Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/459

 between the Exodus from Egypt and the conquest of Palestine (Einw. 38 ff., 56 ff.: cf. Ben. 286). There are indeed few parts of the patriarchal history where this kind of interpretation yields more plausible results; and it is quite possible that the above construction contains elements of truth. At the same time, the method is one that requires to be applied with very great caution. In the first place, it is not certain that Jacob, Esau, and Laban were originally personifications of Israel, Edom, and Aram respectively: they may be real historic individuals; or they may be mythical heroes round whose names a rich growth of legend had gathered before they were identified with particular peoples. In the second place, even if they were personified tribes, the narrative must necessarily contain many features which belong to the personifications, and have no ethnological significance whatever. If, e.g., one set of legends describes Israel's relations with Edom in the south and another its relations with the Aramæans in the east, it was necessary that the ideal ancestor of Israel should be represented as journeying from the one place to the other; but we have no right to conclude that a similar migration was actually performed by the nation of Israel. And there are many incidents even in this group of narratives which cannot naturally be understood of dealings between one tribe and another. As a general rule, the ethnographic interpretation must be confined to those incidents where it is either indicated by the terms of the narrative, or else confirmed by external evidence.

XXV. 19-34.—The Birth of Esau and Jacob, and the Transference of the Birthright (P, JE).

In answer to Isaac's prayer, Rebekah conceives and bears twin children, Esau and Jacob. In the circumstances of their birth ($21-26$), and in their contrasted modes of life ($27. 28$), Hebrew legend saw prefigured the national characteristics, the close affinity, and the mutual rivalry of the two peoples, Edom and Israel; while the story of Esau selling his birthright ($29-34$) explains how Israel, the younger nation, obtained the ascendancy over the older, Edom.

Analysis.—Vv.$19. 20$ are taken from P; note, , (bis), . To P must also be referred the chronological notice $26b$, which shows that an account of the birth of the twins in that source has been suppressed in favour of J. There is less reason to suspect a similar omission of the marriage of Isaac before v.$20$.—The rest of the passage belongs to the composite work JE. The stylistic criteria ( $21 bis.$ $22. 23$;, $21 bis$; , $22$; , $23$) and the resemblance of $24-26$ to 38$27ff.$ point to J as the leading source of $21-28$; though Elohistic variants may possibly be detected in $25. 27$ (Di. Gu. Pro. al.). Less certainty obtains with regard to $29-34$, which most critics are content to assign to J (so Di.