Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/321

 of Eber which he was at a loss to connect with the name of Shem. Hence he avoids the direct assertion that Shem begat Eber, and bridges over the gap by the vague hint that Shem and Eber stand for the same ethnological abstraction.—the elder brother of Yepheth] The Heb. can mean nothing else (v.i.). The difficulty is to account for the selection of Japheth for comparison with Shem, the oldest member of the family. Unless the clause be a gloss, the most obvious inference is that the genealogy of Japheth had immediately preceded; whether because in the Table of J the sequence of age was broken (Bu. 305 f.), or because Japheth was really counted the second son of Noah (Di.). The most satisfactory solution is undoubtedly that of Gu., who finds in the remark an indication that this Table followed the order: Canaan—Japheth—Shem (see p. 188).—24 is an interpolation (based on 11$12-14$) intended to harmonise J with P. It cannot be the continuation of 21 as it stands (since we have not been informed who Arpakšad was), and still less in the form suggested below. It is also obviously inconsistent with the plan of P's Table, which deals with

with the subj. nor does the Hoph.; the Niph. does so once (Gn. 17$17$ [P]); but there the ellipsis is explained by the emphasis which lies on the fact of birth. Further, a is required as subj. of the cl. . The impression is produced that originally was expressly named as the son of Shem, and that the words referred to him (perhaps ). Considering the importance of the name, the tautology is not too harsh. It would then be hardly possible to retain the clause ; and to delete it as a gloss (although it has been proposed by others: see OH) I admit to be difficult, just because of the obscurity of the expression.—] cf. 4$26$.—] V correctly fratre J. majore. The Mass. accentuation perhaps favours the grammatically impossible rendering of G, Σ, al.; which implies that Japheth was the oldest of Noah's sons,—a notion extorted from the chronology of 11$10$ cpd. with 5$32$ 7$11$ (see Ra. IEz.). It is equally inadmissible (with IEz.) to take absolutely (= Japheth the great). See Bu. 304 ff.—24. ] G pref..