Chapter XXXV

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *

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

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

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *

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

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *

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

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *

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

* * * * *