Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 15.djvu/248

 234 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

which was enacted in the very latest period of which the Hexa- teuch treats. The Sinai covenant is a historical and sociological problem of the first importance; and if the details of the period verging upon the times of the settlement in Canaan are so difficult of restoration, the facts become even more obscure as we recede farther and farther into the Hexateuch.

The justification for beginning connected treatment of the social process in Israel at the time of the settlement may be stated briefly as follows : The presumption is against the literal accuracy of supernatural traditions about the history of all ancient peoples. Now, since the supernatural traditions found in biblical literature come within this general category, the pre- sumption is against them also. While they may convey a kernel of history, they are not literally and completely history. Until the contrary is proved, we are entitled to assume, at the start, that the supernatural in the literature of ancient Israel is on the same basis as the supernatural in the literatures of other ancient nations. It is, in other words, a reasonable working-hypothesis that the traditions about the interference of Yahweh with Israelite society are in the same category with traditions about the interference of other gods with other societies. Only upon this principle do the early traditions of any ancient people become intelligible. Now, as already emphasized, it is a matter for notice that the supernatural traditions about Israel's history are more numerous in the Hexateuch, which deals with affairs before the settlement, than they are in Judges, Samuel, Kings, and the prophets from Amos to Jeremiah. In the Hexateuch, the element of the miraculous is at the maximum; while in the other books it is at the minimum. We have already observed that the Book of Joshua (the last work in the Hexateuch) pre- sents a picture inconsistent with the later history as given in Samuel and Kings ; while, on the other hand, the general impres- sion produced by the Book of Judges harmonizes with Samuel and Kings. We are therefore justified in beginning connected treatment of the social process at the time of the invasion as described in Judges. We stand upon this proposition, however, not as a dogma, but as a reasonable working-idea. Our aim is