of the gods in heaven (see p. 226 above). It is conceivable that the 'ladder' of Bethel may embody cosmological speculations of a similar character, which we cannot now trace to their origin. The Egyptian theology also knew of a 'ladder' by which the soul after death mounted up to 'the gate of heaven' (Erman, Hdbk. 96). Whether it has any connexion with the sillu, or decorated arch over a palace gate, depicted in ATLO2, 13, remains doubtful. That the image was suggested by physical features of the locality—a stony hillside rising up in terraces towards heaven—seems a fanciful explanation to one who has not visited the spot; but the descriptions given of the singular freak of nature which occurs near the summit of the slope to the north of Beitīn ("huge stones piled one upon another to make columns nine or ten feet or more in height . . .")lend some plausibility to the conjecture (see Peters, Early Hebrew Story, 110 ff.).
18. Jacob set up the stone, whose mystic properties he had discovered, as a maẓẓēbāh, or sacred pillar (v.i.), and poured oil on the top of it (3514), in accordance with a custom widely attested in ancient and modern times (see p. 380).—19a gives J's account of the naming of the place. If a similar notice occurred in E (as seems implied in 3113 353), it would naturally have stood later.—19b is usually considered a gloss. From Jos. 162 (1813) it appears that Lûz was really distinct from Bethel, but was overshadowed by the more famous sanctuary in the neighbourhood.
20-22 (E). Jacob's vow.—The vow in OT "consists
18. (
Hebrew characters)] ('thing set up,' Ar. nuṣb, Ph. [Language **]) is the technical name
of the sacred monolith which was apparently an adjunct of every fully
equipped Canaanite (or Phœnician) and early Hebrew sanctuary (see
Vincent, Canaan, 96, 102 f., 140). Originally a fetish, the supposed abode
of a spirit or deity,—a belief of which there are clear traces in this
passage,—it came afterwards to be regarded as a vague symbol of
Yahwe's presence in the sanctuary, and eventually as the memorial of
a theophany or other noteworthy occurrence. In this harmless sense
the word is freely used by E (3113. 45. 51. 52 3320 [em.] 3514, Ex. 244);
but not by J, who never mentions the object except in connexion with
Canaanitish worship (Ex. 3413). But that the emblem retained its
idolatrous associations in the popular religion is shown by the strenuous
polemic of the prophets and the Dtnic. legislation against it (Hos. 101f.,
Mic. 512, Dt. 123 etc., esp. 1622 [cf. Lv. 261]); and J's significant silence
is probably an earlier indication of the same tendency. It is only at a
very late period that we find the word used once more without offence
(Is. 1919). See Dri. on Dt. 1621f.; RS2, 204 ff., 456 f.; Moore in EB,
2974 ff.; Whitehouse in DB, iii. 879 ff.—(Hebrew characters)] On this, the usual form, see
G-K. § 71.—19. (Hebrew characters)] A strong adversative, found in Pent. only 4819,
