chapter 19; but it is introduced here with great effect as showing

how Lot had over-reached himself by his selfish conduct.――=14‒17.= The promise of the land is now confirmed to Abram.――=14.= _Lift up thine eyes, etc._] the contrast to Lot’s self-interested glance (verse ¹⁰), while Abram, by his magnanimous surrender of his claims, had unconsciously chosen the good part.――=15.= It is very doubtful if the ‎עַד עוֹלָם‎ can be considered (with Dillmann) a new element of the promise as compared with 12⁷.――=16.= _the dust of the earth_] 28¹⁴.

♦ Probable missing text in book.

This solemn assurance of the possession of the land (¹⁴⁻¹⁷) is somewhat of a contrast to the simple promises of 12²ᐧ ⁷; and has affinities with a series of passages which appear to represent a later phase of religious reflexion (see on chapter 15, page 284). Other reasons are adduced for thinking that ¹⁴⁻¹⁷ are the work of a younger hand than the original Yahwist. (a) It is not the habit of Yahwist to cite divine oracles without a specification of the circumstances under which the theophany takes place (but see 12¹ ᶠᶠᐧ). (b) The conception of Abram as wandering over the land is not that of Yahwistᴴᵉᵇʳᵒⁿ, who fixes his permanent dwelling-place at Hebron. (c) While Bethel commands a view of the Jordan valley, it affords no wide prospect of the land as a whole. Wellhausen (_Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der historischen Bücher des Alten Testaments_² 25 f.) admits that these ‘general impressions’ are not such as to procure universal assent. In point of fact they are rather overstated; and Dillmann’s answers may satisfy those who refuse to carry critical operations further than is absolutely necessary. Nevertheless, Wellhausen’s impression is probably correct, and has commended itself to Kautzsch-Socin, Holzinger, Gunkel, al.¹ The verses may be omitted not only without injury to the context, but with the obvious advantage of bringing out the reference of ¹⁸ to ¹² ᶠᐧ. The redactor has rightly seized the point of the story, which is that by his selfish choice Lot left Abram the sole heir of Canaan.

¹ The only point on which it is impossible to follow Wellhausen is his assumption that Hebron is the fixed residence of Abram in _all_ strata of Yahwist, and that the notion of his migratory life arose from the amalgamation of Elohist (which puts Beersheba in the place of Hebron) with Yahwist. There was probably a whole cycle of Yahwistic legends, in which he is represented as living in the Negeb (see already on 12⁹ ᶠᶠᐧ). So far as mere literary criticism goes, there is no reason why the addition should not be prior to Redactorᴶᵉʰᵒᵛⁱˢᵗ.

* * * * *

‎ =16.= אֲשֶׁר‎] = ‘so that’ (Gesenius-Kautzsch § 166 _b_).――=17.= LXX adds at end καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα,――approved by Ball.

* * * * *

=18.= Abram moves his tent to the _terebinth(s) of Mamre_, in Hebron, and inaugurates the local sanctuary there. In the main narrative of Yahwistᴴᵉᵇʳᵒⁿ the statement was immediately followed by chapter 18; and it is possible that the theophany recorded at the beginning of that chapter is that which marked the place as holy (see on 12⁷).

The site of the tree (or trees, _v.i._) is not known. There was a Terebinth of Abraham about 15 stadia from Hebron, which was the scene of mixed heathen and Christian worship, suppressed by order of Constantine (Sozomen, _Ecclesiastical History_, ii. 4). Josephus (_War of the Jews_, iv. 533) mentions a very large terebinth said to have existed ἀπὸ τῆς κτίσεως μέχρι νῦν, 6 stadia from the city. In spite of the discrepancy as to distance, it is probable that these are to be identified; and that the site was the _Ḥarām Rāmet el-Ḫalīl_, 2 miles North of Hebron. The difficulty in accepting this, the oldest accessible, tradition is that the distance is inconsistent with the statement that the sanctuary was _in_ Hebron. And if we suppose the ancient Hebron to have been at _er-Rāme_ in the vicinity of the _Ḥarām_, this conflicts with the tradition as to the cave of Machpelah, which has as good claims to be considered authentic. The present ‘Oak of Abraham,’ about 2 miles North-west, is as old as the 16th century. See Robinson, _Biblical Researches in Palestine_, i. 216; Buhl, _Geographie des alten Palaestina_, 160, 162; Baedeker, _Palestine and Syria: handbook for travellers_³ 138, 142; Driver _A Dictionary of the Bible_, iii. 224 f.; von Gall, _Altisraelitische Kultstätten_ 52.

* * * * *

‎ =18.= אֵלֹנַי מַמְרֵא‎ (14¹³ 18¹)] see on 12⁶. LXX τὴν δρῦν τὴν Μαμβρήν. Peshiṭtå also reads the singular, which may be right, though 18⁴ cannot be cited in support of it. In Yahwist, Mamre is said to be _in_ Hebron, in Priestly-Code (where the tree is never mentioned) it is a name of Hebron, and in 14¹³ᐧ ²⁴ it becomes the name of an Amorite chief, the owner of the trees. So Peshiṭtå here, as shown by the addition of (‡ Syriac word).

* * * * *