(1.) There are also many separate vestiges warrant- ing the antiquity of these traditions, and proving that they were neither invented nor adorned ; for instance, Jacob, the progenitor of the Israelites, is introduced not as the first-born, which, if an unhistorical and merely external exaltation of that name had been the aim of the author, would have been more for this pur- pose.
(2.) Neither the blemishes in the history of Abra- ham, nor the gross sins of the sons of Jacob, among whom even Levi, the progenitor of the sacerdotal race, forms no exception, are concealed.
(3.) The same author, whose moral principles are so much blamed by the opponents of Genesis, on account of the description given of the life of Jacob, produces, in the history of Abraham, a picture of moral great- ness which could have originated only in facts.
(4.) The faithfulness of the author manifests itself also csjieciallv in the description of the expedition of the kings from Upper to Western Asia; in his state- ments concerning the person of Mclchizedek (Gen. xiv) ; in the circumstantial details given of the inci- dents occurring at the purchase of the hereditary bur- ial-place (chap, xxiii) ; in the genealogies of Arabian tribc.i (chap, xxv) ; in the genealogy of Edoni (ciiap. xxxvi); and in many remarixable detail^ which are interwoven witii the general accounts.
(o.) Passing on to a later portion of the book, we
find the writer evincing the most accurate knowledge of the state of society in Egypt. The Egj'ptian jeal- ousy of foreigners, and especially their hatred of shep- herds ; the use of interpreters in the court (who, we learn from other sources, formed a distinct caste) ; tho existence of caste ; the importance of the priesthood ; the use of wine by the kings (Wilkinson, ii, 142-158); the fact that even at that earl}' time a settled trade existed between Egj'pt and other countries, are all confirmed by the monuments or by later writers. So again Joseph's priestly dress of fine linen, the chain of gold round his neck, the chariot on Avhich he rides, the body-guard of the king, the rites of burial (though mentioned only incidentally), are spoken of with a mi- tnue accuracy Mhich can leave no doubt on tlie mind as to the credibilit}' of the historian. In particular, the account given (xlvii, 13-26) of the manner in which the Pharaohs became proprietors of all the lands, with the exception of those belonging to the priests, is confirmed by Herodotus (ii, lO'.l), and ijy Diodorus Sic- ulus (i, 73). The manner of embalming described in Gen. 1 entirely agrees with the description of Herodo- tus, ii. 84, etc. For other data of a similar kind, com- pare Hengstenberg (^Die Biicker Mosis imd Ae(/ijpten, p. 21 sq.). See Egypt.
5. It is quite impossible, as has alread}' been said, to notice all the olijections made by hostile critics at ev- er}' step as we advance. But it may be well to refer to one more instance in which suspicion has been cast upon the credibility of the narrative. Three stories are found in three distinct portions of the book, which in their main features no doubt present a striking sim- ilarity to one another, namely, the deliverances of Sa- rah and Rebekah from the harems of the Egyptian and Philistine monarchs (xii, 10-20 ; xx ; xxvi, 1-11). These, it is said, besides containing certain improbabil- ities of statement, are clearly only three different ver- sions of the same story.
It is of course ^jossifiZe that these are only different versions of the same story. But is it psychologically so ver}' improbable that the same incident should hap- pen three times in almost the same manner.' All men repeat themselves, and even repeat their mistakes; and the repetition of circumstances over which a man has no control is sometimes as astonishing as the rep- etition of actions which he can control. Was not the state of society in those days such as to render it no way improbable that Pliaraoh on one occasion, and Abimelech on another, should have acted in the same selfish and arbitrary manner.' Abraham, too, might have been guilty twice of the same sinful cowardice ; and Isaac might, in similar circumstances, have copied his father's example, calling it wisdom. To say, as a recent expositor of this book has done, that the object of the Hebrew writer was to represent nn idea, such as "the sanctity of matrimony," that "in his hands the facts are subordinated to ideas," etc., is to cut up by the very roots the historical character of the book. The mythical theory is preferable to this, for that leaves a substratum of fact, however it may have been embellished or perhaps disfigured by tradition. If the view of Delitzsch is correct, that xii, 10-20 is Jeho- vistic; XX, Elohistic (with a Jehovistic addition, ver. 18) ; xxvi, 1-13, Jehovistic, but taken from written documents, this may to some minds explain the repeti- tion of the story.
There is a further difficulty about the age of Sarah, who at the time of one of the occurrences must have been 65 years old, and the freshness of her beauty, therefore, it is said, long since faded. In reply it has been argued that as she lived to the age of 127, she was then only in middle life; that consequently she would have iieen at 65 what a woman of modern Europe would be at 35 or "40, an age at which personal attrac- tions are not necessarily impaired.