Since the work of Julius Wellhausen in the late nineteenth century, a basic component of the classical formulation of the Documentary Hypothesis has been the belief that the J and E documents of the Pentateuch were combined at an early point into a document known as JE. This combination has never been proven literarily, however, but has been assumed by generations of source critics. In this dissertation, the question of whether such a document ever existed will be examined. First, the origins of the scholarly theory of the JE document will be examined, as well as its ramifications for subsequent scholarship. Second, the twentieth-century views on the formation of the Pentateuch will be discussed, with a particular emphasis on views regarding the combination of J and E. Third, a detailed textual analysis of the narratives of D as compared to J and E will be undertaken, in which it will be shown that D is dependent on the separate J and E documents, and not on their purported combined form. Fourth, the issue of the role of the redactor will be addressed, and it will be demonstrated that the common scholarly attributions of passages to the redactor of JE are mistaken. Fifth, it will be argued that the methodology of the redactor is identical across all books and source documents in the Pentateuch, strongly suggesting that there was but one redactor for the entire Pentateuch. Sixth, some of the major historical assumptions regarding the combination of the source documents will be critically examined. Finally, in the conclusion, an alternative to the classical theory regarding the formation of the Pentateuch will be put forward.