Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/286

 Shem); still less 'his contemptible son' (Ra.); or Ham's youngest (IEz.). The conclusion is not to be evaded that the writer follows a peculiar genealogical scheme in which Canaan is the youngest son of Noah.—25-27. Noah's curse and blessings must be presumed to have been legible in the destinies of his reputed descendants at the time when the legend took shape (cf. 27$28f. 39f.$ 49) (on the fulfilment see the concluding note, p. 186 f.). The dominant feature is the curse on Canaan, which not only stands first, but is repeated in the blessings on the two brothers.—25. The descendants of Canaan are doomed to perpetual enslavement to the other two branches of the human family.—a servant of servants] means 'the meanest slave' (G-K. § 133 i).—to his brethren] not the other members of the Hamitic race, but (as is clear from the following vv.) to Shem and Japheth.—26. Blessed be Yahwe the God of Shem] The idea thus expressed is not satisfactory. To 'bless' Yahwe means no more than to praise Him; and an ascription of praise to Yahwe is only in an oblique sense a blessing on Shem, inasmuch as it assumes a religious primacy of the Shemites in having Yahwe for their God. Bu. (294 f.) proposed to omit and read : Blessed of Yahwe be Shem (cf. 24$31$ 26$29$ [both J]). Di.'s objection, that this does not express wherein the blessing consists, applies with quite as much force to the received text. Perhaps a better emendation is that of Graetz ( would be still more acceptable): [May] Yahwe bless the tents of Shem; see the next v.—27. May God expand  Yepheth: a play on the name . The use of the generic  implies that the proper name

§ 70 n.—26. may stand either for  (coll.) or : see Note 3 in G-K. § 103 f. The latter is the more natural here. Ols. (MBBA, June 1870, 382) proposed to omit $26b$, substituting $27a_$ (—), and retain $27b$ with ref. of pl. suff. to. G has in $26b$ and [Greek: ] in $27b$.—27. ] G, V dilatet, etc. The [root] in the sense 'be spacious' is extremely rare in Heb. (Pr. 20$19$ [?24$28$]), and the accepted rendering not beyond challenge. Nö. (BL, iii. 191) denies the geographical sense, and explains the word from the frequent Semitic figure of spaciousness for prosperity. This would almost require us to take the subject of the following clause to be God (v.s.).