regarded the son as a gift of God. At the same time, the good fortune which had now come to her banished from her heart her envy of her sister (ver. 1), and aroused behef in that God, who, as she had no doubt heard from her husband, had given Jacob such great promises; so that in giving the name, probably at the circumcision, she remembered Jehovah and prayed for another son from His covenant faithfulness.
After the birth of Joseph, Jacob asked Laban to send him away, with the wives and children for whom he had served him (ver. 25). According to this, Joseph was born at the end of the 14 years of service that had been agreed upon, or seven years after Jacob had taken Leah and (a week later) Rachel as his wives (xxix. 21-28). Now if all the children, whose births are given in chap. xxix. 32-xxx. 24, had been born one after another during the period mentioned, not only would Leah have had seven children in 7, or literally 6 J years, but there would have been a considerable interval also, during which Rachel's maid and her own gave birth to children. But this would have been impossible; and the text does not really state it. When we beat in mind that the imperf, c. ^ consec, expresses not only the order of time, but the order *of thought as well, it becomes apparent that in the history of the births, the intention to arrange them according to the mothers prevails over the chronological order, so that it by no means follows, that because the passage, "when Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children," occurs after Leah is said to have had four sons, therefore it was not till after the birth of Leah's fourth child that Rachel became aware of her own barrenness. There is nothing on the part of the grammar to prevent our arranging the course of events thus. Leah's first four births followed as rapidly as possible one after the other, so that four sons were born in the first four years of the second period of Jacob's service. In the meantime, not necessarily after the birth of Leah's fourth child, Rachel, having discovered her own barrenness, had given her maid to Jacob; so that not only may Dan have been born before Judah, but Naphtali also not long after him. The rapidity and regularity with which Leah had bom her first four sons, would make her notice all the more quickly the cessation that took place; and jealousy of Rachel, as well as the success of the means she had adopted, would impel her to attempt in the same way to increase the number of her children. Moreover, Leah herself may have conceived again before the birth of her maid's second son, and may have given birth to her last two sons in the sixth and seventh years of their marriage. And contemporaneously with the birth of Leah's last son, or immediately afterwards, Rachel may have given birth to Joseph. In this way Jacob may easily have had eleven sons within seven years of his marriage. But with regard to the birth of Dinah, the expression "afterwards" (ver. 21) seems to indicate, that she was not bom during Jacob's years of service, but during the remaining six years of his sta}' with Laban.
Vers. 25—43. New contract of service between Jacob and Laban. — As the second period of seven years terminated about the time of Joseph's birth, Jacob requested Laban to let him return to his own place and country, i.e, to Canaan. Laban, however, entreated him to remain, for he had perceived that Jehovah, Jacob's God, had blessed him for his sake; and told him to ^x his wages for further service. The words, ^^ if I have found favour in thine ei/es^^ (ver. 27), contain an aposiopesis, sc. then remain. ^^?^n3 " a heathen expression, like augurando cognovi " {Delitzsch). vy ^")2^ thy wages, which it will be binding upon me to give. Jacob reminded him, on the other hand, what service he had rendered him, how Jehovah's blessing had followed " at his foot,^ and asked when he should begin to provide for his own house. But when Laban repeated the question, what should he give him, Jacob offered to feed and keep his flock still, upon one condition, which was founded upon the fact, that in the East the goats, as a rule, are black or darkbrown, rarely white or spotted with white, and that the sheep for the most part are white, very seldom black or speckled. Jacob required as wages, namely, all the speckled, spotted, and black among the sheep, and all the speckled, spotted, and white among the goats; and offered " even to-day " to commence separating them, so that '' to-morrow ^^ Laban might convince himself of the uprightness of his proceedings. "iDH (ver. 32) cannot be imperative, because of the preceding "^^VJ?, but must be infinitive: " I will go through the whole flock to-day to remove from thence all..;" and "'"l^K^ HNT signifies " what is removed shall be my wages," but not everything of an abnormal colour that shall hereafter be found in the flocL This was no doubt intended by Jacob, as the further, course of the narrative shows, but it is not involved in the words of ver. 32. Either the writer has restricted himself to the main fact, and omitted to mention that it was also agreed at the same time that the separation should be repeated at certain regular periods, and that all the sheep of an abnormal colour in Laban*s flock should also be set aside as part of Jacob's wages; or this point was probably not mentioned at first, but taken for granted by both parties, since Jacob took measures with that idea to his own advantage, and even Laban, notwithstanding the frequent alteration of the contract with which Jacob charged him (xxxi. 7, 8, and 41), does not appear to have disputed this right. — Vers. 34 sqq. Laban cheerfully accepted the proposal, but did not leave Jacob to make the selection. He undertook that himself, probably to make more sure, and then gave those which were set apart as Jacob's wages to his own sons to tend, since it was Jacob's duty to take care of Laban's flock, and " set three days^ journey betwixt himself and Jacoh^^ i.e. between the flock to be tended by himself through his sons, and that to be tended by Jacob, for the purpose of preventing any copulation between the animals of the two flocks. Nevertheless he was overreached by Jacob, who adopted a double method of increasing the wages agreed upon. In the first place (vers. 37-39), he took fresh rods of storax, maple, and walnut-trees, all of which have a dazzling white wood under their dark outside, and peeled white stripes upon them, \'^7\ ^m'O (the verbal noun instead of the inf. abs. ^^9)> "i^^^Zzw^ the white naked in the rodsT These partially peeled, and therefore mottled rods, he placed in the drinking- troughs (t3''pn"| lit, gutters, from L}rn=}*5n to run, is explained by D^tsn ninpK^ water-troughs), to which the flock came to drink, in front of the animals, in order that, if copulation took place at the drinking time, it might occur near the mottled sticks, and the young be speckled and spotted in consequence. nDDn*l a rare, antiquated form for i^jpn^fii^ from D^n, and 'J^n*! for ^Dn*l imperf, Kal of Dn^^ = D)on. This artifice was founded upon a fact frequently noticed, particularly in the case of sheep, that whatever fixes their attention in copulation is marked upon the young (see the proofs in Bochart, Ilieroz. 1, 618, smd Friedreich zur Bihel 1, 37 sqq.). — Secondly (ver. 40), Jacob separated the speckled animals thus obtained from those of a normal colour, and caused the latter to feed so that the others would be constantly in sight, in order that he might in this way obtain a constant accession of mottled sheep. As soon as these had multiplied sufficiently, he formed separate flocks (viz. of the speckled additions), ^' and put them not unto Labans cattle;" Le, he kept them apart in order that a still larger number of speckled ones might be procured, through Laban's one-coloured flock having this mottled group constantly in view. — Vers. 41, 42. He did not adopt the trick with the rods, however, on every occasion of copulation, for the sheep in those countries lamb twice a year, but only at the copulation of the strong sheep (nn^ppn the bound ones, Le, firm and compact), — Luther ^ "the spring flock;" n^Dn^p inf. Pi, "to conceive it (the young);" — but not "in the weakening of the sheep," Le, when they were weak, and would produce weak lambs. The meaning is probably this; he only adopted this plan at the summer copulation, not the autumn; for, in the opinion of the ancients (Pliny, Columella), lambs that were conceived in the spring and bom in the autumn were stronger than those born in the spring (cf. Bochart I.e. p. 582). Jacob did this, possibly, less to spare Laban, than to avoid exciting suspicion, and so leading to the discovery of his trick. — In ver. 43 the account closes with the remark, that the man increased exceedingly, and became rich in cattle (^^3"] 1^^ many head of sheep and goats) and slaves, without expressing approbation of Jacob's conduct, or describing his increasing wealth as a blessing from God. The verdict is contained in what follows.
Vers. 1-21. The flight. — Through some angry remarks of Laban's sons with reference to his growing wealth, and the evident change in the feelings of Laban himself towards him (vers. 1, 2), Jacob was inwardly prepared for the termination of his present connection with Laban; and at the same time he received instructions from Jehovah, to return to his home, together with a promise of divine protection. In consequence of this, he sent for Rachel and Leah to come to him in the field, and explained to them (vers. 4—13), how their father's disposition had changed towards him, and how he had deceived him in spite of the service he had forced out of him, and had altered his wages ten times; but that the God of his father had stood by him, and had transferred to him their father's cattle, and now at length had directed him to return to his home. — Ver. 6. *^^^^: the original form of the abbreviated ]J^^, which is merely copied from the Pentateuch in Ez. xiii. 11, 20, xxxiv. 17. Ver. 9. DD^^K: for jD^lK as in chap, xxxii. 16, etc. — " Ten times;" i,e, as often as possible, the ten as a round number expressing the idea of completeness. From the statement that Laban had changed his wages ten times, it is evident that when Laban observed, that among his sheep and goats, of one colour only, a large number of mottled young were born, he made repeated attempts to limit the original stipulation by changing the rule as to the colours of the young, and so diminishing Jacob's wages. But when Jacob passes over his own stratagem in silence, and represents all that he aimed at and secured by crafty means as the fruit of God's blessing, this differs no doubt from the account in chap. xxx. It is not a contradiction, however, pointing to a difference in the sources of the two chapters, but merely a difference founded upon actual fact, viz. the fact that Jacob did not tell the whole truth to his wives. Moreover self-help and divine help do not exclude one another. Hence his account of the dream, in which he saw that the rams that leaped upon the cattle were all of various colours, and heard the voice of the angel of God calling his attention to what had been seen, in the words, " I have seen all that Laban hath done to thee," may contain actual truth; and the dream may be regarded as a divine revelation, which was either sent to explain to him now, at the end of the sixth year, " that it was not his stratagem, but the providence of God which had prevented him from falling a victim to Laban's avarice, and had brought him such wealth" {Delitzsch); or, if the dream occurred at an earlier period, was meant to teach him, that " the help of God, without any such self-help, could procure him justice and safety in spite of Laban's selfish covetousness" (Kurtz), It is very difficult to decide between these two interpretations. As Jehovah's instructions to him to return were not given till the end of his period of service, and Jacob connects them so closely with the vision of the rams that they seem contemporaneous, Delitzsclts view appears to deserve the preference. But the n^'V in ver. 12, " all that Laban 15 doing to thee," does not exactly suit this meaning; and we should rather expect to find HK^y used at the end of the time of service. The participle rather favours Kurt£s view, that Jacob had the vision of the rams and the explanation from the angel at the beginning of the last six years of service, but that in his communication to his wives, in which there was no necessity to preserve a strict continuity or distinction of time, he connected it with the divine instructions to return to his home, which he received at the end of his time of service. But if we decide in favour of this view, we have no further guarantee for the objective reality of the vision of the rams, since nothing is said about it in the historical account, and it is nowhere stated that the wealth obtained by Jacob's craftiness was the result of the divine blessing. The attempt so unmistakeably apparent in Jacob's 'whole conversation with his wives, to place his dealings with Laban in the most favourable light for himself, excites the suspicion, that the vision of which he spoke was nothing more than a natural dream, the materials being supplied by the three thoughts that were most frequently in his mind, by night as well as by day, viz. (1) his own schemes and their success; (2) the promise received at Bethel; (3) the wish to justify his actions to his own conscience; and that these were wrought up by an excited imagination into a visionary dream, of the divine origin of which Jacob himself may not have had the slightest doubt. — In ver. 13 ^^'^ has the article in the construct state, contrary to the ordinary rule; cf. Ges. § 110, 26; Ewald, § 290.
Vers. 14 sqq. The two wives naturally agreed with their husband, and declared that they had no longer any part or inheritance in their father's house. For he had not treated them as daughters, but sold them like strangers, i,e. servants. " And he has even constantly eaten our money^^ i.e. consumed the property brought to him by our service. The inf. abs. i'i^K after the finite verb expresses the continuation of the act, and is intensified by d:i '^ yes, even^ ^3 in ver. 16 signifies "so that," as in Deut. xiv. 24, Job x. 6. — Vers. 17-19. Jacob then set out with his children and wives, and all the property that he had acquired in Padan-Aram, to return to his father in Canaan; whilst Laban had gone to the sheep-shearing, which kept him some time from his home on account of the size of his flock. Rachel took advantage of her father's absence to rob him of his teraphim (penates), probably small images of household gods in human form, which were worshipped as givers of earthly prosperity, and also consulted as oracles (see my Archdologie, § 90). — Ver. 20. " Thus Jacob deceived Lahan the Syrian, in that he told him not that he fied\^ — ^.< ^?? to steal the heart (as the seat of the understanding), like KkeirTeiv voovy and ^^3 with the simple accus, pers.y ver. 27, like Kkiirreiv rcva, signifies to take the knowledge of anything away from a person, to deceive him; — " and passed over the river (Euphrates), and took the direction to the mountains of Gilead.^*
Vers. 22-54. Laban's pursuit, reconciliation, and COVENANT WITH Jacob. — As Laban was not told till the third day after the flight, though he pursued the fugitives with his brethren, i.e. his nearest relations, he did not overtake Jacob for seven days, by which time he had reached the mountains of Gilead (vers. 22-24). The night before he overtook them, he was warned by God in a dream, " not to speak to Jacob from good to bad^^ i.e. not to say anything decisive and emphatic for the purpose of altering what had already occurred {vid, ver. 29, and the note on xxiv. 50). Hence he confined himself, when they met, " to bitter reproaches combining paternal feeling on the one hand with hypocrisy on the other;" in which he told them that he had the power to do them harm, if God had not forbidden him, and charged them with stealing his gods (the teraphim). — Ver. 26. " Like sword-booty;^ i.e. like prisoners of war (2 Kings vi. 22) carried away unwillingly and by force. — Ver. 27. " So 1 might have conducted thee with mirth and songs, with tabret and harpy^ i.e. have sent thee away with a parting feast. Ver. 28. ^^V: an old form of the infinitive for HiK^V as in chap, xlviii. llj 1. 20.— Ver. 29. n; h^h &: ''there is 'to God my hand'' (Mic. ii. 1; cf. Deut. xxviii. 32; Neh. v. 5), i.e. my hand serves me as God (Hab. i. 11; Job xii. 6), a proverbial expression for "the power lies in my hand." — Ver. 30. ''And now thou art gone (for, if thou art gone), because thou longedst after thy father s house, why hast thou stolen my godsV The meaning is this: even if thy secret departure can be explained, thy stealing of my gods cannot. — Vers. 31, 32. The first, Jacob met by pleading his fear lest Laban should take away his daughters (keep them back by force). " For I said:'' equivalent to "for I thought." But Jacob knew nothing of the theft; hence he declared, that with whomsoever he might find the gods he should be put to death, and told Laban to make the strictest searcli among all the things that he had with him. ^'Before our hrethren^^ Le. the relations who had come with Laban, as being impartial witnesses (cf. ver. 37); not, as Knohel thinks, before Jacob's horde of male and female slaves, of women and of children. — Vers. 33 sqq. Laban looked through all the tents, but did not find his teraphim; for Rachel had put them in the saddle of her camel and was sitting upon them, and excused herself to her lord (Adonaiy ver. 35), on the ground that the custom of women was upon her. " The cameVs furniture^'* i.e. the saddle (not " the camel's litter:" Luther), here the woman's riding saddle, which had a comfortable seat formed of carpets on the top of the packsaddle. The fact that Laban passed over Rachel's seat because of her pretended condition, does not presuppose the Levitical law in Lev. xv. 19 sqq., according to which, any one who touched the couch or seat of such a woman was rendered unclean. For, in the first place, the view which lies at the foundation of this law was much older than the laws of Moses, and is met with among many other nations (cf. Bdhr, Symbolik ii. 466, etc.); consequently Laban might refrain from making further examination, less from fear of defilement, than because he regarded it as impossible that any one with the custom of women upon her should sit upon his gods. — Vers. 36 sqq. As Laban found nothing, Jacob grew angry, and pointed out the injustice of his hot pursuit and his search among all his things, but more especially the harsh treatment he had received from him in return for the unselfish and self-denying services that he had rendered him for twenty years. Acute sensibility and elevated self-consciousness give to Jacob's words a rhythmical movement and a poetical form. Hence such expressions as ^^Hi? ph"! ^' hotly pursued,'^ which is only met with in 1 Sam. xvii. 53; natSHK for n3Ni3nj5 " / had to atone for it,^ i.e. to hear the loss; " the Fear of Isaac " used as a name for God, inQ^ ae^a^ = aefiacr/jLa, the object of Isaac's fear or sacred awe. — Ver. 40. " / have been; by day (i.e. I have been in this condition, that by day) heat has consumed (prostrated) me, arid cold by night'^ — for it is well known, that in the East the cold by night corresponds to the heat by day; the hotter the day the colder the night, as a rule. — Ver. 42. " Except the God of my father... had been for me, surely thou wouldst now have sent me away empty, God has seen mine affliction and the labour of my handsj and last night He judged it'^ By the warning given to Laban, God pronounced sentence upon the matter between Jacob and Laban, condemning the course which Laban had pursued, and still intended to pursue, towards Jacob; but not on that account sanctioning all that Jacob had done to increase his own possessions, still less confirming Jacob's assertion that the vision mentioned by Jacob (vers. 11, 12) was a revelation from God. l/^ui as Jacob had only met cunning with cunning, deceit with deceit, Laban had no right to punish him for what he had done. Some excuse may indeed be found for Jacob's conduct in the heartless treatment he received from Laban, but the fact that God defended him from Laban's revenge did not prove it to be right. He had not acted upon the rule laid down in Prov. xx. 22 (cf. Rom. xii. 17; 1 Thess. v. 15).
Vers. 43-54. These words of Jacob " cut Laban to the heart with their truth, so that he turned round, offered his hand, and proposed a covenant." Jacob proceeded at once to give a practical proof of his assent to this proposal of his fatherin-law, by erecting a stone as a memorial, and calling upon his relations also (" his brethren," as in ver. 23, by whom Laban and the relations who came with him are intended, as ver. 54 shows) to gather stones into a heap, which formed a table, as is briefly observed in ver. 465, for the covenant meal (ver. 54). This stone-heap was called Jegar-Sahadutha by Laban, and Galeed by Jacob (the former is the Chaldee, the latter the Hebrew; they have both the same meaning, viz. " heaps of witness" ^), because, as Laban, who spoke first, as being the elder, explained, the heap was to be a " witness between him and Jacob." The historian then adds this explanation: " therefore they called his name GaTed^'' and immediately afterwards introduces a second name, which the heap received from words that were spoken by Laban at the conclusion of the covenant (ver. 49): " And Mizpah" i.e. watch, watch-place (sc. he called it), "/or he (Laban) said, Jehovah watch between me and thee; for we are hidden from one another (from the face of one another), if thou
^ These words are the oldest proof, that in the native country of the patriarchs, Mesopotamia, Aramaean or Chaldsean was spoken, and Hebrew in Jacob's native country, Canaan; from which we may conclude that Abraham's family first acquired the Hebrew in Canaan from the Canaanitee (Phoenicians).
shalt oppress my daughters, and if thou shalt take wives to my daughters! No man is with us, behold God is witness between me and thee! " (vers. 49, 50). After these words of Laban, which are introduced parenthetically/ and in which he enjoined upon Jacob fidelity to his daughters, the formation of the covenant of reconciliation and peace between them is first described, according to which, neither of them (sive ego sive tu, as in Ex. xix. 13) was to pass the stone-heap and memorial-stone with a hostile intention towards the other. Of this the memorial was to serve as a witness, and the God of Abraham and the God of Nahor, the God of their father (Terah), would be umpire between them. To this covenant, in which Laban, according to his polytheistic views, placed the God of Abraham upon the same level with the God of Nahor and Terah, Jacob swore by " the Fear of Isaac " (ver. 42), the God who was worshipped by his father with sacred awe. He then offered sacrifices upon the mountain, and invited his relations to eat, i.e. to partake of a sacrificial meal, and seal the covenant by a feast of love.
The geographical names Gilead and Ramath-Mizpeh (Josh, xiii. 26), also Mizpeh-Gilead (Judg ii. 29), sound so obviously like GaUed and Mizpah, that they are no doubt connected, and owe their origin to the monument erected by Jacob and Laban; so that it was by prolepsis that the scene of this occurrence was called " the mountains of Gilead " in vers. 21, 23, 25. By the mount or mountains of Gilead we are not to understand the mountain range to the south of the Jabbok (Zerka), the present Jebel Jelaad, or Jebel es Salt. The name Gilead has a much more comprehensive signification in the Old Testament; and the mountains to the south of the Jabbok are called in Deut. iii. 12 the half of Mount Gilead; the mountains to the
^ There can be no doubt that vers. 49 and 60 bear the'marks of a subsequent insertion. But there is nothing in the nature of this interpolation to indicate a compilation of the history from different sources. That Laban, when making this covenant, should have spoken of the future treatment of his daughters, is a thing so natural, that there would have been something strange in the omis.sion. And it is not less suitable to the circumstances, that he calls upon the God of Jacob, i.e. Jehovah, to watch in this affair. And apart from the use of the name Jehovah^ which is perfectly suitable here, there is nothing whatever to point to a different source; to say nothing of the fact that the critics themselves cannot agree as to the nature of the source supposed.
north of the Jabbok, the Jebel-Ajlun, forming the other half. In this chapter the name is used in the broader sense, and refers primarily to the northern half of the mountains (above the Jabbok); for Jacob did not cross the Jabbok till afterwards (xxxii. 23, 24). There is nothing in the names Ramath- Mizpeh, which Ramoth in Gilead bears in Josh. xiii. 26, and Mizpeh-Gilead, which it bears in Judg. xi. 29, to compel us to place Laban's meeting with Jacob in the southern portion of the mountains of Gilead. For even if this city is to be found in the modern Salt, and was called Ramath-Mizpeh from the event recorded here, all that can be inferred from that is, that the tradition of Laban's covenant with Jacob was associated in later ages with Ramoth in Gilead, without the correctness of the association being thereby established.
Vers. 1-3. The host of GoD.-r-When Laban had taken his departure peaceably, Jacob pursued his journey to Canaan. He was then met by some angels of God, in whom he discerned an encampment of God; and he called the place where they appeared Mahanaim, i.e. double camp or double host, because the host of God joined his host as a safeguard. This appearance of angels necessarily reminded him of the vision of the ladder, on his flight from Canaan. Just as the angels ascending and descending had then represented to him the divine protection and assistance during his journey and sojourn in a foreign land, so now the angelic host was a signal of the help of God for the approaching conflict with Esau of which he was in fear, and a fresh pledge of the promise (chap, xxviii. 15), "I will bring thee back to the land," etc. Jacob saw it during his journey; in a waking condition, therefore, not internally, but out of or above himself: but whether with the eyes of the body or of the mind (cf. 2 Kings vi. 17), cannot be determined. Mahanaim was afterwards a distinguished city, which is frequently mentioned, situated to the north of the Jabbok; and the name and remains are still preserved in the place called Mahneh {Rohinsoriy Pal. Appendix, p. 166), the site of which, however, has not yet been minutely examined (see my Comm. on Joshua, p. 259).
Vers. 4-13. From this point Jacob sent messengers forward to his brother Esau, to make known his return in such a style of humility (" thy servant," " my lord ") as was adapted to conciliate him. "IHK (ver. 5) is the first pers. imperf. Kal for '^^^.^j from "»n{J to delay, to pass a time; cf. Prov. viii. 17, and Ges. § 68, 2. The statement that Esau was already in the land of Seir (ver. 4), or, as it is afterwards called, the field of Edom, is not at variance with chap, xxxvi. 6, and may be very naturally explained on the supposition, that with the increase of his family and possessions, he severed himself more and more from his father's house, becoming increasingly convinced, as time went on, that he could hope for no change in the blessings pronounced by his father upon Jacob and himself, which excluded him from the inheritance of the promise, viz. the future possession of Canaan. Now, even if his maUcious feelings towards Jacob had gradually softened down, he had probably never said anything to his parents on the subject, so that Rebekah had been unable to fulfil her promise (chap, xxvii. 45); and Jacob, being quite uncertain as to his brother's state of mind, was thrown into the greatest alarm and anxiety by the report of the messengers, that Esau was coming to meet him with 400 men. The simplest explanation of the fact that Esau should have had so many men about him as a standing army, is that given by Delitzsch; namely, that he had to subjugate the Horite population in Seir, for which purpose he might easily have formed such an army, partly from the Canaanitish and Ishmaelitish relations of his wives, and partly from his own servants. His reason for going to meet Jacob with such a company may have been, either to show how mighty a prince he was, or with the intention of making his brother sensible of his superior power, and assuming a hostile attitude if the circumstances favoured it, even though the lapse of years had so far mitigated his anger, that he no longer seriously thought of executing the vengeance he had threatened twenty years before. For we are warranted in regarding Jacob's fear as no vain, subjective fancy, but as having an objective foundation, by the fact that God endowed him with courage and strength for his meeting with Esau, through the medium of the angelic host and the wrestling at the Jabbok; whilst, on the other hand, the brotherly affection and openness with which Esau met him, are to be attributed partly to Jacob's humble demeanour, and still more to the fact, that by the influence of God, the still remaining malice had been rooted out from his heart. — Vers. 8 sqq. Jacob, fearing the worst, divided his people and flocks into two camps, that if Esau smote the one, the other might escape. He then turned to the Great Helper in every time of need, and with an earnest prayer besought the God of his fathers, Abraham and Isaac, who had directed him to return, that, on the ground of the abundant mercies and truth (cf. xxiv. 27) He had shown him thus far. He would deliver him out of the hand of his brother, and from the threatening destruction, and so fulfil His promises., — ^Ver. 12. " For I am in fear of Mm, that (|3 ne) he come andT^ smite m^, mother with children^ D^^S ''^ ^» ^^ ^ proverbial expression for unsparing cruelty, taken from the bird which covers its young to protect them (Deut. xxii, 6, cf. Hos. x. 14). pV super, una cum, as in Ex. xxxv. 22.
Vers. 14-22. Although hoping for aid and safety from the Lord alone, Jacob neglected no means of doing what might help to appease his brother. Having taken up his quarters for the night in the place where he received the tidings of Esau's approach, he selected from his flocks (" of that which came to his hand^^ i.e, which he had acquired) a very respectable present of 550 head of cattle, and sent them in different detachments to meet Esau, "as a present from his servant Jacob" who was coming behind. The selection was in harmony with the general possessions of nomads (cf. Job i. 3, xliii. 12), and the proportion of male to female animals was arranged according to the agricultural rule of Varro (de re rustica 2, 3). The division of the present, " drove and drove separately ^^ i.e. into several separate droves which followed one another at certain intervals, was to serve the purpose of gradually mitigating the wrath of Esau. D^J3 "iQ3j ver 21, to appease the countenance; D^JS K^: to raise any one's countenance, i.e. to receive him in a friendly manner. This present he sent forward; and he himself remained the same night (mentioned in ver. 14) in the camp.
Vers. 23-33. The wrestling with God. — The same night, he conveyed his family with all his possessions across the ford of the Jabbok. Jahhok is the present Wady es Zerka (i.e. the blue), which flows from the east towards the Jordan, and with its deep rocky valley formed at that time the boundary between the kingdoms of Sihon at Heshbon and Og of Bashan. It now separates the countries of Moerad or Ajlun and Belka, The ford by which Jacob crossed was hardly the one which he took on his outward journey, upon the Syrian caravan-road by Kalaat-Zei-Jca, but one much farther to the west, between Jebel Ajlun and Jebel Jelaad, through which Buchingliam, Barckhardt, and Seetzen passed j and where there are still traces of walls and buildings to be seen, and other marks of cultivation. — Yer. 25. When Jacob was left alone on the northern side of the Jabbok, after sending all the rest across, " there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day^^ P??:?-!? an old word, which only occurs here (vers. 25, 26), signifyiag to wrestle, is either derived from P3K to wind, or related to pnn to contract one's self, to plant limb and limb firmly together. From this wrestling the river evidently received its name of Jabbok (p3^= P^^O- — ^^^• 26. '^ And when He (the unknown) saw that He did not overcome himy He touched his hip-socket; and his hip-socket was put out of joint (V\>J^ from y|PJ) as He wrestled with him^ Still Jacob would not let Him go until He blessed him. He then said to Jacob, " Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel (P^^^,, God's fighter, from nib^ to fight, and b^ God); for thou hast fought with God and with men, and hast prevailed^ When Jacob asked Him Hie name, He declined giving any definite answer, and " blessed him there^ He did not tell him His name; not merely, as the angel stated to Manoah in reply to a similar question (Judg. xiii. 18), because it was t5P3 wonder, z.e. incomprehensible to mortal man, but still more to fill Jacob's soul with awe at the mysterious character of the whole event, and to lead him to take it to heart. What Jacob wanted to know, with regard to the person of the wonderful Wpestler, and the meaning and intention of the struggle, be must already have suspected, when he would not let Him go until He blessed him; and it was put before him still more plainly in the new name that was given to him with this explanation, " Thou hast fought with Elohim and with men, and hast conquered^ God had met him in the form of a man: God in the angel, according to Hos. xii. 4, 5, i.e. not in a created angel, but in the Angel of Jehovah, the visible manifestation of the invisible God, Our history does not speak of
Jehovah, or the Angel of Jehovah, but of Elohim, for the purpose of bringing out the contrast betw^een God and the creature. This remarkable occurrence is not to be regarded as a dream or an internal vision, but fell within the sphere of sensuous perception. At the same time, it was not a natural or corporeal wrestling, but a " real conflict of both mind and body, a work of the spirit with intense effort of the body" (Delitzsch), in which Jacob was lifted up into a highly elevated condition of body and mind resembling that of ecstasy, through the medium of the manifestation of God. In a merely outward conflict, it is impossible to conquer through prayers and tears. As the idea of a dream or vision has no point of contact in the history; so the notion, that the outward conflict of bodily wrestling, and the spiritual conflict with prayer and tears, are two features opposed to one another and spiritually distinct, is evidently at variance with the meaning of the narrative and the interpretation of the prophet Hosea. Since Jacob still continued his resistance, even after his hip had been put out of joint, and would not let Him go till He had blessed him, it cannot be said that it was not till all hope of maintaining the conflict by bodily strength was taken from him, that he had recourse to the weapon of prayer. And when Hosea (xii. 4, 5) points his contemporaries to their wrestling forefather as an example for their imitation, in these words, " He took his brother by the heel in the womb, and in his human strength he fought with God; and he fought with the Angel and prevailed; he wept and made supplication unto Him," the turn by which the explanatory periphrasis of Jacob's words, "I will not let Thee go except Thou bless me," is linked on to the previous clause by n^a without a copula or vav consec, is a proof that the prophet did not regard the weeping and supplication as occurring after the wrestling, or as only a second element, which was subsequently added to the corporeal struggle. Hosea evidently looked upon the weeping and supplication as the distinguishing feature in the conflict, without thereby excluding the corporeal wrestling. At the same time, by connecting this event with what took place at the birth of the twins (xxv. 26), the prophet teaches that Jacob merely completed, by his wrestling with God, what he had already been engaged in even from his mother's womb, viz. his striving for the birthright; in other words, for the possession of the covenant promise and the covenant blessing. This meaning is also indicated by the circumstances under which the event took place. Jacob had wrested the blessing of the birthright from his brother Esau; but it was by cunning and deceit, and he had been obliged to flee from his wrath in consequence. And now that he desired to return to the land of promise and his father's house, and to enter upon the inheritance promised him in his father's blessing; Esau was coming to meet him with 400 men, which filled him with great alarm. As he felt too weak to enter upon a conflict with him, he prayed to the covenant God for deliverance from the hand of his brother, and the fulfilment of the covenant promises. The answer of God to this prayer was the present wrestling wnth God, in which he was victorious indeed, but not without carrying the marks of it all his life long in the dislocation of his thigh. Jacob's great fear of Esau's wrath and vengeance, which he could not suppress notwithstanding the divine revelations at Bethel and Mahanaim, had its foundation in his evil conscience, in the consciousness of the sin connected with his wilful and treacherous appropriation of the blessing of the first-born. To save him from the hand of his brother, it was necessary that God should first meet him as an enemy, and show him that his real opponent was God Himself, and that he must first of all overcome Him before he could hope to overcome his brother. And Jacob overcame God; not with the power of the flesh however, with which he had hitherto wrestled for God against man (God convinced him of that by touching his hip, so that it was put out of joint), but by the power of faith and prayer, reaching by firm hold of God even to the point of being blessed, by which he proved himself to be a true wrestler of God, who fought with God and with men, i.e. who by his wrestling with God overcame men as well. And whilst by the dislocation of his hip the carnal nature of his previous wrestling was declared to be powerless and wrong, he received in the new name of Israel the prize of victory, and at the same time directions from God how he w"as henceforth to strive for the cause of the Lord. — By his wrestling with God, Jacob entered upon a new stage in his life. As a sign of this, he received a new name, which indicated, as the result of this conflict, the nature of his new relation to God. But whilst Abram and Sarai, from the time when God changed their names (xvii. 5 and 15), are always called by their new names; in the his- lory of Jacob we find the old name used interchangeably with the new. " For the first two names denoted a change into a new and permanent position, effected and intended by the will and promise of God; consequently the old names were entirely abolished. But the name Israel denoted a spiritual state determined by faith; and in Jacob's life the natural state, determined by flesh and blood, still continued to stand side by side with this. Jacob's new name was transmitted to his descendants, however, who were called Israel as the covenant nation. For as the blessing of their forefather's conflict came down to them as a spiritual inheritance, so did they also enter upon the duty of preserving this inLeritance by continuing in a similar conflict.
Ver. 31. The remembrance of this wonderful conflict Jacob perpetuated in the name which he gave to the place where it had occurred, viz. Pniel or Pnuel (with the connecting sound 1 or ^), because there he had seen Elohim face to face, and his soul had been delivered (from death, xvi. 13). — Vers. 32, 33. With the rising of the sun after the night of his conflict, the night of anguish and fear also passed away from Jacob's mind, so that he was able to leave Pnuel in comfort, and go forward on his journey. The dislocation of the thigh alone remained. For this reason the children of Israel are accustomed to avoid eating the nervus ischiadicus, the principal nerve in the neighbourhood of the hip, which is easily injured by any violent strain in wrestling. " Unto this day:" the remark is applicable still.
Vers. 1-17. Meeting with Esau. — Vers. 1 sqq. As Jacob went forward, he saw Esau coming to meet him with his 400 men. He then arranged his wives and children in such a manner, that the maids with their children went first, Leah with hers in the middle, and Rachel with Joseph behind, thus forming a long procession. But he himself went in front, and met Esau with sevenfold obeisance. nviK '\nw\ does not denote complete prostration, like i^^l^ D^BNI in chap. xix. 1, but a deep Oriental bow, in which the head approaches the ground, but does not touch it. By this manifestation of deep reverence, Jacob hoped to win his brother's heart. He humbled himself before him as the elder, with the feeling that he had formerly sinned against him. Esau, on the other hand, " had a comparatively better, but not so tender a conscience." At the sight of Jacob he was carried away by the natural feelings of brotherly affection, and running up to him, embraced him, fell on his neck, and kissed him; and they both wept. The puncta extraordinaria above li^p^l are probably intended to mark the word as suspicious. They " are like a note of interrogation, questioning the genuineness of this kiss; but without any reason " (Del,). Even if there was still some malice in Esau's heart, it was overcome by the humility with which his brother met him, so that he allowed free course to the generous emotions of his heart; all the more, because the " roving life " which suited his nature had procured him such wealth and power, that he was quite equal to his brother in earthly possessions. — Vers. 5-7. When his eyes fell upon the women and children, he inquired respecting them, *^ WJiom hast thou here f " And Jacob replied, " The children with whom Elohim hath favoured meP Upon this, the mothers and their children approached in order, making reverential obeisance. I^n with double ace. " graciously to present." Elohim: " to avoid reminding Esau of the blessing of Jehovah, which had occasioned his absence" (DeL), — Vers. 8-11. Esau then inquired about the camp that had met him, i,e, the presents of cattle that were sent to meet him, and refjiised to accept them, until Jacob's ui'gent persuasion eventually induced him to do so. — Ver. 10. " For therefore,^ sc. to be able to offer thee this present, " have I come to see thy face, as man seeth the face of God, and thou hast received me favourably,^ The thought is this: In thy countenance I have been met with divine (heavenly) friendliness (cf. 1 Sam. xxix. 9, 2 Sam. xiv. 17). Jacob might say this without cringing, since he " must have discerned the work of God in the unexpected change in his brother's disposition towards him, and in his brother's friendliness a reflection of the divine."' — Ver. 11. Blessing: i,e. the present, expressive of his desire to bless, as in 1 Sam. xxv. 27, xxx. 26. ^^^\}: for HKirij as in Deut. xxxi. 29, Isa. vii. 14, etc.; sometimes also in verbs n"^, Lev. xxv. 21, xxvi. 34. ^b -i^-K^^: ^^I have air (not all kinds of things); viz. as the heir of the divine promise.
Vers. 12-15. Lastly, Esau proposed to accompany Jacob on his journey. But Jacob politely declined not only his own company, but also the escort, which Esau afterwards offered him, of a portion of his attendants; the latter as being unnecessary, the former as likely to be injurious to his flocks. This did not spring from any feeling of distrust; and the ground assigned was no mere pretext. He needed no military guard, " for he knew that he was defended by the hosts of God; " and the reason given was a very good one: " My lord knoweih that the children are tender^ and the flocks and herds that are milking {^^^'^ from h^Vj givii^g i^"^^ or suckling) are upon mg" ( vy): Le, because they are giving milk they are an object of especial anxiety to me; " and if one should overdrive them a single day^ all the sheep would die.*^ A caravan, with delicate children and cattle that required care, could not possibly keep pace with Esau and his horsemen, without taking harm. And Jacob could not expect his brother to accommodate himself to the rate at which he was travelling. For this reason he wished Esau to go on first; and he would drive gently behind, " according to the foot of the cattle ("^^^JP possessions = cattle), and according to the foot of the children" i.e. " according to the pace at which the cattle and the children could go" (Luther), " Till I come to my lord to Seir:" these words are not to be understood as meaning that he intended to go direct to Seir; consequently they were not a wilful deception for the purpose of getting rid of Esau. Jacob's destination was Canaan, and in Canaan probably Hebron, where his father Isaac still lived. From thence he may have thought of paying a visit to Esau in Seir. Whether he carried out this intention or not, we cannot tell; for we have not a record of all that Jacob did, but only of the principal events of his life. We afterwards find them both meeting together as friends at their father's funeral (xxxv. 29). Again, the attitude of inferiority which Jacob assumed in his conversation with Esau, addressing him as lord, and speaking of himself as servant, was simply an act of courtesy suited to the circumstances, in which he paid to Esau the respect due to the head of a powerful band; since he could not conscientiously have maintained the attitude of a brother, when inwardly and spiritually, in spite of Esau's friendly meeting, they were so completely separated the one from the other. — Vers. 16, 17. Esau set off the same day for Mount Seir, whilst Jacob proceeded to Succoth, where he built himself a house and made succoth for his flocks, i.e- probably not huts of branches and shrubs, but hurdles or folds made of twigs woven together. According to Josh. xiii. 27, Succoth was in the valley of the Jordan, and was allotted to the tribe of Gad, as part of the district of the Jordan, ^' on the other side Jordan eastward; " and this is confirmed by Judg. viii. 4, 5, and by Jerome (qucest, ad h, Z.): Sochoth usque hodie civitas trans Jordanem in parte Sci/thopoleos, Consequently it cannot be identified with the Sdcut on the western side of the Jordan, to the south of Beisan, above the Wady el Mdlih. — How long Jacob remained in Succoth cannot be determined; but we may conclude that he stayed there some years from the circumstance, that by erecting a house and huts he prepared for a lengthened stay. The motives which induced him to remain there are also unknown to us. But when Knohel adduces the fact, that Jacob came to Canaan for the purpose of visiting Isaac (xxxi. 18), as a reason why it is improbable that he continued long at Succoth, he forgets that Jacob could visit his father from Succoth just as well as from Shechem, and that, with the number of people and cattle that he had about him, it was impossible that he should join and subordinate himself to Isaac's household, after having attained through his past life and the promises of God a position of pati'iarchal independence.
Vers. 18-20. From Succoth, Jacob crossed a ford of the Jordan, and " came in safety to the city of Sichem in the land of Canaan" uP^ is not a proper name meaning " to Shalem," as it is rendered by Luther (and Eng. Vers., Tr,) after the LXX., Yulg., etc.; but an adjective, safe, peaceful, equivalent to Qi^'K^S, " in peace," in chap, xxviii. 21, to which there is an evident allusion. What Jacob had asked for in his vow at Bethel, before his departure from Canaan, was now fulfilled. He had returned in safety " to the land of Canaan;" Succoth, therefore, did not belong to the land of Canaan, but must have been on the eastern side of the Jordan. D?^ "i^P, lit, city of Shechem; so called from Shechem the son of the Hivite prince Hamor^ (ver. 19, xxxiv. 2 sqq.), who founded it and called it by the name of his son, since it was not in existence in Abraham's time (yid, xii. 6). Jacob pitched his tent before the town, and then bought the piece of ground upon which he encamped from the sons of Hamor for 100
^ Mamortha^ which according to Plin. (h. n. v. 14) was the earlier name of Neapolis (Nablus), appears to have been a corruption of Chamor.
Kesita, np^bP is not a piece of silver of the value of a lamb (according to the ancient versions), but a quantity of silver weighed out, of considerable, though not exactly determinable value: cf. Ges, thes. s. v. This purchase showed that Jacob, in reliance upon the promise of God, regarded Canaan as his own home and the home of his seed. This piece of field, which fell to the lot of the sons of Joseph, and where Joseph's bones were buried (Josh, xxiv. 32). was, according to tradition, the plain which stretches out at the south-eastern opening of the valley of Shechem, where Jacob's well is still pointed out (John iv. 6), also Joseph's grave, a Mahometan wely (grave) two or three hundred paces to the north (Rob. Pal. iii. 95 sqq.). Jacob also erected an altar, as Abraham had previously done after his entrance into Canaan (xii. 7), and called it El-elohe-Israel, " God (the mighty) is the God of Israel" to set forth in this name the spiritual acquisition of his previous life, and according to his vow (xxviii. 21) to give glory to the " God of Israel " (as he called Jehovah, with reference to the name given to him at chap, xxxii. 29), for having proved Himself to be El, a mighty God, during his long absence, and that it might serve as a memorial for his descendants.
Vers. 1-4. During their stay at Shechem, Dinah, Jacob's daughter by Leah, went out one day to see, i,e, to make the acquaintance of the daughters of the land; when Shechem the Hivite, the son of the prince, took her with him and seduced her. Dinah was probably between 13 and 15 at the time, and had attained perfect maturity; for this is often the case in the East at the age of 12, and sometimes earlier. There is no ground for supposing her to have been younger. Even if she was born after Joseph, and not till the end of Jacob's 14 years' service with Laban, and therefore was only five years old when they left Mesopotamia, eight or ten years may have passed since then, as Jacob may easily have spent from eight to eleven years in Succoth, where he had built a house, and Shechem, where he had bought " a parcel of a field." But she cannot have been older; for, according to chap, xxxvii. 2, Joseph was sold by his brethren when he w^as 17 years old, i.e, in the 11th year after
Jacob's return from Mesopotamia, as he was born in the 14th year of Jacob's service with Laban^ (cf. xxx. 24). In the interim between Dinah's seduction and the sale of Joseph there occurred nothing but Jacob's journey from Shechem to Bethel and thence to Ephratah, in the neighbourhood of which Benjamin was born and Rachel died, and his arrival in Hebron (chap. xxxv.). This may all have taken place within a single year. Jacob was still at Hebron, when Joseph was sent to Shechem and sold by his brethren (xxxvii. 14); and Isaac's death did not happen for 12 years afterwards, although it is mentioned in connection with the account of Jacob's arrival at Hebron (chap. xxxv. 27 sqq.). — Ver. 3. Shechem " loved the girl, and spoke to her heart;" i.e, he sought to comfort her by the promise of a happy marriage, and a^ked his father to obtain her for him as a wife.
Vers. 5-12. When Jacob heard of the seduction of his daughter, " he was silent" i.e. he remained quiet, without taking any active proceedings (Ex. xiv. 14; 2 Sam. xix. 11) until his sons came from the field. When they heard of it, they were grieved and burned with wrath at the disgrace. fc<^p to defile = to dishonour, disgrace, because it was an uncircumcised man who had seduced her. '' Because iie had wrought foil}/ in Israel, hy lying with JacoUs daughter" " To work folly" was a standing phrase for crimes against the honour and calling of Israel as the people of God, especially for shameful sins of the flesh (Deut. xxii. 21; Judg. xx. 10; 2 Sam. xiii. 2, etc.); but it was also applied to other great sins (Josh. vii. 15). As Jacob had become Israel, the seduction of his daughter was a crime against Israel, which is called folly, inasmuch as the relation of Israel to God was thereby ignored (Ps. xiv. 1). ''And this ought not to be done:" '^^'^\ potentialis as in chap. xx. 9. — Hamor went to.lacob to ask for his daughter (ver. 6); but Jacob's sons reached home at the same time (ver. 7), so that Hamor spoke to them (Jacob and his sons). To attain his object Hamor proposed a further intermarriage, unrestricted movement on their part in the land, and that they should dwell there, trade (e/i7ropeveaOac), and secure possessions (TH?^?. settle down securely, as in xlvii. 27). Shechem also offered (vers. 11, 12) to give anything
^ This view is generally supported by the earlier -sv^riters, such as Demetrius^ Petavius (Hengst. Diss.), etc.; only they reckon Dinah's age at 16, placing her birth in the 14th year of Jacob's service.
they might ask in the form of dowry (">nb not purchase-money, but the usual gift made to the bride, vid, xxiv. 53) and presents (for the brothers and mother), if they would only give him the damsel.
Vers. 13-17. Attractive as these offers of the Hivite prince and his son were, they were declined by Jacob's sons, who had the chief voice in the question of their sister's marriage (vid. xxiv. 50). And they were quite right; for, by accepting them, they would have violated the sacred call of Israel and his seed, and sacrificed the promises of Jehovah to Mammon. But they did it in a wrong way; for " they answered with deceit and acted from behind'^ (p^Tl ^^y?^' "^5"^ is to be rendered dolos struxit; D''"!^! ">?1 would be the expression for " giving mere words," Hos. x. 4; vid. Ges, thes.), ''because he had defiled Dinah their sister J^ They told him that they could not give their sister to an uncircumcised man, because this would be a reproach to them; and the only condition upon which they w^ould consent (niw imperf. Niph. of n^i<) was, that the Shechemites should all be circumcised; otherwise they would take their sister and go.
Vers. 18—24. The condition seemed reasonable to the two suitors, and by way of setting a good example, " the young man did not delay to do this word,^^ i.e. to submit to circumcision, " as he was honoured before all his father^ s house.^^ This is stated by anticipation in ver. 19; but before submitting to the operation, he went with his father to the gate, the place of public assembly, to lay the matter before the citizens of the town. They knew so well how to make the condition palatable, by a graphic description of the wealth of Jacob and his family, and by expatiating upon the advantages of being united with them, that the Shechemites consented to the proposal. ^''P.c^.* iniegri, people whose bearing is unexceptionable. "And the land, behold broad on both sides it is before them^^ i.e. it offers space enough in every direction for them to wander about with their flocks. And then the gain: " Their cattle, and their possessions, and their beasts of burden... shall they not be ours? " nppp is used here for flocks and herds, HDna for beasts of burden, viz. camels and asses (cf. Num. xxxii. 26). But notwithstanding the advantages here pointed out, the readiness of all the citizens of Shechem {vid. chap, xxiii. 10) to consent to be circumcised, could only be satisfactorily explained from the fact that this religious rite was already customary in different nations (according to Herod. 2, 104, among the Egyptians and Colchians), as an act of religious or priestly consecration.
Vers. 25-31. But on the third day, when the Shechemites were thoroughly prostrated by the painful effects of the operation, Simeon and Levi (with their servants of course) fell upon the town n^3 (i.e. while the people were off their guard, as in Ezek. XXX. 9), slew all the males, including Hamor and Shechem, with the edge of the sword, i.e. without quarter (Num. xxi. 24; Josh. X. 28, etc.), and brought back their sister. The sons of Jacob then plundered the town, and carried off all the cattle in the town and in the fields, and all their possessions, including the women and the children in their houses. By the sons of Jacob (ver. 27) we are not to understand the rest of his sons to the exclusion of Simeon, Levi, and even Reuben, as Delitzsch supposes, but all his sons. For the supposition, that Simeon and Levi were content with taking their murderous revenge, and had no share in the plunder, is neither probable in itself nor reconcilable with what Jacob said on his death-bed (chap. xlix. 5-7, observe ">iK^ ^""iTV) about this very crime; nor can it be inferred from 1XV*1 in ver. 26, for this relates merely to their going away from the house of the two princes, not to their leaving Shechem altogether. The abrupt way in which the plundering is Hnked on to the slaughter of all the males, without any copulative Vav, gives to the account the character of indignation at so revolting a crime; and this is also shown in the verbosity of the description. The absence of the copula is not be accounted for by th^ hypothesis that vers. 27—29 are interpolated; for an interpolator might have supplied the missing link by a vavy just as well as the LXX. and other ancient translators. — Vers. 30, 31. Jacob reproved the originators of this act most severely for their wickedness: " Ye have brought me into trouble {conturbare\ to make me stink (an abomination) among the inhabitants of the land;... and yet I (with my attendants) am a company that can be numbered {lit. people of number, easily numbered, a small band, Deut. iv. 27, cf. Isa. x. 19); and if they gather together against me, they will slay me,** etc. If Jacob laid stress simply upon the consequences which this crime was likely to bring upon himself and his house, the reason was, that this was the view most adapted to make an impression upon his sons. For his last words concerning Simeon and Levi (xlix. 5—7) are a sufficient proof that the wickedness of their conduct was also an object of deep abhorrence. And his fear was not groundless. Only God in His mercy averted all the evil consequences from Jacob and his house (chap. xxxv. 5, 6). But his sons answered, ''Are they to treat our sister like a harlot?" T\^V: as in Lev. xvi. 15, etc.
Their indignation was justifiable enough; and their seeking revenge, as Absalom avenged the violation of his sister on Amnon (2 Sam. xiii. 22 sqq.), was in accordance with the habits of nomadic tribes. In this way, for example, seduction is still punished by death among the Arabs, and the punishment is generally inflicted by the brothers (cf. Niebuhr, Arab. p. 39; Burckhardtj Syr. p. 361, and Beduinen, p. 89, 224-5). In addition to this, JacoVs sons looked upon the matter not merely as a violation of their sister's chastity, but as a crime against the peculiar vocation of their tribe. But for all that, the deception they practised, the abuse of the covenant sign of circumcision as a means of gratifying their revenge, and the extension of that revenge to the whole town, together with the plundering of the slain, were crimes deserving of the strongest reprobation. The crafty character of Jacob degenerated into malicious cuiming in Simeon and Levi; and jealousy for the exalted vocation of their family, into actual sin. This event " shows us in type all the errors into which the belief in the pre-eminence of Israel was sure to lead in the course of history, whenever that belief was rudely held by men of carnal minds" (0. v. Gerlach),
Vers. 1-8. Journey to Bethel. — Jacob had allowed ten years to pass since his return from Mesopotamia, without performing the vow which he made at Bethel when fleeing from Esau (xxviii. 20 sqq.), although he had recalled it to mind when resolving to return (xxxi. 13), and had also erected an altar in Shechem to the "God of Israel" (xxxiii. 20). He was now directed by God (ver. 1) to go to Bethel, and there build an altar to the God who had appeared to him on his flight from Esau. This command stirred him up to perform what had been neglected, viz. to put away from his house the strange gods, which he had tolerated in weak consideration for his wives, and which had no doubt occasioned the long neglect, and to pay to God the vow that he had made in the day of his trouble. He therefore commanded his house (vers. 2, 3), Ld his wives and children, and "aZ^ that were with Mm,** i.e. his men and maid-servants, to put away the strange gods, to purify themselves, and wash their clothes. He also buried *^all the strange gods," i.e, Rachel's teraphim (xxxi. 19), and whatever other idols there were, with the earrings which were worn as amulets and charms, " under the terebinth at Shechem,** probably the very tree under which Abraham once pitched his tent (xii. 6), and which was regarded as a sacred place in Joshua's time (yid. Josh. xxiv. 26, though the pointing is n?K there). The burial of the idols was followed by purification through the washing of the body, as a sign of the purification of the heart from the defilement of idolatry, and by the putting on of clean and festal clothes, as a symbol of the sanctification and elevation of the heart to the Lord (Josh. xxiv. 23). This decided turning to the Lord was immediately followed by the blessing of God. When they left Shechem a ^' terror of God,* i.e. a supernatural terror, " came upon the cities round about,* so that they did not venture to pursue the sons of Jacob on account of the cruelty of Simeon and Levi (ver. 5). Having safely arrived in Bethel, Jacob built an altar, which he called El Bethel (God of Bethel) in remembrance of the manifestation of God on His flight from Esau. — Ver. 8. There Deborah, Rebekah's nurse, died, and was buried below Bethel under an oak, which was henceforth called the " oak of weeping," a mourning oak, from the grief of Jacob's house on account of her death. Deborah had either been sent by Rebekah to take care of her daughters-in-law and grandsons, or had gone of her own accord into Jacob's household after the death of her mistress. The mourning at her death, and the perpetuation of her memory, are proofs that she must have been? faithful and highly esteemed servant in Jacob's house.
Vers. 9-15. The fresh revelation at Bethel. — After Jacob had performed his vow by erecting the altar at Bethel, God appeared to him again there (''again,** referring to chap, xxviii.), "on his coming out of Padan-Aram,* as He had appeared to him 30 years before on his journey thither, — though it was then in a dream, now by daylight in a visible form (cf. ver. 13, " God went up from him^^). The gloom of that day of fear had now brightened into the clear daylight of salvation. This appearance was the answer, which God gave to Jacob on his acknowledgment of Him; and its reality is thereby established, in opposition to the conjecture that it is merely a legendary repetition of the previous vision.^ The former theophany had promised to Jacob divine protection in a foreign land and restoration to his home, on the ground of his call to be the bearer of the blessings of salvation. This promise God had fulfilled, and Jacob therefore performed his vow. On the strength of this, God now confirmed to him the name of Israel, which He had already given him in chap, xxxii. 28, and with it the promise of a numerous seed and the possession of Canaan, which, so far as the form and substance are concerned, points back rather to chap. xvii. 6 and 8 than to chap, xxviii. 13, 14, and for the fulfilment of which, commencing with the birth of his sons and his return to Canaan, and stretching forward to the most remote future, the name of Israel was to furnish him with a pledge. — Jacob alluded to this second manifestation, of God at Bethel towards the close of his life (chap, xlviii. 3, 4); and Hosea (xii. 4) represents it as the result of his wrestling with God. The remembrance of this appearance Jacob transmitted to his descendants by erecting a memorial stone, which he not only anointed with oil like the former one in chap, xxviii. 18, but consecrated by a drink-offering and by the renewal of the name Bethel.
^ This conjecture derives no support from the fact that the manifestations of God are ascribed to Elohim in vers. 1 and 9 sqq., although- the whole chapter treats of the display of mercy by the covenant God, i.e. Jehovah. For the occurrence of Elohim instead of Jehovah in ver. 1 may be explgtined, partly from the antithesis of God and man (because Jacob., th& man, had neglected to redeem his vow, it was necessary that he should be reminded of it by God), and partly from the fact that there is no allusion to any appearance of God, but the words " God said" are to be understood, no doubt, as relating to an inward communication. The use of Elohim in vers. 9 sqq. follows naturally from the injunction of Elohim in ver. 1; and there was the less necessity for an express designation of the God appearing aa Jehovah., because, on the one hand, the object of this appearance was simply to renew and confirm the former appearance of Jehovah (xxviii. 12 sqq.), and on the other hand, the title assumed in ver. 11, £/ Shaddai^ refers to chap. xrii. 1, where Jehovah announces Himself to Abram as El Shaddai.
Vers. 16-20. Birth of Benjamin and death of Rachel. — Jacob's departure from Bethel was not in opposition to the divine command, " dwell there " (ver. 1). For the word 3^ does not enjoin a permanent abode; but, wlien taken in connection with what follows, " make there an altar," it merely directs him to stay there and perform his vow. As they were travelling forward, Rachel was taken in labour not far from Ephratah. pjjtn TTO^ is a space, answering probably to the Persian parasang, though the real meaning of ni23 is unknown. The birth was a difficult one. '^^j^r ^i?^ * she had difficulty in her labour (instead of Piel we find Hiphil in ver. 17 with the same signification). The midwife comforted her by saying: " Fear not, for this also is to thee a son" — a wish expressed by her when Joseph was born (xxx. 24). But she expired; and as she was dying, "^he called him Ben-oni, "son of my pain." Jacob, however, called him Ben-jamin, probably son of good fortune, according to the meaning of the word jamin sustained by the Arabic, to indicate that his pain at the loss of his favourite wife was compensated by the birth of this son, who now completed the number twelve. Other explanations are less simple. He buried Rachel on the road to Ephratah, or Ephrath (probably the fertile, from "TJ^), i^e. Bethlehem (bread-house), by which name it is better known, though the origin of it is obscure. He also erected a monument over her grave ('^^"ifD, crTtjXrj), on which the historian observes, " This is the pillar of RacheVs grave unto this day:" a remark which does not necessarily point to a post- Mosaic period, but which could easily have been made even 10 or 20 years after its erection. For the fact that a grave-stone had been preserved upon the high road in a foreign land, the inhabitants of which had no interest whatever in it, might appear worthy of notice even though only a single decennary had passed away.^
^ But even if this Mazzebah was really preserved till the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites, i.e. more than 450 years, and the remark referred to that time, it might be an interpolation by a later hand. The grave was certainly a well-known spot in Samuel's time (1 Sam. x. 2); but a monumenium ubi Rachel posita est uxor Jacob is first mentioned again by the Bordeaux pilgrims of a.d. 333 and Jerome. The Kubbet Rahil (RacheFs grave), which is now shown about half an hour's journey to the north of Bethlehem, to the right of the road from Jerusalem to Hebron, is merely '' an ordinary Muslim wely, or tomb of a holy person, a small square build-
Vers. 21, 22a. Eeuben's incest. — As they travelled onward, Jacob pitched his tent on the other side of Migdal Eder^ where Reuben committed incest with Bilhah, his father's concubine. It is merely alluded to here in the passing remark that Israel heard it, by way of preparation for chap. xlix. 4. Migdal Eder (flock-tower) was a watch-tower built for the protection of flocks against robbers (cf. 2 Kings xviii. 8; 2 Chron. xxvi. 10, xxvii. 4) on the other side of Bethlehem, but hardly within 1000 paces of the town, where it has been placed by tradition since the time of Jerome. The piska in the middle of ver. 22 does not indicate a gap in the text, but the conclusion of a parashahy a division of the text of greater antiquity and greater correctness than the Masoretic division.
Vers. 225-29. Jacob's return to his father's house, AND DEATH OF ISAAC. — Jacob had left his father's house with no other possession than a staff, and now he returned with 12 sons. Thus had he been blessed by the faithful covenant God. To show this, the account of his arrival in his father's tent at Hebron is preceded by a list of his 12 sons, arranged according to their respective mothers; and this list is closed with the remark, " These are the sons of Jacob, which were horn to him in Fadan-Aram" p?.) for Hp^; Ges, § 143, 1), although Benjamin, the twelfth, was not born in Padan-Aram, but on the journey back. — Vers. 27, 28. Jacob's arrival in " Mamre Kirjath-Arbah,'^ i.e. in the terebinth-grove of Mamre (xiii. 18) by Kirjath-Arbah or Hebron (yid, xxiii. 2), constituted his entrance into his father's house, to remain there as Isaac's heir. He had probably visited his father during the ten years that had elapsed since his return from Mesopotamia, though no allusion is made to this, since such visits would have no importance, either in themselves or their consequences, in connection with the sacred history. This was not the case, however, with his return to enter upon the family ing of stone with a dome, and within it a tomb in the ordinary Mohammedan form" (Rob. Pal. 1, p. 322). It has been recently enlarged by a square court with high walls and arches on the eastern side (Rob. Bibl. Researches, p. 357). Now although this grave is not ancient, the correctness of the tradition, which fixes upon this as the site of Rachel's grave, cannot on the whole be disputed. At any rate, the reasons assigned to the contrary hy Tkeni^is^ Kurtz^ and others are not conclusive.
inheritance. With this, therefore, the history of Isaac's life is brought to a close. Isaac died at the age of 180, and was buried by his two sons in the cave of Machpelah (chap. xlix. 31), Abraham's family grave, Esau having come from Seir to Hebron to attend the funeral of his father. But Isaac's death did not actually take place for 12 years after Jacob's return to Hebron. For as Joseph was 17 years old when he was sold by his brethren (xxxvii. 2), and Jacob was then living at Hebron (xxxvii. 14), it cannot have been more than 31 years after his flight from Esau when Jacob returned home (cf. chap, xxxiv. 1). Now since, according to our calculation at chap, xxvii. 1, he was 77 years old when he fled, he must have been 108 when he returned home; and Isaac would only have re^iched his 168th year, as he was 60 years old when Jacob was born (xxv. 26). Consequently Isaac lived to witness the grief of Jacob at the loss of Joseph, and died but a short time before his promotion in Egypt, which occurred 13 years after he was sold (xli. 46), and only 10 years before Jacob's removal with his family to Egypt, as Jacob was 130 years old when he was presented to Pharaoh (xlvii. 9). But the historical significance of his life was at an end, when Jacob returned home with his twelve sons.
" Esau and Jacob shook hands once more over the corpse of their father. Henceforth their paths diverged, to meet no more" {Del.). As Esau had also received a divine promise (xxv. 23), and the history of his tribe tvas already interwoven in the paternal blessing with that of Israel (xxvii. 29 and 40), an account is given in the book of Genesis of his growth into a nation; and a separate section is devoted to this, which, according to the invariable plan of the book, precedes the tholedoih of Jacob. The account is subdivided into the following sections, which are distinctly indicated by their respective headings. (Compare with these the parallel list in 1 Chron. i. 35-54.)
Vers. 1-8. Esau's wives and children. His settlement IN THE mountains OF Seir. — In the heading (ver. 1) the surname Edom is added to the name Esau, which he received at his birth, because the former became the national designation of his descendants. — Vers. 2, 3. The names of Esau's three wives differ from those given in the previous accounts (chap. xxvi. 34 and xxviii. 9), and in one instance the father's name as well. The daughter of Elon the Hittite is called Adah (the ornament), and in chap. xxvi. 34 Basmath (the fragrant); the second is called Aholihamah (probably tent-height), the daughter of Anah, daughter, i.e, grand-daughter of Zibeon the Hivite, and in xxvi. 34, Jehudith (the praised or praiseworthy), daughter of Beeri the Hittite; the third, the daughter of Ishmael, is called Basmath here and Mahalath in chap, xxviii. 9. This difference arose from the fact, that Moses availed himself of genealogical documents for Esau's family and tribe, and inserted them without alteration. It presents no irreconcilable discrepancy, therefore, but may be explained from the ancient custom in the East, of giving surnames, as the Arabs frequently do still, founded upon some important or memorable event in a man's life, which gradually superseded the other name {e.g, the name Edom, as explained in chap. xxv. 30); whilst as a rule the women received new names when they were married (cf. Chardin, Hengstenberg, Dissertations, vol. ii. p. 223-6). The different names given for the father of Aholibamah or Judith, Hengstenberg explains by referring to the statement in ver. 24, that Anah, the son of Zibeon, while watching the asses of his father in the desert, discovered the warm springs (of Calirrhoe), on v^hich he founds the acute conjecture, that from this discovery Anah received the surname Beeri, i.e, spring-man, which so threw his original name into the shade, as to be the only name given in the genealogical table. There is no force in the objection, that according to ver. 25 Aholibamah was not a daughter of the discoverer of the springs, but of his uncle of the same name. For where is it stated that the Aholibamah mentioned in ver. 25 was Esau's wife? And is it a thing unheard of that aunt and niece should, have the same name? If Zibeon gave his second son the name of his brother Anah (cf. vers. 24 and 20), why could not his son Anah have named his daughter after his cousin, the daughter of his father's brother? The reception of Aholibamah into the list of the Seirite princes is no proof that she was Esau's wife, but may be much more naturally supposed to have arisen from the same (unknown) circumstance as that which caused one of the seats of the Edomitish Alluphim to be called by her name (ver. 41). — Lastly, the remaining diversity, viz. that Anah is called a Hivite in ver. 2 and a Hittite in chap. xxvi. 34, is not to be explained by the conjecture, that for Hivite we should read Horite, according to ver. 20, but by the simple assumption that Hittite is used in chap. xxvi. 34 seiisu latiori for Canaan ite, according to the analogy of Josh. i. 4, 1 Kings x. 29, 2 Kings vii. 6; just as the two Hittite wives of Esau are called daughters of Canaan in chap, xxviii. 8. For the historical account, the ge neral name Hittite sufficed; but the genealogical list required the special name of the particular branch of the Canaanitish tribes, viz. the Hivites. In just as simple a manner may the introduc. tion of the Hivite Zibeon among the Horites of Seir (vers. 20 and 24) be explained, viz. on the supposition that he removed to the mountains of Seir, and there became a Horite, i,e. a troglodyte, or dweller in a cave. — The names of Esau's sons occur again in 1 Chron. i. 35. The statement in vers. 6, 7, that Esau went with his family and possessions, which he had acquired in Canaan, into the land of Seir, from before his brother Jacob, does not imply (in contradiction to chap, xxxii. 4, xxxiii. 14-16) that he did not leave the land of Canaan till after Jacob's return. The words may be understood without difficulty as meaning, that after founding a house of his own, when his family and flocks increased, Esau sought a home in Seir, because he knew that Jacob, as the heir, would enter upon the family possessions, but without waitinfiT till he returned and actually took possession. In the clause " went into the country^* (ver. 6), the name Seir or Edom (cf. ver. 16) must have dropt out, as the words "into the country" convey no sense when standing by themselves.
Vers. 9-14 (cf. 1 Chron. i. 36, 37). Esau's sons and GRANDSONS AS FATHERS OF TRIBES. — Through them he became the father of Edom, Le, the founder of the Edomitish nation on the mountains of Seir. Mount Seir is the mountainous region between the Dead Sea and the Elanitic Gulf, the northern half of which is called Jebdl {Te^aXrjvri) by the Arabs, the southern half, Sherah (Rob. Pal. ii. 552). — In the case of two of the wives of Esau, who bore only one son each, the tribes were founded not by the sons, but by the grandsons; but in that of Aholibaniah the three sons were the founders. Among the sons of Eliphaz we find Amalek, whose mother was Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz. He was the ancestor of the Amalekites, who attacked the Israelites at Horeb as they came out of Egypt under Moses (Ex. xvii. 8 sqq.), and not merely of a mixed tribe of Amalekites and Edomites, belonging to the supposed aboriginal Amalekite nation. For the Arabic legend of Amlik as an aboriginal tribe of Arabia is far too recent, confused, and contradictory to counterbalance the clear testimony of the record before us. The allusion to the fields of the Amalekites in chap. xiv. 7 does not imply that the tribe was in existence in Abraham's time, nor does the expression " first of the nations," in the saying of Balaam (Num. xxiv. 20), represent Amalek as the aboriginal or oldest tribe, but simply as the first heathen tribe by which Israel was attacked. The Old Testament says nothing of any fusion of Edomites or Horites with Amalekites, nor does it mention a double Amalek (cf. Hengstenbergy Dessertations 2, 247 sqq., and Kurtz, History i. 122, 3, ii. 240 sqq.).^ If there had been an Amalek previous to Edom, w^ith the important part which they took in opposition to Israel even in the time of Moses, the book of Genesis would not have omitted to give their pedigree in the list of the nations. At a very early period the Amalekites separated from the other tribes of Edom and formed an independent people, having their headquarters in the southern part of the mountains of Judah, as far as Kadesh (xiv. 7; Num. xiii. 29, xiv. 43, 45), but, like the Bedouins, spreading themselves as a nomad tribe over the whole of the northern portion of Arabia Petrsea, from Havilah to Shur on the border of Egypt (1 Sam. xv. 3, 7, xxvii. 8); whilst one branch penetrated into the heart of Canaan, so that a range of hills, in what was afterwards the inheritance of Ephraim, bore the name of mountains of the Amalekites (Judg. xii. 15, cf. v. 14). Those who settled in Arabia seem also to have separated in the course of time into several branches, so that Amalekite hordes invaded the land of
1 The occurrence of " Timna and Amalek " in 1 Chron. i. 36, as coordinate with the sons of Eliphaz, is simply a more concise form of sayinjf "and from Timna, Amalek."
Israel in connection sometimes with the Midianites and the sons of the East (the Arabs, Judg. vi. 3, vii. 12), and at other times with the Ammonites (Judg. iii. 13). After they had been defeated by Saul (1 Sam. xiv. 48, xv. 2 sqq.), and frequently chastised by David (1 Sam. xxvii. 8, xxx. 1 sqq.; 2 Sam. viii. 12), the remnant of them was exterminated under Hezekiah by the Simeonites on the mountains of Seir (1 Chron. iv. 42, 43).
Vers. 15-19. The tribe-princes who descended from Esau. — D''D1pk was the distinguishing title of the Edomite and Horite phylarchs; and it is ordy incidentally that it is applied to Jewish heads of tribes in Zech. ix. 7, and xii. 5. It is probably derived from ^^^? or D^E57K, equivalent to HinsK^, families (1 Sam. x. 19; Mic. v. 2), — the heads of the families, i,e. of the principal divisions, of the tribe. The names of these Allupldm are not names of places, but of persons — of the three sons and ten grandsons of Esau mentioned in vers. 9—14; though Knohel would reverse the process and interpret the whole geographically. — In ver. 16 KoraJi has probably been copied by mistake from ver. 18, and should therefore be erased, as it really is in the Samar, Codex.
Vers. 20-30 (parallel, 1 Chron. i. 38-42). Descendants OF Seir the Horite; — the inhabitants of the land, or pre-Edomitish population of the country. — " T7ie Horite: " o Tpcoy\oBvT7)<;, the dweller in caves, which abound in the mountains of Edom (vid, Rob. Pal. ii. p. 424). The Horites, who had previously been an independent people (xiv. 6), were partly exterminated and partly subjugated by the descendants of Esau (Deut. ii. 12, 22). Seven sons of Seir are given as tribe-princes of the Horites, who are afterwards mentioned as AUuphim (vers. 29, 30), also their sons, as well as two daughters, Timna (ver. 22) and Aholihamah (ver. 25), who obtained notoriety from the fact that two of the headquarters of Edomitish tribe-princes bore their names (vers. 40 and 41). Timna was probably the same as the concubine of Eliphaz (ver. 12); but Aholihamah was not the wife of Esau (cf. ver. 2). — There are a few instances in which the names in this list differ from those in the Chronicles. But they are differences which either con- fiist of variations in form, or have arisen from mistakes in copying.^ Of Anah, the son of Zibeon, it is related (ver. 24), that as he fed the asses of his father in the desert, he " found ^P?.n;'' — not "he invented mules,'* as the Talmud, Luther, etc., render it, for mules are Dn"i3 and J<^ does not mean to invent;
but he discovered aquce calidce {Vulg.), either the hot sulphur springs of Calirrhoe in the Wady Zerka Maein (vid, x. 19), or those in the Wady el Ahsa to the S.E. of the Dead Sea, or those in the Wady Hamad between Kerek and the Dead Sea.^ — Ver. 30. " These are the princes of the Horites according to their princes^'' i.e. as their princes were individually named in the land of Seir. p in enumerations indicates the relation of the individual to the whole, and of the whole to the individual.
Vers. 31-39 (parallel, 1 Chron. i. 43-50). The kings in THE LAND OF Edom: before the children of Israel had a king. It is to be observed in connection with the eight kings mentioned here, that whilst they follow one another, that is to say,
* Knohel also undertakes to explain these names geographically, and to point them out in tribes and places of Arabia, assuming, quite arbitrarily and in opposition to the text, that the names refer to tribes, not to persons, although an incident is related of Zibeon's son, which proves at once that the list relates to persons and not to tribes; and expecting his readers to believe that not only are the descendants of these troglodytes, who were exterminated before the time of Moses, still to be found, but even their names may be traced in certain Bedouin tribes, though more than 3000 years have passed away! The utter groundlessness of such explanations, which rest upon nothing more than similarity of names, may be seen in the association of Shohal with Syria Sobal (Judith iii. 1), the name used by the Crusaders for Arabia tertia^ i.e. the southernmost district below the Dead Sea, which was conquered by them. For notwithstanding the resemblance of the name Shohal to Sobal^ no one could seriously think of connecting Syria Sobal with the Horite prince Shobal^ unless he was altogether ignorant of the apocryphal origin of the former name, which first of all arose from the Greek or Latin version of the Old Testament, and in fact from a misunderstanding of Ps. Ix. 2, where, instead HDW D"1fc^, Aram Zobah^ we find in the LXX. 2vpi» 2o/3aA, and in the Vulg. Syria et Sobal.
* It is possible that there may be something significant in the fact that it was " as he was feeding his father's asses," and that the asses may have contributed to the discovery; just as the whirlpool of Karlsbad is said to have been discovered through a hound of Charles IV., which pursued a stag into a hot spring, and attracted the huntsmen to the spot by its howling.
one never comes to the throne till his predecessor is dead, yet the son never succeeds the father, but they all belong to different families and places, and in the case of the last the statement that " he died" is wanting. From this it is unquestionably obvious, that the sovereignty was elective; that the kings were chosen by the phylarchs; and, as Isa. xxxiv. 12 also shows, that they lived or reigned contemporaneously with these. The contemporaneous existence of the AUuphim and the kings may also be inferred from Ex. xv. 15 as compared with Num. xx. 14 sqq. Whilst it was with the king of Edom that Moses treated respecting the passage through the land, in the song of Moses it is the princes who tremble with fear on account of the miraculous passage through the Red Sea (cf. Ezek. xxxii. 29). Lastly, this is also supported by the fact, that the account of the seats of the phylarchs (vers. 40-43) follows the list of the kings. This arrangement would have been thoroughly unsuitable if the monarchy had been founded upon the ruins of the phylarchs (yid, Hengstenberg, ict sup, pp. 238 sqq.). Of all the kings of Edom, not one is named elsewhere. It is true, the attempt has been made to identify the fourth, Hadad (ver. 35), with the Edomite Hadad who rose up against Solomon (1 Kings xi. 14); but without foundation. The contemporary of Solomon was of royal blood, but neither a king nor a pretender; our Hadad, on the contrary, was a king, but he was the son of an unknown Hadad of the town of Avith, and no relation to his predecessor Husham of the country of the Temanites. It is related of him that he smote Midian in the fields of Moab (ver. 35); from which Hengstenberg (pp. 235-6) justly infers that this event cannot have been very remote from the Mosaic age, since we find the Midianites allied to the Moabites in Num. xxii.; whereas afterwards, viz. in the time of Gideon, the Midianites vanished from history, and in Solomon's days the fields of Moab, being Israelitish territory, cannot have served as a field of battle for the Midianites and Moabites. — Of the tribe-cities of these kings only a few can be identified now. Bozrah, a noted city of the Edomites (Isa. xxxiv. 6, Ixiii. 1, etc.), is still to be traced in el Buseireh, a village with ruins in Jebal (Rob. Pal. ii. 571). — The land of the Temanite (ver. 34) is a province in northern Idumaea, with a city, Teman, which has not yet been discovered; according to Jerome^ quinque millibus from Petra. — Rehoboth of the river (ver. 37) can neither be the Idumaean Rohotlia, nor er Ruheiheh in the wady running towards el ArisJi, but must be sought for on the Euphrates, say in Errachabi or Eachabeh, near the mouth of the Chaboras. Consequently Saul, who sprang from Eehoboth, was a foreigner. — Of the last king, Hadar (ver. 39; not Hadad, as it is written in 1 Chron. i. 50), the wife, the mother-in-law, and the mother are mentioned: his death is not mentioned here, but is added by the later chronicler (1 Chron. i. 51). This can be explained easily enough from the simple fact, that at the time when the table was first drawn up, Hadad was still alive and seated upon the throne. In all probability, therefore, Hadad was the king of Edom, to whom Moses applied for permission to pass through the land (Num. xx.,14 sqq.).^ At any rate the list is evidently a record relating to the Edomitish kings of a pre-Mosaic age. But if this is the case, the heading, " These are the Icings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israelj^ does not refer to the time when the monarchy was introduced into Israel under Saul, but was written with the promise in mind, that kings should come out of the loins of Jacob (xxxv. 11, cf. xvii. 4 sqq.), and merely expresses the thought, that Edom became a kingdom at an earlier period than Israel. Such a thought was by no means inappropriate to the Mosaic age. For the idea, " that
^ If this be admitted; then, on the supposition that this list of kings contains all the previous kings of Edom, the introduction of monarchy among the Edomites can hardly have taken place more than 200 years before the exodus; and, in that case, none of the phylarchs named in vers. 15-18 can have lived to see its establishment. For the l-ist only reaches to the grandsons of Esau, none of whom are likely to have lived more than 100 or 150 years after Esau's death. It is true we do not know when Esau died; but 413 years elapsed between the death of Jacob and the exodus, and Joseph, who was born in the 91st year of Jacob's life, died 54 years afterwards, i.e. 359 years before the exodus. But Esau was married in his 40th year, 37 years before Jacob (xxvi. 34), and had sons and daughters before his removal to Seir (ver. 6). Unless, therefore, his sons and grandsons attained a most unusual age, or were married remarkably late in life, his grandsons can hardly have outlived Joseph more than 100 years. Now, if we fix their death at about 250 years before the exodus of Israel from Egypt, there remains from that point to the arrival of the Israelites at the land of Edom (Num. xx. 14) a period of 290 years; amply sufficient for the reigns of eight kings, even if the monarchy was not introduced till after the death of the last of the phylarchs mentioned in vers. 15-18.
Israel was destined to grow into a kingdom with monarchs of his own family, was a hope handed down to the age of Moses, which the long residence in Egypt was well adapted to foster" {Del).
That the names which follow are not a second list of Edomitish tribe-princes (viz. of those who continued the ancient constitution, with its hereditary aristocracy, after Hadar's death), but merely relate to the capital cities of the old phylarchs, is evident from the expression in the heading, " After their places^ by their nameSy^ as compared with ver. 43, " According to their habitations in the land of their possession.''* This being the substance and intention of the list, there is nothing surprising in the fact, that out of the eleven names only two correspond to those given in vers. 15-19. This proves nothing more than that only two of the capitals received their names from the princes who captured or founded them, viz. Timnah and Kenaz. Neither of these has been discovered yet. The name Aholibamah is derived from the Ho rite princess (ver. 25); its site is unknown. £lah is the port Aila (vid, xiv. 6). Pinon is the same as Phunon, an encampment of the Israelites (Num. xxxiii. 42-3), celebrated for its mines, in which many Christians were condemned to labour under Diocletian, between Petra and Zoar, to the northeast of Wady Musa. Teman is the capital of the land of the Temanites (ver. 34). Mibzar is supposed by Knobel to be Petra; but this is called Selah elsewhere (2 Kings xiv. 7). 3Iagdiel and Iram cannot be identified. The concluding sentence, " This is Esau, the father (founder) of Edoni* {i.e. from him sprang the great nation of the Edomites, with its princes and kings, upon the mountains of Seir), not only terminates this section, but prepares the way for the history of Jacob, which commences with the following chapter.
The history (tholedoiJi) of Isaac commenced with the founding of his house by the birth of his sons (p. 266); but Jacob was abroad when his sons were bom, and had not yet entered into undisputed possession of his inheritance. Hence his tJioledoth only commence with his return to his father's tent and his entrance upon the family possessions, and merely embrace the history of his life as patriarch of the house which he founded. In this period of his life, indeed, his sons, especially Joseph and Judah, stand in the foreground, so that *^ Joseph might be described as the moving principle of the following history." But for all that, Jacob remains the head of the house, and the centre around whom the whole revolves. This section is divided by the removal of Jacob to Egypt, into the period of his residence in Canaan (chap, xxxvii.-xlv.), and the close of his life in Goshen (chap. xlvi.-l.)i The first period is occupied with the events which prepared the way for, and eventually occasioned, his migration into Egypt. The way was prepared, directly by the sale of Joseph (chap, xxxvii.), indirectly by the alliance of Judah with the Canaanites (chap, xxxviii.), which endangered the divine call of Israel, inasmuch as this showed the necessity for a temporary removal of the sons of Israel from Canaan. The way was opened by the wonderful career of Joseph in Egypt, his elevation from slavery and imprisonment to be the ruler over the whole of Egypt (xxxix.-xli.). And lastly, the migration was occasioned by the famine in Canaan, which rendered it necessary for Jacob's sons to travel into Egypt to buy com, and, whilst it led to Jacob's recovery of the son he had mourned for as dead, furnished an opportunity for Joseph to welcome his family into Egypt (chap, xlii.-xlv.). The second period commences with the migration of Jacob into Egypt, and his settlement in the land of Goshen (chap, xlvi.-xlvii. 27). It embraces the patriarch's closing years, his last instructions respecting his burial in Canaan (chap, xlvii. 28-31), his adoption of Joseph's sons, and the blessing given to his twelve sons (chap, xlix.), and extends to his burial and Joseph's death (chap. L).
Now if we compare this period of the patriarchal history with the previous ones, viz. those of Isaac and Abraham, it differs from them most in the absence of divine revelations — in the fact, that from the time of the patriarch's entrance upon the family inheritance to the day of his death, there was only one other occasion on which God appeared to him in a dream, viz. in Beersheba, on the border of the promised land, when he had prepared to go with his whole house into Egypt: the God of his father then promised him the increase of his seed in Egypt into a great nation, and their return to Canaan (xlvi. 2-4). This fact may be easily explained on the ground, that the end of the divine manifestations had been already attained; that in Jacob's house with his twelve sons the foundation was laid for the development of the promised nation; and that the time had come, in which the chosen family was to grow into a nation, — a process for which they needed, indeed, the blessing and protection of God, but no special revelations, so long at least as this growth into a nation took its natural course. That course was not interrupted, but rather facilitated by the removal into Egypt. But as Canaan had been assigned to the patriarchs as the land of their pilgrimage, and promised to their seed for a possession after it had become a nation; when Jacob was compelled to leave this land, his faith in the promise of God might have been shaken, if God had not appeared to him as he departed, to promise him His protection in the foreign land, and assure him of the fulfilment of His promises. More than this the house of Israel did not need to know, as to the way by which God would lead them, especially as Abraham had already received a revelation from the Lord (xv. 13-16).
In perfect harmony with the character of the time thus commencing for Jacob-Israel, is the use of the names of God in this last section of Genesis: viz. the fact, that whilst in chap, xxxvii. (the sale of Joseph) the name of God is not met with at all, in chap, xxxviii. and xxxix. we find the name of Jehovah nine times and Elohim only once (xxxix. 9), and that in circumstances in which Jehovah would have been inadmissible; and after chap. xl. 1, the name Jehovah almost entirely disappears, occurring only once in chap, xl.-l. (chap. xlix. 18, where Jacob nses it), whereas Elohim is used eighteen times and Ha-Elohim seven, not to mention such expressions as "your God" (xliii. 23), or " the God of his, or your father" (xlvi. 1, 3). So long as the attention is confined to this numerical proportion of Jehovah, and Elohim or Ha-Elohim, it must remain " a difficult enigma." But when we look at the way in which these names are employed, we find the actual fact to be, that in chap, xxxviii. and xxxix. the writer mentions God nine times, and calls Him Jehovah, and that in chap, xl.-l. he only mentions God twice, and then calls Him Elohim (xlvi. 1, 2), although the God of salvation, Le. Jehovah, is intended. In every other instance in which God is referred to in chap, xl.-l., it is always by the persons concerned: either Pharaoh (xli. 38, 39), or Joseph and his brethren (xl. 8, xli. 16, 51, 52, etc., Elohim; and xli. 25, 2^, 32, etc., Ha-Elohim) J or by Jacob (xlviii. 11, 20, 21, Elohim). Now the circumstance that the historian speaks of God nine times in chap, xxxviii. xxxix. and only twice in chap, xl.-l. is explained by the substance of the history, which furnished no particular occasion for this in the last eleven chapters. But the reason why he does not name Jehovah in chap, xl.-l. as in chap, xxxviii. -xxxix., but speaks of the " God of his (Jacob's) father Isaac," in chap. xlvi. 1, and directly afterwards of Elohim (ver. 2), could hardly be that the periphrasis "the God of his father" seemed more appropriate than the simple name Jehovah, since Jacob offered sacrifice at Beersheba to the God who appeared to his father, and to whom Isaac built an altar there, and this God {Elohim) then appeared to him in a dream and renewed the promise of his fathers. As the historian uses a periphrasis of the name Jehovah, to point out the internal connection between what Jacob did and experienced at Beersheba and what his father experienced there; so Jacob also, both in the blessing with w^hich he sends his sons the second time to Egypt (xliii. 14) and at the adoption of Joseph's sons (xlviii. 3), uses the name El Shaddai, and in his blessings on Joseph's sons (xlviii. 15) and on Joseph himself (xlix. 24, 25) employs rhetorical periphrases for the name Jehovah, because Jehovah had manifested Himself not only to him (xxxv. 11, 12), but also to his fathers Abraham and Isaac (xvii. 1 and xxviii. 3) as El Shaddai, and had proved Himself to be the Almighty, " the God who fed him," " the Mighty One of Jacob," " the Shepherd and Rock of Israel." In these set discourses the titles of God here mentioned were unquestionably more significant and impressive than the simple name Jehovah. And when Jacob speaks of Elohim only, not of Jehovah, in chap, xlviii. 11, 20, 21, the Elohim in vers. 11 and 21 may be easily explained from the antithesis of Jacob to both man and God, and in ver. 20 from the words themselves, which contain a common and, so to speak, a stereotyped saying. Wherever the thought required the name Jehovah as the only appropriate one, there Jacob used this name, as chap. xlix. 18 will prove. But that name would have been quite unsuitable in the mouth of Pharaoh in chap. xli. 38, 39, in the address of Joseph to the prisoners (xl. 8) and to Pharaoh (xli. 16, 25, 28, 32), and in his conversation with his brethren before he made himself known (xlii. 18, xliii. 29), and also in the appeal of Judah to Joseph as an unknown Egyptian officer of state (xli v. 16). In the meantime the brethren of Joseph also speak to one another of Elohim (xlii. 28); and Joseph not only sees in the birth of his sons merely a gift of Elohim (xli. 51, 52, xlviii. 9), but in the solemn moment in which he makes himself known to his brethren (xlv. 5-9) he speaks of Elohim alone: " Elohim did send me before you to preserve life " (ver. 5); and even upon his death-bed he says, " I die, and Elohim will surely visit you and bring you out of this land" (1. 24, 25). But the reason of this is not difficult to discover, and is no other than the following: Joseph, like his brethren, did not clearly discern the ways of the Lord in the wonderful changes of his life; and his brethren, though they felt that the trouble into which they were brought before the unknown ruler of Egypt was a just punishment from God for their crime against «Toseph, did not perceive that by the sale of their brother they had sinned not only against Elohim (God the Creator and Judge of men), but against Jehovah the covenant God of their father. They had not only sold their brother, but in their brother they had cast out a member of the seed promised and given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from the fellowship of the chosen family, and sinned against the God of salvation and His promises. But this aspect of their crime was still hidden from them, so that they could not speak of Jehovah. In the same way, Joseph regarded the wonderful course of his life as a divine arrangement for the preservation or rescue of his family, and he was so far acquainted with the promises of God, that he regarded it as a certainty, that Israel would be led out of Egypt, especially after the last wish expressed by Jacob. But this did not involve so full and clear an insight into the ways of Jehovah, as to lead Joseph to recognise in his own career a special appointment of the covenant God, and to describe it as a gracious work of Jehovah.^