RECENT ORIENTAL DISCOVERIES ON OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY. 177 



I think that the paper suggests to us even more. We may find a 

 presumption, at least, that Abraham not only lived, but himself 

 wrote. We know that in his day written contracts of purchases 

 were usual. The account of the purchase of the field of Machpelah 

 is acknowledged to have followed generally the customs of the age. 

 Now in the account itself we read how money is paid and then in 

 verses 17 and 18 the chapter gives this remarkable clause : "And 

 the field of Ephron, which was in Machpelah, which was before 

 Mamre, the field, and the cave which was therein, and all the trees 

 that were in the field, that were in all the borders round about, 

 were made sure unto Abraham for a possession in the presence of 

 the children of Heth." I should like to ask if we could have a more 

 distinct indication of the " making sure " by a written purchase- 

 contract than in these words with their legal phraseology. It seems 

 the strongest evidence that Abraham had to do with a written 

 document and was accustomed to things written. 



Remembering this, we turn to our author's claim, that there is 

 nothing unreasonable in Hommel's suggestion " that Gen. xiv may 

 have existed once in the form of a cuneiform record." The Critics, 

 like, .Dr. Driver, regard it as a distinct document, "SS." Let us 

 grant this : the question remains. Can any special reason be alleged 

 for the existence of such a document The circumstances suggest a 

 striking one. Abraham knew the character of the King of Sodom. 

 He had done him a great service for Lot's sake, who was to remain 

 on an inhabitant of his city. To safeguard him, he had been 

 careful to give no excuse for the King of Sodom's greed. It 

 becomes at once clear how essential a written memorial of the 

 transaction would be, especially one which brought in the King of 

 Salem as Umpire. 



If, then. Gen. xiv is to be explained as a separate document, 

 the most rational explanation would be that for this special 

 purpose it was written by, or by the direction of, Abraham himself. 

 If Abraham wrote it, Moses would naturally possess it, and 

 use it. 



It may, by the way, be noted that the Critics' assertion of an 

 editor or compiler at once destroys any argument against age 

 from phraseology ; because the first business of any editor would 

 naturally be to modernise archaic phraseology ; even a transcriber 

 might, for instance, instinctively change Laish into Dan. 



