Like Wenham and Mathews, Hamilton writes from a generally conservative evangelical perspective. I rank Mathews slightly higher simply because Hamilton is a rather dry read. He is, however, always worth consulting. [Full Review]

Hamilton is a conservative evangelical, and the series is generally seen as being more conservative than WBC, which is probably the reason he gets a little less attention from the less-conservative end of scholarship. I think the commentaries are about equivalent in quality, with Wenham perhaps winning out a little more often in terms of incisive exegesis but Hamilton giving a little more depth on more issues, especially in his introduction. Hamilton is particularly better on linguistic issues such as grammar and close analysis of particular words, but I think he may sometimes overdo it chasing lexical rabbit trails. He takes the time throughout his commentary to look at the New Testament use of Genesis. I would say that Hamilton and Wenham balance each other pretty well as a pair. Hamilton is also known for his Handbook on the Pentateuch. [Full Review]

Emphasis on comparative Semitics. Evangelical. [Full Review]

Emphasis on comparative Semitics. Evangelical. [Full Review]