Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/354

 8, 9. The thought of strife between relatives is intolerable to Abram, who, though the older man, renounces his rights for the sake of an amicable settlement. The narrator has finely conceived the magnanimity which springs from fellowship with God. The peaceable disposition ascribed to the patriarchs is characteristic of the old narratives. Jacob substitutes guile for force, but Abraham and Isaac conquer by sheer reasonableness and conciliation.—10, 11a, 12b. Lot's choice.—lifted up his eyes and saw, etc.] The Burǧ Beitīn (p. 247), a few minutes SE from the village, is described as "one of the great view-points of Palestine" (GASm. EB, 552), from which the Jordan valley and the N end of the Dead Sea are clearly visible.—the whole Oval of the Jordan] cf. Dri. Deut. 421 f.

(only here and 1 Ki. 7$46$ = 2 Ch. 4$17$), or simply (v.$12$ 19$17. 25. 28f$, Dt. 34$3$, 2 Sa. 18$23$), is not (as Di. 230) the whole of the 'Arābāh from the Lake of Galilee to the Dead Sea, but the expansion of the Jordan valley towards its S end, defined in Dt. 34$3$ as 'the plain of Jericho' (see HG, 505 ff.; Buhl, GP, 112). The northern limit is indeterminate; the southern depends on the site of Zoar (v.$10$), whether N or S of the Dead Sea. It is thus not quite certain whether the term includes the Dead Sea basin; and on this hangs the much more important question whether the writer conceives the Sea as non-existent at the time to which the narrative refers. That is certainly the impression produced by the language of v.$10$. Apart from the assumption of a radical transformation of the physical features of the region, the words before Yahwe destroyed S. and G. have no significance. As a mere note of time they would merely show the connexion of the story with ch. 19, and might very well be a gloss (Ols. Di.). See below, pp. 273 f.—Ẓô'ar is the S limit of the Kikkār, and, if situated at the S end of the Lake (as is most probable), would not be seen from Bethel.

but on insufficient grounds (cf. Hupf. Qu. 21 f.)—7b. ] [E] .—] The name is coupled with in 34$30$, Ju. 1$4. 5$ (J), and often appears in enumerations of the pre-Israelite inhabitants (15$20$ etc.). If, as is probable, it be connected with (Dt. 3$5$, 1 Sa. 6$18$, Est. 9$19$), (Ezk. 38$11$, Zec. 2$8$, Est. 9$19$), it would mean 'hamlet-dwellers' as distinguished from Canaanites, occupying fortified cities (see on, 10$17$). That the P. were remnants of a pre-Canaanite population is hardly to be inferred from the omission of the name in 10$16f.$, or from its association with the Rephaim in Jos. 17$15$: this last notice is wanting in G$AB$ and is perhaps a gloss (Moore, Jud. 17).—9. ] GS .——] Ball suggests the pointing, (infs. abs.). [E] reads .—10. ] [E] ; G$L$ om.—] in the sense of 'watered region' only again Ezk. 45$15$ (where