{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_40173/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_40173","id":"gutenberg_40173","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40173","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Old Testament -- Introductions","Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"Transcriber's note:\n\nText enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).\n\nText enclosed by equal signs is in bold face (=bold=).\n\nSmall capital text has been replaced with all capitals.\n\nThe carat character (^) indicates that the following letter or number\nis superscripted (example: 15^b-18^a).\n\n[=e] represents \"e\" with a macon over it.\n\n\n\n\n  HOME UNIVERSITY LIBRARY\n  OF MODERN KNOWLEDGE\n  THE LITERATURE OF THE\n  OLD TESTAMENT\n\n  BY\n  GEORGE FOOT MOORE, M.A., D.D., LL.D.\n\n  LONDON\n  WILLIAMS & NORGATE\n\n  HENRY HOLT & Co., NEW YORK\n  CANADA: WM. BRIGGS, TORONTO\n  INDIA: R. & T. WASHBOURNE, LTD.\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration:\n\nHOME\nUNIVERSITY\nLIBRARY\nOF\nMODERN KNOWLEDGE\n\n_Editors_:\n\nHERBERT FISHER, M.A., F.B.A., LL.D.\nPROF. GILBERT MURRAY, D.LITT., LL.D., F.B.A.\nPROF. J. ARTHUR THOMSON, M.A., LL.D.\nPROF. WILLIAM T. BREWSTER, M.A.\n(COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, U.S.A.)\n\nNEW YORK\nHENRY HOLT AND COMPANY]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration:\n\nTHE\nLITERATURE\nOF THE\nOLD TESTAMENT\n\nBY\nGEORGE FOOT MOORE\nM.A., D.D., LL.D.\n\nProfessor in Harvard University; Editor of the\nHarvard Theological Review; Author\nof \"Commentary on Judges,\" etc.\n\nLONDON\nWILLIAMS AND NORGATE]\n\n\n\n\nThe following volumes of kindred interest have already been published\nin the Home University Library:--\n\n     VOL. 56.--THE MAKING OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. By PROF. B. W.\n     BACON, LL.D., D.D.Vol.\n\n     VOL. 68.--COMPARATIVE RELIGION. By PRINCIPAL J. ESTLIN\n     CARPENTER, D.Litt.\n\n     VOL. 15.--MOHAMMEDANISM. By PROF. D. S. MARGOLIOUTH, M.A.,\n     D.Litt.\n\n     VOL. 47.--BUDDHISM. By MRS. RHYS DAVIDS, M.A.\n\n     VOL. 54.--ETHICS. By G. E. MOORE, M.A.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n  CHAPTER                                                  PAGE\n\n  I THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT                            7\n\n  II THE OLD TESTAMENT AS A NATIONAL\n  LITERATURE                                                 25\n\n  III THE PENTATEUCH                                         29\n\n  IV CHARACTER OF THE SOURCES. GENESIS                       33\n\n  V EXODUS, LEVITICUS, NUMBERS                               47\n\n  VI DEUTERONOMY                                             58\n\n  VII AGE OF THE SOURCES. COMPOSITION OF THE\n  PENTATEUCH                                                 65\n\n  VIII JOSHUA                                                73\n\n  IX JUDGES                                                  81\n\n  X SAMUEL                                                   91\n\n  XI KINGS                                                  100\n\n  XII CHRONICLES                                            118\n\n  XIII EZRA AND NEHEMIAH                                    128\n\n  XIV STORY BOOKS: ESTHER, RUTH, JONAH                      134\n\n  XV THE PROPHETS                                           144\n\n  XVI ISAIAH                                                147\n\n  XVII JEREMIAH                                             164\n\n  XVIII EZEKIEL                                             174\n\n  XIX DANIEL                                                180\n\n  XX MINOR PROPHETS                                         190\n\n  XXI PSALMS. LAMENTATIONS                                  218\n\n  XXII PROVERBS                                             231\n\n  XXIII JOB                                                 235\n\n  XXIV ECCLESIASTES. SONG OF SONGS                          243\n\n  BIBLIOGRAPHY                                              251\n\n  INDEX                                                     253\n\n\n\n\nTHE LITERATURE\n\nOF\n\nTHE OLD TESTAMENT\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nTHE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\n\nThe early Christians received the Sacred Books of the Jews as inspired\nScripture containing a divine revelation and clothed with divine\nauthority, and till well on in the first century of the Christian era\nthe name Scriptures was applied exclusively to these books. In time,\nas they came to attach the same authority to the Epistles and Gospels,\nand to call them, too, Scriptures (2 Pet. iii. 16), they distinguished\nthe Christian writings as the Scriptures of the new dispensation, or,\nas they called it, the \"new covenant,\" from the Scriptures of the \"old\ncovenant\" (2 Cor. iii. 6, 14), the Bible of the Jews. The Greek word\nfor covenant (_diath\u00e9k\u00e9_) was rendered in the early Latin translation\nby _testamentum_, and the two bodies of Scripture themselves were\ncalled the Old Testament and the New Testament respectively.\n\nThe Scriptures of the Jews were written in Hebrew, the older language\nof the people; but a few chapters in Ezra and Daniel are in Aramaic,\nwhich gradually replaced Hebrew as the vernacular of Palestine from\nthe fifth century B.C. The Sacred Books comprise the Law, that is, the\nFive Books of Moses; the Prophets, under which name are included the\nolder historical books (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings) as well as what\nwe call the Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve, i.e.\nMinor Prophets); a third group, of less homogeneous character, had no\nmore distinctive name than the \"Scriptures\"; it included Ruth, Psalms,\nJob, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Daniel,\nEsther, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles. The Minor Prophets counted as\none book; and the division of Samuel, Kings, Ezra-Nehemiah, and\nChronicles each into two books was made later, and perhaps only in\nChristian copies of the Bible. There are, consequently, according to\nthe Jewish enumeration twenty-four books in the Bible, while in the\nEnglish Old Testament, by subdivision, we count the same books as\nthirty-nine.\n\nThe order of the books in the Pentateuch and \"Former Prophets\"\n(Joshua-Kings) is fixed by the historical sequence, and therefore\nconstant; among the \"Latter Prophets\" Jeremiah was sometimes put\nfirst, immediately following the end of Kings, with which it was so\nclosely connected. In the third group there was no such obvious\nprinciple of arrangement, and consequently there were different\nopinions about the proper order; that which is given above follows the\noldest deliverance on the subject, and puts them in what the rabbis\ndoubtless supposed to be a chronological series. So long as the books\nwere written on separate rolls of papyrus, the question of order was\ntheoretical rather than practical; and even when manuscripts were\nwritten in codex form (on folded leaves stitched together like our\nbooks), no uniformity was attained.\n\nAt the beginning of the Christian era, lessons from the Law were\nregularly read in the synagogues on the sabbath (the Pentateuch being\nso divided that it was read through consecutively once in three\nyears), and a second lesson was chosen from the Prophets. The title of\nthese books to be regarded as Sacred Scripture was thus established by\nlong-standing liturgical use, and was, indeed, beyond question. Nor\nwas there any question about the inspiration of most of the books in\nthe third group, the \"Scriptures.\" There was a controversy, however,\nover Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs; some teachers of the\nstrictest school denied that either of them was inspired, while others\naccepted only one of them. The question was voted on in a council of\nrabbis held at Jamnia about the beginning of the second century of our\nera, and the majority decided for the inspiration of both books. There\nwere also, even down to the third century, Jewish scholars who did\nnot acknowledge Esther as Sacred Scripture. On the other hand, some\nwere inclined to include among the Sacred Books the Proverbs of Ben\nSira, which stand in the English Bible among the Apocrypha under the\ntitle Ecclesiasticus.\n\nIt is thus evident that, while there was agreement in general, there\nwas, down to the second century A.D., no authoritative list of the\n\"Scriptures,\" and that about some of the books there were conflicting\nopinions among the learned of the most orthodox stamp. An interesting\nconfirmation of this is the fact that in the first half of that\ncentury it was thought necessary to make a formal deliverance that the\n\"Gospel and other writings of the heretics\" are not Sacred Scripture.\nThere are other indications that in that generation Jewish\nChristianity had a dangerous attraction for some even in rabbinical\ncircles, and there was evidently ground for apprehension that the\ninspiration which the Christians claimed for the Scriptures of the New\nCovenant might impose upon well-meaning but uninstructed Jews. In the\nsame connection it was decided, further, that Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus)\nwas not Holy Scripture, and that no books written from his time on (about\n200 B.C.) were inspired, in accordance with the theory, found also in\nJosephus, that inspiration ceased in the age of Ezra and Nehemiah.\n\nBy such decisions, recognizing the inspiration of books that had been\nchallenged and excluding others for which inspiration had been\nclaimed, the canon of the Scriptures, that is, the authoritative list\nof Sacred Books, was defined. The oldest catalogue we have, containing\nthe titles of all the books, dates probably from the latter part of\nthe second century, and is not concerned with the point of\ncanonicity--which it takes for granted--but with the proper order of\nthe Prophets and the Scriptures.\n\nThe Jews had for centuries been widely distributed through the lands\nthat had been included in the kingdoms of Alexander's successors.\nThere were large numbers in Babylonia and the neighbouring provinces\nof the Parthian empire, and still more in the countries around the\neastern end of the Mediterranean, in Syria and Asia Minor, in Egypt\nand Cyrene. In Alexandria the Jews had a whole quarter of the city to\nthemselves, and Philo estimates their numbers in Egypt in his time\n(ca. A.D. 40) at a million.\n\nIn cities like Alexandria, where Greek was the common speech of a\npopulation recruited from many races, the Jews soon exchanged their\nmother tongue for the cosmopolitan language. The ancient Hebrew of\ntheir Sacred Books was unintelligible, not only to the masses, but\neven to most of the educated, who had learned in the schools of Greek\nrhetoricians and philosophers rather than at the feet of the rabbis.\nIf the knowledge of the holy Law by which the distinctive Jewish life\nwas regulated was not to be lost altogether, the Scriptures must be\ntranslated into Greek. The Pentateuch was doubtless translated\nfirst--legend attributes the initiative to King Ptolemy Philadelphus\n(285-246 B.C.); then other books, by different hands and at different\ntimes and places. To some of the books, as to Daniel and Esther,\nadditions were made in the translation which were not accepted by the\nPalestinian Jews.\n\nBesides the books which were finally included in the Jewish canon,\nthere were various others, written in Hebrew or Aramaic after the\npattern of the several forms of Biblical literature. History, for\nexample, is represented by 1 Maccabees, relating the struggle of the\nJews in Palestine for religious liberty and national independence in\nthe second century B.C.; the Proverbs of Solomon have a counterpart in\nthe Proverbs of Ben Sira, already mentioned; the Psalter, in the\nso-called Psalms of Solomon; the story of Judith may be compared with\nEsther; the visions of Daniel have their parallel in popular\napocalypses bearing the names of Enoch, Noah, Ezra, Baruch, and other\nancient worthies. These writings were sooner or later translated into\nGreek, and some of them attained a wide circulation. The\nGreek-speaking Jews, also, produced a religious literature, in part\nimitating the familiar Biblical forms, as in the Wisdom of Solomon\nand 2 Maccabees, in part cast in Greek moulds, as when prophecy\ndisguised itself in Sibylline Oracles, or the supremacy of reason over\nthe emotions was made the subject of a discourse after the pattern of\na Stoic diatribe (4 Maccabees).\n\nThe influence of Greek culture on many of these writers was not\nconfined to language and literary form; they lived in an atmosphere of\nGreek thought--the popular philosophy, in which Platonic and Stoic\nelements were fused or confused--and a few had a more academic\nacquaintance with the Greek thinkers. But, under all this, they were\nJews to the core, devoted to the religion of their fathers, of the\nsuperiority of which they were the more convinced by the spectacle of\nheathenism about them: Judaism was the only true religion, its\nScriptures the one divine revelation. The Law and the Prophets had the\nsame precedence as in the Palestinian synagogue. Of the other\nScriptures there was no authoritative and exclusive list, and among\nbooks read solely for private edification it is not likely that a very\nsharp line was drawn; but, on the whole, the practice of the\nGreek-speaking Jews does not seem to have been materially different\nfrom that of their countrymen in Palestine.\n\nOutside of Palestine, Christianity was spread by Greek-speaking Jews\nwho had embraced the new Messianic faith, and their converts in the\nfields of their missionary labours, both Jews and Gentiles, spoke\nGreek, either as their mother tongue or as the language of common\nintercourse. The church, therefore, took over the Jewish Scriptures in\nthe existing translations: the Christian Old Testament was from the\nbeginning the Greek Bible, not the Hebrew. They received also from the\nGreek-speaking Jews the belief in the divine inspiration of the\ntranslators, by virtue of which the same infallible authority attached\nto the version of the Seventy which belonged to the Hebrew original.\nIn their desire to possess every word of God, they gathered up the\nreligious books which they found in the hands of the Jews, without\ninquiring curiously whether the Jews included them in the narrower\ncategory of Sacred Scriptures or not; and they discovered no reason in\nthe books themselves why Esther, for example, should be inspired and\nJudith not; or why Ecclesiastes, with its scepticism about the destiny\nof the soul, should be divinely revealed, and the Wisdom of Solomon,\nwith its eloquent defence of immortality, a purely human production;\nor, again, why the Proverbs of Solomon were Scripture, and the\nProverbs of Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus) nothing but profane wisdom.\n\nControversies in the second century made the Christian apologists\naware that the Jews did not acknowledge the authority of some of the\nbooks from which their opponents adduced proof-texts, and this\npractical concern, rather than purely learned interest, led to the\ndrawing up of lists of books which were accepted by the Jews as Sacred\nScripture. The oldest of these lists which has come down to us was\nmade by Melito, Bishop of Sardes, about A.D. 170; it contains the\nbooks of the Jewish canon enumerated above (p. 8), with the noteworthy\nexception of Esther, about which, as we have seen, Jewish opinion was\ndivided. Christian catalogues of the Jewish Old Testament long show an\nuncertainty about the right of this book to a place in the canon.\n\nMeanwhile the church had, in its worship and in religious instruction,\nestablished a use and tradition of its own. The Wisdom of Jesus, son\nof Sirach, was appropriated for the moral instruction of youth and of\nconverts, as is shown by the title it bears in the Greek Bible,\nEcclesiasticus, that is, \"The Church Book,\" and other writings not\nincluded in the Jewish canon were highly esteemed in the church. About\nA.D. 240, Julius Africanus, Bishop of Emmaus in Palestine, addressed a\ncritical letter to Origen on the story of Susanna and the Elders in\nthe Book of Daniel. This story, he said, was not found in the Hebrew\nDaniel, and was not acknowledged by the Jews. He proved by internal\nevidence that it was not translated from the Hebrew, the language in\nwhich the Scriptures of the Old Testament were inspired, but\noriginally composed in Greek, and he raised various historical\nobjections to the tale: it ought not, therefore, to be quoted as\nSacred Scripture. In his answer, Origen, the greatest Biblical scholar\nof his age, argued that if the story of Susanna was to be set aside on\nthe ground that it was not accepted by the Jews, other books, such as\nJudith and Tobit, would have to be rejected also. He appeals to the\nprescriptive usage of the church itself, which had always used these\nbooks and read them with edification. This immemorial tradition was\nauthority enough for Christians; there was no reason why the church\nshould prune its Bible to please the Jews or adapt itself to their\nopinions about what was and what was not inspired Scripture; he\nreminds his correspondent of the law, \"Thou shalt not remove the\nancient landmarks which those before thee have set.\"\n\nThis way of looking at the matter, as might be expected, prevailed in\nthe church. Lists of the books of the Jewish Bible were handed down,\nand scholars were well aware that the Christian Old Testament\ncontained several books not received by the Jews. By the more critical\nof the Greek Fathers these books are not cited with the same authority\nfor the establishment of doctrine as the books of the Hebrew Bible.\nThus, Athanasius, at the end of a list of the canonical Scriptures of\nthe Old and New Testaments (A.D. 365), adds: \"There are, besides\nthese, other books, not, indeed, included in the canon, but\nprescribed by the Fathers to be read by those who come to the church\nand wish to be taught the doctrine of religion, namely, the Wisdom of\nSolomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, and the\nTeaching of the Twelve Apostles.\" But this learned reserve had no\neffect on the liturgical or practical use of the church. The question\nof the inspiration and authority of the supernumerary books of the Old\nTestament was not decided by any council speaking in the name of the\ncatholic church; nor was it ever thus determined exactly what these\nsupernumerary books were, though several local synods made lists of\nthem.\n\nThe Latin Church received its Bible from the Greeks, and the Latin\ntranslations of the Old Testament made from the Greek included, as a\nmatter of course, the books which the church accepted and the\nsynagogue rejected. About the beginning of the fifth century, Jerome\nundertook a new Latin translation direct from the Hebrew. He lived for\nmany years at Bethlehem, and had learned Hebrew from Jewish teachers,\nwhose assistance he employed also in the work of translation. In some\nof the prefaces to this translation (which was published in parts),\nand in other places in his writings, Jerome gives a catalogue of the\nbooks of the Hebrew Bible, corresponding to the contents of our\nEnglish Old Testament, and expressly excludes all others from the\nclass of canonical Scriptures: \"Whatever is not included in this list\nis to be classed as apocrypha. Therefore Wisdom (commonly entitled 'of\nSolomon'), and the Book of Jesus son of Sirach, and Judith and Tobit\n... are not in the canon.\" The word \"apocrypha,\" literally \"secret, or\nesoteric, writings,\" had been used generally for the books of\nheretical sects, or suspected of being such, and, more broadly, of\nwritings which the church repudiated as not only uninspired but\nharmful, the reading of which it often forbade. It was, therefore, a\nvery radical word that Jerome uttered when he applied this name to\nbooks which the church had always regarded as godly and edifying.\n\nJerome himself did not consistently maintain the position which would\nmake the Jewish Bible the canon of the Christian church. At the\nrequest of certain bishops he translated Judith and Tobit, noting in\nthe prefaces that the Jews exclude these books from the canon and put\nthem among the apocrypha, but significantly adding in the one case\nthat he thinks it better to oppose the judgment of the Pharisees and\nobey the commands of the bishops, in the other pleading not only the\ndemand of a bishop but the fact that the Nicene Council had included\nJudith among the Sacred Books.[1] In another preface he describes\nEcclesiasticus and the Wisdom of Solomon as books which the church\nreads \"for the edification of the people, not for proving the\ndoctrines of the church\"--a definition which accords with the attitude\nof many of the Greek Fathers. Jerome thus halts between two opinions:\nin relegating to the apocrypha everything that is not in the Hebrew\nBible he speaks as a critic; in recognizing the books found in the\nChristian Old Testament, but not in the Hebrew, as useful and\nedifying, though of inferior authority for doctrinal purposes, he,\nlike Origen, takes the ground of the practical churchman. The\nmediating position is more clearly defined by Rufinus, who, after\ngiving a catalogue of the books of the Hebrew Bible, adds: \"There are\nother books, which older authors called not 'canonical' but\n'ecclesiastical,' such as the Wisdom of Solomon, and the so-called\nWisdom of the Son of Sirach, named by the Latins Ecclesiasticus; to\nthe same class belong Tobit, Judith and the Books of the Maccabees.\"\n\n  [1] The Nicene Council made no formal deliverance on the subject of\n  the canon, and upon what Jerome's appeal to its authority rests is\n  unknown.\n\nThe great influence of Augustine was thrown wholly on the side of\necclesiastical tradition; he even remonstrated with Jerome for\ntranslating the Old Testament from the Hebrew and thus disturbing the\nminds of the faithful, instead of revising the Old Latin version after\nthe Greek. In his treatise on Christian Doctrine (ii. 8; written in\nA.D. 397) he includes among the canonical books of the Old Testament,\nJudith, Tobit, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus, and the Wisdom of\nSolomon; African provincial synods at Hippo (A.D. 393) and Carthage\n(A.D. 397) pronounced themselves in the same sense.\n\nThe Syriac-speaking churches, whose Old Testament was translated from\nthe Hebrew, originally recognized those books only which were found in\nthe Jewish Bible; it appears, indeed, that the earliest Syriac version\ndid not extend to Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, but did include\nSirach. Under the influence of the Greek Church, those branches of the\nSyrian Church which remained in communion with it gradually added to\ntheir Bible translations of the other books from the Greek; but the\nNestorians, in whose schools Biblical criticism moved more freely than\nin the Catholic Church, continued to reject them, or to accord them,\ntogether with several of the books commonly reckoned canonical\n(Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Job,\nEcclesiasticus, Wisdom), only qualified authority.\n\nThroughout the Middle Ages learned authors repeated the conflicting\nutterances of the Fathers concerning the canon, without being\ndisturbed by their inconsistency; in practice, the Old Testament\ncomprised all the books that were usually found in copies of the Greek\nor Latin Bible, without regard to the fine distinctions of \"canonical\"\nand \"ecclesiastical.\" The immemorial usage of the church had more\nweight than the opinions of scholars. With this concurred the fact\nthat from the fourth century on the Bible was copied in collective\ncodices, on folded sheets of parchment or vellum like our books, not\nin separate rolls, and thus the canon of the Old Testament became, not\na mere list of Sacred Books, but a physical unity, in which the books\nof the Jewish Bible were intermingled with those which the Jews did\nnot accept.\n\nThe question assumed a new significance at the Reformation. In\nrejecting the authority of ecclesiastical tradition and the\nprescriptive usage of the church and making the Scriptures the only\nrule of faith and practice, the Reformers were under the necessity of\ndeciding what books were inspired Scripture, containing the Word of\nGod revealed to men, clothed with divine authority, demanding\nunqualified faith, and a means of grace to believers. Obviously they\ncould not logically acknowledge books whose place in the Bible had no\nother warrant than that the church had accepted them from very early\ntimes; nothing short of the authority of the New Testament itself\nwould suffice, and they found in the New Testament no quotations from\nthese books. To the Jews, St. Paul said, were committed the oracles of\nGod; it was the Jewish Scriptures to which Jesus and the Apostles\nappealed.\n\nNaturally, therefore, Luther reverted to the position of Jerome: the\nbooks found in the Hebrew Bible, and those only, were the Scriptures\nof the Old Testament; whatever was more than these was to be reckoned\namong the apocrypha. In the first complete printed edition of his\ntranslation (1534), these books (Judith, Wisdom, Tobit, Sirach,\nBaruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, the Greek additions to Esther and Daniel,\nthe Prayer of Manasseh) stand between the Old Testament and the New,\nwith the title (after Jerome) \"_Apocrypha_; that is, books that are\nnot equally esteemed with the Holy Scripture, but nevertheless are\nprofitable and good to read.\" The other Protestant versions, on the\nContinent and in England, followed this example.\n\nThe attitude of Luther toward the Old Testament Apocrypha was\nmaintained by the Lutheran Churches, whose Confessions do not,\nhowever, attempt a more exact definition of the value and authority of\nthe Apocrypha. The earlier Reformed (Calvinistic) Confessions take\nsubstantially the same ground: the Ecclesiastical Books, or Apocrypha,\nare useful, especially for moral instruction, but they have not the\nsame authority as the canonical books, and doctrines may not be\ndeduced from them alone. The Articles of the Church of England (1563;\nEnglish translation, 1571) agree on this point with the other Reformed\nConfessions: after enumerating the canonical books \"of whose authority\nthere was never any doubt in the Church,\" the Sixth Article continues:\n\"And the other books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for\nexample of life, and instruction of manners; but yet it doth not apply\nthem to establish any doctrine.\" A list of such books follows,\ncomprising those commonly printed in the English Bible under the title\nApocrypha.\n\nA more radical position was represented by the Synod of Dort (1618)\nand by the Westminster Assembly (1643). The latter declares: \"The\nbooks commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are\nno part of the canon of Scripture; and therefore are of no authority\nin the church of God, nor to be otherwise approved, or made use of,\nthan other human writings.\"\n\nIn opposition to the Protestant limitation of the canon of the Old\nTestament to the books of the Hebrew Bible, the Roman Church defined\nits attitude more sharply. In the Fourth Session of the Council of\nTrent (1546) it framed a \"Decree concerning the Canonical Scripture,\"\nin which the books set apart by the Protestants as Apocrypha are\nincluded with the rest. The complete contents of the Old Testament in\nthe Catholic Bible as thus defined are as follows: The Five Books of\nMoses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy;\nJoshua, Judges, Ruth, four Books of Kings [Samuel, Kings], two Books\nof Chronicles, 1 and 2 Esdras [Ezra, Nehemiah], Tobit, Judith, Esther,\nJob, the Psalter of David, containing one hundred and fifty Psalms,\nProverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah,\nJeremiah with Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, the Twelve Minor Prophets, two\nBooks of Maccabees, namely, the First and Second.... \"If any man does\nnot accept as sacred and canonical these books, entire, with all their\nparts, as they have customarily been read in the Catholic Church and\nare contained in the ancient common Latin edition ... let him be\nanathema!\"\n\nThis decree not only affirms that all the books in question are Holy\nand Canonical Scripture, but seems to put them all in one class, and\ndeliberately to exclude the ancient distinction between the books of\nthe Jewish Bible and the Ecclesiastical Books. Many of the Fathers\nhad, however, made such a distinction, and Catholic scholars, even\nafter Trent, thought it permissible to class the Ecclesiastical Books\n(which Protestants call the Apocrypha) as \"deuterocanonic,\" meaning\nnot thereby to imply that they are inferior in authority or\ninfallibility or dignity--for both classes owe their excellence to the\nsame Holy Spirit--but that they had attained recognition in the church\nat a later time than the others. Individuals have sometimes gone\nfarther, and acknowledged a difference in authority: the\ndeuterocanonic books are useful for edification, but not for the proof\nof doctrines--a position substantially the same as that of the Greek\nFathers and of moderate Protestants; but this is plainly against the\nsense of the decree of Trent.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nTHE OLD TESTAMENT AS A NATIONAL LITERATURE\n\n\nFor the religious apprehension of Jews and Christians the Old\nTestament is a body of Sacred Scriptures, containing the Word of God\nas revealed to the chosen people. The revelation was made \"at sundry\ntimes and in divers manners\" through many centuries, that is to say,\nit has a historical character, an adaptation to the needs or\naccommodation to the capacities of men, and, from the Christian point\nof view, makes a progressive disclosure of the divine purpose and plan\nof salvation. To understand this economy of revelation, or this\npedagogic of religion, it is necessary to distinguish the times, and\nto determine the nature, authorship, and age of the several books or\nparts of books. The critical questions which lie at the threshold of\nevery historical inquiry arise, therefore, in the study of the Old\nTestament, and much learning and acumen have been expended upon them,\nespecially in modern times, by scholars of all shades of theological\nopinion. That there should be wide divergence in their conclusions on\nmany points is not surprising, in view of the difficulty of many of\nthe questions and the insufficiency of the data available for a\nsolution; the same thing is true in other ancient literatures.\n\nA more radical difference exists in the Old Testament, however,\nbecause, for many scholars, Catholic and Protestant, the deliverances\nof the church, or the consent of tradition, or the testimony of the\nNew Testament, or the concurrence of all these, outweighs, in such a\nmatter as the unity and Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, the\ninternal evidence of the books themselves, and makes it their task to\nshow that the evidence which seems to contradict this attribution is,\nwhen properly interpreted, compatible with it; while others hold that\nno external authority and no theory of inspiration can be allowed to\ncountervail the cumulative weight of internal evidence.\n\nApart from its religious value and authority for the synagogue and the\nchurch, the Old Testament contains the remains of a national\nliterature which richly rewards study for its own sake. While its\nmasterpieces may be read with pleasure and profit without regard to\nthe age and circumstances in which they were written, they will be\nbetter appreciated as well as better understood in the light of their\nown times and in their place in the literature as a whole. In this\nliterature are also the sources for the political history of the\nHebrew people and for the history of its civilization and religion.\nThe critical ordering and appraisal of these sources is fundamental\nto any solid historical construction and, indeed, to any historical\nunderstanding of the Old Testament.\n\nIn the present volume the results of this critical inquiry are\nconcisely set forth, with primary reference to the history of the\nliterature and the development of religion, rather than to the sources\nfor the political history, a complete investigation of which would\nrequire a somewhat different method. The questions are approached in\nthe same way in which we should deal with similar questions in any\nother literature; critical problems, whether in sacred texts or\nprofane, can be solved only by the application of the established\nmethods of historical criticism.\n\nAll that survives of Hebrew literature prior to the age of Alexander\nis preserved in the Jewish Bible. It is not until the beginning of the\nthird century B.C. that we come upon books written by Jews in Hebrew\nor in Greek which are not included in the canon. It is, doubtless,\nonly a small part of a rich and varied literature that has thus been\nrescued across the centuries; much the larger part of what was written\nin the days of the national kingdoms, for example, must have perished\nin the catastrophes which befell Israel in the eighth century and\nJudah in the beginning of the sixth. What was saved was preserved for\nits intrinsic religious value or its association with great names of\nreligious leaders and teachers, not out of a merely literary or\npatriotic interest. Nor were these losses confined to the older\nliterature. Of the history of Judah under the Persian kings, for\nexample, there must once have been completer records than the dubious\nscraps we have in Ezra. Of secular poetry, which there is every reason\nto think flourished no less than hymnody, we should have had no\nspecimens, had not an anthology of love songs somehow got the name of\nSolomon, and by a mystical interpretation been converted to religion.\nThe remains of this literature are scattered unequally over a period\nof a thousand years or more. The youngest writings in the canon date\nfrom the second century B.C. (Daniel, Maccabean Psalms), being later\nthan Sirach, and contemporary with some of the visions of Enoch. All\nthat is preserved of the earliest writings has been transmitted to us\nby later authors, who incorporated in their works longer or shorter\npassages extracted from their predecessors.\n\nThe books of the Old Testament differ widely in matter and\nform--history and story; legislation, civil and ritual, moral and\nceremonial; prophecy and apocalypse; lyric, didactic, and dramatic\npoetry. The literary quality of the best in all these kinds is very\nhigh. The Song of Deborah (Judg. 5), notwithstanding the imperfect\nstate of the text, is one of the greatest of triumphal odes; parts of\nJob attain the height of the sublime; some of the Psalms are worthy of\na foremost place among religious lyrics; many oracles of the prophets\nare as noteworthy for the perfection of the expression as for the\nelevation of the thought; the laws are often formulated with admirable\nprecision; in the art of narration the older historians are\nunsurpassed in ancient literature. These qualities appear even more\nconspicuous in comparison with the remains of Egyptian or of\nBabylonian and Assyrian writings. It is only among the Greeks that we\nfind anything to match the finest productions of the Hebrew genius. It\nneed hardly be said that the Old Testament is not all on this high\nlevel of excellence--what literature is? But, taken as a whole, the\nlevel is surprisingly high, and even in the decadence classical models\nare sometimes imitated with no small degree of success.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nTHE PENTATEUCH\n\n\nThe Old Testament begins with a comprehensive historical work,\nreaching from the creation of the world to the fall of the kingdom of\nJudah (586 B.C.), which in the Hebrew Bible is divided into nine books\n(Genesis-Kings). The Jews made a greater division at the end of the\nfifth book (Deuteronomy) and treated the first five books (the\nPentateuch) as a unit, with a character and name of its own, the Law.\nThe names of the several books in our Bibles are derived from the\nGreek version, and indicate in a general way the subject of the book,\nor, more exactly, the subject with which it begins: Genesis, the\ncreation of the world; Exodus, the escape from Egypt; Leviticus, the\npriests' book; Numbers, the census of the tribes; Deuteronomy, the\nsecond legislation, or the recapitulation of the law.\n\nThe three middle books of the Pentateuch (Exodus-Numbers) are more\nclosely connected with one another than with the preceding and\nfollowing books (Genesis, Deuteronomy); in fact, they form a whole\nwhich is only for convenience in handling divided into parts. In these\nbooks narrative and legislation are somewhat unequally represented.\nExod. 1-19 is almost all narrative, as are also c. 24, and cc. 32-34;\nthe story is picked up again in Num. 10, what lies between is wholly\nlegislative; in Num. 10-27, 28-36, narrative and laws alternate, the\nlatter predominating. It is evident that from the author's point of\nview the narrative was primarily a historical setting for the Mosaic\nlegislation.\n\nDeuteronomy begins with a brief retrospect (Deut. 1-3) of the\nmovements of the Israelites from the time they left the Mount of God\ntill they arrived in the Plains of Moab, the lifetime of a whole\ngeneration. There, as they are about to cross the Jordan to possess\nthe Land of Promise, Moses delivers to them the law which they shall\nobserve in the land, and with many exhortations and warnings urges\nthem to be faithful to their religion with its distinctive worship and\nmorals. Thus Deuteronomy also presents itself essentially as\nlegislation.\n\nThe history of the Israelite tribes opens with the account of the\noppression in Egypt, the introduction to the story of deliverance. Its\nantecedents are found in the Book of Genesis, the migration of Jacob\nand his sons from Palestine to Egypt several generations earlier in a\ntime of famine; and this in turn is but the last chapter in the\npatriarchal story which begins with the migration of Abraham from\nSyria or Babylonia to Palestine. Gen. 1-11 tells of creation and first\nmen; the great flood; the dispersion of the peoples, with a\ngenealogical table showing the affinities of the several races and\nanother tracing the descent of Abraham in direct line from Shem the\nson of Noah. But even in Genesis the interest in the law manifests\nitself in various ways, such as the sanction of the sabbath, the\nprohibition of blood, and the introduction of circumcision.\n\nIn regarding the whole Pentateuch as Law, or, to express it more\naccurately, as a revelation of the principles and observances of\nreligion, the Jews were, therefore, doing no violence to the character\nand spirit of these books; and in ascribing them to Moses they were\nonly extending to the whole the authorship which is asserted in\nparticular of many of the laws, and especially of the impressive\nexhortations in Deuteronomy which form the climactic close of his work\nas a legislator.\n\nIt was early observed, however, that there are numerous expressions in\nthe Pentateuch which assume the settlement of Israel in Canaan and\nlook back to the age of Moses as to a somewhat remote past: Gen.\nxxxvi. 31, for example, implies the existence of the Israelite\nmonarchy. In the seventeenth century such anachronisms were bandied\nabout a good deal, but, inasmuch as they were all brief clauses which\nmight well be notes or glosses by scribes, they proved nothing about\nthe age of the main text. The controversy sharpened the eyes of the\ncritics, and many more conclusive facts were brought to light, which\nproved that the Pentateuch was not the product of one author nor of\none age, and that, whatever part Moses may be conceived to have had in\nit, much must be ascribed to later writers. No methodical attempt had\nbeen made, however, to distinguish its different strata, or to\ndiscover the sources from which it was compiled. This was first\nundertaken by an eminent French physician, Jean Astruc, who in 1753\npublished the results of his investigations under the modest title\n\"Conjectures concerning the Original Memoirs which it appears that\nMoses used in compiling the Book of Genesis.\" Astruc's analysis was\nsuggested by peculiar phenomena in the use of the divine names in\nGenesis, and he was led to the hypothesis that Moses had for the\nprimeval and patriarchal history two principal sources, one of which\nemployed consistently the proper name Jehovah, the other the\nappellative Elohim (God). The two narratives were in large part\nparallel, and when they were united in one continuous narrative,\nrepetitions, contradictions, and chronological difficulties were\ncreated which disappear when the sources are separated and recombined\nin their original sequence.\n\nThis is not the place for a history of criticism: it must suffice to\nsay that, as the result of the labours of many scholars in the last\ncentury and a half upon the problem of the sources and composition of\nthe Pentateuch, historians are now generally agreed that four main\nsources are to be recognized, of which three run, in varying\nproportion, from Genesis to Numbers and reappear in Joshua, while the\nfourth is found in Deuteronomy and Joshua only.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nCHARACTER OF THE SOURCES: GENESIS\n\n\nOf the four main sources of the Pentateuch and Joshua, two are easily\nrecognizable, and may be distinguished with certainty in almost any\ncombination. The Book of Deuteronomy, though itself a composite work,\nconstitutes a whole, with a characteristic religious point of view and\nmarked peculiarities of language and style. The strand akin to it in\nJoshua is not always so easy to discriminate from additions and\neditorial retouchings in one of the other sources; but since these are\nof approximately the same age, the difficulty is, from the historian's\npoint of view, not of very serious moment.\n\nThe second source, more closely interwoven in the narrative of\nGenesis-Numbers, and Joshua, has also such strongly marked\npeculiarities, not only in religious ideas and in phraseology and\nstyle, but in its whole conception and treatment of the history, that\nit stands out in salient contrast to any surroundings in which it may\noccur. Its interest is concentrated on the origin of the sacred\ninstitutions of Israel, especially on the priesthood, the worship, and\nthe distinctive religious customs of the people, for which reason it\nis commonly called the \"priestly\" history and law.\n\nThe two remaining sources resemble each other much more closely in\nreligious conceptions, in language, and in their representation of the\nhistory, so that, where their closely parallel narratives are\nintimately interwoven to make one continuous and harmonious story, it\nis often impossible to unravel them. As far as Exod. iii. 14 one of\nthem employs the name Elohim for God, while the other uses Jehovah\nfrom the beginning (see Gen. iv. 26), and this difference frequently\nserves as a first clue; but editors and copyists have so often,\npurposely or thoughtlessly, interchanged the names of God that it is\nby no means a decisive criterion. From Exod. 3 on, this criterion\nfails altogether. Closer acquaintance with the two sources discovers,\nunder all their similarity, individual peculiarities by which they can\nordinarily be recognized. Frequently, also, the connection of the\nstory itself, references or allusions to incidents already recounted\nand preparation for events subsequently to be narrated, serve to\nidentify passages with one or the other.\n\nFor the sake of brevity, it is customary to designate these sources by\nsymbols: J (Jahvist), the source in which God is from the beginning\ncalled Jehovah (more exactly, Jahveh); E (Elohist), the closely\ncognate source in which Elohim (God) is consistently used throughout\nGenesis; D, Deuteronomy and the kindred narrative in Joshua; P\n(Priestly), the source in which the interest in the religious\ninstitutions predominates. This author also uses Elohim exclusively in\nGenesis, and down to Exod. vi. 2 ff.\n\nThe two sources, J and E, both narrate the story of the patriarchs at\nsome length. J begins with the migration of Abraham from Haran (Gen.\n12); the corresponding introduction of Abraham in E is not preserved,\nand the first passage that can with confidence be attributed to that\nsource is Gen. 20. From that point through Genesis and down to Exod.\n24, J and E furnished the author of the Pentateuch most of his\nnarrative. The contents of both were evidently drawn from the same\ncommon stock of legend, and they tell in large part the same stories\nin variant forms, with differences of incident or of localization.\nSometimes one is ampler and more detailed, sometimes the other. The\nauthor of Genesis in such cases often chose the fuller version,\nenriching it here and there from the other; in other places the two\nare combined in more equal measure into one continuous narrative; or,\nagain, as in parts of the story of Joseph, extracts from the two\nalternate in large blocks.\n\nJ and E are, as has been said above, much alike in language and style,\nyet each has distinguishing peculiarities of expression. These of\nnecessity disappear in a translation, especially in a translation\nwhich, like the Authorized Version, raises everything to one stately\nlevel of noble English prose. Even in translation, however, a\ndifference in the story-teller's art and manner may be discerned. For\nJ the reader will find good examples in Gen. 18-19; 24; 38; 39; and\n43-44 (which are nearly solid extracts from that source); with the\nlatter chapters, from the story of Joseph, should be compared Gen.\n40-42, chiefly from E. Gen. 22 is also from E. From the literary point\nof view, J is the better narrator; he tells his story directly,\nswiftly, with almost epic breadth, and with just that measure of\ndetail which gives the note of reality, never overloading the story\nwith circumstance. Nor is it only the external action which he causes\nthus vividly to pass before us; with the dramatic instinct of the true\nstory-teller he makes us spectators of the inner play of feeling and\nmotive.\n\nThe religious element in the stories of J is pervasive. The\nforefathers are favourites of God, who directs their ways, and\nprotects and blesses them in all their doings. He appears to them in\nhuman form, and converses with them as a man with his friends;\nreflection has not yet found such too human behaviour unbecoming in\nGod. Gen. 18 is a striking instance of this familiarity in the deity:\nJehovah with two companions comes to Abraham's tent, eats of the meal\nthe patriarch's hospitality provides, predicts that Sarah shall bear a\nson before the year is out--a prospect which moves the old woman\nlistening behind the door to incredulous merriment--and as he departs\nannounces that he is going down to Sodom to see whether they are as\nbad there as has been reported to him. A still more drastic example is\nthe \"man\" who wrestles with Jacob, and finding himself no match for\nthe brawny patriarch, disables him by a foul, putting his hip out of\njoint, and finally, to get loose, unmasks as a god, owns Jacob the\nwinner, and names him \"Israel,\" the man who held his own against a\ngod (Gen. xxxii. 24 ff.). Or, again, as Moses is on the way to Egypt\nby God's command to deliver his people, Jehovah encounters him where\nhe halts for the night, and tries to kill him, desisting only when\nZipporah bans him by smearing her imperilled husband with the bloody\nforeskin of her son (Exod. iv. 24 ff.).\n\nSuch extremely human representations belong to the ancient legends\nwhich are incorporated in the history; the author's own conception of\nGod, if we may judge him by passages like Exod. xxxiii. 12-23; xxxiv.\n6-9, was much less crude; but it is significant that such traits were\nallowed to remain with so little change.\n\nThe legends also attribute to God a partiality for the patriarchs\nwhich lets him protect and prosper them in transactions such as are\nrepugnant not only to the most rudimentary morality but to savage\nmanliness, as in Gen. 12 and 26, variants of the story how one of the\nforefathers exposed his wife's honour rather than risk his own neck.\nLess striking, but no less instructive, is Jacob, who gains the\nbirthright by overreaching his brother and the blessing of the\nfirst-born by deceiving his father, and in the end outwits the wily\nLaban at his own devices and grows rich at his expense. It would be a\nmistake to take such stories as reflecting the morality of the\nauthor's time: they were the traditions of another age and another\norder of things. But again it is significant that they are narrated\nin J without any visible attempt to mitigate their offensive features.\nOther authors, as we shall see, toned down these features or\neliminated them.\n\nThe second of the authors in the patriarchal history (E) is but little\ninferior to J as narrator, and in translation the difference is even\nless noticeable than in the original. Where they can be directly\ncompared, however, E is slightly less vivid and picturesque. A certain\nlearned, or antiquarian, interest is also apparent. E notes, for\ninstance, that Laban, who as a Syrian naturally spoke Aramaic, called\nthe boundary cairn Jegar Sahaduta, while Jacob named it in good Hebrew\nGal 'Ed (a popular etymology of Gilead), and that the ancestors of the\nIsraelites in their old homes beyond the Euphrates were heathen. He is\nparticularly well informed in things Egyptian; he knows, for example,\nthe Egyptian names of the chief personages in the story of Joseph. It\nis in accord with this tendency that he introduces the name Jehovah\nonly after the call of Moses (Exod. iii. 14 ff.), and for the\npatriarchal period employs only the appellative, God.\n\nThe conception of deity is less na\u00efve than in J: God never appears in\ntangible bodiliness like a man, but reveals himself in visions or\ndreams, or makes known his will by a voice out of the unseen. Things\nobjectionable to morals or taste are frequently softened down. In J,\nfor example, Joseph's brothers, at Judah's instance, sell him to the\nIshmaelites; in E Reuben persuades them to put Joseph into a dry well,\nintending to save him from them and restore him to his father; while\nhe is absent, Midianites steal Joseph out of the well and carry him\noff to Egypt. Compare also Gen. 20 (E) with c. 12 (J), noting how in\nthe former the author takes pains to make clear that no harm came to\nSarah, and that Abraham is a prophet whose intercession is effectual\nwith God. On the other hand, the interventions of God in E often show\na disposition to magnify the miracle and to give it a magical\ncharacter. Thus at the crossing of the Red Sea, in J the waters are\ndriven back by a strong wind, leaving the shallow basin dry; in E the\nmiracle is wrought by Moses with his wand (like the plagues), and this\nrepresentation is followed by P, in which the waters stand in walls on\neither hand while the people march between.\n\nIf the author of E was acquainted with J, as it would be natural to\nassume, he certainly does not copy him; of literary dependence in a\nstrict sense there is no sign. The two appear, rather, to be parallel\nnarratives, drawing on a common stock of tradition, which had already\nacquired by repetition, whether oral or written, a comparatively fixed\nform. This common stock included traditions of different groups of\ntribes and of holy places in different parts of the land. As might be\nsupposed, the tribes seated in central Palestine, with their kinsmen\neast of the Jordan, which constituted the strength of the kingdom of\nIsrael, make the largest contribution; Judah with its allied clans in\nthe south comes second.\n\nIn the treatment of the common tradition in J and E, respectively,\nlocal or national interests appear, from which it is generally\ninferred that E was written in the Northern Kingdom (Israel) and J in\nthe Southern (Judah). The question of the age of these writings can be\nmore profitably considered at a later stage of our inquiry.\n\nThe patriarchal history which begins with the migration of Abraham,\nGen. 12, is preceded by what may be called the primeval history of\nmankind, Gen. 1-11. In these chapters E is not represented, and it\nseems probable that the Israelite historian began his book with\nAbraham. The primeval history as we read it, therefore, is derived in\npart from J, in part from P. From J come Gen. ii. 4b-iv. 25; vi. 1-8;\na part of the composite story of the Flood (vii. 1-5, 7-10, 12, 17b,\n22-23; viii. 6-12, 13b, 20-22); the sons of Noah, ix. 18-27, and part\nof the table of nations (x. 8-19, 21, 24-30); the Tower of Babel (xi.\n1-9). These pieces do not form a literary unity, and they give\nevidence, as we should expect, of diverse origin. There are some among\nthem which imply a continuous development of civilization, unbroken by\nthe catastrophe of the Deluge, and Noah himself was originally an\nagricultural figure, the first vine-dresser and maker of wine, not the\nnavigator of the ark. The tradition which ascribes the invention of\nthe arts of primitive civilization to descendants of Cain (Gen. iv.\n17-24) is obviously of different origin from the story of Cain and\nAbel. Closer inspection shows that the narrative of J in Gen. 1-11 is\ncomposed of two strands, each having a consistency and continuity of\nits own, and similar phenomena appear in subsequent parts of the\nhistory from Genesis to Samuel.\n\nIf these various elements are alike designated by the symbol J, it is\nbecause they exhibit the peculiarities of conception and expression\nwhich characterize that work. The God who walks for pleasure in his\ngarden in the cool of the day, misses his gardeners, and finding that\nthey have eaten the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge, drives\nthem out of the garden for fear they might also put out their hands to\nthe tree whose fruit gives immortality, or who comes down to see the\ntower the Babylonian heaven-stormers are building, and apprehending\nmore presumptuous attempts from their success, breaks up their concert\nby the ingenious device of making them talk different languages, is\nplainly imagined in quite the same way as the God who visits Abraham\non his way to Sodom or wrestles with Jacob or tries to kill Moses on\nthe road to Egypt. Even more primitive is the fragment, Gen. vi. 1-4,\ntelling how deities, captivated by the charms of mortal women, begot\nwith them a mythical race of giants.\n\nThe Deluge has long been known to be a Babylonian myth, which now\nforms an episode in a poem celebrating the exploits of a hero named\nGilgamesh. But, though preserving even such details of the Babylonian\noriginal as the sending out of the birds, the Hebrew author has\nimpressed upon it the stamp of his own religion, effacing its\npolytheistic features, and making the Flood a just judgment on\nuniversal sinfulness; while for the Babylonian hero he substituted a\nfigure of Palestinian legend, and shows his inland bringing-up by\nconverting the ship into an enormous box. It has frequently been\nassumed or asserted that others of these myths of the early world,\nparticularly the Garden in Eden and the Tower of Babel, are also of\nBabylonian origin, but no parallels to them have as yet been\ndiscovered, nor does internal evidence point that way.\n\nThe scenery in the Garden in Eden is na\u00efve enough, but the problem of\nthe myth is one which has exercised the minds of men through all time:\nWhy is man mortal? or, as it is usually put in myths, How did man fail\nof immortality? Two other persistent questions are here joined with\nit, Why has man to work so hard for a living? and Why must women bear\nchildren with pangs and peril? The answer evinces a reflection of\nwhich we often think primitive philosophy incapable: man aspired to a\nknowledge that God jealously kept to himself--he would not respect his\nlimitations.\n\nThe third chief narrative source in the Pentateuch, commonly called\nthe Priestly History (P), is of a different character from those which\nwe have been examining. A more descriptive title for it would be,\nOrigins of the Religious Institutions of Israel. In the view of the\nauthor, these institutions were successively ordained by God at\ncertain epochs in the history of mankind and in connection with\ncertain historical events; these events he narrates as the occasion or\nground of the institution, which the subsequent observance recalls and\ncommemorates. These institutions were not all first revealed to Israel\nand prescribed for it; on the contrary, the author has a theory of a\nprogressive revelation of God's will, beginning with the first man and\nwoman, and amplified from age to age by the addition to its contents\nof fresh ordinances, while at the same time its extension gradually\nnarrows, until, in the Mosaic Law, it is addressed to the chosen\npeople of Israel alone. The place of each new institution is therefore\nfixed not only in a chronological system but in the genealogical\nscheme of races and nations. The genealogies which connect one epoch\nof revelation with the following one are thus not the bare bones of\nhistory, stripped of its flesh and blood, but serve a distinct and\ncharacteristic purpose.\n\nThe Origins begin with the creation of the world (Gen. i.-ii. 4), and\na comparison of this account with that of J in 2-3 well illustrates\nthe difference between the two sources. The God of P is not one who\nfashions man and beast out of clay and breathes with his own lips into\nthe work of his hands the breath of life; he stands above and apart\nfrom the world, and creates all things by fiat: \"Let there be light,\nand there was light\"--so in sublime simplicity the formula runs. The\ncreative acts are six natural days: \"Evening came and morning came, a\nfirst day.\" \"And he rested (kept sabbath) on the seventh day from all\nhis work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day and made\nit holy, because on it he rested from all his creative work.\" The\nordinance of the sabbath thus has its origin and sanction in the\ncreation itself, and this is alleged in the Decalogue (Exod. xx. 11)\nas the motive for man's sabbath-keeping.\n\nThe Flood gives occasion to the blessing of Noah and his sons, in\nwhich for the first time animal food is permitted--like many of the\nancients, P made the first men vegetarians--and with this licence is\ncoupled a prohibition of flesh with blood in it and the sentence of\nGod upon murder, \"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood\nbe shed; for in the image of God made he man.\" These commandments,\ngiven to Noah, are binding on all mankind, his descendants. The\ngenealogies of the antediluvians connect the creation with the Flood\nand serve also the chronology; genealogies of the descendants of\nNoah's sons follow, the chronology attaching to the line of Shem down\nto Terah, the father of Abraham.\n\nAbraham's migration to Canaan and the birth of Ishmael are briefly\ntold, and then, at large, the covenant with Abraham, the promise of a\nson by Sarah, and the institution of circumcision, which is an\nordinance for all the Abrahamic peoples, the Arab descendants of\nIshmael as well as the Israelites and Edomites sprung from Isaac, and\nfor their slaves, home-born or foreign. The only other incident in\nAbraham's life of which P gives a fuller account is the purchase from\nthe sons of Heth of the cave of Macpelah, the burial-place of the\npatriarchs; meagre notices of marriages and deaths, and tedious\npedigrees take the place of the vivid stories of J and E. The contrast\nis most striking in the case of Joseph, about whom we have from P only\na few verses. Doubtless this is in part due to the fact that the\nauthor of the Pentateuch preferred the richer narrative of his other\nsources, but what is preserved of P shows clearly enough that his\nhistory of Joseph, even when complete, was brief and dry.\n\nThe diction and style of P are very unlike that of J and E; a\nfavourable example of his manner is Gen. 17. Even in a translation,\nwhich necessarily obliterates much, some of the author's\npeculiarities can be observed, foremost among them a certain stiffness\nand a laborious circumstantiality, which will be felt if Gen. xvi.\n1-2, 4-8, 11-14 (J) or xvi. 8-21 (E) be compared with c. 17 (P). In\nGen. 1, thanks to the subject, this dry simplicity gives an impression\nof sublimity; but in general, narration is not the author's best gift.\nOn the other hand, the conception of God, as we have seen in Gen. 1,\nis more elevated than in either of the other sources; and in the\nlittle P tells of the patriarchs their deportment is unimpeachable.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nEXODUS, LEVITICUS, NUMBERS\n\n\nIn the early chapters of Exodus the narrative is chiefly a combination\nof J and E; the first considerable extract from P is Exod. vi. 2-vii.\n13, recalling the covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and\nannouncing its approaching fulfilment, adding, as the signature of the\nnew epoch of the history now opening, the revelation of the name God,\nJehovah (Jahveh), which none of the patriarchs had known.\n\nIn the story of the plagues all three sources are interwoven; a\ndistinctive feature of P is that Aaron with his wand, under Moses'\ndirection, brings the plagues to pass. The announcement of the last\nplague is the occasion for P to introduce the ordinance of the\nPassover. The houses of the Israelites are to be marked by the blood\nof the victim on the door-posts and lintel: when Jehovah passes\nthrough the land, smiting dead all the first-born of the Egyptians, he\nwill \"skip\" the houses so protected--thus the name of the feast is\nexplained (Exod. xii. 1-13). To this is annexed a law for the\nobservance of the feast of Unleavened Bread, which in Palestine\nimmediately followed the Passover (xii. 14-20). With the institution\nof the Passover is connected also a change in the calendar: henceforth\nthe month of the vernal full moon (March-April) is to be the first of\nthe year. It was so in the ecclesiastical calendar of later times, but\nthe civil New Year was, and still is, in the Autumn.\n\nAll the strands of the triple narrative lead to a holy mountain in the\ndesert (Sinai in P and probably in J; Horeb in E and D), the Mount of\nGod, represented in all as the ancient seat of Jehovah. It was on this\nmountain that God appeared to Moses and bade him return to Egypt to\ndeliver Israel: when he had brought the people out of Egypt they\nshould worship at this mountain. Thither, therefore, Moses directs\ntheir way after crossing the Red Sea. In all the sources God's\npresence is manifested by cloud and fire upon the mountain, and Moses\ngoes to the summit to meet God (Exod. 19, J, E; xxiv. 15^b-18^a, P).\nThese imposing preparations portend a revelation of no common moment;\nand the whole situation bids us expect the organic law of the religion\nof Jehovah, the things which he requires of his worshippers.\n\nWe find, in fact, in each of the three sources at this point larger or\nsmaller groups of laws purporting to be delivered to Moses at the holy\nmountain, and containing what may be regarded as fundamental\ninstitutions. These bodies of law are, however, very different; the\nproblem of their relation to one another and to the narratives is\nextremely difficult, and the parallel account of the legislation at\nHoreb in Deut. 5 adds another element to the complication. If the\nreader will attentively compare Exod. 20; 21-23; 24; Deut. 5; ix. 8-x.\n5; and Exod. 34, he will get some impression of the nature of the\ndifficulties. According to Deut. v. 22, the Decalogue (Deut. v. 6-21;\nExod. xx. 1-17, with noteworthy variants) was the law written on the\ntwo tables of stone by the hand of God which Moses dashed down and\nshattered when he saw the people wantoning around the golden calf\n(Exod. xxxii. 19). God proposes to reproduce the law on two new\ntablets (xxxiv. 1), but the Decalogue (xxxiv. 28) written on these\ntablets (xxxiv. 14-26) is wholly different from that of Exod. 20,\nbeing not a compend of moral law, but prescriptions for the festivals\nand ritual rules, whereas Deut. ix. 8-x. 5 says in so many words that\nit was the Decalogue of v. 6-21 which was restored.\n\nIt is impossible to discuss these problems here. It must suffice to\nsay that they arise in part from the attempt to harmonize radically\ndifferent representations of what the fundamental law given at Sinai\n(or Horeb) was, in part from the tendency of later times to ascribe to\nthe original Mosaic legislation the whole body of actual law regarded\nas having a religious sanction. To the latter cause we may without\nhesitation attribute, for example, the introduction of the fragmentary\nremains of a Palestinian civil code in Exod. 21-22, to which other\nremnants of diverse origin have been attached, as well as the great\nmass of ritual and ceremonial laws which are thrust into the framework\nof P.\n\nThe fundamental law of J, the basis of the original compact between\nJehovah and Israel, is preserved in Exod. xxxiv. 1-5, 10a, 14-28 (with\nsome manifest amplifications in vss. 15, 16, 24). When this was\ncombined with the story of the golden calf and the broken tables (E),\nit was necessary to take it as a _renewal_ of the law, and this was\naccomplished by very slight additions in vss. 1 and 4 (\"like unto the\nfirst,\" \"that were on the first tables, which thou brakest\").\n\nWhat the Horeb constitution in E originally was, is less confidently\nto be determined. In the form in which E was read by the authors of\nDeut. 5 and of ix. 8-x. 5 (end of the seventh century or later), it\nwas the Decalogue _only_ (Deut. v. 22 f.); but it is not certain that\nthis was the oldest representation. There are other evidences that E\nwas revised and enlarged in the seventh century by an author who was\ninfluenced by the prophets, particularly by Hosea; and the story of\nthe golden calf (with which the Decalogue narrative is closely\nconnected), a condemnation in advance of the Israelite worship of\nJehovah in the image of a bull, may have been introduced in this\nedition, as the repudiation of the sacrifice of children to Jehovah in\nthe story of Abraham and Isaac (Gen. 22) probably was.\n\nIn P the case is clearer. According to his theory all the ordinances\nof worship were revealed at Sinai. Legitimate sacrifice presupposes\none legitimate temple and altar, a legitimate priesthood, and a\nminutely prescribed ritual. In J and E the patriarchs set up altars\nand offer sacrifice in many places; it is an obvious interest of the\nauthors, or of the local legends of holy places which they follow, to\ntrace the origin of the altars, sacred stones, holy trees and wells,\nat Shechem or Bethel, Hebron or Beersheba, to one of the forefathers.\nIn P, on the contrary, the patriarchs never offer sacrifice. Until the\ntabernacle was erected and God's presence filled it, until Aaron was\nconsecrated as priest, until the technique of the various species of\noffering had been revealed by God and exemplified by Moses or Aaron,\nno sacrifice could be anything but impious, like the worship of\nheathen.\n\nAccordingly, the first thing God does when Moses goes up into the\nmount is to give him plans and specifications for a sacred tent--a\nportable temple--with all its furniture, an altar for sacrifice in the\ncourt before it, the vestments of the priests, and the apparatus of\nthe high-priestly oracle, and to reveal in detail the ritual for the\nconsecration of priests (Exod. 25-30). The making of the tabernacle\nand all the other things necessary for the complete cultus is\ndescribed in Exod. 35-40; the consecration of the priests and the\ninaugural sacrifices by Aaron in Lev. 8-9; Lev. x. 1-7 is closely\nconnected with cc. 8-9, and its sequel (combined with other matter) is\nfound in c. 16, the ritual of atonement. Lev. 8-9 is a good specimen\nof the author's method. In the form of a description of the sacrifices\nof consecration and the inaugural sacrifices of Aaron, he gives a\nparadigm for every variety of offering.\n\nHere was obviously a natural place to introduce laws prescribing the\nritual of these species of sacrifice and the circumstances which\ndemand them, and accordingly we find in Lev. 1-7 a collection of such\nlaws, some of them (e.g. Lev. 1 and 3) unquestionably old both in\nsubstance and formulation, with slight adaptation to their surrounding\n(e.g. \"the sons of Aaron,\" i. 5, etc.), or with supplements to meet\nnew economic and social conditions, such as the burnt offering of\ndoves (Lev. i. 14-17, cf. vs. 2); others are younger or have been\nmore extensively enlarged and amended. The chapters thus represent a\ngrowth in actual custom and corresponding rule. In c. 4 we may observe\nan example of another kind of legal growth, namely, the systematic\ndevelopment of principles or ideas. The scale of sin-offerings,\ngraduated by the social station of the sinner--the high priest, the\nwhole people, the prince, a common citizen--is consistently thought\nout in conformity with a theory. Observe that the prince is assigned a\nmodest place next the bottom, below the religious community\ncorporately, while the priest takes his at the top. We can say with\nfull confidence that this elaborate ritual is not the booking of\nusage, but is a product of sacerdotal theory; and, further, that so\nlong as kings reigned, the most high-church ecclesiastic is not likely\nto have arrogated so much to himself, or, at least, to have proclaimed\nhis ambitions. Only in days when, under foreign governors, the high\npriest was really the greatest man in the community is such a table of\nprecedence conceivable. Whether even then this law was actually put in\noperation, may be an open question.\n\nThe position of the sacrificial laws, Lev. 1-7, explains itself, as\nhas been said. In many other cases, however, we see no reason why a\nsubject is brought in where it is. Thus, Lev. 11-15, on various forms\nof uncleanness and the prescribed purifications, to which x. 10 f.\nseems to be a fragmentary introduction, have no obvious association\nwith anything in the context, though they are introduced appropriately\nenough before the general purification of the Day of Atonement, c. 16.\nThe laws, which read like the chapters of an exactly formulated code\nof purity, have been expanded by the addition of new paragraphs (e.g.\nLev. xiv. 21-32, 33-53), and in some cases changes in the ritual may\nbe recognized; compare, for example, Lev. xiv. 1-8 with vss. 10-20.\n\nChapters 17-26 form a distinct body of law, having certain marked\npeculiarities of its own, notably the frequent recurrence of the\nmotive of \"holiness\"--that is, the avoidance of things and actions\ntabooed by the religion of Israel--often coupled with the appeal to\nGod's holiness, as in xix. 2, \"Ye shall be holy, for I, Jehovah, your\nGod, am holy,\" or simply asserting his authority, \"I am Jehovah.\" On\nthe other hand, much in the laws of this Holiness Book (H), as it now\nstands, has close affinity to the mass of ritual and ceremonial laws\nin Leviticus and Numbers. The hypothesis which seems best to explain\nthe phenomena is that an independent collection of laws (or rather the\nremains of such a collection), characterized by the motive of\nholiness, has been expanded and edited in the spirit and manner of the\npriestly legislation, while some laws which were originally included\nin this collection have been transposed to other contexts.\n\nThe Holiness Book closed with an earnest exhortation and warning to\nobserve all these laws, promising the blessing of God on obedience and\ndepicting in strong colours the calamities with which he will punish\ndefection (Lev. 26). The position and prophetic tenour of this chapter\nresemble Deut. 28, and the book in its original form is apparently the\nproduct of the same age with Deuteronomy.\n\nThe Origins (P) described in Exod. 28 f. and Lev. 8 f. the choice of\nAaron and his sons to be priests and their installation in the sacred\noffice. The inferior order of the ministry of the sanctuary, the\nlevites, is not as yet instituted. This is done in Numbers, and indeed\nwith a certain redundancy, for Num. 3 and 4 independently deal with\nthe subject, and c. 18 takes it up afresh without any allusion to a\nprevious appointment. Much stress is laid on the exclusive prerogative\nof Aaron and his sons in the service of the altar and the ministry\n\"within the veil\"; no levite, much less a layman, may presume to these\nsacred functions on pain of death. The levites are given to Aaron and\nhis sons as temple slaves for the menial work of the sanctuary, in\nplace of the first-born Israelites of all tribes who would naturally\nbe dedicated to God, i.e. to the temple. Yet, as ministers of\nreligion, they are supported by a general tithe of the products of the\nsoil imposed on all the people.\n\nThe laws in Numbers present the same variety as in Leviticus. There\nare old laws with modifications and enlargements, and many others\nwhich by various signs betray a more recent origin. Num. 28-36 belong\nas a whole to the latter class; cc. 28 f. exemplify that growth of the\nlaw by the formulation of sacerdotal ideals or desiderata which has\nbeen noted in the case of Lev. 4. It is to be observed that the\nnarrative of P has reached in Num. xxvii. 12-23 the end of Moses'\ncareer; nothing is in place after it but the ascent of Mt. Abarim and\nMoses' death (Deut. 34). Num. 28-36 thus stand even formally in the\nplace of an appendix.\n\nThe narrative of P (Origin of the Religious Institutions) and the\ngreat mass of ritual and ceremonial laws in the three middle books of\nthe Pentateuch are often called collectively the Priests' Code. The\nname naturally suggests to the English reader an orderly body of law,\ncompiled, revised, and promulgated by some authority; and, in fact,\nmany critics--except for the orderliness, which nobody has ventured to\naffirm, and with allowance for later additions--regard the Priests'\nCode as such a law book, compiled and edited by priestly scribes in\nBabylonia, brought to Jud\u00e6a by Ezra, with the authority of the Persian\nking, to reform the many disorders that existed there, and ratified\nand put in force in B.C. 444 by the magnates and the people of the\nJews. (See Ezra 7; Neh. 8-10, and below, pp. 129 ff.) Internal\nevidence of such an origin and destination is, however, sought in\nvain in the laws; the things that Ezra and Nehemiah were most zealous\nabout, especially the veto on mixed marriages, do not stand out in the\nso-called Priests' Code as they do in other parts of the law, while\nabout a reform of the cultus in Jerusalem in conformity with a new\nritual introduced from Babylonia, the story of Ezra's doings is\nsignificantly silent.\n\nThe phenomena we have observed in Exodus-Numbers suggest the\nhypothesis, rather, that various old laws, dealing chiefly with\nsacrifice and with the rules of clean and unclean--the two principal\nsubjects of priestly regulation--were inserted at suitable points in\nthe Origins of the Religious Institutions (P); these received\namendments and supplements both before and after their incorporation;\nother more independent developments, whether representing actual\ncustom or sacerdotal aspirations, found place among or beside them;\nand thus the whole Priestly stratum grew by a process of accretion\nthrough many generations into its present inorganic magnitude. It is\nantecedently probable that this process went on in Palestine, where\nthe ritual laws were a practical concern, rather than in the schools\nof Babylonia; and only strong evidence to the contrary could overcome\nthis presumption.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nDEUTERONOMY\n\n\nDeuteronomy purports to contain the laws under which Israel is to live\nin the land of Canaan. It deals with the conditions of an agricultural\npeople, settled in towns and villages, in the presence of a native\npopulation to the contamination of whose religion and morals the\nIsraelites are exposed. This legislation was revealed to Moses at\nHoreb (Deut. v. 28-33), but, inasmuch as it was not to go into effect\nuntil Israel was established in the possession of Canaan, being in\nfact wholly inapplicable to nomadic conditions--a consideration of\nwhich P, in its code of worship, is oblivious--it was not promulgated\ntill the moment when the people, encamped opposite Jericho, was on the\npoint of invading Palestine. Then the aged Moses, about to lay down\nhis office and his life, delivers to the people, in national assembly,\nthe law by which they are in future to be governed, and adds his most\nurgent injunctions and solemn warnings to be faithful to their\nreligion and the law of their God.\n\nThe book is thus almost wholly in the form of address, and the\nhortatory note is insistent. As an introduction, Moses briefly recalls\nthe history of the wanderings, from Horeb on, impressing at every turn\nthe lessons of their experience (Deut. 1-3); the material is taken\nchiefly from E's narrative, which it was intended to supersede in an\nindependent Book of Deuteronomy. There follows a hortatory discourse\n(iv. 1-40), closely akin to cc. 29-30. The last acts and the death of\nMoses are narrated in confused fashion in c. 31; xxxii. 48-52; 34. The\nSong of Moses (c. 32), and the Blessing of Moses (c. 33), are\napparently independent compositions which have been given an\nappropriate place at the end of the book. The core of Deuteronomy is\ncc. 5-11; 12-26; 28. Speaking generally, the first part (cc. 5-11)\nexpounds the fundamental principles of religion, while the second (cc.\n12-26) contains special laws, and, as a fitting and effective\nconclusion of the whole, c. 28 sets forth the blessings which God will\nbestow on Israel if it keeps his commandments, and the curses it will\nincur by unfaithfulness and disobedience. The special laws,\nparticularly in Deut. 22 ff., are similar in character to those in\nExod. 21-23 and in Lev. 17-25, and doubtless embody in the main\nancient custom; but beside them are provisions of a singularly Utopian\nkind, such as those on the conduct of war in c. 20 and the septennial\ncancelling of all debts (xv. 1-11).\n\nThe conception of religion which dominates the whole book, but is most\nconspicuous in cc. 5-11, is the highest in the Old Testament. There is\nbut one God, supreme in might and majesty, constant in purpose,\nfaithful to his word, just but compassionate; he is not to be imaged\nor imagined in the likeness of anything in heaven or on earth;\nidolatry, divination, and sorcery are strictly forbidden. The essence\nof religion is love (Deut. vi. 4), the love of God to his people and\ntheir responsive love to him is the ruling motive in worship and\nconduct. In the relations of men to their fellows, whether countrymen\nor strangers and to the brute creation, humanity and charity are the\nprime virtues; the Utopian features of the laws are such only because\nthey push the ideal of humanity too hard for unideal human nature.\n\nWhat is most characteristic in the Deuteronomic legislation, the thing\non which it dwells with insistent iteration, is that Jehovah will be\nworshipped only at one place, to be chosen by himself in the territory\nof one of the tribes. There all sacrifices must be offered, all\nfestivals celebrated. At the head of the special laws this fundamental\narticle is repeatedly laid down (Deut. xii. 13-19--seemingly the\noldest formulation--xii. 2-7, 8-12, 20-27), and it recurs in\nconnection with the laws concerning the disposition of God's share in\nman's increase (tithes, firstlings, etc.) and the annual festivals\n(Passover, Tabernacles).\n\nThis was an innovation which dislocated the whole system of religious\nobservances, and the Deuteronomic legislation had to provide for the\ndirect and indirect consequences of so radical a change. By ancient\ncustom the religious dues were rendered and sacrifices offered at the\nvillage altars (\"high places\"), and there also the festivals were kept\nwhich marked the seasons of the husbandman's year; beside the altar,\nwith a simple religious rite, domestic animals were slaughtered\nwhenever hospitality or a family festival gave occasion. If a man\nvisited a more renowned sanctuary at a distance from his home, he did\nit of his own accord and in his own time and way. The feasts at the\nvillage altars, at which custom prescribed open hospitality, were a\ngodsend to the poor of the community, many of whom would else seldom\nhave tasted flesh or eaten their fill. The Deuteronomic law licenses\nthe slaughter of animals at home without any religious rite, and\nintroduces a plan of charity tithes to replace the hospitality of the\naltar. Its concern for the levites (that is, the priests of the local\nsanctuaries), who by the new arrangement were left without a\nlivelihood, is also to be noted.\n\nThe motives for this radical change in immemorial religious custom are\ncharacteristic. In the first place, the \"high places\" had been seats\nof Canaanite worship before they were taken possession of by the\nIsraelites, and not only did the stigma of aboriginal heathenism cling\nto them, but, in fact, many heathenish doings were perpetuated at\nthem--drunken debauches and consecrated prostitution. But, further,\ntheir existence seemed to be incompatible with strict monotheism: the\nmany gods were worshipped in many places; the _one_ God seemed to have\nas corollary _one_ place of worship. As a matter of experience, the\nlocalizing of Jehovah at numerous sanctuaries--Dan, Bethel, Gilgal,\nBeersheba--with their distinctive traditions and local peculiarities\nof ritual, doubtless did result, for the apprehension of the common\nman, in making a local Jehovah, as happens to the Virgin and the\nSaints in Catholic countries. For the Deuteronomist this was only\nanother kind of polytheism: \"Hear, O Israel, Jehovah, our God, is\n_one_ Jehovah!\"\n\nDeuteronomy is, therefore, the programme of a reform. Fortunately, we\nknow how this programme was put in execution; the history of it is\nwritten in 2 Kings 22-23. In the course of some repairs in the temple\nin Jerusalem, a law book turned up, the reading of which threw King\nJosiah and his advisers into consternation. After taking counsel of a\nprophetess, an assembly was convoked, and the book publicly ratified\nby the notables and the people as the law of the realm. Thereupon the\nking proceeded to put the code in force. He not only cleaned house in\nthe temple in Jerusalem, where a miscellany of foreign gods and cults\nwas installed, but he destroyed and desecrated all the \"high places,\"\nthat is, the immemorial seats of the worship of Jehovah in the towns\nand villages of his kingdom, pulling the altars to pieces, smashing\nthe stone pillars, hewing down the sacred poles, and forcibly carrying\noff the priests (levites) to Jerusalem, where he assigned them a\nliving from the income of the temple, but--in his zeal going beyond\nthe law of Deut. xviii. 6-8--excluded them from sacrificial functions.\n\nIt was seen long ago by some of the Church Fathers that the law book\nwhich Hilkiah found and Josiah enforced can have been no other than\nDeuteronomy. The historian of the kingdoms, writing after the reforms\nof Josiah and the following reaction and believing that the\nprohibition of worship at the high places had been binding since the\nbuilding of Solomon's temple, is at pains to say that none of the\nkings from Solomon to Josiah, not even those to whom otherwise he\ngives the best mark for piety, had paid any attention to this law,\nwith the sole exception of a brief attempt by Hezekiah. We can go\nfurther, and say that none of the older historians and none of the\nprophets of the ninth and eighth centuries show any acquaintance with\nsuch a prohibition. If the prophets assail the worship at the high\nplaces, as Hosea does, it is on the ground that it is heathenish and\nimmoral, not that it is illegitimate; if Hosea condemns the\npilgrimages to Gilgal and Beersheba, it is not implied that it would\nbe better to go to Jerusalem; nor, indeed, is any condemnation of the\nworship at the high places more drastic than Isaiah's of the cultus\nin Jerusalem. Before the latter part of the seventh century there is\nno thought that Jehovah has such an exclusive preference for Solomon's\ntemple.\n\nAll the other evidence in Deuteronomy points to the same age. Its\nconception of God and of religion is derived from the prophets of the\neighth century. The influence of Hosea is particularly plain: that the\nessence of religion is love is Hosea's idea, if there is such a thing\nas originality in religion. The language and style of Deuteronomy are\nof the seventh century, in its excellences and in its defects;\nJeremiah and the author of Kings have the closest resemblance to it in\nits rhetorical manner and in its peculiar pathos.\n\nOn these grounds, since the latter part of the eighteenth century, an\nincreasing number of scholars have held that the book was written in\nthe second half of the seventh century for the purpose of bringing\nabout a revolution such as actually followed its well-timed discovery;\nand this is now the opinion of almost all who admit that the common\nprinciples of historical criticism are applicable to Biblical\nliterature.\n\nDeuteronomy is not all of one piece, as has already been pointed out.\nMany older laws were taken up into it at the beginning or introduced\nsubsequently; considerable additions were made to it after Josiah's\ntime, and even after the fall of Judah, for in several passages that\ncatastrophe and the dispersion of the people are an accomplished fact,\nan existing situation. It is only the reform programme and what hangs\ntogether with it that can be definitely dated.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nAGE OF THE SOURCES, COMPOSITION OF THE PENTATEUCH\n\n\nDeuteronomy is a fixed point, by reference to which the age of other\nstrata in the Pentateuch may be determined, at least relatively. Thus\nin P the patriarchs never offer sacrifice at the ancient holy places\nof Canaan, and the notion that legitimate sacrifice can be made only\non one altar is so fundamental an article of religion that the first\nthing at Sinai is the construction of the tabernacle to be transported\nfrom one station to another in the desert. The inference is plain that\nP was written at a time when the principle of the unity of the\nsanctuary for which Deuteronomy contends with the zeal of innovation\nwas no longer disputed, at least in the author's surroundings, so that\nhe has no need to enjoin it, and can, indeed, ignore the fact that\nthere ever had been other sanctuaries of Jehovah. Such a state of\nthings never existed while the kingdom stood; it was only in the\nPersian period, when Jud\u00e6a was reduced to a circle of a few miles\nabout Jerusalem, that the conditions implied in P arose. Only in that\nage, through political circumstances, did the high priests attain the\npre-eminence to which P gives the sanction of divine right; and P\nitself not obscurely witnesses that these towering pretensions did not\ngo unchallenged (see especially Num. 16). With this all the other\nevidence concurs: the supramundane conception of God and the avoidance\nof everything that seems to bring the deity into too close contact\nwith earthly things or tempts the imagination to figure him too\nhumanly speak of the progress of theological reflection. The language\nis plainly in decadence: apart from words which seem to be new, and\noccasionally foreign, the sentence is losing its flexibility, or\nauthors are losing their mastery of it; it is only necessary to\ncompare even the best passages in P (such as Gen. 23) with examples of\nreally classical Hebrew prose (say, in 2 Sam. 11 ff. or the stories of\nElijah in Kings), on the one hand, and with the writing of the\nChronicler (third century B.C.), on the other, to see that P is nearer\nto the latter than to the former.\n\nThe age of the laws now set in the framework of the Origins is a\ndistinct question, or rather, as will be understood from what has been\nsaid above, it is a separate question for every law, and often for\nsuccessive paragraphs of the same law. And behind the question of the\nage of the law in its present formulation is frequently the remoter\nproblem of the age of the institution or custom. Various criteria are\navailable in the history of the Kingdoms, in the prophets, in other\ncollections of laws, and in Ezekiel's programme for the New Jerusalem\n(Ezek. 40 ff.). It must be enough here to say that the older laws in P\ngo back, substantially in their present shape, to the days of the\nkingdom, and in many cases represent a prescriptive usage which is of\nremote antiquity; while the latest additions to P were made at a time\nso recent that they had not found entry into the copies from which the\nearliest Greek version was made in the third century B.C.\n\nJ and E are both older than Deuteronomy. In Genesis, as has already\nbeen noted, they recite the foundation legends of Shechem, Bethel,\nHebron, Beersheba, and other of the holy places of Canaan, telling how\nthe patriarchs built the altars, set up the sacred stones, planted the\nsacred trees, dug the holy wells, and offered sacrifice to their own\nGod at these spots, by this origin legitimating as Israelite\nsanctuaries what were, at the time of the conquest and long after,\nCanaanite \"high places.\" Similarly, in Joshua, Gilgal and Shiloh are\nIsraelite foundations. These were all, in the time of the kingdoms,\nholy places of great repute, frequented by pilgrims from distant\nquarters; but there were others, of less ancient pretensions, which\nattained equal celebrity. Dan, for instance, which came into the\nhands of the Israelites in the time of the Judges, claimed a\npriesthood descended from Moses, and became proverbial for the\ntenacity with which the good old traditions of Israel were preserved\nthere.\n\nThe narratives in Judges, Samuel, and Kings show that every town and\nvillage had its own holy place, with an altar and a sacred stone, and\nsometimes a hall for feasts (e.g. 1 Sam. ix. 22), and that temporary\naltars were built whenever and wherever there was reason. This\npractice is presumed in an ancient fragment of a law, Exod. xx. 24-26,\nwhich prescribes that all offerings must be made at an altar, which\nmay be a mound of earth or a heap of field-stones (not hewn stone),\nand promises that at every place where God has given signs of his\npresence he will come to the sacrifice and bless the offerer. This\nrule, which probably originally stood in the context of J, expressly\nsanctions the local altars and sacrifices which are so abhorrent to\nthe deuteronomic reformers of the seventh century.\n\nOn the other hand, the strong interest in the origins of the holy\nplaces of Canaan indicates that when J and E were written these high\nplaces were Israelite sanctuaries, which had as such their sacred\nlegends; indeed, a considerable part of the patriarchal stories is\nultimately derived from these legends of local sanctuaries, which form\na cycle, harmonized and connected by a migration motive. That both J\nand E were written long after the settlement of the Israelites in\nPalestine is proved even more conclusively by the fact that the\nobligatory religious observances are those of an agricultural people.\nThus in Exod. 34, in what was probably according to J the organic law\nof the religion of Jehovah, and is indisputably the oldest collection\nof religious laws in the Pentateuch, three festivals are ordained, at\nwhich every male is bound \"to see the face of Jehovah,\" that is, to\nappear at the high place with his offering--he is warned not to try to\n\"see Jehovah\" without something in his hands--namely, the Feast of\nUnleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks,[2] and the Feast of Ingathering\nin the end of the year. The first of these, as we know, came at the\nbeginning of the barley harvest, at the second the firstfruits of the\nwheat harvest were presented, the third celebrated the close of the\nvintage and the olive-pressing. The firstlings of the flock and herd,\nif we may infer from the order of the prescriptions, were to be\noffered at the feast of Unleavened Bread in the Spring. The sabbath is\nto be kept as a day of abstention from agricultural labour, \"even in\nploughing-time and harvest thou shalt rest.\" The occupations of a\nnomad go on one day like another; the care of the flocks cannot be\nsuspended for sabbath-keeping.\n\n  [2] The older name, Harvest Feast, is preserved in the parallel, Exod.\n  xxiii. 16.\n\nIt is difficult to reconstruct the narratives of the exodus and the\nwanderings in the desert in J and E as they originally were. Extensive\ntranspositions seem to have been made at some stage in the\ntransmission, by which parallel relations of the same occurrence are\nseparated and appear as distinct events. There were evidently\nconsiderable differences in the traditional accounts which the\nearliest authors found current. The holy mountain is in E named Horeb,\nin J (probably) as in P, Sinai; Moses' father-in-law in the one is\nJethro, in the other Hobab. In J there are some traces of a tradition,\nperhaps the oldest of all, in which there was no mention of Sinai; the\nIsraelites made their way straight from the Red Sea to Kadesh.\n\nA comparison of J and E with the history of the times of Saul and\nDavid in Samuel, and with the stories of Elijah and Elisha in Kings,\nwould lead us to ascribe them both to the classic age of Hebrew prose\nof which those narratives are specimens. On the other hand, in J and\nthe older stratum of E there is no influence of the prophetic movement\nof the eighth century which left so deep a mark on religion and\nliterature. On these grounds J may be probably ascribed to the ninth\ncentury, and E, which is somewhat younger, to the first half of the\neighth. Both used older sources, and both were revised and enlarged\nby later hands; we have had more than one occasion to refer to an\nedition of E which reflects the teaching of the prophets, particularly\nof Hosea.\n\nThese two histories--the one, as we have seen, Jud\u00e6an, the other\nIsraelite--ran so nearly parallel and contained so much matter in\ncommon that an attempt to combine them in one continuous narrative was\nnatural. The task was accomplished with considerable skill, by a\nJud\u00e6an historian in the seventh century, who probably introduced\nvariants or supplementary matter from other sources. The author's own\nhand is most certainly recognized in the multiplied and emphasized\nwarnings against all sorts of heathenism and in a fine tone of\nreligious reflection on the history and its lessons, in which the\ninfluence of the prophets is plainly visible, but the peculiar\ntheories of the seventh century historians do not appear. Whether this\nhistory (JE) extended beyond the Book of Joshua, and if so where it\nended, are questions which must be reserved for later consideration.\n\nIt is the general opinion that the next stage in the growth of the\nHexateuch (Genesis-Joshua) was the inclusion in a new edition of JE of\nthe Book of Deuteronomy in the form and dimensions which it had\nattained in the generation after the fall of Judah; and, perhaps in\nconnection with this, the history of the conquest in Joshua as\nnarrated in JE was recast and much enlarged by an author who was full\nof the ideas and phrases of Deuteronomy.\n\nAt a considerably later time, perhaps in the fifth century B.C., or\neven in the fourth, the Origins of the Religious Institutions, a\nproduct of the Persian period, with the mass of laws that had been\nincorporated in it (see above p. 57), was united with JED, thus\nbringing together into one volume all that was preserved about the\nhistory down to the conquest of Canaan and all the various\ninstitutions and collections of laws which were attributed to Moses.\nThe author of this comprehensive work, as was most natural, took P,\nwith its sharply marked divisions and outstanding epochs, as his\nbasis, and introduced in each period the parts of JE which seemed to\nhim to belong there. Where P had a parallel narrative, as in the story\nof the Flood, he wove the strands together with more or less\ningenuity, omitting, in ordinary cases, only the most palpable\ndoublets. It is possible that the same author first incorporated in P\na large part of the so-called priestly laws; it is more certain that,\nbesides the harmonistic changes necessary in combining his sources, he\nmade numerous additions; but there is usually no way of distinguishing\nhis hand from that of earlier or of still later editors.\n\nThis hypothesis, which, for all its seeming complexity, is doubtless a\ngreat simplification of the actual literary history, is accepted by\nthe majority of Old Testament scholars--with many variations in\nparticulars, it need hardly be said. It is commended to the historian,\nnot merely by the fact that it explains the confusion and\ncontradiction which reign in the Pentateuch and offers a solution of\nits literary problems, but that, when the sources are distinguished\nand reconstructed and their age and relations determined, they become\nhistorical sources of great value for the times in which they were\nrespectively written, confirming, supplementing, or interpreting the\nevidence of the historical books and the prophets, and contributing\nimportant material of various kinds to our knowledge of civilization\nin ancient Israel and of its religious development.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII\n\nJOSHUA\n\n\nIn all the sources of the Pentateuch the possession of Canaan is the\ngoal toward which the whole history moves, from the call of Abraham to\nthe last exhortations of Moses in the plains of Moab, and they must\nall have narrated, however briefly, the occupation of the country. The\nhistory of the conquest and division of Canaan is the subject of the\nBook of Joshua. The author has evidently derived his material from\ndiverse sources, and it is reasonable to expect to find among them\nthe continuation of the chief sources of the Pentateuch. This\nexpectation is verified; it is not difficult to recognize in some\nplaces the sequel of the preceding narratives, and other passages\nwhich on internal grounds may confidently be ascribed to one or the\nother of them. But the attempt to analyze the book discovers at once\nthe fact that the problem is different from that in Genesis to\nNumbers. The author of the Pentateuch had two chief narrative sources,\na history compiled probably in the first half of the seventh century\nand in any case pre-Deuteronomic, which from its two principal strands\nis commonly designated by the symbol JE, and the history of the\nreligious institutions (P), probably of the fifth century. The author\nof Joshua had for his sources, besides the continuation of P, a\nhistory of the conquest by a writer belonging to what is not inaptly\ncalled the deuteronomist school of historians, whose thought and style\nare moulded by those of Deuteronomy. In cc. 1-12 the author of Joshua\nfollows this source almost exclusively, only here and there\nintroducing a passage from the post-exilic narrative (e.g. Jos. v.\n10-12); in cc. 13-24, on the other hand, the allotment of the tribal\nterritories and the assignment of cities in these territories to the\nlevites and the priests, are chiefly from the later work. Inasmuch as\nthe style of the deuteronomist and of the priestly writers is\ncharacteristically different, the rough analysis is here comparatively\neasy, nor is it ordinarily difficult to recognize the brief passages\nwhich are incorporated from the older sources; but, as in the\nPentateuch, the discrimination of the original contents of the\npriestly source from subsequent expansions and from the hand of the\nauthor of Joshua himself is frequently very uncertain. Here also\nadditions were made by editors at a still later time, some of which\nare not found in the Greek version.\n\nA different and much more difficult problem is presented by Jos. 1-12,\nthe problem, namely, of the sources of the deuteronomist history. The\nduplication of the narrative is very plain in the story of Jericho\n(Jos. 6). One account told how the Israelites marched around the city\nonce each day for seven days in ominous silence; on the seventh day,\nat Joshua's command, they broke out in the war-cry, and rushing upon\nthe city from every side, took it by storm, and put every living thing\nin it to the sword, sparing only Rahab the harlot and her household.\nIn the parallel narrative a religious procession, the priests bearing\nthe ark in the midst, compassed the city seven times; on the last\ncircuit the priests blew a fanfare on their ram's horns, at which the\nwalls fell flat to the ground, and the Israelites, after bringing\nRahab to a place of safety, burnt the city with fire. Editors or\nscribes who were particularly edified by the horn-blowing start it\nprematurely in vs. 8 f., 13, and have tried to improve on the story in\nother places. The second version shows the same inclination to glorify\nthe divine interventions by giving them a magical form which has been\nremarked in E's account of the deliverance at the Red Sea, while the\nsimpler story of the unexpected assault--to which there is a close\nparallel in a Roman hand-book of military stratagems--resembles in its\nnaturalness J's account of the crossing of the sea.\n\nBoth sources tell of the rescue of Rahab, and thus presuppose some\nsuch story as we find in Jos. 2, where, again, duplication is evident.\nThe interdict on the spoils of Jericho (vi. 17, J), is the antecedent\nto the story of Achan, whose appropriation of a part of the spoil is\nthe cause of the repulse at Ai (c. 7), and thus the clues can be\nfollowed backward and forward. The chief source in c. 8 (the taking of\nAi) and c. 9 (ruse of the Gibeonites) also is J, with which the\nparallel account of E is combined; additions by later hands are\nrecognizable, the most remarkable being viii. 30-35 (cf. Deut. xxvii.\n1-8, 12). In the history of the two campaigns by which the allied\nkings of the south and of the north respectively were annihilated\n(Jos. 10 and 11) both sources appear. A considerable part of these\nchapters, however, is the work of the deuteronomist author, especially\nthe summary of the conquests, cc. x. 28-43; xi. 10-23. Chapter 12,\nwhich for completeness goes over the conquests east of the Jordan\nalso, is dependent on Deut. 3; Jos. xiii. 2-6 (the territories\nremaining to be conquered) is of the same sort and probably by the\nsame hand.\n\nIt seems, therefore, that both J and E related the crossing of the\nJordan, the taking of Jericho and the operations against Ai, and,\nfurther, the wars with the confederate kings. In these narratives\nIsrael, from its standing camp at Gilgal, invades the country as one\ngreat army under the command of Joshua; the deuteronomist author\nrepresents them as exterminating the native population root and\nbranch, \"they left not a soul alive.\" There are, however, scattered\nhere and there through the text, fragments of a very different story\n(xiii. 13; xv. 13-19, 63; xvii. 11-13, 14-18; xix. 47), most of which\nare also found continuously in Judg. 1. According to this account, the\nIsraelite tribes invaded the country separately or in small groups;\ntheir success varied in different regions, but everywhere the walled\ncities remained in the possession of their old inhabitants; in some\nquarters the Israelites became subject to the Canaanites, in others\nthey in time reduced them to subjection. This account may not embody a\nhistorical tradition--it could perfectly well have arisen by inference\nfrom the actual situation at the beginning of the kingdom--but it is\nat least in a broad sense historical. The case illustrates in an\ninstructive way the fact that the oldest literary sources of the\nhistory which we can recover had themselves diverse and sometimes\ncontradictory sources in tradition.\n\nIn the Pentateuch it is well established that J and E had been\ncombined by a historian of the prophetic period (JE), though there is\nevidence that the separate works continued to circulate. In Joshua,\nalso, it is probable that the deuteronomist historian used the\ncomposite JE, and that the harmonizing of these sources and some of\nthe religious improvement which runs along with it is the work of his\npredecessor who combined the two sources. It seems that P also had E\nindependently, and it is certain that later editors of the\ndeuteronomist school added their contributions.\n\nThe allotment of the tribal territories, the designation of asylum\ncities, and the setting apart of cities for the levites and priests,\ncomes chiefly, as was said above, from a priestly source. How much of\nit was in the older history of P (Book of Origins) is doubtful. One,\nat least, of the earlier narratives told of the division of the land\nby lot, and P, who followed this representation, may have connected\nwith it some sort of domesday book; but it was probably not so\ndetailed as that which we now read.\n\nThe assignment of forty-eight cities to the priests and levites,\nincluding the most important places in the country, is an extravagance\neven for the sacerdotal imagination, comparable to Ezekiel's\npartition of the land in parallel strips. It is the counterpart of\nNum. xxxv. 1-8, in a late supplement to the priestly laws, and\ndirectly contradicts the older principle (Num. xviii. 21-24) that\nneither priests nor levites shall have any landed property. Thus in\nJoshua, as in the Pentateuch, the priestly element is neither of one\nsort nor of one age: and again the evidence of the Greek version shows\nthat additions and changes continued to be made in the text till the\nneighbourhood of 200 B.C.\n\nThere is no evidence that the author of our Book of Joshua was the\nsame as the author of the present Pentateuch; various indications\npoint rather to the contrary. Nor can the author of the deuteronomist\nhistory of the conquest be certainly identified with any one of the\nhands engaged in the compilation and enlargement of the Book of\nDeuteronomy; all that can be affirmed is that he was of the same\nspirit, and that literary dependence upon Deuteronomy, and sometimes\non younger parts of it, is visible in many places in Joshua.\n\nThe Book of Joshua closes with a farewell address by Joshua to the\ntribes of Israel assembled at Shechem, in which, after a brief r\u00e9sum\u00e9\nof God's dealing with their fathers from the calling of Abraham, the\nexodus, and their own more recent experiences down to the present, he\nexhorts them to put away the gods which their fathers served \"beyond\nthe river\" (in Mesopotamia), and worship Jehovah alone. Thereupon the\npeople solemnly pledge themselves to serve him only and hearken to his\nwords (Jos. 24). There is no question that this discourse is derived\nfrom E; a counterpart to it from the hand of the author of the\ndeuteronomist Joshua stands in c. 23, and corresponds to the address\nof Moses in Deut. xxxi. 1-8. The sequel of Jos. xxiv. 28 is found in\nJudg. ii. 6-9. The restoration at a late time, of the old fragment\nJudg. i. 1-36, and the division of the books at this point, led to the\nrepetition of the verses in Jos. xxiv. 29 ff. The importance of this\nfact is the proof it gives that E narrated the history of the\ngenerations following the death of Joshua as an apostasy from the\nreligion of Jehovah such as the dying leader had warned the people\nagainst (Jos. xxiv. 19), and thus determined the treatment of the\nwhole period which we now find in the Book of Judges. The last\ninjunctions of Joshua in the deuteronomist history (Jos. xxiii. 14-16)\nexhibit the same conception of the subsequent history; in Judg. ii.\n11-iii. 6, both E and the deuteronomist author are represented.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX\n\nJUDGES\n\n\nThe Book of Judges falls into three parts, namely, (1) Judg. i. 1-ii.\n5, which intrudes, as has already been observed, between the close of\nJoshua and its immediate sequel in Judges ii. 6 ff.; (2) Judg. ii.\n6-xvi. 31, stories of a succession of champions and deliverers of\nIsrael in the centuries preceding the establishment of the kingdom;\n(3) Judg. 17-18; 19-21, two additional stories laid in the time of the\nJudges. In the Christian Bibles the story of Ruth, which also is said\nto have occurred in the days of the Judges, follows.\n\nThe introduction, Judg. ii. 6-iii. 6, gives a summary of the whole\nperiod: as soon as Joshua and his generation had passed away, the\nIsraelites fell away from the religion of Jehovah, and worshipped the\ngods of Canaan; indignant at this defection, he allowed them to be\noverrun and subdued by their enemies; when in their distress they\nturned to their own God for help, he raised them up champions who\ndelivered them; but their amendment was brief, they presently relapsed\ninto heathenism; and so it went on from bad to worse. In\ncorrespondence with this general scheme each epoch in the history is\nopened in some such way as this: The Israelites again did what was\nevil in the sight of Jehovah; he delivered them into the power of\nsuch and such a tyrant or nation; when they cried unto him, he raised\nup so and so as a deliverer. Thereupon follows the story of the\ndeliverance (see iii. 7-11; iii. 12-15; iv. 1 ff.). Sometimes, as in\nvi. 1-10, x. 6-18, these preambles are expanded, but the purport\nremains the same.\n\nAnother feature of the book is the systematic chronology in which the\nfrequency of the numbers twenty, forty, and eighty (forty years being\nin the Old Testament equivalent to a generation) at once strikes the\nattention; see iii. 11, 30; iv. 3; v. 31; viii. 28; xiii. 1; xv. 20\n(xvi. 31). In several other instances the figures vary a little on\neither side of twenty (eighteen, twenty-two, etc.). The duration of\nthe oppression is given in the introduction of the story; the period\nof peace and prosperity which succeeded the deliverance, at the end;\nsee, e.g., iv. 3; v. 31. In the same way the life of Moses is divided\ninto three parts of forty years each; Eli judged Israel forty years;\nDavid and Solomon each reigned forty years. It can hardly be doubted\nthat this chronology is artificial, and that the key to it is found in\n1 Kings vi. 1, which reckons four hundred and eighty years (i.e.\ntwelve generations) from the exodus to the building of Solomon's\ntemple; but the actual figures in Judges and Samuel do not foot up to\nthis sum, and there are some gaps in the series, namely, the years of\nJoshua after the conquest, the rule of Samuel, and that of Saul. The\nsymmetry of the scheme has been broken by intrusions or accidental\nomissions in the later history of the book.\n\nThe author of the part of the Book of Judges we are now considering\n(ii. 6-xvi. 31) sees in the history of these centuries a series of\n\"oppressions\" by the native kings or by neighbouring peoples which the\nIsraelites brought upon themselves by neglecting their own God and\nworshipping the deities of the Canaanites, the Baals and Astartes.\nThis is making history illustrate and enforce the prophetic teaching\nof Hosea in the eighth century and Jeremiah in the seventh.\n\nAbout the oppressions the author of Judges had clearly no information\nindependent of what he extracted from the stories of the deliverances\nin his sources. In accordance with his theory of national sin and\nnational disaster he converted what are in the stories themselves\nlocal conflicts, involving particular tribes or regions, into\noppressions and deliverances of all Israel; where the story tells of\nraids by the Midianites, for example, the introduction gives them the\nAmalekites and the Eastern Bedouins for allies, and extends the\ndevastation these wrought across the whole country to the\nneighbourhood of Gaza. The exaggeration of the evils and the\nemphasizing of the moral, as in other cases, invited later editors to\namplifications in the same spirit. Of the heroes who delivered Israel\nfrom its oppressors the author made a succession of dictators\n(\"judges\"), who differed from the kings after them chiefly in that\ntheir office was not hereditary, and to most of them he gives in his\nchronology a long reign.\n\nThe setting of the history is thus unmistakably a product of the\nso-called deuteronomist school of the sixth century which we have\nalready recognized in Joshua, and shall learn more of in Kings. The\nstories themselves have, however, not been recast or extensively\nretouched by deuteronomist hands; only at the beginning and the end,\nwhere they had to be fitted into the frame, are such retouches common.\n\nThe author's source was a collection of stories of struggles in\ndifferent parts of the land, both east and west of the Jordan, with\nthe older settled populations or with invaders, and the exploits of\nthe leaders and champions of the Israelite tribes in these struggles.\nIt included Ehud's assassination of the king of Moab, the defeat of\nSisera and the Canaanite kings of the great Plain by Barak and\nDeborah, the rout and pursuit of the Midianite invaders by Gideon, and\nJephthah's victory over the Ammonites in Gilead. The history of\nAbimelech's kingdom of Shechem--sequel to the story of Gideon--which\nis not accompanied by the author's moralizing comments, and the\nstories of Samson, which have no more than a chronological\nintroduction and close, evidently belong to the same cycle of heroic\nlegends; as do also the stories of Micah's idol and the migration of\nthe Danites (cc. 17-18), and the older form of the story of the levite\nand his concubine and the sanguinary vengeance on Benjamin in cc.\n19-21. The two last-named stories were not comprised in the\ndeuteronomist Judges, whose doctrine they could not well be made to\nexemplify. On the other hand we shall see that this work included Eli\nand Samuel among the judges, and came to its natural conclusion with\nthe establishment of the kingdom, as it began with the death of\nJoshua.\n\nIn several of the stories we recognize not merely such additions and\nimprovements as are commonly made to popular tales in the retelling,\nbut evidences of the combination of two versions of the same exploit\nor accounts of other doings of the same hero. This is particularly\nplain in the story of Gideon, where in Judg. vii. 24 f. (vs. 23 is a\nharmonistic note), viii. 1-3, the business of the chiefs of Midian is\neffectually finished, while in viii. 4 ff. it is all still to be done.\nThe phenomenon is entirely similar to those which we have had repeated\noccasion to observe in the Pentateuch and Joshua and is to be\nexplained in the same way. The two versions of the story had been\nunited before the time of the author of the deuteronomist Judges, for\nin the joints of the narrative no trace of his peculiar motives or\nstyle occur.\n\nThe stories recount the exploits of local or tribal heroes, and\ndoubtless represent the traditions of the regions or tribes concerned;\nwith the union of the tribes under the kingdom, however, these\ntraditions became the common property of the nation, and more than one\nwriter made collections of them. As in the patriarchal legends, two\nstrands may be distinguished, which have such affinities with the\nJud\u00e6an and the Israelite histories in the Hexateuch respectively that\nthey are naturally regarded as the continuations of J and E. To J may\nbe probably attributed the story of Ehud (disregarding the\nintroduction and conclusion), say Judg. iii. 16-28; in the story of\nGideon, viii. 4-60 (with small exceptions), and a part of cc. 6-7;\npart of the history of Abimelech; and the adventures of Samson. A good\nspecimen of the other narrator is the beginning of the story of\nAbimelech, with the fable of Jotham, Judg. ix. 1-25.\n\nHere, again, additions have been made at various stages of the\ntransmission: to the sources independently, by the author who first\ncombined them, by the deuteronomist author, and in some places by\neditors at a much later time. These hands cannot always be certainly\ndiscriminated, but the main outlines of the literary history are clear\nenough. A peculiar problem is presented by the so-called Minor Judges,\nof whom nothing is told but the length of their rule and the sultanly\nsize of their families (Judg. x. 1-5; xii. 8-15). They seem to be\nbrought in only for the sake of the chronology, the difficulties of\nwhich they do not diminish.\n\nExcept the curt notices that, the Israelites having again offended\ntheir God, he gave them into the power of the Philistines for forty\nyears, and that Samson judged Israel for twenty years, it has already\nbeen remarked that the stories of Samson have no such introduction and\nconclusion as those which precede. The statement about the duration of\nSamson's judgeship occurs both at the end of Judg. 15, and at the end\nof c. 16, and it has been inferred from this that whoever put this\nformal close in xv. 20 left out the adventure with Delilah and\nSamson's tragic end (c. 16).\n\nThe stories of Micah and the migration of the Danites (Judg. 17-18)\nand of the levite and his concubine and the decimation of Benjamin\n(cc. 19-21) were not included in the deuteronomist book; but there is\nno reason to doubt that they are of the same age as the other stories\nin Judges, nor that they were found in one or more of the literary\ncollections of these stories. In cc. 17-18 the character of the\nnarrative in the main suggests the same source with the stories of\nSamson (J), but there are some duplications and inconsistencies which\nmay be regarded as fragments of a closely parallel account of not\ngreatly inferior age. In cc. 19-21, again, the original story seems to\nbe from J (with perhaps traces of another version in c. 19), but in\nthe following account of the vengeance taken by all Israel on the\nBenjamites, the older narrative has been united with a second, which\nin its point of view, its language, and its unimaginable\nexaggerations, is evidently akin to parts of the Books of Chronicles,\nor to the youngest additions to the Pentateuch such as the vengeance\non the Midianites (Num. 31), and doubtless belongs to the most recent\nstratum of the Old Testament.\n\nJudges i. 1-ii. 5, as has been pointed out above, is foreign to the\nconnection in which it stands, and can only have been introduced there\nby a late compiler or editor. It is a remnant of the most historical,\nand presumably the oldest, account of the establishment of the tribes\nin western Palestine. That, in completer form, it had originally a\nplace in the Jud\u00e6an history (J) is unquestioned, and in that work it\nmay have been closely followed by stories of exploits such as those of\nEhud, Barak, Gideon. Inasmuch as it contradicted the theory of the\ncomplete conquest and extermination of the Canaanites, it was left out\nof the works which described the conquest in that way, but scraps of\nit were subsequently introduced in Joshua, and finally the whole\nrestored in its present position. It is easily seen that the recurring\napostasies into Canaanite heathenism, as well as such stories as those\nof Deborah and Barak and of Abimelech, assume that the Canaanites had\nnot been killed off to the last man, but, on the contrary, were very\nmuch alive; and, in fact, the authors of Judg. ii. 20-iii. 4 feel the\nnecessity of explaining why God had allowed these heathen to survive.\n\nThe historical value of the stories in Judges is very great. However\nlarge the element of legendary embellishment may be in them, they give\nus a picture of the social and religious conditions in the period\npreceding the founding of the kingdom which has an altogether\ndifferent reality from the narratives of the exodus and the\nwanderings.\n\nThe trustworthiness of this picture is confirmed by one contemporary\nmonument of prime significance, the triumphal ode in Judg. 5, commonly\ncalled the Song of Deborah, celebrating the victory of the Israelite\ntribes over Sisera and his hosts and the death of the fleeing king by\nthe hand of a Bedouin woman in whose tent he sought refuge. The text\nin the middle of the poem has suffered greatly, but the beginning and\nend are better preserved and display not only a developed poetic art\nbut poetic inspiration of the highest kind. To the historian it has an\neven greater interest for the light which it throws on the times: the\nindependence of the tribes on both sides of the Jordan, the subjection\nof those along the Great Plain to the Canaanite kings with their\nwalled cities and their formidable chariotry, the summons to the\nstruggle in the name of religion and the varying response, the victory\nof Jehovah over his foes. It should not be overlooked that Judah is\nignored; it was not counted among the tribes of Israel.\n\nThe moralizing improvement of the history in the Book of Judges is not\ncarried beyond the story of Jephthah, but neither at that point nor\nafter the stories of Samson is there anything to indicate that the\nauthor is done. The introduction in Judg. ii. 11-iii. 6, a passage in\nwhich both the deuteronomist historian and a predecessor in the same\nway of thinking have had a hand, seems to require a correspondingly\nsolemn conclusion, and the example of Deuteronomy and Joshua suggests\nthat this would take the form of a hortatory address such as Moses and\nJoshua deliver as their testament to the people. Exactly such a\ndiscourse is found in 1 Sam. 12, where the aged Samuel, on the point\nof laying down his office as judge, reminds the people's conscience of\nthe chief crises of the times of the judges in terms reminiscent of\nthe introduction to the Book of Judges and to the several oppressions,\nupbraids them for their sin in desiring a king, and closes with\nadmonitions for the future. Here Samuel appears as a judge, the last\nin the succession; as a judge he is represented also in 1 Sam. 7,\nwhere he delivers his people from the Philistines in the great victory\nat Ebenezer through the efficacy of his sacrifice and prayers--a\nGideon or a Jephthah went about the business in a more secular\nfashion! Eli also is said to have judged Israel forty years. At some\nstage in the history of the sources of Judges and Samuel, therefore,\nEli and Samuel were enumerated among the judges, and the close of the\nperiod was marked by the address of Samuel which we now read in 1 Sam.\n12. The contents and form of this address have their parallels in the\nwritings of the sixth century or the latter part of the seventh, and\nto that time it is doubtless to be ascribed.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X\n\nSAMUEL\n\n\nA different division is adopted in the present books of Judges and\nSamuel, in which the stories of Eli and of Samuel are not made the\nclose of the period of the judges but the prelude to the history of\nthe kingdom. The Greek Bible divides this history into four books of\nthe Kingdoms, or rather of the Reigns of the Kings; the Hebrew, into\ntwo, Samuel and Kings; the modern translations employ the latter names\nbut adopt the subdivisions of the Greek, thus making two books of\nSamuel and two of Kings. First Samuel shows how the conquest and\noccupation of central Palestine by the Philistines led to the\nestablishment of a national kingdom under Saul, a Benjamite; narrates\nthe rise of his rival, the Jud\u00e6an David, and the feud between them,\ndown to the disastrous battle with the Philistines at Mt. Gilboa in\nwhich Saul and his gallant sons fell. Second Samuel is the history of\nDavid's reign and the tragedy of his house, the conclusion of which,\nthe intrigue which raised Solomon to the throne and the death of the\naged king, is treated as the prelude to Solomon's reign and carried\nover into 1 Kings; one recension of the Greek Bible, however, joins\nthese chapters (1 Kings 1-2) to the preceding book. The two Books of\nKings recount the reign of Solomon; the division of the kingdom after\nhis death into two, on the old line, Israel and Judah; the parallel\nhistory of the two kingdoms to the end of Israel in 721 B.C.; and the\nrest of the history of Judah to its fall in 586.\n\nIn the account of how Saul became king there are two contradictory\nrepresentations. One of these, which agrees with 1 Sam. 12 in treating\nthe desire of the people for a king as the wanton repudiation of\nJehovah their king and of Samuel their divinely appointed judge, is\ncontained in cc. 8; x. 17-27; 12. The other, according to which God,\nseeing the distress the people were in because of the Philistines, of\nhis own motion resolves to give them a king to deliver them from their\noppressors, is in 1 Sam. ix. 1-x. 16; 11. In c. 9 Samuel appears as a\nseer with a neighbourhood reputation of being able to tell where\npeople's stray asses have gone, not as the prophet and judge, the\nfirst man of his time.\n\nThese strands can be followed in both directions beyond the chapters\nnamed: 1 Sam. xiii. 1-xiv. 66 belongs to the second, which we may call\nthe national version of the matter; c. 15 attaches itself to the\nother, say theocratic, representation, though it is of a somewhat\ndifferent texture. On the other side, vii. 3-17 plainly goes with c.\n8; while iv. 1^b-vii. 2 are akin to the national version, showing how\ngrievous the situation was and how urgent the need of a king. Chapters\n1-3 have a twofold motive; they tell of the wonderful childhood of a\ngreat man, and they explain the disasters of Eli's house. The latter\nhas reference to cc. 4-6; the former, a favourite theme of popular\ntales, is an appropriate introduction to Samuel the prophet.\n\nOf the two accounts of the origin of the kingdom, it takes no great\ncritical discernment to see that what we have called the national\nversion is the older and more historical; the other, which condemns\nthe monarchy as a kind of apostasy, takes the standpoint of Hosea. The\npicture of the monarch in 1 Sam. 12 is drawn from sorry experience.\n\nEven in the older narrative not all is of one piece. Chapter 9, in\nwhich Saul is a young man in his father's house, does not tally with\nc. 14, where he has a grown-up son. The author of this narrative made\nit up from traditions of diverse origin, some of them more strictly\nhistorical, others embellished with legendary traits. In its main\nfeatures, however, it gives us a trustworthy account of the\nestablishment of the kingdom. In c. 13, the breach with Samuel, vs.\n7^b-15^a (with x. 8 which prepares for it), are not part of the\noriginal narrative; c. 15 gives another account of the origin of this\nbreach, which was evidently a standing feature of tradition. In the\nremaining chapters of 1 Samuel the central interest is the relations\nof David to Saul. Here also there are not only two main literary\nsources but evidence of variant traditions underlying the oldest\nnarrative, and of the additions by later editors, sometimes of their\nconception, sometimes taken from old and good sources.\n\nIt is impossible here to pursue the analysis of the sources further.\nIt must suffice to say that the further on we go, the more the older\nand better of the histories predominates. In 2 Samuel almost the whole\nis from this source (c. 7 is a notable exception, in the spirit and\nmanner of the seventh century). Abridgment and transposition have\nbrought matters into disorder at some points; but 2 Sam. 9-20 is a\nwell-preserved piece of continuous narrative, of which 1 Kings 1-2 is\nthe sequel. 2 Sam. xxi. 1-14 and c. 24 are from the same source, but\nmust originally have stood at an earlier point in the history; their\npresent position is best explained by supposing that they were once\nomitted--which their contents make very natural--and subsequently\nrestored from a completer copy, not in their proper connection but in\nan appendix. Chapter xxiii. 8-39 is a very ancient roster of David's\n\"valiant men,\" the companions of his days as an outlawed freebooter on\nthe Philistine border; xxi. 15-22 is of the same character. Two poems\nattributed to David are also included in this appendix, c. 22, which,\nwith many variants, is found also in the Psalter (Ps. 18), and xxiii.\n1-7.\n\nThe history of Saul and David gave little invitation to a moralizing\nimprovement such as we have found in Judges and shall find again in\nKings. Whatever faults those heroes had, a propensity to the worship\nof heathen gods could not be laid to them. The national uprising\nagainst the Philistines was, in fact, a revival of religion. If in\ntimes of peace men sought the blessing of the gods of the soil (the\nBaals) upon their tillage, in war their only reliance was on Jehovah,\nthe god of Israel. Nor was the worship of Jehovah at the village\nsanctuaries (high places) or upon altars erected for the nonce,\nillegitimate, even in deuteronomic theory, till God had taken up his\nsole abode in Solomon's temple. Accordingly there is, after 1 Sam. 12,\nonce the close of a history of the judges, small trace of the motives\nor phrases of the seventh-century school of historians; and only in a\nfew passages can the hand of post-exilic editors be suspected. For the\nrest we have in our hands a product of the oldest Hebrew\nhistoriography.\n\nFrom a literary point of view the older source in the history of David\nis unsurpassed. It has in perfection all the qualities that\ndistinguish the best Hebrew prose such as are conspicuous in the\nJud\u00e6an author of the patriarchal stories in Genesis. In the art of\nnarrative Herodotus himself could do no better.\n\nIts historical value is also very high. The account of David's later\nyears in 2 Sam. 9-20; 2 Kings 1-2 bears all the marks of contemporary\norigin. It comes from one who not only knew the large political events\nof the reign, but was intimately informed about the life of the court,\nand the scandals, crimes, and intrigues in the king's household which\nclouded the end of his glorious career. These things are narrated with\nan objectivity and impartiality which cannot fail to impress the\nreader. The author has a high admiration for David, but this does not\nlead him to gloze over his faults or even his grave sins, nor to\ndisguise the weakness of his rule in his own house which was the cause\nof so much unhappiness. His development of this domestic tragedy is,\nindeed, truly dramatic, and the discrimination of the characters--say\nof Absalom and Adonijah--shows fine insight. He tells without comment\nhow only the distrust of some of the Philistine chiefs kept David, as\na vassal of Achish of Gath, from fighting upon the Philistine side\nagainst Saul in the fatal battle of Mt. Gilboa. So, too, he is loyally\nminded to Solomon, but he does not conceal the strings of the\nharem-intrigue by which the doting old King David was brought to\ndeclare for his succession, or to pass over the ominous beginning of\nSolomon's \"new course,\" with the execution of Adonijah, the deposition\nof the priest Abiathar, and the murder, at altar where he had sought\nasylum, of Joab, to whom more than any other the house of Jesse owed\nthe throne. The official pretexts are duly recorded, but the facts\nspeak for themselves. In 1 Kings ii. 5 f. the death of Joab is\nenjoined in David's testament; opinions differ whether these verses\nare from the same source with ii. 12 ff., or are by the late\nseventh-century writer to whom vs. 1-4 are ascribed by all. Without\nidealizing David, we may at least allow ourselves the conjecture that,\nif his last words decided the death of his old companion in arms and\nmost loyal servant, Nathan or Bathsheba was at his dying ear.\n\nThe crisis in the history of the Israelite tribes which the Philistine\ninvasion created; the long struggle with these foes, very different\nfrom their conflicts with their petty neighbours; the emergence in\nthis struggle of a national consciousness at once political and\nreligious; the union of the tribes in a national kingdom; the conquest\nof independence; the following wars of expansion and the foundation\nof a short-lived Israelite empire--these were achievements to stir the\nsoul of a people and be celebrated in song and story. The leaders too,\nin these memorable doings were such heroes as ancient history loves to\nhave in the middle of its stage--Saul with his chivalric son Jonathan;\nDavid with Joab, Abner, and the rest of his gallant band.\n\nThe making of great history has often given a first impulse to the\nwriting of history, and we may well believe that it was so in Israel,\nand that the beginning of Hebrew historical literature, in the proper\nsense of the word, was made with Saul and David. Around such figures\nthe popular imagination always weaves a more or less translucent\ntissue of legend, and particularly about their youth before they come\nout on the stage of history, or the manner of their first appearance.\n\nThe historians gathered up tribal tales such as the exploits of the\njudges (that is, in the original sense, deliverers, or defenders), the\nsacred legends of holy places, the traditions of a wonderful escape\nfrom the Egyptians, a visit to the Mount of God and an agreement to\nworship the god of the place as their god, of another sanctuary in the\ndesert at Kadesh, conflicts with the Bedouins, and attempts to force\nan entry into Canaan--in short, all the diverse material which is\npreserved in the older narratives in Exodus and Numbers--and combined\nthem as best they could into a continuous history of the people of\nIsrael.\n\nThe continuity is, however, only a narrative continuity; historically\nthere are great gaps in it, or, more exactly, the traditions cluster\nabout only a few points, such as the exodus and the invasion of\nPalestine, and these are embellished with a wealth of legendary and\nmythical circumstance beneath which the facts are effectually hidden.\nThe nature of this material may be judged from the fact that between\nJoshua and Eli there are only the episodes of the judges, strung on a\nchronological string, generalized as experiences of all Israel, and\nput under a theological judgment--invaluable as pictures of\ncivilization, but as a history of a couple of centuries (the\nchronology says four) evidently insufficient. On the other side of the\nexodus are, according to the genealogies, three or four generations\n(the chronology again makes it four hundred years) of total ignorance;\nbeyond that lies the patriarchal story, the realm of pure legend.\n\nOut of such materials Jud\u00e6an authors in the tenth and following\ncenturies constructed the history of their people from the remotest\nantiquity, and, as commonly happens with the first precipitation of\nnational traditions, preformed all subsequent representations.\n\nThis earliest book of history is commonly designated in the Pentateuch\nand Joshua by the symbol J. It is disputed whether the oldest history\nof the founding of the kingdom in Samuel should be regarded as a\ncontinuation of J. If it were meant thereby to affirm unity of\nauthorship of this strand from Genesis to Samuel, that would be saying\nmuch more than the facts warrant; but there is through the whole so\nnoteworthy a congruity of conception and sameness of excellence in\nstyle that it is not inappropriate to use for it the one symbol J in\nthe sense of the oldest Jud\u00e6an history.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI\n\nKINGS\n\n\nDavid took Jerusalem, which till then had been a Jebusite stronghold,\nand made it the capital of his kingdom; but he reigned, after as\nbefore, in patriarchal fashion, making, so far as appears, few changes\nin the old institutions. Solomon reorganized the monarchy after the\ncommon pattern of Oriental despotisms, dividing the country into\nprovinces for purposes of taxation, without regard to the autonomy of\nthe tribes and their liberties. He built a great palace in the\ncitadel, and, within the same enclosure, a temple, which, as the royal\nsanctuary, was also in a sense national. Like other Eastern rulers, he\ncaused his doings to be recorded in the annals of the kingdom, and\ndoubtless the priests of the temple kept their own chronicles. From\nthis time, therefore, sources of a new kind make their appearance in\nthe history, contemporary records drawn from the royal and priestly\nannals. The extracts from these sources in the Book of Kings, like\nthose of the Assyrian kings, or the Phoenician annals of which\nfragments (through Menander) are preserved by Josephus, were brief and\nbald records of doings or happenings, not biographical or historical\nnarratives. But brief and bald as they were they furnished a\ngroundwork of fact; and, since they set down at the accession of each\nking the length of his predecessor's reign, they gave also the data\nfor a continuous chronology.\n\nIt is not to be supposed that the historical literature whose\nbrilliant beginnings we have seen ceased in the first century of the\nkingdom or that the writers occupied themselves solely with the\nremoter past. The memorable deeds of great men will not have gone\nuncelebrated. The narrative, however, which is the chief source for\nthe times of Saul and David, breaks off abruptly in 1 Kings 2. The\nBooks of Kings are of a wholly different fabric. For one thing, while\nthe two Books of Samuel cover little more than the span of one long\nlifetime, Kings, in about the same space, comprises the history of\nclose on to four centuries. But there is a still greater difference,\nas we shall see, in the way in which history is treated.\n\nThe grand divisions of the Books of Kings are these: 1 Kings ii.\n12-xi. 43 is occupied with the reign of Solomon; the division of the\nkingdom after his death is narrated in xii. 1-24; the parallel history\nof the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah to the fall of Samaria in 721\nB.C. runs to 2 Kings xviii. 12; the history of Judah from that date to\nits own fall in 586 fills the rest of the book.\n\nThe age of the book is easily determined: it tells of the two sieges\nof Jerusalem by the Babylonians (597 and 586 B.C.); the destruction of\nthe temple and palace and the razing of the city walls, the\nassassination of Gedaliah, whom Nebuchadnezzar had made governor over\nthe devastated land; and the flight of the Jews from the king's\nvengeance to Egypt. The last event mentioned is the liberation of King\nJehoiachin by Evil-Merodach (Amil-Marduk) in 561 B.C. It is of course\npossible that this detached notice (2 Kings xxv. 27-30) was added by a\nlater hand; but there is no reason to include the story of Gedaliah in\nthis suspicion. The book in its present form cannot, therefore, be\nearlier than, say, about 580 B.C. In some places in the body of the\nbook, also, the fall of Judah is spoken of as an accomplished fact,\ne.g. 2 Kings xvii. 19 f. (in conflict with vss. 18 and 21 ff.). Such\npassages are, however, not very numerous, and they commonly sit loose\nin their context, like the verses just cited, as if they were thrust\ninto the narrative by an editor. The bulk of the work, on the\ncontrary, seems to suppose the existence of the kingdom. It is,\ntherefore, the general opinion that the book was written before the\nfall of Jerusalem, and that a continuator added the account of the\ncatastrophe and the events immediately subsequent to it.\n\nThe older Kings, from beginning to end, is dominated by the conception\nand permeated by the phraseology of Deuteronomy and of the prophet\nJeremiah, and must therefore be placed between 621 B.C. (the date of\nthe introduction of the deuteronomic law) and the beginning of the\nlast act of the history, that is to say, probably shortly before the\nyear 600 B.C.\n\nIt is not enough to say that Kings was written under the influence of\nDeuteronomy; it was written, we might rather say, as a commentary on\nthe deuteronomic doctrine that falling away from the national religion\nis punished by national disaster. In this point of view it resembles\nJudges; but while in Judges it is the lapse into Canaanite heathenism,\nthe worship of the Baals and Astartes, which draws upon Israel\ninvasion and subjugation, in Kings not only foreign religions but the\nworship at the high places, that is, the worship of Jehovah at his\noldest and holiest sanctuaries, provokes the wrath of God; for since\nthe dedication of Solomon's temple Jehovah had made it his exclusive\nabode and all other places of worship were illegitimate. We have seen\nthat down to Josiah's reform this worship prevailed unchallenged in\nboth kingdoms. In the author's view, generation after generation,\nunder bad kings and good, had thus sinned against the organic law of\nreligion, and all judgments had failed to work amendment. In Israel\nidolatry made the case worse; the \"golden calves,\" that is, the small\nimages of Jehovah in the form of a bull, which Jeroboam had set up at\nBethel and Dan, were worshipped under all his successors. These sins\nhad in the end brought ruin on Israel, and they were bringing it on\nJudah. Manasseh had done even worse than Jeroboam; strange gods from\nnear and far were installed in the temple itself, and under its walls\nmen sacrificed their children to \"the King\" (Moloch). Josiah's reforms\nhad no lasting results; the reaction under his successors restored the\nhigh places, and heathen cults flourished again. The doom was\nimminent; would Judah learn the lesson of history before it was too\nlate? Some one has said that history is philosophy teaching by\nexample; for the author of Kings history was prophecy teaching by\nexample.\n\nIt was the lesson of the history that the author was after, and this\nruling motive determined his selection of material as well as the\ntreatment of it. It explains why he hardly tells anything about some\nof the greatest kings and the most glorious periods of the history,\nwhich did not afford illustrations of his thesis, while he dwells on\nthings of much less historical importance.\n\nThe characteristic interests of the author and his highly\ncharacteristic style sharply distinguish his own writing from the\nsources which he incorporates. These sources, as will be supposed,\nwere of different kinds and of various worth; they were naturally not\nthe same in all parts of the long period he covers, and he has not\nalways dealt with them in the same way. Part of his material comes,\ndirectly or indirectly, from the annals of the kings, to which the\nreader is regularly referred for further information (see e.g., 1\nKings xiv. 19, 29), or from temple records; part of it from more\nproperly literary sources. Sometimes it has all the marks of\ntrustworthy tradition originating close to the event; again, it is\nembroidered with legendary traits; a smaller part is edifying fiction.\nIn some cases, as in the stories of Elijah and Elisha, a special\nsource is recognizable, but in the main the attempt to trace the\nliterary channels through which the matter reached the author is\nfruitless.\n\nIn the history of Solomon's reign the central place is taken by a\ndescription of the palace and temple he erected (1 Kings 6-7), for\nwhich c. 5 is a preparation, and c. 8, the dedication of the temple,\nthe sequel. The interesting account of the provincial organization and\nsystem of taxation in c. 4 is evidently from an authoritative source;\nthe cession of cities in Galilee to Hiram, the list of cities\nfortified, the (mutilated) account of the revolt of Edom, the rise of\nthe kingdom of Damascus, and the (mutilated) history of the revolt of\nJeroboam, the prelude to the separation of Israel and Judah, are also\nof good authority.\n\nBy the side of these are stories celebrating the magnificence and\nwisdom of Solomon, the beginnings of the exuberant Solomonic legend.\nThe judgment of Solomon in the case of the two harlots and of the\nvisit of the Queen of Sheba are examples of the popular tale, and\nrelatively old. The dedication of the temple has been much expanded by\nthe author of the Book of Kings; 1 Kings viii. 14-66 are wholly his\ncomposition; ix. 1-9 is an appendix to c. 8. In viii. 1-12 an older\naccount of the dedication has been improved by various hands.\nComparison with the Greek translation shows that this process went on\nto very late times; the latest additions are akin to the priestly\nstratum in the Pentateuch. Chapter xi. 1-13 also is by the author of\nthe Book of Kings, built about a few words from his source in vs. 7;\nvss. 29-40 are of the same sort.\n\n1 Kings 12-2 Kings 17 contains the parallel history of Israel and\nJudah. The method of the author is to follow the reign of a king, say\nof Israel, to its end and then go back to take up the king of Judah\nwho came to the throne during this reign, follow him to his death, and\nreturn to pick up the Israelite history again in the same way. The\nresult is, thus, interlocking histories, rather than a parallel\nhistory. The length of each reign is given, probably ultimately from\nthe annals, with a computed synchronism which is at some points\ndemonstrably in error. With the introduction of each king a\ncomprehensive judgment by the standard of the deuteronomic law is\npronounced upon his reign. Thus, \"In the eighteenth year of the king\nJeroboam the son of Nebat [king of Israel], began Abijah to reign over\nJudah. Three years reigned he in Jerusalem, and his mother's name was\nMaacah the daughter of Abishalom. And he walked in all the sins of his\nfather which he had done before him,\" etc. \"In the third year of Asa\nking of Judah began Baasha the son of Abijah to reign over all Israel\nin Tirzah, and he reigned twenty and four years. And he did that which\nwas evil in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the way of Jeroboam,\nand in his sin wherewith he made Israel to sin.\" These judgments are\nso stereotyped that they are pronounced even on kings who reigned but\na short time--Zimri, for instance, who lasted only seven days. In the\ncase of godly kings of Judah, even of such as are credited with\ncommendable zeal against the worships that Deuteronomy denounces as\nCanaanitish heathenism, the reproach of leaving the worship of Jehovah\nat the \"high places\" unmolested is not spared them; see, e.g., 1 Kings\nxv. 1-14; xxii. 43.\n\nThe conflict between the tribes to whom the name Israel by historical\nright belonged, headed by Ephraim, intent on reclaiming the ancient\nliberties which Solomon had curtailed and securing adequate guarantees\nfor them, and Rehoboam, obstinate to maintain the despotism which his\nfather had established and the supremacy of Judah, ended in the\nIsraelite tribes refusing to acknowledge the succession and setting up\na kingdom of their own with Jeroboam the son Nebat as king. These\ncritical events are narrated in the source, 1 Kings xii. 1-20, with\nnoteworthy impartiality; a comparison with the treatment of the matter\nby the author of the Book of Kings himself in xi. 29-39; xii. 21-24,\nis instructive. The account of Jeroboam's religious foundations and\ninnovations in c. xii. 26-33 (with which xiii. 33^b belongs) is\nprobably based on an old Israelite source (the temples Jeroboam built,\netc.), on which the author of the book has put his own construction\nand made his own comments. 1 Kings 13 is a specimen of the edifying\nstories--religious fiction--which were added to the historical books\nat a very late time and are especially numerous in Chronicles; the\nreference to it in 2 Kings xxiii. 17 f. is an interpolation in a\ncontext itself post-exilic. The story of the visit of Jeroboam's wife\nto the prophet Ahijah (1 Kings xiv. 1-18) is in the manner of the\nauthor, but seems to have an older basis. The fluid state of the text\nat a very late time is again shown by the fact that in some recensions\nof the Greek version the story is not found in this place, but,\ntogether with other matter about Jeroboam (in part variant parallel to\n1 Kings xi. 26 ff., 40), in a long passage which stands in c. 12\nbetween vss. 24 and 25.\n\nThe invasion of Shishak, king of Egypt (1 Kings xiv. 25-28), is\nintroduced by the author with a catalogue of the deuteronomic\ntransgressions which provoked God to punish the kingdom in this way;\nthe similarity to the introduction to the oppressions in Judges is\napparent. So in the following chapters: the author's facts probably\ncome from annalistic sources which can in places be recognized, but\nthe religious interpretation of the events, which he sometimes gives\nin his own quality as historian, sometimes puts into the mouth of a\nprophet (e.g. xvi. 1-7, cf. xiv. 1-18), is from the point of view of\nthe deuteronomist school.\n\nAnother characteristic of the author's method is illustrated by his\ntreatment of the reign of Omri (1 Kings xvi. 23-28). Omri was the\nfounder of the greatest dynasty of the northern kingdom, and was one\nof its greatest kings. From an inscription of the Moabite king Mesha,\nwe learn that Omri subjugated the lands east of the Jordan (see also 2\nKings i. 1; iii. 4 ff.), and it is probable that his conquests were\npushed to the north-east into Syria; the Assyrian kings long after his\ndeath call Israel the \"house of Omri.\" But the long and brilliantly\nsuccessful reign of a king who in religion followed in the footsteps\nof the kings of Israel before him, \"golden calves\" and all, obviously\ncould not be made to exemplify the doctrine that such sins are\nregularly visited by condign judgment in national disaster.\nConsequently, all that our author records of Omri, beyond the\nrevolutions which paved for him the way to the throne (1 Kings xvi.\n16-18), is contained in one verse, 1 Kings xvi. 24--he built a capital\non a new site, Samaria!\n\nIn the following reign, however, Israel had troubles enough; the\nconquests east of the Jordan were lost, and the long chapter of Syrian\nwars began. This was material more to the author's purpose, and he\nmakes good use of it. Here also, in addition to the annals and\nwhatever other sources were at his hand for the preceding period, he\nhad a new and peculiarly grateful source in the stories of Elijah and\nElisha. To the fact that these prophets were outstanding figures in\nsome of the crises of the Syrian wars we owe it that so much of the\nhistory of that struggle is preserved; for what the author has\nextracted from the annals is as meagre as elsewhere.\n\nFrom such \"lives and times\" of the prophets is derived much the\ngreater part of 1 Kings 17-2 Kings 10, with 2 Kings xiii. 14-21. The\nstories of Elijah (1 Kings 17-19; 21; 2 Kings 1; ii. 1-18) are among\nthe most striking in the Old Testament; the supernatural in them seems\nthe natural setting for a figure of such heroic mould, and is a\nstronger testimony than any record of fact could be to the impression\nof the superman on the imagination of ordinary mortals. Through the\nvesture of legend, we too have the impression of a something titanic\nin the man who dared solitary to stand for his God against kings,\npriests, prophets, and people, and, worse than all, the vengeful fury\nof a woman! We can see, also, that his conflict against the prophets\nof Baal makes an era in the history of religion in Israel. \"If Jehovah\nbe God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him,\" he thunders at the\npeople on Mt. Carmel. It was not the first assertion of the jealousy\nof Jehovah and the exclusiveness of the true religion; but the issue\nhad never before been so dramatically joined. The intolerant\nmonotheism of Judaism had found its war cry.\n\n1 Kings 17-19, Elijah at Sarepta, on Carmel, and at Horeb, belong\ntogether; the beginning, which must in some way have brought Elijah\nupon the stage, is not preserved; 1 Kings 21 (Naboth's vineyard) may\nvery well be from the same source; in the end of the chapter (vs.\n20^b-26) the author of the Book of Kings has the word, and in the\nother chapters there are slight traces of the same hand. With these\nsmall exceptions the stories are old, and probably received their\npresent literary form in the ninth century, certainly before the\nprophetic movement of the eighth. 2 Kings i. 2-17 is a legend of a\ndifferent kind and presumably considerably younger. 2 Kings ii. 1-18,\non the other hand, is akin to the older stories in 1 Kings 17-19, 21;\nit forms the connecting link with Elisha.\n\nAmong the stories of Elijah stand other episodes of the Syrian wars in\nwhich prophets figure, 1 Kings 20; xxii. 1-38. The second of these,\nMicaiah ben Imlah before Ahab and Jehoshaphat, is of peculiar\ninterest. They are apparently of the same age with their surroundings.\nIn both a few verses are from later editors. To the same cycle\nprobably belong 2 Kings iii. 4-27, the campaign against Moab, as well\nas 2 Kings ix. 1-x. 27, Jehu's revolt instigated by Elisha, the murder\nof King Ahaziah and of the queen mother, Jezebel, the massacre of the\nprinces of the house of Omri and the extirpation of the worship of\nBaal.\n\nBeside these are a group of stories about Elisha, chiefly celebrating\nhim as a wonder-worker, and bringing him into connection with the\n\"sons of the prophets,\" who seem to have formed a kind of dervish\norder. The collector or editor has accumulated them all in one reign,\nprobably against their original intention. Scattered through the\nnarratives drawn from the lives of the prophets are brief notices from\nthe annals and the usual deuteronomist appraisals by the author of\nKings.\n\nThe attempt of Jehu to exterminate the dynasty of Omri, involving the\nslaughter of the Jud\u00e6an princes, had the unintended result of enabling\nthe queen mother, Athaliah, a daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, to seize\nthe throne. The revolution, planned by the chief priest of Jerusalem,\nwhich overthrew the usurper and brought the true heir, the\nseven-year-old Joash, to his own, is told in 2 Kings xi. 1-20; a\nsomewhat minute account of the restoration of the temple in his reign\nfollows in c. xii. 4-16, both from a good Jud\u00e6an source, perhaps\nultimately a temple chronicle. The author of Kings has his usual\nformulas, including the tolerated high places, in c. xii. 1-3. The\nextract from the annals at the end of the chapter, the straits into\nwhich Hazael of Syria brought Joash, and his death by a treasonable\nconspiracy, which might be thought to prove that piety is not always\ncrowned with prosperity, is anticipated by the author of Kings in 2\nKings xii. 3--Joash's piety lasted only as long as he was in the\nleading strings of the priest Jehoiada.\n\nIn the following reigns the material derived from narrative sources is\nmore scanty; a noteworthy passage of this kind is the account,\nevidently from an Israelite writer, of the chastisement Jehoash of\nIsrael inflicted on the presumptuous Amaziah of Judah (2 Kings xiv.\n8-14). The contemporary reigns of Jeroboam II of Israel and Azariah,\nor Uzziah, of Judah, lasting half a century, a period of great\nprosperity in both kingdoms, are dispatched with extreme brevity, and\nare followed by the swiftly successive conspiracies and revolutions in\nwhich the northern kingdom declined to its fall. The story of treason\nand bloodshed is suspended to tell of the reign of Ahaz in Judah (2\nKings 16) from a source chiefly interested in the temple, and then the\nlast act of Israel's tragedy opens. To the brief account of the fall\nof Samaria in 2 Kings xvii. 1-6, is appended the moral of the whole\nhistory, VSS. 7-41. This homiletic improvement of the catastrophe was\nan inviting task, and besides the author of Kings, the exilian\ncontinuator and perhaps still later editors contributed to draw it out\nand emphasize it.\n\nFrom this point the historian has only Judah to deal with. The reign\nof Hezekiah is narrated at some length in 2 Kings 18-20. A\nconsiderable part of these chapters (xviii. 13-XX. 19) is found also\nin the Book of Isaiah (Isa. 36-39), with variations which are of much\ninterest for the history of the text. The psalm, Isa. xxxviii. 9-20,\nfor instance, is not found in Kings; 2 Kings xviii. 14-16 is not in\nIsaiah, and minor differences occur in almost every verse. The\nintroduction to the reign of Hezekiah by the author of Kings is\nsomewhat longer than usual, and attributes to him not only the\ndestruction of the serpent idol in the temple which Moses was\nbelieved to have made (cf. Num. xxi. 8 f.), and of other apparatus of\nheathenism, but the removal of the high places, making him thus\nanticipate the reforms of Josiah a century later (2 Kings xviii. 4).\nThis probably exaggerates Hezekiah's good works, but for the bronze\nserpent to which sacrificial worship had been paid from time\nimmemorial, as well as for vs. 7 f. (Hezekiah's rebellion), which is\nthe antecedent of vs. 13 ff., he may have had the authority of the\nannals.\n\nFrom the annals probably come also 2 Kings xviii. 13-16, with their\nbrief record of the penalty Hezekiah paid for his revolt. Of this we\nhave also Sennacherib's account in his inscriptions, where he tells\nhow he took the cities of Judah and shut up Hezekiah in Jerusalem\n\"like a bird in a cage,\" and gives the figures of the heavy indemnity\nhe imposed upon him. There follow two longer accounts of Sennacherib's\noperations, 2 Kings xviii. 17-xix. 8 and xix. 9-37, which are commonly\nregarded as parallel and somewhat discrepant relations of the same\ncampaign, but by some are thought to refer to two different occasions,\nat an interval of ten years or more. 2 Kings xx. 1-11 (cf. Isa. 38) is\nperhaps from a life of Isaiah, who is the chief figure in it; vs.\n12-19 (Isa. 39), the embassy of the chronic Babylonia rebel, Merodach\nBaladan, presumably to undermine Hezekiah's shaky loyalty to his\nAssyrian lord, seems to belong at an earlier point in the story; in it\nalso Isaiah is the central person. In the closing paragraph the\nauthor of Kings has preserved an interesting annalistic notice of an\naqueduct and reservoir which Hezekiah constructed, not improbably the\nSiloam tunnel and the reservoir it feeds.\n\nOf the fifty-five years' reign of Manasseh, and the two years of his\nson Amon, a half-century of peace and prosperity in which the country\nrecuperated from the disasters Hezekiah had brought upon it, nothing\nis told. Instead we have a long catalogue of Manasseh's religious\nobliquities, which includes all the crimes most abhorrent to the\nseventh-century prophets and laws, and the proclamation of God \"by his\nservants the prophets\" that these sins sealed the doom of Judah. This\nprediction is made from the standpoint of the accomplished fact, and\nindeed most of the chapter seems to be by the exilian continuator of\nKings or a still later writer.\n\nWith the reforms of Josiah (621 B.C.; 2 Kings 22-23) we arrive at\nevents which, if not within the personal knowledge of the author of\nKings, were known to his older contemporaries. This does not, of\ncourse, exclude the use of written records or narratives, and, in\nfact, there seem to be traces of such in the chapters. More certain it\nis that the continuator of the book made some changes in the account;\nthe oracle of Huldah, for example, seems to have been revised in the\nlight of the event.\n\nTo this continuator, as has already been said, the history of the two\nsieges of Jerusalem, the deportations, and the misfortunes of those\nwho were left in the land are to be attributed. In several places in\nearlier parts of the history we have had occasion to observe that\nadditions and changes continue to be made by the editors or\nscribes--and every scribe who copied a book in those days wielded an\neditor's pen when he chose--until a time close to the age of the Greek\ntranslation, that is, the third century B.C.\n\nThe age in which the Pentateuch and the several Historical Books\n(Joshua-Kings), the product of the long and obscure process which we\nhave attempted to outline in the preceding chapters, were adjusted and\nconnected so as to make a continuous history from the creation to the\nfall of the Jud\u00e6an state, can be fixed only by the fact that the\nauthor of Chronicles (about 300 B.C. or somewhat later; see below)\nseems to have read these books in the order and, so far as his use of\nthem permits a judgment, substantially with the contents of our\npresent Old Testament. This arrangement, or edition, if we choose to\ncall it so, as has been shown, did not put an end to additions and\nalterations, though they gradually became less frequent and less\nimportant in the following centuries. A standard and stable Hebrew\ntext was established only in the second century after the Christian\nera.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII\n\nCHRONICLES\n\n\nBy the side of this comprehensive history stands another which is in\npart parallel, in part supplementary, to it, Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah.\nIt differs from the former in being the work of one author, whose\ncharacteristic conceptions, interests, and manner make it easy to\ndistinguish his writing from the sources he incorporates. His\npeculiarities are the better known because there is so much of his own\nin the books--not far from half the matter contained in them.\n\nThe succession of the high priests is brought down to Jaddua, who was\ncontemporary with Alexander the Great, and lists of heads of priestly\nand levitical families are given in Neh. 12 for the reign of Darius\n(Codomannus), the last Persian king. The book can, therefore, not be\nput much, if any, before 300 B.C., and more probably it was written in\nthe following century.\n\nThe history begins with the death of Saul and the election of David as\nking by all Israel at Hebron (1 Chron. 10-11). The preceding chapters\nare filled with genealogies, beginning with Adam. Twenty-six verses\nbring us to Abraham, and the second chapter opens with the sons of\nIsrael, while the third is a list of the sons of David and of his\nsuccessors on the throne to the fall of the kingdom, with the\ndescendants of the last king through several generations. These\ngenealogies, to which historical notices of different kinds are\nfrequently attached, are in part compiled from various places in the\nPentateuch and Historical Books, in part more freely reproduced from\nsuch passages; but a large remainder has no parallel in the older\nwork. The author, here as elsewhere, evidently attaches great\nimportance to these lists, in particular to those which enabled the\nfamilies of his own time, clerical and lay, or the inhabitants of\ntowns and villages, to trace their pedigree back to remote times.\n\nIt is not without reason that the historical narrative sets in with\nDavid, and that the first event of his reign recorded is the taking of\nJerusalem; for Jerusalem is from first to last the centre of the\nauthor's interest. He writes the history of Judah alone, touching upon\nthe kingdom of Israel only in its relation to Judah. The desire to\nmagnify and glorify the kingdom of Judah in its great days, especially\nunder David and Solomon, to represent it as the most powerful,\nwealthy, and magnificent among the nations, not only of its time but\nof any time, frequently expresses itself in enormous exaggerations.\nDavid could raise a native army of a million and a half, almost as\nmany as, according to Herodotus--who certainly does not underestimate\nthe numbers--Xerxes mustered from the whole Persian empire for the\ninvasion of Greece; he laid away, \"out of his poverty,\" to build the\ntemple, a hundred thousand talents of gold and a million talents of\nsilver--over three times the national debt of the United Kingdom in\n1912; at the dedication of the temple Solomon sacrificed 22,000\nbullocks and 120,000 sheep and goats; and so on. It is evident that\nthe author has raised the figures out of the grasp of his own\nimagination.\n\nFrom the same motive, if it is possible to avoid it, he tells nothing\nto discredit the kings whom he thus extols. David's sin in taking a\ncensus is necessarily related, because the sequel of it was the choice\nof a site for the future temple, but, characteristically, not God but\nSatan tempted him to number the people; otherwise none of the misdeeds\nand misfortunes which are set down so impartially in 2 Samuel is so\nmuch as alluded to by the Chronicler; David is in his pages the model\nking. Solomon fares as well; nothing is said of the perverting\ninfluence of his foreign wives nor the temples he erected to their\ngods. Indeed, his piety is such that he will not allow Pharaoh's\ndaughter, apparently the only foreign wife the Chronicler gives him,\nto live in the city of David, for the neighbourhood of the ark is\nholy. Solomon's press-gangs were one of the greatest grievances of the\ntribes; the author of Chronicles takes pains to aver that Solomon\nraised his corv\u00e9e from the remnants of the Hittites and other heathen;\nno Israelites were put to such work. In Kings we read that Solomon\nceded twenty towns in Galilee to Hiram, king of Tyre, in payment for\nmaterials and services in the building of the temple; to the\nChronicler such a transaction is unimaginable, and he amends it by\nmaking Hiram give the towns to Solomon.\n\nAll this is, however, incidental to the main purpose of the book to\nexalt Jerusalem as the religious capital, its temple as the place\nwhich God has chosen for his abode, its liturgy as the correct form of\nworship, its priests and levites as the only ministry of valid orders\nand unimpeachable succession. It is not solely the pride of the\nchurchman which prompts him to dwell on these things. The assertion is\nso emphasized and reiterated that we can hardly mistake in inferring a\ncontroversial animus, especially when we recall that at the time of\nwriting there was a rival temple on Mt. Gerizim near Shechem, at one\nof the most venerable holy places in the land.\n\nThis temple is said by Josephus to have been erected in the time of\nAlexander the Great, in avowed rivalry to the temple in Jerusalem. The\nhigh priests of the Samaritan temple were a branch of the Jewish\nhigh-priestly line, its ritual was the same, the Pentateuch was the\nLaw in Shechem as well as in Jerusalem. If the Jews maintained that\nJerusalem was the only place in the land where sacrifice might\nlawfully be made to God, the Samaritans made the same exclusive claim\nfor their temple: Shechem, not Jerusalem, was the place (unnamed in\nDeuteronomy) which God had chosen out of all the tribes to put his\nname there. At Shechem was held the first great religious assembly of\nIsrael after the invasion of Canaan; there, on Gerizim, the first\naltar of Jehovah was erected by his express command (see Deut. xi.\n26-29; Jos. viii. 30-35; Jos. 24; especially Deut. xxvii. 4, where\n\"Ebal\" in the Jewish Bible is an anti-Samaritan substitute for the\noriginal \"Gerizim\"). The rivalry of Shechem was thus a serious menace,\nand so the Jerusalem Jews treated it.\n\nIn their eyes the people of the old territory of Ephraim were\ndescendants of the assorted heathen whom the Assyrian kings had\ncolonized in the cities of Samaria after transplanting to the eastern\nprovinces of the empire the old Israelite population of the region\n(see 2 Kings 17--a very late passage--noting especially vs. 34, \"unto\nthis day\"). On the other hand, Jerusalem and the region about it,\nafter lying waste for seventy years, had been repeopled under Cyrus by\nJews of pure race returning from the exile in Babylonia, who rebuilt\nthe temple and restored the worship as prescribed in the law. They\nwere surrounded by the \"peoples of the land,\" who were regarded as\ndescendants of the ancient heathen of Canaan with whom intermarriage\nwas forbidden in the law. This is the Chronicler's representation: the\nreturned exiles are the only genuine stock, their priesthood the only\nlegitimate sons of Aaron, the rest of the ministry, down to the temple\nslaves, was authenticated by recorded pedigrees (see Ezra ii. 59-63),\nand the elaborate liturgy of his own time the same in all particulars\nwhich had been used in the temple from its foundation.\n\nThe author has an exaggerated interest in this liturgy, and especially\nin the part taken in it by the minor orders of the clergy, levites,\nmusicians, singers, door-keepers, and the rest. The levites are\nprovided for in the Pentateuch, but the orchestra and choruses,\naccording to the Chronicler, were organized by David (1 Chron. 23-26),\nwho thus provided for the proper execution of his Psalms. When a great\nreligious function is described, the music invariably comes in for a\nprominent notice (e.g. 2 Chron. v. 12 f.).\n\nWe have seen that the historians of the seventh and following\ncenturies, the so-called deuteronomist school, wrote or interpreted\nthe history to exemplify the doctrine that defection from the national\nreligion is surely punished by national calamities. The Chronicler's\ndoctrine of retribution is at once harder and more individual. He also\nturns it about: unusual suffering is proof of sin. Thus, Asa was,\naccording to Kings, a conspicuously good king, but in his old age he\nhad the gout. The Chronicler, by the mouth of a prophet, explains why:\nhe relied on the king of Syria to help him against Israel, instead of\nrelying on the Lord. The king clapped the prophet into prison for\nmeddling with affairs of state, and so added another affront to God.\nHe was impenitent, however, for though the gout was very bad, \"yet\nsought he not unto the Lord, but to the physicians.\" Uzziah, another\ngodly king, was in his later years afflicted with leprosy, a disease\nwhich was regarded as peculiarly the stroke of God. The Chronicler\ngives the reason: the king presumed to burn incense on the altar in\nspite of the protest of the priest, and was smitten with leprosy on\nthe spot.\n\nThere is no reason to impugn the author's good faith in such\nemendations of his sources. He thought he knew the laws of history,\nand if in the particular instance the record did not correspond, it\nmust be defective. But whatever apology may be made for his good\nintentions, it need hardly be said that the unsupported testimony of a\ndoctrinaire historian who deals so sovereignly with the facts is of no\nweight.\n\nThe Chronicler names a considerable number of books as authorities for\ndifferent periods of the history; the Book of the Kings of Judah and\nIsrael (or Israel and Judah) and the Book of the Kings of Israel are\nrepeatedly cited for things not related in our Book of Kings. For more\ninformation about Joash the reader is referred to the \"Midrash of the\nBook of Kings,\" and for Abijah to the \"Midrash of the Prophet Iddo,\"\ntitles that in later times, at least, would designate an edifying\nexposition in which full licence was given to the imagination to\nembroider the theme with picturesque inventions. The favourite\nreferences, however, are to writings bearing the names of\nprophets--Samuel, Nathan, Gad, Ahijah, Iddo, Shemaiah, Jehu son of\nHanani. The title History of Samuel the Seer, of Nathan the Prophet,\nand so on, may mean either _about_ Samuel or _by_ Samuel. Very likely\nthe author entertained the theory which subsequently prevailed among\nthe Jews that in each age the prophets wrote down the events of their\nown time in which many of them had a conspicuous part.\n\nThe question is of no other interest; for an examination of the\nextracts from his sources which the Chronicler has incorporated or\ncondensed shows that (with small possible exceptions to be considered\nhereafter) his material was all taken from our Book of Kings. This\nenables us to confront his history of Judah with his sources and\nacquaint ourselves with his habitual way of dealing with them, an\ninvestigation not only instructive for his method, but of the greatest\nimportance when we come to the Chronicler's history of the Persian\nperiod, where, for the most part, his sources are not independently\npreserved.\n\nIn the first place it will be noticed that he has selected from the\nhistory in Samuel and Kings the parts which particularly interested\nhim for their own sake, such as the description of religious\nceremonies, or could be used as a text for the doctrines he had most\nat heart, and has therefore passed over a very large part of the\ncontents of his source. Precisely so, the author of Kings, two\ncenturies earlier, had dealt with his sources, though with a different\ninterest. What the Chronicler chose to include he generally copied out\nwithout much change; the present variations in the text are chiefly\ndue to divergent transmission. (Compare, for illustration, 1 Chron. x.\n1-xi. 47 with 1 Sam. 31 and 2 Sam. xxiii. 8-39, or 1 Chron. xvii.\n1-xx. 8 with 2 Sam. 7, 8, 10 and 12.). Often he introduces in these\nextracts, or appends to them, notes of his own which would in almost\nall cases be certainly recognizable on internal evidence even if we\nhad not the text of Kings before us. In a few places he condenses or\nabridges the narrative of Kings, as in 2 Chron. xxxii. 1-23 compared\nwith 2 Kings xviii. 13-xix. 37.\n\nOf alterations, or, from the author's own point of view, corrections,\nof the older history several examples have been given above. One more,\nof a striking character, may be cited, viz. 2 Chron. xxii. 10-xxiii.\n21 compared with 2 Kings 11. The Carian mercenaries of the guard in\nthe sacred precincts of the temple (2 Kings xi. 4) were a plain\nprofanation, of which the pious chief priest could not have been\nguilty. The Chronicler accordingly rewrites the story, substituting\nthe levites (note 2 Chron. xxiii. 6) for the obnoxious heathen.\nFinally, he sometimes freely expands on his text, as in the building\nof Solomon's temple (2 Chron. 2-3).\n\nIn view of the Chronicler's multiplied references to authorities, it\nhas frequently been assumed that his immediate source was not the\nBooks of Samuel and Kings, but a work of a \"midrashic\" character--that\nis, euphemistically, a work with more concern for edification than for\nhistorical verity--written not long before his time from the same\npoint of view and with the same salient interests, which the\nChronicler in all simplicity took for authentic history. This ghost\nsource eludes, however, all attempts to catch it actually walking. It\nmay perfectly well be that the Chronicler did not invent everything in\nthe book which is plainly invention, but if not, we can only apply the\nfamous contribution of an undergraduate to Homeric criticism, \"the\nIliad was not written by Homer, but by another man of the same name.\"\n\nThere remain a few short notices, not derived from the Pentateuch or\nHistorical Books, whose contents and form suggest that they are scraps\nwhich the Chronicler picked up from some other source, e.g. the\nmigration of the Simeonites, 1 Chron. iv. 24-43 (in the main). But\nthese passages are so few, and generally of so little historical\nimportance, that the question need here not be pursued farther.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII\n\nEZRA AND NEHEMIAH\n\n\nThe books which in our Bible bear the names Ezra and Nehemiah (in the\nJewish Bible, one book, Ezra) are the immediate continuation of\nChronicles, by the same author. When they were divided, 2 Chron.\nxxxvi. 22-23, the necessary sequel of vss. 20-21 was repeated at the\nbeginning of Ezra (Ezra i. 1-3). The reason for the division is plain:\ndown to the end of the exile the work was no more than an epitome of\nthe Pentateuch and Historical Books; but from the time of Cyrus to\nAlexander it was the only history the Jews possessed. This part was\ntherefore separated from what went before as the book of post-exilic\nhistory, and named \"Ezra\" after the figure most prominent in the\nearlier half of it, on the same principle that the history of the\nfounding of the kingdom was named Samuel. The subdivision into two\nbooks of Ezra as in the Greek Bible, or as we name them Ezra and\nNehemiah, is apparently due to Christian hands.\n\nThis part of the Chronicler's work begins, as has been said, with an\nedict of Cyrus permitting the Jews in Babylonia to return to Jerusalem\nand rebuild the temple. There follows a list (given again in Neh. 7)\nof the families who availed themselves of this permission, shortly\nafter 538 B.C. The restoration of the temple is begun, then stopped by\nthe machinations of their enemies under Xerxes (486-465 B.C.) and\nArtaxerxes (465-424 B.C.), but happily completed (by the same\nZerubbabel and Joshua who began it) in the sixth year of Darius\n(Nothus, 424-405 B.C.). \"After these things, in the reign of\nArtaxerxes,\" Ezra came up from Babylonia, armed with large powers by\nan edict of the king, to order things according to the law of his God\nin the province \"beyond the river\" (Euphrates, Ezra 7 f.). He found\nthings enough that needed reform; particularly the frequent\nintermarriages of all classes, including the clergy, with the \"peoples\nof the land,\" and succeeded in inducing the Jews, in a great act of\npenitence, to divorce these \"foreign women\" (cc. 9-10).\n\nAt this point the History of Nehemiah sets in abruptly in the form of\npersonal memoirs. Nehemiah, a favourite cup-bearer of the Persian king\nArtaxerxes, hearing that the wall of Jerusalem was broken down and the\ngates burned, asks permission to go thither and repair the damaged\nfortifications, and is sent with a commission as royal governor of the\ndistrict. In spite of dangerous opposition from jealous neighbours in\nSamaria and elsewhere, by the utmost endeavours he accomplishes the\nrebuilding of the walls in a very brief space (Neh. 1-6). In all this\nthere is not so much as a mention of Ezra, who is supposed to have\nbeen now thirteen years in Jerusalem, but in Neh. 8 he suddenly\nappears on the scene with his law-book. The law is read, and the\npeople solemnly covenant by sign and seal to observe it; Nehemiah's\nname stands at the head of the list of signers, but otherwise he is\nentirely ignored (Neh. 8-10). Lists of the inhabitants of Jerusalem\nand of other settlements, a catalogue of the priests and levites who\ncame up under Cyrus, and a description of the dedication of the walls,\nin which the singers shine, fill Neh. 11-12. That the Chronicler is\nthe author is palpable. Finally, in c. 13, Nehemiah, who had returned\nto court, reappears, and finds a sad state of things; a foreigner, and\nan Ammonite at that, lodged by the high priest in a chamber of the\ntemple, flagrant violations of the sabbath by market men, and the old\ngrievance of mixed marriages in full gait. Even the high priest's\nfamily was not pure: one of its scions was son-in-law to Nehemiah's\narch-enemy, Sanballat of Samaria. Naturally Nehemiah expelled him.\n\nIt has been necessary to give this somewhat detailed synopsis of the\nbooks to make intelligible the problems they present. On this point it\nis further to be observed that the book is not all written in Hebrew:\nEzra iv. 8-vi. 18; vii. 12-26, containing chiefly correspondence with\nthe Persian court and documents issuing from it, are in Aramaic, the\nofficial language of the western provinces of the empire. Moreover,\nthe oldest Greek translation of the Chronicler's history, part of\nwhich is preserved in the Bible of the church as 1 Esdras, differs\nboth in matter and order from the Jewish standard text and the later\nGreek version; it contains, for example, the famous exhibition of wits\nby the three Jewish youths at the court of Darius (1 Esdr. 3 f.), as a\nresult of which Zerubbabel obtains from Darius permission to go up to\nJerusalem. In 1 Esdras the reading of the law (Neh. 8) immediately\nfollows the act of penitence for the strange wives (Ezra 10).\n\nA large part of Ezra-Nehemiah exhibits the Chronicler's familiar\nmotives and manner; in other places he has incorporated extracts from\nthe sources with or without annotations of his own. Of these sources\nthe only ones which have been independently preserved are the\nprophecies of Haggai and Zechariah, from which the author takes,\nhowever, no more than the facts that at the instance of these prophets\nZerubbabel and Joshua began to rebuild the temple in the second year\nof Darius (Ezra v. 1 f.); the completion of the work by the same\nhands, which according to the Chronicler took place in the sixth year\nof Darius and was celebrated in a great dedication ceremony, is in\nZech. iv. 9 still prediction. Another source which stands out\ndistinctly is the Memoirs of Nehemiah, of which Neh. 1-6 (except c. 3)\nis a solid piece. There is, moreover, a series of documents: Ezra 1,\nthe edict of Cyrus; Ezra iv. 7-vi. 12, complaints to the court of the\nJews' building operations, and answers of the kings Artaxerxes and\nDarius respectively. Ezra vii. 11-26, commission of Artaxerxes to\nEzra. A diplomatic appearance is given to these by the fact\nthat--except the edict of Cyrus--they are all couched in the official\nAramaic; and, inasmuch as in cc. iv. 7-vi. 18 the connecting links of\nnarrative are also in Aramaic, the presumption is that this material\nwas taken bodily from an Aramaic book in which the letters and\nrescripts were already embodied.\n\nFinally, a distinct source is commonly assumed for the history of\nEzra. This is chiefly told of Ezra in the third person; but in some\nparts for a considerable space together Ezra speaks in the first\nperson (I or we), and it is accordingly thought by most scholars that\nthe Chronicler had in his hands Memoirs of Ezra as well as of\nNehemiah, which in part he incorporated intact (e.g. Ezra 8 f.), in\npart recast into the form of a narrative about Ezra (as in Ezra 10;\nNeh. 8 f.). It is evident that the story of Ezra, whatever its origin,\nis badly dislocated: the chapters which now stand in Neh. 8-10 have no\nbusiness there, and, as has been noticed above, in 1 Esdras the\nreading of the law immediately follows Ezra 10. On the other hand,\nthere is a gap at the end of Ezra 6; chapter 9 cannot well be its\noriginal sequel. And, lastly, Neh. 9 f. does not seem naturally to\nfollow c. 8. The most probable restoration of the order is Ezra 8;\nNeh. vii. 70-73; 8; Ezra 9-10; Neh. 9-10. This arrangement gives a\ncontinuous and consistent story, and the numerous dates fall into\nsequence. Incidentally another connection is thus restored, Neh. 11\nfollows vii. 5^a. The list (Neh. vii. 5^b-60) of the exiles who\nreturned with Zerubbabel and his company ( = Ezra 2) is obviously not\nwhat is required here. The dismemberment of the story of Ezra is not\nto be attributed to the Chronicler, but to misadventures of copying\nsuch as are not infrequent in ancient manuscripts.\n\nThe extract from the Memoirs of Nehemiah breaks off with Neh. 6;\nthough perhaps in vii. 1-4; xi. 1-3 the Chronicler has utilized in his\nown way some further sentences. In Neh. xii. 27-43, the procession at\nthe dedication of the walls is described, ostensibly by Nehemiah in\nthe first person, and the passage has on this ground been taken for an\nextract from the Memoirs. It is, however, an unmistakable piece of the\nChronicler's own composition. In c. 13, also, Nehemiah, in the first\nperson, gives an account of his reforming enterprises on a second\nvisit to Jerusalem. An unaltered extract from the Memoirs, however,\nthe chapter cannot well be; the Chronicler's vein crops out in too\nmany places.\n\nIt does not belong to our present task to discuss the historical\nvalue of these sources; but it may not be amiss to say that the\nauthority of the Memoirs of Nehemiah alone is unimpeached. The\nquestion is of peculiar interest in the case of the supposed Memoirs\nof Ezra, because Neh. 8 has been generally understood by recent\ncritics to be the account of the formal introduction of a new, or\nnewly codified, law, the Priests' Code or the Pentateuch, which Ezra\nbrought up from Babylonia.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV\n\nSTORY BOOKS: ESTHER, RUTH, JONAH\n\n\nBesides the older and younger historical books we have been\nconsidering, the Jewish Bible contains some examples of what we should\ncall the short story, and the church has preserved others. The\ncanonical books of this class are Esther, Ruth, and Jonah; among the\napocrypha are Judith and Tobit; others, such as 3 Maccabees, are found\nin manuscripts of the Greek and Latin Bibles, or in Oriental\ntranslations, but did not attain official recognition of any of the\ngreat churches. These stories, which, as might be expected, differ\nwidely in literary quality as well as in subject and motive, are\ndoubtless only the rare survivors of a larger literature of this kind,\nbut they suffice to give us a notion of the popular reading of the\nJews in the last centuries before the Christian era. It would be more\nexact, perhaps, to say the popular story-telling, for probably the\nwritten books were chiefly used by the story-tellers, who reproduced\ntheir contents orally and freely, just as the Moslem story-tellers\nto-day recite stories from the Arabian Nights or the Antar romance.\nSome of them, however, like Esther, attached themselves to popular\nfestivals and were recited or read as part of the celebration.\n\n\nESTHER.--Esther is the story of a beautiful Jewess of Susa whom Xerxes\nraises from the ranks of his concubines to be his queen, and who uses\nher influence over him to save her people from a general massacre\nwhich the grand vizier has prepared for them by way of avenging an\naffront from one of the race. The plot is developed with noteworthy\nart. The deposition of Vashti, which, so far as the main matter goes,\nis necessary only to make room for Esther, under the author's hand\nbecomes a brilliant first act. The embroilment of Mordecai and Haman\nis skilfully managed; the stiffnecked Jew refuses homage to the proud\nvizier, who schemes a generous revenge. Esther ventures her life for\nher people by intruding into the audience chamber, but the\n_d\u00e9nouement_ is artfully retarded--instead of a pathetic plea for the\nimperilled Jews, an invitation for the king and his prime minister to\na _petit d\u00eener_ in the queen's apartments! At the banquet the king\noffers Esther her wish, but again the issue is postponed. Haman, in\nhis elation at such signal marks of queenly favour, builds a gallows\nfor Mordecai seventy-five feet high--and next day has to parade the\nstreets of the capital at the bridle of the hated Jew's horse\nproclaiming him the object of the king's special honour!\n\nThe scene in the banqueting hall when Esther at last makes her\npetition is highly dramatic. She makes it a plea for her own life,\n\"for we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and\nto perish.\" The king, who has no inkling that she is a Jewess, and is\nincensed at the thought of such a plot against his queen, angrily\nasks, \"Who is he, and where is he, that durst presume in his heart to\ndo so?\" The climax so skilfully prepared comes in the stunning words,\n\"This wicked Haman here!\" Thenceforth the action matches swiftly: the\nking bursts out of the room to collect himself by a turn in the\ngarden; the fallen vizier sinks a suppliant on the queen's couch,\nwhere the king, returning, finds him; the sinister eunuch standing by\ndescribes the fine new gallows Haman has at home, ready for Mordecai,\nand on his own gallows, in poetic justice, Haman is hanged, fifty\ncubits high! Mordecai succeeds to the seal of state, and conceives the\ncounter-stroke by which, instead of the heathen massacring the Jews,\nthe Jews slaughter the heathen. An annual festival celebrates the\njoyful issue.\n\nFor the full account of Mordecai's greatness the reader is referred to\nthe royal annals of Media and Persia, where it will be found, he says,\nrecorded along with the mighty deeds of Xerxes, including his\nsubjugation of the Greeks. Despite this authority, it should be\nunnecessary to say that the Book of Esther is a work of fiction.\nWhether it is pure invention, or whether some of the incidents are\nborrowed from fact, is an idle question, because a wholly unanswerable\none. If the local colour, which is laid on pretty thick, is good, as\nsome modern arch\u00e6ologists aver, it would not be strange that a Jewish\nnovelist who wrote not so long after the passing of Persia should\nprove as well acquainted with it as a modern arch\u00e6ologist.\n\nSome recent interpreters find in the story a mythical background:\nEsther is Ishtar, the Babylonian goddess of love; Mordecai, \"Marduk's\nman,\" was originally Marduk himself, the great god of Babylon; the\nname of Haman sounds something like one way of pronouncing the name of\nan Elamite god in the epic of Gilgamesh. The triumph of Mordecai and\nEsther over Haman would thus be an echo of ancient strife between the\ngods of Babylonia and Elam. It will be obvious, however, to the\nmythologically unsophisticated understanding, that if these very\nproblematical combinations are right, the author of the Book of\nEsther was quite innocent of them, and therefore that for the\ninterpretation of the story he tells they are wholly irrelevant.\n\nThe Book of Esther, it was long ago observed, is singular among the\nbooks of the Bible in that there is no mention of God in it. It is\nJewish with a sanguinary loyalty to race, but of Judaism as religion\nthere is not a trace; it is in fact somewhat obtrusive by its absence.\nWhen Mordecai warns Esther that if she fails her people in their hour\nof need deliverance will come \"from another place,\" the word God is\nostentatiously avoided; before her great adventure she fasts three\ndays, but there is no suggestion of prayer; in the celebrations of\nrescue and the annual commemoration of it there is feasting and\ngladness, but no thanksgiving to God. It is no wonder that orthodox\nrabbis doubted the inspiration of so conspicuously secular romance,\nnor that the Greek translators made good the religious deficiencies of\nthe book by putting pious prayers into the mouth of Mordecai and\nEsther at the appropriate junctures.\n\nThe age of the book cannot be very closely determined; it is pretty\ncertainly not older than the third century B.C., more likely from the\nsecond. A note at the end of the Greek version says that this\ntranslation was brought from Jerusalem to Egypt in the year which\ncorresponds to 114 B.C. The earliest mention of the festival of Purim\nis in 2 Macc. xv. 36, where it is called Mordecai Day.\n\n\nRUTH.--The story of Ruth is laid in the time of the Judges, for which\nreason it was placed in the Greek Bible and in modern versions between\nJudges and Samuel. It tells of a young Moabitess, the childless widow\nof a Jud\u00e6an from Bethlehem, who accompanies her widowed mother-in-law\nback to Bethlehem, embracing her religion. Ruth goes out to glean\nafter the reapers and by chance comes to the field of Boaz, a kinsman\nof her husband, who shows her kindness. By Naomi's contrivance, she\nreveals to him who she is under circumstances that appeal to his\nchivalry, and, after a nearer of kin has waived his right, Boaz takes\nthe widow with the land, and they live happy ever after. Their son\nObed is David's grandfather. The legal proceedings in the last chapter\nare different from anything we otherwise know of Israelite custom, but\nour ignorance is no warrant for assuming that the usage there\ndescribed is fictitious.\n\nIf the story of Esther is told with dramatic power, that of Ruth is\ntold with idyllic grace. The pathos of the moment in which Naomi bids\nher daughters-in-law return to their mothers' homes and Ruth refuses\nto part from her is unforced. The picture of the gleaners in the\nfields; the delicacy with which the night at the threshing-floor is\ntreated; the scene at the city gate, where the waiver and redemption\nare witnessed and the shoe given in attestation; the blessing of the\ntownsmen on the union, all have the charm of simple and unaffected\nnarrative.\n\nThe question what the book was written for has received diverse\nanswers. It has been thought that the author meant to protest against\nthe narrowness of those who condemned all marriages with foreigners\nand put the Moabites under a special ban, by showing that David\nhimself had Moabite blood in his veins; others see the point of the\nbook in the commendation of the marriage of childless widows, not by\nbrothers-in-law only as the levirate law required, but by remoter\nkinsmen. Others have conjectured otherwise. In this state of the case\nit is safe to say that if the author had an ulterior motive, he\nconcealed it more successfully than is common to story-tellers who\nwrite with a purpose.\n\nThere are no very definite signs in the book of the age in which it\nwas written. The author is familiar with the Hebrew literature of the\ngood period, and writes a better imitation of it than some. It is\nprecisely this imitative character which stands in the way of putting\nthe book in the days of the kingdom. But where, in the centuries of\nthe Persian or Greek dominion it belongs, it is impossible to say.\n\n\nJONAH.--The third of the short stories, Jonah, is not found, like\nEsther and Ruth, in the Jewish Bible in the miscellaneous collection\nof \"Scriptures\" and in the Christian Bible among the Historical Books,\nbut in the prophetic canon, as one of the Minor Prophets. The reason,\ndoubtless, is that it is not only a story about a prophet and his\nmission, but was thought to be written by himself.\n\nThe tale is too familiar to have to be retold at length. The Israelite\nprophet, Jonah the son of Amittai, is commissioned by God to go to\nNineveh and announce its impending destruction; to escape this\nunwelcome errand he embarks on a Phoenician ship bound for Spain, at\nthe other end of the world; a tempest threatens to engulf the ship;\nthe seamen cast lots to discover against whom the gods are so angry;\nthe lot falls on Jonah, and he is cast into the sea, which thereupon\nbecomes calm; Jonah is swallowed by a monstrous fish, which after\nthree days sets him ashore safe and sound. He goes to Nineveh and\ndelivers his message; the people repent of their sins, and God repents\nof his purpose to destroy them, whereat the prophet is very indignant\nand upbraids God with his soft-heartedness; he expected this from the\nbeginning, and therefore tried to flee to Tarshish. By his own grief\nfor the death of the plant \"which sprang up in a night and perished in\na night,\" the prophet is taught the lesson of the divine compassion:\n\"How should I not have compassion on this great city, Nineveh, in\nwhich are more than a hundred and twenty thousand human beings which\ndo not know their right hand from their left, not to speak of cattle?\"\nWith this rebuke the book ends.\n\nThese closing words leave no room for question about the purpose of\nthe book. In the person of Jonah, the rebuke is addressed to the Jews,\nto whom God's long-suffering with the heathen was a stumbling-block.\nThe greater prophetic books, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, all contain a\nlong array of oracles against foreign nations, predicting their total\nand remediless destruction, some of them very precise as to time and\nagent (see, for example, Isa. 13 f., against Babylon). The fulfilment\nof these prophecies, the final breaking of the power of the heathen\nworld, must come before the golden age of Israel could dawn. Yet the\ngenerations came and went, and the heathen still ruled the earth!\nThen, too, the Jews doubtless felt that they, as the people of God,\nhad an exclusive claim on his affections, as he asserted exclusive\nclaims to theirs. The author of Jonah not only extends to mankind\nGod's word in Ezekiel, \"Have I any pleasure in the death of the\nwicked? saith the Lord God, and not rather that he should return from\nhis way and live?\" but he asserts the all-embracing compassion of God.\nThe one God is the creator of the heathen as well as of Israel, his\nmerciful providence is over all his works.\n\nThe higher spirit of Judaism here reproves the lower, narrow,\nexclusive, and intolerant spirit, which could unfortunately allege so\nmuch warrant for itself from the law and the prophets. Therein the\nauthor had many and noble successors, not only among the sages, with\ntheir cosmopolitan wisdom, but in the circles of the law.\n\nIt is not the fault of the author that modern readers and interpreters\nhave had their attention diverted from the moral of the book to the\nfable in which it is conveyed; he could not have imagined the\npseudo-historical frame of mind to which the question whether it all\nhappened thus and so was of such absorbing importance that it might\nalmost be said that the sea-monster swallowed the commentators as well\nas the prophet. For one of the difficulties of the book he is not\nresponsible, the psalm (Jonah ii. 2-9) which Jonah sings in the fish's\nbelly was put in his mouth by a later editor; vs. 10 is the immediate\nsequel of vs. 1. The poem was evidently not composed for the place; it\nis a hymn of thanksgiving not a prayer for deliverance; but the\n(figurative) references to the depths of the abyss seemed appropriate\nto Jonah's situation.\n\nThe hero of the story is a historical character, of whom, to be sure,\nwe know only that he came from a place named Gath-hepher, and\npredicted the reconquest of lost Israelite territories which Jeroboam\nII. achieved (2 Kings xiv. 25). It has been conjectured that the\nauthor of our book may have heard in some way that he went on a\nmission to Nineveh; but if he had, that would not make the book any\nmore historical.\n\nJonah, like Ruth and Esther, belongs to the later period of Hebrew\nliterature; it is more likely that it was written after the time of\nAlexander than before, but greater definiteness is not justified.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV\n\nTHE PROPHETS\n\n\nIn the old story of Saul and Samuel (1 Sam. 9 f.) Samuel is named \"the\nseer,\" that is, a man endowed with what we call second sight, and a\nnote by an editor explains that what in his time was called a prophet\nused to be called a seer. Samuel was, indeed, in the apprehension of\nlater times, a prophet, but the story itself makes a clear distinction\nbetween the two. The band of prophets whom Saul meets coming down from\nthe high place, working up by music an enthusiasm, or possession,\nwhich makes them beside themselves, raving in the prophetic fury\n(raving and prophesying, in such connections, is the same word in\nHebrew), an enthusiasm which Saul catches, to the surprise and scandal\nof his townsmen, are evidently something quite different from the\nvillage seer; they must have been outwardly very much like modern\nMoslem dervishes.\n\nIn the ninth century of the Syrian wars, these gregarious prophets\nappear in many places; especially in the stories of Elisha they are\norganized societies of devotees, living by themselves in colonies of\nhuts or cells under a superior--again very much like a dervish\norder--and sometimes turning their religious zeal into political\nchannels, as when they incite Jehu to the revolt which overthrew the\nhouse of Omri.\n\nBeside them are others who also bear the name prophet, but stand apart\nfrom the order and often in opposition to it. Such a figure is Micaiah\nson of Imlah, confronting the four hundred prophets whom Ahab got\ntogether, and declaring their unanimity of inspiration to be the work\nof a lying spirit sent from God to lure the king to his doom (1 Kings\n22). Such a figure, above all as we have already seen, is Elijah, who,\nsolitary, champions Jehovah's right to the undivided allegiance of\nIsrael, or thunders the doom of the dynasty at the authors of Naboth's\njudicial murder. It is in such men as these, rather than in the common\nherd of prophets by profession, that the ethical prophets of the\neighth century have their forerunners.\n\nThe moral conception of God had its roots far down in the religion of\nIsrael, as may be seen in the older (certainly preprophetic) strata\nin Samuel, and better still in the patriarchal legends, which received\ntheir present form in the same age; but after the establishment of the\nkingdom it was crossed by the national idea. It was not till the\neighth century that the men came who thought through what the moral\nidea of God involves, and had the courage to proclaim its\nconsequences, fatal though they might be to both state and church.\nThese prophets, beginning with Amos, not only preached a new doctrine,\nthey employed a new method. The message which they spoke to the\nheedless, incredulous, or hostile ears of their contemporaries, they\nalso recorded, whether in the hope to reach through the written page a\nlarger audience, or to perpetuate their words to generations\nfollowing. Thus there begins a prophetic literature which is one of\nthe most characteristic features of the Old Testament. Four prophets\nof the second half of the eighth century have given their names to\nsuch prophetic books, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, and Micah. Then, in the\nlatter part of the seventh century and the beginning of the sixth,\nfollow the little books of Zephaniah, Nahum, and Habbakuk, and the\ngreat one of Jeremiah, whose younger contemporary in Babylonia is\nEzekiel. Haggai and Zechariah were instrumental in the rebuilding of\nthe temple in the reign of Darius I. In the discussion of these books\nwe shall not attempt a chronological disposition, but follow the order\nof the English Bible.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI\n\nISAIAH\n\n\nThe first of the prophetic books bears the name of Isaiah, a Jud\u00e6an\nprophet, who dates his call \"in the year that king Uzziah died,\" a\nyear which cannot be fixed with certainty, but was at all events not\nvery long before 734 B.C., and whose latest dated utterances are from\nthe time of Sennacherib's invasion in the year 701. His prophecies\nthus range over a period of not far from forty years. He witnessed the\nhumbling of Israel by Tiglath-Pileser in 734, the fall of Samaria in\n721, the Assyrian campaigns in the west in 720 and 711, and the\ncondign punishment Sennacherib inflicted on Judah in 701; and all\nthese events (of which we have historical knowledge from both Assyrian\nand Jewish sources) are reflected in his prophecies.\n\nThe book contains, however, much besides the prophecies of Isaiah in\nthe different periods of his long career. It has already been noted\nthat Isa. 36-39 are found also, with some variations, in 2 Kings\n18-20, where they are an integral part of the narrative. That this\nextract from Kings was copied into the Book of Isaiah is explained by\nthe fact that the prophet is a prominent figure in the story. It does\nnot stand in immediate connection with the prophecies of Isaiah\nduring the campaign of Sennacherib in cc. 28-33, from which it is\nseparated by several oracles of different character and date; and the\nnatural presumption is that this historical appendix was added at the\nend of a roll, just as Jer. 52, also an extract from Kings (2 Kings\nxxiv. 18-xxv. 21), is appended at the end of the roll of Jeremiah.\n\nIn the present Book of Isaiah, cc. 36-39 are followed by another\nprophetic book of considerable length (Isa. 40-66), which has no\ntitle, and in which, from first to last, no prophet's name appears.\nThe theme which is announced in the first verses of this book and runs\nthrough a large part of it is the approaching deliverance of the Jews\nfrom the Babylonian captivity, their return to their own land, and the\nrestoration of Zion.\n\nIn Isa. 1-35 certain larger divisions are at once apparent; cc. 1-12,\na collection of prophecies, chiefly, as appears from dates and other\nindications, from the earlier years of Isaiah's ministry; cc. 13 to\n23, a collection of oracles mainly against foreign nations; cc. 24-27,\nprevisions of a great judgment, in a peculiarly mysterious tone; cc.\n28-33, chiefly from the time of Sennacherib, followed by c. 34, in\nwhich God's fury is poured out on Edom, and c. 35, a prophecy of\nrestoration akin to cc. 40 ff. It is thus evident that the present\nbook is made up from several older collections of prophecies gathered\nby different hands; the peculiar titles in cc. 13-23, for instance,\nare most probably to be attributed to the editor of an independent\nbook of prophecies against the heathen.\n\nThe same phenomenon appears on a smaller scale in Isa. 1-12. That\nthese chapters, at one stage in the history of the collections, formed\na roll by themselves is probable from the fact that they begin with a\ngrand overture (c. 1), in which the leading motives of Isaiah's\nprophecy are heard, and close (c. 12) with a psalm of praise for the\nmessianic deliverance which is the subject of c. 11. But the order of\nthe prophecies is not chronological: the inaugural vision and Isaiah's\ncall to be a prophet stands, not at the beginning, as in Jeremiah and\nEzekiel, but in c. 6 (dated in the year of King Uzziah's death), while\nthe chapters that precede it (cc. 2 f.; 5), with what was once an\ninitial title (ii. 1), may confidently be assigned, on internal\ngrounds, to the reigns of Uzziah's successors. Chapters 7 and 8 (dated\nunder Ahaz) seem to have originally followed close on c. 6, as they do\nnow. Whatever may be the reason for this singular arrangement, it\nseems evident that the compiler had several smaller groups or loose\nleaves of oracles, which he put together for better preservation,\nrather, perhaps, by affinity of subject than in order of time.\n\nThis must have taken place at a comparatively late time, for not only\ndoes his roll begin with a prophecy (Isa. i. 2-9) which vividly\ndepicts the devastation of Judah and the isolation of Jerusalem by\nSennacherib in 701 (perhaps the latest oracle of Isaiah preserved in\nthe book), but it contains passages (e.g. xi. 11-16) which bear all\nthe marks of a time several centuries after Isaiah's death; the psalm\nin c. 12 is perhaps later still. Another indication that the\ncollection was made at a date remote from the age of the prophet is\nthe fragmentary character of several of the oracles in cc. 2-5. The\nrefrain verses here afford a certain clue; they show that prophecies\noriginally composed with much art in balanced strophes with closing\nrefrains came into the compiler's hands mutilated and dislocated.\nThus, v. 25 has the refrain of ix. 8-21; x. 4, while x. 1-3 is a \"woe\"\nwhich has strayed away from v. 18 ff., and the refrain ii. 9, 11, 17\nrecurs in v. 15.\n\nFragmentary as many of these prophecies are, enough remains to show\nthat Isaiah had poetical genius as well as unequalled mastery of the\npeculiar literary form of the Hebrew oracle. The parable of the\nvineyard (Isa. v. 1-7), or the picture of the swift, resistless\nadvance of the Assyrian (v. 26-30), or the description of devastated\nJudah (i. 2-8), or the oracle against Samaria (ix. 8-21), in the\nauthorized English Version illustrate in different ways the art with\nwhich Isaiah handles this traditional form.\n\nThe earlier prophecies of Isaiah, whether directed against Israel and\nits allies or against Judah, are unsparing in their condemnation of\nthe political and social evils of the time, and predict the imminent\nand irremediable ruin of both nations. This is revealed to Isaiah in\nthe vision which made him a prophet, in terms so drastic that the\nclosing words were piously erased by some late editor (so in the Greek\nBible), and a meaningless phrase put in their place in the curtailed\nsentence by a still later hand (our Hebrew text). With this the tenor\nof his utterances in cc. ii. 5-iii. 26; v. 1-30; ix. 8-x. 4, wholly\nagrees. These unrelieved forebodings of doom led in later times not\nonly to excisions such as we have noted in vi. 13, but to\ninterpolations; hopeful pendants were attached to the prophet's gloomy\npictures, sometimes written for the purpose--a particularly\ninstructive example is iv. 2-6, after iii. 16-iv. 1--sometimes\nborrowed from other prophetic contexts. To the latter class belongs\nthe famous messianic oracle, ix. 1-7, which is very imperfectly\nconnected (by changes in viii. 22) with the preceding climactic\ndenunciation of doom, the end of which is missing. If Isa. ix. 1-7 is\na prophecy by Isaiah, it can only belong to his latest years.\n\nOne other feature of Isaiah's message must be signalized. His God\nindignantly rejects the sacrifices and all the pompous worship which\nare offered him in his temple in Jerusalem (Isa. i. 10-17). Men think\nthey can thus gain the favour of God and persuade him to overlook or\ncondone their sins against their fellows! Such worship is an insult\nto God. So Amos a few years before had condemned the worship at Bethel\n(Amos v. 21-25). So their successors repeat in no uncertain terms (see\nMic. vi. 6-8; Jer. 7, especially vss. 21-23). It is the fundamental\ndoctrine of prophecy: the will of God is wholly moral. For worship he\ncares nothing at all; for justice, fairness, and goodness between man\nand man he cares everything. Such a God is capable of destroying the\nnation for the wrongs men do their fellow men; he is not capable of\nbeing bribed by offerings, or flattered with psalms, or wheedled with\nprayers. He will listen to no intercession (Jer. xv. 1 ff., after c.\n14); nothing but complete reformation and reparation will he call\nrepentance--and there comes a pass where repentance is impossible.\n\nThe book of prophecies against the heathen (Isa. 13-23) begins with\ntwo remarkable chapters (xiii. 1-xiv. 23) declaring the imminent\ndestruction of Babylon by the Medes, whom the prophet sees already in\nmotion against the doomed city, and exulting over the descent of the\nking of Babylon to hell, greeted by the taunts of the mighty of the\nearth who were before him there. The two prophecies are connected by a\nprediction of the deliverance of captive Israel, which will be\nrestored to its own land and rule over its oppressors (xiv. 1-4^a).\nThe situation is not that of Isaiah's time, in which Babylon was a\nprovince of the Assyrian empire, and when, under Merodach Baladan, it\nfor a while reasserted its independence, seems to have sought an\nalliance with Hezekiah against their common oppressor, Assyria (Isa.\n39 = 2 Kings xx. 12 ff.). The Medes had been in league with the\nBabylonians against Assyria until its fall in 606 B.C.; it was not\nuntil the time of Cyrus that the Medes became a menace to Babylonia,\nand only after Cyrus's conquest of Lydia (546 B.C.) that the turn of\nBabylon was visibly come. On the other hand, the sack and ruin of\nBabylon, pictured with vengeful satisfaction in Isa. 13, did not come\nto pass at that time. The Persian armies, after a decisive battle in\nnorthern Babylonia, entered the city in the autumn of 538 without\nresistance. Babylonian inscriptions acclaim Cyrus as a deliverer, and\nBabylon became one of the capitals of his great empire. On these\ngrounds the prophecy is generally thought to fall between 546 and 538\nB.C.\n\nIt is immediately followed by a short oracle (Isa. xiv. 24-27) against\nthe Assyrians, quite in the tone of the prophecies of Isaiah in the\ntime of Sennacherib (701 B.C.), and by an enigmatical warning to the\ninhabitants of the Philistine cities, said in the title to have come\n\"in the year that King Ahaz died.\" Another prophecy concerned with the\ninhabitants of these cities, bearing Isaiah's name and definitely\ndated (711 B.C.), is Isa. 20. Chapter 17, entitled \"The Burden of\nDamascus,\" is in fact chiefly against the kingdom of Israel, and\nfalls in line with prophecies of Isaiah in the time of the alliance of\nthe two kingdoms against Judah (ca. 736 B.C.); compare Isa. 7. In Isa.\nxxii. 15-25 is a prophecy of Isaiah singular in the fact that it is\nlaunched at an individual, the major domo of King Hezekiah.\n\nBesides these, the collection contains oracles against Moab (Isa. 15\nf.), Nubia (c. 18), Egypt (c. 19), another vision of the fall of\nBabylon before the armies of Elam and Media (xxi. 1-10), but in a\ndifferent spirit from cc. 13-14, the Arabs (xxi. 11 f., 13-17), Tyre\n(c. 23), and one with the mysterious (editorial) title \"Burden of the\nValley of Vision\" (xxii. 1-14). The last-named, in the form of a\nvision, depicts a crisis in the history of Jerusalem, and condemns the\nfrivolous behaviour of its inhabitants on the eve of a siege or, as\nsome think, during the respite given by a temporary raising of a\nsiege. It was probably uttered by Isaiah at an early stage in\nHezekiah's revolt against Sennacherib (704 or 703 B.C.), before the\nactual appearance of the Assyrian army. The oracle against Tyre (Isa.\nxxiii. 1-14--what follows is a later supplement) seems more\nappropriate to the thirteen years' siege by Nebuchadnezzar than to the\noperations of Shalmanezer or of Sennacherib in Isaiah's days.\n\nThus Isa. 13-23, like cc. 1-12, contains prophecies of Isaiah from\nboth the earliest and the latest period of his activity, intermingled\nwith others having a totally different historical horizon and dating\nfrom a much later time, and to both additions have been made by\neditors or scribes. A very interesting example of the latter\nphenomenon is Isa. xix. 18 ff. The passage is, in all probability,\nfrom the time of the Greek kingdoms of Egypt and Syria, the name of\nthe city in the Greek Bible, \"City of Righteousness,\" referring to\nLeontopolis, where a Jewish temple was erected about 170 B.C., with\nhigh priests of the legitimate line exiled from Jerusalem. \"City of\nDestruction\" (_heres_) in the Hebrew text is a hostile perversion,\npossibly by way of another reading \"City of the Sun\" (_heres_).\n\nEach of the three large prophetic books has such a group of oracles\nabout gentile nations, Isa. 13-23; Jer. 46-51; Ezek. 25-32. They are\nin part levelled at the immediate neighbours of Judah, in part against\nthe great powers, Babylon and Egypt. Many of them are in such general\nterms--or, if they refer to specific events and situations, our\nknowledge of the history is so incomplete--that it is peculiarly\ndifficult to fix their age. It was also a kind of prophecy which\npeculiarly invited imitation. Under the foreign yoke the Jews wore for\nso many centuries, it must often have been a relief of soul to repeat\nwhat God was going to do to the heathen; the spirit of the author of\nJonah was not for everybody. Moreover, if there is any place in the\nOld Testament where it would be easier than another for oracles of the\n\"false prophets\" to slip in and be preserved, it is in these\ncollections; about the doom of the enemies of Israel they were as\northodox and as emphatic as the best. It is not strange, therefore,\nthat there should be more than usual uncertainty about the origin of\nthese anathemas on the gentiles.\n\nIsaiah 24-27 contains a series of prophecies of judgment to come which\ndiffer from others in the book in having no particular address. The\nvision seems to widen to a judgment of the world, in which the earth\nitself reels and sinks under the weight of men's sin, and the\ncelestial powers (the heavenly bodies, which are the tutelary deities\nof the heathen) and the kings of the earth are cast into the pit and\nshut up in prison, while the Lord of Hosts reigns gloriously in Zion.\nIn another passage God, with his great sword, punishes the leviathan,\nthe swift and winding serpent, and slays the great dragon in the sea.\nThe mythological eschatology of Judaism made much of such imagery,\nwhich is itself doubtless of mythical ancestry.\n\nThe diction and style of these chapters alone would suffice to acquit\nIsaiah of responsibility for them; anything more unlike his writing\ncould not be imagined. The author, whosoever he was, riots in plays on\nwords, many of them, as is the fate of laborious punsters, forced or\nfar-fetched. As to the age of the chapters, apart from the language,\nprophecy is here plainly making the transition to apocalypse with\nthose visionary revelations of the last judgment in which Jewish\ninvention was so fertile. This of itself points to a late time in the\npost-exilic period. The historical allusions which have been scented\nout in the chapters are too uncertain to reckon with; only, as in c.\n19, the way in which Egypt and Assyria (or Syria) are conjoined seems\nplainly to point to the divisions of Alexander's empire.\n\nIn chapters 28-33 are brought together a number of oracles of Isaiah\nfrom the years of Hezekiah's revolt and Sennacherib's punitive\nexpedition. These oracles are generally brief and pointed; they agree\nin form and spirit with his prophecies in cc. 1-12 quite as closely as\nthe writing of an aging man ordinarily resembles that of his youth. In\nxxviii. 1-4, indeed, an early prophecy against Samaria is made to\nserve as text for a counterpart addressed to Jerusalem.\n\nMingled with these is a series of passages which foretell the\ndestruction of the foe and the miraculous escape of Judah from\nimminent ruin, or, taking higher flight, picture the golden age to\ncome. To the former class belong, for example, xxx. 27-33; xxxi. 4-9;\nto the latter, xxix. 18-24; xxx. 18-26; xxxii. 1-8, 16-20; while c. 33\npartakes of both characters. That Isaiah predicted the deliverance of\nJerusalem in the last extremity is reported also in Kings, and need\nnot be questioned (see also Isa. x. 5-14; xiv. 24-27). Most of the\nprophecies of the golden age are, however, alien to their context, and\nthe unmediated transition from the unsparing predictions of judgment\nto these messianic idylls makes them suspicious. It is not to be\nbelieved that the prophet thus took the sting out of his most pungent\noracles, but the position of the passages in question can have no\nother intention. If, then, these are utterances of Isaiah at all, they\ncannot have been spoken in their present connection. Some of them, at\nleast, are much more likely by other hands. This is true most\nevidently of c. 33, which was probably once the end of this little\nbook of prophecies from the time of Sennacherib (Isa. 28-33).\n\nIsaiah 34 is a prophecy against all the nations, which at once\nconcentrates itself upon Edom, and is remarkable for its rancour, in\nwhich, as in other respects, it resembles cc. 13 f. The supernatural\nfeatures of the judgment remind us also of Isa. 27: it is too little\nthat the people are annihilated, its very land is turned into an\nuninhabitable waste, and, as by some prodigious volcanic convulsion,\nits dust becomes brimstone and its soil burning pitch. This is the\nLord's vengeance for the wrong of Zion. The cause of this unusual\npassion is known from other prophets (see Obad. vss. 10-12; Ezek. xxv.\n12-14; c. 35): in the life and death struggle against Nebuchadnezzar,\nthe Edomites, Judah's next neighbours and near kin, had been on the\nside of the Babylonians, and were the chief gainers by the ruin of\nJudah, occupying permanently the whole south of the country to a line\nnorth of Hebron, making good in this way the part of their own old\nterritory which had been taken by the Nabat\u00e6ans. The injury was\nlasting and the hatred durable, but the flaming passion of Isa. 34\nwould incline us to think that it was written while the grief was\nstill fresh. The pendant to this, Isa. 35, a prophecy of the return of\nthe dispersion and restoration of Zion, is quite in the manner of Isa.\n40 ff., and not improbably by the same author.\n\nOf Isa. 36-39 (2 Kings 18-20) account has already been given (see\nabove, pp. 112 f.).\n\nThere remains the anonymous prophetic book, Isa. 40-66, which not only\nhas no title, but in which--in striking contrast to the frequency with\nwhich Isaiah's name occurs in the earlier chapters of the book--no\nprophet's name appears.\n\nIt begins with the announcement that the Jews have now been\nsufficiently punished for their sins; their guilt has been expiated by\nsuffering. The hour of national restoration is at hand. God has\nalready called the deliverer, who will bring low the pride of Babylon\nand set free captive Israel; by his edict Jerusalem shall be rebuilt\nand the temple restored. The Jews, not only from Babylonia but from\nthe wide and distant lands of their dispersion, shall flock back to\ntheir own country, the cities of Judah shall be repeopled, and Zion\nshall be too strait for its inhabitants. The deliverer is Cyrus (Isa.\nxliv. 28; xlv. 1), who is called God's friend, his anointed one\n(messiah); the victories he has already gained have been won in the\nmight of Jehovah, who, all unknown to him, girds him for the battle,\nand will go before him to new conquests.\n\nThe prophet's prediction was met with incredulity; the power of\nBabylon seemed invincible, the resurrection of the dead nation\nimpossible. Impossible, maybe, to men, but not to the Almighty God,\nthe creator of heaven and earth, the sovereign ruler of the nations!\nAs surely as the words of former prophets have come true, so signally\nshall these foretellings be fulfilled. For history is the unfolding of\nGod's plan from the beginning, which he reveals by chapters to his\nservants the prophets.\n\nThat this prophecy was delivered by Isaiah of Jerusalem, a century\nbefore the fall of Judah and a century and a half before the time of\nCyrus, would never have entered anybody's head had these chapters not\nbeen appended to a roll which bore at its beginning the name of Isaiah\nand contained many oracles of the eighth-century prophet. But this\nphysical fact, which may be due to no intention more profound than a\ndesire to economize writing material, cannot count against the\nconclusive internal evidence; background and foreground in Isa. 40 ff.\nare not merely totally different from those of the prophecies of\nIsaiah and his contemporaries, they are alike inconceivable in his\nage. Nor is the fact that the Jews in New Testament times, including\nthe New Testament writers, quoted these chapters as Isaiah and\nbelieved him the author of them, prove anything except that such was\nthe opinion of the Jews in that age.\n\nThe historical situation in Isa. 40 ff. would of itself be conclusive\nagainst Isaiah's authorship; but it is not the only proof of the\ncontrary. The author of these chapters has not inappropriately been\ncalled the theologian among the prophets. His idea of God is\nconspicuously more advanced than that of the prophets of the eighth\ncentury; it lies in the same line with the monotheism of Deuteronomy\nand Jeremiah, but lies beyond them. And it is characteristic that, in\ncontrast to the older prophets, this one reasons about it. He argues\nthe omnipotence of God in history from his omnipotence in creation,\nand makes large use of the evidence from the fulfilment of prophecy to\nprove that Jehovah is the only God; he can predict because he\nforeordains and brings to pass. With him begins the polemic, not\nagainst the worship of heathen gods, but against their existence. What\nthe heathen bow down to are naught but helpless, senseless idols, the\nwork of their own hands. He is fond of inviting his readers to an\nimage-maker's shop to see how a god is made (see, e.g., Isa. xliv.\n9-20). Such are the impotent gods that the Babylonians expect to save\nthem out of the hands of the creator of the world!\n\nThe style of Isa. 40 ff. is not less decisive. Translation necessarily\nin large measure effaces the differences, but even in translation a\ncomparison of two passages on similar themes such as Isa. x. 5-19 and\nIsa. 47 may perhaps give some impression of them. The style of Isaiah\nand his contemporaries--Amos, Hosea, Micah--is concise and pregnant,\nthe sentences are short and have often an oracular ring. The author of\nIsa. 40 ff. writes with a freer pen in flowing periods; he develops\nhis thought and his figures more at large; if he is obscure, it is\nseldom from compression. Here again, Deuteronomy and Jeremiah, the\nwhole literature of the seventh century, is an intermediate stage. The\nlater author is a poet, as Isaiah is, but with other themes and in\nother forms; compare, e.g., Isa. 5 with Isa. xlii. 1-9. In short, each\nhas a highly characteristic style, and the two are totally different.\n\nThe historical situation, as it has been defined above, appears most\ndistinctly in Isa. 40-55. In the following chapters two passages were\nlong ago seen not to correspond to that situation, viz. lvi. 9-lvii.\n13 and c. 65 (especially vss. 1-16), in which the vehement attack on\nidolatrous and abominable rites practised by Jews under the prophet's\neyes was thought to indicate a pre-exilic origin. It was a serious\nerror, however, to conceive that the so-called exile cured all the\nJews once and for all of every inclination to heathenism; the history\nof the Seleucid period sufficiently proves the contrary. There is\nnothing in the chapters inconsistent with the view, now generally\nentertained, that these flaming denunciations were delivered in\nPalestine in the Persian or the Greek period; and there is no warrant\nfor assuming that they were specifically addressed to the half-heathen\npopulation of the old territory of Israel, still less to the so-called\nSamaritan sect, that is, the worshippers at the rival temple on\nGerizim.\n\nOther chapters (Isa. lvii. 14-21; 60; 61 f.) resemble in spirit and\nmanner the prophecies in Isa. 40-55, but are more probably by later\nwriters under the influence of those prophecies than by their author.\nTheir optimism contrasts with the depressed tone of lviii. 1-lix.\n15^a, in which the sense of sin is borne in on the community by the\ndelay in the coming of the good times. In lix. 15^b-21, and lxiii. 1-6\nGod's fury is poured out on foreign nations, in the latter\nspecifically on Edom; lxiii. 7-lxiv. 12 is a cry for God's\nintervention in dire distress (see lxiii. 18; lxiv. 10 f., devastation\nof Judah, burning of the temple); c. 66 contains diverse elements,\nconsolation to Jerusalem of the school of Isa. 40-45, and censures of\nabominable rites (lxvi. 3 f., 17 ff.).\n\nIsaiah 56-66 is, therefore, generally regarded as an appendix to the\nbook of consolation, cc. 40-55, containing very diverse elements.\n\nIt would be nothing strange if alien prophecies and editorial\nexpansions were found in Isa. 40-55 also, and displacements are\nprobably in more than one passage. The question of authorship is of\npeculiar interest in the case of three prophecies which have for their\nsubject the mission and suffering of the \"Servant of Jehovah,\" Isa.\nxlii. 1-9; xlix. 1-13; lii. 13-liii. 12, which are thought by some to\nbe taken wholly or in part from an older prophet, by others to be\nlater insertions. The reasons for ascribing the \"Servant\" passages to\na different author do not seem decisive.\n\nThe Book of Isaiah is thus a great collection of prophecies of various\nages, from the middle of the eighth century B.C. down perhaps to the\nthird, with some minor additions of even later date.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII\n\nJEREMIAH\n\n\nJeremiah dates his call to the arduous mission of prophet in the\nthirteenth year of King Josiah (626 B.C.), and he lived till after the\nfall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C., so that, like his predecessor Isaiah a\ncentury earlier, his career spans a period of about forty years in a\ntime of great events. Only five years after he began to prophesy,\nJosiah reformed religion in Judah on the new model of the law-book\ndiscovered by Hilkiah (Deuteronomy; see above, pp. 62 f.). Jeremiah,\nscion of a priestly family native in Anathoth, a few miles north of\nJerusalem, which very likely traced its descent from Abiathar, David's\npriest, whom Solomon deposed in favour of Zadok, was therefore one of\nthose priests of the high places who were hit hardest by the\nsuppression of the local sanctuaries. That his townsmen of Anathoth\nsought his life (Jer. xi. 18 ff.) has been attributed to their\nindignation that Jeremiah should dare to preach Josiah's \"covenant\" to\nthem (see Jer. xi. 1-17). Whatever hopes he may have entertained at\nfirst, Jeremiah was not long in seeing that the reform had cleaned\nonly the outside of the cup and the platter, while men fortified their\nconsciences behind the \"covenant\" against an investigation of the\ninside. In 608 B.C. Josiah fell in battle at Megiddo against the\nEgyptian king Necho. After a brief vassalage to Egypt, Judah came\nunder the Babylonian yoke. Jeremiah saw all this; saw, too, Jerusalem\ntwice taken by the armies of Nebuchadnezzar (597, 586 B.C.), the\ntemple burned and the walls razed; and was at last forced to accompany\nthe refugees to Egypt after the murder of Gedaliah.\n\nEarly in the reign of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah delivered himself of a\nfulminant oracle in the gate of the temple (Jer. vii. 1-15, cf. c.\n26), in which he declared that the Jews' faith in the temple as the\npalladium of the city was a delusion; unless they altogether amended\ntheir ways, God would make the temple a ruin like the ancient\nsanctuary at Shiloh. Priests, prophets, and people clamoured with one\nvoice for the blasphemer's death, but he hurled back at them a\nreiteration of his warning. The intervention of some of the magnates\nsaved his life; but another prophet who lacked such influential\nprotection was extradited from Egypt and put to death.\n\nUnder these circumstances Jeremiah took another way of reaching the\npublic (see Jer. 36). He dictated to Baruch the prophecies which he\nhad uttered from the beginning of his mission to that time, and sent\nBaruch to read the roll in the temple at the fast in the ninth month\nin the fifth year of Jehoiakim (603 B.C.). Some of the nobles had\nBaruch give them a private reading, and then carried the book to the\nking, first giving Baruch the friendly advice to put himself and\nJeremiah out of harm's way. The king, as he read the roll, cut off the\npages, and burned them on the brazier in his chamber. Jeremiah\nthereupon dictated to the faithful Baruch another roll containing all\nthe prophecies that were in the first, \"and there were added besides\nunto them many like words.\" We may be sure that the second edition\nwould have been even less agreeable reading to Jehoiakim than the\nfirst. One of the additional words is indeed preserved in Jer. xxxvi.\n29-31. The chapter is of peculiar interest, because it is an\naccount--the only one in the Old Testament--of the origin of a\nprophetic book. We see the prophet reproducing, doubtless from memory,\nthe content of oracles uttered in the course of the preceding twenty\nyears or more, and enlarging the collection for a second edition. It\nis a fair conjecture that this second roll furnished to our Book of\nJeremiah most, if not all, the prophecies prior to the fifth year of\nJehoiakim; but it is certain that the roll itself is not incorporated\nas such in the present book. There are also several prophecies from\nlater years of Jehoiakim, and many from the reign of the last king,\nZedekiah, especially from the time of his revolt and the siege of\nJerusalem by the Babylonians.\n\nA distinctive feature of the Book of Jeremiah is the presence of\npassages of considerable extent derived from a biographical source.\nFrom this comes the account of the making and reading of the collected\nvolume of prophecies in the fourth and fifth years of Jehoiakim of\nwhich we have already spoken (Jer. 36), and particularly the narrative\nof Jeremiah's fortunes during the last siege of Jerusalem and\nafterward, including the flight to Egypt and his experiences with the\nrefugees there, covering thus three or four years beginning with 588\n(Jer. 37-44). To the same source it is natural to ascribe c. 26,\nrelating to the circumstances and consequences of the prophecy\ndelivered in the temple at the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign (c. 7);\nc. 28 (collision with the \"false prophet\" Hananiah, in the beginning\nof the reign of Zedekiah); c. 29 (letter to the Jews in Babylonia,\nabout the same time); and parts of cc. 32, 34, and 35.\n\nThere is good reason to believe that the author of this biography was\nBaruch, who not only stood in intimate relations with Jeremiah before\nthe fall of Jerusalem, but accompanied him to Egypt (Jer. xliii. 6).\nIt is consequently a historical source of the best possible kind. For\nthe first half of Jeremiah's career this source fails us; and, as we\nhave seen, it is continuous only from the last years of Zedekiah. It\nis possible that Baruch's association with Jeremiah began in the time\nof Jehoiakim, and his narrative may have commenced there.\n\nUnfortunately this life of Jeremiah has not been preserved complete or\nintact. The prophecies contained in it led later compilers to\nintroduce other oracles which seemed appropriate to the context, and\nto supplement the words of Jeremiah by edifying compositions of their\nown. Their aim, it must constantly be borne in mind, was not to\nproduce a critical edition of the prophecies of Jeremiah, but to make\na book effective to impress the truths and motives of religion on\ntheir own contemporaries, and with changing times and situations to\nkeep the book, so to speak, up to date. If the words of an old\nprophet suggested to them a good moral, they wrote it out for him,\nwithout dreaming that they were doing either him or morality a wrong,\nor thinking how much trouble they were making for future historical\nstudents. It is exactly the same procedure and the same motive which\nmeets us in innumerable places in the Pentateuch and Historical Books.\nTo stigmatize such interpolations as literary fraud is absurd. These\nadditions are often recognizable by their prosaic preachiness or by\ntheir composite imitativeness.\n\nOf one kind of prediction the Jews of later centuries could not have\nenough, the prophecies of deliverance from the foreign yoke and the\nbetter time to follow. They not only cherished the hopeful words of\nformer prophets and wrote variations on their themes, but gave\nexpression to their faith and their ideals in their own way. That they\noften took their inspiration from Isa. 40 ff. is natural. In Jeremiah\nsuch promises of a happier future are accumulated in cc. 30-33, which\ncontain, with some oracles of Jeremiah, pieces of various authorship\nand age, some of them such pendants to gloomy pictures as we have\nfound numerous in Isaiah (e.g. Jer. xxx. 1 ff. to vss. 12-15), others\nmore independent compositions.\n\nThese stand interspersed among the extracts from Baruch's life of\nJeremiah. In the first half of the book (Jer. 1-25) there is no such\nhistory for a framework. It will be observed here that the prophet\ncommonly introduces his message in personal form, \"The word of Jehovah\ncame to me, saying,\" or \"Then Jehovah said to me,\" or the like.\nSometimes an oracle begins, as in c. 18, \"The words which came to\nJeremiah,\" as a kind of title, while in the sequel the prophet speaks\nin the first person. Dates are infrequent in this part of the book,\nand if a chronological order was observed in Baruch's roll, it has\nbeen broken up in the present arrangement. Internal evidence does not\nalways suffice to fix the age of the utterances, the less because some\nof the early oracles have obviously been adapted to a later situation.\nThis is peculiarly evident in cc. 1-6. In these chapters are several\nprophecies from the years when the wild horsemen from the Scythian\nsteppes were overrunning western Asia and striking terror into the\nstoutest hearts by their barbarous appearance and fierce manners.\nJeremiah saw in them the scourge of God (see e.g. Jer. iv. 5-8,\n27-31), the day of doom was come! It was, indeed, such a vision of\ndoom that first met his gaze, when God made him a prophet (Jer. i. 13\nff.). But in the present shape of these chapters the enemy out of the\nnorth which menaces ruin is not the wild Scythian hordes, but the\nserried armies of Babylon. It is not at all improbable that this\nchange of horizon was made by Jeremiah himself, when at the beginning\nof Jehoiakim's reign the Scythian flood had run off, and, by the\noverthrow of Nineveh and Nebuchadnezzar's defeat of Pharaoh Necho on\nthe Euphrates, the new Babylonian empire had become the impending fate\nof Syria and Palestine.\n\nAmong the prophecies of Jeremiah in this part of the book also are\nintroduced pieces, larger or smaller, which are the product of later\ngenerations; two conspicuous examples are Jer. ix. 23-34; x. 1-16 (x.\n17 is the immediate continuation of ix. 22), and xvii. 19-27.\n\nJeremiah's experience in the pursuit of his calling was a hard one.\nHis Cassandra forebodings gained him the enmity of all, and hostility\ngrew to bitter hatred as the dire fulfilment stared them in the face.\nHis countrymen in Anathoth plotted his death; the prophecy in the\ntemple all but cost him his life, and was an end, for the time at\nleast, of public appearances; the coming of his collected oracles into\nJehoiakim's hands drove him and the scribe into hiding. During the\nlast siege, he first was kept in arrest in a private house, then cast\ninto an empty cistern, where he would have perished but for the\nfriendliness of a negro eunuch; then confined in the court of the\nguard till the taking of the city; released by the Babylonians, his\ncounsel to the refugees not to flee to Egypt was badly received, and\nhe was constrained to accompany them. In Egypt, again denouncing and\npredicting ill, he disappears; Jewish legend says, killed by his\nexasperated countrymen.\n\nBut these outward perils and pains were not all he had to bear for\nbeing a prophet. In anguish of soul he suffered twice the tragedy of\nhis people, in foresight and in fact--suffered as only a man of\nsensitive spirit and unflinching will can suffer. That needs no\ncommentary; but there is another element we do not so easily conceive:\nJeremiah believed that the word of God he had to utter was not merely\na prediction, but the effectual cause, of the ruin of Judah (see Jer.\ni. 9 f.). It is not strange that the task God had laid on him seemed\ntoo heavy to be borne. He feels himself a man of contention to the\nwhole earth. He remonstrates, he reproaches God for having misled him,\nhe resolves never again to speak in the name of the Lord; but there is\nwithin him as it were a burning fire shut up in his bones, he cannot\nhold in (Jer. xx. 7-18; see also xv. 10 f., 15-18; xii. 1-6). These\n\"confessions,\" as they have been called, are of the greatest interest;\nthey are a revelation of the prophet's soul such as has no counterpart\nin the Old Testament, and, with Baruch's simple story, bring him as a\nman nearer to us than any of the other prophets.\n\nIn the Hebrew (and therefore in the English) Bible, the last chapters\nof the book (Jer. 46-51) contain a collection of prophecies against\nforeign nations, to which is appended (c. 52) an extract from the Book\nof Kings (2 Kings xxiv. 18-xxv. 21), describing the taking of\nJerusalem by the Babylonian army in 586 B.C. In the Greek Bible the\noracles against the foreign nations come in between Jer. xxv. 13 and\nvs. 15, but in an altogether different order. They evidently formed a\nlittle book by themselves, which in one recension of the Book of\nJeremiah were appended to the volume of his prophecies, in another\nwere inserted in the middle of it as the corresponding collections of\nforeign oracles are placed in Ezek. 25-32 and Isa. 13-23. The question\nof the original place and disposition of these prophecies is of\nimportance only for the relation of the two forms of the book to each\nother, and need not be pursued here.\n\nIt is very doubtful whether Jeremiah had any hand whatever in these\nchapters. The prolix prophecy against Babylon (Jer. 50-51) is a purely\nliterary exercise, for which contributions have been levied right and\nleft, and was written at a time when Babylon had long ceased to be of\nhistorical importance. Others of the prophecies borrow from earlier\nprophets generously. An examination, by the aid of the marginal\nreferences in the Revised Version (Oxford and Cambridge edition,\n1898), of the appropriations and reminiscences will give a profitable\nnotion of this literary imitation of prophecy.\n\nThe different order of the prophecies is not the only, nor the most\nimportant, difference between the Hebrew and the Greek Jeremiah.\nBesides a great number of variant readings of the ordinary kind, the\noldest Greek version is much shorter than the Hebrew; it has been\nreckoned that in the neighbourhood of 2700 words in the latter have\nnothing corresponding to them in the translation. Some part of this\nmay be due to abridgment by the translators, to which the repetitions\nin parts of Jeremiah--chiefly secondary parts--invited; but when all\nallowance is made for this, it remains that the Hebrew copies from\nwhich the translation was made had a much briefer text than the\nPalestinian Hebrew in our hands, and it is probable that the greater\npart of this difference, which is chiefly in comparative verbosity, is\ndue to padding with stock phrases and turns of thought in the\nPalestinian text. In some instances oracles or tags to oracles which\non other grounds are recognized as late additions to our text had not\ngot into that of the Greek translators.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVIII\n\nEZEKIEL\n\n\nEzekiel was one of the priests of Jerusalem who was carried off to\nBabylonia with King Jehoiachin in the deportation of 597 B.C. Those\nwho were thus deported were the upper classes, including, of course,\nthe royal family and the court and the aristocracy of the priesthood,\nand skilled artisans, particularly the smiths (armorers). Having thus\nremoved the natural leaders of the rebellious people, Nebuchadnezzar\nmade Zedekiah, an uncle of Jehoiachin, king in his stead and gave\nJudah another trial. The eight or ten thousand Jews with their\nfamilies who were removed to Babylonia were colonized at different\npoints, Ezekiel repeatedly mentions the river Chebar, that is,\nprobably, the grand canal in the vicinity of Nippur. The patricians in\nexile thought very poorly of the new lords who had stepped into their\nshoes in Jerusalem, and they flattered themselves that events would\nsoon take such a turn that they would return to Jud\u00e6a and to power.\nThey had prophets and diviners among them who encouraged them in this\nexpectation. When Zedekiah revolted and the Babylonian armies a second\ntime besieged Jerusalem, their faith in the inviolability of Zion,\nconfirmed, rather than shaken, by the outcome of things in 597 B.C.,\nwhen Jehoiachin surrendered and the holy city took no harm, made them\nrefuse hearing to Ezekiel's prediction of ruin; they may even have\ndreamed that Nebuchadnezzar would find out his mistake and restore to\nJudah its legitimate rulers, chastened by experience, and pack\nZedekiah and his advisers into exile in their place.\n\nAgainst this vain and superstitious optimism Ezekiel had to contend\nuntil the disastrous issue made a rude end of all their dreams and\nthrew the exiles into the depths of hopelessness: Bel had triumphed\nover Jehovah, and it was all over with the nation. Thenceforth\nEzekiel's task was to save them from despair by the assurance that God\nstill had a purpose to fulfil with them, and that, in his own time,\nwhen they had been thoroughly purged from their old sins and filled\nwith a new spirit, he would restore them to their own land and bring\nto life again the dead nation.\n\nThese two periods of the prophet's mission sharply divide the Book of\nEzekiel. To the day when the word came to him that the Babylonian\narmies had invested Jerusalem (Ezek. 24) he combats delusion; from the\narrival of the tidings of the fall of the city (xxxiii. 21 ff.) he\ncombats despair. The first part is all menace, the second is full of\npromise. Numerous dated oracles serve as landmarks, especially in the\nfirst part.\n\nBetween the two, in the two years of suspense, when about his own\npeople the prophet is dumb, is placed the group of prophecies against\nforeign nations (cc. 25-32), beginning with oracles against the\nneighbours of Judah who held true to Nebuchadnezzar in this crisis and\nhad their reward at Judah's cost--Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, and\nPhilistines. These are followed by long predictions of the ruin of\nTyre, over whose calamity the prophet exults more loudly than the\ngrievance of Jerusalem (Ezek. xxvi. 2) seems to justify.\nNebuchadnezzar did in fact besiege Tyre for thirteen years (585-572\nB.C.), and doubtless inflicted upon it great losses; but the island\ncity, with its command of the sea, he could not take. Ezekiel himself,\nin a remarkable passage which is perhaps his latest word in the book,\nadmits that his predictions of the capture of Tyre (xxvi. 7-14) had\nnot been fulfilled--Nebuchadnezzar had had to raise the long and\nineffectual siege--but he promises that Jehovah will reward him for\nthese fruitless labours in the Lord's service by giving him Egypt\ninstead (xxix. 17-21). The animosity against Egypt which finds\nexpression in the predictions of the Babylonian subjugation of that\ncountry is more easily explained. Egypt had been the evil genius of\nJudah, instigating rebellion against the Babylonian suzerainty, and\npromising armed aid which always failed in the decisive hour; it was\nmeet that it should taste the cup of humiliation itself. In c. 32 the\ndescent of Egypt to the hell of fallen nations is vividly depicted; a\nsimilar picture of the descent of the Babylonian king in Isa. 14 has\nalready been noted. Not improbably Babylonian notions of the nether\nworld may have influenced the imagery of both, as a myth of paradise\nseems to have suggested the imagery of Tyre in Eden (xxviii. 12 ff.).\nOutside this group is an oracle against Edom (c. 35), and the great\nprophecy of the irruption of Gog and his hordes and their fate (cc.\n38 f.).\n\nA conspicuous feature of the Book of Ezekiel are the extended visions\nand the elaborated symbolical actions. In the inaugural vision (Ezek.\ni.-iii. 15), for instance, God appears, a veritable _deus ex machina_,\non a high seat in a curious motor car made up of animated wheels and\nwinged monsters. In a later vision (c. 10) he sees God leave the\ndoomed temple in Jerusalem and mount this cherubim car, in which he is\nwhirled away through the air to the east; and in the great vision of\nthe new temple in the golden age God returns to his abode in the same\nconveyance (c. 43). Striking examples of symbolical actions may be\nfound in Ezek. 4, and in xii. 1-20. They are of such an extraordinary\ncharacter as to raise the question whether they were really enacted\nbefore the eyes of the people or only described in discourse.\n\nEzekiel's visions are sometimes ecstatic states, in which he is\ninstantaneously translated from place to place. At the end of the\ninaugural vision, \"the spirit\" lifted him up and took him away,\nsetting him down in amazement among the colonists at Tell-Abib. In\nviii. 1 ff., as he sat in his own house in the midst of a company of\nthe elders of Judah, the spirit, which is described as a strange\nluminous creature, took him up by the hair of his head and wafted him\n\"in the visions of God\" to Jerusalem, where his conductor showed him\nall the idolatrous cults and the abominable mysteries that were\npractised in the temple under the very eyes of \"the glory of the God\nof Israel\" (c. 8); after seeing God take his flight from the\ndesecrated sanctuary, the prophet is translated by the spirit to\nChald\u00e6a again. Another such vision in ecstasy is the famous scene in\nthe valley of dry bones (Ezek. 37). In such cases it is impossible to\nsay how much is actually the experience of the visionary, how much\nliterary form.\n\nIn the great vision of the restoration, cc. 40-48, which also is\nintroduced as an ecstasy with the translation of the prophet to\nPalestine, we may be pretty sure that the element of conscious\ncomposition predominates. The chapters contain a programme for the\ncoming age when all the twelve tribes, gathered together from exile\nand dispersion, shall reoccupy the holy land, with a new, geometrical\ndivision of the territory, with a new plan for the city of Jerusalem,\na new constitution for the state, a new temple after the old model, a\nreorganized ministry of religion, and a reformed worship. The ruling\nidea which runs through all is to make impossible those sins against\nthe holiness of God, his land, his house, his people, which had been\nthe cause of former ruin.\n\nThe Book of Ezekiel seems to have been arranged and published by the\nauthor, and though some derangements and repetitions may be observed,\nit has not been much meddled with by later editors, and, to whatever\nreason it may be attributed, exhibits none of the phenomena of\ncompilation and amplification which we have found in Isaiah and\nJeremiah. The Hebrew text, however, has suffered more than most books\nin transmission, and has reached us in an unusually corrupt state. The\nauthor has a style of his own, which can rise to eloquence (as in the\noracles against Tyre), but is generally pedestrian and sometimes\nclumsy. He has plenty of imagination, not always regulated by taste or\nrestrained by decency. His drastic figures of the unfaithfulness of\nIsrael and Judah are often unfit to translate.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIX\n\nDANIEL\n\n\nIn the Hebrew Bible the Book of Daniel stands, not as in our Bible\namong the Prophets, after Ezekiel, but among the miscellaneous books\nin the third division, the \"Scriptures.\" Various reasons have been\nsuggested for this, but by far the most probable is that at the time\nwhen Daniel became current, in the second century B.C., the Prophets\nwere already a definite group of writings with a traditional use in\nthe readings of the Synagogue, to which a new book could not well be\nadded.\n\nThe Book of Daniel consists of two parts, stories about Daniel and his\nthree comrades (cc. 1-6), and visions of Daniel (cc. 7-12); in the\nlatter Daniel reports his visions in the first person as Ezekiel\nhabitually does, and it was only natural that he should be taken for\nthe author of the book.\n\nAccording to the introduction to the first story, Daniel and his three\nfriends, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, were Jewish youths of high\nbirth who were carried captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar in the\nfirst deportation (which is erroneously dated in the third year of\nJehoiakim). One story (Dan. 1) tells how these youths contrived to\navoid all danger of eating unclean food, and how God blessed them in\nbody and mind for their scrupulousness in observance of the dietary\nlaws; another (c. 3), how the three were saved from Nebuchadnezzar's\noverheated furnace, into which they were thrown for refusing to\nworship the idol; a third (c. 6), how Daniel was cast into the lions'\nden for praying to his God despite the edict of Darius. These\nmiraculous deliverances constrain the heathen kings publicly to\nacknowledge that the God of the Jews is the greatest of gods. The same\nacknowledgment is drawn from Nebuchadnezzar when Daniel recalls his\nforgotten dream and interprets it, after all the diviners of Babylon\nhad failed (c. 2); he alone is able to decipher and explain for\nBelshazzar the handwriting on the wall (c. 5). The stories of\nNebuchadnezzar's madness (c. 2) and of Belshazzar's feast (c. 5) teach\nalso how God punishes kings who in their pride of power exalt\nthemselves before him, or in their arrogance profane his holy things.\n\nAll of them thus magnify the God of the Jews as in power and wisdom\nabove all other gods, and two of the most striking of them have for\ntheir theme the deliverance from mortal peril of men who stood\nfaithful to their religion against the king's commandment. These\nobvious motives, as we shall presently see, have a bearing on the age\nof the stories.\n\nIn the second part of the book are four visions, or revelations, which\nstand in chronological order (according to the author's chronology):\nc. 7 in the first year of Belshazzar; c. 8 in his third year; c. 9 in\nthe first year of \"Darius son of Xerxes, of the race of the\nMedes\"--not properly a vision, but a revelation by Gabriel; and cc.\n10-12 in the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia. By the side of these\nmust be put Nebuchadnezzar's dream in Dan. ii. 28-45 (second year of\nNebuchadnezzar), which, in its four-empire scheme, corresponds to\nDaniel's vision in c. 7. The interpretations which Daniel gives to\nNebuchadnezzar or the angel gives to Daniel, though sometimes\nsurrounded with an impressive air of mystery, give all the necessary\nclues to the understanding of the visions, and obscure allusions are\noften made plain by a more explicit parallel.\n\nUnder fantastic and varied imagery, they unroll the history of the\nempires which succeed one another in the dominion of the world, from\nthe Babylonian (Dan. 2 and 7), or the Medo-Persian (c. 8), or Persian\n(cc. 10-12)--that is from the assumed standpoint of Daniel--through\nthe dominion of Alexander and the kingdoms into which his empire was\nbroken up, ending always with the reign of Antiochus IV. (175-164\nB.C.). The goal in them all is the destruction of the heathen power\nand the establishment of the eternal kingdom of the holy people of the\nMost High, otherwise, the Jews.\n\nThe simplest form of this scheme is Nebuchadnezzar's dream in Dan. 2.\nThe image with head of gold, breast and arms of silver, belly and\nthighs of brass, legs of iron, and feet part of iron and part of clay,\nstands for four empires in a scale of deterioration, like the four\nages of Hesiod, beginning with the Babylonian, represented by\nNebuchadnezzar himself. This is followed by an inferior kingdom, and\nthat by a third universal empire; the destructive strength of the\nfourth is figured by iron which shatters all that it smites; the feet\nand toes signify a divided kingdom, in part strong as iron, in part\nbrittle as pottery. The stone which smote the image on the feet and\nbroke them to pieces, whereupon the whole image collapsed into dust\nand was whirled away by the wind, while the stone grew to a great\nmountain and filled all the earth, is the kingdom which the God of\nheaven shall establish in those days, \"which shall never be destroyed,\nnor shall the sovereignty thereof be left to another people, but it\nshall break in pieces and annihilate all those empires, and it shall\nstand forever.\"\n\nThe image thus represents the rule of the heathen as one world-empire,\nthe dominion being exercised successively by four kingdoms and by the\ndivisions of the fourth; in the destruction of these last the heathen\nworld-empire is forever annihilated, and the eternal kingdom of God\nsubdues and rules the whole earth. What is said about the second and\nthird kingdoms is too general to identify them; the iron strength and\ndestructiveness of the fourth, and its divisions with their mingled\nstrength and weakness, naturally suggest Alexander and his successors,\nand this impression is strengthened by the one specific trait in the\nwhole picture; the vain effort to make iron and wet clay combine\nsignifies, we are told, an equally futile attempt to bind the divided\nkingdoms together by intermarriages (Dan. ii. 43). We know from the\nhistorians that attempts to ally the kingdoms of the Ptolemies in\nEgypt and the Seleucids in Syria by dynastic marriages were repeatedly\nmade in vain, and the author of Daniel himself, in c. 11, refers to\nthese alliances and their disastrous failure in plain terms.\n\nThe vision of Daniel in c. 7 brings in the four empires under the\nsymbol of four monstrous beasts. The fourth, more terrible and more\ndestructive than the others, has ten horns (\"out of this kingdom ten\nkings shall arise,\" vs. 24); another horn, \"with the eyes of a man and\na boastful mouth,\" arises which roots out three of the ten. Daniel\nsees how he makes war on the \"holy men\" (i.e. the Jews) and prevails\nover them (vs. 21); the interpreting angel describes in more detail\nthe crimes of the last king: he will utter speeches against the\nHighest, and wear out the holy men of the Most High, and try to change\n(religious) seasons and law (religion). God's people will be delivered\ninto his power till the expiration of three and a half years (cf. xii.\n7). Then the proud king and his kingdom will be annihilated and the\nuniversal and eternal empire of the Jews established.\n\nStill more definite is the description of the doings of the \"little\nhorn\" which springs up on the head of the great he-goat in the vision\nof c. 8. Here the interpreter becomes explicit: the he-goat is by name\nthe Macedonian empire. The little horn is a king who shall arise in\nthe latter time of the divided kingdoms of Alexander's successors.\nThis king magnifies himself against the chief of the heavenly host,\ncasts down his sanctuary, takes away his daily burnt-offerings, and\ndestroys the holy people; and is then himself suddenly \"broken without\nhand.\" In the further explanation given to Daniel in ix. 26 ff., the\ncessation of the daily sacrifice is to last half a week (of years),\ni.e. three and a half years; the profanation of the sanctuary and\nsuppression of the sacrifices and the persecution of the Jews occur\nagain in xi. 31 ff. (cf. xii. 5-12). In connection with this we hear\nof setting up of a \"desolating (or appalling) abomination,\" in the\ntemple. The common use of \"abomination\" (loathsome thing) for idols or\nother objects of heathen worship leaves no doubt that some such object\nis meant here: the king not only stopped the worship of the God of the\nJews in his own temple, but established in its place a heathen cult.\nIt is, indeed, not improbable that the words translated \"appalling\nabomination\" are an intentional distortion of the proper name of the\nheathen god Baal Shamaim, i.e. Jupiter.\n\nThe definiteness of all this proves that the author is not creating an\nimaginary monster in whom all the sins of the heathen rulers against\nthe God of Heaven and his people are accumulated, but describing a\nhistorical figure. Nor is there the smallest room for question whose\nportrait he is painting: every feature of it belongs to Antiochus IV.,\nEpiphanes (Manifest God, the title means, which Antiochian wits\nperverted to Epimanes, Manifest Madman), who in 168 B.C. took\npossession of the temple in Jerusalem, suppressed the worship of its\nGod, erected an altar of Jupiter on the great altar of burnt offering,\nand inaugurated heathen sacrifices. Not only that, but he forbade\ncircumcision, the observance of the sabbath, and the possession of\ncopies of the scriptures, and commanded that Jews should certify their\nabjuration of their own religion by sacrificing to his gods. Those who\nignored or defied his decrees were persecuted; many of them put to\ndeath. This attempt to extirpate the Jewish religion and forcibly\nheathenize the people provoked a revolt led by Judas Maccab\u00e6us and his\nbrothers, who three years later recovered the temple, purged it, and\nrestored the sacrifices.\n\nIf there could be any doubt about the identification, it would be\nremoved by Dan. 11, which, as was recognized by Porphyry in the third\ncentury of our era, contains a minute history of the relations of the\nPtolemies and Seleucids, their intermarriages and their wars, with\nincreasing detail, down to the Egyptian campaigns of Antiochus\nEpiphanes--mentioning, for instance, the rebuff he received from the\nRoman envoy (Popillius Laenas), and in the sequel of this his\ndesecration of the temple in Jerusalem and persecution of the\nlaw-abiding Jews--and there the history ends.\n\nAll this is supposed to be revealed to Daniel in the days of\nNebuchadnezzar and under later Babylonian and Median kings down to the\nfirst year of Cyrus, that is, according to the historical chronology,\nabout three hundred and seventy-five years before the event. Such\nvisionary panoramas form a recognized genus of Jewish literature, and\nthey are regularly unrolled to some man of God in the remote or\nremotest past. In the second and first centuries before our era a\ngreat variety of such visions were attributed to Enoch, others to\nNoah; revelations to Seth the son of Adam were once popular, and Adam\nhimself had some. Another class, like Daniel, bore the names of men of\nthe exile; Baruch is the putative father of several such revelations;\none of the most notable of the kind is the apocalypse of Ezra, which\nstands in the Apocrypha in our Bible as Second Esdras.\n\nThe age of such apocalypses is determined, not by the date assigned to\nthe imaginary seer, but by the actual standpoint of the author as\ndisclosed in the visions. In Daniel the historical panorama is\nunrolled every time to the reign of Antiochus IV., and there stops.\nThe writer had witnessed the desecration of the temple and the\npersecution of the Jews for their religion, he had seen the first\nsmall successes of the Maccabees, but the recovery of the temple and\nthe restoration of sacrifice had not yet occurred. The death of\nAntiochus is circumstantially predicted, but in a place and manner\nvery remote from the reality (Dan. xi. 45). The visions of Daniel\nfall, therefore, between December 168 B.C., the date of the\ndesecration of the temple, and December 165, the restoration. The\nmotives of the stories also (see above, p. 178 f.) are most\nappropriate to the situation under Antiochus. It is possible that they\nare adaptations of older tales, but there is no reason to think that\nthey are of high antiquity. The Greek Bible has three additional\nstories about Daniel (Susanna and the Elders, Bel, and the Dragon)\nwhich stand in our Bibles among the Apocrypha.\n\nOne peculiarity of the Book of Daniel remains for brief mention. Like\nEzra, it is in two languages: Dan. i. 1-ii. 4 is in Hebrew, from ii. 4\nb to the end of c. 7 in Aramaic, and from the beginning of c. 8 the\nrest is in Hebrew again. The Aramaic begins appropriately where the\nChald\u00e6ans (diviners) are introduced speaking in what the author\nevidently conceives to be the language of the country; the text does\nnot, however, revert to Hebrew when this conference is over, but holds\non, not only through all the rest of the stories, but through the\nfirst vision (c. 7). A motive for just this distribution of the two\ntongues is not discoverable; in the chapter of accidents are various\npossibilities which offset one another. As in Ezra--though there are\nsome differences between the two books--the Aramaic is of a kind which\nwas vernacular in Palestine in the last centuries before our era.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XX\n\nMINOR PROPHETS\n\n\nThe Minor Prophets--so called not in depreciation, but because their\nbooks are smaller than those of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel--form in\nthe Jewish Bible one book, in which are brought together oracles in\nthe name of various prophets from the eighth century B.C. (Amos,\nHosea) to the fifth (Haggai, Zechariah), and one anonymous book\n(Malachi). As in the collections which bear in their titles the names\nof Isaiah and Jeremiah, so in the collection of the Twelve, prophecies\nhave been attributed, by error or conjecture or accident, to prophets\nto whom they do not belong, and additions and alterations have been\nmade by compilers or editors. The extent of this alien matter differs\nin different books; Hosea, for example, seems to contain little of it,\nwhile in Micah it is considerable.\n\n\nHOSEA.--In our Bibles, in which the Minor Prophets stand and are\ncounted individually, the first is Hosea. This position, which it has\nalso in the Hebrew Bible, may have been given the book, partly on\naccount of its age, partly on account of its length; but it might also\nclaim it by reason of its worth, for Hosea is one of the greatest of\nthe prophets, not in Minor company alone, but in the canon. No other\ncontributed so much, through his own words and through his great\nsuccessors, Jeremiah and the Deuteronomists, to deepen and\nspiritualize the conception of religion.\n\nHosea was an Israelite who began to prophesy to his countrymen in the\nreign of Jeroboam II., probably about 750 B.C., and after Jeroboam's\ndeath witnessed at least the beginning of that procession of\nassassinations and revolutions through which the kingdom hurried to\nmeet its fate; but it does not appear from his book that he lived to\nsee the invasion of Tiglath-Pileser and the loss of Gilead and Galilee\nin 734 B.C. in which his own predictions of impending doom had so\nsignal a verification. Their complete fulfilment came in 721, when\nSargon made an end forever of the kingdom of Israel, and deported many\nof the people of Samaria to remote quarters of his empire.\n\nThe Book of Hosea opens with chapters out of the prophet's experience\nwith his unfaithful wife, in which he sees a counterpart and symbol of\nGod's experience with Israel. This discovery of this significance in\nthe tragedy of his life is what made him a prophet. He saw then that\nit was for this he had been led to marry a woman who turned out a\ngross adulteress. When he drove her from his house, when later he\nbought her out of the servitude into which she had sunk, and by\nseclusion and a discipline at once firm and kind tried to win her back\nby love to virtue, that, too, was an apologue of God's dealing with\nhis people (see specially Hos. i. 2-9; iii. 1-5). He is the first,\napparently, to use the metaphor adultery, or fornication, for\nreligious defection. The oracle, ii. 2-23, translates it into its\nhistorical terms and discloses Hosea's construction of the religious\nhistory of Israel. The root of Israel's apostasy was the belief that\nthe gods of the soil of Canaan, the baals, gave the corn and the wine\nand the oil which in reality its own God, Jehovah, bestowed. Therefore\nhe will take away all these, which she deems the gift of the baals,\nthe wages of her prostitution, and will lead the people into the\ndesert of exile. But he will be with them there to comfort and\nencourage, and Israel will return to its first love as in the early\ndays when it was alone with God in the desert of the exodus. Then the\nold relation will be restored, never to be broken, and the gifts in\nthe new betrothal are uprightness and justice and charity and kindness\nof heart and faithfulness and the knowledge of God (Hosea's word for\nreligion). That will be the golden age! (See Hos. ii. 18-23.)\n\nWhen the Jew says his _Shema_ or the Christian his Great Commandment,\n\"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with all\nthy soul and with all thy might,\" it is Hosea's great thought he is\nrepeating. Hosea interprets God's dealing with his people by his faith\nin God's inextinguishable love. Outraged love may smite harder than\noffended righteousness, but its blows are remedial, not retributive or\nexpiatory; its aim not to satisfy justice, but to recover the erring.\nThe exile, which for Amos is the final vindication of God's\nrighteousness in the death of the sinful nation, is for Hosea a\nchastisement which leads to repentance and restoration. He is\ntherefore the author of that ideal of a golden age of godliness and\nuprightness and happiness, beyond the impending judgment or the\npresent oppression, which is one of the leading motives of the\nso-called messianic prophecy.\n\nThe rest of the book (cc. 4-14) consists of a collection of oracles,\nwithout titles, and often without obvious boundaries. They contain an\nappalling picture of the sins of the nation as a whole and of all\nclasses of society; kings and princes, priests and prophets and\npeople--all are corrupt. The theme of the whole may be read in Hos.\niv. 1 f.: \"There is no truth, nor charity, nor knowledge of God\n(religion) in the land; naught but swearing and breaking faith and\nmurder and theft and adultery.\" Therefore ruin yawns before the\nnation. Yet God will not destroy utterly; all the pathos of the divine\nlove finds words in such passages as xi. 8 ff., \"How can I give thee\nup, Ephraim?\" or xiv. 1 ff., \"O Israel, return unto the Lord thy God.\"\n\nThis book of a prophet of the northern kingdom has come down to us\nthrough Jud\u00e6an hands; the title, with its list of Jud\u00e6an kings\n(exactly the same as in the title of Isaiah), is doubtless due to a\nJewish editor, and we are not surprised to find in the text itself\nJewish touches, such as the words \"and David their king\" in iii. 5, or\ni. 11, but these are not numerous nor important. The text of Hosea is,\nhowever, unusually corrupt. The prophet's style is very difficult, and\nscribes did as they commonly do with a difficult text, they made\nmechanical mistakes because they did not understand and false\nemendations because they thought they understood what they did not.\n\n\nJOEL.--Joel was probably put between Hosea and Amos because the\neditors of the Book of the Twelve thought that he was one of the\nearlier prophets, and, chiefly because of its position, this opinion\nhas been general until recent times. In the book itself there are\nneither names nor identifiable historical allusions by which its age\ncan be determined. The whole situation, however, is that of the\nso-called post-exilic times.\n\nThe occasion of the prophecy with which the book begins was a\nportentous plague of locusts, whose invasion and ravages are described\nin Joel 1-2 in highly poetical imagery. Locusts and drought together\nhave so devastated the land that both men and beasts are perishing,\nand--the last touch of the extremity--the obligatory daily offerings\nin the temple have been cut off. The prophet calls to fasting and\nsupplication; perhaps God may be entreated to have mercy on them (ii.\n12-17). God had pity on his people; the following oracle (ii. 18-27)\npromises relief and everlasting prosperity. The visitation seems to\nthe prophet an omen of the dread \"Day of the Lord.\" He sees the\nnations gather beneath the walls of Jerusalem (in the valley with the\nominous name, Jehoshaphat, \"Jehovah judges\") for the last onset, to be\nannihilated by the intervention of God. Then the golden age will be\nushered in.\n\nThe heads of the people are priests and elders; of king and princes\nthere is no word. The Judah and Jerusalem which the prophet addresses\nare the religious community which assembles in the temple; people and\ncongregation are the same thing. This one observation takes Joel out\nof the company of Amos and Hosea and puts him by the side of Malachi.\nAll the other features of the book confirm this date. Assyrians or\nBabylonians, without whom no picture of the Day of the Lord in the\npre-exilic prophets would be complete, are not here; Israel has\ndisappeared.\n\nThe author has read much prophetic literature; reminiscences in\nthought and phrase meet us at every turn. The heathen in the Valley of\nJehoshaphat are Ezekiel's hordes of Gog (Ezek. 38 f.); the fountain\nthat flows from the house of the Lord is a modest counterpart of the\nriver that sweetens the Dead Sea (Ezek. 47). The thumb-prints of\neditorial hands have been thought to betray themselves in several\nplaces, and some students would give a larger range to this\nobservation. The additions, if such they are, are not far remote in\ntime from the original book, and reflect the same religious\nconceptions.\n\n\nAMOS.--A dramatic scene in Amos vii. 10-17 describes the appearance of\nAmos at Bethel on a high festival, with his presages of swift and\nutter ruin for Israel (cf. vii. 1-9). That his hearers greeted the\nmessage with incredulity can well be believed, for under Jeroboam II.\nIsrael was at the very culmination of its power and prosperity. The\nchief priest of Bethel was not minded to let such speech pass in his\ndiocese; as scornfully as Creon dismisses the prophet Teiresias in the\nAntigone, he bids Amos be gone: \"O Seer, be off, flee to the land of\nJudah; make thy living there, and there do thy prophesying. But\nprophesy no more at Bethel, for it is a royal temple and a residence\ncity.\" Spurning the contemptuous insinuation, Amos answers: \"No\nprophet am I, and no member of the prophetic order, but a herdsman am\nI and a ripener of sycamore figs. Jehovah took me from following the\nflock, and bade me, Go prophesy against my people Israel.\"\nIncidentally we see in how low esteem the professional prophet stood,\nthat the priest should make a taunt of the name and the prophet\nindignantly repel it.\n\nThe priest followed up his warning by a report to the king, and we may\nsafely conclude that Amos prophesied no more at Bethel. Perhaps it was\nthe rude end of his mission that prompted him to collect his oracles\ninto a book, the earliest example of such a collection, as a witness\nto his own generation and to that which should see the fulfilment.\n\nThe title, this part of which may well be original, describes Amos as\na shepherd from Tekoa, in the wilderness of Judah. Beyond the brief\nscene at Bethel nothing more is told of him in the book or out of it.\nBut the book is his monument.\n\nIt is one of the easiest of the prophetic books to understand and one\nof the best preserved. Chapters 1 and 2 contain a series of brief\noracles, on the same plan, against the neighbours of Israel, the\nSyrians of Damascus, the Philistines, Phoenicians, Edomites,\nAmmonites, Moabites, Jud\u00e6ans, leading up to a longer indictment of\nIsrael and denunciation of God's judgment upon it. This is followed by\nprophecies against Israel (cc. 3-6), which seem to be formally divided\ninto three parts by the introductory formula, \"Hear this word\" (iii.\n1; iv. 1; v. 1), but by subject would naturally fall into a larger\nnumber of oracles. Chapter 7 begins with three visions, the delivery\nof which at Bethel may have provoked Amaziah's interference (vii.\n10-17); c. 8 again opens with a vision, in which the basket of summer\nfruit _(kais)_ is to the prophet a symbol of the coming end\n_(k[=e]s)_ of Israel; in c. 9 Amos sees the Lord standing beside the\naltar and pronouncing the word of destruction and inescapable doom\n(ix. 1-8^a), from which an awkward transition (ix. 8^b-10) carries us\nto a prediction of the restoration of David's kingdom and the\nprosperity of the golden age.\n\nThe doom which Amos sees impending over Israel is visited upon it in\nretribution for the wrongs which men inflict upon their fellows, the\noppression of the poor by the rich, the small man by the great; the\ninjustice, often in the forms of law, by which men are deprived of\nproperty and liberty; the luxury, aping foreign modes, which is not\nonly corrupting in itself, but is the chief motive of injustice and\noppression and fraud. The very prosperity of the nation was its ruin.\n\nWith all this, Israel is very religious; it acknowledges the success\nin war and the profit of commerce as the gift of the national God and\nevidence of his favour, and does not grudge him his share even of\nill-gotten gains. Amos's God has a conscience--that was a new idea\nabout gods!--and abhors such religion; he hates their festivals,\nrefuses their sacrifices, spurns their hymns of praise. \"But let\njustice roll down like floods, and right like an unfailing stream.\"\nThat is the only worship he owns.\n\nThe standard of right is not one thing in Israel and another among the\nheathen: Amos summons the Philistines and the Egyptians to behold\nwith amazement and horror the doings in Samaria. In the oracles with\nwhich the book opens, he pronounces the judgment of God on the peoples\nneighbour to Israel, not solely because they have wronged Israel, as\nin so many of the prophecies against the nations, but because they\nhave violated the principles of humanity. It is the first assertion in\nthe Old Testament that there is such a thing as an international\nmorality. Amos is the first in the succession of ethical prophets, the\nauthor, so far as we know, of a new idea of religion. It is deeply\nsignificant that he and Hosea are contemporaries; hardly more than ten\nyears can lie between Amos's appearance at Bethel and the earliest of\nHosea's prophecies against the house of Jehu. The God of Amos is the\napotheosis of right, the conscience of the world that can neither be\ncorrupted nor sophisticated; the God of Hosea was born in the heart of\na man whose love the grossest wrong could not quench. Retribution is\nthe divinity of the one, redemption of the other.\n\nAmos's conception was the first to take hold; the earlier prophecies\nof Isaiah against Judah are wholly in that mood. Hosea had to wait a\ncentury before his greater thought found a fruitful soil in Jeremiah\nand the Deuteronomists.\n\nThe predictions of judgment in Amos are so sweeping and ultimate that\nlater readers found the message incomplete. Especially the last\noracle (ix. 1 ff.) was an ill-omened close. Consequently, a messianic\npendant was attached to it (ix. 11-15) by a Jud\u00e6an editor, and an\nimperfect juncture made by the introduction of vs. 8^b (which flatly\ncontradicts the first half verse) and 9^b (no grain shall fall to the\nground) perhaps displacing some words of the original.\n\nIt seems that some imitative pieces have been inserted also in c. 1;\nthe prophecy against Judah in ii. 4 f. with its deuteronomic sins,\nfalls out of the scheme and is generally recognized as editorial.\nSlight retouches elsewhere (e.g. iv. 13; v. 8 f.; ix. 6) need not\ndetain us. In general the book has suffered little from the improvers,\nand the text is in relatively good preservation.\n\n\nOBADIAH.--The single chapter of Obadiah, the shortest of the Old\nTestament books, is a prophecy against the Edomites, toward whom, as\nwe have repeatedly seen, the Jews cherished an implacable animosity\nfrom the time of the fall of Jerusalem. Obadiah vss. 1-9 has close\nparallels in Jer. xlix. 7-22 (cf. Obad. vss. 1-4 with Jer. xlix.\n14-16; Obad. vs. 5 f., Jer. xlix. 9 f.; Obad. vs. 8, Jer. xlix. 7).\nThe question which is the borrower has been differently answered.\nObadiah vss. 15-21, in which Edom gets its judgment in the Day of the\nLord on the nations, is probably later than vss. 1-14, but the whole\nis post-exilic.\n\n\nJONAH.--The Book of Jonah has already been discussed along with the\nstories of Esther and Ruth.\n\n\nMICAH.--The prediction of Micah, the Morashtite, that Zion should be\nplowed as a field and Jerusalem be a heap of ruins and the temple hill\nbecome like forest shrines (Mic. iii. 2), is quoted under his name in\nJer. xxvi. 18--the only example of such a prophetic quotation in the\nOld Testament. The author, a resident of Moresheth-Gath in the Jud\u00e6an\nLowland, is said in the title to have prophesied in the days of\nJotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, which is the editor's way of saying that\nhe was a younger contemporary of Isaiah. The reign of Hezekiah is\nattested by the tradition in Jeremiah. It is probable that only cc.\n1-3 (with perhaps some dubious possibilities in the following\nchapters) can be attributed to Micah.\n\nThe book opens with an oracle against Samaria (Mic. i. 2-8). Samaria\nfell in 721 B.C., while the sequel (vs. 9 ff.) portrays the imminent\nperil of Judah, presumably in the time of Sennacherib (701 B.C.). The\ncase seems to be similar to Isa. xxviii. 1 ff.: the fate of Samaria,\nthough it is already fact, is represented prophetically for a closer\nparallel to the following. Verses 10-16 are little more than a string\nof ominous puns on the names of towns in the author's Lowland, which\nin translation lose what little point they have. The second chapter\ngives the cause of the woe much as in Amos or Isaiah, but perhaps with\nlocal emphasis on the wrongs the capitalists of the great city inflict\non the peasant proprietors. His forebodings and censures are not well\nreceived, men bid him stop his preaching, it is a different sort of\nprophet they like (ii. 6-11). \"If a man, walking in wind and\nfalsehood, should lie, 'I will preach to thee of wine and drink,' he\nwill be the preacher for this people.\" Micah has more to say, but not\nbetter, about the demagogue prophets in the following oracle (iii.\n5-7). The predictions of disaster in ii. 1-11 have their point blunted\nin vs. 12 f. in the way the editors of the prophetic books so often do\nit.\n\nChapter 3 returns to condemnation, which turns at last on the heads of\nthe rulers \"who build up Zion with blood and Jerusalem with iniquity,\"\nand ends with the prediction of the total destruction of the city\nwhich has already been quoted.\n\nThen the unexpected follows, in the prophecy that Jerusalem shall\nbecome the religious centre of the earth, to which all nations flow,\nand the law of God the universal arbiter in an age of universal peace\n(Mic. iv. 1-5). Verses 1-3 are found also, in no more suitable\ncontext, in Isa. ii. 2-4. They belong to neither Isaiah nor Micah. For\nthe rest, Mic. 4-5 and cc. 6-7 contain a number of pieces of diverse\nage and origin. Chapters iv. 6-v. 1 are as a whole of good omen, yet\nafter the promise of restoration in iv. 8, Jerusalem is suddenly in\ndesperate straits; exile awaits its people, and only beyond the exile\n(the words \"thou shalt come even unto Babylon\" may be a gloss, but the\nmeaning is not essentially changed) redemption waits (iv. 9 f.). In\niv. 11-13, again, many nations gather against Zion, but it crushes\nthem like sheaves on the threshing floor. There follows (v. 2-9,\n10-15) a messianic prophecy, in which an allusion to Isa. vii. 14\nappears.\n\nNo less strangely assorted are the oracles in Mic. 6-7, of which there\nare four: vi. 1-8; vi. 9-16; vii. 1-6; vii. 7-20. The first of these\ncontains the quintessence of the prophetic conception of religion: God\ndoes not demand holocausts and costly offerings in expiation of sin;\nnor the supreme expiation which the prophets and the laws of the\nseventh century so often reject and condemn: \"Shall I give my\nfirst-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of\nmy soul? He hath showed thee, O man. What is good and what doth God\nrequire of thee, but to do justice and love mercy and walk humbly with\nthy God?\"\n\nTrenchant condemnations of the sins of the times fill vi. 9-16 and\nvii. 1-6, the former of which, at least, is pre-exilic; while the book\ncloses in the situation and spirit of Isa. 40 ff. Thus the Book of\nMicah, like that of his contemporary Isaiah, has been a depository for\nprophecies differing in age by several centuries. Perhaps the book\nonce stood at the end of a roll, and was therefore the natural place\nto add stray and nameless pieces, as happened later to the Book of\nZechariah at the end of the volume of the Minor Prophets.\n\n\nNAHUM.--In the three larger prophetic books we have found groups of\noracles against foreign nations, some relatively old, many late and\nliterary variations on given motives--it was evidently a grateful\ntheme. In Nahum we have a whole book occupied with the impending fall\nof Nineveh and the Assyrian empire, which had so long and so brutally\ntyrannized over all western Asia. Now its hour has struck, and the\nprophet triumphs over the fate of the old lion, who \"rent in pieces to\nsatisfy his whelps and strangled for his lionesses, and filled his\ndens with prey and his lairs with ravin.\" His imagination revels in\nthe terrors of the onslaught, the horrors of the sack, which he\ndepicts with unsurpassed vividness and great poetic power. It is the\njudgment of the Lord, long deferred, but sure and final (Nah. 1).\n\nIn Nah. iii. 8-10 the fate of the Egyptian Thebes is adduced as an\nhistoric example: all her power could not save her, and it shall fare\nno better with Nineveh. The reference is probably to the capture of\nThebes by Assurbanipal in 661 B.C. Nineveh itself fell about 606 B.C.\nunder an attack of enemies from the north (Medes or Scythians), and\nwas destroyed never to be restored. With it the Assyrians disappear\nfrom history. The prophecy of Nahum was probably delivered shortly\nbefore this event, though a date twenty years earlier, when, according\nto Herodotus, Nineveh barely escaped from a similar onset by Cyaxares,\nis not strictly impossible.\n\nIt is thought by many scholars that the first chapter (with which ii.\n2 must go) is a later composition, a poem, much deranged, originally\nin acrostic form.\n\n\nHABAKKUK.--The Book of Habakkuk predicts that Jehovah is about to\nraise up the fierce Chald\u00e6an nation, which marches through the breadth\nof the earth to occupy habitations not belonging to it, which scoffs\nat kings and has dynasts in derision, laughing at all fortresses,\nagainst which it casts up a mound and takes them (Hab. i. 5-11). Such\na prophecy would be timely in the last years of the seventh century:\nthe Chald\u00e6an, or New Babylonian, kingdom dates its independence from\n625, and is hardly likely to have attracted much attention in the West\nbefore the fall of Nineveh in 606 B.C. and the defeat of Pharaoh Necho\non the Euphrates in 605 B.C.\n\nThe prophecy, which does not specifically threaten Judah, intrudes\nbetween i. 4 and i. 12 ff., where the plaint of vss. 2-4 is continued,\nso that vss. 5-11 are at least misplaced. This complaint is of the\noppression of \"the righteous\" (Judah) by \"the wicked\" (heathen, i.\n13-17). From his watch tower the prophet sees a vision of a distant\ntime, which he is bidden record, and of whose ultimate fulfilment he\nis assured (ii. 1-3). What follows is a series of invectives which the\nnations he has gathered under his robber rule shall heap upon the\nfallen oppressor, \"the man who was greedy as hell, insatiable as\ndeath.\"\n\nThe date of the prophecy depends on the identification of this tyrant\nof the nations. If it is Babylon, the oracle must be considered later\nthan i. 5-11, which greets the rise of the Babylonian power to execute\nGod's judgment on the world. An ingenious solution of the difficulty\nhas been proposed, viz., to transfer i. 5-11 from c. 1 to a place\nafter ii. 4, and see in it the contents of the vision spoken of in ii.\n3: the Babylonians would then be the ministers of God's avenging\njustice on the Assyrian robbers of the world, and the whole might have\nbeen uttered about 615 B.C. All parts of these chapters abound in\nreminiscences of the eighth-century prophets; the resemblances to\nJeremiah may be explained by the contemporaneousness of the authors.\n\nHabakkuk 3, entitled \"A Prayer by Habakkuk the Prophet,\" with a\nmusical direction following, as in the Psalms, is in fact a psalm, and\nthe presence of the musical directions, implying liturgical use,\nsuggests that it once stood in a hymn book like the Psalter. It is a\nfine ode, by an author well read in the classic literature of his\nnation. The theophany (iii. 2 ff.) is indebted to Exod. xxxiii. 2 ff.\nand Judg. v. 4 ff. The ode belongs with the Psalms of the Persian\nperiod. It is imitated in Ps. 77. The title ascribing it to Habakkuk\nthe prophet is of no greater authority than the ascription Pss.\n146-148 in the Greek Bible to Haggai and Zechariah.\n\n\nZEPHANIAH.--The pedigree of Zephaniah is carried back to his\ngreat-great-grandfather, Hezekiah. As such genealogical proper names\nhave seldom more than three terms, it has been conjectured that the\nparticular reason for adducing two extra generations here was that the\nprophet boasted royal blood--Hezekiah was the king of that name. The\nthing is possible, though the generations are somewhat rapid; the\nparallel royal line counts four. It would be a romantic touch if the\nprophet was a great-grand-nephew of Manasseh, and a second cousin of\nJosiah, of the manners and morals of whose courts he has so bad an\nopinion.\n\nThe title says that he prophesied in the reign of Josiah, and with\nthis the tenor of a large part of the book agrees. Like the earliest\nprophecies of Jeremiah (Jer. 1-6) Zephaniah's Day of the Lord is\ninspired by the irruption of the Scythian hordes which threatened to\nengulf the civilized nations of western Asia in a common ruin, as the\nMongol and Turkish hordes, pouring out of the same cradle of the\ncommissioned races, the scourges of God, did successively in later\nages. For Judah it is the day of reckoning for the sins which made the\nreign of Manasseh a by-word with prophets and historians, and which\nwent on unrestrained through the short years of his successor and the\nminority of Josiah down to the reforms of his eighteenth year. Nowhere\nis the state of things in that three quarters of a century more\nclearly exposed than in the first oracle of Zephaniah.\n\nThe second chapter holds out the possibility that repentance may still\nsave Judah; the wave of invasion has taken, as we know from historical\nsources it did, the way by the coast, bringing calamity on the\nPhilistine cities. It surged on to the very frontier of Egypt, where\nit was stayed, more likely by the payment of a great indemnity than by\nforce of arms, and rolled back whence it came. Zephaniah sees the\nstorm break over Assyria, and predicts the total destruction of the\nproud city of Nineveh which had so long said in her heart, \"I, and\nnone beside me.\" Several verses in this chapter are suspected of being\nlater amplifications, viz. ii. 7^a (Judah profits by the ruin of the\nPhilistine plain; vs. 7^b connects directly with vs. 6), and\nespecially the oracles against Moab and Ammon, which accuse them of\ntheir enmity to Judah in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, a generation\nafter Zephaniah.\n\nThe first oracle in Zeph. 3 is incomplete; the original conclusion, a\nsentence of doom upon Judah, the only imaginable sequel to vss. 1-7,\nis supplanted by the inconsequent pouring out of God's fury on the\nnations, whereupon the heathen are converted, the dispersion returns,\nand, purified and chastened the remnant of Judah enjoys a modest\ngolden age (iii. 8-13). The book closes in a more jubilant salutation\nof the good time coming (iii. 14-20).\n\nThus in Zephaniah, as in so many other prophetic books, all turns out\nwell in the end; but as in most of the others, the happy endings are\nan afterthought of later generations for whom the judgment was in the\npast but the golden age had not yet come.\n\n\nHAGGAI.--Haggai dates his first revelation to the very day of the\nmonth--a new fashion which he and his contemporary Zechariah have--the\nfirst day of the sixth month (of the Jewish calendar) in the second\nyear of Darius (Hystaspis), that is, 520 B.C. He has the word of the\nLord for Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah, and Joshua, the chief\npriest, that it is high time to rebuild the temple; the lean years\nthey have been having are due to God's displeasure that he is thus\nneglected. The civil and religious heads of the community stir up the\npeople and the work begins; again the exact date is given.\n\nThree other oracles follow, all in the same year. The first of these\n(ii. 1-9) encourages Zerubbabel and the people to more zeal by the\nprediction that the great crisis of history is at hand: yet a little\nwhile and the Lord will shake the heavens and the earth; he will shake\nall the nations, and the treasures of all the nations shall flow to\nhis temple (cf. Isa. lx. 9 ff.), and God will fill the house with his\nglory. The third (ii. 20-23), to Zerubbabel, foretells the overthrow\nand destruction of the kingdoms of the nations; and, in prudently\nveiled phrase--since such great expectations might have ill\nconsequences if they reached Persian ears--the restoration of\nZerubbabel to the throne of his fathers, fulfilling the messianic\npredictions of earlier prophets. The intervening oracle (ii. 10-19) is\nanother spur to zeal in rebuilding the temple.\n\nThe immediate restoration of Jewish nationality which Haggai and\nZechariah so confidently foretold was not merely the expression of a\ngeneral faith or the result of studies in their predecessors. For in\nreality God was shaking the nations; in particular the Persian empire,\nnewly made master of the world, was shaken to its foundations by the\nusurpation of the pretended Smerdis, the death of Cambyses, the\nconspiracy of the nobles against Smerdis, and the elevation of Darius\nto the throne. In the years when the Jewish prophets were making their\npredictions, Darius was confronted by formidable rebellions in every\nquarter of the empire except the west. It might well appear to Haggai\nthat the armies of the nations were falling every one by the sword of\nhis fellow.\n\nIn the end Darius put down all opposition and welded the empire\ntogether more strongly than ever; the brief dream of Jewish\nindependence under a Davidic prince and the brighter vision of the\ngolden age faded.\n\n\nZECHARIAH.--Zechariah's first oracle is dated in the month after that\nin which Haggai's first was delivered. It is a brief exhortation to\nhis countrymen to repent, and not neglect the warnings of the prophets\nas their fathers had done, to their sorrow when the predicted\njudgments overtook them (Zech. i. 1-6). Then follow, in i. 7-vi. 15,\nunder the common date (second year of Darius, 11th month, 24th day), a\nseries of eight visions, the meaning of which is interpreted to the\nprophet by an angel. They symbolize the shattering of the power of the\nnations; the rebuilding of the temple and city, and the golden age to\nfollow; the removal of the sin of Judah; the recognition of the\nMessiah (Zerubbabel); the harmony of prince and priest.\n\nAt the end of this group of visions is a bit of history of high\ninterest. A crown was made of gold and silver brought by some\nrepresentatives of the Babylonian Jews, and set by the prophet on the\nhead of Zerubbabel, who was saluted as \"the Scion,\" i.e., the Messiah\n(Jer. xxiii. 5), with the prediction that he should rebuild the\ntemple, assume majesty, and sit and rule upon his throne. The\ncoronation, it need hardly be said, was in the secrecy of a private\nhouse, and is to be regarded as a symbolical act; the Babylonian\nenvoys kept the crown as a memento. But its significance is\nunmistakable.\n\nThe prediction was not fulfilled. Whatever became of Zerubbabel--he\ndisappears with this scene--he never wore a real crown nor sat upon\nthe throne of his fathers. This has led to more than one change in the\ntext, which, however, as in many other cases, were not sufficiently\nthorough-going to pass unnoticed. First, the crown is once made\nplural, \"crowns,\" as though the intention was to crown both the prince\nand the priest; when it comes to the coronation, however, only Joshua,\nthe high priest, receives the honour (vi. 11). But vss. 12, 13^a,\nwhich are left untouched, can refer only to Zerubbabel. Verse 13^b\noriginally read, \"and [Joshua] shall be priest _at his right hand_ (so\nthe Greek Bible, instead of \"on his throne\"), and there shall be\nharmony between the two.\" In vs. 14 there is only one crown.\n\nIn Zech. 7 the question is asked of the prophet by some pilgrims from\nBethel, whether, now that the temple was rebuilding, they should\ncontinue to keep the fast for the burning of the temple in the fifth\nmonth; his response, that what God wants of them is not fasting but\njustice, charity, compassion, that none should oppress his neighbour\nnor devise evil against him, is quite in the spirit of the earlier\nprophets to whom he appeals.\n\nHe goes on, in c. 8, to picture the coming golden age, when the fasts\nshall all be turned into cheerful feasts, a prophecy which is one of\nthe finest of its kind in the Old Testament and a fitting crown to the\nbook.\n\nThe prophecies of Zechariah (cc. 1-8) are definitely dated; they\nspring out of a definite historical and religious situation which is\neverywhere apparent and consistent. Not so the chapters which follow\n(cc. 9-14). The titles (ix. 1; xii. 1) have a different form\n(\"Burdens\"), the situations which give their background to the oracles\nare wholly unlike that which stands out so clearly in Haggai and\nZechariah; the character of the prophecies, with their affected\nobscurity, easily penetrable, doubtless, to contemporaries, but\nimpenetrable to us who have not the historical key, and their\napocalyptic eschatology, are in strong contrast to the manner of\nZechariah; the evidence of diction confirms that of situation and\ncontent.\n\nIt has, therefore, long been recognized that none of these prophecies\ncan be by the author of Zech. 1-8: they are anonymous oracles which\nhave been appended at the close of his book or of the Book of the\nMinor Prophets. They are not all by the same author: cc. 12-14\ncontain two pictures (xiii. 1-xiii. 6; xiv. 1-21) of the final onset\nof the heathen on Jerusalem, their destruction, and the golden age of\npious prosperity that ensues, variations of Ezekiel's original in the\ngreat prophecy of Gog (Ezek. 38-39) which gave the scheme for all\nsubsequent revelations on the last times. A notable difference between\nthe two pictures is that in Zech. 12 the heathen are destroyed by the\nclans of Judah, who deliver Jerusalem; while in c. 14 Jerusalem is\ntaken by the heathen and subjected to all the horrors of a sack, half\nof its inhabitants being carried into slavery, before Jehovah himself,\ndescending on the Mount of Olives, fights against the nations and\ncleaves the mount itself in twain.\n\nIn cc. xii. 1-xiii. 6 concrete features of the author's time are\nprobably discernible, in the fact, for instance, that Judah (that is\nthe inhabitants of the other towns and the country) besieges Jerusalem\nin company with the neighbouring heathen peoples, and in the striking\nanimosity displayed toward the prophets, who are in the same\ncondemnation with the idols and arouse much intenser feeling (xii.\n2-6). Our ignorance of the internal history of the Jewish community\nfor two or three centuries is, however, so complete that these\nallusions furnish us no clue.\n\nIn Zech. 9-11 also there are two sections, viz. ix. 1-xi. 3 and xi.\n4-17 + xiii. 7-9. The age of these can be fixed with greater\nconfidence by the external historical situation. The heathen power\nthe overthrow of which ushers in the golden age is named, in ix. 13,\nthe Greeks. Egypt and Syria (\"Assyria\"), that is, the kingdoms of the\nPtolemies and the Seleucids, shall be brought low (x. 11). \"The land\nof Hadrach,\" to which the first oracle is directed, is in all\nprobability the region of Antioch, the Seleucid capital. The bad\n\"shepherds\" of cc. 11; xiii. 7-9, who are over the flock of God, are\nvery good likenesses of the Jewish high priests of the Greek time,\nthough it is impossible to identify the concrete historical persons\nand events of c. 11. Taking all together, we shall not go amiss in\nascribing these to the early part of the third century B.C.--say\nbetween the year 200, when Jud\u00e6a came under Seleucid rule and the\nreligious persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes and the Maccab\u00e6an revolt,\nto neither of which is there any allusion in the chapters. Chapters\n12-14 may perhaps be put in the century before.\n\n\nMALACHI.--A third appendix to the Book of Zechariah is the anonymous\nbook which we call Malachi. The earliest title, \"The Burden of the\nWord of the Lord against Israel,\" is word for word the same as that in\nZech. xii. 1 (cf. ix. 1), and doubtless was prefixed by the same\neditor. Subsequently, perhaps to give the book an independent status\nand thus round out the number of the Minor Prophets to twelve, the\nwords \"by 'My Messenger'\" (Heb. _malaki_; iii. 1 f.) were added.\nJewish tradition in later times identified this messenger with Ezra.\nIn the versions the word was naturally taken for a proper name.\n\nThe book consists of two parts, Mal. i. 2-ii. 9, which from i. 6 on is\naddressed to the priests, and ii. 10-iv. 3, to the people at large.\nThe priests treat the worship in the temple with professional\ndisrespect, under which lurks an equally professional scepticism. Any\nkind of blemished or diseased victim is good enough--the prophet\ninvites them to make such a scurvy gift to the governor! The perpetual\nroutine of sacred services they find tiresome. They are no less\nnegligent in their other great function as the religious teachers and\nguides of the people. The _Tora_, that is, the revealed will of God,\nis committed to them, and they, degenerate successors of the faithful\npriests in the good old times, have not only themselves abandoned the\nright way, but have caused many to fall by their false instructions.\nThey have earned the contempt in which men hold them. The curse of God\nis on them.\n\nOne of the most notable words in the Bible stands in this indignant\ndenunciation (Mal. i. 11 f.). Jehovah's own priests in his own temple\ntreat his worship with contempt; he refuses their offerings: \"For from\nthe rising of the sun to the setting, my name is great among the\nnations, and in every place pure sacrifices are burnt to my name among\nthe nations, saith Jehovah of Hosts; but _ye_ profane it by thinking\nthat the table of Jehovah may be polluted and his food despised.\" That\nthe sacrifices of the heathen may be \"pure\" sacrifices, though not\naccording to the Mosaic rite, because all true worship is the worship\nof the true God, is a conception quite unparalleled in the Old\nTestament. The author's polemic against the priests of Jerusalem has\ndoubtless made him say more than he would have stood by as a dogmatic\nstatement; more, indeed, than any church has ever been ready to\nacknowledge, but it was fitting that it should be said, for it is the\nfinal consequence of the ethical conception of religion of which the\nHebrew prophets from Amos on are the exponents.\n\nOf the remaining oracles, one (Mal. iii. 6-12) urges to the honest\nconsecration of the tithes (dues to the temple); another (ii. 10-16),\nas commonly interpreted, condemns the marriages with heathen women\nwhich so disturbed the soul of Nehemiah and Ezra, and especially the\ndivorce of native wives to take foreign ones; but the language should\nperhaps rather be taken as figurative for foreign worship. The two\nremaining prophecies (ii. 17-iii. 5; iii. 13-iv. 3) are addressed to\nsuch as thought that God did not trouble himself about men's affairs:\nthe long threatened day of doom gave no sign of coming, nor was the\npromised reward of serving God bestowed. The prophet declares that the\nDay will come, sudden and terrible, and the ungodly will get their\ndeserts. The last verses (iv. 4-6) are not improbably an addition by\nan editorial hand.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXI\n\nPSALMS. LAMENTATIONS\n\n\nThe Book of Psalms counts one hundred and fifty hymns, and this\nevidently by design, for the Greek Version, which sometimes unites in\none what are two psalms in the Hebrew and divides one Hebrew psalm\ninto two, comes out with the same number. It is divided into five\nbooks, as is indicated in the Revised English Version, vis. Book I.,\nPss. 1-41; Book II., Pss. 42-72; Book III., Pss. 73-89; Book IV., Pss.\n90-106; Book V., Pss. 107-150, each book ending with a liturgical\ndoxology. The rabbis were probably right in the opinion that this\nfivefold division was made in imitation of the five books of the\nPentateuch, but in some cases, as we shall see, the limits correspond\nto those of older separate books. The psalter has not inaptly been\ncalled the hymn book of the second temple. We learn from Jewish\ntradition that certain psalms were used in the liturgy of the\nHerodian temple on certain days or at certain seasons, and to many of\nthem musical or liturgical directions are prefixed and interludes are\nnoted (\"Selah\"), from which, apart from tradition, such a use would be\ninferred. It is evident from the familiarity with the Psalms which is\nshown in the New Testament and in contemporary Jewish writings, both\nGreek and Hebrew, that, like our hymn books, the Psalter was largely\nused for private devotion and edification.\n\nThe poems contained in the Psalter are from different ages and\nauthors, and of widely diverse religious worth and poetical\nexcellence. Some of them are unsurpassed in the religious literature\nof the world; others are the tedious production of authors who, like\nso many hymnists of all climes, were neither born nor made poets.\nThanks to the translators, such pieces are a great deal better, so far\nas expression goes, in the Authorized English Version or in Luther's,\nthan the original.\n\nA modern hymn book is seldom, if ever, a fresh compilation from the\nsources; it is habitually made up from collections already in use,\nwith the addition, perhaps, of the editor's gleanings from the\nsources, or of recent poems. The names of the collections thus used\nmay be given, and the names of the authors--often taken along without\nverification. Editors of hymn books have also generally allowed\nthemselves great liberties with the text of hymns, altering them to\nsuit their own taste or the religious and theological idiosyncrasies\nof their sect; abridging, transposing, expanding, without scruple; and\nonly in very modern times has a tardily awakened literary conscience\nconstrained them to give notice of such changes. In this way medi\u00e6val\nCatholic poets are made to sing good Protestant songs, or Calvinists\nand Methodists to drop their shibboleths and express themselves in a\nmanner acceptable to Unitarians. The familiar hymn,\n\n    \"O for a thousand tongues to sing my dear Redeemer's praise,\"\n\nhas been adapted to Buddhist use as,\n\n    \"O for a thousand tongues to sing my holy Buddha's praise,\n    The glories of my teacher great, the triumphs of his grace,\"\n\nwith similar changes throughout, and if we did not know the Christian\nhymn, we might take the author for a good Shin-shu Buddhist, though an\nindifferent poet.\n\nThe editors of the Psalter proceeded in the same way, and the older\nrecollections on which they worked can in part be recognized. It is\nobserved that Books II. and III. of the Psalter (Pss. 42-89), or, more\nexactly, Pss. 42-83, must once have formed a collection by themselves,\nwhose editor was averse to the use of the proper name Jehovah, and\naccordingly altered the text of the hymns where this name occurred by\nsubstituting the appellative God (Elohim), giving rise to such strange\nexpressions as \"O God, my God.\" Thus Ps. 53 is the same with Ps. 14,\nbut wherever Jehovah stands in Ps. 14, \"God\" takes its place in Ps.\n53; Ps. 70 is merely an extract from Ps. 40 (vss. 13-17) with the same\nchange. In the latter, however, copyists, influenced by the parallel\npassage, have restored \"Jehovah\" in one (Greek) or two (Hebrew)\nplaces, as they have done in other of these psalms. This occurrence of\nthe same hymn in two parts of the Psalter, of which another instance\nis Ps. 108 (made up of parts of two psalms in the elohistic book,\nlvii. 7-11, and lx. 5-12), is itself presumptive evidence that these\nparts once existed separately. At the time when the musical directions\nwere prefixed to the psalms, the last two books (Pss. 90-150) seem not\nto have been included in the temple hymn book; for these directions,\nscattered through Pss. 1-89, are lacking from that point on,\nnotwithstanding the fact that a larger proportion of the psalms in\nPss. 90-150 were manifestly composed for public worship than in Pss.\n1-89.\n\nThe titles of Psalms give the names of other collections from which\nindividual psalms were taken. Thus twelve psalms, Pss. 42, 44-49, 84,\n85, 87, 88, are hymns or songs of the Korahites, and eleven, Pss. 50,\n73-83, of Asaph, who were according to the Chronicler--a good\nauthority on the worship of his time--families, or hereditary guilds,\nof temple musicians, and seem, in this capacity, to have had special\nhymn books containing psalms which they sang, and which may also have\nbeen composed by members of the guild. The fact that the Korahite and\nAsaphite psalms are not scattered through the present Psalter, but\nappear in groups, and only in the elohistic hymn book (Pss. 42-89),\nconfirms this view. When they were incorporated in the collection, the\nsource was indicated by prefixing the name of the guild book to the\nindividual psalms.\n\nAnother group of fifteen psalms (Pss. 120-134) bear in their titles,\n\"The Song of the Ascents,\" a phrase which, by the irregularity of its\nform, shows that it was transferred mechanically from the title of the\ncollection (\"The Songs of the Ascents\") to the individual poems. The\nancient interpretation makes the \"ascents\" the fifteen steps, or\nascending platforms, on which the levitical orchestra stood at the\nfestival of the water-drawing on the evening after the first day of\nTabernacles (hence the Authorized Version, Song of Degrees, i.e.\nSteps). We need not discuss the question; that these psalms constitute\na liturgical unit selected for a specific ceremony is plain.\n\nA considerable number of psalms have loosely prefixed to them the\nwords Hallelu Jah (Praise ye Jah), which in the Hebrew text are\nfrequently found at the end, having been erroneously carried back from\nthe beginning of a following psalm. When this displacement (which is\nlater than the Greek translation) is corrected, the Hallelujah psalms\nare 105-107, 111-118, 135, 136, 146-150. Here also a liturgical\ncollection is naturally inferred. Jewish tradition informs us about\nthe use of the \"Hallel\" (Pss. 113-118) and the \"Great Hallel\" (Ps.\n136) at the festivals, and the name Hallel is also sometimes given to\nPss. 146-148. Both the Hallels and the Songs of Degrees, it will be\nobserved, are in the last of the three parts of the Psalter (Pss.\n90-150).\n\nOf greater interest is the large collection of psalms which bear\nindividually the name of David. This name is found in the titles of\nall the psalms in Book I. (Pss. 1-41), except Pss. 1 and 2, 10\n(properly a part of 9, as in the Greek Bible), and 33 (in the Greek\nBible Davidic); further, in Book II., two groups, Pss. 51-65, 68-70,\nand thereafter, scattering, Pss. 86, 101, 103, 108-110, 122, 124, 131,\n133, 138-145--73 psalms in all, or almost half the Psalter.\nManuscripts of the Greek Bible add a varying number of others, and\nother versions do the same.\n\nIn the light of the phenomena we have already observed, we may\nconfidently infer that there was once a collection of religious lyrics\nbearing some such title as \"Hymns of David.\" So long as this book had\na separate existence, the name would naturally not be repeated at the\nhead of the individual poems in it; such repetition became necessary,\nhowever, when psalms from this book were taken up into a larger hymn\nbook containing not only psalms from the Korahite and Asaphite\ncollections but many anonymous hymns; just as the name of Charles\nWesley would be attached to one of his hymns only when it was taken\nout of his own volume and included in a composite hymn book. By good\nfortune we have the colophon of this Davidic Psalter in Ps. lxxii. 20,\nin the words of a scribe: \"The Prayers (an older name for Psalms) of\nDavid son of Jesse are finished,\" that is, the roll containing them is\ncopied to the end--a very common Oriental form of colophon. Curiously\nenough, the hymn to which this note is annexed is said in its title to\nbe by Solomon, to whom Ps. 127 (one of the Songs of Degrees) is\nsimilarly attributed. In both cases the ground of the ascription is\nplain: the editor thought that Ps. cxxvii. 1 referred to the building\nof the temple, while the prayer for wisdom with which Ps. 72 begins\nsuggested to him Solomon's dream, 1 Kings 3.\n\nFrom this Davidic hymn book came what is now the first book of the\nPsalter entire, except Ps. 1 and probably 2; further the groups in\nBook II. (51-65, 68-70, with 72), which probably stood immediately\nafter Ps. 41. For it will be noted that the second (elohistic) part of\nthe present Psalter (Pss. 42-89) is made up of Korahite, Asaphite, and\nDavidic psalms, and that in their present position the Davidic\npsalms, say Pss. 51-72, are thrust into the otherwise solid group of\nAsaphite hymns Pss. 50 ... 73-83. Further, the transposition of the\nDavidic psalms to the beginning of the book would bring the hymns of\nthe guilds together. The elohistic recension does not extend\nconsistently beyond Ps. 83; and Pss. 84-89 (Korahite) may therefore be\nregarded as a supplementary extract from the guild book.\n\nThe titles of several of the Davidic psalms specify the occasion and\ncircumstances in which the poem was composed; these historical notes\nare especially numerous in the group Pss. 51-72 (see Pss. 51, 52, 54,\n56, 57, 59, 60, 63), but occur also in the First Book (Pss. 3, 7, 18,\n34), and in Ps. 142 (cf. Ps. 57). The incidents referred to are, with\none exception, all narrated in the Books of Samuel. There is no reason\nto imagine that the editor had any tradition about the origin of these\nparticular poems, much less authentic information on the subject.\nPrecisely as in the ascription of Pss. 72 and 127 to Solomon, he\ncombined what he took to be allusions to a historical situation in the\npoems with the history as he read it. Psalm 51, for example, is a\nconfession of deep sinfulness, and seems to specify blood-guilt (vs.\n14). When had David reason to express himself in this manner? Clearly\nafter his adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah. It is a\nvery familiar procedure. Modern commentators have made many similar\nguesses, but nobody attaches any authority to them.\n\nWhether the scattered Davidic psalms in the last part of the Psalter\n(Pss. 90-150) are a gleaning from the Davidic hymn book of poems which\nhad not been included by previous editors or come from some other\nsource is uncertain; the latter is the more probable hypothesis.\n\nThe Psalter, in the form in which we have it, is one of the latest\nbooks in the Old Testament, for it contains poems in which the\nreligious persecution of Antiochus IV. and the Maccab\u00e6an struggle are\nclearly reflected, and very likely events still further down in the\nsecond century B.C. This was shown by an acute critic at the beginning\nof the fifth century A.D., and in the Reformation century John Calvin\nrightly referred Pss. 44 and 74 to the Maccab\u00e6an times, and admitted\nthe same possibility for Ps. 79. All these are from the Korahite and\nAsaphite collections included in the elohistic hymn book, which itself\nis not the youngest of the sources of our Psalter.\n\nNumerous other psalms are, with greater or less probability, assigned\nto the same age; thus, Ps. 149, where the saints, with the high\npraises of God in their mouths and a two-edged sword in their hands,\nexecute judgment on the heathen, is singularly apt to the Maccab\u00e6an\nvictories. Psalm 110 (\"Davidic\") most naturally is understood as one\nof the Asmon\u00e6an princes, since in them alone priesthood and royalty\nwere united.\n\nThere are, however, other and more conclusive criteria than references\nto historical events or persons. The religious situation in the Jewish\ncommunity reflected in very many of the psalms is that of the Persian\nand Greek period, not that of the days of the kingdom. The strife of\nparties or of classes, on one side the righteous, the pious, the poor,\nfor whom the psalmists speak, on the other, the wicked, the ungodly,\nthe rich and the great; here those whose delight is in the law of God\n(religion), there those who contemn it and pursue evil ways regardless\nof its precepts and prohibitions, is a new condition, not in the\nbehaviour of the wicked, but in the self-consciousness of the pious,\nwho feel themselves a distinct class and are evidently crystallizing\ninto a party or a sect.\n\nThe religious conceptions and the conception of religion are drawn\nchiefly from Jeremiah and the Deuteronomists, and from Isaiah 40 ff.,\nbut on the subjective side of religion, piety, the best of the psalms\nrepresent a more advanced stage than the prophets of the seventh and\nsixth centuries. The hopes of the future of God's people and of the\nworld run with the prophets of the Persian period and the contemporary\nanonymous and editorial additions to the older prophetic books. That\nthe long rehearsals of the ancient history like Pss. 78, 105, 106, or\neulogies of the law such as Ps. 119, or litanies of the fashion of\nPs. 136, belong to a stage in the history of the liturgy such as\nrouses the enthusiasm of the Chronicler is also apparent. The evidence\nof language tends the same way. Fine hymns were written even at a late\ntime; but on a large part of the psalms the decadence has set its\nmark.\n\nSuch is the impression the Psalter makes as a whole, and it indicates\nthat not only is the existing collection late, but that most of the\nhymns in it were comparatively modern when they were brought together.\nThis is what would be expected in a hymn book, which for devotional\neven more than for liturgical use, needs to express and nurture the\ntype of piety prevalent in its own time and circle. Protestant hymn\nbooks fifty years ago, outside the Anglican communion, had hardly any\nhymns in them more than a couple of hundred years old, except\nversified translations of the psalms, modernized and Christianized in\nthe operation.\n\nIt would be going much beyond the evidence to say there were no psalms\nin the Psalter that were composed in the days of the kingdom; there\nmay be a considerable number. But the proof that any particular psalm\ncame from that period is difficult and seldom very convincing. This is\ntrue even of the psalms which speak of the king; for, aside from the\nimpossibility of deciding in some instances whether a reigning king is\nmeant or the king of the good time coming (Messiah), a foreign king\nmay sometimes be in mind (Ps. 45 is so interpreted by many), or an\nAsmon\u00e6an king.\n\n\nLAMENTATIONS.--The fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. is the subject of\nfive poems of considerable length which together make the Book of\nLamentations. The mistaken opinion that the prophet Jeremiah was the\nauthor caused this book to be put immediately after Jeremiah in the\nChristian Bible, with an introduction explicitly attributing the\npoems, or the first of them, to the prophet. In the Hebrew Bible the\nbook stands among the miscellaneous Scriptures. The first four poems\nare in the Hebrew elegiac metre, the verse used for dirges, the\ncharacteristic of which is that each line is divided by a c\u00e6sura into\nunequal parts, oftenest in the ratio of three to two, as in Amos v. 1.\n\n    F\u00e1llen no m\u00f3re to r\u00edse | is \u00cdsrael's d\u00e1ughter!\n    Pr\u00f3strate to \u00e9arth she l\u00edes, | n\u00f3 one to l\u00edft her.\n\nIn Lamentations 1-4 this is combined with an alphabetic acrostic. In\ncc. 1 and 2 the poem consists of twenty-two tiercets, the first line\nof each beginning with a letter of the alphabet in order; c. 4, of as\nmany couplets; while in c. 3 each line of the tiercet begins with the\nproper letter. Chapter 5 is neither alphabetic nor in elegiac metre.\nThe alphabetic artifice is not uncommon with Hebrew poets, the most\nelaborate example being Ps. 119, where in stanzas of seven verses\neach line of the stanza begins with A, B, G, D, and so on.\n\nThe five Lamentations differ considerably in character and poetic\nmerit. Chapters 2 and 4 are distinctly superior to the rest, and\ndescribe the agony of Jerusalem in vivid and moving images; peculiarly\ndirect and poignant is c. 5; while c. 3 has more the character of a\npsalm.\n\nThe poems are not all by the same author. Those which seem to stand\nnearest to the catastrophe (cc. 2 and 4 at least) were probably\nwritten no very long time after it; the others perhaps in the\nfollowing generation. There is nothing in them that would lead us to\nthink of Jeremiah as the author. Perhaps the statement of the\nChronicler that Jeremiah made a dirge for King Josiah which was\nwritten among the Lamentations, and recited in later times by the\nprofessional singers of dirges, may imply that he ascribed one of the\npoems to the prophet. At any rate, it became \"tradition,\" and has\nchiefly contributed to get Jeremiah the injurious reputation of the\nweeping prophet.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXII\n\nPROVERBS\n\n\nThe Book of Proverbs bears the title \"The Proverbs of Solomon son of\nDavid, King of Israel.\" Other titles scattered through the book prove\nthat it is made up of several collections of proverbs which once\ncirculated independently. Thus Prov. 10 begins, \"The Proverbs of\nSolomon\"; xxii. 17-21 is an introduction inviting the reader to give\nattention to \"Sayings of Sages,\" and dwelling on the profit of so\ndoing; xxiv. 23, \"These also are by the Sages\"; xxv. 1, \"These also\nare Proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah\nedited\"; xxx. 1, \"The Sayings of Agur son of Jakeh\"; xxxi. 1, \"The\nsayings of Lemuel King of Massa (?), which his mother taught him\";\nfinally, xxxi. 10-31 is an anonymous alphabetic poem in praise of the\ngood housewife.\n\nThe inference of diverse origin drawn from these titles is confirmed\nby diversity of character and form, and by the repetition of proverbs\nin the different sections, especially in Prov. x. 1-xxii. 16 and cc.\n25-29; on the other hand, the similarity of all parts of the book in\nthought and expression indicates that there is among them no wide\ndifference in time. The theme of the book is \"wisdom,\" by which is\nmeant primarily a practical wisdom in the conduct of individual life\nunder the social, political, and economic conditions of the time. The\nend is a prosperous and happy life, and the motive is enlightened\nself-interest. Experience shows that morality conduces to prosperity\nand happiness, and immoral and unsocial actions to the opposite. To\ninculcate this truth and to apply it is the aim of the wise, who make\nthis knowledge the foundation of virtue and of well-being.\n\nTheir instruction is not given in the form of a philosophical ethic,\nwith a discussion of the nature of the highest good and of the\nprinciples and motives of conduct, but in sententious maxims, or\naphorisms, sometimes grouped upon a central theme, often without any\nthread of connection. Religion is affirmed by the most reflective of\nthese authors to be the first principle of wisdom (Prov. i. 7; ix. 10;\ncf. xv. 33), but there is no appeal to a divine law or to the\nconscience of the individual; the maxims are based on observation and\nexperience. The opposite of wisdom is folly; it is an unintelligent\nselfishness which ignores the consequences of its course, and sooner\nor later involves itself in loss or ruin. For ruin is the end of\npersistent folly as happiness is the fruit of wisdom. This is the\norder of the world; God's ordering, no doubt, but working itself out\nby natural law. Wise men and fools are two permanent classes of men,\ndivided by as hard a line as in the Stoic ethics is drawn between the\nvirtuous man and the rest of mankind. The authors know no degrees of\nwisdom; they recognize different kinds of folly, but no difference in\nfools.\n\nThe pictures of society they draw are chiefly of city life, with its\ntemptations and vices, and they closely resemble those which Jesus the\nson of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) paints about 200 B.C. Monotheism is\ntaken for granted; among the many follies the sages condemn, the folly\nof polytheism and idolatry does not appear. The national particularism\nof the Jewish religion is nowhere in evidence; the cultus is hardly\nreferred to, except to say that the sacrifice of the wicked is an\nabomination, or that justice is more acceptable to the Lord than\nsacrifice.\n\nThese features are doubtless due in part to the distinctive tendencies\nof the moralists, but they also reflect the times. We find them in\nJob, in Sirach, and in Ecclesiastes, other products of Jewish \"Wisdom\"\nwhich date from the later Persian or Greek period; and we have every\nreason to believe that this peculiar development, of which we have no\ntrace earlier, was characteristic of that age. With this the evidence\nof language accords.\n\nOf the several parts of the book, Prov. x. 1-xxii. 16 seem to be the\noldest, and may be from the Persian period; the following chapters are\nlater. So also is Prov. 1-9, which may well have been written under\nPtolemaic rule (say 320-200 B.C.), when the Jews enjoyed times of\npeace and prosperity. The latter author treats his topics more\nsustainedly, though without logical disposition or connection, in a\nwarm and friendly tone such as an experienced elder might use toward a\nyouth. The style is easy and flowing, and sometimes rises to poetic\ninspiration. The personifications of wisdom and folly in c. 9 give a\ngood example of his manner. A more philosophical mind is recognized in\nc. 8, with its personification of the divine wisdom, first of God's\ncreations, the skilled artificer who was by his side at the making of\nthe world, rejoicing in God's habitable earth and the sons of men who\npeople it. Here the author comes near the conceptions of the Greek\n\"Wisdom of Solomon,\" and prepares the way for the theological\nhypostases of Wisdom and the divine Reason and Word (Logos).\n\nEven among the aphorisms of the older collections, there are few that\nhave the stamp of true popular proverbs, the wisdom of the generations\nfinding the pregnant phrase in the mouth of the people; they are, what\nindeed they profess to be, maxims of the sages, fashioned with\nconscious art for a didactic end. And these sages seem to have been,\nlike the Greek sophists, professional teachers of the youth of the\nwell-to-do classes.\n\nThat the bulk of this wisdom, when compilation of it came to be made,\nshould have been labelled Solomonic, is explained by Solomon's fame\nfor wisdom, which is the subject of numerous anecdotes in the\nhistorical books (see 1 Kings iii. 4-15, with the examples, ibid. vs.\n16-28; 1 Kings x. 1-14, etc.), coupled with the explicit statement\nthat he \"spake three thousand proverbs,\" not to mention his songs and\nhis expeditions into natural history (1 Kings iv. 29-34). In later\ntimes Solomon's fame for wisdom was not that of an ethical philosopher\nbut of an adept in magic. It is almost a pity to take away from\nSolomon the urgent warnings against women in which the Proverbs\nabound; they have in his mouth such a mordant irony.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXIII\n\nJOB\n\n\nThe Book of Job is the greatest work of Hebrew literature that has\ncome down to us, and one of the great poetical works of the world's\nliterature. In the form of a colloquy between Job and his friends, in\nwhich at last God intervenes, it discusses the gravest problem of\ntheodicy, How can the suffering of a good man be reconciled with the\nmoral government of God?\n\nIn a prose introduction the reader is apprised of the true cause of\nJob's sufferings, of which the parties to the colloquy are, of course,\nignorant: they are a trial of his uprightness, more specifically, of\nhis disinterested virtue. In this \"prologue in heaven,\" Satan insists\nthat Job's exemplary virtue is no wonder, since God rewards him so\nwell for it, and God, who has full faith in the patriarch, gives Satan\npermission to test him. In an hour all his wealth is swept away and\nhis children perish, but Job bows submissive to God's will. Then he\nhimself is smitten with a loathsome and distressful ailment which was\nregarded as in a peculiar sense the stroke of God, his wife bids him\n\"bless\" God (a euphemism for \"curse\") and die; but he rebukes her:\n\"What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not\nreceive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.\" His three\nfriends come to bemoan him and to comfort him, but the sight of his\nmisery makes them dumb; they sit down with him in silence for seven\ndays. So far the prologue.\n\nOn this scene the poem opens: Job's long suppressed grief breaks out\nin bitter words; he curses the day of his birth, he envies the dead\nwho are at rest. The eldest of the three friends answers him, and so\nthe colloquy begins. The structure of the poem is symmetrical. Each\nfriend speaks in turn and to each Job replies. The cycle is thrice\nrepeated (cc. 4-14; 15-21; 22-26), but, at least in the present text,\nthe third round is incomplete--Zophar has no speech. The friends being\napparently convinced that it is useless to argue with him, Job\nsoliloquizes (cc. 27-31), contrasting his former prosperity with his\npresent adversity, and again protesting his good conscience before God\nand men.\n\nNow a new disputant comes on the scene, whose name does not appear\namong the dramatis person\u00e6, the youthful Elihu; a short prose\nintroduction tells us who he is, and why he intrudes. He is incensed\nat them all; at Job for justifying himself at God's expense, at the\nfriends for not having found arguments to put him down. For his part,\nhe is so full of words that he cannot hold in. He delivers himself,\naccordingly, of four speeches (cc. 32 f.; 34; 35; 36), to which Job\nvouchsafes no reply.\n\nSuddenly God, whom Job had alternately challenged and implored to\nappear, answers him out of the whirlwind (cc. 38-41); with Job's\nconfession of his presumption in speaking of things he understood not\n(xlii. 1-6), the poem ends.\n\nIn the prose epilogue God condemns the three friends, whom he pardons\nat Job's prayer; and the trial over, God, in poetical justice,\nrestores Job to a prosperity greater than the first.\n\nIn the argument, the three friends and Elihu maintain throughout the\nview of divine retribution which was plainly the orthodoxy of the\nauthor's time: God rewards piety and virtue with prosperity and\nrequites sin with adversity. This law is grounded in the righteousness\nof God; it is inconceivable that he should act otherwise.\nConsequently if a man is overwhelmed by calamity, as Job is, the only\nexplanation their religion can allow is that he is a great sinner; any\nother interpretation would impugn the justice of God or bring into\nquestion the existence of a divine providence. They recognize, indeed,\nthat in sending suffering God may design through chastisement or by\nway of warning to bring the sinner to repentance and amendment; they\nadmit that suffering may be a trial of man's faith. They present the\nmatter to Job thus, especially in their earlier speeches; but the\ncharacter of Job's replies convinces them that neither of these is his\ncase, and they come at last to outspoken accusation.\n\nJob denies their insinuations and their charges. He has done nothing\nto deserve such a fate; if they insist on calling this God's justice,\nhe will say straight in God's face that he is an almighty tyrant, who\nunjustly destroys an innocent man. If God slay him for it, he will not\nbelie his conscious rectitude.\n\nThe argument goes round and round, takes this or that turn, grows\nhotter as it proceeds, but does not get beyond this deadlock. The\nauthor's motive so far is clear: he means to controvert the dogma that\nall suffering, or at least extraordinary suffering, is retributive,\nand to show in the instance of Job how this doctrine may drive a godly\nman to the denial of God's justice altogether. With remarkable\npsychological insight, however, he makes Job not only cling to the\nbelief that God is more just than his dealings with him show, but\nmakes this faith grow in even steps with his passionate charges of\ninjustice. He appeals from the injustice of God to the just God who\nsome day will have to justify him.\n\nThe author meant to refute the doctrine that God's providence is\nexhaustively explained by distributive justice. Had he his own\nsolution of the problem of theodicy to put in the place of that cruel\ndogma? Job, we have seen, finds no solution. In the speeches of\nJehovah, where dramatic fitness would lead us to look for the author's\nsolution if he had one, there is no refutation of Job's charges, no\nresponse to his pleadings. The speeches are splendid, but the gist of\nthem is that God's ways are inscrutable. If man cannot comprehend\nGod's operations in nature, what folly, what presumption, to pretend\nto fathom his dealings in providence! In that Job acquiesces for the\nsoul of man. Let his sufferings be a mystery, he can submit and trust;\ncall them punitive, and he revolts against the injustice. That is the\nend to which the author would bring his readers. Some one has said\nthat there is nothing about which men are usually so sure as about the\ncharacter of God, and nothing they are so ready to do as to interpret\nhis dealings by his character--especially his dealings with others.\nSuch were Job's friends. And from this point of view we have no\ndifficulty in understanding, what has stumbled some critics, how\nthey, with their zeal for God's character--that is, for their orthodox\nconception of it--come off in the epilogue with so smart a rebuke,\nwhile Job, whose words seemed to them sheer blasphemy, is praised for\nsaying what was right about God.\n\nThe theme of the Book of Job is one which exercised the greatest of\nthe Greek tragic poets, and it is treated with an \u00c6schylean grandeur;\nin conception and execution it declares the genius of its author. It\nhas not come into our hands altogether as it left his, and certain\nparts of the poem are generally recognized as additions by other pens.\n\nThe most considerable of these are the speeches of Elihu (cc. 32-36).\nIt has already been noted that Elihu's name is not in the prologue, he\ncomes in with a bit of a prologue of his own (xxxii. 1-5); and when\nthe three friends are rebuked in the epilogue, he, who surely deserved\nthe same condemnation, is ignored. All his speeches, provocative\nenough, draw no reply from Job. When, at the end of Elihu's discourse,\nGod answers out of the whirlwind (xxxviii. 1 ff.), \"Who is this that\ndarkeneth counsel by words without knowledge,\" it is to Job he\naddresses himself, not Elihu; and the appearance of God is naturally\ntaken as the response to Job's challenge in xxxi. 35, \"O that I had\none to hear me,\" etc., just before Elihu breaks in. All these signs\nindicate that Elihu is an intruder. This inference is borne out by\nthe arguments so pretentiously announced. They are in the main\nvariations on the themes in the preceding speeches of the friends,\nwith a certain evident predilection for the idea that suffering is a\nwarning. It would seem that another poet thought, as he makes Elihu\nboast, that he could improve on the arguments of the friends. The\nunbiassed reader, without depreciating the poetical merit of the\nspeeches, will be likely to differ with him.\n\nThe eulogy of the divine wisdom (Job 28) is a very fine poem, in the\nvein of Prov. 8, of which it is probably not independent, but it is,\nto say the least, inappropriate in the mouth of Job at this point in\nthe debate. The description of ancient mining is particularly\nnoteworthy. In the speeches of God, the long descriptions of the\nhippopotamus and the crocodile (xl. 15-xli. 34) are not without reason\nsuspected of being purple patches, and in putting them in some damage\nhas been done to the margins. It has been questioned whether the prose\nprologue and epilogue really belong with the poem; but it would not be\nintelligible without them.\n\nIn Ezek. xiv. 14, 20 the name of Job occurs with Noah and Daniel as\nexemplary righteous men, who, if they were alive, could nevertheless\nnot save the wicked city of Jerusalem from its doom; but whether the\nstory Ezekiel knew about Job had any resemblance to the prologue of\nour book, no one can tell. It may very well be that there was a prose\nbook of Job (in which, possibly, the friends played the opposite r\u00f4le\nfrom that given them in the poem), and that the poet took from it the\nincidents and setting that he needed; but about that also nothing can\nbe known.\n\nThe age of the book is determined chiefly by the problem with which it\ndeals. The doctrine of individual retribution is the application to\nthe individual of the prophetic teaching about God's dealing with the\nnation; it appears in a peculiarly crude and hard form in Ezekiel at\nthe moment of the break up of the nation. It was furthered by the\nteaching of the sages, as in Proverbs, about the connection between\nprosperity and happiness and virtue. Experience contradicted the\ndogma, and so the problem of theodicy arose--arose in a peculiarly\ndifficult form, because all that befell a man was attributed to the\nimmediate act of God, who was not relieved of any part of his\nresponsibility by talk of second causes and natural laws, and because\nthe sphere of retribution was limited to this life, with no relief in\nthe possible compensations of another.\n\nThis is the problem of Job, and of itself suffices to put the book in\nwhat is called the post-exilic age. It belongs to the literature of\nJewish Wisdom, with Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. The latter book, one of\nthe latest certainly in the Old Testament, is much concerned with the\nsame conflict of dogma with experience, though in a very different\nspirit. Job may be a work of the fifth century B.C., or perhaps of\nthe fourth. The language would incline us to the earlier date.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXIV\n\nECCLESIASTES. SONG OF SONGS\n\n\nTwo singular books remain, about the inspiration of both of which the\nstraitest sect of the Pharisees in the first century of our era had\ngrave difficulties, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs. Both are\nattributed to Solomon, the Song by title, Ecclesiastes by implication\nin the book itself, and doubtless the supposed authorship had much to\ndo with finally securing the two books a place in the Jewish Bible.\n\n\nECCLESIASTES.--The title of Ecclesiastes runs, \"The words of Koheleth\nthe son of David, king in Jerusalem,\" under which pseudonym no one but\nSolomon can be meant; see also Eccl. i. 12, and especially ii. 1-11.\nIn the body of the book, Koheleth is regularly used as a proper name;\nit is apparently coined for the nonce. Like many pseudonyms in other\nliteratures, it is probably a mystification, piquant to the author's\ncontemporaries but impenetrable to us. That it means \"Preacher\"--an\nancient guess--is highly improbable; but even if the meaning were\ntransparent, there is no more reason for translating a fictitious\nproper name than a real one.\n\nThe theme of this symphony of pessimism is stridently announced in the\nfirst notes of the overture: \"Vanity of vanities, vanity of vanities!\nEverything is vanity.\" The world and its happenings, man and his\nstrivings, pleasure, pain, wisdom, folly, good and evil--all is\nutterly empty; existence has no meaning and no worth. All is chance\nand change, in which things endlessly go round and round, but plan,\npurpose, progress is nowhere to be seen. And as all have one lot, even\nthis senseless and inconstant fortune, so death sooner or later\novertakes all alike and ends the strange play without plot we call\nhuman life.\n\nOf a divine providence directed to any end or by any principle, of a\njustice above which requites men according to their deeds, long years\nand happiness to the wise and good, adversity and premature death to\nthe wicked and foolish, Koheleth, looking on the world of things as\nthey are with searching eyes, discovers no sign. Of another world and\nan immortal soul, with which some of his contemporaries consoled\nthemselves, he, keeping his thinking within the bounds of experience,\nknows nothing. Man dies as the beast dies, the same vital breath is in\nthem both, all are of dust and turn to dust again; nor has man any\nadvantage over the beast, they all have the same end (iii. 19-21; ix.\n4-6). There is consolation in this thought, when the misery of the\nworld weighs too heavy on the heart. The dead are better off than the\nliving, but happier still it would be never to be born to see the\nevils that are under the sun (iv. 2 f.).\n\nWhen we look the facts squarely in the face, the only counsel of\nwisdom is to make the most of what capricious fortune gives us in its\nfriendly moods, to enjoy the pleasures life offers while we can, with\nabandon, but without excess. For the \"too much\" is always evil, even\ntoo much wisdom and virtue! \"Be not over righteous nor put on too much\nwisdom, why shouldest thou die before thy time?\" (vii. 16 f.).\n\nThe author's religion makes God somehow the cause of what happens\nunder the sun, the evil and the good. In one place he seems to express\nthe belief that all that God does is fine and opportune, if man could\nonly understand it; but God has denied man the intelligence to\npenetrate the secret of his ways. So there is nothing better for man\nto do than to be merry, and have a good time while he is alive!\n\nIt is easy to imagine what scandal all this gave to pious souls, and\nit was very natural that orthodox editors should try to neutralize\nKoheleth's scepticism and his epicurean counsels by notes in an\nopposite sense. A modern editor would have put his protests into\nfootnotes, as for example to Gibbon's famous chapters on the spread of\nChristianity; an ancient editor, having no footnotes, put his\nincontinently into the text.\n\nTo these editorial improvements belong the last verses (Eccl. xii. 13\nf.), with its conclusion, \"Fear God and keep his commandments, for\nthis is the business of every man; for God will bring every deed into\nthe judgment on all secrets, whether it be good or bad.\" The judgment\nafter death is evidently meant. The warning against many books and\nmuch reading in xii. 12 is also a gloss, while xii. 9-11 appears to be\nwritten by an earlier editor of the book, commending it to reading and\nstudy. In the body of the book, also, several verses are obviously\nintroduced to give an orthodox twist to the author's very heterodox\nutterances.\n\nThat Ecclesiastes belongs to the latest stratum of Hebrew Biblical\nliterature is evident from both its matter and its style; but there is\nnothing in it by which its age can be exactly fixed.\n\n\nSONG OF SONGS.--A verse already quoted (1 Kings iv. 32) tells that,\nbesides three thousand proverbs, Solomon composed a thousand and five\nsongs. We shall probably not err in assuming that this verse was in\nthe mind of the editor who prefixed the title \"The Song of Songs (that\nis, the very best of songs), by Solomon.\" There is nothing in the\nbook to indicate that Solomon was the author or that the poet meant\nhis productions to be attributed to him.\n\nThe one theme of the book, running through many variations, is the\nlove of man and woman, passionate and sensuous. In the second century\nof our era its songs were warbled at banquets or wedding feasts, a\nprofane abuse on which a scandalized rabbi denounced damnation. In the\nfirst century it was, in spite of Solomon's name, no Holy Scripture\nfor the straitest sect, and was not finally admitted to the canon, we\nmay be pretty sure, until an allegorical sense had been discovered in\nit, or rather imposed on it: it sang, under the figure of wedded love,\nof the relation of the Lord to Israel. The Fathers took over all the\nallegory, only making the lover Christ, the beloved the Church (as\nstill in the running titles of the Authorized Version), or the soul.\nThe medi\u00e6val church saw in the bride the Virgin Mary. The allegorical\ninterpretation was a necessary corollary of the dogmatic assumption\nthat the canon of inspired scripture could contain nothing but books\nof religious instruction and edification. Allegorical love\npoetry--usually the love of God and the soul--is not uncommon in\nmystical sects or circles of various creeds; and the ultra-spiritual\npoets often revel in an ultra-sensual imagery of passion and fruition;\nbut nothing in the Song of Songs suggests such an origin, nor have we\nknowledge of a Jewish mysticism of this erotic type in the centuries\nfrom which it must come.\n\nThe literary criticism of the last century chiefly spent itself in\nendeavours to discover in the book a lyric drama with a moral\ntendency, on some such theme as the triumph of pure love over lust.\nGreat ingenuity was expended in dividing the text into regular acts\nand scenes and assigning the speeches to the leading actors and the\nchorus. In its simplest form there were but two actors, the virtuous\nvillage maiden and the harem-jaded Solomon; a more plausible scheme\ngave the girl a rustic lover, which added much to the piquancy of the\nscenes with Solomon, and to the _d\u00e9nouement_, in which the king,\nfoiled by the maiden's constancy, confesses virtue triumphant, and\nsends her back to her shepherd swain. More recent supporters of the\ndramatic hypothesis have modified this scheme in a way to remove some\nof its plainest difficulties, but have complicated it in proportion.\n\nOther interpreters take the book for a collection of love songs, or,\nmore specifically, of wedding songs, such as are sung to-day at\nvillage weddings in Syria and Palestine. A certain dramatic quality in\nthe songs, and their relation to successive stages of the festivities,\nwould give the appearance of a progressive action which has been urged\nfor the dramatic theory. The Syrian peasant to-day, in the region of\nDamascus, is for his bride-week in song and salutation a king or\nprince; a sledge on the village threshing-floor is his throne, and the\nbride is queen. Through the week the royal pair are honoured by the\nvillagers with songs and dances. If in the Hebrew songs the\nbridegroom-king is sometimes called Solomon, it is because Solomon was\nthe richest and most splendid of kings. This view of the nature of the\nbook is simpler and more probable. The several poems are not\ndistinguished by titles, and there is room for difference of opinion\nabout the divisions; but this is a small difficulty compared with the\npartition into roles in the supposed play.\n\nThe songs are fine examples of popular poetry, with traditional\nsubjects, forms, and imagery. Nothing requires us to suppose that they\nare the production of one poet; we may think of them rather as an\nanthology of love songs, not necessarily all composed for wedding\nfestivities, but all appropriate for use on such occasions.\n\nThe language of the songs proves that they belong to a very late\nperiod in Hebrew literature, though the type is doubtless old enough.\nSuch popular poetry has no motive for preserving or imitating\narchaism, as hymn writers do, but modernizes itself from generation to\ngeneration. The wedding songs of old Israel may have been like enough\nto these in character, but they were in another speech.\n\nIt was a fortunate misunderstanding that has preserved them; but the\naccidental preservation of these few pages emphasizes the loss of\nalmost every other vestige of Hebrew secular poetry.\n\n\n\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n\n\n1. =General.=--SMITH, W. ROBERTSON. _The Old Testament in the Jewish\nChurch._ 1892.--These lectures, first published in 1881, were meant to\ngive to laymen an account of the problems and methods of criticism.\nThey are a remarkably lucid exposition of the subject, and may still\nbe read with profit as a general introduction to criticism.\n\n2. =The Canon.=--RYLE, H. E. _The Canon of the Old Testament._ 1892;\n2nd ed. 1895.--A history of the growth of the Old Testament rather\nthan a history of the canon. In that growth there were, according to\nthe author, three stages; in the first, which began with the\nratification of Deuteronomy in 621 B.C., the Law (Pentateuch) was the\nonly recognized collection of Sacred Scripture; in the second the Law\nand the Prophets; and in the third the Law, the Prophets, and the\n\"Writings.\" The latter part of the volume, which treats of the history\nof the canon in the usual meaning of the term, is a convenient but not\nvery accurate compilation.\n\nThe article \"Canon\" (of the Old Testament) in the _Encyclopaedia\nBiblica_, by Karl Budde, and the article \"Old Testament Canon\" in\nHastings' _Dictionary of the Bible_, by F. H. Woods, are concise\npresentations of generally accepted opinions by competent scholars.\n\n3. =Literature of the Old Testament.=--DRIVER, S. R. _Introduction to\nthe Literature of the Old Testament._ 6th ed., revised, 1897. A volume\nof the _International Theological Library_, designed primarily for\nministers and students of theology. The technical matter (lists of\nHebrew words and the like) is, however, set off from the body of the\ntext, and the work can therefore be used with profit by laymen for\npurposes of study. The synopses of the contents of Biblical books will\nbe found helpful. The author is a scholar of conservative temper and\ncautious about accepting new or radical theories.\n\nCORNILL, CARL. _Introduction to the Canonical Books of the Old\nTestament._ Translated by G. H. Box. New York. 1907.--Originally one\nof a German series of theological handbooks, this volume is on a\nsmaller scale than Driver's and goes less into details which are of\ninterest only to the professional student. The author's criticism is\nmuch less conservative than Driver's and more original.\n\nKENT, C. F. _The Student's Old Testament._ 1904-1910.--I. _Narratives\nof the Beginnings of Hebrew History_, 1904; II. _Israel's Historical\nand Biographical Narratives_, 1905; III. _The Sermons, Epistles, and\nApocalypses of Israel's Prophets_, 1910; IV. _Israel's Law and Legal\nPrecedents_, 1907. (Two volumes on the Poetical Books will complete\nthe series.) The sources of the Pentateuch and the Historical Books\nare separated, and where the narratives are parallel they are printed\nin parallel columns with headings indicating their origin. The\nanalysis is also set out in tabular form, and maps and chronological\ncharts are added. The oracles of the prophets are arranged, so far as\npossible, in chronological order, additions and interpolations being\nset in smaller type. The author is an experienced teacher and\nbook-maker, and has a fine talent for exposition.\n\nCARPENTER, J. ESTLIN, and HARFORD-BATTERSBY, G. _The Hexateuch\naccording to the Revised Version._ 2 vols. 1900.--The first volume\n(separately reprinted, 1902) contains an excellent history of\ncriticism, and develops fully and very clearly the evidence for the\nprevailing theory concerning the sources and composition of the\nHexateuch. Tabular appendices exhibit the linguistic evidence in a\nform which makes it available, as far as possible, to the reader who\ndoes not know Hebrew; they also give a synopsis of the laws and\ninstitutions, and an analysis and conspectus of the several codes. The\nsecond volume presents in the text of the Revised Version the analysis\nof the Pentateuch and Joshua in an extremely ingenious typographical\nscheme.\n\nThe articles on the Books of the Old Testament, from Genesis to Judges\ninclusive, in the _Encyclopaedia Biblica_, by the author of the\npresent volume, may be referred to for a fuller statement of the\nreasons for his views and a more detailed analysis. The article\n\"Historical Literature\" in the same Encyclopaedia gives a\ncomprehensive survey of the Hebrew historiography from its beginnings\ndown to the time of Josephus. The article on \"Prophecy and Prophets\"\nin Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, by A. B. Davidson, though not\ndealing primarily with critical questions, may be strongly commended,\nand the article on \"Psalms,\" by W. T. Davison, in the same volume, is\ngood. An excellent article on \"Proverbs\" in the _Encyclopaedia\nBiblica_ should also be mentioned.\n\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\n  Abomination, Dan. 8, 186\n\n  Acrostics, 229 f.\n\n  Alexander and successors in Dan., 185 f.\n\n  Allegory, in Song of Songs, 247\n\n  Amos, Book, 196 ff.\n\n  Annals, royal and temple, 100\n\n  Antiochus Epiphanes, 186, 187 f.\n\n  Apocalypses, character of, 188\n  ----age, how determined, 188\n\n  Apocrypha, older use of the name, 18\n  ----Jerome, 17 f.\n  ----Luther, 21 f.\n  ----_See_ Canon\n\n  Aramaic, in Ezra, 130\n  ----in Daniel, 189 f.\n\n  Asa, king, 123\n\n  Assyria, Greek kingdom (Syria), 155, 215\n\n  Astruc, analysis of Genesis, 32\n\n  Athanasius, 16\n\n  Augustine, 19 f.\n\n\n  Baal, Tyrian, 111\n\n  Baals and Astartes, 83, 192\n\n  Babylon, destruction, prophesied, 152\n  ----taken by Cyrus, 153\n\n  Babylonian myths in Genesis, 43 f.\n\n  Baruch, scribe of Jeremiah, 166 f., 168\n\n  Bible, Jewish, _see_ Old Testament\n\n\n  Calvin, on Maccab\u00e6an Psalms, 226\n\n  Canaan, conquest, in Jos., 77 f., 88 f.\n\n  Canon, Jewish, formation of, 11\n  ----of Greek-speaking Jews, 13\n  ----Jewish, in Church Fathers, 14 ff.\n  ----of Greek Church, 13 ff.\n  ----Latin Church, 17 ff.\n  ----Syrian churches, 20\n  ----in the Middle Ages, 20\n  ----the Reformation, 21\n  ----Reformed churches, 22\n  ----Council of Trent, 23\n  ----_See_ also Apocrypha\n\n  Chald\u00e6ans, in Hab., 205\n  ----in Dan., 189\n\n  Cherubim car, 178\n\n  Chron.--Ezra--Neh., one book 118\n\n  Chronicles, Book, 118 ff.\n  ----sources, 124 f.\n  ----genealogies, 119\n  ----historical value, 124\n\n  Chronology in Judg., 82\n  ----in Kings, 101\n\n  Commandments, Ten, 49 f.\n\n  Criticism, historical, 25 f.\n  ----of Pentateuch, 31 ff.\n\n  Cyrus, edict of, 128\n  ----deliverer, messiah, 160\n\n\n  Daniel, Book, 180 ff.\n  ----two languages in, 189\n  ----Nebuchadnezzar's dream, 183 f.\n  ----the four beasts, _c. 7_, 184 f.\n  ----ram and he-goat, _c. 8_, 185\n  ----Seleucids and Ptolemies, _c. 11_, 187 f.\n  ----age of the book, 188\n\n  Darius Hystaspis, 209 f.\n\n  David, history, 96 f., 109\n  ----Psalms of, 223\n\n  Day of the Lord, in Zeph., 207\n  ----in Joel, 195\n  ----in Mal., 217 f.\n\n  Deborah, Song of, 89\n\n  Decalogue, 49 f.\n\n  Deluge, Babylonian myth, 43 f.\n\n  Deuterocanonic Books, 24\n\n  D (Deuteronomy, Deuteronomist), 35, 84\n\n  Deuteronomists, historians, 84\n  ----_See_ also Jos., Judg., Kings\n\n  Deuteronomy, 58 ff.\n  ----programme of a reform, 62\n  ----age of the book, 64 f.\n\n  Dragon of the sea, 156\n\n\n  E (Elohist), 35\n  ----characteristics, 39 ff.\n  ----origin, 41\n  ----age, 67 f.\n  ----Horeb constitution in, 50\n  ----in Jos. _1-12_, 75 ff.\n  ----in Judg., 86\n\n  Ecclesiastes, Book, 243 ff.\n\n  Ecclesiastes, interpolations, 246 f.\n  ----age, 246\n  ----inspiration, 8 ff., 245\n\n  Ecclesiastical Books, 17, 24\n\n  Ecclesiasticus, in the Church, 15 f.\n\n  Eden, Garden in, 43\n\n  Eden, Prince of Tyre in, 177\n\n  Edom, prophecies against, 158 f., 177, 197, 199\n  ----Obad., 200\n\n  Egypt, Ezekiel's prophecy, 177\n\n  Eli, a judge, 90\n\n  Elihu, in Job, 240 f.\n\n  Elijah, 110 f., 145\n\n  Elisha, 112 f.\n\n  Esther, Book, 135 ff.\n  ----mythical interpretation, 137\n  ----age, 138, 139 f.\n  ----inspiration, 8, 138\n  ----additions in Greek, 138\n\n  Exile, theory of the return, 122\n\n  Exodus, Book, 47 f.\n\n  Ezekiel, Book, 174 ff.\n  ----against foreign nations (_cc. 25-32_), 176 f.\n  ----state of the text, 180\n\n  Ezra, 129 ff.\n  ----Priests' Code, 56 f.\n  ----two languages in, 130\n\n  Ezra and Neh., sequel of Chron., 118\n  ----contents, 128 ff.\n  ----sources, 131 f.\n  ----historical value, 133\n  ----derangement, 132 (_cf._ 128-131)\n\n\n  Fast, the true, 212\n\n  Feasts, agricultural, 69\n\n  Fool, in Proverbs, 232 f.\n\n  Foreign nations, oracles against, 142, 152 ff., 158 f., 171 f.,\n        176 ff., 195, 197, 200, 204 f., 206, 214 f.\n\n\n  Genesis, Book, 33 ff.\n\n  Gerizim, temple on, 121\n\n  God, national idea, 146\n  ----moral idea, 145\n  ----in J, 37 f.\n  ----in E, 39 f.\n  ----in P, 47\n  ----in Amos, 198 f.\n  ----in Hosea, 193, 199\n  ----in Deuteronomy, 59 f.\n  ----in Isaiah _40-66_, 161\n\n  Gog and his hordes, 178, 200\n  ----echo in Zech., 214\n\n  Golden age, prophecies of, 151, 157, 158, 169 ff., 176, 179,\n        193, 198 f., 213 f.\n\n  Golden calves, 104\n\n  Gospels, inspiration of, 10\n\n  Greek versions of O. T., 11\n\n  Greeks, kingdom doomed, 215\n\n\n  Habakkuk, Book, 205 ff.\n\n  Hadrach, 215\n\n  Haggai, Book, 209\n\n  Heavenly bodies, judgment on, 156\n\n  Hezekiah, king, 114 f.\n\n  High places, 65 f., 95, 103, 117\n  ----untouched by good kings, 107\n  ----Hezekiah's measures, 114 f.\n  ----Josiah, 61 f., 116\n\n  Historical literature, 98 ff.\n  ----oldest, 99 _cf._ 96 f.\n\n  History, religious lessons, 104\n\n  Holiness, Law of, Lev. _17-26_, 54 f.\n\n  Horeb, Mount of God, 48\n\n  Hosea, Book, 190 ff.\n\n\n  Idolatry, satire on, 161\n\n  Idols, _see_ Golden Calves, Serpent\n\n  Immortality, denied in Eccles., 244\n\n  Inspiration, cessation of, 10\n  ----of Eccles. and Cant., 8 ff.\n  ---of Gospels, 10\n\n  Isaiah, prophet, 115, 147\n  ----genius of, 150\n  ----earlier utterances, 150\n  ----rejection of sacrifice, 151\n\n  Isaiah, Book, 147 ff.\n  ----main divisions, 147 f.\n  ----_cc. 1-12_, 149 f.\n  ----_cc. 13-23_, 152 ff.\n  ----_cc. 24-27_, 156 f.\n  ----_cc. 28-33_, 157 f.\n  ----_cc. 34-35_, 158 f.\n  ----_cc. 36-39_, 147\n  ----_cc. 40-66_, 159 ff.\n\n\n  J and E, characteristics of, 35 ff.\n  ----in Gen., common tradition, 40 f.\n  ----diversity of tradition, 70\n  ----combined in one book (J E), 71\n  ----in Jos., 78\n  ----in Judg., 85\n\n  J (Jahvist), 35\n\n  J, literary quality, 36\n  ----in Gen. _1-11_, two strands, 41 f.\n  ----anthropomorphism, 37 f., 42\n  ----religious element, 37 ff.\n  ----origin, 41\n  ----age, 67 f.\n  ----fundamental law in, 50 f.\n  ----in Jos., 74 ff.\n  ----in Judg., 86\n  ----in Sam., 99\n\n  Jehoash, king of Israel, 113\n\n  Jehoiakim, king, 165\n\n  Jehu, king, 112, 118\n\n  Jeremiah, prophet, 164\n  ----his hard lot, 171 f.\n  ----\"confessions,\" 172\n  ----not author of Lam., 230\n\n  Jeremiah, Book, 164 ff.\n  ----later additions, 168 f., 171, 173\n  ----Hebrew and Greek texts, 172 f.\n\n  Jericho, taking of, 75 f.\n\n  Jeroboam I., 104, 108\n\n  Jeroboam II., 114\n\n  Jerome, 17, 18\n\n  Jerusalem, two sieges, 117 f., 174\n  ----in Chron., 121\n\n  Joash, king of Judah, 113\n\n  Job, mention of in Ezek., 241\n\n  Job, Book, 235 ff.\n  ----prologue and epilogue, 241\n  ----structure of the poem, 236 f.\n  ----purpose of author, 239 f.\n  ----age, 242 f.\n  ----later additions, 240 ff.\n\n  Joel, Book, 194 ff.\n\n  Jonah, Book, 140 ff.\n\n  Joshua, Book, 73 ff.\n\n  Josiah, king, 116\n  ----his reforms, 62\n  ----reaction, 103 f.\n\n  Judas Maccab\u00e6us, 187\n\n  Judges, Book, 81 ff.\n  ----stories of deliverance, 84 ff.\n  ----interpretation of history, 81, 83\n  ----original close of the Book, 91\n\n  Judgment, last, in Isa. _24-27_, 156 f.\n\n  Julius Africanus, 15\n\n\n  Kadesh, 70\n\n  Kingdom, founding, two accounts, 92\n  ----division of, 108\n\n  Kings, Books, 100 ff.\n  ----2 Kings _18-20_ = Isa. _36-39_, 114\n\n  Koheleth, the name, 243\n\n\n  Lamentations, Book, 229 ff.\n\n  Latin Bible, 17\n\n  Laws, given at Sinai, 49\n  ----Ezra's, ratification of, 130\n\n  Legends, rise of, 98\n\n  Leviathan, 156\n\n  Levites, choice of, in Num., 55 f.\n  ----in Chron., 123\n\n  Leviticus, Book, 52 ff.\n\n  Little Horn, Dan. 8, 185\n\n  Love, principle of religion in Hos., 192 f.\n\n\n  Malachi, Book, 215 f.\n\n  Manasseh, king, his sins, 104\n\n  Medes, 152\n\n  Merodach Baladan, 116, 153\n\n  Messianic prophecy, _see_ Golden Age\n\n  Micah, Book, 201 ff.\n\n  Micaiah ben Imlah, 112, 145\n\n  Midrash, of Kings, 124, 127\n\n  Minor Prophets, 190 ff.\n\n  Mixed marriages, 129, 130, 217\n\n  Myths, Babylonian, in Gen., 177 f.\n\n  Moloch, 104\n\n  Monotheism, in Deut., 59\n  ----in Isa. _40-66_, 161\n\n\n  Naboth's vineyard, 111\n\n  Nahum, Book, 204 f.\n\n  Nehemiah, mission to Jerusalem, 129 f.\n  ----Memoirs, 129, 131, 183\n  ----Book, 118, 128 ff.\n\n  New Year, 48\n\n  Nineveh, prophecy against, Zeph., 208\n  ----Nah., 204 f.\n\n  Numbers, Book, 55 ff.\n\n\n  Obadiah, Book, 200\n\n  Old Testament, the name, 7\n  ----Jewish, divisions, 8\n  ----order of books, 8\n  ----sacred scriptures, 25\n  ----a national literature, 26 ff.\n  ----literary quality, 28 f.\n\n  Omri, king, 109 f.\n\n  Origen, 16\n\n\n  P (Priestly authors), 35 f.\n  ----Origins of Religious Institutions, 44 f.\n  ----in Gen., contents, 45 ff.\n  ----diction and style, 46\n  ----conception of God, 47\n  ----the revelation at Sinai, 51\n  ----age of the laws in, 66 f.\n  ----age and origin of P, 56 f., 65 f.\n  ----united with J E D, 72\n  ----in Jos., 78\n\n  Passover, 48\n\n  Patriarchs, in J and E, 35 ff.\n\n  Pentateuch, 29 ff.\n  ----the law of Moses, 31\n  ----names of the books, 29\n  ----contents, 29-31\n  ----beginnings of criticism, 32 ff.\n  ----main sources, 33 ff.\n  ----method of the author, 72 f.\n  ----composition, 65 ff.\n  ----age of, as a whole, 72 f.\n  ----_See_ under the several Books, also, J, E, D, P.\n\n  Peoples of the land, 122\n\n  Porphyry, 187\n\n  Priesthood, in Chron., 121, 122 f.\n\n  Priests' Code, 56 f., 130, 134\n\n  Priests and levites, cities, in Jos., 78\n\n  Priests, invective in Mal., 216\n\n  Primeval History, sources, 41\n  ----ultimate sources, 42 f.\n\n  Prophets, Former and Latter, 8\n  ----in old Israel, 144 f.\n  ----societies, or orders of, 145 f.\n  ----popular, 202 f.\n  ----bad repute of, 196, 214\n  ----ninth century, 110 ff.\n  ----eighth century, 146 f., 190, 199\n\n  Proverbs, Book, 231 ff.\n\n  Providence, scepticism in Eccles., 243, 244\n\n  Psalms, Book, 218 ff.\n  ----older hymn books, 220\n  ----liturgical and devotional use, 218 f.\n  ----titles, 219\n  ----Elohistic book (Ps. _42-82_), 220, 224\n  ----Davidic, 223, 224, 225, 226\n  ----Asaphite and Korahite, 221, 224\n  ----Songs of Ascents, Hallels, 222\n  ----Maccab\u00e6an, 226 f.\n  ----age of the Book, 223 ff.\n  ----religious conceptions, 227 f.\n\n  Purim, 139\n\n\n  Religion, idea of, in Hos., 191 f.\n  ----in Deut. 59\n  ----in Mic., 203\n  ----in Isa. _40-66_, 161 f.\n  ----in Proverbs, 232\n  ----true, among the heathen, 216\n\n  Restoration, in Ezek., 179\n  ----in Isa., 148 ff.\n  ----_See_ Golden Age\n\n  Retribution, orthodoxy of Job's friends, 237\n\n  Ruth, Book, 139 ff.\n\n\n  Sacrifice, patriarchal, 51 f.\n  ----ritual laws, in Lev. _1-7_, 52\n  ----prophetic rejection, 151 f., 198\n\n  Samaria, Omri's new capital, 110\n  ----fall of, 114\n\n  Samaritan sect, in Jewish eyes, 122\n\n  Samuel, last of the judges, 90 f.\n\n  Samuel, Books, 91 ff.\n\n  Sanballat, 130\n\n  \"Scriptures,\" class of sacred books, 8\n  ----disputed, 9\n\n  Scythians, 170 f., 207\n\n  Seers, 144\n\n  Sennacherib, siege of Jerusalem, 115\n\n  Septuagint, _see_ Greek Version\n\n  Serpent, idol, in temple, 114 f.\n\n  Servant of Jehovah, in Isa., _40_ ff., 164\n\n  Sheol, imagery, 152, 156, 177 f.\n\n  Shishak, invasion by, 109\n\n  Siloam tunnel, 116\n\n  Sinai, 48\n\n  Sirach, Book, _see_ Ecclesiasticus\n\n  Scepticism, 217\n\n  Solomon, 97\n  ----character of his reign, 100\n  ----his wealth and wisdom, 105\n  ----reputation for wisdom, 234\n  ----Proverbs ascribed to, 234 f.\n  ----Eccles. ascribed to, 243\n  ----Psalms ascribed to, 223 f.\n\n  Song of Deborah, 89\n\n  Song of Songs, 246 ff.\n  ----allegorized, 247\n  ----age, 249\n  ----inspiration, 8, 247\n\n  Story books, Jewish, 134 ff.\n\n  Suffering of the good, in Job, 237 ff.\n\n  Susanna and the Elders, 15, 189.\n\n  Symbolical actions in Ezek., 178\n\n  Syria (\"Assyria\"), 155, 215\n\n  Syriac Bible, contents of O. T., 20\n\n  Syrian wars, 110\n\n\n  Tabernacle, in P, 51\n\n  Temple, dedication of, 106\n  ----abode of Jehovah, 103\n  ----no protection to the city, 166\n  ----rebuilding of, 209\n\n  Theodicy, in Job, 237 ff., 242\n\n  Tyre, prophecy against, Ezek., 176\n\n\n  Uncanonical books, Hebrew and Greek, 12\n  ----_See_ also Apocrypha\n\n\n  Valley of dry bones, 179\n\n  Visions, in prophets, 149, 178, 183 ff., 197, 211\n\n\n  Wedding songs, 248\n\n  Wisdom, in Proverbs, 232\n  ----personified, 233\n  ----divine, in Job _28_, 241 f.\n\n  Worship, prophetic attitude, 151 f.\n  ----_See_ Sacrifice\n\n\n  Zechariah, Book, 211 ff.\n\n  Zech., _9-11, 12-14_, age, 214, 215\n\n  Zedekiah, king, 175 f.\n\n  Zephaniah, Book, 207 ff.\n\n  Zerubbabel, Messianic hopes, 210 f.\n\n\nTHE LONDON AND NORWICH PRESS, LIMITED, LONDON AND NORWICH\n\n\n\n\n  The\n  Home University\n  Library\n  of Modern\n  Knowledge\n\n\n  _A Comprehensive Series of New\n  and Specially Written Books_\n\n\n  EDITORS:\n\n  PROF. GILBERT MURRAY, D.Litt., LL.D., F.B.A.\n  HERBERT FISHER, LL.D., F.B.A.\n  PROF. J. ARTHUR THOMSON, M.A.\n  PROF. WM. T. BREWSTER, M.A.\n\n  1/-net\n  in cloth\n\n  256 Pages\n\n  2/6 net\n  in leather\n\n\n\n\n_History and Geography_\n\n     _3. THE FRENCH REVOLUTION_\n\n     By HILAIRE BELLOC, M.A. (With Maps.) \"It is coloured with\n     all the militancy of the author's temperament.\"--_Daily\n     News._\n\n     _4. HISTORY OF WAR AND PEACE_\n\n     By G. H. PERRIS. The Rt. Hon. JAMES BRYCE writes: \"I have\n     read it with much interest and pleasure, admiring the skill\n     with which you have managed to compress so many facts and\n     views into so small a volume.\"\n\n     _8. POLAR EXPLORATION_\n\n     By Dr W. S. BRUCE, F.R.S.E., Leader of the \"Scotia\"\n     Expedition. (With Maps.) \"A very freshly written and\n     interesting narrative.\"--_The Times._\n\n     _12. THE OPENING-UP OF AFRICA_\n\n     By Sir H. H. JOHNSTON, G.C.M.G., F.Z.S. (With Maps.) \"The\n     Home University Library is much enriched by this excellent\n     work.\"--_Daily Mail._\n\n     _13. MEDI\u00c6VAL EUROPE_\n\n     By H. W. C. DAVIS, M.A. (With Maps.) \"One more illustration\n     of the fact that it takes a complete master of the subject\n     to write briefly upon it.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n     _14. THE PAPACY & MODERN TIMES (1303-1870)_\n\n     By WILLIAM BARRY, D.D. \"Dr Barry has a wide range of\n     knowledge and an artist's power of selection.\"--_Manchester\n     Guardian._\n\n     _23. HISTORY OF OUR TIME (1885-1911)_\n\n     By G. P. GOOCH, M.A. \"Mr Gooch contrives to breathe vitality\n     into his story, and to give us the flesh as well as the\n     bones of recent happenings.\"--_Observer._\n\n     _25. THE CIVILISATION OF CHINA_\n\n     By H. A. GILES, LL.D., Professor of Chinese at Cambridge.\n     \"In all the mass of facts, Professor Giles never becomes\n     dull. He is always ready with a ghost story or a street\n     adventure for the reader's recreation.\"--_Spectator._\n\n     _29. THE DAWN OF HISTORY_\n\n     By J. L. MYRES, M.A., F.S.A., Wykeham Professor of Ancient\n     History, Oxford. \"There is not a page in it that is not\n     suggestive.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n     _33. THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND_\n\n     _A Study in Political Evolution_\n\n     By Prof. A. F. POLLARD, M.A. With a Chronological Table. \"It\n     takes its place at once among the authoritative works on\n     English history.\"--_Observer._\n\n     _34. CANADA_\n\n     By A. G. BRADLEY. \"The volume makes an immediate appeal to\n     the man who wants to know something vivid and true about\n     Canada.\"--_Canadian Gazette._\n\n     _37. PEOPLES & PROBLEMS OF INDIA_\n\n     By Sir T. W. HOLDERNESS, K.C.S.I., Permanent Under-Secretary\n     of State of the India Office. \"Just the book which newspaper\n     readers require to-day, and a marvel of\n     comprehensiveness.\"--_Pall Mall Gazette._\n\n     _42. ROME_\n\n     By W. WARDE FOWLER, M.A. \"A masterly sketch of Roman\n     character and of what it did for the world.\"--_The\n     Spectator._\n\n     _48. THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR_\n\n     By F. L. PAXSON, Professor of American History, Wisconsin\n     University. (With Maps.) \"A stirring study.\"--_The\n     Guardian._\n\n     _51. WARFARE IN BRITAIN_\n\n     By HILAIRE BELLOC, M.A. \"Rich in suggestion for the\n     historical student.\"--_Edinburgh Evening News._\n\n     _55. MASTER MARINERS_\n\n     By J. R. SPEARS. \"A continuous story of shipping progress\n     and adventure.... It reads like a romance.\"--_Glasgow\n     Herald._\n\n     _61. NAPOLEON_\n\n     By HERBERT FISHER, LL.D., F.B.A., Vice-Chancellor of\n     Sheffield University. (With Maps.) The story of the great\n     Bonaparte's youth, his career, and his downfall, with some\n     sayings of Napoleon, a genealogy, and a bibliography.\n\n     _66. THE NAVY AND SEA POWER_\n\n     By DAVID HANNAY. The author traces the growth of naval power\n     from early times, and discusses its principles and effects\n     upon the history of the Western world.\n\n     _71. GERMANY OF TO-DAY_\n\n     By CHARLES TOWER. \"It would be difficult to name any better\n     summary.\"--_Daily News._\n\n     _82. PREHISTORIC BRITAIN_\n\n     By ROBERT MUNRO, M.A., M.D., LL.D., F.R.S.E. (Illustrated.)\n\n\n\n\n_Literature and Art_\n\n     _2. SHAKESPEARE_\n\n     By JOHN MASEFIELD. \"The book is a joy. We have had\n     half-a-dozen more learned books on Shakespeare in the last\n     few years, but not one so wise.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n     _27. ENGLISH LITERATURE: MODERN_\n\n     By G. H. MAIR, M.A. \"Altogether a fresh and individual\n     book.\"--_Observer._\n\n     _35. LANDMARKS IN FRENCH LITERATURE_\n\n     By G. L. STRACHEY. \"It is difficult to imagine how a better\n     account of French Literature could be given in 250 small\n     pages.\"--_The Times._\n\n     _39. ARCHITECTURE_\n\n     By Prof. W. R. LETHABY. (Over forty Illustrations.) \"Popular\n     guide-books to architecture are, as a rule, not worth much.\n     This volume is a welcome exception.\"--_Building News._\n     \"Delightfully bright reading.\"--_Christian World._\n\n     _43. ENGLISH LITERATURE: MEDI\u00c6VAL_\n\n     By Prof. W. P. KER, M.A. \"Prof. Ker, one of the soundest\n     scholars in English we have, is the very man to put an\n     outline of English Medi\u00e6val Literature before the\n     uninstructed public. His knowledge and taste are\n     unimpeachable, and his style is effective, simple, yet never\n     dry.\"--_The Athen\u00e6um._\n\n     _45. THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE_\n\n     By L. PEARSALL SMITH, M.A. \"A wholly fascinating study of\n     the different streams that went to the making of the great\n     river of the English speech.\"--_Daily News._\n\n     _52. GREAT WRITERS OF AMERICA_\n\n     By Prof. J. ERSKINE and Prof. W. P. TRENT. \"An admirable\n     summary, from Franklin to Mark Twain, enlivened by a dry\n     humour.\"--_Athen\u00e6um._\n\n     _63. PAINTERS AND PAINTING_\n\n     By Sir FREDERICK WEDMORE. (With 16 half-tone illustrations.)\n     From the Primitives to the Impressionists.\n\n     _64. DR JOHNSON AND HIS CIRCLE_\n\n     By JOHN BAILEY, M.A. \"A most delightful essay.\"--_Christian\n     World._\n\n     _65. THE LITERATURE OF GERMANY_\n\n     By Professor J. G. ROBERTSON, M.A., Ph.D. \"Under the\n     author's skilful treatment the subject shows life and\n     continuity.\"--_Athen\u00e6um._\n\n     _70. THE VICTORIAN AGE IN LITERATURE_\n\n     By G. K. CHESTERTON. \"The book is everywhere immensely\n     alive, and no one will put it down without a sense of having\n     taken a tonic or received a series of electric\n     shocks.\"--_The Times._\n\n     _73. THE WRITING OF ENGLISH_\n\n     By W. T. BREWSTER, A.M., Professor of English in Columbia\n     University. \"Sensible in its teaching, and not over-rigidly\n     conventional in its manner.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n     _75. ANCIENT ART AND RITUAL_\n\n     By JANE E. HARRISON, LL.D., D.Litt. \"Charming in style and\n     learned in manner.\"--_Daily News._\n\n     _76. EURIPIDES AND HIS AGE_\n\n     By GILBERT MURRAY, D.Litt., LL.D., F.B.A., Regius Professor\n     of Greek at Oxford. \"A beautiful piece of work.... Just in\n     the fulness of time, and exactly in the right place....\n     Euripides has come into his own.\"--_The Nation._\n\n\n\n\n_Science_\n\n     _7. MODERN GEOGRAPHY_\n\n     By Dr MARION NEWBIGIN. (Illustrated.) \"Geography, again:\n     what a dull, tedious study that was wont to be!... But Miss\n     Marion Newbigin invests its dry bones with the flesh and\n     blood of romantic interest.\"--_Daily Telegraph._\n\n     _9. THE EVOLUTION OF PLANTS_\n\n     By Dr D. H. SCOTT, M.A., F.R.S., late Hon. Keeper of the\n     Jodrell Laboratory, Kew. (Fully illustrated.) \"The\n     information is as trustworthy as first-hand knowledge can\n     make it.... Dr Scott's candid and familiar style makes the\n     difficult subject both fascinating and easy.\"--_Gardeners'\n     Chronicle._\n\n     _17. HEALTH AND DISEASE_\n\n     By W. LESLIE MACKENZIE, M.D., Local Government Board,\n     Edinburgh. \"Dr Mackenzie adds to a thorough grasp of the\n     problems an illuminating style, and an arresting manner of\n     treating a subject often dull and sometimes\n     unsavoury.\"--_Economist._\n\n     _18. INTRODUCTION TO MATHEMATICS_\n\n     By A. N. WHITEHEAD, Sc.D., F.R.S. (With Diagrams.) \"Mr\n     Whitehead has discharged with conspicuous success the task\n     he is so exceptionally qualified to undertake. For he is one\n     of our great authorities upon the foundations of the\n     science.\"--_Westminster Gazette._\n\n     _19. THE ANIMAL WORLD_\n\n     By Professor F. W. GAMBLE, D.Sc., F.R.S. With Introduction\n     by Sir Oliver Lodge. (Many Illustrations.) \"A delightful and\n     instructive epitome of animal (and vegetable) life.... A\n     fascinating and suggestive survey.\"--_Morning Post._\n\n     _20. EVOLUTION_\n\n     By Professor J. ARTHUR THOMSON and Professor PATRICK GEDDES.\n     \"A many-coloured and romantic panorama, opening up, like no\n     other book we know, a rational vision of\n     world-development.\"--_Belfast News-Letter._\n\n     _22. CRIME AND INSANITY_\n\n     By Dr C. A. MERCIER. \"Furnishes much valuable information\n     from one occupying the highest position among medico-legal\n     psychologists.\"--_Asylum News._\n\n     _28. PSYCHICAL RESEARCH_\n\n     By Sir W. F. BARRETT, F.R.S., Professor of Physics, Royal\n     College of Science, Dublin, 1873-1910. \"What he has to say\n     on thought-reading, hypnotism, telepathy, crystal-vision,\n     spiritualism, divinings, and so on, will be read with\n     avidity.\"--_Dundee Courier._\n\n     _31. ASTRONOMY_\n\n     By A. R. HINKS, M.A., Chief Assistant, Cambridge\n     Observatory. \"Original in thought, eclectic in substance,\n     and critical in treatment.... No better little book is\n     available.\"--_School World._\n\n     _32. INTRODUCTION TO SCIENCE_\n\n     By J. ARTHUR THOMSON, M.A., Regius Professor of Natural\n     History, Aberdeen University. \"Professor Thomson's\n     delightful literary style is well known; and here he\n     discourses freshly and easily on the methods of science and\n     its relations with philosophy, art, religion, and practical\n     life.\"--_Aberdeen Journal._\n\n     _36. CLIMATE AND WEATHER_\n\n     By Prof. H. N. DICKSON, D.Sc.Oxon., M.A., F.R.S.E.,\n     President of the Royal Meteorological Society. (With\n     Diagrams.) \"The author has succeeded in presenting in a very\n     lucid and agreeable manner the causes of the movements of\n     the atmosphere and of the more stable winds.\"--_Manchester\n     Guardian._\n\n     _41. ANTHROPOLOGY_\n\n     By R. R. MARETT, M.A., Reader in Social Anthropology in\n     Oxford University. \"An absolutely perfect handbook, so clear\n     that a child could understand it, so fascinating and human\n     that it beats fiction 'to a frazzle.'\"--_Morning Leader._\n\n     _44. THE PRINCIPLES OF PHYSIOLOGY_\n\n     By Prof. J. G. MCKENDRICK, M.D. \"It is a delightful and\n     wonderfully comprehensive handling of a subject which, while\n     of importance to all, does not readily lend itself to\n     untechnical explanation.... Upon every page of it is stamped\n     the impress of a creative imagination.\"--_Glasgow Herald._\n\n     _46. MATTER AND ENERGY_\n\n     By F. SODDY, M.A., F.R.S. \"Prof. Soddy has successfully\n     accomplished the very difficult task of making physics of\n     absorbing interest on popular lines.\"--_Nature._\n\n     _49. PSYCHOLOGY, THE STUDY OF BEHAVIOUR_\n\n     By Prof. W. MCDOUGALL, F.R.S., M.B. \"A happy example of the\n     non-technical handling of an unwieldy science, suggesting\n     rather than dogmatising. It should whet appetites for deeper\n     study.\"--_Christian World._\n\n     _53. THE MAKING OF THE EARTH_\n\n     By Prof. J. W. GREGORY, F.R.S. (With 38 Maps and Figures.)\n     \"A fascinating little volume.... Among the many good things\n     contained in the series this takes a high place.\"--_The\n     Athen\u00e6um._\n\n     _57. THE HUMAN BODY_\n\n     By A. KEITH, M.D., LL.D., Conservator of Museum and\n     Hunterian Professor, Royal College of Surgeons.\n     (Illustrated.) \"It literally makes the 'dry bones' to live.\n     It will certainly take a high place among the classics of\n     popular science.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n     _58. ELECTRICITY_\n\n     By GISBERT KAPP, D.Eng., Professor of Electrical Engineering\n     in the University of Birmingham. (Illustrated.) \"It will be\n     appreciated greatly by learners and by the great number of\n     amateurs who are interested in what is one of the most\n     fascinating of scientific studies.\"--_Glasgow Herald._\n\n     _62. THE ORIGIN AND NATURE OF LIFE_\n\n     By Dr BENJAMIN MOORE, Professor of Bio-Chemistry, University\n     College, Liverpool. \"Stimulating, learned,\n     lucid.\"--_Liverpool Courier._\n\n     _67. CHEMISTRY_\n\n     By RAPHAEL MELDOLA, F.R.S., Professor of Chemistry in\n     Finsbury Technical College, London. Presents clearly,\n     without the detail demanded by the expert, the way in which\n     chemical science has developed, and the stage it has\n     reached.\n\n     _72. PLANT LIFE_\n\n     By Prof. J. B. FARMER, D.Sc., F.R.S. (Illustrated.)\n     \"Professor Farmer has contrived to convey all the most vital\n     facts of plant physiology, and also to present a good many\n     of the chief problems which confront investigators to-day in\n     the realms of morphology and of heredity.\"--_Morning Post._\n\n     _78. THE OCEAN_\n\n     A General Account of the Science of the Sea. By Sir JOHN\n     MURRAY, K.C.B., F.R.S. (Illus.) \"A life's experience is\n     crowded into this volume. A very useful feature is the ten\n     pages of illustrations and coloured maps at the\n     end.\"--_Gloucester Journal._\n\n     _79. NERVES_\n\n     By Prof. D. FRASER HARRIS, M.D., D.Sc. (Illustrated.) A\n     description, in non-technical language, of the nervous\n     system, its intricate mechanism and the strange phenomena of\n     energy and fatigue, with some practical reflections.\n\n\n\n\n     _Philosophy and Religion_\n\n     _15. MOHAMMEDANISM_\n\n     By Prof. D. S. MARGOLIOUTH, M.A., D.Litt. \"This generous\n     shilling's worth of wisdom.... A delicate, humorous, and\n     most responsible tractate by an illuminative\n     professor.\"--_Daily Mail._\n\n     _40. THE PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY_\n\n     By the Hon. BERTRAND RUSSELL, F.R.S. \"A book that the 'man\n     in the street' will recognise at once to be a boon....\n     Consistently lucid and non-technical\n     throughout.\"--_Christian World._\n\n     _47. BUDDHISM_\n\n     By Mrs RHYS DAVIDS, M.A. \"The author presents very\n     attractively as well as very learnedly the philosophy of\n     Buddhism as the greatest scholars of the day interpret\n     it.\"--_Daily News._\n\n     _50. NONCONFORMITY: Its ORIGIN and PROGRESS_\n\n     By Principal _W. B. Selbie_, M.A. \"The historical part is\n     brilliant in its insight, clarity, and proportion; and in\n     the later chapters Dr Selbie proves himself to be an ideal\n     exponent of sound and moderate views.\"--_Christian World._\n\n     _54. ETHICS_\n\n     By G. E. MOORE, M.A., Lecturer in Moral Science in Cambridge\n     University. \"A very lucid though closely reasoned outline of\n     the logic of good conduct.\"--_Christian World._\n\n     _56. THE MAKING OF THE NEW TESTAMENT_\n\n     By Prof. B. W. BACON, LL.D., D.D. \"Professor Bacon has\n     boldly, and wisely, taken his own line, and has produced, as\n     a result, an extraordinarily vivid, stimulating, and lucid\n     book.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n     _60. MISSIONS: THEIR RISE and DEVELOPMENT_\n\n     By Mrs CREIGHTON. \"Very interestingly done.... Its style is\n     simple, direct, unhackneyed, and should find appreciation\n     where a more fervently pious style of writing\n     repels.\"--_Methodist Recorder._\n\n     _68. COMPARATIVE RELIGION_\n\n     By Prof. J. ESTLIN CARPENTER, D.Litt., Principal of\n     Manchester College, Oxford. \"Puts into the reader's hand a\n     wealth of learning and independent thought.\"--_Christian\n     World._\n\n     _74. A HISTORY OF FREEDOM OF THOUGHT_\n\n     By J. B. BURY, Litt.D., LL.D., Regius Professor of Modern\n     History at Cambridge. \"A little masterpiece, which every\n     thinking man will enjoy.\"--_The Observer._\n\n     _84. LITERATURE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT_\n\n     By Prof. GEORGE MOORE, D.D., LL.D., of Harvard. A detailed\n     examination of the books of the Old Testament in the light\n     of the most recent research.\n\n\n\n\n_Social Science_\n\n     _1. PARLIAMENT_\n\n     Its History, Constitution, and Practice. By Sir COURTENAY P.\n     ILBERT, G.C.B., K.C.S.I., Clerk of the House of Commons.\n     \"The best book on the history and practice of the House of\n     Commons since Bagehot's 'Constitution.'\"--_Yorkshire Post._\n\n     _5. THE STOCK EXCHANGE_\n\n     By F. W. HIRST, Editor of \"The Economist.\" \"To an\n     unfinancial mind must be a revelation.... The book is as\n     clear, vigorous, and sane as Bagehot's 'Lombard Street,'\n     than which there is no higher compliment.\"--_Morning\n     Leader._\n\n     _6. IRISH NATIONALITY_\n\n     By Mrs J. R. GREEN. \"As glowing as it is learned. No book\n     could be more timely.\"--_Daily News._\n\n     _10. THE SOCIALIST MOVEMENT_\n\n     By J. RAMSAY MACDONALD, M.P. \"Admirably adapted for the\n     purpose of exposition.\"--_The Times._\n\n     _11. CONSERVATISM_\n\n     By LORD HUGH CECIL, M.A., M.P. \"One of those great little\n     books which seldom appear more than once in a\n     generation.\"--_Morning Post._\n\n     _16. THE SCIENCE OF WEALTH_\n\n     By J. A. HOBSON, M.A. \"Mr J. A. Hobson holds an unique\n     position among living economists.... Original, reasonable,\n     and illuminating.\"--_The Nation._\n\n     _21. LIBERALISM_\n\n     By L. T. HOBHOUSE, M.A., Professor of Sociology in the\n     University of London. \"A book of rare quality.... We have\n     nothing but praise for the rapid and masterly summaries of\n     the arguments from first principles which form a large part\n     of this book.\"--_Westminster Gazette._\n\n     _24. THE EVOLUTION OF INDUSTRY_\n\n     By D. H. MACGREGOR, M.A., Professor of Political Economy in\n     the University of Leeds. \"A volume so dispassionate in terms\n     may be read with profit by all interested in the present\n     state of unrest.\"--_Aberdeen Journal._\n\n     _26. AGRICULTURE_\n\n     By Prof. W. SOMERVILLE, F.L.S. \"It makes the results of\n     laboratory work at the University accessible to the\n     practical farmer.\"--_Athen\u00e6um._\n\n     _30. ELEMENTS OF ENGLISH LAW_\n\n     By W. M. GELDART, M.A., B.C.L., Vinerian Professor of\n     English Law at Oxford. \"Contains a very clear account of the\n     elementary principles underlying the rules of English\n     Law.\"--_Scots Law Times._\n\n     _38. THE SCHOOL: An Introduction to the Study of Education._\n\n     By J. J. FINDLAY, M.A., Ph.D., Professor of Education in\n     Manchester University. \"An amazingly comprehensive\n     volume.... It is a remarkable performance, distinguished in\n     its crisp, striking phraseology as well as its inclusiveness\n     of subject-matter.\"--_Morning Post._\n\n     _59. ELEMENTS OF POLITICAL ECONOMY_\n\n     By S. J. CHAPMAN, M.A., Professor of Political Economy in\n     Manchester University. \"Its importance is not to be measured\n     by its price. Probably the best recent critical exposition\n     of the analytical method in economic science.\"--_Glasgow\n     Herald._\n\n     _69. THE NEWSPAPER_\n\n     By G. BINNEY DIBBLEE, M.A. (Illustrated.) The best account\n     extant of the organisation of the newspaper press, at home\n     and abroad.\n\n     _77. SHELLEY, GODWIN, AND THEIR CIRCLE_\n\n     By H. N. BRAILSFORD, M.A. \"Mr Brailsford sketches vividly\n     the influence of the French Revolution on Shelley's and\n     Godwin's England; and the charm and strength of his style\n     make his book an authentic contribution to\n     literature.\"--_The Bookman._\n\n     _80. CO-PARTNERSHIP AND PROFIT-SHARING_\n\n     By ANEURIN WILLIAMS, M.A.--\"A judicious but enthusiastic\n     history, with much interesting speculation on the future of\n     Co-partnership.\"--_Christian World._\n\n     _81. PROBLEMS OF VILLAGE LIFE_\n\n     By E. N. BENNETT, M.A. Discusses the leading aspects of the\n     British land problem, including housing, small holdings,\n     rural credit, and the minimum wage.\n\n     _83. COMMON-SENSE IN LAW_\n\n     By Prof. P. VINOGRADOFF, D.C.L.\n\n     _85. UNEMPLOYMENT_\n\n     By Prof. A. C. PIGOU, M.A.\n\n\n\n\nIN PREPARATION\n\n  _ANCIENT EGYPT._ By F. LL. GRIFFITH, M.A.\n  _THE ANCIENT EAST._ By D. G. HOGARTH, M.A., F.B.A.\n  _A SHORT HISTORY OF EUROPE._ By HERBERT FISHER, LL.D.\n  _THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE._ By NORMAN H. BAYNES.\n  _THE REFORMATION._ By President LINDSAY, LL.D.\n  _A SHORT HISTORY OF RUSSIA._ By Prof. MILYOUKOV.\n  _MODERN TURKEY._ By D. G. HOGARTH, M.A.\n  _FRANCE OF TO-DAY._ By ALBERT THOMAS.\n  _HISTORY OF SCOTLAND._ By Prof. R. S. RAIT, M.A.\n  _LATIN AMERICA._ By Prof. W. R. SHEPHERD.\n  _HISTORY AND LITERATURE OF SPAIN._ By J. FITZMAURICE-KELLY, F.B.A.,\n        Litt. D.\n  _LATIN LITERATURE._ By Prof. J. S. PHILLIMORE.\n  _THE RENAISSANCE._ By Miss EDITH SICHEL.\n  _ITALIAN ART OF THE RENAISSANCE._ By ROGER E. FRY.\n  _LITERARY TASTE._ By THOMAS SECCOMBE.\n  _CHAUCER AND HIS TIME._ By Miss G. E. HADOW.\n  _WILLIAM MORRIS AND HIS CIRCLE._ By A. CLUTTON BROCK.\n  _SCANDINAVIAN HISTORY & LITERATURE._ By T. C. SNOW.\n  _THE MINERAL WORLD._ By Sir T. H. HOLLAND, K.C.I.E., D.Sc.\n  _SEX._ By Prof. J. A. THOMSON and Prof. PATRICK GEDDES.\n  _THE GROWTH OF EUROPE._ By Prof. GRENVILLE COLE.\n  _BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS._ By Canon R. H. CHARLES, D.D.\n  _A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY._ By CLEMENT WEBB, M.A.\n  _POLITICAL THOUGHT IN ENGLAND: From Bacon to Locke._ By G. P. GOOCH, M.A.\n  _POLITICAL THOUGHT IN ENGLAND: From Bentham to J. S. Mill._ By Prof.\n        W. L. DAVIDSON.\n  _POLITICAL THOUGHT IN ENGLAND: From Herbert Spencer to To-day._ By\n        ERNEST BARKER, M.A.\n  _THE CRIMINAL AND THE COMMUNITY._ By Viscount ST. CYRES.\n  _THE CIVIL SERVICE._ By GRAHAM WALLAS, M.A.\n  _THE SOCIAL SETTLEMENT._ By JANE ADDAMS and R. A. WOODS.\n  _GREAT INVENTIONS._ By Prof. J. L. MYRES, M.A., F.S.A.\n  _TOWN PLANNING._ By RAYMOND UNWIN.\n\n\n                  London: WILLIAMS AND NORGATE\n\n             _And of all Bookshops and Bookstalls._\n\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTranscriber's note:\n\nMinor typographical errors and inconsistencies have been silently\nnormalized except for the following:\n\nPage 27: \"eighth century and Judah in the beginning of the sixth\".\n\"of\" has been added.\n\nPage 100: \"saying much more that the facts warrant\". \"that\" has been\nchanged to \"than\".\n\nPage 139: \"the festiva of Purim\". \"festiva\" has been changed to\n\"festival\".\n\nPage 224: \"the editor thought that Ps. cxxv i. 1 referred to the\nbuilding of the temple\". \"cxxv i\" has been changed to \"cxxvii\" which\naccording to the context appears to be intended.","title":"The Literature of the Old Testament","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":64291}