NRLF 
 
 SB 
 
.^_rt .T rij 
 
 REESE, LIBRARY 
 
 or 
 
 UNIVERSITY' OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
AN OUTLINE OF THE HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 LITERATURE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 
 
AN OUTLINE OF THE HISTOKY 
 
 LITERATURE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 
 
 WITH 
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 
 
 FOR THE 
 
 HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES 
 
 AND OTHER AIDS TO THE 
 
 EXPLANATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 BY 
 
 E. KAUTZSCH, 
 
 ' 
 PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF HALLE. 
 
 REPRINTED FROM THE "SUPPLEMENTS" TO THE TRANSLATION 
 OF THE OLD TESTAMENT EDITED BY THE AUTHOR. 
 
 TRANSLATED BY JOHN TAYLOR, D.LIT, M.A. 
 
 WILLIAMS~ILND NORGATE, 
 
 14, HENKIETTA STREET, COVENT GAEDEN, LONDON 
 
 20, SOUTH FREDERICK STREET, EDINBURGH; AND 
 
 7, BROAD STREET, OXFORD. 
 
 1898. 
 
// 
 
 7>O 
 
 *-* -JH 
 
 LONDON : 
 
 G. NORMAN AND SON, PRINTERS, FLORAL STREET, 
 COVENT GARDEN. 
 
PEEFACE. 
 
 THE publisher and the editor of " Die Heilige Schrift des 
 A. T." (edited by E. Kautzsch, with the co-operation of 
 Professors Guthe, Kamphausen, Kittel, Marti, Rothstein, 
 Riietschi, Kyssel, Seigfried and Socin ; second edition, with 
 many corrections, Freiburg and Leipzig, 1896), have been 
 repeatedly urged to print separately these " Supplements " 
 to the work, and the appeal has been specially supported 
 from England. They have not acceded to it without careful 
 consideration. With the exception of minor corrections and 
 additions (especially of references to the most recent litera- 
 
 iture), together with an alteration in the arrangement, this 
 separate edition differs from the last impression only in the 
 following points. The division of the six periods into numerous 
 smaller sections with special titles, and the employment of 
 headlines to each page has made it easier to trace the Outline 
 of the History of Old Testament Literature (p. 1 ff.). On 
 p. 93 a discussion of the Song of Moses (Deut. xxxii.) has 
 been inserted, and at p. 97 f. a notice of the so-called Ebed- 
 Jahweh poems. From p. 120 onwards repeated reference has 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 been made to Prof. Ed. Meyer's important work, " Die 
 Entstehung des Judenthums " (Halle, 1896). 
 
 On pp. 225-247, there is an addition to the matter previously 
 contained in the " Supplements," in the form of a Survey of 
 the constituents of the Sources of all the historical books 
 from Genesis to 2 Kings, together with Ezra and Nehemiah. 
 This was requisite because we could not take it for granted 
 that the readers of our Keprint would use along with it the 
 Translation (see above), in which the various documents are 
 distinguished by marginal letters. The Survey now added 
 is naturally in general agreement with those assumptions of 
 literary criticism on which the Translation and the Outline are 
 based. But the renewed weighing of the critical problems 
 and the employment of contributions to the analysis of the 
 sources made by others since 1894, have led to corrections of 
 all kinds, and in some cases (especially with regard to the 
 Third Book of Moses) to more precise results concerning 
 certain strata of the Sources. 
 
 With regard to the standpoint here occupied in literary 
 criticism and theology I must again refer to the concluding 
 words of the " Outline " (p. 164 ff.) . Nothing can alter the fact 
 that scientific problems, once recognized as such, are not 
 stilled until they have been solved, or until, at least, the limits 
 within which they can be solved have been determined. That 
 is true of the problems of theological science and conse- 
 quently of those of Biblical Investigation, as well as of all 
 others, and one of the signs of a church's vitality is that it 
 leaves honest inquiry unhampered and has confidence in the 
 
PREFACE. Vll 
 
 power of Truth, which will triumph in the end. But a church 
 which cannot bear to have the traditions of its faith 
 scientifically tested, and fancies that by majority-resolutions 
 in synods it can arbitrarily maintain a view of Scripture which 
 contradicts Scripture itself, pronounces its own sentence. If 
 people wish to tie men's consciences for ever to traditional 
 views they must be able to meet the objections raised against 
 the tradition. Attempts to do this have not been wanting, 
 and we shall always welcome them, so long as they recognize 
 facts and are content to moderate the excess of critical zeal 
 and to put down an unseemly kind of discussion of the 
 questions involved in Biblical inquiry. But some facts have 
 been finally settled, such as the construction of the Pentateuch 
 and the Historical Books out of different documents, some 
 of them varying widely from each other. And if we are 
 required, even with reference to them, to destroy our sense 
 of truth and give the lie to indisputable results for the 
 sake of groundless prejudices, we protest, in the name of 
 Evangelical liberty, and that the more vigorously seeing that 
 all previous attempts to cover such a demand with a show of 
 erudition have failed utterly and miserably. 
 
 E. KAUTZSCH. 
 HALLE, February, 1897. 
 
TRANSLATOR'S NOTE. 
 
 THE Eev. J. H. Stowell, The Manse, Lightcliffe, lias most 
 kindly placed his MS. translation of the "Abriss" at my 
 disposal during the revision of the proof-sheets of this 
 volume. This does not involve him in any responsibility for 
 the rendering, but it obliges me to cordial thanks, 
 
 J.T, 
 
 November lltft, 1898, 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 PREFACE .......... 
 
 I. HISTORY OF THE LITERATURE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 1. The re-monarchic Period. 
 
 1. The Relics of ancient popular poetry. 
 
 (a) The Book of the Wars of Jahweh The Triumphal 
 Song of "Them that speak in Proverbs" The 
 Song of the Well The Book of the Upright Ones 
 
 (6) The Song of Lamech The passage concerning 
 the Holy Ark Exod. xvii. 16 The Song of 
 Deborah Jotham's Fable 
 
 2. The Relics of ancient stories and legends The 
 
 literary works ascribed to Moses .... 
 
 2. The Period of the Undivided Monarchy. 
 
 1. David's Elegies on Saul and Abner Possible Psalms 
 
 of David Nathan's Parable Solomon's Speech in 
 dedication of the Temple Possible remnants of 
 Solomon's Writings ...... 
 
 2. Other possible literary memorials of the period of 
 
 David and Solomon (especially the " Blessing of 
 Jacob " and the original form of the Balaam- 
 Discourses) ........ 
 
 I 
 
 PAGE 
 V 
 
 10 
 
 14 
 
X TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 3. The Period of the Divided Monarchy until the Destruction 
 of Samaria. 
 
 1. General The " Hero- Stories " of the Book of Judges 
 
 The "Jerusalem- Source" in the Second Book of 
 Samuel The " Saul-Stories " and the " David- 
 Stories" 18 
 
 2. The Beginnings of the Legal Literature : The Book 
 
 of the Covenant . ... .29 
 
 3. The Jahwistic Historical Work On the History of 
 
 Pentateuch Criticism . . . . . .31 
 
 4. Other Relics of the Literature of the ninth and 
 
 eighth centuries (1 Sam. iv. 1 if.) " The Blessing 
 of Moses " The Mirror of the Prophets 1 Kings 
 xx. 22, &c 40 
 
 5. The Historical Work of the older Elohist The more 
 
 recent Biographies of Samuel and Saul ... 43 
 
 6. General Remarks on Prophetism . . . .46 
 
 7. The earliest Literary Prophets : Isa. xv. f., Amos, 
 
 Hosea 50 
 
 8. Isaiah Micah .53 
 
 4. From the Destruction of Samaria to the Exile. 
 
 1. Nahum Zephaniah ..... .59 
 
 2. The Historical Work of the Jehovist Deuteronomy . 61 
 
 3. The Book of Kings . . 68 
 
 4. Habakkuk Jeremiah 74 
 
 5. The Period of the Exile. 
 
 1. Ezekiel 
 
 2. Lamentations 
 
 86 
 91 
 
TABLE OP CONTENTS. 
 
 XI 
 
 PAGE 
 
 3. The Close of the Deuteronomistic Historical Work . 94 
 
 4. Deutro-Isaiah (and Trito-Isaiah) .... 96 
 
 5. Isa. xxxiv. f ., xiii. f ., xxi. 1-10 . . 99 
 
 6. The Law of Holiness . .100 
 
 6. The Post-Exilic Period. 
 
 1. Haggai and Zechariah Malachi .... 103 
 
 2. The Priests' Code and the Law Book of Ezra The 
 
 Close of the Pentateuch and of the Historical Work 
 extending from Gen. i. to 2 Kings xxv. . . . 106 
 
 3. The Work of the Chronicler (Ezra, Nehemiah, and 
 
 Chronicles) . 121 
 
 4. The Book of Ruth The Book of Esther . . .129 
 
 5. The After- Growths of the Prophetic Literature 
 
 (Obadiah, Joel, Jonah, Tsa. xxiv. to xxvii., Zechariah 
 ix.-xiv.) The Close of the Canon of the Prophets . 132 
 
 6. The Book of Daniel 
 
 7. The Poetical Books. 
 
 (a) The Psalter 
 
 (fe) The Song of Songs . 
 
 8. The Monuments of the Wisdom Literature. 
 
 (a) Proverbs ...... 
 
 (6) The Book of Job 
 
 (c) Ecclesiastes 
 
 Conclusion 
 
 138 
 
 141 
 
 148 
 
 151 
 154 
 162 
 
 164 
 
 II. CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAEL- 
 ITES FROM MOSES TO THE END OF THE SECOND 
 
 CENTURY, B.C. ... . . 167 
 
Xll 
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 III. MEASURES AND WEIGHTS, MONEY, COMPUTATION OF TIME 
 IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 1. Measures and Weights ..... 
 
 2. Money 
 
 3. Computation of Time 
 
 PAGE 
 
 206 
 210 
 212 
 
 IV. LIST OF OLD TESTAMENT PROPER NAMES, ACCOMPANIED 
 
 WITH AN EXACT TRANSLITERATION OF THEIR HEBREW 
 FORMS 216 
 
 V. SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 OF SEVERAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 225 
 
 INDEX 
 
 248 
 
ERRATA 
 
 Preface, 1. 4, for Seigfried, read Siegfried. P. 1, 1. 4, for depend, depends. 
 P. 3, 1. 8, for " The Book of Songs," The song book. P. 4, 1. 5, for 6, 16. 
 P. 6, 1. 15, for 22, 24 ! P. 8, 1. 2 from bottom, after 22 for , put . P. 12, 
 1. 22, for 5, 15. P. 17, 1. 9, for xiv, xxiv, and 1. 12, for xxi, xxiii. P. 19, 
 1. 6 from bottom, for its, his. P. 21, 1. 21, read xi, 1. P. 23, 1 11, after " it " 
 add (xvi, 20). P. 24, 1. 24, after " revision " add (xviii, 30). P. 25, 1. 25, 
 after "describe" add (Chap. xi). P. 29, line 7 from bottom, omit "the 
 original text." P. 35, 1. 8 from bottom, for 18, xviii, and for 44, xliv. P. 37, 
 1. 26, after " all " add (Gen. iv, 3 ff.), and 1. 29, after " righteousness" add 
 (xv. 6). P. 40, 1. 3, after " associated " add (Gen. xii, 3, &c.). P. 41, 1, 21, 
 read xviii, 4. P. 45, 1. 15, read xxvi, . P. 46, 1. 9 from bottom, for Abijah, 
 Ahijah ; 1. 4, for 43, 23 ; 1. 2, for Elijah, Elisha. P. 50, 1. 2, for thirty, 
 twenty ; 1. 8, for v, vi. P. 56, 1. 10, for Trite, Trito ; 1. 15, for distinguish, 
 exclude : at P. 57, 1. 5, also, for distinguish, excluded, and for oracle, 
 oracles. P. 58, 1. 9, after "himself" add, iii, 12. P. 62, 1. 19, for 4, 24. 
 P. 66, 1. 15, for xii, xi. P. 67, 1. 20, for xiii, 13. P. 73, 1. 11, after " him " 
 add (v. 15). P. 82, 1. 14, after " voices " add xlii, Iff., and 1. 16, after 
 " Chaldseans " add (xliii, 1 ff.). P. 86, 1. 14, a fresh paragraph should 
 begin with Jechazeqel. P. 89, last line, after " work " add (v, 2 ff.). P. 90, 
 1. 2, after " again " add (v, 3 f.). P. 95, last line of text, after " latter " 
 add (v. 13 ff.). P. Ill, 1. 6 from bottom, for 29, xxix. P. 118, 1. 26, after 
 " Heaven " add (Ezra vii, 12). P. 124, 1. 28, read 21 ff. P. 125, 1. 14, for 
 28, xxviii. P. 129, 1. 2 from bottom, read 3 ? P. 132, 1. 16, for Zech. x, 
 Zech. ix. P. 139, 1. 4 from bottom of text, for vii, viii. P. 151, 1. 15, read 
 xxiv, 23. P. 152, 1. 2 from bottom, after "collection " add (xxv, 1-xxix, 7). 
 P. 170, col 2, read 6? and 1 Sam. v, 1 P. 171, col. 2, for 1 Sam. 
 xiii, 1 Sam. xv. P. 179, col. 5, for 899, 889, and col. 6, for 855, 885. 
 P. 180, col. 1, top of page, insert 876-854 ; col. 3, top of page, insert 873-849, 
 Jehoshaphat of Judah, zealous worshipper of Jahweh. P. 181, col. 3, for 
 Librah, Libnah. P. 191, col. 4, from " 605... conquests," belongs also to 
 col. 5 : for Niniveh, Nineveh : col. 3, for Jer. xiv, 1-17, xviii, 35, read 
 Jer. xiv, 1 xvii, 18. xxxv. P. 193, col. 2, after " Chaldaeans " add (Jer. 
 xxxix). P. 195, col. 2, for Neh. vi, 7 ff., Neh. vii, 6 ff. : col. 3, for Isa. xl-xlv, 
 Isa. xl-lv : col. 5, after Sparta, for . put , P. 196, col. 3, for Chap. 7 ff., 
 Chap, vii ff. P. 199, col. 1, for 321, 320, for 320, 314. P. 201, col. 1, top 
 of page, insert 217. P. 204, col. 1, prefix 153 to "Demetrius". P. 213, 
 1. 28, for 1, 1, . P. 214, 1. 30, for 5, 5, . P. 244, 1. 9, for Elisha, 
 Elijah. 
 
HISTORY OF THE LITERATURE 
 
 OP 
 
 THE OLD TESTAMENT, 
 
 1. THE FEE-MONARCHIC PERIOD. 
 
 1. THE RELICS OP ANCIENT POPULAR POETRY. 
 
 a. The Book of the "Wars of Jahweh. The Triumphal Song 
 of "Them that speak in Proverbs." The Song- of the 
 Well. The Book of the Upright Ones. 
 
 i 
 
 N Israel, as in other nations, the earliest literary period 
 was preceded by one of song and legend. The condi- 
 tions on which, in every age, the appearance of a real 
 literature depend above all, the wide diffusion of the arts 
 of writing and reading, the settled life and comparative 
 prosperity of the people did not exist in Israel till near the 
 end of the so-called age of the Judges, certainly not during 
 the Journey through the Desert or whilst the tribes were 
 incessantly struggling for existence after the immigration into 
 Canaan. 
 
 We do not mean to deny that in these earlier times songs 
 and legends were eagerly repeated. But the subjects they 
 dealt with can only be determined from the subsequent litera- 
 ture, and that in two ways : first, from the actual records of 
 later date, containing the remnants of the old popular poetry, 
 as these could be gathered from the mouth of the people or of 
 the professional singer; secondly, from the free adaptations 
 
 
2 1. THE FEE-MONARCHIC PERIOD. 
 
 and developments of ancient songs and legends which ai 
 also preserved in the subsequent literature. 
 
 As to the first kind, the actual records of ancient popular 
 poetry, we have at least two explicit testimonies that in very 
 early times attention was paid in Israel to the collection of 
 such reliques. At Num. xxi. 14, the " Book of the Wars of 
 Jahweh" is quoted as the source of a very obscure frag- 
 ment of song given there.. The paean of " Them that 
 speak in proverbs," on the overthrow of the Moabites, 
 Num. xxi. 27fL, is possibly taken from the same book; 
 perhaps also the so-called ' ' Song of the Well," v. 1 7 f ., and 
 some other fragments, such as the groundwork of Exod. xv. 
 Iff., and the " Song of Miriam," of which Exod. xv. 21, 
 appears to have given only the beginning. All thes3 traces 
 point to a collection of songs celebrating the heroic deeds of the 
 people, and especially of Jahweh, as the God of War, and the 
 real commander in the battles which had to be fought for the 
 conquest and retention of the land which He had promised. 
 Another collection, " The Book of the Upright Ones " 
 (literally, " of the Upright One ") is mentioned twice. The 
 precise meaning of the title is disputable. It either designates 
 songs about brave and pious members of the nation, or else 
 " of the Upright Ones " is a designation of the people of 
 Israel itelf (hence, "The Book of Israel"). Both passages 
 put it beyond doubt that here again a collection of songs is 
 meant : at Joshua x. 12 f. it is quoted as the source of two 
 verses in which Joshua celebrates Israel's complete victory 
 over the Amorites ; at 2 Sam. i. 18 as the source of David's 
 elegy on Saul and Jonathan. The latter example shows that 
 the collection contained artistically cultivated poetry as well as 
 folk-songs, and these belonging to an age when the founda- 
 tions of a real literature had already been laid. Indeed, if it 
 be a correct conjecture that in the original text of 1 Kings 
 viii. 13 (on which cf. below, p. 13) " The Book of the Upright 
 Ones " and not " The Book of Songs " is quoted, the collection 
 cannot have been arranged earlier than the time of Solomon. 
 
 When we turn to the remains of the popular poetry which 
 
THE RELICS OP ANCIENT POPULAR POETRY. 3 
 
 were subsequently written down, we cannot sufficiently 
 regret that so few fragments have been preserved, and these, 
 in part, badly disfigured and hard to interpret. This is due 
 to a twofold cause. The oldest connected presentations of the 
 history of the people could point to those collections of 
 ancient song as accessible to every one. A brief quotation 
 sufficed to recall the whole of the passage in question as it 
 stood in " The Book of Songs." Besides this, there is another 
 circumstance on which sufficient emphasis cannot be laid for 
 the understanding of Old Testament literature. The com- 
 position, and certainly the final collection and canonization of 
 this literature were effected, one might say, exclusively from 
 the religious standpoint, in the interest of religion. What 
 wonder that, on the whole, when the final redaction was 
 made, everything was omitted and, indeed, expunged which 
 seemed to serve only for the satisfaction of worldly curiosity 
 or actually to excite a carnal national conceit ? 
 
 b. The Song- 'of Lamech. The Passage concerning- the 
 Holy Ark. Bxod. xvii. 16. The Song of Deborah. 
 Jotham's Fable. 
 
 In addition to the fragments already mentioned (Exod. xv. 
 1 ff. and 21 ; Num. xxi. 14 f., 17 f ., and 27 ff. ; Joshua x. 12 f.), 
 the following fragments and sections must be assigned to the 
 pre-monarchic time : 
 
 1. The so-called "Song of Lamech" (Gen. iv. 23 f.), 
 apparently an ancient folk-song, uttering an arrogant boast of 
 the possession of weapons and constant readiness for bloody 
 revenge. This little three-verse song is already stamped 
 with all the marks of Hebrew poetry precise parallelism 
 between the two halves of each verse, exalted, rhythmica 
 language, and the use of special words belonging to the 
 dialect of poetry. 
 
 2. The poetic fragment, Num. x. 35 f . (taken, perhaps, from 
 the "Book of the Wars of Jahweh"). The great antiquity of 
 
 1 * 
 
4 
 
 1. THE FEE-MONARCHIC PERIOD. 
 
 this verse is clearly seen from the manner in which the holy 
 ark is spoken of as a pledge, not to say a representation, of 
 the personal presence of Jahweh an idea which we shall 
 find supported by other ancient witnesses. 
 
 3. The poetic fragment, Exod. xvii. 6 : of this we shall 
 speak again later. 
 
 4. The so-called "Song of Deborah" (Judges v. 2 ff.). 
 The ascription of this " Song to Deborah " (at v. 1, in con- 
 junction with Barak !) may be due simply to a misunder- 
 standing of Y. 7 ("till I arose, &c." instead of "till thon 
 arosest ;" or, with the Greek Bible, " till she arose "). In point 
 of fact, the view that she was the author is excluded by the 
 address to Deborah in v. 12. But it has never been denied that 
 this is a poem of priceless worth, almost contemporaneous with 
 the events it describes, flowing out of impressions experienced 
 by and still vivid to the writer himself. Doubtless the text 
 has suffered severely, as is usually the case with such remnants 
 from the pre-literary period : in fact, v. 8-14 are nothing but 
 a heap of puzzling ruins. But the portion which can certainly 
 be understood fully justifies the verdict that this is genuine, 
 splendid poetry, which enables us to conjecture how much 
 that was equally important has vanished without leaving 
 a trace. The insight, however, which the song gives us into 
 the historical, and particularly the religious, conditions of that 
 far-off century is of infinitely more importance than its- 
 aesthetic value. We are looking on a time when the people are 
 severely oppressed, reduced to forty thousand capable of 
 bearing arms, but possessing none (v. 8). The roads are 
 deserted because no man is sure of his life (v. 6), till Deborah,, 
 by inspiriting speech, and Barak, by courageous action, rouse 
 their own and the adjacent tribes to a fight for freedom. 
 Obviously it is still a time of confusion and disintegration. 
 Only the northern tribes, who are immediately threatened by 
 the Canaanites, with their nearest relatives, bestir themselves 
 for the fight. Strange to say, there is not a word of Judah. 
 But, on the other hand, the scorn poured on Eeuben, who 
 merely gave the matter serious consideration and then 
 
THE RELICS OP ANCIENT STOEIES AND LEGENDS. 5 
 
 preferred to listen to the sound of the shepherd's pipes, 
 shows that something better might have been expected from 
 him that it was his duty to think of the distress of his 
 compatriots. He was connected with them by a tie which 
 ought to show itself stronger than any human covenant or 
 agreement the worship of the same God. The fight was for 
 the victory of His side : His was the glory of the victory 
 gained (v. 2, 3, 31). In His awful majesty He left Mount 
 Sinai, His holy dwelling-place, to appear in person on the 
 field of battle (v. 4 f .), and His curse deservedly falls upon 
 the city (v. 23), which " came not to the help of the Lord 
 amongst the mighty," the Lord who is the champion of His 
 people. 
 
 5. Jotham's Fable (Judges ix. 8 ff.) is of quite another 
 character, but an equally striking and indubitably genuine 
 product of the pre-monarchic time. The technical structure 
 of the fable is here found in such perfection and imbued with 
 so fine a sarcasm as again to suggest the conjecture that this 
 form of composition must have been long and diligently 
 cultivated. 
 
 2. THE RELICS OP ANCIENT STOEIES AND LEGENDS. THE 
 
 LITERARY WORKS ASCRIBED TO MOSES 
 
 (especially Exod. xvii. 14 jf., the Book of the Covenant and the 
 Ten Commandments). 
 
 As a second source for ascertaining the traditions which come 
 from the pre-literary period of the people we have referred to 
 the adaptations and developments of ancient stories and 
 legends which are preserved often in duplicate in the 
 literature proper. It belongs to the nature of the case that 
 we here move on far less certain ground than before. That is 
 to say, in any individual instance it is difficult to decide which 
 traits of a narrative are derived from the original tradition, 
 and which from the later development, or possibly even from 
 very late reflection. But we are not without criteria which. 
 
6 
 
 1. THE PEE-MONAECHIC PEEIOD. 
 
 make it possible to decide up to a certain point. Not seldom 
 in the extant prose narratives there are unmistakable echoes 
 of the early poetical form. This is indubitably the case 
 where the poetical exemplar itself has been preserved, as at 
 Exod. xiv. 29, along with xv. 8; Joshua x. 13b, along with 12bf. ; 
 Judges iv. 17 ft., along with v. 24 ff. And in other instances 
 traces of such poetical exemplars are not lacking: thus at 
 Exod. xiv. 24 ff., on the occasion when Pharaoh was destroyed; 
 at Joshua iii. 16, when the Jordan stood still; or vi. 20, when 
 the walls of Jericho fell at the war-cry and sound of the 
 trumpet. In other passages the great antiquity of the narra- 
 tive is evinced by its correspondence with the primeval 
 traditions of other nations (Gen. iv. 20 ff.), the use of names 
 that are inexplicable or have disappeared elsewhere (Naamah, 
 v. 22), above all, by the intermingling of a mythological 
 element (Gen. vi. 1 ff., xxix. 10, xxxii. 25 ff.) Not unfre- 
 quently there is a connection with primeval local traditions 
 (as at Gen. xix.) or historical recollections (as at Gen. xxxiv. 
 25 ff., confirmed by xlix. 5f.). Hence we must ascribe to an 
 actual tradition, handed down from the pre-literary period, 
 the greatest part of the matter furnished by the ancient 
 documentary sources (see below) in the Pentateuch and 
 Joshua, although the final development of the patriarchal 
 narratives within the limits of a fixed genealogical system 
 may not have been earlier than the period when literature 
 was cultivated. 
 
 In conclusion, we must not shrink from answering a question 
 which will have occurred ere now to many readers. What 
 about the evidences for writings originating with Moses him- 
 self ? Are not these latter to be regarded as the foundation 
 and starting-point of the entire literature of Israel ? 
 
 We may here take it for granted that the Pentateuch in its- 
 present form raises no claim, either by a title or a signature 
 or in any other way, to be, in its entirety, a work of Moses. 
 Not till the later, post-exilic period, and especially in the 
 Chronicles, do we meet with this idea. On the other hand 
 the Pentateuch no doubt states, in four places,, that Moses 
 
THE LITEEAEY WORKS ASCRIBED TO MOSES. 7 
 
 wrote something. At Deut. xxxi. 9, 24, the Deuteronoinic 
 writer,, a redactor living in the exile, relates that the law of 
 Deuteronomy was written by Moses, and a post-exilic redactor, 
 at Num. xxxiii. 2, asserts that he recorded the names of the 
 Stations in the Desert. Seeing, however, that Deuteronomy 
 cannot have originated before the seventh century and that 
 Num. xxxiii. in all probability belongs to the most recent 
 portions of the Pentateuch, the statements mentioned above 
 must not be taken into account here. 
 
 The two other passages are of a different kind. The 
 narrator of Exod. xvii. 14 ff., must have found the express 
 tradition (possibly in the Book of the Wars of Jahweh) that the 
 Amalekites' treachery and probably the threat quoted at 
 v. 16 was recorded by Moses himself in a book (more correctly 7 
 perhaps, " on a leaf," according to Num. v. 23, where 
 precisely the same expression is found). But we cannot 
 ascertain anything more precise respecting the scope and the 
 phraseology of this exceptional writing. The narrator of Exod. 
 xxiv. 4 ff., must also have been acquainted with a definite 
 tradition that Moses himself wrote a " Book of the Law of the 
 Covenant," But it is quite another question how much of 
 the phraseology of this so-called " Book of the Covenant " 
 has been preserved in our present Pentateuch. The Ten 
 Commandments used naturally to be thought of first and 
 foremost as the basis of this Book of the Covenant, although the 
 writing down of them is ascribed at Exod. xxiv. 12, xxxiv. 1, 
 not to Moses but to God Himself. But if we admit that the 
 very words of the Ten Commandments were given in Moses* 
 Book of the Covenant and in distinct documentary form on the 
 Two Tables of Stone, how are we then to explain the origin 
 of two forms of the Ten Commandments, those of Exod. xx. 
 and Deut. v., which, with all their agreement, are yet so 
 diverse ? It would, in any case, have to be admitted that the 
 original text, especially in the First Table, had. been somewhat 
 freely handled. The difficulty becomes still greater if the 
 opinion is correct which Goethe advanced and the majority 
 of students now share. According to it "The Covenant- 
 
8 1. THE FEE-MONARCHIC PERIOD. 
 
 Commandments, the Ten Commandments/' which Moses is 
 bidden to write (Exod. xxxiv. 27) are the preceding statutes, v. 
 14-26, which in many ways vary considerably from Exod. xx. 
 (as the older, so-called Jahwistic, Decalogue contrasted with the 
 Elohistic) . The passage, Exod. xxxiv. 27 ff., does indeed admit 
 of another explanation. Originally, in a different context, 
 it may have referred to our Ten Commandments ; but the 
 redactor did not wish to repeat these in tho present context. 
 Even then the question concerniDg the original Decalogue is 
 still a complicated one and cannot yet be settled.* 
 
 Besides the Decalogue, however, the narrator of Exod. xxiv. 
 3 ff. (cf . v. 3 with xxi. 1) evidently has in view the ordinances of 
 worship and justice in chaps, xx. 24 xxiii. 19, and recent writers 
 are accustomed to limit to this section the name " Book of the 
 Covenant," as the title of the oldest compilation of laws. We 
 may be sure that there are later additions here as elsewhere 
 (most of them recognizable by the use of the plural form of 
 address). But, apart from these, weighty considerations have 
 been adduced against the direct derivation of all these laws 
 from the hand of Moses. A large number of them (especially 
 xxii. 4 ff., 20, 24, 28, xxiii. 9 ff.) are seen at a glance to be 
 a codification of customary laws and maxims which could not 
 have developed till the people had long been settled in the 
 land, cultivating its fields and. vineyards. 
 
 The result is that whilst nothing can be said against the 
 idea of Moses having written some documents, we must not 
 hope to be able to designate any we possess as certainly 
 Mosaic in their phraseoloy. Obviously this does not preclude 
 the existence of many genuine historical reminiscences in the 
 traditions which deal with the motives for the work of Moses, 
 the work itself, and its fundamental significance for the whole 
 history of Israel. No nation ever gratuitously invented the 
 
 * On this controversy, besides DILLMANN'S exhaustive Kommentar zu den 
 Biichern Exodus und Leviticus (Leipzig, 1880), cf . EOTHSTEIN, Das Bundesbuch. 
 Halle, 1888 : BUDDE, Bemerkungen zum Bundesbuch (ZATW, 1891, p. 99 ft'.) : 
 BANTSCH, Das Bundesbuch, Exod. xx. 22, xxiii. 33. Halle, 1892 : MEISNER, Der 
 Dekalog I (der Dek. im Hexateuch). Halle, 1893. 
 
THE LITERARY WORKS ASCRIBED TO MOSES. 9 
 
 report that it had been ignominiously enslaved by another : 
 none ever forgot the days of its deliverance. And so through 
 all the centuries there survived in Israel the inextinguishable 
 recollection that it was once delivered out of Egypt, the house 
 of bondage, by Jahweh, the God of its fathers, with a strong 
 hand and outstretched arm; that especially at the passage of 
 the Red Sea it experienced the mighty protection of its God. 
 And Jahweh employed as His instrument a man the like of 
 whom was never again found. That man had taught his 
 people to recognize as its highest glory the being called the 
 people of this God, as its supreme joy the praising Him and 
 worshipping Him with sacrifices and offerings. And if the 
 -oldest tradition regards it as self-evident (Judges xvii. 13) 
 .that the priestly service of a member of the tribe of Levi is 
 far preferable to any other, this can only be explained by one 
 fact : the tribe of Levi was considered to be the only possessor 
 of the genuine knowledge, derived from Moses himself, of 
 the proper way to worship the God of Israel, to administer 
 justice in His name, and, above all, in special questions and 
 concerns to ascertain His will by means of the holy lot 
 .{the "Urim and Thummiin"). 
 
2. THE PERIOD OF THE UNDIVIDED 
 MONARCHY. 
 
 1. DAVID'S ELEGIES ON SAUL AND ABNER. POSSIBLE PSALMS- 
 OF DAVID. NATHAN'S PARABLE. SOLOMON'S SPEECH IN" 
 DEDICATION OF THE TEMPLE. POSSIBLE EEMNANTS OF 
 SOLOMONIC WRITINGS. 
 
 AN event is said to have happened about the middle of the 
 period of the Judges (Judges viii. 14) which enables us to 
 conclude that the art of writing had been gradually dissemi- 
 nated amongst the common people. It is, therefore, easy to 
 understand that it has been thought necessary to date the 
 beginnings of a real literature not later than this period, the 
 second half of the time of the Judges. It must be acknow- 
 ledged possible that as early as this, perhaps at sanctuaries 
 which had long been famous, such as those at Shiloh and Bethel, 
 amongst a hereditary priesthood of old standing, the writing 
 down of ancient songs or of the histories of these sanctuaries 
 was taken in hand. But no actual proof can be adduced. It 
 would rather appear that we must come down to the time of 
 David for the writing out of the products of those earlier days. 
 If David commanded (2 Sam. i. 18) that the elegy on Saul 
 and Jonathan should be taught to the Judahites this certainly 
 does not preclude his having written it and caused copies to 
 be circulated. But the narrator seems only to have known of 
 its having been written out in the (later) " Book of the Upright 
 Ones." 
 
 The doubts occasionally expressed as to the genuineness 
 of the Song * are now set at rest. It has ever been justly 
 
 * Its erroneous designation as "Song of the Bow," was occasioned by 
 the word "bow" having been brought in from another context to the original 
 text of 2 Sam. i. 18 ("And he commanded to teach [it] to the children of 
 Judah "). This was then taken to be the name of the song that followed. 
 
11 
 
 recognized as a real pearl of Hebrew poetry. And this is true 
 both of its poetical form and of its contents,, at once so simple 
 and so stirring. The almost identical lament at the beginning 
 and at the end serve as a framework for six strophes, each 
 consisting of two verses, with two clauses each. The fifth of 
 them corresponds with the first in fine contrast ; the second 
 and fourth utter the actual dirge for the dead ; the third sings 
 the praise of the fallen heroes. But besides the considera- 
 tions which affect all the people alike, the poet has a personal 
 right to assert that, his pain is deeper than any others feel. 
 This pain he expresses -in his address to the friend who had 
 been so devoted to him, whose love to him was more wonder- 
 ful than the love of women. In the first strophe there is only 
 a distant intimation of the gloomy political background : grief 
 for those who had died heroically on behalf of their people 
 causes the abiding distress of the people to be for the moment 
 forgotten. The religious element is quite absent from the 
 song. But what a monument has David here raised to the 
 king from whom he suffered so much, to the heroic youth at 
 his side, and not ]ess, to himself ! 
 
 No source is mentioned for David's elegy over Abner 
 (2 Sam. iii. 33 f.) . This does not give the slightest occasion 
 to doubt its genuineness. The only question is whether, in 
 this single and unquestionably complete strophe we have the 
 whole lament and not merely a fragment (? the opening). 
 
 Tradition, as it subsequently meets us, especially in the- 
 Chronicles and in the titles of seventy-three * psalms, makes 
 David also the founder and chief representative of sacred 
 song, of psalmody. It has been said that this tradition 
 could not have appeared in such strength and definite- 
 ness if it had been without historical foundation. As 
 a matter of fact, the two elegies are sufficient evidences of 
 David ; s poetical talents, and it is not intrinsically incredible 
 that so zealous a worshipper of Jahweh, the national God, 
 may have treated of spiritual things. But the fact that the- 
 
 Eighty-three in the Greek Bible. 
 
12 
 
 2. THE PERIOD OF THE UNDIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 title, " Of David/' is prefixed in the Book of Psalms to many 
 which are demonstrably exilic, or post-exilic, compels us to 
 disregard those titles entirely. This does not preclude the 
 possibility of genuinely Davidic songs, or fragments of them, 
 having been adopted from some pre-exilic book of songs 
 into the later post-exilic collection. But, alas! we have no 
 standard by which to recognize them as Davidic. The really 
 strong historical tradition knows David, apart from the above- 
 mentioned elegies, only as a skilful harper (1 Sam. xvi. 18, &c.), 
 perhaps also as an inventor of melodies, or (according to 
 another interpretation of Amos vi. 5),* of musical instruments. 
 In any case, the latter passage does not indicate that he was 
 a master of sacred song. It is true that, in the Appendices 
 to the Second Book of Samuel, two songs are expressly 
 ascribed to David (chap, xxii., identical with Ps. xviii., and 
 chap, xxiii. 1-7). Numerous passages in the psalm (especially 
 v. 23 ff., 31, 50 f.) compel us to admit that at most its present 
 form may have arisen from the expansion and adaptation of 
 a Davidic nucleus into a congregational hymn. But the very 
 first verse of the so-called " Last Words " lies open to grave 
 suspicion, partly because it is an obvious imitation of the 
 Sayings of Balaam (Num. xxiv. 3, 5), partly because it 
 makes David call himself "The Darling of the hymns of 
 Israel." And this first verse is so entirely one in spirit and 
 style with those that follow, and can so ill be spared as the 
 presupposition to v. 2, that we have no right to pronounce it 
 an interpolation for the sake of being able to derive v. 2-7 
 directly from David. The whole can only be understood as a 
 free, poetic reproduction of one of David's utterances. Nathan's 
 Parable (2 Sam. xii. 1-4), on the other hand, must be con- 
 sidered as certainly a remnant from David's time. The technical 
 form of the parable here, like that of the fable at Judges ix. 
 8 ff., appears in such perfection as to lead to the conclusion 
 that it had been long and abundantly cultivated. 
 
 In his speech dedicatory of the Temple, 1 Kings viii. 12f., we 
 
 
 * Cf. Expository Times, April, 1898. Tr. 
 
POSSIBLE EEMNANTS OF SOLOMONIC WEITINGS. 13 
 
 have an authentic monument of the time of Solomon. According 
 to the Greek translation (the so-called Septuagint), it was 
 extracted from the " Book of Songs." Probably we ought to 
 follow another reading, "The Book of the Upright"; on this 
 cf. above, p. 2. 
 
 But the attempt has also been made to find a reference to a 
 copious literature from the hand of Solomon at 1 Kings v. 9 ff.* 
 This passage speaks, in the first place, of Solomon's extra- 
 ordinarily great wisdom in all departments. He is further 
 praised as surpassing the wisdom of the dwellers in the East 
 and the Egyptians. This seems to point to astrological (or even 
 astronomical ?) and medical knowledge, as well as to the arts 
 of magic and esoteric lore. Yet all these are pure conjectures, 
 especially as we know nothing about the wise men of 
 old time who are mentioned by name at v. 11. Nothing is 
 said about a literature on the above-named subjects ; at all 
 events, the very remotest trace of it has disappeared. But 
 when it is added : " He spoke 3000 proverbs, and his songs 
 were 1005," it seems as though an extensive Solomonic litera- 
 ture in another department is implied. Even an approximate 
 number like 3000, to say nothing of a definite one, like 1005, 
 could not be given unless the proverbs and songs were in 
 writing. Was the narrator, then, acquainted with a Solo- 
 monic Book of Proverbs and Songs of this compass ? Or 
 had these numbers gradually established themselves in the 
 legend of the wise King ? The expression which immediately 
 follows : " He spake of trees, &c.," appears again to know 
 only of Solomon's wisdom as manifested in speech. As to 
 the sayings concerning all plants and animals, we must evi- 
 dently think not of scientific disquisitions, but only of such 
 matters as thoughtful reflections on Nature, or evidences of 
 attentive observation of it. However that may be, we should 
 at best possess but scanty remains of a literature of this 
 kind, in case the passages on this subject in the " Proverbs 
 of Solomon " were to be ascribed to him. We must here- 
 
 * English Versions, 1 Kings iv. 29 ff. 
 
14 
 
 2. THE PERIOD OP THE UNDIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 entirely ignore the psalms attributed to him (Ixxii., a prayer 
 for the King, and cxxvii., in which the " house/' v. 1, has 
 been in much too mechanical away taken to mean the temple). 
 
 
 .2. OTHER POSSIBLE LITERARY MEMORIALS OF THE PERIOD OF 
 DAVID AND SOLOMON (ESPECIALLY THE " BLESSING OF 
 JACOB " AND THE ORIGINAL FORM OF THE BALAAM- 
 
 DlSCOURSES). 
 
 If, after all, that we cannot prove ancient Hebrew 
 literature to have been considerably enriched with actual 
 writings by David and Solomon, it is, nevertheless, a fair 
 question whether other literary monuments must not be 
 assigned to the period of David and Solomon. And, in fact, 
 the conditions for the rise of a real literature must have existed 
 in abundance under David, to say nothing of Solomon. The 
 previous isolation of the tribes, which still continued during 
 the tribal sovereignty of Saul, gave place, after the conclusion 
 of the Civil War, to a strong confederation of the whole people 
 under the mighty and prosperous sceptre of David. The great 
 martial successes of the King, in which the whole Nation had 
 a glorious share, as well as the continued domination over the 
 surrounding peoples, their tormentors of old, must have aroused 
 a national enthusiasm such as had not been known before. 
 Moreover, the time of Solomon was rich in new motive 
 powers : a brilliant court ; a splendid royal sanctuary, the 
 seat of that venerable palladium, the ark of Jahweh, served 
 by priests who were numbered amongst the principal officials 
 of the King; manifold contact and active commerce with 
 neighbouring States so highly cultivated as Egypt and Tyre, 
 nay, even (through the voyages to Ophir) with the wonder- 
 lands of the South and the East. Must not all this have 
 impelled men, amidst the blessings of a long-continued peace, 
 to become fully conscious of what had been so painfully won, 
 to look back from the height they had climbed to the battles 
 
LITERARY MEMORIALS OP THE PERIOD OP DAVID AND SOLOMON. 15 
 
 and victories which had made such an ascent possible, and to 
 fix the still vivid recollection of them in word and writing for 
 the generations to come ? 
 
 The extent to which this was actually done cannot be 
 strictly demonstrated. But we possess a number of monu- 
 ments, against the placing of which, at least as early as 
 Solomon's time, 110 valid objection can be brought. Hence 
 it is best to discuss them here, although we do not thus deny 
 the possibility of a later origin. Leaving aside the collec- 
 tions of songs already mentioned (p. 1 f.), the " Book of the 
 Upright/' which in all probability is Judahite, and the " Book 
 of the Wars of Jahweh," we here reckon the two poetical 
 productions, the " Blessing of Jacob" (Gen. xlix. 1-27), and 
 the original form of the Balaam-Discourses (Num. xxiii. 7 
 xxiv. 19). 
 
 Under the form of predictions uttered by the dying 
 patriarch, the so-called " Blessing of Jacob " conveys partly 
 a bitter reproach and partly eulogies and promises of blessing 
 to all the twelve tribes. But the fiction is not so closely 
 adhered to as to prevent the actual standpoint of the poet 
 amidst the tribes long-settled in Canaan from asserting 
 itself repeatedly and frankly. This is especially seen in the 
 reference made to certain historical events ; at v. 15 and 
 23 ff. such events are not predicted, but narrated (in the 
 so-called Imperfectum Consecutivum). 
 
 The sayings are in any case ancient and highly poetic, and 
 the following reasons favour the placing of them in the age of 
 David and Solomon. The outrage on the Shechemites by 
 Simeon and Levi, of which a notice has also been preserved 
 in Gen. xxxiv. seems to be still remembered pretty vividly. 
 At all events it is still clearly known that this was the cause 
 of the almost total destruction of the two tribes which were 
 formerly of equal rank with the rest. But it is very strange 
 that the poet was only aware of the curse which doomed Levi 
 to be scattered in Israel, and says not a word about the future 
 significance of the tribe as heir of the traditions handed 
 down from Moses. Was this possible in an age when the 
 
 
16 
 
 2. THE PERIOD OP THE UNDIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 descendants of the tribe of Levi had for a long time, and 
 in high repute officiated at the Koyal Sanctuary of Jerusalem ? 
 On the other hand, v. 8-12 obviously refer to David's heroic 
 deeds and to the hegemony of Judah, founded by him. If 
 Joseph also (as consisting of Ephraim and Manasseh) is 
 enthusiastically extolled and blessed, this can best be under- 
 stood of a time when all tribal feuds had died out and one 
 and the same poet could equally rejoice in. the fame and 
 felicity of all. For the theory that either the saying about 
 Judah, or that about Joseph, was subsequently added breaks 
 down in face of the fact that the speeches were evidently 
 twelve in number at the first. To prove the later origin of 
 the whole, in the time of the divided kingdom, v. 23 f. has 
 been specially appealed to as an incidental reference to the 
 heroic defence made by the northern kingdom against the 
 Aramaeans in the ninth century. But the expression sounds 
 much too general to prevent our thinking just as naturally of 
 glorious fights waged in earlier times by the tribes of Joseph. 
 The designation of Joseph as " Prince amongst his brethren " 
 (v. 26) tells far more heavily against its being dated in the 
 age of David and Solomon. If the word rendered "Prince " 
 must necessarily mean " Wearer of the Diadem," in the strict 
 sense of the expression, the reference to the Ephraimite 
 kingdom founded by Jeroboam I. would be indisputable. 
 But this is not absolutely certain, and the saying concerning 
 Levi would be far more surprising in the ninth century 
 than in the time of Solomon. 
 
 In an almost higher degree even than the " Blessing of 
 Jacob " are the four first Balaam-Discourses pervaded with 
 national enthusiasm, the sense of a mighty association of the 
 people, and, above all, exultant gladness, because of the 
 victories won and the overflowing blessings of Jahweh. 
 The reference to David's victories and conquests at xxiv. 
 1 7 ff. is unmistakable. The religious element which 
 in Gen. xlix., apart from the ejaculation, v. 18, only 
 appears in the saying concerning Joseph, v. 24 f. comes 
 prominently into the foreground in the Balaam-Dis- 
 
LITERARY MEMORIALS OF THE PERIOD OF DAVID AND SOLOMON. 1' 
 
 courses. As to the rest, if we were willing to assign merely 
 the nucleus of these Discourses to the age of Solomon we 
 should be taking our stand on an almost universally admitted 
 fact. Chap, xxiii. formed in the main a portion of the old 
 Elohistic source, chap. xxiv. 1-19, of the Jahwistic one. 
 And since the contents of the Discourses in the two chapters, 
 with all their divergence, exhibit striking points of contact 
 (cf. especially xxiii. 22 and xxiv. 8), we can scarcely doubt 
 that chaps, xxiii. and xiv. supply two different versions of 
 the same ancient poem. An exact restoration of it is 
 naturally impossible now, but chap. xxiv. must be nearer 
 the original form than chap. xxi. (cf. particularly the bold 
 .figure in v. 8b). 
 
3. THE PEEIOB OF THE DIVIDED MON- 
 ARCHY UNTIL THE DESTRUCTION OF 
 SAMARIA. 
 
 1. GENERAL. THE 
 
 THE JERUSALEM-SOURCE IN THE 
 
 SECOND BOOK OF 
 
 SAMUEL. THE 
 STORIES." 
 
 "SAUL-STORIES" AND THE "DAVID- 
 
 THE division of the kingdom, which occurred about 933,. 
 was of profound significance, not only for the external 
 fortunes of the two halves of the kingdom, but also for the 
 development of the literature. A vigorous beginning was 
 made under David by the centralization of military affairs and 
 of the government in Jerusalem, the new capital. And the 
 measures taken by Solomon did their part in enhancing 
 the splendour of this central point at the expense of the 
 remainder of the kingdom. A further advance on this road 
 would have necessarily issued in all the other tribes sinking 
 into insignificant appendages to Judah, and all the ancient 
 sanctuaries being eventually thrown quite into the shade by 
 the splendour of the temple at Jerusalem. The division of 
 the kingdom restored their former self-consciousness to the 
 northern tribes, especially to what had now become the royal 
 tribe of Ephraim : ancient and glorious recollections started 
 into life again, and demanded to be put in writing for the 
 quickening of patriotic feeling. But, above all, Jeroboam I. 
 was careful to create centres for a national worship of Jahweh 
 by raising the long-famous holy places of Bethel and Dan to 
 the position of royal sanctuaries (Amos vii. 13). And thus 
 too were provided central points where a higher culture could 
 be developed in the midst of an honoured priesthood. In 
 setting up the golden calves Jeroboam doubtless did but 
 
GENERAL. 19 
 
 revive a form of Jaliweli worship which was of old standing, 
 but prohibited in the worship at Jerusalem. We nowhere read 
 that this worship itself excited the indignation of an Elijah or 
 Elisha, and their circles. At all events the dwellers in the 
 northern kingdom boldly claimed to belong to the (t People- 
 of Jahweh." Indeed, the total transfer of the ancient name 
 of honour, Israel, to the northern kingdom, shows plainly 
 that it considered itself the true heir, not only of the power,, 
 but also of the glory of the whole people. This is expressed 
 in extremely drastic fashion in King Joash's fable of the 
 thistle and the cedar on Lebanon (2 Kings xiv. 9 ff.). 
 And the Singer of the Blessing of Moses knows of no 
 higher aspiration for. Judah than that " Jahweh may bring 
 him back to his people" (Deut. xxxiii. 7). 
 
 Judah, in fact, with its small and sparsely populated 
 territory was almost powerless compared with Israel. But 
 its continuance, nay, its ever-growing significance for things 
 spiritual, and for the history of religion, was assured by 
 privileges which were entirely denied to the mightier Israel. 
 We cannot, indeed, follow the current opinion which reckons 
 a purer form of Jahweh-worship amongst the number. The 
 belief that the holy ark was a visible representation of 
 Jahweh must for a long time have been a grossly materialistic 
 one in popular circles. A trace of this idea has been pre- 
 served in an addition to Jeremiah (iii. 16 ff.), and, uninten- 
 tionally, even in the so-called Priests' Code (Lev. xvi. 2, &c.). 
 And although King Asa interfered with his mother's idolatry 
 (1 Kings xv. 13) this did not prevent people even in Judah 
 from worshipping Jahweh under the form of an image. 
 Isaiah had to declaim warmly against this error (ii. 8,. 
 18, 20 ; x. 11 ; xxxi. 7). It must also probably be attributed 
 to its influence that Hezekiah at length broke in pieces the 
 brazen serpent to which " unto those days the children of 
 Israel did burn incense" (2 Kings xviii. 4). 
 
 But in three points Judah actually had the advantage over 
 Israel : Jerusalem, the temple of Solomon, and the uninter- 
 rupted rule of the Davidic dynasty. The greatest and most 
 
 2 * 
 
20 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 glorious memories of the people continued to be connected with 
 the time when David, after overthrowing all surrounding foes, 
 was enthroned in the tower of Zion and received the homage 
 of distant kings. And the temple of Solomon was still the 
 most splendid sanctuary that had ever been reared for the 
 God of Israel : the holy ark which it enshrined was a monu- 
 ment of that great age when all Israel was led from victory 
 to victory by Jahweh as the God of Battles. The works of 
 art in the temple and the palace w r ere looked on as a kind of 
 wonder of the world. Of Solomon's throne the saying ran 
 " There was not the like made in any kingdom" (1 Kings 
 x. 20). And as to the stability of the dynasty and all the 
 contributions which that can make to the external 
 prosperity and the spiritual advancement of a people, we need 
 only point to one fact. Compared with the twelve descendants 
 of David who reigned on Zion down to 722, Israel had nine 
 dynasties, with seventeen kings. Seven of the latter were 
 murdered by their successors : Zirnri burned himself and the 
 palace threatened by Omri. In view of such facts we under- 
 stand how the Judahite view of history would not admit the 
 truth of the Israelite idea that the division of the kingdom 
 was a schism of Judah from the united people. It could 
 see nothing there but a revolt of Israel from Judah and the 
 house of David (Isa. vii. 17, 1 Kings xii. 19). Connected with 
 all this is another fact, weightier than anything hitherto 
 mentioned. Judah alone could become the soil from which the 
 idea might spring which has developed the strongest motive 
 power in the religion of Israel, the expectation of the Messianic 
 kingdom. This was chiefly thought of, at all events in the 
 earlier times, as a renewal of the Davidic kingdom under the 
 sceptre of one of his descendants, sent by God and specially 
 equipped by Him : hence the continuance of the Davidic 
 dynasty is its indispensable condition. 
 
 Before discussing the literary products of the two kingdoms 
 it must be premised that until we are far advanced in the 
 eighth century it is impossible to date any monument 
 precisely. In most cases a latitude of a hundred years 
 
 or 
 
OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 ^ 
 
 THE " HEED-STORIES " OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES. 21 
 
 more must be allowed. The only point we can determine 
 with some certainty is the sequence of the sources which have 
 been worked up into our present historical books. And, to 
 judge from what we have before us, literary zeal seems to 
 have applied itself first to historical writing. In the northern 
 kingdom it was naturally the reminiscences of the pre- 
 monarchic time, connected with their native soil, which 
 seemed most worthy of record : in Judah the memories of the 
 person and house of the great founder of the Davidic dynasty. 
 Thus there arose in Ephraim the most ancient stratum of the 
 narratives handed down in our- Book of Judges (designated 
 in the "Survey," at the close of this book, If and H l , i.e., 
 Hero-Stories, and in the appendices, chap, xvii.-xxi., AT and 
 N. 1 ), and in Judah the oldest stratum of the narratives about 
 David which we find in the Second Book of Samuel (desig- 
 nated in the " Survey " Je, i.e., Jerusalem-Source*). 
 
 The " Hero-Stories " are exclusively occupied with the 
 so-called Greater Judges. Ehud (iii. 15 ff.), Deborah and Barak 
 (iv. 4 ff.), Gideon (chaps, vi.-viii., to which the history of 
 Abimelech in chap, ix., a remarkably vivid and ancient 
 narrative, forms a kind of appendix), Jephthah (xi.-xii. G), 
 and Samson (xiii.-xvi.). In their present form they are 
 furnished with many additions and placed in a framework 
 which is entirely foreign to them. But in almost every case 
 the analysis can be made with certainty although the connec- 
 tion thus reached may not invariably be without gaps. No one 
 will be likely to assert that in these narratives we possess all 
 the traditions of the age of the Judges. The interest taken in 
 
 * Besides WELLHAUSEN'S pioneer work in the Fourth Edition of 
 Bleek's Einleitung in das Alte Testament (Berlin, 1878), p. 181 ff. (reprinted 
 with additions in "Die Komposition des Hexateuchs und der historischen 
 Biicher des Alten Testaments," Berlin, 1889), as well as the parts treating of 
 this subject in STADE'S Geschichte des Volks Israel (Berlin, 1881 ff.) and 
 KITTLEL'S Geschichte der Hebraer (Gotha, 1888) [English Translation, Williams 
 and Norgate], use has been especially made of BUDDE'S Die Biicher Bichter und 
 Samuel, ihre Quellen und ihr Aufbau (Giessen, 1890) in the determination and 
 critical examination of the various strata in the historical books. 
 
22 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 the altar of Jehovah- Shalom at Ophrah (vi. 24), and in the 
 worship of the image of Jahweh made out of the gold taken as 
 booty (viii. 24-2 7a) seems to have been the main reason why 
 the Gideon-narratives were admitted. The following points 
 are especially to be regarded as reliable criteria of the old 
 narratives in contrast with the numerous glosses and expan- 
 sions. The later redactors (in the " Survey " Ri and R) took 
 the so-called Judges to be in the strict sense rulers of the whole 
 nation : hence the universal concluding formula, not missing 
 even in the case of a Samson, "and he judged (i.e., ruled) 
 Israel . . . years." On the other hand the old narratives 
 know the so-called Judges simply as heroes who in a special 
 calamity were moved by the Spirit of God, and placed them- 
 selves at the head of their own tribe (like Jephthah) or of 
 a part thereof (as in the older form of the Gideon-narrative, 
 see below) or, at most, of a few tribes similarly threatened 
 {as Ehud, Deborah and Barak) : after performing deeds of 
 deliverance they returned to their former station, like the 
 dukes of German antiquity. Gideon seems to have been the 
 only exception ; seeing that the dominion of his seventy sons is 
 mentioned at ix. 2, as a matter of fact, Gideon himself must 
 have set up a kind of tribal kingship. On the other hand the 
 Samson-narratives leave a distinct impression that he always 
 carried on the fight with the Philistines with his own hand. 
 At least the narrative xv. 9 ff. shows that he had absolutely 
 no support from his fellow-countrymen in Judah. 
 
 The religious element is by no means absent from the 
 ancient narratives. But in contrast with the so-called theo- 
 cratic pragmatism of the redactors, which explains every 
 subjugation to the enemy by an immediately preceding 
 idolatry, every deliverance by an immediately preceding 
 repentance on the part of the people, and an express sending 
 of a deliverer by Jahweh, it appears in a peculiarly primitive 
 and sometimes grotesque form. The worship of Jahweh under 
 an image clearly appears to give not the slightest umbrage 
 as yet. In the ancient narrative it is evidently regarded 
 as an honour to Gideon that he made an ephod, i.e., an image 
 
THE " HERO-STOKIES " OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES. 23 
 
 of Jahweh, out of tlie captured gold; it is the redactor (viii. 27b) 
 
 I who adds the condemnatory judgment on this because it occa- 
 sioned idolatry which became a snare to Gideon and his family. 
 Moreover in the ancient narratives Jahweh does not abandon 
 Israel to their enemies, but these to Israel (iii. 28, iv. 6 ff., 
 14 ff., &c.). The Spirit of Jahweh not unfrequently appears 
 as a magical something which comes suddenly on the heroes 
 and gives them courage and strength (vi. 34, xi. 29, xiii. 25, 
 xiv. 6, 19, xv. 14). Samson's possession of it and of the 
 gigantic strength which it imparts depends upon his unshorn 
 hair ; when this goes Jahweh departs with it. To this 
 peculiar view of the Nazirate the equally mechanical one 
 corresponds of the absolute obligatoriiiess of a religious vow, 
 which compels Jephthah (xi. 30 f ., and 34 ff.) to sacrifice his 
 own daughter to Jahweh. The religious and ethical estimate 
 of events is practically quite in the background. It is only 
 at ix. 56 f. that the fate of Abiinelech and the Shechemites 
 is traced to divine retribution following oil Jotham's curse. 
 A glance at iii. 20 ff., iv. 18 ff. makes it impossible to deny 
 that the narrators deemed bloody and even murderous 
 revenge on the enemies of the people or the tribe justifiable 
 and even praiseworthy. In accordance with, this Samson 
 expressly implores strength from Jahweh for his final deed of 
 vengeance (xvi. 20 ff.). 
 
 In one narrative alone, the first narrative concerning Gideon 
 (vi. 2, ff., to viii. 3), the religious element, the so-called theo- 
 cratic pragmatism, comes out more strongly than usual, 
 But in this very instance it can easily be shown that we have to 
 do with a later revision of the ancient tradition. The latter has 
 been preserved in the fragment, viii. 4 ff . (in the " Survey/ 'IT 1 ) . 
 
 I The opening passage of this account has been cut out, but 
 can readily be conjectured from v. 18 ff. Midianite chieftains 
 had undertaken a raid against Northern Palestine and killed 
 some of Gideon's brothers. Bound to execute blood-revenge, 
 Gideon summons his clan Abiezer (on which cf. vi. 34, viii. 2) 
 to follow him, falls on the unsuspecting Midianites in the 
 south of the East-Jordan land, and w T ith his own hand 
 
 
24 3. THE PEEIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 executes the blood-revenge on their chieftains, after severely 
 punishing the inhabitants of Succoth and Penuel for their 
 imbrotherly conduct. The campaign which appears in this 
 narrative as a private undertaking of Gideon and his clan, 
 necessitated by circumstances, became in the later narrative 
 an affair of the whole nation. The Midianites are an abiding 
 scourge to the land ; for Jahweh has rejected Israel and 
 abandoned them to these enemies. But Jahweh now comes 
 in the form of " the angel of Jahweh " to entrust Gideon 
 with the deliverance of Israel (vi. 13 ff.). But here too the 
 supposition is adhered to that Gideon undertakes the campaign 
 with only three hundred men of the clan of Abiezer. A still 
 later form of the account makes thirty-two thousand men out 
 of all Israel respond to Gideon's summons, but at vii. 2 ff. 
 restores the agreement with the older narrative by dismissing, 
 first twenty- two thousand, then the rest, with the exception 
 of three hundred who lapped water with their tongue instead 
 of conveying it to their mouth by hand. 
 
 In Judges vi.-viii. the two narratives follow one another, 
 so that at viii. 4 Gideon is suddenly on this side the Jordan 
 again, whereas he had already returned from his campaign 
 at viii. 1 ff. But in the First Appendix (chap. xvii. f.) 
 the parallel accounts (in the " Survey " N and N l ) are closely 
 interwoven. The later revision knows of the exile of 722 
 (or 734 ?) whilst the original account knows only of the 
 cessation of the worship in the temple of Shiloh. 
 
 At all events the interest taken in the worship of the image 
 of Jahweh at Dan was the primary cause why this narrative 
 was admitted. In the Second Supplement (chaps, xix.-xxi.) 
 the ancient groundwork is not retained unimpaired excepting 
 in the relatively ancient chap. xix. (which itself, however, 
 is probably dependent on Gen. xix.). On the other hand, 
 chaps, xx. and xxi. belong to a quite late revision in the 
 spirit of the Priests' Code, in fact, of the Chronicler, which 
 only here and there allows a glimpse of the phraseology 
 of the original narrative. Amongst other reasons it is clear 
 that the present text of chap. xx. is due to the blending 
 
THE JERUSALEM-SOUKCE IN THE SECOND BOOK OF SAMUEL. 25 1 
 
 of two parallel accounts from the fact that v. 3a finds 
 its continuation in v. 14 and, yet more clearly, v. 36a 
 in v. 47. 
 
 All the old narratives of the Book of Judges hitherto- 
 mentioned relate exclusively the deeds and fortunes of the 
 northern tribes., and the whole must therefore have sprung from 
 northern soil. They pass over the tribe of Judah in almost 
 total silence. But this tribe is so much the more thoroughly 
 treated of in that source (Je) which we first meet at 2 Sam, 
 v. 3, 6, 8 ff., then in chap. vi., possibly, too, in the ground- 
 work of chap, vii., certainly in the long series of narratives, 
 chaps, ix.-xx. 22. The scene is almost exclusively Jerusalem : 
 David and his family stand throughout at the centre of 
 events. 
 
 As to the superior merits of this source there has long been 
 but one opinion. Jt is one of the most complete, truthful and 
 finished products of historical writing which have come 
 to us from the Hebrews, and indeed from the whole ancient 
 world. It shows no trace of tendency or adjustment: the 
 succession of events flows from an inner necessity : every- 
 thing lies before our eyes clear and comprehensible ; specially 
 marvellous is the characterization of the king. He is a man, 
 and not beyond the reach of human weakness, nay, of criminal 
 passion. The narrator is far from concealing or even palliating 
 this. Rather does he describe, with searching psychological 
 truthfulness, how David is driven on by the curse- of the 
 sin he has committed first, to low cunning against his injured 
 servant, in order, if possible, to bury his own guilt and shame 
 in the darkness, then to crafty murder and ill-concealed rejoicing 
 at its success, till at last his conduct is shown him in its true 
 light by Nathan. Just as little does the narrator pass over 
 in silence another dark point in the character of David, 
 his weakness towards the sins of his children. This is the 
 very doom of his house, the occasion of a whole series 
 of painful events. He breaks forth into hot displeasure 
 at the wrong done by Amnon to Tamar, but he cannot 
 give his son pain. The result is that Absalom, as his sister's 
 
 
26 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 natural protector, takes a kind of blood-revenge on Amnon. 
 The revolutionary plans of Absalom, are evidently fostered 
 l>y the thought that at the worst the father who has forgiven 
 him for murdering his brother will not proceed to the last 
 extremity. And David's conduct after Absalom's death 
 is such that Joab can only bring him to his senses by hard 
 threats. Yet in spite of all this the narrator not only knows 
 how to win our complete sympathy and regard for this same 
 David, but how to augment both continually. We feel 
 ourselves involuntarily touched by the charm which he, like 
 all real leaders, exercises 011 those around. The obvious 
 contradictions in his character disappear at length in the 
 harmonious total impression. We understand how he could 
 be great and noble, yet at the same time stiff-necked and 
 self-willed, sincerely devout and humble (vi. 21 f., xv. 25 f., 
 xvi. 10 ff.) and yet full of shrewd calculation (xv. 27, 33 ff., 
 xix. 12 ff.). But the most masterly psychological ability 
 is shown in the delineation of his relations to his cousins, 
 Joab and Abishai. A secret dislike of them both, arising 
 from utter dissimilarity of character, is constantly kept down 
 by the politic consideration that he cannot deny their merits 
 or dispense with their services. Occasionally, however, this 
 aversion (as at iii. 39 in another source) finds expression 
 in sharp words (xvi. 10), and after Absalom's murder David 
 braces himself up to the resolve that he will put Amasa 
 in JoaVs place. But he is obliged to let things take their 
 course when Amasa is murdered by Joab, and the latter 
 is the only person who can quell the dangerous revolt 
 of the Benjamite Sheba. David is forced to endure to the 
 end the man who is a rough soldier but an embodiment 
 of the monarchical principle. He displays cold-blooded 
 harshness towards David the man, when he holds this essential 
 to the welfare of the king. With hard words the son's 
 murderer forces the father, who is writhing in deepest grief 
 for his lost one, to sit in the gate and make himself 
 agreeable to the people, and the king, in such an hour, 
 must reluctantly do what his subject bids. 
 
THE " SAUL-STORIES " AND THE " DAVID-STORIES." 27 
 
 There are, no doubt, many indications that the narrator is 
 separated by a fairly long interval from the events which he 
 relates. For instance, the reference to certain appellations 
 continuing "unto this day" (vi. 8, xviii. 18; cf. also the 
 remark, xvi. 23). It must also be asked whether such a straight- 
 forward account of distressing events in the house of David 
 could have been circulated in Judah at a time when those con- 
 cerned, or at all events a considerable number of their children 
 and nearest relatives, were still alive. This question would 
 at once lose its point if, as some recent critics think, the 
 whole source was originally a part of the so-called Jahwistic 
 history.* But assuming that this could be proved of the 
 present form of the accounts, we should still be obliged to 
 judge that such acquaintance with the details of the events 
 .above all, such certainty in giving the names of almost all the 
 actors could not have been gained, fully a hundred years after, 
 from popular tradition, but must have been derived from 
 records written by one who drew from the account given by 
 eye-witnesses, or by younger contemporaries of David. This 
 may justify our assigning the Je source to the period im- 
 mediately after Solomon. 
 
 The "Hero-Stories" and the "Jerusalem-Source" are 
 followed, in order of time, by the " Histories of Saul " (S) in 
 1 Sam. ix.-xiv., and the "Histories of David" (Da) from 
 1 Sam. xvi. 14 to the conclusion of 2 Kings ii. Both contain 
 a multitude of reliable historical traditions, but are now freely 
 inlaid with passages taken from a quite different source (SS) 
 and with redactional additions. Their fatherland can only be 
 determined with some reserve. It is intrinsically probable 
 that the Saul- Source is from a Benjamite, a member, 
 therefore, of the northern kingdom, the David-Source from 
 a Judahite. But the partizanship of the one source for 
 Saul and of the other for David, which used to be so frequently 
 
 * In opposition to the attempt repeatedly made since 1830, and most recently 
 by Cornill and Budde, to show that the patriarchal sources are prolonged into 
 the older strata of the Books of Judges and Samuel, cf. KITTEL in the Theol. 
 -Studien u. Kritiken, 1892, p. 44 ff. 
 
28 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OP THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 asserted, cannot really be proved. The David-Source cai 
 indeed tell of the evil spirit which fell on Saul, and drove him 
 to fierce jealousy and even to acts of revenge. But the 
 account nowhere manifests any hostility to Saul : Jonathan*- 
 equally with David, has to suffer through his father's 
 spiritual gloominess (1 Sam. xx. 30 ff.). And the account 
 of Saul's adventure with the Witch of Endor (1 Sam. xxviii.) 
 contents itself with simply stating the facts. The admission 
 of the Elegy,' 2 Sam. i. 1 7 ff., as well as of the accounts in 
 2 Sam. ii. 4 ff. and iv. 10 ff., proves incontrovertibly that 
 the account of Saul's defeat and suicide, 1 Sam. xxxi., i& 
 not at all meant to blacken his memory. After all, it is by 
 no means impossible for both sources to have come from one 
 hand, and also from an age when the verdict on the two first 
 kings had long been purified from party feeling, and was no 
 more disturbed by any tribal jealousy. With this it agrees that 
 1 Sam. xxvii. 6 (Da) obviously knows of several " kings of 
 Judah." But this would not oblige us to date it much later 
 than 900. The marked prominence of the edifying element 
 in such passages as 1 Sam. xxiv. 10 ff. might rather be alleged 
 in proof of the later origin of the David- Stories. Yet it is 
 very debatable how many of these edifying speeches which we 
 find here and at xxvi. 175., are to be ascribed to a subsequent 
 editing. It would have been impossible for the original 
 narrator to continue as he does at 1 Sam. xxvii. 1, if he had 
 written xxiv. 17ff., shortly before. On the other hand, the 
 relatively high antiquity of the Saul-Narratives is evinced by 
 two tokens. The monarchy is a blessing from Jahweh; He 
 Himself, at His people's cry, appointed Saul to be king and 
 sent him to Samuel, that the Philistine oppression of Israel 
 might be brought to an end (1 Sam. ix. 15 ff.). That is 
 quite a different standpoint from the one occupied at 
 1 Sam. viii. 10, 17ff., and in chap, xii., where the people's 
 wish for a king is regarded as treason against Jahweh, and 
 Samuel consequently accedes to it with the utmost reluctance. 
 And further : according to the more recent view Samuel was 
 ruler of the people before the election of the king, and after 
 

 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE LEGAL LITERATURE. 29 
 
 this was the king's guardian,, informing him of Jahweh's 
 commands (1 Sam. xv. 1 fL), and rebuking him severely when 
 he acted on his own account (v. 14 ff.}. In the Saul-Stories, 
 on the contrary, he is a " seer," in high repute amongst the 
 people, and honoured by Jahweh with the duty of anointing 
 the new king, and yet it occasionally belongs to his calling to 
 tell a man where his asses have wandered, in return for a 
 piece of bread, or a quarter of a shekel of silver (1 Sam. ix. 
 6ff.)- 
 
 2. THE BEGINNINGS OF THE LEGAL LITERATURE : 
 THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT. 
 
 All the records hitherto mentioned belonged either to the 
 domain of poetry or to that of historiography, and showed that 
 these departments of literature had reached a high degree of 
 cultivation in early times. On the other hand, we seem to 
 have the oldest record of legal ordinances probably from the 
 beginning of the ninth century in the so-called " Book of 
 the Covenant," of which we had to speak previously (p. 7f.) 
 in another connection. We here leave quite untouched the 
 dispute as to which of the great Pentateuch- Sources, /or E, 
 incorporated this code of law, and as to whether a Decalogue 
 was issued earlier than it, occupying ourselves solely with 
 the contents of Exod. xx. 24 xxiii. 19. It was remarked 
 above that the present text is traversed by many glosses* 
 and redactional additions. None the less evident is it on 
 inspection that the original order of the statutes has been 
 confused in various ways (especially at xxi. 37 ff.). So far, 
 however, as the original text can still be determined 
 it presents, as might be expected, not a legislation embracing 
 the entire life of the people, founded on theoretical principles, 
 but a codification of usage and wont, of customary rights, 
 as these must develop in daily intercourse, especially 
 among neighbours. Hence the greatest amount of space is 
 
 * The following passages betray themselves by the use of the pluraj : xxii. 
 20b, 21, 23,24b, 30, xxiii. 9b, 13. 
 
30 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 taken up by the so-called " Claims for Damages " for 
 manslaughter, kidnapping, murder, corporal injury, theft, 
 negligence with fire, injury to fields or cattle. But alongside 
 this the religious and ethical point of view asserts itself, and 
 not merely in the statutes which especially relate to worship 
 (xx. 24, xxii. 19, 27, 29), or to the rights of male and female 
 Hebrew slaves (xxi. 1-11), but especially in care for slaves in 
 general (xxi. 20 f., 26 f.), strangers (xxii. 20), poor and needy 
 (xxii. 24 if., xxiii., lOf.) as well as in the prohibition of witch- 
 craft and incest (xxii. 1 7 f .) . The Sabbath Law is based 
 solely on the duty of humanity (xxiii. 12). But chiefly do 
 we meet with a lofty ethical standpoint in the directions 
 given (xxiii. 4 f .) that if occasion offer a personal enemy must 
 be protected from harm. 
 
 We are wholly in the dark as to the circle from which 
 all these statutes proceeded a;nd, above all, as to the public 
 authority by which scrupulous obedience was ensured. Yet 
 such an authority must be assumed, otherwise there would be 
 no meaning in the precise fixing of punishments and amends, 
 from the punishment of death, seven times prescribed, and of 
 the avenging on the body of the guilty person the wrong he- 
 had done (xxi. 23 ff.), down to the money-fine. But, empha- 
 tically as justice and impartiality in legal cases is insisted on 
 (xxiii. 1 ff.), there is not a single indication as to who is 
 authorized to pronounce sentence or to supervise the execu- 
 tion of the verdict. It is indeed twice ordered that, in 
 case of a law-suit, the man is to be brought " before God," 
 i.e., to a sanctuary, once (xxi. 6), to perform a symbolic act 
 which will have legal effect, the other time (xxii. 8), to obtain 
 an oracle ; but even in these cases nothing is said about the 
 agents, priests for example.* With regard to the courts of 
 
 * It is a quite untenable opinion, still shared by some moderns, that in these 
 passages the translation should not be " before God " but " before the gods " 
 (grammatically possible, and given by Luther), and that the expression should 
 be understood of the rulers or priests. It should rather be asked whether the 
 expression does not come from a time when God was represented at every 
 sanctuary by an image which was connected with the oracle. In fact, it cannot 
 be pronounced impossible that at xxi. 6 an image is meant, placed in the house 
 itself (at the door ?). 
 
THE JAHWISTIC HISTORICAL WORK. 31 
 
 justice, the drawing up of the indictment, the procedure, 
 such as the examination of witnesses, and the execution 
 of the sentence, it is evident that long-established customs 
 are taken for granted, so that the codification was simply 
 intended to promote greater uniformity in the decision 
 of cases and in the penalties that were to be imposed. If 
 the statement, 2 Chron. xvii. 9, has been derived from 
 a genuine tradition, the establishment and promulgation of 
 these rules of justice may have been due to Jehoshaphat of 
 Judah. But it is also possible that they sprang from the soil 
 of the northern kingdom. 
 
 3. THE JAHWISTIC HISTORICAL WORK. 
 
 Historical composition, as we have seen, had devoted itself 
 in the first place to the events of the earliest period of the 
 Kings, and also, in the northern kingdom, to the heroes of 
 the time of the Judges. The primaeval history of the people, 
 as well as the patriarchal age, the Deliverance from Egypt by 
 Moses and the Conquest of the Promised Land, seem to have 
 been left to oral tradition and adaptation until at least the 
 Solomonic period. The oldest written presentation of these 
 events accessible to us is found in that splendid historical 
 work which is usually called the Jahwistic (J) because of its 
 preponderating use of the divine name Jahweh, which begins 
 even in the history of the Creation. 
 
 On the History of Pentateuch Criticism. In this place we mnst 
 limit ourselves to the following summary of the History of 
 Pentateuch Criticism, or, in so far as the Book of Joshua comes 
 prominently into consideration, Hexateuch Criticism,* a criticism 
 which, after manifold aberrations daring a space of 140 years, has 
 at last gained a fair number of absolutely fixed results. Isolated 
 doubts concerning the authenticity of the whole Pentateuch had 
 already been expressed in past centuries, when Jean Astruc, of 
 Montpellier, a devout Catholic, made the fundamental discovery 
 that in Genesis the divine names Elohim (i.e., God) and Jahweh 
 
 * But cf. below 6, 2, last note. 
 

 32 3. THE PERIOD OP THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 alternate in a striking munner, and founded on this the hypothesis 
 that Moses himself (Pentateuch criticism therefore by no means 
 .originated in rejection of the authenticity !) placed side by side 
 .two principal documents (memoires), an Elohistic and a Jehovistic, 
 and appended to them, in a third and fourth column, fragments 
 from ten other documents. Oar Genesis arose from the blending 
 of these four columns. Astruc published this hypothesis at Brussels 
 in 1753 in an anonymous work (Conjectures sur les memoires, 
 dont il parait que Moyse s'est servi pour composer le livre de la 
 Genese; German translation, Frankfort, 1789), but no attention 
 was paid to him in France. 
 
 In Germany the hypothesis was first published by the Gott. 
 gel. Anzeigen of September 19th, 1754: at the end of the year it 
 was warmly opposed by J. D. Michaelis (Relatio de libris novis, XI. 
 162 if.) ; but at last it was brought into repute, chiefly through 
 Eichhorn (Einleitung ins Alte Testament, first at Leipzig, 1780 fF.). 
 At all events it was in Germany that it first found a deeper 
 .scientific foundation and also, before long, a further expansion. 
 Ilgen ("Die Urkunden des Jerusalemischen Tempelarchivs in Hirer 
 Urgestalt" first vol., Halle, 1798) discovered that, besides the 
 Jehovistic document, not one, but two independent Elohistic ones 
 must be distinguished. Unfortunately he prejudiced this perfectly 
 correct observation by admitting seventeen distinct documents in 
 Genesis which he thought were to be divided amongst these three 
 writers. 
 
 All the divers forms which Astruc's hypothesis passed through 
 before Ilgen are usually grouped together under the title, " Older 
 Document Hypothesis" They all recognize a quite external blending 
 of several independent sources. A second stage is formed by the 
 so-called Fragments Hypothesis, i.e., the derivation of the Pentateuch 
 from a large number of separate, unconnected fragments which 
 were afterwards united into a whole by a compiler (Yater's view, 
 in his Kommentar nber den Pentateuch, Halle, 1802-1805, 3 vols.). 
 As the dispute went on, the Older Document Hypothesis under- 
 went a modification to the effect that the Elohistic document at 
 the foundation of the Pentateuch (the so-called " Grundschrift ") 
 was supplemented by the redactor with material from another 
 source, the Jehovistic. But as the supplementer was eventually 
 identified with the Jehovist this brings us to the Supplement 
 Hypothesis. Prepared for by De Wette, thrown out in 1831 by 
 
 
 
E 
 
 THE JAHWISTIC HISTORICAL WORK. 33 
 
 wald as a conjecture, expressly maintained by Bleek and Peter v. 
 Bohlen, this hypothesis received from F. Tuch, in his " Kommentar 
 uber die Genesis" (Halle, 1838), a thorough scientific foundation, 
 and, because of its great simplicity, soon obtained almost universal 
 recognition. But after Hupfeld (" Die Quellen der Genesis und die 
 Art Hirer Zusaimnensetzung" Berlin, 1853) had, in the first place, 
 shown the correctness of Ilgen's distinction between two Elohistic 
 documents, and, in the second place, had put the significance of 
 the Jehovistic document as an independent historical work beyond 
 all doubt, there gradually arose, on the ground of these two 
 convictions, all the various forms of the " Later Document Hypo- 
 thesis." The peculiarity of them all. is the acceptance of four 
 originally independent main sources (namely, besides the Jehovist 
 [better, Jahwist] and the two Elohists, the Deuteronomic writer 
 [D], in the greater part of Deuteronomy). In fact the number 
 four, as well as the special characters of these main sources, has 
 been demonstrated by such incontrovertible reasons, and such a 
 degree of unanimity respecting the detailed analysis of the sources 
 has been reached amongst all competent inquirers, that the rejection 
 of these results now can only be explained by two reasons j either 
 from lack of acquaintance with the facts, or from a resolution, 
 embraced once for all, not to allow any force of facts to bring 
 about the abandonment of prejudices refuted long ago. 
 
 On the other hand, the adherents of the Later Document Hypo- 
 thesis are. still at variance on two points. First, as to whether the 
 four main sources existed independently, side by side, till they 
 were united by the redactor (whom all hold to be post-exilic), or 
 whether the Jahwist (/) and the Elohist related to him (E) had 
 already been blended into a whole when Deuteronomy (D) was 
 united with them : in the latter case the final stage of redaction 
 would be the union of JED with the other Elohist (P, or the 
 Priests' Code). In our Outline, as in the Historical Tables, the 
 second view is accepted as correct. 
 
 But, secondly and this is far more important the sequence of 
 the four sources is disputed. The older critics were bound hand 
 and foot by the prejudice that the source which stands first 
 (Gen. i.), the Priestly Elohist, must also be the oldest. This 
 seemed to be especially supported by the fact that (at least in 
 Genesis) it actually forms the framework in which the united 
 whole is fitted. Hence there are still distinguished scholars who 
 
 3 
 
34 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 place this document (P), if not at the head, yet (with Dillmann) 
 after E and before /and D. Others put E and / (or / and E) at 
 the head, but claim for P, or a part of it, priority to D. (The 
 belief that the latter originated in the seventh century is practically 
 unanimous.) 
 
 In opposition to all these opinions, the view was next maintained, 
 with ever-growing emphasis, that the Priestly Elohist (P) came 
 last (in and after the Exile), and thus represents the final stage of 
 development within the Hexateuch. Stated first in 1833 by E. Reuss 
 (in theses for his pupils), then propounded in 1835 simultaneously 
 by Yatke (Die Religion des Alien Testaments, I., Berlin) and 
 George (Die dlteren judischen Feste, fyc., Berlin), this hypothesis 
 had practically passed into oblivion when Graf, a pupil of Reuss, 
 revived it in 1806, first with reference to the legal portions of the 
 Priests' Writing, and afterwards including the historical. Hence 
 it has been called the Grafian Hypothesis. At first it was only 
 accepted by individual scholars, and that, as in the case of the 
 great Dutch critic Kuenen, after the most exhaustive independent 
 investigation. At last it has won recognition in ever-widening 
 circles, and reached an almost undisputed sway. This is principally 
 due to Wellhausen's brilliant demonstration (in the first vol. of 
 his Gcschichte Israels, Berlin, 1878 [Eng. Trans., 1885] ; the later 
 editions bear the title Prolegomena zur Geschickte Israels). The 
 reasons why we concur in thinking it absolutely incontrovertible 
 will be adduced in the further course of our Outline. For all the 
 details on which the analysis depends, we refer to Dillmann's 
 Commentary on the Pentateuch, which is as copious as it is 
 reliable (Genesis, 6 1892 [Eng. Trans., 1898] ; Exodus u. Leviticus, 
 1880 ; Numeri, Deuter., Josua, 1886), as well as to Holzinger's Ein- 
 leitung in den Hexateuch (Freiburg und Leipzig, 1893), at the end 
 of which there is an outline in fourteen tables of the results reached 
 by the most distinguished investigators. The history of Pentateuch 
 criticism is given most completely in Westphal's Les Sources du 
 Pentateuque, 1888, 1892, Paris [See also Cheyne's Founders of Old 
 Testament Criticism, Lond., 1893, 2V.]. The reasons on which the 
 analysis rests are more or less thoroughly discussed in all the 
 recent works on the Introduction to the Old Testament. Special 
 mention must be made of CORNILL (Freib. u. Leipz., 1891 ; 3rd 
 and 4th Editions, 1896); ED. KONTG (Bonn, 1893), p. 134 ff. ; 
 DRIVER '(1st Edition, Edinb., 1891; 6th Edition, 1897; Germ. 
 

 THE JAHWISTIC HISTORICAL WORK. 35 
 
 "rans. from the 5fcti Edition by Rothstein, Berlin, 1896). Cf. also 
 the excellent popularly-scientific treatment of the whole problem in 
 W. ROBERTSON SMITH, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church 
 (2nd Edition, Lond., 1892), Germ. Trans, by Rothstein (Das A. 
 Test. Seine Entstehung und Ueberlieferung, Freib. u. Leipz., 1894). 
 The composite character of Genesis is shown very clearly by differ- 
 ences of type in Die Genesis mit ausserer Unterscheidung der Quel- 
 lenschriften ubersetzt von Kautzsch und Socin (2nd Edition, Freiburg, 
 1891), by differences of colour in Paul Haupt's Sacred Books of the 
 Old Testament (Leipzig, beginning in 1893) : up to the present the 
 Hebrew text of Genesis in Eight Colours, by Ball (1896), Leviticus 
 in Two Colours, by Driver and White (1894), and Joshua in Seven 
 Colours, by Bennett (1895), have appeared. 
 
 The Jahwist first appears in the present text at Gen. ii. 4b, 
 but the actual beginning of his work seems to have been 
 omitted, possibly owing to its divergence from the immedi- 
 ately preceding cosmogony of the so-called Priests' Code. 
 From Gen. ii. onwards this source flows abundantly through 
 the whole of Genesis and Exodus, and again from Num. x. 29. 
 It is doubtful whether it is represented in Deuteronomy 
 (beginning at chap, xxxi.) : the latest certain trace of it is in 
 the two first chapters of the Book of Judges. It aims, there- 
 fore at supplying a history of the Israelite theocracy from the 
 beginning of the world to the settlement of the people in the 
 land west of the Jordan. The only legal portion which can 
 be certainly ascribed to it is the groundwork of Exod. xxxiv. 
 14-26. 
 
 As to the luxuriant freshness and vividness, the charming 
 flow in the narratives of the Jahwist, there has long been but 
 one opinion : passages like Gen. iii. 18 f ., xxiv. 44, are true 
 models of classical Hebrew prose. And we cannot value at a 
 lower rate the idea of God and the ethical standpoint of this 
 source. In both respects the powerful influence everywhere 
 betrays itself of those prophetic ideas through which the 
 Jahwistic popular religion was gradually purged from grossly 
 sensuous, and, in part, heathenish ideas and led on to its high, 
 destiny as the religion of the world. No doubt Jahweh is at 
 
 3 * 
 
36 3. THE PEEIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 the beginning only the God of Israel, in the primseval and 
 patriarchal periods the God of the chosen families from which 
 the people of Israel is to proceed. To them belongs His 
 special protection and care. But Jahweh is, therefore, at the 
 same time Lord and Judge of all the world. He destroys 
 the degenerate human race of the first age with the Flood ; 
 He punishes also with annihilation the unparalleled wicked- 
 ness of the dwellers in Sodom and Gomorrah. He makes- 
 Pharaoh feel His power, and thus compels him to set His 
 people free. If there are traces of a much narrower idea of 
 God, one, in fact, which can only be understood as a remnant 
 of antique mythological views (as Gen. vi. 1 ff ., xxxii. 25 ff .), 
 this only shows, first, how far' the Jahwist is from mechanical 
 subjection to a carefully elaborated theological system. 
 Further, the boldest ascription of human qualities to God,, 
 as in Gen. ii. and iii., and pre-eminently, in chap, xviii., 
 is always so made as to leave unimpaired the impression 
 of divine majesty and dignity. That God becomes visible 
 to man, directly interposing everywhere, serves not merely to 
 give dramatic movement to the description, but chiefly to 
 enhance the impression that Jahweh is a living and therefore 
 a life-giving personality, who demands joyful faith and full 
 surrender. To secure this end genuine religious feeling 
 cannot dispense with the so-called anthropopathisms and 
 anthropomorphisms. It was reserved to a much later age, 
 versed in theological abstractions, to take offence at this 
 ascription of human qualities to God and get rid of it from 
 the old narratives as best it could, but at the same time to 
 destroy the charm which they exercise over an unprejudiced 
 religious mind. 
 
 As the idea of God, so also the etfcical views of our source 
 are not to be measured by the strictest standard of Christian 
 ethics. It is an utter mistake to charge the Jahwist with 
 taking pleasure in Jacob's deceiving Esau (the Israelite 
 against the hated Aramasan!). On the contrary, he designates 
 Jacob's conduct as guile (Gen. xxvii. 35), and the part which 
 Esau plays in chap, xxxiii. is far more honourable than Jacob's. 
 
 

 
 THE JAHWISTIC HISTORICAL WOBK. 37 
 
 The power of the popular customs which still prevailed in the 
 Jahwist' s day explains some other points which may seem 
 offensive to us. This especially applies to concubinage and 
 all its consequences. But scandals still remain which cannot 
 be got rid of by the argument that the Jahwist contented 
 himself with an objective narrative and deemed it unnecessary, 
 to pronounce an express condemnation. Amongst these we 
 reckon the risk to which Sarah (Gen. xii.) and Kebekah 
 (chap, xxvi.) were exposed by the false statements of their 
 husbands, the out-manoeuvring of Laban (type of the hated 
 Aramaean) *by the crafty devices of Jacob (Gen. xxx. 37 ff.), 
 and, not less, the robbing of the Egyptians (Exod. xii. 36). 
 The outwitting of foreigners, under certain circumstances, 
 is even counted a clear right. But after all, what are all 
 these details compared with the general impression made 
 on us by the unpretentious piety and the moral earnestness 
 of the actors, and therefore of the narrator himself ! 
 " I am not worthy of all the benefits and of all the truth, 
 which Thou hast shown unto Thy servant." This confes- 
 sion of Jacob (Gen. xxxii. 11) is obviously looked upon as 
 a confession of the people which bears his name. And if 
 the Jahwist thinks of sacrifices and offerings as having been 
 from the beginning of the world the natural expression of 
 a devout disposition, and elsewhere treats the consulting of 
 the divine oracle as a primitive custom (xxv. 22), yet the 
 earliest sacrifice of all teaches that it is the disposition and 
 not the offering which counts, and it is not offerings or other 
 works, but believing reliance on the word of Jahweh which is 
 counted to Abraham for righteousness. 
 
 Up to this point we have spoken of the Jahwistic source 
 as a homogeneous work. But a closer examination of its 
 contents showed long ago that here also we have to do with 
 various strata, and therefore with the work of a Jahwistic 
 school. The narrator of Genesis iv. 16-24 knows of no 
 Deluge ; for he presupposes that all shepherds, musicians, 
 and smiths are descended in an uninterrupted series from the 
 sons of Lamech. At Gen. ix. 20 ff. the sons of Noah, who 
 still dwell with him in one tent, are called in the original text 
 
38 3. THE PEKIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 Shem, Japhet, and Canaan; and these names here stand in 
 a different, far stricter sense, than Shem, Ham, and Japhet 
 elsewhere. At Gen. xi. 1-9 the dispersion of mankind over 
 the earth is not connected, as in chap, x., with their deriva- 
 tion from the different sons of Noah, but with the confusion 
 of tongues which God decreed. All this warrants our dis- 
 criminating between an older and a later form of / (J 1 and / 2 ).* 
 Both relate the primeval history from the standpoint of a 
 history of redemption, but J l as the history of Israel and 
 without presupposing the Flood, J* as the primseval history of 
 mankind and interweaving the account of the Flood. The 
 latter, although carefully purged from all mythological 
 additions, evinces a closer acquaintance with the Babylonian 
 primaeval history and thus shows that J 2 is of later origin than 
 the specifically Hebrew tradition of J l (which has a strong 
 mythological colouring at Gen. vi. Iff.). By far the greater 
 portion of the remaining matter (from Gen. xii. onwards) must 
 have belonged to J" 1 . Subsequently, probably in the eighth 
 century, a Judahite hand (/ 3 ) blended the two recensions, so 
 as to form the Jahwist as we now have him in the Pentateuch. 
 The adoption of this view solves also in the simplest 
 manner the problem as to the Jahwist's native land. In all 
 the patriarchal narratives the utmost care is taken to account 
 for the consecration of the ancient holy places by appearances 
 of Jahweh and special experiences of the patriarchs. But the 
 specifically Israelite sanctuaries also belong to these holy 
 places. How, then, could it be understood that a Judahite, at 
 a time when the temple of Solomon was already in existence, 
 brought the sanctity of Shechem, Bethel, and Peniel into the 
 prominence they have at Gen. xii. 6, xxviii. 13 if., and xxxii. 
 31 ff. ? But, on the other side, the memory of Abraham and 
 perhaps of Jacob also is almost exclusively associated with 
 Hebron ; in the Joseph-Histories it is Judah (not Reuben, as 
 in E) who is spokesman for the brethren; at Exod. xxxii. 1 ff. 
 there is in all probability a Judahite condemnation of the 
 Ephraimite bull-worship. All these apparent contradictions 
 
 * On this compare the pioneer investigations of Budde, Die Biblische 
 UrgescMclite (Gen. i.-xii. 5). Giessen, 1883. 
 
 
THE JAHWISTIC HISTORICAL WORK. 39 
 
 disappear of themselves if we see in J 3 (to say nothing of J" 3 ) 
 a Judahite recension of the Ephraimite original which J l 
 supplied. 
 
 To determine more precisely the time when the Jahwistic 
 source arose we must naturally begin with J 1 . The age of 
 Solomon suggests itself as the earlier limit, for the bond- 
 service of the Canaanites, presupposed at Gen. ix. 25 f. (cf. 
 also xii. 6 and xiii. 7), is traced back to that age at 1 Kings ix. 21. 
 Gen. x. 11 ff. has also been adduced as indicating the earlier 
 limit, where the narrator knows Kalchu (Kelach) which Assur- 
 nasirhabal has already rebuilt (883 ff.) and made into a royal 
 city, but does not know Sargon's buildings in North Nineveh 
 (722 ff.). But it is questionable whether Gen. x. 8 ff. belongs 
 to J l . Just as little certainty can be obtained from xxvii. 40. 
 If the whole verse belonged to J 1 it would no doubt testify to his 
 acquaintance with the revolt of the Edomites under Joram 
 (about 845). But the second (prosaic!) half of the verse quite 
 gives the impression of an addition to the poetic utterance 
 which (like xxv. 23) knows only of Edom's servitude. 
 
 If all this indicates that J 1 belongs to the interval between 
 950 and 850, certain traces are not lacking of a more recent 
 age than that of Solomon. The existence of the northern 
 kingdom under kings of the tribe of Ephraim is undoubtedly 
 presupposed by the glorification of Joseph in the whole of the 
 Joseph-Stories, and yet more clearly by the preference of the 
 younger Ephraim to Manasseh (Gen. xlviii. 17ff.). But the 
 influence of prophetic ideas, everywhere traceable and already 
 brought out by us, is the strongest evidence for the ninth 
 century. The time of the religious war which Elijah waged 
 against Baal seems to be left behind, the worship of Jahweh 
 
 I to be unopposed, indeed to be in its prime. Joy in Him resounds 
 everywhere, but not less joy in the blessings which Jahweh 
 has poured on His people, and in the beautiful land which He 
 has given them. The struggles which had to be gone through 
 to win these lie in the far background. Settled conditions, 
 milder manners, have gained the upper hand. Intercourse 
 with neighbouring tribes is almost without exception of a 
 
40 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 peaceful kind ; joyous consciousness of the great position they 
 have won is not spoiled by any misleading national conceit, but 
 is associated with an elevating anticipation that Israel is 
 intended by its God for something greater than an honourable 
 political position in the world of nations. A precise deter- 
 mination of place, time and author is naturally impossible. 
 But if we are to venture on a conjecture there is most to be 
 said for about 855. The commanding position which Omri 
 had won for Israel was then unimpaired. The attack of the 
 Aramaeans was victoriously repelled at Samaria and then at 
 Aphek, and the extremely friendly relations with Jehoshaphat 
 of Judah might seem to guarantee a long continuance of thej 
 favourable conditions. 
 
 
 4. OTHER KELICS or THE LITERATURE OF THE OTH AND STH 
 CENTURIES (1 SAM. iv. Iff.). " THE BLESSING OF 
 MOSES." THE MIRROR OF THE PROPHETS. 1 KINGS xx. 
 22, &c. 
 
 The other, fairly extensive remains of the historiography 
 and poetry of the ninth and eighth centuries, preserved to us 
 in the Pentateuch, and especially in the Books of Samuel and 
 Kings, all seem, like the groundwork of the Jahwistic source, 
 to have sprung from the soil of the northern kingdom. Thus 
 the narrative of the loss and recovery of the holy ark 
 (1 Sam. iv. Ib-vii. 1, designated E in the "Survey"), 
 perhaps a fragment of a history of the sanctuary at Shiloh. 
 The age of the narrative is specially shown by the idea 
 of the holy ark and the magical powers hidden in it which 
 meets us at iv. 6 fF., v. 3 ff., vi. 19 ff. The so-called 
 " Blessing of Moses " (Deut. xxxiii.) is also unquestion- 
 ably Ephraimite. This is clear from the extraordinarily 
 emphatic glorification of Joseph, v. 13ff., nothing being left 
 for Judah but the wish that he may be reunited to the rest of 
 the people and freed from his oppressors. The consciousness 
 of might and victory which shines forth from v. 17, and 
 
 
 
 * 
 
KELICS OP THE LITERATURE OF THE 9TH AND 8TH CENTURIES. 41 
 
 especially from the close, v. 26 ff., is perhaps explained by 
 Joash's victories over Benhadad II. (798 ff.) which put an end 
 to the long oppression of Israel by the Arama3ans of Damascus. 
 The sentences devoted to Levi prove that the Blessing 
 originated in priestly circles. In whatever way we may 
 account for the difficult introductory words a strong conscious- 
 ness is clearly expressed in v, 10 f . of the importance of the high 
 office and also of the close union and power of the priestly 
 order in spite of all its enemies and haters. It is impossible 
 to determine whether the " Blessing of Moses" has been pre- 
 served as a portion of a larger work (the older Elohistic 
 Pentateuch source ?) or was first inserted by one of the later 
 redactors. 
 
 On the other hand the Prophetical Stories concerning 
 Elijah which we now read in 1 Kings xvii.-xix., xxi. (designated 
 Pr in the " Survey "), usually grouped with the somewhat later 
 Elisha-Stories (Pr 2 ), in 2 Kings ii. ; iv. 1-6, 23 ; viii. 1-15 ; xiii. 
 14-21, under the title "Mirror of the Prophets," must have 
 sprung from a special source. The beginning has not been 
 preserved : Elijah comes on the scene at 1 Kings xvii. without 
 any introduction. Moreover chap, xviii. shows that some 
 account had been previously given of the bloody persecution 
 
 of Jahweh' s prophets by Ahab's consort, Jezebel. But if we 
 have only an excerpt from the whole, and that not free from 
 legendary additions, we have still a right to conclude that our 
 Elijah-Stories are an important monument of that great 
 religious conflict which threatened for a while to end in the 
 victory, or, at least, the strong predominance of Baal-worship 
 in Israel. Not as though a total rejection of Jahweh had been 
 
 contemplated. Neither can Ahab, whose three children bore 
 names compounded with Jah[weh] (cf. too the role which he 
 plays, 1 Kings xxii.), have been a despiser of Jahweh, nor 
 
 can the people have broken absolutely with their whole past. 
 
 But the "halting on both sides" (xviii. 21) was itself bad 
 -enough. Whilst Jahweh was being worshipped, and yet they 
 would not break with Baal, whom they regarded as the 
 bestower of all the gifts of the fruitful land (cf. Hosea ii. 7), 
 
42 
 
 3. THE PEKIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONAECHY. 
 
 they were dragging Jaliweh down into Baal's realm and thus 
 closing the way against the greatest and weightiest of all 
 prophetic ideas, the idea that Jahweh is the sole God, or at 
 all events that His might and glory far surpass all the heathen 
 gods. And the great zealot for this truth, who, amongst all 
 the figures of the Old Covenant, has found his equal only in 
 Moses, hardly in Samuel, who, therefore, according to 
 Mai. iii. 23, was expected by a later age as the forerunner of 
 the Day of Jahweh, has found in the narrator of 1 Kings xvii. ff. 
 an exponent worthy of himself. The mystery of Elijah'^ 
 person, his lightning-like appearance and disappearance, the 
 magnificent severity of his speeches, and the energy of his 
 action all this is brought before us with such marvellous 
 plastic force and dramatic vividness as to create at every step 
 the impression of an extraordinary personalty. 
 
 Compared with the Elijah- Stories the Elisha ones, which 
 begin at 2 Kings ii., show less descriptive power. The legendary 
 element takes up an almost larger space (cf. especially ii. 8, 24 > 
 vi. 8 ff . ; xiii. 20 f.), and some sections appear to be due to 
 imitation of the corresponding Elijah-narratives. Yet these 
 portions also give us many a valuable glimpse of the religious 
 and political circumstances of that age, and are therefore a 
 historical source of exceeding value. 
 
 This is even truer of the approximately contemporaneous 
 narratives of the time of Ahab, Joram, and Jehu, in 1 Kings 
 xx., xxii., 2 Kings iii. (?), vi. 24-vii. 17, and (with all sorts 
 of additions) chapters ix. and x. All these pieces show a good 
 acquaintance with details of the events which happened about 
 two generations before, and are able to narrate them with 
 great clearness and vividness. In all probability they are 
 portions of a larger historical work : doubtless we owe their 
 admission into the Book of Kings to the fact that some kind 
 of religious interest attaches to them all. Thus 1 Kings xx. 
 (apart from the prophetical sayings subsequently interwoven) 
 is a memorial of the fact that Jahweh, the god of the hills- 
 (v. 23), can also conquer with His people in the plains. In 
 chap, xxii., 2 Kings iii. and vi., 24 ff., prophets play a leading- 
 
 
 
THE HISTORICAL WORK OF THE OLDER ELOHIST. 43' 
 
 part : in chaps, ix. and x. it is told how Jehu, anointed at 
 Elisha's bidding, fulfilled "Elijah's threat against the house of 
 Ahab, and at the same time made a complete end of the 
 Baal-worship in Israel. 
 
 5. THE HISTORICAL WORK OP THE OLDER ELOHIST. THE MORE 
 RECENT BIOGRAPHIES OF SAMUEL AND SAUL. 
 
 Ephraimite historiography turns once more to the days of 
 grey antiquity. Somewhere about the middle of the eighth 
 century arose the second of the great Pentateuch sources, 
 which is usually called the Elohistic (E), because of its 
 habitual use of the divine name Elohim (i.e., God). In the 
 Survey of the History of Pentateuch Criticism, we have 
 already mentioned (p. 33 f.) that this source, which in our 
 present Pentateuch is only represented by extracts, was but 
 gradually distinguished from the totally unlike priestly Elohist,. 
 who also, up to Exod. vi., avoids the divine name Jahweh. The 
 first certain trace of the source E is met at Gen. xv. 5, in the- 
 history of Abraham. Hence it seems not to have contained 
 a history of primseval times corresponding to the Jahwistic 
 pieces in Gen. i.-xi. On the- other hand, it must have run 
 in almost unbroken parallelism with the Jahwist in the 
 patriarchal histories, the history of the Exodus and of the 
 Conquest of Canaan. This is evident from the review given 
 in the words of this source at Joshua xxiv., which takes in the 
 entire period from the immigration of Abraham to the death 
 of Joshua. This work, therefore, also aimed at giving a history 
 of the preparation for and founding of the Israelite theocracy. 
 We have already been obliged (p. 27) to state that it is at 
 least unlikely that its description extended also over the times 
 of the Judges and the earlier Kings. 
 
 Its Ephraimite origin has long been universally admitted. 
 In fact, every other view is excluded by the striking promi- 
 nence into which it brings the great Israelite sanctuaries, 
 
44 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 especially the holy stone of Bethel, by the part Keuben plays 
 as spokesman for the brothers, and by much else. On the 
 other hand, it is disputable whether E originated after the 
 Jahwist or was not rather before him. The latter view has 
 been supported by his greater wealth of names and details 
 which have vanished elsewhere. But there are very weighty 
 arguments in favour of the priority of the Jahwist, and the 
 dating E not earlier than the middle of the eighth century. 
 Both the idea of God and the ethical standpoint of E are far 
 more due to reflection than the Jahwist's. The almost entire 
 avoidance of the name Jahweh is enough to prove this : it 
 forcibly reminds us of the later prohibition of the utterance of 
 this name. And, certainly, it is not by accident that God 
 does not, in this source, as in the Jahwist, hold personal inter- 
 course with men, but calls to them from heaven (Gen. xxi. 17, 
 xxii. 11), or makes use of the mediation of an angel (xxviii. 12). 
 The way in which Abraham is cleared from the reproach of 
 falsehood, xx. 12, and of harshness towards Hagar and Ishmael, 
 xxi. llff., above all that in which at xxxi. 6 ff . Jacob's 
 cheating Laban is transformed into an overreaching of Jacob 
 by Laban, testifies clearly to an endeavour to get rid of the 
 ethical offence taken at the older form of the tradition with 
 which the narrator himself was well acquainted. Nor is it 
 mere fancy that misses from this source not only the flowing, 
 energetic style, but also the patriotic and religious enthusiasm 
 of the Jahwist, and finds, instead of these, a subdued tone 
 and anxious disposition. No doubt this is a prophetical his- 
 toriography, as truly as the Jahwist' s is. But, on the whole, 
 it no longer conveys the impression of a triumphant outlook 
 on a glorious future, but rather that of a retrospect on a 
 bygone history, in which were many gloomy experiences. 
 Thus, very especially, all through the concluding chapter, 
 Joshua xxiv., this sentence resounds, " Perhaps there is yet 
 time to avert destruction by sincerely giving up idolatry and 
 turning wholly to Jahweh " : and the people, at Joshua's 
 earnest exhortation, vows to do this. But Joshua himself 
 cannot quite believe it. The gulf between Jahweh's unap- 
 

 THE MOKE EECENT BIOGRAPHIES OF SAMUEL AND SAUL. 45 
 
 proachable holiness and the people's evil disposition is too 
 vast to allow him to hope that the deep wounds will be healed. 
 The people's declaration that they will serve Jahweh alone 
 becomes eventually nothing but a "witness against themselves/' 
 
 When we remember that this work was evidently trans- 
 planted at an early date to Judahite soil, and naturally under- 
 went revision there, till at last it was blended as a whole with 
 the Jahwist, the fact is at once explained that secondary 
 portions were in course of time attached to this source, so 
 that we can speak of an Elohistic as well as a Jahwistic school. 
 
 It is to the last decades of the kingdom of Israel that the- 
 biography of Samuel and Saul also belongs, which is pre- 
 served in 1 Sam. i.-iii., viii., x. 17-24, xv., xvii., and (in many 
 ways inlaid with other elements) chap, xviii. f., xxi. f., then 
 chap. xxvi. last, probably 2 Sam. i. 6 ff. In the " Survey '* 
 we call it 8S. We have indicated above (p. 28 f.) how sharply 
 the standpoint of this source is distinguished from the older 
 Samuel and Saul-Stories. The kingdom is in no sense a 
 blessing, but a curse to the people, for the longing after it 
 amounts to a rejection of Jahweh, and, notwithstanding his- 
 serious warning (] Sam. viii. 10 ff., x. 17 ff.), it is extorted 
 from the seer who has hitherto ruled the people in God's 
 stead. The very first king fully justified the evil forebodings 
 which might be cherished concerning the kingdom. Alongside 
 this theological pragmatism, such an adherence is elsewhere 
 found to the genuinely popular elaboration and transformation 
 of the older historical tradition (1 Sam. xvii. is a thoroughly 
 classical example!) as to justify the verdict that in this descrip- 
 tion traditionary elements of manifold kinds are united into 
 a whole, and partly subjected to a criticism from something like 
 Hosea's standpoint. We can only venture, with all possible 
 reserve, on the conjecture that the completion of this source 
 was connected with the redaction of the so-called " Pre- 
 Deuteronomic Book of Judges/' which was produced by the 
 blending of the old Ephraimite Hero-Stories (see above, 
 p. 21 f .), and the indubitably far more recent enumeration of the 
 so-called "Minor Judges " (designated ri in the " Survey"). 
 
40 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 6. GENERAL REMARKS ON PROPHETISM. 
 
 All these historical works, though in divers ways, were 
 chiefly meant to promote the cultivation of the religious life 
 in Israel. But, meanwhile, another champion had come upon 
 the scene, who pursued the same end by a direct road and 
 with far more effectual means literary prophecy. 
 
 It is admitted that there are manifold analogies to Hebrew 
 prophetism in other religions, and that not merely on Semitic 
 soil. The Greeks and Romans also were acquainted with male 
 and female seers, who were taken possession of by their god, 
 spoke in his name, and gave information about the present and 
 the future, things public and private. But the peculiarity of 
 Israelite prophecy is that it completely detached itself from its 
 initial amalgamation with soothsaying, and gave itself entirely 
 to the service of religion more precisely, the true prophets 
 of God were called and equipped by their God exclusively for 
 this service. 
 
 In the older period we find a double form of prophecy. 
 The one is closely connected with the priesthood. For it is 
 their business also, in answer to inquiries on all possible 
 occasions, to give " direction " (torah) : but the prophet does 
 not employ external means, as the priests use the image of 
 God (ephod) with the Urim and Thummim ; he speaks simply 
 by the power of the Spirit who animates him. But this does 
 not exclude the prophet's spontaneously declaring a word of 
 God. When Samuel is asked he can tell that Kish's lost asses 
 have returned, but at the same time he has a word of God in 
 readiness for the inquirer. The same Abijah of Shiloh from 
 whom Jeroboam's consort (1 Kings xiv.) hopes to get an 
 opinion about her sick son for ten loaves and cracknels and a 
 cruse of honey had aforetime, by a symbolical act and words 
 accompanying it, foretold to Jeroboam that he should be king 
 (xi. 29 ff.). At 2 Kings iv. 43 it is taken for granted that on 
 Sabbaths and new moons people were accustomed to inquire 
 about private affairs, even of an Elijah. Hence we must 
 believe that "the prophet'' Nathan also, and Gad, David's 
 
GENERAL REMARKS ON PROPHETISM. 47 
 
 " seer," from whom we happen only to have divine utterances, 
 given spontaneously, practised as a calling the giving of 
 " directions " in answer to inquiries. Down to Ezekiel's time 
 such inquiries from the prophets are not lacking : the only 
 difference is that in these later times the questions do not 
 relate to private affairs but to the public weal or religious 
 interests. 
 
 Alongside that form of prophecy which we have now men- 
 tioned, there moves another which in all probability sprang 
 from Canaanite soil but also attained importance in Israel. 
 It is that state of inspiration which seized with supernatural 
 force on single worshippers of Jahweh or, by preference, on 
 crowds of them and so impelled them to ecstatic words and 
 deeds as to drag even the onlookers through their example 
 into similar conduct. The oldest notice of this kind must 
 be that at 1 Sam. x. 5 ff . and 10 ff. Far more powerfully 
 is one of these occurrences depicted at xix. 18ff., where 
 even Samuel is drawn in. According to Num. xi. 24 ff. (J) 
 something similar happened once, during the journey through 
 the Desert. Echoes from the time of the Kings are found at 
 2 Kings iii. 15, according to which passage Elisha was 
 usually thrown into a state of inspiration by the playing of 
 a harp, and ix. 11, where Jehu's officers laconically designate 
 the disciple of the prophets whom Elisha had sent as a " mad 
 fellow." We may remark, in passing, that the "sons of the 
 prophets " (see below !) who were gathered round Elijah and 
 Elisha are, however, not to be put in parallelism with those 
 " Jahweh-excited " crowds of the time of Samuel. 
 
 The designation of the prophets as ndbi (pi. nebum), which 
 afterwards became the usual one, evidently belonged at first 
 to these enthusiasts. The word strictly signifies a caller, 
 more precisely one who in holy ecstasy utters cries, perhaps 
 even inarticulate sounds. The verb derived from the noun 
 (hithnabbeh) afterwards meant simply "to predict," but at 1 Sam. 
 x. 5 ff. it evidently continues to import " acting ecstatically." 
 As was originally the case with the Greek word prophttes, 
 the idea of foretelling had at first nothing to do with it. 
 
48 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 At 1 Sam. ix. 9 we are expressly told that in earlier times 
 prophets of the class we first mentioned were not called 
 nebiim but " seers." With this it agrees that Amos (vii. 14) 
 deprecates being looked on as a prophet (nail) or a " son of 
 the prophets," i.e., according to Hebrew usage, a member 
 of the prophetic guild. The word obviously retains a bad 
 connotation : ifc reminds men oE the days when prophecy was 
 in many ways associated with soothsaying, and prediction with 
 divination. The common people certainly never distinguished 
 between the two. It is thus clear how nabi at last could 
 make its way into universal use as the name, nay the name 
 of honour, of God's true prophets. The original meaning 
 passed away. The nabi is " the speaker/' who speaks at 
 God's bidding, but solemnly, not ecstatically. Thus the word 
 can finally denote also the spokesman for another man (ExocL 
 vii. 1; cf. iv. 16, where, for nabi, is simply "mouth"), or r 
 quite generally, God's instruments chosen for the good of the- 
 theocracy (Deut. xxxiv. 10; cf. xviii. 18), and, still more 
 generally, God's confidants and favourites (Gen. xx. 7 ; Ps, 
 cv. 15). 
 
 Where Jahweh-prophetism reaches its highest point it 
 always presupposes that the prophet has been directly and 
 expressly called, although this may not have been expressly 
 stated concerning each one. This calling is not confined to a 
 special rank or a special culture or a fixed age or even to the- 
 male sex. Beside the priests Jeremiah and Ezekiel stands 
 Amos, the shepherd of Tekoa; beside the long series of 
 prophets the prophetesses Huldah and Noadiah. The Spirit 
 of God, in whose might the prophet speaks, sometimes 
 appears to be given for a special occasion and end, perhaps 
 when the prophet has at first had no counsel to give and has 
 been waiting awhile (cf. the remarkable cases Jer. xxviii. 
 and xlii. 4 ff.), sometimes as the result of that gift of the 
 Spirit which was bestowed when God called the prophet, 
 which made him a " man of the Spirit [of God] " (Hosea 
 ix. 5). But as the possession of the Spirit does not depend 
 on the prophet's will so is His operation on the prophet 
 
GENERA.L REMARKS ON PEOPHETISM. 49 
 
 absolutely irresistible. As the lion's roar makes the bravest 
 shudder involuntarily so does the voice of Jahweh compel 
 him to prophesy whom He has called (Amos iii. 8). And 
 if he would attempt to keep to himself the word of Jahweh 
 it would become " a burning fire within him " which he could 
 mever endure (Jer. xx. 9). These and other testimonies of 
 the prophets allow of no twisting and distorting, although the 
 manner in which the Spirit is imparted, the process of the 
 prophetic " vision " may even remain a mystery. The inspira- 
 tion of the prophets is the heart of the Old Testament 
 Kevelation; their whole appearance is the strongest guarantee 
 of the choice and training of Israel as a special arrangement 
 of God's, as the beginning of His saving ways towards 
 mankind. 
 
 When we consider it carefully there is but a relative justi- 
 fication for the common distinction between prophets of deed 
 /(as Elijah and Elisha) and prophets of word (i.e., especially 
 of the written word). The manner in which Isaiah (vii. 3ff.) 
 confronts King Ahaz or even a Shebna (xxii. 15 ff.) or that in 
 which Jeremiah faces the kings, princes, priests and the whole 
 people of his day, also deserves to be called " deed." More- 
 over the literary prophets do not dispense with symbolical 
 actions, although in the earlier period they occur but rarely 
 (in Isaiah only in chap, xx.) and in a very simple and easily 
 .understood form, whereas subsequently (especially in Ezek. 
 iv. f.) they are found, in part, in such a complicated form 
 that they can only be understood as the literary expression 
 of didactic thoughts. Yet, with all this, the main form of 
 prophetic activity, at least in the pre-exilic period, is the 
 spoken word, whether in the shape of direct exhortation and 
 threatening (as, e.g., Isa. i.) or of parable (as Isa. v., xxviii. 
 23 ff.). In the latter case a more or less complete interpre- 
 tation is not excluded. But, for the rest, it may be confidently 
 believed that our extant oracles of the pre-exilic time rest 
 mainly on a later, though very free, record of speeches which 
 were actually delivered. As we learn from Jer. xxxvi. 1 ff ., 
 Jeremiah did not get Baruch to write out all the words of God 
 
 
50 
 
 3. THE PEEIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONAECHY. 
 
 which had come to him since the days^ of Josiah till after- 
 thirty-three years of activity. On the other hand the prophets 
 of the Exile were naturally led to do their work rather by 
 writing. It is characteristic of this that Vision, the form of 
 God's Revelation which is found but rarely in the older 
 prophets (in Isaiah, e.g., only chap, vi.), and then in lofty sim- 
 plicity, is now a matter of complicated artistic elaboration 
 (especially Ezek. i.). In Zechariah's Night Visions (i. 7-v. 9) 
 it appears indeed as the only form of representation. 
 
 7. THE MOST ANCIENT LITEEAEY PEOPHETS. ISA. xv. f., AMC 
 
 HOSEA. 
 
 Our oldest example of literary prophecy must be Isa, 
 xv.-xvi. 12, a piece from an unknown hand which the prophet 
 Isaiah designates as spoken " once " (or " long ago ") and 
 now (xvi. 14) supplies with the renewed announcement that it 
 shall speedily be fulfilled. The original situation is obviously 
 this : The Moabites, reduced to severe distress by the irrup- 
 tion of an enemy from the North (probably Jeroboam II. of 
 Israel), resort to Judah for protection in their extreme need, 
 but are repulsed by the latter. The way in which they sue 
 for Judah/s favour at xvi. 5, as well as the answer in v. 6, 
 betrays the authorship of a Judahite prophet, and with this 
 the evident fact would very well agree that Moab is deeply 
 commiserated on account of devastation inflicted by tJie 
 Israelites. If the [prophecy in these chapters struggles in 
 a striking fashion with the form in which it is clad, this 
 cannot be explained by saying that we have it here in the very 
 moment of its endeavours after a suitable form. Poetry had 
 long before reached a height which would have enabled it to 
 provide suitable forms for such material. We must conse- 
 quently ascribe it rather to a peculiarity of this individual 
 prophet (to say nothing of the great corruption of the text). 
 
 The first literary prophet whose date we can fix with some 
 
THE MOST ANCIENT LITERARY PROPHETS. 51 
 
 certainty is Amos. True, we know nothing more about his 
 person than what we are told in the title of his book, and in 
 the historical episode, vii. 10 ff., viz., that he was a cowherd 
 and sycomore-fig grower at Tekoa, which doubtless is 
 identical with the present Taqua ', two hours south of Beth- 
 lehem; that Jahweh sent him from the herd as a prophet against 
 His people Israel, and that he accordingly appeared in the 
 chief sanctuary of Israel at Bethel, preaching repentance, 
 till Amaziah, the chief priest of Bethel, accused him to 
 Jeroboam of threatening Israel with exile and Jeroboam with 
 death by the sword. The King's reply is not reported, but is 
 probably contained in Amaziah's words to the seer, bidding 
 him fly at once to Judah. Obviously they wanted to get rid 
 as soon as possible of the unwelcome preacher of repentance, 
 but shrank from violence or bloodshed. Amos answers 
 fearlessly by pointing to his Divine commission. Yet there 
 can be no doubt that he was obliged to comply with Ainaziah's 
 strict order, and, returning to Judah, drew up there the book 
 which has been preserved to us. The date given in the title, 
 " Two Years before the Earthquake," shows that several 
 years elapsed before he did this. Zech. xiv. 5 proves that 
 this earthquake happened in the time of Uzziah, the contem- 
 porary of Jeroboam II. From vi. 14 it appears that Israel 
 was once more in possession of the entire East-Jordan land, 
 and therefore that Jeroboam II. had already waged his- 
 successful wars. According to all this we must place the 
 appearance of Amos about 760. 
 
 Jerome's description of the seer of Tekoa as imperitus 
 sc-rmone (unskilful in speech) is evidently a hasty conclusion 
 from his rural occupation, perhaps also from five or six 
 examples of unusual orthography. Far more correctly have 
 the oracles of Amos been recently designated as a model of 
 good style and vivid language, and admiration been felt at the- 
 abundant imagery which he had at command, as well as at 
 his breadth of view. But the epoch-making thoughts which. 
 Amos uttered are more important than these external features. 
 Not as though he had been the first to demand justice and 
 
 4 * 
 
 
52 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 righteousness as the most pleasing manifestation of the 
 religious disposition in the sight of God. It would have been 
 impossible for him to put this with such earnestness and 
 emphasis if it had been an entirely new thing for the people. 
 But it was a new thought that the terrible severity of the 
 11 Day of Jahweh," which the people impatiently longed for as 
 a day of judgment on its foreign foes, would be turned mainly 
 against the sinners amongst themselves. It was a new 
 thought that the holiness of God, everywhere and under all 
 circumstances, must triumph over injustice and wickedness, 
 as amongst foreign nations (i. off.), so especially in Israel 
 itself. Indeed, that holiness of God which they had pre- 
 sumptuously provoked does not shrink from the extremest 
 measures conceivable. In opposition to the popular idea that 
 the national God must needs interpose at the decisive 
 moment for His people and land, in order to vindicate His own 
 honour, the prophet announces that Jahvveh will make use of 
 the enemies of the people for its destruction. Though it perish 
 Jahweh will remain and His will be executed. Thus is the 
 way prepared for an altogether new, infinitely higher, view 
 of Jahweh and of His relation to Israel and the other nations 
 as well. 
 
 Both in time and in contents the prophecy of Hosea 
 attaches itself to Amos. As to his person we know positively 
 nothing. According to the statement at i. 1, which is due to 
 some redactor, he prophesied under Jeroboam II., and it is 
 a fact that at i. 4 the continued existence of the dynasty of 
 Jehu is assumed. This ended with Zechariah's half-year's 
 reign about 743. But according to vii. 7, viii. 4, x. 3, xiii. 10, 
 Hosea is also aware of the swift changes of kings after 
 Jeroboam's death and Menahem's introduction of the 
 Assyrians (v. 13, vii. 11, viii. 9, xiv. 4). There is no trace of 
 anything later : in particular, Hosea knows nothing about the 
 league of the Ararnreans and Israelites against Judah. Hence 
 the other statement of i. 1, that he worked under Hezekiah, 
 cannot be maintained. On the contrary, chaps, i.-iii. belong 
 to the time before 743, chaps, iv.-xiv. to the time before 736. 
 
ISAIAH. MICAH. 53 
 
 All the contents of his predictions, to say nothing of vii. 5, 
 when he speaks of the kings of Israel as " our kings," show 
 that he belonged to the northern kingdom. It is for his 
 people that he must feel deepest anxiety of soul, whose sins 
 stir him to holy wrath, on behalf of whom, in Spite of every- 
 thing, he hopes God's mercy even in the latest hour (xi. 8ff., 
 xiv. 2fL). And thus his speech continually alternates 
 between fear and hope, reproach and consolation, with no 
 strict consecution of thoughts, frequently a sob rather than 
 a speech, and in many points (partly owing to textual corrup- 
 tions) hard to explain. The old dispute as to whether we are 
 to recognize actual experiences of the prophet in the events of 
 chaps, i.-iii., or a mere literary clothing of prophetic thoughts, 
 must doubtless be answered in favour of the first view. Light 
 came afterwards to Hosea, as to Jeremiah (xxxii. 8), showing 
 him that certain events of his life were due to a special 
 appointment of God. The unfaithfulness of his wife, and his 
 receiving her back again by Grod's direction, was to serve as 
 a picture of the people's great guilt and of that pitying love 
 of God which in spite of all endured to the end. 
 
 8. ISAIAH. MICAH. 
 
 If we have become acquainted in the Book of Amos with 
 a monument of Judahite prophetic activity on foreign soil it 
 meets us now in Isaiah on its own ground and in such 
 surprising greatness, that neither before nor after can we 
 name its equal in the realm of the Old Testament. Nor is it 
 merely those famous predictions in chaps, ix. and xi., those 
 pillars of the Messianic hope during more than seven centuries, 
 that justify Isaiah's being called the Evangelist or even the king 
 of the Prophets. The time in which he was placed was one 
 of endless struggles and severest dangers. But at all times 
 he knows only of one standard by which to interpret the signs 
 of the times, of one way leading to deliverance and peace, 
 
54 
 
 3. THE PEEIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 trust in his God, firm as a rock, and inviolable obedience to 
 His holy will. He sees Aram and Israel advance, leagued 
 against the far weaker Judah ; this excites in him no fear, 
 Little-Faith alone would despair "because of these two 
 smoking stumps of fire-brands." He sees them rendered 
 innocuous by the Assyrians' approach, but in this he beholds 
 no deliverance for Judah. For the unbelief of Ahaz had 
 summoned the Assyrians, to his own condemnation. He sees 
 Samaria, " the proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim," 
 fall, but her fate is to him nothing but a sign of the judgment 
 which Judah also will not be able to escape. Yet with all 
 this the prophet is immovably certain that Assyria is simply 
 " a rod of anger and staff of indignation in the hand" of 
 Jahweh. If it imagines that it can act out of the fullness of 
 its own might can destroy at its pleasure when Jahweh 
 meant it only to chastise this is as foolish as if " the axe were 
 to boast itself against him that heweth therewith, or the saw 
 to magnify itself against him that worketh it " (x. 15). And 
 the foolishness of those who would thwart God's world-plan 
 by the cleverest carnal means, especially by leagues with 
 Egypt and other nations, seems to the prophet just as great. 
 As Jahweh Himself awaits His hour and lets things proceed 
 to an extreme, till He "lops the boughs with terror, cuts 
 down the thickest of the forest with iron and brings Lebanon 
 (the Assyrian army) low" (x. 33 f.), so is it Judah' s part to 
 wait patiently till the yoke of its burden is removed and the 
 staff of the oppressor broken. Even when the ferment began 
 in the whole of Western Asia, after the death of Sargon (705), 
 and everyone believed the hour of freedom had come, and 
 even a Hezekiah allowed himself to be hurried into premature 
 action, Isaiah adhered immovably to his word : not from 
 Pharaoh, not from Egypt, can help come, but " in returning 
 and rest shall ye be saved, in quietness and confidence shall 
 be your strength " (xxx. 15). And he held fast to this con- 
 fidence even when Sennacherib was close to Jerusalem and 
 the surrounding country was terribly laid waste, and Hezekiah 
 had vainly hoped at least to avert the surrender of the capital 
 
ISAIAH. MICAH. 55 
 
 by paying an, immense tribute. Whilst the king rends his 
 clothes and deems everything lost, Isaiah has naught but 
 contempt and scorn for the Assyrians' onset. And his faith 
 wins the day. The Assyrian host is wasted by the pestilence ; 
 prophecy celebrates its greatest triumph. 
 
 But the relation of Judah to Assyria is only a fragment of 
 that world of thoughts in which the prophet moves. Along 
 with it his eagle glance takes in the present circumstances of 
 the people, the relaxation of justice under the rule of women 
 and boys, the far future, too, where " Jahweh has removed 
 men far away and the desolation has been great in the midst 
 of the land," where the rescued tenth is again given up to 
 destruction, till at last nothing remains of the fallen oak 
 except its stump the holy seed of the new Israel (vi. 11 ff.). 
 
 How eloquent, too, are the words in which his lofty 
 thoughts are everywhere expressed ! How impressively the 
 prophet can utter his anger in the very first speech, how 
 touchingly he can mourn over the city which had formerly been 
 so faithful, with what terrible earnestness can he threaten with 
 a fire which none can extinguish ! Again, how sweetly can 
 he sing (v. 1 ft'.) of Jahweh' s vineyard, how warmly can he 
 comfort and strengthen wavering faith ! And the most 
 wonderful thing of all, recurring nowhere else to the same 
 degree, is that in all the vehement storms and waves, the 
 manifold varying forms of Isaiah's language, we never for 
 a moment lose the feeling that there is a spirit behind all this 
 which deeply sympathizes and commiserates, yet is subject to 
 no weakness and no disquiet, because it is sure of its Grod and 
 blessed in Him. 
 
 Here again we must profoundly regret that so little has 
 come down to us concerning the person and the outer life of 
 this mighty witness. Jeshajahu (i.e., Jahweh helps), the son 
 of Amoz, according to all the indications, lived and worked 
 exclusively in Jerusalem. Like himself, his two sons, whom 
 lie mentions (vii. 3 and viii. 3), bore significant names. He 
 mentions (vi. 1) the year of Uzziah's death (ca. 740 B.C.) as 
 that of his own calling. We have the latest trace of his 
 
56 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OP THE DIVIDED MONARCHY. 
 
 activity in the oracles belonging to the time of Sennacherib's 
 invasion (chaps, xxx. f. and xxxvii. 22 fl:.), in the year 701, 
 Chronology therefore would interpose no obstacle to the 
 credibility of the legend of his martyrdom niider Manasseh 
 (and that by sawing asunder, referred to perhaps at Hob. 
 xi. 37). But this was probably evolved from 2 Kings xxi. 16. 
 For it would be difficult to believe that no historical statement 
 has survived concerning such an end to Isaiah's life. 
 
 The Book of Isaiah (chaps, i.-xxxix. ; we shall have to speak 
 of chaps, xl.-lxvi., the so-called Deutero-Isaiah [and Trite- 
 Isaiah] much later) has come down to us in a form which 
 betrays manifold redactional activity in times far apart from 
 each other. All the attempts to prove a continuous arrangement 
 in the order of time or events are to be regarded as failures- 
 In the first place it is possible to distinguish a series of 
 sections which are either founded on a later enlargement of 
 genuine oracles (xi. 10 xii. 5, chap, xxxii. f.), or on the expan- 
 sion of an Isaianic nucleus (chap, xxiii), or finally, on the 
 erroneous intermingling of exilic and post-exilic oracles 
 (xiii.-xiv., xxiii. 21? xxxiv. f . ; the peculiar apocalyptic- 
 passage, chaps, xxiv.-xxvii., cannot have originated till a later, 
 post-exilic time). The historical appendix, chaps, xxxvi.-xxxix., 
 was added by some redactor, who took it from 2 Kings xviii. 
 13 xx. 21, partly on account of the Isaianic oracles which are 
 given there, and partly as a key to the historical comprehen- 
 sion of those utterances of Isaiah which refers to Sennacherib's- 
 invasion. 
 
 When all this has been removed the remainder falls easily 
 into three groups. I. : Chaps, i.-xi. 9, oracles concerning Judah 
 and Jerusalem alone. Within this group chaps, ii. to iv. or v. 
 evidently form a distinct collection, with a special title from 
 Isaiah's own hand ; it retained its place when the incomparable 
 Prologue, chap, i., was placed at the head and provided with 
 a special title. After the oldest collection in chaps, ii.-v. it 
 seems that Isaiah placed a second, which opened with the 
 account of his call (the so-called Inaugural Vision, chap. vi.). 
 This explains in the simplest way how chap, vi., which we 
 
: 
 
 ISAIAH. MICAH. 57 
 
 should quite expect to be at the head of the whole, came to 
 stand in the middle of the first group. II. : Chaps, xiv. 
 24 xxii. 25 exclusively directed, with the exception of the 
 o oracles in chap, xxii., against foreign nations (like the 
 oracle xiii. f., xxi., xxiii., which we have distinguished above), 
 and provided by a redactor with the special designation massd, 
 i.e., [solemn] utterance. III. : Chaps, xxviii.-xxxi., the so- 
 called Assyrian Cycle. Chap, xxviii. 1-6 implies the existence 
 of Samaria; but the prophet has probably put this older 
 section in the forefront as an introduction in order to follow it 
 by a declaration that Judah is in the same condemnation. 
 Hence all that follows xxviii. 7 may belong to the time after 
 Sargon's death. Chaps, xxx., xxxi. are obviously not far 
 distant from the catastrophe (701 B.C.). 
 
 Isaiah's contemporary, Micah (precisely, Mikhdyah, i.e., 
 Who[is]like Yah[weh] ?), of Moresheth, near Gath, in the 
 Judasan lowland, worked in the same spirit and the same 
 certainty that God had sent him, though inferior to Isaiah in 
 majesty of diction. The title, i. 1, states that he was also 
 active under Jotham and Ahaz ; but according to the weighty 
 testimony of Jer. xxvi. 18, where Micah iii. 12 is verbally 
 quoted, his work did not begin till the reign of Hezekiah. But 
 a distinction must DO doubt be drawn between an earlier and 
 a later period. Chaps, i.-iii. form a connected utterance, and, 
 so far as the very corrupt text allows us to judge, an extremely 
 vigorous one, in which Samaria first (consequently prior to 
 722) and then Judah and Jerusalem are threatened with 
 destruction because of the utter failure of law and discipline, 
 but, above all, because of the deep corruption of all the leaders 
 of the people, and the carnal reliance placed on Jahweh's 
 presence. 
 
 No kind of critical suspicion prevails respecting these three 
 chapters (excepting as to ii. 12f., verses which are perhaps 
 only in the wrong place). But it is very questionable how 
 much of chaps, iv.-vii. should be denied to Micah. The only 
 point on which there is practical unanimity is that chap. vii. 
 7-20, with its totally different pre-suppositions, cannot have 
 
 
.58 
 
 3. THE PERIOD OF THE DIVIDED MONARCHY.. 
 
 been composed earlier than the Exile (or possibly even in late 
 post-exilic times). Chap, vi., with its impressive summary 
 in v. 8 of all prophetic teaching, and chap. vii. 1-6 are 
 universally ascribed to the time of Manasseh, but some scholars 
 do not deny that they are Micah's. All recognize that in the 
 present text of chaps, iv. and v. thoroughly heterogeneous 
 elements have been worked up cf. especially iv. 10. where 
 the taking of the city is expected, with v. 11, 13, where its 
 deliverance is foretold. Since Micah himself confidently 
 looks forward to the destruction of the city, iv. 9 f., 14, and 
 v. 1-8, as well as the original form of 9-14, might easily 
 belong to him. On the other hand, the section iv. 1-4, which 
 is almost identical with Isa. ii. 2-4, seems to have been subse- 
 quently appended to chaps, i.-iii., so as not to leave off with 
 the comfortless prospect of iii. 12. Ativ. 6-8, on the contrary, 
 a state of deep humiliation for Jerusalem, and the loss of the 
 " former dominion " seem to be implied. 
 
4. FROM TEE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA 
 TO THE EXILE. 
 
 1. NAHUM. ZEPHANIAH. 
 
 OUK reference to the later activity of Isaiah and Micah has 
 already carried us beyond the great catastrophe of the year 
 722, which brought on Samaria the long-threatened destruction 
 and left Judah alone on the scene. The new position thus 
 created, the restriction thenceforward to Judah alone of all 
 the memories of a great past, and all the hopes of the future 
 too, was evidently realized by but few in the anxious time 
 from 722 to 701, when men were in constant dread that the 
 now-gigantic power of Assyria might suddenly crush them. 
 When the God who was enthroned on Zion vindicated 
 the irrefragable promise of His prophet, and in one night 
 triumphed over the myriads of Assyria, we should have thought 
 that a profound movement, the consciousness of an immense 
 debt of gratitude, would necessarily have taken hold of the 
 whole nation, and made it willingly obedient to the true 
 prophets of God. But according to all that we can gather 
 from the scanty traditions of the time of Manasseh, mingled 
 as they also are with all sorts of later additions, something 
 quite different happened. The deliverance was ascribed, not 
 to the God of Isaiah, who was able to control all nations 
 .according to His holy will, but to the national god of Israel, 
 who would not allow his habitation to be violated, or the 
 heaps of sacrifices and offerings brought to him to remain 
 unrewarded. All the aberrations of Manasseh, including the 
 sacrifice of children, which were afterwards summarily set 
 down as idolatry, in all probability arose from a reaction 
 against Hezekiah's attempt to purify the service of Jahweh 
 from all the remnants of the former naturalistic and sensuous 
 cultus. The much innocent blood which Manasseh, according 
 
 
60 
 
 FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 to 2 Kings xxi. 16, shed in Jerusalem,, must have been chiefly 
 that of the people who followed Isaiah and Micah, and would 
 not adapt themselves to this turn of affairs. 
 
 The above-named sections, Micah vi. and vii. 1-6, enable us- 
 to see a long way into the circumstances of Manasseh/s reign. 
 But besides them only one monument of prophecy has been 
 preserved to us from the whole interval between Isaiah and 
 Zephaniah, the extremely sublime prophecy of the destruc- 
 tion of Nineveh by Nahum the Elkoshite. According to 
 Jerome, Elkosh was in Galilee. But this does not imply that 
 Nahum was an Israelite : on the contrary, passages like i. 11 
 (obviously an allusion to Sennacherib's invasion), i. 13, ii. l r 
 will not permit us to think of any but a Judahite. The precise- 
 date of the oracle is doubtful. On the one side we get the 
 impression that the prophet retained a vivid recollection of 
 the Assyrian invasion (i. 11, ii. 3) : and earlier critics wished 
 on this account to put Nahum back into the eighth century. 
 On the other side, the whole tone of the oracle points to 
 an imminently threatening danger to Nineveh : hence the more 
 recent critics think mostly of the siege by Cyaxares and 
 Nabopalassar. But it may still be questioned whether such 
 passages as ii. 2 and iii. 14, on which the chief reliance lias 
 been placed, are not rather to be put down to poetic art 
 which can make the future most vividly present. If we add 
 that the devastation of the Egyptian Thebes, mentioned 
 iii. 8 ff., is obviously remembered very vividly and in all 
 probability is the conquest of Thebes by Esarhaddon or 
 Assurbanipal, we shall be rather inclined to come down to the 
 time between 670 and 660 as the date of Nahum. For the 
 rest, Nahum is rightly regarded as one of the most difficult 
 of the prophets : this difficulty comes both from the poetically 
 bold, nay fiery phraseology, and from the manifold corruptions 
 of the text.* 
 
 * " Der Untergang Ninevehs und die Weissagungschrift des Nahum von 
 Elkosch," by Col. A. Billerbeck and Dr. A. Jeremias (in Delitzsch and Haupt's 
 "Beitragen zur semit. Sprachwissenschaft," III. [1895], 1) gives a thorough 
 discussion of the text (also with reference to military technical terms). 
 

 THE HISTORICAL WORK OF THE JEHOVIST. 61 
 
 Zephaniah's date can be determined with more certainty 
 than Nahum's. When his genealogy is traced back at i. 1, to 
 Hezekiah as his great-great-grandfather, it would be difficult 
 to think of any other than King Hezekiah. If Amariah, his 
 great-grandfather, was born before Hezekiah's accession, 
 Zephaniah may have been born about 655. Of his oracles 
 chap. i. at least, with its sharp denunciations of the idolatry 
 and the outrages practised in Judah, must be assigned to 
 the time previous to Josiah's purification of the cultus (622). 
 According to an opinion which is shared by many moderns, 
 the Scythian invasion (ca. 628) occasioned Zephaniah's 
 preaching of repentance, and supplied him with the colours 
 for depicting the terrible judgment-day of Jahweh. Yet it 
 may be questioned whether iii. 6, which is specially adduced 
 in favour of this, has not the victories of the Medes and 
 Chaldaeans in view ; besides which there are other grounds 
 for placing chaps, ii.-iii. 13 later than Josiah's reform of the 
 cultus. BUDDE (Theol. Studien u. Kritiken, 1893, p. 393 ff.) 
 has at all events made it very possible that ii. 4-15 is a later 
 interpolation. But it is almost universally agreed that the 
 conclusion (iii. 14-20) cannot have originated earlier than the 
 Exile or the immediately succeeding period. 
 
 2. THE HISTORICAL WORK OF THE JEHOVIST. DEUTERONOMY. 
 
 We have no means of knowing to what extent historical 
 writing was practised in the whole of this interval, perhaps in 
 the shape of a renewed recasting and supplementing of older 
 works, as is natural in a literature propagated by manuscripts 
 and devoted almost exclusively to the interests of religion. 
 But we have a proof that the older monuments of this class 
 already enjoyed a sorb of canonical dignity. Otherwise it 
 would be difficult to understand how men came to think of 
 so careful a blending of two ancient historical works as we 
 have in the union of the Jahwist (J) and the older Elohist (E), 
 
62 4. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 which probably was effected in the second half of the seventh 
 century. The fundamental principle of the redactor (who is 
 usually designated JE r or Rje, i.e., the " Jehovistic" redactor) 
 doubtless was to sacrifice nothing that bore the marks of an 
 independent notice. Occasionally he allows only one source 
 to speak for a while : the narrative of the other is then, 
 brought in incidentally (e.g. E, Gen. xxxi. 4 ff., as parallel to 
 J, xxx, 81 ff.), or, if the discrepancy seemed too great, is left 
 out entirely. But if the parallel accounts substantially agree, 
 the phraseology of both sources (especially with retention of 
 both divine names) is adduced in such close and apt combina- 
 tion that the successful analysis of the sources demands most 
 careful observation of the vocabulary and linguistic usage of 
 each source. Not unfrequently these indications fail and we 
 have to be content to speak of JE. A translation corre- 
 sponding to the original phraseology enables the observant 
 reader to detect the manifold joints and seams which were 
 necessarily evolved when narratives almost identical in 
 language were placed side by side. Thus at Gen. xxvii. 4 (/) 
 there is a fresh beginning of what had been begun at v. 21 (E). 
 At xxxvii. 28 Midianite merchants came up to Joseph's 
 brethren : these then drew him out of the well and sold him 
 to the Ishmaelites (cf. the analysis in the "Survey") a 
 striking instance of the manner in which the redactor some- 
 times despaired of reconciling differences which might have 
 been got rid of with the utmost ease. The redactor's own 
 additions must have been few: we regard Gen. xx. 18 as an 
 indisputable example. 
 
 About the same time as a canonical history of the primasval 
 age was thus produced another task of extreme importance 
 was undertaken in the circle of the disciples of the prophets :: 
 the formation of a comprehensive corpus of ritual and civil 
 laws which should re-model the prevalent practice in the 
 commonwealth and in the cultus. The relapse under 
 Manasseh to the natural istically inclined popular religion had 
 shown that no improvement of circumstances was conceivable 
 so long as the service of Jahweh was abandoned to all the 
 
DEUTERONOMY. 63- 
 
 arbitrariness and all the superstition, the intermixture even of 
 all sorts of ancestral heathen customs, which prevailed up and 
 down the country at the local sanctuaries, and especially at 
 the high-places (bdmoth), some of which were primaeval. 
 There was only one remedy : the strict limitation of the 
 sacrifices and festivals to one legitimate sanctuary, i.e., self- 
 evidently, to the temple in Jerusalem. The issue of these 
 considerations was the original form of our Deuteronomy, the 
 so-called Ur-Deuteronomy. 
 
 It has long been recognized that the Book of the Law 
 which the chief priest Hilkiah found in the temple in the 
 eighteenth year of Josiah, cannot have been the whole 
 Pentateuch, but only the original form of Deuteronomy. 
 This 'is confirmed step by step by the detailed account in 
 2 Kings xxii. 8 ff. Shaphan, the scribe, happening to visit 
 the temple, Hilkiah acquaints him with the finding of the 
 law-book, and hands it over to Shaphan, who reads it. For 
 a merely cursory perusal of the Pentateuch at least five or 
 six hours would be requisite : for that of the original 
 Deuteronomy half an hour would be ample. Then Shaphan 
 repairs to the King, gives him a short account of the execution 
 of his commission, and continues : " Hilkiah the priest hath 
 given me a book/' And Shaphan read it to the King. The 
 King is quite horrified at its contents. He rends his clothes, 
 and sends the priest and others to the prophetess Huldah 
 to obtain through her a pronouncement from Jahweh con- 
 cerning this book. Next he assembles at the temple all 
 the notables, together with all the priests and prophets 
 and the whole people ; reads to them all the contents of the 
 newly-found law, and solemnly binds himself, with the whole 
 people, to observe it most strictly. The ensuing narrative of 
 the ritual reform in the temple, in Jerusalem, and all the rest 
 of the land, brings positively incredible facts to light. We see 
 from it (even from the original narrative, apart from the 
 many intensifying additions of later date), that not only the 
 open country but the capital and the temple were practically 
 crammed with the signs of a naturalistic Jahweh-worship 
 
 
64 4. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 and absolutely heathen idolatry , and all this under the eyes 
 of so pious a king as Josiah, and under the eyes of the 
 temple priesthood. 
 
 The strong emotion, the deep grief of the King, can 
 obviously be explained only by the fact that when the law- 
 book was read he perceived something entirely new, opposed 
 outright to the prevailing custom. This new thing is the 
 demand for the concentration of the worship at one place, and 
 the thorough abolition of all remains of the previous Nature- 
 worship. Both are enjoined most emphatically at the very 
 outset of the Code proper (chap. xii.). In accordance with 
 this it is brought out prominently at 2 Kings xxiii. 2 Iff., 
 that a strictly legal celebration of the Passover (i.e., by the 
 whole of the people at the central sanctuary) was held 
 under Josiah for the first time since the Judges. The more 
 ancient festival-laws know nothing about such a demand : it 
 is advanced for the first time at Deut. xvi., and evidently as 
 an innovation. 
 
 The fact that the law-book was found by the chief priest 
 Hilkiah, and handed by him to the scribe naturally to be 
 given in turn to the King has given rise to the conjecture 
 that the priest had a hand in its composition, and that the 
 whole affair was a " pious fraud." All things considered, we 
 must rather conclude that Hilkiah himself was surprised at 
 the discovery. The position of the priests in Deuteronomy is 
 not at all such as to explain any special zeal on their part for 
 its composition and introduction. No doubt the centralization 
 of the worship assured to the priests at Jerusalem a consider- 
 able increase of influence and revenue, although the payments 
 to the priests were in themselves very modest (Deut. xviii. 
 3ff.). But then every privilege was nullified by the express 
 direction (xviii. 6 ff.) that the rural priests should thence- 
 forward have a right to officiate in the temple and share in 
 the priests' dues. We shall, indeed, see that this direction 
 was not permanently carried out : 2 Kings xxiii. 9 knows only 
 of the rural priests participating in the meal offerings, not of 
 their right to officiate. But the Deuteronomic writer obviously 
 
DEUTERONOMY. 65 
 
 meant the direction at xviii. 6 ff. to be understood seriously, 
 and this is a proof that he must be sought, not in the priestly, 
 but in the prophetic circles. That the book came to light 
 during building alterations in the temple is the first evidence 
 of its having been actually deposited there by an unknown 
 hand, in the sure hope that it would be foimi sooner or later 
 and then would attain its end. But secondly, one cannot see 
 why, amidst the most favourable conditions imaginable for 
 a reform of worship, they should have waited till the eigh- 
 teenth year of Josiah to bring out in such a way a work 
 which must long have been urgently required. This question 
 answers itself if we admit that the book was composed in 
 a time of distress, possibly under Manasseh, and deposited in 
 the hope of a better time, but that the author had died 
 meanwhile. 
 
 It must, no doubt, be admitted that even in its original 
 form the law-book claimed to be founded on an address 
 delivered by Moses to the people immediately before his 
 decease. Thus the statement at xxxi. 9 ff., that Moses wrote 
 down " this law " and delivered it to the priests to be read at 
 every Feast of Tabernacles in the Year of Release, can only 
 refer to the original Deuteronomy. But the further conclusion 
 that this is a work of fraud overlooks a fact which has long 
 been recognized. As regards speeches, put into the mouths 
 of older authorities, the idea of literary property is altogether 
 unknown, both to the Old Testament writers and to antiquity 
 in general. The moment the conviction seems justified that 
 a certain statement is in the mind and spirit of that higher 
 authority and must contribute to the welfare of the people, its 
 ascription to that authority is justified. This applies as 
 forcibly to the original Deuteronomy as to the so-called 
 Priests' Code, which in innumerable passages introduces 
 Moses as the speaker, or to t( Ecclesiastes," which makes 
 a Solomon testify to the vanity of all things. We do not here 
 touch on the frequency with which the Deuteronomic writer 
 drops the veil and lets it be seen that he is really addressing 
 a people which has long been settled and is living in the 
 
 5 
 
66 4. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 midst of a fairly advanced civilization thus, as early as 
 xii. 2, in the perfect tense, " have worshipped " [Luther and 
 E. V. " served "] . 
 
 The question as to what portions of the present Deuter- 
 onomy belonged to the original Deuteronomy is an extremely 
 complicated one, and has become more and more a matter of 
 controversy. The comparison of ii. 15, on the one hand, with 
 v. 3 ff., ix. 7 ff., 22 ff ., xi. 2 ff., on the other, shows that the 
 Prologue, up to iv. 40, or at any rate chaps, i.-iii., can only 
 be regarded as a revision of the original Prologue. The yet 
 farther-going assertion that the original Deuteronomy did not 
 begin with chap, v., but with chap. xii. (as the commencement 
 of the legislation) has been met by distinguished investigators 
 with another assertion, viz., that the " Exhortations " in 
 chaps, v.-xii. were indeed composed later than the laws, but 
 by the same hand. On the other hand, it is pretty generally 
 recognized that chap, xxvii. and the Epilogue, beginning at 
 chap, xxviii. 69, with the possible exception of xxxi. 9 ff., cannot 
 have been part of the original Deuteronomy. But we must go 
 a step further. Closer observation of the legal part has 
 discovered that we there have to do with all sorts of repe- 
 titions which can be satisfactorily explained only in one way. 
 The original Deuteronomy must have passed through at least 
 two revisions, in many respects harmonious but in others 
 diverse. Our present Deuteronomy is the result of an amal- 
 gamation of these, thought by most to have been effected in 
 the course of the Babylonian Exile and not to have been 
 accomplished without all kinds of final additions.* 
 
 * W. STAEBK, in "Das Deuteronomium, sein Inhalt u. seine literarische 
 Form" (Lpzg., 1894), attempted a restoration of the law-book presented to 
 King Josiah, based mainly on the observation that the people are addressed 
 partly in the singular, partly in the plural. Independently of Staerk, C. STEUEK- 
 NAGEL (" Die Entstehung des deuteronomischen Gesetzes, kritisch u. biblisch- 
 theologisch untersucht") has subjected it to an exceedingly acute analysis, 
 founded on the same observation. The result is that neither the T/io it-source nor 
 the Ye-source is a strictly homogeneous and original work. On the contrary, the 
 Deuteronomic fundamental law (relating to the concentration of the worship at 
 Jerusalem) forms the starting point. From the union of this fundamental law 
 

 DEUTERONOMY. 67 
 
 This does not render it impossible for the present form of 
 the nucleus of Deuteronomy (designated D in the Survey) to 
 bear an almost entirely homogeneous stamp. And if we 
 leave out the section xiv. 1-21, which strongly reminds us of 
 the so-called Law of Holiness (see below), and can scarcely 
 have belonged to the original Deuteronomy, it is the spirit of 
 prophetism which everywhere meets us in these laws. It 
 reveals itself on the one side in its insistence on the main 
 thing, i.e., undivided, obedient devotion to the God of the 
 fathers. Immediately on the inculcation of the fundamental 
 truth, " Jahweh is our God, Jahweh alone,"* (vi. 4) follows 
 the demand that they shall love Him with all their heart, all 
 their mind, and all their strength. This love is founded on 
 the hearty gratitude of the people for God's having first loved 
 them, notwithstanding all their unworthiness, chosen them 
 for His possession, redeemed them from bondage, and richly 
 blessed them (viii. 10 ff. ; ix. 5). And God demands no 
 return for all this, save that the people will love Him again, 
 -walk in His ways, and be of circumcised heart (x. 12 ff. ; 
 .xi. 1, xiii., &c.). 
 
 On the other side, the spirit of prophetism is revealed in 
 the numerous directions which betray so noble and true 
 .a humanity, nay, such ethical delicacy, that an evangelical 
 strain in this legislation has been quite justifiably spoken 
 
 with the legal enactments arises the fundamental Deuteronomic collection. The 
 latter underwent a double revision in the " Sources of the Elders " and the 
 " T/w-source," other sources of laws being utilized both times. From the 
 uniting the " Sources of the Elders" with utterances of another kind the Fe-source 
 arose ; by the blending of the latter with the T//o?t-source and a few additions 
 a redactor (D r ) produced the law-book which was presented to King Josiah, and 
 this apart from a few exilic and post-exilic additions is in the main identical 
 with our Deuteronomy. Steuernagel thus, in opposition to the view which 
 formerly prevailed, puts the origin of Deuteronomy in the time previous to 
 Josiah's ritual reform. According to him the fundamental collection may 
 belong to the eighth century : the chief redactor (D r ) would have to be placed 
 about 650 at the latest. 
 
 * According to another explanation, " Jahweh our God, Jahweh is one" (or 
 " is one Jahweh"), that is, in contrast to the distinction of divers Jahwehs as 
 the special divinities of certain sanctuaries. 
 
 5 * 
 
68 4. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 of. From the time of Amos, it was the Alpha and Omega 
 of prophetic preaching to insist on the practice of justice and 
 righteousness, to warn against the oppression of the poor 
 and helpless ; and, in like manner, the Deuteronomic writer 
 unweariedly pleads for the poor, the widows and orphans, 
 even for the strangers and slaves. What a glimpse we get of 
 the legislator's heart through such prescriptions as xxiv. 10 ff. 
 and xxiv. 19 ff., compared with the customs which prevailed 
 in the rest of the ancient world. 
 
 3. THE BOOK OF KINGS. 
 
 The natural consequence of the great innovation, the 
 abolition of worship at the high-places, was that an entirely 
 new view was taken of all the preceding history. The- 
 Deuteronomic demand for unity of worship did not, indeed, 
 extend to the time before Solomon's building of the temple. 
 It came into force when Jahweh had made peace for Hi& 
 people before all surrounding enemies, and had chosen for 
 Himself a place where He would have His name dwell. But 
 after the building of the temple, all worship away from the- 
 temple was sin ; and this applied particularly to the worship 
 in the northern kingdom, especially because this was con- 
 nected with bull- worship (the " sin of Jeroboam "). The 
 work in which this new view of things found appropriate- 
 expression is " The Book of Kings." Originally one 
 book, it was divided into two in the Greek and Latin 
 Bible,* thereafter in the German and (since 1518) in the 
 Hebrew Bible. The Book of Kings includes three great 
 groups : I. The History of Solomon (1 Kings i.-xi.). II. The 
 History of the Divided Kingdoms up to the destruction of 
 Samaria (1 Kings xii. to 2 Kings xvii.), concluding with 
 
 * The Greek and Latin Bible reckon our two Books of Samuel and Kings as 
 four " Books of the Kingdoms." Our Books of Kings are, therefore, the third 
 and fourth Books of the Kingdoms (or briefly, " of the Kings "). 
 

 THE BOOK OF KINGS. 69 
 
 a lengthy consideration of the reasons of its fall, and notices 
 about its re-colonization. III. The History of Judah, down 
 to the kindness shown to Jehoiachin, 561 B.C. (2 Kings xviii.- 
 xxv.). The kings are all arranged in the exact order of 
 their accession. Thus Jeroboam I. is followed by the three 
 kings of Judah who were contemporary with him, then by 
 the six kings of Israel, who ascended the throne during 
 Asa's lifetime, &c. 
 
 A superficial glance is enough to show that the book is not 
 intended to be a compendium of the external history of Israel. 
 The author could point to other sources for this. He aims 
 at giving a sort of Church History, above all, a history of 
 prophetic action in both kingdoms. For this purpose he has 
 extracted the material from more comprehensive works, and 
 at the same time pronounced his judgment on all the kings, 
 and often on their individual acts. Deuteronomy is the 
 standard by which he judges everywhere. The spirit and the 
 linguistic usage of that book asserts itself in such a way that 
 the analysis of the passages due to the author of the Book of 
 Kings himself can in almost every" case be carried out with 
 certainty. Hence the designation of the author and of the 
 writers related to him as " Deuteronomists " is thoroughly 
 justified. 
 
 When each king of Judah and Israel is introduced in turn, 
 one and the same scheme is used with painful uniformity. 
 The date of accession is given, according to the regnal year of 
 the contemporary king of the other kingdom; the length of 
 reign ; for the kings of Judah, the age at accession and the 
 mother's name; for all alike the verdict on their religious 
 character. For. the kings of Israel this regularly runs: "He 
 did that which displeased Jahweh," or " he walked in the 
 ways of Jeroboam, and in his sins, wherewith he made Israel 
 to sin." The kings" of Judah are judged diversely, sometimes 
 being compared with their predecessors, or, as in Hezekiah's 
 case, with David. To all of them, however, even the best, 
 down to Josiah, it is imputed as a fault that they tolerated 
 the worship at the high-places (1. K. xv. 14; xxii. 44). The 
 
70 4. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 author assumes that all the kings ought to have known and 
 observed the Deuteronomic law. 
 
 If we inquire whence the author took the historical material 
 which he records, sometimes more fully, but usually, where 
 histories of prophets are not in question, in the briefest 
 manner conceivable, the reply must be : From the works 
 which he quotes for almost all the kings for everything 
 "else which remains to be said about each," i.e., from the 
 "Book of the History of the Kings of Judah," and the 
 " Book of the History of the Kings of Israel." For, in all 
 probability, the "Book of the History of Solomon" (8 a 
 in the Survey), quoted at 1 xi. 41, as well as the Ephrairnite 
 histories of prophets, and other narratives (P, E, P 2 ), already 
 mentioned by us at p. 41 f., were known to our author merely 
 as portions of those history-books about the kings of Israel 
 and Judah. It must even be asked whether we actually have 
 to think of two separate works or of one Book of Kings cited 
 under diverse names, according as it treated of kings of 
 Israel or Judah. This seems to us a very probable idea, and 
 we shall therefore henceforward designate the book simply as 
 "the great King's Book." 
 
 From several additions made to the quotations of this work 
 in our Books of Kings, it is clear that it must have treated both 
 of martial deeds abroad (e.g., I K. xiv. 19; 2 K. xiv. 15, 28), 
 and of conspiracies (1 K. xvi. 20; 2 K. xv. 15), and Government 
 measures (especially buildings, 1 K.xv. 23,xxii.39; 2 K. xx. 20) 
 at home. Once only (2 K. xxi. 17) are the "sins" of a king 
 mentioned, and there, doubtless, transgressions of the legitimate 
 ritual are meant. Yet it is questionable whether this religious 
 pronouncement was found in the great King's Book, or was 
 made by the Deuteronomist himself. 
 
 We have, for the most part, no means of determining the 
 sources on which the great King's Book drew. Leaving aside 
 the above-named extracts which, its author probably made 
 from larger independent works, there remain a fair number 
 of isolated notices which bear the stamp of great simplicity, 
 and therefore of reliableness. Where we seem to have their 
 
THE BOOK OP KINGS. 71 
 
 very phraseology they are designated K in the Survey. But all 
 kinds of statements which the Deuteronomist has interwoven 
 in his introductory formulas belong to this class, especially 
 the length of the reigns and, for the kings of Judah, the 
 mother's name. All this material, which we' designate K, was 
 probably taken from a kind of Chronicles, begun early in both 
 kingdoms, and afterwards continued down to a late period, 
 the work of continuation being taken up by one writer after 
 another, as was in part the case with our mediaeval Chronicles. 
 For instance, the note at 2 K. viii. 22, "unto this day," cannot 
 have been written by a person who was aware of Amaziah's 
 victory (xiv. 7 ; cf. xvi. 6). Yet we must undoubtedly abandon 
 the still prevalent opinion that those chronicles are identical 
 with the official annals of the two kingdoms. In proof of that 
 opinion, appeal has been made to the supposed mention of a 
 royal annalist under David (2 Sam. viii. 16, xx. 24), Solomon 
 (I Kings iv. 3), and Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii. 18, 37). But 
 the expression in question (mazkir) cannot really mean any- 
 thing but an official who " brings to remembrance " the events 
 of the reign before the king, and is therefore a reporting 
 counsellor, corresponding to the vizier of the Mohammedan 
 rulers, or to our " chancellor." With this it agrees that the 
 mazkir is reckoned amongst the highest officials, being placed 
 before the high priest in the Second Book of Samuel. But, 
 considering the repeated changes of dynasty, which were 
 often effected by assassination, it is very improbable that 
 there were official annals in Israel. There are also notices 
 concerning the kings of Judah, in all probability taken from 
 the great King's Book, which it is difficult to believe that the 
 son of the king in question took care to have inserted in the 
 official annals. This does not necessarily imply that the author 
 of the great King's Book did not frequently make use of 
 very ancient documents and notes (amongst other examples, 
 cf. 1 iv. 1 ff., iv. 7 ff., v. 2 f., and the dating of the building 
 of the temple by pre-exilic names of months at vi. 37 f., taken, 
 perhaps, from an inscription in the temple). In some cases 
 we come across parallel accounts, concerning which it is diffi- 
 
. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 cult to say what is their historical worth, and whether they were 
 admitted by the author of the great King's Book or were first 
 adopted by the Deuteronomist (1 K. ix. 23, xi. 13 ff.; 2 K. xviii. 
 14 ff., xxiii. 8b and 19 f. ; much else of this kind is assigned to 
 definite sources in the Survey, but with a ?). It is universally 
 recognized that in 2 K. xix. 10 ff. (K 2 in the Survey) there 
 is a parallel to xviii. 17ff., which 9b has turned into ail 
 independent account. 
 
 The reference to the great King's Book is found with, all 
 the kings of Israel except Joram (obviously because in the 
 present arrangement of the material there is no room for it) 
 and the last king, Hoshea. On the other hand, it is not 
 wanting with Zimri, who reigned a week, and Shallum, who 
 reigned a month. Nor is it lacking with any of the kings of 
 Judah, down to Jehoiakim, except Ahaziah (for the same 
 reason as with. Joram of Israel) and Jehoahaz, who did not 
 really reign. The latest reference being to Jehoiakim, we 
 must hold that the great King's Book extended as far as his 
 reign, and the only remaining question is as to when the 
 Deuteronomist prepared his excerpt. 
 
 The answer seems easy. At 2 K. xxv. 276. the favour 
 shown to Jehoiakim in the thirty-seventh year after his cap- 
 tivity (561 B.C.) is mentioned, and his death implied. The 
 Deuteronomist, therefore, wrote at the earliest date about 
 560, in the Exile. With this it agrees that at 1 K. v. 4 all the 
 kings west of the Euphrates are spoken of as on that side the 
 river, and that in various passages (1 K. viii. 44 ft'., ix. 1 ff. ; 
 2 K. xvii. 19 f., xxi. 7 ff., xxii. 15 ff., xxiii. 26 f.) the exile of the 
 people and the destruction of Jerusalem is presupposed. Yet 
 it has long been recognized that many other passages witness 
 quite as certainly to the pre-exilic standpoint of the Deutero- 
 nomist (thus 1 K. viii. 1 5 ff., xi. 29 ff. ; 2 K. xvii. 21 ff. and 41), 
 and the remark has justly been made that the cultus-reform. 
 under Josiah could not have been so narrated by any one 
 who did not continue to attach to it the hope of the salvation 
 of the commonwealth. 
 
 Two redactions of our present Books of Kings must therefore 
 
THE BOOK OP KINGS. 73 
 
 foe distinguished. The first (somewhere about 600, in the 
 Survey Dt) reached at least to 2 K. xxiii. 30, probably to 
 rxxiv. 1. The second (designated Dft in the Survey) added 
 the conclusion, down to xxv. 30, and all kinds of notices 
 elsewhere (see above). Its religious standpoint is, in one 
 particular, stricter even than that of the first redactor. The 
 latter (1 K. iii. 2) looked on the worship at the high places 
 prior to the building of the temple as not blameworthy ; but 
 the second redactor (v. 3) regarded it as a fault in Solomon 
 that he sacrificed at the great high-place in Gibeon, and made 
 him bring at least a supplementary burnt-offering and peace- 
 offering before the ark of the covenant. 
 
 Finally, we must attribute to the second redactor a portion 
 of the Books of Kings which has given rise to much dispute 
 and thought. This is the so-called synchronisms, i.e., the 
 dating of the kings of Judah according to the regnal years 
 of the kings of Israel, and conversely. The lack of an era 
 was, no doubt, supplied in this way : but the result shows 
 how difficult it was to carry it out. From the death of 
 Solomon to the destruction of Samaria 260 years are allotted 
 ,to the kings of Judah; to the kings of Israel 241 years, 
 7 months, 7 days. There is, therefore, an error of reckoning. 
 We come to the same result by comparing the astronomically 
 certified chronology of the Assyrian Cuneiform Inscriptions. 
 According to these Ahab of Israel took part in the Battle 
 of Karkar (854 B.C.) : from that date to the destruction 
 of Samaria 132 years elapsed. But in the Books of Kings 
 157 years, 7 months, are assigned to the kings from Ahab's 
 son Ahaziah to Hoshea. When we add that the numbers 
 for the first eight kings of Israel, leaving out Zimri, are 
 22, 2, 24 (probably 22 originally), 2, 12, 22, 2, 12, the 
 suspicion arises that 12, as an average number, has been 
 taken for the foundation. It occurs twice, and the 22 seems 
 to be thrice increased to 2 x 12 by the addition of 2. 
 All this makes it impossible to deny that the chronology, 
 .and especially the synchronisms, have in several instances 
 been artificially corrected. This was necessitated, partly 
 
74 4. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 by the lack of traditional numbers (especially for the Israelite 
 kings), partly by the corruption or the contradictions in the 
 actual tradition. And, in conclusion, the influence has been 
 felt of a system which is both late and artificial, the traces 
 of which appear at 1 Kings vi. 1, as well as in the numbers- 
 of the kings. According to 1 Kings yi. 1, 480 years ('i.e.,. 
 12 generations of 40 years each) elapsed between the Exodus 
 and the building of the temple. From then to the end of 
 Zedekiah 430 years are given to the kings of Judah,. 
 50 to the Exile, and the total again is 480 years. It may 
 still be questioned whether the second redactor himself con- 
 templated this extension of the system of 12 years each 
 to the time from the building of the temple to the re-founding 
 of the commonwealth. If he did we must assign his activity 
 to the post-exilic age. But there can be no doubt that this 
 system affected the final determination of the numbers of the 
 kings. This is all the less difficult to believe since, without 
 it, a considerable number of additions (designated Z in the 
 Survey) to the original text of the Book of Kings must be 
 registered. Nor are these merely such as the second redactor 
 might find extant and receive into the text, but others, 
 indubitably post-exilic, which show themselves to be later 
 additions, either by their dependence on the Priests' Code 
 in the Pentateuch (thus 1 K. viii. 4b), or by their 
 divergence from the Deuteronomist's own utterances, or, 
 finally, by their being Midrashic in character (1 K. xii. 
 21 ff. and 33 ff. ; 2 K. i. 9ff.). 
 
 4. HABAKKUK. JEREMIAH. 
 
 It was a prophet's voice which sounded in the ears of the 
 deluded multitude from all the prophetic histories and from 
 the whole of the view given by the Book of Kings, a moving 
 sermon on the infinite guilt of the people and its kings, 
 on the long-suffering of God which, on one occasion, by the 
 judgment on Israel, had shown itself exhausted. But no 
 
HABAKKUK. 75 
 
 prophetic voices could any longer avert that increased harden- 
 ing, followed by judgment, which Isaiah himself (vi. 9 if.) had 
 designated as the true result of the preaching of repentance, 
 willed by God Himself. Nor did those prophetic voices 
 accomplish anything different which we have now to think 
 of as belonging to the time between 623 and 586, that of 
 Habakkuk, and that of one of the greatest of all, Jeremiah. 
 
 Formerly there was almost complete unanimity respecting 
 the interpretation and position of Habakkuk's prophecy. 
 The allusion to the terrible power and the mighty deeds of the 
 Chaldseans (i. 6) seemed to admit of no other date than after 
 the battle of Carchemish, through which Nebuchadnezzar may 
 be said to have entered on the rule over all Hither Asia, 
 that is about 604. For chaps, i.-ii. 8 this view was still held 
 when Stade (Zeitschrift fur die Alttest. Wissenschaft, 1884, 
 p. 154) assigned ii. 9-20 to a post-exilic reviser, and also 
 explained chap, iii., the so-called Psalm of Habakkuk, as 
 a post-exilic congregational hymn. The second of these ideas 
 met with almost universal assent (especially because the 
 musical marks in the title and subscription point to its having 
 been subsequently appropriated from a collection of songs) i 
 but Budde (see below) claims respecting ii. 9 ff. that at least 
 vv. 9-12 and 15-17 belong to the original oracle. And 
 since Giesebrecht ("Beitrage zur Jesaiakritik," Gott., 1890, 
 p. 197f.) and, independently of him, Budde and Rothstein, 
 have proved that i. 5-11 breaks the connection between 
 v. 4 and 12, other hypotheses have been built on this, 
 which also seem worth mentioning. Giesebrecht himself was 
 of opinion that the prediction, i. 5-11 (an oracle complete 
 in itself, the first announcement of the Chaldaeans) should 
 be placed before v. 1, and that the rest formed an inde- 
 pendent piece, composed under the stress of the Chaldaean 
 rule, probably in the Exile. Budde, on the contrary (Theolog. 
 Studien und Kritiken, 1893, p. 383 ff.), saw in the oppressor 
 of the pious, not the Chaldaean, but the Assyrian, who was 
 threatened with destruction by the rising might of the 
 
 Kans. The original position of the threat (i. 5-11) 
 
70 4. FEOM THE DESTKUCTION OP SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 would be after ii. 4 : the whole oracle, apart from the later 
 additions, ii. 13 f. and 18-20, would belong to about 615. 
 Kothstein, finally (Theol. Stud, mid Krit., 1894, p. 51 ff.), 
 comes to the conclusion that Habakkuk's original oracle 
 (about 605) was chiefly directed against the prevailing ungodli- 
 ness and violence in the midst of Judah which Jehoiakim's 
 rule had furthered, and announced the punishment of the 
 apostate land and people which should be accomplished by 
 the Chaldseans. This oracle (the original order of which was 
 i. 2-4, 12a, 13, ii. 1-oa, i. 6-10, 14, 15a) would then be so revised 
 and expanded by a later writer (in the Exile) that, at least 
 in its greater part, it became an oracle against Babylon. 
 Apposite reasons have been advanced for both the last-named 
 hypotheses. On the other hand they both lie open to the 
 objection that they displace at least five verses within the 
 original oracle. Hence it is difficult to decide. 
 
 The mention of Habakkuk has brought us at any rate far 
 beyond the beginning of Jeremiah's activity. But it is with 
 good reason that we now for the first time mention him as the 
 great witness to the righteousness and unapproachable holiness 
 of his God at the close of the pre-exilic age. On him had 
 fallen the unspeakably heavy lot to be obliged to behold, whole 
 decades long, the death-struggles of his fatherland, assured 
 that even the intercession of a Moses and a Samuel could no 
 longer save it. Isaiah and Micah had descried the destruction 
 of Judah a considerable distance off : Jeremiah personally 
 experienced it, with all its horrors. His language accordingly, 
 from beginning to end, is full of reproaches, threats, care and 
 woe. Yirmejahu (i.e., according to the usual interpretation, 
 " Jahweh establishes") was descended, according to i. 1 (cf. 
 also xxxii. 6 ff.) from Hilkiah, one of the priests who lived at 
 Anathoth in Benjamin (now f ^.?z^a,anhour N.E. of Jerusalem). 
 Called to be a prophet whilst still a young man (i. 6), in the 
 thirteenth year of Josiah (628 B.C.), he afterwards laboured 
 constantly at Jerusalem (ii. 1, vii. 2, &c.). Chap. iii. 6 if. is 
 the only oracle dated in Josiah's time : yet Jeremiah him- 
 self says (xxv. 3) that he spoke unweariedly to the people 
 

 
 JEREMIAH. 77 
 
 for twenty-three years, from the thirteenth year of Josiah. At 
 least chaps, ii.-vi. must therefore be regarded as an echo of 
 speeches belonging to Josiah's time. We read a eulogistic 
 judgment on Josiah by the prophet at xxii. 15 ; according 
 to 2 Chron. xxxv. 25 he also composed a dirge over the greatly 
 lamented king after the battle of Megiddo. Chap. xxii. 10 ff. 
 is the only utterance which deals with Jehoahaz (under the 
 name Shallum). 
 
 The state of the commonwealth, and with it that of the 
 prophet, waxed ever gloomier under the reign of Jehoiakim, 
 the unworthy eldest son of the noble Josiah (xxii. 13 ff.). 
 Probably in the beginning of this reign the symbolic action 
 with the linen girdle (xiii. 1 ff.) was performed, certainly 
 another was, the breaking of an earthen pitcher in the valley 
 of Hinnom, and the threatenings connected therewith (xix. Iff.). 
 The sequel of the repetition of this in the forecourt of the 
 temple is that Pashur, chief overseer of the temple, smites 
 Jeremiah and puts him in the stocks for a night (xx. 1 ff.). 
 For this the prophet predicts to him that he shall go through 
 all the horrors of the taking of Jerusalem, and afterwards, 
 together with his family, die in Babylon. No doubt it wa& 
 during that night of imprisonment that the two striking 
 passages, xx. 7 ff. and 14 ff ., originated ; the first of which is- 
 almost an indictment of Jahweh, who had deceived him and 
 given him up to be a common laughing-stock. This is an 
 outburst of despair, from which the prophet struggles back 
 to renewed trust, yea even to praising God. The other is- 
 a cursing of the day of his birth, and of the man who brought 
 tidings of it to his father. 
 
 Chap, xxvi., which also belongs to the beginning of 
 Jehoiakim's reign, records an almost greater danger to 
 Jeremiah than that of chap. xx. Embittered by the threats 
 which he has uttered against the temple and the common- 
 wealth in the forecourt of the temple, which was filled with 
 visitors to the feast, the priests and prophets seize him, crying, 
 " Thou must die ! " The chiefs of Judah, whom we elsewhere 
 see favourably disposed to him, when they hear this, hasten 
 
78 4. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 to the rescue and institute a regular trial. Then Jeremiah 
 shows himself in all his greatness. In answer to the accusa- 
 tions of the priests and prophets he appeals stedfastly to 
 Jahweh's commands, who bade him prophesy thus : Oh, that 
 they therefore would not let the call to repentance sound 
 unheard ! But as to himself he is in their power, and whatever 
 they please may happen to him : only let them remember the 
 ; guilt which his death will bring on them. 
 
 Such words and such dignity conquer the people. Along 
 with the chiefs they take the prophet's side. A few of the 
 leading men also remember what happened in Hezekiah's reign, 
 Micah's menacing prophecy, which did not bring about the 
 death of the prophet but the repentance of the people. 
 Jeremiah thus escaped the threatened death, chiefly through 
 the protection of Ahikam, son of Shaphan. 
 
 After the battle of Carchemish (605) Jeremiah indefatigably 
 proclaims that the judgment on Judah will come through the 
 Chaldaeans. The land must become desolate, the people an 
 object of astonishment and scorn, and must serve the king of 
 Babylon seventy years, till God's judgment come upon him 
 also and his land in turn become desolate (chap, xxv.) . 
 
 In the same year, 605, Jeremiah's oracles were first written 
 out. The fate of the roll which Baruch wrote at Jeremiah's 
 dictation is vividly and impressively depicted in chap, xxxvi. 
 The only result of Jehoiakim's destruction of the roll was that 
 Jeremiah caused Baruch to prepare another, and added to the 
 contents of the first many sayings of like import. 
 
 Jehoiakim's revolt in the year 602 could not be immediately 
 punished by Nebuchadnezzar. And it is questionable whether 
 Jehoiakim lived to see the beginning of the siege of Jerusalem. 
 A shameful death is indeed foretold him, Jer. xxii. 18 ff. and 
 xxxvi. 30, and this could not have come about earlier than in 
 a sally against the Chaldaeans. The siege does not seem to 
 have been vigorously prosecuted till Nebuchadnezzar himself 
 interposed. It was brought to a close by Jehoiachin's volun- 
 tary submission, which was probably made by Jeremiah's 
 advice, certainly in harmony with his views (cf. xxii. 20 ff.) . 
 
JEREMIAH. 79 
 
 The vision of the good and bad figs (chap, xxiv.) in the 
 beginning of Zedekiah/s reign enables us to see what Jeremiah 
 thought of the situation, viz., that this first deportation was 
 the seal put on the destruction of the people. He expects 
 that the deported will obtain by their repentance grace and 
 restoration : for the remainder in Judea and Egypt all the 
 earlier threatenings remain in force. 
 
 In the fourth year of Zedekiah (i.e., 594) the ambassadors 
 of the surrounding smaller nations were gathered together at 
 Jerusalem, evidently for the purpose of conspiring against 
 the Chaldseans. Jeremiah was then directed by Jahweh 
 (chap, xxvii.) to put bands and yokes on his neck, and send 
 a message to the kings of those nations that the only way of 
 escaping utter destruction was by willingly submitting to the 
 Chaldasans. Jeremiah gave the same directions to Zedekiah, 
 the priests, and all the people, accompanying it with impres- 
 sive warnings against the false prophets who flattered their 
 foolish hopes and promised the speedy restoration of the holy 
 vessels which had been carried off, whereas in truth the 
 Temainder, hitherto spared, would have to go to Babylon. 
 Shortly afterwards (xxviii. 1 ff.) Hananiah, a prophet of 
 Gibeon, prophesied anew in the temple that within two years 
 Jehoiachin and the vessels of the temple would return. 
 Although Jeremiah felt some suspicion he supported this with 
 an " Amen," and even suffered Hananiah to take the yoke off 
 his neck and break it in pieces as a sign that before the lapse 
 of two years Nebuchadnezzar's yoke on the neck of the nations 
 should be broken, in pieces. But Jeremiah had scarcely turned 
 his back ere the word of Jahweh came to him : in place of the 
 broken wooden yoke an iron one shall be imposed, and 
 Hananiah, as a false prophet, is to die in the same year. And 
 Hananiah died in the same year, in the seventh month. 
 
 Jeremiah also utters his warning against false prophets in 
 a letter to the exiles in Babylon at about the same time (xxix. 
 1 ff.). On this account he is accused before the priests in 
 Jerusalem by the prophet Shemaiah, but replies only by a 
 minatory prediction against Shemaiah. 
 
 
80 4. PROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMARIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 The advance of the Chaldaeans about 588 causes Zedekiah 
 (xxi. 1 n.) to send two messengers to ask for an oracle from 
 Jeremiah. They receive a most unfavourable answer. But 
 the prophet counsels the people to flee to the Chaldaeans : for 
 none but the fugitives shall save their life. And when, in 
 the second year of the siege, a. gleam of hope appears through 
 Nebuchadnezzar's raising the siege because of the advance of 
 Pharaoh Hophra, Jeremiah still adhered immovably to his 
 declaration. To Zedekiah/s messengers, sent to solicit his 
 intercession, he declares that the ChaldaBans will return, take 
 the city, and burn it. Yea, if the whole army of the Chaldasans 
 were beaten, so that only a few wounded survived, these would 
 rise up in their tent and burn the city. 
 
 Shortly afterwards (xxxvii. 11 ff.) Jeremiah was seized by 
 a warder as he was going out of the city, and, in spite of his 
 denial, brought to the princes as a deserter. They had him 
 scourged and put him in prison in the house of Jonathan the 
 scribe, in a subterranean vault. It was not till some time 
 after, when the siege had been resumed, that Zedekiah had 
 him secretly brought to the palace to hear a word of Jahweh 
 from him. The answer sounds as ever: Thou wilt be delivered 
 into the power of the King of Babylon. But Jeremiah wants 
 to know from the king how he has merited imprisonment, 
 and finally entreats that at least he will not have him taken 
 back to prison in the house of Jonathan. Zedekiah has him 
 kept thenceforward in the court of the guard, and a loaf of 
 bread given to him daily until all the bread in the city was 
 consumed. But during his stay in the court of the guard., 
 Jeremiah is taught by a remarkable event (chap, xxxii.) that 
 behind all these afflictions which await the state and the 
 people, the comfortable hope of the return of the banished 
 and the restoration of the state holds good a promise whicli 
 is further developed in the sayings that follow in chap, xxxiii. 
 
 Chap, xxxviii. brings us into the last days of the siege. 
 Even in the court of the guard Jeremiah is not weary of 
 repeating his prediction of disaster. The princes at last 
 become tired of this, and demand of the king that he shall 
 
JEREMIAH. 81 
 
 die,, because lie only makes the people despondent. Zedekiah 
 faint-heartedly gives Jeremiah up to them. But even then 
 they have not the courage to outrage his hallowed person. 
 'To make him at all events innocuous, however, they let him 
 down by cords into a cistern in the court of the guard which 
 was so full of mud that the prophet sank in it. It is a 
 testimony of the strongest kind to the righteousness of the 
 Divine judgment on Judah that in this hour no one took pity 
 -on the martyr save a stranger, Ebed-Melech, the Ethiopian, 
 one of the king's chamberlains. He obtained from Zedekiah 
 Jeremiah's deliverance : for this the prophet promised him 
 (xxxix. 15 ff.) escape from the sword of the Chaldseans. 
 
 But the same Zedekiah who had so readily abandoned him 
 has him secretly fetched once more (xxxviii. 14 ff.) to inquire 
 of him, and swears that in any case he shall be safe. Again 
 he receives nothing but the counsel to save his life and the 
 existence of the city by voluntary submission. Zedekiah, 
 however, is incapable of any manly resolution. He is afraid 
 of being given up to the Judahite deserters in the Chaldsean 
 camp. All Jeremiah's exhortations effect nothing. Instead 
 of replying, Zedekiah merely enjoins strict silence as to their 
 conversation, and in case of the princes asking about it, 
 suggests an evasion. Jeremiah obeys, and the affair is thus 
 kept secret. 
 
 We have a twofold account of what befel the prophet after 
 the taking of the city : the one (much interrupted by later 
 interpolations) in xxxviii. 28b, xxxix. 3 and 14; the other in 
 chap. xl. Iff. The two can be so combined as to bring out 
 the fact, that after the city was taken, Jeremiah was saved by 
 the Chaldaean officers (perhaps on the intercession of Gedaliah; 
 according to xxxix. 11 f. by Nebuchadnezzar's order), but 
 afterwards was carried to Eamah with the other prisoners. 
 It was here that Nebuzar-Adan, who had been occupied 
 meanwhile with the destruction of the city, discovered him, 
 and gave him the choice whether he would go under his 
 protection to Babylon, or betake himself to Gedaliah at Mizpah. 
 
 6 
 
82 4. FEOM THE DESTKUCTION OF SAMARIA. TO THE EXILE. 
 
 Jeremiah chooses the latter, and Nebuzar-Adan dismisses him 
 with a present. 
 
 After the murder of Gedaliah and all the sad events 
 narrated in chaps, xl. 7 xli. 18, Jeremiah and Baruch fled with 
 the remainder of the people from Mizpah to the South, 
 During a rest near Bethlehem the people desire (xlii. 1 ff .) that 
 Jeremiah will intercede with Jahweh for them, and inquire of 
 Him. The prophet promises to keep back nothing of God's 
 answer from them, and they bind themselves by an oath to 
 obey the Divine word. After ten days the word of Jahweh 
 comes to the prophet ; the only way of saving their life would 
 be by remaining in the land, not by their proposed flight to 
 Egypt. But the prophet had hardly made this word known 
 when insolent voices are raised ; e ' that is a falsehood and not 
 God's command, Baruch has set the prophet on, that they may 
 all fall into the hands of the Chaldeans." In short, they do not 
 obey, but set off, and compel Jeremiah and Baruch to 
 accompany them to Egypt. They settle at Tahpanhes, i.e., 
 according to the Greek Bible, Daphne, near Pelusium, close- 
 to the border. The prophet is here directed (xliii. 8 ff.) to 
 foretell to his countrymen, by a symbolic action and its inter 
 pretation, the devastation of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar. 
 This prediction was first fulfilled in 525 by Cambyses. 
 
 The last trace of Jeremiah's activity lies before us in 
 chap. xliv. in the reprimand of the Egyptian Jews because of 
 their idolatry, practised especially by the women, according 
 to v. 15, and, according to v. 17 and 25, vowed even before 
 the immigration. Seeing that all the misery of the people 
 has not served for a warning to them the last remnant must 
 also perish. The people answer impudently that things are 
 just the reverse. So long as they offered to the Queen of 
 Heaven they had had bread enough and saw no evil. But 
 since their offerings ceased (i.e., since the purification of the 
 cultus by Josiah) they have lacked all things and been 
 consumed by the sword and famine. 
 
 Jeremiah's reply is for us the swan-song of the prophet. 
 
or THE 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF 
 
 JEREMIAH. 83 
 
 Once more he bears testimony against the despisers of God. 
 Let them keep their wicked vow, but no one shall again take 
 the name of Jahweh in his mouth. Only a scanty remnant 
 shall one day return to Judah whilst the rest perish in Egypt. 
 Then will it appear whose word is true, his or theirs. 
 
 An approximate calculation of Jeremiah's age shows that 
 he cannot have long survived this event. If he was about 
 thirty years old in 628, when he was called, he must have 
 been at least seventy at the destruction of Jerusalem. And 
 what anxiety, privation and ill-treatment he endured in these 
 closing years ! According to a Jewish tradition he was finally 
 carried to Babylon. The other tradition is much more 
 probable which says that he was stoned by his own people at 
 Tahpanhes. In 2 Mace. ii. Iff., xv. 14 ff., and again in 
 Matt. xvi. 14, we have eloquent testimony to the vividness 
 with which the people's memory occupied itself with the 
 figure of the great sufferer. There are diverse reasons which 
 explain why he was the prophet whose significance was 
 estimated more and more highly a,s time went on. Not least 
 of these is the fact that no other prophet is personally so near 
 to us, so humanly comprehensible. True we meet with slight 
 traces in Hosea also of the gulf between what he might hope 
 and wish for as a mere man, and what the Spirit of God 
 compelled him to expect and threaten. But in Jeremiah this 
 gulf runs in striking fashion through almost his entire activity. 
 Not as though the prophet were ever unfaithful to the Divine 
 command (i. 18) to show himself " a defenced city, and an 
 iron pillar, and brazen walls, against the whole land, against 
 the kings of Judah, its princes and priests." But what 
 a glimpse we there get into his own distressful heart, which 
 almost gives way under the holy wrath he feels at his people's 
 sins, and at the same time under the deepest pain at his 
 people's destruction ! This incessant struggle between the 
 divided 'forces within him imprints itself to a certain extent on 
 his speech. Although it is very unlike the mighty waves of 
 Isaiah's language it also is able in a peculiar manner to seize 
 and touch the heart by its elegiac tone. Jeremiah has with 
 
 6 * 
 
 
84 4. FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF SAMA.RIA TO THE EXILE. 
 
 reason been called "the first poet of feeling amongst the 
 prophets." 
 
 The origin of our present Book of Jeremiah can be traced 
 in the main to five stages of redaction : the book itself 
 testifies to the four first. 
 
 According to xxxvi. 2, Jeremiah commenced his literary 
 activity in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, when he dictated 
 to Baruch all the oracles of the years 628-60G. This roll is 
 read to the people by Baruch, and burnt piecemeal in the 
 brazier by Jehoiakim. We can only surmise how much it 
 embraced of the present contents of the Book of Jeremiah. 
 Besides an account of the prophet's calling, the greater 
 part of chaps, ii.-xx., xxi. 11 xxii. 19, xxv. 1-14 probably 
 belonged to it. From the phraseology of xxxvi. 2, it is clear 
 that oracles against external nations were also attached to it. 
 And this is confirmed by the fact that the oracles against 
 foreign nations which are to be read in the Hebrew Jeremiah 
 in chaps, xlvi.-xlix. are arranged in the Greek Bible next 
 after xxv. 13, the only indication in the Hebrew text of their 
 original position being xxv. 15-38. Still it must remain an 
 open question how much of the present contents of xlvi-xlix. 
 can have belonged to Jeremiah's first collection. According 
 to xxxvi. 32, when the roll burnt by Jehoiakim was repro- 
 duced, "many like words " were added (amongst them 
 probably the saying to Baruch, chap. xlv.). Hence this 
 is to be regarded as a second stage in the redaction of the 
 book. A third stage is evidenced by the present prologue 
 to the whole (i. 1-3). It dates the ensuing collection from 
 the days of Josiah and Jehoiakim (thus far the title of the 
 first and second roll perhaps extended), but then comes down 
 to the fifth month of the eleventh year of Zedekiah. The 
 redaction of this collection therefore falls in the time after 
 the destruction of Jerusalem : it cannot be determined 
 whether Jeremiah completed it during his two months' stay 
 with Gedaliah, or afterwards in Egypt. But since it says 
 nothing about the oracles in chaps, xlii.-xliv., or the events 
 after the fifth month, it is easily to be distinguished 
 
 
JEREMIAH. 85 
 
 from the fourth step of the redaction, which added chaps, 
 xl.-xliv. and various other accounts of events in Jeremiah's 
 life. This redaction possibly belongs to the first half of the 
 Exile, and may have come from Baruch's hand (but cf. the 
 note). 'In any case these narratives are founded almost 
 everywhere on excellent information which could only have 
 been obtained from records made by Jeremiah or Baruch 
 themselves, or from the statements of eye-witnesses.* We 
 are finally led to a fifth and last stage by the manifold 
 additions (designated Z in the Survey), parts of which can 
 only have originated in post-exilic times. The interpolations 
 in chap, xxxix., arising from a mistaken idea of the context, 
 certainly belong to this class (v. 1-2 came almost verbally 
 from 2 Kings xxv. 1-4 [Jer. Hi. 4-7] ; v. 4-13 from 2 Kings 
 xxv. 4-12 [Jer. lii. 7-16]), as also chap lii. (from 2 Kings 
 xxiv. 18 xxv. 21), and the oracle against Babylon in chap, 
 l.-li. 58. The latter was composed in Judea about 400, and 
 founded on the older oracles against Babylon (Isaiah xiii. f ., 
 xxi., xxxiv. f., &c.), which in many points it reproduces 
 almost verbally. j- 
 
 * In the Chronological Table, the chapters in question, belonging to 608, are 
 enclosed in square brackets. The reasons for this belief in an exilic stage of 
 the redaction are set forth in a peculiarly convincing manner by Kuenen (in the 
 second edition of his " historisch-kritischen Untersuchung der Biicher des 
 alten Bunds," ii. 255 ff.). It would be especially difficult to understand the 
 very surprising arrangement of many of the oracles, and the use of the name 
 Nebuchadnezzar (instead of the correct form Nebuchadrezzar which Jeremiah 
 himself used) on the assumption that it was due to Jeremiah, or, indeed, to 
 Baruch. According to Kuenen, chaps, xviii.-xx., xxvi.-xxix. and xxxiv.-xliv. 
 are also to be ascribed to this redactor. Stade, too (ZAW, 1892, p. 276 ff.), 
 believes that this redactor's activity was far-reaching, and shows his secondary 
 character in chaps, xxi. and xxiv. f. which he derives (together with xxvi. and 
 xxviii. f.) from a book containing narratives about Jeremiah. Giesebrecht 
 ("Kommentar iiber das Buch Jeremia," Gdttingen, 1894), in a very instructive 
 way, has recently distributed the material under the three categories, 
 " Jeremiah, Baruch, Beviser." 
 
 f Cf. the more detailed demonstration of the composition of this oracle 
 (published, doubtless, in Jeremiah's name, and therefore inserted, probably on 
 purpose, before the genuine passage, li. 59 ff.) by Budde, in the " Jahrbiicher 
 fiir deutsche Theologie," Vol. 23, p. 428 ff. 
 
5. THE PEEIOD OF THE EXILE. 
 
 1. EZEKIEL. 
 
 THE period of the Exile apart from Ezekiel, Lamentations, 
 and a number of elegiac psalms was formerly considered 
 a time of deathly sleep as regards literature. But in reality 
 a great literary movement went on at this very time, an 
 obvious eagerness to arrange the inheritance of the pre-exilic 
 past, to revise it from a definite view-point and to unite into 
 a great whole the related parts. Along with 'this there were 
 not lacking fundamental new creations, and this in two 
 apparently quite diverse realms, that of legislation and that 
 of prophecy. Indeed in Ezekiel, the connecting link between 
 the pre-exilic and the exilic time, we have the noteworthy 
 phenomenon of a prophetism which conies forward to legislate 
 and thus becomes of immeasurable significance for the 
 re-founding of the Jewish state as a " theocracy." Jecliazeqtl, 
 i.e., God strengthens, son of Buzi, and a member of the 
 priestly order, had been carried captive with Jehoiachin in 
 597. According to i. 2,* he was called to be a prophet in the 
 fifth year after the captivity of Jehoiachin, i.e.) 593 B.C. 
 Ezekiel was then amongst the exiles at Tel Abib (iii. 15), by 
 the river Chebar, in the land of the Chaldasans (i. 3), and 
 thus, without doubt, in Babylonia proper. According to 
 iii. 24, viii. 1, he dwelt there in his own house. Chap. xxiv. 
 15 fif. shows that he was married : in the ninth year after his 
 captivity his wife, " the desire of his eyes/' was taken from 
 him by disease. It is usually concluded from viii. 1, xiv. 1, 
 
 * The date which precedes this in i. 1, " in the thirtieth year," is usually 
 traced to some Babylonian era, such as that of Nabopolassar as king of 
 Babylon (625). But the original position of the verse was probably at the 
 beginning of an oracle, now lost, belonging to the thirtieth year after 
 Jehoiachin's captivity. Otherwise it is altogether incomprehensible. 
 
wl 
 
 EZEKIEL. 87 
 
 where tlie elders of the people sit before him, that lie was 
 held in special honour by the exiles. But the words simply 
 mean that they wished to inquire of him as a prophet (so 
 expressly at xx. 1), as members of the nation elsewhere 
 inquire of him (xxiv. 19, xxxvii. 18). xi. 25, tells of his 
 appearance in a larger circle. 
 
 Ezekiel's age at the time he was called is nowhere indicated. 
 But his evidently very exact knowledge of the temple allows 
 us to conjecture that he did not leave Jerusalem as a mere 
 youth, but had -probably officiated there as priest. The 
 latest date in his book (xxix. 17) is the twenth-seventh year 
 [after the Captivity], i.e., 571. Hence his prophetic activity 
 lasted twenty-two years. In spite of the favourable judgment 
 which Jer. xxiv. pronounces on the exiles compared with 
 those who had remained behind, Ezekiel (xiv. 3 if., &c.) has 
 grave complaints to make against his comrades in suffering, 
 even as he had been forewarned that bitter experiences 
 awaited him when he was called (ii. 6 if., iii. 8 if.) . At xxxiii. 
 30 ff., he draws a striking picture of the way in which they 
 received his word ' ' as a very lovely song of one that hath 
 a pleasant voice] and plays well on an instrument," and then 
 did not act accordingly. 
 
 The outline of the Book of Ezekiel is exceedingly clear; the 
 fact that the prophet speaks throughout in the first person 
 is an additional evidence of its honiogeneousness. The first 
 main group (chaps, i.-xxiv.) contains visions, discourses and 
 symbolic acts belonging to the time before the destruction of 
 Jerusalem and (according to the dates given in chaps, i., viii.j 
 xx., xxiv.) arranged chronologically in the fifth, sixth, 
 seventh and ninth years after the Captivity. In the second 
 (chaps, xxv.-xxxii.) main group (most of) the oracles against 
 external nations are brought together in geographical order, 
 except that the larger cycle of predictions against Egypt 
 is moved to the end. The following oracles are dated : > 
 xxix. 1 in the tenth year ; xxvi. 1, xxx. 20, xxxi. 1, in the 
 eleventh year; xxxii. 1 and 17, in the twelfth year of 
 the Captivity. The date at xxix. 17 introduces a sort of 
 
88 
 
 5. THE PEEIOD OF THE EXILE. 
 
 correction of the oracle against Tyre (chap, xxvii.). It is 
 evident that this appendix was added to the already finished 
 book, because the threatening against Tyre remains unaltered. 
 The third group (chaps, xxxiii.-xxxix.) consists chiefly of 
 discourses concerning the future, amongst which are the 
 magnificent prediction of the quickening of the dead bones 
 (i.e., the people buried in the Exile) in chap, xxxvii., and the 
 prediction of the final assault of the heathen powers, Gog- 
 and his allies, on the restored divine commonwealth (chap, 
 xxxviii. f.)- The only one of these oracles that is dated is 
 chap, xxxiii. 21, in the twelfth* year. As a fourth main group, 
 belonging to the twenty-fifth year after the Captivity, there 
 follows finally chaps, xl.-xlviii., the great vision of the re- 
 constitution of the divine commonwealth, especially of the 
 temple and the cultus, in the Messianic Age. 
 
 With the exception of xxvi. 1, where, through a clerical 
 error, the month (not the day of the month !) is missing, the 
 dates are everywhere given according to year, month and 
 day. This must have been noted down at the time by the 
 prophet : in one case (xxiv. 2) he is expressly said to have 
 done so. We know not to what extent Ezekiel added other 
 kinds of remarks to these notes. We only know, from the 
 thorough homogeneousness of language and thoughts, and not 
 less from the occasional glances at later occurrences (such as 
 the blinding of Zedekiah, xii. 13, the end of the kingdom, 
 xix. 12 ff.) that the actual composition of the book took place 
 during the later life of the prophet, and was not interrupted 
 by any long intervals. 
 
 The verdict on Ezekiel's literary character was formerly 
 influenced entirely by the assumption that he had before him 
 the Pentateuch, with the'priestly legislation at its head, in its 
 complete form. On this assumption it was not possible to 
 find many original thoughts in Ezekiel, and one could not bub 
 marvel greatly that he a priest ! should come, in chaps. 
 
 * A mistake, no doubt, for the "eleventh year." Otherwise the messenger 
 who brought to Tel Abib the news of the taking of Jerusalem was eighteen 
 months in doing it. 
 
EZEKIEL. 80 
 
 xl.-xlviii., to recast, in many respects in fresh forms, the law 
 which had long been held sacred. But we reach quite another 
 conclusion when we yield to the force of facts and place the 
 so-called Priests' Code of the Pentateuch in the exilic and 
 post-exilic time. Ezek. xl.-xlviii. then becomes, not a re- 
 modelling hard to understand, but the first sketch of the 
 priestly legislation. The man who was supposed to be 
 a bookworm becomes the creator of new ideas, the pioneer of 
 a new order of things, a man of practical activity, and 
 activity which produces an extraordinary result. 
 
 To estimate aright the position and the ulterior aims of 
 Ezekiel we must look back upon the years since 623. The 
 law-book found in 623 had put down the worship at the 
 high-places (at all events after the building of the temple) as' 
 a transgression which must thenceforward be entirely forsaken. 
 But the manner in which the priests of the high-places are 
 recommended to the benevolence of the people, and in which 
 the right is even conceded them at xviii. 6, to officiate as- 
 priests at Jerusalem, show that the Deuteronomic writer did 
 not regard the worship at the high-places and everything 
 connected with it as an inexpiable sin of ' the people. It 
 seemed to him that it was not yet too late to reform and, by 
 the zealous practice of a worship acceptable to God, to save 
 the State. But the subsequent course of events pronounced 
 a different verdict. Neither had the reforming zeal which 
 was excited from above proved lasting what idolatrous 
 abominations in the temple Ezekiel could tell of in chap, 
 viii. ! nor did the judgments which had come in the interval 
 allow of the conclusion that the people's guilt had diminished. 
 It is at this point that Ezekiel' s ideas concerning the whole 
 of the nation's past come in. To him, as chaps, xvi. and 
 xxiii. set forth in more than forcible images, it was from the 
 beginning an uninterrupted series of heathen abominations, 
 an endless accumulation of inexpiable guilt. Hence there is- 
 no compassion for the guilty. Not till the city and the 
 temple have been burnt, till famine and sword and exile 
 have done their work, can there be any thought of showing 
 
30 5. THE PEEIOD OF THE EXILE. 
 
 grace to the scanty remnant which by that time will have 
 been sifted again. And the replanting of this remnant, the 
 re-establishment of the State and the cultus, must be done 
 in forms which will exclude for ever a return to the so 
 heavily punished abominations. " Holiness," i.e., purity from 
 every sort of stain, is to be the character of the new divine 
 commonwealth, holiness, not merely of the temple, but of 
 the whole circuit of the temple, indeed of the whole land 
 and people. And the preservation of this holiness is 
 guaranteed by a series of symbols and inviolable ordinances 
 relating to the holy places, times, persons and actions. These 
 ordinances, indeed, are not regarded as of equal import- 
 ance with the legitimate worship of God, but they are the 
 indispensable conditions of this. Ezekiel thus became the 
 creator of the ceremonial law, the spiritual father of the 
 Levitical tendency in Judaism. Its foundation-lines, as we 
 have said, are to be seen in the nine last chapters of his 
 book. It was a great mistake to see nothing but allegories 
 and symbols in the demands which the prophet there makes. 
 Where there are such, as at chap, xlvii. 1-12, they are easy 
 to interpret. But most of the demands must be understood 
 to be seriously intended by the prophet, and they were 
 carried out in the priestly legislation, except where the power 
 of traditional custom or other circumstances stood in their 
 way. The most important of all the innovations is intro- 
 duced in chap. xliv. 6 ff. Instead of the uncircumcised 
 strangers who have hitherto done the menial work of the 
 sanctuary the former priests of the high-places (and their 
 descendants) are to do it in the future. They lose their 
 priestly privileges : henceforth these are to be reserved for 
 the sons of Zadok, i.e., the offspring of the priestly families 
 of Jerusalem. This demand of Ezekiel's is the root of the 
 distinction between Priests and Levites, which Deuteronomy 
 knows nothing of, whereas it plays an extremely important 
 role in the Priestly Law. That alone is sufficient to show 
 the proper position of the so-called Priests' Code later than 
 Ezekiel. 
 
LAMENTATIONS. 
 
 91 
 
 
 The assertion that, except in the last nine chapters, Ezekiel 
 is quite destitute of originality, or that t{ the prophet was stifled 
 ~by the writer-" is only justifiable to this extent, that Ezekiel 
 must really be styled the earliest of the "literary prophets" 
 (in the narrower sense of the word). Not as though that 
 operation of the Spirit of God, which Ezekiel in particular 
 brings into such frequent prominence, were purely fanciful, 
 or as though no nucleus of fact lay at the foundation of the 
 visions. But those elements of the visions which cannot be 
 put into a mental picture (cf. especially i. 11, 15 ff.), and those 
 .symbolical acts which cannot be performed (cf. iv. 42".), can 
 only be regarded as the literary expression of prophetic ideas. 
 The prophetic discourses, however, are not lacking in new 
 images and similes of all kinds, and over the whole there 
 broods so profound a moral earnestness, so clear a conscious- 
 ness of each man's responsibility for what he does and what 
 he permits (chaps, xiv., xviii., xxxiii.), that it must be called 
 a grievous wrong to the prophet when the preceding thirty- 
 nine chapters are forgotten because of chaps, xl.-xlviii. He 
 who laid the foundation of Leviticism is yet quite in the 
 spirit of the old prophets acquainted with only one means 
 of quickening the dry bones, and that is the breath of God 
 which enters into them, brings the risen ones back to their 
 native soil and there makes an everlasting covenant of peace 
 with them (xxxvii. 14, 26). 
 
 
 2. LAMENTATIONS. 
 
 When we come to deal with the so-called " Law of Holiness" 
 and the Priests' Code, we shall discover the form in which 
 Ezekiel's programme of the future was carried out. We have 
 first to do with a set of literary products in which not only 
 the phraseology but also the spirit of Deuteronomy continued 
 to work. To this class we assign the Lamentations, among 
 the poetical productions ; the Deuteronomistic revision of all 
 
92 5. THE .PERIOD OF THE EXILE. 
 
 the historical books, in the field of historiography; and, in 
 that of prophecy, the consolatory speech of the " Great 
 Unknown " (Tsa. xl. ff.), and some other prophetic pieces 
 which are now incorporated in the Book of Isaiah. 
 
 Lamentations, in the Hebrew Bible the third of the "Fes- 
 tival Rolls/* or Megilloth (more precisely the Megillah of the 
 9th of Ab, the day of the burning of the temple), betrays in 
 almost every part so lively a recollection of the closing period 
 of the siege and taking of Jerusalem, that at least the greater 
 portion of it can have been written by no one who was not 
 an eye-witness or a younger contemporary of these events. 
 The supposition that Jeremiah was the author is unknown 
 to the Hebrew Bible. It first appears in the exordium of the 
 Lamentations in the Greek (hence also in the Latin) Bible, 
 and perhaps rests only on the erroneous interpretation of 
 2 Chron. xxxv. 25. Babylonia not, as others preferred, 
 Egypt is in all probability the country where it was com- 
 posed. Chaps, i.-iv. are alphabetical poems; and in chaps, i., 
 ii., iv. each verse, in chap. iii. each set of three verses, begins 
 with one of the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet 
 (only that in chaps, ii.-iv. ' Ayin comes after Pt, as was 
 originally the case in Ps. xxxiv. 18, 17). Besides this, there 
 is in chaps, i.-iv. a special form of verse (the so-called Lamen- 
 tation-verse or Qinah-verse, discovered by Ley and Budde), 
 in which a short first clause is followed by a still shorter. In 
 chaps, i. and ii. each of our verses consists of three Lamen- 
 tation-verses ; in chap. iii. of one; in chap. iv. of two. In 
 chap. v. every verse has two clauses, but is differently 
 constructed from those of chaps, i.-iv. 
 
 The older view, that all five poems are from the same hand, 
 has of late been much shaken. After Stade (Geschichte des 
 Volkes Israel, p. 701) had assigned chap. iii. to a much later 
 time, Lohr (Die Klagelieder, Gottingen, 1891) distinguished 
 between the poet of chaps, ii.-iv., who everywhere addresses 
 the city and the author of i. and v., who, in adding these, 
 aimed at making ii.-iv. available for divine service. In the 
 Handkommentar (Gott., 1892), Lohr places the poet of ii. 
 
LAMENTATIONS. 93 
 
 and iv. about 570, the one of i. and v. about 530, whilst iii. is 
 ascribed to a third, perhaps somewhat later, poet. Cornill 
 also (Einleitung ins Alte Testament 2 , p. 246 ff. ; 3 4 , p. 231) 
 maintains this undoubtedly correct distinction, in so far as to 
 recognize only chaps, ii. and iv. as the ce oldest and most valu- 
 able" part, and also traces chaps, i. and v. to one hand. In these, 
 too, impressive utterance is given to the wretchedness 
 occasioned by the invariably cheerless surroundings and the 
 burdensome consciousness of a never-expiated guilt of the 
 people. 
 
 To the same period, no doubt, belongs the splendid poem 
 Deut. xxxii. 1-43, which at xxxi. 19fP. is ascribed to God 
 Himself, and at His behest is written out by Moses and 
 Joshua, and at v. 30 is said to have been pronounced aloud 
 by Moses to assembled Israel. But the poem itself contains 
 nothing to necessitate the belief that it was composed by 
 Moses, or in his day. The poet makes no secret of his far 
 later standpoint when he describes the time of Israel's election 
 and the bringing out of Egypt (v. 7) as " the days of old/' 
 treats the occupation of Canaan and the enjoyment of all the 
 blessings of the fertile land (v. 13 ff.) as a historical fact, and 
 (v. 15 if.) represents the Divine rejection of Israel as the inevitable 
 result of Israel's immeasurable apostasy and incurable ingrati- 
 tude. Eeproaches of this sort would doubtless apply to various 
 centuries, and we can therefore understand how earlier critics 
 deemed it possible to place the poem in the ninth or eighth 
 centur} T , and thus thought of it as accepted by the Jahwist (/) 
 or the Elohist (E). A keener investigation of the contents 
 (especially as regards the vocabulary) has -shown the relation- 
 ship in language and spirit with Jeremiah and Deuteronomy 
 to be so striking as absolutely to forbid its being placed earlier 
 than the end of the seventh century. When we also consider 
 that, according to the only natural explanation of the con- 
 clusion (v. 36 ff.), the judgment on Israel has already been 
 executed, and that now, on the other hand, vengeance is to 
 be taken on the arrogant foes who have wickedly exceeded 
 the Divine commission to chastise Israel, we are compelled 
 
94 .5. THE PERIOD OP THE EXILE. 
 
 by all this to place the poem in the Exile. With this it agrees- 
 that in v. 8, according to the original text which is preserved 
 in the Greek Bible,* we meet with a view which cannot be- 
 certainly supported by any but exilic and post-exilic passages. 
 
 3. THE CLOSE OP THE DEUTEEONOMISTIC HISTOEICAL WORK. 
 
 As regards the products of the Deuteronomistic historiography, 
 we must start from the fact adduced on p. 67 that Deuteronomy 
 (apart from the still more recent additions, iv. 41-43, x. 6-9 r 
 xxxii. 48-52, xxxiv. la, 7-9) cannot have assumed its present 
 form till the Exile. In all probability a yet more extensive 
 work of redaction was very intimately connected with this, 
 the blending of the compound JE (as to whose origin cf . p. 61 f.) 
 with Deuteronomy, and the Deuteronomistic revision and 
 expansion of the historical books from the Book of Judges to 
 the Second Book of Kings. 
 
 In the four first books of the Pentateuch the traces of the 
 Deuteronomist are comparatively infrequent. Most likely 
 Gen. xxvi. 5, Exod. xiii. 3-16, xv. 25 f., belong to him, as well 
 as Exod. xxxiv. 10b-13, Num. xxi. 33-35, and much else irt 
 the Pentateuch, which, for the sake of certainty, we have 
 simply designated R (Redactor). The hand of the Deutero- 
 nomist is very noticeable in the Book of Joshua, and his 
 additions are at times so closely interwoven with JE's material 
 that the analysis of the sources is attended with g'reat diffi- 
 culties, and not unfrequeiitly must despair of a certain result. 
 It is not so in the Book of Judges. The Deuteronomistic- 
 enlargements (designated Rl in the Survey) of the pre- 
 Deuteronomic Book of Judges (on which cf. above, p. 21 ff.) can- 
 here be pretty certainly detected by various signs, not the 
 
 * Instead of " according to the number of the children of Israel," read 
 " according to the number of the angels of God," and cf. Deut. iv. 19. As 
 Israel is governed by Jahweh, so the heathen nations, according to His 
 ordination and under His suzerainty, are ruled by inferior gods (cf. especially 
 Ps. Ixxxii.) or "princes" (Dan. x. 13 it). 
 
THE CLOSE OF THE DEUTERONOMISTIC HISTORICAL WORK. 95 
 
 least of which is their similarity to the corresponding portions 
 of the Books of Kings. The idea that the Judges were 
 actual lifelong rulers of the whole people, and the so-called 
 " theocratic pragmatism/' i.e., the tracing all the people's 
 fortunes to their religious behaviour, are to be attributed to 
 this redactor, and next to these his chief feature is the fixed 
 chronological scheme. This is founded on that calculation of 
 the interval between the Exodus and the building of the 
 Temple at 480 years, which we have mentioned above, p. 74. 
 In our present Book of Judges 593 years are given to the 
 same interval,* and this is due to the fact that the final 
 redactor (see below), in opposition to the Deuteronomist's 
 view, adds a number of years (110 in all) for Othniel and the 
 so-called Minor Judges, and also the three years of Abimelech 
 (according to ix. 22). 
 
 The redactor, designated Ri, in the Book of Judges seems to 
 have brought his revision of the older histories down to the 
 end of Samuel and Saul. In the Books of Samuel, apart from 
 the chronological notices and other traces of his activity, 
 there are some other characteristic pieces from a Deuterono- 
 mistic hand. Thus at 1 Sam. ii. 35 ff. there is an undeniable 
 reference to the fate of the non-Zadokite priests after Josiah's 
 reform of the ritual. The later origin of 1 Sam. vii. 3ff. is 
 shown by its ignoring (v. 13 f.) the oppression of Israel 
 by the Philistines, which lasted down to David's time. In 
 1 Sam. xii. the reviser's hand appears to come out specially at 
 the close. At 2 Sam. vii., apart from the general tone of the 
 speech, it is most recognizable in v. 12 f. The original words 
 (retained in v. 27) were: " Thou shalt not build me a house 
 but Jthee!" altered into, "Not thou, but thy son!" The latest 
 Deuteronomistic insertion in the old David-Stories is 1 Kings 
 ii. 1-9, the so-called Testament of David. The principal argu- 
 ment against its belonging to the David-Source (Da) is that in 
 the latter the execution of Joab and Shimei is not ascribed to 
 
 * To the 390 years which we get by adding up the numbers in the Book of 
 Judges we must add forty years each for Moses, Joshua, Eli, Samuel and David, 
 and the three first years of Solomon. 
 
96 
 
 5. THE PERIOD OP THE EXILE. 
 
 David's orders but to other causes. It is difficult to say what 
 end was contemplated by the interpolation. If Solomon, the 
 builder of the temple, was to be thus freed from blood- 
 guiltiness, David, on the other hand, was credited with such 
 revengefulness, nay, treachery, that he lost as much as 
 Solomon gained. On the (second) Deuteronomistic revision 
 of the Books of Kings cf . above, p. 72 f. To it is probably to 
 be ascribed the transplanting of 1 Kings i., ii. from its con- 
 nection with the David-Stories (cf. above, p. 27) to the head 
 of the Book of Kings. 
 
 3. DEUTERO-!SAIAH (AND TRITO-!SAIAH). 
 
 The connected historical work which originated in the pains 
 taken by the Deuteronomistic redactors (for we can hardly 
 ihink of only one hand as doing it all) embraced about two- 
 thirds of all the matter in the historical books from Genesis 
 to the end of the Second Book of Kings. All these supple- 
 ments and revisions of the older literature bore, as we have 
 several times remarked, the stamp of Deuteronomy, of legis- 
 lation in the spirit of prophetism. That spirit was yet alive 
 and capable of creative acts, as is evinced by a wonderful 
 monument of its activity in the last quarter of the Exile, the 
 so-called Deutero-Isaiah,* i.e., chap. xl. ff. of our present 
 Book of Isaiah. 
 
 It is mainly the great events of the time about 546 B.C., 
 the overthrow of the kingdoms of Media and Lydia by Cyrus, 
 which are more or less clearly reflected in chaps, xl.-xlviii. The 
 time of consolation is come, the judgment on Judah is at an end. 
 According to His primaeval counsel, and the prophetic procla- 
 mation made long ago, the Almighty Incomparable God will 
 
 * This name (literally " Second Isaiah ") is not meant to express the 
 conjecture (which has actually been offered) that the author of these nine 
 .chapters was also called Isaiah, but simply to indicate that they form an inde- 
 pendent second part of the Book of Isaiah. 
 
DEUTEKO-ISAIAH (AND TRITO-ISAIAIl). 97 
 
 bring His people home, and put to shame the idols of the 
 heathen. He has chosen Cyrus as the instrument for chas- 
 tising Babylon and delivering Israel. It is this deliverance 
 which opens to Israel the possibility of fulfilling the mission 
 for the salvation of the world entrusted to it by the eternal 
 counsel of God, hindered by its own sins and blindness, but 
 not on that account cancelled. With the renewal of the 
 people its glory, as that of a priestly people, is to be manifested, 
 and the worship of Grod in Spirit and Truth is to take the 
 place of the dead service of works. The new Jerusalem is the 
 prelude of a renewing of heaven and earth : the re-union of 
 all the dispersed, everlasting salvation for the redeemed, and 
 everlasting suffering for the ungodly, form the close. 
 
 But this gives only a slight idea of the overflowing wealth 
 of prophetic ideas in these twenty-seven chapters. Two causes 
 render it very difficult to give a precise statement of their 
 contents. There is no strictly logical consecution of thoughts. 
 Complaints and reproofs alternate with consolations and 
 promises; words of hope and joy are followed by others, 
 occasioned, probably, by fresh events, betraying a depressed 
 mood. The external form also alternates between an exquisite 
 prose and a purely poetic diction. The other difficulty is the 
 ambiguousness of what is said concerning one of the weightiest 
 ideas in the whole book, the " Servant of Jahweh." In one 
 set of passages (xli. 8, xliv. 1, 21, &c.) this as certainly means 
 the people of Israel, as in another (xlix. 5, 1. 10) it is clearly 
 distinguished therefrom. If, as is natural, we take these 
 latter passages to mean the spiritual Israel, the truly theo- 
 cratic-minded ones, to whom has been entrusted the mission, 
 not only to the heathen but also to their own people, a fresh 
 difficulty arises out of the famous section on the Undeservedly 
 Suffering Servant of Jahweh, lii. 13 ff. The ascription of the 
 individual traits to a plurality instead of to a single person is 
 exceedingly difficult, for the prophet certainly belonged to the 
 moral kernel of the people, and yet he sets himself (liii. 2 ff.) 
 with the rest, in contrast to the Servant of Jahweh. But 
 this is not all. After chap. liii. only Servants of Jahweh (in 
 
 
98 
 
 5. THE PERIOD OF THE EXILE. 
 
 the plural) are spoken of (liv. 17, &c.). Duhm (" Kommentar 
 iiber das Buch Jesaja," Gott., 1892) attempted to solve the 
 riddle by assuming that the so-called Ebed-Jahweh (treating 
 of the Servant of Jahweh) Poems, xlii. 1-4, xlix. 1-6, 1. 4-9, 
 lii. 13 liii. 12, were written between 500 and 450, and there- 
 fore were subsequently incorporated with Deutero-Isaiah, 
 Others have distinguished between the poet and Deutero- 
 Isaiah, whilst holding that the poems were written contem- 
 poraneously with the latter. Others altogether dispute the 
 separation of these poems from the work of Deutero-Isaiah. 
 
 The observation already made by Eichhorn that part of 
 the utterances of Deutero-Isaiah can only be explained 
 as belonging to the early days after the Return, has 
 recently been repeated and thoroughly established. The 
 only dispute about it is as to where the line is to be 
 drawn between exilic and post-exilic matter. Stade (Gesch. 
 Israels, ii. 70 f.) designates only chaps. Ixiii.-lxvi. as at 
 least revised, but the result reached by Kuenen (Einl., 
 ii. 235 ff.), chiefly through observation of the style and 
 language, is that the part brought from Babylon in 536 
 (probably xl.-xlix., lii. 1-12) was the nucleus of a collec- 
 tion which expanded still further, to which also its original 
 author may have added, till at length, probably in the 
 sixth century, the whole was united and in some measure 
 arranged. This hypothesis may satisfactorily explain much 
 that is surprising, but the idea that various hands have been 
 at work from chap. 1. onwards is a little suspicious, seeing 
 that there is such far-reaching harmony both of thoughts 
 and of form. Stade, therefore, and Cornill (Einl., 3 p. 153 f. ; 3 
 p. 160f.) would only admit that chaps. Ixiii.-lxvi. were supple- 
 mented or revised by another hand. And Cornill held it 
 possible that chaps, xlix.-lxii. were not written out till after 
 the Return (but by the same author as xl.-xlviii.). Duhm, on 
 the contrary, ascribes Ivi.-lxvi. to a Trito-Isaiah ("third 
 Isaiah"), working about the middle of the fifth century. 
 
 The ascription of these twenty-seven chapters to Isaiah, son 
 of Amoz, which is taken for granted, by Jesus Sirach (xlviii. 
 
ISAIAH XXXIV. F., XIII. P., XXI. 1-10. 99 
 
 27), has not the slightest support in the text. Nowhere is 
 there a trace of the author's wishing to pass for Isaiah. On 
 the contrary, he describes the circumstances of the time in 
 which he lived so clearly that only an exposition misled by 
 false tradition could find prediction here. Jerusalem still lies 
 in ruins : the people addressed still languish in exile (xl. 2, 
 xliv. 26, xlv. 13, xlvii. 6, xlviii. 20, Hi. 2f., 11, Ixiv. 9f.). 
 The Chaldaeans, whose capital is Babylon, are the oppressors 
 (xliii. 14, xlvii. 1, 5, xlviii. 14, &c.). Cyrus (Koresh; we meet 
 the same form of the name at Ezra i. 1, 7 f ., v. 13 ; 2 Chron. 
 xxxvi. 22 f.) is the instrument of deliverance. Hence it is 
 simply foolish to assert that by placing Deutero-Isaiah at 
 the end of the Exile we make it out to be a forgery. In 
 all probability the mistaken connection with the Book of 
 Isaiah (which clearly ends with chaps, xxxvi.-xxxix !) is to 
 be explained as follows. According to a Jewish tradition, 
 which is still attested by the oldest German and French 
 manuscripts, the original order of the prophets was this : 
 Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the Book of the Twelve. In 
 this arrangement by the size of the books Deutero-Isaiah 
 had its proper place betwixt Isaiah and Hosea. When 
 Isaiah, on chronological grounds, was put at the head, the 
 twenty-seven chapters which had no title were taken over 
 with it, and thus a tradition was created which, in spite of its 
 lack of foundation, has tenaciously asserted itself for many 
 centuries. 
 
 5. ISA. xxxiv. f ., xni. f., xxi. 1-10. 
 
 Chaps, xxxiv. and xxxv. of the Book of Isaiah are of 
 precisely the same tone and spirit as Deutero-Isaiah, and 
 therefore are ascribed to him by many. They are a threat 
 against the Edomites because of the wrong done by these to 
 Jerusalem (when it was taken and destroyed : cf . Ps. cxxxvii. 7, 
 Lam. iv. 21), and a promise to the exiles of a happy return 
 
 7 * 
 
 
100 
 
 5. THE PEKIOD OF THE EXILE. 
 
 to Zion. It is questionable whether the two chapters foi 
 one connected oracle : but there can be no doubt that it 
 should be dated in the Exile or soon after. 
 
 The oracle of the fall of Babylon (Isa. xiii.-xiv. 23), also 
 attributed to Isaiah, is of a somewhat different kind. As 
 a specimen of poetry it is one of the most splendid creations 
 in the realm of the Old Testament. This is specially true of 
 the satirical song on the fallen King of Babylon (xiv. 4 ff.) . 
 As in Deutero-Isaiah, the historical background (especially at 
 xiii. 19) is clearly to be distinguished from the prediction. 
 The siege of Babylon by the Medes and Persians is close at 
 hand, and with it the deliverance of the people who have- 
 been so long enslaved. 
 
 Finally, Isaiah xxi. 1-10 is placed by most in the same time 
 (that of the overthrow of Babylon by the combined Medes and 
 Persians ; cf . verse 2) . But the explanation of this difficult 
 section by means of the relations prevalent about 710 B.C. is 
 not altogether impossible, and consequently its derivation 
 from Isaiah is not excluded. 
 
 6. THE LAW OF HOLINESS. 
 
 All these prophetic voices, including Deutero-Isaiah, 
 are of a different spirit from Ezek. xl.-xlviii. They were 
 doubtless preceded by a work, the so-called Law of Holiness, 
 in Lev. xvii.-xxvi., which is closely related to the chapters in 
 Ezekiel. The name was given by Klostermann on account of 
 the frequency with which the Divine commands are grounded 
 on the proposition, " for I Jahweh am holy (xx. 26, xxi. 8, &c.), 
 or "I am Jahweh, who hallows you (or 'them')." The 
 characteristic which immediately strikes us is that of a priestly 
 law, satisfying, above all things, the requirements of th& 
 ritual. The Deuteronomic demand that sacrifices should be 
 brought to only one sanctuary, allowing, however, accordiog 
 to Deut. xii. 15, that animals might be slaughtered and eaten 
 
THE LA.W OF HOLINESS. 101 
 
 at any place, is now raised higher, so as to mean that every 
 act of slaughter is to be regarded as a sacrifice, and conse- 
 quently can only be performed at the one legitimate sanctuary. 
 The unity of the cultus, which the Deuteronomic writer does 
 not require till after the temple had been built, is therefore 
 here carried back to the age of the Journey through the 
 Desert. Then there follow in confused alternation regulations 
 concerning the eating of blood and carcases, forbidden degrees 
 of marriage and sins of unchastity, treatment of the sacrifices, 
 the gleanings, the rights of neighbours in every conceivable 
 relation, also the priests' duties, the celebration of the religious 
 festivals, the Sabbatic year and the Year of Jubilee all from 
 the point of view that the trangression of these command- 
 ments defiles the land and violates the divinely willed holiness 
 of the people, and thus of Jahweh Himself. And all these 
 commandments are introduced as oral directions given by God 
 to Moses that he might hand them on to Aaron and the people. 
 According to the subscription, xxvi. 46, Mount Sinai is the 
 scene of the revelation, and thus the sanctuary is the " tent of 
 revelation" (Luther, "Die Hiitte des Stifts")- The spiritual 
 relationship with Ezek. xl.-xlviii. is of such a kind that this 
 prophet has been held by famous critics to be the actual 
 author of the Law of Holiness. 
 
 Although we have thus far spoken of this law-book as a 
 literary unity, we must now point out that in it also very 
 diverse constituents, and consequently a subsequent revision 
 of an older original, have recently been demonstrated. Most 
 scholars follow Klostermann in designating this original by 
 II, i.e., Law of Holiness ; Dillmann uses S, i.e., Law of Sinai ; 
 Kuenen, P l , i.e., first stratum of the Priests' Law. The only 
 outstanding dispute concerning it is as to its extent. It has 
 been shown probable that some other pieces (Lev. xi., some 
 passages in xiii.-xv. ; and according to Dillmann, Exod. xxxi. 
 13 ff. ; Lev. v. 1-6, 21 ff.; Num. x. 9 ff., xv. 38 ff.) belonged to 
 the original Law of Holiness. And within chaps, xvii.-xxvi. 
 the boundaries between the original and the additions have 
 
102 
 
 5. THE PEEIOD OF THE EXILE. 
 
 been very differently drawn. According to Dillrnann? 
 (Kommentar zu Num. bis Josua, p. 635 ff.) these chapters 
 contain a redactor's amalgamation of two varying revisions of 
 the Law of Sinai (which Dillmann believes to be very ancient). 
 On the other hand, the most recent discussion of this compli- 
 cated question (Bantsch, Das Heiligkeitsgesetz, Erfurt, 1893) 
 distinguishes between chaps, xviii.-xx. (H l ) as post-Deutero- 
 nomic but prior to Ezekiel, and the group later than Ezekiel,. 
 H 2 (chaps, xxi. and xxii.) and H 3 (chaps, xvii. and xxvi.). In 
 any case the entire corpus received its present stamp from a 
 hand which was most closely related to the author or authors 
 of the Priests' Code proper. This comes out with especial 
 clearness at xxiii. 36. In harmony with Dent. xvi. 15 and 
 Ezek. xlv. 25, a seven-days' celebration of the Harvest Festival 
 was here commanded originally (v. 34) : in accordance with the 
 precept in the Priests' Code the reviser added the eighth 
 day. But in spite of its points of contact with Deuteronomy, 
 the original Law of Holiness was not so closely allied to it as 
 to the Priests' Code, which was soon after taken in hand in 
 the same spirit. 
 
6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 HAGGAI AND ZECHAEIAH. MALACHI. 
 
 THE edict of Cyrus (538) threw open the way home to the 
 exiles. The hopes with which at least part of them trod it may 
 be discovered in such prophetic utterances as Isaiah xxxv. and 
 Zeph. iii. 14 ff. But grave hindrances were soon interposed 
 which threatened the existence of the new colony and brought 
 down the joyous spirit of those who had returned. According 
 to Ezra iii. 10 ff. the foundation of the temple was laid soon 
 after the Return : but it was not till after 520 that the 
 building was more vigorously prosecuted. The contempo- 
 rary prophets Haggai and Zechariah give us instructive 
 glimpses into the circumstances and feelings of this latter 
 period. 
 
 Both are mentioned at Ezra v. 1 and vi. 14 as zealous 
 promoters of the building of the temple. Three of the four 
 oracles of Haggai are devoted to this object; and all are 
 dated precisely by the month and day of the second year of 
 Darius (520). In i. 1-11 he exhorts Zerubbabel and the high 
 priest Joshua to greater zeal in promoting the building, and 
 contradicts the assertion that the time for this has not yet 
 come. The appendix (v. 12 ff.) tells of the good result of 
 this exhortation. In ii. 1-9 he consoles the leaders and the 
 rest of the people, especially those who had seen Solomon's 
 temple, for the poverty of the new building. The old promises 
 are yet to be fulfilled : through them shall the glory of this 
 second temple be greater than that of the first. In ii. 10-19 
 the prophet teaches that all sacrifices are useless if they 
 neglect the duty of zealously prosecuting the building of the 
 temple. The fourth oracle (ii. 20 ff.) promises Zerubbabel that 
 when the heathen world is overthrown, i.e., when the Messianic 
 Kingdom dawns, he shall be a signet-ring in God's hand. 
 
104 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PEEIOD. 
 
 It is highly probable that Haggai himself was one of thos 
 who had seen the former temple : in that case he must have 
 been more than seventy years old in 520. As a matter of 
 fact, his whole manner of speaking is that of an aged man ; 
 even in more elevated passages it does not go beyond the 
 bounds of prose. 
 
 Zechariah, the author of Zech. i.-viii. (the so-called Proto- 
 Zechariah ; we shall have to speak later of chaps, ix.-xiv., the 
 " Deutero-Zechariah ") is called son of Berechiah, son of Iddo, 
 in i. 1, but at Ezra v. 1, vi. 14, son of Iddo. The latter state- 
 ment can hardly have been meant to bring out prominently 
 that the prophet belonged to the priestly family which was 
 called after Iddo (Neh. xii. 4, 16). It is more likely that 
 "son of Berechiah" Zech. i. 1, was subsequently interpolated : 
 Kuenen conjectures that it was borrowed from an earlier title 
 of chaps. ix.-xi., which assigned them to a Zechariah, son of 
 Berechiah. 
 
 The Prologue (i. 1-6), dated in the eighth month of the 
 year 520, exhorts the present generation not to neglect the 
 call to repentance, like their fathers, who therefore had to 
 experience the wrathful judgment of God. Connected with 
 this are chaps, i. 7 vi. 8, the seven (or, if ii. 5 ff. is taken as 
 an independent section, eight) Visions of the Night, dated 
 from the 24th day of the llth month of 520. Although seen 
 in the night all these diverse images, which are explained to 
 the prophet by an angel, issue in consoling promises relating 
 to the complete restoration of Judah to favour and the humili- 
 ation of the heathen. The appendix, vi. 9-15, also gives a 
 comforting promise concerning the Messianic time. The 
 second main division (chaps, vii., viii.) contains a prophetic 
 decision relating to the fasts which had hitherto been kept. 
 Jahweh does not desire these fast days (which commemorate 
 the taking of Jerusalem and the murder of Gedaliah) : they 
 should rather be turned into joyous festivals in expectation 
 of the blessings of the Messianic time. Although Zechariah/ s 
 language is somewhat more vivid than Haggai's he seldom 
 rises above the forms of prose. 
 
MALACHI. 105 
 
 Tlie last prophet who probably laboured before the great 
 turning-point of the year 444 (see below) was Malachi. This 
 name might be the shortened form of Malachiah (as in the 
 Greek Bible), i.e., " Jahweh' s Messenger." But it has been 
 truly observed that a new-born babe could scarcely be so 
 called. Moreover Malachi is not called a prophet at i. 1, and 
 .the three superscriptions, Zech. ix. 1, xii. ], Mai. i. 1, were 
 obviously shaped by the same hand. Hence it can hardly be 
 doubted that mal'akhi (" my messenger ") i. 1, is only a 
 catchword taken from iii. 1. It is an ancient, but assuredly 
 idle, conjecture that no less a person than Ezra is here 
 concealed. 
 
 The discourse of this unknown prophet rebukes the dis- 
 honouring of Jahweh by sacrifices unworthy of Him. And the 
 curse is first to fall on the priests, who thus forget the high 
 calling and privilege of Levi (ii. 1-9). Severe blame is then 
 addressed to those who married heathen wives and put away 
 *" the wife of their youth," and those who blasphemed Jahweh 
 by doubting His righteousness (ii. 10-17). But Jahweh will 
 send His messenger (according to iii. 28, Elijah) to prepare 
 His way ; for He will soon appear to destroy manifold kinds of 
 sinners amongst the people and to deliver the godly (chap. iii.). 
 
 The idea formerly prevalent that Ezra's activity is presup- 
 posed all through the prophecy has recently been contested,"* 
 with a view of showing that it must be placed earlier than 
 Ezra. No doubt its insistence on the strict observance of the 
 sacrificial precepts (i. 7 if., 13 f., iii. 10) reminds us of the zeal 
 for the law which originated with the oath to obey Ezra's priestly 
 law-book. Yet there were legal precepts before Ezra : at iii. 
 22 attention is expressly called to the " statutes and ordin- 
 ances " which God gave at Horeb, an obvious reference to 
 Deuteronomy, even as the spirit and language of that law- 
 book is elsewhere noticeable in Malachi. But the observances 
 of such ritual laws as were extant had not hitherto been so 
 strongly insisted on. It is difficult to believe that such 
 offences as are rebuked at Mai. i. 7ff. and 13 f. could have 
 * Especially by Stade, Geschichte Israels, ii. 133. 
 
106 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 been committed after the engagement to observe the Priests* 
 Law (444). Such circumstances also as are presupposed at 
 ii. llff. are incomprehensible after the Draconic measures of 
 Ezra (Ezra ix., x. ; about 457 B.C.). The very latest date 
 possible would be that adopted by some recent writers, prior 
 to Nehemiah's second residence (432), seeing that he also had 
 to contend with mixed marriages (Neh. xiii. 4 ff.) and neglect 
 of the tithes (Neh. xiii. 10; cf. Mai. iii. 10). Yet it remains 
 more probable that Malachi is to be ]Alaced earlier than 458. 
 
 The peculiarity of this prophet's language, which, for the 
 rest, is simple prose, like Haggai's and Zechariah's, is its 
 predilection for a kind of dialogue between God and the- 
 people; so at i. 2, 6, 7; ii. 14, 17 ; iii. 7, 8, 13. 
 
 2. THE PRIESTS' CODE AND THE LAW-BOOK OF EZRA. THE 
 CLOSE OF THE PENTATEUCH AND OF THE HISTORICAL. 
 WORK EXTENDING FROM GEN. I. TO 2 KlNGS XXV. 
 
 The programme for the theocracy of the future we might 
 briefly say, for the priestly commonwealth was sketched by 
 Ezekiel. The first attempt to carry out this programme was 
 contained in the original Law of Holiness (see above, p. 100). 
 But we have 110 knowledge as to the Law of Holiness 
 obtaining official recognition in the worship at Jerusalem after 
 the "Return. Something quite different can be shown to have 
 happened : even after the Exile the further development of 
 the Priests' Law was most zealously pursued in the priestly 
 circles which had remained behind in Babylon. We say t( In 
 the priestly circles/' For it will appear that differences are 
 not wanting which point to divergent theories and therefore 
 to diverse hands and circles participating in the work. The 
 priestly history and law-book in the Pentateuch was the 
 product of various priestly schools in the period between 500 
 and 400 B.C., first at Babylon, then at Jerusalem. Apart 
 from the " Law of Holiness/' which was worked up into it,. 
 
CODE AND THE LAW-BOOK OF EZEA. 107 
 
 the following strata can be clearly distinguished : the Priests' 
 Code proper (about 500) ; the " Law-book of Moses " (pub- 
 lished 444), in all probability drawn up by Ezra himself ; and 
 the final redaction, occasioned probably by the blending of 
 the Priests' Law with the older historical work (JED), 
 about 400 B.C. But as regards the spirit which pervades 
 them and the fundamental assumptions from which they start, 
 all the parts bear so homogeneous a stamp that we have 
 contented ourselves in the " Survey " with the common desig- 
 nation P, i.e., Priests' Writing. This homogeneousness may 
 justify us in attempting here to characterize the whole as it 
 now lies before us. 
 
 The Priests' Writing begins, like /and jE/, with a preliminary 
 history of the people. But it gives this in such extremely 
 scanty outlines as to be only comprehensible when we think 
 of the detailed representation in J and JE'as universally known. 
 The Cosmogony (Gen. i.), in which the artistic arrangement 
 of the six days' work and the highly developed idea of God 
 are especially noticeable, is followed in chap. v. by a list of the 
 patriarchs from Adam to Noah, then by an account of the- 
 Deluge in a quite different chronological framework from 
 the Jahwist's, then by the so-called covenant with Noah 
 (chap. ix.). This was succeeded by a Table of the Nations, 
 of which only part is contained in chap, x., a list of the 
 patriarchs from Shem to Abraham (chap, xi.), and quite short 
 notices on the separation of Abraham from Lot and the birth 
 of Ishmael. Only the Covenant of Circumcision with 
 Abraham (chap, xvii.) and the purchase of the burying-place 
 at Hebron (chap, xxiii.) are more fully treated ; the death of 
 Abraham, the sending of Jacob to Mesopotamia and his 
 return, more briefly ; and, with extreme brevity, Esau's sepa- 
 ration from Jacob, Jacob's going down into Egypt, as well 
 as his death, and his burial in the cave at Hebron. In this 
 series of notices gaps can no doubt be perceived; before 
 xxv. 26b the birth of Jacob and Esau, after xxviii. 7 something 
 or other about Jacob's sojourn with Laban, must have been 
 mentioned. In like manner Joseph must have been spoken 
 
 
108 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PEEIOD. 
 
 of somewhere before xlvi. 6. But all these gaps were doubtless 
 filled up with such scanty notices that the final redactor who in 
 other places considered the Priestly Writing so carefully could 
 -dispense with them. There is, however, no more instructive 
 example of the manner in which P takes for granted the 
 contents of JE, and therefore simply recapitulates in the 
 briefest form, than Gen. xix. 29. This one verse reproduces 
 almost the entire contents of Gen. xviii. and xix. 
 
 In Exodus also the preliminary history down to the legisla- 
 tion at Sinai is somewhat scantily treated. But at chap. xxv. 
 the great consecutive codes of law begin which extend almost 
 uninterruptedly to Num. x. 28 (but see Exod. xxxii.-xxxiv.). 
 After this, too, we meet with detailed laws and narratives 
 from the same source, part of them closely interwoven with JE. 
 An account of the death of Joshua in all probability formed 
 its conclusion in the Book of Joshua (after long statements 
 about the apportionment of the Holy Land amongst the several 
 tribes and the boundaries of these) ; for Joshua xxiv. 29b, 
 can scarcely be from any other source than P. 
 
 If we now ask for the signs which justify the ascription 
 of whole chapters or even single verses and parts of verses to 
 the Priestly Writing, a whole series of these can be mentioned 
 (besides the avoiding of the divine name Jahweh down to 
 Exod. vi. 2) part of which are so characteristic and unmis- 
 takable that almost perfect unanimity has gradually been reached 
 in this particular stratum of the Pentateuch and Joshua. 
 One of the most notable signs is the stylr, with its unfailing 
 breadth, its fondness for exhaustive details and "juristic 
 formulating " (cf. Gen. i. 11 ff., 16 ff., xxvi. and xxviii.) and 
 even for pure schematism (cf. Gen. v. 11, x. if ., Exod. xxxviii. 
 21 ff., Num. i. ii. xxvi. xxviii. xxix. xxxi. 26 ff., but, above 
 all, chap. vii. 12 ff., where six verses are twelve times repeated). 
 Corresponding to the preference for precise measures and 
 numbers is the endeavour to provide the most precise chrono- 
 logical framework possible. Whilst the Jahwist contents 
 himself with such general statements as Gen. xviii. 11, 
 P calculates most particularly how old Abraham was at 
 
the Inn 
 
 THE PEIESTS' CODE AND THE LAW-BOOK OF EZEA. 100 
 
 the Immigration (xii. 4b), at the birth of Ishmael (xvi. 16), at 
 the institution of circumcision (xvii. 1, 24), at the birth of 
 Isaac (xxi. 5), and at his death (xxv. 7). Elsewhere, too, 
 the most precise chronological data all belong to P. 
 
 More important than these external features is the sharply 
 marked religious standpoint of the Priests' Writing. We have 
 already spoken of the elevated idea of God which meets 
 us at the very outset in the cosmogony : " He said, Let there 
 be light : and there was light." As the creative omnipotence 
 of God here requires neither preparation nor medium so 
 elsewhere His revelations are made simply by the word. 
 The Jahwist does not shrink from remarkably human repre- 
 sentations of God (Gen. iii. 8 ff., xviii. 1 ff., xxxii. 24 ff., &c.) : 
 but in the Priests' Writing the appearance of God on extra- 
 ordinary occasions is only indicated as it were from afar 
 (Gen. xvii. 22, xxxv. 9, 13). At Sinai the " Glory of Jahweh" 
 (i.e., His Revealing Appearance, which, however, only displays 
 as it were a part or reflection of His complete personality) 
 is veiled in a cloud (cf. Exod. xvi. 10, and especially Num. ix, 
 15ff.). All closer description is carefully avoided, and only 
 the comparison of Jahweh's glory with consuming fire is- 
 ventured on (Exod. xxiv. 17). Compare with this JS's account,, 
 xxiv. 9 ff., of Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu and the seventy 
 elders beholding the God of Israel ! 
 
 The extent to which the figures of the primaeval history 
 were already surrounded, in the view of the Priests' Writing, 
 with a kind of saintly aureole is seen from the obviously 
 intentional omission of all the traits which seemed to lower 
 the dignity of the patriarchs. Jacob does not flee before 
 the well-deserved vengeance of Esau, but is despatched 
 to Mesopotamia by Isaac in perfect peace (Gen. xxviii. 1 ff.). 
 Thus his fraud (chap, xxvii.) is not presupposed, and the 
 brothers, therefore, dwell peaceably together after Jacob's 
 return, and separate in friendly fashion, merely because their 
 stock of cattle is so great (xxxvi. 6 ff,). 
 
 As to the far weightiest portion of the Priests' Writing^ 
 the laws, everything holds good which we have remarked 
 
 
110 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 -above concerning the character of the Law of Holiness as the 
 first comprehensive realization of Ezekiel's visions. Ezekiel's 
 fundamental ideas are now carried out to their farthest con- 
 sequences, and the legislation is expanded accordingly. It thus 
 became possible for theories to be propounded just for the 
 sake of consistency which simply could not be carried out (e.g., 
 the celebration of the so-called Year of Jubilee, Lev. xxv.), so 
 that, as Jewish tradition admits, the attempt was never made. 
 The fundamental ideas themselves, which regulate every 
 detail of the cultus and of civil life, are exceedingly simple. 
 Strictly speaking, the entire ceremonial law aims at only one 
 thing, that the citizen of the Divine commonwealth should 
 testify by many actions his recognition of Jahweh as the Lord 
 of all space, all time, all property, and all life. Hence all these 
 should be hallowed to Him wholly and for ever, i.e., appro- 
 priated to His sole use as His inviolable property. This being 
 impossible, God contents Himself with the selection of a portion 
 of space, time, &c., for absolute hallowing. Thus the theory 
 is that all the land is Jahweh's property, but only one place, 
 the tent of revelation with the holy ark, is absolutely holy, 
 and, therefore, alone can serve as the spot where God is 
 to be worshipped. This assumption is so seriously made that 
 no kind of cultus seems conceivable in the whole period prior 
 to the erection of the tent of revelation and the altar of burnt 
 offering. The Priests' Writing knows of no altars or sacri- 
 fices in the patriarchal age, and, therefore, of no distinction 
 between clean, i.e., sacrificial, and unclean animals in Noah's 
 ark (Gen. vii. 14 ff. ; the Jahwist, vii. 2, is different). On the 
 other hand, when the law is given at Sinai, the first thing for 
 which provision is made (Exod. xxv. 8 ff.) is the construction 
 of the holy place because it is the indispensable preliminary 
 to the worship. We have already laid stress on the fact that 
 God's abode in this sanctuary was not conceived of as the 
 indwelling of His entire personality. But He has determined 
 to reveal Himself henceforward, and to receive the sacrifices 
 and offerings of Israel only at this place (which is naturally 
 to be considered the prefiguration of the temple). The so-called 
 
Ill 
 
 "Kapporeth, the cover of the holy ark in the Holy of Holies, 
 forms the most sacred centre (Exocl. xxv. 22) . Connected with 
 it are the holy place and the court, gradually diminishing 
 in their degrees of holiness. The Holy of Holies is to be entered 
 by none but the high priest (at least so it seems according 
 to Lev. xvi. ; a somewhat freer theory is found at Num. xviii. 7), 
 and that only on the great Day of Atonement ; the holy place 
 only by the priests (Num. iv. 5, xv. 20, xviii. 3), not the 
 Levites. 
 
 The chief point in the theory of the holy time seems to be 
 that rest days are to be set apart on which the people are not 
 to encroach for their own advantage on the time hallowed to 
 Jahweh. This applies to the weekly festival, the Sabbath, as 
 well as the other feast days. And, indeed, the holier the day 
 the more strictly is all work forbidden ; on ordinary feast days 
 nothing but their daily work (Lev. xxiii, 7 f ., 21, 24, &c.), on the 
 Sabbath and on the great Day of Atonement, work of every 
 kind (verses 3, 30) . In all this two things are noteworthy j 
 the increased number of feasts and the tracing almost all of 
 them to religious (theocratic) motives. The older laws are 
 only aware of the duty of celebrating a feast to Jahweh three 
 times a year (Exod. xxiii. 14, xxxiv. 23, Deut. xvi.), and these 
 three are Nature Festivals, above all, Harvest Festivals. The 
 seven days' Feast of Unleavened Bread in the month of Ears 
 originally was regarded as the beginning of the harvest, 
 according to Deut. xvi. 9, (cf. also Lev. xxiii. 10); the first 
 day of the seven is the Passover, originally the Feast of the 
 Presentation of the firstlings of cattle. The Feast of Weeks 
 celebrates the prosperous conclusion of the corn-harvest ; the 
 Autumnal Feast (anciently " The Feast," absolutely), that of 
 fruit and wine. In the Priests' Law (Lev. xxiii., Num. xxviii. 
 29) the Passover precedes the seven days of Unleavened Bread 
 as an independent feast, and, together with them, is regarded 
 as commemorating nothing but the Divine protection 
 experienced by the people when they went out of Egypt. 
 The autumn festival also lasts eight days, and is devoted to 
 the memory of the dwelling in booths during the journey 
 
 
112 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 through the Desert. The only one which has no theocratic 
 foundation in the Old Testament is the Feast of Weeks 
 (Pentecost). There are the following new feasts : the Day of 
 Memorial-Blowing on the first of the seventh month, and the- 
 great Day of Atonement on the tenth of the same month. 
 The old feasts, like these new ones, are now precisely dated 
 (Passover on the 14th of the first month ; Tabernacles, 
 from the 15th to the 22nd of the seventh month), whereas in 
 earlier times each was proclaimed according to the state of 
 the harvest. On seven of these feast-days (Lev. xxiii. 3 als<> 
 prescribes it for all Sabbaths) there was to be a " holy 
 assembly " of the whole people at the sanctuary a require- 
 ment which could only be addressed to those who, like the 
 post-exilic Jewish community, dwelt near the one sanctuary. 
 Finally, the finishing touches given to the Sabbath celebra- 
 tion in Lev. xxv. are of special interest. Exod. xxi. 2 if., is 1 , 
 also acquainted with the freeing of Hebrew slaves at the end 
 of six years' service, and xxiii. 11 with the abandonment every 
 seven years (consequently not of all fields at the same time) 
 of the products of the arable land to the poor and the beasts. 
 Deut. xv. commanded that every seventh year should be 
 celebrated as a year of release for Hebrew slaves and poor 
 debtors. In the Priests' Writing an altogether new view- 
 point emerges ; the Sabbatic year is first and foremost 
 a Sabbath, a rest time which the land itself celebrates 
 to Jahweh. The fields must not be sown, the vine not 
 pruned, the spontaneous growth not reaped. The ultimate 
 consequence of the Sabbatic idea is the celebration of the year 
 of Jobel or Jubilee (Lev. xxv. 8ff.), every fiftieth year, i.e., 
 at the expiration of seven weeks of Sabbatic years. The 
 Jubilee year is also a rest for the ground and a fixed point, 
 when every kind of alienated property returns to the original 
 possessor. The motive for this peculiar ordinance is clearly 
 expressed at v. 23. No one is a real owner. All land is 
 simply held in fief from Jahweh ; the restoration to the mr,n 
 to whom it was first assigned is a recognition of Jahweh'& 
 suzerainty. 
 

 THE PRIESTS' CODE AND THE LAW-BOOK OF EZRA. 113 
 
 This brings us to the third of those fundamental principles 
 of the Priests' Writing. Jahweh is the real Lord of all the 
 property which Israel could boast of. A very large part of 
 the precepts relating to sacrifices is concerned with the 
 recognition of this fact. The older laws also know of gifts of 
 firstlings, and presentations of sacrifices to Jahweh. But 
 .some of these gifts are very trivial (Deut. xviii. 3, xxvi. 2) ; 
 and in part to be consumed by the offerer and his family at the 
 sanctuary (as the so-called tenths, Deut. xiv. 22 ff., and the 
 firstlings of cattle, xv. 19 ff.). The Priests' Code, on the other 
 hand, prescribes that the breast and the right shoulder of all 
 peace offerings, the whole of the flesh of all sin and trespass 
 offerings, all the firstlings of cattle, and the first fruits of 
 wheat, wine, oil, and dough, are to be given to the priests, 
 besides which the Levites are to have the tenth of all fruits of 
 the ground and of trees, and, according to Lev. xxvii. 32, 
 even of the cattle. Finally, the principle that a portion of 
 all property must be set aside for Jahweh is expanded into 
 the theory that forty-eight cities, with the surrounding 
 pastures, are to be assigned to the priests and Levites 
 ^(Num. xxxv., Joshua xxi.) in opposition to the older 
 principle maintained by P himself at Num. xviii. 20, xxvi. 62. 
 
 At this point we may mention another far-reaching 
 difference between the older custom and that of the Priests' 
 Law as regards the sacrifices and offerings to Jahweh. 
 According to the older idea sacrifice was the presentation to 
 the Deifcy of enjoyable food. Nothing therefore could be 
 offered except what serves for human nourishment (the only 
 additional condition being that the gift must be the actual 
 property of the offerer). Consequently the gladsome meal in 
 .praise and honour of the Deity, the <c eating and drinking 
 before the face of God/' i.e., at the sanctuary, was the principal 
 thing. But in the Priests' Writing the renunciation of one's 
 property comes into the foreground. The old sacrificial 
 meals were regarded by it as offerings of secondary rank; 
 the burnt offerings appear far weightier and more efficacious, 
 .and the sin and trespass offerings more so still. The flesh 
 
 8 
 
114 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 of the latter is "most holy" and can be eaten by none but 
 the priests in a holy place. Perhaps the precise discrimina- 
 tion of these varieties of sacrifices is derived from an earlier 
 period : but we have no reliable proof of their mention before 
 the Exile. The great weight laid upon them is a striking 
 evidence of the gloomy nature of the post-exilic cultus, of its 
 pervasion with a deep penitence and desire for propitiation. 
 The importance ascribed to an orderly service, carried out 
 with painful observance of the ritual, comes out in another 
 circumstance. The pre-exilic time was familiar with daily 
 sacrifices offered by the king (2 Kings xvi. 15), but it is not 
 till Ezekiel (xlv. 17, 22, &c.), that the daily and festival 
 sacrifices are also offered on behalf of the community. In the 
 Priests' Law (cf. the table of sacrifices, Num. xxviii. 29) the 
 official sacrifices, i.e., those offered by the priests in the name 
 of the community, are so multiplied that 113 young bullocks,. 
 1086 lambs, 36 rams, and 29 goats, are required yearly, each 
 with its accompaniment of a fixed measure of meal and drink 
 offering. 
 
 All persons, as well as space, time, and property are conse- 
 crated to Jahweh. This fourth fundamental thought finds 
 expression partly in the consecration of the first-born, accord- 
 ing to ancient tradition, partly in the imposition of the poll-tax 
 (represented at Exod. xxx. 13 ff. as a payment by which those 
 who had become forfeited to Jahweh might be redeemed), 
 finally in the directions concerning the service of the priests 
 and Levites. In pre-exilic times priestly functions were not 
 confined to a distinct class. Every head of a household could 
 and was accustomed to sacrifice ; we are unhesitatingly told 
 that David and Solomon (2 Sam. vi. 18, I Kings viii. 55) even 
 blessed the people. The professional priest at the sanctuaries 
 was chiefly needed to obtain oracles by means of the holy lot. 
 But even at the greatest sanctuaries, such as Jerusalem, there 
 was no tf high priest " such as the Priests' Writing requires, 
 but only a chief priest (two, under David and Solomon). He 
 was one of the king's superior officials, and must strictly carry 
 out his orders (2 Kings xvi. 10 ff.) : like any other official he 
 
THE PKIESTS' CODE AND THE LAW-BOOK OP EZRA. 115 
 
 can be dismissed (I Kings ii. 26). We learn too from such 
 passages as Judges xvii. 5, 2 Sam. viii. 18, xx. 26, that the 
 priesthood was in no way limited to those who were descended 
 from Levi, although according to Judges xvii. 13, a Levite 
 was preferred to any other priest. We have already spoken, 
 on p. 90 of the manner in which the legitimate priesthood 
 was afterwards restricted by Deuteronomy to Jerusalem, and 
 the foundation laid by Ezek. xliv. for the distinction between 
 priests (sons of Zadok) and Levites (formerly priests of: the 
 high places). In the Priests' Writing this distinction is 
 thoroughly carried out and incorporated into a well-devised 
 system, in which post-exilic circumstances are as a matter of 
 course everywhere implied. The following are the main 
 features of this system. 
 
 Theoretically all Israel ought to perform priestly service. 
 To say nothing, however, of other conditions, the requisite 
 Levitical purity could not be maintained by all, and Jahweh 
 therefore prescribed a substitute in the form of the " Sons of 
 Aaron/' i.e., the priesthood hereditary in certain definite 
 families. The tracing all these back to Aaron, or to his sons 
 Eleazar and Ithamar, was evidently intended to enlarge the 
 circle of the " Sons of Zadok." Reasons which we cannot 
 ascertain must have made the recognition of some non- 
 Zadokites inevitable. As the Zadokites were derived from 
 Eleazar so were these others from Ithamar. If exacting 
 demands were made on the ordinary priests with regard to 
 their Levitical purity,, much more were they on their head, 
 the high priest (also a hereditary official). In his person the 
 priestly, and at the same time kingly, people finds its most 
 peculiar and completest embodiment. Especially is this so 
 in the exuberant symbolism of his official dress (Exod. xxviii. 
 2 ff.). The blue and red purple of which his robe is made, and 
 the golden diadem on his mitre, points to the royal dignity; 
 the priestly character of the people is shown by the inscription 
 on the diadem (Holiness to Jahweh) and the names of the 
 twelve tribes engraved in precious stones and worn on the 
 shoulder-pieces and the breastplate. Were it necessary 
 
 8 * 
 
116 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PEEIOD. 
 
 Num. xxxv. 25 would prove that all this declares the higl 
 priest to be the sovereign head of the priestly cornmonwealtl 
 in a manner which no one dreamed of for a royal official before 
 the Exile, which never occurred even to Ezekiel. The rights 
 of the avenger of blood expired at the death of the high priest. 
 That is to say, a definite period of civil life terminates with 
 him, as elsewhere with the death of the prince. 
 
 The official standing of the Levites, like that of the priests, 
 flows from a divine arrangement made once for all. The only 
 error in the still prevalent view is that it takes the Levites to 
 be priests of a lower rank, because they (like Moses and 
 Aaron) were of the tribe of Levi, and thus makes them to be 
 the broad basis from which the priesthood proper rises with 
 the high priest at the summit. But this is not the meaning of 
 the Priests' Code. According to it they are a gift (Num. iii. 
 6, viii. 16 ff. &c.) presented by the people to the priests to wait 
 upon them : hence, when they are consecrated they are to be 
 presented, according to Num. viii. 9 if., quite in the fashion of 
 a so-called "wave-offering " to Jahweh (and to the priests in 
 His stead) . They, therefore, perform all the inferior duties at 
 the sanctuary which should properly be done by the people 
 itself, or rather by the first-born. This idea, that every 
 individual Levite performs his service as representing one of 
 the first-born, finds striking expression at Num. iii. 41 ff. 
 There are only 22,000 Levites to represent 22,273 first-born. 
 Two hundred and seventy-three therefore must be specially 
 " redeemed/' Consecration qualifies the Levites, not to 
 officiate in the sanctuary, but to surround it, and thus, as 
 a sort of protecting wall, to secure the profane multitude 
 against the destroying holiness of Jahweh (Num. i. 53, &c.). 
 
 If we now collect from all this the sum of what is to be said 
 concerning the fundamental ideas of the Priests' Writing and 
 their execution it will, without contradiction, be briefly as 
 follows. The idea that the Priests' Code was extant before 
 the Exile could only be maintained on the assumption that no 
 man knew of it, not even the spiritual leaders of the people, 
 such as the priests Jeremiah and Ezekiel. This would be an 
 
CODE AND THE LAW-BOOK OP EZRA. 117 
 
 enormous assumption ; not less so is the other, that so deep 
 and refined a symbolism, so exhaustive a carrying out of fun- 
 damental religious ideas had begun to be codified and then 
 remained totally unregarded. Pray what could induce the 
 sons of Zadok at Jerusalem not to introduce this law instead of 
 the simple prophetic law in Deuteronomy ? And what could 
 move Ezekiel carefully to lay a new foundation when the whole 
 building was there in most desirable form and extent ? On 
 the other hand everything appears in the best order and self- 
 evident when we think of the codifications as arising in this 
 order : Deuteronomy, Ezek. xl.-xlviii., Law of Holiness, 
 Priests' Code. The latter, though, as we shall see below, not 
 in its present form, obtained official validity through Ezra, and 
 afterwards continued to be the standard of ritual and life and 
 of the entire view of history amongst the Jews. In the 
 gradually written expositions of Israel's laws of life it was the 
 last word. 
 
 Only one possible question remains, and that refers to 
 a leading point, the position of the Levites. According to 
 Ezekiel xliv. 10 ff. the sentence which reduced the former 
 priests of the high places to the inferior services of the 
 sanctuary was a deserved punishment: according to the 
 Priests' Code the service of the Levites, by virtue of a Divine 
 appointment, is an honourable office of which they may be 
 proud. How can these two views be reconciled ? The history 
 of the post-exilic period furnishes the answer. The non- 
 Zadokites were so little inclined to take up the role assigned 
 them by Ezekiel that, e.g., not a single Levite was found at 
 first amongst those who returned with Ezra in 458, and thirty- 
 eight were only induced to accompany him by the special 
 measures which he took (viii. 15 ff.). Again, in the narrative 
 of the revolt of the Korahites, now blended in Num. xvi. with 
 an older account of a political revolt of the Reubenites, we 
 have a clear reflection of the vehement struggles (subsequently 
 buried in deep silence) occasioned by the dislike the non- 
 Zadokites felt to the manner in which they were employed 
 in religious services. From this it is self-evident that the 
 
 
118 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 priestly circles were at least compelled to find another groum 
 for the position of the Levites. 
 
 The extent of the original Priests' Code, drawn up in Babylon 
 somewhere about 500, is uncertain. But it has at all events been 
 shown to be very probable that it contained a law of worship 
 in the shape of a history of the holy ordinances the prelimin- 
 ary history also being included. The more detailed theories, 
 such as the so-called Law of Sacrifice, Lev. i.-vii. (in which 
 several strata are clearly distinguishable), to say nothing of 
 Num. xxxv. and Joshua xxi., may therefore belong to a more 
 and a most recent stratum. 
 
 The delay until 444 in introducing the Priests'Lawis probably 
 to be explained simply by the above-mentioned difficulty of 
 the Levite question. It is extremely astonishing that Ezra, 
 who, according to Ezra vii. 14, brought the law of God 
 (i.e., the form published in 444) with him from Bablyon in 
 458, delayed publishing it for fourteen years. Obviously the fit 
 time did not seem to have come till Nehemiah was installed as 
 Governor. In the highly interesting authentic account of the 
 introduction of the new law, Neh. viii.-x., two things are 
 clearly presupposed. First (viii. 1), that the law-book had 
 hitherto been kept by Ezra alone, and therefore had been 
 brought by him from Babylon. In fact, in the commendatory 
 letter which Artaxerxes I. gave to Ezra, the latter is plainly 
 described as "the scribe/' i.e., the author of the Law of the 
 God of Heaven. Secondly, that the contents were till then 
 entirely unknown to the people. Official heralds must there- 
 fore summon the people to observe the Feast of Tabernacles 
 in the new fashion (viii. 14 ff.). From this passage, with its 
 appeal to Lev. xxiii. 40, we also learn that Ezra's law-book 
 contained portions of the Law of Holiness, On the other 
 hand, it clearly cannot have been identical with the whole of 
 our present Priest's Writing, because Ezra could not in one 
 breath have given the heterogeneous directions which we find 
 in the various strata of the Priests' Code (cf., e.g., Num. iv. 3 
 with viii. 24; Exod. xxix. 7, Lev. viii. 12, xxi. 10, in which 
 passages Aaron alone is anointed, with Exod. xxviii. 41 and 
 
'CLOSE OF THE PENTATEUCH AND OP THE HISTORICAL WORK. 119 
 
 Num. iii. 3 : at Ezra ix. 4 it seems to be assumed that in the 
 evening only a meal-offering is to be brought, whereas at 
 Exod. xxix. 41, &c., a lamb is required). This shows that the 
 earlier view of Ezra's law-book as identical with the whole of 
 our Pentateuch is utterly untenable. On the other hand, it is 
 easy to understand that, when a priestly law-book in Ezekiel's 
 spirit had been observed for some decades, the work would 
 be undertaken of uniting everything extant into one great 
 corpus. But in doing this they were not content to blend 
 Ezra's law-book with JED (see above, p. 94). All the codes 
 were now adopted which had arisen in the priestly circles 
 before and after Ezra,* partly as pendants to previously 
 adopted sections (e.g., Exod. xxxv.-xl. added to Exod. xxv.- 
 xxxi.), partly as expansions of the fundamental thoughts. On the 
 whole the redactor treated the older corpus (JED) with great 
 consideration. He allowed its phraseology to stand even 
 where it contradicted the historical account and the theories 
 of the Priests' Writing. Thenceforward it was left to the 
 Scribes to get rid of the difficulties which could not but arise 
 from the blending of such manifold parts, all regarded as 
 canonical. Elsewhere (e.g., in the Deluge History, Gen. vi. ff.) 
 the offence was removed by an apt interweaving of the various 
 accounts. It is but -seldom that the redactor seems to have 
 resorted to the extreme measure, the omission of divergent 
 accounts. This was certainly the case at Exod. xxxiii. 6, where 
 JWs account of the making of the Tent of Eevelation could 
 not possibly be retained in the midst of the two great sections 
 of the Priests' Writing which were devoted to the same 
 subject. But we have no means of knowing how the corpus, 
 finally completed probably before the close of the fifth 
 century was proclaimed canonical and binding in all parts. 
 One thing only is beyond doubt : the canonization extended 
 at first to the Pentateuch alone, excluding the Book of Joshua, 
 although in this book also the blending of P with JED must 
 
 * The remarkable chapter, Gen. xiv., which seems to have been taken from 
 a Midrash on the Patriarchal History, is also probably one of the additions due 
 to the final redactor. 
 
120 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 have been contemporaneous with the final redaction of th< 
 Five Books of Moses. For the Samaritans recognize the 
 Pentateuch alone as a sacred book; hence, at the time when 
 they received this from the Jews, the Book of Joshua must 
 already have been reckoned in the second division of the 
 sacred books. But this distinction between Law and Prophets 
 stands in connection with the final redaction of the whole 
 corpus, Gen. 2 Kings xxv.* It has left untouched the 
 phraseology of the Deuteronomistic redaction (see above, p. 94f .) 
 almost everywhere in the historical books, from Joshua L 
 downwards, just as in the Pentateuch. The redactor (whom 
 we designate R in Joshua, Judges, and the Books of Samuel) 
 contented himself generally with inserting single verses. So 
 at Judges iii. 1-3, vi. 7 ff. ; seldom in the Books of Samuel 
 (but cf. the thoroughly characteristic examples 1 Sam. vi. 15, 
 2 Sam. xv. 24). Some of these additions were religious 
 verdicts, some chronological data or explanatory observations, 
 sometimes they reconcile the contradictions between the 
 various strata. Yet independent additions are not quite 
 lacking, which must have been borrowed from popular 
 tradition (thus probably at 1 Sam. xix. 18 ff.) or from later, 
 edifying writings. 1 Sam. xvi. belongs to the examples of 
 the latter class, and, especially, that recasting of an older 
 model in the spirit of the Priests' Writing which is found in 
 Judges xx. f. The additions made by the final redactor or 
 redactors in the Books of Kings are designated Z in the 
 " Survey." In such instances as 1 K. viii. 4b, they are unmis- 
 takable, and not less so in sections like 1 K. xii. 21 ff., and 33 if. 
 (cf. 2 K. xxiii. 16 ff.), or 2 K. i. 9 ff., which bear throughout 
 the stamp of the Midrash (see below, on the Chronicles). 
 
 * As Meyer, Die EntsteMiny dest Jndenth. (Halle, 189G),p.216ff., especially has 
 shown, we are not to conceive of the process as one in which the Book of Joshua, 
 was separated from a previously existing Hexateuch, an independent literary 
 work. The separation was effected by means of a deep cleft in the historical 
 united work (from Gen. 2 Kings xxv.) after the account of the death of Moses. 
 
 
THE WORK OF THE CHRONICLER. 121 
 
 3. THE WORK OF THE CHRONICLER (EZRA, NEHEMIAH, 
 CHRONICLES). 
 
 The great work which arose from the efforts we have been 
 describing set forth the course of history from the beginning 
 of the world to the release of Jehoiachin (561 B.C.). Hence 
 a work was still needed to tell of the re-establishment of 
 the Jewish Commonwealth, and especially of the reforms 
 made by Ezra and Nehemiah on the basis of the priestly law- 
 book. In the course of the fifth century this need was met 
 by various monographs, which have been partially preserved 
 for us in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. In their present 
 form, however, these latter came from the hand of the 
 Chronicler, and originally formed one whole with the two 
 " Books of Chronicles " (literally, " of the events of the day," 
 or "annals"). Indeed the Chronicler most probably edited 
 first the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and afterwards sub- 
 jected the older history to a revision. A work thus arose 
 which described continuously the whole history from Adam 
 to Nehemiah's second residence in Jerusalem, 432. This 
 sequence, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, is supported by the 
 fact that the close of the Chronicles, which breaks off in the 
 middle of a sentence, is resumed and completed in the opening 
 of the Book of Ezra. Probably the explanation of the present 
 arrangement is that Ezra and Nehemiah (in whose case alone 
 it was at first necessary) had already been received into the 
 third part of the Canon when it was resolved to grant the 
 Chronicler himself a place there. 
 
 We shall have to discuss more fully below the spirit in 
 which the Chronicler edited the available sources, or in some 
 cases himself wrote history. Let us first turn to the mono- 
 graphs on which he has drawn in the Books of Ezra and 
 Nehemiah.'* Leaving aside several isolated documents, these 
 
 * After the Chronicles had been separated from them Ezra and Nehemiah 
 were still counted as one book by the Jews (as by Joxeplms c. Apion I. viii., and 
 in the Talmud) : Origen and the Latin Bible called them Ezra I. and II. On 
 
122 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 consist of an Aramaic source from the middle of the fiftl 
 .century (Qa in Ezra iv.-vi.), and of the personal Memoirs of 
 Ezra and Nehemiah (E and N). 
 
 As to all these sources, it must be remarked that the 
 Chronicler (respecting his own production, see below) evidently 
 re-cast them, instead of always reproducing their phraseology, 
 so that we have to distinguish in the t{ Survey" between, 
 Q, Qa, E, N, and q, qa, c, n. Thus at the outset, Ezra i. 2 ff. 
 the phraseology of the edict of Cyrus, compared with the 
 form in vi. 3 if., is open to grave suspicion. This is also 
 true of certain terms in the letters of Tattenai, Darius and 
 Artaxerxes I., chap. v. 7 if., vi. 7 ff., vii. 12 ff. ; but we 
 _gladly admit that most of the suspicions against these have 
 been convincingly removed by E. Meyer ("Die Entstehung 
 des Judenthums," p. 41 ff.). According to Neh. vii. 5, the 
 .authentic list of those who returned with Zerubbabel to 
 Joshua comes from the Memoirs of Nehemiah. It is evident 
 that the Chronicler borrowed it from that source (or, still 
 more probably, from a historical work in which Neh. vii. if. 
 had been adopted), because Neh. vii. 73b, a half verse which 
 really forms the beginning of chap, viii., is the continuation 
 of Ezra iii. 1. The Aramaic source in Ezra iv. 8 vi. 18, and 
 vii. 12-26, shows itself well informed; but the Chronicler has 
 placed iv. 6-23 too early. For v. 6 refers to an event in the 
 time of Xerxes (485-465 B.C.), and v. 7 ff. to the prevention 
 by force (cf. v. 23 !) of the fortification of Jerusalem with walls 
 under Artaxerxes I. (about 445, since Nehemiah, according 
 to Neh. i. 1, heard of it in the ninth month of that year). 
 Not till v. 24 is the thread of v. 5 resumed. 
 
 The first part of the Book of Ezra is occupied with the 
 events of 538-516. But chaps, vii.-xii. relate the home-coming 
 of Ezra and a second band of exiles in the year 458, Ezra's 
 own Memoirs being almost exclusively used. These Memoirs 
 
 the other hand, the Greek Bible reckons as Ezra I. an apocryphal Greek book 
 {counted as Ezra III. in the Latin Bible) which originated in the last century 
 "before Christ. The so-called Fourth Book of Ezra is an apocryphon, probably 
 irom the time of Domitian, and is preserved almost exclusively in translations. 
 
THE WORK OP THE CHRONICLER. 123 
 
 show themselves an excellent source, especially where their 
 phraseology has been adhered to (Ezra vii. 27-34, chap, ix.) ; 
 but some of the sources (especially Ezra x. and Neh. viii.-x.) 
 which have passed through the hand of the Chronicler or his 
 authority are also of great weight. The same is true of all 
 parts of the Memoirs of Nehemiah, cupbearer to Artaxerxes I., 
 who came to Jerusalem in 445 as the king's vicegerent, and by 
 swiftly rebuilding its walls secured the sorely imperilled city 
 against further assaults from its hostile neighbours. This 
 " Narrative of Nehemiah, son of Hachaliah," dealing in 
 Neh. i. 1 vii. 5, xi. 1, 2, xii. 311, 37-40 with his first 
 residence (445-433), and in xiii. 4-31 with the second (432), 
 lies before us in its original phraseology, and strongly 
 fascinates us by its unpretentious, trustworthy description of 
 events, and its manifestation of an energetic and, at the same 
 time, truthful and pious personality. From the same source, 
 no doubt, came xi. 4 ff., a list belonging to the time of 
 Zerubbabel, recognized already by Ewald as the original 
 continuation of vii. 73 b. Oil the other hand, the authentic 
 list in chap. xii. must have been mainly derived from the 
 "Book of Annals/' mentioned in v. 23, a chronicle which 
 came down to Johanan, son (according to v. 22, grandson) 
 of Eliashib, i.e., to about the beginning of the fourth century.* 
 Whether the Chronicler (i.e., the redactor of our Books of Ezra 
 and Nehemiah) took the narrative of Ezra in Neh. viii.-x. 
 from this source, or got his extracts as a whole from the 
 Memoirs of Ezra and Nehemiah, must remain undecided. 
 
 If the Chronicler, up to this point, and especially in the 
 Book of Nehemiah, limited himself to isolated additions or 
 unessential alterations, he comes oufc in Chronicles t itself in 
 
 * It will, of course, be different if we think of v. 11 and 22 as taken from the 
 same Chronicles. In that case the mention of Jaddua, the high priest, and 
 "Darius the Persian" (i.e., Darius III.) will compel us, with Meyer (Entstehung 
 des Judenthums, p. 203 ff.), to come down to the time of Alexander the Great, 
 and place the Biblical Chronicles considerably later. 
 
 t Luther adopted this name from Jerome (Chronicon totius historiae divinae). 
 In the Greek Bible the work (for Chronicles originally formed only one book) 
 is called Paraleipomena, i.e., Things Passed Over: the Jews call it "Annals." 
 
124 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 quite another sense as author. In the first part (1 i.-ix.) 
 the history to David's time is given simply in the form of 
 genealogies. The second part (1 x.-xxx.) treats of the history 
 of David; the third (2 i.-ix.) of the history of Solomon; the 
 fourth, finally (2 x.-xxxvi. 21), of the history of Judah, from 
 the division of the Kingdom to the Babylonian Exile. On 
 the conclusion (xxxvi. 22 ff., which is not completed till 
 Ezra i. 3), cf. above, p. 121. 
 
 The Chronicles do not really aim at giving a history of 
 Israel, but only of the Davidic dynasty, with special reference- 
 to the temple service. Their standpoint is that of the strictest 
 Levitism, in a form which could not have been developed till 
 the Priests' Law had long held sway. It is certain that the 
 author was a Levite, and, indeed, a temple-singer or musician, 
 because of the striking prominence which he gives to these. 
 The way in which the Chronicler remodels the older history 
 in the spirit of Levitism confronts us most characteristically 
 in the passages where we can accurately check his description,. 
 by reference to the original in the Books of Samuel or Kings,, 
 of which he made use. We are chiefly struck there by the- 
 mechanical way in which the fundamental principle is carried 
 out : every transgression brings on speedy punishment, and 
 every calamity is a punishment for transgression. Cf. 1 x. 18 f . y 
 2 xii, 1 f., xvi. 12 (in connection with v. 7 ff.) ; xix. 2 ff. (as. 
 a judgment on xviii. 2 ff.) ; xx. 35 ff. (in direct contradiction 
 with 1 Kings xxii. 49 f .) ; xxiv. 2 (against 2 Kings xii. 3),. 
 and xxiv. 17 ff., as the cause of the calamity described in 23 ff.;. 
 moreover, xxv. 14ff., 21; xxvi. 10 fi'.; xxxiii. 11 ff. (where 
 Manasseh's sins are duly punished, but at the same time, the- 
 continuance of his reign for fifty-five years is supposed to be- 
 explained by his conversion). According to xxxv. 2 1 ft'., Josiah 
 fell because he did not obey God's word, which had come to- 
 him through Pharaoh Necho. 
 
 Conversely, when there is indubitable prosperity, a blameless- 
 piety is implied. Hence the Chronicler says nothing about 
 David's life as a freebooter or as Philistine vassal, nothing 
 about his adultery and behaviour towards Uriah, nothing about 
 

 THE WORK OP THE CHRONICLER. 125 
 
 the wretched proceedings in David's family, nothing about 
 the manner of Solomon's accession, described in 1 Kings i. 
 All this is doubtless a part of the attempt to surround David, 
 the real originator of the temple building, with a sort of 
 aureole. The only transgression ascribed to him is the num- 
 bering of the people, 1 xxi. 1, to which Satan had incited 
 Mm. This narrative could not be dispensed with, because 
 the consecration by David of what afterwards became the 
 temple site was connected with it. For it was not to the 
 idolater Solomon (although nothing is said of his idolatry 
 itself), but to David, that everything was to be ascribed 
 which was requisite for the preparation of the temple building 
 and the arrangements of the worship. Not fewer than seven 
 chapters (1 xxii.-xxvi. 28 f.) are devoted to the account of 
 the collection of building materials (amongst which the gold 
 and silver alone were worth nearly 450,000,000) * and the 
 other preparations made by David. Indeed, the model of 
 the temple and of all its vessels was given to Solomon by 
 David, along with written instructions from the hand of 
 Jahweh. 
 
 The statements as to the number of their warriors corre- 
 spond to the mechanical view which makes the prosperity and 
 power of the kings stand in precise relation to the degree of 
 their piety. The most pious kings dispose of the largest 
 armies. Thus David has more than one and a half million 
 warriors, Jehoshaphat more than a million, Asa 580,000, 
 Abiah 400,000 (against 800,000 Israelites, of whom half a 
 million then fall in battle), Uzziah 307,500, Amaziah 300,000, 
 Rehoboam only 180,000. As a matter of fact, these armies 
 serve chiefly for pursuit, not for fight : cf. the striking 
 examples, 2 xiii. 13ff., xiv. 8ff., and xx. 1 ff. Otherwise 
 one of the leading principles of the theocratic theory would 
 
 * [Canon Eawlinson, in the Speaker's Bible, thinks the numbers given in the 
 text of Chronicles corrupt, and says, " Estimated according to the value of the 
 post-Babylonian Hebrew talent, the gold here spoken of would be worth more 
 than one thousand millions of our pounds sterling, while the silver would be 
 worth above four hundred millions." 2Y.] 
 
126 6. THE POST-EXILIC PEEIOD. 
 
 have been violated, namely, that all trust in weapons or other 
 external means, instead of in the immediate interposition 
 of Jahweh, is absolutely sinful. The instance last mentioned 
 (2 Chron. xx.), a complete remodelling of 2 Kings iii. in the 
 spirit of the so-called Midrash, is of altogether special interest. 
 The precise meaning of this Hebrew word is " Investigation, 
 Explanation/' But in the history of Jewish literature it sig- 
 nifies a special class of writings which contain an instructive 
 and edifying exposition of older (especially historical) books. 
 The Chronicler himself 2 xxiv. 27, appeals to a " Midrash on 
 the Book of Kings." In view of the above examples, it is 
 self-evident that a Midrash of this kind cannot possibly pre- 
 tend to be a historical narrative, although the popular view 
 (and with it the Chronicler himself) may have confounded the 
 two in early times. 
 
 Furthermore, it seemed quite self-evident to the Chronicler 
 that the priestly law (as the law of Moses !) had been binding 
 from the beginning, and therefore was to be regarded as the 
 standard in judging of all proceedings. Where the facts 
 would not fit in with the demands of the Priests' Code they 
 were either set aside or corrected, the latter often in a very 
 bold fashion. This was peculiarly necessary where the 
 privileges of the priests and Levites were concerned, especially 
 as the pre-exilic times, according to our explanation above, 
 knew nothing of a distinction between the two : cf. 1 vL 
 18 ff. (against 1 Sam. i. 1), xv. 2, 15, xviii. 17 (against 2 Sam. 
 viii. 18) ; 2 vi. 13 (against the exemplar, 1 Kings viii. 22, 
 cited in v. 12!); xi. 13 f . ; xiii. 9 if ., and quite especially, 
 2 xxiii. and xxiv. 4 ff . (against 2 Kings xi.f.). With this- 
 assumption that the Priests' Law was in force it also corre- 
 sponds that not only Hezekiah, but also other pious kings 
 (thus Asa and Jehoshaphat) abolished the worship at the high 
 places (which to the Chronicler was sheer idolatry like the 
 Israelite bull-worship) . Josiah did not wait till his eighteenth 
 year, but took the reform of worship in hand in his twelfth 
 year (i.e., as soon as he was of age!). The account at 
 2 xxxiv. 8 ft', (taken from 2 Kings xxii.) will not indeed agree 
 

 
 THE WORK OF THE CHRONICLER. 127 
 
 with this. But the Chronicler gets over the difficulty to 
 a certain extent by making Shaphan, v. 18 (against 2 Kings 
 xxii. 10) read "out" of the law-book. For the law-book is 
 to the Chronicler identical with the whole Pentateuch, and 
 Shaphan could not have read this through without a break. 
 
 No wonder then that very hard judgments have been 
 pronounced respecting the trustworthiness of the Chronicles 
 as a historical source, in fact that everything which goes 
 beyond the older historical books has been declared an inven- 
 tion. But we shall come nearer the truth if we admit, first, 
 that the Chronicler actually took part of his material from the 
 sources he so freely cites, and, secondly, that amongst this 
 material have been preserved all kinds of noteworthy and 
 even incontrovertible traditions. As to the first point, it is 
 no doubt true that tendency -narratives do not become more 
 credible through being taken from any exemplar whatever. 
 Yet it is quite a different thing for the Chronicler to have 
 taken from his exemplars in good faith that which best 
 corresponded with his own ideas and language and those of 
 his surroundings, from what it would have been if he had 
 invented narratives and then appealed to imaginary sources in 
 order to create a false impression. 
 
 The character of the material enables us to form a fairly 
 confident estimate of the precise character of the sources 
 which the Chronicler adduces. The book most frequently 
 cited is that of the Kings of Judah and Israel (or the 
 Kings of Israel and Judah; also, abbreviated, "The Kings 
 of Israel," or "History of the Kings of Israel ") : the 
 latest citation relates to Jehoiakim. This work cannot be 
 identical with our Books of the Kings, but probably is the 
 " Midrash on the Book of the Kings," adduced under this 
 complete title at 2 xxiv. 27 (cf. also 2 xiii. 2). Hence 
 it must have been a compilation in which (probably not 
 before post-exilic times) the material of our Books of Samuel 
 and Kings, and perhaps also matters from the so-called 
 "great King's Book" (see above, p. 70 ff.) were re-modelled 
 for the purpose of edification. Nor is it less probable that 
 
128 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 the freely cited monographs (1 xxvii. 24, xxix. 29 ; 2 ix. 29, 
 xii. 15, xiii. 22, xxxiii. 19), perhaps also the biography 
 of Uzziah by Isaiah (2 xxvi. 22), were only portions of that 
 great Midrashic work, especially as the document adduced at 
 2 xx. 34 is expressly said to be " inserted in the book of the 
 Kings of Israel." In similar fashion Isa. xxxvi.-xxxix. and 
 2 Kings xviii.-xx. are referred to at xxxii. 32. 
 
 In addition to the Midrashic matter there is some other 
 documentary material (especially in the genealogies, chaps. 
 i.-ix.), not preserved elsewhere, and possibly drawn by the 
 Chronicler from good historical tradition. The decision as to 
 the actual value of these notices must be reserved in each 
 case for critical consideration. Unfortunately, though the 
 text of Chronicles has in some instances been better pre- 
 served than that of its exemplars, it is on the whole in a very 
 damaged condition. 
 
 Finally, with regard to the date when the Chronicles (with 
 our present Books of Ezra and Nehemiah ; see above, p. 321) 
 were composed, 1 xxix. 7, where a computation referring to 
 the Davidic period is made in Persian darics, would at once 
 bring us to a very late period. Such an anachronism was 
 not possible till that coinage had been current from time 
 immemorial. The description of Darius Codomaunus as 
 " Darius the Persian" (Neh. xii. 22) also brings us down 
 to the Greek period. With this it agrees that the high 
 priest Jaddua, mentioned at Neh. xii. 22, is said by Josephus 
 (Antiqq. XI., vii. 8) to have been in office under Alexander 
 the Great. It depends chiefly on the textual criticism of 
 1 Chron. iii. 19 ff. whether we must descend still later 
 (according to Kuenen, even into the last quarter of the 
 third century). If the original text really knew of eleven 
 generations after Zerubbabel the earliest date for the 
 Chronicler must be about 250 B.C. But another interpreta- 
 tion of 1 Chron. iii. 19 ff. finds only 6-7 members mentioned 
 after Zerubbabel, and thus leads to the dating of Ezra, 
 Nehemiah, Chronicles about 300 B.C. 
 
THE BOOK OF EUTH. 129 
 
 4. THE BOOK OP EUTH. THE BOOK OF ESTHER. 
 
 The last products of Hebrew historiography which remain 
 to be mentioned reflect once more the two main tendencies of 
 Hebrew literature, the booklet of Ruth the prophetic, the 
 Book of Esther the specifically Jewish-Levitical. 
 
 The Book of Ruth, designated by a Goethe as " the loveliest 
 little epic and idyllic whole which has come down to us," 
 cannot have been written till post-exilic times, as various 
 traces show. Apart from certain linguistic signs of the 
 Persian Age which do not indeed occur in the narrative but in 
 the speeches of the actors, chap. iv. 7 especially proves that 
 a considerable interval must have elapsed since Deut. xxv. 9 ; 
 for the narrator has to explain, as practised in Israel "in 
 former time," a custom which in Deuteronomy is assumed to 
 be universally known. Moreover the origin of the booklet is 
 well explained by the proceedings after Ezra's return (458). 
 The merciless strictness with which Ezra (chap. ix. 1 ff.) 
 enforced the banishment of all foreign wives evoked, in the 
 families concerned, many a vigorous protest, which eventually 
 proved most momentous to Jerusalem (see below, p. 195). 
 And thus our idyll perhaps on the ground of very intimate 
 acquaintance with another Ruth ! probably aims at teaching 
 the zealots that all foreign women do not lie under the same 
 condemnation, but that there are those amongst them who are 
 worthy of the highest praise for their true devotion to the God 
 of Israel and to the members of His people. Ruth, the 
 ancestress of the Davidic house, is proof enough of this. 
 
 If this is the precise tendency of the little book it must be 
 admitted that the narrator could appeal to actual tradition in 
 support of his main point, the descent of David from Ruth. 
 The mention of Obed, iv. 17, is also in favour of this. But it 
 cannot be decided whether this was a strictly historical tradi- 
 tion or rested only on a Midrash (on 1 Sam. xxii. 3). In any 
 case it cannot be denied that free inventiveness was at work in 
 
 9 
 
130 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 the names of Elimelech's early-lost sons : Mahlon (" Sickness") 
 and Chilion (" Vanishing"). But the booklet's historical 
 value does not consist for us in its acquaintance with 
 Elimelech's sons or with the progenitors and grandfather of 
 David, but in its remarkable testimony to the meaning of 
 " Eeligion in life," in Ezra's time, notwithstanding all 
 Levitism. For if even the whole story were to be considered 
 didactic poetry its colours are obviously taken from life, and 
 the poem would thus be an honourable monument of the 
 religion which could bring to perfection in the true Israelites 
 such fruits, in the shape of a heartfelt piety and a self- 
 sacrificing disposition. 
 
 Quite another spirit breathes upon us from the Book of 
 Esther, the festival-roll of the Feast of Purim. We have no 
 means of judging whether it is founded on any historical 
 nucleus. What we read in it is a sort of historical romance, 
 which nowhere bears the test if it is wished to regard it as 
 a historical account. Chap. i. would suffice for a convincing 
 proof of this. According to chap ii., Mordecai, who had been 
 carried captive under Jehoiachin (597), lived with his niece under 
 Achashverosh, i.e., Xerxes, about 480. It is still less wonder- 
 ful that Haman, chap, iii., instead of having Mordecai executed 
 without delay, resolves to destroy all the Jews, and casts lots 
 in the first month for all the eleven other months to ascertain 
 the fittest day for the slaughter, than that immediately there-> 
 upon (eleven months beforehand ! ) the irrevocable death- 
 warrant is published in all the provinces. And so the story 
 moves marvellously on, the interest of it gradually heightened 
 in most skilful fashion throughout chaps, iv.-viii., till the 
 climax is reached in chap, ix., where the massacre of more than 
 seventy-five thousand Persian subjects by the Jews is related, 
 and Esther crowns the whole by obtaining the king's consent 
 to a second day of slaughter. 
 
 The aim of the book is clearly stated at ix. 19 ff. It is to 
 explain the origin of the Purim Festival in the month Adar. 
 But the statement at iii. 7 that pur (presumably in Persian) is 
 equivalent to a lot" cannot be linguistically established, 
 

 THE BOOK OF ESTHEE. 131 
 
 Besides which, it was long ago * shown to be probable that 
 the name is connected with the Persian Furdigan Festival, a 
 Spring and New Year's Feast, which was also kept in memory 
 of the dead, and on which the Persians still send to each other 
 presents and sweets (cf. Esther ix. 19). As has already been 
 said, it cannot be ascertained what other occasion the Jews 
 had to celebrate this feast and to what extent a trace of this is 
 still left in the Book of Esther. This only must be said : the book 
 is a monument of the specifically Jewish spirit, as that spirit was 
 gradually formed under the pressure of foreign rule in post- 
 exilic times. This spirit is self- evidently not an irreligious 
 one. The intentional avoidance of the Divine name (very con- 
 spicuously at iv. 14) is evidently due to the scrupulous dread 
 of its being profaned amidst the licence of the feast. Yet the 
 feast is one of thanksgiving for Divine protection granted to 
 the people in a great distress in response to a three days 7 fast. 
 The whole of it, however, expresses such national arrogance 
 ;and such hatred of other nations as makes it easy to under- 
 stand the strong objections to its canonicity which have been 
 raised, not only amongst Christians, but even amongst the 
 Jews (who, however, in later times have treasured this book 
 more than all the prophets ! ) . We shall judge rightly in the 
 main if we criticise the book by the same standard as the 
 Book of Judith. Both are, properly speaking, folk-tales, a 
 self-glorification of the people, fitted thus to bring temporary 
 forgetfulness of the misery of their bondage. But in opposi- 
 tion to the mistaken apologetic zeal which, for the sake of 
 
 * Cf. especially de Lagarde, Purim (Abhandlungen der Gottinger Gesellsch. 
 dor Wiss., 1885), who held that furdigan corresponds to the Persian farwanliyan, 
 the New Year Festival of the Magi (originally devoted to the Expulsion of Death. 
 On the other hand Zimmern (ZAW, 1891, p. 157 ff.) traces Purim to the Baby- 
 lonian puclim, i.e., Assembly (of the gods on New Year's Day, to determine 
 destinies). Mordecai may remind us of Marduk. Finally, according to 
 Jensen (Zeitschr. fiir die Kunde des Morgenlands, 1892, p. 70 ; cf. also Dunkel, 
 Schopfung und Chaos, p. 309 ff.), Haman corresponds to the Elamite god 
 Humman, Vashti to an Elamite goddess, Esther to Istar. [See also Wildeboer 
 and his quotation from a later letter of Jensen's in the new Hand-Kommentar, 
 now being edited by Marti. Tr.] 
 
 9 * 
 
 
132 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 Jewish tradition, will concede to the Book of Esther equal 
 worth and validity with the sayings of an Isaiah or Jeremiah, 
 a Christian has the right to recall the Lord's word : " Know 
 ye not what manner of spirit ye are of ? " 
 
 We cannot venture beyond a conjecture as to when it was 
 composed. 2 Mace. xv. 36 assumes that the day of Mordecai 
 was observed in the period about 160 B.C. But this proves 
 nothing, seeing that the Second Book of the Maccabees can 
 scarcely have appeared before the Christian era. With this it 
 agrees that Jesus Sirach seems not to have known the Book 
 of Esther. The degree of aversion from other nations to which 
 the book bears witness appears incomprehensible till after the 
 Maccabean wars. Consequently it must be correct to put it in 
 the second half of the second century B.C. 
 
 5. THE AFTER-GROWTHS OF THE PROPHETIC LITERATURE (OBADIAH, 
 JOEL, JONAH, ISAIAH xxiv.-xxvii., ZECH. x.-xiv.). THE 
 CLOSE OF THE CANON OF THE PROPHETS. 
 
 Hitherto we have been following out the legislative and 
 historical literatures to their farthest twigs. Now there 
 remain three other classes of post-exilic writing to be dis- 
 cussed : the after-growths of the prophetic literature ; the 
 remains of the poetry proper (religious and secular) in the* 
 Psalms and the Song of Songs; finally, the products of the 
 so-called " Wisdom Literature/' in poetry and prose, i.e. 
 (besides a considerable number of psalms), Proverbs, Job and 
 Ecclesiastes. 
 
 The old opinion that Malachi was the last of all the prophets 
 may have been correct to this extent that Malachi perhaps 
 laboured by oral speech as well as in writing. All the pro- 
 phecies which we find after him must be regarded as simply 
 literary products. The chief proof of this is that (apart from 
 the unique Book of Jonah) they are almost everywhere strictly 
 dependent on the pre-exilic prophecies. This may justify 
 
. 
 
 THE AFTER-GROWTHS OF THE PROPHETIC LITERATURE. 133 
 
 the designation used above, " After-Growths of the Prophetic 
 Literature." It is impossible to fix their chronological 
 position more definitely : even the order in which we adduce 
 them is founded merely on conjecture. 
 
 The threatening oracle of Obadiah against the Edomites 
 doubtless presupposes the destruction of Jerusalem by the 
 Chaldaeans, v. 10-14. On the other hand the nine first verses 
 must be derived from a far more remote time (possibly even 
 from the ninth century), for Jeremiah makes use of them, 
 chap. xlix. 14-16, 9, 10, 7, i.e., in another order and altogether 
 less exactly than in Obadiah. In our present Obadiah, there- 
 fore, a minatory prophecy against the Edomites, characterized 
 by antique vigour of expression, is supplemented by a renewed 
 threat which looks back on Edom's transgression in 586 
 and forwards to the recompense in the Messianic time. The 
 manner in which Jahweh's Day of Judgment on all nations 
 is expected at v. 15 brings us near to Joel and at all events 
 into the fifth century. But it is questionable whether remnants 
 of the ancient oracle have not also been preserved in 
 v. 15-21, and equally so whether the name Obadiah, i. 1, is 
 that of the supplementer or of the author of the original 
 oracle. This oracle might have been occasioned by the revolt 
 of the Edomites under Jehoram of Judah (about 845) . But 
 the hostility of the Edomites towards the Judseans was so 
 frequently manifested on other occasions that we must despair 
 of any nearer definition. 
 
 No less difficulty is found in placing the Writings of Joel, 
 son of Pethuel, who sees in the irruption of a great plague 
 of locusts the token of the [Judgment] Day of Jahweh and 
 earnestly exhorts Israel to avert the outbreak of the Divine 
 wrath by deep repentance. Jahweh does in fact hear their 
 prayer (ii. 18ff.). The promise of renewed harvest-blessing 
 passes over in chap. iii. into a promise of other blessings in 
 the Messianic time ; the outpouring of the Spirit of God on 
 all members of the nation of Israel and the final deliverance 
 of Israel by means of the judgment on all nations in the 
 Valley of Jehosliaphat. 
 
134 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 From chaps, i. and ii. it results that the author lived in the 
 vicinity of the temple and (on account of the great importance 
 he ascribes to the meal and drink-offering, the fast and the- 
 assembly in the temple) in all probability was a priest. From 
 his not mentioning the Aramaeans and Assyrians amongst the 
 enemies of the people it was long held that he belonged to 
 the earlier, pre-exilic time. The remarkable silence of a 
 Jerusaleinite respecting the king was explained by the suppo- 
 sition that he lived during the minority of Joash of Judah 
 (about 835). His position almost at the head of the minor 
 prophets seemed also to recommend his being placed in the 
 ninth century. But all these reasons have of late been almost 
 universally recognized as invalid. Kather does iv. 2 ff., 
 incontrovertibly presuppose the destruction of Jerusalem by 
 the Chaldaeans, and i. ii., the post-exilic community (ii. 16), 
 in which there is no king and no princes, but simply elders 
 (i. 14) and priests, " the servants of Jahwch " (i. 9, &c.), as 
 leaders of the people : the fixed, official ritual of sacrifice 
 also plays an important part. Corresponding to this there 
 is no longer the least hint of idolatry or similar faults, and 
 complete silence is maintained concerning the Kingdom of 
 Israel. Israel, on the contrary, is now represented by Judah 
 alone (ii. 27, iv. 2, 16). Finally let it be added that iii. 5 
 plainly refers to long-familiar prophetic utterances, in fact to 
 Obadiah, 17 (perhaps also to Isaiah xxxiv.), that iv. 18 refers 
 to Ezek. xlvii. and iv. 19 to Obad., 10, and no doubt will 
 remain that Joel should be put about 400 B.C. There is 
 nothing against this in the linguistic characteristics of the 
 book (in the use, for example, of the Aramaic word for 
 "End," ii. 20). 
 
 In the approximately contemporary Book of Jonah we have 
 the only prophetic book which declares an important religious 
 doctrine entirely in the form of a narrative. The hero of 
 the story, Jonah, son of Amittai, is no doubt identical with 
 the prophet of the same name who prophesied, according to 
 2 Kings xiv. 25, under Jeroboam II. (about 760). This does 
 not mean that he was also the author of the booklet. Instead 
 
 
THE AFTEE-GEOWTHS OF THE PEOPHETIC LITEEATUEE. 135 
 
 of this the narrator (iii. 3) does not conceal the fact that 
 Nineveh in his time was a vanished power. The way in 
 which the most astounding things (ii. 1, iv. 10) are related as 
 though they needed no explanation shows clearly that the 
 narrator was not concerned with the marvels but with the 
 doctrines connected with them. Hence the only question is 
 whether the whole should be regarded as a kind of parable 
 or as a free adaptation of an old legend of the prophets. The 
 latter is more probable because of the story's being attached 
 to a definite historical person. But the teaching which the 
 narrator purposes to give can only be found in the closing 
 words, iv. 10 f. It simply runs : God willeth not the death of 
 a sinner, but rather that he may turn and live. The threat 
 of God's wrath once uttered is not a blind fate which must 
 work itself out in any case : by repentance its recall can be 
 procured even by the heathen and thus the Creator's 
 purpose of love towards all His creatures retains its 
 supremacy. The point of this teaching is evidently directed 
 against the unspiritual, revengeful disposition of his fellow- 
 countrymen, who thought they had a right to murmur at the 
 continued delay of the sentence on Babylon and the heathen 
 oppressors of Israel in general. Thus regarded, the little 
 book is far from meriting the mockery of the injudicious, for 
 it stands at the very topmost point of prophetic intuition, 
 leaving a long way behind the idea of God which was 
 cherished in the popular religion (the so-called " particu- 
 laristic " view), and recalling such New Testament sayings as 
 1 Tim. ii. 4. 
 
 We are brought down to a later time, probably indeed to 
 the beginning of the Greek period, by the very remarkable 
 and extremely obscure chaps, xxiv.-xxvii. of the Book of 
 Isaiah. Dim allusions to contemporary events (xxiv. 10, 14; 
 xxv. 2 ; xxvi. 20 ; xxvii. 10) are woven into an inextricable 
 whole with eschatological glimpses of the future (xxiv. 2 1 ff . ; 
 xxv. 7f. ; xxvi. 19). The only certain point (from xxv. 10) 
 is that the prophet writes in the immediate neighbourhood of 
 the temple-hill and therefore in Jerusalem. A number of 
 
 
136 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 linguistic phenomena, in particular an almost boundless accu- 
 mulation of plays on words, would be enough to demonstrate 
 that, notwithstanding his impressive language and many 
 profound thoughts, the prophet could not be identical with 
 the Isaiah of the eighth century. Moreover, the attempt 
 formerly made to place them prior to 588 or in the Exile is 
 shipwrecked on the Biblico-theological character of these 
 four chapters. Such theologumena as that of the annihila- 
 tion of Death (xxv. 8) are unheard of in the earlier post-exilic 
 time, and such utterances as xxiv. 21 and xxvi. 19, have 
 their parallels only in very late psalms and the Book of 
 Daniel. 
 
 The so-called Deutero-Zechariah, i.e., Zech. ix.-xiv., must 
 be regarded as one of the latest portions of all the prophetic 
 books. These six chapters continued to be attributed to 
 Zechariah, the contemporary of Haggai, in accordance with 
 Jewish tradition, notwithstanding the special title in ix. 1 
 (which was afterwards imitated, as it appears, by a redactor 
 at xii. 1 and Mai. i. 1), until the English theologian, J. Mede 
 (f!638) ascribed Zech. ix.-xi. to Jeremiah, because of Matt, 
 xxvii. 9 (where Zech. xi. 12f. is evidently confused with 
 Jer. xxxii. 6ff.). On the other hand the Hamburg theo- 
 logian, Fliigge, 1784, wished to distinguish no fewer than 
 nine distinct oracles in Zech. ix.-xiv. The constantly repeated 
 attempts to solve the riddle led to quite discordant results. 
 The right track already found by Eichhorn, was again for- 
 saken, and no doubt on attractive grounds ix.-xi. were 
 ascribed to a prophet of the time of Ahaz (that is about 735), 
 xii.-xiv. to one of the time of Manasseh, or (by most) to the 
 end of the seventh, century. This solution of the problem 
 was for several decades held to be indisputable till 1881, when 
 Stade overthrew it by convincing arguments in the Zeitsch. 
 fiir die Alttest. Wissenschaft (Years I. and II.). If Stade 
 also has gone too far in asserting that Deutero-Zechariah is 
 dependent throughout on pre-exilic and post-exilic prophets, 
 he is right in maintaining that such passages as ix. 8, 11 ff. ; 
 x. 2, 6, 8 ff. refers to judgments executed in the distant past, 
 
 
THE AFTER-GROWTHS OF THE PROPHETIC LITERATURE. 137 
 
 especially to the banishment of the inhabitants of both king- 
 doms ; that a form of Levitism is implied in xiv. 16 and 20 f. 
 (cf. Exod. xxxix. 30) which is inconceivable till after Ezra's 
 time, and, above all, that ix. 13 can only be explained of 
 the Graeco-Mncedonian. world-power. Assyria and Egypt, 
 therefore, were veiled designations of the Seleucid and 
 the Ptolemaic Kingdoms. We cannot hope for an exact 
 interpretation of such passages as xi. 8 (formerly explained 
 from 2 Kings xv. 8-14) and xii. 10 ff. (formerly referred to 
 the prophet Uriah, Jer. xxvi. 20 ff., or to Josiah), especially 
 as the allusions to current events are often closely interwoven 
 with the eschatological glimpses, quite in the manner of 
 Isa. xxiv.-xxvii. 
 
 Kueneu,* in particular (Einl. 2 ii. 411) has raised objections 
 to Stade's final conclusion that the whole should be put about 
 280. According to him ancient fragments survive in 
 chaps, ix.-xi. and xiii. 7-9, originating mainly in the eighth 
 century (about 745 ff.), arranged by a post-exilic redactor 
 partly in a peculiar fashion, and furnished with additions. 
 And it really must be asked whether every mention of 
 Ephraim (cf. especially ix. 10 and xi. 4-14) can be considered 
 merely a filling up of the Messianic picture, although Ephraim 
 itself had disappeared in the Exile long before the prophet's 
 day. The mention oi: the teraphim and diviners (x. 2) is also 
 very suprising for the Greek period. Bat the verdict on 
 chaps, ix.-xi. as a whole is not altered by its being shown to 
 be probable that there are fragments from an older time. 
 Kuenen puts chaps, xii.-xiv. about 400. The bringing them 
 down to the Greek time arose simply from the supposed unity 
 of chaps, ix.-xiv. But this was not proved by Stade (who 
 holds that chaps, ix. and x. contain a combination of the 
 still unfulfilled older predictions and xi.-xiv. an elucidation of 
 individual points and limitations) . However this may be the 
 
 * H. Schultz, also, Alttestament. Theol. 5 (Gott., 1896), p. 49 [Eng. Trans., 
 p. 70] supports the placing of chaps, ix.-xi. and xiii. 7 ff. in the anarchy after the 
 death of Jeroboam II., and thinks that chaps, xii., xiii. 1-7, xiv. originated 
 about 600 B.C. 
 
138 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 uniting of Zech. ix.-xiv. with chaps, i.-viii., effected by Jewish 
 tradition, must be explained in precisely the same way as that 
 of Isa. xl.-lxvi. with chaps, i.-xxxix. The anonymous pieces, 
 Zech. ix.-xiv. (or ix.-xi., xii.-xiv.) and Mai. i.-iii., perhaps 
 after they had been reduced to their present shape by a 
 redactor and provided with titles, were placed at the close of 
 the minor prophets, till at last Zech. ix.-xiv. was erroneously 
 regarded as a part of the immediately preceding book. 
 
 All that we have had to say about the prophetic writings of 
 the post-exilic time ought to prove that prophecy cannot be- 
 affirmed to have expired with Malachi. But apart from Joel, 
 Jonah, Isa. xxiv.-xxvii. and Zech. ix.-xiv., many other 
 additions, besides isolated alterations in the older prophetic 
 books, testify to the literary ardour which was devoted to 
 prophecy and its products as late as the Greek period. 
 Several of these after-shoots (e.g., Isa. xxiii. 32 f., Micah 
 vii. 7 ff., Jer. 1. f ., TIab. iii., Zeph. iii. 14 ff.) have already been 
 mentioned in this Outline. The conclusion of Amos (ix. 8 ff.) 
 is also counted by many moderns amongst the post-exilic 
 supplements to the old prophetic utterances. The time of the 
 translator of Jesus Sirach must be considered the lowest 
 limit for the close of the prophetic canon as the second part 
 of the Hebrew Bible (because he refers in his prologue to 
 " the Law and the Prophets ") . But there is nothing to prevent 
 our dating the final redaction of the " Former and the Later 
 Prophets " as early as the middle of the second century, B.C., 
 although we know no more about any official act of canoniza- 
 tion than in the case of the Pentateuch. 
 
 6. THE BOOK or DANIEL. 
 
 The Book of Daniel, which, on account of its position in the 
 German [and English] Bible, is usually reckoned amongst 
 the " Greater Prophets," belongs to another part of 
 the Hebrew Bible and also to another class of literature. 
 

 THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 139' 
 
 Tradition looked upon it as the work of a Jewish exile who 
 was brought up at the court of Nebuchadnezzar, and under him 
 and his successors came to great honour. The book itself 
 contains no statement that the whole was composed by Daniel. 
 Yet in chaps, viii.-xi. he speaks in the first person, whereas in 
 chaps, i.-vii. he is spoken of in the third. The contents of 
 the book fall into two divisions : the Narratives (chaps, i.-vi.) 
 and the Visions (chaps, vii.-xii.). 
 
 It has long been seen that if the narratives are con- 
 sidered to be accounts of actual events they lie open to the 
 strongest possible objections, and the best-meant attempts fail 
 to meet these. History knows nothing about a siege of 
 Jerusalem in the third year of Jehoiakim (i. 1). The mention 
 of the " Chaldaeans " at Nebuchadnezzar's court (ii. 2, &c.) 
 betrays a time when the old national name had at length 
 assumed this quite special sense of Magi or astrologers. 
 These " ChaldaBans" speak * to Nebuchadnezzar in West- 
 Aramaic instead of in that Babylonian language which is 
 preserved in countless cuneiform inscriptions. Other 
 unhistorical features are : The seven years' insanity of 
 Nebuchadnezzar (iv. 30 ff.) ; Belshazzar as son and successor 
 of Nebuchadnezzar and last king of Babylon ; and Darius the- 
 Mede as successor of Belshazzar. All these are statements 
 utterly impossible to a contemporary of the events of 608-536. 
 
 On the other hand all difficulties vanish at a stroke when- 
 the true character of the book is admitted : a work of comfort 
 and exhortation belonging to the time when the Jews were 
 sorely oppressed by Antiochus Ephiphanes IV. Indeed, the- 
 limit of its composition can be pretty accurately determined. 
 At vii. 14 the re-dedication of the temple is still an object of 
 expectation. It was accomplished in Dec., 165. The composi-- 
 tion of the book must be placed before this limit, whether 
 in the year 165 or just previously. 
 
 * The Aramaic part of Daniel, beginning at ii. 4, reaches to the close of the 
 seventh chapter. From the misunderstanding of ii. 4 arose the quite erroneous 
 designation of the West-Aramaic idiom (which Jesus and the Apostles also- 
 spoke) as the " Chaldaean Language." 
 
140 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 Not only such, facts as the silence of Jesus Sirach con- 
 cerning Daniel, the very advanced development of the 
 angelology and eschatology, the position of the book almost at 
 the close of the Hebrew canon, but, above all, its peculiar 
 contents, are accounted for by this theory. Everything 
 contributes to a single end the exhortation to endurance, 
 endurance at any cost, in a dire distress which seemed to 
 threaten the existence of the people and the ancestral 
 religioo. The author pursues this end in two ways. By 
 the example of Daniel (who, according to Ezek. xiv. 14, 20, 
 xxviii. 3, must have been a greatly lauded personality of 
 ancient times) and his companions, he shows that God can 
 guard from all harm the true confessors of His name and the 
 zealous observers of His law, and can rescue them miraculously 
 from the utmost conceivable mortal peril (chap. iii. !), so that 
 heathen tyrants also are compelled to recognize His power 
 and greatness. If this is the one aim of the narratives we 
 can easily overlook the facts that Daniel, the scrupulous 
 observer of the Dietary Laws (chap, i.) officiates as head of 
 the heathen Magi, that he has not only to explain Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's dream but must first divine what it was (chap, ii.), 
 that Nebuchadnezzar's conversion (ii. 46 ff.) is at once quite 
 forgotten (chap, iii.), and many other points. The other 
 method which the author uses is the form of the ' ' Apocalypse," 
 i.e., the predicting by a prophet-voice of antiquity events which 
 have already occurred. Thus in chaps, ii. and vii. the order 
 and character of the four world-empires (Babylonian, Mede, 
 Persian and Greek), and in chap. xi. the fortunes and conflicts 
 of the Diadochi, down to Antiochus IV., are revealed with 
 such fulness of detail that even in the first Christian centuries 
 the real standpoint of the Apocalyptic writer was recognized 
 by heathen critics.* The author evidently hoped (and certainly 
 not without reason !) that by clothing his ideas in this form he 
 
 * This real standpoint also appears from chap. ix. Daniel is here troubled 
 because the prediction of Jer. xxv. 11 has not been fulfilled. But at that time 
 (about 538) not seventy years, but fifty at most had elapsed since the beginning 
 of the Exile. 
 

 THE POETICAL BOOKS. 141 
 
 would make a deeper impression and the more surely attain 
 his end. The form of an Apocalypse enabled him to bring- 
 out in the clearest fashion the thoughts on which he believed 
 everything depended : all these disturbances and persecu- 
 tions, all the bloody abominations and desecrations of things 
 holy which God's people must experience, are but the 
 immediate forerunners of the time of redemption when the 
 blasphemers and destroyers will be judged and "the rule, 
 power and might of the kingdoms under the whole heaven 
 shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, 
 and His kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom" (chap, 
 vii. 20 f. ; cf. also xii. 1 ff.). 
 
 7. THE POETICAL BOOKS. 
 a. The Psalter. 
 
 Amongst the so-called " Poetical Books" the Psalter, the 
 hymn book of the post-exilic Jewish community and the 
 noblest Prayer Book of Christianity, takes by far the foremost 
 place in regard to their significance for the history of 
 religion.* In its present form it is a collection of 150f lyric 
 (in part also lyric-didactic or elegiac) poems, the whole of 
 which (including the " Marriage Song," Ps. xlv.) are religious 
 in substance and were compiled for the promotion of the 
 edification of the post-exilic community, especially in divine 
 service. A hundred of them are ascribed to definite authors 
 one to Moses (Ps. xc.) ; seventy-three (eighty-three in the 
 
 * Jewish tradition regards the Psalms, Proverbs, and Job as poetical books in 
 the stricter sense. These three are, therefore, accentuated on a different 
 system from the remaining twenty- one books. 
 
 f The enumeration of the Psalms varies even in Hebrew manuscripts. In the 
 Greek and Latin Bibles Ps. ix. and x. are correctly made one, also (incorrectly), 
 Ps. cxiv. and cxv. : on the other hand Ps. cxvi. and cxlvii. (here again 
 incorrectly) are divided into two. (Besides ix. and x., Ps. xlii. and xliii. are- 
 erroneously divided as well as Ps. cxvii. and cxviii. Ps. cviii. is a compilation 
 from Ps. Ivii. 8-12 and Ix. 7-14.) 
 
142 
 
 THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 Greek Bible, which in other points also differs considerably 
 from the Hebrew in the titles) to David ; two (Ixxii., cxxvii.) to 
 , Solomon ; twelve (1., Ixxiii.-lxxxiii.) to Asaph ; one each to 
 Heman and Ethan (Ixxxviii., Ixxxix.); ten (leaving out Ixxxviii.) 
 to the Korahites. Sixteen psalms have other titles : thirty- 
 four ("the orphans") are entirely without. Seeing that by 
 Asaph, Heman and Ethan, the Davidic choirmasters thus named 
 (I Chron. xv. 17) are doubtless meant, and that the Korahites 
 are probably thought of as David's contemporaries, all the 
 statements respecting psalmists, at least in Pss. i. -Ixxxix (see 
 below) must proceed from the assumption that no psalm is 
 more recent than the age of David and Solomon. For the 
 opinion that those titles were not originally intended to 
 indicate the author but only to intimate that the psalm 
 was to be apportioned to the division of the temple-choir 
 named after David, Asaph, &c.,"* is refuted by the title of 
 Ps. xc. and, above all, by those of Ps. li. f ., liv., Ivi. f ., lix. f ., 
 Ixiii. This is also true of the theory that " of David, &c.," 
 was meant to point to the Book of Poems named after 
 David, &c., from which the psalm had been taken (Baethgen, 
 Psalmen, p. vii.). f( Of the Korahites" is the only title that 
 can be satisfactorily explained (with Hupfeld) in this way. 
 
 The fact that psalms which can be shown to be late (cf., 
 e.g.) in regard to Solomon, p. 14, above) are very often in the 
 titles ascribed to definite authors on the ground of mere 
 conjectures, and that in the above-mentioned psalms from li. 
 onwards, events from the life of David (founded on the Books 
 of Samuel) were alleged as the historical occasions for poems 
 obviously belonging to the community, compels us to conclude 
 that all these titles are later additions, and therefore have 
 absolutely no validity in proving the authorship and date of 
 the several psalms. As to David, we refer to the remarks 
 above, p. 11. What is there said respecting the possibility 
 of genuinely Davidic poems or fragments having passed from 
 some pre-exilic Book of Songs into the post-exilic collections 
 
 * Thus de Lagarde, Orientalia, ii. 13. 
 

 THE POETICAL BOOKS. 143 
 
 of songs must now be yet further generalized : our present 
 Psalter in all probability contains a fair number of pre-exilic 
 songs or fragments of songs. To say nothing of the so-called 
 Royal Psalms, xx., xxi., xlv., which can only be understood 
 as songs from before the Exile, or of the manifold traces of 
 antique phraseology, one circumstance in particular supports 
 this. Such energetic denial of the necesssity of the sacrificial 
 ritual as is found in xl. 7, 1. 8 ff., and li. 18 f. (softened down 
 with much trouble by the liturgical addition, v. 20 f .) could 
 not have found its way into the temple hymn book till the 
 psalms which contain it had long been clothed with a kind of 
 canonical dignity. For the rest, however, the determination 
 of the age of individual psalms depends mainly on subjective 
 considerations, and is therefore easily liable to error. For 
 the adaptation of the psalms to liturgical use must frequently 
 (just as in our hymn books) have necessitated serious altera- 
 tions of their original form. How idle the dispute concerning 
 these annotations is must be clear above all others to the 
 man who employs the psalms for the purpose for which they 
 were collected. What in the world has the perennial edifying 
 power of psalms like xxiii., xc., ciii., cxxi., cxxvii., and many 
 -others, to do with the question whether some post-exilic 
 redactor was right or wrong in attributing them to David or 
 Moses or Solomon ? 
 
 It is now as good as universally admitted that the musical 
 titles and annotations (almost all of them thoroughly obscure) 
 are all connected with the temple music and the temple 
 song of the post-exilic time, and therefore for the most part 
 were later additions, if not actually added at the final revision 
 of the Psalter. This explains how one and the same psalm 
 <xiv. and liii.) received different titles when admitted into 
 different collections. Express mention of the liturgical 
 occasion is found in the titles of Ps. xxx., xxxviii., Ixx., 
 xcii., c. 
 
 The origin of our present Psalter in successive stages has 
 gradually become clear through the observation of the 
 following facts. The division of the Psalter into Five Books 
 
344 6. THE POST-EXILIC PEEIOD. 
 
 is attested from the second century A.D., although special 
 (but always unvocalised) titles, such as " First Book," &c., 
 may not have been added till much later in the Hebrew Bible 
 manuscripts. The close of the several books is indicated at 
 the end of Ps. xli., Ixxii., Ixxxix, cvi. by a so-called doxology 
 (praise) : the entire 150th Psalm serves as doxology to the 
 Fifth Book. Since the doxology to Ps. cvi. seems to be cited 
 at 1 Chron. xvi. 36, it was formerly concluded that the 
 Chronicler must have been acquainted with the Psalter in its 
 present form, along with the division into Five Books. But 
 the opposite conviction has recently asserted itself with ever 
 increasing force : the doxology in 1 Chron. xvi. 36 is original 
 and therefore was added subsequently to Ps. cvi. in order to- 
 form a Fourth Book with the same number of psalms (seven- 
 teen) as the Third. After Ps. Ixxii. comes the subscription 
 (which the punctators regarded as part of the text), "The 
 prayers of David, son of Jesse, are ended." Hence it is 
 clear that the Third Book (Ps. Ixxiii.-lxxxix.) is due to a 
 redactor who wished to supplement a collection of Davidic 
 poems by a gleaning of non- Davidic ones (already, however, 
 ascribed to David's choirmasters). But closer observation of 
 Ps. i. -Ixxii. shows that this part also does not represent a 
 homogeneous collection. In the first place, Ps. xlii.-xlix, 
 (Korahite psalms)) and the Asaph-psalm, 1., must originally 
 have formed a whole with Ps. Ixxiii.-lxxxix. The phrase- 
 ology of the subscription after Ps. Ixxii. (originally probably 
 af ter Ps. Ixxi.) shows that it can only have referred to Ps. iii.- 
 xli. and li.-lxxi. For all these psalms are attributed to David 
 except Ps. x., the second half of Ps. ix.,* Ps. xxxiii., Ixvi., 
 Ixvii., Ixxi. ; and the Greek Bible also designates Ps. xxxiii., 
 Ixvii., and Ixxi. as Davidic. 
 But the marking out of Ps. iii.-xli. by the concluding doxology 
 
 * That Ps. ix. and x. originally formed one psalm is seen from the alphabetic 
 arrangement of the beginnings of the verses (to say nothing of the absence of 
 a title to Ps. x.). In Ps. ix. the alphabetic arrangement is almost unbroken 
 (down to the tenth letter) ; in Ps. x. it has been retained at least in v. 1 and 
 v. 12 ff . 
 
THE POETICAL BOOKS. 145 
 
 as a special collection is seen to be correct ; first, from the 
 two-fold admission of the same psalms (xiv. = liii. ; xl. 14 ff. 
 = Ixx.), and then, from the following discovery of Ewald's. 
 Whilst the First Book uses the divine name Jahweh 278 times 
 and the name Elohim (GJ-od) only about seven times, when 
 Jahweh might have been expected, Elohim preponderates 
 to such an extent in Ps. xlii.-lxxxiii. as to stand two hundred 
 times compared with Jahweh forty-three times. The only 
 explanation, especially when xiv. and liii. have been compared 
 together, is that some redactor, on account of religious 
 scruples, attempted to replace the divine name Jahweh by 
 Elohim in the separate collection xlii.-lxxxiii. (which, there- 
 fore, still lacked the gleanings of Korahite and other 
 psalms, Ixxxiv.-lxxxix.). He did not, indeed, quite attain 
 liis end, for Jahweh often asserted itself in the text alongside 
 Elohim or Adonai (a specially striking instance at 1. 1 ; cf. 
 also lix. 6, Ixviii. 19, Ixxx. 5, 20). 
 
 The gradual growth of the Psalter is accordingly to be thus 
 conceived : Ps. iii.-xli. formed the stem, as the first collection 
 of Davidic poems, arranged about the time of Ezra. Towards 
 t-he end of the Persian age a second collection of Davidic 
 poems (li.-lxxi.) followed, together with poems by David's con- 
 temporaries (xlii.-xlix.,!., lxxii.,lxiii.-lxxxiii.),with a later glean- 
 ing (Ixxxiv.-lxxxix.). The third collection (xc.-cl.) must have 
 been made considerably later, and contained almost exclusively 
 the later and latest psalms down to the time of Simon, the 
 founder of the Asmonsean dynasty (142 ff., B.C.). The interval 
 in time between the second and third collections is shown 
 chiefly by the entire absence from Ps. xc.-cl. of the musical 
 titles and annotations, which seem to have been quite familiar 
 to so late a writer as the Chronicler. In the times after him 
 there must have been so fundamental a transformation of the 
 temple music that those ancient technical terms were altogether 
 unknown to the Alexandrian (Greek) translation of the Psalms. 
 Within the latest collection several connected groups may 
 olearly be distinguished : thus Ps. xcii.-c., civ.-cvii., cxi.-cxvii., 
 and especially the splendid group of the "Pilgrim Songs/' 
 
 10 
 
146 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 Ps. cxx.-cxxxiv. It was, perhaps, the final redactor who- 
 prefixed to the whole collection the anonymous Psalms i. and ii. 
 (which are still reckoned as one at Acts xiii. 33), the one 
 as a kind of programme of the fundamental ethical ideas 
 of the Psalter, the other of its theocratic and Messianic hopes. 
 Yet one of them may have served as an introduction to an 
 earlier collection. The above arrangement of the three- 
 collections does not imply that there were no subsequent 
 dislocations, and especially that isolated Maccabasan psalms 
 (thus, very probably, Ps. xliv. Ixxiv., lxxxiii.),had not already 
 made their way into the second collection. 
 
 The religious and religious-historical significance of the 
 Psalter cannot easily be rated too high. The priestly law- 
 book which Ezra had made the ruling power, by its extra- 
 ordinary emphasis on all the acts which aim at external purity 
 and propitiation in the cultus and in life, readily creates the 
 impression that the entire age after Ezra gave itself up entirely 
 to sacrifice and the ceremonial law, or, at any rate, saw in 
 them by far the most important expression of religious need 
 and feeling. Not as though the Priests' Law had wished 
 the ceremonial law to be observed without a corresponding 
 disposition, opera operata, without faith and personal devotion 
 to God and one's neighbour. But there certainly is this far- 
 reaching distinction that the genuine prophetic view, as we 
 find it at Amos v. 25, Hosea vi. 6, Isa. i. 11 ff., Micah. vi. 6 ff., 
 Jer. vii. 21 ff., in extraordinarily powerful testimonies, held 
 sacrifice and external acts to be indifferent and unessential 
 a clear proof that as yet they knew nothing of a Divine 
 appointment respecting these things. But the standpoint of the 
 Priests' Code is that the sacrifices and externalacts demanded by 
 the law are the most excellent and absolutely indispensable 
 expression of the disposition which pleases God. 
 
 From the Psalter we learn that alongside the legal tendency 
 there ran another, not less powerful, which became of import- 
 ance even in the temple-worship, and can only be described 
 as a continuation and worthy exhibition of the prophetic 
 world of thought. If we leave out Ps. cxix. the reference 
 

 THE POETICAL BOOKS. 147 
 
 to the law in the Psalter is strikingly infrequent, and when 
 it occurs it almost always (cf., e.g., i. 2, xix. 8 ff., xxxvii. 31) 
 has to do with the morally purifying and preserving operation, 
 not the ritual significance, of the law. But what an abundance 
 of evidences we have of every kind of most fervent and genuine 
 religious feeling ! There is heartfelt prayer and thanks- 
 giving, world-conquering faith and trust, most blessed 
 fellowship with God ! Indeed, the above-mentioned genuinely 
 prophetic view of sacrifice here finds (Ps. xl. 7, 1. 8 ff., li. 
 18 f.) vigorous and, as we have already said, really astonishing 
 expression in the worshipping community of post-exilic times. 
 There are, too, in the Psalter many classical utterances of those 
 loftiest expectations which, on account of their significance 
 for all God's saving ways, surpass all other prophetic thoughts 
 in importance the idea of the Messianic Kingdom as a King- 
 dom of God which, thanks to the missionary vocation of Israel, 
 embraces all the heathen, in short, the destiny of Israel's 
 religion to be the world's religion.* 
 
 The correct estimate of the Psalter has been greatly pro- 
 moted by the observation made long ago, but long and often 
 forgotten again, that in a great number of psalms the speaker 
 is not a single godly man but the godly community of the 
 post-exilic time. This is connected with the fact that the 
 individual is nowhere to be considered as the subject of 
 religion but the people. The people was chosen by Jahweh, 
 redeemed from Egyptian bondage by the might} 7 deeds of His 
 arm, and thus made His people. Elsewhere it is called His 
 first-born son (Exod. iv. 22; cf. Hosea xi. 1). It is to the people 
 that the threats of judgment are addressed, as well as the 
 promises of resurrection from the Exile and of the Messianic 
 time. It would indeed be a mischievous exaggeration to 
 recognize nowhere in the psalms the evidences of individual 
 godliness, of individual religious experiences and needs, to 
 
 * Cf . Stade's excellent exposition of this point (in Zeitschr. fiir Theol. u. Kirche, 
 ii. 1892, 369 ff.) which was formerly subjected to ill-founded criticisms in conse- 
 quence of the critics holding much too mechanical a view of the idea " Messianic 
 Prophecy." 
 
 10 * 
 
148 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 think of everything as spoken only from the soul of the praying 
 community. To say nothing of the possibility that many 
 individual traits were suppressed or transformed when the 
 poems were received into the Common Hymn Book, this thesis 
 that the people is the subject of the Israelite religion greatly 
 needs limitation, at least so far as post-exilic times are con- 
 cerned. Jeremiah, in particular, prepared the way for the 
 release of religion from its strait connection with State and 
 nation: according to him (xxxi. 33) the "new covenant" 
 was to become a reality in the inmost heart of every individual. 
 It would thus be a perverted notion if we were absolutely 
 to deny that there are " Individual Psalms," or to maintain 
 that in the Congregational Psalms the poet has not a most 
 vivid personal participation in the woe or joy of the whole. 
 But this does not detract from the truth that a fairly large 
 number of psalms, the interpretation of which formerly gave 
 useless trouble, are lit up at once when taken as Congregational 
 psalms : amongst others we assign iii., iv., vii., ix. f., xi., xiii., 
 and very especially xxii., to this class. * 
 
 b. The Song of Songs. 
 
 We are carried into quite another world by those examples 
 of lyric poetry which have been preserved in the " Song of 
 Songs," or " Canticles." They did not make their way into 
 the Canon without opposition, and no doubt they owe their 
 admission to the two-fold fact that they were held to be 
 Solomon's work, and could be allegorically interpreted 
 throughout in the Synagogue as referring to the relation 
 between Jahweh and the Israelite community, in the 
 
 * The recognition that there are numerous Congregational psalms has been 
 especially promoted in recent times by Olshausen, Eeuss and Cheyne. We may 
 also refer to the discussion of this question and of the underlying theoretic 
 principles by Smend (" Ueber das Ich der Psalmen ") in the Zeitschr. f. die 
 alttest. Wissensch., 1888, p. 49 f?., the most thorough-going development of the 
 theory of a Collective subject ; and by Beer (" Individual- und Gemeinde- 
 psalmen," Marburg, 1894), who takes an intermediate position. 
 
THE POETICAL BOOKS. 149 
 
 Christian Church to that between Christ and His Bride the 
 Church. But a closer consideration of the phraseology com- 
 pels us to reject unhesitatingly this allegorical interpretation 
 as unworthy of God or Christ. That phraseology will not 
 permit us to think of anything but the glorification of the 
 bliss of earthly love, and that, predominantly, on its sensuous 
 side. Alongside this, passages are not wanting which laud 
 bridal or connubial love from a far higher point of view (cf. 
 especially viii. 5 ff.). After the allegorical exposition was 
 abandoned, these passages were used to justify the view that 
 in the Canticles generally there is a glorification of mono- 
 gamistic love as the fellowship designed by God, in contrast 
 to all the distortions occasioned by the harem-system of the 
 great. This view almost always went hand in hand with the 
 theory that Canticles is a drama or opera which depicts in 
 actions and reciprocal songs the bridal love of a country pair 
 (a shepherd and the Shulamite), its forcible interruption by 
 Solomon, who carries off the Shulamite to his harem, 
 Solomon's fruitless wooing, the stedfastness of the Shulamite, 
 and finally her happy reunion with her beloved. Countless 
 attempts have been made* to divide the contents of the 
 Canticles in this or some similar way into acts and scenes 
 mostly assuming that the MS. leaves have been transposed 
 and to apportion them to the actors (Solomon, the Shulamite, 
 the shepherd), perhaps also to a second pair of lovers, finally 
 to the men and daughters of Jerusalem (as choir). The 
 smallest of the difficulties in the way of these attempts is 
 perhaps this : none of the divisions are in any way indicated 
 and consequently no two of the dramatizations coincide. 
 The other difficulty is greater; the drama is unknown on 
 genuine Semitic soil, especially in ancient times, and such 
 converse between the bridal pair as is assumed in the Canticles 
 is unheard of. It seems a far more natural theory that 
 
 * Kecently, to mention only the most important, by Stickel (Berl., 1888), 
 Bruston (Paris, 1891), Herzog (Berl., 1893), Martineau (in the American Journal 
 of Philology, xiii. 3), and, in an exceedingly interesting way, by Bothstein 
 (Halle, 1893). 
 
150 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 Canticles consists of a number of distinct love-songs, whether 
 by one or by several poets. But the riddle seems to us to 
 have been completely solved by the explanations which 
 Wetstem"* has given, founded on his own observation of 
 customs still in vogue amongst the Arabic population in Syria 
 and Palestine. According to it Canticles contain marriage- 
 songs (or fragments of such) as they are sung on the wedding- 
 day and the next seven days, partly to the accompaniment of 
 song and dances, by the bridesmen, the chorus of men and 
 women, and the young pair themselves. These seven days 
 are called "The King's Week," because the young bride- 
 groom and the young wife during this time play the parts of 
 king and queen, and receive the homage of the entire 
 district and even of the neighbouring places, seated 011 a kind 
 of throne which is erected for them as a seat of honour on 
 the threshing-floor. It is remarkable how many enigmatic 
 passages of the Canticles (e.g., vii. 1 ff., as the accompaniment 
 of the bride's sword-dance) are explained in an extremely 
 simple fashion on this assumption. Amongst other things it 
 thus becomes self-evident that neither has Solomon, iii. 7 ff., 
 anything to do with the Solomon of history, nor is Shulamite 
 (vii. 1) a proper name. Both designations are meant as 
 comparisons, and in fact, Shulamite (in the Greek Bible 
 " Shunamite") is an allusion to that Abishag of Shunemf who 
 was appointed, as the most beautiful virgin then in Israel, 
 to attend on the old man David. Budde's very true remark 
 (at the close of the English Essay mentioned below) deserves 
 special attention : all sorts of objectionable things in the 
 Canticles must seem far more harmless and unexceptionable 
 
 * First in the Zeitschr. der deutschen morgenl. Gesellsch., 1868, p. 105 f., then 
 in the essay on "Die Syrische Dreschtafel," in Bastian's Zeitschrift fur Eth- 
 nographic (1873), and in Delitzsch' Kommentar liber das Hohelied (Lpzg., 1875), 
 p. 162 ff. Budde, in "The Song of Solomon" (New World, 1894, p. 56 ff.), as 
 well as in the Preussischen Jahrbb., Oct., 1894, p. 92 ff., makes additional 
 contributions to the explanation, founded on Wetstein's hypothesis. 
 
 t Stade, in the Gesch. Israels, i. 292, gave this unquestionably right explana- 
 tion of the only once used name : see the more detailed proof in Budde, loc. cit., 
 p. 63 f. 
 
 
THE MONUMENTS OF THE " WISDOM LITERATURE." 151 
 
 if they belong to the class of ancient wedding customs and 
 songs. For linguistic reasons, and especially on account of 
 the use of various Greek words, the former part of the Greek 
 period is the earliest to which these marriage-songs can be 
 .assigned. 
 
 8. THE MONUMENTS OP THE " WISDOM LITERATURE." 
 . Proverbs. 
 
 We must devote a final section to the monuments of the 
 so-called Chokma (= Wisdom) Literature which have found 
 admission to the Canon of the Old Testament. Here we leave 
 the question untouched whether " the wise " formed a special 
 guild in pre-exiiic times (alongside the priests and prophets). 
 Jer. xviii. 18 makes this highly probable, and certainly it was 
 .so in post-exilic times, as all kinds of clear traces show (cf. 
 especially Prov. i. 6, xiii. 14, xxii. 17, xxiv. 3, Eccles. xii. 11). 
 We are indeed left almost entirely in the dark as to the 
 formation and constitution of these societies, the extent and the 
 methods of their investigation. Thus much only is clear from 
 numerous passages in the Book of Proverbs (i. 4, 8, ii. 1, iii. 1, 
 iv. 1, &c.) : the activity of the wise was devoted not only to 
 consultations and discussions amongst themselves, but 
 principally to the guidance of the young (the " Sons, i.e.) 
 Pupils of the Wise "). But the Wisdom Books preserved in 
 the Old Testament do at least give us some information 
 respecting the subjects of their inquiry and teaching. The 
 religion of Israel inherited from their fathers, is everywhere 
 the foundation and pre-supposition, for " the fear of Jahweh is 
 the beginning it might also be rendered, the main thing in 
 knowledge " ! (Prov. i. 7). But the ceremonial side of the 
 religion, and with it the dependence on the priestly law, is 
 almost entirely in the background : hence the prophetic 
 tendency comes to the front. But this is the weightiest point : 
 the religion on which Wisdom builds is no longer (cf. above, 
 
152 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 p. 148) an affair of the people as a whole but of the individual. 
 The teachings of Wisdom, the solution of the problems with 
 which it deals, are to serve as guide-posts to direct the 
 individual in wisely ordering, and really enjoying his life, and 
 also for the quieting of painful doubts, the giving assurance as 
 to comforting truths which concern individual human souls. 
 More closely considered the three Old Testament Wisdom- 
 books occupy themselves with the following topics : Proverbs, 
 with all kinds of isolated rules for the conduct of life ; the 
 Book of Job, with a religious-philosophical discussion of the 
 highest importance ; finally Ecclesiastes, with the question 
 whether a complete theory of the world in general is possible. 
 Chaps, x. 1 xxii. 16 are doubtless to be considered the kernel 
 of the Book of Proverbs. At the head of this parfc stands the 
 title, " The Proverbs of Solomon," which was afterwards (i. 1) 
 transferred to the whole book. It proves that there was an 
 ancient tradition, testified to at 1 Kings v. 9 ff. also, that 
 Solomon was the prototype of the " wise," and, in particular, 
 was the founder of Proverbial Wisdom. It is, indeed, 
 altogether uncertain how many of the 375* verses, mainly 
 in so-called antithetic (contrasted) parallelism, are to be 
 attributed to Solomon himself (cf. the remark above, p. 13). 
 "The Words of the Wise," chaps, xxii. 17 xxiv. 22, form 
 the first appendix to this; the twelve verses, xxiv. 23-34, the 
 second. These, too, so far as the title is concerned, make no 
 claim to have been written by Solomon. There is a second 
 principal collection in chaps, xxv. 1 xxix. 27, with the title, 
 " These also are proverbs of Solomon which the men of 
 Hezekiah, King of Judah, copied out." We cannot deter- 
 mine the source of this statement, which must be due to 
 a later redactor, because of the " also." The frequent occur- 
 rence of the same proverbs in both divisions is against 
 the theory that "the men of Hezekiah" in this way 
 
 * Behnke (Zeitschr. fur die Alttest. Wissensch., 1896, p. 122) remarks that 
 375 is the numerical value of the consonants of Sli e lomoli (Solomon, cf. x. 1) : 
 in like manner 136, the number of verses in the second collection, is the value 
 of the consonants of the name Chizqiyahu (Hezekiah ; cf. xxv. 1). 
 
153 
 
 appended their own collection to the first principal collection 
 of Solomonic proverbs (over 100 of the 541 proverbs in 
 the entire book occur more than once). Moreover, it will 
 be shown below that we must recognize a final revision of 
 this part in the post-exilic age. There are the following 
 appendices to the second main collection: 1. The Words 
 of Agur, the son of Jakeh (chap. xxx.). 2. The Words of 
 King Lemuel (xxxi. 1-7.) 3. The Alphabetical Praise of 
 the Virtuous Housewife (xxxi. 10-31). The assertion of 
 Jewish tradition that Agur and Lemuel are mystical designa- 
 tions of Solomon is disproved at once by the linguistic 
 character of those proverbs, which points rather to the later 
 post-exilic time. 
 
 After the collection of which we have been speaking, or, at 
 all events, the greater part of x.-xxix. had been finished, the 
 prologue (i.-ix.) was added. It begins with a common title 
 and short introduction to the whole book (i. 1-6) : then it 
 proceeds, partly with general exhortations to the appro- 
 priation of Wisdom, referring constantly to its blessed fruits, 
 partly with warnings against various distinct sins and follies ; 
 it concludes with an impressive address by Wisdom, herself, 
 in which she solemnly invites to the meal which she has 
 prepared (chap. viii. f.). This conclusion especially, with its 
 peculiar personification of Wisdom, presupposes a long culti- 
 vation of speculation on the philosophy of religion, and the 
 close of our present Book of Proverbs must therefore be 
 placed not earlier than the middle of the fourth century. 
 The numerous additions in the Greek translation of proverbs 
 from other sources also show that after our Canonical Book of 
 Proverbs had assumed its fixed form pains were still taken to 
 extend and to alter it. We must also recognize that final revi- 
 sion of the older collections which has been indicated above, 
 for in no other way can we explain the entire absence of any 
 allusion to idolatry. Keuss has also correctly alleged as 
 a mark of the post-exilic age the manner in which monogamy 
 is everywhere taken for granted. 
 
 The assertion that the Proverbs, like a great part of the 
 
154 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 Psalms, promoted ee Religion in Life," requires a certain 
 qualification. Alongside the many proverbs in which a pro- 
 foundly religious disposition finds such splendid expression, 
 as, e.g., xxxi. 30, there is also a series which recommends 
 rules for wise and even for merely prudent life, simply on 
 the ground of a large experience. Common apophthegms, 
 too, and actually a kind of riddle (xxx. 15 ff.), are not lack- 
 ing : the poetry of culture (especially in the choice collection, 
 chap. xxv. ff.) preponderates over popular poetry, the proverb 
 in the narrower sense of the word. But the contents are 
 nowhere such as to contradict the religious and moral 
 key-note which is heard throughout. 
 
 b. The Book of Job. 
 
 Amidst all the controversy as to the date and aim of the 
 Book of Job, there is one point on which absolute unanimity 
 has ever prevailed : here we have one of the most magnificent 
 creations of which the literary history of all times and all 
 nations can tell, a creation so unique that an idle contest 
 might ever be breaking out anew as to the precise class of 
 poetry in which it is to be enrolled. And if in other didactic 
 poems for in any case the Book of Job is such it is inevit- 
 able that the artistic form should suffer from the doctrinal 
 aim, the Book of Job has not called forth such a criticism 
 from anyone. The construction of the poem, as well as the 
 solution of the problem, takes place before our eyes in such 
 .a fashion that (apart, of course, from some later additions), we 
 never trace a falling off in the poet's creative power : on the 
 -contrary his speech displays its most impressive force at the 
 end of the poem in the speeches of Jahweh. 
 
 The problem itself is none other than the question which 
 includes all that can be objected against the moral character 
 -of the government of the world and the Divine ordering of 
 human fortunes : " How is the suffering of the godly to be 
 reconciled with the righteousness of God ? " This, of course, 
 xioes not deal with the troubles which the mere fact of being 
 
THE MONUMENTS OP THE " WISDOM LITERATURE." 155 
 
 a man brings on every one without exception; all kinds of 
 dangers, occasionally sickness and privation, manifold vexa- 
 tions and failures, death at the last. The question rather is : 
 " How can God so often permit really godly men to be 
 attacked with the sorest affliction of body and soul, leaving 
 them to bear it in utter hopelessness to th,e end, whereas, on 
 the other side, it is an indisputable fact that open despisers 
 of God have often enjoyed to the end great and undisturbed 
 happiness. Where, then, does Keason come in in the order 
 of the world ? Where does Divine Righteousness abide ? " 
 
 This ceases to be a problem the moment that faith asserts 
 itself in a future solution of all riddles, a righteous compensation 
 hereafter, as is the case on the ground of the Christian hope 
 of immortality. But the religion of Israel knew nothing of 
 such a hope for the individual. It must suffice him if he 
 attained to the natural limit of human life, and was not cut 
 off "in the midst of the years/' After that he became the 
 property of the grave, and his unsubstantial shadow went 
 down to the Underworld, and remained for ever unrelated to 
 God and to the sorrow and joy of the world above. 
 
 So long as religion, in accordance with what we have said 
 above, was indissolubly bound up with the needs, the fears 
 .and hopes of the nation as a whole, the problem treated in 
 the Book of Job could not be felt in all its difficulty. 
 Astounding experiences, therefore, whether of the whole 
 nation or its individual members, did not cause men to take 
 umbrage at the righteousness of God ; the immediate future 
 would, perhaps, provide a solution, whether the smitten ones 
 themselves experienced it or not. But it was different when 
 such problems began to be solved on what might be called 
 independent ground, as problems of human life in general, 
 outside the limits of the nation. Then first could he who 
 believed in a Divine righteousness feel the inequality in men's 
 fortunes to be a tormenting riddle. But he would be obliged, 
 in the same measure, to look upon all earlier attempts to quiet 
 doubt and solve the riddle as unprofitable evasions. 
 
 The question must have stood thus when the poet of Job 
 
156 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PEEIOD. 
 
 undertook its solution certainly not for the sole reason that 
 a special inclination towards philosophical speculation attracted 
 him towards it, but because his inmost heart, his whole 
 religious personality, was most mightily laid hold of by it. Nor 
 does he seek the solution in the way of didactic exposition and 
 demonstration, but clothes it with the outlines of a history; 
 sets the problem, as it were, in personal form before our 
 eyes, and illuminates it on all sides from widely different 
 standpoints, till at length the mouth of God pronounces the 
 decision. 
 
 The external organization we might almost say the dramatic 
 structure of the poem is extremely simple and clear. The 
 prose Prologue (chaps, i. and ii.) shows in Job a pattern of 
 exemplary earthly happiness, and also of exemplary piety. 
 The man who offers propitiatory sacrifices for sins which his 
 children may possibly have committed is a really godly person : 
 God Himself repeatedly bears testimony to this (i. 8, ii. 3). 
 The question as to what tradition really said about Job, who 
 is here represented as the owner of great herds in the land 
 of Uz, is altogether trivial and without bearing on the 
 understanding of the book. We merely know from Ezekiel 
 (xiv. 14, 20), who mentions him along with Noah and Daniel* 
 that his was one of those names of the past which were 
 famous for their godliness. Our poet evidently means him 
 and his friends to be thought of as non-Israelites : the problem 
 is to be discussed outside the national soil of the religion of 
 Israel. Naturally, this does not prevent specifically Israelite 
 views and postulates of faith from appearing everywhere, 
 more or less involuntarily. Yet the fiction is so far strictly 
 adhered to, that not only the proper name of the God of 
 Israel (Jahweh), but every direct reference to the history 
 of the people, is avoided in the poetical part of the book. 
 
 The dramatic movement in the working out of the problem 
 begins with the first assault which the Satan a name 
 suggested probably by the poetical use of it at Zech. iii. 1 
 i.e., the Adversary, makes, attempting to cast suspicion on 
 the unselfishness and so on the moral value of Job's piety. 
 
157 
 
 God allows Satan to subject Job's external good fortune to 
 a trial. He knows that it must end in the vindication of His 
 servant. Swift strokes of ruin fall on Job from every quarter: 
 in one day all his riches vanish. He holds his peace till the 
 news of the loss of all his children comes suddenly upon him. 
 Then he complies with the customary observances of sorrow, 
 uttering at the same time words of prayer, the quiet grandeur 
 of which cannot be enhanced by any addition or comment. 
 
 Satan's second assault moves God to abandon Job's body, 
 but not his life, to a final trial. Job is attacked by a horrible, 
 distressing, painful, and altogether hopeless disease. All the 
 symptoms show that the form of leprosy known as elephantiasis 
 is meant. Still he maintains his position with pious resigna- 
 tion against the bitter mockery of his own wife. But when 
 his three friends have appeared and sat down in silence over 
 against him seven days and nights, the grief which rages 
 within gets the mastery at last. He breaks the silence with 
 a monologue, in which he most vehemently curses the day of 
 his birth, praises the earliest possible death as an enviable 
 good fortune, and finally, sinking into melancholy, depicts 
 the sweet rest and the equality of all who dwell in the 
 Underworld. 
 
 The Prologue has, not improperly, been compared with the 
 " Development " in a drama; and this "Development" is so 
 masterly that it is difficult to understand how it could ever 
 have been explained as a later addition to the original poem. 
 By means of it the poet, with conscious art, has accomplished 
 something which, quite apart from the increase of our artistic 
 enjoyment of the poem, is also important for a right estimate 
 of its religious value. The reader is placed at the outset on 
 a firm and sure standpoint, from which he can observe the 
 wavering conflict with most vivid sympathy, but without con- 
 fusion. From the facts of which he has been told, he knows 
 what Job and his friends do not know, that there are sufferings 
 the reasons of which do not lie in the punitive wrath of God, 
 but in His purpose of love. That is not a solution of the 
 problem; we still miss the answer to the question how God's 
 
158 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 purpose of love can permit sucli an infliction of pain on His- 
 own. Yet it is a significant sign-post, indicating that in the 
 issue of the dispute upright piety must at last vanquish 
 prejudice and stupidity. 
 
 Job's first monologue (chap, iii.), which has brought us into- 
 the poetical part of the book (chaps, iii.-xlii. 6), is followed by 
 the controversies, chaps, iv.-xxviii. Each of the friends speaks 
 three times, in the same order, to be immediately refuted each 
 time by Job. But in the third colloquy (xxii.-xxvi.), the 
 material at the disposal of the friends is found to be so 
 exhausted that Bildad, the second, contents himself with 
 a brief embarrassed repetition of what has been said long 
 before, and Zophar, the third, is quite silent. The standpoint 
 of the friends is that of the current doctrine of retribution,, 
 in the form which had developed out of the distortion of the 
 great truth proclaimed at Exod. xx. 5 f . There the ungodly 
 are promised vengeance on their sins to the fourth generation; 
 the pious, God's blessing to the thousandth generation. The 
 popular view distorted this to mean that all sufferings are 
 punishments, whilst continued good fortune is the reward of 
 conduct pleasing to God. From immense suffering they 
 logically deduced immense guilt ; from special judgments, 
 touching the body of the supposed pious man, secret faulti- 
 ness. Hence the friends at first accuse the sufferer covertly, 
 but, at last (xxii. 4ff.), quite expressly, of having merited 
 God's judgment by his sin. They endeavour to weaken Job's- 
 constant reference to those experiences of happiness and 
 suffering, which do not correspond with their theory, by 
 pretending that all the sinner's prosperity is only apparent, 
 and is destined to be suddenly shattered. 
 
 Job does not attempt to deny that he is a sinner in the 
 sense in which all men are ; but he is conscious that he has 
 pursued an upright, pious course in thought, word and deed. 
 The reference to universal human sinfulness cannot, there- 
 fore, in any way explain the enigma of his fate. The assertion 
 of the friends that they have explained it is self-deception and 
 malice. Convinced of this, Job talks himself into such bitter- 
 
 
THE MONUMENTS OF THE " WISDOM L1TEKATUKE." 15D 
 
 ness in the first colloquy that his speeches several times 
 (cf. especially ix. 22 f .) approach very near to blasphemy. 
 But in his inmost soul his faith holds fast to that image of 
 the wise and just God which he has borne in his heart so 
 many years ; in fact, he comes at last to invoke the Heavenly 
 Witness of his innocence, the righteous God,, to be his helper 
 against the incomprehensible God who torments him without 
 cause (xvi. 18ff.). He struggles through to the rock-firm 
 certainty (xix. 23 if.) that God will at last take his part and 
 bring his innocence to light. With such a certainty of vic- 
 tory, he gradually reduces to silence the attacks of his friends; 
 but this does not bring him to a solution of the riddle itself. 
 The concluding speech (chap, xxvii. f.) only reaches the result 
 that God's doings are in any case Wisdom, but that He has 
 kept this exclusively for Himself, and has merely given man 
 such a share in. it as finds expression in the fear of God and 
 the avoidance of evil. As against the riddles of the course of 
 the world, especially such experiences as Job had to undergo, 
 there is nothing but a painful despair of winning knowledge. 
 This being his view, Job's thoughts are again taken up 
 sorrowfully with his former happiness and dignity (chap, xxix.) ; 
 he contrasts with it his present unutterable misery, and then, 
 examines his past life (chap, xxx.) from a standpoint the moral 
 elevation of which reminds us in many ways of the Sermon on 
 the Mount. He had made no reply to the direct accusations of 
 Eliphaz (in chap, xxii.) : now the answer follows, and in a 
 form which leaves but the one thought with the reader, that 
 God must now indeed interpose for the sufferer and confirm 
 the truth of his assertions. Job himself at the close solemnly 
 summons Him, and his expectation is not disappointed. 
 
 But God's reply to him (xxxviii. 1 ff.) * out of the thunder- 
 storm is something quite different from what he had repeatedly 
 desired during the discussion, and, in part, had actually 
 pictured to himself. A questioning and answering (xiii. 22) 
 had hovered before his mind's eye, an occasion on which he 
 
 * On the subsequently interpolated Elihu-Speeches (chaps, xxxii.-xxxvii.). 
 see more below. 
 
 
160 
 
 6. THE POST-EXILIC PEEIOD. 
 
 could not only justify himself to God but God to him. Here, 
 too, the poet displays all his greatness. Instead of a judicial 
 process, which in any case must seem unworthy of God, he 
 introduces God teaching the man, in a speech full of lofty 
 irony, the foolishness, nay, the childishness of his demand. 
 But the irony is not an annoying, absolutely repelling one. 
 It aims simply at bringing the deeply wounded man into the 
 right condition for the sure and speedy healing of his wound. 
 And the solution of the riddle given in these Divine speeches 
 is so clear and simple and thorough that no one who does not 
 intentionally close his eyes can miss it. The God who from 
 the beginning has ruled His creation with infinite glory and 
 wisdom, ordering all things wisely, providing lovingly for every 
 longing of the irrational creatures (xxxviii. 41 ff.), can cherish 
 towards man also nothing but thoughts full of wisdom and love, 
 although his ways may often be incomprehensible to human 
 minds. If a proof were still needed that the poet wished to 
 convey this teaching in the speeches of Jahweh it would be 
 furnished by Job's answer (xl. 4f. and xlii. 3ff.). He recants 
 and repents in dust and ashes, not because he has learnt that 
 we must once for all despair of comprehending God's ways 
 tliat knowledge he had reached previously but because God's 
 appearance at the end had brought the assurance that the 
 good man may ever take comfort in the wise and loving 
 guidance of his God, notwithstanding every appearance to the 
 contrary. This is the only view with which the Epilogue 
 xlii. 7 ff. (again in prose) agrees. 
 
 The form which Job had wished justice to assume was 
 unsuitable. But when he had humbled himself it is expressly 
 admitted that he is perfectly right in not yielding against his 
 own better knowledge and conscience to the unloving prejudice 
 of his opponents. In fact, at their burnt-offering they need 
 his intercession to avert the righteous anger of God. The 
 complete re-establishment of Job's external prosperity 
 (xlii. 10 ff.) is, of course, not a necessary element in the 
 solution of the problem, but only a demand of "poetic justice." 
 The reader's feelings require this demonstration that even 
 
THE MONUMENTS OF THE " WISDOM LITERATURE." 161 
 
 in the concrete case to which the poet has attached the 
 discussion and solution of the problem all controversy was 
 at length hushed in perfect harmony. 
 
 Objections of some importance have been raised against the 
 authenticity of some sections (especially xxvii. 7 xxviii. 28, 
 and the descriptions of the hippopotamus and crocodile, xl. 15 
 xli. 26). But, with the exception perhaps of chap, xxviii., 
 our idea of the whole is not affected by them. The same 
 cannot be said of the Elihu- Speeches, chaps, xxxii.-xxxvii. 
 These stand in absolutely irreconcilable opposition to the aim 
 of all the rest of the poem. After Job's last great monologue, 
 to which God's answer, xxxviii. 1, immediately attaches itself, 
 Elihu enters suddenly upon the scene in order that, in four 
 speeches addressed personally to Job, and differing very con- 
 spicuously from all the others even in form, he may read both 
 the friends and Job a lesson. The former, because they could 
 find no further answer ; Job, because he dared to maintain 
 that he was pure, instead of recognizing that his suffering was 
 ordained by God for a wholesome discipline. We have already 
 mentioned that in the heat of the dispute Job says what 
 must needs wound a pious and reverent spirit. The author of 
 the Elihu-Speeches was evidently offended because no one 
 expressly and fitly corrected Job for this. But the idea that 
 Job was so terribly punished beforehand for guilt which he 
 contracted in consequence of his sufferings is utterly absurd, 
 and therefore it certainly did not occur to the original poet, 
 as we may see from i. 8, ii. 3, and, rightly understood, also 
 from xlii. 7. That the speeches are interpolated is also clear 
 from the fact that, in the further course of the poem, not 
 the slightest notice is taken of this new champion. 
 
 As to the date when the book was composed, opinions have 
 varied between the pre-Mosaic and the Maccabasan age. The 
 many points of contact with Lamentations, Deutero-Isaiah, 
 and, most especially, with the Prologue to the Proverbs, are 
 not quite conclusive in favour of its belonging to the later, 
 post-exilic age : for we usually assign the priority to the one 
 side or the other, according to the judgment we have formed 
 
162 
 
 THE POST-EXILIC PERIOD. 
 
 on other grounds, though a doubt may hardly be possible 
 concerning such passages asxlii. 17 compared with Gen. xxv. 8, 
 xxxv. 29. There is still a dispute, too, concerning the 
 linguistic character of the book, although all kinds of indica- 
 tions of later speech are universally recognized. But, in the 
 first place, it is an important fact that, according to what we 
 have said on p.-155, the problem could not have been handled 
 in this form till the individualistic treatment of religious 
 questions had been freely cultivated. And, secondly, the 
 angels appear in the Book of Job in a form which vividly 
 reminds us of the Book of Daniel. They are called absolutely 
 fc the holy ones" (cf. Dan. iv. 14), although, according to 
 iv. 18, xv. 15, they are subject to error and even to sin, and, 
 according to xxi. 22, xxv. 2, they need the judicial inter- 
 position of God. On the other hand, they can intervene with 
 intercessions for men (v. 1), as, in the Book of Daniel, the 
 various nations are represented by special guardian-angels, 
 hostile to each other. No doubt it is impossible to decide 
 with certainty when these views became common property in 
 Israel, and therefore we will not conceal the fact that dis- 
 tinguished students still date the book much earlier about 
 500, or in the Babylonian Exile, or even in the period just 
 prior to the Exile. 
 
 c. Bcclesiastes. 
 
 If the " Wisdom " of the Old Testament celebrated its loftiest 
 triumph in the Book of Job, by solving a definite religious 
 problem, " The Preacher," on the contrary, must be styled the 
 final abandonment of the attempt to solve the riddle of existence 
 with the means furnished by the Eeligion of the Old Testament, 
 i.e., above all else, without faith in a future compensation. 
 The author's putting his doctrine into the mouth of Solomon, 
 the prototype of all wise men, and all striving after Wisdom, 
 is a very transparent literary disguise : the writer himself 
 betrays its true character at i. 12. And the repeated bitter 
 complaints that justice is badly administered, that injustice 
 indeed prevails in the world, would not come very well from 
 
THE MONUMENTS OF THE "WISDOM LITERATURE." 163 
 
 a reigning king. The theme of the whole is expressed 
 at the very outset. Everything is vain, troublesome, and at 
 the same time aimless. Yain is the striving after Wisdom, 
 like that after property and pleasure. Man ever stands 
 powerless in the presence of an inevitable and, to him, incom- 
 prehensible fate. And thus the only profitable counsel which 
 one may perhaps venture to give (v. 17, &c.) is to get the 
 better of the misery of existence by enjoying life rationally, 
 doing this, however, in the fear of God, and with an abiding 
 recollection of the reckoning which He demands. 
 
 The last-named condition shows that the Preacher is far 
 from recommending the so-called Epicureanism as the highest 
 worldly wisdom. The keynote of his reflections is rather an 
 ethically earnest one, and his faith in God shows itself 
 untouched by any kind of doubt. But it cannot be denied 
 that in his case the decay of the Old Testament faith, has 
 made much progress, so that he vacillates helplessly from 
 chagrin to doubt, from unsatisfactory grounds of comfort to 
 worldly-wise considerations. We can nowhere speak of a 
 fixed plan. The discourse is not unfrequently so full of 
 contradictions that earnest attempts have been made to 
 understand it as a dialogue between a doubting disciple and 
 the master who corrects him, thus setting all the objections 
 to the book aside at a stroke. The very debased Hebrew and 
 the manifold tokens of the age of the Diadochi point to the 
 middle of the third century as the date of Ecclesiastes. 
 Doubtless it owes its admission to the Canon in face of great 
 objections chiefly to the Epilogue (xii. 9 ff.). Though added 
 in all probability by another hand, this seemed adapted to 
 neutralize the objectionable features in the Preacher's 
 deductions, and so to bring everything to a satisfactory issue. 
 However that may be, we owe thanks to the compilers of the 
 Old Testament Canon for not excluding even this book. It 
 proclaims with clear voice the truth which was obviously 
 beyond the ken both of its author and of the compilers of the 
 Canon, that in it, and in all the books which had preceded, 
 the last word of consolation and salvation for mankind had 
 
 11 * 
 
CONCLUDING WORDS. 
 
 not yet been spoken. They all are but forerunners and 
 preparers of the way of that infinitely Greater One who has 
 spoken it. 
 
 We are at the end. But we ardently desire, at the conclu- 
 sion, to come to an understanding with those to whom the 
 treatment of Old Testament Literature in this Outline, and, 
 above all, the dissection of the books and documents into 
 various constituents, has seemed new and startling, perhaps, 
 indeed, highly objectionable. In large circles of the Evan- 
 gelical Church every kind of inquiry which is strictly historical, 
 and therefore critical, is still regarded as a "wrangling of 
 science falsely so-called," the outcome of a conceited and 
 unbelieving disposition, which consciously aims at the 
 destruction of faith in the Scriptures and, with that, of the 
 bronze foundations of the Church/ s faith as a whole. If there 
 are those who in such inquiries seek their own glory and 
 eagerly drag in the dust what is holy to others, they have 
 their reward. But they who with earnest and upright soul 
 strive to investigate the facts concerning the Holy Scriptures, 
 so far as these are accessible to human knowledge, need no 
 justification of their conduct. They know that they are not 
 bound to give account to man, but to God. But in the 
 interest of the many, who for the sake of an wiscriptural view 
 of Scripture have been troubled in conscience, three simple 
 truths may now be mentioned. First, the experimental truth, 
 that all attempts to distort or contradict historical facts for 
 supposed reasons of faith have hitherto proved ineffectual in 
 the end. There was a time when the allegorical exposition 
 of Scripture was regarded as the rightful privilege, in fact 
 the sacred duty, of a really orthodox theology. Our age no 
 longer admits the faintest pretence to such a right. There 
 was a time when the acknowledgment that the Hebrew vowel 
 points originated at the same time as the consonants was 
 reckoned amongst the signs of thorough orthodoxy. To-day 
 

 CONCLUDING WORDS. 165 
 
 such an acknowledgment would only be taken as the sign of 
 boorish ignorance. May that other time not be far distant 
 when the useless resistance to knowledge which can 110 longer 
 be shaken by any exegetical devices will be universally and 
 finally abandoned ! 
 
 Secondly : it is a disingenuous mode of fighting, to point 
 constantly at much which is still uncertain and disputed, and 
 thus endeavour to keep up amongst the ignorant the impression 
 that no scientific Scripture inquiry has ever brought anything 
 to light except subjective opinions, to-day set up, to-morrow 
 contradicted, the next day forgotten. No doubt there is much 
 that is uncertain, much indeed which will never be determined. 
 But that far more has been finally settled can only be denied 
 by him who has formed his opinion without a glance at the 
 actual condition of scientific inquiry. Such a glance renders 
 impossible the odd notion that hundreds of earnest and truth- 
 seeking men have agreed on a number of results purely out 
 of the spirit of contradiction and unbelief. 
 
 And thirdly : the demand for the disavowal of actual (not 
 merely imaginary !) historical facts and certainties, in the 
 supposed interest of religious faith, is a gross contradiction of 
 Evangelical and Keformed principles. And so much the more 
 when faith is demanded for external traditions which like 
 the late Jewish ones in question are demonstrably tarnished 
 in so many ways by accidents and misunderstandings. It is 
 therefore a simple duty of Christian truthfulness, in all those 
 cases where our view of Holy Scripture, founded on those 
 traditions, conflicts with indisputable facts, not to deny the 
 facts, but to reform our view of Scripture. Every other way 
 is an unbecoming criticism of God, to whom it seemed good 
 that thus, and not otherwise, His revelations to Israel and the 
 world should be made known. And not only unbecoming, 
 but also shortsighted. In the end the conviction will and 
 must make way that the theory of the development of Old 
 Testament religion maintained by a great number of Evan- 
 gelical inquirers of the present day, and also in this Outline, 
 corresponds not only with the facts but also with the deepest 
 
 
166 
 
 CONCLUDING WORDS. 
 
 interests of faith. Blamed by opponents as " Construction of 
 History," it rather seeks to trace out truly the methods which 
 God has followed with the chosen people. After tolerating 
 for a while so many semi-heathen elements which were mingled 
 with the religion of Israel as a national religion, they led to 
 ever-growing clearness respecting the true and final ends 
 of God. Prophetism and priestism, seemingly contradictory 
 tendencies, had to join in helping to bring Israel to those 
 ends for the salvation of the world. Prophetism is the medium 
 of those fundamental ideas of the sublime dignity, holiness 
 and righteousness, the grace and mercy, also, of God, the 
 Lord and Judge of all the world. The Priestly Law provides 
 the vesture without which these ideas could not fulfil their 
 work of: educating the as yet immature people. And the 
 longer the Biblical inquirer's thought is absorbed in such 
 contemplations of God's ways, the more willingly will he join 
 in the confession with which the Apostle closes his examin- 
 ation of that Divine mystery which is involved in God's ways 
 with Israel : " the depth of the riches and the wisdom and 
 the knowledge of God ! Of Him and through Him and unto 
 Him are all things. To Him be glory for ever ! Amen/' 
 
 
i 
 
 . 
 -S, .g^w 
 
 6 S^ 
 
 CONTEMPORARY E 
 EGYPT, ET 
 
 in 
 
 is!8 
 
 s.4 
 
 a ^ 
 
 il 
 
 i 
 
 a 
 
 
 .. 
 
 
 
 2 w 
 
 .2 "*"* 
 
 CO O 
 
 bc 
 
 ? 
 
 ^ 
 
168 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 I 
 | o 
 
 >< .. 
 
 1^ 
 
 p fH 
 
 ^2-a 
 
 -.sfL 
 
 cc o 
 
 a SM 
 
 1-1 s !l 
 
 2-S Ss 
 
 Pw ^3 
 
 Bj 
 
 o . 
 
 r 8 *- 9 ^^ 
 
 PM o^ .5 ^HH 
 
 g I 
 
 w o S 
 
 t> M CLI 
 
 H g ss 
 
 s i H 
 
 1-i 
 
 al 
 
 ^ 2 
 
 ,9 
 
 ill 
 
 l M s a 
 
 "S^-5 
 
 4^1 
 
 
 
 ga 
 
 ^| 
 
 HB| 
 
 Bt-4 3 
 
 
 g 
 abl 
 
 amongs 
 Judges 
 
 H 
 
 
 o 
 
 <M 
 
1500-1110. 
 
 169 
 
 ^ 
 
 F 
 
 Ol 
 
 & 
 
 r& 
 
 - PH fl 
 
 
 
 S 
 S >3 
 
 HfiW 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 12 
 *l 
 
 
 
 03 0) O 
 
 &3-S1 
 
 -( s-** 03 ^ 
 
 ^ p^a <u 
 
 "- O ^> b- 
 
 S3g|-8 
 
 *l 
 
 o 
 pd 
 
 4^ 
 
 i 
 
 a 
 
 ^ 2 ^^ 
 
 ^H 
 
 oM l 3 ^* 
 
 o3 S P 
 
 Jii-s-s 
 
 S5 
 
 SsJ-SS 
 
 '& 55 rC tJ o 
 
 1^?^ 
 
 > . 
 
 5^'5 
 
 49 
 
 co 
 .S 
 
 *3 
 
 ssassination of Eglon, King of 
 the Benjamite, Ehud. 
 
 lie Canaanite King (according < 
 iv. General) Sisera is vanquish 
 Plain of Jezreel by partof the 
 tribes under Barak and the " 
 ess " Deborah, and killed by ^ 
 
 stablishment of a part of Dan 
 (Judges xviii.). Jerubbaal 
 defeats the Midianites and f( 
 worship of the golden image o 
 at Ophrah (Judges vi.-viii.). 
 
 limelech, son of Jerubbaal, ass 
 his brothers and rules three 
 king over Shechem and the ne 
 ing towns. Rebellion and o 
 of the Shechemites. Abiim 
 Thebez (Judges ix.). 
 
 iphthah, of Gilead, defe 
 Ammonites and in pursuance 
 sacrifices his daughter (Judge 
 
 ymson, of Dan, champion agi 
 Philistines. 
 
 <1 
 
 H 
 
 H 
 
 ^ 
 
 S 
 
 85 
 
 
170 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 g S 
 S H 
 I 
 
 ag 
 
 I 2 
 
 o w S 
 
 Bfil 
 
 OQ O rt O 
 
 o ox" 1 d 
 
 ^ '' 
 
 S& 
 
 ll 
 
 .2 S 
 
 s 1.1--: 
 
 * 
 
 3 .2 ^ 
 
 5s 
 
 as 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 rd 
 
 e.2 
 
 OM WJ 
 
 M f=i < 
 
 .. 
 
 ?!-1 1111- i 
 
 a S3 5o 
 
 s^g-s^" a-a 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 a 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 J| 
 
1050-1020. 
 
 ^^ O L** W 
 
 ||| | 
 
 '~3sg 
 
 0-2 Or^t 
 
 I 
 
 OT *^ 
 O> .. 
 
 IS^S- 
 llljt. 
 
 O bC 73^0 
 ^*O O 03 
 
 5^ 
 
 
 lderness 
 pursued 
 towards 
 
 the W 
 stantly 
 oimity 
 d xxvi 
 
 
 o 
 
 abal and 
 
 XXV.). 
 
 OJ rt 
 
 "" 
 
 a - 
 
172 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OP THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 M 
 CO 
 
 
 P^ r*i ^ 
 
 *-4 ^-^ *- 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 O *~i 3 
 
 
 
 55 
 
 
 
 
 
 W . 
 
 
 .2 *^ S 
 
 
 
 H| 
 
 
 ^ eS 
 
 
 
 a! 
 
 K -^ 
 
 
 l|rl 
 
 CJ '-M Vl*^ 
 
 
 
 - H 
 
 
 n S fl'SJ -^ 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 *J e+^ ^3 O 
 
 
 
 ?, 
 
 
 S ^c^* ^ ^ 
 
 
 
 & 
 
 
 illli 
 
 
 
 Y EVENTS 
 
 SSYRIO- 
 
 EMPIRE. 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 ^'2 c 5 
 ( ^ i ~~ i 
 
 ^ *i 
 
 
 
 < 
 < 
 
 B ^>^ 
 
 lil 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 ^ 4)pq 
 
 1 2 I 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 Hill 
 
 
 
 
 
 d ^ 
 
 i ^ 
 
 
 
 
 O ed 
 
 1 | 
 
 
 
 
 5^ 
 
 W co 
 
 
 
 
 j?!*^ 
 
 tc HH .< 
 
 
 
 
 H ^ 
 
 H fe w 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 . 
 
 o H 
 
 
 
 
 S|J 
 
 SS 
 
 
 
 
 g3~ 
 
 
 j?| : ? 
 
 v p ti t 
 ^ ^ cd M 
 ^ M 
 
 oo^'rJdQaj" 
 
 r^-d ^ (M 
 
 Illltii 
 Ji.'PI-sa 
 
 .ss 
 
 - a 
 
 Z'-S 
 o j 
 
 HH 
 I. 
 
 1 
 
 avid flees to the Philistine 
 Achish of Gath, obtains the i 
 Ziklag, and, as vassal of Achish, 
 out forays in the South (1 Sam. 
 
 ill 
 
 rai|j 
 
 gSj^^" 
 
 ^lj=il 
 
 - 1 <^ "^ .2 *-< " 
 
 ^^ ^.-Sfl 0^^ 
 
 lljlll^l 
 
 i^! 6 |li! 
 
 i-sji'lll-i 
 
 4I|i^s r 
 
 g PQ ,0 H rfl rf 
 
 av/c?, King of Judah, at Hebron 
 all probability vassal of the Phi 
 [2 Sam. ii. Iff.]). 
 
 
 fi 
 
 H 
 
 6Q 
 
 CO 
 
 ) 
 
 3* 
 
 
 
 
 Ii 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
1020-1000. 
 
 173 
 
 <N 
 
 GO O 
 ? 
 
 -'% P* d JJ 3.2 
 
 *-< 
 
 O O 
 
 r- 1 L_: 
 
 OT p 
 
 2 
 8:2 
 
 8<i 
 
 '*g*d 
 
 CO S 
 
 S-g b 
 
 |tH^^. 
 
 ~e<_i 17^ ^^ 
 1 ^2 
 J^^ 
 _d e8 -S M 
 
 s ^^^ 
 
 " fl> S fcl 
 
 ^ ^^ 
 
 ^5 ^ CS^ 
 
 rt 
 
 ^.9 u>^ 
 
 o _^> p 
 
 t>>^> X O) 
 
 o d d & 
 
 g^ 3 2 ^ 
 
 "^i 
 tf? %% 
 
 *&&* 
 
 <1 
 
 ; ^ ^ 
 
 4 
 
 ^ d S 
 
 .if^i 
 
 .f ? *jjj 
 ^2 
 
 do * W 
 
 lo^ 
 oS|2 
 
 g-s.S^ 
 
 Ml^ 
 
 g * S 
 
 g Cfl^"" 
 
 ^11 
 
 g'g^ai 
 042CN 
 
 IJ ^ 
 II 
 
 
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 2 
 
 
 B 
 
 ' 
 
 i 
 
 
 w 
 
 M H 
 
 w w 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 p 
 
 
 W 
 
 
 H 
 E 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 * H 
 
 
 r< S 
 
 Pig 
 
 
 aSS 
 
 
 ^i w 
 
 - 
 
 rt _2 ^ 
 ^ 
 
 ipgg 
 
 
 ill 
 
 
 W K* 
 
 
 H X K 
 
 
 ^ H -<! 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 THE MONU 
 
 ISRAELITE 
 ATURE. 
 
 |4 
 
 
 la 
 
 PALESTINE. ISRAEL. 
 
 "eS 
 .'S 5 
 
 !f 
 
 ^.C^i 
 
 o 01 
 
 e*-i o 
 *5 
 
 11 
 
 O 03 
 rj 
 
 S^ 
 
 iree years' famine. David expiates 
 the blood-guiltiness of the house of Saul 
 by giving up seven of his descendants 
 to the Gribeonites. Eizpah's deed. 
 (2 Sam. xxi. The point in David's life 
 as uncertain as that of the numbering of 
 the people and the plague. 2 Sam. xxiv.) . 
 
 ibjugation of the Philistines and Moab- 
 ites ; victory over the Aramaean king, 
 Hadadezer of Zobah [and the Ara- 
 maeans of Damascus?] Subjugation 
 of the Edornites (2 Sam. viii.). 
 
 avid's generosity towards Meribaal, 
 son of Jonathan*(2 Sam. ix.). 
 
 anun, King of the Ammonites, in- 
 sults David's messengers, but is de- 
 feated at Eabbath Ammon, along with 
 his allies (Aram, &c.) by Joab and 
 Abishai. David himself defeats the 
 Aramaeans confederated under Shobach, 
 Hadadezer's general, at Helam 
 (2 Sam. x.). 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 GO 
 
 ft 
 
 W 
 
 pf 
 
 
 
00 C3 W d 
 
 ^^="d 2 
 
 -a S 
 
 crt -u 
 
 o SfS-g 
 
 ^'rt ^ 
 h H CO 
 
 ^fi-S 
 
 ^^"o-a 
 
 illi 
 
 rf >: ^ 
 
 t of Kabbi 
 Ammoni 
 
 g S'S 
 
 5r^ 313 
 
 ^^"SJ 
 
 n *S . 
 
 at C ^ ^ s 
 ^d'^ bC ^ 
 
 s a 
 
 fic-g 
 
 o 
 
 C W3 00 . 
 
 I S 2? 
 
 i|S 
 
 ?i 
 
 . ^02 
 
 -***- *j o 
 
 S-S^ o.J 
 
 J^2n'? 
 
 ^57^.- 
 
 11a- 
 
 <w 
 O) O 
 
 2 -d 
 
 0^-M 
 
 l<0 . 
 
 Q '*~ % ' 
 
 ||II| 
 
 *L, o e 
 
 13.2-2 1 
 
 A A p,:a 
 
 qj >~ t 
 
 s^is 
 
 "tJ^S H 
 
 jlll 
 
 i^s 
 
 '5 
 
 f-i "r~ J3 
 
 All 
 
 f|r|j 
 
 ii?j 
 
 M ^H2, 
 
 S r-n 
 
 3g* 
 I'i- 
 
 O) oj .^ 
 
 .SOcg^'l 
 
 ^ 2-2 S g 
 S-^^ 
 
 2.1" 
 
 S-s Se 
 
 1^1 a 
 
 fci-- fi 
 
 5^ 
 
 r^j *^ 
 
 Sag 
 
 el!?- 
 
 & ^ 
 
 "P^'M 
 
 ^ g h <** 
 
 M <u .j O 
 
 .22.5 - 
 
 ~q^ CO Cd *r"J 
 
 o 3a oj.s 
 
 S '3^ 
 
 - ^3^2^ 
 
 ^fl& 
 
 Pi 
 
 39* 
 S& 
 
 & '^ 
 
 S-TJ.S s 
 
 O 0) < r r^ 
 13 ^ E2 rf 
 
 ^^^O ft 
 
 -2 -si 
 
 rd-^ 
 
 D w cc <H 
 
 Ilw3 
 
 "53 's "S 
 3!cT 
 
 a-Iu 
 
 i^l-q 
 
 ilyl 
 
 ^ 
 
 P 
 
 <1 
 
 5 
 
 p 
 
 p 
 
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOE THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAEL1TI 
 
 co 
 
 
 |iy\ 
 
 H 
 
 
 7 __, i i -^ 
 
 S 
 
 
 00 5 
 
 I! 
 
 
 
 cs ^ 
 o g 
 
 rn 
 
 
 "_. s^ CO tJ) CH 
 
 fc 
 
 
 w _ ^ ss jj ctf 
 
 6 
 
 
 i H o e3 "to OT 
 
 
 
 02 fx^s r^ f ri 
 
 P H- 
 
 
 "o A o 
 
 Wg 
 
 
 
 ^*1 
 
 H 3 a 
 
 
 |l g E 
 
 w ^ 
 
 
 S-o g 1 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 y JH 
 
 
 III! 
 
 Ii. 
 
 
 S S | 
 
 H co fn 
 
 H P3 
 
 H 
 
 co 5^ 
 
 ISRAEL. 
 
 Adonijah, oldest surviving son of David, 
 seeks to become king, with Joab's 
 help, instead of his decrepit father. 
 Nathan (allied with the priest Zadok, 
 &c.) obtains from David, through Bath- 
 sheba, the installation of Solomon 
 (1 Kings i.). 
 
 David f. Solomon's vengeance on Adoni- 
 jah, Abiathar, Joab, Shimei (1 Kings ii. 
 16 ff.). 
 
 Solomon's marriage with a daughter of 
 Pharaoh (1 Kings iii. 1). Organization 
 of the administration by the institution 
 of twelve overseers (1 Kings iv.). 
 Importation of horses and chariots 
 from Egypt and trade with that country 
 (x. 26,28). The Edomite Hadad's 
 attempted revolt. Hostilities of Eezon, 
 King of Damascus (1 Kings xi. 14-25). 
 
 ft 
 
 ii 
 
demon's arrangement with 
 Hiram of Tyre. Building 
 of the temple and palace on 
 Zion by Israelite forced 
 labourers assisted by Tyrian 
 artists (I Kings v.-viii.). 
 
 ification 
 ). The 
 m's at- 
 on (1 
 
 
 oi^ -s- 
 
 g^gfci tL M 
 
 wi"5 *! 
 
 s.^'s -a 
 
 bC t- 3 .g m M 
 
 ft ft feO g. r- 
 
 2^'S-a.s tfs 
 
 I'SaiiM ^>^ 
 
 PQ K" 
 
 fS 
 
 
 rH'-Q* 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ^ g -apS ^ 9 
 
 ' 
 
 12 
 
178 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOK THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 RARY 
 HE As- 
 
 ONIAN 
 
 CONTEM 
 EVENTS IN 
 SYRIO-BAB 
 EMPI 
 
 
 OF TH 
 
 MENTS 
 ELITE 
 
 ONU 
 ISR 
 LITE 
 
 M 
 
 asr 
 
 fsa 
 
 00 CQ (M 
 <M 
 
 05 
 
 05 
 
 ^a.in^ P ^ a 
 
 a^^ 
 
 
 
 :S wRr^jH^j-^^-^ Sr^.b! O^^rrtfe 
 
 ^ M rg^,S^^H ^^H^^ ^^ 
 
 ^ w (_, 5 p^q d^^r-j o r rtiS 
 
 II 
 
 fc J-s^lJR'S^J'ill'g 
 
933-877. 
 
 179 
 
 H 
 
 * 
 g^ 
 00 g 
 
 e.s 
 
 ^H 
 -S 
 
 O O 0> 
 
 bC c3 +> 
 
 
 .88 
 
 w 
 
 r-H 00 
 05 
 
 0000 
 00 00 
 
 12 
 
180 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 g" 
 
 I 
 
 s 
 
 m 
 
 fc^ 
 
 O d 
 
 ; 
 
 1W"'.^1|4$M . --.- 
 
 c- LSJSW-S N ^ j - g , S w 
 
 s o^-g^ s -S -:^ g-^.2 
 
 g ^2^^s s'-g oo^^. i'ajaj 
 
 . 
 -.s 
 
 
 oTShd-g .o^S^^a^So^T 
 
 IKiiil 111^1^ 
 
 a 
 
 ^j c3 -^ "-" 
 O T3 g a> 
 
 t^c3 
 
 & 
 
 of the dissuasion of tin 
 along with Jehoshaphj 
 of Israel, marches 
 
 W 
 
 ' ' 2 'S' 
 
 sITshs 
 
 P<M ^ 
 
 n 
 
 besieged 
 
 xxii.). 
 

 O __1 
 
 a -8 
 
 3 xJ' 
 
 B 
 
 'g S' 
 
 
 w =3 
 ft 
 
 ii 
 
 II 
 
 -S .H 
 
 jo 
 
 H 
 
 bC 
 
 e:if 
 
 d *B 
 
 1'in 
 
 he Ara- 
 s under 
 n relief 
 hen hard 
 
 of 
 cu 
 dde 
 
 - 
 
 P, g 
 
 rt 
 
 S s ^ 
 
 '" I 03 
 
 ij '3fl .2 
 
 'i a^^ 
 10 .5 o ca g 
 
 |r^ r^ aj^ 3 
 
 lg l^" 2 
 
 li^ 
 
 p^ 
 
 s-s 
 
 ft 
 
 V* 
 
 O.M-I > 
 
 ^O oo 
 
 d? 
 
 press 
 vasio 
 (2 Ki 
 
 
182 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 ! 
 
 IB 
 
 S ^ 
 
 il 
 
 JL, Q ^ ?-< 
 
 0,0 
 
 o 
 
 'o 3 
 
 Y 
 As 
 IA: 
 
 TEM 
 S IN 
 -BA 
 
 "-* 
 
 ggoH | 
 
 sis 
 
 H B 
 
 ol wJijs 8-31.3 
 
 -M m oo H cr-'q oo PHO^ 
 
 w p K 
 2 ^ 
 
 ill 
 
 1^3 
 
 3 ^ 
 ^^ p.^5 
 
 O QQ g^O 
 
 ,_, a 5 a> 
 
 0^0^ 
 
 as 3 a> 
 
 N -M QJ (-3 
 
 ^S-5^ 
 
 2-rf 
 
 ^rQ.r-. 
 
 fill 
 
 8S14 
 
 'S "o.2^B 
 
 -SS1 
 
 15 5 S 
 --^^ 
 
 KS! 
 
 I! II* 
 
 o ^ tc^- 
 a ..*' a SB 
 
 .SPSS'S.S 
 
 as sJw 
 |3a 
 
 O 
 
 O O t^V * d 
 
 
 I III 
 
 <1 
 
 Ifislls^l ligl.il 
 
 ap^^^aa Js^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
842-783. 
 
 183 
 
 03 0* 
 
 P 3 
 CM 
 O 
 
 i i <n 
 
 o j3 . 
 
 j "S 
 
 W SO 
 
 
 a 
 
 M-l .i 
 
 il 
 
 H s a 
 
 ^ o o 
 
 _. H LJ ^" x 
 
 s's 
 
 ,M 
 
 ilfs 
 
 K-S"f 
 
 i? s 2 
 
 -i p ^I 00 
 
 ^ J 3^ 
 
 g o^^ 
 
 J^? 
 
 ^ -M p,^H 
 
 a^:-- 
 
 l M B ! a 
 
 o ~S "*"* *~^ 
 
 "i p'S.s 
 
 53-11^ 
 
 lisa 
 
 Sri4 O 
 
 PJ i>aj 
 
 OJ 53 M 0) 
 
 36-797 7ba*A 
 arrangemen 
 ture of the 
 (2 Kings xii 
 
 So OJ--J 
 
 P S^ 
 ^^.2. 
 
 ^H - fl^ 
 
 o p ea jo 
 
 SJj^JB 
 
 M 
 
 ^, 2 
 
 r^ N ~ (M 
 ^~" ?* "oT 
 
 2- 5 
 
 I-50O 
 
 M 
 
 O) 
 rjt Ci 
 
 00 
 
184 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 -i 
 *-ra bC -2 v^ a 
 
 a is a e3 p^ o 
 
 'H _> ac-H aJ +-> 2 
 
 te ^ 
 
 MPORARY 
 IN THE A 
 BABYLONI 
 MPIRE. 
 
 NT 
 T 
 O- 
 E 
 
 lOtf t-joo ^^ 
 
 t^r-M^ P^ X>.^| 
 
 C-t->'S rH fl *S OT"^ {3 CO 
 
 R'SS? fc-SS? wg S'S 
 
 ElSE OF THE 
 
 ONUMENTS O 
 ISRAELITE 
 LITERATURE. 
 
 . g 
 
 '~:s -S g -3 EH 
 
 d'R-c -s^Rl j=.|-Ss? : ~ 
 - 1 ^ 
 
 II 
 
 11 
 
 11 
 
 ! 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 W 
 
 CO CO 
 00-tf 
 
783-737. 
 
 185 
 
 a 
 
 S.g 
 
 
 rt^oj.o 
 
 
 4 -* 
 
 1*3 1^.3 . 
 
 1 if tn 
 
 CC 
 
 , 
 
 Sill 
 
 S 
 
 
 .2-3 . 
 
 Sf'5 :=' 
 
 :;: M .^H as K- 
 PQl ( > HI M 
 
 
 \y a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H.: 
 
 ^^l s 
 
 ^Is 13 oo 
 
 ^ss s 
 
 . 
 
 ji 
 
186 CH&ON01 
 
 5EAEL1TES. 
 
 Slg- 
 
 II" 
 
 *.i*l* 
 
 Illlti 
 
 Y 
 
 A 
 
 EVENTS IN TH 
 S YRIO -BAB YLO 
 PIRE. 
 
 E 
 
 
 ill^K as 
 
 ' e i s-i M 
 
 "Mlli i 
 
 *w <J S 
 _ 0^1-5 
 
 z 
 nno o 
 ee 
 
 M 
 
 IB, eg s._ pa OT 
 
 i ^ S^D N *-' 
 
 ia tgl^4 
 
 .2 ci H o 
 
 ^-" "5 'rt oo ^ 
 
 00 b 5 (M c 
 
 t^ CSrS t^ 
 
 , 
 
 O 
 
 I 21^^ 
 
 IS 
 
 " 
 
 Ss. - 
 
 
 slli-a 
 
 1-T if 
 
 rt S^ ^> 
 
 Illl 
 
 ^ 
 
 O >o 
 
 CO 00 
 
 i i 
 
'37-722. 
 
 187 
 
 
 
 o a- 
 
 o o 
 
 l-Wii I 
 
 
 
 
 M ^ .- 
 
 'll 
 
 IS j g 
 
 St 
 
 .i o^ 
 
 S-2 S 
 
 ^Hj^ 
 
 ill 
 
 CCO 4> 
 
 .1 . - 
 
 cJ> S 
 
 C3 fcC Q^ ^ 
 
 15 H .52 N cc 
 
 a^oT*f 
 
 ^J^l 
 
 l^^Q N o 
 _ * caps) 03 
 
 VJ ' q'E ^ -> 
 4^*5 .J P^Sr-, 
 
 ^ o:s B*! 50 t,^? 
 
 4gg|lis 
 
 . 2-2S&U 
 
 
 SfS.g| 
 
 Jill 
 
 W 
 
 l^tf-aaJl^fiSle 
 
 ^g"-s^ a 'ia5-^-i| 
 
 03 j* ^,PHS S rt Or^n-jR 
 
 -5 e3 *J 2 pfl <N ^ O fl O 
 
 CC -M k> i> "*J C, *3 >L^i i cj ,13 ec -- 
 
 2S 
 
 O CM 
 
188 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 PH 
 
 * 
 
 3 
 
 ONTEMPORARY EVENT 
 
 IN THE ASSYRIO- 
 
 BABYLONIAN EMPIRE 
 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 M 
 
 S| 
 
 701 War with Mero 
 dachBaladan ; Baby 
 lon taken (703?). 
 
 o a 
 111 
 
 GrJ O I-H 
 
 
 
 1-7 a* -ri 
 
 -gjs 
 
 K OCT 
 
 
714-609. 
 
 O> 0) 
 
 a 
 
 w**a 9 
 
 s^sll g 
 
 
 ^iliiriili 
 
 001 0) 
 
 Scythian inva 
 Hither Asia. 
 
 189 
 
 The Source N 
 Judges xvii.-xvii 
 
 i & 
 
 O u pfl p3 gj 
 
 00 / *-x ^ v "" ^ p- 
 
 03 x " -S 
 
 ^8 111 
 
 1 II 
 
 
 
 f 
 l 
 e 
 
 ng of 
 nd E 
 
 ^ g 
 
 * ''$*& 
 
 O W * 
 
 ^ JJ.2 
 
 tat 
 into JE. 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 N 
 
 W is5^ 
 
 ^ fli r* 
 
 5-grS a 
 
 i 2 
 bfj 
 
 d 
 
 'C 
 
 is d bc 
 -2 2 d 
 
 -" 
 
 *aj2 g 
 
 P^ c3 g 
 
 a *.*3 
 
 o^ S 
 
 O^ g ^'-f' 
 O ^^-C MO 
 
 jilfsis|:* 
 
 ^lsII4F 
 
 o"o 3 
 
 'g^^& 
 ^ g 
 r2 v Jq >.^ . ^ 
 
 Itt^-s J s||l 
 
 | ^S-g s3 9--J?n3 ? 
 
 
 x 
 
 M 
 
 03 
 
 bO 
 
 a 
 
 w 
 
 the peop 
 
190 CHRONOI 
 
 1*3 
 
 > M 0, 
 
 CONT 
 IN 
 
 BAB 
 
 r o 
 
 
 ! 
 
 ill 
 
 S O o 
 
 i.2'11^1 
 
 IIS%| 
 
 1l?-a?ll 
 
 
022-597. 
 
 191 
 
 of the Assyrian king- 
 dom, and (606 ?) its 
 capitals Niniveh and 
 Asshur. 
 
 605 Nebuchadnez- 
 
 zar (whilst crown- 
 prince) totally de- 
 feats Pharaoh Necho 
 at Carchemish on the 
 Euphrates. 
 
 The Egyptians lose 
 all foreign conquests. 
 
 604-562 Nebuchad- 
 nezzar King (of the 
 Chaldaeans) in Baby- 
 lon. 
 
 J& 
 
 a 
 S . 
 
 11 
 
 en </> 
 
 O f-t 
 
 as 
 
 cvM 
 
 II 
 
 , 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^*1 W r- t 
 
 M M >4 
 
 ^SM^BJf^ 
 
 d^og 1^2, 
 
 -S-at|M.a 
 
 
 
 * 1221113 21 
 
 o3 rt 
 ^5 J3 
 oO 
 
 l^^lllilll^i 
 
 3-1 g ja 
 
 
 B >> d ^S 
 
 *o o ' 
 
 k M 
 
192 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOE THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 -g^ 
 
 il 
 5 
 
 a 5 '-3 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 IBS 
 
 -Ss 
 
 *n 
 
 ^-9 
 
 o 
 
 . >. 
 
 M M 
 
 M ^ 
 
 O* ?H 
 
 i 100 I _ ifc> 
 
 tdekiak raised 
 buchadnezzar. 
 
 
 . 2-2-2^ . 
 
 S ^^tfl'oJ H 
 ocrt^ ?2^2 
 
 litJf 
 ^l-l i" 
 
 .S^^M&s 
 
 8 S.2-3 
 
 
 in 
 ty. 
 ed 
 r a 
 hi 
 ha 
 
 am 
 ity 
 ize 
 a 
 r 
 
 cS'S 
 
 s Q> 
 
 N. 
 
 o 
 
 e 
 n c 
 
 se 
 ezz 
 efor 
 d i 
 
 J^ 
 
597-568. 
 
 193 
 
 i 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 
 
 0; 
 
 a 
 00 
 
 * s'g-g.a -g 
 5 n' -s 
 
 8 8^, 5 
 
 S. a 
 
 sa 
 
 o.g 
 
 fljJI 
 
 .n .22 '"a -j 
 
 
 
 i ill 
 
 =8 
 
 
 i _j S .9 o ' 
 
 1 ^ o tL >>a 
 
 11 Wl: 1 
 
 s 
 
 13 
 
194 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES F03 THE EIISTORY 01? THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 I 
 
 g i S 
 Hg^ 
 g|H 
 3<J 
 
 o w 5 
 
 i: 
 
 ?; M < 
 
 CO 
 
 s-ss 
 
 559-56 Nergal S 
 ezer (Neriglissar 
 
 
 2t . 
 O rt 
 
 fill 
 
 
 O 
 
 _^ '2 
 
 E MONU 
 ISRAELIT 
 TURE. 
 
 
 ah 1 
 
 
 + - 
 
 
 ucleus of the 
 Holiness " 
 ii.-xxvi.). 
 
 
 
 3S? 
 
 *> 
 
 JH qj . 
 
 115 
 
 1 
 
 OT: *^ 
 
 1 
 
 
5G1-529, 
 
 195 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 552 Alliance of Na- 
 bonidus with Croesus 
 of Lydia. 
 
 
 . 
 
 f Ki 
 
 bObC 
 
 .a .2 
 
 II 
 
 
 
 
 
 o-2 
 
 co^ 
 10 PQ 
 
 g d 
 
 
 513 
 
 ^3 o 
 
 " 
 
 i 
 
 ais 
 
 -d -M 
 -- 
 
 '-32 
 
 PC: s 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 13 
 
196 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 W g 
 
 5 fi- 
 
 ONTEMPORARY EVEN 
 IN THE ASSYRIO- 
 BABYLONIAN EMPIRE 
 
 liS 1 
 
 a o 
 **- 
 
 o o 
 
 II 
 
 3 
 
 11 
 
 
 III 
 
 . 
 
 1 
 
 g* 
 
 
 Xerxes 
 li of 
 
 liv 
 le 
 
 485-4 
 (Acha 
 the B 
 
 o 5 
 
 il 
 
 So 
 
 !H ,2|H 
 
 ' sy . 
 
 ^ M 
 
 bo - 2 ^^^^^A 
 be cj'g o Oi X) 
 
 1-1- 
 u I-I 
 
 8' 
 
 j-s.s^. ,:g-g 
 ^afii 5 la 
 
 rt OS 
 
 - 
 
520-445. 
 
 197 
 
 a t 
 
 W >vS 
 
 S'^s 
 111 
 
 erciless dissolution of all mixed 
 riages (Ezra ix. and x.) involves 
 Jewish colony in serious internal 
 ords, and in animosities with their 
 neighbours, and finally (as may be con- 
 cluded from Ezra iv. 7ff. and Neh. i.) 
 occasions the destruction of the walls 
 of Jerusalem. 
 
 a s 
 ^ a-5 
 
 H 
 
 plet 
 em 
 
 E'M-'&Bx 
 
 I S lll:1 
 
 S-sss?:^ 5 
 
 , c 
 se 
 ty 
 osti 
 
 stilit 
 , &c. 
 Jer 
 
 of 
 
 .2-;gJ~- . 
 
1 98 CHEONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 "3 Is o 
 
 O *- M 
 
 s ^ 
 
 o o o 
 
 .t? ^ 
 
 '^ W 
 
 -. 
 
 o pq 
 
 a||S 
 
 .S K 2 OS 
 
 *- a 
 
 M oO.S 
 
 
 l-s-g 
 
 ^ sm 
 
 B. 
 
 ablication of the "Law-book 
 (i.e., the Priests' Code, enla 
 other pieces) brought by 
 the Exile. Celebration of t 
 Tabernacles in accordance 
 
 in Jerusa- 
 buses (Neh. 
 Sanballat's 
 eh. xiii. 28 
 f Jehoiada, 
 t, Eliashib ; 
 ntiqq. XL, 
 at-grandson 
 h. 
 
 ce 
 f ab 
 of 
 
 i 
 ds 
 en 
 g t 
 a s 
 -p 
 us 
 
 ies 
 (A 
 re 
 
 a 
 n 
 
 hemiah's second re 
 em. Reform of all kind 
 iii. 4 ft.). Banishme 
 son-in-law ; according 
 the banished man was 
 ndson of the high- 
 ording to Joseph 
 . 2, and viii. 2ff.) 
 Eliashib, called Ma 
 
432-311. 
 
 199 
 
 a * .3 
 
 ajc* 
 
 31 1| 
 
 CM g a 
 
 o d -M P 
 .._ o &,.; 
 
 
 
 SN 8 
 
 
 C3 fl\ O 
 
 CO r- 
 
 t: "SI 5 
 
 -*r o> d +* 
 
 00 . r-l <! 
 
 s?s 5?i^-s 
 
 i! ill! 
 
 i-H <n o 
 If* 
 
 S-S . 
 -2 n' rt 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 s 
 
 : ^iai*^^ 
 
 
 S O Or i H H t > S'~'dS O r ^Jrt3 
 
 S8^ s^ ^ w^^c? ^ o fl 
 
 M-4 PH 
 
 O C4 
 
 SJ 
 
 .2^ 
 
 ."S o 
 
 S^ 
 <J3 
 
 
 o| 
 
 l| 
 
 og 
 
 d a, 
 
 |fe 
 
 1-5 M 
 
 ! S 
 
 irS 
 
 t 
 
 o S 
 
 53 a 
 
 03 P 
 2 S 
 frV* 
 
 I 
 
 M r ^5^ 
 2 8.? .t>p 
 
 i 1 
 
200 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES, 
 
 E' 
 
 -3^J C op 
 
 &fjta 
 
 i Q) d i 
 
 ill ill i 
 
 , 
 
 ARY EVENTS 
 
 ASSTRIO- 
 
 N EMPIRE. 
 
 The historical work 
 of the Chronicler 
 (Ezra Nehemiah 
 Chronicles). Zech. 
 ix.-xiv. ? 
 
 II It si 4 
 
 
 r 
 
 GJ i t 
 
 O ^> 
 ^ 
 
 I 
 
OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 301-175. 
 
 201 
 
 3S 
 
 m 
 
 "003 
 
 sl^ ^1 
 
 p,-2 
 
 OJ I-H m n-( 
 
 .3 5 
 
 jp| 
 
 a ^ 
 
 i i o O P ( 
 
 iff 
 
 !4 
 
 ^ gw 
 
 rr u^ 
 
 &7 ** 
 2 ^2 - 
 
 ^ a t?3 ^s- 
 .Ea3-g^i~ 
 -~? ^j P<S ^i 1-1 
 
 00 a i 543 M 
 
 ~ 0> r^d t W . 
 
 i-s.sps^ a 
 ^ g^ p.^ 
 
 2 -M 
 
 o o o 
 o <u 
 
 p 
 D 
 
 Wl a 
 
 t'RW 
 
 Itlfil 
 
 c> SI -' T .2 4-i 
 r-< ^^ o3 oo O 
 
 C^ 
 
 o .2J &0 
 
 gw&^s 
 
202 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES, 
 
 2 
 
 
 H o 9 M 
 bC-s3 Q' 
 
 
 
 
 
 r-< t~t t^t V3 
 
 
 
 > u 
 
 w| 
 
 
 Nrj^li 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 S '"^ ^~"^ ^ r^* 
 
 
 
 is 
 
 
 ^_O {~* ctJ " 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 O j ^ ^^ cd 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 -*- -4-3 ^ ^ M 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 o-i '^ S 2 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 
 o a ^"^ 
 
 - 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ^ ^ o^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 K! o ->-3 i-cj 'Tn 
 
 
 
 05 
 
 1 Q, 
 
 
 
 
 b * 
 
 c Q.tr 
 
 
 
 
 
 o pi^5 
 
 
 
 
 !P 
 
 H3^,3 
 O O PH 
 
 
 
 
 Is! 
 
 |al 
 
 
 
 
 ;< ^ < 
 
 0) fl 
 
 
 
 
 6 w 
 
 g SM 
 H.S BHH 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 s 2 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 CG ^5 
 
 5 S 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 -- o 
 
 3 '* 
 
 J^^ e, ^ 
 ^ 1 
 .5 o o 
 fl-fl 
 
 |i i 
 
 w CO 0) 
 
 E d d 
 
 OQ O 
 
 $0 & 
 
 r-$ r"7i ^R 
 
 flfi 1 la 
 1st Is 
 
 o ^, M 'd 
 
 O w '^ c^ ^H 
 
 HI | 
 
 Jason surprises Jerusalem; Antiochus, 
 returning from Egypt, takes ven- 
 geance (169) on the inhabitants and 
 plunders the temple. 
 
 Antiochus, with savage cruelty, pro- 
 secutes the extirpation of the Jewish 
 religion and customs. Sabbath ob- 
 servance, circumcision and the posses- 
 sion of the Book of the Law, forbidden 
 on pain of death. Kazing of the walls of 
 Jerusalem; Syrian garrison in the 
 strongly fortified castle. Compulsory 
 heathen sacrifices in all the cities of 
 Judea. 
 
 In Dec., 168, erection of an altar of 
 Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple 
 was now dedicated, on the altar of 
 burnt offering at Jerusalem (" The 
 abomination of desolation," Dan. xi. 31, 
 xii. 11). 
 
 |s 
 
 f i 
 
 o 
 
 rH 
 
 g 
 
 r 1 
 
 
171-162, 
 
 203 
 
 cu 
 nt 
 ias 
 
 162-150 Demetrius I. 
 (Soter) procures the 
 murder of Antiochus 
 V. and Ly 
 
 i!sS 
 
 i; 
 
 d 
 
 li 2 
 
 ?i 
 
 pd^s P 
 
 S^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 OS 
 
 ^s 
 
 5^1 
 
 s-C-s 
 
 R|^ 
 ^^"s 
 
 H 
 
 organizes the insurrection. Destr 
 tion of the heathen altars. Putting 
 death of the renegade Jews. 
 
 {3 i(?> w O 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 +H 
 
 
 
 - O-Q tT f- 
 
 355.2*3 
 
 g 
 
 ^3 
 
 r^! O 
 
 
 TS fl o S 
 
 s^'pV* 3 
 
 W*w 1*0 
 
 
 fO 
 
 -t-l 
 
 CM 
 
 .s 
 
 M 
 
 P 
 
 S 
 
 w ff 
 
 ! 
 
 
 1 
 
 S 2 * 1*3 
 
 ^isJl 
 ^1^ M - 
 
 Is-d-s 
 
 
 
 1? 
 
 
 
 a * 
 
 45 
 
 3W4J j? 
 
 ' S g g. 
 
 
 
 
 1 a 
 
 
 
 M o"< ^-2 
 
 
 c3 
 
 rd 
 
 
 1 
 
 3J3 fi^J 3^} 
 
 ^3 ^ ^ 
 
 a 
 
 
 eS 5 
 
 en 
 
 ^ ^ CU 
 
 + "T ^ 
 
 T3 
 
 *M 
 
 ^ 
 
 P= 
 
 2^ g^-g a 
 
 
 O) 
 
 O 
 
 s s 
 
 o . 
 
 42 O ^ So 
 
 |j N 3 
 
 n3 
 
 td 
 
 a 
 
 11 
 
 ^^ 
 
 04- 
 
 j! 
 
 .^5|: 
 a S --gfi S 
 
 a! ^^"5 
 
 g^o 
 
 e3 es 
 P^^^ 
 
 
 
 ^.?^-^ 
 
 *~^ a 
 
 'o'H, 
 
 02 g 
 o 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 ll 
 
 00 O2 
 
 1^ 
 
 si 
 
 ^ & 
 
 0) J3 
 
 
 
 fl o^ o . 
 
 .,3 B-d ^^ 
 M ^ H S g 
 
 S3 . 1 
 
 C S ^g tc8 
 
 o bCh-3 *~5 o 
 
 1 
 
 QJ P^ 
 
 g.<* 
 
 Is 
 
 p> 
 
 sll 
 
 =^a 
 
 H 
 
 i 1 
 
 'S-S|-| 
 
 158^5(3 
 p 
 
 3 
 
204 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES. 
 
 II 
 
 .2 " 
 
 S.9 3 
 
 o 
 
 83H 
 
 
 
 
 (Nicanorf). Allianceof Juda 
 Romans. Judas f in th 
 te battle with Bacchides, th 
 f Demetrius. Eule of th 
 rty under the high-pries 
 
 oj^^ 
 
 I *^s 
 
 ^SSS'l 
 
 iiitJ^ 
 
 w 
 
 natJian, brother of J 
 ponderance for the M 
 
 S^ 
 iS^^'S . 
 
 ib!l 
 
 o^^lS 
 
 S-S -S 
 
 o p-P- M 
 
 "S'C J:^-fe* 
 
 .S.SP-^S 
 
 T3 bC^ ^ L, 
 
 Ale 
 II. an 
 m from 
 to the 
 , but is 
 Ptole- 
 
 athan, hitherto a 
 alas, extorts fr t 
 crease of territory an 
 xation, but then passe ov 
 de of Trypho (see column i 
 ken prisoner by the latter 
 ais and afterwards murdere 
 
 mon, Jonathan's brother, high-priest 
 and prince, obtains from Demetrius 
 the recognition of the independence of 
 Judea (in 142 the computation of time 
 by the years of Simon begins). 
 
 2 CO CO 
 ^HTjl 
 5O iH rH 
 
 ^ 
 
 9 
 
205 
 
 be 
 
 be 
 
 I* 
 
 s^b * 
 
 r t 
 H c* 
 
 .2 S *J 3 
 
 I! 
 
 ^W 
 
 ^a 
 
 g-s 
 
 OP^PQO 
 
 o"^ 
 
 II 
 
 11 
 
 gS 
 
 la 
 
 02^ 
 
 ay, 142. 
 of Jeru 
 
 fe'g, 
 
 .22 d 
 
 us 
 
 ty 
 
 peo 
 est, 
 
 on, by the 
 ry high-prie 
 ynasty of the 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 'S 
 
 ^3 
 
 'S 
 
 d 
 
 111 I 'ill 
 
 ^:II:H 
 
 So-a^ * 3 -^ 
 
 K 45^3 oa ftcd o CU 
 
 l 
 
 - 
 
 rH CO r-t 1 
 
 o *2 
 
 rH 0-H 
 
III. 
 
 MEASUEES AND WEIGHTS, MONEY, THE 
 COMPUTATION OF TIME IN THE OLD 
 TESTAMENT.* 
 
 1. MEASURES AND WEIGHTS. 
 
 1. Measures of Length. By far the most frequently 
 mentioned measure of length is the cubit (Heb. 'amma, 
 which also means " elbow " or " fore-arm"). It was divided 
 into two spans (zereth, 1 Sam. xvii. 4, &c.), each of these 
 containing three palms (tophach, Exod. xxv. 25, &c.)j of four 
 fingers each ('esba\ 1 Kings vii. 15). 
 
 Ezekiel (xl. 5, xliii. 13) founds the measure of his future 
 temple on a cubit which is a cubit and a handbreadth of the 
 ordinary standard long. Hence it is usually, and probably 
 with justice, assumed that in place of the smaller cubit which 
 had gradually become prevalent he restored "the old measure," 
 by which, according to 2 Chron. iii. 3, the temple of Solomon 
 was built. But it is uncertain whether the Hebrew measures 
 are to be identified with the Egyptian or the Babylonian. 
 Amongst the Egyptians the great or "royal" cubit, 
 (7 handbreadths or 28 digits) amounted to 525-528 millimetres, 
 and therefore the small one (6 handbreadths) to about 
 
 * On this section cf . especially J. BENZINGER, Hebriiische Archaologie (Freib. 
 i. B. u. Leipzig, 1894), p. 178 ff. 
 
MEASURES AND WEIGHTS. 
 
 450 mm. But the great or " royal " cubit of the Babylonians 
 comes to about 555, the small or common cubit to about 
 495 mm. Hence the difference is not great. In determining 
 the common Hebrew cubit there is an uncertainty of between 
 45 and 49 centimetres, and in that of Ezekiel between 52 and 
 55 centimetres. 
 
 The following larger measures of length are mentioned : 
 
 a. The Kod (qane, precise meaning, reed, cane), which 
 measured, according to Ezek. xl. 5 (cf. also xl. 3, 7 f ., xlii. 
 16 ff.), six great cubits, i.e., according to the above, about 
 3 metres and 20 or 30 centimetres. 
 
 b. The Length (kibnl, only in the connection Jeibrath 'eres), 
 i.e., a length of land, Gen. xlviii. 7, and 2 Kings v. 19, or 
 Idbrcdli ha ares, the length ^ of the land. In all three cases 
 the context shows that it is a short distance, and can scarcely 
 be a definite measure. 
 
 The superficial measure semed also (yoke, literally, team], 
 which is applied to arable land at 1 Sam. xiv. 14, and to vine- 
 growing land at Isa. v. 10, is probably a mere approximate 
 reckoning of as much laud as can be ploughed in a clay with 
 a team of oxen. 
 
 2. Measures of capacity. With the exception of the Corner 
 and its equivalent, the 'issdron, i.e., " tenth " (see below), all 
 the Dry and Liquid measures are formed on the sexagesimal 
 system, and there can therefore be no doubt that they came 
 from Babylonia, from which country this system spread over 
 Syria and Palestine several centuries before the immigration 
 of the Hebrews. The measures mentioned in the Old Testa- 
 ment are : 
 
 Chomer (Isa. v. 10, translated "Malter" by Luther, in all 
 other passages " Homer "), only mentioned as a Dry Measure, 
 = 364-4 litres [In the Oxford " Helps to the Study of the 
 Bible" the earlier Homer is stated to =293760 litres, or 
 8-081 bushels, and the latter 214-200 litres, or 5*893 bushels]. 
 
 Kor (I Kings v. 2, &c., Dry Measure; Ezek. xlv. 14, for 
 Liquid), of the same contents as the Chomer. 
 
 Lethekh, only at Hosea iii. 2 (as a Grain Measure), according 
 
208 MEASURES AND WEIGHTS, MONEY, THE 
 
 to the (perhaps merely conjectural) tradition, half a chomer, 
 i.e., 182-2 litres. 
 
 'Ephd (Isa v. 10, &c., translated " Scheffel " by Luther ; 
 Prov. xx. 10, "Mass"; often also "Epha"), the most 
 frequently mentioned Dry Measure; the tenth part of 
 a chomer (Ezek. xlv. 11) =36-41. At Ezek. xlv. 13 the 
 sixth part of an 'epha is mentioned . 
 
 Bath (at Isa. v. 10 Luther renders "Eimer," elsewhere 
 "Bath"), only for liquids; the tenth part of a kor (Ezek. 
 xlv. 14), and therefore of the same contents as the 'epha, 
 = 36-41. 
 
 Sea, in the Old Testament only for Dry Measure; a third of 
 the 'epha = 12-141. 
 
 Htn, Liquid only; a sixth of the bath = 6-071. 
 
 umer (Gomer), a measure which is only found in the so-called 
 Priests' Code (Exod. xvi.) ; a tenth of the 'epha, therefore = 
 3-64 1. The definite explanation at Exod. xvi. 36 proves that the 
 name was not employed till late. Elsewhere in the Priests' 
 Code the same measure is called 
 
 'Issaron, i.e., tenth (of an 'epha). Consequently in the 
 'Omer or 'Issaron the Decimal System (though not till the 
 Priests' Code) triumphed over the old system, according to 
 which the 'epha fell into fractions or multiples of six. 
 
 Qab, only at 2 Kings vi. 25 ("the fourth part of a cab ") ; 
 the third of a hin, the sixth of a sea, the eighteenth of a bath 
 or 'epha= 2'21. 
 
 Log (only at Lev. xiv. 10 ff, as Oil Measure), the fourth of 
 a qab = 0'50 1. 
 
 3. Weights. Like the Measures of Capacity, the System of 
 Weights, which the Hebrews doubtless adopted from the 
 Canaanites, was of Babylonian origin, and it, too, is founded 
 on the sexagesimal system : 1 talent = 60 minae = 3600 
 shekels. The Babylonians distinguished between the heavy 
 and the light talent, as well as between the heavy and 
 the light mina ; in each case the light weight contained 
 only half of the heavy. But another distinction was also 
 made between the royal weight (according to the standard 
 
TIME IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. 209 
 
 weights found in the ruins of Nineveh, 1 heavy talent = 
 60*6 kilos. , and therefore a heavy mina was about 1 kilo.) and 
 the common weight. The latter (probably older) system made 
 its way amongst the Hebrews and others, and we must 
 calculate the statements concerning weights in the Old 
 Testament according to it : the talent (Heb. IcHcJcdr, literally, 
 circle) = 58*944 kilos.; the mina (Heb. mane), the sixtieth 
 part of a talent = 982*4 grammes ; the shekel (Heb. sheqel), 
 the sixtieth part of a mina = 16*37 grammes. The following 
 fractions of the shekel are mentioned : The half-shekel (Heb. 
 leqa, Gen. xxiv. 22, &c.), the quarter-shekel (1 Sam. ix. 8), 
 and the gtrd (i.e., "grain," = -^o shekel). A distinction also 
 is drawn between the heavy and the light shekel, &c., in this 
 common weight; the light shekel comes into consideration 
 especially with reference to money (see below). 
 
 But as it happened with the measures of capacity so here 
 also a change to the decimal system is found, in that the 
 mina is reckoned as 50 instead of 60 shekels. This does 
 not mean that the shekel was made heavier but that the 
 mina and the talent received a lighter denomination. Traces 
 of this reckoning are first found in the Old Testament at 
 Ezek. xlv. ] 2 (where the direction, " And ye shall reckon the 
 mina at 50 shekels" [see critical note on Ezek. xlv. 12, in 
 Kautzsch's Die Heilige Schrift] obviously introduces some- 
 thing fresh) ; again, in the Priests' Code, Exod. xxxviii. 25 ff. 
 (1 talent = 3000 shekels ; hence the mina = 50 shekels). At 
 2 Chron. ix. 16 the mina seems to be reckoned as 100 shekels, 
 for the weight of Solomon's golden targets is stated at 
 300 shekels, instead of 3 minae (1 Kings x. 17). Probably, 
 however, we have here, as is so frequently the case with the 
 Chronicler, an intentional enhancing of the traditional 
 statement. 
 
 The division of the shekel into 20 gerahs, like the new 
 computation of the mina, seems to have first become 
 customary in Ezekiel's time, for he lays special stress on 
 it at xlv. 12 (see above). With this it corresponds that 
 the proportion is invariably repeated in the Priests' Code 
 
 14 
 
210 MEASURES AND WEIGHTS, MONEY, THE COMPUTATION OF 
 
 (Exod, xxx. 13, Lev. xxvii. 25, Num. iii. 47, xviii. 16) when 
 the " holy weight " is prescribed. The " holy weight " (lit. 
 ff shekel of the sanctuary"), according to the view of the 
 rabbis, is contrasted with the common weight, supposed to be 
 half as heavy ; in reality, with the somewhat lighter silver 
 shekel which was current as a coin (see below). 
 
 2. MONEY, 
 
 Apart from the introduction of Persian coins after the 
 Exile (see below), the precious metals were employed as the 
 medium of exchange by weighing out the amount (Gen. xxiii. 
 15 f. : cf. also Isa. Iv. 2) in the balance (Jer. xxxii. 9). It is 
 no doubt probable that even in early times pieces of deter- 
 minate weight, provided perhaps with some stamp, were in 
 circulation. The silver quarter-shekel, 1 Sam. ix. 8, points in 
 this direction, perhaps also " the pieces of silver," Gen. xlii. 
 25, 35, as well as the geStfd t Gen. xxxiii. 19, Josh. xxiv. 32, 
 Job xlii. 11, which can only be explained, especially in the 
 passage in Job, as pieces of metal of definite weight. But 
 seeing that the weighing of pieces of metal to a definite 
 weight, according to all the indications, was a private affair, 
 and therefore furnished no guarantee of correctness, the 
 re-weighing of these pieces, at least in the case of large sums, 
 was inevitable. The predominance of silver as the medium of 
 exchange is evidenced by the fact that Iceseph, " silver," in the 
 wider sense of the word, may mean " money " or " payment " 
 (Exod. xxi. 11) in general. 
 
 Naturally the money was weighed out in ancient times in 
 accordance with the prevalent scale of weights (see above) : 
 here, too, the shekel, as sixtieth (or 50th) part of the mina 
 and three thousand six hundredth (or 3000th) part of the 
 talent, was the unit. But as the circulation of metal pieces 
 of definite weight became more common it must have been 
 felt more and more keenly that it was very awkward to 
 reckon the gold shekel in terms of the silver shekel, or vice 
 versa, whilst the relative values of gold and silver remained 
 
TIME IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, . 211 
 
 fixed in the proportion of 1 to 13J. According to the great 
 common weight (see above, p. 209) a shekel weighed 16*37 
 grammes, according to the small weight about 8*18 grammes. 
 A silver piece, therefore, of about 109 gr. corresponded 
 with a gold shekel of the latter weight ; a silver piece of 
 218 gr. to a gold shekel of the heavy weight. The difficulty 
 of reckoning was relieved by the production of a unit of 
 silver, a piece which either weighed -j^ta (in Babylonia, &c.) 
 or -j^th (almost everywhere in Phoenicia, as well as among 
 the Israelites) of the silver piece corresponding to the gold 
 shekel : hence if we take the small common weight as the 
 basis it would amount to 10" 91 or 7*27 gr., and with the 
 larger common weight as the basis 21*82 or 14*54 gr. These 
 silver pieces also commonly bore the name shekel, although 
 in reality they were 1*83 or 0*91 gr. less than the shekel of 
 weight or gold shekel. 
 
 The first evidence that the Israelites actually made the 
 silver shekel equal to y^th (not j^th) of the weight of the 
 gold shekel multiplied by 13 J is furnished by the, division 
 into half and quarter shekels which is also found in other 
 places'* where the shekel was fixed at ^th of the above 
 weight. It is shown further by the actual weight of the 
 (stamped) shekels of the Maccabasan period which have been 
 preserved in fairly considerable numbers. This varies 
 between 14*50 and 14*65 gr. : 14*55 gr. has therefore been 
 taken as the average. 
 
 Both in gold and silver the mina was reckoned as contain- 
 ing 50 shekels, not 60 as in the older weight, and the talent 
 60 such minae (and therefore 3000 shekels). If we put the 
 
 * If Exod. xxx. 13 fixes the so-called poll-tax at half a shekel and Neh.'x. 33 
 at a third of a shekel, Nehemiah perhaps adheres to the Persian system, which 
 was constructed on the tenth of a shekel standard and accordingly (cf . Benzinger, 
 loc. cit., p. 193) divided the shekel into thirds, not into halves and quarters. 
 On the other hand, the Maccabjean system, which, according to the above, was 
 constructed on the fifteenth of a shekel standard, again demanded the half 
 shekel as poll-tax (cf. Matt. xvii. 24 ff ., where the didrachma or double drachma 
 corresponds to the value of half a shekel). 
 
 14 * 
 
 
212 MEASURES AND WEIGHTS, MONEY, THE COMPUTATION OF 
 
 value of the gold shekel at about 2, and that of the silver 
 shekel at about 2s 8d* then 
 
 I Gold shekel = 16'37 gr. = 12 
 
 = 818-6 gr. = 100 
 
 Gold mina = 
 Gold talent = 
 Silver shekel = 
 Silver mina = 
 Silver talent = 
 
 49-11 kilos. = 6000 
 14-55 gr. = 2.9 8d 
 727-5 gr. = 6. 13s 4d 
 43-65 kilos. = 400 
 The following stamped coins are mentioned in the Old 
 Testament: 
 
 1. The Daric (Heb. adarkon), introduced by Darius I. 
 (521*485), a gold coin of 8'40 gr. (i.e., about ^th of the light 
 Babylonian mina), and therefore worth about 1. 2s*: cf. 
 Ezra viii. 27 (about 458). At 1 Chron. xxix. 7, the computa- 
 tion by darics is pre- supposed even for David's time, a proof 
 that the coin must have been in circulation for a very long 
 time. 
 
 2. The Drachme (Heb. darkemon), Ezra ii. 69 (Neb. vii. 
 70 ff.). , From a Phoenician inscription found in the Piraeus 
 in 1888, in which darkemon and adarJcon stand beside each 
 other, it is clear that they are not names of the same coin, as 
 used to be thought. Cf. Ed. Meyer, Die Entstehung des 
 Judenthums (Halle, 1896) p. 196ff. He estimates the gold 
 drachme, in case the Persian system is followed, at 4' 3 gr., = 
 about 12s. 
 
 According to 1 Mace. xv. 6, the Jews first obtained the 
 right to coin money in 139-138 B.C., under the high-priest and 
 prince, Simon. 
 
 3. COMPUTATION OF TIME. 
 1. The Year. The ancient Hebrew year was a solar t year 
 
 * [Cf. Helps to the Study of the Bible, p. 150. 2V.] 
 
 f At Gen. vii. 11, viii. 14 (in the Priests' Document) the length of the Deluge 
 Year is reckoned from the 17th day of the 2nd month of the 600th year of Noah 
 to the 27th day of the 2nd month of the 601st year. This presupposes that in 
 the primBBval period they reckoned by lunar years of 354 days, and therefore 
 had to add eleven days to complete the solar year (the traditional length of the 
 Deluge.) 
 
TIME IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. 213 
 
 of twelve months. This follows partly from the names of 
 certain months, in so far as they are suitable to definite 
 seasons, and partly from the assignment to definite months of 
 the feasts which depend upon the harvest. In pre-exilic times 
 the year began in autumn (Exod. xxiii. 16, xxxiv. 22) ; in all 
 probability there is a reminiscence of this in the appoint- 
 ment of the new moon (i.e., the first day) of the seventh 
 month as the " Day of Trumpet Blowing " (Lev. xxiii. 24, 
 Num. xxix. 1). During the Exile, in accordance with the 
 Babylonian system, the beginning of the year was transferred 
 to the spring ; the manner in which Exod. xii. 2 emphasizes 
 the Passover month as the first month of the year shows 
 plainly how much this was felt to be an innovation. 
 
 2. The Months. In spite of and contemporaneously with 
 the computation by solar years (see above) the computation by 
 lunar months (from new moon to new moon) of twenty-nine 
 to thirty days each, adopted from the Canaanites, asserted 
 itself amongst the Israelites. * It is an evidence of this that 
 the expression for " new moon " (chodesh) was partly used for 
 the first day of the month and partly for the " month " in 
 general, and eventually quite displaced the antique Semitic 
 designation of the month (yerach)). Of the old Hebrew (or 
 Canaanite) names of the months, too, it happens that only four 
 have been preserved, namely, 
 
 'Abtb (Exod. xiii. 4, xxiii. 15, xxxiv. 18, Deut. xvi. 1), in 
 full, Chodesh hd-Abtb, i.e., the month of ears, the seventh 
 (according to later reckoning, the first) month. 
 
 Ziv (1 Kings vi. 1-37), the month of the brilliance [of 
 flowers], the eighth (later, second) month. 
 
 'Mhdnim (1 Kings viii. 2), i.e., probably, the month of 
 the constantly flowing [brooks], the first (later, seventh) 
 month. 
 
 Bui (1 Kings vi. 38), the second (later, eighth) month. 
 
 * Although we have no evidence for it in the Old Testament the twelve lunar 
 months (= 354 days can only have been made up into a solar year of 365 days 
 by the deliberate insertion of an intercalary month (in the later Jewish calendar, 
 the second or latter Adar as a thirteenth month.) 
 
214 MEASURES AND WEIGHTS., MONEY, THE COMPUTATION Oi 1 
 
 In the time immediately preceding the Exile the number of 
 the month took the place of its name; this is universal in 
 Ezekiel, in the later portions of the Book of Jeremiah, in the 
 Books of Kings (where the names of the months, 1 vi. 1, 38, 
 viii. 2, already seemed to require explaining), as well as in 
 Haggai and Zechariah. But, together with the numbers, 
 Zechariah already uses twice the new, Babylonian- Syrian 
 names (i. 7, vii. 1) ; five others are incidentally mentioned in 
 the Books of Esther, Ezra and Nehemiah. The complete list 
 of names is : 
 
 1. Nisan (Neh. ii. 1, Esth. iii. 7). 
 
 2. 'lyyar 
 
 3. Sivan (Esth. viii. 9) 
 
 4. Tammuz 
 
 5. 'Ab 
 
 6. 'filial (Neh. vi. 15) 
 
 7. Tishrl 
 
 8. Marches van 
 
 9. Kislev (Zech. vii. 1, Neh. i. 1) 
 
 10. Tebeth (Esth. ii. 16) 
 
 11. Shebat (Zech. i. 7) 
 
 12. 'Adar (Ezra vi. 15, Esth. iii. 
 and often) 
 
 Approximately, middle of 
 March to April. 
 April to May. 
 May to June. 
 June to July. 
 July, to August. 
 August to September. 
 September to October. 
 October to November. 
 November to December. 
 December to January. 
 January to February. 
 
 7, 
 
 February to March. 
 
 3. Weeks and Days. With the exception of Gen. xxiv. 55 
 (supposing that the ten days there is to be regarded as a 
 reference to the division of the month into so-called decades), 
 the. week of seven days (shdbua f , i.e., a seven [of days] is 
 always taken for granted. The days were reckoned from 
 sunset to sunset (but cf. Gen. i. 5-8, &c., where the days are 
 reckoned from morning to morning). In all probability the 
 time from morning to evening was divided into twelve hours, 
 which were longer or shorter according to the season. It is 
 in favour of this opinion that, although there is no expression 
 for " hour" in the Heb. Old Testament, we are told that Ahaz 
 

 TIME IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. 215 
 
 set up a sun-dial in Jerusalem, probably after an Assyrian 
 pattern. 
 
 The night was divided into a first (Lam. ii. 19 : " Beginning 
 of the night-watches"), middle (Judges vii. 19), and last 
 (Exod. xiv. 24) watch of the night; according to 1 Sam. xi. 11, 
 the last was also called the morning watch. 
 
IV. 
 
 LIST OF OLD TESTAMENT PROPER NAMES, 
 ACCOMPANIED WITH AN EXACT TRANS- 
 LITERATION OF THEIR HEBREW FORMS. 
 
 THE Hebrew consonants are transliterated as follows : 'Aleph 
 by } } Beth, &c., ~b, g, d, li, v, z (a quite soft s, not at all 
 resembling the German 3), ch (something like ch in the 
 German "Kachen" [or Scotch loch], t (the hardest t), y, k 
 (when aspirated, kli, something like the German ch in Kechen, 
 Blech, &c.), I, m, n, s, c (a peculiar guttural), p (aspirated, pli), 
 s (an emphatically pronounced s), q (a strong fc, formed at the 
 back of the palate), r, (to be spoken as the common s) sh, t. 
 No notice is taken in the transliteration of the h which is added 
 at the end (especially of feminine words in a), as a mere vowel 
 letter, i.e., as pointing to a preceding vowel. 
 
 The long vowels are represented by a, e, T, 6, u; the 
 short by a, e (unaccented Seghol; accented Seghol by e), 
 i 9 a, u. The so-called 8heva quiescens is not noticed ; 
 Sheva mobile is represented by e, the so-called Chateph- 
 sounds by , a, o; Pathach furtivum (always after a long 
 vowel) also by . 
 
 Hebrew words as a rule have the accent on the final 
 
LIST OF OLD TESTAMENT PROPER NAMES. 
 
 217 
 
 syllable ; an accented penultimate syllable is indicated in the 
 following list by an accent; and in such cases the accented e, i, 
 o, u (e, i } 6, ii) is always a long vowel, but accented a (a) is 
 such only in yahu, . . . yavesh, . . . mdueth, . . . pau. 
 
 Aaron, 'Aharon 
 Abarim, 'Abdrim 
 Abdon, 'Abddn 
 Abel (place name), 
 
 'Abel 
 Abel (man's mame), 
 
 Rebel (breath) 
 Abiah, 'Abiyya (also 
 
 'Abiyydhu, 'Abiy- 
 
 ydm 
 
 Abiathar, Ebydthar 
 Abigail, 'Ablgdyil 
 Abihu, 'Abihu' 
 Abimael, 'Abimcfel 
 Abimelech, 'Abime- 
 
 lekh 
 
 Abishai, 'Abishay 
 Abner, 'Abner, also 
 
 'Abiner 
 Abraham, 'Abraham 
 
 ('Abrdm) 
 
 Absalom, 'Abshdlom 
 Accad, 'Akkad 
 Accho, 'Akkd 
 Achish, 'Akkish 
 Achmetha, 'Achm8thd 
 
 (Ecbatana) 
 Achor, 'Akhar 
 Achshaph, 'Akhshaph 
 Achzib, '_Akhzlb 
 Adam 'Adam (man) 
 Adama, 'Addmd 
 Admah, 'Admtl 
 Adoni j ah , 'Adoniyydhu 
 Adoraim, 'Adordyim 
 Adrammelech, 
 
 5 Adrammclekh 
 Adullam, 'Adulldm 
 Adummim, 'Adum- 
 
 mlm 
 
 Agur, y Agur 
 Ahab, 'Ach'db 
 Ahasuerus, Achashve- 
 
 rush (Xerxes) 
 Ahaz, Achdz ^ 
 Ahaziah, 'Achaeyd, 
 
 'Achazyahu 
 Ahiah, 'Achiyya, 
 
 'Achiyydhil 
 Ahikam, 'Achiqdm 
 Ahimaaz, 'Achvrnd'as 
 Ahimelech, 'Achime- 
 
 lekh 
 Ahithophel, 'Achttlio- 
 
 phel 
 
 Ai, 'Ay, also 'Ayyd 
 Ain, 'Ay in 
 Ajalon, 'Ayydlon 
 Akrabbim, *Aqrdb- 
 
 bim 
 
 Almodad, 'Almoddd 
 Almon, *Almon 
 Amalek, 'Amdley 
 Amasa, 'Arnold 
 Amaziah, 'Amasyd 
 Ammon, 'Ammon 
 Amnon, 'Amnon, 
 Amorite, 'Amort 
 Amos (the Prophet), 
 
 'Amos 
 Amoz (father of 
 
 Isaiah), 'Amos 
 Amraphel, 'Amrdphel 
 Ana, 'And 
 Anab, 'Andb 
 Anak, 'Andq 
 Anakim, 'Andqlm 
 Anamim, 'Andmlin 
 Auathoth, 'Anathoth 
 
 Anim, 'Anini 
 Aphek, 'Apheq 
 Ar, 'Ar^ 
 Arab, *Ardbi 
 Arabian, 'Arab 
 Arad, 'Ardd 
 Aram, 'Aram 
 Ararat, 'Ararat 
 Arba, 'Arba 
 Argob, 'Argub 
 Ariel, 'Ariel 
 Arkite, 'Ariel 
 Arnon, 'Arnon 
 Aroer, 'Aro'er, also 
 
 'Ar'or 
 
 Arpad, 'Arpdd 
 Arphaxad, 'Arpakh- 
 
 shad 
 Artaxerxes, 'Artach- 
 
 shashtd 
 
 Arubboth, 'Arubbdth 
 Arvadite, 'Arvddl 
 Asa, 'Asd^ 
 Asahel, 'Asdliel 
 Asaph, 'Asdph 
 Ashchenaz, 'Ashkenaz 
 Ashdod, 'Ashdod 
 Asher, 'Asher 
 Ashera, ' Asher d 
 Ashima, 'Ashlmd 
 Ashtaroth, 'Ashtdroth 
 Askelon, 'Ashqeldn 
 Asshur, Assyrian, 
 
 'Ashshtlr 
 Astarte, 'Ashtoretli 
 Ataroth, 'Atdrdth 
 Athaliah, 'Athalyd 
 Ava, 'Avvd 
 Azazel, 'Azd'zel 
 Azekah, 'Azegrd 
 
218 LIST OF OLD TESTAMENT PROPER NAMES ACCOMPANIED 
 
 Baal, Baal (Lord) : Betach, Betach 
 Baalath, Baalath Beten, Bet en 
 
 Baal Gad, Baal Gad Beth-Anoth, 
 Baal Hamon, Baal ! 'Anofh 
 
 Hdmon \ Beth Arabah, 
 
 Baal Hermon, Baal\ [hd-YArdba 
 
 Chermon Beth Arbeel, Betli- 
 
 Baal Meon, Baall 'Ariel 
 
 Mean Beth-Azmaveth,I?<?^- 
 
 Baal Perazim, Baal j 'Azmdveth 
 
 Perdslm j Beth Aven, Beth- 
 
 Baal Shalisha, Baall 'Aven 
 
 Shdlishd > Beth Barah, Belli" 
 
 Baal Zephon, Baall Bard 
 
 Sephon Beth-Birei, Betli-Birl 
 
 Baasha, Baslid \ Beth-Cherem, Beth- 
 
 Babel, Babylon,' 'Babel : Kerem 
 
 Bahurim, Bachurtm 
 Bala, Bald 
 Balaam, BiTdm 
 Balak, Bdlaq 
 Bamoth, Bdmoth 
 Barzillai, Barzillay 
 Baruch, Bdruk 
 
 (blessed) 
 Bashan, Bdslidn 
 Bathsheba, 
 
 sJieba 
 
 Bed an, Beddn 
 Beer, Be'er 
 Beeroth, BVerotJi 
 Beersheba, 
 
 Sheba 
 
 BethDagon, Beth Da- 
 gun 
 
 Bethel, Beth-'El 
 Beth Emeq, Beth- 
 
 | Beth Ezel, BBth-fisel 
 Beth Gader, Beth- 
 
 Gdder 
 
 Beth Gamal, Beth- 
 Bath- i Gdmul 
 
 ! Beth Hanan, Beth" 
 
 Chdndn 
 Beth Haram, J56^/z- 
 
 Hdrdm 
 
 Beer \Beih Hoglah, Beth 
 Chogld 
 
 Beth-palet, Beth-Pttet 
 Beth Peor, Beth-Peor 
 
 Beth- 1 Beth Rehob, Beth- 
 Eecliub 
 
 Beth- 1 Beth Shean, Beth- 
 
 Beth-Shemesh, Beth- 
 
 Shcmesh 
 Beth-Shitta, Btth-ha- 
 
 Shittci 
 Beth-Tappuah, Btth- 
 
 Tappuacli 
 Bethuel, Bethu'el 
 Beth-Zur, Beth-sar 
 Betonim, Betunlm 
 Bczek, Bezeq 
 Bezer, Bfaer 
 Bilhah, Bilha 
 Boaz, Boaz (in him 
 
 [is] strength) 
 Bochim, Bokhim 
 Bor Hasira, Bar Has- 
 
 sirci 
 
 Bozkath, Bosqath 
 Bozrah, Basra 
 Buz, Buz 
 
 Beth- 
 
 Beesh-terah, Be'esh- Beth Horon, 
 
 terd Clwrun 
 Bel, Bel \ Beth Jeshiraoth , Beth- 
 
 Bela, Bela [hd-l-Jeshlmoth 
 
 Belshazzar, Belshas- Beth-le-Aphrah[R.v.], 
 
 sar, also Beltsha's- Beth-le-'Aphrd 
 
 sar Beth-lebaoth, Beth-le- 
 
 Benaiah, Bendyd, Be- Bd'dth 
 
 nay all n. Bethlehem, Betide- 
 
 Benhadad, Ben-hadacl diem 
 
 Benjamin, Binydmin Beth-nimrah, 
 Bered, Bered 
 Berothai, Berdtltay 
 Besor, Besor 
 
 . Cabnl, Kabul 
 
 1 Cain, Qdyin 
 
 I Cainan, Qendn 
 Calah, Kvlacli 
 Caleb, Kaleb 
 Caliieh, Kalne, Kalnc, 
 
 also Kalno 
 Canaan, Kenaan 
 Caphtor, Kaphtur 
 Carchemish, KarJce- 
 
 Nimrd 
 Beth-pazzez, 
 Passes 
 
 Betli- 
 Betli- 
 
 Casiphia, Kdsiphyd 
 Casluhim. Kaslucliim 
 Chaldean, Kasdlm 
 Chebar, Kebdr 
 Chedorlaomer, Kedor- 
 
 la'bmer 
 
 Chemosh, Kemosh 
 Chephira, Kephtrd 
 
WITH AN EXACT TRANSLITERATION OF THEIR HEBREW i'ORMS. 219 
 
 Cherethites and Pele- 
 
 thitesT/ia], Kerethi 
 
 [veha] "Pelelhi 
 Cherith, Kerith 
 Cherab, Kerub, pi. 
 
 Kerubim 
 Chinneretk (Chinne- 
 
 roth ) , Kinne reth, 
 
 Kinnerdth 
 Chittim, Kittim (pi. 
 
 of Kitti) 
 Chisloth Tabor, Kis- 
 
 loth Tabor 
 Chushan Rishathaim, 
 
 Kushan Rtsh'uta- 
 
 yim 
 
 Cash, KusJi 
 Oath, Cutha, Ktith, 
 
 Kutha 
 Cyrus, Koresh 
 
 Daberatli, Ddberath 
 Dagon, Ddgon 
 Damascus, Damme- 
 
 'seq 
 
 Dan, Dan 
 Daniel, Ddnlyyel, 
 
 Daniel 
 Daric, Adarkun (but 
 
 Darkemon = Drach- 
 
 me) 
 
 Darius, Ddrei/dvesh 
 David, David 
 Deborah, Debord (bee) 
 Dedau, Deddn 
 Delilah, DeUlci 
 Diblathaim, Dibld- 
 
 thdyim 
 Dibon, DlbOn 
 Diklah, Diqla 
 Dinah, Dlnd 
 Dinhabah, Dinhdbd 
 Dizahab, Dl Zdhiib 
 Doeg, Do* eg 
 Dophkah, Dophqd 
 Dor, Dor 
 
 Dofchan, Dothdyin, 
 
 Do than 
 
 Duinah, Duma 
 Dura, Dura 
 
 Ebal, 'Ebal 
 Eben-ezer, 'Bben ha 
 
 'fizer 
 
 Eber, 'fiber 
 Eden, 'fiden, 'Eden 
 Edom, ^ Adorn 
 Edomite, 'Adorn* 
 Edrei, 'EdrF-l 
 Eglath, 'Eglath 
 Eglon, 'Eglon 
 Ehud, 'Mud 
 Ekron, 'Eqron 
 Elah, 'Ela 
 Elam, 'Mam 
 Elath, Eloth, ' 
 
 Ephron, 'Epnrdn 
 Erech, 'firekh 
 Esarhaddon, 'Esar- 
 
 chaddon, 
 Esau, 'fisdv 
 Bshcol, 'Eshlcdl 
 l^shean, 'Esh'dn 
 Eshtaol, 'Eshtd'ol 
 
 Elealeh, ' 
 Eleazar, 'EFdzdr 
 Elhanan, 'Elchdnan 
 Eli, 'Ell 
 Elias, 'Eliyyd, 'Elly 
 
 Eliezer, 'Ali'ezer 
 Elim, 'Blim 
 Elishah (people), 
 
 'Aliihd 
 Elisha (prophet), 
 
 Elkosh, 'Elqosh 
 JSllasaa?, 'JSllds&r 
 
 Elon, 'Elon 
 Eltekeh, 'Elteqe 
 Emira, 'JSmlm 
 Enam, 'Endm 
 Endor, 'En Dor 
 Engannim, 'En Gan 
 
 nim 
 
 Engedi, 'En GUl 
 Enoch, Chanokh 
 Ephraim, 'Bphrdyim 
 Ephrath, 'Ephrdth. 
 
 TTf . T v /"/ 
 
 jsthemo a 
 Esther, 'E_ster 
 \ Etham, 'Ethdm 
 | Ethan, 'Ethan 
 \ Ethbaal, 'Ethbaal 
 Ether, Ether 
 Euphrates, Pcrdt 
 Eve, Chavvd 
 Evil Merodach, 'Avll 
 
 Merodakh 
 Ezekiel, Y&chezqel 
 Ezion Geber, 'Esyun 
 
 Geber 
 Ezra, 'Ezra 
 
 Gaash, Gii'ash 
 Gad, Odd 
 
 Galilee, Gdlll, Gallld 
 Gallim, Galllm 
 Gamaliel, Gamliel 
 Gareb, Gdreb 
 Gath, Gath 
 Gaza, 'Azzd 
 Geba, Gebcu 
 Gebal, Gebdl 
 Gebim, Geblm 
 Gedaliah, Gedalyd 
 Geder, Gvder 
 Ge derail, Geder d 
 Gedor, Gedor 
 Gehazi, Gechazl 
 Gerar, Gerdr 
 Gerizim, Gerizzlm 
 Gershom, Gershon, 
 
 Gershom.) Gershon 
 Geshur, Geshur 
 Gezer, Gvzer 
 
220 
 
 LIST OF OLD TESTAMENT PROPER NAMES ACCOMPANIED 
 
 Gether, G ether 
 Gibbethon, GMethon 
 Gibeah, Gib\l 
 Gibeon, Gib' on 
 Gideon, Gid'on 
 Gihon, GlcJwn 
 Gilboa, Gilboa 
 Gilead, GiTdd 
 Gilgal, [ha]Gilgdl 
 Giloh, Gilo 
 Girgashite, Girgdshl 
 Gittaim, Gittdylm 
 Gob, Gob 
 Golan, Golan 
 Goliath, Golyatli 
 Gomer, Gomer 
 Gomorrah, 'Amdra 
 Gozan, Gozdn 
 Goshen, Goshen 
 
 Habakkuk, Chftbaqquk 
 Habor, Chdbor 
 Hachxnoni, GhaJc-h- 
 
 moni 
 
 Had ad, Hadad 
 Hadadezer, Hadad- 
 
 'ezer 
 Hadashah (town), 
 
 Chaddshd 
 
 Hadassah, Hadassd 
 Hadid, Chadtd 
 Hadoram, Hadordm 
 Hadrach, Chadrdkh 
 Hagar, Hdgdr 
 Hagarenes ( pi. ), 
 
 Ha grim 
 
 Haggai, Ohaggay 
 Halah, CMldch 
 Halhul, Chakhul 
 Ham, Cham 
 Ham an, Ham an 
 Hamath, Chamdth 
 Hammon, Chammon 
 Hanani, Chandni 
 Hanes, Chdnes 
 Hannah, Ohannd 
 
 Hapara, Happdrd 
 Hapharaim, Chaph- 
 
 drdyim 
 Hara, Hard 
 Haran, Chdrdn 
 Harod, Chdrod 
 Havilah, Chavild 
 Havran, Chavrdn 
 Hazael, Cliazael 
 Hazar Addar, Chasar 
 
 'Adddr 
 Hazarmaveth, Chasar 
 
 Mdveth 
 Hazazon Tamar, Cha- 
 
 sdson Tdmdr 
 Hazeroth, Chaser otli 
 Hazor, Chdsor 
 Hebrew, 'Ibri, pi., 
 
 'Ibrim 
 
 Hebron, Chebron 
 Helbon, Chelbon 
 Helkath, Chelqatli, 
 
 Chelqdth 
 Hem an, Hemdn 
 Hena, Hena 
 Hepher, Chepher 
 Her m on, Cher man 
 Heshbon, Cheshbon 
 Hezekiah, Chizqiyyd 
 Hilkiah, Chilqiyyd, 
 
 Chilqiyydhu 
 Hinnom, Sinn dm 
 
 (usually Ge Hinnom , 
 
 or<?J9e.Er.,VaUey 
 
 of the Son of Hin- 
 nom) 
 
 Hiram, Chirdni 
 Hittite, Chittl, pi. 
 
 Chittlm 
 Hivite, Chivvl, pi. 
 
 Chivvlm 
 Hobab, Chulab 
 Holon, Cholon 
 Hophra, Chophra' 
 Hor, Hor 
 Horeb, Choreb 
 Hormah, Chormd 
 
 | Horonaim, Chord- 
 
 ndyim 
 
 Hosea, 'Hoshe'a 
 Hul, Chul 
 
 Ibleam, Yibledm 
 Iddo, 'Iddo, Ye do 
 Ijon, 'lyyon 
 Indian, Hoddu 
 Isaac, Yischdq 
 ! Isaiah, Yesha'ydhu 
 Ishbosheth, 'Ish 
 
 Bosheth 
 
 Ishmael, Yishmd'el 
 Israel, Yisrd'el 
 Issachar, Yissdklidr 
 Ithamar, 'Ithamar 
 
 Jabal, Ydbdl 
 \ Jabbok, Yabboq 
 
 Jabesh, Ydbesh 
 
 Jabin, Ydbin 
 ! Jabneh, Ydbne 
 
 Jacbin, Ydkhm (He 
 [God] establishes) 
 
 Jacob, Ya'aqob 
 
 Jael, Yael 
 
 Jahaz, Ydhas, YdJisd 
 
 Jair, Yd'ir 
 
 Jakan, Yd'aqdn 
 
 Janoah, Ydnoach 
 
 Japhet, Yepheth 
 
 Japhia, Ydphia 
 
 Jarmuth, Yarmuth 
 i Jashobeam, Ydshob- 
 
 'ani 
 |Jattir, Yattlr 
 
 Javan, Ydvdn 
 
 Jazer, Yazer 
 
 Jebus, Yebns 
 \ Jebusite, Ycbusl 
 | Jechoniah, Yekonyd, 
 Yehhonydhu 
 
 Jeduthun, Yedtlthun 
 
 Jehoahaz, Yeho'dchdz 
 
WITH AN EXACT TRANS LITE RATION OP THEIR HEBREW FORMS. 221 
 
 Jehoash, Yeho'dsh 
 Jehoiachin, Yoydkin 
 
 YShdydkhin 
 Jehoiada, Yoijdda 
 
 Yehoyddd* 
 Jehoiakim, Yoydqtm 
 
 YShoydqim 
 Jehoram, Yvhordm 
 Jehoshaphat, Yoshd 
 phdt, Yehoshdphdt 
 Jehu, Yehu' 
 Jekabzeel, Yeqabse'el 
 Jephthah, Yiphtdoh 
 Jeremiah, Yirmeydhit 
 Jericho, Yericho, also 
 
 Yerecho 
 Jeroboam, Ydrob'dm 
 
 (Yorob'dm?) 
 Jerusalem, Yorilsha- 
 
 Idyim 
 
 Jesse, Yisliay 
 Jethro, Yithrd 
 Jew, Yehudl, pi. 
 
 Yehudim 
 Jezebel, 'Izebel 
 Jezreel, Yizre'el, 
 
 Yizre'el 
 Joab, Yv'db 
 Job, 'lyyob 
 Jobab, Yobdb 
 Joel, Yd' el 
 Johanan, Yochdnan, 
 
 Yehoshdndn 
 Jokmeam, Yoqmifdm 
 Joktan, Yoqtdn 
 Joktheil, Yoqte'el 
 Jonadab, Yunddtib, 
 
 Yehondddl) 
 Jonah, Yund 
 Jonathan, Yondthdn, 
 
 Yehondtlidn 
 Joppa, Ydpho 
 Jo ram, Yordm (for 
 
 Yehordm) 
 Jordan, Yarden 
 Joseph, Yusdph 
 Joshua, Ythosliuci 
 
 Josiah, Yosliiyyahu 
 Jotbatha, Yotbdthd 
 Jotham, Yothdm 
 Jubal, Yubdl 
 Judah, Yehudd 
 Judith, Yehudith 
 Juttah, Yuttd 
 
 Kadesh, Qedesh 
 Kadesh Barnea, 
 
 Qddesh Barnea 
 Kadmonites, Qadmdn 
 Kanah, Qdnd 
 Kedarenes, Qeddr 
 Kedemoth, Q.edemuth 
 Keilah, Qelld 
 Kenath, Qendth 
 Kenezite, Qenizzl, pi. 
 
 Qenizzlm 
 Kenite, Qeni, pi. 
 
 Qenlm 
 Kerioth, Qeriyydth 
 Keturah, Qeturd 
 Kidron, Qidron 
 Kir (Heres,Hareseth) 
 
 Qlr (Cherts, Chare- 
 
 seth) 
 K^irjathaim, Qiryd- 
 
 th dyim 
 S^irjath Jearim, Qir- 
 
 ydtli Yedrlm 
 S!irjath Sepher, Qir- 
 
 jath Sepher 
 S^ishon, Qtshun 
 Kohath, Qehdt 
 Sorah, Qorach 
 
 jaban, Ldbdn 
 jachish, Lakhlsh 
 
 aish, Ldyish 
 
 amech. LemeJeh 
 
 eah, Le'd 
 
 ebanon, Lebanon 
 i, Lech'Z 
 
 emuel, Lemuel 
 
 Levi, Led 
 
 Levite, Levl, pi. 
 
 Levtyyim 
 Libnah, Libnd 
 Lod, Lod 
 
 Lodebar, Lo Debar 
 Lot, Lot 
 Lud, Lud 
 Luhith, Luchltli 
 Luz, Lus 
 
 Maachah, Maakhd 
 Machir, Mdkhir 
 Madon, Mddon 
 Magog, Mdgug 
 Mahanaim, Machand- 
 
 yim 
 
 Makkedah, Maqqedd 
 Malachi, MaVdkhl 
 Mamre, Mamre 
 Manasseh, Menashshe 
 Manna, Man 
 Marah, Hard 
 Mareshah, MdresJid 
 Mash, Hash 
 Masrekah, Masreqd . 
 Massah, Massd 
 Medebah, Medebd 
 Media, Medes, Mdday 
 Megiddo, Megiddd 
 Melchizedek, J/aZ- 
 
 Jclsedeq 
 Memphis, Moph 
 Menahem, Menachem 
 Mephaath, Mephaatli 
 Mephibosheth, Mephi- 
 
 busheth 
 Merab, Merdb 
 Merari, Her art 
 Merodach Baladan, 
 
 MSroddkh Bal'adan 
 Merom, He rum 
 Meroz, Meroz 
 Mesha (place), Meslia 1 
 Vlesha (king) Mesh a' 
 Vleshech, Meshehh 
 
222 LIST OF OLD TESTAMENT PKOPER NAMES ACCOMPANIED 
 
 Micah, Mlkhd 
 Michael, Milchael 
 Michal, Mikhdl 
 Michmash, Mikhmds, 
 
 Mikhmdsh 
 Migdol, Migdol 
 Migron, Migron 
 Milcom, Milkom 
 Minnith, Minntth 
 Miriam, Miry dm 
 Mishael, Mish'dl 
 Mizpah, Mispa\ 
 Mizpeh, Mispu 
 Moab, Mo'db 
 Moabite, Mo'abl 
 Moladah, Molddd 
 Mordecai, Mordekhay 
 Moreh, More 
 Moresheth Gath, 
 
 Moresheth Gath 
 Moriah, Morlyyd 
 Moser, Moseroth, | 
 
 Moser, Moseroth 
 Moses, Moshe 
 
 Naaman, Naaman 
 
 Na'ardn 
 Nabal, Nabal 
 Nadab, Ndddb 
 Nahalal, Nahalal 
 Nahasb, Ndchdsh 
 Kahor, NdcJtor 
 JSTabum, Ndchum 
 Naomi, Nooml 
 Napbtali, Naphtdll 
 Naphtuhim, Naphttl- 
 
 clrim (pi.) 
 Nazarite, Ndzir 
 Nathan, Nnthdn 
 Nebaioth, Nebdyoth 
 Nebat, NPbdt 
 Nebo, Nebo 
 Nebuchadnezzar, Ne- 
 
 bulcadnessar ; in 
 
 Daniel also Nebii- 
 
 kadnessar (in Eze- 
 
 kiel and several 
 
 passages of Jere- 
 . miah the correct 
 
 form Nebukadre'ssar 
 
 is found) 
 Nebuzar-adan, Nebu- 
 
 zardddn 
 Necho, Nekho 
 Nehemiah, Nechemyd 
 Nephtoah, Nephtoach 
 Neriah, Neriyyd 
 Nathaniel, Ntthan'el 
 Nethaniah, Netlianyd 
 Netophah, Netophd 
 Nimrod, Nimrod 
 Nineveh, Nlneve 
 Nisroch, Nisrokh 
 No Am on, No' 'Amdn 
 Noah, Noacli 
 Nob, Nob 
 Nod, Nod 
 Noph, Ndph(= Mdph, 
 
 see Memphis) 
 
 Obadiah, 'Obadyd 
 Obal, 'Obdl 
 Oboth, 'Oboth 
 Og, 'Off 
 Omri, 'Omri 
 On, 'On 
 Onan, 'Ondn 
 Ono, 'On<~> 
 Ophel, 'Ophel 
 Ophir, 'Ophir 
 Ophrah^ 'Ophrd 
 Oreb, 'Oreb (raven) 
 Othniel, 'Othni'el 
 
 Pagu, Paw 
 Paran, Pa* ran 
 Parvaim, Parvdyim 
 Pashur, Pashshur 
 Passover, Phach 
 Pathros, Patlirus 
 Pekah, Pekach 
 
 I Pekahiah, Pekachyi 
 
 \ Peleg, Peleg 
 
 ! Peniel, Penuel, Pern- 
 
 el, Penuel 
 | Peor, Ptfdr 
 \ Perazim, Perds'tm 
 
 Perizzitte, Perizzl 
 1 Pethor, Pethor 
 \ Phai'aoh, Paro 
 
 Philistines, PelishlJni 
 
 .(pi.) 
 
 Pi-hahiroth, Pl-Tiacln- 
 
 roth 
 
 Pisgah, Pisgd 
 Pison, Plslion 
 Pithom, Pithom 
 Potiphar, Potlpliar 
 Pul, Pul 
 Punon, Punun 
 Put, Put 
 
 Raamah, Rama 
 Rabbath Ammon, 
 Rabbath ' Ammon 
 
 Rachel, Each el (ewe) 
 Rahab, Rdchab (as 
 poetical name for 
 Egypt, JRdhafy 
 Ramah, Rdmd 
 Ramoth, Itdmoth 
 Rameses, Hameses, 
 
 Ra anises 
 Rebecca, Ribqd 
 Rechabites, Rekhdbim 
 
 (pi.) 
 
 Reguel, Re-'u-el 
 i Rehob, Rechdb 
 [ Rehoboam, Rechab'dm 
 
 Rehoboth (Ir), ]\ echo- 
 both 'Ir 
 
 Rephaim, Rephd'Jm 
 
 Rephidim, RepJildlm 
 
 Resen, Resen 
 
 Reuben, Reuben 
 
 Rezon, Rezdn 
 
WITH AN EXACT TRANSLITERATION OF THEIR HEBREW FORMS. 223 
 
 Bezeph, Ehepli 
 Bezin, Rgtfn 
 Biblah, Bibld 
 Bimmon, Rwimon 
 Biphath, Rtphath 
 Bogel, Hog el 
 Bogelim, 
 Bosh, Hash 
 Bath, 'Ruth 
 
 Sabbath, Shabbdth 
 Sabta, Salt a 
 Sabtechah, SabtSkhd 
 Salchah, Salekhd 
 Salem, Shdlem 
 Samaria, Shomeron 
 Samson, Shimslum 
 Samuel, Shemuel 
 Sanballat, Sanballdt 
 Sarah, Sard 
 Sargon, Saregon 
 Satan, Satan 
 Saul, Shaul 
 Seir, S'e'ir 
 Sela (town) Sola 
 Selah (musical sign) 
 
 Sela 
 Sennacherib, Sanche- 
 
 rlb 
 
 Sephar, Scphar 
 Sepharad, Sephdrad 
 Sepharvaim, Sephar- 
 
 vdyim 
 
 Seraiah, Sera t/ a 
 Seraphim, Senlplilm 
 Serug, 8&rug 
 Seth, Sheth 
 Shaalbim, ShaalbJm, 
 
 Shaalabblm 
 Shaleph, ShMeph 
 Shalim, Sha'alim 
 Shallum, Shall dm 
 Shalman, Shdlemdn 
 Shalmaneser, Shalma- 
 
 nt'ser 
 Shamga 
 
 Shamgar, Shamgdr 
 
 Shaphan, Shdphdn 
 Sharon, Sharon 
 Sheba (Benjamite), 
 
 Sheba 
 Sheba (in Arabia), 
 
 Shvba; (in Ethio- 
 
 pia), Seba 
 Shebna, Shebna, Sheb- 
 
 nd 
 
 Shechem, Shekhvm 
 Shekel (coin), Sheqel 
 Shem, Sh&m 
 Shemaiah, Shgmayd 
 Sheshbazzar, Shesh- 
 
 bassar 
 
 \ Shiloh, Shtid 
 j Shimei, Shimi 
 \ Shinar, Shindr 
 j Shisak, Shlshaq 
 Shittim, Shittim 
 Shuah, Shuach 
 Shunem, Shunem 
 Shur, Shur 
 Sibmah, Sibmd 
 Siddim, Siddlm 
 Sidon, Sldon 
 Sihon, Slclioti 
 Sihor, Shlhor 
 Siloah, ShUoach 
 Simeon, Shimon 
 Sinai, Sinay 
 Sirion, Shiryon 
 Sisera, Siserd* 
 So, So* 
 
 Sochoh, Sfokho 
 Sodom, Sedom 
 Solomon, Shelomo 
 Sorek, Soreq 
 Succoth, Sukkdth 
 Susa(n), Shtlshan 
 
 Taanach, Ta'dndkh 
 Tabor, Tabor 
 Tabrimmon, Tdbrim- 
 
 tndn 
 Tadmor, Tadmor 
 
 Tahpanhes, Tachpan- 
 
 clies 
 
 Tamar, Tdmdr (palm) 
 Tammuz, Tammuz 
 Tappuach, Tappuach 
 Tarshish, Tarshlsh 
 Tekoah, Teqoa 
 Tel Abib, Tel Ablb 
 Telassar, Tela'Mdr 
 Tema, Temd' 
 Teman, Temdn 
 Terah, Terach 
 Teraphim, Terdphim 
 Thebez, Tebes 
 Tibni, Tibni ' 
 Tiglath-Pileser, Tlg- 
 
 lath pil'eser (also 
 
 peleser) 
 
 Timnah, Titnnd 
 Timnath Sei'ah, Tim- 
 
 nath Serach 
 Tiphsach, Tiphsach 
 Tiras, Tirds 
 Tirhakah, Tirhdqd 
 Tirzah, Tirsd 
 Tob, Tdb 
 Tobiah, Tobiyyd 
 Togarmah, Tdyarmd 
 Tola, Told 
 Tou,Tou 
 Tubal-Cain, Tulal 
 
 Qdyin 
 Tyre, Sor 
 
 Ulai, 'Ulay 
 Uphaz, 'Uphdz 
 Ur, >Vr _ 
 Uriah, 'Uriyyd 
 Urim and Tummim, 
 
 ' Urlm vetummlm 
 Uz, 'Us 
 Uzal, 'Uzal 
 Uzziah, 'Uzziyyd, 
 
 'Uzziyyahu 
 
 Yashti, Vashtl 
 
224 
 
 LIST 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT PROPEE NAMES. 
 
 Zadok, Sddoq 
 Z aim on, Salmon 
 Zamzummim, Zam- 
 
 zummlm 
 
 Zanoah, Zdnoach 
 Zarepbatb, SdrSphath 
 Zaretan, Sartdn 
 Zebah (Midianite), 
 
 Zebacli 
 Zeboim, Sc'bolm and 
 
 Seboylm 
 Zebul, Zebul 
 Zebulon, Zebulun 
 
 Zechariah, Zekharyd, 
 Zekharydhu 
 
 Zedad, Seddd 
 Zedekiah, Sidqiyydhu 
 Zela, Sela ' 
 
 Zephaniah, Ssphanyd- 
 
 liu 
 
 -Zerah, Zerach 
 Zered, Zered 
 Zereda, Sihreda 
 Zerubbabel, Zerul- 
 
 babel 
 Ziba, S-ila 
 
 1 Ziklag, Siqlag 
 \ Zilpah, Zilpd 
 : Zimri, Zimrl 
 \ Zinnah, Sinnd 
 
 Zion, Siyyon 
 
 Zipb, Z-iph 
 
 Zipporah, Sippdra 
 , Zoan, Suan 
 
 Zoar, Soar 
 
 Zobah, Sobd, Sold' 
 
 Zorah, Sord 
 
 Zuph, Snph 
 
 Zuzim, Zuzim (pi.) 
 
V. 
 
 SUEVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM 
 D1FFEEENT DOCUMENTS OF SEVERAL 
 BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 PEELIMINAEY NOTE. The Hebrew Bible (differing from the 
 arrangement of the Hebrew, Latin, German [and English] 
 Bibles) is divided into the following three parts : 
 
 1. Law (Tora). This comprises the so-called "Five Books 
 of Moses." 
 
 2. Prophets (NebTlm), including 
 
 a. The Former Prophets (i.e., those which stand first in the 
 Canon) : Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings. 
 
 &. The Latter Prophets (i.e., those which follow in the 
 Canon) : Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Book of the 
 Twelve [Minor prophets] . 
 
 3. Writings (Kethubim, by the Greeks called Hagiographa, 
 i.e., " Holy Writings "), in the following order, Psalms, 
 Proverbs, Job, Canticles, Kuth, Lamentations, Eccle- 
 siastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles. 
 
 The letter a with the number of the verse signifies the first 
 half of the verse, 6 the second half. An asterisk signifies that 
 a redactor's hand has meddled with the phraseology of the 
 document in question. On the ground of more or less certain 
 
 15 
 
226 SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 tokens the text of the several books is assigned to the 
 different documents as follows * : 
 
 The First Book of Moses (Genesis). 
 
 J l (Jahwist 1 , p. 37 f.) : IY. 16 b -24 (on v. 23 f. cf.p. 3). VI. 1-4. 
 IX. 20-27 (omitting the gloss, "Ham, the father of," in 
 v. 22). XI. 1-9, and from Chap. XII. onwards very 
 much which now cannot be distinguished from / 3 . 
 "The Blessing of Jacob" (XLIX. l b -27, cf. p. 15f.) was 
 also undoubtedly adopted by J 1 . 
 
 J 2 (pp.31f.,38ff.): II.4 b -9, 15 IV. 16 a . V. 29. VI. 5-6, 7*, 
 VII. 1-2, 3*, 4-5, 7-10, 12, 16 b , 17 b , 22, 23 ac . VIII. 2 b , 
 3 a , 6-12, 13 b , 20-22. X. 8, 10-15, 18 b , 19, 21, 25-30. XI. 
 28*-30(?). XII. l-4 a , 6-20. XIII. 1-5, 6 c -ll a ,12 c -18. XV. 
 l bd , 2 a , 3V 4, 6, 9-12 a , 17-18. XVI. l b , 2, 4-7, 11-14. 
 XVIII. XIX. 1-28, 30-38 (?). XXI. 1% 2 a , 7, 33. XXII. 
 20*-24. XXIV. XXV. 1-5, ll b , 18, 21-26 a , 27-34. 
 XXVI. l ac , 2 a (to " spake"), 3 a (to " land"), 6-14, 16-17, 
 19-33. XXVII. l a , 2-4 a , 5-10, 14-15, 17, 18 a , 20, 24-27, 
 29 bc , 30, 31-32, 35-39 a , 40-41, 43, 45. XXVIII. 10, 
 13-16, 19 a . XXIX. 2-14, 26 b , 31-35. XXX. 3 C , 4 b -5, 7, 
 9-16, 20 b 21, 22 C , 24 b 25, 27, 29 XXXI. 1* 3, 21 b 25, 
 
 * A really vivid picture of the manner in which the documents are interwoven 
 cannot be given by merely stating the numbers of the verses. And it is just as 
 impossible to state with each single verse or section whether it is assigned to the 
 document in question by all investigators or by the majority or only by a few. In 
 the Pentateuch and in the Book of Joshua it is only with regard to P that some- 
 thing approaching to unanimity has been reached. To see at a glance the 
 manner in which the sources are mingled the best books to use are Haupt's 
 Bible, mentioned above, on p. 35 (the so-called Eainbow Bible), the work also 
 mentioned there, " Genesis mit iiusserer Unterscheidung der Quellenschriften " 
 (German translation in eight different types), and, finally, " Die Heilige Schrift 
 des Alten Test.", by Kautzsch and others, where the various documents are 
 indicated on the margin by letters (J, E, P, &c.). 
 
OF SEVERAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 227 
 
 27, 38-40, 46, 48% 49 b -52. XXXII. 4-14% 23, 25-32. 
 XXXIII. 1-5% 6-10, ll b -17. XXXIV. l b , 2 b -3 a % 5, 7, 
 11-12, 19, 25*, 26*, 30-31. XXXVII. 3, 4, 21*, 25 bc -27, 
 28 b , 32, 33, 35. XXXVIII. XXXIX. 1*, 2 a % 3% 4 ac , 5 a *, 
 6 bc , 7 b -23. XL. l b , 3 b , 5 b , 15 b . XLI. 31, 41. XLIL 2% 
 4 b , 5 (?), 6 ab , 7, 27-28 ab , 38 XLIII. 13, 15-23% 24 
 XLV. 1% 2 ac , 4 b , 5 ac , 10% 13, 14, 28 (?). XLVI. 1% 28 
 XL VII. 5 a (v. 4% " they spake to Pharaoh/' is repeated 
 from 3 b by mistake), 6 b (before 5 b , 6 a ), 13-27% 29-31. 
 XLVIII. 2 b , 8% 9 b , 10% 13-14, 17-19. XLIX. 33 b . 
 L. 1-11, 14. 
 
 E (cf. pp. 32 f., 43 ff.) : XV. 1*, 2 b ,3% 5. XX. 1-17. XXI. 6, 8- 
 32 a . XXII. 1-13, 19. XXVII. l b ,4 b , 11-13, 16, 18 b -19, 21- 
 
 23, 28, 29% 30 b , 33-34, 39 b , 42, 44. XXVIII. 11-12, 17-18, 
 20 XXIX. 1, 15-23, 25, 26% 27-28% 30. XXX. l b -3 ab , 
 6, 8, 17, 18*, 19, 20 ac , 22 b , 23-24% 26, 28. XXXI. 2, 4-18% 
 19-20, 21 ac , 22-24, 26, 28-37, 41-45, 53 XXXII. 3, 14^-22, 
 
 24. XXXIII. 5% 11% 18 b -20. XXXV. 1-4, 6 b -8. 
 XXXVII. 2 llc , 5% 6-8% 9-11, 19-20, 22, 28 a % 29-31, 34, 36. 
 XXXIX. 2 b , 3 b , 4 bd , 5% 6% 7 a . XL. 1% 2, 3% 4, 5% 6-15% 
 16 XLI. 30, 32, 33, 37-40, 42-45, 46 b -50% 51 XLIL 
 ], 2 b -4% 6% 8-26, 28 c -37. XLIII. 14, 23 b . XLV. l b , 2 b , 
 3-4% 5 bd , 6-9, 10 b '-12, 15-18, 21'-27. XLVI. l'-3 ab , 4, 5 a . 
 XLVII. 12. XLVIII. 1-2% 8 b -9% 10 b -12, 15-16, 20-22. 
 L. 15-22% 23-26. 
 
 (i.e., Sections concerning" which it cannot now be deter- 
 mined whether they belonged to Jor E } or how they have 
 been constructed out of the two ; cf. p. 33) : XXXV. 
 16-22 a . XXXVI. 31-39. XXXVII. 2% 12-18, 23-25". 
 XLI. 34-36. 
 
 P (Priests' Code; cf. p. 106 ff.) : I. 1 II. 4 a . V. 1-28, 30-32. 
 
 ^ VI. 9-22. VII. 6, 11, 13-16% 17**, 18-21, 24. VIII. 1, 
 
 2% 3 b -5, 13% 14-19: IX. 1-17, 28 X. 7,20, 22-23, 31-32. 
 
 15 * 
 
228 SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FKOM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 XT. 10-27, 28*, 31-32. XII. 4 b , 5. XIII. 6 ab , ll b , 12* b . 
 XVI. 1% 3, 15 XVII. 27. XIX. 29. XXI. l b , 2 b -5. 
 XXIII. XXV. 7-11% 12-17, 19-20, 26 b . XXVI. 34-35. 
 XXVIII. 1-9. XXIX. 24, 28*, 29. XXX. l a , 4% 22 a . 
 XXXI. 18 bcd . XXXIII. 18 a . [XXXIV. l a , 2% 3 a , 4, 6, 
 8-10/13-18, 20-24, 25*.]* XXXV. 6 a , 9-12% 13*, 15, 
 220-29. XXXVI. 6-8% 40-43. . XXXVII. 1, 2 a . XLI. 
 46*. XLVI. 6-7. XLVII. 5% 6% 7-11, 27 b , 28. XLVIII. 
 3-6. XLIX. 1% 28 b , 33 ac . L. 12-13. 
 
 R Signifies additions, due to the redactor who blended J and 
 E into one work (JE T ; cf. p. 61 f.), or to the one who 
 united JE and Deuteronomy JED r ; cf . p. 94 f .), or finally 
 to the one who joined JED and P (cf. p. 119 f.) : it also 
 signifies verses or sections originally belonging to J", E or 
 P, but subsequently transplanted by a redactor from 
 another context into their present position: II. 10-14. IV. 
 25-26. VI. 7* VII.3*, 23 b . IX. 18-19. X. 9, 16-18% 24. 
 XIV. (cf. the Note on p. 119). XV. 7-8, 12M6, 19-21. 
 XVI. 8-10. XX. 18. XXI. 32", 34. XXII. 14-18. 
 XXV. 6. XXVI.l b ,2 b ,3 b -5,15, 18. XXVII. 46. XXVIII. 
 19 b . XXXI. l b , 47, 48 b , 49 a . XXXII. 33. XXXIV. 
 26*, 27-29. XXXV. 5, 12 b , 13 b , 14. XXXVI. 1-5, 8 1 '- 
 30. XXXVII. 5 b , 8 b . XXXIX. 1*. XLI. 50 b - XLII. 
 28 C . XLV. 19-21 ab . XLVI. l b , 3 C , 5 b , 8-27. XLVIII. 7. 
 XLIX. 28 a . L. 22 b . 
 
 The Second Book of Moses (Exodus). 
 
 , to whom are almost unanimously ascribed : VIII. 4-10, 
 11* 16-20, 24 b -28. IX. 1-7. XI. 4-8. XII. 21-27* 29, 
 
 * The ascription of these verses to P is disputed ; others think that they belong 
 to a still later time ! 
 
OF SEVEEAL BOOKS OP THE OLD TESTAMENT. 229 
 
 30, 34, 38? 39. The groundwork of XIII. 3-16, but 
 revised by JE r or JED* (cf. above, on Genesis, under R], 
 21, 22. XIV. 5, 6, 11-14, 19 b , 21*. XVI. 4, 5, 19-21* 
 25.30? (others say P or else, in part [v. 28-30] JED*}. 
 XVIII. l b . 
 
 E:I. 15-20 a . III. 10-15. VII. 20 b , 21 a . VIII. 21-24 a . XL 
 1-3. XIII. 17-19. XIV. 7, 16? 19 a . XV. l-18 a (the 
 so-called Song at the Sea ; questionable whether it was 
 received by E or not earlier than by a later redactor 
 [./#'?]), 20, 21. XVII. 8-16. XVIII. 1% 2*, 3-27. 
 XX. 18-21 (originally the continuation of XIX. 15-19). 
 XXXI. 18". XXXII. 1-6. 
 
 JE: I. 6, 7*, 8-12, 14*, 20 b -22. II. l-23 a (v. 1-10 and 15 
 almost entirely E ; v. 11-14 and 16-23 a almost entirely/). 
 III. 1-9, 16-22. IV. V. 1 VI. 1. VII. 14-18, 23-29. 
 IX. 13-35. X. 1-29 (of which / claims most of 1-11, as 
 well as 16-19, 28-29). XII. 31-33 (mainly perhaps E), 
 35-37 (the same), 42 ? XIV. 9*, 10*, 20, 24-28, 30, 31. 
 XV. 22-27 (in 25 b , 26, a clear trace of JED*). XVII. 
 1*, 2-7. XIX. 2 b -25 (mostly from E). XX. 1-17* (the 
 Decalogue ; cf . above, p. 7 f. ; if already admitted by E 
 into his document, it is however not without traces of 
 JED* and possibly [v. 11] JEDP*) . XX. 22 XXIII. 19*, 
 the so-called "Book of the Covenant" [so called from 
 XXIV. 7 ; cf . above, p. 29 f .] ; the prevalent theory is that 
 E had already admitted it into his document. XX. 22 and 
 [on account of the address in the plural] XXII. 20 b , 21, 
 23, 24 b , 30 and XXIII. 9 b , 13 are probably to be considered 
 redactional additions. XXIII. 20-23 (mainly E, but with 
 traces of revision by JE* and probably also JED*). 
 XXIV. 1-14, 15*, 18*. XXXII. 7-14 (according to the 
 prevalent view, composed by JE*, according to others, 
 touched also by JED*), 15-20 (mainly E), 21-25. XXXIII. 
 (7-11 certainly belong to E). XXXIV. 1-28 (mainly /, 
 
230 SURVEY OF TdE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 but with expansions; in v. 10-13 and 24 a clear trace of 
 JE&). 
 
 P: I. 1-5, 7*, 13, 14.* II. 23* ("then sighed, &c.")-25. VI. 
 2-13, 14-30 (late addition). VII. 1-13, 19, 20 a (to 
 " commanded "), 2P>, 22. VIII. 1-3, 12-15. IX. 8-12. 
 XI. 9 XII. 20, 28, 40, 41, 43-51. XIII. 1-2, 20. XIV. 
 1-4, 8, 9*, 10* 15, 16? 17, 18, 21*, 22-23, 29. XV. 19 
 (redactional gloss on the Song at the Sea). XVI. 1-3, 
 6-8 (revised), 9-18, 19-21*, 22-24, 31-36 (v. 36 a later 
 gloss). XVII. 1* (to "Kephidim "). XIX. 1, 2 a . XXIV. 
 15*, 16, 17, 18*. XXV. XXXI. 18* (in XXIX. 9 
 " Aaron and his sons " is a later gloss). XXXIV. 29-35 
 (if not a later addition). XXXV. XL. (more recent 
 parallels to XXV. XXX). 
 
 The Third Book of Moses (Leviticus). 
 
 The contents of Leviticus in great part coine from P (though 
 not without supplements and glosses, as, e.g., VI. 13 
 [Heb.j 20, Eng. y " in the day when he is anointed "] , 
 X. 16-20, XIV. 31 ["such as he is able to get"], XXVII., 
 and traces of revision). Thus, as Benzinger's convincing 
 analysis has shown, Chap. XVI. is composed of two laws: 
 v. 1-4, 6, 11**, 12, 13, 34 b [29-34 a ], containing the older; 
 and v. 5, 7-10, 14-28, the younger. H, the so-called Law 
 of Holiness (see above, p. 100 f.), forms another leading 
 constituent, but in it, too, it is impossible to mistake traces 
 of later revision and subsequent blending with passages 
 from P. Approximately, Chaps. XVII. -XXVI. are attri- 
 buted to H. The most recent analysis by Driver and 
 White, in P. Haupt's English edition of the Bible, attri- 
 butes the following to #. X. 10, 11 ; XI. 2^-23, 41-47 ; 
 XVII.-XXII. (except the introductory formulas, such as 
 
Otf SEVERAL BOOltS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 231 
 
 XVII. 1, 2; XVIII. 1, 2 a ; XIX. 1, 2 a , &c., and a few 
 other additions); XXIII. 10M2, 15-20, 22, 39% 40-43; 
 XXIV. 15'', 16% 17-21, 22 b ; XXV. 2"-10% 13-15, 17-22, 
 24, 25, 35-40% 43, 47, 53, 55 ; XXVI. 
 
 There are no traces in Leviticus of / and E or JE* and 
 
 no*. 
 
 The Fourth Book of Moses (Numbers). 
 J Amongst other passages : X. 29-32, XXI. 1-3. 
 
 E Amongst other passages : XXI. 4*, 5-9 ; XXXII. 16, 17. 
 
 JE: X. 33-36, XI. (mainly from /). XII. (probably E for the 
 most part). XIII. 17 b -20, 22-24, 26*, 27-31, 32*, 33. 
 XIV. 1% 3, 4, 8, 9, 11-25 (if from E; others hold that 
 the passages come from JE y or JED r ), 30-33, 39-45. 
 XVI. 1% 2*, 12-15, 25, 26, 27 -32% 33, 34. XX. 1% 3% 
 4, 5, 7% 8, 9, 10% 11, 13-21. XXI. 1P-31, 32-35 ? (later 
 addition to JE ? perhaps rather to JED*). XXII. 2 
 XXV. 5 (in Chap. XXII. 22-34 contains Fs account; 
 Chap. XXIII. comes chiefly from E., Chap. XXIV. from J. 
 Only Chap. XXIV. 20-24 is regarded by almost everyone 
 as a later addition). XXXII. 1% 2% 3, 5 (6-15, 20-27, in a 
 later revised form, as also v. 31-33 probably is), 34-42 
 (probably in great part from E; in v. 38 the words 
 " their names being changed J) [in speech] is evidently 
 a marginal gloss, required to avoid the word Baal). 
 
 P: I.-X. 28 (not without subsequent additions). XIII. 1-17% 
 21, 25, 26*, 32*. XIV. 1% 2, 5-7, 10, 26-29, 34-38. XV. 
 (the close, v. 37-41, perhaps from H, see above, on Levi- 
 ticus). In Chaps. XVI. and XVIII. two P-accounts are 
 
232 SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 interwoven with JE's (see above). To the one belongs, 
 in the main: XVI. 2*, 3-7% 19-24, 27% 32 b ; XVII. 6-28; 
 to the other: XVI. 1% 7", 8-11, 16-18, 35 XVII. 5. 
 Further: XVIII. 1 XIX. 22, XX. l a (to "month"), 2, 3 1 ', 
 6, 7 ac , 10% 12, 22-29; XXI. 10, ll a ; XXII. 1; XXV. 6- 
 XXXI; XXXII. l a *, 2 b ? 4, 18, 19, 28-30; XXXIII. 
 (compilation by one of the latest redactors, for the most 
 part founded on P) ; XXXIV. XXXVI. 
 
 The Fifth Book of Moses (Deuteronomy). 
 
 On the controversy respecting the extent of the so-called 
 " Original Deuteronomy," cf. above, p. 63 f. The following 
 passages are there regarded as constituents of the book 
 in its older form (D): IV. 44-49; V. 1 X. 5, 10 XI. 28; 
 XIL-XXVI. 15; XXVIII. 1-68; XXXI. 9-13. 
 
 These are regarded as later additions (Dt) : I. I IV. 
 40; XL 29-32; XXVII. 1-4, 8-26 ; XXVIII. 69 XXXI. 
 8, 24-30 [XXXII. 1-43; on which cf. above, p. 93]; 
 XXXII. 44-47; XXXIV. l b , 5, 6, 11-12. Some of the 
 still later passages are XIV. 1-21 ; XXIV. 8, 9 ; XXVI. 
 16-19 ? XXXIV. 2, 3. 
 
 These must have come from JE : XXVII. 5-7 (to 
 speak precisely, probably from E) ; XXXI. 14-23 (not 
 without traces of revision) [XXXIII., see above, p. 40 f .] ; 
 XXXIV. l c , 4, 10. 
 
 FromP: IV. 41-43; X. 6-9; XXXII. 48-52; XXXIV. 
 1% 7-9. 
 
 The Book of Joshua. 
 
 J ( Jahwist : see above, on Genesis), amongst other passages : 
 XV. 14-19, 63; XVII. 11-18; XIX. 47. 
 
OF SEVEEAL BOOKS OP THE OLD TESTAMENT. 233 
 
 E (Elohist) : I. 1,2*, 10, 11*. XXIV. (with numerous traces 
 of a later, probably Deuteronomistic hand ; thus in v. I 1 ', 
 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 26% 31 ; in v. 29 b a trace of P must 
 be found). 
 
 JE (See above, on Genesis, and cf . the remark below on Dt) : 
 II. 1-9% 12-23. III. 1-3, 4 b -6, 8 IV. 12, 15-18, 20. 
 V. 2*, 3, 8, 9, 13 to VII. 26 (Chap. VII. substantially 
 /, but, like Chap. VI., not without traces of Dt). VIII. 
 3-26, 28, 29. IX. 3-15% 16, 22, 23*, 24-26. .X. l a *, 
 3-24 (in 12 b and 13 a citation from the "Book of the 
 Upright Ones"; cf. above, p. 2), 26, 27. XL 1-9 
 (with traces of Dt in v. 2, 3, 6, 8), IP. XIX. 9, 49, 50. 
 
 Dt (Deuteronomistic redactor, of whose hand there are mani- 
 fold traces also in the passages assigned to JE) : I. 3-9, 
 12-18. II. 9M1, 24. III. 7. IV. 14, 21-24. V. 1. 
 VIII. 1, 2, 27, 30 IX. 2, 27 C (a dislocated clause). 
 X. 1*, 2, 25, 28-43. XI. 10-20, 21-23? (or added 
 later?). XII. XIII. 14. XIV. 6-15 (perhaps founded 
 on E). XXI. 43-45 (in the Heb. text, v. 41-43, because 
 36, 37 are missing). XXII. 1-6. XXIII. 
 
 P (Priests' Code): IV. 13, 19. V. 10-12. IX. 15 b , 17-21. 
 XIII. 15-33 (with traces of a later hand). XIV. 1-5. 
 XV. 1-12, 20-44, 48-62. XVI. 4-8. XVII. 1% 3, 4, 9*, 
 10\ XVIII. 1, 11% 12-28. XIX. 1-8, 10-46, 48, 51 (the 
 entire chapter was revised by K, who worked with 
 JE before him). XX. 1-3, 7-9. XXI. 1-11% 13 b -40. 
 XXII. 9-34 (the text of P doubtless rests on an older 
 foundation, but was revised by a more recent hand). 
 XXIV. 29 b . 
 
 R (Latest redactor and isolated later additions) : III. 4 a . 
 V. 4-7. IX. 23*, 27* b . XV. 13, 45-47. XVII. l b and 
 2] (founded on JE}, 5? 6. XX. 4-6. XXL ll b -13*. 
 XXII. 7, 8. 
 
234 SURVEY 01* TtfE COMPOSITION FROM DtFtfEREtfT DOCUMENTS 
 
 In XV. 26-28 the names " Shema, Moladah, Beth-pelet, 
 Hazar-shual, Beer-sheba, and the places belonging to 
 them" were interpolated from Neh. xi. 26 ff., and there- 
 fore are not reckoned in v. 32. In XYII. 9 the second 
 clause conies from another context. 
 
 The Book of Judges. 
 
 J (Jahwist; see above, on Genesis): I. l b -3, 5-7, 9-17, 19 
 II. l a , 5 b , 23 ? (this account of J's, which contains for the 
 most part parallels to the Book of Joshua, is now trans- 
 ferred by the introductory words into the time after the 
 death of Joshua. In II. l b , 5 a , the Jahwist' s original 
 narrative has been displaced by another). 
 
 H l (An older stratum of the ancient Hero-Stories *), constitut- 
 ing the nucleus of the Book of Judges ; see above, 
 p. 23): VIII. 4-10% (to "Karkor"), 11-21, 24-27% 
 29-32. IX. ? (in any case from a very ancient source). 
 
 H (Hero-Stories, from the early part of the Kingly period ; 
 see above, p. 21 ff.) : III. 15 b -26 (questionable whether 
 from the same hand), 27 and 28 ? IV. 4-22. V. l-31 a 
 (Song of Deborah ; see above, p. 4f.). VI, 2 1 ', 3*, 4-6 a 
 11-32, 33*, 36-40? (perhaps stood originally after v. 17). 
 VII. 1* 2-11, 13-22, 23-25 ? (if 23, 24, 25 b were not from 
 Ri). VIII. 1-3, 22-23? X. 8 a . XI. 1-11 (with traces 
 oE revision by Ri), 30 XII. 6. XIII. 2, 3, 5 b -7% 7 C -13% 
 14 b XIV. 4 a , 5-18, 19 C XV. 19. XVI. l-31 ab . 
 
 * Part of the critics (see above, the footnote to p. 27) consider the various 
 strata of H to be continuations of the Jahwistic (J) and Elohistic (E) sources 
 employed in the Pentateuch. 
 
Otf SEVERAL BOOKS Otf TflE OLD TESTAMENT. 2 3 5 
 
 ri (fragments of a list of Judges, from the later Kingly period ; 
 see above, p. 45) : X. 1-5. XII. 8-15. XV. 20. 
 
 Ri (Compiler of the Deuteronomistic Book of Judges, which 
 was constructed on the foundation of H and ri ; see 
 above, pp. 21 ff., 94 f . ) : II. 6-12, 14-16, 18-22.* III. 
 4-10, 12-15% 27 and 28? 29, 30. IV. 1-3, 23, 24. 
 V. 31 b . VI. 1, 2 a , 6 b , 33 b , 34 ? 35. VII. 12. VIII. 10 b , 
 27 b , 28, 33-35. X. 6, 7*, 8 b -18. XII. 7. XIII. 1. 
 XIV. 4 b . XVI. 31 C . 
 
 N and N l (Pre-Deuteronomic compilers of a few narratives 
 which now form the Appendix to the Book of Judges ; see 
 above, p. 24 ). The following must belong to N: XVII. 
 1, 5, 7*, 8-11, 13. XVIII. l bc , 2* 3-6, 1*, 8-10% 11-13, 
 14*, 15*, 16, 17* 18*, 19, 20* 21-29, 31. XIX. 1*, 2-30. 
 Chaps. XX. and XXI. also originally came from this source, 
 but have been thoroughly revised by a hand related to the 
 Priests' Code (P) . The traces of a duplicate narrative are 
 clearly discernible in the accretions, XX. 11, 14 (pro- 
 bably a continuation properly of 3 a ), 36 b (36 b -46 form an 
 evident parallel to v. 29-35 a ), 48. XXI. 9. In the older 
 source the assemblies of the people take place afc Mizpah, 
 in the younger at Bethel. Budde (Die Biicher Bichter 
 u. Samuel, p. 151) attributes to the Mizpah-Source XX. 
 
 * Others hold that Chap. II. 16 ff. contains numerous elements from E 
 (see the note on p. 234) ; Moore (Commentary on Judges, New York, 1895, 
 p. 63 f.) assigns to that source v. 6, 8-10, 13, 14 a , 16, 17, 20, 21 ; III. l a , 3, 4 ; 
 but v. 23 a , III. 2, perhaps, also 5 and 6 to J, and almost all the rest to the 
 Deuteronomistic redactor. In the Gideon Histories he attributes to J, VI. 2-6, 
 in part; 11-24, 34. VII. 1, 9-11, 13-15, 16-20, in part; 21, 22^*. VIII. 4-21, 
 24-27 a , in substance ; 30, 31. IX. : to E VI. 2-6, in part ; 7-10, 25, 32, 33, 
 36-40, 35 a . VII. 2-8, 16-20 in part ; 22 a , 22**, 23 ?, 24, 25. VIII. 1-3, 29. 
 In Chaps. XVII. and XVIII., the account which we have followed Kittel's 
 analysis in designating N is thought by Moore to belong in all probability to 
 J", the original form of the narrative in Chap. XIX. if., perhaps also being his 
 work. 
 
236 SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 l a * l b , 3 b -10, 3% 14, 19, 29, 36 b -38, 40-42 a , and part of 
 43-48; to the Bethel-Source, l a *, 2, 11-13, 15, 17, 20-28, 
 30-33 a , 34% 35-36% and a part of 43-48. 
 
 N 1 XVII. 2-4, 6, 12. XVIII. 1% 2* 1*, 10 b , U*, 15*, 18*, 
 
 20*, 30. 
 
 R> (The post-exilic editor or editors of our present Book of 
 Judges; see above p. 120) : I. l a , 4, 8, 18. II. l b -5 a , 
 13, 17. III. 1-3, 11,31. VI. 7-10. X. 7*. XI. 29. XIII. 
 4, 5 a , 7 b , 13", 14 a . XVII. 7*. XVIII. 17*. XIX. 1*. 
 XX. 27, 28? XXI. H b , 25. 
 
 The following are some of the latest glosses : VI. 26, 
 28 ("the second"); XII. 4 b ("Ye are fugitives of 
 Ephraim," &c. : in v. 1 the Ephraimite attack is explained 
 quite differently) ; XVIII. 17 (the words " came in thither, 
 and took the graven image, and the ephod, and the 
 teraphim, and the molten image," as well as " with the 
 six hundred men girt with weapons of war"). 
 
 ? Passages of doubtful origin : XI. 12-28. XIV. 19 ab . 
 
 The First Book of Samuel. 
 
 S (Saul-Source, a Judahite or Benjamite history of Saul, 
 dating from the tenth or ninth century ; cf . above p. 27 f.) : 
 IX. 1-8, 10 X. 7, 9-16. XII. l-8 a , 9-11, 15. XIII. 
 2-7 a , 15 b -18, 23. XIV. 1-46. 
 
 Da (David-Source; in all probability a Judahite history oJ 
 David, contemporary with S, perhaps from the same 
 hand ; cf. above, p. 27 f . ) : XVI. 14-23. XVIII. 6 ac , 7, 
 
OP SEVERAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 237 
 
 8 b -ll (v. 6 a and 8 C , 10, 11 are not in the Greek Bible, 
 and perhaps come from another source), 20, 21 a , 22-26% 
 27. XX. l b -3, 11, 18-39. XXI. 1. XXIII. 1-5, 7-13, 
 19 XXIV. 13, 15-23. XXV. P-44. XXVII. XXVIII. 
 1-2, 4-16, 19 b -25 (moreover ttte entire section, XXVIII. 
 3-25, should come, in order of time, after Chap. XXX.). 
 XXIX.-XXXI. 
 
 SS (A considerably later history of Samnel and Saul, 
 probably Ephraimite, a combination of diverse traditions, 
 perhaps dating from the second half of the eighth century ; 
 cf. above, p. 45 f.) : I. 1-5% 6-28. II. 11-22% 23-26. III. 
 l-21 a . VIII. X. 17-24. XV.? XVII. 1-11, 12-13, in part 
 (the text there is in utter confusion), 14 a XVIII. 5. In 
 part of this last section it is indeed questionable whether 
 we have SS, especially in the verses and portions of verses 
 not found in the Greek Bible, viz., XVII. 12M4, 1 6-31, 38 b , 
 41, 48*, 50, 55 XVIII. 5 (at XVII. 55 ff. it is evidently 
 intended to narrate the first meeting of Saul and David, 
 whilst according to XVII. 32 ff. there had already been a 
 conversation before the fight. 54 and 57 also could not 
 have stood side by side in one source). XVIII. 12-19 and 
 28-30 (in these two sections also the Greek text has not 
 12 b , 17-19, 29 b , 30). XIX. 1, 2, 4-17. XXL 2-10. 
 XXII. XXVI. 
 
 E (A narrative compiled in the kingdom of Ephraim in the 
 ninth or eighth century; cf. above, p. 40)*: IV. l 1 '- 
 18% 19-21. V. VI. 1-14, 16, 18 b VII. 1. 
 
 * As in the Book of Judges, so here, several critics (Schrader, Cornill, &c., 
 and last of all Budde in " The Books of Samuel in Hebrew," the eighth part of 
 Paul Haupt's English Edition of the Bible, Lpzg., 1894), have apportioned the 
 contents of the four ancient documents which we have distinguished above 
 amongst the various strata of the Jahwistic (J) and Elohistic (E) sources which 
 we have mentioned in connection with the Pentateuch and the book of Joshua. 
 Thus Budde holds that the sources designated S and Da by us are in the main 
 
238 SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 Ri (The Deuteronomistic editor of that form of the Book of 
 Judges [see above, on the Book of Judges] the conclusion 
 of which we probably now have in 1 Sam. xii.). 
 
 Dt (Deuteronomistic revision of the histories of Samuel, Saul, 
 and David; see above, p. 94 f.) : II. 27-31 a , 32 a , 33-36. 
 VII. 2 b -16. XIV. 47-51 ? 
 
 ? (Passages of unknown origin) : II. l b -10. XVIII. 21 h . 
 XX. 4-10, 12-17. XXI. 11-16. 
 
 (Redactional additions of various kinds, part of them 
 probably early, and appended when the ancient sources 
 were welded together, part of them not added till post- 
 exilic times; see above, p. 120) : I. 5 b . II. l a . III. 21 b . 
 IV. l a , 18 b ,22. VI. 15, 17,18*. VII. 2 a , 17. IX. 9. X. 8, 
 15-27. XL 12-14. XIII. 1, 7 b -15 a , 19-22. XIV. 52? 
 XVI. 1-13. XVII. 12% 15. XVIII. 6 b , 8, 26 b . XIX. 
 3,18-24. XX. l a , 40-42. XXIII. 6, 14 ac , 15-18. XXV, 
 la. XXVIII. 3, 17, 18. 
 
 We regard the following as the latest additions 
 (glosses) : II. 22 b , 31 b , 32 b . VI. 19 (the words "fifty 
 thousand men")- XI. 8 b . XVI, 19* (" who is with the 
 sheep"). XVII. 14 b . XXIII. 14 \ XXIV. 14. XXVIII. 
 19 a . XXX. 9 b . XXXI. 7 ( t( and they that were beyond 
 Jordan"). 
 
 identical with <7; our E (chaps, iv.-vi.) with E l ; SS with the Pentateuchal E 2 , 
 or (in many instances from chap. xvii. onwards) with E l , less frequently 
 (almost the whole of chap, xxii.) with J 1 . In harmony with this a portion of 
 the redactional additions are ascribed to the combiner of J and E (JE 1 '). 
 As to the rest, apart from the dispute whether the main documents reach 
 to 1 Kings ii. , considerable agreement has been reached in the analysis of the 
 sources. 
 
OP SEVERAL BOOKS OP THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 239 
 
 The Second Book of Samuel. 
 
 Je (Jerusalem- Source, an old history of David, written most 
 probably in Jerusalem, in any case in Judah, dating 
 from the time of Solomon or Kehoboam ; see above, 
 p. 25 ff)* : V. 3, 6 b , 7*, 8% 9-16. VI. IX. XI. XII. 
 1-9, 13 XX. 22 (except some glosses; cf. on R). 
 
 Da (See on 1 Sam.) : I. 1-4, 11, 12, 17-27 (on the Elegy, 
 v. 18 ff., cf. above, pp. 2, lOf). II. 1-9, 10 b -12, 17 III. 1, 
 6 b -29, 31-39 (on the Elegy, v. 33 b f., cf. above, p. 10 f.). 
 IV. 1-3, 5-12. Y. 1, 2, 17-25. XXI. 15-22. XXIII. 
 8-39. 
 
 88 (See above, on 1 Sam.) : I. 6-10, 13-16. 
 
 Dt (Deuteronomistic redactor): VII. 1-12, 14-29 (perhaps 
 founded on an exemplar furnished by Je). 
 
 ? (Passages of unknown origin) : II. 13-16. III. 2-5. 
 VIII. 1-6% 7-10, 13-14% 16-18. XXI. 1, 2% 3 (from 
 "What" )-14. XXII. 2^-51 (of the same tenor as 
 Ps. xviiU. XXIII. 1^-7. XXIV. 
 
 R (See above, on 1 Sam.) : I. 5. II. 10% 11. III. 6% 30. IV. 4, 
 k V. 4, 5, 7 b . VII. 13. VIII. 6 b , 11, 12, 14 b , 15. XII. 
 7 b -9 a ? 9 b -12. XIV. 15-22 ? XX. 23-26. XXI. 2 b , 3 a 
 (to " Gibeonites ") XXII. 1, 2 a . XXIII. l a . 
 
 
 These are probably to be considered as the latest 
 additions (glosses) : V. 6 C , 8 b . XIII. 8 a , 38 a (becomes 
 
 * Budde and others (see the preceding footnote) maintain that in this source 
 also there are elements of the Jahwistic historical work. 
 
240 SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 superfluous if we put 37 a into its correct position after 
 37 b ). XV. 24* (additions: "and all the Levites with 
 him" [instead of " and Abiathar"; cf. ver. 29], also 
 "of the Covenant" [see v. 29!]; the words, "and 
 Abiathar went up" are now incomprehensible). XXI. 9* 
 (the words " at the beginning of barley-harvest"). 
 
 The First Book of Kings. 
 Da (See above, on 1 Sam.) : I., II. 13-26, 28-46. 
 
 Sa (Extracts from a biography of Solomon : the latter may 
 have been part of the great Book of Kings, mentioned 
 under K) : III. 5-13? 16-28? IV. 1-4% 5-12, 13 a *, 
 14-19 a . V. 2,3, 6? 7-15,24,25,27,28,29-32? VI. 2-6, 8, 
 10, 15, 16*, 17, 23-27, 31, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38*. VII. 1-46, 
 51. VIII. 1-4*, 6*, 10-13 (on v. 12 and 13, cf. above, 
 p. 2). IX.* 11M8, 24? X. 1-10? 13? 16-20 a , 28-29? 
 XI. 7*, 14-28, 40. 
 
 K (Extracts from the " Book of the Histories of the Kings of 
 Judah," or "Book of the Histories of the Kings of 
 Israel," which is cited by Dt for almost every king of 
 Judah and Israel: on this so-called "great King's 
 Book," cf. above, p. 70 f. We here partly put down 
 to K certain sections, the origin of which from the 
 "great King's Book" may be questioned, but which 
 bear more or less of the stamp of authentic tradition) : 
 XII. 2, 1 (the transposition of these verses resulted from 
 the interpolation of 3 a ), 3 b -ll, 12* ("Jeroboam 
 and" is an addition), 13, 14, 16, 18-20, 25. The basis of 
 XIV. 1-18; [further] 25-28. XV. 16-22. XVI. 21- 
 22, 24, 34 ? (on other traces of K cf. on Dt). 
 
OF SEVERAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 241 
 
 
 Dt (Deuteronornist : the principal compiler of our present 
 "Book of Kings/' who wrote under the influence of 
 Deuteronomy ; on this cf. above, p. 72 f.) : II. 1-9 (v. 5-9 
 probably on an ancient groundwork), 27. III. 1, 2, 4, 
 14. IY. 13 b , 19 1 ' V. 1, 16-23, 26. VI. 7, 9, 11-14 (if not 
 Z), 18-22, 28-30, 32, 35, 38*. VIII. 2*, 3'', 9, 14-43, 
 52-64, 65* 66. IX. 10,11% 19-2J, 25-28. X. 11-12? 
 14-15? 20^-27. XI. 1-6, 7*, 8, 9% 11-13, 29-39 (perhaps 
 founded on K; see above), 41-43. XII. 15, 26-31. 
 
 XIII. 33", 34. XIV. 1-18 (founded on K). 
 
 From XIV. 23 onwards we ascribe to Dt all the 
 formulse which introduce or close the accounts of the 
 individual reigns, although they contain all kinds of 
 historical notices which doubtless come entirely from K : 
 
 XIV. 19-24, 29-31 (after K : 20, 21, 30). XV. 1-5 nl >, 
 7-15, 23-34 (after If: 2, 7, 10, 12, 13, 15? 23, 25, 27, 
 29, 33. XVI. 5, 6, 7 ? 8-11, 14-20, 23, 25-33 (after K: 
 8-11, 15-18, 23, 29. XXI. 20 b -22, 24. XXII. 39-54 
 (after K; 39, 42, 47-50, 52). 
 
 Dt 3 (The author, also Deuteronomistic, of certain additions to 
 the Book of Kings compiled by Dt, dating from the 
 second half of the Babylonian Exile ; on this cf. above, 
 p. 72 f.): III. 3, 15. V. 4-5 (or Z.?). VI. 1. VIII. 
 44-51. IX. 1-9. XI. 9", 10. XVI. 12, 18. 
 
 (Information additional to that given in the adjoining main 
 account) : IX. 23. 
 
 Pr (Histories of Prophets ; extracts from a work relating to 
 Elijah, dating from the ninth or eighth century; on 
 it cf. above, p. 41 ) : XVII. I XVIII. 30, 32 b XIX. 
 9 a , 11* ("And Jahweh passed by," &c.), 12-21. XXI. 
 1-20% 27-29, 
 
 16 
 
242 SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 E (Ephraimite narratives ; extracts from a historical worl 
 which appeared in the northern kingdom, dating probably 
 from the ninth century; see above, p. 43) : XX. 1-12, 
 15-21 (in case 15-1 7 a , 19, 21 b are not to be ascribed to 
 Z), 22, 23-25 ? 26-27, 29% 29 b and 30 a ? 30 b , 31-34. 
 XXII. 1-34, 35* (see on Z), 36, 37. 
 
 E (See above, on 1 Sam.) : II. 10-12. 
 
 Z (Subsequent additions. A part of them were perhaps 
 adopted even by Dt or I)t. But most of them were 
 doubtless not inserted till after the Exile in the King's 
 Book arranged by Dt [or Dt 2 ] ; see above, p. 70 f .) : 
 IY. 4'>, 13 a *. V. 4-5? VI. 16*. VII. 47-50. VIII. 
 1*, 2*, 4*, 5, 6*, 7-8 ? 65*. IX. 22. XII. 3% 12* (the 
 words " Jeroboam, &c."), 17, 21-24, 32 XIII. 33*. 
 XV. 5 C . XVI. 1-4? XVIII. 31-32*. XIX. 9Ml a (to 
 " stand upon the mount before Jahweh "). XX. 13, 14 
 (on 15-21 see above, on M), 22-25? 28, 29 1 ', and 30*? 
 35-43. XXI. 23, 25, 26. XXII. 35* (the words " and the 
 blood ran out of the wound into the bottom of the 
 chariot "), 38. 
 
 The following are probably to be considered quite late 
 glosses (and therefore for the most part are not in the 
 Greek translation) : IV. 4 h , 13 ("the villages of Jair, the 
 son of Manasseh, which are in Gilead "). VI. 5 (" round 
 about the walls of the house "). VII. 24 (" compassing 
 the sea round about "), 42 C . VIII. 65 (" and seven days, 
 fourteen days"). XI. 24 ("when David made the 
 slaughter amongst the Aramaeans"). XII. 27 C ("and 
 return to Rehoboam, king of Judah"). 32 ("and he 
 went up unto the altar" : cf.v. 33). XIII. 23 ("of the 
 prophet who had brought him back"). XIV. 31 (cf. v. 
 21). XV. 6 (cf. XIV. 30). XVI. 11 ("he left him not 
 a single man child," see XIV. 10). XVII. 6 (original 
 
OP SEVERAL BOOKS OP THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 213 
 
 text : " bread in the morning and flesh in the evening "). 
 XVIII. 19 ("and the four hundred prophets of the 
 Asherah " ; cf. v. 22 and especially v. 40, where nothing 
 is said about the prophets of the Ashera). XXII. 28 b 
 (from Micah I. 2, occasioned by an erroneous confound- 
 ing of the two prophets), 31 (the number 32 comes from 
 1 Kings xx. 24). 
 
 The Second Book of Kings. 
 
 K (See above, on 1 Kings) : I. 1. VIII. 20-22. X. 32, 33. 
 XL 1-9, 11, 12, 18 b -20. XII. 5-16 ? 18, 19. XIII, 22, 
 24, 25. XIV. 8-14. XV. 16, 19, 20. XVI. 5-18. 
 XVIII. 17 XIX. 9% 36, 37. XXIII. 29-30? 33-35? 
 XXIV. 1 ? (concerning other traces of K cf. on Dt). 
 
 1C 2 The probably somewhat more recent parallel, XIX. 10 
 (from the second clause onwards) -20, 32-35, to the main 
 account in XVIII. 13 ff. 
 
 Dl (See above, on 1 Kings) : I. 18. III. 1-3. VIII. 16-19, 
 23-29 (after K: 26). IX. 7-10% 14, 15 a , 28 C , 29, 36* 
 ("which he spoke, &c."), 37. X. 10 ? 17, 28-31, 34-36. 
 XII. 1-4 (after K: 2), 20-22 (after K : 21-22). XIII. 
 1-3, 7-11 (after K: 7). XIV. 1-7 (after K: 2, 5-7), 
 15-29 (after K: 19-22, 25). XV. 1-15 (after K: 2, 5, 
 10, 14), 17, 18, 21-38 (after K: 25, 29, 30, 33, 35 b ). 
 XVI. 1-4 (after K: 3 ?), 19, 20. XVII. 1-6, 18, 21-28), 
 41 (after K: 3-6, 24-28). XVIII. 1-13 (after K: 2, 4 b , 
 78 b , ? With v. 9-11 cf. XVII. 5, 6). XIX. 9 b . XX. 
 (founded on an exemplar in K : v. 7 should follow v. 11). 
 XX. 1, 2, 16-26 (after K: 1, 18, 19, 23, 24). XXII. l-4 a , 
 5 b , 8, 9 ab , 10-14, 20 b . XXIII. l-4 a (to "the keepers of 
 the door"), 6-7% 8% 9-13, 21-25, 28, 31, 32, 36, 37 
 (possibly 31, 36 are after K). 
 
244 SURVEY OF THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 DP (See above, on 1 Kings) : XIII. 4-6 ? 23 ? XVII. 7-17, 
 19, 20, 29-34 a . XXI. 7-15. XXII. 15-20 a . XXIII. 26, 
 27. XXIV. 2-12, 15 XXV. 30. 
 
 ? (See above, on 1 Kings) : XI. 13-18 a . XVIII. 14-16 (from 
 a very good source). XIX. 2J-31 (from a collection of 
 oracles of Isaiah?). XXIII. 8 1 ', 15, 19, 20. 
 
 Pr (A. stratum of prophetical narratives relating to Elisha, 
 probably from different hands, somewhat younger than 
 the Elisha-Stories distinguished in 1 Kings under the 
 symbol Pr ; see above, p. 41 f .) : II., IV. VI. 23. VIII. 
 1-15, XIII. 14-21. 
 
 E (See above, on 1 Kings) : III. 4-27 ? VI. 24 VII. 17\ IX. 
 1-6, 10VL3, 15 b -28 ab , 30-36 (to " word of Jahweh "). X. 
 1-6% 7-9, 11-16, 18-27. 
 
 Z (See above, on 1 Kings) : I. 2-17. VII. 17 l '-20. X. 6 b ? 
 XI. 10. XII. 17? XVII. 34MO. XXI. 3-6. XXII. 4", 
 5 a , 6, 7, 9'. XXIII. 4* (see above, on Dt.) } 5, 7 1 ', 14, 16- 
 18. XXIV. 13, 14. 
 
 We regard the following as some of the quite late 
 glosses (see above, on 1 Kings) : I. 16 ( (( there is no 
 God, &c.," inserted from v. 6). II. 15 ("in Jericho"). 
 III. 19 (" and every choice city "). VI. 22 and 23 ("and 
 two changes of raiments"). VIII. 1 (last clause). IX. 
 4 ("the servant of the prophet")- X. 19 ("all his 
 worshippers," from v. 21) . XI. 6, 7 (" about the king "), 
 11 ("by the king round about"), 13 (" the guard "), 
 15 ("the captains of hundreds " and "between the 
 ranks"), 19 ("and all the people of the land"). XIII. 
 12-13 (at XIV. 15, 16, these verses are in their right 
 place). XVIII. 17 ("the Tartan and the Eabsaris, &c." ; 
 
OF SEVERAL 1300KS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 245 
 
 cf. Isa. xxxvi. 2). XIX. 10 a (to " Judah." The message 
 consists of a letter !). XX. 11 (" to tlie steps which it 
 had gone down"; from Isa. xxxviii. 8). XXII. 4, 8 and 
 XXIII. 4 : the original text no doubt ran simply, " the 
 priest H.", as at XXII. 10, 12, &c. XXIII. 33 ( that 
 he might not reign in Jerusalem " ; from 2 Chron. 
 xxxvi. 3). 
 
 The Book of Ezra. 
 
 E (Verbal extracts from the Memoirs of Ezra; cf. above, 
 p. 122) : VII. 27 -VIII. 34. IX. 
 
 e (Extracts from the Memoirs of Ezra in a revised form ; cf . 
 above, p. 122) : VII. 1-10. X. 
 
 Q (Extracts from written sources and documents in the 
 original phraseology; cf. above, p. 122) : II. 1-67 (of 
 almost precisely the same tenor as Neh. vii. 6 if.). 
 
 q (Extracts of the same kind in a revised form : cf . above, 
 p. 122) : I. 1-4. II. 68 III. 1, 6. VI. 15. 
 
 Qa (The Aramaic source in Ezra, Chap. IV. ff. ; cf . above, 
 p. 122): IV. 8-23. V. 3. VI. 14 a (except the late gloss in 
 VI. 12 a ). VII. 11-26. 
 
 Iqa (Statements from Qa in a revised form ; cf. above, p. 122): 
 IV. 6, 7. 
 
 Ch (Chronicler, the redactor, or, as the case may be, the 
 compiler of the Historical Work we now have as Ezra, 
 
246 SURVEY OP THE COMPOSITION FROM DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS 
 
 Nehemiah, Chronicles ; as to the rest Ch also stands in 
 those sections where the Chronicler has woven the notices 
 which he may have found extant into a new representa- 
 tion: cf.above, p. 121 ff.): I. 5-11. III. 2-5, 7 IV. 5, 24 
 V. 2. VI. I4 b , 16-22. VIII. 35, 36. 
 
 The Book of Nehemiah. 
 
 N (Verbal extracts from the Memoirs of Nehemiah ; cf. above, 
 p. 122) : I. 1 VII. 5 (on 6-69 and 70-73 a see below, on 
 Qand?). XL 1, 2, 20-24. XII. 31, 32, 37-40. XIII. 
 4-31. 
 
 n (Extracts from Nehemiah's Memoirs in a revised form ; see 
 above, p. 122 : XI. 3-19). 
 
 e (See above, on Ezra!): VII. 73 b X. 40 (amongst other 
 things due to the Chronicler is the insertion of 
 Nehemiah and the Levites in VIII. 9 ; as well as IX. 
 4,5). 
 
 Q (See above, on Ezra !) : VII. 6-69 (admitted by Nehemiah 
 into his Memoirs). XII. l-26 a . 
 
 q (See above, on Ezra !) : VII. 70-73 a . 
 
 Ch (See above, on Ezra !) : XI. 25-36. XII. 26 ] '-30, 33-36, 
 41 XIII. 3. 
 
OF SEVERAL BOOKS OP THE OLD TESTAMENT. 247 
 
 Later Additions to the Book of Jeremiah. 
 
 Z (cf. above, p. 85): III. 14-16? 17, 18. X. 1-16. XV. 
 13, 14 (from XVII. 3, 4). XVI. 13, 14 (from XXIII. 7. 
 8), 18-21. XVII. 19-27. XXL 11, 12. XXVII. 7, 
 XXIX. 10-15? 16-20. XXX. 10, 11, 22-24. XXXI. 
 38-40. XXXII. 1-5, 17-23. XXXIII. 2, 3, 14-26. 
 XXXIX. 1, 2, 443. XLVI. 27, 28 (cf. XXX. 10, 11). 
 XL VIII. 47. L. 1 LI. 58. LII. (cf. 2 Kings xxiv. 
 18 ff.). 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Amos, 50 
 
 Annals of the Kingdom, 71 
 Annalist of the Kingdom, 71 
 Aramaic Document in the Book 
 
 of Ezra, 122 ; Aramaic 
 
 Passages in the Book of 
 
 Daniel, 139 
 Arrangement of the Books in 
 
 the Hebrew Bible, 225 
 
 Balaam-Speeches, 16 
 Baruch, 84 
 Blessing of Jacob, 15 
 Blessing of Moses (Gen.xxxiii.), 
 
 19 
 
 Book of the Covenant, 7, 8, 29 
 Book of the Upright Ones, 2, 13, 
 
 15 
 Book of the Wars of Jahweh, 2, 
 
 15 
 Bow, so-called Song of the, 10 
 
 Calendar, 212 ff. 
 Chronicler, the Work of, 121 ff : 
 Chronicles, Books of, 123 ff. 
 Chronological Tables, 167 
 
 Chronology in the Book of 
 Judges, 95 ; in the Books of 
 Kings, 73 f. 
 
 Collections of Songs, 2, 3 
 
 Congregational Psalms, 147 
 
 Cubit, 296 
 
 Daniel, the Book of, 138 ff. 
 
 Daric (coin), 212 
 
 David, 25; a Psalmist? 
 David-Stories (Da), 28 
 
 Deborah, Song of (Judges v. 
 2 ff.), 5 
 
 Decalogue, 7, 8 
 
 Deutero-Isaiah, 96 
 
 Deuteronomist, 69, 94 f., 233 f. 
 
 Deuteronomy, 33, 34, 62 f ., 94 ; 
 chap, v., 7 ; xxxii., 94 ; xxxiii., 
 40 
 
 Deutero-Zechariah, 136 ff. 
 
 Division of the Kingdom, Con- 
 sequences of, 18 
 
 Document Hypotheses, older 
 and more recent (in Penta- 
 teuch criticism), 32 f. 
 
 Drachme (coin), 212 
 
 .'- Source in the Pentateuch 
 and Joshua (see Elohist) 
 
INDEX. 
 
 249 
 
 
 Ecclesiastes, 162 f. 
 
 Elegy of David on Saul and 
 
 Jonathan, 10; on Abner, ll 
 Elihu-Speeches in the Book of 
 
 Job, 161 
 
 Elijah-Stories, 41 
 Elisha-Stories, 42 
 Elohist (see E),32 f., 43 ff., 227 ff. 
 Epilogue to Deuteronomy, 66 
 Esther, Book of, 130 
 Exodus (see Moses, the Second 
 
 Book) 
 
 Ezekiel, 86 if. 
 Ezra, 106, 118 
 Ezra, Book of 12 L, 
 Ezra's Memoirs, 122 
 
 Fragments Hypothesis, 32 
 
 Genesis (see Moses, the First 
 
 Book) 
 
 G ideon -Narratives, 21, 23 ff. 
 Grafian Hypothesis, 34 
 
 Habakkuk, 74 
 
 Haggai, 103 
 
 Hero- Stories in the Book of 
 
 Judges, 21 
 
 Hilkiah, the Priest, 64 
 Historical Work, the Jah- 
 
 wistic, 35 ff. ; the Jehovistic, 
 
 61 ; the Deuteronomistic, 94 ; 
 
 the final redaction, 119 f. 
 Holiness, Law of, 100 f., 106 
 Hosea, 52 
 
 Isaiah, son of Amoz, 53 ff. ; chap, 
 i., 56 ; ii.-v., 56 ; vi., 56 ; 
 xiii. f., 99 ; xv. and xvi., 50 ; 
 
 xxiv.-xxvii., 135; xxxiv.-xxxv., 
 
 99 
 /-Source in the Pentateuch 
 
 and Joshua (see J ah wist) 
 Jacob's Blessing, 15 
 Jahwist, 32, 33 f., 35 ; various 
 
 strata of, 226 
 Jehoshaphat, Promulgator of the 
 
 Book of the Covenant (?), 31 
 Jehovist, 61 
 Jeremiah, 76 ; the origin of 
 
 the Book, 84 f . ; additions to 
 
 the Book, 85 
 Jerusalem- Source in the Second 
 
 Book of Samuel, 25 
 Job, the Book of, 154 
 Joel, 133 
 
 Jonah ben Amittai, 134 
 Jonah, the Book of, 134 
 Josiah, Purification of the cul- 
 
 tus under, 63 ff. 
 Joshua, the Book of, 94, 120, 
 
 232; x., 12 f., 2 
 Jotham's Fable (Judges ix., 
 
 8ff.), 5 
 Judges, the Book of, 21, 45, 94, 
 
 120 
 
 King's Book, the great, 70 
 Kings, the Book of, 68, 96, 120 ; 
 
 1 Kings v. 9, ff., 13 ; xx., xxii., 
 
 2 Kings iii., vi. 24 ff., ix, f., 42 
 
 Lamentations, 91 
 Lam en tations(Qinah)- Verse, 92 
 Lamech, Song of, 3 
 Lawbook, Ezra's, 106, 118 
 Legends, Remnants of An- 
 cient, 5 
 
 17 
 
250 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Length (measure), 206 
 Levites, according to Ezek. 
 
 xliv., 6, distinguished from 
 
 the Priests, 90 ; in the 
 
 Priests' Code, 117 
 Leviticus (see Moses, the Third 
 
 Book) 
 
 Malachi, 105 f . 
 
 Measures of Capacity, 207 
 
 Measures of Length, 206 
 
 Micah, 57 
 
 Midrash on the Book of Kings, 
 127 
 
 Miriam, Song of (Exod. xv. 21), 
 2 
 
 Moab, Oracle on (Isa. xv. f.), 50 
 
 Money, 210 
 
 Months, Names of, 213 
 
 Moses, 6 ff. ; the First Book of 
 Moses, 226; iv. 23 f., 3; 
 xiv., 119; xlix. Iff., 15. The 
 Second Book of Moses, 228 ; 
 chap, xv., 2 ; xvii. 14 ff., 
 7 ; xx. 7 ; xxxiv. 27 ff., 8. 
 The Third Book of Moses, 
 230. The Fourth Book of 
 Moses, 231; x., 35 f., 3; 
 xxiii. f., 15. The Fifth Book 
 of Moses (see Deuteronomy) 
 
 Nahum, 59 
 Nathan's Parable, 12 
 Nehemiah, 123 
 Nehemiah, Book of, 121 
 Nehemiah's Memorabilia, 122 f . 
 
 Obadiab, 132 
 
 Original Deuteronomy, 63 ff. 
 
 PSee Priests' Code 
 
 Parable of Nathan (2 Sam. 
 
 xii. l,ff.), 12 
 Pentateuch, 6, 119, 226 ff. 
 Pentateuch Criticism, on the 
 
 History of, 31 
 Poetical Books, 141 
 Poetry, Popular, Remains of 
 
 Ancient, 1 
 
 Priests' Code, or Priests' Docu- 
 ment, 33, 106 ff. 227 ff. 
 Prologue to Deuteronomy, 66 ; 
 
 to the Proverbs, 153 ; to 
 
 Job, 157 
 Proper Names transliterated 
 
 exactly from the Hebrew, 216 
 Prophets, Close of the Canon 
 
 of, 137 
 
 Prophets, Mirror, of the, 41 
 Prophetism, 46 ff. 
 Proto-Zechariah, 104 
 Proverbs, Book of, 151 
 Proverbs, Them that speak in, 
 
 2 
 Psalms, Titles of, 141 f.; Number 
 
 of, 141 
 Psalter, 141 ff. ; Origin of, 143 
 
 Qinah- Verse (see Lamenta- 
 tions) 
 
 Rod, 207 
 
 Ruth, Book of, 129 
 
 Samuel, the Books of, 95, 120; 
 1 Sam. iv. 1 ff., 40 ; 2 Sam. 
 i. 18 ff., 2; iii. 33, 11 ; xxii. 
 and xxiii., 1-7, 11 
 
INDEX. 
 
 251 
 
 Saul-Stories (S), 27; (83), 45 
 Septuagint, 13 
 Sinai, Law of, 102 
 Song of Songs, 148 
 Supplement-Hypothesis (in 
 Pentateuch Criticism), 32 
 
 Tell el-Amarna, Clay Tablets 
 from, 173 
 
 Ten Commandments (see Deca- 
 logue) 
 
 Time, Computation of, 212 
 
 Titles of the Psalms, 142 
 
 Trito-Isaiah, 98 
 
 Triumphal Song of them that 
 
 speak in Proverbs (Num. xxi. 
 
 27 ff.), 2 
 
 Weights, 208 
 Well, Song of the, 2 
 Wisdom Literature, 151 
 Writing, Art of, 10 
 
 Zechariah, chaps, i.-viii. , 104 ; 
 
 ix.-xiv., 136 ff. 
 Zephaniah, 61 
 
 t>. NORMAN AND M>\. PRIMERS. KLORAU STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON. 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.OO ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 
 
 APR 24 
 
 ? 25 1933 
 
 Od 17 1933 
 
 MM* 
 
 
 
 23Sep'5?A! 
 
 LD 21-50m-l.'3S 
 
y C 29670 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY