Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/487

 able that, with hardly an exception, they are based on the rivalry between Jacob's two wives. (The names are bestowed by the mothers, as is generally the case in JE.) How far genuine elements of tradition are embodied in such a narrative is a question which it is obviously impossible to answer with certainty. We cannot be wrong in attributing historical significance to the distinction between the tribes whose descent was traced to Jacob's wives and those regarded as sons of concubines; though we are ignorant of the actual circumstances on which the classification depends. It is also certain that there is a solid basis for the grouping of the chief tribes under the names of Leah and Rachel, representing perhaps an older and a later settlement of Hebrews in Palestine (Sta. ZATW, i. 112 f.). The fact that all the children except Benjamin are born in Mesopotamia may signify that the leading tribal divisions existed before the occupation of Canaan; but the principle certainly cannot be applied in detail, and the nature of the record forbids the attempt to discover in it reliable data for the history of the tribes. (For a conspectus of various theories, see Luther, ZATW, xxi. 36 ff.; cf. Mey. INS, 291 f., 509 ff.)

The sources are J and E, with occasional clauses from P.—29$31-35$ is wholly from J (, $31. 32. 33. 35$;, $31$; , $34. 35$), with the possible exception of $32b$.—30$1-8$ is mainly E (, $2. 6. 8$;, $3a$); but $3a$ reminds us of J (16$2$), $4a$ is assigned to P ( and cf. 16$3$), and in $7$ must be either from J (KS. Ba. Gu.) or P (Ho.).—30$9-13$ is again mostly from J (, $10. 12$; cf. $9a$ with 29$31$ 30$1$ 29$35$). $9b$ is P.—30$14-24$ presents a very mixed text, whose elements are difficult to disentangle; note the double etymologies in $18.$ (cf.$16$) $20. 23f.$ The hand of E clearly appears in $17a. 18. 20aundefined. 22bundefined.$ ($22a$ may be from P: cf. 8$1$) $23$. Hence the parallels $14-16. 20aundefined. 24$ must be assigned to J, who is further characterised, according to Gu., by the numeration of the sons $17b. 19. 20aundefined$). $21$ is interpolated.

31-35. The sons of Leah.—31. hated] The rendering is too strong. is almost a technical term for the less favoured of two wives (Dt. 21$15ff.$); where the two are sisters the rivalry is naturally most acute, hence this practice is forbidden by the later law (Lv. 18$18$). The belief that Yahwe takes the part of the unfortunate wife and rewards her with children, belongs to the strongly marked family religion of