CHAPTER XXXV.

_Jacob in Canaan_ (Elohist, Yahwist, Priestly-Code).

The compiler’s interest in the story of Jacob would seem to have flagged after he had brought him safely back to Canaan; and he hurries to a close with a series of fragmentary excerpts from his sources: a second visit to Bethel, with the death and burial of Deborah, ¹⁻¹⁵; the birth of Benjamin and death of Rachel, ¹⁶⁻²⁰; Reuben’s incest, ²¹ᐧ ²²ᵃ; a list of Jacob’s sons, ²²ᵇ⁻²⁶; the death and burial of Isaac, ²⁷⁻²⁹.

_Sources._――The Priestly-Code sections are easily recognised by their phraseology, viz. ⁶ᵃᐧ* ⁹⁻¹³ᐧ ¹⁵ᐧ ²²ᵇ⁻²⁶ᐧ ²⁷⁻²⁹. The last continuous extract from Priestly-Code was 28¹⁻⁹; and the connecting links are 29²⁴ᐧ ²⁸ᵇᐧ ²⁹ 30⁴ᵃᐧ ⁹ᵇᐧ ²²ᵃ 31¹⁸ᵃ{βγδ}ᵇ 33¹⁸ᵃ{β}. The natural position of 35²²ᵇ⁻²⁶ is between 30²²ᵃ and 31¹⁸ (see verse ²⁶); and this transposition is adopted by Wellhausen (_Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels_⁶ 327); but perhaps a still better position would be in 37² (see page 443). A more thorough readjustment is proposed by Gunkel: 28¹⁻⁹ 35⁶ᵃᐧ ¹¹⁻¹³ᵃᐧ ¹⁵ 29²⁴ᐧ ²⁸ᵇᐧ ²⁹ 30⁴ᵃᐧ ⁹ᵇᐧ ²²ᵃ 35²²ᵇ⁻²⁶ 31¹⁸ᵃ{βγδ}ᵇ 33¹⁸ᵃ{β} 35⁹ᐧ ¹⁰ᐧ ²⁷⁻²⁹. This division of the Bethel-theophany into two, one on the way to Mesopotamia and the other after the return (as in Elohist), is very attractive, and relieves some critical difficulties, as shown in the notes on ⁹ ᶠᶠᐧ.――To Elohist belong ¹⁻⁵ᐧ ⁶ᵇ⁻⁸ᐧ ¹⁴: compare [ה]אלהים‎, ¹ᐧ ⁵ᐧ ⁷; אל‎, ³ᐧ ⁷; ‎ מצבה‎, ¹⁴; אלהי הנכר‎, ²ᐧ ⁴ (compare Joshua 24²ᐧ ²⁰ᐧ ²³); and the reference in verse ¹ to 28²⁰ ᶠᶠᐧ.――¹⁶⁻²⁰ are also from Elohist in the main, though perhaps with Yahwist variants (מצבה‎, ²⁰; compare the retrospective reference in 48⁷).――The only purely Yahwistic section is ²¹ᐧ ²²ᵃ (ישראל‎ _bis_).

=1‒8 + 14. Bethel re-visited: the death of Deborah.=――=1.= Jacob is reminded of his vow at Bethel (28²⁰ ᶠᶠᐧ), and commanded to build an altar there.――_go up_] From Shechem to Bethel there is a continuous ascent of over 1000 feet.――_and dwell there_] It would almost seem that Bethel is to be Jacob’s permanent residence; and this (though contradicted by verse ¹⁶) would be in harmony with the tenor of the Elohistic tradition, which closely associates this patriarch with the chief Ephraimite sanctuary.――=2.= Jacob purifies his household for a solemn act of worship.――_Put away the strange gods_] The same words spoken under the same tree by Joshua (24²³ [Elohist]), point, it would appear, to the memory of a great national renunciation of idolatry at Shechem in the early history of Israel (see verse ⁴). A reference to the Teraphim stolen by Rachel (31¹⁹) does not exhaust the significance of the notice.――=3.= The use of the old name אֵל‎ here and verse ¹ (compare verse ⁷) is noticeable.――=4.= _the earrings_ (see on 24²²)] Objects of superstition, being used as amulets, and in false worship (Hosea 2¹⁵, compare Judges 8²⁴ ᶠᶠᐧ).――_the terebinth near Shechem_] See on 12⁶. The burial of idolatrous emblems under this sacred tree has some traditional meaning which we cannot now explain.――=5.= _a terror of God_] a πανικὸν δεῖμα (Delitzsch); compare Exodus 23²⁷, 1 Samuel 14¹⁵, 2 Chronicles 14¹³ etc.

Verse ⁵ presupposes an incident like that recorded in chapter 34. The intervening verses ¹⁻⁴ are not in keeping with this view of the situation; and the change of subject from ‘Jacob’ to ‘the sons of Jacob’ makes it highly probable that verse ⁵ is either redactional (Kuenen), or belongs to a different stratum of Elohist.

* * * * *

‎ =1.= בית־אל‎] LXX εἰς τὸν τόπον Βαιθὴλ is not unlikely to be original (compare 28¹¹ 12⁶).――=3.= ואעשה‎] LXX ונעשה‎.――=4= end] LXX + καὶ ἀπώλεσεν αὐτὰ ἕως τῆς σήμερον ἡμέρας.――=5.= ויסעו‎] LXX καὶ ἐξῆρεν Ἰσραὴλ ἐκ Σικίμων.――יעקב‎] LXX Ἰσραήλ.

* * * * *

=6a= (Priestly-Code). See below.――=7.= The designation of _the place_ (_i.e._ the sanctuary: 12⁶ 28¹¹) as _’Ēl Bêth’ēl_ is not confirmed by any other Old Testament allusion. Partial analogies may be found in such place-names as Ašterôth-Ḳarnaim, Nĕbô, Baal-Ḥăẓôr, Baal-Gad, etc., where the name of the deity is extended to the sacred precincts (Gunkel 248); but the text is not above suspicion.――_there the gods had revealed themselves to him_] The plural verb together with the use of the article suggests that the sentence preserves a more polytheistic version of the Bethel-legend than 28¹²,――one in which the ‘angels of God’ were spoken of as simply אֱלֹהִים‎.――=8, 14.= The death and burial of Deborah.――_below Bêth’ēl_] means apparently ‘to the South of Bethel.’――_under the oak_] or ‘sacred tree’ (see on 12⁶).――_tree of weeping_] But _v.i._――=14.= For the grounds on which this verse is connected with ⁸, see the footnote _ad loc._――_set up a maẓẓēbāh_] So verse ²⁰ at the grave of Rachel. These monuments came to be regarded as simple grave-stones; but were doubtless originally objects of worship, as the next clause indicates.――_poured out a libation on it_] The libation was in the first instance an offering to the dead, according to a custom attested among many ancient peoples,¹ and found in Catholic countries at the present day.――_poured oil_] 28¹⁸.

¹ Egyptians (Erman, _Life in Ancient Egypt_, 307), Persians (Herodotus vii. 43), Greeks (Homer _Iliad_ xxiii. 196, _Odyssey_ xi. 26 ff.), Arabs (Wellhausen _Reste arabischen Heidentums_² 182 f.). It is not mentioned in Old Testament, but food-offerings to the dead are referred to in Deuteronomy 26¹⁴ (Tobit 4¹⁸, Sirach 30¹⁸).

The notice of Deborah is in many ways perplexing. The nurse who accompanied Rebekah (24⁵⁹) is nameless, and there is nothing to lead us to expect that she was to be an important figure in Hebrew legend. How she could have come into Jacob’s family is quite inexplicable; and the conjectures that have been advanced on this point are all puerile. Moreover, the sacred tree referred to is in all probability identical with the palm-tree of Deborah ‘between Ramah and Bethel’ in Judges 4⁴ ᶠᐧ. There seems to have been a confusion in the local tradition between the famous prophetess and the nurse; and the chief mystery is how the name of Rebekah got introduced in this connexion at all. If we could suppose with Cheyne (417 f.) that בכות‎ should be בְּכֹרַת‎ and that this is an alternative form of רבקה‎, so that the real name of the tree was ‘Tree of Rebekah,’ we might be a step nearer a solution. The identity of the two trees would then have to be abandoned. It is, however, an unsafe argument to say that a ‘nurse’ could not have been conspicuous in legend: compare the grave of the nurse of Dionysus at Scythopolis, in Pliny, _Naturalis Historia_, v. 74 (Delitzsch, Gunkel).

* * * * *

=6a.= לוזה‎] See on 28¹⁹. The clause is an amalgam of Priestly-Code and Elohist.――=7.= למקום‎] LXX τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ τόπου.――אל בית־אל‎] LXX, Vulgate, Peshiṭtå ביתאל‎.――=8.= ותקבר‎] LXX omitted.――אַלּוֹן‎] see on ‎ 12⁶.――בכות‎] ‘weeping.’ The text is perhaps confirmed by בֹּכִים‎ (weepers), Judges 2⁵, which may be the same place. But though ‎ בכים‎ might plausibly be regarded as a corruption of בְּכָאִים‎ (2 Samuel 5²³ ᶠᶠᐧ, Psalms 84⁷), it is difficult to think that בכות‎ is so: ‘sacred tree of the baka-trees’ is an improbable combination (see von Gall, _Altisraelitische Kultstätten_ 103).

* * * * *

=9, 10. Jacob’s name changed= (Priestly-Code).――Compare 32²⁸ ᶠᐧ (Yahwist).――_when he came from Paddan ’Ărām_] On Gunkel’s rearrangement (page 423 above), there is nothing to suggest Bethel as the scene of the revelation. It is a faint echo of 32²⁵ ᶠᶠᐧ from which every element of local tradition, down to the name of the sanctuary, has been eliminated.

* * * * *

‎ =9.= עוד‎] LXX + ἐν Λοῦζα.――אתו‎] _The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch_, LXX + אלהים‎.――=10.= LXX simplifies by omitting ‎ שמך יעקב‎ and ויקרא את שמו ישראל‎.

* * * * *

=6a, 11‒13, 15. The blessing transmitted to Jacob=: Priestly-Code’s parallel to 28¹⁰ ᶠᶠᐧ.――=11, 12.= _’Ēl Shaddai_] see on 17¹.――For other expressions in the verses, compare 17⁶ᐧ ⁸ᐧ ¹⁶ 28³ᐧ ⁴ 46²⁶ 48⁴.――=13a.= _God went up from him_] as 17²².――=13b= is an awkward continuation, and has probably arisen through dittography from verse ¹⁵.――=15.= The naming of the place, as 28¹⁹.

That the section refers to Jacob’s outward journey, and that ⁹ ᶠᐧ describe a different theophany on his return, is probable from the following considerations: (1) The analogy of the older tradition (Jehovist). (2) בבאו מפדן ארם‎ (⁹) is superfluous after we have read (⁶ᵃ) that he had reached a spot בא׳ כנען‎. (3) That two consecutive verses (¹⁰ᐧ ¹¹) should commence with ויאמר לו א׳‎ is unnatural even in Priestly-Code (so Kautzsch-Socin). (4) The self-disclosure of the divine speaker (¹¹) must introduce the revelation (compare 17¹). (5) The עוד‎ of verse ⁹ (generally treated as redactional) presupposes a former revelation. The one difficulty in this theory of Gunkel is to imagine an adequate reason for the dislocation of Priestly-Code.

* * * * *

‎ =12.= נתתי‎] Peshiṭtå נשבעתי‎ (so a scholia in Field).――=14.= The verse cannot possibly be from Priestly-Code, who recognises no maẓẓebās, and no ritual worship of any kind before the Sinaitic legislation. As a part of the Bethel-narrative, it is unintelligible in Elohist, who has already described the origin of the maẓẓebāh there (28¹⁸), and still more in Yahwist, who does not sanction maẓẓebās at all. The impression that the scene is Bethel depends solely on the words במקום――אתו‎, which can easily be excised, as a gloss from ¹⁵. The suggestion that the verse continues ⁸ is due to Cornill (_Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft_, xi. 15 ff.), and seems the most satisfactory solution of the problem.――נֶסֶךְ‎] 2 Kings 16¹³ᐧ ¹⁵ is the only other instance of the word before Jeremiah, though the verb appears in 2 Samuel 23¹⁶, Hosea 9⁴. In Jeremiah, Ezekiel (20²⁸), and II Isaiah it is an accompaniment of heathenish worship; its legalisation for the worship of the temple appears in Ezekiel 45¹⁷ and Priestly-Code. Its mention here is a proof of the great antiquity of the notice (Cornill _l.c._).

* * * * *

=16‒20. Rachel dies in child-birth= (Elohist).――=16.= The event took place on the journey from Bethel to _’Ephrāth_, an unknown locality in the later territory of Benjamin (see after verse ²⁰).――=17.= _This also is a son for thee_] So the nurse cheers the dying woman by recalling her prayer at the birth of Joseph (30²⁴).――=18.= With her last breath Rachel names her son _Ben-’ônî_; but the father, to avert the omen, calls him _Bin-yāmîn_. The pathos of the narrative flows in sympathy with the feelings of the mother: a notice of Jacob’s life-long grief for the loss of Rachel is reserved for 48⁷.――=19.= _on the way to ’Ephrāth_] The next clause, _that is Bethlehem_, is a gloss (see Stade _Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft_, iii. 1 ff.).――=20.= See on verse ¹⁴.

The site of Rachel’s grave is determined by 1 Samuel 10² (on the border of Benjamin, between Ramah and Gibeah) and Jeremiah 31¹⁴ (compare 40¹). Christian tradition places it about a mile North of Bethlehem, in accordance with the gloss at the end of ¹⁹. This, however, rests on a confusion of Ephrath and the better known clan-name אֶפְרָת ־ָה ־ִים‎, which is always connected with Bethlehem. It is unnecessary to assume a divergence of ancient tradition regarding the site. The beautiful verse of Jeremiah 31¹⁴ shows how vivid and persistent was the hold of these legends on the popular mind.――The birth of Benjamin in Canaan is interpreted by many critics to mean that this tribe, unlike the rest, was formed after the conquest of the country (Wellhausen, Stade, Guthe, al.): Steuern, goes further, and infers that the rise of Benjamin brought about the dissolution of the Rachel tribe. But all such speculations are precarious. The _name_ Benjamin, however, does furnish evidence that this particular tribe _was_ formed in Palestine (_v.i._ on ¹⁸).

* * * * *

‎ =16.= ויסעו מביתאל‎] LXX Ἀπάρας δὲ Ἰακώβ + ἔπηξεν τὴν σκηνὴν αὐτοῦ ἐπέκεινα τοῦ πύργου Γαδερ (from ²¹), showing the influence of the theory that מגדל עדר‎ was at Jerusalem, which Jacob would naturally pass on the way to Bethlehem.――כברת הארץ‎] 48⁷, 2 Kings 5¹⁹† (without article). Apparently a measure of distance (Peshiṭtå a parasang); but nothing is certain. Accusative to Hoffmann (_Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen_, 1890, 23 ff.), ‘as far as one can see.’――=17.= בהקשתה‎ (Hiphil) ∥ ותקש‎ (Piel) in ¹⁶,――possibly variants from Elohist and Yahwist.――Another trace of Yahwist is גם זה‎, pointing back to 30²⁴ᵇ.――=18.= בן־אוני‎] ‘son of my sorrow,’ from אָוֶן‎, ‘trouble.’ Not improbably it is an obsolete proper name, having some connexion with אוֹנוֹ‎, a city and valley in Benjamin (Bennett 325; Cheyne 420).――בן־ימין‎] Usually understood as ‘son of good fortune,’ the right hand being in antiquity the lucky or fortunate side. The original meaning is probably ‘son of the south’ (compare 1 Samuel 23¹⁹ᐧ ²⁴, Psalms 89¹³ etc.), Benjamin being the most southerly of the Rachel tribes.

* * * * *

=21, 22a. Reuben’s incest= (Yahwist).――=21.= _Tower of the Flock_] Such towers would be numerous in any pastoral country; and the place here referred to is unknown. Micah 4⁸ proves nothing; and the tradition which locates it near Bethlehem rests on this passage. The order of Yahwist’s narrative (see page 414) would lead us to seek it East of the Jordan, where the tribe of Reuben was settled.――=22a.= _and when Israel heard_] Probably a temporal clause, of which the apodosis has been intentionally omitted.

The story, no doubt, went on to tell of a curse pronounced on Reuben, which explained his loss of the birthright (so Gunkel; otherwise Dillmann). The crime is referred to in 49⁴. The original motive is perhaps suggested by the striking parallel in _Iliad_ ix. 449 ff. (Gunkel):

ὅς μοι παλλακίδος περιχώσατο καλλικόμοιο· τὴν αὐτὸς φιλέεσκεν, ἀτιμάζεσκε δ’ ἄκοιτιν, μητέρ’ ἐμήν· ἡ δ’ αἰὲν ἐμὲ λισσέσκετο γούνων, παλλακίδι προμιγῆναι, ἵν’ ἐχθήρειε γέροντα.

Note that in 30¹⁴ ᶠᶠᐧ also, Reuben plays a part in the restoration of his mother’s conjugal rights.――An ethnographic reading of the legend finds its historic basis in some humiliation inflicted by Reuben on the Bilhah-tribe, or one of its branches (Dan or Naphtali). See on 49⁴.

=22b‒26. A list of Jacob’s sons= (Priestly-Code).――In two points the list deviates from the tradition of Jehovist (chapters 29. 30): The children are arranged according to their mothers; and the birth of Benjamin is placed in Mesopotamia. Otherwise the order of Jehovist is preserved: Leah precedes Rachel; but Rachel’s maid precedes Leah’s.――On the position of the section in the original Code, see pages 423, 443.

* * * * *

=22a.= The double accentuation means that ²²ᵃ was treated by the Massoretic sometimes as a whole verse, sometimes as a half; the former for private, the latter for liturgical reading (Strack 129; Wickes, _Prose Accents_, 130). Note the ‘gap in the middle of the verse,’ which LXX fills up with καὶ πονηρὸν ἐφάνη ἐναντίον αὐτοῦ.――ישראל‎] The name, instead of Jacob, is from this point onwards a fairly reliable criterion of the document Yahwist in Genesis.――=26.= ילד‎] _The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch_ and Hebrew MSS ילדו‎.

* * * * *

=27‒29. The death of Isaac= (Priestly-Code).――In Jehovist Isaac was at the point of death when Jacob fled from Esau; whereas, according to the chronology of Priestly-Code, he survived for 80 years. An equally remarkable divergence from the earlier tradition is seen in Esau’s living on with his father in Hebron (see on 32⁴), and the unbroken friendship between him and Jacob.――=27.= _Mamrē, Ḳiryath-’Arba‛, Ḥebrôn._ See 13¹⁸ 23².――=29.= Compare 25⁸ᐧ ⁹.――Isaac is buried by _Esau and Jacob his sons_] as Abraham by Isaac and Ishmael (25⁹). Priestly-Code always lays stress on the harmony of the patriarchal family life.

* * * * *

‎ =27.= קרית הארבע‎] Read perhaps קריתה ארבע‎ (Kittel).――חברון‎] LXX, Peshiṭtå + בארץ כנען‎.――=28.= יצחק‎] LXX + אשר חי‎ (as 25⁷).――=29= end] Syriac (‡ Syriac phrase).――In Priestly-Code’s chronology, Jacob at his father’s death had reached the age of 120 years (compare 35²⁸ with 25²⁶); he was 40 years old when he set out for Paddan Aram. The interval of 80 years has to be divided between his sojourn with Laban and his subsequent residence with Isaac; but in what proportions we have no data to determine.

* * * * *