Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/250

documentary analysis (comp. the interesting exposition by Gu.² 121 ff.). Here it must suffice to give the results of the process, along with a summary of the criteria by which the critical operation is guided and justified. The division generally accepted by recent critics is as follows:

J 6^5-8 7^{1-5 7 (8. 9). 10 12 16b 17b 22. 23}

P ^{9-22 6 11 13-16a 17a 18-21}

J ^{2b. 3a 6-12 13b 20-22}

P 7²⁴ 8^{1. 2a 3b-5 13a 14-19} 9^1-17.

The minutiæ of glosses, transpositions, etc., are left to be dealt with in the Notes. Neglecting these, the scheme as given above represents the results of Bu. (to whom the finishing touches are due: Urgesch. 248 ff.) Gu. and Ho. Dillmann agrees absolutely, except that he assigns 7¹⁷ wholly to J, and 7^23b to P; and We., except with regard to 7¹⁷ (J) 8^{3. 13}, which are both assigned entirely to P. The divergences of Kue. and Co. are almost equally slight; and indeed the main outlines of the analysis were fixed by the researches of Hupfeld, Nöldeke, and Schrader.—This remarkable consensus of critical opinion has been arrived at by four chief lines of evidence: (1) Linguistic. The key to the whole process is, of course, the distinction between the divine names (Hebrew characters) (6^{5. 6. 7. 8} 7^{1. 5. 16b} 8^{20. 21}) and (Hebrew characters) (6^{9. 11. 12. 13. 22} 7^16a 8^{1. 15} 9^{1. 6. 8. 12. 16. 17}). Besides this, a number of characteristic expressions differentiate the two sources. Thus J's (Hebrew characters) (7²) answers to P's (Hebrew characters)[*] (6¹⁹ 7^{(9). 16}); (Hebrew characters) (6⁷ 7^{4. 23}) to (Hebrew characters) and (Hebrew characters) (6^{13. 17} 9^{11. 15}); (Hebrew characters) (7²²) to (Hebrew characters)^[1] (6¹⁷ 7²¹); (Hebrew characters) (7^{4. 23}) to (Hebrew characters)[*] (6^{12. 13. 17} 7²¹ and oft.); (Hebrew characters) (8^{8. 11}) and (Hebrew characters) (7^3a) to (Hebrew characters) (8⁵); (Hebrew characters) (8^13b) to (Hebrew characters) (8¹⁴) [but see on 8^13b]; (Hebrew characters) (8²²) to (Hebrew characters) (6¹⁷); (Hebrew characters) (7³) to (Hebrew characters) (6^{19. 20}); (Hebrew characters) (7¹) to the specific enumerations of 6¹⁸ 7^{(7). 13} 8^{16. 18}. (Comp. the list in Ho. Gen. p. 68).—(2) Diversity of representation. In J clean and unclean animals are distinguished, the former entering the ark by sevens and the latter in pairs (7², cf. 8²⁰); in P one pair of every kind without distinction is admitted (6^19f. 7^15f.). According to J, the cause of the Flood is a forty-days' rain which is to commence seven days after the command to enter the ark (7^{4. 10. 12} 8^{2b. 6})—the latter passage showing that the waters began to subside after the 40 days. In P we have (7¹¹ 8^2a) a different conception of the cause of the Flood; and, in 7^{6. 11. 13. 24} 8^{3b. 4. 5. 13a. 14}, a chronological scheme according to which the waters increase for 150 days, and the entire duration of the Flood is one year (see p. 167 ff.).—(3) Duplicates. The following are obviously parallels from the two documents: 6^5-8 6^11-13 (occasion of the Flood); 7^1-5 6^17-22 (command to enter the ark, and announcement of the Flood); 7⁷ 7¹³ (entering of the ark); 7¹⁰ 7¹¹ (coming of the Flood); 7^17b 7¹⁸ (increase of the waters: floating of the ark); 7^22f. 7²¹ (destruction of terrestrial life); 8^{2b. 3a} 8^1f. (abatement of the Flood); 8^13b 8^{13a. 14} (drying of the earth); 8^20-22 (9^8ff. (promise that the Flood shall not recur).—(4) The final confirmation of the theory is that the two series of passages form two all but continuous narratives, which

1. Phrases characteristic of the style of P generally.