EREMIAH:
HIS LIFE & TIMES
BY
REV, CANON T, K, CHEYNE, M.A., D,D
JEREMIAH
JEREMIAH:
HIS LIFE AND TIMES. ^
- 5lfC
REV. T. K. CHEYNE, M.A., D.D.
ORIEL PROFESSOR OF THE INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE AT OXFORD,
CANON OF ROCHESTER.
JAMES NISBET AND CO.,
21, BERNERS STREET, W.
TO
PROF. EBERHARD SCHRADER,
Autljov of
"THE CUNEIFORM INSCRIPTIONS AND THE OLD TESTAMENT,"
A FOREMOST PUPIL OF EWAI.D
AND PIONEER OK ASSYRIOI.OOY,
AS A MEMORIAL
OF PLEASANT PERSONAL INTERCOURSE
IN FORMER DAYS.
C'est pour nous tons un devoir de rompre lecercle magique dans
lequcl nous rcstons volontairement enferm^s ; sachons nous con-
cilier le grand public par une bonne et scientifique vulgarisation de
nos travaux, et ne nous contentons pas de dix lectenrs erudits,
quand nous pouvous reunir dans notre auditoire tons ceux que
le pass<5 de I'csprit humain cliarme et attire.
M. BARBIER DE MEYNARD.
PREFACE.
JKREMIAH is one of the central figures of an exciting period
which has to be reconstructed by a combined effort of criticism
and imagination. It is nearly twenty years since I first began
to prepare for a commentary on Jeremiah, and since then the
book and its author have retained an interest for me. The ex-
position in the " Pulpit Commentary " (1883-1885) is a most
fragmentary realization of my original plan, and I was glad to
take up the pen once more. In the summer of 1887 I preached
a course of sermons on Jeremiah in Rochester Cathedral, simi-
lar to a course which I have printed on Elijah. 1 These sermons
are the germ of the present volume.
In these two biographies I have entered on a field which is
new to me the literary and yet critical treatment of those Old
Testament narratives which from my childhood I have loved.
With faltering steps I have sought to follow Arthur Stanley,
who regarded it as his mission "so to delineate the outward
events of the Old and New Testament, as that they should
come home with a new power to those who by long familiarity
have almost ceased to regard them as historical at all." It is
hoped that this volume may be an appropriate companion to
Dr. Driver's critical and yet both reverent and popular study
on the Life and Times of Isaiah.
I regret that, since Deuteronomy had to be brought in at all
hazards, it was impossible to discuss the question of the text
of Jeremiah, that of the arrangement of the prophecies, or that
of the origin of Jer. x. 1-16, and (see p. 168) 1., li. I should
now probably modify what I have written on these subjects in
1 " The Hallowing of Criticism " (Hodder and Stoughton, 1888).
Vlll PREFACE.
the '' Encyclopaedia Britannica " (art. "Jeremiah "), and in the
" Pulpit Commentary," and should have to discuss them in
connexion with the larger question of the method of the editor
of Jeremiah, who, I suspect, dealt more freely with his material
(yet not so as to injure its true prophetic inspiration) than some
of the other editors of the prophecies. I have thought it best
on this occasion not to assume more than the most assured
results of criticism. The reader must make allowance for the
narrow limits prescribed to the volumes of this series. The
Book of Jeremiah itself is full of exegetical interest ; the character
of Jeremiah is a fascinating psychological problem ; the times
of Jeremiah are among the most important in Old Testament
history. On each of these subjects I have tried to throw some
light from various sources, and at the same time to kindle in
the reader that same reverential sympathy which I hope I feel
myself for this great prophet.
Sept. 1 8, 1888.
CONTENTS.
PART I.
JU DAM'S TRAGEDY DOWN TO THR DEATH OF JOS f AH.
CHAPTER I.
PAGE
(Ion COMMANDS TO TAKK THE TRUMPET i
The narrative of Jeremiah's call ; its biographical and spiritual
value.
CHAPTER II.
FKIKNDS IN COUNCIL 13
Jeremiah and his friends Reformers before the Reformation.
CHAPTER III.
Hol'l - \M> FEAKS QflCKI.Y REALIZED 21
Jeremiah's early discourses, and the historical inferences war-
ranted by them The quiescence of the reforming party The
sign granted at length The threatened Scythian invasion.
CHAPTER IV.
MuKMNG-CLOUD GOODNESb 37
The crisis and its effects Religious reaction.
CHAPTER V.
' Hi; THAT SEEKRTH, FIXDKTII " 48
The finding of the book of Divine instruction The national
covenant Jeremiah, a preacher of Deuteronomy.
x CONTENTS.
CHAPTER VI.
I' AGE
THE ANCIENT LAW TRANSFORMED 60
The publication of the first Scripture, its significance The lead-
ing ideas of Deuteronomy- -The effects of the recognition of
the Lawbook.
CHAPTER VI f.
FRAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION? 69
Criticism of the narrative in 2 Kings xxii. The Mosaic author-
ship of the Lawbook, not tenable Reasons for this Notes on
the allusions to Egypt in Deuteronomy, and on the finding of
the Lawbook.
CHAPTER VIII.
"His REMEMBRANCE is LIKE Music" (ECCLUS. XLIX. i) . .87
David's "last words" fulfilled in Josiah His thirteen golden
years after the great covenant Jeremiah's comparative happi-
ness His friends among the wise men Pharaoh Neco profits
by the weakness of Assyria Josiah 's defeat at Megiddo ; his
death The national mourning The tragedy of his life, and of
Israel's history.
PART II.
THE CLOSE OF JUDAH S TRAGEDY.
CHAPTER I.
THE CLOUDS RETURN AFTER THE RAIN 102
Consequences of Josiah's death Jeremiah's changed attitude
towards Deuteronomy His visit to Anathoth.
CHAPTER II.
ON THE VERGE OF MARTYRDOM 114
Jeremiah's sermon in the Temple The fate of Shiloh The
prophet's trial and acquittal The martyrdom of Uriah.
CHAPTER III.
KEEP THE MUNITION, WATCH THE WAY ! 125
Progress of Neco Accession of Jehoahaz, and soon after of
Jelioiakim Fall of Nineveh Neco's defeat by Nebuchadrezzar
Dread of Babylon at Jerusalem Jeremiah's new peace of
mind His prophecy on Egypt, &c
CONTENTS. XI
CHAPTER IV.
TAGS
THERE BE GODS MANY, LORDS 'MANY 139
Jeremiah's verdict upon the later kings Nebuchadrezzar
crosses the border Duel between Jeremiah and Jehoiakim.
CHAPTER V.
BKIGHT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMI:EK 148
Jeremiah's Wartburg period and its results The drought The
problem of Israel's spiritual condition The new covenant -
Jehoiakim's rebellion The Rechabites Two symbolic actions
Jehoiachin's captivity His character and Nebuchadrezzar's.
CHAPTER VI.
1 1 THOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU! 165
Xedekiah ; his accession and character Kzekiel, the prophet of
the exiles The lower prophets at home and in Babylonia Zede-
kiah's revolt First siege of Jerusalem Imprisonment of Jere-
miah His purchase of family-property He is again in danger
of his life Cast into the cistern Ebedmelceh's help Fall of
Jerusalem Book of Lamentation.
CHAPTER VII.
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL 182
Gedaliah becomes viceroy The prophet stays with him at Miz-
pah IshmaePs outrages Flight from Mizpah Migration into
Egypt The heathen festival The stormy colloquy.
CHAPTER VIII.
PER CHUCEM AD LUCEM 200
Legendary accounts of Jeremiah's death His sufferings and
compensations Jeremiah compared with Milton and Savonarola
The spring foreseen by the Israelite and the Italian still future.
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
(Supplementary to Table in Driver's "Isaiah" in this series}
B.C.
685-641 Reign of Manasseh.
640-639 Amon.
638-608 Josiah.
608 Jehoahaz.
607-597 .. Jehoiakim.
en* ,, Jehoiachin.
596-586 Zedekiah.
** These dates are taken from Kamphausen's "Die Chronologic
der hebraischen Konige '' (Bonn, 1883).
PART I.
JUDA1VS TRAGEDY DOWN TO THE DEATH OF
JOSIAII.
CHAPTER I.
GOD COMMANDS TO TAKE THE TRUMPET.
The narrative of Jeremiah's call ; its biographical and spiritual value.
THE peculiar importance of Jeremiah, both as a man and as an
actor in an unique tragedy, is too visible upon every page of his
wrilings to need explanation at the outset. His life resembles
no other life ; his character and his experiences are full of
surprises which stimulate thought on great moral and religious
problems. The introductory paragraph (i. i), due perhaps to
his faithful secretary Baruch, is of itself of a somewhat startling
nature. Is it not strange that the herald of the Church of the
New Covenant should have been a hereditary member of the
sacerdotal order ? There is nothing however to indicate that
he ever performed priestly functions. Ezekiel very possibly
did ; he was not called so young as Jeremiah, and was evidently
well acquainted with and keenly interested in the traditions of
the priesthood. Still, Jeremiah had a true priestly heart in the
deepest sense of the word. By intense sympathy, he so iden-
tified himself with his people as to feel their sins and sufferings
his own, and bear them on his heart before his God. He was
a priest, not merely by birth, but by the grace of God ; and his
life, as a critical view of the Psalter proves, was a fertile seed
of similar Christ-like self-forgetfulness.
It was not all at once, indeed, that Jeremiah attained the
heights of saintly heroism. There was a time when no more
than Moses (Exod. iv. 13) could he deny that he had sought to
evade a pastor's grave responsibilities (comp. xvii. 16), when he
agonized, as in a Gethsemane, confessing the divinity of the
2
2 JEREMIAH.
impulse which stirred him, but painfully conscious of his own
natural infirmity. He tells us so himself in his book, parts of
which might fitly be called " The Confessions of Jeremiah ; "
for, admitting that later experiences may have coloured the form
of the introductory narrative, a solid substratum of fact must,
even on psychological grounds, be assumed. It was the
thirteenth year of King Josiah when three distinct heavenly
voices reached the youthful Jeremiah reached him, that is,
not from a God without, but from the God within him ; or, in
Western language, he passed through three separate, though
connected, phases of consciousness, which he could not but
ascribe to a direct Divine influence. I cannot say more about
this belief of Jeremiah's in this place ; those who will, may
accuse what I have said of vagueness ; the phenomena of
Biblical religion cannot be brought under the clear, cold defi-
nitions of Western orthodoxy. A fresh and openminded
re-examination of the religion of the Old Testament is urgently
called for, and a sketch of the life and times of a single prophet
is not the place to insert one of the chapters in such an
exposition. Suffice it to say that Jeremiah must have had
inner experiences at a still earlier age, which made these
phases of consciousness in a psychological sense possible. A
veil may conceal them from view, but of what prophetic
experiences (in the wider sense) must not the same confession,
to some extent at least, be made ? We may at least be sure
that, as with St. Paul, so with Jeremiah, there was a "gracious
proportion between the revelation vouchsafed and the mental
state of the person receiving it." In both cases there is some
material for conjecture, but I doubt if the main object of this
book will be served by an attempt which might reasonably
enough be made in a critical survey of Old Testament prophecy.
I prefer therefore to confine myself now to the distinct state-
ments of the Biblical record.
The first Divine truth of which Jeremiah became conscious
may be summed up thus Jehovah hath foreordained thee to
be a prophet x (Jer. i. 5). To understand this we must read the
1 Observe to be a prophet not a Nazirite as well (Plumptre). The two
classes are evidently distinguished (Amos ii. u, 12). Jeremiah's sorrowful
experiences may have made him an ascetic, but such an one needed no
outward rules. Nor, probably, was his life, even after his call, one of
unmixed gloom.
GOD COMMANDS TO TAKE THE TRUMPET. 3
1 39th Psalm. Every man's career is written in the book of
God ; but, if possible, there are some careers more legibly
written than others. To some it is only given to see God's
"purpose" (Ixxiii. 24) concerning them at the end of life;
while others, like Abraham (Gen. xviii. 19), Cyrus (Isa. xlv. 4),
and Jeremiah, are assured from the very first that the personal
God has distinguished and selected them (I knew thee, means
all this) to perform a special work for Him. It inspires them
with double energy and enthusiasm, and is a part of the secret
of their success. The belief in predestination, as Ewald truly
observes, was a " powerful lever in Hebrew prophecy 1 ; " and
though "prophet,'' "religious reformer," and (much less)
" saint," are not absolutely synonymous terms, we may well
appropriate the lesson that (in the words of Milman) "he who
is not predestined, who does not declare, who does not believe
himself predestinated as the author of a great religious move-
ment, he in whom God is not manifestly, sensibly, avowedly
working out his pre-established designs, will never be saint or
reformer." 2 This did not, however, become Jeremiah's con-
viction without an attempt at resistance.
And I said, A fas, O Lord Jehovah ! behold, I cannot speak;
for I am (still) young (like a young man); i. 6. It is a cry of
pain. Jeremiah is too warmhearted to regard with any com-
placence the office of a censor ; it hurts him to say that which
will give pain to others. He would fain live at peace with all
men, and one of his saddest complaints in later life is this
Woe is me, my mother, that thou hast borne me, with whom all
the world has strife and contention (xv. 10). It is also a cry of
alarm. How can one who is not yet of mature age in Oriental
society a young man has no role to play expect to be listened
to, especially by those who have been already fascinated by
more flattering orators? And even if his credentials were
accepted and his prophetic message received, is it not too
likely that, through the malice of those whom he provokes, his
career will be cut short when it has scarcely begun ?
And so a man uniquely qualified to promote it was well nigh
lost to the cause of spiritual religion. There were hundreds of
1 " Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott," ii. 208.
2 " History of Latin Christianity,'' i. 112. Perhaps some may wish the
word " saint " away from this fine passage ; for are not all Christians called
to be (not, to become) saints (icX;roi rYyioi)?
4 JEREMIAH.
stationary and unprogressive religionists who exercised the
sacred office of prophet ; there were few indeed to be compared
with Jeremiah. There were Zephaniah and Habakkuk, and we
shall be indebted to these prophets later on for illustrations ;
but, if we may judge from Jeremiah's account, the main drift
of prophetic influence was downwards and not upwards. The
young man is only too conscious of this, and in his pain and
alarm almost makes the "great refusal" to apply once more
the phrase (Dante, " Inf." iii. 60) which has been so variously
interpreted. His first impulse was insufficient to carry him
away, and so the God of revelation caused a second, which,
translated into words, could be expressed thus
Say not, I am (still) young; for to whomsoever I send thee,
thou must go, and whatsoever I command thce, thou must speak.
Be not afraid because of them; for I am with thee to deliver
thec, saith Jehovah (i. 7, 8).
God had his own method for overcoming Jeremiah's hesi-
tancy. First, he heightened the young man's consciousness of
a Divine call. He made him feel that the work to which he
was summoned was not his own but God's that the youth
would be lost in his message. How could he be disobedient
to the voice which came indeed from above, but which he
heard within himself? The lion roareth who will not fear ?
tJic Lord JcJiovah hath spoken,who can but prophesy I (Amos iii.
8 ; cf. Hos. xi. 10). The path of duty was the path of safety
above all for one called to be a prophet. As another propheti-
cally-minded writer says in lyric verse
I have set Jehovah before me continually ;
With him at my riyht hand, I cannot be moved (Psa. xvi. 8).
Did Jeremiah think of God's early promise of deliverance, as
he went through his last brief agony ? Did his heart tell him
that God could be better than his promise, and even in death
could "deliver" him from the songless, praiseless world of the
shades? But we must not anticipate too much, though here as
elsewhere it is true that "coming events cast their shadow
before."
While Jeremiah is pondering, a third voice reaches him,
Behold I put (or, I have put) my words in thy mouth (i. 9) :
that is, whenever the occasion to prophesy arises, Jehovah will
supply the fitting words, just as Jesus Christ said to His dis-
GOD COMMANDS TO TAKE THE TRUMPET. 5
ciples, When they deliver you iip, be not diet-careful, for it is
not ye tJiat speak, but Hie Spirit of your Father ii'/io speaketk
in you (Matt. x. 20). But how is this? Docs the Biblical
record sanction the later Hellenistic view of inspiration, which
impressed itself so firmly on traditional theology, that, as
Hooker says, " so oft as God employed them (the prophets) in
this heavenly work, they neither spake nor wrote any word of
their own, but uttered syllable by syllable as the Spirit put it
into their mouths, no otherwise than the harp or the lute doth
give a sound according to the discretion of his hands that
holdeth and striketh it with skill" 1 ? No; this would be to
degrade Jeremiah to the level of a /uJt'rif or a Trpo^j/rj/e (Plato,
"Timaeus," 72 B), or since we are speaking of a Semitic and
not an Aryan religion of an Arabian kdhin whose personality
is entirely absorbed in that of the genius or divinity who speaks
through him. 2 Jeremiah's book is too full of human nature to
allow us to imagine this for a moment. / have put my words
in thy mouth, cannot, of course, mean anything poor or
commonplace. But who can say that such a paraphrase as
this gives an unworthy or inadequate meaning " I promise
never to leave thee in uncertainty as to thy message ; I will
guide and overrule the natural promptings of thy heart and
intellect as that thou shalt convey the only true conception of
my will which the language can express or the people of Israel
comprehend."
But this is not all. The voice adds
See, I set thec in charge this day over tJie nations and over
the kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to
overthrow, to build and to plant* (i. 10).
It may seem strange that Jeremiah could thus early realize
1 " Works,"ed. Kcble, iii. 662 ; comp. I'hilo, II. 417, and other passages
Lee's " Inspiration,' 1 ist ed. pp. 54-57. Hooker, however, does not, like
Philo, represent unconsciousness as an essential condition of the prophetic
inspiration. According to him, the prophet? both sympathize with and
understand the words committed to them; according to I'hilo, "the
understanding goes away from home" (t^otKt^trcti o voi'c).
3 See Wellhausen, "Skizzen und Vorarbeiten," Heft 3, p. 133.
3 Sirach quotes this passage in his eulogy of great men, but apparently
explains it, in the sense suggested by Jer. xxxi. 28, of the pulling down
and building up of Israel. In the original context, it applies at least as
much to the non-Israelitiih world as to Israel.
6 JEREMIAH.
the wide range appointed for his ministry, and some will
suspect that, writing perhaps twenty-three years afterwards, he
may have transferred his later conviction to those early days
when the state of his own country must have been the absorb-
ing theme of his meditation. Modern parallels to such a case
will at once suggest themselves how constantly for instance
Goethe violated strict historical truth in re-editing and re-
arranging his various works ! But why need we go beyond the
king of the Hebrew prophets? If at the opening of his
ministry Isaiah had really become certain (see Isa. vi. 9, 10)
that his preaching would only confirm his people in its blind
obstinacy, could he have had courage to work as cheerfully and
as sympathetically as he did? Must not his later experience
have cast a deep shadow over his recollections of the past ?
Psychologically, this is quite conceivable ; and it is certain that
the prophets were in no hurry to express their burning thoughts
and words in literary style. At any rate, it seems more than
probable that the phraseology of Jer. i. 10, 12 is modelled upon
a passage in one of Jeremiah's subsequent prophecies (xxxi.
28), and these verses cannot be taken alone the whole context
must equally have been affected by the prophet's later ex-
perience. 1 And yet may not the tntths which underlie tliis
verse have been already present to the mind of Jeremiah,
though he may have not fully realized their application to
his own case ? For what do the solemn words, / set thee in
charge over the nations, mean ? Surely this that it is not the
necessary result of certain physical laws when an institution, or
a dynasty, or a people, is overthrown and perishes. The forces
of nature are, according to this passage, but ministers of
Jehovah, " fulfilling His word." The one absolute Power in
the universe is God's " wisdom," or thought, or purpose, or
word a Power which, both in the sphere of creation and in
that of government, has two aspects a destructive and a con-
structive, so that the world is a mysterious scene of blended
production and destruction. Between this great Power and
ordinary mankind the prophet is the link ; he has in a certain
sense to co-operate with God by pronouncing words which are
in a secondary sense forces.
1 Possibly, too, w. 18, 19 may be a development of xv. 20, 21, though
Ewald regards the latter verses as a (shortened) " repetition " of i. 18, 19.
GOD COMMANDS TO TAKE THE TRUMPET. 7
" Tis not in me to give or take away,
But He who guides the thunder-peals on high,
He tunes my voice, the tones of His deep sway
Faintly to echo in the nether sky.
Therefore I bid earth's glories set or shine,
And it is so ; my words are sacraments divine." 1
If Jeremiah had already grasped the truth that Jehovah was
the God of the whole earth and is there any reason to doubt
this ? why should he not have had at least a presentiment (i)
that to the world at large, as well as to Israel, he had a pro-
phetic mission ; and (2) that if he was called to destroy and to
overthrow, this was only that he might, as a fellow-worker with
God, plant and build up ? The former conviction without the
latter would have been a source of deepest anguish. One who,
as a prophet, was set in charge even over a single nation needed
all the strength and comfort which could be conveyed to him.
Why should not He, " by whose holy inspiration we think those
things that be good," have suggested to Jeremiah's mind a
bright though as yet vague vision, not of Israel alone, but also
of the other nations, emerging regenerate from the temporary
chaos of political ruin. At a later time the vision reappeared
(xxxi. 28), and became the subject of earnest meditation, though
doubtless it is for God's " first-born son," Israel, that Jeremiah
is chiefly concerned.
I have spoken of this experience of the young prophet as an
inward experience. So it mainly was. But it was accom-
panied with imaginations which were as real to him as if they
had been visible to the outward eye. They partook of the
nature of visions, but, unlike many recorded visions, were un-
accompanied, as we must infer, with morbid, moral, or physical
phenomena. I mention this to distinguish them from the vision
which attended the only inward experience analogous to our
prophet's with which extra-Biblical history acquaints us the
vision of Mohammed on Mount Hira. From a historical point
of view, Mohammed must be called the Prophet of Islam, and
his prophetic career was introduced by a vision which is alluded
to in the opening lines of the 96th Sura of the Koran. But the
mingled character of Mohammed's prophetic ministry is fore-
shadowed by the morbid elements in the phenomena of his
call. " From youth upwards," says the late Professor Palmer,
1 Lyra Afioslolicii, cxxiv., "Jeremiah" (by Keble).
8 JEREMIAH.
" [Mohammed] had suffered from a nervous disorder which
tradition calls epilepsy, but the symptoms of which more closely
resembled certain hysterical phenomena well known and
diagnosed in the present time, and which are almost always
accompanied with hallucinations, abnormal exercise of the
mental functions, and not unfrequently with a certain amount
of deception, both voluntary and otherwise." ' One cannot,
however, be sure that we have the visions of the prophets
exactly as they were experienced, if they were written down a
long time afterwards, and the plays upon words which occur in
Jeremiah's account of his own visions, 2 warn us not to build too
much on the literal historical accuracy of the narrative. It will
be pardonable if some reader should doubt whether Jeremiah
meant us to believe that he had really had any vision at all
whether he does not presume that his readers will take these
so-called visions as pure literary fictions, such as have been
recognized in all great literary periods. The decision depends
on the range which each person allows to the quality of reve-
rence. For my part, I prefer to believe that one who is so
candid as Jeremiah in his descriptions of himself really did
experience a vision at this crisis of his inner life, like Isaiah
before him ; but I lay no stress upon this, because the opposite
view is possible, and Jeremiah's principal object in writing
verses 11-16 of chap. i. is to bring strikingly before us
the grand though not the only themes of his prophetic
discourses.
The first visionary experience of Jeremiah is described in the
words, And Jehovah put forth his hand and touched my nioiitJi
(i. 9). Just as God so often employs the letter of Scripture as
the channel of spiritual illumination, so here He repeated
a scene in the grand inaugural vision of Isaiah, because His
servant, by frequent study of that revealed vision, was prepared
to understand a similar experience. Jeremiah's inner eyes
were opened (2 Kings vi. 17), and he saw a Form, which he
does not attempt to describe, approach him and touch his lips.
What this meant could only become clear by the Divine
guidance of the prophet's reasoning powers. Isaiah had been
led to interpret a similar action, performed by one of the sera-
1 "The Qur'an" (Oxford, 1880), Part i., Introd., p. xx.
3 These plays upon words remind us of Amos viii. 2, which was probably
Jeremiah's model.
GOD COMMANDS TO TAKE THE TRUMPET. 9
phim, of the purification of his "unclean lips" (Isa. vi. 9);
Jeremiah, however, understands the Divine touch to mean the
revelation of a truth the communication of a message from
Jehovah to Israel. No longer could he complain, like Moses,
of inability to speak ; He who gave the theme would so lift up
his whole being that the most appropriate words would rise
unsought for to his lips.
Two more visions are recorded in the same chapter, which
the prophet, with intuitive certainty, interprets that is, with
which he connects a truth impressed upon his mind with Divine
power. The first is of the rod of an almond tree (i. 1 1). The
Israelites, with the unconscious natural poetry of primitive times,
called it shaqed, or the "wakeful" tree, because it blossoms
in Palestine as early as January, when all the rest of the plant-
world seems asleep. So, thought Jeremiah (it was God who
suggested the thought), Jehovah will be wakeful over his word;
that is, will break through the winter of man's careless sleep by
a sudden but not premature fulfilment of the purpose which His
prophets have announced (comp. xxxi. 28 ; xliv. 27). The
second is a seething cauldron with its front turned from ///<
north (i. 13). The fire of war is a frequent image in Arabic
literal me. Thus one poet says
" Their sternness remains unflagging, though they be rcastcd,
Again and agnin in War's most flaming furnace ; " '
and another, speaking of fierce warriors, long used to the
helmet
" White are our foreheads and worn ; for ever our cauldrons boil ; " 2
in commenting on which the scholiast quotes a verse from
another poem in which, still more distinctly, the boiling caul-
dron seems to mean the desolation caused by war. In Isaiah,
too, fire is an image for war, but of war regarded as a judgment
sent from Jehovah (Isa. ix. 19; x. 17, 18). The cauldron in
Jeremiah's vision is on the point of boiling over, and the seer's
intuitive interpretation (intuitive, and therefore Divinely sanc-
1 I.yall, "Ancient Arabian Poetry, 1 ' p. 8; " Ham Asa," ed. Freytag,
p. 13, 1. 4.
2 Lyall, p. 18 ; "Ilamasa," p. 47, 1. 7.
10 JEREMIAH.
tioned) ' is, Out of the north shall the evil seethe (i.e., come
seething), over all the inhabitants of the land (i. 14). "The
evil " means that which Jeremiah has already learned to
expect, as a thinker trained in the school of Amos and Isaiah
"the evil" which sin, when it is mature, necessarily produces,
by a law of God's moral government. And why "out of the
north " ? Does it mean that the threatened invaders will be a
northern people (comp. v. 15 with Ezek. xxxix. 2), or simply
that the road which they will take will lead them through the
north of Palestine ? We must leave this question until Jere-
miah's own prophecies supply us with the means of answering
it.
It is needless to say much more on this opening chapter, the
remainder of which is of little biographical use for this, the
earliest stage of Jeremiah's ministry. It contains three ideas,
(i) That Jeremiah is to say out frankly and fearlessly whatever
message may be given him ; (2) That he will encounter great
opposition ; and (3) That Jehovah's protection will render His
prophet invincible. Two of these ideas are repeated from the
first part of the chapter ; the third is one which can hardly
have been realized by Jeremiah as fully as the words would
imply. I think we shall gain something if now and then we
read the first fourteen verses by themselves. They give us a
striking picture of what Jeremiah was by nature, and what
Jehovah would have him become, and will, I hope, prepossess
us in favour of the prophet and the book which he and his dis-
ciples have left us. Shall we not let this favourable bias have
full play, and allow Jeremiah some influence in forming our
character, remembering that " whoso receiveth a prophet in the
name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward." Prophets
are few and far between, even if the term be stretched to in-
clude all great moral and religious teachers ; but of those who
"receive a prophet," in the highest sense of the phrase, by em-
bodying the truths which he teaches in their life and character,
there may and should be many. We cannot all be Shake-
speares, but we can all take up some part of Shakespeare into
1 Does not this parenthesis justify the self-confidence of prophets like
Hananiah (ch. xxviii.) ? It explains it, I would rather say. As a prophet's
God, so his prophetic intuitions. A false or at least inaccurate conception
of God was as virtually powerful for the lower prophets as a true conception
was for the higher prophets like Jeremiah.
GOD COMMANDS TO TAKE THE TRUMPET. II
ourselves. We cannot all be prophets, but we can all be dis-
ciples of the prophets, and receive a prophet's reward.
As the earnest of such a reward, may we seek to have the
inner experiences which Jeremiah had in his early manhood !
May we open our ears to the still small voice of God's Spirit !
May we never thrust ourselves into any post without the sense
that we are providentially called to it ! On the other hand,
may we never reject a true call from any earthly consideration !
A call to a position of comparative poverty may be just as truly
Divine as a call to riches and prosperity. Who so happy as he
who deliberately sacrifices a brilliant prospect for the sake of
his conscience ? May we learn to submit our personal wishes
and aspirations to that supreme authority whose oracle is
within us, and whose living voice is known to the obedient
disciple as the shepherd's voice is known to the sheep ! When
langour or depression creeps over us, may the thought of duty
revive us, and be to us an inspiration ! In circumstances of
danger, may God's Spirit teach us how to speak and how to
act ! May our natural graces be transformed into supernatural,
and even our natural disqualifications be overruled to the profit
of ourselves and our work ! And may we learn something even
from that part of Jeremiah's " vision " which speaks of " destroy-
ing" and "building up" learn, that is, to trust God more
boldly, not only for ourselves, not only for society, but also for
the Church, remembering that Christ's religion is not bound up
with this or that form or system, is not indeed properly a form
nor a system, but a spirit and a life, and that the gospel lives
and thrives upon honest inquiry, and delightedly assimilates
fresh truth. Christ is the great Reconciler both in the spiritual
and in the intellectual sphere, both in the individual soul and in
society at large, and all outward changes and painful revolu-
tions are but the disguised ministers of His all-reconciling
Love.
Need I offer an excuse for this appeal addressed to myself as
much as to my readers. If so, why, let me ask, should books on
the Scriptures be written solely in the academical or historical
style? Is there not a human nature common alike to the
historical critic and to the ordinary reader of the Bible ? Why
is it that the patristic commentators still possess an attractive-
ness for many students? They are deficient in that self-
projection into a different order of ideas which is necessary for
12 JEREMIAH.
the historical realization of distant times, but they see the per-
manent elements in Scripture- teaching, even if they exaggerate
them. " Their whole soul is stirred and penetrated with words
which to them are manifestly full of the words and Spirit of
God ; their reading leaves them aflame with the enthusiasm of
admiration, delight, awe, hope'"' (Dean Church). Is it impos-
sible that, among the many new developments of the Christian
life for which Providence is preparing us, this may be one
the union of the critical with the devotional and with the social
spirit ? Are there not even now some examples of this union,
like the first ripe fruit in prophetic imagery, " wise master-
builders " (i Cor. iii. 10) of the Church of the future ?
CHAPTER II.
FRIENDS IN. COUNCIL.
Jeremiah and his friends Reformers before the Reformation.
THE conflict between Jeremiah and the constituted authorities
referred to at the end of Chapter I. belongs properly to the
time of Jehoiakim and his successors ; but surely not less
important is the earlier period during which his character was
formed, and his hold upon fundamental truths became assured.
However scanty then may be the records concerning it, we
must make the most of them, and not refuse the help of
imaginative inference or conjecture. The dangers of an
undisciplined imagination are undeniable ; in the regions of
science and in those of history beacon-lights enough have risen
to view within the recollection of our generation, and far be it
from me to encourage the intrusion of a sensational element
into the hallowed study of the records of revelation. But the
fact that the imagination is a bad master does not nullify
its usefulness as a servant say rather, as God's appointed
minister for enabling us to realize the significance and the
beauty of His words and works in the past. A biography with
an element admitted to be imaginative may have less of
photographic accuracy than one based entirely on so-called
fact, but more of essential fidelity, both to the ideals and to
the achievements of a life. One is often tempted to ask, What
have we gained by the biographies of the present day, which
give us countless details but without a breath of realizing
imagination. Useless indeed would a " Life of Jeremiah" be,
if no attempt were made in it to reconstruct what may, or must
14 JEREMIAH.
have been, the course of the prophet's development, by the
help of the imagination.
The only facts that we know as yet are that Jeremiah was
called to be a prophet in the thirteenth year of the reign of
Josiah (say, B.C. 618, or 617), that he was then under the age
at which it was usual for men to venture an opinion in public, 1
and that he at first timidly drew back from so weighty an
office, but gave way to Jehovah's repeated injunctions, which
were coupled with promises of protection and visionary dis-
closures of the appointed subject-matter of his prophecies.
But how had Jeremiah been prepared to be thus distinguished ?
What had been his education? Who had been his friends?
If we dip into his book we are at once struck, first, by the
warmth of his sympathies, and next by the isolation in which
he would seem to have lived. His tender heart overflowed
with sympathy. To apply the words of psalms wlrch may,
perhaps, present an idealized view of Jeremiah s " when others
were sick, he clothed himself with sackcloth," 2 and yet '* when
he looked for sympathy himself, there was none," 3 so that he
felt in his loneliness as if the patriarch Jacob's lot were his
as if " bereavement had come upon his soul. 1 ' 4 He had, in fact,
felt the truth of those warnings of Jehovah. The whole land,
kings, princes, priests, and people, shall fight against thce ; ^even
thy brethren and the house of thy father, even they have dealt
treacherously with thee. 6 Take ye heed every one of his friend,
and trust ye not in any brother. 1 Nor had he that soothing
compensation which many a persecuted Christian has found
in family joys ; for he had received this express injunction :
Thou shalt not take thee a wife, neither shalt thou have sons
or daughters in this place* What, then> became of that
sympathy in which Jeremiah's nature was so rich ? Did its
precious waters run wholly to waste, like the neglected over-
flow of some Eastern river which once irrigated a smiling
country, and now stagnates in pestilential marshes ? The
psalmist, indeed, who gives us, as some think, Jeremiah
idealized, craves from his God that recompense of love which
1 Recalls himself "a boy "' (i. 7), somewhat as Solomon calls himself
"a young boy " (i Kings iii. 6, comp. xi. 4), though probably as much as
twenty years old.
3 Psa. xxxv. 13. 3 Psa. Ixix. 20. < Psa. xxxv. 12.
5 Jer. i. 19 (comp. 18). 6 Jer. xii. 6. i Jer. ix. \. 8 Jer. xvi. a.
FRIENDS IN COUNCIL. 1$
was denied him by men let my prayer (for them) return (i.e.,
be recompensed) into mine own bosom. 1 But must we can
we believe that Jeremiah was so utterly without responsive
human love? That his own strong sympathy with his people
only served to call forth its opposite hate ? Can human
nature in the land of Judah have been so base as this ? Must
we take Jeremiah at his word ?
In reply it may be said that none of the prophets are artists
in moral portraiture ; they do not, like even the saddest of our
recent novelists, express the lights as carefully as the shades
of the social picture; and Jeremiah most of all was liable to
exaggeration through the very intensity of his character. He
has left us some inestimable pages of confessions, supplemented
by notes of important episodes in his career, but not a com-
plete autobiography. It is allowable therefore to hold that he
did, at some period in his life, enjoy the privilege, as successively
disciple and teacher, of communion with other minds, and
that we should have found some allusion to this in his works,
if twenty-three years had not elapsed before his first public
addresses received a permanent form ? I am the more inclined
to this view because it appears certain that Jeremiah often
somewhat exaggerates the spiritual insensibility of his people
he himself even now and then confesses that it is composed
of two very different elements (see xv. 19, xxiv. 5-7). Surely
some like-minded men must have gravitated towards Jeremiah ;
presently, the names of a few such may occur to us.
This conjecture will gain much in plausibility if we fix this
fact in our minds that the new movement of religious reform
probably began earlier than is sometimes supposed. If so,
Jeremiah must have had friends, for he too (I will justify the
phrase presently) early became a religious reformer. But did
the new reform-movement begin before the eighteenth year of
the reign of Josiah ? Certainly ; and one may add that it must
have begun earlier. Just consider the state of things when the
young king came to the throne. We know but little of the
long reign of Manasseh (a good critical view of it will be
found in Ewald 2 ), but we do know what Manasseh's next
1 Psa. xxxv. 13.
" History of Israel,'' iv. 206-213. Perhaps, however, this great critic
(whom an American writer has strangely mis-named "the great denier")
may have erred in some of his details ; e.g., he may have placed the Book
of Job a little too early. But we will return to this later. Ewald's
1 6 JEREMIAH.
successor but one found. He found the friends of a comparatively
pure religion deprived of many of their natural leaders, in-
cluding, as legend asserts, the aged Isaiah, by the persecution
of Manasseh ; and, as we shall see, the venerated sanctuary
at Jerusalem polluted by a number of imported heathenish
rites. But he did not find pure religion friendless, indeed,
among its friends, as the event proved, were many of the
princes and even of the priests of Jerusalem, and some of these
would seem to have obtained the guardianship of the eight-
years-old * prince Josiah on the death of his father (himself
but a young man), Amon, son of Manasseh. This was of the
greatest importance to the plans of the as yet quiescent re-
forming party. Manasseh had ascended the throne when
on the verge of manhood, and fell at once into the hands of
reactionary advisers ; Joash, on the other hand, who became
king at seven, was (in spite of a too probably polytheistic
queen-mother) completely under sacerdotal influence, and,
accordingly, " did that which was right in the eyes of Jehovah,
all his days wherein Jehoiada the priest directed him" (2 Kings
xii. 2). It is most unfortunate that our sources of information
are so silent as to the period of Josiah's minority ; but none,
I hope, will object to the "imaginative inferences'' which I
venture to draw from the facts which have reached us.
But where shall we find even a scanty basis of fact ? The
earlier and more documentary of our two narrative-books
merely says that in the eighteenth year of Josiah's reign he
began a course of reforming measures which, by their drastic
nature, threw those of Hezekiah completely into the shade.
The second book of Chronicles indeed states 2 that the yourg
account of Manasseh may be compared with the modest and instructive,
though not too critical, sketch in Edersheim's " History of Israel and
Judah," vii. 169-177.
1 Provisionally, I follow the ordinary view that the unidiomatic expression,
" eight year" instead of "eight years" in 2 Kings xxii. i, (Hebrew text)
is an unimportant accident (2 Chron, xxxiv. i, has "eight years").
Klostermann, however, thinks that the original document used by the
compiler had "eighteen year"; this would be idiomatic, but would
involve a revision of the chronology of the kings. In Arabia it was a local
principle that no minor could be elected caliph.
2 2 Chron. xxxiv. 3. It is doubted by conservative scholars whether
vv. 4-7 describe what Josiah did (or at least began to do) in his twelfth
year, or whether they are an awkward anticipation of facts to be told
more fully later.
FRIENbS IN COUNCIL. 17
king began his reformation, not in the eighteenth year of his
reign but in the twelfth, and as early as the eighth began to
seek after the God of David his father. But can we altogether
trust this assertion, considering the late period of the
Chronicler, and his evident determination to judge the kings of
Judah by the orthodox standard of his own times ? This
would be too bold ; and yet I think there is something to learn
from the Chronicler. He perhaps reconstructs history on the
basis of inference : "we may follow him in his inferences,
though we may be vaguer and less dogmatic in our historical
reconstruction. Certainly it is difficult to conceive that
Josiah's adoption of reforming principles was really so sudden
as it is represented in the Second Book of Kings. An ob-
servation of God's ways both in nature and in the soul of man
justifies the conclusion that events which we call sudden have
been long since prepared by unobserved agencies. The call
of Jeremiah, for instance, must, psychologically speaking, have
been preceded by inward experiences, the nature of which we
can only conjecture. And so it is but reasonable to suppose
that Josiah had not indeed all at once shocked his people by
what would seem to their unprepared minds arbitrary icono-
clasm, but nevertheless given early and serious consideration
to the lessons of the past and the needs of the future. The
premature death of his idolatrous father Amon may well have
appeared to him in the light of a judgment, and the reforming
zeal of Hezekiah may have fired him with a noble emulation.
Nor can he have been unacquainted with those bold prophecies
of Isaiah which supplied a Divine sanction to the not very
successful attempt of his great ancestor ; of Isaiah, not less
than of Jeremiah, may it be said, that by their pen they
accomplished more than by their speech. And yet, if we may
venture to carry on the method of inference reading and medi-
tation cannot have satisfied a mind of so practical a bent.
Josiah would naturally seek for living teachers and congenial
religious friends. Isolation is as unfavourable to practical
ability as to personal religion. The ideas of Isaiah needed
to be developed and supplemented before they could be
applied to present circumstances. And even if none of Josiah's
contemporaries was ready as yet to show how this could be
done, yet it would be no slight gain if Josiah and some like-
minded friends could ponder the lessons of history together,
3
1 8 JEREMIAH.
and build each other up in the truths of prophetic religion.
He had, no doubt, his " tutors and governors," but he must also,
unless human nature has changed since his time, have needed
youthful associates. Among such would naturally be Jeremiah
and others of the same generation. What happy days the
destined prophet must have had at this period, for what friend-
ship so delightful as that which is cemented by common
principles and a common object of ambition ? I could
willingly believe that it is Jeremiah who takes that melancholy
retrospect (almost the sweetest-saddest passage of the Psalter),
in which those touching words occur
" But it was even tlioti, mine equal,
My companion, and my familiar friend ;
We took sweet counsel together,
And walked to the house of God as friends " PSA. Iv. 14,
Alas ! this was not " the friend that sticketh closer than a
brother." Worse than Demas, who forsook Paul out of mere
worldliness, this bosom-friend became an apostate first and a
personal enemy of his old associate afterwards.
Shall I startle the critical, nineteenth-century reader if I
remark that Jeremiah is already revealed in these circum-
stances as a true though incomplete type of Him to whom
all prophecy points? Let me assure such an one that the
theory which underlies this remark involves no unfaithfulness
to a strict historical method. It is simply a corollary from
the fundamental Christian doctrine of Providence. No doubt
the theory may be pressed too far. " Types " which satis-
fied, and were personally intended by the guiding Spirit to
satisfy, earlier ages do not and cannot satisfy our own. But
as long as the belief in Providence and a sense of biographic
analogies last, there will be many who are not afraid to recog-
nize "adumbrations " (a synonym of which Mr. Max Miiller
has lately reminded us) of Jesus Christ in the great men of
ancient Israel. There will even be some who, with a personage
in "John Inglesant," can go further, and maintain that, " as the
innocent and heroic life of Socrates, commended and admired
by Christians as well as heathens, together with his august
death, may be thought, in some measure, to have borne the
image of Christ ; and, indeed, not without some mystery of
purpose, and preparation of men for Christianity, has been so
FRIENDS IN COUNCIL. 19
magnified among men " (vol. i. p. 36). I have said elsewhere 1
that I belong to this class of religious thinkers, and that I
account Jeremiah a striking historic type of that Servant of
Jehovah, who is himself a grand poetical type of the Saviour
of Israel and the world. Certainly Jeremiah " knew the
fellowship of Christ's sufferings," and it is pleasant to hope
that his Christlike sympathy with his people was accompanied
by some Christlike friendships in which he, not less than
more commonplace persons, began to practise on a small
scale the Divine virtue of love. "It is enough for the
disciple," says Jesus, "that he be as his Master" (Matt. x. 24),
and we are sure that the Master formed some close human ties
in the course of His ministry, and that only one of His twelve
associates proved a traitor. Would that we knew something
more definite about Jeremiah's friendships ! But we can at
least fill up our mental image of them by conjecture ; and if
we not only venerate but are interested in this great prophet,
how can we refrain from doing so? It seems to me, then, not
out of place to recollect here the words of Roger Ascham in
"The Scholemaster," respecting our own boy-king. "Ifkyng
Edward," he says, "had lined a litle longer, his onely example
had breed soch a rase of worthie learned ientlemen, as this
Realme neuer yet did affburde." Surely it is probable enough
that the person of the Jewish boy-king formed in like manner
the centre of a little society of kindred spirits, for we know that
Jewish kings were not idolized as divine like the Egyptian
Pharaohs a society of which Jeremiah was a youthful member,
and the two Hilkiahs 2 (one the High Priest, the other also a
priest, and the father of Jeremiah) were among the recognized
leaders. The probability amounts almost to certainty in the
1 "The Prophecies of Isaiah," 3rd ed. ii. 195 (comp. p. 26).
2 It has been conjectured that Hilkiah, the father of Jeremiah, is
identical with "Hilkiah the priest," in 2 Kings xxii. (e.g., by Clement of
Alexandria, "Strom."' i. p. 328, comp. Jerome, "Quaestt. Hebr. ad i Chron.
ix. 15," and by Joseph Kimchi). This is not indeed impossible. It is true
that " Hilkiah the priest " belonged to the line of Eleazar (i Chron. vi. 13),
whereas Abiathar, who as we have seen, had " fields " at Anathoth, was
of that of Ithamar. It is a very fantastic criticism which can build any
argument at all on this harmless statement ; why should not the high
priest Hilkiah have had landed property at Anathoth ? But I will not on
this account be tempted by the conjecture. Hilkiah was not an un-
common name.
20 JEREMIAH.
case of the High Priest, for it was he who, later on, brought
the Book of Law to the notice of the king; it is something less
than this in the case of Jeremiah's father, and yet, considering
the conditions of education at this period, it is scarcely credible
that the religious ideas of the son should not have been largely
derived from the father. The name of the latter be it re-
marked means "Jehovah is my portion"- a phrase which
was at once a deep confession of faith in the true God, and a
silent protest against the heathenish name and character of the
late king Amon. He who could utter this phrase in the sense
which it bears in Psa. xvi. 5 (comp. Jer. x. 16, li. 19), cannot
have been ill-qualified for leadership in the noble army of
religious reformers.
But would Jeremiah himself, previously to the eighteenth year
of Josiah, have called himself a reformer ? I do not see why
he should not have done so. It is possible indeed that he only
aspired to carry out the plans of his leaders in a modest, unob-
trusive way ; but if even the pots in Jerusalem and Juclah
might, by a consistent religious thinker, be called holy to
Jehovah (Zech. xiv. 20, 21), much more might a humble-minded
young priest be called I need not say a reformer but, in
Biblical language, an amencler of the ways of Israel. At any rate,
the inner experiences related in chap. i. are not psychologically
intelligible, if he had not brooded deeply over the defects of the
national religion, and longed to be made use of in removing
them. That no action was taken for several years of Josiah's
reign, proves how carefully the friends of reform considered the
position of affairs, and how anxiously they waited for some
indication of the Divine will. The seniors would naturally be
the most averse to a hasty movement. They would caution the
juniors against compromising Jehovah's cause by a " zeal not
according unto knowledge." They would point out how few
and at present inactive were the higher as compared with the
lower prophets, and how the princes, or elders of the people,
who had a constitutional share in the government, were still
attached to the fascinating local superstitions. Nothing, they
would in effect say, but a visible sign of the Divine displeasure
will break up this unnatural calm, and at once add a new
practicalness to the preaching of the higher prophets, and pre-
dispose both princes and people to listen to it.
CHAPTER III.
HOPES AND FEARS QUICKLY REALIZED.
Jeremiah's early discourses, and the historical inferences warranted by
them The quiescence of the reforming party The sign granted at
length The threatened Scythian invasion.
WK have seen that after a spiritual training, which, though but
dimly discernible, is none the less certain, Jeremiah was called
to be a prophet in the thirteenth year of King Josiah. By
birth, as the heading tells us (i. i), he was connected with
Anathoth in Benjamin. 1 Dreary enough the place ('Anata)
looks now a wretched little village, which forces from us, in a
slightly different sense, the old prophet's exclamation, O thou
poor Anathoth (Isa. x. 30, R.V.). Anciently, no doubt, it was a
fortified town, and some of the stones built into one and another
of its few poor houses present the appearance of great age. It
stood, in fact, on the great northern road, as Isaiah intimates in
the passage from which I have quoted. One great advantage
it had for Jeremiah's training it was not far from Jerusalem,
which he could easily reach in a little more than an hour's
walk. But in itself it was not adapted to form a cheerful or
a poetic mind. Cut off from the thrilling sight (to a devout
beholder) of the Holy City, its inhabitants look down eastward
and south-eastward on the Dead Sea and the Lower Jordan
striking elements in a landscape, no doubt, but requiring to be
1 I cannot here enter into the question of the antiquity of the arrange-
ment of the Levitical cities, the list of which in Josh. xxi. (see v. 18) includes
Anathoth.
22 JEREMIAH.
varied, and deficient in happy associations. There, however,
Jeremiah was tied, by inheriting a piece of land (comp. xxxii.
6-12, xxxvii. 12) a point in which he reminds us of Abiathar,
the well-known high priest of David, who lost his office on the
accession of Solomon and retired to " his own fields " at Ana-
thoth (i Kings ii. 26). Since Jeremiah's call to be a prophet,
however, he naturally resided chiefly at Jerusalem, though there
is a striking episode in his career of which Anathoth is the
scene. The capital was the true home of prophecy the valley
of vision, as Isaiah calls it (Isa. xxii. 5, if Delitzsch be right).
Would that we could have heard the young and once timid
prophet after the great transformation wrought within him by
his call ! But alas ! neither of his first discourse nor of any
succeeding one have we an exact report ; and it is only with
much qualification that one can assent to JSwald, who regards
chap. ii. as Jeremiah's earliest public address. No doubt the
opening words, Go and cry thus in the ears of Jerusalem (ii. i),
may seem to indicate that all the following words were actually
spoken not long after the prophet's call, but when we observe
the generality of much of the contents, and the strong appear-
ance of condensation, we see that Jeremiah must have composed
chap. ii. some time after he began his ministry on the basis of
notes or general recollections of a number of discourses. It is
therefore not so much a discourse as the quintessence of several
discourses. Four leading considerations are developed in it :
I. Israel's infidelity contrasted with the fidelity of Jehovah to
Israel and of the other nations to their gods (vv. 4-13). II.
Israel's punishment and its cause (vv. 14-19). III. Israel's
inveterate and unblushing idolatry, and its practical inutility
(vv. 20-28). IV. Israel's sole guiltiness (Jehovah having per-
formed His own part of the covenant) and its magnitude.
There is much that is striking in the chapter, from Jehovah's
loving address with which it opens, to the mixture of earnestness
and irony in the concluding description of Israel's guilt. There
is also much that might well startle us. Take verse I, for in-
stance I venture to quote it in Reuss's version, which is at
once graceful and scholarly
Je te garde le souvenir de la iendresse de ton jtime age, de
V amour de ton temps de fiancee, quand tu me suivais a t ravers
le desert, par une terre sans culture.
It is quite certain that the words here ascribed to Jehovah
HOPES AND FEARS QUICKLY REALIZED. 23
(with intuitive certitude on the part of the prophet) give an
idealizing view of the Israel of antiquity, and that the popular
religion of Israel, even after Moses had spoken, was very dif-
ferent from that spiritual religion to serve which Jeremiah con-
secrated his life.
Then take verse 13, doubly beautiful to those who can realize
the preciousness of water in the East
For two evils hath my people committed; me have they
forsaken, the fountain of living water, to hew out for themselves
cisterns, broken cisterns, that hold no water.
It is not less certain that the contemporaries of Jeremiah
were not conscious of having forsaken Jehovah, though, as we
shall see, their Jehovah was very different from the Jehovah
of the prophet. In proof of this, see i>. 23 of this very chapter,
where the Israelites are represented as meeting the charge of
going over to Baal-worship by a direct denial of the offence.
A fair-minded student is bound to say that Jeremiah and his
opponents were both right. Jeremiah was right, in that the
moral and spiritual elements of early Israelitish religion had
been nearly extinguished through the influence of the impure
religions of Israel's neighbours ; his opponents were right, in
that Israel in its worst days never ceased to worship Jehovah
as the national God. The Baalim of the different cities and
villages to which Jeremiah seems to refer in ii. 28 (=xi. 31)
were not necessarily, in the mind of the worshippers, " other
gods beside Jehovah," and even when they were, their worship
did not exclude that of Jehovah.
The fault of the Jews was not, strictly speaking, in throwing
off the service of Jehovah, or, as Jeremiah says, changing their
gods, but in refusing to rise, at the call of the nobler prophets,
to a higher stage of religion, in not even standing still, but
sinking to a lower level.
Again, take v. 18
Well then, what hast thou to do with a journey to Egypt
to drink the water of the Nile ? or what with a journey to
Assyria to drink tiie water of the Euphrates?
To this the Jews might very well have replied, that their
experienced politicians did but adapt themselves to circum-
stances ; that Israel's imperial position under David and
Solomon was due to the temporary depression of both Assyria
and Egypt, between which its territory was situated; that, even
24 JEREMIAH.
were Israel to be reunited, its only chance for safety would lie in
attaching itself to the stronger of those two powers ; that a
policy of isolation would be fatal at once to the little country
of Judah, and that the only question could be whether a philo-
Assyrian or a philo-Egyptian policy were the more expedient.
The right rejoinder, in the spirit though not in the words of
Jeremiah, would be this that God had committed to Israel the
deposit, not indeed of a perfect religion, but of one which, by
wonderfully varied means of the Divine selection, both could
and would be developed into a religion adapted for all nations ;
that, as long as political independence was necessary for this
object, Jehovah would preserve His people without its having to
condescend to statecraft (" perverseness and crookedness," as it
is called in Isa. xxx. 12 *), and that when it ceased to be required,
God would still preserve the moral and spiritual independence
of Israel as He preserved its forefathers in Egypt, and conse
quently that Israel's true interest lay in dutifully co-operating
with its Divine Guide.
The rejoinder would be, I repeat, a true one ; and yet we
must not be unjust to the politicians, who thoroughly acted out
their own idea of patriotism, and who were in their own sense
religious men. Was not Hezekiah himself at one time tempted
to rely too much on a human alliance (Isa. xxxix.), and was not
a king (Azariah or Uzziah), who is only less commended by the
historian than Hezekiah, the prime mover in a Syrian coalition
against Tiglath-Pileser II. ? a Certainly the temptation to rely
on the arts of the politician was not less at this part of Josiah's
reign than under his great ancestors. Decay had begun in the
blood-cemented empire of Assyria even before the death of
Assurbanipal, and this cannot have been unknown to the " in-
telligence department" of the Jewish court. It was owing to
this that, as the second chapter of Jeremiah shows us, the
philo-Egyptian party (com p. Isa. xxx. 2, xxxi. i) had supplanted
the philo-Assyrian one in the councils of the sovereign. We see
from this that, whatever the personal inclinations of Josiah and
his nearest friends might be, he was not as yet sufficiently inde-
pendent to strike out a line for himself ; and we may observe
1 See the "Variorum Bible" on the passage.
2 This is at any rate accepted by Schrader, and regarded as probable by
the cautious Tiele in his " Babylonisch-Assyrische Geschichte," part i,
(Qotha, 1886), pp, 230, 231,
HOPES AND FEARS QUICKLY REALIZED. 25
in this connection that already in the narrative of his call
Jeremiah speaks of the kings of Judah (i. 18), i.e. perhaps the
large and influential royal family which seems to have shared
the important governmental function of judgment with the
reigning king (xvii. 20, comp. xxi. 11, 12.
Thus the facts implied in Jeremiah's second chapter cast a
bright light on the quiescent attitude of the reforming party at
this period. It is evident that the " sign," for which, as we saw
in chap, ii., the reformers must have been looking, had not yet
been given, and that people were generally prosperous, and
went on with their quaint medley of religious rites, trusting
that Jehovah, at any rate, had no longer any complaint against
them. As Jeremiah puts it
Thou saidst, I am innocent ; surely his anger hath turned
from me (ii. 35).
Some, I am aware, have found a precisely opposite statement
in vv. 14-17, where the past tenses retained in the Revised Ver-
sion are no doubt substantially correct. But though these verses
may be a later interpolation, as Ewald holds, due, perhaps, to a
disciple of the prophet's, it seems to me perfectly possible to
explain them as a vivid, dramatic description of the almost
inevitable calamity which hung over Judah. " Prophetic per-
fects " (see Driver, "Hebrew Tenses," pp. 21-25) are common
enough, and passages like iv. 14, vi. 8, warn the reader not to
take the description too prosaically (for chaps, iv.-vi. form a
group of prophecies).
I will not linger further on this chapter, and only remark that
it opens a welcome view of the Biblical training of the youthful
Jeremiah. The great prophets of the eighth and following
centuries were no "untaught geniuses." Hence, Jeremiah, like
his fellows, is fond of borrowing ideas and phrases from older
writers ; this very chapter presents numerous points of contact
with that fine song (Deut. xxxii.) of unknown authorship,
enshrined, by a singular good fortune, in the Book of Deute-
ronomy. It formed no part of that Book of the Law which
one of the Ililkiahs, as we shall sec, brought to light, but is an
independent Scripture, though for centuries covered over, as it
were, by Deuteronomy, very much as that book itself is said to
have been found by Hilkiah covered over in a corner of the
temple. I think, however, that Jeremiah is, in one respect, the
superior of his nameless predecessor ; he treats his countrymen
26 JEREMIAH.
more tenderly, more sympathetically. Not tenderly enough,
perhaps, as we should think, and yet with a wonderful amount
of sympathy, if we compare his first prophecy (if chap. ii. may
be called such) with the Song attached to Deuteronomy, and
indeed with the works of any of the prophets who went before
him, except Hosea. It was the gospel which opened wide the
floodgates of truly humane sympathy ; but Jeremiah, in spite
of the relics of antique sternness which still cling to him, has a
tender fellow-feeling with his people, which may be compared to
the first delicate streaks of advancing dawn. Surely God chose
him out precisely because he was cast in this softer mould, even
as He chose out Hosea to be the prophet of the decline and
fall of the kingdom of Israel. And why? Because there is no
chance of an audience for the prophet of woe, if no sound of a
stifled sob strikes the ear ; would our own Carlyle have in-
fluenced the last generation as he did, if men had not felt that
underneath that rough exterior there beat the warmest and most
sympathetic of hearts ?
That Jeremiah was fond of Hosea's book is certain ; the
touching words which open chap. ii. are closely parallel to
a passage in Hosea (ii. 15). A happy instinct guided him ;
he felt himself allied in genius to the elder prophet ; and he
must have noticed how similar his own circumstances were
to those of Hosea. I will not, however, exaggerate this simi-
larity. Jeremiah had a harder fate than Hosea in this respect,
that whereas Hosea was always able to look with some degree
of hope to Judah, in Jeremiah's days the last remnant of Jeho-
vah's people seemed swiftly nearing destruction. 1
It is true that Providence still has an eye upon Judah ;
both the guilty sisters shall yet dwell together as favoured
children of Jehovah (iii. 18); but we maybe sure that to the
increased severity of the judgment upon Judah, there corre-
sponds a deeper gloom in the mind of its prophet ; Hosea
was not tried as severely as Jeremiah.
Altogether this third chapter deserves an attentive and sym-
pathetic study. There seems to me no reason why criticalness
and sympathy should not be combined in the same reader.
Let me then point out some phenomena which might escape an
uncritical reader. The chapter begins (as the margin of the
Revised Version rightly states) with the word saying evidently
1 Esvald, " The Prophets of the Old Testament," iii. 68.
HOPES AND FEARS QUICKLY REALIZED. 27
a mere fragment of a superscription. Those who know any-
thing about manuscripts (and even the unlearned can easily
imagine what I am describing) are aware how apt words, and
even sentences, are to get dropped out of the text in the process
of transcription ; sometimes, too, words and phrases will
become illegible, and the scribe who makes his copy from such
a manuscript will forget to indicate that there is a gap in his
text. Sometimes, moreover, words will get copied into the
wrong line, and this seems to have been the case here, the
first part of the heading of v. I having been transposed to v. 6.
Let us then read v. i thus,
And the word of Jehovah came tin to me in the days ofjosiah
the king, saying, &c.
To those who read their Bible as attentively as their
Shakespeare or their Virgil, this critical remark will not, I
hope, seem trifling. It requires however to be supple-
mented. Is it possible that verses 4 and 5 were meant to close
a section of this, in general, well-arranged group of prophecies ?
This is how they run in Reuss's version, from which I again
quote because of its simple dignity and essential fidelity
Maintenant, n'est-ce pas ? tu me cries; Moti pert / tot, le
fiance de ma jcunesse ! s'en souviendra-t-il done toujours? me
gardtra-t-il rancune ajainaisf Voila comme tu paries, tout en
faisant le mal, et en y persisfant.
I am only considering the passage now in its literary as-
pect ; the facts of history which explain it will come before
us later. Notice then from this point of view that such
deeply-felt expressions can hardly stand at the end of a
prophecy. The divine speaker is wrought to a high pitch
of feeling ; he is touched by the tender expressions of the
personified people of Judah, which indeed correspond to the
sweet appeal of Jehovah (quoted, from Reuss's version, in
page 22), but knows only too well that they are but unmeaning
sounds. And so he begins to expostulate in the style of Isaiah
(i. 12), "Why spread out your hands before me. I hate such
prayers when coupled with evil practices. With unchanged
minds you return home and calmly repeat all the old abomina-
tions." Some further development of these ideas is clearly
wanted ; Jeremiah is not without the instincts of an artist, and
does not leave his finest motifs only half worked out. What
we seem to want here is a contrasted picture of Jehovah's
28 JEREMIAH.
lovirgkimlness to Judah ; then, a renewed expression of horror
at Judah's infidelity ; and then, a picture either of the almost
inevitable judgment, or (for Jeremiah has in him a strong dash
of the emotionalism of Hosea) of the final conversion of heart
which God's people must and will in His own good time
experience. This is the close which verses like iii. 1-5 lead
us to expect, and there actually is a passage which exactly
meets our requirements ; only it is separated from verses 1-5
by another passage which the editor (a disciple of Jeremiah's ?)
seems to have inserted here to illustrate the hopes held out in
verses 21 and 22, and so give a more complete answer to the
question, Will he keep (anger) for ever (v. 5) ?'
Observe first of all the contrast,
Moi,favais dit : Comme je te mettrai par mi mcs enfant s ! Je
te donncrai tin pays de delices, un patrimoine magnifique, le
plus excellent qifait tin peuple ! Je disais : Vous iriappcllerez
pere, et vous ne vous detournerez pas de mot (iii. 19).
Next, the horror at Judah's surprising infidelity (does not
house of Israel here include Judah ? comp. ii. 4, 26)
Eh oui ! Comme unefemme devient infidele a son amant, ainsi
vous favez tit a mot, maison d 1 Israel, parole de FEtcrnel
(iii. 20).
See how deeply the Divine speaker has been hurt ! He refuses
the word used by Judah in v. 4 (comp. Prov. ii. 17), which ex-
presses the intimate friendship between husband and wife, and
substitutes another, already used by Hosea (iii. i), and indeed
by himself in verse i, to describe a superficial and illegitimate
attachment. Of course house of Israel in this verse must be
taken to include Judah.
Lastly, the graphic description of the genuine heart-con-
version in the days to come, which reminds us of the pictu-
resque tableau in chap. xxxi. Here, however, I must desert
Reuss's version, and venture on an English rendering
Hark ! there is a sound tipon the heights, tears and entreaties
of the children of Israel, because they have perverted their
way, have forgotten Jehovah their God. " Return, backsliding
children; I will heal your backslidings." "Behold, we are
come unto t/ice ; for thou art Jehovah our God" (iii. 21, 22).
1 In tliis view I mainly follow Stade, "Zeitschrift fiir die alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft," 1884, p. 151, &c.
HOPES AND FEARS QUICKLY REALIZED. 2y
But gloomy indeed did the immediate prospect of Judah
appear to the young prophet so much so that in the prophecy
which extends from iii. 6 to iii. 18 he announces on the part of
Jehovah
Hacks/iiling Israel hath shewn herself more righteous than
treacherous Judah (iii. 11),
and, more astonishingly still, invites the backslider to return
with the tender assurance
I will not knit my brow at you, for I am full of lovingkind-
ness, sail/i Jehovah, I will not keep (anger} for ever ....
Return, backsliding children, saith Jehovah, for I am a husband
unto you : and I will take you one of a city and two of a family
and will bring you to Zion 1 (iii. 12, 14).
As I have already said, I regard the prophecy from which
these quotations are taken as distinct from iii. 1-5 and 19-
25. It may have been written at the same period as the
latter, but it has some noteworthy differences, e.g., that the
future is described in still more attractive terms, and with a
singular spirituality ; also that the phrase backsliding children^
which in verse 22 refers to Judah (v. 21 compared with
v. 2 proves this note the phrase the heights in both), in
verse 14 evidently refers to the northern Israel. We must
remember that "backsliding" (both adjective and substan-
tive) is a favourite word of Jeremiah's (see ii. 19 ; iii. 6, 8,
II, 12, 14, 22; v. 6; viii. 5; xiv. 7; xxxi. 22; xlix. 4)
the different use of such a phrase need not therefore surprise
us. I may remark too that the word forms another link
between Jeremiah and Hosea. And so we get an answer to a
question which may have troubled some readers, viz., Had
Jeremiah really such grave cause for complaint against Judah ?
I mean that the idea of "backsliding" occurred naturally to
idealistic teachers like the prophets to Hosea not less than
Jeremiah, and to Jeremiah before as well as after the year of
the great reformation. I think, however, that both the pro-
phecies which together make up chap. iii. received a heightened
colouring, if indeed they were not altogether put into shape,
1 For " knit my brow " the Hebrew has "cause my countenance to fall "
if we cannot translate a figure, we must substitute a corresponding one
for it. " Kind " is, more fully, " rich in lovingkindness " (k/tdsed the bond
of the covenant-relation between Jehovah and Israel).
30 JEREMIAH.
subsequently to the eighteenth year of Josiah, though based on
Jeremiah's notes or recollections of his pre-reformation activity.
I must now pass on to another portion of the first great group
of prophecies, viz., chapters iv. and vi., from which we may, I
think, infer that the looked-for " sign " from heaven came at
last, encouraging the reformers to take up their task in earnest.
Who has not heard of Attila and the Huns, and the horror excited
by these fierce barbarians among the civilized peoples of the
Roman Empire ? ' A close parallel to this is furnished by the
Scythian invasion of Assyria and Babylonia, not to add Pales-
tine, in the early part of the reign of Josiah. Who the Scythians
were, what was the order of their desolating inroads and how
far they extended, belongs rather to the historian of the ancient
East than to the biographer of Jeremiah to discuss. Our
knowledge of these subjects depends primarily on the narrative
of Herodotus (i. 74, 103-106, iv. i), the Hebrew historical
records being here, as so often, imperfect, and the cuneiform
tablets being as yet not fully transcribed and not in all respects
satisfactorily explained. That the Scythians, like the Cim-
merians, whom, according to Herodotus, they displaced, were
originally nomads, is clear ; but it is possible that, after having
passed the Caucasus, they settled themselves permanently in
a province of northern Armenia called Sacasene (from Sacce
the Persian name of the Scythians, Herod, vii. 64), and made
this their headquarters during their later ravages. Gugu, a
chief of " the land of Sauj," captured by Assurbanipal, 2 may, as
some think, have been a Scythian prince ; and it is an attractive
view which connects Gog, the prince of Magog (Ezek. xxxviii.
2, 3) with this Gugu. At any rate, there is no doubt as to the
vast and general subversion which they produced. The power-
ful kingdom of Urartu (comp. Ararat) henceforth disappeared
from history. The Moschi and the Tabali, Assyria's gallant
foes, were reduced to a small remnant which took refuge on the
mountains by the Euxine Sea, 3 and it is of this apparently that
Ezekiel speaks in the following graphic passage, so important
for the delineation of the popular view of the underworld
1 See Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," chap, xxxiv.,
and notice his parallel of the Mongols.
2 "Annals of Assurbanipal, " cyl. B., " Records of the past," ix. 46.
3 See Lenorrnant, " Les origines de 1'histoire," ii. i, pp. 458-461 ; cf.
Schrader, " Keilinschriften und Geschichtsforschung," p. 159.
HOPES AND FEARS QUICKLY REALIZED. 31
There is Meshech, Tubal, and all its multitude round about its
grave ; all of them unclad, slain by the sword, who caused
terror in the land of the living. And they lie not with heroes,
giants of the olden time, who went down to Sheol in full
armour, with their swords fait under their heads, and their
shields upon their bones, for there was terror at their prowess
while they lived (Ezek. xxxii. 26, 27).'
Province after province of the civilized and semi-civilized
East was visited by this crashing storm (Ezek. xxxviii. 9).
The incredibly fertile plains of Mesopotamia were laid
waste. Towns and villages which had not the protection
of walls were pillaged and destroyed (comp. Ezek. xxxviii.
n) ; only well-defended cities could defy the attacks of the
bold Scythian archers (Ezek. xxxviii. 15, comp. Herod, iv.
46). The wave of ruin swept along Palestine by the coast-
road to the borders of Egypt. That most ancient temple
of Aphrodite at Ashkelon, of which the lately-discovered
temple at Cythera was a copy, was plundered (Herod, i. 105).
Psamitik (Psammetichus) only averted an invasion of Egypt by
"gifts and prayers." Did the little country of Judah remain
unscathed? If Hitzig and Ewald arc right in finding allusions
to the Scythians in the Psalter (the former refers Psalms xiv.
and Iv., the latter Psa. lix., to this period), we must answer in
the negative. This view, however, is not a good specimen of
the critical tact of these eminent scholars, and Knobel has
very naturally included this in a too bitter indictment of this
faulty though never-to-be-forgotten leader of thought (See
Expositor, 3rd series, vol. iv., p. 263). The obvious inference
from the narrative of Herodotus is that Judah was in the main
exempt from injury. The highlands of Judah were protected
by nature, besides which the Scythians knew well enough where
to make the most productive conquests. It is probable how-
ever that straggling parties turned aside inland. The fertile
plain of Sharon, studded with villages on their little tels or
eminences, must surely have suffered, especially as the road
swerved from the coast-line at some distance to the north of
Joppa. Here the straight way was barred by a thick forest
called Assur, 2 well known as late as crusading times, for it was
1 I follow Cornill's corrected text.
3 See Maspero in the "Album "of Egyptological papers published in
honour of Dr. Leemans.
32 JEREMIAH.
at this point that Cceur-de-Lion overcame Salaclin in a great
battle on Sept. 7, 1191, under the walls of Arsuf, the ancient
Apollonia. Some (after Pliny and Syncellus) have found a
trace of their presence in the name Scythopolis (= Beth-shean,
a finely-situated town, now Beisan, on the edge of the cliffs
which descend from the Wady Jalud to the Ghor). Even if
this be not a corruption of Sikytopolis (city of Siccuth), \ve
surely cannot venture to connect it with these Scythians. 1
One thing at least is more than probable that two faithful
servants of the true Jehovah were called to be prophets when
the danger from the Scythians began to loom in the horizon.
One was Zephaniah, whose short book seems based on the
prophet's notes of his discourses during the terrible crisis. We
cannot help turning over its pages, for they illustrate passages
of Jeremiah ; for us at least, Zephaniah is not a " minor
prophet." This, then, is what he says, Be still, for the judg-
ment is irrevocably fixed ; yea, Jehovah hath already prepared
the sacrifice, hath consecrated his invited ones (Zeph. i. 7 ; comp.
Isa. xiii. 3 ; Jer. li. 27, 28, where prepared in the Revised
Version should be consecrated, as in Isa. I.e. ; see also Isa.
xxxiv. 6, Jer. xlvi. 10). The great day of Jehovah, he adds, is
near; it is near and hasteth greatly (Zeph. i. 14) a passage
which to us has a special interest, because this and the following
verse partly suggested the famous hymn of Thomas of Celano,
beginning Dies irce, dies ilia. There are those in Judah, our
prophet tells us, who have hitherto known neither shame nor
fear ; surely these cannot but tremble now at the imminent
recompence of their heathen wickedness. False Israelites !
No better are they than their neighbours ; nay, their obduracy
makes them still more deserving of punishment. On the other
hand, true seekers after Jehovah should go quietly on in the
path of obedience, if perhaps ye may hide yourselves in the day
of Jehovah's anger. For Gaza, he continues, shall become a
desert tract, and Ashkelon a desolation; they shall drive out
Ashdod at noonday, and Ekron shall be rooted out (Zeph. ii. 3, 4).
Such was the prophet's anticipation, when the Scythians began
their southward march. All the peoples with which they came
into contact should have to rue their wickedness ; the barbarian
1 Its population was predominantly a non-Jewish one (2 Mace. xii. 30 ;
Jos. " De Bello Jud.," ii. 18, and "Vit."6). " Scythian " may mean "bar-
barian" (comp. 3 Mace. vii. 5 ; Col. iii. ii).
HOPES AND FEARS QUICKLY REALIZED. 33
horde was, like Altila, the '' Scourge of God." That the pro-
phecy, thus explained, was not fulfilled to the very letter, is no
argument against this view ; the Book of Jonah is a warning
to us not to be surprised if God's dealings with man are gentler
sometimes than His threatenings.
Let us notice, before we pass on, Zephaniah's unusually clear
perception of the greatness of God's world ; in his judicial
survey of the peoples known to him, the space allotted to Judah
is not more than agrees with its real position among the nations.
Also that no measures of reform had as yet been introduced no
plan of action had as yet commended itself to that little band of
friends which included (probably) Josiah, the two Hilkiahs,
Jeremiah, and to which we may now add the name of Zephaniah.
But each member of this upward and forward looking company
was being gradually ripened for his own share in the work.
Zephaniah's own importance would be doubtless enhanced, if
he belonged to one of the branches of the royal family. Is there
any ground for such a supposition ? Ibn Ezra thinks that there
is, and the reader will perhaps agree with him, on looking at
the first verse of the Book, in which, contrary to the usual prac-
tice, the genealogy is carried up to the fourth generation, and if he
observes the name last mentioned Hizkiah, or, as the Revised
Version more consistently gives it, Hezekiah. Truly, tlic wind
blowetli where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but
canst not tell whence it comcth nor whither it gocth. The Spirit
of revelation chooses the most unlikely instruments, calls Elisha
from the plough, Amos from the herd, Zephaniah (it may be)
from the steps of the throne.
And who was the second of the prophets called forth by the
danger from the Scythians ? The reader will have guessed his
name already ; it was Jeremiah. Among the minor motives
which overcame this prophet's hesitation, one must have been
his people's urgent need of an interpreter of the signs of the
times. In Judah, as in England now, people were only too ready
for external and non-moral views of political questions ; this
was the constant trouble of Isaiah, it became that of Jeremiah.
Against the " opportunism " of the statesmen he directs the
weapons of his sarcasm. Why gaddest thou about so much, he
says, to cJiange thy way (thy policy, as we should say)? Thou
shalt be ashamed of Egypt also, as t/iou wast asliained of Assyria
(Jer ii. 36). Not from Egypt, not from Assyria, unable soon to
4
34 JEREMIAH.
help themselves shall the great wind come which shall smite
the four corners of the house, so that it falls 1 (Job. i. 19). From
another and a more energetic race, ever replenished (in Jere-
miah' language see v. 15) from a secret store of vitality, the new
dangers will arise. Like some mighty perennial stream, or (to
quote again from the opening vision) like the contents of a caldron
(Jer. i. 14), will "the evil" come. For lo, I will call all the families
of the kingdoms of the north, said Jehovah, and they shall come
(Jer. i. 14, 15 ; comp. iv. 6, vi. i). We see, however dimly,
that, as the punishment of accumulated sins, some new and
more awful enemies are threatened, and when we consult the
pages of history, we cannot doubt that these are, first the
Scythians, and next the Chaldasans. The phrase (if I am not
mistaken) was selected after the course of history had sharpened
the prophet's eye to understand his remembered vision better
selected in order to include both the Scythians and the Chal-
dasans. "The north" had long since been marked out as the
great arsenal from which God drew forth first one weapon of ven-
geance and then another. To Isaiah it suggested the Assyrians
(Isa. xiv. 31) ; to Jeremiah the not less destructive nations who
continued their work. 2 First, however, the Scythians. Surely
it is of these dread ministers of judgment that our prophet
speaks with emotional exaggeration in language such as the
last man might employ, on the morning of the great doomday,
" / saw the earth it was a waste Chaos j and heavenwards
the light thereof was gone ; I saw the mountains they trembled,
and all the hills moved to and fro; I saw mankind had dis-
appeared, and all the birds of the heaven had flown. I saw
the garden-land (had become) desert, all the cities thereof had
been broken down, 3 because of Jehovah, because of his hot anger.
1 That Job is a "parable" was early seen (see "Job and Solomon,"
p. 61). The great sufferer may be poetically individual! zed, but he is more
than a common man he is a symbol, not merely of afflicted humanity,
but of Israel.
2 How elastic the symbol was, appears from Jer. xlvii. i, where a clause
inserted by the editor (before Pharaoh smote Gaza) suggests that he under-
stood the waters from the north (v. 2) to mean the army of Neco on its
southward journey to Egypt.
3 I do not say that this feature of the description applies to the Scythians.
Jeremiah adapted his prophesies respecting the Scythians to the later
Chaldaean crisis, just as he adapted to it the older prophecy against Moab,
preserved in Isa. xv., xvi., and the old poem in Num. xxi. 27-30 (see
Jer. xlviii.) See pp. 40, 41.
HOPES AND FEARS QUICKLY REALIZED. 35
. . . At the noise of horsemen and bowmen the whole land flceth ;
they go into thickets, and climb up upon rocks ; every city is
forsaken, and not a man dwelleth therein (Jer. iv. 23-26, 29).
But I must not linger on this interesting theme. Suffice it
to add here a sentence which has struck me in reading (since
the above was written) the posthumous revised edition of vol.
iv. of Lenormant's " Histoire de 1'Orient," published in 1885 with
the friendly aid of a disciple of the lamented Assyriologist
(M. Babelon),
" Quand on lit, dans les premiers chapitres de Jdrdmie, une
description de ces hordes de barbares qui se ru^rent sur la
Palestine comme sur la Mesopotamie, on croirait assister a une
invasion des soldats de Gengis ou de Tamerlan, dont les
Cimmeriens sont d'ailleurs les ancetres " (p. 379).
There is nothing arbitrary, then, in what the preceding
pages have offered as a reconstruction of a half-forgotten
chapter in the history of Judah. From every point of view, it
is clear that we have arrived at a new epoch, and if Zephaniah
can claim the distinction of being its earliest prophet, Jeremiah
has still the superiority in the richness and variety of his
subject-matter. The transformation of the timid, sensitive
Jeremiah evidently began at once. A marvellous maturity
strikes us even in the opening chapters of his book, and though
these, in their present form, may reflect a later stage of his ex-
perience, yet the maturity visible may in part be attributed to
his Spirit-led meditations before his call came. Jeremiah,
then, was a reformer even before Josiah's great reformation.
What a hope it gives us both for ourselves and others when
we see how much the Spirit of revelation made of Jeremiah !
I spoke of some of the unlikely agents of that Spirit among the
prophets who preceded him. But who can have seemed more
unlikely than Jeremiah ? Who of Josiah's little band could
have expected to see his timid friend occupying any prominent
position ? He at least, it might have been said, was of too soft
a nature to lead, and too sympathetic by far to endure the strain
of prophesying in an age which was growing tired of prophets.
He was perhaps too soft to take the lead in action, and per-
haps without the example of Zephaniah that sensitive shrinking
from the acknowledged call of duty might have even more
resembled the agony of Gethsemane. Mysterious are the ways
of the Spirit ; an electric spark often seems to pass from one
36 JEREMIAH.
to another in a company of young men, and so perhaps it was
with Zephaniah and Jeremiah. And there appeared unto thetn
tongues parting asunder, like as of fire; and it sat upon each of
them (Acts ii. 2).
To those who have followed me thus far, the form and bearing
of the man underneath the prophet's mantle have, I hope,
become somewhat more real than before. He has none of the
so-called apathy of the Stoic ; he may use bold words at the
risk of life, but he does so with quivering lips. Even in the
solemn hour of his consecration, he has had sore misgivings,
and would gladly have made way for a stronger man. But one
of his chief qualifications is precisely his sense of weakness ; he
needs no thorn in the flesh to make him pray to be clothed upon
with Divine strength. He is not a hero by nature, but by grace ;
and in his sometimes strange confessions we clearly read that
grace never expelled nature. His life is at once the most natural
and the most supernatural in the Old Testament. Let us then
be patient even with ourselves ; God is better than our fears,
and more generous than our highest hopes, if in base cowardice
we do not shrink back from His call.
CHAPTER IV.
MORNING-CLOUD GOODNESS.
The crisis and its effects Religious reaction.
WE have seen in the preceding chapter that in the early part of
the reign of Josiah a great migration of peoples took place ;
first of all the Cimmerians, and then the Scythians (who in the
Babylonian inscriptions are called Gimirrai r a name more
properly belonging to the Cimmerians) spread ruin and desola-
tion through the fairest countries of Asia. The latter of these two
barbarian hordes even violated the sacred land of Jehovah. Can
we doubt that the prophets on their watch-towers were keenly
alive to the danger? Nothing but a dread of admitting unful-
filled predictions can have prevented some critics of the last
and the present generation from recognizing the light which
these facts of history throw upon the language of the two con-
temporary prophets Zephaniah and Jeremiah. The limits of
this volume prevent me from entering into the question of the
relation of prediction to fulfilment. Again and again, however,
the expositor is obliged by the force of truth to state facts which
conclusively demonstrate that " it is not fate that presides ovei
prophecy, nor does fatality follow it." 2 Prophecy is simply
the declaration and illustration of the principles of the divine
government sometimes in the past, sometimes in the present,
sometimes in the future. The illustrations, however, are always
inferior in strict accuracy to the principles, and among the
1 Schracler, " Kcilinschriften und Gcschichtsforschung,'' p. 150; Lenor-
inant, " Les origines de 1'histoire," ii. i, p. 547.
a Kdershcim, "Prophecy and History in Relation to the Messiah,''
P- 153-
38 JEREMIAH.
illustrations those which have to do with the circumstances of
the hour are more implicitly to be trusted than those which
have to do with the past and with the future. Zephaniah and
Jeremiah were prophets in the sense which I have described,
and their expositor is not to be tied down by the mistaken
theories of dull and unsympathetic theologians.
So far, then, as we know for certain, the only one of the
nations of Palestine upon which the threats of Zephaniah were
at all fulfilled was Philistia (Herod, i. 105) ; and it is but a
probable guess that Judah, so earnestly warned both by
Zephaniah and by Jeremiah, suffered somewhat from the re-
turning Scythians. God, who had stretched out His hand over
His guilty land as if to annihilate it, withdrew it, as it seems,
after (at most) a very mild chastisement. That Zephaniah and
Jeremiah did not foresee this, does not detract from their
prophetic character. God meant them to make the utmost use
of a very real danger to Judah in teaching and admonishing
their people. It was certain to both that the national sins must
be followed by an awful national judgment, and Jeremiah
especially went on, like Evangelist in the " Pilgrim's Progress,"
urging his countrymen to flee from the wrath to come. Like
the wise men to whom we owe the canonical proverbs, like
the Rabbis their successors, and above all like "the Master"
Himself, he did not disdain the homeliest illustrations. It is a
condensed parable, borrowed from his favourite Hosea (Hos. x.
12), with which he begins the prophecy of the northern invasion
in chap, iv. 1 ,
For thus saith Jehovah to the men of Judah and to Jerusalem,
PlougJi for yourselves fallow ground, and sow not among thorns.
It is needless to explain this illustration ; one might take it
for a scene from our Lord's Parable of the Sower. Doubtless
it is but a condensed note of a more elaborate and pointed dis-
course, like that with which Isaiah concludes one of his great
warning prophecies (Isa. xxviii. 23-29). Both regard agricul-
ture, in the spirit of primitive times, as derived from the mani-
fold wisdom of God, who doth instruct him (the husbandman)
aright, and doth teach him (Isa. xxviii. 26 R.V.). Sow not
among the thorns, says the prophet, implying that his hearers
1 This chapter ought to begin at verse 3 ; verses i and 2 belong to the
preceding prophecy.
MORNING-CLOUD GOODNESS. 39
were doing so at the time. He had at length joi
in announcing the approach of the instrument of God's wrath
The preaching based on the terrors of judgment seems to have
produced some result. In iii. 4 (see p. 27) Judah personified
is represented as from this time addressing Jehovah by the
most endearing of titles. We may be sure that the little band
of highminded and likeminded friends to which Jeremiah him-
self belonged had tried, each in his own circle, to call forth a
fitting spirit of contrition and amendment. Could the efforts
of these good men be absolutely and entirely resultless ? Con-
sider for a moment the great spiritual forces laid up at the
outset in the people of Israel, to which, through Jehovah's
lovingkindness, was due a long succession of inspired men
taken from the ranks of the people. Could these forces be
entirely spent ? No ; the good spiritual elements inherited
from far-off ancestors had doubtless been impaired by the
adverse influences of Canaan, Assyria, and Egypt endangered,
but not entirely destroyed. And so a certain amount of moral
reformation must have been produced, and, we infer from Jere-
miah, was actually produced through the efforts of God's
servants at this period. But it was too much like the reforma-
tion of which Hosea speaks in northern Israel, your goodness
is as a morning cloud, and as the dew that goeth early away
(Hos. vi. 4).
Upon shallow and superficial natures, already " choked "
with the "thorns" of noxious habits, the most diligent cul-
tivation was thrown away. So Jeremiah came to think; and
yet may not the scantiness of the result have been partly due
to the style of the prophet's teaching? He had not entirely
got beyond the imperfect moral conceptions of Isaiah, who says
in effect in his opening discourse (Isa. i. 15-17), "Wash you,
make you clean, and then God will hearken to your prayers,"
implying that the sinner himself can nip his evil inclinations in
the bud can, by his native strength, " cease to do evil " and
"learn to do well." Jeremiah in iv. 3, 4 speaks like Isaiah. In
other passages indeed he approaches the point of view of the
Fifty-first Psalm. In ii. 22 he says, Though thou wash thce
with lye, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked
(i.e., deeply ingrained) before me, saith the Lord Jehovah; and
in xiii. 23, Can the Ethiopian change his skin, and the leopard
his spots ? then may ye also do good, that are trained to do evil,
40 JEREMIAH.
But he dqps not get so far as Purge me with hyssop, and 1 shall
be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow (Psa. li. 7) ;
he even says, not as it would seem ironically, in iv. 14, O Jeru-
salem, wash thine Jieart from wickedness, that thou mayest be
saved (compare the striking language of iv. 4).' The reason of
this inconsistency is that he has no knowledge as yet of the in-
dwelling of the Spirit of God, which is surely the second half of
the Gospel, and which is almost revealed in one of the pro-
phecies attached to the original Book of Isaiah (Isa. Ixiii. u)
and in the Fifty-first Psalm (v. n), both written, as I at least
must believe, later than the time of Jeremiah.
The results, then, of this earnest but onesided preaching were
a bitter disappointment to the prophet. What indeed was the
good of a few isolated good actions, as long as the moral bent
remained unchanged ? Or, to speak parabolically with Jeremiah,
How could even a single sheaf of ripe wheat be harvested in a
field choked by thorns ? And so the prophet, in reproducing the
discourses of this period, gives but one verse to (I suppose) the
exhortations of many days, and at once passes on to give a most
graphic and deeply felt description of the advance of the swarm-
ing barbarians, reminding us of a similar picture of the expected
advance of the Assyrians in Isa. x. It is possible that at a
later stage the prophet of woe became the bearer of the glad
tidings of deliverance. To Jeremiah's deeply religious mind,
the retirement of the Scythians would appear Jehovah's merci-
ful recognition that there were at least " ten righteous " in the
city (Gen. xviii. 32) for whose sakes a brief space was granted
for a fuller repentance. Not having a complete collection of
Jeremiah's discourses, we are at liberty to guess this. But cer-
tain it is, that in finally editing the prophecies which make up
chaps, iv. and vi., Jeremiah introduced some new features, and
otherwise heightened the colouring of some descriptions, to make
them suit later and in reality more dreadful foes the Chaldrcans
(see p. 34, note 3). This is in harmony with the manner
* Circumcise yourselves to Jehovah, &c. Is this phrase (with which
comp. vi. 10) suggested by Deut. x. 16? If so, we must, it would seem, in-
clude it among the features (see below) added by the prophet to his earliest
discourse some years afterwards. That Jeremiah should adopt the less
advanced expression (as compared with the language of Deut. xxx. 6),
would be in harmony with the acknowledged result of criticism that Deut.
xxx. is one of the later additions to the original Deuteronomy.
MORNING-CLOUD GOODNESS. 41^
of the prophets, and indeed of the Jewish writers in general.
Jeremiah deals with his own earlier predictions as the authors
of the ancient versions, to whom the Bible, as Geiger says, was
"no dead book," deal with the Scriptures in general ; he works
them up anew, or rather " works over " them, to adapt them to
later circumstances. That difficulties might arise to readers in
remote centuries, did not of course occur to him ; Providence
has given to each fragment from the pen of prophets and
apostles an importance which the writers could not have antici-
pated. But let us not interpret these in many respects peculiar
works as if they were indited yesterday, and as if we had them
in their first draft. Let us frankly recognize that they may be
susceptible of two interpretations with equal claims on our at-
tention. They are in fact a fusion of kindred historical scenes,
to some extent analogous to the fusion of details from two
national catastrophes in Psa. Ixxix.
It will perhaps make it easier to understand this fusion of
prophecies if we remember that, however sharp the agony of
this crisis may have been, it cannot have lasted long. The
whole period of the Scythian successes must have been much
shorter than is stated by Herodotus, if he is right in dating it
from the defeat of Cyaxares. 1 At any rate there can have been
but a brief interval between Jeremiah's first gloomy forebodings
and the withdrawal of Jehovah's chastening hand. It is surely
not a misplaced comment that God is at once more loving and
more just than finite mortals can be. He " seeth not as man
seeth" (Job x. 4), and recognized elements of good which Jere-
miah, with his tear-bedimmed eyes, could scarcely notice. He
was ready to make allowances (tiriEiKfe, 2 as the Septuagint of
Psa. Ixxxvi. 5 has it) for shallow and superficial natures and
for inconsistent characters, for the plants which " forthwith
sprung up," but " had no root," or (to quote a feature more
parallel to Jeremiah's own words in iv. 3) to those which were
"choked" by "the thorns" (Matt. xiii. 5-7). In His loving-
kindness He spared Judah and Jerusalem for this time ; but in
His justice He made use of the Scythians to prepare the chosen
instrument for carrying out that bitter purpose of which He
1 Comp. Meyer, "Geschichte des Alterthums," i. 557; Maspero, " His-
toire ancienne des peuples de 1'Orient," ed. 4, p. 514.
* Finely adapted to the lin-aZ Xtyo/utiw sallakh (A.V. and R.V.
" ready to forgive ").
42 JEREMIAH.
had said, I have not repented, neillter will I turn back from it
(iv. 28)
Assyria and Chaldcea, those two great peoples of the basin of
the Euphrates and the Tigris, had long since filled a large place
in the minds of the Jews. The former looked upon herself as
the queen of nations, but her power had been seriously impaired
by her ceaseless wars ; the energetic warrior caste, to which its
conquests were due, not being replenished (as was the case in
Turkey formerly) from outside, declined more and more, and
even in Judah her fall had long since been foreseen by the
illuminated eye of the prophet Nahum. With no acquired moral
justification, and no principle of cohesiveness, the great Assyrian
empire could not but fall, not gradually like that of Rome, but
with a sudden and terrific crash. To her at least might be
applied the prophetic words first uttered at this crisis respecting
Jerusalem, Evil impends from the north and a great ruin
(iv. I).
But all this is still in the future. At present, to quote an
earlier prophet, behold, joy and gladness, slaying oxen and
killing sheep, eating flesh and drinking ivine (Isa. xxii. 13), in
the exuberant festivity, not (as in Isaiah's prophecy) of de-
spairing sensualists, but of a people "rejoicing before Jehovah"
for all the benefits that He had done unto them. Earnest no
doubt were the thanksgivings offered both in the temple at
Jerusalem and at the various local sanctuaries. Yes, at the
"high places" as well as at the house where Jehovah was
" enthroned upon the cherubim" ; for in all good faith the Jews
must have believed that their moral and religious practices had
just received a Divine sanction of the most positive kind. As
long as the Scythians were near, the Jews would seem to have
listened to Jeremiah, and prompted by alarm to have made
certain promises of amendment. Truly from this time, says
the Divine oracle, than criest unto me, My father, (and,) Thou
art the bridegroom of my youth (Jer. iii. 4). Then in terrified
accents the Jews inquire, Will he retain anger for ever? will
he keep it perpetually? Verily, the prophet adds from his
experience of what actually took place, when the danger was
removed, thou hast spoken (such things), but hast done those evil
tJiings effectually (Jer. iii. 4).
That Jeremiah, in spite of his proneness to take dark views,
was disappointed at the heathenish reaction which now set in
MORNING-CLOUD COODNESS. 43
may be inferred from the extreme bitterness, the s<zva inaigna-
tio,of the opening words of chap, v., Roam ye through the streets
of Jerusalem; look welt, take notice, and seek in the broad places
thereof, if ye can Jijid a man, if there be any that doeth justice,
that seeketh faithfulness; and I will pardon lier (Jer. v. i).
May we not safely regard this as one of those exaggerations to
which from his temperament this prophet was peculiarly liable?
for surely, if the prophets really warned the Jews of the ap-
proach of a judgment, it follows from the withdrawal of the
"outstretched hand" that there must have been a few righteous
men within the city. God knew better than His servant, and
in the course of His providence contradicted the extreme ex-
pressions of that passage, which may be compared to the
overstatements of Elijah in the wilds of Arabia, and those of
the Florentine Elijah Savonarola, in the earliest period of his
reforming activity. Still, we need not hesitate to accept Jere-
miah's authority for the less favourable aspect which the popu-
lar religion once more assumed. This is how the prophet
continues to unburden his mind in chap. v. The first passage
testifies to a loosening of the moral bands of society ; the
second, to the increased opposition offered to the nobler class of
prophets. Jehovah, do not tJiine eyes look for faithfulness ? if
thou smitest them, they feel nothing; if thou consumest them,
they will not receive correction; they make their face harder than
rock, they will not (urn (v. 3).
They have denied Jehovah, and said, " Not he '/ upon us shall
no calamity come, sword and famine we shall not see "; and
" Those prophets shall become wind; speaker, there is none in
them ; it shall be done thus unto themselves'''' (v. 12).
In fact, it is from this point that we may date the beginning
of Jeremiah's long martyrdom. Priests and prophets were
now to a great extent united against him and his friends, and my
-people, he sadly says, assuming the person of Jehovah, love to
have it so (v. 31). The king, however, is not mentioned in
this dark chapter, some of the details in which we hesitate to
take too literally, although to resolve them into mere allegories
1 The speakers mean to deny, not the metaphysical existence of Jehovah,
but rather His moral government of the world, like the ungodly described
in Psa. xiv. and similar passages. A'of he means " Not he is the true lord
of the world," " Not he is the avenger of the innocent " (cf. the commenta-
tors on Psa. x. ii, 13, xii. 5, xiv. i).
44 JEREMIAH.
would destroy half their force. 1 All classes except the highest
being described and condemned, one naturally asks, What was
Josiah doing? What were his feelings, and what his course
of action, on this large accession of strength to the heathenish
party ?
Surely we cannot doubt that Josiah would gladly have inter-
posed, had he been able, and that his feelings were those of
alarm and shame. It is true that he had hitherto deliberately
tolerated the old religious customs (" high places " and all that
they involved), which, in so far as they merely indicated
deficient religious insight, may not have seemed to him as
unmitigatedly evil as they did to the later historian. Let us
remember that to the student of religions the customs which
would be odiously repulsive if reintroduced become full of
meaning, and therefore relatively excusable in the light of
antiquity. Josiah was not a critical student, but he may well have
understood the traditions of his people better than the vehement
Jeremiah, and have known or believed that certain of them
were still to some extent the manifestations of a naive and
sincere piety. On the other hand, there were other customs
which must have appeared to him as pernicious morally as they
did to Jeremiah, especially those which, like the custom of
child-sacrifice, had but recently been introduced into the popular
religion. This expression may perhaps be criticised. Readers
of Dr. Kuenen's " Religion of Israel" must well remember the
powerful passage in which he sums up the evidence for the
survival of human sacrifices among the Israelites (vol. i., p. 237).
But the utmost that this great critic can prove is the possibility
that sporadic cases of human sacrifice occurred in early times.
In the same connexion he quotes Mic. vi. 7,
Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression,
Tlie fruit of my body for my personal sin f
The author of Mic. vi., vii., however, is, regarded from a
religious point of view, one of the precursors of Deuteronomy
(comp. Mic. vi. 8 with Deut. x. 12), and, from a historical one,
1 It is certain that the customs which were bound up with the reactionary
Baal-worship were profoundly immoral (see my notes on Hos. iv. 11-14 in
the "Cambridge Bible"). Butz/. 7, according to the best reading, runs . . .
though I made them to swear (allegiance to me), yet they committed adultery,
(comp. Psa. Ixxiii. 27), which favours at least a partial reference to a relapse
into heathenish religion.
MORNING-CLOUD GOODNESS. 45
contemporary with an influx of idolatry and a bitter persecution
such as only occurred in the reign of Manasseh (see my " Micah,"
p. 14). Child-sacrifice was, as I have said, a recent importation,
and surely it is even more shocking to natural feelings of
humanity than the hewing of Agag in pieces before Jehovah
which was permitted in the rude age of Samuel. Is there any
evidence that child-sacrifice was ever a distinctively Israelitish
practice? Phoenician, Arabian, and Babylonian, it undoubtedly
was ; ' but we must not too hastily assume that it was known
to all the Semitic tribes before their separation. The influence
of Babylonia and Assyria upon the Semitic East was vast long
after that prehistoric event. As the Babylonians borrowed this
cruel rite from the " Accadians," so did the Phoenicians and (if
I am not mistaken) the Arabians from the Babylonians. Re-
member too that I am now speaking of the comparatively pure
religion brought by the tribes of Israel from the desert of the
wanderings ; what their more distant ancestors may conceivably
have practised is not germane to my subject. It is with good
reason that a late chronicler says of Ahaz that he made his son
(or, as the Septuagint in Lucian's recension gives, his sons, TOVQ
vioi-Q ai'Tuv, comp. 2 Chron. xxviii. 3) pass tkrottgh the fire,
according to the abominations of the nations whom Jehovah had
expelled before the children of Israel 2 (2 Kings xvi. 3). That
1 Saycc, " Hibbert Lectures" (1887), p. 78 ; Wellhausen, "Skizzen und
Vorarbeiten," Heft iii. (1887), pp. 112, 113; Baudissin, art. " Moloch," in
Herzog's " Encyclopadie/' ed. 2, x. 174, 175. Notice the doubtless
synonymous Phoenician names, Respuyathon and Malikyathon, in which
Resper is the name of the heavenly Fire-god and Malik= Moloch, i.e.,
"king of heaven." It may be observed in passing that it is doubtful
whether Malik, Melech, Molech, or Moloch (we may adopt which form we
please) can strictly be called a proper name of the great heaven-god. For
the horror at child-sacrifices felt in a humane age, see the end of Plutarch's
treatise on Superstition.
2 Baudissin, in the article already referred to, thinks that the custom of
appeasing the god Molech (Sept., Moloch) by sacrifices of children pro-
bably began before Ahaz, though from some unknown cause the cult of
Moloch became specially prevalent in and after the time of that king.
This view he supports by the virtual identification of Molech or Moloch with
Baal in Jer. xix. 5, xxxii. 35. He rightly denies that the phrase "to cause
to pass through the fire " can be used of mere fiery lustrations. Doubtless,
however, the children were slain before the fire-rite was performed upon
them (see Ezek. xvi, 20, 21, xxiii. 39, and comp. Isa, Ivii, 5, Psa. cvi.
37- 38)-
46 JEREMIAH.
very narrative and that very law to which reference has been
made conclusively show that when they were written, or rather
when the traditional story in the one and the custom which lies
at the root of the other became current (this takes us back to
a still earlier period), these horrible child-sacrifices were not
approved by the general consciousness of Israel ; the ram in
Gen. xxii. is a substittite for Isaac, and the firstborn of man in
a well-known law (Ex. xiii. 13) was to be redeemed. In contra-
distinction to Ahaz, it is recorded of Josiah that he walked in
all the way of David his father (2 Kings xxii. 2), and the primi-
tive simplicity of David's religion (see i and 2 Samuel) must not
blind us to its comparative refinement. 1 I think, then, that I
have not claimed too much for Josiah. If his friend Jeremiah
has a " fear and love of God's holy name " which contrasts so
"amazingly" with the low type of religion prevalent in Israel,
and by this contrast, as Colenso has said, 2 convince us of his
inspiration, can we doubt that Josiah, true son of David as he
was, and even in youth a " seeker after the God of David "
(2 Chron. xxxiv. 3), felt as truly, though not quite as warmly, as
Jeremiah, and that he cast many a look of horror on what the
prophet calls the way of Israel in the valley (Jer. viii. 23) ? If
even for us the picturesque scenery of the glen of Hinnom
("moaning " is a suggestive even if not an undoubtedly correct
rendering) is spoiled by the awful memories of Moloch's
religion, how much keener must have been the feelings of one
who lived in the midst of the still uncertain struggle against its
abominations ! I admit the difficulty which arises. If these
were really Josiah's sentiments, why did he lose a moment in
extinguishing the horrid rites of " the Topheth " ? 3 So we may
naturally ask, but, as I suggested above, it is doubtful whether
he had the power to do so. If the present ruler of Egypt could
1 Can we fairly say, with Kuenen, that " David, at the instigation of the
Gibeonites, seeks to avert Yahveh's anger by the death of seven of Saul's
progeny " (" Religion of Israel," i. 237) ? Doubtless he is not shocked by
the impalement of Saul's descendants as we should have been ; but,
believing that the guilt of bloodshed lay upon his people, could he have
acted otherwise than he did ? It was not a sacrifice but an act of vengeance
which the Gibeonites performed.
2 Colenso, "On the Pentateuch," part v., p. 300.
3 See Jer. xix. 13, the place of the Topheth (i.e., according to a common
but doubtful etymology, " the abomination," lit., " the object of spitting,"
comp. Job xvii. 6).
MORNING-CLOUD GOODNESS. 47
with difficulty be persuaded that it was safe to venture on a
somewhat similar step, 1 how can a king of Judah, who was by
no means an absolute sovereign, be blamed for his backward-
ness ?
So much, at least, is certain, that Josiah and his friends must
have had a sad life. Disappointed once already, they had
nothing to expect from the future but still more bitter dis-
appointments, if they attempted the smallest reform in their
own strength. Meantime the good old Israclitish character
was in danger of a sad transformation. Must not the frenzy of
nature-worship in course of time intoxicate the unhappy
devotees, and assimilate them to the impure and cruel character
of their Phoenician neighbours ? Yes, it must do so ; Judah
has sinned worse than Israel (Jer. iii.), and must be punished,
both inwardly and outwardly inwardly, by being given over to
moral degeneracy, and outwardly by being cast off from the
land which she has defiled. But in a strange and unlocked for
way one more chance is to be offered her ; for the sake of
"ten righteous men" the city is to be spared for a while, if so
be the covenant between Jehovah and Israel can on man's side
be renewed.
1 The abolition of the d6seh, or trampling upon a human causeway,
which Tewfik always abhorred as "an inhuman rite" (see Butler, "Court
Life in Egypt"). Comp. Miss Edwards, "A Thousand Miles up the
Nile," p. 707, and (for the same usage at Beirut) Thomson, "The Land
and the Book," p. 156.
CHAPTER V,
"HE THAT SEEKETII, FINDETH."
The finding of the book of Divine instruction The national covenant
Jeremiah, a preacher of Deuteronomy.
LET us now transport ourselves in imagination to the year 622
(or 621) B.C. the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah, and
try to realize the religious condition of the people of Judah.
Beyond question, they were " servants of Jehovah," but their
Jehovah (I speak of the mass of the people) was simply the
supreme deity in a Pantheon, and had insensibly adopted the
characteristics of the Canaanitish Baal. All through these
eighteen years no forward movement had been made, in spite
of the genial atmosphere of peace which, since the retreat of
the Scythians, seemed to invite a closer attention to religious
culture. How much there was that needed reform ! The most
honoured sanctuary of Jehovah was still polluted by idolatrous
polytheistic emblems. Altars still smoked both to Him and to
other divinities " under every green tree and upon every high
hill." Children were still sacrificed to the cruel Fire-god in the
torrent-valleys like that of Hinnom " under the clefts of the
rocks." Worship was still offered to the host of heaven upon
the housetops, while at every street-corner in the larger towns
there were shrines of Jehovah or Baal or the " queen of heaven."'
1 See Jer. ii. 20, 28, iii. 6, 13, vii. 17, 18, xi. 13, xix. 13, and comp.
2 Kings xxiii. 4-15. For the child-sacrifices, see Jer. ii. 23, vii. 31, xix
5, xxxii. 35, and comp. Isa. Ivii. 5. Of the prophecy to which the latter
passage belongs, Ewald very justifiably asserts that it (like Mic. vi., vii.)
transports us into the times of Manasseh, or those immediately following his
death, and adds that the piece bears the closest resemblance to the earlier
pieces of Jeremiah (" Prophets of the Old Testament,'' iv. 321).
"HE THAT SEEKETH, FINDETH." 49
Josiah and those who sympathized with him had still to endure
these painful sights and sounds, for no plan of reform had,
according to our chronological notices, as yet commended itself
to the practical mind of the king. Such was the state of affairs,
when a lightning-flash all at once illuminated the scene. A
messenger had been sent by Josiah to the temple on business
connected with the repairs of the building. Nearly two and a
half centuries ago the sacred building had been efficiently
restored by Joash, the account of whose work is placed in
designed parallelism (compare the two descriptions') to that of
Josiah. We are not told what the circumstances were which
led to the new restoration ; but we must conjecture that they
bore a close relation to the gradually progressing though not
publicly recognized reform-movement. The messenger himself
was Shaphan, the scribe or chancellor, also known as the father
of Jeremiah's patron Gemariah (Jer. xxxiv. 10, 19, 25), and
grandfather of the equally friendly Micaiah (Jer. xxxvi. 11-13).
We shall have to refer to him again ; he was evidently one of
the adherents of a progressive or spiritual religion. At present
we must accompany him to his royal master, and watch the
effect of the tidings which he bears from the temple, where a
discovery has just been made by Hilkiah the priest. It is a
book which has been found, containing directions on religious
and moral points which cut at the root of many popular customs
and practices. The name which Hilkiah gives to it is "the
book of torali " (i.e., of Divine direction or instruction) ; the
narrator himself calls it "the covenant book" (2 Kings xxiii. 2).
The Chronicler, however, gives it a fuller title " the book of
Jehovah's torah given by Moses" (2 Chron. xxxiv. 14), which
probably expresses the meaning of the earlier narrator. For
certainly it was as a Mosaic production that " the book of
torah " effected such a rapid success, though not (even accord-
ing to the compiler of Kings) the whole of what is now called
the Pentateuch. There can be no longer any doubt that the
book found in the temple was substantially the same as our
Book of Deuteronomy. Does the narrative in Kings describe
the book as " the book of torah " and its stipulations collec-
tively as " the covenant " (2 Kings xxii. 8, xxiii. 3) ? These
are also phrases of the expanded Book of Deuteronomy (Deut.
xxix. r, 21, xxx. 10, xxxi. 26, &c.). Do the king and the
1 Comp. a Kings xii. 4-16, xxii. 3-7.
5
50 JEREMIAH.
people pledge themselves to walk after Jehovah, and to keep
his commandments and Ids precepts and Jiis statutes with all
their heart and with all their soul, performing the words of this
covenant that are written in this book (2 Kings xxiii. 3) ? The
same phrases occur over and over again in Deuteronomy
(see Deut. viii. 6, n, vi. 5, x. 12, 13, iv. 13, xxix. 9). Does
Josiah devote himself to the suppression of the local sanc-
tuaries and the centralization of worship ? This is also one
of the principal aims of the Book of Deuteronomy.
Whenever, therefore, the Old Testament is rearranged for
English Bible-students, we may expect that the chapter on the
Reformation of Josiah will contain something like the following
section :
And Hilkiah the high priest said to Shaphan the chancellor,
I have found the lawbook in tJie house of Jehovah. And Hil-
kiah gave the book to Shaphan, and he read it, and came to the
king, and told him, Plilkiah the priest hath given me a book.
And Shaphan read it before the king. And among the com-
mandments of the lawbook that Shaphan read before the king
were found these words : Hear, O Israel : Jehovah is our God,
Jehovah is one j and thou shalt love Jehovah thy God with all
thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. Ye
shall destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye dis-
possess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon
the hills, and under every green tree; and ye shall tear down
their altars, and dash in pieces their standing stones, and burn
their Asherahs ( or emblems of AshtraJi) with fire ; and the
graven images of their gods ye shall break down, and shall de-
stroy their name out of that place. Not thus shall ye worship
Jehovah your God. But unto the place which Jehovah your
God chooseth out of your tribes to put his name there to inhabit
it, shall ye seek, and thither shalt thou come; and ye shall bring
thither your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices. Thou shalt not
plant an emblem of A sht'rah, of any kind of tree, beside the altar
of Jehovah thy God which thou shalt make thee. Neither shalt
thou set thee up a pillar which Jehovah thy God hateth.
When thou art come into the land which Jehovah thy God
giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of
the nations which were before thee. There shalt not be found in
thee any that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through
the fire, any thai useth divination, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer,
"HE THAT SEEKETH, FINDETH." $t
or a charmer. For these nations which thou dispossessest do
hearken unto sorcerers ; but for thee Jehovah hath not so
ordained. Jehovah thy God shall (continually) raise up for tlicc
a prophet from tJie midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me ;
unto him shall ye hearken. 1
I pause here for a moment in the interests of my reader.
The future (" shall Jehovah raise ") has here a frequentative
sense, as in Isa. x. 5, Against an impious nation am I wont to
send him (not, " will I send him," as A.V. and R.V.). It means
" shall from time to time raise," and the verse contains a promise
that a prophet in the highest sense (as opposed to the sooth-
sayers just before mentioned) shall never be wanting, and a
direction to pay unconditional obedience to such a prophet. It
is therefore a grand glorification of the inspired Hebrew (or,
shall I say? Mosaic) prophethood which we have before us ; not
a Messianic prediction, except so far as it indicates that a vic-
torious king was not adequate to God's gracious purposes for
Israel and the world, that not only a " Messiah" was requisite
but a prophetic mediator to interpret the Divine counsel to man.
(It is no objection to this view that xxxiv. 10-12 denies that a
prophet ever arose " like unto Moses " ; for this passage is not
the work of the author of Deuteronomy (see chapter vii.).
And if thou wilt hearken unto the voice of Jehovah thy God,
he will set thce on high above all the nations of the earth ; but
if thou wilt not hearken, then will all these curses come upon
thee and overtake thce, until Jehovah have consumed thee from
off tlie land, whither thou goest in to possess it. And when the
king heard the words of the laivbook, he rent his clothes." 2
Such is the only setting in which a Biblical scholar, who, if I
may model my phrase en that of Dante, 3
. . . 'twixt reverent and free,
I know not which is more . . .
1 This rearrangement has been judiciously made already for American
readers. The title of the book is, "Scriptures Hebrew and Christian,
Arranged and Edited for Young Readers as an Introduction to the Study
of the Bible." By E. T. Bartlett, A.M., Dean of the Protestant Episcopal
Divinity School in Philadephia, and Ja. P. Peters, Ph.D., Professor of the
Old Test. Languages and Literature in the same school. Vol. i. London,
James Clarke & Co., 1886.
2 2 Kings xxii. 8-10 ; Deut. vi. 4, 5, xii. 2-6, xvi. 21, 22, xviii. 9-15,
xxviii. 15-21. 3 " Purgatorio," xxiv. 13, 14 Longfellow).
52 JEREMIAH.
is permitted to place the kernel at least of Deuteronomy (if this
somewhat misleading name is still to be used 1 ), but not more
than this, for the fifth of the so-called " Books of Moses " has
most certainly grown like the other four. It is too soon to
inquire what this " kernel " was ; too soon to set forth the pro-
bable origin of this earliest part of the book. To our regret,
though not to our surprise, the narrator is silent on much which
we modern students would like to know. Conversations on
this mysterious lawbook must have taken place between the
king and his friend the high priest, but they have found no
record in history. The narrator only mentions the profound
impression which the book at once made upon the king. Was
the latter afraid of the curses pronounced upon a persistently
disobedient people? So the narrator appears to think. I
would rather suppose that a spirit of great hopefulness came
upon him, now that the wished-for "sign" from heaven had
come, and that his only remaining desire was to ascertain, not
whether the pen of Moses wrote, but whether the successors of
Moses in the prophetic office guaranteed it to be according to
the will of God. He sent therefore to one of those who were
specially called to "interpret" that will (Isa. xliii. 27, R.V.).
The circumstances of the visit are noteworthy. When a pro-
phecy of woe has to be delivered to Hezekiah, it is Isaiah who
visits the king (Isa. xxxix. 3) ; prophetism and royalty are still
almost equal powers in the state. But since Isaiah's death the
relation of these two powers has changed. In the present
instance, it is a prophetic personage to whom the king sends
his ambassadors. It is an interesting but not very important
fact 2 that this personage is a woman. Possibly she was
selected as being at once of advanced age and high in repute
as well with the king as with the people (this qualification
would exclude Jeremiah). There were doubtless, as in Ezekiel's
time (Ezek. xiii. 17-23), many prophetesses, but not many
1 The name means "repetition of the law" ; it is founded on a philo-
logical mistake, and assumes a critical view which very many believe to be
equally erroneous. The philological mistake referred to is the rendering of
Deut. xvii. 18, where the Septuagint has "this deuteronomy " (instead of
" a copy of this law "). The doubtful critical view is that " Deuteronomy "
is later than the rest of the legislation in the Pentateuch.
2 The later Jews judged otherwise, however, if we may argue from the
so- called Tomb of Hulclah on Mount Olivet.
"HE THAT SEEKETH, F1NDETH." 53
Huldahs ; the rarity of them would with some add to her
personal reputation. The prophecy ascribed to Huldah 1 by the
later compiler has, for different reasons, been a stumbling-
block to students. The moderns have remarked that Josiah
went through life in perfect unconsciousness of any dark fate
brooding over his people, and that the phraseology is that of
later prophecy ; the ancients were more puzzled by the state-
ment that Josiah should die in peace (some copies of the
Septuagint gave in Jerusalem in Salem). The king's next
step suggests that he really wished the reforms called for by the
lawbook to be the result of a national movement (comp. Isa.
xxvii. 9, xxx. 22). The wish was too languid, to judge from the
king's subsequent methods, but may he not really have wished
to see Isaiah's prophecy fulfilled? At any rate, he summoned an
assembly in which the whole nation was duly and fully repre-
sented, and which accepted the newly " found " lawbook, as
soon as it was read to them, in a form probably shorter than
that in which we have received it. Finally all present joined
the king in a solemn "covenant," binding themselves to carry
out faithfully " the words of this book." The narrative runs
thus :
And the king sent, and there ^vere gathered unto him all the
elders of Judah and of Jerusalem. And the king went up to the
house of Jehovah, and all tJie men of Judali and all tJie inJiabi-
tants of Jerusalem with him, and tli e priests, and the prophets, 3
and all the people, both small and great ; and he read in their
ears all the words of tJie book of covenant 3 which was found
in the house of Jehovah. And tlie king stood on the platform?
And he made tlie covenant before Jehovah, to walk after Jeho-
vah [i.e., to serve no other god], and to keep his commandments
and his testimonies and his statutes, with all his heart and all
1 There are coins with the name of Huldah, a Nabatrean queen, tlie con-
sort of King Aretas Philodemos, a contemporary of Pompeius (" Zeitschr.
der d. morgenland. Gesellschaft," xiv. 370, &c. )
2 Jeremiah, therefore, was present, as we may presume.
3 That " the book of covenant " is different from that mentioned in Exod.
xxiv. 7, needs no showing. Observe that Deuteronomy is entirely silent
respecting that covenant-book and its acceptance.
* So K.V. margin rightly. Some conspicuous place, specially reserved
for the king, seems to be meant (comp. 2 Kings xi. 14). The Hebrew
\i in in ml means anything which stands firmly usually (but not neces-
sarily) a pillar. Josephus has, <m<c tjri rai< /3>//<ro<;,
54 JEREMIAH.
liis so:il, to perform the icords of t]iis covenant that are written
in Hi is book. And all the people entered into the covenant.
And the king commanded all the people, saying, Keep the pass-
over unto Jehovah your God, as it is written in this book oj
covenant 1 (2 Kings xxiii. 1-3,21).
But what is meant, the reader will ask, by this word "cove-
nant" (beritJi) ? It would take too long to discuss it philologi-
cally and exegetically. It means, however, when used in con-
nexion with God, a law to the observance of which certain
promises are attached. Looking at the history of Israel from
the vantage-ground of Christianity, we may say that it is a
history of " covenants." From time to time God has revealed
His will to chosen persons, telling them how He would be
worshipped, how men should behave themselves to be like their
God, and how He would reward them for their faithful obedi-
ence. Such a revelation is, in Hebrew phrase, a "covenant."
There was a "covenant" with Abraham, with Moses, and, we
might analogically say, with each of those prophets who had
something really new to declare, such as Hoseaand Isaiah and
Jeremiah. And now the religious stagnation or retrogression
which has prevailed since the time of Micah is all at once
interrupted by the ratification of a fresh covenant. Not that
either " new " or " fresh " is to be taken literally ; there is but
one "covenant" between Jehovah and Israel that of Sinai,
and all other covenants are but developments of its meaning.
In other words, that "prophet like unto Moses" and his faith-
ful priestly coadjutor of whom I have spoken were favoured
with a fuller intuition of that which was involved in the old
Mosaic covenant. They were not great men ; they could not
take the intellectual initiative like Hosea and Jeremiah ; but the
peculiar combination of prophecy and law whirh they pro-
duced was something which had not yet been seen, and from
which even the Christian student need not disdain to learn. It
was a "covenant" that is, God vouchsafed to make Himself
authoritatively known to the Jews in the way best suited to
their actual stage of development. And (if I may glide from
an academic into a popular religious phraseology) just as we
through our parents at the font thankfully accepted God's cove-
nant iu Christ, and responded to it by a promise before God
1 Klostermann has pointed out that 2 Kings xxiii. 21 must originally
have stood after v. 3.
"HE THAT SEEKETH, FINDETH." 55
and the Church to make His commandments, promises, and
threatenings the rule of our lives, so did the men of Judah
through their representatives at this memorable assembly.
This in itself is a sufficiently unexpected result. Could we
have believed that those who till now had not only exercised
boundless freedom in the choice of a sanctuary, but associated
Jehovah with a number of other " divinities," including even
the cruel Moloch, 1 would at the call of Josiah and on the reading
of a hitherto unknown book permit their moral and religious
life to be revolutionized ? It is a riddle which at first sight
baffles our comprehension. For an Israelitish king was not an
absolute sovereign, and could not (like German princes in the
i6th century) convert his people by force, nor had Josiah the
assistance of a prophet with that wonderworking power and
unique popular authority which according to tradition belonged
to Elijah.
Let me now quote a portion ofthe nth chapter of Jeremiah's
book. It will perhaps assist us in solving this psychological
problem, and suggest the reflexion that, if Josiah had no
Elijah to help him, he had a friend and fellow-worker who was
better adapted to the altered times.
The word which came to Jeremiah from Jehovah, as
follows :
. . . And thou shalt speak" unto the men of Judah and unto
the inhabitants of Jerusalem in these terms, Thus said JeJiovah,
the God of Israel, Cursed be the man that heareth not the
words of tliis covenant, which I commanded yotir fathers when
1 broitght them out of the land of Egypt the iron furnace,
saying, Hearken to my voice, and carry them out {i.e., these
words] in the fullest measure, so shall ye become to me a people
and I shall become to you a God, that 1 may maintain the oath
which I swore unto your fathers that I would give a land
1 I retain the received way of denominating the heavenly Fire-god.
But, as I have already pointed out, it is at least very doubtful
whether Malik = Moloch ("king") ought to be regarded as a proper name.
2 I follow the Septuagint in reading the and person singular. The
received Hebrew text has the 2nd pers. plur., and prefixes, Hear ye the
ivords of this covenant. This is evidently wrong. The original reading
may have been, Publish than the -words, &c. ; or else the whole of the
opening clause may have become illegible in the standard manuscript upon
which our text ultimately depends, and the words which now supply its
place may have been inserted by guess from verse 6.
56 JEREMIAH.
f owing with milk and honey, as it is this day. And 1
answered and said, A men, Jehovah.
TJius spake Jehovah unto me, Recite all these words in the
cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem, saying, If ear ye
the words of this covenant, and carry them out. For solemnly
have I warned your fathers, when I brought them up out of the
land of Egypt (and) unto this day, from earliest dawn, Obey my
voice. But they have not obeyed, nor bent their ear, but have
walked every one in the stubbornness of his evil heart, so I
brought upon them all the words of this covenant which I com-
manded them to carry out, but they carried not out (Jer. xi.
1-8).
I do not know how to understand this prophecy (the impor-
tance of which is shown by the double form in which it has
been handed down, 1 and which is clearly isolated from the
context), except by supposing that Jeremiah undertook an
itinerating mission to the people of Judah, beginning with the
capital, in order to set forth the main objects of Deuteronomy,
and to persuade men to live in accordance with its precepts. 2
The ideas and phraseology of the section are in some respects
so akin to those of the kernel of Deuteronomy, 3 and the refer-
ence to the curses threatened for disobedience reminds us so
strongly of Josiah's reference (2 Kings xxii. 13) to the wrath
that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not
hearkened unto the words of this book,'' that the supposition
1 Verses 2-5 give one form of it, and verses 6-8 another. R.V. has
rightly altered A. Vs., " Then the LORD said" (v. 6) into " And the LORD
said."
2 It is now seventeen years' since I consulted Dahler's French work on
Jeremiah (2 vols., 1825, 1830), but I well remember the forcible way in
which the above hypothesis is presented.
3 By the word "kernel" I mean the earliest and most original part of
the Book of Deuteronomy. Comp. Jer. xi. 3 with Deut. xxviii. 15-19 ;
ver. 4 with Deut. iv. 20 (" iron furnace"), xxvi. 17, 18, xxvii. 9, xxix. 12
(Israel a people to Jehovah, and Jehovah a God to Israel) ; ver. 5 with
Deut. vi. 3 (" a land flowing," &c.) ; ver. 8 with Deut. xxviii. 15 (" words,"
in "all the words,"=" things spoken of," i.e., in this context, curses such
as those in Deut. xxviii. 16-68 ; see 2 Chron. xxxiv. 24, "all the curses ").
Comp. also Jer. vii. 23-26.
* I am well aware of the critical uncertainty of this part of the narrative
in Kings. But it does not seem to me sufficient to compel me to pass
over this very obvious comparison. Kuenen and Dillmann, at any rate,
accept Deut. xxviii., which contains the blessings and curses, as the work
"HE THAT SEEKETH, FINDETH." 57
cannot be evaded or dispensed with. It is just possible that
there is a faint recollection of this mission of Jeremiah in the
not very accurate account of the reign of Jehoshaphat pre-
served in that recast of historical traditions and pious fancies
made, long after the return from the Captivity, in what we call
the Books of Chronicles. There we read what is entirely op-
posed to the earlier account in Kings that Jehoshaphat took
away the " high places," and sent nine Levites and two priests
throughout all the cities of Judah to teach " the book of
Jehovah's torah " (2 Chron. xvii. 6-9). It is possible that the
compiler of Chronicles (a man of fervent piety from whom we
have much to learn, but most inaccurate as a historian) ante-
dated the mission of the preachers of the law, just as he
antedated the full development of the musical service in the
temple. At any rate, if Jeremiah's words mean anything at
all, they cannot mean less than this that he went about in
Jerusalem and the provincial cities (possibly as far as Shiloh,
vii. 12) explaining a book which closely resembled our
Deuteronomy, and persuading the Jews to live according to it.
Put this fact side by side with that of the great national
assembly which seems to have passed off so smoothly, although
the object to be obtained was so contrary to the wishes of the
majority of the Jews. Does not the one fact illustrate the
other? Jeremiah, I know, is reluctant to admit that his preach-
ing met with the least success ; but that is because he put his
notes and impressions into shape at so late a period in his
ministry. That which he knew had been all along his great
object, he did fail for the most part to obtain. But this is quite
consistent with his having had those temporary successes which
still relieve the gloom of ministerial disappointment. One such
he probably had, as we have seen, on the first news of the
approach of the Scythians ; may he not have had another when,
in the enthiibiubin of youth and the strength of a Divine
call, he carried with him as the textbook of his missionary
addresses the first complete account of Israel's holy religion ?
The reader will recall that, according to the view which I
endeavoured to make plausible, Jeremiah was a reformer in
of tlic Dcnteronomist, and if it be such, I have a right, on the authority
of 2 Kings xxii. 13 (comp. v. ti) to assume that Josiah read it and was
much affected by it.
5-S JEREMIAH.
spirit before he was called to be a prophet, and belonged to a
band of religious friends who clustered around the pious boy-
king Josiah. He will remember how long the friends waited in
suspense for some sign from heaven or some practical scheme
of reform. The sign from heaven had come, and both Zepha-
niah and Jeremiah had sought in vain to get the people to see its
meaning. The Jews did indeed see their danger, and, asakind
of life-insurance, made some hasty promises of amendment, but
no radical change followed (Jer. iii. 4, 5). And now, full of
renewed zeal, Jeremiah goes forth with a practical scheme of
reform, of which he may or may not know the authors, but
which he has recognized as an inspired interpretation of the
fundamental ideas of the covenant of Sinai. He has felt its full
power himself, and has from the heart said ' Amen ' to its varied
contents. But the principle to which, as it would seem, he
makes his first appeal in addressing his countrymen is that of
fear. He doubtless knew the coarseness of their moral fibre,
and hoped against hope that those who began with fear would
end with love, and that the promises would seem all the sweeter
when the threatenings had been realized in their awful serious-
ness. It is not Christ's way ; but then Christ addressed a
prepared people, and without concealing the dark side of
heavenly truth, He trusted far more to the attractive power of
the promises than to the deterrent efficacy of the threatenings
of the Gospel. Jeremiah tried the opposite plan and failed. In
the world of grace as well as in that of nature, it sometimes
seems as if God made experiments, before the best and final
plan were adopted. Not that God is finite, but that in this as in
other respects His works are adapted to the faculties of those
who are to study them. Nature without evolution, and revelation
without historical progress, would both of them lose half their
charms.
Jeremiah is not as yet to any great extent a type of Christ ;
he will become more so later on, when his personal training is
more complete, and he has received the crowning revelation of
his life. At present he is but continuing the work of Elijah on
Mount Carmel ; or rather, the second Elijah is the iconoclast
Josiah, and Jeremiah in his missionary circuit prepares the way
for that series of violent measures which is described in 2 Kings
xxiii. I cannot see that the part played by Josiah was as noble
as that of Jeremiah ; in the roll of honour the royal iconoclast
"HE THAT SEEKETII, FINDETH." 59
must stand below the preacher. It was a confession of weak-
ness, however, that both Hilkiah and Jeremiah allowed Josiah
(who would surely have respected their opposition) to commit
these arbitrary and in some cases cruel acts. At any rate, if
the latter trusted the results of his mission, why did he not bid
Josiah wait for a spontaneous iconoclastic movement of his
(Jeremiah's) converts (comp. Isa. xxx. 22) ? Or why did he not
throw himself at the king's feet, and beg and implore what he
might not venture, like Elijah, to command ? Had even he
learned no lesson from the transitoriness 1 of Hezekiah's violent
reforms? Yes; but not all that he might have learned. He
knew that nothing but a fresh revelation could induce the people
either to initiate or to accept at the king's hand the much needed
reforms, but he did not yet see that without a true spiritual
motive, without conversion of heart, the moral standard and the
ideal of life must remain low, and the new law of worship
simply issue in a fresh idolatry. This was the reason why both
he and Hilkiah stood by while Josiah executed judgment on the
outward forms of superstition. King, prophet, and priest were
alike victims of the delusion that, when the storm of revolution
had raged itself out, the Divine law would become the national
rule of life, and so a claim would be established to the blessings
promised by Jehovah to the righteous nation.
I am not blaming, however much I may pity, these great
men ; we can but dimly imagine the debasing influence of the
worships which Jeremiah preached against and Josiah violently
put down ; and if the prophet's hearers were not to be trusted
to rise of their own accord against these abominations, this does
but increase our surprise at the ultimate results of the divine
education of this very people. Nowhere is the fact of a Divine
Providence so powerfully attested to the religious mind as in the
later history of the people of Israel.
1 It has been suggested that the account of Hezekiah's reforming measures
in 2 Kings, xviii. 4 contains anachronisms, the writer not being willing to
suppose that so pious a king would have loft the " high places " untouched.
Certainly the Chronicler commits just such an anachronism in his account
of Jehoshaph.it (2 Chron. xvii. 6). Hut is it likely that any of the writers
concerned in the narrative now before us were quite so devoid of historical
sense? This demands a further examination.
CHAPTER VI.
THE ANCIENT LAW TRANSFORMED.
The publication of the first Scripture, its significance The leading ideas of
Deuteronomy The effects of the recognition of the Lavvbook.
IT is not my design in the present chapter to discuss the
details of the historical passage which describes the reforma-
tion of Josiah, Beyond question, it was a rough and vigorous
reformation, which could never have been effected but for the
" Mosaic " lawbook, and very different from the compromising
measures of the newly established Church in the country districts
of the Roman empire. 1 Both in the capital and in the provinces,
as far even as Bethel and the cities of Samaria (where a new
heathenism had joined itself to the old heretical worship, 2 Kings
xvii. 29-31), a work of purification by destruction was carried
out which is quite unique in the earlier chapters of the ancient
history of religion. Where in fact can we find a parallel to the
zeal of Josiah in the Semitic East till we come to Mohammed ? a
and if the non-appearance of dolmens and the like in Western
Palestine be due (as Conder plausibly holds 3 ) to the reformations
1 See Albert Marignan, " Le Triomphe de lEglise au quatrieme siecle"
(Paris, 1887).
3 The heretical Egyptian king Khuenaten (Amenhotep iv.) did but erase
the name of the old Theban deity whose worship he superseded by that of
the solar disk. And in spite of Mohammed's zeal against idols, he left not
only the ''black stone " at Mecca, but numerous dolmens all over Arabia
the atifdb or sacrificial stones (lit. "standing stones " = Heb. ma^cboth,
" pillars," Deut. xii. 3. &c.), against which, however, he warns his followers
(" Koran," v. 92).
3 " Syrian Stone-Lore," p. 126 ; comp. " Hetli and Moab," pp. 264-5,
Stanley, "Jewish Church," i. 59. Mr. Oliphant found four huge prostrate
THE ANCIENT LAW TRANSFORMED. 6 1
of Hezekiah (?) and Josiah, these kings of Juclah effected a more
complete abolition of idols than even Mohammed. Of idols,
but not of idolatry. The altar-stones and pillars might be
broken, and the chapels destroyed, but the old sanctity still
clung to the sites, as Jeremiah found later on to his cost. Did
the prophet co-operate with Josiah in his iconoclastic work? So
far as the temple was concerned, it is possible enough that he
did, but I prefer to think of him, not so much as the iconoclast,
but as the persuasive preacher. And what if he did represent
Deuteronomy to be the work of Moses ? Did not the illusion
cover an important truth ? Did not the authors of the new law-
book enable men to see into the heart of the Mosaic covenant,
by speaking to them as Moses would have spoken had he come
to life again as a prophet and a reformer ? Other writers had
made the same attempt in a more mechanical way ; their
work had failed however to produce any considerable effect.
Collections of primitive laws had been made, based perhaps on
Mosaic or early post-Mosaic material (comp. Hos. viii. 12 '),
among which we may safely include the Decalogue (Exod. xx.
1-17, comp. Deut. v. 6-21), the greater Book of the Covenant
(Exod. xx. 22-xxiii.), and the lesser Book of the Covenant (Exod.
xxxiv. 11-26), which, as many critics consider, ought properly
to be arranged as a second Decalogue. 2 But there is no proof
that those collections enjoyed any public, that is, national recog-
nition, and their circulation was probably limited to the priests
(if the collection was a ritualistic one), and to the few edu-
cated people among the laity (if the collection related to social
duties). It is worth noticing that the Deuteronomist (even if
two authors are concerned, we may sometimes for variety or
convenience use the singular) represents Moses as sending the
individual Israelite to "the priests the Levites " ( = " the Levitical
priests") for an authoritative "direction" (to nth). He doubt-
less reflects the customs of his time, and we may assume (a
good commentary on Leviticus would amply justify the assump-
slabs of stone which, he says, had evidently once formed a dolmen, near the
secluded village of Mugheir in the northern Samaritan hill-country ("Haifa,"
P- 337)-
1 Render, " I am wont to write unto him, c., but they are counted as a
strange thing." Comp. Smend, " Moses aptid Prophetas " (1875), p. 15.
2 Comp. Briggs, "Old Testament Student "(Chicago), vol. ii. (1882-
1883), pp. 264-272.
62 JEREMIAH.
tion) that there were various collections of legal traditions (at
first unwritten, and then written) in the possession of priestly
families on the basis of which the priests ("those that handle
the iorah" Jer. ii. 8, comp. Dent, xxxiii. 10) gave, orally, their
tdrCih or " directions."
Still, though many may have carried their perplexities to the
priests, some that is, of course, the more educated would
sometimes at least, avail themselves of such written records as
were extant. For these, and for the priests themselves, and
above all, for the general life of the nation, it was of the utmost
importance that the legal traditions of Israel should be re-
vised, harmonized, corrected, reorganized. For it is more
than doubtful whether all the pre-Deuteronomic collections of
laws subserved the interests of a truly progressive and in some
measure spiritual religion. There are indications enough that
the religious literature of the Israelites was not entirely con-
fined to those whom we look up to as the inspired writers, and
it appears from a passage in Jeremiah that the formalist priests
and lying prophets employed the pen to give greater currency
to their teaching. How do ye say (the question is addressed to
the laity), We are wise, and the law of the LORD [Jehovah] is
with us ? But, behold (this is the prophet's answer), the false
pen of the scribes hath wrought falsely (marg., hath wade of it
falsehood) Jer. viii. 8, R.V. The prophet cannot refer here
to Deuteronomy ; he can only mean something analogous to
the heretical Gospels of early Christian times something
which, though it pretended to a divine sanction, was really
subservient to false religious principles.
It was a truly memorable event this publication of the first
Scripture, for henceforth it became possible for the religion of
an insignificant Asiatic people to survive a national catastrophe
and become. the faith of the human race. A poor Bible, some
one may say. Yes ; but it was a Bible admirably adapted to
those times. And does not the distinctive quality of our Bible
consist partly in this that it contains the comparatively poor
religious standards of past ages ? Just consider what a
difference this makes between a Christian and a Mohammedan
Reformation. Moslems, not less than Jews and Christians, are
a " people of the Book " ' ; but their Book only belongs to a
1 Mohammed uses this phrase of Jews and Christians in " Koran,"
ii. 56, &c.
THE ANCIENT LAW TRANSFORMED. 63
single period and comes from a single man. To reform
Mohammedanism is therefore to go back twelve hundred years
and believe as Mohammed believed. But a Christian Reformer
is not thus rigidly confined to the standards of a single age or
person. 1 By comparing Scripture with Scripture in a critical but
religiously sympathetic spirit, 2 he discovers which are really
the essential doctrines and the fundamental facts, and exercises
the right of restating them to his own generation, just as
prophets and reformers did of old to theirs. That inspired
prophet and priest (so great in their self-effacing humility) who
composed the main part of the Book of Deuteronomy, re-
created Moses for their own age. They adapted older laws
with the utmost freedom, but in the spirit of Moses and his
equally inspired successors, " bringing forth out of their
treasury things new and old." And whenever the same need is
felt, it should be the Christian's happy faith that the right man
will be sent for the task.
Deuteronomy may be a poor Bible, from a modern point of
view ; but it is rich in significance, if judged by a historic
standard. It sought to place the whole moral and spiritual life
of Israel upon a new basis. It condenses the essence of the
past, and anticipates the future developments of Judaism (in
Ezra's form of it) and Christianity. And upon the whole in
how effective a style ! As Ewald has well said, " A work
which transformed the ancient law with such creative power, so
emphatically threatened all those who despised it with the
severest Divine penalties, and, on the other hand, spoke with
such tenderness and human feeling about its observance, was
in every respect adapted to make a profound impression on its
readers, and to produce the effect for which it was designed." 3
It could not have been composed by a mere priest. The
Deuteronomic torah is in fact the joint work of at least two of
1 The Christian religion of the nineteenth century cannot be the same as
that of the second or the fourth ; it need not be opposed to it, but it
cannot be identical with it. Dr. Bigg, in his " Bampton Lectures" (1886),
has made a similar remark of the Christianity of the fourth century as com-
pared with that of the second.
2 Some readers will mentally make the comment that this union is
inconceis'able. But are there then no living persons in whom this union is
an accomplished fact ? The infinite variety possible in the Christian life is
only now beginning to be realized.
J " History of Israel," iv. 227.
64 JEREMIAH.
the noblest members of the prophetic and the priestly orders,
each caring for that particular jewel which God in His provi-
dence had deposited with him. From the prophetic writer comes
the width of view so conspicuous, for example, in x. 12-22, and
which contrasts strangely with the exclusiveness imposed by
tradition upon his priestly companion (see xxiii. 3-8 ; xxv. 17-19 ;
xx. 17). To the priest is due the general conception of a
religious organization of the national life, as well as the arrange-
ments of its details. He too is animated, within the sphere of
Israelitish interests, by a fine spirit of humanity, which some-
times even leads him to make impracticable requirements (see
e.g. xx. 1-9). A poor Bible? Nay; such a combination of
priestly energy and policy with the idealizing prophetic spirit
was the greatest work which the Divine Spirit acting upon the
human had yet produced.
Of this remarkable book the following are the four chief
ideas, i. Jehovah is the one God worthy of the name Elohim
" the Elohim," as he is called both by the Deuteronomist and
by the disciple who added to his work (iv. 35, 39, vii. 9). It
was enough to assert the comparative inability of other gods
to help see iii. 24, iv. 7, and comp. "the God of the gods
(Elohim) and the Lord of the lords, the great, strong, and
fearful God (El.)," x. 17. So in vi. 4 we read, Hear, O Israel ^
Jehovah our God is one Jehovah (i.e., Jehovah is unique in kind
and in nature). We need not be surprised, however, that in
some of their moods the writers regard the other gods as
mere wood and stone iv. 28, xxviii. 36, 64, xxix. 17 ; comp.
Jer. ii. 27. 2. The life of the community in all its aspects is to
be worthy of the servants of a holy God. Israel is to be, as
another writer expresses it, "a kingdom of priests and a holy
nation " (Exod. xix. 6.) 3. There is to be only one temple ; the
many local shrines and stone monuments of a lower worship
are to be destroyed. This was on account of the licentious
nature-worship which connected itself with the festivals held in
the open air around the " high places." * 4. One tribe alone (in
1 Such " chapels " as may have existed must have been for the most part
rather rude ; the essential thing was the altar. Comp. the Homeric T^IIVOQ
fiufioQ re Gvl)ti (" II." .viii. 48 ; xxiii. 148 ; "Odyss." vii. 363). The later
Jewish traditions on the construction of these chapels are put together in
Levy's " Neuhehraisches Worterbuch,' 1 art. bamah. See also Ewald,
" History of Israel," iii. 306 note.
THE ANCIENT LAW TRANSFORMED. 65
Opposition to the custom of the northern kingdom '), is to supply
ministers for the sanctuary ; they are to be no mere servants of
the king (contrast 2 Sam. viii. 17, xx. 25), but to have an inherent
authority of their own. Not all Levites, however, are to have
the duties and privileges of the priesthood. Those who are not
priests may be local teachers and judges, and are commended
to the liberality of their fellow-Israelites ; and any Levite may
remove from the country-districts to Jerusalem, and receive a
share of the priestly duties and emoluments. These ideas are
inculcated or promoted in two ways by series of definite laws
and by exhortations. Hence there is both a priestly and a pro-
phetic element in Deuteronomy. The charm of the book lies
in the sweetly impressive tone of the prophetic passages. But
we must not forget the Divine sanction given afresh to the
principle of law ; the prophetic element does but spiritualize
the legal. And, if the trite but natural reflexion may be
pardoned, the Redeemer has delivered His followers from the
" curse " but not from the obligation of law. Indeed, was it not
the leading object of His holy life to make men perform the
law of God " His Father and their Father" from love ? And
may we not venture to say that the authors of Deuteronomy
have so transformed their hero as to make him a true though
imperfect type of Christ ? It is true that St. John says, The law
was given tJirougJi Moses, but loinngkindness and truth came
through Jesus Christ (John i. 17), apparently assuming an anti-
thesis between them ; but the word " came " here means " were
fulfilled" (see Prov. xiii. 12), and is there not a promise or
anticipation of the Divine lovingkinclness in the discourses of
Deuteronomy? It is indeed a most superficial view which
treats this book as a mere legal document. The Moses whom
it brings before us really represents noble spirits like Jeremiah
(whom we have learned to regard as a type of Christ). He
can indeed command, but, like our Lord, he prefers to persuade.
He does not refuse to incorporate many very imperative utter-
ances monuments of an earlier stage into his so-called
recapitulation of the torah. There are whole series of laws in
Deuteronomy which have quite the short, dictatorial style of
the old legislation. But in those prophetic passages of which
I spoke, the "stiffness and severity" of the ancient form of
1 We must remember that part of the northern kingdom had been
attached to the dominions of Josiali (see below).
6
66 JEREMIAH.
expression disappears. Moses becomes like unto Christ ; he
" speaks in his own name to the people ; he searches out every
human reason which could operate on their conscience, and
impel them to keep the law ; and, moved by the warmth of his
love, he speaks to the heart, because the action of this alone
can proceed from love." 1
That the view of Moses and his teaching given in Deuteronomy
is a highly idealized one could not escape the attention even of
those English scholars who still occupy the antiquated position
of Hengstenberg. " His work (i.e., that of Moses)," remarks
one of the youngest and, though still immature, not the least
able of the number, " was not for one generation : ' mediator of
the Old Covenant,' he stands high above all other prophets and
saints ; already half glorified, no longer subject to the limitations
of time, he surveys the Israel of all ages until the coming of
Christ, and accordingly his work assumes (viz. in Deuteronomy)
a prospective and ideal character, so striking that unbelieving
critics could not but mistake it as the evidence of a much later
origin." 2 To " unbelieving," say rather " modern, 1 ' critics
Deuteronomy is conspicuously devoid of the ecstatic element
which theory compels this writer to assume ; but they will all
gladly welcome the admission that the book stands by itself,
and has a message and an interest for the Christian as well as
for the Jewish Church.
" Love is life's only sign," says the poet of the " Christian
Year." This is the very essence of the religious thinking of the
Deuteronomist. Israel, like the Church, has been "first loved"
by Jehovah ; and " the true Israelite is he who loves both his
fellow-Israelites and Jehovah of his own accord, just as Jehovah
of His own accord loved Israel." 3 This truth is equally set
forth in Deuteronomy and in the Deuteronomist's great
spiritual predecessor, Hosea. The primal love of Jehovah to
Israel fills the foreground of each writer's discourse, and all
human relationships within the Israelitish community are
rooted in this. This love is, however, a moral love : Jehovah
1 Ewald, " History of Israel," iv. 223 (but compare the more nervous
and forcible German of .the original work).
2 G. Vos, "The Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuchal Codes" (Lond. ,
1886), p. 90. The author is an American of Dutch extraction, and, we may
confidently expect, will before ten years are over have changed his opinions.
3 Cheyne, ' ' Hosea " (Cambridge School and College Bible), p. 28 (Introd.)
THE ANCIENT LAW TRANSFORMED. 67
is not more loving than righteous. Moral and spiritual cor-
ruption will be must be punished by ruin and destruction.
The abominations old and new which disfigured the national
religion in the time of the authors of Deuteronomy, must, as
these inspired men felt, bring God's curse upon those who
practised them. This is the essential idea of the awful threats
hurled throughout this book by the imaginary Moses at the
close of his career against the races which would be found in
Canaan by the Israelites. As a matter of fact, it cannot be
proved on historical grounds (see "Encyclopaedia Britannica,"
art. " Canaanites") that those races were either expelled or de-
stroyed by the invaders. On the contrary, they were gradually
amalgamated with the Israelites, who became in the arts of
civilization, and too often in the practices of religion, their
willing pupils. It was never the policy of the leaders of Israel
to lay waste cities and massacre their populations indiscrimi-
nately, and even destroy the innocent cattle. "These are only
the pictorial mode in which the writers (of Deuteronomy) express
their utter abhorrence of the practices which destroyed the
sanctity of Israel and insulted the majesty of Israel's Holy
One. Strangely do these fierce sentiments read beside the
repeated declarations of the divine compassion, the reiterated
appeals to the heart of loyalty and trust, which give to these
pages such a kindling glow. It is well that we can in part
resolve the inconsistency which seems to discredit the value
of a piety apparently marred by such bloodthirsty ferocity.
The writers present their principles under the limitations of
imaginary circumstances that were never real." x This will not
indeed apply to the case of the Amalekites, for there is no
evidence that this race was religiously dangerous to the
Israelites. The explanation is given in Deut. xxv. 17, 18 ; comp.
Exod. xvii. 14. The Deuteronomist would of course remember
the extinction of the remnant of Amalek in the days of
Hezekiah (i Chron. iv. 41-43).
I must leave the reader to compare the reforming measures
of Josiah (2 Kings xxiii.) with the directions in the Book of
Deuteronomy. Each fact will be found to correspond to some
provision in the law, except to some extent the treatment of the
country priests. According to Deut. xviii. 6-8, the Levites of
'Carpenter, article on the Book of Deuteronomy, "Modern Review,"
April, 1883, p. 274.
68 JEREMIAH.
the provinces were to have equal rites with the priests of the
temple, if they came up to Jerusalem. But in 2 Kings xxiii. 9
we read that the priests whom Josiah brought up to join in the
Passover were not permitted to sacrifice, but ate unleavened
bread among their brethren. 1 This fact is interesting, because
the mention of it seems to contradict the theory that Deutero-
nomy was a forgery, composed either (if before the iSth year
of Josiah) in the interests of the temple-priests, or (if after the
Reformation) to justify the course which Josiah and his friends
had taken. Would that it were possible to compare the system
exhibited in Deuteronomy with the civil and religious condition
of Judah some years after the Reformation. Were the laws
strictly observed ? and above all, did the spiritual teaching ot
the prophetic passages take hold upon the people ? Alas ! we
lack the material for a satisfactory answer to these questions.
The account of Josiah's reign in 2 Kings is tantalizingly
fragmentary, and it is impossible to point definitely to any
prophecy of Jeremiah's as describing the post-Reformation part
of the reign of Josiah. That Jeremiah himself was deeply
influenced by Deuteronomy both in his ideas and in his
phraseology, is no new proposition to the reader. The phe-
nomena have led some critics to conjecture that he even wrote
Deuteronomy. 2 This I see no sufficient reason to believe. It
is certain, however, that he was far the greatest of the school of
writers formed upon the Book of Deuteronomy a school which
includes historians, poets, and prophets, and without which the
Old Testament would be deprived of some of its most valued
pages.
1 I follow Klostermann, who holds that the words, And he brought up all
the priests from the cities of Judah (2 Kings xxiii. 8), and the whole of ver.
9, are misplaced, and belong properly to a description of the preparations
for the Passover which once existed but is not now preserved (see 2 Kings
xxiii. 21, 22). This view accounts for the mention of the "unleavened
bread." Comp., however, Robertson Smith, "The Old Testament and
the Jewish Church," pp. 360-362.
3 Comp. a valuable excursus in Kleinert's "Das Deuteronomium und
der Deuteronomiker " (1872) comparing the vocabulary of Deuteronomy
with that of other books, which specially notices not only those words and
phrases which occur but also those which do not occur in the Book of
Jeremiah, and which also distinguishes between Deuteronomy proper and
the additions to it.
CHAPTER VII.
TKAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION ?
Criticism of the narrative in 2 Kings.xxii. The Mosaic authorship of the
Lawbook, not tenable Reasons for this Notes on the allusions to
Egypt in Deuteronomy, and on the finding of the Lawbook.
I HAVE endeavoured in the preceding chapter to give a general
sketch of Josiah's great reformation, without diverting the
reader's attention to modern disputes whether of a historico-
criticai or of a purely exegetical character. The latter are
doubtless more capable of settlement, but the former raise
points of a more wide-reaching significance. I must therefore
at least touch upon the former ; a slight treatment of historico-
critical questions is painful to me, but it is all that a regard
to the proportions of this work will allow me to attempt.
A monograph on Deuteronomy would only make incidental
reference to Jeremiah ; a monograph on Jeremiah, especially if
not written solely for the college student, can only present a
short and far from exhaustive account of the controversy of
Deuteronomy. There are some points which can be and have
been settled, and some upon which a degree of uncertainty can-
not be avoided ; it is right to lay most stress upon the former.
Let us not then be concerned if we hear it said in some
quarters that the narrative in 2 Kings xxii. contains patent im-
probabilities, and is inconsistent with facts derived from the
Book of Jeremiah. There are many other ancient narratives
presumably based upon tradition which are in the main accepted
in spite of similar difficulties. It is difficult to believe that so
elaborate a narrative is purely fictitious. It is not the wont of
Hebrew story-tellers to draw exclusively upon their imagination,
liven the Chronicler, who is sufficiently biassed by what we
may call his ecclesiastical interest, would not have indulged
70 JEREMIAH.
in so flagrant a violation of the truth of facts. 1 And if the
narrative were indeed a pure fiction, it would surely not have
contained an incidental and perfectly simple-minded admission
that Josiah had, in one important respect, not carried out the
directions of the lawbook (2 Kings xxiii. 9 ; comp. Deut.
xviii. 6, 7). Two points at least ought, I think, by the most
sceptically inclined critic to be accepted as historical, viz.
(i) that the "lawbook" was published in Josiah's reign with
the view of recommending certain reforms and establishing the
national religion on a firmer basis ; and (2) that Hilkiah, one
of its chief promulgators, asserted that he had found it in
the temple. The view implied (probably) in 2 Kings xxii. and
expressed in 2 Chron. xxxiv., that the " book of torah " had the
leader of the Exodus for its author, cannot from a critical
point of view be maintained, for these among other reasons,
that the Deuteronomist (if we may so for convenience refer to
the author or joint-authors of the original Deuteronomy) has
(i) employed documents manifestly later than Moses, (2) made
allusions to circumstances which only existed long after Moses,
and (3) expressed ideas which are not such as are, psycho-
logically speaking, possible in the age of Moses.
i. The evidences of the Deuteronomist's dependence on the
Yahvistic narrative 2 in the Pentateuch written, at earliest
(Dillmann), in the middle of the sejtetttii century B.C., are em-
barrassing from their very abundance. Here are a few head-
ings of statements borrowed from the Yahvist, which I quote
with but little attempt at selection from the classical treatise
1 It is worth noticing that the Chronicler adopts the narrative of the
finding of the lawbook in the temple (2 Chron. xxxiv. 14-33), although its
tendency is directly opposed to his own simple-minded view that the Law
had been the foundation of Israelitish life since the time of Moses. Con-
sidering that he certainly selects and modifies his material with a view to
edification, it is singular that he adopts a statement which, on the hypothesis
mentioned above, was of comparatively recent origin. He actually does
omit another important part of the narrative in Kings, viz., the description
of Josiah's violent measures, which implied a previous state of things very
inconsistent with Mosaic orthodoxy. He writes as a devout churchman,
but he is not without some claim to the character of a historian.
2 " All are agreed that Deuteronomy is later than the Yahvist," remarks the
orthodox theologian, H. L. Strack (" Handbuch der thcologischen Wis-
senschaften," i. 136). To use the non-form " Jehovist" in this connexion
would be absurd.
FRAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION? 71
of K. H. (iraf. 1 Jacob's going down to Egypt with seventy
persons (Dent. x. 22 ; xxvi. 5). The oppression of the Israelites
and the Exodus (vi. 12, 21, 22 ; vii. 8, 18, 19; and often).
The destruction of the Egyptians in the Red Sea (xi. 4).
The manna (viii. 3, 16). The water out of the rock (viii. 15),
The temptation at Massa (vi. 16, ix. 22). The tables of stone
and the golden calf (ix. 7-21). The forty years' wandering
(viii. 2, 15, xi. 5). The serpents (viii. 15). Balaam (xxiii. 5, 6).
It is true that in the Deuteronomic parallels we sometimes
meet with deviations from the Yahvistic narrative, but these
are hardly sufficient to outweigh the minute points of agreement
which also occur. They only prove that our author derived
his material from more than one source, his secondary
authority being sometimes popular tradition, sometimes perhaps
his own creative imagination. But the case becomes even
stronger when we consider the introductory portion of the book
(i. i-iv. 40) by itself. This is a free recapitulation of the account
of the wanderings contained in the earlier books, and was evi-
dently intended as a convenient connexion between Deutero-
nomy proper and the Yahvistic narrative. Let the reader only
carry his studies a little farther, and see how a scholar of the
Deuteronomist has edited Joshua, and he will not quarrel with
any one for asserting that the Yahvistic narrative must have
been written first, and that a Deuteronomistic writer composed
Deut. i.-iv. 40 as a link between his own and the earlier work.
2. But these are far from being the only points in which the
author of Deuteronomy has betrayed himself. He is full ot
allusions to circumstances which did not exist till long after
Moses. The Israel of his description is separated from the
Israel of the Exodus by a complete social revolution. The
nomad tribes have grown into a settled and wealthy com-
munity (notice the phrase "the elders of the city," xix. 12, &c.),
whose organization needs no longer to be constituted, but only
to be reformed. I do not say that no directions can be found
which bear on their face the stamp of a primitive age. Our
author did not hesitate to adopt earlier laws, though he neutra-
lized their possible evil effect either by distinct modifications or
by the context in which he placed them. But the elaborate
1 Graf, "Die geschichtlichen Biicher," u.s.vv., pp. 9-19; comp. Bp.
Colenso, "The Pentateuch and Book of Joshua Critically Examined,"
vi. 34. 35-
72 JEREMIAH.
character of most of the Deuteronomic arrangements con-
clusively proves the lateness of their origin. See, for instance,
the laws of contracts (chaps, xv., xxiii., xxiv.), of inheritance
(chap, xxi.), and, above all, of war (chap, xx) ; and contrast the
last-mentioned with the very primitive directions in Numb.
xxxi. 25-30. The fact that in Deut. xx. the law-giver distinctly
contemplates wars of foreign conquest, brings down the date -of
the law below the period of David. Or take still more definite
allusions. The law regulating the kingship is proved by its
contents to be later than the time of Solomon, whose dangerous
tendencies are not obscurely alluded to (xvii. 14-20) ; the law
confining the right of sacrificing to the tribe of Levi, to be
later than the Mosaic age * (even in the widest sense of the
term), later than the times of David and Solomon, 2 later than
Jeroboam,^ and probably later than Azariah; 4 the warnings
against the lower forms of prophecy (xviii. 10-12), to be not
earlier than the first of the great succession of prophetic
teachers of a moral and spiritual religion Amos and Hosea ;
the prohibition of star-worship (iv. 19, xvii. 3), to be not earlier
than the Assyrian period; 5 and lastly, the law restricting sacri-
fices and festival observances to the temple at Jerusalem (xii.
5-27, xvi. 1-17, &c.) to be later certainly than Amos and Hosea, 6
later certainly than Mesha's Moabitish inscription, 7 and later
almost certainly than the reign of Hezekiah. 8
1 Exod. xx. 24-26, as all critics (see especially Dillmann) agree, is ad-
dressed to the whole body of the Israelites, not to a single tribe.
2 2 Sam. viii. 18 (see "Variorum Bible"), vi. 13, 14, xxiv. 25 ; i Kings
viii. 62, 63.
3 i Kings xii. 31 (see "Variorum Bible"). Had the sacerdotal rights
of the Levites been generally recognized, Jeroboam would not have
ventured on promiscuous ordinations. * 2 Chron. xxvi. 16-21.
5 This form of worship being derived immediately from Assyria, Amos
prophesies that the Israelitish star-worshippers shall have to carry the
images of their star-gods (to which he gives Assyrian names) beyond
Damascus, a vague but significant expression for Assyria : "Therefore ye
shall take up Sakkuth your king, and Kaivan your star-god ; even your
images, which ye have made unto yourselves " (Amos v. 26 ; see Schrader,
and comp. 2 Kings xxi. 5).
6 Amos and Hosea, though denouncing star-worship, say nothing against
the non-idolatrous worship of Jehovah at the local shrines.
7 Mesha states that he took "altars (strictly, altar-hearths) of Yahveh "
from the town of Nebo in the trans-Jordanic country (Moabite Inscription,
line 18).
8 According to 2 Kings xviii. 4, Hezekiah abolished the " high places"
FRAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION? 73
3. It will also be clear, on a little reflexion, that there are
ideas expressed in Deuteronomy which can only have arisen at
an advanced stage of religious development. 1 I will not now
appeal to the Deuteronomic idea of the exclusive right of
Jehovah to Israel's worship, for that is also expressed in the
Decalogue. Nor will I lay any stress on the repeated prohibi-
tions of the use of " similitudes " in the worship of Jehovah
(Deut. iv. 12, 15-18, &c.). For this prohibition, too, occurs in
the Decalogue. But there are several characteristic ideas of
Deuteronomy, to the use of which as evidence of a late date
no exception can be taken.
Thus (i.) the thought of giving a religious colour to the
whole of the national organization is the logical develop-
ment of the idea so earnestly inculcated by Isaiah (iv. 3,
vi. 13, xi. 1-9, &c.) of the "holy people 1 ' (seven times in
Deuteronomy). It is the thought of one who was a states-
man, as well as an inspired prophet, and who saw that in the
coming struggle for the national existence of the Israelites,
their only hope lay in the deepening and concentrating of their
religious life. Hence those elaborate arrangements which
descend even to such minutiae as the substance of a man's
clothing (xxii. 11, 12), but which are all set in a framework of
religious precepts and principles. We have before us, in fact,
the prelude of the Levitical reformation set on foot by Ezra.
The author of Deuteronomy and his friends, with not inferior
earnestness though with less rigour than Ezra, attempted the
bold experiment (bold, for any but prophets and the disciples
of prophets) of converting a nation into a church, and an
earthly kingdom into a theocracy. But the fundamental idea
of the "holy people" is Isaiah's. It was that great prophet's
function to transfer the conception of holiness from the physical
to the moral sphere. Others no doubt had laboured in the
or local sanctuaries. It is an open question whether this strong statement
is correct. Evenjosiah, though he insists on the sanctity of Mount Zion
never fulminates against " high places." From 2 Kings xxiii. 13 we gather
that even very near Jerusalem the reformation was but slight.
1 Not only are the ideas peculiar, but they are expressed in a phraseology
as peculiar thoroughly unlike that of the rest of the Pentateuch, and
presenting many points of contact with Jeremiah. Besides, the general
character of the style points equally to the silver age of Hebrew literature
(comp. Ewald, " History of Israel," i. 137).
74 JEREMIAH.
same direction, but none was so "clothed with the Spirit" for
the work as Isaiah. The notion current among the Israelites
of their relation to Jehovah was of a privilege enjoyed by a
natural, indefeasible right. Isaiah fought against this illusion.
He taught that it was not enough to be outwardly a child of
Abraham ; the enjoyment of the Divine favour was conditional
on the performance, not merely of ceremonies, but of certain
primary moral acts. The difference between Isaiah and the
author of Deuteronomy is simply that the one looks for the
" holy people " to an ideal future ; the other seeks, prematurely
enough, to realize the conception in the present.
(ii.) The idea of limiting the public worship of Jehovah to a
single sanctuary (xii. 5-17, &c.) is closely connected with that
of the "holy people." If Israel took his stand on his religion,
it was necessary for him to distinguish it as sharply as possible
from that of his neighbours and antagonists. As long as
Jehovah was worshipped at the local sanctuaries called "high
places," the forms of worship were liable to become assimilated
to those of alien, unspiritual religions. The significant figure of
"whoredom" for idolatry (Jer. ii. 20, &c.) sufficiently indicates
the danger by which the Israelites of this period were threatened.
Yet religion could not be entirely divested of material symbols.
Hence even Isaiah, with all his hatred of formalism, insists
repeatedly on the sanctity of the temple-mount, though (call it
inconsistency, or call it a wise discretion) he refrains from
fulminating against the country sanctuaries. A complete
measure of religious centralization was reserved for the author
of Deuteronomy.
(iii.) Still further to increase the popular reverence for the
temple-worship, the Deuteronomic legislator gave a solemn
sanction to the exclusive claims of the Levitical priesthood. 1
From the Mosaic age onwards, they ministered the Divine
torah to the Israelites who came to them (comp. Deut. xxxiii. 9,
Jer. ii. 8) ; but it cannot be shown that they alone " stood
before Jehovah to minister unto him," as this legislator com-
manded that they should do. It is only natural to suppose that
this important innovation (so it may be called, even though it
may have been based on a growing custom) belongs to a late
and somewhat revolutionary age.
1 Passages friendly to the Levitcs, Deut. xviii. 1-5 (comp. xii. 12, 18, 19,
xiv. 27, 29, xvi. ii, 14, x.\ vi. 11-13), xxiv. 8, xxxi. 9, 25, 26.
FRAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION? 75
In the course of the foregoing negative proof I have been
compelled to bring forward positive evidence in favour of a very
late date for Deuteronomy. David and Solomon, Mesha, king
of Moab, the Yahvist, Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah, must have
lived prior to the author of the lawbook ; and we have just
found reason to suppose that its composition belongs to a
revolutionary period of Israel's history. Now, Hezekiah's reign
being excluded 1 (see above), the reigns of Manasseh and
Josiah remain the only ones of which the Second Book of
Kings relates any reformation or revolution. The former is
the more plausible from the point of view of the ordinary
reader. 2 Assuming this to be the period of the composition of
the book, we could make a shrewd guess as to the cause of its
being deposited in the temple. Manasseh, it seems, hated the
strict religion and morality which Deuteronomy was written to
promote, and the true-hearted prophet and priest who composed
the book could not venture, we might reasonably assume, to keep
it in their own hands. It is no doubt strange that the book
should have been lost sight of by its priestly custodians. Possibly,
however, the secret of its hiding-place had been confided to but
one or two, and the few who knew it had died without handing
it on. At any rate, one might say that Providence watched
over the roll, and caused it to be brought forth at the right
moment. I do not myself hold this view, however, and only
develop it here to assist the reader's imagination. If the book
were written under Manasseh, it is at least strange that the
book should not, either in its exhortations or in its commands,
make any allusions (tpwavTa ovvtTotviv) to the fact that Jehovah's
central sanctuary had been invaded by idols (2 Kings xxi. 4,
&c.). Looking at the lawbook by itself, one can understand
it better if written tinder Josiah. The hopefulness of the
writer, which penetrates each page of his book, was justified by
the character of the new king, and it seems reasonable to sup-
1 S'.-c, however, Vaihingcr in Herzog's " Realencyclopadie," cd. i, xi.
327-8.
- Since writing the above, I find that a young and able German writer,
Rudolf Kittel, who began his career with a temperate criticism of Well-
hausen's " Geschichte Israels" (now more fitly styled " Prolegomena zur
Geschichte Israels") adopts Manasseh' s reign an the date of Deuteronomy
in his new " Geschichte der Hebriicr." I agree with Dillmann that
]osiah's reign is rather more probable.
?6 JEREMIAH.
pose that the book was published soon after it was written,
while its joint-authors were still alive, because this helps us to
account for the rapid success of its ideas. Add to this the fact
irr tbtrt- the literary influence of Deuteronomy lyiftg (as it would
1 seem) v/5h' Jeremiah, and there remains but little excuse for
doubting that the authors of Deuteronomy were among the
actors in the great reformation of King Josiah.
The one great advantage of referring the lawbook to the
reign of Manasseh, is that it permits us to form the highest
possible moral estimate of Hilkiah and Shaphan. Rough
critics (especially if tinctured with the old-fashioned dogmatic
rationalism) are apt to fly off from the one extreme of Bible-
hero-worship to the other of Bible-hero-depreciation, and
accuse at any rate Hilkiah of complicity in a forgery. We still,
in English books especially, meet with statements that our only
choice lies between the " good old view " of the Mosaic origin
of Deuteronomy and that of its purely fictitious character. I
confess that, in spite of these statements, I cannot think that
the latter hypothesis merits a long examination. Let the
following remarks suffice.
I will admit that the hypothesis of forgery (advocated by Von
Bohlen and others) is not to be rejected straightway on the
ground of its moral repulsiveness. M. Alexandre, the editor of
the Sibylline Oracles, has remarked on the excellent morality of
their contents coexisting with the fiction of their authorship.
The moral standard of one age is not that of another, and great
saints have allowed themselves in practices which would now be
disclaimed by all good men. Nor yet may it be scouted on the
ground that it is plainly impossible to palm off a modern statute-
book as ancient upon a whole nation. Sir Henry Maine has given
an instance of such a successful forgery in the history of Eng-
lish law ("Ancient Law," p. 82), and what has been done in one
country may, the conditions being not essentially different, be
effected in another. But the hypothesis is in the highest degree
improbable, because Deut. xviii. contains (as we have seen) a
law relative to the country Levites which directly clashes with
the class interests of the Zadokite priests, from whom, on the
hypothesis of forgery, Deuteronomy proceeds. It is also
critically unnecessary. Of course, it is only the middle part of
the book (chaps, v.-xxvi.) about which there can be any dis-
putethat part which in the opening and closing chapters is
FRAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION? 77
referred to as " this torah," i. 5, iv. 8 (comp. v. 44), xxvii. 3, 8,
26, xxviii. 58, xxix. 28, xxx. 10, xxxi. 11, 12, 26, xxxii. 46. This
portion is no doubt declared to be Mosaic. There is no possi-
bility of explaining this away. Listen to the Book,
And Moses called all Israel^ and said unto them, Hear, O
Israel, the statutes and ordinances which I speak in your ears
this day. . . . (Deut. v. i).
And Moses wrote this law [/Jrd/i] (Deut. xxxi. 9).
What did this mean to the mass of those who, in Josiah's
eighteenth year, heard the lawbook read? It is self-evident
that no human being could recall from oblivion the statement
of fundamental laws which Moses (by a sudden concentration
of his intellectual powers for he was primarily a man of action,
and neither an orator nor a writer) may possibly have given at
the close of his career. It would be difficult ' to suppose that the
men of Judah adopted such an absurd idea, or even that they
held a theory most reasonable in the case of Ecclesiastes that
the author did but assume the character of a hero of antiquity
by a literary fiction. 2 They were not subtle-minded people, and
must have drawn the most obvious inference from the facts
presented to them, viz., that the lawbook had been lost for
centuries, and been recovered only now by the high priest
Hilkiah. That the latter (who had his own interpretation of
the word " Mosaic," to which I will turn presently) permitted
this belief to exist may be stigmatized by some as deceit ; what
he practised, however, was not deceit nor rtHusion, but rather
zTlusion. Need I justify the principle which, unconsciously
to himself, lay beneath his action ? Novalis may exaggerate
* I say "difficult" and not "impossible," for I remember that Fathers
of the Church did believe Ezra to have rewritten the Law of Moses
under Divine inspiration. But the credulity of theologians, when
assisted by a predisposing motive, is greater on some points than that
of ordinary men. Besides, the doctrine of verbal inspiration was not as
yet developed.
2 I do not in the text refer to the theory of a legal fiction, because I
doubt whether, unless we use the pruning-knife very vigorously, the middle
part of Deuteronomy can have been understood on this theory or principle.
I do not deny the existence of legal conventions generally understood as
such by educated Israelites (comp. Robertson Smith, " The Old Testament
in the Jewish Church," p. 387), but the nucleus of our Deuteronomy seems
to me too large and complex to be put on a level with isolated laws such as
Numb, xxxi, 27,
78 JEREMIAH.
when he says, *' Error is the necessary instrument of truth ;
with error I make truth." But he is strictly correst in his
following words, " All transition begins with illusion." ' Both
historically and educationally it is clear that at certain stages
of development men cannot receive the pure truth, which must
therefore be enclosed for a time in a husk of harmless error.
The history of the prophets shows us that, as a matter of fact,
Providence employed much illusion in training its instruments.
Jeremiah himself at length became aware of this in his own
case, and not without a momentary disappointment at the
discovery. " Thou hast deceived me, Jehovah," he ex-
claims, "and I was deceived" (or, "enticed"; Jer. xx. 7,
R.V.) ; and the New Testament suggests the view that, when
the older writers speak of the rewards of Israel's obedience,
they sometimes make a large use of illusion : For if Joshua
had given them rest, he (David) would not have spoken after-
ward of another day. There remaincth therefore a sabbath
rest for the people of God (Heb. iv. 8, 9, R.V.). The illusion
respecting the authorship of Deuteronomy lasted for centuries,
and produced, as we may reverently suppose, no injurious effect
upon the Church. But in modern times, and especially now,
when the reign of law is recognized not less by the defenders
than by the opponents of theology, to ask men to believe that
Deuteronomy was written by Moses, or that its substance was
spoken though not written by Moses and supernaturally com-
municated to Hilkiah, would be to impose a burden on the
Church which it is not able to bear, and to justify the prejudice'
against the Church's Biblical scholars which finds frequent
utterance in the secular press.
But in what sense did Hilkiah himself call " the book of
tdrah" (for 2 Chron. xxxiv. 14 substantially expresses his mean-
ing) " Mosaic " ? He means partly that the Deuteronomist
absorbed older laws into his code (the full evidence for which
must be sought in Dillmann's great critical and exegetical work);
partly and more especially that this keen-sighted man wrote as
Moses would have written, had he been recalled to life for this
purpose. For instance (i), Moses, as the Deuteronomist firmly
believed, maintained the claims of Jehovah to an exclusive
worship. Hence, even if Moses in his own very early days
1 "Hymns and Thoughts on Religion by Novalis," translated and
edited by W. Hastie (1888), p. 90.
FRAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION ? 79
permitted or even perhaps encouraged local sanctuaries (Exod.
xx. 24, comp. xxii. 30), it was clear to the Deuteronomist that,
when they had ceased to be useful, Moses would have abolished
them. Therefore he, " sitting in the seat of Moses," did abolish
them. (2) In Deut. v. 9 the Deuteronomist reverently reproduced
the statement of the Decalogue that God " visits the iniquity of
the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth genera-
tion," a statement true to the experience of an earlier age, and
yet, in his faithfulness to the later leadings of the Divine Spirit,
he frankly declared (as he thought that Moses in his place would
have declared) in vii. 9, 10, that while mercy is transmitted,
wrath is fully worked out on those who have incurred it. Comp.
Deut. xxiv 16, the doctrine of which encountered extreme oppo-
sition in the post-Josian period (see Jer. xxxi. 29, 20 ; Ezek. xviii.
2-4), many Jews being still incapable of appreciating a truth
which the " good old view " absurdly supposes to have been pro-
pounded at the Exodus. (3) In Exod. xxi. 7 (a passage belonging
to the greater " Book of Covenant," and doubtless regarded by
the Deuteronomist as Mosaic) it is enacted that a Hebrew
bondwoman shall not be set free at the end of seven years like
a bondman ; but in Deut. xv. 12-18 the law is made uniform for
both sexes. (4) In Exod. xxii. 30, firstlings are to be offered to
God on the eighth day; but in Deut. xii. 17, 18, xv. 19, 20, they
are to be eaten at the sanctuary at the yearly festivals. 1 (5) In
Exod. xxii. 31. carrion is to be cast to the dogs ; but in Deut.
xiv. 21, social relations having become more developed, the
" sojourner " (ger^n'tToiKas) is allowed to eat it. At other times
the author of Deuteronomy simply gives a further development
to an ancient law. Thus the law of usury in Exod. xxii. 24 recurs
in Deut. xxiii. 19, 20, with a permission to take usury from a
stranger ; and the directions as to taking pledges in Exod. xxii.
26, 27, recur in Deut. xxiv. 10-13, with the addition that the
choice of the pledge is to be left to the giver of the pledge.
Thus the law on the punishment of death for the renegade,
which in Exod. xxii. 19 receives the most concise expression
possible, is expanded in Deut. xvii. 2-8 into the description of
a complete judicial procedure. Thus, too, the law of the sab-
1 Comp. Robertson Smith, "Additional Answer to the Libel" (1878),
pp. 17, 18, 55 ; and especially the full comparison of the laws in Deutero-
nomy and in the "Book of Covenant" in Graf, "Die geschichtlicheii
Biichur," pp. 20-24.
80 jEREMiAtt.
batical year in Exod. xxiii. 10, i r is condensed into as short a
space as possible in Deut. xv. i, in order to throw into bolder
relief an independent ordinance on the mercy to be shown to
the debtor during this year. 1 I might, in fact, far exceed my
available space in showing how largely older collections of
laws have been used. To sum up briefly : The object of
the Deuteronomist was to keep up the historic continuity of
the " Mosaic " school of legalists the orthodox school, one
may call it, in opposition to those " lying pens " of which
Jeremiah speaks (Jer. viii. 8). The object of Hilkiah was to
terminate the painful hesitancy of the believers in a spiritual
religion by producing the joint work of some well-trained priest
and prophet as the only suitable and divinely appointed law
of the state. To abolish polytheism and the dangerous local
shrines a new prophecy and a new lawbook, of a more effi-
cacious character than any which had yet been seen, were
clearly necessary. These were provided in the original Book
of Deuteronomy.
Who was the author, or rather, who were the authors, of the
original lawbook ? The question reveals, first of all, a want of
comprehension of the ethos of the inspired writers. No trace
can one find in them of the least regard for personal distinction ;
indeed, the Oriental mind in general is so convinced of the
littleness of the individual, that even outside the " household of
saints " personal fame is an object of trifling importance. Let us
take a lesson from Josiah, whose anxiety was not as to the original
author of the lawbook, but as to its agreeableness to the will of
God. It argues, next, a defective sense of what it really con-
cerns us to know. What does it matter whether the prophet
of Israel's Restoration was, or was not, literally a "second
Isaiah " ? or whether the author of the prophecy (or of part
of the prophecy) attached to Zech. i.-viii. was, or was not, like
his predecessor named Zechariah ? Whether Hilkiah was or
was not a joint-author of Deuteronomy is a point which has
much exercised some critics. No doubt " Moses " in Dent.
xxxi. 26* directs the Levites to take this lawbook and put it
by the side of the ark of the covenant; this may seem to sup-
1 Kleinert, "Das Deuteronornium und der Dcuteronomiker " (1872),
pp. 49, 50.
2 From the point of view of critical analysis, Dcut. xxxi. 26 docs not
belong to the book read by Josiah (sec further on).
FRAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION? 8 1
port the hypothesis of forgery. And yet can we suppose that
Hilkiah was clever enough to justify his (supposed,) forgery in so
natural a way ? Was the art of forgery already so far advanced ?
It would be interesting biographically could we ascertain
that Jeremiah was the prophet who (as it seems) assisted
the unknown priest in the composition of the book. Could it
further be shown that the high priest Hilkiah was Jeremiah's
father, one would be strongly tempted to accept Hitzig's view
that the " finder " of the lawbook was also its joint-author.
But I doubt whether the knowledge of these facts would throw
any fresh light on the prophet's character. As a matter of fact,
the internal evidence supplied by the Book of Jeremiah is
strongly opposed to his having been a Deuteronomist. It is
true that the Book is full of phraseological points of contact with
Deuteronomy. That great scholar Zunz (whom George Eliot
has made known to many unlearned readers) has pointed out
sixty-six passages of Deuteronomy, echoes of which occur, as
it seems, in eighty-six passages of Jeremiah. 1 We must re-
member, however, (i) that Jeremiah is imitative ; (2) that not
all these passages are undoubtedly Deuteronomic and Jeremian
respectively ; 2 (3) that the influence of Deuteronomy can be
traced in many pages of the Old Testament, which there is no
ground whatever for assigning to the Deuteronomist ; and
(4) that while the mood of Jeremiah alternates between
despondency and indignation, the Deuteronomist's is that of
majestic calm and trust. There are also remarkable differences
1 " Gesammelte Schriften," i. 219-222. Bishop Colenso's list in the
Appendix to Part vii. of his work on the Pentateuch includes too much.
Kleinert's excursus on the phraseology and vocabulary of the Deuterono-
mist is more truly critical. In his sixth dissertation he sums up the lin-
guistic differences of the two books. Konig's list in his " Alttestamentliche
Studien," Heftii. (1839), pp. 23-98, requires sifting.
2 In the original Book of Deuteronomy (if the whole of chaps, v.-xxvi.
may be regarded as such) there occur twenty-four passages which are
echoed in prophecies of undoubted Jeremian origin. Taking these latter
together, there are (according to Zunz's list) only seven chapters or sections
(i., iv., x. 17-25, xviii., xxxi., xlv., xlvii.) which do not present phraseolo-
gical points of contact with our Book of Deuteronomy. These calculations
will give the reader some idea of the state of the case. To be strictly
accurate several tables would be necessary. No "echo " of Deuteronomy
is detected by Zunz in Jer. iv. and xxxi. But does not the prophet allude
(though in a perfectly free manner) to Deut. x. 16, xxx. 6 in Jer. iv. 4,
and to Deut. xxvi. 19, xxviii. i in Jer. xxxi. 7?
7
82 JEREMIAH.
both in the choice of words and expressions, and in the lin-
guistic type of the two books. The Deuteronomic exhorta-
tion to "love God," and the Deuteronomic titles of God and
of Israel respectively, "a consuming fire," " a jealous, a merciful,
a faithful, a terrible God," " a special people," ''a holy people,"
" thine inheritance," are wanting in Jeremiah ; on the other hand,
there is nothing in Deuteronomy corresponding to those descrip-
tions of God's attributes in the style of the Psalms in which
Jeremiah takes so much delight, e.g., " O Jehovah, my strength,
and my fortress, and my refuge," Jer. xvi. 19, cf. ix. 23, x. 7, 10,
xi. 20. Still more remarkable, perhaps, are the linguistic
phenomena. Aramaism abounds in Jeremiah ; it is hardly
to be traced in Deuteronomy. Any student approaching
the subject with a fresh mind will, I think, agree with me
on the general superiority of the style of the Deuteronomist.
Consider this point, too that, however akin Jeremiah's con-
ception of religion may be to that of the Deuteronomist, he
shows no sign of interest in the cultus or of any special regard
for the Levitical priesthood, He denies thaf the regulation of
sacrifices formed any part of the Sinaitic law (Jer vii. 22), and
continually denounces the conduct of the priests (Jer. i. 18,
ii. 8-26, iv. 9, v. 31, viii. I, xiii. 13, xxxii. 32). The number
and vehemence of the passages referred to are not outweighed
by such sporadic instances of a milder view as xvii. 26, xxxi. 14,
xxxiii. ii, and 17-24. Indeed, this last passage (xxxiii. 17-24)
is very possibly not Jeremiah's work. The whose section in
which it occurs (vv. 14-26) is omitted in the Septuagint. I may
now safely leave this question. It was worth discussing, because
the reader may now see less arbitrariness in my future treatment
of Jeremiah's course as a preacher.
It only remains to explain the phrase " the original Book of
Deuteronomy." We can scarcely claim to restore with precision
the very book which made such an impression on Josiah. It is
undoubtedly contained in the middle part of Deuteronomy ; the
only question is whether the whole of this part belongs to the
original book. I think that, allowing for some few later inser-
tions 1 and glosses, we may regard chaps, v.-xxvi. as the original
1 As such Dillmann . regards ix. 25~x. ii, and xi. 29-33. I n m 7 critical
analysis I mainly follow Kuenen's new edition of Vol. i. of his " Onder-
zock," translated as a separate work by Mr. Wicksteed (1886); compare
(with this Wellhausen's reprinted in his " Skizzen und Vorarheiten," Heft ii.
1885), and Horst's in " Revue de 1'histoire des religions," 1888, p. i, &c.
FRAUt) Ok NEEDFUL ILLUSION ? 83
"book of (Divine) instruction." It is probable that i. r-iv. 44,
and iv. 45-49 are two distinct introductions, composed inde-
pendently by two different writers, close students of the original
" book of torah " in that which is most distinctive of it, the
former of whom may perhaps have had some really Deutero-
nomic material to work upon. The book itself begins with the
" Ten Words " (not, Commandments), of the first of which
(Deut. v. 6, 7) chaps, vi. 4-xiii. 18, and, in a less strict sense,
chaps, xiv. i-xvi. 17, may be considered as an exposition. The
author then " passes (though not without re-crossing the line
occasionally) from that which concerns religion in the narrower
sense of the word to the outward realm and its arrangement "
(xvi. i8-xxvi. 15). And here comes in that appeal, couched in
the liveliest prophetic style, to the instinct of self-preservation,
which seems to have made so deep an impression on Josiah and
his contemporaries : it was for them indeed that it was specially
written. As the Book of Deuteronomy now stands, this appeal
is interrupted at the very outset (as any one may see by reading
xxvi. 16-19, xxvii. 9, 10, and xxviii. I, &c. consecutively) by
directions (not by the Deuteronomist) about some great stones
or oTj/Xot on which "the words of this tvra/i" were at a later
time to be inscribed. They are further interrupted by certain
formulae of benediction and malediction to be recited in the ears
of the people on mounts Gerizim and Ebal respectively. " In-
terrupted " may seem to imply blame ; but it is not the passage
itself, which in the light of travel is one of the most striking in
the Bible, but its unfortunate position which one criticises.
Chaps, xxvii. 9, 10 and xxviii. form the true conclusion of the
original Deuteronomy; to which, as an epilogue, the writer added
xxxi. 9-13, containing the directions of Moses on the writing of
the orally-delivered toni/i, on its safe custody, and on its public
recitation every seven years. 1 Chaps, xxix., xxx. are by a student
of the Deuteronomist, who takes for granted the fulfilment of
the curse (comp. Lev. xxvi. 44), and makes it the point of de-
parture for his hopes of Israel's conversion and prosperity in the
future. Possibly he had Deuteronomic material to work upon ;
this point cannot be dogmatized upon. But at any rate he was
a noble writer ; the holy affectionateness of Moses, as he is
1 I low dearly this is an imaginary Mosaic word. Comp. Deut. xvii. 18,
where every king is directed to writ,: him a copy of this law (tordh] in ./
took.
84 JEREMIAH.
here represented, is most affecting. The Song of Moses (xxxii.
1-43), together with xxxi. 14-23 and xxxii. 44, not improbably
once belonged to a different work on the life of Moses. Chaps,
xxxi. 24-30 and xxxii. 45-47, which are in the Deuteronomic
manner, may have been inserted by a writer of the school of the
Deuteronomist when he fitted the Song and the accompanying
passages into their present place. The Song is a fine work of
the best type of prophetic religion, and has many points with
Jeremiah. The writer of the book from which it was taken
thought it worthy to be ascribed to Moses. There are linguistic
affinities between it and the ninetieth psalm to which early
Jewish students gave the same origin. The collection of
rhythmical sayings on the tribes in chap, xxxiii. is certainly
an early work, 1 and of great historical interest. 1 But neither this
nor the few remaining passages of the book need detain us now.
Let me only add, that, in spite of the critical dissection of Deu-
teronomy which in honesty I have been obliged to give, I can
enjoy the book as a whole as much as any one, and can admire
the skill with which the different parts have been put together.
It is a fine imaginative account of the latter days of Moses, and I
glow with pleasure as I read the concluding words, There hath
not arisen a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses (Deut.
xxiv. 10). Yes, truly ; for in this Moses I detect the germ of
Jeremiah the forerunner of Christ.
NOTE ON THE "FINDING" OF THE LAWBOOK IN THE TEMPLE.
It would perhaps have startled the reader, if, in the preceding note, I had
mentioned the statement of Hilkiah in 2 Kings xxii. 8 as due to the imitation
of an Egyptian custom, and urged that this created a presumption in favour
of the view that the philo-Egyptian circle from which this statement pro-
ceeded was also the circle within which the original Deuteronomy was com-
posed. And yet there would have been some plausibility in this. It was a
suggestion of M. Maspero's in the " Revue critique " (I think, in 1878) which
first drew my attention to the subject, and it has often struck me, as from
an Egyptological point of view, a not unreasonable one. Ewery year, in
fact, reveals fresh points of contact between the culture of Egypt and that
of the neighbouring countries, and it requires a firm hold on the peculiarity
of Hebraism not to exaggerate the role of teacher which in many respects
1 As early, certainly, as the reign of Jeroboam II., the " saviour " given to
Israel (2 Kings xiii. 5) ; see Graf's very cogent argument, " Der Segen
Mose's," p. 8 1.
FRAUD OR NEEDFUL ILLUSION? 85
belongs to the people of the Nile-valley. The facts on which M. Maspero's
suggestion is bnsed are these : It was a common practice of Egyptian
scribes to insert in their transcripts of great religious or scientific works a
statement that the writing in question had been " found " in a temple. For
example, chap. Ixiv. of the "Book of the Dead" (an authority for some
important religious doctrines) was declared in certain documents to have
been found by an Egyptian prince, in the reign of Mencheres, beneath the
feet of the god Thoth. 1 Again, a chapter in the medical papyrus preserved
in the British Museum bears the following rubric: ''This cure was dis-
covered at night by the hand of a minister of the temple of the goddess who
happened to go into the Hall in the temple of the city of Tebmut in the
secret places of that goddess. The land at the time was in darkness, but
the moon shone on that book all over it. It was brought as a valuable
treasure to His Majesty King Kheops." 3 And one of the medical treatises
in the Berlin papyrus edited by Brugsch " was found, in ancient writing, in
a coffer of books at the feet of the god Anup of Sekhein, in the days of the
holiness of the king of the two Egypts, the Veracious. "3 Now it is too
much to believe that the priests and learned men of Egypt were so ignorant
of their own literature as to discover these important works by a pure acci-
dent. It is much more probable that it was a conventional fiction of the
priestly class to say that a book had been " found " in a temple, when it
was wished to affirm and inculcate its sacred and authoritative character
with special emphasis. May there not then (considering the other traces of
an acquaintance with Egypt in the book) be an imitation of this custom
when Ucut. xxxi. 26 makes " Moses" say, Take this book of /orit/i, and put it
by the side of the ark of tlic co-ccnantl The position assigned to the law-
book beside the ark (in a box of some kind, we must suppose) corresponds
to that of the " coffer of books at the feet of (the Egyptian god) Anup."
Deuteronomy does not indeed bear the title ' ' found in a coffer beside the
ark" ; but Hilkiah in the narrative of 2 Kings says that he found the book
in the temple. Is it not possible that the book was not lost by accident,
nor yet placed in the sanctuary with the intention to deceive but simply
taken to the temple and formally placed there as authoritative Scripture,
and then communicated to Josiah with the view of its promulgation ? My
answer is that the lawbook as known to Hilkiah did not (as we have seen)
contain Deut. xxxi. 24-30 ; that Hilkiah represents a party opposed to
foreign influences (comp. Jer. ii. 18) ; and that the authors of none of the
other religious classics of Israel (however Egyptian their colouring, as in
the case of the Joseph-story) imitate this custom of the Egyptian litcmti.
It is only in Phoenician literature than we can perhaps find a parallel to
it ; Philo of Byblus (second cent. A.D.) asserts that the Phoenician history
of Sanchoniathon had been concealed and brought back to light by himself.
1 Brugsch, "Geschichte ^Egyptens," ed. i, p. 84 ; Maspero, "Ilistoire
ancienne de 1'Orient," cd. i, p. 73.
- Birch, " Egyptische Zeitschrift " (1871), p. 63.
3 Brugsch, as above, p. 60 ; Maspero, as above, p. 57.
86 JEREMIAH.
NOTE ON THE AI.UTSIONS TO EGYPT IN DEUTERONOMY.
One of the principal arguments for the Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy
is based on its allusions to Egypt and to Egyptian customs, combined with
the absence of allusions to Assyria. Dr. Bissell, one of those young
American scholars from whom so much may be hoped, goes so far as to
represent this as fatal to the theory of the late origin of the lawbook. 1 Such
allusions to Egypt doubtless exist, though the list requires sifting. Among
the best attested are the references to the ox treading out the corn un-
muzzled (Deut. xxv. 4) ; cf. Wilkinson, "Ancient Egyptians," ii. 46 ; and to
the practice of irrigating the soil " with thefoot '' (Deut. xi. 10), i.e., in Mr.
Espin's words, " by means of tread-wheels working sets of pumps, and by
means of artificial channels connected with reservoirs, and opened, turned,
or closed with the feet." The frequent references to the servitude of the
Israelites in Egypt (Deut. v. 15, vi. 21, &c.) are also remarkable. We
might have expected that the writer would show a horror of the Egyptians,
but no ; he represents Moses as deprecating such a feeling, and permitting
an Egyptian to be admitted to religious privileges in the third generation
(Deut. xxiii. 7, 8). Lastly, I must mention a very singular passage in the
law for the king (Deut. xvii. 14-20) : " But he shall not multiply horses to
himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should
multiply horses : forasmuch as Yahveh hath said unto you, Ye shall hence-
forth return no more that way " (v. 16). No thoroughly satisfactory expla-
nation of this prohibition has, perhaps, yet been given. We may, however,
at least, infer from it that in the time of the writer an attachment to Egypt
prevailed among the highest classes of the Israelites. Possibly we may
illustrate this by the name of Josiah's father Amon, which is identical with
that of the Egyptian Sun-god (cf. No-Amon, No of Amon, or rather Amen,
the name of the Egyptian Thebes in Nahum iii. 8). But at any rate there
is no necessity from these Egyptian allusions to argue the Mosaic author-
ship of Deuteronomy. In fact, the communication between Palestine and
Egypt was so easy, that the wonder is, not that there should be some allu-
sions to Egypt in the Old Testament, or in any book of it, but rather that
there should be so few. Allusions to Assyria were of course not to be ex-
pected in a summary of " Mosaic " laws and discourses. I do not venture
to assume that the form of the literary fiction in Deuteronomy is borrowed
from Egypt, though the assumption would have some plausibility. It would
of course cut away the ground for the theory of Mosaic authorship.
x "The Pentateuch : its Origin and Structure" (1885), p. 278, &c.
CHAPTER VIII.
"HIS REMEMBRANCE IS LIKE MUSIC" (ECCLUS. XLIX. l).
David's "last words" fulfilled in Josiah His thirteen golden years after
the great covenant Jeremiah's comparative happiness His friends
among the wise men Pharaoh Neco profits by the weakness of Assyria
Josiah's defeat at Megiddo ; his death The national mourning
The tragedy of his life, and of Israel's history.
" And these are David's last words :
David, son of Jesse, saith,
The man whom God exalted saith,
The anointed of the God of Jacob,
And the darling of the songs of
Israel ;
Jehovah's spirit spake by me,
And his word was on my tongue ;
The God of Israel said,
To me the Rock of Israel spake :
Who ruleth justly over men,
Who ruleth in the fear of God,
Is like the morning light at sunrise,
A morning without rain.
Through sunshine, through rain,
grass springcth from the earth."
(2 Sam. xxiii. 1-4.)
THESE are the words dramatically put into the mouth of
David by one of those nameless writers who flourished in
the period of the greater prophets themselves filled to over-
flowing with the spirit of prophetic religion. Just as several
great inspired prose-writers and poets busied themselves in
the Book of Deuteronomy (see end of Chapter VII.) with
reproducing what must have been the last words of Moses, or
what would have been his last words if he had lived in their own
time, so several great inspired poets endeavoured, so to speak,
to think themselves back into the soul of David, and complete
the scanty number of the songs of the founder of psalmody.
One of these poets is the author of the eighteenth psalm ;
another composed that beautiful poem the first part of which is
the motto of this chapter. This latter writer may well have
88 JEREMIAH.
lived in the time of Hezekiah or Josiah, 1 and the second part of
his poem may reflect the vigorous measures of one or the other
of these great reformers. But whichever king suggested this
idealization of his remote ancestor, it is in Josiah alone that the
opening words of the poem are fully realized. Of him, more
than of any other king, may it be said that he was the darling
both of Jehovah and of Israel ; and the words of the poem do but
express in ornate language the idea of Jeremiah's noble epitaph
(as I have called it) on his friend : Did not thy father eat and
drink, and do judgment and justice, and then it was well with
him ? He judged the cause of the poor and needy ; then it was
well with him; was not this to know me, saith Jehovah ? (Jer.
xxii. 15, 16).
For thirteen years after the publication of the first Scripture,
Josiah continued to occupy the throne of David, of whose ideal
he seemed the living embodiment. David fell far short of his
ideal, because he had no Scripture as the compass of his life ;
whereas the mingled sentiments of fear, love, and hope,
awakened in Josiah by the reading of Deuteronomy, could at
any time be kindled again to a white heat by meditation upon
that inspired volume. The words, Then said I, Lo, I am come ;
in the roll of the book is my duty written j my delight, O my
God, is to do thy will j yea, thy law (torah) is within my
heart (Psa. xl. 7, 8), even if written later, must represent the
state of mind of the good Josiah. I can well believe that he
fulfilled the direction in Deut. xvii. 18, and wrote him a copy of
this law, and read therein all the days of his life. And I think
we may safely conjecture that these last thirteen years of his
reign were among the happiest of the long period of the mon-
archy. Certainly they must have been so if the Deuteronomic
code was approximately carried out. Even where its provisions
seem to us unpractical, their spirit is so exquisitely humane, that
a modern reader may well sigh at the slow pace of our improve-
ments. Here is a lawbook, made in the interests not of any
class or caste, but of the whole people ; or, if it does display a
1 The song must be taken in connexion with the prophecy put into the
mouth of Nathan (see especially 2 Sam. vii. ti-i6) by a writer who lived
when prophecy had long assumed a literary garb, and, in all probability, at
the time assigned above to the author of our song, who " thought himself
into the soul " of David, just as the author of 2 Sam. vii. 5, &c. " thought
himself into the soul " of David's prophet.
"HIS REMEMBRANCE IS LIKE MUSIC." 89
preference for any part of the community, it is for the poor and
weak. Where is the Christian nation which recognized this
even as a standard to be aimed at, until that great awakening
of the moral and religious conscience or, in Bible language,
that great Day of the LORD (Jehovah) which filled up the close
of the eighteenth century ? Well said the author of Deutero-
nomy, in the introduction r which (after perhaps a few years'
experience of the benefits to the nation at large of the system
introduced through him) he prefixed to his original work, What
great nation is there, tliat hath statutes and judgments so
righteous as all this law (tord/t), which I set before you this day?
(Deut. iv. 8). He speaks, no doubt, in the assumed character
of Moses ; but by the three times repeated expression great
nation (see vv. 6-8) he reveals the fact that the people of
Israel had, either through God's longsuffering mercy (Rom. ii. 4)
or through His blessing upon its obedience, attained a high
degree of temporal prosperity.
It is remarkable that not one of the prophecies of Jeremiah can
be referred to these years. Either he still devoted himself to the
exposition of the Deuteronomic law, or, if he delivered original
prophecies of his own, he did not afterwards care to reproduce
them, except of course so far as their contents reappeared in
prophecies of later reigns. At any rate, in spite of his melan-
choly statements at an earlier and a later period, I make no doubt
that these thirteen years were a time of comparative happiness
to the prophet, that, like Isaiah, he enjoyed the society of
friends and disciples, and that to these among others he refers in
a subsequent discourse respecting those captives in Babylon
on whom Jehovah graciously promised to set His eyes for good
(Jer. xxiv. 2-7). Among these friends may have been the name-
less author of the first nine chapters of the Book of Proverbs,
which were not written to fill their present place, but once
formed an independent work in praise of true Wisdom. 2 In
its genial, persuasive tone and sunny spirit, this book reminds
us not so much of Jeremiah as of the exhortations in the Book
of Deuteronomy, like which it inculcates the doctrine, so well
adapted to young pupils and primitive nations, that the fear of
God is the one source of earthly happiness.
1 On the critical analysis of the book, see end of Chapter VII.
2 "Job and Solomon" (1887), p. 156, &c. ; comp. Stanley, "Jewish
Church," ii. 170, &c,
90 JEREMIAH.
My readers will admit that there is nothing violent or far-
fetched in the view which I have put forward, and which fits
itself admirably into a harmonious and well-proportioned his-
torical picture of the times. There were three orders of God's
ministers in what by anticipation I may venture to call the
Jewish Church priests, wise men or moral teachers, and pro-
phets. Their respective functions are well indicated in a popu-
lar saying reported by Jeremiah (xviii. 18), Religious direction
shall not be lost from the priest, nor counsel from the wise man,
nor revelation from the prophet. There is no doubt that other
prophets of the nobler type were on friendly terms with the best
of the wise men, whose very language they sometimes borrow, 1
and how can Jeremiah have been unacquainted with so eminent
a wise man as the author of this lovely treatise, so closely akin
to his own favourite book, Deuteronomy ? The value of such
conjectures (which, when supported by all the attainable evi-
dence, approach indefinitely near to facts) is that they help
to make the Bible story live again to us, and I hope never to
cease repeating that this is one of the greatest tasks of the
Christian teachers of our day, and closely connected with the
future of Christianity among the educated classes.
The wise men or moral teachers flourished most in periods
of tranquillity. It was in such a period that of Solomon that
we can first confidently trace them, and a not less golden oppor-
tunity was furnished for their work by these last thirteen years
of Josiah. Alas that the " fine gold " so soon "became dim"
(Lam. iv. i) ! Alas that the teachers so soon had to become
learners again in the stern school of calamity ! The inspired
poet to whom I owe my motto spoke of a summer sky, with
its sweet vicissitudes of sun and shower, causing the grass to
spring up, and all homely, common blessings. Suddenly and
without a warning, that smiling heaven became black with
clouds. Do not let us despise the elementary lesson which this
supports, aud which it took God's ancient people so long to
learn. Trust not the future ; fierce are the storms of spring, but
those of summer can be as wild ; God is not bound to make the
years resemble each other in the cloying sweetness of perpetual
ease. Midway in I'rfe 2 to each of the two best kings of Judah
1 "The Prophecies of Isaiah," note on Isa. xxviii. 23. In Jer. viii. 9,
our prophet refers perhaps to the less religious class of wise men.
3 Hitzig would render, in the opening line of Hezekiah's psalm (Isa.
"HIS REMEMBRANCE IS LIKE MUSIC." 91
caiVie a sore calamity ; Hezekiah became sick unto death, but
the Lord's hand held him back ; ' Josiah, at the same age of 39,*
was overmatched by a too powerful opponent, and died in battle.
This is how it came about, and why we should regard this event
as one of the greatest tragedies of the sacred story.
Let us now go back in imagination about twenty years to the
time when the Scythian hordes overran Assyria and Babylonia."
Both countries, as we remember, suffered cruelly, but the
Assyrians, up to this time the more aggressive and warlike race,
had at length been overtaken by a lassitude which had de-
stroyed their physical power of recovering from injury. They
had added conquest to conquest, but taken no pains to weld
their dominions into a durable empire, and so revolt followed
upon revolt, and the reign of Assurbanipal was like the last fine
day in autumn the too brilliant forerunner of a period of trouble
and disaster. The death of Assurbanipal (was it 626 B.C. ?)
certainly fell in the first part of the reign of Josiah, and the
dangerous position of that great king's successor may have en-
couraged Josiah to extend his own sway over part of the former
kingdom of Ephraim, for we find him continuing his iconoclastic
progress to Bethel and "the cities of Samaria 3 (2 Kings xxiii.
15-19; comp. 2 Chron. xxxiv. 6). At any rate, Neco II., the
reigning Pharaoh, an enterprising monarch (as we know from
Herodotus), 4 and strong in all military resources, resolved to
xxxviii. 10), " In the middle of my days must I go," &c. ; comp. the ex-
treme limit of the age of man in Psa. xc. 10. A suggestive even if wrong
rendering !
1 Isa. xxxviii. 17, thou hast held back my soul from the pit of destruction.
R.V.'s rendering is barely possible ; but the text only says, " thou hast
loved my soul out of," &c. I prefer to follow the reading of the Septuagint
and the Vulgate, with most recent critics.
2 With most, I assume the correctness of the revised text of 2 Kings
xvii. i.
3 Is it possible to account for Jeremiah's special kindness and courtesy
towards northern Israel in chaps, iii. and xxxi. by a desire to make up for
the judicial severity of his royal patron (2 Kings xxiii. 19. 20), which must
have deeply wounded the feelings of the remnant of Ephraim?
4 In v. 21, two words need correction from 3 Esdras i. 25 "house" be-
comes " Euphrates "; " disguised himself" becomes " firmly resolved "the
latter correction is also confirmed by the Septuagint ; lastly, where the
received text reads " to make haste," I follow Klobtermann in reading "in
a dream."
92 JEREMIAH.
profit by the manifest weakness of Assyria. In the spring of 608,
he began a series of campaigns, designing to conquer one by
one the provinces of feudatory states of the Ninevite empire.
Of these feudatory states Judah had formerly been one. I think
it probable that Josiah had for some time past, like Hezekiah
(2 Kings xviii. 7), refused tribute to the Assyrian suzerain ; at
least, it would be unreasonable to suppose that Josiah took the
field against Neco, as he presently did, in the character of
a vassal of Nineveh. This is all that the earlier of the two
Hebrew narrators says on the intervention of Josiah,
In his days Pharaoh Neco king of Egypt went up against
tlic king of Assyria to the river Euphrates : and king Josiah
went against him, and he slew him at Megiddo when he hud
seen him (2 Kings xxiii. 29).
The Chronicler is rather more full. He feels the fragmentary
character of his preceding record, and connects this record with
the sad story which follows in a purely mechanical manner.
After all this that Josiah had prepared the temple, Neco
king of Egypt went up to fight by Carchemish on the Euphrates ;
and Josiah went out against him. And Neco sent messengers
to him, saying, What have I to do with thce, king of Judah?
Not against thee am I come this day ; for upon Euphrates is my
ivar. And Elohim hath commanded me in a dream j keep thee
away from Elohim, who is with me, that he destroy thee not. But
Josiah turned not his face from him, for he had firmly resolved
to fight with him, and hearkened not unto the words of Neco
from the mouth of Elohim ; and he came to f-ght with him in
t/ie valley of Megiddo (2 Chron. xxxv. 20-22). *
We may perhaps regard it as a historical fact that Neco sent
an embassy to Josiah ; the Chronicler certainly preserves some
1 This delightful writer becomes our chief authority for this period, as
Brugsch in an eloquent, melancholy sentence tells us ("Geschichte ALgyp-
tens," ed. i, p. 737). From Herod, ii. 152, iv. 42, we learn to respect in
Neco (Ne/ctuf) the predecessor of Lesseps (for the Egyptian king fully de-
served to succeed in cutting through the isthmus of Suez) and of Diaz and
Vasco de Gama (in the circumnavigation of Africa). If Neco and his
imitator, the Corinthian tyrant Periander, had but succeeded in their
enterprising schemes, hoVv profoundly they would have affected the course
of history ! The true cause of Neco's abandonment of the canal was pro-
bably, not the supposed oracle in Herodotus, but the necessity of increasing
his forces for the defence of the Egyptian frontier after his defeat in Asia.
On the canal, comp. Ebers, " Durch Gosen zum Sinai," p. 471, &c.
"HIS REMEMBRANCE IS LIKE MUSIC." 93
historic traditions omitted in Kings. Even the contents of the
message are in themselves probable enough. Like the bold
statement of the Rabshakeh in Isa. xxxvi. 10, they may be fitly
illustrated by the striking description of a dream-oracle in the
Annals of Assurbanipal. 1 Neco had his own prophets who could
doubtless interpret dreams. If, however, we decline the con-
jectural reading "in a dream" (see below), we may, if we will,
follow 3 Esdras i. 28, when the words of Neco become the words
of Jeremiah. Certainly, it is probable enough that Jeremiah's
person had a supernatural sanctity in the eyes of Egyptian as
well as of Assyrian generals. But we know nothing from the
Book of Jeremiah of any advice which he gave to Josiah, and
the point of the narrative seems to be that even Neco had a true
presentiment, while Josiah, the darling of God and man, rushed
blindly to his fate. But what was the cause of his aggressive
conduct? It is quite impossible that he should have been
affected by considerations of statecraft, not merely because he
was the friend of Jeremiah, and must have accepted as Divine
the early fulminations of the prophet (chap, ii.), but also from
the very nature of the case. For policy would have suggested
to him cither to help Neco, or at any rate not to oppose him.
What harm could the Pharaoh possibly do to the Jews? Sup-
posing that he defeated the Assyrians, would he not soon have
more formidable opponents in the Medes and Babylonians, 2 a
rumour cf whose warlike movements must by this time have
reached Palestine, and be only too glad to return within his own
borders ?
I think that a comprehensive study of the history of revealed
religion suggests the true explanation. God sometimes sacri-
fices the individual for the sake of the community allows him
to become the victim of dangerous illusions, in order that they
may be seen to be illusions. Josiah if I have described him
rightly made the Scripture of Deuteronomy the rule of his
li/e. It was not merely a formal but a spiritual obedience that
1 "Records of the Past," ix. 52. It was Assurbanipal's prophet who
had the dream. Probably, like the Egyptian priests, when they sought for
oracles, he slept, like Samuel, near the holy place, and regarded his
" thoughts from visions of the night " (Job iv. 13) as necessarily Divine.
2 Joscphus ("Ant." x. 5, i) actually says that Neco's object was to war
witli tin; Medcs and Babylonians, " who had overthrown the empire of the
Assyrians."
94 JEREMIAH.
he gave to it ; he performed God's law from love. I do not in
this equalize him with our Lord or even with His saintly fol-
lowers ; but upon the whole we must believe him to have assimi-
lated that great idea, first clearly announced, though not in
such few words, by Hosea, and incorporated into the prophetic
portion of the Book of Deuteronomy that " God is love."
Josiah cannot have known his countrymen as Jeremiah knew
them ; he was of too exalted a rank to gauge their spiritual
attainments. The idea that his reformation was half a failure
could never have occurred to him, and if suggested by another,
it would have been against nature for him to admit it. This,
then, was one of the illusions to which he became a victim the
illusion that his countrymen knew and served Jehovah, and were
consequently the objects of His loving favour, in the same sense
or degree as himself. The other was one to which in all pro-
bability even Jeremiah was still subject, in common with such a
noble and inspired religious thinker as the author of the little
book on Divine Wisdom in Prov. i.-ix. It was this that in
the long run righteousness is rewarded in this world by pros-
perity, and unrighteousness punished by adversity. Josiah
would certainly have called himself a righteous man, not in the
sense of that Chinese who said that he had never committed a
single " sin " (he added that neither had his father nor his
grandfather ever done so), but in the sense that he had given
his heart to God, and that his chief desire was to perform that
law which he so much loved. He must have argued therefore
(comp. the argument which Assurbanipal pleads to Istar) J that
Jehovah would meet love with love, and reward him openly for
his faithful obedience. It would have been quite intelligible
had Josiah aspired to revive the glorious days of David. Dr.
Oort of Leyden and Mr. F. W. Newman have indeed too
boldly conjectured that Psa. Ixxii. expresses such anticipations
on the part of one of Josiah's subjects, and Deut. xx., xxi. might
conceivably have stimulated warlike feelings in the monarch.
But at any rate, when, at the head of warriors not less righteous
(as he fondly supposed), Josiah took the field against a heathen
invader, he must, one imagines, have been full of a David-like
boldness and faith. Nor, sympathetic as he must have been
towards pious psalmists, can he have failed to recall those words
which a recent poet had put into the mouth of David,
1 See " Records of the Past," ix. 51.
"HIS REMEMBRANCE IS LIKE MUSIC." 95
Jehovah dealt with me according to my righteousness,
According to the cleanness of my hands he recompensed me,
Because I kept the ways of Jehovah,
And did not wickedly depart from, my God:
For all his ordinances -were before me,
And I did not put away his statntes from me /
/ was also perfect towards him,
And I kept myself from guiltiness.
So thou gavest me thy shield of victory ;
Thy right hand Iicld me up,
And thy condescension made me great.
I pursued mine enemies and overtook them ;
And turned not again till I had consumed them,
I dashed them to pieces that they could not rise,
But fell under my feet (Psa. xviii. 20-23 ; 35-38).
But still more must he have thought of those glowing benedic-
tions at the end of Deuteronomy which are expressly attached
to the faithful observance of the book of the covenant,
And it shall come to pass . . . that Jehovah thy God will set
thee on high above all nations of the earth. Blessed shalt ihou
be in the city, and blessed in the field. Blessed shall be thy basket
and thy store. Blessed shalt thou be when thou contest in, and
blessed when thou goest out. Jehovah shall cause thine enemies
that rise up against thee to be smitten before thy face j they shall
come out against thee one way, and flee before thee seven ways
(Deut. xxviii. 1-8).
For it was not a war of conquest in which Josiah was engaging,
but a holy war. The south of the land of Israel had, it is true,
been spared ; but both in his reforming progress, and, we may
now add, even in his final choice of a battlefield, Josiah de-
clared himself to be the rightful king both of north and of south
the legal representative of David and Solomon. 1 If the
Assyrians had withdrawn their heavy hand from the territory
of Ephraim, was it to be endured that another unbelieving foe
should pitch his tents in the very heart of the sacred land?
And so no doubt costly sacrifices were offered in the temple
before the army set forth, and the twentieth psalm was sung,
containing the words,
Now am I sure that Jehovah saveth his anointed,
He will answer him from his holy heaven
With the mighty saving acts of his right hand (Psa. xx. 6).
1 See above, p. 60,
96 jKREMIAtf.
The two armies met in the strategically important valley
or, to use the more accurately descriptive term, plain (Heb.,
bik l dh, a broad plain between mountains) of Jezreel or Esdra-
elon. 1 The name of the place was confounded by Herodotus'
informant with that of a town on the north-east frontier of
Egypt, which I shall have to mention again later ; it was really
Megiddo, not Magclol, where the fatal clash of arms took place
(2 Kings xxiii. 29). By what route did the Egyptians arrive ?
Just before his reference to- Neco's defeat of the " Syrians" at
" Magdolos," Herodotus speaks of the docks where the ships
were built which that king "employed wherever he had occa-
sion." 2 It is not impossible that, to avoid hostilities with
Josiah, Neco took his troops by sea to some landing-place
north of Judah proper say, to Dor, an ancient and famous
port, 3 which probably remained Phoenician, even after Nafath
(or Nafoth) Dor was conquered by the Israelites (Josh. xi. 2,
xii. 23, Judges i. 27, I Kings iv. 11). its Phoenician inhabitants
were doubtless as politic as Josiah was the reverse. From Dor
(slightly to the north of the modern village Tantura) to Megiddo
in the great plain of Jezreel was no great distance ; Duru (Dor)
and Magidu or Magadu (Megiddo) are in fact mentioned to-
gether in the Assyrian inscriptions. The alternative is to
suppose that Neco took the same route as Thothmes III. (B.C.
1600?), in whose reign, as the inscriptions tell, "Egypt placed
its frontier where it pleased," and who led his invading forces
by land to " Maketa " or Megiddo, where he routed the combined
forces of Syria and Mesopotamia. 4 At any rate, it was on the
battlefield of Megiddo, 5 famous already in the poetry of Israel
by the defeat of Jabin and Sisera, and not less celebrated in
apocalyptic vision (Rev. xvi. 16), that the unequal struggle
1 Herod, ii. 15* ,
2 For the historical associations connected with this " battlefield of
Syria," ranging from Thothmes III. and Rameses II. to Bonaparte and
Kleber, see Lias's note on Judg. vi. 33 (Cambridge Bible).
3 See Schiirer, " The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ," E. T.
Div. ii., Vol. i., p. 88.
4 " Records of the Past," ii. 37-39 (Birch) ; comp. Brugsch, "Geschichte
/Egyptens," ed. i, pp. ,295-6.
5 On a low promontory thrown out from the Samaritan hills towards the
recess between the Nazarene range and Jebel Dahy ("Little Hermon ")
stood the Roman Legw, whence the modern Lejiin. Here, too, probably,
in the most peaceful of landscapes, stood Megiddo.
"HIS REMEMHRANCE IS LIKE MUSIC." 97
between Neco and Josiah took place. Alas ! the men of Israel
fled at the very beginning of the battle ;* it was as if (applying
a well-known Hebrew figure 2 ) the aspect of the angry Egyptian
king had scattered his enemies. The fate of Ahab became that
of Josiah: " a certain man drew a bow at a venture, and smote
the king of Israel" (i Kings xxii. 34, comp. 2 Chron. xxxv. 23).
He was brought to Jerusalem to die. What were his last
thoughts ? Did he still trust God ? None can answer that
question ; but that the faith of many of his subjects was shaken,
we may be certain. The problem of a perfect and upright man
given into the hand of " the Satan " became from this time forth
the problem of Jewish wisdom the problem of which there is
but a faintly hinted solution in the noblest monument of that
wisdom, the Book of Job.
That blessed results accrued in the long run to the Jewish
Church from this great calamity, could easily be shown. From
Megiddo the eye turns instinctively to the hillside on which,
twelve miles distant, lovely Nazareth stands. But who thought
of looking beyond the sad sights of the immediate present ?
Faith was paralyzed ; the heart of the nation seemed to stand
still. Unmixed sadness and consternation spread through all
classes. The more recent of our two narrators makes this
statement, to which I shall have to return later,
And all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for Josiah. And
Jeremiah lamented for Josiah : and all the singing men and the
singing women spake of Josiah in their lamentations unto this
day j- and they were made an ordinance (i.e., institution) in Israel
(2 Chron. xxxv. 24, 25).
Such a national mourning was doubtless very different from
the prescribed lamentations at an ordinary king's death ; one
thinks of the mourning after the field of Flodden in Scottish
history. The whole land mourned ; every family felt bereaved
(Zech. xii. 11, 12). But some may in a special sense be called
1 So we must explain the words, when he had seen him. It is not stated
in the Old Testament that the men of Israel fled ; but we may safely pre-
sume that the presence of the king was still as all-important to the army as
in Ahab's time. So Josephus understood the Biblical passages. He says
that Josiah was setting his army in array when one of the Egyptians shot
him, and put a stop to his eagerness for the fray ; on which he commanded
a retreat to be sounded.
8 See e.g. Lam. iv. 16.
S
98 JEREMIAH.
" chief mourners." First of all, the poor and weak, to whom
it had been Josiah's delight to do justice ; and next, the friends
of spiritual religion with whom from his earliest youth he had
been so closely allied. Let us sympathize, then, most deeply
with Jeremiah, whose hopes have once more been dashed to the
ground. For the result of the defeat and death of Josiah was,
not merely the reduction of Judah to the rank of a subject-state,
but above all, the revival of idolatry and the sore discourage-
ment of the little band of reformers. Jeremiah, the most
illustrious mourner, must indeed have felt the blow. Henceforth
his life is a true martyrdom, only relieved by his rock-like
constancy, and by that wondrous revelation to which I have
already alluded, and which represents the high-water mark of
Jewish religion before the Captivity.
The story of Israel is a succession of tragedies ; but perhaps
there is none more touching than the tragedy of the death of
Josiah. And for this reason that he is so entirely innocent.
His case was not that of so many of the later Jews, who fell
back into an illusion which revelation ought to have dissipated.
No ; he could not have believed otherwise than he did. What
an enigma his fate would remain, if Jesus Christ had not ratified
the presentiments of the noblest Jews since Jeremiah, and
proved that the way to the crown lies by the cross. Can we
doubt that even this defeated king has received a crown the
crown of one who has lived by the light of God's word, and
ventured all rather than distrust His promises? And in the
spirit of Josiah's life shall not we, my readers, follow him ?
Say not that the standard is too high, that such passionate
earnestness is not in our character, that such devotion to con-
science is Quixotic. It is the glory of the Gospel that, by using
its resources, the common man or woman may exceed the
standard of the highest Old Testament saint (Matt. xi. u).
Our heart may be an unsteady thing; but, as the psalmist says,
Jehovah is not only the believer's portion in eternity, but his
rock in time. With God's " light " and God's " truth " (that is,
"faithfulness") for guides (Psa. xliii. 3), the weakest character
and the strongest gain alike a supernatural depth and seriousi
ness. They will go with us into battle, like the ark of Jehovah,
and ensure us the victory, even though, as in Josiah's case, the
victory may not be manifest even to ourselves till we reach the
other side I will not say, of death, but of life. With these
"HIS REMEMBRANCE IS LIKE MUSIC." 99
heavenly guides, we need fear no shocks whether to our out-
ward or to our inward being. Riches may take to themselves
wings and flee away; friends may pass before us into the "silent
land ' ; forms of doctrine may, as with Josiah's contemporaries,
prove to be not free from educational illusion ; but " Israel's
Rock" (Isa. xxx. 29, R.V.) remains. My flesh and my heart
faileth) but God is the rock of my heart, and my portion for ever
(Psa. Ixxiii. 26).
I spoke of Josiah's death as one of the greatest of religious
tragedies. Alas that in Israel's history there should be one
still greater, which, if we felt it aright, would make our hearts
bleed. It is a perennial tragedy that of the veiled face set
forth in sculpture on the lovely door of the Chapter-room of
my own cathedral. The mourning of the people of Judah
for Josiah is taken in the Book of Zechariah (xii. 10-14) a s
an emblem of a mourning yet future, when God's " ancient
people" 1 (Isa. xliv. 7) shall look on him 2 whom they pierced^
and shall mourn for him as one mourneth for an only son, and
as the mourning for Hadad-rimmon 3 in the plain of Megiddo.
The tragedy lies in the well-nigh two thousand years' wander-
ings of Israel through a labyrinth of slowly brightening
1 It is often impossible to determine with certitude between different
interpretations, and one may sometimes believe that, like other Oriental
writers, the prophets and psalmists meant to be enigmatical (comp.
Delitzsch's note on Psa. l.xxii. 15). Delitzsch explains this phrase of the
people of the antediluvian world ; Brcdenkamp (the latest commentator,
who doubtless ought to be the wisest), of the people of Israel, called to be
God's people since the earliest times.
2 The received text has "unto me," but the last letter (i) representing
the pronoun "me," is probably the first letter, or a fragment of the first
letter, of some lost word, the middle part of which has dropped out, and
the last part is represented (or misrepresented) by the letters HM- The
reading "unto him" is, probably, only a conjectural emendation, the accept-
ance of which does not modify the syntactic peculiarity of the phrase. I
have adopted it above, simply from ignorance of the true reading, which may
either have been a proper name or a term descriptive of character or office.
Who was the person alluded to? Was it the same martyr who seems to
be referred to in the ancient prophecy adopted and modified in Isa. lii.
i3-liii. ? If so, Jehovah sympathized with His martyr, and regarded the
" insult " as offered to Himself (cf. Psa. Ixix. 9).
3 Jerome says, " Adadremmon is a city near Jerusalem, now called
Maximianopolis, in the field of Mageddon, where the righteous king Josiah
was wounded by the Pharaoh called Nechao." At a short distance from
100 JEREMIAH.
darkness. The clue is missing ; when shall the wanderer find
it ? Sad, beyond expression sad ; but is it not a fascinating
tragedy ? Why do so few of us know this ? Is it nothing to
vou, all ye that pass by, whose eyes are never satisfied with
seeing, nor whose ears with hearing, for whom no poetry is
too sensuous, no romance too strange ? Ye who have been
nourished on the story of the Israel of Scripture has it so
fully satisfied your curiosity that you have not a thought for the
second part of that wondrous tale ? Has no one told you of the
manifold interest of Jewish history in the middle ages, and of
Jewish life at the present time ? Some of you, who think scorn
of poetry and romance, find your pleasure perhaps in the
records of missionary work in heathen lands. Is there no
pleasure to be won from the records of missions (not merely
English missions) to the Jews a pleasure mingled (I must
sadly confess) with pain at the faulty methods which have too
often been adopted, but one which brings you very near the
heart of Jesus ? There may be others among you who fear
even this chastened pleasure, and who promote Christian
missions simply from a sense of duty. Does not the thought
of five thousand poor Jewish refugees added to the population
of East London suggest to you the idea of a duty the duty of
bringing them to the great Teacher if you can, but at any rate
of helping them, and especially of sympathizing with them, of
giving some thought to their past history and present condition.
God hath not cast away his people? says St. Paul, with the
passionate earnestness which is the keynote of his character.
Nay, a part of the prophecy is being fulfilled. A " spirit of
supplication" has been " poured out " upon many of those who
are still in the fullest and truest sense Israelites. No people on
the face of the earth weeps so much for its sins and their
punishment as the eastern Jews. Those who have once heard
them in their synagogues cry in Hebrew, " Forgive us now,
forgive us now," confess that they can never forget it. It is
almost as touching to see the Jews, as Sir Richard Temple
truly remarks, come singly and quietly, without any form or
Lejjiin there is still a place called Rummanc, in which the second part of
the name Hadad-rimmon may perhaps survive. It ought to be mentioned
that there is another explanation of Zech. xii, n ; but to do it justice, would
tarry us too lar into criticism.
1 Rom. xi. i ; comp. Jer. xxxi. 38.
"HIS REMEMBRANCE IS LIKE MUSIC." IOI
ceremony, to weep over the beloved stones at the accustomed
" Wailing-place." ' When shall the other part of the prophecy
be fulfilled ? When shall they look with desire on Him whom
by their ignorant unbelief they have so long pierced ? 3
This is the tragedy of Israel a people, than which there is
none more ancient 3 nor more noble, but neglectful of its highest
honour and grandest privilege. To understand the causes of
this tragedy, will be the reward of him who ponders the later
pages of the romantic story of God's people.
1 " Palestine Illustrated " (1888), p. 40.
2 In a few sentences, one can hardly express a point of view, much less
give conclusions. May I therefore refer to the article entitled " The Jews
and the Gospel " in "The Expositor," 1885 (i), pp. 405-418, which seeks
to be just to all who "turn upwards " (Hos. vii. 16) in Israel, whether in a
manner congenial to ourselves or not.
3 I do not forget the constancy of the old Egyptian ethnic type, which
permits you, as M. E. M. de Vogue" remarks, to confound the fellah who
guides you in the Bulak museum with the statues against which he jostles.
But can the motley population of Egypt be called a nation ?
PART II.
THE CLOSE OF JUDAH' S TRACED V
CHAPTER I.
THE CLOUDS RETURN AFTER THE RAIN.
Consequences of Josiah's death Jeremiah's changed attitude towards
Deuteronomy His visit to Anathoth.
IN a volume of poetic reproductions of sacred stories by the
late Dr. Neale there is one entitled " Josiah," which suggests a
modification of an image employed in the last chapter. At the
opening of Josiah's reign it might indeed be natural to compare
it to a bright summer sky, but we who know its sad termination
must feel with the poet that the pensive beauty of an autumnal
day is a more appropriate figure, especially when we remember
how, even in England, the glories of autumn sometimes pass
away in the tempest of a single night. Yes ; and it was not
an English but an Eastern winter, such as we find described
by the world-weary Preacher (Eccles. xii. 2) which followed
Josiah's death. The religious results of that great calamity were
twofold. First, the revival, to some extent at least, of idolatrous
practices. This is what Jeremiah himself says (xvii. 2), The
sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron and with the point of
a diamond; it is graven upon the tablet of their hearty and upon
the horns of their altars; inasmuch as their children (stilt)
bethink them of their altars and their AsheraJis tinder the leafy
trees upon the high hills (the conical hills of Judah which so
well adapt themselves to such forms of worship). We cannot
wonder at such a natural though inopportune revival. Deep in
the heart of primitive man lies the instinct of sacred places and of
THE CLOUDS RETURN AFTER THE RAIN. 103
polytheism. It would be absurd to connect Moslem saint-worship
as a whole with the polytheism of the ancient Israelites, but
who can doubt that those little white cupolas (Arabic, qitbba)
which continually meet the eye in Palestine, each on its
eminence, and often (see the Palestine Fund's photographic
view of Tell Hazur near Banias) with its sacred tree or trees, are
the direct successors of those "altars upon the high hills under
the leafy trees " of which Jeremiah speaks ? If, after the lapse
of centuries, and in spite of the levelling hand of the conqueror
and the sweeping torrent of invasion, the fellaheen are still
drawn to the old consecrated spots, and gaily dressed groups
can still be seen going up hill and down dale to " visit " some
saint or prophet (i.e., his reputed tomb), is it wonderful that
the same fascinating beliefs should have reasserted their sway
over the half-converts of Josiah ? Why, even Mohammed's
early converts longed after the old Semitic sacred trees. One
of the oldest Arabic historical works" contains this interesting
tradition, " The Ourashites and other heathen Arabs ac-
counted holy a large green tree, and every year had a festival
in its honour, at which they sacrificed and hung their arms
upon it. On the way to Hunain we called to God's Messenger
[Mohammed] that he should appoint for us such trees. But he
was terrified and said, ' Lord God, Lord God ! ye speak even as
the Israelites did to Moses, Make us such a god as the others
have ; ye are still in ignorance ; those are heathen customs.' "
Mohammed could talk thus, for fortune was on his side ; but
Jeremiah had a harder task to reconvert his contemporaries,
for it must have seemed to them as if the old beliefs were not
merely pleasant but efficacious. We may perhaps express their
thoughts thus : " All the early days of Josiah we had pros-
perity ; why ? Surely because we not only appeased the god
of our own nation but also the old divinities of the land, and
besides these, the gods of the powerful nations around us who
need to be propitiated even more (comp. Jer. xliv. 17). We
believe that it was the jealousy of these supernatural powers, so
seriously injured by Josiah, which led to the defeat and death
of that wrong-headed king." The details of this recrudescence
of the old wounds are not given us, but the general statement
in 2 Kings that the four successors of Josiah did evil in the
1 " Vakidi's Book of the Campaigns of God's Messenger," by Wellhauscn,
P- 356.
104 JEREMIAH.
sight of Jehovah according to all that their fathers had donc>
and that of Josephtis respecting Jehoahaz in particular that he
was "an impious man and impure in his course of life," permits
us to form but a low estimate of the national religion. The
case of Juclah under its kings was not like that of England
under the second Charles. If the " head " was " sick," we may
be sure that the "heart " WAS " faint." A formal revocation of
Josiah's covenant was unnecessary ; it is always simpler to
allow laws to fall into desuetude than to repeal them. Those
who liked to obey it, might do so ; those who did not, might
equally follow their inclination. In short, we can hardly doubt
that the wise and beautiful Deuteronomic law became at this
time, in the vivid language of another contemporary prophet,
benumbed or paralyzed (Hab. i. 4).
In one point, at any rate, it may be reasonably held that the
work of Josiah was not undone, viz., the abolition of the cruelties
of " the Topheth." Although the nineteenth chapter of Jeremiah
forms part of a section which principally relates to the reign of
Jehoiakim, yet I cannot draw from it the inference that the
worship of Moloch had been restored after the death of Josiah-
In fact, v. 13, where the houses of the kings of Jtidah are
threatened with a defilement comparable to that of the place
of the Topheth, sufficiently shows that " the Topheth " had
been disgraced ever since the Reformation ; ' the sins which are
rebuked must therefore be the inexpiable abominations of
Manasseh's reign (comp. Jer. xv. 4). But with this and
perhaps a few other exceptions, we may fairly assume that the
old cults came to life again, or rather, were brought back to the
light of day. For in fact it is doubtful whether any really
popular cult can be put down by main force. Neither Islam
nor the Roman Catholic Church has succeeded in doing this.
Not to mention the survivals of paganism in both, it is enough
to refer to the communities of crypto-Jews which so long
existed both in Christian and Mohammedan countries, and one
of which in Arabia still exists. 8
1 How strong an abhorrence of Hinnom was felt by the later Israelites is
shown by the use of Geenna in the New Testament for the abode of con-
demned spirits. (Gccnna.= Ge-l>en-/iinn<Jm.)
2 See an interesting article on Crypto-Jews in the Sf. Jamfs's Gazette,
May 24, 1888, and compare a letter by George Eliot in her " Life and
Letters " (by Cross).
THE CLOUDS RETURN AFTER THE RAIN. 105
A passage in Psa. Ixxxv. has lately been explained as
referring to this period. 1 We read in v. 8, according to A.V.
and R.V.,
/ will hear what God the Lord [Jehovah] will speak :
For he will speak peace unto his people, and to his saints !
But let them not turn again to folly.
Prof. Cornill thinks that the psalm reflects a definite historical
situation, the heavy affliction referred to in v. 4 being the tragic
death of Josiah. The psalmist doubts the permanence of the
good king's work. In w. 9-13 he gives an ideal picture of
Josiah's reign, which will also be true of the time to come
(that glory may dwell " that glory may continue to dwell ") if
Israel is faithful to its God. He seems to hear Jehovah
whisper this to him an oracle of peace, coupled with one con-
dition, viz., that the people does not fall back into idolatry
And Prof. Cornill thinks that this psalm follows Psa. Ixxxiv.
with chronological accuracy, for that lovely poem, according to
him, was composed in the latter part of the reign of Josiah. It
is a very suggestive and plausible view more so, I think, than
Ewald's conjecture that Psa. 1. expresses the mind of a pro-
phetic writer (who agrees with Jer. vii. 22, 23) when troubles
began to close round Josiah and his people. Neither view can
I discuss here ; the historical occasions of the psalms are not
to be determined by a dictatorial assertion. Neither view, I may
add, do I myself hold, but I would rather that my readers adopted
one or the other than that they rejected all attempts to find
historical situations for the sacred lyrics. Without reconstruct-
ing the porticoes, we shall not be in a position to do full justice
to the inner glories of the palaces of the Psalter.
Folly it might most truly be called this falling back into a
purely nationalistic view of Jehovah, as a supernatural Power
not able or willing at present to protect his people, as not even
the chief god of a crowded Pantheon. To such another prophet
exclaims, with cutting irony, in the name of the true God, " Of
whom wast thou in fear that thou wast thus faithless, and
forgattest Me ? But thy works shall not profit thee ; let thy
rabble of idols, when thou criest to them, deliver thee, if they
1 See essay by Dr. Cornill in the Homiletic Magazine, July, 1882. The
original is in Lmhardt's " Zeitschrift," 1881, p. 337, &c.
106 JEREMIAH.
can ! " ' But there was also a class of persons, not belonging
to the lowest ranks, who were differently and not less injuriously
affected by the recent catastrophe. These men could not even
yet shake off the illusion that righteousness is always rewarded
in the present life by prosperity, and wickedness punished
by adversity. They had never been able to assimilate the
prophetic element in the Detiteronomic fusion of legal and
evangelical religion. They were now more than ever bent on
reducing religion to a system of rules which might be "learned
by rote" (Isa. xxix. 13, R.V. margin). But they were not
satisfied with the scanty prominence given to sacrifices in the
Deuteronomic tordh, and if we may understand Jer. vi. 20 as
well as Jer. vii. 4 as referring to this period, they attempted to
bind Jehovah to them and to their interests by lavish sacrifices,
while sadly neglecting those " weighty matters of the law,"
"judgment, mercy, and faith."
These two classes of persons would naturally give different
explanations of the recent calamity. How the former set must
have argued we have seen. With it the latter will have agreed
in viewing Josiah's death as a sign of the Divine anger. " But
the sole divinity," they would say, " whom Judah has offended
is Jehovah. We lost our king because we did not as a nation
observe the law strictly enough ; because idolatrous customs
still lingered in our midst. More sacrifices are wanted to bring
back the sunshine of prosperity. But at least we need not be
afraid of a severer punishment. The temple of Jehovah j the
temple of Jehovah; the temple of Jehovah are these, i.e., these
buildings (Jer. vii. 4). Thus did these men faithfully hand on
the teaching of those prophets of a former generation, who, as
Micah tells us (iii. n), were wont to lean upon Jehovah, and
say, Is not Jehovah among us? no evil can come upon us.
Such is the obstinacy of old illusions, even when Providence
attempts, as one might say, to dissipate them, even when they
have become dangerous errors. Let us not be hard upon the
Jews ; how uncommon it is for the actors of history to be fully
able to read its lessons ! We know that Josiah's death was
" the beginning of sorrows " the first scene in the last act of
1 Tn these words Prof. Driver (" Isaiah : His Life and Times," p. 158)
condenses Isa. Ivii. 11-13 ( nrst part). I have myself long since adopted
the critical theory of Ewald relative to Isa. Ivi. Q-lvii. n<z (see '* Encyclo-
paedia Britannica," art. " Isaiah ").
THE CLOUDS RETURN AFTER THE RAIN. 107
the tragedy (not indeed of that national tragedy which is
still in progress, but of the tragedy of Israel before the Cap-
tivity). We know that God had decreed to send His people
into captivity. We know His merciful object in doing so
viz., first, to cure the nation of idolatry, and next, to lead
individuals to " serve God for nought," and after conceiving the
idea of " saving others," to form the magnificent conception
of a perfect Israelite Israel's and the world's Saviour. We
know all this ; but how could the Jews ? Unless those are right
who date the Book of Job in this period, there was but one
clear-sighted Jew Jeremiah, and even he could not see to the
end of God's ways. One step however we are sure that he took
now, if he did not take it before. He cannot any longer have
been an itinerant expounder of Deuteronomy. Nothing which
could be colourably represented as favouring mechanical religion
was a fit text-book for a progressive teacher. It is perhaps a
significant fact in this connexion that, in Jeremiah's epitaph
(if I may call it so) upon Josiah, he praises the king, not for
introducing the- tonik, but for doing justice to the poor, and
thus proving that he " knew " Jehovah (Jer. xxii. 16). Later on
he even becomes the prophet of a " new covenant " which is to
supersede all previous torah (Jer. xxxi. 31). Clearly, then,
Jeremiah must before this have begun to be disappointed with
Deuteronomy. He may have read it privately this perhaps we
may argue from his continued allusions to it, but in public he
confined himself to reproducing its more spiritual, more pro-
phetic portions. As a whole, Deuteronomy must be regarded
as thrust somewhat into the background, until at length the
problem which it sought to solve was resumed at the close of
the Exile, and afresh combination of elements, partly historical,
partly sacerdotal, partly prophetic, was published as our present
Pentateuch by the great reformer Ezra.
But though a kind of travel-weariness, to be accounted for
on moral rather than on physical grounds, may have attacked
the prophet, there was one place not far from the capital which
a natural feeling still prompte i him to visit. This was his
native town, Anathoth in Benjamin, which had been inhabited
for centuries by many priestly families. Jeremiah's own family
was not one of the poorest, so that his movements, whenever
he went there, could not fail to draw public attention. In fact
had he been less known, he might have been more honoured
108 JEREMIAH.
according to that saying of our Lord, A prophet is not without
honour save in his own country, and among his own kin, and
in his own house (Mark i. 28). Doubtless he had often ex-
perienced this on previous visits, but now after the death of
Josiah he found the neglect of contempt deepening into hatred.
He had gone to his native town, absorbed in his message, and
as unsuspicious of evil (see the Revised Version of Jer. xi. 19)
as a gentle lamb that in led to the slaughter, when an unpro-
voked attempt was made upon his life. With fair speeches (see
Jer. xii. 6), unworthy kinsmen of his own sought to draw him
into an ambush, and but for a "special providence" his career
would have been prematurely cut short. And Jehovah gave me
knowledge of it and I knew it; then thou shewedst me their
doings (Jer. xi. 18, R.V.). "Then" means "when I was in
utter unconsciousness." No one can think of excusing such
dastardly conduct, only worthy of the Bedouin robbers on the
other side of Jerusalem (Luke x. 30, comp. Jer. iii. 2) ; but can
we throw any light upon its motives ?
History requires that we should do equal justice to men who
in the heat of conflict may have misunderstood each other
that we should remember the complexity and the almost
tyrannical power of circumstances, and try and think ourselves
back into the position of both parties. In our present study,
it may help us to bear in mind that the word of a true prophet
was universally believed to have a supernatural efficacy. Balak,
for instance, sought to force Balaam to curse the Israelites, and
Esau was mortally offended with Jacob for coming " with
subtilty" and "taking away his blessing" (Gen. xxvii. 35).
Jeremiah himself held the same view, which is of course
only a primitive thinker's inference from the Divine origin of
prophecy. But who is the true prophet and which word of
prophecy has a Divine origin? There were always many com-
peting prophets at Jerusalem, and till the value of their oracles
had been tested by history, it did not seem possible to say
which of them were true prophets. This view of prophecy is
not obscurely expressed in Deut. xviii. 22,
And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word
which Jehovah hatli not spoken ? When a prophet speaketh in
the name of Jehovah, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass,
that is the thing which Jehovah hath not spoken.
It is not by any means a complete theory of prophecy (it is
THE CLOUDS RETURN AFTER THE RAIN. 109
in fact qualified by Deut. xiii. 1-3), or even of the relation of
predictive prophecy to fulfilment ; but it is one which naturally
commended itself to the people, and which prior to his own sad
experience our prophet himself probably held. 1 Jeremiah him-
self cannot have had a high place as yet in popular esteem.
For the people appear to have been sceptical as to the claims
of a prophet of woe to Divine inspiration, and Jeremiah had
delivered most emphatic predictions of national disaster which
moreover had not as yet been fulfilled. During the panic
caused by the Scythians, he probably was for a time encircled
by a halo of sanctity ; this we may infer from the fact that a
brief repentance followed upon his impassioned exhortations.
But the Scythians returned at last without molesting Judah, and
the respect for Jeremiah's prophesying appears to have vanished.
Whenever he went abroad, he had to listen to the mocking
inquiry, Where is the word of Jehovah ? pray, let it come to
pass' (Jer. xvii. 15). And so the wheel of fortune went round ;
the prophets who shouted "Peace, peace" (Jer. vi. 14) caught
the popular ear, and Jeremiah had either to keep silence or to
take up the new vocation of expounder of the law. But now it
must have seemed to the Jews as if those old predictions of
disaster, which had hitherto, so to speak, floated in the air
(comp. Isa. ix. 8), had come down charged with a first instal-
ment of disgrace and ruin. The smile of indifference was
exchanged for the scowl of hatred. Men began to fear Jere-
miah, and when the priests at Anathoth heard him say these
1 In Jer. xxviii, 8, 9 the prophet qualifies the older theory thus : True
prophets have, as a rule, for the sins of the people, predicted ' ' war. and
evil, and pestilence " ; therefore if a prophet falls into the new, sweet strain
of peace, he must be regarded with suspicion until the event proves that he
has been truly sent. Comp. Jer. xiv. 13-15. The popular argument, if I
have not been unjust to it, was exactly the opposite Jehovah was Israel's
God, and received all due homage from Israel ; consequently Israel (now
virtually synonymous with Judah) shall have peace. Once, but once only.
Jeremiah seems to ascribe the current prophecies of peace to Jehovah as
their author (Jer. iv. 10, comp. i Kings xxii. 20-23). This may perhaps
be due to the as yet imperfect distinction between true and false prophets
(contrast Jer. xiv. 13-15, xxiii. 25, Ezek. xiii. 1-16). But the passage re-
ferred to admits of another explanation (see my commentary).
2 Some think, however, that this passage refers to the time when Nebu-
chadnezzar returned in haste to Babylon, after defeating Neco, to secure
his crown.
1 10 JEREMIAH.
awful words in the name of Jehovah, What hath my beloved to
do in mine house ? 'will "vows and hallowed flesh take thy
wickedness from thee ? wilt thou therefore rejoice? (Jer. xi. 15,
Ewald), they began to feel towards him as their fathers would
have done to that prophet of Kemosh who said to Mesha, king
of Moab (so the ancient stone records), "Go destroy Israel."
Add to this that the foe, as they deemed him, of the common
weal was a kinsman of their own, and we have a sufficient ex-
cuse, not indeed for their treachery, but at least for the bitter
hostility with which the prophet's relations regarded him.
Can we help remarking the parallel between Jeremiah's early
history and that of Jesus Christ? Our Lord, like the prophet,
found His truest home-life at least, after His ministry had
begun in Capernaum and Bethany, and not in Nazareth. Of
his neighbours in that village-community it is true in the
fullest sense, that his own received him not (John i. n). They
did not indeed have recourse to cunning and treachery, but led
him to the brow of the hill (well known and dear to Jesus) on
which their city was built, that they might hurl him down the
cliff (Luke iv. 29). No wonder that He whose heart was far
more loving even than Jeremiah's lavished the wealth of His
affection on a few, and especially on the one most congenial to
Himself, among His disciples ; of this ore at least it could not
be said,
It is not an enemy that revilelh me, , . . -
(But) my companion and familiar friend (Psa. Iv. 12, 14).
Both our Lord and His prophetic predecessor had a longing
for true friendship which was very imperfectly satisfied. In
Jeremiah's case this was so keen as to be oppressive, and, as I
have ventured to point out, some of the psalmists, feeling a
special interest in this prophet, and having formed their ideals
partly upon his life and character, seem to have expressed his
very soul more strikingly even than he has done himself. Es-
pecially touching is the new sense which one of these temple-
poets has given to the familiar word " bereavement,''
They render me evil for good ;
Bereavement hdth come upon my soul (Psa. xxxv. 12, De Witt).
This, as we feel at once, sounds a lower depth of grief than
Jacob's If I be bereaved of my children, I am bereaved (Gen,
THE CLOUDS RETURN AFTER THE RAIN. Ill
xliii. 14), or than the following sad words of an imaginative
writer of our own day,
There's a rival bauld wi' young and auld,
And it's him that has bereft me ;
For the surest friends are the auldest friends,
And the maist o' mine hae left me. 1
The psalmist, I say, who thinks himself back into the soul of
Jeremiah, expresses a grief more bitter than that of the patriarch
or of the sufferer imagined by the Scotch poet it is that the
oldest friends did not prove the surest that they left him by no
natural compulsion but through treachery. This truly is a grief
which can "sap the mind" which did sap even Jeremiah's
mind, not completely indeed, for he knew the friend which
stickcth closer tlian a kinsman (Prov. xviii. 24), but enough to
breathe into him thoughts which are inconsistent with a perfect
inspiration. But thou, Jehovah, knowest me ; than seest me,
and triest my heart toward thcc; pull them out like sheep for
the slaughter, and consecrate them (like sacrificial victims) for
the day of slaughter (Jer. xii 3). There is the dross of human
frailty in this to be excused as we excuse the bitterness of the
prophet-like poet of mediaeval Christendom to be excused, not
to be justified. And whenever we read such words even in the
Scriptures, whether it be in Jeremiah or in psalms affected only
too intimately by Jeremiah, let us mentally correct them in
accordance with the words, Father, forgive them; for they know
not what tJiey do,
In the conjecture which I am now about to hazard I leap over
a wide space of time. But Jeremiah's life and character contain
the germ of so much that is Christian, that psychologically the
conjecture seems admissible that a period came when the flame
of resentment died away in the prophet's breast died away
quite naturally, because nothing remained as an object of
resentment. Is it not so with ourselves in so far as we have
the Spirit of Christ ? Does not life bring to each of us in a too
often dull and dusty pathway moments of a spiritual quality so
rich and rare that our past troubles appear but a slight bruising
(as St. Paul expresses it), and as working out for us in its initial
stage an eternal weight of glory (2 Cor. vii. 17)? Such a
1 Mr. Robert Louis Stevenson (" Underwoods").
112 JEREMIAH.
moment was given to the Florentine poet when, like St. Paul,
he was caught up 1o the third heaven (2 Cor. xii. 2), and
"smiled" at the "vile semblance" of earth and its miseries
(Paradiso, xxii. 133-135). And had not the prophet of the new
covenant similar moments, when, like him who in Psa. xvii.
has so piercingly complained of his bitter enemies, he could
pass into the world of God's light and truth, and say,
As for me, I shall behold thy face in righteousness ;
hlay I be satisfied, when I awake, -with thine inutge (Psa. xvii. 15).
The Christian proto-martyr himself used language only less
bitter than Jeremiah's in his grand final invective (Acts vii.
S'-SS^but his rough journey to Paradise was brightened by
the far holier inspiration, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge
(v. 60). And must not Jeremiah, amid that shower of cruel
stones which legend asserts to have crushed his earthly
tabernacle, have had the same angelic visitant, and so resembled
St. Stephen, not only (as they say) in the form of his martyr-
dom, but also in his intuition of a Divine fairness which is as
far above natural human justice as heaven is above the earth
a fairness which is but one aspect of essential love.
Jeremiah, as idealized by the noblest of his disciples or
admirers, was free from any morbid tendency to vindictiveness.
Among the psalms of the Passion, as we may call them, for
which we are indebted to these nameless writers, there is one
which stands out by its complete freedom from the sad legacy
of imprecation it is the twenty-second. This is not to be
ascribed to ignorance of Jeremiah's infirmity, for the psalm
alludes (or appears to allude) to a verse in the very section
which we have been considering. Jeremiah expresses himself
thus (Jer. xi. 20),
But, O Jehovah Sabdoth, that judgest righteously, that triest
the reins and the heart, let vie see thy -vengeance upon them :
for upon thee do I roll my cause (i.e., " I disburden myself by
commending my cause to thee ") ; and the words may, I think,
be in the psalmist's mind, when he represents the enemies of
that ideal Israelite, who is not unlike Jeremiah, but soars above
him, being a poetical anticipation of Israel's and the world's
Saviour, as uttering this derisive speech,
He has rolled (his cause) upon Jehovah ; let him deliver him ;
Let him rescue him, since he delighteth in him (Psa. xxii. 8).
THE CLOUDS RETURN AFTER THE RAIN. 113
And if you ask me how the disciple could rise above such a
master, whose works were to him the oracles of truth, I reply
that because his eyes were more fully opened by the lessons
of Providence. And this may suggest a comforting thought
for ourselves, preceded as we are by so many great teachers
that religious truth seems (but only seems) to lie before us full-
orbed, that it may be possible for us to divine what they
would say, if placed where we now stand, and reverently to
correct and supplement their words, just as the authors of
Deuteronomy did to Jeremiah, and the later psalmists to
Jeremiah. God's revelations let me say it again are never
ended ; the elements of truth may be as old as the first
"covenant" and as changeless as the nature of man, but new
combinations of those elements, both in Christian ethics and in
Christian theology, have the charm and novelty of fresh com-
munications from the spirit-world. When he, the Spirit of
truth, is come, he ^uill guide you into all the truth.
CHAPTER II.
ON THE VERGE OF MARTYRDOM.
Jeremiah's sermon in the temple The fate of Shiloh The prophet's trial
and acquittal The martyrdom of Uriah.
IN the process of the Church's education, of which Pentecost
does but begin the second or rather the third part, Jeremiah's
completed life forms one of the chief waymarks. But as yet
one half of it still lies before us. It is a story of bold adven-
ture and of faith ; of heroic endeavour persistently maintained,
like Christ's, in spite of failure foreseen ; of danger encountered
against heaviest odds in the cause of true religion and, in a
very high sense, of patriotism. Jeremiah's experience at his
native place was the prelude of this part of his career. Hence-
forth, however, like our Lord at the close of His ministry, he
concentrated his efforts upon Jerusalem. There too he was
sometimes in danger through treachery. This is his own
account of it. For I have heard the backbiting of many ; there
is terror on every side. Inform, say they, and let us inform
against him (Jer. xx. 10) ; i.e., his enemies, including some
former friends, were not contented with injurious reports re-
specting him, but encouraged one another to lay an information
against him as a public criminal (comp. Psa. xxxi. 13). And
then Jeremiah continues with the grand but too passionate
outburst,
But Jehovah is with me as a fierce warrior; therefore shall
mine enemies stumble and not prevail; they shall be greatly
ashamed, because they have not prospered, with an everlasting
reproach that shall never be forgotten. And thou, Jehovah
Sabdoth, that triest the righteous, that seest the reins and the
heart, let me see my revenge upon them, for upon thee do I roll
my cause (Jer. xx. u, 12).
ON THE VERGE OF MARTYRDOM. 115
The concluding words are repeated with slight variations
from Jer. xi. 20, showing that the prophet himself saw the
analogy between the two sets of circumstances. He had
indeed escaped from persecution at Anathoth, but only to
experience a worse renewal of it at Jerusalem. There too
he carried on a life and death struggle, though as a rule with
less ignoble enemies. Here is a specimen of it. The incident
to which I shall refer arose out of a prophetic discourse, which
we fortunately possess in two editions (one in chap, vii., and
the other in chap. xxvi.). It appears that some great festival
or possibly fast had brought together a large number of people
from all quarters to the temple, and that Jeremiah was directed
to stand between the inner and outer court and address them.
One wishes that this among other fine passages of the Bible
could be faithfully re-translated in modern English, that the
reader might see how forcible the timid, shrinking Jeremiah
can become. (Is there any force like his who only bursts out
now and then, like a volcano, because the fire within cannot be
restrained ? Comp. Jer. xx. 9.) But I will at least quote here
a few important verses in the best version which suggests itself.
Put not your trust in the lying words, The temple of 'Jehovah,
the temple of Jehovah, the temple of Jehovah, is this * (vii. 4).
What? steal and murder and commit adultery and swear
falsely, and burn incense to Baal, and go after other gods which
ye knew not ! and then ye come and stand before me in this
house upon which my name has been called, and think, We have
escaped (only) to repeat 2 all these abominations (vii. 9, 10).
Do we not seem to hear these self-deluded men (fanatical in
the worship of Jehovah in spite of their combination of this
with Baal-worship) filling the air with their shrill cries, and
calling upon Jehovah to deliver them, because " the temple,
1 Lit., are tfase (i.e., these buildings). The Hebrew suggests more than
we can express in English viz., that the sanctity of the temple proper com-
municated itself to all the various buildings connected with it (comp. Matt,
xxiv. i). Similarly in Psa. Ixviii. 35 a translator will do well to change
" thy (v.l., his) sanctuaries" into " thy (or, his) sanctuary."
2 The Hebrew has simply " to do " (or " practice "). Comp. Psa. Ix. 4,
Thou hast giroi a banner to them that fear thec, (only] Unit they may jlce
from before the bow. In each passage a striking effect is produced by
representing the consequence of an act as something deliberately intended.
Some indeed suppose that in the psalm-passage " only 1 ' AMS originally a
part of the text.
Il6 JEREMIAH.
the temple, the temple is this," as if the iteration of the phrase
increased its efficacy, while others give equally formal thanks
for deliverance, blindly arguing that, because no invader has
yet "cast a bank against" the city (Isa. xxxvii. 33), their escape
is assured, and they may go on practising all their old im-
moralities ?
Jeremiah continues, still merging his own personality in that
of his Divine Sender, and giving Jehovah's message,
A den of robbers then has this house whereupon my name is
called become in yottr eyes ? /, even /, have surely seen /'/, is
Jehovah's oracle.
To see with God is to punish. The lawless rich say in their
hearts, " Thou wilt not require satisfaction." So one of the
psalmists tells us, adding,
Thou hast seen it ; for thou lookest on mischief and vexation,
To deal out (vengeance) with thy hand (Psa. x. 14).
No wonder then that Jeremiah next announces the punishment
of those who thus abuse the holy name of religion. How he
leads up to this, deserves an attentive study. A single verse
doubtless condenses a fuller and more descriptive passage of
an oral prophecy. Nearly the whole of the period of the
Judges or more exactly, between Joshua's latter days (Josh,
xviii. i) and Eli's death (i Sam. iv. 3), the ark found a "resting-
place " the name given to the Shiloh temple in the later
tradition in the famous Ephraimitish town of Shiloh. It is
evident that a mere tent would not have sufficed for this long
period; there must have been some kind of permanent "house"
or temple. This is no mere presumption, but is confirmed by
the language of the narrative books see especially i Sam. i. 9,
where Eli is represented as sitting by the door-post of the temple
of Jehovah. For a long time this was the most honoured
sanctuary of the Israelites ' its central shrine, in a different
sense from that in which Jerusalem is sometimes called the
centre of worship, for its existence did not exclude that of
numerous banwth or "high places." But its "day of visitation"
(Isa. x. 3) came at length. When, we cannot say with certainty,
but from the fact that one of the psalmists introduces the
catastrophe immediately before the accession of David to the
1 In Jer. xli. 5 "Shiloh" should be "Salem " (Sept. Cod. Vat.). Comp.
John iii. 23.
ON THE VERGE OF MARTYRDOM. 117
throne (see Psa. Ixxviii. 59-72), we may plausibly infer that the
temple was destroyed during the Philistines' oppression. 1 How-
ever this may be, it is probable that Jeremiah found in the
history of Samuel and Saul current in his own time a full
account of this great event. 2 I suppose that he also found
there that prophecy of Samuel, which seems to refer, partly at
any rate, to the destruction of the Shiloh-temple. For he
announces in Jer. xix. 3 that Jehovah will bring evil upon tliis
place, ivhich whosoever heard h, his ears will tingle, evidently
alluding to I Sam. iii. n. So it appears that his "Book of
Samuel" was similar in some respects to ours, though dissimilar
in others. It was in fact a complete narrative, and was doubt-
less supplemented by a living popular tradition. Mothers told
their children of the fate of the " house of Jehovah " at Shiloh,
where God had revealed Himself to ancient prophets more
distinctly if not more truly than to those of their own time,
and the blood of the youthful listeners curdled in their veins.
That " uncircumcised Philistines " should have laid low that
most holy place, seemed too strange for aught but the fictions
of the professional story-teller. The supernatural sanctions of
prophecy guaranteed it, however, and more than one of the
youths who heard that prophecy (i Sam. iii. 11-14) never forgot
it, but introduced its phraseology into works of their own. 3
In respect for the memory of the Shiloh-temple and horror
at its end, Jeremiah and his fanatical hearers were agreed. As
a doom, they both regarded its destruction by the Philistines.
The latter, I make no doubt, confirmed themselves in blind
self-righteousness by thinking of the wickedness which must
have caused this awful judgment. " God, I thank thee that I
am not as other men " heterodox and schismatical ritualists,
despisers of the house of David and of the more recent but
1 From Judg. xviii. 30, 31 it may at first seem as if the Shiloh temple
lasted till the captivity of the northern tribes. But any clear head will see
at once that Judg. xviii. 30 is a later addition (see Ewald, "History of
Israel," ii. 348 note ; Wellhausen's edition of Bleek's "Einleitung," p. 199).
2 See Wellhausen's " Prolegomena " (Germ, ed.), p. 44, and his edition of
Bleek's "Einleitung," 103 (p. 210) ; also Maybaum, article in Steinthal's
" Zeitschrift fiir Volkerpsychologie," 1887, pp. 290-315 ; Vatke, " Biblische
Theologie," p. 318, &c. ; Graf's note on Jer. vii. 12 and his early treatise
" De Templo Silonensi." Comp. also Bertheau's note on Judg. xviii. 31.
3 Another allusion to this prophecy occurs in 2 Kings xxi. 12, 13.
IlS JEREMIAH.
far worthier sanctuary, which has proudly withstood Egyptian,
Assyrian, yes, and Israelitish invaders. This must have been
their spoken or unspoken monologue with Jehovah ; and
Jeremiah, seeing through them, virtually answers them like our
Lord, Except ye repent, ye shall all in like manner (o/)/o-,
" similarly '') perish (Luke xiii. 3, R.V.). But he has his own
way of expressing this. By a most effective turn in the
discourse, he bids them come with him to Shiloh, and scan the
desolate ruins of that once glorious shrine glorious, not
perhaps by its outward magnificence, but by the accumulated
veneration of centuries. (Popular respect is indeed not always
given to the symbols or the sanctuaries which are outwardly
the most magnificent.) There was, it would seem, a special
appropriateness in the time when this invitation was given.
For we cannot suppose that so sacred a place as Shiloh had
been entirely without a sanctuary between the times of Saul
and Josiah. There must have been an altar there, and at least
a humble " chapel," though none that could bear comparison
with the king's at Bethel (Amos vii. 13). But Josiah, not many
years since, had broken down both altar and " chapel " (as he
had done to those at Bethel), and it may well be that Jeremiah,
on that visit to Shiloh 1 which (see Part I., Chap. V.) I ventured
to assume, saw (like Dr. Robinson 2 ) the owls fly off from the
desolate spot. At any rate, all knew the two destructions of
the sanctuary of Shiloh, the latter of which was but a rc-
affirmation of the original doom worked out by the abhorred
Philistines. And now for the argument which Jeremiah builds
upon the facts of past and present history. If the actual re-
ligion of Judah,no\v that Josiah's reforms have half collapsed, is
in its idolatry and in its mechanical formalism so similar to that
of its northern sister, and results in moral practices no better
than those for which Hosea denounced the Israelites, and if
the most ancient temple of Jehovah which lay within the
Israelitish border was by His will profaned and destroyed,
1 I know of course that " Go ye now," &c. in Jer. vii. 12 may be merely
a rhetorical phrase, as in Amos vi. 2. But it may equally well be intended
literally ; and if so, one must suppose Jeremiah to have set the example in
visiting Shiloh.
2 "Biblical Researches," iii. 86. To this eminent American traveller
belongs the credit of having discovered the true site of Shiloh (now Seilun),
which, in spite of Judg. xxi. 19, had been forgotten since St. Jerome.
ON THE VERGE OF MARTYRDOM. IIQ
does it not follow that the same fate must soon overtake
Jerusalem and its sanctuary ? Both temples were successively
" places of the name 1 of Jehovah Sabdoth " (comp. Jer. vii. 12
with Isa. xviii. 7, Deut. xii. 5) ; how could one be punished and
the other escape ?
Thus far Jeremiah has addressed himself (see Jer. vii. 9) to
the idolatrous party, who do indeed worship Jehovah, but do
homage to " other gods beside" Jehovah, violating the first
(or second) of the Ten Words of God (Exod. xx. 3). I do not
say that the analogy between the Shiloh and the Jerusalem
temple is as perfect as Jeremiah represents. 2 But his main idea
is certainly correct. Throughout the history of Biblical religion
we find righteousness described as essential to the true worship
of God. The wrath of Cod is revealed from heaven against all
irreligiousncss and immorality (Rom. i. 1 8) ; " irreligiousness "
and " immorality " describe different aspects of the same idea.
No religious observances can " wipe out the old score," and
give us liberty to break the commandments of God. And now
comes the turn of those who worship Jehovah alone but in a
purely formal way, who are free from the worst moral excesses
of the others, but rest their hopes for Judah's future on the sacri-
fices for which the Deuteronomist cared so little and Jeremiah
still less. This was in effect what he said to them : " If ye
think to serve God by a multitude of sacrifices, ye do greatly
err. Jehovah did indeed allow your fathers to offer Him sacri-
fices, but He gave no special directions concerning them." The
Divine silence is significant ; it means that nothing has an
absolute value with God but an obedient heart.
/ spake not unto your fathers nor commanded them, when I
brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings
or sacrifices; but this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my
voice, and I will be to you a God, and ye shall be to me a people;
and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it
may be well with you (Jer. vii. 22, 23).
Can we doubt that the speaker is thinking of Deuteronomy,
1 Guthe has remarked that the expression "the name of Jehovah" is
sometimes virtually synonymous with the ark. Certainly the special sanctity
both of the Shiloh and of the Jerusalem temple arose out of the presence
of the ark of the covenant.
2 Jeroboam was apparently much opposed to heathenism proper and the
introduction of new gods (Ewald, " History of Israel," iv. 27).
120 JEREMIAH.
one favourite phrase of which he instinctively repeats, and more
especially of that sacred Decalogue, adopted into the Deute-
ronomic tordh, which relates entirely to moral and spiritual
duties, and not at all to ritual ? As for your sacrifices, they
would have been poor and imperfect things at the best (comp.
Psa. 1. 12, 13), and yet graciously accepted, as the expressions of
childlike love. But this is a nation that obeyeth not the voice of
Jehovah their God (ver. 28). Therefore /#/ your burnt offerings
to your sacrifices, and eat them as Jlesh (ver. 21, Ewald), i.e.,
throw all your offerings into a mass, and eat them at your
pleasure ; they have neither any inherent sanctity nor any
secondary importance from the character of the offerers.
And what, the reader may ask, was the fate of this bold
preacher of righteousness ? We must turn to the parallel
twenty-sixth chapter for a full description of the scene which
ensued. The narrative is most effective in its unadorned sim-
plicity ; I need only recall its leading features. The priests, the
prophets, and the people surrounded the prophet with angry-
looks and words. Like St. Stephen's audience long afterwards,
they were cut to the heart, and gnashed upon him with their
teeth (Acts vii. 54). Narrowly indeed did he escape St.
Stephen's fate, for when they heard those echoing words of re-
lentless doom, " This temple shall become like Shiloh," they
seized him, saying, Thou shalt surely die (vers. 8, 9). But in
the nick of time a fresh power appeared on the scene the
"princes," or high officers of the state, who came up from their
place of deliberation in the "king's house" (v. 10, comp. xxxvi.
12), and apparently the "elders," some of whom had doubtless
taken part in Josiah's reformation. Without the concurrence
of these, the legal forms would not have been duly complied
with ; the prophet's violent death would have been a mere
assassination. Jeremiah in dignified terms defended his own
right to prophesy, and warned the people of the consequences
of their act. Then said the princes and all the people the crowd
were as easily led by their superiors now as at Josiah's reforma-
tion to the priests and to the prophets, This man is not worthy
to die, for he hath spoken unto us in the name of Jehovah out-
God (ver. 16). "-Certain of the elders " helped this view of the
matter, and acted a truly patriotic part, by appealing to a fact
in the past religious history of Judah (vers. 18, 19) ; and observe
by the way, how much we arc indebted to those who in our own
ON THE VERGE OP MARTYRDOM. 121
day bring to light half-forgotten facts in religious history. The
fact about Micah (or, as he is here called, Micaiah, see v. 18,
R.V.) was not unknown, but its full significance had not as yet
been seen. Micah may be called the morning-star of the evan-
gelical movement in the Jewish Church. He saw that society
needed to be reorganized on a new moral and spiritual basis,
and that Zion must be ploughed as a field, and Jerusalem become
heaps ) and tJie temple-mount as thicket-covered heights T (Mic.
iii. 12). This implies the essential reformation-truth that a
temple is consecrated not merely by containing sacramental
symbols of the Divine presence, but through being resorted to
by holy worshippers. I do not say that no prophetic writer ex-
pressed this between Micah and Jeremiah ; for however Isaiali
may vary his descriptions of Israel's future, he never fails to
insist on the necessity of a judgment and the indispensableness
of a righteous remnant. But Isaiah's truly evangelical teaching
had to some extent been counteracted by the Deuteronomic
compromise between Law and Gospel. And at any rate our
prophet was the first to proclaim this great truth so distinctly as
to strike even the dullest listener.
The glory of being the evangelical proto-martyr was, however,
reserved for another prophet, named Uriah, son of Shemaiah, of
the "town of the copses " (or thickets), Kiryath-Yearim. 2 In
1 The word for " heights " (biimdlh) only has this general meaning in
poetic style (so again in Mic. i. 12) ; in prose, it has the specialized sense of
" high places." That rendered "thicket-covered "(the Hebrew has "heights
of thicket") is explained in the next note. The Jerusalem hills were
anciently more overgrown with capse than they are now (see above). Hence
we are not surprised that Judah the Maccabce and his brethren found
(agreeably to the wide-reaching prophecy of Micah) the s>sn<-/ miry dcsolati ,
and the altar prof atud, and the gs.ta; [>i/riifJ il<>n'it, and shrubs growing in
the court as in a forest or in one of the mountains (i Mace. iv. 38).
2 The ancient "copse-town" has now become a "grape-town" (Karyet
el-'Enab), if Robinson's identification be accepted. Condor's proposal to
place Kiryath-Yearim. on the site of the copse-enclosed ruin called 'Erma,
"on the south side of the great ravine which is the head of the valley of
Sorek," is in some respects plausible, though a philological connexion
names does not exist. "Yearim" may however be explained, after the
Arabic use of wa'r, as " rough, impracticable tracts of country" (comp.
Isa. xxi. 13, where Wctzstein gives this sense to ya'ar, the singular of
yeCirim}. Thomson remarks that there are very rough " wa'rs " on every
side almost of Karyet el-'Enab, and that the ark would have had a rough
road from this village to Jerusalem ; Conder, that the dense thickets of
122 JEREMIAH.
spite of the traditional connexion of his native city with the most
sacred symbol of his religion (see i Sam. vi. 2i-vii. 2), Uriah,
possibly a disciple and doubtless a friend of Jeremiah, had the
insight to discern the superstition and immorality which degraded
the national religion, and the imminent danger which beset his
country. He preached the truth, and paid the forfeit with his
life. That he at first fled into Egypt, is not to be interpreted as
an act of cowardice. Surely an inner voice had said to him>
" Wait ; it may be that Israel's God has more work yet for
thee as well as for Jeremiah to do." The latter, at any rate, was
saved for the Master's future use by the interposition of the
v ' princes," and especially of Ahikam z (one of the deputation
sent to Huldah the prophetess, according to 2 Kings xxii. 14),
whose friendly interest in Jeremiah may remind us of that of the
Duke of Lancaster in John Wycliffe.
See from the narrative which we have had before us the good
results of the prophet's self-communings after his trouble at
Anathoth. " Peace was not made for earth, nor rest for thee "-
such was now his conclusion, like that of ' c New Self " in Hurrell
Fronde's poem. 2 He had fought his inner fight, not unaided by
the sense of spirit-borne warnings and expostulations, such as
these which he has ventured to clothe in words,
If thou hast run -with the footmen, and they have wearied
thee, then how canst thou contend with horses ? and though in a
land of peace thou art secure, yet how wilt than do in the pride
of Jordan ? (Jer. xii. 5, R.V.)
The " footmen " and the " land of peace " are Jeremiah's rela-
tives and the town of Anathoth, where, but for secret machina-
tions, he would have dwelt in peace. The " horses " and the
" pride of Jordan '' are the mighty multitude and the city where
enemies beset the faithful prophet, who can only be compared
to the fierce lions in the jungle of tamarisks on Jordan's banks.
Looking back on his recent bitter experience, Jeremiah that is,
copses must once have been more widely spread than they are now. I
cannot discuss the geographical or philological questions further here. (See
preceding note.)
1 One of Ahikam's sons, Gemariah, lent Baruch his official room for his
recitation of the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jer. xxxvi. 10) ; another son,
Gedaliah, showed himself Jeremiah's friend, and politically his disciple,
when governor of Judah under Nebuchadrezzar (Jer. xl. 5-10).
2 " Lyra Apostolica," Ixxix. , " Old Self and New Self."
ON THK VERGE OF MARTYRDOM. 123
his "Old Self" complains of his sad lot ; but looking forward
to the trials which must, if he follows his conscience, be in store
for him, he checks his sveak complainings, and comforts himself
with the inerrancy of the Divine justice. These thoughts were
to his mind the direct suggestions of his ever-present Lord ;
hence their power hence the wonderful transformation which
ensued (strictly speaking, indeed, it had begun earlier, see
Part I., Chap. III., end) in the prophet's character. At Anathoth,
in a comparatively small danger, he gave way to impatient
murmurs; at Jerusalem, amidst an infuriated mob led by priests
and prophets, he is as calm as if he were amidst friends. Human
nature was the same then as it is now. Are not many of us too
ready to lose our self-command under small trials ? And is
there not still but one unfailing source of calmness the presence
of God in the soul?
Thus, from the point of view of the Christian, Jeremiah's
message comes ultimately to this that the lowly and believing
heart is God's favourite temple, and the only one which has the
promise of permanence. Full often has the course of history
taught us the same truth. No need to point to Furness or to
Melrose. " Go ye now to Shiloh " ; or rather,
" Go down with yonder abject few,
In caftan green or dim white veil,
Who hurry by to raise anew
Their feeble voice of endless wail,
Before Moriah's stones of might.
Scant beards are torn, old eyelids stream
With many a sad, unhelpful tear ;
Man's weeping and earth's ruin seem
To find their common centre here." *
But, thank God ! there are more cheerful preachers than those
of the Jewish " wailing-place." Elevating indeed must have
been the sight of those five thousand French Protestants who
gathered together the other day in the mountains of the
Cevennes 2 to commemorate beneath the summer sky the stolen
religious meetings of their forefathers. The gathering may
indeed have partaken of the nature of a fast as well as of a
1 St. John Tyrwhitt, " Poems," "The Jews' Wailing Place."
2 Alluding to an impressive ceremony recorded in the newspapers, August,
i83/. This passage is retained from a cathedral sermon.
124 JEREMIAH.
festival ; for where are the moral representatives of the heroic
though far from faultless Cevenols ?
" Cold mountains and the midnight air
Witnessed the fervour of their prayer,"
who died even as they lived the spiritual children of psalmists
and prophets. Yet we may be grateful to those who, in cele-
brating the centenary of Louis XVI.'s edict of toleration, and
praising the new virtue of religious tolerance, could not and did
not withhold their homage to the more fundamental qualities
which distinguished their ancestors. By this commemoration,
the patriarchs and martyrs of the Cevennes, "being dead, yet
speak," and hand on the lesson afresh to later ages that " God is
spirit" (John i. 24, R.V. margin), and that the fairest contribu-
tions of art and of historic tradition to the outward forms of
worship cannot compensate for the absence of spiritual re-
ligion, of an open Bible, and of hearts where Conscience reigns.
CHAPTER III.
KKKP THE MUNITION, WATCH THE WAY !
Progress of Xeco Accession of Jehoahaz, and soon after of Jehoiukim
Fall of Nineveh Neco's defeat by Nebuchadrezzar Dread of Babylon
at Jerusalem Jeremiah's new peace of mind His prophecy on Egypt,
&c.
So Jeremiah was snatched from his enemies delivered from
that most terrifying of all dangers the fury of a fanatical mob. 1
He was acquitted ; but his position was not thereby materially
improved. The elders who so opportunely interposed may
or may not 2 have been hearty believers in his special Divine
mission ; but it is certain that the new king was not, that the
bulk of the priests and of the prophets was not, and that the
people had only a temporary access of superstitious awe at the
troublesome preacher. It was indeed morally impossible that
any but an elect few could tolerate such a violent reversal of re-
ceived ideas. But how came the prophet to venture on such a
step ? What was it that so far altered the nature of this sensitive
man that he could thus court opposition, and provoke the spirit
of fanaticism ? Was it as a forlorn hope that he took up his
station that morning in front of the assembled pilgrims and
devotees ? Was it the inspiration of despair at the strong back-
ward current which had set in both in morality and in religion ?
I reply that it was not this, though Jeremiah's " Old Self" may
well have troubled his "New Self" with despairing suggestions.
1 May I at least illustrate this by the vivid description of the mob at
Charing Cross in "John Inglesant," chap, xiv., and the remark of the officer
to Inglesant, " You stood that very well. I would rather mount the dead-
liest breach than face such a sight as that."
2 In their favour it may be urged that they treat Jeremiah's case as entirely
parallel to Micah's. But the low tone of their concluding words Thus
should ive commit great evil against our own souls may by some be taken
to prove that they were merely afraid of the probable dangerous conse-
quences of putting Jeremiah to death.
126 JEREMIAH.
Listen to this a favourite passage with our own sensitive poet
Cowper,
O that I had in the wilderness a lodging-place of 'wayfaring
men, that I might leave my people and go from them ! (Jer. ix.
2, A.V.).
And then the prophet proceeds to describe the wickedness of
the times in terms which remind us partly of his experience at
Anathoth,
Take ye heed every one of his neighbour, and trust ye not in
any kinsman 1 ; for every kinsman useth trickery, and ei.>ery
neighbour goeth about with slander (ver. 4).
Yes, Jeremiah's inner voices did not always appeal to his
higher nature. And one of the psalmists who, as we have seen,
thought themselves back into the soul of this prophet, was so
moved by this passage that he amplified it in lyric verse,
Fear and trembling have come upon me.
And horror ovcrwhelmeth me ;
And I say. Oh that I had wings like a dove !
Then -would 1 fly away, and be at rest :
Lo, then would I wander far off,
I would lodge in the wilderness ;
I would haste me to my safe retreat
From the stormy wind and the tempest.
(Psa. Iv. 5-8, De Witt.)
I am sure that those who agree with me on the subject of the
porticoes of psalm-palaces (seep. 105) will enjoy this psalm more
as the work of a writer circumstanced like Jeremiah and there-
fore drawn in an especial manner towards his life and character.
The imitation is lovely, but the original passage is more vigorous.
One feels that the speaker will not long remain in despondency.
That he should be cast down, is only natural ; the prophetic call
was not designed to kill nature, but to control and elevate it.
And if, intelligibly enough, Jeremiah had his occasional moods
of deep sadness, he had also, as I will presently show, his moods
of lofty satisfaction at the providential ordering of affairs in
Western Asia. These alternations are, in my opinion, clearly
traceable in the changing tones of the prophetic strain, to
1 I adopt the translation " kinsman," to bring out the chronological con-
nexion of chap. ix. with xi. i8-xii. 6 (see especially the last verse in this
section). One might of course render or paraphrase " fellow-Israelite." The
Hebrew has " brother."
KEEP THE MUNITION, WATCH THE WAY ! 12J
account for which let us resume for a few minutes the thread
of history.
Josiah had thrown himself, as it were, before Neco's chariot-
wheels, and been crushed to Israel a piteous tragedy, but a
matter of supreme indifference to an Egyptian conqueror.
Straighten went the proud Pharaoh towards the Euphrates, only
halting before the renowned city of Kaclesh, 1 now easier to take
than of yore, when first one and then another Thothmes
penetrated to the north of Palestine. He then continued his
triumphal march, none venturing to check him, till once more
after the lapse of nine centuries Egyptian garrisons looked
down on that historic stream, and Neco could then return to
secure his hold on Syria and Palestine. Three months after the
battle of Megiddo he paused at Israel's ideal northern frontier
(Num. xxxiv. 11, Ezek. vi. I4 2 ), where, by the walls of Riblah,
not many miles from the already captured city Kadesh, in a
" deep and lazy stream " the Orontes flows, to receive the sub-
mission of the petty Syrian princes. There he learned that the
Jews had lost no time in providing themselves with a new king
an act of rebellion, for which he summoned Jehoahaz (to
whom I shall return later) to answer. At Riblah the unhappy
1 This statement depends on the interpretation of a famous passage in
Herodotus (ii. 159). Neco is there said to have defeated the Syrians (i.e.
the Jews) at Magdolus, and then taken Cadytis, "a large city of Syria."
Magdolus is obviously an error for Megiddo, which Herodotus confounded
with the Magdolus Egyptian frontier-city Migdol or Magdol, now Tell el-
Hir (Jer. xliv. i). Cadytis in Herod, iii. 5 means Gaza, which is Katatu or
Kazatu in the Egyptian, Khazitu in the Assyrian inscriptions. The con-
quest of Gaza would, however, certainly not have been mentioned just after
the battle of Megiddo, whereas that of Kadesh or Kodshu (the ancient
capital of the Hittites) would be quite in order. In the accounts of the
Syrian campaigns of Thothmes I. and III. the names Magidi (Megiddo) and
Kodshu (Kadesh) constantly occur together. The Syrian chiefs, after being
defeated at Magidi, generally retreated to Kodshu, and a second engage-
ment took place beneath its walls. Is it not reasonable to suppose that
Herodotus once more made a confusion of names (Katatu and Kadshu,
or Kodshu) ? The site of Kadesh has been identified by Conder with Tell
Neby Mendeh (Laodiccea) ; see "Twenty-one Years' Work in the Holy
Land," pp. 152-156. M. Maspero, the Egyptologist, however, is not fully
convinced.
- Here we should evidently correct "Diblath" (or, " Diblah ") into
" Riblah " (see " Variorum Bible "). The mistake of the Massoretic text is
repeated by the Septuagint in 2 Chron. x.xxvi. 2, Jer. Iii. 9, 27.
128 JEREMIAH.
king was deposed, and an elder brother, 1 known to us as
Jehoiakim, set up by Neco in his stead. Probably it did not
take the Jews long to accustom themselves to the new state
of things. A powerful philo-Egyptian party had long existed
in Judah, and if a national choice had to be made, the Jews
could not help preferring an Egyptian overlord to an Assyrian ;
the Assyrians were in fact the most cruel of all the conquering
nations of antiquity. But soon another great piece of news
startled the Jewish world. The Medes had long since given
much trouble to the Assyrians. Once already indeed they had
attacked Nineveh (Herod i. 103), and but for the invasion of
Media by the Scythians would doubtless have taken it. Upon
the withdrawal of the Scythians, they returned to the assault,
and the Assyrian capital fell before the combined forces of
Media and Babylonia. This was probably in the year 607. The
remains of his hastily built and unfinished palace testify to the
disquiet of the closing years of the last Assyrian king (Assur-
etililani).
It is an immense loss that we have no historical account of the
details of this great event. The cuneiform records as yet disco-
vered even those which belong to the reign of Nabopolassar
are silent respecting them, while the classical writers confounded
this final catastrophe with the temporary humiliation of Assyria
in 788. But if a historian may be called a "backward-looking
prophet," a prophet may surely be regarded in some degree as a
" forward-looking historian." For the feelings of the Jews at
any rate, as well as for the fact of the inevitableness of
Nineveh's ruin, we may refer to Nahum the Elkoshite, who
about 66o, 2 when Assurbanipal was still at the height of his
glory, predicts the destruction of the lion's lair. It was the
cruel punishment of Thebes (No-Amon) for its defection to the
Ethiopians which opened' the eyes of Nahum to the necessity
1 According to i Chron. iii. 15, Josiah had four sons Johanan,
Jehoiakim, Zedekiah, Shallum. Shallum is supposed to be the name of
Jehoahaz before he became king. Though placed fourth, he was older than
Mattaniah or Zedekiah (comp. 2 Kings xxiii. 31, xxiv. 18). On the changes
of names I will speak later.
2 The Assyrian inscriptions enable us to fix the date of Nahum in the
most positive manner. They prove that the capture of Thebes, referred to
by the prophet, took place about 663. Now as the event was still fresh in
Nahum's recollection, he can hardly have written later than 660 (Schrader,
"Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament," ed. i, p. 290).
KEEP THE MUNITION, WATCH THE WAY ! 129
of Nineveh's fall. History confirms not only the accuracy of
his anticipation, but the principle upon which it is based. The
Roman empire lasted, because it was based not merely on force,
but on that unwritten covenant which Virgil has described in
imperishable lines. The Assyrian fell, because the conquered
provinces were only kept under by the iron heel of tyranny. I
quote a passage in which, with a keen sense of retributive
justice, the prophet argues from the cruelty of the Assyrian
tyrants to the downfall of their capital :
And all they that see thee shall flee from thee and say, De-
stroyed is Nineveh I who will condole with her ? Whence shall
I seek comforters for thee ? Art thou (O Nineveh ! ) better
than No-of-Amon, which was enthroned by the Nile-streams^
surrounded by water; which was a fortress of the sea, whose
wall was water? 1 Ethiopia was her strength, and Egypt, and
there was no end; Put and the Lubim were thy helpers. She
however went as captive into exile ; her children also were
dasJied in pieces at every street-corner, and for her honoured
ones men cast lots, and all her great ones were bound in fetters.
Thou also shalt be drunken, thou shall faint away ; thou also
must seek a refuge because of an enemy (Nah. iii. 7-11).
That there is no exaggeration in the atrocities here ascribed
to Assyria, a glance at the monuments or at the translated
inscriptions is enough to prove. Well might Nahum, as a
representative of the petty states of Asia, draw breath in the
striking words which conclude his prophecy,
All that hear the rumour of thee clap the hands over thee ;
For upon whom hath not thy wickedness passed continually ?
(Chap. iii. 19 ; comp. the delicate touch
in the last line of chap. ii. 13.)
The burden of this grand triumphant strain was taken up by
Jeremiah's contemporary Zephaniah, but with less ardour of
passion. The fall of Assyria is to this prophet merely a detail
in the general judgment of the nations, and the last feature in
his description " every one that passeth by her shall hiss and
wag his hand contains a reminiscence of the vigorous distich
just now quoted from Nahum. We need not be surprised at
this, for not only was Zephaniah a less original and effective
writer than Nahum, but he lived at a time when Nineveh was
1 I point maylm with the Septuagint, the Peshitto, and the Vulgate.
10
130 JEREMIAH.
no longer dangerous to the populations of Palestine. Whether
spoken with more passion or with less, however, the maledic-
tions of the prophets were accomplished to the letter. Xenophon
and his Ten Thousand passed by the ruins of Nineveh in 401,
and mistook them for the remains of Median cities laid waste by
the Persians : the very name of Nineveh had been forgotten. In
the lapse of years the ruins themselves became unrecognizable,
and it is only in our own day that they have been discovered
beneath their clothing of sand.
So colossal an event could not but involve grave consequences
it was destined to change the face of Asia. Not indeed
all at once ; for the next two years Syria and Palestine con-
tinued to be attached to the empire of Egypt. But about
605 Nabopolassar (more correctly, Nabu-pal-u$ur, i.e., " Nebo,
protect the son " !), originally a general sent out by the
former of Assurbanipal's two successors to quell a Chaldrean
revolt, 1 but too ambitious to resist the temptation of seizing the
Babylonian crown, and now the conqueror of Assyria, sent his
son to recover the southern provinces of the empire from
Pharaoh-Neco : it is the prince who bears the fatal name
Nebuchadrezzar 2 (more strictly, Nabu-kudur-ugur, i.e., "Nebo,
protect the crown"). Neco too set forth once more on the way
to Syria, and halted near Carchemish 3 on the Euphrates. In
olden times this had been a great city as the capital of the
Hittites, but its commercial prosperity dated from its conquest
by Sargon in 717. To the Assyrio-Babylonian king, the pos-
session of this point was of the utmost consequence, for it
secured the passage of the River and the high road from Meso-
potamia to Palestine. With a well-appointed army Pharaoh-
Neco encountered his young rival ; but oh the strange sight to
all whoknew Egyptian warriors ! the heroes were bcatenin pieces
(by the heavy Babylonian maces), they fled away, and looked not
back; or rather, the sivift could not flee, nor the heroes escape
1 Tiele rightly regards this as the kernel of the strange account given by
Abydenus. It is possible, however, that Nabopolassar was not merely a
general sent on a special mission, but viceroy of Babylon. Assurbanipal had
suppressed the viceroyalty ; the increasing peril of the empire may have
induced his successor to restore it.
2 So given in Jer. xxi. 2, 7 and twenty-four other passages.
3 Identified by George Smith, in his last fatal journey, with Jerablus or
Jinibis, on the right bank of the Euphrates.
KEEP THE MUNITION, WATCH THE WAY ! 13!
(Jer. xlvi. 5. 6), because those swifter than the leopard (Hab. i. 8)
were upon them. Nothing but the death of the old Babylonian
monarch arrested his son's triumphant progress. Fearing to be
absent from his capital, the young king committed the charge of
his garrisons to his generals, and, with characteristic prompti-
tude, dashed homeward with a small escort the shortest way
across the Arabian desert. 1
And now, what was the tone of mind in Judah during these
eventful years ? The reiterated references in Jeremiah to the
" Peace, peace" of the flattering or' false prophets 2 sufficiently
show that, as in Isaiah's time, " they which should lead had
caused Israel to err, and destroyed the way of his paths " (Isa.
iii. 12). Putting aside a few individuals, the nation (i.e., all those
classes of the nation which counted) neither had nor wished to have
any true conception of its position. Neither had, nor wished to
have, I say designedly. For a long time past, prophecy had
been a source of national danger. It had always been a regular
and tolerably lucrative profession ; but whereas in a simpler
age, the prophets had " divined for money " and yet been con-
scientious, in the luxuriousness of the later regal period they
had more and more laid themselves out for gain apart from con-
science (see Mic. iii. n). Their sole object was to please, and
the way to please was to keep up all agreeable illusions. Listen
first to Isaiah and then to Jeremiah.
For it is a disobedient people, lying sons, sons that will not hear
the direction of JehovaJi, who say to the seers, Ye shall not see
[//v//t'], and to the prophets, Ye shall not prophesy unto us right
things ; speak unto its smooth things, prophesy illusions (Isa.
xxx. 9, 10).
The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule at their
beck, and my people love to have it so (Jer. v. 31).
It may be remarked by some reader of Wellhausen that the
latter passage does not apply to the period which followed the
Reformation. For the public recognition of the Deuteronomic
Scripture must have greatly increased the authority of the
priests, under whose care (comp. Deut. xxxi. 25, 26) it was
placed. The prophet who was a joint-author of Deuteronomy
gave up much for himself and his order that he might gain
1 Berossus,/r<7?v. ir, in Joscplnis, " Ant." x. n.
2 Jer. vi. 14, viii. n, comp. iv. 10 (all these passages occur in contexts
referring pmly to the Scythians, but partly no doubt to the Chaldoeans)
132 jEREMIAtf.
more for the community. This is true, from whatever source
the reader's insight may be derived. But we must remember
that the Deuteronomic torah was suffering a temporary eclipse.
The old conditions of things were partly restored. Unity was
lost, and the excited people must now more than ever have
turned to the prophets for comfort. They at least could offer
what no mere priests and no mere book could pretend to offer
a direct revelation from the Deity on matters of present moment.
And so both statesmen and priests had to bend low before the
prophets, or at least before the prophetic order. But the prophets
(among whom I of course do not now include Jeremiah) could
not afford to follow the inner voice. They were led by love of
gain and of influence to ascribe a Divine authority to the blind
instincts of the people, which received a fresh glamour from
being expressed in the rhetorical style of prophecy. These in-
stincts were at present those of self-complacent vanity. Three
times over had God spoken in history, and loudly enough, one
might think, to awaken all who had the power to reflect, but
each of these unexpected events had but lulled the Jews in a
deeper security. Again and again, one may suppose, Jerusalem
gave itself up to the wild rejoicings of which Eastern nations
alone are capable. Nineveh had fallen ; Neco had been de-
feated ; and now the prince who wielded the dreaded power of
Babylon, had been turned back, as it seemed, by some super-
natural hand.
Jeremiah at least saw more clearly. Not to him could those
words of Jesus be applied, Ye can discern the face of the sky, but
ye cannot discern the signs of the times (Matt. xvi. 3). He saw
once more the seething caldron ready to precipitate a flood of
ruin over his dear country (Jer. i. 13, 14). You might think
perhaps that the vision would strike him dumb with terror, as
he thought of the fierce warriors streaming in from the north
under the greatest general of the Semitic East before Hannibal.
Listen to Habakkuk, who lived at Jerusalem about this time,*
and see how awful the prospect really was :
Look ye among the nations and behold; amaze yourselves, be
ye amazed ! for a deed doeth he in your days 'which ye believe
not when narrated. For behold I raise up the Chaldceans, the
rough and the restless nation, which goeth through the breadth
of the earth, to possess dwellings which are not his. Frightful
1 That is, after the battle of Carchemish.
KEEP THE MUNITION, WATCH THE WAY I, 133
and terrible is it, from himself his justice and his majesty gocth
forth ; and swifter than leopards arc his horses, and fiercer than
evening wolves his chargers leap, and his horsemen go far away,
fly as an eagle haslet h to gorging; each cometh to do wrong, the
endeavour of their faces is towards assault, so that he collecteth
prisoners like the dust; and at kings he mocketh, and princes
are to him a laughingstock, and he laugheth at every stronghold,
and throweth up dust and laketh it. But he exceeded in daring
and transgressed, and be cometh guilty : this his strength be-
cometh his God 1 (Hab. i. 5-11, Ewald).
The rapidity of the rise of the new conquering power had
evidently impressed Habakkuk. He compares the Chaldtean
horses to leopards meaning perhaps the chetah, or hunting
leopard, still found in Palestine, " the rush of which on its prey
is the most rapid of possible movements; 2 and he gives the
former the superiority in swiftness (comp. Dan. vii. 6). The
thought of what is coming paralyzes him, and all the more be-
cause this physical energy of the Chald&ans is combined with a
fierce and defiant assertion of their own standard of justice and
their own all-surpassing majesty. But, as Ewald says, the pro-
phet, commenting on the revelation which he has uttered, gives
a hint of comfort to the true believer. The Chaldasan idolizes
that strength which he owes to Another, and denies the true God.
Then, in the next section, his tone becomes more pleading. The
death of Israel as a nation would be equivalent to the death of
Jehovah. There have no doubt been divine deaths. Where is
thegodofHamathandthegodofArpad(lsa..-xxxv\\. 13)? But
art thou not from everlasting, Yahve my God? my Holy
One, thou canst not die / . . . Thou of too pure eyes to behold
iniquity, and who to look at evil art not able, wherefore lookest
thou upon the treacherous, holdest thy peace when the unjust
devoureth the just, and makest men as fish of the sea, as the
worm that hath no ruler f (Hab. i. 12-14). Thus Habakkuk
like Jeremiah (xii. i) is troubled by the incompleteness of the
Divine retribution. Judah, by comparison with Chaldaea, is
righteous (Ewald, for greater vigour, shortens the literal render-
ing, which is, "the unrighteous devoureth him who is more
righteous than he ") ; as for the covetous invader, his inmost
soul is puffed up, it is not iipright (or perhaps, humble j lit.,
1 I have here followed Mr. J. Frederick Smith's accurate translation,
* Tristram, " The Land of Israel," p, 495.
J34 JEREMIAH.
" level "), but tlie righteous shall live by his faithfulness ' (ii. 4).
Such is the sure hope which pierces the clouds of trouble.
Righteousness must outlive unrighteousness ; and when we add
to this the faith in a God who only hath immortality (i Tim.
vi. 16), what can the prophet need more to revive his courage?
Alas that Habakkuk should have so far miscalculated the
moral value of the two nations Chaldasa and Israel, and seen
so dimly into the abyss of the Divine purposes ! Like Jeremiah,
he "stood in the council of Jehovah" (Jer. xxiii. 18) ; why did
he not " see and hear " better ? He did indeed " see " that God
loves and will have righteousness ; but he did not see the moral
and religious need of a complete subversion of the existing
order of things. He saw that "law" (torali) even the incom-
parable Deuteronomic law was benumbed (Hab. i. 4) ; but he did
not see that bright spiritual landscape beyond the sea of afflic-
tion (Zech. x. n), in which rises the mount of beatitudes and
the second and better covenant. His fate reminds us somewhat
of Josiah's. He trusted God implicitly, and his trust was not
rewarded in the way that he expected. But he was probably
spared Josiah's premature end ; he may have lived to take to
his heart of hearts the purer hopes and loftier aspirations of
Jeremiah.
Or listen to the latter prophet's expressions of horror in one
of his gloomier moods,
Behold, as clouds he cotneth up, and as the whirlwind are his
chariots; swifter than eagles are his horses. Woe unto us!
for we are spoiled (iv. 13).
O daughter of my people, gird thee with sackcloth, and roll
thee in ashes j make thee an only son's mourning, most bitter
lamentation j for suddenly cometh the spoiler iipon us (vi. 26).
Oh that my head were waters,. and mine eyes a fountain oj
tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the
daughter of my people (5x. I ).
The last of these passages is surely a direct expression of
Cassandra-like horror at the fate which impends over Judah. In
some places the prophet may have husbanded his talent, and
adapted old prophecies respecting the Scythians to the new and
1 "Faithfulness" should be interpreted as in Jer. v. i, where it is
synonymously parallel to "right." There is an implied antithesis to the
unfaithfulness of the Chnldcean invader, who acknowledges not God nor
Ihe Divine law.
KEEP THE MUNITION, WATCH THE WAV ! 135
greater Chaldaean crisis ; but surely not here. But the fact that
there are so few direct expressions of grief confirms the view
that the sensitive Jeremiah was lifted up by a wonderful inspira-
tion to a height like that which Christian poets love to describe
a height from which past troubles appear to be swallowed
up in light. As soon as the prophet gained his first clear intui-
tion of the future, what, think you, was his mood? The answer
is given in chaps, xlvi.-xlix., a group of prophecies on the
foreign nations (A.V.'s " Gentiles " is surely a most inappro-
priate rendering), written at various times during the period
beginning 606-605. Here, more than anywhere else, is revealed
Jeremiah's conviction that prophetic oracles are, not less than
wind and storm, messengers of God, fulfilling His word, in
destruction not less than in reproduction, and through this faith
he obtains a profound repose for his throbbing heart. His own
consciousness becomes more than ever absorbed in the divine
at least, in that aspect of the divine which at this moment
forces itself upon him ; and so he shuts up his heart's best trea-
sure of love and pity (like Jehovah Himself, according to Isa.
Ixiii. 15, R.V.), and rejoices, not unlike the prophet-poet Dante,
in the just judgments of God. Does not this suggest to us the
true explanation of that calmness which surprised us in Jere-
miah not long ago, and which contrasts so strikingly with his
irritation at Anathoth? The prophet's intuition of the future
was acquiring greater definiteness ; and tired of his ceaseless
anxiety, he was relieved to know that the end was so near. It
is somewhat as when a man is told by his physician that he has
not many months to live ; the certainty has been known to bring
to such an one a new, strange peace of mind. The fret and
fever of life vanishes in a moment ; troubles and disappoint-
ments assume another aspect, and he even welcomes weak-
ness and pain as the harbingers of a change which, if God be
faithful, cannot be for the worse.
In the opening oracle of the series referred to, Jeremiah's
new peace of mind appears to be intensified into a kind of stern
joy. I suppose that on this one occasion at least his words
may have been echoed by the majority of his countrymen, who
only remembered that it was by Neco that the nation's darling
had been slain, and saw not that the Pharaoh's defeat did but
prepare the way for a more severe master. Jeremiah's rejoicing,
however, was not like that of his light-hearted people. He
136 JEREMIAH.
may indeed have hated Egypt only less than Assyria, and
on much the same grounds as his countrymen, but this is not
the whole secret of his triumph at its humiliation. He knew
but too well the blow that was preparing from Jehovah's, not
Nebo's, hammer ' Nebuchadrezzar. And this was to him the
source of an inward transformation as remarkable as any in the
New Testament. The Divine rebuke in Jer. xii. 5 was never
required again. The prophet's sensitive nature was recast, and
though traces of the old infirmity remained, yet, whenever
there was a need for action, he was calm, adventurous, and
resourceful.
I wish I had space to enter at length into the truly remark-
able prophecy on Egypt, which should be read by all who would
estimate the poetic capacity of Jeremiah. It falls into two
parts, which cannot have been composed at quite the same
time. In the former (vers. 3-12) the point of time assumed is
immediately before the battle of Carchemish. It is a grand
triumphal ode, describing this fatal blow as a Divine judgment
from which Egypt cannot possibly recover. The latter (vers.
14-26 2 ) is a prediction in highly poetic imagery of Nebuchad-
rezzar's conquest of Egypt. 3 The date is not to be deduced
with precision from the contents, but it is safest to refer both
this and the following prophecies to the anxious time of Nebu-
chadrezzar's first Palestinian campaign. How striking is the
picture which in the former passage unrolls itself before the
prophet's imagination ! First, the setting forth of the splendid
Egyptian army ; then the strange contrast knights sans peur
et sans reproche perishing miserably, their shields (to quote
from an earlier poet) being " vilely cast away " (or perhaps,
"defiled" 2 Sam. i. 21). Well for mankind, thinks our pro-
1 Jer. 1. 23, How is the hammer of the -whole earth cut asunder and
broken ! The passage represents Jeremiah's view of Nebuchadnezzar, even
if it be not written by him.
2 I make this prophecy close at v. 26 and not at v. 28, because the two
concluding verses of the chapter are evidently inserted at a later time from
xxx. 10, IT, where they cohere far better with the context than they do here.
3 Egypt certainly had more claims upon Jeremiah's sympathy than Moab.
Had the prophet foreseen the hospitality accorded by Egypt to the Jews at
a somewhat later time, and the important consequences which were to flow
from this, he would perhaps have devoted more than half a verse to Egypt's
happier future,
KE^P THE MUNITION, WATCH THE WAY! 137
phet, that it was so ! for the march of an Egyptian army is
like nothing so much as a monstrous devastating river. But
the day of vengeance is come. Gilead's costly balm, so
prized in Egypt (Gen. xliii. n, 1. 2), has no healing virtue for
Egypt's wound.
"To pluck up and to break down and to destroy" (Jer. i. 10)
was no small part of Jeremiah's ministry at this time. We can-
not however pause beside each canvas in this prophetic por-
trait-gallery. Suffice it to mention that what may seem repellent
is mitigated by bright glimpses of the future. When the sword
has done its work, it will be sheathed (Jer. xlvii. 6) ; Moab,
Ammon, and Elam shall not always be exiled from the eternal
providence (Wisd. xvii. 2), and even exhausted Egypt shall
again support a teeming population. But what shall we say of
chap, xxv., which gives the substance of chaps, xlvi.-xlix. in
a more fearfully impressive form ? Well, even here a bright
prospect opens in vers. 12-14 to the nations (including Judah)
which have drunk the wine of God's fury. It does not indeed
commend itself to a Christian reader, but to Jeremiah's con-
temporaries it was only too congenial a picture (see vers.
12-14). "Fearfully impressive" is, I think, not too strong
an epithet to use of this chapter as a whole. It deserves an
attentive study on various grounds, historical, exegetical, and
critical. As a survey of the Eastern world, in which Judah
occupies no more than its due place, it reminds us of the pro-
phecy of Zephaniah (see p. 33) ; as a list of the "nations round
about" (vers. 19-26), it has even a geographical value; and
from the peculiar arrangement of this chapter in the Septuagint
interrupted as it is after ver. 13 by the insertion of xlix. 34-39,
xlvi., xlvii., xlix. 7-22, 1-6, 28-33, 2 3~ 2 7> xlviii.) it presents the
student with a curious critical problem. How much the early
students of the Scriptures were interested in this chapter, is
shown by several important interpolations ; ' evidently they
1 Tims in v. 9 we should probably omit all between "saith Jehovah"
and "and will bring them " ; in v. 12, "the king of Babylon and," and
also "and the land of the Chaldaeans " ; and in v. 26, "and the king of
Sheshach shall drink after them " (most inappropriate, at the end of a list
of the nations to be punished by Babylon ; a little more elaborateness was
surely required in the deseription of Babylon's retribution). See, however.
Ewald's note on v. 9 in his " Prophets," vol. ii., where a brave attempt
is made to defend the Massoretie text (only changing 'cl into 'et/i).
138 JEREMIAH.
had brooded deeply over it. Very different must have been
the effect of this chapter on most of those who originally heard
its substance. But was it ever publicly delivered ? the reader
may ask ; for sometimes the denunciations of prophets would
seem to have been elaborated in private for the reading of dis-
ciples or future generations. My own opinion is that it was,
and that it is the prophecy which Jeremiah dictated to Baruch
according to Jer. xxxvi. I find it difficult to believe that the
roll referred to in that striking chapter contained the substance
of all Jeremiah's prophecies from the beginning of his ministry.
A complete reproduction of the prophecies would not have
suited Jeremiah's purpose, and Jer. xxxvi. 29 expressly states
that the obnoxious roll contained one great and terrible de-
claration the very same which we find in Jer. xxv. But I am
in danger of anticipating, and must now prepare to resume the
thread of the narrative.
CHAPTER IV.
THERE BE GODS MANY, LORDS MANY.
Jeremiah's verdict upon the later kings Nebuchadrezzar crosses the border
Duel between Jeremiah and Jehoiakim.
IT may have struck some readers that in hastening on to the
great catastrophe which was to revolutionize Asia, I passed
somewhat lightly over the fate of Josiah's successor. Let me
now correct this involuntary injustice. In 2 Kings xxiii. 33, 34
we are simply told that Neco bound Jehoahaz at Hamath, and
then took him away to Egypt, where he died in captivity. His
melancholy end deeply moved his contemporaries, not, as that
of another " king for a hundred days " has moved our genera-
tion, from its moral significance, but at least from its pathetic
suggestions.
\\~ccpye not for tlic rtV<7</(said the tender-hearted man beneath
one of the prophets of that day), neither bemoan him: but weep
sore for Mm that is gone away; for he shall return no more, nor
see his native country. For thus saith Jehovah touching Shalluin
the son ofjosiah, king of Judah, ivhich reigned instead ofjosiah
his father, "which -went forth out of this place : He shall not re-
turn thither any more ; but in t/te place whither they have led
Jiim captive there shall he die, and he shall see this land no more
(Jer. xxii. 10-12).
Jeremiah feels and writes in complete sympathy with his
people ; and so, it seems to me, does his younger contem-
porary Ezekiel, who perhaps (as Ewald suggests) has adopted
one of the popular elegies upon Shallum or Jehoahaz in Ezek.
xix. 1-4. " A young lion of royal strain, caught untimely, and
chained and carried away captive, this was how the people of
i.;o JEREMIAH.
Israel conceived of Shallum. 1 ' ' Sooner would they have chosen
for him the tragic but not dishonourable end of his father, than
that he should be dragged with the rope of a captive to a foreign
land, and be buried in the "house of bondage "far from the
tombs of his ancestors. The words of Huldah to Josiah, Thou
shall be gathered to thy grave t'n peace (2 Kings xxii. 20), hardly
seem an exaggeration in the light of coming events. Of the
character of Jehoahaz, Jeremiah generously says nothing ; even
if the report of this king's wickedness (see p. 104) be well-
founded, yet he can hardly have done much good or evil in his
short reign of three months. Of his elder brother Jehoiakim,
however, the prophet speaks with great positiveness and pa-
triotic resentment, drawing a pointed contrast between him
and his noble father (Jer. xxii. 13-17). The same kingly virtues
which were so conspicuous in David (2 Sam. viii. 15^) adorned
Josiah ; covetousness and oppression and judicial murders dis-
graced the rule of Jehoiakim.
Woe tinto him that buildeth his house by unrighteousness, and
his chambers by injustice ; that inakcth his neighbour work for
nought, and giveth him not his hire. . . . Shalt ihou reign be-
cause thou vicst -with Ahab? did not thy father eat and drink
(i.e., enjoy life), and do judgment and justice ? then it -was well
ivith him. He judged the cause of the poor and needy j then it
ivas well. Was not this to know me? saith Jehovah. But
thine eyes and heart are only tipon thy (dishonest] gain, and on
shedding innocent blood, and on carrying out a crushing oppres-
siveness (Jer. xxii. 13, 15-17).
What a picture ! Josiah's model was David ; Jehoiakim's is
Ahab, whose judicial murder of Naboth was the culminating
sin of his life (i Kings xxi.). Is it not an apostrophe worthy of
the great Elijah, whose vigorous expression (suggested, it is
true, by his antagonist) " disturber of Israel" i.e., subverter of
the ancient social and religious order is quite as applicable
to Jehoiakim as to Ahab ? We owe the genuine reading of
Jer. xxii. 15^ to two of our great Septuagint manuscripts (the
Alexandrine and the Friderico-Augustan) ; the Massoretic read-
1 Cox, " Biblical Expositions," p. 120. Tristram was reminded of Eze-
kiel's imagery in observing the rude Syrian mode of capturing a lion by
driving it with cries and noises into a pitfall with spikes at the bottom
(" Natural History of the Bible," p. 118).
THERE fcE GODS MANY, LORDS MANY. 141
ing is almost impossible to construe, 1 and the other Septuagint
reading " with Ahaz " (so the Vatican MS.), though accepted by
Ewald, is to be rejected (i, because "vying with Ahaz" has
no historical basis ; and 2, because " Ahaz " might easily be
misunderstood to mean " Jehoahaz," of which name "Ahaz" is
an abbreviation).
But the description of Jehoiakim is not confined to gene-
ralities. He is brought before us in i>. 14 (which is a digression
or parenthetic illustration) as a great builder, and as such re-
ceives severe censure. This is worthy of remark. The archi-
tectural tastes of Solomon are mentioned (i Kings v.-vii.) without
a word of blame ; why should those of Jehoiakim be treated
differently ? At another time certainly no one could have
blamed Jehoiakim and his nobles 2 for being discontented with
the narrow, ill-lighted chambers of Syrian houses, and saying,
/ will build me a wide house and spacious chambers, and cutting
out their windows, inlaying the chambers with cedar, and paint-
ing them with vermilion (Jer. xxii. 14). But was this the
moment for beautifying Jerusalem when the land was still
groaning under Neco's war-fine 3 (2 Kings xxiii. 33) ? And how
could a worshipper of Jehovah wrong his brother-Israelite by
exacting labour for which he had neither the will, nor (we may
fairly assume) the ability to pay?
The truth is that Jehoiakim was smitten with a passion for
the pomp and splendour of an Oriental despot. He knew by
hearsay of the great buildings of Egypt and Assyria which had
been erected by forced labour, and may perhaps already have
heard of some of the grand royal constructions of Nebuchad-
rezzar. 4 Another prophet may be taken to allude to these in
1 R.V., however, attempts what is almost impossible; " thou strivest
to excel in cedar" (i.e., in cedar buildings), is at any rate good English,
and masks the difficulty that Jehoiakim's self-chosen rival is not named.
The reason why "with Ahab " has not met with more favour is that critics
supposed his " ivory house " to be alluded to. But really there is no direct
connexion between v. 14 and v. i$a.
3 See Jer. xxii. 23 (quoted later on), which was addressed to the richer
inhabitants of Jerusalem, including the king.
3 It was a comparatively small fine (comp. 2 Kings xv. 19, xviii. 14) ;
was the land already too impoverished to bear a larger one? One seems
to feel in reading 2 Kings xxiii. 35 that the new king's mode of collecting
it caused great dissatisfaction.
* On the building tastes of Assyrio-Babylonian kings, comp. Perrot-
Chipiez, " History of Art in Chaldsea and Assyria," i. 51. For Nebuchad-
142 JEREMIAH.
the following passage, the conclusion of which is closely parallel
to Jer. xxii. 13, 17,
Woe to him that gaineth evil gains for his house, that he may
set his nest on high, that he may withdraw himself from the
grasp of misfortune. . . . For the stone shall cry out of the wall,
and the beam out of the timber shall answer it. Woe to ///;/.
that buildeth a town with bloodshed, and establishcth a city im.'ii
wrong (Hab. ii. 9-12). In fact, neither Solomon nor Nebu-
chadrezzar can have seemed to a prophet like Jeremiah or
Habakkuk a much fitter model than Ahab, and to accuse Je-
hoiakim (whether directly or indirectly) of copying either of
these kings was to pronounce his religious condemnation.
In their religious estimate of Nebuchadrezzar the prophets
may possibly have done him some injustice ; into this delicate
question we must not refuse to enter at a more advanced point
of the narrative. But we have no reason to question Jeremiah's
verdict upon Jehoiakim, who, alike from a religious and a
political point of view, appears to have been unequal to the
crisis in the fortunes of Israel. It might indeed be urged in
favour of Jehoiakim that in his own way he was as zealous for
Jehovah as his father. Had he not even changed his original
name Eliakim (with the Pharaoh's approval) into Jehoiakim, 1
to assure to himself, by a name compounded with Jehovah, the
special protection of Israel's God ? To apply the language of
Prof. Milligan, " As in the case of so many of the Old Testa-
ment worthies, his name is the index to what he was," 2 or at
least to the religion which he professed. Now what does "Je-
hoiakim " mean? "Jehovah (rather Yahveh) raiseth up." It is
an expression of faith that it is by Jehovah (Yahveh) that princes
reign, and that not alliances, not defenced cities, not "the mul-
titude of an host," can deliver a king, but the God in whom he
trusts. Some, I know, have said that it was Neco who changed
rezzar's beautification of Babylon, sec his inscriptions (e.g., in " Records of
the Past," vol. xii.).
1 See 2 Kings xxiii. 34 (Dr. Lumby's note in the "Cambridge Bible"
does not quite meet the difficulty). Eliakim's brother Shallum (Jer. xxii. n)
had also changed his name, as most suppose. Possibly the two names,
Ilubid and Yahubid, of a certain king of Hamath in Sargon's reign may be
accounted for on these analogies. On the Assyrian custom, see Sayce,
" Hibbert Lectures," pp. 303, 304 ; and on Egyptian and Arabian parallels
Goldzihcr, " Dor Mythos bei den Ilcbracrn," p. 351.
2 " Elijah : his Life and Times," p. 43.
THERE BE GODS MANY, LORDS MANY. 143
the name of Eliakim into Jehoiakim, and Nebuchadrezzar who
altered Mattaniah's name into Zedekiah. They have on their
side the meagre and perhaps hastily compiled Hebrew record
of the reigns of the later kings, which in this one particular
reads more like an Egyptian than a Jewish document. But if
the names Jehoiakim and Zedekiah had been directly chosen
by the Egyptian and the Babylonian king respectively, why is it
that they have not an Egyptian and a Babylonian colouring
(comp. Gen. xli. 45, Ezra v. 14, Dan. i. 7, and the names given
to captured cities by the Assyrians) ? To meet this, it has been
suggested that the names of the Jewish vassal kings may have
been compounded with the name of Israel's God, because they
had been made to swear by Jehovah. This view is barely pos-
sible with regard to Zedekiah, because his oath of fidelity to
Babylon had been sanctioned by Jehovah's prophets (2 Chron.
xxxvi. 13, Ezek. xvii. 13), but hardly with regard to Jehoiakim.
The prophets of this period were as a rule the advocates of a
strong nationalistic policy ; the higher prophets those like
Jeremiah recognized the necessity of submission to Babylon,
but none, so far as we know, were in favour of Egypt. But
without the consent of prophets of Jehovah it is difficult to
say how a king of Judah could swear allegiance to Egypt by the
name of Jehovah. I think then that Shallum's and Eliakim's
and Mattaniah's change of name must have had a religious
motive ; it was as if the king entered thereby into a special,
personal covenant with his father-God (comp. Psa. Ixxxix. 26).
Assyrian, Egyptian, and Arabian analogies appear to me to
confirm this view.
But was the religion professed by Jehoiakim identical with
Josiah's ? It was of course based on the worship of Jehovah ;
but then who was this Jehovah, and what amount of truth was
there in his godship? Certainly he did not rank as high in
the scale of divinity as either Merodach (Maruduk), in whose
honour, and not simply for his own aggrandizement, Nebuchad-
rezzar strengthened and beautified Babylon, or Merodach's divine
son Nebo (Nabu), whose " darling " the great king called him-
self both of these deities were honoured by him with a worship
only less pure and noble than the Hebrew psalmists' worship
of their God. I And most certainly this Jehovah was not the
1 For Nebuchadrezzar's prayers, sec "Records of the Past," vol. xii. ;
Sayce's " Hibbert lectures," p, 97. In all religiously important points,
the interpretation of them is, I believe, secure.
144 JEREMIAHi
equal of the holy Cod who spoke by Moses, by Elijah, by
the Deuteronomist, by Jeremiah, by the psalmists, and who
attached the enjoyment of His favour to compliance with strict
moral conditions. No ; the Jehovah in whom Jehoiakim truly
enough professed his faith on ascending the throne was not He
whom a great disciple of St. Paul so emphatically identifies
with the Father of the Lord Jesus (Heb. i., ii.) ; rather he may
be called, without any rhetorical flourish, a rival of the true
God. A poor rival, some may say, for his dangerousness to
Israel consisted in the fact that he too claimed the name
Jehovah. But is there not often very much in a name ? Was
not the contest between the God of Elijah and the God of
Ahab and Jezebel a contest between two rival claimants of
the title " Lord " (Baal) ? ' May we not even venture to say
that upon the death of Josiah a contest (or a new phase of a
contest) began between two Jehovahs, not in the sense in
which such a contest is carried on in the speeches of Job, 2 but
in that in which in other countries besides Palestine a bitter
but not doubtful contest has been waged between a partly
moral God, who tolerates no rival, and claims the empire of the
world, and a mere territorial divinity, the impersonation of the
natural forces which the cultivator of the soil desires to pro-
pitiate. The true "son" or "servant" of Jehovah (for these
terms are nearly equivalent ; see 2 Kings xvi. 7, Mai. iii. 17,
Gal. iv. i) was no longer the Israelitish but startling though
most true paradox ! the Babylonian king. And this in a
twofold sense : i, because Nebuchadrezzar carried out the true
God's providential purposes, and 2, because there are strong
points of affinity between the religion of Merodach and that
of Jeremiah's Jehovah. We have indeed no such prophetic
glorification of Nebuchadrezzar as the " second Isaiah " gives
of Cyrus, Thus saith- Jehovah to his Anointed, to Cyrus,
"whom I grasp by his right hand, words which so strikingly
1 We may legitimately infer this from Hos. ii. 16 (on which see my note
in the " Cambridge Bible "). Ahab would not have confessed that he was
an opponent of the worship of Jehovah. But to the great prose-poet who
has described the contest on Mount Carmel it appeared as if Ahab had in
very deed led the Israelites into forsaking Jehovah's covenant and throwing
down His altars. The exaggeration was only natural ; it reveals the true
poet who delights in simple, direct issues, and the disciple of the later
prophets.
8 See "Job and Solomon," pp. 31, 32.
THERE BE GODS MANY, LORDS MANY. 145
remind us of expressions in the Cyrus cylinder-inscription
(line 12), "whose hand he (Maruduk or Merodach) holds."
IUit I see no reason why Jeremiah should not have used
them as a direct contradiction to the misleading name of the
preceding king (Jehoahaz, i.e. "he whom Jehovah holdeth"),
except perhaps that he was unaware of the strong resemblance
in character between Nebuchadrezzar's God and his own. At
any rate, he does twice call the Babylonian king "my ser-
vant " (xxvii. 6, xliii. 10, not in xxv. 9, which is interpolated),
and even if he means this in the lower sense of "one who,
with or against his will, cannot help forwarding the designs
of Me, who am God of Israel and of all the nations," we who
read his words in the light of history know that they mean this,
and more than this, viz., that Nebuchadrezzar's worship, however
imperfect, was accepted by Jehovah, while that of Jehoiakim,
nominally Jehovah's " son " and " servant," was rejected. 1
To this battle of rival Jehovahs, there corresponds an
antagonism between their respective representatives Jehoiakim
and Jeremiah, a specimen of which is presented to us in Jer.
xxxvi. The date of the event is the fifth, or more probably, as
the Septuagint of verse 9 says, the eighth year of Jehoiakim,
/.('. the fifth year of Nebuchadrezzar. The king of Babylon
has hitherto spared Judah, having more important work in
other frontier territories. But at last he finds leisure to glance
at its mountain fortress Jerusalem, which lies too near Egypt
(then as now the coveted prize of ambition) to be left in the
hands of a friend of Neco. He takes the field or, as Bible
language puts it, "goes up" against Judah (2 Kings xxiv. i),
but he encounters no resistance, for Jehoiakim makes haste
to swear the oath of fidelity. 2 How shall we account for the
Jewish king's good resolution ? Was he completely taken by
surprise ? Had he made no request for Egyptian aid ? Or
had the inflated self-conceit of the Pharaohs been so reduced
by the disaster at Carchemish that Neco refused to listen to
Jehoiakim's prayer ? One or the other of these alternatives
1 I fear that the " lower sense " is the one intended by Jeremiah, to whom
the few spiritual believers in Israel formed, collectively, the only "servant
of Jehovah " as yet in existence (Jer. xxx. 10, xlvi. 27, 28).
2 Note how even a Jewish prophet recognizes an oath of fidelity to
1'abylon (Ezek. xvii. 11-21), and contrast Isaiah's indifference to Hezekiah's
breach of faith towards Assyria.
1 1
146 JEREMIAH.
may be correct ; but a third view is suggested by an atten-
tive reading of the striking chapter referred to. The sub-
ject, as I have said, is a duel between Jeremiah and his bitter
opponent the king a duel, however, in which the combatants
do not meet face to face. It is wonderful, let us notice in
passing, how much could be done in the political world even
then merely by pen and ink. Jeremiah was certainly no
Cobbett, but he produced an effect with the help of his scribe
which even Cobbett would not have disdained. Let us try to
picture the scene. Nebuchadrezzar and his army have crossed
the Jewish border. The country-places are being deserted ;
Isaiah's description of a northern army (Isa. xi.) is being
verified to the letter. A temple fast is about to be proclaimed
(just as the last Assyrian king at a similar crisis proclaimed
one) for the citizens of Jerusalem, and for all who have flocked
in from the cities of Judah (Jer. xxxvi. 6-9). Jeremiah seizes
the opportunity to carry out a new plan. The people will not
allow him to address them ; then Baruch the scribe shall read
the most relevant of his. prophecies to them, especially that
very important one (chap, xxv.) written in the fatal year of
Carchemish, and containing a new and definite announcement
of most serious import. The trumpet is blown in Zion (Joel
ii. i), and at the first notes citizens and refugees alike hasten
to the temple. Soon sacrificial smoke ascends ; suppliant pro-
cessions go round the altar ; penitential psalms are chanted,
and those piercing cries of which Jewish throats are capable
resound through the temple-courts. Baruch, too, the brave
and faithful Baruch, betakes himself to God's house ; or rather,
for how should he win the attention of this busy multitude ?
to one of the many chambers of different sizes attached to the
temple. A fellow scribe, whose duties bring him into constant
relations to the king, and who is the brother of Jeremiah's
patron Ahikam, offers him hospitality. Probably he is ac-
quainted with Baruch, who himself has a family connexion
with the court, being the brother of one high functionary (Jer.
li. 59, see " Variorum Bible ") and the grandson of another
(2 Chron. xxxiv. 8). x In this large room Baruch recites one or
more prophecies to many of the people, declaring that "this
1 The respectful behaviour of the princes to Baruch in v. 15 confirms
the view that he was of good social rank; comp. Joscphus, "Ant." x,
9, i. This illustrates Jeremiah's caution to Baruch in |cr. xlv. 5,1.
THERE BE GODS MANY, LORDS MA\Y. 147
house shall become like Shiloh," and that " Nebuchadrezzar shall
destroy this land and all the countries round about " (Jer. xxvi.
6, xxv. 9 ; comp. xxxvi. 29), but doubtless adding a strong
appeal to them to " return every man from his evil way that I
(Jehovah) may forgive their iniquity " (Jer. xxxvi. 3).
Not a very attractive sermon for those who think to move
Jehovah by forms and ceremonies ! The next to hear it, by their
own request, are the princes in their council-chamber. They too
are startled at its boldness. They know Jeremiah, but a pre-
diction quite so definite as this they have not yet heard from
him. They also know Jehoiakim, and how passionately he
resents the least infringement of his royal rights. As politicians,
too, perhaps they partly sympathize with him, even though, as
fellow-converts of Josiah, the oldest and gravest of them revere
Josiah's prophet. They turn trembling one to another, and say
unto Barucli, We have to tell tJie king of all these words (ver.
1 6). We all know the sequel ! it is one of the scenes in the
Bible-story which has engraved itself the most deeply on the
memory. Jehoiakim sends for the scroll. It is December ;
Jehoiakim is sitting in the " winter house," i.e., in that part of
the royal palace which was arranged for use in winter (comp.
Amos iii. 15), and there is a fire burning in the fire-pan or
brasier still, as I know by experience, commonly used in Syria?
and called by a name (kamlti) which also designates the months
of December and January. How piercingly cold these months
can be, even to those who have come from temperate climes, is
well known. One remembers, too, how in Ezra's time, on the
twentieth day of the ninth month (i.e., some time in December),
all the people sat in the street of the house of God, trembling
because of this matter, and for the great rain (Ezra x. 9). A
group of courtiers stands in the background. Jehudi (a courtier ;
but, being the son of an Ethiopian, not a Jewish citizen) comes
forward and reads first one column, then another, and then
another. But the proud king can bear it no longer ; he rises
he steps forward three high officers in vain attempt to check
him he snatches the scroll from the reader's hands he cuts it,
with a cruel kind of pleasure, into piece after piece, and throws
it into the fire. Then, as he watches the curling fragments, he
despatches three other high officers, to arrest the prophet and
the scribe on a charge of high treason.
The fortunes of spiritual religion hang upon the escape of
Teremiah.
CHAPTER V.
BRIGHT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMBER
Jeremiah's Wartburg period and its results The drought The problem ot
Israel's spiritual condition The new covenant Jehoiakiin's rebellion
The Rechabites Two symbolic actions Jehoiachin's captivity His
character and Nebuchadrezzar's.
THE duel between Jehoiakim and Jeremiah reminds us to some
extent of that between Ahab and Elijah. Differences of course
there are, but both at any rate agree in this, that a prophet
singlehanded overmatched a king and his false prophets. Take
Jeremiah for instance. Even if he had paid for his boldness
with his life, yet he had effectually thwarted the advocates of
the insane policy of resistance. You remember the complaint
of the enemies of Jeremiah some time after this, He iveakeneth
the hands of the men of war and of all the people in speaking
'itch words unto them (Jer. xxxviii. 4). This was precisely
what the prophet did, with truest patriotism, on this occasion.
The stern oracles recited by Baruch produced such an effect
that no one either would or could lift a hand against Nebuchad-
rezzar. Thus a brief respite was gained for earnest preachers
to renew God's conditional offers of mercy, and a last chance
presented to the Jews for repentance. Do you not admire the
loving craft by which Jeremiah accomplished this ? Said I not
rightly that he was fertile in resources ?
Elijah and Jeremiah were both for the moment successful,
but each of them had to flee from his defeated antagonist. Of
the latter we are told that Jehovah hid him " (Jer. xxxvi. 26).
1 The princes had already told Baruch to go into hiding with Jeremiah
(v. 26) ; but how easy it should have been for the king's officers to track
them, as they tracked Urijah (Jer. xxvi. 20-23) '
CRIGIIT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMBER. 149
May there not be an allusion to this in a psalm plausibly
ascribed to Jeremiah, In the covert of thy presence dost than
hide them from the ploitings of man ; thou kcepest them secretly
in a pavilion from the strife of tongties * (Psa. xxxi. 20, see
R.V.) ? One loves to linger on such sweet words, and even to
hope that they may often be verified in lives far humbler than
Jeremiah's. To be kept in a pavilion from the strife of tongues
oh how much one needs this amidst the jangling controversies
of our time ! Oh how hard it is to preserve the attitude of the
peace-maker, of one who does justice to the elements of truth
in contending parties, a Falkland in theology and in politics !
How hard, nay, how impossible, without a special benediction
not vouchsafed to those who do not seek it. Keep me, as the
apple of the eye; hide me tinder the shadow of thy wings not
that I may evade my share in the work of the age, but that,
being in heaven with my heart, I may work the better with head
and hands upon earth. Fairness and charity are sure tests of
this heart-communion with heaven, and these perfum.es of the
soul cannot be long preserved unless we come sometimes
into a desert place apart, and rest awhile. There we repent of
having followed human leaders, instead of Him whose name is
Truth, and whose " banner over us is Love." There we bathe
in the waters of life, and lose the morbid craving for earthly
excitements, the joy of battle and the fame of achievement.
Too seldom have we collectedness enough for this spiritual trans-
figuration ; and so God Himself gently draws us apart into soli-
tude. This was now the case with our prophet, who had indeed
acquired a new peace of mind, but who was still ignorant of that
sweet charity which believeth and hopeth all things. Perhaps
"the Lord hid" His faithful servant, in order to guide him to this
loftier height. Jeremiah should not die knowing no more than
a Moses or an Isaiah. It was not enough that he had lost the
irritation of conflict, and accepted God's will as in some unconi-
prehended way the best ; not enough that he loved God and
God's people with a pure heart fervently. A great thing was
to happen. Jeremiah was to be taken into God's secrets, as no
other prophet had been ; and as a consequence of this, he
was to realize the capacities of the individual soul as he had
not done before. He was to learn to love, not merely Israel,
but each Israelite.
1 See also Psa. xxxi. 21, and cf. Jcr. i. 18.
150 JEREMIAH.
And the king commanded to take Bantch and Jeremiah;
but Jehovah hid them. The first result of this enforced
seclusion reminds us of Martin Luther's Bible-work in the
Wartburg. Jeremiah too betook himself to Bible-work. The
first prophetic roll had been destroyed ; but, as in the case of
Tynclale's New Testament, a new and improved edition issued,
as it were, from the flames. Jeremiah cared intensely for his
people ; he might win a deeper love for individuals, but no man
could love Israel more than he. And if love if even his love,
anxious, importunate, and sometimes disguised under threaten-
ings was powerless to move his people, yet a stronger appeal
to the motive of self-interest might perhaps do so. Therefore,
we are told, he not only reproduced the old prophecies, but
added thereto " many like words " (Jer. xxxvi. 32). Only for
the king, though a son of his friend Josiah, he had no love and
consequently no hope left. He foresaw that Jehoiakim's vow
of fidelity was only a momentary shift, and spared no circum-
stance of horror in foretelling his end. But we must not think
that the wacle in Jer. xxxvi. 30 is simply retaliation on Jere-
miah's part. It is no doubt called forth by a personal offence
against Jehovah's prophet, but the same awful details come
before us again in a different setting (Jer. xxii. 19) as the
punishment of a life of consistent transgression of God's law.
Jeremiah was already moving towards the individualistic view
of morality implied, as we shall see, in his great final discovery
in the sphere of religion, and which a prophet considerably
influenced by him (Ezekiel) expresses in these striking words,
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear
the iniquity of the father^ neither shall the father bear the
iniquity of the son: -the righteousness of the righteous shall
be upon him, and the "wickedness of the wicked shall be -upon
him (Ezek. xviii. 20 ; " soul" = person, cf. Ezek. xvi. 5, A.V.).
Among the prophecies written in the strict privacy of this
period I am tempted to include at any rate chaps, xiv., xv. (or
xiv. i-xv. 9). The softer side of the prophet's nature comes
out finely in the first of these chapters, which brings vividly
before us the painful " searchings of heart" which accompanied
the exercise of his prophetic ministry. One of those terrible
droughts which so frequently visited Palestine had caused acute
suffering among all classes, as well as among the cattle with
whom psalmists and prophets never fail to sympathize. Jere-
BRIGHT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMBER. 151
mi ah's picture of it is "like some of Dante's in its realisir, its
pathos, and its terror." Twice he intercedes for his people on
the ground of the covenant, but in vain. How pathetic is the
pleading in v. 8 !
O thou hope of Israel, the saviour thereof in time oj
trouble, why shonldest thou be as a stranger in the land (a
/ulroiicoc, who had no civic rights, and no interest in the com-
monwealth), and as a wayfaring man that trtrneth aside to
tarry for a night? (Jer. xiv. 8, A.V.) The first verse of chap,
xv. connects it very clearly with that which precedes.
11 On receiving a revelation (xv. 2-9) of the bitter fate in
store for his people, Jeremiah bursts out into a heart-
rending complaint that his destiny should throw him into such
a whirlwind of strife. His Lord at once corrects and consoles
him (xv. 10-21)." So I have myself explained the connexion, 1
though not concealing my strong doubts. Surely we cannot
appreciate chap. xvi. unless we read it in close connexion with
xv. 7-9. Could we venture on a rearrangement of the prophet's
discourses, we should, I think, be justified in placing this
thrilling passage (xv. 10-21) immediately before the section xl.
1-6, which relates the prophet's decision to remain with the
Jews at home, and not to go to Babylon with the exiles. At
any rate, it is this passage of Jeremiah's life which seems to
me to be best illustrated by it. I do not think that Jeremiah's
newly gained acquiescence in the will of God concerning his
people was so quickly lost. But how his heart must have bled
that even the comparatively small trouble of the drought could
not be taken away in answer to his prayers ! In this respect
again he reminds us of Elijah, who, charitable as he was by
nature (i Kings xvii. 17-24), and fervent and effectual as his
supplications were (James v. 16, 17), could not help his people
till it turned back to Jehovah.
The drought in Jehoiakim's reign, however, was but a
" beginning of pangs," a prophecy of severer judgments, a
sign that Jehovah's longsuffering was exhausted. The northern
Israel, when gathered in a national assembly, returned from
" the error of its way." Till Judah did the like, what hope
was there for its future ? And this is partly why Jeremiah
from the very first is so earnest in attacking the moral abuses
1 "Jnrcmiah" (in the " Pulpit Commentary"), i. 372.
152 JEREMIAH.
of his time. Jehovah could not be to His people that which
He wished to be until they had offered Him that to which He
could respond. / said, Obey my voice, and walk in my ways,
and I will be to you a God (Jer. vii. 23). Nevertheless they
proceed from evil to evil, and know not me, saith Jehovah (Jer.
ix. 3). Therefore, O Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wicked-
ness (Jer. iv. 14).
But can such a great thing be? The prophet has heard of
physical but not of moral miracles. He thinks with Zophar in
the Book of Job written as some think at this very time that
an empty man will get understanding, when a wild ass's coll
is born a man (Job xi. 12, R.V. marg.). Can the Ethiopian
change his skin, or the leopard his spots ? . . . Woe unto thcc,
O Jemsalem ! how long yet ere thou become pure f ' (Jer. xiii.
23, 27). You see the prophet is like a man without a clue in a
maze. The intricacy of the problem baffles him. It is not
Job's difficulty of the righteous man suffering, but the still
greater one of the want of means for breaking the force of
habit, and giving the will a new bias.
I venture to suppose that Jeremiah began to make the dis-
covery, or, speaking religiously, to receive the revelation, which
threw a flood of light on this spiritual problem, during his
enforced seclusion, 2 and that this is why Jehovah hid Baruch
and Jeremiah. It takes long to bring a great thought to
maturity. The process was certainly completed in Jeremiah's
case at the fall of Jerusalem ; when did it begin ? Surely on
the day when the last hope of Judah's repentance began to
fade away when the faithful prophets had either been killed
(like Uriah) or driven into hiding-places (like Jeremiah), so that
the work of preaching could only be done by obscure disciples
at the peril of their lives. The last hope had not yet quite dis-
appeared ; but it was as feeble as the last gleam of departing
day. What, then, is this sublime truth which visited the pro-
phet's mind, and enabled him to look forward to the dread future
with more than calmness, to bear up under the personal perils of
1 R.V.'s rendering, in some respects an improvement upon A.V., retains
the faulty "be made clean." "Allow thyself to be made clean " would be
better ; but this is too lengthy.
2 I do not deny that in their present form Jer. xxx., xxxi. belong to a
later period than the reign of Jehoiakim. See Kuencn, " Ondcrzock," ii.
207, but comp. Graf, " Jcremin," pp. 365-368.
BRIGHT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMBER. 153
the siege and the privations hardly less painful which fol-
lowed ?
The problem which besets Jeremiah is not quite the same
as that which beset St. Paul, when he wrote those three
memorable chapters, Rom. ix., >:., xi. St. Paul's problem is
twofold, first, how the apparent fact of Israel's rejection is to
be accounted for; and next, how, in spite of this fact, the
ancient promises to Israel are to be fulfilled. The first part of
St. Paul's problem is discussed by him at great length. He
answers it both upon theological and anthropological or psycho-
logical grounds. IlatJi not the potter a right over the clay, from
the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honour and another
unto dishonour? (Rom. ix. 21, R.V.) This question gives the
kernel of his theological argument : God predestines. As to
Israel he saith, All the day long did I spread out my hands
unto a disobedient and gainsaying people (Rom. x. 21, R.V.).
This quotation from Isaiah gives the substance of his psycho-
logical argument : man is free to obey or disobey. The second
part of his problem the apostle does not discuss at all ; it was
unnecessary after the many glimpses which he had given into
his Divine philosophy. A hardening in part hath befallen
Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in ; and so all
Israel shall be saved (Rom. xi. 25, 26, R.V.). The judicial
blindness from which the Jews suffer at present shall in Cod's
good time be taken away, and then the gospel will find an
entrance into their heart ; or, to quote from an earlier Epistle,
Unto this day, whensoever Moses is read, a veil lictli upon their
heart ; but whensoever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is
taken away (2 Cor. iii. 15, 16).
Our prophet would not have sympathized with St. Paul's
theological use of the figure of the potter. Very different is his
own application of it in chap, xviii. Jehovah, according to
him, has not the sovereign right to do as He will either with
individuals or with nations, His action being strictly limited by
a regard to character. Israel was, no doubt, in these latter
years, like clay in the hand of the potter : its fate is about to
be determined, liut Jehovah has endowed His creature with
the power of choosing its own lot. No threat of punishment
can be unconditional. One instant (such is the Divine voice
in our prophet's heart) / may speak concerning a nation and a
kingdom, to pluck up and to pull deivn and to destroy; but ifthat
1 54 JEREMIAH.
nation, against which I have spoken, turn from their evil t 1
repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them (Jer. xviii. 7,
8). Nor would Jeremiah have laid such a stress on the judicial
hardening of Israel's heart. If it be true that Jehovah hath
rejected them (Jer. vi. 30), it is because they are all grievous
revolvers (Jer. vi. 28). Isaiah may introduce Jehovah saying,
Co on hearing, but understand not, and go on seeing, but per-
ceive not (Isa. vi. 9), but Jeremiah accounts for Israel's rebellion
simply and solely by a spontaneous action on Israel's part :
This people hath a revolting and a rebellions heart j they arc
revolted and gone (Jer. vi. 23). It is therefore not difficult to
Jeremiah to take in the idea of the rejection of Israel, con-
sidered apart from the Divine covenant ; but it is an enigma
how Jehovah's sure word of promise is to be fulfilled. Let us
see how light dawns upon the prophet. The record of it is to
be found in chaps, xxx., xxxi., which represent, as xxx. 4 states,
" the words which Jehovah spake concerning Israel and con-
cerning Judah." It is clear that Jeremiah can never have
delivered this prophecy before a mixed audience ; it is an
anticipation of Isa. xl.-lxvi., and meant for the comfort of
penitent believers during the Exile. The later seer's prophecy
of Israel's Restoration may be, poetically regarded, finer than
Jeremiah's, but except in chap. liii. (the chapter of the Sin-bearer,
and in the passages relative to the Church), is less original ;
so that the earliest " evangelical prophet " is, not the Baby-
lonian Isaiah, but Jeremiah, and chaps, xxx., xxxi., are the
casket in which the evangelical truths are enshrined. The
prophecy falls into two parts, the first reaching from xxx. 5 to
xxxi. 14, the second from xxxi. 15 to xxxi. 40. Part I. itself
has four sections, in each of which the prophet (or shall
I say ? the seer) reveals himself as a master of picturesque
imagery. His usual practice is to begin a section with a picture
of the calamitous present, but this is only to enhance the effect
of a prophetic description of the glorious future. Yes ; the
prophet has come to the end of his jeremiads ; he can almost
welcome calamity in the strength of his new faith in the Divine
promise. As one of the later psalmists wrote from the point of
view of at least an initial fulfilment, He hath sent redemption
unto his people j he hath appointed his covenant for ever j
holy and reverend is his name (Psa. cxi. 9). Redemption ! A
short time ago Jeremiah would not perhaps have thought it
BRIGHT VISIONS IN' THK DEATH-CHAMBER. 155
possible ; but now he builds upon it as an assured certainty.
With the eye and car of faith, he discerns Jehovah approaching
to redeem Israel, and saying, I have loved thce -with an ever-
lasting love ; therefore do I continue lovingkindncss unto thee.
In the fourth section (vv. 7-14), transported with joy, the
prophet breaks through his custom, and at once gives an
idyllic sketch of the future prosperity. Specially beautiful is
the opening of the second part, 1 which, as Matt. ii. 16-18
shows, found a home in the Jewish heart. The prophet
seems to hear Rachel weeping for her banished children,
and comforts her with the assurance that they shall yet be
restored. For Ephraim has come to himself, and God, who has
overheard his soliloquy, advances towards him with gracious
promises. Then another voice is heard calling Ephraim
home. See the generosity of a true prophet a statesman in
the kingdom of God. Should Jeremiah's prophecy fall into
the hands of the recently acquired subjects of Judah, how they
will contrast his treatment of them with Isaiah's ! The older
citizens of the enlarged state sufficiently know their prophet's
passionate love for his people. Well may they be content
with the few but radiant lines given them in Jer. xxxi. 23-25.
Alas ! too soon the sweet vision vanishes ; but it continues
to supply food for his Spirit-guided meditations. How this
strange reversal of Israel's fortunes (Israel's, not less than
Judah's, the " ten tribes " cannot be lost) can possibly be, is
as yet a moral mystery to Jeremiah, just as it was to the
psalmist who wrote those two strangely-contrasting verses,
Lord, where are thy old lovingkindnesses
Which thou swarest unto David in thy faithfulness ?
For thou hast said, levingkindness shall be built for ever ;
In tite heaven (itself) -wilt thou stablish thy faithfulness.
(Psa. Ixxxix. 49, 2.)
But the fact, to both writers, is not less certain than the exist-
ence of God. The first helpful idea that occurs to him (Jer.
xxxi. 29, 30) is that God cannot, strictly speaking, be said to
1 At that most interesting place Eleusis, I could not help comparing Demeter,
sitting on the mystic stone, and weeping for her daughter, with the poet-
prophet's Rachel. May not both be fitly taken as symbols of Humanity
weeping for its children carried off into the " land of the enemy " ? Surely
this is in the spirit of St. Matthew (comp. Dame, " Convito," ii. i). We all
of us find such higher meanings in Shakespeare ; \\!iy not in Jeremiah?
I$6 JEREMIAH.
"visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children.'-' If the
children are punished, it must be because human sin has a
natural tendency to perpetuate itself in succeeding generations ;
no transgressor is punished simply for the sin of his ancestor.
As Barabas asks the cruel governor in Marlowe's "Jew of
Malta " (act i., scene 2),
" But say the tribe that I descended of
Were all in general cast away for sin,
Shall I be tried by their transgression?
' The man that dealeth righteously shall live' "
A comforting idea, doubtless, during the Captivity, but one
which does not clear up the difficulty how an ungodly nation
is to be made godly. Hezekiah and Josiah had cut the Gordian
knot, but to the little band of advanced religious thinkers a
violent reformation had become intensely repugnant. Even
Deuteronomy did not meet the wants of the time ; it was a
compromise between two opposing principles the legal and
the evangelical. Jeremiah felt that if the problem were to be
solved, it must be on the evangelical and not on the legal
principle ; in short, that he must work out the germinal ideas
found in the prophetic not the legal part of Deuteronomy.
Obedience, according to this part of the book, is based, not
upon compulsion, but upon love (see Deut. xi. i), and in one
remarkable passage (Deut. x. 16 for I exclude Deut. xxx. 6, as
not in the original book) we find the strangely new phrase " to
circumcise the heart." But was this "evangelical" enough?
Had not Israel lost (if it ever possessed it) the faculty of loving
God? What great things God had done in the past ! and yet
Israel had never- felt more than a slight tingling of gratitude
comparable to morning dew. And how could Israel "circum-
cise " his own heart ? The virgin of Israel is fallen; she can
no more rise ; she is cast down upon her land; tlicrc is none
to raise her up (Amos v. 2). Moses has not sympathy enough ;
he broke the two tables of stone at the sight of Israel's very
first sin, and what means of help has he in his covenant ?
Surely the thunders of Sinai do but sound the knell of con-
demned sinners. And so with the boldness of despair, and the
intensity of a love like St. Paul's (Rom. ix. 3), Jeremiah dares
to proclaim that the old covenant is superseded by a new one
which more completely meets the wants of poor human nature.
BRIGHT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMBER. 157
Its contents may be summed tip thus. God, of His free grace,
will make the people what He would have them to be, by first
forgiving their sins in so absolute a manner that it shall seem
as though He had forgotten them, and then as it were writing
His requirements on the tablets of their hearts (comp. Psa. xl.
8). Neither priests nor sacrifices will therefore be henceforth
necessary the one for making known to men the details of
Jehovah's tordh, and the other for expiating sins and trans-
gressions. A written /Jrd/i, too, will become superfluous, and
there will be no longer the terrible fear that the copies in
circulation may be " handled deceitfully " (see Jcr. viii. 8).
Some one, however, may ask, Is not this going too far ?
Does the promise of the new covenant really anticipate that
priesthood and sacrifices will be abolished ? But did I use the
word " abolished " ? Jeremiah's words do indeed appear to me
to point to a time when a regenerate people will, as the hymn
says,
see Thee face to face,
In peaceful, glad Jerusalem, thrice holy, happy place,
When Sacrament and Temple shall never more be known,
When Thou art Temple, Sacrifice, and Priest upon the throne."
But neither here nor elsewhere does the prophet explicitly
announce such wonderful things ; nor do I say that the last
line was within the range even of his thoughts. All that he
affirms here is that there shall be direct relations between
Jehovah and each member of His people (individuality shall
come to its rights) ; all that vii. 22 declares is that the Sinai
covenant related not to sacrifices but to obedience ; all that
xvii. 12, 13 and iii. 16, taken together, say is that Jehovah is
Israel's true sanctuary, so that the presence of the ark in the
earthly temple was unimportant. 1 We may safely assume that
Jeremiah's disciples consisted of two classes of men those
who could rise to the sunlit heights of spirituality (comp. Psa.
li. 17), and those who into their pictures of the future could not
help introducing temple and ark, priests and sacrifices (see
xvii. 26, xxxi. 11, 14, and comp. Psa. li. 19). In truth, Jeremiah's
predictions of the Messianic age were all the more stimulative
1 The Deuterononiic lorCih (apart from its setting) does not mention the
ark. Josiah, to prevent superstition, forbade it to be carried about in
processions (2 Chron. xxxv. 2). A late legend says that Jeremiah afterwards
hid it in a cave on Mount 1'isgah (2 Mace. ii. 4, 5).
158 JEREMIAH.
because of their real or apparent inconsistencies. It would not
have been well that one class of thinkers alone should be able
to appeal to Jeremiah ; he shines out more gloriously as the
author of a movement than he would have done as the founder
of a sect. If Isa. Ixvi. i is inspired by Jeremiah, so also is
Ezek. xxxvii. 26-28,' and, may we not add, the prophecies on
the Church and on the Sin-bearer due to that great prophet, who
was "hidden" in Babylonia (like Jeremiah in Jeiusalem) that
he might brood deeply over the spiritual problem of Israel.
Not Jeremiah, but the Second Isaiah, had the first dim intuition
of the " mediator of the new covenant," but the "new covenant "
itself was first foreseen by Jeremiah.
Said I not right that " the fortunes of spiritual religion hung
on the escape of Jeremiah ? " But in fact his life is a series of
escapes. He was soon to exclaim whether he wrote the words
or not, they must express his feeling, Blessed be Jehovah ! for
he hath shewed me passing great kindness in a besieged city
(Psa. xxxi. 21). Wishing himself back under the Pharaoh's
supremacy, Jehoiakim in B.C. 597 broke his oath to Babylon,
three years after he had taken it. The neighbouring peoples
refused to join him. Following the example of "the Chaldaeans "
(i.e., those left in garrison in Syria), they made raids upon the
country districts of Judah (2 Kings xxiv. 2, 2 Chron. xxxvi. 5
Sept.), driving a crowd of fugitives before them to Jerusalem.
One dramatic scene in Jeremiah's biography, well versified by
Dean Plumptre, belongs to this period (Jer. xxxv.). Venturing
forth in this great crisis, he noticed among the refugees a group
of men of strange aspect, seldom or never seen before in
Jerusalem. These men belonged to the tribe of the Rechabites,
who were a branch of the Kenites, and therefore bound by an
ancient alliance to the Israelites, and who stood, both socially
and religiously, exactly where the Israelites stood during their
wanderings, after they had consolidated their union on the basis
of Jehovah-worship. 2 They had had, as it seems, a great
reformer, who had restored the purity of their social and
religious customs, one Jonadab, whose zeal for Jehovah is
described in 2 Kings x. 15-27, and whose personal influence on
1 Note, in this connexion, Ezekiel's fondness for the term "covenant"
(see Ezek. xi. 20, xiv. u, xxxiv. 24, xxxvi. 28, xxxvii. 23, 27).
2 Probably enough, the Rcchabites adopted into their clan many who,
like the Esscnes afterwards, were disgusted with a too sensuous civilization.
BRIGHT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMBER. 159
his clan exceeded, as Jeremiah declares, that of even the greatest
prophets on the Israelites. Jeremiah knew the religious con-
stancy of these Rechabites, and put it to a severe test, in order
to contrast it with the religious inconstancy of the Israelites.
According to their law, these simple folk ought not to have
entered a walled city like Jerusalem. If they had broken their
vows in one respect, why should they not in another ? There
were the wine-bowls and the drinking-cups ; why not enjoy one
of the sweetest and most valued products of civilization ?
Plainly and even bluntly the Rechabites refused to drink.
Jeremiah was prepared for this result, and at once pointed the
moral.
Jonadab had tied up his people to a life of hardship; Jehovah
had done the opposite, simply requiring obedience to certain
precepts, chiefly moral, which would set Israel on high above
the nations of the earth. Yet Jonadab's precepts were obeyed
and Jehovah's were not. Therefore all the threatenings con-
ditionally pronounced against Israel must be fulfilled, whereas
Jonadab, the son of Rechab, shall not want a man to stand
before me for ever (Jer. xxxv. 19). What does this closing
promise mean? "To live long in the land" is the reward of
filial obedience in Exod. xx. 12. The Rechabites therefore are to
continue in Judah, while the Jews are carried captive to Babylon.
Nor will their life be useless. They will go on witnessing to
the divinity of Jehovah in Jehovah's land. Although without
any but the simplest ritual, they will be, what Israel ought to
have been, a " kingdom of priests " (Exod. xix. 6) ; for " to stand
before Jehovah " is specially the function of priests. 1
The ceaseless inroads of the "bands" of divers nations were
almost worse to bear than a regular invasion. What such
"bands " could do, we may see from i Sam. xxx. i, 2 (comp. v.
8). Even the Rechabites fled before them in dismay. The land
of Judah was passing through a similar experience to that of
Babylonia during the Scythian invasion. Was Jehoiakim, then,
defenceless ? Yes ; the warriors were paralyzed by dread of
the Chaldasans, and Neco's troops, on which (comp. Jer. xvii. 5,
6) the king probably relied, were slow to appear. In the midst
of this confusion the chief author of it all died. How, we
cannot say for certain. Did he, like Joash, fall by the assassin's
1 Was Jeremiah thinking of the favourite phrase of Jonadab's great
predecessor Elijah, Jehovah, before whom I stand ?
l6o JEREMIAH.
hand, and was his dead body thereupon cast out unburied, as
Jeremiah had threatened ? Or does the Septuagint correctly
report (2 Chron. xxxvi. 8) that " Joakim slept with his fathers,
and was buried in ganozan " (i.e., the garden of Oza or Uzza) ?
The latter view is at any rate much the easier. 1 Jehoiakim
died in peace, and upon his unoffending son was visited the
collective sin of his family. It was a short reign which fell to
the lot of Jehoiachin just as long as Napoleon's after his land-
ing in March, 1815, or as that of his own uncle Jehoahaz, and
then more bitter weeping than even for his ill-fated uncle.
But I must not anticipate ; for Jeremiah has left us an ample
record of his prophetic activity during these three months. 2
We know the prophet's tone of mind already. He was no
longer called upon
" To watch with firm, unshrinking eye
His darling visions as they die."
The old visions had long since died away ; new and more
divine ones had taken their place. One of his first actions was
to renew the terrible announcements familiar to us already from
chap. vii. To emphasize this, he had recourse to that sign-
language in which the heroes and prophets of Israel delighted
(i Sam. xi. 7, Amos vii., viii.), although the words of the Hebrew
tongue were as full of expressive figure as they could be. Once
more, it was the work of the potter which he chose for a symbol,
but not the still soft though moulded clay (as in chap. -xviii.),
but the already definitely formed vessel. With this he went
with certain elders into the glen of Hinnom, and, as a Syrian
fdlah still does when under the dominion of violent passion,
shivered the jar to atoms. 3 Need I repeat the prophet's sermon,
or need I add that it drew down upon him the wrath of the
priests ? The instrument of torture applied to him (Jer. xx. 2)
was doubtless more painful than our " stocks " ; and his punish-
ment was equivalent to a declaration that he was a madman
and a pretender to the prophetic office (see Jer. xxix. 26). It
was the duty of the " second priest " (comp. Jer. lii. 24) to keep
1 The statement in the Greek version runs directly counter to the terms
of the denunciation in Jer. xxii. 19, xxxvi. 30, and must therefore be founded
on tradition.
2 2 Kings xxiv. 8 says "three months" ; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 9 adds, "and
ten days."
3 Similar actions are ascribed to early Quaker zealots.
BRIGHT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMBER. 161
an eye on such ; in fact, the guild of the prophets was subject
to a certain official control on the part of the priests. 1 Jeremiah,
though in the "stocks," will not be hindered from uttering his
revelations. He answers Pashhur very nearly as Amos answered
Amaziah the priest of Bethel in like circumstances (Amos vii. 16,
17). I do not think, however, that because of this bitter utterance
I need modify what I said just now of Jeremiah's tone of mind.
It is true that Jer. xx. 7-18 contains expressions which are not
in harmony with the heroic temper which I have ascribed to him.
But this section is almost entirely out of chronological order ;
probably it was placed where it now stands simply because
the phrase Mcigor-missablb occurs both in v. 4 and in v. 10.
This was not the prophet's only use of sign-speech. He is
deficient in that fine taste which distinguishes a greater than
the prophets in His parables from common life. But when we
see his meaning, I think we shall excuse him for the symbolic
text of his sermon against Judah's pride. Evidently his mind
was much exercised by the dissolution of the bond between
Jehovah and Israel. This is what he says elsewhere, in a
choicer style, of the new king,
As I live, saitk Jehovah, though Coniah, the son ofjehoiakim,
king of Judah, be a signet upon my right hand, surely I will
pluck thee thence (Jer xxii. 24).
The humiliation of course is greater when the object of com-
parison is a rotting linen apron. I cannot help thinking that
the choice of this symbol was dictated by a proverb like the
Arabic, " He is unto me in place of a waist-wrapper 2 ; " it will
be noticed that the second part of the discourse actually has a
proverbial saying foHts text. The strangeness of Jer. xiii. i-i i
will now perhaps offend the reader less, especially if I add that
"Euphrates" in A.V. and R.V. is probably a mistake; the
Hebrew has P'rath, which may be a name, or a corrupted name,
of a place near Anathoth, still known, as our maps show, by the
name Farah. 3 It was not, then, by the Euphrates (which is not
1 W. Robertson Smith, " The Prophets in Israel," p. 389.
a We have no more dignified equivalent for 'ezor = Arab, 'izdr (on which
see Lane, "Arabic Lexicon," i. 53 ; Dozy, " Dictionnaire detaille des noms
des vGtements," p. 24, &c.).
3 See Robinson, "Biblical Researches," ii. 288. Should not P'ralh be
Parah (Josh, xviii. 23), as Birch suggests ("Palestine Fund Statement,"
Oct. 1880, p. 236) ?
12
i62 JEREMIAH.
a rocky stream) that Jeremiah hid his apron, but in a rocky and
yet even in summer verdant retreat, not so far from the famous
Michmash, close to one'of the torrents which unite to form the
Kelt (Cherith ?). How he must have suffered as he walked
alone to this spot, perhaps repeating the words, But if ye will
not hear it, my soul shall weep in secret for your pride (Jer. xiii.
17) ; or, Is this man Coniah a despised broken pot? is he a
"vessel wherein is no pleasure? (Jer. xxii. 28, comp. xiii. 14).
Soon after Jeremiah's return the second time, may we not
suppose that his worst previsions began to be realized ? Up to
the last he had cried, Hear ye, and give earj but now tlie De-
stroyer of the nations is on his way. The cities of the Southland
are shut up (blocked up with ruins), and the daughter of Zion
is left . . . as a besieged city (not yet beleagured, but cut off
from communication with the provinces). 1 Neco seems at
length to have despatched troops in aid of Judah, but it was of
no avail. A part of the Destroyer's army was detached to invest
Jerusalem, while he himself (probably) met and defeated the
Egyptians, so that the king of Egypt came not again any more out
of his land (2 Kings xxiv. 7) . The harvest is past, cried Jeremiah,
the summer is ended^ and we have not been saved (Jer. viii. 20).
Nebuchadrezzar's arrival determined the young king and his
mother and his court to surrender at discretion ; and the king
of Babylon took him in. the eighth year of his reign (2 Kings
xxiv. 12). Never again did Jehoiachin see the land of Judah
or Judah's last great prophet. But was there no mitigation of
his lot ? Yes ; a sad one indeed, but one for which Jehoahaz
might have envied him. All that was best and worthiest in the
old capital city went with Jehoiachin to Babylon. Most of the
trained warriors (who were doubtless also the proprietors of the
soil),- 7000 in all, most of the artisans, amounting to 1000,
and 2000 more heads of families, including doubtless many
refugees from the provinces, were carried away from their own
dear hill-country to the monotonous but fertile plain between the
Euphrates and the Tigris. Of the two greatest religious thinkers
of that time, one (Ezekiel) was taken and the other (Jeremiah)
was left. The numbers indeed arc not quite certain. Some
think that the passage, 2 Kings xxiv. 13, 14, has been misplaced.*
1 Jer. xiii. 15, iv. 6 ; Isa. i. 8.
a Stade thinks that these two verses properly refer to the deportation of
the year 586, and points out that they interrupt the flow of the narrative
(" Gcschichte," p. 680, and see the reference there given).
BRIGHT VISIONS IN THE DEATH-CHAMBER. 163
I do not see that this makes much difference (see vers. 15, 16) ;
but the total number of the captives must have been larger than
that mentioned in the narrative. We may be sure that sons
and daughters very often (not always ; see Ezek. xxiv. 21) ac-
companied their parents. This was the beginning of the " dis-
plantation " (to use a word of Sir Walter Raleigh's) of Judah
the first great fulfilment of the ancient prophecy in Isa. iii. 1-3.
Let us pause here to contrast the two men thus strangely
brought together Jehoiachin and Nebuchadrezzar. Both
indeed are called lions, the former in Ezek. xix. 6 ; the latter
in Jer. iv. 7, xlix. 19 ; but if Jehoiachin had really shown a war-
like and ambitious character, would his offended overlord have
spared his life? From Jer. xiii. 18 it would almost seem that
he shared the supreme power with his mother Nehushta. 1 If
he did so, we may be sure that Nehushta had the reality and he
the semblance of power, according to the old saying, A child is
my people's tyrant, and women rule over it (Isa. iii. 12). Add
to this the friendly feelirigs which he inspired alike in Babylonian
kings, contemporary Hebrew prophets, and the later generations
of the Jews, 2 and I think we may safely describe Jehoiachin as
a man of mild and probably (even from the higher point of view)
not irreligious character. I cannot, however, go to the length
of ascribing to him (with Ewald) the composition of Psalms
xlii., xliii., Ixxxiv. ; the " last sigh of the royal exile," as he
gazed from the hill above Banias, was one of those which "can-
not be uttered," least of all in lyric poems which soar so high
into the regions of faith. Perhaps, indeed, Nebuchadrezzar
could have appreciated these psalms better than his captive.
Energy and force of will sit upon the brows of the young hero
in the cameo portrait of him at Berlin ; 3 there is, however, a
1 Great stress is laid on the fact that the queen-mother accompanied her
son into exile (see Jer. xxii. 26, xxix. 2 ; 2 Kings xxiv. 12, 13).
2 See z Kings xxv. 27-30 ; Ezek. i. 2 ; Lam. iv. 20 ; Josephus, "De
Bello Jud. " vi. 2, i (where an annual commemoration of Jehoiachin is
spoken of). One of the gates of Jerusalem bore his name (Mishna, " Mid-
doth," ii. 6).
3 The type of features might no doubt be accounted for if Nebuchad-
rezzar could be shown to have had (like the Assyrian king Shashanq) an
Egyptian mother. But Babelon's view (in the large edition of Lenormant's
"Histoire, " iv. 394) does violence to Herodotus, who may himself have
credulously adopted a mere legend. On the Berlin portrait, my friend Prof.
Schrader has learnedly commented in the "Transactions of the Berlin
Academy, 1879," pp. 293-298.
164 JEREMIAH.
refinement of feature which suggests that he is above the
savage inhumanities of the Assyrian kings. Even if we hesitate
to accept the evidence of this portrait, there is the undeniable
evidence of facts. Nebuchadrezzar could indeed be severe
(like the Asmonaean princes among the Jews, and like the chival-
rous Saladin himself) to those who rebelled against his divine
King, 1 but he willingly tempered the lot even of those whom
he regarded as rebels. He was cruel, according to our ideas,
to Zedekiah, but that unhappy king had broken his pledged
word, and even to Zedekiah he was less cruel than Saladin to
Raynald after the battle of Hattin. How gentle he was to the
Jews left in Judah, and how respectful to Jeremiah in particular,
the sequel of this story will show. "Such treatment," remarks
an American Assyriologist, 2 "is a beautiful contrast to the way in
which Saul or David would have dealt" [four centuries earlier].
Both these men, therefore, come out better in a historical
picture than they did in the Scripture handbooks of our youth.
The shock, so far as Nebuchadrezzar's character is concerned.
will be mitigated by remembering that Jeremiah honoured him
as "Jehovah's Servant," a distinction which carries more weight
than the blame of a too patriotic, too sanguine contemporary,
Habakkuk3(Hab. i. 13).
1 For a case in point, see Jer. xxix. 22. The punishment referred to there
was not arbitrarily chosen, but common both in Assyria and in Babylonia
(see " Records of the Past," ix. 56 ; and comp. Berlin in " Babylonian and
Oriental Record," vol. i. No. 2).
2 Prof. Lyon, " Israelitish Politics," p. 10.
3 That " the wicked " here means the Babylonians collectively is certain.
But we must not with Hooker, in his second sermon, give the same sense
to "the wicked" in Hab. i. 4, which, as the context shows, means the
lawless men in Jerusalem.
CHAPTER VI.
IF THOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU !
Zedekiah ; liis accession and character Ezekicl, the prophet of the exiles
The lower prophets at home and in Babylonia Zedekiah's revolt-
First siege of Jerusalem Imprisonment of Jeremiah His purchase of
family-property He is again in danger of his life Cast into the
cistern Ebedmelech's help Fall of Jerusalem Book of Lamenta-
tion.
IN spite of his virtual abdication, Jehoiachin (like Edward II.
in Berkeley Castle) still wore a crown, at least in the eyes of his
fellow-exiles. Doubtless they bewailed his hard fate, and the
elegy, based probably on a popular song, in which Ezekiel
laments over "the princes of Israel," contains this verse on the
sad termination of Jehoiachin's reign,
And they put hint into a cage with hooks, and brought him to
the king of Babylon, that his voice might no longer be heard upon
the. mountains of Israel (Ezek. xix. 9).
Deeply too must Ezekiel, and all true priests and worshippers,
have mourned their removal from the holy city, though as yet
sobs must have stifled the utterance of their grief. Not less
bitter must have been the mourning in Jerusalem, not only for
the material losses to church 1 and state, but for the vanished
familiar faces. What an official mourning meant to a Semitic
race, we know from the cuneiform inscriptions ; and what a
national mourning was in Judah, the last sad page of Josiah's
1 The temple vessels, remarks Evvald, were the things most regretted at
Jerusalem in the next few years. Comp. 2 Kings xxiv. 13 with Jer. xxvii,
l6, 18-22, xxviii. 3-6, Dan. i. 2, v. 2, &c., Baruch i. 8,
1 65 JEREMIAH.
story tells us. This new lamentation was a national one
indeed.
A phantom-king had meantime been set up by Nebuchad-
rezzar, but his want of maturity of character must already have
excited the fears of religious patriots both at home and in
Babylon. His name was Mattaniah he was " Jehovah's gift "
to Josiah in the memorable year of the finding of the lawbook ;
but on his elevation to the throne he was allowed to take the
name Zedekiah or Zidkia, 1 i.e., "Jehovah is righteousness."
Was he already (like his namesake in Jer. xxix. 22) cherishing
dreams of a "righteous" interposition of Jehovah for Israel, or
even applying to himself the great prophecy of the Branch
(rather, Shoot) in Jer. xxiii. 5, 6 ?
I doubt it ; the name of this poor rot faineant (see Jer. xxxviii.
5) must have been chosen for him by others. Personally, he
would have been content with the " base kingdom " given him
(Ezek. xvii. 14). It was not repugnant to him to be like a vine
trailing along the ground (such as any one may see in the
Lebanon), watered, as it were, by the favour of Babylon ;
Ezekiel's parable, so far as he was concerned, might have been
comprised in the first six verses of his seventeenth chapter. It
was Zedekiah's " environment " (if we may use a word of recent
coinage) which was the chief source of his trouble. The Jewish
princes may have had their faults, but at any rate they formed
a true aristocracy ; and when most of them had been removed
to Babylon, it was as if a fair garden-land (Jer. ii. 7 Heb.) had
been robbed of all its good fruit (Jer. xxiv.). There was no
wisdom left to direct, no strength to carry out. no moral prin-
ciple among the governors or the governed. Woe unto the
shepherds, cries Jeremiah to the wretched " princes " of this
period (Jer. xxiii. i, 2). All the old evils had, under their
utterly selfish rule, suddenly gathered to a head ; both prophet
and priest are profane j yea, in my house have I found their
wickedness, saith Jehovah (Jer. xxiii. n). Jeremiah alludes to
practices specially inconsistent with the holy place, and one of
the Jewish captives explains what they were (Ezek. viii. ; comp.
v. n, and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 14). There was i, an image of
Asherah ; 2, totemistic animal emblems on the wall of a temple-
1 Zidkia was the name of a king of Ashkelon in Hezekiah's time (see
Schrader on Josh. xiii. 3). What the relation is between the Israelitish
Yahveh and the Canaanitish Yahu, I will not attempt to decide.
IF THOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU ! 167
chamber ; 3, weeping for " Thammuz yearly wounded " ; 4,
sun-worship and the rite of holding up " the twig " to the nose. 1
Side by side with these heathenish usages, some of them of a
low type, there was the self-righteousness and formalism of a
large number of Jehovah's worshippers, who still trusted in the
inviolable sanctity of the temple, and perhaps thought that, in
spite of a few violations of the Law, 2 they could still claim the
fulfilment of Deuteronomic promises. The popular discontent
was fanned by the arrival of ambassadors from the neighbouring
nations, who had come to draw Judah into a confederation
against the common foe. 3 Jeremiah thought that he could give
no better expression to the Divine warnings entrusted to him
than by a symbolic act like that ascribed to Isaiah in Isa. xx. 2.
This was probably in the fourth year of Zedekiah (comp. Jer.
xxvii. I, " Var. Bible," xxviii. i), the year to which chap, xxviii.
refers the episode of Hananiah "the prophet," who with a light
heart made promises in Jehovah's name, inconsistent with the
moral condition of the people, and therefore not to be realized.
It was Jeremiah's own symbolic action which in the same sign-
speech Hananiah contradicted ; the prophetic denunciation of
the former followed the next day, and was literally fulfilled.
Perhaps this awful fact gave a temporary weight to Jeremiah's
warnings. At any rate Zedekiah became anxious to dissipate
the rumours of his infidelity, and either journeyed himself or
sent an embassy to Babylon to give fresh assurances to his
strict overlord. According to Jer. li. 59-64, it was on this oc-
1 This reminds us of a precept respecting a twig called baresma, in a
Zoroastrian Scripture (" Vendidad " xix. 64), and of a custom (Sir Monier
Williams says that it still exists among the Parsees) of holding up a veil to
prevent impurities of breath from passing into the sacred fire.
2 I do not think we can take all Ezekiel's descriptions of the heathenism
of Judah in their most obvious sense. Ezek. viii. seems to say that the
" high-places " were resorted to in Zedekiah's reign ; but surely he throws
himself back into Manasseh's reign, the abominations of which he cannot
recall without a deeply felt -woe, woe unto thee (Ezek. xvi. 23 ; comp. a
Kings xxiv. 3).
3 It has been supposed that troubles in Elam may have favoured these
projects of revolt. But, as Tiele remarks, in the division of the Assyrian
empire Elam (or the Assyrian claims upon Elam) passed to Media. The
conqueror pointed to in Jer. xlix. 34-39 may be Teispes ( Tsheispa] of the
Achcemenid family, the ancestor of Cyrus II. and Darius Hystaspis, of
whom Jeremiah may have heard through the Jewish exiles in Babylon
( " Babylonisch-assyrisch Geschichte," p. 435),
l68 JEREMIAH.
casion that Jeremiah committed the long prophecy in Jer. 1., li.
to the friendly prince Seraiah, who, after reciting it, was to bind
it to a stone and cast it into the Euphrates, with the words of
doom, Thus shall Babylon fall. I have elsewhere given the
reasons for holding these chapters to be wrongly ascribed to
our prophet, 1 just as Isa. xl.-lxvi. and certain parts of Isa. i.-
xxxvi. are erroneously assigned to Isaiah. They furnish a wel-
come addition to our already large collection of literary products
dating from the close of the Exile.
Let us pause a moment, for this reference to Jer. 1., li. suggests
the thought of the great intellectual refreshing for which Israel's
genius was indebted to the sojourn in Babylonia. The first
great writer of this period began his career in the year follow-
ing Zedekiah's journey or embassy. After passing his first four
years of expatriation by one of the many canals of the Euphrates
(called the Chebar), Ezekiel the priest saw divine visions (Ezek.
i. i), and came forward among a people, whose God seemed to
it to have been defeated, to show how great and wondrous and
righteous and yet merciful Jehovah was. With this object in
view, he scrupled not to press into his service the novel and
stupendous imagery of Babylonia, and became a great imagi-
native writer. But alas ! his fellow exiles " refused to hear the
voice of the charmer ; " the poetry of Ezekiel was too enig-
matical and his prose too coldly judicial in tone to produce
much immediate impression. His influence, like Jeremiah's,
was most felt by individuals ; his conception of religion, though
churchly, was also individualistic, and it was his task to gather
out of the corrupt mass those who might in time form the
nucleus of a Jewish Church. As a poet, he has sometimes been
overrated ; it is absurd to compare him, with De Quincey, to
jEschylus. As a teacher, he has been equally underrated. He
owes, indeed, much to Jeremiah, whose very phrases, as Movers
has shown (in his work on the two recensions of Jeremiah, part
iii. sect. 16), he sometimes reproduces, but he has added much
from his own Spirit-led meditations. His book is more dis-
tinctly literary than those left by Isaiah and Jeremiah, but,
though written long after the latter had passed away, is of the
1 Orelli, a good scholar, still holds out against this result of criticism.
But this half-hearted critic regards Isa. i. -xxxvi. as altogether the work of
Isaiah !
IF THOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU ! 109
utmost value for the period which we are studying ; would that
my limits permitted me to draw more from it !
How constant the intercourse was between Jerusalem and the
Jewish colonies in Babylonia, we may see, not only from Ezekiel,
but from Jeremiah. In Jer. xxix. we have the substance of a
letter sent by Jeremiah through two royal officials to the exiles,
exhorting them to resign themselves to the will of God, and obey
their foreign lords, in spite of the misleading advice of the lower
prophets. On the receipt of this, one of the latter wrote letters
to the Jews at home, especially to Pashhur's successor in the
office of "second priest," named Zephaniah,but only to his own
confusion. Build ye houses, and dwell in them; and plant
gardens, and cat the fruit of them, . . . and seek the welfare of
the city whither I have sent you as captives, and pray unto
Jehovah for it, such was Jeremiah's advice. Nebuchadrezzar
was, at present, Jehovah's commissioned Servant (Jer. xxviL 6),
and as Bossuet says, applying Jer. xxvii. to Oliver Cromwell,
" Quand ce grand Dieu a choisi quelqu'un pour etre I'instriiment
de ses desseins, rien n'arrete le cours ; ou il enchaine, ou il
aveugle, ou il dompte lout ce qui est capable de resistance." 1 If
the Jews could only be persuaded of this, there might yet be
two Judahs, a greater and a lesser ; the one in Babylonia, the
other in Judah to be reunited after seventy years, 2 by which is
perhaps meant a long and indefinite period (comp. Jer. xxv. n,
xxix. 10, with Jer. xxvii. 6). It appears certain that chaps,
xxvii.-xxix. have not come down to us as their author left them
(among other peculiarities, note the spelling Nebuchadnezzar *) ;
the section xxvii. 16-22 ought certainly to be restored to its
original purity from the Septuagint. 4 But the historical state-
ments of the chapters are above suspicion. How interesting,
although painful, are the notices of prophets like Hananiah,
who was not exactly a " false prophet " as the Septuagint calls
him (Jer. xxxv. i), but rather a fallen prophet, one who devoted
1 " Oraison funcbre de Henrietta Marie de France, reine d'Angleterre."
2 " Seventy " is a symbolic number both in Jeremiah and, partly at least,
in " Daniel" (Dan. ix. 24).
3 " Nebuchadrezzar " only occurs once in these three chapters (Jer. xxix.
21). The only other places where " Nebuchadnezzar " occurs in Jeremiah
are xxxiv. i and xxxix. 5.
* See Movers' Latin treatise on the recensions of Jeremiah, part ii. sect,
i.-i ; Matthcs, Modern Review, 1884, p. 438.
170 JEREMIAH.
his natural prophetic gifts to the service of a Jehovah who was
not the true one, because not "the God who ruleth in righteous-
ness," and who had " sent " Jeremiah to warn His people of their
too sure punishment. Stationary or retrograde prophets could
only do harm to Israel. Hence Ezekiel compares such to jackals
burrowing in ruins, and says that in fostering Israel's blind self-
love, they do but give a coating of plaster to mud- walls (Ezek.
xiii. 4, 10). No good word can either Jeremiah or Ezekiel find
to say for them, and the only palliation of their conduct is that
though the true Jehovah hath not sent them, and, as we are told,
hath deceived (or, enticed) them, they expect the confirmation oj
the oracle (Ezek. xiii. 6, xiv. 9.) they are honest though mis-
guided enthusiasts. 1 Why, indeed, may not such prophets,
however blameable, as having fallen from their "high calling of
God," yet have been fanatically sincere in their patriotism and
their religion ? Superficially regarded, does their prophesying
differ from that of Isaiah in some of his discourses (comp.
Hananiah's expressions in Jer. xxviii. n with those of Isa. x. 25,
xxix. 17) ? If this leading prophet refused to " bate a jot of heart
or hope " in Judah's extremity, and grew still bolder in faith,
why should not his successors copy him in this respect ? The
answer is, that Isaiah's encouraging promises were combined
with a resolute maintenance of the highest moral standard,
whereas our only authorities distinctly assert that the lower
prophets (and, as one of them says, prophetesses) of their time
lived evil lives themselves, and " strengthened the hands of the
wicked" (Jer. xxiii. 14, xxix. 23; Ezek. xiii. 19, 22). If, like
Habakkuk a few years earlier, they had been equally earnest
for moral and for political salvation, Jeremiah and Ezekiel
would not have opposed them so bitterly as "conspirators"
(Ezek. xxii. 25) against the common weal. May we take all
their vehement expressions literally? It matters not ; whatever
the lower prophets were in private, they neglected their public
duty when they might perhaps have saved the state. And
though the exiles as a body may have been superior to the
home-community (comp. Ezek. xiv. 22, 23), there is no evidence
that the prophets of Babylonia were wiser or better than their
fellows at Jerusalem.
1 For a fair view of these lower prophets, see Rowland Williams,
" Hebrew Prophets," ii. 56, 57, and Matthes' valuable monograph "De
pseudoprophetismo Hebrrcorum" (Lugd. Bat. 1859).
IF THOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU ! 171
" Like prophet, like people," we may say, applying Hos. iv. 9.
It is clear that, from the point of view of the higher religion,
the Jews both at home and in Babylonia had not been brought
nearer to God by calamity, but driven farther from Him. Sin-
gularly enough, whereas it is prosperity which too often makes
its forget God, it is adversity which had this effect among the
early Jews, brought up in the narrow belief that Israel's God
was bound to be Israel's protector. God had His own pur-
poses, however ; Ezekiel believes in the " new covenant " as much
as Jeremiah (Ezek. xi. 19, 20, xxxvi. 25-27), and knows that the
next generation will confess, It is good for me that I have been
afflicted (Psa. cxix. 71). But the vine-stock of ancient Israel,
half-consumed already, has no possibility of usefulness. Let it
be again consigned to the purifying flames (Exek. xv). Did
the Jews believe this ? No ; they only said, Doth he not make
fine parables (Ezek. xx. 49) ? Was there not a new Pharaoh,
whom men praised already for his energy and ambition (Uahibri,
called Hophra in the Hebrew of Jer. xliv. 30, Ovnipprj in the Sept.,
'ATI-JO/?;? in Herodotus) ? So the people had their way, and Zede-
kiah rebelled against Babylon, Tyre and Ammon joining him,
and Egypt promising " horses and much people" (Ezek. xvii.
15). At once Nebuchadrezzar takes the field, but against which
adversary ? He stands where the ways divide to use divination;
he shuffles the arrows J (Ezek. xxi. 21), and decides for Jerusalem.
How could he hesitate? Strategically the capture of Jerusalem
was too important to be postponed. In January 587 the siege
began. Had Zedekiah done nothing to avert this ? No ; the
experience of Jehoiakim was repeated. They have blown the
trumpet, and made all ready ; btit none goeth to the battle (Ezek.
vii. 14). An attempt was indeed made to increase the number
of Jerusalem's defenders, by reviving a neglected law, not long
since adopted and expanded in Deuteronomy, which directed
that every enslaved Hebrew or Hebrewess should be emanci-
pated after seven years. To atone for their previous neglect, the
princes did more than fulfil this law, for they set all their slaves
and handmaids free. And behold ! a wonder happens, which
seems like a blessing upon their obedience, and a repetition of
the great deliverance in Hezekiah's reign. The approach of an
Egyptian army compelled Nebuchadrezzar to raise the siege,
1 See Lyall, " Ancient Arabian Poetry," p. 106 ; Lenormant, "La divi-
nation," p. 18 ; Wellhausen, "Skizzen," iii. 127.
172 JEREMIAH.
and go to meet it. In vain did Jeremiah try to sober the excited
minds of his people. At once the freedmen were enslaved
again, and the one true patriot Jeremiah was arrested at one
of the city-gates on a charge of " falling away to the Chaldaeans."
The poor weak king had probably nothing to do with either
transaction (comp. Jer. xxxiv. 8 with v. 15). Certainly he had
a superstitious veneration for Jeremiah, to whom he had not
long before sent a deputation of priests, hoping to obtain through
him another " wonderful work " like that granted of old to the
prayers of Isaiah. 1 The excuse for those who arrested Jeremiah
on a false charge is that the prophet had actually said (Jer. xxi.
9), He that goeth away and fallcth away to the Chaldccans^ he
shall live j and judging him by the ordinary standard, was it
not (so his accusers may have said) only too clear that he was
basely deserting his post in the hour of danger ? The grounds
were doubtless insufficient ; for had not the Chaldaeans raised
the siege ? But the prophet's old friends among the princes
were now in Babylonia, and he was as helpless before his low-
minded adversaries as a suspected aristocrat before a French
revolutionary tribunal. He was consigned to an unhealthy
prison, until the king, with whom, upon the return of the
Chaldaeans, he had a private interview, gave orders for his
removal to the " court of the guard," which adjoined the palace
(Jer. xxxii. 2, comp. Neh. iii. 25). Soon after this, he received
a visit from his cousin Hanameel, who, strange to say, invited
him at this dark moment to purchase the family property at
Anathoth. To Jeremiah this was clearly the hand of God. He
called witnesses, paid the price of the land, had the purchase-
deed prepared, subscribed and sealed it, and then gave it to
Baruch to keep securely, and all this in spite of a mental struggle
which even he, the prophet of the " new covenant," 2 could not
escape. Yes ; even after his great victory on Carmel, Elijah
must have his doubting time in the wilderness, and Jeremiah's
bright visions must once more be renewed to him in his cap-
1 To obtain a full account of this episode, we should, with Stade, connect
Jer. xxi. i, 2, xxxvii. 4-10, xxi. 4-14. The more original form of the
prophecy is that given in Jer. xxxvii. 7-10.
2 The form of chap. xxxi. may here and there (e.g. in v. 15, on which see my
note) have been affected by later experiences ; but the kernel of the prophecy
I regard as earlier. How can we understand his prophecies or account
for his development otherwise ?
IF x;:ou HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU ! 173
tivity. So once again he is assured that a new and better
covenant will be given to Israel, and that as one consequence
of this, houses and fields and vineyards shall yet again be bought
in this land (Jer. xxxii. 15).
So the days went by in prayer and prophecy (notice the con-
nexion of these in Jer. xxxiii. 3) and intercourse with those who
like Zedekiah retained some belief in the prophet. But the
bitter end of the struggle was visibly approaching, and the
princes, to whom the defence of the city was committed,
thought that Jeremiah was playing an unpatriotic part by
counselling surrender. We can hardly wonder at this. Rightly
or wrongly, the princes had decided on resistance, and felt
bound to enforce at any rate silent acquiescence. Surely any
modern government would do the like. Jeremiah had " de-
spaired, not merely of his country, which any man may in-
nocently do : but also for her, which no man has a right to do "
(if I may apply Thirlwall's words, spoken of Phocion), at least
from the point of view of a politician. We, who are free from
their illusions, can pity the princes, and partly even respect them.
But still more can we respect and admire the prophet. Alone
among these desperate men he persisted in advocating what
was then the only "way of life" (Jer. xxi. 8), though, as
Niebuhr remarks, he would doubtless have spoken differently
in the days of the Maccabees. Such lonely heroism was worthy
of a type of Christ. Imagine the scene ; recall the faces in
Munkacsy's " Christ before Pilate," and compare the psalmist's
words in Psa. xxii. 12-17 (written perhaps with more thought
of Jeremiah's trouble). Neither Christ nor Jeremiah could
soften unwelcome truths nor, at the supreme crisis, look to God
to hide him from his enemies (comp. Jer. xxxvi. 26, Luke ^vj 30).
Jeremiah fell a victim to his cowardly foes " cowardly "~T call
them, because they were too superstitious to kill Jeremiah, as
Jehoiakim killed Urijah ; they would rather that famine should
do their work for them. So, like Joseph in the fine old story,
he was cast into a cistern, and Jeremiah sunk in the mire (Jer.
xxxviii. 6).
Now, thought the princes, we may safely forget Jeremiah.
But they overlooked one thing, that the cistern was near the
palace, and that about the king's person were some who by the
accident of birth were free from the prejudices of Israelites.
(Need I say that none of the cisterns under the floor of the so-
i;4 JEREMIAH,
called Grotto of Jeremiah can be that intended, for the simplest
topographical reasons ; ' mediaeval traditionalists have indeed
much to answer for !) Assistance prompt, courageous, and effec-
tual was on its way when the prophet least thought it. Three men
("thirty," Jer. xxxviii. 10, is a scribe's error), with "old cast
clouts" to ease Jeremiah where the cords might cut him, were
sent to draw him up out of the cistern. That dark form which
bends over the pit is, not the angel of death, but a friendly Ethi-
opian who has used his influence with the king in favour of the
prophet. His true name we know not ; he passed among the
Jews as " King's slave " Ebedmelech ; but he ranks in the
Bible with the eunuch of queen Candace (Acts viii. 27) as one
who feared God and was accepted by Him. " Can the Ethiopian
change his skinf" (Jer. xiii. 23). True ; but where is white-
ness of soul to be found in Ebedmelech or in the Jewish
princes ? in Livingstone's tender-hearted African bearers or in
the Arab slave-merchants ? Jeremiah at any rate knew who
was his true " neighbour." A short prophecy in his works is
devoted to Ebedmelech, closing with the words (with which
compare Psa. xxxvii. 40), because than hast put thy trust in me
(Jer. xxxix. 18).
One person there was whose " feet were sunk in a mire"
worse than that of Jeremiah's cistern ; this was king Zedekiah.
His character at this period seems a bundle of inconsistencies.
He deserves credit for bravery in sitting at the gate of Benja-
min, where Ebedmelech found him (Jer. xxxviii. 7) ; for this,
being in the north of the city, was the point most exposed to
the besiegers. He has also relieved himself from the imputa-
tion of cruelty by assenting to the transference of Jeremiah
from the cistern to his old safe lodgings. But he is now to be
tested again for the last time, and fails shamefully. / am afraid
of the Jews that are fallen away to the Chaldczans, lest they (i.e.,
the latter) deliver me into their hand, and they mock me (Jer.
xxxviii. 19). What unkingly cowardice and selfishness ! Why
should Zedekiah fear taunts or ill-treatment from these deserters,
when he would rather deserve thanks, for having justified their
own course of action ? And how could he think of himself when
the fate of his country and, as it might seem, of his religion
was in question ? Especially when, as he probably thought,
Jeremiah had guaranteed his own personal safety and comfort,
1 Ses Thomson, "The Land and the Book" (1881) p. 555.
IP THOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU ! 17$
by prophesying (as Zedekiah might easily infer from Jer. xxxii. 5,
xxxiv. 5) that after a short stay in Babylon, he would return to
" die in peace " in his own country. With kindly earnestness
Jeremiah presses the king, whose weakness he pities, to listen
to his advice, but in vain. Zedekiah cannot bear the thought
of being ridiculed, but can with calmness picture Jerusalem in
flames and its inhabitants, except himself, exposed to every
outrage. Let him be; vengeance is on its way ; the oracles
concerning him will be fulfilled, but not as he thinks. Let us
keep our sympathy for worthier objects. Oh for a solemn
symphony to attune the mind ! For the end of the first part of
Israel's tragedy is at hand. Tints saith the Lord Jehovah : An
evil, an only (i.e., unique) evil ; behold it cometh. An end is
come, the end is come, it awaketh against tJiee j behold, it cometh
(Ezek. vii. 5, 6). Primitive Israel is about to pass through its
supreme agony. Good may come out of this great " evil " ; yet
we can but sympathize with those upon whom the ploughshare
of captivity made such "long furrows " (Psa. cxxix. 3).
The siege had now lasted for one year, five months, and
twenty-seven days. It was early in July, 1 586, and the wheat
harvest ought to have been near. Provisions had long since
begun to fail; indeed, but for this we might never have heard of
the capture of Jerusalem. There was still no thought of sur-
render. Zedekiah stayed within the walls from pure weakness
of mind ; the "princes," because they would sooner starve than
see their proud city laid low. Some homes there were in which
(as in the later siege) sights of horror were seen (Lam. ii. 20,
iv. 10), which I will merely hint at in the reticent words of
Ugolino's poet, "Then even grief by hunger was outdone."- The
famished warriors could no longer defend the one weak point
in their fortifications. With a wild shout, the besiegers poured
in through a breach in the northern wall. It was night, and
under cover of the darkness Zedekiah and his little army
hurried in the opposite direction. By the rocky ravine of the
Kedron they fled as far as the " plains of Jericho " ; doubtless
they hoped to cross the Jordan, and elude their pursuers in the
1 The exact day is chronicled the ninth of the fourth month. Like
the other "black days" of this period, it was afterwards observed as a fast
(Zech. viii. 19).
2 " Poscia piu che' 1 dolor poti il digiuno," Dante, " Inf." xx.xiii. 75.
Above, I have followed Dean Plumptre.
176 JEREMIAH.
mountains of Moab. But it was too late ; the Chalckeans were
upon them. The army melted away ; the king was captured,
and carried to the headquarters atRiblah (see p. 127), where, as
a punishment for his perfidy (Ezek. xvii. 16), his eyes were put
out, his sons and "all the nobles of Judah" 1 having been
previously executed (Jer. xxxix 6, 7 ; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 13). Ruth-
less Nebuchadrezzar ! some one may say. But it was the just
reward of Zedekiah's perfidy (Ezek. xvii. 16), according to the
ideas of those times ; Nebuchadrezzar was of a more refined
character than any of the Assyrian kings (see p. 146). Jeremiah
foresaw this gloomy issue of the building extravagances of
Jehoiakim's reign. In an impassioned address to the nobles
of Jerusalem (collectively described as a maiden dwelling in
Lebanon, because of their houses inlaid with cedar-wood) he
says,
O inhabitress of Lebanon that makest tJiy nest in the cedars,
how wilt thou groan* when pangs come upon //iee, the pain as oj
a woman in travail ! (Jer. xxii. 23).
A month of passive submission to the outrages of the soldiery
followed. The officers of the king of Babylon had posted them-
selves by the so-called " middle gate," from which they doubt-
less commanded both parts of the city, the upper and the lower.
The names of the two chief officers 3 are preserved (Jer. xxxix.
13), showing that the narrative (which, of course, is not Jere-
miah's work) is based on a contemporary record. On the
seventh day of the fifth month came the chief of Nebuchadrez-
zar's bodyguard, Nebuzaradan by name, 4 and burned all the
1 More complete details are given in 2 Kings xxv. 18-21. The chief
priest and the second priest were included.
2 So the Septuagint, which is followed by the Peshitto and the Vulgate.
The text-reading gives, according to the Revised Version, "How greatly
to be pitied wilt thou be" ; this, however, is improbable. The difference
of readings is slight.
3 V. 3 should be corrected in accordance with v. 13, " Nebushazban
(Nabfisezibanni] the chief eunuch, and Nergalsharezer (Nergalsarttfur) the
chief Magian." "Chief Magian " is, however, an uncertain rendering
of " Rab-mag . " "Mag "is probably a synonym for rubft, Assyrian for
"prince." Tiele, "Bab. -ass. Geschichte," p. 430.
* NabAziriddin would be the Babylonian form ; his office may be more
strictly defined as that of "chief of the executioners." Dr. Lansing's
objection (Expositor, Sept. 1888, p. 224) cannot stand; Ass. tal>ikhu=.
" executioner."
F THOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU ! 177
houses of the city, and with them the palace and the house of
Jehovah. The sacred vessels still remaining, together with the
two splendid pillars (i Kings vii. 15-22), were carried away.
How many of the inhabitants were carried away, we know not ;
Nebuchadrezzar's library is likely to be more precise on this
point than the fragmentary Jewish narrative. One day we shall
doubtless have it ; till then, we must rest content with a few
facts and possibilities.
Certain it is that agriculture was not entirely interrupted by
the calamities of the state. Besides the incidental notice in
Jer, xli. 8, we have the definite and trustworthy statement in
Jer. xxxix. 10 that Nebuzaradan left of the people the mean ones
who had nothing, and gave them vineyards and fields. From
Jer. xliv. 2, Ezek. xxxvi. 4, Isa. li. 3, c., it is clear that the
remaining inhabitants of Judah were comparatively few ; this
was only too natural, for the previous calamities had reduced the
land of Israel to a waste condition, as Ezekiel testifies (Ezek.
xxxiv. 23, 27). But it would be hasty to infer that these few
were entirely composed of the lowest class. Criticism has shown
it to be not impossible that the educated class was to some
extent represented among them. 1 To members of this literary
class in Judah some critics have ascribed the Book of Obadiah
and the prophecy which now forms chaps, xxiv.-xxvii. of Isaiah,
also the Lamentations. Yes ; these touching elegies, which have
so long been ascribed to Jeremiah, are now generally denied to
him on grounds which no archaeological research can deprive of
their force. Poems like these cannot, it is urged, have been pro-
duced till the worst misery of conquest had been mitigated by
time. The technical artificiality of their form proves this. In
the first four it is noteworthy that each verse begins with one of
the Hebrew letters, according to the alphabetical order. Even
in the fifth, in which this strict " alphabetic" structure is not
found, there is at least an approximation to it ; the number of
verses being the same as that of the Hebrew letters, viz., twenty-
two (comp. Psa. xxxiii., xxxviii., ciii.). To assert, with Dean
Plumptre, that the born poet "accepts the discipline of a self-
imposed law just in proportion to the vehemence of his
emotions," still seems to me incapable of proof from modern
European poetry, and, if possible, still more opposed to the
facts of Hebrew literature. Some of the examples which the
1 See Kuenen, " Religion of Israel,' ii. 176.
'3
i;8 JEREMIAH.
dean adduces, in the introduction to Jeremiah in Bishop
Ellicott's series of commentaries, " are merely the rhetorical
exercises of poets learning their craft ; others merely conces-
sions to the taste which every now and then prevails for super-
fine elaboration in every branch of art ; others again 'and these
few examples are alone in point), the attempts of the artists to
help Nature to recover her balance, when the recovery has
already begun, and emotion has already lost its overpowering
vehemence." l
Surely we ought to be glad and not sorry at this result, the
critical grounds for which I have explained in detail elsewhere.
We are introduced through it to three writers. One is the
author of Lam. i., ii., iv. ; a second, of Lam. iii. ; and a third, of
Lam. v. The second, who is acquainted with Job as well as
with Jeremiah, may have lived either in Judah or in Babylonia ;
the first and third are most naturally regarded as resident in
Judah. Jeremiah was apparently the favourite book of all
these poets, though the second seems also to have been well
acquainted with Job (written most probably in the exile period).
If therefore a title had to be given by way of defining the
authorship, we might perhaps style the entire collection, on
the analogy of portions of the Psalter, " The Book of the
Lamentations of the Sons of Jeremiah." 2
The author of the Septuagint version may therefore be
excused for representing the Lamentations to have been indited
by Jeremiah, seated (like another Job) on the dustheaps of
Jerusalem. He says (and this notice is repeated with a few
additional words in the Vulgate), "And it came to pass, after
Israel was taken captive, and Jerusalem made desolate, that
Jeremias sat down weeping, and lamented with this lamenta-
tion over Jerusalem, and said." Some account for this preface
by supposing the writer to have followed 2 Chron. xxxv. 25,
which states (see p. 97) that Jeremiah "lamented for Josiah,"
and also " all the singing men and singing women," and
that these lamentations are written down in a collection called
qinoth ("elegies"). If this view were correct, the Chronicler
must have absurdly interpreted Lam. iv. 20 of Josiah. It is
quite enough, however, to suppose that the Septuagint translator
was struck by the affinities of phraseology between Jeremiah
1 '' Lamentations " (in " Pulpit Commentary "), Introduction, p. vii.
a Ibid. Comp. my crit. note on Psa. xxix. i.
IF THOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU ! 179
and the Lamentations, and also found a certain poetic pro-
priety in ascribing the authorship of the latter to Jeremiah, just
as some Hellenistic Jew actually assigns Psa. cxxxvii. to this
prophet, 1 because of the words " sat down and wept," although
Jeremiah never saw the " rivers of Babylon," at any rate with
his outward eyes. More elaborately imaginative than the
Septuagint translator of Lamentations were the traditionalists
who fixed upon a cave near the Damascus Gate for the abode
of the weeping prophet. The " savage wildness " of the spot
" may well seem," as George Williams thinks, " to have caught
the gloomy colour of the desolate heart that pours forth its
plaintive melody" 2 in the Lamentations. I cannot myself see
that " savage wildness " of which the learned archaeologist
speaks. It was natural for a Jew to seek refuge in a cave, and
Jeremiah could hardly have found a grander or a more convenient
hermitage than the cave which bears his name. According to
Thomson, it extends about 120 feet under the cliff, and I can
well believe it. In fact, but for the much more extensive
quarries close by, it would be reckoned among the wonders of
Jerusalem. A vast column of rock, left and indeed produced
by the quarrymen, supports the roof and adds to the impressive-
ness of the place. But the elliptically shaped cave which you
see first is not the whole of the excavation. To the left of the
column you enter a second cave, not so large, nor so light and
pleasant, as the first, and forming as it were an inner chamber.
Clearly this is no common hermit's cell, but worthy of the
large-hearted prophet, to whom it would have afforded both
space' and quiet for his poetic toils. Nor is it incredible that
some of the inhabitants of Jerusalem should have found refuge
both here and in the larger quarries. Addressing Moab, Jere-
miah says (and he may well have thought of his own advice
when the " day of Jerusalem " came)
ye inhabitants of Moab, leave the cities and dwell in the
rock j and be like the dove that maketh her nest in the sides oj
the hole's mouth (Jer. xlviii. 28).
In later times these quarries were used, like the catacombs, for
graves. It is not an ignoble fancy that Jeremiah " sat down and
wept " over the grave of his youthful hopes in this grand natural
hermitage, the rock-doves round about him cooing in unison with
1 The Septuagint has a conflation of two titles, T<jJ &avi5 ' j
* Supplement to vol. i. of " The Holy City," p. 67.
180 JEREMIAH.
his elegies. Yes ; it is not an ignoble fancy, and even Dean
Stanley sees no strong objection to accepting it. 1 But truth must
prevail over mere imagination. Jeremiah could not have stayed
long in a cave in the "day of Jerusalem." We mistake the
result of providential training when we suppose that he all at
once forgot his highest intuitions, and his far-seeing religious
patriotism. His words are not, as Stanley thinks, "preserved
to us in the Book of the Lamentations." We wrong him by
too exclusively picturing him with the " awestruck figure" and
" attitude of hopeless sorrow " attributed to him by Michel
Angelo. It is a touching idea of a Jewish Rabbi (Eleazar) that
though the gates of prayer are closed, the gates of tears are not,
but though suggested by the Lamentations (Lam. iii. 8, comp.
Psa. xxxix. 12), it does not express the mind of Jeremiah.
This spiritual hero is not rightly styled the weeping prophet.
There was a time, no doubt, when he really was that which
poor Matthew Arnold so much disliked ; it was when his
intuition was clear enough to show him the swiftly approaching
judgment, but not the buds of peace and holiness blossoming
on the fields of ruin. Jeremiah's anguish in his helpless
wisdom, when he alone a grander Demosthenes saw how the
judgment could be stayed, and no one would give heed to him,
when he wished that " his head were waters and his eyes a
fountain of tears, that he might weep day and night for the
slain of the daughter of his people " (Jer. ix. i), is indeed a
subject worthy of a painter's hand, but is there not a still nobler
theme the same once sad man taking up his cross and bearing
it aloft, strengthened (like his great antitype) by "the joy that
was set before him " (Heb. xii. 2) ?
Of this I shall be called to speak in the next chapter.
Meantime let me not withhold the truest and most admiring
sympathy from those "sons of Jeremiah," who followed the
prophet in his weakness rather than in his strength, but who so
sweetly struck the keynote of captive Israel's mourning. 2 Is
1 " Sermons on Special Occasions," p. 311. Comp. p. 317, "We are with
Jeremiah on the rocky mount, weeping over Jerusalem." Truly we could
hardly imagine that even a weeping prophet always remained in his cave-
dwelling.
2 These elegies were the forerunners of a large body of synagogue poetry.
The most famous of the later glnoth is that of Yehuda Halevi (twelfth
century A.D.), known even to general readers by Heine's poem in the
IF TIIOU HADST KNOWN, EVEN THOU ! iSl
there another such book in the whole world such an " almost
unalloyed expression of unrestrained anguish, and utter, incon-
solable desolation" ? Well did Stanley draw out the permanent
elements of human interest which it contains, and find a pathetic
present-day illustration of them in the Siege of Paris, 1870-71.
But there is that in the circumstances of the original writers to
which, from the nature of the case, there can be no complete
parallel. The tragedy of Israel is greater than that of any other
people : Behold and see if there be any sorrow like unto my
sorrow (Lam. i. 12).
CHAPTER VI.
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL.
Gedaliah becomes viceroy The prophet stays with him at Mizpah
Ishmael's outrages Flight from Mizpah Migration into Egypt
The heathen festival The stormy colloquy.
"BUT have you not been somewhat too hasty in rejecting the
help of tradition ? Have you not expressly accepted the help
of imaginative conjecture in filling up the scanty notices of
contemporary records (see p. 13) ? Why should you refuse
the co-operation of those early traditionalists, who were them-
selves so imaginative?" So some one may ask, dismissing
with a wave of the hand the reasons which I have offered, and
pointing triumphantly to the four verses which follow the
account of Nebuzaradan's displantation of the " remnant of the
people "(Jer. xxxix. 11-14). In this paragraph we are in fact
told that Nebuchadrezzar gave special injunctions to his high
officer to " set his eyes on Jeremiah, and do him no harm,"
in consequence of which the prophet was brought from the
" court of the guard " into u the house " (i.e., perhaps the
royal palace), and given perfect liberty of movement. Is it
likely that Jeremiah would feel happy in the home of fallen
greatness ? Why may we not suppose that, while the captives
were awaiting the order to remove, Jeremiah "sat down and
wept " in the dim seclusion of the cave,
" Still round and round that strange old alphabet
Weaving his long funereal chant of woe?"
(Alexander, " The Waters of Pabylon.")
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL. 183
I am afraid that this imaginative inference from those four
verses will not hold, for we have an express statement in Jer.
xl. which militates altogether against it. There we are told that
the prophet was taken with the other captives, bound with
chains, to Ramah, where he was set at liberty by Nebuzaradan. 1
This is much more likely than that Jeremiah received any
special attention in the turmoil of the capture, and most of all
improbable is it that Nebuchadrezzar himself had anything
to do with his liberation. Let us then accept the historical
picture suggested by Jer. xl. Jeremiah, who doubtless passed
at first for one of the dependents of the palace, went with
Ebedmelech and the rest to Ramah. 2 That conspicuous hill-
town, five miles north of Jerusalem, now became the meeting-
place of bands of exiles from all quarters. It was there that
Jeremiah, in the greatest of his prophetic visions, had seemed
to hear " ancient Rachel " (as Dante calls her) weeping for her
captive children (Jer. xxxi. 15), and there that, in sober, waking
reality, he now saw and heard the bitter grief of the last repre-
sentatives of the true people of Israel. It is in a dreary,
lonesome country only interesting to us from its historical
associations, and surely the saddest of these is that connected
with the starting of the Jewish exiles for Babylonia. Not far
off, to the south-west, was a still more strikingly situated
hill-town called Mizpah, 3 where in the period of the Judges
popular assemblies had been held (Judg. xx. I ; I Sam. x. 17).
This place had been selected for the residence of the newly
appointed governor of " the cities of Judah," himself a Jew,
and bound by family ties to Jeremiah Gedaliah, the son of
Ahikam (comp. Jer, xxvi. 24). It now became the duty of
Nebuzaradan to consider the special circumstances of any
particular captive, and Gedaliah appears to have called his
1 It will be noticed that two remarkable expressions in Jer. xxxix. 11-14,
"set eyes upon" and "dwell among the people," occur also in Jer. xl.
Probably therefore the shorter account in Jer. xxxix. is not to be regarded
as a distinct tradition.
x Ramah (now the village er-Ram) was on the frontier of the two king-
doms (see i Kings xv. 17, 22). Hence the reference in Jeremiah's vision.
3 I do not see how the well-known Mizpah of Benjamin can be identified
with Nob (so Conder). Neby Samwil, where traces of an ancient town
are still found, answers all requirements (see Robinson, "Biblical Re-
searches," ii. 144). It has a grand view, "the most comprehensive in
southern Palestine," thus justifying its name.
1 84 JERF.MtAIf,
attention to Jeremiah. There was much in the character and
previous history of the prophet to command even a Babylonian's
respect. We know how susceptible of reverence for all that
was good and spiritually noble Nebuchadrezzar was, and we
cannot doubt that Nebuzaradan acted in the spirit of his
master when he gave Jeremiah the choice of either going to
Babylon with the exiles, or dwelling with the Jews who remained
under the native governor. In an impassioned section of his
prophecy (Jer. xv. 10-21) Jeremiah (as some think) reveals the
state of mind in which his difficult decision was made. " He
tells his friends that the resolution to go to Gedaliah costs him
a severe struggle. He longs for rest, and in Babylon he would
have more chance of a quiet life than among the turbulent
Jews at home. But he has looked up to God for guidance,
and, however painful to the flesh, God's will must be obeyed.
He gives us the substance of the revelation which he received.
The Divine counsellor points out to him that He has already
interposed in the most striking manner for Jeremiah, and
declares that if he will devote himself to the Jews under
Gedaliah, a new and fruitful field will be open to him, in
which, moreover, by Divine appointment, no harm can happen
to him." ' Yes; in these trying circumstances Jeremiah may have
wavered for a moment, and longed that " this cup might pass
from him." How much he had suffered from the intense strain
of the last few years ! Would it be wrong to live in compara-
tive ease in Babylonia, varying the elegies of the mourner with
the bright visions of the heaven-taught prophet ? No ; it
would not be wrong in another ; but it would be inconsistent
with his unselfish character. There was Ezekiel for the exiles ;
the poverty-stricken remnant at home 2 could not dispense with
Jeremiah. So he bade farewell to the captives, and went to
Mizpah. It is a noble example, and those who can follow it
1 "Jeremiah " (in " Pulpit Commentary") i. 373. In this view I follow
Gratz. It is no doubt only a conjecture, but it enables us to realize the
words of the prophet more vividly. There are some great difficulties in the
text, and apparently one interpolation, verses 13, 14 being probably an
incorrect copy of xvii. 3, 4.
2 I see no reason to suppose with M. Clermont-Ganneau that the
"remnant of Judah" consisted merely of "serfs of the Israelitish aris-
tocracy, themselves not of pure Israelitish blood " (see his lecture, trans-
lated in " Palestine Fund Statement," 1875, p. 206). Observe that
princesses of the blood royal were among those who were left behind.
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL. 185
may miss much that is pleasant in life, but show that they have
the true prophet's spirit.
It was a bold experiment which was about to be tried, and
Nebuchadrezzar deserves credit for the kindness which prompted
it. The newly organized subject people might perhaps be
less fickle than the primitive Israel now numbered with the
dead, but there was certainly a risk of disappointment. There
was also not a little danger from the small neighbouring
peoples, which had looked with malicious pleasure on the
calamity of Juclah, and hoped to increase their territory at
its expense (see Lam. iv. 22, Ezek. xxv., xxxv., Obad. 10-16).
The governor, however, had been carefully selected ; his views
(see Jer. xl. 9) were precisely those which Jeremiah had so
long vainly inculcated in Jerusalem. General confidence ap-
pears to have been reposed in his upright character, and
crowds of Jewish fugitives resorted to him from their tempo-
rary hiding-places in foreign lands. Even the leaders of the
Jewish guerilla bands condescended at his entreaty to engage
in husbandry. Nature did her best to efface the sad marks of
invasion ; we are told that the husbandmen (most of them now
for the first time proprietors, Jer. xxxix. 10) " gathered wine and
summer fruits very much " (Jer. xl. 12). No doubt they took
this for a favourable omen, and ventured to hope that He, who
had not forgotten His covenant with the land, would yet call to
remembrance His covenant with His people (Hos. ii. 21-23).
Our prophet would be the last to blame them ; but he would
warn them not to forfeit these blessings by disobedience to the
authority which had Jehovah's sanction. A certain chastened
happiness must have been Jeremiah's at this time ; he had the
governor on his side, and the other prophets (who found no
more vision from Jehovah, Lam. ii. 9), had left the field free
to their "despised and rejected" colleague. For about four
years' all went smoothly; but in the fifth, grave events took
place. It was now Tisri, the month of the Feast of Booths
1 Comparing Jer. xli. i with 2 Kings xxv. 8, we might infer that only
two months elapsed between Nebuzaradan's arrival at Jerusalem and the
massacre at Mizpah. This is in itself improbable ; besides, in lii. 32 a
third deportation of Jews is mentioned, which certainly stands in some
connexion with the murder of Gedaliah and the Chaldeeans. Such an open
insult to Babylon would surely not wait nearly five years for a severe punis!:-
ment. It is only fair to mention that Jer. xli. i does not mention the year
in which the events to be described took place.
l86 JEREMIAH.
the annual thanksgiving for the crops. Ishmael, a prince of the in-
jured royal house, had determined to spoil this year's celebration
for all peaceable Jews. He obtained the support of Israel's
bitter foe, Baalis, the Ammonite king, and began to seek an
opportunity of wreaking his vengeance on the Babylonian
viceroy. One of the old guerilla-leaders Johanan by name
heard of it, and gave notice to the governor ; but he in the
simplicity of his heart refused to credit such baseness. The
warning was repeated, Why should he slay ihee, that all the
Jews which are gathered unto thee should be scattered, and all
the remnant should perish ? (Jer. xl. 15) but in vain. Gedaliah
refused to give leave for Ishmael to be slain ; " thou speakcst
falsely? he said, " of IshmaeL"
And now we hear no more of the Ammonite: the story of
accumulated murders which follows has for its central figure
the inhuman Ishmael. With ten companions he reaches the
hill-town where Gedaliah resides, and is entertained by the
governor at a meal. Generous, simple-minded Gedaliah ! how
could he dream that even the law of hospitality was no longer
sacred to his guest, and that he who had, from the purest
patriotism, accepted the unenviable position of head of a
ruined house (Isa. iii. 6), would be called to account for mis-
fortunes which none more than he deplored ? Then arose
Ishmael, and the ten men that were with him, and smote
Gedaliah the son of Ahikam the son of Shaphan with the
sword, and slew htm whom the king of Babylon had made
governor over the land (Jer. xli. 2). Too significant words !
Gedaliah, the innocent Gedaliah, suffered the vengeance in-
tended for Nebuchadrezzar, and with him all the trained
warriors who were about him, including, we are expressly
told, u the Chaldeans who were present there.' 11 Whether the
interests of Judah were promoted or not by these murders, was
not a question which occurred to Ishmael. Perhaps he would
have been content himself with the position of a chieftain of a
small Israelitish tribe under the suzerainty of the Ammonites.
As yet, however, his predominant feeling was that of rage at
any Israelite who recognized "the logic of facts," and submitted
to the Babylonians. The second day after the murder, " while
no one knew it" (had Ishmael, then, closed the gates of the
town ?), there came eighty men from Shechem, Shiloh (or
perhaps rather Shalem or Salem '), and Samaria places
1 See p. 116, note i.
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL. 187
which, probably through Josiah's exertions, still maintained
their religious interest in Jerusalem, on their way to the site
of the destroyed temple. They had all the outward signs of
mourning ; it was no joyous festivity which they thought to
celebrate ; but, so far as they could, they wished to observe
the accustomed .forms by bringing oblations (ininkhali) to
Jehovah. Truly a noteworthy phenomenon ! How great is
the power of sacred spots, even apart from the buildings
essential, as one might think, to religious observances ! The
temple has been burned, but the temple-precincts are not less
sacred to these faithful worshippers. And now that the sad
procession has almost reached Mizpah, they can clearly see
these precincts, and weep anew. 1 Perhaps it was evening ; at
any rate, one more halt would be necessary. Hence the men
were not surprised at the seemingly hospitable invitation,
" Come to Gedaliah the son of Ahikam." But the speaker
was the ruthless Ishmael ; of those eighty men only ten re-
turned home. Unchanging East ! still dost thoti nourish the
same hot, revengeful natures as of yore ; still does thy revenge
accept the help of treachery in the execution of its fell designs.
Cawnporc and Mizpah stand together in the annals of Oriental
passion.
There was a " great cistern " in the middle of the town which
king Asa had constructed during his war with Baasha king of
Israel (comp. i Kings xv. 22) ; into this Ishmael threw the
dead bodies of the murdered seventy. And what of the ten ?
Was it pity which saved them ? No ; it was greed. Then, as
now, husbandmen who feared robbers stored the rich products
of the soil where no one would suspect them in carefully con-
cealed openings in the rocky hill-side. These ten men were
more prosperous than the rest, and ransomed theirlives by
their wealth. 2 Ishmael was doubtless a poor adventurer, and
material means were wanting to carry out his plans. The
greatest difficulty, however, still remains to be explained.
How could Ishmael venture to touch the sacred persons of
pilgrims ? I suppose that he was one of those whom Jeremiah
1 Following the Suptuagint (see "Variorum Bible").
2 There is a Zulu formula for deprecating death on the ground of some
important work which cannot be done without the person whose life is in
danger. Bishop Callaway compares this with the story before us (" Zulu
Nursery Tales," i. 242) ; but it is not a very close parallel.
1 38 jEftEMIAfr.
addresses in that indignant strain, What f steal, murjcr, atid
commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense iinto
Baal? (Jer. vii. 9). Possibly too he thought that Jehovah
had deserted his land, and that now less than ever were those
moral laws, of which Jeremiah was the exponent, binding upon
an Israelite. These eighty men were carrying oblations to
Jehovah ; he, for his part, was satisfied with the less exacting
religion of Baal. But why were the people of Mizpah spared ?
Did he think that those poor northern people could be better
dispensed with than the inhabitants of his own native Judah ?
Or that seventy was about the number of those Jewish nobles
whom Nebuchadrezzar had slain in Riblah (Jer. xxxix. 6), so
that the avenger of blood could now afford to be merciful ? At
any rate, the people of Mizpah, including, besides Jeremiah,
kinswomen of Ishmael belonging to the royal house, were being
carried off by these few bold adventurers in the direction of the
land of Ammon.
The route which they adopted led them at first northwards.
Before they had got far, they paused to drink by "the great waters
that are in Gibeon." ' How natural ! Remember that they had
started in haste. One can still observe an ancient broken
reservoir on the west side of the hill of Gibeon (el-Jib) and in
the wet season, says Thomson, there is a considerable pond in
the plain below the modern village. While the caravan halted,
Johanan and his fellow-captains came up with them. What could
Ishmael and his ten warriors 2 do against this superior force ?
Blows were exchanged, and Ishmael lost two of his men, and
made off with the rest to the Ammonites. What was Johanan
to do now ? Had he been able to deliver up the arch-conspirator
to the Chaldoeans, he might perhaps have hoped for a con-
tinuance of Nebuchadrezzar's favours. But appearances were
against him. He had (so it would be said at the court) allowed
a few bold men to subvert the existing organization, to kill
the representatives of Babylon, and to escape unpunished.
1 In 2 Sam. ii. 13 these " waters " are called " the pool of Gibeon."
2 In Jer. xli. 16 "men of war" must surely be an interpolated gloss.
According to v. 3 the warriors had all been slain by Ishmael. The Hebrew
g'barim (represented in A.V. by "mighty") simply means "men" as
opposed to " women." In Jer. xliii. 6, where the sexes and classes of the
people of Mizpah are again catalogued, we have simply gbarlm (comp.
xliv. 20).
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL. 189
Vengeance would assuredly be taken for this, and among the
leading sufferers would be Johanan and his fellows. So they
thought it most prudent to make for the Egyptian frontier, and
without stopping at Mizpah, pressed on to the hospice or khan
of Chimham (if the reading is correct '), close to Bethlehem.
Here they halted to hold a fresh council of war, and more
especially to obtain supernatural light from the prophet of
Jehovah. It was indeed no slight matter for the choicest part
of the remnant of Israel to return to the very land out of which
their fathers had been divinely guided. So they (i.e., the whole
community) approached Jeremiah in suppliant guise, as one
who, like Moses and like Samuel, had power with God to turn
the destinies of his people. Jeremiah agreed to this request,
and Johanan promised in return that, whatever the oracle
should be, they would cheerfully obey the commandment of
Jehovah. " Methinks he doth protest too much," was perhaps
the unspoken thought of Jeremiah.
Nine days the prophet passed in meditation and prayer.
Knowing him as we do, we cannot doubt that he sustained a
severe mental conflict. His dear friend and patron, who
seemed to have been raised up " for such a time as this,"
had been brutally murdered, and Jehovah had not warned
him of it. Common sense seemed to bid acquiescence in the
policy provisionally adopted by Johanan. Jeremiah knew as
well as any one what Babylonian vengeance meant ; could he
imperil the lives of so many of his countrymen by advising
them to remain ? It was hard no doubt to condemn them-
selves to exile ; but in all material respects might they not hope
to be the gainers, and if Isa. xix. 18-25 was really written by
Isaiah, did it not indicate that, even religiously, Israelites might
have all their cravings satisfied in Egypt ? And yet the pro-
phetic spirit had distinctly assured him that in Babylon alone
could the regeneration of Israel be effected. Had not the
silence of Jehovah in the recent crisis proved that the delight-
1 Chimham (rather, Kimham) is most probably a personal name. To
founcf*a khan for the accommodation of travellers was a most natural ex-
pression of public-spirited liberality. Possibly it is the son of the rich
Gileaditu Barzillai (2 Sam. xix. 37-40) who is meant. But Josephus and
Aquila appear to have read "by the hurdles of Chimham," which is almost
more probable. Gcderah, Gederothaim, and Gederoth, are the names of
three places belonging to Judah in josh xv.
190 JEREMIAH.
ful project of a small home-community was not from Him? 1
And was He not the God of the innocent, and the helper of the
friendless ? So faith spoke louder than policy, and on the
tenth day the prophet had a clear intuition of the Divine will,
or, in the consecrated phrase, the word of Jehovah came unto
Jeremiah. He sent word to Johanan, and the whole com-
munity again met before the great prophet. No longer, how-
ever, in the same submissive spirit. These ten days had not
been spent idly by the captains and their companions. The
more they considered the question, the less they could regard it
as an open one. Jeremiah was in a difficult position. Never
was the need more obvious of a class of teachers distinct from
the prophets, who could inculcate prophetic ideas in a more
conciliatory style. Such a class had never existed at Jerusalem,
though some of the "wise men " had down to the time of the
death of Josiah helped to predispose suitable individuals in
favour of the prophetic point of view. 2 There was certainly no
one to stand by Jeremiah now no one to go in and out of the
tents, preparing the people to receive his address, and explain-
ing it kindly and wisely after it had been spoken. So the
words of the "allocution" fell upon unfriendly ears, and the
increasing sternness of its tone suggests that clouds of wrath
were visibly gathering on the brows of the excitable audience.
This is what Jeremiah in effect said : " I know that ye are sick
of the trumpet's blare, and of the never long absent fear of
famine. I know that ye long to live together under a mild
sovereign. All these things that ye desire shall ye have, if ye
will only dwell in this land. Jehovah is satisfied with the
chastening which Israel has received, nor does He wish to
root up His people altogether. Be not afraid of Nebuchad-
rezzar ; he is the instrument of God's purposes, and God will
turn his heart like the water-courses. But if ye obstinately
disobey, I warn you that the evils which ye dread shall over-
take you there ; ye shall see this land no more. Do ye
scowl at me ? Infatuated men ! Ye deluded yourselves 3 when
ye protested such willingness to obey God's word. Ye have
1 In imagining such a thought to have passed through Jeremiah's mind,
I assume that Jer. xlii. 10 does not accurately represent the point of view of
Jeremiah. See below.
2 See p. 90.
3 In Jer. xlii. 20, we should render, " Yea, ye misled your own selves," &c.
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL. 191
made your choice ; know, then, that sword, famine, and pesti-
lence await you in Egypt."
It is a striking narrative. The writer does not conceal iiom
us that he has taken his side. Azariah * (who seems now to
have pushed himself to the front) and Johanan are the leaders
of a band of disobedient apcstates. 2 Their reply to Jeremiah is
preserved ; it places us in the very midst of the religious party-
struggles of the day. Thou spcakest falsely, they say ; Jehovah
our God hath not sent tliee, saying, Go not into Egypt to sojourn
there. Their point of view is precisely that of the priests and
prophets on an earlier occasion. When Jeremiah prophesied,
"This house shall be like Shiloh," they arrested and con-
demned him to death, not on the ground that he was a false
claimant of the prophetic gift, but that he had mistaken his
private opinion for the " word" of Jehovah. So his opponents
argued now, though they cast a part of the blame on one of
whom we should never have thought the prophet's faithful
scribe : Baruch the son of Neriah setteth thee on against us, to
deliver us into the hand of the Chaldceans (Jer. xliii. 3). Was
there any foundation for this story? It is possible. From the
special oracle to Baruch, spoken in the fatal fourth year of
Jehoiakim, we may gather that Baruch was inclined by nature
to paint things in rose-colour. And seekest thou great things
for thyself ? seek them not? Behold, that which I have built
will 1 break down, and that which I have planted will I pluck
up, even this whole land (Jer. xlv. 5, 4). Taking this passage
in connexion with Jer. xlii. 10, I infer that Baruch, though his
moral standard was as high as Jeremiah's, believed that, even
after its heavy losses, Israel as a nation could yet be "built up"
in its own land. No doubt the oracle in Jer. xlv. weakened his
illusion for the time ; indeed, the logic of facts had already
added sorrow to Itis grief. But, as is the wont of human nature,
his personal bent reasserted itself, and the establishment of
Gedaliah at Mizpah seemed a providential confirmation of his
hopes. Will it not help us to understand Jeremiah's attitude,
1 Azariah, whose name appears in Jer. xlii. i by mistake as Jezaniah
(Sept. gives "Azariah "), is not mentioned among the captains, Jer. xl. 8.
2 "All the proud men." The word (zcdini) is one which occurs re-
peatedly in Psa. cxix. (see the author's note on v. 21). Compare the anti-
thesis between restless pride and composed humility in Psa. cxxxi.
3 Gentle Bishop Ken's motto (in his copy of Grotius " De Veritate ").
192 JEREMIAH.
if we suppose that Baruch really did influence him during this
period ? The prophet does not appear to have remonstrated
with Gedaliah for accepting the responsibilities of a vassal
chieftain, nor to have given him any prophetic counsel, nor to
have received any prophetic warning of his death : in short, so
far as we can see, his communion with his God was not as vivid
nor as direct as it had been formerly. May we not ascribe this
to some shade of human reason intervening between the prophet
and his Sun, and probably enough, to his intercourse with
Baruch? I cannot help thinking that we not only may, but
must ; and considering that these chapters, as they stand,
cannot be the work of Jeremiah, my loyalty to the prophet
suggests the conjecture that Jer. xlii. 10 embodies ideas for
which Baruch is chiefly responsible Baruch, whom the pro-
phet has already described as being (in no ignoble sense, of
course) ambitious of great things, and as listening with a heavy
heart to the oracle, " I will break down, and I will pluck up."
Angry as the captains were, they made no attempt on the
life either of Jeremiah or of Baruch. They had not that class-
jealousy of the prophet which doubtless animated his enemies
in the temple at Jerusalem (Jer. xxvi.). They carried the
prophet with them to Egypt. If he could not protect them
by his presence, he should at least share their fate. Beyond
the frontier they doubtless found other Jewish fugitives already
settled (Jer. xxiv. 8), and it would seem from Jer. xliv. I that
they separated into two bands, some going to the two northern
frontier cities Migdol and Tahpanhes (inhabited to a great
extent by foreigners), others further south to Noph and
Pathros (or Upper Egypt). 1 From these havens of rest they
looked with a pity mingled with self-satisfaction on their less
1 Migdol (comp. xlvi. 14, Ezek. xxix. 10, xxx. 6, R.V. marg. } is the
Magdolon of Herodotus (ii. 159, see above, p. 96) ; it is also mentioned in
the Itinerary of Antoninus, as being twelve Roman miles from Pelusium.
It derived its name from one of the forts connected by a wall on the Asiatic
frontier. (This is not the Migdol of Exod. xiv. 2 ; see Naville, " Pithom,"
p. 25.) Tahpanhes is doubtless Daphnae (comp. Septuagint) ; Noph is
more probably Memphis than Napata (comp. Jer. ii. 16, xlvi. 14, Ezek.
xxx. 13, 16, 18). Pathros (pa Hathor, " place of the goddess Hathor ")
means first the nome of Thebes, and next the whole of Upper Egypt. See
Ebers, " Aegypten und die Biicher Mose's," i. 81-83, "S- I2 < anc * comp.
Mr. Stuart Poole's excellent little volume, "The Cities of Egypt." [At the
last moment, I can add Part II. of Mr. Petrie's " Memoir on Tanis."]
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL. 193
fortunate fellow-countrymen in Judah, some of whom were at
this moment perhaps being carried oft" by Nebuzaradan
out of vengeance for the recent outrage to the majesty of
Babylon (Jer. lii. 30). Jeremiah was now at Tahpanhes. There
he laid a fresh prophetic burden on the land of Egypt, which
calls for attention (Jer. xliii. 8-13). It is introduced by another
specimen of sign-speech. A prophetic impulse bade him take
great stones and imbed them in the mortar (not " clay," as
A.V.) in the pavement at the entry of the royal palace. This
means that Nebuchadrezzar, who all men thought would stop
short at the Palestinian frontier, would soon set up his throne
here, and from here penetrate into Egypt, slay or lead captive
its inhabitants, destroy its obelisks and temples, and go fortli
from thence in peace. An indefatigable English explorer (Mr.
Flinders Petrie) is the best commentator on this "sign-speech"
of Jeremiah. In the year 1886 he found at Tell Defenneh the
ruins of a fort built by Psametik I., and now called "the palace
of the Jew's daughter," and could identify Jeremiah's " pave-
ment " with " a great open-air platform of brickwork, a sort
of mastaba, such as is now seen outside all great houses, and
most small ones, in this country." 1 Little, however, he says,
is left of the palace. But have we gained as much as some of
us thought when the news of this interesting discovery reached
us ? Not unless further corroboration of the details of Jere-
miah's prophecy comes from contemporary inscriptions. As
to the burning of the temples spoken of (Jer. xliii. 12), that
of course is a prophetic hyperbole, which is simply useful as
giving us a measure of the feeling which animated the speaker.
On the other hand, the particular instance of Divine vengeance
specified by the prophet is true to fact. Of the obelisks of the
Sun-god's temple at Heliopolis (in Egyptian, " Pe-Ra " or " Ra's
Abode" ; in Hebrew, " Beth-Shemesh " or" House of the Sun"),
only one remains, to prove the venerable antiquity of the fallen
religion." But what of Nebuchadrezzar and his desolating in-
vasion of Egypt ? Did he erect his tribunal at Tahpanhes ?
\Ve shall return to this later ; Jeremiah himself will give us the
best of opportunities. But we must, even here, carefully notice
the difference between this and the other prophecies of the
calamities of Egypt (Jer. ix. 25, 26, xlvi. 2-26), viz., that
1 " Memoir on Tanis," Part II. "Egypt Exploration Fund," 1888, p. 50.
- Mr. Stuart Poole states that " it was set up at least 4000 years ago, '
14
194 JEREMIAH.
Jeremiah is here thinking as much of his fellow-countrymen
as of the Egyptians. It was by the Divine will that Jacob and
his sons went down into Egypt ; but there is no " land of
Goshen" for those who go there of their own will. When the
" woe to Egypt " is fulfilled, let not the foreign refugees expect
to be mere spectators. " Death, captivity, and sword " in Jer.
xliii. ii correspond to "sword, famine, and pestilence" in Jer.
xlii. 17 ; comp. xliv. 12-14.
The last discourse of Jeremiah which is preserved to us
(chap, xliv.) is in several respects an interesting one. Wo
might have thought that the change of the old order of
things would have brought some peace and quiet to the
harassed prophet. But no the great Huguenot's motto, rcpos
ailleurs, might have been Jeremiah's. Not yet could he put
off Elijah's mantle ; the close of his ministry was to be as full
of rejected calls to repentance as the beginning. No more
bright and original ideas, but sad reminiscences of a past
which must have seemed to Jeremiah far more distant than it
really was. Must we not admire him for thus calmly resuming
his thankless task, and renewing offers only too sure to be
despised ? Where the scene of the prophecy is laid, and
what was its occasion, we shall see presently. It falls into
five sections. In verses 2-10 Jeremiah reminds his hearers
of the terrible judgment upon Judah. Surely this part of the
discourse at any rate must have been modified by the hand
of Baruch, for the description of the state of Judah is a very
exaggerated one. 1 Suicidal, continues the prophet, is the
conduct of the refugees in continuing their polytheistic prac-
tices even after such a warning. How contrite they ought to
be ! With what trembling hope they ought to approach
Jehovah, remembering that with t/iee there is forgiveness, in
order that thou mayest be feared. But what a different tale
is told by these unmoved countenances (see Jer. xliv. 10) !
In verses 11-14, tne doom already proclaimed (Jer. xlii.) is
repeated with a terrible particularity. Did Jeremiah really use
1 We are only told that the citizens of Mizpah and their families went to
Egypt ; the farmers (as we should call them) of whom Jer. xxxix. 10, xl. 10,
speaks remained to cultivate the soil, and kept certain "cities" from abso-
lute desolation. In a subsequent passage (Jer. xliv. 22) the exaggeration is
still stronger, unless "without inhabitant" be an interpolation (see Sep-
tuagint).
A PASTOR'S STRANGF. FAREWELL. 195
these words? Or may we not ascribe some of them, as well as
the parallel expressions in chap, xlii., to the editor, Baruch ? I
for my part can with difficulty realize the relapse of Jeremiah
into his old, too vehement manner, considering the Pisgah-view
which he has taken of a better and happier age. The section
concludes with the words, for none but (single) escaped ones
shall return (comp. 7'. 28). At this point an explanatory
statement is inserted, with reference to the speech of the Jews
which follows. Isaiah at the close of two of his greatest pro-
phecies (Isa. iii. i6-iv. I, xxxii. 9-12) turns to the women,
" gathered, we may suppose, at a little distance from the rest,
and testifying their indifference." ' So Jeremiah appears to have
done at least he distinctly addresses his answer (vv. 21-30)
to the women who had boldly addressed him as well as to the
men. This is the note in question,
Then all the men who knew that their wives burned incense
unto other gods, and all the women who were standing by, a
great assembly, even all the people who dwelt in the land oj
r.gypt, in rathros, answered Jeremiah (Jer. xliv. 15).
" Great assembly " (comp. i Kings viii. 65) is clearly a reli-
gious phrase ; these men and women had resorted to some
central place in Upper Egypt to celebrate the worship of
the " queen of heaven." Not an encouraging circumstance
for Jeremiah, some one may say. No, truly ; he carried
his life in his hand, and thought perhaps of that other
" assembly " (Jer. xxvi. 17) when he had had such a hair-
breadth escape from danger. He now ventured again before
a crosvcl of religious enthusiasts, who had not indeed cast
off the worship of Jehovah (see especially verse 26), but had
placed other gods beside the true God of Israel. They were
among those who had taken the Deuteronomic Torah in its
most obvious but not its highest sense. And the consequence of
recent events was a strong reaction in their minds against the
God who, in His impotence, as it seemed, had let them be
driven out of their own land. Jehovah had promised pros-
perity, they said, to those who observed the Law ; they had
observed it, and see what the result had been. They must
now, in common prudence, revert to those old idolatries which
Deuteronomy had forbidden, and especially to the worship of
that gracious divinity, the "queen of heaven." And who \\;i
1 " The Prophecies of Isaiah," i. 186.
196 JEREMIAH.
the "queen of heaven "? We must first of all see the issue
of the controversy.
As for the word that thon hast spoken unto us in Jehovah's
name, we will not hearken tin to thce : but we will perform all our
promises to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out
drink offerings unto her, <ts we did, we andour fathers, our kings
and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jeru-
salem, and so we were satisfied with bread, ami were hitppy, and
saw no evil. But since we left off burning incense to the queen
of heaven, and pouring out drink offerings unto her, we have
wanted all tilings, and have perished by sword and famine.
Let us not be too severe on these unhappy men. At any rate,
they are in some sense patriots ; the fate which lias befallen
so many of their countrymen they make, by sympathy, their
own. It is probable enough, from the prominence given to the
women, that the wives had really been all along hankering
after this femim tie cuhus, in the rites of which they were, by old
custom, important persons. (Is it not the fact that women
are everywhere a conservative religious influence ?) But see,
one of the women steps forward to speak to Jeremiah, who
may perhaps suppose that they forced their wishes on their
unwilling husbands. Not so. If we burn incense to the queen
of heaven, and pour out drink offerings unto her, is it without
our husbands that we have prepared cakes for her to pour tray
her, and poured out drink offerings unto her ?
Verses 20-23 form the third section of the prophecy. The
prophet himself puts his own point as forcibly as possible in v.
23. Because ye burned incense . . . therefore this evil happened
unto you (v. 23). He admits the facts, but interprets them in
a diametrically opposite sense. By so doing, he shows how
hopeless it was to make any progress along the traditional
lines of Jewish religious thought. That true piety must lead
to earthly prosperity, was an illusion which had become posi-
tively harmful. Jeremiah knew this, but had not the power to
set it forth in a logical manner ; and yet it was a logical
explanation which was imperatively called for by the circum-
stances. And so in the fourth section (verses 24-28) he
endeavours to make up for his logical deficiency by expressing
more earnestly than ever his prophetic intuition that Jehovah
cannot permit such insults to the higher and the only true
view of His " name " or essential nature to pass unpunished.
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAREWELL. 197
Behold^ I sicear l>y my great name, no more shall my name be
pronounced by the mouth of any man of Judali /hat saith " By
the life of the Lord Jehovah." Such is the oracle ; it means
that all the Jewish refugees shall perish but a very small
number (comp. v. 14), who shall have to take refuge in their
old land (v. 28). Never did Jeremiah (if the report be correct)
commit himself more definitely to the literal fulfilment of a
prediction than now. He knows the Jewish fondness for
"signs," and so, that his opponents may recognize him as a true
seer of the future, he offers them two " signs." First, those
few who do ultimately escape shall know by sad experience
ic hose word standetli, mine, or theirs (v.- 28). Next, to quote
the prophet's own words in the last section, Behold, I give
f'hanwh Ifophra king of Egypt into the hand of his enemies,
and into the hand of tJiem that seek his life, as I gave Zedekiali
king of Judah into the ha/id of Nebuchadrezzar king oj
Babylon, his enemy, and that sought his life (v. 30).
One cannot but be distressed, first, that Jeremiah in spite of
himself accepted the old "tendency argument"; and next,
that he staked his prophetic character on the circumstantial
fulfilment of certain predictions. The argument was of course
inconclusive ; the circumstantial fulfilment, even if it can be
proved, cannot now contribute did it indeed ever greatly con-
tribute ? to increase the influence of Jeremiah. Granting
that we find a prediction in Jeremiah of some event which
actually took place, yet how easy it is for a prophet or his
editor to manufacture predictions after the event. And how
difficult it is to prove such fulfilments. It appears certain
that Jeremiah's and Ezekiel's prediction of the Babylonian
conquest of Tyre (Jer. xxv. 22, xxvii. 3, xlvii. 4 ; Ezek. xxvi. i-
xxviii. 19) was not ratified by the event ; Ezekiel himself seems
to say as much (Ezek. xxix. 17-21). Is it probable, so a
rationalist might well argue, that the conquest of a country
like Egypt should have been really foreseen in its details by
Hebrew prophets ? I think that from the highest point of view
prophecy neither gains nor loses by having received a circum-
stantial fulfilment ; the moral and spiritual clement is that by
which alone it lives. Let me not then be thought biassed by
theology if I hold,' in opposition to M. Maspero, that in all
essential points the prophetic references to a Babylonian con-
1 Soc my discussion of tlii^ question in " The Pulpit Commentary."
198 JEREMIAH.
quest of Egypt are accurate. Putting together two cuneiform
records and a hieroglyphic inscription, it appears that in his
37th year Nebuchadrezzar penetrated into Egypt as farasSyene.
There he was met and repulsed by the Egyptian troops (comp.
Ezek. xxix. 10). Two years later the Babylonians renewed the
invasion, and by their complete success forced Egypt to pay
tribute. It has not however been shown (see Herod, ii. 169)
that Hophra (the old ally of Zedekiah) was slain by the Baby-
lonians, though this seems almost required, if Jer. xliv. 30 is to
have the character of a " sign."
Certainly Jeremiah and Ezekicl spoke a true " word of the
Lord " when they uttered these prophecies. What sufficient
moral safeguards had these ancient states ? A temporary
exception may be made for Babylon, the religion of which,
with all its imperfections, was, as we have seen, a noble one.
But -of all the communities of that time the most miserable
was this Jewish one in Egypt. Less endowed with physical
advantages, it was also, through the operation of causes which
we have studied, at a lower moral and spiritual level than any
other. In the religion of Babylon at any rate there were
elements akin to that of the prophets and psalmists. Even
the worship of the " queen of heaven " may in some countries
have had a moral tinge ; but it was not so among the Jews of
Pathros. The children gathered wood, the fathers kindled the
fire, the women kneaded the dough, to make sacrificial cakes,
as they had done in Jehoiakim's time (Jer. vii. 18), simply as a
propitiatory rite which would keep off sword and pestilence.
Who was the " queen of heaven " ? ' Was she the moon ? or
the planet known to the Babylonians as I star and to ourselves
as Venus (not the masculine deity referred to in Isa. xiv. 12,
but the feminine)? Some have preferred the former, remind-
ing us that cakes were offered to Artemis at the Eleusinian
Mysteries. But Wellhausen has pointed out - that a similar
1 See Schrader's paper in the "Transactions of the Berlin Academy,"
1886, pp. 477-491 ; Kuenen, " De Melecheth des Hemels" (Amsterdam,
1888) ; and articles by Stade in his " Zeitschrift," 1886, pp. 123-132, 289-
339; and comp. Morris, "Assyrian Dictionary," i. 86. "Melecheth" is
doubtless wrongly vocalized ; the punctuators explained the whole phrase
" (God's) work in the heaven " (comp. Gen. ii. i, 2). They meant the
starry host.
2 " Skizzen und Vorarbeiten," iii. 38, 39. The worship of different
planetary divinities was widely spread among the Arabian tribes.
A PASTOR'S STRANGE FAR I:\VKLI.. 199
rite formed part of the cultus of the Arabian goddess al-Uzza
(Venus), and Kuenen that in the Targum of the prophetical
books the Hebrew phrase is rendered "star (fcin.) of heaven,"
i.e. the planet Venus, while Isaac of Antioch, who wrote in the
same century (the fifth A.D.) in which that Targum was finally
shaped, infers from this passage of Jeremiah that the Jews
sacrificed to "the Star" (which he identifies with the Arabian
al-Uzza or Venus).' Finally, Schrader has given evidence that
the Assyrians called the feminine Istar inulkatu "queen,"' and
that in Assurbanipal's reign (i.e. not so long before Jeremiah's
prophecy) the northern Arabs worshipped a deity called Atar-
samain (i.e. Atar 2 of heaven).
It is a tempting theme which Jeremiah's last prophecy suggests
to us. Many writers have dealt already with the " vestiges of
ancient manners and customs discoverable " 3 in Christen-
dom. The phrase " Regina Cocli" can now be dealt with as
one of these "vestiges" with more fulness than before. It
belongs not only to the Virgin Mary, and to the Ephesian
Artemis, but in the Semitic countries (probably) to the goddess
of the Moon and of Venus. Yes ; it is a tempting study, and
if pursued a little farther, might lead us to sympathize in some
sense with the myth-makers. Why, then, did Jeremiah hate
the "queen of heaven"? Because these fair but inwardly
exhausted mythologies did dishonour to Him who is the true
"king of heaven" (Dan. iv. 37), and of whom it was said,
/fair, O Israel : Jehovah our God is one Jehovah (Ueut.
vi. 4).
1 To the passages from St. Isaac cited by Kuenen, add Carm. x. v. 343
(Bickell i. 220, 221), where boys and girls are said to have been sacrificed
to "the Star."
- Atar is the Assyrian Istar. See Schrader' s note on Jer. vii. 18.
3 I quote from the title of an early work by Prof. J. J. Blunt, of Cam-
bridge.
CHAPTER VII.
PER CRUCEM AD LUCEM.
Legendary accounts of Jeremiah's death His sufferings and compensa-
tions Jeremiah compared with Milton and Savonarola The spring
foreseen by the Israelite and the Italian still future.
THE heathen festival proceeds. But where is the grieved, the
broken-hearted protester? What was the prophet's subse-
quent history ? When Nebuchadrezzar conquered Egypt, did
he, as some later Jewish writers say, carry Jeremiah and
Baruch with him to Babylon ? Or, as a Christian legend,
possibly referred to in Heb. xi. 37, asserts, was he stoned to
death at Tahpanhes by his unbelieving people ? Certainly the
latter is psychologically a probable view of Jeremiah's closing
scene. Once and again, when death stared him in the face,
Jehovah had " hidden " Jeremiah ; but why should Providence
baffle the designs of his persecutors, now that his work was
done, and their malice could but add fresh flowers to the faith-
ful servant's crown? His God "hid" him this time in a far
more secret place, if we may trust our sense of the fitness of
things. Already (see p. 112) I have invited my readers to
follow this legend. Already the narrative of St. Stephen's
martyrdom has helped us to imagine how
" . . . . some strong pathetic
Face of a wounded prophet gazed, and then
Sank in God's darkness grandly
From out the infinite littleness of men," *
1 Alexander, " Death of the Earl of Derby.
PER CRUCEM AD LUCKM. 2OI
and to infer the feelings of Jeremiah. May we venture on a
still bolder step, and, with the great Jewish scholar Saadya
(who died 942 A.D.) and with the versatile statesman-critic
Bunsen, consider Isa. lii. ij-liii. Israel's penitent confession of
its guilt in having slain this great teacher? Certainly Jeremiah
likens himself to the gentle lamb tltat is led to the slaughter
(xi. 19), and might, even by one who knew his slight regard
for the sacrificial system, have been called metaphorically a
sacrifice for his people. But to me it seems clear that if a
historical martyr is referred to in that great monologue, it must
be some one who was judicially murdered, and whose death
was remembered afterwards. Jeremiah's, death was forgotten;
so indeed Isaiah's had been. At an earlier age some prose-
poet might have projected from his divinely illumined imagina-
tion chariots and horses of fire to carry them up to heaven ;
and at a later period the rising Church would have chronicled
the minutest facts of the " new births " of such heroes of faith.
Their earthly fame suffers ; but dear sJiall their blood be in
lus siglit.
" In Jeremiah," as the most sympathetic of critical inter-
preters has said, " the kingdom lost the most human prophet
it ever possessed. His heavy sorrows and despair, his noble
yet fruitless struggles, and his fall, were those of prophetism,
and, so far as prophetism constituted the inmost life of the
ancient state, of the state itself. If any pure soul could still
save the state, that soul was Jeremiah's, whose period of
greatest vigour fell in these three and twenty years of its dying
agony : but even for the noblest of the prophets the time
was now gone by ; and the last great prophet, and all the
remains of the ancient kingdom of Israel, which had been
preserved amid the storms of centuries, were engulfed in a
common ruin." ' Three and twenty years, however, is not the
whole duration of Jeremiah's career. He saw not only the
dying agony, but the last stage of the disease which prepared
that agony. If he was martyred five years after the fall of
Jerusalem, and if he began to prophesy in the thirteenth year
of Josiah's reign, we get forty-four years as the duration of his
ministry, so that his age at his death cannot be less (comp.
Jer. i. 6) than sixty-four. He was therefore an old man, and my
comparison of his glimpse of the " new covenant " to the prospect
1 Ewuld, " History of Israel,'' iv. 249.
202 JEREMIAH.
which Moses enjoyed upon Nebo is justified. " Few and evil "
were his days. Nor had he the blessing which Israelites prized
so dearly a wife and children (Jer. xvi. 2), in this respect less
favoured than Moses. But can we say that his sun went down
in unmitigated gloom ? Had he no compensations but his post-
humous influence and his early friendships ? Surely he had, if,
" speaking as a man," the Saviour had any. Jesus, too, was old
in experience and perhaps in countenance (John viii. 57), and
was without the closest of earthly ties. Jesus, too, was, except
by a few friends, "despised and rejected." Still the Saviour
had not only "unknown griefs," but unknown comforts
the joy that was set before him, and Jeremiah, I think,
must in some dim way have enjoyed a similar spiritual
happiness. Yes ; Jeremiah is not unfitly called a " type," an
unfinished sketch as it were, of the unique, the incomparable
One. It is true that only once ' does he (perhaps) refer to a
personal Saviour of Israel, and even then he uses a symbolic
expression which circumstances were proving to be wholly inade-
quate to its object. But if he did not predict the true Christ
in words, he did so by his life. Rightly did the Crusaders
erect a church at their Anathoth dedicated to Saint Jeremiah.-'
It is true the later Jews had in their fashion already canonized
him (see the touching narrative in 2 Mace, xv., and notice the
homage paid to him in the land of his martyrdom by Philo 3 ).
A long characterization of our prophet is needless. If this
book does not present a living, growing character, it has missed
its aim. I have no space to speak of his literary merits, which
have been depreciated perhaps somewhat too much. He was
not an artist in words ; he is given to repetition and the use of
stereotyped formula: ; he is too often diffuse and always imita-
1 Jeremhih has but one undoubted reference (xxiii. 5) to royalty as the
organ of God's future government of His people it is the famous prophecy
of the "Shoot" or perhaps "Shoots" (i.e., either a Davidic king or a
succession of Davidic kings). This shows that, while on the one hand
Jeremiah will not neglect the symbol of his gifted predecessor, he is fully
conscious of its inadequacy in the decadence of the royal house. As for
Jer. xxxiii. 14-26, it is extremely probable that it is an accretion on the
text. It is not contained in the Septuagint.
2 Their Anathoth was Karyet el-'Enab (on which see p. 121, note 2).
The church (now in the possession of the French) is one of the most
interesting in Palestine.
' See Diummond, " 1'hilo Judaeus," i. 16.
PER CRUCEM AD LUCEI^. 203
tive. But how could he soar, when there was so much to
depress his imagination ? He at any rate can touch the heart,
and is free from affectation. His greatest poem is his own
fascinating character. In the earlier chapters I have taken
much pains to detect the germs of subsequent developments ;
I must not repeat myself. Suffice it here to mention two persons
with whom Jeremiah may be profitably compared.
The first is our own Milton, whose greatness both as a poet
and as a public man is so inextricably connected with his
fervent spiritual religion. There have been few who could
more fully enter into Jeremiah's first chapter than Milton (from
whom the motto for my own opening chapter is taken), or who
have equally experienced that loneliness which fell upon Jere-
miah when, as Wellhausen puts it, "the true Israel was nar-
rowed to himself." ' Neither was wholly free from the bitterness
of strife, but to neither was refused an emancipating heavenly
vision. A literary critic has recently said that " the love of
country in its most creative and passionate form was the out-
come of Puritanism;"- but the same passionate spiritual
ardour which we find in the patriotism of the Puritans existed
long before in that of Jeremiah.
lint at the close of his ministry I would rather compare
Jeremiah with one who was minify both in words and in deeds
(Acts vii. 22), and whom a sympathetic poetess has painted
perhaps more truly than her sister-artist in prose.' Need I
mention his name ?
". . . . This was he,
Savonarola, who, while Peter sank
With his whole boat-load, cried courageously,
' Wake, Christ ; wake, Christ ! '
Who also by a princely deathbed cried,
1 Loose Florence, or God will not loose thy soul !'
Then fell back the Magnificent and died
Beneath the star-look shooting from the cowl,
Which turned to wormwood-bitterness the wide
Deep sea of his ambitions."
1 " Encyclopaedia Britannica," xiii.
2 Spectator, June 16, 1888 (review of Mr. Harrison's " Cromwell ").
' Mr. G. W. Cooke well remarks that George Eliot's Savonarola is
"always much more of an altruist than of a Christian." Prof. Creighton,
I think, would reject the version of Lorenzo de' Medici's death accepted by
Mrs. Browning. But the general impression given by the above lines is, I
hope, correct.
204 JERElVflAH.
I admit that Jeremiah had not the hopefulness described in
the opening lines ; Jerusalem was a less promising field of
work than, with all its faults, Florence was in the age of
Lorenzo. But do not the closing lines give almost a reflexion
of Jeremiah's attitude towards Jehoiakim ? Savonarola had, I
suppose, a richer nature than Jeremiah. In him several of the
old Hebrew prophets seemed united. He had the scathing
indignation of Amos, and the versatility of Isaiah, as well as
the tenderness of Jeremiah. He differs most from the latter in
two respects in his emphatic reassertion of the principle of
theocratic legislation, and in his ultra-supernaturalistic theory
of prophecy, which disturbed the simplicity of his faith in his
own inspiration. Again and again, however, in his latter days,
his preaching reminds us of Jeremiah's. " Your sins," he cries
to the Florentines, "make me a prophet. . . . And if ye will
not hear my words, I say unto you that I will be the prophet
Jeremiah, who foretold the destruction of Jerusalem, and
bewailed it when destroyed." Like Jeremiah, he had many a
sore inward struggle ; " an inward fire," he says, " consumeth
my bones (comp. Jer. xx. 9), and compelleth me to speak."
Like Jeremiah, he was no respecter of persons ; he fought
bravely, and outwardly at least was defeated. Like Jeremiah,
he foresaw the end of the struggle. " If you ask me in
general " so he said, shortly before he was burned at the
stake, in the convent-church of St. Mark's " as to the issue of
this struggle, I reply, Victory. If you ask me in a particular
sense, I reply, Death. For the master who wields the hammer,
when he has used it, throws it away. So He did with Jeremiah,
~a'/n>i>i He caused to be stoned at the end of his ministry. But
Rome will not put out this fire, and if this be put out, God will
light another, and indeed it is already lighted everywhere, only
they perceive it not."
It was winter both in Jeremiah's time and in Savonarola's.
Which was the more favoured of these two heralds of spring ?
/ think, Jeremiah, because his prophecy of spring was fulfilled,
after a brief interval, to his own people. Not so fortunate was
Savonarola. Germany, France, and England not Italy
were the theatre of the promised Reformation. Italy still
waits. Still Jeremiah's advantage was not so great as it might
seem. Israel had indeed its bright spring (thanks to the
Second Isaiah), and its disappointing but still brilliant summer
PER CRUCEM AD LUCEM. 2O5
(thanks to Ezra), but it passed only too quickly into another
winter. Israel waits again, and seems to say, How lonif,
Jclioi'aJi, wilt thou forget me for ever? But why be im-
patient ? Winter is not death. We know that there is a real
though concealed life around us in the winter-time, and that
mighty forces are at work, which will restore to us first, spring's
fair promise, then summer's fulness of growth, and then
autumn's golden fruitage. And we know that mighty spiritual
forces are at work in Israel and among the Italians, and that,
though not with the voice of Jeremiah or of Savonarola, yet
with such power as God has given them Israelitish and
Italian reformers are continuing the work of those prophets in
Italy and Israel. True sons of the prophets are they
".. . men, whose spirit-sharpened sight
Foreknows the advent of the liirht."
UNWIN BROTHERS,
CHILWORTH AND LONDON.
Now Complete, with Full Index, in Six Volumes,
Price i6s. each Volume.
THIRTY THOUSAND THOUGHTS.
On all Subjects : from all Sourcei :
Theological, Patristic,
Philosophical, Mediaeval,
Biographical, Puritanic,
Practical, Modern,
Ethical, Foreign,
Biblical, Scientific,
Ecclesiastical. , Classical,
Welsh.
EDJTED BY THE
VERY REV. DK. SPENCE, M.A., REV. JOSEPH S.
EXELL, M.A., REV. CHARLES NEU,, M.A.
WITH INTRODUCTION BY
VKRY REV. DEAN HOWSON, D.D.
CHARACTER OF THE WORK.
IN order to place the entire range of literature under con-
tribution, scores of workers have searched thousands of
volumes ; especially of the Fathers and the Puritans ; Books of
Biography, Books Scientific, Classical, Philosophical, Foreign ;
University Lectures, and all the great Reviews of the age. The
volumes contain illustrative extracts and quotations, choice and
carefully selected literary gleanings of the highest order, anec-
dotes aiding to define moral and religious truths, historical
parallels, similitudes in brief, useful and suggestive thoughts,
gathered from the best available sources, on all subjects.
The Rev. J. S. Exell, Dartmouth, will cause VOLUME I.
of the above work to be sent as a SPECIMEN on receipt
of Six Shillings and Sixpence.
CRITICAL NOTICES OF THE ENGLISH AND
AMERICAN PRESS.
THE SCOTSMAN, Edinburgh:
"Under the title 'THIRTY THOUSAND THOUGHTS,' we have the
first volume of a work which, if the design of the compilers be
carried out in its integrity, will be at once the largest, the most com-
prehensive, and the most scientifically arranged epitome of ideas on
theology, scriptural and ecclesiastical history, and Christian ethics, tc
be found in our language. With regard to the method of classifica-
tion and arrangement adopted, it has the merit of comprehensiveness
and logical sequence : and, when once mastered, will give the student
access to any point to which he may have occasion to refer. It is not
easy to perceive how the systematization could be more thorough. "
THE LITERARY WORLD, London :
" We doubt not the work will be esteemed the greatest treasure he
possesses by many a country minister who is fortunate enough to ob-
tain it ; and even the City preacher, to whom the vast libraries of the
metropolis are open, need not despise this aid to his memory and
guide to the best literature on certain subjects. Further volumes will
be eagerly looked for. "
THE LITERARY CHURCHMAN, London:
" As a guide to what we read, as suggestive of thought; and as
affording valuable data on subjects of the highest importance, it will
prove a valuable addition to the theological library, and also an
equally valuable help in the direction of homiletics."
THE CHURCH TIMES :
" As an illustrative dictionary or common-place book, it will prob
ably begin at once to secure a first position amongst the works of ihib
class. Its homiletical use will soon be discovered, and the skill of its
arrangement utilized by many who are brought to face the controver-
sies of the day. We must not forget to mention the value of the
sectional indices, which will be supplemented by a general alpha-
betical index, upon the execution of which will greatly depend the
practical value of the work."
THE LUTHERAN REVIEW, Philadelphia :
"This great work is virtually a library upon each subject pre-
sented. . . . The extracts are short and pointed, and every page
affords rich and interesting reading, while the arrangement is so
complete that no difficulty is experienced in at once turning to any
point one may desire to find It is a masterpiece of order and a mine
of thought."
LONDON : JAMES NISBET & CO., 21, BERNERS STREET, W.
Now Ready. Price 2s. 6d. each
Cf)e Jften of tlje
ABRAHAM : His Life and Times. P,y Rev. W.
J. DEANE, M.A. Fifth Thousand.
" As the first volume of a scries entitled ' Men of the Bible,' we have an
interesting and carefully-written account of ' Abraham ; his Life and Times'
(James Nisbet and Co.), by the Rev. W. J. Deane, M.A., Rector of Ashen,
Essex. The Biblical record of the career of the patriarch is faithfully fol-
lowed, but is elucidated by Mr. Deane from the results of modern scientific
research and archaeological discovery, and the book embodies a great
;iin"imt of instructive information in an acceptable form." The Scotsman,
MOSES : His Life and Times. By Rev. Canon G.
RAWLINSON, M.A. Fifth Thousand.
" As easy to read as a story-book. Its information is wonderful. Our
author makes Moses live before your eyes. Such is the writer's acquaintance
with Eastern history, manners, and scenery, that he becomes the Macaulay
of Moses, only without the inaccuracy of our English historian. This is
a grand chance for half-a-crown. It the other ' Men of the Bible' find such
biographers, tin: publishers will have to enlarge their premises. Friend,
1'ity this book. We believe yon will thank us for the advice when you find
yourself fairly fascinated by it." Sword and Trowel.
"A work of great merit." The Clergyman's Magazine.
' ' \V< irks of this description are invaluable to diligent readers of the
sacred text." Glasgow Herald.
SOLOMON : His Life and Times. By Yen. Arch-
deacon F. W. FARRAR, D.D. Fifth Thousand.
"An excellent history, and very readable, conveying a proper estimate of
this magnificent, though criminal, prince." 'J he Clergyman's M^azine.
"Yet, with every discount, Farrar's 'Solomon' is well worth readin;;,
and it constitutes such a magnificent word-picture of the great king that
one rises from it with a more vivid idea of the royal preacher than 01
likely to obtain by other means. The cost is only half-a-cmua : the literan-
taste, and skill, and leaining are worth a thousand crowns at the least.'
Sword and Trowel.
" This is in every way a satisfactory sketch of the wonderful career of the
great Suleimaun ben Daoud." Literary Churchman,
THE MEN OF THE BIBLE
(Continued}
ELIJAH : His Life and Times. By Rev. Prof. W.
MILLIGAN, D.D. Third Thousand.
ISAIAH : His Life and Times. By Rev. Canon
DRIVER, M.A. Third Thousand.
SAMUEL and SAUL. By Rev. VV. J. DEANE, M.A.
JEREMIAH : His Life and Times. By Rev. Canon
T. K. CIIEVNK, D.D.
PREPARING FOR PUBLICATION,
READY IN NOVEMBER.
JESUS THE DIVINE MAN. By Rev. F. J.
VAI.LINGS, M.A.
READY IN DECEMBER.
DANIEL : His Life and Times. By Rev. H.
DEANE, B.D.
GIDEON : His Life and Times. By Rev. J. M.
LANG, D.D.
JOSHUA AND THE JUDGES. By the Rev.
W. J. DEANE, M.A.
JOSEPH : His Life and Times. By Rev. H. G.
TOMKINS.
THE KINGS OF ISRAEL AND JUDAH. By
Rev. Canon RAWLINSON.
DAVID: His Life and Times. By Rev. W. J.
DEANE, M.A.
LONDON : JAMES NISBET & CO., 21, BEP.NERS STREET, W.
" A wonderful (ampliation of valuable thought."
CHRISTIAN UNION.
THE BEST EXPOSITORY, SERMONIC, AND ILLUSTRA-
TIVE BIBLE FOR PREACHERS AND TEACHERS.
THE
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR,
Or ANECDOTES, SIMILES, EMBLEMS, ILLUS-
TRATIONS, and SERMON OUTLINES on the
VERSES of the BIBLE, gathered from the entire range
of Home and Foreign Literature of the past and present.
The Volume containing ST. MATTHEW (Fifth
Thousand) is now ready, price 73. 6d. Also the Volume
on ST. MARK, price 73. 6d. Each Volume contains
700 closely-printed pages, and about 4,000 Sermon Out-
lines and Similes.
ST. LUKE commences in Sevenpenny Monthly
Parts with October, 1888.
"And we are sure that the present work will be a very useful one, especially to
those who have small libraries. Mr. Exell is a man of wide reading, and has a good
deal of practical skill in the compiling and editing of books, and it would be very
difficult to find work more satisfactory of its kind than we have in this volume. It
is, indeed, a very good, practical, and devotional commentary on the Gospel accord-
ing to St. Mark, and the reader may safely open it anywhere with the assurance that
lie will alight upon good things. "Church Bells.
" In the shape of illustration of the text there is an amazing amount of matter in
the volume." Aberdeen Journal.
" Preachers and teachers should find the volume of 'The Biblical Illustrator ' on
St. Mark, which the Rev. I. S. Exell has just issued through Messrs. Nisbet, very
useful. The references are taken from widely different sources, and it is evident that
their collection must have been the cause of many years' arduous work." The
Quiver.
" But anything in which the Rev. J. S. Exell has had a hand is usually well done,
and ' The Biblical Illustrator ' is no exception to the rule. The volume just issued on
the Gospel according to St. Mark contains a remarkable collection of anecdotes,
similes, expository and homiletic matter not, of course, equal in merit, but nearly
always yielding some useful thought." Yorkshire Post.
" Though not actually a commentary, the matter it contains might well form part
of a commentary, and will be found a very useful aid in studying and expounding the
Bible. "-John Bn.
" The book, from its wealth of anecdote, exposition, similes, and geographical,
scientific, historical, and homiletical notes, is one that will prove of great advantage
to clergymen and teachers who wish to study and expound clearly the Evangelist's
gospel. " Liverpool Courier.
"The volume on the Gospel according to St. M ark contains an extraordinary series
of extracts, homiletical, expository, and illustrative, drawn from many widely diffe-
rent sources. Mr. Exell has done his work in a most thorough and careful manner."
Record.
" Indeed there is an embarras de ricjiesse, and one is bewildered amid the variety
exhibited.' 1 Aberdeen Free Press.
" For variety and fulness of material to suit preachers and teachers, and to aid
them in their work, it would be difficult to find a book that surpasses this."- -Priniiti; e
Methodist Magazine.
" Plenty of matter for your money. We never remember to have seen such solid
pages ; and in small type, too ! When compositors get blank spaces, and halt i
without type, they call them fat: the books are leanness itself. They are litn;ill\
crammed. They remind us of trusses of compressed hay. Portions from sermons,
commentaries, and all sorts of books are used as expositions on the various verses ut
these two Gospels ; and they have been, upon the whole, right well selected and ar-
ranged. Mr. Exell has a great gift in that direction, and he uses it with marvrll.>us
diligence. This begging, borrowing, and stealing of the thoughts of authors has be-
come quite an art. We feel that the price of these books 75. 6d. each is very low,
even for material which has been all of it gathered from others. A preacher with
better eyes than ours will exult over this volume as one that findeth great spoil : for
our optics the type is a little too small. Some persons would have made three
volumes of each of these, but Mr. Exell has rammed it down and squeezed it in as if
he had used hydraulics. Mark is so graphic and picturesque that he affords a fine
field for the use of emblems and other illustrations ; and as the editor has carefully
collected these, he has made up a very rich volume, which we gratefully place among
our expositions of Mark. Of Mattliew we can also speak most heartily." C. 11.
Spnrgeon.
" It certainly shows a great deal of painstaking, and has cost a vast amount of
labour. ' ' Christian Commonwealth.
"This is the second volume of a most useful work. Sunday School teachers,
preachers, and occasional speakers, will find it of great value. It is very rich in f.\|>. >
sition, anecdotes, similes, varied illustrations ; and gives precious results of diligent
gleaning from many fields, both English and foreign." Methodist Sunday School
^Record.
" It is a library in itself. It contains the freshest possible information ; the cream
of the richest minds of the nineteenth century that have made St. Mark a study."
Christian Leader.
"There is a perfect mine of wealth in this volume." Perthshire Advertiser.
" For preachers and teachers there is no volume on this gospel so full of usable
passages." Sunday School Chronicle.
" It is, in a word, an encyclopaedia of scholarly thought and research of the most
able living theologians and preachers. The editor has brought together in one volume
the best thought of the best writers and thinkers who have adorned every section of
the Christian Church." Christian Union.
"This is a remarkably complete repertory of anecdotes, similes, emblems, and
illustrations on the verses of Mark's gospel." The Christian.
" No writer, either of note or of worth, seems to have 1 <-cn overlooked, and all the-
best things have been laid under contribution. "Hafitist Union.
LONDON : JAMES NISBET & Co., BERNERS STREET, W.
University of California
SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
305 De Neve Drive - Parking Lot 17 Box 951388
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095-1388
Return this material to the library from which it was borrowed.
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
A 000 636 783 3