chapter 49 is the result of any particular action of these two

tribes (see page 516 f.).――The one point, indeed, which stands out with some degree of evidence from these discussions is that there was a form of the patriarchal tradition which knew nothing of the sojourn in Egypt, and connected the story of the conquest with the name of Jacob.

¹ A singularly apposite and interesting modern parallel is quoted by Bennett (page 318 f.) from Doughty, _Arabia Deserta_, ii. 114.

* * * * *

=27‒29= are regarded by Dillmann as a late interpolation; and this is perhaps necessary if the second account is to be identified with Priestly-Code. The possibility that the verses have been glossed by some one who had Numbers 31 in mind is not to be denied.――=27.= חללים‎] literally ‘pierced,’ means either ‘slain’ (Numbers 19¹⁸ 31⁸ᐧ ¹⁹ etc.), or (rarely) ‘fatally wounded’ (Lamentations 2¹² etc.); neither sense being suitable here. Gunkel suggests חֹלִים‎, ‘sick’ ∥ כאבים‎, verse ‎²⁵.――=29.= שָׁב֖וּ וַיָּבֹ֑זּוּ‎] Remove athnach to שבו‎ (√ שבה‎) and omit ו‎ before את‎ (compare _The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch_, LXX, Peshiṭtå).――בבית‎] collective; but Peshiṭtå (‡ Syriac word) LXX ἐν τῇ πόλει καὶ ὅσα ἦν ἐν ταῖς οἰκίαις.――=30.= עכר‎] = Arabic _‛akira_, ‘be turbid,’ in Hebrew literally ‘make turbid’ = ‘undo,’――a strong word; compare Joshua 6¹⁸ 7²⁵, 1 Kings 18¹⁷ ᶠᐧ――מתי מספר‎] literally ‘men of number,’ numerable, and therefore few; Deuteronomy 4²⁷ 33⁶, Jeremiah 44²⁸ etc.

* * * * *