.. .•¦:¦.¦.¦
|ff|jf§|l:

Gift of
Professor Max Farrand
1917

THE CANON

OF THE

OLD TESTAMENT

Nee temere nee timide
1 Canon non uno, quod dicunt, actu ab hominibus, sed paulatim
a Deo, animorum temporumque rectore, productus est ' LOESCHER

THE CANON

OF THE

OLD TESTAMENT

AN ESSAY ON
THE GRADUAL GROWTH AND FORMATION OF
THE HEBREW CANON OF SCRIPTURE

HERBERT EDWARD RYLE, D.D.
BISHOP OF WINCHESTER

Second Edition

MACMILLAN AND CO., Limited
KEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
I9O4
All rights reserved

XpH nev toi r« tov 3na£ napaoeSujuevov tou KTioavTOt tov
xoajuov eivai toutoc tok; fpo^dc neneToBai, oti oca nep'i
thc KTioetoi; omavTa to?c Shtouci tov ntpi oOthc Aorov,
TauTa kou nepi tuv rpa<pa>v. Omgen.

Miw40

First Edition, 1892; Second, 1895; Reprinted, 1899, 1904

TO THE
RIGHT REVEREND WILLIAM BOYD CARPENTER
D.D.
LORD BISHOP OF RIPON
THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED
IN GRATEFUL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF MUCH
PERSONAL KINDNESS AND SYMPATHY
BY ONE OF HIS CHAPLAINS

PREFACE
Most students of the Bible know something about
the history of the Canon of the New Testament, and
about the process by which its limits were gradually
determined. Few, by comparison, are aware that the
Canon of the Old Testament passed through a very
similar course of development. In the present essay
the attempt is made to sketch the history of this
gradual growth. It is but a slight contribution to the
study of a large and difficult subject. But, inadequate
though it is, I venture to hope its appearance may be
welcome to some students, who have wished to obtain
a more connected view of the historical process to
which we owe the formation of the Hebrew Canon of
Scripture. That the view which is here presented should differ
widely in certain respects from that of traditional
opinion, will be no sort of a surprise to those who
have made themselves acquainted with modern Biblical
research. Restricting myself to the limits which appear

Vlll PREFACE.
now to be generally recognised by the best scholars,
I have sought to reap the full advantage of the addi
tional evidence which the results of modern criticism
have placed at our disposal. But it will be understood
that the enquiry treats of the Sacred Collection as
a whole, and that questions dealing with details of
authorship, date, and structure are only touched upon
so far as they help to throw light upon the admission of
the individual books, or groups of books, into the Canon
of Holy Scripture.
There is no need, in the present day, to 'apologize'
for such use of Biblical criticism. There are, no doubt,
some who would still include all Biblical critics under
the same sweeping charge of repudiating Revelation
and denying the Inspiration of Scripture. But they thus
show so plainly either their want of acquaintance with
the literature of Christian criticism or their disinclination
to distinguish between the work of Christian scholars and
that of avowed antagonists to religion, that the complete
misapprehension under which they labour is not likely
to be widely shared, and only calls for the sincere
expression of a charitable regret.
The Church is demanding a courageous restatement
of those facts upon which modern historical criticism
has thrown new light. If, in the attempt to meet this
demand, the Christian scholarship of the present gene
ration should err through rashness, love of change, or
inaccuracy of observation, the Christian scholarship of
another generation will repair the error. Progress
towards the truth must be made. But it will not be

PREFACE. ix
made without many a stumble. Still, if it is progress,
it is not stagnation nor self-satisfied repose. Those who
have gone before us have made their mistakes (see
Excursus A), and we shall not enjoy an immunity from
error. But we shall at least, I trust, endeavour to
make use of the gift with which God has enriched our
age, the gift of historical criticism, to the very utmost of
our power, so that the Church may be found worthy of
the responsibility which the possession of such a gift
entails. If we are true to our belief in the presence and
operation of the Holy Spirit in our midst, we need
never doubt that the Church of Christ is being guided —
even through frequent failure — into a fuller knowledge
of the truth.
So far as the present essay is concerned, criticism, it
may gratefully be acknowledged, enables us to recog
nise the operation of the Divine Love in the traces of
that gradual growth, by which the limits of the inspired
collection were expanded to meet the actual needs of
the Chosen People. It is the history of no sudden
creation or instantaneous acquisition, but of a slow de
velopment in the human recognition of the Divine
message which was conveyed through the varied
writings of the Old Covenant. The measure of the
completeness of the Canon had scarcely been reached,
when 'the fulness of the time came.' The close of
the Hebrew Canon brings us to the threshold of the
Christian Church. The history of the Canon, like the
teaching of its inspired contents, leads us into the very
presence of Him in Whom alone we have the fulfilment

X PREFACE.
and the interpretation of the Old Testament, and the
one perfect sanction of its use.
In order to record my obligations to other writers,
I have drawn up a list of the books which I have most
frequently, used. I ought perhaps to state that Prof.
Wildeboer's book came into my hands after I had
already completed the main outline of the work; but
I gratefully acknowledge the help which his treatise
has rendered me. Prof. Buhl's important work did not
appear until I had almost completed the present volume.
In the case of both these works, the student will find
them very valuable for purposes of reference, but scarcely
so well adapted for purposes of continuous reading.
To Canon Driver's Introduction to the Literature of
the Old Testament, the importance of which can hardly
be over-estimated, I have been able to make occasional
references, while correcting the sheets for the press. It
is a pleasure to feel that the results of Biblical criticism,
a knowledge of which I have often been obliged to pre
suppose, have thus been rendered accessible to English
students in so admirable a form.
Prof. Kirkpatrick's Divine Library of the Old Testa
ment appeared too late for me to make use of it. But
I have added these useful lectures to the list of books
which is placed after the ' Contents.'
To Dr. Hort, who read these pages in proof, I am
most grateful for numerous suggestions and friendly
criticisms, of which I have been glad to avail myself, as
far as has been possible.

PREFACE. XI
In conclusion, I would humbly express the hope that
the present work, with all its shortcomings, may enable
the reader to realize, in however slight a degree, that
the growth of the Canon of the Old Testament was
bound up with the life of the Jewish Church, and with
the discipline of preparation for the coming of Christ.

HERBERT E. RYLE.

Meadowcroft, Cambridge.
The Festival of the Epiphany, 189a.

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
In issuing a Second Edition of The Canon of the Old
Testament, I desire very gratefully to acknowledge the
kind reception that has been accorded to it, in spite of
its many defects, by scholars and critics as well as by
the public generally.
There are only two substantial changes made in the
present edition. An Appendix has been added to
Chap. IV, dealing with the subject of the Samaritan
Version of the Pentateuch ; and Excursus C has been
completely rewritten on the strength of a most generous
loan of valuable material from the renowned Hebrew
scholar, Dr. Ginsburg, who with great kindness caused
to be forwarded to me the first sheets of his learned
and exhaustive Introduction to the Massoretico-critical
edition of the Hebrew Bible.
My thanks are due to kind friends, and in particular
to Mr. G. von U. Searle, for calling my attention to
numerous points that needed correction, and for various
useful suggestions.
I have been reproached by some of my critics for so
often presenting the results of literary enquiry in the

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. xiii
light of probability rather than of certainty. I have
done so from the simple desire of telling what seems to
me to be the truth. I may be convinced of a thing in
my own mind ; but if the evidence be insufficient for
absolute proof, it is right that it should be stated to the
reader, not in terms of certainty, but in those of a greater
or less degree of probability.
In a little treatise, Essai sur la Formation du Canon
de l' Ancien Testament (Paris, 1894), the learned writer,
Mons. X. Kcenig, who is, I am glad to find, in general
agreement with the present work, has thus expressed
the position of the student of the Old Testament Canon :
'Mais ce qui nous console de l'apparente incertitude
planant sur notre essai, c'est que, s'il fallait se r^signer
a ignorer tout ce qui n'est pas prouve mathematiquement,
nos connaisances se reduiraient a peu pres a rien. II est
possible que l'histoire du canon ne se soit point passee
comme nous le crayons. A tout le moins notre r^cit
paraitra vraisemblable. Cela suffit-il en histoire ? Peut-
etre. Pour nous, si nous ne le savons pas, nous le
croyons non seulement vraisemblable mais vrai.'
The absolute caution and reverence with which Pro
fessor Sanday has handled the whole subject of the
Canons of the Old and New Testament in his Bampton
Lectures on Inspiration (1893), deserve the thankful
recognition of every one who is interested in this branch
of Christian literature.
That the present work should have received in some
quarters very severe condemnation for accepting the
main outline of modern critical studies as the basis for

XIV PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
historical investigation, is only what was to be expected.
The interval of three years has increased my conviction
that English readers wish to have the new positions
, stated, without any spirit of controversy, by men whose
faith and hope, for this life and the life to come, rest
unshaken in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Those who are still under the impression that the
character of a spiritual Revelation is imperilled by the
processes of literary analysis, cannot be expected to pre
serve a very tolerant attitude towards Critical Studies.
That criticism, however, is concerned simply with
literary facts, and that the spiritual force of the Old
Testament cannot therefore be impaired by it, are prin
ciples by which we may securely abide. The position
of the Bible in the Church of Christ is strengthened
by every honest endeavour to set forth the human
elements in its growth and history. The more clearly
we discern the human structure, the more readily shall
we recognise the presence and power of the Divine
Spirit, through Whom alone it is that the Bible is the
Word of God to us.
H. E. R.
Meadowcroft, Cambridge.
Jan. 14, 1895.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION.
The Canon of the Old Testament, how formed. — External
evidence wanting. — Legend : Jewish and Christian. — Popular
assumption. — Speculation. — Analogy of N. T. Canon. — Internal
Evidence. — The 'Tripartite Division of Books'; 'the Law, the
Prophets and the Writings ' : their contents .....
CHAPTER I.
The Preparation for a Canon.
The human limitations of the Divine Message. — A preparation
for a Canon to be presupposed. — Hebrew Literature existing
before Hebrew Canon. — Three stages : formation, redaction,
selection. — Collections of Hebrew Writings : (i) Songs, early
national collections — transmitted orally — their religious pur
pose. — (2) Laws: the Decalogue — the Book of the Covenant —
the Law of Holiness — the Deuteronomic Laws — the Priestly
Laws. — Semitic Institutions— the Spirit of Israelite Law new
rather than the system — Priestly tradition — Priestly rules known
before codified — Purpose of collections of laws — 'the Law of
Moses' — 'Torah.' — (3) History: Official Records — Compilation —
Oral Tradition — Prophetic purpose of Narratives. — (4) Prophecy :
Profession of Prophets — the work of leading Prophets — Sayings
of Prophets, repeated by memory, condensed, written — Value of
written Prophecy — Preservation of writings. — Tradition of laws
kept in sanctuary. — Two Tables of Stone. — the Testimony at the
coronation of Joash. — a Kings xi. 12 discussed ....

XVI CONTENTS.
CHAPTER II.
The Beginnings of the Canon.
PACE
Discovery of ' the Book of the Law,' 621 b. c. — Its influence. —
Its contents, not whole Pentateuch, but collection ofDeuteronomic
Law. — (1) Similarity to Deut. — Denunciatory passages. — Reforms
effected through 'the Book of the Law.' — Called 'Book of the
Covenant.' — (2) Evidence of Books of Kings. — Conclusion. — Pre
vious history. — Not a forgery, unknown before Seventh Cent. —
Is. xix. 19. — Possible date. — Deuteronomic Laws, not all repetition
of old, nor all new. — Chief characteristic. — Crisis in Seventh
Cent. — A people's, not a priest's, book. — Secret of its power. —
Its opportuneness. — Its historic significance  47
CHAPTER III.
The Beginnings of the Canon (continued).
'The Book of the Law,' influence of, on individuals. — Distinctive
in style and in treatment of national questions. — Influence of,
upon Jeremiah, upon Book of Kings. — But Prophet's voice pre
ferred to any sacred writing. — ' Book of the Law ' insufficient. —
Amplified in Sixth Cent. b. c. — Israelite History and the Jewish
Exile. — Conjectured acceptance of joint narrative and law. — Com
pilation of Priestly Laws during Exile. — Ezekiel and Priestly
Laws. — Priestly Laws codified, not published .... 63
CHAPTER IV.
The Completion of the First Canon : The Law.
The Return from the Exile. — People ignorant of complete code
of law. — Its possession, a new power. — Ezra, not the writer of
the Priestly Laws. — Possibly their promulgator in Jerusalem. —
Ezra and the Law. — A crisis. — Priestly opposition. — Ezra's
Book of the Law, our Pentateuch. — Its position, at first, un
defined. — Possible later insertions, respecting burnt-offering,
temple tax, tithe, Levitical service. — Novelties excluded. — Uni
form text necessary.— First Hebrew Canon = Pentateuch. —
Position of Torah. — Evidence of Post-Exilic Scripture, later Jew
ish literature, Synagogue usage, title of 'Law.' — Direct evidence
of Samaritan Pentateuch. — First Canon determined before 432 B.C.
— Appendix on the old Hebrew characters of the Samaritan
Pentateuch  -j

CONTENTS. XVU
CHAPTER V.
The Second Canon, or the Law and the Prophets.
PAGE
The Canon of ' the Law ' insufficient. — Prophecy and the Law.
— The ' Nebiim ' group. — (I.) Causes of Selection : Joshua, Judges,
Samuel, Kings. — Distinctive features. — Witness of Prophets
often unpopular. — Change produced by Exile and Return. — In
creased honour of Prophecy. — 2 Mace. ii. 13. — (II.) When were
' Prophets ' regarded as Scripture ? — ' Law,' at first, overshadowed
all other writings. — Isaiah, Jeremiah, Minor Prophets.— Alex
ander's victories, reaction against Legalism. — Ecclesiasticus, evi
dence of. — Order of the 'famous men.'— Mention of the Twelve
Prophets. — Important names omitted. — Dan. ix. 2, evidence of. —
Greek Prologue to Ecclesiasticus. — Prophets selected, 300-200
B.C. — Value of their witness in the Second Cent. b. c. — (III.)
Other Books known, but not recognised as Scripture. — Ruth and
Lamentations, not in ' Nebiim.' — The ' Prophets ' and Synagogue
usage. — ' The Law and the Prophets '  104

CHAPTER VI.
The Third Canon, or The Law, the Prophets, and
the Writings.
Books known but not regarded as Scripture. — Appendix to the
Law and the Prophets. — Apparent anomalies in ' tripartite division '
of Scripture explained. — Jewish explanations. — An unlikely
theory. — Maccabean Epoch. — Edict of Antiochus Epiphanes, its
effect. — Important tradition, 2 Mace. ii. 14. — Psalter, quoted as
Scripture, 1 Mace. vii. 16. — 1 Chron. xvi. 36. — Books, undisputed
and disputed. — Undisputed : Proverbs, Job, Ruth, Lamentations,
Ezra-Nehemiah, Daniel. — Disputed : Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes,
Esther. — Books of Chronicles, appended  129

CHAPTER VII.
The Third Canon (continued).
External Evidence : (1) Greek Prologue to Ecclesiasticus. —
(2) The Septuagint Version, begun circ. 250 b. c. — Possibly com
plete, 132 B. c. — (3) 1 Maccabees. — (4) Philo. — De Vita Content-
plat. § 3, doubtful evidence. — (5) The New Testament. — The Tri-
b

XVlli CONTENTS. PAGE
partite Division. — Books of O. T. not quoted. — Groups recog
nised. — Completion of Canon presupposed. — Apocryphal Books
not treated as Scripture. — (6) 4 Esdras, circ. 90 a. d. — (7) Flavius
Josephus, 37-circ. no a. d., Antiquitates Judaicae. — Contra Apio-
nem, cap. viii. — Josephus, spokesman of Jews. — Uses LXX. —
Belief in inspiration. — His Canon of 22 Books. — Standard of
Canonicity. — His enumeration explained . . . . . 153
CHAPTER VIII.
The Third Canon (concluded).
Canon recognised by Josephus, permanently accepted. — De
struction of Jerusalem. — Heightened veneration for Scripture.-
The Greek Version, its relations to Hebrew Canon. — The influ
ence of Greek language — Of Christian usage. — Rabbinical discus
sions on subject of Canonicity, of first cent. a. d. — Synod of
Jamnia. — Jewish official conclusion of Canon about 100 a. d. —
Canon practically closed 105 b. c. — External evidence. — Historical
probability, Pharisees and Sadducees, Rabbinical Schools. — ' Dis
puted' books, grounds of probable admission. — ' Kethubim' group
admitted 160-105 b.c. — Significance of two periods : 160-105 BC->
90-1 10 a. d. — The Hebrew Canon and the New Covenant . . 178
CHAPTER IX.
After the Conclusion of the Canon.
No change in Hebrew Canon. — Apocrypha in Christian Church.
— Why not in Jewish ? — Canon protected by (1) antiquity, (2)
prestige of origin, (3) distinctive teaching. — Ecclesiasticus, 1 Mac
cabees, written in Hebrew, never admitted into Canon. — ' To defile
the hands.' — ' Disputed,' or 'hidden ' books (Genueim). — ' Extra
neous/ or ' outside,' books (Kkiteonim)  191
CHAPTER X.
Later Jewish Testimony.
Rabbinic evidence uncritical. — Two titles : ' the Four-and-
Twenty ' and ' The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings.' — Rab
binic objections to the Canonicity of Ezekiel — Jonah — Proverbs —
Ecclesiastes — Song of Songs — Esther. — Canonicity presupposed. 200

CONTENTS. XIX
CHAPTER XI.
The Hebrew Canon in the Christian Church.
PAGE
Esther, excluded from public use, locally. — Melito, his list. —
Omission of Esther, (a) accidental, (6) intentional. — Place of
Esther in other lists. — Causes of omission. — Placed among ' Genu-
eim,' not understood. — Prejudice perpetuated by tradition. — Ori-
gen, omits Minor Prophets — adds 'Epistle.' — 'Apocrypha' belong
to history of lxx  214
CHAPTER XII.
The Arrangement of the Books.
The Tripartite Division. — Jewish explanations inadequate. —
Modern teaching, deduced from, not explanatory of, facts. — I. In
fluence of lxx on arrangement of books — Melito — Origen — Cod.
Vaticanus — Cod. Alexandrinus — Cod. Sinaiticus — Cyril of Jeru
salem — Athanasius — Gregory of Nazianzus — Council of Laodicea,
spurious Canon — Epiphanius — Ruffinus. — II. Hebrew Canon —
Variations in order — (a) Ruth and Lam. — Jerome, Prol. Gal. —
Evidence inaccurate — Patristic idea, twenty-two Hebrew letters,
twenty-two Hebrew Books of Scripture— Twenty-four Hebrew
books — Ruth and Lam. in Talmud, Targum, Jerome's Pre/at. in
Dan. — (6) Order of ' the Prophets ' — Writing on Rolls — Nebiim
rishonim and Akharonim — The Talmudic Order, Jer., Ezek., Is. —
Explanations — Rabbinic, Abr. Geiger, Fflrst, Marx. — Minor Pro
phets. — (c) Kethubim, Talmudic order — Order in Jerome's Prol.
Gal. — in Hebrew MSS. — Talmudic, Spanish, German. — Poetical
books — Five Megilloth. — Another Tahnudic order. — Division of
books. — Sections ' closed ' and ' open.' — Synagogue Lessons. —
Babylonian use — Palestinian— Chapters and Verses ... 221

EXCURSUS A.
The Origin of the Canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, according
to Tradition : —
1. The Legend of Ezra and the Books of Scripture . . 250
a. The Men of the Great Synagogue .... 261
b2

XX CONTENTS.
EXCURSUS B.
PAGE
Baba Bathra 14 b, 15 a, Baraitha, in English Translation . . 284
EXCURSUS C.
Lists of Hebrew Scriptures  a92
1. The order of the Megilloth after the Pentateuch . . 292
2. Table showing the order of the latter Prophets . . 293
3. Table showing the order of the Hagiographa . . 294
EXCURSUS D.
Text of important quotations  295
EXCURSUS E.
Titles of Hebrew Scriptures  302
Index to Scripture References ...... 307
General Index  312

A List of some of the more Important Books
consulted in the present Work.

Bloch, J. S., Studien eur Geschichte der Sammlung der althebrdischen
Literatur (Breslau, 1876).
Buhl, Fr., Kanon u. Text des Alien Testamentes (Leipzig, 1891) : Eng.
Trans. (Edinburgh, 1892).
Buxtorf, Joh., Tiberias sive Commentarius Massorethicus Triplex (Basle,
1665).
Cheyne, T. K., Job and Solomon (London, 1887) ; The Origin of the
Psalter (London, 1891).
Davidson, Sam., The Canon of the Bible (London, 1877).
Derenbourg, J., Essai sur I'Histoire et la Geographie de la Palestine
(Paris, 1867).
De Wette-Schrader, Lehrbuch der histor.-krit. Einleitung (Berlin, 1869).
Dillmann, Aug., Ueber die Bildung u. Sammlung heiliger Schriften des
A. T. (Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theol. 1858, pp. 419-491) ; Ueber die Com
position des Hexateuch (Kursgefasstes Exeg. Handbuch zum A. T., 2t8
Auflage, Leipzig, 1886).
Driver, S. R., Critical Study of the Old Testament (Coniemp. Review,
Feb. 1890) ; An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament
(Edinburgh, 1st ed. 1891, 6th ed. 1897).
Etheridge, J. W., Introduction to Hebrew Literature (London, 1856).
Furst, Jul., Der Kanon des Alten Testamentes (Leipzig, 1868).
Geiger, Abr., Urschrift u. Uebersetzungen der Bibel (Breslau, 1857).
Ginsburg, Ch. D., The Massoreth Ha-Massoreth of Elias Levita (London,
1867).
Keil, C. F., Lehrbuch der histor.-krit. Einleitung in das A. T. (Frankfurt
a. M. 1873).
Kirkpatrick, A. F., The Divine Library (London, 1891).
Konig, Ed., Einleitung in das Alte Testament (Bonn, 1893).
Kosnig, Xavier, Essai sur la Formation du Canon de V Ancien Testament
(Paris, 1894).
Leusden, Joh., Philologus Hebraeus (Utrecht, 1672, edit. sec).
Marx, Gust. Arm., Traditio Rabbinorum Veterrima (Leipzig, 1884).

XX11 LIST OF BOOKS.
Riehm, Ed., Einleitung in das Alte Testament (Halle, itor Teil, 1889 ; ateT,
1890).
Sanday, W., Inspiration (London, 1893).
Schurer, Emil, Geschichte des Jiidischen Volkes, 2torTheil (Leipzig, 1886).
Smith, W. Robertson, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church (Edin
burgh, 1881, 2nd ed. revised and enlarged 1892).
Speaker's Commentary, Apocrypha (2 vols. London, 1888).
Strack, Herm. L., Article, Kanon des Alten Testaments (Herzog-PIitt.
R. E.2 vol vii. 1880) ; Talmud (Herzog-PIitt. R. E.2 vol. xviii. 1888).
Stuart, Moses, Critical History and Defence of the O. T. Canon (London,
1849).
Taylor, C, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers (Cambridge, 1877).
Weber, Ferd., Die Lehren des Talmud (Leipzig, 1886).
Wellhausen-Bleek, Einleitung in das Alte Testament (Berlin, 1886).
Westcott, B. F., Article, ' Canon ' in Smith's Bible Diet. (London, 1863) ;
The Bible in the Church (London, 1863-1885) ; On the Canon of the
New Testament (London, 1855-1881).
Wildeboer, G., Het Onstaan van den Kanon des Ouden Verbonds (Gro-
ningen, 1889).
(N. B.— Z. A. T. W.^Zeitschrtftfar die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft ;
Z. D. M.G.=Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft ;
M. G. W. J. = Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wisserschaft des
Judenthums.)

Scriptural Quotations are uniformly taken from the Revised Version.
Isaiah i-xxxix is sometimes, for brevity's sake, referred to as Isaiah I,
and xl-lxvi as Isaiah II.
The clauses of verses are sometimes distinguished by the letters ' a '
and ' b,' e. g. Gen. ii. 4 b.

CHRONOLOGY.
B.C.
621. Discovery of 'the Book of the Law.'
586. Destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans.
536. Return from the Exile.
444. Nehemiah, Governor of Jerusalem ; Ezra reads ' the Law 'to the
people.
432. Nehemiah expels grandson of Eliashib.
332. Conquest of Persian Empire by Alexander the Great.
219. Simon II, High Priest.
180 (?). Jesus, the son of Sirach, wrote Ecclesiasticus.
168. Persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes.
132. Prologue to Ecclesiasticus.
105. Death of John Hyrcanus.
A.D. 70. Destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.
90 (?). Synod of Jamnia ; and, possibly, composition of 2 (4) Esdras.
100 circ Josephus, Contra Apionem.

THE CANON OF THE OLD
TESTAMENT. INTRODUCTION.
Recent Biblical discussion has familiarised English ihtroduct.
readers with many of the chief problems raised by modern
phases of Old Testament Criticism. But the interest,
which is naturally felt in the investigation of the structure
of the Sacred Books, has tended to throw into the back
ground that other' group of problems, which concerns
their admission into the Canon. To the Christian
student the latter, though a less attractive, or, at least, a
less promising field of investigation, must always be one
of first-rate importance. For, after all, whether a book
has had a simple or a complex history, whether or no
the analysis of its structure reveals the existence of
successive compilation, adaptation and revision, are only
secondary questions, of great literary interest indeed, but
yet of subordinate importance, if they do not affect the
relation of Scripture to the Church. They are literary
problems. They need not necessarily invite the interest
of the Christian student. Whether they do so or not,
will depend upon his habits of mind. A better know
ledge of the structure of a book will not, as a rule,
B

a THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
ihtroduct. affect his view of its authority. His conviction, that
a book is rightly regarded as Holy Scripture, will not
be shaken, because it proves to consist of elements
whose very existence had been scarcely imagined before
the present century.
Other problems, however, arise before the Biblical
student. He never ceases to wish to learn more ac
curately, nay, he is compelled, against his will, to reflect
more seriously upon, the process, by which the books of
Holy Scripture have obtained recognition as a sacred
and authoritative Canon.
The process, by which the various books of the Old
TheO. t. Testament came to be recognised as sacred and author-
fornZ4}°W itative, would, if we could discover it, supply ois with the
complete history of the formation of the Old Testament
Canon. By that process, we know, books, believed to be
divine, were separated from all other books. By that pro
cess, we know, writings, containing the Word of God,
became recognised as the standard of life and doctrine.
These are only the results which lie at our feet. We in
stinctively inquire for the causes which led to them. How
were these writings separated from all other Hebrew
literature ? When did the separation take place ? What
was the test of Canonicity, which determined, in one case,
admission into, in another, exclusion from, the sacred
collection ? Questions such as these, cannot fail to suggest
themselves to every thoughtful Christian mind. Indeed,
the literature of the Old Testament is itself so varied in
character, that an inquiry into the formation of a Canon,
which includes writings so different as Genesis and the
Song of Songs, Esther and Isaiah, Judges and the
Psalter, needs no justification. It is demanded by the
spirit of the age. It is even demanded, as just and

INTRODUCTION. 3
necessary, by the requirements of reverent and devout introduct.
study. The inquiry, however, is no simple one. The subject External
is involved in great obscurity. At the outset, we are "wanting.
confronted by the fact, that no historical account of the
formation of the Canon has been preserved. Neither in
Scripture, nor in Josephus, is any narrative given of the
process of its formation. A couple of legendary allu
sions, to be found in the Second Book of Maccabees (ch.
ii. 13-15) and in the so-called Fourth Book of Esdras
(ch. xiv. 19-48), supply all the light which direct external
evidence throws upon the subject 1. The path is thus left
open ; and, in consequence, the investigation is beset by
all the usual obstacles that can be thrown in the way,
untrustworthy legend, popular assumption, clever, but
baseless, speculations.
The necessity of offering some account of the origin of Legend-
their Sacred Scriptures occasioned the rise of certain christtcm.
legends amongst the Jews, which, as is well known,
associated, now with Ezra, now with the Men of the Great
Synagogue, the task of collecting, transcribing, revising,
and promulgating the Hebrew Canon. What may have
been the origin of these legends, and what their relation
to particular phases of Jewish history, we do not stop here
to inquire2. They rest on no historical support, so far
as they relate to the final formation of the Canon of the
Old Testament.
In unscientific times, plausible legend is readily ac
cepted, in the absence of direct testimony, for trust
worthy history. Having once been adopted and cir-
1 N.B. — Talmudic legend (Baba bathra, 14 b) does not touch the sub
ject of ihe formation of the Canon. See Excursus B.
2 See Excursus A.
B 3

4 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
ihtroduct. culated in the Jewish Church, such legends were only
too naturally transferred to the soil of the Christian
Church. Accordingly, we find the belief that Ezra
was inspired to rewrite and reissue the Sacred Books,
which had been burned by the Chaldeans at the
destruction of Jerusalem, commonly accepted, and
repeated by successive divines of the Christian Church
until the era of the Reformation \ Thenceforward the
authority of a learned Jew, Elias Levita, who published
his Massoreth Hammasoreth in 1538, caused a more
credible tale to be generally accepted, that the work of
collecting and editing the Scriptures of the Old Testament
was performed by the ' Men of the Great Synagogue.'
Many varieties of the same story have since found favour
in the Church — a circumstance which is certainly not due
to the more trustworthy character of the evidence for the
narrative, but, probably, merely to the greater inherent
credibility of its statements 2.
Recent investigation, which has given to these legends
their proper weight at particular stages of the historical
inquiry, has also brought convincingly to light their
wholly untrustworthy character. It is recognised that,
while Ezra's work was rightly connected, in the memory
of his countrymen, with the preservation of the Scriptures,
only legend has transformed that connexion into the
work of officially promulgating the Books of the Old
Testament. Again, the very existence of ' the Great
Synagogue,' save as a name for a blank space in the
annals of the Jewish people, has failed to stand the
scrutiny of a close historical inquiry. The further we
recede into the past, the more meagre grows the evidence
1 See Excursus A. I. a See Excursus A. II.

INTRODUCTION. 5
for that tradition. Indeed, if such an institution ever introduct.
existed, if it ever exerted an influence over the Jewish
people and over Jewish literature, it is, to say the least, a
surprising, an inexplicable fact, that it was reserved for
mediaeval writers to supply the names of its members and
to describe the details of their functions.
It may be doubted whether, with the mass of modern
English readers, ecclesiastical legend carries much weight.
Those, to whom the work of Ezra and of ' the Great Syna
gogue ' upon the Old Testament has been known simply
as a pleasing tale, are not likely to feel distressed at
learning its worthlessness as history. Few, we may be
sure, have ever seriously regarded their Old Testament
Scriptures in the light of a collection whose limits and
character had been determined by Ezra and his col
leagues. By the mass of readers, if any thought has ever
been expended upon the origin and formation of the Old
Testament Canon, ecclesiastical tradition has probably
been generally set aside in favour of a vague popular
assumption. Popular assumption is apt to follow the line of least Popular as-
resistance. It is impatient of the slow, dull, processes sum
and small results of historical research. Popular
assumption accounts a general belief in the great
fact of Inspiration sufficient for all practical purposes.
Armed with that weapon, a man can afford, it is
thought, to dispense with the necessity of forming
any careful opinion upon the origin of the Canon.
Popular assumption has sometimes even thought it
the part of true piety to stifle inquiry with the fallacious
maxim, that, where we are not told a thing, there we are
not intended to know it. Popular assumption identifies
the age of which a narrative treats with the age of its

6 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
introduct. composition. Popular assumption regards the most emi
nent personage in the narrative as the individual most
likely to have been its author. Popular assumption
pictures to itself the whole Canon of the Old Testament
as an. unbroken succession of sacred writing; as a
continuous stream, fed, in each generation, by tributaries
from the most holy men, from Moses and Joshua down
to Ezra and Malachi ; as a mighty deposit, to which
each age, by the hand of its holiest representative, has
contributed an additional layer, until, in the days of
Ezra and Malachi, the whole orderly work was brought
to a conclusion.
For the purpose of a true conception of the history of
the Canon, such unsupported assumptions, it is needless
to say, are alike inadequate and misleading. We need
not waste time with their refutation. They are con
tradicted by what we know both of the history of the
people and of the analysis of the individual books.
speculation. Hardly more satisfactory, however, are the conjectures
which, in the absence of more direct evidence, have
been put forward by men of learning and ability with
the view of explaining the origin of the Canon. Thus, it
has been suggested that the Canon contains merely the
relics of Hebrew literature, which, having survived, in
the language of ancient Israel, the ravages of time,
were regarded by the Jews as sacred and authoritative ;
and that, hence, the sacred authority with which they were
invested was only the recognition of their literary anti
quity and rarity 1. Recent criticism, however, if only by
1 Hitzig, Ps., histor. krit. Comm. ii. p. 1 18, ' alle aus Christi Vorzeit stam-
menden hebr. Bucher sind kanonisch ; alle kanonischen hebraisch, wahrend
zu den Apocryphen alle griechisch geschriebenen gerechnet werden.' Bert-
holdt, Einleit. i. p. 13.

INTRODUCTION. J
establishing the comparatively late date of the composi- introduct.
tion of such books as Chronicles, Ecclesiastes and Daniel,
will have sufficiently disposed of the assumption that
the Canon is a mere residue of archaic Hebrew writ
ings ; even if evidence were not abundantly at hand
to show, that Hebrew writing was very far from being
extinct in the days when the Canon was being brought
to a conclusion. To suppose that books were con
stituted a sacred Canon of Scripture, because of the
accident of their having survived in the Hebrew lan
guage, is completely to invert the actual order of events.
Nothing can be more clear than this, that the Books of
the Old Testament have come down to us in the
Hebrew, because, having been, at the first, written in
that language, they were also, in that language, received
and reverenced as the Canon of Scripture in the Jewish
Church. Similarly, we need here only mention, for the sake of
at once dismissing from view, the supposition that the
Old Testament is merely an anthology of Hebrew liter
ature, a choice collection, as it were, of the gems of
Jewish classics, such as might have been made, in later
days, from Greek or Roman literature. Such a con
ception ignores the most distinctive and fundamental
feature of the Old Testament Canon. This, we feel,
is, beyond all dispute, its religious character. All the
evidence, external and internal, combines to show, that
the collection was intended to serve a religious purpose;
and, in the perception of that purpose alone, can we hope
to recognise the principles that governed its formation.
We assume, therefore, that the collection of the
sacred writings of the Old Testament cannot be ac
counted for on the ground, either of its containing the

8 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
introduct. relics of a past literature, or of its being intended to
serve, for literary purposes, as the standard of Hebrew
composition. We assume, that the writings included in
the Canon of the Old Testament were brought together
for a special purpose, and that that purpose was a re
ligious one.
Of course, if we were justified, at this point, in
making use of the analogy to be drawn from the
Canm of Canon of the New Testament, we might forthwith as-
iogy'.' ' """ sume, that the Scriptures were gradually selected from
among the literature of the Jews, on the ground of
their being believed to make known the Word of God
in a special degree and manner ; and that, as the result of
their selection and by virtue of this belief in their divine
origin, they acquired undisputed authority over the people.
Such an analogy, it is true, would supply us at once
with a key to our inquiry. We should look for the
essence of Canonicity in the gradual selection from a
people's religious literature, and for the principle of that
selection in the popular recognition of the spiritual power
and sanctity possessed by certain writings.
We must, however, be on our guard against the
anachronism of freely introducing into our inquiry
ideas which have been borrowed from the experience
of the Christian Church. The formation of the He
brew Canon belongs to an earlier time than that of
the New Testament Canon. It belongs to a very
different community. The circumstances attending its
growth were as widely different as possible from those
which accompanied the formation of the New Testament
Canon. Accordingly, while it may be interesting to
remind ourselves, from time to time, that the Canon of
the New Testament was formed by gradual accretion,

INTRODUCTION. 9
and that its limits were determined rather by popular introduct.
usage than by personal or official authority, we must not
suffer the coihparison to bias the freedom of our in
vestigation. Analogy may illustrate, it must not antici
pate our argument. Even the use of such terms as Canon
and Canonicity are, so far, apt to be misleading. No
other terms can well be employed in their place. But
we must remember that they and, in some measure, the
ideas connected with them, have been derived from an
exclusively Christian usage, which dates, at the earliest,
from the fourth century A.D. 1
What now remains with which we can prosecute our internal
investigation? We have seen that Jewish and Christian
legends are rejected as untrustworthy, so far as they
claim to give an account of the formation of the Canon,
and that they can only be employed, and then but with
caution, to illustrate particular points. We are confident,
that mere assumptions, whether popular and ignorant or
ingenious and speculative, cannot, in the present day,
be accepted as supplying any satisfactory substitute
for the results, however small they may seem to be, of
historical criticism. We are left face to face with the
books themselves. When the external evidence fails us,
it is to the internal evidence that we must turn. Scrip
ture must tell its own tale. No record of the circum
stances which led to the formation of the Sacred deposit
having elsewhere been preserved to us, we must pierce
down and investigate the signs of the strata themselves.
We must see, whether their history has not there been
told, and, if so, whether we cannot decipher it. The
testimony of other Jewish writings will, of course, be
* On the origin and use of the word ' Canon,' see Westcott, On the Canon
cfthe New Testament. Appendix A.

10 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
introduct. employed, where possible, for the purpose of illustrating
and confirming the results that may be obtained. But,
strictly speaking, the observation of details in Scripture
itself will supply the needed clue to the history of the
Sacred Canon more fully than any hints to be derived
from other sources.
Tripartite At the outset, attention has usually, and perhaps
booaT" rightly, been called by scholars who have written upon
the subject, to the tripartite division of the books in the
Hebrew Canon, expressed in the threefold name ' Law,
Prophets, and Writings' (Torah, Nebiim, Kethubini), by
which the Jews have designated their Scriptures. This
tripartite division, of which the first direct evidence dates
from the second century B.C.1, is obviously no arbitrary
arrangement. As we hope to show, in the course of
the present work, it can only be rightly understood,
when viewed in the light of that history of the Canon
which we endeavour to sketch here. Its full discussion,
therefore, as evidence to the formation of the Canon, must
be deferred to the stage when the first mentionof the three
fold division comes under our notice. Regarded, however,
merely as the embodiment of a very ancient Jewish
tradition, it deserves mention at this point, on account
of its being opposed to the legends which have been
alluded to above. For, whereas the Jewish legends,
assigning to Ezra or to 'the Great Synagogue' the forma
tion of the Old Testament Canon, reflect the belief that
it was the work of one man or of a single generation,
the triple division of the Hebrew Scriptures embodies a
far more ancient tradition, that of a gradual development
in the formation of the Canon through three successive
1 See Greek Prologue to Ecclesiasticus (written about 133 B.C.), quoted
in extenso, Appendix D.

INTRODUCTION. II
stages. If this be the correct explanation of the Tripartite introduct.
Division of the Hebrew Canon, and we believe it is so,
we shall be able to appeal to it later on as evidence,
which favours the representation of history to be made
in the following chapters.
For the sake of readers who may not before have
given close attention to this subject, we here subjoin the
contents of the Hebrew Canon of Scripture in the order
and arrangement in which they appear in Hebrew
Bibles :—
I. ' The Law,' or Torah, which is equivalent to our
Pentateuch. II. ' The Prophets,' or Nebiim, which are divided into
two groups —
(a) The Former Prophets, or Nebiim rishonim ; four
narrative books, Joshua, Judges, Samuel,
Kings.
(J>) The Latter Prophets, or Nebiim akharonim ; four
prophetical books, three ' great prophets,'
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 'the Minor
Prophets,' the twelve being united in a single
book.
III. ' The Writings,' or Kethubim, which are divided
into three groups —
(a) The Poetical Books ; Psalms, Proverbs, Job.
(b) The Five Rolls (Megilloth); Song of Songs,
Ruth, Lamentations^ Ecclesiastes, Esther.
(c) The remaining books ; Daniel, Ezra and Nehe
miah, Chronicles.
Upon some of the details of this arrangement we shall
have occasion to speak at the close of the present work 1.
1 See Chap. XII, and Excursus C.

CHAPTER I.
THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON.
chap. i. EVERYWHERE throughout the history of the literature,
The human as well as in the actual pages, of God's Holy Word we
lo/theDMne recognise the invisible presence and the constant opera-
^Inffnd t'on °f ^'s Holy Spirit. Save, however, where express
mention is made of some external miraculous agency,
it is neither the part of true faith nor of sound reason
to presuppose in the case of Holy Scripture the occur
rence of any interference with the laws that regulate
the composition and operate in the transmission of
human literature. In this respect, we may say, it is the
same with the Books of Scripture as with the Prophets
and Apostles, who were inspired revealers of the
Divine Will. We acknowledge in both the overruling
guidance of the Spirit. But the sacred Canon was
subject to the external conditions of the composition
and preservation of human literature, as were the
messengers to the laws of human existence. The
men, thus highly privileged to be sent on their
sacred mission, had been moulded and influenced by
education and surroundings, by the very limitations of
their place and time ; nor should we think of attribu
ting to them the possession of any supernatural powers
of which no mention has been recorded in Scripture.
Similarly, in the case of the Sacred Writings, we are not

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 1 3
justified in assuming that the external circumstances of chap. i.
their origin, composition, and transmission were subject
to any supernatural privilege or exemption. In their
colouring and tone, they will reflect the literary charac
teristics which distinguished the day of their composition.
In their structure and formation, they will reproduce the
common standard of artistic skill, they will be the pro
duct of the usual methods pursued by authors in that age
and country. The Divine Spirit penetrates their message
with life ; it quickens their teaching with power ; but it
does not supersede, nor become a substitute for, the exer
cise of the powers of the human intellect, the reason, the
imagination, the discernment, the industry, which have,
we believe contributed with unimpaired freedom to the
formation of the Sacred Books.
So much it was needful to say by way of preface.
For, wherever, as in the case of Holy Scripture, we are
possessed with a strong belief in the active operation
of Divine Inspiration, there we are subject to a propor
tionately strong temptation to anticipate every difficulty
by the supposition, that a special miracle may have
been permitted, even though it be in the domain of
strictly human effort. ' Voluntary humility ' is linked so
closely to the indolent desire for interposition within the
laws of our nature, that rather than acknowledge in Scrip
ture the presence of the limitations of the human intel
lect, or patiently unravel the gradual unfolding of the
Divine Will by the instrumentality of human weakness,
it prefers to assume, that human powers were made
divine, and raised above the liability to error and imperr
fection. Let us therefore, in all reverence endeavour to bear in
mind throughout this discussion that, in the formation

14 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. i. and transmission of the Old Testament Canon, as in that
of the New, we must expect to find the continual opera
tion of the same natural laws, through which the Divine
purpose is unceasingly being fulfilled on earth. Nor, on
the other hand, let it ever be absent from our minds, that
those efforts of the human intelligence, the results of which
we here endeavour to trace, were ever being overruled,
' according to the commandment of the eternal God,' to
furnish and to perfect those Scriptures that revealed His
Will, and thus to prepare the way for the final Revelation
vouchsafed in the coming of our Lord and Saviour in the
flesh.
Aprepara- We consider first, the preparatory steps which led
canoZtote to the formation of a Hebrew Canon. That there
*poSt were such preparatory steps, and that the Canon did not
start into existence fully formed, might, indeed, appear
self-evident. The very idea of a Canon of Scripture
implies some preliminary stage. We can hardly think
of it, save as of a collection of writings regarded as sacred
and -authoritative by a community professing, outwardly
at least, to Gonform to its teaching. We therefore pre
suppose, in the idea of a Canon of Scripture, the existence
of a community prepared to accept its authority. Further,
if no Divine Revelation is recorded as specifying the
writings of which it should consist, we must also assume
that the writings, to which such honour was paid, were
selected by that community from out of its general
literature. We have, accordingly, one conception of the
formation of a Canon in the selection, or adoption, by a
religious community, of a certain body of writings
from its existing literature. Now a community would
hardly accept the sanctity, or acknowledge the author
ity, of writings, which it did not regard as containing,

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 15
in some way, the expression of the Divine Will. Con- chap. i.
versely, if a community did not recognise the Will of
God, it would not acknowledge that those writings, which
claimed to reveal His Will, possessed either sacredness or
authority. In other words, the formation of a Canon of
Scripture presupposes the existence of a community of
believers. Accordingly, when we reflect on it, we see how this very
conception of a Canon of Scripture may point us back to
a yet earlier time, when the writings of which it is com
posed had their place among the ordinary literature of
a believing people. The literature must first arise, before
the process of selection begins that leads to the formation
of a Sacred Collection. Again, so far as the community
is concerned, we see that a community which selects a
Canon of Scripture will not only be a believer in the
God Who is recognised in that literature, but must also
have reached that particular stage in its religious history,
when the possibility of the revelation of the Divine Will
through the agency of human literature has dawned
upon the consciousness of the nation. This last point is
of importance. For there is nothing at all improb
able in a religious community existing for a long
period without the adoption of any particular writings as '
the embodiment of belief, or as the inspired and author
itative standard of worship and conduct : least of all
would this be improbable, if there were other, and,
seemingly, no less authoritative, means of declaring the
commands of God and of maintaining His worship un
impaired. Circumstances, however, might arise which
would alter the case, and make it advisable, either to
embody in writing the sacred teachings of the past, or
to recognise the authority and sanctity of certain writings

1 6 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. already existing, which contained this teaching in any
specially suitable form. For instance, the peril of
national disintegration and the break up of national wor
ship might reveal, of a sudden, that in such writings the
people had a divinely ordained means of preserving the
sacred heritage of the past and a standard providentially
afforded them for the maintenance of true religion in
the future.

a Hebrew But, to turn from so purely a speculative line of
Literature , . ,tt,
before a thought, we find that, as a matter of fact, the Hebrew
c'anm. Scriptures themselves carry with them their own testi
mony to a previous stage of literature. For, setting
aside for the moment their frequent allusions to and
quotations from earlier writings, the composite character
of the structure, which, in the case of many books, has
been placed beyond all doubt by the careful analysis
applied by modern criticism, conveys clear evidence of
such a previous stage. It is only necessary to refer to
the undoubted instances of composite structure pre
sented to us in the Pentateuch, the Historical Books,
Isaiah, the Psalter, and the Book of Proverbs. The fact
that their present form has been reached by compilation
from earlier writings would, in itself, be sufficient to
demonstrate the truth of the principle, of which we need
so often to be reminded, that the beginnings of the
Hebrew Canon are not to be confounded with the begin
nings of Hebrew literature.
This principle, however, by itself, important as it is, is
not enough. For when we have fully recognised that
periods of literary activity are presupposed by the com
position of our Books, as we know them in their present
literary form, it is scarcely less necessary to recognise

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 1 7
also the distinction that is to be drawn between the chap. i.
process of literary construction and the process of ad
mission into the Canon ; the one, by which the Books
reached their present literary form by composition and
compilation ; the other, by which they were separated
from all other writings as the sacred and authoritative
expression of the Word of God. The realization of this
distinction opens up a very interesting, but a very
intricate, field of investigation. Were any books, that
are now included in the Old Testament, originally ex
pressly composed for the purpose of forming, or of help
ing to complete, the Hebrew Canon ? Or, was there, in
every case, an interval of time, more or less considerable,
which elapsed between composition and final acceptance
in the Canon ?
We must not however anticipate. Let it be enough
here to insist, that great misapprehensions will be re
moved, if we are careful to distinguish between the three Three
stages, under which we recognise the guidance of the Tfot'ma-
Holy Spirit in preparing for us the Revelation of the'""' ,.
J r r r o 2. redacttonl
Word contained in the Old Testament. These are 3- selection.
firstly, the ' elemental ' stage, or, that of the formation
of the literary antecedents of the Books of the Old Tes
tament : secondly, the ' medial,' or that of their compila
tion and redaction to their present literary form : thirdly,
the ' final,' or that of their selection for the position of
honour and sanctity in the national Canon of Holy
Scripture. The distinction between these three phases
is essential.

We are not here concerned with the investigation
into the rise of the earliest Hebrew literature, but only
C

18 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. with the processes which led directly to the formation
and growth of the Canon. We need not therefore
waste time over a preliminary discussion of any side
issues. We need not examine, as has so often been
done in other works upon this subject, all the earliest
instances in which the practice of writing is recorded in
Holy Scripture (e. g. Ex. xvii. 14, xxiv. 4, 7, xxxiv. 27,
Num. xxxiii. 2, Deut. xxxi. 9,22, Josh. xxiv. 16, 1 Sam.
x. 25, 2 Sam. xx. 24, 25 x). We rather proceed at once
to examine the assured instances of collections of
writings made before the reign of Josiah 2 for purposes of
national and religious instruction. The earliest collec
tions of this kind may be classed under (1) Songs, (2)
Laws, (3) Histories, (4) Prophecies.
songs: (1) Songs. The literature of Israel forms no excep-
'nltionai col- ti°n to the general rule that ballads, recounting and
Uctwns; glorifying the brave deeds of old, are to be reckoned as
the earliest fruit of a nation's literary genius. Under
this head we should class such poetical pieces as ' The
Song of Moses and the children of Israel,' sung after the
crossing of the Red Sea (Ex. xv. 1), the songs commem
orative of the occupation of the Amorite territory on the
east bank of the Jordan, and of the overthrow of Heshbon
(Num. xxi. 14-18 and 27-30), the triumph song of
Deborah (Judg. v), and the dirge of David over Saul
and Jonathan (2 Sam. i. 19-27). In some of these songs
we may sometimes discern the outline of a narrative
differing somewhat from the prose narrative of the
1 To this list some would add Jud. viii. 14 (R. V. marg.). On early
Israelite writing, see an article by Neubauer on ' The Introduction of the
Square Characters in Biblical MSS.' (Studia Biblica, vol. iii. 1891).
3 The reign of Josiah is here referred to because, before that era, there is
no certainty that any writing ever ranked as Canonical Scripture in Israel.
Cf. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, Art. ' Canon ' by Westcott.

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 1 9
historian who incorporates them. Thus, for instance, chap. i.
it has been pointed out that the story of Deborah, as
recorded in the song (Judg. v), differs in certain particu
lars from the story as narrated by the historian of Judg.
iv.1 In those songs from which extracts are made in
Num. xxi, events are related of which the Pentateuch
elsewhere tells us nothing, although it is clear that the
recollection of them produced a deep impression upon
the minds of the children of Israel.
National collections were undoubtedly made of such
patriotic songs at an early time. The names of two
such collections have been preserved, unless, indeed, as
has been suggested, they are only two titles of the same
collection. These are ' The Book of the Wars of the
Lord ' (Num. xxi. 14), and ' The Book of Jashar, or
The Upright' (Josh. x. 13, 2 Sam. i. 18). The titles
convey to us the purpose with which such collections of
national poetry were formed. Songs contained in the
Book of the Wars of the Lord will have described how
the Lord fought for Israel, and how truly Israel belonged
to a God who had done such great things for them. The
songs contained in the Book of Jashar will have contained
a series of pictures of great and upright men, judges,
warriors and princes, measured by the best judgment of
their time, but above all by the standard of the fear of
Jehovah. Very possibly, too, songs that were of undoubted
antiquity, but of doubtful authorship, came to be grouped
under certain honoured names. Thus, for instance, it is
possible that some of the oldest songs were ascribed to
1 See the article by Professor Davidson in The Expositor, Jan. 1887,
and the valuable dissertation on The History and Song of Deborah (Oxford,
189a), by the Rev. G. A. Cooke, M.A.
C 2

20 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap, i. Moses, just as we know that those of a later time were
commonly ascribed to David. The authorship of the
song in Deut. xxxii, the contents of which clearly show
that its composition dates from a period, when Canaan
was already in the possession of the Israelites, and when
the writer could look back upon a past generation in
which Moses lived 1, was popularly attributed to Moses, or,
at least, had been so attributed in the national collection
of songs from which it was transferred to its present
place. So, too, the Blessing of Moses (Deut. xxxiii),
which, if we may judge from verses 4, 7, 27, 28 2, belongs
to a later period than that of the Lawgiver, has been
taken from a similar collection ; and the title, ' A Prayer
of Moses,' to Ps. xc, was possibly introduced into the
Psalter from a national collection of early songs in which
it had traditionally been ascribed to Moses.
Although the art of writing may have been known and
practised by Israelites in the days of Moses 3, the number
of those who could read was at that time, and for
transmitted centuries afterwards, very small. The songs mentioned
above, if they were at first committed to writing, which
is in itself an improbable supposition, must have owed
their preservation chiefly to oral tradition. Composed
originally to be sung at sacred festivals, around camp
fires, and at public gatherings, they were intended both
to instruct the people generally upon the facts of their
previous history, and, especially, to quicken their faith
and to confirm them in the service of Jehovah. The
attainment of this purpose could only be secured by the
1 Cf. w. 7-12.
a See Revised Version.
3 Certainly the cuneiform character may have been used by them. Cf.
Sayce, Transactions Vict. Inst. 1 889. No Phoenician writing earlier than
the 10th cent. B.C. has yet been found.

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 21
freest oral circulation, that is to say, by trusting to the chap. i.
memories of the common people. We shall therefore do
well to observe that the Song of Heshbon is not quoted
from a book, but is referred to as preserved in the current
utterance of those 'that speak in proverbs' (Num.
xxi. 27), a phrase which suggests a comparison with the
recitations of Ionian bards and mediaeval minstrels.
Again, we gather from 2 Sam. i. 18, that David's Dirge
over Jonathan and Saul was taught to the people orally,
and repeated from one to another. The reason is clear.
The oral preceded the written tradition of national song.
The compiler of the Books of Samuel himself quotes from
the written Book of Jashar. In his time, at any rate, the
song had been incorporated in a national collection which
commemorated the glories of Israelite heroes. Now we
know-, that, while the Book of Jashar commemorated the
victory of Joshua at Bethhoron (Josh. x. 13), it also,
according to the very probable explanation of a tradition
preserved in the Septuagint translation of 1 Kings
viii. 53, contained an ode commemorative of the founda
tion of Solomon's temple \ The process of forming such
a national collection of songs, covering the history of
many centuries, may of course have been a gradual one.
But, with the evidence at our disposal, we can hardly
suppose that 'Jashar' reached the literary stage, at
which it could be quoted as a well-known book by the
writer of 2 Sam. i. 18, until, at the earliest, the first half
of the ninth century B.C.
One word remains to be said upon the religious inten- their
tion which led to the formation of such national collec- purpose*
1 ovk 18011 avTi] yiypaiTTai Iv &i@Kiq> t?)s ojotjs ; it has been ingeniously
conjectured that the last four Greek words indicate an erroneous reading
T>B>n 1BD3 for ">B»n 1SD3.
• - v" : T t- v •

22 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. tions of songs. It may be illustrated from the language
of the Deuteronomist. The song which is there put
into the mouth of the great Lawgiver is regarded as an
instrument of instruction in the true faith of Jehovah :
' Now, therefore, write ye this song for you, and teach
thou it the children of Israel ; put it in their mouths that
this song may be a witness for me against the children
of Israel' (ch. xxxi. 19). The teaching of the people
by means of this song (ver. 22) is kept quite distinct
in the narrative from the priests' duty of guarding and
transmitting the law which Moses had received (ver. 9).
National songs must therefore be regarded as having
been, in early times, a recognised means of giving instruc
tion to the people. The formation of collections of such
songs marks a step, though it be but a slight one, in the
direction of the selection of literature which should more
fully and authoritatively reflect the teaching of the Spirit
of the Lord.
We have purposely refrained from mentioning the
collections of Psalms made in the name of David1- That
he was a Psalm-writer, appears from 2 Sam. i. 17-27, iii.
^, 34, xxii, xxiii. 1-7. But it does not appear whether
collections of Davidic Psalms existed before the Exile.
By Amos his name is mentioned, but as a musician
rather than as a poet (Amos vi. 5).
aws: (2) Laws. Analysis of the Pentateuch has shown con
clusively that numerous collections of Israelite laws were
made at different times, before any part of our present
Pentateuch had received from the people generally the
recognition which was afterwards given to the Canonical
writings of Holy Scripture. Such a statement in no way
1 The majority of the Psalms ascribed to David are to be found in Books
I (i-xli) and II (xlii-lxxii).

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 23
calls in question what we may call the Mosaic basis of chap. i.
the legislation. But it suggests that the form in which
the laws have come down to us does not reproduce them
in the shape of their first promulgation. The laws, that
is to say, are not transmitted to us, stamped with the
mark of their first official codification. Rather, they con
tain the substance of the legislation, either as it was
handed down by oral tradition, or as it was transcribed
for the guidance and direction of rulers, by men who were
eager that the government and worship of Israel should
be carried out in the spirit of the great Lawgiver, and on
the lines of the revelation that had been made to him.
In either case they have been modified in expression
and developed in detail, in order that they might be
adapted to the requirements of later times. The import
ance of a servile verbal reproduction was not therefore
taken into account in the degree which seems essen
tial to us who have been accustomed for centuries past to
the idea of an unalterable Canon of Scripture. The con
tinual change of circumstances in every age demands
either the change of old laws or the creation of new ones.
One thing, however, would have been regarded as indis
pensable in the framing of new, no less than in the trans
mission and modification of old laws, namely, the duty
of preserving the legislation upon the old lines and of
attaching the requirements of new circumstances to the
terms and phraseology, even to the external setting of the
most ancient precepts.
Of the early collections of laws the earliest is un- rheDeca-
doubtedly to be seen in the Moral Code of the Decalogue, ogue'
which was inscribed upon the two tables of stone. Two
versions of the Decalogue are found (Ex. xx. 1-17 and
Deut. v. 6-21), which, as is well known, differ from one

24 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. another in certain details of quite inconsiderable import
ance. But the fact of these differences, if the argument
from style were not sufficient to show it, points to the De
calogue having originally existed in a still shorter form 1.
It argues also the freedom with which the compilers,
the Elohist2 and the Deuteronomist2, the one in the eighth
or ninth, the other in the seventh century B.C., considered
themselves at liberty to vary the form in which the
fundamental Moral Code was transmitted. Both writers
have introduced some touches of individual style and
colouring into the explanatory clauses of the longer com
mandments, e. g. fourth and fifth. They have not thereby
impaired the substantial accuracy of their record ; but, by
leaving impressed upon the Decalogue itself the literary
stamp of the age to which they respectively belonged,
they showed as conclusively as it was possible for them
to show, that, in their days, the most sacred laws of Israel
were not yet fenced about with any scrupulous regard
for the letter apart from the spirit.
The Book Another collection of laws of the greatest antiquity is
covenant, preserved in the so-called' Book of the Covenant' (Ex.
xx. 20-xxiii. 33). It is a disputed point whether it
has been incorporated directly into the Pentateuch
from the writings' of the Jehovist2, or whether it was
introduced by the hand which combined the Jehovist
1 E. g. 2nd Commandment, ' Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven
image.'
4th „ ' Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.'
5th „ ' Honour thy father and thy mother.'
10th „ ' Thou shalt not covet.'
In this short form they could easily be inscribed, in two groups of five,
upon two tablets.
a For a description of the sources from which the Pentateuch and the
Book of Joshua were compiled, see Driver's Introd. to the Literature of
the 0. T.

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 25
and the Elohist writings. In either case, it has been chap. i.
derived from an earlier, and doubtless a much earlier,
literary source. As a body of laws, it is suited to the
needs of a society in a very early stage of civilization.
If, as may well be allowed, the main substance of its
laws has descended from the Mosaic legislation, there
is no reason to doubt, that it has also at different times
been adapted by subsequent revision to the require
ments of the people, when they were in the enjoyment of
a settled agricultural life. Several stages must have
intervened between the transcription of the laws by the
Jehovist and their original promulgation. Their abrupt
commencement (xxi. 2), the loose order in which subjects
(e.g. xxi. 28-36, xxii. 18-20, xxiii. 19) follow one another,
the frequent breaks in the thread of the legislation,
indicate that the collection is not to be regarded in the
light of an exhaustive official code of statutes, but rather
as an agglomeration of laws, perhaps transcribed from
memory or extracted fragmentarily, for some private
purpose, from an official source.
With the Book of the Covenant agree very closely
the laws contained in Exodus (xxxiv. 10-26), which
in all probability were found in the writing of the
Jehovist. Some scholars have detected another group
of ' ten words,' a second Decalogue, embedded in them
(cf. xxxiv. 27, 28). The identification remains a matter
of uncertainty. But if the hypothesis should prove to be
correct, it is possible that we should recognise, in these
two instances, traces of an ancient custom of assisting the
recollection of laws by collecting them in groups of ten.
Another ancient, and very distinct, collection of laws is The Law of
incorporated in the section which has been called by
scholars ' The Law of Holiness ' (Levit. xvii-xxvi). The

26 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. form in which this collection of laws has come down to
us, reflects in some degree, no doubt, the later style
which characterizes the compilation of the priestly laws
generally. But although this be admitted, it is a fact,
which no scholars have ventured to dispute, that these
chapters contain extensive excerpts from a collection of
laws whose general character must have closely resembled
the Book of the Covenant, differing only from it in
subject-matter so far as it is occupied more generally
with ceremonial than with civil regulations.
TheDeu- The Deuteronomic Laws (Deut. v-xxvi), contain
Laws. ' many clear instances of parallelism with the Law of
Holiness. But, apart from parallelisms, they are also
clearly dependent, in a very direct manner, upon other
earlier collections of laws. They embody the substance
of existing legislation, and they expand it with freedom
of purpose, in order to adapt its requirements to the
circumstances of a later century. The writer does not
create new laws. He accepts the form in which they
were current in his own day. He employs them in the
spirit of a true prophet of Israel. He makes them the
text of his exhortation. He feels the religious needs of
his generation may be met by the interpretation of the
spirit of the laws which the people inherited from their
forefathers. Scholars have pointed out that, while there
are numerous points of contact with ' The Law of Holi
ness,' by far the most distinctive feature of the Deutero
nomic Laws is the way in which they so evidently pre
suppose acquaintance with the Decalogue and the Book
of the Covenant, and, so far as they differ, contain but a
development of their teaching.
The use, which was thus made of collections of laws
for purposes of religious instruction, was not probably an

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 27
isolated instance. The custom, if custom it was, marks chap. i.
a step in advance towards the adoption of an authorita
tive standard of teaching.
Modern criticism has probably shown incontrovertibly ThePriestiy
that the period of the final literary codification of the
Priestly legislation, by which is denoted the great mass
of the Levitical Laws exclusive of ' the Book of the
Covenant,' 'the Law of Holiness,' and 'the Deutero-
nomic Laws,' can hardly be placed before the era of
the Exile1. It teaches, however, no less emphatically,
that the Priestly Laws themselves have been gradually
developed from previously existing collections of regula
tions affecting ritual and worship. Of this result of
criticism we believe a clear confirmation can be obtained
from any careful comparative study of their enactments.
Such a comparison, candidly drawn, has forbidden us to
regard the Priestly Laws as homogeneous, or as the pro
duct of one generation. We recognise in our Pentateuch
different strata of priestly and ceremonial laws. They
have come down to us from different periods of the his
tory. When we once grasp this idea firmly, we see that
it would be as much a mistake to affirm, that the Priestly
Laws were created en bloc in the days of the Exile or of
Ezra, as to maintain that they had been promulgated,
in the form in which they have come down to us, in the
days of Moses.
The importance that has been attached to the subject
of the Ritual Law compels us to make here a brief ex
planatory digression. Much misconception has arisen, Semitic in-
because it has not been sufficiently realized, that tne*
merely ceremonial system of the Israelite religion had
1 See Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament,
pp. 128 ff.

28 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. its roots in a quite prehistoric antiquity. It is clear that,
in its general features, it resembled the ceremonial sys
tems prevalent among the religions of other Semitic races
(cf. Robertson Smith's The Prophets of Israel, p. 56).
At the call of Abraham it received the quickening im
pulse of a new spiritual life. But we have no reason to
suppose, that the rules of worship, the distinctions of
cleanness, and the regulations of sacrifice, that were
observed by the patriarchs, differed substantially from
those which they had received by tradition from
a period when their forefathers were polytheistic (Josh.
xxiv. 2). Rules of Sacrifice (Gen. xv. 10), the Rite of
Circumcision (Gen. xvii, Ex. iv. 24-26), the custom of
Tithe payment (Gen. xiv. 20, xxviii. 22), the observance
of the Sabbath (Gen. ii. 1-3, viii. 10, Ex. xvi. 23), Vows
(Gen. xxviii. 20), all these, later tradition considered to
be in force among the Israelites before the Sinaitic
covenant was concluded, equally with the prohibition of
moral offences, of murder (Gen. ix. 4-7), of theft (Gen.
xxxi. 32, xliv. 9), of adultery (Gen. xxxviii, xlix. 4).
In respect of their national customs and institutions,
which were nothing if not part of their religion, we
cannot detach the people of Israel from the great
Semitic stock of which they were a branch. Nor indeed
can we altogether leave out of view the possibility of
a survival of such customs from an earlier stage of
religion and a society yet more primitive.
The Sinaitic legislation, therefore, so far as it related
to the priesthood, to sacrifice, to ritual, was intended
not so much to create a new system as to give a new
The spirit significance to that which had already long existed
Tthmtkir among Semitic races, and to lay the foundation of a
system. higher symbolism leading to a more spiritual worship.

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 29
In a word, it was not the rites, but their spiritual signifi- chap. i.
cance ; not the ceremonial acts, but their connexion with,
and interpretation of, the service of Him who made Him
self known as the pure, the spiritual, the loving God of
Israel, that determined the true character of the revela
tion granted on Mount Sinai. Then, as in every other
epoch of religious creativeness, life was conveyed not by
the external imposition of a new ceremonial, but by the
infusion of a truer spiritual force into the customs of
popular worship, making them instinct with new mean
ing, and rescuing the souls of men from bondage to
a barren externalism.
Rules of sacrifice, of cleanness, and of worship would Priestly
,1 . . . . r . r tradition.
generally be transmitted from one generation of priests
to another, in a very large degree, and especially in early
times, by oral tradition. But, as time went on, a written
tradition would, sooner or later, be formed. In either case,
whether committed to writing or entrusted to memory,
a stereotyped cast of language would arise from the
transmission of such regulations through a succession of
priestly families. It is this stereotyped cast of language
which is reproduced throughout the Priestly Laws, and
which itself witnesses to their derivation through long
periods anterior to their compilation.
What, however, is the verdict of modern criticism, so priestly
far as collections of these Priestly Laws are concerned ? 'known
We seem to be brought to the following conclusion. In b^ned
the pre-exilic writings of the Old Testament, ritual and
ceremonies, which are mentioned in the Priestly Laws of
the Pentateuch, are undoubtedly occasionally referred to :
the references do nothing more than testify to the
existence of such institutions at the time spoken of.
Unless clear traces of quotation accompany them, they

30 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. i. cannot be taken to prove the existence of one authoritative
code of Priestly Laws. Before the Exile, quotations
from Priestly Laws arp, it is universally admitted, ex
ceedingly rare. Their rarity and doubtfulness make
it probable that no authoritative collection had been
made, or, at any rate, officially formulated before the
era of the Captivity. On the other hand, the few cer
tain quotations which are to be found, e.g. Deut.
xiv. 4-20, 1 Sam. ii. 22, 1 Kings viii. 1 and 5, may indi
cate at the most, that collections of Priestly Laws,
possibly of a private nature, existed for the use of
priests 1. A careful comparison of the detail of the
Priestly Laws with that of the laws in Deuteronomy
shows conclusively, that the codification of the former is
later, and belongs to a more advanced period of worship,
than the age of the Deuteronomist. This, however, in
no way invalidates the conclusion upon which all critics
are agreed, that in the Priestly Laws are embedded
groups of laws derived from much earlier usage. Un
mistakable instances of this mixture of earlier with more
recent regulations are to be found in Lev. i-viii, xi-xv,
Num. v, vi, ix, xv, xix.
Purpose of Enough, and more than enough, has now been said
faws.""" upon the laws, to convince us that various collections
of laws were made at different times during the his
tory of the people. Some have become lost to view.
Others the Hebrew scholar has little difficulty in dis
tinguishing even now in the Pentateuch. The clearly
marked characteristics of language, which, speaking gene-
1 The lxx text in 1 Sam. ii. 22, 1 Kings viii. 1, 5, omits the language
agreeing with the usage of the Priestly Laws.
On the whole of this intricate question, see Driver's Literature of
the 0. T.

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 31
rally, distinguish the three legislative periods represented chap. 1.
by the Book of the Covenant, the Deuteronomic Laws,
and the Priestly Laws, force themselves upon our notice.
The purpose with which the more ancient collections,
to which attention has been drawn, were made, must,
doubtless, have differed in different cases. Sometimes,
the object may have been to render assistance to a ruler
or a judge in the discharge of his office; sometimes,
merely to preserve an oral tradition, which threatened to
become obsolete ; sometimes, to keep intact from foreign
or idolatrous taint the inherited institutions of the people.
But in all cases, the originator of the collection, were
he king, priest or prophet, would have promoted its for
mation for the benefit of his people, for the safeguarding
of their society according to the law of Jehovah, and for
the preservation of the pure Israelite Monotheism.
One point remains to be noticed, which arises naturally 'The Law
from the mention of collections of Israelite law. What
is the sense to be ascribed to the words, ' The Law of
Moses,' which frequently occur in the later portions of
the Book of Joshua, and in the Books of Kings, Chro
nicles, Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel ? It is clear that they
cannot be referred to any one particular code of laws
that has escaped all modification from later times. The
fact, now so clearly established, that the Laws of Israel, as
of other nations, only reached their final literary form by
development through gradual stages, must show conclu
sively, that Moses was not the writer of them in the form
in which they have come down to us, and in which they
were certainly known after the Exile. But just as, in
Deut. xxxi. 9 and 24, Moses himself is said to have
committed to writing the law, which formed the nucleus
of the Deuteronomic legislation, so we understand the

32 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. legislation which was initiated by Moses to have become
expanded into the complex system of laws included in
the Pentateuch. The great Lawgiver, who was the
founder, became also the personification of Hebrew
legislation, as David was of the poetry, and Solomon of
the wisdom of Israel1, and, it may be added, as Solon
was of Athenian legislation.
'ToraA.' As has often been shown, the word, Torah, is only asso
ciated with the idea of the written Law after the Exile.
Primarily, it means ' a pointing out,' an individual deci
sion, it may be, on a moral question of right or wrong, or
on a ceremonial question of clean or unclean. It is to
be remembered that in early Semitic life government
was largely administered by means of ' Tordth,' authori
tative decisions, delivered by the chief or judge who gave
his verdict upon the basis of custom and precedent. It
was the reign of Themis, or of what we might call Con
suetudinary Justice. A picture of such an administration,
actually conducted by Moses on such lines, stands before
us in the narrative of Ex. xviii. 13-27. Priests, as
the repositories of sacred tradition, were required to give
such decisions (cf. Deut. xvii. 9-12, xxiv. 8, Haggai ii.
11, 12) ; and in the Book of Micah we find the prophet
rebuking the priests for taking bribes before pronouncing
sentence (Micah iii. 11).
1 Cf. Professor Driver : ' The laws even in their developed shape, may
be supposed to have been attributed to Moses, because Hebrew legislation
was regarded, and in a sense regarded truly, as derived ultimately from
him ' (Contemporary Review, Feb. 1890). ' The " law of Moses " is indeed
frequently spoken of; and it is unquestioned that Israelitish law did
originate with him : but this expression is not evidence that Moses was the
writer of the Pentateuch, or even that the laws which the Pentateuch
contains represent throughout his unmodified legislation' (Introd. Lit. of
0. T. p. 118 n.).

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 33
In the rebukes which the prophets deliver against their chap. i.
countrymen, they make no appeal to the sacred authority
of any written standard of law or doctrine. The pro
phet's utterance is derived directly from God. The
prophet is a spokesman on God's behalf. He appeals
to no authoritative writing which should regulate the life
of Israel. Hosea enumerates the ways in which Jehovah
had made himself known to his people, ' I have also
spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions
and used similitudes by the ministry of the prophets ' (xii.
10). But he makes no mention of the ministry of a written
code of law or of anything corresponding to an authori
tative Canon of Scripture. It is true that, in a much con
troverted passage (viii. 1 2), he uses the words ' Though I
write for him my law in ten thousand precepts.' But
considering the invariable usage of the word ' law,' or
'Torah,' before the Exile, we are not justified in sup
posing that it can refer here to any book of ritual. The
allusion is probably to the ' Torah ' or ' instruction ' of the
prophets embodying the true teaching of Jehovah. This
is ' The Torah,' the Law of the Lord (Hosea iv. 6, Amos
ii. 4), which differed so widely from the ' Torah ' of priests ;
it was concerned with no mere lists of statutes touching
ritual and cleanliness, but with the eternal principles of
truth, justice and mercy. These the prophet may well
have known in a written form, embodied, even in his
time, in those written collections of moral law and pro
phetic teaching, of which the main substance may have
been preserved to us.
(3) History. The composition of prose narrative History.
among the Israelites doubtless belongs to a later stage
of literature than the composition of ballads and primi
tive laws. D

34

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

chap. i. In the records of the Old Testament we have fairly
clear evidence of different classes of prose narrative.
There is, for instance, the narrative of the official me-
In the court of David, and of his successors on

Official
Records.

Compila
tion.

moir.

the throne, we find the scribe, or recorder, occupying
a prominent place among the officials (cf. 2 Sam. viii. 16,
xx. 24, 1 Kings iv. 3, 2 Kings xviii. 18, &c, &c). The
short, dry, record of the official chronicle is probably
to be recognised in the skeleton structure of our Books of
Kings. Upon the mere outline of events, thus officially
sketched, more complete histories would afterwards be
built up by compilers, who made extracts from these
among other written sources of information, but relied
chiefly upon the abundant materials of oral tradition to
furnish them with a narrative of living interest.
Most of the historical books of the Old Testament
are unmistakably the result of compilation. It is not
always easy to say where the compiler is simply tran
scribing his authorities, and where he is himself working
up and redacting material derived from a hundred
different sources. It is generally possible to analyse a
compilatory work so as to reduce it to its main com
ponent literary elements. But it becomes a precarious
task, one on which we cannot place much reliance, when
the attempt is made to break up each of those component
parts, in their turn, into their ultimate constituents.
Some portions, however, in the historical narrative bear
the stamp of having been transferred, in their entirety,
directly from their original sources, e. g. the narratives in
Judges xvii, xviii, xix, the older narrative of the life of
Saul (1 Samuel ix. 1-10, xiii, xiv), and the narrative of
the reign of David (2 Samuel ix-xx). For the most
part, however, the compilation of a Hebrew narrative

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 35
was a complex and artistic process. Previously written chap. i.
accounts were condensed or expanded, revised or re-
written, before they could be inserted in the new
history. Full importance must be granted to the part played OraiTradi-
in Hebrew narrative by the -direct transcription of oral
tradition. We can hardly doubt that the brightness and
vividness of much of Hebrew narrative is due to its
having been derived from the Jips of practised story
tellers. To this source we are probably indebted for
those portions in the Books of Judges and Samuel
which are regarded as presenting the best style of
Hebrew prose. With them we must associate the two
great collections of narrative, called by critics the Elo
hist and Jehovist writings, which form so large a portion
of the compilation of the Pentateuch. They, too. had
been compilations ; they, too, incorporated early written
records. But in their pure and simple style, resembling
closely the best portion of Judges and Samuel, we trace
the influence of oral tradition. It makes itself heard and
felt in the simple conversational prose, in the vividness
of the description of scenes, and in the naturalness and
ease of the dialogue. Scholars have been divided in
opinion as to the date to which these two great nar
rative collections should be assigned. Very probably
their composition preceded the time when the prophets
Amos and Hosea wrote. The fact, however, that those
two prophets allude to incidents recorded in the patri
archal narrative of the Elohist and Jehovist (Hosea xii. 3,
4, 12, 13 ; cf. Amosii. 9) must not be relied on too confi
dently as proof of their acquaintance with the precise
materials that have come down to us. The prophets do
not actually quote the words familiar to us in Genesis.
D 2

36 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. The narratives would be current in popular tradition.
They may possibly have existed in other written forms,
besides those which have been incorporated in the Pen
tateuch. The argument, however, whatever be its value,
derives a certain degree of confirmation from the beauty
and simplicity of the style, which point to a date at
which Hebrew prose literature was neither in its infancy,
nor yet had reached the beginning of its decadence.
. Such a date may well have been the century before the
ministry of Hosea and Amos.
Prophetic Accordingly, we have, in the compilations of narrative,
Narrative, another instance of the tendency, in preexilic times, to
make collections of literary materials, of which use could
be made for the purpose of providing religious instruction
for the people. It is interesting, therefore, to find that
careful critical analysis of the Pentateuch shows that, in
all probability, the Jehovist and Elohist writings were
themselves welded into one historical work, dealing with
the narrative from the Creation to the death of Joshua.
The existence and influence of this compilation are pre
supposed in the writings of the Deuteronomist, so that
the work of welding them together can hardly be later
than the middle of the eighth century B.C. The object of
the compilation was obviously a religious one. It was
intended to give the history of the Israelite people from
the beginning, to show their Divine selection, and to
testify to the special providence which had delivered
them from the bondage of Egypt, which had built up
the constitution upon the foundation of the Covenant of
Sinai, and which had brought the people, in fulfilment of
the promises made to the patriarchs, into the possession
of the land of Canaan. We fancy that the construction
of this vivid retrospect of Israel's early history must have

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 37
been connected with the efforts of the prophets to en- chap. i.
courage a more pure and spiritual religion. They fore
saw the fall of the Northern kingdom ; the danger of
the sister kingdom could not be disguised. The hope
of averting this catastrophe lay in the spiritual reunion of
the people. Historical narrative played its part by re
calling to memory the Covenants made of old with the
Patriarchs. (4) Prophecy. What has just been said, leads us to Prophecy.
make a few references, at this point, to the functions of
the prophet, and to the commencement of the system of
collecting prophecies in writing.
Communities of prophets were not originally, as is so The Pro-
often erroneously supposed, banded together for purposes prl'phet
of study, or of literature, or even of sedentary devotion.
From the earliest notices which we have of them in
Scripture (1 Samuel x), we gather that the ' Sons of the
Prophets ' thronged together for the purpose of inspiring
the common people with religious enthusiasm by prac
tices of ecstatic fervour. Their conduct and life may, in
some respects, be illustrated, as has often been pointed
out, by the dervishes of the East in modern times.
The institution of prophets was, we find in Holy
Scripture, connected, both in Palestine and in the ad
joining countries, with the service of different deities. The
reader need only refer to the narrative in 1 Kings xviii
and 2 Kings x, to see how conspicuously the prophets of
Baal figured in one great crisis of the history of Israel.
Throughout the days of the Monarchy, the Exile and
even after the Return, the prophets of Jehovah appear
constantly. But many were false prophets, professional
deceivers (cf. 1 Kings xxii. 6-28, Neh. vi. 10-14, Ezek.
xiii, xiv) ; the majority of them were quite inconspicuous

38 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. (cf. 2 Kings vi. 1-7). Only a few attained to any great
The work eminence. The leading men amongst them had their
"feaJing disciples, or, as they were called, their 'sons' (cf. I Samuel
Prophets. x. 12), who served them, imitated them, and perhaps
aspired to fill their place (2 Kings ii. 15). The greater
prophets were consulted on all occasions of difficulty and
trouble. Their reputation frequently spread beyond
their immediate neighbourhood (cf. 2 Kings v and vi).
They seem to have had special days for teaching the
people and for giving answers to applications made to
them from different quarters (2 Kings iv. 23). The
reply of a prophet was vouchsafed, sometimes upon
matters of fact (cf. 1 Samuel ix, x, 1 Kings xi. 26-40,
xiv. 1-16), sometimes upon questions of morality (cf. 1
Samuel xv, 2 Samuel xii. 1-14) ; but the most important
part played by the prophet, in the time of the monarchy,
was when he came forward to speak in the name of the
Lord upon questions of national policy (e. g. 1 Kings xi.
26-40, xviii. 1 ff., 2 Kings vii-ix), to encourage (2 Kings
xix. 20), or to warn (1 Kings xxi. 17-22, Isaiah vii. 3-17).
Each prophetic utterance was a pointing out, a ' torah,'
an instruction, based upon the principles of the Law of
Jehovah.
sayings of The more important of such utterances would be pre-
repea°ted "by served by the disciples of the great prophets. In earlier
Zna^nsed. times they were probably only committed to memory.
Afterwards, as the practice of writing became more
common, they would be transcribed, sometimes by the
prophet himself, sometimes by his followers, from the
recollection of the utterance. The earliest specimens of
prophetic utterance, committed to writing, that have
come down to us, are to be found in the Books of Amos
and Hosea. Whether these prophets themselves pre-

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 39
pared them for publication, we cannot say. Doubtless, chap. i.
by comparison with the actual spoken word of which the
prophets delivered themselves, the books are mainly
condensations. In the Book of Amos the work of con
densation has been done so dexterously as to present us
with a smooth and flowing style ; but in the Book of
Hosea the process of condensation was not so skilfully
effected, and this will probably account for the enigmatical
abruptness and obscurity of the prophet's style. For
another extensive illustration of the way in which groups
of prophecies were collected and summarised, we need
only refer to the contents of the first portion of Isaiah
(i-xxxix) 1.
The necessity of committing their utterance to writing Written.
was often imposed upon the prophets by the refusal of
the people to listen to their warnings, or by the prohibi
tion, on the part of the authorities, of liberty to speak in
the hearing of the people (Amos ii. 12, vii. 12, 13,
Micah ii. 6). It is for some such reason that Isaiah
solemnly commits to his disciples the charge of his testi
mony and his 'torah' (viii. 16-20).
The utterances of earlier prophets were cherished in
the memories, or in the tablets, of those who succeeded
them. We find that Micah and Isaiah quote from
the same utterance of some prophet, unknown to us,
who had testified before their day (cf. Isaiah ii. 2-4
and Micah iv. 1-3). Whether it was extant in writing,
we cannot say. But the preservation of prophecy for
the benefit of disciples was only a step in the direction
of continuous formal compositions such as we find in
Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
1 See the Commentaries by Cheyne and Dillmann, and Driver's Isaiah,
his Life and Times, ed. 2, 1893 (' Men of the Bible ' Series).

40 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. Thus was a commencement made of preserving, in
VaiuVcf writing, collections of prophetic utterances intended for
^ophecy the instruction of the people. In vain, it seemed, had
the witness of the faithful prophet been borne by word
of mouth in the face of a malignant court and a time
serving people. But the very rancour of princes, the very
obstinacy of the people, their very refusal to listen, their
very contempt of the prophet's speech, were overruled to
be the means of preserving the memorial of the sacred
message. The prophets wrote what they could not or
might not utter. The true value of the written collec
tions of prophecy was thus discerned. Yet not at once ;
only through the discipline of the exile were the lessons
of prophecy, that had been preserved by the writings of
the prophets and their disciples, fully taken to heart.
For our purpose it is enough that, in the collections of
prophetical utterances which were made, some by those
who spake them, others by those who heard them, we
may recognise another advance made in the direction of
the formation of a Canon of Scripture.

Preserva- As to the methods by which these collections of songs,
writings, laws, narratives, and prophecies were made and trans-
"fnaHmai mitted, we have, it must be confessed, practically no
concern. evidence. It is sufficient, however, to note their exist
ence, and to observe in passing that, in the extant
memorials of Israel, there is no appearance of such
collections, with the possible exception of the Decalogue,
having ever acquired authority, resembling that of
Canonical Scripture, over the public life of the nation.
We might, indeed, fairly infer from the religious thought
which characterises the extant remnants of these collec
tions, that their contents were scarcely likely to have

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 41
been in agreement with the forms of religion which chap.i.
found favour with the people during the greater part of
the monarchy. In proportion as they approximated to
the pure spiritual tone and religious sincerity of the
faithful prophets of Jehovah, they must have come into
collision with the cruder externalism, which prevailed
even in Jerusalem. Their worth was proved in the
furnace of opposition. Those that survived the ordeal
were destined afterwards to receive enduring recognition.
The preservation of public documents in a place of Tradition
safety, and therefore, probably, in a place of sanctity, °in sZnctu-
was doubtless a practice observed by the Israelites as ary'
well as by other nations of antiquity. The evidence is
not sufficient to show that any of the collections which
we have described, save, possibly, of certain laws, came
under the category of documents that were preserved
with especial care. Out of the passages generally quoted
to show that we should attribute the preservation of the
Old Testament Scriptures to the practice of storing
archives in the sanctuary, one passage refers to the two
tables of stone (Exodus xl. 20), three passages, to the
substance of the law of Deuteronomy (Deut. xvii. 18,
xxxi. 24-26, 2 Kings xxii. 8) x ; one, a very doubtful
case, to a writing of Joshiaa which has not survived
(Joshua xxiv. 26) ; one, to -a law of the monarchy, of
which we are told nothing beyond the fact, that Samuel
committed it to writing and laid it up before the Lord
(1 Samuel x. 25). At the -most, then, it may be said,
tradition, as represented by these passages, favours the
view that some portions of the earliest law were wont to
be preserved in sacred precincts. But, judging from the
history, it does not appear that, until the reign of Josiah,
1 On ' the Book of the Law ' in 2 Kings xxii, see Chap. III.

42 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. any such portions of the law received the veneration of
the people to which they afterwards became entitled.
It is only too evident from 2 Kings xxii, that the pre
servation of a book, even in the Temple, afforded no
protection against forgetfulness and utter neglect.
The habit of preserving ancient portions of the law in
a place of sanctity was not identical with investing them
with Canonical authority. Let us take the case of the
Decalogue. It is open to question, whether even this
sacred nucleus of the law was, in all times, regarded by
the people of Israel as authoritative. If it was, it is
strange that its authority should not have been more
generally recognised, that appeals to its prohibition of
idolatry should not have been made by kings and pro
phets who were bent upon the purification of religion.
Certainly, if its position had been that which later usage
learned to ascribe to it, it is quite unaccountable that so
little allusion is made to its claims.
Two Tables Nevertheless, the account which is preserved of the
two tables of stone, on which the Ten Words, or Com
mandments, were inscribed, shows plainly that in them
we have the nearest approach to the Canonical Scriptures
of a later stage in the people's history. It appears from
a statement in the Books of Kings that, in the days of
Solomon, the tables of stone were still preserved in the
ark within the Holy of Holies (1 Kings viii. 9). But
did they exert any practical influence over the religious
life of the people ? Our answer must be in the affirma
tive ; they may have remained to all appearances a dead
letter, their testimony may not have been directly ap
pealed to by the prophets ; but on them had rested the
whole fabric of civil and religious order. They were
known by writers, in the first stages of Israelite literature,

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 43
to contain the foundation of the moral law, the first Chap. i.
'torah' of Jehovah (Ex. xx. 1-17, Deut. v. 6-21).
The sanctity of the two tables of stone is inseparable,
in the priestly tradition, from the sanctity of the ark
which was constructed to receive them ; and, as we know
from Jeremiah (iii. 16), the sanctity of the ark was
connected in the remembrance of the people with the
earliest stages of their religious history 1. The Laws of
the Decalogue were the Testimony ; so the ark was
called the Ark of the Testimony, and the two tables of
stone the Tables of the Testimony. The Decalogue
embodied the Covenant of Sinai ; so the ark was called
the Ark of the Covenant.
That the Ten Commandments were considered to The Testi-
contain the fundamental charter of the Israelite con- '^nation
stitution, is a view that has sometimes been thought to °-fJ°ash-
receive an illustration from the narrative of the coro
nation of Joash (2 Kings xi. 12, 2 Chronicles xxiii.
1 1). We there read that the high priest Jehoiada ' put
the crown upon him and gave him the testimony,' or, as
the translation is more literally, ' put upon him the
crown and the testimony.' The traditional interpreta
tion of these words has always been, that the high priest
either rested upon the head, or placed in the hand, of the
young king the Tables of the Testimony, in order that
the royal purpose of reigning in accordance with the
Covenant of Sinai might thereby be symbolised. The
reading of the passage, however, is not quite certain. The
literal translation of the words sounds harsh and abrupt,
to say the least of it. Is the text at fault ? Was it that Text of -2
Kings xi.
1 Outside the Hexateuch, cf. Jud. xx. 27 ; 1 Sam. iii-vi, xiv. r8 ; 2 Sam.
vi, vii. 1, xi. 11, xv ; 1 Kings ii. 26, iii. 15, vi. 19, viii. 1-9, 21 ; Ps. cxxxii. 8,
Chron. pass.

44 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Char/. Jewish scribes, in after times, left out the words ('the two
tables of '), hesitating to record in writing what they
understood in the mention of the sacred tables, i.e. the
removal of them from out of the Ark of the Testimony
and the obtaining of them from the Holy of Holies,
which was inaccessible to all save to the high priest
alone, and to him only once in the year ? Or was it, as
has been suggested by some recent scholars, that the
word ' Testimony' is a wrong reading and that the
Proposed original word, in the place of which 'Testimony' has
emendation. , . , ...
been inserted, meant 'the bracelets' which were the
insignia of royalty (cf. 2 Samuel i. 10)? This latter
suggestion is ingenious enough; for, in the Hebrew
spelling, the two words, rendered 'Testimony' and
' bracelets,' very closely resemble one another. But it
is an objection that the proposed word rendered ' brace
let ' occurs in this sense only once elsewhere in the Bible,
(Isaiah iii. 20) \ It is a much more serious objection,
that the substitution of the word ' Testimony ' for the
word ' bracelets ' was hardly likely to have been made.
' Testimony,' the commoner word, was the harder read
ing. There was nothing which would tempt a scribe to
introduce into the narrative such an apparent profana
tion both of the Ark of the Testimony and of the Holy
of Holies. The suggestion therefore of a false reading
does not commend itself on the ground of inherent pro
bability. It is unfortunate, that critics should thus have at
tempted to alter the significant word of a passage, a
word which happened also, apparently, to tell against
the particular views which the critics upheld. ' Testi
mony' is the reading found in this passage in both
' nnjs 'bracelets,' nns ' testimony.'

THE PREPARATION FOR A CANON. 45
accounts (Kings and Chronicles). It occurs both in the chap, i.
Hebrew and in the Septuagint text. Now the word
' Testimony ' is applied, in the Priestly portion of the
Pentateuch, to the tables of the Law (e. g. Exodus xxv.
16, 21, xl. 20), and to the ark (e.g. Exodus xvi. 34, xxvii.
21, Leviticus xvi. 1^, xxiv. 3, Numbers xvii. 4, 10). It is
obvious therefore that the occurrence of the word, in its
former technical sense, in this passage of the Book of
Kings, might be claimed as proof of acquaintance with
the phraseology of the priestly writings of the Pentateuch,
at least in the times of the exile, if not at a considerably
earlier date, since the history of the Jehoiada episode is
clearly based on contemporary records. On this account,
the proposal to remove so significant a word from the
text can hardly escape the charge of appearing either
arbitrary or disingenuous. It seems the more candid
course to accept the reading ' testimony,' while acknow
ledging that the text may not be free from suspicion.
We are thrown back, therefore, upon the former alter
native, that the difficulty in the reading was due to an
omission, which is to be accounted for by the hesita
tion of scribes to record an apparent instance of the
profane handling of the tables of the Law and the viola
tion of the rule respecting the sanctity of the Holy of
Holies. The difficulty, however, admits of another solution. Suggested
Retaining the reading 'Testimony,' are we obliged to'^"' '" """
restrict the meaning of the word to its special, and, ac
cording to the critics, later, technical sense of ' the tables
of stone ' ? If the two tables had survived the disasters
of Shiloh, is it probable that they would have been
brought out of the Ark, or fetched from the innermost
shrine ? The ' Testimony ' may surely refer to the

46 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. i. substance of the fundamental laws of the Covenant,
without necessarily conveying the idea of the two stone
tables on which it was originally inscribed. The contents
of the Testimony may well have been preserved on
parchment or on tablets (cf. Isaiah viii. i). The re
quirements both of the word in the original and of
the context in which it occurs are satisfied to the full,
if we suppose that Jehoiada handed to the young
king a roll or tablets, on which was inscribed the
fundamental charter of the constitution. Whether
such a charter was limited to the Ten Commandments,
or whether it contained other laws that are embodied in
documents which have been incorporated in the Penta
teuch, we cannot, of course, pretend to do more than
conjecture. But it is a natural conjecture, that portions
of the civil law, such as were, for instance, formulated
in a prophetic form by the writer of Deuteronomy, may
have received ratification from the king on the occasion
of his enthronement (cf. Deut. xvii. 14-20).
But a Magna Charta is not a Bible, nor can the
fundamental law of a constitution, ratified at a corona
tion, be the equivalent of a Canon of Scripture.

CHAPTER II.
THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON.
The Book of the Law.
It is not till the year 621 B.C., the eighteenth year chap. ii.
of the reign of King Josiah, that the history of Israel 621 b. c.
presents us with the first instance of ' a book,' which was
regarded by all, king, priests, prophets, and people alike,
as invested not only with sanctity, but also with supreme
authority in all matters of religion and conduct.
The book had been discovered in the house of God Discovery
of the Book
by the High Priest, Hilkiah. The discovery was quite of the Law
accidental ; for the book was apparently brought to light
by workmen in the course of certain structural repairs in
the Temple. It was at once recognised by the High
Priest, who apprised Shaphan, the scribe, and gave it
into his charge. The King was informed of the start
ling intelligence, and he, on having its contents read
aloud to him, was thrown into sudden and vehement
consternation. He despatched messengers to consult
the prophetess Huldah. They returned with the dis
couraging reply, that 'the woes predicted in the book
could not be averted. Nothing daunted, Josiah and his
counsellors addressed themselves at once to energetic
measures of religious reform. The worship at the high
places which King Hezekiah, nearly a century before,
had vainly attempted to put a stop to, was now sum-

48 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. n. marily suppressed. All public worship of Jehovah was
itsinfluence. to be concentrated at the Temple of Jerusalem (2 Kings
xxiii. 1-20). A great celebration of the Passover was
kept in conformity with the requirements of this book,
and, we are told, ' there had been none like it since the
days of the Judges' (vv. 21-23). ^n order 'that he
might confirm the words of the law which were written
in the book that Hilkiah the priest found in the house
of the Lord,' Josiah put away 'them that had familiar
spirits and the wizards and the teraphim and the idols '
(ver. 24) ; and amongst the relics of false worship which
he destroyed we have particular mention of images used
for the worship of the heavenly bodies (vv. 4-1 1). The
King's action had the support of the whole people.
When he ' made a covenant before the Lord ... to
confirm the words of the covenant that were written
in the book,' it is added, ' and all the people stood to
the covenant ' (ver. 3).
In this familiar scene, 'the Book of the Law ' stands in
the position of Canonical Scripture. It is recognised as
containing the words of the Lord (xxii. 18, 19). Its
authority is undisputed and indisputable. On the
strength of its words the most sweeping measures are
carried out by the King, and accepted by the people.
The whole narrative, so graphically told by one who
was possibly a contemporary of the events he describes,
breathes the conviction that the homage paid to ' the
book,' was nothing more than its just due.
its contents. When we enquire what this ' Book of the Law ' com
prised, the evidence at our disposal is quite sufficiently
explicit to direct us to a reply. Even apart from the
knowledge which we now possess of the structure of the
Pentateuch, there was never much probability in the

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 49
supposition, that the book discovered by Hilkiah was chap.ti.
identical with the whole Jewish ' Torah,' our Pentateuch. Notthe
The narrative does not suggest so considerable a work. whole
bfa Pentateuch,
Its contents were quickly perused and readily grasped x-
Being read aloud, it at once left distinct impressions
upon questions of national duty. Its dimensions could
not have been very large, nor its precepts very technical.
The complex character of the Pentateuch fails to satisfy
the requirements of the picture. Perhaps, too (although
the argument is hardly one to be pressed), as it appears
that only a single roll of the Law was found, it may not
unfairly be remarked, that the whole Torah was never
likely to be contained in one roll ; but that, if a single
roll contained any portion of the Pentateuch, it was most
probably the Deuteronomic portion of it ; for the Book
of Deuteronomy, of all the component elements of the
Pentateuch, presents the most unmistakable appearance
of having once formed a compact independent work 2.
But, there is no need to have recourse to argu
ments of such a doubtful kind. For while the evi- tui collection
of Deutero-
dence shows that a completed Torah could not have nomicLaw.
existed at this time, we seem to have convincing proof
that ' the Book of the Law ' was either a portion of our
Deuteronomy or a collection of laws, Deuteronomic in
tone, and, in range of contents, having a close resem
blance to our Book of Deuteronomy. The evidence is
twofold. (1) The description which is given of the
book found in the Temple shows, that, in its most
characteristic features, it approximated more closely
to portions of Deuteronomy than to any other section
1 2 Kings xxii. 11, xxiii. 2.
2 Cf. Ps. xl. 7 : ' In the roll of the book it is prescribed to me'' with
Prof. Kirkpatrick's note (Psalms, vol. i. Camb. Bible for Schools).
E

50 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap, ii. of the Pentateuch. (2) The historian, from whom we
obtain the account, appears, when he speaks of 'the
law,' to have in view the Deuteronomic section, and
scarcely to be acquainted with any other. These argu
ments have been frequently and fully discussed in other
works, so that we need not here do more than sum
marize them very briefly.
Evidence: (i) The description of the book shows that, in its
)o Deut most conspicuous features, it was in close agreement
with the contents of Deuteronomy.
(.a) Presence (a) The book contained denunciations against the
"ciatioZ"^ neglect of the covenant with Jehovah (2 Kings xxii. 11-
13. l6> J7)-
Now the Pentateuch contains two extensive passages
describing the fearful visitations that should befall the
people of Israel for following after other gods (Lev.
xxvi ; Deut. xxviii-xxxi). Of these, the passage in
Deuteronomy is the longest, and while the passage in
Leviticus would be calculated to produce a very similar
impression, it may be noticed that the words of Huldah,
in referring to the curses contained in ' the Book of the
Law,' possibly contain a reference to Deut. xxviii. 37,
xxix. 24 (cf. 2 Kings xxii. 19). It cannot be doubted
that one or other, or both of these denunciations, must
have been included in Josiah's ' Book of the Law.'
(b) Reforms (b) The reforms carried out by the king and his
book. advisers, in order to obey the commands of ' the Book
of {he Law,' deal with matters all of which are mentioned,
with more or less emphasis, in the Deuteronomic legis
lation, (i) The principal religious reform carried out by
Josiah was the suppression of the worship at the high
places, and the concentration of worship at the Temple.
No point is insisted on so frequently and so emphatically

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 51
in the Deuteronomic laws as that all public worship is to chap. ii.
be centralised at the one place which Jehovah himself
should choose (Deut. xii. 5 and passim), (ii) Josiah took
measures to abolish the worship of the heavenly bodies,
a form of idolatry distinct from the worship of Baal and
Ashtoreth. His action is in obedience to the commands of
Deuteronomic laws (Deut. iv. 19, xvii. 3). There alone
in the Pentateuch is this particular form of idolatry com
bated. For, although it had existed in an earlier time,
it does not seem to have infected the religion of Israel
until late in the monarchical period (cf. 2 Kings xxi. 3,
5, xxiii. 4, 5, 12). (iii) Josiah celebrated the Feast of the
Passover (2 Kings xxiii. 21-23) in accordance with ' the
Book of the Law' — we find the Law of the Passover
laid down in Deut. xvi. 1-8. (iv) Josiah expelled the
wizards and diviners from the land in express fulfilment of
' the Book of the Law ' (2 Kings xxiii. 24) : we find the
prohibition of this common class of impostor in Oriental
countries expressed in strong languagein Deut. xviii. 9-14.
It is not, of course, for a moment denied that laws,
dealing with these two last subjects, are to be found
elsewhere in the Pentateuch. But as in all four cases
Josiah's action was based upon 'the law,' whatever ' the
law ' was, it must have dealt with ' feasts ' and with
' wizards ' as well as with 4 concentration of worship '
and 'star-worship.' In the Deuteronomic laws all four
points are touched upon.
(c) The book found in the Temple is designated ' the (A Called a
Book of the Covenant' (2 Kings xxiii. 2, 21), and it covenant:
appears that it contained a covenant, to the observance
of which the king solemnly pledged himself (id. 3).
In the Pentateuch we find, it is true, a mention of ' the
Book of the Covenant' (Ex. xxiv. 7), by which the
E 2

52 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. ii. substance of the Sinaitic legislation (Ex. xx-xxiii)
seems to be denoted. But it is clear, from the fact that
the section, Ex. xx-xxiii, contains no denunciation ;
from the fact that it contains only the very briefest
notice of the Feast of the Passover, and then under
another name, ' the Feast of Unleavened Bread ' (Ex.
xxiii. 15); from the fact that it makes no mention of
either wizards or star-worship ; — that this portion of
the Israelite law cannot be ' the covenant ' referred to in
2 Kings xxiii. On the other hand, an important section
at the close of our Book of Deuteronomy is occupied
with a ' Covenant ' ; and it can hardly be doubted, that
a ' Book of the Law,' which was also ' the Book of the
Covenant,' must have included such passages as Deut.
xxix. 1, ' These are the words of the covenant which
the Lord commanded Moses to make with the children
of Israel ' ; ver. 9, ' Keep therefore the words of this
covenant' ; ver. 14, 'Neither with you only do I make
this covenant and this oath ' ; ver. 21, ' According to all
the curses of the covenant that is written in the book of
the law ' ; vers. 24, 25, ' Even all the nations shall say,
Wherefore hath the Lord done thus unto this land ? . . .
Then men shall say, Because they forsook the covenant
of the Lord.'
2. Evidence (a) The historian who has preserved to us the narra-
BoUksof" tive of the finding of 'the Book of the Law' himself
Kmss- quotes directly from 'the law' in two passages, and in
both instances from Deuteronomic writing. In 1 Kings
ii. 3, 'And keep the charge of the Lord thy God to walk
in His ways, to keep His statutes, and His command
ments, and His judgements, and His testimonies, ac
cording to that which is written in the law of Moses,'
that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest and

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 53
whithersoever thou turnest thyself/ the words used chap. ii.
are characteristically Deuteronomic, and the thought is
possibly based on Deut. xvii. 1 8-20 {cf. Josh. i. 8). In
2 Kings xiv. 6, ' But the children of the murderers he
put not to death ; according to that which is written in
the book of the law of Moses, as the Lord commanded,
saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the
children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers ;
but every man shall die for his own sin,' the citation is
taken almost word for word from Deut. xxiv. 16. In
numerous characteristic expressions and phrases the com
piler of the Books of Kings shows a close acquaintance
with the Deuteronomic portion of the Pentateuch, though
nowhere, perhaps, so frequently as in 1 Kings viii, ix, e. g.
viii. 51 (cf. Deut. iv. 20), ix. 3 (cf. Deut. xii. 5), ix.
7, 8 (cf. Deut. xxviii. ^J, xxix. 24). Generally speak
ing, where reference is made to ' the law ' in the Books of
Kings, the allusion can only be satisfied by a reminis
cence of a Deuteronomic passage. Thus, exclusive of
the two passages already quoted, may be noted 1 Kings
viii. 9 (cf. Deut. x. 5, xxix. 1), 53 (cf. Deut. iv. 20), ^6
(cf. Deut. xii. 9, io, xxv. 19), 2 Kings x. 31, xviii. 12,
xxi. 8, xxii. 8, xxiii. 25.
If, therefore, the compiler of the Books of Kings iden
tified ' the law of Moses ' and ' the book of the law '
with Deuteronomy, or, at least, with a Deuteronomic
version of the law, we may nearly take it for granted,
that, in his narrative of the reign of Josiah, when he men
tioned 'the Book of the Law ' without further description,
he must have had in his mind the same Deuteronomic
writings with which he was so familiar.
The language of the compiler of the Books of Kings Conclusion.
tends therefore to strengthen the argument from the

54

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Previoushistory of
book.

chap. ii. effect produced by the perusal of ' the Book of the Law,'
and from the nature of the reforms based upon its
authority. We see no reason to question the accuracy of
the conclusion, that Hhe Book of the Law' found in the
house of God, in the eighteenth year of King Josiah's
reign, was substantially identical with the Deuteronomic
portion of our Old Testament.
If this be granted, we have next to inquire into the
previous history of this book. Had it ever before received
the recognition which it received in Josiah's reign ? Had
it ever before been known as a sacred writing whose
authority could be recognised as paramount over the
kingdom of Judah ? In other words, was its position of
canonical authority in Josiah's reign a restoration to
prestige previously enjoyed ? or was it due to a combina
tion of especially favourable circumstances, that a writing,
never before so recognised, was now, for the first time,
promoted to a position of religious pre-eminence in
the nation?
To these questions, the scholars who suppose the com
position of the book to have been the work of Hilkiah
himself and of his friends, and who ascribe its discovery,
not to chance, but to collusion, have no difficulty in
making reply. Viewed from such a point of view, the
book played a part in a clever intrigue conducted by
the priests at Jerusalem, who aimed at dealing a finishing
stroke to the rival worship at the high places.
But we have no reason to impugn either the accuracy
or the sincerity of the historian, who describes an
incident of which he was possibly a witness *- An unpre-
¦ For according to some scholars (e. g. Wellhausen and Kuenen) the
compilation of the Books of Kings took place before the exile and only
received a few additions at a later revision.

A theory:
forgery by
Hilkiah.

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 55
judiced perusal of his narrative leaves the impression, that chap. ii.
he has no shadow of a suspicion of the discovery having
been anything else but a fortunate accident, and that, in
the opinion of those living at the time, the book was sup
posed to have existed long before and to have been lost.
Assuming then that this Deuteronomic ' book of the Unknown
law ' was honestly regarded as an ancient book in the cent'l.c.
eighteenth year of Josiah, we must take into considera
tion the following facts : —
(i) That never before, on the occasion of a religious
reform, do we find, in the books of Samuel and Kings, any
appeal made to the authority of a book ; (2) that, even in
Hezekiah's reign, the attempt to suppress the high places
was not, so far as the history tells us, supported by any
such appeal ; (3) that the earlier prophets, Amos, Hosea,
Micah, and Isaiah (I), give no certain sign of having been
influenced by the Deuteronomic law. Of course, as has
been already pointed out, ancient laws are copiously
incorporated in Deuteronomy, and the mere mention of
institutions and customs, which are spoken of in Deuter
onomy, does not prove the existence of the book itself.
The force of the argument from silence, however, will at
once be appreciated when the pronounced influence of the
Deuteronomic writings upon the style of authors, to whom
the Book of Deuteronomy was well known, e. g. Books
of Kings, Jeremiah, and Zephaniah, is fully taken account
of. There is nothing parallel to it in the undoubtedly
earlier Hebrew literature. The inference is obvious : the
Book of Deuteronomy, in the earlier period, was either
not yet composed or not yet known. But if written,
could it have escaped the notice of Amos, Hosea, and
Isaiah ? could it have failed to leave on them something
of the mark it made on later literature ?

56 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. ii. One well-known passage (Isaiah xix. 19) should be
is. xix. 19. sufficient to disprove the possibility of that prophet's
acquaintance with the Deuteronomic law. ' In that day
there shall be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the
land of Egypt, and a pillar (mazze'bah) at the border
thereof to the Lord.' Isaiah could hardly have said this,
if he had been acquainted with the prohibition of Deut.
xvi. 22, ' Thou shalt not set thee up a pillar (mazze'bah)
which the Lord thy God hateth.' Nor is the reply satis
factory that Isaiah refers to the soil, not of Palestine, but
of Egypt ; for the prophet is contemplating a time when
all the world should be subject to the ' law ' of Israel's
God1. It would appear, therefore, that the Deuteronomic
'book of the law' was not known to Isaiah or his prophetic
predecessors, and could hardly have been written before
the reign of Hezekiah. Seeing that, in addition to this,
the marked characteristics of its style correspond to those
which are found in the Hebrew writing of the 6th and
latter part of the 7th cent. B.C., it is the most natural con
clusion, that the literary framework of the book is not
to be placed earlier than the close of Isaiah's ministry
(circ. 690 B.C.).
Possible date The conclusion to which we incline is that the book
"tion!" °Si' was compiled in the latter part of Hezekiah's, or in the
early part of Manasseh's, reign. Under the idolatrous
reaction that took place in the reigns of Manasseh and
Amon, such a work, breathing the fervent spirit of the
purest worship of Jehovah, may well have disappeared
from view, whether forcibly suppressed or silently with-
1 Cf. Is. xix. 21, ' And the Lord shall be known to Egypt, and the
Egyptians shall know the Lord in that day ; yea, they shall worship with
sacrifice and oblation, and shall vow a vow unto the Lord, and shall perform
it.'

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 57
drawn. Its recognition by Hilkiah shows that a recollec- chap. ii.
tion of the laws was retained among the priests. The
narrative shows also that an accurate knowledge of the
laws was not to be found outside the priesthood and the
prophets. Even by those who do not share the view here put
forward with respect to the date of its composition, the
admission is generally made, that, at no time previous
to Josiah's reign, is there any evidence of such a book
having exerted what we should call canonical authority
over the people.
In order to account for the extraordinary regard thus
manifested for ' the book of the law,' we must under
stand the nature of its contents. Two mistakes have
commonly been made with respect to the Deuteronomic Deutero-
1 /-\i 11-11 111 nomicLaws.
laws. Un the one hand, it has been assumed, and the Not aiirepe-
name ' Deuteronomy ' is partly accountable for it, that ''JZ^iinew.
the book consists solely of a reiteration of the laws con
tained in previous codes. On the other hand, it has been
supposed — and the theory that it was composed to aid a
priestly intrigue would support the idea — that the book
consists of a new, a second, code of laws. A closer inspec
tion of its contents, and a comparison with the other
laws, show the erroneousness of both suppositions. It is
not a reiteration of the Sinaitic laws. For, while it
doubtless repeats some unchanged, it reproduces others
so far altered and modified, that their identity is only
faintly discernible. Such alterations and modifications
illustrate the interval of time which separates the later
legislation from that of ' the Book of the Covenant ' (Ex.
xx-xxiii). Again, it is not a new legislative creation ;
for even where its precepts differ from the older laws,
it is the difference which arises from expansion and

58 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. ii. development rather than from contradiction. The fact
that its legislation rests upon earlier laws is admitted on
all hands.
chief char- But the characteristic feature of the Deuteronomic 'book
acteristic. • i i
of the law is its homiletic setting. Its oratorical style,
so smooth, so copious and redundant, and yet so impas
sioned, distinguishes its literary form from that of any
formal official code. It forbids us to assign Deuteronomic
literature to any early date. It marks at once the age
from which its composition springs. It conveys no less
clearly the purpose of popular exhortation, with which
some ardent prophet moulded into its present shape a
collection of his people's laws.
Collections of laws, as we have seen in the previous
chapter, had been made at different times and with
different objects. Hitherto the possessors of the laws
had been the priests and the prophets — the official re
positories of the religion and of the learning of the
Book not people. Thecommunity generally had not felt the need of
before. a book of religion. They had been able to have recourse
to the priests at the local altars ; they had been able to
consult the prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord ;
they had been able to repair to the Temple at Jerusalem,
where the High Priest was invested with the Urim and
Thummim.
Crisis in But at the beginning of the 7th cent. B.C. a crisis was
evidently at hand. The efforts of Hezekiah had recently
been exerted to put down the local worship at the high
places. The high places were a constant obstacle to
the spiritual development of the worship of Jehovah ;
they possibly also impeded the attempts of statesmen to
reunite all Israel at Jerusalem, after Samaria had fallen.
But the abolition of the high places must have seemed to

7th Cent.
B.C.

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 59
the common people like the annihilation of the constant chap. ii.
witness, to be found ' on every high hill,' to the reality
of their religion. The removal of the priests, who for
centuries had presided over local and family festivals,
offered the daily evening sacrifice, and decided every
doubtful point of faith or honesty or ' cleanness,' must
have seemed like the withdrawal of sentinels from their
post, and the surrender of the country-side to the mercies
of the invaders' gods. Then, too, the successes of the
Assyrian armies favoured the idea, that they were the
strongest gods that presided over the most powerful
legions. All the old tendency to idolatrous syncre
tism received a fresh impulse from the introduction
of new thoughts and strange superstitions from the banks
of the Euphrates.
Lastly, there was present to every thoughtful and
devout mind the warning conveyed by the overthrow of
the Northern Kingdom. Was it not possible that such
a disaster was impending over Judah too ? And what
was there of true vitality, which could uphold the
religion of Jehovah, if the Temple should be over
thrown, its courts desolated, its altar laid in ashes ?
If that fatal blow should come, was the life-blood of
the nation's faith to ebb at once away ? Were the men
of Judah, like their brethren of the Northern Kingdom,
to be poured out like water on the sand and lost ?
Then, we may suppose, one or more of the prophets of Prophets
. i- \ /t ,, , , , , revealthe
the kingdom of Judah arose, and sought to supply the sore spiritual
religious need of their countrymen. The people's laws, 'jawl*
which had lain hitherto too much in the hands of the
princes and their priests, these, they resolved, should now
be made known to all. But the mere publication of
a group of laws would do little to quicken the conscience,

60 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. ii. or inspire enthusiasm. Accordingly, the laws only con
stitute the framework for the real message, a setting
for a great hortatory appeal. The legislation thus
published was clearly not intended to be exhaustive.
It was not so much a complete code as a group of
excerpts from the statute-book. The legal portion
furnished but the basis for prophetic teaching. Behind
all, there hangs the sombre background of warning, and
the denunciation based on the recollection of the cap
tivity which had already swept away the kingdom of the
northern tribes.
At tr Thus were the old laws presented in a popular form,
not a as the 'people's book,' combining creed and law, exhort -
priesl's, . , , . . T , , r ,
book. ation and denunciation. It was a prophet s formula
tion of The law of Moses,' adapted to the requirements
of that later time. ' The law,' in the guise of prophecy,
this might become a spiritual rallying-point for Judah and
Jerusalem ; it might be the means of upholding spiritual
life even in the overthrow of national hopes.
Secret of Such an explanation satisfactorily accounts for the com-
tts power, bination of the homiletic style, characteristic of literature
in the seventh and sixth cent. B.C., with a formulation of
laws which included some of the most ancient statutes.
Nor is it difficult to understand how such a work,
during the reactionary reign of Manasseh, became lost to
view. That its accidental discovery in the eighteenth
year of King Josiah produced so astonishing an effect
can well be imagined. The evils, which the prophet
writer or writers had sought to combat, had grown
in intensity during the seventy or eighty years which
had elapsed. The reform, so necessary before, culminating
in the abolition of the high places, which Hezekiah had
failed to carry out successfully, had now been long

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 6l
delayed : the difficulty of effecting it must have become chap. ii.
proportionately greater ; the flagrant indulgence in open
idolatry, under the patronage of the court, had raised yet
more serious obstacles in the path of religious restoration.
In a single year ' the book of the law ' caused the re
moval of every obstacle. The laws it contained must,
many of them, have been familiar, by tradition, long
usage, and written codes. But in this book, laws, old
and new alike, lived in the spirit of Moses, and glowed
with the vehemence of prophecy. The tone in which
the law was here expounded to the people was something
new. It marked the close of one era ; it heralded the Its °fP°r-
tuneness.
beginning of another. It rang sharp and clear in the
lull that so graciously intervened before the tempest of
Babylonian invasion. The enthusiasm it aroused in the
young king communicated itself to the people. The
discovery of ' the book of the law ' procured at once
the abolition of the high places. The book was re
cognised as a divine gift, and lifted, though but for
a passing moment, the conception of the nation's re
ligion above the routine of the priesthood's traditional
worship. In the authority and sanctity assigned, at this con
juncture, to a book, we recognise the beginnings of the
Hebrew Canon. And. we cannot but feel, that it was
no mere chance, but the overruling of the Divine
Wisdom, which thus made provision for the spiritual
survival of His chosen people on the eve of their political
annihilation. The generation of Hilkiah had hardly passed away, /* historic
i ii • , • • r t i ii significance.
when the deportation of the citizens of Jerusalem and the
destruction of the Temple seemed to threaten the extinc
tion of pure worship. But Josiah's reign had seen the

62 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. u. dawn of that love and reverence for Scripture, with
which the true Israelite, whether Jew or Christian, was
destined ever afterwards to be identified. The coinci
dence is instructive. The collapse of the material
power of the house of Israel contained within it the seed
of its spiritual revival in the possession of the indestruc
tible Word of God.

CHAPTER III.
THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON (continued).
The Exile.
THE degree of veneration which ' the book of the chap. iii.
law' received from the people at large, can hardly at any 'Book of the
time have been very considerable before the exile. It^,'^/^"
certainly was not of a lasting character. Josiah's reforms d*viduais.
were effected, so to speak, from above downward. They
did not emanate from the people, but from the king.
Outside the court and a few sincerely religious minds
among the prophets and the priests, there were probably
not many who, after the first shock of surprise, troubled
themselves about the ascendancy temporarily obtained
by ' the book of the law.' The half century of idolatrous
government by Manasseh and his son had unfitted the
nation for the moral effort of acknowledging the claim
and submitting to the restraint of any new spiritual
authority. The verdict of the historian of the Books
of Kings makes it sufficiently evident, that Josiah's sons
and successors did nothing to promote the spiritual in
terests of their people. Nor, indeed, could we expect
from their short, disturbed, and calamitous reigns any
further popular recognition of the sacred authority vested
in ' the law.' And yet its influence upon those whom it

64 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iii. was most calculated to impress has left traces clear and
unmistakable. Perhaps we should not quite be justified
in saying that the influence of this book is alone re
sponsible for the so-called Deuteronomic style, wherever
it is to be found in the Old Testament. For the possi
bility must be admitted, that the style was but charac
teristic of a phase in Hebrew literature, and marked the
particular colouring peculiar to the prophetical writing
of the centuiy.
Distinctive But, even so, we shall probably be right to connect
and in the prevalence of Deuteronomic thought in later writings
'natiomu* with the feelings of veneration excited by 'the book of the
questions. jaw ' -phe appearance of the peculiar style and phrase
ology of Deuteronomy denotes something more than
the accidental resemblance of contemporary literature. It
implies that the Deuteronomic treatment of the nation's
history, for some reason, commended itself in an especial
way to later writers, and that, for the same reason, the
stamp of its religious thought was transferred to other
literature. Clearly the standard of life and doctrine, re
flected in ' the book of the law,' was adopted as the truest
utterance of the Spirit of Jehovah. It is a noteworthy
phenomenon in the history of Hebrew literature. Can
we, however, doubt as to the reason ? It was because,
though on a small scale, the influence of the written
Word, as the revelation of the Divine Will both for
the people and for the individual, had for the first time
made itself felt.
Of the influence, exerted upon religious thought by
this first instalment of the Hebrew Canon of Scripture,
we are able to form some judgment from writings which
were either actually composed, or compiled and edited,
in the century following upon the discovery of 'the

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 6^
book of the law,' and were afterwards admitted into the chap. iii.
Canon of Scripture.
The two most conspicuous examples are supplied by
the prophecies of Jeremiah and the Books of Kings.
Jeremiah's call to the ministry of prophecy took place influence
five years before the discovery of ' the book of the law ' miali/"''
(Jer. i. 2). He was one, probably, of a small but devoted
number, who recognised in this book a pledge of spiritual
hope, and joined himself heartily to the efforts of religious
revival on the basis of the newly-discovered, prophetic,
and popular formulation of the law.
Jeremiah is an author who places himself freely under
obligations to other writers. In his extant prophecies
he frequently makes allusions to incidents recorded in
the Pentateuch, without, however, directly citing from
materials incorporated in our Pentateuch. It is the
more noticeable, therefore, that such quotations as he
undoubtedly derives from the Pentateuch are all to be fer.'s quo/a
found in Deuteronomy, e.g. : — iv. 4 from Deut. x. 16 Deut.
(xxx. 6); v. 15, 17 from Deut. xxviii. 31, 49; xi. 4
from Deut. iv. 20 ; xi. 8 from Deut. xxix. 14, 19.
It will be remarked, that he does not introduce these
quotations with the formula of citation from a sacred
book. But this is perhaps not surprising in the early
days of the recognition of a sacred book. The time
had not yet come to rely upon the authority of a
quotation. The prophet was still the living oracle.
Jeremiah's testimony, in certain other respects, is full His recogni-
of importance. He refers not only to the existence of written law.
' the law,' but to the danger of its being perverted by the
recklessness or by the wilful malice of the scribes (ch.
viii. 8): 'How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of
the Lord is with us? But behold the false pen of the
F

66 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iii. scribes hath wrought falsely.' Here was a peril which
was especially likely to arise, when but few copies of ' the
law ' existed, and when the authority of the written law
was not fully recognised. In another passage, the prophet
rebukes the unscrupulousness of the priests, to whom
was entrusted the duty of instructing the people from
the law (ch. ii. 8): 'The priests said not, Where is
the Lord ? And they that handle the law knew me not' ;
and, possibly, he is there also referring to the sacred
deposit of the written law. But the abuses which he con
demns, the perversion and falsification of the written text,
belong to a time which as yet was as far as possible a
stranger to the awe that was eventually to gather round
the text of Canonical Scripture. Zephaniah, a younger
contemporary of Jeremiah, possibly calls attention to
the same neglect of the newly- established written
authority, when he complains of the priests, ' they have
profaned the sanctuary, they have done violence to the
law ' (iii. 4).
His Deuter- Jeremiah's own devotion to ' the law ' stands in marked
onomicstye. contrast t0 tne indifference and faithlessness of the
priests he denounces. A comparison of his Hebrew
style with that of Deuteronomy has justified some
scholars in the assertion, that the prophet must have
elaborated his oratorical prose upon an imitation of that
in the book of Deuteronomy. Whether this was actu
ally the case or not, a comparative study of the style
of the two books shows how the prophet must have
steeped himself in ' the book of the law,' whose words
and phrases he so frequently repeats, whose teaching he
so persistently enforces.
Turning to the Books of Kings, we shall, of course,
notice the use of the formula of citation in the passages

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 67
to which attention has already been called (e. g. 1 Kings chap, hi
ii. 3, 2 Kings xiv. 6), from which, as well as from the BookTof
whole narrative in 2 Kings xxii, xxiii, we gather the Kings'
compiler's attitude towards ' the book of the law.' In
these historical books, no less than in the prophecies of
Jeremiah, the impress of the Deuteronomic character
istics is everywhere observable. But, while its influence
may most easily be discovered in the use of particular
words and phrases, it is reproduced in a more subtle form
by the whole conception of Israelite history and Israelite
religion, presented in the narrative of the two kingdoms.
The Books of Kings apply the Deuteronomic standard
of judgment, that of the Covenant relations of the people
with Jehovah, to the interpretation of history.
In other books of the exilic period we may notice
the same influence at work. Thus, leaving out of the
question the historical framework of the Deuteronomic
laws which was possibly composed at or about this time,
we have only to mention the distinctly Deuteronomic
portions included in Joshua and Judges1, and to point
to traces of the same influence in the language of Isaiah II,
Ezekiel, and Zephaniah.
But, in spite of the influence which it thus clearly Sacred
exercised, the Deuteronomic law was still far from play- 7e7sv"fued
ing the part, which Canonical Scripture occupied in ?£*j °^.a
later times. For this we may see two reasons. Firstly,
the living voice of the prophet was still heard, and took
precedence in men's minds of any written oracle. The
sixth cent. B. C. saw Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the writer of
Isaiah II, Zechariah, and Haggai still labouring in the
midst of their countrymen. The pious Jew who listened
1 e. g. Jos. i, viii. 30-35, x. 28-43, xxii. I-8> xxiii ; Jud. ii. 11-23, "'¦ 4-6,
x. 6-18, &c
F 2

68 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iii. to them, and who reverted in thought to the history of the
past, could hardly do otherwise than believe, that, so long
as the spirit of prophecy remained, in it, rather than in
any writing, would be conveyed the message of the Lord
to His people. By comparison with the force of living
utterance, the authority of written law would appear
weak. And this impression would be increased, when
a prophet, like Ezekiel, could formulate a new ideal
scheme of worship (xl-xlviii), differing in many respects
from that contained in the written tradition of the law.
Moreover, in numerous details, it was not easy, and
loss of confidence would be the price of failure, to
reconcile the enactments in ' the book of the law ' with
the words of a yet older tradition, or to adapt them
to the changes in the outward circumstances of the
people consequent on the Captivity and the Return.
'TheBookof Secondly, a national Scripture, consisting only of the
the Law' . ...... . ,
insufficient. Deuteronomic law, carried with it its own evidence of
insufficiency. The recognition of such a Canon could
not fail to be followed by a demand for its expansion
and enlargement. The Deuteronomic ' book of the law '
presupposed a knowledge of the older laws ; it presup
posed also a knowledge of the early history of the
Israelite race. The veneration in which the Deutero
nomic formulation of the law was itself held, must have
added to the popular regard for those other documents,
without a knowledge of which so many of the allusions
in the Deuteronomic Scripture would have been un
intelligible. Now the writings on which Deuteronomy
rests, both for historical facts (e.g. Deut. i. 9-17, cf. Ex.
xviii ; Deut. ii. 26-32, cf. Num. xx, xxi) and for laws
(cf. Ex. xx-xxiii), are the Jehovist and Elohist narratives,
which, for some time before the beginning of the seventh

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 69
cent. B. c, had been united into a single composite chap. iii.
WOrk. Amplified
In a century of great literary productiveness, of which '^t^c'.
we have a few extant examples in the prophecies of
Jeremiah, of Ezekiel, of Isaiah 11, of Obadiah, of Ze-
chariah, and of Haggai, in the compilation of the Books
of Kings, not to mention the possible composition, in
the same era, of Job, Lamentations and certain Psalms,
it was almost sure to happen, that the heightened
veneration for the most ancient records would result in
some endeavour to connect them with ' the book of the
law ' that was so dependent on them. We conjecture,
therefore, that the Deuteronomic law having received
its definitely historical setting (Deut. i-iv, xxxii-xxxiv),
the Book of Joshua was added to it by the scribe, or
redactor, who so freely edited the Jehovist-Elohist ver
sion of the Joshua narrative in the spirit of the Deu
teronomic Scripture ; and that then, or about the same
time, a redaction of the whole Jehovist-Elohist compila
tion was prefixed to the Deuteronomic laws. Such a
step may at first have been taken for private edification,
or, conceivably, for convenience in public reading. In
any case, it was a natural step. We need not go far to
find the motives for it. Imagine the reverence with Israelite
which the pious Jew, in his Babylonian exile, would the Jewish
regard the archives that recorded the beginnings of his xie'
nation and the foundation of his faith. He saw his
people threatened with extinction in the land of their
captivity ; the ancient records told him that the founder
of his race was summoned alone by the voice of God
from this very land of the Chaldees, and preferred
before all the princes of Babylonia. He saw the Jews
lying helpless in the grasp of the mightiest empire in

70 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. in. Western Asia ; the history described to him a deliver
ance, which was the very birthday of Israel's nationality,
when they emerged from a condition of servitude under
Pharaoh, more intolerable than ever Nebuchadnezzar
had thought of imposing.
He saw in Babylon the most elaborate worship of
heathen deities, Bel, Nebo, Merodach and a host
of others, a worship performed with infinitely greater
splendour than was probably ever witnessed at the
Temple of Jerusalem, which now lay in ruins, and
yet attended with depths of moral degradation that
made Babylonian shamelessness a proverb. He read
in the ancient records of his race, how Jehovah had
manifested Himself to the Patriarchs, to Moses, and
to the prophets, in purity and love as well as in power ;
and he realized something of that pure and simple
spiritual revelation of Jehovah, which, through the
teaching of the Prophets, had ever been lifting Israel
up to higher and nobler conceptions of man and his
Maker. These were thoughts which shed a new light
upon the Divine purpose served by the nation's earliest
writings ; they revealed the possibility that the pen of
the scribe would transmit the expression of Jehovah's Will
in a more enduring form than even a prophet's voice.
Conjectured The exact manner in which the Deuteronomic laws
joint narra- were thus revised, and the Jehovist-Elohist writings con-
tiveandiaw. j0jne(j wjtjj them, will never be known. It was, as we
have said, an age of literary activity. Annals were being
collected, histories compiled, prophecies transcribed and
edited, everything, in short, was being done to preserve
the treasures of Hebrew literature and the memorials of
Hebrew religion, which had been threatened with ex
tinction in the national overthrow.

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 71
The addition of the Jehovist-Elohist writings to the chap. hi.
Deuteronomic was but one instance of the collecting
and compiling process that was going on. But the use
of this larger literary work would not have commended
itself all at once for general acceptance. For all we
know, it may have had to compete with other similar
compilations ; and have survived them on account of its
intrinsic superiority.
Conceivably the institution of the Synagogue, or the
germ of that institution, promoted the process of its
reception into special favour. Exiles in a foreign land
would there have gathered not only to hear the exhorta
tions of the prophet, but to listen as some priest or Levite
read aloud the traditions of the past, that recorded the
former mercies of Jehovah and His everlasting purpose
toward His chosen people.
But yet another process of compilation must have been Compilation
going on, of which we only know that a commencement Lawsdur-
was made at the beginning of the exilic period. This was in£Bxlle-
the gathering together of the numerous groups of
Priestly Laws. That the Priestly Laws existed in any
one complete compilation before the time of the exile,
so that they could be referred to, for literary purposes,
as a code well known to the people at large, is hardly
any longer possible to be maintained ; but that the cus
toms and institutions, with which these laws are con
cerned, had most of them existed for centuries, and
were provided for by appropriate regulations, is not
denied. The disasters of the exile doubtless stimulated devout
priests to collect and group together laws and pre
cedents, with which hitherto the priestly families had
alone been thoroughly conversant. For, after the

72 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iii. destruction of the Temple, the tradition both of the
Temple ritual and of religious ceremonial generally
was in peril of being forgotten. Desuetude was likely
to be more fatal in its influence than wilful neglect.
Ezekieiand It is in the writings of Ezekiel that we first find un-
the Priestly . , , , . . .
Laws. mistakable signs of acquaintance with a collection of
Priestly Laws that we can certainly identify. His lan
guage shows so close a resemblance to the Law of Holi
ness, that some scholars have even maintained that the
prophet was the author of Lev. xvii-xxvi. That view is
now generally rejected, but the resemblance is best ex
plained on the supposition that the collection of ' the Laws
of Holiness ' had not long been formed when Ezekiel wrote.
The individual laws themselves were, of course, most of
them very much older than his time ; but the prophet was
not only, as a priest (Ezek. i. 3), accurately acquainted
with their contents, he was also deeply penetrated with
their spirit, he assimilated their distinctive phraseology,
he adopted their special formulas. Jeremiah too was
a priest (Jer. i. 1) ; but he was unaffected by ' the Law of
Holiness.' The inference is obvious. In the land of the
captivity the priests grouped together and formulated
in writing the priestly regulations, to save them from
being lost. Hence it is Ezekiel, who was one of the
exiles ' in the land of the Chaldeans,' — and not Jeremiah
who remained in Palestine, — that testifies to their exist
ence. But though he was acquainted with ' the Law of
Holiness' as a separate collection, it is unlikely that the
other Priestly Laws, in their present form, were, in
Ezekiel's time, finally codified. It is true his knowledge
of their technical terms is- undeniable ; but this is only
what we should expect from a priest well versed in the
phraseology which had become traditional among the

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CANON. 73
members of the priestly caste 1. As compared with Chap- u1-
the mass of the Priestly Laws in the Pentateuch, the
Priestly Laws sketched by Ezekiel (cf. xliii. 13-xlvi. 24)
indicate a slightly earlier stage of ritual develop
ment. The arguments of critics, who, while acknow
ledging the antiquity of the institutions themselves,
have pointed out signs of their being represented in
a somewhat more ornate and developed form in the
Priestly Laws of the Pentateuch than in Ezekiel, cannot
well be resisted 2.
If so, we may regard the ' Law of Holiness ' in its
present literary form as a compilation of ancient cere
monial laws in conformity with the tradition at the begin
ning of the exile, and as illustrating the process by which
the Priestly Laws generally were afterwards collected.
The Book of Ezekiel shows with what freedom a prophet
could handle the priestly tradition. It shows that he
could not have regarded it as a fixed code admitting
of no substantial alteration. Changes so complete
as those which he contemplates in his Vision would
bring with them changes in worship, and he has no
compunction in propounding them.
The work of compiling the Priestly Laws was pro- Priestly
bably carried on at Babylon, which, as we know, was judnoTpub-
the scene of a vigorous literary activity among the hshed-
Jews. At a time and place which witnessed the
redaction of Judges, of Samuel, and of Kings, an
analogous process applied to the Priestly Laws and to
the version of the early narratives, which embodied the
teaching and tradition of the priests, is only what we
should expect. That this work had been completed, or
1 Cf. Smend's Ezekiel, Introd. p. xxvii.
a See Driver, Introd. Lit. 0. T. pp. 132, 133.

74 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. hi. that, if completed, the Priestly Code had as yet been
recognised as authoritative Scripture by the side of the
Deuteronomic ' book of the law ' when the Jews returned
from exile, may well be doubted. On the face of it,
we should expect that some interval would elapse be
tween the process of compiling the laws of the priestly
caste and the expression of a desire to unite them with
writings which had been, perhaps, for a generation or
more, the accepted means of popular religious instruc
tion. It is, therefore, noteworthy that Zechariah in
his prophecy makes no appeal to it ; and that Haggai
(ii. 11-12), when speaking of the priestly authority to
decide on matters of cleanness, represents the priests
delivering their sentence upon their own authority,
not prefacing it, as the scribes of a later day would
have done, by the formula, ' It is written.' The priests'
authority was based, no doubt, on their Priestly Law,
written or oral ; but the prophet's words suggest that
the requirements of the Priestly Law were not known
to the nation generally, and existed in no other form
than that of a private code in the hands of the priests
themselves *.
1 The objection that Ezra iii. 2 seems to indicate acquaintance with the
codified priestly law is only an apparent difficulty, and is not really ad rem.
Critical analysis has clearly shown that the chapter in question does not
come from the pen of Ezra, but from the chronicler (see my commentary
on 'Ezra and Nehemiah,' Introd. § 4, in the ' Cambridge Bible for Schools,'
Cambridge, 1893), who, writing in the third century B.C., everywhere
assumes that the completed priestly code underlay the whole Israelite
constitution from the earliest days of the monarchy. The passage cannot
therefore be alleged as evidence dating from the period of the return, of
which the narrative tells. It is only an instance of the chronicler's belief
that the priestly worship of the Temple, with which he was himself ac
quainted, had never varied — a position which is now known to be untenable.

CHAPTER IV
THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON.
The Law.
The Jews who returned from the exile (536 B. C.) chap. iv.
formed at Jerusalem a religious rather than a political 536 ac.
community. To them the first object to be achieved TheRffur"
J J from the
was to restore the Temple worship and to rebuild the Exile.
House of God. For the achievement of that object, and
for that only, had Cyrus granted them his merciful
decree. (Ezr. i. 1-4.) A small number only of the
children of Israel returned to their own land. A century
later the nation had become a sect, their constitution
a^Church, their 'law' a Bible.
During all the first years of privation and hardship
endured by this community, the only Scripture, recog
nised as such by the people, seems to have been the
Deuteronomic law. It was on the strength of this law
that Ezra took action against marriage with the 'strange
women' (Ezra ix. 1, 2, x. 3)1; and it is the teaching and
phraseology of Deuteronomy which colour the language
of Ezra's confession in Ezra ix. 6-15, and of Nehemiah's
prayer in Neh. i. 5-1 1. Undoubtedly an oral tradition of
priestly and ceremonial law was kept up by the priests
1 Cf. Neh. xiii. 1-3 with Deut. xiv. 2, xxiii. 3-6.

76 THE canon of the old testament.
Chap. iv. who ministered at the restored Temple. But either this
had no close resemblance to the completed priestly code
familiar to us in the Pentateuch ; or, if it had, it was
most negligently and carelessly administered by the
priests. There is no escape from the alternative. At
Neh. viii. least, this would appear from Neh. viii. 13-18, where
people we learn, that until the people received instruction
icVm°piIt!cfde frorn Ezra they had been ignorant, or had been kept
of taw. ;n ignorance, of the right way to celebrate the great
Feast of Tabernacles. Such a degree of ignorance
on the part, not of the common people only, but of
the heads of the great houses, and even of the priests
and the Levites, would be to us incomprehensible, if we
could suppose that the completed code of Priestly Laws
had all along formed part of the sacred Canon of Scrip
ture. On the supposition, however, that the Priestly
Laws had hitherto been mainly orally transmitted, and
then perhaps only fragmentarily and too often negligently,
the contrast between the defect of custom and the re
quirement of the letter becomes in some degree intel
ligible. The Deuteronomic law (Deut. xvi. 13-17) had
said nothing of the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles
by dwelling in booths. The construction of booths is
required, in the precepts of the Priestly Law, as a dis
tinctive symbolic feature of the feast. Until Ezra made
it known, the requirement had not been observed. Was
it that the custom had been forgotten by the people?
If so, the Priests had either neglected to teach the
people the Law, or they had failed to preserve the tradi
tion of the Law faithfully. The conclusion is almost
certain, with this striking example before our eyes, that
the full Priestly Law could not have been, at least
popularly, known in Jerusalem before the year 444 B. c

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 77
It will be remembered that we have already regarded chap. iv.
it as probable that the compilation of the Priestly Laws
had gradually taken place among the Jews in Babylon,
and that with them there had also been combined the
great Jehovist and Elohist narrative and the Deutero
nomic writings. The possession of the combined work
would acquaint those who studied it with a complete
scheme of Israelite worship and ceremonial based upon
the tradition derived from earliest times. Whether or no itsposses-
such a tradition occasionally contradicted itself on certain source of
details, was immaterial, so long as whatsoever was pro- f"mer-
nounced to be ancient, and whatsoever of sacred custom,
was faithfully committed to writing. It is clear that
such a work would place any careful student, who took
the trouble to master its contents, upon a footing of
equality with, and even of superiority to, priests who
only relied upon the memory of individual families,
upon local tradition, and upon personal usage. He
would be possessed, in a compact form, of all that a
single priestly memory could retain, and, in addition, of
all that survived of cognate interest, to be derived from
other sources. The minute study of the priestly as
well as of the other national laws would thus enable any
devout Jew, ardent for religious reform, to occupy an un
assailable position both in rallying the people to a stan
dard of purer worship, and in combating any tendency to
negligence or unfaithfulness arising from the ignorance
or worldliness of the priesthood. But, before arraigning
the priesthood, the reformer would have to assure him
self of the sympathy of the people. Until he could gain
a hearing, it would be labour lost to invoke the national
enthusiasm for the stricter observance of the ancient
laws.

78 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. Ezra the scribe, as we are told, ' went up from Babylon,
Esra. and he was a ready scribe in the law of Moses ' (Ezra vii.
6). He was ' the scribe of the words of the command
ments of the Lord, and of his statutes to Israel ' (Ezra
vii. ii). The law of his God was in his hand (Ezra
vii. 14).
On the strength of the words just quoted, Hebrew
legend of later time told how Ezra was inspired to
dictate from memory all the twenty-four books of the
Hebrew Canon of Scripture, that had been destroyed by
the Chaldeans at the destruction of Jerusalem (4 Esdras
xiv. 39-48). On the strength of the same words, it has
been suggested in modern times, that Ezra himself was
the author of the Priestly Laws, which, with the help of
Nehemiah, he succeeded in imposing upon the Jews of
Jerusalem. For the Jewish legend there is, as we shall
see, no foundation in historical fact *. There is scarcely
more solid foundation for the other wild specula
tors not tion. The extant portions of Ezra's own • memoirs
'ofthelUr (Ezra viii-x) show no resemblance whatever to the
PLawlly characteristic style of the Priestly Laws. The latter, as
we have already pointed out, consist of various groups
of regulations, which, dealing, as a rule, with different
subjects, every now and then reintroduce topics that
have already been handled ; and, in such cases, the
obvious variations, not to say contradictions, between
one passage and another, cannot be reconciled with any
theory of unity of date or unity of authorship (e. g. Num.
iv. 3, &c. with Num. viii. 23-26 ; Lev. iv. 13-21 with
Num. xv. 22-26). It has, indeed, been objected that the
sameness of the style that runs through the Priestly Laws,
coupled with the occurrence of late forms of Hebrew,
See Excursus A.

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 79
might be regarded as an argument in favour of the view chap. iv.
that a single writer, if not Ezra himself, at least one
who was of Ezra's period, should be credited with their
composition. But the general sameness of style is a
characteristic that arises not so much from unity of
authorship as from the continuous use of technical lan
guage relating to a special class of subjects. As to the
occurrence of late Hebrew forms, their presence must be
admitted, though not in the degree claimed for them
(e.g. by Giesebrecht, Z. A. T. W., 1881, 177-276).
They are to be regarded as evidence of the date at
which the work of compilation was performed ; they are
fatal to the maintenance of the antiquity, not of the laws,
but of their medium, the vocabulary, by which they have
been transmitted to us.
It appears to me quite useless to attempt to ascribe to
any one man this work of compilation and redaction.
Such a process would have been long and gradual. It
had probably been going on continuously ever since the
beginning of the exile. Whether, therefore, Ezra, 15°
years later, had any direct share in the work, is a
question upon which it would be vain to speculate.
He was a scribe ; and, so far, it is just possible he may
have been directly connected with the last phases of the
process. So much, or rather so little, can be granted of
the alleged connexion of Ezra with the formation of the
Canon of Scripture.
With the history of its acceptance, however, his direct Possibly
connexion is proved by unequivocal testimony. The muigator in
completed compilation, which had been executed byJer "¦-"-¦'
the scribes of Babylon, had not found its way to Jeru
salem before the arrival of Ezra (457 B. a). The possi
bility suggests itself, that Ezra's mission to Jerusalem

8o THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. was undertaken for the purpose of promulgating the
completed Book of the Law, and, at the same time of
establishing the religion of Jehovah, once for all, upon a
footing of publicity and of immutability from which it
could not be dislodged by any unscrupulousness, treach
ery, or neglect on the part of the priesthood. From the
Memoirs of Ezra and Nehemiah it is evident that an
influential section of the priests was not to be trusted.
We are told that Ezra started upon his journey to
Jerusalem having as his object in life, ' To seek the law
of the LORD and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes
and judgments ' (Ezra vii. 10). For upwards of thirteen
years he apparently made no attempt to publish to the
people the Book of the Law. No sooner, however, did
Nehemiah arrive, as governor, than Ezra took steps to
make it known. We are left to conjecture the motive
for his delay. Was it due to the opposition that his
first measure of reform encountered (Ezra ix, x) ? or was
he content quietly to devote himself to the task of
completely mastering the details of the Law, before
venturing to promulgate it, resolved deliberately to wait,
until the opportunity of popular enthusiasm, joined
with the certainty of official support, should absolutely
assure him of success ?
Neh. viii-x. The account of the occasion, on which he made known
^helaw. to tne people the contents of the completed ' Law,' is
narrated in a document written by one who was almost,
if he was not actually, a contemporary of the event.
The Chronicler has inserted the description in the middle
of the Memoirs of Nehemiah (Neh. viii-x). Into the
various questions, relating to that scene and its narrative,
this is not the place to enter with any minuteness. So
much, however, is quite clear: (i) that the Book of the

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 8l
Law, introduced by Ezra, and publicly read by him and chap. iv.
the Levites before the Temple and in the presence of the
assembled people, was to the mass of his countrymen a
new book ; (2) that the fulfilment of its requirements
apparently caused alterations in usage, which — and it can
hardly be an accidental coincidence— correspond with
variations that, in a comparison between the Deuterono
mic and the Priestly Laws, are distinctive of the latter
and, we believe, the more recently formulated code
(e.g. observance of Tabernacles, Deut. xvi. 13-17, Num.
xxix. 12-38 ; payment of tithe, Deut. xiv. 22-29, Num.
xviii. 21-32) l ; (3) that, in the promulgation of this
book, the Levites were more conspicuously associated
with Ezra than the priests ; (4) that, from henceforward,
the requirements of the Priestly Laws are unquestionably
complied with in the events recorded by the historian
and by Nehemiah, and are presupposed in all Jewish
literature later than the time of Ezra.
The following brief explanation, it is hoped, will suffice
to make the circumstances clear. Assured of the favour
and active support of Nehemiah, Ezra published to the
people the law which was ' in his hand.' It consisted, as
we suppose, of the final expansion of the people's Book
of the Law ; with Deuteronomist law and Jehovist-
Elohist narrative had now been combined the Priestly
Narrative and the Priestly Laws. The publication of the
work heralded a radical change in the religious life of
the people. The People's Book was no longer to be
confined to the prophetic re-formulation of laws, which
had once so deeply aroused Jewish thought and influenced
Jewish literature. The priesthood was no longer alone to
possess the key of knowledge as to the clean and the un-
1 Cf. Neh. viii. 14-17; a. 32, 38.
G

82 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. clean, the true worship and the false (cf. Ezek. xliv. 23, 24).
Their hereditary monopoly was to be done away. The
instruction of the people was to pass from the priest to
the scribe. Not what ' the law ' was, but what its meaning
was, was henceforth to call for authoritative explanation.
The Law itself was to be in the hands of the people.
The conjuncture was a critical one for the history of
Judaism. There was a sharp division between the High
a crisis. Priest's party and the supporters of Ezra. The records
of Ezra and Nehemiah leave us in no practical doubt
on the point. The priests were foremost in supporting
a policy of free intercourse with the heathen, of frater
nizing, for the sake of material advantages, with the
leaders of the Samaritans (cf. Ezra ix. 1, 2, x. 18-22,
Neh. vi. 10-14, x»i. 4-14, 28). The opposition of Ezra
and the energetic action of Nehemiah averted the evil
effects of this policy. But it is probable that, if the
patriotic enthusiasm of the people had not been awakened
by Nehemiah's successful restoration of the walls, Ezra
and his colleagues would not have been strong enough,
in the face of the priests, to establish upon a firm footing
the public recognition of a larger Canon of Scripture.
The far-reaching effect of their action may not then
have been so obvious as the immediate advantage to be
obtained. The immediate advantage was, that a know
ledge of the Priestly Law was placed within the reach of
every Jew, and that a fatal barrier was thus raised against
any attempt at fusion with the stranger and the Samari
tan1. The far-reaching effect was that a standard of
holy and unholy, right and wrong, clean and unclean,
was delivered to the Jews as a people, so that all Jews,
1 From this time forward intrigues for combination with the Samaritans
cease, and the Samaritans become a rival religious community.

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 83
whether of the Dispersion or in Judea, whether in Babylon chap.iv.
or in Alexandria or within the walls of Jerusalem, could
equally know the will of the Lord, and equally interpret
the difficulties of moral and social life by appeal to the
' Torah,' to the verdict, not given by the mouth of the
priest or the prophet, but obtained by search into the
letter of ' the Law.'
In effecting this change, Ezra, and Nehemiah gave PHestiy
its final shape to the religious legalism of their people. *
As to the priests, while it is probable that some, for
popularity's sake, refused, and others who favoured the
cause of Ezra did not wish, to stand aside on the
occasion of the popular acknowledgment of the Covenant,
which was ratified on the basis of the publication of this
'law' (Neh. ix. 38, x. 2-8), their attitude as a body can
not be regarded as having been warmly sympathetic.
The absence of Eliashib's name among ' those that
sealed ' (Neh. x. 1, 2) has naturally, but perhaps unneces
sarily, excited attention; it may be that his name is
included in that of Seraiah, the name of his ' father's
house ' : but, even so, the evident hostility which Nehe
miah experienced at the hands of the High Priest's
family (Neh. xiii), coupled with the greater prominence
of the Levites in viii. 4, 7, 9, ix. 4, 38, makes it probable,
that the policy of Ezra and his colleagues was far from
having the support of the aristocratic and priestly caste.
But, in spite of all obstacles, their policy (triumphed. It
was never reversed. Judaism took its rise from their
policy, that of national submission to the yoke of ' the
Law.' That ' the Law,' thus acknowledged by the people as Ezra's Book
sacred and accepted as binding, was substantially the "M^ aw
same as our Pentateuch, is generally admitted. With Pentateuch.
G 2

84 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. iv. the exception of a few possible later insertions, and of
certain minor alterations, due to an occasional revision
of the text, ' the Torah ' has probably descended to us
very little changed.
itsposition, Naturally the full significance and value of such a
at firsts tin-
defined. ' Canon ' of Scripture would not at first be understood.
Its influence would only be very gradually obtained.
None could have foreseen its future absolute sway. Long
habit had accustomed the priesthood to adapt the details
of their regulations so as to meet the changing cir
cumstances of their day. It was not likely that this
elasticity of administration, with all the opportunities
which it permitted of relieving burdens and advancing
interests, would all at once be surrendered. For some
time at least after the authority of ' the Law ' had been
accepted, divergencies in detail would be openly per
mitted or tacitly practised, without any thought of dis
honouring the sacred Book, so long as the great prin
ciples of the legislation were safeguarded. It has been
suggested that such variations in practice Sometimes led
to interpolations being made in the Priestly Laws, and
that certain difficulties presented by different accounts of
(a) the burnt-offering, (b) the Temple-tribute, (c) the tithe,
(d) the age of Levitical service, as well as by the text
of Exodus (xxxv-xl), are only intelligible on the sup
position, that a long time elapsed before the sanctity of
Scripture effected uniformity of practice, or protected
the purity of the text of Scripture.
Possible (a) The law of burnt-offering in Lev. vi. 8-13, which in
tions'" language and style is apparently the most ancient extant,
turn/*'"'"'1 ^oes not contam any enactment for an evening burnt-
offering. offering. In the history of the Monarchy we have men
tion of an evening meal-offering (cf. 2 Kings xvi. 15),

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 85
but not of an evening burnt-offering. Now in the chap, iv,
apparently later Priestly law of Ex. xxix. 38-42, Num.
xxviii. 1-8, we find both a morning and an evening
burnt-offering commanded ; and reference to a double
daily burnt-offering distinctly occurs in Neh. x. 33 and
Chronicles (e. g. 2 Chron. xxxi. 3). The view, that the
laws of Ex. xxix. 38-42, Num. xxviii. 1-8 were inserted
after that codification of the Priestly Laws, to which Lev.
vi. 8-13 belongs, offers a solution which should not be
hastily set aside. The same variation is patent, both in
the laws and in the narratives. Either then the men
tion of ' the continual burnt-offering' in Neh. x. 33 refers
to a new practice, which was afterwards expressed in
the law of Ex. xxix, Num. xxviii. by a later insertion,
or the law in Lev. vi, supported by 2 Kings xvi, con
tains but a partial and incomplete statement. Whether
we see a variety in custom in the one case, or an incom
plete description in the other, we must admit that
changes in practice, real or implied, could easily arise.
(b) In Ex. xxx. 11-16 a poll-tax of half a shekel is 0>)4 skekei
ii- , 1 r 1 Temple-tax:
commanded in every year that a census was taken of the
Israelite populace. From this irregular payment an
annual Temple-tax would of course differ considerably.
But it has naturally called for remark, that in Neh. x. 32
the annual Temple-tax is assessed at one-third shekel a
head, while in later times the Temple tribute-money was
half a shekel (Matt. xvii. 24), a sum obviously based
on Ex. xxx. 11-16. Either, therefore, the one-third
shekel marked the prevailing poverty of Nehemiah's
time, or the sum mentioned in Ex. xxx. 11-16, agreeing
with later custom, marks an alteration in the Priestly
Law made after Nehemiah's time, substituting \ shekel
for \. In either case, freedom of action, in reference to

cattle ;

86 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. important details contained in the law, would be illus
trated by this instance.
(c) Tithe of (c) A yet more remarkable example is furnished by
the Priestly Law of tithe. There can be very little
doubt that in the earlier Deuteronomic law (Deut. xiv.
22-29) and in the regulations laid down by Nehemiah
(Neh. x. 35-39, xii. 44, xiii. 5), the tithe was only sup
posed to have reference to the produce of the field, and
consisted mainly of corn, wine, and oil.
But in the Priestly Law of tithe in Lev. xxvii. 30-33,
' the law of the tithe of the field ' (vv. 30, 31) is followed
by ' the law of the tithe of the herd and the flock '
(vv. 32, 33). The only support for this enormous addi
tion to the burden, laid upon the people for the main
tenance of the priests and Levites, is found in the
narrative of the Chronicles (2 Chron. xxxi. 6) ; where,
however, the mention of the tithe of oxen and sheep
reads suspiciously like a later gloss 1-
The difficulty is not one that admits of full discussion
here. But clearly, if the tithe of cattle was a custom
known in Nehemiah's time, it was not exacted ; and if it
was not known then, it either had dropped altogether
out of usage, or it had never yet been introduced.
Whether, then, it was originally in the Priestly Law and
had become obsolete, or is a late interpolation, later than
Nehemiah's time, we have, in this case also, proof that
scruples concerning the text of Scripture did not for
some considerable time arise in sufficient force to secure
1 2 Chron. xxxi. 5, ' And as soon as the commandment came abroad, the
children of Israel gave in abundance the firstfruits of corn, wine, and oil,
and honey, and of all the increase of the field ; and the tithe of all things
brought they in abundantly.' Ver. 6, 'And the children of Israel and
Judah, that dwelt in the cities of Judah, they also brought in the tithe of
oxen and sheep, and the tithe of consecrated things,' &c.

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 87
for it immunity from interpolation or rigid uniformity in chap. iv.
the observance of the letter.
(d) A well-known illustration of the composite nature (d) Age of
of the Levitical Law is presented by the requirements sewia.
for the age at which a Levite could enter upon his work
of ministration. In Num. iv. 3, &c. the age of service is
reckoned as from thirty to fifty, but in Num. viii. 24 it
is reckoned as from twenty-five to fifty. In Ezr. iii. 8,
and in 1 Chron. xxiii. 24-27, however, the active service
of the Levites is stated by the Chronicler as commencing
at the age of twenty. Whether or no it is the case that
this reduction in the age arose in post-exilic times from
the difficulty of obtaining the service of any Levites at all
(cf. Ezra viii. 15), it exemplifies the freedom with which
even in the Chronicler's time (circ. 250 B.C.) variations
from the law were considered unimportant in matters of
detail. (e) The strangest and most difficult problem, arising (<=) Text of
Ex. xxxv-xl
from the freedom with which the Torah, in spite of its in i.xx
sanctity, was treated in early times, is presented by the
condition of the text" throughout a long section of
Exodus (xxxv-xl). This passage, which repeats almost
word for word the substance of a previous section
(xxv-xxxi). differs considerably in the Greek text from
the Hebrew both by variety of order and by omission of
verses. Now the LXX version of the Pentateuch was
probably composed in the third century B.C., and is the
most carefully executed portion of the Greek Bible.
How then did these variations arise ? The answer is not
apparent. But the inference is certainly permissible,
that some time must have elapsed before the veneration
of the law effectually prevented alterations or minor
efforts at textual revision.

version.

88

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Chap. IV.
If occasional
revision of
old, no
introductionof new sub
jects of
legislation
permitted :
e. g. wood-
offerings, Neh. x. 34.

Tendency
towards uniform text.

On the other hand, the temptation to introduce fresh
regulations, dealing with new subjects, seems on the
whole to have been successfully resisted. A signal
instance of this is afforded by the mention of the
regulations for wood-offerings. Wood-offerings must,
at all times, have formed an important contribution
to the sanctuary ; and, probably, in consequence of the
wholesale destruction of wood by the Chaldeans at the
siege of Jerusalem, wood had become, in Nehemiah's
time, exceedingly scarce and proportionately expensive.
The charge of providing the needful supply of wood, for
the sacrifices of the Temple, was distributed among tb?
leading families, who took it in turn, the rotation being
decided by lot, to furnish as much as was required (Neh.
x. 34). From Nehemiah's own words it is clear that
that energetic governor regarded the establishment of
this rule as one of the most important reforms he had
been enabled to carry out (Neh. xiii. 31). It deserves
notice, therefore, that, while, in Neh. x. 34, the rule itself
is described by the formula, ' As it is written in the law,'
no such law is to be found in the Pentateuch. The
reference of the formula can hardly be limited to the
mention of the law of the burnt-offering (Lev. vi. 8-13) ;
for the reference to the burnt-offering in Neh. x. 34 is
perfectly general in terms. It is more probable that, inas
much as the regulation dealt with a subject unprovided
for in existing statutes, it was decided that the introduc
tion of such a novelty into the Law should be avoided.
Whatever freedom of treatment the Canon of ' the Law '
received at first, there can be no doubt, that so soon as
the Priestly Laws became public property they began to
lose elasticity. It was only a matter of time. Once
regarded as universal in application, they would soon

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 89
become stereotyped in form. The scribe's task of tran- chap. iv.
scribing the letter and of explaining its application to
the daily affairs of life, was necessarily based on the
uniformity of the text. The multiplication of copies,
which would result from the law becoming a people's
book and ceasing to be a priest's book, soon raised a
barrier against any extensive change. The public read
ing of the law which seems to have been continued from
the great example of Ezra (Neh. viii) was a distinctive
feature of Synagogue worship ; and liturgical use, while
it added sanctity to the books, made it the more necessary
that copies of the book should not vary in their
contents. That this first Hebrew Canon of Scripture consisted First
of the Pentateuch, and of the Pentateuch only, if nowhere canon
directly affirmed, is implied by all the converging in- Fentaieuch-
direct evidence of which we can make use.
(a) It is implied, by the fact, that, from the earliest ' Torah:
. (a) Always
time at which mention is made of the Hebrew Canon, distinct
the Torah is mentioned separately as a distinct group £rottp-
from ' the Prophets and the other writings ' (cf. Prologue
to Ecclesiasticus).
(b) It is implied by the exceptional reverence paid to 0>) Object of
the Law of Moses in the post-exilic writings of the Old reverence in
Testament. The compiler of the Chronicles and of Ezra scripture.
and Nehemiah assumes the authority of the law in its
finished form throughout all the centuries of the history
which he narrates. The prophet Malachi (iv. 4) appeals
to the Law of Moses as the accredited standard of doc
trine for all Israel. In the Book of the Psalms, though
it is true we have comparatively little reference to the
details of ceremonial, the veneration for the Law, ex
pressed by the writer of such a late Psalm as Psalm cxix,

90 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. iv. shows how unique was the influence of the Jewish Law,
the earthly emblem of the Psalmist's ideal. It is only in
the Book of Daniel (ix. 2), a book which, in its present
literary form, was probably not composed until the
second century B.C., that we first find any mention of
other writings beside the Law, to which appeal could
be made as an authoritative standard.
(c) in later (c) It is implied in the special deference accorded to
literature, the Pentateuch by Jews of later time, in comparison
with that which they paid to their other Scriptures. It
is the Torah which is the subject of the son of Sirach's
eulogy in Ecclus. xxii. 23 ; and it is the Torah, as the
mainstay of Judaism, that Antiochus labours to de
stroy (1 Mace. i. 57). It is the translation of the Penta
teuch into Greek which was not only the first instalment
of the Septuagint version, but also, if we may judge from
the rendering and the style, the only portion of the ver
sion which was carried out upon some definite plan, or
executed with something of the accuracy and care that
would be demanded for an authoritative edition. We
may surely suppose, that, if at the time when the Torah
was translated into Greek, it constituted the whole
Scriptures of the Jews, one authoritative Greek version
would have been prepared for public use in the Syna
gogues. The unequal and often very defective transla
tion of the other books shows that the work, in their case,
is the result of private and independent literary enter
prise. It is reasonable to regard this as a proof that the
sacred authority of the Prophets and Writings was not
for some time recognised, not indeed until their transla
tion had become established by common use among
Greek-speaking Jews. Similarly, it is to the Pentateuch
far more than to any other portion of the Hebrew Scrip-

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 9 1
tures, that Philo, the great representative of Alexandrine chap. iv.
Judaism, ascribes the highest gift of divine inspiration.
(d) It is implied by the fact, that from the Torah, and H)inSyna.
from the Torah alone, for some considerable time at least, Svfa' *'r
lessons were systematically read in the public services of
the Synagogue. It was not till a later time, as we shall see,
that lessons were added from the Books of the Prophets ;
and in their case it does not appear certain, that any
systematic division into lessons was adopted until after
the Christian era (Luke iv. 17). Even in later days the
Lesson from the Prophets consisted merely of an extract,
intended to supplement and illustrate that from the
Torah. The Prophets were never read continuously
through, like the Law. The earlier use and the earlier
liturgical division of ' the Law ' suggest its earlier recog
nition as Scripture.
(e) It is implied by the fact, that the title of 'the Law ' (e) Titieof
was long afterwards used to designate the whole Hebrew s£^tu"'
Canon of Scripture, partly as a reminiscence of earlier
usage, partly as a tribute to the higher esteem in which the
Law was held. Cf. John x. 34, xii. 34, xv. 25, 1 Cor. xiv. 21.
One piece of evidence of a yet more direct character Direct
is offered by the Samaritan version of the Pentateuch. s'amTritan
The Canon of Scripture recognised by the Samaritan J'"'iaUucn-
community, even down to the present day, consists of
the Pentateuch alone. It has been very generally and
very naturally supposed, that the Samaritan community
obtained their Torah, which, save in a certain number of
comparatively unimportant readings, is identical with the
Jewish Torah, from the renegade Jewish priest, of the
name, according to Josephus, of Manasseh, who instituted
on Mount Gerizim a rival temple worship to that on
Mount Moriah (Jos. Ant. xi. 7 and 8). Josephus has

92 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. placed this event in the days of Alexander the Great ;
but here he is probably a victim of the strangely erro
neous views of chronology, which the Jews of his own
and of later times have commonly entertained respecting
their nation's history in the interval between the Return
from the exile and the victories of Alexander. But as
Nehemiah makes no mention of the building of the
Temple on Mount Gerizim, it is very possible that that
event was considerably later than the expulsion of the
High Priest's grandson, and that Josephus' chronology
may be correct so far as regards the date of the erection
of the rival Samaritan shrine. We need have little
hesitation in connecting Josephus' account with the
ejection by Nehemiah of the grandson of the high
priest, Eliashib, who had married the daughter of
Sanballat, and had thus disgraced the family of the
high priest (Neh. xiii. 28). The latter event happened
almost exactly a century before the age of Alexander's
victories. It is hardly likely that two events, so similar
in character and yet so near in point of time, narrated
the one by Nehemiah and the other by Josephus, should
be unconnected with one another. We may safely
assume that the events are the same, and that the grand
son of Eliashib is the renegade priest, Manasseh. When
this priest, at the head probably of a disaffected Jewish
faction, joined the Samaritan community and established
an exact reproduction of Jewish worship, he, or sub
sequent followers, may be presumed to have carried with
them the Scriptures that regulated the Temple worship
and were read in the services of the Synagogue. Now,
if the Canonical Scripture of the time consisted of the
Torah alone, we have here an explanation of the fact
that the Torah alone was adopted by the Samaritans

THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST CANON. 93
to be their Scripture. They adopted that which the chap. iv.
schismatic Jews brought with them. The Scriptures,
whose authority was recognised by the Jews after the
occurrence of the schism, never found a place in the
Samaritan Canon. Of course, it may fairly be contended,
that the Samaritans would not be likely to adopt into
their Canon any books that might appear to glorify
the Temple at Jerusalem. But there were books against
which they could take no such exception, as, for instance,
the Book of Judges, which dealt especially with the heroic
deeds performed in the northern tribes, or the Book of
the prophet Hosea, who was an Ephraimite. If these had
already been accepted as Canonical at Jerusalem, the
Samaritans would have had no reason for excluding them
at the time when they admitted the Torah of the Jews.
Had they once accepted into their Canon any other
books beside the Torah, the scrupulous conservatism in
religious matters, which has always distinguished the
Samaritan community, could not have failed to preserve
either a text of the books themselves or the tradition of
their usage. The limitation, therefore, of the Samaritan
Canon to the Torah affords presumptive evidence that, at
the time when the Samaritan worship was instituted, or
when it received its final shape from the accession of
Jewish malcontents, the Canon of the Jews at Jerusalem
consisted of the Torah only.
The expulsion of Eliashib's grandson took place about 'The Law'
• first Hebrew
the year 432 B. C. Approximately, therefore, in this date canon of
we have a terminus ad quern for the conclusion of the first ^flte^
Hebrew Canon of the Scripture. Before that year, its BC-
limits had already been practically, if not officially, deter
mined. At that time, no other writing was regarded by
the Jews as sacred and authoritative. This was the

94 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. beginning of the era of the Sopherim or Scribes. Under
their influence Jewish religion received the legalistic
character which ever afterwards clung to it. The power
of the prophets had passed into the hands of the scribes.
The religion of Israel had now become, and was destined
henceforth to remain, the religion of a book ; and the
nucleus of that book was the Torah.

Appendix to Chapter IV.
It is necessary here to append -a few remarks upon the chap. iv.
Samaritan Version of the Pentateuch, the importance of _H
which, in the history of the Hebrew Scriptures, will be
apparent to every thoughtful student. Important, how
ever, as the subject is, it will be felt to belong more
properly to the province either of an inquiry into the
history of the Hebrew text, or of an investigation into
the history of the Hebrew characters. But in recent
years the evidence of the Samaritan Pentateuch has
been loudly proclaimed to be the rock upon which the
modern criticism of the Pentateuch must inevitably make
shipwreck. Under these circumstances an apology is
hardly needed for briefly touching upon the subject.
The Samaritan Pentateuch, as is well known, has been The old
preserved to us in the old Hebrew, or, as some prefer to characters
say, in the Canaanite, characters, and not in the square %^irUan
Hebrew, or Aramaean, characters, which are so familiar version.
to us. Upon this interesting fact of the preservation
of the old Hebrew characters in the Samaritan Penta
teuch, attention has been concentrated. It is this fact
which in some quarters is alleged to furnish a conclusive
proof that the Pentateuch, practically in its present form,
existed before the Exile. The Jews, it is said, changed

96

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Talmud.

chap. iv. their method of writing from the old style to the new
_Ifl while they were still in Babylon ; and, accordingly, the
Samaritan Pentateuch, which is written in the characters
of the old style, must, it is alleged, at least have been
copied from pre-exilic exemplars, written in the old char
acters, and may even have been derived from Israelite
copies, which had survived the overthrow of the Northern
Kingdom in the year 721 B.C.
Everything, according to this contention, turns upon
the accuracy of the principal assertion, that the Jews
changed their style of writing while they were in exile.
The evidence upon which it rests consists of a legend
which ascribes to Ezra the merit of devising the square
Hebrew characters. We meet with this legend in the
Talmud : ' R. Jose said, Ezra was worthy that the Torah
should have been given by his hand ; but although it
was not revealed through him, the characters in which it
was written were altered by him V But apparently the
earliest mention of it in literature is to be found in the
writings of the Fathers. Origen records the Jewish
belief that Ezra, during the Exile, had committed to the
Jews a different alphabet from that which had previously
Eusebius. been in use 2. Eusebius (if indeed it is not Jerome who
inserts the statement in his translation) mentions the
current belief that Ezra gave the Jews their Scriptures
ferome. written in a new style of writing3. Jerome goes into
1 Jer. Meg. i. lo; b. Sanh. 21 b, quoted in Hamburger's Real Encyklo-
padie, Bd. 2, p. 1212.
2 Origen, Selecta in Pss. ii. I, 2 ; ii. 539, $aol ycip rhv "EoSpav iv tjj
aixixaXtaaia Irkpovs avrots xilPalcTVPas napd. tovs irportpovs irapad^bauevai
(ed. Lommatzsch, torn. xi. 396 f.).
3 Euseb. Chronicon, Lib. i. § 5, ' Is (Esdras) enim fertur cunctas a Deo
dictas Scripturas in mentem sibi revocasse, easque Judaeis tradidisse novis
Hebraicarum literarum formis expressas.'

Origen.

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER IV. 97
greater detail: 'The Samaritans,' he says, 'moreover chap. iv.
transcribe the Pentateuch of Moses exactly letter for — -
letter ; they differ only in the shapes and minor details
of the characters. And it is certain that, after the capture
of Jerusalem and the restoration of the Temple under
Zerubbabel, Ezra, the scribe and teacher of the law,
devised these other letters which we now use. For right
up to that time the same characters had been employed
by the Samaritans and the Jews V Epiphanius writes Epipha-
to very much the same effect: 'When Ezra went up """
from Babylon, his desire was to separate Israel from the
rest of the nations, in order that the stock of Abraham
might not appear to be mingled with those dwellers in
the land ( — 'am haarec) who hold the Law but who do not
(accept) the Prophets (i.e. the Samaritans). He therefore
completely changed the old style of writing, giving up
the pointed character, because the use of that style had
already been adopted by the Samaritans 2.'
The unhistorical character of the legend is recognis- Legend un
able upon its very surface. Not a trace of it is found in
the Canonical Scriptures, in the Apocrypha, or in the
writings of Josephus. Its first appearance in literature
is six centuries after the period of Ezra ; and Jewish
legend was notoriously active with the name of Ezra, to
whom it promiscuously ascribed any event or institution
1 Jerome, Prologus Galeatus, 'Samaritani etiam Pentateuchum Moysi toti-
dem Uteris scriptitant, figuris tantum et apicibus discrepantes. Certumque
est Ezram Seribam legisque doctorem post capta Hierosolyma et instaura-
tionem templi sub Zorobabel alias literas reperisse quibus nunc utimur, cum
ad illud usque tempus iidem Samaritanorum et Hebraeorum characteres
fuerint.' 2 Epiphanius, De xii Gemmis (Versio Antiqua, torn. iii. 255 ; ed. Migne,
iii. pp. 358, 359) : ' Hesdra ascendens a Babylone, volensque discernere Israel
a reliquis gentibus, ut genus Habrahae non videretur esse permixtum cum
H

98 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. connected with the interval between the return from the
— 1 Captivity and the victories of Alexander. In assigning
Ezra to the period of the Captivity and the generation
of Zerubbabel, the legend betrays the untrustworthy
character, and shares the chronological confusion of
late Jewish tradition respecting post-exilic events. The
intrinsic improbability of the story that Ezra should
have originated ah alphabet in order to separate his
countrymen from the Samaritans is sufficient to condemn
it. That at a period when the literature of the Jews
enjoyed a well-established position and inherited the
treasured productions of former centuries written in the
old characters, any one individual should have succeeded
in abolishing the old alphabet and in imposing upon his
people another, for the purpose of accentuating a racial
hostility, will appear to every reasoning mind to the last
degree improbable.
But, indeed, there is scarcely need to consider the
story seriously. A short review of the history of Hebrew
writing will at once show the real character of the legend,
and dispose of the popular assumption which has arisen
out of it. An element of truth will, in this as in other
similar cases, be found to lurk in a seemingly unlikely
legend ; and to this we shall call attention after review
ing the testimony supplied by our existing knowledge of
the history of Hebrew writing.
habitatoribus terrae, qui tenent quidem legem, non tamen et prophetas,
immutavit pristinam formam relinquens deessenon ( = ^in 3103, read some
times in Jewish authorities fJJVl 31D3), propter quod ea forma a Samari-
tanis praeoccupata jam fuerat.' The fancifulness of the legends respecting
Ezra and the Samaritans may be illustrated from another passage in
Epiphanius Advers. Haereses, Lib. i. torn, i, Haeres. vii ; i. 23 : 'EiraiSeue
roivvv "Eafipas Kai ol /«t' avrov rb yevos rb iv rfj 2a/iapeia, Kai fK\-h9r]oav
"Xap-apurai oi rdv v6fiov 81& tov "Effdpa rod aird BafivXcbvos ijkovtos 5ia5e£a-
jiivoi. AiijkOe 5k xt^>vo% ^™" TfOOapaKovra aWaiv, Kai 1} aixpaAwaia aveiSrj.

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER IV. 99
The old Hebrew, or Canaanite, character of Israelite Chap. iv.
writing has been preserved to us from the age of Hezekiah 
(circ. 700 B. C.) in the Siloam inscription, in which the Hebrew
letters have a general resemblance to the characters in c^na^lers:
Mesa's inscription upon the so-called Moabite Stone Monarchy;
(circ. 900-850 B. a). This ancient style of letter, which
is called in the Talmud Kethob Ibri, or ' Hebrew writing,'
continued in use for a long period. There is no trace of its
use being affected by the Exile. In Ezra iv. 7 the words,
' And the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian
character,' probably indicate that the Jews, in the days
of Artaxerxes (465-424 B. C.). were obliged to have re
course to the Aramaean characters for purposes of official
correspondence with the authorities of the Persian empire,
but they also imply that the Aramaean characters were
still regarded as part of a foreign usage. In the second in the second
century B.C. the coins of Simon Maccabeus (143-135 B.C.), "Ztsecond'
and so late as the second century A. D. the coins of ceniur* A- D-
Bar-Cochba (135 A. D.), retain the old Hebrew lettering;
and it may fairly be claimed that the lettering of the
coinage of a native dynasty or of a patriotic leader must
above all things be legible by the people and acceptable
to them. Possibly these coins may retain certain archaic
forms ; but they furnish evidence of incontestable force
that, so late as the second century A. D., the old letters
were preferred by patriot Jews to the square Aramaic
characters. How completely this disposes of the legend
of Ezra's inventing a more sacred form of alphabet, need
hardly be pointed out.
Turning now to the square Hebrew characters, it ap- The square
pears that they represent a development of an archaic characters:
Aramaean alphabet, traces of which are preserved in ^™ean
Assyrian weights, &c. of the eighth century B. C, and in
H 2

100 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. the famous stele of Teima in Arabia dating from the
App
— - sixth century B.C. The spread of this alphabet through
out Western Asia was gradual and continuous throughout
the last four centuries before the Christian era. In our
Lord's time the square characters had apparently become
very generally accepted. They are found in inscriptions
Used in the belonging to that era. Our Lord Himself clearly refers
aS "' ry to their use, when He speaks of the ' Yod ' (I&tcl) and of
' the tittle ' (nepala) or horn of a square Hebrew letter
(Matt. v. 1 8). By the Rabbins it was called either the
' square writing,' Kethob merubba, or the Assyrian writing,
Kethob Asshuri. A subsequent development of the
square characters is to be found in the Palmyrene and
Nabataean inscriptions of the second century A. D.
Such, then, are the chief facts that are known as to the
history of Hebrew writing. But the further question
when the Jews dropped the old Hebrew characters and
adopted the square characters in the transcription of the
sacred rolls containing the Books of the Law, cannot be
answered with any certainty. The most ancient Hebrew
inscription in which the first signs of the change from
the old Canaanite letters to the square Aramaean are
discernible, is that which is known as Arak-el-Amir on
the ruins of the castle of Hyrcanus on the east side of
the Jordan, belonging to the year 176 B.C. On the other
hand, the earliest Hebrew inscription written in pure
Aramaean characters is that on the so-called Tomb of
St. James, in the valley of the Kidron, which is assigned
to the first century B.C. There can be no manner of
doubt that the two characters were in use at the same
time, and that the Aramaean only very slowly drove out
the Canaanite style.
So far as the Samaritan Pentateuch is concerned, the

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER IV. lOl
characters in which it is written are described by palaeo- chap. iv.
graphists as a late modification of the old Hebrew — 1
writing. As such, it may be attributed, in the forms
that have been preserved, to the ultimate stage in the
development of the old Hebrew alphabet, before the
final adoption of the square Aramaean form 1. And in
support of this view I may adduce the authority of one
of the most eminent Orientalists, the late Professor
W. Wright (Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Races,
Cambridge, 1890, p. 39): 'This alphabet is still found,
with slight modifications, upon the Maccabee and other
Jewish coins ; and is known to us in its latest shape as
the Samaritan alphabet. It began, however, to be dis
used by the Jews even before the commencement of our
era, and to be supplanted by a modified form of the
Palmyrene character, the so-called square character,
^?7t? ^I* Some of the extant inscriptions of this type
belong to the century preceding our era.'
Jewish and Samaritan writings were probably therefore
alike composed in the old Hebrew characters until the
fourth or third century B.C. From about that time
forward it appears probable that the Aramaean characters
began to compete with the old Hebrew in Jewish litera
ture. This is what we might expect, bearing in mind
the general diffusion of the Aramaean characters in Syria
and Babylonia, and the spread of Jewish population
throughout Western Asia. Under the influences of ' the
Dispersion ' and the pressure of trade, the movement in
favour of a change of character from the old Hebrew to
the square Aramaean must have been immeasurably
' See Benzinger's Hebrdische Archaologie (Freiburg, 1894), pp. 286-288 ;
Nowack's Hebrdische Archaologie (Freiburg, 1894), pp. 284-288.

conclusion.

102 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. iv. stronger in the Jewish community than it could have
App' been in the more limited and more deeply Hellenized
Samaritan people. With the Jews the two styles of
handwriting must have for some time competed side by
side. Patriotism preferred the old Hebrew letters ; but
the interests of commerce, the influence of the scribes of
Babylonia, and the tendency towards a uniform simpler
style of writing, proved too strong a combination, and
prevailed. The Samaritan Church, however, preserved
the old characters unaltered. Greek had probably in
vaded all Samaritan literature save that of worship.
General As a result, then, of this slight sketch, it appears that
the use of the old Hebrew characters in the Samaritan
Pentateuch simply furnishes the evidence that at the
time when the Samaritans received from the Jews their
Torah, the style of writing had not yet undergone the
change which it was destined to undergo among the
Jews. ' Unfortunately,' as Buhl says (p. 41), ' we possess
no tradition respecting the time at which the Samaritans
received the Law. Those, however, who do not admit
that the Pentateuch was subjected to any substantial
revision after the time of Ezra, can scarcely entertain a
doubt that this took place at the time when the Samaritan
Church and worship were set up upon Mount Gerizim.'
While the available evidence points to the probability
of the view which has been advocated above, that the
Samaritans received their Torah at the close of the fifth
or at the beginning of the fourth century B.C., the palaeo-
graphical testimony, supplied by the traditional forms of
the Samaritan alphabet, makes it practically certain,
that the Samaritan MSS. of the Torah have been derived
from an exemplar, or exemplars, zvritten at a later period
than the fourth century b.c. The supposition therefore

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER IV. 103
that the characters in which the Samaritan Pentateuch chap, iv,
r • • Al'p-
is extant furnish any argument against the legitimacy 
of the main outlines of Pentateuchal criticism, is due to
a misapprehension of the facts.
The legend which, with so little probability, ascribes Thestgntfi
a change of literary characters to the unique influence tg"tdcm'
of Ezra, is not altogether lacking in significance. The E""'a'?
Jews were apt to personify important incidents or
institutions by connecting them with famous names of
the past. In the present instance the selection of Ezra
was not otherwise than happily made. Ezra was the
typical scribe. He impersonated to the Jews the age
of the Sopherim. The gradual transformation of the
Hebrew characters from the Canaanite to the Aramaean
was begun during the epoch of the ascendency of the
scribes. To assign this change to the commanding
influence of the typical scribe was doubtless to overstep
the limits of strict historical accuracy. But the poetical
licence of legendary fiction has thus enshrined the recol
lection of a great and impressive change in the literary
history of the Hebrew Scriptures — a change which may
possibly have been expedited by the traditional hatred
of the Samaritans, and by the desire to distinguish the
Torah-rolls of the Jewish synagogues from those that
were copied on Mount Gerizim ; but which may, with
even more probability, be considered to have been
promoted by the influence of the Rabbinic Schools of
Babylon, by the spread of Jewish synagogues in Syria
and Mesopotamia, and by the gradual adoption, on the
part of the Jews, of the Aramaic dialect in preference to
the Hebrew of their forefathers.

CHAPTER V.
THE SECOND CANON, OR THE LAW AND THE
PROPHETS.
chap. v. In the latter half of the fifth century B. C. the Torah
The canon had received its final recognition as Holy Scripture.
°£suffitient. The popular veneration for this ' Canon,' quite apart from
the teaching of the scribes, must have been largely due
to the fact, that its contents dealt with the origin of the
Hebrew race and with the foundation of the Israelite
religion. But, in an even greater degree, its association
with the Temple ritual, its perusal in Synagogue services,
and its growing use as the test of conduct and doctrine
in social and private life, had the effect of exalting it
above all other Hebrew literature, and of enhancing its
value in the estimation of every devout Jew. And yet
it was impossible for ' the Law ' to remain the whole
' Canon ' of Jewish Scripture. It lacked the repre
sentation of that very element which had been the most
important factor in the growth of the pure religion of
Jehovah, the element of prophecy. Without prophecy,
as has been said, ' the Law was a body without a soul V
And although the prophetic spirit breathes in the
leaching of the Torah generally, and in particular in
that of Deuteronomy, nevertheless the Torah, as a whole,
did not represent either the fulness or the freedom
of prophecy. * Cf. Dillmann, Jahrb.f. deutsche Theol. 1858, p. 441.

THE SECOND CANON. 105
It would not be too much to say that the life and chapjv.
purity of Israel's faith had hitherto depended upon the Prophecy
testimony of the prophets. It was to the prophets that ""
the people owed the revelation of the Lord's will. In a
sense they had been the true mediators of the law. The
consciousness of the inseparableness of the spirit of pro
phecy from that of 'the Law,' expressed in such different
passages as 2 Kings xvii. 13, Zech. vii. 12, and Neh. ix.
26, was sure, sooner or later, to make itself felt in the
worship of the nation. For centuries ' the Word of God '
had been declared to the people by the prophet in the
form of ' instruction ' or Torah. But now the work of
the prophet was over ; ' Torah ' was identified with a
written law, it was no longer the prophet's spoken
word. Prophecy had ceased ; and the question was,
whether ' the Law ' alone could permanently fill the gap
which had thus appeared in the religious life of the
community ?
Instinctively our answer is, that it could not. And The
because it could not, we shall see that, after an interval
of time, the writings called in the Hebrew Canon the
' Nebiim ' or * Prophets 1,' gradually received such recog
nition in the Jewish Church as caused them also to be set
apart as Canonical Scripture, although never probably,
in Jewish opinion, estimated as of equal honour with
' the Law.'
The steps by which these additions to the Canon of
' the Law ' were made are, indeed, in a great measure
hidden from our view. The scanty evidence at our
1 A group consisting, in our Hebrew Bibles, of the two divisions, (a) ' the
Former' or historical prophets, represented by the four books, Joshua, Judges,
Samuel, and Kings ; (6) ' the Latter ' or prophetical, represented by the four
books, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve Minor Prophets. See p. 1 1.

106 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. command points, as we hope to show, to the conclusion,
that the canonicity of all 'the Prophets' had been
recognised, before any of the writings of the last group,
or Hagiographa, were included in the national Scrip
tures.
i. Causes of For this purpose, it is necessary, firstly, to consider
// Period, briefly the circumstances under which these writings
"tion'*"'1' tended to obtain such special recognition as at once
separated them from other literature and associated them
with the sacred 'Law' ; secondly, to investigate the limits
of the period within which it seems probable that
the canonicity of ' the Prophets ' was determined ; and
thirdly, to consider whether other writings, besides those
included in the traditional group of the Nebiim, received
at the same time the stamp of canonicity.
I. In the first place, we consider the circumstances
which led to the selection of ' the Prophets ' and their
association with ' the Law.' Attention has already been
frequently called to the literary activity which prevailed
among the Jews of Babylon during and after the exile.
The desire to preserve the ancient memorials of the
race would have led to many works of compilation.
Of such, a few only have survived, and they entirely
owing to their having afterwards become ' Canonical '
Scripture. It would be a mistake, however, to suppose that ' the
Prophets,' historical and prophetical, represent only the
surviving specimens of Israelite literature, that were
rescued from the wreck of the civil community by the
energy and industry of a few devout men. The work
which led to the formation of the Canon was not merely
conservative ; it was also constructive and selective, con
structive from the point of view of the historian of Old

THE SECOND CANON. 107
Testament Theology, selective from the point of view of chap. v.
the historian of Jewish literature.
To the earlier part of the exilic period should pro- Joshua,
bably be referred the compilation of the materials of the "urtlg
Book of Joshua, which, based on the narratives of the ExiU-
Jehovist-Elohist Writing, were edited in the spirit of the
Deuteronomic law, and eventually combined with our
Deuteronomy. The combination did not long outlast the
formation of the Hexateuch (p. 69). To the close of the
period of Nehemiah is to be ascribed the action of the
scribes, by which our Book of Joshua was separated from
the Deuteronomic portion of the ' Torah.' The ground
of the separation must have been, either that its narrative
did not contain direct religious teaching, or, as seems
more probable, that the Book of the Law seemed to
close more appropriately with the death of the great
Lawgiver. The close literary union of Joshua with Jos. and
Deuteronomy is, on grounds both of the style and of the
continuity of the subject-matter, placed beyond all doubt.
The fact that the books are separate, and, further, that
they appear in two different groups of the Hebrew
Scriptures, at once becomes intelligible, when we realise
that an interval of time elapsed between the recognition
of the ' Torah ' and the final acceptance of ' Joshua.'
When we pass to the Book of Judges, we find signs judges,-
that its compilation probably belongs to the same period, sources of,
It is well known to every careful reader, that the book^""*
consists of three clearly marked portions, which differ in
style and treatment, and represent extracts from different
sources of narrative. In the first of these sections (i. 1-
ii. 5) it is probable that the narrator borrowed from the
same ancient literary source that supplied material for
the compilation of Joshua ; e. g.

108 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. Judges i. 10-15 = Joshua xv. 13-19-
21 = 63.
27, 28 = „ xvii. 12, 13.
„ 29 = „ xvi. 10.
In the second (ii. 6-xvi), which contains some of the
oldest fragments of early Jewish literature, it is equally
evident, from the style, that they have been compiled or
edited by one who writes in the spirit of the Deutero
nomic Law. Clear proofs of his handiwork are to be
seen in such passages as ii. 11-23, m- 7-II> vl- 7_IO>
x. 6-17.
In the third portion (xvii-xxi), containing two distinct
narratives, as well as in the first, ' no traces are to be
found of the hand of the Deuteronomic redactor of the
middle division ; there are no marks either of his distinc
tive phraseology or of his view of the history as set forth
in ii. 11-19. Hence it is probable that these divisions
did not pass through his hands ; but were added to the
book as he left it (ii. 6-xvi) as an introduction and appen
dix respectively by a later hand.' (Driver, in the Jewish
Quarterly, Jan. 1889.)
The compilation of the whole work belongs therefore
to the literary energy of a period later than that of the
Deuteronomic editor. To attempt to decide the date
of the compiler with any precision would be out of the
question. Perhaps we should assign his work to the latter
part of the exilic period.
Books of The Books of Samuel are a compilation, which contains
some most ancient elements. The influence of Deutero
nomy is not so clearly marked in them as in the Book
of Judges, although its presence may probably be
detected in 1 Sam. ii. 1-11, 27-36, vii. a— viii, x. 17-26,
xii, xv, 2 Sam. vii. The work of compilation may

THE SECOND CANON. 109
therefore have taken place in the exilic period. The Chap, v.
materials, however, which are incorporated in the Books
of Samuel were comparatively little modified by the
compiler. But either the sources from which they were
taken survived for a considerable period, and occasioned
the variations of text which appear in the LXX version ;
or the books were current in a different recension, before
they received recognition as Sacred Scripture.
The Books of Kings terminate with the mention o{Booltsof
& T Kings.
events that occurred about 560 B.C. In them, more con
spicuously than in any of the other narrative books, is
to be seen the influence of the Deuteronomist. Some
scholars have supposed this effect to be due to the first
vivid impression produced by the publication of the
Deuteronomic law, and have therefore placed the first
compilation as early as the last decade of the seventh
cent. B.C. (610-600). They have suggested that, half-a-
century later, various additions were made and the last
chapters of the history appended.
The composite character of the narrative is obviously
expressed by the writer's reference to ' The Book of the
Acts of Solomon ' (1 Kings xi. 41), and by frequent
allusions to ' The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings
of Israel and Judah,' as well as by the clearly marked
excerpts from a narrative history of the prophets, espe
cially of Elijah and Elisha (e. g. 1 Kings xvii-xix, xxi,
2 Kings i-viii, xiii. 14-19). The date of its compilation
can hardly be placed earlier than the close of the sixth
cent. B.C.
Now from the composite character of the historical
books we may infer the existence of abundant narrative
material at the period when their compilation took place.
But we can gather from the books themselves what the

IIO THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. qualities were, which led to their being selected and
eventually preferred above all other historical memoirs
Distinctive dealing with the same events. Over and above the
narrative truthfulness, the dignity, the beauty, the vividness, the

simplicity of their narratives, stands one pre-eminent
characteristic, which at once explains the mould in which
they were cast and imparts to their narrative its wonderful
power to teach. This was the spirit of Hebrew prophecy
interpreting to us the course of history in accordance
with the eternal principles of Divine Revelation. The
four narrative books of 'the Prophets' are no mere
catalogues of facts, they are not even a continuous uniform
history. They unfold the workings of ' the law of Jeho
vah ' in the history of Israel, both in their description of
the nation's internal development and in their picture of
its relation to other nations.
If now the historical books were finally selected,
because in a special manner they set forward the history
of Israel's past, judged by the law of the Lord, and
in the light of the spirit of prophecy, it is natural to
ascribe the beginning of their separation from other
literature to a period, when the work and teaching of
the prophets were, for some reason or other, attracting
especial attention, and claiming peculiar veneration.
witnessof Before the exile, the prophets of Jehovah found them-
during*' selves, as often as not, in opposition to the dominant form
notpop!?' °f religion. Their sayings were perpetuated either orally
lariyac- or m the writings of their disciples; but their testimony,
if preserved in the recollection of the people, as in the
instance of Micah the Morashtite (Jer. xxvi. 18), did not
at once obtain any hold over the religious thought of the
nation in a literary form. The acquaintance, however,
of the prophets with the words of their own predecessors

THE SECOND CANON. ill
in the ministry of prophecy is openly avowed. Jeremiah chap. v.
borrows largely from other sources. Ezekiel appeals to
the predictions of the prophets (Ezek. xxxviii. 17) which
the people had disregarded.
Towards the close of the exile, the power and prestige change pro-
of the prophets must have been greatly enhanced, in Bxiielnd
the estimation of their countrymen, by the evidently Reiurn-
approaching fulfilment of the predictions of Jeremiah.
The prophet Zechariah could appeal to the fulfilment of
the words of ' the former prophets ' (cf. Zech. i. 4, vii. 7,
12). Both the catastrophe of the exile and the joy of
the return confirmed the confidence of the faithful, and
removed the doubts of the wavering, in respect of the
mission of the prophets. The descendants of the genera
tion that had sought to put Jeremiah to death rallied to
the exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah (Ezra v. 1).
The reverence for the prophets was heightened, as it
became increasingly evident, that the gift of prophecy
was becoming more rare and threatened to become
extinct. Zechariah foresees the time at hand when the
claim to prophecy shall betoken imposture (Zech. xiii. 3).
In the days of Nehemiah, the old prophets are referred
to as the ministers of Jehovah, who had witnessed in the
past to a stubborn disobedient race and had been dis
regarded (Neh. ix. 26, 30). Modern prophets were
largely intriguers (Neh. vi. 7, 14). And if one more voice
of prophecy was to be heard, it was to testify, that the
day was past for that form of delivering Jehovah's
message, and to express the belief, as it were, in its
last breath, that, through the witness of no new prophet
but only through the return of Elijah, the prototype of
prophecy, could be brought about the regeneration of so
corrupt a people (Mai. iv. 5, 6).

112 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. It was, then, at the time when the Canon of the Law
increased was already recognised, that the veneration for prophecy
p^oThecy0. £rew apace, and made the people deplore its decay and
resolve, so far as possible, to preserve the words of the
ancient prophets from perishing. It is, therefore, import
ant as well as interesting, to find that one of the few tradi
tions, respecting the collection of the Jewish Scriptures,
connects the task of forming a library, in which pro
phetical and historical works are especially mentioned,
with the labours of Nehemiah. The tradition is con
tained in a certain letter, prefixed to the Second Book of
Maccabees, which purports to be addressed by Jews in
Palestine to their countrymen in Egypt in the year 144
B.C. The letter is generally, and on good grounds, con
sidered by scholars to be spurious ; but even so, the
possibility remains, that the traditions which are contained
in the letter may have been obtained from other sources
An Ancient of a more trustworthy kind. The tradition which here
3 Mace. K. i3. concerns us mentions a current report, ' how (Nehemiah)
founded a library and gathered together the books (or,
things) concerning the kings and prophets, and the
(books) of David and letters of kings about sacred gifts '
(2 Mace. ii. 13)1. These words throw no light upon the
recognition of any portion of the Canon. But they
connect with the memory of Nehemiah, and therefore,
probably, with the whole generation which he per
sonified, the preservation of public documents, and of
historical records and court memoirs of national interest.
As we have before had occasion to observe, the preser
vation and collection of writings mark the stage in the
history of the canonical writings which is prelimi
nary to their especial selection for liturgical use and
1 See Excursus D. v.

THE SECOND CANON. 113
religious purposes generally. While, therefore, we have chap. v.
no right to assume, as has often been done, that the
writings referred to in the Epistle are to be identified
with ' the Nebiim,' with ' the Psalms,' and with ' Ezra and
Nehemiah,' there is fair reason to suppose, that, in Nehe
miah's time,somesucha collection of books and documents
was made, and that amongst them were possibly some
of the books afterwards embodied in the Canon, some,
too, of the older documents on which they were based.
II. Having, then, reached this probable conclusion, that when were
in the days of Nehemiah a special interest had been regZrdelas
aroused in the preservation of the writings and sayings Scrit"ur'
of the prophets, we have next to consider within what
limits of time we should place the process, by which they
came to be recognised as authoritative Scripture.
We might naturally assume that such recognition
would not take place, until some time had elapsed after
the acceptance of the Law as the people's Scripture. The
sanctity and dignity of ' the Law ' must at first have over
shadowed everything else. A possible illustration of its
influence may be found in the historical sketch contained
in the prayer of Ezra and the Levites (Neh. ix). The The Law at
details of the sacred narrative are there all drawn from the shadowed
Pentateuch (vv. 6-25) ; and, though allusions are made a^°^
to events of later history (e. g. vv. 27, 30), these are ex
pressed only in vague outline and in the most general
terms, and the great names of Joshua, of Gideon, of
Samuel, of David, of Solomon, of Elijah are con
spicuously absent. Whether the historical Psalms cv,
evi. belong to this date or not, we cannot say. But it is
noticeable, that in them, as in Neh. ix, reference to the
merciful dealings of God with His people Israel is, for the
most part, limited to the events included within the range
I

114 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. v. of the Pentateuchal literature. And the explanation is
probably this, that these religious songs are based upon
the Canon of the ' Torah,' made familiar to the people by
the service of the Synagogue.
Turning for a moment to the books of the prophets,
we can possibly glean hints from some of them as to the
date of the revision, which presumably immediately pre
ceded their admission to the rank of Holy Scripture.
isaiah, date Isaiah. In our book of Isaiah, the first portion (i-xxxv)
"ion!" ' ' consists of collections of prophecies written, most of
them (i-xxiii, xxviii-xxxiii), by Isaiah himself. Several
of them, however, the best scholars judge to be derived
from a much later time. Now, if the period of the exile
prove to be, as is very probably the case, the date of
chaps, xxxiv, xxxv, and if a post-exilic date be assigned
to the group chaps, xxiv-xxvii. (see Ewald, Delitzsch,
Dillmann, Driver) \ we perceive at once, that the compi
lation of this first portion only — to which have been
appended both an extract from the Book of Kings
(2 Kings xviii-xix) and the song of Hezekiah (xxxviii.
9-20), obtained probably from some independent collec
tion of national psalms — can hardly have taken place
much before the period of Nehemiah. It may be
conjectured, that the addition of the concluding section
(xl-lxvi), which makes no claim to Isaianic authorship,
but indisputably reflects the thought of the closing years
of the exile, was added at a time when the prophetical
writings were being collected and edited by the scribes,
and when, the recollection of the authorship of this
section having been forgotten, it could, not unnaturally,
be appended to the writings of Isaiah.
1 See however, ' An Examination of the Objections brought against the
genuineness of Is. xxiv-xxvii,' by W. E. Barnes, B.D. (Cambridge, 1891).

THE SECOND CANON. 1 15
Jeremiah. In the case of the Book of Jeremiah, we chap. v.
have clear evidence that some interval of time elapsed jeremiah,
between the decease of the prophet and the age in which 'J^'/L^
his prophecies were edited. This may be shown by the
fact that chap, xxxix. 1-13 is condensed from 2 Kings
xxv. 1-12, and that the concluding chapter (Iii) is derived
from 2 Kings xxiv. 18, &c, and xxv. 27-30. It would
also appear from the dislocated order of the prophecies.
The existence, again, of great variations in the text of
the LXX version points to the probability of Jeremiah's
prophecies having once been current in some other form,
as, for instance, in smaller collections of prophecies. This
variation in form would probably be earlier in date than
their final recognition as sacred Scripture, after which
event it is not likely that any important changes could
be introduced.
Minor Prophets. In the collection of the Twelve MinorProphets.
Minor Prophets, we have possible indications of the limit
of time, before which it is at any rate improbable that
these writings were received as sacred Scripture. It is
likely enough that they already formed a distinct collec
tion, and were already treated as a single work, when
they were first raised to Canonical dignity. For it
appears, that to the editor who combined them are due
not only the headings prefixed to Hosea, Joel, Amos,
Micah, but also the title given to the three last groups
of prophecy, irrespective of their different authorship,
' The burden of the word of the Lord,' Zech. ix. 1, xii. 1,
and Mai. i. 1.
As to the date of their compilation, we gain some idea Malachi.
from knowing that Malachi was composed at or about
the time of Nehemiah's governorship (445-433 B. C.). A
collection of prophetical writings which included that of
I 2

Il6 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. Malachi, could hardly have been made until some time
had elapsed from the date of its composition. We cannot
suppose, that popular opinion would have approved the
incorporation of recent, or almost contemporary, work
in the same collection with the older prophets. Many
years would have to slip away, before it was fully realised
that Malachi was the last of the great series. Perhaps
nearly a century had passed, before his countrymen
learned to class his words with those of his honoured
and more venerable predecessors.
jonak. If, as seems very possible from the evidence of the
language, the Book of Jonah is an allegory written, for a
didactic purpose, at the close of the fifth century B.C.,
it would hardly, we think, have been admitted at once
among the earlier prophets of Israel. Some time must
have elapsed since it had been composed, the popularity
of the work must have become assured, and the hero of
the story been generally identified with the prophet of
Gath-hepher (2 Kings xiv. 25), before it obtained its
unique position, corresponding to the date of the sup
posed writer, of a narrative among the Minor Prophets.
zechariah. The writings of Zechariah (i-viii) received an exten
sive addition (ix-xiv) of uncertain date and unknown
authorship from the hands of a compiler. This must
have been effected, when the recollection of what were and
what were not Zechariah's writings,had become indistinct;
probably, therefore, later than the fifth century B.C.
From the indications thus given by the contents and
structure of the books themselves1, we infer that, in the
case of 'the Prophets,' if the process of special collec-
1 The evidence of Joel has been purposely omitted, on account of the
great uncertainty, whether the post-exilic date, ascribed to it, can be con
sidered to have been substantiated.

THE SECOND CANON. 117
tion was begun in the time of Nehemiah, that of their Chap. v.
selection and recognition as sacred Scripture can hardly
have begun until a century later. This is an im
pression for which we derive some support from the
condition of the text of the Septuagint version. The
marked divergency between the Hebrew and the Greek
text, in the Books, for instance, of Samuel and the pro
phet Jeremiah, points to the existence of different Hebrew
recensions current not long before the Greek translation
was made in Alexandria, or to a different text being
recognised by the scribes in Palestine from that which
was best known in Egypt. Differences of recension were
not likely to have been permitted after the books had
once obtained a special recognition. So long as varieties
of texts existed side by side, so long, we may assume,
the books had not been invested by the Jews with any
strict ideas of canonicity. The particular recension of
the book, which happened to receive canonical recogni
tion from the scribes, would be that which in after time
suffered least from the accidents of transmission, because
its preservation had been the object of special care. It is
possible, however, that a Hebrew text, representing the
recension which accompanied the admission of the book
within the precincts of the Canon, may preserve to us a
text differing more widely from the original than that of
the Septuagint version. It is possible, in other words, that
the existing Hebrew text may represent a poorer text
from the fact that it has been more studiously ' revised '
by the scribes. Against that, however, must be set the
undoubtedly greater freedom with which the Jews in
Alexandria handled the national Scriptures. Interpola
tion in Egypt may be set off against ' redaction ' pro
cesses in Palestine and Babylon.

Il8 , THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. We assume, therefore, that the Greek translation
of 'the Prophets' was for the most part completed
before their Canonical character had been determined,
or recognised, in Alexandria. On the other hand,
the evidence of the ' Prologue to Ecclesiasticus ' is con
clusive, that the Canonicity of ' the Prophets ' had
been accepted there since the beginning of the second
century B.C.
It deserves passing notice that the Chronicler, writing
about the beginning of the third century, and making
large extracts from the Books of Samuel and Kings,
makes no sign of consciousness that he is borrowing
material from any peculiarly sacred source.
If our general line of argument be admitted, the date
which we assign for the terminus a quo of the period,
within which the Canonicity of the prophets was recog-
injiuences; nised, will be not earlier than 300 B. C. Was it the spread
der's of Hellenic culture that followed in the wake of Alexan-
rlac*tton' der's victories, which contributed the crowning impulse
against to ^e desire of the Jewish community to expand the
legalism. J J r
limits of their sacred literature, and to admit the writings
of the Prophets, for purposes of public reading, into the
'ark' of the Synagogue? It is a thought fruitful in
interesting speculation. It cannot be affirmed upon
the basis of any direct evidence, but it surely is a not
improbable suggestion. Whether also ' something like
a reaction against the spirit of Ezra x ' may partly account
for the elevation of ' the Prophets ' to the rank of Holy
Scripture by the side of ' the Law,' is also a question
which, if, for lack of evidence, it admits of no certain
answer, is certainly a suggestive conjecture. It is an
interesting thought, that the fascination of the new
1 Cheyne, The Origin of the Psalter, p. 363.

THE SECOND CANON. 119
Hellenic literature and the spiritual sterility of the in- chap. v.
terpretation which the Jewish scribes applied to 'the
Law,' may have been forces operating together, though
from opposite sides, to bring about the inclusion of ' the
Prophets ' within the Hebrew Canon.
The task of determining a terminus ad quern for this
period is, perhaps, not so difficult. At least, the evidence
which is here at our disposal is of a more definite
character ; and it tends to show that, at the beginning
of the second century B.C., the Prophets had already, for
some time, occupied the position in the Hebrew Scriptures
which was assigned to them by later tradition. Before
the beginning of the second century B.C., the second stage
in the formation of the Canon had ended ; and the limits
of ' the Law and the Prophets ' had been determined.
(i.) The first evidence to this effect that we have to Ecciesiasii-
notice is that which is supplied by the writings of Jesus, wisdom of
the son of Sirach, whose collection of proverbial sayings {"^f'"
is contained in the book, known to English readers as &"**,
a arc. 180
Ecclesiasticus, which was composed about the year 180 b.c
B.C. In his celebrated eulogy (ch. xliv-1) upon ' the
famous men ' of Israel, he refers to events as they are
recorded in the Books of Joshua, Samuel and Kings 1.
When he refers to Isaiah, he expressly ascribes to him the
comforting of 'them that mourn in Zion ' (Isaiah lxi. 3).
Shortly afterwards, he makes mention of Jeremiah, using
of him language borrowed from his own prophecies (Jer.
i. 5-10). He proceeds, next, to speak of Ezekiel, refer-
1 The Judges are dismissed in a couple of verses (Ecclus. xlvi. n, 12).
For Joshua, see ch. xlvi. 1-6 ; for the Books of Samuel, see ch. xlvi. 13-
xlvii. 11 ; for the Books of Kings, see ch. xlvii. 12-xlix. 3. Isaiah is men
tioned, ch. xlviii. 20-25 ; Jeremiah, ch. xlix. 6, 7 ; Ezekiel, ch. xlix. 8, 9 ;
the Twelve Prophets, ch. xlix. 10 ; Zerubbabel and Jeshua, ch. xlix. 11, 12 ;
Nehemiah, ch. xlix. 13.

120 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. ring especially to his mysterious vision (Ezek. i. 28). He
then makes mention of the 'Twelve Prophets,' who
' comforted Jacob and delivered them by assured hope.'
He speaks of Zerubbabel and Joshua, and, although his
notice of them may be based on the writings of Haggai
(ii. 3) and Zechariah (iii. 1), it is clear from his references
to Nehemiah, that he was acquainted with the substance of
Ezra and Nehemiah. In, at least, one passage he makes
allusion to the Books of Chronicles (xlvii. 9, cf. 1 Chron.
xvi. 4). In other passages he makes use of language in
which have been noted parallelisms with the Psalter, with
the Book of Proverbs, with the Book of Job, and, though
this is very doubtful, with the Book of Ecclesiastes.
The writer alludes, therefore, to other books besides
those which are included in ' the Law and the Prophets.'
It is not, however, possible for us to infer anything more
from this than that 'the son of Sirach' was well ac
quainted, as we might have expected, with the literature
of his countrymen, with books which undoubtedly existed
in his day, were largely read, and afterwards included
within the Canon.
The two most important features in his testimony
The 'fam- are (d) the systematic order of his allusions to ' the
"metuimed famous men,' and (b) his mention of the 'Twelve
m order of pr0phets.' (a) In his list of 'the famous men' he seems
Scripture. r s '
to follow the arrangement of the books of the Law and
the Prophets, to which, we might suppose, were popularly
added, by way of appendix, the writings from which he
derived his mention of Zerubbabel, Jeshua, and Nehe
miah. Towards the close of his reference to the Books
of Kings, he naturally introduces his mention of Isaiah
in connexion with the reign of Hezekiah. After he has
finished his review of the historical books, he mentions in

THE SECOND CANON. 121
succession Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and ' the Twelve Prophets,' chap, v.
and he appends the names of the heroes of the Return
from the Captivity, before passing on to describe the
glories of his own great contemporary, the high priest
Simon, (b) The fact that he mentions the 'Twelve The Twelve
„ , , . , . . , . . , . Prophets.
Prophets, proves that, in his time, this title was given
to a group of prophets, whose writings had long been
known both in the form and with the name of a sepa
rate collection, clearly identical with that in which they
appear according to the tradition of the Hebrew Canon.
We have said that his mention of Zerubbabel, Jeshua,
and Nehemiah seems to imply his recognition of the
books Ezra and Nehemiah as a kind of appendix to the
historical books of the Prophets. It is possible that
other books may have occupied a similar position. But
that a clearly marked line of separation was drawn
between such books and those that were regarded as
Canonical is probably implied by the writer's omission significant
of Ezra, Job, Daniel, Esther, and Mordecai from the "e^TsL,
list of the ' famous men ' x of Israel. The omission of Dan-
Ezra, regarded by itself, would not have had any such
significance ; for the mention of Nehemiah shows the
writer's acquaintance with the latter portion of the
Chronicler's work. But when we recollect the position
that Ezra occupied in later Hebrew tradition, when we
remember, too, the popularity which the stories of Esther
and Daniel obtained in later times, it is hardly possible
to suppose that, in so striking a list of the heroes and
champions of his people mentioned in Jewish Scripture,
the author would have omitted these great names, if he
had known that his readers were familiar with their story,
' Ecclus. xliv. i, ' Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that
begat us.'

122 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. or if their story had, in his day, been found in the Jewish
Canon. (ii.) The next piece of evidence to be noticed is that
which is supplied by the Book of Daniel, which, in all
probability, was compiled, if not actually composed, in or
Dan. ix. 2. about the year 165 B.C. We find in chap. ix. 2 a reference
to the prophecy of Jeremiah, which the writer speaks of
as forming a portion of what he calls 'the books.' His
words are, ' In the first year of his (Darius') reign I
Daniel understood by the books the number of the years,
whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the
prophet for the accomplishing of the desolation of Jeru
salem, even seventy years.' The author here refers to a
group of writings which included the prophecies of
Jeremiah, and which for some reason he designates ' the
Sepharim,' or ' the books.' It is a natural supposition —
when we recollect that the Book of Daniel itself never
had a place among 'the Prophets' — that the writer or
compiler of Daniel wrote these words when the Canon
of ' the Prophets ' had already been determined. It
appears probable, at any rate, that the writer of Daniel
was here referring to this group of the Hebrew Scriptures.
By the title which he gives to them, equivalent almost to
the later term 'the Scriptures,' though hardly yet em
ployed in so technical a sense, the writer testifies to his
knowledge of certain important and sacred books set
apart for religious use, and evidently expects his readers
to know what ' The Books' were, to which he refers, and
in which were included prophecies of Jeremiah.
Greek Pro- (iii.) Lastly, we take the evidence supplied by the
^•c^asticus,- Greek Prologue to Ecclesiasticus, written by the grand
's2 BC* son of Jesus, the son of Sirach, about the year 132 B.C. a
1 See Chap. VI, and Excursus D.

THE SECOND CANON. 123
Three times over he there makes mention of ' the Pro- chap. v.
phets ' as a second group in the tripartite division of the
Hebrew Scriptures. There is practically no reason to
doubt that ' the Prophets ' thus mentioned are identical
with the group that has become familiar to us in the
traditional arrangement of the Canon. Be this as it
may, the evidence of the Prologue is sufficient to show
that, in the writer's opinion, one division of the sacred
books of his people was known by the name of ' the Pro
phets,' and was, in his time, part of a well-established
arrangement, which he could assume his readers in
Alexandria to be perfectly acquainted with.
On the basis, therefore, of the external evidence, The
coupled with the testimony of the books themselves, we s/ectd, '*
arrive at the probable conclusion that the formation of 3n°-2°° BC-
the group of ' the Prophets,' having been commenced not
earlier than the year 300 B. c, was brought to. a comple
tion by the end of the same century. We may conjecture
that the conclusion of the second Canon, viz., ' the Law
and the Prophets,' may have been reached under the
High Priesthood of Simon II (219-199 B.C.). Having
first been added as a kind of necessary appendix to
the Law, ' the Prophets ' had gradually grown in esti
mation, until they seemed partially to fill the gap, which
the people never ceased to deplore in the disappearance
of the prophetic gift (Ps. lxxiv. 9, 1 Mace. iv. 46, ix.
27, xiv. 41, Song of Three Children, 15). Before the
close of the third cent. B. C. they ranked as Scripture,
after ' the Law,' and above all other writings.
In this we should surely reverently acknowledge the Thevaiueof
guiding hand of Providence. For. thus, it was divinely „ess,7n'the
overruled that, on the eve of the great crisis, when ™'%%0°{as
Antiochus Epiphanes, seconded only too skilfully by Epiphanes.

124 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. the turpitude of the Jewish high priests, Jason and
Alcimus, sought to obliterate the religious distinctive
ness of the Jewish people, to break down the wall of
separation, and to reduce their religion to the level
of a local variety of Hellenic paganism, another bulwark
had been opportunely raised in the defence of the
pure religion of Jehovah. The veneration of 'the
Law ' was deepened in the hearts of ' the Pious '
(the Khasidim) by the recognition of the prophets. The
temper which reckoned ' the Prophets ' as part of the
inspired Scriptures of the people was a pledge of the
success of the Maccabean revolt.
III. One question remains to be asked. Did the
group, called 'the Prophets,' in this second stage of
the development of the Canon, include any book which
is not found in the traditional order of the Hebrew
Scriptures? Did any of the books which are now
included within ' the Hagiographa ' originally belong to
' the Prophets ' ?
other books We have already noticed the probability, that, at the
known, not ... -, , - . . . ,
recognised beginning of the second century B.C., other highly
7ureZ'P venerated writings formed a kind of appendix to the
Prophets, without being as yet actually included in the
Canon. Thus, besides the historical writings of Chro
nicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, collections of Psalms and
Proverbs were doubtless familiarly known. But there is
little ground for supposing that these writings were ever
combined in the same group with the writings of ' the
Prophets.' The collection of ' the Prophets,' if we may
judge from its contents, was evidently intended to be
homogeneous. Purposes of public reading in the Syna
gogue had, we may well imagine, determined their
selection. In this case, writings, differing widely from

THE SECOND CANON. 1 25
one another in character, differing also, for the most part, chap. v.
from 'the Prophets' in style and subject-matter, were
not likely to be associated with them. They would
require the formation of a new and distinct group of
Scripture. The Books, however, of Ruth and Lamentations have
occasioned some little uncertainty. Much doubt has
been felt as to which group they originally belonged
to, ' the Prophets ' or 'the Writings.' In the Septuagint
Version, the Book of Ruth follows the Book of Judges, Ruth and
and the Book of Lamentations follows that of Jeremiah. „^%" '
By many it has been thought that the Septuagint Ver- 'Ne0"m'
sion has thus preserved their original position ; in other
words, that the two books already ranked as Scripture
when the Canon of the Prophets was closed. According
to this supposition, the Books of Ruth and Lamentations
were not transferred to their place in the Hagiographa
of the Hebrew Bible, until the arrangement of the Jewish
Scriptures was finally decided upon by the Jewish
doctors of the middle ages. We hope, however, to show,
in the course of the following chapter, that there are
good reasons for regarding ' Ruth ' and ' Lamentations '
as having, from the first, been completely separate works
from ' Judges ' and ' Jeremiah,' and, therefore, as never
having been included among ' the Prophets,' except
where the influence of the Alexandrian Version may be
detected. The principle upon which the books of the
Septuagint Version are arranged in the extant copies will
fully account for the position assigned in them to Ruth and
Lamentations respectively. No account is taken of the
separateness of the two groups of the Hebrew Scriptures,
the Prophets and ' the Writings.' Regard is apparently
only paid to connexion of subject matter, or to con-

126 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. siderations of chronological sequence, as roughly deter-
mining the order of their arrangement. But even then
no uniformity of order is observed ; and the fact of the
extant MSS. being Christian in origin deprives their
evidence of any real value, when they are found in con
flict, as is the case in this question, with the uniform
testimony of Jewish tradition.
'The ^ With the recognition of the Prophets we naturally
in the Syna- associate their use in public worship. Probably, there-
££ervices. f°rej during the third century B. C, the lesson from the
Prophets (the Haphtarah) was added by the scribes to
the lesson from the Law (the Parashah) *. It was an
ingenious suggestion, but one without a word of support
from early literature, and first made in all probability by
Elias Levita, that the introduction of a lesson from ' the
Prophets ' arose during the persecution of the Jews by
Antiochus Epiphanes. According to this conjecture,
when Antiochus made the possession of a copy of 'the
Law ' punishable by the heaviest penalties (i Mace. i.
57), it was necessary to hide ' the rolls of the Laws ' ;
the scribes, therefore, determined to select the Syna
gogue lessons from the writings of -* the Prophets '
instead of from ' the Law ' ; and from that time forward
the use of the prophetic lesson retained its place in the
public services. Unfortunately for this conjecture, no
confirmation of it has yet been found in any early
testimony. It is far more probable, that the adoption
of a lesson from ' the Prophets ' corresponded with the
period of their admission into the Canon ; and that
their occasional liturgical usage, having from time to
time found general approval, facilitated their reception
1 Parashah = ' division,' or ' section.' Haphtarah = ' conclusion ' or
' dismissal ' (cf. ' Missa ').

THE SECOND CANON. 1 27
as Scripture. Whether they were suited for reading in Chap. v.
the Synagogue services, may very possibly have been
the test which decided the admission of a book into
the group of the Nebiim. It is possible that the
practice of reading portions in the Synagogue first
led to the idea of setting apart, as sacred, other books
besides the five books of the Law.
But the reading of ' the Prophets ' was not at first
arranged upon the same systematic plan as the reading
from ' the Law,' nor until some time after the Christian
era. In the New Testament, we have mention of the
reading, in the Synagogues, from ' the Prophets ' as well
as from 'the Law' (Luke iv. 16, 17, Acts xiii. 15, 27);
but from the passage in St. Luke's Gospel (iv. 16, 17), we
rather gather that our Lord read a passage from Isaiah,
which He either selected Himself, or read in accordance
with the chance selection of the Synagogue authorities.
We do not find, until several centuries after the
Christian era, any mention of other writings being
systematically x read in the Synagogue besides those
included in 'the Law and the Prophets,' and in this
Synagogue tradition we seem to have a confirmation of
the view that ' the Prophets ' were received into the
Canon before the Hagiographa. Also, in connexion
with this subject, it may be remarked that the Aramaic
Paraphrases, or Targums, of the Law and the Prophets
are much earlier in date than those which exist of the
Hagiographa ; and that, while the Targums of the Law
and the Prophets appear to have been prepared for the
1 That extracts from the Hagiographa were from time to time read in
the Synagogues, before the present Jewish Lectionary came into force, is
a very probable supposition. But later usage favours the view that the
reading of such extracts was for the purpose of brief and informal com
parison with the Lessons from the Law and the Prophets.

128 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. v. purpose of public reading, those of the Hagiographa
seem rather to have been intended for private use.
The Law Whether or no a recollection >of the time, when the
Prophets. Hebrew Canon consisted only of the Law and the
Prophets, is preserved in the frequent use of the phrase,
'the Law and the Prophets,' may be disputed. But the
possibility of the explanation may be acknowledged ;
and, if so, an illustration of this earlier stage in the history
of the formation of the Canon survives in the language
of the New Testament (e. g. Matt. v. 17, vii. 12, xxii. 40,
Luke xvi. 16, 29, 31, Acts xiii. 15, xxviii. 23).

CHAPTER VI.
THE THIRD CANON.
The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings.
The earliest intimation that we have of a third group chap. vi.
of writings being included among the Hebrew Scriptures
is obtained from the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus, which
was referred to in the previous chapter. The Prologue,
as we saw, was written in Greek, and was prefixed to the
Greek translation of the ' Wisdom of Jesus, the son of
Sirach,' that his grandson made in Egypt about the year
132 B.C. Three times over in the course of this Prologue
he speaks of the sacred Scriptures of the Jews, calling
them at one time ' The Law and the Prophets and the
others who followed after them,' at another ' The Law
and the Prophets and the other Books of our Fathers,'
at another ' The Law, the Prophets, and the rest of the
Books.' The employment of these terms justifies us in
supposing that the writer was acquainted with a recog
nised tripartite division of Scripture. But the expression,
by which he designates the third group, certainly lacks
definiteness. It does not warrant us to maintain, that
'the Writings ' or 'Kethubim ' were all, in their completed
form, known to the writer. What, however, it does
warrant us to assert, is that the writer fully recognises
the fact that other books could take, and some had
already taken, a ' tertiary ' rank by the side of ' the Law
K

130 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. vi. and the Prophets.' He is addressing himself to the
Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria ; he is translating
a work written in Hebrew by a devout Jew of Palestine ;
and, as he does not add any words either of qualification
or of explanation to his mention of this third group, we
may fairly assume that the beginning of the formation
of a third group of Sacred Books had been known for
some time, and that, in his day, it might be taken for
granted as known by Jews whether in Palestine or in
Egypt.
Books, When now we come to consider the history of this
not re- third group, we cannot, perhaps, hope to determine, with
scriptu/e, anv degree of precision, the origin of its formation. But
200 b.c we can conjecture, with some show of probability, what
the circumstances were that led to its commencement.
We may remember that, at the time when the group of
' the Prophets ' was in all probability closed, there existed
among the Jews an extensive religious literature outside
the limits of the Canon. The author of Koheleth
(Ecclesiastes), writing probably in the third century B.C.,
sighs over the number of books and the weariness of the
flesh resulting from their study (Eccles. xii. 12). The
great historical narrative of the Chronicler, comprising
our Books of Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, had pro
bably been completed in the early part of the same
century (cf. Neh. xii. 11, 22). Perhaps from the same
period had come the Book of Esther. The Books of
Job and Proverbs had long been well known to Jewish
readers, and the influence of the Book of Proverbs, in par
ticular, has left its mark upon the Wisdom of Sirach.
Large portions of the Psalter were doubtless well known,
especially through the Temple services. The Book of
Lamentations was commonly supposed to record the

THE THIRD CANON. I31
elegy of Jeremiah over the destruction of Jerusalem. In chap. vi.
the Song of Songs had come down one of the most per
fect specimens of early Hebrew poetry ; and in the Book
of Ruth a charming idyll of early prose narrative. These
writings, which are so well known to us, were probably
only samples, though doubtless the choicest ones, of an
abundant literature to which every Jew at the end of the
third century B. C. had access.
It is very possible, as has already been suggested, that, An appen-
at the close of the third century B.C., some of the writ- 'the Law
ings we have just mentioned occupied so conspicuous a "p^^ts:
position as to constitute an informal appendix to the
Canon of ' the Law and the Prophets.' Informal only ;
they were not yet admitted to the full honour* of
canonicity. In that reservation we have the only satis
factory explanation of the peculiarities which naturally
call for remark in ' the tripartite division ' of the Hebrew
Scriptures. Why, it is asked, are not the Books of Ezra
and Nehemiah, of Ruth, of Esther, and of Chronicles,
found among the narrative books of the second group ?
Why, again, are not the Books of Lamentations and of Anomalies
t-. 1 1 i-i -• *n tripartite
Daniel found among the prophetical writings of the division of
same Canon ? The only probable answer is that supplied fxpilhied.
by the recognition of development in the formation of
the Hebrew Canon. When the collection, called by the
name of ' the Prophets,' was being completed, the
writings that we have just referred to had not yet
obtained the degree of recognition, which alone could
cause them to be regarded as Scripture. When we ask
ourselves why they failed to obtain recognition, our
answer will be different in almost every instance. Some
would be excluded because in the treatment of their
subject-matter they differed so widely from the books
K 2

13a THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap^vi. included in the prophetic group; among these would
be Lamentations, the Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, and
Ruth. Others, which closely resembled the writings of
the second group, failed to find admission on account of
the recency of their composition ; among these would
be Chronicles, Esther, Ezra and Nehemiah. In the case
of two others, it is probable that their compilation had
not yet been completed at the time when the Canon of
the Prophets was concluded ; these were the Psalter and
the Book of Daniel. Books, unfitted, on such grounds,
for reading in the Synagogue services, would not be
admitted to ' the Nebiim,' the contents of which were
probably selected for that purpose principally.
Mediaeval The explanations which Jewish writers in later times
Expiana- put forward to account for the peculiarities of the tripar-
*2u.nade' tlte division are for the most part little else but fanciful
trifling, or, at the best, baseless speculation. Thus, for
instance, it was little else but trifling when they asserted
that the Books of Daniel and Esther, having been
written on foreign soil, did not merit a place among the
Prophets ; or that Daniel, not having been called to the
office of a prophet, could not have his writings placed in
the prophetical group. But, for the most part, Jewish
explanations of the three divisions of Scripture were
based on the assumption that they represented three
descending degrees of inspiration, an opinion, which, it
is needless to say, is destitute of any support from
historical evidence. The three grades of inspiration
were themselves merely the result of speculation based
upon the fact of the tripartite division. The tripartite
division of Hebrew Scripture accounts for the Rabbinic
theory: the Rabbinic theory is no evidence as to the
origin of the tripartite division.

THE THIRD CANON. 133
It is indeed strange to find the astounding theory put chap. vi.
forward in an English commentary that the tripartite An unlike-
division of the Hebrew Canon was derived from the lythcory-
words, quoted above, in the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus
(cf. The Speaker s Commentary, Apocrypha, vol. ii.
pp- 5, 38). It is, I think, quite incredible that words
occurring in a Greek preface to the translation of a
Hebrew work should have produced so lasting an effect
upon all subsequent Hebrew tradition as to have per
manently influenced the arrangement of the Books of
the Hebrew Canon. It is, too, I think, quite incredible
that the thrice repeated formula, employed in the
Prologue, should have been an invention of the Greek
Translator, and not rather the description of the
Hebrew Scriptures commonly used among the Jews.
The theory, indeed, hardly requires refutation ; and
while it could only have had its origin in the inability to
recognise the historical growth of the Hebrew Canon, it
illustrates the straits to which scholars are driven who
are unable to accept the view of the gradual formation
of the Canon, and are yet compelled to discover some
other plausible explanation for the origin and apparent
anomalies of its tripartite division.
We turn now to the subject of the formation of the The
third group. We must pass in review the events which Epoch. '"
occurred in Jerusalem, between the conclusion of the
Second Canon and what seems to have been, approxi
mately, the time of the commencement of the Third.
During this interval, men like Jason and Alcimus, had
brought the High Priesthood to the lowest stage of de
gradation. Their corruption and treachery had been
followed by the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes.
The latter tyrant, finding himself unable to bend, with

134 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. vi. a rapidity sufficient to please him, had endeavoured to
break, at a single blow, the obstinacy of the Jewish
people. The horrors of his persecution had been fol
lowed by a wild outbreak. The seemingly hopeless
struggle for freedom had been led by the patriotic sons
of Mattathias B.C. 167 (cf.Dan. xi. 34). Little by little,
in the face of overwhelming odds, the cause of the
Jewish patriots had triumphed. First of all, religious
freedom had been won ; then, after a time, civil liberty
had been obtained, foreign garrisons were withdrawn, the
old borders restored. Under the successive High Priest-
fonathan hoods of Jonathan and Simon, the brothers of Judas
simm 143- Maccabeus, it appeared as if complete independence had
135 BC' been attained, and as if the Jewish people had once more
entered upon a career of national greatness, united by
the ties of devotion to the religion of Jehovah.
The of ct of It appears a not unnatural supposition, that the en-
i68b.c.:»/j thusiasm of that unique religious revival originated the
effect. movement, which sought to expand the Canon of the
Hebrew Scriptures by the addition of another, a third,
group of writings. The impulse for such a movement would
not be far to seek. The subtle, but impolitic,- command
of Antiochus went forth to destroy the copies of the Jew
ish Law (1 Mace. i. 56, 57 2). He divined their influence,
but he misjudged his power to annihilate it. His order en
hanced, in the eyes of the patriot Jews, the value of the
treasure which they possessed in their national writings.
The destruction of books of the law would probably be
1 1 Mace. i. 56, 57, 'And when they had rent in pieces the books of the
law which they found, they burnt them with fire. And wheresoever was
found with any the book of the testament (better, covenant), or if any
consented to the law, the king's commandment was, that they should put
him to death ' (A. V.). Cf. Jos. Ant. xi. 5, 4 ^4><m'£cTo Si ei itov P't0\os
tiiptQA-n Upa koX vo/jlos.

THE THIRD CANON. 1 35
accompanied by the indiscriminate destruction of any chap. vi.
other ancient and carefully-cherished Hebrew writings.
On whatsoever documents the ignorant and brutal
soldiery of Antiochus could lay hands, they would treat
all alike as ' copies of the law ' in order to gain the reward
of their destruction. The pillage of Jerusalem and the
profanation of the Temple by the Syrian army must
have occasioned the loss of many a precious literary relic
of the past, which might otherwise have come down
to us. But the persecution of Antiochus, like that of
Diocletian 303 A.D., only succeeded in revealing to the
possessors of Scripture the priceless character of their
heritage. The blow of the persecutor ensured the
preservation of the Sacred Books. The power and
sanctity of Scripture were realised, when it was seen that
the arch-enemy of the nation sought to destroy the
religion of the Jews by destroying their books.
Amid the general revival of religion, of which the
renewal of the Temple services and the restoration of the
Temple fabric would be the most conspicuous signs, we
may be sure that a heightened veneration for the national
Scriptures played a significant and an important part.
It is, therefore, with feelings of special interest that we
come upon the traces of a tradition which connected a
movement, undertaken for the recovery, collection, and
preservation of ancient Jewish writings, with the great
name of Judas, the Maccabee. The tradition is to be An import-
found in the same spurious letter prefixed to the Second ""/J^''
Book of Maccabees that we had occasion to mention in *Macc.h.i5.
the last chapter. The passage runs as follows : ' And in
like manner Judas also gathered together for us all those
writings that had been scattered by reason of the war
that we had ; and they remain with us ' (2 Mace. ii. 14).

136 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap, vi. The spurious character of the Epistle, in which the
passage occurs, makes it, of course, impossible for us to
put implicit confidence in its statements. But its refer
ences to the Maccabean age are, by comparison with
its mention of Nehemiah, proportionately more trust
worthy, as the writer may be presumed to rely upon
a more nearly contemporary source of information.
Judas was a man, not of letters, but of action ; and
his death followed shortly after his greatest victory
(161 B.C.). Probably, therefore, if a movement for the
preservation of ancient Hebrew writings was set on foot
at this time, it was only by later popular legend imper
sonated in the name of the great hero, with whom the
war of Jewish independence, and everything connected
with it, were apt to be identified. Among the writings
' that had been scattered by reason of the war,' we may
well imagine that the majority of the ' Kethubim ' are to
be included. At this, as at the other stages in the for
mation of the Canon, the process of collection and of
reverent preservation is preliminary to that of admission
within the sacred limits. The religious leaders of the
patriotic party were not likely to delay long. In raising
to the dignity of Holy Scripture writings which had thus
escaped destruction, they would make a selection of those
which had exerted the greatest influence over the spirit
of the devout Jews during the time both of the great
national rising and of the humiliation which preceded it.
To invest them with the rank of Canonical Scripture
would be the best means of ensuring their preservation
and of perpetuating their spiritual ascendency. They
would be entrusted to the special charge of official
scribes ; the whole nation would at once be enlisted in
their protection and veneration.

THE THIRD CANON. 137
When, however, was the first step taken ? It is, per- chap. vi.
haps, only a conjecture ; but when we remember that the
recognition of, at least, some portion of the ' Kethubim '
is referred to in a writing not much later than 132 B. c.
(Prol. Ecclus.), we can hardly place it later in the century
than the important epoch of the revival under Jonathan
and Simon, who in turn succeeded to the leader
ship of the Patriotic party, after the death of Judas
(161-135 B. C).
The Psalter is the most important book of the ' Kethu- ThePsaiter.
bim,' at the head of which it stands in our Hebrew Bibles.
We have little doubt that the Psalter was the first book
in the third group to obtain admission to the rank of
Scripture. The Psalter had hitherto been used as the
service book of the Temple singers \ Henceforward it
was to become the hymn book of Israel. Whereas it
had been the sacred book of poetry for the priests and
Levites, it was now to minister to the spiritual thought
of the whole nation. Its final revision, which probably
immediately preceded its admission into the rank of
Scripture, was subsequent to the persecution of Antio
chus — if it be true, as is very generally supposed,
that the influence of the Maccabean era is to be traced in
Psalms xliv, lxxiv, lxxix, if not in others to which critics
have assigned a similar late date. The time of its final
promulgation in its present form and of its first recogni
tion as part of the people's Scriptures, may well have
been that of the great religious revival that accom
panied the success of the Maccabean revolt, and the
downfall of the Hellenizing party among the Priests
and nobles.
1 For the use of the Psalter in the Temple services cf. the Titles of Pss.
xxiv, xlviii, xciii, xciv, in the Septuagint Version.

138 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. vi. The influence of the Psalter as a book of Scripture
Quotedas soon made itself felt. Accordingly, whereas it is doubt -
iMacc""^. uu whether the Psalter is ever directly quoted by
l6- the son of Sirach, it is noticeable that in the First of
Maccabees, a book written at the close of the same
century, a quotation from the Psalter occurs, which is
introduced with the formula of citation from Scripture
(1 Mace. vii. 16 ; cf. Psalm lxxix. 2, 3). It is not for a
moment denied that collections of Psalms had been in
existence, and had been commonly known and used, long
before. Of this we may be satisfied without stretching
the interpretation of ' the Books (or things) of David '
(2 Mace. ii. 13), which Nehemiah is said to have col
lected, so as to make it mean necessarily the Psalms of
our Psalter.
The Chronicler makes free extracts from Psalms,
mingling them together (1 Chron. xvi. 8-36); but he gives
no sign of taking them from a sacred collection.
Evidence, to show that the Psalter had been finally
compiled, or was treated as authoritative Scripture, is
lacking before the Maccabean era. After that epoch,
the evidence is forthcoming. May we not suppose, that
its use by the devout and patriot Jews, during the three
or four years, when the Temple worship was suspended
(168-165), led to its general recognition immediately
afterwards? Withdrawn from special priestly usage, it
became at once the people's book of devotion.
An argument which has sometimes been brought
forward in order to prove that the Psalter had been
current in a completed form before the Maccabean
era is based upon 1 Chron. xvi. 36. It is alleged that
the Chronicler must have been acquainted with the
Psalter in its division into five books, in order to

THE THIRD CANON. 1 39
quote the doxology that concludes the cvith Psalm, chap. vi.
The argument, however, is not so convincing as it
would appear to be at first sight. On the one hand,
it is maintained by some, that the doxologies that
appear at the close of the Books of Psalms were not, as
the above-mentioned argument would pre-suppose, added
at the time when the Psalter was finally edited ; but
that those Psalms were selected to conclude the various
books of the Psalter which happened to terminate
with a suitable doxology. On the other hand, Professor i chron.
Cheyne suggests, ' it is not certain that any part of xvl' 3 '
Psalm evi. is quoted in i Chron. xvi ; vv. 34-36* consist
of liturgical formulae which were no more composed
solely for use in Psalm evi. than the doxology attached
to the Lord's Prayer was originally formulated solely
to occupy its present position. It is highly probable
that a doxology was uttered by the congregation at the
close of every Psalm used in the Temple service, and
there is no reason why not only the doxology in verse 36,
but the two preceding verses, should not have been
attached by the Chronicler to the Psalm which he had
made up simply as liturgical formulae ' (Cheyne's Origin
of the Psalter, p. 457). The division of the Psalter into
five books was more or less arbitrary. The compiler adds
to the concluding Psalms of the first four books (xii, lxxii,
lxxxix, evi) a liturgical formula. The formula in Ps. evi.
46 differs from the others, and its concluding verse is
longer by one clause than the parallel passage in 1 Chron.
The Chronicler would have had no object in omitting
it. But the editor of the Psalter may have adapted
the new words from the text of the Chronicler in
1 Chron. xvi. 36*.
If now it be asked what other books were admitted

140 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. vi. into the Canon at or about the same time as the Psalter,
Booksundis- we should reply, although with the reserve due to the
JilpuTd. necessary element of conjecture in our reply, Proverbs, Job,
Ruth, Lamentations, Ezra and Nehemiah, and, very pos
sibly, the Book of Daniel. With respect to the Books of
Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Esther, and Chronicles, there
are grounds for supposing that, in their case, admission
was more tardy. At least, it is natural to surmise that
objections, which were felt and expressed in later days,
to the retention of some of these books within the Canon,
very possibly reflect something of the hesitation that
preceded their acceptance as Scripture. There are also
other reasons, which I shall shortly mention, that make
it unlikely that these four books were admitted at the
earliest possible opportunity. They constitute what we
may venture to call the ' Antilegomena ' of the Old
Testament. They are the ' disputed ' books of the Hebrew
Canon. A few words are here necessary upon each of the
books included in this last group of the Canonical
writings. We shall be able to gather from our inquiry
something of the nature of the writings themselves, and
therefore judge better of the principles upon which they
were admitted. The Psalter has been already noticed.
Proverbs. The Book of Proverbs is a clear instance of a work
that has been gradually compiled. From the title of
chapter xxv we gather that the group of proverbs col
lected in chapters xxv-xxix, in the time of Hezekiah,
was added when one, if not both, of the other main
groups already existed (chaps, i-ix, x-xxiv). Unfortu
nately, the date at which the collection, made by the
men of Hezekiah's reign, was thus appended has not been
told us ; but it is evident that to this combined work

THE THIRD CANON. 141
were also added, at a much later time, the concluding chap. vi.
groups of proverbs (chaps, xxx and xxxi. 1-9, 10-31).
Three or four stages are thus clearly revealed by the
structure of the compilation. The latter groups, form
ing a sort of appendix, were probably added at the
time when the whole book was issued in its present
literary form, very probably not earlier than the fourth
century B. C. Its moral strength, the brightness and
variety of its maxims, the antiquity of its contents, and
the name of Solomon associated with the authorship of
its earlier portion, combined to place it in the highest
repute1. A book, however, which was so evidently
compiled for purposes of private religious edification
and so little adapted for purposes of public reading,
would have had no appropriate place among 'the
Prophets,' the group which, as we have seen, seems to have
been intended especially for public reading in the syna
gogues. But the Book of Proverbs would be among the
first to receive recognition in the formation of a more
miscellaneous group of religious writings. The practical
philosophy of Jewish wisdom (Khokmah) was by it
represented in the Hebrew Canon.
The Book of Job, which was, in all probability, com- Job.
posed during the period of the exile, belongs to a vein
of religious thought which, as may be shown by a
comparison of Job with the contents of Isaiah xl-
lxvi, seems to have exercised a profound influence
upon the religious conceptions of that epoch. Ob
viously of a very different class of writing from the
Prophets, it was not likely to be admitted into the
Canon until the formation of the ' Kethubim ' allowed
1 Its influence has left a strongly marked impression upon the Wisdom
of Sirach. Cf. Montefiore in the Jewish Quarterly Review, 1890, p. 490.

142 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.'
Chap. vi. room for poetical and philosophical writings. The group
of ' the Prophets ' had been occupied with the considera
tion of national events and the national religion. The
Book of Job appeared to deal with the troubles of in
dividual experience. From the earliest times it was
undoubtedly treated by the Jews as a strictly historical
work (cf. Davidson's Job, Cambridge Bible for Schools,
p. xiii). Whether a work of biography or imagination,
the Book of Job supplied a new element in the discussion
of one of the great problems of life, viewed from the
aspect of individual consciousness. It dealt with specu
lative questions. It had no fitting place in the Canon
save in the mixed group of ' the Kethubim.'
Ruth. The Book of Ruth, in its simplicity and picturesque-
ness, is one of the most attractive writings that have
come down to us from the pre-exilic literature. The
pedigree of David (Ruth iv. 18-22) was probably ap
pended long after its original composition, but may
possibly have facilitated the admission of the little book
into the Canon, either along with, or soon after, the
Psalter with which the name of David was inseparably
associated. In connexion with this suggestion, it is
noticeable that in the Talmudic order (Baba Bathra, 14 b)
the Book of Ruth stands immediately before the Psalter,
the book of David's genealogy preceding the book of
his Psalms. (See Chapter XII.)
It has already been mentioned that by some scholars
the Book of Ruth is considered to have originally formed
part of the Book of Judges. In support of their view,
they appeal to the traditional position of the book in
the Septuagint version, and to the statements of Jerome
respecting the Hebrew custom of his day. But Jerome's
opinion in the matter adds nothing, as we shall see later on,

THE THIRD CANON. 143
to the evidence of the Septuagint ; while the arrangement chap. vi.
of the books in the Septuagint version, according to
subject-matter, deprives the juxtaposition of Ruth to
Judges of any real significance. With this exception,
the Hebrew tradition is uniform, that the book belonged,
from the first, to ' the Kethubim.' And this is what we
should gather from a comparison of the style and con
tents of the Book of Ruth with the concluding chapters
of the Book of Judges. The quiet idyllic picture which it
gives of Palestine stands in sharp contrast to the wild
scenes of disorder described in Judges xvii-xxi. Nor can
we ignore the thought, that in the Book of Judges, which
deals for the most part with events of national interest
and political importance, transacted also generally in
the northern part of the country, we should not expect
to find a quiet domestic tale, of which the scene is laid
at Bethlehem, a town of Judah. Ruth has more resem
blance to Samuel than to Judges.
The Book of Lamentations has occasioned a similar Lament*
difficulty. In the Septuagint version, it has a place
immediately after Jeremiah, and a preface is prefixed to
it stating that it is the composition of Jeremiah. Jerome
affirms that in the Hebrew Scriptures 'Lamentations' was
reckoned with Jeremiah among 'the Prophets.' The
tradition of Jeremiah's authorship, commonly current
among Jews and Christians alike, would be sufficient to
account for the position of the book in the Septuagint
version, and for the tradition that it once had a place
amongst the ' Prophets.' Leaving out of the question
the matter of authorship, which is very far from being
certainly ascertained, it will be sufficient here to point
out the improbability that the Book of Jeremiah, which
closes with the historical narrative of chapter Hi,

144 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap, vl ever had a poetical section appended to it. If it
be objected that the writings of Isaiah furnish an exact
parallel, the concluding section (Isaiah xl-lxvi) hav
ing been appended to the historical narrative (xxxvi-
xxxix) which concludes the prophecies of Isaiah I,
we may reply that the analogy is a misleading one.
There is all the difference in the world between a long
prophetical section like Isaiah xl-lxvi and the little
group of poems, some of them containing acrostic
poetry, comprised in the Book of Lamentations. Such
poetry partook little of the character of writing
adapted for inclusion among ' the Prophets ' ; Isaiah
xl-lxvi seemed exactly to coincide with it. If, again,
'Lamentations' had been appended to the writings of the
prophet at or before the time of the formation of the
second Canonical group, I can see no sufficient reason
for its separation at a later time, nor any likelihood
that Jewish scribes would have permitted so innovating
a change. It is more natural, I believe, to suppose
that the poetical character of the work, which excluded
it from 'the Prophets,' caused it to be introduced, at
the same time with the Psalter and with Job, among the
miscellaneous books of ' the Kethubim.'
Ezra and The Books 'Ezra' and 'Nehemiah' form one work in
Nehemiah. the Hebrew manuscripts ; and there is no reason to
doubt that they were not only originally united, but
that they originally formed the concluding portion of
the Books of Chronicles. The fact of their having been
separated from the Books of Chronicles and of their
occupying a position, in the traditional order of the
Hebrew Bible, in front of, instead of, as we should
expect from chronological reasons, after, the Books of
Chronicles, is at first sight a strange circumstance, and

THE THIRD CANON. 145
difficult to account for. But it receives a satisfactory chap. vi.
explanation from the probable history of their admis
sion into the Canon. The narrative contained in 'the
Prophets' had closed with the middle of the exile
(2 Kings xxv. 27). We may well fancy how essential
it would seem, that some record of the return from the
exile, of the restoration of the Temple, of the rebuilding
of the city walls, of the first reading of ' the Law,' should
be included in the writings of the Jewish Scriptures.
The latter portion of the Chronicler's work, which seems
to have been compiled not earlier than the beginning
of the third century B.C., offered just what was required.
If now we adopt the conjecture, that a portion, identical
with our books, Ezra and Nehemiah, was separately
admitted into the Canon, and that, at some later time,
the remaining portion, i.e. the Books of Chronicles, re
ceived similar recognition, we are able to reconcile the
phenomena of the identity of style and structure (cf.
2 Chron. xxxvi. 22, 23, Ezra i. 1-3) with the difficulty
presented, at first sight, by the position assigned to Ezra
and Nehemiah, separate from and yet in front of Chron
icles. That Ezra and Nehemiah had already been detached
from the Chronicles in the days of Jesus, the son of Sirach
(b. c. 180), is certainly possible, and is, perhaps, favoured
by the reference made to the name of Nehemiah in Ecclus.
xlix. 13 (cf. Neh. vii. i). The allusion in the same pas
sage to Zerubbabel and Joshua is probably derived from
Haggai and Zechariah (Hag. i. 12, 14, ii. 2, 4, 21, 23 ; Zech.
iii. 1-9), and is therefore inapplicable for this argument.
The Book of Daniel. The present is not the place to Daniel.
enter into details of the thorny controversy respecting
the date and authorship of the Book of Daniel. For
our purpose, however, it is important to call attention
. L

146 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap, vl to one point. We may put it in the form of a question.
Supposing that so remarkable a work, dealing in a
spirit of prophecy with the destiny of the great empires
of the world, had been well known to the Jews at the
time that the group of ' the Prophets ' was formed, is it
probable that it would have failed to receive a place in
that portion of the Canon ? It is, I believe, most im
probable. The inference is obvious. Either the book
was not known at the conclusion of the third century
B. c. ; or it had not yet been compiled. Of the two
alternatives, the former, I confess, seems to me the
more improbable ; the latter has a good deal to be said
in its favour, (a) It would be difficult to suppose that
a book of such importance could remain in obscurity.
(b) The character of the Hebrew in which it is written
favours the hypothesis of a late date, (c) The absence
of any reference by the son of Sirach to Daniel, in his
list of the ' famous men,' would be most surprising, sup
posing that he had been acquainted with our Book of
Daniel. In a somewhat similar list, enumerating the
heroes of the Jewish race, which occurs in a book com
posed less than a century later, we find allusion made
both to the Three Children and to Daniel in the den
of lions (cf. i Mace. ii. 59, 60). (d) To some readers a yet
more convincing proof of the date of composition is
afforded by the contents of chaps, viii, ix, xi, in which the
incidents described evidently correspond with details of
history, politics, movements of armies, treaties, and royal
marriages, that belong, during the first half of the second
century B.C., to the mutual relations of Syria, Egypt, and
Palestine. Judging by analogy, such detailed descrip
tion has less resemblance to the style of prediction of
the future than to that of the apocalyptic narration of

THE THIRD CANON. 147
the past, (e) It may also be noted, that while no quota- chap. vi.
tion from, or allusion to, the book occurs in writings of
an earlier date than the Maccabean era, references to it
are frequent after the middle of the second century B. C.
The oldest portion of the Sibylline Oracles (iii. 396-400),
written possibly about 130 B.C., shows acquaintance with
it. Its contents are referred to by the author of 1 Macca
bees (i. 54, ii. 59, 60) ; and the rise of Jewish apocalyptic
literature, which was so largely coloured by imitation
of Daniel, has never been attributed to a date earlier
than the latter half of the second century B. C. But
whatever conclusion be come to upon the question of
its date, its admission to the Canon was evidently not
long delayed after the commencement of the formation
of the Kethubim group1.
That the remaining books, which I have called the 'Antiiego-
' Antilegomena ' of 'the Kethubim,' were admitted with
great hesitation, and after considerable delay, and that,
even after their admission to Canonical rank, they were,
for a long time, viewed with suspicion and but little used,
seems to be a natural conclusion to be drawn from the
dearth of reference to them in the Jewish literature of
the next two centuries (100 B.C.-100 A.D.), and from the
rumours of opposition, more especially to the Song of
Songs, Esther, and Ecclesiastes, of which we find echoes
in later Hebrew tradition.
The Song of Songs is derived from the best period of TiuSong of
Hebrew literature. At a time when the poetry of the mgs' -
Psalms, Job, and Lamentations was being received into
1 The dependence of the first portion of Baruch (i-iii. 8) upon Daniel
(chap, ix) is clearly shown by Baruch i. 15, 16, 17, 21, ii. 1, 9, 11, 19. But
the composition or re-edition of Baruch (1 ) belongs to a much later date than
that traditionally assigned to it: cf. Schiirer, Gesch. desjiid. Folks, 2ter Theil,
p. 721, and Psalms of Solomon (ed. Ryle and James), pp. Ixxii-lxxvii.
L 2

148 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. vi. the sacred Canon, it would have been natural to include
so exquisite a poem, which was popularly ascribed to
Solomonic authorship. Having once been admitted,
however, grave objections seem to have been raised
against it. Jewish scholars were perplexed by the diffi
culty of discovering a suitable interpretation to its seem
ingly secular theme. Allusions to the book are not
found in literature before the Christian era. It is in
cluded in the list of Hebrew Scriptures recorded by
Melito (170 A. D.). According to Jewish tradition, its
canonicity formed the subject of discussion among the
Jewish doctors of the first and second centuries A. D.1
Etdesiastes. Ecclesiastes, which had been written probably in the
third cent. B. C, contained much that must have sounded
strangely in the ears of Jews, much that, we know, gave
offence to some readers. But its inclusion in the Canon
had very probably taken place, before these objections
were fully realised. The name of Solomon had possibly
contributed to its admission into the group, which already
included the Proverbs and the Song of Songs. Its place
in the Canon represents one phase of the spirit of Jewish
wisdom, or Khokmah, in an age of intellectual questioning.
As we shall see, its methods of dealing with the problems
of life gave rise to grave doubts among the Jews, as to
whether its statements could be reconciled with the
' Law,' and, therefore, whether it could be retained within
the Canon. But it is everywhere implied in these dis
cussions, that the book was already in the number of the
Scriptures, and, according to a Talmudic story2, it was
1 See Chap. ix.
2 See Jer. Berakoth, Chap. vii. 2 (fol. nb), 'The king (Jannaeus) said
to him, " why didst thou mock me by saying that 900 sacrifices were re
quired, when the half would have sufficed?" "I did not mock thee,"'

THE THIRD CANON. 149
quoted as Scripture by Simon ben Shetach in the reign chap, vi.
of Alexander Jannaeus (b. c. 105-79). Along with the
Song of Songs, its canonicity, according to Jewish
tradition, was discussed and ratified at the Council
of Jamnia (90 and 118 A.D.). See Cheyne, Job and
Solomon, pp. 279 seq.
The Book of Esther, the composition of which may Esther.
very probably be assigned to the third century B.C.,
became in later days one of the most popular writings
of the Kethubim. But its admission to the Canon was
either so long delayed, or was afterwards, for some
reason, regarded with such disfavour, that in some
quarters among the Jews of the first century A.D., as
we shall see later on, it was omitted altogether from
their list of sacred books (e. g. Melito, cf. chap. xi). The
doubt about its acceptance may possibly have arisen
in connexion with the Feast of Purim. The book con
tains the explanation of the origin and observance of
that feast. Was objection taken to the book on the
ground of its inculcating a feast not commanded in the
Law? Or did the observance of the feast on the four
teenth of Adar (Esth. ix. 19) appear to add undue
importance to the festival which commemorated the
victory of Judas Maccabeus over Nicanor on the thir
teenth of Adar (B.C. 161), and was it thus capable of
being regarded with suspicion and jealousy by the
Pharisee faction, who, throughout the greater part of
the first century B.C., were at deadly enmity with the
Asmonean house ? Or, was it that the fast commanded
to be observed on the thirteenth of Adar, in commemo
ration of Haman's attempt to destroy the Jews on that
replied Simon, " thou hast paid thy share, and I mine . . . Verily it is
written (Eccles. vii. 12): For wisdom is a defence, and money is a defence" '

150 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. vi. day (Esth. iii. 13, ix. 1), conflicted with the feast-day of
Nicanor, and therefore gave offence to the populace ?
Such are some of the various suggestions that have been
made. Yet another ground of objection may have been
found in the absence of the sacred Name. This peculiar
feature, which it shares with 1 Maccabees (in the best
text), may be accounted for, either by the exaggerated
dread of profanity in the frequent use of the sacred
Name, or, as Riehm suggests (Einleit. ii. 341) by the
writer having intended his work not for religious usage,
but for reading on occasions of secular festivity. The
same explanation, which accounts for the absence of the
sacred Name, will account for the hesitation to place
the work on a level with the rest of Scripture.
' The day of Mordecai ' was observed in the days of
the writer of 2 Maccabees (xv. 36). Whether, in con
sequence, we should be justified in inferring the general
recognition of Esther among the sacred books at the
beginning of the first century A.D., is obviously a very
doubtful question. All we can say is, that it was recog
nised among the sacred books by Josephus, who, when
speaking of the Canon of Scripture, evidently had the
Book of Esther in view, as the last book, in point of date
of composition, that had been admitted into the sacred
category (Joseph. Contr. Ap. i. 8).
The temper and tone of the book, perhaps, commended
it to the choice of a generation which still smarted under
the recollection of the cruelties perpetrated by Antio
chus Epiphanes, and may account for its acceptance
in the second century B.C. ; but, with equal probability,
it may have incurred unpopularity with the more
thoughtful spirits among the teachers of the people in
the first century B. C. Was it the recrudescence of per-

THE THIRD CANON. 151
secution that revived the popularity of the book ? Did chap. vi.
the attitude of the Roman Empire recall the savage
purpose of Haman, and restore the narrative of Esther
to favour ? Or, was it the resemblance between Haman,
the Agagite, and Herod, the Idumean ?
We mention the Books of Chronicles last of all, not TheBooksof
. ... . . , , .. , Chronicles.
because, in their case, canonicity has been more disputed
than in the case of the three last-mentioned books, but
because in the traditional order of the Canon they pre
sent the appearance of being added as an appendix. The
detachment of Ezra and Nehemiah from the main work,
their admission into the Canon as a separate narrative,
and their position there immediately in front of Chroni
cles, form a line of probable evidence, that the canonicity
of Chronicles was recognised at a considerably later
date than that of Ezra and Nehemiah. But at what
date did this take place? In our Saviour's time, the
Canon of Hebrew Scripture very probably concluded
with Chronicles. The real pertinency of the argument
which has been alleged in favour of this view, based
upon our Lord's appeal to the whole category of
innocent blood shed 'from the blood of Abel to the
blood of Zachariah,' is only then understood, when it is
seen that He is not referring to the limits of time, from
Abel to Joash (Matt, xxiii. 35, Luke xi. 51, cf. 2 Chron.
xxiv. 20-22), but to the limits of the sacred Canon,
from Genesis to Chronicles — from the first to the last
book in Hebrew Scripture : it was equivalent to an
appeal, in Christian ears, to the whole range of the Bible
from Genesis to Revelation.
We have nothing further to go upon than probability,
in assuming that the four last-named books, Song of
Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, and Chronicles, were accepted

152 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. vi. into the Canon at a later date than the other writings of
the Hagiographa. If so, they may have occupied, for
some time, the position of ' Antilegomena,' or disputed
books, accepted by some Jews, and rejected by others.
The books of the Hagiographa were not continuously
read in the Synagogues. They were not, therefore, esti
mated by the same test of public usage. It would be
possible, I should think,- for a book to hover a long time
in suspense, having been admitted into the sacred list at
a time of popular religious enthusiasm, but having after
wards incurred suspicion, in consequence of doubts as
to its orthodoxy, raised by the factious jealousy or
officious zeal of learned scribes. But, once admitted, a
book was never likely to be excluded. The dread of
novelty, which protected the Canon against encroach
ment, helped also to appease the resentment against
writings that had already received a quasi-recognition.
The fact of a book having once been received within
the list of the national Scripture never failed to out
weigh, in the long run, the scruples that were felt at its
doubtful orthodoxy.
There are unfortunately wide gaps in the external
evidence, which stretches over more than two centuries
of Jewish literature, from the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus,
written about 132 B. c, down to the Contra Apionem of
Josephus, written at the close of the first century A. D.
But the external evidence requires separate considera
tion, and we must devote to it the following chapter.

CHAPTER VII.
THE third CANON (continued).
i. The Greek Prologue to Ecclesiasticus. This writing chap. vii.
has already been referred to ; and attention has been Greek pro.
drawn to the importance of its testimony, the earliest l°f^a%fucs
that has come down to us, respecting the ' tripartite '32 BC-
division of the Canon.' The vagueness of the writer's
words, in designating the third division, stands in sharp
contrast to the precision with which he describes the
first two divisions by the very names that have tradi
tionally been attached to them. The vagueness, such as
it is, is probably due to the hitherto undefined character
of the canonicity, granted to the miscellaneous contents
of the new group. But the suggestion which has some
times been made, that the writer of the Prologue con
sidered his grandfather's work could ultimately take
rank with those ' other' writings, among the Scriptures
of the Jews, is not justified by the language of the open
ing sentence. Its importance makes it desirable I
should quote it here in extenso, rambling and obscure
though it is.
' Whereas many and great things have been delivered
unto us by the law and the prophets and by the others
that have followed upon them, for which it is due to
commend Israel for instruction and wisdom ; and since
it behoves those who read not only to become skilful
themselves, but also such as love learning to be able
to profit them that are without, both by speaking and

154 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. vii. writing; my grandfather Jesus, seeing he had much given
himself to the reading of the law and the prophets and
the other books of the fathers, and had gotten therein
sufficient proficiency, was drawn on also himself to write
something pertaining to learning and wisdom, to the
intent that those who love learning might, after giving
their attention to these words also, make yet further
progress in their life according to the law.'
The exact meaning of the last sentence may be ob
scure ; but there is no thought of putting the Wisdom
of Sirach into competition with the writings ' of the
fathers.' It is affirmed that the author's sole object was
to assist others to a closer walk in accordance with the
law, and that his assiduous studies in ' the law, prophets,
and the other books' especially fitted him for the task of
counselling them. The translator concludes the Prologue
with the remark, that he intends his version ' for those
also who, living abroad, are wishful to be learners, being
engaged in a moral reform leading to a strict life ac
cording to the law.'
The translator, if he were like the rest of his fellow-
countrymen, would certainly not have placed 'the other'
writings on the same level with ' the faw and the pro
phets ' ; still less, we believe, would he have regarded
any work, so recent as that of his grandfather, as deserv
ing of a place among ' the books of the fathers.'
His view of ' the other books ' may be thus ex
plained. He was aware of the two divisions of Holy
Scripture, ' the law and the prophets,' which had long
stood over against, and separate from, the great mass of
Hebrew literature. But he was aware also that certain
other writings had recently been gradually raised above
the rest of Jewish literature and had become separated

THE THIRD CANON. 155
from it, reverence, affection, and usage causing them to Chap. vii.
be treated as similar, though not to be reckoned as equal,
in holiness, to ' the law and the prophets.' Whether
this third group already contained in 132 B.C. the whole
of the Kethubim, may reasonably be doubted.
2. The Septuagint Version. It is disappointing to «. The
find how little evidence to the Canon is to be derived version"
from the LXX version. The version must have been com- begun circ.
menced by the translation of ' the Law ' about the year 2S0B-C'
250 B. C. The translation of other books followed ; but,
outside ' the Law,' there seems to have been no unity of
plan. The books were translated by different hands,
and at different times. Versions of the same book com
peted, as it were, for general acceptance. Those were
accepted which found most general favour. With the pos
sible exception of the Pentateuch \ the version contains
simply those renderings of books which, having in course
of time most recommended themselves to. the Jewish
residents in Alexandria, outlived, because they were
preferred to, all other renderings..
We infer from the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus that in possibly com-
132 B.C. a Greek translation already existed of ' the Law i32 b.c
and the Prophets and the other writings.' ' For the same
things uttered in Hebrew, and translated into another
tongue, have not the same force in them : and not only
these things (i. e.the Wisdom of Sirach), but the law itself
and the prophets, and the rest of the books have no small
difference, when they are spoken in their own language.'
The translation of some disputed books of the Hagio
grapha had clearly taken place before the year 132 B.C.
1 That a Translation of the Torah was executed at the request or at the
expense of an Egyptian prince is the least that may be inferred from the
Jewish tradition underlying the Letter of Aristeas and the statements of
Josephus (Ant. xii. 2, Cont. Ap. ii. 4) and Philo ( Vila Mosis ii. 5).

156 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. vii. Whether all of them had been then translated, we can
not pretend to say for certain. It appears that the Greek
translation of the Books of Chronicles was known to
Eupolemus, the historian (circ. 150 B.C.)1, and that, accord
ing to the subscription to the Book of Esther, the transla
tion of that book may possibly be dated at 178 B.C. But
the mere fact of the translation of a book does not convey
anything to us as regards its position in the Canon.
The inclusion of the so-called Apocryphal Books in
the LXX version is sometimes alleged to be a proof, that
the Alexandrian Jews acknowledged a wider Canon of
Scripture than their Palestinian countrymen. But this
is not a legitimate inference. Our copies of the LXX
are derived from Christian sources ; and all that can
certainly be proved from the association of additional
books with those of the Hebrew Canon, is that these
other books found favour with the Christian com
munity. Doubtless, they would not thus have found
favour with the Christians, if they had not also enjoyed
high repute among the Jews, from whom they were ob
tained along with the undoubted books of the Hebrew
Canon. The fact, however, that, neither in the writings
of Philo, nor in those of Josephus — Jews who both make
use of the LXX version — have we any evidence favouring
the canonicity of the Apocryphal Books, is really conclu
sive against their having been regarded as Scripture by
Greek-speaking Jews before the second century A.D.
The testimony of the LXX version has chiefly a nega
tive value. The translation of the books by different
hands, and apparently without concert, would hardly
have taken place when the Canon was fully determined.
The only considerable portion of the translation done at
1 Cf. Freudenthal, quoted by Schiirer, ii. p. 733.

THE THIRD CANON. 1 57
the same time and by the same hands is the Pentateuch ; chap. vii.
and the Pentateuch, as we have seen, was probably the
only certainly recognised Canon at the middle of the
third cent. B.C. The want of uniformity, the inequalities
and inaccuracies which characterize the rest of the trans
lation, show that its execution was not part of a sacred
duty, nor even carried out in deference to any official
requirement. It may fairly be questioned, whether the
Alexandrine Jews could have had any idea of the
canonicity of such books as Daniel and Esther, when
translations of these books were made, in which the text
was allowed to differ so widely from the original as in
the LXX version, and Haggadic variations were freely
interpolated. Unfortunately we do not know when the
renderings were made. The resemblance in the style of
the LXX version of Ecclesiastes to that of the version of
Aquila has been remarked upon. But it is unreasonable
to build upon this resemblance the theory that the LXX
version of Ecclesiastes was rendered by Aquila himself.
It belongs to the same school ; but the improbability * of
the suggestion that Ecclesiastes was not translated before
the end of the first century A.D., needs no demonstration.
Yet, even if this were shown, the date of the Greek
translation would prove little as to the date at which
the canonicity of the Book was determined.
q. The First Book of Maccabees, which was composed a- T Macca-
J J r bees.
probably at the close of the second cent. B.C. or early in
the first cent. B.C., contains a reference to the Psalms,
introduced with a formula of quotation from Scripture,
' Whereupon they believed him ; howbeit he took of
them threescore men, and slew them in one day accord
ing to the words %vhich he wrote, " The flesh of the saints
1 See pp. 1 48 f.

158 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. vii. have they cast out, and their blood have they shed round
about Jerusalem, and there was none to bury them "
(1 Mace. vii. 16, 17 ; cf. Ps. lxxix. 2, 3).
We also find in this book (ch. ii. 59, 60) a mention of
Ananias, Azarias, and Mesael, who ' by believing were
saved out of the flame,' and of Daniel who ' for his inno-
cency was delivered from the mouth of the lions.' Their
names are commemorated after the mention of Abraham,
Joseph, Phinehas, Joshua, Caleb, David, and Elijah. It
is probable that the speech of Mattathias is intended to
pass in review a list of heroic names, familiar to his
hearers through the writings contained in the Canon of
Scripture. But, though it proves that the contents of
the Book of Daniel were well known, it cannot be
claimed as establishing anything more than the proba
bility of the book being at that time regarded as Canon
ical. The reference in 1 Mace. i. 54 to Daniel's words
in Dan. ix. 24-27 is undoubted ; but proves nothing
more for our purpose than acquaintance with the book.
4. Phiio. 4. The writings of Philo, who died about 50 A.D., do
not throw very much positive light upon the history of
the Canon. To him, as to other Alexandrine Jews, the
Law alone was in the highest sense the Canon of Scrip
ture, and alone partook of divine inspiration in the most
absolute degree.
Philo's writings, however, show that he was well
acquainted with many other books of the Old Testa
ment besides the Pentateuch. He quotes from Joshua,
Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, the Minor
Prophets, Psalms, Proverbs, Job, and Ezra. According
to some scholars he is said to show acquaintance with
books of the Apocrypha. But this is very doubtful ;
and, even if it be granted, he certainly never appeals to

THE THIRD CANON. 159
them in support of his teaching in the way that he does chap, vn
to books included in the Hebrew Canon, and never
applies to them the formulae of citation which he em
ploys, when referring to the acknowledged books of the
Jewish Scriptures. By comparison with his quotations
from the Pentateuch, his quotations from the other
sacred writings are very scanty ; but it is observable that
even in these few extracts he ascribes an inspired origin
to Joshua, Samuel, Kings, Ezra, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Hosea, and Zechariah. The negative value of
his testimony is strong, though not conclusive, against
the canonicity of any book of the Apocrypha, or of any
work not eventually included in the Hebrew Canon.
On the other hand, the absence of any reference in his
writings to Ezekiel, Daniel, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs,
Esther, Ruth and Lamentations, to which some would
also add Chronicles, must also be taken into account \
Undoubtedly we have no right to expect that every
book of the Old Testament will be quoted in the writings
of a single author. Personal prejudices and predilections,
the absence of any point of contact between a book of
Scripture and the author's particular subject, may often
account for an apparent silence. But, in the case of a
religious writer so voluminous as Philo, and possessed
with so ardent a veneration for his people's Scriptures,
1 Whether or not Chronicles (i. vii. 14) is quoted in De Congr. erud.gr.
§ 8, its acknowledgment is practically implied in the quotation from Ezra
(viii. 2, cf. De confus. ling. § 28). On the subject of Philo's quotations
I may perhaps venture to refer the reader to my own book, Philo and Holy
Scripture (Macmillan, 1895), in which all Philo's citations from and
allusions to the books of the Old Testament have been extracted and
arranged. N. B. The quotations from Hosea (xiv. 8, 9, cf. De plant. N. § 33) and
Zechariah (vi. 12, cf. De confus. ling. § 14) are sufficient attestation to his
use of the Minor Prophets, which were treated as one book.

160 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. vn. we are conscious that we are hardly justified in ascribing
to merely accidental causes the total absence of any
allusion to six, or seven, of the books of the Hagio
grapha. Considering the strange treatment accorded to
the Books of Daniel and Esther in the LXX version, it
is more than probable that Philo, like other Jews in
Alexandria, had not learned to attach to them the value
of Canonical Scripture. The doubts, too, which were
elsewhere felt respecting Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs,
and Esther, may very reasonably incline us to suppose
that Philo's silence respecting them was not altogether
accidental. The possibility that Ruth is to be included
with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah, may fairly
.be taken into account.
De vita A famous passage in Philo's De Vita Contemplativa
%"", do"ubtfui § 3 (ii- 475), which so clearly speaks of the tripartite divi-
evidence. sjon Qc ^ neDrew Canon, ' laws and oracles, delivered
by prophets, and hymns and the other (books) by which
knowledge and piety are mutually increased and per
fected,' deserves mention, on account of its having been
so often referred to in connexion with the history of the
Jewish Canon. But doubts have been entertained as to
the genuineness of the passage. The treatise in which
it occurs has been supposed by some recent students of
Philo's works to have been written in the third or fourth
cent. A.D.1 Whether this be so or not, we are precluded
from adducing it, with any confidence, as evidence to the
Jewish thought of the first cent. A.D. As, however, the
passage only relates to the division of the sacred Canon,
for which we have plenty of evidence elsewhere, and does
1 Lucius, Die Therapeuten (1879). On the other side, see Edersheim,
Did. Christ. Biog., 3. 'Philo'; and Massebieau, Le traiti de la Vie Con
templative et la question des Thirapeutes, Paris, 1888.

THE THIRD CANON. l6l
not affect its contents, the fact of its genuineness being Chap. vii.
disputed is not a matter of any vital importance.
5. The New Testament. The writings of the New Testa- 5- The New
ment furnish clear evidence to the 'tripartite division'
of the Hebrew Canon of Scripture. Our Lord's words
'that all things must needs be fulfilled which are written and 'the
tft'faa j^ti tc
in the Law of Moses, and the Prophets, and the Psalms division;
concerning me' (Luke xxiv. 44), can haidly be under- ^"ke xx,v'
stood on any other supposition ; but they do not warrant
the assertion, which has sometimes been made, that they
prove the completion of the Hebrew Canon in our Lord's
time. Our Lord appeals to the Messianic predictions
contained in the three divisions of Jewish Scripture.
He does not, however, apply the title of ' Psalms ' to the
whole group of 'the Kethubim.' He singles out the
Psalter, we may imagine, from among the other writings
of this group, because the Messianic element in it was
conspicuous, and because, of all the writings outside
' the Law and the Prophets,' this book was the best
known and had produced the deepest impression upon
the religious feeling of the Jews. Our Lord's reference
to the group of ' the Prophets ' (John vi. 45) is not in
consistent with acquaintance with the three divisions of
the Canon ; and similar evidence may be derived from
the Acts of the Apostles (vii. 42, xiii. 40).
Quotations are found in the writings of the New Books of
Testament from all the books of the Old Testament, quoted: ex-
except Obadiah, Nahum, Ezra and Nehemiah, Esther, #«»«*'«»•
Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. The absence of any
reference to Obadiah and Nahum does not affect the ques
tion of the canonicity of these books ; the whole collection
of the Twelve Minor Prophets was by the Jews treated en
bloc as one canonical work, while the brevity of the two
M

162 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. vii. books in question will quite account for their not having
chanced to furnish appropriate material for quotation.
When we turn to the books of ' the Kethubim,' the
absence of any citation from, or reference to, Ezra and
Nehemiah does not call for remark, as affecting the
question of the canonicity of these books, seeing that
reference to the Chronicles is undisputed (Matt, xxiii.
$5, Luke xi. 51), and the recognition of Chronicles pre
supposes that of Ezra and Nehemiah.
Esth., Song The three ' disputed ' books, Esther, Song of Songs,
Ecaiesfnot and Ecclesiastes, receive from the New Testament no
referred to; SUpport; either by quotation, or by allusion, for their place
among the Canonical Scriptures. On the other hand, it
would be rash to infer from their contents not being
mentioned or referred to, that the writers of the New
Testament did not regard them as canonical. For it
cannot be said that the contents of these books were
at all especially likely to supply matter for quotation or
illustration in the New Testament writings. If we ask
ourselves, whether, supposing these three books to have
been included in the Canon, there would be anything
improbable in their not being referred to in the New
Testament, considering the peculiar character of each
of them, there can be little doubt what an unprejudiced
reply would be.
Groups to It is perhaps more to the purpose, in order to arrive at
leimg-fr* a perfectly fair judgment respecting the ' silence ' of the
cognised. New Testament, to have regard not so much to the fact
that individual books are not quoted or referred to, as
to the fact that the groups of books to which they belong
are very definitely recognised. The testimony of the
New Testament to the latest written book of the Canon,
'Daniel,' is very explicit (Matt. xxiv. 15); and the

THE THIRD CANON. 163
allusion to the Book of Chronicles in Matt, xxiii. 35, chap. vii.
Luke xi. 51, admits, as has been mentioned before, of
a most suitable explanation, when it is regarded as an
appeal to the last book in the completed Hebrew
Scriptures. If so, the recognition of the last book in
the sacred collection may possibly imply the recognition
of all the others, even though they are not all directly
cited. Thus Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes may reason
ably be imagined to have long been popularly associated
in men's minds with the writings of Solomon, and the
Book of Esther with Daniel and Nehemiah, and all
three, therefore, to have naturally been included in the
Canon. Of course, this is purely hypothetical ; but all
three disputed works may well have belonged to the
Canon, without either becoming the favourite literature
of the New Testament writers, or furnishing material
which in any way affected their style, or influenced their
thought, or lent itself naturally for uses of quotation.
Against the hasty reasoning that, because these three
disputed books are not referred to in the New Testa
ment, they were, therefore, not reckoned in the Hebrew
Canon by the first Christian writers, it must be urged,
(1) that these same books were apparently regarded
as canonical, at the close of the first century A.D., byiK T.pre-
the author of 4 Esdras and by Josephus, and (2) that computed
the references in the New Testament to the Old Testa- ano"
ment Scriptures lead the unprejudiced reader to sup
pose, that the Jewish Scriptures were regarded in the
middle of that century as a complete and finished col
lection, the sanctity of which would utterly preclude
the idea of any further alteration. This latter point is
probably one that will have often impressed itself upon
readers of the New Testament. Allusions and appeals
M 2

164 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. vh. to ' the Scriptures,' ' the holy Scriptures,' ' the sacred
writings,' leave a conviction upon the mind, which is
probably as strong as it is instinctive, that the writers
refer to a sacred national collection which had been
handed down from ages past, and whose limits could
never be disturbed by addition or withdrawal (e.g. Matt.
xxii. 29, Acts xviii. 24, Romans i. 2, 2 Tim. iii. 15).
Apocry- The assertion has sometimes been made (cf. Wilde-
not treated boer, pp. 44-47) that the New Testament writers took
TufT'*' a somewhat lax view of the limits of the Canon of
Hebrew Scripture, and were ready to extend it to a
wider circle of writings than is comprised in ' the Law,'
' the Prophets,' and ' the Writings.' When we come to
examine more closely what this statement means, we
feel quite at a loss to discover how such a startling
conclusion is reached. It is possible, nay, more pro
bable than not, that some of the writers of the New
Testament were acquainted with some of the books of
the Apocrypha. But the parallelism of such passages
as Heb. i. 3 with Wisdom vii. 26, and Jas. i. 9, 19 with
Ecclus. iv. 29, v. 11, is not so very remarkable as even
to make it certain, that the New Testament writer
was in each case the borrower of the phrase, common
to him and the Apocryphal writer. But, granting that
this was the case, it would show nothing more than
that the New Testament writer was acquainted with
the contemporary literature of his people. In no case
can it be said that a New Testament writer appeals
to an extra- canonical work for support of doctrine or
statement, although references for purposes of illustra
tion may be admitted. I scarcely believe that any
tendency to enlarge the borders of the Hebrew Canon
can seriously be thought to be implied by the possible

THE THIRD CANON. 165
reference in Heb. xi. 35, 36 to the contents of 2 Mace. vi. Chap. vii.
18-vii. 42, in Heb. xi. 37 to an unknown passage in the
Ascension of Isaiah, in 2 Tim. iii. 8 to an unknown
work in which the magicians Jannes and Jambres figured,
in Jude 9 to a passage possibly1 contained in the
Assumption of Moses, in Jude 14 to the Book of Enoch.
Reference to contemporary literature is not incompatible
with strict views as to the Canon. Surely, to suggest that,
because reference is made to such works as those just
mentioned — works which, so far as is known, never had
the slightest possibility of being included within the
Canon — the New Testament writers must therefore have
held very lax views on the subject of canonicity, argues
a strange incapacity to treat the New Testament writers
as rational human beings, or as Jews of Palestine in the
first century A.D.
There remains to be noticed a group of passages (Matt.
xxvii. 9, Luke xi. 49, John vii. 38, 1 Cor. ii. 9, Ephes.
v. 14, Jude 14-16), in which it has been alleged that
citations occur that cannot be identified with any pas
sage in the Old Testament, and, therefore, can only have
been made from Apocryphal writings2. A reference to
any good commentary will show that, whatever expla
nation be adopted of the difficulty presented in Matt.
xxvii. 9 and Luke xi. 49, the theory of their containing
an appeal to the authority of an Apocryphal book rests on
1 Cf. Origen, De Princip. iii. 3.1.
2 Jerome (Comm. in Matt, xxvii. 9), 'Legi nuper in quodam Hebraico
volumine, quod Nazarenae sectae mihi Hebraeus obtulit, Jeremiae apocry-
phum, in quo haec ad verbum scripta reperi.'
Origen on I Cor. ii. g, ' In nullo regulari libro invenitur, nisi in secretis
Eliae prophetae.' (Comm. in Matt, xxvii. 9; iii. 118; ed. Lommatzsch,
torn. v. 29.
The passage in Jas. iv. 5, 6 has only, by a mistranslation, been supposed
to contain a direct quotation.

166 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. vn. no trustworthy foundation and isto be rejected. The quo
tations in John vii. 38, 1 Cor. ii. 9, are to be explained as
giving the substance and combined thought of more than
one passage of the Old Testament. The words in Eph.
v. 14, if not to be explained in the same way, may very
possibly have been derived from some early Christian
liturgical source. Only in Jude 14-16 do we find a clear
case of quotation, and that from the Apocryphal Book
of Enoch, a pseudepigraphic apocalypse of great value,
which exerted on Jewish thought considerable influence1.
In the Epistle of Jude it is regarded as the genuine work
of Enoch the patriarch ; and it is only fair to say that it
is quoted in the same respectful way, as canonical books
of Scripture. But there never seems to have been any
idea among Jews that the Book of Enoch might be
included within the Canon ; and we can hardly consider
the fact of its being quoted by Jude as a proof that its
claims were ever gravely considered 2
If the greater freedom, which the New Testament
writers are alleged to have shown in their treatment
of the Hebrew Canon, did not permit them to express
more clearly than they did their recognition of the
important works of Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom, it is
scarcely likely that a quotation from Enoch, occurring
in the Epistle of St. Jude, can be accepted as proving
1 As may be seen e.g. in the Book of Jubilees and the Testamenta XII.
Pair. 2 Origen quotes it, De Princip. iv. 35, ' Sed in libro suo Enoch ita ait.'
But elsewhere he says, ' De quibus quidem hominibus plurima in libellis,
qui appellantur Enoch, secreta continentur et arcana : sed quia libelli isti
non videntur apud Hebraeos in auctoritate haberi, interim nunc ea, quae
ibi nominantur, ad exemplum vocare differamus' (Horn, in Num. 28. 2. ed.
Lomm. x. 366). Cf. C. Cels. v. 54. Tertullian, ' Scio scripturam Enoch . . .
non recipi a quibusdam, quia nee in armarium Judaicum admittitur.' (De
cult. fern. i. 3.)

THE THIRD CANON. 167
a general statement, for which the other arguments when chap. vii.
taken in detail break down so completely 1.
6. The Fourth Book of Esdras. This apocalyptic work 6. 4 Esdras,
was written not long after the destruction of Jerusalem,
possibly in the last decade of the first cent. A.D. The
author, who purports to narrate the visions granted to
Ezra, contemplates, under the veil of this imagery, the
condition of the Jews in his own time, predicting the
days of the Messiah and the overthrow of the Roman
empire. The book is, of course, devoid of any historical
value for the period of Ezra. But, for the history of
the Canon in the first cent. A.D., it contains important
testimony. It relates the legend that Ezra was inspired
to recall to memory the sacred books of his people which
had been destroyed by the Chaldeans 2, and that, for the
space of forty days, he dictated their contents to five men
who had been gifted with divine understanding for the
express purpose. The words to which attention must
be especially drawn occur in chap. xiv. 45-48 : ' In forty
days they wrote ninety-four books. And it came to
pass when the forty days were fulfilled that the Most
High spake, saying, " The first that thou hast written
1 ' But the quotation from the Book of Enoch is quite unequivocal and it
definitely prevents us from saying that no Apocryphal Book is recognised
by a Canonical writer. In this, as in so many other things, it is impossible
to draw a hard and fast line, though in any case the use of the Apocrypha
bears a very small proportion to that of the Old Testament, and in respect
to spiritual authority enters into no sort of competition with it.' Sanday,
Inspiration (Longmans, 1893), p. 95.
2 4 Esd. xiv. 21, ' Thy law is burnt.' The Speaker's Comm. makes the
extraordinary suggestion : ' Perhaps with an allusion to Jehudi's (sic) cutting
to pieces and burning the roll of the Law (Jer. xxxvi. 26). But comp. iv.
23, above.' On this note, we observe, (1) it was not the act of Jehudi, but
of the king Jehoiakim (Jer. xxxvi. 28), (2) it was not 'the roll of the Law,'
but the prophecy of Jeremiah, (3) the passage is not ver. 26, but ver. 23.
The ref. to iv. 23 is correct.

168 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. vii. publish openly, that the worthy and the unworthy may
read it; but keep the seventy last that thou mayest
deliver them only to such as be wise among the people ;
for in them is the spring of understanding, the fountain
of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge." And I did so1.'
We have here the mention of two groups of writings,
the one consisting of seventy, whose contents were to
be made known only to those especially worthy, the
other of twenty-four (?) which were to be made known
to all. It has generally been understood that the writer
intends, by his group of seventy, the class of mystic
writing which only those initiated in esoteric literature
would understand and profit by. By the books which
should be published for the benefit of all, scholars
are agreed that, if the reading 'ninety-four' is cor
rect, the allusion is undoubtedly to the Books of the
Hebrew Canon of Scripture ; for their number, as we
shall see, according to later Hebrew tradition, was
almost invariably reckoned as ' twenty-four.' It must,
however, be admitted that the reading is uncertain.
Instead of 'ninety-four,' the Vulgate reads 'two
hundred and four.' 'Ninety-four' seems to be the
common reading of the other (Eastern) versions, the
Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, and Armenian. But the MSS.
of the Latin show the utmost variation, one reading
giving ' nine hundred and four,' another ' nine hundred
and seventy-four,' another ' eighty-four ' (Wildeboer,
p. 35). Assuming, however, that 'ninety-four' is the
right reading, the reference to the contents of the Hebrew
Canon is unmistakable, and the passage must be held to
be one of great interest and importance for our purpose.
(a) It testifies to the virtual closing of the Canon, and as to
1 See Excursus A.

THE THIRD CANON. 169
a familiarly known fact, that it consisted of twenty-four chap. vii.
sacred writings, (b) As the number ' twenty-four ' agrees
with the computation of later tradition, and as there is
no reason to suppose that any early computation of
the twenty-four books would have made them different
from the twenty-four accepted at a later time, we may
infer that all the ' disputed ' books, including ' Esther,'
were contained in the list of canonical books recognised
by the writer of 4 Esdras \ (c) It is the first occasion
on which the number of the sacred books is mentioned.
7. Fiavius Josephus. The last testimony we here adduce 7. Fiavtus
to the formation of the Canon is supplied by the great Jarc'"™37
Jewish historian. In completeness and directness it sur- AD
passes the evidence which we have so far reviewed.
Antiquities of the Jews. Indirectly Josephus throws Antigut-
light, in the course of his History (Antiquities), upon judatcae,
the Canon of Scripture received in his time by the Jews. arc' 9i AD'
But if we only had to rely upon his use of Scripture in
the construction of this narrative, we should not be much
further advanced upon our way. Josephus, generally,
makes use of the LXX version of the Old Testament,
and he does not hesitate to embellish the Biblical nar
rative with untrustworthy legends. He makes use of the
Books of Ruth, Chronicles, Daniel, and Esther ; but in the
1 The suggestion made by Prof. Robertson Smith, Old Testament in the
Jewish Church, p. 408 (ed. 1 ; but omitted in ed. 2), that ' if 94 is original,
it is still possible that 70= 72 (as in the case of the LXX translators) leaving
22 canonical books,' hardly helps matters, (a) If 70 = 72, it is nevertheless
expressed very definitely as 70 (' the seventy last '), leaving a balance of 24.
(b) For the 72 translators, there was a clear reason, i.e. 6 for each tribe.
Here there would be no reason for 72 books. But for 70 there would
be a good reason, in its being a round number, and typical of perfection
(10 x 7). See commentators on Gen. xlvi. 27, Ex. xv. 27, Num. xi. 25,
Luke x. 1. Such a mystical figure the writer would apply to the literature,
of which his own apocalypse was probably a typical specimen.

170 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. vii. Book of Esther he employs the Greek version, and has
recourse to the apocryphal 1 Esdras with as much readi
ness as to the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah (cf. Antiq.
xi. 3). In the history of the Maccabean period he relies
upon 1 Maccabees. Beyond, therefore, showing acquain
tance with all the narrative literature that is contained in
the Hebrew Canon, the Antiquities fail to give us any de
finite information as to either the date of the conclusion,
or the limit of the contents, of the Jewish Scriptures \
In his description of Solomon, Josephus makes no
allusion to his being supposed to have written the
books of Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs ; nor, on the
other hand, to his having been the writer of the Book of
Proverbs. The truth is, he writes his History without
any pretence of literally restricting himself to the
limits which his countrymen, for purposes of their reli
gious use, had set to the contents of their Scriptures.
Thus, in his Preface to the Antiquities (chap. 3),
he only uses rhetorical language, which it would denote
a complete misconception of his style to interpret
literally, as if it were the expression of a laxer concep
tion of the sacred Canon than that generally entertained
by his countrymen, when he says, ' our sacred books,
indeed, contain in them the history of five thousand
years.' Similarly, at the close of the Antiquities (xx. 11),
after stating that 'these Antiquities contain what has
been handed down to us from the time of the Creation
of man to the twelfth year of the reign of Nero  '
he goes on to claim that he has 'accurately recorded
. . . everything according to what is written in our
sacred books.' But it is evident that he is here using
1 The language of Josephus respecting the Book of Daniel and its position
among the sacred writings deserves especial notice (Ant. xi. 11. 7).

THE THIRD CANON. 171
the language of rhetorical exaggeration. No one would chap. vii.
have the temerity to suggest, that Josephus, or, indeed,
any Jew of his time, would have reckoned among
' the sacred books ' the chronicles which recorded the
history of the Jews in the reigns of Augustus and
Tiberius Caesar, or would ever have associated the
historical treatises of a Demetrius and an Artapanes
with the Books of Samuel and Kings. Josephus merely
means that he makes full use, as long as he can, of the
acknowledged sacred books, and continues their narrative
down to contemporary times. He certainly does not
intend to suggest that the other Jewish authorities, to
which he had recourse for historical materials, were
reckoned either by him or by his countrymen as worthy
to rank in the same category with Scripture. He may
be guilty of laxity of language ; there is nothing to
justify the supposition that he was more liberal in his
conception of a sacred Canon.
The Dialogue against Apion. But our attention must Dejudaeo-
now be directed to the important passage in another '"ustvl "'
work of Josephus, the Contra Apionem. In the open- ^'^em
ing chapter of that treatise he repeats the rhetorical o«.k»a.».
language with which he had concluded his history.
' These Antiquities contain the history of five thousand
years, and are taken out of our sacred books and
written by me in the Greek tongue' (chap. 1). He
then proceeds to defend, at some considerable length,
the accuracy of the materials for Jewish history, and
to maintain their superior credibility in comparison
with the histories of other nations, of the Greeks
more especially (chap. 4). In the following remark
able words he asserts the accuracy of the Jewish
Scriptures, and rests it upon the ground of their divine

172 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap.vil inspiration: 'It has not been the case with us that all
alike were allowed to record the nation's history ; nor
is there with us any discrepancy in the histories re
corded. No, the prophets alone obtained a knowledge of
the earliest and most ancient things by virtue of the
inspiration which was given to them from God, and
they committed to writing a clear account of all the
events of their own time just as they occurred ' (chap. 7).
He then proceeds to give a description, in greater detail,
of these inspired writings. He points out that because
they were divinely inspired, they were able, although
only twenty-two in number, to convey a perfect and
complete record. His words are : ' For it is not the
Chap. 8. case with us (i. e. as it is with the Greeks) to have vast
numbers of books disagreeing and conflicting with one
another. We have but two and twenty, containing the
history of all time, books that are justly believed in 1.
And of these, five are the books of Moses, which
comprise the laws and the earliest traditions from the
creation of mankind down to the time of his (Moses')
death. This period falls short but by a little of three
thousand years. From the death of Moses to the
(death2) of Artaxerxes, King of Persia, the successor
of Xerxes, the prophets who succeeded Moses wrote the
history of the events that occurred in their own time, in
1 The usual reading, ' believed to be divine,' is probably a gloss. ' Beta
ante ircmoTtvuiva, add. Euseb.' (Niese. in loc.)
2 If apxvs is only a gloss, reKevTrjs must be supplied. The reference to
' Artaxerxes ' might suggest that the Book of Ezra and Nehemiah is thought
of, did we not know that in Antiq. xi. 5 the Artaxerxes of Ezra and Nehe
miah is called by Josephus 'Xerxes,' and that in xi. 6. 1 the Ahasuerus of
the Book of Esther is called ' Artaxerxes.' (' After the death of Xerxes the
kingdom came to his son Cyrus, whom the Greeks called Artaxerxes.')
The Artaxerxes of our passage, therefore, is Ahasuerus, whom Josephus took
to be the son of the Persian king that favoured Ezra and Nehemiah.

THE THIRD CANON. 1 73
thirteen books. The remaining four documents comprise chap, vil
hymns to God and practical precepts to men. From
the days of Artaxerxes to our own time every event has
indeed been recorded. But these recent records have not
been deemed worthy of equal credit with those which
preceded them, on account of the failure of the exact
succession of the prophets \ There is practical proof
of the spirit in which we treat our Scriptures. For
although so great an interval of time (i.e. since they were
written) has now passed, not a soul has ventured either
to add, or to remove, or to alter a syllable ; and it is the
instinct of every Jew, from the day of his birth, to con
sider those (Scriptures) as the teaching of God, to abide
by them, and, if need be, cheerfully to lay down life in
their behalf.'
Before examining the full bearing of this important
passage upon the history of the Canon, we must realise
the context in which it stands, (i) We must remember Josephus:
that Josephus writes as the spokesman of his people, in ofjews.""
order to defend the accuracy and sufficiency of their
Scriptures, as compared with the recent and contra
dictory histories by Greek writers (cf. ch. 2-4). In
this controversy he defends the judgment of his peo
ple. He does not merely express a personal opinion,
he claims to represent his countrymen. (2) We must (7«jlxx.
1 The usual translations of this clause fail to give the full meaning, e.g.
' Because there has been no exact succession of prophets ' (Robertson
Smith, O.T.J.C, p. 408, ed. I ; but corrected in ed. 2, p. 164, to ' because
the exact succession of prophets was wanting ') ; ' Because there was not
then an exact succession of prophets' (Shilleto's Whiston). The position
of the article shows that Josephus has in his mind the unbroken succession
of prophets whose writings had supplied the Holy Scripture. The line of
prophets failed ; and the failure of the prophetic spirit brought to a close
' the succession ' of inspired writings. Josephus echoes the lament of his
people that since Malachi the prophets had ceased.

174 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap.vil remember that he is addressing foreigners, and that he
writes in Greek to Greeks. He cannot assume that
his readers would be acquainted with Hebrew ; but he
may reasonably expect them to know the Alexandrine
version. His own habit in the Antiquities, his previous
work, had been to refer to the LXX version. We may be
sure, therefore, that, in the present treatise, he will speak
of the sacred books of his race, as they would be accessible
to Greek-speaking readers. In other words, he writes
Belief in with the LXX version before him. (3) We must remember
' that he has just explained his view of the inspiration
which the Jewish prophets partook of. The books
he here describes are those only 'that were justly
believed in.' He has in his mind the sacred, but limited,
library of the Jews, exclusive of their miscellaneous
literature from which he had borrowed in the composi
tion of his Antiquities.
How then does he describe the Sacred Books ?
His canon, (i) He mentions their number; he speaks of them
as consisting of twenty-two books. He regards them as
a well-defined national collection. That is to say,
Josephus and his countrymen, at the beginning of the
second cent. A.D., recognised a collection of what he,
at least, calls twenty-two books, and no more, as the
Canon of Holy Scripture. This Canon it was profana
tion to think of enlarging, diminishing, or altering in any
way.
siandardof (2) He records a test of their canonicity. He mentions
anomaly. ^ standard which, apparently, in current Jewish opinion,
all books satisfied that were included in the Canon. No
historical writings, it seems, belonged to it which were
deemed to have been composed later than the reign of
Ahasuerus. The mention of this particular limit seems

THE THIRD CANON. 175
to be made expressly with reference to the book of Chap, vil
Esther, in which alone the Artaxerxes of Josephus (the
Ahasuerus of the Hebrew book of Esther) figures.
Thus we learn that a popularly accepted test, that of
date of composition, however erroneously applied,
determined the question of canonicity. In the first cent.
A.D., the impression prevailed that the books of the
Canon were all ancient, that none were more recent than
Ahasuerus, and that all had long been regarded as can
onical. The same limit of date, although not so clearly
applied to the poetical books, was, in all probability,
intended to apply equally to them, since they combined
with the books of the prophets to throw light upon the
same range of history. That such a standard of canoni
city as that of antiquity should be asserted, crude as it
may seem, ought to be sufficient to convince us that
the limits of the Canon had for a long time been un
disturbed. (3) In his enumeration of the books, Josephus mentions Enumera-
five books of Moses, thirteen prophetical books, and four
books of hymns and moral teaching. It will be ob
served that he does not follow the tripartite division of
the Canon, nor does he state the number of the books
as twenty-four, in accordance with later Hebrew tra
dition, but as twenty-two. That he does not mention
the Hebrew triple grouping of the sacred books admits of
a natural explanation, (a) He is referring, in particular, by subject,
to the historical books of the Jews, and he would
naturally class them all together, (b) He had in his « lxx.
mind the LXX version in which the Hebrew grouping
is not reproduced. He was not likely to risk the be
wilderment he might cause his Gentile readers by
the mention of the Hebrew arrangement, which,

176 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap.vil as it differed from the Greek, would require special
explanation. That he speaks of twenty-two, and not of twenty-four,
books, admits of a similar explanation. There is no
necessity to suppose he is contemplating a smaller Canon
than that which has come down to us. We know that
he makes use of the LXX version ; we know too that
those, in later time, who reckoned the books of Hebrew
Scripture as twenty-two in number, accepted the com
plete Canon, undiminished in size. There is little reason
to doubt that Josephus' enumeration of twenty-two books
is due to his reckoning Ruth with Judges, and Lamenta
tions with Jeremiah. In later lists, e.g. those of Origen
and Jerome, the number twenty-two is reached in this
way (see below) ; and, in the list of Melito, ' Lamenta
tions,' which is missing, is doubtless understood in the
mention of Jeremiah.
If, then, we may understand the ' twenty-two ' books of
the Canon referred to by Josephus as the same as those
included in later lists, Ruth being reckoned with Judges,
Thirteen Lamentations with Jeremiah, how, we may ask, does he
Prophets, distribute them ? What are the thirteen books of the
Prophets ? What the four books of hymns and practical
precepts ? The thirteen books of the Prophets are pro
bably the following : — (1) Joshua, (2) Judges and Ruth,
(3) Samuel, (4) Kings, (5) Chronicles, (6) Ezra and Ne
hemiah, (7) Esther, (8) Job, (9) Daniel, (10) Isaiah,
(11) Jeremiah and Lamentations, (12) Ezekiel, (13) The
Twelve Minor Prophets.
Four Books The four books of hymns and practical precepts are
\c. ym"s' probably the following: — (1) Psalms, and (2) Song of
Songs, which constitute ' the hymns ; ' (3) Proverbs, and
(4) Ecclesiastes, which constitute ' the practical precepts.'

THE THIRD CANON. 177
Of this distribution we cannot, of course, speak con- chap, vil
fidently ; but it appears the most probable. The
objection that the Book of Job is made to rank
among the historical writings is not a grave one, since
it was popularly considered to contain the history of the
patriarch. The position of Ecclesiastes is certainly suit
able, while that of Daniel is very intelligible. Gratz 1,
who fancied that neither Ecclesiastes nor Song of Songs
had been received into the Canon in Josephus' time, left
these two out of the list, and then separated Ruth and
Lamentations from Judges and Jeremiah, an arrange
ment which happily corresponded with Gratz's own
views as to the date of Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs.
But it is impossible to reconcile with the words of
Josephus, in speaking of a long-settled Canon, the sup
position that Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes were im
ported into it shortly after Josephus wrote. Gratz's
theory finds no support in later lists, in which, if there
is any divergency from the one we have ascribed to
Josephus, it is not found in connexion with either of
the two books, Song of Songs or Ecclesiastes.
1 Cf. Kohelet, p. 169.

N

CHAPTER VIII.
The Third Canon (concluded).
chap. viii. ACCORDINGLY, we conclude that the contents of the
canon Canon which Josephus acknowledged, may be regarded,
\y™jose$ms Wltn some degree of confidence, as the same with the
perman- contents of the Hebrew Canon at a later time. In other
ently accepted. words, the limits of the group of ' the Writings,' or
' Kethubim,' had practically been determined, and the
Canon of Hebrew Scripture had, therefore, practically
been closed, when Josephus wrote. Practically, we say ;
for whether the conclusion of it had been officially ac
knowledged, or its compass authoritatively decided by
the religious leaders of the people, we cannot know for
certain. Very probably there was no need for an official
70 a.d. pronouncement before the destruction of Jerusalem by
Titus. We nowhere find traces of any attempt to intro
duce into the early Synagogue worship a systematic read
ing from the Hagiographa. The modern Synagogueuse of
' the Hagiographa ' dates from a much later century1. The
question, therefore, of the canonicity of a book would not
be raised in any acute form, if the public use of it was
irregular and occasional. A ' disputed book ' would be
used, where it met with esteem and favour ; by those
1 They may have been at an early date used in the Synagogue for pur
poses of interpretation and exposition (MidrasK), but not of the lectionary
((A. Jer. Sabb. 16, fol. 15 ; Tosephta Sabb. 13).

THE THIRD CANON. 1 79
who entertained doubts of its orthodoxy or sanctity, its chap, viii,
use would simply be discontinued. It was not, we may
suppose, until after the destruction of Jerusalem, that the
necessity for a stricter definition of the Canon was
generally felt.

Two circumstances probably conduced, after the great Destruction
catastrophe, to make some official statement desirable saiem.
respecting the contents of the Sacred Collection.
(i) Firstly, the destruction of Jerusalem had broken up Heightened
the rallying-place of the Jewish people ; it had scattered scripture.
the schools of the scribes ; it had ended for ever the Tem
ple services ; it had dealt a deadly blow at the very heart
of religious Judaism. As on the occasion of the previous
disasters, inflicted by Nebuchadnezzar and by Antiochus
Epiphanes, so now, after the great Roman catastrophe,
the religion of the Jews, which the nations of the world
believed to have perished among the ashes of the Temple,
lived again through the power of their Scriptures.
The sense of the irreparable loss they had sustained
made the Jewish doctors doubly anxious to safe
guard 'the oracles' which still survived, the Holy Books.
We can understand, how, henceforth, the veneration which
had encompassed the books of the Canon was raised
almost to the pitch of idolatry. The Scriptures were a
token from Jehovah. They still survived to recall the
mercies of the past ; and they sufficed to infuse into the
race the indomitable courage and devotion with which
they faced the future. In the period that immediately
followed the destruction of Jerusalem, we should expect
to hear of some earnest endeavour on the part of the
Jewish leaders to add, if possible, yet greater prestige to
N 2

180 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. viii. the Hebrew Scriptures, to clear away doubts, where any
existed, respecting 'disputed' books, and, by a final
definition of the limits of the Canon, to prevent the in
troduction into the sacred list of any book which had not
stood the test of time.
Danger of (2) Secondly, the general use and growing influence of
version the Lxx version among the Greek-speaking Jews of the
encroaching Dispersion threatened to lead to some misconception as
on Canon of L x
Hebrew to the contents of the true Hebrew Canon. The sug
gestion has been made that the Jewish community in
Alexandria formally recognised a distinct Canon of much
wider limits than that of the Palestinian Jews. The
suggestion no doubt rested on a misconception due to the
fact that Apocryphal books (e.g. i and 2 Maccabees,
Sirach, Wisdom) are included in the copies of the LXX
version, and were quoted as Scripture by the early
Fathers of Alexandria. The MSS., however, of the
LXX are, all of them, of Christian origin ; and, moreover,
differ from one another in the arrangement as well as in
the selection of the books. There is no uniform Alex
andrian list. The Christian Church derived their Old
Testament Scriptures from the Jews ; but whether they
found the books of the ' Apocrypha ' in Jewish copies, or
added them afterwards, we have no means of judging.
Perhaps the copies which the Christians of Alexandria
adopted, happened to contain, in addition to the Canon
ical Scriptures, certain other writings which the Jews in
Alexandria were more especially attached to. We can
not say for certain. But we do know that in Alexandria,
if we may judge from Philo and the writer of the Book
of Wisdom, the veneration for the law had been car
ried to such an extent, that a wider interval seemed to
separate ' the Law ' from the other books of the Hebrew

THE THIRD CANON. 181
Canon than that which separated the other sacred books chap. viii.
from the works of the great or wise men of any time or
country J- Perhaps, in Alexandria, no formal list was
recognised. Be that as it may, the line of demarcation
was apt to become very slight ; and the prevalent liberal
tone seems to have led men not only to tolerate variation,
not only to welcome, along with the recognised books
of Scripture, such writings as ' Ecclesiasticus ' and ' Wis
dom,' but even to approve and license the addition of
Haggadic legends and amplifications in the Greek ver
sions of Job, Daniel, and Esther.
The utmost confusion was likely to arise, when the de- Less
struction of Jerusalem bereft the Palestinian tradition known,
of Scripture of its historic centre. The number of "J^"**'*
the Hebrew-reading Jews was likely to diminish yet
more, and the number of the Greek-speaking Jews to
increase. If the Hebrew Canon was permanently to be
preserved, it was necessary that it should forthwith be
carefully defined. If a Hebrew, and not a Greek, tra
dition of the Jewish Scriptures was to prevail, there
must be no mistake what the Hebrew Canon was. The
inevitable alternative would be, that the Greek Alexan
drine version of the Hebrew Scriptures, with its different
arrangement and possibly its more elastic limits, would
pass into general acceptance and overwhelm the tradition
of Jerusalem and of the scribes of Palestine.
Another cause of perplexity in connexion with the The aa, the
LXX, not to say of objection to its use, arose from the church"
adoption of it by the Christian Church as their sacred "pe"^
Scripture. If Aquila's more literal and uniform render
ing was intended to supply the place of the LXX with
the stricter Jews, it affords another illustration of the
1 Cf. Philo, Vita Mosis, §§ 8, 23, 24, and De Cherub., § 14.

1 82 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. viii. anxiety that was felt in the second cent. A.D. concerning
the Hebrew Scriptures, and of the desire to keep the
tradition of the Hebrew Canon free from the influence
of the Alexandrine version.
Questions of Whether we attach to these circumstances much or
discussed by little importance in the last phases of the formation of
Rend"oTist the Canon, they cannot, I think, be altogether ignored.
Cent. a.d. They at least tended to hasten a result, which cannot be
placed much later than the end of the first cent. A.D. or
the beginning of the second cent. A.D. That result we
believe to have been some sort of an official declaration
by the Jewish Rabbis, that finally determined the limits
of the Hebrew Canon. The fact that the Mishnah, the
contents of which had been current in an oral form
before they were committed to writing at the end of the
second cent. A.D., assumes the existence of fixed limits
to the Canon of Scripture, is probably sufficient to show
that a considerable interval of time had elapsed since its
determination. The Mishnah records how disputes arose
between Jewish Rabbis upon the canonicity of certain
books, and, in particular, of books in the Hagiographa,
and how the doubts were allayed through the influence
of such men as Rabbi Johanan ben Zaccai and Rabbi
Akiba, who died about 135 A.D. (Yadaim, iii. 5). The
language which they are reported to have used shows,
beyond all question, that they accepted the tripar
tite division of the Canon, and that, even while they
were discussing the qualities of books whose right to a
position in the Canon of Scripture was questioned by
some, they never doubted that the contents of the Canon
had been determined.
Synod of Now we happen to know that a council of Jewish
jamma. jj_abDjs was held at Jamnia (Jabne), not very far from

THE THIRD CANON. 1 83
Jaffa, about the year 90 A.D., and again, perhaps, in chap. viii.
118 A.D. Rabbi Gamaliel II seems to have presided1,
and Rabbi Akiba was the prominent spirit. In the
course of its deliberations the subject of the Canon was
discussed. It was decided that the difficulties which
had been felt about the Book of Ecclesiastes and the
Song of Songs could be fairly answered (Eduyoth, v. 3).
The suggestion has been made, that we have in the Synod
of Jamnia the official occasion, on which the limits of the
Hebrew Canon were finally determined by Jewish au
thorities. It may, indeed, very well have happened at this, or at
some similar, gathering about that time. In the absence
of precise information — for the Rabbinic evidence is
fragmentary and the reverse of precise — we can only say
that, as the time at which the Synod of Jamnia was held,
and apparently the subjects which occupied its discus
sions, are favourable to the conjecture, there is no reason
for objecting to it. As a matter of fact, the Synod of
Jamnia can be little else to us but a name ; still, as it is
a name connected with the ratified canonicity of certain
books, it may symbolize the general attitude of the Jewish
doctors, and their resolve to put an end to the doubts
about the ' disputed ' books of the Hagiographa.
We, therefore, take the year 100 A.D. as representing, Jewish
as nearly as possible, the terminus ad quern in the gradual *^-OT
formation of the Canon. It marks, however, only the °fCanon,
' J about
official conclusion. Practically, we may be sure, its 100 a.d.
bounds had long before been decided by popular use.
The commencement of the process by which the books
1 Gamaliel II succeeded Johanan ben Zaccai, and was himself succeeded
by Eleazar ben Azariah as head of the School at Jamnia. Cf. Strack, Art.
Talmud, Herzog-PIitt, R.E.2 xviii. p. 346.

184 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. viii. of ' the Writings ' were annexed to ' the Law and the
Prophets ' is probably to be ascribed, as we have already
seen, to the beginning of the era of the Maccabean as
cendency (160-140 B.C.). Two centuries and a half later
the final results of that process received an official ratifi
cation at Jamnia or elsewhere. And yet, we have reason
to believe, all the books included in the third group of
the Canon had obtained some measure of recognition,
either complete and undisputed, or partial and dis
puted, within fifty years from the commencement of the
formation of the third group. The Jewish Rabbis had
only, as it were, to affix an official seal to that which had
already long enjoyed currency among the people.
Concerning the undisputed books, Psalms, Proverbs,
Job, Ruth, Lamentations, Ezra and Nehemiah, and pro
bably Daniel, there seems to be little reason to doubt
that they were admitted almost at once into the sacred
Canon. At what time the others, ' the disputed ' books,
received recognition, must always remain more or less
a matter of obscurity, and the most different opinions
will be entertained.
Canon prac- But there are good grounds for the view that all the
105 b.c ' books eventually included in the Canon had obtained
some sort of recognition before the close of the second
cent. B.C., and before the death of John Hyrcanus II
(105 B.C.). These grounds may, for convenience' sake, be
summarised under three heads, (1) the external evidence,
(2) the conditions of the Jewish Church, (3) the character
of the disputed books.
Before 2nd (i) The external evidence has already been reviewed.
cent ad*
joslphus, We gather from it, that the generation of Josephus re
garded the Canon as having long ago been determined.
For Josephus considered the Canon to consist of a col-

THE THIRD CANON. 185
lection of writings to which a continuous series of chap. viii.
prophets contributed, from Moses until the reign of
Ahasuerus ; and he was evidently of opinion that the
Canon had been closed for 400 years, and that the Book
of Esther was the last thus to be acknowledged.
In the writings of the New Testament, we saw that, by
a very possible interpretation of one passage, the Books
of Chronicles were already regarded as the recognised
conclusion of the Hebrew Canon. We saw that the
absence of quotation from 'the disputed' books in the
New Testament and in Philo constituted no valid argu
ment against their recognition as Scripture, especially as
the contents of Esther, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes
scarcely lent themselves to the Christian writers of the
first century A.D. for purposes of quotation. We noticed
the force of the contention, that ' the Scriptures ' in the
New Testament are appealed to as a most sacred com
pleted ' Corpus ' of writings, in which any alteration
would be most improbable.
(2) To the careful student of Jewish history we venture No change
to think it must, on reflection, appear exceedingly un- b.c. proba-
likely that any fresh book would be introduced into the b^a£™'s
Hebrew Canon of Scripture after the beginning of thef?rei?n.and
first century B.C. The last century before the Christian
era witnessed the great civil war in Palestine, which
deluged the country in blood (92-86 B.C.), the capture of
Jerusalem by Pompey in 63 B. C, the reduction of Judea
to the condition of a Roman province, and, lastly, the
tyranny of Herod the Great (37 B. c-4 A. D.). The religious
and social life of the Jews during all this disastrous
period was marked by two characteristic features, from
both of which we might gather how utterly futile any
attempt would be to widen or alter the compass of the

1 86 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. viii. already accepted Canon. The first of these was the hos-
pharisees tility between the Pharisee and the Sadducee factions,
dZcefs"* which, until the arrival of Pompey upon the scene, had
divided the people into two opposing camps, and con
tinued long afterwards to be the constant cause of discord.
During the whole of this century, it would be impossible
to imagine any public step, intimately connected with
the most sacred associations of the people, which would
have received the approbation of both parties ; while
the action which commended itself to but one party
was either doomed at once to failure, or, if attended
with success, would be handed down by tradition
tainted with the memory of a partisan achievement 1-
schools of Secondly, the rise of the great Rabbinic schools of
the Rabbins. T T . . . . ,01 - ,
Hillel and Shammaiwas a guarantee that a conservative
attitude would be maintained towards the sacred Scrip
ture. The Doctors whose glory it was ' to make a fence
about the law ' were not likely to advocate the introduc
tion of fresh writings within the limits of the Canon ;
nor, if one were bold enough to advise such a step, would
1 The tradition recorded in the writings of the Christian fathers, Pseudo-
Tertullian (adv. Haer. 1), Origen (c. Cels. i. 49 and Comm. in Matt. xxii. 29,
31-32), and Jerome (in Matt. xxii. 31, Contr. Lucif. 23), that the Sadducees
only accepted the canonicity of ' the Law,' rests on no real foundation. It
receives no support from Josephus in his description of the Sadducees ; and
the fact that our Lord confuted the Sadducees from ' the Law ' (cf. Matt.
xxii. 23-32), which has sometimes been alleged in its favour, is no justifica
tion of the conjecture, but illustrates the regard which the Jews paid to any
proofs from ' the Law ' above all other arguments from their Scripture. It
is probably due to a confusion of Sadducees with Samaritans, or to a mis
conception of the statement that the Sadducees rejected the tissue of
tradition which, the scribes had woven around the precepts of the law.
According to another more probable conjecture, the possibility of
the admission of Ecclesiasticus and 1 Maccabees within the Canon was
frustrated by the opposition of the Pharisees, who raised objections to
those books, because they contained no assertion of their favourite teaching
upon the subject of the resurrection.

THE THIRD CANON. 1 87
he have escaped vehement attacks from rival teachers, chap. viii.
Their work, however, was almost wholly defensive and
negative ; their object, to interpret Scripture as they had
received it. We should not anticipate from the founders
of the schools of Rabbinic exegesis any favour to a more
liberal treatment of the Canon.
There is certainly no probability that any fresh book
would have obtained admission into the Canon during a
century distinguished above all others by the antagonism
of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and by the establish
ment of the Rabbinic Schools.
(3) The character of the books themselves is not un- Even
favourable to their having been received in the second ^kTifkeiy
century B. C. The Books of Ecclesiastes and the Song of * b'af'
Songs were popularly ascribed to Solomon, and would
naturally, therefore, be regarded as works for which room
should be found in the same group with the Book of
Proverbs. It was not as if they had only recently been
composed. The more recent of the two had existed, in
all probability, if we may judge from internal evidence,
at least for more than a century before the Maccabean
era ; while the Song of Songs was the most ancient
piece of poetry not yet included in the Canon.
The Book of Esther, which was also probably com
posed in the third century B. C, was evidently at one
time a very favourite work. Several recensions of it
existed ; and at a time when the deliverance from the
foreigner was still fresh in the memories of the Jews, it
perhaps seemed to have peculiar claims for recognition.
To the Jew of the Dispersion, it brought a special mes
sage of Divine Providence, which corresponded to the
gentler message of Ruth to the proselyte stranger.
The Books of Chronicles, from which Ezra and Nehe-

1 88 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. viii. miah were severed, would very naturally be appended to
the books of Scripture. The important genealogies and
the special features of its history in connexion with the
Temple worship make it improbable that such a narra
tive would be for long excluded.
All four books are naturally associated with groups
that had been received without hesitation into the Canon.
Both Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs seemed to deserve
their place as the writings of Solomon ; and the Song, in
its poetical treatment of joy, formed the complement to
the plaintive note of the Lamentations. The Book of
Esther seemed to fill a gap in the history of the exile,
and thus to follow upon the Book of Daniel and the Books
of Ezra and Nehemiah. The Books of Chronicles received
a position as the appendix of the Hebrew Scriptures, in
the same group with Esther, Ezra, and Nehemiah.
In all four disputed works, the claim to antiquity was
generally conceded. In this respect they would find a
ready acceptance in comparison with the Wisdom of
Sirach and the First Book of Maccabees, which were
avowedly of recent composition.
Now if all the books of ' the Kethubim ' were known
and received in the first century A.D., and if, as we
believe, the circumstances of the Jewish people ren
dered it all but impossible for the Canon to receive
change or augmentation in the first century B. c, we
conclude that ' the disputed books ' received a recognition
in the last two or three decades of the second century
B.C., when John Hyrcanus ruled, and the Jews still
enjoyed prosperity. The hostility between the Pharisee
and Sadducee parties had then not yet assumed the pro
portions of an open conflict ; the influence of the Rabbinic
Schools was then still in an early stage.

THE THIRD CANON. 1 89
The period, then, to which we assign the formation of chap. viii.
the Kethubim is the interval between 160 B.C., the High 'KeThubim'
Priesthood of Jonathan, and 105 B.C., the death of John '^sic
Hyrcanus. According to this view, fully two hundred
years had elapsed, since the Scriptural character of
the last books had been, in some measure, recognised,
when the Rabbins, in the generation after the destruction
of Jerusalem, pronounced their official sentence upon the
limits of the Canon. It was then that the Writings we
have called ' Disputed Books,' which, from the peculiarity
of their contents and teaching, had previously exerted little
influence upon religious thought, had been little used in
public and, possibly, little studied in private, seemed all
at once to receive an adventitious importance. Doubts
were expressed, when their canonical position was finally
asserted. But no sooner were such difficulties raised and
scruples proclaimed and protests delivered against their
retention in the Canon, than eager voices were lifted up
to defend the character of writings which, after all, had
long been recognised, although, in comparison with the
acknowledged books of the Kethubim, little valued and
rarely made use of.
If the two periods I have indicated, the one for the significance
admission of the last group into the category of Scrip- fj™^
ture (160-1C5 B.C.), the other for the final ratification ('60-105
\ •J n b.c, 90-no
of the completed Canon (90-110 A.D.), be approximately a.d.).
correct, their significance to the Christian student should
be duly considered.
The full complement of Scripture had been arrived at,
a century before the coming of Him who came not to
destroy but to fulfil ' the Law and the Prophets ' (Matt.
v. 17). In the view of that Revelation, we need not

190 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. viii. wonder at the absence of confirmation in the New Testa-
The Hebrew ment for Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs. The
S"X»a"rf new Revelation taught a better spirit than that of the
Covenant, patriotic fierceness which is breathed in Esther. The
despair of the Preacher, which expressed the unsatisfied
yearning of the soul for its Redeemer, finds no echo in
the books of the New Covenant. The Song of Songs
told of the beauty of earthly affection ; but, in the
presence of the full declaration of Divine Love, its slight
ray was fully absorbed like that of a candle in the light
of the midday sun.
The final determination of the Hebrew Canon pre
ceded the Church's formal acceptance of it as the Canon
of the Scripture of the Old Covenant.
It was thus divinely ordered that we should be
enabled to know the exact limits of those Scriptures
upon which has rested the sanction conveyed by the
usage and blessing of our Divine Master, and of which
He spake, ' these are they which bear witness of me '
(John v. 39). Thus, too, an effectual barrier was raised
to protect the Scriptures of the Apostles against the en
croachments of any unauthorised additions. The use
of the LXX version familiarised the Christian Church
with writings that never found a place in the Hebrew
Canon ; but, through the action of the Jewish doctors at
the close of the first cent. A.D., there was never any
doubt what the limits of the Hebrew Canon were. The
only question which seemed to admit of two answers
was, whether the Christian Church should regard the
limits of the Hebrew Canon as determining the com
pass of the Old Testament.

CHAPTER IX.
AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE CANON.
The Hebrew Canon of Scripture, whose gradual chap. ix.
growth we have traced from its earliest stage to its final m change
ratification, has been preserved by the Jewish com- '^aJ^VB>
munity intact. Since the beginning of the second cen
tury A. D., no alteration has been permitted in the range
of its contents, which, as I hope I have shown, had
probably remained the same for at least two centuries.
In all probability, the only modifications which* it has since
received from Jewish hands were changes affecting the
order of the books of the Hagiographa (the present
order being the work of mediaeval Jews, and dating,
perhaps, from the eighth or ninth century), and the
sub-division, made so late as the sixteenth century A. D.,
of the Books of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and
Nehemiah. It was natural that the Hebrew Canon, both as the Apocrypha
Bible of the Jewish Church, and as the Scriptures ttanChurch.
acknowledged by our Lord and the Apostles, and espe
cially sanctioned by their use, should from the first have
been adopted by the Christian Church. But the pre
valent use of the Septuagint version tended quickly to
obliterate the distinction between the books of the He
brew Canon and the books which, from their popularity
among the Christians, were wont to be often publicly
read in the churches, e. g. Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom,

in Jewish }

192 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. ix. 1 Maccabees, Baruch, &c. It required all the weight
and learning of such men as Melito (fcirc. 170), Origen
(t353)> Cyril of Jerusalem (f386), Athanasius (t373)>
Ruffinus (f4ro), Jerome (7420), to preserve the recol
lection of the true Hebrew Canon, and to maintain a
preference for the testimony of its contents.
why not __ Now, in the third and fourth centuries A.D., many of
the books which we term ' the Apocrypha ' had passed
into general use in the Christian Church, and were con
stantly quoted as Scripture. Is there no analogous
experience to be recorded in the Jewish Church ? Did
no ' Apocrypha ' find their way within the sacred limits
of the Hebrew books ? And, if not, how was the exclu
sive character of the Canon so successfully secured ?
In order to answer these questions, we must recall the
circumstances under which the books of the Hagio
grapha were admitted, and under which the Canon had
been closed.
Canon pro- In the first place, the impulse which led to the
1. antiquity, admission of the Hagiographa had been received from
the religious revival of the Maccabean era. The revolt
of Jewish patriotism against the predominance of Hel
lenism was based on the Revelation of Jehovah to His
people in earlier times. Revelation, it was thought, had
ceased with prophecy. Scripture was the embodiment
of past Revelation, its claim to antiquity a recognised
test of its genuineness. There was no room for recent
writings, there was no confidence in their authority.
prestige In the second place, each of the books admitted into
the Canon was invested with the prestige not of an
tiquity only, but also of connexion with an honoured
name. Daniel, the latest work, was considered to have
been written in the Captivity, and this supposition was

of origin

AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE CANON. 1 93
favoured by the words of Ezek. xiv. 14, 20, xxviii. 3 ; chap. ix.
Ecclesiastes, probably the next most recent, was ascribed
to Solomon. The Psalter was ascribed to David ; Pro
verbs and the Song of Songs to Solomon ; Job to the
patriarch himself; Lamentations to Jeremiah; while
Ruth, Esther, Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah were
ascribed to the famous men who wrote the narrative of
their own day, to Samuel, Mordecai, and Ezra.
In the third place, each of the books that were ad- 3- distinctive
x teaching.
mitted to the group of the Hagiographa presents a
distinct phase in Jewish religious thought. Each has
thus contributed to the representative character of Jewish
Scripture some new feature. Each reflects the light of
divine teaching from a different aspect of earthly expe
rience. How much of the variety and the many-sided
sympathy of the Old Testament books arises from this
group ! The Psalter, Job, Lamentations, and the Song
of Songs, give us Hebrew poetry of strikingly various
complexion. Proverbs and Ecclesiastes offer two very
distinct aspects of Jewish Khokmah. The Book of
Daniel shows us prophecy in its final apocalyptic form.
The Books of Chronicles reiterate the history of the
monarchy from the standpoint of the Temple wor
shipper. Ezra and Nehemiah give us records and
extracts from memoirs dealing with the Return from
exile and with the foundation of Judaism. Ruth offers an
idyllic picture of Israel in days of peace ; Esther a page
of fierce intensity from the traditions of the exile. In a
literature so varied there was no side of Hebrew life and
thought which was not, so to speak, claimed and selected
to add its influence to the work of the Jewish Canon, the
work of educating, teaching, and inspiring the ' Israel of
God.' o

194 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. ix. Now it may well be thought that, if such writings
found admission in the second century B. C, on the
ground not only of their intrinsic merit but of their re
puted great antiquity and, in several cases, of their reputed
connexion with some great personage of the past, the
conception of their antiquity and their dignity would
grow more venerable and majestic as years rolled on.
The separation between them and all other writings
would widen with proportionate rapidity. It could
not be long before the very idea of ranking any other
work with the contents of the Canon would be treated as
little short of blasphemy by the Rabbinic teachers.
Ecciesias- Only in the case of two extant writings is there any
ticus, • °
. Maccabees, probability that an attempt may have been made, in
some quarters, to include them within the Canon, i.e.
Ecclesiasticus and the First Book of Maccabees. In
both instances there never seems to have been any real
approach to success. They were neither of them re
commended by the claim to great antiquity ; they were
neither of them stamped with the attributes of originality,
or inspired with the gift of communicating any fresh fund
of spiritual life and force. They were modern ; for the
Wisdom of Sirach did not claim to be earlier than the
beginning of the second century B. C, while the First of
Maccabees dated, at the earliest, from the close of the
same century. They introduced no new conception of
Israel's religion and history ; the Wisdom of Sirach
followed very closely on the lines of Proverbs, while the
First of Maccabees was but a faithful chronicle of recent
events. Although they were never admitted within the Canon,
they undoubtedly enjoyed high favour, and perhaps, in
the opinion of some Jews, deserved a place among the

AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE CANON. 195
Scriptures. The Wisdom of Sirach is twice at least chap.ix.
quoted, with the formula of citation from Scripture, in the
'Talmud' (Ecclus. vii. 10 inErubin, 65 a, and xiii. i5,xxvii.
9 in Baba Kamma, 92 b). In a passage from Bereshith
Rabba (c. 91), it is said to have been quoted as canonical
by Simon ben Shetach, brother of Queen Salome, in the
year 90 b. c. (For ' other Palestinian authorities ' see
Delitzsch, Gesch. der Judischen Poesie, p. 20, quoted by
Cheyne, Job and Solomon, p. 282.) For three centuries
or more it enjoyed a position of peculiar honour,
perhaps of quasi-authority, but without the prestige of
canonicity. The public reading of it is expressly for
bidden by Rabbi Joseph in the Babylonian Talmud
(San. ioo b).
The First Book of Maccabees never obtained such a
degree of recognition. But, in the days of Josephus, it
was regarded as the one trustworthy Hebrew source of
history for the Maccabean period, and, in the time of
Origen, it was still known in the Hebrew (cf. Orig. ap.
Euseb. H. E. vi. 25).
It was not to be expected that books written in Greek
would stand any chance of admission into the Palestinian
Canon. On that account neither the Second of Macca
bees nor Wisdom could ever have been favoured, or even
have been thought of, in such a connexion. This objec- Eccius. and
... ... ~ ,1 Mace. In
tion did not exist in the case of Ecclesiasticus and Hebrew.
the First of Maccabees; and the statement which has
sometimes been made, that they failed to obtain cano
nicity, because they chanced to be no longer current in
Hebrew at the time when the Canon was being con
cluded, is in all probability incorrect. The Book of
Ecclesiasticus, probably, not only existed in Hebrew,
but was also current in an Aramaised version, from
O 2

196" THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. ix. which the Babylonian Jews made extracts 1. More
over it was known to Jerome, either in the original
Hebrew form or in its later Aramaic dress ; and that
Father affirms that it had a place along with Ecclesiastes
and Song of Songs, and was designated by the title of
' Parables.' (Cf. Praef. in libr. Sal., ' Fertur et Jesu filii
Sirach liber . . . quorum priorem Hebraicum repperi, non
Ecclesiasticum, ut apud Latinos, sed parabolas prae-
notatum, cui juncti erant Ecclesiastes et Canticum Can-
ticorum 2.')
The existence of the First of Maccabees in Hebrew,
in the time of Origen, is shown by the title which he
gives to it — 2ap^r)6 2a/3ai>aie'A (ap. Eus. H. E. vi. 25) =
possibly 'the Sceptre of the Old Man are the Sons of
God ' (ba 132 N1D trm^), or, ' Prince of the House that
God buildeth ' (?t< W NTM "it?), or, ' the Prince of Evil
(and) the Mighty Men ' (?>n »}3 xnt^a ~w), i. e. Antiochus
and the Patriotic Jews3. Jerome also states that he
was acquainted with the First of Maccabees in Hebrew
(Prol. Gal., ' Machabaeorum primum librum Hebraicum
repperi ').
It was not, therefore, due to their being extant only in
1 On the Hebrew quotations to be found in Rabbinic literature, see
Schechter, Jewish Quarterly Review, July, 1891.
2 It was recognised in the Canon of Scripture of the Nestorians, who
probably derived it from the usage of Syrian Jews. (Cf. Buhl. K. u. T. d. A.
?¦ PP- 52-53-)
3 The usual text, that of Stephens, 2ap0r)d 'SapPavi 'EA., -\xd ruiD
hti '32 ('1®), is rendered variously, e. g. Grimm, ' The History of the Prince
(or Princes) of the Sons of God.' Ewald : 'jn '32 iib td ' 2 -ii» = ' the sceptre
of the Prince of the Sons of God.' Derenbourg: l?N'32Tic rv2 TDD = the
Book of the House of the Prince of the Sons of God. (Hist. Pal. pp. 450-
451.) Another explanation might be hazarded, ^« (':3td) >32td rv2 14) =
the Prince of the house of the rebels (or, 3 for 2, chieftains) of God. Geiger
(Urschrift,-p. 205), ¦>» '32TD ruin; 'the obstinacy of the obstinate against
God ' = the Syrians.

AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE CANON. 1 97
a Greek translation, that Ecclesiasticus and the First of chap. ix.
Maccabees failed to find their way into the Canon at the
close of the first century A. D. Nor do other books of our
' Apocrypha,' which were originally composed ift Hebrew
— e.g. Tobit(?), Judith, Baruch i. i-iii. 8 — appear ever
to have been put forward by Jewish writers as worthy to
take rank with the acknowledged Scriptures of the nation.
The fact, however, that so recent a book as Ecclesias
ticus should, even by mistake, be referred to with the
formula of quotation from Scripture, shows that the tend
ency to import a favourite work into the sacred list was
a real danger in the Jewish, as well as in the Christian,
Church. To guard against such a profanation, it was
incumbent upon the Jewish teachers to devise some plan,
by which the compass of the Canon should be rigidly
preserved, and the sanctity of a book maintained, by
careful tradition. For this purpose a strangely artificial
standard of canonicity was, more Rabbinorum, adopted.
In order to preserve the Scriptures from a profane 'Defiuthe
or careless handling, the Rabbins laid down the rule, ,ands'
that to touch the Sacred Books was to incur ceremonial
defilement. As the result of this rule, precautions were
taken that the books should be kept well out of reach
of common touch. It also became necessary to declare
precisely what books were included in the Canon and
would therefore communicate defilement, and what books
could be handled without conveying such effects. The
question of canonicity or non-canonicity soon resolved
itself into the question, whether a book * defiled the
hands,' or whether it did not. If it did, it was because
it belonged to the Canon of Scripture ; if it did not, it
was because it was not included in the sacred register of
' the Twenty-four.' The remembrance of the disputes

198 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. ix. which this test occasioned is preserved in a treatise of
the Mishnah ( Yadaim, or 'hands')1- Without an explana
tion of the phrase, ' defile the hands,' Jewish criticisms
upon the canonicity of books of Scripture would, indeed,
convey no intelligible meaning ; but, provided with this
explanation, we gain a conception both of the freedom
with which questions of canonicity were discussed, and
of the finality with which custom had practically decided
the compass of the Canon before the Rabbinic discus
sions in the first and second centuries A. D.
The need was also felt of other phrases to complete
the Rabbinic definition of 'canonicity'; one, which
would convey the idea of disputed books which it was
not advisable to read publicly as Canonical Scripture,
and another for undoubtedly uncanonical or downright
heretical books, which it was advisable to eschew
Dtsputedor altogether. The former idea was expressed by the term
Books 'genuzim' or ' hidden,' which was, probably, originally
(dmi35). applied to worn-out copies of the rolls of Scriptures that
were buried or consigned to a special chamber designed
for their reception2, and were thus put out of sight and
separated from the rolls kept, for purposes of public
reading, in the ' case ' or ' theke' ' 3 within the ' ark ' of
the Synagogue. In this category of books preserved as
ancient, but not adapted for public reading, the Rabbins
seem to have placed the books whose canonicity was
disputed, or whose interpretation gave rise to especial
perplexity. The ' genuzim', however, according to this
explanation, were quite different, in spite of the similarity
1 Cf. Yadaim, iii. 5, ' All the Holy Scriptures defile the hands.'
a Called the 'Geniza.'
3 Np^n, p'n, Briny. The 'ark' or chest was the rtvri = /h/3cut(5s, cf
Meg. iii. 1, Taan. ii. 1-2, Chrys. Orat. adv.Jud. vi. 7 (ed. Migne, Tom. i.
p. 914).

AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE CANON. 1 99
in the derivation of the word, from ' Apocrypha' ; the chap. ix.
name denotes doubt rather than final rejection. As there
is no evidence to prove that, in the first cent. A.D., a lesson
was read from the Hagiographa, we must suppose that
the relegation to the ' genuzim' of 'disputed' books,
such as Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, (see chap.
x.) implies the use of the Hagiographa, for purposes of
' Midrash,' for the public interpretation (cf. Luke iv.
17-21) of ' the Prophets ' in the Synagogues.
For rejection from the Canon, the term ' extraneous,' Extraneous
• 1 , _,, .. -ii,.-. or ' outside '
' outside, was used. The writings ' outside the Canon Books
(Sepharim Khitzontm, 'books that are outside') corre- (D'31s'n>
spond more closely to our conventional conception of
'Apocrypha,' and we find designated by this term the First
Book of Maccabees (' the Megillah of the house of the
Asmoneans '), Ecclesiasticus (' the Proverbs of the Son
of Sira '), Wisdom (' the Wisdom of Solomon ') as well as
books by heretics, Sadducees, Greek Philosophers, or
Christians \ Accordingly we find the maxim laid down
in general terms, ' It is forbidden to read in the " ex
traneous " books.' (Kohel. Rabba, 84 c, quoted by Weber,
Die Lehren des Talmud, Leipz. 1886, p. 81.)
But the employment of the two phrases in Rabbinic
writing is not free from obscurity. The distinction which
has here been given seems to offer the most probable
explanation (cf. Noldeke, Die alttest. Literatur, 1868,
p. 238).
1 Cf. Sank. xi. 1, quoted by Fiirst, Kanon d. Alt. Test., p. 97. But see
Gratz (M. G. W.J. 1886), who renders : ' R. Akiba said, Whoso readeth
in the " extraneous " (i. e. Judeo-Christian) books, hath no part in the world
to come. But books, like Ben Sira, written since the days of the prophets
a man may read, just as he reads a letter.' Buhl, p. 8.

evidence uncritical.

CHAPTER X.
LATER JEWISH TESTIMONY.
Chap. x. After the time of Josephus, we must look to Rab-
Rabbtnic binic literature for any additional Jewish testimony.
Unfortunately, very little value can be assigned to the
testimony of the Talmud, and of Rabbinical literature
generally, in questions of historical criticism. The Rab
binic writings abound in matter full of useful illustration ;
but the chronological uncertainty which envelops so
much of Talmudic tradition, the fragmentary and dis
cursive character of its contents, the indefiniteness of
its allusions, the technical nature of the subjects which
it handles, the unsatisfactory condition of the text, com
bine to make us distrust its critical worth, wherever
accuracy of date is requisite.
It is, therefore, advisable to treat this branch of the
subject separately, and at no great length. As evidence
for our special purpose, Rabbinical statements generally
tend to confirm the conclusions to which we have already
come ; but their principal interest consists in the light
which they throw upon the attitude of Jewish teachers
towards the subject of the Canon.
Two Titles of Scripture1 . Two of the commonest titles
of the Hebrew Scripture, employed in Rabbinic literature,
reveal the general acceptance of the Canon both in the
1 See Excursus E.

LATER JEWISH TESTIMONY. 201
actual extent and in the tripartite arrangement, which, chap. x.
as we have seen, it most probably possessed at the close
of the first century A.D. The one title, ' the Four and The Four
Twenty Books or Holy Writings,' is doubly significant1.
It excludes the number ' twenty-two,' which, with its
transference of Ruth and Lamentations to ' the Pro
phets,' was adopted, probably in all cases, under the
influence of the LXX version2 (cf. Josephus, Melito,
and Origen) ; and, further, as a title, it closes the door
against the introduction of any apocryphal or doubtful
books. The importance of its usage, in popularly de
fining the limits of the Canon, receives an instructive
illustration from the sentence, 'Whoso bringethinto his
house more than the Four and Twenty Holy Writings,
brings into it confusion ' (cf. Jer. Sanhedr. x. 1).
Another title, which became the regular designation of Law,
the Hebrew Bible, ' The Law, the Prophets, and the Writ- writings:
ings,' occurs so frequently in Rabbinic writings, that its sig
nificance may easily be overlooked. The Jews, by adopt
ing this somewhat cumbrous name, testified to the deep
and lasting impression produced by the gradual growth
of the Canon. They acknowledged that their Bible was
not strictly one collection, but the result of three suc
cessive collections. The name of the whole is threefold,
and of such a kind that each separate title could be
applied with justice to either of the other two divisions.
Thus, although the name ' Torah ' (vojxos, Law), was
specially employed of the first division, it was capable
of being applied to the whole collection (cf. John x. 34,
xii. 34, xv. 25, 1 Cor. xiv. 21). Again, the name 'Nebiim '
was specially employed of the second division ; but we
1 For the early Jewish use of this number, cf. Bab. Taanith 8 a, Kohel.
Rabba, fol. 116 a, on xii. 11. 2 See Chap. xii.

202 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. x. may remember that the composition of the Pentateuch
was ascribed to one who was a prophet (Deut. xviii. i8,
cf. Ezra ix. ii), that of the Psalter to another (Acts ii.
30), that of Daniel to another (Matt. xxiv; 15). Accord
ingly, while the general word, 'Nebiim,' was specially
used for the second division, it might have been used
for the whole, or for any, of the writings included
in the range of the Canon. The comprehensiveness
of these two terms is illustrated by the common use
¦ the Law of ' the Law and the Prophets ' for the whole Scripture
"prophets: where 'the Hagiographa' were clearly not excluded
(e. g. in the New Testament, Matt. v. 17, vii. 12, xi. 13,
xxii. 40, Luke xvi. 16, 29, 31, xxiv. 27, 44, Acts xiii. 15,
xxiv. 14, xxviii. 23).
The third title ' Writings ' was still more indefinite in
character. It may be observed that as this name was
adopted in Greek (al ypatpai) and in Latin (Scriptura)
for the whole collection of sacred books, a special
designation, ' Hagiographa ' (a.yi6ypa<pa), had to be in
vented for the remaining group.
The whole Hebrew title, therefore, is a combination of
three different names, each applied to a particular section,
but each capable of representing the sacred character of
the whole.
The original separateness of the three divisions is thus
reflected by the threefold name, and by the absence of
any one title. The formula l-in. T. N. K. (i. e. Torah,
Nebiim, Kethubim) belongs to a later (i.e. the Massoretic)
phase of Hebrew literature.

We turn next to the consideration of a subject which,
at first sight, would seem to be of great importance. The

LATER JEWISH TESTIMONY. 203
canonicity of certain books of the Hebrew Scriptures, chap.x.
was, as we have already noticed, called in question, at Rabbinic
different times, by Jewish teachers. In the case of ^S/T
Ezekiel, Jonah, Proverbs, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes,0-^
and Esther, objections were made by various Rabbins.
Their position in the Canon had given rise to scruples or
perplexity. The reasons, however, which led to these
adverse criticisms are not such as would have any weight
in the present day. They reflect the subtlety of aca
demical discussion more than the anxiety of a perplexed
conscience. As a rule, they illustrate only too well the
character of the Rabbinism from which they emanated.
At the most, they testify to the degree of tolerance
permitted in the range of controversy, and to the prob
ability that, at an earlier date, the admission of certain
books into the Hebrew Canon had met with consider
able opposition, or with only a moderate degree of
approbation. Ezekiel. The difficulty raised concerning this book Esekiet.
could never have seriously compromised its position in
the Canon. The objection was felt that, in several points,
it apparently contradicted the Pentateuch. According
to one tradition (Menachoth, 45 a), it was resolved that,
on account of its discrepancy with the law of Moses in
the matter of priestly regulations, it was necessary to
exclude the book from public reading. ' Elias, when he
comes, it was said, will explain the difficulty.' At this
crisis, Hananiah, the son of Hezekiah, the son of Garon,
a younger contemporary of Hillel, is said to have arisen
and to have succeeded in showing by ' Haggadic ' 1 inter-
1 ' Haggada ' was the Rabbinic term given to doctrinal exposition ;
Halaka to practical exposition. Parable, legend, and allegory entered
largely into Haggada. The ' Mercaba ' or ' Chariot' vision of Ezekiel was
the nucleus of the Kabiala or esoteric teaching of the Jews.

204 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. x. pretation that the apparent discrepancies could be recon-
ciled (cf. Sabbath, 13 b, Chagigah, 13 a, b). ' But as for
Hananiah, the son of Hezekiah, blessed be his memory,
— if it had not been for him, the Book of Ezekiel would
have been hidden (i.e. made apocryphal, withdrawn from,
public reading, placed among the Genuzim), because its
words contradict the words of the Torah. What did
he do ? They brought him 300 measures of oil ; and
he sate down and explained it.' The manner in which
Hananiah disposed of the difficulty was so satisfactory,
that the Book of Ezekiel was afterwards quoted as pos
sessing the full authority of the Torah itself, on matters
of ceremonial and cleanliness (cf. Moed Qatan, 5 a).
It is very possible that the real objection felt to the
public reading of Ezekiel was due to the great obscurity
of certain passages, especially the visions of the Chariot
and the Temple (ch. i. and xl-xlviii). The contradictions
to the law of Moses, in matters of detail, added to
the general perplexity, and afforded an intelligible
pretext for those who advocated its withdrawal from
public reading in the Synagogues. The introduction of
the Haggadic method of interpretation was the means
both of reconciling contradictions and of importing
mystic explanations for that which had hitherto been
obscure. Jerome (Ep. ad Paul., Ep. liii) records the
existence of such difficulties experienced by the Jews
in the interpretation of these passages, and reports the
custom that these portions were not to be read until
thirty years of age were reached. ' Tertius principia et
finem tantis habet obscuritatibus involuta, ut apud
Hebraeos istae partes cum exordio Geneseos ante annos
triginta non legantur.'
jonak. Jonah. The adverse testimony is here very slight,

LATER JEWISH TESTIMONY. 205
The idea that the book contained only a legendary story chap. x.
may possibly have induced some Jewish scholars to
exclude it from the Canon, and may account for the
language of the Midrash Bammidbar (c. 18), ' Lord of
fifty, that is, of fifty books, that is, the twenty-four books
of Holy Scripture, with eleven of the Twelve (Minor
Prophets), excluding the Book of Jonah, which is a
book by itself, and with the six Seders (of the Mishnah),
and the nine Midrash books on the law of the Priests :
behold the fifty.' Without pausing except to point out
that, as, in the canonical twenty-four books, the Twelve
Minor Prophets were already represented as one book,
there was no need for them to be counted over again,
we may suppose the passage to indicate a doubt whether
Jonah was of equal historical value with the other
prophets. Kimchi (a. D. 1240), in the introduction
to his commentary on 'Jonah,' hints at the same sus
picion. But there is no evidence to show that the re
cognition of Jonah as a book of Canonical Scripture was
ever seriously imperilled.
Proverbs. Any doubts that may have arisen as to the Proverbs.
canonicity of this book probably arose from its being
generally classed with the two other so-called Solomonic
works. The suspicions in which Ecclesiastes was involved
seem to have spread to the earlier representative of the
Khokmah, or Sapiential, literature. The objections to
Proverbs were based, partly upon verbal contradictions
in the book itself, partly upon the ground that it was
supposed to favour heretical (query : Sadducean) pro
clivities. But the authority of the book was never in
reality seriously compromised. There is a well-known
passage in the Bab. Sabbath 30 b : ' Some desired also to
withdraw (lit. to hide, ganaz) the book of Proverbs from

206 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. x. use, because it contained internal contradictions \ but the
attempt was abandoned because the wise men declared,
" We have examined more deeply into the Book of
Ecclesiastes and have discovered the solution of the
difficulty ; here also we wish to enquire more deeply." '
A similar account is given in Aboth R. Nathan (cap. i),
'At fi/st, they withdrew Proverbs, and the Song of
Songs, and Ecclesiastes from public use (i.e. placed them
among the Genuzim), because they spoke in parables.
And so they continued, until the Men of the Great
Synagogue came and expounded them.' The passages
referred to in Proverbs are ch. vii. 7-20, xi. 9. From
this it is evident that, if ever its canonicity was impeached,
it was upon the same internal grounds as the Book of
Ecclesiastes, and that it was never at any moment in
danger of being absolutely rejected. The removal of
doubts about Ecclesiastes sufficed to allay any appre
hensions about Proverbs.
Ecclesiastes Ecclesiastes, or Koheleth. In the case of this book,
there is a much clearer and stronger tradition, recording
the hesitation as to its admission into the Canon. The
grounds of this hesitation are stated by Jewish tradition
to have been, (1) that the book contained contradictory
statements, (2) that it was opposed to other Canonical
Scripture, (3) that it favoured the views of the heretics
(i.e. Sadducees).
alleged tote The first of these charges is stated in Sab. 30 b:
' The wise men desired to " hide " the Book Koheleth
(i.e. withdraw it from public use), because its language
d) self- was often self-contradictory.' As instances were given,
Tory, 'sorrow is better than laughter' (vii. 3), which was
1 e.g. xxvi. 4 and 5, ' Answer not a fool according to his folly ....
Answer a fool according to his folly.'

LATER JEWISH TESTIMONY. 207
considered to contradict ' I said of laughter, it is to be chap. x.
praised ' (R.V. ' mad '; ii. 2) ; ' Then I commended mirth '
(viii. 15), which was considered to contradict ' (I said of
mirth, what doeth it ? ' (ii. 2) ; ' Wherefore I praised the
dead which are already dead more than the living which
are yet alive ' (iv. 2), which was considered to contradict
' For a living dog is better than a dead lion ' (ix. 4).
A second charge is found in the same context, Sabbath (2) opposed
30 a, where the Preacher is asserted to contradict the
words of the Psalter: 'O Solomon, where is thy wisdom ?
where thy discernment? Doth it not suffice thee that
many of thy words contradict the utterances of David,
that thou contradictest even thyself.'
A third charge is found, in combination with the (3) unortho-
second, in a passage of the Midrash Vayyikra Rabba, c.
28 : ' They sought to withdraw (lit. to hide) the book
"Koheleth" because they found in it words which
favoured heresy, and because Solomon said, "Rejoice, O
young man, in thy youth," &c, &c. (Ecc. xi. 9), whereas
Moses said, " And that ye go not about after your own
heart and your own eyes " (Num. xv. 39).' The same
charge of heresy is brought on account of the words, 'What
profit hath a man of all his labour, ' &c. (Ecc. i. 3), which
were considered to favour the ' heretics,' a phrase that
seems to have been intended for the Sadducees, or
generally those who denied the doctrine of the resurrec
tion. Other passages illustrating the doubts raised by
this book are Eduyoth1, v. 3 ; Yadaim, iii. 5 ; Midrash
Koheleth i. 3, xi. 9. Aboth. R. Nathan (ut supra).
1 Eduy. 5, 3, R. Simon says, ' In three cases the School of Shammai makes
easy, and the School of Hillel makes difficult. According to the School of
Shammai, Koheleth defileth not the hands ; the School of Hillel says, It
defileth the hands.'

208 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. x. These charges against the canonicity of Ecclesiastes
were apparently more gravely considered than those
against any other book (see below, Meg. 7 a). The
' Wise,' however — by whom we should probably under
stand the scribes and principal Rabbins of the first and
second centuries A.D. — seem to have investigated the
question carefully. They found that the difficulties
were all capable of explanation. Perhaps, recourse to
the methods of ' Haggadic ' interpretation facilitated
this favourable judgment. Perhaps, the concluding verses
(xii. 13, 14), which, according to some scholars, were
added at a date subsequent to its actual composition,
were able, by the utterance of their simple faith, to
redress the balance that seemed to be so cruelly dis
turbed by the expressions of despair occurring earlier in
the book. There is, however, no probability in the
conjecture of Krochmal, adopted by Fiirst1, that these
concluding verses were added by Hananiah and his
colleagues, in order to justify their opinion as to the
canonicity of the book, and to declare by their means
that the contents of the Canon were now finally com
pleted. The Talmudic passage quoted above (Sabbath 30 b)
records the conclusion of the Wise Men : ' Why did they
not " hide " it ? Because the beginning and the end of it
consist of words of Torah.' With this we should com
pare Jerome's statement respecting the Jewish doubts as
to this book. He says in his comment on chap. xii. 13,
Jerome on 1 4 : ' Aiunt Hebraei quum inter cetera scripta Salomonis
quae antiquata sunt nee in memoria duraverunt et hie
liber obliterandus videretur eo quod vanas Dei assereret
creaturas et totum putaret esse pro nihilo, et cibum, et
1 Fiirst, Kan. d. A. T. pp. 90-96.

Eccles.xii.13, 14.

LATER JEWISH TESTIMONY. 209
potum, et delitias transeuntes praeferret omnibus ; ex chap. x.
hoc uno capitulo meruisse authoritatem ut in divinorum
voluminum numero poneretur, quod totam disputationem
suam, et omnem catalogum hac quasi avaKe<pa\aia>crei
coarctaverit et dixerit finem sermonum auditu esse
promtissimum, nee aliquid in se habere difficile : ut scilicet
Deum timeamus et ejus praecepta faciamus.'
The Song of Songs- The acceptance of this book into TheSongof
the Canon possibly implies a date at which allegorical in
terpretation — in other words, the influence of Haggadic
teaching — had come into use. The Canonicity of the
Song of Songs could thus be defended on other grounds
besides that of its being a writing of Solomon, and in
spite of the objections that were felt on account of the
primarily secular character of its contents. But its
reception did not pass without opposition. At least, this
is the natural explanation of the vehement anxiety with
which Jewish tradition has insisted upon its sanctity.
Thus, after saying that ' all the Holy Scriptures defile
the hands,' it is expressly added, as if to meet an obvious
criticism, that ' the Song of Songs and Koheleth defile the
hands ' ( Yad. iii. 5). In another passage (Meg. 7 a), we
find an interesting allusion to the variety of opinion held
upon this book, and to the way in which it was expressed :
' Rabbi Meir saith, " The book Koheleth defileth not the
hands, and with respect to the Song of Songs there is
difference of opinion." Rabbi Joshua saith on the other
hand, " The Song of Songs defileth the hands, and with
respect to Koheleth there is dispute." Rabbi Simeon
saith, " Koheleth belongeth to the things which the
school of Shammai maketh easy and the school of Hillel
maketh difficult ; but the Books of Ruth, the Song of
Songs, and Esther defile the hands." That is what Rabbi
p

2IO THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap, x Joshua said. We are taught that Rabbi Simeon ben
Menasiah saith, " Koheleth defileth not the hands, because
it containeth the Wisdom of Solomon." '
Most noticeable of all is the passage in which the
sentence, 'All Holy Scriptures defile the hands, even
the Song of Songs and Koheleth,' is discussed. ' R. Juda
saith: "The Song of Songs defileth the hands, but
Koheleth is disputed." R. Jose saith : " Koheleth defileth
not the hands, and the Song of Songs is disputed." R.
Simeon saith : " Koheleth belongeth to the things which
the school of Shammai maketh easy and the school of
Hillel maketh difficult." R. Simeon ben Azai said : " 1
received it from the seventy-two Elders, that on the day
when R. Eleazar ben Azariah was made President (i.e.
in the school at Jamnia), it was determined that the Song
of Songs and Koheleth defile the hands." R. Akiba said,
" God forbid that any man of Israel should deny that the
Song of Songs defileth the hands ; for the whole world is
not equal to the day on which the Song of Songs was
given to Israel. For all the Scriptures are holy, but the
Song of Songs is the holiest of the holy ; and if there is
dispute, it is groundless except in the case of Koheleth " '
( Yad. iii. 5). Rabbi Akiba's encomium upon such a book
suggests an allusion to some serious objection. It is
as if at the weakest link of the chain it was deemed
politic to make the loudest assertion of confidence in its
strength.
Esther. Esther. The Book of Esther gave rise to disputes
among the Rabbins of a similar nature. Like the Book
of Ecclesiastes, it was probably among the last to be
received as canonical. This fact alone would probably
account for some of the opposition which it encountered.
But a more serious ground for questioning its right to be

LATER JEWISH TESTIMONY. 211
regarded as Scripture was found in its apparently inten- Chap. x.
tional omission of any reference to the Divine Name.
It is this peculiarity which no doubt occasioned the
questionings implied in the following extracts from
Jewish tradition (Meg. ja). (a) ' Esther (i. e. the book)
sent to the Wise the following entreaty, "Write me
in the Book (? the Canon) for all ages." They sent
to her in answer, " (It is written), Have not I written
three things?"' i.e. three and not four. The quotation is
from Prov. xxii. 20, where the Hebrew text is doubtful
and the meaning obscure. The doubtful word (translated
in the R.V. 'excellent things1,' marg. 'heretofore,' ac
cording to a variant reading) is accepted by the Jewish
tradition to mean ' three,' and to contain an allusion to
the ' Law, Prophets, and Writings.' The three classes of
Scripture are complete, say the Wise men ; there is no
warrant for making a fourth class in order to receive the
Book of Esther : it is written, ' I have written three.'
(b) ' Rabbi Jehuda said in the name of Samuel, " The
book of Esther defileth not the hands." Is then the Book
of Esther not inspired ? Could Samuel have thought
this? He said however, Is it inspired ?" Answer. " He
understood, it is given for reading, and is not for
writing." '
(c) ' We are taught : Rabbi Eleazer saith, " The Book
of Esther is inspired, for it is said (Esth. vi. 6), ' Now
Haman said in his heart ' (i. e. which could be known to
none but the Holy Spirit)." Rabbi Akiba saith, " The
Book of Esther is inspired ; for it is said (Esth. ii. 22),
' And the thing was known to Mordecai.'" Rabbi Josse
ben Durmascit said, " The Book of Esther is inspired ;
for it is said (Esth. ix. io), ' But on the spoil they laid not
1 Kethib, diib^id; Qeri, D'wjti.
P 2

212 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. x. their hand.' " Samuel said, " Had I been there, I would
have said one word, which surpasses all ; it is said (Esth.
ix. 27), '(the Jews) ordained and took upon them' (that
is, that was ordained above in heaven, which they took
upon them on earth) "/
Such sayings imply, that there had been some hesi
tation in accepting the canonicity of the book. But
the difficulties that had been felt, vanished before the
application of these strange methods of interpretation.
According to the tradition, ' The Wise men ceased not
discussing the matter backwards and forwards until
God enlightened their eyes, and they found it written in
the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings.' (See also the
next chapter.)
Such are some of the chief objections that Jewish
scholars are reported to have raised against the canonicity
of certain canonical books. The reader will form his own
judgment as to the amount of weight to be attached to
their evidence. It cannot, however, in any way qualify
the results of our enquiry into the history of the Canon.
The earliest Jewish traditions that have been quoted were
probably not committed to writing until the close of the
second cent. A.D. We have no means of verifying the
facts preserved by such oral tradition, or, in case of inter
polation, of discriminating between the original tradition
and the glosses which it may have acquired in the process
of transmission. It is impossible, therefore, to say for
certain, how far these strange academical discussions,
turning wholly on subjective criticism, accurately repro
duce the actual controversies which closed the Canon, or
resulted from its conclusion. They, at least, reflect the
spirit in which the Jewish doctors met the real and
imaginary difficulties which they and their disciples

LATER JEWISH TESTIMONY. 213
delighted to multiply, and gloried in either surmounting Chap. x.
or evading.
Perhaps the most important thing for us to observe Canonicity
is that the discussions of the Jewish doctors, whether posed.
serious controversies or only academic displays of verbal
adroitness, presuppose the existing canonicity of the dis
puted books.

CHAPTER XI.
THE HEBREW CANON IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
chap. xi. ONLY in one instance do the objections, which had.
been felt against the inclusion of a book within the
Canon, appear to have survived for long, or to have
resulted, in some quarters, in its actual withdrawal from
the list of Holy Scripture.
Esther ex- Opposition to the Book of Esther appears to have
public use™ taken this open form. Its withdrawal may, of course,
locally. have only expressed a local prejudice due to the teach
ing of some influential Rabbi. But the fact of the book
having been actually excluded from a Jewish list of
Canonical Scripture merits attention. For, although we
learn of it from a Christian source, the position of the
Book of Esther in certain other Christian lists, which
profess to give the contents of the Hebrew Canon,
indicates the suspicion with which it was apt to be
regarded.
Meitto, circ. Melito, the Bishop of Sardis (circ. 170 A.D.), sent to
list. "a friend a list of the Old Testament Scriptures, which
he professed to have obtained from ' accurate enquiry,'
when travelling in the East, in Syria (ap. Euseb. H. E.
iv. 26 x). Its contents agree with those of the Hebrew
* On Melito's list, see Chap, xii and the Table in Excursus C. The words
with which he prefaces it are, axtkBiw oZv ch rijv dvaroXijv, nal cms tou
rbirov ywbpwos ivBa (KripvxBrj Kai iirpaxBrj Kai aKpifiais piaBwi ra T7JS iraAmas
SiaBrjicrjs /3ij3A.ia, viroTa£as inciupa am. (Ap. Eus. H. E. iv. 26.)

HEBREW CANON IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.' 215
Canon, save in the omission of ' Esther.' For ' Lamen- chap. xi.
tations ' is doubtless to be reckoned with Jeremiah, and
Nehemiah with Ezra. Was the omission of Esther
accidental ? Or was it that the book had either been
absolutely set aside as uncanonical, or been temporarily
withdrawn from ' reading ' as a doubtful work ?
(i) The supposition that the name has only accidentally Omits
dropped out from the list, may fairly be claimed to be accident, 5
not altogether improbable. In Origen's list of the Old
Testament Scriptures, the Minor Prophets are thus ac
cidentally omitted ; and it is certainly very possible that
in Melito's list the name of ' Esther ' may similarly have
been passed over, either by the inadvertence of a scribe,
or by the careless confusion of the name ' Esther ' with
that of ' Esdras,' after which book it appears in several
other lists, e.g. Cyril of Jerusalem (f 386) and Epiphanius
(f 403). But accident, though very possible, cannot be
accepted as the most probable reason for the omission.
(2) That it was intentionally left out by Melito's Jewish (Apurpose-
• t- rr 1 i ¦ -r-. 1 ly- compare
informants, offers the more natural explanation, tor the uter Christ.
same unfavourable opinion, which the omission would '"" "*"'
denote, is not only expressed in the Rabbinical discussions
mentioned in the previous chapter, but is also implied
in the position allotted to the book in other Christian
writings, which claim to reproduce the contents of the
Hebrew Canon. In the list of the Hebrew books of
the Old Testament, given by Origen (f 253), the
Book of Esther stands last. In the list of Athanasius
(t 373) m ms Festal Epistle (xxxix), written in
367 A.D., the book ' Esther ' is not classed among
the canonical writings, but is found in the group of
the other books that were to be read for instruction,
i. e. the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach,

omission.

2l6 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xi. Esther, Judith, Tobit, ' the Didache,' and ' the Shepherd.'
In the so-called list of Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium
(circ. 380 A.D.), the Book of ' Esther ' is not included
among the Old Testament writings ; but, at the end of
the list of the Old Testament Canon, it is stated that
' some add the Book of Esther1.' In the list of Gregory
of Nazianzus (f 391) it is omitted from the Old Testa
ment writings ; in the list of Leontius (circ. 590) it is not
mentioned among the ' twenty-two ' of the Canon, while
in that of Nicephorus (814) it is not mentioned among
' the twenty-two books of the Old Testament,' but among
the ' Antilegomena ' of the Old Testament along with
the Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, Proverbs of Solomon,
Judith, Susanna, and Tobit.
Cause of It is difficult to feel certain whether the unfavourable
verdict of these Christian fathers was based upon Jew
ish objections or Christian prejudices. In Melito's days,
the Hebrew Canon had evidently been decided by the
Jews. The position of the Book of Esther in it was
fully assured. How then can we account for its omission
in Melito's list ? Possibly, on the ground that, objections
being felt to the Fast and Feast of Purim, it was thought
advisable, at least in the locality where Melito prosecuted
his enquiry, to discontinue the public use of the Book,
upon the authority of which those anniversaries were
observed. Thus, it may have been objected that the
day of Haman's murderous project (Esth. iii. 13), which
seems to have been commemorated by a fast (Esth.ix. 312),
coincided with the Day of Nicanor (2 Mace. xv. 36), the
13th day of Adar, a Feast-day, on which fasting was
1 Totlxois itpooeyKpivovai Ttjv 'EaBfip rives (Iambi ad Seleuc. ap. Greg. Naz.
Carm. Sect. ii. vii.).
2 The reference to fasting in Esther ix. 31 is omitted in the lxx

HEBREW CANON IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 217
prohibited (cf. Megillath Taanith, xii. 30 : Texte de la M. T., chap. xi.
Derenbourg, Hist, de la Pal. pp. 442-444). Or, it may
have been objected, that the Feast of Purim was not of
ancient origin ; and that its celebration, having certain
resemblances to the usages of a Persian Feast (Furdigan),
gave occasion to misunderstanding, and was apt to be
confounded with heathen practices x For some such Esther's
reason, or for the simpler reason that the book had locally 'GenuZim*
fallen into disrepute on account of its omission of the
Sacred Name, Esther was not included in the list that the
Bishop of Sardis obtained from his enquiries in the East.
In all probability, the Book had, temporarily and only
locally, been placed among the Genuzim. For reasons
which have not transpired, it was withdrawn from public
use. But it was not placed amongst the Khitzontm. It
was 'disputed,' not 'rejected.' This distinction, on the
part of Syrian Jewish converts, a Greek Bishop would
scarcely be able to appreciate.
To Christian readers the character of the book may
very naturally have given rise to difficulties. Its spirit
and teaching seemed to have little in common with the
New Testament. The knowledge that its canonicity Not under-
was not universally accepted by the Jews, would be^°diCeiT
enough for those who were prejudiced against it. Some, ^tuluTby
too, who appear to advocate its exclusion from the list of tradition.
the Old Testament Scriptures, merely repeat the opinion
of previous writers without attempting to investigate the
question afresh. Jerome, in his Preface to Esther, records
no adverse Jewish opinion. Aphraates, circ. 350 A. D., who
was well instructed in Hebrew tradition, omits no book
from the Hebrew Canon (Buhl). We may fairly assume
1 See Lagarde (Gesam. Abhandl., quoted by Robertson Smith, O.T.J.C.,
p. 161 sq., ed. 1; p. 184, ed. 2).

2l8 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. xi. from what we know of Patristic methods, that the list of
Melito, in the History of Eusebius, will account, in great
measure, for the exclusion of Esther from late Christian
lists of the Hebrew Canon. On such a question, the
Fathers, who knew no Hebrew, were wont to rely on
earlier tradition, and seek no fresh testimony \
But the adverse evidence of the Fathers quoted above,
although it illustrates the independence of local Jewish
opinion upon the Canon, is not sufficient to shake our
confidence in the claim of Esther to its place in the
Hebrew Scriptures.
Origen The only other important variations in the contents 2,
Min.Proph. as distinct from the variations in the order, of the
^Epistle: Hebrew Canon, as reported by a Christian Father,
occur in the list of Origen (ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 25), in
which are to be noticed the omission of the Twelve Minor
Prophets and the inclusion of a work entitled ' The
Epistle' along with Jeremiah. The omission of the
Twelve Prophets is undoubtedly due to an inadvertency.
either on the part of Origen himself, or of Eusebius, or of
some copyist. The addition of ' The Epistle,' by which
we must probably understand the Book of Baruch,
indicates that Origen gives the contents of the Hebrew
Canon as they were represented in the LXX version.
1 On the influence of Eusebius upon the lists of Gregory of Nazianzus and
Amphilochius, see Westcott, Bible in the Church, pp. 167.
2 We ought, perhaps, to mention the omission of Chronicles in the earliest
Syrian Version. The books of Chronicles are not commented on by Ephrem
Syrus ; while Theodore of Mopsuestia seems to have excluded Job, Esther,
and Ezra and Nehemiah. It does not appear probable that such omissions
were based on any tradition of a shorter Hebrew Canon. Rather, they re
flect the working of somewhat arbitrary subjective principles. (Cf. Buhl, pp.
52, 53). Is not the omission also of Esther, in Melito's list, to be attributed
to the influence of similar doubts, entertained with as little historical reason,
in the Syrian Church 1

HEBREW CANON IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 21 9
There is no sign of the Book of Baruch having ever chap. xi.
found general acceptance in the Jewish Synagogue. The
possibility may be conceded, that Origen is reporting
a local practice. But it is more probable that, when he
mentions Jeremiah among the Hebrew books, he has in
his mind the expanded form in which it appeared in his
Greek Bible ; and, as we shall see in the next chapter,
this explanation is confirmed by the order in which he
enumerates the books. The subject of the order of the
books in the Hebrew Canon belongs to a distinct enquiry ;
but, as it is not without interest for our subject, we
shall touch upon it briefly in the following chapter.
The history of the admission of the books of the 'Apocrypha'
' Apocrypha ' into the Greek and Latin copies of the Old history "of
Testament lies outside the scope of the present work. ^D^af
The Christian Church of the Apostolic age accepted the Scriptures.
Palestinian Canon of the Hebrew Scriptures in its entirety.
The Palestinian Canon is that whose growth and forma
tion we have endeavoured to trace. It is that which our
Lord and the Apostles, by their usage, sealed for the
blessing and divine instruction of all ages to come. It is
that of whose compass and integrity we have assurance
from the unalterable character of Hebrew tradition, as
well as from the combined testimony of Melito, of
Origen, of Ruffinus, of Jerome, and of others, who con
tended for the purity of the Hebrew Scriptures as the
only true Canon of the Old Covenant.
The intermixture of the so-called Apocryphal books,
and their quasi-recognition in the Christian Church, con
stitute the theme of a separate study1. The Apocryphal
Books never had a place (see Chap, x.) in the Palesti-
1 See Westcott's Bible in the Church, and my article ' Apocrypha,' in
Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, ed. 2.

220 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap. xi. nian Canon. The position which they obtained among
Christians after the 2nd century, was due to the prevalent
ignorance of Hebrew, and, as a consequence, to the
ignorance of the true limits of that Jewish Bible, which
the Apostles had sanctioned. Defective acquaintance
with the Hebrew tradition and with the Palestinian
Canon is answerable, in the main, for the additions
which were made in the Greek Bible and in the versions
derived from it. When once additional books were ac
cepted in the list of the LXX, the enormous influence of
that Version caused them to be regarded with a venera
tion, which only the more learned men in the Church
could keep distinct from that which was due to the
inspired and holy writings of the Hebrew Canon of
Scripture, and to them alone, as the Bible of the Jewish
Church on which our Saviour set the seal of His
authority.

CHAPTER XII.
THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS.
HITHERTO I have designedly abstained from touch- chap, xii.
ing upon the subject of the arrangement of the books,
except so far as ' the tripartite division' of the Canon, and
the position of the books, Ruth and Lamentations, have
necessarily claimed attention in connexion with the
historical argument.
If that historical argument has been as fully supported
by evidence, as I think it has, it will long ago have
become plain to the reader, that ' the tripartite division '
gives no arbitrary grouping, but is a trustworthy witness
and an invaluable memorial of the historical growth and
gradual development of the Canon.
The arrangement of the Nebiim and Kethubim is not The Tn-
partite
chronological, nor is it according to subject-matter. If Division .-
they had been grouped upon either the one principle or the
other, we should not have found Ruth, Chronicles, Ezra
and Nehemiah, and Esther placed in a separate group
from Judges, Samuel, and Kings, nor the Books of Lamen
tations and Daniel separated from those of Jeremiah
and Ezekiel.
The usual explanations which have been given, have Jewish ex.
gone, as a rule, very wide of the mark. They have par- inadequate.
taken rather of the nature of comment, drawn from the
fact of the triple division, than of explanation based upon
actual evidence. Thus, the Jewish tradition that the three

222 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. groups correspond to three descending stages of inspira
tion 1, 'the gradus Mosaicus,' ' the spirit of prophecy,' and
'the Holy Spirit ' in its simplest form (or Ruakh Haqqo-
desh), offered no real explanation of the phenomena ;
but simply repeated the opinion which Jewish teachers
pronounced upon the relative religious value of the three
groups (see Maimonides, Moreh Nebochim, ii. 45).2
Modem Modern explanations, which have not been based upon
'duceTfrom, a recognition of the gradual expansion of the Canon,
not explain- are i;abie to the same censure. Thus, it may, in a great
ing forma- ' J ' °
tion of, measure, be perfectly true, that the three divisions of the
division. Hebrew Canon correspond to the course of development
to be traced in the history of Old Testament Theology,
in (i) the nucleus of Mosaic Revelation, (2) the ob
jective expansion of it through the Prophets, (3) its sub
jective expression through the poetry and 'Wisdom' of
the Hagiographa (cLOehler, Theology of the Old Testament,
i. 70 Eng. trans.). There may be a truth in the assertion that
the three divisions reflect in a special manner the attitude
of religious thought in Israel towards the Almighty, to
wards the Theocracy,and towards Revelation, respectively
(cf. Keil, Einleit. p. 501). Still, these and similar ex
planations are pious reflexions, evoked by the existence
of a tripartite division, rather than scientific arguments
based on the literary or historical criticism of the groups.
They are not without use as suggestive generalisations.
1 See on this subject John Smith's Discourse of Prophecy, chap. ii. pp.
178 seq. (ed. Camb. Univ. Press, 1859).
2 Some of the attempts to account for the position of Daniel
among the Hagiographa, instead of among the Prophets, are almost
absurd in their variety and obvious inadequacy, e. g. ' Daniel was a
prophet in gift, not in office,' 'he prophesied in a foreign land, not in
Palestine,' ' he received manifestations of angels ' (Nachmanides), ' he was
a politician, and lived at a royal court.'

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 223
But, as a rule, they are put forward on the assumption Chap. xii.
that the formation of the whole Canon was undertaken by
one man, or by a single generation, endowed with special
supernatural gifts for the work (cf. Keil, Einleit. p. 501).
That assumption breaks down utterly, when confronted
with the better knowledge of the books obtained by
modern study, by a more careful analysis of the language,
and by a stricter scrutiny of the contents of the indi
vidual writings. The generation to which Ezra belonged
may have assisted at the first, they had nothing to do
with the final, stage in the formation of the Canon. The
books of Chronicles and Ecclesiastes alone would dis
prove the correctness of the traditional view.
Even apart from the results of recent criticism, the
generalisations alluded to above equally break down,
when tested by application to specific cases, to the
peculiar anomalies of the tripartite division. Thus, the
explanation that Daniel, being an apocalyptic work, could
not take rank among the ' Prophets,' will hardly com
mend itself to the ordinary reader in the face of our Lord's
words (Matt. xxiv. 15) '. Similarly, the contention that
the narrative books of the Hagiographa, e.g. Ruth, Ezra,
and Nehemiah, relate the sacred history from a different
1 John Smith (page 243, ut sup.), in whose days the idea of a gradual
formation of the O. T. Canon was unknown, attributes the position of
Daniel in the Hagiographa to the error of the Jews. 'And, therefore,
whatever the latter Jews here urge, for thus ranking Daniel's books with
the other D'2ln3, yet, seeing they give us no traditional reason which their
ancestors had for so doing, I should rather think it to have been, first of all,
some fortuitous thing which gave an occasion to this after-mistake, as I
think it is ' (1650). So also Leusden, Philolog. Hebrae. Dissert, viii. p. 91
(ed. 2, 1672), ' Continet ergo (Daniel) prophetiam ; et propterea Judaei
eum immerito e choro Prophetarum extmdunt, et ad Hagiographa ablegant.'
This appears to be a more candid explanation for the position of Daniel in
the Hebrew Canon than the attempts to show that Daniel was not really a
Prophet.

224 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. standpoint from the Books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings,
may or may not be true ; but it conveys no sufficient
reason for their non-admission into the group of the
' Prophets.' If the 'Prophets' included Haggai, Zechariah,
and Malachi, the parallel narratives in Ezra, Nehemiah
and Esther had just as much claim to admission among
the narrative books of the same group.
The truth is, that explanations of the difficulties of the
triple grouping are little better than guess-work, so long
as the historical sequence in the formation of the Canon
is not recognised. It is not, therefore, worth while here to
discuss their inadequacy at any length. For as fast as
one explanation is disposed of, another can always be
discovered. On the other hand, so soon as the gradual
growth of the Canon is admitted, the phenomena of the
triple grouping are seen not to constitute difficulties, but
to illustrate the history of the literary process at suc
cessive epochs.

The chief variations in the arrangement of the books
fall into two main groups ; the one, representing the in
fluence of the Alexandrine version ; the other, the
changes that have, at different times, occurred within the
second and third divisions of the Hebrew Canon.
i. influence I. The Alexandrine version disregarded the Hebrew
arr^igp tripartite division, and generally endeavoured to group
ToThs"^ t^e t>°°ks> according to their subject-matter, into the
divisions of narrative, poetical, and prophetical books.
But no uniformity of order seems to have been main
tained.
Meitto. The list of Melito (Euseb. H. E. iv. 26), though pur
porting to give the order and contents of the Hebrew

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 225
Canon of Scripture, probably enumerates the Hebrew Chap. xii.
books in the order of the Greek Bible. ' Five books of
Moses, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books
of the Kingdoms, two of Chronicles (= Paralipomena), the
Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Ecclesiastes,
Song of Songs, Job, the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, the
Twelve in one Book, Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras.' We here
notice (i) the general arrangement into narrative, poetical,
and prophetical groups, the book Esdras ( = Ezra, Nehe
miah) being attached, as an appendix, to the prophets of
the Captivity ; (2) the use of the Septuagint titles, ' Joshua
the son of Nun,' ' Kingdoms ' (for ' Kings '), ' Paralipo
mena'; (3) the place of Ruth next after Judges, of
Chronicles after Kings, of Lamentations, presumably,
after Jeremiah, of Daniel before Ezekiel ; (4) the sub
division of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles.
The list of Origen is very similar : — ' the five books Origen.
of Moses ; Joshua, the son of Nun ; Judges, Ruth
along with them, in one book ; Kingdoms first, second,
third, fourth ; Chronicles, first, second ; Esdras first,
second ; Book of Psalms ; Proverbs of Solomon ; Eccle
siastes ; Song of Songs ; Isaiah ; Jeremiah, with Lamen
tations and the Epistle, in one book ; Daniel ; Eze
kiel ; Job ; Esther (Euseb. H. E. vi. 25) 1. Here, again,
we notice (1) the same general arrangement into nar
rative, poetry, and prophecy ; (2) the titles of ' Joshua,
the son of Nun,' ' Kingdoms,' ' Paralipomena,' ' Proverbs of
Solomon ' ; (3) the place of Ruth, Chronicles, Lamentations,
Daniel ; (4) the sub-division of Samuel,Kings, Chronicles,
Ezra and Nehemiah ; (5) the insertion of ' The Epistle '
( = Baruch or Baruch vi, the so-called Epistle of Jeremy).
1 The Twelve Minor Prophets have fallen out by accident (p. 218);
probably they came after Jeremiah. Q

226 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. Origen gives the Hebrew names of the books as well
as the Greek, and expressly mentions that Samuel,
Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, are each but one
book in the Hebrew Scriptures. His object is to give
the names and the number of the Hebrew books ; and
he enumerates them, following the Alexandrine order,
omitting all books not contained in the Palestinian
Canon ; ' the Epistle,' which was united with Jeremiah,
being the only exception.
Cod. Vat. In the Codex Vaticanus, the books are arranged upon
4t ent. tke same prjncipie) the chief differences being (i) the in
troduction of ' Apocrypha,' (2)the place of ' Job' after the
canonical writings of Solomon, due perhaps to the un
certainty about authorship ; and (3) the place of the
Twelve Minor Prophets before Isaiah, due probably to
an attempt at chronological arrangement. The order in
which the books follow one another is, ' Genesis — Chron
icles, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras ( = Ezra, Nehemiah), Psalms,
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job, Wisdom of
Solomon, Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, Esther, Judith,
Tobit, Twelve Minor Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch,
Lamentations, Epistle of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel.
Cod. Atex. The Codex Alexandrinus contains the books of the
s em. Q|j -peS(.ameni- ;n three volumes, in the following order :
— vol. i. Genesis to Chronicles ; vol. ii. Twelve Minor
Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations,
and Epistle of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel (Theodotion's
version), Esther with Additions, Tobit, Judith, 1 Esdras,
2 Esdras ( = Ezra, Nehemiah), 1, 2, 3, 4 Maccabees ; vol.
iii. Psalms with Canticles, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,
Song of Songs, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of the Son
of Sirach.
In the Codex Sinaiticus, the books of the Old Testa-

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 227
ment probably followed one another in a somewhat similar chap. xii.
order. Genesis to Chronicles, 1 Esdras, % Esdras ( = Ezra, Cod SinaiL
Nehemiah), Esther, Tobit, Judith, i Maccabees, 4 Mac- *lh CmU
cabees, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations,
and Epistle, [Ezek. Dan.J, Minor Prophets, Psalms,
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom of
Solomon, Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, Job. But the
fragmentary condition in which the Old Testament in
this MS. has survived, precludes any absolute certainty
as to the place of Ezekiel and Daniel.
Cyril of Jerusalem (^-386) who gives the contents of Cyril, Bp. of
Holy Scripture in his 4th Catechesis (sec. 33) shows
acquaintance with Hebrew usage, and expressly mentions
that the 1st and 2nd Books of ' Kingdoms ' were regarded
as one book by the Jews, as also the 3rd and 4th Books
of ' Kingdoms,' the 1st and 2nd of Chronicles, and the
1st and 2nd of Esdras. He mentions the books in the
following order : — the historical books, Genesis to Deu
teronomy, Joshua, Judges with Ruth, 1-4 Kingdoms
(Samuel and Kings), 1, 2 Chronicles, 1, 2 Esdras, Esther ;
the poetical books, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,
Song of Songs ; the prophetical books, the Twelve
Minor Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamenta
tions, and Epistle, Ezekiel, Daniel.
In the list of Athanasius (365), the books are given in Athanastus.
the following order : — Genesis to Deuteronomy, Joshua,
Judges, Ruth, 1, 2, 3, 4 'Kingdoms,' 1, 2 Chronicles, 1,2
Esdras, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs,
Job, Twelve Minor Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah with
Baruch, Lamentations, and Epistle, Ezekiel, and Daniel.
(Ep. Fest. xxxix.)
Gregory of Nazianzus (f39o) gives an arrangement Gregory
in three groups, of twelve, five, and five books respec- scci.i.*™
Q 2

228 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. tively; historical,Genesis to Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges,
Ruth 'the eighth book,' Kings, Chronicles, Ezra (Esther is
omitted) ; poetical, Job, David (= Psalms), and three of
Solomon (Eccles., Song, Prov.) ; prophetical, the Twelve
Minor Prophets (in the LXX order), Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel, Daniel (Lamentations probably reckoned with
Jeremiah).
Coundiof The Spurious Canon (Lix) of the Council of Laodicea
Laodicea 363 . -. . .
spurious (303) composed probably about 400 A.D., thus enumerates
iaTr"UE' tne books of the Old Testament : (1) Genesis of the world,
(2) Exodus from Egypt, (3) Leviticus, (4) Numbers, (5)
Deuteronomy, (6) Joshua, son of Nun, (7) Judges, Ruth,
(8) Esther, (9) 1, 2 ' Kingdoms,' (10) 3, 4 'Kingdoms,' '
(11) 1, 2 Paralipomena, (12) i, 2 Esdras, (13) Book of
Psalms, (14) Proverbs of Solomon, (15) Ecclesiastes,
(16) Song of Songs, (17) Job, (18) Twelve Prophets,
(19) Isaiah, (20) Jeremiah and Baruch, Lamentations
and Epistles, (21) Ezekiel, (22) Daniel.
Epiphanius. In one list of Epiphanius (f403) the contents of the
Hebrew Scriptures are given in the following order : —
Genesis to Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges. Ruth, Job,
Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, 1-4
' Kingdoms,' 1, 2 Chronicles, Twelve Minor Prophets,
Isaiah, Jeremiah with Lamentations, Epistle, and Baruch,
Ezekiel, Daniel, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Esther (Haeresis
viii. 6). In another list, the order given is slightly
different, the books are arranged in five ' pentateuchs '
with two over : — (i) The legal, Genesis to Deuteronomy ;
(ii) The poetical, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,
Song of Songs ; (iii) Records, or Hagiographa (sic),
Joshua, Judges with Ruth, Chronicles 1 and 2, ' King
doms ' 1 and 2, ' Kingdoms ' 3 and 4 ; (iv) The pro
phetical, Twelve Minor Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Eze-

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 229
kiel, Daniel; and two others, 1, 2 Esdras and Esther Chap.xh.
(De Mens.etPond.4). In another list the Hebrew books are
given in the following order : — Genesis to Deuteronomy,
Joshua the son of Nun, Job, Judges, Ruth, Psalms, 1, 2
Chronicles, 1,2' Kingdoms,' Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of
Songs, Twelve Minor Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
Daniel, 1, 2 Esdras, Esther (De Mens, et Pond. 22, 23).
Ruffinus (f4io) gives the following order : — Genesis to Ruffinus.
Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges with Ruth, four Books of
Kingdoms, Chronicles, 1, 2 Esdras, Esther, Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel, Twelve Minor Prophets,
Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs
(Comm. in Symb. Apost. § 36).
From an examination of these lists it appears that
even where it was intended to give the contents of the
Hebrew Canon, as distinguished from the longer Canon
of the Greek Bible, the Christian Fathers followed the
order of the books in the Greek Bible. Where no
acquaintance is shown with the Hebrew tripartite
division, there we may be sure the list of the Hebrew
Canon is taken from a Greek source. Its limitation, not
its arrangement, is reproduced : its contents, not their
order, have been preserved. Proof of this is to be
found in (1) the Greek titles, e. g. Joshua the son of Nun,
' Kingdoms,' ' Paralipomena ' ; (2) the insertion of Greek
books, e. g. Baruch, Epistle of Jeremiah, and 1 Esdras ;
(3) the sub-division of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-
Nehemiah ; (4) the prevailing arrangement by subject-
matter, e. g. of Chronicles, Daniel, Esther, and the effort
to group chronologically, as in the position of the Minor
Prophets before Isaiah ; (5) the complete absence of any
uniformity in the arrangement. The tripartite division
of the Hebrew Canon was recognised universally by the

230 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. Jews when the Mishnah was committed to writing (circ.
200 A.D.). It was well known to Jerome (vid. infr.) in
the fourth century. The fact that it is not adopted in
the Christian lists, cited above, which claimed to give the
Hebrew Scriptures, must be attributed either to general
ignorance of the Hebrew tradition, or to disregard of
what seemed to be a trifling divergence from the Bible
in use among Christians.
11. Hebrew II. We turn now to the variations in the arrangement
Variations of the books of the Hebrew Canon, where the tripartite
m order, division was known and recognised. The variations are
confined to the second and third divisions. They may be
discussed under the heads of (a) the position of Ruth and
Lamentations ; (b) the order of ' the Prophets ' ; (c) the
order of ' the Hagiographa.'
(a)Ruthand (a) We have already noticed that, in the earliest
arrangement of the Hebrew Canon, Ruth and Lamenta
tions were included among the Hagiographa. Some of
the grounds for this belief have been mentioned in a
former chapter. The lists in which they appear among
the ' Prophets ' are all, I believe, those which have been
influenced by the usage of the Greek Bible. Even the
list of Jerome, in his Prologus Galeatus 1, which claims to
give the Hebrew books in the Hebrew order, offers no
exception to this rule.
Evidence of The enumeration of twenty-two books in the
p^oTgoL Hebrew Scriptures requires the conjunction of Ruth
with Judges, and of Lamentations with Jeremiah.
Jerome gives one enumeration of twenty-two books,
another of twenty-seven ; the former, he points out,
corresponds to the letters of the Hebrew alphabet,
1 See Excursus D.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 231
the latter to the Hebrew alphabet with the letters, Chap, xii.
Caph, M£m, Nun, Pe, Tsade (which have a different
shape at the close of a word) reckoned over a second
time. The additional five letters correspond, according
to Jerome, to the double books 1, 2 Samuel, 1, 2 Kings,
1, 2 Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Jeremiah-Lamentations.
This assertion, however, illustrates how little we can rely
upon Jerome's testimony for an accurate statement of
Hebrew tradition. Nothing can be more certain than
that, in the Jewish Church, the Hebrew books, Samuel,
Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah were not subdivided
till many centuries later l. Jerome's reference, therefore, inaccurate
,. r ,--n ,i astoHebrew
to the ' double books is proof that he is influenced by, tradition.
and is alluding to, the usage of the Greek and Latin
Bibles, and is not accurately reproducing the state of the
case as to the Hebrew Canon. Once more, the imper
fection of even his own artificial enumeration of twenty-
seven books is exemplified by his omission of Judges-
Ruth, which he regarded as two books in one, from the
category of ' double books.' Had he included Judges-
Ruth, his list of 'double books' would have exceeded
the number of ' final ' Hebrew letters, and would have
spoiled the symmetry of his calculations 2.
The testimony, therefore, of Jerome to the view that
Ruth and Lamentations belonged, in Hebrew copies, to
' the Prophets,' fails altogether to command our confi
dence. It is based on the assumption that the number
of the books in the Canon was twenty-two. This was a
1 Not till the beginning of the sixteenth century.
3 John of Damascus (t75o) avoids this difficulty by not including Jere
miah and Lamentations among the double books, typified by the five ' final '
Hebrew letters. He boldly makes the assertion : SvvavTCTat yap "Poiifl
rots Kptrats Kai apiBpiUTai irap' 'Eflpaiois fua @i0\os. (Dejid. Orthod.iv. 17.)

232 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. number which tallied with the Septuagintal arrangement,
and also possessed, in Jerome's mind, especial virtue
and significance, because it corresponded to the number
Patristic of the Hebrew letters. The number 'twenty-two' is first
'brewiettets given to the contents of the Hebrew Canon by Josephus
BoVkffa™ ^Contr. Ap. i. 8), who, as we have seen, used the Septua-
aous. gint version. Origen was the first who pointed out
that this number was also that of the letters in the
Hebrew alphabet (Euseb. H. E. vi. 25), and the coinci
dence is emphatically repeated by Athanasius, Gre
gory of Nazianzus, Hilary of Poitiers, and Epipha
nius, as well as by Jerome1. The coincidence, it was
thought, could hardly be accidental. The ' twenty-two '
books of the Greek Bible must, it was supposed, represent
'twenty-two ' books of the Hebrew Bible ; hence, it was
concluded, the number of the books in the Hebrew
Canon was providentially ordained to agree with the
number of the Hebrew letters. On such a wholly shadowy
hypothesis, the number ' twenty-two ' received support
from the Christian Fathers ; and, in consequence, it was
1 Orig. ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 25. — obit ayvoirriov b" thai tcls evmaBtjKovs
fiiPKovs, ws 'Efipaioi irapamfioaoiv, Svo Kai eiKoat, oaos 6 apiBpids twv Trap'
aiiroTs aroix^iojv iariv.
Athan. Ep. Pest, xxxix. — tan to'wvv ttjs ptv itakaias maBt)Kr]s 0i0\ia t§
aptBpw to. Travra ilKoaibvo' roffavra yap cbs rjKovaa Kai ra OT0tx*ta ra nap'
'E/3paiots efaat napaoldoTat (observe the significance of fjKovoa).
Greg. Naz. Carm. Sect. i. 1 2 —
'Apxalas p&v tO-rjKa ova Kai uftoat Pi@\ovs
rots xcuv 'Efipaiojy ypdpipiaaiv avTiBerovs.
Hil. Prol. Comm. in Ps. — Et ea causa est, ut in viginti duos libros lex
Testament! Veteris deputetur, ut cum literarum numero convenient.
Epiphan. Haer. viii. 6. — al t'lKoai tttrb. 0/j3Aoi al k« Biov SoBeiaai tois
'lovoaiois, (ttcoai Svo ok eiatv &s ra -nap' avrois arotxeta tuiv 'Efipaitcwv
ypap-fxarcvv apiQp.ovpzvai, ma. to onrXovoBat diKa (3i@\ovs els irivre \cyoptivas.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 233
not doubted that the books, Ruth and Lamentations, chap, xii
had, from the first, been united with Judges and Jeremiah.
It is noteworthy that the supposed agreement in the
number of the Hebrew letters with the number of the
Hebrew sacred books seems to be of Greek origin, and
does not appear in Hebrew tradition. This would
hardly have been the case, if ' twenty-two ' had been the
original number of the books in the Hebrew Bible.
On the other hand, the number ' twenty-four ' is uni- Twenty-
formlygiven bygenuinely Hebrew tradition as the number^X.
of the Hebrew books of Scripture. As has already been
pointed out, this number most probably receives sup
port from a testimony dating from the close of the
first century A.D. (4 Esdras). It is the number found
assigned to the contents of the Canon both in the
Talmud and in Rabbinic literature generally. This
number, ' twenty-four,' requires the enumeration of Ruth
and Lamentations as separate works.
In the earliest Rabbinic list of Scripture, Ruth and Talmud.
Lamentations are placed among the Hagiographa (Baba
Bathra 14b, see below) ; and in the Targums1 of 'the
Prophets,' even in the most ancient, that of Jonathan,
Ruth and Lamentations do not appear. According to
the legend, Jonathan-ben-Uziel was forbidden, by a
1 Targum is the name given to the oral interpretation, or paraphrase, of
the Scripture read in the Synagogue. Only the learned knew Hebrew in
our Lord's time. An officer, called the Meturgeman (= Dragoman), gave
the sense of the Lesson in the Aramaic tongue, which the people used.
Gradually the oral interpretation assumed a fixed form, and was
committed to writing. Hence the Torah Targum of Onkelos, i. e.
the rendering according to the school of Aquila, and the Nebiim
Targum of Jonathan, which some identify with the school of Theodotion.
The Targums of the Kethubim were clearly not intended for use in the
Synagogue.

234 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap.xh. Divine Message, to undertake the translation of the
Targum. Kethubim (Megilla 3 a) ; and there can be no sort of
doubt that the Targums of Ruth and Lamentations
are of very much later date than those of 'the Prophets.'
The Targum of Jonathan is probably a homogeneous
work, dating possibly from the second century A.D. ; and
it never embraced either Ruth or Lamentations.
jenme, Pre- One single passage, taken from Jerome's own writings,
fat. m Dan. jg sufficjent to demonstrate, that his inclusion of Ruth
and Lamentations among the ' Prophets,' and his support
of the number 'twenty-two' for the books of the Old
Testament, have no critical value, and contradict the
genuine Hebrew tradition. He himself, when he
is not distracted from the simple narration of facts by
imaginary symbolism, is able to reproduce the Hebrew
Canon in accordance with the Hebrew tradition as to
the number of the books. In his ' Preface to Daniel,'
he states the Hebrew usage, assigning five books to the
Law, eight to the Prophets, eleven to the Hagiographa:
'I call attention to this, that, among the Hebrews,
Daniel is not reckoned with the Prophets, but with
those who wrote the 'Ayioypacpa. For all Scripture is
by them divided into three portions, the Law, the
Prophets, and the eAyi6ypa<f>a, that is into five, and eight,
and eleven books.'
Writing on (b) The order of the books of ' the Prophets ' and the
Roils. Hagiographa varies very much in the extant lists of the
Hebrew Scriptures and in the Hebrew MSS.1 For this,
1 The reader will bear in mind, that no known(i89i)HebrewMS.ofthe Bible
is earlier than the tenth century. The date, 856, claimed for the Cambridge
MS. No. 12, is undoubtedly very considerably too early; cf. Schiller
Szinnessy's Catalogue Hebrew MSS. in Cambridge University Library, and
Neubauer's Essay in vol. iii. of Studia Biblica.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. Ztf
at first sight, startling phenomenon, a simple explana- chap. xii.
tion is forthcoming. For a long time each book was
written on a separate roll ; and the question of the order
of the books was not mooted. In early times, to possess
more than one book in a single roll was an exception,
and called for remark. This may be illustrated from
the Talmud, ' Our Rabbis taught : it is not forbidden to
write the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa in
a single volume. The words of Rabbi Meir 1 were, that
Rabbi Jehudah 2 used to say " The Law should be
written separately, and the Prophets separately, and the
Hagiographa separately." The Wise Men also used to
say, each book should be written separately. And
Rabbi Jehudah said, that Boethus, the son of Zonin, had
eight prophets united in one (book), with the approval
of Eleazar ben-Azariah 3. But some say, they were not
united, but each one written separately. Rabbi 4 said in
reply, they brought before us the Law, the Prophets, and
the Hagiographa united together and we approved
them.' (Baba Bathra, fol. 13 3 5.)
Similarly, questions are recorded as having been asked
by the Rabbins, whether it was lawful to combine the
Prophets with the Law in one volume, whether the Pro
phets and the Hagiographa might be included in the
same volume with the Law ; and there seems to be no
doubt that, in those questions, the Prophets and Hagio-
1 A pupil of Rabbi Akiba ; eminent Jewish teacher in second century A.D.
2 Rabbi Jehuda, ben-Ilai, lived in first century A.D.
3 Eleazar, successor of Gamaliel, end of first century A.D.
4 i.e. Rabbi Jehuda, the Holy, compiler of the Mishnah, tire. 200 A.D.
5 'Sopherim, iii. 6, allows all the books to be united in inferior copies
written on the material called diphthera, but not in synagogue rolls ; a
compromise pointing to the gradual introduction in post- Talmudic times of
the plan of treating the Bible as one volume.' Robertson Smith, O. T. J. C.
p. 410, ed. 1; p. 173, ed. 2.

23<5 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. grapha denote, not the whole groups, but only individual
books belonging to those groups x.
The unwieldy size and shape of the rolls made it
almost impossible to combine many books in a single
volume. The Rabbins also clearly viewed with sus
picion the attempt to include more than one book in a
single roll. Perhaps they foresaw difficulties from the
combination of various books, if it should happen that
one was to be removed from public reading. Perhaps, too,
they disliked the necessary variety in size both of the
rolls and of the characters in which they were written, as
likely to multiply errors in transcription.
The three groups were rigorously kept apart. But,
within the Prophets and the Hagiographa, the order
of sequence of the books was either not authoritatively
laid down, or was not generally known. The rolls were
preserved in their case (Np^fi), and treasured in the Ark
of the Synagogue. They were brought out as they
were needed from time to time. The manner of their
preservation did not help to determine their relative
priority. This question only arose when the Codex
began to supplant the Roll for the purpose of private
study, and when more books than one were written in
a single roll.
Nebiim The Prophets. As might be expected, no variation is
' found in the order of the four narrative books, 'the
former prophets.' They follow the order of chronolo
gical sequence — Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings.
akharontm. In the case of 'the latter prophets,' an interesting
variation is found, which raises the question, whether the
1 Cf. Meg. 27a, and Jer. Meg. iii. 74a quoted by Marx (Tradit. Jud.
Vet. pp. 28-30).

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 237
order of ' the great prophets ' — Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel chap. xii.
— really agrees with the earliest arrangement of the books
in the Hebrew Canon. It is the obvious chronological
order ; and it is found in the lists of Origen and Jerome,
who, however, are probably influenced by the LXX.
The Hebrew tradition preserved in Baba bathra 14 b, Talmudic
a passage which has already been referred to, mentions ^//j. '
them in the order of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah ; and
they are found in that order in a large number of MSS.,
especially those of German and French origin.
Now Isaiah, we instinctively feel, is very naturally
placed at the head of the prophetical writings, as the
greatest and most majestic of all the prophets, and as
the earliest in date of 'the great prophets.' If its place
was originally at their head, it is certainly difficult to
account for its position in this fragment from Rabbinic
tradition. If, on the other hand, its place was originally
between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets, we can well
imagine, how, out of regard both for its chronological
position, for its commanding prestige, for its beauty, and
for its spiritual influence, it was transferred, at a later time,
to the post which it now holds in the Hebrew Bible,
at the head of the prophetical writings. All we can say
is, that its Talmudic position, after Ezekiel and in front
of the Minor Prophets, is opposed to the idea of arrange
ment either in order of chronology or in order of dignity ;
and that if this represents the earliest position assigned to
the prophet, it must have been owing to some very definite
purpose. What this purpose was, we can only determine
by conjecture. And conjecture has not been idle.
(1) The Rabbins supplied a highly characteristic ex- Explana-
planation. The order of the books was intended to (""Rabbinic:
reproduce the continuity of the subject-matter. The^f*

238 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. Books of Kings closed with a picture of desolation, and
were therefore followed by Jeremiah, whose book was all
desolation. Jeremiah was followed by Ezekiel, who
opens with words of desolation and closes with words of
comfort ; Ezekiel is therefore followed by Isaiah, whose
book was all comfort (Baba bathra, 14). See Excurs. B.
(2) Geiger: (2) It was a simple, but ingenious, suggestion of Gei
ger1 that the books are arranged in order of size. If we
take a Hebrew Bible of Van der Hooght's edition, we find
that Jeremiah occupies 84 pages, Ezekiel 73, Isaiah 64,
the Minor Prophets 58. But such an explanation seems
scarcely worthy of the subject. The coincidence of the
size with the relative positions of the books is note
worthy. But that it is anything more than a coincidence,
I cannot believe to be at all probable. It is not sup
ported by the analogy of the arrangement in the case
of other books. For the group of Solomonic books,
Prov., Eccles., Song of Songs, being attributed to the
same author, obviously offers no real parallel.
(3) Fiirst: (2) Another most improbable conjecture, that of
xi-kvi. Krochmal, repeated by Julius Fiirst in his book on the
Canon2, deserves a passing notice in spite of its wildness.
He pointed out that the position of Isaiah after Ezekiel
agreed with the date of the latter portion of Isaiah
(xl-lxvi), and further that the consolatory tone of the
book, referred to by the Rabbins, is only characteristic
of Isaiah II. He therefore suggested that originally
1 Abr. Geiger (quoted by Strack, art. ' Kanon ') Wissensch. Ztschr.f. Jud.
Theol. ii. (1836), pp. 489-496. The same view is put forward by Herzfeld
Gesch. Volks Jiid. ii. p. 103 (1863), independently, or, at least, without re
ference to Geiger's having suggested it.
a Kan. d. Alt. Test. pp. 15-28. Strack (Art. ' Kanon ' R.E.2) attributes
the place of Isaiah in the Talmudic list to a recollection of the Exilic
origin of the latter part of the book.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 239
Isaiah I stood first, and Isaiah II fourth, but that after chap, xii
the writings of Isaiah I had been united with those of
Isaiah II, the position of the exilic portion was re
tained, and for a long time determined the place of the
book in the Hebrew Canon. But to suppose that the
Rabbins from whom we receive the Mishnah and Gemara
would have assigned any portion of Isaiah to the period
of the exile, is a quite inadmissible assumption (cf. John
xii. 38-41). And the son of Sirach clearly shows that the
latter part of Isaiah was by the Jews of his time unques
tionably assigned to the great prophet of Hezekiah's
reign (cf. Ecclus. xlviii. 24, 25).
(4) The explanation put forward by Marx (Traditio (4) Marx:
ludaeorum Veterrima, p. 36) appears more probable. follow
The Book of Jeremiah followed naturally upon the Books '"**'
of Kings ; it was similar in style ; it dealt with the
closing scenes of the Jewish Monarchy. Jeremiah could
hardly be separated, in point of time, from Ezekiel.
Isaiah remained, and was naturally placed in front of
the Minor Prophets. In point of date Isaiah would pair
with Hosea as fittingly as Jeremiah with Ezekiel. At
first the books of the Great Prophets would have been
kept in separate rolls. The question of priority in order
hardly arose, until it began to be the custom to write
them in the same book. Thus, the Talmudic position of
Isaiah is a memorial of the time when no very sharp
distinction had yet been drawn between the narrative
and the prophetical books in the Second Group.
In mediaeval times the distinction between the his
torical and the prophetical books of 'the Prophets'
became more marked. They were divided into the
'former' and the 'latter' prophets. The Massoretes,
perhaps, first put Isaiah at the head of the 'latter'

240 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap.xh. prophets, in which place it stands in the earliest Hebrew
MS., that of the Prophetae Posteriores, the Codex Baby-
lonicus Petropolitanus, 916 a.d., edited by Strack (St.
Petersburg, 1876), and in the many MSS. of Spanish
origin. But there are traces of an intermediate stage.
Some Jewish scribes, who united Jeremiah closely with
the Books of Kings, placed Isaiah between Jeremiah and
Ezekiel, so that Jeremiah might, as it were, close the his
torical, and Isaiah commence the prophetical books : this
order is found in several MSS. (seeKennicott). A few MSS.
(e. g. Kennicott, Cod.3301, 47 1, 587) give the strange order
— Ezekiel, Isaiah, Jeremiah ('Ezech. praecedit Isaiam').
Mm. Proph. The order of the Minor Prophets is doubtless intended
as approximately chronological. The position of the
Book of Jonah is probably due to the mention made of
the prophet in 2 Kings xiv. 25, which helped to deter
mine its reputed date. In the Septuagint Version an
attempt, presumably made to secure greater accuracy
in the chronological arrangement, led to the slightly
different order — Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah,
Jonah, for Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah.

17)1.

M Kethub- (c) The Hagiographa. It is in the Hagiographa that we
find the greatest amount of variation in the arrangement
of the books. This is partly to be accounted for by the
great variety of their subject-matter and style, partly
also by the fact that the ' Kethubim ' were not, at least
after the completion of the Lectionary, read in the ser
vices of the Synagogue. The earliest arrangement of
the books of the Hagiographa that has come down to us
is given in the Baba bathra passage, quoted above,
1 On the strange Paris Codex (330 Kennicott), see Manuscrits Orientaux
(Tascheriau), No. 17, p. 2 (Paris, 1866).

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 241
which records that ' the order of the " Kethubim " is chap. xii.
this : Ruth, the Book of Psalms, Job and Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs and Lamentations, Daniel
and the Roll of Esther, Ezra and Chronicles.'
In this Talmudic order of the books we should ob- Talmudic
serve (1) that Ruth and Lamentations are reckoned or er'
among the Kethubim ; (2) that Ruth is placed before
Psalms, presumably on the ground that the record of
David's ancestry should precede his writings ; (3) that
Job, a book which is considered in the Baba bathra
to have been written by Moses, stands between Psalms
and Proverbs, probably so as to leave the priority of
place to the Psalter, and at the same time not to break
the group of Solomonic books ; (4) that the other books
follow the order of their supposed date of composition,
the Solomonic writings preceding the Lamentations
of Jeremiah, while Daniel, Esther, and Ezra represent
the beginning, the middle, and the close of the exile
respectively. The Books of Chronicles, which were
ascribed to Ezra, formed an appendix to the whole
collection, the position of the books agreeing with the
inference that has been drawn, as we saw in an earlier
chapter, from our Lord's words in Matt, xxiii. 35, viz. that
they were either the last book or, at least, the last narra
tive book in the Hebrew Canon.
The order of the Hagiographa, as given by Jerome in Order in
his Prologus Galeatus, is Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Eccle- proiGai.
siastes, Song of Songs, Daniel, Chronicles, Ezra, Esther,
while Ruth and Lamentations are reckoned among ' the
Prophets/ But it is not .likely, as has already been
shown, that he supplies us with the accurate order of the
Hebrew books. It is more probable that he simply
arranges the books in what seemed to be their natural
R

243 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap.xh. chronological Order. We do not elsewhere find an
instance in Hebrew literature in which the Book of
Job is placed at the head of the Kethubim ; again,
the arrangement of Ezra and Esther after Chronicles
suggests the influence of the Christian Bibles rather
than the reproduction of the Hebrew order. It is
noticeable that Jerome concedes that, in the opinion of
some (nonnulli), Ruth and Lamentations ought to be
ranked among the Hagiographa, in which case, he says,
the number of ' twenty-four ' books of Scripture being
obtained, a reference to them is found in the vision of
St. John, where the four-and-twenty elders are around
the Throne (cf. Rev. iv. 4-10, v. 8). But reasoning of that
kind is obviously not conclusive upon a question of fact.
In his ' Preface to Daniel,' he says categorically1, that ' all
Scripture is divided by the Jews into three portions, the
Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa, that is, into
five, and eight, and eleven books.' Here his testimony
agrees exactly with that of the Hebrew tradition, and
implies the inclusion of Ruth and Lamentations among
the Hagiographa. We do not, therefore, attach any
importance to the variations from it into which he
occasionally permits himself to fall. He did not realise
the necessity of accurately preserving the Hebrew tradi
tion. He could not foresee the confusion that might
afterwards arise from carelessness, or want of thorough
ness, in his use of it. For to this, and nothing else, can
we ascribe his mention of the tripartite division in the
Prologus Galeatus, and his enumeration of the books,
immediately afterwards, in an order which, claiming to
be the Jewish order, fails to agree with that of genuine
1 See above, p. 234.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 243
Hebrew tradition, or even with his own explicit state- chap. xii.
ments elsewhere.
The order of the books of the Hagiographa in extant in Hebrew
Hebrew MSS. shows the utmost variety. The Massoretes MS*'
laid down no rule for their arrangement. For the most
part, these variations may be divided into three groups,
representing the Talmudic, the Spanish, and the Ger
man arrangement1. According to one tradition, the
Talmudic preserves the Babylonian, the Spanish the
Palestinian order.
(a) The Talmudic. This, which is probably the most (a) Taimu-
ancient order, is given in Baba bathra, quoted above. It t0cn\%lSaby~
is followed in many of the best MSS.
It is the order in which the books are given in
Halakoth Gedoloth (sub fin.), a work composed in the
ninth century A.D., and in the Anonymous Chronicle,
edited by Neubauer (Jewish Chronicles, 1887, Oxford).
(b) Very many of the MSS., more especially Spanish, (b) Spanish
begin the Hagiographa with ' Chronicles,' either with nia^, £S*~
the view of connecting the Hagiographa with the histori
cal group that preceded it, or from the idea that a book
containing the primitive genealogies of the race was
entitled to a priority. The order commonly followed
in these MSS. is — Chronicles, Psalms, Job, Proverbs,
Ruth, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther,
Daniel, Ezra2- But slight variations often occur: e.g.
Job is often placed after Proverbs, Ecclesiastes after
Lamentations. It will be observed, that, according to this order, the
1 For the distinction into Spanish and German MSS., see Elias Levita's
Massoreth Ha-Massoreih, ed. Ginsburg, p. 120.
a To this class belongs the MS. of the Firkowitzsch collection in the
Imperial Library at St. Petersburg (Cod. B. 19"), which contains the whole
O. T., and is dated 1009 ; the date, however, is not free from doubt
R 2

244 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Chap.xh. Solomonic books are separated from one another, and
that the Five Megilloth (Ruth, Song, Eccles., Lam., Esth.)
are kept together, although not in the order of the sacred
seasons, with which they were associated in the Syna
gogue services. The arrangement is, therefore, more
artificial than the Talmudic, less so than that which we
notice next 1.
(c) German, (c) The commonest order of the books in the MSS.
Editions, is that of the German MSS., which has been followed
in the printed editions. The arrangement is in three
groups : firstly, the Poetical books, Psalms, Proverbs,
Job ; secondly, the Five Rolls or Megilloth, Song of
Songs, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther ;
thirdly, the Narrative books, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah,
Chronicles. The following points of interest, in con
nexion with this arrangement, may here be recorded.
Poetical (i) The group of poetical books was sometimes
referred to in Jewish literature by the name 'Emeth
( = ' Truth') (n ON), a Hebrew word consisting of the
initial letters of Job, Proverbs, and Psalms. But, in the
MSS., the Psalter as the most important book of the
Kethubim stands first, while Proverbs and Job are con
stantly interchanged, Job, as the reputed work of Moses,
being placed before that of Solomon.
s Megnioth. (2) The second group consists of five books, which
are used for public reading in the Synagogue on cer
tain sacred seasons. The Song of Songs is read at the
Feast of Passover, Ruth at the Feast of Weeks or Pen-
1 'The Grammatico-Massoretic Treatise entitled Adath Deborim (A.D.
1207) describes this order, as far as the Hagiographa are concerned, as the
correct one, exhibiting the Western or Palestinian practice ; and the order
which places Chronicles or Esther at the end of this division as the Eastern
or Babylonian practice, which is to be deprecated.' Ginsburg's Massoretic
Introduction, p. 4.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 245
tecost, Lamentations on the day of the Destruction of chap. xii.
Jerusalem (9th of Ab), Ecclesiastes at the Feast of Taber
nacles, Esther at the Feast of Purim. The succession of
the sacred days determined the order of the books in
many MSS., and in the printed Bibles ; and the name
of the Five Rolls or Megilloth was given to the group
because they were written on separate rolls to be read
on these particular occasions, according to post-Talmudic
liturgical usage.
But the MSS. give the Megilloth arranged with
almost every possible variety of order. The most
common variations are Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Song of
Songs, Lamentations, Esther; and Ruth, Song of
Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther, in both of
which the chronology of the books determines the
order. In such variations, as Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs,
Lamentations, Ruth, Esther, or Ruth, Esther, Eccle
siastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, the grouping is
probably modified according to subject-matter.
In some MSS. and early editions of the Hebrew Bible,
the Megilloth follow after the Pentateuch. For examples
of these and other variations in the order of the Hagio
grapha, the reader is referred to Excursus C.
(3) In the last group of the Hagiographa, the com
monest variation in the order in the MSS. is caused by
the placing of Chronicles before the Psalms ; and there
are also numerous cases in which Daniel stands before
Esther, doubtless for chronological reasons.
Another arrangement of the books is referred to in Another
the Babylonian Talmud, according to which three sub- order? "'
divisions were recognised, (1) the Former Kethubim,
Ruth, and the Triad called ' the Greater Kethubim,'

246 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap. xii. Psalms, Proverbs, Job ; (2) the Lesser Kethubim, or the
Triad, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations ; (3)
the Latter Kethubim, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah,
Chronicles. (See Fiirst, who quotes Berakoth 57 a and b,
Kanon des Alten Testaments, pp. 60 and 82.) But it
does not appear to have been ever in general use.
Division of The sub-division of the Pentateuch into five books
belongs possibly to its original formation. The division
of the Psalter into five books was doubtless made in
imitation of it.
The division of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra1, into
two books each originated in Alexandria ; and was not
introduced into Hebrew Bibles until the sixteenth cen
tury (Bomberg Bible, 1521).
Sections In connexion with the arrangement of the books, we
'open.' "" may here mention the system by which the books of
the Hebrew Scriptures were divided into sections. A
passage or section, ' Parashah,' was marked off by spaces
or gaps in the writing. Small sections denote slight
change of thought, and correspond to our paragraph.
Large sections denote change of subject, and are more
akin to our chapter. (1) A small section, or ' Parashah,'
was denoted by a small gap in the writing, the space of
three letters being left open. This was called a 'closed
section,' or ' Parashah sethumah,' and in the space the
letter ' S ' (D) was inserted, representing the word
' Sethumah.' The section was called ' closed/ because
the line in the official copies was not left open; the
writing was resumed, after the space, in the same line.
(2) A large section was denoted by a complete break in
1 In some MSS., Nehemiah was separated by one blank line from Ezra.
But it was always regarded as part of the same book, and was referred to
under the same title, that of Ezra.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. 247
the line ; in the old copies the rest of the line was left chap. xii.
completely open, and in later copies the space of nine
letters was left open. In consequence of the line having
been left completely open, the long section was called
' open,' ' Parashah pethukhah ' ; and where it occurred,
the letter ' P ' (D), representing ' Pethukhah,' was in
serted. Both these sections appear in the Torah, and in Baer's
edition of the Massoretic text they are given also in the
other books of the Hebrew Canon1.
The number of the sections given is not the same in
all MSS. But the number of ' closed sections ' in the
Torah is between 370 and 380, the number of ' open
sections ' between 280 and 290.
Quite distinct from these sections is the Liturgical Synagogue
Division into sections for the Synagogue service. The
lesson from the Torah was called the Parashah, that
from the Nebiim the Haphtarah. The Babylonian Babylonian
Lectionary was arranged so that the whole Torah could *"*'
be read through in the year (Megilla, 31 b). There were
fifty-four ' Parshiyyoth 2.' They begin as a rule with the
commencement of one of the sections just described, and
are indicated by the sign of a ' closed ' or ' open ' section,
' sethumah ' or ' pethukhah.' In the former case the
lesson is marked by a thrice repeated ' S ' (DDD), in the
latter by a thrice repeated ' P ' (DDD). Only in Gen.
xlvii. 28 does a lection begin at a passage which does
not happen to introduce either a ' closed ' or an ' open '
section. The lessons from the Prophets were passages selected
1 Evidence of a pre-Talmudic system of sections is to be found in Mark
xii. 26 iwl toE /3nTou, Rom. xi. 2 iv 'HAi'a.
2 On the names ' Parashah ' and ' Haphtarah,' see p. 126 n.

248 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
chap.xh. so as to correspond with the lessons from the Law.
Thus, the ' Haphtarah,' Isaiah xiii. 5-xliii. 11, corre
sponded to and was read on the same day with the
' Parashah,' Gen. i. i-vi. 9. The ' Haphtaroth,' however,
are not indicated in the Massoretic text ; but attention
is called to them in the Massoretic notes.
Palestinian. Among the Palestinian Jews a different lectionary
was used, according to which the Law was divided into
154 lessons and was read through every three years.
The Palestinian lectionary was undoubtedly of greater
antiquity than the Babylonian. Both systems are referred
to in the Talmud (Meg. 39 b, 31 b). But the practical
convenience of having the lectionary conterminous with
the calendar probably led to the general adoption of the
Babylonian system1. (See the articles by Dr. J. Theodor
inM.G.W.J., 1885.)
It has often been too hastily assumed that the books
of the Hagiographa were never, in the pre-Talmudic
period, used for any purpose in the Synagogue services.
But we know from the Treatise B. Shabbath (f. 116 b),
that at Nehardea, in Babylonia, lessons from the Hagio
grapha were read at the Sabbath afternoon services in
the Synagogues. Moreover the fact that books of the
Hagiographa were liable, from one cause or another, to
be removed from public reading (genuzim) leads us to
suspect that, at the time when this could take place,
extracts were wont to be read from the third group
as well as from the Prophets. Perhaps this was the
case before the Lectionary Cycle had been finally
1 Perhaps as late as the 14th cent. The reader is referred to the learned
discussion on ' The Reading of the Law and Prophets in a Triennial Cycle,'
by Dr. Adolph Biichler, in the April and October numbers of The Jewish
Quarterly Review for 1893.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOKS. . 249
reduced to a system. In connexion with this conjecture chap. xii.
Mr. Schechter has called attention to the Mussaph
Prayer in Rosh Hashanah, containing extracts from all
three groups of Scripture, which formed the basis of
religious exhortations at the Synagogue services. The
Kethubim may thus have been used, along with the
Torah and Nebiim, for homiletic purposes, although
never, as the evidence of the Targums indicates, included
in the Lectionary.
' The Samaritan text of the Law is divided into Samaritan.
sections (ftp), which are carefully marked in all MSS.,
and their total number given at the end of each book V
Lastly, we may notice the division into chapters and chapters
verses that has been adopted in the printed editions Q{andVerses-
the Hebrew Scriptures. The Vulgate division into
chapters, made in the 13th cent., was first employed
upon the Hebrew Bible in the Hebrew Concordance of
Isaac Nathan (1437-1448), but was not introduced into
regular use until the following century. It first appears
' in the first two Bomberg editions [of the Hebrew Bible],
the folio and the quarto of 151 8. The numeration of
the verses was introduced in Bomberg's Great Bible
of 1547-1548, in which every fifth verse (1, 5, 10, &c.) is
designated by the Hebrew numeral ; the use of Arabic
numerals for the intervening verses (2, 3, 4 ; 6, 7, 8, 9 ;
&c.) was introduced by Leusden-Athias in 1661, though
there were older editions (in Polyglotts or with inter
linear Latin version) in which every verse was indicated
by an Arabic numeral 2.'
1 A. Cowley on 'The Samaritan Liturgy and Reading of the Law'
(Jewish Quarterly Review, Oct. 1894).
2 Professor G. F. Moore (Journal of Bibl. Lit. xii. 1. 77), to whom my
thanks are due.

EXCURSUS A.
The Origin of the Canon of the Hebrew Scriptures,
according to Tradition.
excurs.a. The legendary accounts of the formation of the Hebrew
Canon require separate treatment. They may be classed under
two main heads according as they ascribe the work to Ezra or
to the men of the Great Synagogue.
i. The Legend of Ezra and the Books of Scripture.
Ezra and The first we hear of the tradition that Ezra was inspired to
Scripture recaU t0 memory and to restore to the Jews in writing their
4 Esdr. xiv. Scriptures that had been destroyed by the Chaldeans, is the
account given in the Jewish Apocalyptic work, 2 (4) Esdras,
which was probably composed not long after the destruction of
Jerusalem. In chap, xiv it is related that Ezra, having been warned
of God that his end was near at hand, bewailed the spiri
tual destitution of the people, 'for the law is burnt, therefore
no man knoweth the things that are done of Thee, or the works
that shall begin. But if I have found grace before Thee, send
the Holy Ghost into me, and I shall write all that hath been
done in the world since the beginning which were written in
Thy law,' &c. (vv. 21, 22). Ezra's prayer is heard, and he is
commanded to retire for forty days in company with five chosen
men, Sarea (Seraiah), Dabria (?=Dibri), Selemia (Shelemiah),
Ecanus(?=Elkanah), and Asiel (Asael), taking with them numer-

EXCURSUS A. 251
ous tablets for writing (ver. 24). Ezra obeys, and the revelation excurs. a.
vouchsafed to him is described as follows : — ' So I took the five
men, as he commanded me, and we went into the field, and
remained there. And the next day, behold, a voice called me,
saying, Esdras, open thy mouth, and drink that I give thee to
drink. Then opened I my mouth, and, behold, he reached me
a full cup, which was full as it were with water, but the colour
of it was like fire. And I took it, and drank ; and when I had
drunk of it, my heart uttered understanding, and wisdom grew
in my breast, for my spirit preserved (conservabat) memory:
and my mouth was opened, and shut no more. The Highest
gave understanding unto the five men, and they wrote the won
derful visions (?) of the night that were told, which they knew
not (or, ' in letters which they understood not,' cf. Aeth. and Ar.) ;
and they sat forty days, and they wrote in the day, and at night
they ate bread. As for me, I spake in the day, and I held not
my tongue by night. In forty days they wrote ninety-four (other
readings, 'two hundred and four,' ' nine hundred and four ') books.
And it came to pass, when the forty days were fulfilled, that the
Highest spake, saying, The first that thou hast written publish
openly, that the worthy and unworthy may read it ; but keep the
seventy last, that thou mayest deliver them only to such as be
wise among the people : for in them is the spring of under
standing, the fountain of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge.'
(2 (4) Esdr. xiv. 37-48.) x
Whether the legend which is thus described originated with
the composer of the Fourth Book of Esdras, or whether he has
merely incorporated an existing legend into his book, we have
no means of deciding.
He wrote at a time (circ. 90 a.d.) when more than 500 years
had elapsed since the death of Ezra. Josephus, his contem
porary, did not apparently know the legend. He only agrees
with it so far as to express his belief, that no Jewish works com-
1 See Excursus D.

252 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. a. posed since the reign of Ahasuerus were to be reckoned in the
sacred Canon * (Conl. Ap, i. 8).
Devoid of historical value though the Fourth Book of Esdras
may be, the passage we have quoted above either originates or
repeats a legend, which reflected one aspect of the popular
Jewish opinion respecting the service rendered by Ezra towards
the preservation of the Hebrew Scriptures. That opinion rested
on the account in Neh. viii-x, where Ezra promulgates the Book
of the Law, and finally establishes its authority.
Ezra and Later Jewish tradition, while it almost disregarded Nehemiah,
Tradition, exaggerated freely the Scriptural record of Ezra's share in that
transaction. It has thus however, probably, borne true witness
to the deep impression produced upon the imagination of the
people by Ezra's work in connexion with the Torah. Ezra
in Talmudic tradition was a second Moses : e. g. ' The Torah
was forgotten by Israel until Ezra went up from Babylon
and reestablished it' (Succa. 20 a). 'And Moses went up
unto God (Ex. xix. 3) ; of Ezra it is said, " And Ezra went
up from Babylon " (Ezr. vii. 6). What is the meaning of
this expression " Go up " ? It has the same meaning in the
one passage as in the other, and refers to the Torah ' (fer.
Meg. cap. i). No mention is made in Rabbinic literature
of the legend contained in 4 Esdras, that Ezra was super-
naturally empowered to recall to memory the Jewish Scrip
tures; but the tradition is recorded, that he was said to have
committed to writing a pure copy of them, and to have deposited
it in the Temple courts (Moed Qatan 1 8 b).
1 Cf. ' Up to that time (Alexander the Great) the prophets prophesied
through the Holy Spirit, from thenceforth the wise men only wrought,'
Seder Olam., p. 70, ed. Meyer, 1706. Only thirty-four years were supposed
to have elapsed between Ezra and Alexander. That Josephus meant
Ahasuerus, when he speaks of Artaxerxes in Cont. Ap. i. 8, is shown by
a comparison of Ant. xi. cap. 6 with Ant. xi. cap. 5. In the latter
chapter, speaking of the Persian King, who favoured Ezra and Nehemiah,
Josephus calls him Xerxes, son of Darius. In the former chapter, speaking
of the Persian King, who married Esther, he calls him Artaxerxes.

EXCURSUS A. 253
The Fourth Book of Esdras does not appear to have exerted excurs. a.
much influence upon later Jewish literature. The particular 4 Esc[ras
legend contained in chap, xiv, seems, so far as we know, to have a"f .
passed unnoticed by the Midrashim. A reason for this is, Tradition.
perhaps, to be found in the popularity which the book acquired
among the Christians, partly also in the fact that its original
language was, in all probability, Greek. From the Greek the
Fourth Book of Esdras was translated, apparently by Christians,
into Latin, Syriac, Arabic, Aethiopic, Armenian. In all of those
versions it is still extant. It has been transmitted to us by
Christian, not by Jewish, hands.
It can hardly be questioned, that it was from this source that
the Christian fathers derived their legend, that Ezra miraculously
restored the Hebrew books and formed the Canon of Scripture.
Just as they took their history of the origin of the Septuagint
version from a spurious Alexandrine work, the so-called Letter
of Aristeas, so they seem, with the same unquestioning con
fidence, to have derived their view of the origin of the Hebrew
Canon from a pseudepigraphic Greek Apocalypse of the close of
the first century a.d. It is, of course, possible that the legend
may have reached them through some other more trustworthy
channel. But the language in which they record it makes the
inference most probable, that the Fourth Book of Esdras is the
source from which the stream of an almost unbroken ecclesi
astical tradition directly flows.
The following passages will illustrate the Patristic treatment
of the story as well as the way in which the same tradition was
repeated from generation to generation.
Circ. 170 t. Irenaeus (Contr. Haer., lib. iii. p. 216, ed. Migne, irenaeus.
p. 948) : ' And it is surely not a thing to be marvelled at, that
God should have brought this to pass (i. e. the miraculous
preparation of the lxx version). For, when the people
were carried away captive in the days of Nebuchadnezzar,
the Scriptures were utterly destroyed ; but, after the space of
seventy years the Jews returned to their own land; and

254

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Clement of Circ. 200 A. D
Alex
andria.

•excurs. a. then in the times of Artaxerxes, king of the Persians, God did
inspire Esdras, the priest, who was of the tribe of Levi, to set
forth in order all the words of the prophets that had gone
before, and to restore to the people the law that had been
given by Moses.'
Tertuiiian. Circ. 200 a. d. Tertullian (De Cultu Feminarum, i. 3) : ' As
suredly, if it had been destroyed by the violence of the
flood, he, in the power of the Spirit, could have reconstructed
it again, just as is well known, when Jerusalem had been
taken and destroyed by the Babylonians, the whole Canon
(omne instrumentum) of Jewish literature was restored by
means of Esdras.' Clement of Alexandria (Strom, i. 22, ed. Potter,
i. p. 410): 'It was not strange that by the inspiration
of God, Who hath given the gift of prophecy, should also
be produced the translation, which was a kind of Greek
prophecy, seeing also that, when the Scriptures had been
destroyed in the captivity of Nebuchadnezzar, Ezra, the
Levite, the Priest, in the times of Artaxerxes, King of
the Persians, being inspired, prophesied and renovated
(avaveoiiuvos npoctfiriTevcre) all the ancient Scriptures ' (cf. Ire
naeus, I.e. above). Id. (i. 21, ed. Potter, p. 392: 'Ezra —
through whom (instead of fit' 6V, read St' 0?) comes to pass the
redemption of the people and the recollection (dvayva>piap.6s)
of the inspired (writings), and the renovation of the oracles '
(dvaKaivKT/ibs Xoylav), &C
253 1. Origen (Selecta in Psalmos, ed. Lommatzsch, tom.
xi. p. 371): 'Either Ezra recalled these (psalms) also to
memory along with the rest of the Scriptures, or the wise
men of old among the Hebrews collected those that were
current as each man's memory happened to serve him.'
Circ. 34of. Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. v. 8. 15) quotes the passage
from Irenaeus cited above. He says elsewhere, Chronic.
Lib. i. § 5, ed. Migne, i. p. 177, ' He (Ezra) is moreover said
to have recollected all the Scriptures spoken by God (cunctas

Origen.

Eusebius.

EXCURSUS A. 255
a Deo die/as Scripturas), and to have committed them to the Excurs. a.
charge of the Jews written out in new characters of the
Hebrew alphabet.'
Circ. 379 1. Basil the Great, in his Epistle to Chilo (Epistolarum Basil.
Classis I, Epist. xiii. p. 129, ed. Migne, iv. p. 357), uses the
words : ' There is the field to which Ezra withdrew and in
which, by the command of God, he indited all the inspired
books,' in which he evidently refers to 4 Esd. xiv. 37, &c.
397 1. Ambrose (Epistolarum Classis I, Epist. Ixii. 30, ed. Ambrose.
Migne, iii. p. 1198): 'Ezra forgetful of the Scriptures,
who restored the Scriptures by a feat of memory ! '
407 t. John Chrysostom (Horn, in Ep. ad Hebraeos, cap. v. chrysostom.
Horn. viii. 4, ed. Migne, tom. xii. p. 74): 'War came
upon them ; they slew them all, they cut them down, the
books were burned in flames. Again God inspired another
wonderful man, I mean Ezra, to publish them (the books),
and He caused them to be constructed from out of the
remnants' (dno tu>v Xcitydvcov).
Circ. 426 1. Jerome (Adversus Hehidium. De perpetud vir- Jerome.
ginilale beatae Mariae, p. 212, tom. 2, p. 190, ed. Migne):
' Whether you choose to speak of Moses as the author of
the Pentateuch, or of Ezra as the restorer of the same
work.'
Circ. 458 1. Theodoret (In Psal. i. p. 606, ed. Migne, i. p. 864) : Theodoret.
' One hundred and twenty years before their translation
(i. e. the lxx), the wondrous Ezra, filled with divine grace,
committed to writing the holy books (that) owing to the
negligence of the Jews and the enmity of the Babylonians
had long been destroyed ' (or, corrupted, SiacpBapilo-as).
(?) 500-600 1. Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae (Pseudo-Athanas.),cap. Synops.
20 (Alhanasit Opera, ed. Migne, tom. iv. p. 352) : ' This too f££f
is related of Ezra, that, when the Scriptures had been lost
in consequence of the negligence of the people and on
account of the long period of the captivity, Ezra himself being
a noble man, and of good ability, and a diligent student,

2j6 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. a. preserved all their contents in his memory (lead' iavrbv), and
finally produced them and published them to all, and to this
is due the preservation of the Scriptures.'
Leontius. 590T. Leontius (DeSectis, Act. 2, § 8, p. 632, ap. Gallandi Bibl.
Venet. 1788) : 'When Ezra came to Jerusalem and found
that all the books had been burned at the time when the
people were carried away captive, he is said to have written
down from memory the two and twenty books which we
enumerated above.'
Isidore. 636^ Isidore (De Ortu et Obilu Patrum, cap. Ix, ed. Migne, v.
p. 146): 'He (Ezra) was a writer of sacred history, and
was the second giver of the Law after Moses ; for, after
the captivity, he restored the Law which by the Gentiles had
been burned.'
De Mtrab. (?) 700-800 t. De Mirdbilibus Sacrae Scripturae, cap. xxxiii
(Pseudo-Augustine, tom. iii. p. 2 191) : 'At which time Ezra
the priest of God restored the Law which had been burned,
among the archives of the Temple, by the Chaldeans ; for
he was filled with the same Spirit whereby it had afore
time been written.'
Bede. 737t. Bede (In Esdr. et Neh. Proplutas Allegor. Expos., lib.
ii. cap. ix, ed. Migne, i. p. 859): 'Ezra was moreover a
ready scribe in the Law of Moses ; for he restored the Law
that had been destroyed. He rewrote not the Law only,
but also, as is reported currently by the men of old time,
the whole Canon (seriem) of Holy Scripture, which had all
alike perished in the flames, according as he thought the
needs of readers required.'
Rabanus 856 1. Rabanus Maurus (De fnstit. Cleric, lib. ii., c. 54,
ed. Migne, i. p. 366) : ' After the Jews had entered Jeru
salem, he (Ezra) restored all the ancient sacred books
by means of the Divine Spirit of Inspiration, and purified
all the volumes of the prophets that had been defiled by
the Gentiles. And he arranged the whole Old Testament
into four and twenty books, so that there might be as many

Maurus.

EXCURSUS A. 257
books in the Law as letters in the Alphabet.' (N.B. The excurs. a.
difference in the number of the letters between the Hebrew
and the Greek Alphabet was presumably not known to
Rabanus Maurus.)
(?) 800-850 t. Nicephorus Callistus (Eccles. Hist., lib. iv. cap. 15) Niceph.
quotes the passage from Irenaeus cited above.
89 if. Photius (Ad Amphilochium Quaestio, ed. Migne, vol. i. Pkottus.
p. 816) : ' The books perished in the flames at the time of
the captivity. Afterwards, when the Jews of Jerusalem and
those of Babylon used to send to one another the oracles of
God, the Gentiles laid in wait and destroyed their books.
The Jews, on their side, took to writing in characters which
the Gentiles could not understand, and from this cause also
the uncertainty arose : until, at length, Ezra, being inspired,
recalled to memory all (the books) and committed them to
writing.'
ii35t. Rupert of Deutz (De Victoria Verbi Dei, lib. v\i. Rupert
c. xxxii. ed. Migne, iii. p. 1380): 'What ought not Ezra
to be to us? For we ought not to forget that it was
he who restored the Law, and that by him the Holy
Scriptures which are the very voice of the Word of God
that had been scattered far and wide and had scarcely
escaped destruction in the flames, were collected and
fashioned anew. . . . Verily, that imperishable work, the
renewing of Holy Scripture, is and ever will be a per
formance of more enduring memory, greater renown and
higher, excellence,' &c.
1 1 40 t. Hugo de St. Victor (Allegor. in Vet. Test., lib. viii. c. x. Hugode
ed. Migne, i. p. 730): 'Ezra denotes Christ; for he
fashioned anew (re/ormavit) Holy Scripture.'
1 1981*. Petrus Comestor (Liber Judith, cap. v. ed. Migne, Petrus
p. 1483): 'At that time (i.e. in the reign of Artaxerxes)
Ezra, of the house of Aaron, restored the Law which had
been burned by the Chaldeans. ... It does not behove
us to marvel that he, through the Holy Spirit, should have
S

258 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. A. restored the books, seeing that many, even in our own days,
have known how to restore (i. e. repeat by memory) the
Psalter, the Book of Hymns, and numerous books of the
same class.'
It will be observed that Rupert of Deutz lays emphasis on
the work of collecting and editing the sacred books, and that
Petrus Comestor endeavours, by introducing a comparison with
feats of memory well known in his own day, to minimize the
miraculous element in the legend. The improbability of the
story could hardly fail to impress itself upon men's minds. But
it was not until the era of the Reformation, that men found
themselves at liberty to reject a form of legend which had been
current for so many centuries in the Church. Among the
Reformers it was natural enough that a legend which had no
support in Scripture, and which contained so unlikely a narra
tive, should be discredited.
Reformers: The English divine, Whitaker, may be taken as a repre-
' sentative of the opinion of the Reformed Churches. In
his Disputation on Scripture, written in 1602 (pp. 114-116,
ed. Parker Society), he mentions the legend. ' There are
some, however, who imagine that the whole Old Testament
perished in the captivity. This suspicion, perhaps, arose
from considering that, when the temple was burnt, all that
was in it must have been consumed in the same conflagration.
Hence they believe that the sacred volumes of Scripture must
have been destroyed in the flames ; but, that, after the captivity,
Ezra, instructed by the Holy Spirit, published these afresh, as it
were again recovered.' He here quotes Clemens Alexandrinus,
Irenaeus, Leontius, Isidore, and Rabanus Maurus, and then
proceeds : ' They affirm, therefore, two things : one, that the
whole sacred and canonical Scripture perished in the Babylonian
captivity ; the other, that it was restored to its integrity by Ezra,
instructed and inspired in a wonderful manner by the direct
agency of God. But the falsehood of this opinion is manifest.
For the pious Jews had, no doubt, many copies of the Scripture

EXCURSUS A. 259
in their possession, and could easily save them from that Excuhs. a.
calamity. What man in his senses will say that there was no
copy of the Scriptures beside that in the temple ? Besides, if
these books had been deposited in the temple, would not either
the priests or somebody else have been able to rescue them
from the flames ? It is incredible that the religious Jews should
have been so unmindful of piety and religion as to keep no
copies whatever of the Scriptures whilst they lived in Babylon,
especially while they had such men among them as Ezekiel and
Daniel. But it is certain that they had many copies. For even
Antiochus himself could not utterly destroy them all, though he
set himself to do so with the utmost zeal and sedulity. Hence
it appears that there were everywhere a very great number of
copies ; and now the Babylonians made no such fierce assault
upon the sacred books. In accordance with what we might
expect from such premises, Ezra is simply said, Nehem. viii, to
have brought the book of Moses and read it. The books of
Moses, therefore, and, in like manner, the other books of Scrip
ture, were preserved safe in the captivity ; and we have now no
other, but the very same books of Scripture of the Old Testa
ment as those which were written by Moses and the rest of the
prophets. However it is very possible that the books, which
may have been previously in some disorder, were corrected by
Ezra, restored to their proper places, and disposed according to
some fixed plan as Hilary in his prologue affirms particularly of
the Psalms, &c.'
We notice, therefore, with especial interest the position of Beiiarmine.
Beiiarmine (1542-1621), who, as the champion of the Roman
Catholics against the Reformed Churches, might be thought a very
unlikely man to acknowledge even the possibility of the ancient
traditional view, that a great miracle was wrought, being erroneous.
He, however, after relating the tradition, candidly mentions that
' there is another view according to which Ezra was indeed the
restorer of the sacred books, not however by dictating them all
afresh, but by collecting and arranging all the Scriptures, of
S 2

26o THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
excurs. a. which he had found portions in different places, into a single
volume, as well as by correcting them wherever they had
suffered from the carelessness of copyists, seeing that during
the whole period of the captivity, when the Jews were without
temple or tabernacle, the law was carelessly preserved ' (Opp.
tom. i. lib. 2 ; De Verbo Dei, cap. i).
Cornelius 1568-1637. We need quote only one other authority, the emi-
nent Roman Catholic commentator, Cornelius a Lapide (van der
Steen), whose words illustrate the change of view in reference to
the legend (Comment, in Esdr. et Neh., Prolog, p. 201). After
quoting Patristic evidence in favour of the legend he goes on to
say: 'Leo Castrius, in his preface to Isaiah iv, supports the
same view, to wit, that Ezra restored the books of the law from
memory. Nor is this wonderful. For that is even more
wonderful which we read of St. Antonius of Padua, that he
knew by heart (calluisse) the whole of Holy Scripture, insomuch
that he was called by the Pope " The Ark of the Testament."
" For he had the pages of both Testaments alike so clearly fixed
in his memory, that, like Ezra, he had the power, if occasion had
required it, of completely restoring from his memory the whole
Canon of sacred literature, even though all the MSS. had been
utterly destroyed " ; so says the author of his life. Nevertheless,
although this opinion appear probable on account of the weight
of Patristic authority, the contrary opinion is yet far more
probable and based on certain reasons, to wit, that the sacred
books were neither all of them burned by the Chaldeans, nor
restored from memory by Ezra.' He proceeds to give his
reasons. The first is, that there is no record of the Chaldeans
having burned the Scriptures; and, considering the number of
copies in use in Judea and elsewhere, if they had burned them,
they could not possibly have completely destroyed them all.
The second reason is, that Daniel (chap. ix. 2), in the first
year of Darius, possessed the prophecy of Jeremiah and other
prophets, and was in the habit of reading it. The third reason
is, that Josephus (Ant.Jud., lib. xi. 1) relates how Cyrus, having

EXCURSUS A. 261
been shown the prophecy of Isaiah (xiv) which he had fulfilled, Excurs.a.
became kindly disposed to the Jews in consequence. Cornelius
a Lapide adds as yet another reason, that the Fourth Book of
Esdras was apocryphal, and that ' the two hundred and four
books ' (the Vulgate reading) written by the five men at Ezra's
dictation had nothing in common with the books of Scripture.
We shall not perhaps attach the same value to all of the reasons
thus alleged. But it is clear that at the beginning of the 17th
century the legend that Ezra had alone, and by miraculous aid,
formed the Canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, had become
generally discredited and discarded. The story was inherently
improbable, and it rested on no historical evidence.
2. The Men of the Great Synagogue.
But the legend respecting Ezra and the books of Holy Scrip- 2. The Men
ture could not be dethroned without some account of the forma- "synagogue.
tion of the sacred Canon being found to serve as its substitute.
Its place was filled by the tradition of ' The Men of the Great
Synagogue,' which had the twofold advantage 'of offering a more
probable explanation and of claiming to rest upon the authority
of trustworthy Hebrew tradition. For more than three centuries
this legend, or one or other of its modern modifications, has
held the field.
The reasons for its general acceptance may be recognised
without difficulty. The revival of learning in the fifteenth
and sixteenth centuries had given a new prominence to the
study of Hebrew and a fresh authority to the words of Jewish
writers. In the course of the controversy among Hebrew Origin of
scholars respecting the origin and date of the Massoretic '•//i'/S/1'
system, an eminent Tewish writer, Elias Levita, maintained in Levita's
J J 'Massoreth
an important work, entitled Massoreth Ha Massoreth (1538), Ha-Masso-
that Ezra and his companions, the men of the Great Synagogue, ret '
promulgated the correct consonantal text, and at the same
time collected the Holy Scriptures and formed the Canon.
Such a suggestion, put forward at a time when it seemed im-

262

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Buxtorf's 'Tiberias'

excurs. a. possible to defend the historical character of the ecclesiastical
tradition about Ezra, could hardly fail to command attention
and to find a welcome. It quickly obtained great popularity.
In the Hebrew controversy respecting the antiquity of the
vowel-points, the subject of the Great Synagogue was frequently
referred to; and, although very opposite opinions were freely
expressed by able men, the preponderance of learning, among
the scholars of the Reformed Churches, certainly leaned to the
side of the new suggestion. The most important work dealing
with it was the Tiberias sive Commentarius Masorelhicus of John
Buxtorf, published at Basle in 1620. This book, which ad
mirably summarised all that was known, in the beginning of the
sixteenth century, respecting the ' Massorah,' according to Jewish
tradition, makes frequent allusions to ' the Great Synagogue ' as
its principal source. It contains all the principal evidence for
' the Great Synagogue ' to be found in Rabbinic literature.
The weight of John Buxtorf's authority told enormously in
support of the new theory upon the origin of the Old Testament
Canon. It was reinforced by that of his son John Buxtorf (1599-
1664) in his conflict with Morinus and Cappellus, who had dared
to question the inviolable character of the Massoretic text, had
impugned the antiquity of the square Hebrew characters, and
even thrown doubts upon the accuracy of Rabbinic tradition
generally, and respecting the Great Synagogue in particular.
The 'Tiberias' appeared in a new edition in 1665, when it was
issued by John James Buxtorf, the grandson of the author.
All subsequent writers have quarried from the Tiberias, and
the influence of this treatise has had even more to do with the
general acceptance of the tradition about ' The Men of the
Great Synagogue ' than the earlier work of Elias Levita.
The hold which the new view obtained over the best scholars
of the seventeenth century may be exemplified by the following
quotations : —
Walton. (1) Brian Walton, Bishop of Chester (1 600-1 661): cThe
first and most famous edition of the books of the Old Testament

Acceptanceof the
theory.

Bp.

EXCURSUS A. 263
was that of Ezra (whom the Jews call a second Moses), and the excurs.a.
Great Sanhedrim, or the men of the Great Synagogue, after the
return from Babylon. For as there no longer existed either
the Temple or the Tabernacle, where the authentic copies had
formerly been deposited, the sacred volumes were negligently
kept all through the period of the captivity. This being the case,
Ezra and his companions collected the MSS. from various quar
ters, arranged them in order, and reduced them to the compass of
a single volume. They removed the corruptions from which
the text had suffered, and restored it to its former pure state ;
and thus they established the Canon. Their work of establish
ing the Canon possessed truly divine authority; for there
belonged to that Council not only Ezra but also the last of the
Prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, and (as some think)
Daniel,' &c. (Walton's Polyglott. Prolegg. iv. 2, London 1657.)
(2) ' It has been an incontrovertible principle as well with HotUnger.
Christians — those indeed who have not a fungus for a brain —
as with Jews, that the Canon of the Old Testament was all, at
one and the same time, established, with an authority absolutely
divine, by Ezra and the men of the Great Synagogue.' (Hottin-
ger, Thesaurus Philologicus, lib. i. c. 2. 1, p. 111, ed. 2, Zurich
1659.) (3) Leusden (1629-1 699): 'By the men of the Great Synagogue Leusden.
are understood not those who were members of ordinary
Councils, but those who were admitted to that extraordinary
Council of one hundred and twenty men. This Council reduced
the books of the Old Testament to the compass of a single
volume, separated Holy Scripture from the fictitious books of
Pseudo-Prophets, and rendered many other services in connexion
with the reformation of the Church, and in connexion with the
sacred books, by purifying (emuscando) them from the errors
that had become attached to them.' (Philologicus Hebraeus,
Dissertatio ix. c. 20, ed. 2, Utrecht, 1672.)
(4) Carpzovius (1767) : 'Ezra's first and last thought being for Carpzovius.
the sacred volumes, he, in conjunction with the other members

264

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Opposition
to the
theory.

Alting.

excurs.a of the Great Synagogue, among whom the Jews reckon Haggai,
Zechariah, Malachi, and Nehemiah, collected from all sides the
MSS. of the Scriptures, arranged them in order, separated them
from the miscellaneous writings which had crept in among them ;
and he was the first of all to reduce the books to the compass of
the single volume and ' System ' which we call the Old Testa
ment, from which time no other book has been admitted into the
Canon of the Old Testament.' (Introd. in libr. Canon. Bibl. V.T.,
P. i. 2. 1, Leipzig 1757.)
There were, however, many scholars who strongly objected to*
the new view. These were men who had no great confidence
in the accuracy of Jewish tradition. Among them we may
mention the names of Jacob Alting and Franciscus Burmann,
both eminent scholars.
Alting (1618-1697) : ' For the Great Synagogue lived neither
at one time nor in one place ; that Synagogue had no existence,
but is a fiction of the traditionalists who could nowhere else
find any support for their n-apaoWis.' (Jacobus Altingius,
Epist. ad Perigon., op. tom. v. p. 382, quoted by Rau, P. i.
cap. iii. vii.)
Burmann (1632-1679): 'But that account of the Congress,
I speak of the Great Synagogue, since there is no mention of it
in Scripture, and it is open to various objections, is more dis
putable than certain.' (Franciscus Burmannus, Synops. Theol.,
tom. i. lib. iv. 37. 7, Utrecht 1671.)
Rau's 'Dia- 1727. The objections to the whole story of the Great
Syn. Mag: Synagogue were put forward in a very complete and interesting.
form by Joh. Rau in his Diatribe de Synagoga Magna, pub
lished at Utrecht in 1727. This work is the most considerable
monograph upon the subject. But it was doubtless written with
a certain degree of animus ; for, besides the passage just quoted
from Franz Burmann, he placed on the title-page of his work
the words of Hugo Grotius, ' The Jews are the worst teachers of
history. For ever since they were driven from their country,
all their history has been marred with crass errors and legends,

Burmann.

EXCURSUS A. 265
to which absolutely no credence is to be given unless other excurs. a.
witnesses be brought in their support.' (Comm. in Matt. xxiv.
24.) Still, his work must be regarded as a protest against the
blind veneration for the mere authority of the great Hebrew
scholars, and against the uncritical acceptance of Jewish tradi
tion. It gives a full account of the tradition of the Great
Synagogue, shows how devoid it is of historical support, and
seeks to explain its origin.
Another shorter work by Aurivillius, published in his Disser- Aurivillius.
tationes which were edited by Michaelis in 1790 (Leipzig),
dealt with the same subject on very similar lines.
The objections that were levelled against the story of ' the Men Modifica-
of the Great Synagogue ' succeeded in causing certain modifica- thwry.
tions in it to be accepted. Jewish tradition which regarded the
whole interval of time between the Return and the age of Alexander
as included within thirty-four years, and which called Zechariah,
Haggai, Mordecai, and Simon the Just, members of the Great
Synagogue along with Ezra, Nehemiah, and Malachi, could
not be accepted in a literal sense. Accordingly, it became
necessary to introduce certain modifications into the story.
Variations were from time to time suggested. According to some,
the Great Synagogue was, as the tradition had asserted, an
assembly of Jewish Divines, who constituted a special court, deal
ing only with matters of religion, during the whole period between
Ezra and Simon the Just (445-290 or 196 B.C.). According to
others, e.g. Selden, De Synagogis (1679), it was the same as the
Sanhedrim of later times. According to John Lightfoot, 'the
date of its first institution is not certain, but under this title the
Jews include the whole administration of the nation from the
time of the return from Babylon down to the time of the presi
dency of Simon the Just' (Opera posthuma, Memorabilia, p. 86,
ed. 1699).
In modern times the story of 'the men of the Great Synagogue'
has found favour up to a very recent date. But there has been
a very considerable diversity shown, and not a little freedom

266

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Herzfeld.

Gtnsburg.

excurs.a. exercised, in the handling of the tradition. The following
references will serve as illustrations : —
Herzfeld, in his Geschichte des Volkes Israels (ite Band, 1863,
Leipzig), devotes his Twelfth Excursus (pp. 380 ff.) to the careful
discussion of the Great Synagogue, which he identifies with the
Sanhedrim. Ginsburg, in his edition of Levitds Exposition of the
Massorah (London 1867, note on pp. 107, 108), says : 'The
Great Synagogue .... denotes the Council, or Synod, first
appointed by Nehemiah, after the return of the Jews from the
Babylonish captivity, to reorganise the religious life of the people.
It consisted originally of one hundred and twenty members,
comprising the representatives of the following five classes, of
the Jewish nation, (i) The Chiefs of the Priestly Divisions ;
(ii) the Chiefs of the Levitical Families; (iii) the Heads of
the Israelite Families; (iv) Representatives of the Cities, or
the Elders ; and (v) the Doctors of the Law, or the Scribes.
The number of one hundred and twenty was, however, not
adhered to after the death of Nehemiah, and ultimately it was
reduced to seventy. The period of its duration extended from
the latter days of Nehemiah to the death of Simon the Just,
b.c. 410-300; thus embracing about one hundred and ten
years.' Westcott (Bible in the Church, p. 300, Appendix A, 1863-
1885): 'This Great Assembly or Synagogue, whose existence
has been called in question on insufficient grounds, was the
great council of the nation during the Persian period, in which
the last substantive changes were made in the constitution of
Judaism. The last member of it is said to have been Simon
the Just (c. b.c. 310-290). It was organised by Ezra, and, as
commonly happens, the work of the whole body was transferred
to its representative member. Ezra . . . probably formed a
collection of the prophetic writings; and the Assembly gathered
together afterwards such books as were still left without the
Canon, though proved to bear the stamp of the Spirit of God.'

Westcott.

EXCURSUS A. 267
Fiirst (Kanon des All. Test., Leipz. 1868, pp. 22, 23) : 'Dieses excurs.a,
grosse Kollegium oder der Staatsrath hatte seine erste Begriin- Furst.
dung im zwanzigsten Jahre des persischen Konigs Artaxerxes
Langhand (Artachschasta) d. h. am 24. Tischri des Jahres
444 v. Chr. gefunden, als Nehemijah nach Jerusalem gekommen
war, um nachdem die Stadtmauern bereits im Monat Elul fertig
geworden, eine grosse religios-constituirende, aus Priestern,
Leviten und Volksfursten oder Stammhauptern (Rasche ha-
Abot) bestehende Versammlung nach dem Laubenfeste abzu-
halten, welche die. seit 515 v. Chr. (1. Jahr des Darius), namlich
seit den 70 Jahren nach der Errichtung des Serubbabel'schen
Tempels, eingerissenen Missbr'auche und Unordnungen be-
seitigen und uberhaupt ein neues Nationalleben anregen
sollte. Durch Entwerfung und Unterzeichnung eines Statuts
und Vertrags wurde dieses Kollegium organisirt. Unter
persischer Oberhoheit leitete es Judaa religios und politisch
128 (sic) Jahre (444-328), indem es sich stets bis zur von
Anfang an fixirten Zahl von 120 Mitgliedern erganzte, dann
unter griechisch-seleukidischer Oberhoheit 132 Jahre (328-
196 v. Chr.), d. h. bis zum Tode des Hochpriesters Schimon b.
Chonaw II.'
Derenbourg (Essai sur I Histoire etla Ge'ographie de la Palestine, Deren-
Paris 1867, chap. ii. pp. 33, 34) : 'Le nom special des docteurs oure'
quieurent alorsla ferme volonte- de propager la connaissance de
la parole divine, d'expliquer la loi a. tous ceux qui voulurent
l'etudier, d'augmenter le nombre des disciples et de former de
nouveaux maitres, de resserrer la chaine des prescriptions afin
d'en assurer mieux l'observation et qui formerent plut6t un
college qu'un se'nat, un corps de savants qu'une autorite- con
stitute, £tait, comme nous 1'avons de'ja dit, celui d'hommes de la
Grande Synagogue. . . . Nous considerons ce qui est raconte"
de la Grande Synagogue comme historique. Un corps sem-
blable, nous croyons l'avoir de'montre', rdpondait a la situation;
la transformation qui s'est ope're'e au sein du judai'sme est comme
reflet incontestable d'une cause conteste'e mal a, propos; le

268 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
excurs.a. pontificat seul aurait amene encore une fois les consequences
funestes que nous avons vues se produire dans l'intervalle qui
s'e'coule entre le depart de Zerobbabel pour Babylon et l'arrive'e
d'Ezra a Jerusalem. Nous ajouterons que le nom d'Ansche
Ken/set haggeddlah, qui ne s'est jamais applique" qu'aux hommes
de ce temps, dont on ne comprend plus m§me tout a fait le
sens, et qui, au iie siecle, ce"da la place a un nom nouveau et
de"signant une organisation plus artificielle, doit avoir it€ porte"
par un corps qui a exists, qui a v^cu. L'imagination aurait 6t4
chercher une denomination ancienne, re"pondant a une institu
tion gendralement connue.'
Hoffman. C. H. H. Wright (Ecclesiastes, London 1883, Excursus iii.
Wright. p. 486): ' Hoffman further argues that even in the Books of Ezra
and Nehemiah mention is made of a senate at Jerusalem under
various names (Ezra x. 8, vi. 7, 14 ; Neh. x. 1, xi. 1, &c). The
governing body was then composed of priests and Levites
under the headship of the High Priest, and of Israeli tish laymen
under the headship of the Prince of the House of Judah. " The
Elders of the House of Israel " were all probably " scribes,"
skilled in the Law like Ezra himself (Ezra vii. 25). Such a body
would naturally be renewed from time to time, and the name of
" the Great Synagogue " was given to it in later days not only
on account of the important work it performed in the recon
struction and preservation of the Jewish Church and State in
troublous times, but also because its members were originally
more numerous than those of the Sanhedrin of a later period,
or even of the council of elders which occupied its place in
earlier and happier days. Though we cannot narrate the
history of the disruption of the Great Synagogue, it is highly
probable that after the death of Simon the Just it was shattered
by internal dissensions, &c. ..." The Great Synagogue " was
broken up some years previous to the heroic struggles of the
Maccabees.' See also Bloch's Sludien zur Geschichte der Sammlung der
allhebraischen Liter alur, Breslau 1870, pp. 99-132.

EXCURSUS A. 269
It is time now to turn from the modern, and often conflicting, excurs. a.
representations of the old tradition to the actual evidence upon
which it all rests.
For this purpose it will be convenient, firstly, to quote the ' The Great
description which Joh. Buxtorf gives of ' the Great Synagogue,' ynagogue'
seeing that most of the subsequent descriptions have been drawn
from his Tiberias; and, secondly, to sift and analyse the evidence
which he and others cite in support of his account. For, as
Buxtorf gives no dates in his citation of authorities, the reader
is apt to carry away a very misleading impression from the
array of Hebrew evidence advanced in support of his state
ments, unless he is able to check them by a knowledge of their
age and literary value.
Joh. Buxtorfi Tiberias s. Comment. Masorelhicus, recognitus described in
a Joh. Buxtorf. fit., ed. nov. accurante Joh. Jac. Buxtorf. nep. > Tiberias:
(Basileae, 1665.)
p. 2 2 3, cap. x. ' " The men of the Great Synagogue." Such
is the name given by the Jews to the Great Council assembled at
Jerusalem by Ezra, the priest, its president, after the Babylonian
exile. By its aid and support he restored the whole Church of
Jerusalem and Judea, purged it of many corruptions, faults, and
vices contracted in Babylon, and constructed it afresh. . . .
Ezra and Nehemiah associated with themselves certain others
of the more noble and learned of the people, so that the entire
Council, or Ecclesiastical Senate, embraced the number of one
hundred and twenty men. . . . It is said in the Book fuchasin,
fol. 13, respecting this Council : — "Ezra's house of judgment is
that which is called the Great Synagogue, which restored the
Crown to its former state." Among the Jews there were three
crowns, of the Law, of the Priesthood, and of the Kingdom. . . .
The Crown of the Law, i. e. the study of wisdom and the know
ledge of the Divine Law, was greater than all, as it is written,
"Byrne kings reign" (Prov. viii; 15). This crown Ezra and
his colleagues restored to its pristine condition, i. e. rid the
ecclesiastical Republic of the pollutions and defilements of

270 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
excurs.a. Babylon, and restored it to its former purity, and purged Holy
Scripture of the fictitious books of the false prophets, and of
every sort of corruption. . . .'
p. 24 a. ' But in order that the Law of God itself and the
whole Scripture might continue among the people in their
purity, genuineness, and integrity, in order, too, that a distinction
might be drawn between the writings of numerous false prophets
and the books of the true prophets, and in order that any cor
ruption might be removed which could appear to have been intro
duced into the sacred text through the stress of a long captivity,
there was the utmost need for mature deliberation, for the anxious
forethought of scholars and those best skilled in the study of Holy
Scripture and for the earnest efforts of many minds. There
were present as Divinely appointed colleagues in the task
(divini symmistae) men endowed with the spirit of prophecy,
Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, and Nehemiah, whose ardour and
glowing zeal are proclaimed in their own sacred words ; there
was present Zerubbabel, that prince of utmost energy, whose
family and renown are ennobled by the genealogy of our Saviour
Christ ; there was present the High Priest Jeschua, and other
leading priests and Levites that had accompanied Zerubbabel
from Babylon, and all as many as had been an example and a
support of true religion among the Jewish people. These are
reinforced by Ezra with certain others of leading rank, mighty
in the Holy Scriptures, and excelling in influence, in number
one hundred and twenty, who were called " The Men of the
Great Synagogue," the Great Council, in order that they should
take pious and weighty counsel respecting the chief things of
their religion, not so much having regard to the advantage of
the moment or to any pressing need, but also so far as possible
with the view of providing for the salvation of posterity in all
future time, seeing that they knew the gift of prophecy would
soon be taken away from them.'
p. 24 b, cap. xi. ' On convening the Synod, Ezra first
gave attention to Holy Scripture as the undoubted Canon of

EXCURSUS A. 271
faith and true religion, and defined the limits of the Mosaic, the excurs. a.
Prophetical, and the other books that were written by special
inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and rejected all the heterogeneous
writings that had crept in amongst them. . . . The canonical
books themselves were diligently searched, lest they should re
tain any foreign or mischievous interpolation. Nor had it been
enough to have handed down to the Church the authentic sacred
books; but even the way of reading the same clearly, and of
expounding them, was given and laid down with the utmost
care.' p. 25 a. ' First of all, they determined the number of the
canonical books, and then reduced them to the compass of
a single body of Scripture; they divided it into three prin
cipal portions, viz., the Law, the Prophets, and the sacred
writings.' pp. 26 b, 27 a. 'The sum of it all amounts to this, that
Ezra, with the men of the Great Synagogue, in which were in
cluded the last of the Prophets, determined the limits of the
Canon of Holy Scripture within certain books, and distributed
them into those three portions, which from that time forward
have always been and are still even now recognised in the
Jewish Church; and this was the first beginning of the Massora
in connexion with Scripture.'
The following is the evidence upon which these statements Evidence.-
are based, arranged in order of date : —
1572. Genebrardus (Chronologia, lib. 2) is quoted by Bux- Genebrar-
torf (p. 25 a): 'The prophets were succeeded by the Great
Synagogue, whose leaders were Ezra, Nehemiah, Mordecai,
Zerubbabel, Jeshua. These presided over the Council, into
which one hundred and twenty persons were admitted, some of
noble, some of humble origin, to provide for the correction of
the Holy Scriptures and the setting up of their Canon according
to the rule of the tradition.'
1538. Elias Levita (1472-1549). Massoreth Ha-Massoreth. Ellas
(a) ' The men of the Great Synagogue, i. e. Haggai, mta'

272 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
excurs.a. Zechariah, Malachi, Daniel, Mishael, Azariah, Ezra, Nehemiah,
Mordecai, Zerubbabel, with whom were associated other sages
from the craftsmen and artizans to the number of one hundred
and twenty persons' (ed. Ginsburg, pp. no, in).
(b) ' What shall we say to the various readings (Keri and
Kethiv) which are found in the books written by the captives
themselves, such as Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Daniel, Ezra,
who wrote his own book and the Chronicles, and Mordecai,
who wrote the Book of Esther? Were not these themselves
among the men of the Great Synagogue? . . .' (id. p. 107).
(c) ' The whole period of the men of the Great Synagogue
did not exceed about forty years, as is shown in Seder Olam
and in Ibn Daud's Seder Ha-Kabbalah' (id. p. 108) 1.
(d) ' But when they failed to find the autograph copy itself,
which seems most likely to have happened, they undoubtedly
followed the majority of the MSS., which they had collected
from different places, one here and one there, as the twenty-four
books were then not joined together into one volume. Now
they (i.e. Ezra and his associates) have joined them together
and divided them into three parts, the Law, the Prophets, and
the Hagiographa, and arranged the Prophets and Hagiographa
not in the order in which they have been put by our Rabbins of
blessed memory in Baba bathra (14 a)' (id. p. 120).
Abr.ben 1 502. The book quoted as Juchasin, fol. 13, by Buxtorf in
cuto. "" me Tiberias (cap. x. p. 22 b) is the Sepher Juchasin or Book of
Generations, a chronological treatise by Abraham ben Samuel
Zacuto, who lived in Spsfti about 1490. The passage quoted is,
'Now Ezra's house of judgment is that which is called the
Great Synagogue or the Great Council, which restored the
crown to its former condition.'
Abarband. Don Isaac Abarbanel, the introduction2 to whose book
1 N.B. The last quotation is not accurate ; see Ginsbnrg"s note in toe.
' Morinus quotes from the same introduction an illustration of Jewish
ignorance or carelessness about chronology, 'Of the same generation as
Simon the Just was Dosa, the son of Harcines. For he was of the number

EXCURSUS A. 273
entitled The Inheritance of the Fathers (Nachalath Avoth) is Excurs.a.
quoted by Buxtorf (cap. x. p. 23 a), lived 1 436-1 509. The
passage quoted is the following : ' The list of the Men of the
Great Synagogue is Haggai, the prophet ; Zechariah, the pro
phet ; Malachi, the prophet ; Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel ;
Mordecai, the son of Bilschan; Ezra, the priest and scribe;
Jeshua, the son of Jehozedek the priest; Seraiah; Realiah; Mispar
Bigvaeus (Bigvai) ; Rachum ; Baana ; Nehemiah, the son of Cha-
chiliah. These are the twelve chiefs expressly named who went
up from Babylon to Jerusalem at the beginning of the (age of the)
second temple. With them were likewise joined others from the
more leading men of the people of Israel, until the number of one
hundred and twenty was completed, and they were called the
Men of the Great Synagogue, and they were so styled, because
they were called together to establish good laws for the right
government of the people and to repair the breaches of the Law.'
1360-1412. The passage from Ephodi, the literary title oi'Ephodi:
Profiat Duran or Rabbi Isaac ben Moses ha-Levi (1360-1412),
quoted by Buxtorf (cap. xi. p. 29 a) and Morinus (lib. ii. Exercit.
xxv. cap. iv.), bears less directly upon the subject of the Great
Synagogue : ' The perfect one, the chief of the scribes, Ezra,
the priest and scribe, shook out his lap, and exerted all the
strength of his might to restore what had been perverted ; like
wise did all the scribes who followed him, and corrected these
books with all the care they could, until they left them most
perfect, by numbering the sections, verses, words, and letters
.... and composed out of them books, which are the books of
the Massorah.'
c. 1250. [Tanchuma ben Josef, generally called Tanchuma
Jerushalmi, according to Herzfeld, reckoned the Nethinim of
Ezra ii. 53 with the Great Synagogue (Tanchuma 19, referred to,
Gesch. d. Volk Isr. p. 382, 1863).]
of the men of the Great Synagogue, and prolonged his life until he saw
Rabbi Akiba ' (Biblic. Exercitt. II. v. cap. iii.).
T

274 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
excurs.a. t 1235. The great Jewish commentator, Rabbi David Kimchi,
Kimchi. wno died m I235 A-D-> refers, though in very general terms, to
the work of the Great Synagogue :
(a) ' It appears that at the first captivity the Scriptures were
lost and scattered ; and the wise men that knew the Law had
died. Then the Men of the Great Synagogue, who " restored
the Law to its former condition," found the doubtful passages
in the Scriptures and followed the majority (of the MSS.) ac
cording to their knowledge' (Praefat. in Jos.). This passage
Kimchi repeats in his comment on a various reading in 2 Sam.
xv. 21.
(b) ' And Ezra united the book (Chronicles) with the Sacred
Writings by the hands of (at the direction of, ^J ?J?) Haggai,
Zechariah, and Malachi, the last of the Prophets, and they joined
it with the Kethubim and not with the Nebiim, because it was a
Chronicle ' (Praefat. in Chron).
Maimo- 1135-1204. The great Jewish philosopher of the Middle
Ages, Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides), writes : 'Ezra's House
of Judgment (or Council) consisted of those who are called the
Men of the Great Synagogue ; and they are Haggai, Zechariah,
Malachi, &c, and many wise ones with them, up to the number
of one hundred and twenty. The last of them was Simon the
Just ; he belonged to the number of the one hundred and
twenty.' (Praefat. in Fad Hachazakah, quoted by Buxtorf, cap.
x. p. 23 b.)
Abr.ben c. 1160. Rabbi Abraham ben David of Toledo says : 'Joshua
handed it (the Law) on to the elders, who lived after him ; the
elders handed it on to the prophets ; the prophets handed it on,
from the one to the other, through successive generations, down
to Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi ; the prophets handed it on
to the Men of the Great Synagogue, who were Zerubbabel the
son of Shealtiel, the son of Jechoniah, the king of the Jews, and
those who came with Zerubbabel, Jeshua, Nehemiah, Seraiah,
Realiah, Mordecai, Ritschan, Mistpar, Bigvai, Rechum, Baana,
who were the heads of the Great Council.' (Sepher ha-Kabbala

David.

EXCURSUS A. 275
or Book of Tradition, fol. 23, col. 4, quoted by Buxtorf, cap. x. excurs. A.
p. 23 a.)
t 1 105. Rashi, or Rabbi Solomon Isaac, the celebrated com- RasM,or
mentator, composed a Commentary upon most of the Talmudic c ''
Tractates. Commenting upon Baba bathra, fol. 15, he says:
'The Men of the Great Synagogue, Haggai, Zechariah, and
Malachi, and Zerubbabel, and Mordecai, and their colleagues,
wrote Ezekiel which was prophesied during the Captivity : and
I know not why Ezekiel did not write it himself, unless it was
that prophecy was not permitted to be written outside the (holy)
land ; and they wrote it, after they returned to the (holy) land.
So too, with the book of Daniel, who was in the Captivity ; and
so too, with the Roll of Esther ; and so with the Twelve (Minor
Prophets). Because their prophecies were short, the prophets
did not write them themselves, each one his own book. But
Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, on their return, saw that the
Holy Spirit would be taken away, and that they were the last
prophets. And they arose, and wrote their prophecies, and
combined with them the little (or, short) prophecies, and made
them into a great book, so that they should not be lost.'
Commenting on Megilla, fol. 2, he says : ' The Men of the
Great Synagogue are those who, in the days of Mordecai and
Esther, instituted the joy of Purim, and the reading of the Roll
of Esther.' 1092-1167. Abraham Aben-Ezra, the commentator, says : Aben Ezra.
' A few years after the building of the second Holy Temple, the
Spirit of the Lord, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding,
rested upon the Men of the House, which are called the Men of
the Great Synagogue, that they might interpret all that was
sealed, by precepts and words transmitted, according to the
mind of the just ones, from the mouth of the earlier and latter
prophets.' (Sepher Moznaim, a Hebrew Grammar, quoted by
Morinus, lib. ii. Exercit. xii. 7.)
9th cent. (?) The Targum of ' Song of Songs ' speaks of Targum to
' Ezra, the priest, and Zerubbabel, and Jeshua, and Nehemiah, songs:
T 2

276 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs.a. and Mordecai, and Belsan, the Men of the Grea| Synagogue,
who are likened unto roses, that they may have strength to
labour in the Law by day and night.' (Chap. vii. i, 2.)
The oldest Jewish tradition is comprised in the following
extracts, the exact antiquity of which it is impossible to com
pute. The earliest reference is that which is contained in the
Pirqe Aboth, a Mishnic treatise committed to writing about
200 a.d.
Talmud. Talmud. Tal. fer. Berakoth, ii. 4 (cf. 33 a, Megillah, fol. 17 b). R
Jeremiah says: 'The 120 members of the Great Synagogue,
including more than 80 prophets, have arranged this prayer (i.e.
the 18 blessings), and put it in order.'
(The number of 'the elders' is stated to be 85 in. Jer. Meg. i.
7, and Midrash Ruth)
Tal. fer. Berakoth, vii. 4 (cf. Megillah, iii. 8). ' And when
the Men of the Great Synagogue arose, they restored " the
greatness " to its pristine state.'
Of this tradition another form appears in Yoma, fol. 69 b,
Sanhedrin, fol. 64. ' Why were they called the Men of the
Great Synagogue ? because they restored " the Crown " to its
pristine state.'
Tal. fer. Berakoth, vii. 4. ' When the Men of the Great
Synagogue arose . . .' the formula was used again 'God the
great, the strong, the terrible.'
Pesachim, cap. 4, fol. 50, 2, as quoted by Buxtorf, ap. Tib.
p. 23 a. 'On four and twenty fast-days the Men of the Great
Synagogue sate (?) on account of the scribes that wrote the
Scriptures, Tephillim andMezuzoth1, lest they should grow rich;
for if they were to grow rich they would not write.'
Megillah, iii. 7. (See below Pirqe Aboth)
Baba bathra, fol. 15, 1. ' The Men of the Great Synagogue
wrote Ezekiel, and the Twelve (Minor Prophets), Daniel and
1 i. e. Phylacteries and Texts to be attached to doorposts, &c,

EXCURSUS A. 277
the Roll of Esther1.' As quoted in Mishpete-ha-Teamim (in the Excurs.a
MS. Moses b. Asher, 895 a.d., ed. Baer-Strack), the first
sentence runs ' The Men of the Great Synagogue and among
them Haggai and Zechariah,' &c.
Pirqe Aboth, c. 1 (quoted also in Aboth d Rabbi Nathan and
Meg. iii. 7) : ' Moses received the Torah from Sinai and delivered
it to Joshua, and Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the
prophets, and the prophets to the Men of the Great Synagogue.
They said three things: Be deliberate in judgment, and raise
up many disciples, and make a fence to the Torah. Simon the
Just was of the remnants of the Great Synagogue.' The 'Pairs'
of Jewish Scribes preceding the schools of Hillel and Shammai
are then enumerated.
The Tractate, Aboth d Rabbi Nathan, ' Sayings of the Rabbi
Nathan,' commenting on the first of these precepts, 'At first they
said, Proverbs and the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes were
not for public reading (i.e. Genuzim), because they spake para
bles. And they remained. And they removed them from public
reading until the Men of the Great Synagogue came and ex
pounded them.' (P. 2, ed. Schechter, Vienna, 1887.)
The passage from Pirqe Aboth should be carefully compared
with a similar statement in Peah. ii. 6, ' Nahum, the scribe, said
it was received from Rabbi Maesa (Meir), who received it from
Rab (i. e. Rabbi Jehudah), who received it from "the Pairs,"
who received it from the Prophets.' The absence of any refer
ence to the Great Synagogue between ' The Pairs of Scribes '
and ' the Prophets ' is very noteworthy.
We have thus recorded the principal evidence to be adduced
in support of the Great Synagogue. There is no mention
of any such body conveyed in the use of the word a-waywy^
in 1 Mace. vii. 12, xiv. 28. In the former passage, where
1 According to Maccoth, 23, and Jer. Meg. i. (quoted in Hamburger,
Real Lex. Talmud, sub voce Gr. Syn), the Men of the Great Synagogue
established the authority of the Book of Esther, and caused the Days of
Purim to be observed ; cf. Rashi, ut supr.

278 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
excurs. a. it is stated that a company of scribes (irvvayayrj ypappaTtav) re
sorted to Alcimus and Bacchides, it is obvious that no formal
community is intended. In the latter passage, the words ' at a
great congregation (or gathering) of priests and of the people
and rulers of the nation and the elders of the country ' could
not admit of such a reference. The nfyafa) irvvayayrj seems to
denote the gathering of a representative meeting, not the title of
a recognised official body. Had the latter been intended, the
article would have been prefixed.
Nohistoricai There is no mention of ' the Great Synagogue ' in the writings
nee. qj. e|jjier josephus or Philo. There is no allusion to it in the
Apocrypha. There is not a sentence in Nehemiah which,
according to any literal interpretation, would lead a reader to
suppose that Ezra founded an important deliberative assembly,
or even a religious Synod or College.
The earliest evidence therefore is that supplied in the Mish-
nic Treatise, Pirqe Aboth, which may have been committed to
writing in the 2nd or 3rd century a.d. The remainder of the
Talmudic evidence is Gemara, and not Mishnah, and therefore,
probably, was not committed to writing earlier than the 6th or
7 th century a.d. There is ho evidence from any literary
source whatever, nearer to the historical period, to which the
Great Synagogue is assigned, than Pirqe Aboth; and all the
testimony of Pirqe Aboth amounts to is this, that, in the chain
of tradition from Moses to the Scribes of the 2nd century b.c,
the Great Synagogue intervened between the Prophets and ' the
Pairs' of Scribes, and that Simon the Just ranked as its last
surviving member.
The argument from the silence of the Old Testament, of the
Apocrypha, of the Antiquities of Josephus, of Philo, is significant
enough by itself. But when taken in conjunction with the late
ness and meagreness of the earliest testimony in favour of the tra
dition, it is seen to be almost fatal to the historicity of the story.
Summary Let us then briefly sum up the results of the earliest Hebrew
"wMcn^! testimony upon the subject of the Great Synagogue.

EXCURSUS A. 279
1. It belonged to the era of Ezra and included in its members Excurs. a.
Simon the Just. (This, according to traditional chronology,
was well within the bounds of possibility. Simon the Just was
believed to have been High Priest in the days of Alexander
the Great ; and Alexander the Great was supposed to have
reigned in the generation after the Return from the Exile.)
2. It consisted of 85 or 120 members, and therefore differed
from the later Jewish Sanhedrin, which consisted of 70.
It contained in its ranks many prophets. It seems to have
been an assembly convened for special purposes at a particular
epoch, immediately before the disappearance of the gift of
prophecy. 3. It was credited with having discharged important duties
in connexion with the religious life of the people : (a) it restored
the ascendency of the law ; (b) it wrote certain books of the
Hebrew Scriptures ; (c) it drew up certain prayers ; (d) it allayed
the doubts that had been felt about the books Ecclesiastes and S ong
of Songs ; (e) it instituted the observance of the days of Purim.
4. It was regarded, especially, as the sacred body which
received the holy tradition of the ' Law ' from the Prophets, and
handed it on to the Scribes of the 2nd century b. c.
It may be said at once that this picture does not correspond N° resem-
with any Jewish Assembly or Council recorded in the Persian, Jewish
Greek, or Roman period of Jewish history. S^f"*
After the time of Ezra, the chief power in the Jewish com
munity fell into the hands of the High Priest, under whom was
a purely political body of aristocratic 'elders' or Gerousia.
The assumption of the High Priesthood by the Asmonean
family made the Government still more autocratic. The title
of King was taken by the last Asmonean princes. The Gerousia
continued to exist (cf. 1 Mace. xii. 6, xiv. 20, Jos. Ant. fud. xiii.
6, 5) ; and when the Jewish Monarchy was abolished by the
Romans, it was this body which, under the successive constitu
tions laid down by Pompey, Gabinius, and Caesar, became the
principal domestic power in Judea.

286 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
excurs. a. The name of Sanhedrin (o-w/Spiov) is first certainly used of
this reconstituted assembly in a passage of Josephus describing
an early adventure of Herod the Great (Ant. xiv. 9, 3-5), cf. Ps.
Sol. iv. 1.
There is no evidence to show that the Gerousia, under the
presidency of the High Priest, in the interval between Nehemiah
and the Roman supremacy, was ever designated 'the Great
Synagogue,' or ever possessed the administrative supremacy in
religious matters assigned to it by very late Jewish tradition.
None of the historical authorities for that period support such an
idea ; certainly they do not lead us to suppose that the formation
of the Canon was due to such a body.
Jewish tra- We know that mediaeval Jews (e.g. Tanchuma 39 a) could
often un- place the scribes, Shemaiah and Abtalion, at the head of the
historical. Qreat Synagogue ; and there is no doubt that the Jewish tradi
tion which the Talmud represents fancied that the Sanhedrin
was a Council of Scribes, and that, from the days of the Macca
bees, it was presided over by the most eminent Scribe, the Presi
dent being called the Nasi, the Vice-President the Abb§th-din.
The slightest acquaintance with Jewish history will show
the unhistorical character of such a view. The origin of this
transformation of a political assembly into a gathering of Scribes
was due to the attempt to read into earlier times the Synagogue
system which prevailed in the Talmudic period, and which, to
the Rabbinic imagination, must have prevailed in earlier days (cf.
Wellhausen, Pharisaer u. Sadduc aer, pp. 26-43; Schiirer, Gesch.
Jud. Volk, vol. ii. 25).
Have we not good reason to suspect that the Great Syna
gogue is a similarly unauthenticated Rabbinic fiction ? If the
Great Synagogue were a gathering of Prophets and Scribes, it
was neither the administrative Council of the nation, nor the
Sanhedrin in its earlier form. What then could it have
been?
Modem ex- To this the reply is made, either that it was a religious College
*aaHlge"lr instituted to establish the lines of Jewish worship in the time of

EXCURSUS A. 281
Ezra and lasting for a single generation, or that it denotes a excurs.a.
succession of great religious teachers. a succession
Fatal to the first alternative are the two objections, (a) that "/''"'hers.
Simon the Just is emphatically pronounced to have been a
member of the same college as Haggai and Zechariah, (b) that
no mention of this institution is recorded by any trustworthy
authority, and that the first mention of it occurs in a tradition
committed to writing six centuries after Ezra's days.
Fatal to the second alternative is the objection, that the
Talmudic testimony clearly contemplates a corporate body
acting collectively. According to Talmudic chronology, there
was nothing improbable in this ; for as the interval between
Ezra and Alexander the Great could be regarded as only
thirty-four years (Aboda zara, 9 a, Seder Olam, p. 41), it was
perfectly possible for Ezra and Simon the Just to be members
of one assembly. But, for our purposes, such a chronological
confusion heightens suspicion, if it does not absolutely destroy
confidence. On the one hand, if the Great Synagogue be regarded as a
definitely appointed religious assembly, we are, of course, obliged
to assume that, Haggai, Ezra and Simon the Just being mem
bers of it, its functions must have been continued for at least
two centuries. But this is a departure from the actual tradition,
which makes it all the more inexplicable, that no reference
to such an institution should appear in Josephus, or in Philo, or
in the Apocrypha.
If the Great Synagogue be a name for a succession of eminent
Jewish Scribes, the Jewish tradition is no longer treated seriously
as evidence ; its whole character is altered and modified in
such a' way as to become plausible. But are we justified in thus
handling the meagre, late, and doubtful testimony? Can we
accept it, and reserve to ourselves the right of altering it until we
have reduced it to proportions of historical probability ?
I believe that the evidence is quite insufficient to justify us Origin of
in regarding ' the Great Synagogue ' as an institution which ever ' gen '

282 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
excurs.a. played a real part in the History of the Jews. But the evidence,
defective as it is, is sufficient to account for the rise of such a
legend. The period between Ezra and the Maccabean war was
hidden in an obscurity, upon which the Jewish Annals completely
failed to throw any satisfactory light. Josephus contributes
practically nothing ; and, as the example above mentioned
shows, the greatest ignorance, as to the chronology of that
period, prevailed in the Talmudic age and among the Jews of the
Middle Ages.
The Jewish Doctors, however, sought to fill the gap. They
felt compelled to account for the transmission of the true
tradition of the Torah, after the spirit of prophecy had failed,
and before the great Rabbinic schools arose. Into the gap
between the prophets and Antigonus ', they inserted the fiction of
' the Great Synagogue.' The Synagogue system was that which
to them embodied the hope and strength of religious Judaism.
The Synagogue system was supposed to have arisen in the
period of Ezra. What was more likely, then, than that it had
been based on the model of a Great National Assembly?
Such an assembly would have given the pattern of which all
Jewish Synagogues were smaller copies. Such an assembly
determined finally the ascendency of the ' Torah,' restored ' the
Greatness ' of it to Israel, supervised the composition of certain
of the Sacred Books, and drew up liturgical devotions and
prayers to accompany the reading of the ' Torah.' Such an
assembly would have been ' the Great Synagogue.'
It was, we believe, a dream of the Jewish Doctors. But it
was not destitute of a specious plausibility. There was no real
evidence to support it ; but then, owing to the dearth of historical
materials, there was no obvious evidence against it. That the
idea may have arisen from an Haggadic expansion of Neh.
Neh. viii-x. viii-x, and that the number of the 120 members may have been
based on the combination of the lists of names contained in that
1 Antigonus of Soko (Pirqe Aboth, i. 3).

EXCURSUS A. 283
passage, is not altogether improbable. In Neh. x. 1-28, as excurs.a.
Krochmal pointed out (Kerem-chemed, 5, 68), we have the names
of 84 or 85 (see ver. 10) Signatories : in Neh. viii. 4-7, the
names of 26 who stood by Ezra at the promulgation of the
Torah : in Neh. ix. 5, 6, the names of 8 Levites who sang and
uttered prayer on the occasion (see Kuenen, Over de mannen des
Groote Synagoge, 1876 *).
But, while the correctness of this last ingenious conjecture
must be left undetermined, we may safely infer from the legend,
that it affords one further illustration of the deep impression
which the action of Ezra and his colleagues, in the public
promulgation of the Torah, produced upon the mind of succeed
ing generations.
In conclusion, the reader will be careful to observe that no
early Jewish testimony associated with the Men of the Great
Synagogue the work of completing the Hebrew Canon of
Scripture. This was a late expansion of the legend, and one of
which no trace is found in the earlier forms of the tradition.
[Cf. also article on 'Great Synagogue' in Herzog-PIitt, R.E?
and the references to it in Robertson Smith's Old Test, in
Jewish Ch. (1881), Taylor's Sayings of the Jewish Fathers
(1877), Streane's Chagigah (Introd. p. vii. 1891), Driver,
Introd. to Lit. of 0. T. (Introd. p. xxxv), 1891.]
1 Translated into German by K. Budde in Gesammelte Abhandlungen
zur Biblischen Wissenschaft von Dr. Abraham Kuenen (Leipzig, 1894).

EXCURSUS B.
Baba Bathra, fol. 14° and 15s.
Excurs. b. The Baraitha, or unauthorized Gloss, dealing with the Hebrew
Scriptures in this portion of the Talmudic Tractate, , Baba
Bathra, has often been considered to have an important bearing
upon the history of the Hebrew Canon. For this belief a
glance at its contents will show that very little can be said.
The passage contains strange and often impossible traditions
respecting the composition of certain books of Scripture. But
on the formation of the Canon it tells us nothing. It is how
ever full of interest ; and as a curious specimen of the uncritical
character of Rabbinic speculation in Scriptural questions deserves
attention. We subjoin a translation from the critical text supplied by
G. A. Marx in his Traditio Rabbinorum Veterrima (Leipzig,
1884): ' Our Rabbins teach, that the order of the Nebiim is Joshua,
Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, the Twelve
(Minor Prophets).
' But, was not Hosea first (i. e. chronologically) ? -As it is
written (Hos. i. 2) " When the Lord spake at the first by
Hosea." Well, how then spake He with (or by) Hosea "at
the first?" For from Moses to Hosea, were there not many
prophets? Rabbi Jochanan said, At the first, that is, first in
respect of the four prophets who prophesied at the same time ;
and they were Hosea and Isaiah, Amos and Micah. Let,
then, Hosea be placed at the head. Seeing that his prophecy
was written along with Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, and

EXCURSUS B. 285
that Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi were the last of the Nebiim, Excurs. b.
it must be reckoned with them. And yet they wrote it separately,
and placed it in front 1 Because it Js so small, it might easily
slip out of sight.
' But was not Isaiah before Jeremiah and Ezekiel ? then Isaiah
should be placed at the head I The reason (i. e. for the Tal
mudic order) is that Kings ends with desolation, and Jeremiah
is all of it desolation, while Ezekiel opens with desolation, and
ends with consolation, and Isaiah is all of it consolation ;
accordingly we join desolation to desolation and consolation to
consolation. ' The order of the Kethubim is Ruth, the Book of Psalms, Job
and Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs and Lamentations,
Daniel and the Roll of Esther, Ezra and Chronicles.
' Now if it be said, Job lived in the days of Moses ; Job there
fore should be placed at the head : the answer is verily, we do
not begin with calamity. And yet, is not Ruth calamity? It
is calamity with a good end to it : as said Rabbi Jochanan,
" Why was her name called Ruth ? " because from her there
went forth David, who satiated (rivvathd) the Almighty with
songs and hymns.
' And who wrote them (i. e. the books of Scripture) ? Moses
wrote his own book, and the section about Balaam and Job.
Joshua wrote his own book, and eight verses in the Torah'. DeutmAv.
Samuel wrote his own book, and the Book of Judges and Ruth. s"12'
David wrote the Book of Psalms at the direction of (or for) the
ten elders, the first man, Melchizedek, and Abraham, and Moses,
and Heman, and Jeduthun, and Asaph, and the three sons of
Korah. Jeremiah wrote his own book, and the Book of Kings
and Lamentations. Hezekiah and his company wrote Isaiah,
Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. The Men of the
Great Synagogue wrote Ezekiel, and the Twelve (Minor
Prophets), Daniel, and the Roll of Esther. Ezra wrote his own
book and the genealogies in Chronicles down to his own time.
' With this agrees the saying of the Rabbi (Abba Aricha, third

286 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. b. cent.), whom Rabbi Jehudah1 reports to have said, Ezra went not
up from Babylon until he had written his genealogy : and then
he went up. Who completed it? Nehemiah, the son of
Hachaliah. ' Whereas it says, Joshua wrote his own book and eight
verses in Torah, its teaching agrees with those who affirm, Eight
verses which are in Torah, Joshua wrote : for the reading is,
Deut. xxxiv. " And Moses the servant of the Lord died there " : is it
possible that Moses should have in his lifetime written the words
" And he died there ? " Was it not that Moses wrote so far,
and from that point and onward Joshua wrote ? The words of
Rabbi Jehuda2, or, as others say, of Rabbi Nehemiah, when Rabbi
Simeon said to him, " Was it possible that the book of Torah
lacked a single letter, when it was written, Take this book of the
Deut. xxxiv. Law ? " Verily, up to this point the Almighty dictated and Moses
5' wrote ; but from that point and onward the Almighty dictated,
and Moses wrote with tears. Just as we read in the passage,
jer. xxxvi. " And Baruch said unto them," " He pronounced with his mouth
&c." With whom does that agree ? Even with the Rabbi
whom Rabbi Jehoshua, the son of Abba, reports, on the authority
of Rabbi Giddel, to have said " Eight verses in Torah one pro
nounced alone." Is this as much as to say, that it is not as
Rabbi Simeon said ? well, even if you say, Rabbi Simeon, still
since it was once altered, it was altered for ever.
' Joshua wrote his own book : but as for that which is written
Jos. xxiv. ig. ¦" And Joshua the son of Nun the servant of the Lord died,"
Eleazar added it at the end. And whereas it is written, " And
Eleazar, the son of Aaron, died," Phinehas and the elders added
that. ' Whereas it is said Samuel wrote his own book, and it is
•£<?«• written, "And Samuel died," Gad, the seer, and Nathan, the
prophet, added that.
' Whereas it is said, " David wrote the Book of the Psalms at
1 This was probably R. Jehuda, ben Ezekiel, of the 3rd cent. A.D.
a R. Jehuda, the compiler of the Mishnah.

XXV1U,

EXCURSUS B. 287
the direction of (or for) the ten elders," should not also Ethan excurs. b.
the Ezrahite be reckoned among them ? Rab said, Ethan the
Ezrahite is Abraham ; for it is written in one place, " Ethan the Ps.
Ezrahite," and in another, " Who hath raised up one from the ^xit a.
east (mimmizrah) ? " If it be said, and Ethan may be Jacob, as Gen. xxxii.
it is written, " And the sun rose upon him," that only means to 3I"
say, the sun that had gone down for his sake now rose for his
sake. Assuredly, Moses is reckoned in the number (of the
elders), and Heman is reckoned in their number : but Rab said,
Heman is Moses, as it is written in one place " Heman,'' and in Ps. lxxxviii. 1.
another, " He is faithful (ne'eman) in all my house.' There were xum.
two of the name Heman. *"¦ 7-
' Whereas it is said, " Moses wrote his own book, and the
passage about Balaam and Job," that agrees with the words of
Rabbi Levi bar Lachma, who said, "Job lived in the days of
Moses," for it is written in one place, "O that (epho) my words Job xix. 23.
were now written," and it is written in another place, " For (epho) Ex. xxxiii.
wherein now shall it be known ? " But he might be said to have
lived in the days of Isaac, for it is written, " Who then (epho) is Gen. xxvii.
he that hath taken venison ? " Or, again, in the days of Jacob,
for it is written, " If it be so now (epho), do this." Or, again, in Cen. xiiii.
the days of Joseph, for it is written, " Where (epho) are they Gen.
feeding?" But you are not to think so, for it is written, " Oh xxxvii- l6-
that they were inscribed (lpniM) in a book," but Moses is
called " the Inscriber" (ppira), as it is written, "And he pro- Deut. xxxiii.
vided the first part for himself, for there was the law-giver's
(Inscriber's, ppino) portion reserved."
' Rabba said, " Job lived in the days of the spies," for it is
written in one place, " There was a man in the land of Uz (pv), J»b '• ¦•
whose name was Job," and in another place, " Whether there be Num. xiii.
wood (ys) therein," in the one place " Uz," in the other " Ez."
Thus Moses spake to Israel, bidding them see, whether there
was there the man whose years were as a tree, and who defends
his generation like a tree.
' There sate one of our Rabbins before Rabbi Samuel bar-

288 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. b. Nachmani, and said, " Job was not, nor was created, but is a
parable." He said unto him, " Against thee, pronounces the
sentence, 'There was a man in the land of Uz whose name
2 Sam. Was Job.' " " Still, the words, ' But the poor man had nothing
save one little ewe lamb, &c.,' what are they but a parable ? "
He replied: "Even if it be granted so, there is still his name
and the name of his town ; to what end do they serve ? "
Rabbi Jochanan and Rabbi Eleazar believed that Job was one
of those who went up out of the captivity (Golah), and that his
School was in Tiberias. Others reply : The days of the years
of Job began at the entering of Israel into Egypt and ended at
their going forth. But it is not so ; it is only said, His days
were as many as from the entering in of Israel into Egypt unto
their going forth from the same.
' Some object : Seven prophets prophesied to the Gentiles, and
they are Balaam, and his father, and Job, Eliphaz the Temanite,
and Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite, and Elihu
the son of Barachel the Buzite. But think you that Elihu the
son of Barachel was not of Israel ? Surely he was, and yet he
prophesied unto the Gentiles. But thus, too, Job prophesied
unto the Gentiles. Therefore, is it not the case that all the pro
phets prophesied unto the Gentiles ? In some, the substance of
their prophecies is directed towards Israel, in others towards the
Gentiles. ' Some reply : There was one pious among the Gentiles, and
his name was Job ; and he was only born into the world that he
might receive his reward. When the Almighty brought chastise
ment upon him, he began to revile and curse ; and the Almighty
doubled unto him his reward, to the intent that he might drive
job xiii. him from the world (to come), as it is said, " And the Lord gave
Job twice as much as he had before."
'This is the teaching of the Tannaim. Rabbi Eleazar saith,
Job lived in the days of the judging of the Judges, as it is said,
job xxvii. "Behold, all ye yourselves have seen it." What generation was
it that was all vanity ? he saith, it was the age of the judging of

EXCURSUS B. 289
the Judges. Rabbi Jehoshua, the son of Korkhah, used to say, Excurs. b.
"Job lived in the days of Ahasuerus, as it is said, 'And there job xlii. ,5.
were no women found, &c.' " What was the generation in which
they sought for fair women ? he saith, it was the generation of
Ahasuerus. But it might have been in the days of David, as it
is written, " So they sought for a fair damsel." There, however, 1 Kings
it was " throughout all the coasts of Israel," here it is " in all ^ ..
the provinces of thy kingdom."
' Rabbi Nathan used to say, Job was in the days of the king
dom of Sheba, as it is said, " Sheba fell upon them and took job i. 15.
them away." And the Wise Men used to say, "Job was in the
days of the Chaldeans, as it is said, ' The Chaldeans made three Job i. 17.
bands.' " And there are some who say " Job was in the days of
Jacob, and Dinah, Jacob's daughter, was his wife " ; for it is
written in one place, " Thou speakest as one of the foolish job ii. 10.
women speaketh," and in another place, " Because he wrought Gen.
folly in Israel." ^"^
' And thus all the Tannaim considered that Job was of Israel,
save those referred to under " There are some who say."
' If it should occur to you that he was of the Gentiles, ask
yourself, " From Moses onward, who is there among the Gentiles
to whom the Shechinah was revealed?" as it is said, " So that we Ex.xxxin.
be separated, I and thy people, &c," and it is written, "Before ^. 5
all thy people I will do marvels." ' IO-
Upon this strange document much might be said. But we
must confine our remarks to two points that deserve notice.
(1) The Men of the Great Synagogue are stated to have
' written ' certain books : Ezekiel, Minor Prophets, Daniel,
Esther; and Hezekiah and his company are said to have
'written' Isaiah, Proverbs, Songof Songs, Ecclesiastes. We can
not interpret the word ' write ' in a different sense from that in
which it is applied in the context, in the case of Moses, Joshua,
Samuel, &c. We cannot say that in the two former cases it
denotes 'committed to writing,' and in the other cases 'com-
U

.XXXIV,

290 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. b. posed.' Doubtless, the statements in this document are generally
fanciful and wild, and not least so in respect of authorship.
But we must bear in mind that the Men of the Great Synagogue
were considered by ignorant tradition to belong to a generation
which included Haggai, Zechariah, Daniel, and Esther.
In the other case, Isaiah may well have been included in the
' company ' of Hezekiah ; and, on the authority of Prov. xxv. 1,
tradition may have assigned ' Proverbs ' to this same band, and,
if Proverbs, then the other Solomonic writings.
But no one, after reading the document translated above, will
be surprised at finding any assertion, however improbable, re
specting the origin of the books.
(2) The books stated to have been written by Hezekiah and
his council were denoted by a ' memoria technica,' YiMSHaQ,
giving the initial letters of Isaiah, Proverbs, Song of Songs, and
Ecclesiastes (rbnp, WVm "VE', 'b&b, ww°).
The books stated to have been written by the ' Men of the
Great Synagogue ' were also denoted by a ' memoria technica,'
QaNDaG, giving the fourth letter of Ezekiel, the second
letter of 'The Twelve,' the initial letter of Daniel, and the
second letter of 'Roll of Esther' (r6lD, baCi% "W D'St?, SwpVp
nriDx). This selection of letters appears at first sight arbitrary. But
it is not so in reality. The first letters of Ezekiel, Twelve, and
Roll (d, b>, »), had been used up in the previous ' memoria tech
nica.' The only ' initial ' in QaNDaG is D for Daniel, and D
had not occurred in the previous 'memoria technica.' If the
initial letters of the three other books could not be used without
confusion with those of Isaiah, Song of Songs, and Proverbs,
then the second letter would naturally be selected, which explains
the N and the G. But the Q presents a difficulty; it is neither
the first, nor the second, but the fourth letter of Ezekiel's
name : and what is more, it has occurred in the previous
' memoria technica.' The last-mentioned fact possibly accounts
for its selection. In order to facilitate the recollection of the

EXCURSUS B. 291
two groups of books, the second group was denoted by a excurs. b.
memorial word whose initial letter (Q) recalled the last letter of
that which denoted the first group. Thus each memorial word
supplied a key to the remembrance of the other : the one ending,
the other beginning with Q.

U 2

EXCURSUS C.

excurs. c. 'The order of the books' has been a special subject of
investigation in Dr. Ginsburg's Massoretico-critical edition of the
Hebrew Scriptures. I very gratefully acknowledge my indebted
ness to the generosity with which he has forwarded for my
use the first sheets of his valuable and laborious Introduction.
The following useful tables are the result of his collation of the
best MSS. and earliest editions of the Hebrew Bible.
i. The order of the Megilloth after the Pentateuch.

I.

II.

III.

IV.

V.

MSS.
Nos. I, 2, 3.

MSS.
Nos. 4, 5, 6.

MSS.
Nos. 7, 8.

MS. No. 9.

Early
Editions.

Song of Songs
RuthLamentations Ecclesiastes
Esther

Esther
Song of Songs
Ruth
Lamentations Ecclesiastes

RuthSong of Songs
Ecclesiastes
Lamentations Esther

RuthSong of Songs
Lamentations
Ecclesiastes
Esther

Song of Songs
Ruth
LamentationsEcclesiastesEsther

The nine MSS. collated for this Table are the following, in
the British Museum : — (1) Add. 9400; (2) Add. 9403 ; (3) Add.
19776; (4) Harley 5706; (5) Add. 9404; (6) Orient. 2786;
(7) Harley 5773 ; (8) Harley 15283; (9) Add. 15282.
The fifth column represents ' the order adopted in the first,
second and third editions of the Hebrew Bible, viz., Soncino
1488, Naples 1491-93, and Brescia 1492-94; as well as that
of the second and third editions of Bomberg's Quarto Bible
(Venice 1521 and 1525), in all of which the five Megilloth follow
immediately after the Pentateuch.'

.

EXCURSUS C.
Lists of Hebrew Scriptures (A—G Hebrew Tradition, H—U showing influence of Alexandrine Version).

A
Tal
mudic :
Baba
bat lira,
fol. 130,
14, 15.

B
MSS. (st
Levtta, life
(153S), e<

C D
e statement of Ellas
ssorcth Ha-Massoreth

E
Printed
editions.

F
Cant'
bridge
MS. No. 12
( Univ.
Libr.),
Kennicott

G
Jerome {Prol. Cat.)

H
Melito
{Ens. apud
H.E.
iv. 26).

I
Origen
(Ens. apnd
H.E.
vi. 25).

/
Cyrit.Jer. {Catech. iv. 33)-

K
A thanas.
{Ep. Fest.
xxxix).

L

Epipkaniiti

N

0
Cod. B
(Vati-
canus).

P
Greg. Naz.
{Carm. Sect.
i. xii).

„ Q
Amphi lochius
{Iambi ad
Selene.
Sect. ii).

R
Cone.
L aodic.
(Canon
LIX. later
addition).

S
Hilary of
Poitiers {Prol.
Comm.
/'W. §15).

T
Ruffinus
[Cotnm. in
Synth.
Apost. §36).

U
Synops. Script.
Sacr. ap.
A thanas.
(Migne,

i. Gtnsbnrg.p. 120).

{Haer.
viii. 6j.

{De Mens.
et Pond. 4).

{De Mens.
et Pond.
cc. 22, 23)

Spanish

German \
French )

Massoretic

89.
pp. 283 sqq.)
5 Legal
12 Hist.
Torah (5 books)
—
—
Moses (5 books)
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
Pent.
i
Nebiim
—
—
—
—
—

5 Poetical
(8 books)
Hist.
Job
Psaltery
Prov. Sol.
Eccles. Cant.
5 Hist.
Jos.
—
—
—
—
—
Joshua,
Joshua,
Joshua,
Joshua,
Joshua,
Joshua,
Joshua,
Joshua,
Jos.
Jos.
Jos.
Joshua,
Joshua,
Joshua,
Joshua,
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of Nun
son of N un
son of Nun
Jud
—
—
—
—
Jud. Ruth
Jud.t
Jud. Ruth
Jud. Ruth
Jud.
Ruth
Jud.
Jud. Ruth
Job
Jud.
Jud.
Jud.
Jud. Ruth
Jud. Ruth
Jud. Ruth
Jud.
Sam.
—
—
—
—
-
Sara.
Rutht
Kingdoms 1, 2
Kingdoms 1, 2
Kingdoms 1-4
Ruth
Paralip. 1, 2
Jud.
Ruth
Ruth
Ruth
Esther
Ruth
Kings
—
—
—
—
—
Kings
Kingdoms,
= Sam.
Kingdoms
Kingdoms,
Paralip.
Job
Kingdoms,
Ruth
Kingdoms,
' Acts of
Kings 1-4
Kingdoms,
Kingdoms,
Kingdoms,
Kingdoms,
i-4
3,4 = Kings
3,4
1, 2
i, 2
i-4
Kings '
(2 books)
1, 2
Kingdoms,
1, 2
Kingdoms,
1, 2
Kingdoms,
1, 2
Kingdoms,
Jer.
Is.
Jer.
Is.
Is.
Is.
Is.
Paralip. 1, 2
Paralip. 1, 2
Paralip. 1, 2
Ezr. 1, 2
Psaltery
Kingdoms, 3, 4
5 Proph.
Pss.
Paralip. 1, 2
Paralip.
Paralip. 1, 2
3, 4
Paralip. 1, 2
3. 4
Paralip. 1, 2
T 3- 4
Paralip. 1, 2
3, 4
Paralip. 1, 2
Ezek.
Jer.
Is.
Jer.
Jer.
Jer.
Jer. Lam.
Pss. Dav.
Ezr. 1, 2
Ezr. 1, v
Book of
Pss.
Prov. Sol.
xii Proph.
Paralip. 1, 2
1 Esdr.
2 Esdr.
(Ezr. Neh.)
Ezra
5 Poet.
Ezra 1, 2
5 Poet.
Ezra 1, 2
Ezra
Ezra r, 2
Ezra 1, 2
Is.
Ezek.
Ezek.
Ezek.
Ezek.
Ezek.
Ezek.
Prov. Sol.
=Wisd.
Book of
Pss.
Esth.
Poetical.
Prov.
Eccles.
Is.
Kingdoms,
Ps.
Job
Job
150 Pss.
Book of
Pss.
Esther
Psaltery of
David
xii Proph.
—
—
—
—
xii Proph.
Eccles.
Prov. Sol.
Job
Eccles.
Cant.
Jer.
ii 2
Prov.
David
Book of
Prov. Sol.
Prov. Sol.
Is.
Prov. Sol.
iii
Kethubim (n books)
(9 books)
Cant.
Eccles.
Book of
Pss.
Cant.
Kingdoms, 1
Ezek.
• > 4
Pss.
Ruth
Chron.
Ps.
Chron.
Ps.
Ps.
Job
Job
Proph.
Cant.
Prov.
Job
» 2
Dan.
Prov.
Eccles.
3 Solomon
— Eccles.
3 Solomon
= Prov.
Eccles.
Eccles.
Jer.
Eccles.
Ps.
Ps.
Prov.
Ps.
Prov.
Prov.
David =
Ps.
Is.
Is.
Eccles.
xii Proph.
i) 3
Ezr. 1, 2
Eccles,
Cant.
Cant.Prov.
Eccles.Cant.
Cant.
Cant.
Ezek.
Cant.
Job
Job
Job
Job
Job
Job
Solomon
Jer.
Jer. )
Lzm.Ep, 1
Cant.
Is.
» 4
Esth.
Cant.
Job
Job
Dan.
Job
= Prov. \
Eccles. >
Cant. J
Pi-oph.
5 Proph.
Prov.
Prov.
Cant.
Prov.
Cant.
Ruth
xii Proph,
Dan.
xii Proph.
Jer.5^r. )
L3.jr1.Ep. J
Paralip. 1
xii Proph.
Wisd.-Sol.
xii Proph.
xii Proph.
xii Proph.
xii Proph.
xii Proph.
xii Proph.
Eccles.
Ruth
Ruth
Ruth
Ruth
Cant.
Dan.
Ezek.
Is.
0 2
Cant.
Cant.
Lam.
Cant.
Lam.
Eccles.
Dan.
Ezek.
Job
Jer. Bar. \
L2.xn.Ep. j
Ezek.
xii Proph.
Is.
IVisd.-Sir.
Is.
Is.
Is.
Is.
Job
Ps. David
Is.
Lam.
Eccles.
Eccles.
Eccles.
Eccles.
Esth.
Chron.
Ezr.
Esth.
Is.
Jer.
Esth.
Jer.
Jer.
Jer. Bar. )
Lam. Ep. ]
Jer. 1
Lam. Ep. J
Dan.
Lam.
Esth.
Lam.
Esth.
Lam.
Ezr.
(N.B. If
(N.B. xii
Ezek.
Dan.
Jer. Bar. [
Lam.Ep. J
Ezek.
Jud.
Ezek.
Ezek.
Solomon
Jer.
Esth.
Esth.
Dan.
Esth.
Dan.
Dan.
Esth.
Esther
Proph
Dan.
Dan.
Too.
Dan.
Dan.
Ezek.
Dan.
= Prov. »
Eccles. \
Cant. )
Ezek.
22
dropped
dropped
Ezek.
Ezr. 1
xii Proph.
—
Dan.
Ezek.
Dan.
Ezr.
Dan.
Ezr.
Dan.
Ezr.
Ezr.
(Praef. in
out, Jud
out, (?)
Dan.
,, 2
Is.
' Some add
Job
'Some
(Ezr. Neh.)
Dan.)
and
after
Ezr. 1
Esth.
Jer. Bar. 1
La.rn.Ep. }
Esther'
Esther
among He
Chron.
Ezr.
Chron.
Ezr.
Chron.
Chron.
Lex =
Ruth
Jer.)
)» 2
brews add
5 books
One
Esth.
Ezek.
Esther,
Proph. =
book.)
Dan.
and unite
S books
Ruth with
Hag.=
Jud.'
11 books
24
24
22
22
22
22
27
22
27
22
22
22
22
22
Jerome in Prol. Gal. follows Hebrew tripartite grouping, except in case of Ruth and Lam. ; but arranges Hagiographa chronologically, possibly following arrangement of Greek Bibles. His list is therefore placed at the end of the lists
that reproduce the Hebrew tradition.
Esther is omitted in the O. T. lists of Melito (If), Athanasius (K), Greg. Naz. (P) ,Amphilochius (0, and Synops. Sacr. Script. (U ); but is mentioned in that of Amphiloch., as being sometimes included in the Christian Canon of
Scripture, and in that of the Synofis. Sacr. Script., as sometimes included in the Hebrew Canon.
The Twelve Minor Prophets in Greg. Naz. (/>), Amphilochius (Q), and Synops. Sacr. Script. (U), are given in the lxx order.
EXCURSUS C

293

' It will thus be seen that the early editions of the Hebrew excurs. c.
Bible adopted unanimously the order exhibited in the first
column. It is also to be remarked that the different sequences
do not belong to different countries. The three MSS. which
head the first column belong, respectively, to the German and
Franco-German schools. The three MSS. in the second column
are German, Franco-German, and Italian. The two in the
third column are Italian and Spanish; whilst the one MS.
at the head of the fourth column is of the German school.'
ii. Table showing the order of the Latter Prophets.

I.

II.

III.

IV.

Talmud
and three MSS.

Two MSS.
Paris & London.

Eleven MSS.

Five
Early Editions.

Jeremiah Ezekiel
Isaiah Minor Prophets

Jeremiah Isaiah EzekielMinor Prophets

Isaiah
Jeremiah EzekielMinor Prophets

Isaiah
Jeremiah Ezekiel
Minor Prophets

Column I. (1) The Babylon Talmud; (2) MS. No. 1 National
Library, Madrid, dated a.d. 1280; (3) Orient. 1474; (4) Orient.
4227 >' (5) Add. 1545. (The last three in the Brit. Mus.)
Column II. (1) MS. National Library, Paris, dated a.d. 1286;
(2) Orient. 2091, Brit. Mus.
Column III. (1) St. Petersburg Codex, dated a.d. 916 ;
(2) the St. Petersburg MS., dated 1009; (3) Orient., dated a.d.
1246, in Brit. Mus.; (4) Arund. Orient. 16, (5) Harley 1528,
(6) Harley 5710-11, (7) Add. 1525, (8) Add. 15251, (9) Add.
15252, (10) Orient. 2348, (11) Orient. 2626-8, in the Brit. Mus.
Column IV. (1) The first edition of the entire Bible, Soncino
a.d. 1488; (2) the second edition, Naples a.d. 1491-93;
(3) the third edition, Brescia a.d. 1494; (4) the first edition of
the Rabbinic Bible, edited by Felix Pratensis, Venice a. d. 151 7 ;
(5) the first edition of the Bible with the Massorah, edited by
Jacob ben Chayim, Venice a.d. 1524-25.

iii. Table showing the order of the Hagiographa.

I.

II.

III.

rv.

V.

VI.

VII.

VIII.

Talmud
and six MSS.

Two MSS.
Paris & London.

Add. 15252.

Adath Deborim
and three MSS.

Ar. Or. 16.

Or. 2626-28.

Or. 220 U

Five
Early Editions.

I

Ruth

Ruth

Ruth

Chronicles

Chronicles

Chronicles

Psalms

Psalms

2

Psalms

Psalms

Psalms

Psalms

Ruth

Psalms

Job

Proverbs

3

Job

Job

Job

Job

Psalms

Proverbs

Proverbs

Job

4

Proverbs

Proverbs

Proverbs

Proverbs

Job

Job

Ruth

Song of Songs

5

Ecclesiastes

Song of Songs

Song of Songs

Ruth

Proverbs

Daniel

Song of Songs

Ruth

6

Song1 of Songs

Ecclesiastes

Ecclesiastes

Song of Songs

Song of Songs

Ruth

Ecclesiastes

Lamentations

7

Lamentations

Lamentations

Lamentations

Ecclesiastes

Ecclesiastes

Song of Songs

Lamentations

Ecclesiastes

8

Daniel

Esther

Daniel

Lamentations

Lamentations

Lamentations

Esther

Esther

9

Esther

Daniel

Esther

Esther

Esther

Ecclesiastes

Daniel

Daniel

ro

Ezra-Nehemiah

Ezra-Nehemiah

Ezra-Nehemiah

Daniel

Daniel

Esther

Ezra-Nehemiah

Ezra-Nehemiah

n

Chronicles

Chronicles

Chronicles

Ezra-Nehemiah

Ezra-Nehemiah

Ezra-Nehemiah

Chronicles

Chronicles

Column I. (1) The Talmud; (2) Codex No. 1 in the Madrid Univer
sity Library, dated A.D. 1280; (3) Harley 1528, (4) Add. 1525,
(5) Orient. 2212, (6) Orient. 2375, (7) Orient. 4227 (the last five in the
Brit. Mus.).
Column II. (1) MS., Nos. 1-3, dated A.D. 1286, in the National
Library, Paris ; (2) Orient. 2091, Brit. Mus.
Column III. Add. 15252, Brit. Mus.

Column IV. (1) St. Petersburg MS., dated A.D. 1009 j (2) Adath
Deborim, t..v. 1207; (3) Harley 5710-11, (4) Add. 15251, in the Brit.
Mus. Column V. Arund. Orient. 16, Brit. Mus.
Column VI. Orient. 2626-28, Brit. Mus.
Column VII. Orient. 2201, dated A.D. 1246, Brit. Mus.
Column VIII. The five Early Editions, described above.

EXCURSUS D.
TEXT OF IMPORTANT QUOTATIONS.
I.
2 Kings xi. 12 (2 Chr. xxii. n). excurs.d.
nnyrrnMi i»n-ns vby jiti
LXX. Kai HdaiKev eV airbv leffp (A. to efep) Kai to paprvpiov.
II.
Dan. ix. 2.
-kpk own nsoo onsD3 wn iwoi •¦jk wi>»^ nns rotjo
:njB> qijdb> d^btv nmr6 niKta? N\3jn .Ta-v-ta mir-iai im
III.
Ecclesiasticus xlix. 10 (12), circ. 180 b.c.
Kai tS>v ifi 7rpo(pr]T£)V ra. oarS avaSakoi c'k tov rdnov avrav.
Prologue to Ecclesiasticus, circ. 132 b.c. IIoXXSj/ zeal peydXav
rjp.iv 81a toO vouou Kat twv irpo(pr)T£>v Kai tS>v aWav twv kot avTovs
TjKoXovOrjKOTiov fehopeviav, wrep Ziv Seov eo-riv ittaiveiv rbv 'lcrpar)\ irai-
Selas Kai o-o<plas' Kai as ov povov avTovs tovs dvayivmo-KOvras heov iariv
ittio-Tripovas yiveo-dai, dAAa Kai tois 4ktos ftvvaoSai tovs (piXopaflovvTas
Xpr/o-lpovs eivai Kai \cyovras Kai ypdfpovras' 6 wcmiros pov 'itjo-ovs eVt
7tKetov iavrov Sobs els Te rr/v tov vopov Kai tS>v irpoiptjTav Kai tusv aXXav
irarpiiav /3i/3Xt'a)i> dvdyvojmv, Kai iv tovtois iKavr)v i£iv ¦nepnroiJio'dptvos,
irpof]x6r] Kai alrbs ovyypdtyai ti tS>v els iraidelav Kai o-o<piav dvrjKovTiov,
omos 01 (pi\opa8iis Kai tovtchv ivoxpi ytvopevoi ttoKKa paXKov iirmpocr-
Barriv hia rrjs ivvopov j3id>o~e<os. jrapaKeKAno-6'e ovv per evvoias Kai
Trpoo-o)(Tjs ttjv dvdyvacnv Ttoifia&ai, Kai avyyvaprjv exnv e0' °'y av SokS>-
pev raiv Kara tt\v eppyvelav necpikoirovripivav tic/1 twv \t£eav dhvvapCiv'
ov yap lo-o8vvapet avTa iv iavrols E/3patarl \ey6peva Kai orav pfraxBrj
els iripav y\S>o-o-aV ov povov 8e raCra, dXXa Kai airbs 6 vopos Kai al
Trpotfiirreiai Kai ra \011ra tS>v J3ij3\ui>v ov pixpav e^et ttjv biaipophv Iv

296 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. D. eavrols Xeyopeva. iv yap tg> dySdca Kai TptaKoord) erei im tov "Evep-
¦yeTov /3ao-tXeW irapayevr/Bels els AiyvirTov Kai avyxpovlo-as, evpov ov
piKpas iraiSelas ddjopoiov. avayKawrarov ideprjv airbs irpoo-fveyKao-8ai
Tiva airovSrjV Kai (piXoiroviav tov pe8eppr)vevo-ai Tijvfie tt)v /3t/3Xoi/'
n-oXXfyj' yap aypvirviav Kai iirio-Tr)pr)v irpotreveyKapevos iv ra Siao-Trjpan
toO xpdvov irpbs to em irepas ayovra to j3i(3Xlov enSacrOai Kai to'is iv TJj
itapoiKia fiovXopivois (jiiXopaBelv, irpoKaraaKeva^opivovs to ij8r) iv vop<j>
{SiOTeveiv. IV.
1 Maccabees vii. 16, 17 (quot. from Ps. Ixxix. 2, 3), circ. 100 b.c.
Cod. Alexandrinus (A), ed. Swete.
Kai dtteKreivev avTovs iv rjpipa pia Kara tovs Xdyovs ovs (v. 1. tov-
Xd-yov 6k) eypayjteV Sdprac oviiov o-ou Kai dlpara airHv i£exeav kvkXio)
'lepovo~a\r]p, Kai ovk fpi avrols 6 Bdirriov. V.
2 Maccabees ii. 13, 14 (extract from spurious Epistle, of uncer
tain date, perhaps 1st cent. b.c). Cod. Alexandrinus
(A), ed. Swete.
'E^ryyovVTO Se Kai iv rais dvaypacpa'is Kai iv rots viropvr)paTio-pdis to'is
Kara tov Neeplav ra aira (v. 1. ravra), Kai &>s KaraftaXXdpevos /3ij3Xjo$q-
kt)v iirurvvryyayev ra irepl tS>v ftao-iXiav Kai irpo(pi]TS>v /3i/3Xia, Kai to toC
AavdS xal iirtrrroXas ftarriXiav irepl dvaSepaTiov.
'Qtravras Si Kai 'loiSas ra SiaircirraKora Sia tov yeyovdra iroXepov
iipiv imawrjyayev ravra (v. 1. irdvra), Kai eari jrap' r/plv.
VI.
New Testament.
"On-coy eX6y id! vpds irav aipa SiKaiov iKxvvdpevov im rijr yrjs dirb
toC a'paTOs'&^eX tov SiKaiov ea>s tov aiparos Za^ap/ov viov Bapa^tov,
ov eipoveio-are peTa!-v toO vaoO Kai toC Bvaiao-Tifplov (Matt, xxiii. 35).
"Oral' oSv "Syre rb fiSeXvypa Trjs eprjpao-eas rb pt]8ev Sia Aavi^X tou
irpotprjrov (Matt. xxiv. 15).
°Oti Set irXrjpa>8tjvai irdvra ra yeypappeva iv ra vdpm Mmvo-eas Kai
rots irpo<ptjrais Kai \jtdXpois irepl ipov (Luke xxiv. 44)

EXCURSUS D. 397
VII. Excurs D.
2 (4) Esdras xiv. 44-46 (circ. 90 a.d.).
Scripti sunt autem per quadraginta dies libri nonaginia1
quatuor. Et factum est, cum completi essent quadraginta dies,
locutus est Altissimus dicens : priora quae scripsisti in palam
pone, et legant digni et indigni, novissimos autem septuaginta
conservabis, ut tradas eos sapientibus de populo tuo.
VIII.
Josephus: Contra Apionem i. 8 (i. 37-41, ed. Niese),
circ. 100 a.d.
EtKorcus ovv, paXXov Se dvayKaias, are prjre rb viroypdcpeiv avre£ov~
alov irao-iv ovtos pryre rivbs iv to'is ypatpopivois ivovcrrjs Siacpmvlas, dXXd
povov rav TrpodjrjrGiv ra pev avcordrit) Kai iraXaiorara Kara rrjv iirlirvoiav
rf/v dirb tou Beov paddvrav ra Se Ka8' airovs i>s iyevero rracpais ovyypa-
<povTi.iv, ov p.vpidSes @i(3\lu)v elcrl irap rjpiv drrvptpGivcov Kai paxopeviav,
Svo Se pdva irpbs rots eiKoo-t /3t/3Xia roS iravrbs exovra xpdvov rr)v dva-
ypatprjv, ra SucaiW ireirio-revpeva.
Kai TovTiov irevre pev eo-ri Mavo-etus (l tovs re vdpovs irepiexet Kai
rrjv dir dvdpoTroyovias irapdSoo~lv pexpl rr)s avrov reXevrrjs' ovtos 6
Xpdvos dirdXeiirei TpurxiXlav SXlyta irav. dirb 8e rijs Mavceas TcAeuTrjs
pexpl rrjs 'Apra£ep£ov tov peril Sep£r]V Yiepaav {iaaikicos oi pera Mcou-
o-rjv irpoffirai ra Kar' avrovs irpax8evra o-vviypafyav iv rpio\ Kai SeKa
fSiffXion' al Se Xowral reo-o-apes vpvovs els rbv 6ebv Kai reis dvdpayirois
viro8i)Kas rod jSi'ov ireptexovo-tv. dirb Se 'Apra£ep£ov pexpl roii Kaff
r/pas XP°V0V yeypairrai pev eKacrra irio-reios 8' oix bpo'ias lj^iarai rdis
irpb avrav 8ta rb pi) yeveo-dai rrjv rmv irpo<pr)rav aKpifir) SiaSoxiv.
SijXov S' io-riv epyco, irws rjpeis irpbo-ipev rots ISiois ypdppaai'
too-ovtov yap alwvos 17S17 irapmxrjKdros ovre irpouBe'ivai tis oiSev ovrc
dfpeXe'iv avrav otVe peradeivai rerdXprjKev. irdo-t Se o-vpqbvrov iariv
eidvs «k ttjs irpamrjs yevecreas 'lovSaiois rb voplgeiv aira 8eov Soypara
Kai rovrois ippeveiv Kai virep avrav, el Seoi, 8vi\o-Keiv rjSeas.
1 The Oriental versions (Syr., Arm., Aeth., Ar.) read '94.' The Latin
MSS. vary ; the best supported Latin reading is Dccccmi, others are 204,
84, 974.

298 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. I). X.
[Philo : De Vila Coniemplativa § 3 (Mangey, ii. 475).]
(Treatise of disputed genuineness.)
'Ev eKdo-Tt) Se olula irrrlv lepov, 6 KaXeirai aepve'iov Kai povaarrjpiov,
iv 10 povovpevoi ra tov aepvov jSi'ou pvorr)pia TeXovvrai, pr/Sev elo-Kopi-
(ovres, pr) trdrov, pr) airiov, ptjSe ti rav aXXav otra irpbs ras toO o-aparos
Xpeias dvayKaia, dXXa vopovs Kai Xoyia 6eoirio-8evra Sia irpoCprjTav, Kai
vpvovs, Kai ra aXXa ols imo-TrjpTj Kai evo-efieia rrvvav£ovrai Kai reXeiovvrai.
XI.
Melito: ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iv. 26 (circ. 170 a.d.).
'Ev Se ra'is ypa(pelo-ats airSt eVcXoyais 6 avrbs Kara to irpoolpiov airb
apxopxvos rav opoXoyovpevav ttjs iraXaids SiaBfjKtjs ypa<f>£>v iroielrai
KardXoyov, ov Kai dvayKaiov ivravBa KaraXe^ai. Tpdrpei S' outcus"
"MeXiVaw 'Ovrjo-ipw ra dSeXfpa ^aipeu/. 'EireiSr) iroXXaKis r)£l<oaras
airovSfi rfj irpbs tov Xdyov xpa>p,€i>oy, yeveadai eVcXoyas croi eK re rov
vdpov Kai rav irpocprjTcov irepl rov o-arrfpos Kai irdijrjs rrjs iriareas rjpav,
en Se Kai pa8etv rr)v tS>v iraXaiasv fiifiXiav ifiovXi)dr)s aKplfieiav, irdaa
tov dpi8pov Kai oiroia rr)v rd£iv eiev, icrirovSao-a rb toiovto irpdtjat,
iiriardpevos crov to OTrouSai'oi' jrfpl rr)v irlo-riv Kai (piXopades irepl tov
Xoyov, on re paXio-ra irdvrav ird8a ra irpbs 8ebv ravra irpoKplveis, nepl
tt)s alaviov o-arrjpias dyavt£dpevos. 'AveXBav oZv els rr)v dvaToXr)v Kai
Has rov roirov yevdpevos ev8a iK^pixBr) Kai iirpdxdt), aKpiftas padav ra
rrjs 7raXaias Sia6i)Krjs fiifiXla, virordgas eirep-^td 0-01* av iari ra dvdpara'
Mavaeas irevre, Teveais, "Et-oSos, "Apidpoi, AeviriKdv, Aevre povdptoV
'IijeroCs Navi), Kpirai, 'Pov8' Bao-tXeiav reao-apa, YLapaXeiiropevav Sio.
tyaXpav Aa/3i'S, SoXopiovos Jlapoipiai, f) Kai Sotpi'a, 'EKKXrjo-iao-Trjs,
""Ao-pa 'Aapdrav, 'la/2. Upodyrjrav, 'Hcratov, 'lepeplov, rmv ScoSeKa iv
povofilfiXcp' AavirjX, 'le£eKiijX, "EoSpas . 'E£ av Kai ray iKXoyas iiroujcrd-
prjv, els ei- fti/SXia 8ieXav." XII.
Origen: ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi. 25 (t 253).
" Owe dyvorjreov B' eivai ras ivSia8i)Kovs filfiXovs, i>s 'Efipaioi irapa-

EXCURSUS D. 299
8(8oao-(i', Svo Kai eiKoo-i, otros dpidpbs rav Trap' airols aroixeiav iariv " Excurs. D.
. . . Eio-t Se al eococrt 8uo j3i'(3Xoi Ka8' *E0paiW alSe- r) Trap r)piv
riveo-ts K.T.X. . . . 'Eo-8i)p. *E£<d Se roirav iarl ra MaKKa/3a4Ka, iirep
imyiypairrai 2apj3ij6 Sa^avateX (Sleph. 2ap/3aj/e "EX)."
XIII.
Jerome (t 420).
Praefat. in Dan. Mud admoneo, non haberi Danielem apud
Hebraeos inter prophetas, sed inter eos qui 'Ayi6ypa<j>a conscrip-
serunt. In tres siquidem partes omnis ab eis Scriptura
dividitur: in Legem, in Prophetas, in 'Ayidypadja, id est, in
quinque, et octo, et in undecim libros 
Praefat. in libr. Samuel et Malachim. Viginti et duas
litteras esse apud Hebraeos, Syrorum quoque et Chaldaeorum
lingua testatur, quae Hebraeae magna ex parte confinis est :
nam et ipsi viginti duo elementa habent eodem sono, sed
diversis characteribus, Samaritani etiam Pentateuchum Mosi
totidem litteris scriptitant, figuris tantum et apicibus dis-
crepantes. Certumque est Esdram, scribam, legisque doctorem,
post captam Ierosolymam, et instaurationem templi sub Zoro-
babel, alias litteras reperisse, quibus nunc utimur ; cum ad
illud usque tempus iidem Samaritanorum et Hebraeorum
caracteres fuerint. In libro quoque Numerorum (cap. iii. 39)
haec eadem supputatio, sub Levitarum ac sacerdotum censu,
mystice ostenditur. Et nomen Domini tetragrammaton in
quibusdam Graecis voluminibus, usque hodie antiquis expressum
litteris invenimus. Sed et psalmi tricesimus sextus, et centesi-
mus decimus, et centesimus undecimus, et centesimus octavus
decimus, et centesimus quadragesimus quartus, quamquam
diverso scribantur metro, tamen ejusdem numeri texuntur
alphabeto. Et Jeremiae Lamentationes, et Oratio ejus :
Solomonis quoque in fine Proverbia, ab eo loco in quo ait,
Mulierem fortem quis inveniet, iisdem alphabetis vel incisionibus
supputantur. Porro quinque litterae duplices apud Hebraeos

300 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
excurs. d. sunt, caph, mem, nun, phe, sade : aliter enim per has scribunt
principia medietatesque verborum, aliter fines. Unde et quinque
a plerisque libri duplices aestimantur: Samuel, Malachim,
Dabre-Jamim, Ezras, Jeremias cum Cinoth, id est, Lamentatio-
nibus suis. Quomodo igitur viginti duo elementa sunt, per quae
scribimus Hebraice omne quod loquimur, et eorum initiis vox
humana comprehenditur : ita viginti duo volumina supputantur,
quibus, quasi litteris et exordiis, in Dei doctrina, tenera adhuc
et lactens viri jusli eruditur infantia.
Primus apud eos liber vocatur Bresith quem nos Genesim
dicimus. Secundus Elle smoth qui Exodus appellatur. Tertius
Vajecra, id est, Leviticus. Quartus Vaj'edabber quem Numeros
vocamus. Quintus Elleaddabarim qui Deuteronomium praenota-
tur. Hi sunt quinque libri Mosi, quos proprie Thoralh, id est,
legem appellant.
Secundum Prophetarum ordinem faciunt; et incipiunt ab
Jesu filio Nave, qui apud eos fosue ben Nun dicitur. Deinde
subtexunt Sophtim, id est, Judicum librum : et in eundem com-
pingunt Ruth, quia in diebus judicum facta narratur historia.
Tertius sequitur Samuel, quem nos Regnorum primum et
secundum dicimus. Quartus Malachim, id est, Regum, qui
tertio et quarto Regnorum volumine continetur. Meliusque
multo est, Malachim, id est, Regum, quam Malacholh, id est,
Regnorum dicere. Non enim multarum gentium regna de-
scribit ; sed unius Israelitici populi, qui tribubus duodecim con
tinetur. Quintus Isaias. Sextus feremias. Septimus Iezechiel.
Octavus liber duodecim Prophetarum, qui apud illos vocatur
Thare asar.
Tertius ordo 'Ayidypacpa possidet ; et primus liber incipit ab
fob. Secundus a David, quem quinque incisionibus, et uno
Psalmorum volumine comprehendunt. Tertius est Salamon tres
libros habens : Proverbia, quae illi Parabolas, id est, Masaloth,
appellant: Ecclesiasten, id est, Coeleih; Canticum canticorum,
quem titulo Sir assirim praenotant. Sextus est Daniel.
Septimus Dabre Ajamim, id est, verba dierum, quod significantius

EXCURSUS D. 301
lipoviKov totius divinae historiae possumus appellare. Qui liber excurs. d.
apud nos napaXeMropci/ow, primus et secundus inscribitur.
Octavus Ezras, qui et ipse similiter apud Graecos et Latinos in
duos libros divisus est. Nonus Esther.
Atque ita fiunt pariter veteris legis libri viginti duo; id est,
Mosi quinque : Prophetarum octo : Hagiographorum novem.
Quamquam nonnulli Ruth et Cinoth inter 'Ayidypacpa scripti-
tent, et libros hos in suo putent numero supputandos : ac per
hoc esse priscae legis libros viginti quatuor : quos sub numero
viginti quatuor seniorum Apocalypsis Joannis inducit adorantes
Agnum, et coronas suas prostratis vultibus offerentibus : stantibus
coram quatuor animalibus oculatis et retro et ante, id est, et in
praeteritum et in futurum respicientibus, et indefessa voce
clamantibus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus omni-
potens, qui erat, et qui est, et qui venturus est (Apoc. iv. 8).
Hie prologus Scripturarum, quasi galealum principium
omnibus libris, quos de Hebraeo vertimus in Latinum, convenire
potest : ut scire valeamus quidquid extra hos est, inter diroKpvdja
esse ponendum. Igitur Sapientia, quae vulgo Salamonis
inscribitur, et Jesu filii Syrach liber, et Judith, et Tobias, et
Pastor, non sunt in Canone. Machabaeorum primum librum
Hebraicum repperi. Secundus Graecus est : quod ex ipsa quo
que djpdo-ei probari potest 

EXCURSUS E.
TITLES OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES.
excurs. e. i. Old Testament.
(a) The Law.
' The book of the Law of Moses,' Neh. viii. i.
' The Law of Moses,' Ezr. vii. 6 ; Mai. iv. 4.
(b) Prophets, or the Law and the Prophets.
' The books,' Dan. ix. 2.
2. Apocrypha.
(a) The Law.
Ecclus. xxiv. 22 'The Book of the Covenant (/3i)3Xoj SiaBr)-
kjis) of the Most High God.'
1 Mace. i. 56 ' The books of the law ' (ra. /3i/3X/a toO vopov).
„ 57' The Book of the Covenant ' (fiifiXiov SiaflijKns).
2 (4) Esdr. xiv. 21 'Thy law was burnt,' 22 'Written in
Thy law.'
(b) The Law and the Prophets.
Ecclus. Prolog. ' The Law and the Prophets and the rest
of the books.'
2 Mace. xv. 9 ' And comforting them from the Law and the
Prophets.'
3. New Testament.
(a) General titles.
al ypadjai, 'the Scriptures,' frequently, e.g. Matt. xxii. 29 ;
John v. 39; Acts xvii. 2, n. (ypa<pij in Sing., of a
passage of Scripture, as is shown by the use of 17 ypada).

EXCURSUS E. 303
See Bp. Lightfoot's note on Gal. iii. 22, and on i) ypa<pr)= excurs. e.
' the Scripture,' personified, in Gal. iii. 8.)
ypatpal ayiai, ' the Holy Scriptures,' Rom. i. 2.
Iepa ypdppara, ' the sacred writings,' 2 Tim. iii. 15.
d vdpos, 'the law,' e.g. John x. 34 (Ps. lxxxii. 6), 1 Cor.
xiv. 21 (Is. xxviii. n).
d vdpos Kai 01 irpoiprjTai, ' the Law and the Prophets,' e.g.
Matt, vii, 12 ; Luke xvi. 16.
' The law of Moses and the Prophets,' Acts xxviii. 23.
'Moses and the Prophets,' Luke xvi. 29, 31.
' The Oracles of God,' Rom. iii. 2 (Acts vii. 38).
(b) Contents of three groups.
' The law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms,' Luke
xxiv. 44.
(c) The Law.
' Moses,' e.g. Acts xv. 21 ; 2 Cor. iii. 15.
' The Old Covenant,' 2 Cor. iii. 14.
4. Josephus.
to iepa ypdppara, ' the sacred writings,' Antiq.fud. Prooem. 3.
al iepal /3$Xo«, 'the sacred books,' e.g. Antiq.fud. xx. 261
(xii. i). al rav lepav ypacpav |3i(3Xoi. Cont. Ap. ii. 4.
to iepa |3i/3Xta, ' the sacred books,' e.g. Cont. Ap. i. i.
Philo.al lepal ypatpal, e. g. Quis rerum div. heres, § 32, i. 495 ;
lerpa! /3i/3Xoi, e.g. Quod del. pot. insid. § 44, i. 222; lepol
Xprjo-poi, e.g. De Somn. ii. § 32, i. 687.
at Jepal dvaypadjai, e. g. Quis rerum div. heres, § 4, i. 474 ',
6 iepbs Xdyos, e.g. De Ebriet. § 36, i. 380;
and d ^pijo-p-dy, oi xpr]0~poi, rb Xdyiov, to 6eamo~8ev Xdyiov
occur frequently.
5. Patristic.
to ttjs iraXaias Sia8i]Kr)s /3tj3Xi'a, e.g. 'the books of the Old
Covenant,' e.g. Melito ap. Euseb. H. E. iv. 26, and
commonly.

304 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Excurs. e. al ivSid8t]Koi /3i'/3Xoj, ' the Covenant-books,' e.g. Origen ap.
Euseb. H. E. vi. 25. Cf. al ivbia8eroi pijSXoi, Epiphanius
(De Mens, et Pond. 4).
i) iraXata SiadrjKq, ' the Old Covenant,' e.g. Cyril of Jer.
(Catech. iv. 33).
TO iKKX-qo-iao-TiKa filfiXia rr)s iraXaias ypa(pr)s, ' the ecclesiastical
books of the Ancient Scripture,' Leontius (De Sectis,
Act. ii).
' Vetus testamentum,' e.g. Tert. Adv. Prax. 15 ; Augustin de
Civil. Dei, xx. 4.
' Vetus instrumentum,' Tert. Apol. 47.
' Vetus Scriptura,' Rufinus, Expos, in Symb. Apost.
Law = r) irevrdrevxas (sc. /3#3Xor), ' Pentateuchus.'
XII Prophets = to SaSeKairpdcprjrov.
6. Rabbinic.
(a) General Titles.
Bhp>n larra, ' the holy writings.'
N"Ji?!?, ' that which is read,' i.e. the text. Miq'ra formed the
lowest stage in the ascending scale of Miq'ra, Mishnah,
and Gemara (cf. Weber, Die Lehren des Talmuds,
p. 83. 1880).
mm, ' law ' (pars pro toto) ; and sometimes its Aramaic
equivalent Kn^M.
nssn, « the book.'
DnaD, 'books.'
B^BD T'D, ' the twenty-four books.'
D'OirDl WWII rnm, 'the Law, the Prophets, and the
Writings ' ; in late Hebrew this title is abbreviated into
jin (T.N.K. for Torah, Nebiim, Kethubim).
(6) Special Titles.
The Torah.
mm Win ncnsn, 'the five-fifths of the law,' e.g. Sanh. 44*.

EXCURSUS E. 305
The Prophets. Excurs. E.
/DWKl DW3J, 'the former prophets,' Jos., Jud., Sam.,
1 Kings.
j D^nnx DW3J, ' the latter prophets,' Is., Jer., Ezek., twelve
^ Minor Prophets.
Nnoi>E>N, ' tradition ' (Massoretic title).
Hagiographa. DUma, ' Writings.'
roan, ' Wisdom.'
T\\biO van, 'the five rolls,' Ruth, Song, Lam., Eccles.,
Esth.
n"dX, ' Psalms, Proverbs, Job,' from the initial letters in the
reverse order.
D^VH D^ria, 'Psalms, Proverbs, Job': EMDp tV-ama, 'Song
of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther ' (Berakoth 57b).
Prophets and Writings, as separate from Torah.
i"li>ap, 'tradition' ; or &03Jn, ' the prophet.'

TITLES

OF HEBREW BOOKS.

English.

Hebrew (with English Translations).

Origen ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. s$ ;
cC./er. Prol. Gal.

Other Hebrew titles (Mishnic).

Genesis

n'WSIl (In the beginning)

BpijoiS

m'S» TDD
ips'i pns' DrniN 'c

Book of Creation
Book of Patriarchs

Exodus

niDlD n'jNI (Now these are the
names)

QveXeapiiS

j'p'u 'd

Book of Penalties
(Ex. xxi.)

Leviticus

Mlp'l (And . . . called)

Oiiicpi

D'JrO'D
nunp'D

Book of Priests
Book of Offerings

Numbers

121D2 (In the wilderness)

'AppeaipenaiSeip *

D'llpB 'D
D'IDDo'd

Book of Precepts
Book of Numbers

Deuteronomy

D,-mnrrtN (These are the words)

'E\eaS5ePapeip.

m\DD'D
ninain'D

Book of Reiteration
Book of Reproofs

Joshua

Sfflin< (Joshua)

'Iwffove Plv Nouc

Judges
D> ID Dill) (Judges)
Sojpareip
Samuel I, 2
7N1DU) (Samuel)
Xo.povr)\
Kings I, 2
D'370 (Kings)
Ovappe\x Aa)3i'S a
Isaiah
rrsiB' (Isaiah)
'leaaia
Jeremiah
n<nv (Jeremiah)
'lepepia
Ezekiel
7Npin' (Ezekiel)
'Ie£eicit)\
12 Min. Proph.
¦WD'in (Twelve)
(Epiphan. SaBapiaffapa.)
Psalms
D'7nn (Psalms)
S<pap9e\\eip
ni7Dn
Prayers
Proverbs
'ban (Proverbs of)
Me\a>e
nnan'o
Book of Wisdom
Job
av» (Job)
'lii&
Cant.
o'l'OT T» (Song of Songs)
'Sip daaipip
Ruth
im (Ruth)
(Epiphan. 'PoiJe, Jer. Ruth)
Lam.
ri3'» '('How')
(Epiphan. KtvdiS, Jer. Ruth)
nu'p
Lamentations
Eccles.
ronp (Koheleth)
K01€\fl
Esth.
"WDM (Esther)
'EaBfjp
Dan.
^N'jn (Daniel)
Aavir)\
Ezr. (Neh.)
N11S (Ezra)
'Efpa
Chronicles i, 2
? 't^n '131 (Words of the days,
i.e. Chronicles)
Aapprjiapeiv
1 DHips «inh = fifth part of
» = ' Now the king David,' i Kings i. I ; Jer.
Precepts ; Jer. ' Vajedabber,' Epiphan. "IovfidfS(lep.
Malachim,' Epiph. S^aAax«'. * Opening word.
INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES.

OLD TESTAMENT.

GENESIS.

i. i-vi. 9

. . 248

ii. i-3 •

. . 28

viii. 10 .

. . 28

ix.4-7 .

. . 28

xiv. 20 .

. . 28

XV. 10 .

. . 28

xvii. . .

. . 28

xxvii. 33

. . 287

xxviii. 20, 2

2 . . 28

xxxi. 32

. . 28

xxxii. 31

. . 287

xxxiv. 1

. . 289

xxxvii. 16

. . 287

xxxviii.

. . 28

xliii. n

. . 287

xliv. 9 .

. . 28

xlvi. 27 .

. . .i69n

xlix. 4 .

. . 28

EXO

BUS.

iv. 24-26

. . 28

XV. I . .

. . 18

xv. 27 .

. . . 169 n

xvi. 23 .

. . 28

xvi. 34 .

¦ • 45

xvii. 14 .

. . 18

xviii.

. . 68

xviii. 13-27

• • 32

xix. 3 .

. . . 252

xx.-xxiii.

¦ 52. 57. 68

xx. 1-17

• • 23, 43

xx. 20-xxiii

• 33 • 24

xxi. 2, 28-3

6 . . 25

xxii. 18-20

. . 25

xxiii. 15

. . . 52

xxiii. 19. . . . 25

xii. 7 . . .

. 287

xxiv. 4 . . . . 18

xiii. 20 . . .

. 287

xxiv. 7 . . . 18, 51

xv 

• 3°

xxv.-xxxi ... 87

xv. 22-26 .

• 78

xxv. 16, 21 . . . 45

xv. 39 . . .

. 207

xxvii. 21 ... 45

xvii. 4, 10 .

• 45

xxix. 38-42 . . 85

xviii. 21-32

. 81

xxx. n-16 ... 85

xix. . . .

• 30

xxxiii. 16 . . . 287

XX 

. 68

xxxiii. 17 . . . 289

xxi. . . .

. 68

xxxiv. 10 . . . 289

xxi. 14 . .

• 19

xxxiv. 10-26 . . 25

xxi. 14-18 .

. 18

xxxiv. 27 . . 18, 25

xxi. 27 . .

21

xxxiv. 28 . . . 25

xxi. 27-30 .

. 18

xxxv.-xl. . . 84, 87

xxviii. 1-8 .

. 85

xl. 20 . . . 41, 45

xxix. 12-38

. 81

xxxiii. a

. 18

LEVITICUS.

i.— viii  30

DEUTERO

NOMY.

iv. 13-21 ... 78

i. 9-17 . .
i.-iv. . .

. 68

vi. 8-13. . 84,85,88

. 69

ii. 26-32
. 68
xvi. 13 . . . . 45
iv. 19 . .
• 51
xvii.-xxvi. . . 25, 72
iv. 20 . .
53. 65
v.-xxvi. . .
. 26
xxvii. 30-33 . . 86
v. 6-21 . .
23. 43
x. 5 . . .
• 53
x. 16 . .
• 65
5T»53
NUMBERS.
xii. 5 . .
iii. 39 .... 299
xii. 9, 10 .
• 53
xiv. 2 . .
• • 75 n
xiv. 4-20 .
• 3°
xiv. 22-29 •
. 81, 86
viii. 23-26 ... 78
xvi. 1-8
• 51
viii. 24 ... . 87
xvi. 13-17 .
76,81
xvi. 22 . .
• 56
xi. 25 .... 169 n
xvii. 3 . .
• 5i
X 2
3o8

INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES.

5°

xvii. 9-12
xvii. 14-20
xvii. 18 .
xvii. 18-20
xviii. 9-14
xviii. 1 8 .
xxiii. 3-6
xxiv. 8 .
xxiv. 16 .
xxv. 19 .
xxviii.-xxxixxviii. 31, 49
xxviii. 37
xxix. 1 .
xxix. 9 .
xxix. 14 .
xxix. 19 .
xxix. 21 .
xxix. 24 .
xxix. 25 .
xxx. 6 .
xxxi. 9-22
xxxi. 9 .
xxxi. 19, 22
xxxi. 24
xxxi. 24-26
xxxii.xxxii.-xxxiv,xxxiii. .
xxxiii. 21
xxxiv. 5 .
xxxiv. 5-12
JOSHUA
i 
i. 8 . . .
viii. 3°-35 ¦
x. 13 . . .
x. 28-43 .
xv. 13, 19, 63
xvi. 10 . .
xvii. 12, 13
xxii. 1-8
xxiii. . . .
xxiv. 2 . .
xxiv. 26 .
xxiv. 29, 33
JUDGES.
i. 10-15, 21
i. 27, 28, 29

32
4641 535i
202
75° 32
535365
5o.5352,5352,65 65 52
52,53 65 18
22,31 2231
4i 20
69 20
287286285

67 n
67 n
19, 21
67 n
108 108
108
67 n
67 n
28
18,41 286

108
108

ii. 6-xvi.
ii. 11-23
iii. 4-6
iii. 7-1 1
v. . .
vi. 7-10
viii. 14
x. 6-17
xvii.-xixxvii.-xxi xx. 27

. . 108
67 n. 108
. 67 n
. 108
18, 19
. 108
. 18 n
. 108
¦ 34
108, 143
¦ 43n

RUTH.
iv. 18-22 . . . 142
1 SAMUEL.

11. 1-11 .
ii. 22 . .
ii. 27-36
iii.-vi. .
vii. 2-viii.
ix. . .
ix. 1-10.

x. 12 . .
x. 17-26
x. 25 . .
xii. . .
xiii. . .
xiv. . .
xiv. 18 .

. 108
• 30
. 108
• 43 n
. 108
• 38
• 34
37.38
¦ 38
. 108
18,41
. 108
• 34
• 34
• 43 n
xv  38, 10S
xxviii. 3 . . . . 286
2 SAMUEL.

44
19, 21 1822
43 «
108
43 n
34 34
43" 38
288
43 n
i8,34

i. 18 . .
i. 17-27 .
»}• 33. 34
vii. * . .
viii. 16 .
xi. 11 . .
xii. 1-14
xx. 24 .

. 1 ]

xx. 25 .
xxii. . .
xxiii. 1-7

1 KINGS.

i-3 •
ii. 3 •
ii. 26 .
iii. 15
iv. 3 .
vi. 19
viii. 1-5
viii. 1-9
viii. 21
viii. 53
viii. 9.
viii. 51, 53
ix. 3. 7, 8
xi. 26-40
xi. 41
xiv. 1-16
xvii.-xixxviii. . .
xxi. . .
xxi. 17-22
xxii. 6-28

56

18
22
22

289
52.67 43n
43" 34
43° 3°
43n
43 n
21
42 535338
109 38
109
37.38 109 38
37

2 KINGS.

l.-vm.ii. 15 .
iv. 23
V. . .
vi.vi. 1-7
vii.-ix.x. . .
x. 31 .
xi. 12
xiii. 1 4-1
xiv. 6
xiv. 25
xvi. 15
xvii. 13
xviii.
xviii. 12
xviii. 18
xix. .
xix. 20
xxi. 3, 5
xxi. 8

109 38 38383838383753
43, 295
. 109
53.67
116, 240
84,85 I05114 5334
114 38
51 53

INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES.

3°9

42
41, 53
"5 5°50
48
48, 5°
48 51
i. 5153
IT5 "5MS

1 CHRONICLES.
vii. 14 ... . 159 n
xvi. 4 . . . . 120
xvi. 8-36 . 138, 139
xxiii. 24-27 . . 87

2 CHRONICLES.

xxii. 8 . .

• A

XXV. 2 7-3O .

xxu. 11-13 .

xxii. 16, 17
xxii. 18 . .
xxu. 19 . .
¦ '
xxm. 1-20 .
xxm. 2, 3, 4
5.12
xxm. 21-23,
24 1
xxm. 25
xxiv. 18
XXV. I-I2 .
.
xxv. 27 . .
XXII. II . . .
295
xxm. 11 . .
43
xxiv. 20-22
151
85
xxxi. 5, 6 . .
86 n
86
XXXVI. 22, 23 .
MS
EZRA.
i- i-3
i. 1-4
ii- 53
iii. 2 .
iii. 8 .
iv. 7 -
v. 1 .
vi. 7, 14
vii. 6
vii. 10
vii. 11, 1
vii. 25
viii.-x.viii. 15
ix.ix. I, 2
78,
H5 75
273
74 n
87
99
in
268
2, 302 80 78
26S 788780
75.82
ix. 6-15 .
ix. 11
x. . .
x. 3 . .
x. 8 .
X. 1 8 -2 2
75
20.' So 75
26S 82
NEHEMIAH.
1. 5-11 .
vi. 7, 14
vi. 10-14
vii. 1
viii. . .
viii. 1
viii. 4-7
viii. 4, 7, 9
viii. 13-18
viii. 14-17
viii.-x .
ix. 4, 38
ix. 5, 6
ix. 6-25
ix. 26
ix. 27
ix. 30
x. I .
x. 1-28
X. 2-8
x. 32, 33
x. 34 . .
x- 35-39
x- 37, 38
xi. 1 . .
xii. 11, 22
xii. 44 .
xiii. 1-3
xiii. 4-14
xiii. 5 .
xiii. 28 .
xiii. 31 .
So,
• 75
. m
37,82
¦ 145
. S9
• 302
• 283
• 83
• 76
. 81 n
252, 282
• 83
- 283"3
105, in
• "3
m, 113
268283 8385SSS6
Sin 268 130 S6
75 n
8286
82, 92
. 88
ESTHER.
11. 3 .
ii. 22 .
111. 13
vi. 6 .
ix. 1 .
ix. 10
. 289
. 211
150,216 . 211
. 150
. 211
ix. 19
ix. 27
ix. 31
JOB.
i- 15, J7
11. 10
xix. 23 .
XXVII. 12
xlii. 10 .
.
xiii. 15 .
149
212 2l6
287
28728828828a
PSALMS.
XXIV. .
xl.7.
xii. .
xliv. .
xlviii.lxxii. lxxiv.lxxiv. 9
lxxix.Ixxix. 2,3 138
lxxxii. 6
lxxxviii. 1
lxxxix.
xc.xciii. .
xciv. .
evi. .
evi. 46
cxix. .
exxxii. 8
.I37"
• 49 n
• 139
• 137
¦ 137 n
• 139137
¦ 123
• 137
158, 296
¦ 3°3
. 287
• 139 20
-137" ¦ 137 n
¦ 139
¦ 139
. 89
• 43 n
PROVERBS.
-ix.
vn. 7-20
viii. 15 .
x.-xxiv. .
xi. 9 . .
xxii. 20 .
xxv.-xxixxxv. 1
xxvi. 4, 5
XXX. . .
xxxi. 1-9
xxxi. 10-31
140
206269 140
206 211140 290
206 n
. 141
, 141
, 141
x 3
310

INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES.

ECCLESIASTES.

'¦ 3 •
ii. 2 .
iv. 2
vii. 3 .
vii. 12
viii. 15
ix. 4 .
xi. 9 .
xii. 13-14
xii. 12 .

, 207
207207206
•i49n 207
207 207
. 208130

ISAIAH.

l.-XXXV. .
ii. 2-4 .
iii. 20
vii. 3-17
viii. 1
viii. 16-20
xix. 19 .
xix. 21 .
xxviii. 11
xxxvi.-xxxix.
xxxviii. 9-20
xl.-lxvi. 114,
238
xii. 2 . .
xiii. 5-xliii. II
lxi. 3 . .

, 114 39
, 44
¦ 38
, 46 39
5«
56 n
303 144
114
141, 144,
, . 287

119

JEREMIAH.

1. 1. .
i. 2 .
i. 5-10
ii. 8 .
iii. 16
iv. 4 .
v. 15. 17

72
65
119 6643
65 65

2 (4) ESDRAS.
xiv. 19-48 . . 3, 78
xiv. 21 . 167 n, 250, 302
xiv. 37-48 . .251, 255
xiv. 44-46 . . . 297
xiv. 45-48 ... 167
WISDOM OF
SOLOMON.
vii. 26 ... . 164

viii. 8 . .

. . 65

xi. 4, 8 . .

- 65

xxvi. 18

. . no

xxxvi. 18 .

. . 286

xxxvi. 26, 28

. . 167 n

xxxix. 1-13

- • 115

Iii. . . .

"5. M3

EZEKIEL.

I. 2S
xiii.xiv.

1  204
i- 3  72
. . 120
• • 37
• • 37
xiv. 14, 20 . . . 193
xxviii. 3 . . . . 193
xxxviii. 17 . . . in
xl.-xlviii. . . 6S, 204
xliii. 13-xlvi. 24 . 73
xliv. 23, 24 . . 82
DANIEL.
viii  146
ix. . ... 146
ix. -1 90, 122, 260, 295,
302
xi  146
• • 134

xi- 34

HOSEA.

1. 2 .
iv. 6 .
viii. 12
xii. 3. 4
xii. 10
xii. 12, 13
xiv. 8, 9

33
33353335
• '59 "

AMOS.

11.4.

33

APOCRYPHA.
ECCLESIASTICUS.
Prologue, ion, 89, 118,
122, 137, 153, 154,
155. 295, 3°2
iv. 29 .... 164
v. n .... 164
vii. 10 ... . 195
xiii. 15 ... . 195
xxii. 23 ... . 90
xxiv. 22 . . . . 302

ii. 9  35
ii. 12  39
vi. 5  22
vii. 12, 13 ... 39
MICAH.
ii. 6  39
iii. n . . 32
iv. 1-3 ... . 39
ZEPHANIAH.
iii. 4  66
HAGGAI.
i. 12, 14. ... 145
ii. 2, 4, 21, 23 . 145
ii. 3  120
ii. 11, 12 . . 32, 74
ZECHARIAH.

1.4 .
iii. 1 .
iii. 1-9
vi. 12
vii. 7 .
vii. 12
ix. 1 .
ix.-xiv.
xii. 1 .
xiii. 3

. in
. 120 H5
¦ 159"
. in
105, in
¦ "5
. 116
• "5
. in

MALACHI.
i. 1  115
iv. 4 . . . 89, 302
iv. 5, 6 . . . . in

xxvii. 9 . . . . 195
xliv. 1 . . . 121
xliv. n, 12 . . .iign
xlvi. 1-6 . . . iign
xlvi. n-12 . . . 11911
xlvi. 13-xlvii. n . iign
xlvii. 9 . . . . 120
xlvii. 12-xlix. 3 . 119 n
xlviii. 20-25 • • 11911
xlviii. 24-25 . . 239

INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES.

3"

xlix. 6, 7, 8, 9 . iign
xlix. io . H9n, 295
xlix. n, 12 . iign
xlix. 13 . . iign, 145
BARUCH.
i.-iii. 8 . . 147 n, 197
SONG OF THREE
CHILDREN.

15

123

1 MACCABEES.
i- 54 • • • M7, '58
1. 56 . . . . 134, 302
i. 57 . 90, 126, 134,302
ii. 59, 60 146, 147, 158
iv. 46 ... 123
vii. 12 . . 277
vii. 16 ... . 138
vii. 16, 17 . . 158,296
ix. 27 .... 123
xii. 6  279

xiv. 20 . .

¦ • 279

xiv. 28 . .

. . 277

xiv. 41 . .

¦ ¦ 123

2 MACCABEES.
ii. 13 . 112,138, 296

11. 13-15 .
ii. 14. . .
vi. 18-vii. 42

3
135. 296
• 165

xv. 9 . . .
xv. 36 . .

¦ 3°2
150, 216

NEW TESTAMENT.

6-. MATTHEW.
v. 17 . .128, 202
v. iS . . . . 100
vii. 12 . 128, 202, 303
xi. 13 .... 202
xvii. 24 . . 85
xxii. 23-32 . . . 185 n
xxii. 29 . 164, 186, 302
xxii. 40 . . .128, 202
xxiii. 35 . 151, 162, 163,
296
xxiv. 15 . 162, 202,223,
296
xxvii. 9 . . . . 165
¦5". MARK.
xii. 26 ... . 247 n
.?. LUKE.
iv. 16 .... 127
iv. 17 . . 91, 127
iv. 17-21 . . 199
x. 1  169 n
xi. 49 .... 165
xi. 51 . 151, 162, 163
xvi. 16, 29, 31 128, 202,
303
xxiv. 27 . . . . 202
xxiv. 44. 161,202,296,
303

S. JOHN.

v- 39-
vi- 45
vii. 38
x. 34
xii. 34
xv. 25

. . 190, 302
. 161
. . 165, 166
91, 201, 303
. . 91, 201
91, 201

THE ACTS.
ii- 30 
vii. 38
vii. 42
xiii. 15
xiii. 27
xiii. 40 .
xv. 21 .
xvii. 2, n
xviii. 24.
xxiv. 14 .
xxviii. 23 128, 202, 303
ROMANS.
i. 2 . . . 164, 303
iii. * . -303
1 CORINTHIANS.

¦ 303
. . 161
127, 128, 202
. . 127161
• 3°3302 164

165, 166
91, 201, 303
2 CORINTHIANS.

11.9 .
xiv. 21

111. 14, 15

3°3

GALATIANS.
iii. 8, 22 ... 303
EPHESIANS.
v. 14 . . 165, 166
2 TIMOTHY.
iii. 8  165
iii. 15 . . . 164, 303
HEBREWS.
i- 3  l64
xi. 35. 36, 37 • • 165
JAMES.
i. 9, 19 . . 164
iv. 5, 6 . . . . 165 a
JUDE.
9 • • • -165
14 . . 165
14-16 . . . 165, 166
REVELATION.
iv. 4-10 . . . 242
iv. 8 . . . 301
v. 8  242

GENERAL INDEX.

Abarbanel, 272.
Aben-Ezra, 275.
Aboda zara, 281.
Abraham, 28.
Abraham ben David, 274.
Abraham ben Zacuto, 272.
' Acts of Solomon,' 109.
Akiba, R., i82f, 199 n, 210.
Alcimus, 124, 133, 278.
Alexander, the Great, 92,118, 252 n,
279, 281.
— Jannaeus, 149.
Alexandria, 117, 155, 180.
— so called Canon of, 156, 180.
Alting, 264.
Ambrose, 255.
Amon, 56.
Amos, 35, 39, 55.
Amphilochius, 216, 218 n.
' Antilegomena,' 140, 147, 152, 184,
189.
Antiochus Epiphanes, 90, 123, 126,
I33f, 150-
Aphraates, 217.
Apocrypha, 156, 164,180, 191 f, 219,
278.
Apostles, the, 190, 219.
Aqnila, 157, 181, 233 n.
Aristeas, Pseudo, 253.
' Ark of Synagogue,' 118, 236.
Artapanes, 171.
Artaxerxes, 172, 175, 252 n.
Athanasius, 215, 227, 232.
Aurivillius, 265.
Baba bathra, 3n, 142, 233, 235, 237 f,
243, 276.
Baba kamma, 195.
Babylon, 70, 73, 79, 106.

Bacchides, 278.
Baer, 247.
Baraitha, 284 ff.
Barnes, H4n.
Baruch, 147 n, 219.
Basil, 255.
Bede, 256.
Beiiarmine, 259.
Berakoth, 148 n, 246, 276.
Bloch, 268.
Boethus, 235.
Bomberg, 246, 249.
' Book of the Law,' 48 ff, 58, 61,
63 ff.
Buhl, 196 n, 218 n.
Burmann, 264.
Burnt-offering, 84 f.
Buxtorf, Joh., 262,269.
— Joh., junior, 262.
— Joh. Jac, 262.
Cappellus, 262.
Carpzovius, 263
Chagigah, 204.
Cheyne, 39 n, n8n,i39.
Chronicler, the, 138 if, 145.
Chronicles, Books of, 144, 151, 162,
&c.
Chrysostom, 198 n, 255.
Church, the Christian, 190 f.
Clement of Alexandria, 254, 258.
Codex Alexandrinus, 226.
— Petropolitanus, 240.
— Sinaiticus, 226.
¦ — Vaticanus, 226.
Collection of writings, 18, 2 2 ff, 30,
36, 39 f, 58, 1 1 2, 136.
Compilation, 34ff, 71, 79, 106 ff, 122.
Composite structure, 16, 109.

GENERAL INDEX.

3*3

Cooke, 19 n.
Cornelius a Lapide, 260 f.
Covenant, Book of the, 24^51 f, 57.
Cuneiform writing, 20 n.
Cyril of Jerusalem, 215, 227.
Daniel, 7, 90, 122, 131 f, 145, 162,
177, 223 f.
David, 18 f, 22, 34.
Davidson, 19 n.
Deborah, Song of, 18 f.
Decalogue, the, 23 ff, 41 ff.
' Defile the hands,' 197, 209.
Delitzsch, 114, 195.
Demetrius, 171.
De Miraiilibus Script. Sacr., 256.
Derenbourg, 196 n, 317, 267.
Deuteronomic Laws, 26, 49, 51, 57,
69 f, 76.
— Style, 64 ff.
Deuteronomy, 49 f, 55 ff, 75, 107.
Dillmann, 39 n, i04n, 114.
Diocletian, 135.
Division into chapters and verses,
249.
Doxology, 139.
Driver, 24 n, 30 n, 32 n, 39 n, 73,
108, 114, 283.
Ecclesiastes, 7, 120, 130, 148, 187,
206.
Ecclesiasticus, Prologue, 118, 122,
129, I54f.
— Book of, 119, 194 f.
Edersheim, 1 60 n .
Eduyoth, 183, 207.
Eleazar ben Azariah, 183 n, 210,
235-
Elias Levita, 4, 126, 261, 271 f.
Eliashib, 83, 92 f.
Elijah, 109, in.
Elohist, the, 24, 35 f, 69 f, 77, 81,
107.
Emeth, 244, 305.
Enoch, Book of, 165 ff.
'Ephodi/273.Ephrem Syrus, 2i8n.
Epiphanius, 97 n, 215, 228, 232 n.
Esdras, Fourth Book of, 3, 167,
250 ff.
Eupolemus, 156.
Eusebius, 96, 218, 254.

Ewald, 114, i96n.
Exile, the, 69 ff, uof.
Ezekiel, 39, 68, 72, in, 203.
Ezra, 3, 6, 74 n, 78 ff, 80 ff.
— Legend of, 3, 78, 96 f, 250 ff.
— Book of, 144 f.
Freudenthal, 156 n. '
Fiirst, 199 n, 208, 238, 246, 267 f.
Gamaliel II, 183, 235 n.
Geiger, 196 n, 238 n.
Gemara, 239, 304.
Genebrardus, 271.
Genesis, 35, 204.
Geniza, 198 n.
Genuzim, 204, 217.
Gerousia, 279.
Giesebrecht, 79.
Ginsburg, 2440, 266 f, 272, 292.
Gratz, 177, 199 n.
Great Synagogue, 3ff, 10, 261 ff.
Gregory of Nazianzus, 216, 218 n,
227 f, 232.
Grotius, 264.
Haggada, 157, 181, 203, 208.
Haggai, 74, in.
Hagiographa, 106, 294, passim.
Halaka, 203 n.
Halakoth Gedoloth, 243.
Hamburger, 277 n.
Hananiah, the son of Hezekiah,
203^ 208.
Haphtarah, 126, 247.
Hebrew Literature, 6 f, 64, 70.
Hellenism, 118, 137, 192.
Herod the Great, 151, 185.
Herzfeld, 266.
'Heshbon, Song of,' 18, 21.
High Places, 47, 55, 58, 60.
High Priest, 58.
Hilary, 232 n, 259.
Hilkiah, 47 ff, 57.
Hillel, 186, 203 n.
History, 33.
Hitzig, 6 n.
Hoffman, 268.
Holiness, Law of, 25, 72 f.
Hosea, 35, 39, 55, 93.
Hottinger, 263.

3H

GENERAL INDEX.

Hugo de St. Victor, 257.
Huldah, 47, 50.
Inspiration, 5, 13, 132, 222.
Irenaeus, 253 f.
Isaiah, 39, 56, 114.
— 'Ascension of,' 165.
Isidore, 256, 258.

Jamnia, 149, 182 ff, 210.
Jashar, Book of, 19, 21.
Jason, 124, 133.
Jehoiada, 43.
Jehovist, the, 35 f, 69 f, 77, 81,
107.
Jeremiah, 39, 55, 65, in, 122.
Jerome, 96, 97 n, 165 n, 196, 204,
208, 217, 230, 241 ff, 255, 299 ff.
Jerusalem, Fall of, 179.
Jeshua, i2of, 145.
Joash, 43, 151.
Job, 69, 130, 141.
Johanan R., ben Zaccai, 182, 183 n.
John Hyrcanus, 184, 188 f.
John of Damascus, 231 n.
Jonah, 116, 204.
Jonathan, High Priest, 134, 189.
— ben Uziel, 234.
Jose R., 96, 210.
Josephus, 91 f, 97, 134^ 150, 152,
169 ff, 251 f, 282, 297,303.
Joshua, 107.
Josiah, 18, 47ff, 54, 57, 61, 63.
Juda R. (Jehuda), 210, 235.
Judaism, 83.
Judas, the Maccabee, I34f, 149.
Judges, Book of, 35, 93, 107 f, 143.

Kabbala, 203n.
Keil, 222 f.
Kennicott, 240.
Kethubim, iof, 136, passim.
Khasidim, 124.
Khitzontm, 199, 217.
Khokmah, 131, 148, 193.
Kimchi, 205, 274.
Kings, Books of, 52 f, 54 n, 55, 63,
66 f.
Kirkpatrick, 49 n.

Krochmal, 208, 238, 183.
Kuenen, 283.
Lagarde, 217 n.
Lamentations, Book of, 69, 125,
131, 230.
Laodicea, Council, Spur. Can., 228.
'Law, the,' 91.
„ „ and the Prophets, 128.
Laws, 2 2 ff .
— Priestly, 27 ff, 71, 74, 76.
Lectionary, 248 f.
Leontius, 216, 256, 258.
Leusden, 223 n, 263.
Lightfoot, Joh., 265.
- J. B., Bp., 303.
Lists of Hebrew Scriptures, 225 ff,
292 f.
Lucius, i6on.
Maccabean era, 124, 134, 138, 282.
„ Psalms, 137.
Maccabees, First Book of, 150, 157,
188, 194, 196.
— Second Book of, 112, 135, 138,
150.
Maimonides, 222, 274.
Malachi, 6, 89, 115.
Manasseh, King, 56, 60, 63.
— Samaritan, 91 f.
Marx, 236 n, 239, 284.
Massebieau, 160 n.
Massoretes, 239, 243, 248.
Mattathias, 134, 158.
Mazze'bah, 56.
Megillah, 198 n, 236 n, 276.
Megilloth, the Five, II, 244, 292.
Meir, R., 209.
Melito, 148, 2i4f, 224 f, 298.
Micah, 39, no.
Midrash, 178 n, 199, 205, 207.
Minor Prophets, 115, 120, 215,
229.
Miqra, 304.
Mishnah, 182, 198, 230, 304.
Moed Qatan, 204, 252.
Monotheism, 31.
Montefiore, 141 n.
Morinus, 262.
Moses, 19, 22, 31.
— ' Assumption of/ 165.

GENERAL INDEX.

3*5

Moses, Blessing of, 20.
— Law of, 31, 60.
— Prayer of, 20.
Nachmanides, 222 n.
Nahum, 161.
Nathan, R., Aboth, 206 f, 277.
Nebiim, 10 f, 105 f, 127, 132, 202,
et passim.
Nehemiah, 82, 86, 88, 92, in f, 120.
Nestorians, 196 n.
Neubauer, 18 n, 234 n, 243.
New Testament, 127 f, 161 ff, 185,
190.
Nicephorus, 216, 257.
Niese, 172 n, 297.
Noldeke, 199.
Obadiah, 161.
Oehler, 222.
Official records, 34.
Oral Tradition, 35.
Order of ' Prophets,' 234.
— * Hagiographa,' 240.
Origen, 96, 165 n, 186 n, 196, 215,
218, 219, 225 n, 254, 298, 304.
Parashah, 126 f, 248.
Passover, 48, 51.
Peah, 277.
Pentateuch, 22, 30, 36, 89 f, 113.
Petrus Comestor, 257.
Pharisees and Sadducees, 186 f.
Philo, 91, 158 ff, i8of.
Photius, 257.
Pirqe Aboth, 276 f.
Polytheism, 28.
Pompey, 185.
Popular assumption, 5 f.
Preservation of writings, 40 f.
Prophecy, influence of, 104 ff.
Prophets, 33, 38 ff, 123, 127.
Proverbs, Book of, 140, 205.
'Psalms of Solomon,' 147 n, 2 So.
Psalter, 89, 130, 137 f, 161.
Purim, Feast of, 149, 216.
QaNDaG, 290 f.
Quotation, 65, 159.

Rabanus Maurus, 256, 258.
Rabbinic Schools, 186 f, 207 n, 212.
— Writings, 200, 252.
Rashi, 275.
Rau, 265.
Redaction, 17, 34, 69, 73, 79.
Revelation, 14 f, 17, 29, no, 192.
Riehm, 150.
Roll, writing on, 49, 235 f.
Rosh Hashanah, 248.
Ruffinus, 219, 229.
Rupert of Deutz, 257 f.
Ruth, Book of, 125, 131, 142, 187,
&c.
Sabbath, 178 n, 204 ff.
Sadducees, 186 n, 206.
Samaria, 58.
Samaritan Pentateuch, 91 ff, 95 ff.
Samuel, Books of, 34 f.
— R., 211 f.
Sanhedrin, 201.
Saul, 34.
Sayce, 20 n.
Schechter, 196 n, 218 n, 248, 277.
Schiirer, 147 n, 156 n.
Scribes, 79, 94, 107, 117.
Seder Olam, 25211.
Selden, 265.
Selection of Writings, 17, 106, no,
117.
Sepharim, 122.
Septuagint Version, 21 f, 45, 87,
9°, io9. "5, "7. "5, 142, 155,
174, 181, 224.
Seraiah, 83.
'Sibylline Oracles,' 147.
Simon II, 121, 123.
— Asmonean, 134, 137.
— ben Shetach, 149, 195.
— Maccabeus, 99.
Sinaitic Legislation, 28, 43.
Sirach, son of, 120, 130, 146.
Smend, 73.
Smith, John, 222 n, 223 n.
— Robertson, 28, 169 n, 173 n,
217". 235". 283.
Song of Songs, 131 f, 147, 187, 209.
Songs, national, 18 f.
Sopherim, 94.
— (Tractate), 235 n.

316

GENERAL INDEX.

' Speaker's Commentary,' 133, 167 n.
Star-worship, 51.
Stephens, Rob., 249.
Strack, 183 n, 238 n, 240, 277.
Streane, 283.
Succa, 252.
Synagogue, 71, 901T, 118, 126 f,
152, 178, 244, 247.
Syncretism, 59.
' Synopsis Sacr. Script.,' 255.
Taanith, 198 n, 201 n.
Tabernacles, Feast of, 76, 81.
Tables of Stone, 43 ff.
Talmud, 96, 195, 235, 245, 276.
Tanchuma, 280.
Targum, 127, 233 n, 275.
Tascheriau, 240 n.
Taylor, 283.
Temple Tribute, 84 f.
Tertullian, 166 n, 254.
— Pseudo-, 186 n.
' Testimony, the,' 43 f.
Tkeke, 198 n, 236.
Theodor, J., 248.
Theodore of Mopsuestia, 218 n.
Theodoret, 255.
'Tiberias,' 262, 269 ff.
Tithe, law of, 81, 84, 86.
Titles of Psalms (lxx), 137 n.
— Scripture, 200 ff, 302.

' T.N.K.,' 202, 304.
Torah, 32 f, 38 f, 43, 49, 83, 104,
&c.
'Tripartite division ' of Canon, 10 f,
132 f, 221, passim.
Verses, Division into, 249.
Walton, Brian, 262.
' Wars of the Lord,' Book of, 19.
Weber, 199, 304.
Wellhausen, 280.
Westcott, 9n, 2i8n, 2i9n, 266.
Whiston, 1 73 n.
Whitaker, 258.
Wildeboer, 164, 168.
Wood-offering, 88.
Wright, C. H. H., 268.
— W., 101.
Writing, earliest mention of in
Scripture, 18, 38.
— Prophets' use of, 39.
Xerxes, 172, 252 n.
Yadaim, 182, 198, 209 f.
YiMSHaQ, 290 f.
Zechariah, 67, 74, in, 116, 120.
Zephaniah, 55, 66 f.
Zerubbabel, 97 f, 120 f, 145.

OXFORD: ROKACE HAKT, PSINTEK TO THE UNTVEKSITY

A Catalogue of
Theological Works
published by
Macmillan ftP Co., Ltd.
St. Martin's Street
London, W.C.

CONTENTS

The Bible —

PAGE

History of the Bible ....

3

Biblical History .....

3

The Old Testament

5

The New Testament ....

7

History of the Christian Church

14

The Church of England

15

Devotional Books .

19

The Fathers . . ...

20

Hymnology .....

2 1

Religious Teaching

22

Sermons, Lectures, Addresses, and Theological
Essays 

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE
Gbe Bible
HISTORY OF THE BIBLE
THE BIBLE IN THE CHURCH. By Right Rev. Bishop West
cott. ioth Edition. Pott 8vo. 4s. 6d.
A GENERAL VIEW OF THE HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH
BIBLE. By the Right Rev. Bishop Westcott. Revised by
W. Aldis Wright, Litt.D. 8vo. 12s. 6d.
BIBLICAL HISTORY
THE HOLY BIBLE. (Eversley Edition.) Arranged in Paragraphs,
with an Introduction. By J. W. Mackail, M.A. Vols. 2 to 8.
Globe 8vo. 4s. net each.
Vol. II. Deuteronomy — 2 Samuel. III. 1 Kings — Esther. IV.
Job — Song of Solomon. V. Isaiah — Lamentations. VI. Ezekiel
— Malachi. VII. Matthew — John. VIII. Acts — Revelation.
THE MODERN READER'S BIBLE. A Series of Books from the
Sacred Scriptures presented in Modern Literary Form. The Text
is that of the Revised Version. It is used by special permission
of the University Presses of Oxford and Cambridge. Edited by
R. G. Moulton, M.A. Pott 8vo. 2s. 6d. each volume.
History Series, 6 volumes. — Genesis, The Exodus, Deuteronomy,
The Judges, The Kings, The Chronicles.
Poetry Series, 3 volumes. — The Psalms and Lamentations, 2 vols.
Biblical Idylls — Solomon's Song, Ruth, Esther, Tobit.
Wisdom Series, 4 volumes. — The Proverbs, Ecclesiasticus, Ecclesiastes
and the Wisdom of Solomon, The Book of Job.
Prophecy Series, 4 volumes. — Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel.
New Testament Series, 4 volumes. — St. Matthew and St. Mark and
the General Epistles ; The Gospel, Epistles, and Revelation of St.
John. St. Luke and St. Paul, 2 vols.
Introductory Series, 3 volumes. — Bible Stories (Old Testament),
Bible Stories (New Testament), Select Masterpieces of Biblical
Literature.
Introductory Series. Cheap Editions, is. 6d. each. Bible Stories
(Old Testament), Bible Stories (New Testament).
.ST. I AMES'S GAZETTE.— "While the sacred text has in no way been tampered
with, the books are presented in modern literary form, and are furnished with an intro
duction and notes by Professor Richard G. Moulton. The notes are scholarly, and of
real help to the student."
BIBLE LESSONS. By Rev. E. A. Abbott, D.D. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
SIDE-LIGHTS UPON BIBLE HISTORY. By Mrs. Sydney Buxton.
Illustrated. Crown 8vo. 5s-
STORIES FROM THE BIBLE. First Series. By Rev. A. J. Church.
Illustrated. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
BIBLE READINGS SELECTED FROM THE PENTATEUCH
AND THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. By Rev. J. A. Cross.
2nd Edition. Globe 8vo. 2s. 6d.

4 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Biblical History — continued.
CHILDREN'S TREASURY OF BIBLE STORIES. By Mrs.
H. Gaskoin. Pott 8vo. is. each. Part I. Old Testament ; II.
New Testament ; III. Three Apostles.
THE NATIONS AROUND ISRAEL. By A. Keary. Cr. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
VILLAGE SERMONS. By Rev. F. J. A. Hort, D.D. 8vo. 6s.
This Volume contains a Series of Sermons dealing in a popular
way with the successive Books of which the Bible is made up.
They form an admirable introduction to the subject.
SERMONS ON THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. (Selected from
Village Sermons.) Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
POLITICS AND RELIGION IN ANCIENT ISRAEL. An Intro
duction to the Study of the Old Testament. By the Rev. J. C.
Todd, M.A. Cantab., Canon of St. Saviour's Cathedral, Natal.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
The author writes from the standpoint of a frank acceptance of the
results of Biblical criticism, and the necessity of restating the history in the
light of modern research. His chief aim is to assist those who have been
placed in a condition of uncertainty by the results of criticism, and to
bring back the attention of intelligent men and women to the Scriptures
as a source of spiritual instruction. Canon Todd in his work has assumed
the main results of criticism, and while, for the most part, he has avoided
the discussion of disputed points, he has in some details advanced views
which have not hitherto been suggested.
HISTORY, PROPHECY, AND THE MONUMENTS ; or, ISRAEL
AND THE NATIONS. By Prof. J. F. M'Curdy. 3 Vols.
8vo. Vol. I. To the Downfall of Samaria. Vol. II. To the
Fall of Nineveh. Vol. III. To the end of Exile (completing the
work). 14s. net each.
TIMES. — "A learned treatise on the ancient history of the Semitic peoples as
interpreted by the new light obtained from the modern study of their monuments."
EXPOSITORY TIMES.— "The work is very able and very welcome. . . . It will
take the place of all existing histories of these nations."
A CLASS-BOOK OF OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY. By Rev.
Canon Maclear. With Four Maps. Pott 8vo. 4s. 6d.
A CLASS-BOOK OF NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. Includ
ing the connection of the Old and New Testaments. By the same.
Pott 8vo. 5s. 6d.
A SHILLING BOOK OF OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY. By
the same. Pott 8vo. is."
A SHILLING BOOK OF NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. By
the same. Pott 8vo. is.
THE BIBLE FOR HOME READING. Edited, with Comments and
Reflections for the use of Jewish Parents and Children, by C. G.
Montefiore. Part I. To the Second Visit of Nehemiah to
Jerusalem. 2nd Edition. Extra Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. net.
Part II. Containing Selections from the Wisdom Literature, the
Prophets, and the Psalter, together with extracts from the
Apocrypha. Extra Crown 8vo. 5s- *>d, net.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 5
Biblical History — conti?iued.
VOCAL AND LITERARY INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE.
By S. S. Curry, Ph.D. Introduction by Francis G. Peabody,
D.D. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net.
SCOTSMAN. — " The book, itself a cultured and erudite treatise upon a matter too
often left to teachers of mere physical accomplishments, is further recommended by an
introduction from the pen of an eminent American divine, Dr. Francis G. Peabody. It
deserves the attention of every one interested in its subject."

THE OLD TESTAMENT
SCRIPTURE READINGS FOR SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES.
By C. M. Yonge. Globe 8vo. is. 6d. each ; also with comments,
3s. 6d. each. — First Series: Genesis to Deuteronomy. — Second
Series: Joshua to Solomon. — Third Series: Kings and the
Prophets. — Fourth Series : The Gospel Times. — Fifth Series :
Apostolic Times.
THE DIVINE LIBRARY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. Its
Origin, Preservation, Inspiration, and Permanent Value. By Rev.
A. F. Kirkpatrick, B.D. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
TIMES. — "An eloquent and temperate plea for the critical study of the Scriptures."
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN. — "An excellent introduction to the modern view
of the Old Testament. . . . The learned author is a genuine critic. . . . He expounds
clearly what has been recently called the ' Analytic ' treatment of the books of the Old
Testament, and generally adopts its results. . . . The volume is admirably suited to
fulfil its purpose of familiarising the minds of earnest Bible readers with the work which
Biblical criticism is now doing."
THE DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS. Warburtonian Lectures
1 886- 1 890. By Rev. A. F. Kirkpatrick, B.D. 3rd Edition.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
SCOTSMAN. — "This volume gives us the result of ripe scholarship and competent
learning in a very attractive form. It is written simply, clearly, and eloquently ; and it
invests the subject of which it treats with a vivid and vital interest which will commend
it to the reader of general intelligence, as well as to those who are more especially
occupied with such studies."
GLASGOW HERALD. — " Professor Kirkpatrick's book will be found of great value
for purposes of study."
BOOKMAN. — " As a summary of the main results of recent investigation, and as a
thoughtful appreciation of both the human and divine sides of the prophets' work and
message, it is worth the attention of all Bible students."
THE PATRIARCHS AND LAWGIVERS OF THE OLD
TESTAMENT. By Frederick Denison Maurice. New
Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE PROPHETS AND KINGS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
By the same. New Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. An Essay on the
Growth and Formation of the Hebrew Canon of Scripture. By the
Right Rev. H. E. Ryle, Bishop ofWinchester. 2nd Ed. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
EXPOSITOR. — " Scholars are indebted to Professor Ryle for having given them for
the first time a complete and trustworthy history of the Old Testament Canon."
EXPOSITORY TIMES. — "He rightly claims that his book possesses that most
English of virtues — it may be read throughout. ... An extensive and minute research
lies concealed under a most fresh and flexible English style."
B

6 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
The Old Testament — continued.
THE MYTHS OF ISRAEL. THE ANCIENT BOOK OF GENESIS.
WITH ANALYSIS AND EXPLANATION OF ITS COM
POSITION. By Amos Kidder Fiske, Author of " The Jewish
Scriptures," etc. Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE EARLY NARRATIVES OF GENESIS. By the Right Rev.
H. E. Ryle, Bishop of Winchester. Cr. 8vo. 3s. net.
PHILO AND HOLY SCRIPTURE ; OR, THE QUOTATIONS OF
PHILO FROM THE BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
With Introduction and Notes by the Right Rev. H. E. Ryle,
Bishop of Winchester. Cr. 8vo. 10s. net.
In the present work the attempt has been made to collect, arrange in
order, and for the first time print in full all the actual quotations from the
books of the Old Testament to be found in Philo's writings, and a few of
his paraphrases. For the purpose of giving general assistance to students
Dr. Ryle has added footnotes, dealing principally with the text of Philo's
quotations compared with that of the Septuagint ; and in the introduction
he has endeavoured to explain Philo's attitude towards Holy Scripture,
and the character of the variations of his text from that of the Septuagint.
TIMES. — " This book will be found by students to be a very useful supplement and
companion to the learned Dr. Drummond's important work, Philo Judtzus."
The Pentateuch —
AN HISTORICO-CRITICAL INQUIRY INTO THE ORIGIN
AND COMPOSITION OF THE HEXATEUCH (PENTA
TEUCH AND BOOK OF JOSHUA). By Prof. A. Kuenen.
Translated by Philip H. Wicksteed, M.A. 8vo. 14s.
The Psalms 
GOLDEN TREASURY PSALTER. The Student's Edition.
Being an Edition with briefer Notes of "The Psalms Chrono
logically Arranged by Four Friends." Pott 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
THE PSALMS. With Introductions and Critical Notes. By A. C.
Jennings, M.A., and W. H. Lowe, M.A. In 2 vols. 2nd
Edition. Crown 8vo. I OS. 6d. each.
THE BOOK OF PSALMS. Edited with Comments and Reflections
for the Use of Jewish Parents and Children. By C. G. Monte-
fiore. Crown 8vo. is. net.
THE PRAYER-BOOK PSALMS. Relieved of Obscurities, and
made smoother for Chanting, with scarcely noticeable alteration.
By the Rev. E. D. Cree, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. net.
Isaiah —
ISAIAH XL.— LXVI. With the Shorter Prophecies allied to it
By Matthew Arnold. With Notes. Crown 8vo. 5s.
A BIBLE -READING FOR SCHOOLS. The Great Prophecy of
Israel's Restoration (Isaiah xl.-lxvi.) Arranged and Edited for
Young Learners. By the same. 4th Edition. Pott 8vo. is.
Zechariah —
THE HEBREW STUDENT'S COMMENTARY ON ZECH
ARIAH, Hebrew and LXX. ByW. H. Lowe, M.A. 8vo. 10s. 6d.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 7
THE NEW TESTAMENT
THE AKHMIM FRAGMENT OF THE APOCRYPHAL
GOSPEL OF ST. PETER. By H. B. Swete, D.D. 8vo. 5s. net.
THE PROGRESS OF DOCTRINE IN THE NEW TESTA
MENT : The Bampton Lectures, 1864. By Canon Thomas
Dehany Bernard, M.A. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
HANDBOOK TO THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF NEW
TESTAMENT. By F. G. Ken yon, D.Litt, Assistant Keeper
of Manuscripts in the British Museum. 8vo. 10s. net.
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
Eight Lectures. By Professor E. C. Moore of Harvard University.
Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net.
THE SOTERIOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. By W.
P. Du Bose, M.A. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
THE MESSAGES OF THE BOOKS. Being Discourses and Notes
on the Books of the New Testament. By Dean Farrar. 8vo. 14s.
ON A FRESH REVISION OF THE ENGLISH NEW TESTA
MENT. With an Appendix on the last Petition of the Lord's
Prayer. By Bishop Lightfoot. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
DISSERTATIONS ON THE APOSTOLIC AGE. By Bishop
Lightfoot. 8vo. 14s.
BIBLICAL ESSAYS. By Bishop Lightfoot. 8vo. 12s.
THE UNITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. By F. D. Maurice.
2nd Edition. 2 vols. Crown 8vo. 12s.
A GENERAL SURVEY OF THE HISTORY OF THE CANON
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT DURING THE FIRST FOUR
CENTURIES. By Right Rev. Bishop Westcott. 7th Edition.
Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.
THE STUDENT'S LIFE OF JESUS. By G. H. Gilbert, Ph.D.
Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
THE STUDENT'S LIFE OF PAUL. By G. H. Gilbert, Ph.D.
Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
THE REVELATION OF JESUS : A Study of the Primary Sources
of Christianity. By G. H. Gilbert, Ph.D. Crown 8vo. 5s.net.
THE FIRST INTERPRETERS OF JESUS. By G. H. Gilbert,
Ph.D. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
NEW TESTAMENT HANDBOOKS. Edited by Shailer
Mathews, Professor of New Test. Hist, at the University of Chicago.
A HISTORY OF NEW TESTAMENT TIMES IN PALES
TINE (175 B.C.-70 a.d.). By Shailer Mathews, A.M.
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
A HISTORY OF THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF THE
NEW TESTAMENT. By Marvin R. Vincent, D.D.
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
THE BIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTA
MENT. By Ezra P. Gould, D.D. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.

8 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
The New Testament — continued.
A HISTORY OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM OF THE
NEW TESTAMENT. By Prof. H. S. Nash. 3s. 6d. net.
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT. By
B. W. Bacon, D.D. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
THE TEACHING OF JESUS. By G. B. Stevens, D.D.
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE ORIGINAL GREEK. The
Text revised by Bishop Westcott, D.D., and Prof. F. J. A.
Hort, D.D. 2 vols. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. each. — Vol. I.
Text ; II. Introduction and Appendix.
Library Edition. 8vo. 10s. net. [Text in Macmillan Greek Type.
School Edition. i2mo, cloth, 4s. 6d. ; roan, 5s. 6d. ; morocco,
6s. 6d. ; India Paper Edition, limp calf, 7s. 6d. net.
GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON TO THE NEW TESTAMENT.
By W. J. Hickie, M.A. Pott 8vo. 3s.
ACADEMY. — "We can cordially recommend this as a very handy little volume
compiled on sound principles."
GRAMMAR OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK. By Prof. F.
Blass, University of Halle. Auth, English Trans. 8vo. 14s. net.
TIMES. — "Will probably become the standard book of reference for those students
who enter upon minute grammatical study of the language of the New Testament."
THE GOSPELS-
PHILOLOGY OF THE GOSPELS. By Prof. F. Blass. Crown
8vo. 4s. 6d. net.
GUARDIAN. — " On the whole, Professor Glass's new book seems to us an im
portant contribution to criticism. ... It will stimulate inquiry, and will open up fresh
lines of thought to any serious student."
THE SYRO-LATIN TEXT OF THE GOSPELS. By the Rev.
Frederic Henry Chase, D.D. 8vo. 7s. 6d. net.
The sequel of an essay by Dr. Chase on the old Syriac element in the
text of Codex Bezae.
TIMES. — "An important and scholarly contribution to New Testament criticism."
SYNOPTICON : An Exposition of the Common Matter of the Synop
tic Gospels. By W. G. Rushbrooke. Printed in Colours. 4to.
35s. net. Indispensable to a Theological Student.
A SYNOPSIS OF THE GOSPELS IN GREEK. With various .
Readings and Critical Notes. By the Rev. Arthur Wright,
B.D., Vice-President of Queens' College, Cambridge. Second
Edition, Revised and Enlarged. Demy 4to. 10s. net.
The difference between the first and second forms of this book is
important, practical considerations having led to the enlargement of the
original. Passages previously omitted are now included in brackets and
printed in a distinctive type to indicate the foreign character of such
accretions to the primitive text. Various readings have been added ; so
have also an introduction, many critical and a few grammatical notes.
The author's primary object has been to make available all the facts
relating to the text of the Gospels : he has, as a secondary proceeding,
explained his own deduction from the construction which he himself puts
on them — and this deduction points to an origin not in written but in oral
tradition. The case for it is fully argued in the introduction.
THE COMPOSITION OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. By Rev.
Arthur Wright. Crown 8vo. 5s.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE a
The Gospels — continued.
CAMBRIDGE REVIEW- -"The wonderful force and freshness which we find on
every page of the book. There is no sign of hastiness. All seems to be the outcome of
years of reverent thought, now brought to light in the clearest, most telling way. . . .
The book will hardly go unchallenged by the different schools of thought, but all will
agree in gratitude at least for its vigour and reality. "
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE FOUR GOSPELS.
By Right Rev. Bishop Westcott. 8th Ed. Cr. 8vo. ios. 6d.
FOUR LECTURES ON THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE
GOSPELS. By the Rev. J. H. Wilkinson, M.A., Rector of
Stock Gaylard, Dorset. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
THE LEADING IDEAS OF THE GOSPELS. By W. Alex
ander, D.D. Oxon., LL.D. Dublin, D.C.L. Oxon. , Archbishop of
Armagh, and Lord Primate of All Ireland. New Edition, Revised
and Enlarged. Crown 8vo. 6s.
TWO LECTURES ON THE GOSPELS. By F. Crawford
Burkitt, M.A. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
Gospel of St. Matthew —
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. Greek Text
as Revised by Bishop Westcott and Dr. Hort. With Intro
duction and Notes by Rev. A. Sloman, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
_ MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" It is sound and helpful, and the brief introduc
tion on Hellenistic Greek is particularly good."
Gospel of St. Mark—
THE GREEK TEXT. With Introduction, Notes, and Indices.
By Rev. H. B. Swete, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity
in the University of Cambridge. 2nd Edition. 8vo. 15s.
TIMES. — "A learned and scholarly performance, up to date with the most recent
advances in New Testament criticism."
THE EARLIEST GOSPEL. A Historico-Critical Commentary on
the Gospel according to St. Mark, with Text, Translation, and In
troduction. By Allan Menzies, Professor of Divinity and Biblical
Criticism, St. Mary's College, St. Andrews. 8vo. 8s. 6d. net.
SCHOOL READINGS IN THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
Being the Outlines of the Life of our Lord as given by St. Mark, with
additions from the Text of the other Evangelists. Edited, with Notes
and Vocabulary, by Rev. A. Calvert, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
Gospel of St. Luke —
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE. The Greek Text
as Revised by Bishop Westcott and Dr. Hort. With Introduction
and Notes by Rev. J. Bond, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
GLASGOW HERALD. — " The notes are short and crisp — suggestive rather than
exhaustive. "
THE GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. A Course
of Lectures on the Gospel of St. Luke. By F. D. Maurice.
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE IN GREEK,
AFTER THE WESTCOTT AND HORT TEXT. Edited,
with Parallels, Illustrations, Various Readings, and Notes, by the
Rev. Arthur Wright, M.A. Demy 4to. 7s. 6d. net.

10 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
The Gospels — continued.
ST. LUKE THE PROPHET. By Edward Carus Selwyn, D.D.
Gospel of St. John — [Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d. net.
THE CENTRAL TEACHING OF CHRIST. Being a Study and
Exposition of St. John, Chapters XIII. to XVII. By Rev. Canon
Bernard, M.A. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
EXPOSITOR Y TIMES. — " Quite recently we have had an exposition by him whom
many call the greatest expositor living. But Canon Bernard's work is still the work that
will help the preacher most."
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. ByF.D. Maurice. Cr.8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.
ADDRESSES ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. By
the late Archbishop Benson. With an Introduction by
Adeline, Duchess of Bedford. Super Royal 8vo. 21s. net.
THE CREDIBILITY OF THE BOOK OF THE ACTS OF
THE APOSTLES. Being the Hulsean Lectures for 1900-1.
By the Rev. Dr. Chase, President of Queens' College, Cambridge.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE OLD SYRIAC ELEMENT IN THE TEXT OF THE CODEX
BEZAE. By the Rev. F. H. Chase, D.D. 8vo. 7s. 6d. net.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES IN GREEK AND ENGLISH.
With Notes by Rev. F. Rendai.l, M.A. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
SATURDAY REVIEW.— "Mr. Rendall has given us a very useful as well as a
very scholarly book."
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" Mr. Rendall is a careful scholar and a thought
ful writer, and the student may learn a good deal from his commentary."
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. By F. D. Maurice. Cr.
8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. Being the Greek Text as
Revised by Bishop Westcott and Dr. Hort. With Explanatory
Notes by T. E. Page, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. The Authorised Version, with Intro
duction and Notes, by T. E. Page, M.A., and Rev. A. S.
Walpole, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
BRITISH WEEKL Y.—" Mr. Page's Notes on the Greek Text of the Acts are very
well known, and are decidedly scholarly and individual. . . . Mr. Page has written an
introduction which is brief, scholarly, and suggestive."
THE CHURCH OF THE FIRST DAYS. The Church of
Jerusalem. The Church of the Gentiles. The Church
of the World. Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles. By
Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.
THE EPISTLES— The Epistles of St. Paul—
ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. The Greek Text,
with English Notes. By Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan. 7th Edition.
Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. A New Transla
tion by Rev. W. G. Rutherford. 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
PILOT. — " Small as the volume is, it has very much to say, not only to professed
students of the New Testament, but also to the ordinary reader of the Bible. . . . The
layman who buys the book will be grateful to one who helps him to realise that this per-
plexing Epistle ' was once a plain letter concerned with a theme which plain men might
understand.' "

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE n
The Epistles of St. Paul — continued.
PROLEGOMENA TO ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES TO THE
ROMANS AND THE EPHESIANS. By Rev. F. J. A. Hort.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
Dr. Marcus Dods in the Bookman. — " Anything from the pen of Dr. Hort is sure to
be informative and suggestive, and the present publication bears his mark. . . . There
is an air of originality about the whole discussion ; the difficulties are candidly faced, and
the explanations offered appeal to our sense of what is reasonable."
TIMES.—" Will be welcomed by all theologians as ' an invaluable contribution to the
study of those Epistles ' as the editor of the volume justly calls it. "
DAIL Y CHRONICLE. — f ( The lectures are an important contribution to the study
of the famous Epistles of which they treat."
ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. An Essay on
its Destination and Date. By E. H. Askwith, D.D. Crown
8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. A Revised
Text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. By Bishop
Lightfoot. loth Edition. 8vo. 12s.
STI PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. The Greek Text
with Notes. By the late Bishop Westcott. 8vo. [/« the Press.
ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. A Revised
Text and Translation, with Exposition and Notes. By J. A rmitage
Robinson, D.D., Dean of Westminster. 2nd Edition. 8vo. 12s.
GUARDIAN. — " Although we have some good commentaries on Ephesians, ... no
one who has studied this Epistle would say that there was no need for further light and
leading ; and the present volume covers a good deal of ground which has not been
covered, or not nearly so well covered, before."
CHURCH TIMES. — "We have no hesitation in saying that this volume will at
once take its place as the standard commentary upon the Epistle to the Ephesians. . . .
We earnestly beg the clergy and intelligent laity to read and ponder over this most
inspiring volume."
PILOT. — " We can scarcely give higher praise to Dr. Robinson's ' Ephesians ' than
that which is implied in the expression of our opinion that it is worthy of a place beside
the commentaries of Lightfoot, Westcott, and Swete. And an exposition of this Epistle
on the scale of their writings was much needed. . . . For soberness of judgment, accuracy
of scholarship, largeness of view, and completeness of sympathy with the teaching of
St. Paul, the work which is now in our hands leaves nothing to be desired. ... A work
which is in every way so excellent, and which in every page gives us a fresh insight into
the meaning and purpose of what is, from at least one point of view, the greatest of
St. Paul's Epistles."
ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. A Revised
Text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. By Bishop
Lightfoot. 9th Edition. 8vo. 12s.
ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. With transla-
tion, Paraphrase, and Notes for English Readers. By Very Rev.
C J. Vaughan. Crown 8vo. 5s.
ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES TO THE COLOSSIANS AND TO
PHILEMON. A Revised Text, with Introductions, etc. By
Bishop Lightfoot. 9th Edition. 8vo. 12s.
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. Analysis and Ex
amination Notes. By Rev. G. W. Garrod. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE THESSALONIAN EPISTLES.
By E. H. Askwith, D.D., Chaplain of Trinity College, Cambridge.
Crown 8vo. 4s. net.

12 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
The Epistles of St. Paul — continued.
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. With
Analysis and Notes by the Rev. G. W. Garrod, B.A. Crown
8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. With
Analysis and Notes by Rev. G. W. Garrod. Cr. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL TO THE EPHESIANS, THE
COLOSSIANS, AND PHILEMON. With Introductions and
Notes. By Rev. J. Ll. Davies. 2nd Edition. 8vo. 7s. 6d.
THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL. For English Readers. Part I. con
taining the First Epistle to the Thessalonians. By Very Rev. C.
J. Vaughan. 2nd Edition. 8vo. Sewed, is. 6d.
NOTES ON EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL FROM UNPUBLISHED
COMMENTARIES. By Bishop Lightfoot, D.D. Second
Edition. 8vo. 12s.
THE LETTERS OF ST. PAUL TO SEVEN CHURCHES
AND THREE FRIENDS. Translated by Arthur S. Way,
M.A. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
ANALYSIS OF CERTAIN OF ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. Re
printed from Bishop Lightfoot's Commentaries. With Preface
by the Lord Bishop of Durham. Fcap. 8vo. is. net.
The Epistles of St. Peter—
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF ST. PETER, I. 1 to II. 17. The Greek
Text, with Introductory Lecture, Commentary, and additional
Notes. By the late F. J. A. Hort, D. D. , D. C. L. , LL. D. 8 vo. 6s.
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF ST. PETER (Greek Text). By
J. Howard B. Masterman, Principal of the Midland Clergy
College, Edgbaston, Birmingham. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
The Epistle of St. James —
THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES. The Greek Text, with Intro
duction and Notes. By Rev. Joseph B. Mayor, M.A. 2nd
Edition. 8vo. 14s. net.
EXPOSITORY TIMES.— "The most complete edition of St. James in the English
language, and the most serviceable for the student of Greek."
BOOKMA N. — " Professor Mayor's volume in every part of it gives proof that no time
or labour has been grudged in mastering this mass of literature, and that in appraising it
he has exercised the sound judgment of a thoroughly trained scholar and critic. . . .
The notes are uniformly characterised by thorough scholarship and unfailing sense. The
notes resemble rather those of Lightfoot than those of Ellicott. ... It is a pleasure to
welcome a book which does credit to English learning, and which will take, and keep, a
foremost place in Biblical literature."
The Epistles of St. John —
THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN. By F. D. Maurice. Crown
8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN. The Greek Text, with Notes.
By Right Rev. Bishop Westcott. 4th Edition. 8vo. 12s. 6d.
GUARDIAN. — " It contains a new or rather revised text, with careful critical remarks
and helps ; very copious footnotes on the text ; and after each of the chapters,
longer and more elaborate notes in treatment of leading or difficult questions, whether in
respect of reading or theology. ... Dr. Westcott has accumulated round them so much
matter that, if not new, was forgotten, or generally unobserved, and has thrown so much
light upon their language, theology, and characteristics. . . . The notes, critical,

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 13
The Epistles of St. John — continued.
illustrative, and exegetical, which are given beneath the text, are extraordinarily full and
careful. . . . They exhibit the same minute analysis of every phrase and word, the same
scrupulous weighing of every inflection and variation that characterised Dr. Westcott' s
commentary on the Gospel. . . . There is scarcely a syllable throughout the Epistles
which is dismissed without having undergone the most anxious interrogation."
SA TURDA \ ' REVIEW. — *' The more we examine this precious volume the more
its exceeding richness in spiritual as well as in literary material grows upon the mind."
The Epistle to the Hebrews —
THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS IN GREEK AND
ENGLISH. With Notes. By Rev. F. Rendall. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. English Text, with Com
mentary. By the same. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. With Notes. By Very
Rev. C. J. Vaughan. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
TIMES. — "The name and reputation of the Dean of Llandaff are a better recom
mendation than we can give of the Epistle to the Hebrews^ the Greek text, with notes ;
an edition which represents the results of more than thirty years' experience in the training
of students for ordination."
THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. The Greek Text, with
Notes and Essays. By Right Rev. Bishop Westcott. 8vo. 14s.
GUARDIAN. — " In form this is a companion volume to that upon the Epistles of St.
John. The type is excellent, the printing careful, the index thorough ; and the volume
contains a full introduction, followed by the Greek text, with a running commentary, and
a number of additional notes on verbal and doctrinal points which needed fuller discus
sion. . . . His conception of inspiration is further illustrated by the treatment of the Old
Testament in the Epistle, and the additional notes that bear on this point deserve very
careful study. The spirit in which the student should approach the perplexing questions
of Old Testament criticism could not be better described than it is in the last essay."
The Book of Revelations —
THE APOCALYPSE OF ST. JOHN. The Greek Text, with
Introduction, Notes, and Indices by the Rev. Professor H. B.
Swete, D.D. 8vo. [In the Press.
THE APOCALYPSE. A Study. By Archbishop Benson.
8vo. 8s. 6d. net.
LECTURES ON THE APOCALYPSE. By Rev. Prof. W.
Milligan. Crown 8vo. 5s.
DISCUSSIONS ON THE APOCALYPSE. By the same. Cr. 8vo. 5s.
SCOTSMAN. — "These discussions give an interesting and valuable account and
criticism of the present state of theological opinion and research in connection with their
subject." SCOTTISH GUARDIAN.—11 The great merit of the book is the patient and skilful
way in which it has brought the whole discussion down to the present day. . . . The
result is a volume which many will value highly, and which will not, we think, soon be
superseded." LECTURES ON THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN. By Very
Rev. C J. Vaughan. 5th Edition. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.
THE CHRISTIAN PROPHETS AND THE PROPHETIC
APOCALYPSE. By Edward Carus Selwyn, D.D. Crown
8vo. 6s. net.
THE BIBLE WORD-BOOK. By W. Aldis Wright, Litt.D.,
LL.D. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
C

14 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Christian Cburcb, Ibistor^ of tbe
Bury (Professor J. B.)— THE LIFE OF ST. PATRICK, AND
HIS PLACE IN HISTORY. 8vo. 12s. net.
Cheetham (Archdeacon).— A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN
CHURCH DURING THE FIRST SIX CENTURIES. Cr.
8vo. 1 os. 6d.
TIMES. — " A brief but authoritative summary of early ecclesiastical history."
GLASGOW HERALD. — " Particularly clear in its exposition, systematic in its dis
position and development, and as light and attractive in style as could reasonably be
expected from the nature of the subject."
A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH FROM THE RE
FORMATION TO THE PRESENT TIME. Cr. 8vo. [In the Press.
Gwatkin (H. M.)— SELECTIONS FROM EARLY WRITERS
Illustrative of Church History to the Time of Constantine. 2nd
Edition. Revised and Enlarged. Cr. 8vo. 4s. 6d. net.
To this edition have been prefixed short accounts of the writers
from whom the passages are selected.
Hardwick (Archdeacon).— A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN
CHURCH. Middle Age. Ed. by Bishop Stubbs. Cr. 8vo. 10s. 6d.
A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH DURING THE
REFORMATION. Revised by Bishop Stubbs. Cr. 8vo. 10s. 6d.
Hort (Dr. F. J. A.)— TWO DISSERTATIONS. I. On
MONOrENHS 6B0S in Scripture and Tradition. II. On the
" Constantinopolitan " Creed and other Eastern Creeds of the
Fourth Century. 8vo. 7s. 6d.
JUDAISTIC CHRISTIANITY. Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE CHRISTIAN ECCLESIA. A Course of Lectures on the
Early History and Early Conceptions of the Ecclesia, and Four
Sermons. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Kriiger (Dr. G.)— HISTORY OF EARLY CHRISTIAN
LITERATURE IN THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES. Cr.
8vo. 8s. 6d. net.
Lowrie (W.)— CHRISTIAN ART AND ARCHEOLOGY:
A HANDBOOK TO THE MONUMENTS OF THE EARLY
CHURCH. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. [8vo. 21s. net.
Oliphant (T. L. Kington).— ROME AND REFORM. 2 vols.
Simpson (W.)-AN EPITOME OF THE HISTORY OF THE
CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
Sohm (Prof.) — OUTLINES OF CHURCH HISTORY.
Translated by Miss May Sinclair. With a Preface by Prof. H.
M. Gwatkin, M.A. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" It fully deserves the praise given to it by Pro
fessor Gwatkin (who contributes a preface to this translation) of being ' neither a meagre
sketch nor a confused mass of facts, but a masterly outline,' and it really 'supplies a
want,' as affording to the intelligent reader who has no time or interest in details, a con
nected general view of the whole vast field of ecclesiastical history."
Vaughan (Very Rev. C. J.)— THE CHURCH OF THE FIRST
DAYS. The Church of Jerusalem. The Church op the
Gentiles. The Church of the World. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 15
Sbe Cburcb of EnQlanb
Catechism of —
CATECHISM AND CONFIRMATION. By Rev. J. C. P.
Aldous. Pott 8vo. is. net.
THOSE HOLY MYSTERIES. By Rev. J. C. P. Aldous. Pott
8vo. is. net.
A CLASS-BOOK OF THE CATECHISM OF THE CHURCH
OF ENGLAND. By Rev. Canon Maclear. Pott 8vo. is. 6d.
A FIRST CLASS-BOOK OF THE CATECHISM OF THE
CHURCH OF ENGLAND, with Scripture Proofs for Junior
Classes and Schools. By the same. Pott 8vo. 6d.
THE ORDER OF CONFIRMATION, with Prayers and Devo
tions. By the Rev. Canon Maclear. 32mo. 6d.
NOTES FOR LECTURES ON CONFIRMATION. By the
Rev. C. J. Vaughan, D.D. Pott 8vo. is. 6d.
THE BAPTISMAL OFFICE AND THE ORDER OF CON
FIRMATION. By the Rev. F. Procter and the Rev. Canon
Maclear. Pott 8vo. 6d.
Disestablishment —
DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. What are
they? By Prof. E. A. Freeman. 4th Edition. Crown 8vo. is.
A DEFENCE OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND AGAINST
DISESTABLISHMENT. By Roundell, Earl of Seleorne.
Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d.
ANCIENT FACTS & FICTIONS CONCERNING CHURCHES
AND TITHES. By the same. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
A HANDBOOK ON WELSH CHURCH DEFENCE. By the
Bishop of St. Asaph. 3rd Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Sewed, 6d.
Dissent in its Relation to —
DISSENT IN ITS RELATION TO THE CHURCH OF ENG
LAND. By Rev. G. H. Curteis. Bampton Lectures for 187 1.
Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
History of —
HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH. Edited by the late
Dean Stephens and the Rev. W. Hunt, D.Litt. In Eight
Volumes. Crown 8vo.
Vol. I. HISTORY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
FROM ITS FOUNDATION TO THE NORMAN CON
QUEST (597-1066). By the Rev. W. Hunt. 7s. 6d.
Vol. II. THE ENGLISH CHURCH FROM THE NOR
MAN CONQUEST TO THE ACCESSION OF EDWARD
I. (1066-1272). By Dean Stephens. 7s. 6d.
Vol. III. THE ENGLISH CHURCH IN THE FOUR
TEENTH AND FIFTEENTH CENTURIES (1272-1486).
By the Rev. Canon Capes, sometime Reader of Ancient
History in the University of Oxford. 7s. 6d.

16 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
History — continued.
Vol. IV. THE ENGLISH CHURCH IN THE SIX
TEENTH CENTURY, FROM THE ACCESSION OF
HENRY VIII. TO THE DEATH OF MARY (1509-1558).
By James Gairdnee, C.B., LL.D. 7s. 6d.
Vol. V. THE ENGLISH CHURCH IN THE REIGNS OF
ELIZABETH AND JAMES I. (1558-1625). By the Rev.
W. H. Frere. 7s. 6d.
Vol. VI. THE ENGLISH CHURCH FROM THE ACCES
SION OF CHARLES I. TO THE DEATH OF ANNE
(1625-1714). By the Rev. W. H. Hutton, B.D., Fellow of
St. John's College, Oxford. 7s. 6d.
Vol. VII. THE ENGLISH CHURCH IN THE
EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. By the Rev. Canon
Overton, D.D., and the Rev. F. Relton. 7s. 6d.
.In i'FP'f)€L¥{l.'t'1,0'2'L
Vol. VIII. THE ENGLISH CHURCH IN THE NINE
TEENTH CENTURY. By F. W. Cornish, M.A., Vice-
Provost of Eton College.
THE STATE AND THE CHURCH. By the Hon. Arthur
Elliot. New Edition. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d.
DOCUMENTS ILLUSTRATIVE OF ENGLISH CHURCH
HISTORY. Compiled from Original Sources by Henry Gee,
B.D., F.S.A., and W. J. Hardy, F.S.A. Cr. 8vo. 10s. 6d.
ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW.—" Will be welcomed alike by students and
by a much wider circle of readers interested in the history of the Church of England.
For the benefit of the latter all the Latin pieces have been translated into English. . . .
It fully deserves the hearty imprimatur of the Bishop of Oxford prefixed to it."
DAILY CHRONICLE.— ¦" Students of the English Constitution as well as students
of Church History will find this volume a valuable aid to their researches."
SCOTTISH GUARDIAN.—" There is no book in existence that contains so much
original material likely to prove valuable to those who wish to investigate ritual or
historical questions affecting the English Church."
Holy Communion —
THE COMMUNION SERVICE FROM THE BOOK OF
COMMON PRAYER, with Select Readings from the Writings
of the Rev. F. D. Maurice. Edited by Bishop Colenso. 6th
Edition. i6mo. 2s. 6d.
FIRST COMMUNION, with Prayers and Devotions for the newly
Confirmed. By Rev. Canon Maclear. 32mo. 6d.
A MANUAL OF INSTRUCTION FOR CONFIRMATION AND
FIRST COMMUNION, with Prayers and Devotions. By the
Liturgy — [same. 32mo. 2s.
A COMPANION TO THE LECTIONARY. By Rev. W. Benham,
B.D. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE CREEDS. By Rev. Canon
Maclear. Pott 8vo. 3s. 6d.
CHURCH QUARTERL Y REVIEW.—" Mr. Maclear's text-books of Bible history
are so well known that to praise them is unnecessary. He has now added to them An
Introduction to the Creeds, which we do not hesitate to call admirable. The book
consists, first, of an historical introduction, occupying 53 pages,t then an exposition of
the twelve articles of the Creed extending to page 299, an appendix containing the texts
of a considerable number of Creeds, and lastly, three indices which, as far as we have
tested them, we must pronounce very good. . . . We may add that we know already
that the book has been used with great advantage in ordinary parochial work."

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 17
Liturgy — continued.
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE ARTICLES OF THE
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. By Rev. G. F. Maclear, D.D.,
and Rev. W. W. Williams. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.
The Bishop of Salisbury at the Church Congress spoke of this as " a book which
will doubtless have, as it deserves, large circulation."
ST. JAMES'S GAZETTE.— "Theological students and others will find this com
prehensive yet concise volume most valuable,"
GLASGOW HERALD.— " A valuable addition to the well-known series of Theo
logical Manuals published by Messrs. Macmillan."
CHURCH TIMES. — "Those who are in any way responsible for the training of
candidates for Holy Orders must often have felt the want of such a book as Dr. Maclear,
with the assistance of his colleague, Mr. Williams, has just published."
NEW HISTORY OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER.
With a rationale of its Offices on the basis of the former Work by
Francis Procter, M.A. Revised and re-written by Walter
Howard Frere, M.A., Priest of the Community of the Resur
rection. Second Impression. Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d.
AN ELEMENTARY INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF
COMMON PRAYER. By Rev. F. Procter and Rev. Canon
Maclear. Pott 8vo. 25. 6d.
THE ELIZABETHAN PRAYER-BOOK AND ORNAMENTS.
With an Appendix of Documents. By Henry Gee, D.D.
Crown 8vo. 5s.
TWELVE DISCOURSES ON SUBJECTS CONNECTED WITH
THE LITURGY AND WORSHIP OF THE CHURCH OF
ENGLAND. By Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan. 4th Edition.
Fcap. 8vo. 6s.
Historical and Biographical —
THE ECCLESIASTICAL EXPANSION OF ENGLAND IN
THE GROWTH OF THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION.
Hulsean Lectures, 1894-95. By Alfred Barry, D.D., D.C.L.,
formerly Bishop of Sydney and Primate of Australia and Tasmania.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
The author's preface says : " The one object of these lectures — delivered
on the Hulsean Foundation in 1894-95 — is to make some slight contribu
tion to that awakening of interest in the extraordinary religious mission of
England which seems happily characteristic of the present time. "
DAILY NEWS. — " These lectures are particularly interesting as containing the case
for the Christian missions at a time when there is a disposition to attack them in some
quarters." LIVES OF THE ARCHBISHOPS OF CANTERBURY. From
St. Augustine to Juxon. By the Very Rev. Walter Farquhar
Hook, D.D., Dean of Chichester. Demy 8vo. The volumes sold
separately as follows: — Vol. I., 15s. ; Vol. II., 15s. ; Vol. V.,
15s. ; Vols. VI. and VIL, 30s. ; Vol. VIII., 15s. ; Vol. X.,
15s. ; Vol. XL, 15s. ; Vol. XII., 15s.
ATHENSEUM. — "The most impartial, the most instructive, and the most interest
ing of histories."

18 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Historical and Biographical — continued.
THE LIFE OF THE RIGHT REVEREND BROOKE FOSS
WESTCOTT, D.D., Late Lord Bishop of Durham. By his Son,
the Rev. Arthur Westcott. With Photogravure Portraits.
2 vols. Extra Crown 8vo. 17s. net. Abridged edition in One
Vol. Extra Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d. net.
MEMOIRS OF ARCHBISHOP TEMPLE. By Seven Friends.
Edited by E. G. Sandford. With Photogravure and other
Illustrations. 2 vols. 8vo. 36s. net.
LIFE AND LETTERS OF ARCHBISHOP BENSON. By his
Son. Abridged Edition. In one Vol. 8s. 6d. net.
CHARLOTTE MARY YONGE : HER LIFE AND LETTERS.
By Christabel Coleridge. With Portraits. 8vo. 12s.6d.net.
LIFE AND LETTERS OF AMBROSE PHILLIPPS DE LISLE.
By E. S. Purcell. Two Vols. 8vo. 25s. net.
THE OXFORD MOVEMENT. Twelve Years, 1833-45. By
Dean Church. Globe 8vo. 4s. net.
THE LIFE AND LETTERS OF R. W. CHURCH, late Dean
of St. Paul's. Globe 8vo. 4s. net.
LIFE AND LETTERS OF FENTON JOHN ANTHONY
HORT, D.D., D.C.L., LL.D., sometime Hulsean Professor and
Lady Margaret's Reader in Divinity in the University of Cambridge.
By his Son, Arthur Fenton Hort, late Fellow of Trinity College,
Cambridge. In two Vols. With Portrait. Ex. Cr. 8vo. 1 7s. net.
THE LIFE OF FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE. Chiefly
told in his own letters. Edited by his Son, Frederick Maurice.
With Portraits. Two Vols. Crown 8vo. 1 6s.
MEMORIALS. (PART I.) FAMILY AND PERSONAL, 1766-
1865. By Roundell, Earl of Selborne. With Portraits and
Illustrations. Two Vols. 8vo. 25s.net. (PART II. ) PERSONAL
AND POLITICAL, 1865-1895. Two Vols. 25s. net.
LIFE AND LETTERS OF WILLIAM JOHN BUTLER, late
Dean of Lincoln, sometime Vicar of Wantage. 8vo. 12s. 6d. net.
TIMES. — " We have a graphic picture of a strong personality, and the example of
a useful and laborious life. . . . Well put together and exceedingly interesting to
Churchmen."

IN THE COURT OF THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTER
BURY. Read and others v. The Lord Bishop of Lincoln.
Judgment, Nov. 21, 1890. 2nd Edition. 8vo. 2s. net.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY ON RESERVATION
OF THE SACRAMENT. Lambeth Palace, May 1, 1900.
8vo. Sewed, is. net.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE tg
Historical and Biographical — continued.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF YORK ON RESERVATION OF
SACRAMENT. Lambeth Palace, May I, 1900. 8vo. Sewed.
is. net.
JOURNAL OF THEOLOGICAL STUDIES. Quarterly. 3s. 6d.
net. (No. I, October 1899.) Yearly volumes, 14s. net.
CANTERBURY DIOCESAN GAZETTE. Monthly. 8vo. 2d.
JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW. Edited by I. Abrahams and
C. G. Montefiore. Demy 8vo. 3s. 6d. Vols. 1-7, 12s. 6d.
each. Vol. 8 onwards, 15s. each. (Annual Subscription, lis.)
Devotional Books
Cornish (J. F.)— WEEK BY WEEK. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
SPECTA TOR. — "They are very terse and excellent verses, generally on the subject
of either the Epistle or Gospel for the day, and are put with the kind of practical vigour
which arrests attention and compels the conscience to face boldly some leading thought in
the passage selected."
SATURDAY REVIEW.— "The studied simplicity of Mr. Cornish's verse is al-
together opposed to what most hymn -writers consider to be poetry. Nor is this the
only merit of his unpretentious volume. There is a tonic character in the exhortation
and admonition that characterise the hymns, and the prevailing sentiment is thoroughly
manly and rousing."
Eastlake (Lady).— FELLOWSHIP: LETTERS ADDRESSED
TO MY SISTER-MOURNERS. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d.
ATHENAEUM. — " Tender and unobtrusive, and the author thoroughly realises the
sorrow of those she addresses ; it may soothe mourning readers, and can by no means
aggravate or jar upon their feelings."
CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.— ¦" A very touching and at the same time a very
sensible book. It breathes throughout the truest Christian spirit."
NONCONFORMIST.— ¦" A beautiful little volume, written with genuine feeling,
good taste, and a right appreciation of the teaching of Scripture relative to sorrow and
suffering." IMITATIO CHRISTI, Libri IV. Printed in Borders after Holbein,
Diirer, and other old Masters, containing Dances of Death, Acts of
Mercy, Emblems, etc. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
Keble (J.)— THE CHRISTIAN YEAR. Edited by C M.
Yonge. Pott 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
Kingsley (Charles). — OUT OF THE DEEP: WORDS
FOR THE SORROWFUL. From the writings of Charles
Kingsley. Extra Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
DAILY THOUGHTS. Selected from the Writings of Charles
Kingsley. By his Wife. Crown 8vo. 6s.
FROM DEATH TO LIFE. Fragments of Teaching to a Village
Congregation. With Letters on the "Life after Death." Edited
by his Wife. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
Maclear (Rev. Canon).— A MANUAL OF INSTRUCTION
FOR CONFIRMATION AND FIRST COMMUNION, WITH
PRAYERS AND DEVOTIONS. 32mo. 2s.

20 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Maurice (Frederick Denison). — LESSONS OF HOPE. Readings
from the Works of F. D. Maurice. Selected by Rev. J. Ll.
Davies, M.A. Crown 8vo. 5s.
THE COMMUNION SERVICE. From the Book of Common
Prayer, with select readings from the writings of the Rev. F. D.
Maurice, M.A. Edited by the Rev. John William Colenso,
D.D., Lord Bishop of Natal. i6mo. 2s. 6d.
THE WORSHIP OF GOD, AND FELLOWSHIP AMONG MEN.
By Frederick Denison Maurice and others. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
RAYS OF SUNLIGHT FOR DARK DAYS. With a Preface by
Very Rev. C J. Vaughan, D.D. New Edition. Pott 8vo. 3s. 6d.
Welby-Gregory (The Hon. Lady).— LINKS AND CLUES
2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Westcott (Bishop).— THOUGHTS ON REVELATION AND
LIFE. Selections from the Writings of Bishop Westcott. Edited
by Rev. S. Phillips. Crown 8vo. 6s.

Cbe tfatbers

INDEX OF NOTEWORTHY WORDS AND PHRASES FOUND
IN THE CLEMENTINE WRITINGS, COMMONLY
CALLED THE HOMILIES OF CLEMENT. 8vo. 5s.
Benson (Archbishop).— CYPRIAN : HIS LIFE, HIS TIMES,
HIS WORK. By the late Edward White Benson, Archbishop
of Canterbury. 8vo. 21s. net.
TIMES. — "In all essential respects, in sobriety of judgment and temper, in sym
pathetic insight into character, in firm grasp of historical and ecclesiastical issues, in
scholarship and erudition, the finished work is worthy of its subject and worthy of its
author. ... In its main outlines full of dramatic insight and force, and in its details full
of the fruits of ripe learning, sound judgment, a lofty Christian temper, and a mature
ecclesiastical wisdom."
SATURDAY REVIEW.— "On the whole, and with all reservations which can
possibly be made, this weighty volume is a contribution to criticism and learning on
which we can but congratulate the Anglican Church. We wish more of her bishops were
capable or desirous of descending into that arena of pure intellect from which Dr. Benson
returns with these posthumous laurels."
Gwatkin (H. M.)— SELECTIONS FROM EARLY WRITERS
ILLUSTRATIVE OF CHURCH HISTORY TO THE TIME
OF CONSTANTINE. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. net.
Hort (Dr. F. J. A.)— SIX LECTURES ON THE ANTE-
NICENE FATHERS. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
TIMES. — "Though certainly popular in form and treatment they are so in the best
sense of the words, and they bear throughout the impress of the ripe scholarship, the
rare critical acumen, and the lofty ethical temper which marked all Dr. Hort's work."
NOTES ON CLEMENTINE RECOGNITIONS. Crown Svo.
4s. 6d.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 21
Hort (Dr. F. J. A.) and Mayor (J. B.)— CLEMENT OF ALEX
ANDRIA : MISCELLANIES (STROMATEIS). Book VII.
The Greek Text, with Introduction, Translation, Notes, Disserta
tions, and Indices. 8vo. 15s. net.
Kriiger (G.)— HISTORY OF EARLY CHRISTIAN LITERA
TURE IN THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES. Crown 8vo.
8s. 6d. net.
Lightfoot (Bishop).— THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Part I.
St. Clement of Rome. Revised Texts, with Introductions,
Notes, Dissertations, and Translations. 2 vols. 8vo. 32s.
THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Part II. St. Ignatius to St. Poly-
carp. Revised Texts, with Introductions, Notes, Dissertations, and
Translations. 3 vols. 2nd Edition. Demy 8vo. 48s.
THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Abridged Edition. With Short
Introductions, Greek Text, and English Translation. 8vo. 16s.
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— " A conspectus of these early and intensely in
teresting Christian ' Documents ' such as had not hitherto been attainable, and thereby
renders a priceless service to all serious students of Christian theology, and even of
Roman history."
NA TIONAL OBSERVER.—" From the account of its contents, the student may
appreciate the value of this last work of a great scholar, and its helpfulness as an aid to
an intelligent examination of the earliest post-Apostolic writers. The texts are con
structed on the most careful collation of all the existing sources. The introductions are
brief, lucid, and thoroughly explanatory of the historical and critical questions related to
the texts. The introduction to the Didache, and the translation of the ' Church Manual
of Early Christianity,' are peculiarly interesting, as giving at once an admirable version
of it, and the opinion of the first of English biblical critics on the latest discovery in
patristic literature."

1bi?mnoIog£

Bernard (Canon T. D.)— THE SONGS OF THE HOLY
NATIVITY. Being Studies of the Benedictus, Magnificat,
Gloria in Excelsis, and Nunc Dimittis. Crown 8vo. 5s.
Brooke (Stopford A.)— CHRISTIAN HYMNS. Edited and
arranged. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
Selborne (Roundell, Earl of) —
THE BOOK OF PRAISE. From the best English Hymn Writers.
Pott 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
A HYMNAL. Chiefly from The Book of Praise. In various sizes.
B. Pott 8vo, larger type. is. — C. Same Edition, fine paper, is. 6d. —
An Edition with Music, Selected, Harmonised, and Composed by
John Hullah. Pott 8vo. 3s. 6d.
Smith (Horace).— HYMNS AND PSALMS. Ex. Crown 8vo.
2s. 6d.
Woods (M. A.) — HYMNS FOR SCHOOL WORSHIR
Compiled by M. A. Woods. Pott 8vo. is. 6d.

22 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
IReligioue £eacbin$
Bell (Rev. G. C.)— RELIGIOUS TEACHING IN SECOND
ARY SCHOOLS. For Teachers and Parents. Suggestions as
to Lessons on the Bible, Early Church History, Christian Evidences,
etc. By the Rev. G. C. Bell, M.A., Master of Marlborough
College. 2nd Edition. With new chapter on Christian Ethic.
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
GUARDIAN. — " The hints and suggestions given are admirable, and, as far as Bible
teaching or instruction in ' Christian Evidences ' is concerned, leave nothing to be desired.
Much time and thought has evidently been devoted by the writer to the difficulties which
confront the teacher of the Old Testament, and a large portion of the volume is taken up
with the consideration of this branch of his subject."
EDUCATIONAL REVIEW.— "For those teachers who are dissatisfied with the
existing state of things, and who are striving after something better, this little handbook
is invaluable. Its aim is ' to map out a course of instruction on practical lines, and to
suggest methods and books which may point the way to a higher standpoint and a wider
horizon.' For the carrying out of this, and also for his criticism of prevailing methods,
all teachers owe Mr. Bell a debt of gratitude ; and if any are roused to a due sense of
their responsibility in this matter, he will feel that his booic has not been written in vain."
Gilbert (Dr. G. H.)— A PRIMER OF THE CHRISTIAN
RELIGION. Based on the Teaching of Jesus, its Founder and
Living Lord. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. net.

Sermons, Xectures, Hobressea, anb
SbeoloQical Essays
(See also 'Bible,' ' Church of England,' 'Fathers')
Abbey (Rev. C. J.)— THE DIVINE LOVE: ITS STERN
NESS, BREADTH, AND TENDERNESS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
GUARDIAN.— " This is a book which, in our opinion, demands the most serious
and earnest attention."
Abbott (Rev. Dr. E. A.)—
CAMBRIDGE SERMONS. 8vo. 6s.
OXFORD SERMONS. 8vo. 7s. 6d.
Abrahams (Israel).— FESTIVAL STUDIES. Being Thoughts
on the Jewish Year. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d.
Abrahams ( I. )— Montefiore (C.G.)— ASPECTS OF JUDAISM.
Being Eighteen Sermons. 2nd Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
TIMES.—" There is a great deal in them that does not appeal to Jews alone, for,
especially in Mr. Montefiore's addresses, the doctrines advocated, with much charm of
style, are often not by any means exclusively Jewish, but such as are shared and
honoured by all who care for religion and morality as those terms are commonly under
stood in the western world."
GLASGOW HERALD.—" Both from the homiletic and what may be called the
big-world point of view, this little volume is one of considerable interest."

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 23
Ainger (Rev. Alfred).— THE GOSPEL AND HUMAN LIFE.
Edited, with Preface, by Canon Beeching. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
DAILY NEWS. — "We think we can safely say that no one commencing to read this
volume will leave any single sermon unread. Canon Ainger was a careful and conscien
tious writer, and composed his sermons with a fidelity to literary form and exactness of
expression that will please the most imperious critic. If we were to single out any one
quality of these discourses, it would be the close, searching analysis of human nature.
He was a close observer of human life in all its strange inconsistencies and varying
moods, a shrewd judge of motive and disposition."
Askwith (E. H.)— THE CHRISTIAN CONCEPTION OF
HOLINESS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE SPECTA TOR. — " A well-reasoned and really noble view of the essential pur
pose of the Christian revelation. . . . We hope that Mr. Askwith's work will be widely
read."Bather (Archdeacon).— ON SOME MINISTERIAL DUTIES,
CATECHISING, PREACHING, etc. Edited, with a Preface,
by Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan, D.D. Fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6d.
Benson (Archbishop) — ¦
ARCHBISHOP BENSON IN IRELAND. A record of his Irish
Sermons and Addresses. Edited by J. H. Bernard. Crown
8vo. 3s. 6d.
PALL MALL GAZETTE. — "No words of mine could appreciate, or do justice
to, the stately language and lofty thoughts of the late Primate ; they will appeal to
every Churchman."
Bernard (Canon T.D.)— THE SONGS OF THE HOLY NATIV
ITY CONSIDERED (1) AS RECORDED IN SCRIPTURE,
(2) AS IN USE IN THE CHURCH. Crown 8vo. 5s.
GLASGOW HERALD. — " He conveys much useful information in a scholarly way."
SCOTSMAN. — " Their meaning and their relationships, the reasons why the Church
has adopted them, and many other kindred points, are touched upon in the book with so
well-explained a learning and with so much insight that the book will be highly valued
by those interested in its subject."
Brastow (Prof. L. O.) — REPRESENTATIVE MODERN
PREACHERS. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net.
Brooke (Rev. Stopford A.)— SHORT SERMONS. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
Brooks (Phillips, late Bishop of Massachusetts) —
THE CANDLE OF THE LORD, and other Sermons. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
SERMONS PREACHED IN ENGLISH CHURCHES. Crown
8vo. 6s.
TWENTY SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE MYSTERY OF INIQUITY. Crown 8vo. 6s.
ESSAYS AND ADDRESSES, RELIGIOUS, LITERARY, AND
SOCIAL. Edited by the Rev. John Cotton Brooks. Crown
8vo. 8s. 6d. net.
NEW STARTS IN LIFE, AND OTHER SERMONS. Crown
8vo. 6s.
WESTMINSTER GAZETTE. — "All characterised by_ that fervent piety, catho
licity of spirit, and fine command of language for which the Bishop was famous."
THE MORE ABUNDANT LIFE. Lenten Readings. Royal
l6mo. 5s.

24 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Brooks (Phillips, late Bishop of Massachusetts) — continued,
THE LAW OF GROWTH, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 6s.
SCOTSMAN. — "All instinct with the piety, breadth of mind, and eloquence which
have given Phillips Brooks' pulpit prolocutions their rare distinction among productions
of this kind, that of being really and truly suitable for more Sundays than one."
GLOBE. — " So manly in outlook and so fresh and suggestive in treatment."
SEEKING LIFE, AND OTHER SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
CHRISTIAN WORLD.— "It will, we think, be generally agreed that the twenty-
one sermons in this concluding volume are worthy to rank with the other volumes of a
notable series. There is the wonted felicity in the choice of subjects, and the wonted
combination of spiritual insight and practical force in their treatment."
THE INFLUENCE OF JESUS. The Bohlen Lectures, 1879.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
LECTURES ON PREACHING DELIVERED AT YALE COL
LEGE. Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE PHILLIPS BROOKS YEAR BOOK. Selections from the
Writings of Bishop Phillips Brooks. By H. L. S. and L. H. S.
Globe 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
CHRIST THE LIFE AND LIGHT. Lenten Readings selected
from the Writings of the Rt. Rev. Phillips Brooks, D.D.
By W. M. L. Jay. Crown 8vo. 6s.
LIFE AND LETTERS OF PHILLIPS BROOKS. By A. V. G.
Allen. 3 vols. 8vo. 30s. net.
Campbell (Dr. John M'Leod) —
THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 6th Ed. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
THOUGHTS ON REVELATION. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE GIFT OF ETERNAL LIFE.
Compiled from Sermons preached at Row, in the years 1829-31.
Crown 8vo. 5s.
Carpenter (W. Boyd, Bishop of Ripon) —
TRUTH IN TALE. Addresses, chiefly to Children. Crown 8vo.
4s. 6d.
THE PERMANENT ELEMENTS OF RELIGION: Bampton
Lectures, 1887. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
TWILIGHT DREAMS. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
LECTURES ON PREACHING. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
SOME THOUGHTS ON CHRISTIAN REUNION. Being a
Charge to the Clergy. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
TIMES. — " Dr. Boyd Carpenter treats this very difficult subject with moderation
and good sense, and with a clear-headed perception of the limits which inexorably cir
cumscribe the natural aspirations of Christians of different churches and nationalities for
a more intimate communion and fellowship."
LEEDS MERCURY. — "He discusses with characteristic vigour and felicity the
claims which hinder reunion, and the true idea and scope of catholicity."
Charteris (Prof. A. H.)— THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, ITS
LIFE AND WORK. An Attempt to trace the work of the
Church in some of its Departments from the Earliest Times to the
Present Day. Crown 8vo. 6s.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 25
Cheetham (Archdeacon).— MYSTERIES, PAGAN AND
CHRISTIAN. Being the Hulsean Lectures for 1896. Crown
8vo. 5s.
CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORKING CLASSES. Edited by
George Haw. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. net.
Church (Dean) —
HUMAN LIFE AND ITS CONDITIONS, Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE GIFTS OF CIVILISATION, and other Sermons and Lectures.
2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
DISCIPLINE OF THE CHRISTIAN CHARACTER, and other
Sermons. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
ADVENT SERMONS. 1885. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
VILLAGE SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
VILLAGE SERMONS. Second Series. Crown 8vo. 6s.
VILLAGE SERMONS. Third Series. Crown 8vo. 6s.
TIMES. — " In these sermons we see how a singularly gifted and cultivated mind was
able to communicate its thoughts on the highest subjects to those with whom it might
be supposed to have little in common. . . . His village sermons are not the by-work of
one whose interests were elsewhere in higher matters. They are the outcome of his
deepest interests and of the life of his choice. . . . These sermons are worth perusal if
only to show what preaching, even to the humble and unlearned hearers, may be made
in really competent hands."
CATHEDRAL AND UNIVERSITY SERMONS. Crown Svo. 6s.
PASCAL AND OTHER SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
CLERGYMAN'S SELF-EXAMINATION CONCERNING THE
APOSTLES' CREED. Extra Fcap. 8vo. is. 6d.
Congreve (Rev. John).— HIGH HOPES AND PLEADINGS
FOR A REASONABLE FAITH, NOBLER THOUGHTS,
LARGER CHARITY. Crown 8vo. 5s.
CONVERSATIONS WITH CHRIST. A Biographical Study. By
the Author of The Faith of a Christian. Cr. 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
Davidson (Archbishop) —
A CHARGE DELIVERED TO THE CLERGY OF THE
DIOCESE OF ROCHESTER, October 29, 30, 31, 1894.
8vo. Sewed. 2s. net.
A CHARGE DELIVERED TO THE CLERGY OF THE
DIOCESE OF WINCHESTER, Sept. 28, 30, Oct. 2, 3, 4,
and 5, 1899. 8vo. Sewed. 2s. 6d. net.
THE CHRISTIAN OPPORTUNITY. Being Sermons and
Speeches delivered in America. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
SPECTA TOR. — "To all who hope for and long to help our age, to the true Christian
and the true patriot on both sides of the seas, in the new home where the speaker spent
so happy and fruitful a sojourn, in the old to which he has returned, as we hope, refreshed
and encouraged, we commend these hopeful, prayerful, suggestive words as in a very real
sense the best of Christmastide reading."

26 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Davies (Rev. J. Llewelyn) —
THE GOSPEL AND MODERN LIFE. 2nd Edition, to which is
added Morality according to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper.
Extra fcap. 8vo. 6s.
SOCIAL QUESTIONS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF
CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
WARNINGS AGAINST SUPERSTITION. Extra Fcap. 8 vo. 2s.6d.
THE CHRISTIAN CALLING. Extra Fcap. 8vo. 6s.
BAPTISM, CONFIRMATION, AND THE LORD'S SUPPER,
as interpreted by their Outward Signs. Three Addresses. New
Edition. Pott 8vo. is.
ORDER AND GROWTH AS INVOLVED IN THE SPIRITUAL
CONSTITUTION OF HUMAN SOCIETY. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
SPIRITUAL APPREHENSION: Sermons and Papers. Crown
8vo. 6s.
Day (E. E.) — SEEKING THE KINGDOM. A Study.
Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net.
THE DIARY OF A CHURCH-GOER. Second Impression. Crown
8vo. Gilt top. 3s. 6d. net.
Canon Beeching in a letter to the Editor of the SPECTA TOR.—" I should like to
draw the attention of your readers to a book recently published, The Diary of a Church-
Goer. . . . What in my judgment, gives the book its value, and makes it worth the
attention of thoughtful people, is the glimpse it affords of a cultivated mind worshipping
and reflecting upon its religious experiences. ... It is this positive side of the book with
which I feel myself most in sympathy ; but its critical side also is worth serious attention,
especially from the clergy, because it will show them where at least one thoughtful man
finds difficulties."
Donehoo (J. de Quincey).— THE APOCRYPHAL AND LE
GENDARY LIFE OF CHRIST. Being the Whole Body of
the Apocryphal Gospels and other Extra Canonical Literature
which pretends to tell of the Life and Words of Jesus Christ, in
cluding much Matter which has not before appeared in English.
In continuous Narrative Form, with Notes, Scriptural References,
Prolegomena, and Indices. 8vo. I OS. 6d. net.
Edghill (Rev. E. A.)— AN ENQUIRY INTO THE EVI
DENTIAL VALUE OF PROPHECY. Being the Hulsean
Prize Essay for 1904. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Edwards (Jonathan), SELECTED SERMONS OF. Edited
by Prof. H. N. Gardiner. i6mo. is. net.
Ellerton (Rev. John).— THE HOLIEST MANHOOD, AND
ITS LESSONS FOR BUSY LIVES. Crown 8vo. 6s.
English Theological Lihrary. Edited by Rev. Frederic
Relton. With General Introduction by the late Bishop
Creighton. A Series of Texts Annotated for the Use of
Students, Candidates for Ordination, etc. 8vo.
Re-issue at Reduced Prices.
I. HOOKER'S ECCLESIASTICAL POLITY, Book V., Edited
by Rev. Ronald E. Bayne. 10s. 6d. net.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 27
English Theological Library — continued.
II. LAW'S SERIOUS CALL, Edited by Rev. Canon J. H. Overton.
4s. 6d. net.
DAILY NEWS. — "A well-executed reprint. . . . Canon Overton's notes are not
numerous, and are as a rule very interesting and useful."
CAMBRIDGE REVIEW— "A. welcome reprint. ... All that it should be in
paper and appearance, and the reputation of the editor is a guarantee for the accuracy
and fairness of the notes."
III. WILSON'S MAXIMS, Edited by Rev. F. Relton. 3s. 6d. net.
GUARDIAN. — "Many readers will feel grateful to Mr. Relton for this edition of
Bishop Wilson's 'Maxims.' . . . Mr. Relton's edition will be found well worth possess
ing : it is pleasant to the eye, and bears legible marks of industry and study."
EXPOSITORY TIMES. — " In an introduction of some twenty pages, he tells us
all we need to know of Bishop Wilson and of his maxims. Then he gives us the maxims
themselves in most perfect form, and schools himself to add at the bottom of the page
such notes as are absolutely necessary to their understanding, and nothing more."
IV. THE WORKS OF BISHOP BUTLER. Vol. I. Sermons,
Charges, Fragments, and Correspondence. Vol. II. The Analogy
of Religion, and two brief dissertations : I. Of Personal Identity.
II. Of the Nature of Virtue. Edited by the Very Rev. J. H.
Bernard, D.D., Dean of St. Patrick's, Dublin. 4s. 6d. net each.
THE PILOT. — " One could hardly desire a better working edition than this which
Dr. Bernard has given us. . . . Sure to become the standard edition for students."
THE SPECTATOR.— ¦" An excellent piece of work."
V. THE CONFERENCE BETWEEN WILLIAM LAUD AND
MR. FISHER, THE JESUIT. Edited by Rev. C. H. Simpkin-
SON, M.A. Author of The Life of Archbishop Laud. 4s. 6d. net.
ESSAYS ON SOME THEOLOGICAL QUESTIONS OF THE
DAY. By Members of the University of Cambridge. Edited by
H. B. Swete, D.D. 8vo. 12s. net.
Everett (Dr. C. C.)— THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ELEMENTS
OF RELIGIOUS FAITH. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
EVIL AND EVOLUTION. An attempt to turn the Light of Modern
Science on to the Ancient Mystery of Evil. By the author of
The Social Horizon. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
FAITH AND CONDUCT : An Essay on Verifiable Religion. Crown
8vo. 7s. 6d. [Also 8vo. Sewed. 6d.
FAITH OF A CHRISTIAN, THE. By a Disciple. Cr. 8vo. 3s.6d.net.
GUARDIAN. — "The general impression left upon our mind by this book is so
good that we wish to recommend it to our readers' attention, for we believe that any
one who reads it through will lay it down with a feeling of gratitude to its author."
TIMES. — "A simple, honest, and refreshing volume. . . . Those who are least
inclined to agree with the writer's theses will be first to acknowledge that his thoughts
upon them are worth reading."
Farrar (Very Rev. F. W., late Dean of Canterbury) —
Collected Edition of the Sermons, etc. Cr. 8vo. 3s. 6d. each.
SEEKERS AFTER GOD.
ETERNAL HOPE. Sermons Preached in Westminster Abbey. Also
8vo. Sewed. 6d.
THE FALL OF MAN, and other Sermons.
THE WITNESS OF HISTORY TO CHRIST. Hulsean Lectures.

2S MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Farrar (Very Rev. F. W., late Dean of Canterbury) — continued.
Collected Edition of the Sermons, etc. — continued.
THE SILENCE AND VOICES OF GOD.
IN THE DAYS OF THY YOUTH. Sermons on Practical Subjects.
SAINTLY WORKERS. Five Lenten Lectures.
EPHPHATHA : or, The Amelioration of the World.
MERCY AND JUDGMENT. A few words on Christian Eschatology.
SERMONS AND ADDRESSES delivered in America.
Fiske (John).— MAN'S DESTINY VIEWED IN THE LIGHT
OF HIS ORIGIN. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
LIFE EVERLASTING. Globe 8vo. 3s. 6d.
Foxell (W. J.)— GOD'S GARDEN : Sunday Talks with Boys.
With an Introduction by Dean Farrar. Globe 8vo. 3s. 6d.
SPEAKER. — "Deals with obvious problems of faith and conduct in a strain of
vigorous simplicity, and with an evident knowledge of the needs, the moods, the diffi
culties of boy-life. It is the kind of book which instils lessons of courage, trust, patience,
and forbearance ; and does so quite as much by example as by precept."
IN A PLAIN PATH. Addresses to Boys. Globe 8vo. 3s. 6d.
SPEA KER. — " He handles with admirable vigour, and real discernment of a boy's
difficulties, such high themes as the use of time, noble revenge, the true gentleman, the
noblest victory, and progress through failure. There is nothing childish in the method of
treatment, and yet we feel sure that a man who spoke to a congregation of lads in this
fashion would not talk over the head of the youngest, and yet find his way to the hearts
of those who are just passing from the restraints of school to the responsibilities of life."
Fraser (Bishop). — UNIVERSITY SERMONS. Edited by
Rev. John W. Diggle. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Grane (W. L.)— THE WORD AND THE WAY: or, The
Light of the Ages on the Path of To-Day. Crown 8vo. 6s.
HARD SAYINGS OF JESUS CHRIST. A Study in the Mind
and Method of the Master. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s.
GREATHEART. Some Talks with Him. By a Pilgrim. Crown
8vo. 3s. net.
Green (S. G.)— THE CHRISTIAN CREED AND THE
CREEDS OF CHRISTENDOM. Seven Lectures delivered
in 1898 at Regent's Park College. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Griffis (W. E.) — DUX CHRISTUS: An Outline Study of
Japan. Globe 8vo. 2s. net. Sewed, is. 3d. net.
SCOTSMAN. — "A well-informed and valuable sketch of a large subject, it comes
out opportunely to satisfy the curiosity of the many readers now anxious for information
upon all aspects of Japanese life."
Harcourt (Sir W. V.)— LAWLESSNESS in THE NATIONAL
CHURCH. 8vo. Sewed, is. net.
Hardwick (Archdeacon). — CHRIST AND OTHER MAS
TERS. 6th Edition. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.
Hare (Julius Charles).— THE MISSION OF THE COM
FORTER. New Edition. Edited by Dean Plumptre. Crown
8vo. 7s. 6d.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 29
Harris (Rev. G. C.) — SERMONS. With a Memoir by
Charlotte M. Yonge, and Portrait. Extra Fcap. 8vo. 6s.
Headlam (Rev. A. C)— THE SOURCES AND AUTHORITY
OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY. Being an Inaugural Lecture
delivered by the Rev. Arthur C. Headlam, D.D. 8vo. Sewed.
is. net.
GUARDIAN. — "A learned and valuable vindication of the place of dogmatic
theology by a scholar trained in historical and critical methods."
Henson (Canon H. H.)— SERMON ON THE DEATH OF
THE QUEEN. 8vo. Sewed, is. net.
SINCERITY AND SUBSCRIPTION. A Plea for Toleration in
the Church of England. Globe 8vo. is. net.
THE VALUE OF THE BIBLE, AND OTHER SERMONS (1902-
1904). With a letter to the Lord Bishop of London. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
CHURCH OF ENGLAND PULPIT.— "We can recommend this work to our
readers with the conviction that if more preachers were as broad-minded and as outspoken
as the Rector of St. Margaret's, Westminster, there would be no lack of large congrega
tions in our London churches."
Hicks (Rev. Canon E. L.)— ADDRESSES ON THE TEMPTA
TION OF OUR LORD. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
Hillis (N. D.) — THE INFLUENCE OF CHRIST IN
MODERN LIFE. A Study of the New Problems of the Church
in American Society. Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE QUEST OF HAPPINESS. A Study of Victory over Life's
Troubles. Extra Crown 8vo. 6s. net.
Hilty (Carl).— HAPPINESS : Essays on the Meaning of Life.
Translated by Professor F. G. Peabody. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
Hodgkins (Louise M.) — VIA CHRISTI : An Introduction to the
Study of Missions. Globe 8vo. 2s. net. Sewed, is. 3d. net.
Hoffding (Prof. Harald.) — THE PHILOSOPHY OF RE
LIGION. Translated by Miss B. E. Meyer. 8vo. 12s. net.
Hort (Dr. F. J. A.)— THE WAY, THE TRUTH, THE LIFE.
Hulsean Lectures, 1871. Crown 8vo. 6s.
CA MBRIDGE REVIEW.—" Only to few is it given to scan the wide fields of truth
with clear vision of near and far alike. To what an extraordinary degree the late Dr.
Hort possessed this power is shown by the Hulsean Lectures just published. They carry
us in the most wonderful way to the very centre of the Christian system ; no aspect of
truth, no part of the world, seems to be left out of view ; while in every page we recog
nise the gathered fruits of a rare scholarship in the service of an unwearying thought."
JUDAISTIC CHRISTIANITY. Crown 8vo. 6s.
VILLAGE SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Selected from the Sermons preached by Professor Hort to his
village congregation at St. Ippolyt's, and including a series of
Sermons dealing in a broad and suggestive way with the successive
books of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation.
SERMONS ON THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE (selected from
Village Sermons). Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
VILLAGE SERMONS. Second Series. Cr. 8vo. 6s.

30 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Hort (Dr. F. J. A.) — continued.
VILLAGE SERMONS IN OUTLINE. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Contents : I. The Prayer Book, 16 Sermons. II. Baptism,
5 Sermons. III. Mutual Subjection the Rule of Life (Eph. v. 21),
6 Sermons. IV. The Sermon on the Mount (St. Matt. v. I ; vii.
29), 1 1 Sermons. V. Advent, 4 Sermons. VI. The Armour of
the Cross. VII. The Resurrection, 7 Sermons.
CAMBRIDGE AND OTHER SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Hoyt (Dr. Arthur S.)— THE WORK OF PREACHING.
A Book for the Class-room and Study. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net.
Hughes (T.)— THE MANLINESS OF CHRIST. 2nd Ed.
Fcap. 8vo. 3s, 6d.
GLOBE.—" The Manliness of Christ is a species of lay sermon such as Judge Hughes
is well qualified to deliver, seeing that manliness of thought and feeling has been the
prevailing characteristic of all his literary products."
BRITISH WEEKLY.—" A new edition of a strong book."
Hutton (R. H.)—
ESSAYS ON SOME OF THE MODERN GUIDES OF ENG
LISH THOUGHT IN MATTERS OF FAITH. Globe 8vo.
4s. net.
THEOLOGICAL ESSAYS. Globe 8vo. 4s. net.
ASPECTS OF RELIGIOUS AND SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT.
Selected from the Spectator, and edited by E. M. RoscOE. Globe
8vo. 4s. net.
Hyde (W. De W.)— OUTLINES OF SOCIAL THEOLOGY.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
Dr. Hyde thus describes the object of his book : "This little book aims
to point out the logical relations in which the doctrines of theology will
stand to each other when the time shall come again for seeing Christian
truth in the light of reason and Christian life as the embodiment of love. "
PRACTICAL IDEALISM. Globe 8vo. 5s. net.
Illingworth (Rev. J. R.)— SERMONS PREACHED IN A
COLLEGE CHAPEL. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s.
UNIVERSITY AND CATHEDRAL SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 5s.
PERSONALITY, HUMAN AND DIVINE. Bampton Lectures,
1894. Crown 8vo. 6s. Also 8vo. Sewed. 6d.
TIMES. — " Will take high rank among the rare theological masterpieces produced by
that celebrated foundation."
EXPOSITOR. — "It is difficult to convey an adequate impression of the freshness
and strength of the whole argument. . . . It is a book which no one can be satisfied with
reading once ; it is to be studied."
DIVINE IMMANENCE. An Essay on the Spiritual Signiacance of
Matter. New Edition. Cr. Svo. 6s. Also 8vo. Sewed. 6d.
CHURCH QUARTERLY REVIEW.— ¦" A very valuable book. . . . Divine
Immanence is likely to prove of great service to Christian truth. It combines, to a
remarkable extent, profound thought and clear expression. It is throughout written
in an interesting style."
GUARDIAN.— "Altogether, we have rarely read a book of such philosophical
earnestness in construing the Christian view of existence in terms of the thought and
knowledge of these days, nor one more likely to bring home the knowledge of a Saviour
to the modern man."
REASON AND REVELATION. An Essay in Christian Apology.
8vo. 7s. 6d.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 31
Illingworth (Rev. J. R.) — continued.
CHRISTIAN CHARACTER. Being Some Lectures on the Ele
ments of Christian Ethics. New and Cheaper Edition. Crown
8vo. 6s.
TIMES.—" We should like to follow Dr. Illingworth further, but we have said enough
to show that these studies are rooted in deep reading of things and men, and the best
thoughts of men, and the fruit should be plentiful in proportion."
Inskip (Rev. J. T.)— THE PASTORAL IDEA. Lectures in
Pastoral Theology delivered at the King's College, London, during
the Lent term, 1905. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Jacob (Rev. J. A.) — BUILDING IN SILENCE, and other
Sermons. Extra Fcap. 8vo. 6s.
Jacob (Rev. J. T.)— CHRIST THE INDWELLER. Cr. 8vo. 5s.
Jellett (Rev. Dr.)—
THE ELDER SON, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Joceline (E.)— THE MOTHER'S LEGACIE TO HER UN
BORN CHILD. Cr. i6mo. 4s. 6d.
Jones (Jenkin Lloyd) —
JESS : BITS OF WAYSIDE GOSPEL. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Joseph (Rev. Morris).— JUDAISM AS CREED AND LIFE.
Extra Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
The view of Judaism set forth in this work lies midway between the
orthodoxy which regards the Shulchan Aruch, or at least the Talmud, as
the final authority in Judaism, and the extreme liberalism which would
lightly cut the religion loose from the bonds of tradition. The present
volume, then, may fairly lay claim to novelty. Almost all the expositions
of Judaism which have hitherto appeared in England have been written
from the rigidly conservative standpoint, but thus far no attempt has been
made to elucidate systematically the intermediate position, and to give a
comprehensive account of Jewish belief and practice as they are conceived
by men of moderate views.
Kellogg (Rev. S. H.)—
THE GENESIS AND GROWTH OF RELIGION. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
SCOTSMAN. — " Full of matter of an important kind, set forth with praiseworthy
conciseness, and at the same time with admirable lucidity. . . . Dr. Kellogg has done
the work allotted to him with great ability, and everywhere manifests a competent ac
quaintance with the subject with which he deals."
Kingsley (Charles) —
VILLAGE AND TOWN AND COUNTRY SERMONS. Crown
8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE WATER OF LIFE, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
SERMONS ON NATIONAL SUBJECTS, AND THE KING OF
THE EARTH. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
SERMONS FOR THE TIMES. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
GOOD NEWS OF GOD. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE GOSPEL OF THE PENTATEUCH, AND DAVID. Crown
8vo. 3s. 6d.
DISCIPLINE, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
WESTMINSTER SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
ALL SAINTS' DAY, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
ACADEMY. — "We can imagine nothing more appropriate than this edition for a
public, a school, or even a village library."

32 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Kirkpatrick (Prof. A. F.)— THE DIVINE LIBRARY OF THE
OLD TESTAMENT. Its Origin, Preservation, Inspiration, and
Permanent Value. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
THE DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS. Warburtonian Lectures
1886-1890. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Knight (W. A.)— ASPECTS OF THEISM. 8vo. 8s. 6d.
LETTERS FROM HELL. Newly translated from the Danish. With
an Introduction by Dr. George Macdonald. Twenty-eighth
Thousand. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d.
Lightfoot (Bishop) —
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. Reprinted from Dissertations on
the Apostolic Age. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
LEADERS IN THE NORTHERN CHURCH : Sermons Preached
in the Diocese of Durham. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. '
ORDINATION ADDRESSES AND COUNSELS TO CLERGY.
Crown 8vo. 6s.
CAMBRIDGE SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
SERMONS PREACHED IN ST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL. Crown
8vo. 6s.
SERMONS PREACHED ON SPECIAL OCCASIONS. Crown
8vo. 6s.
A CHARGE DELIVERED TO THE CLERGY OF THE
DIOCESE OF DURHAM, 25th Nov. 1886. Demy 8vo. 2s.
ESSAYS ON THE WORK ENTITLED "Supernatural Reli
gion." 8vo. Re-issue at 6s. net.
DISSERTATIONS ON THE APOSTOLIC AGE. 8vo. 14s.
BIBLICAL ESSAYS. 8vo. 12s.
TIMES. — " As representing all that is now available of the Bishop's profound learning
and consummate scholarship for the illustration of his great subject, the present volume
and its successor will be warmly welcomed by all students of theology."
Lillingston (Frank, M.A.)— THE BRAMO SAMAJ AND
ARYA SAMAJ IN THEIR BEARING UPON CHRIS
TIANITY. A Study in Indian Theism. Cr. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
M'Connell (Dr. S. D.)— CHRIST. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.
Macmillan (Rev. Hugh) —
BIBLE TEACHINGS IN NATURE. 15th Ed. Globe 8vo. 6s.
THE TRUE VINE ; OR, THE ANALOGIES OF OUR LORD'S
ALLEGORY. 5th Edition. Globe 8vo. 6s.
THE MINISTRY OF NATURE. 8th Edition. Globe 8vo. 6s.
THE SABBATH OF THE FIELDS. 6th Edition. Globe 8vo. 6s.
GLEANINGS IN HOLY FIELDS. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE CORN OF HEAVEN. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Mahaffy (Rev. Prof.)— THE DECAY OF MODERN PREACH
ING : AN ESSAY. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
Marshall (H. Rutgers)— INSTINCT AND REASON: An
Essay with some Special Study of the Nature of Religion. 8vo.
12s. 6d. net.
Mason (Caroline A.)— LUX CHRISTI : An Outline Study of
India — A Twilight Land. Cr. 8vo. 2s.net. Sewed. 1s.3d.net.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 33
Mathews (S.)— THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF JESUS:
AN ESSAY IN CHRISTIAN SOCIOLOGY. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Maurice (Frederick Denison) —
THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. 3rd Ed. 2 Vols. Cr. 8vo. 7s.
THE CONSCIENCE. Lectures on Casuistry. 3rd Ed. Cr.8vo. 4s. 6d.
DIALOGUES ON FAMILY WORSHIP. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
THE DOCTRINE OF SACRIFICE DEDUCED FROM THE
SCRIPTURES. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD. 6th Edition. Cr. 8vo. 4s. 6d.
ON THE SABBATH DAY; THE CHARACTER OF THE
WARRIOR; AND ON THE INTERPRETATION OF
HISTORY. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
LEARNING AND WORKING. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
THE LORD'S PRAYER, THE CREED, AND THE COM
MANDMENTS. Pott 8vo. is.
Collected Works. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. each.
SERMONS PREACHED IN LINCOLN'S INN CHAPEL. In Six
Volumes. 3s. 6d. each.
SERMONS PREACHED IN COUNTRY CHURCHES.
CHRISTMAS DAY AND OTHER SERMONS.
THEOLOGICAL ESSAYS. (Also 8vo. Sewed. 6d.)
PROPHETS AND KINGS.
PATRIARCHS AND LAWGIVERS.
THE GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.
GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.
EPISTLE OF ST. JOHN.
FRIENDSHIP OF BOOKS.
PRAYER BOOK AND LORD'S PRAYER.
THE DOCTRINE OF SACRIFICE.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.
CHURCH TIMES. — "There is probably no writer of the present century to whom
the English Church owes a deeper debt of gratitude. . . . Probably he did more to
stop the stream of converts to Romanism which followed the secession of Newman than
any other individual, by teaching English Churchmen to think out the reasonableness
of their position." . .
SPEAKER. — "These sermons are marked in a conspicuous degree by high thinking
and plain statement." ....
TIMES. — "A volume of sermons for which the memory of Maurice s unique personal
influence ought to secure a cordial reception."
SCOTSMAN. — "They appear in a volume uniform with the recent collective edition
of Maurice's works, and will be welcome to the many readers to whom that edition
has brought home the teaching of the most popular among modern English divines."
Medley (Rev. W.) — CHRIST THE TRUTH. Being the
Angus Lectures for the year 1900. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Milligan (Rev. Prof. W.)— THE RESURRECTION OF OUR
LORD. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s.
SPECTATOR. — "The argument is put with brevity and force by Dr. Milligan, and
every paCTe bears witness that he has mastered the literature of the subject, and has made
a speciarstudy of the more recent discussions on this aspect of the question. . . . The
remaining lectures are more theological. They abound in striking views, in fresh and
vigorous exegesis, and manifest a keen apprehension of the bearing of the fact of the
Resurrection on many important questions of theology. The notes are able and
scholarly, and elucidate the teaching of the text."

34 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Milligan (Rev. Prof. W.) — continued.
THE ASCENSION AND HEAVENLY PRIESTHOOD OF
OUR LORD. Baird Lectures, 1891. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
MISSIONS— UNITED STUDY OF. See under Griffis, Hodgkins,
Mason, Parsons, and Smith.
Montefiore (Claude G.)— LIBERAL JUDAISM. An Essay.
Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
Moorhouse (Bishop) —
JACOB : Three Sermons. Extra Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE TEACHING OF CHRIST. Its Conditions, Secret, and
Results. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
DANGERS OF THE APOSTOLIC AGE. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
CHURCH WORK: ITS MEANS AND METHODS. Crown
8vo. 3s. net.
CHURCH TIMES. — " It may almost be said to markan epoch, and to inaugurate a
new era in the history of Episcopal visitation. "
TIMES. — "A series of diocesan addresses, full of practical counsel, by one of the
most active and sagacious of modern prelates."
GLOBE. — "Throughout the volume we note the presence of the wisdom that comes
from long and varied experience, from sympathy, and from the possession of a fair and
tolerant mind."
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" Full of interest and instruction for all who take
an interest in social and moral, to say nothing of ecclesiastical, reforms, and deserves to
find careful students far beyond the limits of those to whom it was originally addressed."
Myers (F. W; H.)— SCIENCE AND A FUTURE LIFE.
Gl. 8vo. * 4s. net.
Nash (H. S.)— GENESIS OF THE SOCIAL CONSCIENCE.
THE RELATION BETWEEN THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF CHRISTIANITY IN EUROPE AND THE SOCIAL
QUESTION. Crown 8vo. 6s.
SCOTSMAN. — " The book is eloquently, and at times brilliantly, written. . . . But
few readers could go through it without being inspired by its clever and animated hand
ling of philosophical ideas.'
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— " An interesting and suggestive little book."
Parsons (E. C.)— CHRISTUS LIBERATOR : An Outline Study
of Africa. With an Introduction by Sir Harry H. Johnston,
K.C.B. With Coloured Map. Globe 8vo. 2s. net. Sewed.
is. 3d. net.
Pattison (Mark). — SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Peabody (Prof. F. G.)— JESUS CHRIST AND THE SOCIAL
QUESTION. Crown Svo. 6s.
JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHRISTIAN CHARACTER.
An Examination of the Teaching of Jesus in its relation to some
of the Moral Problems of Personal Life. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net.
THE RELIGION OF AN EDUCATED MAN. Crown 8vo.
Gilt top. 4s. 6d. net.
This little volume, by the well-known Harvard Professor, treats the
subject under the following main heads : — Religion as Education ; The
Message of Christ to the Scholar ; and Knowledge and Service.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 35
PEPLOGRAPHIA DVBLINENSIS. Memorial Discourses Preached
in the Chapel of Trinity College, Dublin, 1895-1902. With
Preface by the Very Rev. J. H. Bernard, D.D., Dean of St.
Patrick's. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
PHILOCHRISTUS. Memoirs ofa Disciple of the Lord. 3rd Ed. Svo. 12s.
Picton (J. Allanson).— THE RELIGION OF THE UNI
VERSE. 8vo. 10s. net.
ACADEMY. — "The book is most seriously to be recommended to any one who
desires a dignified and impressive statement of what is most obviously the religion of the
coming time."
Pike (G. R.)— THE DIVINE DRAMA THE DIVINE MANI
FESTATION OF GOD IN THE UNIVERSE. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Plumptre (Dean). — MOVEMENTS IN RELIGIOUS
THOUGHT. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
Porter (Mrs. Horace).— THE SECRET OF A GREAT IN
FLUENCE. Notes on Bishop Westcott's Teaching. With a
Chapter on Bishop Westcott's Commentaries by the Rev. Arthur
Westcott. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
In the pages of her book Mrs. Porter has tried to gather together some
of the treasures of stronger faith, wider hope, and clearer vision which are
offered to those who will seek them in the writings of the Bishop, and, as
an encouragement to others in the same position, she makes known the
fact that it is only through the published works that she has been able
herself to learn of the great teacher.
PRO CHRISTO ET ECCLESIA. Second Impression. Crown 8vo.
Gilt top. 4s. 6d. net.
BOOKMAN. — "It is not only its anonymity which suggests comparison with Ecce
Ho?no. The subject is the same in both books — the method and aim of Jesus — though
treated from quite different points of view ; and the level of thought is much the same ;
the easy originality that cuts a new section through the life of Christ and shows us strata
before unthought of ; the classic severity of the style, the penetrating knowledge of human
nature, the catholicity of treatment, all remind us of Professor Seeley's captivating work."
Purchas (Rev. H. T.) — JOHANNINE PROBLEMS AND
MODERN NEEDS. Crown 8vo. 3s. net.
RELIGIOUS DOUBTS OF DEMOCRACY. Papers by Various
Authors. Edited by George Haw. 8vo. Sewed. 6d.
Kendall (Rev. F.)— THE THEOLOGY OF THE HEBREW
CHRISTIANS. Crown 8vo. 5s.
Bidding (George, Bishop of Southwell).— THE REVEL AND
THE BATTLE. Crown 8vo. 6s.
TIMES. — "Singularly well worth reading."
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" Marked by dignity and force."
Robinson (Prebendary H. G.)— MAN IN THE IMAGE OF
GOD, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
Robinson (Dean J. A.)— UNITY IN CHRIST AND OTHER
SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.

36 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Rutherford (Rev. Dr. W. G.)— THE KEY OF KNOWLEDGE.
Sermons preached to Westminster Boys in the Abbey. Crown
8vo. 6s.
Ryle (Rt. Rev. H. E., Bishop of Winchester). — ON HOLY
SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
SCOTSMAN.— "Written with Dr. Ryle's accustomed erudition and vigour of
reasoning." ON THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Schmidt (Prof. N.)— THE PROPHET OF NAZARETH.
8vo. i os. 6d. net.
Sclmltz (Dr. H.)— OUTLINES OF CHRISTIAN APOLO
GETICS FOR USE IN LECTURES. Ex. Crown 8vo.
7s. 6d. net.
Seeley (Sir J. R.)— ECCE HOMO : A Survey of the Life and
Work of Jesus Christ. Globe 8vo. 4s. net. Also 8vo. Sewed. 6d.
NATURAL RELIGION. Globe 8vo. 4s. net.
A THEN/E UM. — ' ' If it be the function of a genius to interpret the age to itself, this
is a work of genius. It gives articulate expression to the higher strivings of the time.
It puts plainly the problem of these latter days, and so far contributes to its solution ; a
positive solution it scarcely claims to supply. No such important contribution to the
question of the time has been published in England since the appearance in 1866 of Ecce
Homo. . . . The author is a teacher whose words it is well to listen to ; his words are
wise but sad ; it has not been given him to fire them with faith, but only to light them
with reason. His readers may at least thank him for the intellectual illumination, if they
cannot owe him gratitude for any added favour. ... A book which we assume will be
read by most thinking Englishmen."
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— "The present issue is a compact, handy, well-
printed edition of a thoughtful and remarkable book."
Selbome (Roundell, Earl of).— LETTERS TO HIS SON ON
RELIGION. Globe 8vo. 3s. 6d.
THE CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH. Globe 8vo.
3s. 6d.
Service (Rev. John).— SERMONS. With Portrait. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Smith (A. H.)— REX CHRISTUS. An Outline Study of China.
Globe 8vo. 2s. net. Sewed, is. 3d. net.
Stanley (Dean) —
THE NATIONAL THANKSGIVING. Sermons preached in
Westminster Abbey. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d.
Sterrett (Dr. J. M.)— THE FREEDOM OF AUTHORITY.
Essays in Apologetics. Ex. Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d. net.
Stewart (Prof. Balfour) and Tait (Prof P. G.)— THE UNSEEN
UNIVERSE; OR, PHYSICAL SPECULATIONS ON A
FUTURE STATE. 15th Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Stubbs (Dean) —
CHRISTUS IMPERATOR. A Series of Lecture-Sermons on the
Universal Empire of Christianity. Edited by Very Rev. C. W.
Stubbs, D.D., Dean of Ely. Crown 8vo. 6s.
SCOTSMAN. — " Their prelectionswill be found stimulating and instructive in a high
degree. The volume deserves recognition as a courageous attempt to give to Christianity
its rightful place and power in the lives of its professors."

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 37
Talbot (Bishop).— A CHARGE DELIVERED TO THE
CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE OF ROCHESTER, October
24, 25, and 26, 1899. Svo. Sewed. 2s. net.
THE CHURCH'S FAILURES AND THE WORK OF CHRIST.
A Charge addressed to the Clergy of his Diocese at his Second
Visitation in the Ninth Year of his Episcopate and in the Year of
Our Lord 1903. Svo. Sewed, is. net.
DAILY NEWS.— "A little hook that will be read with interest by all who are
concerned in the same problem here considered — the relation of Christianity as an active
inspiration of common Hfe to such masses of toiling populations as are represented by
the millions of South London."
Temple (Archbishop) —
SERMONS PREACHED IN THE CHAPEL OF RUGBY
SCHOOL. Extra Fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6d.
SECOND SERIES. 3rd Edition. 6s.
THIRD SERIES. 4th Edition. 6s.
THE RELATIONS BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE.
Bampton Lectures, 1884. New Impression, 1903. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
CHARGE DELIVERED AT HIS FIRST VISITATION. 8vo.
Sewed, is. net.
(1) The Doctrine of the Eucharist ; (2) The Practice of Confession ;
(3) Uniformity in Ceremonial ; (4) The Power of the Bishops.
Thackeray (H. St. John).— THE RELATION OF ST. PAUL
TO CONTEMPORARY JEWISH THOUGHT. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
TO THOSE WHO SUFFER. A Heart of Compassion. Crown 8vo.
Sewed, is. net.
PALL MALL GAZETTE.—" We have rarely met so slim a volume more full of
suggestive and helpful thoughts. . . . A true, a beautiful book ; and we trust the modest
way it is ushered into the world will not prevent it obtaining the attention and recognition
it deserves."
Trench (Archbishop).— HULSEAN LECTURES. 8vo. 7s. 6d.
Tymms (Rev. Dr. T. V.)— THE CHRISTIAN IDEA OF
ATONEMENT. Angus Lectures. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
Vaughan (Dean) —
MEMORIALS OF HARROW SUNDAYS. 5th Edition. Crown
8vo. 10s. 6d.
HEROES OF FAITH. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
LIFE'S WORK AND GOD'S DISCIPLINE. 3rd Edition.
Extra Fcap. 8vo. 2S. 6d.
THE WHOLESOME WORDS OF JESUS CHRIST. 2nd
Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
FOES OF FAITH. 2nd Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
COUNSELS FOR YOUNG STUDENTS. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
THE TWO GREAT TEMPTATIONS. 2nd Ed. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
ADDRESSES FOR YOUNG CLERGYMEN. Extra Fcap. 8vo.
4s. 6d.
" MY SON, GIVE ME THINE HEART." Extra Fcap. 8vo. 5s.
TEMPLE SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.

38 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S
Vaughan (Dean) — continued.
AUTHORISED OR REVISED? Sermons on some of the Texts in
which the Revised Version differs from the Authorised. Crown
8vo. 7s. 6d.
LESSONS OF THE CROSS AND PASSION. WORDS FROM
THE CROSS. THE REIGN OF SIN. THE LORD'S
PRAYER. Four Courses of Lent Lectures. Crown 8vo. ios. 6d.
UNIVERSITY SERMONS. NEW AND OLD. Cr. 8vo. ios. 6d.
NOTES FOR LECTURES ON CONFIRMATION. Fcap. 8vo.
is. 6d.
DONCASTER SERMONS. Lessons of Life and Godliness, and
Words from the Gospels. Cr. 8vo. ios. 6d.
RESTFUL THOUGHTS IN RESTLESS TIMES. Cr. 8vo. 5s.
LAST WORDS IN THE TEMPLE CHURCH. Globe 8vo. 5s.
SATURDAY REVIEW.— "These discourses, in thought, in style, have so much
that is permanent and fine about them that they will stand the ordeal of being read by
any serious man, even though he never heard Dr. Vaughan speak."
UNIVERSITY AND OTHER SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
TIMES. — "As specimens of pure and rhythmical English prose, rising here and there
to flights of sober and chastened eloquence, yet withal breathing throughout an earnest
and devotional spirit, these sermons would be hard to match."
SCOTSMAN. — "All are marked by the earnestness, scholarship, and strength of
thought which invariably characterised the pulpit utterances of the preacher."
Vaughan (Rev. D. J.)— THE PRESENT TRIAL OF FAITH.
Crown 8vo. 5s.
QUESTIONS OF THE DAY, SOCIAL, NATIONAL, AND
RELIGIOUS. Crown 8vo. 5s.
NATIONAL OBSERVER.— "In discussing Questions of the Day Mr. D. J
Vaughan speaks with candour, ability, and common sense."
SCOTSMAN. — "They form an altogether admirable collection of vigorous and
thoughtful pronouncements on a variety of social, national, and religious topics."
GLASGOW HERALD. — "A volume such as this is the best reply to those friends
of the people who are for ever complaining that the clergy waste their time preaching
antiquated dogma and personal salvation, and neglect the weightier matters of the law."
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— "He speaks boldly as well as thoughtfully, and
what he has to say is always worthy of attention."
EXPOSITOR Y TIMES.—" Most of them are social, and these are the most interest
ing. And one feature of peculiar interest is that in those sermons which were preached
twenty years ago Canon Vaughan saw the questions of to-day, and suggested the remedies
we are beginning to apply."
Vaughan (Canon E. T.)— SOME REASONS OF OUR CHRIS
TIAN HOPE. Hulsean Lectures for 1875. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d.
Venn (Dr. John).— ON SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF
BELIEF, SCIENTIFIC AND RELIGIOUS. 8vo. 6s. 6d.
Welldon (Bishop).— THE SPIRITUAL LIFE, and other
Sermons. Crown 8vo. 6s.
SCO TTISH LEA DER. — " In a strain of quiet, persuasive eloquence, Bishop Welldon
treats impressively of various aspects of the higher life. His discourses cannot fail both
to enrich the heart and stimulate the mind of the earnest reader."
GLASGOW HERALD.—" They are cultured, reverent, and thoughtful produc
tions." THE REVELATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. Crown 8vo. 6s.

THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE 39
Welldon (Bishop) — continued.
"I LIVE": BEING HINTS ON THE CHRISTIAN LIFE.
Crown Svo. is. 6d. net.
THE CONSECRATION OF THE STATE. An Essay. Crown
Svo. 2s. net.
Westcott (Bishop) —
ON THE RELIGIOUS OFFICE OF THE UNIVERSITIES.
Sermons. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
GIFTS FOR MINISTRY. Addresses to Candidates for Ordination.
Crown 8vo. is- 6d.
FROM STRENGTH TO STRENGTH. Three Sermons (In
Memoriam J. B. D.) Crown 8vo. 2s.
THE REVELATION OF THE RISEN LORD. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
THE HISTORIC FAITH. 3rd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. Also
Svo. Sewed. 6d.
THE GOSPEL OF THE RESURRECTION. 6th Ed. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
THE REVELATION OF THE FATHER. Crown 8vo. 6s.
CHRISTUS CONSUMMATOR. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
SOME THOUGHTS FROM THE ORDINAL. Cr. 8vo. is. 6d.
SOCIAL ASPECTS OF CHRISTIANITY. Crown 8vo. 6s.
ESSAYS IN THE HISTORY OF RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN
THE WEST. Globe 8vo. 4s. net.
THE GOSPEL OF LIFE. Crown 8vo. 6s.
THE INCARNATION AND COMMON LIFE. Crown 8vo. 9s.
TIMES. — "A collection of sermons which possess, among other merits, the rare one
of actuality, reflecting, as they frequently do, the Bishop's well-known and eager interest
in social problems of the day."
CHRISTIAN ASPECTS OF LIFE. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
CHURCH TIMES.— "We heartily commend this volume to the notice of our
readers. . . . The Church of England is not likely to lose touch with the people of this
country so long as she is guided by Bishops who show such a truly large-hearted
sympathy with everything human as is here manifested by the present occupier of the
see of Durham."
LITERA TURE. — " A sermon of the national day of rest, and some attractive per
sonal reminiscences of school days under James Prince Lee, are among the choicest parts
of the volume, if we are to single out any portions from a work of dignified and valuable
utterance." DAILY NEWS. — " Through every page . . . runs the same enlightened sympathy
with the living world. One forgets the Bishop in the Man, the Ecclesiastic in the Citizen,
the Churchman in the Christian."
THE OBLIGATIONS OF EMPIRE. Cr. Svo. Sewed. 3d. net.
LESSONS FROM WORK. Charges and Addresses. Second
Impression. Crown 8vo. 6s.
ADDRESS DELIVERED TO MINERS, July 1901. Crown Svo.
Sewed. 6d.
WORDS OF FAITH AND HOPE. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.
CHRISTIAN SOCIAL UNION ADDRESSES. Crown 8vo.
is. net.
COMMON PRAYERS FOR FAMILY USE. Crown 8vo. is. net.
PETERBOROUGH SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
SCOTSMAN. — " They are characteristic prolocutions of an eminent Anglican divine,
and will be read with interest both within and without the Church of England."

40 MACMILLAN AND CO.'S THEOLOGICAL CATALOGUE
White (A. D.)— A HISTORY OF THE WARFARE OF
SCIENCE WITH THEOLOGY IN CHRISTENDOM. In
Two Vols, 8vo. 2 is. net.
TIMES. — " Is certainly one of the most comprehensive, and, in our judgment, one of
the most valuable historical works that have appeared for many years. - ._ • He has
chosen a large subject, but it is at least one which has clear and definite limits, and he
has treated it very fully and comprehensively in two moderate volumes. . . . His book
appears to us to be based on much original research, on an enormous amount of careful,
accurate, and varied reading, and his habit of appending to each section a list of the
chief books, both ancient and modern, relating to it will be very useful to serious students.
He has decided opinions, but he always writes temperately, and with transparent truth
fulness of intention."
DAILY CHRONICLE.— "The story of the struggle of searchers after truth with
the organised forces of ignorance, bigotry, and superstition is the most inspiring chapter
in the whole history of mankind. That story has never been better told than by the
ex-President of Cornell University in these two volumes."
Whiton (Dr. J. M.)— MIRACLES AND SUPERNATURAL
RELIGION. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. net.
Wickham (Very Rev. Dean).— WELLINGTON COLLEGE
SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Wilkins (Prof. A. S.)— THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD : an
Essay. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.
Wilson (Archdeacon) — ^.
SERMONS PREACHED IN CLIFTON COLLEGE CHAPEL.
Second Series. 1888-90. Crown 8vo. 6s.
ESSAYS AND ADDRESSES. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.
GUARDIAN. — " We heartily welcome a new edition of Archdeacon Wilson's
Essays and A ddresses. "
SPEAKER. — "We are glad to welcome a new edition of the Archdeacon of
Manchester's Essays and A ddresses. . . . These addresses are manly, straightforward,
and sagacious ; and they are, moreover, pervaded with a deep sense of responsibility and
unfailing enthusiasm."
SOME CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE RELIGIOUS THOUGHT
OF OUR TIME. Crown 8vo. 6s.
HOW CHRIST SAVES US, OR THE GOSPEL OF THE
ATONEMENT. Being the Hulsean Lectures for 1898-99.
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. Also 8vo. Sewed. 6d.
SPEAKER. — " This volume deserves a cordial welcome, and will reward a careful
study. It is marked by a candour and courage, a sincerity and liberality of spirit, which
prove very attractive. "
OXFORD MAGAZINE.—" They contain a good deal of strong thought and
delicate expression."
SPECTA 7 OR.— "A notable pronouncement."
TWO SERMONS ON THE MUTUAL INFLUENCES OF
THEOLOGY AND THE NATURAL SCIENCES. 8vo.
Sewed. 6d. net.
SIX LECTURES ON PASTORAL THEOLOGY. With an
Appendix on the Influence of Scientific Training on the Reception
of Religious Truth. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net.
PROBLEMS OF RELIGION AND SCIENCE. 8vo. Sewed. 6d.
Wood (C. J.)— SURVIVALS IN CHRISTIANITY. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— ¦" Striking, stimulating and suggestive lectures.
. . . The author writes with the boldness and conviction of a mystic ; he brings wide
reading to bear upon every branch of his subject, and his book is impressive and
interesting throughout. "
Printed by R. & R. Clark, Limited, Edinburgh.
c. 5. 4.06.

' ¦ ¦