Some 30 years ago, I obtained a copy of the article “The Divine Name in Exodus iii.14” by William Arnold, Journal of Biblical Literature (JBL), 24 / 1905, pages 107 – 165.
I have made it available at:
http://www.filesend.net/download.php?f=582f2547f2b9e6db63ad362818d6361c
for the small group who will be interested. I do not pretend to understand all that Arnold says, and I have no ability reading Hebrew or Greek. This does not prevent me making this available to the more scholarly amongst you.
I apologize for poor quality at times. The material went through a few stages – 35mm film, photocopy, scanning and reversing of the black and white image. Hopefully, someone might have access to a better quality original that could be made available.
-----------------------
To give an idea of the material, the first page reads:
The section of the Book of Exodus in which this verse occurs is a familiar one. It describes Jahweh's initial appearance to Moses and the latter's commission to deliver the Children of Israel from the Egyptian bondage. The Jahwistic and Elohistic sources have been so closely interwoven at this point that the greatest difference of opinion exists among critics as to the attribution of the material. There are hardly two writers who do not disagree at some point or other in the course of the third chapter, while some make no attempt at a complete analysis. There is, however, universal agreement regarding the fact that the passage which has to do with Moses' inquiry after the proper name of the god of Israel's fathers and the ensuing reply, is to be assigned to the E source. Not merely has it the earmark of the appellative [Hebrew characters] but the J source has no room or occasion for such an episode, whereas the E document almost requires it. Dillmann, Wellhausen, Kuenen, Jülicher, Kittel, Driver; Cornhill, Bacon, Baentsch, Holzinger, Moore, Carpenter and Harford – all are agreed that vss 10-15 contain no J material, though a number of them maintain that redactional elements are not lacking. That is the position assumed in this paper.
Nor, for the purposes of our discussion, does it make any difference whether or not we hold with Steuernagel that all the subsequent passages in the E document in which the name [Hebrew characters: HWHY] occurs, together with vss 13-15 of this chapter, in which the name is formally introduced, are additions from the hand of E2, the original E1 source knowing nothing of [end of first page].
Doug