only prove a date not earlier than Solomon.—Other arguments, such as the omission of Asshur and the inclusion of Kelaḥ and Nineveh in the list of Assyrian cities in 1011 etc., are still less conclusive.
While it is thus impossible to assign a definite date to
J and E, there are fairly solid grounds for the now generally
accepted view that the former is of Judæan and the latter of
Ephraimite origin. Only, it must be premised that the body
of patriarchal tradition which lies behind both documents
is native to northern, or rather central, Israel, and must
have taken shape there.[1] The favourite wife of Jacob is
not Leah but Rachel, the mother of Joseph (Ephraim-Manasseh)
and Benjamin; and Joseph himself is the
brightest figure in all the patriarchal gallery. The sacred
places common to both recensions—Shechem, Bethel,
Mahanaim, Peniel, Beersheba—are, except the last, all in
Israelite territory; and Beersheba, though belonging geographically
to Judah, was for some unknown reason a
favourite resort of pilgrims from the northern kingdom
(Am. 55 814, 1 Ki. 193).—It is when we look at the divergence
between the two sources that the evidence of the
Ephraimite origin of E and the Judæan of J becomes consistent
and clear. Whereas E never evinces the slightest
interest in any sanctuary except those mentioned above, J
makes Hebron the scene of his most remarkable theophany,
and thus indelibly associates its sanctity with the name of
Abraham. It is true that he also ascribes to Abraham the
founding of the northern sanctuaries, Shechem and Bethel
(127. 8); but we can hardly fail to detect something perfunctory
in his description, as compared with E's impressive
narrative of Jacob's dream at Bethel (2810-12. 17-12), or his
own twofold account of the founding of Beersheba (chs. 21.
26). It is E alone who records the place of Rachel's grave
(3519), of those of Rebekah's nurse Deborah (8), of Joseph
(Jos. 2432), and Joshua (30),—all in the northern territory.
The sections peculiar to J (p. xliii) are nearly all of local
- ↑ We. Prol.6 317. It is the neglect of this fact that has mainly led to the belief that J, like E, is of Ephraimite origin (Kue. Reuss, Schr. Fripp, Luther, al. ).
