and the object of the threats, and appears to be explained most naturally as the result of an accident, i.e., of actuality.  That in a comparison of Leviticus xxvi. with Jeremiah and Ezekiel, the former cannot claim priority, appears distinctly from the comparative use of the phrase uncircumised heart.  That phrase originates in Jeremiah (iv. 4, ix. 24 seq.), but in Leviticus xxvi. it is used as a well-known set term.  In the same way the phrase pine away in their iniquity is repeated by Ezekiel as he heard it in the mouth of the people.  He is its originator in literature; in Leviticus xxvi. it is borrowed. 1

*********************************************** 1.  Horst tries to find a place for Leviticus xxvi. in the last years of king Zedekiah (op. cit. p. 65, 66), but in this he is merely working out his theory that the author was the youthful Ezekiel; and the theory is sufficiently condemned if it leads to this consequence.  Delitzsch (Zeitschr. fur Kirchl.  Wissench. 1880, p. 619) thinks it a piece of impertinence in me to read out of Ezekiel xxxiii. what that passage says.  On Deuteronomy x. 16, xxx. 6, and generally on the color Hieremianus in Deuteronomy, see Jahrb. fur D. Thhcol., 1877, p. 464. **********************************************

The criticism of Leviticus xvii. seq.  Ieads us to the result, that a collection of laws which took form during the period of the exile was received into the Priestly Code, and there clothed with fresh life.  We need not then tremble at Schrader’s threatening us with “critical analysis,” and Graf’s hypothesis will not be thereby overturned.

IX.II.3.  Two or three further important traces of the final priestly revision of the Hexateuch may here find mention.  In the story of the flood the verses vii. 6-9 are an editorial addition, with the object of removing a contradiction between JE and Q; it shares the ideas and speaks the language of the Priestly Code.  In the title of Deuteronomy the verse, “It came to pass in the fortieth year, in the eleventh [(#TY] month, on the first day of the month, that Moses spake unto the children of Israel according to all that Jehovah had given him in commandment unto them” (i. 3) is shown by the most undoubted signs to belong to the Priestly Code, and is intended to incorporate Deuteronomy in that work.  We have already shown that the Priestly Code in the Book of Joshua is simply a filling-up of the Jehovistic-Deuteronomistic narrative.

That the Priestly Code consists of elements of two kinds, first of an independent stem, the Book of the Four Covenants (Q), and second, of innumerable additions and supplements which attach themselves principally to the Book of the Four Covenants, but not to it alone, and indeed to the whole of the Hexateuch—­this assertion has not, strange to say, met with the opposition which might have been expected.  Ryssel has even seen in the twofold nature of the Priestly Code a