The Abraham Narrative Vs. the Jacob Narrative I

CHAPTER TWO

THE EVIDENCE OF THE PATRIARCHAL STORIES: THE ABRAHAM NARRATIVE VS. THE JACOB NARRATIVE

I. Introduction

The Abraham Cycle (Genesis 12:1–25:11) differs from the Jacob Cycle (Genesis 25:19–35, 29–36) in several respects.1 First, there is a discern- ible difference of style and structure, due mainly to divergent cultural patterns and endemic phenomena, as well as contrasting religious con- cepts. But there is also a different literary approach, as evident in the aims and tendencies of the story. The same goes for the portrayal of the heroes. The broad consensus among critical commentaries is that the main stratum of the Abraham stories is attributable to the southern documentary source (the Judean – J), while that of the Jacob stories is of northern (= Ephratite – E) origin. It has also been commonly thought that the J pre-date those of E – but as Z. Weisman noted recently, this assumption is largely untrue. His analysis reveals the primary stratum in the Jacob stories as the earlier of the two, the passages of J origin being later editorial additions.2 In so doing, Weisman has also suc- ceeded in the resolving some of the basic textual difficulties.3 In our present study there is no room for such an in-depth textual analysis, but as a rule, it is worth noting that southern additions to the Jacob stories are broadly distinguishable by their content and outlook. One fundamental difference is that in the stories of divine revelations to Jacob, God is portrayed mainly as a deity of personal

1 I prefer this sort of division of the stories, although others have chosen to attribute the list of Ishmael’s descendants (Genesis 25:12–18) to the Abraham Cycle, and the list of Esau’s descendants (Genesis 36) to the Jacob Cycle. Some also regard Genesis 25:19–26:35 as an independent entity within the Isaac stories. See: G.W. Coats, Genesis, with an Introduction to Narrative Literature, Grand Rapids 1983. 2 See: Z. Weisman, From Jacob to Israel, Jerusalem 1986. 3 These are particularly apparent in the description of Jacob’s dream at Bethel (Genesis 28:10–22), with its redundancies and inconsistencies (ibid. pp. 57–67) – but also in the stories of the treaty at Gilead, of the struggle at Jabbok and of the birth of Jacob and Esau. 60 chapter two protection. Even His promises to Jacob are at the personal level; only in the secondary – Judean – stratum are the nationalist aspects added. While inserting these additions, the editor(s) tried to adapt their style and structure to those of the basic stratum – often quite skillfully and sensitively, making the distinction between the strata fairly challenging. For this reason, I prefer to discuss the Jacob Cycle without reference to the documentary division.4 This study will confine itself, therefore, to details that are illustrative of the distinctions between North and South. The Abraham Cycle consists of several discrete stories, each founded on an independent plot and setting. Occasionally, a story might be perceived as a direct sequel of its predecessor – such as the story of the destruction of Sodom (Genesis 19), when the angels arrive at Sodom after having visited Abraham, and reveal to him what is about to happen. But even here the alleged continuity is questionable, as the number and identity of the visitors varies as the story unfolds: one moment we read about three people, who speak and are addressed in the plural; the next moment it is a single person, who speaks and is spoken to in the singular. The story appears, therefore, to be a fusion of two separate narratives. The mention of “the two angels” at the start of the story of Sodom may be a redactor’s attempt to bridge these two accounts, by implying that the three “men” were none other than God Himself and two angels.5 However, later in the story, the text again talks about “men,” not angels. Similarly, the story of the confrontation between Abraham’s herds- men and those of Lot (chapter 13) might be regarded as a sequel to the story of Abraham and Sarah in Egypt. We are told that on return- ing from Egypt, Abraham and Lot were both rich in cattle and flocks and herds, and therefore “the land could not support them to dwell together.” Yet apart from this loose connection, the two stories have independent plots, and the conflicts they describe are of a very different nature.

4 For a similar approach, albeit with a different reasoning, see: H. Bloom,Gen- esis, New-York 1986; R.N. Whybray, The Making of the Pentateuch: A Methodological Study, Sheffield 1994; Idem, Introduction to the Pentateuch, Grand Rapids, Michigan 1995. 5 See: B. Uffenheimer, “Genesis 18–19, a New Approach,” Mélanges André Neher, Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient, Paris 1975 pp. 145–153. Also: S. Gelander, “Simple stories in the process of becoming composed and complex,” Art and Idea in Biblical Narrative, Tel-Aviv 1997 pp. 20–36.