Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/384

direct and incidental. The passage may therefore be the continuation of the E-sections of ^1-6, on the understanding that in E the covenant had to do with the promise of a seed, and not with the possession of the land.—13. a sojourner] (coll.): see on 12¹⁰.—400 years] agreeing approximately with the 430 years of Ex. 12⁴⁰ (P).—15 is a parenthesis, if not an interpolation, reassuring Abram as to his own personal lot (see on 25⁸).—16. the fourth generation] e.g. Levi, Kohath, Amram, Aaron (or Moses) (Ex. 6^16ff.). To the reckoning of a generation as 100 years (cf. v.¹³) doubtful classical parallels are cited by Knobel (Varro, Ling. lat. 6, 11; Ovid, Met. xii. 188, etc.).^[1]—the guilt of the Amorites] (the inhabitants of Palestine) is frequently dwelt upon in later writings (Dt. 9⁵, 1 Ki. 14²⁴, Lv. 18^24f. etc. etc.); but the parallels from JE cited by Knobel (Gn. 18^20ff. 19^1ff. 20¹¹) are of quite a different character.

Vv.^13-16 are obviously out of place in J, because they presuppose ¹⁸ (the promise of the land). They are generally assigned to a redactor, although it is difficult to conceive a motive for their insertion. Di.'s suggestion, that they were written to supply the interpretation of the omen of v.¹¹, goes a certain distance; but fails to explain why the interpretation ever came to be omitted. Since ¹¹ is intimately connected with ^13-16, and at the same time has no influence on the account of J, the natural conclusion is that both ¹¹ and ^13-16 are documentary, but that the document is not J but E (so Gu.). It will be necessary, however, to delete the phrases (Hebrew characters) in ¹⁴ and (Hebrew characters) in ¹⁵ as characteristic of the style of P; perhaps also (Hebrew characters) in ¹³. The whole of ¹⁵ may be removed with advantage to the sense.—The text of ¹² is not homogeneous, so that as a whole it cannot be linked either with ¹¹ or with ^13ff.. (Hebrew characters) and (Hebrew characters) are doublets (note the repetition of (Hebrew characters)); and the poetic (Hebrew characters) (only here in Pent.) is doubtless a gloss to (Hebrew characters). The opening clause (Hebrew characters) is presumably J (in E it is already night in v.⁵). E's partiality for the visionary mode of revelation may be sufficient justification for assigning the (Hebrew characters) to him and the (Hebrew characters) to J; but the choice is immaterial.

Jos. 2⁵ (J).—13. (Hebrew characters)] G pr. (Greek characters).; and apparently read (Hebrew characters), avoiding the awkward interchange of subj. and obj.—16. (Hebrew characters)] acc. of condition, 'as a fourth generation' (cf. Jer. 31⁸); G-K. § 118 q.

1. Cf. We. Prol.⁶ 308 (Eng. tr. p. 308), who cites these vv. as positive proof that the generation was reckoned as 100 years (see p. 135 above),—a view which, of course, cannot be held unless vv.^13-16 are a unity.