YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE LIBRARY OF THE
DIVINITY SCHOOL

ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS

CONCERNING

THE BOOK OF JOB

i. THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE
2. POSITION OF THE BOOK IN THE CANON
3. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP
4. INTEGRITY OF THE TEXT

Rev. W. H. B. PROBY, M.A.
TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
FORMERLY TYRWHITT HEBREW SCHOLAR IN THE UNIVERSITY'

RIVINGTO STS

WATERLOO PL AC

MDCCCLXXXT [

, £0iEW?/LIBRIS SAXCTL CAROLI
AFJUD HATFIELD

Yale Divinity Library
New Haven, Conn.

ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS CONCERNING
THE BOOK OF JOB.

ORIGINAL LANGUAGE.
Several writers have asserted that the Book of Job
" was originally written in the Aramaean or Arabic
tongue, and afterwards translated into Hebrew by
Moses, David, Solomon, or some unknown writer.
Of this opinion was the author of the Appendix in
the Septuagint, and the compiler of the tract on Job
added to the works of Origen and Jerome : in modern
times it has been chiefly defended by Spanheim, in
his Historic/, Jobi. But for a translation there is too
much propriety and precision, in the use of words
and phrases ; the sentences are too compact, and free
from redundant expressions and members ; and too
much care is bestowed on their harmony and easy
flow. The parallelism also is too accurate and
perfect for a translation, and the whole breathes a
freshness that could be expected from an original
work only." (B. W. Hengstenberg, cited in Kitto's
Bible Cyclopcedia, vol. ii. p. 609 b.
The view, however, thus combated does not
appear to have commended itself to modern writers
generally. And this may excuse us from discussing
a 2

4 On Certain Questions concerning
the subject further. "We believe the form in which
we have the Book to be the same form in which it
Was originally penned. (As for the integrity of the
text, see below.) The language in which we have it,
and which we call Hebrew, we believe to have been
spoken (though with minor variations of dialect)
by all the tribes ranging from the Great Syrian
Desert eastward to the Mediterranean Sea west
ward; except the Syrians of Damascus and its
neighbourhood, who spoke a language known to us
as Aramaic, and the Phoenicians, if indeed these last
can be considered as really an exception. Thus we
believe it to have been spoken by the Moabites and
the Midianites ; and in the Hauran country. And
as we believe Balaam to have used it in his attempt
to curse Israel, — and Jael to have used it in invitino" p
Sisera to her tent, and Sisera to have used it in
asking for water, — so we believe it to have been the
language spoken by Job and those who conversed
with him; the interlocutors having been (as there
seems satisfactory ground for believing them to
have been) residents in the last-mentioned territory,
the country of the Hauran.

POSITION IN THE CANON.
The Book of Job occupies various positions in
the Sacred Canon, according to various authorities.
Of the Books comprising the Canon of the Old

the Book of Job. 5
Testament, Hody has collected a great number of
lists ; from which we have selected what seemed to
our purpose, including all the lists cited by him
from Greek authors down to St. Epiphanius in the
fourth century; including also some MSS. and
printed editions. All these may be classified in
groups, according to the order in which the Psalms,
the Proverbs, and Job are arranged in them severally.
I. Those in which the Psalms precede Job, and
Job the Proverbs.
II. Those in which the Psalms precede the
Proverbs, and the Proverbs Job.
III. Those in which Job precedes the Psalms,
and the Psalms the Proverbs.
IV. Those in which the Proverbs precede Job,
and Job the Psalms.
Of this last class, however, no more notice need
be taken.
Group I. The order in which the three aforenamed
books occur in this group has the authority of a
tradition given in that treatise of the Babylonian
Talmud called Bava Bathra, and which, so far as
the position of the Book of Job is conceraed, is
thus expressed : " Our Rabbies have taught that
the order of the Prophets is . . . The order of the
Hagiographa is, Ruth, and the Book of Psalms,
and Job, and Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of
Songs, and Lamentations, Daniel, and the Roll of
Esther, Ezra, and Chronicles." (Bava Bathra,

6 On Certain Questions concerning
fol. 14 b.) The importance of this tradition is
evidenced by the manner in which it is introduced :
it is given, not as the teaching of any individual
Rabbi, however eminent, but as a tradition of the
Rabbies in general. Thus, although the Bava
Bathra was not compiled until about the sixth
century of the Christian era, the tradition is
probably much older; and may, for aught we know,
be as old as the Men of the Great Synagogue. It
derives, too, additional weight from the fact that the
compilers of the Bava Bathra proposed another
order (if indeed such order had not been proposed
before), which other order some deemed to be
theoretically more correct : for the passage proceeds,
— " And according to the opinion that Job existed in
the days of Moses, let them put Job first ; so that I
may commence with punishments [with which] we
do not [usually] commence." If these Rabbies
believed their own view to be the correct one, why
should they specify the old tradition, and give it
the dignity of precedence ?
Group I. has also the authority of the LXX.
(according to the Alexandrine MS.), and of
Maimonides (Yad, Hillechoth Sepher Tor ah, ch. vii.
sub fin.), besides four Hebrew MSS. cited by Hody,
in which the three Books, Psalms, Job, and
Proverbs, occur together, and in the order here
cited : also Ben Asher and Ben N/aphtali.
Group II. Against the order of the preceding

the Book of Job. 7
group there appear some authorities of scarcely less
weight : — that of the Massoretes, according to which
the order of books is Psalms, Proverbs, Job, — and
that, apparently, of Josephus, who speaks of those
books in the same order ; though, as he inserts the
books of Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Joshua, Judges
(with Ruth), Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra (with
Nehemiah), and Esther, between Proverbs and Job,
his authority and that of the Massoretes must be
regarded as to a certain extent in conflict with one
another. Melito, Bishop of Sardis about a.d. 179,
mentions the Books in the same order, only inserting
Ecclesiastes and Canticles between Proverbs and
Job. Gregory bar Hebrseus inserts the two books
of Kings between Psalms and Proverbs, and
Ecclesiasticus, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Wisdom,
Ruth, and the Story of Susanna, between Proverbs
and Job. The Huntingdon MS. in the Bodleian
Library inserts Ecclesiastes between Proverbs and
Job. St. Athanasius inserts Ecclesiastes and Can
ticles in the same place ; and the same is done
in a Synopsis falsely ascribed to the same Saint.
Other authorities cited by Hody are, Origen, a list in
Galatinus, Bomberg's 4to Venice edition of 1491,
the Pisauris 1 4to edition of 1494, with four other
editions, Bomberg's Venice edition of 1515, which
puts the Psalms, Proverbs, and Job immediately after
the books of Kings, the Munster edition of 1534, the
1 Brescia is probably meant.

8 On Certain Questions concerning
Venice edition of 1547, an edition of Manasseh the
son of Israel (Amsterdam, 1635), in which the three
books are put immediately after the Law, an edition
by R. Leo (Modena) : with some others, cited by
Hody as " alii."
Group III. To this group belong the LXX.,
according to the Vatican MS.; the Ethiopic Version
of the Old Testament, made from the LXX. ;
St. Jerome's list; another list cited by him;
the so-called Apostolic Canons ; perhaps the
Council of Laodicea (a.d. 367) in this last Canon;
and St. Epiphanius (a.d. 374). To the same group
belong also St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Gregory of
JSazianzum, and Amphilochius ; who classify Job,
Psalms, and Proverbs together as poetical books,
St. Gregory of Nazianzum inserting Ecclesiastes and
Canticles between Psalms and Proverbs. But the
most remarkable instances in the group are two
MSS. of a Syriac version made from the LXX., and
in which Job is put next after the Law, — and a
Hebrew MS. in Oriel College Library, in which
the order is this : — first the Law, then " Sectiones
in synagogis legi solitge " (i.e., we suppose, the
Haphtoroth), and afterwards Joshua and Job.
Regarding which last order we may remark that
the place assigned in it to the Book of Job is
certainly not that which the Book held in the
Sacred Canon originally. And there can, we appre
hend, be only one explanation of the matter : viz.

the Book of Job. 9
that the Book of Job was put next after the Law
because it was believed by the scribe, or by those
from whom he copied, to have been composed, or at
least edited, by Moses.
"With this diversity of order, then, the question is,
Which order is the original one ? And looking at
Group I. first* we know of no other way in which
the order of books according to it (so far as regards
these three, Psalms, Job, and Proverbs) is to be
explained, save on the view that it was the original
order as settled by Ezra : these three books being
properly poetical ones, as counted by St. Gregory
of Nazianzum and by Amphilochius, and among the
three the Psalms holding precedence because of their
continual use, and Job and Proverbs next, in what
Ezra believed to be their true chronological order.
Those who adopted the order of books found in
Group III. had for their object, as would seem, the
bringing of the Psalms and the Proverbs together,
Solomon having been David's son, and Job being
put first because of its partly historical character,
and forming as it thus does a link between the
historical and the poetical Books, having itself in its
composition some prose as well as a great deal of
poetry. Or it may have been put first because
the compilers of the lists ascribed it to Moses; or
possibly, for both these reasons together.
In like manner is to be explained the order which
¦ we find in Group II. : here also the object having been,
a 3

10 On Certain Questions concerning
apparently, to bring the Psalms and the Proverbs
together, and Job being put after them, as having
more in common with the Proverbs than with the
Psalms. "We conclude, then, that (as we said) the true
order of these three Books, as settled by Ezra, is,
Psalms, Job, Proverbs. It is obvious that this
conclusion forms a datum for estimating the date at
which the Book of Job was written ; if the opinion
of Ezra thus indicated is to be accounted as having
any weight at all. And when we have regard to
that entire set of books which form the Hagiographa,
the rationale of the arrangement as given in the
Bava Bathra seems more likely to have been chrono
logical than otherwise, according to the view which
Ezra took of the authorship of the several books.
Thus we understand him to have deemed the author
of Job a cotemporary of David.

DATE AND AUTHORSHIP.
Some clue to the date of the Book will be afforded
by a consideration of the relations in which the Book
stands with respect to certain other Scriptures.
And some clue to the authorship of it will be afforded
by a determination of the country in which it must
have been written. To both these points, then, our
attention must now be directed.
Numerous quotations from, or allusions to, the

the Book of Job.

1 1

Book of Job are found in other portions of Holy
Scripture. Of these, by far the larger number,
perhaps, are found in Psalm xxxix., which we assume
to have been written by David the son of Jesse.
We proceed to give a list of those pairs of passages
which we have remarked, in Job and the above-
named Psalm, as containing respectively one and the
same idea, argument, or tone : —
Job vii. 11—21.

vii. 11-
viii. 9.
is. 17, «J?2ffl. — t :
x. 2, &c, " Show me.'
xiv. 1.

,, 7-
xvi. 20.

Psalm xxxix. 4 (Heb.).
„ 5.
» n, Tjjtta.
„ 5.
.. 5.
„ 6.
., 11-
„ 13-
.. 12.

xxiii. 12, *jpn (faw made by me 7
' * for myself). J

2.
2.

xxxi. 30, sinning with mouth.
Of those passages in the above list which are taken
from the Book of Job, ch. viii. 9, occurring in the
first speech of Bildad, is the only one which does
not occur in a speech of Job. The list next following
comprises pairs of passages in which one or more
words are identical, or nearly so.
Job vi. 11, ">2Jp. Ps. xxxix. 5 (Heb.), slightly different.

viii. 19, nyty.
„ 21,V)jm
ix. 27, ro^nm
x. 20, m^UNT
„ 21, -pjn anan-
xiii. 28, VV-
xiv. 6, rWEf.
xvi. 6, >1»3.

14, slightly different.

12, slightly different.
14, slightly different.
3.

A 4

i 2 On Certain Questions concerning
All the passages of Job in this second list are
taken from the speeches of Job. The identity proves
one of three positions : either (1) that both the
Psalmist and the author of Job drew from a common
document, — or (2) that the author of Job made use
of the 39th Psalm, — or (3) that the Psalmist made
use of the Book of Job.
Of these three alternatives we may dismiss the.
first as being in the highest degree improbable.
There is no parallel in the case of the identity of
expression found in the first three Gospels, inasmuch
as the writers of them must have had a tolerably
uniform oral teaching from which to draw; but
there is no evidence of the history of Job as having
been handed down, from generation to generation,
in the details in which we have it, otherwise than in
writing. Nor would any Arab tradition of details
be in point here, unless such tradition could be
proved to have arisen independently of the Koran.
Our second alternative was adopted by the late
Mr. Joseph Francis Thrupp,5 on the ground that
" the beauty and freshness of the Psalm, and its
union of brevity and completeness, almost forbid us
to suppose that it could ever have been compiled
out of extracts from different parts of a longer
2 Vicar of Barrington, Cambridgeshire, and formerly Fellow of
Trinity College, Cambridge. I cannot forbear a word of lament
over the loss which the Church sustained in the early decease of
this amiable and learned divine.

the Book of Job. 1 3
poem."3 The identity of expression, however, may
be explained in another way. Just as in Psalm v.
David assumes the character of a priest preparing
to offer the morning sacrifice, and just as in Psalm
xxv. he assumes the character of the historical Jacob,
so in Psalm xxxix. he may be assuming the character
of Job.4 So far, then, as the passages in the last list
are concerned, the choice between alternatives. (2)
and (3) is still open.
Another pair of passages, moreover, may be now
mentioned, in which we have a general similarity in
sense, but nevertheless an entire difference of ex
pression : — Job vii. 11 with Psalm xxxix. 3 (4, Heb.).
If the Book of Job were a mere expansion of the
Psalm, we should surely have found at least one of
the Psalmist's words in the passage of Job. The
absence, then, of identity of expression in this case
inclines us in favour of the third alternative men
tioned above.6
In Job v. 17 we have a passage similar in sense
to Psalm xciv. 12 ; but with only one word (nm*)
the same in both.
That passage of Job is also similar to Proverbs iii.
3 Introduction to the Study and Use of the Psalms, vol. i. p. 213.
4 See Thrupp's remarks on these Psalms severally, in the work
just cited.
5 There is yet another pair of passages, viz., Job xxxii. 18 — 20
(in Elihu's first speech), and Psalm xxxix. 3 (4, Heb.), where the
unreasonableness of expecting an identity of expression is not so
obvious, but not by any means inconceivable.

14 On Certain Questions concerning
11; but where we have HtB in Job, we have 'T\ in
Proverbs. It does not seem possible to decide from these
passages alone, which is the oldest. Each has its
own context, and all appear to fit into their respec
tive contexts equally well.
In Job xii. 25 and Psalm cvii. 27 we have the
same expression ("nSKto, like a drunken man) used
in two different references. In Job the reference is
metaphorical, in the Psalm it is literal. The coinci
dence is curious, — but as the expression fits, to all
appearance, equally well into either context, it does
not seem possible to build an argument upon it.
But in Job xii. 21 we have a passage identical in
words with part of Psalm cvii. 40. And here there
can, we think, be no question but the Psalmist copied
from the Book of Job, and not the author of Job
from the Psalm. For the passage sounds abrupt in
the Psalm, while it harmonizes excellently with its
context in Job.
No one can fail to be struck with the correspon
dence in idea between Job xxxvi. 5 — 7 and Psalm
cxii. 5 — 8. At the same time, it is evident that
neither passage is a quotation from the other. But
if the author of the Book of Job had had the Psalm
before him, would he not have preferred borrowing
the elegant language which was there ready to his
hand, to using his own, awkward and elliptical in
the highest degree ? This makes in favour of as-

the Book of Job. 1 5
signing an earlier date to the Book of Job, in pro
portion to the probability which there is that Psalms,
composed for use in Divine worship, would speedily
become known to the company of God's people in
general, and chiefly to such among them as were
being employed by God the Holy Ghost in writing
canonical books.
With regard to the locality in which the Book of
Job was written, we see no reason against assuming
it to have been the same country as that in which
the events of which it treats happened; i.e. the
country of the Hauran, east of the Jordan, and
beyond the Israelitish territory. The caravans by
which that country was traversed will have sufficed
for bringing to the writer what information he shows
himself to have possessed about such animals as the
crocodile, the elephant, and the hippopotamus, about
mining operations carried on in Arabia, about the
Egyptian name for marsh-grass,8 and about the
papyrus, a plant which even now chokes up half of
the lake Huleh.7 A writer of that country, when
wishing to specify some large river, would naturally
specify the Jordan rather than any other.8 And he
might designate himself as one of the " children of
the East," having respect to that tract of country
over which he knew his mother-tongue to be spoken ;
6 TTN, Job viii. 11.
' See Macgregor's Bob Boy on the Jordan.
8 See Job xl. 23.

1 6 On Certain Questions concerning
just as "the largest land-owner in the Eastern
counties " is an expression which, might just as well
be used by an inhabitant of one of those same.
counties in England, as by a Welshman. Anyhow,
the use of the above-mentioned expression by the
author of the Book of Job9 must limit the composi
tion of the book either to Palestine or to the Hauran :,
it could not have been used either in Arabia or in
Egypt. And the acquaintance shown by the writer,
with the manners and customs of the country1 is
such as of itself to force upon us the conviction that
he must have acquired his knowledge by actual,
observation. It must not be forgotten, too, that the
traditions of the Hauran itself make Job a native
of it.2
We are now in a position to form some opinion as
to when and by whom the Book of Job was written ;
or if not exactly as to the person by whom it was
written, yet at all events as to one person by whom
it was not written.
The evidence furnished by position in the Canon
is, as far as we have been able to judge, incapable of
being explained on any merely chronological view.
9 Job i. 3.
1 See especially Job ii. 9 ; and note the definite article in the
expression " the ashes " (¦rijs Koirpias, LXX.), explained by a remark
of Dr. Wetzstein, cited by Delitzsch, to mean the heap of ashes
left from burning the cattle-droppings used for fuel, and which is
to be seen outside of every Hauranitish village.
2 See Schumacher's Across the Jordan, pp. 188, &c.

the Book of Job. 1 7
That is, those who assigned to it one place or another
in the sacred list, and whose authority is of any.
weight, do not appear to have been influenced by
mere chronological considerations. There are, in
deed, as we have seen, indications, which can scarcely
be questioned, of a belief, in the authors of some of
the lists cited above, that the Book was written by
Moses ; not to speak of the express declarations in
the Bava Bathra. But in fixing the position of the
Book in the Canon that belief was overriden by
other considerations ; generally the consideration of
the character of the Book itself.
The principal arguments on the ground of which
the Book is referred to the patriarchal age are
these : —
1. Archaic language : the obscurity which " is
owing to obsolete words, intense concentration
of thought . . . and incidental allusions to long-
forgotten traditions:" so Canon Cook states this
argument. (Smith's Diet, of the Bible, art. Job (p.
1096 b).
2. Archaic style. "Firm [we quote Canon Cook
again, p. 1095 b], compact, sonorous as the ring of
a pure metal, severe and at times rugged, yet always.
dignified and majestic, the language belongs al
together to a period when thought was slow, but
profound and intensely concentrated, when the
weighty and oracular sayings of the wise were wont
to be engraved upon rocks with a pen of iron and in

1 8 On Certain Questions concerning
characters of molten lead (see xix. 24). It is truly
a lapidary style."
3. Manners and customs. "Ewald, whose judg
ment in this case will not be questioned," says Canon
Cook once more [p. 1097 a], " asserts very positively
that in all the descriptions of manners and customs,
domestic, social, and political, and even in the indi
rect allusions and illustrations, the genuine colouring
of the age of Job, that is of the period between
Abraham and Moses, is very faithfully observed :
that all historical examples and allusions are taken
exclusively from patriarchal times."
4. Silence as to later historical events ; and espe
cially as to the giving of the Law. There is in the
Book of Job an evident reference to the Flood (ch.
xxii. 16) ; and perhaps a reference to the destruction
of the cities of the plain by fire and brimstone (ch.
xviii. 15) : but these are apparently all the allusions
which there are in the Book to any events wherewith
we are acquainted.3 And yet "the sanctions and
penalties of the Law, if known, could scarcely [Canon
Cook thinks, p. 1096 b] have been passed over by
the opponents of Job, while the deliverance of Israel
and the overthrow of the Egyptians supplied exactly
the examples which they required in order to silence
the complaints and answer the arguments of Job."
a It is possible that there may be an allusion in ch. xxxiv. 20
to the death of the Egyptian first-born, — in ch. xxxvi. 7 to the
history of Joseph,— and in ch. xxxviii. 23 to the discomfiture of
the Canaanites (Josh. x. 11).

the Book of Job. 19
On the other hand, it may be remarked that of
the alleged obsoleteness of any words used in the
Book of Job we have no proof at all. Of the inci
dental allusions to traditions Canon Cook adduces
no one instance ; and even if he had adduced any,
we might still have demanded evidence of the tra
dition as having been long-forgotten at the time
when the Book was written.
When, characterizing the style of the Book as
" truly a lapidary style," the Canon adds, " such as
was natural only in an age when writing, though
known, was rarely used, before language had
acquired clearness, fluency, and flexibility, but lost
much of its freshness and native force," — we may
observe that that passage will be just as true if
for the words "an age when . . ." we substitute
"a country where . . ." How many of the in
habitants of the Hauran, we wonder, understand
reading and writing even now ?
And, indeed, the first three of the above argu
ments, and that part of the fourth which relates to
striking historical events in general, seem entirely
set aside by considerations of the country and the
admitted character of its inhabitants. We talk
about the unchanging East; and we talk truly.
Manners and customs remain, in the East, unchanged
for centuries; and where manners and customs
remain unchanged, there will not be any material
change of language. Therefore, as the manners

20 On Certain Questions concerning
and customs described in the Book of Job may, to
our thinking, have been equally referable to any
period of time from that of Abraham down to our
own, so we may refer the language of the Book to
any period from the time of Abraham to the time
when Moslem conquests extended the empire of the
Arabic language to the disparagement of its sister-
tongues. Similar remarks may be made with regard to the
argument derived from the fact that no reference is
made in the Book to the Mosaic Law. That argu
ment is nullified by this consideration : that in the
events described in our Book, neither Israel in
general, nor any Israelite in particular, was con
cerned at the time : and the Law was given for the
Israelitish nation only. Suppose an Englishman
residing among the Boers of South Africa were to
write a poetical narrative of certain events which
had happened there, and of a discussion carried on
among the Boers who knew nothing, or next to
nothing, of any concerns except their own, he would
not dream of putting into a Boer's mouth any
allusions to passages of English history, or re
ferences to points in English constitutional law.
And the people of the Hauran were probably as far
separate from Palestinian influences in the time of
Job (whatever that time may have been), as they
are now, or as, until the last few years, the Boers
were from English influences. And when Canon

the Book of Job. 2 1
Cook remarks, " The sanctions and penalties of the
law, if known, could scarcely have been passed over
by the opponents of Job, while the deliverance of
Israel and the overthrow of the Egyptians supplied
exactly the examples which they required in order
to silence the complaints and answer the arguments
of Job" (Smith's Diet, of the Bible, vol. i. p. 1096 b),
we confess ourselves entirely unable to see how
God's dealings with Israel would really form a
sufficient answer to Job's arguments. Those deal
ings were special, and for a special purpose ; Job,
on the other hand, treats of God's dealings with the
world at large, and with himself in particular, who,
even if he knew anything at all about the Mosaic
dispensation, was himself, at any rate, altogether
outside it.
One argument might seem to make the scale pre
ponderate towards assigning the Book to the patri
archal age. We mean, the argument to be derived
from the use, in the Book (ch. xlii. 7), of the word
keseetah. Assuming that nwvp means either a
coin called a " lamb," or a quantity of silver equal
to the average value of a lamb, and thence deriving
its name, we conceive that such an expression could
only be used in a time when such a standard was in
actual use, so that the meaning of the word would be
generally understood. And however constant might
be the general manners and customs of the country,
those manners and customs remaining the same from

22 On Certain Questions concerning
one age to another, yet in a country which was
traversed by caravans to and from the neighbouring
countries, it may be that the currency could not
avoid being affected by whatever changes took place
in the currencies of the countries around ; so that
as the money-coinage in those other countries
advanced from what had been used in the times of
primitive simplicity, that in the Hauran also would
advance, so that the old coinage would fall into
disuse, and the old names be forgotten. Against
this, however, must be set our inability to estimate
the time which would have to elapse before such a
change could be fully effected.
To sum up, then, the result of these investi
gations : — We have concluded that the Book was
written in the same country where the scene of it is
laid — i.e. in the Hauran : and that is a country
which does .not appear to have ever been visited by
Moses. We have seen, from the relations which the
Book bears to other Scriptures, reason to think that
it is older than Jeremiah — older than Isaiah — and
older than the 39th Psalm. We have also in
ferred, from its true place in the Canon, that Ezra
deemed its author to be cotemporary with David.
On the whole, therefore, we incline to the opinion
that the Book was written by some Israelite whose
name is unknown to us, and who had emigrated to
the Hauran in or about the time of David, and
under similar circumstances, perhaps, to those

the Book of Job. 23
recorded in Ruth i. 1, 1 Samuel xii. 7. There the
Israelite in question fell in with the history of Job,
and there he committed it to writing in the form in
which we have it now. If in ch. xxxiv. 20 there is
an allusion to the death of the Egyptian firstborn,
and in ch. xxxvi. 7 an allusion to the history of
Joseph, these will be, as far as they go, confirma
tory of the view now taken : and so also if there
is an allusion, in ch. xxxviii. 23, to the discomfiture
of the Canaanites (Josh. x. 11).

INTEGRITY OF THE TEXT.
By asserting the integrity of the text of the Book
of Job, we mean to assert that the text has under
gone no material alteration in any respect ; but
that we have it as it came from the editing pen of
Ezra. We thus express an opinion the reverse of what is
held by some eminent scholars ; who maintain that
several passages, as we have them, are in a wrong
order; and not only so, but that in one place a
whole verse has been lost, on the insertion of which
depends an important part of the argument.
Of course, if our present text can be proved
defective in so vital a point as this last, the
presumption in favour of its integrity in other
respects will be weakened. Let us, then, first

24 On Certain Questions concerning
consider the insertion which Kennicott, Bernard,
and Elzas propose to make, immediately before
ch. xxvii. 13 : viz. "Then answered Zophar the
Naamathite, and said."
In favour of this insertion two arguments
are adduced : —
1 . The character of the passage which immediately
follows, viz. ch. xxvii. 13 to end of ch. xxviii. ; more
especially the last half of ch. xxvii ; the argument
of which is more proper in the mouth of one of
Job's friends than in the mouth of Job himself.
This is forcibly put by Bernard : — " Let the reader
ask himself, whether the calamities, which are de
picted in the eleven verses as sure to overtake the
wicked, could possibly be assigned to them by one
who has, like Job, over and over again asserted^
that they meet with nothing but unparalleled
prosperity and success," &c. (p. 237).
2. The character of such sentiments as that in
xxviii. 39 ; which, Bernard most reasonably alleges,
could not be truly classed among " words without
knowledge;" that term being applied to Job's
speeches both by Elihu, and even by God Himself,
(Bernard, p. 245.)
3. The fact that while Eliphaz and Bildad have
each three speeches allotted to them, Zophar, with
our present text, has only two. Therefore, it is
urged, either a whole speech of Zophar's has been
lost, or else we must supply "Then answered

the Book of Job. 25
Zophar the Naamathite, and said" at some point
or other in ch. xxvii. or xxviii. : and if so, there can
be no doubt but the interval between verse 12 and 13
of ch. xxvii. is the place where the insertion should
properly be made.
With regard to the first of these arguments, it
may be observed that the insertion of a single
word is enough to meet it : the insertion of the
word iDab, saying. (By "insertion" we mean, by
Way of understanding, not expression.) There are
numberless passages of the Bible in which the
supplying of that word, or of its like, is necessary
for completing the sense ; and in which, accordingly,
it is supplied by every one. (One instance familiar
to all readers is Psalm ii. 2, 3 ; between which
verses the word " saying " is very properly inserted,
in italics, by King James's Translators.) And we
are therefore amply justified in supplying it in the
passage now under consideration.
In reply to the second argument, we would only
observe that the charge of uttering " words without
knowledge" applies to Job's speeches in general;
and not to any particular statements or expressions
which may be found in them. In Job's speeches
there are plenty of passages which are full of truth,
unquestioned and unquestionable : and the last
verse of ch. xxviii. is one such.
The third argument is very plausible. But the
27th chapter of Job is not the only place of Holy

26 On Certain Questions concerning
Scripture in which, as our text stands, there is some
apparent defect. Another such passage is in Psalm
cxlv., which is an alphabetical acrostic, each verse
commencing with a letter of the alphabet in its proper
order, save that there is no verse commencing with
Nun. There, a superficial critic cries out at once
that there was a Nun-yevse once, and that it has been
lost. He, however, who looks deeper accepts the
Psalm as we have it in the Hebrew Text, and holds
that the omission of a Nun-verse was designed.4
Similarly in this case, we maintain that the at
tributing of two speeches rather than three to
Zophar. is a part of the writer's express design.
For even if the curtailing of Zophar's words does
seem anomalous, yet it is not the only anomaly.
Bildad's words also are curtailed : his third speech
is only five verses long. But the explanation, we
believe, is this : — and a very sufficient explanation it
seems to be : — viz. that the sacred writer desired to
express artificially the progressive failure of Job's
three friends to answer his complaints and argu
ments. This failure is seen in the progressive
diminishing of their speeches : thus, Eliphaz's first
4 The Eabbinic explanation is very beautiful, and (we cannot
help thinking) the true one: — "The Nun is lacking from the
alphabet [of initial letters in this Psalm], because David saw
therein a grievous fall : ^Nlt^ n'jiru Dip ^DITI nbl n^ED, the
virgin of Israel is fallen, she shall no more rise (Amos vi. 2). But
he turned again, and by the Holy Spirit put next to it [the verse]
'The Lord upholdeth all that fall."' Note embodied in the
commentary of Kashi in loco.

the Book of Job. 2 7
speech occupies 50 verses (almost all of two
chapters); his second 34, and his third 29.
Bildad's first speech occupies 21 verses ; his second
20, and his third only 5. Zophar's first speech is
contained in 19 verses. His second speech, it is
true, has as many as 28 ; but by this extra effort
(so to call it) he exhausts himself, and when he
should speak a third time, he has not a word more
to add ; his argument failing him altogether.
Manuscript authority is entirely against the pro
posed insertion. We know, indeed, that manuscript
authority in Hebrew books is not of the same value
as in Greek. Still, however, it is a consideration
not to be entirely despised, that of all the MSS. of
Job which we possess, not one is known to contain
the proposed insertion. Every MS. without excep
tion which has been collated attributes the whole
of chapters xxvii. and xxviii. to Job.
Again, if chapter xxviii. had been really an utter
ance (or part of an utterance) of Zophar's, chapter
xxix. would not have commenced as it does, but
with "12NVI 2VN $1, But Job answered and said :
as before.
Bernard speaks cf the words (proposed to be
supplied) " Then answered Zophar the Naamathite,
and said" — as a mere mark. So they doubtless are.
But then, so also is every verse in the Bible ; nay,
we may say, so is every chapter ; the only difference
beino- that these are marks of a more complex

28 On Certain Questions concerning
character, and indicative of more complex ideas.
But if (as is probably the case) he means by this
expression to imply that we can dispense with such
a " mark " in the same way as we can dispense with
inverted commas, we utterly deny such a position ;
seeing that it is not supported by any parallel
instances whatever. The ellipsis of such expres
sions as "saying," "he said," "one said," "the
other said," and the like, are not in point; for in
them the ideas implied are no more than one, or at
the most two ; and those, obvious enough to be
taken in a glance : whereas here we should have
not merely the idea of a voice speaking to Job, but
a certain voice in particular ; and we should need
a distinct proposition to1 inform us whose voice ;
which thing would not be obvious at first ; and
would, indeed, only be surmised (if it were to be
surmised at all) when the argument of the following
verses had been duly considered.
And this consideration derives additional force
from the truth that the Book of Job is not a common
work, written merely by a human person and for a
human purpose. It is one of those Books which
were "given by inspiration of God," for the purpose
of teaching God's people valuable lessons concerning
Him. Now we may be very sure that in a case like
this, where the omission of a verse must be owned,
on the view which we are combating, to have led
nine-tenths of the translators and commentators

the Book of Job. 29
astray, such an omission is with God simply im
possible. Grant that such a verse as it is proposed
to insert did once exist in this place, and we un
hesitatingly assert that for the sake of the Divine
truthfulness that verse must, in God's Providence,
have been preserved.
The same arguments will apply to the cases of
alleged transposition. These are —
ch. xxxix. 19 — 25, which, says Bernard, ought to follow v. 30.
xl. 1 — 5, „ „ „ xlii. 6.
xl. 32 — xii. 3 (in Auth. Vers. xii. 8 — 11), which, says
Bernard, ought to follow xii, 26 (34 Auth. Vers.).
Every one of these passages can be made to fit well
into the context in which we find it, provided only
that we do not assume too much at first. Bernard
assumes that the Divine speech will be regulated in
all respects according to the strict rules of human
oratory. This, however, is a thing which either
may be or may not be; and when the Christian
reader calls to mind how in later times GOD
Incarnate condescended, in naming two of His
disciples, to use a provincialism (for such the word
Boanerges is believed by scholars to be); and when
he calls to mind the numerous pieces of bad
grammar and bad diction which occur in the
At>ocalypse, he need not hesitate to ascribe even to
Almighty God, in the arrangement of His discourse
as poetically described in the Book of Job, such
apparent breaches of order as we find attributed to

30 On Certain Questions concerning Job.
Him in the text as we have it. In all such matters
the true wisdom appears to be to take things as
we find them, and form our theories accordingly :
not to alter the text in order to square with
our theories.
Some critics consider all the speeches of Elihu to
have been interpolated into the original work.
Against this view we would urge the following con
sideration : — The concluding section of the Book,
viz. chapter xlii. 7 to end, is clearly connected with
the first. Again, the first verse of the concluding
section necessarily refers to the speeches put pre
viously into the mouth of the Deity. But in the
opening of the first of those speeches the word
7TW0, whirlwind, has the definite article : now there
are, indeed, instances of the use of the definite
article without any apparent reference to a thing
previously defined ; unless, however, there is a
special reason for counting this among them (which
we have never seen), the definite article here must
refer to the concluding portion of the speech of
Elihu ; or rather, to that same whirlwind to which
Elihu had been calling attention. And this will
establish the genuineness of that part of Elihu's
speech : but if of a part, then of the whole ; for we
cannot break up the connection, as, on the opposite
view, would have to be done.
GILBERT A-ND RIVINGTON, LIMITED, ST. JOHN'S SQUARE, LONDON-.

1542