Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/613



by the rest already implies a central point of view, the inadequacy of the theory is seen when we observe that all the longer passages (Reuben, Simeon-Levi, Judah, Joseph) assume that Jacob is the speaker, while the shorter pieces are too slight in content to have any significance except in relation to the whole.—An intermediate position is represented by Land, who distinguished six stages in the growth of the song: (1) A primary poem, consisting of the two tristichs, vv.$3$ and $8$, written at the time of David's victories over the Philistines, and celebrating the passing of the hegemony from Reuben to Judah: to this v.$4$ was afterwards added as an appendix. (2) A second poem on Judah, Dan, and Issachar (vv.$9. 17. 14f.$: distichs), describing under animal figures the condition of these tribes during the peaceful interval of David's reign in Hebron: to which was appended later the v. on Benjamin (27). (3) The Shiloh oracle (vv.$10-12$), dating from the same period. (4) The decastich on Simeon and Levi (vv.{5-7}), from the time of the later Judges. (5) The blessing of Joseph ($2$2-26), a northern poem from about the time of Deborah. (6) The five distichs on Zebulun, Dan, Gad, Asher, and Naphtali (in that order: vv.$13. 16. 19. 20. 21$), commemorating the victory of Deborah and Barak over the Canaanites. The theory rests on dubious interpretations, involves improbable historical combinations, and is altogether too intricate to command assent; but it is noteworthy nevertheless as perhaps the first elaborate attempt to solve the problem of the date and integrity of the poem, and to do justice to the finer lines of structure that can be discovered in it.—On the whole, however, the theory of the 'traditional document' (v.s.), altered and supplemented as it was handed down from one generation to another, while sufficiently elastic, seems the one that best satisfies all the requirements of the problem (so Gu. 420 f.).

The order in which the tribes are enumerated appears to be partly genealogical, partly geographical. The six Leah-tribes come first, and in the order of birth as given in chs. 29 f., save that Zebulun and Issachar change places. Then follow the four concubine or hybrid tribes; but the order is that neither of birth nor of the mothers, the two Zilpah-tribes, Gad and Asher, coming between the Bilhah tribes, Dan and Naphtali. The Rachel-tribes, Joseph and Benjamin, stand last. Geographically, we may distinguish a southern group (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah), a northern (Zebulun, Issachar, Dan?, Gad [trans-Jordanic], Asher, Naphtali), and a central group (Joseph, Benjamin). The general agreement of the two classifications shows that the genealogical scheme itself reflects the tribal affinities and historical antecedents by which the geographical distribution of the tribes in Palestine was in part determined. The suggestion of Peters (Early Heb. Story, 61 ff.), that the ages of Jacob's children represent approximately the order in which the respective tribes obtained a permanent footing in Canaan, is a plausible one, and probably contains an element of truth; although the attempt to reconstruct the history of the invasion and conquest on such precarious data can lead to no secure results. It is clear at all events that neither the genealogical nor the geographical principle furnishes a complete explanation of the arrangement in Gn.