Biblica_2:Layout 1 21-11-2011 13:02 Pagina 435 435 THE DECEPTIVE PEN OF SCRIBES The second level constitutes the exilic Judean layer Vg (equivalent of proto-Genesis [pG] of Carr), in which the promise of the land and progeny in 28:13*-14 is added to the original northern sanctuary tradition. The secondary nature of the promise is evident 32. YHWH’s promise for the land and progeny appears abrupt at best against the current narrative context of Jacob’s flight and the discovery of a sacred place. Considering Jacob’s current circumstances, the promise of guidance and protection (v. 15) fits better. Jacob does not mention the promise of the land and progeny when he wakes up but only that of the protection. Later accounts in the Jacob story (e.g., 31,13; 35,1) do not seem to recall this ancestral promise either 33. Further, the basic vocabulary of the narrative, e.g., “place” or “stone”, does not appear in vv. 13-14. Now we have established two main levels of the Bethel accounts: the pre-exilic northern layer and the exilic Judean edition. The subsequent discussion, then, focuses on the transition between the first two literary layers in the Bethel account (see the above chart), as established by Blum. Note that this exilic edition Vg (or pG) is the layer in which the southern Abraham tradition 34 and the northern Jacob tradition are combined into a unified patriarchal narrative. Redaction critics, then, customarily account for the inserted promise (28,13*-14) as a redactional bridge through which Judean scribes attempted to connect these two originally independent tradition blocks 35. But my interest goes one step beyond that redactional Yahwist was not committed to the view that the rebuilt temple had to be in Jerusalem”. VAN SETERS, Prologue, 301. For a similar observation, see GOMES, The Sanctuary of Bethel, 76. 32 Both Blum and Carr base their argument on the connections established between the promise speech in our text as well as Gen 12,1-7 and 13,14-16. BLUM, Vätergeschichte, 289-301; CARR, Fractures, 180-83. See also SCHMID, Dual Origins, 103. Note esp. the close affinity between Gen 28,13-14 and 13,14-16. Both chapters are placed in a strategic point, right after parting with their kindred when they were going through a troubling phase of their lives. 33 Cf. CARR, Fractures, 205-206. 34 For an important study regarding Abraham’s position among the southern tribes, see R.E. CLEMENTS, Abraham and David. Genesis XV and its Meaning for Israelite Tradition (SBT 2/5; Naperville, IL 1967) 35-46. Yet, Clements, working in the 1960s, argued, “the priority given to Abraham as the great ancestor of all Israel reflects the position of pre-eminence which was claimed by Judah at this time”. For a critique of Clements’s position, see N.E. WAGNER, “Abraham and David?”, Studies on the Ancient Palestinian World. Festschrift F.V. Winnet (eds. J.W. WEVERS – D.B. REDFORD) (Toronto 1972) 117-140. 35 E.g. RENDTORFF, “Jakob in Bethel”, 518; CARR, Fractures, 181-182; KRATZ, Composition, 260, 263-264, 269.