the confederates of Abram (G (
Greek characters))] The expression (Hebrew characters)
does not recur; cf. (Hebrew characters), Neh. 618. Kraetzschmar's
view (Bundesvorstg. 23 f.), that it denotes the relation of
patrons to client, is inherently improbable. That these men
joined Abram in his pursuit is not stated, but is presupposed
in v.24,—another example of the writer's laxity in narration.—14.
As soon as Abram learns the fate of his brother (i.e.
'relative'), he called up his trained men (?: on (Hebrew characters) and (Hebrew characters),
v.i.) and gave chase.—three hundred and eighteen] The number
cannot be an arbitrary invention, and is not likely to be
historical. It is commonly explained as a piece of Jewish
Gematria, 318 being the numerical value of the letters of
(Hebrew characters) (152) (Ber. R. § 43: see Nestle, ET, xvii. 44 f. [cf.
139 f.]). A modern Gematria finds in it the number of the
days of the moon's visibility during the lunar year (Wi. GI,
ii. 27).—to Dan] Now Tell el-Ḳāḍi, at the foot of Hermon.
(Hebrew characters), G (Greek characters).—14. (Hebrew characters)] Lit. 'emptied out,' used of the unsheathing
of a sword (Ex. 159, Lv. 2633, Ezk. 52. 12 etc.), but never with pers. obj. as
here. Tu. cites the Ar. ǧarrada, which means both 'unsheath a sword'
and 'detach a company from an army' (see Lane); but this is no real
analogy, [E] has (Hebrew characters) = 'scrutinize' (Aram.). G (Greek characters) (so V) and TO
(Hebrew characters) ('equip': so S and TJ) settle nothing, as they may be conjectural.
Wi. (AOF, i. 1022) derives from Ass. diḳu = 'call up troops'; so Sellin,
937. Ball changes to (Hebrew characters).—(Hebrew characters)] (Greek characters), G (Greek characters), V expeditos,
STO 'young men.' The [root] (Hebrew characters) suggests the meaning 'initiated' (see
on 417), hence 'trained,' 'experienced,' etc. Sellin (937) compares
the word ḫanakuka = 'thy men,' found in one of the Ta'annek tablets.
If it comes direct from the ceremony of rubbing the palate of a new-born
child (see p. 116), it may have nothing to do with war, but denote
simply those belonging to the household, the precise equivalent of
(Hebrew characters). The latter phrase is found only in P (1712f. 23. 27, Lv. 2211)
Mamre and Eshcol were really names of places, and the writer took them for names of individual men, the fact has the most important bearing on the question of the historicity of the record. The alternative theory, that the names were originally those of persons, and were afterwards transferred to the places owned or inhabited by them, will hardly bear examination. 'Grape-cluster' is a suitable name for a valley, but not for a man. And does any one suppose that J would have recorded Abram's settlement at Hebron in the terms of 1318, if he had been aware that Mamre was an individual living at the time? Yet the Yahwist's historical knowledge is far less open to suspicion than that of the writer of ch. 14.
