Vv.l. 2. 27b_
Ch. S**"** is a passage of peculiar difHcultj;. The linguistic evidence proves it to be in the main from the hand of a Deuteronomist editor, but Ijesides containing, as the Dt redaction sometimes does, a trace of the priestly writer (in the phr.ase mma ija v.*'), it records a tact, the building of an altar at Mt. Ebal, which conflicts with the princiiial law of Dt, that there shall be only one sanctuary in the land. It apparentlj' refers to two pas- sages in Dt (112»-» which orders blessing to be set on Gerizim, but cursing on Ebal, and the very composite 27''", which enjoins the erection of plastered stones, when Israel crosses Jordan, and the inscription on them of the Torah vv.^- ' ; that this shall be at Ebal v.*, and that an altar of unhewn stones shall be raised there for sacrifice to Jehovah ; and that the tribes shall be divided to bless opposite Gerizim and curse opposite Ebal), yet it does not wholly agree with either of these (for it records a reading of the whole law where 1 1*" speaks only of the blessing and cursing, and 27'"" speaks only of the writing of the Law). Jos S^'** appears therefore not to have been composed with the mere view of recording the fulfilment of the afore- said Dt injunctions (and indeed it ignores Dt 27'''''' altogether), but to be an independent* writing based on documents, part of which, the building of the Ebal altar, cannot be Deuteronomist, but is more likely to belong to E, whose interest in northern sanctuaries is constant.t (It is to E that the cor- responding passage Dt 27'' ' is assigned : on the his- torical questions raised by the passage, see below).
In ch. 9 (the Guile of Gibeon) the introduction
* The Dt passages, the first of which is an Interpolation, thf second ao extraordinarily composite paragraph (in part« con tradictory of itself), may, indeed, have been inserted (a Dl illV sequent to the appearance of the passage in Joshua
t The description of the altar ii very like Ex 8(jv
JOSHUA
JOSHUA
78i
(vv.'-', cf. T)t 1', Jos 1*) and the cIosin<; words {v.2^'> llie nt formula 'the place which He shall ehooso) are Deuteronoinic ; so, too, w."'- '" (the reference to Sihon ami O'f) and vv.*'-'' (cf. Dt SI)'"'*). In ch. 10 (The Victor}- of Giheon and C(jni|uest of the South), which is covered by the Ut inlrodviction 9'- ^, tiiei e are manj' fra^'menla of the I)t style, vv.'- "^- '*'' (the introduction and close of the story of J which is gathered round the quota- tion from the Bk. of Jashar: the phrase in v.'^ 'in the day . . . Israel' is used 9 times in Dt, and nowhere else in the Pent, j the phra.se in v."'' ni.T \jKns"'? cnSj is also Ut, but there is no rea.son why it niijiht not have been used by another writer), and yylub (perhaps), '■" ; besides w. ■*"■", the summary of the Conquest of the South, whi-jh by other documents, Jos IS'*'", Jg l'»-", is attributed to Judah and Caleb. Ch. II (the Conquest of the North) is also treated in the summary arrangement of the Deuteronomist, and mainly in Dt lanj;uage ; while ch. 12 is assigned by virtually all critics to a Deuteronomic hand on the ground that vv.'' follow Dt 3»-"- "•" rather than the parallel Nu 21'-" (Og is again joined with Sihon), and that Dt touches appear in the following verses. The list of kinijs vv. •'•-■' might be from any source.
In the Second Section of the ISook, the Division of the Land, chs. 13-21, the Dt passages are few. Here again the introduction is one of them, 13''", a summary description of the land still uncomjuered, and a charge to divide what is conquered among the 9i tribes ; and a description of E. Palestine studded not only with phrases but facts peculiar to the Deuteronomist {e.g. v." |1 Dt 18' ; v.'2.J tribes; v." Og ; cf. also vv.'-" generally with the Dt pa.ssage Jos 12'''). TlitT" are, too, signs of an attempt to harmonize two dift'ering accounts of the conquest (cf. Wellh. Comp. des Hex. y. 129 ; Kuenen, Ondcrz. i. I,§7, n. 27). Ch. 14'-' is Deuteronomic ; so, too, chs. 18'- ""' 21^'"", which repre.-*ent the con- quest of the Iloly Land aa in complete fullilment of the Divine promise : a representation not eun- si.stent with other pa-ssages nor borne out by the subsequent history, but in harmony with the Deuteronomist's icleal treatment of the subject. It is remarkable that in ch. 20 the Dt additions do not occur in the LXX. In the Appendi.\ chs. 22-24, Joshua's charge to the 2 J tribes (ch. 22'-'), and his last charge to the nation (23'""), are in the well-known hortatory style of Dt.
(b) The Priestly Writing in Joshua. — It is most convenient to take this next. In the First Section, chs. 1-12, the passages from P are few and frag- mentary, and consist either (a) of additions to the narrative of dates and statistics (about which, however, there is this difficulty, that, though such things are characteristic of P in the Pentateuch, they do not in Joshua always agree with other statistics given by P, and being but bare figiires cannot be i)roved on evidence of language to belong to P) ; or (A) of the substitution of characteristic terms of P for the corresponding terms of other documents ; or (c) of statements with regard to the ritual and enforcement of the Law. Of the first of those three cla-s-ses are 3'(?) 4"-"; of the second 5* .-i-nSo.-i •b';k ^3 o-irin (C), and the evident ex- pansion of 7" and 7^ p* Skis" hz v\k iojvi, 10" ly .11.1 cv.n Dsy (U"); of the third cla-ss 5"-" the account of the Passover, 6°" 7' O""" U".