Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/23

 differences of representation or language assume a significance which they might not have apart from that presumption. That the analysis is frequently tentative and precarious is fully acknowledged; and the danger of basing conclusions on insufficient data of this kind is one that I have sought to avoid. On the more momentous question of the historical or legendary character of the book, or the relation of the one element to the other, opinion is likely to be divided for some time to come. Several competent Assyriologists appear to cherish the conviction that we are on the eve of fresh discoveries which will vindicate the accuracy of at least the patriarchal traditions in a way that will cause the utmost astonishment to some who pay too little heed to the findings of archæological experts. It is naturally difficult to estimate the worth of such an anticipation; and it is advisable to keep an open mind. Yet even here it is possible to adopt a position which will not be readily undermined. Whatever triumphs may be in store for the archæologist,—though he should prove that Noah and Abraham and Jacob and Joseph are all real historical personages,—he will hardly succeed in dispelling the atmosphere of mythical imagination, of legend, of poetic idealisation, which are the life and soul of the narratives of Genesis. It will still be necessary, if we are to retain our faith in the inspiration of this part of Scripture, to recognise that the Divine Spirit has enshrined a part of His Revelation to men in such forms as these. It is only by a frank acceptance of this truth that the Book of Genesis can be made a means of religious edification to the educated mind of our age.

As regards the form of the commentary, I have endeavoured to include in the large print enough to enable the reader to pick up rapidly the general sense of a passage; although the exigencies of space have compelled me to employ small type to a much larger extent than was ideally desirable. In the arrangement of footnotes I have reverted to the plan adopted in the earliest volume of the series (Driver's Deuteronomy), by putting all the textual, grammatical, and philological material bearing on a parti