could two such dissimilar revelations be coupled together in this way?" V.10 recalls an incident of the past, while 13 is in the sphere of the present: moreover, 'I am the God of Bethel' must surely open the communication. We. solves the difficulty by removing 10 and 12 (assigning them to an unknown source), and leaving 11 as the introduction to 13: similarly Di. Ho. OH. al. Gu. supposes parts of Jacob's speech to have been omitted between 9 and 10 and between 12 and 13.—It is scarcely possible to recover the original sense of the fragment. If the dream had preceded the negotiations with Laban, it might have been a hint to Jacob of the kind of animals he was to ask as his hire (Str. Gu.); but that is excluded by 12b; and, besides, in v.8 it is Laban who fixes the terms of the contract. We can only understand it vaguely as an assurance to Jacob that against all natural expectations the transaction will be overruled to his advantage. 13. I am the God of Bethel] links this theophany with that of 2810ff., and is (in E) the first assurance given to Jacob that his vow (2820-22) had been accepted.—14-16. Jacob's appeal has been addressed to willing ears: his wives are already alienated from their father, and eagerly espouse their husband's cause.—14b. Comp. 2 Sa. 201, 1 Ki. 1216.—15. has sold us] like slaves.—consumed our money] i.e., the price paid for us (cf. Ex. 2135). The complaint implies that it was considered a mark of meanness for a man to keep the mōhar for himself instead of giving it to his daughters. A similar change in the destination of the mahr appears in Arabia before Islam (We. GGN, 1893, 434 f.).—16. is ours
G-K. § 135 o.—13. (
Hebrew characters)] The art. with constr. violates a well known
rule of syntax (G-K. § 127 f); and it is doubtful if the anomaly be rightly
explained by supposing the ellipsis of (Hebrew characters) or (Hebrew characters). The original text may
have been (Hebrew characters) [(Hebrew characters)] (Hebrew characters); (so [but without (Hebrew characters)] G, adopted
by Ba.); or (Hebrew characters)[(Hebrew characters)—](Hebrew characters) (TOJ, Kit.).—(Hebrew characters)] see on 1128. It is the
only occurrence of (Hebrew characters) in E.—G adds (Greek characters).—15. (Hebrew characters)]
[E]GSV (Hebrew characters).—(Hebrew characters)] see on 2733.—16. (Hebrew characters)] G + (Greek characters).
17-25. A complete analysis of the vv. cannot be effected. The hand
of E is recognised in 19b ((Hebrew characters), cf. 30 352ff.), 20, (? (Hebrew characters), as 24), and especially
24 ((Hebrew characters), (Hebrew characters); cf. 29. 42). J betrays its presence chiefly by doublets:
21aβ 17 ((Hebrew characters)), and 25a 23b ((Hebrew characters), (Hebrew characters)). The assignment of 21aβ to J is
warranted by the mention of the Euphrates: hence 17 is E. Further
than this we cannot safely go. Gu.'s division (19a. 21-23. 25b = J; 17. 18aα. 19b. 20.
24. 25a = E) is open to the objection that it ignores the discrepancy between
the seven days of 23a and the crossing of the Euphrates in 21a (see on 23
above); but is otherwise attractive. Mey. (235 ff.) gets rid of the geographical
difficulty by distinguishing two strata in E, of which the
later had been accommodated to the representation of J.—18 (from
