G. J Spurrell.

Notes on the text of the book of Genesis : with an appendix online

. (page 1 of 35)
Online LibraryG. J SpurrellNotes on the text of the book of Genesis : with an appendix → online text (page 1 of 35)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook












IN SEMITIC LANGUAGES, 1889, 1890, 1892, 1894, 1895 ; ASSISTANT





\^All rights reserved '\






The present volume of notes was undertaken at the
suggestion of Prof. Driver, and is mainly intended for
students beginning the Hebrew language. The notes are
taken chiefly from the best German commentaries, and do
not aim at originality. The Versions have also been used,
and references are given to various grammars, the writer's
object being to adapt the book to the wants of students using
different grammars. The Commentaries used are those by
Tuch\ Delitzsch^j and Dillmann^, to whom the writer is
chiefly indebted ; reference is also made to Mr. Wright's ^
Notes on Genesis, and (occasionally) to the commentary by
the late Dr. Kalisch ^. The Versions are quoted partly from
the London Polyglot, and partly from separate editions.

^ The 2nd edition, by Arnold and Merx, Halle, 1871.

"^ The 4th edition, Leipzig, 1872.

3 The references to Dillmann are to the 4th edition of his Genesis, in
the Kurzgefasstes Exeg. Handbuch zutn alien Test., Leipzig, 1882.
A 5th edition appeared in 1886, but as some of the sheets had already
been printed off, the references to the 4th edition have been kept, and
any changes in the 5th edition noted on the margin.

* The Book of Genesis in Hebrew, by C. H. H. Wright, London, 1859.

' Historical and Critical Commetitary on the Old Test., Genesis,
London, 1858.


For the LXX, Lagarde's text has been used^ reference
being occasionally made to the text contained in the London
Polyglot, and to Tischendorf's edition. The Targum of
Onqelos, or Babylonian Targum, has been taken from the
edition by Dr. Berliner 2, the text in the London Polyglot
being compared, while the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan
and the Jerusalem Targum are quoted from the London
Polyglot ^ For the Peshitta (Syriac) version the Polyglot
and the edition by Lee *, which is based on the text in the
London Polyglot, have been used, while the Vulgate has been
taken from a Paris edition^ and the Polyglot. The other
Greek versions (Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion) are
usually cited second-hand, reference being also made to
Field's edition of Origen s Hexapla ^ The Arabic version of
Saadiah has been quoted from the Polyglot: the Hebrew-
Samaritan text and the Samaritan version are also cited
from the same source '. The Grammars to which reference
has been made are those of Gesenius, Davidson, Stade,

' Genesis Graccc, edidit P. A. de Lagarde, Leipzig, 1868.

■^ In two parts, Berlin, 1884. The first part containing the text after
the ' editio Sabioneta ' of 1557, ^nd the second part, the notes, introduc-
tion, and indices.

■^ The Targum of Pseudo- Jonathan and the Jerusalem Targum (which
only exists in a fragmentary form) are really two recensions of one and
the same Targum, the Jerusalem Targum ; see Bleek's Einkitung^ ed.
Wellhausen, p. 606 f. ; Eng. trans., ed. Venables, vol. ii. p. 439 f.

* London, 1823.

^ Published by Gamier Brothers, without date.

« Oxford, 1875.

^ The reader should consult the various * Introductions ' to the Old
Testament on these versions (especially that of Wellhausen-Bleek, 1878
or 1886), or read the articles in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible.


Ewald, Olshausen, Bottcher (occasionally), Miiller (for the
Syntax only), and the treatise on the Tenses by Prof. Driver \

The text of Genesis that has been followed in compiling
the notes is that of Baer (with a preface by Delilzsch), and
the same text has been used in quoting passages from other
books, the edition of Theile ^ being only cited in those
portions of the Old Testament that have not yet been edited
by Baer^

Two appendices have been added to the book : one on
the structure of Genesis, as it was deemed necessary that
the student should have some information about the modern
views as to the criticism of the Pentateuch ; and the other on
the names of God, which could not be adequately discussed
within the limits of a note.

The writer has to acknowledge the great obligations he is
under to Prof. Driver for the valuable help he has rendered

^ Gesenius' Grammar, translated by Davies, and edited by Mitchell,
London, 1880 (since reprinted). Davidson's Grammar, Edinburgh, 8th
edition, 1887. Stade, Lehrbuch der hebrdischen Graminatik, Leipzig,
1879. Ewald, Lehrbuch der hebrdischen Sprache, 8te Ausgabe, Got-
tingen, 1870: the Syntax (the third part of the Lehrbuch) has been
translated by Kennedy, Edinburgh, 1879. Olshausen, Lehrbuch der
hebrdisch. Sprache, Braunschweig, 1861. Bottcher, Lehrbuch der he-
brdisch. Sprache, Leipzig, 1868. Aug. Miiller, Outlines of Hebrew
Syntax, translated by Robertson (being a translation of the third part of
MUller's Hebrdischc Schiilgrammatik, Halle, 1878), ist edition, 1882;
2nd edition, 1887. Driver, Hebrew Tenses, 2nd edition, Oxford, 1881.

^ 3rd edition, Leipzig, 1867.

2 The following portions of the Bible have been published by Baer :
Genesis, Leipzig, 1869; Isaiah, ib., \%']2;Job, ib., 1875; Minor Pro-
phets, ib., 1878; The Psalms, ib., 1880; Proverbs, ib., 1880; Daniel,
Ezra, Nehemiah, ib., 1882; Ezekiel, ib., 1884; and Canticles, Ruth,
Lamentations^ Ecclesiastes, Esther, ib., 1886.


him in preparing these notes, and for kindly revising the
proof-sheets. His thanks are also due to the Delegates of
the Clarendon Press for their assistance in publishing the
book, and to Mr. Pembrey, their Oriental reader, for the
care which he has taken in passing the sheets through
the press.


Oxford, /uly, 1887.



In the present edition of the ' Notes on Genesis ' a large
amount of new matter has been incorporated into the book.
An Introduction has been substituted for Appendix I, and
the new edition has been enlarged by the addition of about
forty new pages. Many of the notes have been recast and
expanded, and many new notes have been added on different
matters, generally points which were not commented on in
the first edition, or inadequately treated. This will be seen
in the fuller accounts of the different foreign nations men-
tioned in Genesis, cf. chaps. lo, 25. 36, 8, etc. More attention
has also been given to the geography of Genesis. The sites
of the different places mentioned and other matters apper-
taining to geography are generally quoted from Dillmann's
Genesis ^, Smith's Historical Geography, and Badeker's Pales-
tine, 2nd EngHsh edition, 1894; so that the information on
these points is as far as possible up to date.

The Grammars to which reference has been made are the
same as in the former edition, with the addition of references
to Davidson s Hebrew Syntax, and occasionally to Konig's


Lehrgebdude, P. The 25th (German) edition of Gesenius-
Kautzsch's Grammar has been used. As a translation of this
^vork is in preparation, the references given in the notes will
serve for the English edition 2. The extracts from the different
Versions are the same as in the first edition, with the excep-
tion of the LXX, which is now quoted from Swete's
(Cambridge) edition.

The Introduction, which is a new feature in the book,
has been compiled mainly from the writings of Dillmann,
Wellhausen, Kuenen, Cornill, Driver, and more especially
from the excellent Einleitung in den Hexateuch, by
Dr. Holzinger^.

The writer desires to acknowledge the valuable assistance
he has received from his friend Mr. J. F. Stenning, Hebrew
Lecturer at Wadham College, who kindly revised the proof-
sheets and made several useful suggestions. He is also
indebted to Mr. Pembrey, the Oriental reader at the
University Press, for the skill and care with which he has
prepared the sheets for press.


London, Dec. 14, 1895.

^ Part II of Konig's Lehrgebdude was not published in time to be
used for the notes.

^ This Grammar, which is very badly and clumsily arranged, is now
superseded, as far as the Syntax is concerned, by Davidson's Hebrew

^ See the references in the notes appended to the Introduction.



Introduction xv-lxiii

Notes on Genesis ...... i

Appendix 4^7

Addenda et Corrigenda 4^5


A.V. =TheAuthorizedVersion,i6ii.
Aq. = Aquila's Greek Version.
Aram. = Aramaic ^
B. and D. = Baer and Delitzsch.

B. Jubil. = The Book of Jubilees, ed.
R. Charles, Clarendon Press, 1894.

Badeker, Pal. or Palest. = Palestine

and Syria, 2nd (English edition),

Barth, N.B. = Die Nominalbildung

in den Semitischen Sprachen,

Leipzig, 1894.
Baumg. = Baumgarten.
Ber. Rab. = Bereshith Rabba.
Bemst. = Bernstein.
Boch. = Bochart.
Boh. = von Bohlen.
Bott. = Bottcher.
Bottcher, Neue Aeh'. = Neiie He-

brdische Aehrenlese (in 3 vols.),

Leipzig, 1849-65.
Budde, Urgesch. = Die Biblische

Urgeschichte, Giessen, 1883.

C. I. S. = Corpus Inscrip. Semiti-
cariwi, Paris, 1881 at seq.

C. P. Ges. = Hebrew and English

Lexicon, etc.
1892 et seq.

Clarendon Press,

Dav. = Davidson, Introductory He-
brew Grammar, various years.
Dav., S. = Hebrew Syntax, 1894.
Del.^andDel.5 = The 4th and 5th edd.

of the Commentary on Genesis.
Del., Par.= Wo lag das Paradies'^

Leipzig, 1 88 1.
Del., Proleg. = Prolegomena,heipzig,

Di. = Dillmann.
Di., A^. D.y. = Commentary on Num.,

Deut., and Josh.
Driver or Dr. = Hebrew Tenses, 3rd

ed., 1892.
Driver, Introd. = Introduction to the

Lit. of the 0. T, 5th ed., 1894.
Driver, Sam. = Notes on the H. T. of

the Books of Samuel, 1890.
Ecclus. ^ Ecclesiasticus.
Ewald,y. B. = Jahrbikher der bib-

lischen Wissenschaft, Gottingen,

1848 et seq.
Frankel, Einfluss or Eitifl. = Ueber

den Einfluss der paldstin. Exegesc

^ Most of the abbreviations, with which the student will be familiar, are not
given here.

2 It should be pointed out that the languages usually called Chaldee, Syriac,
and Samaritan are really three dialects of the Aramaic, and should be embraced
under the term Aramaic.



aiif die Alexandr. Hcrmeneutik,

Leipzig, 1 85 1.
Frankel, Vorstudien = Vorsludien zu

der Septtiaginta, Leipzig, 1841.
Ges. = Gesenius, Hcbr. Grammatik,

ed. Kautzsch, 25th ed., Leipzig,

Ges., Th. or Thes. — TJiesaurus,

Leipzig, 1829-58.
Glaser, Skizze = Skizze der Geschichte

viid Geog}'aphic Arahiens, 2 vols.,

Gr. Ven. = Versio Veneta, see Bleek's

Introduction (Eng. trans.), vol. ii.

p. 430.
H. W. B. = Ges., Handw'drterbuch

iiber das A. T., 12th ed., 1894.
Halevy, Mel. = Melanges.
'R^\€yy,R.B. = Rechcrches Bibliques.
Halevy, R. E.J. = Revue des Atudes

Hier. or Hieron. = Hieronymus,

Hier., ^z^aj^j/. = Hieronymus' Qtiaes-

t tones Hebraicae hi libro Geneseos,

at the end of Lagarde's Geti.

Graece,l.eipzig, 1868.
Holz. or 'RcAzmgQr =^ Eznleitung in

den Hexatetich, Freiburg i. B.,

and Leipzig, 1893.
J. A. = Journal Asiatique.
J. B. L.= Journal of Biblical Lite-
rature and Exegesis.
Jos. ^ Josephus.
Ke. = Keil.
Kn. = Knobel.
Konig, Lehrg. = Histor, Krit. Lehr-

gebdude der Heb. Sprache, i part,

Leipzig, 1881.
Lagarde or Lag., B. N. = Bildung

der N'omina.
Lagarde or Lag., Symm. — Symmicta.

Lenor. = Lenormant.

Levy, Chald. W. B. = Chald. Wor-
terbuch, Leipzig, 1881.

M. B. A. W. = Monatsberichte der
Berliner Akademie der Wissen-
schaften, various years.

M. R. — Otct lines of Hebrew Syntax,
by A. Miiller, translated by
Robertson, 3rd ed., 1888.

Mid. ^e.Ta.=Midrash Bemidbar, on
the book of Numbers.


Nold., Unters.= Untersuchungen zur
Kritik des alten Test., Kiel, 1869.

01s. = Olshausen.

Onom. = Onomasticon.

Onq. = Onqelos.

Pesh. =^ Peshitta (Syriac) Version.

Proleg. or Prol. Grit. = Prolegomena
Critica in Vet. Test. Hebr., by
H. L. Strack, Leipzig, 1873.

R. V. = Authorized Version revised,

Riehm, H.W. B. = Handw'drterbuch
des Bibl. Alterfhums, 1875 and
following years,

Rob., Pal. = Palestine, ist ed., Lon-
don, 1841.

S.B.A.W. = Sitzungsberichte der
Berliner Akademie der IVissen-

Saad. =Saadiah's Arabic Version.

Sam. = The Samaritan Version, and
the Hebrew Text in Sam, charac-
ters, when both agree ; the former
is quoted as Sam. Ver., and the
latter as Heb.-Sam.

■■= Keilinschriften U7id Geschichts-
forschung. .

Schrader, C. 0. T. = Die Keilin-
schriften und das alte Test., 2nd



ed., 1883; translated into English
by Whitehouse, 2 vols., London,
1885 and 1888.

Sh., G. = The Historical Geography
of the Holy Land, by G. A. Smith,
London, 1894.

Symm. = Symmachus' Greek Ver-

Targ. Jer. = Jerusalem Targum.

Targ. Ps.-Jon. or Jon. = The Targum
of Pseudo-Jonathan.

Targg. = Targums, when the three
Targums agree.

Th. or Theod. = Theodotion's Greek

Th. S. W. = Theolog. Studien aus

Well., ComJ). = Wellhausen, Die
Composition des Hcxateticli s , re-
printed with an Appendix, 1889.

Well., Sam.=Der Text der Biicher

Saviuelis tintersucht, 1872.
Winer, R. W. B. = Biblisch. Real-

Worterbuch, 1847-48, 3rd ed.
Wright, Comp. Gram. = Lectures on

the Comparative Gramiiiar of the

Semitic Languages, 1890.
Z. A. — Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie.
Z. A. S. A. = Zeitschrift fiir aegyp-

tische Sprache nnd Alterthiimer.
Z.A.T W. = Zeitschnft fiir die

Alttest. Wissenschaft.
Z. D. M. G. = Zeitschrift der Dettt-

schen Morgetildndische?i Gesell-

Z. D. P. V.^ Zeitschrift des Deut-

schen Paldstina - Vereins.
Z. K. S. F. = Zeitschrift fiir Keil-

sch riftforsch u ng.
"1:11 = -\ni3i. et caetera.


The book of Genesis, like the other books of the Hexa-
teuch, was not the production of one author. A definite plan
may be traced in the book, but the structure of the work forbids
us to consider it as the production of one writer. This is
clear, not only from the (apparently needless) repetitions that
occur (e.g. 21, I a and I b ; 4, 25 f., and 5, i-6 ; 47, 29ff.,
and 49, 29 ff.), but also from the different accounts of one
and the same event which we meet with, not merely such as
may be explained on the supposition that the author is really
describing different events, or reproducing different traditions
(e.g. the narratives contained in 12, 10 ff.; 20, i ff., and 26,
7 ff.; the story of Hagar and Ishmael, in 16, i ff., and 21,
I2ff.; the double covenant with Abram, chaps. 15 and 17;
the double blessing of Jacob by Isaac, 27, i ff., and 28, i ff.;
the double promise of a son to Sarah, 17, 17, and 18,
I off.; the three explanations of the name Isaac, 17,17; 18,12;
21, 6; the two explanations of the names, Edom in 25, 25.
30; of Issachar, Zebulun, and Joseph, in 30, 16-18. 20. 23 f. ;
of Mahanaim, in 32, 3. 8; cf. also for Ishmael, 16, 11 f., and
21, 17; for Peniel, 32, 31, and the allusion in 33, 10), but
such as mutually exclude one another, because the event
narrated can only have happened once (e.g. the two accounts


of the creation, in chaps, i and 2 ; the number of the animals
that went into the ark and the time the flood continued on
the earth, in chap. 6 f. ; the dispersion of the nations, in
chaps. 10 and 11, i ff., cf. 10, 25 ; the varying explanations
of the names, Beersheba, in 21,31. 26, 33; Israel, in 32, 29.

35, 10; Bethel and the pillar of Bethel, 28, 18 f. 35, 14 f.;
the different accounts of the relations between Jacob and the
Shechemites, in chaps. 34 and 48, 22; and the variations in
the narrative in 37, 19-36, — the sale of Joseph by his
brethren). Many other notices in Genesis also militate
against the unity of authorship (e.g. that the limit of human
life was reduced to 120 years, 6, 3 against 5, ii^- that
Abraham begat many sons after the death of Sarah, 25, i ff .
against 18, 11 f. 17, 17; that Esau had already settled in Seir
when Jacob returned from Mesopotamia, 32, 4 ff. against

36, 6 ; that Rebekah's nurse came with Jacob from Meso-
potamia, 35, 8 against 24, 59 ; that all Jacob's sons were
born in Paddan Aram, 35, 26 against ver. 16 ff.; the different
names of Esau's wives, 26, 34. 28, 9 against 36, 2 f.; the
two accounts of Joseph's master, 37, 36 and 39, 1-40, 4 ;
and the two narratives in 42, 27. 35 and 43, 21. Statements
like 4, i4f. 17 seem out of place in their present context;
the differences in chronology, e.g. in the age of Sarah, in
17, 17, cf. 12, 4, and in 12, 11. 20, 2 ff.; in the case of
Ishmael, 17, 24. 21, 5. 8 and 21, igf.; as to Isaac's approach-
ing death, in 27, i f. 7. 10. 41 and in 35, 28 and 26, 34; in
the account of Rachel's death in 35, 19, while in 37, 10
she is represented as still living); also 30, 25 f. does not
agree with 31, 38. 41 (cf. Di., p. 345 f.) ; further, the
ages of Jacob's sons which are given, or presupposed in
chaps. 32-37 and chaps. 39-45, do not agree with 46, 8-27
(cf. Di., p. 380 f. and p. 478); even narratives are found in
which some parts do not agree with the remainder of the

^ Cf. the note, however, on 6, 3.


narrative (e.g. 31, 48-50, and 24, 62-67 and the beginning
of the chapter) \

These discrepancies and difficulties in the book of Genesis,
and similar ones in the other books of the Pentateuch, were
not really discovered until the time of Ibn Ezra (twelfth
century). The prevalent opinion among both Jews and
Christians, was that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch.
The same view was held by Philo, Josephus, and in the
Talmud; and the only opposition it met with in the first
centuries of our era, was from unimportant, heretical sects in
the Church, especially the Gnostics.

Ibn Ezra — in criticising the views of Rabbi Isaac ben
Salomo Israeli, of Kairoan in N. Africa 840-950 '^j that
Gen. 36, 31 could not have been written before the time
of King Jehoshaphat — himself inclined to the opinion that
portions of the Pentateuch could not have been written by
Moses; cf. his Comm. on Gen. 12, 6. 22, 14. Deut. 1,1. 3, n.
chap. 34. He did not deny the Mosaic authorship entirely. The
views of other scholars up to the time of Astruc (1684-1766),
the real founder of Pent. Criticism, must be omitted here^.

Astruc, a Paris physician, published anonymously, in 1753,
a work on the authorship and structure of the book of Genesis'*.
He first drew attention to the two different names of God, and
inferred from this fact, the existence of two different documents,
A Elohistic, and B Jehovistic. These proving insufficient, he
assigned the narrative of the Flood, in which neither Jehovah
nor Elohim occurred, to a third document C ; and all the other
passages, where neither name occurred, were apportioned
to nine other documents of non-Hebrew ori":in. A and B

^ Cf. Di., Genesis^, p. ix f. ; Holzinger, Einleitung, p. 15 f, and the
authorities cited by him ; and Driver, Introd.^, p. 6 ff.

^ Bleek-Well.*, Einleitung, p. 16 ; cf. Holz., I.e., p. 28.

3 They will be found in Bleek-Well., I.e., p. 18 ff. ; Holz., I.e., p. 29 f.

* Conjectu7'es sur les me?noires originanx dont il paroit que Moyse
sest servi pour composer le livre de la Genese, Brussels, 1753.
Ui b


alone were held to be real documents, the others fragments ;
and Moses was regarded as the author \ Eichorn arrived
independently at practically the same conclusions as Astruc ;
but he examined the documents more thoroughly and com-
pletely, apportioning the different parts of Genesis and
Exodus I and 2 to the Elohist and Jehovist. He also
pointed out that the language of the two documents differed,
and criticised the style and contents of the two sources. Ilgen
made the next advance 2. After he had examined the book
of Genesis, he came to the conclusion that it was composed
of seventeen documents to be referred to three authors ; two
Elohists and one Jehovist. These he called respectively
' The Sopher Eliel harischon,' 'the Sopher Eliel hascheni,' and
the Jehovist. The three documents were independent, com-
plete in themselves, and each exhibiting characteristic marks^.

The next development was the hypothesis, that the Pen-
tateuch was composed from fragments partly by different
authors, and arranged by a collector or Redactor. This view
was adopted, with various modifications, by several scholars ;
e. g. Vater, Hartmann, (and at first) De Wette, &c.^

The third stage in the history of the criticism of the
Pentateuch was the theory that one of the documents was
composed to complete and supplement the other. This
opinion was accepted by Von Bohlen, Stahelin, Bleek,
De Wette, Von Lengerke, and Delitzsch*. The question

^ Cf. Holz., I.e., p. 40, and authorities cited by him. The view adopted
by Astruc and his followers is called by German scholars Die Urkun-

^ Die Urkumlcn des jemis. Tempelarchivs, etc., Halle, 1798. Only
vol, i, Genesis, was issued.

^ Ilgen's division of the sources attracted little attention at first, but
was revived in 1853, by Hupfeld.

* Full details in Holz., I.e., p. 43 f. ; Cornill, Einleitung, p. 20 f. This
hypothesis is called by German scholars Die Fragmentenhypothese,
cf. Holz., I.e., p. 54 f.; Corn., I.e., p. 22 f.


was most thoroughly discussed by Tuch in his Comm. iiher
die Gen., 1838. He maintained that there were only two
authors, one of whom supplemented or * filled in ' the work
of the other ; (i) the ' Grundschrift ' or the Elohist, and
(ii) the ' Supplementer ' or Jehovist \ The first document
was composed by a priest in the time of Saul, the second
must be referred to the reign of Solomon. Slahelin extended
the theory to the other books of the Pentateuch, to the
books of Samuel and Kings, and to the other historical
writings. He discovered in these two systems of legislation ;
the first or Elohim source, c. 1300 b.c, and the second or
Jehovah source, in the time of Samuel. Stahelin's Jehovist
contains the Jehovist, the Jehovistic Redactor, the Deutero-
nomist and the Deuteronomic Redactor, merged into one
person. The other scholars, however, regarded the Jehovist
as the author of Genesis, Numbers, and of Joshua in the
original form, and believed that his work was again ' filled
in ' by the Deuteronomist.

The great objection to this hypothesis was the fact that it
under-estimated the Jehovist. The Jehovist when carefully
compared with the ' Grundschrift ' was found to contain
much that agreed with that document, and much that was in
direct contradiction to it (e.*g. the two accounts of the
creation). And it became clear that the theory of a supple-
mental document was quite untenable. The two documents
were therefore to be regarded as two distinct and independent
works. Out of this change of view the present system of
Pentateuch criticism was gradually evolved.

Among the scholars who were the first to adopt the new
hypothesis were Gramberg ^ and Stahelin ^ who were both of

^ The name adopted for this hypothesis by German scholars is the

2 Liber Gcneseos scamdum fontes rite dignoscciidos adumhratio nova,

^ Krit. Untersuch. iiber die Genesis^ 1830.

b 2


opinion that Genesis was composed of two documents, the
Elohist and Jehovist, and a compiler who is responsible for
the present book of Genesis. Ewald held that the Pentateuch
was composed of five documents, which were revised by the
author of the fifth document. A sixth document (Deuteronomy)
was added, and finally edited by a seventh hand who added
Deut. 33 ^

The new hypothesis was further developed by Hupfeldl
He considers that three separate documents may be traced
in Genesis — the ' Urschrift,' the first document, the younger
Elohist, and the Jehovist. Each source is a coherent and
complete narrative, and all three were composed inde-
pendently. The three documents were worked up into the
present text of Genesis by a later Redactor. Other scholars
followed in Hupfeld's footsteps. Bohmer ^ differentiated the
sources — printing them in different types — and drew atten-

Online LibraryG. J SpurrellNotes on the text of the book of Genesis : with an appendix → online text (page 1 of 35)