RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Hexateuch
vii. 6, 11-viii. 5 (except vii. 12, 16b, 17, 22-23,
viii. 2b), viii. 13a, 14-19, ix. 1-17, 28-29; all the
rest is J except that in vii. 7-10 there
7. Analysis are editorial additions. Shechem and Illustrated Dinah in Gen. xxxiv.: Hamor is the
and chief personage in the narrative of Justified. P-verses 1, 2a, 4, 6, 8-10, 14-18, 20-24; Shechem is the principal personage in the other verses, which belong to J. The spying out of the promised land, Num. xiii.-xiv.: P is in xiii. 1-1 7a, 21, 25, 26, 32, xiv. la, part of 2, 5-7, 10, 26-29, 34-38. The rebellion of Korah and of Dathan and Abiram: JE makes Dathan and Abiram direct their rebellion chiefly against Moses, and his document is in xvi. lb, 2a, 12-15, 25-34; P, in which Korah and his 250 followers espoused the cause of equality of all Israel in priestly rights, is in xvi. la, 2b-ll, 16-24, 35 (and it appears that Korah had a double part, since in verses 2-7 he seems to stand at the head of the men of various tribes, while in verses 8-11 he is the spokesman of the Levites; Deut. xi. 6 appears to have had a report in which Dathan and Abiram acted independently). The report of Israel's sin in Moab, Num. xxv. 1-5, is composed from J and E, as the exchange of the designations " Israel " and " the people " indicates; the one, in lb, 2, 4a, mentions the lewdness between Israelites and Moabite women; the other, in verses 3, 5, denounces only the worship of Baal-peor. Further justification is attained by the recognition of varied linguistic peculiarities. If one reads the creation story in Gen. i.-ii. 4a, the genealogies from Adam to Noah (Gen. v., except verse 29), and from Noah to Abraham (Gen. xi.), the establishment of the covenant of circumcision (Gen. xvii.), and the purchase of the piece of ground at Machpelah (Gen. xxiii.), on the one hand, and the narrative of Paradise and the fall (Gen. ii. 4b-iv.), the visit of the three heavenly beings to Abraham, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. xviii.-xix., except xix. 29) and the mission of Abraham's steward in behalf of Isaac (Gen. xxiv.), on the other hand, he will be convinced, even in using a translation, that the two sets of stories can not be by the same author, and that the differences exist in more than the material, the disposition of the material, and the purpose. The principal linguistic differences of the five main documents of the Hexateuch are given in § 11 of H. L. Strack's Einleitung (6th ed., Munich, 1906), cf. H. Holzinger's Einleitung in den Hexateuch (Freiburg, 1896); see also Feasts and Festivals, I., §§ 4-5. Of the scholars who, at the end of the nineteenth century, thought the authorship of Moses scientifically tenable, nearly all have died.
8. Modern Some names are K. F Keil, E. C. Conserva- Bissell, A. Zahn, W H. Green. The
tive Bavarian clergyman E. Rupprecht Writers, fights almost alone in this cause in Das Rathsel des Filnfbuches Mose und seine jalsche Losung (Gutersloh, 1894), Des Rdthsel's Losung (1895-97), and Wissenschaftliches Handbuch der Einleitung in das Alte Testament (1898). Roman Catholic and conservative Jewish scholars are apt to be dogmatically hindered from ac-
cepting critical conclusions. Of Roman Catholics may be mentioned F. Kaulen, Einleitung in die heilige Schrift Alten und Neuen Testaments (3 parts, 4th ed., Freiburg, 1897-99), §§ 190-201; and A. Schopfer, Geschichte des Alten Testaments (Brixen, 1902), § 27; of Jewish scholars, D. Hoffmann, rector of the Rabbinerseminar in Berlin, in Magazin ]ur die Wissenschaft des Judenthums (1876-80); Abhandlungen uber die pentateuchischen Gesetze (Berlin, 1878); and Die wichtigsten Instanzen gegen die Graf- Wellhausensche Hypothese (1904).
Practically all other scholars of the present seek with the aid of the documentary hypothesis to gain a conception of the construction of the 9. General Hexateuch. Problems of importance Positions of under discussion are : the order in time Advanced and the absolute age of the individual Criticism, documents, the shape each of these documents had up to its union with another or with others of its fellows, the number and character of the editorial efforts at combining the documents. In consequence of the expositions especially of K. H. Graf (1866) and J. Wellhausen (1876-78), whom E. Reuss (since 1833) and W Vatke (1835) preceded, the predominant majority of Old Testament scholars in Germany, England, and North America hold: that D was written immediately before the reformation of Josiah and with a view to using his influence; that the completed central portion of P, brought together at the earliest in the Babylonian exile, is not historically trustworthy; and that the closing of the Hexateuch is to be placed in the time of Ezra (Wellhausen, -B. Stade) or still later (E. Reuss, A. Kayser, A. Kuenen, and many others). But it must be remarked here that the law-book which came to light in the eighteenth year of Josiah must have been written earlier; that the Holiness Code is earlier than Ezekiel; that the value of P, the priestly document, is by most scholars rated too low; and that P (Wellhausen's Q) was not taken into the united JED, but that D was taken into the united PJE (QJE). The present writer is convinced that in the future neither the old traditional views nor those of the " advanced critics " will hold the field.
The conclusions of E. Konig (in his Einleitung) are: that from Mosaic times come the decalogue, the book of the covenant (Ex. xx. 22- 10. Position xxiii. 33), Ex. xxxiv. 10-26, the poetof Koenig, ical pieces in Ex. xv., Num. vi., x., Dillmann, xxi., and at least for substance other Wellhausen, parts; E belongs to the time of the A. Kuenen. Judges, J not before David nor after Solomon; the analysis of JE is in many places no longer possible; the kernel of D is iv. 45-46, v.-xxviii. 46, xxxi. 9-13, which has a Mosaic basis, but was worked over in the time of the Judges and immediately after 722 B.C.; P is a collection of oral traditions which grew up in priestly circles and was completed hardly before 600-500; the union of JED with P was probably made by Ezra in Babylon. A. Dillmann (in his commentary on Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua, Leipsic, 1886) places E (which he calls B) in the first half of the ninth century; it used written sources
Hexateuch