Semitic cosmogony appears
in a form very diff'erent from that in which we read it in the Babylonian
Creation-epic It appears 'in the form which it received at the hands of
devout Israelites moved by the Spirit of God, and penetrated with the pure
belief in the spiritual Jehovah. The saints and prophets of Israel stripped
the old legend of its pagan deformities. Its shape and outline survived.
But its spirit was changed, its religious teaching and significance were
transformed, in the light of revelation. The popular tradition was not abolished ;
it was preserved, purified, hallowed, that it might subserve the Divine purpose
of transmitting, as in a figure,' to future generations, ' spiritual teaching upon
eternal truths' (Ryle, Early Narratives of Genesis, p. 12 f.)*.

(iii) It remains only to indicate in outline the nature of this teaching.

^ Jastrow, Jewish Quart. Rev. 1901, p. 653.

2 E.g. by Sayce, Gunkel, Winckler, Zimmern.

3 That Heb. folk-lore told of a conflict of Jehovah with a dragon is apparent
from Job ix. 13, xxvi. 12 {Rahab, 'boisterousness,' though in Is. xxx. 7, Ps. Ixxxvii. 4,
a poetical name of Egypt, being here manifestly the name of some monster). The
context in Ps. Ixxiv. 13 — 17, Ixxxix. 9 — 12, where there follow allusions to Jehovah's
creative work, seems even to shew that the victory over Eahab, as an aboriginal
monster symbolizing chaos, was pictured as having preceded the work of creation :

32 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

(1) Tho Cosmogony of Genesis shows, in opposition to the conceptic
widely prevalent in antiquity^ that the world was not self-orifjinated ; that it
was called into existence, and brought gradually into its present state, at the
will of a spiritual Being, prior to it, independent of it, and deliberately planning
every stage of its progress. The spirituality, not less than the dignity, of the
entire representation is indeed in marked contrast to the self- contradictory,
grotesque speculations of which the ancient cosmogonies usually consist. * It
sets God above the great complex world-process, and yet closely linked with it,
as a personal intelligence and will that rules victoriously and without a rival '
(Whitehouse, art. Cosmogony in DB.^ p. 507'*).

(2) Dividing artificially the entire period into six days, it notices in order
the most prominent cosmical phaenomena; and groups the living creatures
upon the earth under the great subdivisions which appeal to the eye. By this
means it presents a series of representative pictures, — none, indeed, corre-
sponding, in actual fact, to the reality, but all standing for, or rej^resenting
it, — of the various stages by which the earth was gradually formed, and peopled
with its living inhabitants ; and it insists that each of these stages is no product
of chance, or of mere mechanical forces, but is an act of the Divine will,
realizes the Divine purpose, and receives the seal of the Divine approval^ It
is uniformly silent on the secondary causes through which in particular cases,
or even more generally," the effects described may have been produced; it
leaves these for the i'nvestigation of science ; it teaches what science as such
cannot discover (for it is not its province to do so), the relation in which they
stand to God. The slow formation of the earth as taught by geology, the
gradual development of species by the persistent accumulation of minute
variations, made probable by modern biology, are but the exhibition in detail
of those processes which the author of this cosmogony sums up into a single
phrase and apparently compresses into a single moment, for the purpose of
declaring their dependence upon the Divine will.

(3) It insists on the distinctive pre-eminence belonging to man, implied in
the remarkable self-deliberation taken in his case by the Creator, and signified
expressly by the phrase * the image of God.' By this is meant, as was shewn
above, man's possession of self-conscious reason, — an adumbration, we may
suppose, however faint, of the supreme reason of God, — enabling him to know,
in a sense in which animals do not know, and involving the capacity of
apprehending moral and religious truth (see more fully on v. 26). Whether,
as a matter of fact, man appeared originally as the result of an independent
creative act, or whether, as modern biologists commonly hold, he appeared
as the result of a gradual evolution from anthropoid ancestors, does not affect
the truth which is here insisted on : however acquired, rational faculties are
still his ; and whether this opinion of modern biologists be true or not, there
can at least be no theological objection to the supposition that, as God has
undoubtedly endowed the organism of the individual with the power of

cf. Is. li. 9, where, though the immediate reference is obviously to the overthrow of
Egypt at the Eed Sea, the imagery used by the prophet seems to have been borrowed
by him from the same legend of the destruction of Eahab. Cf. Zimmern, The
Bah. and Heb. Genesis, pp. 8—12 ; KAT.^ 607 ff. ; and art. Bahab in DB.
1 Comp. above on vv. 3, 4.

THE COSMOGONY OF GENESIS 33

developing mind out of antecedents in which no sign or trace of mind is
discernible, it may also have pleased Him, by the workings of His providence
in a far-distant past, to endow certain forms of organized being with the
capacity of developing, in His good time, under the action of a suitable
ciiA'iroument, the attributes distinctive of man.

It is important to have a clear and consistent view of the first chapter of
Genesis. It stands upon the threshold of the Bible; and to all who have
anything more than a merely superficial knowledge of the great and far-
reaching truths which science has brought to light, it presents the greatest
(lifiiculties. These difficulties are felt now far more acutely than they used to
i 0 : 70 or 80 years ago there was practically no geology ; but the progress of
seienco has brought the Cosmogony of Genesis into sharp and undisguised
antagonism \\ath the Cosmogony of science. The cfi'orts of the harmonists
have been well-intentioned; but they have resulted only in the construction
of artificial schemes, which are repugnant to common sense, and, especially
in the minds of students and lovers of science, create a prejudice against
the entire system mth which the cosmogony is connected. The Cosmogony of
Genesis is treated in popular estimation as an integral element of the Christian
faith. It cannot be tod earnestly represented that this is not the case. A
definition of the process by which, after the elements composing it were
created, the world assumed its present condition, forms no article in the
Christian creed. The Church feas never pronounced with authority upon the
interpretation of the narrative of Genesis. It is consequently open to the
Christian teacher to understand it in the sense which science will permit;
and it becomes his duty to ascei-tain what that sense is. But, as the
Abbe Loisy has justly said, the '.science of the Bible is the science of the
age in which it was written; and to expect to find in it supernatural in-
formation on points of scientific f{ict, is to mistake its entire purpose. And
so the value of the first chapter of Genesis lies not on its scientijlc side,
but on its theological side. Upoix the false science of antiquity its author
lias grafted a true and dignified representation of the relation of the world
to God. It is not its office to forestall scientific discovery; it neither
comes into collision with science, nor needs reconciliation with it. It must
be read in the light of the age iji which it was written ; and while the
spiritual teaching so vividly expressed by it can never lose its freshness or
Value, it must on its material side be interpreted in accordance with the
])]ace which it holds in the history of Semitic cosmological speculation ^

1 See, further, on the subject of the preceding pages, Huxlev, Collected Essays,
IV. 64 ff., 139—200; Kiehm, Der Bihlische Schbpfungshericht, Halle, 1881 (a lecture
pointing out the theological value, at the present day, of the cosmogony of
Genesis) ; C. Pritchard, Occasional Notes of an Astronomer on Nature and Revela-
tion, 1889 (a collection of sermons and addresses, often very suggestive), p. 257 ff.
{' The Proem of Genesis,' reprinted from the Guardian, Feb. 10, 1886) ; Dr Ladd,
What is the Bible ? (New York, 1890), chap. v. (' The Bible and the Sciences of
Nature') ; Byle, Early Narratives of Genesis (1892), chaps, i., ii. ; H. Morton, The
Cosmogony of Genesis and its Reconcilers, reprinted from the Bibliotheca Sacra,
April and July, 1897 (a detailed criticism, by a man of science, who has also
theological sympathies, of the schemes of the reconcilers. President Morton's
general conclusions are the same as those adopted above. See a note by the
'present writer ^^ the Expositor, June, 1893, pp. 464 — 9); Whitehouse, art.

P. ; 3

34 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

The Sabbath,

The sabbatli, it is not improbable, is an institution ultimately of Babylonian
origin. In a lexicographical tablet (ii Rawl. 32, 1. 16), there occurs the equa-
tion ilm nHh libbi = shabaUumj or 'day of rest of the heart' (i.e. as parallel
occun-ences of the same phrase shew, a day when the gods rested from their
anger, a day for the pacification of a deity's anger) = sabbath. Further, in
a religious calendar for two of the Assyrian months which we possess^,
prescribing duties for the king, the 7th, 14th, 19th'', 21st and 28th days, are
entered as 'favourable day, evil day' (i.e. a day with an indeterminate
character, which might become either one or the other, according as the
directions laid down for its observance were followed or not), while the
others are simply ' favourable days.' On the five specified days, certain acts
are forbidden : the king is not, for instance, to eat food prepared by fire, not
to put on royal dress or of^ev sacrifice, not to ride in his chariot or hold court,
&c. ; on the other hand, as soon as the day is over, he may offer a sacrifice
which will be accepted. The days, it is evident, are viewed superstitiously;
certain things are not to be done on them, in order not to arouse the jealousy
or anger of the gods. It is not however known that the term shabattum was
applied to these days; nor is there at present [1903] any evidence that a con-
tinuous succession of 'weeks,' each ending with a day marked by special
observances, was a Babylonian institution 3. Nevertheless, there is undoubtedly
a decided similarity between the Babylonian and the Hebrew institution ; and
it is more than possible that Schrader, Sayce, and other Assyriologists are
right in regarding the sabbath as an institution of Babylonian origin. Many
other institutions of the Jewish law (cf. on ch. xvii.) were common to Israel's
neighbours, as well as to Israel itself, though the Israelites, in appropriating
them, stamped upon them a new character ; so there is no d, priori objection to
the same having been the case with the sabbath as well. If this view of its
origin be correct, the Hebrews, in adopting it, detached it from its connexion
with the moon (fixing it for every seventh day, irrespectively of the days of the
calendar month), they extended and generalized the abstinence associated with
it, they stripped it of its superstitious and heathen associations, and made
it subservient to ethical and religious ends*.

Cosmogony in DB.; Zimmern and Cheyne, art. Creation in EncB.; Zimmern, The
Bab. and Heb, Genesis (in a series of short, popular brochures, called * The Ancient
East'), 1901, pp. 1 — 28; the Abb6 Loisy, Les Mythes Bahyloniens et les premiers
chapitres de la Genese (1901), pp. 1 — 102; Jastrow, Jewish Quart. Rev. July, 1901,
pp. 620 — 654 ; L. W. King, Bab. Religion and Mythology (popular), pp. 53 — 146.

1 See Jastrow, Religion of Bab. and Ass. 376 fi.

2 Perhaps the 49th (i.e. the 7 x 7th) day from the 1st of the preceding month.
This was a dies now, but on the other days mentioned, as the contract-tablets
shew, ordinary persons transacted business much as usual.

3 Shabattum is at present known to occur only three or four times altogether in
the Inscriptions. The terms in which Prof. Sayce speaks {Monuments, 74 — 77 ;
EHII. 193) would lead a reader to suppose that the resemblance between the
Babylonian and the Hebrew institution was greater than it Ik.

* See further the writer's art. Sabbath in DB. (especially § ii.), with the
references : in §§ iii., iv,, also, there will be found some notice of references to
tl^e sabbath in the Mishna, and other post-Biblical Jewish writings, in the NT.,
ami in early Christian writers. See also now iT^ilT.^ 592 £f. ^^

I
/

THE BOOK OF GENESIS 35

Gen. ii. 1 — 3, it will be observed, does not name the sabbath, or lay down
my law for its observance by man : all that it says is that God ' desisted ' on
ilio seventh day from FTis work, and that Ho 'blessed' and 'hallowed' the day.
It is, however, impossible to doubt that the introduction of the seventh day is
>iinply part of the writer's representation, and that its sanctity is in reality
iiitedated : instead viz. of the seventh day of the week being sacred, because
God desisted on it from His six days' work of creation, the work of creation
^vas distributed among six days, followed by a day of rest, because the week,
iifled by the sabbath, existed already as an institution, and the writer wished
' adjust artificially the work of creation to it. In other words, the week,
cd by the sabbath, determined the * days' of creation, not the 'days' of
I cation the week.

Chapters II. 4^— III. 24.

» The Creation and Fall of Man.

■ With ii. 4> we enter into an atmosphere very different from that of
||P — ii. 4*. That the narrator is a different one is so evident as not to need
iiitailed proof: it will be sufficient to notice here some of the more salient
points of difference, ii. 4^ ff. differs then firstly from ch. i. in style and form.
i?he style of ch. i. is stereotyped, measured, and precise ; that of ii. 4^ ff. is
diversified and picturesque ; there are no recurring formulae, such as are so
marked in ch. i. ; the expressio.ns characteristic of ch. i. are absent here (e.g.
to create) ; and where couimon ground is touched (as in the account of the
formation of man), the narrative is told very differently, and without even
any allusion to the representation of ch. i. (e.g. to the 'image of God').
Ch. i. displays, moreover, clear marks of study and deliberate systematiza-
tion : ii. 4^ff. is fresh, spontanepus, and, at least in a relative sense, primitive :
we breathe in it the clear and free mountain air of ancient Israel. The present
Qarrative differs secondly from ch. i. in representation. Both the details and
the order of the events of creation (in so far as they are mentioned in it — for
the narrator deals briefly with everything except what relates directly to man)
differ from the statements of ch. i. The earth, instead of emerging from the
waters (as in i. 9), is represented as being at first dry (ii. 5), too dry, in fact, to
support vegetation : the first step in the process of filHng it with living forms
is the creation of man (ii. 7), then follows that of beasts and birds {v. 19), and
lastly that of woman {v. 21 f.) ; obviously a different order from that of ch. i.^
Another, in some respects, even more vital difference, is that in ii. 4^ ff. the
conception of God is much more anthropomorphic than it is in ch. i. : whereas
there God accomplishes His work of creation by a series of words, or by per-
forming other acts (as creatincf, dividing, making, setting), which (taken in
connexion with the objects on which tliey are performed) imply nothing local

^ ^ The separation between the creation of man and woman, if it stood alone^
aaight indeed be reasonably explained by the supposition that ii. 4^ ff. was intended
simply as a more detailed account, by the same hand, of what is described
summarily in i. 26 — 30 ; but this explanation does not account for the many other
differences subsisting between the two narratives.

3—2

36 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [11.4,5

or sensible in the Divine nature, Jehovah here, for instance, moulds, breathes
into man the breath of life, plants, places, takes, sets, brings, builds, closes up^
walks in the garden (which is evidently regarded as His accustomed abode), so
that even the sound of Ilis footsteps is heard, and makes coats of skin (ii. 7, 8,
15, 19, 21, 22, iii. 8, 21) ; in other words, He performs various sensible acts, and
is evidently conceived as locally determined within particular limits in a
manner in which the author of ch. i. does not conceive IlimK

An interest conspicuously prominent in the entire narrative is the desire to
explain the origin of existing facts of\urnan nature, existing customs and
institutions, especially those which were regarded as connected with the loss
by man of his primaeval innocence. Tlius among the facts explained are, for
instance, in ch. ii. the distinction of the sexes, and the institution of marriage,
and in ch. iii. the presence of sin in the world, the custom of wearing clothing,
the gait and habits of the serpent, the subject condition (in the ancient world)
of woman, the pain of child-bearing, and the toilsomeness of agriculture. The
explanations offered of these facts are, however, not historical or scientific
explanations, they are explanations prompted by religious reflection upon the
facts of life. The narrative 'purports to account for the entrance into the
world of sin, suffering, and shortened life. In carrying, out this purpose, it
is less faithful to historical than to moral and religious truth. The evidence of
archaeology, geology, biology, and allied sciences points to the conclusion that
man, so far from having begun his ^existence upon the globe in the happy
surroundings of an Eden, has slowly emerged from a state of savagery, in
which he was, externally at least, kittle removed from the brute creation. His
primitive condition was not one of harmony and happiness, but of fierce
conflict against opposing forces. Pain and death prevailed upon earth before
man made his appearance, and have, it would seem, been prime factors in his
evolution. The narrative is valuable, therefore, not as a description of
historical events, but as a declaration of certain important ideas^.' See
further the remarks, p. 51 ff.

II. 4^... in the day that ^the Lord God made earth and heaven.
5 And no plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of

* Heb. Jehovah, as in other places where Lord is put in capitals.

II. 4^ — 7. The formation of man.

4^, 5. In the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven, no
shrub (xxi. 15 ; Job xxx. 4, 7 1) o/* the field was yet, &c.^ The words,
taken in connexion with the sequel {v. 7), arc intended to describe the

1 The same contrasted conceptions of the Divine nature recur in many subse-
quent parts of the same two documents.

2 Wade, Old Test. History (1901), p. 50 f.

3 Dillra. and others, however, render ' In the day that Jehovah God made earth
and heaven — when no shrub of the field was yet, &c. \yv. 5, 6] — Jehovah God
formed,' &c. (cf. the footnote on i. 1). If this construction (here and i. 1 — 3) is
correct, it may, as Hommel has remarked, be more than an accidental coincidence
that the Bab. account of creation (p. 28) begins also with a long sentence
containing a parenthesis.

1 1. 5-7] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 37

the field had yet sprung up : for the Lord God had not caused J
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 face of the ground. 7 And the Lord
God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed
into his nostrils the breath of life ; and man became a living

condition of the earth at the time when man was created : no shrub
or lierb, — and a fortiori, no tree, — had yet appeared upon it, for it was
not sufficiently watered to support vegetation. According to i. 11 f.,
plant- and tree-life was complete three 'days' before the creation of
man : obviously the present writer views the order of events differently.

in the day. I.e. at the time, — Heb. usage compressing often what
may have been actually a period of some length into a ' day/ for the
purpose of presenting it vividly and forcibly : see e.g. Jer. xi. 4, xxxiv. 13.

Jehovah God. An unusual combination, recurring throughout
ii. 4^ — iii. 24, but found elsewhere in the Hex. only Ex. ix. 30, and
generally uncommon. It is usually supposed that in ii. 4^^ — iii. 24 the
original author wrote simply Jehovah ; and that God was added by the
compiler, with the object of identifying expressly the Autlior of life of
ii. 4* — 25, with the Creator of ch. i. On the name ' Jehovah ' (properly
* Yahweh '), see the Excursus at the end of the volume.

5. and there ivas not a nmn to till the ground,— audi, it is to be
understood, to supply the deficiency of rain by artificial irrigation.

6. hut a mist used to go up..., and water &c., — and so at least
prepared the soil for the subsequent growth of vegetation.

a mist. The word (^ed) occurs again only in Job xxxvi. 27. In
Ass. edu means the overflow of a river, esp. of the Euphrates, such as
annually irrigated the plains of lower Babylonia; and some recent
scholars are of opinion that we ought to render here * but a flood used
to come up,' &c. (cf EncB. i. 949).

7. formed. The fig. is that of a potter (lxx. l-rrXaa-Ev), moulding
the plastic material in his hands. The w^ord is often used of the
Divine operation, with reference, not only to material objects (as here,
Ps. xciv. 9, xcv. 5, civ. 26), but also more generally, as of a nation,
Is. xxvii. 11, xliii. 1, and even of shaping, or pre-ordaining, events of
history. Is. xxii. 11, xxxvii. 26, xlvi. 11.

man of the dust of the ground. The words contain a point not
reproducible in English; for in Heb. 'ground' (^dddmdh) is in form
the fem. of ' man ' i^dddm) : thus to the Hebrews man by his very
name seemed to be connected with the 'ground,' and to find his
natural occupation in working it (v. 5, iii. 19, 23). — Cf xviii. 27 ;
Ps. ciii. 14 ; Job iv. 19, viii. 19, xxxiii. 6 ; Wisd. vii. 1 ; 1 Cor. xv. 47.
See also p. 53 n. 2.

breath of life. Cf. (of animals generally) vii. 22 (see note); also
spirit of life in vi. 17, vii. 15 (both P). Breath is evidently, in the
-great majority of animals ordinarily known, the physical accompaniment

38 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [ii.

soul. 8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward,
Eden ; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And
out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that

and condition of life ; and so the meaning of the clause is, endowed
him with the faculty of life : cf Is. xlii. 5 ; Job xxvii. 3 (where ' life '
= * breath' here : Heb. n^shdmah), xxxiii. 4^ xxxiv. 14.

a living soul. As explained on i. 20, a ' soul ' is in Heb. psychology
common to both animals and men ; hence no pre-eminence of man is
declared in these words: they simply state that he became a living
being. Man's pre-eminence, according to this writer, is implied in the
use of the special term breathed, which is not used of the other animals
(v, 19), and which suggests that in his case the ' breath of life ' stands
in a special relation to the Creator, and may be the vehicle of higher
faculties than those possessed by animals generally. Cf Ez. xxxvii. 9 ;
and, in a spiritual sense, Jn. xx. 22. Note also the contrast with the
'life-giving spirit' (p. 4 n.) of the 'last Adam ' in 1 Cor. xv. 45 (RV.).

8 — 17. God does not leave man to himself: He places him in a
garden specially prepared for him, and assigns to him specific duties.

8. a garden. Rather what we should call a j!?arA;. lxx. (both here
and elsewhere) irapaBeiaos (= Paradise : a Pers. word signifying properly
an enclosure, and then in particular a park), which hence became the
usual name in the Christian Church for the ' garden ' planted in Eden.

eastward. The original home of man is placed in the far-
distant East, in a region in or near Babylonia, the seat of the most
ancient and influential civilization known to the Hebrews.

''Eden. As a Heb. word, 'eden would mean pleasure, delight (see
cognate words in Is. xlvii. 8 ; Neh. ix. 25), and thi« sense was no doubt
suggested by it to the Hebrews (cf lxx., in iii. 23, 24, and generally,
6 TrapaSeto-os 7175 rpv<j>rj^) -, if it be the true original meaning of the
word, we must suppose 'Eden' to be an abbreviation for 'land of
Eden.' But * Eden ' is the name, not of the garden itself, but of the
region in which it lay, so that there is no particular appropriateness
in such a meaning ; and it is possible that it is the Sumerian edinu,
a word explained in Ass. word-lists as meaning ' plain, prairie, desert,'
in which case it will denote simply the great alluvial plain watered by
the Tigi'is and the Euphrates \ Elsewhere the 'garden of Jehovah'
(or * of God '), or the ' garden of Eden,' is alluded to as the type of a
fertile, well- watered place, abounding in noble trees : see ch. xiii. 10 ;
Ez. xxviii. 13, xxxi. 8 f , 16, 18, xxxvi. 35; Is. H. 3; Joel ii. 3.

9. Emphasis is laid on the trees with which the garden was stocked
(cf Ez. xxxi. 8 f , 16, 18), partly on account of the two which are
singled out for special mention, but partly also, it would seem, because,
according to the conception of the writer, man was originally intended

1 Cf. Friedrich Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies? 79 f.; KAT.^ 2C f. ; Sayce,
Monuments, 95; Zimmeru, KAT.^ 529; Pinches, The OT. m the light of the hiu.
records of Ass. and Bab. (1902), 70 — 72; and see Muss-Arnolt, Ass. Lex. p. 21.

11.9-1^] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 39

is pleasant to the sight, and good for food ; the tree of life also J
in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil. 10 And a river went out of Eden to water the
garden ; and from thence it was parted, and became four heads.
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.

1 Or, beryl

to subsist on the fruit of trees (cf. v. 16) ; he is not condemned to live
on herbs till iii. 18.

the tree of life. Cf. on iii. 24. The expression occurs also, in a fig.
use, in Pro v. iii. 18, xi. 30, xiii. 12, xv. 4.

10 — 14, Provision made for the irrigation of the garden. The
reference is implicitly to a system of canals, such as existed in
Babylonia, from at least the time of Hammurabi (c. 2300 B.C.) onwards ^
conveying the water from a main stream to different parts of the land.
The river arose in Eden, outside the garden ; it passed through the
garden, providing water for its irrigation ; and from thence, i.e. as
it issued from the garden, it was divided, and became four heads, i.e.
(cf. Ez. xvi. 25, xxi. 19; and the use of the expression 'heads of
rivers' in Arabic of the parting-point of two streams, cited by Del.)
the heads of four streams, each taking its separate course, as described
in vv. 11 — 14. The representation gives an idea of the magnitude of
the river flowing through the garden : even after leaving it, it could
still supply four large streams ^

11. Pishon, Not elsewhere mentioned. See p. 58 ff*.

Hdmldh. Most probably (see on x. 29) a region in the NE. of
Arabia, on the W. coast of the Persian Gulf The gold of Arabia was
famed in antiquity.

12. bdellium. Heb. b^dolah, mentioned also Nu. xi. 7, where
the manna is compared to it, so that it must have been a well-known
substance. Most probably it was what the Greeks called jS^iWa or
iSSeXXiov, a transparent, wax-like gum, valued for its fragrance, and
soothing medicinal properties (Diosc. i. 80; Pliny, H^. xii. ix. ;
Plaut. Cure. 101, in a list of perfumes). The best came from Arabia
(Diosc), or Bactria (Pliny) ; but it was found also in Gedrosia
(Beloochistan), India, and other places. See further the art. in EncB.

onyx. Heb. shoJiam, the name of a precious stone, much esteemed
by the Hebrews (Job xxviii. 16 ; cf Ex. xxviii. 9, 20), though there is

1 See Maspero, ii. 43 f.; and cf. below, p. 156 n. 5.

' This is the obvious and generally accepted interpretation of the verse : there
is however another view according to which it describes, not four streams diverging
from one, but four streams converging into one (see below, p. 58 f.). But the
narrator is manifestly following in his description the downward course of the
stream; it is most unnatural to suppose that by the words 'from thence it was
parted ' he means to describe its u;pward course, above the garden.

40 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [ii. 13-

13 And the name of the second river is Gihon : tlie same is it .>
that compasseth the whole land of Gush. 14 And the name of
the third river is ^Iliddekel : that is it which goeth ^in front of I
Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. 15 And the Lord |
God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress

^ That is, Tigris. * Or, toward the east of

some uncertainty what it was, philology throwing no light upon the
word, and the ancient versions varying much in their renderings
(lxx. onyx, beryl, sardius, emerald, &c. ; Pesh. and Targ. heryl) Vulg.
usually onyx). Either beryl or onyx seems most probable (see Beryl
in EncB., and Onyx in DB.). According to Pliny {HN. xxxvn.
§ 86 fF.) the onyx was obtained specially from India and Arabia.

In Ass. there is a gem sdmtu, often mentioned ; but it is at present
unfortunately quite uncertain what it is : ' turquoise ' (Sayce), and
'pearr (Haupt), are both conjectural renderings.

13. Gihon. Not mentioned elsewhere in the OT.^: see p. 58 ff.
CusJi. The usual Heb. name of Ethiopia : see on x. 6.

14. Hiddekel (also Dan. x. 4). The Tigris : Ass. Idiglat, Aram.
Deklath, Arab. Dijlat^.

in front of. The expression might mean in front of (from the
standpoint of the narrator), i.e. in reality, west of: 'in front of,'
however, means commonly in Heb. (cf. iv. 16, xii. 8 ; 1 S. xiii. 5
Heb.) east of\ but this rendering is open to the objection that Assyria
extended far to the East of the Tigris : hence, if it is adopted, it must
either be supposed that the description is a vague and inexact one
(cf. Is. vii. 20) ; or (Sayce) Asshur must be taken to be the 'city of
Asshur,' now KaVat Sherkdt, on the W. bank of the Tigris, about
60 miles S. of Nineveh, the capital of Assyria, until superseded by
Calah and Nineveh, and a city repeatedly mentioned by the Assyrian
kings in their inscriptions (e.g. KB. I. 29, 33, 39, 125, 127, 133, &c.).
But the fact of this city being not elsewhere referred to in the OT.
makes it somewhat unlikely that it should be named here as a land-mark.

Euphrates. Heb. P^rdth] Ass. Purdtu (the Gk form Euphrates
is based upon the Old Persian Ufrdtu).

15. Continuation of v. 9^, after the digression, m. 10 — 14. Man
is not made simply to enjoy life ; he is to labour and work. Even
such a garden as the one described in v. 9 gives scope for man's
activity : he is to till it, to develop its capacities, and adapt it to
his own ends, and to keep (Is. xxvii. 3) or guard it, against the
natural tendency of a neglected garden to run wild, and against damage
from wild animals or other possible harm.

1 For of course the ♦ Gihon ' of 1 K. i. 33 al. cannot be intended. As a Heb.
word Gihon would mean a 'gushing forth : see the cognate verb in Job xl, 23''.

3 Tigris, Old Pers. Tigrd, means the arroic-Uke, i.e. the swift (cf. Strabo, xi. 14.
8), from Old Pers. tighra, sharp, tighri, arrow.

11. 15-19] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 41

it and to keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, J
'iiiying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat :
1 7 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt
not eat of it : for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt
surely die.

18 And the Lord God said. It is not good that the man
should be alone ; I will make him an help ^meet for him. 19 And
out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field,

1 Or, answering to

16, 17. 'But man is not designed solely to till and keep the garden.
There are dormant in him capacities of moral and religious attainment,
wliich must be exercised, developed, and tested. A command is
therefore laid upon him, adapted to draw out liis character, and
to form a standard by which it may be tested. It is a short and
simple command, unaccompanied even by a reason ; but it is sufficient
for the purpose : man's full knowledge of what he must do or not do
can be attained only as the result of a long moral and spiritual
development, it cannot exist at the beginning. And the command
relates to something to be avoided: the acknowledgment and observance
of a limitation, imposed upon his creaturely freedom by his Creator and
Lord, must be for man the starting-point of everything else ' (Dillm.).

17. The knowledge of good and evil, — implying the power of
distinguishing them, and estimating each at its proper worth, — is a
capacity not possessed by little children (Dt. i. 39), but gradually
acquired by them (Is. vii. 15, 16), and accordingly deficient In second
childhood (2 S. xix. 35); it is specially necessary for a judge (1 K. iii. 9),
and is possessed in a pre-eminent degree by divine beings (ch. iii. 5, 22),
and angels (2 S. xlv. 17^).

18 — 25. The formation of animals and of woman.

18. It is not enough to place man in the garden : further provision
is yet required for the proper development of his nature, and satisfaction
of its needs : a help, who may in various ways assist him, and who may
at the same time prove a companion, able to interchange thought with
him, and be in other respects his intellectual equal, is still needed.

an help meet for him. Better, corresponding to him, i.e. adequate
to him, intellectually his equal, and capable of satisfying his needs and
instincts^ Cf. Ecclus. xxxvi. 24.

19. First of all beasts and birds are formed, also from the ground,
and brought to the man to see how they would Impress him, and

^ AV., EV. had : but the Heb. is the same ; and in fact the expression includes
what is beneficial and injurious, as well as what is morally good and evil.

2 'Meet' is of course an archaism, meaning adapted, suitable (cf. Ex. viii. 26;
Mt. iii. 8 [AV.], xv. 2G). To speak of woman (as is sometimes done) as man's 'help-
; meet ' (absolutely) is an error implying strange ignorance of the English language.

42 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [ii.

and every fowl of the air ; and brought them unto the man
see what he would call them : and whatsoever the man called
every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20 And the
man gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to
every beast of the field ; but for ^man there was not found an
help meet for him. 21 And the Loud God caused a deep sleep

1 Or, Adam

whether they would satisfy the required need. Fishes are not
mentioned ; the possibility of their proving a ' help ' to man being out
of the question.

In ch. i. animals are all created before man : so that it is again
apparent that the writer of cb. ii. 4^ fF. follows a different conception
of the order of creation. (The rend. ' had formed' is against idiom.)

what he would call them. The name being (primarily) the
expression of what a man thinks, this is tantamount to saying, what
impression they would make upon him, and how he would regard them
m relation to himself.

living creature. Living soul (exactly as in v. 7) : see on i. 20.

20. gave names &c. Distinguished, it is implied, their different
characters, or appearances, and gave them corresponding names. A
hint is here given of one of the earliest uses to which man would put
his faculty of language (cf. p. 55) : animals, by their variety, their
often remarkable forms and habits, their life and activity, in many
features so singularly resembling his own, would impress him vividly,
and quickly give him occasion to put this faculty, possessed by him, to
practical use.

But amongst all the animals thus surveyed by him, there was
found no 'help, corresponding to' himself. Many animals are
serviceable to man, and so a ' help ' ; some may even become his
companions : but none are on an equality with him ; there are none
with whom he can converse intelligently, or whom he can treat as his
intellectual or social equal. ' The dignity of human nature could not,
in few words, be more beautifully expressed' (Dillm.) : compare the
parallel in i. 26.

for man. The Massorites have here and iii. 17, 21 pointed D*iS7
without the article, treating it as a proper name ; but, inasmuch as,
where the article is part of the consonantal text, it appears consistently
till iv. 25 (see e.g. ii. 21, iii. 22, 24, iv. 1), it is better to point
accordingly here (Id'c'iddm, not l"dddm), and to render /or the man.

21, 22. The need thus awakened in the man God now proceeds
to satisfy by creating woman.

21. a deep sleep. In order that the secret of God's operation might
remain concealed from him. Tlie word, as ch. xv. 12, 1 S. xxvi. 12.

We have here a wonderfully conceived allegory, designed, by a
most significant figure, to set forth the moral and social relation

IT. ,1-25] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 43

to fall upon the man, and he slept ; and he took one of his ribs, J
and closed up the flesh instead thereof : 22 and the rib, which
the Lord God had taken from the man, ^made he a woman, and
brought her unto the man. 23 And the man said, This is now
bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh : she shall be called
-Woman, because she was taken out of ^Man. 24 Therefore shall
a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his
wife : and they shall be one flesh. 25 And they were both
naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

1 Heb. biiilded he into. ^ Heb. Isshah. ^ Heb. IsTi.

of the sexes to each other, the dependence of woman upon man, her
close relationship to him, and the foundation existing in nature for the
attachment springing up between them, and for the feelings with which
each should naturally regard the other. The woman is formed out of
the man's side: hence it is the wife's natural duty to be at hand, ready
at all times to be a * help ' to her husband, it is the husband's natural
duty ever to cherish and defend his wife, as part of his own self.

23. The man at once recognizes in the woman one intimately
related to himself, and fitted to be his intellectual and moral consort.

This is now &c. I.e. noiv at last, in contrast to the animals which
had before been brought to him. The exclamation, which has almost
a poetical rhythm, gives expression to the joyfal surprise with which
he beholds her.

hone of my hones &c. Cf., though the expression is not so strong,
xxix. 14 ; Jud. ix. 2 ; 2 S. v. 1.

Woman. The assonance of the Heb. (see RVm.) is in this case
fairly reproducible in English. Symmachus for the same purpose uses
avSpt?, Luther Mdnnin.

24. The narrator's comment, explanatory of the later existing
custom (cf. X. 9, xxii. 14^, xxxii. 32) \ Therefore, — viz. because man
and woman were originally one, and hence essentially belong together, —
doth a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave unto his wife ;
and they become one flesh : the attachment between them becoming
greater, and the union closer, even than that between parent and child.
Marriage, — and moreover monogamic marriage, — is thus explained as
the direct consequence of a relation established by the Creator.
Cf. Mt. xix. 4—6 (ii Mk. x. 6—8); 1 Cor. vi. 16, xi. 8—12 ; Eph. v.
28—33 ; 1 Tim. ii. 12—14.

they. LXX. the twain, whence Mt. xix. 5, Mk. x. 8, 1 Cor. vi. 16.

25. The narrative closes with a picture of their child-like innocence.
The particular direction in which their innocence is represented as
displaying itself, is due probably to the narrator's intention of explaining
afterwards (iii. 7, cf. 21) the origin of clothing.

1 Tlie teiiBes used have a frequentative force: see G.-K. §§ 107^ 112'".

44 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [iii. i

Chapter III.
The Fall and its Conseqitences.

The chapter describes how man was seduced into disobedience : and how,
after a judicial inquiry held by God, sentence was passed successively upon the
seducer, upon the woman, and upon the man. The sinful desire, though it has
its real seat within the soul, is excited by an outward object, appealing to the
senses ; and here it is stimulated into activity, and directed towards its object
(the forbidden fruit), by the serpent. The serpent is introduced in the first
instance simply as one of the animals which had passed before the man : it
appears soon, however, that it is more, at any rate, than an ordinary animal :
it possesses the faculty of speech, which it exercises with supreme intelligence
and skill. The serpent is a creature which among primitive and semi-primitive
peoples nearly always attracts attention: its peculiar form and habits, so differ-
ent from those of other animals, suggest that there is something mysterious
and supernatural about it ; the Arabs, for instance, say that in every serpent
there lurks a jinn (or spirit). The serpent had moreover in antiquity the
reputation of wisdom (Mt. x. 16), especially in a bad sense : it was insidious,
malevolent, ' subtil.' And so it appears here as the representative of the power
of temptation; it puts forth with great artfulness suggestions, which, when
embraced, and carried into action, give rise to sinful desires and sinful acts.
The serpent is not, however, in the narrative identified with the Evil One. The
OT. does not mention the being whom we call ' Satan ' till the period of the
exile; and even then he is not the 'tempter' of the NT.^: it was only later,
when it had become usual to connect the power of evil with a person, that those
who looked back upon this narrative saw in the serpent the Evil One. The
identification appears first in Wisd. ii. 24 ('by envy of the devil death entered
into the world'); cf. Rev. xii. 9, xx. 2.

III. 1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of J
the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the
woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of ^any tree of the

* Or, all the trees

III. 1. The serpent begins by addressing the woman, the weaker
vessel, who moreover had not herself actually heard the prohibition
(ii. 16 f.). It first distorts the prohibition, and then affects surprise
at it when thus distorted ; thus it artfully sows doubts and suspicions
in the heart of the unsuspecting woman, and at the same time

^ See A. B. Davidson's note on Job i. 6 in the Cambridge Bible for Schools,

111. 1-6] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 45

garden ? 2 And the woman said unto the serpent, Of the fruit J
of the trees of the garden we may eat : 3 but of the fruit of the
tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall
not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 4 And the
serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die : 5 for
God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes
shall be opened, and ye shall be as ^God, knowing good and evil.
G And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food,
and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was ^to be
desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did

1 Or, gods "^ Or, desirable to look upon

insinuates that it is itself qualified to judge of the propriety of such
a prohibition.

subtil. Or, wil^ (Jos. ix. 4), crafti/ (Job v. 12) ; used also in a
good sense (= callidus), Pr. xii. 16, 23 al.

2, 3. The woman corrects the serpent; and, to shew how fully
aware she is of the strictness of the prohibition, adds (what is not
contained in ii. 16 f.) that they are not even to touch the fruit of the
tree.

4. 5. The serpent now goes on to deny flatly the truth of the
threat, to suggest an unworthy motive for it, and to hold out the hope
of a great boon to be secured by disobedience. The immediate reward,
adroitly though fallaciously put forward, thus sets out of sight the
remoter penalty.

5. for God doth know &c. It is not on your account, to save you
from death, but on His account, to prevent your becoming like Him,
that He has forbidden you to eat this fruit. The serpent attributes
the prohibition to envy, the quality so often ascribed to the gods by the
Greeks (e.g. Hdt. i. 32, iii. 40, vii. 10, 48).

as God. Or, as gods (RVm. = AV.). The Heb. is ambiguous (the
Heb. for 'God' being plural in form) ; so that the marg. is quite possible
(cf V. 22 ; 2 S. xiv. 17). The distinction between God and divine
beings was not so clearly drawn by the Hebrews as it is by us (cf. 1 S.
xxviii. 13; perhaps, also, Ps. Ixxxii. 1, 6, xcvii. 7, cxxxviii. 1) : angels
are called sometimes the ' sons of God ' (or ' of the gods ' ; cf. on v. 22,
and p. 82 n.).

6. The woman does not repel the suggested doubt as to God's
truth and love, but yields to it : the prospect of the tree in
front of her, and the thought of the boon to be so speedily and
easily acquired, overpower her : she both eats of the fruit herself,
and also offers it to her husband, who naturally follows the example
which she has set.

to make one wise. Better, though the general sense remains the
same, for becoming wise (Ps. ii. 10, xciv. 8). To look upon (lxx.,

46 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [iii.

eat ; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he
eat. 7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew
that they were naked ; and they sewed fig leaves together, and
made themselves ^aprons. 8 And they heard the ^ voice of the
Lord God walking in the garden in the ^cool of the day : and the
man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord
God amongst the trees of the garden. 9 And the Lord God
called unto the man, and said unto him, Where art thou?

1 Or, girdles ^ Or, sound * Heb. wind.

Pesh., Vulg., Ges., RVm.) is a meaning of Msl'd which is not otherwise
known. (It occurs in Aramaic, and post-Biblical Hebrew, but only in
the reflexive conjug., properly to shew oneself attentive.)

7. They had eaten of the tree of knowledge ; and. so, the idea is,
they had passed in a moment — as we all pass, though only in the
course of years — from the innocence of childhood into the knowledge
which (see on ii. 17) belongs to adult age. Their sense of guilt betrays
itself unconsciously, before long, in their behaviour as described in v. 8.
For the present, however, the narrator notices only their acquisition of
another sense, in which adult age differs from childhood, and the
absence of which had been noted in ii. 24 as a mark of innocence.

the eyes of them both were opened. The expression is used of any
sudden, or miraculous, enlightenment, xxi. 19, 2 K. vi. 17. The
serpent's words {v. 5) were thus fulfilled : but the knowledge gained
was very different from that which they had been led to anticipate.

jig leaves. Why in particular ^p^-leaves ? Probably because among
the leaves of Palestinian trees those of the fig-tree were the largest.
The mention of the fig is an indication that the narrative, if Babylonian
in origin, must have been domesticated in Palestine : for the fig-tree is
indigenous in Syria and Palestine, and (Hdt. i. 193) there were 'no fig-
trees ' in Babylonia.

aprons. Girdles, such as used to be worn round the loins, — in
later times, outside the dress. See the same word in 1 K. ii. 5, Is. iii. 24.

8 — 13. God's judicial inquiry.

8. voice. Bather, sound. The garden was one in which, it is
implied, God and man were wont to meet and discourse together : but
now, when they hear His footsteps, they are afraid — for the voice of
conscience tells them that they have incurred His displeasure — and
make a vain attempt to hide themselves.

toward the cool of the day. I.e. toward evening, when in the East
a cooling wind arises (Cant. ii. 17 = iv. 6), and the Oriental can issue
forth from his dwelling (contrast ch. xviii. 1).

9. Where art thou'? 'The call which, after every sin, repeats
itself to the man who seeks to deceive himself and others concerning
his sin' (Dillm.).

III. io-h] the book of genesis 47

10 And he said, I heard thy ^ voice in the garden, and I wasJ^
jifraid, because I was naked ; and I hid myself. 11 And he
said, Wlio told thee that thou wast naked ? Hast thou eaten of
the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest 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 the
Lord God said unto the woman, What is this thou hast done ?
And the woman said. The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent. Because thou hast
done this, cursed art thou ^above all cattle, and ^above every
beast of the field ; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt

1 Or, sound 2 Qr, from among

10. Being no longer able to hide himself, but shrinking still from
acknowledging the entire truth, the man at first alleges only his
nakedness, as the cause of his concealment.

11, 12. But the Judge presses for a full confession, so the man
now owns the deed, but seeks immediately to extenuate it by casting
the blame for it upon the woman, and even ultimately upon God
('whom tliou gavest to be with me').

13. The woman, when questioned, in her turn casts the blame
upon the serpent. Cf 2 Cor. xi. 3; 1 Tim. ii. 14.

The object of the questions is to elicit from both the man and the
woman a full admission of their guilt. No such questions are put to
the serpent, because, being not a morally responsible being, the awaken-
ment of a sense of guilt in it is not needed, or indeed possible.

14 — 19. The sentences.

14, 15. The sentence on the serpent. The serpent, being an
animal, is not morally responsible : but it is punished here as the
representative of evil thoughts and suggestions ; man must recognize,
in its punishment, how the curse of God rests upon all evil thoughts,
such as those of which it has been the instigator.

14. above. Lit. out of, or (RVm.) from among, i.e. selected out of
others as cursed, and not implying (as 'above' might suggest) that
other animals are cursed likewise.

upon thy belly &c. The mark of the serpent's curse consists in its
crawling gait, and dusty food (cf Is. Ixv. 25) ; not that it actually
lived on dust, but moving as it did with its mouth upon the ground, it
might readily be supposed to swallow more dust than other animals (cf
Mic. vii. 17).

As the serpent, by the stealthiness and rapidity of its attack, and
its often deadly bite, was a fit emblem of the destructiveness of the
power of evil, so, by its life passed in the dust, it was to remind man
of the prostrate condition in which it was God's design and intention
that the power of evil should ever be held down.

48 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [in. 14-16

thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 and I will put enmity j
between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her
seed : it shall ^bruise thy head, and thou shalt ^bruise his
heel. 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy
sorrow and thy conception ; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth

1 Or, lie in loait for

all the days of thy life. The serpent is obviously identified here
with the serpent-r«c^ ; and suitably so, for it represents the ever-
reviving, ever newly active, power of evil (cf. 'seed' in v. 15).

15. The serpent is to be not only a grovelling creature; there is
to be irreconcilable enmity between it and man. The terms of the
sentence are suggested by the relation actually existing between the
human race and (speaking generally) the serpent race ; but it is evident
that the words used include more than this : the serpent, even more
clearly than in v. 14, is the representative of the power of evil.

bruise. The word recurs Job ix. 17; Ps. cxxxix. 11 \ 'Bruise,*
however, does not properly suit the last clause (where it is used of the
serpent) ; hence many moderns render aim at^ make for (cf lxx.
Tr)ptjcr€i{<:) ; Onk. watch, observe), supposing shuph to be a cognate form
of shaaph, prop, to pant (Jer. xiv. 6), fig. to pant after, be eager for
(in a hostile sense), Ps. Ivi. 1, 2, Ivii. 3 al [EV. would swallow me up\
It may, however, be doubted whether this poetic, metaphorical applica-
tion (RVm. lie in wait for is too free) is here very suitable either ; and
it seems better, on the whole, to retain bruise, supposing it to be used
improperly of the serpent in the last clause on account of its use of the
woman's seed in the clause before.

The passage has been known for long as the Protevangelium ; and
no doubt it is that : but we must not read into the words more than
they contain. No victory of the woman's seed is promised, but only a
perpetual antagonism, in which each side, using the weapons which it is
natural to it to employ, will seek to obtain the mastery of the other.
Only from the general drift and tenor of the passage can it be inferred
that the conflict is one in which the ' seed of the woman ' may hope
ultimately to have the victory : as Dillm. remarks, a conflict ordained
by God, in which the serpent is viewed evidently as the offender and
aggressor, cannot but end in the triumph of its opponent. The passage
thus ' strikes at the outset of redemptive history the note of promise
and of hope' (Ottley, History of the Hebrews, p. 11). See further ;
p. 57.

16. The sentence on the woman : pain, especially the pain
attendant upon child-bearing, and evils arising out of her relation
to her husband.

thy pain and thy conception. I.e., probably, pain (in general), and
especially such as is the result of pregnancy. 'Pain' (p^vy, only

1 Here probably corrupt (read prob. '•JSw'l 'screen me'); for 'darkness' cannot
be said naturally to 'bruise ' a person.

I III. 16, 17] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 61

cljildren ; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shalll
rule over thee. 17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast
Iicarkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree,
of which I commanded thee, saying. Thou shalt not eat of it :
cursed is the ground for thy sake ; in Hoil shalt thou eat of it all

^ Or, soirow

besides v. 17, v. 29) includes bodily as well as mental pain ; and is not
to be limited to what we should now describe as ' sorrow ' (see v. 29).

in pain &c. The Hebrews spoke proverbially of the severe pain (^>n,
I not 3VV, as here) of child-bearing (e.g. Is. xxi. 3; Jer. vi. 24; Ps. xlviii.
I 6) ; and here it is represented as the penalty for Eve's transgression.

thy desire &c. Woman is to be dependent in two respects upon
lier husband : (1) she will desire his coliabitation, thereby at the same
time increasing her liability to the pain of child-bearing ; (2) he will
rule over her, with allusion to the oppressed condition of woman in
antiquity, when she was often not more than the slave of her husband,
and was liable to be treated by him with great arbitrariness.

It is of course evident that the presence of sin in the world has
been the cause of immeasurable suffering to woman in precisely many
of the ways that are here indicated ; but it is not to be supposed that
the physical constitution of the human frame has been so altered by it
that a function, which would otherwise have been exercised painlessly,
should have become a painful one : in so far, therefore, as the text
implies this, we can only conclude that, as in other instances, the
writer was guided by moral rather than by historical considerations
(cf p. 36). At the same time, even in regard to child-bearing, it
is no doubt the case tliat at this critical and anxious moment of
a woman's life, the sense of past wrong-doing weighs peculiarly
upon her, and also that men's cruelty and women's folly have con-
tributed to make the process more painful and perilous for women
than it is for animals.

17 — 19. The sentence on the man. Work had been appointed
for man before (ii. 15) : the penalty is to consist in its laboriousness,
and in the disappointments and vexations which often accompany it.
Agriculture is specified in particular, because it was one of the earliest,
and has always been one of the most necessary, of human employments ;
and a curse is accordingly laid upon the soil and upon its productive
|)ower. Human wilfulness and human sin have in innumerable ways
embittered toil ; but, as before, we cannot suppose that the sin of Adam
affected directly the physical productivity of the earth*.

17. toil. Heb. pl^y, pain, as v. 16*; here oi painfal toil, as v. 29;
cf. the use of the cognate n"iy in Pr. x. 22^ xiv. 23", v. 10^ Ps. cxxvii. 2.

1 It may be worth recalling that classical antiquity also supposed that in the
Golden Age the earth brought forth spontaneously all that was required for human
sneeds, and that the cultivation of the soil was only introduced at a later period (see
e.g, Hes. Op. et Dies, 118 f.; Ovid, Met. i. 101 ff.; and cf. Verg. G. i. 121 ff.).

i>. 4

^^ THE BOOK OF GENESIS [m. 17-23

the days of thy life; 18 thorns also and thistles shall it bring,
forth to thee ; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; 19 in
the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto
the ground ; for out of it wast thou taken : for dust thou art,
and unto dust shalt thou return. 20 And the man called his
wife's name ^Eve ; because she was the mother of all living.
21 And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife coats of
skins, and clothed them.

22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as
one of us, to know good and evil ; and now, lest he put foi-th
his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for
ever : 23 therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the
garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

1 Heb. Havvah, that is, Living^ or, Life.

18. the herb of the field. Herbs, it is implied, need to be toil-
somely cultivated, to prevent their being choked by weeds, whereas the
fruit of trees (ii. 16) matures spontaneously.

19. till &c. Emphasizing the thought of v. 17 end, that the toil
is to be life-long.

and unto dust &c. Cf. Job x. 9, xxxiv. 15 ; Ps. xc. 3, civ. 29 (of
animals), cxlvi. 4 ; Eccl. iii. 20, xii. 7.

20. £Jve. Heb. Ifawwdh, 'life'; the name being explained as
implying that all (human) Hfe originated from her. The word must be
a very old one in Hebrew ; like Jehovah (* Yahweh'), it is derived from
a form (with w for 1/) obsolete in ordinary Hebrew, though preserved in
Phoenician, as hdwdh, ' to be,' is preserved in Aramaic.

21. The feeling which prompted the making of girdles of fig-leaves
(v. 7) is recognized as a sound one ; only coverings of a more permanent
and substantial kind are provided. The origin of clothing is at the
same time explained. Skins of animals are mentioned as the simplest
and most primitive kind of clothing in practical use.

coats. Rather, tunics.

22 — 24. The expulsion from Paradise. Man was created, it is
imj)lied, mortal ; though, if he had continued innocent he might have
secured immortality by eating of the tree of life. But immortality — or i
at least immortality to be so attained — is out of the question for a|
sinful being : to prevent him therefore from obtaining it, he is driven j
forth to till the ground to which he belongs (ii. 7, iii. 19), under the
toilsome conditions imposed in 1?. 17 ff.

22. as one of us. Man has acquired to a certain degree what is a
divine prerogative or distinction. It is not however said that he has
become like Jehovah, but only that he has become like one of the class
of divine beings (cf. on v. b) to which Jehovah also belongs.

III. .4] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 51

21 So he drove out the man ; and he placed at the east of the J
iiarden of Eden the Cherubim, and the flame of a sword which
turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

24. The Cherubim, and the flaming sword, set to guard the way
to the tree of life, are a symboKcal expression of the truth that the
carden of innocence and purity and ideal happiness cannot be entered

lin by man upon earth.

But the garden, with the tree of immortality in its midst, thus lost
to man in his earthly existence, came in a later age, when the belief
in a future life began more definitely to shape itself, to supply imagery

the ideal place of happiness after death. And so we find * the
ulcn of Eden' {\ip. iJ) in post-Biblical Jewish writings\ and * Paradise
(see on ii. 8) in 2 Esdr. viii. 52, the NT. (Lk. xxiii. 43 ; 2 Cor. xii. 4 ;
Kev. ii. 7), and other Cliristian writings, used to denote the future
abode of the blessed; comp. the 'tree of life' in Eaoch xxv. 4 f -
(2 cent. B.C.) ; 2 Esdr. viii. 52 ; Rev. ii. 7, xxii. 2.

On the emblematic figures called Cherubim, see further p. 60 f

Allusions to the Fall scarcely occur in other parts of the OT. (for IIos. vi. 7,
Job xxxi. 33, are both uncertain: see RVm.): they appear, however, in the
Apocrypha, as Wisd. ii. 24, x. 1 ; Ecclus. xxv. 24; 2 Esdr. iii. 21, iv. 30, vii. 48
(118); cf. Apoc. of Baruch liv. 15, 19 (see Sanday-Headlam, Romans, p. 137);
and in NT. the references to it are frequent; see Horn. v. 12 — 21 j 1 Cor.
XV. 21 f.; 2 Cor. xi. 3; 1 Tim. ii. 14; Rev. xii. 9, xx. 2.

On the narrative ii. 4^ — iii. 24.

In reading these two chapters we must distinguish between the narrative
itself, — the scenery and incidents, as such, — and the spiritual teaching which
they are intended to convey. Tiie material side of the narrative was derived,
there can be little doubt, from the representations and traditions current
among the writer's fellow-countrymen, though not entirely of native origin.
The narrative contains features which have unmistakable counterparts in the
religious traditions of other nations; and some of these, though they have been
accommodated to the spirit of Israel's religion, carry indications that they are
not native to it. A 'golden age' standing at the beginning of history, in which
the earth yielded its products freely, and men lived a life of ideal happiness,
unalloyed by care or sin, by toil or trouble, was pictured by many ancient nations,
Persians and Indians, for instance, as well as Greeks (e.g. Hes. Op. et Dies,
iJO— 92, 109—120) and Romans (Ov. Met. i. 89—112). The idea of a garden
upon earth, which is God's own abode, and in which supernatural gifts are
conferred by means of the fruits of trees, is akin to (though not identical
with) the representations current in India and Persia, according to which the

1 E.g. Ahoth V. 20 (Taylor 29); Targ. of Cant. iv. 12. Cf. Enoch Ix. 8 'the
garden where the elect and righteous dwell,' with Charles' note.

• Where, however, its truit confers only long life, not immortality.

4—2

62 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

dwellings of gods and genii on the sacred mountains contained wonderful trees
able to confer many different kinds of blessings, especially (as the Soma plant)
immortality. Both these and other elements in the representation, as the
Cherubim and the flaming sword, perhaps even the serpent, have in fact a
mythical colouring, and suggest the inference that they have been derived
ultimately from a mythological source. There are also features tending
specifically to connect the narrative with Babylonia. As different represen-
tations of the course of creation were current in Israel, so, as we now know,
they were also current in Babylonia; and one in which, as in ch. ii., the
formation of man precedes that of plants and animals, exists in a very ancient
narrative (according to llommel, as old as 3—4000 b.o.) which was published by
Mr Pinches in 1890. It is too long to translate verlatim'^; but it describes
how when as yet 'no reed had sprung up, no tree had been created' [cf. Gen. ii. 5],
no house or city built, Nippur and Erech, with their temples, not yet founded,
and when the world was all a sea, Marduk formed the dry land, and made it
an abode for the gods ; and after this how he ' created mankind,' made beasts
of the field, living things of the field, the Tigris and the Euphrates in their
places, the verdure of the field, grass, marshes, reeds, the wild-cow with her
young, the young wild-ox, the ewe with her young, the sheep of the fold, parks
and forests, and finally houses and cities, and Nippur and Erech with their
temples. In view of the antiquity of this narrative, Prof. Sayce^ does not
hesitate to see in it 'the earliest starting-point yet known to us of that form of
the story of creation, which we find in Gen. il' Two of the rivers mentioned
in Gen. ii. are Babylonian; perhaps 'Eden,' and the slioham-aione (ii. 12) are so
likewise. The irrigation of a tract of country by a large river (with, it is to be
understood, cross-canals) is Babylonian. A sacred palm-tree, with two winged
figures, having the heads sometimes of eagles, sometimes of men, standing or
kneeling on either side, is often depicted on Assyrian gems^ It is possible that
these figures are the prototypes of the Biblical 'cherubim' (see further p. 60 f.).
A very ancient inscription may be here cited, describing a sacred garden with
a mystic tree, which in its general conception is a counterpart of the Heb.
'garden of God*'—
At Eridu^ a palm-stalk grew overshadowing ; in a holy place did it become

green ;
its root was of bright lapis-lazuli which stretched towards the abyss^;
[before] the god Ea was its growth at Eridu, teeming with fertility;
its seat was the (central) place of the earth;
its foliage (?) was the couch of Buhu, the (primaeval) mother.

1 It may be read in full in Ball's Light from the East, p. 18, or KB. vi. 39—43.
See also Jastrow, Rel. of Bab. and Ass. 444 — 450; Zimmern, KAT.^ 498.

2 Monummti, p. 93. « Ball, op. cit. pp. 28, 29—33.

4 Pinches, Trans. Vict. Inst. xxix. (1897), p. 44 ; Pinches, op. cit. (above, p. 38 k.
p. 71 (with some differences in the translation) ; Sayce, Monuments, p. 101.

° Eridu was a very ancient sacred city of Babylonia; formerly, when the
Persian Gulf extended further inland than it does now, it stood upon its south
shore ; now its site (Abu-Shahrein) is on the right bank of the Euphrates, about 50
miles from its mouth (Maspero, i. 561, 563, 614 f., with map). Its sacred tree is
mentioned also by Eri-aku [p. 156], who calls himself its guardian {KB. in. i. 97).

• The 'waters under the earth.*

THE NARRATIVE OF PARADISE 63

Into the heart of its holy house which spread its shade like a forest hath

no man entered.
In its interior is the sun-god, Tammuz,
Between the mouths of the rivers (whicli are) on both sides*.

Enough will have been adduced to shew that, though no complete Baby-
lonian parallel to the story of Paradise is at present known, there are features
in the narrative which point strongly towards Babylonia, and in the liglst of
the known fact that other elements in the early chapters of Genesis are derived
from Babylonia, authorize the inference that echoes of Babylonian beliefs
supplied, at least in part, the framework of the representation 2.

In considering the question of the origin and character of this represen-
tation, it must not be forgotten that the beginnings of the human race reach
b.'ick, it is certain (p. xxxi ff.), to a period far more remote than that from
which any trustworthy recollections could have been transmitted to historical
times : and hence we are not entitled to suppose that the Hebrews had more
trustworthy information respecting the life and condition of the first men than
other nations of the ancient world : on the contrary, we have every reason for
believing that the pictures which their historians offer of primitive times were
derived from the same source as those drawn by other nations, viz. folk-lore^ —
whether native or borrowed, cannot, naturally, in every particular detail be
precisely determined. And so we may conclude, in view of the facts mentioned
above, that a legend respecting the first beginnings of man upon earth, contain-
ing elements derived partly from Babylonia, partly, it may be, from elsewhere, but
at the same time, in other features, strongly Hebraized, was current in ancient
Israel; and that this, stripped of its primitive polytheism, and retaining only
faint traces of what was probably its original mythological character, formed
the material setting which was adapted by the narrator for the purpose of
exhibiting, under a striking and vivid imaginative form, the deep spiritual
truths which he was inspired to discern ^ As ch. i. gives no scientific account of

1 There is also a scene depicted on an ancient Bab. cylinder, now in the British
Museum (Smith, Chald. Gen. p. 91 ; Ball, p. 25) — two fi^'ures seated on either side
of ft fruit-tree, to which they are both stretching out their hands, while behind one
of them a serpent is coiling upwards — which recalls forcibly Gen. iii.: but as no
inscription accompanies it, its interpretation is uncertain ; and it is hazardous to
suppose it to represent the Bab. story of the Temptation. And the passage quoted
by Sayce, Monuments, p. 104 (cf. p. 65 n.), Ryle, p. 40, and in DB. i. 839'' (cf.
Wade, OT. Hist. p. 49 bottom) from the third tablet of the Creation-epic (11. 132
—138), has certainly no reference to the Fall : it describes the feast held by the
'great gods' before appointing Marduk their champion against Tiamat (above,
p. 28) : see the context, and an amended translation, in Ball, p. 7, by Zimmern, in
Gunkel, p. 410, or Jensen, KB. vi. 21 : cf. also Jastrow, p. 424. On the myth of
Adapa (who, beguiled by Ea, lost immortality), and possible traces of its influence
in Gen. iii., see Zimmern, Bab. and Heb. Gen. 31 ff., KAT.^ 520 ff., Jastr. 544 ff.

' Comp. also, with the formation of man from dust, or (Job xxxiii. 6) clay, how in
the Gilgamesh-epic (see p. 103), i. 34 (KB. vi. 121; Jastrow, pp. 448, 474; KAT.'^ 430),
Aruru creates Eabani out of clay (LD''tD) ; and how also, according to Berossus —
Feemingly in tlie Creation-epic — men were formed of earth mingled with the blood of
a deity {KAT.^ 489, 497; cf. above, pp. 27 n. 2, 30 n. 1).

' Cf. Dr Bernard in DB. i. 840*: *We believe, then, that we have in this
I Biblical record of the Fall a purified form of legendary narrative concerning man's
!■ early history, which had wide currency among Semitic peoples..'

64 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

the process of creation, so ch. ii. 4^— iii. 24 contains no scientific solution of the
problems of anthropology. But the narrative expresses a variety of ethical and
theological truths respecting human nature in a figurative or allegorical dress,
the details not being true in a literal sense, but being profoundly true in a
symbolical sense (cf. p. 32), i.e. as expressing in a symbolical or representative
form real facts of human nature, and real stages through which human nature
actually passed. And the writer, in constructing his narrative, has shewn a
wonderful power of combining deep thoughts upon man and God with an
almost child-like simplicity of outward form: he has thus produced, not
only a narrative singularly impressive and attractive in itself, but one more-
over which can *be understood by the simplest, as it may also be studied with
spiritual benefit by the wisest of mankind.'

Let us, then, while keeping our eye on the teachings of modern science,
consider how we may regard the narrative of Gen. ii. 4^ ff., and what lessons we
may derive from it.

Of the actual beginnings of man upon this earth we know nothing: science,
by a patient collection and examination of facts, may make certain conclusions
as to our physical antecedents and ancestry more or less probable ; but that is
all. The general trend of modern science is to regard man as having developed
gradually out of humbler anthropoid ancestors ; and the possibility of this
theory being true must at least be reckoned with by the theologian : as was
remarked above (p. 32 f.), there can be at least no h priori objection to it upon
dogmatic grounds. But at what moment, or with what feelings, man first
awoke to consciousness of himself, we know as little as we know in the case of an
infant child. Every individual among us has emerged by gradual steps out of
a state of unconsciousness, firstly into a state of sensitive consciousness, in which
he could be sensible of pleasures and pains, but could not reason, and after-
wards into a state of intellectual and moral consciousness, in which he can use I
the powers of reason, can apprehend moral distinctions, and rise to the con- |
ception of spiritual realities. In our own cases, the influence of the civilization i
around us, and the instruction and example of parents and elders who have !
been educated before us, and are able to help us to rise to their own level, !
facilitate and accelerate the process : in the case of the first men, it must |
have been vastly slower and more gradual. But of the stages by which all this }
took place neither history nor science tells us anything definite. Nor are the \
early chapters of the Bible intended to supply this deficiency. What they do !
is to seize and express, under forcible concrete images which all can understand, \
certain important moral and theological truths respecting the nature of man. |
And in estimating the manner in which they do this, we must bear in mind the
stage of knowledge and culture reached by those to whom they were in the
first instance addressed. They were addressed to men who were wholly un-
acquainted with the teachings of physical science, and who had never made
human nature the subject of either archaeological or psychological study. They
were addressed to men, by no means destitute of civilization and culture, —
their polished literary form is alone sufficient to shew that, — but still to men
who were untouched by all the deep and varied influences which (to speak
summarily) owe their origin to Greece, and Rome, and modem Europe. They
vrere addressed to men whose intellectual aptitudes and modes of thought were

THE NARRATIVE OF PARADISE 65

thus, speaking relatively, those of children. And accordingly the truths which
they contain are expressed in a form which men such as these would naturally
understand.

What then are some of the truths which these chapters of Genesis thus
bring before us?

1. Man, it is said, was formed out of the 'dust.' This is obviously a
pictorial, or symbolical, expression of the ftict that there is a material side to
his nature, and that on this side of it he is connected with the earth. But by
what process he was thus * formed ' ; through what intermediate forms, if any,
the 'dust' passed before it became man, — these are questions which do not
come within the range of the author's thought. It may be that, as science
teaches, man, like many other species of living beings, arose by gradual differ-
entiation and development, under varying conditions of environment, from a
pre-existing form (or succession of forms) of life : but, if, and in so far as this
theory is true, it simply implies an alteration in the manner in which God is
conceived as having acted ; what was supposed to have been accomplished by
Ilim, as the result of a single act, some 6000 years ago, was really accom-
plished by Him as the result of a long process, extending through unnumbered
years: the essential point, which the old Hebrew narrator has here seized,
remains unaflfected, that God (mediately, or immediately) ' formed man of the
dust of the ground^.' The second part of the same verse, 'and breathed into
his nostrils the breath of life,' suggests (as pointed out in the note) that there
is also another and higher side to man's nature. And so the verse teaches by
implication the truth of man's double nature. On the one hand, man has a
material body, in virtue of which he is dependent for his support and welfare
upon the material world, and has to accommodate himself to the material
conditions under which he finds himself; on the other hand, his life is in some
special sense a divine gift ; it brings with it intellectual and moral capacities,
differing from those possessed by other animals, a sense of the reality and
distinctive character of which is strongly impressed upon the narrative.

2. Man was made not to be idle, but to worky to attend to the garden in
which he was placed, and to develop its capacities. Man is intended to
exercise his faculties ; and so there is declared in iiuce the truth that it is
part of the Divine order that man should pi^ogress ; and as years went on,
originate and develop all the various arts, employments, and sciences, which
are in different ways conducive to the welfare or knowledge of humanity.

3. The narrative hints at one of the earliest uses to which man would put
his reason, the creation of language (ii. 19 f.). The power of creating language
essentially differentiates man from animals. Animals distinguish : they know
(in many cases) one man, or one creature, from another, they know one food
from another : but only man fixes such distinctions, by associating them with
particular sounds, and thereby creating language. The power of giving names
to animals implies the possession of reasoa

^ For a ;uller discussion of the theistic aspects of Evolution, the writer may be
permitted to refer to the first of his Sermons on Subjects connected with the Old
Testament (1892), pp. 1 — 27. See also the illuminative treatment of the subject in
Aubrey Moore's Science and the Faith (1889), pp. 162 — 235, and in Oxford House
Papersy No. 21 (1889), 'Evolution and Christianity.'

66 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

4. The account given of the formation of woman is, naturally, not to be
understood literally; but under a symbolical form, it teaches (as indicated in
the notes on ii. 18 ff.) the deep etliical and social significance, which under-
lies the difference between the sexes.

5. The narrative teaches that man possesses a moral nature, which must
be exercised, and tested ; and a command is accordingly laid upon him for the
purpose (cf. on ii. 16f.). The command is broken; and man falls thereby from
his state of innocence, and forfeits the blessiiig of the Divine favour, and the
Divine presence, which he had before enjoyed. The command, of which the
man became conscious, and which he disobeyed, can be meant only to represent,
as in a figure, the moral law, a sense of which, — though we cannot define when,
or where, — awoke in primitive man, but almost as soon as it did awake, was
contravened. It is the awakening conscience of the human race, the awakening
sense of right and wrong, the operation of which is thus figuratively brought
before us,

6. The narrator analyses very completely the psychology of temptation,
bringing out particularly the insidiousness with which suggestions of evil
come upon a man, prompting him often, with fatal effect, to do something
which is apparently harmless, or which can plausibly be represented as
harmless.

7. The narrative teaches that man possesses freewill: he was created
with the capacity to remain innocent, but also vrith the capacity to sin (Ecclus.
XV. 11 — 20; Jas. i. 13 f.). Temptation, though it does not proceed from God,
is permitted by Him : it tests man's character ; and tends to strengthen and
perfect it by giving him the opportunity of manifesting his readiness to prefer
God's will to his own, and thereby of establishing a habit of goodness.

8. As regards the condition of man before the Fall, there is a mistake
not unfrequently made, which it is important to correct. It is sometimes
supposed that the first man was a being of developed intellectual capacity,
perfect in the entire range of his faculties, a being so gifted that the greatest
and ablest of those who have lived subsequently have been described as the
* rags ' or ' ruins ' of Adam. This view of the high intellectual capacities of our
first parents has been familiarized to many by the great poem of Milton, who
represents Adam and Eve as holding discourse together in words of singular
elevation, refinement, and grace. But there is nothing in the representation
of Geneiis to justify it ; and it is opposed to everything that we know of the
methods of God's providence. All that, as Christian theologians, we are called
upon to believe is that a time arrived, when man's faculties were sufficiently
developed for him to become conscious of a moral law, and that, having become
conscious of it, he broke it : he may have done this, without possessing any of
those intellectual perfections with which he has been credited, but the existence
of which, at such a stage of history, would be contrary to the whole analogy
of providence : progress, gradual advance from lower to higher, from the less
perfect to the more perfect, is the law which is stamped upon the ontire range
of organic nature, as well as upon the history of the civilization and education
of the human race. The fact that this law is the general rule is rot affected
by retrogression in civilization in particular cases. But it is si fficient for
Christian theology, if we hold that, whatever the actual occasior may have

THE NARRATIVE OF PARADISE 57

been, and however immature, in intellect and culture, he may have been at
the time, man failed in the trial to which he was exposed, that sin thus
entered into the world, and that consequently the subsequent development of
the race was not simply what God intended it to be ; it has been attended
through its whole course by an element of moral disorder, and thus in different
ways it has been marred, perverted, impeded, or thrown back. And what has
(joen said remains true, even though it should be the case — though (p. xxxvi)
this is not tlie view which commends itself to modern anthropologists — that
mankind are not all descended from a single human pair, but arose in-
dependently in different centres of the globe : the real unity of the human
race consists not in unity of blood, but in identity of mental constitution, r.nd
of moral and spiritual capacities^; in this case, therefore, as the facts are
sufficient evidence of the presence of sin in all the races of mankind, the
natural inference would be that each race independently passed through
similar moral experiences, and each similarly underwent a ' fall/ The typical
truth of the narrative of Gen, iii. would thus, if anything, be eAhanced rather
than diminished, if this supposition were true^.

9. The Protevangelium (iii. 15) lays down a great ethical principle.
There is to be a continual spiritual struggle between man and the manifold
temptations by which he is beset. Evil promptings and suggestions are ever
assailing the sons of men ; and they must be ever exerting themselves to repel
them. It is of course true that the great and crowning defeat of man's
spiritual adversary was accomplished by Him who was in a special sense the
* seed ' of the woman, the representative of humanity, who overcame once and
for all the power of the Evil One. But the terms of the verse are perfectly
general ; and it must not be interpreted so as to exclude those minor, though
in their own sphere not less real, triumphs, by which in all ages individuals
have resisted the suggestions of sin and proved themselves superior to the
power of evil. It is a prolonged and continuous conflict which the verse
contemplates, though one in which the law and aim of humanity is to be
to resist, and if possible to slay, the serpent which symbolizes the power of
temptation.

The site of Paradise,

The question of the site of Paradise is one that has exercised many minds :
and very extraordinary speculations have sometimes been propounded on the
subject. After what has been said in the preceding pages, however, it will be
evident that Paradise, as described in the Book of Genesis, is an ideal locality;
and hence what we have to consider is not the question of tiie site of Paradise

^ Though, if the doctrine of evolution be true, there would in this case also be a
unity of blood, only its starting-point would be further back ; and it would be
based, not upon descent from a single human pair, but upon descent from a single
group of anthropoid precursors.

^ With the main thought of the preceding paragraph comp. especially a sermon
by Canon (now Bishop) Gore in Lux Mundi, App. ii (ed. 10, p, 526 ff.) ; and the same
writer's Epistle to the Romaus (1900), ii. 220—2, 228—235; also a lecture reported
in the GMrch Times, Feb. 19, 1897, or, more briefly, in the Exp. Times, Apr. 1897;
nod Illingworth, Bampt. Lect. vi. pp. 143—7, 154—161. Cf. DB. iv. 528^

68 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

as a real locality, but the question of its site, as it was pictured by the Hebrew
narrator. And even this question is not one the answer to which is obvious.
A river, branching into four, of which two are the Tigi-is and the Euphrates,
corresponds to nothing which is to be found — or, we may safely add, was ever
to be found — on the surface of the earth. And when we endeavour to identify
the two remaining rivers, the Pishon and the Gihon, by what we know of the
countries which they are represented as flowing around, they elude our grasp.
Havilah (see on xxv. 18) was probably in N.E. Arabia; Gush is generally
Ethiopia, though it might (see on x. 8) denote the Kasshites, a people dwelling
in the mountainous region between Babylonia and the Caspian Sea, who figure
rather prominently in early Babylonian history, and indeed gave Babylon
a dynasty of kings who ruled for 576 years {c. 1786 — 1211 b.o.). None of
these identifications however enable us to determine the Pishon and the
Gihon consistently with what we know of the geography of the regions in
question.

The following are the principal proposals, which have been made for fixing
the site of Paradise, in accordance with the description in Genesis.

1. The Tigris and the Euphrates rise in the same country, Kurdistan;
and hence some older scholars, as Keil, placed Paradise there, the Pishon
being either the Phasis or (Keil) the Araxes (which, joining the Kur, runs into
the Caspian Sea on the E.), and the Gihon being the Oxus (now the Jihoun).
But these rivers do not actually rise together, in fact the Oxus rises far to the
East of the Caspian Sea, in Afghanistan ; and there are no grounds for locating
!5avilah and Gush in this region.

2. Friedrich Delitzsch, the eminent Assyriologist, son of the well-known
commentator, in 1881 propounded the view that Eden was the whole 'plain'
(see on ii. 8) of Babylonia; * Paradise' was the region close to Babylon, on
the N., where the Tigris and the Euphrates approach each other most closely ;
the Pishon was the Pallakopas, a canal running for a long distance (from above
Babylon) on the W. and S. of the Euphrates, and debouching finally in the
Persian Gulf; the Gihon was the canal, called now the Shatt en-Nil, which
runs, on the E. of the Euphrates, from Babylon, till it joins the Euphrates
again near the ancient Ur, Gush being a name of Babylonia (derived from
the fact, mentioned above, that a Kasshite dynasty ruled in Babylonia for
many centuries). Prof. Delitzsch's work is full of most valuable information,
collected from the inscriptions, respecting the geography and antiquities of
Babylonia and the surrounding countries ; but it is generally felt by scholars
that these identifications do not agree sufiiciently with the Biblical descriptions
to be probable.

3. Professor Sayce\ adopting the view of ii. 10, mentioned in the footnote
on p. 39, considers that the river parted into four heads is the Persian Gulf
(which the Assyrians do not seem to have recognized as an arm of the sea, for
they called it Ndr Marratum, the 'Bitter River'); the Pishon was the
Pallakopas canal ; the Gihon the Khoaspes (now the Kerkha), which, rising

1 Monuments, pp. 95 — 103 ; art. Eden in DB. Similarly (except that the Pishon
is identified with the Karun, E. of the Kerkha) Sir J. W. Dawson, Modern
Science in Bible Lands, chap. iv.

THE SITE OF PARADISE 59

in tliG mountains of the Kasshites (who are meant by * Cush '), flowed formerly
into the Persian Gulf ^ ; Eden was the ' plain ' of Babylonia ; Paradise was the
sacred garden of Eridu (see p. 52), which stood formerly (ibid.) on the S. shore
of the Persian Gulf. This view has the advantage of identifying Paradise
with a known sacred garden of the Babylonians; but it seems impossible
(p. 39) to accept the interpretation of Gen. ii. 10, upon which it depends.

4. HommeP— following largely Ed. Glaser^, who, by his travels and the
numerous inscriptions wliich he has collected, has made many important
additions to our knowledge of the geography and ancient history of Arabia —
places Paradise at Eridu, and considers Eden to have been the ' plain ' about

t : the Pishon, Gihon, and Hiddekel, he identifies with the IVddy Dawdsir,
1 he IVddy Rummd, and the Wddy Sirhdn, three Wadys in N. Arabia, which
run down from the neighbourhood of Mecca, Medina, and Damascus, respec-
tively, in the direction of the Persian Gulf. These identifications are supported
with Hommel's usual cleverness and ingenuity ; but besides being open to the
serious objection that the three Wadys mentioned are not * rivers,' but dry
valleys, they involve too many purely hypothetical elements to have any claim
to be regarded as probable*.

5. Delitzsch and Dillmann identify the Pishon with the Indus (the gold-
country being then India), and the Gihon (as was already done by Josephus,
Ant. 1. 1. 3) with the Nile^ (Cush being then, as generally in the OT., Ethiopia).
These identifications may seem startling, in the light of modern geographical
knowledge : but it must be remembered that the ancients, to a much later
date than that at which Gen. ii. must have been written, had most inexact
ideas of the geography of distant parts : of distant rivers they had only a dim
and vague knowledge, not at all realizing their actual coui*ses, or the points at
which tiiey ran into the ocean, and being ignorant in particular of the geography
of. S. Arabia and of the Red Sca^ There is no reason for supposing that the
Hebrews were better informed'^.

6. Paul Haupt, the well-known Assyriologist, in an article on the site
of Paradise^, holding similarly that, in our localization of the rivers in Gen. ii.,
we must not start with the conceptions of modern geography, thinks that the

^ The Kerkha, the Tigris, and the Euphrates, formerly entered the Persian Gulf
by separate mouths ; but the head of the Gulf has since ancient times been largely
silted up, and the three rivers now converge in the Shatt el-Ardb, about 100 miles
above the sea.

2 ART. 314—16 ; more fully (with map at end) Aufsatze und Ahhandlungen, iii.
i. (1901), pp. 281—4, 292, 298, 335—9.

* Skizze der Gesch. und Geogr. Arabiens von den dltesten Zeiten his zum Propheten
Muhammad (1890), ii. 317—357.

■* They are rejected by Prof. Sayce {Exp. Times, 1901, p. 564) : see also the
detailed criticism by Konig, Fiinf neue Arab. Landschaftsnamen im AT. p. 66 &.

^ Cf. Jer. ii. 18 lxx. ; Ecclus. xxiv. 27. Jos. identifies the Pishon with the Ganges.

^ Alexander was led, by the crocodiles in the Indus, to think at first that he
had reached the sources of the Nile (Arrian, Exp. Alex. vi. 1. 3).

' ' The inspiration of the Biblical writers did not in matters of natural know-
ledge raise them above the level of their age : it need therefore cause no surprise if
the Biblical representation of Paradise bears marks of the imperfect geographical
knowledge of the ancients' (Delitzsch, Neio Comm. on Genesis, 1837, on ii. 13).

8 In Ueber Land und Meer, 1894 — 5, No. 15 (with maps).

60 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

Tiew underlying the description is that tliere was on the N. of Mesopotamia
a large body of water (perhaps suggested by a dim knowledge of tiie Black
Sea), which was the source of the four rivers : the Euphrates and the Tigric,
flowing southwards, ended in marshes ^ ; the Pishon (suggested by the Kerkha),
starting more to the E., flowed into the Persian Gulf (supposed to be a river),
then turning westwards it encircled Havilah (= Arabia), and ended in the Red
Sea; there was land beyond the Pishon, and the Gihon (suggested by the
Karun), starting still further to the E., flowed first southwards, then, turning
westwards, it passed through this land, and encircling Gush (-Ethiopia) ended
finally in the Nile.

Something of this kind, inconsistent as it is with actual geography, does
seem to be what the description in Gen. ii. points to. The general relative
positions of the Euphrates and the Tigris were no doubt known; and this
must form the starting-point of any attempt to fix the site of Paradise, as
pictured by the Hebrews. The cradle of humanity was believed to be some-
where to the East of Palestine (Gen. ii. 8), in or near Babylonia ; and there, in
a region watered by the supposed common source of the two greatest rivers
which they knew, and also of two others, the course of which it is impossible
to determine consistently with actual geography, the Hebrews located
Paradise.

Tlie Cherubim,

The cherubim were composite emblematic figures, which are mentioned
in the OT. chiefly (1) as bearers of the Deity; (2) as guardians of sacred
things. Thus (1) in Ps. xviii. 10, Jehovah rides on the cherub in the thunder-
storm ; in the Tabernacle, two small cherubim facing each other are described
as rising out of the ends of the mercy-seat on the ark (Ex. xxv. 18 — 20), and
in the Temple stood two colossal cherubim which with their wings over-
shadowed the ark (1 K. vi. 23 — 8), at once protecting it and also forming
a throne on which Jehovah was regarded as being seated (' Thou that sittest
upon the cherubim,' Ps. Ixxx. 1 al.Y\ in the visions of Ezek. (i. 5 ff., cf. x. 1 ff.)
four cherubim bear the ' firmament ' which supports Jehovah's throne — here it
is said that each had four faces, that of a man, a lion, an ox, and an eagle,
four wings, the hands of a man, and the feet of calves (i. 6 — 10), though
whether these reproduced exactly the cherubim of the Temple is uncertain :
it is pogsible that they represent elaborations, constructed partly with elements
derived directly from Babylonia, of an older and simpler conception. In
Gen. iii. the cherubim appear as guardians of God's abode and of the spiritual
treasures reserved therein. The passage which ought on all grounds to be

1 Cf. the curious ancient map of Babylonia, in which the country is represented
as surrounded by an actual circle, expressly called Nar Marratum (i.e. the Persian
Gulf), and the Euphrates does enter, at least partly, apparu or ' marshes ' : see
Ball, Light from the East, p. 23, or (more fully) Ezekiel, in Haupt's Polychrome
Bible, p. 101.

^ Figures of cherubim were also carved as ornaments, together with palm-trees
and open flowers, upon the walls and doors of the Temple (1 K. vi. 29, 32, 35 ; cf.
Ez. xli. 18 — 20 [here with two faces, one that of a man, the other that of a lion], 25),
and on the bases of the ten lavere (1 K. vii. 29) : cf. also Ex. xxvi. 31.

THE CHERUBIM 61

compared is Ez. xxviii. 13 — 17, where the 'prince of Tyre' is represented as
a glorious being bedecked with gold and precious stones, who had been placed
'in Eden, the garden of God/ had there 'walked up and down in the midst of
stones of fire' (i.e. flashing gems), but had forfeited his high estate by pride,
and had been expelled from tlie holy ' mountain of God' by a cherubK Ezek.,
it is probable, had access to traditions about Paradise more ample than those
preserved in Gen., and perhaps in some respects different from them ; and he
makes use of them here for the purpose of reiDresenting pictorially the fall of
the king of Tyre.

The cherubim are to be interpreted as symbolic beings — imaginative
symbols of the mystoriousness, the ubiquity, the dread unapproachability
of the Deity. The origin of the conception is uncertain. The word has no
lleb. etymology. Lenormant's statement {Origines, i. 118; of. Sayce, Monit-
merits, 102) that he had read kiruhu ('may the gracious kirubu give
protection ') on a talisman in M. de Clercq's fine collection of Assyrian and
Babylonian gems, as a synonym for the usual shidu, the name of the huge
winged human-headed bulls which guard the entrance of Assyrian palaces and
temples^, has not been verified : no such inscription is quoted in the catalogue
of the collection which has recently been published'. Ps. xviii. 10 would suggest
that the conception arose in a personification of the thunder-cloud (upon, or
within, which, as the context of the verse plainly shews, the Hebrews believed
Jehovah to be borne along). Composite figures of different kinds were how-
ever common in the art of most of Israel's neighbours — Egyptians, Phoenicians,
Hittites, Babylonians, and Assyrians — from one or other of whom they also
found their way into early Greek art*; and it is quite possible that the
idea of the cherub was borrowed from some of these (see further Cherub
in EncB.)K

It need only be added here that in the OT. the cherubim are the attendants
or guardians of Deity upon earth : they are first transferred to heaven in the
Book of Enoch, where they appear among the highest angels, as the unsleeping
guardians of God's celestial throne (xiv. 11, 18, xx. 7, Ixi. 10 ff., Ixxi. 6f.):
cf. the four ^c3a (the name as in Ezek., but with different functions) of Rev. iv.
6—8, v. 6, 11,' 14, vi. 1—7, vii. 11, xiv. 3, xv. 7, xix. 4.

^ The text is in parts obscure and corrupt ; but there is little doubt that this is
the real meaning ; see Davidson's Gomm. (in the Cavib. Bible), p. 207. Kead (after
Lxx.) in V. 14 *With the cherub I set thee, thou wast in the holy mountain of God,'
&c., and in v. 16 end ' and the cherub destroyed thee from the midst,' &c.

2 See Ball, op. cit., Plate opposite p. 28 ; and cf. KAT.^ 529 f.

3 It is now stated that the reading rests upon a mistake {KAT.^ 632 n. 5).

* Especially in the form of the gold-guarding ypvires (eagle-headed lions), Aesch.
P. V. 803 f. ; Hdt. iii. 116, iv. 13, 27, derived, according to Furtwangler, from
Hittite art. See his elaborate article Gryps in Eoscher's Mythol. Lex.

* Comp. the * cherubic' figures in Ball, pp. 28, 29, 30, 31 — 33 (winged human
figures standing or kneeling before a sacred tree, and one eagle-headed winged
human figure) ; but (N.B.) there is no Bab. or Ass. text in which any of these is
called a 'cherub.' Dr Tyler has shewn {PSBA. June, 1890, p. 383 ff.; cf. Masp.
1. 555 f., 557) that in many cases these figures are represented as fertilizing the
date-palm with the pollen from the male palm-spathe : the date was of great
importance in Babylonia as an article of food; and probably some religious
significance attached to the act. Observe the cherubim by the side of palm-trees in
many of the passages cited p. GO n. 2, especially Ez. xli. 18, 19.

62 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

Chapter IV.
The Progress of Manldnd in the line of Cain.

This chapter deals with three subjects : (1) Cain's murder of his brother
Abel, and the banishment which was its punishment, vv. 1 — 16; (2) the origin
of early arts in the line of Cain's posterity (which is traced, for seven genera-
tions from Adam, as far as Lamech's sons), vv. 17 — 24; (3) the first two links
in the parallel line of Seth, vv. 25, 26, this line being given more comi)letely
(through ten generations, to Noah) in ch. v. The story of Cain {vv. 1 — 16)
supplies a striking example of the manner in which the propensity to sin may
be transmitted, in even an aggravated form, from one generation to another :
the disobedience of Adam is followed, in the case of his son, by a terrible out-
burst of self-will, pride, and jealousy, leading to a total and relentless renuncia-
tion of all human ties and affection. The object of vv. 17 — 24 is to sketch in
outline the progress of civilization, and the rise of various arts. The period
was one to which no historical recollections reached back ; and the narrative
furnishes another example (cf. ii. 19 f., 24, iii. 7, 14, 16, 17—19, 21) of the
manner in which the Hebrews, like many other nations, sought to fill up the
blank, and explain for themselves the origin of the habits and institutions of
a later day. Thus in this section of the chapter there are explained the
beginnings of city-life, polygamy, music, and metallurgy; in v. 2, also,
the origin of pastoral life and of agriculture seems to be referred to Abel and
Cain respectively ; and in v. 26 the beginning of the public worship of God is
described. These would hardly be all the arts and institutions explained by
Hebrew folk-lore : it is probable therefore that the narrator (or compiler)
merely selected a few typical examples sufficient to produce a general picture
of the moral and material progress of early man, as conceived by the Hebrews.
There is no parallel at present known from Babylonian antiquity ; but some-
thing similar was told in Phoenicia (see p. 73). It seems to have been
a collateral aim of the compiler to shew how the line which made so many
advances in material civilization fell yet more under the power of sin, and
developed a spirit of vengeance and thirst for blood : the line of Seth {v. 25 f),
on the other hand, is characterized by the growth of piety.

In parts of the narrative, facts or institutions are presupposed (as the
custom of sacrifice, v. 3 f., of blood-revenge, vv. 14, 15, and the increase of
population, vv. 14, 15, 17), of the origin of which nothing is said. The first
two of these omissions need hardly occasion surprise : the customs referred to
might either have been supposed by the narrator to have arisen instinctively,
or have been imported by him unreflectingly into his picture of primitive times
from the associations of his own age. The third omission constitutes a graver
inconsistency, which has led some to infer that the Book of Genesis did not
represent the whole human race as descended from Adam and Eve, but
recognized the existence of * pre- Adamites/ It is true, man undoubtedly
existed upon this globe long before the date which the Book of Genesis

IV. 1-3] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 63

assigns for his creation (p. xxxi) ; but the whole tenor of the narrative shews
that none of the writers to whom we owe the early chapters of Genesis were
conscious of the fact : we may be sure, indeed, that, had they been conscious
of it, they would have mentioned it distinctly. The allusions in question must
consequently be explained diflFerently. In any case they are inconsistencies of
which the author of the Book in its present form seems to be unconscious ;
though possibly they are also indications of the fact either that the narratives
containing them once formed part of a wider cycle of legend, in which the
existence of other branches of mankind was accounted for, or else (cf. p. 72)
that at least iv. 1 — 16 related originally to a later stage in the history of
mankind than that to which it is now referred.

IV. 1 And the man knew Eve his wife ; and she conceived, j
and bare Cain, and said, I have ^gotten a man with the help of
the Lord. 2 And again she bare his brotlier 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

^ Heb. kanah, to get.

IV. 1—16. The story of Cain and Abel.

1. / have gotten &c. The mother expresses her joy in words
which are so framed as to explain at the same time the name of the
child. 'Cain' cannot indeed mean gotten (for it cannot be derived
from the verb kdndh), any more than *Noah,' for instance, can mean
comfort, or ' Moses ' drawn out. What we have in these, as in many
similar cases in the OT., are not etymologies, but assoiiances, i.e. the
name is explained not by the word from which it is actually derived,
but by a word which it resembles in sound. RVm. indicates this by
saying, not that 'Cain' means 'gotten,' but that the Heb. for 'to
get' is kdndh, a word which, it is obvious, resembles 'Cain.' As a
Heb. word, 'Cain' ('Kayin') might be explained (from the Arabic)
as meaning metal-worker^ smith (cf. v. 22) : 'Kenite' (xv. 19) is also,
at least in appearance, a gentile name derived from it (cf p. 72).

2. Abel Heb. Hebel, which means a breath (Is. Ivii. 13), fig.
of something evanescent, Ps. xxxix. 5 (RVm.). This was no doubt
the meaning which the name suggested to the Hebrews; but what
its original meaning was, is quite uncertain. Possibly, it is the Ass.
abluy ' son ' : for other speculations, see EncB. s.v. Abel introduces
pastoral life, Cain agricultural life (such as that to which Adam had
been condemned, iii. 17), both relatively primitive and simple modes of
life^ especially the former, which would naturally be the stage next
following that at which men supported themselves on the spontaneous
produce of the soil, and by fishing and hunting (p, 68).

3. 4. The two brothers bring offerings to Jehovah, each of the
produce of his own toil and care.

1 Not the earliest (above, p. xxxix ff. j cf. Tylor, Anthropology, 206 ff., 219 ff.).

64 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [iv. 3-5

the fruit of the ground an oifering unto the Lord. 4 And Abel, J
he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat
thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his
offering: 5 but unto Cain and to his offering he had not
respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

of the fruit of the ground... ^ of the firstlings of his flock. Both
firstfruits and firstlings were ancient and common kinds of offering
among other nations as well as among the Hebrews (Ex. xxii. 29, 30,
in the ancient * Book of the Covenant ') ; being offered, at least in
civilized times, as natural expressions of thankfulness for the fruitful-
ness of the soil and of animals (cf Dt. xii. 6, 7). However, no such
motive is alluded to here ; nor is it one that is likely to have operated
in really primitive times*.

an offering. Heb. minhdh, meaning properly a present offered to
conciliate, or retain, tJie good will of a superior (e.g. xxxii. 13, 18,
xliii. 11 ; 2 S. viii. 2) ; of a 'present' offered to Jehovah, here, 1 S.
ii. 17, xxvi. 19, and elsewhere (RV. usually 'offering'), also used
specifically, in a narrower sense, of the 'meal-offering' (Lev. ii.)^

4. fat. Fat pieces (the Heb. word being plural), a highly-prized
portion of the animal, and so offered regularly upon the altar (Lev. i. 8,
iii. 3 f ; in firstlings, Nu. xviii. 17).

The custom of sacrifice is here represented as practised naturally
immediately after the introduction of pastoral and agricultural life,
and as being in each case an acknowledgment to God for His blessing,
and arising out of a spontaneous feeling of gratitude for the gifts of
the earth. On the question whether this has really been the predomi-
nant motive in determining the institution of sacrifice, see DB, s.v.
Sacrifice, pp. 330 — 2, 349* (references).

5. fell. Indicating discontent : cf Job xxix. 24 Heb., Jer. iii. 12.
Why were the two offerings regarded thus differently, when each

is described in similar language, and each is manifestly intended as
an expression of reverence and thankfulness? The ground of the
difference is not stated, and it can only therefore be inferred. But
it can hardly have lain in anything except the different spirit and
temper actuating the two brothers. Cain, it is to be noticed, as soon as
he perceives that his gift has not been accepted, becomes angry and
discontented — in itself a sufficient indication that his frame of mind
was not what it should have been. There must have been in his
purpose some secret flaw which vitiated his offering : it may have
been envy at his brother's better fortune, it may have been some
other thought or feeling inconsistent with ' a sacrifice of righteousness,'
i.e. a sacrifice offered with a pure and sincere purpose (Ps. iv. 5). It
seems thus to be at least a collateral aim of the narrator to illustrate
and emphasize the prophetic teaching that it is not the gift, but the

1 Cf. Jevons, Tntrod. to Hist, of Bel. 223—5; Frazer, Golden Bough?, ii. 459.

2 See more fully, on the usage of this word, DB. s.v. Oi'jter, OrFEBiNO, § 4.

IV. 6-9] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 65

6 And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth ? and why J
is thy countenance fallen ? 7 If thou doest well, ^shalt thou not
be accepted ? and if thou doest not well, sin coucheth at the
door: and unto thee ^shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule
over him. 8 And Cain ^told Abel liis brother. And it came to
pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against
Abel his brother, and slew him. 9 And the Lord said unto
Cain, Where is Abel thy brother ? And he said, I know not :

1 Or, shall it not be lifted up ? ^ Or, is its desire, but thou shouldest rule

ovpr it 3 Heb. said unto. Many ancient authorities have, said unto Abel

Ills brother, Let us go into the field,

spirit in which the gift is oifered, which determines its value in the
sight of God\ ^ Of. Heb. xi. 4 ; 1 Jn. iii. 12 ; also Jude 11.

6. 7. A Divine warning follows, bidding Cain control his temper,
and hinting at the consequences if he fails to do so.

7. The margin must be followed. If thou doest well, i.e. hast a
right and sincere purpose, it will shew itself in thy countenance, shall
there not be lifting up? viz. of thy countenance, it will not be down-
cast and sullen, but bright and open : and if thou doest not well, hast
sinister, envious thoughts, sin is then near at hand, couching like some
wild animal at the door, and unto thee is its desire, it is eager to spring
upon and overpower thee : but thou shouldest rule over it, conquer
the rising temptation before it is too strong for thee, and subdue it.
The text is open to suspicion; but as thus understood, it teaches a
profound psychological truth, the danger viz. of harbouring a sullen
and unreasoning discontent : it is a temper which is only too likely
to lead to fatal consequences, and which, therefore, as soon as it begins
to shew itself, should at all costs be checked.

and unto thee &c. The words are identical substantially with
iii. 16^ ; but they are differently appHed.

8. But Cain, heedless of the warning, gives the rein to his sullen
thoughts ; he tempts his brother to go with him into a solitary place
(Dt. xxii. 27), and there attacks and slays him.

told. The Heb. means, not * told,' but said unto, and the words
said ought to follow. Sam., lxx., Vulg., Pesh., and Ps.-Jon. have
the clause given on RVm., which has no doubt accidentally dropped out
of the Hebrew.

9 — 15. Cain's punishment.

9. Where &c. The question, introducing the judicial inquiry,
as in iii. 9 ; but the answer shews how sin has gained in power. Adam
and Eve only excuse themselves : but 'Cain says falsely that he does not

1 Another view, however, is that there underlies the story some early struggle
ij between two theories of sacrifice, which ended by the triumph of the theory that
Jihe right offering to be made consisted in the life of an animal.

66 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [iv.

am I my brother's keeper? 10 And he said, Wliat hast th<
done ? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the
ground. 11 And now cursed art thou from the ground, which
hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy
hand ; 12 when thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth
yield unto thee her strength ; a fugitive and a wanderer shalt
thou be in the earth. 13 And Cain said unto the Lord,
^My punishment is greater ^than I can bear. 14 Behold, thou

* Or, Mine iniquity * Or, than can be forgiven

know where his brother is, and adds defiantly that he is not his
keeper, and consequently is under no obligation to know ' (Knob.).

10 — 12. But the Divine voice refuses to be silenced. It holds
before him his crime, and forthwith pronounces sentence upon him.

10. Hark! (Is. xiii. 4, lii. 8) % brother's blood crieth &c.
Blood wrongfully shed was regarded as crying to God for vengeance,
until it had been atoned for : cf. Job xvi. 18 ; Ez. xxiv. 7 f.

11. from the ground. From must either denote the direction from
which the curse is to proceed, or mean pregnantly away from : v. 14*
rather supports the latter interpretation. Ground seems here (cf. v. 14)
to mean the cultivated soil in contrast to the face of the earth in
general. Cain must leave the cultivated soil on which he has hitherto
prospered, and become a wanderer in wild and unknown regions.

Iier mouth. Cf. for the poetical figure Nu. xvi. 32, and (of Sheol)
Is. V. 14. The 'ground,' after having swallowed the gruesome drink
which Cain has provided for it, can no longer bear him, but must cast
him off as accursed.

12. The particulars of the curse. The ground will no longer
respond to his toil : so he will ever have to be seeking a new resting-
place, while a guilty conscience will the more increase his restlessness.
That the ground will refuse him its strength is in excess of the curse
pronounced in iii. 17.

strength. I.e. produce (Job xxxi. 39).

a fugitive. More exactly, a totterer (cf, the verb in Is. xix. 1),
the word denoting the hesitating, uncertain gait of one not knowing
where to go, or famting for lack of food, or drunken (Am. iv. 8 ; Ps. cix.
10, cvii. 27 [' stagger '] : the renderings ' be moved,' * wander,' * be
vagabond/ are all inadequate).

13. 14. Cain, though not penitent, is humbled and alarmed : so
he pleads for a mitigation of the punishment.

13. punishment. Lit. ifiiquiti/, but including here its consequences,
i.e. its punishment : cf. 1 S. xxviii. 10.

than I can bear. RVm. is legitimate philologically ; but the
context (v. 14) speaks only of Cain's punishment.

14. Cain is still pictured as in 'Eden' {v. 16), though not in tha
garden : Jehovah's presence is supposed to be confined to the garden

[V. 14-16] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 67

last driven me out this day from the face of the ground ; and J
from thy face shall I be hid ; and I shall be a fugitive and a
wanderer in the earth ; and it shall come to pass, that whosoever
andeth me shall slay me. 16 And the I^ord said unto him,
Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on
iim sevenfold. And the Lord appointed a sign for Cain, lest
\uy finding him should smite him.

16 And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and
Iwelt in the land of ^Nod, ^on the east of Eden.

1 That is, Wandering. ^ Or, in front of

iiid its precincts ; beyond these limits he will be hidden from YLisfacBy
xikI deprived of the protection which, according to ancient ideas,
proximity to a sanctuary conferred even upon a murderer : he will be a
tvanderer over the wide earth ; above all, his guilty imagination brings
before him the vision of the blood-avenger, dogging his steps, and
3ausing him daily to tremble for his life'. *Cf. the striking picture
af the supposed murderer of Laius in Soph. Oed. Tyr. 463 — 482 ; and
that of the restlessness of the evil conscience in Job xv. 20 — 24' (W. L.).
It has often been asked, Who could there have been to slay Cain ?
According to the existing Book of Genesis, it is plain that there could
have been no one. The inconsistency is one of which, however, the
narrator (or compiler) is evidently unconscious. Comp. p. 72.

15. A concession is made to Cain's fears ; and he receives a promise
of immunity from the blood-avenger. But he is not restored to happi-
ness : banished from his relations and from the presence of God, haunted
in his wanderings by an uneasy conscience, Cain remains a lesson and a
spectacle for all time.

Therefore. Viz. because Cain's complaint has some force in it. Cf.
the use of the same word in xxx. 15.

s&cenfold. By seven of the murderer's family being slain — by Cain's
kinsmen, according to ancient ideas — to atone for his death.

a sign. Viz. for his protection, which, to have the effect intended,
must have been something attaching to his person; though what it
was is not stated, and it is idle to speculate.

16. from the presence of Jehovah. Regarded as confined to the
garden and its precincts : cf. v. 14 ; also 1 S. xxvi. 19 ; Jon. i. 3.
[From the presence of is more lit. from before, as Gen. xli. 46 al.)

the land of Nod. I.e. of Wandering (cf. ndd, 'wanderer,' vv. 12, 14),
a land not geographically definable, but pictured as being on the East
of Eden, in the remoter, vaguer, less-known East even than Eden itself.

^ In early Greece, banishment might be the penalty even for accidental
iKMoaicide (as in the case of Patroclus, II. xxiii. 85 ff.) ; cf. the case mentioned by
Doughty, Arabia Deserta (1888), ii. 293.

5—2

68 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [iv. 17

The narrative of Cain has a typical significance: it furnishes a typical
example of the manner in which sin gains dominion over a man; and the
psychological analysis of the process {vv. 7, 8) is very complete. Among the
lessons or truths which the narrative teaches may be instanced : the nature
of temptation, and the manner in which it should be resisted; the conse-
quences to which an unsubdued temper may lead a man ; the gradual steps by
which in the end a deadly crime may be committed; the need of sincerity of
purpose lest our offering should be rejected ; God's care for the guilty sinner
after he has been punished ; the interdependence upon one another of members
of the human race ; and the duties and obligations which we all owe to each
other. In its general outline the story of Cain and Abel belonged no doubt
to the cycle of popular beliefs, current in ancient Israel: the narrator has
made it the vehicle of some great moral lessons, designed primarily for the
instruction of his own nation and age, but destined ultimately, through God's
providence, to become the possession of tlie world at large. Notice how a few
strokes suffice to sketch the picture, and yet how complete and effective, aa
a whole, it is.

17 And Cain knew his wife ; and she conceived, and bare
Enoch : and he builded a city, and called the name of the city,

17 — 24. The growth of civihzation, and the origin of what were
taken to be primitive institutions or modes of life, in the line of Cain.
No doubt, the narrator reports faithfully what was currently believed
by the Hebrews, — and perhaps by the Canaanites before them, — aboul
the beginnings of civilization : but the picture, it must be evident,
cannot be historical. Archaeology shews that 'cutting instruments,
as well as other implements and utensils, were for long made only 0'
copper (or bronze), and that the use of iron came in only at a com^
paratively late date: so that it is extremely unlikely that the art 0
smelting and forging both should have been discovered by one man
And the 'Bronze age' was preceded by a ' Stone age,' of very consider
able duration, during which metals (except gold, for ornaments) wer
not in use at all, but for which the narrative of the present chapte
leaves no room. Men, moreover, for long before the domestication d
animals and agriculture (w. 2, 20) were introduced, lived in a rud
state of culture, as hunters, subsisting on game and fish, and wild fruit
(Dawkins, Early Man in Britain^ 172, 244, 246 ; c£ above, pp. xxxix-
xli), for which likewise there is no room in the narrator's scheme
It is also highly improbable that cities were built, or musical instri
ments invented, so soon after man's first appearance upon the eart
as is here represented to have been the case.

17. Whence did Cain take his wife? and who were there to inhab:
the city which he built ? The questions are analogous to the one raisefi
by V. 14, and must be answered similarly.

Enoch. Heb. HanoM, which recurs in the line of Seth (v. 18j
and occurs also (as that of a Midianite tribe) in xxv. 4, and (as that < \
a Eeubenite clan) in xlvi. 9. As a Heb. word, it would mean trainm \

V. 17-21

] THE BOOK OF GENESIS

ifter the name of his son, Enoch. 18 And unto Enoch was born J
I rad : and Irad begat Mehujael : and Mehujael begat Methushael :
lind Methushael begat Lamech. 19 And Lamech took unto him

vr o wives : the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the
|)ther Zillah. 20 And Adah bare Jabal : he vras the father of
iiuch as dwell in tents and Tiave cattle. 21 And his brother's

)r dedication. Nothing definite can however be inferred, whether from
his or from most of the following names, respecting their origin or the
deas which they were intended to convey ; in many cases the meaning
> uncertain ; for we do not know what was the vocabulary of the
^emitic language from which they were derived, at the time when they
vera formed, or how far, for instance, we may rightly explain them by
irabic. There is a presumption, from general analogy, that some at
east will be of Babylonian origin : but even so we have no guarantee
}hat they are in their original fonn ; in the process of naturalization
n Israel, they may easily have been Hebraized.

18. Mehuyd'el (as a Heb. word) means apparently * blotted out (vi. 7)
}y God.' Lxx. however read ^ for 1 (as the Heb. does in clause h), and
localize MatT/X, i.e. MahyVel 'God maketh me alive.'

Methushael. This name is Babylonian in form = mutu-sha-ili, 'man
'i.e. liegeman, Cheyne) of God.'

19. Lamech introduces polygamy.

'Adah — also the name of a ' wife ' of Esau (xxxvi. 2) — might mean
'Ass., Arab.) 'the dawn' j and Zillah (Heb.) 'shadow,' — 'a suggestive
lescription of a noble chieftainess, whose presence was like a refreshing
ind protecting shade. Is. xxxii. 2 ' (Cheyne, EncB. i. 626).

20 — 22. The introduction of three (seemingly) primitive modes of

ife, or professions, is referred to Lamech's three sons. The series of

-cn-en names ends by branching into three, just as in ch. v. the series

)f ten names does (Shem, Ham, and Japheth). By this ' knot ' in the

genealogical tree, it is indicated (Ewald) that a new and broader

levelopment is about to commence (cf. xi. 26).

I 20. Ydbdl. The meaning is obscure. Dillm.'s ' wanderer' is very

' juestionable. The Heb. ydbal (in the causative conj.) is a poet, word

'<)r to bear or lead along in state (Is. xviii. 7, Iv. 12, al.); ydbdl is

i poet, word for stream (Is. xxx. 25, xliv. 4). The three similarly

)unding names may be an indication of the artificial character of the

^^enealogy : Arabic parallels are cited by Lenormant, Origines, i. 192.

riie Greeks associated shepherds and musicians : similarly here Yabal

Hid Yubal are sons of the same mother.

father. In a fig. sense, = originator of the occupations or profes-
sions described.

^ such as dwell &c. I.e. of nomads, moving about, like the patriarchs,
:mth flocks and herds (cf xiii. 12, 18 ; Jer. xxxv. 7). The nomadic
mode of life is referred to Yabal as its originator.

70 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [i v. .1-23

name was Jubal : he was the father of all such as handle the J
harp and pipe. 22 And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-cain, Hhe
forger of every cutting instrument of ^ brass and iron : and the
sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah. 23 And Lamech said unto
his wives :

1 Or, an instructor of every artificer * Or, copper and so elsewhere.

21. harp. Heb. Mnnor, perhaps in fact the k/re, a simpler instru-
ment, very popular in antiquity. Comp. the writer's Joel and Amos,
p. 234f.

pipe. Mentioned with the kinnor in Job xxi. 12, xxx. 31 ; also
Ps. cl. 4t.

22. Tubal-cain. I.e. (apparently) ' Tubal of (the individual or the
tribe ?) Cain.' The form of name is peculiar. Tubal is perhaps the
eponymous ancestor of Tubal (x. 2), a people living on the NE. of
CiKcia, and famous in the days of Ezckiel (Ez. xxvii. 13) for its 'vessels
of copper' (or 'bronze'). So Lenormant, p. 210, and others.

the forger. Lit. the sharpener. The marg. on these words (= AV.)
may be disregarded.

brass. Bronze, or copper— which, indeed, as Dr Aldis TVright, in
his Bible Word-Book reminds us, was the meaning of ' brass ' in Old
English. It is evident, from his referring the working of these metals
to primitive times, that the writer has no knowledge of the long ante-
cedent Stone age.

Na'amdh. I.e. 'pleasant,' 'gracious.' No doubt mentioned here
as a figure well known to Hebrew folk-lore, of whom (as of most of
the other personages named in this genealogy) a good deal more was
recounted than the narrator has reported. The three professions
referred to are perhaps mentioned as characteristic elements of nomad
life. At any rate, the smitlis form even now in Arabia a distinct
caste (Doughty, 11. 656), as they are said to do also all over Africa
(Hoernes, Primitive Man^ in the 'Temple Primers,' p. 67).

Those who have visited Florence will recollect the illustrations of
these early arts on Giotto's campanile.

23. 24. The 'Song of the Sword.' Lamech, returning, we may
suppose, from some deed of blood, and brandishing his weapon in
his hand, boasts before his wives — as an Arab chiej it is said, will
do still — of what he has done ; and expresses his delight at the
means which he now possesses of avenging effectually bodily injuries.
The Song is composed in the usual parallelistic form of Heb. poetry.

23 a, b. A formal introduction, inviting the attention of his wives
to what he is about to say (cf Is. xxviii. 23, xxxii. 9).

c, d. Lamech boasts that he has requited a (mere) wound or bruise
(Ex. xxi. 25, where ' stripe ' = ' bruise ' here), inflicted upon him, with
death. — The first margin on line c is possible by Heb. idiom : the
second marg. (=AV.) may be disregarded.

IV. 33-26] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 71

Adah and Zillah, hear my voice ;

Ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech :

For ^I have slain a man ^for wounding me,

And a young man for bruising me :
24 If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,

Truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

25 And Adam knew his wife again ; and she bare a son, and
called his name ^Seth : For, said she, God ^hath appointed me
another seed instead of Abel ; for Cain slew him. 26 And to
Seth, to him also there was born a son ; and he called his name
Enosh : then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.

^ Or, I will slay ^ Or, to my wounding^ and a young man to my hurt

« Heb. Sheth. * Heb. shath,

24. seventy and sevenfold. So terrible will be the vengeance which
his kinsmen will exact. The words give expression to Lamech's sense
of superior security, as compared with Cain (v. lb), on account of the
metal weapons provided for him by his son's invention. The readiness
to shed blood, which had been first manifested by Cain, appears in an
intensified form in Lamech.

25, 26. Two notices from the parallel line of Seth, as given by J ;
preserved here (like v. 29) on account of the particulars contained
m them. The line, as far as Noah, is given completely (from P)
in eh. v. It forms in character a contrast to that of Cain : for Seth
is represented as a substitute for the righteous Abel ; and under Enosh
the public worship of Jehovah is stated to have been introduced (see
also V. 22, 24, vi. 9).

25. hith appointed. The etymology is to be understood upon the
same principle as that of ' Cain ' in v. 1. Observe that UVm. does not
say that Seth means ' appointed.'

seed. Used instead of son, probably because the writer has in view
the entire line, of which Seth is the ancestor.

26. ^ Enosh. In Heb. a poet, word for ' man ' ; in Aramaic (in the
form ^endsh) the usual word for ' man.'

then began &c. The formal and public worship of God is repre-
sented as now beginning.

to call upon. Properly (as always) to call with, i.e. to use the
name in invocations, in the manner of ancient cults, especially at
times of sacrifice : cf. xii. 8, xiii. 4, xxi. 33, xxvi. 25.

On the narrative of Cain and Abel. In the preceding notes this narrative
has been explained in the sense which it most obviously possesses /or us: it is
anotlier question, which, though it may be touched upon briefly, it lies beyond
the scope of the present commentary to discuss fully, whether in any respects
the sense originally attached to it was different. The allusions in vv. 3, 4 to an

n THE BOOK OF GENESIS

established system of religious observances, and in tm. 14, 15, 17, to an already
existing population on tlie earth, have been thought by some recent critics
to imply that * Cain ' is a figure which belonged originally to a much later stage
in the history of mankind than that at which it is here placed ; it has also been
urged that the terms of «?. 16 become far more significant if Cain (like
many other of the early figures in Genesis : see on ix. 25 fF., and ch. x.)
represented in fact 21. people, in which case v. 15* would be really the boast of a
tribe, who, as the Bedawin of the desert do still, held sacred the duty of blood-
revenge and (in this case) dechired that for every slain member of their tribe
they would exact seven lives of the tribe to which the murderer belonged.
The * sign ' which Jehovah sets upon Cain's person for his protection, is con-
sidered further to have been the tribal mark or badge \ such as would be at
once recognizable by all who saw it, and which marked out its possessor as
under the protection of the tribal God. Upon this view, the story, in its
original form, was an attempt to explain what, to those who had experienced
the enjoyments of a settled agricultural life, seemed so strange, the restlessness
of the nomadic life, and the excessive development, among some of those who
still adhered to it, of the custom (in itself, of course, a legitimate one, according
to Hebrew ideas) of blood-revenge : these two peculiarities implied that some
kind of curse rested upon the tribe, the curse in its turn implied guilt ; and
the guilt was ' Cain's' murder of his brother (i.e., if ' Cain ' represents a tribe, its
destruction of a neighbouring agricultural tribe, which resulted, however, in its
own perpetual exile from its former home) I Speculations of this kind must not
be ruled out of court in an attempt to throw light upon an ancient narrative,
the original sense and connexion of which may well have been lost or obscured :
nevertheless, it must be evident that in pursuing them we are moving upon
uncertain ground. The name Cain (as was remarked on iv. 1) would be
naturally tliat of the eponymous ancestor of the Kenites ; and in fact it occurs
(in the Heb.) as the name of this tribe in Nu. xxiv. 22 (see RV.), Jud. iv. 11
(RVm.). Hence it is tempting to think, with Stade, that the Kenites are the
tribe referred to : they were neighbours of Israel (cf. on xv. 19), and at least
some of them retained their nomadic habits till a late period of the history
(Jer. XXXV. 7 : see 1 Ch. ii. 55). The existence of some connexion between
'Cain' (pp) and 'I^cnite' ('•3"'p) must be admitted to be possible: but there
do not seem to be any grounds for supposing that the Kenites were con-
spicuous among nomad tribes in general for possessing the characteristics
attributed specially to 'Cain' in Gen. iv. 14, 15 (cf. Noldeke's criticism of
the preceding theory in his art. Amalek, § 7, in the EncB.y.

On the names in v.llfL Respecting these names, nothing material can

1 Cf. Cuttings in the Flesh (§§ 5, 6) in the EncB.

2 CI. Eyle, p. 72 (the story may preserve the recollection of some old collision
betsveeu the agricultural and pastoral elements in prehistoric man).

3 See further Stade's essay on Cain in the ZATW. 1894, pp. 250—318 (an
abstract in Holzinger, p. 50 f.); Gunkel, pp. 41, 42 — 44; Cain in the EncB.-, and
on the other side, Dr Worcester, Genesis in the Light of Modern Knowledge (New
York, 1901), pp. 260 — 70. That Cain and Abel represent two peoples is however
held also by Hommel {Sunday School Times, Dec. 31, 1898), who thinks, from Arabic
analogies, that 'Abel' means shepherd (cf. Abel in EncB.), and Sayce (Exp. Times,
X., 1899, p. 362).

CAIN AND THE CAINITES 73

be added to what has been said in the notes : they are * the names of legendary
heroes, to whom the origins of civilization, science and art, were popularly
ascribed by the Hebrews' (Ottley, Hist, of the Hebrews, p. 13). There are
also (cf. p. 62) grounds for supposing that the particulars here preserved are
only excerpts from a wider cycle of tradition current in ancient Israel Some
interesting, if not conclusive, speculations respecting the names which are
mentioned, may be found in the art. Cainites in the EncB. (cf. also below,
p. 81): though no direct Babylonian parallel has as yet been discovered, it
is nevertheless probable, in view of the wide influence exerted by Babylonia
upon early Israel, that they are in some way ultimately connected with
Babylonia (cf. p. 80 f.). On the whole, our judgement upon them may be
expressed in the words of Prof, (now Bishop) Ryle : * Perhaps we should not
be far wrong in regarding these personages as constituting a group of
demigods or heroes, whose names, in the eailiest days of Hebrew tradition,
filled up the blank between the creation of man and the age of the Israelite
patriarchs. Such a group would be in accordance with the analogy of the
primitive legends of other races. The removal of every taint of polytheistic
superstition, the presentation of these names as the names of ordinary human
beings, would be' partly a result of their naturalization in Israel itself,
partly *the work of the Israelite narrator' {Early Narratives of Genesis,
p. 81).

Phoenician parallels. A few words deserve, however, to be added about
the very similar account given by the Phoenicians of the origin of different
inventions, preserved by Eusebius {Praep. Ev. i. 10), in extracts from Philo
of Byblus, who in his turn quotes from the Phoenician author Sanchoniathon.
The extracts are not always perfectly consistent, and seem to be derived from
different sources; but into these questions it is not necessary here to enter; the
differences do not affect the general character of their contents. They are too
long to cite at length : but a few specimens may be given. Among the early
descendants of the first pair {Upoiriyovos and Ala>v) were two brothers, Sofuy-
fipovfios [= DHJP ^pi^'] o Koi 'Yylrovpavioy, and Ovaaos, of whom 'Yylrovpdvtos
founded Tyre, and first made huts out of reeds, i-ushes, and papyrus, while
Ovaaos wa« the first to make clothing from the skins of animals, and to
venture on the sea upon the trunk of a tree. Many other inventions were
ascribed to a race of six pairs of brothers descended from 'Y^ovpai/toy.
From 'Aypevs and 'AXteuy^ came hunting and fishing; from the second pair,
of whom one was called Xpvaoap (? K^^n 'smith,' which is also Phoenician),
the discovery and working of iron, magic and divination, the invention of
various kinds of fishing tackle, and navigation; from the third {T€xvlttjs
[i cf. ]\\^] and Vr'iuos AvToxOav), the making of bricks and roofs ; from the fourth
{'Aypos and ^Aypovrjpos), courts and enclosures to houses, agriculture and
hunting^; from the fifth {"Ap-wos and Mdyos), village and pastoral life'; from
the sixth (Mto-wp [I'lC^^p 'equity'] and 2vduK [Pl*^* 'righteousness']), the use of

^ Toiis dXeias Kal &ypas evperds, i^ wv KKrjBrivai dypevrcLS Kal a\i.eis.

'■^ iK rovTuyv dyporai Kal KwrjyoL (cf. 'the father of in Gen. iv. 20'', 21'*).

'■^ ot Kar^dei^av /cto/^aj Kal irolp.va% (cf. Gen. iv. 20'').

74 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

salt^ The authors of other inventions are also specified; but these examples
will suflico. It is difficult not to think that the Heb. and Phoen. representa-
tions spring from a common Caiiuanite cycle of tradition, which in its turn
may have derived at least some of its elements from Babylonia.

Indications of two cycles of tradition in J's narrative in Gen. 1. — xi. It
is the evident intention of iv. 17 — 24 to describe the beginnings of the civiliza-
tion which existed in the writer's own day : was a knowledge, then, of the arts,
the invention of which is here narrated — and they are probably typical of
many other arts not expressly mentioned'^ — preserved by Noah and his house-
hold in the ark? or had all these arts to be rediscovered afterwards? The one
alternative is as improbable as the other. A consideration of this and other
facts presented by the early chapters of Genesis has forced recent critics
(cf. Ryle, p. 79) to the conclusion that the narrative of J in Gen. i. — xi. is
not really homogeneous, but that it consists of two strata — or embodies two
cycles of traditions — one of which either made no mention of a Flood, or, if it
did mention it, did not view it as universal, and regarded the arts and civiliza-
tion of the writer's own time as having been handed down, without break or
interruption, from the remote period indicated in the present chapter. As we
go further, we shall meet with other indications pointing to the same conclu-
sion'. The passages which may be referred with probabihty to the stratum of
narrative here referred to are ii. 4^ — iii. 24, iv. 17—24, vi. 1 — 4, ix. 20 — 27,
xi. 1 — 9 ; J's story of the Deluge, if this view be correct, will have been added
afterwards, from an independent cycle of tradition.

Chapter V.
The line of Setli from Adam to Noah,

In the form of a genealogy of ten generations, the development of mankind
from Adam to Noah is brietly narrated ; and so the transition is made from
the Creation to the next event of principal importance, the Flood. The
difference in style and manner (except in v. 29) from cli. iv. is strongly
marked (notice, for instance, * God,' not * Jehovah' ; the expressions in vv. 1 — 3
the same as in ch. i.; and the stereotyped form in which the accounts of the
several patriarchs are cast) ; and shews that the compiler returns here to the

1 Eus. Praep. Ev. (cd. Heinichen) i. 10, §§ 6—11 : the Greek text of Philo is
also to be found in Milller's Fragm. Hist. Grace, in. 566 f. There is a translation in
Lenormant's Origines de Vhistoire^, i. 536 ff . : cf. also Baudissin, Studien zur Sem.
Rel.-gesch. (1876), i. 14 f. It is much to be regretted that the various names have
not been preserved in their original Plioenician.

2 The arts of engraving, cutting metals and stones, building, writing, and many
others, are known now, by the actual products remaining to the present day, to have
been practised, and to have reached even a high degree of perfection, both in
Babylonia and in Egypt, at a date long before that assigned in Genesis to the Plood
(of. pp. xxxii — xxxiv).

3 See on vi. 4 and xi. 1 — 9.

V. 1-3] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 75

same source (P) from wliich he drew i. 1 — ii. 4% only v. 29 being taken by
him from J. Except in vv. 22, 24, 29, the chapter consists of a bare list
of names and numbers, the items stated regularly in each case being the
age of the patriarch at the birth of his firstborn and at his death, and the
fact that he 'begat sons and daughters.' The aim of the writer is by means
of these particulars to give a picture of the increasing population of the earth,
as also of the duration of the first period of the history, as conceived by him,
and of the longevity which was a current element in the Hebrew conception
of primitive times.

It need hardly be said that longevity, such as is here described, is physio-
logically incompatible with the structure of the human body ; and could only
have been attained under conditions altogether diflferent from those at present
existing, such as we are not wari'anted in assuming to have existed. The names
are not to be understood as those of real persons ; they serve merely, taken in
conjimction with the statements connected with them, to bring before the
reader a general picture of primitive times as conceived by the narrator. The
attempt has sometimes been made to save the names as those of real persons
by supposing links omitted ; but this supposition, though it may be legitimately
made elsewhere (e.g. in Mt. i.), is excluded here by the terms used, which are
not limited to the simple words ' begat/ or * the son of/ but include the age of
the father at the birth of his firstborn, and the number of years which he lived.
It is *more candid and natural to admit that Israelite tradition, like the
traditions of other races, in dealing with personages Uving in prehistoric times,
igned to them abnormally protracted lives 1. Hebrew literature does not, in
s respect, diiTer from other literatures. It preserves the prehistoric
ditions. The study of science precludes the possibility of such figures being
terally correct. The comparative study of literature leads us to expect
exaggerated statements in any work incorporating the primitive traditions of
a people' (llyle, p. 87).

V. 1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the P
day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he liim ;
2 male and female created he them ; and blessed them, and called
their name ^Adam, in the day when they were created. 3 And

1 Or, Man

V. 1*. of the genei^ations of Adam. As far, viz., as Noah, who
begins a new epoch (cf. vi. 9).

1^ 2. A recapitulation of the substance of i. 27, 28, designed for
the purpose of reminding the reader that the multiplication of mankind,
and propagation in them of God's image {v. 3 ff.), was in accordance
with the Divine purpose, as there declared.

2. and blessed them (i. 27), bidding them at the same time increase
and multiply.

called their name man. Not mentioned in ch. i. On the sense of
the expression see on i. 5.

1 Cf. the references in Jos. Ant. i. 3. 9 j and Hes. Op. et Dies, 129 t

76 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [v. 3-^0

Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his P
own likeness, after his image ; and called his name Seth : 4 and
the days of Adam after he begat Seth were eight hundred years :
and he begat sons and daughters. 5 And all the days that
Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years : and he died.

6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat
Enosh : 7 and Seth lived after he begat Enosh eight hundred
and seven years, and begat sons and daughters : 8 and all the
days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve yeara : and he died.

9 And Enosh lived ninety years, and begat Kenan : 10 and
Enosh lived after he begat Kenan eight hundred and fifteen
years, and begat sons and daughters : 11 and all the days of
Enosh were nine hundred and five years : and he died.

12 And Kenan lived seventy years, and begat Mahalalel :
13 and Kenan lived after he begat Mahalalel eight hundred
and forty years, and begat sons and daughters : 14 and all the
days of Kenan were nine hundred and ten years : and he died.

15 And Mahalalel lived sixty and five years, and begat
Jared: 16 and Mahalalel lived after he begat Jared eight
hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters: 17 and
all the days of Mahalalel were eight hundred ninety and five
years : and he died.

18 And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and
begat Enoch : 19 and Jared lived after he begat Enoch eight
hundred years, and begat sons and daughters : 20 and all the

3. Seth being in Adam's image, he is also {v. 1) in God's image.
It follows that the image of God is transmitted to Adam's descendants.
On Seth and Enosh, comp. (in J) iv. 25 f.

9. Kenan. The name (Ileb. P^"^) is etymologically a derivative of
Cain (Heb. TP), and is supposed by some to be a mere variation of it
(cf p. 80). It occurs in the Sabaean inscriptions of S. Arabia (of. on
X. 28) as the name of a deity (CIS. iv. No. 8).

12. MahalaVel, as a Heb. word, means j^ra/se (Pr. xxvii. 21) of God.

15. Jared ( Yered), as a Heb. word, would mean a descending\

18. Enoch. Heb. Hdnokh, as iv. 17.

1 But not (as has been suggested) a * descendant' (which would be in Heb. an
unidiomatic application of the idea). The ' Book of Jubilees,' — a midrashic para-
phrase of Genesis, in which the history is arranged in periods of 50 years, dating
(Charles) from c. 120 b.c.,— explains the name (iv. 15; p. 33, ed. Charles, 1902),
« because in his days the angels descended on the earth' (Gen. vi. 2) : see also Enoch
vi. 6, with Charles' note ; and cf. PEFQS. 1903, p. 233 f.

V. .0-29] THE BOOK OF GENESIS ^

days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years : and he P
died.

21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methu-
selah : 22 and Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah
three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters : 23 and all
the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years :
24 and Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God
took him.

25 And Methuselah lived an hundred eighty and seven
years, and begat Lamech : 26 and Methuselah lived after he
begat Lamech seven hundred eighty and two years, and begat
sons and daughters : 27 and all the days of Methuselah were
nine hundred sixty and nine years : and he died.

28 And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and
begat a son : 29 and he called his name Noah, saying. This J
same shall ^comfort us for our work and for the toil of our
hands, ^because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed.

* Heb. nahem, to comfort. ^ Or, which cometh from the ground

21. MetJmshelah. I.e., as it seems, *man of Shdlah/ — the name,
or the corrupted name, of a deity (p. 81). Cf. Methusha'el, iv. 18.

22. walked with God, i.e. in companionship with Him (cf. 1 S. xxv.
15, where the Heb. for 'were conversant' is walked), implying, as its
natural condition, that his manner of life was such as God approved :
hence lxx. cv-qpia-r-qcri Tw ^cw (whence Heb. xi. 5). The same expres-
sion is used of Noah, vi. 9 : cf. (with a qualifying adjunct) Micv vi. 8 ;
Mai. ii. 6 (each time -j^n).

23. On the number 365, see p. 78.

24. he was not. The expression is used of sudden, or inexplicable,
disappearance (Is. xvii. 14; Ps. ciii. 16; 1 K. xx. 40; ch. xlii. 13, 36).

took him, viz. on account of his piety, lxx. fiireOrjKe, whence Heb.
xi. 5. Cf. Wisd. iv. 10—14. In Babylonian mythology, Xisutliros, the
hero of the Flood, was for the same reason transported, without dying,
beyond the waters of death (p. 103). See further, on Enoch, p. 78 f.

28 — 31. Lamech. To judge from v. 29, a character very different
from the Lamech of iv. 19, 23 f. Verse 29 is another excerpt, like the
one in iv. 25, 26, from the hne of Seth, as given by J; notice the name
Jehovah, and the allusions to iii. 17 end.

29. Noah. I.e. rest : the explanation from nahem, to ' comfort,'
depends, like that of Cain from kdndh in iv. 1, on an assonance, not an
etymology.

shall comfort us from our work and from, the toil of our hands,
(which cometh) from the ground &c. Noah is regarded as mitigating

78 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [v. 30-33

30 And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety P
and five years, and begat sons and daughters : 31 and all the
days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years :
and he died.

32 And Noah was five hundred years old : and Noah begat
Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

in some way the curse of iii. 17, — viz. (as generally understood) by
becoming, in virtue of his piety, the founder of a new epoch, in which
the earth is not again to be cursed on man's account (viii. 21). The
persons, however, in whose name (' us ') Lamech speaks, all either died
before the Flood, or perished in it : hence Budde, Stade, Gunkel, al,
suppose that the verse is taken from that stratum of J which (p. 74)
took no cognizance of the Flood, and consider that the allusion is to
the refreshment after toil afforded by wine (Ps. civ. 15 ; Pr. xxxi, 6 f ),
the art of making which is in ix. 20 — 27 referred to Noah as its
inventor.

On Enoch. A probable explanation of the ideas associated by the Hebrews
with Enoch has been found by Zinimern. Enoch was the seventh from Adam;
and the seventh of the antediluvian Babylonian kings, according to Berossus
(see p. 80), was Edoranchus or Euedorachus, who can hardly be different from
Enmeduranki, a legendary king of Sippar, the city sacred to the sun-god
Shamash. According to a recently published ritual tablet, the god called
Enmeduranki to intercourse with himself, gave him the * table of the gods,'
taught him the secrets of heaven and earth, and instructed him in various arts
of divination : the knowledge thus derived he passed on to his son, and he
thus became the mythical ancestor of a hereditary guild of Babylonian diviners.
Enoch may thus be reasonably regarded as a Hebraized Enmeduranki, the
converse with his god being divested of all superstitious adjuncts, and
interpreted in a purely ethical sense. His life of 365 years, — which is much
shorter than that of any of the other patriarchs in the same list, — is the sole
survival of his original character : Enmeduranki being in the service of the
sun-god, the years of Enoch's life are the same in number as the days of the
solar year^.

On account partly, it is probable, of the expression 'walked with God'
(understood in the sense of actual converse), but partly also (especially if he is
rightly identified with Enmeduranki) on the ground of independent tradition
about him, handed down orally among the Hebrews, though not included in
the Book of Genesis, Enoch was supposed in later ages to have been made the
recipient of superhuman knowledge, and in the course of his intercourse with
God to have received revelations as to the nature of heaven and earth, and the
future destinies of men and angels. And so in the apocryphal ' Book of Enoch ' —
which is of composite authorship, but dates mostly from the 2nd and 1st

1 Ziramern, The Bab. and Heb. Genesis, p. 43 ff. ; KAT? 533—5 (with a trans-
lation of the ritual tablet referred to), 540 i.

THE SETHITES

ceiiturios, B.C.— Enoch is represented as recounting the visions of judgement on
men and angels which he is supposed to have had, as describijig how he has
been shewn by an angel the different places set apart for the righteous and
wicked after deuth, and has seen the Almighty seated on His throne, and
the Messiah judging the world, as unfolding (in very obscure language) the
' secrets of the heavens ' (i.e. the courses of the heavenly bodies, the principle
of the calendar, the causes of lightnings, wind, dew, &c.), and as foretelling, in
a veiled, allegorical form, the history of Israel to the 2nd century B.C. It is
in accordance with this view of Enoch that he is called in Ecclus. xliv. 16
(Heb. text) an ' example of knou^ledge (Dl^'il Tm) to all generations.' The Book
of Enoch (i. 9, v. 4, xxvii. 2 : cf. Ix. 8) is quoted in Jude 14, 15 \

On the figures in eh, v. {\) These figures are certainly all artificial ;
though upon what principle they were computed has not as yet been discovered.
It deserves to be mentioned, however, that in the Samaritan text of the
Pentateuch, and in the lxx., the figures differ in many cases from those given
in the Hebrew, the Samaritan in three cases making the father's age at the
birth of his firstborn less than it is in the Heb. text, while the lxx. in several
cases makes it as much as 100 years higher, the general result of these
differences being that the total in the Samaritan is 349 years less than in the
Heb., while in the lxx. it is 606 years more. The following table will make the
details clear, the first column in each case giving the age of each patriarch at
the birth of the next, and the second column giving his age at death : —

Heb,

Sam.

LXX.

1. Adam

130

930

130

930

230

930

■ 2. Seth

105

912

105

912

205

912

3. Enosh

905

190

905

4. Cainan

910

170

910

5. Mahalalel

895

165

895

6. Jared (Yered)

162

962

847

162

962

7. Enoch

365

165

365

8. Methushelah

187

969

720

1872

9G9

9. Lamech

182

777

653

188

753

10. Noah

500

[9501

500

[950]

500

[950]

(Age at Flood)

100

Total from the Creation \
of man to the Elood j

1656

1307

2262

Thus, while in the Heb. text the date of the Flood is a.m. 1656, in the
Samaritan it is a.m. 1307, and in the lxx. a.m. 2262. IVIethushelah, in both
the Heb. and the Samaritan text, dies in the year of the Flood : in the lxx.
text he dies six years before it. The figures have evidently, on one side or
the other, been arbitrarily altered. The more original figures are generally
held to be preserved in the Heb. text ; but Bertheau, Budde, Dillmann, and

1 Cf. Jub. iv. 17; and see further Enoch and Apocalyptic Literature in DB.
and EncB.y and Dr Charles' translation of the Book of Enoch (Oxford, 1893).

2 Or, according to many mss., 167.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS

Holzinger adduce reasons for holding that they have been preserved in the
Samaritan. The question is not of sufficient importance to call for further
discussion here.

(2) In the first ten generations, down to the Flood, the Book of Genesis
(Heb. text) reckoiid 165G years, while the Babylonians (see below) reckoned
432,000 years. Now, as the French Assyriologist, Oppert, has ingeniously
shewn, 432,000 years = 86,400 'sosses,' while 1656 years=86,400 weeks (1656 =
72x23; and 23 years being 8395 days + 5 intercalary days = 8400 days =1200
weeks) ; and hence Oppert inferred that the two periods rested upon a common
basis, the Hebrews reducing the longer period of the Babylonians, by taking
as their unit the week instead of the ' soss' of 5 years ^

On the names in chaps, iv. and v., and their possible Babylonian origin.
(1) The genealogies of J in iv. 1 — 24, and of P in ch. v., contain many names
winch, even when they are not identical, resemble one another remarkably ;
and it has in consequence been often supposed that the two lists are really two
divergent versions of the same original prehistoric tradition. The resemblances
between the two lists will be seen most plainly if they are exhibited in tabular

form : —

J P

Adam

Seth

Enosh

Eain

Enoch

'Irad

Mehuya'el-
Methushael
Lamech

Jabal Jubal Tubal-Kain

2.
3.
4.

" 6.

• 7.

10.

Adam.

Seth.

Euosh.

Kenan.

Mahalal'el.

Yered.

Enoch.

Methushelah.

Lamech.

Noah.

Shem Ham Yepheth
It has even been supposed that Seth and Enosh, who now form in J (iv. 25 f.)
the head of the second line of Adam's descendants, stood originally at the head
of the first line in J (between Adam and Kain) : if this conjecture is correct,
the resemblance between the two hsts would be still greater than it is now.
However, as we now possess them, the two lists have a different character
impressed upon them.

(2) In P's list there are ten patriarchs before the Flood ; and according to
Berossus, the Babylonians told similarly of ten kings who reigned before the
Flood, and who reigned moreover for the portentous period of 120 ' sars,' or
432,000 years. These are their names, with the number of years that each
reigned, according to Berossus^: —

1. Alorus (10 'sars') 36,000 6.

2. Alaparus (3)3 10,800 7.

3. Amelon, Alraelon, or Amil-

larus(13) 46,800 8.

4. Ammenon (12) 43,200 9.

5. Megalaros, Amegalarus (18) 64,800 10.

Daonus or Daos (10) 36,000

Edoranchus or Evedorachus

(18) 64,800

Amempsinus (10) 36,000

Otiartes or Ardates (8) ... 28,800

Xisuthros (18) 64,800

1 Of. Marti, EncB. i. 777. See also the Oxford Hexatetich, i. 135, or Oppert'a
art. Chbonology in the Jewish Encyclopaedia, iv, (1903), 66 f.

2 Mtiller, Fraqm. Hist. Graec. n. 499 f. ; Masp. i. 546, 564 f. ; KAT.' 531 f.
■' Perhaps, with A for A, the Adapa of p. 53, n. 1 {KAT.^ 531, 538).

THE ANTEDILUVIAN PATRIARCHS 81

Extraordinary knowledge was supposed to have been possessed in these
antediluvian times. According to Berossus, there emerged from the Erythraean
Sea (the Persian Gulf), under (probably) Alorus, a strange being, called Oannes
(not improbably the god Ea), who taught men all kinds of sciences and arts
(writing, city and temple building, legislation, &c.), and introduced civilizing
influences: under the fourth {al. the third), sixth, and seventh kings, also,
other beings appeared, who explained more fully the teachings of Oannes
(Miiller, pp. 496 f., 499 f ; KA T? 535—7). And in Assyrian texts there are
allusions to the 'wise men who lived before the Flood' {KAT? 537 f).

It is considered, now, by Hommel and Sayce that the names of the Heb.
patriarchs are, at least in some cases, translations or equivalents of the
corresponding Babylonian names \ Thus —

3. Amelon = Babylonian amilu, 'man,' and 3. Enosh = 'raan' (on iv. 26).

4. AmmSnon = Babylonian ummdnu, 'artifex,' and 4. ^dnan (5ain) =
' smith.'

5. Amegalarus, Hommel suggests, may be a corruption of Amildlarus^
i.e. Amil-Aruru ' man of Arum,' and 5. Mahalal'el may have been originally
Amtl-alil, Hebraized afterwards into Mahalal'el, 'praise of EL'

7. Enoch (IJS,nokh) appears upon independent grounds (see p. 78) to
correspond to 7. Evedorachus.

8. Ameuipsinus is (Hommel) a corruption of Amihinus, i.e. Amil-Sin,
' the man of Sin (the moon-god),' and 8. Methushelah may be (Sayce) a
variation of Mutu-sha-Irkhu, ' man of the moon-god,' or, if the more original
form of the name is Methusha'el, ' the man of God,' this may have taken the
place of 'the man of the moon-god.'

10. Xisuthros (the patriarch under whom, according to Berossus, the
Deluge happened) is the Babylonian Hasis-atra, otherwise called Ut-
napishtim\ who, however the difference of name is to be accounted for,
unquestionably corresponds to the Heb. Noah (see p. 103 ff.) : the name of his
father, Otiartes, can be nothing but a corruption of Opartes (TI for n), i.e.
Vbara-tutu, the father of Ut-napishtim, in the Babylonian narrative of the
Flood (p. 104).

Zimmern {KA T.^ 539 — 43) rejects the suggestions under 6, and does not
mention those of Sayce under 8, though he points out that in both lists the
eighth name is similarly formed, being a compound of ' man ' with what is to
all appearance the name of a deity. On the whole, in spite of the differences
which still remain unexplained in the case of several of the names, there are
sufficient resemblances between the two lists to make it possible to hold, with
Zimmern, that they are at bottom divergent versions of the same original
tradition.

See further, on Gen. iv., v., the learned and interesting discussion by
Lenormant, Les Origines de rhistoire"^, i. 140 — 290.

1 See Hommel, PSBA. 1893, p. 243 ff. ; Sayce, Expos. Times, May, 1899, p. 353.

2 So, states Zimmern {KAT.^ 545), it is now clear that this name must be read.
The ideographically written first syllable was read formerly Shamash-, Sit-, or Par-'.

8^ THE BOOK OF GENESIS

Chapter VL 1—4.
The sons of God and the daughters of men.

As men began to multiply, a race of giants arose, through unnatural unions
between the sons of God and the daughters of men, the unlimited development
of which had to be checked by Divine intervention. The narrative is a strange
one. It is introduced abruptly, and it ends abruptly. Certainly, it is often
supposed that the intention of the writer was to assign a cause for the
corruption of mankind described in w. 5—8 : but this is not stated in the text;
and what the narrative, understood in its natural sense, seems rather intended
to explain is how it happened that mankind at large came to be tyrannized
over by a race of giants. Hence Dillraann and other recent commentators are
doubtless right in supposing that, though the compiler of Genesis may have
intended vv. 1 — 4 as an introduction to vv. 5 — 8, vv. 1 — 4 were written originally
without any reference to the Flood; and that the reappearance of the Nephilim
in Nu. xiii. 33 is an indication that they belong to the same stratum of tradition,
to which iv. 17 — 24 also belongs, and which took no cognizance of a Flood,
destroying absolutely all pre-existing civilization.

That the section belongs to J appears from its general style and phraseology.
It has no connexion with ch. v. (P), — for the expression 'began to multiply'
cannot be understood naturally of the close of a period as long and as proUfic
as the one there described. Even with J, however, its connexion is imperfect ;
though a connexion with the end of J's Cainite line (iv. 17 — 24), or even of J's
Sethite line (iv. 25, 26, v. 29), — if, as the remaining fragments seem to indicate,
this in its complete form did not shew such high figures, or imply such a wide
diffusion of mankind, as the parallel in P (v. 1 — 28, 30 — 32) does, — is not
perhaps impossible. The narrative is in fact a * torso ' (Stade, Gunkel), — the
original position and full intention of which, — for the close, describing the
further history of the giant race referred to, seems missing, not less than a
proper connexion at the beginning, — cannot now be recovered.

The expression ' sons of God ' (or * of the gods 'y denotes elsewhere (Job i. 6,
ii. 1, xxxviii. 7 : cf. Dan. iii. 25 [RV. : comp. v. 28] ; Ps.xxix. 1, Ixxxix. 6, RVm.)
semi-divine, supra-mundane beings (cf. on iii. 5, 22), such as, when regarded, as
is more usually the case, as agents executing a Divine commission, are called
faaVdkhmi or ayyeXoi (i.e. * messengers '). And this, which is also the oldest
interpretation of Gen. vi. 2 (lxx. ol ayyikoi rov Beov ; Enoch vi. 2 flf. ; Jub. v. 1
(c£ iv. 15); Jude 6, 2 P. ii. 4 [based on Enoch x. 5, 6, 12, 13]), is the only sense
in which the expression can be legitimately understood here. Naturally, how-
ever, when understood literally, as a piece of actual history, this explsmation of
the passage was felt in many quarters to occasion difficulty ; and other inter-
pretations became prevalent. (] ) The Targums, followed by many other Jewish
authorities, understood 'elohim, — on the basis of a sense which the word is

1 ' Sons of God ' pointing fig. to their derived, yet spiritual nature ; * sons of
gods ' meaning (cf. ' sons of the prophets ' = members of the guild of prophets)
members of the class of divine beings, to which (cf. on iii. 5) Jehovah Himself also
belongs (so Davidson on Job i. 6; Schultz, OT. Theol. ii. 216 [' sons of God' here
is a mistranslation for ' sons of gods '] ; cf. Cheyne on Ps. xxix. 1).

VI. 1-3] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 83

apparently capable of bearinf? in Ex. xxi. 6, xxii. 8, 9, 1 S. ii. 25, Ps. Ixxxii. 1^,
\\z. judges,— 2le signifying, generally, nohles or potentates — so that 'sons of the
'elohlm' would denote youths of the upper classes, while * daughters of men'
were taken to mean maidens of lower rank ; (2) many Christian expositors, in
both ancient and modern times, have understood by 'sons of God ' godly men of
the line of Seth, and by ' daughters of men,' worldly women of the hne of Cain.
But for neither of these views is there any support in the text : not only do
they rest upon arbitrary interpretations of the words used, but it is incredible
that * men ' in ^. 2 can be intended in a narrower sense than in «?. 1 ; nor is it
apparent why the intermarriage of two races, each descended from a common
ancestor, should have resulted in a race characterized either by gigantic stature
or (supposing vv. 5 — 8 to be rightly connected with 'ov. 1 — 4) by abnormal
wickedness. Understood in accordance with the only legitimate canons of
interpretation, the passage can mean only that semi-divine or angelic beings
contracted unions with the daughters of men ; and we must see in it an ancient
Hebrew legend,— or (to use Delitzsch's expression) a piece of 'unassimilated
mythology,' — the intention of which was to account for the origin of a supposed
race of prehistoric giants, of whom, no doubt (for they were ' men of name '),
Hebrew folk-lore told much more than the compiler of Genesis has deemed
worthy of preservation (cf. Ryle, op. cit. pp. 94, 95). As a rule, the Hebrew
narrators stripped off the mythological colouring of the pieces of folk-lore which
they record ; but in the present instance, it is still discernible. Many races, it
may be recalled, imagined giants as living in the prehistoric past : the Greeks
had their Titans ; the Phoenicians knew of a generation of men ' surpassing in
size and stature' (Eus. Praep. Ev. i. 10. 6) ; the Arabs told of the ' Adites ' and
'Thamudites,' to whom they attributed both the erection of great buildings, and
also deeds of savagery and bloodshed ; and the Israelitish traditions of the con-
quest of Palestine spoke of the men of giant stature, who were dwelling at the
time in different parts of the country (Dt. ii. 10, 11, 21, iii. 11 ; Jos. xv. 14, al).

VI. 1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply j
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
the Lord said. My spirit shall not ^strive with man for ever,
Hoy that he also is flesh : ^yet shall his days be an hundred and

^ Or, rule in Or, according to many ancient versions, ahide in
^ Or, in their going astray they arejiesh ^ Or, therefore

VI. 2, of all that &c. Whomsoever they chose. The expression
seems to imply that they dealt with them exactly as they pleased.

3. A very difficult and uncertain verse. Only three interpretations
need, however, be considered here. (1) RV. The meaning of this is :
* My spirit (regarded as an ethical principle) shall not strive with man
for ever, inasmuch as he also is flesh (i.e. carnal, sensual) ; yet his days
(i.e. his still remaining days, the days of respite before the judgement
comes) shall be 120 years.' The objections to this view are —the rend.

6—2

84 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [vi. 3, 4

twenty years. 4 The ^Nephilim were in the eaHh in those days, J
and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the
daughters of men, and they bare children to them : the same
were the mighty men which were of old, the men of renown.

^ Or, giants See Num. xiii. 33.

inasmuch as (or for that) implies a late Heb. idiom (Eccl. ii. 16), very
improbable here ; ' flesh ' in the OT. denotes what is frail, but not
what is sensual ; the sense given to ' his days ' is not a natural one.
(2) RVm. (implying a slight change of the text) : ' My spirit (regarded
as a vital principle : cf. on i. 2) shall not for ever abide [or, be
established] in man ; by reason of their going astray, he is flesh (i.e.
weak, frail: cf Is. xxxi. 3; Ps. Ixxviii. 39); and (i.e. and so, in RVm.
paraphrased by therefore) his days (i.e. the days of his life — the natural
sense of the expression) shall be 120 years': the operation of God's
life-giving spirit in man is crippled by sin ; and in future the normal
limit of his life shall not exceed 120 years. This interpretation,
whether right absolutely or not, is certainly open to fewer objections
than (1). (3) Ewald, Wellh., Holz., Gunkel : ' My spirit (the divine
spirit common to Jehovah with the 'sons of God') shall not for ever
abide in man, because he is also flesh (and on this ground alone, there-
fore, not intended to live for ever), and his days (i.e. his life) shall be
120 years ' ; the passage, agreeably with its mythological context, being
supposed to express the idea that the union of the (semi-)divine
'spirit' with man {v, 3) would result, contrary to Jehovah's intention,
in man's immortality ; a limit is accordingly imposed by Him upon the
duration of human life. It is wisest to acknowledge the simple truth,
which is that both textually and exegetically the verse is very
uncertain, and that it is impossible to feel any confidence as to its
meaning.

4. The Nephillm. Mentioned also in Nu. xiii. 33 as a giant race
inhabiting part of Canaan at the time of the Exodus, in whose eyes the
spies were ' as grasshoppers.' The etymology, and true meaning, of the
word are unknown ; there have been many conjectures respecting it
(see Di.), but none possessing any real probability. The Nephilim, it
is said, were in the earth both at the time here spoken of and also
afterwards, i.e., no doubt, at the time referred to in Nu. xiii. 33 — if,
indeed, the words — which interrupt the connexion (for the following
when clearly refers to in those days) — were not originally (Budde,
Wellh., Holz., Gunkel) a marginal gloss added by one who recollected
that the Nephilim were mentioned also in this passage of Numbers.

they were &c. This clause characterizes the Nephilim : they were
the ancient men of prowess, renowned in Hebrew folk-lore. Doubtless,
deeds of insolence and daring were told of them ; we cannot, unhappily,
particularize more precisely. For later allusions to, or developments of,
what is narrated in vv. 1 — 4, see Wisd. xiv. 6 ; Ecclus. xvi. 7 ; Baruch
iii. 26—28 ; 3 Mace. ii. 4; Enoch vi.— xvi. ; 2 Pet. ii. 4; Jude 6, 7.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS 86

VL 5— IX. 17-
Tlie history of the Flood.

The narrative here becomes more circumstantial than it has been in
chaps, iv. and v. ; for the Flood is the first event of crucial importance since
the Creation and the beginnings of man upon earth (chaps, i.— iii.), of which
Hebrew tradition told. The Flood marks the end of a past age, and the
beginning of a new one : it is thus an event in which the purposes of God may
be expected to declare themselves with peculiar distinctness ; and it is
accordingly treated as the occasion of a great manifestation both of judgement
(ch. vi.) and of mercy (viii. 15— ix. 17). The Flood is a judgement upon a
degenerate race : Noah, with his family, is delivered from it on account of his
righteousness; as humanity starts upon its course afresh, new promises and
new blessings are conferred upon it.

The narrative is one of which the composite structure, as has been often
pointed out\ is particularly evident ; for the compiler, instead of (as in Gen. i.,
for instance) excerpting the entire account from a single source, has interwoven
it out of excerpts taken alternately from J and P, preserving in the process
many duplicates, as well as leaving unaltered many striking differences of
representation and phraseology. The parts belonging to P are vi. 9 — 22,
vii. 6, 11, 13 — 16* (to commanded him), 17* (to upon the earth), 18 — 21, 24,
Tiii. 1, 2* (to stopped), 3^ (from and after)— 5, 13* (to off tlie earth), 14—19,
ix. 1 — 17 : if these verses are read consecutively, they will be seen to contain
an almost complete narrative of the Flood, followed by the account of a blessing
and covenant concluded with Noah. The verses which remain (except a few
clauses here and there, especially in vii. 7 — 9, which are due, probably, to the
compiler) form part of the parallel narrative derived from J, but not preserved
so completely as that of P, which the compiler has interwoven with it. In
some places the duplicate character of the narrative is plain : thus vi. 9 — 13
is, in substance, identical with vi. 5 — 8; and though the directions for the
construction of the ark are naturally given only once, the sequel (vi. 17, 19, 20,
22, P) is similarly repeated in vii. 1 — 5 (other instances are pointed out in the
notes). The most characteristic difference between the two accounts is that
while in P one pair of all animals alike is taken into the ark (vi. 19, 20, vii. 14,
15), in J a distinction is drawn, and one pair of unclean animals but seven pairs
of clean animals are taken in. Another difference relates to the duration of
the Flood. In P the waters 'prevail' for 150 days; then they gradually
decrease; the entire period of their remaining upon the earth being (vii. 11,
comp. with viii. 14) one year and 11 days^: in J they increase for 40 days and
40 nights ; then after three times seven days (viii. 8 3, 10, 12) they disappear,

^ See, for instance, as long ago as 186B, the art. Pentateuch by J. J. S. Perowne
(the late Bishop of Worcester), in Smith's BB. ii. 776.

2 I.e., as a lunar year is here probably presupposed, 354 + 11 = 365 days, or
one solar year. The lxx., by the reading 27 for 17 in vii. 11, viii. 4, intend no
; doubt to express one solar year more directly.

' Seven days being implied here by the 'yet other' of viii. 10 : see the note on
viii. 10.

86 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [vi. 5-9

the entire duration of the Flood in J being thus 61 days. It is a minor
diflference that J attributes the Flood to rain only (vii. 7, 12, viii. 2^), whereas
P speaks also of the subterranean waters bursting forth (vii. 11, viii. 2»).
Among the literary characteristics of the parts belonging to P may be noticed
the careful specification of all details (such as the measurements of the ark, the
animals, and members of Noah's family, to be taken into it, vi. 18, 20, vii. 13,
14, and brought out again, viii. 16, 17, 18, 19), the dates (vii. 6, 11, viii. 4, 5, 13,
14), and the recurring expressions, God (not, as in the other narrative,
Jehovah), all flesh (13 times), destroy (vi. 13, 17, ix. 11, 15 : in J wipe or Hot
out, vi. 7, vii. 4, 23), expire (vi. 17, vii. 21), kind (as in i. 11, 12, 21, 24, 25), vi. 20,
vii. 14, swarm (as in i. 20, 21), vii. 21, viii. 17, ix. 7. In J, also, conip. shut in
(vii. 16), and smelled (viii. 21), with the expressions noted on p. 36 as character-
istic of ii. 4''ff. For some further questions connected with the present narrative,
see p. 99 ff.

5 And the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great J
in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his
heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the Lord
that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his
heart. 7 And the Lord said, I will Mestroy man whom I have
created from the face of the ground ; both man, and beast, and
creeping thing, and fowl of the air ; for it repenteth me that I
have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the
Lord.

9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous f

1 Heb. blot out.

5 — 8. J's introduction to his narrative of the Flood. Mankind
was utterly corrupt : Jehovah saw His purposes with regard to it
frustrated, and determined accordingly to blot it out from the face of
the earth.

5. every imagination &c. The corruption had seized their whole
mind and purpose : it was complete (' only evil,' i-e. nothing but evil),
and continuous.

6. it repented Jehovah &c. Because, viz.. His gracious purposes
for the progress and happiness of humanity seemed ruined by human sin.

and he was pained to his heart. A strong and expressive
anthropomorphism. Cf. the same verb (in the transitive conjug.) in
Is. Ixiii. 10.

7. destroy. Blot out, as also vii. 4, 23. The word, as remarked
above, is characteristic of the narrative of J.

9 — 12. P's introduction to his narrative of the Flood. The passage
is parallel to vv. 5 — 8 in J.

9. These are &c. The formula regularly used by P at the
commencement of a new section of his narrative : see p. ii.

a righteous man &c. Cf. v. 8 in J. See also Ezek. xiv. 14, 20.

VI. 9-15] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 87

man, and ^perfect in his generations : Noah walked with God. P

10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

11 And the earth was corrupt before God, and the earth was
filled with violence. 12 And God saw the earth, and, behold, it
was corrupt ; for aU flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.

13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come
before me ; for the earth is -filled with violence through them ;
and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. 14 Make thee
an ark of gopher wood ; ^ rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and
shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. 15 And this is

^ Or, blameless ^ Heb. nests.

perfect. I.e. without moral flaw, blameless, guileless : cf., of Job,
Job i. 1 ; also ch. xvii. 1, Ps. xviii. 23, 25, cxix. 1 (RV.), al, and
perfectness (EW. usually integrity), Ps. vii. 8, xxvi. 1, 11, al.

in his generations. I.e. among his contemporaries. A different
word in the Heb. from the one rendered generations JMst before (which
is lit. begettings).

walked with God. See on v. 22.

10. Repeated, in P's manner, at the beginning of a new section,
from V. 32^ ; cf xi. 27 (see v. 26), xxv. 12^ (xvi. 15), 19^ (xxi. 3).

12. all flesh. An expression occurring 13 times in the narrative
of the Flood (all P), and denoting sometimes (as here and v. 13) men
alone, sometimes animals alone (vi. 19, vii. 15, 16, viii. 17), sometimes
both (as vi. 17, vii. 21, ix. 11 : so Lev. xvii. 14 ; Nu. xviii. 15, al.),

13 — 17 (P). Noah commanded to construct an ark.

13. Cf m 6, 7, in J.

is come in before me. I.e. before my mind ; it is resolved upon by me.

14. an ark. Heb. tebdh^ a word of Egyptian origin ; used only
(here and in the sequel) of the 'ark' of Noah, and of the 'ark' in
which Moses was laid, Ex. ii. 3, 5.

gopher. Only found here. Probably some kind of resinous tree,
either pine or cypress.

rooms &c. More exactly : (all) cells (lit. nests) shalt thou make
the ark : it was to consist internally of rows of cells, to contain the
different animals.

pitch. Bitumen ; Heb. kopher (found only here). Ass. kupru^
used repeatedly by Nebuchadnezzar in his descriptions of buildings,
and also occurring in the Babylonian account of the Flood (1. &Q\ see
p. 104). Elsewhere in the OT. 'bitumen' is expressed by hemdr
(xi. 3, xiv. 10 ; Ex. ii. 3) ; it is possible therefore that kopher came
into Heb., with the story, from Babylonia. ' In the second volume of
the History of the Euphrates Expedition, p. 637, Col. Chesney gives a
very interesting account of the simple and rapid manner in which the
people about Tekrit and in the marshes of Lemlum construct large
barges and make them water-tight with bitumen' (Huxley, Collected
Essays, iv. 262). See also EncB. s.v. Bitumen; and cf on xi. 3.

88 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [vi. 15-^0

liow thou slialt make it : the length of the ark three hundred P
cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty
cubits. 16 A ^light shalt thou make to the ark, and to a cubit
shalt thou finish it ^upward ; and the door of the ark shalt thou
set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories
shalt thou make it. 17 And I, behold, I do bring the flood of
waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath
of life, from under heaven ; every thing that is in the earth
shall die. 18 But I will establish my covenant with thee ; and
thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife,
and thy sons' wives with thee. 19 And of every living thing of
all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep
them alive with thee ; they shall be male and female. 20 Of
the fowl after their kind, and of the cattle after their kind, of

1 Or, roof 2 Or, from above

15. The cubit measured probably about 18 inches : so that the
ark, as here described, would be about 450 ft. long, 75 ft. broad, and
45 ft. high.

16. a light. To be pictured, apparently, as a kind of casement
running round the sides of the ark (except where interrupted by the
beams supporting the roof), a little below the roof. The word occurs
only here (though in the dual it is the usual Heb. for noon- day). The
marg. roof is doubtful : it is based upon the meaning of the corre-
sponding word in Arabic, hack.

and to a cubit shalt thou finish it above (or from above). The
words are obscure ; but are generally understood to mean either that
the casement above (i.e. close under the roof) was to be a cubit in
height, or that there was to be the space of a cuhitfrom above (i.e. from
the roof) to the top of the casement.

17. the flood. Heb. mabbul, used only of the Deluge of Noah,
Gen. vi. — ix. (12 times), x. 1, 32, xi. 10, and Ps. xxix. 10. The word
(though not itself found in Ass.) may be derived from the Ass. nabdlu^
to destroy : it has no apparent Heb. etymology.

breath. Better, spirit (Heb. ruah) ; not as ii. 7. So vii. 15 ; of.
Is. xlii. 5 ; Zech. xii. 1.

die. Expire : so vii. 21. An unusual word, and (except in P
[12 times]) entirely poetical [12 times, 8 being in Job]. Of. on xxv. 8.

18 — 22. The command to enter the ark, according to P. With
Noah and his descendants it is God's purpose to establish a new
relationship (designated here by the term covenant) ; and in trustful
reliance upon the promise thus given, Noah is to enter the ark, taking
with him one pair of every land animal. For the fulfdment of the
promise, see ix. 8 — 17.

20. kind (twice). ^ Kinds : see on i. 12. Cattle (not as iv. 20),
9,nd creeping thing^ as i. 24 (where see the note), 25, 26.

VI.20-VII.4] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 89

every creeping thing of the ground after its kind, two of every p
sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. 2fl And take
thou imto thee of all food that is eaten, and gather it to thee ;
and it shall be for food for thee, and for them. 22 Thus did
JSToah ; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.

VII. 1 And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all J
thy house into the ark ; for thee have I seen righteous before
me in this generation. 2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take
to thee seven and seven, the male and his female ; and of the
beasts that are not clean two, the male and his female ; 3 of
the fowl also of the air, seven and seven[, male and female] : to R
keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth. 4 For yet seven
days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and
forty nights ; and every living thing that I have made will I

22. And Noah did (so) ; according &c. The form of sentence is
characteristic of P; cf. Ex. vii. 6, xii. 28, 50 (Heb.), xl. 16 (Heb.);
Nu. i. 54 (Heb.), al. (see p. ix, No. 12).

VII. 1 — 5. The command to enter the ark, according to J.
Noah is to enter the ark, taking with him seven pairs of every clean
animal, and o?ie pair of every unclean animal. In the parallel in P
(vi. 19 f.), one pair of every kind is to be taken, and nothing is said of
the distinction between clean and unclean animals.

1. righteous &c. Cf. in P vi. 9.

2. the male and his female (twice). Each a7id his mate : the Heb.
(though no English reader would suspect the fact) is entirely different
from that rendered 'male and female' in vi. 19, vii. 3, 9, 16. On the
distinction of * clean ' and * unclean ' animals see Lev. xi. (P ; || Dt. xiv.) :
more of the former than of the latter are to be brought in, perhaps
because, in the view of the writer, only 'clean' animals would be
available for Noah and his family for food, and (viii. 20) for sacrifice,
perhaps, also (Knob.), in order that the creatures most useful to man
might increase more rapidly after the Flood.

It is to be noticed that J assumes for the patriarchal age the
Levitical distinction of 'clean' and 'unclean' animals, as he also
speaks of sacrifices offered, and altars built, during the same period
(iv. 3, 4, viii. 20, xii. 9, &c.). P, on the contrary, never attributes
Levitical institutions and distinctions to the pre-Mosaic age ; he regards
all such as creations of the Sinaitic legislation.

3. seven and seven. Viz., as the context and viii. 20 shew, of
* clean ' species : the raven (viii. 7) shews that J thought of ' unclean '
species also (see Lev. xi. 15) as included. Perhaps, indeed, we should
read with Lxx., 'of fowl also of the air that are clean^ seven and seven,
male and female, and of fowl that are not cleuUy tivo and two^^ &c.

4. every subsisting thing. The word, winch is peculiar, is found

90 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [vii. 4-n

^destroy from off the face of the ground. 5 And Noah did J
according unto all that the Lord commanded him.

6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of P
waters was upon the earth. | 7 And Noah went in, and his .7
sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark,
because of the waters of the flood. 8 Of clean beasts, and of
beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that
creepeth upon the ground, 9 there went in [two and two] unto 11
Noah into the ark, [male and female,] as God commanded Noah, r
10 And it came to pass after the seven days, that the waters
of the flood were upon the earth. | 11 In the six hundredth P
year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth
day of the month, on the same day were all the fountains of
the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were

1 Heb. hlot out.

only here, v. 23, and Dt. xi. 6. It is entirely different from the
ordinary one rendered ^living thing' in vi. 19, viii. 1, 17, 21.

destroT/. Blot out, as vi. 7.

6. Noah's age, at the time of the Flood, according to P.

7 — 9. Entry into the ark according to J (cf. vv. 2, 3). The text,
though clearly in the main that of J, seems to have been glossed in
parts by the compiler so as to harmonize with the representation of P
(especially in ' two and two ' : see vi. 19, 20).

9. God. Sam., Targ., Vulg. Jehovah; no doubt, rightly.
VII. 10 — VIII. 14. The course of the Flood : its beginning, con-
tinuance, and end.

10. The beginning of the Flood according to J, viz. seven days
after Noah entered the ark.

the seven days. Those mentioned in v. 4.

11. The beginning of the Flood according to P.
the second month. Prob. the month following Tisri (so Jos. Ant. 1.

3. 3 ; Targ. Ps.-Jon. ; Ew., Di., Del., &c.), called by the later Hebrews
(from the Babylonian) Marcheshvan^ our November, the month in
which in Palestine the rainy season sets in. The old Heb. year began
in autumn, with the month called in later times Tisri.

the great deep. As Am. vii. 4, Ps. xxxvi. 6, Is. li. 10, the
subterranean waters, the ' deep that coucheth beneath ' of xlix. 25, the
source, as the Hebrews supposed, of springs and seas (see on i. 9) : the
' fountains,' leading from these to laud and sea, which at ordinary times
flowed only moderately, ivere cleft asunder (implying some terrestrial
convulsion), so that the waters from underneath burst forth and inun-
dated the^ earth. Not only this, however, but the windows of heaven
(cf. Is. xxiv. IS) were also opened, so that the waters stored up 'above
the firmament ' (see on i. 6) poured down upon the earth as well.

VII. ii-ao] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 91

opened. | 12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and j
forty nights. | 13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, p
and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and
the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark ; 14 they,
and every beast after its kind, and all the cattle after their
kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth
after its kind, and every fowl after its kind, every bird of every
^sort. 15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and
two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life. 16 And they
that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God
commanded him: | and the Lord shut him in. | 17 AndJ"P
the flood was forty days upon the earth ; | and the waters J
increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the
earth. | 18 And the waters prevailed, and increased greatly P
upon the earth ; and the ark went upon the face of the
waters. 19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the
earth ; and all the high mountains that were under the whole
heaven were covered. 20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters

1 Heb. wing.

12. The duration of the Flood according to J.

And there was heavy rain. The word used (d'J>3) signifies a hurst
of rain, heavy rain] and is sometimes used (as Cant. ii. 11) of the
heavy rains of the Palestinian winter. Cf. G. A. Smith, HG. 64 ; and
the writer's Joel and Amos, on Am. iv. 7.

13— 16^ The entry into the ark according to P (cf. vi. 19, 20).
In J this has been narrated already in vv. 7 — 9.

13. In the selfsame day. Connecting closely with v. 11. The
expression in the Heb. is one of those characteristic of P (p. ix, No. 13).

14. kind (4 times). Kinds, as vi. 20.

of every sort. Heb. wing : cf. Ez. xvii. 23 (EVV. wing), xxxix. 4
(EVV. sort, as here) ; also (in the Heb.) Dt. iv. 17 ; Ps. cxlviii. 10.

15. two and two of all flesh. Cf. vi. 19, 20 (P).
breath. Spirit, as vi. 17.

^ 16^ (J), and Jehovah shut him in. The words must have stood
originally between v. 9 and 'cv. 10, 12 ; for they evidently form the close
of J's account of the entry into the ark.

17»(P). The Hnk connecting (in P) v. 16^ with v. 18. 'Forty
days' is probably an addition of the compiler, based upon v. 12 (J).

17^. and the waters increased &c. The progress of the Flood
according to J. The words form the sequel to vv. 10, 12.

18—20. The progress of the Flood, told more circumstantially,
according to P.

20. upward. I.e. above 'the high mountains' {v. 19). The ark

92 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [vii. 20-viiL 3

prevail ; and the mountains were covered. 21 And all flesh died P
that moved upon the earth, both fowl, and cattle, and beast,
and every ^creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and
every man : | 22 all in whose nostrils was the breath of the J
spirit of life, of all that was in the diy land, died. 23 *And
every living thing was ^destroyed which was upon the face of
the ground, both man, and cattle, and creeping thing, and fowl
of the heaven ; and they were ^destroyed from the earth : and
Noah only was left, and they that were with him in the ark. |
24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred andP
fifty days.

VIII. 1 And God remembered Noah, and every living
tiling, and all the cattle that were with him in the ark : and
God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged ;
2 the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven
were stopped, | and the rain from heaven was restrained ; 3 and J"
the waters returned from oflT the earth continually : | and after p

1 Or, swarming thing that swarmeth ^ Or, And he destroyed every living

thing ^ Heb. blotted out.

was apparently regarded as immersed up to half its height (vi. 15) ;
accordingly, when the waters begin to decrease, it can just touch the
summit of an exceptionally high range of mountains, viii. 3^ 4 (the
tops of ordinary mountains emerge only 73 days afterwards, v. 5).

21. Death of all things, according to P.
died. Expired, as vi. 17.

everi/ swarming thing that swarmeth &c. See on i. 20.

22, 23. Death of all things, according to J.

22. in whose nostrils was the breath of [the spirit of] life, Cf.
ii. 7 (also J). The expression, as it stands, is unexampled, being a
combination of the phrase of J (ii. 7) with that of P (vi. 17, vii. 15).
The bracketed words — in the Heb. one word — are probably a marginal
gloss.

of all that. "Whatsoever ; cf. vi. 2.

23. And he blotted out (so in correct editions of the Mass. text:
cf. KVm.) evei-y subsisting thing &c. See on vi. 7 and vii. 4.

24. The length of the period during which, according to P, tlie
waters * prevailed' {vv. 18 — 20).

VIII. 1, 2* (to stopped), 3^ The decrease of the waters, according
to P. With the expressions in v. 2% cf. vii. 11.

1. And God remembered. As xix. 29, xxx. 22 ; Ex. ii. 24 (all P).
2^, 3*. The decrease of the waters, according to J.
rain. Heavy rain, as vii. 12.

VIII. 3-io] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 93

the end of an hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. P
4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth
day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the
waters decreased continually until the tenth month : in the
tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the
mountains seen. | 6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, J
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 off 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 unto him to the ark, for the
waters were on the face of the whole earth : and he put forth
his hand, and took her, and brought her in unto him into the
ark. 10 And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he

4, 5 (P). The ark lands ; and 73 days afterwards the tops of the
mountains appear.

4. Ararat. A land^ named also in Is. xxxvii. 38, Jer. li. 27,
the Urartu^ so often mentioned by the Assyrian kings from the
9th cent. B.C. onwards, the rugged, mountainous, and wooded region,
forming part of modern Armenia, N. of Lake Van, and embracing the
valley of the Araxes'^. The modern Mount Ararat is a particular lofty
peak {c. 17,000ft.) among the 'mountains of Ararat,' for 4000 ft. from
its summit covered with perpetual snow. The mountain which P had
in view, whether it was the peak now called * Mount Ararat ' or not,
must in any case have been a lofty one; for, though the waters
decreased continually, it was not until 73 days after the ark rested
upon it, that the tops of ordinary mountains became visible.

6 — 12 (J). Noah sends forth first a raven, and afterwards a dove,
to ascertain whether the waters have abated.

6. And it came to pass at the end of forty days. In the original
context of J, the * forty days ' referred, no doubt, as in vii. 4, to the
entire period of the Flood, and the clause stood perhaps before
V. 2^ * and {or that) the heavy rain from heaven was restrained' : the
compiler, in combining P and J, has transposed it, and made it refer
to 40 days after the date named in v. 5.

10. yet other seven days. Implying, almost necessarily, that 'seven
days' had been mentioned previously: hence it is probable, as most

1 Not a mountain : the .e is no ' Mount Ararat ' in the Old Testament.

2 See the map and description in Maspero, iii. 52 — 60; and cf. EncB. s.v. The
valley of the Araxes (now the Aras) which runs from W. to SE., a little N.
of Mount Ararat, is nearly 3000 ft. ahove the sea ; the mountains around are
5000 ft. or more ; Lake Van is about 5500 ft. See the fine orographical map of
Asia in Philips' Imperial Atlas; and cf. Freshfield, Central Caucasus, p. 155 ff.

94 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [viii. 10-20

sent forth tlie dove out of the ark ; 11 and the dove came in to J^
him at eventide ; and, lo, in her mouth ^an olive leaf pluckt off:
so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.
12 And he stayed yet other seven days ; and sent forth the
dove ; and she returned not again unto him aay more. | 13 And P
it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first
month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up
from off the earth : | and Noah removed the covering of the ark, J
and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dried. I
14 And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of P
the month, was the earth dry.

15 And God spake unto Noah, saying, 16 Go forth of the
ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with
thee. 17 Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with
thee of all flesh, both fowl, and cattle, and every creeping thing
that creepeth upon the earth ; that they may breed abundantly
in the earth, and be fruitftd, and multiply upon the earth.
18 And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his
sons' wives with him : 19 every beast, every creeping thing,
and every fowl, whatsoever moveth upon the earth, after their
families, went forth out of the ark. | 20 And Noah builded an J
altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of

* Or, a fresh olive leaf

modern scholars have supposed, that ^And he stayed seven days^ (and
sent forth, &c.) have dropped out at the beginning of v. 8.

11. pluckt off. Le. freshly-pluckt, or fresh (^Ym.).

13* (P). Continuation of v. 5. The waters are dried up.

13^ (J), 14 (P). The earth itself becomes dry, — according to P,
one year and 11 days after the Flood began (vii. 11).

15 — 19 (P). Noah is instructed to leave the ark; and does so
accordingly. Both the command and its execution are described
circumstantially, in P's manner (cf. vi. 18 — 20, vii. 13 — 16).

17. breed abundantly. Swarm (i. 20) : cf., of men, ix. 7.

and be fruitful &c. Cf. i. 22. The words are a renewal of the
command, or permission, there given.

19. after their families. A mark of P's hand (p. ix, No. 14).

20 — 22 (J). Noah, in thankfulness for his c-eHverance, offers up a
burnt-offering; and Jehovah thereupon expresses His determination
not again to smite all living things, or disturb the course of nature, as
He has done. Cf. Is. liv. 9.

builded an altar &c. Cf. on vii. 2 (second part of note).

viii. ao-ix. i] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 96

every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. J"
21 And the Lord smelled the sweet savour ; and the Lord said
in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for
man's ^sake, for that the imagination of man's heart is evil from
his youth ; neither will I again smite any more every thing
living, as I have done. 22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime
and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and
day and night shall not cease. | IX. 1 And God blessed Noah P
and his sons, and said unto them. Be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth. 2 And the fear of you and the dread of

^ Or, sake; for the

hv/rnt offerings. Or holocausts. Heb. ^oldh^ from ^dldh, to go up^
denoting a sacrifice of which the whole 'went up' (Is. Ix. 7) upon the
altar, as opposed to those of which portions were eaten by the worshipper
or the priest.

21. the savour of gratification (or composure : lit. of rest-
giving). A common expression in the Levitical terminology (Lev. i. 9,
13, 17, ii. 2, 9, 12, &c.), to express the character, or effect, of a sacrifice
which is favourably accepted: c£, with smell, 1 S. xxvi. 19. 'Sweet
savour' is a paraphrase, based upon the Lxx. rendering, oafx-q evcoSias.

said to his heart. I.e. to Himself. (Not in, as xvii. 17 al.)

for that. This gives the reason for * curse ' (' I will not again curse
the ground, as I might do, because' &c.): the marg. for gives the
reason for 'not curse,' — 'I will not again curse the ground, because,' &c.:
having regard, viz. to man's now innate propensity to evil, God will not
again be moved by men's evil deeds to a judgement such as the Flood
had been, but will exhibit forbearance (Rom. iii. 25), and long-suffering.
The marg. is preferable. The terms expressive of man's sinful pro-
pensity are the same as in vi. 5, but less strongly expressed (without
'every,' 'only,' and ' continually ')\

from his youth. I.e. from the time when the 'knowledge of good
and evil' (ii. 17) comes to be acquired, and evil, too often, gains the
mastery over good.

IX. 1—17 (P). The blessing of Noah {m. 1 — 7) ; and the cov&nant
{w. 8 — 17) concluded with him by God.

1 — 7. A blessing given to the new race of men, corresponding to
that bestowed upon the first (i. 28), but enlarged, and adapted to man's
more developed state, by an extension of his rights over the animal
kingdom. At the same time {vv. 4 — 6) two limitations are imposed
upon his too absolute authority.

1. Be fruitful,... and fill the earth. As i. 28, which see.

1 On the yezer hd-rd\ or ' evil propensity' { = <pp6vrijxa aapKds), of the later Jewish
theology, derived from this passage, see Aboth ii. 15, iv. 2, with Taylor's notes (ed. 2,
pp. 37, 64, 129 f., 148 £f.); Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus, i. 167; F. C. Porter
in Bihl. and Sem. Studies by members. ..of Yale University (New York, 1901), 93 —
156, esp. 108 ff. (with some criticism of Weber, AUsynag. Theologie, p. 221 ff.).

96 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [ix. .-5

you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl P
of the air ; with all wherewith the ground Heemeth, and all the
fishes of the sea, into your hand are they delivered. 3 Every
moving thing that liveth shall be food for you ; as the green
herb have I given you all. 4 But flesh with the life thereof,
which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. 5 And surely your
blood, the blood of your lives, will I require ; at the hand of

^ Or, creepeth

2. Animals had been subject to man from the beginning (i. 26, 28) ;
they are now to be in dread of him ; they are * given into ' his * hand,'
an expression implying (cf. e.g. Lev. xxvi. 25; Dt. xix. 12) that they
are at his disposal, and that he has over them the power of life and
death. As v. 3 shews, the view of the writer is that hitherto animals
had had nothing to fear from man ; they had not been killed by him
for food, and ct fortiori not for other purposes.

3. An extension of the permission granted in i. 29 : animal food is
permitted now, just as vegetable food was permitted then.

green kerb. Green of herb, as i. 30.

4 — 6. Two limitations upon man's too absolute authority.

4. Only flesh with its soul, (that is,) its blood, ye shall not eat.
Men may eat flesh, but only flesh which no longer has blood in it. As
the blood flows from a wounded animal, so its life ebbs away ; hence
the blood was regarded as the seat of the vital principle, or 'soul'
(Heb. nepheshy-, this, however, was too sacred and mysterious to be
used as human food; it must be ofi^ered to God before man was at
liberty to partake of the flesh, 1 S. xiv. 32, 34 (cf W. R. Smith, Rel
Sem. p. 216 f , ed._ 2, p. 234 f ; EncB. 11. 1544). The eating of blood
is repeatedly prohibited in Heb. legislation, as Dt. xii. 16, 23 ('for the
blood is the soul; and thou shalt not eat the soul with the flesh'),
Lev. vii, 26 f, xvii. 10 — 14 {v. 11 'the soul of the flesh is in the blood,'
and hence ' the blood atoneth by means of the soul ' ; v. 14 * for as
regards the soul of all flesh, its blood is with its soul ' (i.e. it contains
its soul), and ' the soul of all flesh is its blood ') ; and abstention from
it became ultimately one of the fundamental principles of Judaism : to
the present day, strict Jews will eat the flesh of such animals only as
have been slaughtered with special precautions for thoroughly draining
the carcases of blood.

5. 6. The second, more important limitation. Man may slay
animals; but the blood of man himself is not to be shed with impunity,
either by man or by beast. The life of man is to be inviolably sacred.

5. And surely your blood, according to your souls. I.e. the blood
of each individual person, whoever it may be (Del.). Dillra. al. render,
less naturally (see Del.), ' (that) of your souls' i.e. of yourselves (cf Jer.
xxxvii. 9 E,V.), your own blood, in contrast to that of the animals.

1 Cf. Aen. IX. 349 ' Purpuream vomit ille anivuim.'

IX. 5-1 1] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 97

every beast will I require it : and at the hand of man, even at P
the hand of every man's brother, will I require the life of man.
6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed:
for in the image of God made he man. 7 And you, be ye
fruitful, and multiply ; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and
multiply therein.

8 And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him,
saying, 9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and
with your seed after you ; 10 and with every living creature
that is with you, the fowl, the cattle, and every beast of the
earth with you ; of all that go out of the ark, even every beast
of the earth. 11 And I will establish my covenant with you ;
neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of the

require. Cf. xlii. 22; Ez. xxxiii. 6; Ps. ix. 12.

of every beast. Cf. Ex. xxi. 28 (in the 'Book of the covenant').

life. Properly, soul (as v. 4). Heb. has two words for ' life/ one
(D>^n) meaning state of life (as in 'the days of his life'), the other
(CJ'S:) meaning the principle of life (as in 'to take one's life'). The
latter signifies properly soul (cf. on i. 20) ; and it is sometimes conducive
to clearness to retain this rendering.

6. It is explained now how blood shed will be ' required,' viz. by
the death of the murderer. It is not, however, defined more precisely
by what agency the penalty will be exacted — whether, for instance, as
in primitive communities, by a relative of the murdered man, or, as in
more advanced communities, by the state : the general principle only is
affirmed — one of the great and fundamental principles, on which the
welfare of every community depends, the sanctity of human Hfe.

for &c. The ground upon which the punishment of murder is
based. Man bears in himself God's image (v. 3, as well as i. 27) ; he
therefore who destroys a man does violence to God's image. In other
words, every man is a person, with a rational soul, the image of God's
personality (cf on i. 27), which must be treated as sacred.

7. The blessing closes with a repetition of the substance of -y. 1.
bring forth abundantly. Swarm (i. 20) : of men, as Ex. i. 7 (P).

8 — 17. God's covenant with Noah, concluded in fulfilment of the
promise given in vi. 18, by which he engages no more to destroy all
flesh by a flood. This ' covenant ' is the parallel in P to the promise^
viii. 21 f, in J. Like the promise, it is established not with the
descendants of Shem only, but with aU mankind, and indeed (vv. 10,
12, &c.) with the whole animal world.

8 — 11. The terms of the covenant.

10. creature. Heb. soul: see on i. 20. So vv. 12, 15, 16.

11. Cf. viii. 21\ 22, in J.

all flesh. Including here animals: see on vi. 12. So vv. 15, 16, 17.

D. 7

98 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [tx. 11-16

flood ; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the /
earth. 12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant
which I make between me and you and every living creature
that is with you, for perpetual generations : 13 ^ I do set my
bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant
between me and the earth. 14 And it shall come to pass, when
I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the
cloud, 15 and I will remember my covenant, which is between
me and you and every living creature of all flesh ; and the
waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh.
16 And the bow shall be in the cloud ; and I will look upon it,
that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God
and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.

1 Or, I have set

12 — 17. The token of the covenant, the rainbow. A covenant
must have an external sign or token, which may remind the parties to
it of its terms, and also serve as a guarantee of the undertaking given
with it. Cf. xvii. 11, where the * token' is something to be done by
man ; here it is something appointed by God.

13. / do set. The Heb. perfect tense is ambiguous; and may
express either I have set (so Geneva Version, and RVm.), viz. long ago,
from the beginning (cf. vi. 7 ' have created '), or / have just set, I set
now (cf. V. 3, i. 29, xli. 41, xlviii. 22), or even (the 'perfect of certitude')
/ will set (so Coverdale: cf. xxiii. 13 Heb.). The appearance of the
rainbow depends, of course, upon the laws of the refraction and
reflection of light ; and it is incredible that these laws did not exist,
as a fact, till the time of Noah. If therefore the writer means to imply
(what seems to be expressed by RV. text = AV.) that the rainbow was
then first to be seen, he shews simply that he shares the prevalent
ignorance of physical science which was characteristic of the ancient
world in general: if, however, his meaning is rightly expressed by
RVm., then all that is future is and it shall be for a token, &c., and the
writer may have regarded the phaenomenon as occurring before, and
have merely represented it as invested now with a new significance as
the sign or symbol of mercy (cf Ryle, p. 117 f).

14, 15. when I bring clouds [lit. cloud (with) cloud, the word
being a collective : * bring a cloud ' is not strong enough] over the earth,
and the bow is seen in the cbud{s), that / will remember, &c. The
text gives an incorrect sense ; for the rainbow is not seen every time
that God * brings clouds ' over the earth.

16. everlasting covenant. An expression frequent in P (xvii. 7,
13, 19; Ex. xxxi. 16; Lev. xxiv. 8; Nu. xviii. 19; cf. xxv. 13).

16, 17. The thought of w. 13 — 15 dwelt upon, and in part repeated,
in P's manner, for emphasis (cf. xvii. 26, 27).

IX. 17] THE BOOK OF GEIJ^SIS 99

17 And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant P
which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon
the earth.

A suggestive symbolism is here attached to a beautiful, and — especially
for a primitive people — striking natural phaenomenon. As the rainbow appears,
when a storm is passing by, and the sun, breaking forth from the opposite
direction, casts its gleams over the still clouded sky, it is interpreted as an
emblem, to a religious mind, of God's returning friendliness and grace, and
made a symbol of the mercy with which He regards all mankind (cf. Is. liv. 9).

The marvel of the phaenomenon, to people ignorant of the optical laws by
which it was produced, led many ancient nations to seek imaginative or
symbolical explanations of it. Thus, with the Indians, it is the war-bow of
Indra, which he has laid aside after finishing his contest with the demons:
in the Iliad it is a repa^ /nepoTrcBv dvOpairav, portending war and storms {II.
XI. 27 f., XVII. 547 — 50), but (personified) it is also the bright and swift
messenger of the gods (ii. 786, iii. 121, at.) ; in the Icelandic Edda it is the
bridge, built by the gods, connecting heaven and earth.

The only other Biblical references to the rainbow are Ez. i. 28 ; Rev. iv. 3,

X. 1 {n ipis) ; cf. Ecclus. xliii. 11 f., 1. 7. It is not impossible that the representa-
tion found here rests ultimately upon a mythological basis; and that the
rainbow was regarded originally by the Hebrews as Jehovah's war-bow (which
is elsewhere the meaning of ntJ'p : cf., as poetically attributed to Jehovah,
Hab. iii. 9 al.\ laid aside as the sign of pacified anger (Wellh. Hist. 352, Holz.,
Gunkel) ; but perhaps (Riehm, Dillm.) the rainbow is viewed merely as the
emblem of returning favour, and the name is based simply on the similarity of
form.

The Historical Character of the Deluge.

I. Has there been a Universal Deluge? Until comparatively recent
times, the belief in a Deluge covering the whole world, and destroying all
terrestrial animals and men except those preserved in the ark, was practi-
cally universal among Christians. Not only did this seem to be required by
the words of the narrative (vi. 17, vii. 4, 21 — 23) ; but the fossil remains of
marine animals, found sometimes even on lofty mountains, and the existence
of traditions of a Flood among nations living in many different parts of the
world, were confidently appealed to as confirmatory of the fact. But the rise,
within the last century, of a science of geology has shewn that the occurrence
of a universal Deluge, since the appearance of man upon the earth, is beyond
the range of physical possibility; while the principles of comparative mythology
shew that the traditions of a Flood current in different parts of the world do
not necessarily perpetuate the memory of a single historical event. (1) If
*all the high hills under the whole heaven' (vii. 19) were covered, there must,
by the most elementary principles of hydrostatics, have been Jive 7niles depth
of water over the entire globe : whence could this incredible amount of water
have come, and whither, when the Flood abated, could it have disappeared ?

7—2

100 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

Even, indeed, though the expression in vii. 19 were taken hyperbolically
(cf. Gen. xli. 56, 57 ; Dt. ii. 25 ; 1 K. xviii. 10), or limited to the mountains
known to the writer, the difficulty would not be materially diminished : it
is clear from viii. 4, 5 that the writer (P) pictured an immense depth of
water upon the earth : and even if only Palestine^ and the mountains (not
the highest) in Armenia were submerged, it must have risen to at least
3000 ft. ; and water standing 3000 ft. above the sea in Palestine or Armenia
implies 3000 ft. of water in every other part of the globe — ^an amount incredible
in itself, besides involving, quite as fully as five miles of water would do, all the
difficulties mentioned below. No doubt there was a time when hills and
mountains were submerged, and when the remains of marine animals referred
to above were deposited on what was then the bottom of the sea; but, as
geology shews, that was in an age long anterior to the appearance of man
upon the earth, and the period of submergence must have lasted, not for
a single year (P), but for untold centuries (cf. p. 20). (2) Without the
assumption of a stupendous miracle (for which there is not the smallest
warrant in the words of the text), all species of living terrestrial animals
(including many peculiar to distant continents and islands, and others adapted
only to subsist in the torrid or frigid zone, respectively) could not have been
brought to Noah, or so far tamed as to have refrained from attacking each
other, and to have submitted peaceably to Noah. (3) The number of living
species of terrestrial animals is so great that it is physically impossible that
room could have been found for them in the ark. (4) A universal deluge is
inconsistent with the geographical distribution of existing land animals ; for
different continents and islands have each many species of animals peculiar to
themselves— S. America, for example, has the sloth and the armadillo,
Australia has marsupials, New Zealand strange wingless birds ; but if all land
animals were destroyed at a date — whether c. B.C. 2501, or (lxx.) c. b.c. 3066 —
when these continents and islands were separated from one another sub-
stantially as they are now, how could the representatives of all these species
have found their way back over many thousand miles of land and sea to their
present habitations? (5) If the entire human race, except Noah and his
family, were destroyed at the same date, the widely different races, languages,
and civilizations of Babylonia, Egypt, India, China, Australia, America — to say
nothing of other countries — cannot he accounted for : for the races inhabiting
these countries, if they ever lived together in a common home, could not have
developed the differences which they exhibit, unless they had started migrating
from it centuries, and indeed millennia, before either b.o. 2501 or b.c. 3066
(p. XXXV ff.); moreover, in the case of at least Babylonia aad Egypt, we possess
monumental evidence that civilization in these countries existed continuously y
without a break, /rom a period long anterior to either of these dates.

Upon these grounds — to which others might be added^— the supposition
that the Deluge of Noah was a universal one, is, it is evident, out of the
question, and has indeed been generally abandoned.

1 In which Jerusalem is 2600 ft. and Hebron 3040 ft. above the Medit. Sea.

2 See the excellent discussion of this question by J. J. S. Perowne in Smith,
TtB. art. Noah, pp. 567—71.

THE DELUGE 101

Even, however, the attempt which has been often made to regard the
Dehige as a * partial ' one, is beset by diflSculties. Certainly (see p. 107 f.) there
would be no objection, upon scientific grounds, to the supposition that there
was, abotit b.c. 2500, an extensive and destructive local inundation in the lower
part of the plain of IBabylonia ; but an inundation such as this does not satisfy
the terms of the narrative of Genesis. (1) P, at any rate — for J does not
state to what height he pictured them as rising— describes the waters as rising
at least as high as the * mountains of Ararat ' (viii. 5), the lowest of which are
more than 2500 ft. above the plain of Babylonia. (2) Both P and J speak
repeatedly of every living thing which had been created, including in par-
ticular all mankind, as having been destroyed (vi. 7, vii. 4, 23, viii. 21 J ;
vi. 17, vii. 21, cf. viii. 11, 15, P). But a flood confined to the plain of
Babylonia would certainly not have destroyed all animals upon the earth :
it is moreover certain — to say nothing of India, China, and other parts — that
long before B.C. 2501 mankind had spread as far as Egypt, and had established
an important civilization there, which obviously could not have been aflfected
by a flood, however extensive, in Babylonia^ It is manifest that a flood which
would submerge Egypt as well as Babylonia must have risen to at least 2000 ft.
(the height of the elevated country between them), and have thus been in fact
a universal one (which has been shewn to be impossible) : a flood, on the other
hand, which did less than this is not what the Biblical writers describe^ and
would not have accomplished what is represented as having been the entire
raison d'etre of the Flood, the destruction of all mankind. "We are forced,
consequently, to the conclusion that the Flood, as described by the Biblical
writers^ is unhistorical.

II. Flood-stories in other nations. It is a remarkable fact that stories of
a flood, which sometimes covers the whole earth, while at other times it
embraces only the country in which the story is current, and from which but
few escaped, are told in many different parts of the world. Naturally the same
or similar features often recur in these stories; but in other respects the
details (which are often grotesque) vary considerably ; and we have no space to
repeat them here 2. The principal countries in which these Flood-stories are
found are Greece (Deucalion's deluge), Lithuania, Australia, Hawaii and other
Polynesian islands, Cashmir, Thibet, Kamchatka, diflferent parts of India, ar.d
America (where such stories are particularly numerous) : they are not found
(according to Andree) in northern and central Asia; they are also absent in
Egypt, China, and Japan, and almost absent in other parts of Africa (except

1 Further argument on this point is hardly necessary ; but it may be pointed out
that (as an orographical map of Asia will at once shew) the great alluvial plain of
the Euphrates and the Tigris (which slopes down gradually from an elevation of
500—600 ft. at its N. end, a httle E. of Aleppo, to the head of the Persian Gulf,
some 700 miles to the SE.) is hemmed in on all sides, except towards the Persian
Gulf, by elevated ground, and in particular that the whole of Syria and Arabia,
from Aleppo in the N. to Aden in the S., has an elevation of more than 2000 ft. ; so
that, even though the volume of water were such that, being driven up the slope by
winds, it covered the entire plain of these two rivers, it could not by any possibility
submerge the neighbouring countries.

2 See specimens in the Encycl. Brit. ed. 9, art. Deluge ; DB. s.v. Flood ;
Worcester, Genesis in the Light of Modern Knowledge, pp. 418 ff., 527 — 551 ; and
esp. the full collection in Andree, Die Flutsagen, ethnograjphisch betrachlet, 1891.

102 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

where they are due to Christian influence). It was once supposed that all
these stories arose from the recollection of a common physical catastrophe;
but this can readily be shewn to be untenable. (1) As was shewn above, upon
independent grounds, there cannot have been any really universal Flood, of
which these stories might have preserved the recollection. (2) Even supposing,
per impossibile, that there had been a universal Flood, it is a well-known fact
that savage nations, such as many of those among whom Flood-stories are
current, do not remember anything very long, and certainly have no ancient
history : if then they possess no knowledge of events that occuri'cd 100 years
ago, it is in the last degree improbable that they should have preserved the
memory of an event that happened (ex hyp.) more than 4000 years ago. (3) If
the Deluge of Noah were merely a local inundation, confined to the plain of
Babylonia, though the memory of it might have been retained by some of the
immediate neighbours of the Babylonians, it would be most unlikely for a
knowledge of it to have travelled to nations settled in such distant continents
or islands as Australia, Polynesia, and America (which must, as was pointed
out on p. 100, have been already peopled long before B.C. 2501).

It does not fall within the province of the present work to consider the
question of the origin of these Flood-stories; so it must suffice to remark
briefly that they are due probably to the operation of diflferent causes. Most
frequently, says Mr Woods, the Flood-story is the highly-coloured tradition
of some historical event, or extraordinary natural phaenomenon — for instance,
among island and coastland peoples, of the early settlement of their ancestors
who came in boats across the ocean, of the appearance or disappearance of an
island by a volcanic eruption, or of a tidal wave resulting from an earthquake ;
among inland peoples, of the overflow of a river, the formation or disappearance
of a lake, or the melting of the winter snows. In other cases Flood-stories
appear to have originated in an attempt to account for some otherwise
unexplained fact, as the dispersion of peoples and differences of language, the
red colour of some of the N. American tribes, or the existence of fossil remains
on dry land, and even on hills. Account must also be taken of the tendency of
the human mind, well known to students of anthropology, to construct, under
similar local and mental conditions, similar mythological creations. And those
stories, which in particular details resemble strongly the Biblical narrative, are
open to the suspicion of having had these features introduced into them from
Christian sources, in quite modern times.

It was maintained by the late Professor Prestwich, on the ground of certain
geological indications (especially the so-called * Rubble Drift '), that long after
the appearance of palaeolithic man, there was a submergence of the crust of the
earth, chiefly in W. Europe, but also in NW. Africa, though extending doubt-
fully as far E. as Palestine, causing a great inundation of the sea, which, though
of short duration, destroyed a vast amount of animal and some human life, so
that some species of animals (e.g. the hippopotamus in Sicily) became extinct
in regions which they formerly inhabited ; and he suggests that this inundation
may have accounted for the above-mentioned traditions. As Mr Woods {DB.
II. 23), however, points out, without at all questioning the geological inference!
drawn by Professor Prestwich, had this explanation of the Flood-stories been
correct, it is remarkable that in Europe itself Flood-stories should be com-

THE DELUGE 103

paratively scarce, while they are most frequent in countries such as N. and
Central America, which are far removed from the region supposed to have
been submerged. Even Babylonia, where the most important and graphic
Flood-story originates, is not within the area over which Professor Prestwich
supposes the submergence to have extended ; and it is evident that the inun-
dation postulated by him is something completely different from the Flood of
Noahi.

III. The Babylonian narrative of the Flood. There can be no doubt
that the true origin of the Biblical narrative is to be found in the Babylonian
story of the Flood, which was discovered in 1872 by G. Smith in the Library
of Asshurbanipal at Kouyunjik. That the Babylonians possessed a legend of a
Flood was known before from the outline preserved by Berossus, who states
that Kronos warned Xisuthros, the tenth ante-diluvian king (see p. 80), that
mankind would be destroyed by a flood, and bade him build a huge ship in
which he, with his family and friends, might be savedl The substantial
accuracy of Berossus' account is confirmed by the cuneiform narrative, though,
naturally, it is at the same time superseded by it. The story forms an episode
in the great Babylonian epic, which narrates the exploits of Gilgamesh, the
hero of Uruk (the Erech of Gen. x. 10), and occupies the eleventh of the twelve
cantos into which the epic is divided. Gilgamesh's ancestor, Ut-napishtim, it
was said, had received the gift of immortality ; and Gilgamesh, anxious to learn
the secret by which he had obtained this boon, resolves to visit him. After
many adventures he reaches the Waters of Death (which are identified with
the ocean encircling the world), and having succeeded in crossing them he sees
Ut-napishtim, his figure unchanged by age, standing upon the further shore.
In answer to his inquiries, Ut-napishtira describes how in consequence of his
piety he had been preserved from destruction at the time of the great Flood,
and had afterwards been made immortal by Bel.

Ut-napishtim's story occupies more than 200 lines ; and only extracts can
be given here^. He begins (11. 8—31) by narrating how the gods, Ann, Bel,

1 Sir J. W. Dawson, in his Meeting Fiace of Geology and History (1894),
extending, as it seems, this theory of Professor Prestwich, speaks very confidently
(pp. 88 f., 130, 148 f., 154 f., 204, 205) of a great submergence, and accompanying
'diluvial catastrophe,' which took place shortly after the close of the glacial period,
and destroyed palaeolithic man, and which is identified by him (pp. 155, 205) with
the Deluge of Noah. An eminent English geologist, Canon T. G. Bonney,
Emeritus Professor of Geology at University College, London, and an ex-President
of the Geological Society, who has examined Sir J. W. Dawson's arguments,
permits me however to say that he considers this identification to be altogether
untenable: he is aware of no evidence shewing that ' a vast region' of either Europe
or Asia was submerged at the age spoken of ; and even supposing that it were so
submerged, the flood thus produced would be many thousand years before the time
at which, according to the Biblical chronology, the Deluge will have taken place.
He adds that he is acquainted with no geological indications favouring the suppo-
sition that a submergence, embracing certainly Asia, and including in particular
Armenia (the * mountains of Ararat'), and causing great destruction of animal life,
took place at c. b.c. 2500 or 3000. Cf. his art., Expositor, June, 1903, p. 456 ff.

2 See Muller, Fragm. Hist. Graec. ii. 501 f.; or the translations in Lenormant,
Origines, i. 387—90, Zimmern, Bab. and Heb. Genesis, p. 48 f., or KAT.^ 543 f.

* The text may be read in full in Ball's Light from the East, p. 35 ff. and in
KB. VI. 229 ff., with notes, p. 480 ff. See also the extracts, with valuable discussion,
in Jastrow's Bel. of Bab. and Ass., pp. 493—517 ; and KAT.^ 545 ff.

104 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

Ninib, and Ennugi, had determined to destroy Shurippak, a city described as
* lying on the Euphrates,' by a flood {dbvbu), and how Ea, 'lord of wisdom/
had warned him to escape by building a great ship : —

23 0 man of Shurippak, son of Ubaratutu :

Frame a house, build a ship;
25 Forsake (thy) possessions, seek (to save) life ;

Abandon (thy) goods, and cause (thy) soul to live:

Bring up into the midst of the ship the seed of life of every sort

As for the ship, which thou shalt build,

Let its form be long;
30 And its breadth and its height shall be of the same measure.

Upon the deep then launch it.

There follows (11. 32 ff.) the excuse which he is to make, if asked by the
men of his place what he is doing, Ut-napishtim then proceeds to relate how
he carried out these instructions : —

67 On the fifth day I began to construct the frame of the ship.

In its hull its sides were 120 cubits high.

And its deck was likewise 120 cubits in breadth:
60 I built on the bow, and fastened all firmly together.

Then I built six decks in it,

So that it was divided into seven storeys.

The interior (of each storey) I divided into nine compartments;

I drove in plugs (to fill up crevices).
65 I looked out a mast, and added all that was needful

Six sars of bitumen {kupru) I spread over it for caulking:

Three sars of naphtha [I took] on board.

When he had finished it, he entered it with all his belongings :—

81 With all that I possessed, I laded it:

With all the silver that I possessed, I laded it;

With all the gold that I possessed, I laded it;

With the seed of life of every kind that I possessed, I laded it
85 I took on board all my family and my servants;

Cattle of the field, beasts of the field, craftsmen also, all of them,
did I take on board.

Shamash (the sun-god) had appointed the time, (saying,)

* When the lord of the whirlwind seudeth at even a destructive rain,

Enter into thy ship, and close thy door.'

The arrival of the fated day filled Ut-napishtim with alarm : —
93 I feared to look upon the earth :

I entered within the ship, and closed my door.

The storm which began next morning is finely described (11. 97—132).
Ramm^n ('Rimmon,' — the storm-god) thundered in heaven; the Anunnaki
brought lightnings ; the waters rose : even the gods were in consternation ;
they took refuge in heaven, * cowering like dogs ' ; and Ishtar, the lady of the
gods, * cried like a woman in travail ' ; —

THE DELUGE 105

128 Six days and nights

Raged wind, deluge (ahuhu), and storm upon the earth.
130 When the seventh day arrived, the storm and dehige ceased,

Which had fought like a host of men ;

The sea was calm, hurricane and deluge ceased.

I beheld the land, and cried aloud:

For the whole of mankind were turned to clay (fi?w=to'»D);
135 Hedged fields had become marshes.

I opened a window, and the light fell upon my face.

The ship grounded on Nisir — a mountain east of the Tigris, across the
Little Zab (KA T? 63)— and remained there for six days : —

146 When the seventh day arrived,

I brought forth a dom^ and let it go :

The dove went to and fro;

As there was no resting-place, it turned back.
150 I brought forth a swallow, and let it go:

The swallow went to and fro;

As there was no resting-place, it turned back.

I brought forth a raven, and let it go :

The raven went, and saw the decrease of the waters ;
165 It ate, it waded, it croaked (0, it turned not back.

After this Ut-napishtim leaves the ark, and, like Noah, oflFers sacrifice : —

156 Then I sent forth (everything) towards the four winds (of heaven):
I offered sacrifice:

I prepared an offering on the summit of the mountain. .

I set Adagur- vases, seven by seven,

Underneath them I cast down reeds, cedar-wood, and incensa
160 The gods smelt the savour,

The gods smelt the goodly savour;

The gods gathered like flies over the sacrificer.

Ishtar hereupon reproaches Bel, because, when the goda had intended only
to destroy a single place, Shurippak, he had brought about the destruction of
all mankind (II. 163 — 170). Bel, on the other hand, is incensed with Ea, because,
by enabling Ut-napishtim to escape, he had frustrated his plan; but is
pacified by Ea's representations (11. 182 ff.)i that, though the sinner may
rightly suffer, it is inconsiderate to destroy all without discrimination.

In the end Bel accepts Ut-napishtim favourably, and takes him and his
wife away to immortality : —

201 He turned to us, he stepped between us, and blessed us, (saying) :
* Hitherto Ut-napishtim has been a (mortal) man, but
Henceforth Ut-napishtim and his wife shall be like unto the gods,
even unto us, and

1 In 1. 196 Ut-napishtim is called Atra-hasis ( = 'very clever'), which, inverted
{Hasis-atra), is the origin of Berossus' ' Xisuthros.'

106 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

Ut-napishtim shall dwell far away at the mouth of the rivers.*
Then they took me, and far away at the mouth of the rivers they made
me to dwell.

It should be added that fragments of two different versions of what is
manifestly the same story have been found : one (12 lines) ^ containing Ea's
instructions to Atra-basis about entering the ship ; the other (37 fragmentary
lines) ^, which is of extreme antiquity (the tablet on which it is written being
dated in the reign of Ammi-zaduga, the 4th successor of Hammurabi,
B.C. 2245 — 2223), representing some god as calling upon Rammlbn to bring a
flood upon the earth, and Ea as interposing to save Atra-ljasis.

Though there are differences in detail, the resemblances with the Biblical
narrative are too numerous and too marked to be due to accident. Thus the
Babylonian narrative agrees with P in that the hero of the Flood is (according
to Berossus) the tenth of the ante-diluvian kings, just as Noah is the tenth from
Adam ; in the fact that instructions are given for making the ark of particular
dimensions and with storeys (though the dimensions are not the same, and in
P the number of storeys is three, not seven), and that it was made water-tight
by bitumen, that the vessel grounds upon a mountain (but Ni§ir, not Ararat) 3,
and that Bel 'blesses' Ut-napishtim (1. 201), as God *blesses' Noah (Gen. ix. 1)*:
it agrees with J in that the flood is attributed to rain only ; in its shorter
duration (but seven days, not 40), as compared with P (one year), in a prefer-
ence for the number seven (11. 62, 130, 146, 158 ; cf. in J, Gen. vii. 2, 3, 4, 10,
viii. 10, 12), in the episode of the dove and the raven (though in the reverse
order, and with a swallow as well), in the sacrifice offered by Ut-napishtim
after leaving the ark, and in the gods * smelling the goodly savour' : it agrees
with P and J alike in that Ut-napishtim is warned, like Noah, to take refuge
from the coming flood in a shij), in the fact that all perish except the few who
are saved on account of Ut-napishtim's piety, and that, after the flood is over,
Bel, like Jehovah, promises (implicitly) not again to destroy mankind thus
indiscriminately, and receives Ut-napishtim favourably. The resemblances
with J are on the whole the more striking. Of the differences, the most con-
spicuous is the polytheistic colouring of the Babylonian narrative, as compared
with the monotheism of the two Biblical writers ^ It is another noteworthy
feature that in Genesis it is Enoch, not Noah, who is translated without dying.

The Hebrew and the Babylonian narratives have evidently a common

1 See KB. vi. 254—7 ; Sayce, Monuments, 108 f. ; cf. KAT.^ 651.

2 Exp. Times, May, 1898, p. 377 f.; KB. vi. 289—91; cf. KAT.^ 552—4.

8 Why in P the • mountains of Ararat ' appear in place of Nisir must remain
matter of conjecture: possibly, because they were the loftiest known to the
Hebrews; for another conjecture, see EncB. i. 289.

* Whether the rainbow is alluded to (Sayce, pp. 112 [1. 148], 114) in the Bab.
poem (in KB., 1. 164) is very uncertain : see DB. iv. l^^^n., and KAT.^ 550 n. 2.

•^ Prof. Sayce (EHH. 126) also calls attention to points in which the story has
assumed a Palestinian colouring : the ship has become an *ark,' as was natural in
a country in which there were no great rivers or a Persian Gulf; the period of the
rainfall has been transferred from Sebat ( = Jan. — Feb.), when the winter rains fall
in Babylonia, to the 'second month' ( = Nov.), the time of the autumn or 'former'
rains in Palestine ; and the dove brings back in its mouth a leaf of the olive, a tree
much more characteristic of Palestine than of Babylonia.

THE DELUGE 107

origin. And the Hebrew narrative must be derived from the Babylonian :
for not only is the Babylonian story of the Flood much older than (upon any
view of its origin) the Book of Genesis (for, as was shewn above, we have a
version of it dating from c. 2200 B.C.), but, as Zimmern has remarked, the very
essence of the Biblical narrative presupposes a country liable, like Babylonia,
to inundations ; so that it cannot be doubted that the story was ' indigenous in
Babylonia, and transplanted to Palestine^.' Of course, the Biblical account was
not, any more than the Biblical account of the Creation, transcribed directly
from a Babylonian source : but by some channel or other — we can but specu-
late by what (cf. p. 31)— the Babylonian story found its way into Israel; for
many generations it was transmitted orally, so that details were naturally
forgotten or modified ; it assumed, of course, a Hebrew complexion, and was
accommodated to the spirit of Hebrew monotheism ; but its main outline
remained the same : J and P, at different times, cast it into a written form,
each impressing upon it features characteristic of his own point of view and
hterary method ; and from the combination of the two texts thus formed, the
present narrative of»Genesis has arisen.

In its Hebrew form, the story of the Flood has thus a new character
stamped upon it ; and it becomes a symbolical embodiment of ethical and
religious truth. It marks an epoch in the early history of mankind. A
judicial motive is assigned for it : it becomes a judgement upon corrupt and
degenerate mankind 2. It thus exemplifies a great principle by which God
deals with both nations and individuals (cf. the application in Mt. xxiv. 37 — 9).
Noah, on the other hand, is the type of a righteous man (cf. Heb. xi. 7 ; 1 Pet.
iii. 20 ; 2 Pet. ii. 5), an example of blamelessness and obedience in the midst of
a heedless and perverse generation, a man worthy of the seal of God's approval.
His probity saves, not himself only, but his family. Rescued from the flood of
waters, he becomes the second father of humanity, and inaugurates for it a
new era. A new and gracious declaration of God's purposes towards man
marks the significance of the occasion : the promise in J (viii. 21 f.), the
blessing and the covenant in P (ix. 1 — 17), are tokens of His good will towards
mankind ; a new principle, the sanctity of human life, is established for the
maintenance and welfare of society. And so humanity starts afresh, with the
sense of God's favour resting upon it, if it will but fulfil faithfully the duties
devolving upon it.

It remains only to consider the possible basis of the Babylonian story.
Delitzsch, Dillmann, Huxley^, Haupt, and Jastrow, following the geologist
Siiss, of Vienna, consider that it is based upon dim recollections of an actual
extraordinary inundation of the lower Euphrates over the plain of Babylonia.
Both the Tigris and the Euphrates, when the snows in the upper basins of the
two rivers melt in spring, regularly overflow their banks, and transform a large
part of the alluvial plain into a vast inland sea : the region is also liable to
earthquakes ; and if, at the height of an inundation, when the waters were

1 Similarly Sayce, EIIH. 125.

' This may be indirectly implied in the Babylonian narrative in 1. 184 f., but it
certainly is not stated distinctly; and in 1. 13 f. the destruction of Shurippak seems
attributed simply to the caprice of the gods.

3 Collected Essays, iv. 221, 242 ff. ('Hasisadra's Adventure').

108 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [ix. 18, 19

further swollen by heavy rains, *a hurricane from the SB. swept up the
Persian Gulf, driving its shallow waters upon the delta, and damming back the
outflow, a catastrophe not unlike 5asisadra's might have been produced,' and
a vessel might have been driven up stream, over a continuously flooded country,
till it grounded — not indeed on the summit of Nisir, or on Ararat, but — ' on
one of the low hills between which both the lower and the upj)er Zab enter the
Assyrian plain' (Huxley, pp. 247 f., cf. 263, 279). If this view bo correct—
and it certainly appears a reasonable one — we must suppose that there was
once an actual extraordinary overflow of the Euphrates, which resulted among
other things in the destruction of Shurippak, that there was a tradition, or
legend, current in Babylonia, that some succeeded in effecting their escape in
a great ship, that in the popular imagination the disaster was magnified into a
destruction of all mankind except those who escaped, and also myth ©logically
embellished, that the story further found its way to Palestine, and ultimately,
in the manner indicated above, was incorporated in the Book of Genesis.
Upon this view of the origin of the Biblical narrative, it will be evident that it
is no * fiction ' of the narrators ; it is a current popular helief, of long standing
in Israel, which they report ; and instead of being shocked or startled at the
fact, we should rather marvel at the 'divinely-guided religious feeling and
insight, by which an ancient legend has been made the vehicle of religious and
spiritual truths'

18 And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were J
Shem, and Ham, and Japheth : and Ham is the father of
Canaan. 19 These three were the sons of Noah : and of these
was the whole earth overspread.

18, 19 (J). A short connecting passage, forming («. 18*) the close to
J's narrative of the Flood, and {v. 19) the introduction to J's Table of
Nations, preserved in parts of en. x. Verse 18^ is probably an addition
due to the compiler, and intended as an introduction to vv. 20 — 27.

19. of these &c. Better, from, these the whole earth (i.e. the
whole population of the earth, as xi. 1) was spread abroad (x. 18).

20 — 27 (J). Noah, the vine-grower, and his three sons. Noah appears
here under a new aspect. As in iv. 17 — 24 we learned how Hebrew tradition
accounted for the origin of diff'erent inventions and institutions, so we learn
here, vv. 20, 21, how it attributed to Noah the introduction of what we may
suppose to have been a more artificial type of husbandry, as compared with
that implied in iv. 2, and also in particular of the culture of the vine. The
vine and its fruit were highly prized in Palestine (cf. xlix. 11 f., and on xxvii.
28) ; and the first discovery of the uses to which its juice might be put, must
have been a notable one in the history of inventions. Here it is ascribed to
Noah, who is connected (viii. 4) with Armenia ; and Armenia and the E. part
of Pontus are just the region in which the plant appears to have been

1 Woods in DB. ii. 23. Holzinger (p. 88), and Gunkel (p. 66) also remark upon
the immeasurably higher spiritual feeling displayed by the Biblical narrative, and
on the contrast between the sublime moral dignity of the God of Noah, and the
' genuinely heathen ' character and motives displayed by the Babylonian deities.

ix.ao-a5] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 109

indigenous, and from which it spread gradually to other countries. But, with
a keen perception of its liability to abuse, the narrator paints a vivid picture
of the disgrace and misfortune which the enjoyment of the fermented juice of
the vine entailed upon its first cultivator. The scene is a typical one ; and it
stands as a warning of the consequences of excessive indulgence, and of the need
of watchfulness and self-control, even in the use of what is good and innocent
in itself.

20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and planted a j
vineyard : 21 and he drank of the wine, and was drunken ; and
he was uncovered within his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of
Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two
brethren without. 23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment,
and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and
covered the nakedness of their father ; and their faces were
backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. 24 And
Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his ^youngest son
had done unto him. 25 And he said,

^ Or, younger

20. And Noah, the husbandman, began, and planted,^ &c.
'The title, "the husbandman," here applied to Noah is surprising,
and can only be understood as pointing to a cycle of tradition respect-
ing Noah, in which he figured in that capacity' (Dillm.).

21. Noah, it is implied, was the first to plant a vineyard, and
manufacture mne: hence he was unacquainted with the effects of
wine, and was not responsible for the state into which it brought him.

22. 23. Ham, in what he did, shewed no modesty, or filial respect;
his two brothers, on the contrary, displayed delicacy of feeling, and
respect for their father. The ' garment ' {simldh) is the large square
mantle^ ot plaid, often used for sleeping in (Ex. xxii. 26 f ).

24. youngest. From the order in both J {v. 18) and P (v. 32,
vi. 10, vii. 13, X. 1), it would naturally be inferred that Japheth was
the youngest son of Noah. The writer of vv. 20 — 27 must have
followed a different tradition — either one which gave Noah's sons in
the order Shem, Japheth, and Ham, or (see below) one which made
them to be Shem, Japheth, and Canaan. (RVm. is not legitimate.)

25. Deeply moved by what had occurred, and discerning from it
the characters of his sons, Noah in an elevated, impassioned strain,
pronounces upon them a curse and blessing. It was an ancient belief
that a father's curse or blessing was not merely the expression of an
earnestly felt hope or wish, but that it exerted a real power in determin-
ing a child's future ; and hence the existing later condition of a tribe
or people is often in the OT. referred to the words supposed to have
been pronounced by a patriarchal ancestor upon its progenitor. Cf.
xxvii. 28 f , 39 f , xlviii. 13 — 20; and on ch. xlix.

no THE BOOK OF GENESIS [ix. 25-27

Cursed be Canaan ;

A servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
26 And he said,

Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem ;

And let Canaan be ^his servant.
57 God enlarge Japheth,

And ^let him dwell in the tents of Shem ;

And let Canaan be ^his servant.

1 Or, their « Or, he shall

servant of servants. I.e. the very lowest of servants. Canaan is
here not an individual, but the representative of the Canaanites, the
native races of Canaan, who, if not destroyed, were ultimately sub-
jugated by the Israelites (cf. Jud. i. 28 IF. ; 1 K. ix. 20 f.) : and the
intention of the passage is in reality to account for the enslaved
condition of these races, as the Hebrews knew them. How the
subjection to Japheth (* his brethren ' : and v. 27°) is to be explained
is less clear : perhaps it is introduced only as a secondary feature in
the curse; perhaps, however, cases were known to the author of the
blessing in which the Phoenicians, for instance, whether commercially
or politically, had been unable to hold their own by the side of Japhethic
rivals (x. 2 — 4). On the question why Canaan is cursed, when Ham
was the offender, see below.

26, 27. In strong contrast to the curse on Canaan are the blessings
on Shem and Japheth.

26. The knowledge of the true God possessed by the Hebrews
forms the basis of the blessing pronounced upon their ancestor (see
x. 21 ; xi. 10 fF.), Shem; and the form in which the blessing is cast, —
not * Blessed be Shem,' but * Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem,' —
evinces a warm and lively sense of the privileges which this knowledge
conferred upon those who shared it: it is the happiness of Shem
and his descendants that they *have Jehovah for their God.'

his. Better, their (RVm.), referring to ' his brethren,* v. 25.

27*. The blessing begins this time with a wish suggested by the
name, there being in the Heb. for enlarge an obvious play upon
Japheth (cf xlix. 8, 16, 19). May God fulfil the omen of Japheth's
name and grant him width, expansiveness ! The large extent of
territory inhabited by the nations represented by the sons of Japheth
(x. 2 — 5), their material development, and mental energy, are what is
here alluded to.

God. Not Jehovah (who is reserved for Shem), there being no
knowledge of the God of revelation in Japheth.

27^ Unlike Canaan, with whom Israel is to have no dealings
(Ex. xxiii. 32), may Japheth have free intercourse with the descendants
of Shem, and dwell unhindered in their tents ! The words are a
reflection of the more friendly regard with which reHgiously-minded

IX. .8, .9] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 111

28 And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty P
years. 29 And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and
fifty years: and he died.

Israelites viewed the Japhethites, as compared with the Canaanites.
They may also include perhaps in germ the thought (which is developed
afterwards more fully by the great prophets, e.g. Is. ii. 2—4) of the
ultimate inclusion of the peoples referred to Japheth as their ancestor
in the spiritual privileges enjoyed by the descendants of Shem.

28, 29. The close of P's account of Noah. The verses resemble
closely in form v. 7 f , 10 f , 13 f , &c.

We may call the words addressed by Noah to his three sons a prophetical
interpretation of history. Canaan, Shem, and Japheth are not individuals :
they are personifications, representing the nationalities of which they were
the reputed ancestors, and reflecting their respective characters. * The curse
of Canaan is the curse pronounced against Israel's greatest foe and con-
stant source of moral temptation; the shamelessness of Ham reflects the
impression produced by the sensuality of the Canaanite upon the minds of the
worshippers of Jehovah ' (Ryle, p. 122 : see e.g. Lev. xviii. 3, 24—30; 1 K. xiv.
24). And the curse takes the form of political subjection, which is the natural
penalty of long-continued moral degradation, and of the physical enervation which
inevitably accompanies it. The purer religion possessed by the Hebrews is
the thought determining the blessing of Shem. The width of territory and
expansiveness characteristic of the Japhethites explains the terms used of
Japheth. Thus, taken as a whole, the blessing defines in outline the position
and historical significance of the three great ethnical groups, which were
referred to Noah as their ancestor. It contrasts their diflfering characters ; and
holds out to each correspondingly different prospects for the future. It thus
interprets the history * prophetically,' i.e. not predictively, but eliciting from it
the providential purposes of which it is the expression.

There remains the question why Canaan was cursed, when Ham was the
offender. No doubt, the simplest supposition is that Canaan is cursed, because
among all the ' sons ' of Ham (x. 6) the Canaanites were the most intimately
known to the Hebrews, and in intercourse with them displayed in a preeminent
degree the evil traits which had characterized Ham. By recent critics^,
however, this explanation has been regarded as unsatisfactory, and the opinion
has gained ground that the narrative is no longer in its original form : originally,
these critics suppose, the author of the misdeed was Canaan^ who may even,
in the oldest form of the tradition, have been treated not as the grandson of Noah,
but as the youngest (cf. v. 24) of his sons (as indeed the connexion in vv. 24—27,
where he stands by the side of Shem and Japheth, seems still to imply) ; the
compiler, in appending this narrative to the story of the Flood, harmonized it
with the genealogy of Noah's sons which had then gained currency, by inserting
in V. 18 the explanatory gloss 'and Ham is the father of Canaan,' and in v. 22
the words * Ham the father of ' before * Canaan.* Verses 20—27, in their original
form, will upon this view represent a difi"erent stratum of Israelitish tradition,

1 Wellh., Budde, Holz., Gunkel, aJ.; cf. Ryle, 119—121.

112 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

in which Canaan figured as a son of Noah. And as we are dealing not
with individuals as such, but with individuals as representing nationalities,
there is at least no difficulty (cf. on x. 7 Sheba and Dedan, xxii. 21) in
supposing that they may have been differently grouped, and the relations
between them differently defined, by different writers or at different times.

Chapter X.
The Table of Nations,

The object of this Table is partly to shew how the Hebrews supposed the
principal nations known to them to be related to each other, partly to assign
Israel, in particular, its place among them. The chapter falls into the plan of
the compiler of Genesis. The compiler's ultimate goal is the history of the
chosen family ; but at the point when he was about to enter upon this, he was
sensible (in Gunkel's words) 'of the scientific necessity of saying something
about the rise of other nations, of the aesthetic necessity of bringing clearly to
a close the history of primitive undivided mankind, and last, but not least, of the
religious necessity of exhibiting clearly the selection of Israel out of the mass
of nations.' And so, after this chapter, he is able to limit himself exclusively
to the line of Shem (xi. 10 ff.), and shortly afterwards to a particular branch of
the family of Terah (xi. 27 ff.), viz. the family of Abraham.

In relating the nations to each other, each is represented as summed up in
a corresponding eponymous ancestor, these being related to one another as
father, son, brother, &c. The names are in no case to be taken as those of real
individuals ; they just represent peoples. This is clear in many cases from the
names themselves, which are dual (Mizraim), or plural (Ludim, Anamim, &c.)
in form, or names of places (as Tarshish, Zidon, Ophir, &c.), or gentile names
(as the Jebusite, the Amorite, &c,) ; in other cases, from its being contrary to
all analogy for the names of nations to be derived from those of known
individual ancestors. Moreover, the real origin of the nations enumerated
here, belonging in many cases to entirely different racial types, — Semites,
Aryans, 'Hittites,' Egyptians, — must have reached back into a remote
prehistoric age, — far earlier than b.c. 2500, — from which, we may be sure, not
even the dimmest recollections could have been preserved at the time when
the chapter was written. The nations and tribes existed: and imaginary
ancestors were afterwards postulated for the purpose of exhibiting pictorially
the relationship in which they were supposed to stand towards one another.
An exactly parallel instance, thougli not so fully worked out, is afforded by the
ancient Greeks. The general name of the Greeks was Hellenes, the principal
subdivisions were the Dorians, the Aeolians, the lonians, and the Achaeans ;
and accordingly the Greeks traced their descent from a supposed eponymous
ancestor Hellen, who had three sons Dorus and Aeolus, the suppo. ed ancestors
of the Dorians and Aeolians, and Xuthus, from whose two sons, Ion and Achaeus,
the lonians and Achaeans were respectively supposed to be descended. And so
here, the principal nations known to the Hebrews are represented, through
their corresponding ancestors, as the members of a great family more or less
closely related to each other, as the case may be. The great ethnical groups,

THE BOOK OF GENESIS 113

most strongly distinguished from one another in physical type and character,
are represented as the sons of Noah. The primary divisions (i.e. nations), into
which each of these groups falls, appear as the ' sons ' of its representative
ancestor (as Javan, i.e. the Greeks [lonians], the son of Japheth) : subordinate
divisions (i.e. tribes or local settlements) appear as * grandsons' (as Zidon, *8on*
of Canaan, and ' grandson ' of Ham).

The Table does not include all nations known to the Hebrews. Some,
which were more closely connected with the Hebrews than any here mentioned,
as Moab and Ammon, the descendants of Nahor, and of K:eturah, the Ishmaelite
tribes, and Edom, are intentionally excluded : they find their place at later
stages of the narrative i. Others, as the Rephaim, the *Anakim, the Zuzim, are,
perhaps, not mentioned, as not being of sufficient importance : for the omission
of others, it is less easy to suggest satisfactory reasons. Others, again, as the
pre-Semitic Sumerian inhabitants of Babylonia, the negro-races of Africa,
many nations of Europe, the Indian races, the Chinese, and the peoples of
Australia, America, the Pacific Isles, &c., are not mentioned, simply because
the knowledge of the Hebrews did not embrace them. The area included in
the Table extends, speaking broadly, from Annenia on the N. to Ethiopia and
S. Arabia on the S., and from Elam (E. of Babylonia) on the E. to Greece and
the dimly known Tarshish in the W. The knowledge of the more distant
peoples mentioned came probably to the Hebrews in many cases through trade
or war. It is remarkable how many of these, particularly when they belong to
P, agree with those mentioned by Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and in general bow
largely the horizon of the Table agrees with the horizon of these prophets :
see the notes on Gomer, Magog, Javan, Tubal, Meshech {v. 1), Ashkenaz,
Togarmah (». 2), Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim {v, 3), Cush, Put {v. 6), Ka'mah,
Sheba, Dedan {v. 7), Ludim («?. 13), Arvad (tJ. 18), Elam {v. 22); and compare
especially Ez. xxvii., and xxxviii. 2 — 6, 13, xxxix. 1^.

Upon wliat principle are the nations included in the Table arranged?
No doubt, the two writers, whose joint work the Table in its present form is,
both conceived their arrangement to be ethnological, i.e. they supposed the
nations to be really related by blood as they represented them to be ; but
though this was doubtless the case in some instances, in others it is not probable ;
and sometimes linguistic and other facts known to us shew it to be altogether
out of the question : the Canaanites, for instance, had certainly no direct racial
connexion with Egypt, nor the Hittites with 'Canaan,' or with the Amorites,
nor Elam with Shem. Where a blood-relationship cannot be presupposed, the
principle of arrangement, it seems evident, was chiefly geographical, though
sometimes it was historical or political Thus, the three main divisions,
Japheth, Ham, and Shem, occupy, respectively, on the whole, a northern,
middle, and southern zone. Then, further, the peoples or tribes living in or
near a particular country, whether connected together racially or not, are often
described as descendants of the ancestor representing the country (as the
'sons' of Gomer, v. 3, of Mizraim, v. 13 f., and of Canaan, vv. 15 — 18 : see also

1 xix. 30 £f., xxii. 20 £f., xxv. 1 ff., 13 ff., xxxvi.

' On the gradual growth of geographical knowledge among the Hebrews see
further the luminous art. Geography (Biblical) in the EncB,

D. 8

114 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. i, 2

on ch. xxxvi.). In other instances political or commercial relations have led
probably to peoples being connected genealogically, where no blood-relationship
existed ; as in the cases of Tarshish and Javan (v. 4), and Canaan and Ham
{v. 7). Naturally, our knowledge is often not sufficient to enable us to say, in a
given case, by which of these principles the classification has been determined.
But, after what has been said, it will occasion no surprise to find the same
people classed difibrently, in different genealogies, compiled by diflferent
writers or at different times (cf. on vv. 7, 23, xxii 21, xxv. 3).

It will thus be evident that the Table of Nations contains no scientific
classification of the races of mankind. Not only this, however ; it also offers
no historically true account of the origin of the races of mankind. It represents
as starting from a single centre, at about B.C. 2500, or (lxx.) 3066, varieties
(Semitic, Aryan, 'Hittite' or Mongolian, and Egyptian) which (in Prof. Sayce's
words) * the ethnologist is not at present able to trace back to a single original
type' {Monuments, 120 f.), and which, if (as modern anthropologists also
believe) they ultimately had a common origin, must beyond question have
begun the process of separation and differentiation a great many centuries before
either b.c. 2500, or B.C. 3066. The Table thus offers no sufficient explanation
of the racial differences even of the nations included in it. And there remain
the numerous native races of Africa, E. Asia, Australia, America, &c., refeiTed
to above, which certainly must have been in existence millennia before even
B.O. 3066 (for otherwise the strongly-marked differences of racial character and
language which they exhibit, could not have had time to develop), the origin
of which is not accounted for at all. Cf. the Introduction, p. xxxiv ff.

As regards the composition of the chapter, vv. 1 — 7, 20, 22 — 24, 31, 32
belong to P, the rest belongs to J (with probably a later insertion in vv. 16 — 18*).

X. 1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, i
Shem Ham and Japheth : and unto them were sons born after
the flood.

2 The sons of Japheth ; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and
Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras. 3 And the sons of

X. 2—5. The ' sons ' of Japheth.

2. Gomer. Mentioned in Ez. xxxviii. 6, by the side of Togarmah
(v. 3, here), among the allies of Gog, of the land of Magog, in the
* uttermost parts of the north,' who is pictured by the prophet as the
leader of an ideal assault of nations against the restored Israel.
LXX.TajLtep (in Ez.roju.cp), the Gimiri^ai, whom Esarhaddon (b.c. 681 — 668)
speaks of having defeated, and who, Asshurbanipal (668 — 625) tells
us (KB. II. 129, 173—7), invaded Lydia in the days of Gugu
(i.e. Gyges, the famous king of Lydia, B.c. 687 — 653, Hdt. i. 8—14).
Their territory at this time corresponded generally to the later
Cappadocia (which is called in Armenian Gamir). There is little
doubt that they are the same as the Cimmerians (Kt/x/xcpiot, Od. xi. 14,
&c.); and if so, their original home was the country N. of the Euxine,
from which they were expelled by the Scythians (Hdt. 1. 15, 103, rv. 11 f ).

X. a] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 115

Magog. In Ez. xxxviii. 2 (with the article), xxxix. 6, a land and
people in the * uttermost parts of the north,' whose ruler Gog is prince
of 'Rosh, Meshech, and Tuhal,^ and has among his allies Gomer and
Togarmah. The expedition imagined by the prophet in Ez. xxxviii. — ix.
is no doubt modelled upon the great irruption of the Scythians into Asia
(Hdt. I. 104 — 6), which took place c. 630 B.C., and which is in all
probability alluded to in Jer. iv. 3 — vi. 30 (see especially v. 15 — 17,
vi. 22 f.; cf. LOT, 237 f.). And in fact, since Josephus, 'Magog'
has been commonly understood of the Scythians, though the origin of
the name, if this view be correct, is not apparent \

Mddai. The Medes, often mentioned in the OT. from the
8th century B.C. (2 K. xvii. 6, xviii. 11, Is. xxi. 2, xiii. 17 f., al.)\
and in the Assyrian Inscriptions from the time of Ramm^n-nirari
(812 — 783 B.C.) onwards, perhaps also (Schrader, Tiele, Sayce) identical
with the Amadai of Shalmaneser II. (b.c. 860 — 825). The home of
the Medes was in the mountainous country E. of Assyria, and SW.
of the Caspian Sea. Their capital city was Egbatana (now Hamaddn).

Ydvdn. The Greeks, or, more exactly, the lonians (in Horn.
*IaFov€s), i.e. in particular, the Asiatic lonians, who were settled
along the coasts of Lydia and Caria, and whose cities throve
commercially some two centuries earlier than those of the Peloponnesus.
Yd'vdn being thus the name under which the Hebrews first became
acquainted with the Greeks (probably through the Phoenicians), it
remained the name by which they were always known. They are
mentioned by Sargon {KAT.^ 81). In the OT. they are named
besides, Ez. xxvii. 13 (by the side of Tubal and Meshech, as bringing
slaves and copper into the Tyrian market), 19 (?), Is. Ixvi. 19, Joel iii. 6;
and (the Macedonian Greeks) Zech. ix. 13, Dan. viii. 21, x. 20.

Tubal and Meshech (lxx. Moo-ox). Named similarly together in
Ez. xxvii. 13 (by the side of Yavan, as just noted), xxxii. 26 (in Sheol,
with Egypt, Elam, &c.), xxxviii. 2 and xxxix. 1 (as ruled over by Gog),
and probably (see lxx.) in Is. Ixvi. 19 (beside Yavan, as distant nations).
They are the Tabali and Mushku of the Inscriptions, Tabali being
first mentioned by Tiglath-pileser I. (c. 1100 B.C.), and Mushku by
Shalmaneser II. (860 — 825), and both also being mentioned often
subsequently (see KAT? ad loc.) ; and the Moaxot and Tt^apryvot, whom
Hdt. (ill. 94, VII. 78) also names together as belonging to the 19th
satrapy of Darius. The notices of them in the Assyrian period shew
that their home was then NE. of Cilicia (Hilakku) and E. of Cappadocia
(GimirraiY; but by the time of Herodotus they had retired further
to the N., to the mountainous region SE. of the Black Sea.

Tiras. Perhaps the Tvp(r-r}voC, a people dwelling anciently on the
N. shores and islands of the Aegean Sea, and much dreaded by the
Greeks as pirates (Hdt. i. 57, Thuc. iv. 109).

1 Mat is the common Assyrian word for 'land'j and hence 'Magog' has been
supposed to be a contraction for Mat-Gog, *the land of Gog' (Sayce, Monuments,
125 f.), or {Z.fiir Ass, 1901, p. 321) for Mat-Gagaia, *the land of Gagaia,' a people
mentioned on the Tel el-Amarna tablets {KB. v. 6).

2 See the map in KAT.^ (or KAT.^); or the excellent one in EncB. s.v. Assyria.

8—2

116 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. 3, 4

Gomer ; Aslikenaz, and ^Riphath, and Togarmah. 4 And the F
sons of Javan ; Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and ^Dodanim.

* In 1 Chr. i. 6, Diphath. » In 1 Chr. i. 7, Rodanim.

3. The * sons * of Gomer.

Ashkenaz. Mentioned in Jer. li. 27 by the side of Ararat (see on
viii. 4) and Minni (the Mannai of the Assyrian Inscriptions, SE. of
Lake Van) ; and hence doubtless a people living in that neighbourhood.
Thought by many recent Assyriologists to be the land of Ashguza,
whose prince is mentioned by Esarhaddon as an ally of the Mannai
{KB. II. 129, 147), and whose people may even be identical with the
^KvQa.i (see Masp. iii. 343 ; EncB. s.v.).

Riphath (in 1 Ch. i. 6 Diphath). Quite uncertain : understood by
Josephus to denote the Paphlagonians.

Togarmah. Mentioned in Ez. xxxviii. 6, by the side of Gomer,
as forming part of the hosts of Gog ; and in Ez. xxvii. 14, after Yavan,
Tubal, and Meshech, as supplying horses and mules to the Tyrian
merchants. According to ancient Greek authorities (see Dillm.), the
Armenians. For reasons unknown to us, Ashkenaz, Riphath and i
Togarmah must have been regarded as offshoots of the Gimirrai.

4. The * sons ' of Javan.

Elishah. Of. Ez. xxvii. 7, where it is said that purple-stuffs were
brought to Tyre from the * isles {or coasts) of Elishah.' The mussel
from which the purple-dye was obtained by the ancients abounded on
the coasts of the Peloponnese, especially Laconia (Hor. Od. ii. 18. 7,
al.) ; but it is difficult to find a locality there both suitable in itself,
and also one the name of which would be likely to be represented in
Ileb. by Elishah : 'EAXa?, *HXt5, and the AioXcts, which have been
suggested, are all, for one reason or another, unsuitable. Syncellus has
a gloss 'EXto-o-a c^ ov tiK^XoL ; hence Dillm. thinks of lower Italy and
Sicily. W. Max Miillcr and Jastrow {DB. v. 80^) identify with the
Alashia of the Tel el-Amarna letters (25 — 33), i.e., probably, Cyprus.

Tarshish. The place called by the Greeks Tartessus (Hdt. i. 163,
iv. 152), in Spain, beyond the straits of Gibraltar, near the mouth of
the Guadalquivir, connected commercially with the Phoenicians from
an early date, and known to the Hebrews from the time of Solomon
(1 K. X. 22, &c.). Mentioned in Ez. xxvii. 12 as trading with Tyre in
silver (cf. Jer. x. 9), iron, tin, and lead (cf. Diod. Sic. v. 35, 38) j and in
Is. Ixvi. 19, Ps. Ixxii. 10, as a typical distant country.

Kittim. I.e. the Kitians, the people of Kit, or Kiti, as it is
termed in Phoenician inscriptions, the Kition of the Greeks, an important
city in Cyprus, no\Y Larnaka. Cf. Is. xxiii. 1 ; Jer. ii. 10 ; Ez. xxvii. 6.
Kition itself, and indeed C3^rus generally, as amongst other things
inscriptions shew, was colonized largely by Phoenicians; but Greeks
were also numerous in the island, which accounts for the Kitians being
ranked here among the * sons ' of Javan.

Dodanim. Sam., lxx., and 1 Ch. i. 7, read, no doubt correctly,
Bodanim, i.e. the Rhodians. Rhodes was already known to Homer

X.5, 6] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 117

o Of these were the ^isles of the nations divided in their lands, P
every one after his tongue ; after their families, in their nations.
6 And the sons of Ham ; Gush, and Mizraim, and Put, and

^ Or, coastlands

(II. II. 654 ff.). The Phoenicians came there at an early date; it
lay on their direct route towards Greece and the West.

5. 0/ these were the isles of the nations divided [. These are the
sons ofJapheth,] in their lands &c. It is almost certain that the words
enclosed in brackets have accidentally dropped out of the text. The
expression 'isles' (or 'coasts') cannot be naturally understood of the
localities inhabited by the peoples mentioned in vv. 2, 3, whereas it is
used frequently of the islands and coasts of the Mediterranean Sea
(Is. xi. 11; Ez. xxvi. 18, xxvii. 3, 6, 7). The words, 'Of these...
divided/ thus refer solely to v. 4, and state that other islands and
coasts towards the West, besides those mentioned in that verse, were
also peopled by 'sons' of Javan. The restored text has at the same
time the advantage of giving a subscription to the enumeration of the
sons of Japhetli, similar to those in vv. 20, 31.

isles. Or, coastlands. Tlie word includes both. Arabic seems to
shew that it means properly a deversorium or station ; so that it would
be a term applied naturally to the many harbours, or resting-places,
afforded by the promontories and islands of the Mediterranean Sea.

6—20. The ' sons ' of Ham. In late Psalms (Ixxviii. 51, cv. 23, 27,
cvi. 22) ' Ham ' is a poetical (collective) designation of the Egyptians.
The name is very probably the Egyptian Kam-t, Demotic Kemi, Coptic
KHME or XHMI, the native name of Egypt, from Jcam, 'black,'
with allusion to its dark-coloured soil (/xeXayyatov, Hdt. ii. 12 ;
Wiedemann, Ag. Gesch. 22), as opposed to the bright, yellow sand of
the desert. Here, however, 'Ham' appears as the eponymous ancestor,
not of the Egyptians only, but also of a number of other peoples
connected, or supposed to have been connected, with them.

6. Gush. Egypt. Kash, Kesh, the name of a reddish-brown people
(cf Jer. xiii. 23), often mentioned in the Egyptian inscriptions, dwelling
on the S. of Egypt, their N. border being 24° N. at the First Cataract
(Maspero, i. 488 ff.). Often mentioned in the OT. ; and frequently in
EVV. represented (as already in lxx.) by ' Ethiopians,' ' Ethiopia.'

Mizraim. The standing Heb. name for Egypt, — meaning properly
* the two Mizrs* with reference probably to Upper and Lower Egypt,
the two districts into which the country naturally feU, and which are
frequently so distinguished in the Inscriptions'. In Lower Egypt
(which corresponded generally to what we call the Delta), the
principal seat of government was Memphis (12 miles S. of Cairo) ; the
capital of Upper Egypt (consisting of the valley of the Nile, S. of the

1 See Eawl. Hist, of Eg. i. 102 n.; EncB. ii. 1233; Erman, Anc. Eg. 60
(illustration of the curious double crown symbolizing the double country). This
is the general view ; but see W. Max Miiller's objection, EncB. lu. 3161 n.

118 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. 6

Delta) was Thebes (280 miles S. of Memphis), the brilliant seat of (in
particular) the 18th, 19th and 20th dynasties. The Assyrian name
of Eg)rpt was Mizri, Mizivj Muzur, or Muzru ; and the singular Mazor
occurs in Is. xix. 6, xxxvii. 25 [=2 K. xix. 24]; Mic. vii. 12.

Put. Named elsewhere, by the side of Gush and either the
Lubim or Lud, as a people supplying contingents to the armies of
Egypt (Nah. iii. 9; Jer. xlvi. 9; Ez. xxx. 5), Tyre (Ez. xxvii. 10), or Gog
(Ez. xxxviii. 5). Probably the Libyans : Lxx. in Jeremiah and Ezekiel
have At)8ucs; and the western part of Lower Egypt (the so-called
Libya Aegypti) is called in Coptic Phaiat.

Canaan. The eponymous ancestor of * Canaan,' i.e. of the country
inhabited by those (see w. 15 — 19) whom we should now distinguish
as Phoenicians and Canaanites. Greek writers, quoting from Phoenician
sources (see Dillm.), state that Xi/a was the older name of *otVt^ or
^OLVLKT} ; and the Laodicea N. of Lebanon is called on coins |V3:3i k^k,
'Laodicea that is in Canaan \' The name Canaan occurs in
Egyptian Inscriptions, and (in the form Kinahhi) in the Tel el-Amarna
correspondence. It appears to have denoted originally the low coast-
land of what was afterwards known as Phoenicia and Palestine,— though
both * Canaan ' and * Canaanite ' acquired afterwards a more extended
signification. See further the writer's Commentary on Deut.^ p. 12 f. ;
and Canaan in the EncB.

The Phoenicians (and Canaanites) were beyond all question a
Semitic people, and spoke a language closely allied to Hebrew : why
therefore are they classed here among the descendants of Ham?
Different answers have been returned to this question. (1) Religious
antagonism, and a sense of moral and political superiority to a race
whom they felt that they had superseded (see on ix. 25) may have
led the Hebrews to assign the Canaanites to a different stock from
themselves. (2) There was much intercourse in ancient times between
Phoenicia and Egypt (cf Is. xxiii. 3, 5); and the marks of Egyptian
influence are strongly impressed upon Phoenician art^: a racial con-
nexion may consequently have been supposed to subsist between the
two peoples. (3) Dillm. points out that there was an ancient tradition
(Hdt. I. 1, VII. 89) that the Phoenicians were immigrants from the
parts about the Red Sea ; and supposes that the genealogy ' reflects a
consciousness that the ancestry of the Canaanites was not that of the
Israelites.' Upon the whole, it is most probable that the origin here
assigned to the Phoenicians and Canaanites is due to the joint operation
of (1) and W.

1 For instances in the OT. in which Canaan or Canaanite means in particular
Phoenicia or Phoenician, see Is. xxiii. 11 ; Hos. xii. 7 (EVm.) ; Ob. 20.

2 See Perrot and Chipiez, Art in Phoenicia, i. 73, 77, 80, 125, 126 ff., 183—9,
211, 246, 382—4, ii. 5, 6, 10 f., 12, 864, 449*' (Index) ; Phoenicia in EncB., § 8.

3 If (as has been supposed by Hal6vy, Sayce, and Hommel) it were due to a
recollection of the political dependence of Canaan upon Egypt during the 15th
cent. B.C., as attested by the Tel el-Amarna letters, we should, as Dillm. remarks,
have expected Canaan to be represented, not as a brother of Mizraim (implying
equality) but as his son.

x.6-8] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 119

Canaan. 7 And the sons of Cush ; Seba, and Havilah, and P
Sabtah, and Raamah, and Sabteca : and the sons of Raamah ;
Sheba, and Dedan. | 8 And Cush begat Nimrod : he began to J

7. The * sons ' of Cush. Several of these are Arabian tribes ; and
that there was intercourse between the opposite sides of the Red Sea
is attested, at least for a period later than that here referred to, by
the evidence of language : the (post-Christian) Ge'ez, or ' Ethiopic/
being obviously a sister language to the languages spoken by the
Sabaeans and Minaeans in the S. of Arabia.

Sebd. Mentioned in Ps. Ixxii. 10 (beside Sheba), and in Is. xliii. 3,
xlv. 14 (beside Egypt and Cush) ; and since Josephus {Ant, ii. 10. 2)
commonly identified with Meroe (about 100 m. N. of the modern
Khartoum). There is however no evidence that Meroe was ever called
Seba; and it is better (with Di.) to understand by Seba a branch
of the Cushites settled on the W. coast of the Ked Sea : Strabo

(XVI. 4. 8, 10) speaks of a Xt^a-^v 2a^a, and a SajSal ttoXis cvfieyedrjsy on
the Adulitic Gulf, about 15° 45' N. in Spruner's Atlas.

Havildh. This tribe has perhaps left traces of its name in the
koXtto^ AvaXtTT/s, and the 'A/JaAtrat, on the African coast, a little S.
of the Straits of Bab el-Mandeb. The name will appear again among
the Joktanidae {v. 29; cf ii. 11, xxv. 18), seemingly as that of a tribe
in NE. Arabia: unless, therefore, the two names are entirely uncon-
nected, we must suppose probably that this was a large tribe, part of
which migrated to the E. coast of Africa, carrying its name with it.

Sabtah. Unknown, — unless, indeed, we may think of ^dpara
(Strabo xvi. 4. 2), or Sabota, in Sabaean nuc^, capital of the Chatra-
motitae (see on v. 26), which * had 60 temples, and was an emporium
of the trade in frankincense ' (Pliny, ^iV'. vi. § 155, xii. § 63).

Ba'mah. Mentioned with Sh6ba, in Ez. xxvii. 22, as a trading
people, who brought spices, precious stones, and gold, to Tyre. Very
probably the Sabaean Ra^mah^ the 'Pa/^/Aavtrat of Strabo xvi. 4. 24,
N. of the Chatramotitae (on v. 26), in Spruner c. 65° E., 17°30'N.

Sabtechah. Not identified.

Shebd. Most probably a northern offshoot, or colony, of the
S. Arabian Shgba mentioned in v. 28 (where see the note), which
on account of its being settled near Dedan (cf Ez. xxxviii. 13),
came to be grouped genealogically with it. In xxv. 3 (J), the, same
two tribes appear as ' sons ' of Abraham's concubine, Keturah.

Bedan. Mentioned (besides xxv. 3), — mostly as near either Edom
or T^ma (see on xxv. 15), some 250 miles SE. of Edom, — in Jer.
xxv. 23, xlix. 8 ; and, as a trading tribe, in Is. xxi. 13 (note Tema in
V. 14), Ez. xxvii. 20, xxxviii. 13. A district Dedan is mentioned several
times in the Sabaean and Minaean inscriptions, and a ruined site
Daiddn by the Arab, geographer Yakiit (see references in Dillm. ;
and add Hommel, AHT. 239 f.), both seemingly somewhere near
T^ma.

120 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. 8-ro

be a mighty one in the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter./
before the Lord : wherefore it is said, Like Nimrod a mighty
hunter before the Lord. 10 And the beginning of his king-
dom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the

8—12. A digression. Origin of the empires of Babylon, and
Assyria.

8. Gush. It is very strange that Ethiopia (v. 6) should be
mentioned as the home of Nimrod, and through him (vv. 10 — 12) of
the civilization of Babylonia and Assyria : and so nearly all recent
Assyriologists — as Friedr. Delitzsch {Paradies, 53 f.), Schrader (KA T^
87 f.), Haupt, Hommel, Winckler, Sayce (Monuments^ 128) — suppose
that 'Cush' in v. 8 denotes really not the African Cush, but the
Babylonian Kasshu, the Koo-oratot of the classical writers (Strabo xi.
13. 6, &c.), a predatory and warlike tribe, dwelling in the wild
mountains of the Zagros in or near Elam, and often mentioned in the
inscriptions, who were so influential in early times that they even
provided Babylon with a line of kings which continued in power for
576 years (b.c. 1786 — 1210, according to Prof. Sayce); and that the
identification of this *Cush' — or, as it would be better pronounced,
'Cash' — with the 'Cush* of vv. 6, 7 is due to a misunderstanding on the
part of the compiler of the chapter.

Nimrod. Mentioned only once again, Mic. v. 6 (the 'land of
Nimrod ' ; I| * Assyria '). See further p. 122 f.

a mighty one. To be understood, apparently, in connexion with
V. 10 : Nimrod's ' might ' shewed itself in his power of governing men
and organizing a kingdom.

9. A parenthesis, describing how Nimrod was also, in particular,
'mighty' as a hunter, and explaining a proverb which had reference
to this.

before Jehovah. I.e. as He looked upon him, and (it is implied)
had some regard for him. Cf. vii. 1, 2 K. v. 1; also Jon. iii. 3.

Like Nimrod. This is the proverb : the words following are the
narrator's explanation of its meaning. When the Hebrews wished to
describe a man as being a great hunter, they spoke of him as 'like
Nimrod.'

10. Babel. The Heb. form of the name which, following the
Greeks, we call Babylon. The origin of Babylon is shrouded in
obscurity ; but it must have been a place of great antiquity. The
date of the earliest king of Babylon known to us, Sumu-abi, the founder
of the first dynasty (p. 156 n. 1), was c. 2400 B.C. {EncB. i. 444 : 2478 B.O.,
Sayce) ; but there is little doubt that the city itself was older.

Erech. lxx. Op^x) the Babylonian Uruk, now the ruined site
called Warka^ on the left bank of the Euphrates, about 100 miles
SE. of Babylon ; the ruins, which shew remains of large and decorated
buildings, and are some 6 miles in circumference, shew that it must have
been an important place. It was a place of greater antiquity than even

X. 10, ii] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 121

land of Shinar. 11 Out of that land ^he went forth into J'
Assyria, and builded Nineveh, and Rehoboth-Ir, and Calah,

1 Or, went forth Asshur

Babylon is (at present) known to have been : Hilprecht has discovered
recently contemporary inscriptions shewing that Lugalzaggisi made
Erech the capital of Babylonia at (probably) about 4000 b.c.^

Accad. This has for long been well known as the name of a
district, ' the land of Akkad ' in the standing title of the Assyrian
kings ('king of Shumer and Akkad') denoting northern Babylonia;
but a decree of Nebuchadnezzar I. (c. 1150 B.C.) has recently been
found, in which it is mentioned also as the name of a city, though its
site is uncertain, and nothing further is at present known about it.

Calneh. Uncertain : though Delitzsch and Tiele think that it
may be the place usually called Zirlaba or Zarilaby mentioned by
Hammurabi (c. B.C. 2300), and also several times by Sargon (e.g.
KB. II. 53), the characters of which admit, however, of being read
ideographically as Kalunu. From the connexion in which Sargon
mentions Zirlaba, it seems to have been somewhere near Babylon.

Shin'dr, A Hebrew name for Babylonia, recurring xi. 2, xiv. 1, 9,
Jos. vii. 21, Is. xi. 11, Zech. v. 11, Dan. i. 2. The explanation of the
name is uncertain, as nothing exactly corresponding has been found
hitherto in the inscriptions. Some Ass3Tiologists regard it as a
dialectic variation of the Shumer, quoted above : Prof Sayce connects
with Sangar, a district a little W. of Nineveh.

11, 12. How Assyria was founded, or, as we might say, colonized,
from Babylonia.

Nineveh. The great capital of Assyria, beautified and made famous
by (especially) Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, and Asshurbanipal, on the
left bank of the Tigris, about 250 miles NW. of Babylon. The site of
the ruins is now called Kouyunjik. Nineveh, however, was not the
most ancient capital of Ass3T:ia. The original capital of Ass3rria was
the * city of Asshur ' (cf on ii. 14), about 60 miles S. of Nineveh :
Shalmaneser I. (b.c. 1300) transferred the royal residence from Asshur
to Calah ; but Nineveh is not known to have been made a royal
residence till B.C. 1100, and it was not the permanent capital till the
time of Sennacherib. The earliest ruler of Assyria known to us, it
may be added, is i\iQ patesi, or 'priest-king,' Ishmi-dagan, c. 1850 B.C.

Rehohoth-^Ir, To all appearance, simply two Heb. words meaning
' broad places [see on xix. 2J of a city ' : perhaps (Delitzsch, Paradies,
260 f; Hommel, Gesch. 280) the *r§bit Nina,' or suburbs of Nineveh
on the N. side, which Esarhaddon states that he entered on his
return from one of his expeditions {KB. ii. 127, 1. 54; cf. p. 47, 1. 44).

Calah. Shewn by inscriptions found on the spot to have lain in
the fork between the Tigris on the W. and the Upper Zab on the E.,
about 18 miles S. of Nineveh, under the mounds now bearing the name
of Nimrud. Calah was built, as Asshurnasirpal (b.c. 885 — 860) tells

1 Rogers, But. of Bah. and Ass. (1900), i. 354 f.; cf. EncB. i. 442 f. (§ 47J.

122 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. n

12 and Resen between Nineveh and Calah (the same is the J
great city).

us {KB. I. 117), by Shalmaneser I. (c. 1300 B.C. V Palaces were erected
here by Asshurnasirpal and many subsequent kings, from the ruins of
which numerous sculptures, bas-reliefs, inscriptions, &c., have been
recovered. Calah, even when it was not actually the capital, was, after
Nineveh, the ' second city of the empire.' The famous Black Obelisk,
which stands now in a conspicuous position in the British Museum,
and mentions the tribute of Jehu, was found at Calah, having been
erected there by Shalmaneser XL (860 — 825). Cf. Maspero, in. 44 — 50
(with illustrations).

12. Besen. Stated to have been 'between Nineveh and Calah' ; and
this is virtually all that is known about it : the ruins of Selamiyeh,
about 3 miles N. of Nimrtld, would suit the description ; but there
is no monumental evidence that this was the site. The Bi-ish-i-ni,
suggested by Prof. Sayce {Monuments, 152), does not seem to be in a
suitable position ; for, to judge from the terms in which it is mentioned
by Sennacherib {KB. ii. 117), it would seem to have been on the north
of Nineveh, and not, therefore, ' between ' Nineveh and Calah.

that (i.e. the four places just mentioned) is the great city. Mounds,
marking the sites of ancient buildings, and other signs of a once
abundant population, are numerous about Nineveh ; and it seems that
the four places here named, although in reality some miles apart, were
so connected with one another that they were reckoned, at least by
foreigners, as forming a single great city.

As the preceding notes will have shewn, the Babylonian and Assyrian
monuments illustrate, though not completely, the geographical data contained
in these five verses, but they throw very little light on the historical &i9iiQmQi\i%
contained in them, and indeed in details conflict with them seriously. The
two broad facts which the verses express, — viz. that Babylonia was the oldest
seat of civilization in the great plain of the two rivers, and that Nineveh was
(so to say) colonized from it, are indeed in harmony with what we learn from
the monuments : politically as well as in its whole civilization, writing, and
rehgion, Assyria in early times was dependent upon Babylonia. But these
verses of Genesis connect the foundation of Babylonian civilization and its
extension to Nineveh with a single man, Nimrod; and on Nimrod, the
monuments at present are silent. They do not even associate together, as the
text of Genesis does, the four Babylonian cities on the one hand, and the
four Assyrian cities on the other, or lead us to infer that all were built
approximately at the same time. Nimrod must have been to the Hebrews
(cf. Mic. V. 6) a figure — whether mythical or historical, we cannot say — with
whom were associated dim recollections of the foundation and extension of
political power in the East, and who, for some reason unknown to us, was
viewed as the representative of old Babylonian power.

As regards the question, who Nimrod was, two theories may be mentioned.
According to Haupt and Sayce, he is Nazi-muruda^h, one of the later
Kasshite kings (c. 1350 B.C.), who, it is conjectured, may have 'planted his

X. 13] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 123

power so firmly in Palestine as to be remembered in the proverbial lore of the
country.' This is possible only under the condition that the verses embody a
very confused and inaccurate recollection of the facts. For Nimrod is placed
at the beginning of Babylonian and Assyrian civilization ; but Nazi-murudash
lived long afterwards: Babylon and Nineveh had both been built centuries
before him, — the Kasshite dynasty alone had been established in Babylon for
some 300 years. The other theory (which was first propounded by the late
Mr George Smith) is that Nimrod corresponded, not, of course, in name, but
in personality and character, to Gilgamesh\ the champion of Erech, and hero
of the famous mythological epic, of which the Deluge-story occupies the
11 th canto. In this epic Gilgamesh is depicted as a mighty hunter who, besides
engaging in successful combat with lions, leopards, and other monsters, delivers
Babylonia by his prowess from the yoke of Elam, and saves Erech 2. And Erech
is just one of the cities of Nimrod's kingdom. Gilgamesh is not known at
present to have borne any name resembling Nimrod ; and so the last-mentioned
theory remains for the present a conjecture ; but it is an attractive and
probable one. It remains a difiiculty that Nimrod should be connected with
the Kasshu ; for both Babylon and Nineveh had been founded long before the
Kasshite dynasty was established in Babylon. Perhaps the name Nimrod
may have first reached Palestine at a time when the long-continued Kasshite
supremacy, as attested by the Tel el-Amarna letters, caused the Kasshu to be
regarded as synonymous with the Babylonians^

13 And Mizraim begat Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehabim, J

13, 14. The tribes 'begotten' by Mizraim, Ham's second 'son.'
The verses form evidently the sequel to v. 7.

Ludim. Elsewhere mostly in the sing. Lud, mentioned as archers in
the Egyptian or Tyrian army (Jer. xlvi. 9 ; Ez. xxvii. 10, xxx. 5), usually
by the side of Gush and Put {v. 6), and as a distant people (Is. Ixvi. 19).
Not identified; but doubtless a tribe bordering upon Egypt on the
West, and known to the Hebrews as mercenaries*.

'Anamim. Unidentified. W. Max Miiller {Orient. Litt.-zeit. 1902,
p. 471 if.) conjectures Kenamim, the inhabitants of the S. and largest
Oasis of Knmt (now el-Khargehy about 120 m. W. of Luxor).

Lehahim. No doubt the same as the Luhim of Nah. iii. 9 ; 2 Ch.
xii. 3, xvi. 8 ; Dan. xi. 43 ; and in all probability the Libyans, properly
so called, whose home would be to the W. of the Put of v. 6.

Naphtuhim. Uncertain. Erman {ZATW. 1890, p. 118 f.) con-
jectures a scribal error for Pathmuhim, the inhabitants of the ' north-
land ' (temhi), or the Delta : W. Max Miiller would read Pathnuhim, the
inhabitants of the Oasis of To-ehe, now Farafra,

1 The ideographically written name was read formerly as Izdubar or Gisdubar.

2 See Maspero, i. 573—591.

* See further an art. by the writer in the Guardian, May 20, 1896.

^ Sayce {Monuments ^ 134 f.) supposes the Ludim to be the Lydians (of Asia
Minor), who {KB. ii. 177) sent mercenaries to assist Psammetichus (c. 658 b.c).
But it does not appear that these were of sufficient importance to lead to the sup-
position that the Lydians were 'begotten' by Egypt (cf. Maspero, iii. 424 f., 492).

124 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. 13-16

and Naphtuhim, 14 and Pathrusim, and Casluhim (whence J"
went forth ^the Philistines), and Caphtorim.

15 And Canaan begat Zidon his firstborn, and Heth; 16 [and R

1 Heb. Pelishtim.

14. Pathrusim. The inhabitants of Pathros (Is. xi. 1 1 ; Jer. xliv.
1, 15; Ez. xxix. 14, xxx. 14), Egypt. Pa-to-ris, 'the south-land'
(^pa being the Bgyp^. art., to meaning 'land/ and ris 'south'), i.e. what
we call upper Egypt.

Casluhim. Unidentified : see doubtful conjectures in Dillm. Lxx.
Xa<TfioivL£Lfi, whence Miiller would read Nasamonim (Hdt. iv. 172).

{whence went forth the Philistines). This clause is in all probability
misplaced; and ought to be transposed so as to follow Caphtorim:
see Am. ix. 7 ; Dt. ii. 23 ; Jer. xlvii. 4.

the Philistines. Mentioned often in the historical books, their
five principal cities being Ekron, Gath, Ashdod, Asbkelon, and Gaza,
in the plain bordering on the Medit. Sea, W. of Judah. They are
very probably (W. M. Miiller, 887—390; Maspero, 11. 462 — 4; Sayce,
Monuments, 183, 387, and elsewhere) the Purasati of the Egyptian
inscriptions — to judge from the terms in which they are there spoken
of, a plundering people who, coming from the SW. of Asia Minor, and
the islands of the Aegean Sea, in the reign of Kamses III. (c. 1200 B.C.),
swept down upon the SW. of Palestine, and secured a footing there.
The Hebrews, as appears from Am. ix. 7, Dt. ii. 23, Jer. xlvii. 4 — if
not (see above) from the present passage as well — regarded them specifi-
cally as immigrants from ' Caphtor.' See further EncB. s.v.

Caphtorim. The inhabitants of Caphtor (Jer. xlvii. 4), mentioned
also Am. ix. 7 ; Dt. ii. 23. Caphtor is usually identified with Crete ;
notice how in 1 S. xxx. 14, Zeph. ii. 5, Ez. xxv. 16 the Philistines are
either parallel to, or mentioned beside, Krethim (i.e., as it would seem,
'Cretans'). W. Max Miiller, however {Asimi u. Ewropa, 344 — 53),
argues strongly in favour of identifying Caphtor with the Egypt. Kefto,
which appears to have been the name of a people inhabiting Cilicia and
Cyprus (cf. Caphtor in the EncB., where another explanation of Krethim
is also proposed). Whatever place ' Caphtor ' may have been, political
relations, subsisting anciently between it and Eg3rpt, no doubt determined
the statement that Mizraim ' begat ' Caphtor.

15 — 19. The places, or peoples, 'begotten' by Canaan, the
eponymous ancestor (p. 118), both of the Phoenicians, and of the
Canaanites (in the sense in which this term is commonly understood).

15. Zidon. The oldest Phoen. city; hence called here Canaan's
'firstborn.' It was afterwards eclipsed by Tyre ; but the Phoenicians
generally, as if in recollection of its old pre-eminence, continued
still to be often spoken of as 'Zidonians' (1 Ki. v. 6, xvi. 31). Tyre,
however, is mentioned, as well as Zidon, in the Tel el-Amarna letters
(B.C. 1400). See further the interesting art. Phoenicia in EncB.

Heth. The great nation of the Hittites, whose home was in the
region N. of Phoenicia, and of the 'land of the Amorites' (see on v. 16),

X. i6, 17] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 125

the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite ; 17 and the R

two of whose principal cities were Carchemish on the Euphrates, and
Kadesh on the Orontes, and who left traces of their presence, in
sculptures and inscriptions carved upon the rocks, in many parts of
Asia Minor, as far W. as the Karaoel pass, a little E. of Smyrna.
The Hittites are mentioned repeatedly in the Egyptian and Assyrian
inscriptions; and their power and importance may be inferred from
the terms of the treaty — the oldest treaty in existence — concluded with
them by Ramses IL, after his expedition into Syria (see Masp. 11. 401 f.).
The Hittite power lasted from c. 1600 to c. 700 B.C., when they were
absorbed into the empire of Assyria. The Hittites, as depicted on
their monuments, have a striking physiognomy and dress : a retreating
forehead and chin, full lips, large nose, high cheek-bones, and the hair
plaited behind in three pig-tails, the type being that of the Mongol,
very unlike either the Semitic or the Aryan type^ The Hittite
inscriptions (still undeciphered) are also pecuHar in appearance, and
entirely different from those of either Assyria or Egypt. These Hittites
on the N". of Palestine are alluded to in 1 K. x. 29, xi. 1, 2 K. vii. 6 ;
and offshoots of them appear to have had settlements in the extreme
N. of Canaan (Jud. i. 26, iii. 3 [read Hittite for Hivite]; Josh. xi. 3
mterchange, with lxx., Hittite and Hivite]; and probably 2 S. xxiv. 6
see Comm., or the Variorum Bible]) : there are also allusions to them,
which occasion difficulty, as settled in the S. of Canaan (see on
ch. xxiii.). We cannot be sure whether the reference here is to the
great nation in the N., or to the offshoots in the N. of Canaan — the sub-
ordination of * Heth ' to * Canaan ' might favour the latter alternative.

16, 17*. Four nations of Canaan.

16. the Jebusite. The name of the tribe which occupied Jerusalem,
and maintained itself there till expelled by David (Josh. xv. 8, 63;
2 S. V. 6—9).

the Amorite. The name (under the forms Amctr, Amurru) occurs
in both the Egypt, and the Ass. inscriptions. In the Tel el-Amama
letters (b.c. 1400), the * land of Amurri ' is mentioned by the side of
various Phoen. and Syrian towns in such a manner as to shew that it
is simply the name of a canton or district, N. of Canaan, behind
Phoenicia. It was at this time (like the rest of Phoen. and Palestine)
under Egyptian rule ; and its governor Aziri addresses many letters to
Amenophis''. Afterwards, the Amorites appear to have extended them-
selves southwards ; and in the OT. the term is used in two connexions :
(1) Nu. xxi. 13, and often, of the people ruled by Sihon, on the E. of
Jordan; (2) as a general designation of the pre-Israelitish population
of the country W. of Jordan (so esp. in E and Dt. ; but occasionally
also besides: see e.g. ch. xiv. 7, xv. 16, xlviii. 22; Dt. i. 7; Jos. x. 5;
1 S. vii. 14 ; Am. ii. 9, 10 ; and cf. the writer's Deuteronomy, p. 11 f.). So

1 See, for fuller particulars, Wright's Empire of the Hittites (with numerous
illustrations) ; Maspero, ii. 351 — 9 ; Ball, 95 — 98 ; and Hittites in EncB. and I)B.

2 See Petrie, Syria and Egypt from the Tell el Amarna letters (1898), pp. 136 f.,
140 f. ; and cf. Canaanixi: (§§ 7—11) in the EncB.

126 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. 17, 18

Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite ; 18 and the Arvadite, R
and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite :] and afterward were the J

far as we can judge, this population consisted in the main (for there
were no doubt smaller local tribes as well) partly of 'Amorites,'
and partly of ' Canaanites ' (see on v. 18) ; and some writers used the
one, and some the other (cf on xii. 6), as a general designation of the
pre-Israelitish inhabitants of Palestine ^

the Girgashite. A tribe mentioned also five times (ch. xv. 21;
Dt. vii. 1 ; Josh. iii. 10, xxiv. 11 ; Neh. ix. 8) in the lists of the peoples
dispossessed by the Israelites (see on xv. 19 — 21); but without any
indication of the locality in which it dwelt.

17^. the Hivite. A petty people mentioned likewise often in the
same lists (Ex. iii. 8, 17, &c.); but also appearing in particular in
Shechem (ch. xxxiv. 2) and Gibeon (Josh. ix. 7, 2d. 19), and hence
probably settled in central Palestine.

17**, 18. The inhabitants of five cities — four in northern Phoenicia,
and one (ffimath) N. of that.

17^ the Arkite. "ApKyj, now Tel Arka, about 80 miles N. of Zidon,
at the foot of Lebanon, still an important city in the Roman period, the
birthplace of Alexander Severus (a.d. 222 — 235). Both Arka, and the
following Sin and Zemar, are mentioned together by Tiglath-pileser III.
{KB. II. 29, 1. 46) as cities on the sea-coast.

the Sinite. 'Jerome (Quaest. in Gen.^ ad loc.) states that Sin, as
the name of a once prosperous city, still attached to a site near Arka ;
and Breydenbach, in 1483, found a village of Syn about 2 miles from
Nahr Arka ' (Dillm.). Ass. Siannu {KB. I.e.).

18*. the Arvadite. Arvad (now Buad), about 25 miles N. of Arka,
was the most northerly of the great Phoen. towns ; it was built on an
island (' in the midst of the sea,' KB. i. 1 09), and was always famous
as a maritime state : Tiglath-pileser 1. {c. 1100 B.C.), for instance,
embarked on ships of Arvad upon the Great Sea ; see also Ez. xxvii. 8,
11 ; Hdt. VII. 98, and Strabo xvi. 2. 12—14. It is mentioned in the
Tel el-Amarna letters; and also frequently by the Ass. kings. See
further EncB. s.v. ; and a plan, shewing the island, in Masp. 11. 170.

the Zemarite. The city or fortress of ^t/xvpa, St/x^pos (Strabo xvi.
2. 12, &c.), 6 miles S. of Arvad; the name is still preserved in a village
Sumra (Bad. Pal.^ 442). This place is mentioned very frequently in
the Tel el-Amarna letters; see Petrie, 157, 183, s.v. Tsumura, Tsumur.

the Hamathite. Hdmdth, on the Orontes, 50 miles ENE. of Arvad,
the later Epiphaneia, now Hamd^ often mentioned both in the OT.,
and also in the Egypt, and Ass. inscriptions: in ancient times, the
capital of an independent kingdom (cf Is. xxxvii. 13; its 'kings' are
also mentioned in the Ass. inscriptions), and still a large place of

1 It may be noticed that ' Amorite ' is a racial name (i.e. it denotes a race or
people so called), while *Canaanite' is a geographical name (i.e. it denotes the
people inhabiting the country called 'Canaan').

X. i8-2i] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 127

families of the Canaanite spread abroad. 19 And the border of J'
the Canaanite was from Zidon, as thou goest toward Gerar, unto
Gaza ; as thou goest toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah
and Zeboiim, unto Lasha. | 20 These are the sons of Ham, after P
their families, after their tongues, in their lands, in their
nations.

21 And unto Shem, the father of all the children of Eber, J

30,000 inhabitants. The * entering-in of Hamath ' is often mentioned
(e.g. Am. vi. 14) as the ideal N. limit of Isr. territory, though the
exact place denoted by the expression is uncertain {DB. iv. 269 f )\

18^. The families of the ' Canaanite' — here and v. 19 used evidently
in its narrower and more usual sense, exclusive of the Phoenicians —
increased, and gradually extended themselves over what is now generally
known as ' Canaan ' ; and -y. 19 defines their S. limits.

19. The two limits of the Canaanites in the S. are Gaza in the
SW., in the direction of Gerar, and Lesha'" in the SE., in the direction
of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim. Gerar was some distance
SE. of Gaza : on its probable actual site, see on xx. 1. Lesha' is not
mentioned elsewhere : according to the Targ. Ps.-Jon. and Jerome, it
was the later Callirrhoe, a celebrated bathing resort, with hot springs
(Jos. BJ. I. 33. 5), on the E. side of the Dead Sea, near the mouth
of the Wady Zerka Ma'in. Sodom and Gomorrah were in all proba-
bility at the S. end of the Dead Sea (see p. 170 f.). Admah and
Zeboiim, destroyed at the same time as Sodom and Gomorrah, are
mentioned also in ch. xiv. 2, 8, Dt. xxix. 23, Hos. xi. 8.

21—31. The sons of Shem. The double introduction {vv. 21, 22)
is a clear indication of the double origin of this section of the chapter :
V. 22 is the introduction to the list of the sons of Shem, exactly
analogous in form to vv. 2, 6; and v. 21 is out of place before it.
Verses 22, 23 belong to P; v. 21 (analogous in form to iv. 26) belongs
to J.

21. all the children of ^Eber. The expression includes, of course,
all the Arabian tribes mentioned vv. 25 — 30, as well as (see xi. 16 — 26)
the descendants of Abraham, i.e. the Israelites, Ishmaelites, Midianites
(xxv. 2), and Edomites; but no doubt the writer has his own nation
chiefly in view, and the words are intended to bring out the significance
of Shem as the ancestor of the ^ebrews,' the people who possessed the
knowledge of the true God. 'Eber is simply the supposed eponymous
ancestor of the Hebrews, the first letter in the original being the same
in both words : see further on xi. 14.

1 It is probable that vv. 16 — 18^ (to Hamathite) are an addition to the original
text of J, inserted by one who thought the list of names imperfect : notice (1) that
V. 16 anticipates v. IS*'; (2) that the five peoples named in vv. 17^ — 18* dwelt
North of Sidon, and are consequently not included in the terms of v. 19; and
(3) that and afterward in v. 18 connects better with v. 15 end than with vv. 16 — 18*.

2 Lasha* is the * pausal ' form : the name itself would be L^sha',

128 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. 21, «

Hhe elder brother of Japheth, to him also were children bom. J
I 22 The sons of Shem ; Elam, and Asshur, and Arpachshad, and P

1 Or, ihe brother of Japheth the elder

the elder brother of Japheth, The words are added in order to
preclude the idea that, because named last, Shem was therefore the
youngest.

22. Elam. A land and people E. of Babylonia, and NE. of the
Persian Gulf, of which the capital was Susa (Heb. Shushan), on the
Eulaeus : in Ass. Mama, Mamma, or (with the fern, term.) Elamtu.
This people early developed a flourishing and many-sided civihzation ;
in about the 23rd cent. B.C. it exercised for many years (see p. 156f ) a
suzerainty over Babylonia ; and in later times it is mentioned repeatedly
both in the Ass. inscriptions and in the OT. (ch. xiv. 1; Is. xi._ 11,
xxi. 2, xxii. 6 ; Ez. xxxu. 24, al). Racially, the Elamites were entirely
distinct from the Semites, their language, for instance, being aggluti-
native and belonging to a different family : their geographical proximity
to Assyria is in all probability the reason why they are here included
among the ' sons ' of Shem. It is true, inscriptions recently discovered
seem to have shewn that in very early times Elam was peopled by
Semites, who were dependent upon Babylonia, and governed by
Babylonian patesi's; and that the non-Semitic Elamites spoken of
above only acquired mastery over it at a period approaching B.c. 2300 ^
but the fact is not one which the writer of the verse is very hkely
to have known.

Asshur. The great nation of the Assyrians (in Heb. Asshur) : see
on V. 11. The Assyrians were a Semitic people, their language belong-
ing obviously to the same family as Hebrew, Phoenician, Aramaic,
Arabic, and Ethiopic.

Arpachshad. A name still not satisfactorily explained. It is very
commonly understood of 'AppaTraxtrts (Ptol. vi. 1. 2), a mountainous

district on the Upper Zab, N. of Nineveh (about 37° 30' N.), in the

" y \), now Albdk; but

explanation leaves the -shad unexplained. It is, on the whole, more

Ass. inscriptions AiTapha {Paradies, 124 f ), now Albdk', but this

probable that the name is intended as that of the supposed ancestor of
the Kasdim (EVV. * Chaldaeans '), the people who, living originally in
the * sea-land,' on the lower course of the Euphrates, spread afterwards
inland, and in the 7 — 6 cent. B.C. became the ruling caste in Babylonia
(see more fully on xi. 31). Prof Sayce {Exp. Times, Nov. 1901, p. 65 f )
interprets the word as meaning ' the wall'^ of Chesed,' supposing it to
denote properly the fortified district within which the Kasdim dwelt
(cf on xxii. 22). See further v. 24, and xi. 10 — 13.

1 See Scheil, Textes Elamites-Semitiques (1900), pp. ix. — xii. ; or the account of
M. de Morgan's excavations in 1897 — 1899, by St Chad Boscawen, in the Asiatic
Quarterly Review, Oct. 1901, p. 330 ff., esp. p. 338; and cf. Sayce, Exp. Time$t
Jan. 1901, p. 155 f.

2 Eth. arfat is a 'wall'; and the Ass. kar, 'wall,' is in a recently published
lexicographical tablet explained by arpu.

X. «, .3] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 129

Lud, and Aram. 23 And the sons of Aram ; Uz, and Hiil, and P

Lud must, it seems, be the Lydians of Asia Minor, of whom
Herodotus (i. 6 — 94) has much to say, and who first emerge into
history c. 740 B.C. (Maspero, in. 336 — 341); though why they should
be mentioned between Arpachshad and Aram, or, indeed, reckoned to
Shem at all, is by no means apparent. Hdt., however (i. 7), mentions
a legend connecting the ancestors of the Mermnadae with ' Ninus, son
of Belus ' ; and it is possible that the civilization of Lydia may, in ways
not at present capable of being more precisely determined, have been
related to that of Ass)rria ; and that this fact may be the explanation
of the appearance of the name here\

Aram. The great Aramaean, or Syrian ^ people, spread widely
over the region NE. of Palestine, as far as Mesopotamia — special
branches being designated by special names, as 'Aram of the Two
Rivers,' 'Aram of Damascus,' 'Aram of Zobah' (ch. xxiv. 10; 2 S. viii.
5, X. 6). The most important and powerful of the Aramaean (Syrian)
kingdoms in OT. times was that of Damascus, of which we read so
often during the period of the Kings. From the 8th cent. b.c., if not
from an eariier date, Aramaean influence extended itself considerably
in different directions : weights with their value stamped upon them
in Aramaic shew that it was used as the language of commerce in
Nineveh; Is. xxxvi. 11 shews that in B.C. 701 it was also the language
of diplomacy: inscriptions, in different Aramaic dialects, found at
Zinjirli, near Aleppo (of the age of Isaiah), in Egypt (c. 480 B.C., and
later), and of somewhat later dates at Palmyra, Tema (see on xxv. 15),
and El- 'Ola (the Nabataean inscriptions of NW. Arabia) testify to the
wide diffusion of Aramaic around Palestine; after the Exile, the Jews
gradually acquired the use of Aramaic from their neighbours, so that
parts of Ezra and Daniel are actually written in an Aramaic dialect,
while other books belonging to the same period (as Jonah, Chronicles,
Esther, the Pleb. parts of Daniel, Ecclesiastes, and late Psalms) shew
the clearest indications of its influence.

23. Four branches of Aram are here specified, which were, pre-
sumably, of some note at the time when the genealogy was drawn up,
though now three out of the four are virtually unknown.

* Uz. Best known as the people of Job's fatherland (Job i. 1) ; as
may be inferred from Lam. iv. 21, also, settled not very far from Edom.
Jer. xxv. 20 (MT.) mentions kings of the land of 'Uz: see also Gen.
xxii. 21, xxxvi. 28. Hul and Gether are both unknown. Mash is
perhaps connected with the Mons Masius, ro MaVtov 6po<s (Strabo xi.
14. 2), N. of Nisibis, a range which separates Armenia from Mesopotamia
(Paradies, 259). In Ass. mat Mash, the ' land of Mash,' is the name
of the great Syro-Arabian desert, ' a land of thirst and faintness, where

1 Sayce {Mon. 146, cf. 95, 105) would read Nod (cf. iv. 16) for Lud, supposing
•Nod' to represent the Manda, or nomad tribes (cf. on xiv. 1), of the Inscriptions

; The identification of Nod with Manda is, however, itself anything but probable.

2 Syria, Syrian^ in the OT. is in the Heb. always 'Aram, 'Arammi (Aramaean).

D. 9

130 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. .3-^9

Getlier, and Mash. | 24 And Arpachahad ^ begat Shelah ; and P
Shelah begat Eber. 25 And unto Eber were born two sons :
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
begat 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 :

^ The Sept. reads, hegat Cainan, and Gainan begat Shelah. * That is, Division.
s In 1 Chr. i. 22, Ebal.

no beast of the field is, and no bird builds its nest,' as Asshurbanipal
describes it {ibid. 242 ; KB. ii. 221); but it is hazardous, with Sayce
{Exp. Times, Mar. 1897, p. 258), to derive the name of a people from this.
24 — 30. The compiler here resumes his excerpts from J.

24. With RVm. of. Luke iii. SQ.

25. divided. The word is susceptible of different interpretations;
but it seems most likely that 'earth' is meant in the sense of population
of the earth {d. xi. 1); and that the 'division' referred to is the
dispersion of ix. 19, x. 32, xi. 9. Cf. the same Heb. word in Ps. Iv. 9>
Palgu is however in Ass. a 'canal' (cf. peleg, 'water-course,' in Ps.
i. 3); and hence Sayce {I.e.) supposes the reference to be to the
* division' of Babylonia into canals under Hammurabi (p. 156 w.).

26 — 30. Thirteen tribes descended from Yoktan. Several of these
cannot be identified, at least with any certainty ; l3ut it is clear that in
general tribes dwelling in different parts of Arabia are meant.

26. Almodad. Uncertain : see DB.

Sheleph. Perhaps one of the many places of the name Salf which
(according to Glaser, p. 425) still exist in the S. of Arabia between
Yemen and Hadramaut\

Hazarmaveth. Mentioned in the Sabaean inscriptions, now Hadra-
maut, a district in S. Arabia, a little E. of Aden : the Xarpa^awTtrat of
Strabo (xvi. 4. 2), one of the four chief tribes which, according to the
Greek geographer, inhabited S. Arabia.

Yerah, and {v. 27) Hadoram and Diklah, are all unidentified.

27. tizal. According to Arab tradition (see CIS. iv. i. p. 2), the
old name of San'^ (as it has been called, since its occupation by the
Abyssinians in the 6th cent. a.d.), the capital of Yemen. Ez. xxvii. 19
(RVm.) speaks of iron being brought from Uzal; and the steel of San'^
is said to be still in high repute {DB. i. 135).

28. ^Ohal. ^Abil is said to be at the present day the name of a
district and of several locahties in Yemen.

Abimael, Not identified: the name is however one of genuine
Sabaean type.

Shebd. This is seemingly the main body, a colony or offshoot
of which in the N. is named in v. 7. Sheba is often mentioned in the

1 SaXttTT^Poi in Ptol. vi. 7. 23 seems to be a textual error for KaXaTr^jj/oi.

X. 29, 3o] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 131

all these were the sons of Joktan. 30 And their dwelling was J
from Mesha, as thou goest toward Sephar, the ^mountain of the

1 Or, Mil country

OT. as a distant and wealthy people, famed for its gold, precious
stones, and perfumes, esp. frankincense (see on v. 30), which were
exported to Palestine, Phoenicia, and other countries (1 K. x. 1, 2, 10 ;
Jer. vi. 20^; Ez. xxvii. 22, xxxviii. 13; Is. Ix. 6; Ps. Ixxii. 10; cf. Job
vi. 19, and the description in Strabo xvi. 4. 19). The ancient
geographers state that the Sabaeans dwelt in the SW. of Arabia, and
that their capital was Mariaba or Saba (about 200 miles N. of the
modern Aden). Sabaean inscriptions have been discovered recently in
great numbers ; and they shew that the Sabaeans were a settled and
civilized nation, possessing an organized government, with cities,
temples, public buildings, &c. {see pB. i. 133 f., and s.v. Sheba).

29. Ophir, A land from which, in Solomon's time, the fleet of
Hiram and Solomon brought once in three years gold, precious stones,
sandal-wood (probably), silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks (1 K. ix. 28,
X. 11, 22^; cf. xxii. 48), and the gold of which is in the OT. proverbial
for its fineness (Ps. xlv. 9 ; Is. xiii. 12, al.). Much has been written
upon Ophir, and many attempts have been made to identify it (see DB.
or EncB. s.v.) : but nothing more definite can be stated about it than
that it was perhaps Ahhira at the mouth of the Indus, perhaps some
sea-port on the E. or SE. coast of Arabia, which served as an emporium
for the products of India ^ but of which the name has now dis-
appeared ^

Havildh. In all probability, different from the Havilah of v. 7,
but the same as the Havilah of ii. 11, and xxv. 18, the terms of which
imply that it was in the opposite direction to Shur ' in front of Egypt,'
i.e. in NE. Arabia. Di. compares the XavXaratot of Strabo (xvi. 4. 2),
and a place Huwaila in Bahrein, on the Persian Gulf.

30. The limits, from N. to S., of the country occupied by the
Joktanidae.

Mesha. Very probably (Di.), with only a change of points, to be
read as Massa (xxv. 14), the name of a N. Arabian tribe, about halfway
between the Gulf of 'Akaba and the Persian Gulf

1 Comp. Aen. i. 416 ceutumque Sahaeo Ture calent arae; G. ii. 117 Solis est
turea virga Sabaeis (both already quoted by Jerome).

2 1 K. ix. 28, X. 11 make it probable that Ophir, though not actually named,
was the destination of the *navy of Tarshish,' — i.e. (cf. our 'East Indiaman') a
fleet of large merchant-vessels, fit for long voyages, — mentioned in this verse.

3 The Heb. words for ' apes ' and ' peacocks ' are not Semitic, but Indian.

* Ophir might, in the abstract, be either the Arabian coast of the Persian Gulf,
or Dhofar (see p. 132, on v. 30) ; but the positive arguments adduced by Glaser
{Skizze der Gesch. u. Geogr. Arab, ii., 1890, pp. 353 f., 357 f., 368—73, 377 f.,
380 — 3) in favour of the former view, and by Prof. A. H. Keane {The Gold of Ophir,
1901, pp. 75 ff., 194 — 6) in favour of the latter view, are anything but conclusive.
On Carl Peters' identification with the region between the Zambesi and the Sabi
(in which there were anciently extensive gold-workings), see the Addenda.

9—2

132 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [x. 30-3^

east. I 31 These are the sons of Shem, after their families, after J
their tongues, in their lands, after their nations.

32 These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their
generations, in their nations : and of these were the nations
divided in the earth after the flood.

Sephdr. Probably (though the sibilant does not correspond as it
ought to do) Daphdr (or Dhofdr), a town and plain on the S. coast of
Arabia (54° E.)', situated beneath a lofty mountain, and well adapted
to form a landmark (DB. s.v.).

unto the mountain (or hill country) of the east. Probably the great
frankincense mountains, which extend some distance beyond Daphar
towards the East^ Cf. EncB. iv. 4370, 5148.

31, 32. Subscriptions, in P's manner, to vv. 22 — 30 (cf. vv. 5, 20),
and to the whole chapter, respectively.

Chapter XL 1—9.
The Tower of Babel,

As in previous sections of J, the origin of various existing customs and
institutions is explained, so here the explanation is given of the diversity of
languages, and of the distribution of mankind into peoples speaking different
languages and inhabiting different parts of the earth. Almost as soon as men
began to reflect, differences of language must have impressed them as something
caUing for explanation : not only were they remarkable in themselves, but they
also formed a great barrier to free intercourse, and accentuated national
interests and antagonisms (cf the dread and aversion expressed for men
speaking an unintelligible language, in Is. xxviii. 11, xxxiii. 19; Dt. xxviii. 49;
Jer. V. 15; Ps. cxiv. 1)^. 'The story of the Tower of Babel supplied to such
primitive questionings an answer suited to the comprehension of a primitive
time... Just as Greek fable told of the giants who strove to scale Olympus, so
Semitic legend told of the impious act by which the sons of men sought to raise
themselves to the dwelling-place of God, and erect an enduring symbol of
human unity to be seen from every side' (Ryle, pp. 128, 131), and how Jehovah
interposed to frustrate their purpose, and brought upon them the very dispersal
which they had sought to avoid.

From a critical point of view the narrative presents difficulties : for, though
it belongs manifestly to J, it is not easy to harmonize with other representations

1 The SaTT^apa of Ptol., and Sapphar of Pliny (see Spruner's Atlas).

2 Bent, Southern Arabia (1900), pp. 89, 91, 234 f., 241 f., 245, 252—4, 270 f.

3 And contrast the pictures drawn by the prophets, of the future harmony of
nations, in the fear and worship of the One God, Is. ii. 2—4, xix. 18, 23 — 25,
Zeph. iii. 9; and the thought of the universality of Christianity, as expressed
symbolically in Acts ii. 5 — 11.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS 133

of the same source. It seems to be out of connexion with the parts of J in
ch. x.^ : for there the dispersion of mankind appears as the result of a natural
process of migration, here it is the penalty for misdirected ambition; and
Babel (Babylon), the building of which is here interrupted, is in x. 10
represented as already built. It connects also very imperfectly with the close
of J's narrative of the Flood ; for though the incident which it describes is
placed shortly after the Flood, the men who gather together and build the
city seem to be considerably more numerous (cf. the terms of v. 1) than the
members of the single family of Noah. In all probability (Dillm.) the story
originally grew up without reference to the Flood, or the derivation of mankind
from the three sons of Noah, and it has been imperfectly accommodated to the
narratives in chs. ix. and x. : perhaps, indeed, Wellh. and others are right in
conjecturing that originally it belonged to the same cycle of tradition as
iv. 17 — 24, in which (see p. 74) the continuity of human history seems not to
have been interrupted by a Flood, and that it formed part of the sequel to
iv. 24.

That the narrative can contain no scientific or historically true account of
the origin of different languages, is apparent from many indications. In the
first place, if it is in its right position, it can be demonstrated to rest upon
unhistorical assumptions: for the Biblical date of the Flood (see the Introd. § 2)
is B.C. 2501, or (lxx.) b.c. 3066 ; and, so far from the whole earth being at either
B.O. 2501 or B.C. 3066 ' of one language and of one (set of) words,' numerous
inscriptions are in existence dating considerably earlier even than B.C. 3066,
written in three distinct languages, the pre-Semitic Sumerian (or ' Accadian '),
the Semitic Babylonian, and Egyptian. But even if Wellh.'s supposition that
the narrative relates really to an earlier stage of the history of mankind, be
accepted, it would be not less difficult to regard it as historical. For (1) the
narrative, while explaining ostensibly the diversity of languages, offers no
explanation of the diversity of races. And yet diversity of language, —
meaning here by the expression not the relatively subordinate differences
which are always characteristic of languages developed from a common
parent-tongue, but those more radical differences relating alike to grammar,
structure, and roots, which shew that the languages exhibiting them cannot be
referred to a common origin, — is dependent upon diversity of race. It is of
course true that cases occur in which a people brought into contact with a
people of another race have adopted their language ; but, speaking generally,
radically different languages are characteristic of different races, or (if this
word be used in its widest sense) of subdivisions of races, or sub-races, which,
in virtue of the faculty of creating language distinctive of man, have created
them for purposes of intercommunication and to satisfy their social in-
stincts^. Differences of race, in other words, are more primary in man than

1 In the parts of oh. x. ■which belong to P, distinct languages, as well as distinct
nations, are already spoken of {vv. 5, 20, 31). No doubt their existence is also
implied in J ; but it is not expressly affirmed.

2 'The idioms of mankind have had many independent starting-points' (Sayce,
Introd. to the Science of Lang., 1880, ii. 328). The number of separate families of
speech, now existing in the world, which cannot be connected with one another,
approaches 100 : see ibid. ii. 32 — 64.

134 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xi. h ^

differences of language\ and have first to be accounted for. (2) Not only,
however, are differences of race left entirely unexplained in the Biblical
narrative; but (comp. above, p. 114) the great races into which mankind is
divided must have migrated into their present homes, and had their existing
character stamped upon them, at an age vastly earlier than that which the
chronology of Genesis permits, — even upon Wellh.'s view of the original place
of xi. 1 — 9, — for the dispersion of mankind. The antiquity of man^ and the
wide distribution of man, with strongly marked racial differ ences^^xe two great
outstanding facts, which the Biblical narrative, — whether here or elsewhere in
Genesis, — not only fails to account for, but does not even leave room for 2.

The narrative thus contains simply the answer which Hebrew folk-lore
gave to the question which differences of language directly suggested. In
reality differences of language are the result, not the cause, of the diffusion of
mankind over the globe. At the same time, the explanation is so worded as
to convey, like the other early narratives of Genesis, spiritual lessons. Though
the conception of Deity is naive, and even, perhaps {v. 7), imperfectly disengaged
from polytheism, the narrative nevertheless emphasizes Jehovah's supremacy
over the world ; it teaches how the self-exaltation of man is checked by God ;
and it shews how the distribution of mankind into nations, and diversity of
language, are elements in His providential plan for the development and
progress of humanity.

The Fathers and many subsequent scholars, including some even in the
last century, believed Hebrew to be the primitive language of mankind. The
rise of a science of comparative philology has shewn this to be completely out
of the question 3, if only because, when compared with the other Semitic
languages, Hebrew exhibits elements of decay, and Arabic is, in many respects,
an older and more primitive language. But, unless all analogy is deceptive,
the language of the primitive men must have been of a far more simple,
undeveloped form than any of the existing Semitic languages*. As need
hardly be remarked, what the primitive language of mankind was, is unknown.

XI. 1 And the whole earth was of one ^language and J
of one ^speech. 2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed

1 Heb. Up. 2 Heb. words.

XI. 1. was of one language, and of one (set of) words. I.e.

had one language (viewed as a whole), and used the same individual
expressions. For the idiom, use of lip (KVm.), of. w. 6, 7 (twice), 9,
Is. xix. 18, xxxiii. 19 (Heb.). On the statement itself, see above.

2. The writer pictures these early men as moving nomadically
(cf. the note on xii. 9) from spot to spot, till at last they found a plain
on which they settled.

1 Cf. Sayce, Races of the OT. p. 37 f.: 'Diversity of race is older than diversity
of language.'

2 See further the Introduction, pp. xxxi — xUi.

3 Comp. Max Miiller, Lectures on the Science of Lang., 1st series, Lect. iv. (ed.
1864, p. 132 ff.).

4 Comp. A. H. Keane, Ethnology (1901), pp. 197, 198, 206 f.

XL 2-5] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 135

^east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar ; and they J
dwelt there. 3 And they said one to another, Go to, let us
make brick, and bum them throughly. And they had brick for
stone, and ^ slime had they for mortar. 4 And they said. Go to,
let us build us a city, and a tower, whose top may reach
imto heaven, and let us make us a name ; lest we be scattered
abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 5 And the Lokd

1 Or, in the east ^ That is, bitumen.

eastwards (xiii. 11), or (RVm.) in the east. _ Viz. of Palestine
(cf. ii. 8). The expression is a vague one ; and it is idle to speculate,
especially in view of the uncertainty, mentioned above, as to the
original context of the narrative, whence the writer may have sup-
posed mankind to have started.

a plain. The /^eya TreSCov, in which, according to Hdt. (i. 178),
Babylon lay.

Shin'dr. I.e. Babylonia; see on x. 10.

3. In Palestine stone was abundant, and used for all buildings
of any pretensions; in Babylonia it was unknown, and brick (as the
excavations abundantly shew) was the regular building-material, burnt
bricks, cemented together by bitumen, being generally used for the
outer parts of a building, and sun-dried bricks, laid in coarse clay,
for the interior. See more fully Rawlinson, Anc. Monarchies^, i. 71 —
74 ; and, for an illustration of an ancient brick house at Ur, Maspero,
I. 746 \ The verse was evidently written by one to whom great build-
ings constructed with brick and bitumen were unfamiliar.

slime. Bitumen (lxx. dcr(/)aXTos) ; Heb. hemdr (xiv. 10 ; Ex. ii. 3t),
apparently the genuine native word for the foreign kopher in vi. 14.

4. a tower (with) its top in heaven. The expression is probably
meant here, not hyperbolically (Dt. i. 28), but literally, 'heaven'
(cf on i. 6) being regarded as an actual vault, which might be reached
(cf Is. xiv. 13 f), at least by a bold effort. The coincidence may be
accidental ; but it may be worth mentioning that the Bab. and Ass.
kings pride themselves upon the height of their temples, and boast
of having made their tops as high as heaven (Jastrow, Religion of
Bah. and Ass. p. 613, citing KB. i. 43, 1. 102 f , iii. 2, p. 5, 1. 38 of
Col. I.: cf EncB.i. 4.11, n. 3).

make us a iiame. Make ourselves famous, and secure our names
against oblivion. The expression, as Is. Ixiii. 12, 14; Jer. xxxii. 20, a/, j
for the motive, comp. 2 S. xviii. 18 ; Is. Ivi. 5.

lest &c. The city, and its famous tower, were to form a centre and
rallying-point, which would hold mankind together.

1 The bitumen was obtained anciently from the springs at Hit, on the
Euphrates, about 150 miles above Babylon, where it is still abundant (Hdt. i. 179,
with Rawl.'s note: Layard, Nineveh and its remains^ ii. 46 f., describes also the
springs near Kal'at Sherkat [above, on ii. 14], on the Tigris). Cf. on vi. 14.

136 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xi. 5-9

came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of «7
men builded. 6 And the Lord said, Behold, they are one
people, and they have all one language ; and this is what they
begin to do : and now nothing will be withholden from them,
which they purpose to do. 7 Go to, let us go down, and there
confound their language, that they may not understand one
another's speech. 8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from
thence upon the face of all the earth : and they left off to build
the city. 9 Therefore was the name of it called Babel ; because
the Lord did there ^confound the language of all the earth :
and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the
face of all the earth.

^ Heb. balal, to confound.

5. came down. Gf. v. 7 ; Ex. iii. 8.

to see &c. For the anthropomorphism, cf. xviii. 21 ; also v. 7, below.

6, 7. It seems probable, from the terms of u 7 (* let us ^o down '),
that words after v. 5 have been omitted; and that the narrative
originally told how Jehovah returned to His lofty abode, and addressed
the words which now follow as vv. 6, 7 to the inferior divine beings
there, His heavenly counsellors or associates.

6. If this great work is the beginning of their ambition, what will
be the end of it ? nothing soon will be beyond their reach. The thought,
tacitly underlying the verse, is that they may in some way make them-
selves the rivals of the Deity, and even become too powerful for Him ;
a danger such as this must be averted betimes (cf. iii. 22). The
narrative, it must be remembered, embodies a rudimentary, child-like
conception of Deity.

7. let us go down. The plural — unless, indeed, it is here the
survival of an originally polytheistic representation (cf. the last note
but one) — is to be explained as in iii. 5, 22. The use in i. 26, Is. vi. 8
is different.

9. Babel. I.e. Babylon (see on x. 10). The etymology given
here is, however, known now to be incorrect ; for the name is written
in the inscriptions in a manner which shews clearly that it signifies
* gate of God ' (Bdb-E), and that it cannot be derived from the Heb.
bdlal, to mix, confuse. It is simply a popular etymology, which lent
itself conveniently to the purpose which the narrator had in hand.

No Babylonian parallel to the preceding narrative has as yet been dis-
covered ^ Indeed, though it evidently presupposes a knowledge of Babylon,

1 There are no sufficient grounds for the supposition that the confusion of
tongues is referred to in the fragmentary inscription translated by G. Smith, Chald.
Gen. p. 160 ff., and mentioned by Sayce, Mon. p. 153 ; for the meanings of the two
crucial words, rendered 'strong place' and 'speech,' are both extremely doubtful.
See the note in DB. iv. 793» ; and add King, Tablets of Creation, pp. 219, 220.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS 137

it does not seem itself to be of Babylonian origin : if any Babylonian legend
lies at the basis of it, it must have been strongly Hebraized. As Gunkel has
remarked, the narrative reflects the impression which Babylon would make
upon a foreigner, rather than that which it would make upon a native : the
unfavourable light in which the foundation of Babel (i.e. Babylon) is repre-
sented, the idea that the erection of what {ex hyp.) can hardly have been
anything but a Babylonian zikkurat (or pyramidal temple-tower) ^ was inter-
rupted by {ex hyp.) a Babylonian deity, the mention, as of something unusual,
of brick and bitumen as building-materials, and the false etymology of the
name ' Babel,' are all features not likely to have originated in Babylonia. It
does however seem a not improbable conjecture (Ewald, Schrader, Dillm.)
that some gigantic tower-like building in Babylon, which had either been left
unfinished, or fallen into disrepair, gave rise to the story. The tower in
question has been supposed by some to be the celebrated zikkurat of E-zida,
the great temple of Nebo, in Borsippa (a city almost contiguous to Babylon on
the SW.), the ruined remains of which form the huge pyramidal mound now
called Birs Nimroud. This zikkurat, remarkably enough, Nebuchadnezzar
states had been built partially by a former king, but not completed : its ' head,'
or top, had not been set up; it had also fallen into disrepair; and Neb.
restored it*. Others regard it as an objection to this identification that
ll-zida was not actually in Babylon; and prefer to think of the zikkurat
of E-sagil, the famous and ancient temple of Marduk in Babylon itself, the
site of which is generally considered to be hidden under the massive oblong
mound called Babil, about 10 miles N. of Birs Nimroud^ Schrader does not
decide between lE-zida and ifi-sagil : Dillm. thinks ]&-sagil the more likely, but
leaves it open whether, after all, the Heb. legend may not have referred to
some half-ruined ancient building in Babylon, not otherwise known to us.
The high antiquity of Babylon, the fact that it was the chief centre of a region
in which the Hebrews placed the cradle of the human race, and the further
fact that it was always a great meeting-place for men of many nations (cf. Is.
xiii. 14, xlvii. 15), would lead it not unnaturally to be regarded as the point
from which mankind dispersed over the earth,

XL 10—26.
The genealogy of the Shemites, from Shem to Terah.

A section derived from P, as is evident from the stereotyped style, which
closely resembles that of ch. v. Like that chapter, it bridges over an interval,
about which there was nothing special to record, by a genealogy, the design of

1 A zikkurat (from zukkuru, to elevate) is a massive pyramidal tower, ascending
in stage-like terraces, with a temple at the top. See Jastrow, Hel. of Bab. and Ass.
pp. 615—622 ; and cf. Hdt. i. 181.

2 The inscription is translated in KAT.^ p. 124 f.; KB. ra. 2, pp. 53, 55. Of
course, however, the present narrative dates from an age some centuries earlier
than the time of Nebuchadnezzar.

' See the plan of Babylon and its environs in Smith's DB. s.v. ; or in the EncB.
B.v. Views of the two mounds referred to may be seen in Smith, DB. s.v. Babel,
and Babel, Toweb of; or in Ball's Light from the East, pp. 220, 221.

138 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xi. lo-ic

which is to convey an idea of the length and general character of the period.
In the ages assigned to the several patriarchs, it will be noticed that those in
vv. 18 — 26 are lower than those in vv. 10 — 17, while all are considerably lower
than those of the patriarchs (except Enoch) mentioned in ch. v. : it is thus the
theory of the author that the normal years of human life gradually diminished
during these two prehistoric periods. The number of years embraced in the
entire period from the Flood to the birth of Abraham is 290, or, according to
the Lxx., 1070 (the ages of six at the birth of their firstborn being 100 years
more than in the Heb., and there being besides 50 extra years for Nahor, and
the 130 of Cainan). The Sam. text gives 940 years for the* entire period. In
tliis case (cf. p. 79) it is generally allowed that the Heb. preserves the original
figures. They are less extravagant than the figures in ch. v. ; and though the
entire lifetimes assigned to the various patriarchs are out of the question, the
age of each at the birth of the next might, in itself, be historical. Whence
the names are derived, must remain undetermined. Some of them seem to be
personal names abstracted from the names of tribes or places ^ ; and the same
may be the case with the rest. Verses 12 — 17 (Shelah, 'Eber, Peleg) are parallel
to X. 24, 25 in J, just as v. 3—8 (P) are parallel to iv. 25, 26 (J).

10 These are the generations of Shem. Shem was an hundred 1
years old, and begat Arpachshad two years after the flood:
11 and Shem lived after he begat Arpachshad five hundred
years, and begat sons and daughters.

12 And Arpachshad lived five and thirty years, and begat
Shelah : 13 and Arpachshad lived after he begat Shelah four
hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters.

14 And Shelah lived thirty years, and begat Eber : 15 and

10. Arpachshad. See on x. 22. 'Its position here at the head
of the genealogy shews that this land was a primitive seat of those
mentioned afterwards, and consequently of the Terahites ' (Dillm.).

12, 13. Shelah. The LXX. read Kainan for Shelah in m. 12, 13;
and then insert two verses stating that Kainan lived 130 years and
begat Shelah, and lived afterwards 330 years. Cf. x. 24 RVm.

14. ''Eber. The eponymous ancestor of the Hebrews. The word
^eber signifies the otJier side, acivss; and so the name Hebrew (^'^??^,
— in form a gentile name, denoting the inhabitant of a country, or the
member of a tribe) is usually explained as denoting those who have
come from ^eber ha-ndhdr (see Jos. xxiv. 2, 3, 14, 15), or 'the other side
of the River' (the Euphrates), i.e. from Haran (v. 31) in Aram-naharaim,
the home of Nahor (xxiv. 10) and Abraham (xxiv. 4, 7, comp. with 10).
It is however possible that Stade, Wellh., Kautzsch, and others are
right in explaining it as signifying those who have come from 'the
other side' of the Jordan, supposing it to have been first given to

^ As happens sometimes in the case of Arabian genealogies {EncB. ii. 1660).

XI. i5-^i] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 139

Shelah lived after he begat Eber four hundred and three years, P
and begat sons and daughters.

16 And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg :
17 and Eber lived after he begat Peleg four hundred and thirty
years, and begat sons and daughters.

18 And Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu : 19 and
Peleg lived after he begat Reu two hundred and nine years, and
begat sons and daughters.

20 And Reu lived two and thirty years, and begat Serug :
21 and Reu lived after he begat Serug two hundred and seven
years, and begat sons and daughters.

Israel by the Canaanites, after they had entered Palestine'. It is
a peculiarity of the name Hebrew that (like that of the * Greeks,' for
instance) it is not the normal native name, but is, all but exclusively,
either placed in the mouth of foreigners (as xxxix. 14), or used
by Israelites for the purpose of distinguishing pointedly Abraham
or his descendants from foreigners (as xiv. 13, xl. 15, xliii. 32;
Jon. i. 9 : cf Ex. i. 15, 16, ii. 6, 7, v. 3, xxi. 2)'.

16. Peleg. Cf on x. 25.

20. Serug. Certainly connected with Seruj^ a district and city,
mentioned already, in the form Sarugi, in the * Assyrian Domesday
Book,' or description of holdings about Haran in the 7th cent. B.C.,
published by C H. W. Johns (1901), pp. 29, 43, 48, 68 (33, 45, 50);
and well known to Arabic and Syriac writers of the middle ages ;
in Mesopotamia ('Aram-Naharaim,' xxiv. 10), about 38 miles W. of
Haran (v. 31), and 30 miles SW. of Urhoi (Edessa). See Sachau,
Eeise in Syr. u. Mesop. 1883, pp. 181 — 3, and the 2nd Map at
the end.

^ Why 'Eber is not the immediate, but the sixth ancestor of Abraham, and why
many other tribes besides the Hebrews are reckoned as his descendants (see on
X. 21), must remain matter of conjecture : no doubt the Heb. genealogists were
guided partly by facts, partly by theories, respecting the movements and mutual
relations of the tribes mentioned by them, with which we are unacquainted. It
may be (cf. Konig, Lehrgeb. i. 19, 21) that, though the Israelites were /car' i^oxw
'Hebrews,' it was remembered that the land 'across ' the Euphrates had been for a
long time the resting-place of Abraham's ancestors, and that many other tribes
(Peleg, Rei), &g. as well as the Yoktanidae, x. 26 ff.) had migrated from it.

^ The theory of Hommel {Anc. Heb. Trad. 324 — 7, and elsewhere : see also
EncB. Eber, and DB. ii. 326) that Ebir ndri (=the Bibl. 'eber ha-ndhdr) was the
name originally given by the Babylonians to the region about Ur (see on v. 31) on
the other (i.e. the western) side of the Euphrates, that accordingly Abraham and his
forefathers were known to the Babylonians as 'Hebrews' (in the sense of 'inhabi-
tants of this ebir nari^), that Abraham and his descendants carried this foreign
name about with them for many centuries, till finally it reappeared in the OT. in
the applications explained above, is in itself most improbable, besides resting,
from the first stage to the last, upon a basis of pure hypothesis.

140 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xi. ..-sr

22 And Serug lived thirty years, and begat Nahor : 23 and p
Serug lived after he begat Nahor two hundred years, and begat
sons and daughters.

24 And Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begat Terah :
25 and Nahor lived after he begat Terah an hundred and
nineteen years, and begat sons and daughters.

26 And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor,
and Haran.

22. Nahor, ' Once the name of a people of considerable import-
ance ' (Dillm.) : cf on 'o. 29. The name is perhaps preserved in
Til-Nahirii a place near Sarugi (Johns, op. cit. p. 71).

XI. 27—32.
The family history of Terah,

A short account of the history of Terah, stating what was necessary as an
introduction to the history of his son, Abraham, chaps, xii. — xxv. 10. Verses
27, 31, 32 belong to P, vv. 28—30 to J.

27 Now these are the generations of Terah. Terah begat p
Abram, Nahor, and Haran ; and Haran begat Lot. | 28 And J
Haran died in the presence of his father Terah in the land of
his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees. 29 And Abram and Nahor
took them wives : the name of Abram's wife was Sarai ; and the
name of Nahor's wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father
of Milcah, and the father of Iscah. 30 And Sarai was barren ;
she had no child. | 31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot P
the son of Haran, his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law,
his son Abram's wife ; and they went forth with them from

28. in the presence of his father. I.e. while his father was yet
alive. So Num. iii. 4.

in Ur of the Chaldees. See on -y. 31 : the words are here very
possibly a harmonistic addition — the land of Haran's and Abram's
* nativity ' being in J Aram-Naharaim (see p. 142).

29. Nahor marries Milcah, his niece (cf. xxii. 20—23): comp.
Abraham's marriage with his half-sister, xx. 12. Perhaps, liowever,
Dillm. is right in supposing that in this case the ' marriage ' signifies
really the amalgamation of communities.

31. and they^ went forth with them. Who went with whom ?
Read probably, with lxx., Sam., and Vulg., and he brought them forth
(Dn'i^ N>'h for Di?^ ^^V.')).

XL 31, 32] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 141

Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan ; and they P
came unto Haran, and dwelt there. 32 And the days of Terah
were two hundred and five years : and Terah died in Haran.

Ur. Now, as inscriptions found on the spot shew, el-Mukayyar'^
(often written incorrectly Mugheir), 6 miles S. of the Euphrates, on its
right bank, and 125 miles from its present mouth. Mukayyar consists
of a collection of low mounds, forming an oval about 1000 yds. long
by 800 yds. broad, which conceal the ruins of the ancient city. Ur
(Ass. Uru) was an important city long before Babylon. Two of its
early kings, Ur-bau, and his son Dungi (c. 2800 B.C.), have left many
monuments of themselves — engraved cylinders and other works of art,
besides numerous buildings, not only in Ur itself, but also in the sur-
rounding towns. The position of Ur made it important commercially.
The Euphrates anciently flowed almost by its gates, and formed a
channel of communication with Upper Syria ; while it was connected
by caravan-routes with Southern Syria and with Arabia.^ Its tutelary
deity was the Moon-god, Sin ; the zikkurat of Sin, built by Ur-bau,
Nabu-na'id (B.C. 555 — 538), upon cyUnders found on the spot, tells us
that he restored. See farther Maspero, i. 561, 563 (Map), 612—19,
629—31 (zikkuratf with views); Ball, Light from the East, 62—64.

of the Chaldees (Heb. Kasdim). This is no Babylonian designation
of Ur; and must be an addition of Palestinian origin (Sayce, Monu-
ments, 158 f ). Kasdim is the Heb. form of the Bab. and Ass. Kaldw
(* Chaldaeans '), a tribe named often in the inscriptions from B.C. 880;
their home at that time was in Lower Babylonia (the Persian Gulf is
called the * sea of the land of Kaldii ') ; afterwards, as they increased
in power, they gradually advanced inland: in 721 Merodach-baladan,
*king of the land of Kaldti,' made himself for twelve years king of
Babylon; and ultimately, under Nabopolassar (625—605) and Nebu-
chadnezzar (604 — 561) the Kaldii became the ruling caste in Babylonia.
*Ur Kasdim' is mentioned besides in v. 28, xv. 7, Neh. ix. 7.

unto Haran (with the hard H, Lxx. Xappav, quite different from
the Hardin, with the soft H, of m 26, 31*). Ass., Syr. and Arab.
Ha/rrdn, Gk. Kappat; in ancient times an important place, situated
about 550 miles NW. of Ur, on the left bank of the Belikh, a tributary
which flows into the Euphrates from the N., at about 60 miles from the
confluence, and of course on the ' other side ' of the Euphrates from
Palestine (cf on v. 14). At present, nothing remains of the ancient
city but a long range of mounds and the ruins of a castle; but it
is often mentioned in the Ass. inscriptions, and also by writers of
the classical and mediaeval period. Harrdnu is a common Ass.
word meaning way; and the place, it has been supposed, received its
name on account of the commercial and strategical importance of its
position : it lay at the point where the principal route from Nineveh

1 I.e. the Utuminated — so called from the bitumen, with which its walls are
cemented (cf. on xi. 3; and see Eawlinson, Anc. Monarchies*, i. 16 f., 76—9).

142 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

to Carchemish was met by the road from Damascus (on its trade,
cf. Ez. xxvii. 23). Like Ur, Haran was also an ancient and celebrated
seat of the worship of the Moon-god, who was known in N. Syria as
Baal-Harran, or 'Lord of Harran^'; Nabu-na'id, who restored his temple
there, tells us that Sin had had his dwelling at Harran from remote
days {KB. m. 2, 97). See further DB. and EncB. s.v.; Mez, Gesch. d&r
Stadt Ilarrdn, 1892.

32. Sam. for 205 has 145, making Abram's departure from
Haran (xii. b^) take place in the year of Terah's death (xi. 26, and
xii. 4^). The same figure appears to be presupposed in Acts vii. 4".

•Jwo traditions seem to have been current respecting the original home
of the ancestors of the Hebrews. According to xi. 31 (cf. v. 28, xv. 7) their
original home was Ur, in South Babylonia. There exists however a group
of passages in Gen., which not only connect consistently Abraham's near
relations with Haran^ in Aram-Naharaim, far away from S. Babylonia (without
any suggestion of their having migrated thither from elsewhere), but imply
also that it was Abraham's own native place as well (notice the expressions in
xii. 1 and xxiv. 4, 7, where v. 10 shews that Haran is referred to ; cf. also Josh,
xxiv. 2, 3). The tradition connecting Abraham with Haran is that which
predominates in J ; and if it might be supposed that the words ' in Ur of the
Chaldees' in xi. 28, and the verse xv. 7, were additions to the original J,
J would follow consistently the same representation. P (xi. 31) harmonizes
the two traditions, by representing Abraham's residence in Haran as the
result of a migration from Ur. But even in P itself the names in xi. 10 — 27
seem to point to Mesopotamia as the home of Abraham's ancestors. The two
traditions cannot therefore be said to be represented consistently, the one
by J, and the other by P. What the source of the tradition connecting
Abraham with Ur may have been we do not know : of course it will not have
been first promulgated by P, but must have been current when he wrote.
Its correctness we are not at present in a position, from external evidence,
either to affirm or to deny. Contract-tablets, and other contemporary inscrip-
tions, recently discovered, bear witness to the fact that in, or even before, the
age of Abraham persons bearing Hebrew (or Canaanitish) names resided in
Babylonia, and shew that intercourse between Babylonia and the West was
more active than was once supposed to be the case^; but notliing sufficiently
direct has at present [June, 1903] been discovered to prove definitely that the
ancestors of the Hebrews had once their home in Ur.

1 The title occurs in an inscription from Zinjirli, near Aleppo [above, p. 129] :
see G. A. Cooke, Text-hook of North- Semitic Inscriptions (1903), p. 182.^

2 Ussher, in order to harmonize the Heb. text with Acts vii. 4, interpolates
60 years in v. 26 (see the note in editions of the AV. with marg. references), giving
the verse the impossible meaning, 'And Terah lived 70 years; and [60 years
afterwards] begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.'

' At Sippar, about 80 miles NNW. of Babylon, there seems indeed to have
been an *Amorite quarter,' which (though of course Abraham was no Amorite)
testifies to communication between Babylonia and the West (see Saycc, Babylonians
and Assyrians, 1900, p. 187 ff.; Pinches, The OT. in the light of the records of Ass.
and Bab.y p. 169 f.).

THE BOOK OF GENESIS 143

PART 11. THE HISTORY OF THE PATRIARCHS.

CHAPTERS XIL— L.

With ch. xii. the second part of the Book of Genesis begins, the history of
the patriarchs. Hebrew tradition told how the ancestors of the nation had,
under Divine guidance, migrated from the distant East into Canaan, had
sojourned in different parts of the land, had entered into various relations,
friendly or unfriendly, as the case might be, with the native inhabitant'^, and had
in the end, in the persons of Jacob and his 12 sons, gone down into Egypt ;
and the narration of all these events occupies the second part of the Book.
The places which the patriarchs principally visit — Shechem, Bethel, Hebron,
Beer-sheba, Beer-lahai-roi — are those which in later times were regarded as
sanctuaries ; and the origin of their sanctity is here explained : it is deduced
from incidents in the lives of the patriarchs. It is a plausible conjecture that
stories of the patriarchs were attached to the sanctuaries which it was believed
that they had visited ; and that these were written down and arranged by the
different writers, especially the two earlier ones, J and E, whose narratives,
excerpted and adjusted by a later compiler, form the bulk of the existing
Book of Genesis. The substance of the narrative is, no doubt, historical;
though the characters and experiences seem to be idealized (cf. p. Iviii ff.).
We cannot, for instance, suppose that we have, so to say, a photographic
record of all that was said or done : however difficult it may be to estimate
the strength of memory and of oral tradition in these patriarchal times, when
the conditions were so different from our own, it is scarcely possible that the
recollection of such minutiae as are here often recorded should have been
transmitted unaltered during the many centuries that intervened between the
time at which the patriarchs lived, and that at which their biographies were
ultimately committed to writing. The idea (which nevertheless has been
seriously suggested) that the patriarchs carried about with them libraries
of burnt bricks, upon which, in Babylonian fashion, they recorded their
experiences, is an ingenious one ; but it has absolutely nothing to support it,
and cannot therefore be made the basis of an argument for establishing the
autobiographical character of the patriai-chal narratives. The outline of these
narratives, we may confidently hold, was supplied by tradition; but in the
details something at any rate will be due to the historical imagination of the
narrators, who filled in what tradition handed down to them with picturesque
circumstance and colloquy, and at the same time breathed into the whole
the same deep and warm religious spirit by which they were inspired
themselves.

144 . THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xii. 1-3

Chapter XII.

Abram's migration into Canaan. The first of the promises.
Sarah's adventure in Egypt.

Since Noah, the line of Shorn (xi. 10 ff.) has been that in which the know-
ledge of the true God has been perpetuated; and now, in the person of
Abram, this knowledge reaches a higher stage: Abram is the recipient of
fuller and more distinct revelations of God ; and though not uniformly fault-
less, becomes nevertheless an example of faith and obedience iu the midst of
heathen neighbours (cf. Dean Church, The Discipline of the Christian
Character^ chap. i.). Verses 1—4% 6—20, belong to J j w. 4^ 5 to P.

XII. 1 Now the Lord said unto Abram, Get thee out of J"
thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house,
unto the land that I will shew thee : 2 and I will make of thee
a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great ;
and be thou a blessing : 3 and I will bless them that bless thee,

XII. 1. And Jehovah said &c. The words state the sequel of
xi. 31^ the country which Abram is commanded to leave being not
Ur, but Haran. 'God's voice is to be thought of not as something
external, but as heard within Abram's inmost soul' (Del.).

thy country .. .thy kindred &c. 'The expressions are accumulated
in order to shew that God made no small demand of him when He
required him to sever his family ties and wander forth into an unknown
land'CDillm.). CfHeb. xi. 8f.

2 f. The promise. The promises (and blessings) contained in
Gen. form two series (J and P). The series in J (or occasionally E)
consists of iii. 15 (the ' Protevangelium ') ; viii. 21 f (Noah); xii. 2 f., 7,
xiii. 14 — 17, XV. 5, 18 — 21, xviii. 18, xxii. 15 — 18 (all addressed to
Abraham); xxvi. 2 — 5, 24 (Isaac); xxv. 23, xxvii. 27 — 9, xxviii. 13 —
15, xlvi. 3f. (Jacob); xlix. 10 (Judah): that in P consists of i. 28 — 30
(Adam); ix. 1—17 (Noah); xvii. 2, 6—8 (Abraham), cf 20 (Ishmael);
xxviii. 3 f , XXXV. 11 f , cf xlviii. 3 f. (Jacob). These two series deserve
to be carefully studied and compared : each (esp. in the promises ad-
dressed to the patriarchs) will then be found to have features peculiar
to itself, and distinguishing it from the other (cf on xvii. 2, 6 — 8).

2. a blessing. I.e., according to a Hebrew idiom (cf. Ps. ex. 3
RVm.) the impersonation of blessing, most blessed. Comp. Ps. xxi. 6
(see RVm.); Is. xix. 24 (see v. 25); Zech. viii. 13.

3. and I will bless &c. Cf xxvii. 29 ; Nu. xxiv. 9. Abram will
become indirectly a source of blessedness to others: so favoured by
God will he be that those who are friendly towards him will be blessed
with prosperity, while those who are unfriendly will be visited with
misfortune.

XII. 3-5] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 145

and him that curseth thee will I curse : and in thee shall all the J
families of the earth be blessed. 4 So Abram went, as the Lord
had spoken unto him ; and Lot went with him : | and Abram was P
seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.
5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son,
and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls
that they had gotten in Haran ; and they went forth to go into
the land of Canaan ; and into the land of Canaan they came. |

and through thee shall... he blessed. If this rend, is correct, the
passage will express an early phase of the great doctrine developed
afterwards more fully by the prophets (e.g. Is. ii. 2 f , xix. 23 — 5), and
point to the ultimate extension of the religious privileges enjoyed by
Abraham and his descendants to the Gentiles. The expression in the
Heb. is the same in xviii. 18, xxviii. 14; in all these passages the
conjugation of the Heb. verb being the Niphal, which may have either
a reflexive or a passive sense (G.-K. § Sl*^''*^). There are, however, two
other passages, xxii. 18, xxvi. 4, in which, though otherwise similar,
the conj. is the Hithpael, the sense of which is undoubtedly reflexive
('bless themselves ') ; and most modern scholars (including Ges., Del.,
Dillm., and Riehm, Mess. Proph. Edinb. 1891, p. 97 f ) consider that
the two passages of which the sense is clear should determine the
interpretation of the three in which the sense is ambiguous, and render
therefore (here, xviii. 18, and xxviii. 14, as well as xxii. 18, xxvi. 4)
* bless themselves by thee,' i.e. in blessing themselves will use thy name
as a type of happiness (see, in illustration of this usage, the notes on
xxii. 18 and xlviii. 20), wish for themselves the blessings (including the
religious privileges), recognized as the special possession of Abraham
(or, in xxviii. 14, of his descendants): cf Is. Ixi. 9^ Ixv. 23 \ Thus
upon the first interpretation the words declare that the blessings of
which Israel is to become the organ and channel are to be communi-
cated ultimately to the world ; upon the second, they imply that these
same blessings will 'attract the regard of all peoples, and awaken in
them the longing to participate in them ' (cf Is. ii. 3 ; xlii. 4^ ; Zech.
viii. 23): in either case, therefore, the thought remains, in the wider
sense of the term, a Messianic one. Cf Gal. iii. 8 (though the
quotation here is taken more directly from ch. xviii. 18).

4^ (from and Abram), 6 (P). More detailed particulars, in P's
manner, of Abram's migration from Haran into Canaan. The most

1 Dillm. asks, Why should less be said of the seed of Abraham (which, ex hyp.,
is the direct medium of the transmission of the blessings to the Gentiles) than of
Abraham himself, as would be the case if, in xii. 3, xviii. 18, the verb were rendered
be blessed, while in xxii. 18, xxvi. 4 it is rendered bless themselves ? On the other
hand, it might be urged (cf. the writer's Sermons on the OT. p. 54) that the
difference of conjugation created a presumption of a difference of meaning : we are
not, however, sure that the writer is in all five cases the same, and the difference of
conjugation may be due to a difference of author. (The Niph. of "jll occurs only in
the three passages in question.)

D. 10

146 THE BOOK OF GE]ST:SIS [xn. 6

6 And Abram passed through the land rnito the place of J^
Shechem, unto the ^oak of Moreh. And the Canaanite was

1 Or, terebinth

probable route for a traveHer journeying from Haran to Canaan would
be to cross the Euphrates by the great ford at Carchemish' (60 miles
W. of Haran), then to turn S. past Hamath and Damascus; and after
this, either, crossing one of the S. spurs of Hermon, in the neighbour-
hood of the modem BsbuySs, to enter Canaan from the N. on the
W. side of the waters of Merom, or striking down into the Jordan-
valley, to travel along it, on the E. side of the stream, until he reached
the ford of ed-Damiyeh (25 miles N. of the Dead Sea), crossing which,
as Jacob did afterwards, and turning up to the NW., he would soon
reach Shechem, in the centre of the land.

tauU. I.e. persons (p. ix, No. 19), here denoting slaves (cf xxxvi. 6).

6. place. The word means here very probably sacred place : cf.
xxviii. 16 ; Dt. xii. 2, 3 ; 1 S. vii. 16 Lxx. ; Jer. vii. 12. The correspond-
ing Arabic word makdm is used similarly (cf. Conder, TW. 304 f ).

Shechem. Afterwards an important town in the hill-country of
Ephraim, lying in a fertile, well-watered vale, between Ebal and
Gerizim (see a view in Smith, DB. s.v.), just 30 miles N. of Jerusalem,
and 5 nules SE. of Samaria. After its destruction in the wars of
Vespasian, Shechem was rebuilt under the name of Flavia Neapolis,
whence its modem name of Ndhlus. For notices of Shechem in later
books, illustrating both its religious and political importance, see Jos.
XX. 7, xxiv. 1, 25, 26, 32 (Gen. xxxiii. 18—20); Jud. ix., xxi. 19;
1 K xii. 1, 25 j Ps. Ix. 6 : comp. also Gen. xxxv. 4, and on xlviii. 22.

unto the directing terebinth (or, terebinth of (the) director).
An oracular tree. Moreh is the ptcp. of hdrah, the word used regularly
of the authoritative direction given by priests (e.g. Dt. xxxiii. 10;
Mic. iiL 11: RV. usu. teach), and the verb from which tordh, 'law'
(prop, direction), is derived (see DB. rn. 64 f.). No doubt the reference
is to a sacred tree, supposed by the ancient Canaanites to give oracles,
and attended by priests, who interpreted its answers to those who
came to consult it. * Oracles and omens from trees, and at tree-
sanctuaries, are of the commonest among all races, and are derived
in very various ways, either from observation of phaenomena connected
with ^<& trees themselves (such as the rustlings of their leaves), or from
ordinary processes of divination peiforaQed in the presence of the sacred
object*/ The terebinth ('elon) must have been one of those mentioned

1 Maspero, n. 145.

« W. B. Smith, Bel. of the SemiteSy p. 178 (ed. 2, p. 195). Tree-worship was
often practised by the heathen Semites (t5. p. 169 ff., ed. 2, p. 185 ff.). Even to
this day Palestine abonnds in trees, especially oaks, supposed to be ' inhabited,' or
hiwmfa^ by spirits {jirm) ; and the sopersUtions peasants suspend rags upon them
as tokens of hcnnage (Thomson, L. and B. n. 101, 171 f., 222, 474).

F<w trees uliidi, to jndge from the connexion in which they are mentioned,
were pcobabty i^arided as sacred, s/ee Gen. xiii. 18 (xviii. 1), xxi. 33, xxxv. 4, 8 ;

XII. 6-8] THE BOOK OF GEIST^SIS 147

then in the land. 7 And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and J
said, Unto thy seed will I give this land : and there builded he
an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him. 8 And he

also in Dt. xi. 30 (if, indeed, we should not read there, with Sam., lxx.,
the sing. * terebinth ') ; very probably, too, it is the same as the one
called in Jud. ix. 37 the * Soothsayers' terebinth ' (d*j:j?d pt'K), if not
also (though this is less certain) the same as the 'elah of Gen. xxxv. 4,
and the 'allah of Jos. xxiv. 26 ' in Jehovah's sanctuary ' at Shechem.

terebintli. There are five similar Heb. words — V/ [only in the pL
V^w], 'elah, 'elun^ 'allah (only Jos. xxiv. 26), and 'allon — the difference
between which depends m part only upon the punctuation, and the
special sense of each of which is not perfectly certain : Gesenius, after
a careful survey of the data, arrived at the conclusion, which has been
largely accepted by subsequent scholars, that V/, 'eldh, *eldn denoted
properly the terebinth, and *alldh, 'allon the oak\ The terebinth
(or turpentine- tree) in general appearance resembles the oak (though
it grows usually alone, not in clumps or forests) ; and both trees are
still common in Palestine*.

And the Canaanite &c. The remark is made in view of r. 7 : the
land promised there to Abram's seed was not at the time ownerless ;
it was, in fact, in the possession of those very Canaanites, who were
afterwards to be dispossessed by Abram's descendants. The term
* Canaanite ' is used by J, like * Amorite ' by E, as a general designation
of the pre-IsraeKtish inhabitants of the country (see on x. 15, p. 125 f.;
and cf xiii. 7, xxiv. 3, 1. 11).

7. The promise of the laud is here for the first time given ex-
plicitly : in vv. 1 — 3 it is at most implied- Comp. afterwards xiiL 15,
17, XV. 18, xxvi. 3, xxviii. 13; and in P xvii. 8, xxxv. 12 (xlviii 4).

huilded he an altar. The building of an altar is the standing
rehgious obser^^ance of patriarchal times, not only on a special occasion,
as viii. 20 (Noah), xxii. 9, or after a theophany, as here, xxvi. 25, and
xxxv. 1, 7, but also independently, v. 8, xiii. 18, xxxiii. 20 (but see
the note) ; cf Ex. xvii. 15. The place thus marked by the theophany,
and the altar, is very probably identical with the * sanctuary,' or sacred
place, at Shechem, mentioned in Josh. xxiv. 26, the original conse-
cration of which is here referred to Abram.

8. Abram next moved southwards to a spot between Bethel
and *Ai, where in like manner he 'built an altar,' and also invoked
solemnly Jehovah's name (see on iv. 26). On Bethel, the modem

Jos. xxiv. 26 ; Jud. vi 11, 19 (cf. 24), ix. 6, 37 ; IS. xxii. 6, xytj 13. Comp. also
the frequent allusions to idolatrous rites celebrated beside trees (e.g. Dt xii 2 ; Is.
i. 29, Ivii. 5 ; Hos. iv. 13). See further NifTUBs Wobship, ^ 2, 3, in EncB. ; and
R. B. Taylor on ' Traces of Tree-Worship in the OT.,* in the Exp. Times, June 1903,
p. 407 ff. The Heb. words for 'terebinth' are quite possibly derived from *eZ, ' God.*

^ Hence RY. has always for 'eldh and ^elOn, and for 'eUm in Is. i. 29, 'tezebin^*
either in the margin or (Is. vi. 13 ; Hos. iv. 13) in the text.

•* Tristram, NHB. pp. 367—371, 400 f.

10—2

148 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xii. 8, 9

removed from thence unto the mountain on the east of Beth-el, J
and pitched his tent, having Beth-el on the west, and Ai on the
east : and there he builded an altar unto the Lord, and called
upon the name of the Lord. 9 And Abram journeyed, going on
still toward the ^ South.

1 Heb. Negeh, the southern tract of Judah.

Beitin, 10 miles N. of Jerusalem, see more fully on xxviii. 12. *Ai
is very probably the present Haiydn, a ruined site 2|- miles ESE. of
Beitin, with a deep ravine on the N. (Jos. viii. 11), and with a hill
between it and Beitin, from which (c£ xiii. 10) the Jordan-valley and
N. end of the Dead Sea are plainly visible (Rob. BR. 11. 575;
PEFM. II. 373, III. 31—35; cf. Conder, Tent Work, 253 f., and Ai in
EncB. and DB.).

the mountain. See on xiii. 10.

the west. Lit. the sea. The ' sea ' (i.e. the Mediterranean Sea) is in
Heb. the regular expression for the West. Its use in the Pent, is an
indication that this was written by men who had lived long enough in
Palestine for the ' sea ' to have come to be used in this sense. Cf
W. K Smith, OT. in the Jewish Church, 323 ('326).^

9. journeyed, viz. by stages, as is customary in the East. The
word used means properly to pluck up (sc. the pegs of the tent), i.e. to
move tent or camp : it thus becomes the standing word for to journey
(xiii. 11, XX. 1 ; Ex. xii. 37, &c.).

toward the South. Or, the Negeh, — the word (meaning properly the
dry land^) being used in a technical geographical sense (as is indicated
by BVm.) of a particular district of Judah, intermediate in elevation,
and also in character {DB. or EncB. s.v. Negeb; HG. 278—286),
between the *hill country' (Jos. xv. 48) around Hebron, &c., and the
wilderness et-Tih, N. of the Sinaitic peninsula. The Negeb began on
the N. a little S. of Dhaheriyeh (prob. the ancient Debir), 10 miles NNE.
of Beer-sheba, and it seems to have extended as far S. as Kadesh (xiv.
7). The cities situated in the Negeb are enumerated in Jos. xv. 21 —
32. When used in the technical sense here explained, 'south' is in
RV. regularly printed with a capital S (e.g. Dt. i. 7; Jer. xiii. 19).

10—20. This narrative represents Abram in a new light. Anxious lest
his personal safety should be indirectly endangered by his wife's beauty, he
manifests a want of candour which, when discovered, not only brings him
into difficulties which might easily have proved more serious than, happily,
they actually were, but also subjects him to a humiliating rebuke on the part
of the Pharaoh. Untruthfulness and dissimulation are extremely common
faults in the East ; and it would be manifestly unjust to measure Abram by a
Christian standard : nevertheless, the narrator is clearly conscious that he fell
below the standard which he might have been expected to attain, and contrasts
him unfavourably with the upright and straightforward heathen king. Cf. the
similar narratives, xx., xxvi, 6 — 11.

1 The root is not in use in Heb., but it is common in Aramaic.

XII. IO-I3] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 149

10 And there was a famine in the land : and Abram went J
down into Egypt to sojourn there ; for the famine was sore in
the land. 11 And it came to pass, when he was come near to
enter into Egypt, that he said unto Sarai his wife. Behold now,
I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon : 12 and it shall
come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall
say. This is his wife : and they will kiU me, but they will save
thee alive. 13 Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister : that it may
be well with me for thy sake, and that my soul may live because

10. There being no artificial irrigation in Palestine, and the
country being largely dependent for its fertility upon the annual
rainfall, a famine was no unfrequent occurrence in it (cf Am. iv. 6, 7,
and elsewhere) : on the other hand, the yearly rise of the Nile, which
secured the fertility of Egypt, rarely failed; so that Egypt was the
country to which, when there was a famine in Canaan, the inhabitants
would naturally turn (cf xxvi. 1, xlii. 1 f ).

went down. Viz. from the high ground of Canaan — the expression
regularly used of one journeying from Canaan into Egypt (e.g. xliv. 21) ;
as conversely ' come (or go) up ' is said as regularly of a journey in the
opposite direction (e.g. xiii. 1, xliv. 17, 24).

to sojourn there. I.e. to stay there temporarily — the regular mean-
ing of the word (Is. lii. 4 ; cf on ch. xv. 13).

11. From xii. 4, compared with xvii. 17, it appears that Sarai was
at this time at least 65 years of age; and it has often been wondered
why Abram should have been in alarm on the ground stated, and why
the Pharaoh should have been attracted by her beauty. The solution
of the difficulty is to be found in the fact that the statements about
Sarai's age belong to a different document (P) from the one (J) which
narrates the visit to Egypt : the author of the latter evidently pictured
Sarai as still a comparatively young woman. There are other chrono-
logical discrepancies in Gen., which are to be similarly explained
(cf on xxi. 15, xxiv. 67, xxxv. 8, and pp. 262, 365 w., 368, 398).

13. my sister. The statement was true, but not the whole truth
(see XX. 12): so that it was a prevarication on Abram's part; a fact of
vital importance on the question at issue was purposely concealed, and
a false impression was thereby created.

that it may he well with me for thy sake. That I may be treated
with friendliness, for the sake of my fair sister.

my soul. The ' soul,' in Heb. psychology, is the seat of feeling and
emotion; hence in poetry, or choice prose, 'my (thy, his, &c.) soul'
becomes a pathetic periphrasis for the personal pron., — often, indeed,
in poetry interchanging with it in the parallel clause. See xxvii. 4,
19, 25, 31 (by the side of the pron. in m 7, 10); Nu. xxiii. 10 (RVm.);
Jud. xvi. 30 Heb.; Is. i. 14, xlii. 1, Iv. 3, Ixi. 10, Ixvi. 3, &c.

150 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xii. 13-17

of thee. 14 And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come J
into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld 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 entreated Abram well for her sake : and he had
sheep, and oxen, and he-asses, and menservants, and maid-
servants, and she-asses, and camels. 17 And the Lord plagued
Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai

15. Pharaoh. The official, not the personal, designation of the
Eg)rptian king. The word is the hieroglyphic Pr-'o, which means
properly the Great House, and in inscriptions of the ' Old Kingdom '
(1 — 11 dynasties) denotes simply the royal house or estate, but after-
wards— something in the manner of the * Subhme Porte ' — became
gradually a title of the monarch himself^ and finally (in the 22nd and
following djmasties) was prefixed to the king's personal name (as in
' Pharaoh Necho '). See the lucid exposition of the history of the term
by Mr F. LI. Griffith, in the DB. s.v. Pharaoh. There is nothing in
the present narrative to indicate what 'Pharaoh' is here meant; but if,
on account of xiv. 1 (p. 156), Abram is assigned rightly to c. 2300 B.C.
it will have been one of the rulers of the 12th (Brugsch, Budge, Hist,
of Eg. III., ch. i.), or 13th (Petrie, Hist, of Eg. i. 206) dynasty. ^

was taken into Pharaoh's house — or palace', in accordance with the
custom of Eastern princes of arbitrarily selecting beautiful women to
be added to their harems. Polygamy was not the rule in Egypt ; but
wealthy Egyptians, and especially the Pharaohs, often had two or more
wives: see Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 74 — 6, 142, 151 — 3.

16. entreated. Le. treated : an archaism. So Ex. v. 22, al.

and he had. I.e. and he came to have, received. The presents
are given for the sake of his supposed sister: Abram, by accepting
tliem, thus places himself in a false position. The animals mentioned
appear elsewhere also, along with slaves, as forming the chief wealth of
the nomadic patriarchs: cf. xxiv. 35, xxxii. 14 f.; also Jobi. 3, xlii. 12.
The mention of camels has been supposed to be an anachronism ; for
the camel was not used or bred in ancient Egypt, nor does it appear
*in any inscription or painting before the Greek period' (Erman, p. 493 :
cf. W. Max Miiller, EncB. 634 ; Sayce, EHH. 169): they would how-
ever be a very natural gift for a nomad sheikh, and they miglit have
been readily procured for the purpose from trader? (cf. xxxvii. 25).

menservants and maidservants. I.e. male and female slaves. See
Jer. xxxiv. 9, 10, 11 his (Heb. as vv. 9, 10): cf. ch. xx. 14, xxiv. 35.

17. A mysterious sickness fell upon Pharaoh and his house, whicli,
it must be assumed, aroused suspicions, and so led to inquiries which
resulted in the discovery of the truth.

1 See examples of its use, similar to those in Gen., in the 'Tale of the Two
Brothers' (see on ch. xxxix., p. 336) in Petrie's Egyp. Tales, ii. 53 — 64.

XII. I7-XIII. 6] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 151

Abram's wife. 18 And Pharaoh called Abram, and said, Wliat J
is this that thou hast done unto me ? why didst thou not tell me
that she was thy wife? 19 Why saidst thou, She is my sister?
so that I took her to be my wife : now therefore behold thy
wife, take her, and go thy way. 20 And Pharaoh gave men
charge concerning him : and they brought him on the way, and
his wife, and all that he had.

Chapter XIII.

Abram^s return into Canaan; and Lot's separation from him.

XIII. 1 And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his J
wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the South.

2 And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold.

3 And he went on his journeys from the South even to Beth-el,
unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between
Beth-el and Ai ; 4 unto the place of the altar, which he had made
there at the first : and there Abram called on the name of the
Lord. 5 And Lot also, which went with Abram, had flocks,
and herds, and tents. | 6 And the land was not able to bear P

plagued... with plagues (TrXrjyaC). Properly struck... with strokes
(Dt. xvii. 8), — of severe sickness, as 1 K. viii. 37, Ps. xxxviii. 11.

18, 19. Pharaoh, displeased, rebukes Abram for his prevarication;
and bids him, with some peremptoriness, take his wife with him and
depart.

20. gave men charge concerning him. Or, appointed men over him ;
i.e. assigned him an escort, to accompany him to the frontier.

brought him on the way. Lit. sent him on: cf. xviii. 16; and Trpo-
TTc/xTTciv Acts XV. 3, xxi. 5.

XIII. 1 — 5. Abram returns to the place where he had built the
altar near Bethel (xii. 8).

1. the South. See on xii. 9.

2. The narrator draws a picture of the wealth and importance of
Abram. Cf xxiv. 35.

3. on his journeys. Rather, by his stages (lit. plucMngs up: cf on
xii. 9 ; and see Ex. xvii. 1 ; Nu. xxxiii. 1, 2, RVm.). But the word
'journey ' (Fr. journee) seems in these passages to be used in its old
etymological sense of ' a days travel.'

6 — 13. Lot separates himself from Abram.

6._ P's account of the cause of the separation: there was not
sufficient pasture for their united flocks. Cf xxxvi. 7 (also P),

152 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xiii. 6-ro

them, that they might dwell together : for their substance was P
great, so that they could not dwell together. | 7 And there was J
a strife between the herdmen of Abram's cattle and the herdmen
of Lot's cattle : and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled
then in the land. 8 And Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no
strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my
herdmen and thy herdmen ; for we are brethren. 9 Is not the
whole land before thee ? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me :
if tliou wilt tahe 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 beheld all the ^ Plain of Jordan, that

^ Or, Circle

where a similar reason is assigned for the separation of Esau from
Jacob. The verse was in its original context followed immediately by

V. ll^ l2^

7. J's account of the cause of the separation of Abram and Lot : dis-
putes arising between their respective herdmen (cf. xxi. 25, xxvi. 20 ff.).

Perizzite, So, together with * Canaanite,' xxxiv. 30, Jud. i. 4, 5 ;
alone, Josh. xvii. 15; and in the lists of nations dispossessed by Israel,
ch. XV. 20, Ex. iii. 8, 17, Dt. vii. 1, al. To judge from the first-named
passages, the Perizzites were a people of central Palestine ; but more is
not definitely known about them. It is thought by some (Sayce, Races
of the OT. 120; Moore, Judges, p. 17) that the word is not the name
of a tribe at all, but that it is connected with perdzl, ' country-folk,
peasantry' (Dt. iii. 5; 1 S. vi. 18), and denoted the village population
of Canaan, t\iefellaki?i, or labourers on the soil.

8, 9. Such disputes between relations are unseemly; so Abram
proposes a separation, and though he is the elder, generously offers his
nephew the first choice.

8. brethren. I.e. near relatives : cf. xiv. 14, 16, xxiv. 27, xxix. 12.

10. There is a 'conspicuous hill,' a little E. of Bethel (cf. on xii. 8),
commanding a wide prospect, upon or near which the narrator may
have pictured Lot and Abram as standing. ' To the East there rises
in the foreground the jagged range of the hills above Jericho ; in the
distance the dark wall of Moab ; between them lies the wide valley of
the Jordan, its course marked b^ the track of tropical forest growth
[the 'pride of Jordan' of Jer. xii. 5, xlix. 19 = 1. 44, Zech. xi. 3], in
which its rushing stream is enveloped ' ; while on the S. and W. appear
the bleak hills of Judah (Stanley, ;S^. and P. 218).

the Oval of Jordan (Heb. Kikkdr, a 'round'). The Kikkdr was the
specific name of the basin consisting of the lower and broader part of
the Jordan-valley (beginning about 25 miles N. of the Dead Sea), and
including apparently (see p. 170 f.) the Dead Sea itself, and the

1 See however the following footnote.

MIL 10-14] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 153

ifc was well watered every where, before the Lord destroyed J"
Sodom and Gomorrah, like the garden of the Lord, like the
land of Egypt, as thou goest unto Zoar. 11 So Lot chose him
all the Plain of Jordan ; and Lot journeyed east : | and they P
separated themselves the one from the other. 12 Abram
dwelled in the land of Canaan, and Lot dwelled in the cities of
the Plain, | and moved his tent as far as Sodom. 13 Now the J
men of Sodom were wicked and sinners against the Lord
exceedingly. 14 And the Lord said unto Abram, after that

small plain at its S. end {v. 12, xix. 17, 25, 28, 29; Dt. xxxiv. 3;
2 S. xviii. 23) ; the ^Kikkdr of the Jordan' (here, ij. 11, and 1 K. vii. 46)
being in particular the part including the lower course of the Jordan
(see further DB. s.v. Plain, 4). The Jordan-valley, once (see p. 168)
a sea-bottom, contains large patches of salt and barren soil; but in
some parts, esp. about Jericho (where anciently there were beautiful
palm-groves), and along the banks of the river (cf. the last note), it is
extremely fertile, and produces exuberant vegetation (see IIG. 483 f ,
487, 489); and the writer, it seems, pictured it as having been still
more fertile than it was in his own day, before Sodom and Gomorrah
had been destroyed (xix. 24 — 28).

well watered. Especially about Jericho, and across the Jordan,
where numerous streams, descending into the Kikkar^ form lines of
verdure along the mountain sides. Ezek. (xvi. 48 f ) attributes the
sin of Sodom to its ease of living and material prosperity.

like the garden of Jehovah (Is. li. 3). I.e. the garden of Eden, —
well-irrigated, and a type of fertility (cf on ii. 8).

like the land of Egypt. Also irrigated by a river, and celebrated
for the fertility of its soil.

as thou goest unto Zo^ar^ near the SE. corner of the Dead Sea (see
p. 170). The words connect with well watered every where, and define
the S. limit of the area once, as the writer supposes, thus well-watered
and fertile'. But possibly Zo'an (Pesh.) should be read, the name of
the well-known city (Tanis) in the NE. of the Delta.

11. Such a fair prospect was more than Lot was able to resist : so
heedless of the prior claim possessed by his uncle, and heedless also of
the character of those whom he would thereby have living around him
{v. 13), he chose for himself the Kikkdr of Jordan.

13. The verse is intended partly to shew Lot's indifference, partly
to prepare for ch. xix., and partly also to illustrate the providence
which preserved Abram from association with such men.

14 — 17. The reward of Abram's unselfishness. Being now left
alone in the land, he receives a new and emphatic repetition of the

1 This verse, and v. 12^ (cf. xiv. 3), read, it must be admitted, as if the writer,
though he did not (p. 170) think of the cities of the Kikkdr as submerged, neverthe-
less pictured the Dead Sea as non-existent at this time. Cf. Gunkel, p. 159 f.

164 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xiii. 14-18

Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look J
from the place where thou art, northward and southward and
eastward and westward : 15 for all the land which thou sccst,
to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. 16 And I wiU
make thy seed as the dust of the earth : so that if a man can
number tlie dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be
numbered. 17 Arise, walk through the land in the length of it
and in the breadth of it ; for unto thee will I give it. 18 And
Abram moved his tent, and came and dwelt by the ^oaks of
Mamre, which are in Hebron, and built there an altar unto the
Lord.

1 Or, terebintlis

promises previously given (xii. 2, 7), and is encouraged (v. 17) to move
about freely in the country destined to become ultimately the possession
of his descendants.

In Gal. iii. 16 this passage, — or the similar one, xvii. 8, — is referred
to by St Paul as shewing that the promises given to Abram (the
' land ' being interpreted in a spiritual sense) were fulfilled in Christ.
On the argument of the apostle (in which ' seeds ' is shewn by post-Bibl.
Jewish usage to signify not contemporary, but successive generations),
see the present writer's note in the Expositor, Jan. 1889, p. 18 ff.

16. as the dust of the earth. So xxviii. 14. Cf. the comparison to
the stars, xv. 5, xxii. 17, xxvi. 4, and to the sand, xxii. 17, xxxii. 12.

18. Abram now moves southwards, as far as Hebron, on the high-
ground (or *hill country') of Judah (Jos. xv. 48 — 60, — Hebron is
3040 ft. above the Medit. Sea), 19 miles SSW. of Jerusalem.

the terebinths (xii. 6) of Mamre. So xviii. 1 (J) ; and xiv. 13
(where, as in xiv. 24, Mamre appears as the name of a local sheikh or
chief, the owner of the terebinths): 'Mamre' also occurs (in P) in
descriptions of the cave of Machpelah, which is said to be * in front of
Mamre,' xxiii. 17, 19 (where Mamre is identified with Hebron), xxv. 9,
xlix. 30, 1. 13. The site has not been identified; though if the present
mosque (p. 228) is really built over the cave of Machpelah, and if ' in
front of has its usual topographical sense of 'East of,' it will have
been not far W. of the present mosque. From Josephus' time (see BJ.
IV. 9. 7) to the present day, terebinths or oaks, called by the name of
Abraham, have been shewn at different spots near Hebron (see a view
of the present ' Oak of Abraham ' in L. and B. i. 283) ; but none has
any real claim to mark the authentic site of the ancient * Mamre ' (see
further particulars in the writer's art. Mamre in DB.y.

1 Sozomen [HE. ii. 4), in speaking of the 'Abraham's Oak' of Constantine's
time (two miles N. of Hebron), adds that it was regarded as 8ac:-ed, sacrifices being
offered beside it, and libations and other offerings being cast i ito a well close by,
until these observances were suppressed by Constantino as sup. 3rstitious. Cf. Eus.
Vita Const, ni. 63.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS 155

in Heh^on. Afterwards an important city of Judah : according to
Jos. XV. 13 f. taken by Caleb; and for 7 J years the seat of David's
kingdom (2 S. ii. 1 — 4, v. 1 — 5): 2 S. xv. 7, 12, also, shew that it
was the seat of a sanctuary. It is now a ' long stone town,' stretching
from NW. to SE. 'on the W. slope of a bare terraced hill.' Its modern
name is el-Halil, 'the friend,' abbreviated from 'the town of the friend
of God,' the name (see Is. xli. 8 ; 2 Ch. xx. 7 ; Jas. ii. 23) by which
Abraham is known among Mohammedans (Kor. iv. 124). Cf. on xxiii. 2.

*By thus separating from Abram, and voluntarily quitting Canaan, Lot
resigns his claim to it, and the later territorial relations of Moab and Amnion
(xix. 30 — 38), and Israel, are prefigured. At the same time, by the departure
of Lot, Abram becomes the central figure of the following narrative. The
incident is, further, narrated in such a way as to aflford a fresh illustration of
Abram's spiritual greatness, in his self-denying and peace-loving disposition,
and at the same time of God's providential care for him ' (Dillm.).

Chapter XIV.

Expedition of CJiedorla'omer and his allies against the cities
of the Kihkar, Abram's rescue of Lot, The episode of
Melchizedeh.

Abram appears here in a new character, not merely as a patriarch having
peaceful dealings with the natives of Palestine, but as a warrior, defeating with
a handful of followers a combination of powerful kings from the East. The
aim of the narrative is evidently to magnify Abram : he ' defeats kings, he is
blessed by a king, he will not take from a king even as much as a shoe-latchet^' :
he is, moreover, disinterested, independent, and highminded. The style and
phraseology of the chapter shew that it does not belong to either J, E, or P,
but that it is taken from some independent source (hence «S'aS'= special source) :
it has some affinities with P, but they are not sufficiently marked to justify its
being attributed to him: the general style and literary character of the
narrative suggest, however, that it is not of earlier date than the age of Ezekiel
and the exile (cf. p. xvi). The archaeological learning, implied in vv. (>, 7, if
not also in vv. 1 — 3, 8, 9, recalls the antiquarian notices in Dt. ii. 10—12, 20 —
23, iii. 9, 11, 13^, 14. The peculiarities of the narrative, its contrast with the
representations of J and E, and certain improbabilities which have been
supposed to attach to it, have led many to treat it as unhistorical : this question
will be better considered, after the chapter has been studied in detail, and the
bearing of recent archaeological discovery upon it has been estimated.

The following is, in briefs, the light which has been thrown by recent dis-
coveries upon the names of the four kings from the East, mentioned in v. 1.

^ Contrast the very different spirit and motives, with which he receives
presents in xii. 16.

2 See more fully, on some points, the writer's article in the Guardian, March 11,
1896.

ise THE BOOK OF GENESIS

1. Amraphel, king of Shin'ar. Shin'ar, we already know (see on x. 10),
is a Hebrew name of Babylonia. No name ^Amraphel' has been found as yet
in the inscriptions ; but there is a reasonable probability that it is a corrupt
representation of Hammurahiy the name of the 6th king of the first dynasty of
Babylon, of which we have information^ Hammurabi, according to a nearly
contemporary chronological register of part of this dynasty, recently dis-
covered 2, reigned for 43 years,— according to Prof. Sayce^, b.c. 2376—2333*:
as his own inscriptions testify, he was a powerful and successful ruler, who, by
his skill in organizing and consolidating the resources of his country, and his
victories over its rival, Elam, laid the foundation of its future greatness'. In
one of his inscriptions he is called ^adda ['father,' i.e. ruler] of Martu' or
the West Land, an expression commonly denoting Syria, Phoenicia, and
Palestine, and implying, consequently, if it has the same meaning here, that
he claimed to rule as far as the Mediterranean Sea (cf Masp. 11. 38 n.).

2. Arioch, king of Ellas ar. In all probability Eriaku (or Riaku), king
of Larsa^ now Senkereh, about midway between Babylon and the mouth of
the Euphrates, whose name is mentioned in many inscriptions, dating from his
own time^, and who was contemporary with Hammurabi. His inscriptions
shew that he was ruler not only of Larsa, but also of Nippur, Nisin, Ur (xi. 28),
and Eridu (p. 52 n) ; so we must picture him as ruling over a small principality
in S. Babylonia. Further, Eriaku is said to be the son of ' Kudurmabuk, add a
of YamutbaF.' Kudurmabuk, now, is not a Babylonian, but an Elamitish
name, — Elam being (x. 22) the mountainous region across the Tigris, E. of
Babylonia; and Yamutbal is shewn by other notices to have been a province in
the E. part of S. Babylonia, bordering on Elam, and at this time under Elamite
dominion. It thus appears that at the time in question the Elamite power had
obtained a footing in S. Babylonia : Kudurmabuk, we may suppose, ruled him-
self in Yamutbal, and, supported by him, his son, Eriaku, maintained himself in
Larsa and the surrounding parts of S. Babylonia. Eriaku's father, Kudur-

1 The 11 kings of this dynasty, with the lengths of their reigns {in all 311 years)
are given on a tablet found in 1880 by Mr Pinches in the British Museum. The
list may be seen in KB. 11. 286 ff., Maspero, 11. 27, BB. i. 226 (but the date here
given for the dynasty has been since abandoned by Hommel : see note 4, below), or
Sayce, Early Israel (1899), p. 281.

2 L. W. King, Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi, iii. (translations), 1900,
pp. Ivi. — Ixxi., 212 — 253: cf. Pinches, OT. in the light of the records dc. 211 ff.

3 Early Israel, p. 281.

4 The date b.c. depends in part upon statements made by later kings : as these
are not in all cases perfectly consistent, and the correctness of some of the figures
is on independent grounds open to question, other scholars arrive at somewhat
different dates for Hammurabi, as 2342—2288 (Bogers), 2287—2232 (Maspero),
c. 2200 (King), 2130—2087 (Hommel, Exp. Times, x. (1899), 211). See the
discussion of the subject in Eogers, Hist, of Bab. and Ass. (1900), i. 313 — 348.

^ See particulars of his reign in Maspero, 11. 39 — 44, or the Introd. to King,
op. cit. He constructed among other things a system of canals in Babylonia.
Recently also a very interesting code of laws promulgated by him, resembling in
some respects the civil and criminal legislation of Ex. xxi. — xxiii., has been
discovered: see Johns, The oldest Code of Laws in the world (1903).

6 KB. III. 1, p. 93 ff. The reading of the name has however been disputed,
and most Assyriologists prefer to read Rim-Sin (so in KB. : cf. Masp. 11. 29 n.).

^ See the inscription cited by the present writer in Hogarth's Authority and
Archaeology, p. 40 (from KB. m. 1, p. 99); Pinches, p. 219.

INTR0DUCTI3N TO CHAPTER XIV 167

mabuk, also receives the same title ^ adda of Martu,' which is given to
Hammurabi ; he appears therefore to have claimed the same kind of authority
over Syria and the West which was claimed by Hammurabi.

Eventually, however, the Elamite rule in S. Babylonia was brought to an
end, Hammurabi (as another inscription states) defeating both Eriaku and his
father Kudurmabuk, and, in his 31st year, adding Yamutbal to his domain ^.
It may be conjectured that it was after this victory, which secured Ham-
murabi's supremacy over the whole of Babylonia, that he assumed the title of
^adda of Martu,' quoted above.

3. Chedorla^omer, king of Elam. Elam (x. 22) has been long known as
an important country, with a very ancient civilization, repeatedly mentioned in
the inscriptions ; Chedorla'omer also was clearly a genuine Elamite name, — for
Kudur (meaning perhaps ' servant ') was known to occur in other proper names
belonging to Elam, and La'omer, or, as it might be pronounced, Lagomer (lxx.
Aoyofifiop), is the name of an Elamite deity, mentioned by Asshurbanipal {KB. ii.
205),— but until lately no independent mention of it had been found. In 1892,
however, Mr T. G. Pinches ^ discovered in the British Museum three inscribed
tablets, containing a name, which, though the pronunciation of the middle
part is not certain, has been read conjecturally Kudurlach{'i)gumal, or
(Hommel) Kudurdugmal, and so regarded as corresponding to the Heb.
ChedorW diner. Other Assyriologists, however, hold that the facts do not
justify this identification 3; so that, at best, it must be considered doubtful.
The tablets are of very late date {c. 300 B.C.), and are written also in a florid,
poetical style, so that they have not the value of contemporary records : at the
same time it is not unreasonable to suppose that they are based upon more
ancient materials, and preserve the memory of genuine historical facts. The
tablets are much mutilated in parts, but their general gist is clear: they
describe how Kudurlachgumal invaded Babylonia with his troops, plundering
its cities and temples, and exercising sovereignty in Babylon itself. A couple
of extracts may be quoted —

(1) The gods... in their faithful counsel to Kudurlachgumal, king of Elam,
said (?), 'Descend,' and the thing that unto them was good [they performed,
and] he exercised sovereignty in Babylon, [and] placed [his throne ?] in Babylon,

the city of the king of the gods, Marduk Dur-sir-ilani, the son of

Eri-6kua, who [had carried off?] the spoil, sat [on] the throne of dominion.

(2) Who is Kudurlachgu[mal], the maker of the evils ? He has assembled
also the Umman-manda [see on v. 1, below] ; he has laid in ruins.

If J however, Kudurlachgumal is rightly identified with Chedorla'omer, the
Eri-^kua mentioned here can hardly be different from the Eriaku, king of
Larsa, referred to above. The inscriptions do not explain the relative positions
of Kudurlachgumal and Kudurmabuk, Eriaku's father; but it may be con-
jectured that Kudurlachgumal (as king of Elam) was over-lord of Kudurmabuk,
the adda of Yamutbal, and of his son Eriaku, king of Larsa. Kudurlach-
gumal's victories in Babylonia will naturally have preceded Hammurabi's final

1 See King, p. Ixvii., and the ancient chronicle, p. 237, or Pinches, p. 212.

2 Tram. Vict. Inst. xxix. 45 ff. ; OT. in the light &c. 223 £f.

■■* King, Letters of Hammurabi, i. (1898), liv. — lvi. (see an abstract of his
argument in the Addenda); Ball, p. 70 j Zimmern, KAT.^ 486.

158 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xiv. i, ,

and successful effort to shake off the Elamite supremacy, and bring to an end
the kingdom of Eriaku. The expedition narrated in the present chapter, if
historical, must also be assigned to the same period : Kudurlachgumal, it
must be assumed, in virtue of the supremacy exercised by him over Babylonia,
obliged Hammurabi to take part vk'ith him in his campaign^

4. Tidied, king of Goiim. A ' Tudchula, son of Gazza/ is mentioned in one
of the three inscriptions found by Mr Pinches, as spoiling and plundering ; the
mutilated condition of the tablet does not permit anything more definite to bo
said of him 2.

XIV. 1 And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king ,
of Shinar, Arioch king of EUasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam,
and Tidal king of ^ Goiim, 2 that they made war with Bera king
of Sodom, and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of

1 Or, nations

1 — 4. The five kings of the cities of the Kikkdr (xiii. 10) revolt
against Chedorla'omer.

1. On the kings mentioned in this verse, see the Introd. above.
Goiim. The ordinary Heb. word for 'nations' (so AV.) ; as this,

however, seems to yield no satisfactory sense, RV. understands the
word as a proper name. No people Goiim is, however, otherwise
known; and hence Sir H. Rawlinson's conjecture has been widely
accepted, that Goiim is a corruption of Giitim, the Guti of the inscrip-
tions, a people living E. of the Little Zab, corresponding to the E. part
of the present Kurdistan. Professor Sayce, however, suggests that
Goiim may be retained in its usual sense of * nations,' and understood
of the Umman-manda, or ' hordes ' of northern peoples, who are men-
tioned from time to time in the inscriptions as invading Assjrria, and
who, on one of the tablets quoted above (p. 157), are also said to have
been gathered together by Kudurlachgumal.

2. Of the kings named in this verse, nothing is known beyond
what is stated in the present chapter. Bera' and Birsha' may be
intended by the writer to suggest the meanings with evil (J^l?) and
with wickedness (J'^'?.?), respectively.

Shin' ah. For the name, Friedr. Delitzsch {Paradies, 294) compares
SanihUy the name of an Ammonite king mentioned by Tiglath-
pileser III. {KAT.' p. 257).

1 Chedorla'omer is evidently the leader of the expedition in Gen. xiv. {vv. 4, 5).

2 Mr King {I.e. p. liii.), and Mr Ball (p. 70) question also the identifications of
Eri-Skua, and Tudchula: in particular, Mr King observes, neither Eri-ekua nor
Tudchula is in the inscriptions styled 'king.' See also KAT.^ 367.

The mention of Chedorla'omer ('Kudur-luggamar,' 'Kudur-Laghgharaar') quoted
by Hommel, AHT. 173—180 (cf. 165, 195), and Sayce, EHH. pp. 12 w., 27, ia
admitted to rest upon a false reading of Dr Scheil's (see Sayce, in the Exp. Times,
Mar. 1899, p. 267, Ball, p. 68; and more fully King, I.e. p. xxv. ff.): the reading
Kudur-Laghghamar, in Sayce, EHH. 26—8, falls through on the same ground. In
Hommel's treatment of Gen. xiv. in AHT. p. 147 ff., there is much that is very
arbitrary and hypothetical.

XIV. .-5] THE BOOK OF GEN7^]SIS 169

Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela SS
(the same is Zoar). 3 All these ^joined together in the vale of
Siddim (the same is the Salt Sea). 4 Twelve years they served
Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. 5 And
in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that
were with him, and smote the Rephaim in Ashteroth-karnaim,

^ Or, joined themselves together against

Admah and Zeboiim are mentioned also in x. 19, and (as destroyed,
like Sodom and Gomorrah) Dt. xxix. 23, Hos. xi, 8.

Bela'. The name is found only here and v. 8\ The five cities
here mentioned are in Wisd. x. 6 called the * Pentapolis ' : they were
situated, in all probability, at the extreme S. end of the Dead Sea
(see p. 170 f ).

3. All these (the kings mentioned in v. 1) Joined together in.
More exactly, joined together (and came) unto, i.e. came as allies unto.

the vale of Siddim. Mentioned only in this chapter. It is identi-
fied here with the Dead Sea, — a statement which can be correct, only if
the reference is to the southern part of the Sea, which is very much
shallower than the northern part, and where in Abram's time there
ma^/ have been dry land (cf pp. 169, 171).

the Salt Sea. One of the Biblical names of what we know as the
Dead Sea, so called on account of its excessive saltness, — ordinary sea-
water containing about 6 per cent, of salts, whereas the water of the
Dead Sea contains more than four times as much (about 24*50 per
cent.). Its saltness is due to the character of the soil about it : saline
springs flow into it, and at its SW. end there is a ridge of cliffs, some
600 feet high, and five miles long, composed entirely of rock-salt (cf.
p. 169). The name recurs Nu. xxxiv. 3, Dt. iii. 17, Jos. iii. 16, al.

4. rebelled. No doubt, by refusing the customary annual tribute.
Cf 2 K. xviii. 7, xxiv. 1, 20.

5 — 9. The march of Chedorla'omer and his allies. It may be pre-
sumed that, following the usual route from Babylonia to Palestine, they
would march up along the Euphrates to Carchemish ; and, crossing the
river there (cf on xii. 4), would turn southwards, and, passing Damascus,
come down upon the places mentioned on the E. of Jordan. In
describing these places the writer uses the names of prehistoric peoples
who, according to tradition, had been their original inhabitants.

the Eephaim. A giant aboriginal race, reputed to have once in-
habited parts of Palestine, from whom certain place-names are derived,
and whose descendants — or reputed descendants — are alluded to in
historical times. Thus there was a *vale {'emek) of Rephaim ' SW. of

1 Hommel's attempted identification [AHT. 195—8) with a city (?) of uncertain
site, mentioned in Ass. under the name Malkd, Margu, &g., has been shewn by
Mr Johns {Expositor, Aug. 1898, pp. 158—60) to rest upon a series of misunder-
standings.

160 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xiv. 5, 6

and the Zuzim in Ham, and the Emim in ^Shaveh-kiriathaim, i.
6 and the Horites in their mount Seir, unto El-paran, which is by

^ Or, the plain of Kiriathaim

Jerusalem (Jos. xv. 8, al); in 2 S. xxi. 16, 18, 20, 22, various
doughty warriors of Gath are described as * sons of the Kapha ' (' the
Kapha' being meant collectively = 'the Rephaim') ; and in Dt. iii. 11,
Og, king of Bashan — ^just the region here referred to (see the next
note) — is stated to have been * of the remnant of the Rephaim.'

* A shte7'otk-karnaim. Probably Tell ^Ashterd^ a hill, with remains
of ancient walls, in the region of the ancient Bashan, about 21 m. E. ot
the Sea of GaHlee. See further DB., or EncB.^ s.v. Ashtarotil

Zuzim. Probably the same as the Zamzummimy according to the
archaeological note Dt. ii. 20, 21, the Ammonite name of a giant
people, the original inhabitants of the region NE. of the Dead Sea,
afterwards occupied by the Ammonites. See further DB. s.v.

in Ham. Not mentioned elsewhere, but conjectured (from the
context) to have been the ancient name of the Ammonite capital
Rabbath-Ammon (2 S. xii. 26, al.)j 25 m. NE. of the upper end of the
Dead Sea.

the Emim. According to Dt. ii. 10 f., the Moabite name of a giant
people, the original inhabitants of the territory E. of the Dead Sea,
afterwards occupied by the Moabites.

Shaveh-hiriathaim, or the plain of Kiriathaim. Kiriathaim (Jos.
xiii. 19, Jer. xlviii. 1, al.) is probably the modern Kureydt^ 10 m. N. of
the Arnon and 10 m. E. of the Dead Sea.

6. the Horites. The original inhabitants of Seir (xxxvi. 8, and
frequently), the mountainous country S. of the Dead Sea, and E. of the
great gorge now called the Wddy el-Arahahy occupied afterwards by
the Edomites. See Dt. ii. 12, 22, and on ch. xxxvi.

^El-paran. I.e. 'El (lxx. the terebinth : cf. on xii. 6) of Paran^
most probably identical with the place elsewhere called (with the fem.
term.) 'Elath (AiXaO), or 'Eloth (Dt. ii. 8, 1 K. ix. 26, al.), the later
well-known and important harbour at the head of the Gulf of 'Akabah
(also, fiom the classical name of Elath, AtAaj/a, called the Aelanitic
Gulf)\

The site of Par an (1 K. xi. 18) is unknown : it may be inferred
from the present passage that it was somewhere near Elath. The
wilderness will be naturally the one bordering on Elath, called else-
where the * wilderness of Paran' (ch. xxi. 21, at.), the bare and elevated
plateau of limestone, now called et-Tih, bounded on the E. by the N.
end of the Gulf of 'Akabah and the *ArS,bah, and stretching out west-
wards to the present isthmus of Suez.

1 Elath has always been celebrated for its date-palms (cf. Strabo, xvi. 776) ; and
hence perhaps its name (for 'eZ, ^eldh, may in Sem. dialects other than Heb. have
denoted, like the Aram. 'iZctn, a large tree generally: cf. Ex. xv. 27).

XIV. 6, 7] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 161

the wilderness. 7 And they returned, and came to En-mishpat SS
(the same is Kadesh), and smote all the ^country of the
Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwelt in Ilazazon-tamar.

1 Ueh. field.

7. returned. Better, turned back, making viz. the sharp angle
necessary for one arriving at Elath from the NE. (perhaps down the
steep Wddi/ el-Ithm, Rob. i. 174) in order to go on to Kadesh (70 m.
W. of N. fi'om Elath). The route from Elath to Kadesh would involve
an ascent of 1500 ft. up one of the wadys on the W. of the 'Arabah
(Rob. I. 174 f., 186 f.), in order to reach the wilderness of Paran, on
which Kadesh lay (Nu. xiii. 26).

^En-Mishpat. I.e. Spring of judgement] a sacred fountain, — its
other name, Kadesh, signifies consecrated, sacred, — at which, as at an
oracle or sanctuary, contending parties, it may be supposed, sought
authoritative settlement of their disputes \

Kadesh. The site, for long entirely lost, was identified by the
Rev. J. Rowlands, in 1842, with 'Ain-Kadish, a spring issuing forth in
a wady, at the foot of a low range of limestone hills, about 50 m. S. of
Beer-sheba, and forming a little oasis of shrubs and flowers in the midst
of the arid stone-covered desert of et-Tih. The site was afterwards
lost again, till it was re-discovered by Dr Trumbull in 1881 {Kadesh-
harnea, 1884, pp. 238 — 75). There is an interesting account of *Ain-
Kadish, with photographs and plan, in the Biblical World (Chicago),
May, 1901, p. 327 IF.

country. lAt. field: cf. xxxii. 3, xxxvi. 35, Jud. v. 4, Ru. i. 1.

the * Amalekites. A predatory tribe, whose home was in and about
(Nu. xiii. 29, xiv. 25, 43, 45) the desert et-Tih, just referred to, and
who in general character very much resembled the modern Bedawin
who range over the same region. They are described as opposing the
Israelites, upon their attempting to enter the peninsula of Sinai
JEx. xvii. 8 — 16) ; and were afterwards severely smitten by Saul
^1 S. XV.), though not exterminated (1 S. xxx.). Cf. on xxxvi. 12.

the Amorites. See on x. 16. The term is used here, as in xv. 16,
xlviii. 22, Nu. xiii. 29 &c., in its vaguer sense, of the pre-Isr. population
of Canaan generally.

in Hazazon-tamar. Identified in 2 Ch. xx. 2 with 'En-gedi, which
is situated, in an almost inaccessible position, high up on the cliffs at
the mouth (N. side) of the deep gorge of tbe Wddy Ghdr (also called
the Wddy Kelb), which runs down into the Dead Sea, at about the
middle of its W. shore. The roads from Jerusalem and Carmel (S. of
Hebron) converge on the rough and desert table-land above this wady,
at about a mile from the sea, and 2,000 ft. above it : the path thence
* descends by zigzags, often at the steepest angle practicable for horses,

1 On sacred springs among the Semites, see Rel. Sem. 127 f., 151 — 168 (^ 134 f.,
166 — 184). Springing, or, as the Hebrews termed it (cf. on xxvi. 19), 'living'
water, suggested the presence of a living agent, or spirit.

D. 11

162 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xiv. s-io

8 And there went out the king of Sodom, and the king ofi
Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboiim,
and the king of Bela (the same is Zoar) ; and they set the battle
in array against them in the vale of Siddim ; 9 against Cliedor-
laomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of Goiim, and Amraphcl
king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar ; four kings against
the five. 10 Now the vale of Siddim was full of ^ slime pits ;

^ That is, bitumen pits,

and is carried partly along ledges or shelves on the perpendicular face
of the cliff, and then down the almost equally steep debris' (Rob.
I. 503). At a point 1,340 ft. down; and 610 ft. above the sea, the
'spring' of *En-gedi bursts out from under a great boulder; and a
jungle of canes and other vegetation marks the line along which the
stream dashes down to the sea below. There are traces of the ancient
village (Euseb. Onom. 254) a little below the spring. At the foot of
the descent there is a small, shingly plain, with some scanty shrubs
growing on it. There is no passage along the shore northwards, except
by clambering or wading round promontories^; there is, however, a
rough path to the S., followed by Tristram'^, and forming apparently
the route along which the Moabites and Ammonites made an inroad
into Judah in the days of Jehoshaphat (2 Oh. xx. 2)'.

Knob, and Holz., however, thinking 'En-gedi to be too far to the
N., would identify Hazazon-tamar with Thamara (? the Tamar of
Ez. xlvii. 19, xlviii. 28), a village on the road between Elath and
Hebron (Onom. 210, cf 85), — now, perhaps (Rob. ii. 202*), Kv/rnuhy
about 20 m. WSW. of the S. end of the Dead Sea. If this identifica-
tion be correct, Chedorla'omer would certainly have reached his goal
(v. 3) by an easier and more probable route*.

8 — 12. Defeat of the kings of the Pentapolis in the vale of Siddim,
and the capture of Lot.

8, 9. The list of names is repeated, in order to impress the reader
with the greatness of the occasion : it was a conflict of kings against
kings.

10. full o/ bitumen wells. The petroleum" oozed out from holes
in the ground, which proved fatal to the retreating army. Such wells
are not known now in the neighbourhood of the Dead Sea : but the

1 Tristram, Land of Israel, 252, 274, 278 ; Bob. i. 506.

2 Ibid. pp. 296—8, 310—16.
* See further HG. 269—72 ; PEFM. ni. 384—6.
^ Though the identification rests upon a doubtful reading: see Lagarde's text

of the Onom., and Expos. Times, xii. (1901), 288, 336.

«5 'Tamar' however means & palm-tree i and Cheyne {EncB. 1977) asks, Could
palms ever have grown at Kurnub? For palms at En-gedi, see Ecclus. xxiv. 14
{EncB. 1293, on the reading), and Jos. Ant. ix. 1. 2.

*" Bitumen is petroleum (which arises from the decomposition of vegetable and
animal matter under water), hardened by evaporation and oxidissation (Dawson,
Egypt and Syria^ p. 117 f.).

XIV. IO-I5] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 163

and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and they fell there, SS
and they that remained fled to the mountain. 11 And they
took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their
victuals, and went their way. 12 And they took Lot, Abram's
brother's son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed.
13 And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the
Hebrew : now he dwelt by the ^oaks of Mamre the Amorite,
brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner ; and these were con-
federate with Abram. 14 And when Abram heard that his
brother was taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in
his house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued as far as
Dan. 15 And he divided himself against them by night, he and
his servants, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah,

^ Or, terebinths

strata about it are rich in bituminous matter; the ancients state that
masses of bitumen were often found floating upon it (whence it was
called by Josephus and others the * Asphaltic Lake ') ; and after earth-
quakes similar masses still appear.

and they fell there. I.e. the people, not the kings (see v. 17).

the mountain. The mountains of Moab, on the E. side of the sea.

13 — 16. Abram's rescue of Lot.

13. the Hebrew. See on xi. 14.

the terebinths of Mamre. See xiii. 18. As was remarked in the
note there, Mamre, here and «. 24, appears as the name of a person.

Eshcol. In Nu. xiii. 23 f , the name of a wady, near Hebron; and
said also there to have been so named from the * cluster* of grapes
which the spies cut in it.

14. brother. I.e. kinsman : so 'o. 16. Cf. on xiii. 8.

led forth. The Heb. word, meaning properly to empty (xiii. 35), is
used of drawing out a sword from its sheath (Ex. xv. 9, al.) : so, if the
text is sound, the meaning here seems to be drew out rapidly and in
full numbers.

born in his house. I.e. slaves born and brought up in his household,
opp. to those who had been purchased (cf. xvii. 12, 13, 23, 27) ; and
as such regarded as specially attached and trustworthy (Dillm.).

Dan. In the far N. of Canaan, near the foot of Hermon, now Tell
el-Kadi. At the time in question, it would however be called Laish
(Josh. xix. 47), or Leshem (.Jud. xviii. 29) : it only received the name
of Dan after its capture by a band of Danites, as narrated in Jud. xviii.
(more briefly, Josh. xix. 47).

15. divided himself &c. I.e. divided his men into bands, which
fell on the enemy by night from diflerent directions, and so surprised
them. Cf. the same stratagem, Jud. vii. 16 ff., 1 S. xi. 11.

Hobah. Prob. E[oba, a place about 50 m. N. of Damascus, and

11—2

164 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xiv. 15-18

which is on the ^left hand of Damascus. 16 And he brought aSJI
back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and
his goods, and the women also, and the people. 17 And the
king of Sodom went out to meet him, after his return from the
slaughter of Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him, at
the vale of Shaveh (the same is the King's Vale). 18 And
Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine:

1 Or, north

consequently some 100 m. from Dan. For * left ' in the sense of North,
see Ez. xvi. 46 ; and comp. the ' right-hand ' in the sense of the South,
Ps. Ixxxix. 12, and frequently. The Hebrews, in fixing the quarters of
the heavens, turned always to the East (cf on xv. 19, xvi. 12).

17. The king of Sodom comes out to welcome Abram back, and to
receive the rescued captives.

from the slaughter of. Lit. from smiting (as v. 15), — implying
a defeat, and, it may be, a severe one (2 Sam. viii. 13), but not neces-
sarily the actual ' slaughter ' of the persons named.

the King's Vale (Pt?l?). Mentioned in 2 S. xviii. 18 (RV., unfortu-
nately, * dale' for the same Heb.), as the place in which the childless
Absalom reared a memorial for himself that his name might not be
forgotten. Probably some spot near Jerusalem (according to Jos.
Ant. VII. 10. 3, two stadia from it), but not identified.

18 — 20. The episode of Melchizedek.

18. Melchizedek. To the Hebrews the name doubtless suggested
the meaning 'king of righteousness' (Heb. vii. 2), or *my king is
righteousness ' : but Zedek was probably in fact the name of a Phoen.
deity (ci. the n. pr. Adoni-zedek, 'my lord is Zedek,' Josh. x. 1 [cf.
Adonijah, * my lord is Jah '1 ; and the Phoen. name Zedek-melek [cf.
Elimelech], 'Zedek is king'); and it is quite possible that the name
originally meant 'my king is Zedek.'

Salem. Intended probably (Gunkel) as an archaic name for Jeru-
salem, though it is found elsewhere in this sense only Ps. Ixxvi. 2, and
though the Tel el-Amama letters shew that Jerusalem was already
called Uru-salim, c. 1400 B.C. Melchizedek was no doubt a figure
handed down by tradition ; and the intention of the passage seems to
be to represent him as the forerunner and prototype of the Isr.
monarchy, and Isr. priesthood, both of which had afterwards their
principal seat at Jerusalem, and at the same time as a representative
of the true religion, to whom Abram, Israel's most illustrious ancestor,
already paid tithes. In Josh. x. 1 ff . a king of Jerusalem has the
name Adoni-zedek, which is a compound similar in form to Mel-
chizedek*.

1 The identification of Salem with Jerusalem is as old as Jos., Ant. i. 10, 2.
Jerome's identification with the Salim of John iii. 23, now Salhn, 2 m. W. of the
Jordan, and 6 m. S. of Scythopolis (Bethshean), has little to recommend it.

XIV. i8-.o] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 166

and he was priest of ^God Most High. 19 And he blessed him, SS
and said, Blessed be Abram of ^God Most High, ^ possessor of
heaven and earth : 20 and blessed be ^God Most High, which

1 Heb. El Elyon, 2 Qr, maker

bread and wine. As refreshment for Abram's men. Bread and
water would have been sufficient (Dt. xxiii. 4) ; but Melchizedek wished
to honour Abram. Nothing is said about a sacrifice (cf. Westcott,
Hebrews^ p. 201 n.), _ _

^ God Most^ High. Heb. 'El 'Ely on. 'El (' God ') was often distin-
guished by different epithets, bringing out different aspects of the
Divine nature, as in 'El Shaddai (xvii. 1), *God Everlasting' (xxi.
33), *God of Bethel' (xxxv. 7); and so the Canaanite has here his
'El 'Elydn\ The name may be actually that of an ancient Canaanite
deity ^j but it may also have been merely chosen by the narrator as
a name which on the one hand would not be unsuitable for a Canaanite
to use, and on the other hand was capable of being referred to Jehovah',
and so fell in with his evident desire to represent Melchizedek as
a worshipper of the true God. To suppose, however, even upon the
former alternative, that a knowledge of the true God really existed in
the Canaanite city, would be against analogy : rather, in that case,
'El 'Elyon will have been a Canaanite deity, whom his worshippers
recognized as the highest^ in opposition to other, inferior deities, and
who could conseijuently be the more readily identified with Jehovah.

19, 20. Melchizedek blesses Abram in the name of his God ; and
praises his God for Abram's successes. The blessing is semi-poetical in
style, and unusual words are employed.

19. possessor. Better, producer, or, as we should probably say,
author. The word means properly to acquire, — usually by buying

^ The attachment of special epithets to the names of deities was common in the
ancient world: Zeus, Athene, &;c. appear often with local or other epithets; and
among Semitic peoples we have, for instance, Baal of Pe'or, Baal of the covenant
(Jud. viii. 33), and in inscriptions Baal of Lebanon, Baal of Heaven, &c.

2 Ace. to Philo of Byblus {ap. Euseb. Fraep. Ev. i. 10, §§ 11, 12) there was in
the Phoen. theogony a certain 'EXiovv KaXo^i/xevos "T\pL<TTo$, 'father of heaven and
earth,' who was slain in an encounter with wild beasts, and afterwards divinized.
This euhemeristic legend may at least be taken as evidence that 'Elyon was a
divine title among the Phoenicians ; but it does not, unfortunatel v, tell us anything
definite about the antiquity of the title. In inscriptions of the Graeco-Koman
period, chiefly from parts of Greece, the Bosporus, Asia Minor, Palmyra, and
Phoenicia (cf. EncB. i. 70), the title debs (or Ze«>s) vrpiaTos frequently occurs; but
Schiirer (who has collected and discussed the passages in an interesting study on
•The Jews and the communities of cre^bixevoL debv ij\f/i(rTov in the Bosporus,' in the
Sitzungsberichte of the Berlin Academy, 1897, p. 200 ff. ) has made it probable that
these are mostly the expression of a monotheistic tendency prevalent at the time,
and due, at least in part, to Jewish influence. It is thus doubtful whether
even the Phoen. examples rest upon genuine native usage, though in view of
the statement of Philo there is some presumption that this is the case (cf. Schiirer,
p. 214 w.).

3 'Ely on is a common poet, title of Jehovah in the OT.; e.g. Nu. xxiv. 16,
Ps. xviii. 13.

166 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xiv. .o-h

hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him ^.S
a tenth of all. 21 And the king of Sodom said unto Abram,
Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself. 22 And
Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto
the Lord, ^God Most High, ^ possessor of heaven and earth,

23 that I will not take a thread nor a shoelatchet nor aught
that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich :

24 ^save only that which the young men have eaten, and the

1 Heb. El Elyon. 2 Qr, maker

* Or, let there be nothing for me; only that dc.

(Gen. XXV. 10, and often), but also in other ways : applied to God, it
denotes Him as the author — here and v. 22 of nature, Dt. xxxii. 6 of
Israel's national existence, Ps. cxxxix. 13 of the human frame, Pr. viii.
22 of the personified Wisdom [all].

20. delivered. Found elsewhere only Hos. xi. 8, Pr. iv. 9, and to
be restored in Is. Ixiv. 7 (see RVm.).

a tenth of all. I.e. of all the booty (cf Heb. vii. 4). The custom
of paying tithes to a priesthood or sanctuary was widely diffused in
antiquity. The later Heb. law exacted tithe only on the produce of
the soil, and on cattle : but among other nations it was exacted on
many other sources of revenue ; among the Greeks, for instance, we read
of tithe being paid on spoil taken in war, on gains made in trade, on
confiscated property, &c., not less than on the annual crops. The
temples in Babylonia, at least in the time of Nebuchadnezzar and his
successors, were largely supported by eshru, or tithe (Sayce, Pair.
Pal. 175). In his payment of tithe to the priest, not less than in his
receiving the blessing from him, Abram becomes a pattern to the
Israelites of a later day (cf on xxviii. 22).

21 — 24. Resumption of the narrative begun in v. 17, but inter-
rupted by the episode described in vv. 18 — 20. Abram, as captor,
would have a claim to the whole of the booty : the king of Sodom
proposes a compromise. But Abram firmly declines to accept anything :
he had not made war for his own aggrandisement, and he will lay him-
self under no semblance of obligation to the king of Sodom. He only
{v. 24) makes a reservation on behalf of his servants and allies.

22. Abram swears by Melchizedek's God, whom the narrator, — or,
more probably, perhaps, a later glossator (for * Jehovah * is omitted in
Lxx., Pesh.), — identifies here with Jehovah.

/ lift up (viz. now, at the present moment) mine hand. I.e. /
swear. To ' lift up the hand ' is the gesture of a person taking an oath, {
impl3dng that he appeals to God as a witness to the truth of his affirma-
tion : so (with j^tJ'J for Dnn) Ex. vi. 8, Nu. xiv. 30, Ps. cvi. 26 RV.
(from Ez. xx. 23 : misrendered in PBV.), al. (esp. Ez.).

23. shoelatchet. Sandal-thong, fig. of something insignificant.

24. Abram asks only that his servants may be allowed what they

XIV. 24] THE BOOK OF GEKESIS 167

portion of the men which went with me ; Aner, Eshcol, and jS3
Mamre, let them take their portion.

have eaten of the recovered provisions (w. 11, 16), and that his three
allies may have the usual share of the spoil.

save &c. Not at all ! (ht. Apart from me^ — deprecating : exactly
so xli. 16) (give me) onfy that which &c. — It is mentioned here for the
first time that Abram's three allies (v. 13) had accompanied him.

On Melchizedek. In Ps. ex. (which is addressed to an Israelitish king)
Melchizedek is referred to (' Thou art a priest for ever after the manner^ of
Melchizedek,' i.e. priest and king alike) as a type, consecrated by antiquity, to
which the ideal king of Israel, ruling upon the same spot, must conform : j
Melchizedek was priest as well as king, and the ideal king of Israel must be
priest as well as king likewise. In the NT. the writer of the Epistle to the .
Hebrews quotes both Gen. xiv. and Ps. ex. in his proof of the priesthood of /
Christ. In Heb. v. 6, 10, vi. 20, Ps. ex. 4 is quoted to shew that a priesthood '
such as that of Melchizedek is promised to the ideal king ; vii. 1 — 3 enumerates
the points in which Melchizedek is typical of Christ (in his name and title, in
bis priesthood being not represented as in any way dependent upon his priestly
descent, or as being interrupted by his death) ; vii. 4 — 10 it is shewn (by refer-
ence to Gen. xiv.) how Melchizedek was superior to both Abraham and Levi ;
vii. 11 — 28 it is shewn (by reference to Ps. ex.) in what respects the priesthood
which he typified (i.e. Christ's) was superior to the Levitical priesthood. In
his treatment of the narrative in Gen. xiv. it is to be observed, as Bp Westcott *
has pointed out {Hebrews^ p. 199 f.), that the writer of the Epistle adopts an,f
ideal interpretation : he * interprets the Scriptural picture of Melchizedek, and'
does not attempt to realize the historical person of Melchizedek'; he does notl
imply that that was true of him literally as a hving man (e.g. ' without father,
without mother,' having no * end of hfe ') which is suggested in the ideal inter-
pretation which he gives: in other words it is 'the Biblical record of
Melchizedek, and not Melchizedek himself,' which is taken by him as a type of
Christ. — The bread and wine brought forth by Melchizedek for the refresh-
ment of Abram and his men have, from Clem. Alex.^ onwards, been very /
commonly regarded in the Christian Church as typical of the spiritual refresh- '
ment afforded by the Eucharist.

No mention of Melchizedek has as yet been found in the inscriptions. The I
Tel el-Amarna tablets mention Uru-salim (Jerusalem), and they include seven *
letters from its governor, Abdi-hiba, to Amendphis IV.^ The general purport
of these letters is to ask help from the Egyptian court : Abdi-hiba is beset by
foes; he has been traduced to his Egyptian sovereign; and unless help is
speedily forthcoming, the province under his rule will be lost to Egypt. In
the course of his letters he uses an expression, which has been supposed by Prof.
Sayce to illustrate the position assigned to Melchizedek in Gen. xiv., 'Tliey

^ Not • order,' as though an 'order' of priesthood were referred to.
* Strom. TV. 25, § 161 eh tvttov evxapiffrlas.

8 Winckler, KB. v. 303—315 (Nos. 179—185); Ball, Light from the East,
pp. 89—98 (No. 184 omitted).

168 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

slander me before the king, my lord, (saying,) " Abdi-hiba has revolted against
the king his lord ! " Behold, as for me, neither my father nor my mother set
me in this place : the arm of the mighty king [Winckler, Ball : the mighty arm
of the king] established me in [lit. caused me to enter] my father's house ;
wherefore then should / do evil to the king my lord^?' This * mighty king,'
now, is supposed by Prof. Sayce to be Abdi-hiba's god : and so it is inferred
that he was both priest and king, like Melchizedek. But, to say iiotliing of
the fact that testimony respecting Abdi-hiba, c. 1400 B.C., is of virtmdly no
value respecting Melchizedek, whc (if Amraphel be Hammurabi) must have
lived some 8 — 900 years previously, there is no justification whatever for the
inference itself: the letters of Abdi-hiba do not afford the smallest ground for
the supposition that he was either Spriest' or *king in Jerusalem ; and the
context shews (as Jastrow, Ball, and other Assyriologists do not doubt) that
the * mighty king' is simply Amendphis IV. himself; Abdi-hiba pleads that, as
he owes his position not to his birth, but to the pleasure of the king, he is not
likely to have rebelled against him. Another passage of the same letters is
supposed by Prof. Sayce to contain the name of a god * Salim,' wlio is declared
to be identical with the ' God Most High ' of Gen. xiv. ; but no other Assyriolo-
gist recognizes a god Salim in the passage at all 2. The letters of Abdi-hiba
are of great interest, as shewing that already in B.C. 1400 Jerusalem was a
stronghold and an important place in Canaan : but they contain absolutely
nothing which has any bearing on Melchizedek ; and everything which Prof.
Sayce has inferred from them on the subject will be found, if examined, to be
destitute of solid foundation 3.

The Vale ofSiddim and the Dead Sea. The probable site of the Cities of
the Kikkdr. It is impossible to discuss the question of the site of the Cities of
the Plain without giving some account of the geological character of the Head
Sea and of the surrounding strata. The Head Sea is about 46 miles long by
10 broad : it lies at the S. end of the deep trough or depression through which
the Jordan flows, its surface being 1,292 ft. below the Mediterranean Sea, and
some 3,900 ft. below Jerusalem. This deep trough, called in ancient times the
*Ar^bah [Ht. l 1 RVm.], and now el-Ghor [i.e. ' the Hollow '], consists of a
great 'fault' or fracture in the earth's crust, formed originally in the Tertiary
period, when Palestine was first elevated above the sea: in the fissure a
portion of the ocean was imprisoned, and so, in ages long before the appear-
ance of man upon the earth, there was a great inland sea extending from Lake
Huleh (usually identified with the waters of Merom) to the Head Sea, the
deposits from which are still clearly visible in the mounds and ridges of grey
marl found in many parts of the Jordan-valley, especially about Jericho, and

1 Monuments, p. 175; Patr. Pal. p. 72 f.; and elsewhere (cf. KHII. 28 f.). See
Winckler, No. 179. 6—15, Ball, p. 89. The words 'Neither my father nor my
mother' &c., recur also in Nos. 180. 25—28, and 181. 13—15 (Ball, p. 91 his).

2 The words in No. 183. 14, 15, rendered by Professor Sayce {Patr. Pal. 144)
•the city of the mountain of Jerusalem, the city of the temple of the god Ninip
(whose) name (there is) Salim,' are rendered by Zimmern, Winckler, and BaJl
(p. 93), *a city of the territory of Jerusalem, whose name is Beth-Ninip.'

^ See further an art. by the writer in the Guardian, Apr. 8, 1896, with the refer-
ences. Mr Pinches substantially agrees {OT. in the light &c. 233—6, 239 f.).

THE VALE OF SIDDIM AND THE DEAD SEA 169

iu the terraces or beaches of gravel rising one above another on the shores of
the Dead Sea. In process of time, however, changes of climate took place ;
the rain-fall decreased; and consequently the surface of this great lake fell, till
ultimately all that remained of it was the Lake Huleh (7 ft. above the Medit.
Sea), and the Lake of Gennesareth (682 ft. below it) in the N., and the Dead
Sea in the S., with the Jordan connecting them. The Dead Sea itself consists
further of two parts, the N. part (N. of the peninsula on the E., called el-
LisdUj or the * Tongue') forming a great bowl, which in its deepest part
reaches 1,300 ft. below the surface, but the S. part (S. of el-Lisdn\ being very
much shallower, varying in fact from 12 to 3 ft. in depth, and being in places
sometimes fordable. This S. part is sometimes for distinctness called the
Lagoon.

On the E. and W. sides the hills descend pretty steeply, occasionally to the
water's edge, though usually there is a piece of shingly beach, of varying width,
covered often with boulders, or pieces of drift-wood, and presenting a desolate
appearance, except at the few spots where freshwater springs produce patches
of grass and allow trees to grow \ Hot saline and sulphur springs discharge
themselves into the sea at different points along the coast. At the SW. end
there is the remarkable range of salt cliffs, the Jebel Usdum ('mountain of
Sodom '), mentioned above (on v. 3) : this is of course a deposit dating from the
time when the water was many hundred feet higher than it is at present, and
there was the great inland sea spoken of above.

At the North end of the Dead Sea there is first a shingly beach, slightly
above the level of the water, then others, 30 and 100 feet above it, all of course
marking former hmits of the Sea ; then, 300 ft. above the water, ' flat shelves
of marl with steep slopes much worn by water action.' These marl beds were
deposited originally by the ancient inland sea ; they extend up the Jordan-valley
for about 4 miles, the entire soil as far N. as Jericho being a white-crusted salt
mud, upon which no vegetation will grow.

At the South end of the Sea there is a large flat, called es-Sehkha^ some
6 miles broad and 10 miles long, bounded for the N. half of its W. side by the
Jebel Usdum, and consisting of ' fine sandy mud,' brought down by the wadys on
the SW. and S., and mingled with drainings from the Jebel Usdum : it is entirely
destitute of vegetation, and in its N. part so marshy as to be impassable with
safety : there are indications that at times — perhaps annually — the sea over-
flows it. At the South-east corner of the Sea, however, beyond the Wady
Ghurundel, the character of the soil changes : the ground is higher ; an
abundant supply of fresh water is provided by the Wady el-AhsS,, flowing down
from the SE. ; and the consequence is that here there is a small oasis, some
6 miles long by 1—3 broad, covered with shrubs and verdure, and cultivable
for wheat, &c. From the high and smooth sandstone range, rising up behind
it, this oasis is called the Ghdr es-Safiyeh (' the Hollow of the smooth cliff').
There is also a similar wooded area to the N. of the Ghor es-Safiyeh, behind
the promontory el-Lisan.

The level of the water in the Sea naturally varies according to the season of

^ These are indicated very clearly in the map in Tristram's Land of Israel.
' The word * Sebkha' means salt and watery ground.

170 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

the year : as the lines of drift-wood on the shores shew, it is at times higher by
15 ft. or more than at others. During recent years, also, there appears to have
been a general rise in the level of the water {PEFQuSt. 1902, pp. 159, 164,
167).

The commonly-accepted site of the cities of the Kikkdr has been at the
South end of the Dead Sea ; but Mr (afterwards Sir G.) Grove (in Smith's DB.)
and other recent English travellers have adduced arguments tending to shew
that they were at its North end. We have no space here to state the argu-
ments on each side fully; and must refer for particulars to the art. Zoar
in DB.

It can hardly be doubted that the ordinary view is the right one. Especially
itisnoticeablethatZo'ar, which is mentioned several times in the OT., is always
spoken of as a Modbite town (Is. xv. 5, Jer. xlviii. 34), and not claimed as an
Israelite, or (Josh. xiii. 15 — 21) Reubenite town, as it naturally would be if it
lay at the N. end of the Sea : moreoveij there actually was, in post-Biblical
times, at the S. end of the Dead Sea. a well-known place, Zoor or Zoara,
which Josephus treats as a matter of course as identical with the Biblical Zo'ar
{Ant. 1. 11. 4; BJ. IV. 8. 4), and which is repeatedly mentioned by mediaeval
Arabic writers, under the names Zughar\ Zughar &c., as an important station
on the caravan-route between Elath and Jericho. Wetzstein (in Delitzsch's
Genesis^ 566 — 70) has made it probable that the site of this Zoara or Zughar
was in the Ghdr es-Safiyeh, at the SE. comer of the Dead Sea (cf. on xix. 22).
And Ezekiel (xvi 46) speaks of Sodom as being on the right (i.e. the South) of
Jerusalem (Samaria being on iis> ' left,' or North), which also implies that he
did not picture it at the N. end of the Sea (which is due E. of Jerusalem).

Where, however, were the other cities of the Kikkdr and the 'Vale of
Siddim'? It may be inferred from xix. 20 ff. that the other cities formed
a group situated apart from Zo'ar, though at no great distance from it ; and
the 'Vale of Siddim,' though it is nowhere either said or implied that the
cities were in it, will hardly have been far from them. The old idea that the
cities were submerged is of course out of the question : not only does geology
shew that the Dead Sea existed many ages before the time of Abraham, but
the Bible never alludes to them as submerged : on the contrary it speaks of
their site as salt and barren soil (Dt. xxix. 23, Zeph. ii 9), or implies that it
was an uninhabited desert region (Is. xiii. 19 f.; Jer. xlix. 18 = 1. 40)^ If, now,
the words in v. 3, that is the Salt Sea, are by the writer of the chapter, and are
to be taken in their most obvious sense, as implying that the plain on which
the two armies met was what was afterwards the Dead Sea, they give an
impossible site, and at once stamp the description of the battle as unhistorical;
for, as has just been remarked, the Dead Sea existed not only in Abraham's
time, but long before it. It is, however, possible (a) that the words quoted
are an incorrect gloss by a later hand : in this case it is open to us to find
another site for the ' Vale of Siddim,' and it might, for instance, have been the
barren plain mentioned above (p. 169) at the N. end of the Dead Sea.
Condor^, in support of this view, states that the Arab, sidd (properly barrier,

1 Cf. also Wisd. x. 7, Jos. BJ. iv. 8. 4 {KeKavfiinj irdcra).
a Tent Work, p. 208; cf. 210, 219, 267.

SITE OF THE CITIES OF THE PLAIN 171

obstruction^ dam^ from sadda^ to stop or close up [Gen. ii. 21 Saad.]) * is used
in a peculiar sense by the Arabs of the Jordan-valley, as meaning " cliflfs " or
banks of marl, such as exist along the S. edge of the plains of Jericho ' (above,
p. 169). It is, however, precarious to explain a Heb. name of 2,500 or more
years ago from a local Arabic usage of the present day; nor can the Vale
of Siddim be reasonably supposed to have been separated from Zo'ar (which,
as we have seen, there are cogent grounds for placing at the SB. corner of the
Dead Sea) by the entire length of the Dead Sea, with practically no passage
along either shore. But (6) it is also possible that even though the words,
that is the Salt Sea, are from the hand of the author of the chapter, he may
have meant them to refer only to the shallow S. part of the Dead Sea (see
above). And it seems, in fact, to be at least geologically possible^,— moYQ
cannot be said, — that what is now this part of the Dead Sea was, in the
time of Abram, dry ground, and the morass es-Sebkha fertile soil (like
the present Ghor es-Safiyeh, mentioned above); but that an earthquake
took place, which caused a subsidence of the ground, and overthrew all the
cities except Zo'ar; the Vale of Siddim was covered by the S. part of the Dead
Sea, and the site of the four cities became the present saline morass, es-Sebkha.

On the historical character of the narrative. This is a question which
has been much debated during recent years. On the one hand, it has been
alleged that the improbabilities attaching to the narrative are so great that it
is impossible to regard it as historical : on the other hand, it has been main-
tained, especially by Prof. Sayce, that * the historical character of Chedorla-
'omer's campaign has been amply vindicated' by the inscriptions^. Let us
endeavour, as well as we can, to estimate what is adduced in support of each of
these alternatives.

The following are the principal improbabilities alleged. (1) If the object of
the expedition was, as is stated, the reduction of the rebels in the Pentapolis,
why did not the four kings, when they reached, for instance, the neighbourhood
of Kerak, descend at once into the Vale of Siddim, — whether by the Wady
Kerak (up which Tristram went, in the contrary direction, from the Ghor
es-Safiyeh 3), or by one of the easier descents S. of the Wady el-Ahsa*, — instead
of taking the circuitous and often difficult route past Edom to *Akabah, then
turning back, and climbing up 1,500 ft. on to the * great and terrible wilder-
ness,' et-Tih, to Kadesh, after this crossing the rough and mountainous country
of southern and central Judah to *En-gedi, and finally, after making the steep
and all but impracticable descent here (see on v. 7), turning back southwards,
along the shore of the Dead Sea, to reach the Vale of Siddim"? Is this a
probable, or indeed a possible route for an army with horses, chariots, and the

^ See Siddim, Vale of, in BB.\ and cf. Blanckenhorn's brochure, Bas Tote
Meer, 1898, p. 41 f.

2 Monuments, p. 171 ; and often to the same effect elsewhere.

3 Land of Moah, p. 55 ff.

* Wetzstein in Delitzsch, Genesis^ p. 566 top.

^ If the cities were at the N. end of the Sea, the route would be more circuitous,
and at least equally difficult, on account of the route from En-gedi, — whether
inland, over a succession of steep wadys (Bob. i. 526 — 32), or along the shore, by
wading or clambering round promontories (above, p. 162).

172 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

usual impedimenta^ which may be reasonably supposed to have formed part of
it? (2) The names in v. 13 are suspicious: Harare and Eshcol are elsewhere
the names oi places (see the notes). (3) How could 318 men, — and the number
is expressly fixed, — attack and rout an entire army, recovering all the spoil
they had taken, and pursuing it moreover over one of the S. spurs of Hermon,
for some 100 miles, to Hobah? (4) If v. 3 is to be taken in the plain sense of
the words, the narrative must be unhistorical ; for the Dead Sea, it is certain,
existed ages before Abraham.

In these objections we are dealing to a certain extent with unknown magni-
tudes. They certainly constitute improbabilities ; whether they are sufficient
to stamp the expedition as impossible is more than we can say. As regards (1),
the route taken by Chedorla*omer, though not the most obvious one, may have
been dictated by motives which are not mentioned : whether it was impossible
for an army can hardly be determined by one who has not traversed personally
the regions in question : it may, however, be remembered that the Assyrian
kings often speak of leading their armies into difficult and impassable moun-
tainous countries (e.g. KB. i. 61, 77, 81) ; and Chedorla'omer might have left
his chariots at the top of the descent of En-gedi, and taken only his foot-
soldiers down into the plaint As regards (3), it must be allowed that the
narrative, as it stands, contains elements which are not credible. It is,
however, a serious mistake to imagine that we have, either here or else-
where in Genesis, the report of an eye-witness : the account, if it rests
really upon a basis of fact, will have been handed down by tradition ; and
tradition, as is its wont, may have modified the original account, and
exaggerated, or distorted, some of its particulars : so that what is now
represented as having been a defeat of the four kings by Abram, and a long
pursuit, may have been in reality nothing more than a surprise of their rear-
guard, with a recovery of the captives and some of the spoil. And of course
other details in the narrative as well may have been modified in the course of
oral transmission. The case is one in which, in spite of improbabilities attach-
ing to details, the outline of the narrative may still be historical. As regards
(4), see the note ad loc, and the remarks above, p. 170 f.

On the other hand, monumental evidence that the narrative is historical is
at present [July, 1903] entirely lacking. The terms in which Prof. Sayce and
others have spoken of it are altogether unwarranted by the facts 2. It is not
difficult to sum up what the monuments have taught us respecting Gen. xiv.
Of the four kings mentioned in v. 1, who were previously but mere names, they
have, we may reasonably hold, brought two, Amraphel and Arioch^, into the
light of history, and have told us many interesting particulars about tliem. In
three late inscriptions (3 cent. B.C.), mention is also made of a king who is
perhaps identical with Chedorla'omer, and possibly of Tid'al as well : the
' Eri-ekua' of these inscriptions may also be the * Eriaku of Larsa' of the older
inscriptions (i.e. the Arioch of Gen. xiv. 1). The older inscriptions shew that

1 If Hazazon-tamar be Kurnub (on v. 7), the difficulties connected with
*En-gedi would disappear; for from Kurnub there would be a direct descent to the
S. end of the Dead Sea by the Wady Muhauwat (see G. A. Smith's large map).

2 See the excellent criticism of G. B. *Gray, Expositor, May, 1898, pp. 342 ff.
* If at least the name Eriaku is correctly read: see p. 156 n. 6.

THE EXPEDITION OF CHEDORLA'OMER 173

Amraphel and Arioch were contemporary, and that they reigned over the
countries assigned to them in Gen. xiv.; the three late inscriptions shew also
that Kudurlachgumal (if we may so read the name) was king of Elam, and {if
Eri-ekua=Eriaku) that he was also a contemporary of Arioch and Amraphel.
These facts may be taken as evidence that at least the names * Amraphel'
and ' Arioch/ possiUy also * Chedorla'omer/ and * Tid'al,' were derived by
the narrator from some trustworthy source, in which, further, they may have
been mentioned together. In addition to this, the monuments bear witness to
the fact that several rulers of Babylonia, as well as one Elamite ruler (p. 157),
claimed authority over the * West land,' and that Sargon of Agad^ {c. 3800 b.c.)
actually subjugated 'the land of Amurri' (the Amorites) on the N. of Canaan ^ :
they have shewn consequently that an invasion of Palestine and neighbouring
countries on the part of a ruler from the far East was, in the abstract, within
the military possibilities of the age. They have not shewn more than this.
They make no mention of the particular expedition into Canaan, which forms
the principal subject of Gen. xiv.; and they name neither Abraham, nor
Melchizedek, nor any one of the five Canaanite kings {v. 2) against whom the
expedition was directed. Obviously, the monuments cannot * corroborate ' the
account of an expedition which they do not mention, or even by implication
presuppose. The improbabilities mentioned above may naturally be estimated
differently by different minds ; but, whatever their weight, they are not
neutralized by the inscriptions at present known 2. The campaign described in
Gen. xiv., though particular details are improbable, may in outline be historical :
but the evidence that it was so is for the present confined to that which is
supplied by the Biblical narrative itself^.

Chapters XV.— XXIL

The trials of AbrarrCs faith.

' Hitherto Abram has been the recipient of promises and blessings ; and all
seems ready for the moment when he may be installed as the head of a new
covenant, and receive the promised seed. But now various delays, hindrances,
and disappointments intervene, in overcoming which evidence is given both of
the strength of his faith, and also of the providence continually watching over

^ 1 'In the year in which Sargon conquered the land of the Amurri' is the date
given on 'a contemporary contract-tablet : see Hogarth's Auih. and Arch. p. 40.

2 It ought also not to be forgotten that the site of the Vale of Siddim is only a
possible one: we do not know that the S. part of the Dead Sea was dry land in
Abraham's time.

* The view of those who regard the narrative as a comparatively late *Midrash'
(see on this term LOT. 497, ed. 7, 529) is perhaps best exhibited by Gunkel,
esp. p. 262 ff. Upon this view (stated briefly), it springs from an age which loved
to represent Jews as playing an important part in relation to the empires of the
world, and which produced somewhat later the narratives of Esther, Daniel, and
Judith : the names of the four kings in v. 1, if not also their expedition into Canaan,
and the figure of Melchizedek as well, embody historical reminiscences ; but the
narrative as a whole is intended simply as an imaginative picture of Abram's
greatness, — his surprising success in a military enterprise, the spirit of independ-
ence and high moral feeling by which he was actuated, and the respect which he
commanded among the princes of Palestine.

174 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xv. i, 2

him. Thus the following narratives exhibit, under diflFerent aspects, Abram's
mural education and probation, until at last the perfect man of God, the hero
of faith, who is to serve as a pattern to all coming generations, stands fully
portrayed before us. The point about which Abram's trials mainly centre is
the attainment and possession of a bodily heir, who should found the covenant-
race. The very first section, eh. xv., introduces the theme' (adapted in
substance from Dillm.).

Chapter XV.
The promise of an heir to Ahram,

The promises of xii. 2, xiii. 15 f., being in appearance futile, on acount of
Abram's childlessness, he here receives two special assurances {vv. 1 — 6, 7 — 21)
that he will have a son and heir, and that a seed sprung from him will inherit
the promised land. The narrative shews indications of not being homo-
geneous ; and though the criteria are (in parts) indecisive, so that no generally-
accepted analysis has been effected, it can hardly be doubted that we have here
for the first time traces of the source, parallel, and often very similar, to J,
called ' E,' which has been discussed in the Introd. p. xi. ff. Verses 6 — 11, 17,
18, it is generally agreed, belong to J. Perhaps, on the whole, the analysis
shewn in the text may be adopted : most critics, however, are of opinion that
tiv. 12 — 16, 19 — 21 are expansions due to the compiler of JE.

XV. 1 After these things the word of the Lord came unto E
Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram : I am thy shield,
^and thy exceeding great reward. 2 And Abram said, O Lord

1 Or, thy reward shall be exceeding great

XV. 1 — 6. The first assurance.

1. After these things. A loose formula of connexion : xxii. 1, 20,
xxxix. 7, xl. 1, xlviii. 1.

the word of Jehovah came unto. So v. 4, but not elsewhere in the
Hex. It is an expression frequently used of a prophetic revelation
(e.g. 2 S. vii. 4, and often in Jer., Ezek.) ; and its use here agrees with
the representation in xx. 7 (where Abram is called a prophet).

in a msion. A common form of prophetic intuition : Nu. xxiv.
4, 16 ; Is. xxi. 2, &c. Cf the writer's Joel and Amos, pp. 126, 200 f

JF^ear not. The promise attaches to Abram's presumed state of
anxiety with regard to the future.

shield. Fig. of defence, as Dt. xxxiii. 29, and often in the Psalms
(iii. 3, xviii. 2, 30, xxviii. 7, &c.).

thy reward shall be exceeding great. The reward, viz., for obey-
ing my call.

2. After such a promise, the thought of Abram's childlessness
comes home to him with special force : hence his question here.

XV. .-5] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 175

^GoD, what wilt thou give me, seeing I ^go childless, and he that E
shall be possessor of my house is ^Dammesek Eliezer? | 3 And j-
Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and,
lo, one born in my house is mine heir. 4 And, behold, the
word of the Lord came unto 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 abroad, and E
said. Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be
able to tell them : and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. |

^ Heb. Jehovah, as in other places where God is put in capitals.

2 Or, go hence * The Chaldee and Syriac have, Eliezer the Damascene.

Lord Jehovah. So v. 8 : elsewhere in Gen. — Sam. only Dt. iii. 24,
ix. 26 ; Josh. vii. 7 ; Jud. vi. 22, xvi. 28 ; 2 S. vii. 18, 19, 20, 28, 29.
Extremely common in Ezek., and not unfrequent in the other prophets.

go hence (RVm.). To *go' in Heb. sometimes has the force of go
away^ 'vanish (Job vii. 9), depart (from life) ; so e.g. Ps. xxxix. 13
(where, as here, the Heb. is simply go). Cf. the corresponding Arab.
halaka, to perish. LXX. a^roXvo/xat: cf. Nu. xx. 29; Tob. iii. 6, 13;
Luke ii. 29.

and he &c. The Heb. is very peculiar : lit. ' and the son of the
possession (= the possessor) of my house is Damm^sek (the usu. Heb.
for Damascus) of Eliezer,' the meaning (if the text be sound) being that,
Damascus being the home of his servant Eliezer, his property, if he died
childless, would pass into the possession of that town. This, however,
is a thought not very likely to be expressed : the word for ' possession,'
also {mesheh, — supposed to be chosen for the sake of the assonance with
Dammeseh), occurs only here, and is suspicious. There seems to be
some corruption in the text. Targ., Syr. (see RVm.), * Eliezer the
Damascene,' is some improvement, but the corruption which it presup-
poses {>p^m7\ nTy^!?8<, or \>y^ry^'o nty^N, changed into niy^^x p^^i) is
not very probable.

3.^ The verse repeats the substance of v. 2, and reads as though it
were introduced from a parallel narrative.

one horn in my house. Lit. a son of my house (Ec. ii. 7 Heb.);
i.e. a member of my household, a dependent. The Heb. is different
from that in xiv. 14. Lot, it will be remembered, has separated him-
self from Abram (ch. xiii.).

4. The reply to the complaint of v. 3.

he that shall come forth &c. Cf. 2 S. vii. 12, xvi. 11.

5. The starry sky at night is at once a striking evidence of the
Divine power (Is. xl. 26, Ps. viii. 3), and an effective example of what
is (practically) innumerable (cf. xxii. 17, xxvi. 4).

tell (twice). An archaism for count, as 1 K. viii. 5, 2 K. xii. 10, Ps.
xxii. 17, xlviii. 12, Ivi. 8, cxlvii. 4. Cf Milton, L Allegro, 'And every
shepherd tells his tale,' &c. (see Jer. xxxiii. 13).

176 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xv.6-ii

6 And he believed in the Lord ; and he counted it to him for J
righteousness. 7 And he said unto him, I am the Lord that
brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land
to inherit it. 8 And he said, O Lord God, whereby shall I know
that I shall inherit it? 9 And he said unto him. Take me an
heifer of three years old, and a she-goat of three years old, and
a ram of three years old, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon.
10 And he took him all these, and divided them in the midst,
and laid each half over against the other : but the birds divided
he not. 11 And the birds of prey came down upon the carcases,

S^ 6. Abram's faith. Against appearances he trusts in God, sur-
^ renders himself to Him. in full confidence that He will fulfil His
promise. Cf. Ex. xiv. 31 , Nu. xiv. 11, xx. 12.

and he counted it (i.e. his trust) to him for righteousness. For
Abram there was no *law': hence nis 'righteousness* was not that
which consisted in obe3dng it (Dt. vi. 25, xxiv. 13), but was devotion to,
and trust in, God, of a more general kind. For the expression, cf.
Ps. cvi. 31 ; and on the passage itself, see esp. Rom. iv. 3, 9, 22 (where
it is quoted by S. Paul in his proof that righteousness is dependent not
on the works of the law, but on faith). Gal. iii. 6, Jas. ii. 23 : cf. also
the quotation in 1 Mace. ii. 52. On quotations of the passage in Philo,
and also, more generally, on the importance attached to the faith of
Abraham in the Rabbinical Schools, see the Excursus in Lightfoot's
Galatians^^, p. 158 fF. ; and Sanday-Headlam, Romans, pp. 101, 104;
Thackeray, St Paul and Contemp. Jewish Thought (1900), p. 91 ff.

7 — 19. The second assurance, sealed solemnly by a covenant.
That the occasion is distinct from the one narrated in lov. 1 — 6 appears
from the fact that that was at night {v. 5), while this was shortly before
sunset (v. 17).

7. See xi. 28, xii. 7, xiii. 15.

8. In reply, Abram asks for some sign or proof by which he may
know that he mil inherit it. Cf. Jud. vi. 17 ; 2 K. xx. 8.

9—11, 17. The promise is ratified by a covenant, in which the con-
^v tracting parties pass between the divided victims, each thereby symbol-
"^r izing that, in case he breaks the terms agreed to, he is willing to be
parted asunder in like manner. Cf. the common Heb. expression 'to
cut a covenant' (like opKia re/Ai/ctv, and 'foedus icere'), v. 18, al, ; Il'jn.
298—301, and the impressive formula in Liv. i. 24. The ceremony
described is not a sacrifice (for there is no altar), but a sacred and solemn
act. Nevertheless it is a kind of type of the later sacrificial usage : for
the animals prescribed are all such as are allowed in the later Lev. law,
the birds not being divided (v. 10) on the analogy of Lev. i. 17.

9. of three years old. Perhaps (Dillm.) because three was a sacred
number, usual in solemn affirmations, imprecations, &c.

11. The birds of prej^, threatening to interrupt the conclusion of

XV.1I-I6] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 177

and Abram drove them away. 12 And when the sun was going j
down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram ; and, lo, an horror of great
darkness fell upon him. 13 And he said unto Abram, Know of
a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that 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 afterward shall they come out with great
substance. 15 But thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace ; thou
shalt be buried in a good old age. 16 And in the fourth
generation they shall come hither again : for the iniquity of the

the covenant, would be an omen of evil, as when (Ewald, Hist. i. 330)
the harpies sought to carry off the sacrifices {^Aen. iii. 225 ff.), and
might foreshadow the efforts which the Egyptians, for instance, would
make with the object of frustrating the Divine plan : but Abram, by
driving them away, signified how all such efforts would prove abortive.
12 — 16. A parenthesis, or digression (-v. 17 being the real sequel
to w. 9 — 11), containing an interpretation of the evil omen of v. 11.
Though the promise will eventually be fulfilled, hindrances will inter-
vene which will long postpone its fulfilment; and a presentiment to
this effect reaches Abram in a vision.

12. a deep sleep. As ii. 21. Mentioned here, as in Job xxxiii. 15,
as a state in which one may become conscious of a vision.

an horror, a great darkness. Preparatory to the dark announce-
ment of V. 13.

13. a stranger. Cf. Ex. xxii. 21. Sojourner would be a better
rendering, a temporary resident being what is intended. The cognate
verb is rendered sojourn, xlvii. 4, Dt. xxvi. 5, Is. Hi. 4 (all of Israel in
Egypt), and generally.

13, 14. The allusions to the bondage in Egypt, to the plagues by
which it was terminated ('will I judge'), and to the Exodus, are
obvious. See e.g. Ex. i. 11, 12, xii. 35 f., 38.

13. four hundred years. The figure agrees substantially with that
given by P (430 years) in Ex. xii. 40 (RV.), 41, for the sojourn in
Egypt. Cf. «. 16 ; and see further the Introd. p. xxix f.

15. But no misfortune will touch Abram himself.

go to thy fathers. I.e. join them in Sheol (see on xxxvii. 35 ; and
cf. xlvii. 30).

a good old age. Ch. xxv. 8 (P) ; Jud. viii. 32 ; 1 Ch. xxix. 28 f.

16. in the fourth generation. This statement agrees with the pas-
sages (P) which assign only four generations from Joseph to Moses (Ex.
vi. 16 — 20, Nu. xxvi. 5 — 9), or five to Joshua (Jos. vii. 1). If the v. is
by the same writer as v. 13, he must, in accordance with the traditional
ages of the patriarchs, have reckoned a * generation ' at 100 years.

they shall return hither. Viz. to Canaan : the measure of the
Amorite's iniquity being not yet full (cf. 1 Th. ii. 16), he cannot for

D. 12

178 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xv. 16-18

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 the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy
seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the

the present be driven out. * Amorite,' as xiv. 7 (where see the note).
On the moral corruption of the pre-Isr. population of Canaan, cf.
xiii. 13, xviii. 20 ff., xix. 1 ff., 2 K. xxi. 11 ; and on the belief that it
was the ground of their expulsion by Israel, Lev. xviii. 24 f., 28,
XX. 22 ff., 1 K. xiv. 24, xxi. 26, 2 K. xvi. 3, xvii. 8, xxi. 2.

17. The sequel to u 11 : the sign by which the covenant is ratified.
a smoking furnace (tannur). I.e. a portable earthenware stove,

such as is used still in the East for baking bread, about 3 ft. high, of
the shape of a truncated cone, and heated by the burning embers being
placed in it at the bottom. See EncB. i. col. 605 (c) ; DB. i. 318^ ;
Whitehouse, Primer of Heh. Antiquities, p. 73 (with illustration).
The stove, with smoke and flames issuing from the top, symbolized
Jehovah : by passing between the divided pieces, it signified the ratifi-
cation on His part of the terms of the covenant. The ritual is no
doubt that by which a solemn covenant was actually ratified in ancient
Israel : comp. esp. Jer. xxxiv. 18 f.

A covenant is a compact or agreement, concluded under solemn
religious sanctions, and implying mutual undertakings and obligations.
The covenant most often referred to in the OT. is that concluded
between Jehovah and Israel at Sinai (Ex. xxiv.) : Jehovah promises
that, if Israel observes its terms, He will bestow certain specified
blessings (Ex. xxiii. 22 ff.). In references to the covenant, the stress
lies, according to the context and purpose of the writer, either on the
Divine promise (e.g. Dt. iv. 31), or the human obligation (e.g. Dt.
iv. 23). Here the stress lies upon the former, the promise of the grant
of Canaan to Abram's descendants.

18 — 21. The terms of the covenant, on Jehovah's part, i.e. the
promise of the land.

18. the river of Egypt. This can he only the Nile, or, at least, the
easternmost (Pelusiac) arm of it, which can also, it seems, only be
meant by the ' Shihor in front of Egypt,' assigned in Josh. xiii. 3 (cf.
1 Ch. xiii. 5) as the SW. border of Israel's territory. The usual SW.
limit is the * Wady (nahal) of Egypt ' (Nu. xxxiv. 5, Jos. xv. 4, 47,
1 K. viii. 65 (= 2 Ch. vi'i. 8), Is. xxvii. 12), called by the Greeks the
Rhinokorura, now the Wddy el-^Arish, 'which, with its deep water-
course (only filled after heavy rains), starts from about the centre of
the Sin. peninsula (near the Jebel et-Tih), and, after running N. and
N"W., finally reaches the sea at the Egjrptian fort and town of el-Arish*
{EncB. 1249), 45 m. SW. of Gaza. The Pelusiac mouth of the Nile is
some 80 m. W. of the mouth of the Wady el-Arish : so (unless nahal
should be read for n'^har) the present passage must, like Josh. xiii. 3
(late Deuteronomic), and 1 Ch. xiii. 5 [no || in Sam.], contain a hj^oer-
bolical representation of the limits of Isr. territory in this direction.

XV. i8-.i] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 179

great river, the river Euphrates : 19 the Kenite, and the J

Kenizzite, and the Kadmonite, 20 and the Hittite, and the

Perizzite, and the Rephaim, 21 and the Amorite, and the
Canaanite, and the Girgashite, and the Jebusite.

the great river, the river Euphrates. So Dt. i. 7, Jos. i. 4. Cf. on
xxxi. 21. The Euphrates, as the E. Hmit of Isr. territory, is an ideal
limit, reached actually only once, in the palmy days of Solomon ^1 K.
iv. 21 ; cf. Ps. Ixxx. 11), but promised also elsewhere (Ex. xxiii. 31,
Dt. i. 7, xi. 24, Jos. i. 4 ; cf. Ps. Ixxxix. 25), and forming the basis
of the ideal hopes, or pictures of the future, in Is. xxvii. 12, Zech. ix. 10,
Ps. Ixxii. 8.

19 — 21. Such enumerations of Canaanite peoples, to be dispos-
sessed by Israel, are very common in JE and Dt. (Ex. iii. 8, 17, xiii. 5,
xxiii. 23, xxxiv. 11, Dt. vii. 1, xx. 17, Jos. iii. 10, ix. 1, xi. 3, xii. 8,
xxiv. 11), but usually only 5 or 6, or at most 7 (Dt. vii. 1 : see the
writer's note on this passage), are enumerated : here there are 10.

19. the Kenite and the Kenizzite, These seem intended to repre-
sent the tribes of the Negeb (xii. 9). The Kenites Tin the S. of Judah :
1 S. xxvii. 10, XXX. 29) are associated with the Amalekites (cf. Nu.
xxiv. 20, 21 f.), and were probably a branch of them ; but while the
Amalekites were hostile to Israel, the Kenites were friendly (1 S.
XV. 6). Their absorption in Judah seems to be what is alluded to in the
present passage. The Kenizzites were a tribe of which a branch was
settled in Edom (ch. xxxvi. 11), and a branch in Judah : for Caleb,
a Kenizzite (Jos. xiv. 6, 14 ; cf. Jud. i. 13), is also the eponymous
ancestor of an important Judahite clan (1 Ch. ii. 9 [read Caleb for
Chelubai], 42 — 49). Like the Kenites, the Kenizzites were thus a tribe
originally of foreign origin, but afterwards absorbed in IsraeP.

the Kadmonite. Only here. The name means those of the front (or
east); and probably, like the ^b'ne kedem* (see on xxtx. 1), denotes the
inhabitants of some part of the Syrian desert, E. of Canaan.

20. the Hittite. It is hardly possible to say where the * Hittites *
mentioned either here or in the similar lists (Ex. iii. 8, 17, &c.) were
pictured by the authors of these lists as located. The reference cannot
be to the gi-eat nation whose home was N. of Phoenicia and the Lebanon
(see on x. 15) ; for this was never conquered by the Israelites. Tlie
reference may have been originally to a branch settled within Isr. terri-
tory, in the extreme N. of Canaan (see ibid.); but a belief seems
gradually to have grown up, — though how far it corresponded to
historical fact it is difficult to say, — that there were once Hittites in
the more southerly * hill-country ' of Canaan (see Nu. xiii. 29, — J or E),
and even in Hebron (see p. 228 ff.) ; and it is possible that this may
be the view expressed in these enumerations.

the Perizzite^ and the Rephaim. See on xiii. 7, and xiv. 5.

21. See on x. 16, 19.

1 See further Moore, Judges, pp. 30 f., 34 f.; Noldeke, EncB. s.v. Amalek, § 6,
and Eenaz.

12—2

180 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xvi. i, «

Chapter XVI.
The birth of Ishmael.

The narrative contained in this chapter describes the circumstances
attending the birth of Ishmael, mentioning various facts connected with it
such as would interest the Israelites of a later day. It is chiefly important,
partly as marking a stage in Abram's probation, and partly as explaining the
national characteristics of a group of tribes (xxv. 12 — 18) well known to the
Hebrews, which, while related to them, nevertheless lived in separation from
them, and had a strongly marked character of their own. Verses 1% 3,
15, 16, belong to P; the rest of the chapter belongs to J.

XVI. 1 Now Sarai Abram's wife bare him no children : JP

1 and she had an handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar. j

2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the Lord hath
restrained me from bearing; go in, I pray thee, unto my
handmaid ; it may be that I shall ^obtain children by her. And

j" Heb. be huilded by her,

XVI. 1 — 3. Sarai, being long barren, in accordance with the
manners of the age (of. xxx. 3, 9 ; also xxii. 24, xxxvi. 12, Ex. xxi. 7, 8),
gives Abram her female slave, Hagar, in the hope that she may obtain
children through her, whom she may adopt, and reckon as her own.

1. an handmaid. I.e. a female slave : of. on xii. 16 (where the
same word is rendered * maidservant'). Hagar was more particularly
Sarai's own possession (of xxix. 24, 29). Comp. Lane, Mod. Egypt.^
I. 233 : ' Some wives have female slaves who are their own property,
generally purchased for them, or presented to them, before their
marriage. These cannot be the husband's concubines, without their
mistress's permission, which is sometimes granted (as it was in the case |
of Hagar) ; but very seldom.'

an Egyptian. So v. 3 (P), xxi. 9 (E). Ishmael's wife was also an
Egyptian (xxi. 21). Some connexion must have been recognized as
existing between the Ishmaelite tribes and Egypt. Sir R. F. Burton j
remarked upon the Egyptian physiognomy of some of the Bedawi clans
of Sinai observable at the present day {DB. ii. 504^ n. §) \

2. it may he that I shall be built up from her. So xxx. 3 ; the
family being represented under the figure of a house (cf. Dt. xxv. 9 ;
Ru. i. 11).

1 It is difficult to think that a N. Arabian 'land of Musri' (see EncB. MIzraim,
§2&) can be meant {cf. on this subject Budge, Hist, of Egypt, 1902, vi. pp. x — xxx).

The name 'Hagar' may stand in some relation to that of the nomadic tribe of
Hagarites (or Hagarenes), on the E. of Gilead, 1 Ch, v. 10, xxvii. 31; Ps. Ixxxiii. 6
(of. EneB. Hagab, § 2). In Arabic, it may be added, the corresponding verb
signifies tojlee (cf. Hejra, of the era marked by the 'flight' of Mohammed).

XVI. .-8] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 181

Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai. | 3 And Sarai Abram*s J P
wife took Hagar the Egyptian, her handmaid, after Abram had
dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to Abram
her husband to be his wife. | 4 And he went in unto Hagar, and J
she conceived : and when she saw that she had conceived, her
mistress was despised in her eyes. 6 And Sarai said unto
Abram, 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 : the Lord judge between me and thee. 6 But
Abram said unto Sarai, Behold, thy maid is in thy hand ; do to
her that which is good in thine eyes. And Sarai dealt hardly
with her, and she fled from her face. 7 And the angel of the
Lord found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness, by the
fountain in the way to Shur. 8 And he said, Hagar, Sarai's

3. The verse is parallel in substance to v. 2: the regard to
chronology shewn in it is in P's manner (cf. 'c. 16, xvii. 1 &c.).

4—6. The flight of Hagar.

4. And he went in &c. The direct continuation of v. 2 end.

despised. Cf 1 S. i. 6f (where 'rival' me&ns fellow-wife). Barren-
ness is still viewed with contempt in the East. Cf Lane, I.e. p. 232 :
if a man's chief wife be barren, and an inferior (either wife or slave)
bear him a child, it commonly results that the latter woman becomes
his favourite, and that the chief wife or mistress is * despised in her
eyes.'

6. Sarai shews herself both imperious and unreasoning : she had
herself persuaded Abram to take Hagar, but because he does not im-
mediately interfere to stop Hagar's reproaches, she passionately and
unjustly lays the blame for them upon him.

Ml/ wrong. I.e. the wrong done to me by Hagar : may the re-
sponsibility for it rest upon thee !

judge. And, it is implied, punish thee for tolerating Hagar, and
help me to my right. Cf Jud. xi. 27 ; 1 S. xxiv. 12, 15.

6. Abram replies that Hagar is Sarai's slave, not his; and she
must deal with her.

dealt hardly; viz. by treating her harshly, and imposing heavy
work upon her. It is the word commonly rendered afflict (e.g. xv. 13).

7 — 12. Hagar is met by the angel and reassured : ner son will
become the ancestor of a great people. The narrative, like xxi.
16 — 19, illustrates beautifully the Divine regard for the forlorn and
desolate soul.

7. She fled naturally in the direction of her home.

tlis fountain &c. Doubtless some well-known watering-place on the
caravan-route leading from Hebron into Eg3rpt. Cf on v. 14.

Shur, A name of doubtful origin and meaning (see DB. Shur),

182 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xvi. 8-ia

handmaid, whence earnest thou ? and whither goest thou ? And J
she said, I flee from the face of my mistress Sarai. 9 And the
angel of the Lord said unto her, Return to thy mistress, and
submit thyself under her hands. 10 And the angel of the Lord
said unto her, I will greatly multiply thy seed, that it shall not
be numbered for multitude. 11 And the angel of the Lord
said unto her. Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son ;
and thou shalt call his name ^Ishmael, because the Lord hath
heard thy affliction. 12 And he shall be as a wild -ass among
men: his hand shall he against every man, and every man's
hand against him ; and he shall dwell ^in the presence of all

1 That is, God heareth, * Or, over against Or, to the east of

but certainly denoting the region bordering upon Egypt on the NE.,
along what is now the Isthmus of Suez. It is mentioned also ch. xx. 1,
XXV. 18 (where it is said to be *in front of Bgypt,' i.e. East of it : so
1 S. XV. 7), Ex. XV. 22 (where the Israelites after crossing the Red Sea
enter the * wilderness of Shur '), and 1 S. xxvii. 8.

9 — 12. The angel addresses to her three words : he (1) bids her
return to her mistress and * humble herself* under her bauds, v. 9 ;
(2) encourages her to take this step, by the promise of a numerous
seed, u 10 ; and (3) fixes in anticipation the name and character of
her future son, vv. 11, 12.

11. Ishmael. I.e. God heareth, — or better, perhaps (Gray, Heh,
Proper Names, p. 218), May God hear!

thy affliction. In the Heb., cognate with the verb rendered * dealt
hardly ' in v. 6.

12. he shall he a wild-ass of a man. The wild-ass is a wild,
untameable animal, whose home is the open plain : see Job xxxix. 5 — 8 ;
Hos. viii. 9 (where render, 'being alone for himself,' i.e. going his own
way wilfulty). Ishmael (cf on ix. 25 — 7) is the impersonation of the {
tribes reputed to be his descendants ; and the writer draws, in a few |
touches, a true and characteristic description of the Bedawin, — the
men of the hadw, or *open plain,' — as we should now term them,
then, as stiU, the free and independent sons of the desert, owning no
authority save that of their own chief, reckless of life, treacherous
towards strangers, ever ready for war or pillage'.

in the face of (or in front of) all his brethren shall he dwell.
The expression used means commonly in Heb. on the East of (as
1 K. xi. 7: cf. on xiii. 18, xiv. 15); and it is true that, speaking
generally, the home of the Ishmaelite tribes was on the E. of Israel

1 The Ishmaelites must not however be identified with the modern Bedawin:
the Ishmaelites (see xxv. 12 — 16) consisted of 12 definite tribes ; and all that what
is said above is intended to affirm is a general similarity in mode of life and
character.

XVI. 12-16] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 183

Ills brethren. 13 And she called the name of the Lord that spake J
unto her, ^Thou art ^a God that seeth: for she said, Have I even
here looked after him that seeth me? 14 Wherefore the well was
called ^Beer-lahai-roi; behold, it is between Kadesh and Bered. |
15 And Hagar bare Abram a son: and Abram called the name of P
his son, which Hagar bare, Ishmael. 16 And Abram was fourscore
and six years old, when Hagar bare Ishmael to Abram.

1 Or, Thou God seest me ^ Heb. El roi, that is, Ood of seeing,

3 That is, The well of the living one who seeth me.

and Edom (see on xxv. 12 — 18). Dillm. al think, however, that hostility
or defiance is intended: cf. the same Heb. in Job i. 11, vi. 28, xxi. 31.
13, 14. Explanation of the name of the place at which this
happened.

13. a God of seeing. In accordance with what was said on xiv. 18,
Jehovah is here distinguished under a particular attribute, and venerated
specially as a God of * seeing,' i.e. as a God who sees all things and
manifests His providence accordingly. EVm. (= AV.) is not a possible
rendering of the existing (pointed") text.

Save I even &c. The words (assuming the text to be correct) can
only be explained in this way : Have I Jiere also (in the desert, a place
which, in times when the manifestations of Deity were regarded as
limited to particular spots, might have been supposed to be beyond
the reach of God's providence) seen after him that saw me ? i.e. He saw
her ; she did not see Him, but only ' saw after ' Him, saw Him, as He
left her (cf. Is. xxxvii. 22 Heb.), and then perceived that the all-seeing
God, in the person of His angel, had been present there (so Dillm^^

14. Beer-lahai-roH. Explained (as usually understood) in KVm.
See, however, the footnote.

between Kadesh and Bered. For Kadesh, see on xiv. 7. Bered is
not mentioned elsewhere, and has not been identified. For Beer-lahai-
roi (also xxiv. 62, xxv. 11) a site has been plausibly suggested at ^Ain
Muweileh, a station with several wells on the caravan-route from Egypt
to Syria (cf. on v. 7), 12 m. WNW. of 'Ain Kadish (xiv. 7), and 50 m.
SW. of Beersheba, at the SE. foot of a range of hills, the Jehel Muweileh
(Rowlands, in Williams' Holy City, n. 489 fF. ; Trumbull, Kadesh-
harnea, 64 ; Palmer, Desert of the Ex. n. 354 — 6 ; EncB. s.v.).

15. 16. Account, from P, of the birth of Ishmael, and of the age
of Abram at the time.

^ The sense thus obtained is however not very naturally expressed ; nor does it
contain any explanation of 'the living one' in the name of the well, v. 14. A
conjectural restoration by Wellh. {Hist. p. 326), obtained by supplying letters
supposed to have accidentally dropped out, is therefore worthy of mention: 'Have
I even seen [God, and lived] after [my] seeing?' (i.e. D^-I^^^ for Q^n, TiNI inserted
before nnX, and ^>{<-) for ij^n), with allusion to the belief (xxxii. 30) that no one
could 'see God and live.' If this restoration be accepted, * a God of seeing' must be
interpreted in the sense of ' a God who is seen ' ; and the name of the well will mean
•He that seeth me liveth.'

184 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

The angel of Jehovah, — or, in E (xxi. 17, xxxi. 11), of Gody—is a self-
manifestation of Jehovah: he identifies himself with Hira (xxxi. 13, of. 11 ;
Ex. iii. 6, cf. 2), speaks and acts with His authority (Gen. xvi. 10, xxi. 19,
cf. 17, xviii., xxii. 12, 15 f.), and is spoken of as God or Jehovah by others
(Gen. xvi. 13, xlviii. 16 f. ; Jud. vi. 14, cf. 12, xiii. 21 f. ; Hos. xii. 4, 5). On the
other hand, he is also distinguished from Jehovah (Gen. xvi. 11, xix. 13, 21, 24 ;
Nu. xxii. 31), 'the mere manifestation of Jehovah creating a distinction be-
tween the angel and Jehovah, though the identity remains. The form of
manifestation is, so to speak, something unreal (Dt. iv. 12, 15), a condescension
for the purpose of assuring those to whom it is granted that Jehovah in
His fulness is present with them. As the manifestation called the angel of
Jehovah occurred chiefly in redemptive history, older theologians regarded it
as an adumbration or premonition of the incarnation of the Second Person
of the Trinity. This idea was just, in so far as the angel was a manifestation
of Jehovah on the earth in a human foiin, and in so far as such temporary
manifestations might seem the prelude to a permanent redemptive self-
revelation in this form (Mai. iii. 1, 2); but it was to go beyond the OT.,
or at any rate beyond the understanding of OT. writers, to found on the
manifestation distinctions in the Godliead. The only distinction implied is
that between Jehovah, and Jehovah in manifestation' (A. B. Davidson, in
DB. S.V. Angel, p. 94^). Cf. Ex. xxiii. 20, 21 (where * name '= fulness of
revealed nature); la Ixiii. 9 (where the * angel of his presence' means the
angel in whom God's face or presence [Dt. iv. 37] is revealed). See further
Oehler, OT. Theol. §§ 59, 60 ; Schultz, OT, Theol u. 218—23 (a temporary but
full revelation of Jehovah's being).

Chapter XVII.
The institution of Circumcision,

Thirteen years after Ishmael's birth, God appears to Abram, promises
him a numerous posterity assures him that he and his seed will inherit the
land of Canaan, and declares that He will conclude a covenant with him for
all time, according to which He will be his God and the God of his descendants,
vv. 1 — 8. Circumcision is instituted as the sign of this covenant, vv. 9 — 14,
Abram's name is to be in future Abraham, and Sarai's Sarah. Ishmael will
become a great nation ; but Sarah's own son will be the heir of the promises,
vv. 15 — 22. Abraham circumcises all the males of his household, vv. 23 — 27.

The chapter is derived entirely from P, the phraseology and style of which
it displays markedly throughout. It is longer than most of the recent excerpts
from P, on account of the importance of the subject-matter, resembling in this
respect the accounts, from the same source, of the Creation and the Flood. It
marks, in the economy of P, the next important stage to the blessing and
covenant of ix. 1 — 17, and introduces a new phase in the development of the
Divine plan. The covenant, it may be noticed, is not simply (as in ch. xv.) a
solemn promise, but implies the establishment of a reciprocal relationship, in
which obligations are undertaken on both sides.

XVII. 1-5] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 186

XVII. 1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, P
the Lord appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am ^God
Almighty ; walk before me, and be thou perfect. 2 And I will
make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee
exceedingly. 3 And Abram fell on his face: and God talked
with him, saying, 4 As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee,
and thou shalt be the father of a multitude of nations. 6 Neither
shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall
be Abraham ; for the father of a multitude of nations have

1 Heb., El Shaddai.
XVII. 1 — 8. The promise to Abram.

1. God Almighty. Heb. *El SJiaddai, — according to P, the charac-
teristic patriarchal name of God, the name 'Jehovah' (Yahweh) not
being known till the age of Moses (Gen. xxviii. 3, xxxv. 11, xlviii. 3 ;
and esp. Ex. vi. 3). The same view was perhaps shared by the author
of the book of Job, who lays his scene in the patriarchal age, and
throughout the dialogue represents his characters as saying Shaddai
('Jehovah' only once, xii. 9)^ The origin and real meaning of Shaddai
are both doubtful : see the Excursus at the end of the volume.

walk be/ore me, and be perfect, — or blameless (vi. 9). The condition
which Abram is called upon to fulfil : not, as in the later Levitical law, ^
obedience to a multitude of particular observances, but simply the 7>»
duty of leading generally a righteous and holy life. To * walk before '
any one is to live and move openly before him (1 S. xii. 2) ; esp. in
such a way as (a) to deserve, and (b) to enjoy, his approval and favour.
Here the thought of (a) predominates, the meaning being to comport
oneself in a manner pleasing in God's sight (so xxiv. 40, xlviii. 15
[lxx. evapea-Tclv ivavTLov] ; cf. Is. xxxviii. 3) ; for (6) see 1 S. ii. 30, and
(with reference to God) Ps. Ivi. 13, cxvi. 9 [shall, not will].

2. Upon this condition (v. V) God grants his covenant; and
promises, at first quite generally, to multiply greatly his posterity.

3. fell on his face. An expression of respect towards men
CRu. ii. 10; 2 S. ix. 6, xiv. 22), and of reverence towards God
(v. 17, Nu. xiv. 5, Jud. xiii. 20, and frequently).

4 — 8. The promise stated in greater detail.

5. Abram (contracted from Abiram) means 'the father [a divine
title] is exalted'*: Abraham has no meaning in Heb., nor is any
meaning apparent from the cognate languages. The name is explained
here simply by an assonance (see on iv. 1) : Abraham is supposed to
have been suggested by the Heb. hdmon, 'multitude.' Cf. Rom. iv. 16 f.,
where the second part of the verse is interpreted in a spiritual sense.

1 Elsewhere 'El Shaddai occurs Gen. xliii. 14 (E), xlix. 25 (see the note),
Ez. X. 5 ; Shaddai alone is also found, as a poet, name of God, in Nu, xxiv. 4, 16
(in Balaam's prophecies), Ez. i. 24, Is. xiii. 6 = Joel i. 15, Ps. Ixviii. 14, xci. 1;
31 times in the dialogue of Job; and in the semi-poetical sentences, Eu. i. 20, 21.

2 On names compounded with Ab, AM, see EncB. i. 9—11, in. 3287 — 9.

186 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xvii. 5-8

I made thee. 6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and i

1 will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and
thy seed after thee throughout their generations for an ever-
lasting covenant, to be a God unto thee and to thy seed after
thee. 8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after
thee, the land of thy sojournings, all the land of Canaan,
for an everlasting possession ; and I will be their God.

6—8. The promise should be compared with the others in P, viz.
xxviii. 3 — 4, xxxv. 11 — 12, xlviii. 3 — 4, Ex. vi. 2 — 8, when the features
both in phraseology and in contents which distinguish it from the
promises in J (see on xii. 2 f.) will become apparent.

6. make thee... fruitful. Cf. v. 20, xxviii. 3, xlviii. 4.

nations. So vv. 4, 5, 16, xxxv. 11 ; cf. 'company of peoples,' xxviii. 3,
xxxv. 11, xlviii. 4; Ishmaelites and Edomites being included. In J the
promise is only of a single nation: xii. 2, xviii. 18, xlvi. 3.

kings. So v. 16, xxxv. 11. Another feature peculiar to the promises
of P. The allusion is to the kings of Israel and Edom (xxxvi. 31).

7. establish my covenant. As vi. 18, ix. 9, 11, 17 (all P). See p. x.
and thy seed after thee (twice). So m. 8, 9, 10, 19, and elsewhere

in P. See the Introduction, p. viii, No. 11.

throughout their generations. So w. 9, 12, Ex. xii. 14, 17, 42, and
often in P. See ihid. p. ix, No. 20.

everlasting covenant. Cf. vv. 13, 19 j and on ix. 16.

to he a God wnto thee &c. This is the central feature in the co-
venant: 'El Shaddai will be a God to Abraham and his seed, i.e. He will
be on the one hand the object of their worship and veneration, and on
the other hand, also, their lord, their leader, their protector, and their
benefactor. The promise is found frequently in P and H (Ex. vi. 7,
xxix. 45; Lev. xi. 45, xxii. 33, xxv. 38, xxvi. 12, 45; Nu. xv. 41 :
elsewhere in the Hexateuch only Dt. xxix. 13, cf. xxvi. 17) : it is also
acharacteristic thought of Jer. (vii. 23, xi. 4, xxiv. 7, xxx. 22, xxxi. 1, 33),
and Ez. (xi. 20, xiv. 11, xxxi v. 24, xxxvi. 28, xxxvii. 23, 27) ; see also

2 S. yii. 24 (= 1 Ch. xvii. 22), Zech. viii. 8 (not elsewhere). The cor-
relative 'and they shaU be to me a people,' i.e. belong to Me as loyal
subjects, enjoying My protection, and acting worthily of it, is found in
most of the passages quoted from Jer. and Ez., and occasionally besides,
but not in P or H, except Lev. xxvi. 12 (cf. Ex. vi. 7).

8. the land of thy sojownings. The land in wnich thou dwellest
as a ger, a temporary resident, or 'sojourner' (cf on xv. 13). So xxviii. 4,
xxxvi. 7, xxxvii. 1, xlvii. 9 ; Ex. vi. 4 (all V). Cf. p. ix. No. 21.

all the land of Oanaan. Promised here in P for the first time.

etierlasting possession^ as xlviii. 4, Lev. xxv. 34. The word for
* possession ' (ntn.N) is one that is very common in P, and occurs but
rarely elsewhere : see p. ix. No. 22.

XVII. 9-14] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 187

9 And God said unto Abraham, And as for thee, thou shalt keep p
my covenant, thou, and thy seed after thee throughout their
generations. 10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep,
between me and you and thy seed after thee ; every male
among you shall be circumcised. 11 And ye shall be circum-
cised in the flesh of your foreskin ; and it shall be a token of a
covenant betwixt me and you. 12 And he that is eight days
old shall be circumcised among you, every male throughout
your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with
money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. 13 He that is
born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must
needs be circumcised : and my covenant shall be in your flesh
for an everlasting covenant. 14 And the uncircumcised male
who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul
shall be cut ofi" from his people ; he hath broken my covenant.

9—14. The * token' (ix. 12, 13, 17), or external mark, of the
covenant : circumcision {v. 10 £), to be performed (v. 12) on the
eighth day after birth upon all males, including {v. 13) slaves, whether
born in servitude, or purchased from without.

12. eight days old. A regulation, ever afterwards religiously
observed by the Jews : cf. xxi. 4; Lev. xii. 3 ; Luke i. 59, ii. 21 ; PhiL
iii. 5.

horn in the house. See on xiv. 14.

bought with money. Verse 13 ; Ex. xii. 44 (where it is laid down
that a slave must be circumcised before he can eat the passover).

stranger. Foreigner (as Lev. xxii. 25 E,V.), which, indeed, though
the fact has now become obscured, is the real meaning of 'stranger'
(Lat. extraneus: cf. on * strange,' xxxv. 2l So v. 27; Ex. xii. 43 (RV.
alien) ; Ps. xviii. 44, 45 ; Is. Ivi. 3, 6, al.

14. shall be cut off from its father's kin. A formula, with slight
variations (as from Israel, from his people, &c.), very common in P^,
the penalty defined by it being prescribed usually for neglect of some
ceremonial observance, and only occasionally (as Lev. xviii. 29,

1 Two distinct Heb. words, with different meanings, are unfortunately repre-
sented in E VV. by * stranger ' : one [ger) signifying sojourner, temporary resident
(see on v. 8 and xv. 13), the other {ben nehdry or nokri) signifying foreigner (cf. on
xxxi. 15). See Stranger in DB.

2 From {the midst of) his (or its) father's kin. Gen. xvii. 14, Ex. xxx. 33, 38,
xxxi. 14, Lev. vii. 20, 21, 25, 27, xvii. 9, xix. 8, xxiii. 29, Nu. ix. 13 ; from the midst
of his {their) people, Lev. xvii. 4, xviii. 29, xx. 18, Nu. xv. 30, and with the first
pers. I will cut off, Lev. xvii. 10, xx. 3, 5, 6, Ez. xiv. 8 (cf. Lev. xxiii. 30 I will
destroy) ; from Israel, Ex. xii. 15, Nu. xix. 13 ; jrom the congregation of Israel,
Ex. xii. 19 ; from the midst of the assembly, Nu. xix. 20; from before me, Lev. xxii. 3;
be cut off (absolutely). Lev. xvii. 14, Nu. xv. 31, with before the eyes of the children
of their people, Lev. xx. 17,

188 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xvii. 15-20

15 And God said unto Abraham, As for Sarai thy wife, thou P
shalt not call her name Sarai, but ^ Sarah shall her name be.
16 And I will bless her, and moreover I will give thee a son of
her : yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations ;
kings of peoples shall be of her. 17 Then Abraham fell upon
his face, and laughed, and said in his heart. Shall a child be
born unto him that is an hundred years old ? and shall Sarah,
that is ninety years old, bear? 18 And Abraham said unto
God, Oh that Ishmael might live before thee I 19 And God said,
Nay, but Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son ; and thou shalt
call his name ^ Isaac : and I will establish my covenant with him
for an everlasting covenant for his seed after him. 20 And as
for Ishmael, I have heard thee : behold, I have blessed him, and

* That is, Princess, * From the Heb. word meaning to laugh.

XX. 3, 5, 6 ; Nu. xv. 30) for some moral offence, or idolatry. It has
been questioned whether death or excommunication is intended by the
expression: Ex. xxxi. 14 would point to the former; but even if this be
the intention of the expression, it is to be understood, probably, as a
strong affirmation of Divine disapproval, rather than as prescribing a
penalty to be actually enforced.

father's kin. The word, though it resembles the ordinary Heb.
word for * a people,' is 'plwral : as it is impossible to speak of a man's
'peoples,' the word must, when it is so used, have some different
meaning; and this is shewn by Arabic^ to hQ father s kin. For another
formula of P's, in which the same expression occurs, see on xxv. 8.

15 — 21. The promise repeated with reference to Sarai. Ishmael
will become a great nation ; but the covenant will be established with

15. Sarah means ' princess ' ; the meaning of Sarai is obscure.
That given by some older commentators, *my princess,' is philologically
impossible. It is thought by some modern scholars (see DB. s.v.) to
be an older form of Sarah, formed with the less usual fem. term. -ay.

16. she shall become nations. Cf. on v. 6.

17. a?id laughed, in incredulity. Abraham cannot believe it, and
still rests his hopes upon Ishmael, on whose behalf he now (v. 18)
proceeds to utter a prayer.

18. before thee. I.e. under thy eye and care : cf. Hos. vi. 2 ; also
Jer. XXX. 20; Is. liii. 2.

19. The answer adheres to what was said before (v. 16). The
name Isaac ('he laughs') is manifestly suggested by the laughed of
V. 17.

20. I have heard thee. With a play on ' Ishmael ' (see xvi. 11).

* *.4ni=both jpatntiw and 2)atrueW«.

XVII. .o-n] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 189

will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly ; p
twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great
nation. 21 But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which
Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.
22 And he left off talking with him, and God went up from
Abraham. 23 And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that
were born in his house, and all that were bought with his
money, every male among the men of Abraham's house, and
circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as
God had said unto him. 24 And Abraham was ninety years old
and nine, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
25 And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old, when he was
circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 26 In the selfsame day
was Abraham circumcised, and Ishmael his son. 27 And all the
men of his house, those born in the house, and those bought
with money of the stranger, were circumcised with him.

twelve princes. See xxv. 13 — 16.

22 — 27. Abraham circumcises all the males of his household. The
account is given with the circumstantial detail and repetition which P
loves : notice both the expressions in vo. 23, 24^ 25^ repeated from
'ov. 11% 13 : and vv. 26, 27, repeating the substance of u 23.

22. went up from. Cf. xxxv. 13.

23, 26. in the selfsame day. See on vii. 13.

25. The circumcision of Ishmael at the age of 13 is probably
intended as an explanation of the corresponding custom among the
Ishmaelite tribes. Circumcision has for long been practised by the
* Arabs ' ; but it is commonly performed among them at a much later
age than was customary with the Jews : the age varies in different
places from 3 — 4 years to 13 — 15 years (see references in Dillm., and
DB. II. 504^; and add Doughty, Arabia Deserta, i. 340 f. [3 years],
391 f.).

Circumcision,

Circumcision is not, as is sometimes supposed, a rite peculiar to the Jews.
It was, and still is, widely practised in different parts of the world. In ancient
times we hear of it especially as usual in Egypt (Hdt. ii. 36, 37 ; Philo ii. 210 ;
cf. Josh. V. 9, where *the reproach of Egypt' implies that the Egyptians were
circumcised), where indeed (Ebers, Aeg. u. die Bb. Mose's, p. 283) the monu-
ments afford evidence that it was practised as early as the period of the
4th dynasty (3998 — 3721 B.O., Petrie), and whence Herodotus declares (ii. 104)
that the custom spread to the Ethiopians, the Phoenicians, and the ' Syrians
of Palestine' (i.e. the Jews). Jer. ix. 26 shews also that it was practised by
the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, and certain Arab tribes; indeed, from
the fact of the Philistines being so pointedly referred to as ' uncircumcised^'

190 THE BOOK OF GENESIS

it may be inferred that most of Israel's neigli hours were circumcised like
themselves. The practice was an ancient one among the Arabs; and it is
referred to in the ^or'an as an established custom. The Babylonians and
Assyrians appear to have been the principal Semitic peoples who did not
practise it. It is possible that, as Dillm. and Nowack suppose, the peoples of
N. Africa and Asia who practised the rite adopted it from the Egyptians ; but
it appears in so many other parts of the world, that it must at any rate in
these cases have originated independently ; it is practised, for instance, among
the Mandingos, Gallas, Falashas, Bechuanas, and other African tribes, in
Madagascar, in many parts of Australia, in the New Hebrides, New Caledonia
and the Fiji Islands, and among several of the native tribes of America.
Stade, in his Essay on the subject {ZATW. 1886, p. 135 ff.), has quoted
particulars shevring that in most of these cases the rite was performed some-
times at the age of 7 — 10^ but more often at the approach of puberty, and
usually with preliminary rites of separation, the youths to be circumcised
being isolated for some time previously from the rest of their tribe in places
set apart for the purposed A practice so widely diflfused must rest on some
general principle ; and the idea which appears generally to underlie it is that
it is a rite of initiation into manhood : by it the grown-up youth is formally
admitted among the men of his tribe, receives permission to marry, and is
invested with the full civil and religious rights of his tribe. It is a tribal
badge, and as such possesses both a civil and a religious significance^.

In Israel, the two distinctive characteristics of circumcision are (1) its
being performed in infancy ; (2) the religious ideas associated with it. To
take (2) first : the idea of membership in the nation is absorbed in that of
consecration and dedication to Jehovah : the religious point of view supersedes
the civil or political : circumcision becomes the external condition and seal of
admission into the religious privileges of the nation (cf. Ex. xii. 44, 48 [P]), the
first condition of membership in it, as a religious community. (1) The age was
fixed at 8 days. This was probably a consequence of (2) : when the religious
point of view superseded the secular or civil, it would be natural for the child
to be dedicated as early as possible to the God who was to be his protector
through life. At the same time a humanitarian motive may have cooperated :
for the operation is much less serious when performed upon an infant than
when performed upon one more or less grown up.

Thus circumcision, like sacrifice and other institutions of Israel's religion,

^ This was also the age at which it was performed in Egypt, as is clear from
the representation in Ebers, I.e. p. 280, or Guthe's Bibelworterbuch (1903), p. 14.

2 See in Spencer and Gillen's Native Tribes of Central Australia (1899),
pp. 212 — 386, a detailed account of the very curious and elaborate initiation cere-
monies, including as important items circumcision (p. 218 ff.), and 'sub-incision'
(p. 251 ff.), which must be undergone by every youth in Central Australia before he
can be regarded as a full member of his tribe or be allowed to marry (p. 264).

* So in Madagascar a man who is uncircumcised can become neither a soldier
nor a citizen ; and in Loango the rite must be completed before a man can obtain
a wife. It is remarkable that the Heb. word for father-in-law (hothen) is derived
from a root which signifies in Arabic to circumcise : it thus seems to have meant
originally circumciser, and to indicate that in primitive times circumcision was
among the Hebrews a general preliminary of marriage. Comr). Ex. iv. 25, as
explained in EncB. s.v. §§ 2, 6 (col. 830, 832) ; Rel. Sem. 310 (2 328)

XVIII. i] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 191

was a rite common to Israel with other nations, but stamped in Israel with
special associations and a special significance^

The national contempt for men uncircumcised is apparent from the manner
in which the Philistines are spoken of, 2 S. i. 20 al.

The prophets began to spiritualize the idea, and to teach that the external
mark should be the concomitant of a corresponding frame of mind; they
accordingly enjoined the duty of circumcising the heart (Dt. x. 16, xxx. 6 :
of. Rom. ii. 29, also Col. ii. 11), or removing its foreskin (Jer. iv. 4); and they
characterized the ear (Jer. vi. 10), or heart (Jer. ix. 26 ; Ez. xliv. 7, 9 ; Lev. xxvi.
41), which was closed in, and so impervious to godly influences and impressions,
as 'uncircumcised' (cf. Acts vii. 51).

In the early church it became a pressing question of principle whether or
not the Jewish ordinance of circumcision should be imposed upon Gentile
converts : on the manner in which the Apostles viewed the rite, and upon
their attitude towards this question, see Acts xv. 1 — 29, xxi. 21 ; Rom. ii. 25 —
iv. 12; 1 Cor. vii. 19; Gal. v. 2—12, vl 12—16; Phil. iii. 3; Col. iii. 11.

Chapters XVIIL, XIX.

Visit of the angels to Abraham and Lot. The destruction
of Sodom and Gomorrah, Origin of the nations of Moah
and Ammx)n.

One of the most graphically and finely written narratives in the OT.
Except in xix. 29 (P), the author is throughout J, whose characteristics — ease
and picturesqueuess of style, grace and delicacy of expression, and naive
anthropomorphisms — it conspicuously displays. Abraham is attractively de-
picted : he is dignified, courteous, high-minded, generous, a man whom
accordingly God deems worthy of His confidence, visiting him as one friend
visits another, bestowing upon him promises, and disclosing to him His
purposes : a strong contrast to the weak and timid Lot, and still more so to
the profligate inhabitants of the cities of the Kikkdr. The promise in
xviii. 10 — 15 is in reality not a subsequent one to that narrated in ch. xvii. (P),
but a parallel account of the same promise given by a different hand (J) ;
xviii. 10 — 15 is clearly written without reference to xvii. 15 — 19, and the
writer is evidently not conscious that an announcement of the same kind has
already been given.

XVIII. 1 And the Lord appeared unto him by the ^oaks J
of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day ;

1 Or, terebinths

XVIII. 1 — 15. Visit of the three angels to Abraham, and promise
of a son to Sarah.

1. the terebinths of Mamre. The sacred grove at Hebron : see
on xiii. 18.

1 Ex. iv. 25 f. , Josh. v. 2 ff. are thought by many to be alternative popular ex-
planations of the introduction of the rite into Israel: see EncB. s.v. § 2.

192 THE BOOK OF GENESIS [xviii. .-5

2 and he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood J
over against him : and when he saw them, he ran to meet them
from the tent door, and bowed himself to the earth, and said, i

3 ^My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not
away, I pray thee, from thy servant : 4 let now a little water be
fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree :
5 and I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your heart;

1 Or, 0 Lord

door. Heb. opening^ i.e. entrance. So v, 10, and regularly in thl^'
expression.

2 — 5. Abraham's ready and courteous hospitality. The descrip-
tion, says Lane {Mod. Eg.^ i. 364), ' presents a perfect picture of the
manner in which a modern Bedawee sheikh receives travellers arriving
at his encampment. He immediately orders his wife or women to
make bread, slaughters a sheep or other animal and dresses it in haste ;
and bringing milk and any other provisions that he may have at hand,
with the bread and the meat that he has dressed, sets them before his
guests ; if they are persons of high rank he also stands by them while
they eat.'

2. bowed himself to the earth. The Eastern mode of respectful
salutation: xxxiii. 3, xlii. 6; Ku. ii. 10, al.

3. My lord. This is probably right, the word being a title of
courtesy (as xxiii. 6, 11), and one of the strangers, distinguished in.
some way from the other two, being addressed. The Massorites,
however, point (as w. 27, 30 — 32) Adondi ('Lord': so RVm.), the
form used when Jehovah is intended, implying thereby that Abraham
recognizes Him from the beginning. But My lord is preferable :
Abraham would scarcely have presumed to offer food and drink to one
whom he recognized as Jehovah (on Jud. xiii. 15, see v. 16^); and the
words in v. 5, * after that ye shall pass on,' shew that he regarded the
three men as ordinary travellers. The disclosure who they are is
made only gradually, vv. 10, 13, 17—22 (cf. Jud. vi. 12 ff., 22, xiii. 6,
10, 16^ 21^).

4. and wash your feet. An attention paid regularly in the East
to one arriving from a journey (xix. 2, xxiv. 32, xliii. 24; cf. Rob.
n. 229 f ), and grateful, if not necessary, in a country in which the
feet are protected only by sandals.

and recline yourselves^ in preparation for the meal.

6. a morsel of bread. A modest description of the sumptuous
repast which is coming.

comfort. Support'. Exactly so Jud. xix. 5, 8: cf Ps. civ. 15,
' bread that supporteth man's heart.' But ' comfort ' in Old English (as
Wright, Bible Word-Book^ s.v., shews) meant to strengthen (late Lat.

1 Heb. nro, whence n^-lVD, in post-Bibl. Heb. a, feast.

XVIII. 5-9] THE BOOK OF GENESIS 193

after that ye shall pass on : ^forasmuch as ye are come to your J
servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said. 6 And
Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make
ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make
cakes. 7 And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf
tender and good, and gave it unto the servant ; and he hasted
to dress it. 8 And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which
he had dressed, and set it before them ; and he stood by them
under the tree, and they did eat. 9 And they said unto him,
Where is Sarah thy wife? And he said, Behold, in the tent.

1 Or, for therefore

confortare', so Vulg. here), and only gradually acquired the modern
sense of console^. On the idiom, use of 'for therefore' (RVm.) with
the force oi forasmuch as (so xix. 8, xxxiii. 10 al.) see Leiv. p. 475\

6. three measures. Three sS'ahs (so also, for the colourless
* measure,' 1 S. xxv. 18 ; 1 K. xviii. 32 ; 2 K. vii. 1 ; Mt. xiii. 33 [oraVov]),
which were equal to one ephah, or about 8 gallons, — a large quantity,
perhaps (notice the terms of Mt. I.e.) the usual amount of a daily
Daking (cf the * ephah' of Jud. vi. 19).

cakes. Rolls, — baked rapidly by being placed upon the 'hot
stones' (1 K. xix. 6 RVm.), — i.e. stones heated by a fire having been
made upon them, — and covered with the hot ashes, lxx. €yKpv<^tat;
Vulg. panes suhcinericii^.

7. Flesh is rarely eaten in the East: the *calf tender and good'
is an indication of Abraham's sense of the distinction of his guests
(cf. L. and B. ii. 436; in the one vol. ed., 1898 &c., p. 363).

8. butter. Curdled milk, or (as it is now called in Syria and
Arabia) lehen, stiU esteemed by the natives as a grateful and refreshing
beverage, and just such as would be offered to a traveller or (Jud. v.
25; 2 S. xvii. 29) thirsty fugitive. That * butter' is not meant is appa-
rent, if only from the fact that hem' ah was a liquid (Job xx. 17). In an
Arab's tent there hangs a semily^ or 'sour-milk skin': the fresh milk
is brought in foaming; it is poured into the semily, the portion ad-
hering to the inner surface of the skin from a former occasion serves
as a ferment; and after a few minutes' shaking the lehen is ready
(Doughty, Arabia Deserta, 1888, i. 221, 263, ii. 235, 304, 658; cf.
Palmer, Desert of the Exodus^ ii. 488 ; EncB. s.v. Milk).

stood by them (Jud. iii. 19). To see that his guests received
every attention. The same custom prevails still {L. and B. i. 308 f ).
and they did eat. Contrast Jud. xiii. 16 ; also Tob. xii. 19.

1 Wy cliff e (1380) has 'that comforteth me' for t^ ivSwatiovvrl /xe, Phil. iv. 13;
and 'comfort' in PBV. of Ps. xxvii. 16, xli. 3, cxix. 28 has the same meaning; see
, the writer's Parallel Psalter, p. 468 f.

' Cf. EncB. 604; and Eob. i. 485 * the women in some of the tents [near Engedi]
were kneading bread, and baking it in thin cakes in the embers.'

D. 13

;

194 THE BOOK Oi^ GENESIS [xviii. 10-16

10 And he said, I will certainly return unto thee when the J
season ^cometh round ; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son.
And Sarah heard in the tent door, which was behind him.

11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, and 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 waxed
old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also ? 13 And the
Lord said unto