The same representation of the tent as pitched without the camp, and as associated with Moses and Joshua in particular, reappears in the narrative of the seventy elders (Nu H'*'-^"'"), and in the inci<lent of Miriam's lepro.'<y (12"'-, note esp. v.*'-), both derived from E ; also in the reference, based upon, if not originally part of, the same source, in Dt 31'«-.
The interpretation now given of this important section of the
Elohistic ijuurce is that of almost all recent gcholars, including 80 strenuous an opponent of the Graf-Wellhausen h.i.'pothesis as August Dillmann (see his Com. in loc.). Little, therefore, need be said by way of refutation of the views of those who have endeavoured to harmonize this earlier representation with that which dominates the Priestly Code. The only one of these views that can be said to deserve serious considenition is that which sees in the tent of Ex 337ff- a provisional tent of meeting pending the construction of the tabernacle proper. This in- terpretation is generally combined with the theory that the tent in question was originally iloscs' private tent — an opinion which dates from the time of the Gr. translators {Xet^a/v Ma>t>r»:( rr? r»tj»t:» flciTtfw, »t;l, so also Pesh.), and has found favour with commentators, from Itashi downwards, including most English expositors. Tliis view is a priori plausible enough, but it falls to pieces before the fact disclosed above, that the same representation of the tent of meeting situated without tlie camp, with Joshua as its solitary guardian, is found in the Pentateuch, even after the erectiun of the more splendid taher- nacU of the prirtitli/ xrriierg. Moreover, there is no hint in the •^xt of Ex :«'■" of the tem]iorary nature of the tent ; on the contrary, as we have seen, the tenses employed are intended to describe the habitual custom of the Hebrews and their leader
during the whole period of the wanderings. The closing vers< of the section, finally, proves conclusively that Moses had hki abode elsewhere, and only visited the tent when he wislied to meet with J". At the same time, the presen-ation of thJa section of E by the final editor of the Pentateuch, when ths preceding account of the construction of the ark (cf. Dt lO^-* with r)ri\ er's note) was excised, can hardly l>e explained other- wise than by the supposition that he regarded the tent of meet, ing here described as having some such provisional charactef as this theory presupposes.
During the conquest and settlement, the tent of meeting presumably continued to shelter the ark (which see) until superseded by the more substan- tial ' temjile ' of J" at SniLOH. The picture of this temple (Vj-.i) with its door and doorposts (1 S P 3") disposes of the late gloss (2--''), based on a similar gloss. Ex 38", which assumes the continued exist- ence of the tent of meeting (see the Comm. in loc). So, too, Ps 78*, which speaks of the sanctuary at Shiloh as a tent and a tabernacle (mish/cdti), is of too uncertain a date to be jiluced against the testimony of the earlier historian. In the narra- tive of the older sources of the Book of Samuel (1 S 4ff.) there is no mention of any special pro- tection for the ark until we read of the tent pitched for it by David in his new capital on Mt. Zion (2 S 6", cf. 1 Ch 16', and the phrase 'within curtains,' 2 S 7^ 1 Ch 17')- The later author of 2 S 7*, however, evidently thought of the ark as housed continuously from the beginning in a tent. ' I have not dwelt in an house,' J " is represented as saying, ' since the day that I brought up the chil- dren of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent {'ohcl) and in a tabernacle {mishkan),' or, as the text should more probably run, ' from tent to tent, and from tabernacle to tabernacle' (so Klost., Budde, basing on 1 Ch 17=). David's tent was known as 'the tent of J"' (1 K 2^'''). Before it stood the essential accom- paniment of every sanctuary, an altar, to which the right of asylum belonged (ib. P"). What the tent may have contained in addition to the sacred ark is unknown, with the exception, incidentally mentioned, of ' the horn of oil,' with the contents of which Zadok the priest anointed the youthful Solomon (ib. I**). A solitary reference to ' the tent of meeting ' in a pre-exilic document yet remains, viz. the late gloss 1 K S', the unhistorical character of which is now admitted (see Kittel, Benzinger, etc., in loc, and cf. Wellh. Proleg. [Eng. tr.] 43 f.).
To sum up our investigation, it maj- be affirmed that the autlior of 2 S 7 not only accurately repre- sents the facts of history when he describes the ark as having been moved ' from tent to tent and from tabernacle to tabernacle,' but reflects with equal accuracy the opinion of early times that a simple tent or taliernacle was the appropriate housing for the ancient palladium of the Hebrew tribes. This is confirmed both by the analogy of the practice of other branches of the Semitic race, and by incidental references from the period of religious decadence in Israel, which imply that tent-shrines were familiar objects in connexion with the worship at the high places (2 K 23'' RVm, Ezk 16'* ; cf. the names Oliolibah and Oholibamnh, and art. Ohoi.ah).