YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE

BAMPTON LECTURES
1889

Q
THE

ORIGIN AND RELIGIOUS CONTENTS

OF

THE PSALTER
IN THE LIGHT OF OLD TESTAMENT CRITICISM
AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS
WITH AN INTRODUCTION 4ND APPENDICES
(Eigftf feecfuree
PREACHED BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD IN THE YEAR 1 889
ON THE FOUNDATION OF THE LATE REV. JOHN BAMPTON, M.A.
CANON OF SALISBURY

BY
THOMAS KELLY CHEYNE, M.A., D.D.
ORIEL PROFESSOR OF THE INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE
CANON OF ROCHESTER

LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER, & CO. Ltd.
1891

( The rights of translation and of reproduction are reserved)

TO THE
RIGHT REV. JAMES MOORHOUSE, D.D.
LORD BISHOP OF MANCHESTER
WHO HAS NOT DESPAIRED OF PRESENT AND FUTURE BENEFIT TO THE CHURCH
FROM THE MORE HISTORICAL STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
AND WHO OPENED WIDE THE DOOR OF PROGRESS AT THE MANCHESTER
CHURCH CONGRESS IN MDCCCLXXXVIII

EXTRACT
FROM THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT
OF THE LATE
REV. JOHN BAMPTON,
CANON OF SALISBURY.

 ' I give and bequeath my Lands and Estates to the Chan
cellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University of Oxford for ever,
to have and to hold all and singular the said Lands or Estates upon
trust, and to the intents and purposes hereinafter mentioned ; that
is to say, I will and appoint that the Vice- Chancellor of the Uni
versity of Oxford for the time being shall take and receive all the
rents, issues, and profits thereof, and (after all taxes, reparations, and
necessary deductions made) that he pay all the remainder to the
endowment of eight Divinity Lecture Sermons, to be established for
ever in the said University, and to be performed in the manner
following :
' I direct and appoint, that, upon the first Tuesday in Easter
Term, a Lecturer be yearly chosen by the Heads of Colleges only,
and by no others, in the room adjoining to the Printing- House,
between the hours of ten in the morning and two in the afternoon,
to preach eight Divinity Lecture Sermons, the year following, at
St. Mary's in Oxford, between the commencement of the last month
in Lent Term, and the end of the third week in Act Term.
'Also I direct and appoint, that the eight Divinity Lecture
Sermons shall be preached upon either of the following Subjects —
to confirm and establish the Christian Faith, and to confute all
heretics and schismatics — upon the divine authority of the holy

viii EXTRACT FROM CANON BAMPTON'S WILL.
Scriptures— upon the authority of the writings of the primitive
Fathers, as to the faith and practice of the primitive Church — upon
the Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ — upon the Divinity
of the Holy Ghost— upon the Articles of the Christian Faith, as
comprehended in the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds.
' Also I direct, that thirty copies of the eight Divinity Lecture
Sermons shall be always printed, within two months after they are •
preached ; and one copy shall be given to the Chancellor of the
University, and one copy to the Head of every College, and one
copy to the Mayor of the city of Oxford, and one copy to be put
into the Bodleian Library ; and the expense of printing them shall
be paid out of the revenue of the Land or Estates given for estab
lishing the Divinity Lecture Sermons ; and the Preacher shall not
be paid, nor be entitled to the revenue, before they are printed.
' Also I direct and appoint, that no person shall be qualified to
preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons, unless he hath taken the
degree of Master of Arts at least, in one of the two Universities of
Oxford or Cambridge ; and that the same person shall never preach
the Divinity Lecture Sermons twice.'

INTRODUCTION.

(I.— III.) Explaining the Origin and Critical Basis, and (IV.)
Illustrating some Features in the Contents of these
Lectures.

I.
THE present work may at least claim to be comprehensive.
The first part of it might be enlarged, with the help of the
underlying researches, into a synthetic Introduction to the
Old Testament ; the second into a historical sketch of post-
Exilic Jewish religion down to the time of Christ. There
would be only one hindrance, the same which has delayed
the appearance of this work, namely, the continued necessity
of not overworking my sight. As each fragment of long-
planned work is finished, I cannot withhold the expression
of deep thankfulness. But — semper amari aliquid. I have
already had a foretaste of the rough treatment to which these
Lectures are exposed through a misapprehension of their
object,1 and I fear that even with the printed page before
them some readers may not find it easy to give it a fair con
sideration. It may be worth while in an Introduction to
assist such to understand both the author and his point of
view. And first, what is the object of this book, which is
so much more than a collection of actually spoken discourses ?
1 Even Mr. Gore misapprehends, not, I am sure, my object, but my theory,
to judge from his somewhat unkind and premature reference to it {Lux Mundi,
ed. 10, Preface, p. xxi.).

INTRODUCTION.

It is primarily historical, but also in a very real sense apolo
getic. . At the present juncture we seem to need a more
critical study of the facts which condition the outward form
of Christianity. Some of the most .important of these are of
course to be found in the Old Testament, as the crown of
which we may justly regard the Psalms. The history of the
growth of the Psalter must therefore first of all be studied,
and if the whole of it, practically, should prove to belong to
the great post-Exilic period, we shall have to compare the
religious ideas of the Psalter, obtained by a careful exegesis,
with those of the peoples with whom the Israelites came into
the closest contact.
I am far from expecting or even desiring to make at once
a large number of converts to my theories (mine, not in any
invidious sense). I wish to help, not to force, my fellow-
students. Of most I would only ask that they would keep
my argument in view for a long time, and ponder first one
part of it and then another again and again. They must
remember that many subordinate problems are involved, the
solution of which, though always important for critical accu
racy, may sometimes without serious loss be postponed.
And in the study both of these and of the main problem
they must be so fair as to suppose that the objections to
my solutions which may occur to them have most probably
occurred to me, and should not be too hastily presumed
to be insurmountable. In a word or a sentence, or, more
often, a note, these objections may prove to have been
met, though I must regretfully confess that even with the
aid of notes I have not always been able to exhibit the full
strength of my arguments. May I suggest that the best way
to study the book (if it should be so fortunate as to find
students) would be, first to read it without and next with the
notes, and with the appendices ; and that possibly some of
my older readers would do well to read the second part
(beginning at Lect. VI.) before the first ? I should like to

INTRODUCTION.

add that by the patient use of the Index of Passages this
volume may to some extent serve as a critical commentary
on the Psalms and on related passages of the Bible. It is, I
know, but too probable that this may seem to many an
extravagant request. They may wish that I had selected
some far simpler critical problem, and treated of the difficul
ties which it may have caused to belief from the most deve
loped dogmatic point of view. Some future Bampton Lec
turer may adopt such a course, which would be both modest
and safe. That one who addresses not only Hebraists but
the religious public at large, to which he appears to be only
known as a recent writer, should act differently, doubtless
demands some justification, which I will now in the second
place proceed to give.
Yes ; the problem of the origin of the Psalter (not to speak
now of the problem of the development of its ideas) is cer
tainly a complicated one. But to a competent scholar that
will be its strongest recommendation. In the light of the
history of Old Testament criticism, this is the very moment
to attack it. Why have there been hitherto such great differ
ences of opinion respecting its solution ? Because it has been
treated without sufficient reference to collateral problems.
This was excusable on the ground that the examination of
those problems was still in an early stage. Of late however
solutions of many of them, approximately certain, have been
obtained, and critics can return to the problem of the Psalter in
the sure hope that, if it can be solved in a manner historically
intelligible, the solutions of those other problems will become
all the more convincing. The cautious reader will therefore
ask now to be assured whether the Lecturer who in 1889
adopted so novel a course was a recent fledgeling or a critic of
fully adequate experience.
The antecedents of a student are only important in so far
as they explain the road by which he has travelled. The
taste for Biblical problems is with me, so to speak, an inherited

INTRODUCTION.

one ; I deserve no credit for it. I could not be disloyal to
my earliest teacher, whose spirit is in me still, and whose
work, which faintly shone in a dark period, it is my privilege
to continue. To other teachers I have incurred far greater
intellectual debts. But to him I owe the example of a mild
and yet fervent Johannine religion, and a Pauline love
of the Scriptures. One thing more he both taught and
practised— the disregard of luxury. No credit then is due
to me for being content to study for ten years in silence
and poverty till the college of Scott and Jowett for the
first time opened a fellowship (Nov. 1869) to Semitic and
Biblical scholarship ; much less for the enthusiasm with
which, fresh from Gottingen, I looked forward to the day
when native Biblical scholars should resume the work of
Lowth, so fruitful in Germany, so fruitless for the time in
England. There was then another dreamer too in Oxford,
whose enthusiasm was more practical than mine, the late Dr.
Appleton, who aspired to promote critical theology not less
than other studies, and used to discuss and give clearness to
my ideas at the time of the foundation of the Academy
(1869- 1 870). It was largely owing to this friend that I per
severed in free Old Testament criticism, when alone in Oxford
and probably in the Anglican Church. It might not be impos
sible, he thought, in course of years for me and for others to
make even a smaller weight of learning than Pusey's available
for progress by the sedulous polishing of the critical faculty.
Neither of us knew then that outside my own communion I
had a powerful and brilliant fellow-worker in distant Aber
deen. Nor that in my own neighbourhood a younger scholar
was being matured to take his share at first in the purely
linguistic but at last also with growing firmness in the fully
critical treatment of the Old Testament.
Thrown once more on my own resources since the sad
death of my friend Appleton, I entered on a fresh phase of
experience. I felt isolated, like so many overzealous stu-

INTRODUCTION.

dents, and began to doubt whether I had not valued research
too highly, and whether my inner life was not suffering from
a sometimes too keen and unsympathetic criticism. Those
doubts were not altogether unfounded. But though I should
now soften some too incisive statements of earlier days, I
have written nothing which in the light of further experience
I can wish absolutely to retract. The thought of a palinode,
which has been imputed to me, has never entered my head.
Some of the work begun between 1870 and 1876 has quite
lately been finished ; some more will yet, if health be granted,
find its completion. I am thankful for the task long since
committed to me, and am not less strict a critic than of old
because now more of a church- teacher. I had however to
pass through a difficult experience in order to gain or regain
full sympathy with brethren left behind. There are many
traces of this in my third work on Isaiah, which I confess
. surprise me now and then a little myself. The reader must
not misinterpret this. Those who sympathize with critical
progress, and remember how cold Oxford and the Church
apparently were between 1870 and 1880, will admit that I
have some right to be surprised. During those bitter years
a piercing and reconciling word on the subject of the Bible
was impossible, because Church and university would none
of those things which criticism had discovered. In its self-
suppression and in its irenic and apologetic attitude the
Isaiah of 1 880-1 881 was a strong effort of faith in the unseen.
Many younger students were, it is true, being prepared to meet
me, but I did not know of their existence. Yet no credit is
due either to me for fny advances towards them, or to them
for their advances towards me. We were all of us being
gently led forward by different routes. A high tide of God's
Spirit had been sweeping over Oxford and the Church. In
one obscure student its influence showed itself in this— that
Johannine religion reasserted its supremacy over criticism
and speculation. He came to realize the full meaning of

INTRODUCTION.

words which he had himself penned in his first book,
' Rationalism and mysticism have been hitherto the poles of
exegesis ; yet each of these, exclusive as they seem, may
serve to indicate a higher region where contradictions repose
in the light of God's truth.' 1 He ceased to require to see for
himself the full reconciliation of seemingly opposed truths,
though determined to do his best both as a finder of truths
and as an inquirer after the truth. Without subscribing to
Goethe's sentence ' Grau, theurer Freund, ist alle Theorie,'
he felt that he needed for himself, both inwardly and out
wardly, a fuller experience of truth. And so he was uncon
sciously prepared to receive a new and unexpected call. On
the eve of a journey to the East, he turned back, and bound
himself by the obligations of a country pastor. He had his
reward ; the sense of spiritual isolation passed from him and
he gained the pastoral spirit. But was this a reward to rest
in ? Was there not another priesthood, not less of divine
appointment than that of the Church — the priesthood of study
and of teaching ? And in this student's life ought not the
latter to take the precedence of the former ? Meantime it
became evident enough that the long frost which had bound
up the study of the Bible, was breaking. The religious
temper at Oxford seemed to be becoming more irenic and in
the best sense Christian. Partizanship seemed to be dimi
nishing ; there might possibly be room for one who ventured
to combine what men call or miscall rationalism and mysti
cism. When therefore in 1887 a new academical prospect
opened before him, he went hopefully to meet it.

II.
This third period of ten years begins with the Prophecies
of Isaiah, and ends with the Lectures on the Psalms. Is
there any noteworthy difference between these books, beyond
1 Notes and Criticisms on the Heb. Text of Isaiah, T869, p. ix.

INTRODUCTION.

the fact that the one is primarily exegetical, the other mainly
critical and historical ? To be frank, there is. That extreme
self-suppression which marks the former work throughout,
and that willingness to concede to tradition all that could
with any plausibility be conceded, it would be scarcely proper
to exhibit in the altered circumstances of the Church. In
1880 it was still a heresy to accept with all its consequences
the plurality of the authorship of the Book of Isaiah ; in
1 890, to a growing school of church-students this has become
an indubitable fact. In 1880, seeing too much with the eyes
of my expected readers, I adopted a possible but not suffi
ciently probable view of certain psalms, and a possible but
not sufficiently probable view of the central prophecy of the
Second Isaiah. In 1890, seeing entirely with my own eyes
not less as an apologist than as a critic, I offer my readers
the truest solution which I can find of these and of all other
problems, believing that this course is now, for the Church
itself, both necessary and right. Let those Church-teachers
cast a stone at me for this seeming inconsistency, who were
able in 1880 to act as I have done in 1890.
The reader will, I think, have seen that my outer and
inner history was preparing me to produce exactly such a
book as this. Each part of these Bampton Lectures has
grown out of work already done, and its mental attitude is
the result of my whole experience. It still remains for me
to indicate the researches on which the present volume is
partly based, and which are not merely personal, but express
views to which many, both here and in America, have of late
been drawing nearer. It was in 1869 that a small book of
Notes and Criticisms on the Hebrew Text of Isaiah announced
the principles to which I hoped, and still hope, to be true,
viz. that preconceived theological notions ought to be
rigorously excluded from exegesis. In 1870, in The Book of
Isaiah Chronologically Arranged, I adopted what many now
regard as the best way of promoting the assimilation of
a

INTRODUCTION.

critical ideas. The work condescends too little to the general
reader, and there are too many gaps in the commentary.
The limits of the work, its date, and the circumstances of the
writer will explain this. But there are some evident signs of
progress. In criticism the book is by no means a servile
copy of Ewald, and in the stress which it lays on the develop
ment of religious ideas and on the illustration of Isaiah by
Assyriology, it takes a clear step beyond him. Both in
these two latter points and in its acceptance of the unity of
Isa. xl.-lxvi. (a theory easier than any other to commend to
beginners) it anticipates a recent work with similar objects
from the able pen of Dr. Driver. I have had to refer to this
book at p. 275 on Isa. liii. My next subjects of special but
(as will be seen) not exclusive study were the Books of
Genesis and Jeremiah. It was no doubt rash, considering
the state of the public mind, to meddle with the former, but
I had caught from Germany the idea of disinterested study,
and I believed in the force of truth. Just then my own
disinterestedness was put to a severe test. The English idea
of consistency was, and to a great extent perhaps still is, that
having chosen your school and your leader, you should stick
to them. With all their faults I loved Ewald's works and
Ewald himself. Schleiermacher and he were to me what
Maurice and Stanley were at that time to so many of my
brethren. Ewald's works, in particular, had lifted me to a
higher plane of knowledge, and he himself, the ' riickschau-
ender Prophet,' seemed to me a great even though very
imperfect personality. Yet in 1 870-1 871 I passed into the
school of Graf and Kuenen. I hesitated, indeed, to accept
the full conclusions of the latter, who appeared to me not to
allow enough for the freedom of development,1 and I was
still in some points a follower of Ewald. My course of study
involved this. Unlike some of my younger friends at the
present day, I was not so fascinated by the Pentateuch as to
1 Academy, Dec. 25, 1875 (review of Duhm's Theologie der Propheten).

INTROD UCTION.

neglect the study of the prophets. Jeremiah lay open before
me beside Genesis, and Kuenen on Jeremiah seemed to me
cold compared with Ewald. But I have said enough else
where (see pp. 191, 209) to explain my attitude towards
these two great critics. Suffice it to add that the appearance
in 1 87 1 of Part VI. of Colenso on the Pentateuch (a faulty
but at that time thankworthy book) strengthened the impetus
towards Genesis-studies which I had received from foreign
teachers. I examined this book, first for myself and then for
the readers of the original Academy, and ventured to prophesy,1
five years before the appearance of Wellhausen's Geschichte
Israels, that the most important results common to Graf,
Kuenen, and Colenso would be confirmed by an increasing
number of critics, ' though theological prejudices in England,
combined in Germany with prepossessions induced by a long
critical tradition, [might] for some time retard the conclusion.'
Many another able work or article on the Old Testament,,
proceeding most often from Germany or Holland, also exer
cised my powers of criticism and assimilation. I indulged
the not wholly vain hope that I was getting nearer and
nearer to the centre of problems, but I am not ashamed to
admit that by Christmas 1875 I had satisfied myself that the
most immediately fruitful field of work lay, not in the
criticism of the Pentateuch, but in that of the prophets and
Hagiographa. Something of course had been won by the
restless energy of Kuenen, but doubts grew upon me, first, as
to the complete post-Exile origin of the priestly legislation,
and then as to that of the narratives, and the eager interest
with which I followed the recent Assyrian discoveries opened
my eyes to the difficulty of dating even the narrative of the
Yahvist as it stands. With fresh archaeological and Assyrio-
logical evidence I hoped to return some day to a problem which
as yet ' baffled ' me. For the present, in spite of the seductions
of Wellhausen (1878), I devoted myself to other departments of
1 Academy, March I, 1873.

INTRODUCTION.

study, and not least (as long as health allowed me) to learning
the Assyrian language. My Genesis remained unfinished, but
out of this fragment grew five articles published in 1876-
1877 in the Encyclopedia Britannica on ' Canaan ' and
' Canaanites,' 'Cherubim,' 'Circumcision,' 'Cosmogony,' and
' Deluge.' All these exhibit an interest in the mythic sub
stratum1 of narratives and phrases in the Old Testament
which is, I suppose, peculiarly though not exclusively English,
and is not unexpressed in this volume. The reader will also
find me in 1877, in a discussion of the Babylonian Deluge-
story, asking a question which in one of these Lectures is
answered in the affirmative,2 viz. ' Can the Yahvistic narrative
in [the early chapters of Genesis] be safely broken up into
several?' I have to add that in 1877 an article on Daniel
(see p. 106), in 1878 one on Esther (see p. 298), and in 1881
articles on the Hittites, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Jonah appeared
in the same work.
These articles were none of them written to order, but
grew out of the plan, formed about 1875, of a historical
sketch of the growth of the Old Testament literature from
the advanced, and yet not extreme, point of view which I
had adopted. Of course, disputable points would have been
mentioned, and some documents would have been referred to
in different chapters ; of the partly provisional character of
such a sketch I was well aware. The task was too great for
me, and it has since been accomplished on a larger scale than
I thought of by that honoured veteran, Reuss. But I learned,
in preparing my material, to treat Old Testament subjects in
a large and comprehensive way, which may be the hardest
but is, I believe, the best way. Among other articles, I
will here only speak of two — those on Isaiah and on Jonah.
1 Ewald, out of a too passionate opposition to Strauss, sought to banish the
words ' myth ' and ' mythic ' from Biblical criticism. This appeared to me to be
flying in the face of facts.
2 See pp. 270, 279, and cf. Job and Solomon, p. 6, where this answer is antici
pated.

INTRODUCTIOA.

The former is perhaps more interesting now than it was at
the time, because of its analysis of the so-called Second Isaiah,
by which it not only takes, as I believe, a step in advance,
but a step which other critics are only just beginning to take.
Of course, I do not forget that my honoured teacher Ewald
had pointed the way, but how vague and hesitating his
criticism is, no one can fail to see. Half the phenomena
were hidden from him, and of the rest he has no sufficiently
plausible account to give. It appeared to me when com
pleting my commentary on Isaiah that the time had come
for a keener analysis. I had long lived as it were in the
Exilic and post-Exilic period of Hebrew literature, and
certain conclusions forced themselves upon me as they would
hardly have done upon a special student of the separate book
of Isaiah. I took care that the data upon which I worked
should appear in my commentary, but through the deliberate
self-suppression which is the soul of that work I reserved my
results for the Encyclopaedia. The consequence was that
few scholars met with them, and that not till 1888 did Stade
begin to take steps unknowingly in my own direction, and
only in 1889 did Kuenen independently adopt nearly my
own views. Mr. G. A. Smith, in vol. ii. of Isaiah (just pub
lished) in the ' Expositor's Bible,' is the only English scholar
who has as yet conceded the principle of the separability of
Isa. xl.-lxvi. into parts of distinct origin. When the question
is debated more widely here and in Germany, it will be
impossible for generous students to ignore either my article
or its date ; it must however be taken in connexion with
the alterations of view indicated in this volume, and to
which I hope to return elsewhere.1 The latter of the above-
mentioned articles (' Jonah ') had to be of narrow compass
in consideration of the smallness of the book. It must be
grouped with an article entitled 'Jonah, a Study in Jewish
1 First of all in notices of Mr. G. A. Smith's work in the Expositor (Feb.
1 891) and the Academy (Feb. 21). To the former I ask the attention of critics.

INTRODUCTION.

Folklore and Religion' in the Theological Review for 1877
(pp. 21 1-2 19), in which I endeavour to show that the Book
of Jonah is not a mere romance, as we might infer from
Noldeke,1 but an edifying story, adapted to the writer's times,
and founded, like some of those in Gen. i.-xi., on Semitic
mythology. I may add that this article was written before
the appearance of Goldziher's Hebrew Mythology? which
indeed is somewhat meagre in its treatment of 'Jonah.'
Two other, books of the prophetic canon, of special interest
for the critic, I also touched upon in articles, though not in
the Encyclopedia— -Joel incidentally in various reviews of
books, and Zechariah in an essay read before a theological
society in London in 1879, though only published (without
alteration) in the Jewish Quarterly Review for Oct. 1888.
I had pointed out in a review of Baudissin's Studien [Academy,
Nov. 25, 1876) that Joel and at any rate Zech. xii.-xiv. must
be studied together, but had not felt it safe to draw the most
obvious conclusion, viz. that these writings are about con
temporaneous. In 1873 I still thought that by disintegrating
Joel we might show it to be pre-Exilic ; in 1876 I admitted
that this book was post-Exilic, but hesitated as to 2 Zechariah.3
Not till 1879 did I formulate views on Zechariah which,
compared with the more recent utterances of Stade and
Wellhausen, are moderate, and are substantially those put
forth by Kuenen in 1889 in his Ondersoek (ed. 2, vol. ii.).4
In referring to these articles on the present occasion I am
of course not claiming for them more than a relative degree

1 Die alttestamentliche Literatur (1868), p. 72- Noldeke uses the word
' romance,' but explains ' almost entirely a free production of the imagination.'
2 The most appreciative and certainly not the least detailed and discriminating
of the English reviews of Goldziher was from my own pen {Academy, March
10 and 17, 1877).
3 Prof. Driver has been equally cautious. He has now, I believe, arrived at
a result respecting Joel. But in 1880 he saw difficulties in a post-Exile date
which he could not at that time overcome (see his thorough review of Merx's
Toel, in the Academy, 1880).
' Cf. Stade, Geschichte, ii. (1888), p. 70.

INTROD UCTION.

of accuracy. There is much said in them which I should
now, not retract, but modify, and much unsaid which must
be gathered from other works. The ' unsaid ' matters relate
mostly to the linguistic argument. Linguistic studies have
always keenly interested me, and a desire for fresh stimulus
in them took me when poor, and unknown to Gottingen.
Against two ' prevalent errors ' I pleaded in 1 876, when a
large measure of university reform seemed imminent ; one
was ' the supposition that the Old Testament [could] be
fruitfully treated from a purely linguistic point of view,' the
other ' too narrow a conception ' of the linguistic preparation
required by an Old Testament critic.1 And again in 1880 I
complained that ' though keenly interested in criticism, the
public takes wonderfully little pains to master the pre
liminaries.' 2 A large and thorough criticism rests on an
equally large and thorough exegesis, and exegesis itself rests
ultimately on the grammar and the lexicon. The linguistic
argument is unfortunately not often of primary importance
in the higher criticism of the Old Testament. But it is very
often of at least subsidiary value, and I must regret that
condensed summaries even in the best of Encyclopaedias did
not permit me to do it justice.
A small group of works mainly exegetical must now be
mentioned, every one of which has helped to form the
basis of these Lectures. The group opens with notes on
the Old Testament in the so-called Variorum edition of
the Authorized Version, the labour of preparing which was
shared with me by my friend Mr. (now Professor) Driver.
Then follows in 1 880-1 881 Isaiah, jn 1882 Micah (see below,
p. 224), in 1884 Hosea (see p. 378), in 1 883-1 885 Jeremiah
and Lamentations (see p. 100). My plan in these latter
books was, upon educational grounds, to give more or less
fully the exegetical facts upon which critical conclusions
1 Essays on the Endowment of Research, p. 192.
2 The Prophecies of Isaiah, ed. 3, ii. 224.

INTROD UCTION

were based, without generally drawing these conclusions my
self. An exception is however made in the treatment of
Jer. x. 1-16 and Jer. 1., Ii., and this exception marks my
dawning consciousness that the necessity for minimizing the
results of literary criticism even in addressing clerical students
was passing away. The transitional period however is not
yet quite over, and so my commentaries (especially those on
Isaiah and Jeremiah) need not yet be reconstructed. Modi
fications of my views on Isaiah will be found on pp. 35, 182,
184, 264, 275 of this work, and some of the special problems.
of Jeremiah I have examined more freely in a volume to be
noticed presently. I indulge a faint hope that a larger criti
cal treatment of this great prophet may yet be open to me.
Meantime I am not ashamed to have offered in my com
mentary on Jeremiah one more sacrifice as a teacher to the
temporary needs of the Church. I have therefore ventured
to refer to it at p. 376 in speaking of Jer. vii. 22, 23, my
comment upon which supplies the only frank and yet con
siderate discussion of a stumbling-block to orthodoxy, and
the only provisional standing-ground, which I am myself
able to point out to perplexed students.
Another small group of writings opens with a new version
of the Psalms with introduction and notes (' Parchment
Library,' 1884), on which the larger commentary of 1888 was
based. My attention had been much directed to the Hagio-
grapha, as the volume called Job and Solomon, or, The Wisdom
of the Old Testament (1887), further shows. The latter work
is a real Ben-oni (Gen. xxxv. 18). During its preparation I
proved by personal experience how thoroughly faith and free
historical criticism of the Bible can be reconciled, and how
the one can be strengthened by the other. Nothing but the
certainty of the fundamental Old Testament truths, reasserted
and developed by Jesus Christ, could have supported me in
my sore trial, when, not indeed my life, but my twofold
ministry, seemed closed. I trust that this is, in no narrow

INTRODUCTION

sense of the word, an evangelical work. But it is none the
less uncompromisingly critical, and as such is necessarily
appealed to in these Lectures. The two remaining books
are popular in form, but I hope that the Jeremiah of 1888
(' Men of the Bible ') is a contribution to the psychological as
well as critical reading of the times of the great prophet. A
mere life of an individual prophet it certainly is not, nor does.
it appeal merely to a popular audience. It is, so far as its
limits allow, a summing up of many critical and historical
questions, and a synthesis of many sure and some at least
probable results. Elijah, or, The Hallowing of Criticism
(1888) is also referred to in these Lectures in support of my
belief in the permanent religious value of mythic and legen
dary narratives in the Old Testament. III.
Upon the results of these works, modified wherever
necessary and developed, I have ventured to build, but upon
the results of how many other scholars too, need hardly be
said. My predecessors are of course chiefly German ; I can
no more ignore them than if I were myself a German. But
what a pleasure it has been to me to refer to some English
workers ! Professor Sayce's recent attitude towards Old
Testament criticism causes me, I must confess, some little
surprise. It seems a poor return for the general willingness
of critics to learn from Assyriology. But to the stimulating
character of my friend's books and conversation I gratefully
own my indebtedness. Prof. Robertson Smith, since we first
met on the way to Germany, has always been to me a valued
ally. His Religion of the Semites was not yet out when these
Lectures were in preparation, so that the coincidences are
perhaps the more interesting. To another true friend of my
second period, Prof. Driver, my references would have been
more frequent, had his expected book on the Old Testament

INTRODUCTION.

literature appeared in time. As a student of the language
and grammatical sense of the Old Testament, I have long
since had a high respect for his opinion ; as a critic I do not
yet know to what extent we agree. Slowly have time and
study melted his conscientious reserve, and made him' in a
double sense my comrade. But his excellent though in some
points over-cautious handbook to Isaiah and his recent article
in the Contemporary Review (Feb. 1890) leave no doubt to
which side upon the whole his judgment inclines, and his
known fairness and candour, and the solidity of his exegetical
basis, will give special value to his book at the present junc
ture. To two other scholars, Prof. Davidson and Prof. Briggs,
I would also willingly have referred oftener. In my youth I
looked to the former for teaching, but in vain ; in riper years
I welcome his luminous but too rare contributions to Biblical
theology.1 Nor can I forget that from his classroom have
proceeded the most promising of our younger workers. With
the latter, who is also happily the founder of a school, I am
in full accord on the expediency of a bolder church-policy
towards historical criticism, and among other points on the
interpretation of Ps. xvi. [Messianic Prophecy, p. 151). It is
pleasant to add the names of Mr. C. J. Ball and Mr. G. A.
Smith, the one the author of Jeremiah (vol. i., 1890), the
other of Isaiah (2 vols., 1889-1890) in the ' Expositor's Bible.'
That the former is very much less fair to my own work than
the latter (doubtless from imperfect knowledge of it) need
make no difference in my estimate of his ability.
Is there anything else of mine worth mentioning as con
tributing to the basis of these Lectures ? Yes ; but only in
the department of apologetic It is something perhaps to
have pointed out^ again and again how criticism assists the
discovery of the moreTpermanent elements in the religion of
the Old Testament, and in The Prophecies of Isaiah to have
1 See his articles in the Expositor on Hosea (1879), the Second Isaiah (1883-
84), Amos (1887), Joel (1888). See also his, Job and Hebrews.

INTRODUCTION.

given more than one apologetic essay which has a bearing on
the Psalms as well as on Isaiah, also in two Church Congress
papers l to have sketched a programme both theoretic and
practical for apologetic workers. The theoretic portion of
the latter is of course the most important. The principle of
the Kenosis (or, as it has been lately paraphrased, the self-
limitation) of the Divine Son, and that of the continual guid
ance both of the Church and of each faithful Christian by the
Holy Spirit, seemed to me in 1883 and 1888 (as they still
seem to me in 1890) the only possible foundation for a reform
of apologetic suited to our English orthodoxy. The develop
ment of these principles in their application to Biblical criti
cism is a delicate work, for which the combination of several
or even many minds is required, but I ventured to offer care
fully expressed suggestions, and to appeal most earnestly to
the clergy to consider them. Nor were these the first condones
ad clerum which, not uninvited, I had ventured to deliver.
Before the members of the London Biblical Society I read in
1 88 1 a paper on the Progressive Revelation of the Doctrine
of the Holy Spirit [Clergyman's Magazine, March 1880)
which urged the increasing importance of fearless faith in the
Paraclete. It seemed too much to hope to see results, when,
who could have believed it? — in the autumn of 1889 a very
able reassertion of both fundamental principles proceeded
from the pen of the Principal of Pusey House (see his fine
essay in Lux Mundi). Now I will not accuse Mr. Gore, who
is a ripe theological thinker, of borrowing from me without
acknowledgment. But fairness and brotherly feeling must
impel him to recognize that the movement which he advocates
for the reform of the Old Testament section of apologetic
theology was initiated in the Anglican Church on almost the
same lines by another.
Still, deeply thankful as I am for the support of one who
has done so much high-toned work both for Oxford and
' See Job and Solomon, pp. 1-9; The Hallowing of Criticism, pp. 183-207.

INTRODUCTION.

Calcutta, I earnestly wish that some Church-students, whose
position is somewhat different from Mr. Gore's, would rally
to the same banner. Professor Driver's paper at the Derby
Diocesan Conference in 1888 on the relation of the Church
to Bible-criticism was such as we might have expected from
the author of the helpful handbook on Isaiah published in
the same year. Its tendency is similar to that of my own
addresses. The recommendation to begin Biblical study by
seeking a vivid realization of the Gospel picture of our Lord
is an echo (I would rather say, a sanction) of my own advice
to hallow criticism by the love of Christ, and to study with
reverent care the facts of Christ's humanity reported in the
Gospels. But Professor Driver's ecclesiastical position is so
independent that I must still look out eagerly for champions.
who represent a school. When will some young adherent, I
will not say of Evangelicalism, but of Evangelical principles-
set himself to think out in his own way the relation of Biblical
criticism to vital Christian truth ? Let me explain briefly
what I mean.
It is, I suppose, of the essence of evangelical Protestantism
that the religious teaching received from without should be
submitted by the individual Christian to the test of its agree
ment with the ' living oracles.' Vast as his debt to the Church
may be, he must not rest satisfied till he can say, ' Now we
believe, not because of thy saying ' (John iv. 42). It is in
cumbent upon him to take nothing upon authority, but in
humble reliance upon the Spirit's all-powerful help, by the
critical study of the Scriptures and by personal experience,
to discover for himself, and to help his fellows to discover for
themselves, what are the really vital elements of Church doc
trine. I do not say that he will soon come to an end of that
study, but I do say that, from the Protestant point of view,
he must begin it. And that which is the duty of ordinary
evangelical Churchmen must surely be still more the duty of
those who are in high Church-positions. It is for them not

INTRODUCTION.

to be continually appealing to the letter of Church-formu
laries, but first to study the Scriptures both critically and
spiritually, and then to initiate a higher exegesis of the
formularies to correspond to the higher criticism and exegesis
of the Scriptures. I am very far from desiring another
' Tract XC.,' but I do desire, as one who springs from an
Evangelical stock, that the formularies should be interpreted
by the Scriptures, and not the Scriptures by some current
view of the formularies. A true Evangelical begins, not with
the Prayer-book and Articles, but with the Holy Scriptures.
And a reforming Evangelical should prove his Protestant
sincerity by adopting modern historical principles of Bible-
criticism. With singular prescience Mr. H. B. Wilson, late
Fellow and Tutor of St. John's College, Oxford, expressed
these ideas in the Bampton Lectures for 185 1, the historical
importance of which has perhaps not yet been fully recog
nized : —
In appealing to Scripture sense, I mean not necessarily, as the
Scripture has been interpreted in some times and places, even by
the then authorized interpreters, who may, nevertheless, have been,
not only the authorized, but also the best interpreters of their day ;
but the sense of Scripture, as it shall be interpreted, under the best
lights of the present and future times (p. 28).
The sense of formularies founded on Scripture must be sought
in the declarations and history of Scripture rightly understood, and
interpreted according to the best lights of those who in each age are
responsible for their judgment upon it (p. 32).
The appeal therefore which on June 4, 1889, I addressed
to a clerical meeting at Lambeth Palace Library to ' some
Evangelicals and some High Churchmen' I now with all
brotherly frankness renew. I have no secret wish to exalt
Evangelical over Catholic theologians. Both can be equally
fervent Christians and earnest Anglican Churchmen. I only
urge upon those who, though deeply appreciative of much
that is in the old Catholic theology, are both by education
and by the stress of personal experience essentially Protestant

INTRODUCTION.

Evangelicals, the importance of adopting, not indeed Mr. Gore's
estimate of the positive results of criticism, but at least his
view of the needs of apologetic theology. Evangelicals will
naturally find it somewhat harder than Mr. Gore to follow
the critics to their more advanced conclusions, because they
cannot say with him, ' It is becoming more and more difficult
to believe in the Bible without believing in the Church ' (in
the sense of the writers of Lux Mundi). It was to a great
extent in their interest that I ventured at Lambeth 1 to entreat
some of our learned Church-dignitaries to unite in recom
mending the most certain results of Old Testament criticism
' first of all, for study and assimilation, and in due time for
use in public teaching, as conducive to the interests of edifica
tion.' That appeal for a compromise has not been responded
to ; even a fair-minded neutral,2 who rightly guesses that in
my heart I addressed it to Nonconformists as well as Anglicans,
reads into my words his own ideas of what I must have
meant, and clings to his own view. I wish that it could have
been otherwise, though in that case I should have had to
restrict my own freedom, not indeed as a critic, but as a
Church-teacher. Let us then, if it must be so, go on as
before, tolerating much difference of opinion, and freely
recognizing the provisional character of most apologetic
arguments, but vying with each other in the love of Christ
and His Church.
Yes ; our arguments must for the most part bear the
stamp of provisionalness. Of those two fundamental principles
of which I have spoken it is the first alone which is absolutely
certain : ' He shall guide you into all the truth.' Helpful as
the idea transferred from a fervid exhortation of St. Paul to
orthodox theology certainly is, it is exposed, as the great
German constructive theologians found, to serious objections
1 See paper on 'Reform in the Teaching of the Old Testament,' in Con
temporary Review, Aug. 1889.
2 Principal Cave, Contemporary Review, April 1890.

INTRODUCTION.

both from the elder orthodoxy and from the more negative
criticism. It remains to be seen whether it will hold its
ground here, as a dogmatic principle, in a more advanced
stage of criticism and exegesis, whether in short our English
Liebners will not be pushed either backward or forward —
backward to the elder orthodoxy, or forward to a view of the
Church-dogmas as not to all intents and purposes infallible
theories, binding on the Christian intellect, but logical and
imperfect renderings of the imaginative Biblical symbols of
superlogical phenomena. Speculative orthodoxy will perhaps
regard this as a needless alarm, but critical historians who
have to supply facts to the speculative theologians, must keep
their minds in suspense. Let them not be hindered in their
useful work, but rather encouraged to take some steps in
advance. We want fresh Lightfoots, as thorough as the great
Bishop but critically more versatile, who will not disdain
the use of new methods, and who, if I may, under a sense of
duty, again affectionately say so, will 'enter more sympa
thetically into the labours of the Old Testament critics.' '
IV.
A few words in conclusion on the contents of these
Lectures. Some may perhaps wish to know whether I have
retreated at all from the position taken up in the spoken
discourses. For an adequate reason I should have been
willing either to go forward or to go backward ; but I have
not found such a reason. Passages omitted in delivery have
been restored ; notes and appendices have been added ; cor
rections have been introduced throughout ; and in the eighth
Lecture the relation of Judaism to Zoroastrianism has re
ceived a much more elaborate treatment. This is the sum of
the changes in the printed volume. I venture to ask that the
contents may be judged, not only from the point of view of
1 Contemp. Rev. Aug. 1889, p. 232 (see note on p. 218).

INTRODUCTION.

criticism, but from that of education. It is my hope that I
have brought together much that is useful to the Bible-student
quite apart from my argument. The notes abound in his
torical and exegetical matter, and the store of facts in the
linguistic appendix can hardly fail to be helpful to the He
braist. I have still a word to say respecting the first of the
two appendices. I feel that conservative readers may neglect
it, because the external evidence is treated in it from my own
special point of view, and because it involves careful reference
to parts of the Lectures. I respectfully deprecate this.
Again and again have hasty arguments been drawn from the
external evidence ; I have endeavoured to show how little
comparatively this external evidence is worth, and how scanty
are the conclusions which, so far as it is real, can be drawn
from it. I should be glad, however, if some younger scholar
would give a more detailed but a not less keen examination
to the supposed allusions to the Psalms in Ecclesiasticus and
Baruch, in connexion with a fresh inquiry into the date of
these books.
Turning now to the Lectures, and first of all to the
* higher criticism ' in them, the reader will observe that, while
in Lects. V.I.-VIII. I have referred now and then to the
Priestly Code as upon the whole a post-Exilic work, in the
earlier Lectures I have not assumed for it any date what
ever. Not that I had any uncertainty on this point ; but
I thought it best to let the reader find out how well the
results of Psalm-criticism agree with a late date. That
the Psalter as a whole presupposes the Law, is not to be
doubted ; it has in fact been sufficiently shown by such a
conservative critic as Prof. Bissell. Now the psalms are, as
has been said before, the response of the worshipping congre
gation to the demands made upon it in the Law. If the Law
as a whole were pre-Exilic, the Psalter, or at any rate a con
siderable part of it, should be pre-Exilic too, unless indeed
we go so far as to conjecture that a pre-Exilic Psalter, akin

INTRODUCTION.

to though possibly not so fine as our Psalter, has been lost.
It may of course be maintained that a number of the extant
psalms which I have taken to be post-Exilic should rather
be referred to the age of Josiah. I cannot wonder if this
should occur to many of my readers, because my own opinion
has not always been the same. Before I had given a suffi
ciently thorough study to the various groups of psalms, and
before I had sufficiently viewed the psalms, both singly and
in groups, in the light of other Old Testament productions,
the date of which has been approximately fixed, I had thought
it possible that not a few psalms might belong to the period
of Josiah and Jeremiah, and that nearly all the psalms which
I now refer to the Greek or Maccabsean period might be
placed in the Persian age. I have now given up these views
for reasons which will be found in these Lectures. Suffice it
to observe here that the new conservative school is apt to fill
the reign of Josiah with more literary works than it can bear,
and that the early Maccabaean enthusiasm ought to have
produced an appreciable effect on sacred poetry. But what
I specially wish to bring home to the orthodox reader is this
— that if, putting aside Ps. xviii., and possibly lines or verses
imbedded here and there in later psalms (see pp. 108, 203, 205),
the Psalter as a whole is post-Exilic, the Christian apologist
of the nineteenth century has everything to gain. Take Ps. \
xvi. for instance. If this be pre-Exilic, nay even if it be an \
early post-Exilic work, it is impossible to find in it anticipa
tions worth mentioning of Christianity, except indeed upon
the hypothesis of a ' heaven-descended theology.' As Gruppe
has well said,1 ' Es liegt den alteren Sangern fern, das Unbe-
greifbare, oder wie man richtiger sagen wiirde, das Ungreif-
bare zu fassen.' But if Ps. xvi. falls within that part of the
post-Exilic period when immortality began to take form as
the highest hope of believers, how full of Christian significance
does it become ! I say this not without an effort, remember-
1 Griechische Culte und Mythen, i. 221. b

INTRODUCTION,

ing how violently Max Miiller was attacked by a German
philologist for finding traces of the hope of immortality in the
Old Testament.1 But the effort is more than compensated
by the help which I have derived from my critical results as
a Christian teacher. Throughout the Psalter indeed I have
been able to draw a fulness of spiritual meaning from the
Psalms which was impossible to me before, as I hope that
my eleven Psalm-studies in the Expositor (1888-1890) prove.2
But have you not, it may be asked, condescended unduly to
the cravings of orthodoxy ? I cannot see that I have. Or
thodoxy and heterodoxy were alike far from my thoughts,
nor did I at all anticipate these exegetical results. They are
based not merely on literary criticism, but on a long and
careful examination of the Old Testament in the light of
Babylonian and (especially) Persian religion.3 For this I
would diffidently ask the attention of students, as I have
tried to fill up provisionally a lacuna in historical theology.
It will be found that my conclusions are not those of most
previous critics, and that they tend to diminish the amount
of Hellenic and to increase that of Oriental influence on the
Jews in the period which preceded Christianity. I have no
antecedent prejudice myself against the view that Hellenic
ideas and sentiments have filtered to some as yet uncertain
extent into the New Testament (cf. p. 312), but I think
that this infiltration, so far as it took place, was only pos
sible because similar purely Oriental influences had gone
before. Certainly I cannot join with Mr. Owen in the
theory, derived apparently from M. Havet, that the Judaism
1 Lehrs, essay on Greek ideas on the future life, Aufsatze, p. 303.
2 These Studies represent as many cathedral sermons on the Psalms.
3 I regret that I am no Zend and Pahlavi scholar, but I have at least practised
caution. That we have among us such eminent specialists as Drs. Mills and West
is a subject for much congratulation. What Dr. Mills has printed in the Sup
plementary Introduction to Vol. I. of his great work on the Gathas fully justifies
the non-specialist in trusting his guidance. America and England may both claim
a share in him. Dr. West, however, as a native English scholar, needs not my
poor eulogy. For other authorities see pp. 395, 433-435.

INTRODUCTION.

amidst which Jesus Christ lived ' was already permeated
by Hellenizing teaching.' 1 Nor even with such an eminent
scholar as Professor Pfleiderer 2 in the view that ' Hellenic
eschatology had probably influenced the general popular
belief of the Jews in the time of Jesus through the channel
of Essenism.' The view which I have given of the development of the
belief in immortality among the Jews appears to me to be
strongly confirmed by the accepted results of scholarship
respecting the parallel development in Greece. It is most
interesting to trace upon the monuments how the gradual ex
tension of the Hellenic cult of heroes converted immortality
from an aristocratic into a popular possession.3 A similar
phenomenon is visible, as I think, in the Old Testament. At
first only great men like Enoch, Elijah, and doubtless (see
Isa. xxix. 22, 23, lxiii. 16, Jos., Ant. i. 13, 3) Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob, were regarded as the denizens of Paradise. But,
partly through deeper religious thought and experience, and
partly through Zoroastrian influence, what the ordinary man
had formerly not dared to dream of, might become the assured
hope of each believer. In the period of the Psalter there
were no doubt differences of sentiment on the future lot of
man ; so there were also in Greece and in Egypt. But the
road along which Jewish religion was henceforth to travel,
was now definitely marked out. I trust that those parts of
my book which deal with the history of religion will not be
rejected by theological students. They will find many illus
trations derived from ethnic religions, and contributions to
a survey of Jewish thought down to the time of Christ.
1 Review of Hatch's Hibbert Lectures (Academy, Dec. 13, 1890).
2 Philosophy of Religion, iv. 162. I only refer to this statement (which the
author would now probably alter) because of the deservedly wide circulation of
the work in which it occurs.
9 See Lehrs, Aufsatze, p. 337 &c. ; Weil, review of Rohde's Psyche, Journal
des Savants, Oct. 1890. Prof. Max Miiller's third volume of Gifford Lectures
will, I believe, deal with this subject.

INTRODUCTION.

Those interested in missions may also be invited to glean
from these Lectures. When for instance our Oxford friends
in Calcutta have again to oppose Mr. Dutt's statements on
the indebtedness of Christianity to ' a Palestinian Buddhism,' l
they may perhaps be assisted by my pages on the Essenes,
which contain some fresh material. And to all students,
whatever their special tastes may be, the Index will, I hope,
reveal many interesting features of the book.
And so I bid farewell to a volume in which I have spoken
more frankly, but I am sure not less considerately and
charitably than ever. May it be blessed, in spite of its mani
fold imperfections, to the good of the Church at large ! To
me at any rate the exercise of the critical faculty and of the
historic imagination has been as truly a religious work as
joining in the worship of the sanctuary. I have found that
to be true which an old Oxford friend has recently expressed
in earnest words, —
All such research adds interest to the record, as it opens out to
us the action of the Divine Intimacy, in laying hold of its material.
We watch it by the aid of such criticism, at its work of assimilation ;
and, in uncovering its principles of selection, we apprehend its inner
mind ; we draw closer to our God. — (H. S. Holland, Lux Mundi,
P- 43-) 1 See The Epiphany (edited by the Oxford missionaries), Aug. 21, 1890.

CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE.

[N , B, On the chronological problems of this period, cf. Kuenen, De chronologie
van het Perzische tijdvak der Joodsche Geschiedenis (Amsterdam, 1890), and
Schiirer, The Jewish People in the Time of Christ, Div. I., vol. i. (Edinburgh,
1890). Events in foreign history contemporary with those in Jewish are
printed in italics.]

Captivity of Jehoiachin and Ezekiel
Fall of Jerusalem
First return of the jews .
Pythagoras ....
Foundation of second temple .
Haggai and Zechariah prophesy, under Zerubbabel and Joshua
(pp. 21, 52) . . . 
Capture of Babylon by Darius Hystaspis (p. 73)
Completion of second temple 
Revolt of Egypt and Persian reconquest (cf. p. 52, foot) .
Capture of Babylon by Xerxes (p. 73)
Artaxerxes I. Longimanus (p. 163) .
Revolt of Inarus in Egypt .
Second return of Jews under Ezra .
Revolt of ' Megabyzus in Syria (p. 71) ....
Nehemiah the Tirshatha (p. 228) ....
Fortification of Jerusalem (pp. 50, 231, 232)
Artaxerxes II. Mnemon ....
Murder by Johanan the high priest ; tyranny of Bagoses
Artaxerxes III. Ochus (captivity of Jews, pp. 53, 229)
Battle of Issus (Jaddua, high priest, p. 59) .
Foundation of Alexandria (p. 10)

• 597
. 586
¦ 536
540-510 • 535

520
. 520
• 5i5
486-484 . 481
465-425462-456 • 458

(P-

¦ 448 445
• 444
405-359
52) 383 (?)
359-338
• • 333
• 33i

Ptolemy I. Soter, king of Egypt (Onias I., Simon I., high priests) 323-285
Capture of Jerusalem by Ptolemy .  32°
Ptolemy II. Philadelphus (Eleazar and Manasseh, high priests, p.
170) .... . • • 285-247
Ptolemy III. Euergetes (Onias II., high priest, p. 127) . 247-222
Antiochus III. Magnus, king of Syria (Simon II., high priest) 223-187
Capture of Jerusalem by Antiochus (cf. p. 114) ¦ • 203
Seleucus IV. Philopdtor . ' . . . .187-175

CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE.

B.C.
Scopas recovers Jerusalem for Ptolemy V. Epiphanes, but is
defeated by Antiochus at Paneas (p. 114). • • • 199-198
Sacrilege of Heliodorus (p. 123)  ^7
Composition of Wisdom of Ben Sira in Hebrew . . . 180 (?)
Accession of Antiochus IV. Epiphanes (Onias III., high priest, p.
123)  175
Onias III. deposed, and succeeded by Joshua or Jason . . . 174
Jason outbid and supplanted by Menelaus  171
Murder of Onias III. (pp. 123, 137)  17°
Massacres of Antiochus and Apollonius at Jerusalem (p. 94) 170, 168
The ' abomination of desolation ' (pp. 94, 105) set up . . 168 (Dec.)
Persecution of faithful Jews (pp. 19, 66) ; revolt under Mattathias
(pp. 48, 57) ; the leader's death  167-166
Judas Maccabaeus organizes his army with solemn prayer at Mizpah
(pp. 18, 94) ; victory at Emmaus (pp. 94, 199) . . . 166-165
Victory at Beth-zur (p. 199) ; re-dedication of the temple (Dec. ; see
pp. 16-18, 33)  165
Composition of Book of Daniel, probably in Jan. (p. 94) ; successful
war against the Edomites &c. (p. 98) ; death of Antiochus
Epiphanes  164
Judas defeated at Beth-Zacharia (p. 92)  163-162
Alcimus (Jakim) appointed high priest (p. 27) ; his massacre of the
Asidasans (pp. 56, 93)  162
Victory of Judas at Adasa (pp. 48, 178) ; his defeat and death at
Eleasa (pp. 93, 96)  161
Death of Alcimus  160
Jonathan begins to rule from Michmash (p. 68) .... 158
Occupies Jerusalem, and is invested with the high priesthood (p. 68) 153
Destruction of Carthage by the Romans (p. 23)  146
Assassination of Jonathan, who is succeeded by Simon ; capture of
the citadel (p. 25) ; fortification of Jerusalem (p. 50) . . 142
Popular decree in favour of Simon and his family (p. 26) . . . 141
Assassination of Simon, who is succeeded by John Hyrcanus (p. 24) 135
First appearance of parties called Pharisees and Sadducees (p. 39) 135 &c.
Translation of Wisdom of Ben Sira into Greek . . . .132(F)
Hyrcanus destroys Shechem and the temple on Gerizim, and con
quers the Edomites ; his sons destroy Samaria (p. 96) . 109-108
Aristobulus I. assumes title of king (pp. 28, 39) .... 105
Alexander Jannasus (p. 24)  104-78
Salome Alexandra (p. 61) ; adopts a Pharisaaan policy . . 78-69
Hyrcanus II. and Aristobulus II. refer their claims to Pompeius
(PP- 143, 219) 5 Jerusalem surrenders to the latter, who captures
the temple and forces his way into the Most Holy Place . . 63
Battle of Pharsalia ; death of Pompeius ...... 48
Composition of Psalms of Solomon in Hebrew .... 63-48
Herod the Great  37-4

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION.
PAGE
The Origin, Critical Basis, and Contents of these
Lectures  ix

LECTURE I.

PART

I. The Psalters within the Psalter  3
II. Analysis of Books IV. and V  15
LECTURE II.
I. Analysis of Books IV. and V. continued . . .47
II. Conclusion of the Analysis  63
LECTURE III.
I. Maccab^ean Psalms in Books II. and III. . . .89
II. Psalms of the Pre-Maccab^ean Greek and of the
Persian Period in Books II. and III. „ . .112
LECTURE IV.
I. Psalms LXXII., LXXIII., XLIX, L., etc  141
II. Psalms LI., LXV.-LXVII., XLV, etc  161
LECTURE V.
I. The Earliest of the Minor Psalters . . . .190
II. Larger Groups of Psalms in Book 1  226

CONTENTS.

LECTURE VI.
PAKT PAGE
I. The Religious Ideas of the Psalter not Borrowed . 258
II. Who is the God of the Psalter?  285

LECTURE VII.
I. Jehovah's Sphere of Working and His Agencies . 312
II. How Jehovah Works, and with what Results . . 338

LECTURE VIII.
I. Human Obedience and Divine Lovingkindness . 363
II. Rise of Doctrine of Judgment after Death . . 381

APPENDICES.
APPENDIX
I. Last Words on Maccab^ean Psalms and other Points 455
II. The" Linguistic Affinities of the Psalms . . . 461

INDICES ... . . 485

*^* The reader will kindly remember that the numbering of the verses in refer
ences to the Old Testament is in accordance with the Hebrew Bible.

LECTURE I.
And they came into the house and saw the young child with Mary
his mother ; and they fell doivn and worshipped him ; and opening
their treasures they offered unto him gifts, gold and frankiticense and
myrrh. — Matt. ii. n (R.V.).

LECTURE I.
Part I. — Need of reform in that part of orthodox theology which relates to
the Old Testament. — New facts have come and are coming to light, new critical
results have been and are being obtained, which will contribute some essential
elements to the new apologetic theology. Some of these arise out of the historical
study of the Psalter. The criticism of the earlier Lectures will furnish a basis for
the historico-theological outlines of the later ones. — The error of the older
interpreters — their neglect of the Psalters within the Psalter. — How Carpzov
opened the door to criticism; importance of the colophon, Ps. lxxii. 20. — We
must argue backwards from the date of Books IV. and V. to that of any earlier
groups of psalms. — Three strongly marked features of these books enable us to
determine their period. — The argument leads up to the view that the collection
of Books IV. and V. is contemporaneous with a reorganization of the temple
music under Simon the Maccabee.
Part II. — Books IV. and V. must now be analyzed into groups. — Why such
groups can be discovered here with special ease. — Are there any which require
a Maccabsean date for their adequate explanation ? — A priori historical reasons
for expecting such. — Immediately available criteria of MaccabEean psalms.—
Application of these to the three psalms which are most plausibly viewed as
Maccabaean, viz., cxviii., ex., cxlix., and first to Ps. cxviii., the most striking
psalm of the group (Pss. cxv. -cxviii.), which forms the second part of 'the
Hallel.'— Both this psalm and the rest of the group shown to be Maccabsean ;
occasion of Ps. cxviii. , the purification of the temple. —A fresh canon of criticism. —
Theories of the origin of Ps. ex. examined.— The Maccabajan theory preferred.—
The subject, Simon the Maccabee ; see 1 Mace. xiv. 8-15, and for the impression
produced by Simon's career, Orac. Sib. iii. 652-660. — The occasion, the capture
of the Acra; comp. Ps. ex. 3.— Why 'the order of Melchizedek ' ?— An answer
to the objections brought against the high priesthood of Simon.— Can Simon's
eulogist have been inspired? A twofold answer: (1) Inspiration recognizes the
limitations of human nature ; (2) Ps. ex. is ' germinally Messianic,' and the
indirect Messianic prediction which underlies the psalm was not based on illusion.

PART I.
THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER.
May the spirit of these words sink into my mind, and so per
fume with its fragrance every critical detail, that the youngest
student may feel the Christian earnestness of these inquiries.
There are some who tell us that criticism is without sym
pathies, and cares not to become interesting to those who
have. For my own part, I think that sympathy is one condition
of historical insight, and if I had no sympathy with that Old
Testament religion, as the ripe fruit of which I regard primi
tive Christianity, I should know that my labours would be
smitten with sterility. As for being interesting, that is an
object which perhaps I may not always gain, but which I
shall most assuredly continue to aim at. I have tried to take
the step myself from knowing to imagining, and I shall
endeavour to help others both to know more and to imagine
better. With such principles, I invite you to-day into a far-
off land, like that from which the Magi came, the land of
Israel's religious antiquity. We will study the products of
the soil, and gather such precious gifts as we can for Him
to whom the star will point us. You will follow me some
times at a distance, for I cannot put before you the whole of
a complicated argument. Preserve your independence, but
grant me at least the respect which belongs to a native
English worker. A lost leader of old Oxford has told us
how, after twenty years in a new spiritual climate, he felt no
delicacy in speaking with some authority.1 Those words I
may venture to apply to myself. After more than twenty
years of deepening experience of free Bible-study, I have
earned a right to another title than that of ' Germanizer.' The
1 Newman, Difficulties felt by Anglicans, p. 372.

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER. lect.

phrase ' German criticism,' in the sense in which it is commonly
used, is, indeed, scarcely accurate. Enthusiastic as one's
regard must be for the past and present Biblical scholars of
Germany, it remains true that Biblical science did not begin
with them ; nor can it, even in the Old Testament, be by them.
exhausted. I have said that I would fain be interesting, and it is
especially to churchmen in the widest sense, both in England
and in America, that I make my appeal. Reforms in that
part of orthodox theology which relates to the Old Testament
are, as many think, urgent, for to neglect them would mean
the unchecked progress of the great spiritual revolt. Will
these reforms be ungrudgingly conceded ? Gleams of hope
have lately visited us in the English-speaking countries ; but
I am well aware of the remaining hindrances. Not yet have
the workers sufficiently realized that the time for compromise
on certain points is over,1 and that you must not ' put a piece
of new cloth upon an old garment.' Let us at least in Oxford
not confound inconsistency with reverence, nor deny to Old
Testament subjects the complete revision which they need.
Let St. Paul be our model- — -St. Paul, that great reviser of
exegesis, and yet steeped in reverence. The truths of the
past, let us, like him, revere, but not its errors. Imposing
enough were those errors in the past ; St. Paul himself in the
field of criticism could not but be subject to them. A poetic
attractiveness they had, which ensured their supremacy, and
the Christian ideas of which they were the vehicle gave them
the semblance of truth. But by degrees religion has out
grown its shelter. Fancied knowledge respecting the Old
Testament has been weighed in the balances and found
wanting. The old house has fallen, and great has been the
fall of it.
To us, teachers of historical theology, and cramped by no
theory of the inspiration of books, younger students look for
guidance in the seeming chaos." They need first a true
statement of the present position of criticism, and next an
assignment of the share of work which belongs to them.
1 The precise meaning of this qualification has been explained elsewhere (see
Preface). • For all notes referred to by letters see at end of the Part.

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER.

The chaos indeed is no longer absolute ; it would be mis
leading to say that we are only now beginning to reconstruct.
Sound results have already been obtained, which are definite
enough to modify very largely our view of the Old Testa
ment. These results must be popularized with wise dis
cretion. But there are others which are only in course of
being obtained, and the sufficient demonstration of which is
still future. It is these which call for the renewed research
of young scholars who have passed through a faithful appren
ticeship. The genuine student has a large faith in the future.
Historical truth is not ' like a sinking star,' and if we band
ourselves together in manly modesty and in general agree
ment as to principles, we shall accomplish a serviceable
though still imperfect reconstruction.
I think that this prospect ought to allure fresh labourers,
and to revive the courage of the old. Our work ought to
show by its brighter and more buoyant style the new and
hopeful stage upon which we are entering. The false facts
and mistaken inferences of the past should be brushed aside
with a proper impatience. Dulness, conventionality, and
repetition, are qualities out of date, now that the Hebrew
Scriptures are fully recognized as a literature, and have taken
their fitting place alone, yet not alone, at the head of the
sacred books of the East.
To explore the recesses of this literature, so like and yet
so unlike every other, in a free but sympathetic spirit, and
show the importance of the results for the historical com
prehension of our religion, would supply themes for a goodly
company of Bampton lecturers. I have chosen the Psalter for
myself, because the study of this book in England has hardly
kept pace with that of the narrative books of the Old Testa
ment. It is indeed a favourite with all classes ; as many winged
words from it have passed into common use as from any
other part of the Scriptures. But it is only beginning to
attract the attention of Bible-students, and the language in
which St. Chrysostom stirs up the Christians of his own day
to a more intelligent use of the Psalter is still but too
applicable to ourselves.1 It is surely no unworthy ambition
to enable the English-speaking peoples to love and honour
1 Horn, in Ps. cxl. (cxli. ).

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER. lect.

the Psalms not less heartily but more wisely and in a more
historical spirit. Kay and Perowne in England and De Witt
in America have prepared the way. Their admirable works
have been little short of a revelation to many, though the
< quiet in the land ' do not ' lift up their voice ' and proclaim
the treasure that they have found. I will not blame these silent
friends of the Psalter, but may point out that the criticism
and the exegesis not less than the translation of the Psalms
need to be modernized. There is a growing and dangerous
tendency of English Biblical critics to concentrate themselves
upon the Pentateuch— dangerous, because they are not all
sufficiently aware that their historical induction will be pre
mature until they have included in its basis the facts supplied
by the Psalter.b
The work before me, then, is twofold : firstly, critical and
historical ; secondly, exegetical and theological. A moderni
zation of the study of the Psalter is needed in both these
aspects, but more especially in the former. Dean Jackson, a
luminary of the best age of Anglican theology, ' bewails the
negligence of most interpreters in not inquiring into the
occasion and authorship of the psalms.' l The complaint is
even now more justified than one could wish. I hope that I
do not undervalue an exegesis which, so far as it can, evades
critical decisions, but such exegesis must be incomplete, and
the view of the Old Testament to which it leads is neither a
satisfactory nor an inspiring one. Let me then seek to furnish
by criticism a solid basis for the historico-theological out
lines which will conclude these lectures, and which will, as I
hope, contribute some essential elements to the new apolo
getic theology.
I have remarked elsewhere that the Hebrew Psalter came
together, not as a book, but as a Pentateuch.2 In spite of
this undoubted fact, a thick darkness settled down on the
older interpreters, for want of a critical and analytic study of
the Psalters within the Psalter. Hammond, for instance, the
contemporary of Bishop Walton, after alluring us with a title
referring to the Books of the Psalms, expects us to be con
tented with explanatory notes which do indeed incidentally
indicate where each book begins and ends, but attach no
1 Works, viii, 84. 2 The Book of Psalms (1888), Introd. p. xiii.

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER.

critical reflections to the notice. As Dr. Briggs truly says,.
' One looks in vain in the commentaries of this period (the
seventeenth century) for a critical discussion of literary ques
tions.' x It is noteworthy, that this same Henry Hammond,.
who retains the fivefold division of the Psalms with utter
unconsciousness of its critical significance, has no scruple in
denying the unity of the book of Zechariah. You will remind
me, of course, that he denies it, not as a critic, but as a
theologian. He does so, and the same temper upon the
whole pervades all the older expositors. Even Lowth, who
did so much for opening the eyes of. men to the literary cha
racter of the Old Testament, is still as uninterested in critical
questions as his predecessors, and treats the Psalter simply
as a lyrical anthology. And yet twenty years before Lowth
delivered his famous lectures, a German professor, J. G.
Carpzov, had discovered the historical importance of the
colophon attached to Ps. Ixxii., ' The prayers of David, son
of Jesse, are ended,' of which even Calvin, the most modern of
the Reformation expositors, so entirely misses the meaning.2
In his Introductio in Libros V. T. (1721), part ii., p, 106, the
first germ of the later Psalm-criticism appears. Carpzov
there expresses the view that the Book of Psalms was
brought into its present form by Ezra, but that Hezekiah
had already made a smaller collection which contained Pss.
i.-lxxii.c This observation is destructive of the view that the
Psalter is a chaotic anthology which, but for a reverential awe
(' Wake not David from his slumbers,' said a Bath Qol, or
oracular echo 3), its Jewish custodians might have been well
pleased to rearrange.
This colophon or subscription in Ps. Ixxii. 20 is the
starting-point of my present inquiry into the origin of the
Psalter. It shows convincingly that the Psalter as we have
it was preceded by one or more minor Psalters. It shows.
this, and more than this. The colophon, 'The prayers of
David, the son of Jesse, are ended,' must originally have been
appended to a collection of psalms, each of which was headed
Vdavid, i.e., written by David. We actually find a number of
1 Biblical Study, its Principles, Method, and History (1883), p. 168.
2 Cf. my Commentary, Introduction, p. xiv.
3 Midrash Tillin, t. 27.

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER. lect.

such poems in what is now the second Book of the Psalms.
These poems, then, formed the collection ; for it is most im
probable that any psalms headed I'ddvid were omitted by the
editor. But the colophon now stands at the end of a psalm
bearing the title lish'lomdh, i.e., written by Solomon. How
came it to be transferred thither ? A reason is suggested by
| the case of the prophecy in Jer. L, li., the colophon of which,
though it now stands at the end of v. 64, must once have
stood at the end of v. 58. This is clear from the fact that
the words, ' and they shall be weary,' which at present pre
cede the colophon in v. 64, occur again at the end of v. 58,
where alone they have a sense. That early scribe to whom
the current text of Jeremiah is due, having accidentally omitted
the subscription in its proper place, supplied it at the close
of the brief appended narrative, taking with it a word (lBim),
which stood in the same line with it in v. 58. The case may
be similar with the colophon in Ps. Ixxii. 20, which probably
stands where it does by a clerical error, Ps. Ixxii. being
,a late appendix to the Davidic hymn-book. The colophon
is therefore a witness to the gradual enlargement of small
psalm-collections. Is there anything else to mark Ps.
Ixxii. as the last member of a large group of psalms ? Ob
viously there is — the blessing or doxology [v. 19). How,
then, can we help assuming at least provisionally that the five
books of the Psalter once constituted as many independent
collections ? I say, provisionally ; because an inspection of
Pss. cvi. and cvii. will presently suggest that Pss. xc.-cl. were
divided into two books only by an afterthought.
It is to the fourth and fifth Books of the Psalter (which
were originally but one Book) that I would first invite your
attention. Book IV. contains two psalms, and Book V. fifteen,
which are headed I'ddvid. You will admit that there is a
strong presumption that the collections which include these
psalms were brought together subsequently to that which
contains the great body of so-called Davidic psalms, or let us
say, to Psalms i. (or iii.)— Ixxii. Psalms attested by a com
paratively old tradition as Davidic would not have had to
wait for an official sanction. If, therefore, we can establish
the period when these collections were respectively made, we
shall be in a position to argue backwards to the date of any

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER.

large or small earlier groups. Of these groups I shall have
much to say ; the psalms must be studied not merely singly
but by groups, and the use of the comparative method will give
our results greater definiteness and sureness. We have now to
ask, Have Books IV. and V, taken as wholes, any strongly
marked features which enable us to determine their date or
dates ? Yes ; for instance (a) the paucity of authors' names,
(b) the almost complete absence of musical phrases in the
titles, and [c) the many distinct references to a congregational
use of the psalms — characteristics which presuppose, the
first that the psalms of Books IV. and V. are not much older
- than the collections themselves, the second that the temple
t music had undergone a radical change in (or near) the time
of the collectors, and the third that while the temple services
had become more precious than ever, the older psalms were
found to be from a later point of view not in all points
sufficiently adapted to congregational use.1 We have there
fore to study the long space of time between the Return
from the Exile and the Septuagint translation of the psalms
(say between 537 and the second half of the second century
B.C.) ; does history suggest a period in which the stationary
civilization of Judaea received such an impulse from without
that the old music became intolerable to cultivated ears ? I
have as yet only mentioned external characteristics, but may
now point to certain peculiar spiritual qualities of this part
of the Psalter. Listen to the jubilant, sometimes even
martial notes, of the psalmists, and observe how completely
the old doubts of God's righteousness have died away. Now
can we find the period ? That of the Persian domination is
out of the question ; the severity of the Persian governors,
the excessive taxation, and the passage through Palestine of
army after army on its way to Egypt, so depressed the
national spirit that any great impulse to civilization from the
side of Persia is inconceivable. But who does not know the
growing and persistent influence exerted upon the Jews by
the Hellenic type of culture ? I would not go so far as Mr.
Flinders Petrie, who dates this influence from the Jewish
migration in Jeremiah's time to the Grseco-Egyptian frontier-
1 See Lecture VI. Part I.

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER. lect.

city of Tahpanhes or Daphnae, and then, quoting the fiction
by which Josephus • tries to save the verbal inspiration of
Jeremiah, accounts for the Greek names of musical instru
ments in Daniel by Nebuchadrezzar's deportation of these
partly Hellenized Jews to Babylonia.2 But we may venture
to say that both for the religion and for the civilization of the
Jews the foundation of Alexandria, B.C. 331, was an event of
the first importance. Whether or no we can trace a vague
and indirect Greek influence upon the Book of Ecclesiastes, it
is quite certain that Judaism, formerly as inhospitable and
exclusive as Egypt itself, had, in the time of Ben Sira, been
largely affected by the laxer and softer habits of Greek life.3
That Greek music was known in Palestine very shortly after
his time must be inferred from the Graeco- Aramaic names of
musical instruments in Daniel, of which Mr. Petrie has, as it
would seem, so much exaggerated the antiquity. The date
of Ben Sira's Wisdom may be set at about 180 B.C.; but
from the picture of Jewish life in Josephus [Ant. xii. 5, 1)
it is clear that a revolutionary movement in Judaea itself
preceded the violent Hellenizing measures of Antiochus
Epiphanes. This movement was not exclusively a paganiz
ing one ; d it was the result of the operation of new and
subtle forces, from which there was no escape, and was
powerfully aided by the foundation of Hellenistic towns in
Palestine itself,4 and by the friendly relations of the Jews
both at home and in Egypt to the three first Ptolemies. The
rash attempt of the fourth Antiochus to set up what we may
almost call an anti-Messianic kingdom, with Zeus and not
Jehovah as the supreme God, collapsed. Jehovah ' arose, like
one out of sleep,' and set at nought ' the ungodly that forsook
his law.' The desecrated and desolated sanctuary was (in
165 B.C.) purified and restored ; and ' with songs and citherns,
and harps and cymbals ' the faithful Jews kept the feast of
the dedication for eight days. This was the achievement of
that noble champion, Judas the Maccabee. It was re-
1 Jos., Ant. x. 9, 7.
2 Tanis, part ii., pp. 49, 50. (Fourth Memoir of Pal. Explor. Fund.)
3 Cheyne, Job and Solomon, p. 191.
4 See Schiirer, The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, Div. ii., vol. i.,
pp. 57-149-

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER. n
served for Simon, the last of the five valiant brethren, to
expel (in 142 B.C.) the Syrian garrison from 'the Acra,' that
BidficiXos 7rovr]pds which had so long dominated the sanctuary.
He entered it with the same rejoicings as at the dedication of
the temple,1 and 'ordained that that day should be kept
every year with gladness' (1 Mace. xiii. 51, 52).
What would we not give for some precise information as
to the character of the music at these festivals ! e Wide
must have been its discrepancy from the temple-music of
Nehemiah's time, just as this too must have differed from
that of the pre-Exile period, and we may, nay we must, con
jecture that not many years after the second of these festivals,
the noble high priest and virtual king, Simon, devoted
himself to the reconstitution of the temple psalmody. We
know that he did not despise that Greek architecture which
had begun to establish itself in Palestine ; f and can we
suppose that he would refuse already familiar 'musical
harmonies' (Ecclus. xliv. 5), simply because they had some
Greek affinities ?
It was a great occasion, an epoch in the outer and inner
history of Israel. What more natural than that Simon
should follow the example of David his prototype, as
described in Chronicles, and make fresh regulations for the
liturgical services of the sanctuary ? The prosaic narrator,
who warms into poetry in telling of the prosperity of Israel
under Simon, makes it the climax of his description that he
' made glorious the sanctuary, and multiplied the vessels of
the temple' (1 Mace. xiv. 15). Is it likely that he beautified
the exterior, and took no thought for the greatest of the
spiritual glories of the temple — those ' praises of Israel '
which Jehovah was well-pleased to ' inhabit ' ? If so, he had
no feeling for that exquisite psalm which calls the ministers
of the temple happy because ' they can be always praising '
God (Ps. lxxxiv. 4). No ; there cannot be another time so
suitable for the editing of the two last books of the Psalter
as this period of the Maccabaean history. We have no
ancient record of it, and yet perhaps it is more deserving of
credence than the story of the completion of the library of
1 Comp. Spencer, De Legibus Hebrceorum, ii. 11 16.

12 THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER. lect.

national records by Judas ,in the untrustworthy second Book
of Maccabees (2 Mace. ii. 14).
Our result is that Books IV. and V. of the Psalter received
their present form soon after B.C. 142. Egyptian -Jewish
pilgrims must quickly have carried it home to their brethren.
For the synagogues at Alexandria, one of which rivalled the
temple in its splendour,1 and at least to some extent for the
small and little-frequented sectarian temple of Onias at Leon-
topolis, a manual of sacred song was indispensable.g There
may indeed have been an earlier version of the Psalter in its
incomplete form, but not long after Simon's edition reached
' Israel in Egypt ' it was probably put into a permanent Greek
form with the title v/jlvoi2 (=D^rj]ji) for the members of the
metropolitan community. The date of this event cannot be
fixed precisely, but it was at any rate (see p. 83) before the
Christian era. Maccabaean psalms in the Septuagint Psalter
are referred to both by Philo and by the translator of
1 Maccabees.3

Note *, p. 4.
' The chaos which at present reigns in Old Testament criticism '
(article on 'The Present Desiderata of Theology,' Expositor, April
1890). From what point of view are these words written? Not
from that of a worker in criticism. Destruction and reconstruction
have ever gone side by side. ' The inspiration of the Bible.' In
what sense is this phrase used ? The Church says, ' I believe in
the Holy Ghost . . . who spake by the prophets.'
Note b, p. 6.
I shall therefore avoid such arguments as imply the post-Exile
origin of the ' priestly code,' though I fully agree with Prof. Robert
son Smith that 'a just view of the sequence and dates of the
several parts of the Pentateuch is essential to the historical study
of Hebrew religion ' [Religion of the Semites, p. 198).
1 Succa, $ib (Wunsche, Der bab. Talmud, i. 398). Josephus might well have
called this synagogue icpbv, like that at Antioch ( War, vii. 3, 3).
2 See Ps. lxxi. 20 Sept., and comp. references to Philo in Hatch, Essays in
Biblical Greek, p. 174. Josephus, too, describes the Psalms as S/xvoi eiy ®ebi>, and
the Levites as ifivySoi (Ant. xx. 9, 6).
3 The references to the Sept. Psalter in the Greek Sirach produced by Ehrt
(Abfassungszeit, &c, p 128) will not bear examination. See Appendix I.

THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER. 13

Note c, p. 7.
As soon, says Carpzov, as an inspired writer composed a psalm,
his autograph copy was placed in the 'tabularia' of the temple
among the sacred rolls. The frequent recitation of these psalms
in the services imprinted them on the memory of the faithful, and,
either from memory or from the copies possessed by the Levites,
they were written down for the general use. ' Hinc factum est, ut
jam Ezechiae regis tempore psalmorum aliqua prostaret collectio, ut
ex 2 Chron. xxix. 30, necnon ex citatis Davidis verbis Jes. xxxviii. 18,
Jer. xvii. 7, 8, apparet : quam crediderim privata opera factam, et
Ps. Ixxii. obsignatam fuisse. Unde clausula subjuncta, " Completse
sunt orationes David, filii Isai : " ese nimirum, quae collectori ad
manus fuerunt, et quarum sylloge tunc temporis vulgo in populo
obtinebat.' But, he thinks, besides these there were other psalms,
which were sung, though more rarely, in the church, and that ' the
men of Hezekiah ' (Prov. xxv. 1) completed the original roll by
adding these. This roll, or, it may be, these rolls, were carried to
Babylon, and when Ezra restored the temple-worship, and, ' divino
nutu,' arranged the Old Testament canon, he edited and finally
completed the Psalter by adding some more inspired psalms, in
cluding many of David's. He adds, however, the unfortunate
suggestion ('nisi forte velis') that the subscription in Ps. Ixxii. 19
may refer to the close, not of the book, but of the life of David
(cf. 2 Sam. xxiii. 1). Note d, p. 10.
Freudenthal [Alexander Polyhistor, Breslau, 1875, p. 128) puts
this very forcibly, but his theory of the date and country of the
Jewish writer Eupolemos (accepted by Schiirer) has been shaken by
the criticisms of Gratz [Gesch. der Juden, iii., ed. 4, p. 603).
Note e, p. 11.
Comp. Ecclus. 1. 18. I do not deny that the primitive Hebrew
music may have survived in some popular religious rites, just as
Gobineau assures us that primitive Asiatic music has survived in the
ceremonies of the Persian Passion Play.
Note f, p. n.
Gratz ascribes the erection of the Maccabaean family monument
at Modin to John Hyrcanus [Gesch. der Juden, iii., ed. 4, p. 81).
This, however, is contrary to the positive assertion of the authorities

14 THE PSALTERS WITHIN THE PSALTER, lect. I.

(i Mace. xiii. 27-30 ; Jos., Ant. xiii. 6, 5). That the style of the
architecture was Greek, is certain, though no traces of the monument
have yet been found at Khirbet-el-Mediyeh (the site of Modin).
But as early as b.c 176 we have a monument of naturalized Greek
art, erected by a Jewish priest, the colossal remains of which still
exist in a trans- Jordanic wady ('Araq-el-Emir). Gratz's objection that
Simon would not have erected a pyramid for himself is answered
by a reference to the common practice of Oriental monarchs and
grandees. Note e, p. 12.
It may be objected that there is no evidence that psalmody
formed part of the public worship in the early synagogues (cf. Gibson,
Expositor, July 1890, pp. 25-27). But they were at any rate ' prayer-
houses ' like the temple (Isa. lvi. 7), and I can with difficulty believe
that prayer did not include praise (cf. Ps. xiii. 9, Hab. iii. 1): espe
cially as the missionary psalms contain passages specially appropriate
to the Diaspora. See further p. 363.
On the history of the temple of Onias (the site of which, as Brugsch
and Naville agree, is Tell-el-Yehfidieh) see Herzfeld, Gesch. des Volkes
Jisrael, iii. 463; Jost, Gesch. des Judenthums, i. 1 16-120. The
temple appealed originally to those who valued the legal sacrifices,
but felt a horror at the corruption of the high priestly family just
before the Maccabaean times. Philo does not mention it ; no wonder,
for he was a spiritualizer. 'God,' he said, 'delights in fireless
altars.'

PART II.
ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V.
LET us now proceed to analyze these two books with a view
to determining the date of the groups of psalms which
they contain, most of which of course need not be as late as
the period of the editors. It is an easy process, because, as
Ewald remarks, this collection, being the latest, has under
gone fewer changes than the others, and the strata of which
it is composed are almost palpably visible. The first question
is, Are there any groups of psalms which are most easily
explained on the theory of a Maccabaean origin ? There are
strong reasons for expecting to find such. Consider the
greatness of the Maccabaean period, more keenly felt by
none than by the writers of the Book of Daniel and the
Epistle to the Hebrews. a It is indeed morally so great that
even if no psalms, probably Maccabaean, had been preserved,
we should be compelled to presume that they once had
existed. If there were psalmists in the age of Pompey
(63-48 B.C.), when the stimulus given by Mattathias and his
sons was waxing feeble, b how should there not have been in
the age of these heroes themselves ?- Prophetic and poetic
inspiration being closely connected in primitive times
prophetic psalm-writing was a common phenomenon both in
the Jewish and in the early Christian Church. c If apocalypse
the child of prophecy, began so nobly in the Maccabaean
Book of Daniel, how can the same spirit of world-subduing
faith have failed to find a worthy expression in spiritual song ?
These considerations, I think, justify the provisional accept
ance of a Maccabaean date for those psalms in the fourth
and fifth Books which, upon exegetical grounds, seem to require
it. The non-exegetical arguments against Maccabaean psalms
will be considered in connexion with certain disputed psalms

16 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.

in Books II. and III. What, then, for our present purpose
will be the criteria of Maccabaean psalms? I should not
lay any great stress on the linguistic criteria, nor can I in this
place attempt to indicate them.d But this we may and must
require — that in typical Maccabaean psalms there should be
some fairly distinct allusions to Maccabaean circumstances ;
I mean expressions which lose half their meaning when
interpreted of other times.e And, above all, we expect to
find an uniquely strong church feeling, an intensity of
monotheistic faith, and in the later psalms an ardour of
gratitude for some unexampled stepping forth of the one
Lord Jehovah into history. We can hardly err in supposing
that tests like these were applied by that keenest of the
patristic expositors, Theodore of Mopsuestia, in determining
his Maccabaean psalms Let me in passing pay a tribute of
admiration to the extraordinary genius which at so early an
age outstripped all his predecessors/
But we must now seek to apply these criteria for ourselves-
to one of the more promising psalms — the 118th. The his
torical background is here singularly definite. Jehovah has
interposed ; he has avenged the death of his D*TPD. ; he has
put down the idol-gods and their worshippers ; friendless
Israel has proved too strong for the whole world in arms.
The psalm has been written to commemorate this great fact,
and to be sung antiphonally in the name of the church by
worshippers and by Levites. I know that several great
events in the history of the Jewish Church have been thought
of — e.g., the erection of the altar of burnt-offering at the
feast of Tabernacles in B.C. 536,1 or the foundation of the
second temple in B.C. 53s,2 or the dedication of the same
temple when finished in B.C. 515.3 But neither of the two
former can be the occasion, if only because the temple is
referred to by the psalmist as completed ; nor is the exu
berant spirit of independence and martial ardour in the
psalm in harmony with the third. But the purification and
reconsecration of the temple by Judas the Maccabee in B.C.
165 " is fully adequate to explain alike the tone and the
expressions of this festal song.s Read it in the light of this
1 Ezra iii. 1-6 ; so Ewald. 2 Ezra iii. 8-13 ; so Hengstenberg.
3 Ezra vi. 15-18; so Delitzsch. 4 1 Mace. iv. 37-59, 2 Mace. x. 1-7.

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 17

event, and especially vv. 10-12, 15-16, 21-22, and 26. Need
I show how that thrice repeated refrain, ' In Jehovah's name
will I mow them down ' (Bruston, 'je les massacre') suits
the character of the terrible hero Judas ? The rendering ' will
I mow them down ' supposes an allusion to the ' grass which
is cut down and withereth.' If, however, with strict ad
herence to usage, we were to render ' will I circumcise them,'
we should have a very striking paronomasia, closely akin to
St. Paul's fiXETrsTs ttjv /caTa.To/j.rfv (Phil. iii. 2). It is no doubt
a meaning too painful to be that intended by the editor, but
the original writer may, in Oriental style, have had two
meanings in his mind, one for the moment, the other to be
brought forth in quieter times. Or need I comment at length
on that second triple burden, ' The right hand of Jehovah
doeth valiantly, is exalted, doeth valiantly ' ? h — or do more
than refer (on v. 21) to the prayer of Judas (1 Mace. iv.
30-33) when he saw the Graeco- Syrian army at Beth-zur,
before that great victory which opened to him the way to
Jerusalem ?
But I must pause a moment at v. 22. Does the ' stone '
mean Israel which had, to the surprise of all men, again
become conspicuous in the organization of peoples ? Or —
for this large application of the figure of the building implies
too much reflection — may it not have a more special reference
to the Asmonsean family, once lightly esteemed, but now to
become recognized more and more as the chief corner-stone ? '
Nor can I leave v. 27 unexplained ; every line of it is significant.
* Jehovah (not Zeus) is God ; light hath he given us.' May
not this allude to the illumination which gave rise to the
second namej of the Dedication Festival ('the Lights '), a
name which Josephus regards as a symbol of unexpected
deliverance k [Ant. xii. 7, 7)? 'Bind the procession with
branches,' the verse, if I understand the obscure words aright,
continues, '(step on) to the altar-horns.' True, we cannot
tell how the ancient people celebrated its autumn festival ;
but we do know that solemn processional circuits of the altar
were made in the later periods, the priests repeating mean
while the 25 th verse of our psalm. Can we doubt that the
same rite was practised in earlier times, and that, as in other
cases, the meagre rules in Leviticus should be read by the
C

1 8 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. LECT.
light of later custom ? Ps. cxviii., then (unlike Ps. xxx.),
was from the first used as a Dedication hymn. Once more
the pipe and the harp were heard in Israel, and this was one
of the first strains which reawakened their melody (comp.
I Mace. iii. 45, iv. 54). I wish that we could at once proceed
to study Ps. lxxix., which there is good reason to place in
the year before the glorious Dedication. Permit me at least
to whet your appetite by quoting from a Jewish poetess who
has finely contrasted the scenes in which, as I think, Pss. lxxix.
and cxviii. respectively arose : —
They who had camped within the mountain-pass,
Couched on the rock, and tented 'neath the sky,
Who saw from Mizpah's heights the tangled grass
Choke the wide Temple-courts, the altar lie
Disfigured and polluted — who had flung
Their faces on the stones, and mourned aloud,
And rent their garments, wailing with one tongue,
Crushed as a wind-swept bed of reeds is bowed,
Even they, by one voice fired, one heart of flame,
Though broken reeds, had risen, and were men;
They rushed upon the spoiler and o'ercame,
Each arm for freedom had the strength of ten.
Now is their mourning into dancing turned,
Their sackcloth doffed for garments of delight ;
Week-long the festive torches shall be burned,
Music and revelry wed day with night.1
It was with the best of reasons, then, that Ps. cxviii. (as
a part of the Hallel,m i.e. Pss. cxiii.-exviii.), though chanted
on single days at other festivals, was appointed to be sung on
the eight successive days of the Feasts of Tabernacles and of '
the Dedication." Let us now approach the other members of
the second part of the Hallel, and ask, Have they the same
historical background as Ps. cxviii. ? It cannot be said that
either Ps. cxv. or Ps. cxvi., still less that the minute 117th
psalm, by itself compels an affirmative answer. But all these
come to us from the Church of the Second Temple as mem
bers of the same group, or subdivision of a group, as Ps.
cxviii., and it is a canon of criticism that when certain psalms,
1 Emma Lazarus, 'The Feast of Lights.'

I. ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 19
all of which agree in some leading features, and positively
disagree in none, have come to us from ancient times in one
group, we are bound to assign them to the same period,
though it is only in one instance that we can from internal
evidence speak positively as to the date." And who can deny f
that the death of the khasidim p (' pious ones ') spoken of in
cxvi. 1 5 forcibly reminds us of the Syrian persecution ? ori
that the threefold division of the faithful in cxv. 9-13 suggests j
that the psalm proceeded from the same circle as cxviii. 2-4 ? " i
A truce then to the inconclusive vagueness of De Wette and i
Hupfeld. Pss. cxv., cxvi., and probably cxvii. (the litur-j
gical introduction to Ps. cxviii.) are Maccabaean, and the]
historian is justified in using them to give colour to his nar-'
rative. Only we may, without violating our canon, assign
them to a somewhat later year and a different author.
The tone is quieter ; the devotional spirit purer and more
tender. And yet Ps. cxv., though not the work of a Tyrtasus,
may well have been a battle-song of the 'AaiBalot, or
khasidim, just as it was that of the heroic John Sobieski,
King of Poland, in 1683, when the tide of Mohammedan
invasion was for ever turned back ; nor was it perhaps wholly
unjustified when Cromwell and his army sang Ps. cxvii. after
winning the fight of Dunbar in 1650.1 ' Not unto us, Je
hovah, not unto us/ is surely the very tone of a whole-hearted
religious warrior, and the assured conviction of the psalmist
in cxvi. 9, ' I shall walk before Jehovah in the lands of the
living,' is but another form of the thought expressed in cxviii.
17, ' I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of Jehovah.'
For what object could true Israelites have in speeding from
land to land but to declare the deeds of the living God,
and, in the words of Ps. cxvii., to summon all nations to
praise that loving-kindness and truth which are mighty over
all, of whatever race, who are ' fearers of Jehovah ' (Ps. cxv.
13), and, in the widest sense of the word, proselytes? And
before I pass on let me remark that for the Christian Feast
of Lights1, in all its varied significance, this would be an
appropriate group of psalms, if we might interpret the too
violent expressions of religious zeal in Ps. cxviii. by the
chastened, charitable utterances of Ps. cxvii.
1 See Harrison, Oliver Cromwell (1888), p. 157.

20 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. LECT.
There are two other psalms which have been not less fre
quently and positively referred to the Maccabaean times — the
i loth and the 149th. The difficulty of the former arises from
its brevity and obscurity,1 which are specially remarkable in a
temple-song (for such the work is, although in form a mix
ture of prophetic oracle and encomium). If critical questions
could be decided by votes, we should have to allow that at
any rate this psalm belonged to the Davidic age.s By some
strange accident, comparable to that by which the Moabite
Stone was only discovered twenty years ago, this Davidic
poem waited (it would seem) for a public recognition till
(probably) after the Return from the Exile ! * Well, let us
admit that this is not absolutely beyond the limits of possi
bility. When and by whom can it have been written ? By
a court-poet, it is said, as a glorification of David, who, by
transferring the ark to Mount Zion, had become a true
successor to the ancient Melchizedek." We are reminded
that two striking features of the picture here presented to us
recur in 2 Sam. vi. That narrative states that, before fetching
the ark to Kirjath-Jearim, ' David gathered together all the
chosen men of Israel ' (2 Sam. vi. 1 ; compare Ps. ex. 3), and
that he afterwards performed priestly acts, leading in the
sacred dance, offering sacrifices, girt with a linen ephod, and
blessing the people in the most sacred of names (2 Sam. vi.
13, x4> l7, 18). Believe this who can ! Where in the psalm
are the ark, the dance, the ephod spoken of? Where is the
name Jehovah [Yahveh] Sabaoth (see p. 203) ? And where
does the historical narrative refer to the tithes which have such
a prominent place in the story of Melchizedek ? Besides,
granting that the establishment of the ark upon Mount Zion
strengthened David's hold upon the priesthood,2 he did not
then become a priest for the first time. State and religion
being to Orientals identical conceptions, the regal dignity
was originally inseparable from the sacerdotal. Saul, David,
Solomon, and the kings of Israel and Judah, Sennacherib,
Assurbanipal, and Nebuchadrezzar— none of them would
have craved the divine permission to assume the title of
priest. Why, even David's sons could be styled priests.
1 On the obscure second half of v. 3 see linguistic appendix.
2 See Wellhausen, Prolegomena, p. 136.

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V.

(2 Sam. viii. 18) ; much more the king himself. If the pre
ceding verses had referred to the erection of the temple,
one could understand such an oracle in v. 4 as, ' Thou shalt
continue my priest for ever ; ' it is just such a context
which introduces the prayer of Tiglath-Pileser I., that Anu and
Ramman ' would establish his priesthood for the future like the
mountains faithfully.' ¦ There would in this case be a reason
for the use of the title ' priest,' which, is wanting on the hypo
thesis that David is the hero of the psalm. But no one, I
fear, claims the psalm for Solomon.
We must next examine the second view, viz., that Ps. ex.
was written in the age of Zerubbabel v with reference to the
Messiah regarded as priest and king in one. The view is based
upon Zech. vi. 9-13. We are there told that three Babylonian
Jews had come with a present of silver and gold to the
struggling community at Jerusalem. This appeared to
Zechariah like a first fulfilment of anticipations such as those
of Haggai (ii. -7) that 'the desirable things of all nations
should come.' A prophetic impulse stirred him to receive
it, and make it into crowns, and to place these (according to
the received text) on the head of Joshua the high priest, in
order, as St. Cyril long ago explained, 2 to typify Him who
as God was king, and as man was high priest. This inter
pretation is retained even by Delitzsch,3 except with regard to
the divinity of the Messiah, which Zechariah cannot be
supposed to have held. Yet, though, following Riehm, I
once held this view in a modified form, I must admit that it
is critically untenable. The concluding words of Zech. vi. 13,
'and there shall be a priest upon his throne [or, as the
Septuagint has, ' at his right hand '], and the counsel of
peace shall be between them both,' prove that in the original
form of the prophecy two persons were mentioned, each of
whom was to be crowned, viz., Joshua with the silver, and
Zerubbabel with the gold crown. As Ewald has shown,
there can be no doubt that in v. 1 1 we should read, ' upon
the head of Zerubbabel and upon the head of Joshua,' w and
1 Prism-inscription, col. viii., lines 32-38 (Winckler, in Keilinschriftliche
Bibliothek, i. 45).
2 In Aggceum, 638 a.
3 Messianic Prophecy (1880), p. 98.

22 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.

with this correction the only proof-passage for the idea of a
Messiah-Priest in the Old Testament falls away.x Con
sequently Ps. ex. does not belong to the age of the prophet
Zechariah. (Observe in passing that in Zerubbabel's time it
was a perfect Davidic king who was looked for — the prophets
even thought of Zerubbabel himself ;y in the Maccabaean times,
a trustworthy prophet.1 In the reign of Hyrcanus, when the
Pharisees became unfriendly to the Asmonaean house,2 it is
intelligible enough that the hope of the Davidic Messiah
should have revived.3)
The third view places this strange psalm in the Macca
baean times, which the writer regards as germinally Messianic.
The hope of the Messiah may have flourished most in
Egypt,z but it had not died out (how could it have done so,
while the Scriptures were studied ?) even in Palestine. The
Asmonaean family will, as the psalmist believes, furnish a line
of Messianic princes, whose victories will become more and
more splendid till they correspond to the grand description
in Ps. ii. The accession of one of these had in fact just then
awakened all the writer's latent enthusiasm. It seemed as if
the ' sure lovingkindnesses of David ' (Isa. lv. 3 aa) were about
to be fulfilled in no scanty measure. Can we be surprised at
this, or call it a wild idea that in Judas and his heroic
brethren the ' darling of Israel's songs ' (2 Sam. xxiii. 1 ?) had
•come to life again ? It has indeed been asserted by a Jewish
historian that the leaders of Israel during this period were
sober-minded and put a severe restraint on their imagination.
He cannnot deny that in the story of the liberation reference is
often made to hymns of praise, but supposes that none but
old hymns rose to the freedmen's lips ! In spite of historical
analogies we are asked to believe that there were no Maccabaean
psalmists ! I do not stand alone in characterizing this view
.as untenable in the face of the 1 18th psalm. And even though
some parts of this song may seem to favour the Jewish critic's,
view, yet we have a right to expect that other works will
not only in part but altogether point in an opposite direc
tion, and give unqualified witness to a lofty and unmixed
enthusiasm. 1 See I Mace. iv. 46, xiv. 41.
2 Jos., Ant. xiii. 10, 5; cf. Targ. Deut. xxxiii. 11.
3 See Book of Enoch.

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V.

Listen, then, to an Israelite who ' has consented to sing in
a strange land one of the songs of Zion.' l We must not, in
our reaction against ' Teste David cum Sibylla,' be too severe
upon him for assuming the character of a Sibyl. He does
but express his belief in that spirit of prophecy which is not
confined to the people of Israel, but which cannot anywhere
express hopes or ideas at variance with those of God's first
born son. He is no ' fanatic,' but an ' earnest and courageous
missionary.' bb
Kai tot' aV ^eXt'oto co Oeos ire/jof/ei fiaaiXrja.,
* Os -Tracrav yaiav iravaet. iroXtfwio kokoio,
OSs p.ev apa kteiWs, ols 8' op/aa 7rio-ra. TtXecro-aSi'1'1
OuSe ye Tats totals /3ouA,ais TaSe 7rdvTa •koitjo'u,
'AAAa ®eov p.eyd\oio iriOrjO-as ooy/Aacrti' eo"f?Xots.ee
Aaos S'av yneyaA.010 ®£oC TrepiKaWii. tt\ovtu>
Bt^rjtf9a>s, xpvcrio re Kai apyvpto, r/Si T€ k6o-/j.u>
TIop<pvp£<p' 2 /cat yala TeAeo-^)d/oos, rjSe Od\ao"<ra
T5v dyaOSiv irXyjOovaa. — Orac. Sibyll. iii. 652-660.
And now consider these two points. (1) It has been)
proved by Hilgenfeld that the quasi-prophetic description)
which precedes carries us down to the conquest of Greecej
and the destruction of Carthage by the Romans in 146 B.C.,
and the seizure of the Syrian throne by the usurper Tryphon
in 142 B.C. (2) Just before the latter event Simon the
Maccabee succeeded his brother Jonathan. A passage in
I Mace, xiv., probably derived in part from an old song,
shows us how the strange good fortune of his rule stirred the
imagination of Judaean writers. Here are some verses from
it:— 'And they tilled their ground in peace, and the earth
gave her increase, and the trees of the field their fruit. The
elders sat in the broad places ; they all communed of good
things, and the young men put on glorious robes and warlike
apparel. He furnished provisions for the cities, and equipped
them with means of defence, so that his honourable name
was renowned unto the end of the earth. He made peace in
the land, and Israel rejoiced with great joy  And
1 Drummond, Philo Judceus, i. 170.
2 Comp. 1 Mace. xiv. 9, 43 (Simon's dress ; cf. xi. 58).

24 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. LECT-
none was left in the land to fight against them, and the
kings were crushed in those days ' [vv. 8-n, 13).
What more natural than that Egyptian-Jewish writers-
should follow suit, and that the Sibyl should regard this as the
opening of a brief Messianic period, too soon to be followed
by the worst troubles which could come upon the human
race? It is unimportant to decide whether or no Simon
himself is the ' king ' referred to.ff If he is, the poetic ex
aggeration consists, not so much in the use of the title ' king
(see on Pss. xx., xxi.) as in the world-wide influence ascribed to
Simon, and it has a superficial resemblance to the idealizing
language of Ps. ex. 5-7. If he is not, we may yet suppose,
with Dr. Drummond, that the details of the Sibyl's descrip
tion were suggested by the career of Simon. So that this
Egyptian Jew is in any case a witness to the deep impression
produced by the last great Maccabee.gg
With still greater confidence, however, can we refer to
Ps. ex., as in the fullest sense a glorification of Simon. The
poet implies, but does not expressly state, that his hero is
about to assume regal authority. Does not this fully corre
spond to the historical position of Simon ? He did not, of
course, claim the title of king ; l but he lacked nothing of the
dignity but the name. Syria claimed no authority over him ;
without asking leave of his nominal overlord he struck coins,
and collected armies, and from his accession the Jewish
people dated the era of its independence.1111 Who else can
be meant but Simon ? Alexander Jannaeus was, no doubt,
the first Asmonaean king recognized as such on the coins,11
but he was totally unworthy of a religious poet's encomium.
More plausible is the claim (put forward in his first edition
by De Wette) in favour of Simon's son, Johanan or John
Hyrcanus (B.C. 135-105),^ who may be said to have con
solidated the second Israelitish empire. How he struck his
contemporaries may be seen from the Book of Enoch, which
represents him symbolically as a 'great horn,' his predecessors
being smaller horns (xc. 9). Three privileges, says Josephus,
were divinely accorded to him, the government of his nation,
the dignity of the high priesthood, and prophecy.2 Those
1 See, however, on Pss. xx., xxi. (Lect. V.).
! Jos., Ant. xiii. 10, 7, War, i. 2, 8.

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 25

who would reduce Ps. ex. to the rank of a party pamphlet,
might plausibly ascribe it to some Sadducaean writer, who
wished to contradict the taunts cast by the Pharisees at
Hyrcanus,1'1' by giving a lyric form to one of his master's older
prophecies. Against this view, however, it may be urged —
(1) that this enmity of the Pharisees towards Hyrcanus arose
in the latter part of his rule, whereas this psalm is evidently,
like Ps. xiv., addressed to a ruler who has recently come to
the throne ; (2) that the first part of Hyrcanus's reign was not
marked by success ; and (3) that the predictions which are
ascribed to him were doubtless, like that of Caiaphas (John
xi. 51), official oracles, and presupposed the dignity which in
Ps. ex. 4 is conferred upon the hero of the psalm. And so
we are driven back to the view that the psalm is an encomium
upon Simon, who, by the capture of the Acra and the
expulsion of its garrison (May 142),11 had completed the
liberation of Jerusalem, and rendered it possible for a
psalmist to say, ' All eagerness are thy people in the day of
thy muster upon the sacred mountains ' (Ps. ex. 3).
It was a great turning-point of history — the surrender
of the Syrian garrison in the Acra. Hitherto, the legend
upon Simon's coins, ' Jerusalem the Holy,' had seemed only
half-true (for ' holy,' as the corresponding legend on Tyrian
coins mm proves, signifies ' sacrosanct, inviolable'). But now, the
sacred precincts being no longer overlooked by the proud
heathen, it seemed like an initial fulfilment of the great
prophecy in Joel iii. 17.
The prophetic order was still indeed painfully missed,"11
but passing gleams of prophecy were not withheld, and the
ancient oracles were manifestly receiving a most unthought-
of fulfilment (cf. Ecclus. xxxvi. 1 5, 16).00 Jehovah had ' arisen
into his resting-place,' had ' clothed his priests with salvation,'
and had, at least in a symbolic or typical sense, ' made a horn
to shoot forth unto David ' (Ps. exxxii. 8, 16, i7).Pp Does any
one object to my supposition of a symbolic or typical inter
pretation thus early ? But, not to adduce other evidence,1 did
not the psalmist himself interpret ' Melchizedek ' typologi-
cally, and without adopting such a principle how could the
pattern Israelite have 'meditated on God's law day and
1 See the Books of Daniel and Judith.

26 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.

night ' (Ps. i. 2) ? ' David ' then had become for that gene
ration the type of a righteous and successful king, and a
psalmist in quasi-prophetic rapture could thus address the
Maccabaean prince, whose symbol was Aaron's rod that
budded, ' Thy mighty rod (or sceptre) doth Jehovah stretch
forth from Zion, (saying,) Have sway in thine enemies' midst '
(Ps. ex. 2).
In truth, it was from Zion that the high priest now began
to stretch forth his sceptre. No sooner had the sound of the
joyous psalmody4*1 died away, than Simon resolved to raze
the Acra and cut away the very steep on which it stood, so
that henceforth Zion, instead of the Acra, became the citadel
of Jerusalem (Jos., Ant. xiii. 6, 7). 'Moreover, the hill of the
temple that was by the Acra he made stronger than before,
and there he dwelt himself with all his company' (1 Mace.
xiii. 52). It was, perhaps, while this great work was in
progress that a popular decree was carried in favour of
Simon, which throws fresh light on the 1 10th psalm. It will
be found translated with substantial accuracy in 1 Mace. xiv.
27~46.rr After detailing the eminent services of Simon, and
mentioning that the people had already made him their
ruler [r/jovfisvov) and high priest,ss it continues thus : ' And it
pleased well the Jews and the priests that Simon should be
their ruler and high priest for ever [sis rbv alGsva), or at
least" until there should arise a trustworthy prophet ' (capable
of deciding doubtful points, like Elijah). The historian states
in conclusion [v. 47) that ' Simon accepted this dignity, and
was well pleased to be high priest and general [~W) and
ethnarch (possibly K,ifJuu) of the Jews and priests, and to
stand before all.' Can we doubt that the enthusiasm which
prompted this decree would further express itself in song?
and can we fail to hear an echo of the language of the record
in the psalmist's words, ' Thou art a priest for ever ' ?
And what of the words which follow, ' after the manner
of Melchizedek ' ? Can we illustrate them from the literature
of this and the subsequent period ? We can. In the so-
called letter of Caesar Augustus in Jos., Ant. xvi. 6, 2, Hyr
canus II. is called ap^iepevs rov v^la-rov ©eoi),vv and in the
book called ' The Assumption of Moses ' (dating from about the
beginning of the Christian era), the Maccabaean princes are

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 27

referred to as ' priests of the most High God ' (vi. I7).w This
was in fact long the usual title of the ruling prince in letters
of divorce and similar legal documents, according to an old
Talmudic tradition. Now remember that Melchizedek, ' king
of righteousness,' xx is called in Gen. xiv. 18, JvVy ^ |i£
'priest of God most High,' and can you not see the con
nexion of ideas? The favourite title of Jehovah in the
later period is precisely this — \~\ty W,1 and one of the
accounts of the patriarchs yy associated this title with the
ancient priest-king of Salem. What more natural than to
take this righteous and religious personage as the type of
another priest-king of Salem, whose conception of God was
expressed in the same venerable phrase ? It is in fact in
credible that Philo should have been the first to reflect on
the higher meaning of P^T^b'O and Ji^y ^S.2
There was, moreover, a special reason why the thoughts
of our psalmist should have been directed to this point.
Alcimus, who ' struggled ' against Judas for the much-coveted
prize of the high priesthood (1 Mace, vii.), had really a far
better claim to it, legally, than his rival, being a direct de
scendant of Zadok ; whereas Judas belonged to one of the
ordinary pries#tly families. Accordingly, Alcimus's pretensions
were at first favoured by the party of khasidim, or strict
legalists (1 Mace. vii. 14), who were only brought to recognize
Judas as not merely a general, but a possible high priest, by
the wicked massacre of their too trustful leaders (see on Ps.
lxxix.). Our psalmist justifies the popular decree in favour
¦of Simon,zz and meets the objections of any still doubtful
khasidim, by showing that Simon, though a ' stone which the
builders had refused,' was a high priest of a better order than
that of Zadok. Melchizedek himself was his pattern, and that
not only outwardly but inwardly. Proudly but truly said the
greatest of Babylonian kings,3 ' I am Nebuchadrezzar, king
of righteousness' [sar misari). It remained for Simon to
prove that he too deserved this noblest of names. And he
1 See my note on Ps. vii. 18.
2 De Leg. Alleg. iii. 25, 26 (i. 102, 103). Notice in passing how much
deeper is the allegory of Melchizedek in Heb. vii. 1-10.
3 In the opening of the Phillipps Cylinder Inscription (see Ball, in Proceed-
ings of Soc. of Biblical Archceology, Feb. 7, 1888).

28 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.
did deserve it. If his brother Judah was 'the hammer,""
Simon was more than this— he was in the strictest sense a
righteous ruler. If, as v. 6 anticipates that he would, he
' shattered heads ' of ' lawless and wicked men,' he also ' con
firmed all the lowly of his people' (i Mace. xiv. 14). Did
not such an one deserve to be commemorated in the Psalter ?
and was not his encomium well worthy to be assigned to the
golden age of David ?
But you will ask me, Can a poet so exuberant in his
enthusiasm for Simon really have been inspired ? Do not
his eulogistic words overshoot their mark ? I understand the
difficulty, and sympathize with those who are jealous for the
honour of canonical Scriptures. My reply is twofold. First,
it appears to be certain from many prophetic passages that
inspiration was not incompatible with some harmless illusions.
Human nature being what it has pleased God to make it, the
progress of revelation was not psychologically possible other
wise. The variously gifted Asmonaean princes served God's
purposes for a time, but for a time only. It would not have
been profitable either to Israel or to humanity that they
should have consolidated a great world-empire. Not so could
the highest Messianic prophecies be fulfilled. Even the
successes of Jonathan and Simon and John Hyrcanus implied
a decay of the lofty idealism with which the war began ; the
good things for which they strove were no longer purely
spiritual. But when Aristobulus assumed not only the regal
title but the style and manners of an Oriental despot, the old
ri!3g} ipn (' lovingkindness and truth,' Ps. Ixxxv. 11) took
flight from the soil of Israel, and the rejoicing of one of the
so-called Psalms of Solomon (xvii.) over the fall of the
Asmonaean dynasty was but too amply justified.bbb All this
is true ; but could a contemporary of Simon's be expected to
know it ? Must not a lyric poet, sensitive to all national im
pulses, have been carried away on the full tide of national
enthusiasm ? Is there anything in this inconsistent with the
facts of inspiration as they are known to us ? Secondly, if
the psalmist is under an illusion as regards the Asmonaean
family, he is not so with reference to the Messianic ideal, of
which (as I have said) he considers the successes of Simon to
be an initial fulfilment. The indirect Messianic prediction

I. ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 29
which underlies Ps. ex. has not been belied, nor were the
scribes altogether wrong in applying the psalm to the expected
Messiah.

Note a, p. 15.
See Delitzsch or Rendall on Heb. xi. 34-38. The hints given in
this passage were developed at great length by St. Isaac of Antioch
{4th and 5th centuries a.d'.), who devotes no less than 117 lines
of his (Syriac) poem ' On the Bird which sang the Trisagion ' to
' Semonitha and her holy sons,' to Mattathias, and to Judas and his
brethren.1 The story of the Maccabees was, in truth, much more
thought of by the ancient Church than it is by us, and we might
well be led by this to ' consider our ways and be wise.' Both in the
East and in the West, August 1 was sanctified as the spiritual
' Birthday of the Maccabees,' by which, however, was meant not the
entrance into rest of the five heroic sons of Mattathias, but that of
the seven sons of ' Semonitha ' (as St. Isaac calls this pious mother),
whose death of torture is related (we may hope, truthfully) in 2 Mace.
vii. Doubtless this stirring episode laid more hold on the Christian
imagination than the rest of the traditional story. 'The seven
Maccabees ' seems to have been a common phrase, and to the
seven brethren, according to St. Augustine, a basilica was dedicated
at Antioch, ' ut simul sonet et nomen persecutoris et memoria coro-
natoris.' How popular the festival [rrav^yvpis) of ' the Maccabees '
was at Antioch we can gather, not only from St. Isaac, but from
St. Chrysostom, whose works contain two sermons 'on the holy
Maccabees and their mother.' 2 St. Gregory Nazianzen has also left
us a fine oration on the same subject.3 It is largely based, however,
on the so-called Fourth Book of Maccabees, which is really, as
Freudenthal has shown, a sermon before a Hellenistic Jewish audience
on one of the memorial days of the Maccabees (perhaps one of the
eight ' Dedication ' days) shortly before the fall of Jerusalem. All
these eloquent Fathers dwell much on the virtually Christian
character of these heroes of faith, but none as forcibly as St.
Augustine in his sermons ' on the Maccabees,' whose words are in
full accordance with the noble eleventh chapter of the Epistle to the
Hebrews.4 1 Opera, ed. Bickell, i. 1 58-163.
2 Opera, ed. 1636, i. 516 4c, 552 &c. ; cf. v. 972 (Serm. lxv.).
3 Opera, ed. 1630, i. 397 &<=. (Orat. xxii.).
4 Opera, ed. Ben., v. 1218, 1219. 'Neque enim post passionem suam ccepit
habere populum Christus : sed illius populus erat ex Abraham genitus . . . Non-
dum quidem erat mortuus Christus : sed martyres eos fecit moriturus Christus.'

30 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.

Note b, p. 15.
It is unreasonable to assert that the Maccabssan age was purely
imitative, and to refer in proof to the so-called Psalms of Solomon.
These artificial and yet historically interesting works only just fall
within our period, and were not completed till after its close (see
Drummond, The Jewish Messiah, pp. 135-141). They do, however,
prove that psalm-composition was not extinct. Remember also the
psalms in the Greek Daniel, in Judith and Tobit, in the ' Assump
tion of Moses ' (c. x., Merx), and in the copious Samaritan literature.
Note c, p. 15.
Miriam and Deborah are both called prophetesses (Ex. xv. 20,
Judges iv. 4). Notice the use of the verb ' to prophesy,' 1 Sam. x.
5 &c, xix. 20 &c. (see Targ.), Luke i. 67, and cf. 1 Chron. xxv. 1,
3. On the affinity between prophecy and psalm-writing, see 1 Cor.
xiv. 26, and cf. Hickes, The Spirit of Enthusiasm Exorcised (1709),
pp. 31, 32 ; Weizsacker, Das apostolische Zeitalter, 1886, pp. 577-579 ;
Warfield, in Expositor, 1885 (2), pp. 301 &c, 321 &c.
Note d, p. 16.
The argument from the linguistic complexion of the several
psalms is generally less cogent than that from the ideas and phrase
ological affinities, and is therefore seldom referred to in these
lectures. The linguistic evidence will, however, be given in the case
of certain psalms in the Appendix. Note e, p. 16.
The writer of the argument to Ps. Iv. (lvi.) in Corderius's Catena
—probably Theodore of Mopsuestia— felt this. He says, Uepnra9eo-
Tepoi yap 7ro)s Sokovo-w elvai 61 toiovtol, cn^dSpa iiriKXao-BivTos rov
7rpo<prjrov -Trpos ras o-u/i^opa? ras aurw. In Corderius, too, we find
this comment on lxxviii. (lxxix.) 4, ascribed to Theodore : TioWaxov
81 iv to« </raVo7s T(3v MaKKaBaiotv fie/xvifrai twv yiiTovwv <os oVei8i£oViw
eiKOTUs. Note f, p. 16.
The ' Interpreter ' par excellence of the Syrian Church still waits
for an English monograph at once complete and sympathetic. Dr.
Swete's article in the Diet. Christ. Biogr. is full of learning, but
contrasts unfavourably in tone with Bishop Milne's article in the

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V.

Church Quarterly Review, vol. i., No. i. Scant justice moreover is
done to the Old Testament work of this great theologian, who, as
the Jesuit scholar S. J. Flunk well observes, occupies ' a completely
unique position ' by his critical talent [Zeitschr. f. kathol. Theologie,
1887, p. 181). The fact of which we are assured not only by
Leontius but by Theodore himself (see Dr. Swete), that his work on
the psalms was the work of a beginner, does but increase our admira
tion for it. Theodore was not in all respects more competent in
later years ; the dogmatist could not but impose limitations on the
exegete (cf. Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, ii. 78, 79, note •). His
exegesis of the psalms may now be studied with the help of
Baethgen's Syriac researches (see articles in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1885,
p. 53 &c. ; 1886, p. 261 &c, often referred to here).
Note «, p. 16.
This occasion justifies and explains the use made of the ' Song
of Moses' (cf. v. 14 with Ex. xv. 2, and perhaps vv. 15 and 16
with Ex. xv. 6). As this fine psalm will be several times referred to,
let me here (though it does not sensibly affect my argument, but
only the general picture of psalm-composition) express my thorough
agreement with De Wette, who, in 1807, wrote thus of Ex. xv. 1-18 :
' It is too long and too artificial for these times [the Mosaic] and
for a popular song.' ' Otmar's conjecture,' he adds, 'is not un-
plausible, that only v. 1 (repeated in v. 21) formed the original
song ' [Beitrdge zur Einleitung ins A. T. ii. 216). Dillmann himself
has the same impression, but thinks that vv. 1-3 may have formed
the original song of Moses, and that the song as it now stands
(except v. 1 7, which is of later date) arose soon after the entrance of
the Israelites into Canaan. This early date of the song as a whole
is, however, opposed to a truly historical conception of the develop
ment of Israelitish religion, and I see no reason for placing the poem
earlier than the historical songs in the Psalter. All the arguments
against pre-Exile, or at any rate pre-Josian psalms, are applicable to
Ex. xv. 1-18. Verses 1-3 may be more ancient than the rest, but
what means have we for fixing their date ? It is true v. 2a is
copied in Isa. xii. 2b. But the snatches of lyric song in Isa. xii. are
full of points of contact with post-Exile psalms, and express the joy
of the restored exiles in the services of the second temple. This
was long ago shown by Ewald, and was confirmed in 1878 by Lagarde
[Semitica, i. 28). It has been my own view since 1881. I have
pointed out similar phenomena elsewhere (see below, p. 214).

32 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.

Note h, p. 17.
The psalmist speaks like a second Joshua (see Ps. xliv. 4, a
Maccabaean passage). Note !, p. 1 7.
This is much more natural than the view of Theodore of Mop-
suestia that ' the stone ' is Zerubbabel. The ' builders ' (cf. cxxvii.
1) are possibly those who had reconstituted the Jewish state after the
Return, one of whom was Zerubbabel. Remember that the Macca
bees were descendants of Aaron, not in the direct line, but in the
collateral line of Jojarib (1 Mace. ii. 1). The passage did not much
attract the attention of the Jewish doctors. It is only quoted once
in the Talmud, and not applied Messianically.
Note J, p. 17.
The first being nsjn = to. eyxatVia (John x. 22). In support of
Ewald's view on the ' Feast of Lights ' cf. Griinbaum, Zeitschr. der d.
morg. Ges. xxxi. 281. Note k, p. 17.
The unexpectedness of the liberation was one of the leading
ideas suggested by the feast in later times. Hence the selection of
Ps. xxx. as one of the psalms for the Hanukka. See vv. 6 and 12,
and notice (p. 18) Emma Lazarus's fine adaptation of v. 12. Of
course it does not exclude Ewald's view that the rite of illumination
was adopted from heathenism, and was originally connected with the
feast of the solstice, i.e. of the new light of the year [History, v. 312).
Such an origin would account for the reluctance of the Egyptian
Jews (who had some special festivals of their own) to adopt this
once foreign, though now Palestinian, festival (see 2 Mace. i. 18,
where it is the feast ri?s o-KrjvoTnjyias kol tov Trupds). Ewald connects
this solstice festival with the Christian Epiphany ; comp. J. Reville on
the transformation of the Mithriac festival of the renascent sun into
Christmas [La religion a Rome sous les Siveres, p. 98). Macrobius
confounds <£us and <p(3s [Saturn, i. 7, 31).
Note™, p. 18.
At the passover meal the Hallel was divided into two parts. It
is to the second part (Pss. cxv. -cxviii.), sung over the fourth and last
cup, that the vp.vrjo-avTe's of the Gospels refers. Delitzsch's Hebrew
N. T. well paraphrases, ' after they had finished the Hallel ' (Mark

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 33

xiv. 26, Matt. xxvi. 30). It is noteworthy that the only other
occasion on which Jesus Christ is reported to have referred to Ps.
cxviii. is when He applied one of His parables to those who rejected
His Messiahship (see Mark xii. 10, n, and parallel passages). None
of the accounts of His purification of the temple suggest that He
thought of Ps. cxviii. and the purification of Judas ; the Scripture
quotations are from passages of a more spiritual tenor than that
vehement psalm. Note n, p. 18.
The faithful Jews who rejoiced eight days at the dedication of the
new altar in b.c. 165, remembered the miserable Feast of Tabernacles
which they had lately kept ' like wild beasts ' (2 Mace. x. 6). The
new Feast of the Dedication was in fact regarded as a supplement to
that of the Tabernacles (2 Mace. i. 9). Thus the old festival was
filled with a new meaning, and the new one became the interpreter
of the old. (For I can scarcely think, with Geiger, that the Greek
translator mistook the meaning of Jn !) That the recitation of the
Hallel on these occasions goes back to Simon, can hardly be doubted.
The Talmud itself [Pesachim, 117a) states that the Hallel was insti
tuted for a twofold object, to celebrate festival days, and to com
memorate deliverance from a great danger (i.e., from the tyranny of
Antiochus Epiphanes). See Gratz, Monatsschrift, 1879, p. 202.
Note °, p. 19.
It is remarkable, however, that the patristic arguments of the
psalms in Corderius's Catena say nothing of the possible Maccabaean
reference of Ps. cxviii., but explain Ps. cxvi. either of the Return (so
also Theodore of Mopsuestia) or of the Maccabees — % ws erepos,
Ta kcit' 'Avtioxov tov '~E,m<pavfj TrpoBeo-iri&i (alluding to Theodoret).
Note p, p. 19.
On khasidim see below, p. 56, note0. It is worth noticing that
the word does not by any means occur in all the (probably) Macca
baean psalms, nor yet in the Book of Daniel. It was frequent,
however, in the Hebrew Psalms of Solomon, as can be seen even
from the Greek version. Note 1, p. 19.
The reference to proselytes in both these passages is most easily ;
explained if the psalms are of the Greek age. D

34 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect

Note r, p. 19.
Gregory Nazianzen calls the Epiphany ^ dyia tS>v cptortov rj/xipa
(Orat. xxxix.). Note ', p. 20.
1 suspect, nowever, that the best living scholars would not urge
the claims of David as confidently as their predecessors. Graf
Baudissin says cautiously that the pre-Exilic kingship is referred to,
and probably that of David, if at least the words ' Sit thou at my
right hand ' refer to David's privilege of setting up his throne beside
the ark, the symbol of the divine presence. An Asmonaean prince is
not meant, he thinks, because the priestly dignity belonged to this
family by inheritance. (Not, however, the high priestly.) See his
Gesch. des alttest. Priesterthums (1889), pp. 259, 260, and cf.
Orelli's explanation in his Old Testament Prophecy.
Note *, p. 20.
Even Delitzsch holds this opinion. This is the single Davidic
psalm, he says, in which, as in his Last Words (2 Sam. xxiii. 1-7),
David looks out into the future of his seed, and has the Messiah
objectively before him [The Psalms, by Eaton, i. 89). But will
Delitzsch's theory of these so-called Last Words stand (see Lect.V.)?
and can we,, till a parallel is found, bring ourselves to believe in
a strictly Messianic psalm (see Lect. VII.) ? Elsewhere, if I rightly
interpret his implications, Delitzsch suggests that the Asmonaean
royalty was regarded by its friends as a fulfilment of the oracles
in Ps. ex. [Messianic Prophecy, by Curtiss, p. 117). This is a tacit
recognition of the plausibility of the Maccabaean theory, and I cannot
see what prevents Delitzsch from accepting it as correct, for it is just
as easy to hold that a Maccabaean psalm is typically prophetic of
Christ as that parts of a Maccabaean prophecy (Dan. xi.) are typically
prophetic of Antichrist. For it is noteworthy that, though he has
much to say of the New Testament references to Ps. ex. (Matt. xxii.
41 &c, Acts ii. 34-36> * Cor. xv. 25, Heb. i. 13, v. 6, vii. 17, 21,
x. 13), which he rightly regards as determining the contemporary
Jewish exegesis, Delitzsch makes no appeal to the supposed authority
of our Lord. He is free, therefore, to give full play to his critical
faculty. Let all younger students recognize the admirable fairness of
this truly evangelical expositor. He knows full well how inconceiv
able it is that Jesus Christ should have formed critical decisions
upon the date and authorship of the psaims. So at least it appears-

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 35

to me from a not superficial acquaintance with Delitzsch and his
works. Some of my readers may be inclined to differ from us both.
Let them, however, answer these questions. Did the subject of the
authorship of Ps. ex. fall within the range of Christ's teaching, so far
as this can be gathered from a historical study of the Gospels?
Must not so keen a critic of the Jewish legal tradition have felt the
futility of the current Biblical criticism ? Is it not clear, then, that
Jesus simply assumes the premises of the Pharisees to prove that
even thus He is much more than a son of David, that they must
carry their Messianic researches into a far higher spiritual region ?
Later on Jewish controversialists abandoned the strict Messianic
interpretation of this psalm. Justin Martyr [c. Tryph. 33, 83) and
Tertullian [adv. Marc. v. 9) mention and refute a view which makes
Hezekiah the subject of the psalm. Messianic applications, however,.
still occur in the Talmud (see Pick, Hebraica, April 1886, p. 137).
Note ", p. 20.
Ewald writes thus : ' Since David took the field in person on this-
occasion [the campaign against Edom] it may well have been that,
as he was previously offering sacrifices and prayers at the holy place,.
some prophet like Gad or Nathan uttered that wonderfully elevating
oracle which supplied a poet of kindred spirit with the starting-point
of Ps. ex., and in which the royalty of Israel, combined with the
cheerful valour of the people, shone forth with unsurpassable bright
ness and purity ' [History, iii. 158).
Note v, p. 21.
This was still my own view in 1884 (see The Prophecies of Isaiah,
vol. ii.). The phrase ' an oracle of Jehovah ' (Ps. ex. 1) seemed to
me out of character with an age which painfully felt the want of
prophetic revelations (see 1 Mace. iv. 46, ix. 27, xiv. 41). But I
now see that what the age missed was not occasional prophetic oracles,
nor even recasts of old prophetic anticipations in a new form (with
both of which it was gratified), but true prophets according to its
own too narrow conception of the office, men who would never be at
a loss, who would have an answer ready for any question, whether it
were ' How long ? ' (Ps. lxxiv. 9), or ' Who is the divinely sanctioned
high priest ? ' or ' What shall be the end of the Syrian tyrant ? ' or
' What shall be the lot of them that sleep in the dust of the earth ? '
Some of these questions were answered by the Book of Daniel, but
the continuance of apocalyptic writing shows that the thirst for
insight into the divine secrets was by no means quenched.

36 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.

Note w, p. 21.
Not improbably (see Hitzig) we should read in v. 13, 'and
Joshua shall be a priest upon his throne.' This would imply that
Zerubbabel was the personage called ' Shoot ' who was to live in
perfect harmony with the high priest Joshua. The erasure of the
names will then be the record of a pathetic disillusionment : Zerub
babel did not prove the man that Haggai (Hag. ii. 20-23) and Zechariah
(Zech. iii. 8, 9, vi. 9-13) took him for ; Joshua, too, according to
Zerubbabel's (?) words in Ezra ii. 63, Neh. vii. 65, was not a perfect
priest, because he could not decide by Urim and Thummim.

Note x, p. 22.
This was always a distinctively Christian idea (see Stanton,
The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, pp. 128, 129).
Note y, p. 22.
Hag. ii. 20-23, Zech. iii. 8, iv., vi. 9-15. A distorted version of
such preaching reached Sanballat (Neh. vi. 6, 7). Chrysostom men
tions the view that Zerubbabel was the recipient of the oracles in
Ps. ex., and objects that this prince was no more a priest than
David. Note z, p. 22.
Comp. Gen. xlix. 10, Num. xxiv. 7, 17 in Sept., and see Frankel
{ Ueb. den Einfluss der paldstin. Exegese auf die alexandrin. Exegese,
pp. 50, 182-5). The other passages quoted by Edersheim [Jesus the
Messiah, i. 72), after Gfrorer, scarcely prove a further development of
-the doctrine of the Messiah in Alexandria. In Isa. ix. 6 ayyeXos
corresponds to b#, and need mean neither more nor less than the
Hebrew. A similar remark applies to Ps. Ixxii. 5, 7 ; compare v. 7
with Ps. lxxxv. n, where no one supposes the Messiah to be
referred to. Nor does Sept.'s version of Ps. ex. 3 at all prove (in
spite of Rev. xxii. 16) that the translator held a fuller or more
definite Messianic doctrine than the psalmist. The version may be
Englished thus : ' From the womb, as one more glorious than the
morning star, have I begotten thee ' (see linguistic appendix). There
is nothing in this which, from an 'Oriental point of view, is inappli;
cable to a great ruler (comp. Isa. xiv. 12). The pointing wh*.
does, no doubt, suggest that the translator regarded Pss. ii. and ex.
.as parallel ; but, however probable it may be, it is not certain that he
interpreted Ps. ii. of the Messiah.

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 37

Note aa, p. 22.
Besides this famous passage, which is decisive as to the symbolic
value of the name ' David,' notice the way in which the narratives of
Daniel and Judith (works of unequal value, but in this respect at
least parallel) convert Nebuchadrezzar into a symbol of Antiochus
Epiphanes. I have spoken above of Judas and his brethren as
typified by David. Strictly speaking, however, it is Saul who typifies
Judas ; while David, and partly Solomon, symbolize the work of
Jonathan and Simon. When the two latter buried Judas they
adapted the burden of David's lamentation over Saul and his son
(see 1 Mace. ix. 19-21). Note bb, p. 23.
Against Pusey, Daniel the Prophet, p. 367, see Ewald, History,
v. 360. Reuss has called Judas the Maccabee ' the unique fanatic'
This Sibylline poet belongs to the same class.
Note cc, p. 23.
What does this phrase mean ? (1) ' From the East ' ? If so, comp.
Trpos'Hw t 'He'XicV re, Hom. //. xii. 239. From the Sibyl's point of
view either Simon or any purely ideal king might be described as
coming from the east. (It is misleading to compare Isa. xii. 2 ;
Cyrus would be out of place here.) Or (2) ' from heaven,' whence
Cyrus (line 286), and honey and fruits, flocks and herds (line 745,.
&c), are said to come. The sun may be mentioned here to suggest
that, as the Septuagint makes the psalmist say of the priest-king
(Ps. cix. 3), the hero spoken of would be ' born more glorious than
the morning star ' [trpb Iwo-^dpov). The Sibylline writer is, moreover,
an Egyptian Jew, and to connect a king with the sun is natural'
in Egypt. Note, too, that in Orac. xiii. 151, 164, a Christian
Sibyl does not scruple to call Odenathus, priest-king of Palmyra,.
-r/\id7r£//.7rros. Note dd, p. 23.
The mention of oprao. suggests that some historical fact is alluded
to (cf. 1 Mace, viii., xii.). Note ee, p. 23.
Like David the king will be guided by divine oracles, whether
-those of Scripture or such as that in Ps. ex. 1.

38 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect,

Note a, p. 24.
Holtzmann thinks that he is [Judenthum und Chris tenthum, 1867,
p. 199). Schiirer [The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ,
Div. ii., vol. ii., p. 136) will hear of none but a strictly Messianic
interpretation ; and similarly Stanton [The Jewish and the Christian
Messiah, -p. 115). Against the latter, see on Pss. xx., xxi. Against
the former, note that the true Messianic felicity is certainly placed
after the great attack of the nations upon Jerusalem. It is only
a foretaste of happiness which the Sibyl describes, and her picture
corresponds, as we see, to the poetical idealization of Simon's reign
in the old song imbedded in 1 Mace. xiv. Dr. Drummond, with some
hesitation, proposes the view which I have adopted [The Jewish
Messiah, p. 275}. Note be, p. 24.
It would be a serious objection to this view if the enthusiasm for
the Maccabees were limited to Palestine. From the document
or documents (of very doubtful genuineness) in 2 Mace. i. 1-36,
ii. 1-18, it would seem that in b.c. 143 the Jews of Palestine an
nounced their happy deliverance to those of Egypt, and invited
them to celebrate the newly instituted Feast of the Dedication,
but that in b.c. 124 they had to write again with the same request.
Even if historical, this only proves that the Egyptian Jews, who
had special festivals of their own (Ewald, History, v. 358), were not
inclined to adopt at once what they may have regarded as a local and
provincial festival at the bidding of the Judaean authorities. It does
not warrant us in assuming that none of the Egyptian Jews sym
pathized with the great religious champions. There were differences
on the subject of the policy of the Maccabees even in Palestine ;
yet, as 2 Maccabees shows, this did not prevent a full national
recognition at any rate of the hero Judas. Add to this, that the
allusions to the Alexandrine version of Daniel in the Third Book of
the Sibylline Oracles, prove how early the greatest religious monu
ment of the Maccabaean rising found admiring readers among the
Jews of Egypt (comp. Sib. iii. 396, 397 with Sept. Dan. vii. 7, and
Sib. iii. 613 with Sept. Dan. vii. 23, 24). Prof. Fuller's counter
argument in Speaker's Comm. vi. 219, does not appear to me satisfac
tory. Frankel has good reason to speak of ' eine auf festen Anzeichen
u. Facten ruhende Gewissheit, dass zwischen den Bekennern desselben
•Glaubens in zwei Nachbarlandern viele Beriihrungspunkte obwalteten '
•[Ueber den Einfluss der pal. Exegese auf die alexandrin. Hermeneutik,
¦p. 3). And Jost well remarks, ' Hatten schon die glucklichen An-

I. ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 39
strengungen der Religionshelden in alien Gemeinden, wohin die
Kunde gelangte, eine lebhafte Spannung unterhalten, so musste die
Ernennung Simon's zum Fursten allgemeine Begeisterung erzeugen '
{Geschichte, i. 122). Note hh, p. 24.
1 Mace. xiii. 42 ; cf. Josephus, Ant. xiii. 6, 7, who gives the titles
of Simon as 'benefactor and ethnarch of the Jews ' (on the former,
cf. Luke xxii. 25, and on the latter, Jos., Ant. xiv. 7, 2 — both imply
the possession of virtually supreme authority). Several other cities
also dated new eras from their declaration of independence about
this time (Sidon from in b.c). See also 1 Mace. xiii. 39, and cf.
Madden, Coins of the Jews, p. 67 (Simon struck coins before Antiochus
expressly conceded the privilege). Note u, p. 24.
Josephus [Ant. xiii. n, 1) gives the title to Aristobulus, who
reigned but one year ; but on his coins he only calls himself high
priest (see Levy, Gesch. der jild. Miinzen, p. 54).
NoteJJ, p. 24.
Helorfs Pilgrimage, by Otto Strauss, a historical novel which
quickened my own boyish imagination, places its reader in the
Judaea of the age of Hyrcanus. Note kk, p. 25.
Whether or no Hyrcanus was himself originally a Pharisee (see
Wellhausen, Pharisder und Sadducaer, pp. 89-91), there is no reason
to doubt Josephus's statement that the Pharisees showed violent
hostility to him [Ant. xiii. 10, 5). This agrees with the anti-
Asmonaean spirit of 2 Mace, and the bitter language of Assumpt.
Mosis (v. 15), and of the Psalms of Solomon (xvii.). To prove the
legitimacy of the high priesthood of Hyrcanus his friends would, of
course, appeal to his supposed prophetic gift— an imperfect substi
tute for the old oracular responses by Urim and Thummim. What,
then, were the oracles of Hyrcanus ? If I rightly understand Jos.,
Ant. xiii. 10, 3, they came to him by a Bath Q61 (a ' daughter- voice '
or ' echo ' of the divine word) in the sanctuary, as he was offering
incense (cf. Luke i. 9-1 1). Even the Talmudic tradition concedes
this (Geiger, Urschrift, p. 214), and it is no slight admission, as the
story in Sanhedrin n<z shows. The Sanhedrin was holding its
session in the upper chamber of a house in Jericho. Suddenly a

40 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.'
Bath Qol came from heaven saying, ' There is one here who merits
that the Shechina should rest on him, even as on our teacher Moses,
but his age is not worthy of him.' Then the wise men turned their
eyes on Hillel the elder. Josephus states [Ant. iii. 8, 9) that the
Urim and Thummim ceased to give oracles 200 years before he wrote
his Antiquities ; comp. Ezra ii. 65, Neh. vii. 65, which suggest that
the high priestly lot was in some way restored after the Return,
though not immediately. In spite of the Talmudic statement [Sota,
48^) we must, I think, accept this ; but I do not feel bound to take
Josephus's calculation quite literally.
Note n, p. 25.
See 1 Mace. xiii. 51. The 23rd of the month Iyyar was kept as
a commemorative festival (see the calendar in Gratz, Geschichte, iii.
ed. 4, p. 562 ; cf. Derenbourg, Histoire, p. 67).
Note mm, p. 25.
The Tyrian staters bear the legend Tvpou Upas ko.1 dmj'Xov..
Comp. Jos., Ant. xiii. 2, 3, tepav Kai axrvkov Kai eXtvBipav (of
Jerusalem). Note nn, p. 25.
I interpret 1 Mace. iv. 46, xiv. 41, in accordance with ix. 27 (Ps.
lxxiv. 9). Derenbourg, however [Revue des etudes juives, 1881, p.
291), thinks that the prophetic herald of the day of Jehovah (MaL
iv. 5, 6) is meant. He reminds us that in the Mishna litigated
questions are often said to be postponed till the coming of Elijah.
(Comp. Sota, 48^, with the Baraithi in Geiger, Urschrift, p. 213
note.) May not the two interpretations be combined ? Joel ii. 28,
29 pointed to a large outpouring of the spirit of prophecy in the
latter days. Others have seen an allusion in 1 Mace. xiv. 41 to Deut,
xviii. 18 ; cf. Num. xii. 7. Note 00, p. 25.
In v. 15 the right reading is undoubtedly wpoipij-mas.
Note pp, p. 25.
No other religious justification could be offered of the assumption
of the Davidic sovereignty by the Asmonaeans, which (see Psalm Sol
xvii. 6-8) seemed such a heinous offence to the later Pharisaic
opponents of that house. One can hardly believe with M. Vernes

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. 41

that ' son of David ' in the Psalms of Solomon is ' un titre glorieux,
qui marque moins, chez le roi apres lequel soupire notre poete, la
descendance materielle que la descendance spirituelle ' [Histoire des
idees messianiques, &c. p. 135). Note ««, p. 26.
Simon entered into the Acra, says our record, p,era atvecrews . . .
Kai iv v/jlvois /cat iv toSats (1 Mace. xiv. 51).
Note rr, p. 26.
In defence of the genuineness of the document, see Oscar Holtz-
mann, Gesch. des Volkes Israel (in Oncken's series), ii. 382. In
many passages the Greek translator evidently found the Hebrew text
difficult. Note ss, p. 26.
In other words he became a high priest who was also a ruler
(T^ITB'D, Dan. ix. 25). Note tt, p. 26.
' Or at least.' For the duration of the promised tenure of office
differs in the psalm and in the legal document. The psalmist hopes
that the Messianic age is beginning ; the scribe, more cautiously,
that the Asmonaean dynasty will last till the Messianic age.
Note uu, p.. 26.
~W in the above sense was usual at this period (cf. also 2 Chron.
xxxii. 21, Sept.) ; not so WQ?\. Note vv, p. 26.
The old calendar in Megillath Taanith states that the 3rd day
of Tisri is a festival, because on it the mention of God in contracts
was abolished. A Baraitha. explains that formerly it used to be
written : ' In such a year of Johanan, priest of the most High God '
(Rosh ha-Shanah, 18b). Johanan is here merely a symbol for the
reigning high priest (Geiger, Urschrift, p. 34 ; Jost, Gesch. des Juden-
thums, i. 279). Note ww, p. 27.
* Sacerdotes summi Dei,' says the Latin version.

42 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. lect.

Note xx, p. 27.
It is perfectly possible that Melchizedek is an old traditional
name, meaning (as most think), ' Cedeq is king of heaven ;' comp.
Adonizedek, the name of a king of Jerusalem (Josh. x. 1 ; but Sept.
reads Adonibezek). But old religious names were constantly rein
terpreted ; e.g., Yahveh among the Israelites, and Assur (cf. Schrader
on Gen. ii. 14) among the Assyrians. Nor is the rendering ' king of
righteousness' at all a bad one; 'city of righteousness' was an
idealizing title of Jerusalem as early as Isaiah (Isa. i. 25 ; cf. Isa. xix.
18, in Sept.— a significant parallelism). ' Jerusalem,' too, was probably
shortened into ' Salem ' to indicate that it was the ' perfect city ; ' cf.
Heb. vii. 3. The same form occurs in Ps. lxxvi. 3 (Persian age ;
see p. 165). That ' Salem ' was an earlier name of Jerusalem (Jerome,
Qwest, in Gen.) seems disproved by the Tell el-Amarna tablets
(see Academy, Oct. 25, 1890), which give the name Urusalim.
Note w, p. 2 7.
Cuneiform researches have not made it really more probable that
Gen. xiv. 1-17 is of pre-Exilic origin. But I can afford to leave this
on one side. Those who will may argue that the ' uniqueness,' or
unparalleled nature, of the contents of the narrative, supported as these
are, in some incidental points, by Assyriology, goes far to prove
their historical character (so apparently Graf Baudissin, Gesch. des
a. t. Priesterthums, p. 67). But the appendix to the narrative [vv>
18-20) is certainly due to a late, post-Exilic editor, before whose
prophetic mind stood a vision of an ideal high priest and civil ruler,
and who materialized this fair dream in a corner of the typical
biography of Abraham. In the form which his dream or vision
took there was nothing extraordinary or against verisimilitude. It
is needless to refer to the priest-kings of Arabia. From the close of
the Persian period onwards the Jewish high priest acted as irpoo-Tanjs
both in civil and religious matters, and 'judged God's people in
righteousness' (Ecclus. xiv. 24, 26 ; cf. Jos. Ant. xi. 4, 8, and see
Lect. V., on Pss. xx., xxi.). Philo moreover actually speaks of
Ptolemy Philadelphus as sending ambassadors with a view to get the
Bible translated irpbs tov ttjs 'Iov&uias apxiepea Kai /SaonXea- 6 yap
avros i?v [De Vita Mosis, Mangey, ii. 139). The appendix, then, is
ideally and prophetically, though not historically, true. If a critic,
liberal in many of his convictions, but conservative by nature, like
Graf Baudissin, inclines to deny its historicity, one may reasonably
assume that many other perhaps over-cautious critics will range
themselves ultimately on his side.

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V.

43

Note » p. 27.

The need of a justification is shown by the fact that the objec
tions of the strict legalists to the Maccabaean high priesthood revived
in the time of John Hyrcanus (see above, p. 39, notekk).
Note aaa, p. 28.
This rendering ' Hammer ' or ' Hammerer ' implies the readipg
13i?©, which Kennicott found in two MSS. of the Megillath
Antiochus, and which may fairly be said to be confirmed by the
Greek MaKKa/?aios (k generally = p). The Syriac version of the
Greek 1 Mace, also took this view (giving Maqbi). Mr. Ball favours
the reading with p, but alters the name to N3i?0 (Wace's Apocrypha, i.
247, note). Dr. Curtiss, however, in his exhaustive monograph The
Name Machabee (Leipz. 1876), prefers the more difficult reading
'DSO, which is supported by Jerome's Machabaeus.
Note bbb, p. 28.
Jonathan, Simon, and John Hyrcanus were not, I think, the
worldly-minded princes Wellhausen takes them for [Die Pharisder
und die Sadducder, p. 85 &c). But there certainly is a touch of
modernness in their complex characters which marks them off from
the unprogressive and, an unfriendly critic might add, fanatical
khasidim.

LECTURE II.

Jehovah I thou hast been our refuge from one generation to
another. — Ps. xc. i.

LECTURE II.
Part I. — The tone of mind proper to this inquiry.— We next consider Pss.
cviii. and cix. which form a small group with Ps. ex. Ps. cix., however, may be
reserved ; it was placed where it is for a purely mechanical reason. Ps. cviii. is a
compilation, made presumably under Simon the Maccabee. — The third of the
three psalms specially set apart in Lecture I. is Ps. cxlix. This too is Maccabaean,
as internal evidence and coincidences with passages in Maccabees prove. A fit
psalm for the first 'day of Nicanor.' — And does not this result involve the
Maccabaean date of other psalms ? How can we separate Pss. cxlviii. -cl. ? —
The word khasidim under certain conditions an evidence of date. — We now ask,
Do any psalms in Books IV. and V. require to be dated before the Maccabees (or
at any rate before Ezra) ? Study the rest of the Hallel and of the Hallelujah
psalms. Those groups have points of mutual contact, and were presumably
arranged by Simon. But were all the psalms so old ? Pss. cxiii. and cxiv. need
not be, but post-Exile they must be on the internal and especially phraseological
evidence. Pss. cxlvi. and cxlvii. are, at any rate, not older than Nehemiah, but
still better suit the age of Simon. The Hallelujah psalms are all certainly either
of the Persian or the Greek period. Pss. exxxv. and exxxvi. are probably
Maccabaean. Pss. cxi. and cxii. go naturally with Ps. cxix. (early Greek ?) — The
' Songs of Ascent,' a collection of psalms for the use of pilgrims. Their date
discussed in much detail. They reflect the fluctuating fortunes of the Jews during
the Persian and, perhaps, early Greek period. — Israel's third great captivity. —
Historical value of the 'minor Psalter.'
Part II. .—Consideration of the remaining twenty-five psalms. Pss. ciii. and
civ. are clearly contemporaneous with Pss. cv.-cvii. (see Hallelujah psalms).
Ps. cix. more difficult. Why not Messianic. Psychological study of the poem.
An Exilic date not probable, in spite of the parallels in the Book of Job. Marks of
the Persian period (cf. Isa. xxxiv. ). — Pss. cxxxviii.-cxlv. (' Davidic '), within which
Pss. cxl.-cxliii. form a minor group. Ps. cxli. certainly, Ps. exxxviii. probably,
Maccabaean. — Date of Ps. exxxix. singularly clear ; perhaps early Greek. — We
next pause at Ps. ci., which is most intelligible with a Maccabaean background.
A companion-piece to Ps. ex. — Why thirteen psalms in Books IV. and V. were
assigned to David. —Ps. exxxvii., why not early post- Exilic, but probably Macca
baean. — Ps. cii., why considerably older than the Maccabees ; strikingly illustrates
Neh. iv. 3. Historical significance of this. — The 'heptad of new songs' (xciii.
and xcv.-c). Not much later than the Second Isaiah.— Pss. xci., xcii., xciv. are
all Persian ; Ps. xciv. from the troublous times of Artaxerxes Ochus.  Ps. xc, why
not Mosaic— How to account for the title.— When was the psalm written ?
Phraseological evidence and the character of the ideas bring it very near the
reorganization of the church-people.

PART I.
ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED.
THE 90th psalm is not the starting-point but the goal of my
present lecture. Its solemn opening words, however, strike a
note to which I fervently hope to be true throughout the
course of this inquiry. In my previous lecture I began the
analysis of Books IV. and V., which form a small psalter in
themselves. I determined the period of Pss. cxv.-cxviii. and
ex., our first Maccabaean psalms, and showed that the prince
referred to in Ps. ex. was most probably Simon the Maccabee.
The question now arises, May we assume, on the analogy of
Ps. cxviii., that the psalms which appear to belong to the same
small group with Ps. ex. were composed in the Maccabaean
period ? These psalms are cviii. and cix. The latter psalm
may be at once set aside for future consideration. The tone
is absolutely opposed to that of the Maccabaean age. A
reason for placing it before Ps. ex. was suggested by the
catchword in the last verse, ' For he standeth at the right
hand of the needy,' which leads on to the '3*0^ 3K> in Ps. ex. 1.
But Ps. cviii. (the only Elohistic psalm in the collection) was
presumably compiled from the so-called Davidic Psalms, lvii.
[vv. 8-12) and lx. [vv. 7-14), under Simon the Maccabee, and
is a fitting introduction to Ps. ex.
Let us pause next at Ps. cxlix., than which no poem in
the Psalter is more clearly Maccabaean. This is no hymn of
universal benevolence, like Pss. lxxxvi. and cxlv. The mem
bers of the great conspiracy against Israel and his God deserve
no better fate than that of Midian and of Sisera [v. 9, cf.
lxxxiii. 10-13). They are the 'peoples that delight in wars'
(lxviii. 31) ; it remains for the ' friends of God,' however averse
to it by nature, to seize the two-edged sword, and, lifting a
song of praise, to advance to battle [v. 6). Is this poetry or

48 ANAL YSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED, lect.
history ? It is both. Notice the unsought coincidence of
, v. 6 with 2 Mace. xii. 37, 1 Mace. iv. 33, and 2 Mace. xv. 26,
27. Can there be much doubt that the psalm expresses the
national rejoicing, not at the return from Babylon, but at the
victories of Judas the Maccabee, more especially (cf. p. 178,
note s) his last victory over Nicanor at Adasa in March 161 ?
That was a high festival day when the conquerors entered the
city and joined the anxious holiday makers in the feast of
Purim. Well may this psalm have been sung when the ' day
of Nicanor ' was first kept in memory of this great salvation
(1 Mace. vii. 49, 2 Mace. xv. 36).*
But does not the Maccabaean date of this psalm carry with
it that of others ? b Read Pss. cxlviii. and cxlix. together, and
especially compare cxlviii. 14 with cxlix. 1, and you will agree
with me that the two psalms cannot be separated irr date.; .
And now it is time to say why, although in itself the term
khasidim (' pious ones,' ' friends of God ') is not distinctively.
Maccabaean, yet, taken in connexion with other exegetical
phenomena which point to the Maccabaean age, it steps at
once into importance as an evidence of the first value. In the
Maccabaean rising khasidim ('Ao-iSatot0) was the name given:
to those 'mighty (or, perhaps, capable) men' who joined the
volunteer Church Army under the aged Mattathias, and 'smote
sinful men in their anger and lawless men in their wrath ' (1
Mace. ii. 44). Judged by a modern standard they may be
found wanting. Dean Stanley complains that 'their obstinate,
foolhardiness vexed the great soul, and their narrow selfish
ness cost the life of Judas.' l But it was a passionate love of
the sacred deposit of pure religion which animated them, and
if they took umbrage at the treaty between Judas and the
Romans, it must be admitted that this alliance was in flagrant
contradiction to the traditions of the higher religion. It was
not to renew the ideal kingship of David that they had taken-
the sword, and ' the lofty hymns divine ' which were ' in their
throat' were inspired far less by the slaughter of God's
enemies than by His wondrous and adorable perfections
(cxlviii.). They sing for joy, not only upon the field of battle,
but in the recovered sanctuary, where Simon, as it would
appear, reorganized the service of song in a nobler style.
1 Jewish Church, iii. 333.

II. ANAL YSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED.

49

There it was that 'Hallelujah' was understood in its full
significance as the song of creation's priest to creation's God
(Ps. cl.). Consistency requires us to make Ps. cl. contempo
raneous in origin with its two predecessors.
And now see how these closing psalms confirm the view
which we have taken of Ps. ex. Comparing Ps. cxlix. 7 with
Ps. ex. 5, is it not clear that the writers regard the Jewish
victories which they have witnessed as the beginning of a
world-judgment, the agents in which will be the true Israelites
(cf. Dan. vii. 26) ; in short, that both psalms are germinally
Messianic ? Next observe that in Ps. ex. 3 we have the remark
able phrase, ' Thy people are self-devotion ; ' but we do not
find anywhere in Ps. ex. that distinctively Maccabaean term
(which occurs in Pss. cxlviii. 14, cxlix. 1, 5) khasidim. That is
true ; but notice the definition of khasidim given in 1 Mace.
ii. 43, ' every one that freely devoted himself for the law.' d
Does not this at once explain the concise phrase in Ps. ex. 3,
and show that it is really synonymous with ' Thy people are
khasidim ' ? Is not the case for the contemporaneousness of
these psalms reasonably complete ? And if one of them be
Maccabaean, must not the others be so too ?
I now advance a step, and inquire, Are there any psalms
in these two books which require to be dated before the
Maccabaean period, or at any rate before that promulgation of
the Law without which the Maccabaean heroes would have
had nothing to fight for ? Take the larger groups to which
Pss. cxv.-cxviii. and cxlviii.-cl. respectively belong, one of
which (Pss. cxiiL-cxviii.) is called the Hallel or the Egyptian
Hallel, and the other (Pss. cxlvi.-cl.) the Hallelujah psalms.
Both groups Y present phraseological and other linguistic points
of mutual contact. It is highly probable that the arrangement
of both goes back to the time of Simon ; 2 but of course it
does not follow from this that all the psalms were new. Pss.
cxiii. and cxiv. have affinities with the great body of literature,
partly lyric, partly prophetic, which was called forth by Israel's
second wonderful deliverance from foreign bondage.e They
can' hardly be earlier, and may be even later, than Ezra's and
Nehemiah's time. Pss. cxlvi. and cxlvii. are at any rate not
1 See Ehrt, Abfassungszeit und Abschluss des Psalters, p. 83.
2 With regard to the Hallel see above, p. 33, note ". E

50 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V CONTINUED, lect.
products of an earlier period ; one could easily prove this,
granting critical principles, from the literary and linguistic
evidence. The only question is whether the fortification of
Jerusalem referred to in cxlvii. 2, 13, is that which was cele
brated in B.C. 444 f (Neh. xii. 27), or that in B.C. 142 (see
1 Mace. xiv. 37). It would be delightful to know some
of the psalms with which Nehemiah's dedication-feast was
celebrated.8 Still we must not be too confident. The
picture in Ps. cxlvii. may possibly be true to the facts of
the great governor's time, but it corresponds almost more
strikingly with the age of Simon.h The reference to the law
[vv. 19, 20) agrees equally well with both periods. At any
rate, it is certain that these psalms received their full meaning
when Simon reorganized the arrangements of the temple.
Not without some reason did a noble pioneer of modern
Jewish scholarship — Nachman Krochmal — call Pss. cxlvi.-cl.
the Greek Hallel,1 because it was collected, if not entirely
composed, in the Greek period. At the same time it must be
remembered that Pss. cxiii.-exviii. (of whose title ' the Egyp
tian Hallel ' Krochmal was thinking) have an equal claim to
this appellation.
Let us now extend our range of inquiry to the rest of the
poems which are in the widest sense Hallelujah psalms.
There are altogether seventeen which have a right to this
designation, because they all bear on the front the formula
hallelu Jah,' praise ye Jehovah' J The remaining psalms of
this large group are cv.,k cvi., cvii., cxi., cxii., exxxv., and exxxvi.
The two last are undoubtedly the least original in the whole
Psalter, and some perhaps may doubt whether an age so full
of inspiration as the Maccabaean could have produced them.
But that Pss. exxxv. and exxxvi. are dependent upon
Maccabaean psalms (the one upon Ps. cxv. and the other on
Ps. cxviii.), is certain, and why may not the authorities, even
in this stirring period, have had the practical wisdom to
employ some less gifted persons to produce a few plain
hymns for liturgical use ? l Pss. cv. and cvi. must have
belonged to the temple Psalter at the end of the Persian
period, for they contribute to the imaginary psalm in
I Chron. xvi. 7-36 ; in other words, are not Maccabaean. But
we can go further than this. The trilogy which they form

H. ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED. 51
with Ps. cvii. m is not merely pre-Maccabaean and (see cvii. 2, 3)
post-Exilic, but can be determined by the literary allusions
(for which see the commentaries) to be not earlier than the /
latter part of the Persian period. With regard to Ps. cvii. I |
will only add that it contains [v. 11) the divine name 'Elyon,
which, perhaps from its Phoenician association, was avoided
by the pre-Exile prophets and by Ezekiel. l Pss. cxi. n\
and cxii. were obviously not written as Hallelujah psalms.
They must originally have been without the opening;
Hallelujah, and have been followed by Ps. cxix. All three
belong to the class of alphabetic psalms, in which every verse,
or half-verse, or group of verses begins with one of the)
twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet taken in order.l
All three are equally appropriate for private and for liturgical)
use. They are the work of diligent students of the religious
classics of Israel (the Torah in the widest sense), who
would fain propagate their own peaceable and pious type of
character. They might have taken for their motto those
fine words in Ps. cxix. [v. 54), ' Thy statutes are the subject
of my songs in the house where I am a stranger.' Their
post-Exile origin needs no proof. Ps. cxix. in particular
contains traces of that internal struggle of growing intensity
between the Hellenists and the strict Jehovists which preceded
the violent measures of Antiochus Epiphanes. The author
is a spiritual ancestor of the Pharisees, as the ' divided ones '
(i.e., the religious compromisers) inw. 113 are the forefathers
of the Sadducees. The psalm evidently belongs to the pre-
Maccabaean portion of the Greek period.0
It is natural to refer next to Pss. cxx.-cxxxiv., a little
Psalter called ' the Songs of Ascents,' or better ' of Ascent '
(compare Ex. xxxiv. 24), which was originally enclosed on
both sides by Hallelujah groups.p Probably it is a portion of
a larger collection of spiritual songs which the pilgrims sang
(as the Russian pilgrims in Palestine sing hymns) to enliven
their journey to the Holy City. There is great variety in
the contents ; the pilgrims were not like the narrow-minded
and fanatical crowds which swarm from all parts of the
Mohammedan world to Mecca. Their religious tone and
special interest in Mount Zion prove them to be subsequent
1 See below on Pss. xci. -xcii. E 2

ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED, lect.

to the centralization of worship in the reign of Josiah.q» We
may therefore at once set aside the titles (found in the
Hebrew text, but not in the true Septuagint), which assign
four of these songs (cxxii., cxxiv., cxxxi., cxxxiii.) to David,r
and one (cxxvii.) to Solomon. The only psalm which a modern
reader might be tempted (with De Wette, who yet has his
doubts) to ascribe to Solomon, is cxxxii. Not only are
vv. 8-10 put into the mouth of Solomon by the Chronicler
(2 Chron. vi. 41, 42), which of course is but a literary fiction,
but vv. 6 and 8 contain a distinct reference to the ark. This
reference, however, is introduced dramatically, nor can the
psalm be separated from others of the post-Exile period in
which ancient promises are placed in a new setting. Was it
written during the governorship of the native prince Zerub
babel, around whose head the Messianic hopes of Haggai and
Zechariah played, and who, as the wild growths of later legend
prove, was followed with the admiring love of subsequent
generations ? l If so, it is a fresh record of a pathetic
moment in Israel's history which has failed to obtain the
attention which it deserves. But it seems more in accordance
with the comparative principle, which dictates the grouping
of parallel psalms with a view to determining their date, to
assign it to a somewhat earlier part s of the same period as
its twin brother Ps. lxxxix., that is to the last century of the
Persian rule. What a fulness of meaning is reflected upon
vv. 9 and 16 (cf. ex. 4 and cxlix. 5) from the Maccabaean
period,* which, no doubt, is still in the distance, but is being
prepared for, alike by the growing corruption of the priest
hood, and the closer combination of those faithful worshippers
known as khasidim ! u Troubles enough there were for Israel'
in this and in the preceding century, though there was a lull
when Ps. cxxxii. was written. Not only did satraps and
their deputies plunder the land, but a succession of Persian
generals on their way to Egypt brought it near famine
through the vast supplies of food which they demanded. The
defilement of the temple by Bag6ses (under 'the other
Artaxerxes'), and the 'enslavement ' (Jos., Ant. xi. 7, 1), took
place probably about 383. Disgraceful as the first part of the
1 See I Esdras iii., iv. In Ecclus. xlix. there is already a sign of this
admiring love.

ANAL YSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED. 53

story is to the leading family of the Jews, the retribution
must have still further embittered the relations between the
oppressors and the oppressed. It is not improbable that the
Jews joined other nations in revolting in 363, and certain
that they did so between 358 and 350. We learn from an
early chronologist that captive Jews were settled, ' some in
Hyrcania by the Caspian Sea, others in Babylonia.' It was
the third of Israel's great captivities. v
More than once in the sequel we shall have to call these
facts to mind. We do not, I think, sufficiently estimate the
manifold and growing unhappiness of the Persian period (see
on Ps. lxxxix.). And yet there were moments when Israel,
engrossed by its religion and somewhat less tormented by its
oppressors than usual, could indite the happy psalms embodied
in the pilgrim song-book — such, for instance, as Pss. cxxxiii.
and cxxxiv., which, in accordance with the comparative prin
ciple, I treat in connexion with Ps. cxxxii. Ps. cxxxiii. [Ecce
quam bonum) is not a disguised exhortation, whether to Absa
lom and Amnon (as Castelli, regarding the psalm, against the
linguistic evidence, as Davidic), or to the supposed rival
chiefs, Zerubbabel and Joshua (as Gratz). It is a pure and
lovely encomium on the brotherly love fostered by the Jewish
¦n-avrjyvpsis. Students of Pentateuch criticism will notice the
suggestive reference to the anointing of the high priest.
The psalm was placed here by way of illustration ; it
represents the promises to Zion in Ps. cxxxii. 13-18 as
realized, with the exception that there is no reference to the
Davidic house. Its author, however, must have lived in an
earlier and happier period than the writer of Ps. cxxxii.
The case of Ps. cxxxiv. is different. • There is no reason why
it should not be a late composition, as its place among the
Pilgrimage songs suggests. It is one of those plain and unpoetic
liturgical compositions of which I spoke before, and upon the
analogy of Ps. cxvii. (a still shorter liturgical form), we may
assume that it was used as the introduction to some fully
developed psalm.w From the fact that Ps. exxxv. in our
Bibles actually begins with almost the same form of words,"
we may be tempted to conjecture that Pss. exxxv. and exxxvi.
were included in the Pilgrimage Song-book, as the pilgrims'
farewell expression of joy and gratitude. But I hesitate to

54

ANAL YSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED, lect.

adopt this view, for I can hardly believe that the Songs of
Ascent were not completed before the Maccabaean period.
A hint may now be taken from the Chronicler. In
2 Chron. vi. 40-42 there are quotations, more or less com
plete, from Ps. cxxx. 2, and from Ps. cxxxii. 8-10. This makes
it in some degree probable that Pss. cxxx. and cxxxii. (both
evidently congregational, though the former is more quietistic
in tone) were composed in the same period, though scarcely
at the same time. The latter psalm was written, as we have
seen, not very long before a grievous desolation of the land
and violation of the Temple. And surely no smaller trouble
can have occasioned Ps. cxxx. — that unique expression of
contrite self-abasement and confidence in God's covenant-love.
As historical students, we cannot interpret the De Profundis
in the manner of Luther and Wesley and of that fine old poet
Phineas Fletcher. It is not from the deeps of purely spiritual
despondency but from a ' sea of troubles' that the speaker cries
to his God.y His sense of sin, or rather of sins, has been
stimulated by some sore trouble which has befallen the
church-nation. The pledge of forgiveness, too, for which the
sufferer pleads, is not merely a spiritual but a temporal bless
ing — a fact of serious import, to which we shall return. In
the next psalm z (a work of the same circle, if not of the same
author, as Ps. cxxx.), Israel has quieted his perturbed mind,
and waits patiently for that forgiveness which must, he feels,
already be on its way. ' Though it tarry,' says the leader of
the choir to his companions, ' wait for it ; yea, hope, Israel, in
Jehovah from henceforth even for ever ' (Ps. cxxxi. 3 ; cf.
cxxx. 7). Not for such an one are the plots of the political
party, nor the speculations of the ' wise men ' touching the
deep things of God's moral government.
But let us pass on to Ps. cxxxiii., the tone of which will
lead us to combine it with Pss. cxxi., cxxii., cxxiv.-cxxix.
There is no distinct reference to the Return from the Exile
even in cxxvi. 1, cxxvii. 1, but who can believe the 'literary
miracle ' of a pre-Exile origin ? Fair-minded students will, I
hope, agree that all, even the I27th,aa in spite of its title in
the Hebrew,bb belong to the same period as the other Psalms
of Ascent. Ps. cxxv., for instance, expresses the deepest
ground of Israel's misery under heathen rule, viz. the fear of

II. ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED. 55
being tempted to acts of infidelity (comp. v. 3 with Ps. xix.
14, and v. 5 with cxix. 113). Ps. cxxix. adds that, submis
sive as Israel may be, it is hated by its neighbours for its
strange exclusiveness. Pss. cxx. and cxxiii. are not included
in this little group, being distinctly persecution psalms. Read
them in inverse order, and they become a record of deepening
misery amidst malicious neighbours and under irresponsible
tyrants. They may be referred either to the time preceding
the arrival of Nehemiah, or (comparing Pss. Hi. and lvii.) to
a still later period, not far from that of Ecclesiastes.
And now we can sum up, so far as regards the Songs of
Ascent. This little hymn-book is a mirror of the fluctuating
fortunes and feelings of Israel during the Persian and perhaps
the early part of the Greek period (when the Diaspora became
more extensive). It reveals a strong but not stormily-excited
feeling for church and nation, and a sweet, childlike spirit of
devotion. It shows that we must not judge of the period re
ferred to entirely from the complaints of Ecclesiastes, who is
indeed on one side convicted of exaggeration by the portrait
painter of the ' virtuous woman ' (Prov. xxxi. 10-31).°° There
was much pure and bright domestic life, based upon the fear
and love of God (Pss. cxxvii., cxxviii.), and much spiritual
love of the forms of worship (Pss. cxxii., cxxxiii.), though,
being true to facts, the picture is not entirely without
shadows.

Note a, p. 48.
So Gratz ; he disputes, however, the existence of Purim so early.
So, too, Zunz, who asks, ' Would the Jews have made a new festival
on the 13th (of Adar), if the 14th were recognized as the feast of
Purim ? ' I have ventured to call this hypercriticism [Enc. Brit. viii.
561). There is also a Talmudic tradition on the 'day of Nicanor'
(Talm. Bab., Taanith, \%b), with which that in Maccabees should be
compared. Nicanor was a Greek eparch, who every day lifted up his
hand against Jerusalem and said, ' When will it fall into my hands, so
that I can tread it down ? ' But when the rule of the Asmonaean house
had overpowered him, they cut off his thumbs and great toes, and
hung them up on the gates of Jerusalem, with the words, ' On the
mouth that spoke so proudly, and on the hands which lifted them-

56 ANAL YSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED, lect.

selves up against Jerusalem, shall vengeance be taken ' (Wiinsche, Der
bab. Talmud, i. 438). Schiirer agrees with Gratz as to the date of the
victory. Note b, p. 48.
The alternative is to refer Pss. cxlviii. and cxlix. (as well as cxlvi.,
cxlvii., cl.) to the circumstances described in Neh. iv. and vi. (see
Dillmann, Jahrbiicher f. deutsche Theologie, 1858, p. 467, &c), a course
which is not equally favoured by the contents of those psalms.
Note c, p. 48.
1. As to the word 'Ao\ employed in 1 and 2 Mace. Its Hebrew
connexion is obvious, and in the light of this it is difficult not to
regard the khasidim of those psalms which on other grounds are
probably Maccabaean, as mainly at least consisting of the Asidaean
party. The Peshitto translator of the Psalms however did not see
this ; hence the misleading variety in his rendering of khasidim.
The Syriac translator of 1 Mace, is in another way equally blind.
He servilely reproduces the Greek term (1 Mace. ii. 42, Lagarde ;
ii. 42 and vii. 13, Ambrosian MS.), except at vii. 13 (Lagarde),
which he mistranslates. The term khasidim or 'Au-iSatoi has been
thought to be connected with ' Essenes,' but this is philologically
impossible (comp. Lightfoot, Colossians, ed. 3, p. 358). 2. As to
the statements respecting the 'Ao-. Those who rallied round ' Matta
thias and his friends' are described in 1 Mace. ii. 42 as [a)
o-way<iyyrj 'Ao-iSaiW (Geiger and Tischendorf however prefer the
reading 'IouSauov), [b) io-xypoi SWa/xei airo '\o-parjX, [c) iras 6 €Kovo~ia-
£o//.evos ™ vo/iu. Here [b) is clearly limited by [c) ; the ' valiant
men ' are primarily vop.tKoi ; they have won their spurs in Biblical
study (??n na| in the wider sense). This meaning is confirmed by
1 Mace. vii. 12, 13, where the 'Ao-iSaiot are members of a o-waywyr]
ypap,ft,aTiwv, which gives the exact force of the phrase in [a). The
context in which this last passage occurs is important historically.
When the Syrian king Demetrius sent Bacchides to reinstal Alcimus
as high priest, the Asidaeans, recognizing the legitimacy of his claims,
and trusting his friendly words, made peace with him. The mas
sacre which followed is perhaps referred to in Ps. lxxix. 2 (see p. 93).
The third passage, which refers to the 'Ao-. (2 Mace. xiv. 6), repre
sents them as more conspicuous in the war than they really were.
The author, who lived in the last century B.C., did not know who
the 'Ao-. really were, and confounds them with the personal adherents
of the Maccabaean brothers (called in 1 Mace. ix. 26, 28, 'the friends
of Judas ').

II. ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED. 57

Note d, p. 49.
Notice also that the ideal of righteousness in ex. 4 corresponds
with the description of the faithful who joined Mattathias in the
mountains as ' many that sought righteousness and judgment ' ( 1
Mace. ii. 29). The same emphasis on ' righteousness,' and the same
accidental absence of the word khasidim, characterize Ps. cxviii. (see
vv. 15, 19, 20). Hamburger, following out an idea of Geiger's,
infers from the occasional reference to ' the righteous ' in Maccabaean '
psalms that there were two religious parties among the Jews (not
counting the Hellenizers) — the Caddikim and the Khasidim, the one
the more moderate party (= the Sadducees), the other the strict
legalists (= the Pharisees) — and supposes the Maccabees to have set
on foot a compromise between them [Realencyclopddie fiir Bibel und
Talmud, Abth. ii., art. ' Sadd. u. Phar.'). But SaSSouK = Zadok
(Jos., Ant. xviii. 1, 1), and there is no evidence that the name
'Sadducee' was wittily changed into Caddik. Wellhausen 's view of
the parties of the time is historically sounder. Against deriving
' Sadducee ' from p*VX, see also Dr. Taylor's Jewish Fathers, p. 4 (top).
Note e, p. 49.
Cf. cxiii. 9 with (2) Isa. liv. 1-3, xlix. 21 ; and cxiii. 7-9 with 1
Sam. ii. 5, 8. The Song of Hannah ('a very late interpolation,'
Kuenen) is certainly, like Ps. xviii., post-Deuteronomic, and probably
an early post-Exile work. It has suffered somewhat from editors
and scribes, both in the Hebrew text and in the Sept., and two
lines (in v. 10b) were added as a liturgical close to the song. These
lines give it a Messianic tinge (cf. p. 207, on Ps. xviii. 51), and
perhaps point to the age of Haggai and Zechariah. There was a
reason for the interpolation of the song. The fortunes of Sarah
and Hannah (both barren, and yet remembered at last by God)
were regarded as types of those of Israel ; hence the Biblical accounts
of them are the New Year's Day lessons in the Synagogue. The
Song of Hannah was originally a hymn of praise of the Church-
nation, just as its N. T. counterpart, the Magnificat, was originally
perhaps a hymn of the Israel redeemed by Christ. Independently
Smend has defended the national reference of 1 Sam. ii. 1-10 in
Stade's Zt, 1888, p. 144 : cf. Driver, Text of Samuel, 1890, pp. 21, 22.
Note f, p. 50.
Hermann von der Hardt (17 13) actually believed that the Hallel
was composed by Ezra for this occasion (see Carpzov, Introd. ii. 93).

58 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED, lect.

Note s, p. 50.
Sept. gives ' AXkyjXovia ¦ 'Kyyaiov Kai Za^aptou as the title of Pss.
cxlvi.-cxlviii. (this version divides our Ps. cxlvii. in two parts). I
attach no weight to this ; the title is clearly the wrong one for Ps.
cxlviii. Theodore assigns all this group to the Restoration period,
except Ps. cxlviii. But this ignores the points which this and the
neighbouring psalms have in common.
Note h, p. 50.
The author of 1 Mace. (ii. 63) quotes Ps. cxlvi. 4 in a shorter
form, as if this psalm were very familiar to him. The later the date
of Ps. cxlvi.-cxlvii. is, the more intelligible this becomes.
Note i, p. 50.
On the same analogy of the Egyptian Hallel, Krochmal proposes
to call Ps. cvii. the Babylonian Hallel.
Note J, p. 50.
'Hallelujah' is the formula with which the liturgies summoned
the worshippers to join in praise. Note k, p. 50.
Pss. cv. and cvi. are so closely connected together, that one seems
justified in transferring ' Hallelujah ' from the close of Ps. civ. to the
beginning of Ps. cv. (see Gratz, Psalmen, i. 91).
Note ', p. 50.
H. von der Hardt finds the occasion for Ps. exxxvi. in Ezra iii.
10, 11. But this psalm is the companion of Ps. exxxv., which pre
supposes the completion of the temple [v. 2). Ps. exxxv. was
appointed for the first day of the Passover [Soferim, 18, 2) ; its twin
brother is sometimes called the 'great Hallel.'
Note m, p. 51.
Hence the justice of Krochmal's designation (see note * above).
Note n, p. 51.
Theodoret refers this psalm to the victory gained by Jehoshaphat,
according to 2 Chron. xx., simply because of the reference (see 2

II. ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED.

59

Chron. xx. 21). The same mechanical criticism as Von der Hardt's
(see note ¦). See on Ps. lxxxiii. Note °, p. 51.
Jaddua the high priest, whom Josephus brings into connexion
with Alexander, was suggested as the author by Hermann von
der Hardt. Simon the Righteous would be better. He, like the
psalmist, placed love of the Torah first among Israel's defences
(see Pirqe Aboth, i. 2), and in his own family he saw the first
tokens of advancing corruption. But why seek for a name? I
do not believe that the psalmist himself fills an important post ; he
writes, as Chenery well says, ' in the true spirit of an Eastern scholar '
[The Assemblies of Al Hariri, i. 89). The view, mentioned by Ibn
Ezra, that the psalmist is a young captive of high rank in Babylon
(such as Daniel), need not be discussed here (see Comm.), though it
has been revived by Dr. Forbes (1888).
Note p, p. 51.
I take ni^>VBn ~\V as = n^tsn <~£& ; the same idiom as in
riUNn IV3. The title therefore properly belongs to the collection, and
not to any particular member of it. Those who in error prefixed it to
each psalm must have taken ni?5?D in the sense of ' pilgrim-cara
vans ; ' cf. the title of Ps. cxxi. 1 ni^S/B? T^, which is grammatically
more correct. The traditional Hebrew explanation, however, is
that these, fifteen songs were so called from as many steps in the
temple. This has been lately advocated in a very elaborate form
(based of course on Talm. Bab., Succa, 51^) by Gratz. For six
nights, he says, during the Feast of Booths, multitudes thronged the
temple-courts in joyful expectation of the bringing of the water from
Siloam for the solemn libation which played such a great part in the
later ritual. Towards morning their minds were attuned to serious
thoughts by the singing of psalms to the accompaniment of musical
instruments. The singers were Levites, who stood on the fifteen
steps which led from the inner court to the court of the women, and
sang the fifteen psalms which, from the place occupied by the
Levites, were called the Step-psalms. Gratz also maintains that Pss.
exxxv. and exxxvi. were sung by the people in response to the song
of the Levites. It is an objection to this theory that the Talmud
itself does not say either that the Levites sang these fifteen psalms, or.
that the psalms in question derived their name from the steps.
Shortly afterwards, indeed [Succa, 53a), it does explain their name,
but in connexion with a legend upon David and Ahithophel. Nor is

60 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED. LECT.

it certain that the Sept. title aiSij t&v dva[3a6p,wv is anything more
than an uncomprehending literal translation.
Note % p. 52.
H. von der Hardt ascribed them all to Nehemiah. But Heng-
stenberg is at least right so far as this — that they are not all from
one pen, though, as this critic thinks, they ' fit in well enough to each
other.' The Sinaitic Codex of the Sept. Psalms ascribes Pss. cxxii.,
cxxiv., cxxxi., cxxxiii. to David (for the precise amount of evidence,
see Swete). Delitzsch has proved that this, however impossible, is
not purely arbitrary. Note r, p. 52.
Ps. cxxii. is ascribed to David simply because the name occurs in
v. 5. It is, however, post-Exile because of the perfects in vv. 4, 5,
and, at any rate, not earlier than Nehemiah, because such a bright
little psalm on the ' well-knit city ' could not have been composed
till after that great achievement of Nehemiah — the permanent re
building of the walls. Note s, p. 52.
In both psalms Israel longs for the fulfilment of the promise to
David (2 Sam. vii.), but in Ps. cxxxii. there is no trace of any recent
crushing calamity. Ben Sira, too, in his encomium upon 'mighty
men,' alludes to the same prophetic promise (Ecclus. xlvii. 1, 11, 22).
Note *, p. 52.
Hitzig supposes this psalm to have been written for the first
celebration of to. <^mra (Jos., Ant. xii. 7, 7) ; comp. "13 ' a lamp,'
v. 17. But this assumes that vv. 8-10 were adopted from 2 Chron.
vi. 41, 42, a view which lacks all probability. That the high priest
(' Jehovah's anointed,' v. 10 ; cf. lxxxiv. 10) is irpoo-TaT-qs tov Xaov
in the writer's time may, however, be taken as certain. Such
importance could never have been attached to the priests by a
temple -poet of the pre-Exile period. Verse 18 refers probably to the
high priestly diadem ; comp. i"i?J r",s; with Ex. xxxix. 30, and see
below, p. 199. Note u, p. 52.
Note the deep earnestness in the psalmist's prayer for the priests
and for the khasidim.

n. ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED. 6 1

Note v, p, 53.
Syncellus (Dindorf), i. 486. The pseudo-Hecataeus, quoted by
Josephus [c. Ap. i. 22), tells us of cruel deaths endured by the Jews
for their religion in the Persian period. But this is not historical
{see Gratz, Gesch. der Juden, iii., ed. 4, p. 608).
Note w, p. 53.
Ps. cxxxiv. (cf. on Ps. viii.) was probably written for use at the
nightly vigils of the priests and Levites (see the nearly contemporary
statement of Hecatseus of Abdera in Jos., c. Ap. i. 22, and the
Talmudic notices in Delitzsch). Gratz boldly connects it (as the
complement to which he regards what now forms Pss. exxxv., exxxvi.)
with the popular rejoicing at the ceremony of the water-libation at
the Feast of Booths. He therefore brings it down to the time of
Salome Alexandra (between 78 and 69 b.c). ' In the nights ' refers,
he thinks, to the six nights of the feast, during which the people
remained in the temple-courts and the Levites sang the fifteen ' Step-
psalms ' [Monatsschrift, 1879, p. 241).
Note *, p. 53.
More especially if Ps. cxxxiv. 1 be filled out from the Septuagint.
Note y, p. 54.
St. Augustine compares the cry of Jonah out of the midst of
Shedl (Jon. ii.). Both psalms, in fact, are prayers of the Jewish
Church. Note *, p. 54.
For the title I'ddvid, cf. 2 Sam. vi. 22 ; 1 Sam. xviii. 18, 23. It
is wanting, however, in Sept. (Cod. Al.), Jerome, and Targum. The
Peshitto makes the psalm relate to the high priest Joshua (so too
Gratz, and Paul Haupt in Hebraica, Jan. 1886, p. 105).
Note aa, p. 54.
Dean Plumptre has well illustrated exxvii. 1 by cxviii. 22 and
the images drawn from building in Zechariah's prophecies.
Note bb, p. 54.
Hengstenberg justifies the Hebrew title ' of Solomon ' by the
supposed parallelism between v. 2 and 1 Kings iii. 5-14 O^T

62 ANALYSIS OF BOOKS IV. AND V. CONTINUED, lect. ii.

being Solomon ; cf. above on Ps. xiv.), and by the coincidence
between the ideas of the psalms and those of Proverbs (see especially
Prov. x. 22). Against the Solomonic authorship of Proverbs, how
ever, see Job and Solomon, pp. 130-133. The title is not found in
Sept., which in v. 2 reads dyair-qTols. It was therefore probably
inserted subsequently to the time of Simon.
Note cc, p. 55.
On this fine alphabetic poem see Job and Solomon, pp. 154, 155.

PART II.
CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS.
I RESUME the consideration of the question, Are there any
psalms in Books IV. and V. which require to be dated before
the Maccabaean period, or at any rate before the promulgation
of the Law by Ezra ? I may remind you that we have still
twenty-five psalms to consider, viz. xc. (which is ascribed to
Moses), xci.-c, cii. and cxxxvii. (which are anonymous), ci.,
ciii. and civ. (these two are properly but one psalm), cix.,
cxxxviii.-cxlv., which the titles assign to David. It is need
less to spend time on proving that the great hymn to
Providence (Pss. ciii., civ.) belongs to the same period as
Pss. cv.-cvii., viz. the second half of the Persian rule.a But
what is to be said of Ps. cix., the tone of which differs so
widely from that of the neighbouring psalms ? It would be too
bold to attempt to date it without making sure that we un
derstand it. Is it Messianic ? Certainly not, if there be such
a science as historical exegesis. I know that our Messiah is
reported to have uttered a woe upon His betrayer (Matt. xxvi.
24), but who can compare the restrained passion of those
solemn and divinely unselfish words with the refined cruelty
of vv. 6-20 of the 109th psalm ?b It is to the honour of
Theodore of Mopsuestia, that alone among the Christian
fathers he denied that this psalm, under the form of a prayer
of Jesus Christ, is a prediction of the treason of Judas.0 Those
who go thus far with Theodore will also, with him, naturally
deny that the psalm is of Davidic authorship. Indeed, the
burden of proof lies upon those who, contrary to all philo
logical evidence, assert it. Fancy the magnanimous David
uttering these laboured imprecations ! No : the speaker is
not a brave and bold warrior, but a sensitive poet, excited
beyond endurance by the sufferings of his people. Believing

64 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect.
like Balaam in the power of a curse,d he comes forward to
execrate this Haman — this arch-enemy of Jehovah's people
and religion. In a qualified sense, however, we may accept
Chrysostom's explanation of the psalm as Trpocpnyreia hv s'iBei
apas.1 It expressed, that is, a quasi-prophetic presentiment
that the 'curse causeless,' which 'cannot come' (Prov. xxvi. 2)
on the good man, will return through the deserved impreca
tions of the psalmist in the form of punishment on the bad
man who uttered it. This presentiment, however, was no
genuine intuition but a mere inherited notion, and it was cor
rupted in the psalmist's mind by the infirmities of human
passion. Verses 6-20 are therefore not a prophecy in the
truest sense. True prophecy is closely related to prayer.2
' Call unto Me, and I will answer thee ' (said Jehovah to His
prophet), ' and will show thee great things, and secret things
which thou knewest not ' (Jer. xxxiii. 3). But is there in the
opening verses a single tender glance upwards,3 hallowing the
psalmist for his work ? No. He does indeed ' pour out his
heart ' (lxii. 9) ; but a mere ' pouring out ' is not, in the fullest
sense, prayer, though it may be, and even in the Psalms often
is, the preliminary to true prayer. The element of true prayer
in Ps. cix. begins with the appeal to Jehovah's Name in v. 2 1 ;
all that precedes is but so much clearing away of ' perilous
stuff.' We are not bound to defend vv. 6-20 simply because
they are found in the Psalter. If I am to love the psalmists,
I must sometimes be allowed, I will not say to censure, but to
pity them. And have we not in this psalm an occasion for
pity quite as great as anywhere in the Book of Job, not so
much in the vehemence of the language as in the extremity
of the sufferings which led to it ?
Some one may object to this comparison that the speeches
of Job were not penned by the great sufferer himself. True ;
but by a sufferer they were penned, and by one who, like the
psalmist, thought more of the troubles of his people than of
his own. The much-tried man who speaks under the mask
1 Opera (ed. 1636), iii. 313. He compares Gen. xlix. 37, ix. 25, Matt. xi.
21-23, xxiii- 37, 38-
2 See Riehm, Messianische Weissagung, p. 23 (ed. 1), or p. 38 (ed. 2)-
comp. Delitzsch, Messianic Prophecies, p. 6.
* Hab. ii. 1 ; cf. Ps. v. 4.

ii. CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 65

of 'Job' is a greater poet than the author of Ps. cix. —
that is the chief difference between them. Emotion makes
even ordinary natures speak poetically. If, therefore, the
author of Ps. cix. does not speak poetically, may we not infer
that his passion has already begun to cool, and that he uses
language in excess of his feeling ? Certainly there is nothing
elsewhere in the Psalter (even in Ps. lxix.e) quite as startling
as vv. 6-20. On the other hand, vv. 2-5 and 26-31 have
a genuine lyric note. They, at least, were written at the
inspiration of love. It follows that the original psalm, like so
many of the prophecies, was retouched and added to by the
author. The additions are no doubt the least pleasing part of the
psalm, but it is from them chiefly that we must determine the
date. Some phenomena in them may at first sight seem to
favour a Babylonian origin. Thus (1) the awful intensity of
the imprecations reminds us of the mamit or objectified
curse, so prominent in the Babylonian hymns ; ' (2) there are
parallels of thought and expression in the Book of Job f (a
work of the Exile) ; and (3) the cursing of wicked persecutors
meets us again in Isa. lxv. 1 5 — indeed, both Isa. lxv. and Ixvi.
imply (equally with Ps. cix.) that faithful Israelites were con
temned and oppressed by hostile kinsmen (see Isa. lxv. 5, Ixvi.
S). Certainly there is nothing in Ps. cix. to suggest a pre-
Exile date. But must we therefore assign it to the Exile
period? The objectified curse is not peculiar to Babylon.2
Job was imitated long after the Exile. Isa. lxv. and Ixvi. were
not written before the Persian period. Then consider (1) the
points of contact between our psalm and Ps. cii.,g and (2) the
stylistic defects of the former, and say if you find any reason
for placing Ps. cix. earlier .than the time of Nehemiah h (in
which case the enemy might be Sanballat) or even perhaps
than the close of the Persian age.1 The refined cruelty of vv.
6-20 reminds us of an equally artificial chapter in the Book
of Isaiah (chap, xxxiv.), which I have elsewhere referred to
the same period.
We now pass on to Pss. cxxxviii.-cxlv. (all headed
I'ddvid). Ewald separates Pss. cxl.-cxlii., and regards them
1 Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, p. 306 &c. ; Hommel, Die semit. Vblker, i. 367.
2 See Num. v. H-29 ; cf. Koran, iii. 54, la'nata-llahi, ' God's curse.' F

66 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. LECT.

as pre-Exilic. This appears to me arbitrary. Either the
whole group or no part of it is ancient. Surely the general
characteristics, religious and stylistic, of the group are post-
Exilic, an idea which is already suggested in the headings of
Pss. cxxxviii. and cxxxix. in Cod. Alex, of the Septuagint.
' Davidic ' these psalms can only be as echoes of earlier so-called
Davidic psalms.J One may admit, however, that Pss. cxl.-
cxliii. form a minor group in themselves,11 the date of which is
approximately determined by the dependence of cxliii. 5 on
lxxvii. 6 (Ps. lxxvii. belongs to the close of the Persian period).
I do not insist on regarding these four psalms as Maccabaean,
in spite of the special appropriateness of some passages to the
great persecution and revolt of the second century ' (see cxl. 8b,
cxli. 4-7). Nor can any one be prevented from explaining
Ps. cxlv. from the pre-Maccabaean age by the occurrence of
the word khasidim in v. 10, and the parallelism between
v. 13 and Dan. iii. 33, iv. 31. The psalm, like most alpha
betical ones, is somewhat vague. But the coincidences
between Pss. cxlv. and cxlvi. make a Maccabaean origin rea
sonable for the former as well as the latter psalm.m Ps. cxliv.
is composite, as Ewald rightly points out. But I cannot, con
trary to the stylistic evidence, admit that vv. 12-14 are a
pre-Exile fragment." It is, no doubt, Ps. cxli. which misled
the great critic— a psalm which is certainly the monument of
a bitter persecution, but not of Manasseh's (comp. v. 4 with
2 Mace. vi. 18 and v. 7 with lxxix. 2). Ps. cxliv. consists of
two parts, once independent, but united probably by Simon
and his priestly helpers. Both are of post-Exile origin,0 and
very possibly of the Greek period ; v. 8,
Whose mouth speaketh deception,
And their right hand is a right hand of falsehood,
is too strikingly applicable to the Graeco-Syrian kings,p and
the reference to palace architecture in v. 12 may suggest the
influence of Greek art. Notice, too, the prayer ascribed to
Judas in 1 Mace. iv. 30, : Blessed art thou, O Saviour of Israel,
who didst quell the violence of the mighty man by the hand
of thy servant David.' Do not these words throw a light
ox\v. 10 of our psalm ?
1 Ps. cxli. 3 may be alluded to in Ecclus. xxii. 27 (see App. I.).

ii. CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 67
It is he that giveth salvation to kings,
That rescueth David his servant from the hurtful sword.
For was not the life of Judas full of parallels to the early life
of David ? Fitly, then, did this psalmist accommodate to his
own times choice phrases from the 18th psalm. It is the
distinction of Theodore of Mopsuestia to have first seen that
those times were the Maccabaean.q
To the close of the Persian, if not to the beginning of the
Greek age,r we must, upon stylistic and other grounds, refer
the composition of the 139th psalm — that profound confession
of faith, the spirit of which each Christian student of nature
would desire to make his own. The contents agree with this
date. The psalm evidently stands in the second half of that
long reflective period, the poetic masterpiece of which is the
Book of Job, and it may perhaps be grouped with Ps. lxxiii.
In vv. 19-21 we catch a glimpse of facts such as brought
Koheleth so dangerously near to pessimism.
The first psalm of this group (Ps. cxxxviii.) is one of the
least original in the Psalter, but it strikes the note character
istic of the post-Exile period. A Maccabaean date is most in
harmony with the spirit of daring enterprise claimed by the
speaker in v. 3, and is directly suggested by the dependence
of v. 8a upon Ps. lvii. 3-s
We pause next at that fine sketch of the character of an
ideal ruler — the 101st psalm. It was evidently written by a
student of Proverbs (or of parts of Proverbs),* and since Heze-
kiah was both a poet and a lover of proverbs (though his
' song ' is of disputed genuineness), and also a reformer, Dr.
Gratz suggests that he may be the author of this psalm.
There is nothing, however, in the style of the psalm, which is
vigorous, but unpoetic, to make an early date plausible, and
if all the neighbouring psalms are post-Exilic, some strong
reason is required for making this one pre-Exilic. With a
late historical background Ps. ci. becomes at once intelligible
and interesting. The phraseology of v. 1 reminds us of
Ps. lxxxix. 2, and the ejaculation in v. 2a (see my note), of
Mai. iii. 1. Both these passages, however, belong to the
second half of the Persian period, which is too early for a
psalm that presupposes the national independence. Now
compare Ps. ci. with Ps. ex. They are almost equally short,

68 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect

and serve as the opening and closing psalms of the decade.
Ps. ex. is Maccabaean ; it sets before us Simon as a ' king of
righteousness,' and as sitting at Jehovah's right hand on
. Mount Zion. Ps. ci. acquires a new distinctness when re
garded as a companion to Ps. ex. How forcible is the phrase
' city of Jehovah ' u [v. 8) as a protest against the Hellenizing
party ! How real the expression of — shall I say, holy, or
fanatical — zealv becomes, if we take it as the programme of
one whose achievements are thus described in the history :
' He strengthened all the humble ones of his people ; he
studied the law to practise it,1 and every lawless and wicked
person he cut off'2 (i Mace. xiv. 14). And if a more positive-
statement be desired to justify us in our reference of Ps. ci. 8
to Simon, take these words of the same narrator : ' so that they
also that were in the city of David in Jerusalem, who had
made themselves a fortress, out of which they issued, and
polluted all about the sanctuary, &c, were cut off'3 (1 Mace.
xiv. 36). There is, I may now add, much reason to suppose
that Ps. ci. was written to inaugurate a festival which the
Jewish Calendar [Megillath Ta'anith, vi. 3) mentions for the
22nd day of Elul, as the celebration of the destruction of
the Hellenists.w
But I seem to hear some one objecting that, upon this view,
Pss. ci. and ex. ought to change places. I reply that the
psalms were not arranged on principles of strict chronology.
Still Hitzig may possibly be right in supposing the pre
decessor of Simon to be the subject of Ps. ci.x After the
death of the hero Judas, we are told, ' The transgressors put
forth their heads4 in all the borders of Israel, and there rose
up all such as wrought iniquity,' till Jonathan ' began to judge
the people, and extinguished 5 the ungodly (i.e. the Hellenizing
party) out of Israel' (1 Mace. ix. 23, 71). It was only after
this that the judge became also the high priest, or, as the
historian says, 'put on the holy robe ' (1 Mace. x. 21), and
with this coincides the fact that Ps. ci. contains no reference
to the priesthood.
Some one may, perhaps, now ask, why, in the collection
1 e|6^)Ti)(re, cf. Sept. civ. (cv.) 45.
2 ^fjpey, cf. Sept. Deut. xix. 19, Judg. xx. 13 = 1573.
3 toD e£ap8iji/ai (see last note). 4 e£e/cm|«xj'. 5 ri<pdvicre.

CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 69

edited (as I have said) by Simon and his friends, thirteen
psalms were ascribed to David, when all the rest but one were
left in ' orphanhood ' (to use the Jewish phrase), that is, anony
mous. Without claiming omniscience, I venture to give my
judgment. I believe that these psalms never existed sepa4
rately as a so-called Davidic hymnbook, and that the collector;
provided them with the title I'ddvid in order to give these
later books a certain external similarity to the two earliest.
The Septuagint translator, or the writer of the Hebrew MS.
which he used, sprinkled this title more freely still (see
Pss. xc, xcii.-xcviii.) : the Greek Psalter even rejoices in an
extra psalm entitled lBio<ypa<pos sis AavlS. In some cases,
even in the Hebrew text, the recipients of this honour seem
to have been picked out at random ; in others, some excuse for
the title is suggested by the contents of the psalms/ The
ideal description in Ps. ci. seemed suitable enough for the
idealized second founder of the monarchy ; it reminds us in
fact of the idealizing description of David in 2 Sam. xxiii.
2-7 (Josian). Ps. ex. relates, as we have seen, to the heir of
the Davidic promises. Pss. cxl.-cxliii. contain numerous
allusions to so-called Davidic psalms in earlier books.
Lastly, Ps. cxlv., together with the Hallelujah group (cxlvi-
cl.), of which it probably formed the introduction, may have
been regarded as a n?riri (see the title), as an outburst of
jubilant praise, worthy of David himself. So the Jews them
selves certainly thought in the time of Mohammed, in one of
whose Suras (xxxiv. 10) occur the words, 'And we did give
David grace from us, " O ye mountains ! echo (God's praises)
with him, and ye birds " ' (alluding to Ps. cxlviii. 9, 10).
\ This latter explanation may also justify the title given in
the Sept.2 to Ps. exxxvii., which, from an aesthetic point of
view, is perhaps the most striking in the two last books. In
somewhat earlier times, it would, I suppose, have been headed,
' of the sons of Korah.' It is, in fact, in some respects closely
analogous to that beautiful lyric which has been divided into
Pss. xiii. and xliii., and like it is evidently the work of a
temple-musician. When was it written ? A post-Exile date
is demanded by critical exegesis and favoured by certain
grammatical forms.1 Yet the psalm must not be placed too
1 See Appendix II.

70 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect.

early :aa so striking a poem, if composed soon after the Return,
would have found a home in the 3rd Book of the Psalms.
Let us group it then with Pss. exxxv. and exxxvi., and place
it in the time of Simon the Maccabee. It is in the fullest
sense a ' dramatic lyric' Just as the author of Ps. xviii.
thinks himself into the soul of David, so a later temple-singer
identifies himself by sympathy with his exiled predecessors
in Babylon.bb It was not, however, solely an exercise of the
imagination. Edom and Babylon were, even to the prophets,
types of the class of Jehovah's enemies.00 To a Maccabaean
writer (cf. 1 Mace. v. 1,3) they represented the ' nations ' which
in his own day had ' come into God's inheritance ' (Ps. lxxix. 1),
and need I remind you that Rabbinical writers constantly
identify Edom and Rome ?
~ The 102nd psalm appears from the heading to have
become a popular favourite, and, as such, to have received a
partly new interpretation before the close of the Psalter."1? No
psalm was more clearly written for the collective use of the
Church, but sanction was early given by the heading to a
secondary individualistic interpretation. It must therefore
have been written considerably before the time of the Macca
bees. That it is not earlier than the close of the Exile, is
evident from its allusions not only to the Book of Job, but to
the Second Isaiah.ee But it may with good reason be placed,
with other kindred elegiac psalms, much later than this. The
Restoration was so inadequate a fulfilment of the Second
Isaiah's prophecies that a post-Exile psalmist could not but
repeat the yearning aspirations of the great prophet, just as
other poets went on imitating the Book of Job 1 long after the
antitype of Job (Israel) had seen a few gleams of happiness.
Our psalmist was one of those moderately gifted writers, whose
precise place in the long post-Exile period may sometimes be
uncertain. But his own date can surely be fixed without
much hesitation. Accompany Nehemiah on his lonely ride
jaround the burned walls of Jerusalem (Neh. ii. 1 1-20), and
jlisten to Sanballat mocking at the Jews for attempting to
{' revive the stones out of the heaps of rubbish ' (Neh. iv. 2) ;
you will then recognize the occasion of this psalm, and
sympathize with the plaintive words,
1 Job and Solomon, pp. 67-70 ; cf. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 244.

CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 71

For thy servants take pleasure in her stones,
And it pitieth them to see her in the dust.'— (cii. 14.)
We have thus gained a precious source of information for
the state of things at Jerusalem during a part of that period
(B.C 457-445) which is undescribed in the Books of Ezra
and Nehemiah." There is good reason to think that it was
not Zerubbabel but Ezra who rebuilt the walls ; Zechariah in
fact anticipates that Jerusalem will remain unfortified, Je
hovah being ' a wall of fire unto her round about ' (Zech. ii. 4).
Great must have been the ' affliction and reproach ' of the
Jews in ' the province ' when, as a consequence, direct or in
direct, of the revolt of the great satrap Megabyzos, ' the wall
was broken down and the gates thereof burned with fire '
(Neh. i. 3).«« But I must now ask you to turn back from ' the
prayer of the afflicted when he is fainting,' to the glorious
'new song'hh (xcvi. 1). It may seem to you an abrupt tran
sition, but it is not really more so than one which occurs in
that very ' prayer of the afflicted.' How melancholy is the
opening of Ps. cii., but how bright are the subsequent flashes
of anticipation which proceed either from that ' new song ' or
from its inspiring source in prophecy ! ' New song ' do I call
it ? It is rather a heptad of new songs (viz. Pss. xciii. and
xcv.-c, to which Ps. xlvii. might have been added), all
relating to the enthronization upon Zion of the Divine King
(Isa. Hi. 7) — that 'far off event' to which (see Lect. VII.) the
whole previous history of Israel had moved. Or, if you will,
we may describe it as a psalm in seven parts, of which
Ps. xciii., when disengaged from the fragment attached to it,
forms the introduction, and Ps. c. an exactly corresponding
conclusion. To what period shall we refer it ? Can we study
the parallel passages in the two compositions, and doubt that
the ' new song ' is very little later than the work of the prophet
commonly known as the Second Isaiah ? u I need not remind
you of the strong lyric element in the great Restoration-
Prophecy (see e.g. the ' new song' in Isa. xiii. 10-13). The |
Second Isaiah was almost as much a poet as a prophet, and
his work presupposes the existence of a circle of hymnists
among the exiles in Babylonia.1 It is, I believe, a conjecture
1 Comp. The Prophecies of Isaiah, iv. 3, ii. 250.

72 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect.
which accounts for all the facts, that one of the younger-
members of this circle composed this psalm or group of
psalms to celebrate the completion of the second temple,
B.C. 516. Let the student work out this idea for himself in
the light of Ezra vi. 16, and he will be surprised at the fuller
meaning which the too familiar phrases acquire. Not without
reason did the Templar Knights select the Venite as their
battle-song, and the Chronicler insert the following psalm in
the composite thanksgiving-hymn, sung, as he declares, on
the introduction of the ark into the city of David ( 1 Chron.
xvi. 7). And probably not without a basis of tradition did
the Septuagint translator give this title to Ps. xcvi., ote 6 oikos
OLKoSofislrai fiera Trjv alj^fiaXcoaiavP
There still remain three anonymous psalms to date, or, as I
may surely say, to understand ; these are Pss. xci., xcii., and
xciv. How strangely does Ps. xciv. intervene between the
two jubilant psalms xciii. and xcv. ! Is this due to some
sacramental secret, or is it a freak of chance ? It is neither
the one nor the other. It is not indeed enough to explain it
by a regard for phraseological coincidences (comp. xciv. 22,
xcv. 1). The true reason seems to be a liturgical one. We
know from the Sept. that the arrangement of psalms to be
sung on the successive week days which is recorded in the
Talmud kk was in existence when that version was made.
IPs. xcii., e.g., is already marked in the Sept. (as well as in the
Hebrew) as the Sabbath-psalm [els rr\v r)jj,spav tov aafifiarov) ;
IPs. xciii. is Friday's psalm [sis rr\v r/fispav tov 7rpoa-a/3j3aTov);
' Ps. xciv. is Wednesday's psalm [rerpdhi aafifiaTOv). The
order of Pss. xcii., xciii., and xciv. seems to have arisen out of
an attempt (not carried very far) to promote liturgical con
venience. Obviously, however, Ps. xciv. must be later than
Ps. xciii., from which it differs so much in tone and import.
/ We may safely place it chronologically not far from Ps. cxxxix.
Both psalms were written by lovers of Job (that masterpiece
of the Exile) ; both show the same painful interest in the
perennial problem of suffering. But trouble pressed more
heavily on the author of Ps. xciv., who (if not a contemporary
of Judas the Maccabee) may perhaps have seen those ter
rible days (see on Ps. cxxxii.), when rebellious Judaea was so
severely punished by the soldiery of Artaxerxes Ochus.
In Pss. xci. and xcii. we feel that we are in a different

CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 73

atmosphere. Through the former we become acquainted with
another of Job's friends— his later and better friends. Notice
in v. i the two divine names ' Elyon and Shaddai, which are
both' marks of a late date,11 and more especially the latter,
which is in a high degree characteristic of the Book of Job.
Our psalmist's favourite passage of Job occurs in a speech of
Eliphaz (Job v. 17-23) ; he imitates the picturesque language
of the Temanite, but gives it a new and paradoxical sense.
Taken literally indeed the psalm would have been most unfit
for use in the second temple, but, understood as Gordon
understood it, it becomes one of the fairest fruits of the
divine education of Israel. To enjoy it we should, I think,
read it immediately after Ps. xc, to which it supplies the
finest of contrasts. The psalmist, who would fain speak for
Israel, ' mourns no more his vanished years ; ' 1 his outer and
inner conflicts have but deepened his sense of the love which
has brought him through them, and he ' rejoices in hope of
the glory of God.'
The next psalm (xcii.) is a hymn to God's faithfulness.
The author is not one who sees cV saoirrpov iv alvlyfian.
Revelation has made the ' dark speech ' or ' enigma ' of
Ps. xlix. 5 plain to him. God has repeatedly stepped forth
in history and justified His ways. The poet looks back upon
the fall of two great world-empires, and upon the recent
captures of Babylon by Darius Hystaspis (520) and Xerxes
(481). He sums up this series of judgments in idealizing
language (xcii. 8), which reminds one of a psalm in the First
Book (ix. 6, 7). ' Faith cannot be satisfied with weak ex
pressions or imperfect fulfilments.' But the poet, speaking
in the name of the more thoughtful members of the Church,
cannot yet forget distressful experiences during the blossom-
time of ungodliness ; he belongs to a somewhat different
circle of religious thinkers from the author of Ps. xci. The
latter is so absorbed in communion with God that he cannot
spare even one stray thought for the days that are past. Yet!
both writers may be contemporary, and have written in that
new sense of security and of energy awakened by Ezra and J
Nehemiah ; and both can add vividness to the picture of the!
new reformation which, as presented to us in the fragmentary?
chronicles, is too monotonous in colouring.
1 Cf. Ps. xc. 9, 10.

74 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. LECT,,

We have at length, in our voyage upwards through the
last of the Psalters, arrived at port. Can it be called the
' haven where we would be ' — this 90th psalm, regarded in
the light of historical criticism and exegesis ? It is incumbent
upon me to give some answer to this question, because in
spite of the fact that almost all the ancient and mediaeval,"1™1
and many of the best modern Christian commentators, deny
the psalm to Moses, most*jEnglish readers are wedded to a
belief in the correctness of the title."11 I trust to be able to
deal frankly and yet considerately with this deeply rooted
prejudice. It is true that I find nothing in the language or
ideas of this psalm which suggests the fourteenth century B.C.
But this is not because I disbelieve in the historical position
of Moses, or desire to detract from the great leader's fame.00
I should be overjoyed to be shown Mosaic songs similar in
psychological truth and linguistic peculiarity to the Gathic
chants of Zoroaster. But I cannot reconcile myself to taking
one of its finest monuments from the post-Exile period, and
practically rewriting it by an imaginative exegesis to suit the
age of Moses. I know that most Bible students regard the
question differently, so that what to me is affirmation and
discovery, to them is negation and loss. But let such re
member that the psalm itself cannot be denied, cannot be
lost, and I think that to those who are interested in the
divine education of Israel the newer view of Ps. xc, far
from belittling it, will invest it with a more pathetic beauty.
The case of this song is exactly parallel to that of the poem
of Job. Who that has assimilated a more critical view would
wish to return to the obsolete theory that it was written by
Moses ? Putting aside a few half-understood but vaguely
edifying passages, what religious help was there in the view
of Job as a literally true history written by Moses ? But
which of us moderns is not helped by that almost perfect
expression of the conflicting thoughts of an earnest man on
the great problem of suffering which criticism reveals to us ?
And who is most edified by the 90th psalm ? He who
regards it as a verbally inspired Mosaic work, or he who
thankfully accepts ill-connected thoughts, sometimes both
right in themselves and grandly expressed, sometimes only
half-right and plainly or even awkwardly put, but all pro-

II. CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 75
ceeding from one who deeply loved his Church, his Bible, and
above all his God ?
The Mosaic theory of Ps. xc has passed through several
phases. A Rabbi consulted by Origen (Iullos=Hillel) held
that its title in the Hebrew and in the Greek determined the
Mosaic authorship, not only of that psalm, but of the ten
following anonymous psalms ; and the same view is found in
the Midrashpp The idea was that each psalm corresponded
to one of the eleven blessings in Deut. xxxiii. This is an
extreme form of the theory. A view suggested by Grotius qq
is that some later poet may have written the psalm in the
character of Moses, analogies for which could doubtless be
produced from the Old Testament and from the Psalter
itself. But who that approaches our psalm with a fresh
mind can accept either this or any other form of the Mosaic
theory ? If Ps. xc. be an ' imaginary psalm of Moses,' why
has the author inf. 10 contradicted the statement of Deut.
xxxiv. 7 that Moses ' was 1 20 years old when he died ' ? rr Or
if it be really of Mosaic authorship why did the author of
that statement (which by the way is in perfect harmony with
similar statements respecting Aaron, Joshua, and Caleb)
venture to make it in opposition to the psalm ? No ; the
psalm is a precious historical record ; it has the ring of
genuine passion, but the age of which it is the monument is
not the Mosaic.
How, then, shall we account for the title, and when was
the psalm written? It was assigned to Moses (as the noth
psalm was to David) partly as a mark of distinction and to
ensure for it the respect of future generations. Upon the
whole, it must be confessed that the Jewish Church of the
Exile and post-Exile period cared but little for its own his
tory. It ' thought upon ' the stones of the outward temple,
but not much upon those records of the past which are the
stones of a temple not made with hands. It was not, how
ever, by a pure caprice that either Moses or David was fixed
upon for these important temple psalms. Of the title of the
noth psalm I have spoken already; that of the 90th was
suggested by the phraseological parallels between that psalm
and the poems in Deut. xxxii. and (perhaps) xxxiii.,ss which
had long since been ascribed to Moses. The author of the

76 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect.

title was not critic enough to see that the contents of both
these poems made it impossible that they should really have
been written by Moses, and hailed the opportunity of adding
another to the laurels of the ' beloved of God and men, whose
memorial is blessed ' (Ecclus. xiv. i).
When was the 90th psalm written ? Of course later
than the main part of the Second Isaiah, the insertion of
the Song and Blessing ' of Moses ' in Deuteronomy, and the
promulgation of the Pentateuch by Ezra, and, as we may pre
sume, not long before, or after, the nearest group of psalms.
Some light may be gained by comparing v. 8b with xix.
13b, and vv. 13-17 with xcii. 5-7, 10, 11. The evXafisia of
the phrases ' hidden ' and * unknown faults ' is characteristic
of an age trained to scrupulousness by the strict observance
of the Law (see exposition in pp. 356, 357), and the prayer
in vv. 13-17 may not improbably be that of which the answer
is commemorated in Ps. xcii. If so, ' the work of our hands '
(xc. 17) may be fitly illustrated by Ezra vi. 22 and Neh. ii.
18, 20. In short, the psalm may be dated during or just
after that reorganization of the Church-people which was
completed by Ezra the scribe and Nehemiah the governor.

Note a, p. 63.
I have already remarked on the free, poetic use of the post- Exile
cosmogony in Gen. i. Cf. also on Ps. viii.
Note b, p. 63.
Most kindly but decidedly did an Oriel Canon and Bampton
Lecturer in 1840 decline to be rebuked for holding that 'even the
psalmists may sometimes have been permitted in some of their
expressions to fall below the Christian standard of holiness and
charity' (Hawkins, Bampton Lectures, pp. 306-308). The 109th
psalm is an extreme instance of this imperfection. As Grotius says
' Hoc carmen possumus appellare 'Apas, sive, ut Virgilius, Diras \
multum habet hoc de spiritu Legis.'
Note c, p. 63.
It is, however, also to the credit of Theodore's glorious friend St.
Chrysostom that, though in deference to the * prince of the apostles,'

II. CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 77
he admits that the psalm contains references to Judas, he denies that
it is throughout prophetic of the great treason. Parts, according to
him, refer to some one who plotted against the priesthood after the
Return from Babylon ; ol (piXoirovioTepot. lo-ao-i tovto. ' I shall not
-cease,' he continues, ' to repeat that though these things seem to be
a curse, they are really a prophecy showing how God is irritated
by plots against the priesthood.' Contrast Theodore's weak-kneed
follower Theodoret ! But though, as a matter of course, we reject
the old title psalmus Iscarioticus, we must not weaken the force of the
poem by taking vv. 6-15 as simply a quotation from the curses of
the wicked man — the malevolent words with which he sought to
blast the poor, helpless god-fearing Israelites. Considering (1) the
frequency with which ' we ' and ' I ' alternate in the psalms, and the
probability that in many psalms in which ' I ' predominates the
speaker is the Church nation ; (2) that in not a few psalms (e.g. xiv.,
xxxvii., cxl.) the wicked are described now in the 3rd pers. sing, and
now in the 3rd pers. plur. ; and (3) that the curses in Ps. cix. are but
a little more violent than those in Ps. lxix., which obviously refer to a
class of bad men, we can hardly, I think, do otherwise than interpret
¦m 6-19 as directed against either a class (see the Peshitto) or a
class as summed up in their leader (just as the class of pious Israelites
is summed up in the psalmist). The individualizing features in the
description are so strong that I venture to prefer the latter alternative,
which is also nearer to the traditional Church view. It is perhaps
surprising that Ps. cix. was not, like Ps. vii., appointed for the Feast
of Purim ; iDB* TO? (see cix. 13, and comp. Sept.) at any rate became
the popular formula for execrating the name of Haman.
Note d, p. 64.
Balaam is but a strong instance of the common Semitic belief
(cf. Kalisch, Balaam, pp. 99-102). Note e, p. 65.
Altogether the nearest parallel is Ps. lxix. Both psalms have
been ascribed to Jeremiah (Ps. lxix. by Hitzig, Ps. cix. by Mr.
Ball). But Jeremiah, I think, never brooded over his resentment
thus. Note f, p. 65.
Dr. C. Taylor suggests the following : v. 2 (false charges ),
cf. Job xiii. 4; v. n ('wander and beg'), cf. Job xv. 23, xviii.
12, xxvii. 14; v. 13 ('race and name perish'), cf. Job xviii. 17-

78 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect.
19; v. 11 ('strangers spoil his labour'), cf. Job xv. 21 [v. 19,
'stranger') ; v. 16 (charge of oppression), contrast Job xxix. 12 ; v
18 ('he drank cursing like water'), cf. Job xv. 16, xxxiv. 7, xx. 12 ;
v. 23 ('as a shadow'), cf. Job xiv. 2 ; ib. OmMJ), cf. Job xxxviii. 13.
Dr. Taylor also agrees with those who compare v. yb ('Satan' or
'a Satan ' ?) with Job ii. He thinks that in vv. 6-15 the curses used
by the psalmist's enemy are quoted. The wicked man prays that
Satan may plead against the good Israelite, as he did against Job.
In answer to this the good Israelite, like Job, looks for his vindication
to God [vv. 28, 29). Note s, p. 65.
Comp. cix. 22 with cii. 5 foil. ; cix. 23 with cii. 7, 12 ; cix. 22,
24 with cii. 24 ; cix. 24 with cii. 5, 6, 10 ; cix. 28-31 with cii. 25-29.
Both psalms, moreover, have affinities to the Book of Job.
Note h, p. 65.
Bunsen actually ascribed the psalm to Nehemiah (cf. Neh. xiii.
25). I could at any rate more easily believe this than that Ezra
wrote the poem of ' Job.' Note *, p. 65.
This is consistent with the dates which I have assigned elsewhere
to imprecatory and elegiac psalms (e.g., vii., xxii., xxxv., Iv., lxix.).
Note that Nehemiah himself was not free from the faults of the
psalmist (see Neh. iv. 4, 5, xiii. 25).
Note J, p. 66.
Ps. xiii. will give occasion to return to the question of the date of
Ps. cxliii. Note k, p. 66.
See Ehrt, p. 107 &c The situation is the same in all, but with
slight differences which would be easily explained had we a diary of
the period. Even Delitzsch grants that these four psalms are only
' Davidic ' in a wide sense. The most strikingly so is Ps. cxl. from its
affinities in thought and imagery with 'psalms of David.' The
situation is that of Absalom's rebellion (D. compares Pss. lviii. and
Ixiv.). Ps. cxli. may have been composed by some historian as a
lyric illustration of that period. St. Chrysostom also notices its obscu
rity, and condemns his hearers for repeating their ' evening hymn '

II. CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 79
so glibly without being stirred up to investigate its difficulties. De
Wette confounds this obscurity with originality, and says, ' I consider
this and the 10th psalm to be*among the most ancient.' He admits,
however, that Ps. cxli. refers to the paganizing party among the Jews.
Notice 'SIX nirV, cxl. 8, cxli. 8 ; certainly not an ancient title of God.
Note m, p. 66.
Observe especially i"l3B>, v. 5, cf. cxlv. 15 ; d^SISS fp) v. 8, cf.
cxlv. 14. The similarity in the train of thought is equally note
worthy. Note n, p. 66.
Verse 15 was added, according to Ewald, by the post-Exile editor
who rescued vv. 12-14 (xxxiii. 20 being post-Exile). My own view
is that vv. 1, 2, v. 3, and vv. 12-15, are quotations — the two former
from comparatively old works, the latter from a more recent psalm,
designed to encourage the Church-nation in a troublous time. Verse
4 implies the sad reflection that Jehovah at present does not ' take
notice ' of Israel (man's chief representative) ; in vv. 5-7, phrases in
Ps. xviii. are converted into prayers.
Note °, p. 66.
Comp. cxliv. 9 with xcii. 4, xxxiii. 2 (the ten-stringed nebhel), and
on vv. 12-14 see Appendix II.
Note p, p. 66.
See 1 Mace. vi. 62, vii. 10, x. 46, xi. 53, xv. 27, and contrast the
emphasis on the Jewish respect for oaths in Jos., Ant. xii. 1,1.
Note % p. 67.
Theodoret, however, explains Ps. cxliv. ¦ of the troubles of the
Jews after the Return ; v. 2b applies, he thinks, to Zerubbabel and
Joshua. Note r, p. 67.
Verse 15 can scarcely refer to the ' pre-existence of souls ;' but
vv. 19-22 may perhaps refer to the growth of a Hellenizing reli
gious party. On account of v. 16 the psalm is assigned by Rashi
to Adam. The position of Ps. cxxxix. may have been suggested
by the occurrence of the catch- word 'thy right hand' [v. 10 ; cf.
exxxviii. 7).

80 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect.

Note ', p. 67.
It is no real argument against this date that the Sept. gives as a
duplicate title 'Ayyaiov Kai Zaxapwv. The translator, or his editor,
seems to have stumbled at the ascription of the psalm to David, and
to have cast about for a more probable author. Just so the pre
ceding psalm is headed T&> Aavl8 'lepepLiov (Cod. Vat.). Haggai
and Zechariah are as much a guess in Ps. cxxxviii. as Jeremiah in
Ps. cxxxvii. The idea of ascribing certain psalms to prophets is
clearly of Egyptian-Jewish origin.

Note *, p. 67.
An eminent Tamil scholar tells me that many fine Tamil proverbs
are of extreme antiquity ; why then, he asks, may not ' Solomonic '
proverbs be in some form as early as David, and at any rate why
may not David's ethos be as advanced as that of the Proverbs? But
the Israelitish race developed slowly both in poetry and in morality.
Such evidence as we have is against my friend's theory (cf. Job and
Solomon). Note u, p. 68.
The phrase is inconsistent with a pre-Solomonic and most con
sistent with a post-Exile origin (cf. Pss. xlvi. 15, xlviii. 2, 3, 9,
lxxxvii. 3, Isa. Iii. 1, lx. 14). Note v, p. 68.
' The moralist and the philosopher who reads the words of " the
Servant of God, Omar Saleh," may be almost inclined to think that
a little dash of his sublime fanaticism would be no bad thing for the
civilized world of to-day ' [St. James's Gazette, Nov. 29, 1889, on the
Mahdist Manifesto). Note w, p. 68.
As to the ' city of David,' see the commentators on 1 Mace. i. 33.
Dr. Gatt stands alone in identifying it with the whole city of Jeru
salem [Theolog. Quartalschrift, 1889, p. 77 &c). The scholium on
the ' Jewish Calendar ' tells us that three days' time for repentance
was given to the godless ones, after which they were killed. This is
against 1 Mace. xiii. 47-50, but 1 Mace. xiv. 14, 36 suggests that a
part of the Hellenists was really annihilated (Gratz, Geschichte, iii., ed.
At P- 5^5 i Derenbourg, Histoire, p. 69).

II. CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 81
Note x, p. 68.
Jonathan the diplomatist may not have been as simple-minded
in his religion as the hero Judas (see p. 43), but was not less neces
sary to the Jewish cause. A psalmist may therefore have written of
him. Note y, p. 69.
Not however, of course, for the latter part of the title of Ps. cxiii.,
which is as absurd as the Sept.'s addition, irpos tov ToAiaS, to the
title of Ps. cxliv. (compare Targum on v. 10), and ore ip.ovop.dxwe
tu> ToXiaS in the title of the appended psalm in Sept.
Note z, p. 69.
Codd. X and B have ™ AavetS only. Cursive MSS. sometimes add
'lept/ALOv, Sia Tepe/uov (so Complut. and Aid.), Sid Tep. Kai "E^ekit/X,
Sid Tta^apiov, and dyiwv (jnovai tcov iv al)(jj.a\<oo-ia. Mr. Mozley boldly
accepts the authorship of Jeremiah, and thinks that he prefixed the
psalm to a Davidic collection which he rescued from the king's
library [David in the Psalms, 1890, pp. 5, 6).
Note aa, p. 70.
Halevy places Ps. cxxxvii. immediately before Cyrus's capture of
Babylon [Revue des etudes juives, 1880, i. 22, 23).
Note bb, p. 70.
He forgot the change which had passed over the service of sacred
song since the fall of the first temple.
Note cc, p. 70.
The Jews never forgave their old enemy Babylon. In the most
ancient part of the Sibylline Oracles (iii. 300-313) woes are
announced to Babylon, on 01 vahv piyav i£aXaira£ev.
Note dd, p. 70.
'Partly new,' because the ' afflicted one' referred to in the title is
of course one who feels Israel's troubles as his own. Smend, how
ever, thinks that 'jy is Israel personified, which is possible of course
(see, e.g., xxxv. 10, xl. 18), but seems hardly probable here. The
psalm presumably had the same heading in a smaller Psalter, in
tended both for public and for private use. G

82 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect.

Note ec, p. 70.
Cf. v. 6 with Job xix. 20 ; v. n with Job xxx. 22 ; v. 24 with
Job xiv, 1 : vv. 26-28 with Isa. xlviii. 13, li. 6 ; v. 28 with Isa. xii.
4 (on which see my note). Delitzsch, with Calvin, places our psalm
at the close of the Exile. But this does not allow time for the poets
to feel the influence of 2 Isaiah. Note ff, p. 71.
Comp. also li. 20, 21 (unless this falls a few years earlier), and
some or the persecution-psalms in Book I. (xxii. &c). Ps. cix.
(though contrasting in one respect with Ps. cii.) may have been
occasioned by the same national trouble. Observe that, although
the last echoes of the jubilant ' new song ' (xcvi. 1) had died away,
the faith of the psalmists still clung to the Messianic promise.
Note bs, p." 71.
The revolt took piace (in Syria) b.c 448 ; Nehemiah arrived at
Jerusalem b.c 445. The disturbed state of Syria must have en
couraged Sanballat to venture on active warlike measures against the
Jerusalem community. See further on Pss. xxii., xxxv., lxix.
Note hh, p. 71.
In a synagogue hymn the Song of Moses in Ex. xv., which closes
with 'Jehovah shall reign for ever and ever,' is also called a 'new
song.' It does in fact probably represent the new sense of Jehovah's
world-wide sway which characterized the post-Exile Church. Dr.
Muir adduces a parallel from a Vedic hymn, ' Sing (to Indra) with
out ceasing a new hymn, worthy of him, and unequalled in earth or
heaven' [Rig Veda, x. 89, 3, in Sanskrit Texts, iii. 231). But the
idea there is rather that art must seek to outdo itself worthily to
praise divine excellences (cf. Ludwig, Rig Veda, Introd.), whereas
in the Psalms the ' new song ' corresponds to the ' new covenant '
and the new-born Catholic Church. eVei Xaos ets ty, Kai Wvos iv
ivi T07ra) Kai KXifnaTi Kai to ao-p/x Kai y) XaTpua to TraXaiov TrepiwpurTO
(Chrys. in Ps. xcv.).
Note u, p. 71.
But earlier than Isa. xxiv. 23, Zech. xiv. 9, where Jehovah's king
ship is something to tie realized in the future (if these are of post-
Exilic origin). , Contiust also the description of Moses and Aaron as

ii. CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 83
both priests (Ps. xcix. 6) with the phrase ' Aaron the Holy One of
Jehovah' (Ps. cvi. 16, more in accordance with the priestly code),
andcf. Baudissin, Gesch. des Priesterthums, p. 258 ; Wellhausen, Pro
legomena, p. 147. Note-", p. 72.
Sept. adds, however, aiS?/ ™ AaveiS.
Note kk, p. 72..
See Rosh hashana, 31a (Wiinsche, Der bab. Talmud, i. 336).
The explanation of the selection, however, which is there given on
the authority of R. Akiba, is as fanciful as the Agadic theory which
makes Ps. xcii. to have been composed by Adam on his first Sab
bath. Gratz has pointed out that the want of correspondence
between the psalms and the works of creation (except perhaps in the
case of Ps. xxiv.) shows that the real motive of the selection was the
special suitableness of the several psalms to the depressed period
when the arrangement was made. Light and shade, reproof and
comfort, interchange, with a beautiful regard to the wants of the
Jewish Church. The selection, according to Gratz, implies the exis
tence of the entire collection, and, holding that the Sept.'s version
of the Psalter was not made till about a.d. 44, he is able to make
the arrangement later than the capture of Jerusalem by Pompeius
[Monatsschrift, 1878, p. 217 &c). I cannot, however, see how the
Sept. version can be brought down so late (see p. 12), nor why the
selection implies the complete Psalter. Why should not the arrange
ment have been made in the last century of the Persian period ?
The times were certainly gloomy enough to account for the selection.
See also on Ps. Ixxxi. (Sunday's psalm is Ps. xxiv. ; Monday's,
Ps. xlviii. ; Tuesday's, Ps. lxxxii. ; Thursday's, Ps. Ixxxi.)
Note u, p. 73.
Pss. xci. and xcii. are, equally with Ps. xcvii., 'Elyon-psalms,
i.e. the divine title 'Elyon (' most High ') occurs in all three (xci. 1,
9, xcii. 2, xcvii. 9). We have found it hitherto only in cvii. 11. It
is more frequent in Books II. and III. ; the Levitical poets had a
special predilection for this great name. (The instances are xlvi. 5,
xlvii. 3, 1. 14, lvii. 3, lxxiii. 11, lxxvii. 11, lxxviii. 17, 35, 56, lxxxii. 6,
lxxxiii. 19, [Ixxxvii. 5, Ixxxix. 28].) In Book I. we shall find it more
rarely (vii. 18, ix. 3, xviii. 14, xxi. 8) ; in Lam. it occurs twice (iii.
35. 38)- Jerome gives 'Ely5n among the ten Jewish names of God ;
the Jerusalem Talmud, however, expressly includes it among those

CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect..

divine epithets (such as 'gracious,' 'merciful,' 'great,' 'terrible'),
which have not an equal degree of sanctity with the most sacred
name, and with Elohim, Shaddai, &c. (see Rahmer in Gratz's
Monatsschrift, 1870, pp. 183-187). Not only the pre-Exile prophets
and Ezekiel, but even the pre-Exile narrators, avoid this name, which
belonged (if we may base anything on Philo of Byblus) to Phoeni
cian mythology. The reason may be questioned, but not the fact.
Num. xxiv. 16 and Deut. xxxii. 8 are the only undoubtedly pre-
Exile passages in which 'Elyon occurs (Gen. xiv. 18-24 being
post-Exilic), and these are poetical. The first prophet who uses the
name is Exilic (Isa. xiv. 14), and he only uses it in a poetical
speech given to the king of Babylon. Post-Exile writers were
¦ specially fond of using it, or its Aramaic equivalent (see especially
Daniel, Enoch, and Sirach). See further in my coram, on Ps. vii.
18. — Ps. xci. is also a Shaddai-psalm (like Ps. lxviii.). The original
pronunciation and meaning of Shaddai are disputed, but it is at least
certain that the only undoubtedly pre-Exile passages in which it
occurs are Gen. xliii. 14, where no critic will doubt that ' El Shaddai '
is due to the hand of the editor, and Num. xxiv. 4, 16 (in the poe
tical speeches of Balaam). It is clear that this name, like 'Elyon, was
discountenanced by the pre-Exile prophets and narrators (i.e. those
who are admitted as such by all critics). It occurs thirty-one times
in the Book of Job (where 'Yahveh' is avoided). We also find it
in Isa. xiii. 16, Joel i. 15, Ruth i. 20, 21. Also in Ezek. i. 24
(where Cod. B of the Sept., the Hebrew original of which is alone
correct, does not contain it), and x. 5 (which Cornill has shown to
be an interpolation). It is noteworthy that Ezek. x. 5 is the only
passage in which Sept. reproduces the name in Greek letters (SaSSai).
Noldeke and G. Hoffmann conjecture that the original pronunciation
was HEJ\ This would amply account for its rarity in pre-Exile lite
rature. But I do not wonder that Baethgen protests [Beitrdge zur
semit. Religionsgesckichte, p. 293).
Note mm, p. 74.
For a conspectus, see Littledale, A Commentary on the Psalms
from Primitive and Mediceval Writers (begun by Neale), vol. iii., p.
145, who however does not mention an interesting Jewish theory
that Moses uttered the psalm and David placed it in the Psalter,
' for the time of captivity ' (see the exposition of Ps. xc. by Maimun
ben Joseph, who connects it very acutely with Deut. xxxii., Jewish
Quarterly Revieiv, ii. 86). This is akin to the view of Theodore of
Mopsuestia, as represented by his Syriac epitomator (see Baethgen),
that David uttered it ' in the name of the people in Babylon, which

II. CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. 85
entreats that its sufferings may have an end.' Theodoret (see on
vv. 16, 17) too expounds in accordance with this theory. As a
curiosity, note Saadya's explanation of the title that the singing was
entrusted to the children of Moses who were at the king's court (ap.
Neubauer, in the Oxford Siudia Biblica, ii. 12).
Note nn, p. 74.
'Man of God'=prophet (1 Sam. ix. 6-9). The same title is
given to Moses (comp. Deut. xxxiv. 10) in Deut. xxxiii. 1, Josh. xiv.
6, 1 Chron. xxiii. 14, 2 Chron. xxx. 16, Ezra iii. 2 ; and to David in
2 Chron. viii. 14, Neh. xii. 24. As we have seen, it was natural to
credit a prophet with the gift of sacred song.
Note 00, p. 74.
It is not essential that we should wait till the question as to the
historical elements in the traditions of the Exodus, &c, has been
more thoroughly investigated by home-scholars. Even setting aside
these traditions provisionally, ' the internal evidence of the religious
evolution itself witnesses most incontrovertibly to the fact and the
character of the great beginning under Moses. That Israel never
passed through the stage of mythological polytheism, but, so to
speak, overleaped it, testifies to his work most conclusively ' (Prof.
G. F. Moore, Andover Review, 1888, p. 549). The case is partly
analogous to that of Zoroastrianism (see De Harlez, Les origines du
Zoroastrisme, 1879, where however the naive mythic conceptions
which descended from the pre-Zoroastrian period seem not suffi
ciently recognized). Note pp, p. 75.
Gratz, Monatsschrift, 1881, pp. 442, 443- The notion that the
anonymous psalms are due in each case to the author last named
was shared by Jerome (Ep. ad Cyprianum, Opera, torn, iv., f. 43^)
and many others. Note °-«, p. 75.
Grotius even extends the theory to the ten following psalms.
Note rr, p. 75.
The only way to turn the point of this argument (already urged
by Bellarmine) would be to quote the case of the Book of Job.
How little effect has the story of the patriarch had upon the

86 CONCLUSION OF THE ANALYSIS. lect. ii.
speeches which are the kernel of the work ! True ; but the heading
of Ps. xc. is far from possessing the authority of the titles which
introduce these splendid pieces of deeply felt oratory.
Note ss, p. 75.
See Appendix II. The allusions in Ps. xc. to these poems (or,
to this poem) are not studied, but involuntary. Time must there
fore be allowed for them (or, for it) to have gained such a popularity.
The date of the Song may be fixed in the reign of Josiah ; that
of the Blessing, probably, in that of Jeroboam II. (cf. my Jeremiah
(1888), p. 84).

LECTURE III.
My soul is among lions ; if I lay me down, 'tis among firebrands —
the sons of men, whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue, a
sharp sword, — Ps. Ivii. 5 (Kay's translation).

LECTURE III.
Part I. — Survey of results of Lects. I. and II. — Two more minor Psalters,
Books II. and III. ; chiefly Elohistic. — Three groups of Elohistic psalms, —
Davidic, Korahite, and Asaphite, besides three anonymous psalms, and a Solo
monic one. — Why the majority must be assumed to be pre-Maccabaean. — Yet a
study of Pss. xliv., Ixxiv., and lxxix. shows that these at least must be Macca
baean. —Reply to a priori objections to Maccabaean psalms. — Can these three psalms
be the entire lyric record of such a stirring period ?— A study of Pss. Ix. , lxi. ,
lxiii. , and lxxxiii. shows that these four psalms are also Maccabaean. — Ps. lxxxiii.
contrasted with Ps. cix. — Objection to Maccabaean royal psalms ; the answer
reserved. — Anachronisms in the titles of these psalms (if Maccabaean) accounted
for. Part II. — Are there any psalms of the pre-Maccabaean, Greek, and of the
Persian period in Books II. and III. 1 — Ps. lxviii. was written either towards the
close of the Exile, or in the third century ; the latter date is to be preferred. —
Pss. xiii. and xliii. (properly one psalm) are also of the Greek period ; this follows
from the necessity of finding a captivity in the post-Exile period in which cap
tives were carried to the N. E. of Palestine. — Pss. Ixxxix. and lxxxviii. discussed
in connexion with the Psalm of Hezekiah in Isa. xxxviii. The subject of all
three poems is, not Hezekiah, but the Jewish Church of the Persian period, and
Ps. Ixxxix. in particular was written in the calamitous reign either of the second
or of the third Artaxerxes. Date of Pss. Ixxxvii. -lxxxiv. discussed. The first, a
noble specimen of Jewish catholicity, may be early Greek ; so also Ps. lxxxvi.
The two last, and so also Pss. lxxxii. and lviii. (strange but interesting works),
belong to the Persian period. Pss. Iii., liv., lv.-lvii., lix., lxii., and Ixiv. form
another group of vigorous church-songs. The picture is definite enough ; perse
cution is in progress. But who is the speaker ? In particular, is Ps. Iv. by
Jeremiah ? or by Onias III. ? Safer to leave this uncertain ; the speaker may
even be Israel personified. None of these psalms require to be Greek. Thus
far Books II. and III. are a collection of church-historical records, chiefly, but
not entirely, of the Persian period.

PART I.
MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III.
Let us now survey the course that we have been taking.
These sixty-one psalms — all of them, even Ps. ex., church-/
hymns — come to us as a collection from the age of Simonf
the Maccabee. It is not surprising, therefore, that Maccabaean';
psalm-literature should be represented in it. It is equally
certain, however, that the bulk of the collection represents
the various stages of the pre-Maccabaean part of the post-
Exile period. No single psalm in it is either pre-Exilic or
Exilica Could I enter here into linguistic details,1 it would be
plain that the language of the psalms is, on the whole, favour
able to this view. It is true that even the 139th psalm
can hardly be said to be written in a 'jargon,' but Aramaisms
and peculiar words and forms are characteristically frequent.
The relative purity of the Hebrew of these psalms is explained
by the sanctity already attaching to the earlier writings, which
became literary models to the temple poets. The collection
was originally meant as a separate work, and nobly was it
introduced by Ps. xc, which seems to cry aloud that ' upon
this rock ' — the rock of the foundation truths which it sums
up — ' God will build His Church.' When, however, it was
united to Books I.— III. it seemed appropriate to break it in
two. In the Law the demands of Jehovah were expressed in
a five-fold form ; ought not the response of the believing
community to have a similar division ? Ought there not, in
fact, to be a Davidic Pentateuch ? The new plan, however,
injured the right appreciation of the Psalter. The short book
which closes at Ps. cvi. has no right of existence by itself, and
the jubilant thanksgiving of the Maccabaean period (Pss.
1 On this subject see Appendix II.

90 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect.
cxlvi.-cl.) is rooted in the grave earnestness and chastened
joy of the previous age.
I now pass on to Books II. and III. These minor Psalters
I contain forty-eight psalms, of which only four are Yahvistic,
i.e. evince a predilection for the name Yahveh ; the others
being Elohistic, i.e. characterized by the predominant use of
Elohim.1 The Elohistic phraseology, however,, is at any rate
not always due to the authors of the psalms,b but sometimes
(indeed, in my opinion, often) to an editor, as will be clear
from a comparison of Ps. liii. with the recension of the same
poem in Ps. xiv., and of Ps. lxx, with the recension of the
same passage in Ps. xl. 14-18.0 The six Yahvistic psalms
(lxxxiv.— Ixxxix.), of which four (lxxxiv., lxxxv, Ixxxvii.,
Ixxxviii.) are traditionally Korahite, one (lxxxvi.) Davidic,
and one (Ixxxix.) Ethanite, are appended to the Elohistic,
proving that the editor who ventured on the alteration only
, had before him Pss. xiii.— lxxxiii. These psalms, then, formed
a great Elohistic collection, and upon examining the titles we
are able to analyze the collection into three groups, viz. a
Davidic (li.-lxx.), a Korahite d (xlii.-xlix.), and an Asaphite
(1., lxxiii. -lxxxiii.), besides the three anonymous psalms (Ixvi.,
lxvii., and lxxi., of which the two latter are ascribed to David
in the Septuagint), and the Solomonic 72nd psalm. We
\may assume that the majority at least of these psalms are
pre-Maccabaean, for the terms ' Korahite,' ' Asaphite,' and
' Ethanite ' e had evidently gone out of use when the Eourth
and Fifth Books were collected. I say 'the majority,' be
cause there was nothing to prevent a reviser, or ' diaskeuast,'
from inserting Elohistic Maccabaean psalms even in Books II.
and III., and giving each of them the same title, however
anachronistically, as the neighbouring psalms. We know
that such a reviser added the Yahvistic Pss. lxxxiv.-lxxxix.
as a supplement, and there is no reason why an Elohistic
reviser should not have been only a trifle bolder. Can we
convert this possibility into a probability? That depends
upon our being able to show that none but a Maccabaean
date will adequately account for the exegetical phenomena of
a group of interesting psalms. Let us take the 44th psalm
first, and read vv. 18, 19, and 21-23 m Kay's translation —
¦ ' See Lecture VI., p. 287.

ill. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. 91
Our heart has not turned backward,
Nor have our steps swerved from Thy path :
That Thou shouldst have bruised us into a haunt of jackals,
And covered us over with death-shade.
Would not God search out that ?
For He knows the hidden things of the heart.
Yea, on Thy account are we killed all day long,
We are reckoned as sheep for slaughter.
Rouse Thee : — why sleepest Thou, O Lord ?
Wake up, cast not off for ever.
To what period do these words seem to you to point ?
Pass down the stream of history, beginning with the pro
mulgation of the first Scripture by Josiah/ Pause a moment
at the mourning of Megiddo. Might the psalm, think you,
be the work of one of those pious men who in 608 B.C. were
victims of the pathetic illusion that Israel knew and served
Jehovah, and had therefore a claim on His protection ? No ;
such a view is inconsistent with the known religious results
of that sad tragedy — the defeat and death of Josiah. Well,
then, try the Exile period. May the lofty self-consciousness
of Ps. xliv. be compared with that of Job ? and do the com
plaints in vv. 1 1— 17 fairly answer to the sufferings of the
Exile-Church ? To both questions you can but answer, Yes ;
but no fresh mind will admit that the psalm as a whole can
be intelligibly expounded as a work of the Exile, and in
.particular that vv. 18 and 19 can be interpreted as they are
by Bredenkamp,1 ' Since our punishment, we have been faith
ful servants of Jehovah.'
Perhaps you will next think of the latter part of the
Persian period, and find allusions in the psalm to the outrages
committed by Bagoses, or to the later insurrection (which I have
mentioned before) against Artaxerxes Ochus. To the sufferings
occasioned by these events Ewald in his youth ascribed this
psalm,8 and I willingly admit that the conscious innocence so
characteristic of this psalm appears again in Pss. vii. andxvii.,
and (with a qualification) in Ps. lxix.,h which not improbably
belong to the period mentioned. But though this theory may
explain some parts of Pss. xliv, lxxiv, and lxxix., it can hardly
be said to provide the right historic background for these psalms
1 Gesetzund Propheten, pp. 127, 128.

92 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. LECT.
regarded as wholes, much less for the whole group, to which
(as we shall see) they belong. Few, for instance, will believe
that the sacrilege of Bagdses, caused as it was by the still
greater sacrilege of the high priest himself, can be the defile
ment complained of in the 79th psalm. The Maccabaean
period alone remains.' Often as it has been repudiated, the
minds of critics have constantly returned to it, and the
brightest of the early Christian interpreters at once recog
nized its appropriateness.1 The objections urged against it
do not touch the nerve of the theory, and are partly due to
prejudice. I shall return to some of them in the Appendix,
but will take them now in the form in which they have been
presented by Dillmann.1 (1) ' Nothing is said in the disputed
psalms of the religious differences of the Israelites.' But in
the typical 44th psalm it is the Church-nation which speaks.
To break the covenant is to cease to be of Israel, and hence
in Ps. lxxiii. 1, ' Israel ' is defined in the parallel line as ' the
pure in heart' Besides, it is possible that in xliv. 21, 22, the
psalmist does cast a glance at the hypocrites. (2) ' Many
circumstances of the Maccabaean insurrection are not alluded
to.' But the psalmists are not chroniclers, and if in Ps. xliv.
there are no appeals to victories already won, remember that
it is the wont of the psalmists to base their appeals to God
on the wonders of the olden time. Besides, this may be one
of the earliest of the Maccabaean psalms. Other writers
object — (1) that vv. 7 and 8 are inconsistent with the anxiety
of Judas the Maccabee to obtain the friendship of the Romans
(1 Mace viii.). But the treaty referred to, which, as a fact,
was obnoxious to the khasidim (they applied the curse in
Jer. xvii. 5 to Judas 2), may perfectly well have been sub
sequent to the circumstances presupposed by Ps. xliv. (2)
' That there were no defeats of the " armies " of the Macca
bees ; Judas, Jonathan, and Simon were uniformly victorious.'
But this statement is not correct. More than one dark day
has found its record in Maccabaean history. Think of the
terrible defeat of Beth-Zacharia, transformed in the romantic
Second Book of Maccabees into a victory (see 1 Mace vi.
1 See Dr. Pusey's version, Lectures on Daniel, p. 322.
2 See Gratz, Geschichte, ii. 2, pp. 374, 375, and cf. Church and Seeley's
admirable chapter ' The Falling Away ' in their Maccabaean story, The Hammer.

in. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. 93
28-54, 2 Mace xiii. 13-17), and of the still more crushing
blow at Eleasa, when the 3000 patriots were hemmed in on
either side, 'Judas also was killed, and the remnant fled'
(1 Mace ix. 18). And is it likely that these were the only
misfortunes?-' (3) 'That Ps. xliv. (and some of the other
Maccabaean psalms) do not indicate so lofty a view of the
future life as the speeches of the martyrs in 2 Mace vi., vii.'
But the doctrine of the Resurrection was not generally re
ceived in the Church so early as B.C. 167. It was to a great
extent the Book of Daniel which brought it a more general
recognition. Pardon me if I have taken the longest route. Had I been
writing a history of the Old Testament literature I should
Simply have said that if, as the Nestor of Hebraists (Franz
Delitzsch) himself holds, Pss. lxxiv. and lxxix. relate to Mac- •
cabaean times,k it is difficult to resist the impression that
Ps. xliv. (which Delitzsch ascribes to David on the false
analogy of Ps. Ix.) belongs to the same period. Notice the
reference to synagogues in lxxiv. 8,m and remember that a
passage from Ps. xliv. was used in a most impressive part of
the daily ritual in the Maccabaean period down to the time
of John Hyrcanus.1 It was probably not many years after
the death of the same prince that the writer of 1 Mace vii.
16-17 found in Ps. lxxix. 2 an exact description of the
massacre of sixty leading Asidaeans by Alcimus." This, of
course, by itself proves nothing ; but when we notice this
historian's predilection for post-Exile psalms,2 and remember
that no other post-Exile period described in history but the
Maccabaean suits this and the twin psalm (lxxix.), we are
entitled to regard the passage referred to as furnishing sub
sidiary evidence for the Maccabaean theory. Observe too
that the same historian in 1 Mace i. 37 ° indirectly applies
Ps. lxxix. 1, 3 to the earlier cruelties of the Syrian Greeks
in the time of Mattathias.
Do not think that I am a partizan critic, who fights for
theories as other men do for more tangible objects. The only
side which I have taken is that of the historical interpretation
1 Talm. Bab., Sota, 48a.
¦' Comp. also I Mace. ii. 62 with Ps. lxxxiii. 10 ; I Mace. ii. 63 with Ps
cxlvi. 4; 1 Mace. ix. 23 with Ps. xcii. 8 (Sept.).

94 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect.
of the psalms ; and, unless there be some strange gap in the
historical traditions, there is no period which gives the right
background for these psalms but the Maccabaean. I am well
aware that history repeats itself, and that when the maidens
seven sang Deus, venerunt gentes in Dante's earthly paradise,
Beatrice, compassionate and sighing,
Listened to them with such a countenance
That scarce more changed was Mary at the cross. !
It may be that lovers of the Gospel can, like Dante, feel
the apparent defeats of the Gospel as the authors of these
psalms felt the blow that had been dealt to the elder form of
spiritual religion. But we do not live in such depressing days
as Dante, and if we are to realize and vitalize this group of
psalms, it can only be by the historic imagination. Either
the massacres of Antiochus and Apollonius ( I Mace i. 24, 30,
2 Mace v. 11-16, 26), or that of Alcimus2 (1 Mace ix. 9-16),
seem to be the occasion of Ps. lxxix., and if there be one
moment which better than another suits its companion-psalm-p
it is that described in 1 Mace iii. 46-6o.q There they stand,
those faithful Israelites, gathered as in the first dark days of
Babylonian tyranny in the mountain city of Mizpah/ From
that lofty post of observation they can distinctly see the pro
faned sanctuary, which supplies the theme of Ps. lxxiv. 3-7,
and can imagine that they descry the grand idol-form s of
'heaven's lord ' ('abomination that maketh desolate' is a pun
ning transformation of this title) on the platform of the altar
of Zerubbabel. Clothed in sackcloth, and with ashes on their
heads, they spread open a copy of the Law which had escaped
the search of the persecutors. What a fulness of meaning is
poured into that appeal [v. 20), ' Look upon the covenant '
(i.e. perhaps, 'the book of the covenant,' cf. 1 Mace i. 57),
from this historical notice! And if you wish to realize the
force of the complaint, 'There is no prophet any more' [v. 9),
recollect that in the next year but one (B.C. 164) somefei-
vently believing Israelite composed the first Hebrew apoca
lypse, and in the spirit of the wise man Daniel (Ezek. xxviii.
3) answered that pathetic cry, ' O God, how long? [v. io).*
Once more, do not think me the prey of my own fancies.
1 Purgatory, xxxiii. -6. z See p. efj.

ill. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. 95
If you would rather take this psalm as a reflection, not so
much of a moment as of a period, I make no objection, pro
vided that you sufficiently realize the moments which make
up the period. Indeed I would willingly take it so myself
and think of all the details so simply and affectingly related
between 1 Mace ii. 27 (Mattathias crying with a loud voice,
' Follow me, all ye that are zealous for the law ') and 1 Mace
iii. 46-60 (the thrilling scene at Mizpah, when they knew that
the king had given commandment to abolish the people).
Let me at this point remind you of the non-linguistic
criteria of Maccabaean psalms which I ventured to put for
ward in my first lecture. They were (1) the presence of some
fairly definite historical allusions ; (2) an uniquely strong
church feeling ; (3) a special intensity of monotheistic faith ;
and (4) an ardour of gratitude for a wondrous deliverance.
The last criterion, of course, cannot be applied in this form to
Pss. xliv, lxxiv., lxxix. Faith, according to these poems, is
sorely tried by the unaccountable hiding of Jehovah's face
and the 'burning' of his anger against 'the flock that he
shepherdeth' (lxxiv. 1, lxxix. 5, 6, 13 ; cf. xliv. 25). Yet
there is no real discrepancy between these and the later Mac
cabaean psalms. In all there is the same belief in the retribu
tion doctrine, though in the latter God's justice is seen and
praised ; in the former not seen, and therefore passionately
called for. The fourth of our criteria must therefore be modi
fied if it is to be applied to both classes of Maccabaean psalms.
But when this has been done, are there no other psalms to be
joined to those three earlier Maccabaean works which we have
been considering ? Surely there must be. The source of in
spiration cannot have suddenly dried up. Those who made
bold to insert these three Maccabaean psalms in the Third and
Fourth Books cannot have had the heart to leave all the rest
to dull oblivion.11
Well, then, take the other psalms which Dillmann himself
accepts as post-Exilic, and admits to be most plausibly
viewed as Maccabaean, viz. Ix., Ixxx., and lxxxiii., and first of
all Ps. Ix.'" Can you not see at a glance that vv. 3, 12-14
are closely parallel to Ps. xliv. 6, 7, 10 ? and will you hesitate
to infer that these two psalms are related to each other
precisely as the 74th is to the 79th — that, in short,

96 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. LECT.
they proceeded from the same circle of writers, and were
separated by no great interval of time ? w And does not the
| reference to a divine oracle in vv. 8-10 remind you of the
Maccabaean noth psalm (also headed I'ddvid), and suggest
j that the person to whom it was given was another of the
\ great Maccabaean brethren ? Who, in fact, was so worthy of
this particular oracle as the ' lofty Maccabee,' whom Dante
so fitly names in Paradise next after Joshua ? ' Some, per
chance, will prefer John Hyrcanus, who was doubtless in a
fuller measure than Judas the second Joshua of his people.
His, indeed, was not the fame of that glorious victory gained
almost on the spot where Joshua longed, like Agamemnon,
that the friendly sun might for him delay its setting." But it
was literally true that he added Galilee, Samaria, the east-
Jordan land, and the new Idumaea to the narrow Jewish
dominion. Yes, John Hyrcanus, who was like .his father a
righteous prince, and professed moreover to have received
prophetic oracles, might have been the first speaker of the
Joshua-like words in Ps. Ix. 8-IO, if only the psalm did not
appear in the Septuagint, and if the depression of the rest of
the psalm (St. Cuthbert's ' fit funeral dirge ') were in character
with his generally prosperous reign. Let us, therefore, try
some earlier part of the story of the Maccabees ; and why not
that which has already furnished us with a very possible occa
sion for the partly parallel 44th psalm ? The expressions
in Ps. Ix. 3-6 are certainly not too strong for the 'great afflic
tion in Israel' on the death of Judas, 'the like whereof,'
according to the Hebrew history, 'had not been since a
prophet had not appeared among them' (1 Mace ix. 27).
The crushing defeat at Eleasa, and the grievous famine which
followed, might well be likened in poetic language to an
earthquake. The reverse of fortune was complete ; for the
moment the religious patriots were stupefied (cf. Ps. Ix. $b),
and one of them, I suppose, sadly recalled the words of a
somewhat earlier psalm r (now lost), and contrasted the pro
mises given to Judas, perhaps in a vision (cf. 2 Mace xv. 12-
16), with the strange blight which had now fallen upon their
prospects. ' Who will now be our leader ? ' said he. ' Under
whose generalship will Israel recover the territory wrested
1 Paradiso, xviii. 37-42.

ill- MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III.

97

from it by its mortal foes, the Edomites ? ' It is a psalm, as
you see, of the interregnum. The experiences of the long-
past time of the Judges are being repeated. There is no
leader, and no plan of campaign : the very existence of
Jehovah's ' beloved ones ' (D'TT) is imperilled (Ps. Ix. 7).
A Saul is wanted z to unite the divided parties into a nation
conscious of its unity, and fight the battles of Jehovah with
more abiding results.
Ps. Ixxx. I make no attempt to claim as Maccabaean.
The ' Interpreter ' of the Syrian Church is, I am aware,
against me, and the too ingenious Hitzig among the moderns.
Ewald too (whom Dillmann evidently follows), though he
does not make this psalm Maccabaean, regards it as contem
porary with the 79th.1 But the latter, when he eulogizes
the mildness of its tone and the refinement of its art, virtually
disproves his own critical decision. Very different is the case
of Ps. lxxxiii., the tone of which precludes any but a post-
Exile, or, let me say at once, a Maccabaean origin.aa The
author is a student of Scripture,2 and loves best those early
narratives which have a special affinity to Maccabaean circum
stances. Like another psalmist (lxxiv. 9), he is fully aware
that extermination is the real aim of the enemies of the Jews,
and in response to the ' roaring ' of the heathen [v. 3) he
sends a passionate cry for vengeance towards heaven.
When was the psalm written ? When did these ten
peoples ' conspire against Jehovah's hidden ones ' bb [v. 4) ?
Well, it seems uncritical to reject the light which falls upon
the psalm from the fifth chapter of the First Book of Mac
cabees. Six of the ten names mentioned by the psalmist
occur in this striking narrative. Of the remaining four Gebal
is the Gobolitis of Josephus [Ant. ii. 1, 2), the Gebalene of
Jerome [ad Obad. i.) ; 00 the name was applied illegitimately
to a port of the south country of Judah appropriated by the
Edomites. The mention of Amalek is half-Haggadic, half-
antiquarian, and is parallel to the representation of Haman
as a descendant of Agag in the Book of Esther (iii. i).dd The
Hagarenes [viol "Ayap, Baruch iii. 23) are mentioned in
I Chron. as dwelling in Gilead, but in the cuneiform inscrip-
1 Cf. Ewald, History, v. 98.
' Cf. Ewald's remark on the-phrase 'sons of Lot,' History, i. 312 (note2). H

98 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect.
tions and in Strabo side by side with the Nabatseans. The
name ' Assyria ' may as well be given to the Syrian as to the
Persian empire,66 and Hitzig reminds us that on three several
occasions (i Mace iii. 41, vii. 39, xi. 60), the Swa/us %vpias
(i.e., the Syrian troops in garrison) plays a subordinate part
in the Maccabaean story. Thus the psalm carries us to the
year after the re-dedication of the sanctuary, when the nations
round about, in their displeasure, ' resolved to destroy the race
of Jacob that was among them ' (1 Mace v. 1, 2), but were
chastised by Judas in several most remarkable campaigns in
B.C. 165 and 164. 'All nations have come about me,' said
another psalmist on such an occasion ; ' in Jehovah's name
will I mow them down ' (Ps. cxviii. 10).
Let those blame such language who can. The historical
student is not less thrilled by it than by that ' awful sight '
which furnishes Ps. lxxxiii. with one of its finest images, 'a
spreading forest fire preceded by its wild wind.' There is
nothing artificial here as in the 109th psalm. It is all as real
as the terrible judgment which Judas executed again and
again on those who would have extirpated his people. ' Piety
lives in him in whom pity is dead ' — these words of Dante '
might have been adopted by the khasidim in this their agony.
Could it, think you, have been otherwise ? The khasidim
were not men of war by nature. 'Anavim, 'humble-minded
ones,' ff was the term most descriptive of their character. It
was from heaven that the ' holy sword ' came which was to
' wound the adversaries ' (2 Mace xv. 16). The 149th
psalm shows us, indeed, how congenial this work became to
those who would once have started back from it with horror ;
but could we expect the anger of such early saints to be
coupled like Christ's with grief at hardness of heart (Mark
iii. 5) ? Our psalmist, at any rate, has had a glimpse, as I
have shown, of a better missionary method. Read vv. 17
and 19 together, and you will agree that even the most
vehement expressions of Jewish patriotism are not without
some permanent religious elements.
But have we exhausted the number of Maccabaean psalms
in these books ? Granting that Pss. xliv., Ix., lxxiv., lxxix.,
1 Inferno, xx. 28.

III. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III.

99

and lxxxiii. are rightly so called, are there no others which
may reasonably be joined with them ? Do not the last three
of these look like the beginning, the middle, and the con
cluding psalm of a group ? We must not be too ready to
trust appearances. For on closer examination we shall find
that Pss. lxxvii.-lxxxi.ss have been placed together on the
ground of certain similarities of expression, and since Ps. Ixxx.
is not Maccabaean we have no right to presume that Pss.
lxxvii., Ixxviii., and Ixxxi. are. Nor is there any striking
parallelism between these and the three undoubtedly Mac
cabaean psalms. The same remark is true of Ps. lxxxii., and,
in spite of Hitzig, I think we may add Pss. Ixxv. and Ixxvi.
Pss. lxi. and ]xiii.,hh however, may well be Maccabaean.
Pre-Jeremian such highly spiritual hymns obviously cannot
be, and it is only the references to a king which induced
Kuenen in 1865 to refer them reluctantly to the reign of one
of the last Davidic kings. But we cannot separate them from
kindred psalms. It would be not unplausible to make them
contemporaneous with Ps. xiii.,11 the king being Antiochus the
Great ; Ps. lxi. 6-g will then express the gratitude of the
psalmist upon his return to Jerusalem from a brief captivity.
But it is more natural, especially considering the language of
Ps. lxiii. 12, to suppose the king to be Jonathan, or (better)
Simon, and then these two psalms will form a natural triad
with Ps. Ix. There were occasions enough on which faithful
Jews at a distance from the sanctuary might entertain the
feelings so sweetly expressed in these psalms.1 The ' liars '
are perhaps those calumnious, false-hearted Jews, whom
Simon, as described in ci. 7, resolved to put down. - 1 know,
of course, the objection that will rise in many minds. Mr.
Stanton has already expressed it in discussing a passage in
the Sibylline Oracles (see p. 38). ' How should any of these
(Jonathan or Simon or John Hyrcanus) be even called a
king ? ' 2 I will reply to this when we come to Pss. xx. and
xxi., between which and Pss. lxi. and lxiii. there is some
degree of parallelism.-" Suffice it to remind you here of the
significant use of the name Melchizedek in Ps. ex. 4.

*&'

1 See my study on Ps. lxiii., Expositor, April 189
2 The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, p. 115.

ioo MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect,,
But here let us pause a moment. Our object has been
attained. The extent of the latest editorial additions to the
Second and Third Books has been approximately made out.
There are seven psalms which present clear traces of a Mac
cabaean origin. The Maccabaean editor (whether he lived in
the time of Judas or of Simon need not here be determined)
threw himself into the spirit of the original collector, and
made his additions Elohistic to correspond to the earlier
psalms of the Korahite, the Asaphite, and the second Davidic
collections. He was no doubt guilty of an anachronism, not
indeed in his substitution of ' Elohim ' for ' Yahveh,' which
must still have commended itself to a certain class of religious
minds, but at any rate in his adoption of the headings ' of the
sons of Korah,' ' of Asaph,' ' of David.' The heading I'ddvid
is of course not a worse anachronism in the case of the 6oth
than of any other psalm ; but the other two headings do
appear to need a special excuse, because the division of
singers which they imply had already been modified in the
time of the Chronicler,kk and had passed away when the Fourth
and Fifth Books were collected. Do they indicate a wish of
the Maccabaean editor to infuse a leaven of contemporary
thought and feeling into hymnals which otherwise might not
have been sufficiently valued ? Yes ; but we can say more
than this. It can be rendered probable that among the
psalms described as Korahite there are some which are of
the Greek period, though pre-Maccabaean. Consequently the
heads of the Hemanite guild which had taken the place of
the Korahite had already set the example of adding psalms
to the Korahite collection which did not really belong to
the Korahite period (see note 6).

Note a, p. 89.
One may remark that though neither in Books IV. and V. nor in
the earlier books can we venture to find Exilic psalms, we have not
only fragments of spiritual song in the Second Isaiah, but a collection
of lamentations on the sad estate of Israel, both belonging to the
Exile. On the date of the latter I have spoken at length in the
Pulpit Commentary*; cf. Jeremiah, his Life and Times, pp. 177-181.

iii. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III.

Note b, p. 90.
No one will care to defend ' O God, my God ' in xliii. 5, and
similar impossible readings in xiv. 8, lxiii. 2, lxvii. 7, lxviii. 9, nor
the equally impossible 'Elohim Cebaoth ' in Ixxx. 8, 15 (cf. lix. 6,
Ixxx. 5, 20, lxxxiv. 9). Note °, p. 90.
In Ps. liii. ' Yahveh ' is throughout changed into ' Elohim ; ' in
Ps. lxx. the same change is made three times (for in Ps. xl. 18 we
should certainly with Ewald read nin1), but, as a compensation, in
v. 6 mrv is substituted for t6k.

Note d, p. 90.
Dean Plumptre thinks that the Korahite psalms were all com
posed in the reign of Hezekiah [Biblical Studies, p. 147 &c). But
how improbable that psalms with so many dissimilarities should be
contemporaneous ! The truth is that Hezekiah's age presents the
first distinct germs of the religion of the post-Exile period, to one or
another part of which all these Church-songs must belong.
Note e, p. 90.
The title ' of the sons of Korah ' must originally have stood at
the head of the collection, and only by a later editor have been
prefixed to each psalm. And who were the ' sons of Korah ' ? That
the phrase may mean descendants of an ancient Levite named
Korah is admitted. But it is indubitable that it may also mean
members of a society or guild (like D^X 'J3, Ps. xxix. 1, and the
parallels cited in my Psalms, p. 379). To adopt the former view on
the unsupported authority of the Chronicler, a saintly man but a
prejudiced historian, seems to me uncritical. Why ' Asaph ' is used
as a title for the guild of Asaphites, instead of ' sons of Asaph,' I do
not know. The two expressions may be synonymous, as ' Aaron '=
'the house of Aaron' (1 Chron. xii. 27 &c). Or possibly the
collector of the Asaphite songs meant to assign them to the ideal
founder of the Asaphite guild, just as another collector ascribed the
early Davidic songs to the traditional founder of psalmody. The
same explanation may be given of the expression 'of Ethan the
Ezrahite' (Ps. Ixxxix. 1), where 'Ethan' (as we shall see) is equiva
lent to the ' Jeduthun ' of Pss. xxxix., Ixii., lxxvii. Ethan is, in
fact, the ideal founder of a guild of Ethanites which takes rank in
the Chronicler's time beside Heirian (the substitute for Korah, see

102 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect.
title of Ps. lxxxviii.) and Asaph. Observe that the Chronicler under
stood i Kings v. n (iv. 31 Auth. V.) to mean that both Ethan and
Heman were sons of Mahol, whereas the tradition in Kings states
that Ethan was ' an Ezrahite ' (or Zarhite). Doubtless he followed a
tradition of modern origin, which was guided in its choice of the
two new names of singers by the mention of Heman (as was thought)
and Ethan as 'sons of Mahol' i.e. of the dance, see Ps. xxx. 12,
and elsewhere). Note f, p. 91.
Lagarde's attempt to bring Ps. xliv. into the age of Hezekiah is
desperate. He takes the ' reproacher and reviler ' of v. 1 7 to be
the Rab-shakeh, and thinks that in B.C. 701 Judah could justly boast
of its fidelity to Jehovah [Mittheilungen, ii. 376, 377). So too Dean
Plumptre [Biblical Studies, p. 194).
Note «, p. 91.
See Dichter des A. B. (1835), ii. 353 &c. ; cf. History, v. 120,
note. His later view was that Pss. xliv., lxxiv., lxxix., Ixxx., cxxxii.,
and Ixxxix., Ix., and lxxxv., belong to the end of the sixth or the
early part of the fifth century. Professor Robertson Smith inclines
to Ewald's first view [Enc. Britann. xx. 31), which De Jong too
peremptorily rejects [Disquisitio de psalmis Maccabaicis, p. 10). I
have hesitated myself, on the ground that, just as history has almost
failed to record the destruction of Jerusalem's walls in Ezra's time, so
it may possibly have lost the memory of a burning of the temple at a
later period. It is also possible that the Jews may have furnished a
contingent to the army of the Syrian revolters in the time of Artaxerxes
Ochus, and that this is referred to in Ps. xliv. 10 (cf. Ix. 12). But can
it be called probable ? Josephus has heard of the ' defilement ' of the
temple by Bagoses. He is not given to minimizing ; surely some
echo of a still greater blow to his religion would have reached him,
if the blow ever took place. And would a ' contingent ' have been
described by a poet as ' our armies ' ? Even if we refer Pss. xliv.,
lxxiv., lxxix. to this troublous time, we must at any rate assume that
literal accuracy has been departed from in Ps. lxxiv. 7 (see on that
psalm). Note h, p. 91.
The hatred which the Jews experienced had a religious ground
(lxix. 8, 10), but Israel knows that God can discern his hidden
'guiltinesses' [v. 6), on which cf. Lect. VII. Part II.

ill. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. 103'

Note ', p. 92.
Bar-Hebraeus, who represents Theodore's views, entitles Ps. xliv.
' a prayer of the Maccabees, when compelled by Antiochus to sacrifice
to idols' (Baethgen in Zeitschr. f. d. alttest. Wissenschaft, 1886, p.
273). Theodoret, who insinuates a suspicion that Theodore was
sometimes more anxious to have the Jews on his side than 'the
nurslings of the faith' [Prcefat. in Psalmos), and Chrysostom, who
cares more for simple exegesis than for criticism, both adopt the--
same view without any hesitation. Note \ p. 93.
I admit that the First Book of Maccabees is veracious, but not
that it is complete. It is not impossible that the occasion of Ps.
xliv. may be some earlier defeat than either of the above, which
occurred (as Theodore of Mopsuestia appears to have held) in the
lifetime of the great 'reviler' (see Ps. xliv. 17) Antiochus Epiphanes.
So Gratz argues, Gesch. der Juden, ii. (2), p. 446. Prof. J. P. Peters,
in his Scriptures Hebrew and Christian (ii. 410), heads this psalm
' Prayer of Judas Maccabaeus.' Note k, p. 93.
Delitzsch, however, candidly points out certain phrases in Ps.
lxxiv. which appear to him to suit the Chaldaean better than the
Maccabsean period— viz. ' everlasting ruins ' [v. 3a), and ' they set on
fire thy sanctuary ' [v. -ja). I feel with him, but is it not probable
that Ps. lxxiv. was partly remodelled after the great deliverance so as
to serve as a memorial of two great troubles ? We may compare the
combination of features from the Scythians and the Chaldeans in
certain prophecies of Jeremiah, and, as I venture to think, the refer
ence to the (Chaldaean) burning of the temple in Isa. lxiv. n, which
probably belongs (see note s, p. 130) to the period of Artaxerxes
Ochus. Let me add that the theory that Ps. lxxiv. was retouched
perhaps by the author himself is not a wilful one ; vv. 12-17 were
certainly not placed where they now stand by the deeply moved
writer of the rest of the psalm. Also that a Maccabaean date is
permitted (for Pss. xliv. and lxxiv.) by the translators of our Geneva
Bible, and virtually given to Ps. lxxiv. by Dean Jackson (17th cent.),
who appeals to 'best interpreters' [Works, viii. 62). Lastly, the
same view is taken both of Ps. lxxiv. and of Ps. lxxix. by Theodore,
and of Ps. lxxix. by Theodoret and Eusebius [Dem. Ev. x. 1). Theo-
doret's argument to Ps lxxix. I quote as characteristic of a class :

104 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect.
Avri6)(ov, tov iiriKXyjv 'Yjmcfaavovs, ttjv koto, tov Xaov ti2v Iovoawov
fiaviav 6 irpoifirp-iKos wpoOeo-iri^i Xoyos- T-qv Se f(pr]0-p.oXoyiav £is ev)(r)v
crxrjfjiaTit,ei, (us V7ro twv eicreB,wv tu>v io-opiivav Tr/viKavTa Trpoo-fepofievrjv •
oiSeiru) p.iv vcviktjkotoiv, eri Be TrepiKXvtpp.iviav rats o-vp,(popais.
Note m, p. 93.
See my note on this verse, and cf. De Jong, Disquisitio, pp.
21-23, 26-28. For the early use of the term o-vvaywyrj for a place
of prayer and instruction by Greek-writing Jews, cf. Jos., War, vii.
3, 3 ; Psalms of Sol. xvii. 18. Israel Sack [Die altjiid. Religion,
1889, pp. 277, 278) revives Gesenius's view that Ps. lxxiv. 8 (written
during the Exile) refers to the bamoth, which is only possible if the
psalm be pre-Josian. Note n, p. 93.
The quotation is introduced by the words Kara tov Xoyov ov
fypaij/e. Understand 6 ypai^as (i.e. Asaph). The Syriac inserts ' the
prophet,' which may imply that the psalmist spoke, according to the
translator, in the character of the Jews of the Maccabaean age. If
so, his impression doubtless was that this is a Maccabaean psalm,
though prejudice compelled him, as it constantly compelled Theo
dore, to throw the psalm back nominally to pre-Exile times. It has
been asked whether or no (following the Greek text) the historian
quotes the passage as a Scripture. Ehrt (p. 23) decides in the
affirmative, and infers that Ps. lxxix. is pre-Maccabaean. Of course,
the psalm had already been included in the temple-hymnbook ; but
what has this to do with its date? Taking Ps. lxxix. as Maccabaean,
it is interesting to notice that two of the ideas of that psalm are
brought together in the confession of Daniel (cf. Dan. ix. 16b with
Ps. lxxix. 4, Sb).
Note °, p. 93.
Kat e^e^eai/ alp,a d&poi' kvkXu tov ayido-fiaTos, Kai e/j.6Xvvav to
ayiacrp.a (1 Mace. i. 37). Note p, p. 94.
For other indications of a Maccabaean date, see my notes on
lxxiv. 9, 20. Note 9, p. 94.
See the lines quoted from Emma Lazarus (p. 18). A less
probable occasion is the moment before Judas joined battle with
Gorgias at Emmaus (1 Mace. iv. 6-1 1). 'Remember how our

III. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS. II. AND III. 105

fathers were delivered in the Red Sea,' says Judas (compare these
words with Ps. lxxiv. 14). 'And now let us cry unto heaven, if
peradventure it will have mercy upon us, and remember the cove
nant of our fathers' (cf. Ps. lxxiv. 20). Then, we are told, 'the
strangers [aXX6$vXoi) saw their coming, and went out of the camp
to battle.' Now read the last verse of Ps. lxxiv. May not this
abrupt close be a proof of the highest art, and indicate that the
psalm was meant as the war-song of the Jewish army, and found its
sequel in the onset and the ' confused noise ' of the melee and the
swiftly won victory ? Yes ; but the psalmist's tone of discourage
ment accords but ill with the general tone of the speech of Judas.
Note r, p. 94.
The Greek has Massepha (cf. Judges xx. 1, Sept.). In 1 Mace
v. 35 the Gileadite Mizpah is referred to as Maspha (cf. Josh. xiii.
26, Sept., ed. Lagarde). Note 9, p. 94.
Dr. Pusey [Daniel the Prophet, p. 442) denies this ; but see
Talm. Bab., Taanith, 28b, 29a. That an idol is meant by DDK' p-lpt?
(Dan. xii. n ; cf. xi. 31, ix. 27), is now certain. The phrase is
an intentional alteration of DDC bv2 Baal-samem (i.e. Zeus). The
first Phoenician inscription of Umm el-'awamid (b.c. 132) begins
DDCPsni' pN?, i.e. to Zeus ; the Phoenicians were more complaisant
than the Jews to the patron-god of the Seleucidae. According to the
Syriac version of 2 Mace. vi. 2 the temple at Jerusalem was called
by Antiochus's emissary ' the temple of heaven's lord.' See Nestle's
cogent exposition in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1884, p. 248; cf. G. Hof-
mann, Ueb. ein. Phon. Inschr., 1889, p. 29.
Note *, p. 94.
The solution of the problems of the Book of Daniel is probably
almost as complete as we can hope to see it made, both on the side
of language and on that of subject-matter, and those who most
dislike deviating from tradition will at the very least concede that in
its present form the book is of Maccabaean origin. I say 'in its
present form,' because there are some who think that narratives of
earlier origin were worked up with the visions. In my opinion, this
view has not yet been made plausible. I admit that the writer of
the narratives is not wholly dominated by the thought of making
Nebuchadrezzar a type of Antiochus (cf. p. 37); he carries with him
other more friendly ideas respecting non-Israelites. Still the wish for

ro6 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect.-
a type of the present persecution is foremost in his mind, and there is
an essential unity underlying the book, in spite of its inconsistencies
in detail. There is as yet no complete treatise on Daniel represent
ing the present state of the question, but it can hardly be long
delayed. My revered friend (for the last twenty years of his life)
Franz Delitzsch is in this, as in some other points, a mirror of his
time. In 1858 he published an article on Daniel in Herzog's Real-
encyclopddie, written from the point of view of Havernick. In the
second edition of that work, however, he printed another article
which differed materially from the first, inasmuch as it made that
least possible concession referred to above. This was in 1878. In
the same year I endeavoured to summarize the actual state of the
question for English readers in the art. ' Daniel ' in the Encyclopcedia
Britannica, but without entering (as it is now my privilege to do in
official teaching) into the relation of the results of Daniel-criticism
to apologetics. This lacuna does not exist in the article of Delitzsch.
His apologetics will not indeed satisfy all ; there must for a long
time be various solutions of apologetical problems. But his contri
bution is of importance for all who approach this subject from a
theological point of view. The critical solution, I may add, is
becoming almost every year more clear and definite. I will only
here notice Nestle's explanation of the phrase rendered fihkXvyp.a
iprj/xmo-eoi's (just referred to), and Cornill's researches on the ' seventy
weeks' (Konigsberg, 1889). The hint given above will, I hope,
assist the reader in realizing the object of the Book. Men com
plained of the disappearance of God's interpreters the prophets.
True, replied a ' fervently believing ' Israelite, they have disappeared.
But, God helping me, I will bring back one of them, viz. Daniel,
from Hades, and question him concerning the ways of Jehovah.
Some old seer must have prophesied of these days, for ' the Lord.
Jehovah doeth nothing but he revealeth his secret unto his servants
the prophets ' (Am. iii. 7). The present problem therefore was to
recover this seer's words, not without prayer and fasting. But why
Daniel's words ? Did this pious writer infer from the circumstance
that Daniel was only mentioned in Ezek. xiv. 14, xxviii. 3, that he
must have been a contemporary of Ezekiel's (whereas Ezekiel would
have placed him in long past primitive times), or was there really a
tradition that Daniel was one of the exiles in Babylon ? The former
view seems the more probable. There can hardly have been two
such widely different traditions about the age of Daniel. In either
case, ' Daniel ' is an enigmatical name. It occurs only once again,
viz. in 1 Chron. iii. 1 ; but the Mas. text there probably needs cor
rection (see the variants in the Sept. of 1 Chron. iii. 1 ; 2 Sam. iii. 3,
and Klostermann on 2 Sam. I.e.). It is barely possible that

in. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. 107
' Daniel ' may have been coined out of the Zend d&nu, ' wise ' or
1 wisdom ' (see, for this word, Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman, p.
29), an appropriate title for a revealer of the divine secrets like
Zoroaster (cf. Ezek. xxviii. 3). If the barecma (the bundle of
sacred twigs held by the Magian priests) found its way to Jerusalem
in Ezekiel's time (Ezek. viii. 17), may not this highly receptive
prophet have heard of Zoroaster in Babylonia ? ' Zarathustra ' itself
would have been extremely difficult to Hebraize. It is more than
probable that the Iranian sage was already glorified by legend, and
assigned to a too early age. Plutarch found it stated that ' Zoroaster
the Magian lived 5000 years before the Trojan war' [De Is. et Osir.,
c. 46). Hyde naively enough brought him into contact with Abra
ham ; Ezekiel may have placed him between Noah and Job.
Note u, p. 95.
It is possible (see above, on Ps. ex., p. 23) that the parallelistic
structure and the poetical phrases which here and there strike us in
1 Maccabees arise from lost Maccabaean psalms. The suggestion is
due to Reuss. Note t, p. 95.
The heading of Ps. Ix. may be explained like that of Ps. Iii. and
the companion-psalms. The Hebrew enables us to correct the text
of 2 Sam. viii. 12, 13 (see Klostermann on 2 Sam.).
Note w, p. 96.
Theodoret misses this parallelism, and explains Ps. Ix. of the
Captivity. Theodore is wiser. His views' are thus expressed in
the argument in Corderius's Catena (ii. 185): 'When the land was
being held by the aliens, whether the neighbouring nations or the
generals of Antiochus, I will drive away the enemies,' he says, ' and
recover the land from them, and give it back to you, dividing it out.'
The tendency of a fair though cautious criticism is well expressed in
these words of Nowack : ' If we think of the pre-Exile period for
our psalm, v. 8 limits us at any rate to the last century ; but I do
not see how we can find a place for the psalm in it. If we admit a
post- Exile date, there is most to be said for the time of the Maccabees ;
at least v. 12 will not, I think, suit an earlier period.' Delitzsch,
however, still maintains the Davidic authorship because of the
Hebrew heading. This he supposes to be derived from a history
of David's time which contained poetical illustrations such as this
psalm and Ps. xviii. I too hold the same theory of the heading.

108 MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect.
But it does not follow that David wrote the poem which the
historian communicated. The tone of Ps. Ix. and the phraseological
coincidences between it and decidedly late writings, render this most
improbable. The only question can be whether vv. 8-n (or the
main part of these verses) are an old Davidic fragment, as Ewald,
Renan, and (apparently) Klostermann believe. If they are, the
heading must originally have referred to them and not to the whole
of our present psalm. But the view of the psalm given above seems
to me easier. It will be observed that I base no argument on v. 6b,
which both A. V. and R. V. render, ' that it may be displayed because
of the truth' (i.e. in defence of the true religion), because, with most
critics, I think this version grammatically and exegetically improbable.
How Delitzsch can render v. 6b thus, and yet admit this psalm to be
Davidic, I cannot see. To me, this version would at once prove
Ps. Ix. to be post-Exilic Note x, p. 96.
Josh. x. 12, 13a ; comp. //. ii. 412-418, and see below on Ps.
xix. 1-7. Just so, in a popular song, the Syrian fellahin cry to the
sun to hasten his going down that they may rest ; and so Milton
supposes the sun to delay ('suspense in heav'n') to hear the angel
tell his (the sun's) generation [Paradise Lost, vii. 99 &c). The
second half of Josh. x. 13 is due to a misunderstanding of the prosaic
commentator. But surely the victory (ny-lB'.'1) of Joshua is scarcely
rendered more wonderful by an ' abnormal prolongation of daylight.'
Nor was the second victory of Beth-horon less important to revealed
religion. Note y, p. 96.
A psalm of David 'according to Ewald and Renan. But the
expressions of the oracle cannot without violence be applied to
the campaigns of the great king, as Ewald against his will acknow
ledges. It is not decisive against the above view that the first
person is employed in v. n as well as in vv. 8-10. Of course, the
psalmist would interpret vv. 8-10 as spoken for the community
of Israel. After the death of Judas, Israel assumed more fully those
hopes and fears which Judas had cherished in its name. Yet I have
no wish to quarrel with any one who can get on without my theory,
explaining vv. 8-10 on the analogy of xliv. 7, 8, 16, where 'I'
clearly = 'we.' Note z, p. 97.
The dirge in 1 Mace ix. 2 1 is just such as might have been sung
over Gideon or Jephthah.

ill. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lag

Note aa, p. 97.
(Other views of Ps. lxxxiii.) Delitzsch and Lagarde explain from
2 Chron. xx. 1, 2. Freudenthal points out that the Hellenistic
Jewish writer Eupolemos represents not only Suron (Huram) king of
Tyre, but the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, Ituraeans, Nabataeans,
and Nabdaeans, and the Assyrians and Phoenicians in Gilead, as
sending presents to Solomon, which he supposes to be based on Ps.
lxxxiii. [Alexander Polyhistor, p. 115). But a writer of this school
needed no point d'appui in a psalm. Freudenthal himself remarks
on the imaginative character of the history of Eupolemos. And Ps.
lxxxiii. says nothing of presents to a Jewish king.
Note bb, p. 97.
De Wette and Hupfeld take the catalogue of names to be a
poetic way of saying that all the enemies whom Israel has ever had
have risen up against him. This altogether blurs the historic out
lines, and is contrary to analogy. The psalm is a Gelegenheitsgedicht.
Ewald would rather find a reference to the attacks on the new
Jerusalem described in Neh. iv. and vi. But, as he admits (in his
2nd, not 3rd, edition), this was a comparatively ' small danger.' No
attempt was then made to extinguish the name of Israel. The
object of the enemy (with which many of the Jewish nobles sympa
thized) was simply to abate the seemingly excessive religious pre
tensions of the advocates of legal ' holiness.' And though ' Asshur '
[v. 9) may mean Persia, represented by the satrap (see Ezra vi. 22),
it is more natural (Babylon being out of the question) to take it as
equivalent to Syria. Note c0, p. 97.
Josephus reckons Marissa to Idumaea [Ant. xiii. 9, 1 ; 19, 4) ;
comp. 2 Mace. xii. 35. Marissa = Mareshah, 2 Chron. xi. 8.
Note dd, p. 97.
' Half-Haggadic ; ' comp. the ancient Midrash, Mechilta, 63a,
where Amalek is the type of the class of God's enemies. 'Half-
antiquarian ; ' note that Mordecai is represented as descended from
Kish, the father of the conqueror of the Amalekites (see on title of
Ps. vii.). In illustration of this, observe that the ' Second Targum '
on Esther traces the ancestry of Haman to Esau, and that of
Mordecai to Jacob, while the Targum of Jerusalem comments thus
on Num. xvii. 16 : 'The first king who will sit upon the throne of

no MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. lect.
the kingdom of the sons of Israel, Shaul the son of Kish, will set the
battle in array against the house of Amalek, and will slay them ;
and those of them that remain will Mardekai and Esther destroy.'
Note ee, p. 98.
See on Ps. lxxxiii. 9, and add a reference to Jer. xiii. 1 1, Ezek.
xxxii. 29 (both Sept.) ; Jos., Ant. xiii. 6, 7 ; Eupolemos, in Euseb.
Prmp. Ev. ix. 30 (roiis iv TaXaBiijvfj 'Aacrvpiov; Kai <J?otVi/cas). Hitzig's
interpretation of the Sept. headings of Pss. lxxvi. and Ixxx. (' Assyrian '
= 'Syrian') is plausible but not probable. Theodore and Rashi
both explain Ps. lxxvi. of Sennacherib's invasion (because of vv.
3, 4) ; Sept. will have done the same. Observe that in both psalms
Cod. Sin. omits the reference to the ' Assyrian.'
Note ff, p. 98.
In the post-Exile period, 'anavim and 'aniyyim became stand
ing designations of the true Israel, as opposed to the indifferent,
the selfish, the proud, and the paganizers. See my note on Ps.
ix. 13 (where also Dr. Gratz' s theory of the 'Anavitic Levites' is
referred to). Note re, p. 99.
It may be asked why Pss. lxxvii. and lxxxii. follow Pss. lxxvi.
and Ixxxi. respectively. The answer is that Pss. lxxvi. and lxxvii.
both refer to a theophany, and Pss. Ixxxi. and lxxxii. both introduce
God speaking as a Judge. Note hh, p. 99.
Ps. Ixii. will be treated in connexion with Pss. iv. and xxxix. ; all
three must belong to the same period, viz. the Persian. The
position of Ps. Ixii. in the Psalter was perhaps suggested by the
parallelism between Ixii. Zb, gb, and lxi. 4.
Note u, p. 99.
That Ps. xiii. has affinities with Pss. lxi., lxiii. is obvious. The
general idea of the fainting, longing heart of the believer is common
to all. De Wette's rendering ' from the end of the land ' in lxi. 3a
would suggest a parallelism with xiii. 7. It is safer to compare xiii.
9, xliii. 3, with lxi. Bb ; xiii. gb with lxiii. 7 ; and the use of J3 in lxi.
9, lxiii. 5. In lxi. 3, ' Lead me upon the rock ' reminds one of ' God

iii. MACCABAEAN PSALMS IN BOOKS II. AND III. m
my rock' in xiii. 10, as well as of the fine title of Jehovah in Ixxiii.
20, ' the rock of my heart.' The painful transition in v. 10 sug
gests the similar one in Ixxiii. 27. Notice also the affinity between
lxi. 1-9 and xxvii. 1-6 (a far finer lyric utterance).
Note JJ, p. 99,
Comp. especially lxi. 6-8 with xxi. 2, 3, 5, 7 ; lxi. 6b may be
corrected from xxi. 3b. A less satisfactory view is that of Giese-
brecht, who maintains that lxi. 7, 8, and rvQB>; 'stfjQO} in lxiii. 12 were
inserted in the time of the Asmonaean kings (in which case the
original psalms may belong to the time of Zerubbabel), unless both
psalms are altogether Maccabaean (in which case lxi. 6b, reading
JlEhjS!, may refer to the desire of Aristobulus ' to change the govern
ment into a kingdom,' Jos., Ant. xiii. 11, 1 ; but see below on
Ps. xx.). Stade's Zeitschr., 1881, p. 326.
Note m, p. 100.
By the beginning of the Greek period the two guilds of singers
had, as we have seen, developed into three ; for evidently in 1 Chron.
xxv., as elsewhere, the Chronicler antedates the temple arrangements
of his own day.

PART II.
PSALMS OF THE PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND OF
THE PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III.
In the history of psalm-composition the Maccabaean age
cannot be separated by any hard and fast line from that
which precedes it. We shall presently see that to the pre-
Maccabsean Greek age not only Korahite but Asaphite and
Davidic psalms most probably belong. Take for instance
Ps. lxviii.,a once called the most difficult in the Psalter, but
now, thanks to the exegesis of the last half-century, easier
than many which may appear far simpler — easier, that is,
to understand as a historical product, not easier to interpret
in all its peculiarities of phrase. I will not pause to develop
the argument from the names of God,b but will assert that
two periods, and two only, can now be defended for its com
position. It was written either towards the close of the
Exile, or during one of the dynastic wars between Egypt
and Syria, for the possession of Palestine ; either in the sixth
century (more precisely, a little before the defeat of Croesus
at Sardis, B.C. 549), or in the third (probably between 220 and
217, or between 203 and 198 B.C.). It is the work of a poet
who is not less learned than patriotic, and delights to refer to
the Restoration-prophecy, and to various popular as well as
cultured lyric poems of various dates.6 Its literary remi
niscences, however, whether allusive or in the way of
quotation, reveal no contemptible degree of art, and are
vivified with a true lyric sentiment. The psalm as a" whole
has a wonderful power and range, and is in this, as in other
respects, easier to understand in the Greek than at the dawn
of the Persian period."1 Time was needed for the Second., t
Isaiah to become a mine of learned suggestion. All the
other psalms which are dependent on the Restoration-pro

Hi. PRE-MACCABAEAN, ETC., PSALMS INBB. II. &* III

"3

phecy are subsequent to the Return ; why should this be an
exception ? Above all ; read vv. 20-28 consecutively, and
tell me if you think it reasonable to take vv. 20-24 and
25-28 as referring to different periods. Np ; if, as I have
said, the psalm divides at v. 20— if, 'strengthened in his
faith by the foregoing pictures of the past, the poet [now]
throws himself into the interests and prospects of the present '
—why sh.ould we burden him with a gratuitous inconsistency
in vv. 25-28, as if he all at once glanced backward at the
religious usages of the first temple ? Indeed, how can we do so,
considering that the four tribes mentioned are precisely those
which correspond to the two orthodox post-Exile provinces,
Judaea and Galilee? Pre-Exilic the poem cannot be ; and,
I may add, Maccabaean it cannot be.e Not yet has Israel been
faithful unto death for his religion ; not yet has he been
driven to take up arms in self-defence ; his modest part as
yet is to recall God's ancient wonders, and to intone the chant
of waiting faith,—
Lord, in our cause make sure and strong
Thy word and gracious will,
Thou Watcher of Jerusalem,
From Thy most holy hill.— [vv. 286, 29a, Keble.)
But when Keble introduces into the closing verse the words,
'Tis Israel's God who gives
Might to His own, and deeds of war, —
he plainly violates the spirit of his author. The divine gift
which Israel implores — what is it ? Not the ability to ' bind
their kings in chains, and their nobles with links of iron,' for
the psalmist himself will presently utter the prayer,
Rebuke him that bemires himself for gain of money,
Scatter the peoples that delight in wars. — [v. 31.)
Not ' deeds of war,' exploits Davidic or Maccabaean, but that
bulwark of inviolable peace which Jehovah unaided can pro
duce for His waiting people.
In spite of its literary indebtedness, there is no greater ode \
in Hebrew literature than the 68th psalm. Now, can we believe \
that it stands alone in the period to which we have referred
it ? The psalm which I have been led to couple with it is the

H4 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
42nd, of which the 43rd is the conclusion, tastelessly sepa
rated by the latest editor from the body of the poem.f Not
because both psalms (the 68th and the 42nd) express a
passionate love of the temple ; psalms not belonging to the
Greek period have this characteristic, and the language of the
42nd psalm has a deeper spirituality than that of the 68th.
But for two reasons — (1) that only in the Greek period can I
find circumstances like those presupposed by the 42nd psalm ;
and (2) that according to a probable view of v. 7,8 there is a
striking allusion in Ps. xiii. to Ps. lxviii. That the 42nd
psalm is post-Exile, must be clear to all who are accustomed
as critics to range freely over the Old Testament, and to be
ever giving more definiteness of outline to their picture of
Israel's history. I need not therefore discuss the theory of
Ewald that Ps. xiii. is the melodious farewell of the royal exile
Jehoiachin, as in 597 B.C. he was being carried away beyond
the ridge of Hermon.h The writer is no king but a temple-
musician (cf. xiii. 5, 9), and the problem before us is to find
out a captivity either of the nation or of a part of the nation
in the post-Exile period of Jewish history, the scene of which
was the north-east of Palestine, on the border of Syria. Now
the particular moment which (following Hitzig in all but his
dogmatism) I am about to select, may or may not be right,
but it is difficult to resist the impression that this captivity
is subsequent to the division of Alexander's empire, by which
Syria fell to the Seleucidae and Egypt to the Ptolemies.1 Is
there a time when Jerusalem was taken, and its inhabitants
ill-treated by a foreign foe ? Certainly ; but neither of the
two occupations of the Holy City by Ptolemy Lagi is the
occasion of which we are in search.
It was not until B.C. 199-198 that an event took place,
the sequel of which will account for the 42nd psalm (see
Jos., Ant. xii. 3, 3). The enemy this time was the yEtolian
mercenary Scopas, who, in the enforced absence of Antiochus
the Great, sought to reattach Syria to Egypt, and among
other cities captured those of Judaea. The Book of Daniel
seems to refer to this, when it states that a party of ' young
high-minded ' Jews, who had risen against the ' king of the
south,' should meet with a fall (Dan. xi. 14). Probably this
means that Scopas punished the Seleucid party severely, after

m. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 115
which is it not fair to presume that he carried away some
Jewish captives ? It was in the winter-time, as Josephus tells
us, and it was to the northern highlands that the conqueror
bent his way. But Antiochus, returning from Asia Minor, \
was at hand. Not long afterwards, amidst the scenes so
vividly described in the 42nd psalm, the two warriors met ' at
the sources of the Jordan.' It must have been at Banias,
from the hill above which so glorious, but to a captive, so
melancholy, a prospect is visible. The ^Etolian was defeated,
and nearly all his army destroyed. Thus the Jewish captives !
were delivered ; they returned of course with Antiochus to
Jerusalem, where the supreme council^ to make up for its
recent compulsory defection, gave a splendid reception to the
Syrian king. Do we not now understand the complaints of the
psalmist better ? He does but hint at the severity of the rain
storms of the Hermon district in winter (xiii. 8). It is from the
' oppression ' of the ' loveless nation ' (the unscrupulous Egyp
tian mercenaries), and bitter heathen railleries, that he prays
so earnestly to be delivered, and swiftly and surely was the
prayer answered. The bringing back of Jewish captives was
one of Antiochus's chief cares,k though of course the captive
psalmist looks behind 'second causes,' and trusts, not in
princes, but in his faithful God. We need not, however,
suppose that this beautiful poem is a literal transcript of the
thoughts of the captive at Banias. It is more probable,
comparing the phenomena of Ps. lxxvii., that it received its
present form after the psalmist's happy return to Jerusalem.
And what of the allusion to Ps. lxviii. ? I have not for
gotten it. Ps. xiii. 7 is variously explained, but unless we too
boldly omit the two last words "WVP "TO altogether, there
must, I think, be a contrast between the lofty Hermon-
summits (' the Hermonim ') and ' the mount of insignificance '
(cf. Gen. xix. 20, where Zoar is "rose, and therefore not
worth destroying) ; hence Jerome's rendering ' de monte
minimo' is a good one. This consideration is not affected
by the reported discovery of a high mountain in West
Jordan-land, called Mic'ar ; is not this name merely /car'
avTicppao-iv, according to an usage more Arabic than
Hebrew ? At any rate in this context a poet would hardly
single out a mountain with this particular name. Now, if

n6 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
such a contrast is intended, it is difficult not to suspect an
allusion to Ps. lxviii. 15, 16. In other words, "H7X0 "in is pro
bably Mount Zion, and o (as Hitzig suggests) was prefixed
in error, owing to the closing letter of the previous word (on
the analogy of Jer. xxix. 8).m The verse thus obtains a rich
meaning, which will be of service to us later on (see
Lecture VII.).
Such is the historical setting in which I would fain place
this gem of sacred song. It is pleasant and not contrary to
analogy to suppose that, though corruption had infected the
degenerate descendants of the righteous Simon, the less
exalted temple-ministrants still cultivated the sweet ancestral
piety. What they felt most in that unhappy time when the
Jews, as Josephus says, ' were very like to a ship in a storm
which is tossed by the waves on both sides ' [Ant. xii. 3, 3),
was the enforced removal of some of them to a distance from
the temple, a lot which they of course shared with others of
their nation. It is in the name of their brethren, as well as in
their own, that these unselfish minstrels frame their heart-felt
songs. I pause for a moment to remark that there is nothing in
these results at which we need be surprised. They are in a
very true sense conservative ; that is, they prove the con
tinuity of the succession of ' spiritual men ' (Hos. ix. 7) and
of highly gifted religious poets in ancient Israel. By their
help we can distinguish far more clearly than of old that
chime of rolling rivers
Through the forest of the psalms,
of which a poet-preacher dear to many in Oxford has told us.1
We must not, however, assume that all the psalms in Books II.
and III. are of the Greek period ; we may confidently expect
that earlier periods will be also represented in the collection.
In the remainder of our survey of Books II. and III. we will
keep in view the possibility that there are yet more psalms of
the Greek period, but will aim chiefly at discovering the lyric
utterances of the preceding age. Certainly the 89th psalm
must, if my own exegesis be correct, belong to the Persian
age, when there was no native ruler of the Davidic line.
1 Bishop Alexander of Deny.

ill. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 117
However much the concluding verses may sound like the
personal complaint of a Davidic king (see especially v. 48),
the 19th verse, as Tholuck remarks, proves that the psalm
had not a regal author even in poetic fiction. Nor is the
psalmist really desirous (like the author of the companiort-
psalm, the 132nd) to bind Jehovah to the letter of his
promises to David in 2 Sam. vii. ; n it is the fate of Israel in
which (like Ben Sira in his encomium," where, as I think, he
twice alludes to our psalm) he is absorbed — of Israel who,
as prophets and psalmists agree, has become the heir of ' the
sure mercies of David.' p How the old promises are to be
fulfilled, and through whom as His organ Jehovah will in
future govern His people, does not cause this poet a moment's
anxiety. He has not even an idealistic regard for royalty ;
he is one of the Soferim (students of Scripture), or, if his
partiality for the word khtfsed, ' love ' or ' lovingkindness,'
justifies this specializing use of the term,q of the khasidim—
those who responded to God's covenant-love of Israel by
obeying His commands at all cost and believing the promises
of His torah. Like the author of the 86th psalm, he could
truthfully have said, ' Preserve thou my soul, for (although
neither great nor strong) I am duteous in love' [khdsid,
lxxxvi. 2).
Still it is not, I think, surprising that Eichhorn, the father
of recent criticism, should have been tempted to ascribe
Ps. Ixxxix. to Hezekiah.1 For who more fitly than this king,
especially as he is described in 2 Chron.,2 could claim the
epithet khdsid? or on whose lips would the complaints in
vv. 46 and 48 be more natural than on those of him who
became ' sick unto death ' in the midst of an Assyrian in
vasion ? Yes ; if Hezekiah really composed that sweet and
plaintive 'writing' which bears his name, it is plausible to
conjecture that he also wrote the 88th,r and was in the mind
of the writer of the 89th psalm [v. 46a). But if, as for the
last ten years I have maintained, the so-called Song of
Hezekiah is a post-Exile work, it will be clear that those who
share Eichhorn's impression respecting Ps. Ixxxix., ought
• Einleitungin das alte Test., v. 24 (ed. 4, 1824). Manasseh, Josiah, and
Jehoiachin have also been thought to be referred to.
2 Note the phrasing of 2 Chron. xxxii. 32.

n8 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect..
logically to become converts to the critical theory expounded
in this lecture. The subject of this ' strange psalm ' (as Dr.
Gratz calls the 89th), and not less so of Ps. lxxxviii., as well
as of the song in Isa. xxxviii., is no longer Hezekiah, nor any
other individual sufferer, but the post-Exile Jewish Church ;
and the period to which Ps. Ixxxix. at any rate is best
assigned, is that of the terrible calamities which befell
Judaea under the second and third Artaxerxes, and which
very possibly called forth that wonderful psalm-like medi-.
tation, so parallel in some respects to Ps. Ixxxix., Isa. lxiii. 7-
lxiv.s In fact, no psalm, perhaps, contains such abundant evi
dence of its date as the 89th, and even those passages which
may seem like ' purple patches ' are eloquent of contemporary
thought and feeling. We cannot say as much of Ps. lxxxviii.,
which is eloquent enough, no doubt, in its own sad way (cf.
Ps. vi.), but of which historical criticism cannot venture to fix
the date too precisely. The reference to v. 4 in Ecclus. li. 6
shows, however, that it was written before the appendix to
Ecclesiasticus. Doubtless it describes some gloomy portion
of the pre-Maccabaean post-Exile period. This is confirmed
by its resemblances to other psalms of lamentation, and by
its author's predilection for the most melancholy portion of
the Book of Job, the hero of which he evidently regards as a
symbol of the Jewish people. May we not say that even the
limitations of this ' spiritual man ' (Hos. ix. 7) have a pathetic
interest ? The darkness is ever deepest before the dawn.
Israel is on the eve (as we shall see in a subsequent lecture)
of the discovery — or revelation — of immortality.
The 87th psalm lifts us up again, just as at an earlier
point the 68th stirred and refreshed us after the 69th. Clearly
the editors of the Psalter appreciated the effect of strong
contrasts. How tantalizingly incomplete but how suggestive
this psalm is ! Its author is a temple-singer who, devoted as
he must be to his own class, looks forward with joy to the
enlargement of the sacred choir by the admission of foreigners.
This, however, is not the main subject of the psalm. The
idea which fills this holy minstrel with enthusiasm is the ex
pansion of the Church of Israel into the Church universal.
And though direct references to historical facts are wanting,

ill. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 119
the grand universalism of the psalm, and the choice of the
national types of worldly success, leave us in no doubt as to
its period.' The prophecies of both Isaiahs have had at least
an initial fulfilment. Worship has been fully centralized by
the rebuilding of the temple and the firm establishment of the
Levitical system, and an influx of proselytes has suggested
that great new metaphor, now so old, of the second birth of
conversion." Ps. Ixxxvii. transports us, as it would seem, into the early
Greek age. To the same period we may perhaps assign
Ps. lxxxvi., also (see v. 9) a missionary psalm. Very un
like, however, are the respective psalmists in literary talent ;
they belong to different circles and own different principles
of composition. Even the early collectors must have been
struck by this, for while Ps. Ixxxvii. is Korahite, Ps. lxxxvi.
bears the very unusual title — 'prayer of David ' (cf. Ps. xvii.).
Another such piece of mosaic work scarcely exists in the
earlier books : Ps. cxliii. is its only parallel in the Psalter.
Not that these two psalms breathe exactly the same spirit.
In lxxxvi. 2 the speaker pleads for preservation on the ground
of his piety, but in cxliii. 2 he deprecates judgment because
' before God no man living is righteous.' Is not this • differ
ence significant ? If the 143rd psalm is of the Persian period,
may not the 86th belong to the succeeding age, when the
anti- Hellenistic reaction so greatly intensified the self-con
sciousness of the khasidim or strict Jehovists ? Yes ; and we
can perhaps also prove that it does so ; for it contains un
deniable allusions to Pss. liv. and cxvi.T— both productions
of the Greek period.1 It belongs, I suppose, to a compara
tively peaceful portion of the early Maccabaean age, when
the khasidim had gladly exchanged the sword for the pen,
and the battlefield for the student's chamber.
In Ps. lxxxv. we meet with the khasidim again ; ' his
people' and 'his khasidim' are synonymous terms in v. 9.
There is, however, in the true text no reference to an idola
trous party, and the Hasidaean tendency certainly began
before the Greek period. Nor is there anything to suggest a
later period than the Persian for Ps. lxxxiv., for the ' anointed '
in v. IO is probably (note the context) the high priest. w
1 Cf. Jeremiah, his Life and Times, p. 105.

120 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
This beautiful lyric reminds us somewhat of Ps. xiii., but (with
all deference to Ewald) the historic background is altogether
different. A poem over which sweet peace so calmly broods
cannot be the complaint of an exile. The only pains which
the speaker knows are those inseparable from the pilgrim's
life ; they are now past, for he is on the point of appearing
before his God in Zion •* [v. 8). Neither he nor his nation
has anything to fear at present from the great heathen power ;
he casts but one side-glance at the ' tents of ungodliness '
(lxxxiv. ii). Would that we had this psalm in as complete
and original a form as the 42nd ! In the more connected
portion of it [vv. 2-8), several indispensable words have
fallen out of the text, while the concluding part has very
possibly been altered for liturgical purposes by the Elohistic
editor/ In spite of its title, the song may, I think, once have
belonged to the book of the Songs of Ascent.z
We next cross over into the Asaphite Psalter, pausing at
Ps. lxxxii., with which the 'Davidic' 58th psalm is closely
connected. The former is a fine poetic commentary on the
phrase ' who only hath immortality.' The ' Elohim ' and the
' sons of 'Elyon ' are the prince-angels of the nations, so that
the psalmist is a witness to that renascence of mythology
which characterizes some of the later books. The strange
threat in v. 7, like the parallel passage Isa. xxiv. 21-23, can
only be explained by the light of apocalyptic eschatology.
To the illustrative references given elsewhere, I may add the
Targum on Judg. v. 13, which makes one of the deliverers or
patron angels of Israel descend and break the power of the
gibborim of the nations. Who are these gibborim ? We can
answer by referring to Joel iii. (iv.) 11, where Jehovah's gib
borim are certainly the angels. So then the putting down of
injustice is imagined as a war between the angelic powers.
We know how prevalent this mode of thought was in the
Greek period (Dan. x. 13, 20, 21). But we need not bring
down Pss. lviii. and lxxxii. so late.aa The yearning for a
fuller theocracy and the belief in a coming war of Jehovah
are characteristic of Joel, of the close of Zechariah, of Isa.
xxiv.-xxvii., and of Isa. xxxiv.,bb all of which writings belong
to the Persian period, and some, perhaps, to those dark days
when even a wise man ' commended death rather than life '

ill. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 121
(Eccles. iv. 1-3). The psalmists are not of the spirit of Eccle
siastes. The closing verse of Ps. lxxxii. is parallel to that
of the next psalm, written probably later, which assures us that
now at length ' Jehovah, and he alone, is most high [Elyon ;
cf. Ps. lxxxii. 6) over all the earth' (Ps. lxxxiii. 19).
Let us turn next to Pss. lii.-lix., which stand between
an Exile or early post-Exile psalm and one of the Maccabaean
period.66 As we might expect, not a single psalm written
either before or even during the Exile has found its way
among them. We are assured of this (in spite of the heading
I'ddvid) by an examination of the phraseological allusions to
other psalms or Old Testament books.' To which period
shall we refer these psalms ? or have more periods than one
contributed to the group ? The latter question I at least
must answer in the negative, feeling bound to regard all
members of a group which have common characteristics as
belonging to the same period. In the present instance there
is a group within the group. Ps. liii. is but a more corrupt
form of Ps. xiv. (notice the incoherence of v. 6), which must
be considered later ; and Ps. lviii. requires, as we have seen,
to be coupled with Ps. lxxxii. There remain Pss. Iii., liv.,dd
lv.— Ivii., and lix., with which Pss. Ixii. and lxiv. should (see
my commentary) be connected, though now, for obvious
reasons,66 placed elsewhere. All these are animated by a
strong church-sentiment. The speaker is either a leading
Israelite, who has suffered indeed with his nation, but who
draws some of his details from personal experience ; or Israel
personified ; or perhaps we may say that he is sometimes
one and sometimes the other. He is oppressed by foes both
native and foreign, who, without actually drawing the sword,
wage deadly war against the true religion, and who (especially
the disloyal Israelites) watch for opportunities of manifesting
their hatred of those for whom the psalmist speaks. ' Swords
are in their lips ' (lix. 8 ; cf. lv. 22), and worldly power is in
their hands. Faithful Israel is pressed beyond endurance,
and bitter, vindictive words force themselves from his lips
(see especially lv. 16, lviii. 7-10, lix. 12).
One tyrant is specially mentioned (Iii. 3), whom we may
identify with the false friend in lv. 13-15. unless, indeed, we
feel compelled by an excessive regard for consistency to

122 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
convert not only ' thou tyrant,' but ' my companion and my
familiar friend,' into a collective term.ff Theoretically, this is,
of course, allowable ; but lovers of literature will probably
be unwilling in this and in similar instances ' to use the
licence. To appeal to the literary instinct may perchance be
stigmatized by some as uncritical. This need not disturb
us ; it is one of our objects to enjoy the psalms as works of
literature, and were they not sometimes enlivened by personal
references, their poetical charm would be very seriously im
paired. And yet we must not, in quest of biographical
touches, follow the "acute and original Hitzig (not to mention
an earlier writer, Dean Jackson) in ascribing a number of
psalms, and among them the 55th, to Jeremiah, simply
because his is the richest character, and the most fully
recorded life, of. the introductory period of the Jewish
Church. eg This would be only a less error than ascribing
the psalms in question to David, a theory which merely
rests upon an early misunderstanding. All that we can
safely admit is, I believe, this — that certain psalmists,
who had partly formed their ideals of life upon Jeremiah,
expressed the spirit of that noble prophet even more
strikingly than he had done himself.hh Not that they wrote
imaginary psalms of Jeremiah," just as a great prose-writer
imagined the last discourses of Moses,jj but periods came
when the life of Jeremiah was a true parable of the fortunes
of the Church. Now in which period can it have been seen
to be so to such an extent as to explain Ps. lv. ? It must
have been a period in which the ' love of many ' for the true
religion had 'waxed cold,' and when the faithful few were
deserted by their natural leaders, and opposed by a great
world-power. kk I do not say that this is an accurate descrip
tion of the circumstances of Jeremiah, but it was near enough
for those who studied that prophet for edification, and it
corresponds to the picture presented in these psalms.
Was the age of Nehemiah such a period as we are in
search of? Surely not. To mention only one objection:
there was no great coalition of the heathen world against
Israel in the times of Nehemiah. But to the psalmist or
1 Cf. Ps. xxxv. and Lam. iii., and see below (Lect. VI.).

III. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 123
psalmists the present calamities of Israel are great enough
to be the first stage in that uprising of the heathen world so
vividly described in Joel and in the Second Zechariah. This
is why Jehovah ' laughs ' at them (lix. 9 ; cf. ii. 4) and will send
'his army' (the angels) to overthrow them (lix. I2;cf. Joel
iii. 11). It is not the petty tribes of the neighbourhood who
are arrayed against the Jews, but one of the great powers of
the East. Is it Persia, or is it the Graeco-Syrian kingdom ?
Theodore of Mopsuestia,1 with an acuteness worthy of Hitzig, f
supports the latter view with regard to Pss. lv.-lix. (and lxii.).|
In Ps. lv, for instance, he makes David assume the character)
[irpoo-cdirov) of the pious high priest Onias III., who is filled)
with horror at the wickedness of the citizens, and, knowing!!
that there are designs upon his life, meditates flight. This*
view of the contents is based upon a tradition, found also in
two passages of Josephus,11 according to which Onias III. was
not murdered in the sacred grove at Daphnae (as 2 Mace iv.
34, 35 asserts ; cf. Dan. ix. 26), but fled into Egypt, and there
built the temple at Leontopolis. In other respects Theodore
agrees with the narrative in 2 Maccabees. The treacherous
friend in Ps. lv. 13-15 he takes to be that irpoo-raT^s tov
lepov, called Simon,"™1 who fell out with the high priest Onias,
and gave information to the court which led to the sacrilege
of Heliodorus (2 Mace iii. 4-7). In this last identification
Theodore certainly goes too far. The psalm is not spoken
in the name of a high priest, for the speaker calls his faithless
friend ' a man of his own rank ' [v. 13) ; nor is it any isolated
act of treachery which is referred to, but the hostility of a
party-leader."11 Nor can I anywhere else in this group of
psalms discover a clear reference to the Hellenistic movement
in Judah. The tyrant who glories in mischief (Hi. 1) is no
more the ungodly high priest Alcimus2 than Doeg the
Edomite ; he is only in practice, not in theory, an apostate.
The moral scenery of these psalms reminds us of that of
Pss. xciv. and cxxxix. as well as of Isa. lix.00 and the Book of
Ecclesiastes, none of which have been proved to be later than
the close of the Persian period. But here I must pause.
Some of the most interesting psalms of Books II. and III.
> See Baethgen in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1885, p. 88 ; 1886, p. 276 &c.
2 Cf. I Mace. vii. 9, and see above, p. 56.

124 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
still remain for another lecture. Suffice it to have shown that
thus far these books, like the fourth and fifth, are a collection
of precious church-historical records mainly of the Persian, but
to some extent also of the Greek period.pp Our conception of
the range of Bible-history and of the extent and methods of
inspiration has already, I trust, begun to widen. The opening
words of Heb. i. I [troXvp,ep&>s Kai iroXvTpoiras) should already
be acquiring a richer and a more satisfying significance.

Note a, p. 112.
Ps. lxviii. closes a small group of four psalms, all provided with
titles containing the words "totsp and "W. If even one of them is
post-Exile, the presumption is that all are. Nothing however indi
cates that they are absolutely contemporary. Why were they
grouped ? For some musical reason ? Because of a common uni-
versalistic element ? At any rate, Pss. Ixvii. and lxviii. are parallel
in their openings (comp. the one with Num. vi. 24, 25, and the other
with Num. x. 35). Note b, p. 112.
There is a tendency sometimes visible in writings which on other
grounds are post-Exile to accumulate names for God (cf. the epithet
TroXviavv/jioi given to Greek divinities, and see on Ps. L). Ps. lxviii.
and the Song in Exod. xv. are instances of this. Both poems have
ba, Dt6k, ni.T-, and "OIK. The psalm also has 'W [v. 15), which first
appears in authoritative religious literature at the close of the Exile
(see on Ps. xci.). PIJ occurs perhaps in v. 5 of the psalm, and cer
tainly in v. 19 ; also in Ex. xv. 2, xvii. 16 (the first of which may
be, and the second must be, pre-Exilic), and in Cant. viii. 6 (which
may be pre-Exilic) ¦ but also forty-two times in Biblical passages
which on various other grounds are all most probably (I speak within
bounds) either Exilic or post-Exilic. (Of these forty-two passages,
thirty-nine are in the Psalter ; the other three are Isa. xii. 2, xxvi. 4,
xxxviii. n.) I base no argument on the infrequency of miT in Ps.
lxviii. (only vv. 17, 21) as compared with «j-|K (six times), as such
phenomena may be due, or partly due, to the editor and the scribes.
Note °, p. 112.
Cf. v. 4 with Isa. xxxv. 10, li. 10, n ; v. 5 with Isa. xl. 3 ; v. 7
with Isa. xiii. 7, xlix. 9, lxi, 1 ; vv. 30-32 with Isa. xiv. 14 ; v. 21

in. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 125
with Isa. xxvi. 29 (idea). Among the lyric poems referred to are the
ancient song in Judg. v., Moses' marching prayer in Num. x. 35
(priestly code), the Song and Blessing of Moses (cf. my Jeremiah),
and the grand Exilic, or more probably post-Exilic, Ode in Hab. iii.
(Grill compares v. 8 with Hab. iii. 12, 13 ; v. 11 with Hab. iii. 14 ;
v. 12 with Hab. iii. 9 ; vv. 18, 20 with Hab. iii. 8 ; v. 21 with Hab.
iii. 13 ; v. 22 with Hab. iii. 13, 14 ; v. 25 with Hab. iii. 6, 7, 10 ; v.
29 with Hab. iii. 2 ; v. 34 with Hab. iii. 6. But the points of con
tact are not all equally clear.) Note d, p. 112.
Among other points favouring a very late date, note the develop
ment of the heavenly host into ' many myriads ' [v. 18). The best
defence of the earlier date will be found in J. Grill, Der achtund-
sechzigste Psalm (Tubingen, 1883) ; cf. Kautzsch's review, Theol.
Litztg., 1884, cols. 1 29-1 31. For a fuller development of my own
view (assuming the later date), see my Study in Expositor, Sept.
1890. Nowack's conclusion is similar; he is much impressed by
the phraseological coincidences between Ps. lxviii. and Isa. xl, &c.
(he would add, following Grill, Isa. xxiv.-xxvii.). J. W. Pont may
also be quoted on this side. His monograph (specially valuable for
its critical survey of the theories of previous commentators) is entitled,
Ps. lxviii., eine exegetisch-kritische Studie (Leiden, 1887). It is no
step in advance when two eminent Jewish scholars, Gratz and Halevy,
agree in dating our psalm at or near the close of the Jewish state.
The existence of the temple being presupposed, the psalms must, as
they strangely think, be pre-Exilic. The antithesis of the ' righteous '
and the ' wicked ' [vv. 3, 4) points to the recent introduction of the
Deuteronomic Law, which was not as effectual as its promoters
wished. So at least Gratz, who adds that the psalmist dreads
Pharaoh Neco. Halevy, however, denies this. The ' wild beast of
the reeds ' [v. 31) is Babylonia. To Egypt the psalmist is friendly,
he says, because an Egyptian army was Judah's one hope in Zede-
kiah's reign (Jer. xxxvii. 5). ty'2>, v. 22, is emended into -|WE>, and
the verse-groups are partly rearranged to produce a better whole.
Halevy is independent to a fault. It is not wise to disdain one's
predecessors. See Revue des itudes juives, xix. 1-16.
Note e, p. 113.
Some one has, however, explained the psalm of Judas's victory
at Bethhoron and the re-dedication of the temple (see Grimm on
1 Mace. iii. 24).

126 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
Note f, p. 114.
Ps. xliii. has no title in the Hebrew. Sept. calls it a psalm of
David, and Mr. Mozley takes this literally, offering various exegetical
arguments, e.g. (see v. 4) that the first person sing, is never used in
the direct ascription of thanks and praise in the Levitical psalms,
whereas ' David ' often uses it. David, he thinks, completed the work
of a Levite [David in the Psalms, pp. 38-42). But an untitled
psalm is abhorrent to Sept., and David was the typical psalmist.
Cod. Alex, adds words to the title ascribing Ps. xliii. to the sons of
Korah. Note «, p. 114.
This verse almost determines the date of the poem. It probably
refers to the mercenary troops of Egypt and Syria (cf. the story of
Heliodorus). See however Hupfe\d[Psalmen) and Land [Theologisch
Tijdschrift, 1872, pp. 564, 565), who limit the reference to Syria.
Note b, p. 114.
Dean Stanley is reminded of the ' last sigh of the Moor ' — the
name of the spot from which Boabdil bade farewell to his beautiful
Granada. Against Ewald, cf. my Jeremiah, his Life and Times, p.
163. I need simply chronicle the undoubting belief of Delitzsch
that our psalm is the work of a Korahite Levite in the train of
David, when he was in exile beyond Jordan (at Mahanaim in Gilead).
The ideas, he thinks, come from David's works, but are reproduced
with a freshness due entirely to the author. He refers for the
Davidic ideas to Pss. xxiii., xxvi., lv., lxiii. Theodore and Theo
doret both place the psalm in the Exile. Cornill, while of course
rejecting Ewald's theory that Jehoiachin himself is the author, still
thinks that this psalm (with lxxxiv. and lxxxv.) may have been com
posed by one of Jehoiachin's fellow-exiles (Luthardt's Zeitschrift,
1881, p. 337 &c). Halevy prefers to date the psalm at the very
close of the Exile [Revue des etudes juives, i. 27). To all these
theories a critical commentary will at once suggest numerous objec
tions, to which may be added the use made of Ps. xiii. in Jon. ii. 2-
9 (see note *), and (for those who follow my arguments) the paral
lelisms between our psalm and psalms of post-Exile origin (e.g.
comp. xiii. 2 with lxiii. 2 ; xiii. 9, xliii. 3, with Ivii. 4 ; xiii. 9, ' my
Rock,' with lxxvii. 7 ; xiii. 4 with Ixxx. 6, lxxix. 10, cxv. 2).
Note1, p. 114.
The only objection I see to this is the use made of Ps. xiii. in
the psalm of Jonah. But this psalm is not really more connected

ill. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 127
with the story of. Jonah than the psalm of Hannah is with that of
Hannah (see above, on Ps. cxiii.), and may have been inserted in
Jonah subsequently to B.C. 198. It is a composite work, in the
style of Ps. cxiii., like which (see Jon. ii. 2, A.V. 1) it probably
once bore the heading n^Bfl 'a prayer,' and describes how afflicted
Israel wrestled with its despondency. Its familiar symbols were
transparent to the editor, who placed it where it now stands, and
who knew that the Jonah of the Book was, like Job, a tyo or simi
litude for the people of Israel (cf. Jer. li. 34). I have assigned the
psalm of Hannah to the early post-Exile period. The psalm of
Jonah, a greatly inferior work, was not improbably written about the
same time as the njsn in the appendix to Ecclesiasticus (li. 1-12).
In fact, the two last-mentioned lyrics are as much a pair as Pss. xxvi.
and xxviii., and the latter alludes to (cf. Ecclus. li. 5, 'belly of hell,'
with Jon. ii. 3) and throws light upon the former. Israel's sore
peril arose from ' an accusation to the king by an untruthful tongue '
(Ecclus. li. 6), i.e. a charge of meditated rebellion. Now can we
doubt that Onias II. 's non-payment of taxes to Ptolemy Euergetes,
shortly after that king became lord of Judaea, had a political cause
(Jos., Ant. xii. 4, 1 as explained by Herzfeld and Edersheim) ? The
threat of colonizing Judaea with Egyptian soldiers was surely quite
dangerous enough to occasion both these Hebrew lyrics. See
further, Smend, Stade's Zt, 1888, p. 145 ; my views however owe but
little to his article. The purpose and date of the Book of Jonah are
treated of in my two articles, Theological Review, 1877, p. 211 &c,
Encyclop. Britannica, and in Dr. Wright's Biblical Essays, and the
text-criticism in Bohme's article, Stade's Zt., 1887, p. 224 &c.
Renan's view [Histoire, torn, ii., and Journal des Savans, Dec. 1888)
that the book is a ' pamphlet against prophetism ' is a caricature
of the truth. You might as well say that it, like Isa. lviii., is a pam
phlet against the legal fasting. Note J, p. 115.
This council preceded and was distinct from the Sanhedrin. It
is mentioned in this connexion in a letter of Antiochus III. for the
first time (see note k), and is probably the DHinTi lin attested by
the early Maccabaean coins. Josephus traces the supreme council
under the high priest to the return from Babylon [Ant. xi. 4, 8).
Probably, however, it was adopted from the Hellenic aristocracies,
as it corresponds to the increased power of the high priest in the
Greek period.

128- PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND LECT.
Note k, p. 115.
Antiochus, in his letter to Ptolemy, speaks of the general poverty
and depopulation of Jerusalem at this time, and expresses his resolve
to remedy the former by the remission of taxes and liberal gifts to
the temple, and to bring back those who have been scattered abroad
(Jos., Ant. xii. 3, 3). Note m, p. 116.
Thus Ps. cxxxvii. 5 becomes partly parallel. The objection to
Hitzig's view is that in v. 8 the psalmist addresses God (not Zion).
But this is hardly as important as I once thought. From the temple
the transition is easy to the temple's God. And observe that in v. 5
the psalmist ' remembers ' or ' thinks upon ' the joyous processions to
the temple. The connecting link is suggested by Ps. xliii. 3, ' Send
forth thy light,' &c At any rate, the text must be wrong, and Hitzig
may be right. Note n, p. 11 7.
Written in the time of Hezekiah or (much more probably) Josiah
{see Jeremiah, his Life and Times, p. 88). As Wellhausen remarks
its comparatively late date is as obvious as that of 1 Sam. ii. 27-36,
to which it is parallel (Bleek's Einleitung, ed. 4, p. 223). This result
has satisfied such a sober critic as C. H. Cornill (' Die Quellen der
BB. Samuelis,' in Konigsberger Studien, Bd. i.). I do not of course
deny that this idea of the perpetuity of David's royal house is
older than the time of Josiah (see Am. ix. 11, Hos. iii. 5, Isa. ix. 7,
xi. 1). But the psalmist undoubtedly refers to the later expression of
this idea. Note °, p. 11 7.
There is only a vague Messianic hope in Ecclus. xliv.-l. (see Job
and Solomon, p. 188). Ben Sira's real interest is in the perpetuity of
the people of Israel, which at present is identified for him with the
continuance of the high priesthood (Ecclus. xiv. 26, 1. 24 Pesh.).
The latter passage (in which, with Gratz and Edersheim, I prefer the
Syriac text, but without their emendations) runs thus : ' And with
Simon (the high priest) let lovingkindness be established, and with
his seed as the days of heaven.' There is no sufficient objection
to the text-reading !,£&-*¦>. The Hebraizing sense 'lovingkind
ness' is above suspicion (see Pesh., Ecclus. i. 13), and the
absence of a suffix may be explained by a reference to Ps. Ixxxix. 3
(rm< IDn). The concluding figure is from Ps. Ixxxix. 30 (cf. Deut.
xi. 21).

III. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 129

Note p, p. 117.
Comp. v. i8£ with v. 2 5^, and see Isa. lv. 3 (cf. 2 Sam. xxiii. 5).
Verse 19 assumes the point of view of Nathan's prophecy. ' It was
promised that we should have kings whom God Himself would
protect.' But the essential point with the writer is the lot of the
nation (hence 'our hom'). Note °-, p. 117.
One can hardly suppose that khasidim was as yet used as a party
name. A stronger reaction against Hellenizing manners was needed
before the ' straitest sect ' of legalists assumed a special right to this
fair name. ' Koheleth ' only advises his disciples not to be ' righteous
overmuch' nor to be 'overwise' (Eccles. vii. 16).
Note r, p. 117.
Dean Plumptre is half disposed to assign Ps. lxxxviii. to Hezekiah
[Biblical Studies, p. 172). Eichhorn simply says, 'Written long after
David's time, perhaps unde;r Hezekiah, or even as late as the Exile.'
Venema thought of Jeremiah (because of the pit in v. 7), but as an
alternative suggested that the psalmist writes in the character of Job
in his leprosy (so too Delitzsch and Klostermann). The Targum
and the Rabbis (except Ibn Ezra) interpret the psalm of the still
present dispersion of the Jews. The unreason of this was seen by
Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret, who (followed by De
Wette) regard it as a lamentation of the exiles in Babylon. The
title of our psalm has suggested to Delitzsch and Klostermann the
view that ' Heman the Ezrahite ' was the author of the Book of Job,
parts of which the psalm so much resembles. But the first of the
two ' conflate ' titles deserves the preference over the second. In
spite of 1 Chron. ii. 6, Heman was not a Zarhite, but a son of
Mahol (1 Kings iv. 31). It is only a later student who represented
the Korahite 88th psalm to be a ' Maschil of Heman the Ezrahite "
to provide a companion for the ' Maschil of Ethan the Ezrahite ' (Ps.
Ixxxix.). That Pss. lxxxviii. and Ixxxix. have no strong affinity is
clear ; ' both in poetical character and in situation the two psalms
are different' (Delitzsch). Nor are there any incidental ideas or
expressions common to both which justify their being grouped
together. On the other hand, between Pss. lxxxvi. and lxxxviii.
there are several points of contact; cf. lxxxvi. 1, lxxxviii. 3, 16,
lxxxvi. 10, lxxxviii. 11 ; and especially lxxxvi. 13, lxxxviii. 7. These
psalms may once have stood side by side, though it is true that Ps.
ML

130 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
Ixxxvii. is not exactly misplaced. It is in fact a poetic sketch of
the happy results of the conversion of the nations anticipated in
lxxxvi. 9. Note 3, p. 118.
See my review of G. A. Smith's Isaiah, in Expositor, Feb. 1891. In
1 88 1 I placed this evidently liturgical composition early in the Exile.
This was preferable to assigning it to the same period as Isa. xl.
&c, and could be supported on exegetical grounds. Still this is not
a likely date for a writing which stands between late Exile and post-
Exile works. The view adopted above suits all the requirements of
the case much better. The references to the Divine Spirit suggest
a date not very far from Nehemiah (and Ps. li.). Notice too that
according to Isa. lxiii. 18 Jehovah's servants have had but a short
possession of His holy mountain. Isa. Ixiv. 10 reminds us of Ps.
Ixxxix. 41, and the heroic insistence on thanksgiving in Isa. lxiii. 7
of Ps. Ixxxix. 2, 3. But I confess that I cannot believe in a burning
of the temple at this period (see p. 102). Was the description in
Isa. Ixiv. 11 inserted by the author himself (see note k, p. 103, for an
analogy) to make this section available as a liturgical commemora
tion of the earlier catastrophe under Nebuchadrezzar? That the
proposed date suits both Ps. Ixxxix. and Isa. lxiii. 7 &c, is suffi
ciently clear. In such troubles it might well seem as if nothing short
of a theophany (Isa. lxiii. 19 ; cf. lviii. 2, post-Exile) would meet
the needs of Israel, and Israel himself might complain of having
grown old before his time (Ps. Ixxxix. 46), and of ' fading as a leaf '
(Isa. Ixiv. 5). For how else can we explain these passages ? Can
it be Rehoboam whose ' days ' have been ' shortened ' by disgrace ?
So thinks Delitzsch. But as Dr. Forbes remarks, 'whatever may
have been the original occasion of the psalm, its present position and
connexion . . . point distinctly to the cessation of the outward
visible kingdom ' [Studies, p. 96). And why should we deny that not
only these but the expressions of the psalm point either to the Exile
(as Grotius, with the Peshitto) or the post-Exile period, though not
necessarily to the Maccabaean age, to which Rudinger and Hitzig
refer it ? Notice the doctrine of God and of the angels implied in
vv. 6-9, and the parallelism between vv. 10, n and Isa. li. 9, 10.
Also the representation of the 'kings of the earth' as 'sons of God,'
whose chief was the king of Israel [v. 28). The pre-Exile writers
do not describe even the Messianic king as God's son ; that title
belongs to the people of Israel, Ex. iv. 22, Hos. xi. 1 ; cf. Deut. xiv.
1. After the Exile the ordinary Oriental title for kings was adopted
in connexion with the view, now sanctioned by the psalmists, that
the earthly kingdoms had heavenly patrons (see on Ps. lxxxii. 1, 6).

ill. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 131
Note ', p. 119.
Hengstenberg and Delitzsch (with whom Dean Plumptre agrees)
place Ps. Ixxxvii. in the reign of Hezekiah, remarking that the
prophets had already beheld the king of Babylon in the foreground
of the future, and represented him to themselves as the heir of
Assyria, to prove which they refer to Isa. xxxix. 6, 7, Mic. iv. 10.
But it has been shown (see my notes) that these passages, either
entirely or in part, have been inserted by later editors, who were so
full of the great deliverance from Babylon that they made references
to it where none originally existed. Besides, the author knows the
Book of Isaiah as a whole ; comp. Isa. xxx. 7, li. 9 (Rahab) ; xviii.
7, xiv. 14 (conversion of Cush); xix. 18-25, x^v- J4 (conversion of
Egypt) ; xx. (Philistia) ; xxiii. (Tyre). It is possible, indeed, that
one of these passages (Isa. xix. 18-25) was inserted in the Greek
period; but it would not follow that Ps. Ixxxvii. was equally late.
Post-Exile, however, the psalm must be. The ideas (as Calvin
clearly saw) are those which Isa. xl. &c. made familiar to the
Jewish Church (cf. Isa. xliv. 5, Zech. viii. 22, 23) ; and the state
ment respecting Babylon shows that the embitterment caused by
Babylonian oppression had long since passed away.
Note u, p. 119.
See my Study on Ps. Ixxxvii., Expositor, 1889 (2), p. 360 &c.
The historical situation of the psalm would be unimaginable if we
did not assume an initial fulfilment of the prophecies of conversion.
Stade may be right in seeing in 2 Chron. xv. 9, xxx. 6-1 1, a reflection
of conversions of the descendants of the ancient Israelites in the
early Greek period [Gesch. des Volkes Israel, ii. 198, 199). But this
will not go very far towards explaining the situation. There must
have been conversions from heathenism not only at home but
abroad, news of which had reached the psalmist. Cf. the reference
to ' fearers of Jehovah ' in Pss. cxv., cxviii.
Notet, p. 119.
Comp. lxxxvi. 14 with liv. 5 ; v. 16 with cxvi. 16. That liv. 5 is
quoted in its Elohistic form, proves that the Elohistic redaction
of the Korahite and Asaphite fasciculi preceded the composition of
Ps. lxxxvi.
Note w, p. 119.
See p. 60 (note '), and cf. pp. 119, 339> and notice that> Slde W
side with the revived archaism Yahve ^ebaoth [v. 9, see next note),

132 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
we have the stately and solemn combination ' Yahve Elohim,' which
characterizes the widened theological outlook of the Persian period.
Note x, p. 120.
David's authorship is irreconcilable with the language used of
the sanctuary. Clearly the erection of the temple is an event of the
past. Baudissin cautiously remarks, ' One may suppose that it is of
the regal age7 [Gesch. des Priesterthums, p. 260). If so, the latter
half of the reign of Josiah is the only period which can be thought of
(see my Jeremiah, p. 105). But we must not, without some special
reason, isolate this psalm from its companions. And, as remarked
already, can we imagine pure and spiritual church-psalms existing
thus early ? Note ?, p. 120.
Can we avoid supposing that Ps. lxxxiv. 9, 10 has at least been
touched by the editor of Pss. lix. (see v. 6) and Ixxx. (see vv. 5, 8,
15, 20, and cf. my commentary)? 'El, Elohim, Yahveh' (1. 1) is
unpoetic enough, but ' Yahveh Elohim Cebaoth ' is still more so.
A frigid accumulation of these divine names is intelligible in Ps. 1. 1
(written by a wise man who had turned poet), but hardly in such
deeply felt lyrics as Pss. lix., Ixxx., lxxxiv. I therefore take Ps.
lxxxiv. 9, 10, to be a late liturgical insertion which took the place of
verses more suitable for pilgrims than for the Church at large. The
phrase 'our shield ' was perhaps suggested by v. 12a.
Note ', p. 120.
Herder long since claimed Ps. lxxxiv. as a pilgrim-song. Ols-
hausen agrees with this. So also Derenbourg in his Study on this
psalm [Revue des etudes juives, avril-juin 1883, p. 162).
Note aa, p. 120.
Observe that Ps. lxxxii. is one of the proper psalms for the
successive days of the week (see on Ps. xciii.). It is probable that
this arrangement is not as late as the Greek period.
Note bb, p. 120.
On the dates of these books, or portions of books, see articles
in Encycl. Britannica. My own article on Isaiah, the latter part of
which developed some neglected results of Ewald in a form which
seemed to me in fuller accordance with the exegetical facts, was

ill. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 133
published in 1881 ; I could now give it much greater precision.
Other critics too are tending in the same direction. With regard to
Isa. xxiv.-xxvii. it has lately been well said by Kuenen that there
are few left who doubt that the prophecy belongs to the Persian
period. Ewald in 1841 referred it to the reign of Cambyses; but
most will feel that this is too early. Dillmann (1890) takes a some
what wider range ; Isa. xxiv. 4-13 may, he thinks, point to the wars
and disturbances under Cambyses and Darius. Vatke in his post
humous Einleitung (1886) preferred the reign of the tyrant Artaxerxes
Ochus, when Sidon, as a punishment for its large share in the revolt,
was destroyed (b.c 351). Hilgenfeld (1885) thinks the prophecy to
be occasioned by Alexander's conquest of Tyre, and long before him
Vitringa had even brought it down as late as Antiochus Epiphanes.
In 1884 Smend thus summed-up his own conclusions : 'We have
the choice either to place the events which are here presupposed in
the 60 years between Zechariah and Ezra, or in the 200 years be
tween Nehemiah and Hyrcanus the farmer of the taxes. The latter
view has the most probability' (Stade's Zeitschrift, 1884, p. 210).
For Joel even Prof. A. B. Davidson has committed himself to a
post- Exile date [Expositor, March 1888) ; for a fuller discussion see
Matthes, Theologisch Tifdschrift, 1885, pp. 34 &c, 129 &c. On
2 Zechariah I can refer to my own article, written in 1879 (before
Stade's articles appeared) on the publication of Dr. Wright's Bamp-
ton Lectures, and published without alteration in the Jewish Quarterly
for Oct. 1888. Dr. Kuenen's conclusions in the new edition of his
Onderzoek are very similar to my own.
Note cc, p. 121.
The mutual points of contact of these psalms and their con
nexions with other writings are worth noticing, as they have a
bearing on criticism. I select a few of them :—
Ps. Iii. 4, cf. lv. 12 (Ivii. 2). Ps. lvi. 2, cf. Ivii. 4.
„ „ 10, „ xcii. 14- ,, .. 5> 10> I2> cf- cxviil- 6-
„ „ 11b, cf. liv. Sb. „ ,, 7. cf x. 8, 9.
„ liv. 5, cf. lxxxvi. 14. „ fix. 4, „ x. 8, 9.
„ „ 6, „ cxviii. 7- .. lvi. 8, „ fix. 6 ('the nations,'
„ 9, „ lix. 11, xcii. 12. in antithesis to 'my
"„ lv. 11, „ lix. 7, 15- Pe°Ple'' v' I2 ' cf"
„ „ 12, „ Isa. lix. 14 (post- 'ruler in Jacob' v.
Exile). M).
„ „ 13-15, cf. xii. 10. „ fix. 5, „ vii. 7.
„ „ 22, cf. Ivii. 5, fix. 8. „ „ 8, „ xciv. 4.
Pss. lvi.- and Ivii. are closely connected ; lv. and lix. ; (liii.) lviii.

134 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
and xiv. Comp. also several phenomena in Pss. vii., ix., x. In
fact, the persecution-psalms have not a few striking features in
common (comp. Delitzsch on Ps. Ivii.). There are also affinities
between Pss. lviii. and lxxxii., and (as Dr. Kay points out) between
Ps. lviii. and Isa. lix. (see above, on lv. 12). Observe, too, that in
the Hebrew Pss. Iii.— lv. are each headed maskil, and Pss. lvi.-lx.
miktam. The two groups are mechanically linked by the ' dove ' in
lv. 7, lvi. 1. In each group one psalm seems inserted by an after
thought. Ps. liii. gives a theoretic justification of the special case
described in Ps. Iii. ; Ps. lviii. performs the same office for Pss. Ivii.
and lix. Note dd, p. 121.
Theodore of Mopsuestia (according to Baethgen's Syriac text)
explains Pss. Iii., liv., and, of course, liii. (see on xiv.), of Hezekiah's
times. So too the anonymous arguments in Corderius (ii. 1).
Rabshakeh, says the writer (Theodore?), was a renegade Hebrew
captive. Theodoret (on Pss. Iii., liii.) also follows Theodore, but
saves his respect for the title of Ps. Iii. by means of a prophetic
theory. Ps. Ixii. he explains as if Maccabaean (cf. Theodore, p. 123).
Note ee, p. 121.
The closing verse, Ixiv. 11, resembles lxiii. 12. Ps. lxiii. is itself
of the Greek period. Ps. Ixii. is placed after Ps. lxi. because the
titles ' rock ' and ' refuge ' for God occur in both (lxi. 3, 4, Ixii. 3,
7, 8, 9). It has, however, also a close connexion with Ps. xxxix.
Both poems have a touch of the Hebrew reflectiveness (see on Ps.
xxxix.). Note ff, p. 122.
My spoken words were that such a criticism can rob the rose of
its perfume. The phrase might pass as representing the mood of the
moment, but it were unfair to adhere to it. The sufferings of a
nation have a still subtler fragrance than those even of the noblest of
its members. The collective theory must be applied in cxx. 6, ' Full
long has my soul had her dwelling beside him who hates peace'
(Kay's version). It may be applied in Ps. lv. 13-15, and still more
easily in Ps. xii. 10 (comp. Obad. 7). At any rate, the treacherous
friend was not alone in his treachery, if we may trust psychological
verisimilitudes. Comp. Job xix. 19, Prov. xix. 7.
Note ss, p. 122.
Hitzig originally (in 1835-1836) referred as many as twenty-seven
psalms to Jeremiah, viz. v., vi., xxii.-xli., Hi.— liv., lxix., Ixxi; In his

ill. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 135
later commentary (1863-1865) he is content with specifying twelve or
• fourteen, viz. v. (?), vi., xxii., xxx., xxxi., xxxv., xxxviii., xxxix. (?), xl.,
liii. (= xiv.), lv., lxix., lxx. (= xl. 14-18), lxxi., though in his intro
duction he seems inclined to add more ; and Mr. Ball, claiming his
authority, is inclined to refer Pss. xxiii., xxvi.-xxviii. to the prophet's
pen [Expositor's Bible : Jeremiah, 1890, p. 10). The exegetical and
historical combinations by which Hitzig supports his theory are
interesting and suggestive. It would be delightful to be able to
modify our view of Jeremiah by his own lyric disclosures of his inner
life ; delightful, too, to learn something definite about the impression
produced in Judah by the wave of ruin which swept along Palestine
early in Josiah's reign (see my small Jeremiah, p. 30). It was
Ewald's opinion that Ps. lix., and Hrtzig's that Pss. xiv. (= liii.) and
lv. refer to the Scythian invasion, but this is hardly a good specimen
of the critical tact of these eminent scholars. It is the exegetical
arguments of Hitzig on which the acceptance of his theory of Jere
miah's authorship depends. To some they will probably appear
plausible ; both Ewald and Delitzsch do in fact, as we shall see,
agree with Hitzig in one or two instances. I am not surprised that
Mr. Ball is even more moved by the great Zurich professor. If
these psalms are neither Davidic nor Exilic and post-Exilic, what
age is so fit for them as that of Jeremiah ? It is true that the age of
Jeremiah is at first sight equally fit for other writings, and will by
degrees become somewhat too full of literature, especially consider
ing the troubles of the time ; but while we look at each critical pro
blem separately, this circumstance is likely to escape us. I fear I
must at various points go on objecting to Hitzig's view (see e.g. Lect.
V., Part II., note p). At present, however, I need only repeat the
criticism which I offered in 1883, that though the parallelism between
certain psalms and Jeremiah's life and works is to some extent a real
one, the explanation provided is too easy. ' We have to deal with
the fact that there is a large body of Biblical literature impregnated
with the spirit, and consequently [presenting] many of the expres
sions, of Jeremiah. The Books of Kings, the Book of Job, the
second part of Isaiah, the Lamentations, are, with the psalms [in
question], the chief items of this literature ; and while, on the one
hand, no one would dream of assigning all these to Jeremiah, there
seems, on the other, to be no sufficient reason for giving one of them
to the great prophet rather than the other. With regard to the cir
cumstantial parallels in [certain] psalms to passages in the life of
Jeremiah, it may be observed (1) that other pious Israelites had a
similar lot of persecution to Jeremiah (cf. Mic. vii. 2, Isa. Ivii. 1) ;
(2) that figurative expressions like ' sinking in the mire and in the
deep water ' (Ps. lxix. 2, 14) require no groundwork of literal bio-

136 PSALMS OF PRE-MACCABAEAN GREEK AND lect.
graphical fact (not to remind realistic critics that there was no water
in Jeremiah's prison, ch. xxxviii. 6) ; and (3) that none of the psalms
ascribed to Jeremiah allude to his prophetic office, or to the conflict
with the 'false prophets,' which must have occupied so much of his
thoughts [Pulpit Commentary : Jeremiah, vol. i., p. xii.). Dean Jackson's
form of the theory requires no criticism ; it was a resting-place for
faint-hearted critics, who did not wish to reject the time-honoured
headings. This is that a number of ' Davidic ' psalms (including Ps.
xl.) 'were penned, or paraphrased upon, by Jeremiah for the people's
use in the Babylonish captivity ' ( Works, viii. 84). And what shall
we say of the headings of these psalms ? I think that we can easily
account for them in the case of Pss. hi., liv., lvi., Ivii., lix. The
historical notes attached to them suggest that these psalms had once
been inserted as illustrations in the history of David, or, better
perhaps, that they were conventionally used by teachers to illustrate
David's life. It was a small step further in those days to say that
David was the author of those psalms.
NOTEhh, p. 122.
Jeremiah, his Life and Times, p. no, cf. p. 126. Jeremiah being
the most Christlike of prophets, it was natural that a psalm, like Ps.
lv. inspired by him, should be thought a prophecy of Jesus Christ,
o-Kiaypa<j>iav Tiva. €^wv twv SeoTrOTiKw ira6-qp,aTuiv (Theodoret).
Note u, p. 122.
Stade, I observe, thinks that the author of Lam. iii. poetizes in
the character of Jeremiah [Geschichte, p. 701).
NoteJJ, p. 122.
I might add, just as another psalmist ' thought himself,' however
imperfectly, into the person of David (Ps. xviii.).
Note kk, p. 122.
I do not, with Olshausen, press the reference to ' evening, morn
ing, and noon ' as times of prayer (Ps. lv. 18). Even if a post-Exile
writer, the psalmist is not thinking of the obligation of praying
thrice in the day, but of his constant need of free prayer to the God
of his life. Note ", p. 123.
War, i. 1, 1, vii. 10, 2-4 ; cf. Talm. Bab., Menachoth, ioga ;
Yoma (Jer.), 6, 3. In Ant. xii. 9, 7, xiii. 3, 1-3, xiii. 10, 4, xx. 10,

ill. PERSIAN PERIOD IN BOOKS II. AND III. 137
however, it is more correctly Onias IV. who builds the Egyptian
temple. Nowhere does Josephus refer to the murder of Onias III.
at Daphnae, and Theodore appears to desert 2 Maccabees delibe
rately at this point. Both Baethgen and WernsdOrf (not Schiirer)
regard the story of the murder as one of the fictions of 2 Maccabees.
But why ? The narrative of Josephus is certainly not complete (see
Ant. xii. 5, 1), and Theodore had an object in deserting 2 Mace.
(viz. to illustrate Ps. lv. 7-9). Note mm, p. 123.
In the Catena of Corderius (ii. 61, on Ps. lv. 14) Theodore com
ments thus upon rryefiu>v p.ov (Sept's, read, of 'D-ITS) — <J>s 71-pds tov
2(/.'.o)i'a • «r£i8i) tov /xaKapiov 'Oviov dp^iEpareiJOVTOS Trpoo~Tacriav Tiva.
iyKtyjEipio-To. He goes on to say that the subordinate officers of
kings are called their captains. Note nn, p. 123.
Hitzig's theory is not open to this objection. Pashur, whom he
takes to be the false friend of the psalmist, was but one of many
1 ; cf. Jer. xii. 6, xxvi. 8, n.

Note 00, p. 123.
Notice in Isa. lix. the points of contact both with Ps. lviii. and
with Jeremiah's prophecies. This was a time in which psalmists and
prophets alike saw a striking resemblance to the age of Jeremiah.
Note pp, p. 124.
Vatke, in his posthumous Einleitung, remarks of Books II. and
III., ' Many, especially Korahite, psalms were evidently written
under the Diadochi' (p. 529).

LECTURE IV.
Be his name [blessed] for ever ;
While shines the sun, may his name have increase ;
May [all tribes of the earth] bless themselves by him,
May [all] nations call him happy. — (Ps. Ixxii. 17.)

LECTURE IV.
Part I. — Psalm Ixxii. Must this psalm be either in the narrowest sense
Messianic or a piece of bombast? Coleridge thought so. — Another question —
Is it spoken dramatically of Solomon ? or of Hezekiah ? or of one of the As
monaean princes? Conclusive objections to each theory. — Is the psalmist carried
h trvziiuuTt into the age of the Messiah? Objections. — The only remaining
theory. — The psalm not being pre-Exile, may not the king be a foreigner? Two
kings are possible — Darius and Ptolemy Philadelphus. Reasons for preferring
the latter, who was not only a magnificent and fortunate prince, but a special
friend of the Jews. Hitzig's theory criticized. — The poem probably written soon
after the accession of Philadelphus (B.C. 284), who is called in v. I 'the king's
son,' because his royal father was still alive. Objections answered. — The Joseph-
psalms, a monument of Israelitish patriotism in the Persian period. — Pss. Ixxiii.
and xlix. both on the same subject, and reaching the same conclusion. The
former about contemporary with Ecclesiastes ; the latter somewhat older. — Ps. 1.
not a mere didactic poem, but a quasi-prophetic utterance with a definite historic
background. Argument for a post-Exile origin (Persian period) both for Ps. I.
and for Ps. xl. 1-12.
Part II. — Ps. li. why not Davidic. Written probably after the Return, but
before the great rebuilding of the walls by Nehemiah. Nor do any of the re
maining psalms of Books II. and III. (among which note especially Ps. xlviii. , a
festival psalm, specially designed for pilgrims) belong to the Greek period, except
Ps. xiv. What is the date of this ' song of lovely things ' ? Does it refer to
Ahab ? or to Jeroboam II. ? Objections to each. Analogousness of this psalm
to the 72nd. It was not, indeed, written as a church-hymn, but is not without
Messianic features and by its fine moral and religious spirit contrasts with the 1 7th
Idyll of Theocritus addressed (like Ps. xiv. ?) to Philadelphus. Objections to
this view of Ps. xiv. answered. Meaning of 'Jehovah thy God.' Conjecture
as to the origin of the poem. — Reason for the fulness of detail in the preceding
argument ; such hypotheses must be set forth tentatively, and are unimportant
unless they account for a large number of phenomena. — Historical and phraseolo
gical allusions in favour of this hypothesis. — How came Ps. xiv. to be admitted
into the Psalter ? Theory of its reference to Solomon. Its profoundly Christian
moral sentiment.

PART I.
PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX, L., ETC.
The times are past when even Samuel Taylor Coleridge
could say that ' in any other than the Christian sense Ps. Ixxii.
would be a specimen of more than Persian or Mogul hyper
bole and bombast.' Against such words the young sciences
of language and religion enter a protest, which all who share
in the intellectual life of our time must eagerly endorse. The
poetic glorifications of Egyptian and Babylonian kings which
have been disinterred from the dust of ages glisten to us of
this generation with a strange and pathetic beauty. The high
hopes attached to Rameses, to Nebuchadrezzar, to the early
Ptolemies, may have been bathed in illusion, but were ' too
fair to turn out ' wholly ' false.' The names, in the ancient
sense of the word, of these righteous kings may have passed
away, but their ' souls are in the hand of God,' and, may be,
their hopes are fulfilled in the ' land of the silver sky.' a And
so far as their aspirations passed the bounds of what is per
mitted to man, they are true of Him of whom all worthy
kings are types, of Him who, more completely than Nebuchad
rezzar (Ezek. xxvi. 7), is ' king of kings and lord of lords.' b
Permit me now to resume the thread of my inquiry, link
ing two sections together in Hebrew fashion by a catchword.
The question has been raised whether there are any ' imagi
nary psalms of Jeremiah.' This is a plausible view doubtless;
and may to some suggest the idea that the author of Ps. Ixxiii
assumes the character of a contemporary of Solomon. That
the poem can at most have only a dramatic reference to that
king, is clear. The social state of Israel was radically unsound
in the time of Solomon, nor did he resemble the ' prince of
peace ' portrayed by the psalmist (1 Kings xi. 14-25, xii. 4,
1 8).° Even supposing that a temple hymn-book existed in

142 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect.
Solomon's days, how can one suppose that a psalm which
would read like bitter irony would find or at least keep a
place within it ? On the other hand, if it be true that we
have not only several ' imaginary psalms ' of Jeremiah, but
also at least one (see Ps. xviii.) of David, written long after
the great king's time, why may not this be a similar imaginary
psalm or dramatic idealization of Solomon ? The view is
confirmed, to some slight extent, by the heading of Ps. Ixxii.,
els XaXafiwv, i.e. ' with reference to Solomon,' a but is to be
rejected on these two grounds : (i) that underneath the ideal
glory of the picture we fail to trace the lineaments of the his
torical Solomon, and (2) that the tone of supplication requires
a reference either to a contemporary or to a future king.
Dr. Gratz proposes another view. The psalmist is, he
thinks, the spokesman of devout Levitical singers and musi
cians (according to him, the 'andvim, or ' meek and lowly '
ones, so often spoken of), who send up their loyal and re
ligious aspirations for the new king Hezekiah. I will not say
that such a reference is plainly impossible. If, as a late Regius
Professor of Hebrew thought,1 the subject of Isa. ix. 6, 7, is
this youthful prince, ' whose nascent virtues qualified him in
a peculiar manner to be the object of the nation's hope,' Ps.
Ixxii. may plausibly be viewed as a lyric expansion of that
great prophecy. The anticipations were, no doubt, too high,
but there would be no such moral incongruity in keeping a
record of them as if they related to a despot like Solomon. It
must be objected, however, that Professor Nicoll's interpreta
tion is very doubtful, and that upon the phraseological
evidence we cannot put the psalm earlier than the seventh
century [v. 17b being dependent on Gen. xxii. 18, xxvi. 4),
or, more precisely, than the Exile [v. 12 resting on Job
xxix. 12, and v. 16b on Job v. 25).e It is even a question
with some whether, simply on the ground of the allusion
which they find in v. 8 to Zech. ix. 10/ the psalm must not
be brought down as late as the conquests of Alexander. In
this case we might follow Professor Church,2 who seems in
clined to apply Ps. Ixxii. to Judas the Maccabee. Verses
1 See Prof. Nicoll's Sermons (Oxford, 1830), p. 57. The Memoir prefixed
to this volume should not be overlooked.
2 Church (and Seeley), The Hammer, p. 370.

iv. PSALMS LXXIL, LXX1IL, XLIX., L., ETC. 143
12-14 do in fact accurately describe the public character of
Judas, and v. w might perhaps express the aspirations of
the chieftain's friends. But ' the Hammer ' was rather a Judge
(in the old sense) than a king of Israel. Hyrcanus I. and
Hyrcanus II. might both, in different senses, be called ' kings '
and ' kings' sons.' g But the other conditions of the problem
are not satisfied by either of them (comp. on Ps. ex.), least of
all by the second — that feeble son of a queenly mother.
Shall we then explain the psalm, with Coleridge and so
many others, of a king future to the psalmist ? Most of the
older writers (whose view does not stand or fall with the
heading) suppose the psalmist to have been carried by the
spirit of prophecy into the age of the Messiah. The Targum
for instance paraphrases v. I, 'O God, give the course of
thy judgments to the king Messiah, and thy righteousness to
the son of King David.'h This is not, indeed, absolutely im
possible. The strict Messianic idea emerges now and then in
the post-Exile literature. The words 'Behold, thy king cometh
unto thee ' (Zech. ix. 9) may conceivably have stirred up some
poetic writer to prepare a hymn suitable for the accession of
the ' desired king.' It is strange, however, that he does not
display a more rapturous joy at such a delightful vision —
strange, too, that he describes the king, not as 'the son -of
David,' but simply as ' the (or, a) king's son.' I can think of
no way to remove these difficulties. The idealisms of the
psalm seem to me to be gathered about a kernel of solid fact.
The hero who is celebrated is not only a king, but a scion of
a royal stem [v. 1), and the psalmist's prayer is that he may
redeem his youthful promise, and deserve the blessings and
intercessions of the grateful people of Jehovah [v. \^b ; cf.
v. 2a). Imagine this being said of the Messiah, or even of
any idealized Israelitish king ! * Was it not the glory of the
latter to be Jehovah's son (Ps. ii. 7, Ixxxix. 27, 28), and his
special privilege to intercede for and to bless his people
(1 Kings viii. 22, 55) ? Yet Ps. Ixxii. is no mere court-poem ;
it is a seriously meant expression of the church-nation's
homage to a king reigning (though a foreigner) by the grace
of God. But must we stop here ? May we not, with due
modesty, seek to determine the age, and even, if possible, the
name of this favourite ruler ? The search will at any rate be

144 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect.
profitable ; until we are better acquainted with the history of
the Jewish Church, and apply it to the illustration of the
Scriptures, we shall miss much of the pleasure, and some at
least of the lessons, which the Bible was intended to yield us.
Probably we shall think first of all of the Restoration period,
from B.C. 515 onwards. Darius was personally well worthy of
such an eulogium as Ps. Ixxii., and it is not inconceivable that
the good deeds of Cyrus (especially the liberation) were
credited to his successor. I could wish to explain Ps. Ixxii.
of this noble believer in Ahura Mazda. But it appears to
me that the Persian king was too far away from Judaea (cf.
Eccles. v. 7) to be represented as ruling there in person, and
certainly the psalmists of the Restoration rose to sublimer
strains (see Ps. xciii. &c).
But was there no prince less remote but not less powerful
than Darius, for whom the Jews had the strongest feelings of
loyalty and gratitude ? Yes, there was one — Ptolemy Phila
delphus,3 who 'to the Jews became (as) a Jew, that he might
gain the Jews,' and who, almost better in some respects than
Cyrus and Darius, deserved a Hebrew poet's encomium.k He
was in fact the second Cyrus of Israel, not only because he
continued the privileges granted by his father to the Jews, but
because he redeemed at his own cost a multitude of Jewish
captives.1 ' It is a misfortune that we have no contemporary
authority for this fact, but there is no sufficient reason for re
jecting the statements of 'Aristeas' where they are credible,™
and it is in a high degree credible that the captives were
released, and that on hearing the glad news and receiving the
rich presents intended for the temple the Jews at once offered
sacrifices and public prayer for the gracious monarch.11 I do
not assert that Ps. Ixxii. 14 either describes or predicts (as a
vaticinium post eventum) the release of the captives. The
poem was most probably composed in Jerusalem before this
event — not long after the accession of Philadelphus in his
father's lifetime, B.C. 285, an allusion to which may be traced
in the expression, 'the king's son,' in v. 1. But I must
admit that Hitzig's theory (that much of the psalm is but
disguised history) is, from an external and realistic point of
view, plausible enough when we consider how literal in some
cases was the fulfilment. How forcibly Theocritus's descrip-

PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. 145

tion of the conquests of Philadelphus [Id. xvii. 86-89) reminds
us of vv. 8-1 1 of our psalm, closing as it does with the
words — 8aXao~o~a oe 7rdo~a Kai ata
Kai iroTajxol KeAaSovTM dvacrcrovTat LTroAeyiiatai.0
The Syracusan poet, however, omits what the psalmist, in his
anticipations, records for all time — that, prosperous as this
Ptolemy was in war through policy and the skill of his gene
rals, his most durable glories were those of peace.P The
dominant note of the psalm is righteousness. How earnest
a spirit breathes in these words : —
May he give doom to thy people in righteousness,
And to thine afflicted ones according to right.
Before him let foemen bow,
And let his enemies lick the dust, . . .
Because he delivers the needy when he cries,
The afflicted also who has no helper [vv. 2, 9, 12).
Surely it is possible enough that the reputation of this popu
lar Ptolemy justified such anticipations. It was too soon for
the faults of the young prince to have cast a shadow upon his
name. Fortunate then will Israel be under such a humane
ruler. And yet, as the phrase ' thy (i.e. God's) people ' im
plies, this post-Exile writer will not permit even the kindest
of sovereigns to take the place of Jehovah.
A Ptolemy can only be the deputy of Israel's true King.
But could even a second David be more ? And it is as a
second David, or a second Cyrus, that the poet praises the
young Ptolemy : —
His name shall last for ever ;
While the sun shines, his name shall be perpetuated ;
And men shall bless themselves in him,
All nations shall tell of his felicity [v. 17, Kay).
That is, May the Messianic promises be visibly fulfilled in
and through this kind and equitable ruler !
Does any one assert that no pious Jew could have written
thus of a non-Jewish king, and remind me of Israel's self-
concentration upon the' Law and the faithfulness unto death
of the Maccabees ? I .reply that I have shown already how
L

146 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect.
deeply I respect these great qualities, but that, as the Books
of Ruth, Jonah, and 'Malachi' prove, neither the work of
Ezra and of the Maccabees, nor frequent heathen oppression,
prevented the rise of a new charity on Israel's part towards
the ' nations.' Under the Ptolemies, as Ewald has pointed
out,1 the union or association of Israelites and Greeks could
not but appear both easy and desirable. There was in this
a strong element of illusion, and a reaction followed. To the
author of the apocalypse of Daniel such an object appeared
in a very different light. Least of all could he have ventured
to attach a quasi-Messianic character to a king of Hellenic
stock ; he could not have idealized even an Alexander. And
he was doubtless right. The religious tendency of the Mace
donian conquests was the opposite of that of the Persian.2
But this did not at once become clear. It was the frantic
Antiochus who revealed the wide difference between his
Olympian Zeus and Ahura Mazda. But Ptolemy Phila
delphus acted in another spirit, and a psalmist in the century
before ' Daniel ' could not but regard him as a friend both of
the Jews and of their religion. Why should he not have
expressed his gratitude ? Rebuke him for his lofty words,
and he will reply, like those Jews in the Gospel, ' That he was
worthy for whom he should do this, for he loveth our nation.'
And long afterwards the Jewish philosopher of Alexandria
embalms the great Ptolemy's memory in this splendid eulogy :
' He was, in all virtues which can be displayed in govern
ment, the most excellent sovereign not only of all those of
his time, but of all those that ever lived. . . . All the other
Ptolemies put together scarcely did as many glorious and
praiseworthy actions as this one king did by himself, being,
as it were, the leader of the herd, and in a manner the head
of all the kings.' 8
The dark places of history must sometimes be illumined by
the torch of conjecture. A hypothesis which meets all the con
ditions of the case has at least the value of a symbol (see p. 171).
Philadelphus, or some foreign king like Philadelphus, is most
probably the hero of the psalm, if we would read it, not as the
1 History, v. 225 ; cf. Stade, Zeitschr. f. d. A. T. Wiss., 1882, p. 289.
2 See Ranke, Wettgeschichte, Band i.
3 Philo, De vitd Mosis (Mangey, ii. 138, 139).

IV. PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L, ETC. 147
early Christian Church, nor yet as Simon the Maccabee read
it,1 but as the original poet intended it to be read. It is an
expression of early Jewish catholicity, and as such forms no
unworthy close of the Second Book of the Psalter. Other
psalms may be finer specimens of Hebrew poetry, but this one
has a ' tone of large magnificence ' which delights the ear, and
suggests the widest applications.
The three psalms between lxviii. and Ixxii. are manifestly
not of the Greek period,"1 and will be most conveniently treated
in Lecture V.2 We may therefore proceed to ask, Are there
any productions of the Greek period among the Joseph-psalms
(those which are marked by the use of the term ' Joseph,' viz.,
lxxvii., lxxviii., Ixxx., Ixxxi.) ? Ps. lxxvii. may conceivably
be one.- It opens with a kind of colloquy between the higher
and the lower self, such as we have already met with in
Ps. xiii., and a fine phrase in v. 7 may seem to be an imitation
of Ps. xiii. 9. Still we are not forced to make this psalm as
late as the 42nd. The wonderful psalm-like meditation in
Isa. lxiii. is almost as completely parallel, and this, though
post-Exilic, cannot be later than the Persian age (see p. 130),
while the phrase in v. 7 (' Let me call to mind my song in
the night ') may be based on Job xxxv. 10, an Elihu-passage
which must have been well known before the Greek period.
Besides, the last four verses of our psalm, which are a
fragment joined on by an editor, are a poetical sketch in the
manner of, and probably imitated from, the ode in Hab. iii.,
which is one of the lyric passages inserted in the prophecies
in the Persian period.1" Ps. lxxviii. (with which Ps. Ixxxi.
65-17 must be grouped8) contains nothing suggestive of the
Hellenistic age.3 It presupposes, however, the general currency
of the Yahvistic and similar narratives (note in passing the
allusion in v. it, to Ex. xv. 8), and its view of the Davidic
kingdom resembles that of the Chronicler.* It would be
foolish therefore to separate it from Pss. cv.-cvii. ; judging
from v. 49, it may, like Ps. lxxvii., be nearly contemporary
1 For the sense in which Simon probably understood this psalm, see on
Ps. xiv. (p. 173).
2 On Pss. lxix.-lxxi. see pp. 230-233.
3 The same remark is of course true of the fragment, Ps. Ixxxi. 2-6a. Olshausen
produces no distinct evidence in favour of a Maccabeean date for Ps. Ixxxi.

148 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX, L., ETC. lect.

with the speeches of Elihu (cf. Job xxxiii. 22). Ps. Ixxx., a
beautiful specimen of parallelism, tampered with by the
Elohistic editor,1 is also most naturally referred to the
Persian period; ^.13 reminds us strongly of Ixxxix. 41,
42, and the mention of Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh
in v. 2 can hardly be explained except on this theory. For
if this psalm were of the Greek age, to which Hitzig refers it,
should we not have had, instead of Ephraim and Manasseh,
Zebulon and Naphtali (i.e. Galilee) as in lxviii. 28 ?
These four psalms are in fact a fine monument of the
Pan-Israelitish sentiment of the Persian period. Wherever
the term ' Joseph ' occurs (even in Ixxxi. 6) it is a symbolic
archaizing expression " for the northern tribes — archaizing,
one may fairly say, since M. Groff s discovery (see on lxxvii.
16), in a fuller sense than of old. The psalmists are evidently
preoccupied with the thought that Judah alone cannot pro
perly represent all Israel.v North and south had an equal
right in the great passover-festival (Ixxxi. 6), and equally
belonged to the flock of Jehovah. These religious patriots
delighted in the old story of Joseph the hero of the north,
and select for imitation that part of the blessing of Jacob
which belongs to Joseph.w One phrase above others in that
section seems to have delighted them : Jehovah was the
' shepherd of Israel,' and Israel's highest honour was to be
' the sheep of his pasture.' x
Pss. lxxv. and lxxvi. will be best treated in connexion
with Pss. xlvi. and xlviii. ; but Ps. Ixxiii., a psalm of the
Church within the Church, claims immediate attention/ It
reminds us of Koheleth in that it deals with a grave moral
problem, but whereas the wise man leaves the difficulty
almost where he found it, the psalmist discovers for it a deep
religious solution. The poem doubtless belongs, like Kohe
leth, either to the last part of the Persian or to the beginning of
the Greek period. As its position suggests, it stands in close
historical connexion with the two Maccabaean psalms, lxxiv.
and lxxv. You know the course of the psalmist's thought.
Many Jews had given way to the seductions of a sceptical
view of life. They had thrown off the restraints of Jehovah's
religion (cf. cxxxix. 19, 20). They had become rich, and
1 See above, note °, p. 101 (top).

149

IV. PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC.
oppressed their poorer brethren, and it seemed as if Provi
dence were on their side (cf. Mai. iii. 15). The Hebrew Pascal
broods over these things till he can bear it no longer. He
knows the Book of Job, but he cannot rest in another man's
imperfect solution of the perennial problem of suffering. He
recovers his mental balance in the sanctuary. There he realizes
that the punishment of these bold, bad men is but post
poned, and* as for himself, he needs no other reward than the
sense of nearness to God, and the prospect of being taken
to His glory [vv. 23, 24, 28). z And now see the contrasts
which the editor suggests to us. One of the peculiar words
of Ps. Ixxiii. is niKB'D ' ruins ; ' ' thou castest the ungodly
down,' we read, ' into ruins ' (Ps. Ixxiii. 1 8). In Ps. lxxiv.
'everlasting ruins' [v. 3) are actually visible to the psalmist;
but alas ! they are those of that very temple in which the
author of Ps. Ixxiii. won back his faith.
The problem then recurs, ' Has God after all forgotten the
righteous ? ' ' No,' we seem to hear another psalmist answer
us in Ps. lxxv. ; ' ye did wrong to be envious at the boasters,
at the ungodly' (Ixxiii. 3). Grievous indeed was their
tyranny, but now ' unto the boasters,' saith Jehovah, ' Be not
so boastful,' and to the ungodly, ' Set not up your horn '
(lxxv. 5). So varied are the moods of the psalmists, and so
cunningly, to judge from a few glimpses, has the order of the
psalms been devised to stimulate devout study of Israel's
history.aa It is natural to connect Ps. Ixxiii. with Ps. xlix.bb The
problem in both is the same, viz., how to justify the ways of
God to the suffering righteous man. Both writers in treating
this rise for a time to the heights of mystic devotion (cf. xlix.
1 6b with Ixxiii. 23^), but relapse into the same didactic tone
in which they began. From both the problem receives the
same solution, though the expression of this is clearer in
Ps. Ixxiii.1 Both writers agree moreover (see the two pas
sages last referred to) in alluding to the story of Enoch in
the priestly narrative (Gen. v. 24), and the author of Ps. xlix.
probably refers besides to the account of man's origin in
Gen. i. (see Ps. xlix. 13, 21). Both, too, have points of
contact with Job and Ecclesiastes. It seems to me, how-
1 See Lecture VIII.

150 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect.
ever, that the difficult plural behimoth in Ps. Ixxiii. 22 may be
best explained as an allusion, not to Job xl. 15, but to
Ps. xlix. 13, 21. Considering also that the historical circum
stances presupposed in Ps. Ixxiii. are more overwhelmingly
painful than those in Ps. xlix., and at the same time that the
treatment of the problem in the former is more skilful, I think
that we may reasonably place the 49th psalm somewhat before
the close of the Persian period. More on this point later.00
Ps. 1. differs both in its tone and in its historical setting
from the other Asaphite psalms ; its isolated position in the
Psalter is thus sufficiently accounted for. There is no indica
tion that a part of the Israelites have fallen away from their
faith, nor that Israel is languishing under foreign oppression.
Khasidim in v. 5 has not the well-defined party acceptation
which it obtained in Hellenistic times ; it designates the
entire body of nominal Israelites, good and bad alike, who,
as the psalmist says, are to assemble (viz., from the lands of
the Dispersion, cf. Ps. cvii. 3) that Jehovah may set before
them His claims, and sever the good, though imperfectly
instructed, Israelites from their unworthy fellows. The
former are plainly told that animal sacrifices, though tole
rated by God, are childishly absurd.1 The latter are con
victed of having ' omitted the weightier ' — nay, this poet
would say, the only weighty, ' matters of the law ' (cf. Matt.
xxiii. 23 dd). Their punishment will be that of all the nations
who are forgetful of God (ix. 18) — some terrible form of
death. On the other hand, the reward of the acceptable
worshipper will be a delighted gaze on that great expected
blessing of which even in one of the darkest parts of the
post-Exile period another poet can say —
My soul pines away for thy salvation ;
For thy word have I waited.
Mine eyes pine away for thy promise,
Saying, ' When wilt thou comfort me ? '
(Ps. cxix. 81, 82, Kay.)
The psalm is throughout grammatically easy ; and some
critics have mistakenly described it as a mere didactic psalm.
That, however, is a grand mistake. It is, as Ewald has said,
1 See below, Lecture VIII.

IV. PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. 151
more akin to a prophetic discourse than to a song, and pro
phetic discourses, as we know, are not merely didactic, but
have a definite historic background.
The view of that great critic himself, tenable enough in
1835, I only mention as a starting-point. He connects this
psalm with Josiah's thorough-going reformation of the
national life on the basis of the Deuteronomic law, and
regards it as a warning of a disciple of the prophets (cf.
Jer. vii. 22, 23, viii. 8) against the spiritual drawbacks
incident to a book-religion. The ceremonialism and hypo
crisy spoken of in the psalm were no vague abstractions,
but had taken shape before the psalmist's eyes. In favour
of this view is the constant reference of the psalmist to the
contents of Deuteronomy and the affinity of his ideas with
those of the prophet Jeremiah. Against it is the strong
improbability (1) that the ideas of Jeremiah should be so
fully grasped and so distinctly expressed thus early ; and (2)
that this alone among the Asaphite psalms should be of
pre-Exile origin. With regard to the first point, it may
be observed that even Jeremiah is not entirely consistent
with himself in his utterances on sacrifice j1 and with regard
to the second, that without some very strong reason all the
psalms in one well-defined group ought to be assigned to
the same period,66 ought at any rate to be reckoned uniformly
as either pre-Exilic or post-Exilic
I may now advance a step further. Not only does
nothing speak against, but there is much positively in favour
of, placing this psalm in the post-Exile period. That was the
time when poets delighted in descriptions of theophanies,lf
and when the thought of the Divine Judgeship dominated
every mind. That was the time when the national canoniza
tion of Jeremiah led to the composition of a group of literary
works which we may call Jeremianic That was the time
when the people as a whole could be called khasid, ' pious,'
and when formalism and hypocrisy became so general as to
stir ' the indignation ' not merely of prophets but of temple-
poets. That was the time, as we shall see later,2 when there
1 See Jeremiah, his Life and Times (1888), p. 157; on Ewald's hypothesis
cf. p. 105.
1 See Lecture VI., p. 287.

152 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect.
was much anxious speculation on the names of God, some
men preferring to cease using the name Jehovah, and others
to substitute or to add other names, such as Eloah (see Ps.
1. 22), Elohim, or Adonai. I do not scruple to affirm that
such an accumulation of divine names or titles as ' El,
Elohim, Yahveh ' (or, less probably, ' the God of divinities,
Yahveh ') is only intelligible after the return from the Exile.
We find the same accumulation in Josh. xxii. 22.gs The
document to which this passage belongs is by very many
critics assigned to a post-Exile writer or writers. And even
if some of us reject this theory, yet no one can help admitting
that Josh, xxii., or some part of it (including v. 22), pro
ceeds from the school of religious thinkers to which I have
referred. So that, in any case, Ps. 1. 1 confirms the view that
the great work of ' Ezra the scribe ' lies behind and not before
the psalmist.
This result may not be plausible from a mechanical
evolutionary point of view. Anti-ceremonial utterances like
those of Ps. 1. would, it may be said, most naturally precede
the promulgation of the Law. It is difficult to believe that
Ezra and Nehemiah had opponents among the temple-poets
as well as among unprogressive prophets and priests (cf. Neh.
vi. 14, xiii. 29, Mai. i. 6). Perhaps ; but history does not
follow the course prescribed by theory. We must allow for
the varieties of religious sentiment. Ezra at any rate (as the
Books of Ruth and Jonah prove) was not an autocrat, and
the author of Ps. 1. may have belonged to a somewhat
different school than that of the great reformer. I shall have
more to say on this subject later. Suffice it to remark that
while the psalmist admits the temporary validity of the estab
lished legal system, he looks forward to the realization of
nobler visions than those of Ezra. He has in his mind the
deeply spiritual intuitions of one of the later prophets : —
' Thus saith Jehovah, The heavens are my throne, and the
earth is my footstool ; what manner of house would ye build
for me ? and what manner of place for my rest ? For all
these things did my hand make ; [I spake] and the world
arose ; but this is the man whom I regard, the man who
is afflicted and contrite in spirit, and trembleth on account of
my word' (Isa. Ixvi. 1, 2).

IV. PSALMS LXX1L, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. 153
And not only these, but also the bold ideas expressed in
the following sentence [v. 3), which declares (or seems to
declare) that the sacrifices of the Jews have no essential
superiority to the heathenish cults still practised in obscure
corners of Palestine.
Some will at once divine the inference which I venture to
draw, but would by no means press upon every one. If Isa. lxv.
and Ixvi. form the second of two appendices to the Restoration-
prophecy, and were written subsequently to the completion of
the second temple,hh we may safely make not only Ps. 1. but
that fine psalm or psalm-fragment Ps. xl. 1-12, nearly con
temporaneous with them.

Note a, p. 141.
An Assyrian phrase for heaven. ' Silver ' means ' sunlit ; ' so
Hariri speaks of ' white day ' as opposed to ' black night ; ' cf.
Delitzsch, Iris, p. 30. Note b, p. 141.
In 1 Tim. vi. 15 this is a title of the invisible God ; but in Rev.
xvii. 14, xix. 16 it seems to denote the Messianic world-wide empire,
agreeably to the Hebrew usage. Note °, p. 141.
The picture in Chronicles is no doubt more reconcilable with
the psalms than that in Kings (note that in 2 Chron. ix. 23 'all the
earth ' has become ' all the kings of the earth ') ; and, later on,
popular legend exaggerated Solomon's empire to the full extent of
the psalm (see Orac. Sibyll. iii. 167-170 ; cf. xi. 79-92). But nothing
is said in the psalm of the king's surpassing wisdom (that favourite
subject of later ages, cf. Ecclus. xlvii. 14-17)- Justin Martyr remarks,
Kai on pkv /3ao-tXei>s iyivero *m'rav^ Ka< /"V5 ° SoAo/xan/, . . .
eTTio-ra/xoi, 011 81 ovBev tuv iv T(3 ij/aXfuS eipr)p.ivo>v, (twe^ ai™
tpalvtTai [Dial. c. Tryph, c. 34, cf. c. 64). Justin, however, is a pre
judiced critic, and seeks to extol the Christian Messiah at the
expense of Solomon. So also Tertullian [adv. Marc, v. 9), whereas
Theodore of Mopsuestia (see Baethgen, in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1885,
p. 65) takes an opposite line. St. Jerome adopts a typical Messianic
theory. ' Ex parte autem et quasi in umbra et imagine veritatis in

154 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect.
Salomone praemissa sunt, ut in Domino Salvatore perfectius imple-
rentur' (Comm. in Dan. xi. 24). This at least recognizes the rights
of history. Note d, p. 142.
That this is an incorrect interpretation must, I think, be admitted.
If I'ddvid means 'written by David,' lish'lomoh can only mean
' written by Solomon.' The author of the heading either meant that
Solomon prayed this prayer for himself (cf. 1 Kings iii.), or that he
wrote it, not for himself, but for the congregation to pray on his
behalf. Of course, this is as impossible as the statement in the
headings of Ps. cxxvii., Prov. i. 1, x. 1, xxv. 1. Calvin's view, how
ever, that Solomon versified David's last prayer for his successor (see
Ps. Ixxii. 20) is scarcely more critical ; in a cruder form this theory
was held by the Jews in Justin Martyr's time.
Note 6, p. 142.
I do not include the supposed allusion in v. 8 to Zech. (see
above). The phrasing may, after all, not be borrowed ; it sounds
conventional enough. Note f, p. 142.
On the date of Zech. ix.-xiv., see my art. in Jewish Quarterly
Review, Oct. 1888 (written in 1879), and cf Stade's articles in his
Zeitschrift, beginning 1881 (Heft 1), and Wellhausen's art. 'Zechariah '
in Encyclopaedia Britannica. The choice of date lies between the
Persian and the Greek period. Note s, p. 143.
S. Weissmann even finds an allusion to the Jewish name of
Hyrcanus (II.) in the ate. Xey. ]M\, v. 17 [Jiid. Liter aturblatt, May
13, 1886). Note h, p. 143.
So also the Midrash on the Psalms, referring to Isa. xi. 1, 5. Verse
1 7 supplied Talmudic Judaism with one of the seven names of the
Messiah ( Yinnon) ; see e.g. Nedarim 39^ (Wiinsche, Der bab.
Talmud, 209, also Midrash on Prov. xix. 21). .
Note *, p. 143.
An occasional special prayer for a Jewish sovereign (see Pss. xx.,
xxi.) can be understood, but scarcely that constant repetition of

IV. PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX, L., ETC. 155
prayer and blessing (Ps. Ixxii. 15), except for a foreign ruler of whom
much spiritual good might be hoped, but little as yet could be
known. Let me add that "TJD Hariri [v. 15) occurs thirteen times
elsewhere, and that the act thus described is always that of a prophet
or priest (Job in Job xiii. 10 is virtually a prophet). See especially
Gen. xx. 7, ' for he (Abraham) is a prophet, and he shall intercede
for thee, so that thou livest,' and remember that Israel in the later
period more and more regarded itself as the prophet and the priest
of the rest of humanity. Note J, p. 144.
Compare what follows with the discussion of Ps. xiv. My view is
that of Hitzig and Reuss ; Olshausen too agrees that some non-
Jewish post-Exile king is meant. As will be seen presently, I do
not interpret vv. 8-14 in Hitzig's matter-of-fact style. The poet
gives us well-grounded aspirations or anticipations — neither more
nor less. Nor, though the reference to rain [v. 6) and to the moun
tains of Palestine [v. 16) does not settle the point, do I think it at
all probable that the psalm was written in Egypt.
Note k, p. 144.
See the striking passage in Droysen, Hellenismus, ii. 51, 52.
Cyrus restored the Jews to obtain a secure advanced post for an
attack upon Egypt. Egypt equally needed this Brikkenland (Judaea)
for its commercial enterprises. The second Ptolemy from the first
planned to win and hold at least the south of Syria. Hence his
ceaseless efforts to make friends with the Jews.

Note \ p. 144.
Josephus, in lieu of any direct encomium, says of this Ptolemy
that he 'caused the Jewish law to be interpreted, and set free
120,000 natives of Jerusalem who were in slavery in Egypt' [Ant.
xii. 2, 1). Note m, p. 144-
Mahaffy [Greek Life and Thought, &c, p. 472) agrees ; cf. Oort,
De laatste eeuwen van Israel's volksbestaan, i. 34. The release and
sacrifices are described in pp. 20-22 of the letter (cf. Jos., Ant.
xii. 2).

156 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect.
Note n, p. 144.
Cf. Ezra vi. 10, 1 Mace vii. 33, Baruch i. n. Josephus repre
sents the refusal to offer sacrifices for foreigners, and notably for
Caesar, as the true beginning of the war with the Romans ( War, ii.
17, 2). Note °, p. 145.
If, in speaking of this psalm and Ps. xiv., I refer so often to
Theocritus, it is of course with no wish to lower the psalmists to his
level. The author of Ps. xiv., especially, is much liker in spirit to
the devout Pindar. The above lines of Theocritus were written
subsequently to the marriage of Ptolemy and Arsinoe II. (which took
place in or before B.C. 273). The inscription of Pithom discovered'
by M. Naville, by its references to the wars of Philadelphus, con
firms this. See Wiedemann, ' Die Ehe des Ptol. Philad. mit
Arsinoe II.,' in Philologus, N. F., i. 81-91. The Hebrew psalmist's
picture must therefore be anticipative, the Greek poet's historical.
Note p, p. 145.
Droysen, Hellenismus, ii. 236. Comp. Thirlwall on the tendency
of Alexander's measures and institutions [History, vol. vii.).
Note «, p. 147.
Ps. lxxi. precedes our Ps. Ixxii. partly on account of the catchword
' thy-righteousness,' which occurs both in lxxi. 24 and in Ixxii. 1. This
psalm drew with itself two other ' Jeremianic ' elegies — lxix. and lxx.
Note r, p. 147.
The earliest possible date is, I am sure, the Exile period. But
the strong expressions can hardly be accounted for by an Exilic
background, unless we are content to regard this church-ode as more
or less of an academic exercise. The most natural position for it is in
the Persian period. It was doubtless appended to Habakkuk for the
same reason for which Isa. lxiii. 7-lxiv. was attached to the great
prophecy of Restoration, viz. that the earlier national troubles seemed
to the Jewish Church to be typical of its own sore troubles after the
Return. The writers of this period seem to have delighted much in
descriptions of theophanies (cf. Ps. 1. 1, the Accession-psalms, and
the Book of Daniel). The lovely closing verses of Hab. iii. are also
in a tone congenial to the later religion. How imitative and arti
ficial, in a word, how late (in spite of its affectations of archaic rough-

IV. PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. 157

ness) the style of the ode is, need not be shown here. Like the
so-called Song of Hezekiah, it once evidently formed part of a
liturgical collection (cf. Hab. iii. 19, Isa. xxxviii. 20). On the whole
question cf. Stade [Zeitschr. f. d. alttest. Wissenschaft, 1884, p. 157) —
who, however, damages his cause by urging some doubtful arguments
— and, I can now add, Kuenen, Onderzoek, ed. 2, ii. 394, 395.
Note s, p. 147.
This part of Ps. Ixxxi. is, like Ps. xix. 2-7, a fragment of a sepa
rate psalm (so Olshausen and Bickell). From its hortatory use of
ancient history it is presumably contemporary with Ps. lxxviii. It
was the psalm appointed for Thursday in the weekly liturgy (see
on Ps. xciii.) ; the tinge of hope in its closing verses prepared the
way for the more cheerful psalms for Friday and for the Sabbath.
Note *, p. 147.
An able Zend scholar, M. de Harlez, concludes from the glori
fication of David and the non-mention of the temple of Solomon
that the author of Ps. lxxviii. wrote under David, whence it follows
that ' the belief in demons was much anterior to the period of the first
possible relations between Judaea and the Iranian lands ' [Proceedings
of Soc. of Bibl. Arch., ix. 372). The latter deduction is wrongly for
mulated. Not demons (cf. Sept.) but ' hurtful angels ' are referred to
in v. 49, and even if we hold the belief in a plurality of such angels to
be post-Exile, we need not derive it from Persia. And the conclusion
as to the date of the psalm is uncritical/ Even Calvin sees that the
psalm must have been written long after the death of David, and,
indeed, after the schism of the tribes, though he does not notice
that the didactic use of past history is of itself decisive against a
pre-Exile date (see on Pss. cv., cvi.).
Note u, p. 148.
Comp. Zech. x. 6, and notice in passing the friendly attitude of
2 Zechariah to Ephraim, and his anticipation of its joining with
Judah in a war against Javan (Zech. ix. 13).
Note v, p. 148.
Ps. lxxviii. cannot properly be urged against this view. Ephraim
may have sinned grievously, and the temple of Shiloh have been
rejected. But Jeremiah fully admits this, and yet prophesies the
repentance and return of Ephraim. So too might the psalmist.

158 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect.

Note w, p. 148.
Comp. Ps. Ixxx. 16 with Gen. xlix. 22, and the passages referred
to in the next note with Gen. xlix. 24, xlviii. 15. One can easily be
lieve, moreover, that the Joseph-story, with its perfect justification
of the dealings of Providence, specially commended itself to an age
which longed in vain to see righteousness adequately rewarded.
Comp. Ps. cv. 16-22. Note ", p. 148.
See lxxvii. 21, lxxviii. 52, Ixxx. 2 ; cf. lxxiv. 1, lxxix. 13, xxiii. 1,
xcv. 7, c. 3, and note Sept.'s rendering of •135.ro'1 sroi/xavei aiTovs
xlvii. (xlviii.) 14. The Second Isaiah, too, had said, ' He will feed
his flock as a shepherd' (Isa. xl. n) ; comp. Jer. xiii. 17, xxxi. 10
1. 19, Ezek. xxxiv. 11-16. The idea, of course, is an old one. An
ancient king was a 'shepherd of the peoples,' cf. 1 Kings xxii. 17,
Zech. xi. 8, and Ass. ri'u, 1. herdsman, 2. sovereign.
Note y, p. 148.
Ewald groups Ps. Ixxiii. with Pss. lxxvii. and xciv., and too boldly
assigns them to the writer who, later on, produced Pss. xcii., xciii.,
and xcv.-c. Note z, p. 149.
See Lecture VIII., and cf. the late Prof. Elmslie's exposition,
Memoir and Sermons (1890), pp. 175-191.
Note aa, p. 149.
Here is another instance of the suggestiveness of this order.
How comes it that a single Asaphite poem — Ps. L— should have
been interposed between a group of Korahite and a group of so-called
Davidic psalms ? For the answer, see my Commentary, p. 144.
Note bb, p. 149.
A similarity in the opening words is all that connects Pss. xlix.
and xlvii. There is a more real affinity between the former and
Ps. xxxix., but the conclusions of these psalms are very different.
Note oc, p. 150.
Delitzsch illustrates the large didactic claims of vv. 2-5 by the
oratorical promises of the eager Elihu (Job xxxii. 17 &c, xxxiv. 2-4,

iv. PSALMS LXXI I., LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. 159
xxxvi. 2-4), whose discourses he regards as pre-Exilic, and, indeed,
of the age next to the Solomonic. Plumptre comes near this view
when he assigns Ps. xlix. to the reign of Hezekiah, connecting vv.
8-12 with the Shebna of Isa. xxii. 15 &c. If Job and the proem of
Proverbs are late, such early dates become impossible. The earliest
defensible date is the post-Deuteronomic part of the reign of Josiah
(i.e. after his 18th year), because this is the earliest possible date for
the proem of Proverbs. But even if the address to ' all nations,' the
large conception of wisdom, and the startling social contrasts implied
in the psalm, correspond to the circumstances of that period, the
solution of the moral problem with its eschatological reference, points
very decidedly to a later age even than that of the Exile, to which in
some respects (consider the facilities for growing rich in Babylon,
and the deepening ethical reflection) it might be plausible, with Prof.
Gratz, to assign it. I shall return to this in Lecture VIII., Part II.
Note dd, p. 150.
Can fiapvTepa here mean ' harder,' as Prof. B. Weiss supposes ?
Note ee, p. 151.
The conception of Jehovah as Judge in Ps. 1. is characteristic of
the Asaphite psalms (cf. King, The 'Asaph '-psalms, Hulsean Lectures
for 1889). Notice also that parallels to passages in Deut. and Jer.
occur not only in Ps. 1. but in the Asaphite fragment Ps. Ixxxi.
6^-17 ; one °f them consists of the clause 'I am Yahveh thy God'
(Ixxxi. n, cf. 1. 7). Comp. further Dn»bn=D»> 1. 4, 5, lxxxv. 9 ; and
HETT, 1. 11, Ixxx. 14. Note ff, p. 151.
Note yain. v. 2, as in Ixxx. 2 (prayer for a theophany). Comp.
Deut. xxxiii. 2. I do not forget Ps. xviii. 8-16, the prototype of
similar passages. See also Lecture VII., Part II.
Note eg, p. 152.
May we compare 'Yahveh Elohim Cebaoth ' in Ps. lxxxiv. 10
(Massoretic text) ? Note hh, p. 153.
See art. ' Isaiah,' Encycl. Britannica (1881) and art. in Expositor,
Feb. 1891, and cf. Kuenen, Hist. krit. Onderzoek, ed. 2, part 2 (1889),
pp. 140, 141. How far down this appendix (Isa. lxv., Ixvi.) must be

160 PSALMS LXXIL, LXXIIL, XLIX., L., ETC. lect. iv.
brought depends mainly on the date given to the somewhat earlier
one, Isa. lxiii. 7-lxiv., which I incline (see p. 118) to make later than
Prof. Kuenen, and to explain of a still greater calamity than that re
ferred to in Neh. i. 3 (see on Ps. xxii.). It will be admitted that the
recrudescence of superstitious cults alluded to in Isa. lxv. 3-5, Ixvi.
3, 1 7 will suit the times of Artaxerxes Ochus as well as any earlier
period of national disaster, and that Ixvi. 24 suits the embitterment
of these fearful times much better. Lastly, the description of the
judgment in Isa. Ixvi. strongly reminds us of Joel iii. and Zech. xiv. ;
comp. also Isa. Ixvi. 21 with the equally wide-hearted promise in
Zech. xiv. 21 (second half of Persian period). I see how necessary
it is to return to this subject elsewhere from the inadequate though
learned and most interesting treatment of Isa. lxiii.— Ixvi. by that
eminent scholar, Dillmann (1890).

PART II.
PSALMS LI, LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC.
We now pass to a psalm which, though akin in spirit to its
predecessor, must rank still higher in our estimation. For
surely there is no passage in the Old Testament at once more
inspiring and inspired than the 51st psalm. Must we not,
then, be eager to throw what light upon it we can from the
circumstances of its origin ? True, it will be answered, but
this has already been done. In the matter of the psalm-
headings, or at any rate of an arbitrary selection from them,
we most of us still stand where our forefathers stood in the
seventeenth century.3. The vowel-points, indeed, are no longer
held to be inspired, but the titles, or at least some of them,
virtually are. A full account of the occasion of Ps. li. is given
in the heading. To this I must object that hitherto the titles
of the psalms have not yielded a single trustworthy bio
graphical reference, and that a faithful exegesis proves that
the title of Ps. li. is no exception. I do not say that it is\
valueless. It suggests thus much, that when the editor of this
psalm lived, the ordinary tone of the Jewish Church was less
penitential than it was sometimes — less so, for instance, than
when church-writers penned the confessions in Ezra ix. and
Dan. ix., and especially in Isa. lix. and Ixiv. The original writer,
if I may build upon. the printed results of my own exegesis,
spoke in the name of the Church.b The editor, however, did not
perhaps feel the appropriateness of a ' general confession to be
said of the whole congregation,' no provision for which is
made even in the deepest part of Leviticus — the law of the
Day of Atonement. He owned the touching beauty of the
psalm, but set it on one side, as it were, for great sinners like
David, justifying this, no doubt, by the superficial resemblance
between v. 6a (hastily read) and 2 Sam. xii. 1 la. That the
M

162 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. lect.
title implied this, may have been felt by our prince of poets,
when he made King John say : —
But in the spirit I cry unto my God,
As did the kingly prophet David cry,
Whose hands as mine with murder were attaint.
This great psalm is in every sense the crown of the second
' Davidic ' collection. If you cannot enjoy it without imagining
that you know its author, then you might not unreasonably,
upon exegetical grounds, give your voice for the poet-prophet
whom we now call the Second Isaiah. It is a proof of the de-
sultoriness of ancient criticism that the Septuagint translator,
who assigns several of the psalms to prophetic writers, left
this obvious conjecture for Hitzig. But, for my own part, I
think it safer to ascribe our psalm, not to the Second Isaiah, but
to one of those lyric poets (see p. 71) who were subject to the
spell of his genius. May we presume that the psalmist lived
during the Babylonian Exile ? Both Theodore of Mopsuestia
and Ewald held this theory, which is pleasing enough to the
imagination. The sacred singers, according to Ps. cxxxvii.,
hung their harps upon the willows ; here we see the harps
taken down and used. The view is not precluded by the
reference to the priestly rite of purification [v. 9 ; cf. Appen
dix), nor by vv. 20, 21, an epilogue which may, or must, have
been added in the time of Nehemiah (cf. on Ps. cxlvii.).0 Nor
does the view of sacrifices in vv. 18, 19, of itself prove that
Ps. li. is quite contemporaneous with Ps. 1. Still we must
remember that the other Deutero-Isaianic psalms are post-
Exilic, and that Isa. lix. and lxiii. 7-lxiv., of which this
church-psalm in parts so strongly reminds us, are also at
earliest works of the age of Nehemiah.d We may reasonably
consider, then, that Ps. li. was written during the Restoration
period, before the great rebuilding of the walls by Nehemiah
(see v. 20).
Let us now turn to Pss. lxv., Ixvi., and lxvii., of which the
first is called Davidic ; the other two are nameless. When
were they written ? Ewald finds a great resemblance between
Ps. lxv. ( Te decet hymnus) and Pss. xlvi. and xlviii., which he
brings close up to Judah's great deliverance in Hezekiah's
reign. The parallelism, however, is really confined to a single
verse [v. 8 ; cf. Ps. xlvi. 3, 4, 7), nor is it urged by Delitzsch,

IV. PSALMS LL, LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. 163
though he agrees with Ewald as to the date of the psalm.
My own grounds for differing from both are derived from the
phraseological affinities of the poem e and from the history of
Biblical theology/ It is the second temple which engrosses
the church's affection, and which Israel longs to see the
spiritual centre of the world, and it is deliverance from one
•of the troubles that befell Judah, say, under Artaxerxes I.
(465-425), which calls forth the song of grateful praise.8 The
same period will suit the somewhat similar 67th psalm [Deus
misereatur), which is a psalmist's commentary on the priestly
blessing, Num. vi. 24-26. We now come to Ps. Ixvi. [Jubilate
Deo), which one modern critic (Tholuck), under the glamour
of the Isaianic period, actually refers to king Hezekiah. But
must we — may we — on these four slender grounds, (1) that an
individual gives thanks for the nation ; (2) that he and they
have been delivered from a crushing burden and a furnace of
affliction ; (3) that his prayers are the expression of an honest
and believing heart ; and (4) that Hezekiah was, according to
the common opinion, a poet, ascribe the psalms to that pious
king ? The acute Theodore of Mopsuestia gives a much
more reasonable explanation of this and the preceding psalm.
In accordance with his theory of prophecy, he thinks that
David was transported into distant times, and prophesied the
return from the Exile. His Biblical theology may be at
fault, but the critical view which he implies is here again
almost equal to the best.h The 66th psalm does not belong
to the Solomonic temple, and though post-Exile, is not, on
the ground of a single expression (cf. v. 7 with lxviii. 19),
to be brought down as late as the Greek period.
We are now approaching another station in our route.
Ps. xlvii. has only an artificial connexion with Pss. xlvi. and
xlviii. It struck a later editor as the lyrical expansion of the
idea of Ps. xlvi. II, that Jehovah is both de jure and de facto
the governor of the nations. But it interrupts the far closer as
well as more obvious connexion of Pss. xlvi. and xlviii. It was
not amiss to group these three psalms for the temple-service,
but, considering the clear affinities between Ps. xlvii. and the
' new song ' in celebration of the second temple (viz. Pss. xciii.
and xcv.-c), we are bound to regard it as properly a misplaced
fragment or perhaps a replica of that ' new song.' ; Pss. xlvi.
M 2

164 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. lect.
and xlviii., however, have a family connexion. They agree
ih presenting remarkable coincidences both of thought and
of expression with Assyrian prophecies of Isaiah. Nowhere
can these be found so fully set forth as in the commentary of
Dr. Perowne, to which I may refer the reader. My own
opinion has varied. In 1870 I thought with Hitzig that the
prophet Isaiah might have been also a psalmist, and have
written these psalms on the great deliverance from Senna
cherib. I no longer think so.'' The Jewish Church in Isaiah's
time was far too germinal to have sung these expressions of
daring monotheism and impassioned love of the temple ; and
the word 'Elyon (xlvi. 5 ; cf. xlvii. 3) as a title for Jehovah
never occurs in Isaiah, but frequently in the (probably) later
psalms. Of what later age,k then, are these fine psalms the
records ?
Well, Isaiah soon became a favourite prophet — Jeremiah
for instance abounds in allusions to him, and in any part of
the post-Exile period the temple-poets may have resorted to
him for stimulus. The divine name, Jehovah Sabaoth, and
the title 'Elyon, were in use both in the Persian and in the
Greek period (see for the former, Pss. lxxxiv. 9, lix. 6), and
the admiration expressed for the beauty of Jerusalem in
Ps. xlviii. 3 reminds us of the loving encomium in Ps. 1. 3,
and points to a period subsequent to the completion of the
second temple. Then indeed it was true in a far larger sense
than ever before, that Jerusalem was 'the joyof the whole
earth.' x Then it was, that at the great feasts Jerusalem became
too small for the thronging Jewish pilgrims from every land,
all familiar with the leading parts of the Scriptures, and eager
to realize the scenes of the sacred story. To whom so fully
as to a pilgrim of the Diaspora do these words apply ? —
According to thy name, Elohim,m so is thy praise
Unto the ends of the earth :
Thy right hand is full of righteousness.
Walk about Zion, and make the round of her,
Reckon up the towers thereof.
Mark well her rampart,
Study her palaces,
That ye may tell the next generation, — (Ps. xlviii. 11, 13, 14.)
An allusion to Lam. ii. 15.

IV. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVII, XLV, ETC. 165
Yes ; Ps. xlviii. at any rate is, I think, a festival psalm,
inspired by the idea, now becoming a practical reality, of the
Catholic Church. It presupposes a knowledge of the Scrip
tures, and may be grouped with the well-known historical
psalms, from which it differs only in its more poetic character.
Thus and thus only can we account for the exaggeration in
v. 5, For, behold, the kings n assembled,
They passed on together.
Not thus would a contemporary of Isaiah have written. But
after the Return it was perfectly natural to use this seeming
exaggeration. For the overthrow of Sennacherib, like that
of Pharaoh, became then typical of the great future over
throw of the assembled hostile nations predicted by the later
prophets.1 The use of historical motives in Ps. xlvi. is more delicate
than in Ps. xlviii., though not less certain. You have one
parallel for it close by in Ps. xlvii. 4, 5, which is a retrospect
of the subjugation of the Canaanites and the conquest of
Canaan. You have another in a psalm to which I would
next invite your attention — Ps. lxxvi., which, together with
Ps. lxxv., Ewald places immediately after Pss. xlvi. and xlviii.
and considers to have been occasioned by Sennacherib's over
throw.0 You will observe at once that Ps. lxxvi. begins, like
Ps. xlviii., with a reference to Jerusalem, and that lxxvi. 9
and lxxv. 4 are parallel in part to xlvi. 7. Affinities to
Isaiah are not wanting p in either of these psalms, though they
are much less striking than those in the former pair. The
Septuagint, moreover, prefixes to Ps. lxxvi. the title mSr; irpbs
tov 'Aaavpiov.'1 But if Pss. lxxvi. and lxxviii. are post-Exilic,
much more are Pss. lxxv. and lxxvi. Observe, for instance,
the use of ' Salem' for 'Jerusalem' in Ps. lxxvi. 3 (as in the
post-Exilic passage, Gen. xiv. 1 8-20 ; see p. 42), and the
legal tone of ' Make vows and pay them ' in Ps. lxxvi. 1 2.
Notice also the pervading antithesis in both psalms between
the ' ungodly ' and the ' evil-doers ' on the one hand, and the
' righteous ' and the ' afflicted ' or ' humble-minded ' on the
other. This last feature may even suggest to some the
1 Comp. Ezek. xxxviii., xxxix., Isa. Ixvi. 6-24, Joel iii. 2, Zech. xiv. 2.

166 PSALMS LI., LXV-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. lect.
possibility of a Maccabaean reference. It does not of course
necessitate this, but it would be quite in harmony with it
And so, too, is the keynote which is struck in Ps. lxxv. I : —
We give thanks unto thee, Elohim, we give thanks unto thee ;
And they that call upon thy name rehearse thy wonders.
These answers to prayer and these wonders of Elohim —
can they be limited to the ' old lovingkindnesses ' ? Then
read these words in vv. 5 and 6 : —
I say unto the boasters, Be not so boastful,
And to the ungodly, Do not exalt your horn ;
Do not exalt your horn towards heaven,
Nor speak arrogantly of the Rock.r
Ask yourselves now, to whom do these disparaging titles
and statements more fitly belong than to the pagans and
paganizers, Antiochus Epiphanes and his myrmidons, the
vireprj<pavia of whose speech is expressly imputed to them as
a crime both in Daniel (vii. 8, 11) and in 1 and 2 Mace
(1 Mace i. 24, vii. 34, 2 Mace ix. 4)? And then look at
Ps. lxxvi. No Asaphite psalm is equally vivid and vigorous ;
it is ' keen as swordblades flashing down upon Syrian helms.'
Yes ; the psalms may be Maccabaean,3 as Hitzig would have
them, but we cannot claim for this view the highest degree of
probability, especially as neither psalm refers to any warlike
deeds of Israelites. It is safer, I think, to connect these
twin-psalms with Pss. xlvi. and xlviii., and assign them, at
the earliest, to one of the happier parts of the Persian age.
The only remaining psalm of Book II. is the prelude to
the Song of Songs — the 45 th. Let it be understood that I
speak, not of the virtually re-written psalm of the old Catholic
Church, but of the Hebrew ' song ' in its original meaning.
For both I need not say that I have the utmost reverence,
but as I am endeavouring to throw myself back into the
period when the psalms were written, I must not allow
myself to be influenced by the ideas of later interpreters. I
need not, therefore, stay to show that the opening words
attribute to the author a real but not a prophetic inspiration.*
Nor yet that the royal subject of the ' song ' -is by no means
' King Messiah,' as the Targum and most Jewish and
early Christian interpreters supposed," but some contemporary

iv. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV., ETC. 167
monarch. The most conservative views which seem to me ten
able are those of Hitzig and of Ewald.1 Of the two I prefer
Ewald's.* The life of Ahab gains no doubt in melancholy in
terest, if he be the king referred to. One thinks of that young
man who was untrue to his vocation, but whom Jesus beholding
loved. But it is easier to understand the psalm of that great
king, Jeroboam II., who to the devout historian seemed Israel's
divinely sent deliverer (2 Kings xiii. 5). We may be sure
that the political revival of Ephraim was not without effect
upon its literature. Indeed, there may be a hint of this in a
discourse of Amos, probably composed in the second half of
Jeroboam's reign. It occurs in a description of the luxurious
practices of the nobles of Samaria and Jerusalem, which in
cluded ' singing idle songs to the sound of the viol,' and ' devis
ing for themselves instruments of music like David ' w (Am. vi.
4, 5, R.V.). And we may infer from it, not only that there was
no deep gulf in David's time between religious and non-religious
music, but above all that there was a class of court-poets
in northern Israel who sang the praises of the king and his
nobles, of wine and love, and the achievements of heroes.
Alfred von Kremer has drawn a vivid picture of such a class
under the Caliphs ; it would not be surprising if the increase
of luxury produced a similar current of song in ancient
Palestine. Of course, this may have been the case as early
as the reign of Ahab, but it is still easier to understand it in
the following century, of which we have somewhat more com
plete historical information.1 The developed art of Ps. xiv.,
and of an analogous production — the Song of Songs y — is also
more in harmony with the theory of Ewald, who points out
that ' though lofty, sometimes bold, and throughout elegant,
the poem (Ps. xiv.) lacks the pure fire within,' that 'it is a
mere work of art, and not of elemental, primitive force.'
But from possibility to probability is a long step. Remem
bering our critical results hitherto, I judge it more reasonable
to seek a home at any rate for the courtier's love-poem (Ps.
xiv.) in the post-Exile period;1 the linguistic affinities of
certain words can at least as readily be accounted for on this
1 See my Psalms, p. 123. Delitzsch thinks of Joram, but fails to account
satisfactorily for xiv. 13. And could Athaliah, a native Israeli tish princess, be
called Sw ?

168 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. lect.
hypothesis as on any other. If you ask : In which part of
the post-Exile period ? I reply, Most naturally in the part
to which we have already referred Ps. Ixxii., the only other
direct eulogy of a king in the Psalter. And if Ps. xlv. belongs
to the age of Philadelphus, surely that friend and patron of
the Jews may (or must) be also its subject. Striking themes
are generally taken up in the Psalter a second time. If the
author of Ps. Ixxii. could pray that in this ' king's son ' the
Messianic promise might be visibly fulfilled, may not the
religious court-poet who wrote Ps. xlv. have addressed his
work, which is not without Messianic features, to the same
favourite prince ? aa
My own instinct would here again have led me to prefer
Darius. But historically there is nothing in Ps. xlv. which
is plainly unsuitable bb to Ptolemy Philadelphus (see p. 144
&c). It was, no doubt, of himself and his Hellenic brothers
that Theocritus thought when he said : —
None entered e'er the sacred lists of song,
Whose lips could breathe sweet music, but he gained
Fair guerdon at the hand of Ptolemy ; °°
but the .partiality of Philadelphus for the Jews is an un
doubted fact, nor was Philometor the first Ptolemy who was
interested in Jewish writers.dd To whom so well as to the
most condescending, generous, and literary of the Ptolemies
do the first two verses of this Hebrew song apply ? And can
we think of any ruler of the Jews between Solomon and
Ptolemy Philadelphus to whom the words would be more
fitly addressed — ' Grace ' (a Greek would have said, Peitho)
' hath been shed upon thy lips ' ?
It is too true that Philadelphus violated the highest ideal
of marriage more conspicuously than some of the better
Oriental monarchs.1 The elevated strains of Ps. Ixxii. do
not refer to this, but we may justifiably trace an allusion to it
in Ps. xlv. 10. The writer is certainly no friend of polygamy,
but, though as devout as Pindar himself, he cannot turn a
court-poem into a sermon. Still, to those who can read
between the lines, he forbids the king to sink below the
standard of the Solomon of poetry, ' Sexaginta sunt reginae
1 Droysen, Hellenismus, ii. 237.

iv. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. 169
... ; una est columba mea, perfecta mea' (Song of Sol.
vi. 7j 8)- One further advice, or rather request, he has to
urge, for Ptolemy himself most wholesome, for Israel the ' right
eous ' and the ' lowly,' who is already scattered in many lands,
a matter of life and death. As a divine hero, the king is to
gird on his sword and fight, not merely for empire, but for
righteousness and lowliness [v. 5). See how far our poet sur
passes Theocritus, and how delicately he refers to the ex
pected patronage of his own people (cf. Ixxii. 2) ! And though
v. 17 has been thought60 to show that a Persian king must
have been meant, the Rosetta stone (where the Ptolemy is
styled Kvpcos fiao-iXeicov) shows that this is a very hasty con
clusion. Palestinian writers knew the character of their
Egyptian rulers, and interpreted by the Messianic promise, a
loyal Jewish subject might well accept the Ptolemy's title,
and paraphrase it in the words of v. 17 (comp. Ixxii. 8). Yes ;
it is no unworthy enthusiasm which animates the Hebrew
poet, even in vv. 7, 8. He idealizes his king, not in the (to a
Jew) blasphemous deifying style of Egyptian court-poets and
scribes,ff but precisely as Cyrus was idealized by the Babylo
nian Isaiah. The words ' Jehovah thy God ' can hardly mean
as little as ' Jehovah ' means when a Hebrew writer describes
the thoughts of Potiphar (Gen. xxxix. 3). They imply cer
tainly that the king stood in a special relation to Jehovah,gg
and possibly an expectation that he will before long acknow
ledge that ' the God who hath no form and whose name is a
mystery' (Egyptian expressions) is Jehovah. For although
there is an innocent and genuinely Hebraic sense in which
Jehovah and Zeus are one (cf. Mai. i. 1 1 and Ps. lxv. 3 ?), yet
the highest hope of a prophet who is perhaps quoted by our
poet is that Yahveh's name may be one (Zech. xiv. 9).
Already there are some favoured non-Israelites, whom the
true God gently leads to a fuller knowledge of Himself.
That one of these was Cyrus, might be inferred (2 Chron.
xxxvi. 22, 23) from these words of the prophet, 'that thou
mayest know that I am Jehovah, I that call thee by thy
name, the God of Israel ' (Isa. xlv. 3). That Alexander was
another, must have been believed by some, though the
Aggadic form of the belief may not be earlier than Jose
phus.1111 And why should not the young Ptolemy, as an heir

170 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. lect.
of the noble schemes of Alexander, have been a third ? If
the first Greek sovereign of Asia adored the most sacred
name, why not also another of his race ?
Do not make the personal character of Philadelphus an ob
jection ; time could not as yet have revealed its darker aspects."
But even had the poem been written later, remember how
highly an earnest Jew like Philo esteemed this Ptolemy. In
this he does but carry on the tradition of the prophets. It was,
of course, no regal virtue, as Jeremiah said, to ' vie with Ahab ' '
in magnificence ; but to ' judge the cause of the poor and needy *
was a quality so noble that the prophet can even describe it
as ' knowing Jehovah ' (Jer. xxii. 16). ' Philanthropy towards
all men, especially towards Jewish citizens,' 2 was a note of the
character of Philadelphus ; was not this a reflection of the
philanthropy of Jehovah ? And if the king seemed at the top
of human happiness, must it not be ' Jehovah his God ' who
had thus 'anointed him with the oil of joy ' above the other
Hellenic kings ?
I will venture upon a further conjecture, which is not
bolder than many which pass current among us. If Onias,
the founder of the rival Egyptian temple, could believe that
Isa. xix. 1 8 referred to his own circumstances,3 may not
another Jew have conceived the delightful idea that vv. 23-25^
of the same chapter would be fulfilled by the conquests of
the Ptolemies : and why should not this Jew be, like Onias, a
member of the high priestly family, who offered this en
comium in return for his advancement to the civil and
religious headship of his people ? And what opportunity
could be so favourable for this as a nuptial feast ? I conjec
ture, then, that the author of Ps. xlv. may have been that
) Eleazar or (if Eleazar be a fiction) Manasseh who upon the
' death of Simon I. succeeded to the -rrpoo-Tao-ia instead of the
legitimate heir Onias.kk This event may be dated in B.C. 287..
Two years later Ptolemy Soter abdicated in favour of his
son, afterwards called Philadelphus. It is probable4 that
the brilliant and world-famous coronation-festival was soon
followed by the marriage of the young king to Arsinoe,
daughter of Lysimachus, king of Thrace, and that Eleazar or
1 Jer. xxii. 15, following Sept. (Cod. Alex.). 2 'Aristeas,' Merx, i. 260.
3 Jos., Ant. xiii. 3, 1. 4 Droysen, Hellenismus, i. 632.

PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. 171

Manasseh senf his panegyric on this occasion — sent it in all
good faith, believing the new Ptolemy to be in reality, what
his father was, for the first time in history, called, ' a
saviour.'11 He wrote it, of course, in Jerusalem, in sur
roundings happily very different from those in which Theo
critus in Alexandria was inditing idylls to a Jew necessarily
so profane. The reader will excuse the length to which the preceding
exposition of a so-called ' mere conjecture ' has gone. Iden
tifications of this kind must be set forth tentatively, and their
value is largely symbolic (see p. 146, foot). The more pheno
mena they take account of, the greater their importance to
the student. Of course in a history of the Jews or of Jewish
religion such a conjecture as the present would occupy a very
subordinate place. Ps. xlv. would there be referred to simply
as post-Exilic The first half of these lectures however is
critical, and some fulness of detail is necessary to avoid the
charge of rashness. — But are there any historical or phraseo
logical allusions in favour of this view (with or without the
preceding conjecture) ? Surely the tone of large magnificence
harmonizes admirably with it. Among the details (which
may once have been more numerous, if the poem has been
edited for church-use) note the allusion to Tyre in v. 13a
('daughter of Tyre' and 'king's daughter' are not the same),
which reminds us that Phoenicia equally with Judaea formed
part of the province of Ccele Syria, and that though Ptolemy
Soter had in 312 ' impoverished ' the island-city (Zech. ix. 4),
it recovered, at least commercially, from the effects of the
siege. The harvest of literary allusions is less abundant than
in Ps. Ixxii., but this is because our poem is less distinctly
religious. Still in v. 2 the phrase ' a ready scribe ' cannot but
remind us of the description of Ezra (Ezra vii. 6), and v. dfi
is illustrated by Ps. xxi. 6 (post-Exilic). And if vv. 7 and 8a
are suggestive of Isa. xvi. 5, v. 8b is equally so of Isa. lxi. 3
(Exilic), while v. 10b ('gold of Ophir') reminds us of Job
xxii. 24, xxviii. 16, Isa. xiii. 12 (all Exilic). We may also
compare Ps. Ixxii. itself, where the same prominence is given
to 'righteousness' and 'humility.' And as in Ps. Ixxii. 8
there is probably an allusion to Zech. ix. 10, so in Ps. xlv. 6
there may be a melancholy, distant echo of Zech. ix. 9,

172 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV., ETC. lect.
' Behold, thy king cometh unto thee, righteous is he and
helped (viz. by the God of battles), humble,' or perhaps,
comparing Ps. xviii. 36, 'condescending.' I say, 'a melan
choly echo ; ' for I am well aware of the haze of illusion
which encompassed our poet, and from which Philo him
self, long afterwards, was not free. Bard and wise man alike
overrated this Ptolemy, the former because he took too ex
ternal a view of the Messianic promise, and both because
they were flattered by a Hellenic king's partiality for their
people. Philo, moreover, exaggerated the significance of the
royal desire for the translation of the Pentateuch, which
appeared to him ' zeal and longing for the laws of Israel,'
but which is amply accounted for by a literary and political
interest. Our poet wrote, I suppose, before this translation
had been thought of, but not before that peaceful interaction
of Jewish and Hellenic ideas had begun, which was violently
stopped by the madness of Epiphanes. He was a student of
the prophets, and, remembering what they had said of Cyrus
and Nebuchadrezzar , he made a bold venture of faith, and
trusted God to fulfil His promises, and ' make Himself known
to Egypt' in the person of its king (Isa. xix. 21). Blame
him, if you will, for taking up the singing-robes of a court-
poet, but acknowledge that it was a good way, not only of
expressing gratitude, but of insinuating a pure religious
morality. There can have been no difficulty in getting his
poem rendered into Greek ; some of our psalms may already
have been translated in some shape for private use among
the Egyptian Jews. It is another question whether such a
Greek version can have charmed the royal ears.1
But I lay no stress on this conjecture. The Septuagint
version of Ps. xlv. was at any rate not prepared from the
autograph Hebrew copy. It is more important to explain
the admission of such a poem into the Psalter. One of
Philadelphus's chief titles to fame (the origination of the
Septuagint) is said to have been regarded with much dis
favour in Palestine. How, then, came these very Jews to
canonize Ptolemy's encomium ? mm Well, the Talmudic tradi
tion may have some basis of fact,nn but is valueless as a
testimony to Jewish opinion in the age of Philadelphus.
1 Comp. Ebers's story, The Sisters, E.T. ii. 97, 102.

iv. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. 173
Whether or no Palestinian rabbis in Alexandria had a share
(it can only have been a small one) in the work of translation,
the first Greek version of the Pentateuch cannot all at once
have aroused such hostility in Palestine. Time was needed
for its deadly errors to be discovered ; St. Paul, at any rate,
failed to discover them. I grant, however, that an eulogy of
Ptolemy would not as such have been adopted into the
permanent Psalter by Simon the Maccabee. Doubtless in
his time the original occasion of the psalm had been for
gotten ; we can hardly overrate the carelessness of tradition
on such points. But Simon at least must have formed some
theory respecting this psalm. Did he explain it as referring
to the personal Messiah ? Scarcely. The Messianic inter
pretation of psalms (in the stricter sense) originated as a
protest against the later Asmonaeans. It is far more probable
that Ps. xlv., like Ps. Ixxii., was explained by Simon (uncriti
cally, no doubt) of Solomon. This view is perhaps confirmed
by the latter part of the title, which runs thus in the Septua
gint, a>hr) virep tov ayairr]Tov 00 (some manuscripts insert after
aJS?), tov AavlS). The translator either read -pt TSS> and took
TT as short for nnn' (nn* ' his beloved,' in cxxvii. 2, was
interpreted by an editor — see the Hebrew title — of Solomon pp),
or else vocalized riTT (not rn'T), and explained this, as
Kimchi did afterwards, but in a different sense, as short
for aj rVTT. (cf. fs: nTT , Jer. xi. 15). In either case, the
ayairTjTos of the Greek title may be Solomon, who is called
n;TT in 2 Sam. xii. 25. It is true, the Solomonic reference
of Ps. xlv. harmonizes neither with the Book of Kings nor
with that of Chronicles. According to the first, Solomon was
neither specially pious nor eminently warlike ; according to
the second he was pious enough, but by no means warlike ;
and according to neither was he a champion of the poor and
oppressed.0-0- But the theory was plausible enough for Simon
(or the collector), who may have compared the description of
the 'king's daughters' in Ps. xlv. 10 and the "virgins' in xlv.
1 5 with the passage to which I have already referred in Song
of Sol. vi. 8. It was uncritical, as I have said, but surely not
more so than the ascription of the spiritual and churchly
sentiments of Ps. li. to David. And may not Simon in his
heart have prized the psalm (as we, I hope, still prize it) as an

174 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. lect.
expression of moral, and I may almost say, Christian optimism?
You might have thought from Ecclesiastes that Israel was
rapidly sinking into an abyss of pessimism. Not so ; a little
sunshine of prosperity rekindled its faith in the ultimate pre
dominance of righteousness. Persia had fallen, like Nineveh
and Babylon, but a better kingdom had arisen," which, while
it obeyed the law of justice and mercy, could mock at
change. With this thought I take leave of this psalm. S3 A
philosopher l has called the Jews the most optimistic race in
history. Elastic, indeed, was their optimism ; it adjusted
itself to disillusionments without number, and it rested on
the truth that righteousness tendeth to life, and is the only
secure basis of an empire. And is not this truth a profoundly
Christian one ? and, as we read the ' goodly words ' of the
45th psalm, may we not join hands with the author across
the centuries, and acknowledge a still present power in his
words to delight and to instruct ? Lovers of the psalms cannot
admit that chivalry is a purely Christian conception. Long
ages before Arthur, ' truth, meekness, and righteousness '
formed the Hebrew ideal of kingship, and for that grand fifth
verse of our psalm I know no better parallel than the song of
Arthur's knights : — -
Blow trumpet ! he will lift us from the dust.
Blow trumpet ! live the strength, and die the lust !
Clang battle-axe and clash brand ! Let the King reign.

Note a, p. 161.
Hildersam, a Puritan divine, in his CLII. Lectures upon Psalm
LI. (Lond. 1642), says that the titles of the psalms 'are a part of the
holy Scripture given by Divine inspiration,' and infers that 'it is a
sin and matter of great danger to neglect and slight them.' Very
different is the attitude of that great expository preacher, St. Chrysos
tom, who, like his friend Theodore of Mopsuestia (see note at begin
ning of Lect. V.), accepts the Davidic authorship of the psalm, but
is enabled by his theory of prophecy to interpret it as having a non-
Davidic as well as a Davidic reference. His theory of Ps. li. is that
David, who foresaw the falling away and captivity of the Jewish
1 Schopenhauer.

IV. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. 175
people, wrote this psalm as a medicine both for his own wounds and
for those of his people. In a word, the psalmist is to some extent
like a tragic poet [h-paymBrjo-iv), who throws himself into the misfor
tunes of other men. The latest German commentator (F. W. Schultz)
assigns the psalm to the Exile. So, too, Nowack in his edition of
Hupfeld, but adding that a still later date is more probable. In our
own land Dr. Stanley Leathes and Mr. Mozley adhere to the Davidic
authorship, remarking that David had much building work to do at
Jerusalem. But Henry V. on his deathbed took a truer view of the
meaning of v. 20. Note b, p. 161.
So Theodore, who explains v. 6a, 'against thee, thee only,' by
an implied antithesis, 'not against the Babylonians' (cf. Hab. iii. 13).
(The editor of Ps. li. overlooked ' thee only,' when he explained the
psalm of David's sin with Bathsheba.) On the church-reference of
this and other psalms, see Lect. VI., p. 262 &c.
Note °, p. 162.
Smend, indeed, maintains that vv. 20, 21 form an integral part of
the psalm, but this hangs together with his theory that they relate
to the Messianic age (cf. Mai. iii. 3), which is at any rate unnecessary.
Delitzsch, who regards vv. 3-19 as Davidic, is inclined to admit that
vv. 20, 21 are 'a liturgical addition of the Church of the Exile.' So
virtually Theodoret, and after him ' one of the wise men of Spain '
referred to by Ibn Ezra. This acute commentator has himself no
objection ; ' we may say that they were uttered in the spirit of
prophecy ' (BHIpn nm)- So, too, Kimchi. This is merely to save
the current orthodox theory. Note d, p. 162.
It is not improbable, however (see p. 118, on Ps. Ixxxix.), that the
prophecy in Isa. lxiii. 7-lxiv. was written during the troubles under
Artaxerxes Ochus. Ps. li. can easily find a home in the same period,
like Ps. cxxx. ; vv. 19, 20 may allude to the breaking down of the
walls which was probably a part of the cruel punishment inflicted
upon the Jews for their revolt. The date here proposed seems to
me clearly the best for Isa. lxiii. 7 &c, but I hesitate somewhat
with regard to Ps. li. Note e, p. 163.
See my commentary. Note also that if njp-l'n in lxv. 2 be cor
rect, it suggests connecting this psalm with the neighbouring 62 nd

176 PSALMS LI, LXV.-LXVIL, XLV., ETC. LECT.
psalm (in v. 2 of which "1 may have, as here, an ethical meaning —
see Delitzsch). Note f, p. 163.
The views of spiritual religion are developed beyond the average
pre-Exile standard (cf. Isa. Ivii. 7 and Mai. i. 11, both post-Exile).
Note also the parallelism between vv. 2, 3 and Ps. 1. 14, 15. Tho-
luck remarks, ' David names the two sacrifices of the pious which
are demanded in Ps. 1.' Note e, p. 163.
(Ps. lxv. not pre-Exile.) Many MSS. of Sept. (with Complut.
and Aid. editions) prefix wBr) 'Icpe/xiov Kai 'lit,eKirjX rov Xaov 7-^9
irapoiKia'S, ore tfxeXXov iKTrop^viaOai. This shows us how to explain
the use of prophets' names elsewhere in the Greek headings ; they
are chiefly symbols of a period. Kimchi also interprets this psalm
of the Return. Comp. the Greek heading of Ps. lxxi.
Note h, p. 163.
Post-Exile characteristics in Ps. Ixvi. are in vv. 1-4, 8, the invita
tion to the nations to praise Jehovah ; in v. 6, the didactic view of
history ; in vv. 10-12, the retrospect of the Exile (cf. Pss. cxxiv.
and cxxix.) ; in vv. 13-15, 18, 19, legalism.
Note *, p. 163.
It is strange that Theodore did not notice this ; he explains
Ps. xlvii. as if Maccabaean. Eichhorn goes to the other extreme.
According to him, the psalm celebrates the bringing up of the ark to
the city of David. But the ' going up ' of the ark is, in fact, in Ps. xlvii.
6 a symbolic expression for the ' return of Jehovah ' to the (second)
temple. Notice the phrase ' Abraham's God ' in Ps. xlvii. 10. There
is no sure reference to Abraham in the whole of the pre-Exile
poetry and prophecy. Note J, p. 164.
Ewald and Lagarde long ago convinced me that Isa. xii., which is
evidently a fragment of a psalm (and that by no means an original
psalm), was not written by Isaiah. The latter critic, as we have seen
(p. 31), refers it to the time of the completion of the second temple.
Of course, Pss. xlvi. and xlviii. might, nevertheless, be of the period
mentioned above, to which Ewald refers them. Yet I venture
to reject this view for the reasons given in the text. It should be

iv. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV., ETC. 177
added that Perowne extends the Sennacherib reference to all the
three psalms, and that Lagarde admits it for Ps. xlvi. (he thinks that
Immanuel= Hezekiah, cf. Ps. xlvi. 8, 12).
Note k, p. 164.
' Later age.' For Hitzig's theory that these two psalms were
occasioned by the ill success of the Syro-Israelitish assault upon
Jerusalem (2 Kings vi. 5) is inconsistent with the mixed character of
the Immanuel-prophecy, for which the circumstances of the time
amply account. The Jehoshaphat theory (comp. note aa, p. 109)
mentioned by Calvin, once favoured by De Wette, and adopted (for
Pss. xlvii. and xlviii.) by Hengstenberg and (for all three psalms) by
Delitzsch, has against it, (1) that it leans solely on the Chronicler
(2 Chron. xx.) ; (2) that even according to Chron. the allied forces did
notactually threaten Jerusalem ; and, (3) that these psalms havestriking
points of contact with Isaiah. To the last objection Delitzsch replies
that Ps. xlvi. is not an echo but a prelude of Isa. xxxiii. But when
two writings are parallel, the one a prophecy and the other a poem,
the presumption is very strong that the former is the original.
Note m, p. 164.
Probably the editor has substituted ' Elohim ' for ' Yahveh : ' see
Ps. cxiii. 3.
Note ", p. 165.
Comp. Ps. ii. 2, ' the kings of the earth ' (at least, if the psalm be
held to refer imaginatively to the Hezekian age).
Note °, p. 165.
So Hengstenberg and Delitzsch. It is against this view, in my
own judgment, that Ps. lxxv. alludes (see note r) to the Song of
Hannah, and Ps. lxxvi. to the Song in Ex. xv., the former of which is
(see p. 57, note e) probably, and the latter almost certainly (see p. 31)
post-Exile. (I doubt whether Dillmann's view of Ex. xv. 1-18 can
be justified — that an old song from the Mosaic age was developed
subsequently, but not so late as the times of David and Solomon,
into a great festal ode.)
Note p, p. 165.
Ps. lxxv. 2 (?), cf. Isa. xxx. 27,
» „ 4«, » » xiv. 31,
„ „ 8, „ „ xxxiii. 22, N

178 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV., ETC. lect.
Ps. lxxvi. 12 (KTi»)> cf. Isa. viii. 13,
„ „ 13 (-1X3''), „ „ xviii. 5,
„ „ „ (rj-n)» „ „ xxxiii. 11.
The description in lxxvi. 4-7 suggests the overthrow of Senna
cherib (as described in Isaiah's prophecies), though a touch is bor
rowed from the account of the catastrophe of Pharaoh (Ex. xv. 19).
But these overthrows were regarded as typical specimens of the
working of Him who ' alone doeth great wonders ' (Ps. exxxvi. 4,
10-18, Isa. xliii. 17). Note «, p. 165.
Theodoret states that he found this heading 'in some copies,'
though not in the Hexapla. It is, in fact, omitted in Cod. Sin., as
also the similar one of Ps. Ixxx. That ' the Assyrian ' is to be taken
literally (in spite of Hitzig) must be presumed from the fact that no
other titles in Sept. point as late as the Syrian-Greek period, and
that Theodore and Theodoret (like Rashi afterwards) explain this
psalm of Sennacherib's invasion (because of vv. 3, 4). Observe in
passing that while Theodore takes a similar view of Ps. lxxv., Theo
doret regards this psalm as spoken in the person of the captives at
Babylon. Note r, p. 166.
Reading >1V? (see my crit. note, and cf. Baethgen, Jahrb. f. prot.
Theol., 1882 ; Lagarde, Mittheilungen, ii. 378). Comp. Ps. lxxv. 6b
(thus corrected) with 1 Sam. ii. 2b, 3a.
Note s, p. 166.
We might compare, for Ps. lxxvi., the prayer ascribed, with great
psychological fitness, to Judas before the great battle of Adasa ('on
the Judaean watershed, four miles north of Jerusalem ') in 1 Mace.
vii. 40-43 (cf. 2 Mace. xv. 22), which refers to 2 Kings xix. 35
(=Isa. xxxvii. 36). Note *, p. 166.
Hebrew as well as Greek antiquity regarded poetry as a direct
divine gift. Cf. Pind., Pyth. iv. (end), evpe irayav d/t/Jpoo-iW tVeW.
An encomium like Ps. xlv. may far more fitly be compared in its spirit
with Pindar's odes than with Theocritus's idylls. Its subject is not
merely the king's prosperity, but the love of God to him ; and this
poet, like Pindar, means what he says.

iv. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVII. XLV, ETC. 179
Note u, p. 166.
Apart from the other difficulties of the old Messianic interpreta
tion, it was contrary to the ideal of an Israelitish king to ride upon
a horse. See Zech. ix. 9 ; Psalms of Sol. xvii. 37. Dr. Westcott
says that Ps. xlv. is not quoted in the N. T., except in Heb. i. 7, 8.
But Rev. vi. 2, at any rate, alludes to Ps. xlv. 5, 6. Theodore is
one of those who adopt the Messianic explanation.
Note v, p. 167.
In the first and second editions of his work on the Psalms, Ewald
only ventured to maintain that some king of N. Israel must be
meant ; in the third, he selected Jeroboam II. Upon Hitzig's view
see further my Commentary, p. 123, and note that no member of
the house of Ahab bears a name compounded with Baal. His son
is Yehoxam ; his daughter Axh&lyah or Athsiyahu.
Note w, p. 167.
Cf. 1 Chron. xxiii. 5, ' the instruments which I made (said David)
to praise therewith ; ' Neh. xii. 36. Remembering this, perhaps, our
old dramatist, George Peele, gives David an ivory lute !
Note x, p. 167.
Notice that the custom of adorning the houses of the rich with
ivory had become general in the time of Jeroboam II. (Am. iii. 5,
vi. 4, and comp. Ps. xlv. 9, Cant. vii. 5). Ahab's ivory palace
(1 Kings xxii. 39) was doubtless unique.
Note *, p. 167.
' An analogous production.' Read both poems again, and then
judge if the phrase be inappropriate. But even the comparison of
single passages will help much. Thus compare v. 3 of the psalm
with chap. v. 13 ; v. 4 with iii. 8 ; v. 8 with viii. 13 ; v. 9 with iv. 14,
vii. 5 ; v. 14 with iv. 7, v. 16 ; v. 16 with 1, 4, &c. An additional
argument is based on the Aramaic colouring of both poems (but see
appendix). Kuenen [Hist. krit. Onderzoek, iii. 386, cf. Religion of
Israel, i. 373) thought that both may have come from one author —
must have come from the same age (that of Jeroboam II.). Why
should not Ps. xlv. have been written on occasion of Jeroboam's
marriage ? Why not, if we approach Ps. xlv. with the preconceived
opinion that the Song of Songs in its present form is a pre-Exilic n 2

180 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV., ETC. lect.
work ? But is it such ? I have long hoped to discuss this question
in a fitting place, and so to redeem the promise made in Job and
Solomon in 1887. Note z, p. 167.
Giesebrecht thinks that Ps. xlv. is a ' dramatic lyric ' by a post-
Exile poet, who was caught by the romantic tendency of his time
(attested by the Song of Songs) to idealize Solomon and his court
(Stade's Zeitschrift, 1881, p. 318). I could almost as soon believe
that Theocritus's 17th idyll was the work of a Greek contemporary of
Horace. But I welcome Giesebrecht's adhesion to a post-Exile date.
Note aa, p. 168.
The idealisms of Ps. xlv. 3-8 remind us indeed of Isaiah, but the
Messianic world-empire is not so prominent in Ps. xlv. as in Ps. Ixxii.
' Thy fellows ' in v. 8 are independent kings, though less mighty ones
than Ptolemy. The psalm begins and ends as an encomium. Verse 18
corresponds to v. 2 ; it is the natural close of such a poem (contrast
Ps. xviii. 50, and cf. Pindar, end of third and fourth Pythians).
The writer hopes by his ' work ' (7ro%ia) to hand down the memory
of the king to distant ages. (I cannot see with Smend that the
speaker is the Jewish Church.) Note bb, p. 168.
It may be urged that Ptolemy Philadelphus did not descend
from a long line of kings (see v. 17). But if Theocritus in his
panegyric can speak of that king's fathers, so can the Hebrew poet.
Note 00, p. 168.
Id. xvii. 112-114 (cf. Id. xiv. 60 &c), Calverley's version, which
in /. 1 omits ' of Dionysos.' The whole of this idyll of Theocritus
deserves to be read both for its parallels and for its contrasts to the
psalm. See also the close of Callimachus's hymn to Zeus, who, says
the poet, gives to all kings, but to none so much as ' to our ruler '
(cf. Ps. xlv. 8, ' above thy fellows ').
Note dd, p. 168.
Gratz thinks that Philometor (b.c 1 81-146), not Philadelphus
(b.c 285-247), was the patron of the Greek translation of the Penta
teuch (cf. Jewish Quarterly Review, Oct. 1890, p. 196). But the
statement in the text seems to me probable enough.

iv. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV., ETC.

Note ee, p. 169.
At first, for instance, by De Wette. He followed Augusti, who
thought of Mordecai as the author and Xerxes (Ahasuerus) as the
royal hero of the poem. Comp. v. 10a with Esth. ii. 9, 17. It is
possible, too, that ' lord of kings ' in the Phoenician inscription of
Eshmunazar (line 18) refers, not to any Persian king, but to one of
the early Ptolemies, and certain that this is the case in Cyprian in
scriptions and in that of Ma 'sub (cf. Ganneau, Revue archiol., 1885
(1), p. 384, and Berger, R. a., 1887 (2), pp. 6-8).
Note ff, p. 169.
The apotheosis of the king of Egypt began at his coronation.
As Synesius says, he was ' a god who was raised after death to the
rank of a superior god' [De Prov. i. 5, quoted by Wiedemann).
Theocritus's 17th Idyll may be artificial as a Greek poem, but it
accurately reflects Egyptian sentiment. On the stele of Pithom we
read, ' The living Horus, the victorious child .... the son of Ra,
the lord of diadems, Ptolemy, living like Ra eternally.' Arsinoe,
too, is dressed as a goddess, and identified with ' the mighty Isis,
the great Hathor' (Naville, The Store City of Pithom, -pp. 16, 17).
Elsewhere, too, we find references to ' the god ' (Philadelphus) and
'the gods Adelphoi' [Records of the Past, iv. 71, x. 76). No Jew
could have tolerated, much less adopted, such phraseology (see Isa.
xiv. 12-15, wltri mv commentary) ; the Phoenicians were less par
ticular (Inscr. of Ma 'sub, lines 7, 8). Even the Hellenized Judaism
of ' Aristeas' recognizes 'one only true God,' and Philo, speaking of
a king, says that he is human in his oio-ia, though in his rank ' like
the supreme God ' (Mangey, ii. 673, top). The author of Wisdom
(xiv. 16-20) expressly reprobates the evil Egyptian custom, and we
know the storm evoked by the self-deification of. Caligula. I admit
that, from a purely historical point of view, Dr. Westcott's censure
of the language of Theocritus may be too severe [The Epistles of
St. John, p. 256). What Josephus says of Demetrius might fairly be
applied to any Egyptian king, tijjmv lo-oOiuiv eruxe irapd tois eS
iraOovo-i. If the Nile river might be divinized, why not also he upon
whom devolved the maintenance of a just system of irrigation?
And Philadelphus was, as we know, in a special sense an eiepyerrjs.
But from the severely monotheistic Jewish point of view, to represent
this king, or any king, as God, was impossible (Zech. xii. 8 is no
proof to the contrary). And even orthodox Christian expositors,
while rendering DTTJK "]KD3 'thy throne, O God' [v. 7), felt the
difficulty of the expression as interpreters though not as dogmatic

182 PSALMS LL, LXV-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. lect.
theologians. Theodoret, for instance, noticed how thoroughly human
the whole picture in Ps. xlv. was, and had nothing better to say on
v. 7« than this : ' Inasmuch as the earlier description was too lowly
for the divine dignity [of Christ], he fitly teaches us by these words
that He is God and an everlasting King, and neither had a beginning
nor shall have an end.' Dr. Westcott, too (on Heb. i. 8), feels the
same difficulty, and actually insists on going back to Doderlein
(1779), and rendering 'Thy throne is God.' I have read the Cam
bridge professor's note and also the privately circulated tract by
Dr. Hort, which advocates the same view, with surprise and regret.
This rendering of the Hebrew words and of the Greek version is in
admissible (cf. Driver, Hebrew Tenses, ed. 2, p. 286). None of the
instances quoted to justify it are in point ; exegesis condemns it un
hesitatingly. ' Thy throne is God's throne ' is, of course, a possible
sentence, though, as the style of our poet is so simple, we should
have expected ' Thou sittest beside Yahveh on his throne,' or the
like. But ' Thy throne is God ' (i.e. belongs to the class of divine
beings) is not possible ; it would contradict the great doctrine of the
psalmists that, not the temple, not Jerusalem, not any created object,
was the true safeguard of Israel, but the Lord Jehovah (cf. Jer. xvii.
12, 13, where the true sanctuary is stated to be Jehovah). The
Rev. Vers, of Heb. i. 8 is therefore more correct than Dr. West-
cott's version ; the Sept., like the Targum, supposes a transition in
v. 7 from the king to Jehovah. But the critical editor of the Hebrew
text is bound either to read n W for DTV?K CrPfV had, it is conjectured,
been misread nirv), with Giesebrecht and others, or to follow Bickell,
as I have done in my commentary. Giesebrecht's proposition is
ingenious, but his Hebrew does not please my ear ; it is bald, and
exhausts an important detail too soon. But the sense either way is
the same. Note es, p. 169.
It is a remarkable fact that both Persian and Greek sovereigns
are described in Babylonian inscriptions as grateful worshippers of
Marduk. An inscription of Antiochus Soter, dated B.C. 259, is
quoted in Hommel's Gesch. Babyloniens und Assyriens, pp. 792-794,
and, what is more interesting for us, a terra-cotta cylinder is extant
which contains a description of the capture of Babylon in 538 and
in general of the policy of Cyrus (see Sir H. Rawlinson, Journal of
R. A. S., Jan. 1880, pp. 70-97). I have already entered into this
subject, and will only now say that it appears unsafe to maintain,
on the ground of this inscription, either that Cyrus was a polytheist,
or that, if a Mazdayasnian, his religion was to him a purely national
matter, so that he could afford a disdainful tolerance for the gods of

iv. PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV., ETC. 183
inferior nations. I think that he was in some sense a grateful wor
shipper of Marduk, or rather of the ' god of heaven,' whose highest
name was Ahura Mazda, but who might also be called either Marduk
or Jehovah. Prof. Sayce regards the religious eulogy of Cyrus in
the cylinder-inscription as ' the flattery exacted by a successful con
queror ' [Hibbert Lectures, p. 86). I think myself that the inscription
truthfully represents Babylonian sentiment, and enables us, compar
ing well-known passages in the Second Isaiah, to understand the
attitude of Cyrus. In order to do justice to the Babylonian and the
Hebrew references to Cyrus, and, I ask permission to add, to Ps. xlv.,
we must remember that, not only in the religion of Jehovah but in
those of Marduk and of Zeus, there was a nearly contemporary
tendency to universalize the conception of the Deity. Now if Cyrus
was a Mazdayasnian he would have a special interest in the religions
of Israel and the Chaldaeans, and in the restoration of their temples.
And again, if Ptolemy appreciated the width of Jewish theism, we
are no longer forced to account for his kindness to the Jews solely
from political motives. In this connexion the views of ' Aristeas '
may deserve attention (ed. M. Schmidt, Merx's Archiv, i. 255, 256).
Note hh, p. 169.
Jos., Ant. xi. 8, 5, cf. the Talmudic story in Yoma, 6ga (Wiinsche,
Der bab. Talmud, i. 374). We also read in Talmudic legends of a
Csesar Antoninus who was a proselyte. Pre-Maccabaean Judaism can
hardly have been less ready to believe the best of worthy rulers.
Note u, p. 170.
Persian seriousness was conspicuously wanting in Philadelphus.
But one of those moral errors with which he is most often reproached
— his second marriage with his sister — would not be recognized as
such from a Persian any more than from an Egyptian or from an
ancient Semitic point of view (see Spiegel, Eran. Alter thumskunde,
iii. 678 ; Ebers, Durch Gosen zum Sinai, ed. 1, p. 83 ; Robertson
Smith, Kinship and Marriage in Arabia, p. 162 : cf. Gen. xi. 29).
The pseudo-Aristeas (about 200 b.c) tacitly condones the act, while
the pseudo-Phocylides (first century a.d.) forbids such a marriage.
This variety of view is intelligible enough. The former, who lived
under a Ptolemy, knew the Egyptian theory that such marriages pre
served the purity of the divine royal race ; the latter, who lived
probably under Tiberius, felt the necessity of a vigorous moral pro
test against heathen corruption. We are not called upon to dogma
tize as to the line which the psalmist would have taken had he written

1 84 PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVIL, XLV, ETC. lect.
a little later. At any rate, he would have severely reprehended the
murder of Nicocles and the execution of the nephew of Antigonus.
Note JJ, p. 170.
It would be not unnatural in the Greek age to use ' Asshur ' as
an equivalent for ' Syria ' (cf. note on Ps. lxxxiii. 9). In the above
conjecture I assume that Isa. xix. 18-25 was written in the time of
Ptolemy Lagi, and request readers of The Prophecies of Isaiah to
record this as my present conclusion. If the passage is (as I have
admitted) a subsequent addition to the prophecy, and later prophetic
writing delights in the circumstantial style, why should we hesitate
to refer the verses to the Greek age ?
Note kk, p. 170.
Jos., Ant. xii. 2, 5 ; cf. 4, 1. Gratz [Geschichte, ii. 2, p. 242) re
jects Eleazar, because derived from the letter of ' Aristeas,' which,
however, he seems to bring down too late.
Note u, p. 171.
Vatke explained the psalm of Demetrius Poliorcetes (the least
likely of all persons to be idealized by a Jew). He also discovers
imitations of Homeric phrases (see his Life by Benecke, pp. 551,
552), precisely as Gratz finds Theocritean phrases and images in the
Song of Songs. I cannot, for my part, believe in a Hebrew parallel
to Latin Alexandrinism (cf. Mommsen, Rome, iv. 609). The psalm
is thoroughly Oriental in phrase and imagery.
Note mm, p. 172.
This objection has been raised by S. Weissmann in connexion
with a similar theory of Ps. Ixxii.
Note nn, p. 172.
See Soferim, i. 8, with Joel Miiller's note ; and comp. Gratz,
Geschichte der Juden, iii., ed. 4, p. 578 ; Frankel, Vorstudien zu der
Septuaginta, p. 61. The notice in Soferim, I.e., describes the 'day'
of the Greek translation as ' a hard day for Israel, like that on which
Israel made the calf In Meg. Taanith (last chapter) the 8th day
of Tebeth is indicated as a fast-day for this calamity. It was pro
bably appointed out of opposition to the Alexandrian festival day
spoken of by Philo ( Vit. Mosis, ii. 140, Mangey).

PSALMS LI., LXV.-LXVII, XLV, ETC. 185

Note 00, p. 173.
So Symmachus, ao-p.a tk tov dyairqTov. Jerome, 'canticum
amantissimi.' Eusebius of Ceesarea [Eclog. Proph. iv. 12) compares
Ps. lxvii. 12 (Sept.), 6 ^aaiXev? tu>v 8vvd/j.i<ov toC dyaTrqrov (where
6 dyair. = Israel, cf. Jer. xi. 15), explaining both passages of Christ.
Aquila, however, has ao-fxa Trpoo-<j>iXias ; and so Ewald, Hitzig, and
Dyserinck ('love-song'). Note pp, p. 1 73.
"V*j> is also a title of Solomon in the Talmud [Menakhoth, 53).
Note 11, p. 173.
There are reasons enough for not following Simon or the collector
in his view of Ps. xlv. Two more may be added, viz., (1) that in the
traditional songs of David (Ps. xviii., 2 Sam. xxii. 1, xxiii. 7) the
idealized hero speaks in his own person, and (2) that this psalm,
according to its natural meaning, refers to a contemporary king,
whom, together with his consort, the poet desires to propitiate
(comp. on Ps. Ixxii.). Note rr, p. 174.
'It may be truly asserted that his (Alexander's) was the first
of the great monarchies founded in Asia that opened a prospect
of progressive improvement, and not of continual degradation to its
subjects ; it was the first that contained any element of moral and
intellectual progress.' Thirlwall, History of Greece, vii. in.
Note ss, p. 174.
One small point remains. It may be asked, Why was Ps. xlv.
placed where it now stands ? Partly, it would seem, because of the
external similarity between xliv. $a and xlv. 7a. Such a reason does
not appeal at all to modern minds, but the truth in criticism is some
times most unmodern. Delitzsch and Cornill may have sought to
prove too much with regard to catchwords, but they have at least
shown that ancient editors and arrangers were often partly influenced
by such external minutiae. I will add that it is likely that v. 7 was
already mutilated when the 2nd Book was collected.

LECTURE V.
T call upon him who is to be praised, upon Jehovah ; so am I
saved from mine enemies. — Ps. xviii. 4.
But thou art the Holy One, enthroned upon the praises of Israel.
— Ps. xxii. 4.

LECTURE V.
Part I. — The earliest of the minor Psalters.— Necessity of testing the head
ings even here by their compatibility with history. — Ewald's conclusion that
fourteen psalms and psalm-fragments are Davidic. — Criticism of this theory.
Ewald's imperfect grasp of the historical principle of development. Church-
hymns not possible in the time of David or even of Isaiah. David a gifted
musician and poet, but best known in the age of Amos by his secular poetry.
That he may have composed religious songs, though not in the style of our
psalms, need not therefore be denied. And it is barely possible (especially
considering that one genuine fragment of Solomonic poetry has survived) that
phrases or whole verses of Davidic origin may have passed into some of our
psalms, or at least have exerted some influence on the psalmists. Of course, this
can only have been very occasional ; the favourite • old songs ' would naturally
be those inspired by the "teaching of the higher prophets. — Another possibility.
The authors of these older songs may have been influenced by a great poet whom
we may call a second David, and the assumption of whose existence makes
various phenomena more intelligible. Gifted he must have been, but when
composing psalms for the first temple, he was bound to consider the low spiritual
average and the rough singing of the worshippers. — The ground being thus
cleared, we can proceed to break up Book I. into groups. We start from Ps.
xxxiii. , the one nameless psalm among those headed I'ddvid. Is it an early post-
Exilic or a Maccabsean psalm ? The latter alternative is preferable ; and since
this is not the only Maccabaean psalm in Book I., Fddvid should probably be
restored, for which there is some Greek authority. — And which are the other
Maccabaean psalms ? There is a plausible case for reckoning as such Pss. vii. ,
xiv., xvi., xx., and xxi. An examination of these seems to show that, while all
may be, two (viz. xx. and xxi. ) must be Maccabaean, so that Ps. xxxiii. is pro
bably a rightful member of the first ' Davidic ' psalm-book. Among the points
of detail in the preceding examination, note the discussion of the use of ' king '
for Maccabaean prince (hence a fresh illustration of ' Malki-cedeq '). — For con
venience sake we next consider the three fine nature-psalms (viii., xix. 1-7, and
xxix.) which occur at regular intervals in Book I. The second and third of
these are specially connected by their mythic imagery, and we naturally pass
from these to Pss. xviii. and xxiv. 7-I0> which have also more or less mythic >
colouring. Of all these, the most interesting historically is Ps. xviii. Is this,
like Pss. xix. and xxiv., a composite psalm ? If so, may it contain a Davidic
element? Renan is of this opinion; but no sufficient reason exists for separating
the two parts (if two parts there be) of the psalm by any long interval. Applying
the comparative method, we can only hesitate between the reign of Josiah and
some part of the Persian period. The former is here preferred, but with the
admission that the song, thus dated, cannot have been originally intended for use
in the temple-services (v. 51 is probably a later addition). — Ps. xxxvi. is con
sidered next in order, because of the similarity of its title to that of Ps. xviii.

ANALYSIS OF LECTURE V

Nothing however in its contents reminds us of Ps. xviii. The psalms with which
it may rightly be compared belong to the Persian period.
Part II. —We pass to the first large group of cognate psalms (Pss. iii  vii. ,
ix.-xiv., xvii.). Criticism leads to the result that no member of this group can
be much earlier than the close of the Persian period. Those in which the tone
is most depressed or agitated may refer either to the tyranny of Bagoses, or to
the troubles under Artaxerxes Ochus. A confirmation of this view arises from
the title of Ps. vii. — The second -group of persecution-psalms maybe analyzed
into two minor groups. Pss. xxii., xxxi., xxxv., and xl. 13-18 ( = lxx.), with
which we may connect Pss. lxix. and lxxi., have very similar characteristics, and
belong (with the possible exception of the imitative psalms xxxi., xl. 13-18, and
lxxi.) to the same period, viz. that which preceded Nehemiah's first journey to
Jerusalem. The second minor group contains Pss. xxvi., xxvii. 7-14, xxviii.,
xxxviii., xxxix., xii. These all belong to the later persecution-period referred to
above. From Ps. xii. (the last in Book I. ) we have to make our way backward
to Ps. i. , which, from a critical point of view, is the last of the temple-songs. A
discussion of various psalms, all (as it appears) of the Persian age, follows. First,
Ps. xl. I-I2 (another 'new song,' cf. Isa. xiii. 10); next, Ps. xxx. (which is
partly parallel), Ps. xxxvii. (an alphabetic psalm, like Pss. xxv. and xxxiv. ), and
Pss. xxv., xxxiv., xxxii. (a triad of ' songs of deliverance'). Then by an easy
transition we pass to the ' Guest-psalms' (xv. , xxiv. 1-6, xxvii. 1-6, xxiii. cf. v. 5
and lxi. 5). The didactic fragment, Ps. xix. 8-1 5, is the only Davidic psalm which
remains. How vividly it describes the devout churchmen of the Persian and the
Greek age ! Pss. i. and ii. are without a heading ; they are the double gate of
the Psalter. Internal evidence shows that Ps. ii. is of the post-Exilic and most
probably of the (pre-Maccabaean) Greek period. It may be viewed as an idealized
historical picture with a strong eschatological tinge. The writer throws himself
back into the age of David or Solomon. He is more of a prophet than an
historian, but also a great lyric poet. Ps. i. is often said to be pre-Jeremian, on
account of a parallelism between v. 3 and Jer. xvii. 8. Objections to this view.
The psalm is at any rate pre-Maccabaean. It has some points in common with
Ps. ii. , but the two psalms are not on this account organically connected. Pro
bably they are nearly contemporaneous, and certainly both are introductory
psalms. Even if not written as such, they were well adapted to fulfil this function,
Ps. ii. for the first ' Davidic ' hymn-book, Ps. i. for a large pre-Maccabsean Book
of Psalms. Principal Notes. — Part I.: Lists of Davidic psalms. — Criticism of Kuenen.
— Was David a prophet ? — Solomonic fragment in Kings. — Temple-hymns before
the Exile.
Part II. . Date of Isa. xxxii. and xxxiii.

PART I.
THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS.
In our voyage up the stream of song our last station must
be made at Book I., in some respects the most interesting as
it is certainly the earliest of the minor Psalters. All the
psalms which it contains, except i., ii., and xxxiii. (I do not
include x. because of its close connexion with ix.), are directly
ascribed in the titles to David. I need not stay to prove that
these titles are no more authoritative than those which assign
the collection of sayings in the centre of Proverbs (x.-xxii. 16)
to David's keen-witted successor. They do, indeed, represent
an early tradition respecting the origin of the first Psalter,
but it is probable that they also represent an early misunder
standing of that tradition ; I mean that (like Shir hamma-
'aldth) the title I'ddvid may have been originally prefixed,
not to the separate psalms, but only to the collection, which
may therefore have contained some hymns which the first
collector himself would not have had us ascribe to David."
At any rate, the traditional titles form no part of the authentic
text,b and must in each case be tested by their compatibility
with the much more secure historical tradition of the life of
David. Ewald, who would willingly strain a point to do
honour to the poet-king, himself admits this, though not as
distinctly as one could wish. He professes to have gained a
clear view of the character and poetic genius of his hero from
the narrative of his life, and finds that there are fourteen
psalms and fragments of psalms which are so fine that none
but David can have written them, and which can without
violence be attached to episodes or periods in David's career.0
' None but David.' ' Can without violence.' Do you not see
the inherent weakness of such arguing ? The man of whom
we are speaking was not an isolated student-poet. A child

LECT. v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 191
of the people, he cannot (if at least we can trust historical
analogy) have had an absolutely unique talent of song. The
divine fire must have passed from others to him, and again
from him to others. Why may not successors of David have
been his equals in natural and his superiors in spiritual
capacities ? Admit this, and you at once disengage the
criticism of the psalms from a crowd of illusions. You have
no longer any interest in proving (contrary to all reasonable
exegesis) that the circumstances of David's life are the most
natural historical setting of the ' Davidic ' psalms, nor that
this ' man of war' (1 Chron. xxviii. 3) was on a higher spiritual
level than is assigned to him in the Books of Samuel. You
will not, I am sure, mistake me. I have said enough else
where of the good side of Ewald's exegesis and critical re
arrangement of the Psalms. Ewald is my oldest teacher in
criticism, but since the publication, twenty years ago, of the
Godsdienst van Israel, I have owed an equal debt to Kuenen.d
That the latter, in spite of his extraordinary modesty, is in
some respects the greater historian, can scarcely be questioned.
Not to him can those words of Dorner, spoken of Heinrich
Ewald, be applied, ' He fails to perceive the connexion of the
internal and external history of Old Testament religion, and
has not grasped the principle of historical development.1 It
is one of the tasks of critical theology to show that neither
David himself nor the psalms lose even in religious interest
when studied on sounder principles than Ewald's.
But I speak to-day neither in the name of Ewald nor in
that of Kuenen, but for myself, without inquiring who may
chance to agree with me. Let dictionaries give an exhaustive
catalogue of critical theories ; it is for the lecturer to elucidate
the process of research by frankly explaining how he came
to his results, and so enabling the student to see with his
teacher's eyes. Let this lecturer then say for himself that he
cannot divide sharply between the age of David and that,
say, of Isaiah. The latter is no Christian, nor is the former
a heathen. It is possible, that if we had a sufficient number
of the more religious songs of David, we might detect in
them some real affinities to the religion of Isaiah. But it
may be questioned whether these affinities would have struck
1 History of Protestant Theology, E.T., ii. 437.

192 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
an uncritical observer, and above all whether either David
(who was not a church-leader like Zoroaster) or even Isaiah
could have dreamed of church-hymns such as those contained
in the Psalter.e That David was a gifted musician, is indeed
attested, not only by the prophet Amos (vi. 5, but not accord
ing to Septuagint), but by one of the very earliest historical
traditions1 (i Sam. xvi. 14-23), and we may assume that he
could also, like the Arab prince-poet Imra al-Kais, as a ' sweet
song-maker' (2 Sam. xxiii. 1), fascinate his half-primitive
people. His poetry would, of course, be chiefly occasional in
its character. The early races quickly fell into the moods
of joy and grief, both of which required the services of the
poet ; but, strange to say, passionately as the Israelites loved
dancing (cf. 1 Sam. xx. 11, Jer. xxx. 19, xxxi. 4), the only
two indubitably Davidic compositions are in the elegiac style.
You know them full well — one is in 2 Sam. i. 19-27, the
other in 2 Sam. iii. 33, 34/ The latter may be a fragment of
an impromptu ; the former is a fine specimen of the simple
but exquisite art of early poesy. How soon they were written
down, we cannot at present conjecture,g but both were pro
bably preserved in a pre-Exilic song-book called ' The Book
of the Upright ' (i.e. of Israel).11 But though these may be the
only authentic specimens of David's work, and his posthumous
fame rested chiefly upon his secular poetry (Am. vi. 5), we
need not assume that all his compositions had a non-religious
character. It is not an unreasonable conjecture that when
' David and all the house of Israel played before Jehovah
with all their might, and with songs and with (divers musical
instruments),' 2 some of these songs had been made for the
purpose by the poet-king. Only, as critics, we cannot con
sistently suppose that the religious songs of David (if there
were any) were as much above the spiritual capacities of the
people as the psalms which, I will not say the later Jews, but
which Ewald or Hitzig or Delitzsch would assign to him. It
would be only a step further to accept the Christianization of
David in Browning's well-known masterpiece [Saul). Consider,
moreover, the strict conventionalism by which early religious
art is controlled. From the point of view of the history of
1 Bleek's Einleitung, ed. Wellhausen (1878), p. 216.
5 2 Sam. vi. 5 (correcting, with Klostermann, after 1 Chron. xiii. 8).

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 193

art, not less than from that of the history of religion, the
supposition that we have Davidic psalms presents insuperable
difficulties. Even the 18th psalm must, in spite of the con
trary opinion of Ewald, be transferred to a later poet than
David. This can, I believe, be positively decided by the
internal evidence. To objectors who point me to the admis
sion of the poem into the appendix to Samuel * (see 2 Sam.
xxii.), I reply that this only proves that the poem was con-
jecturally ascribed to the idealized David not long before the
Exile, just as Ps. Ixxii. was assigned by a still later student
to the idealized Solomon.
Our result fully justifies what I said in my first lecture,
that the most productive and spiritually the richest of the ages
of psalmody cannot have been the earliest. The only ques
tion is whether, considering how fond the psalmists are of
quotations, they may not have preserved phrases or even
whole verses of Davidic hymns, and whether the editors of
the psalms may not in the same conservative spirit have com
bined old Davidic with new and very un-Davidic material. It
was Wilhelm Vatke who first suggested this in 1835. 'Single
songs,' he says, ' may have survived in the mouth of the
people, and in an altered shape have passed into our Book of
Psalms, or at least have exerted an influence as ancient models.'1
This is barely possible, no doubt. A fragment of an old
religious song which, though not Davidic, may perhaps really
be Solomonic, is quoted by an Exilic writer from the song-
book called the ' Book of the Upright' It runs thus : —
The sun hath Yahveh set up in heaven ;
But he said he would (himself) dwell in darkness :
I have built a high mansion for thee,
A place for thee to dwell in for all ages.J
To this particular passage there is no allusion in the
Psalter ; even the- two so-called Solomonic psalms present no
points of contact with it. Of course, this does not decide the
question. Other genuine relics of the Davidic and Solomonic
poetry might conceivably have influenced the psalmists, and
it is not unnatural to imagine a Davidic element in Pss. xviii.
1 Die Religion des A.T., i. 291-293. Against Vatke, see De Wette's
famous article in Theol. 'Studien und Kritiken for 1837. 0

194 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
and Ix.1 Only we must be on our guard against pleasant
illusions. No concession can be made which a conservative
of the old school would think worth accepting. The religious
reorganization of the people in Ezra's time was too complete
to allow any considerable influence to archaic liturgical
formulae. In spite of the analogies from the Chaldaean, the
Vedic, and the Zoroastrian hymns,k it is not possible to hold
that there is any large admixture of old and new in the
Hebrew Psalter ; almost every psalm might be appropriately
styled ' a new song.' And even if any relatively old songs
were used as models by the temple-poets, the preference would
surely be given to those inspired by the teaching of the higher
prophets, such as Ps. xviii. (if this be not post-Exilic) and the
lyric fragments incorporated into the Second Isaiah.
I do not, however, deny that the authors of these older
songs may themselves have been influenced by some still
earlier gifted hymnist. Indeed, I feel bound to assume the
existence of a ' David ' (using the name in a symbolic sense m)
subsequently to the poet-king, to account for the literary
character of the Book of Amos. He cannot indeed have been
alone ; he must have had able followers, by whose help he
influenced his age, and left a deeper impress than the histo
rical David, not only upon Amos, but after Amos upon the
authors of the earliest extant psalms (Deut. xxxii., Ps. xviii. ?).
The grand fault of the elder orthodoxy is that it identifies
these two Davids — the one the hero of the transition from
rudeness to culture, the other of a more cunning art and
a more spiritual religion — the herald of greater glories to
come. Let us be thankful for both Davids, but not rank
even the second of them too high, at least as the author
of psalms intended for the first temple. For all the evidence
goes to show that throughout the pre-Exile period the service
of religious song was not committed to any special class," but
was the privilege of the congregation at large (2 Sam. vi. 5,
Am. v. 21-23, lsa- xxx. 29), and as late as the fall of Jeru
salem the noise of the Chaldaean soldiery in the temple is
likened to that made by the worshippers on a feast-day (Lam.
ii. 7). When the singing was so rough, recalling the humble
origin of the Hebrew t'hillah? the psalms themselves cannot
1 See pp. 108, 203. 2 See Appendix I., part ii. (on n?rjp|).

THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 195

have been too polished in style. We might even infer from
Am. v. 21-23 that they were as formal and unspiritual as the
sacrifices which they accompanied. At any rate, we require
more than the individual efforts of an eminent psalmist to
account for the beauty and perfection of the hymns of the
earliest collection.0
I cannot, however, linger on this interesting theme. What
we have to do is, if possible, to break up the first Psalter into
groups, and apply the same comparative method as before.
The groups indeed are somewhat less easy to distinguish than
in Books III.— V., but they exist notwithstanding. We shall
do well to start from Ps. xxxiii., the one nameless psalm (ac
cording to the Hebrew text) which interrupts the ' Davidic '
series." It .is a smooth and easy, alphabetizing,0- liturgical
psalm in praise of Jehovah as He was conceived of subse
quently to the Second Isaiah.1 Not long since, a heathen
nation had oppressed Israel, but the Creator had interposed
in behalf of the ' righteous ones ' [v. 1 ; cf. cxviii. 1 5, 20, Macca
baean ) s who trusted not in the equipments of war, but in the
protection of a loving God [v. 20 ; cf. cxv. 9-1 1, Maccabaean).
A ' new song ' was demanded by these new proofs of the divine
fidelity ; but to which divine deliverance does the phrase
refer ? To the overthrow of Babylon and the resettlement of
Israel in its own land* (as in Isa. xiii. 10, Ps. xcvi. i,xcviii. 1),
or to the early victories of the Maccabees leading up to the
re-dedication of the temple (as probably in cxliv. 9, cxlix. 1,
Judith xii. 2, 13)? The fact that there are other points of
contact between Ps. xxxiii. and the Maccabaean songs which ,
close the Psalter justifies us in preferring the latter reference. I
It is no objection to this, that the speaker disclaims trust in
armies (cf. xliv. 7), for he contrasts his own scanty numbers
with the well-equipped infantry and cavalry of Syria. The
khasidim had in fact only been nerved to fight by religious
enthusiasm, and returned with joy to their old peaceful habits
of life and thought. The great Maccabee himself could have
sung vv. 16 and 17, for, as has been well said, ' he possessed a
simple and constant faith in the divine power to give the
victory to those who were not strong, and the race to those
who were not swift.' ]
1 Conder, Judas Maccabceus (1879), p. 159.

196 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
But is this correctly viewed as a nameless psalm ? May
not certain Greek translations be right in prefixing tco Aavl8,u
a mere accident having perhaps caused the omission of the
title in the standard Hebrew manuscript from which our text
seems to be derived? This is possible if there is good
reason to suppose that any of the psalms in Book I., which
are headed I'ddvid, are of Maccabaean origin. To decide this
question we must examine Pss. vii., xiv., xvi., xx., and xxi.,
for which Maccabaean circumstances may with most plausi
bility be assumed as a background.
The 7th psalm is one of those in which the divine title
'Elyon occurs, which, as experience has shown, is specially
post-Exilic1 The context proves that it sums up and sym
bolizes the great truth, so slowly reached, of monotheism. As in
the post-Exile Asaphite psalms, the God whom Israel worships,
is also the Judge of the nations. As in the post-Exile 139th
psalm (see vv. 1, 23) and the Maccabaean 44th (see v. 22), He
is the KapBMjvcoo-TTjs — ' the trier of the hearts and reins.' The
oppressors of Israel are the ' ungodly,' or ' unrighteous ; ' Israel
on the other hand is both outwardly and inwardly righteous
(comp. xliv. 18, 19, Maccabaean). And yet the psalmist,
speaking for the 'upright in heart,' cherishes a bitterness
towards his enemies which (see Lev. xix. 17) proves that they
were not Israelites, but heathen (though, of course, degenerate
Israelites may have swelled their number). That faithful
Israel, and not any individual as such, is the speaker, is mani
fest from the sequence of thought in v. 9, 'Jehovah judgeth
the peoples ; (therefore) give sentence for me, Jehovah.'
There are some points of contact with Jeremiah ; comp. with
vv. 10 and 11, Jer. xi. 20, xvii. 10, xx. 12, and with v. 15, Jer.
xviii. 20, 22. Y But a church-psalm in the proper sense of the
word is to me inconceivable as early as Jeremiah ; w and since
during the Exile the tone of faithful Israel was penitential (see
Lamentations), the psalm must be brought down below the
\ legislation of Ezra. It need not, however, be Maccabaean
I but may be placed with other psalms of persecution in the
last gloomy days of the Persian period. The abruptness of
the style is no objection to this view (cf. Ps. lix.), of which I
hope presently to produce a somewhat novel confirmation.
1 See my note or v. 18.

v. THE EARLIES1 OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 197

The 14th psalm,1 too, is clearly post-Exile, some may
even think Maccabaean ; comp. v. 1 with Ps. Hi. 3, a com
parison all the more attractive, because the psalm Dixit
insipiens occurs again in a less correct (Elohistic) form as
Ps. liii.x If, then, the ' foolish ' atheist in v. 1 is meant to be
an individual, may he be Antiochus Epiphanes, or one of the
Syrian generals, Nicanor for instance (1 Mace vii. 26), whom
we might also identify with the ' tyrant ' of Iii. 3 ? If, more
over, with Hitzig and Hupfeld, we find a historical perfect in
v. 5, may the defeat spoken of be one of those mentioned in
1 Maccabees (see e.g. 1 Mace vii. 40-44) ? This is at any rate
more probable than the reference to Sennacherib and the
Rab-shakeh, suggested by Theodore the Interpreter/ which
is opposed by the similarity of Ps. xiv. not only to Ps. xii. (a
later work) but also to passages in Jeremiah certainly not influ
enced by our psalm.2 It is, however, not favoured by a sober
exegesis of the psalm as a whole. ' The fool ' is not here an
individual, but a collective term. Still, we must not give it
the sense of ' the foolish people ' who ' contemn Jehovah's
name ' (Ps. lxxiv. 1 8, Maccabaean), but rather illustrate it by
the description in Ps. x. 13 of those bad Israelites who ' con
temn God, saying in their heart, Thou wilt not punish ' [UW~\ is
admittedly collective). Nor is the perfect in v. 5 historical ;
in such a context it cannot but be prophetic. The close of the
Persian period meets all the requirements of this psalm and
of the group to which it belongs (see below). In v. 3 some |
may excusably find a touch of the pessimism of Koheleth |
(Eccles. vii. 28, 29), and in the liturgical EirMpdovTjfAa [v. 7) they
may be reminded of Zech. xiv. 3, Isa. Ixvi. 6, all which pas
sages were written at the close of the Persian period.
The 1 6th psalm I did myself for a time regard as
Maccabaean. Certainly no one who thinks that, upon the
whole, history is marked by progress rather than by degene- [
ration can, without inconsistency, affirm this psalm .to be';
Davidic2 It cannot even be pre-Exilic at all, but is the fruit
of that long weaning from the world, begun in Babylonia and
perfected -under another foreign yoke in Israel's recovered
1 On Pss. xiv., xv., xvi., and xix., cf. Delitzsch, ' Der Dekalog in Exodus und
Deuteronomium,' in Luthardt's Zeitschrift, 1882, p. 290.
* See especially Jer. v. 1, 23, x. 21, 25.

198 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
home. It is in fact one of the finest church-songs. The
' excellent ' and the ' holy ones ' in v. 3 (in the received text)
can be no other than the priests, who, as represented by the
' high (literally, great) priest,' were more and more found to be
Israel's firmest support against heathen aggression ; l it is
the period of what Ewald calls the ' hagiocracy ' to which v. 3
clearly points. Its highly spiritual view of life and death
forcibly reminds us of Pss. xlix. and Ixxiii. The reference to
religious dissensions points either to a paganizing movement
in the Persian period (cf. v. 4a with Isa. lxv. 11), or somewhat
more probably to the early Hellenistic one described by
Josephus [Ant. xii. 5, 1). Need I remind any one of the
prominence of libations • apart from other sacrifices in the
daily life of Greeks and Romans ? More especially were
they common before and after meals (see e.g. Horn., 77. vii.
480), and it is to such libations that I suppose our psalmist
to refer (cf. Ps. cxli. 4b, and the abhorrence of later Jewish
writers for heathen wine ^QA IV., Aboda zara, 55«). At any
rate, it is evident that true believers are tightening the bands
of religious association (comp. v. 3 with Ps. cxli. 4, 5) ; there
seem to be at least the germs of the Asidaean movement.*"1
We can therefore thank that early editor who styled this
psalm miktam, thus connecting it with the other psalms bear
ing this title 2 (lvi.-lx.), which are best viewed as monuments
of the Persian and Greek periods.
Two of our test-psalms still remain — the 20th and the
2 1 st. May we consider the king who is the object of such
religious loyalty to be one of the Asmonaean princes ? bb This
will only be possible if a post-Exile origin should upon the
whole appear probable. Are there any indications of such a
date ? We must not insist too much upon the clear, flowing,
and often elegant style, at least if we refer the Book of the
Praise of Wisdom (Prov. i.-ix.) to the happier part of the
reign of Josiah.00 It is conceivable that when the usual sacri
fices were offered before the campaign which cost Josiah his
life, the 20th psalm was sung, and that it had been recently
composed by some gifted friend of the king, while Ps. xxi.,
1 Ewald, History, v. 204.
- On the external features common to the Miktam-psalms, see Delitzsch's
introd. to Ps. xvi.

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 199
the style of which is less smooth, may have been written for
Hezekiah. I have myself held this view,dd which seemed
plausible until I began to apply the comparative method
more consistently. I now feel that there are various opposing
considerations of great cumulative force. It is impossible to 1
separate these psalms from Pss. lxi. and lxiii., which, as\
wholes, scarcely admit of a pre-Exile date. Next, looking at
the tone of this pair of liturgical poems, we are almost driven
to refer them to the post-Exile period, when poets and wise
men so frequently adopted an oracular style ; and we are
equally struck by the transition from ' we ' to ' I ' in v. 7 (cf.
Ixxxv. 9), and the reference to ' Zion ' as the centre of
Jehovah's sovereignty and the starting-point of His judg
ments (comp. xiv. 7, lxviii. 36). Nor are these the only
indications of a late date. The phrase ' Be thou exalted '
(xxi. 14), i.e. 'exercise Thy supernatural power as El 'Ely5n,'
is found again in Ivii. 6, 12, comp. xlvi. 11. A disciple of the
prophets might of course have used it before the Exile, but
this psalm expresses the mind, not of a small circle, but of
the church-nation. Ps. xx. 8 is closely akin to Pss. xxxiii. 17,
cxlvii. 10 (both probably Maccabaean passages), and Ps. xxi. 5
to Pss. xlv. 3, lxi. 7 ee (probably of the Greek period). Lastly,
the peculiar word rendered ' (we) stand upright ' (xx. 8)
virtually occurs again in Pss. cxlvi. 9, cxlvii. 6, and there
only. Can we hesitate to draw the natural inferences ?
First, the psalms are post-Exilic Next, a Persian or Graeco-
Egyptian king being out of the question, must not the king
(who has no chariots and horses) be one of the early Macca
baean princes, who so mightily stirred the popular enthusiasm ?
Most probably he is Simon ; in Ps. xxi. 7, 8 (cf. xx. 8,
xxxiii. 16, 17, cxlvii. 10) there may be a backward glance at
the victories of Judas over the Syrian cavalry (at Emmaus
and Beth-zur). The 'crown of pure gold'ff (Ps. xxi. 4) will be
the ' sacred crown ' (")&) of pure gold on the high priestly tiara
(Ex. xxix. 6, xxxix. 30, cf. Ecclus. xlv. 12), while the phrase
' his anointed,' Ps. xx. 7, is parallel to ' thine anointed,' Pss.
lxxxiv. 10, cxxxii. 10 (of a high priest in Persian times) ;
see pp. 60, 119, 339).
And now read these psalms in connexion with 1 Mace
xiii. 42-47. Do they not seem twice as fresh as before,

200 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
and can you not more easily account for the passionate
vehemence which, from a Christian point of view, deforms
Ps. xxi. [vv. 10, ii)? Then place side by side the noth
and the 21st psalms. Is it not probable that the one is the
pendant to the other ? The former says, ' Thou art a priest
for ever ; ' the latter virtually adds, ' Thou art a king for
ever' (I explain xxi. 5 by lxi. 7, and compare 1 Mace xiv. 41).1
Are we surprised that this psalmist, unlike the other, should
directly claim for his hero the title of ' king ' (cf. lxi. 7,
lxiii. 12) ? But we must remember that, although parties
were not yet sharply divided, there were already some Jews
who felt much more keenly than others the indispensableness
of the temporal power of the pontificate, and who propor
tionately emphasized the more secular side of the Melchizedek
prophecy. Long after this Philo quite innocently calls even
the pre-Maccabaean high priest /3ao-iXsvs,ge as being not only
a spiritual but in some degree a temporal sovereign. Still
more natural was it to apply the name, poetically or rhetoric
ally, to Simon the Maccabee, who, like David, had ' taken
away the yoke of the heathen from Israel,' and been freely
chosen by the people to be their ' captain and leader ' ( 1 Mace
xiii. 41, 42). And I think that any other expression for a
legal Jewish prince than ^?p would have been intolerable in- a
psalm framed on the Davidic model. Rightly or wrongly it
was believed that a portion of the psalms came from David
or his age. Such a title as N'B^ or T33 would not have been
in keeping with the style of the Psalter, and would also have
suggested an idea which was hardly in the writer's mind.hh
Nor can it be objected that the belief in a Davidic Messiah
must have prevented the poetic designation of Simon as a
king. The hope of a personal Messiah had not indeed died
out, but it was not strong at this time in Palestine ; it is
markedly absent from Daniel." On the other hand, I will
ingly admit that as soon as the Asmonaean princes themselves
publicly assumed the regal title, and entered the fellowship
of Oriental fiao-iXsls, it must have become impossible for a
psalmist to give it to them. The authors of Pss. xx., xxi.,
lxi., lxiii. had used the word y?Q in the good old Semitic sense
well expressed by the Latin ' consul,' 2 but the royalty of
1 Cf. also xxi. "jb with ex. la. * See appendix (linguistic affinities).

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 201
Judas Aristobulus (surnamed ^>iXeXXrjv) and his descendants
was too clearly akin to the selfish and oppressive tyranny of
the Graeco-Syrian kings." In the days of the former it would
be natural enough that psalms like xx. and xxi. should
assume a new meaning — the Messianic.
I hope that I have kept well within the bounds of the
probable, and that I shall not be thought to have taken up
an arbitrary and unreasonable hypothesis. It seems, then,
that there are at any rate two Maccabaean psalms in the
group which both the Hebrew and the Greek texts assign to
David. We may therefore follow those Greek versions and
include Ps. xxxiii. in the first Davidic hymn-book. The
editor wished, as it were, to convert Book I. (as well as
Books II— V.) into a 'new song' by infusing a Maccabaean
element. It would be delightful could we ascertain that not
only the latest but the earliest age of developed spiritual
religion was represented in this treasure-house. We have
failed to find records of this period in the other minor
Psalters ; we could wish to be compensated here. Well,
there is no harm in the wish ; compensated, we are sure to
be, for ' he that seeketh, findeth ; ' only we must not dictate
the form that our compensation is to take.
Let \is first of all seek historical homes for the three
beautiful nature-psalms (viii., xix. 1-7, xxix.) which occur at
regular intervals in the first book. Ps. viii., as the Song of
the Moon and Stars, is the pendant to Ps. xix. 1-7 ; as the
hymn of creation it is still more fitly compared with Ps. civ.kk
The wide sweep of thought in both suggests of itself the
beneficial influences of the Exile. Many students will go
still further, and admit that if the priestly code is post-Exile,
those psalms which (as the author of Hebrews may already
have held with regard to Ps. viii.11) allude to the first chapter
of Genesis, must be post-Exile too.1"111 This date agrees,
-with the moral indignation at successful wickedness which
the psalmist cannot wholly suppress. The phrase in Ps. viii. 3,
* to still the enemy and the revengeful ' (imitated perhaps in
Ps. xliv. 17 nn), implies that when the psalm was written, Israel
had put forward some assertion of superiority which its neigh
bours felt as an injury to themselves. Can we doubt what this
was ? It was that claim on behalf of the religion and people

202 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
of Jehovah which found its sharpest expression in the iso
lating policy of Ezra and Nehemiah.00 The one objection to
a post-Exile date is the apparent allusion to Ps. viii. 5 in
Job vii. 17. A single parallelism like this has, however, an
uncertain value. The psalmist may, contrary to the general
opinion of interpreters, imitate the wise man ; or, unwillingly
I say it, the Book of Job may, as a whole, be post-Exile.pp
Pss. xix. 1-7 and xxix. must be studied together. Both
belong to that literary revival of Hebrew mythology during
and after the Exile of which the Books of Job and to some
extent Jonah are monuments. With fearless step these kings
of sacred song — the psalmists — venture into the recesses of
popular imaginative symbolism, and reclaim them from super
stition to the service of the Most High. The swift-running hero
Shemesh, the caste or guild of the Elohim, the crashing voice
of the Thunder-god, fine myths debased by unholy associations,
were by them transfigured into poetic symbols of ' the throne
and equipage of God's almightiness.' qo- Once, indeed, this
might have been dangerous ; but now that the true Jehovah
(for the name Jehovah had itself needed transfiguration)
reigned in Israelitish hearts, His worshippers might inno
cently delight themselves in the fancies of their forefathers.™"
Both psalms were, however, in a sense, criticized by later
writers. The Song of the Sun (Ps. xix. 1-7) was provided
with a new conclusion more in harmony with the intense
Scripturism of the later post-Exile period, and probably con
temporaneous with the 119th psalm (Greek period). The
Song of the Storm (Ps. xxix.) was known to the author of
the 96th psalm, for he repeats vv. 1 and 2 of the Song in a
slightly modified and expanded form, caring more for correct
ness of doctrine than for poetry of phrase. Ps. xcvi. need
not, however, have been composed very much later than
Ps. xxix. ; ' the glory of his name ' and ' Jehovah is enthroned
as king for ever' (Ps. xxix. 2, 10) are the two watchwords of
the Return.ss
There are two other psalms in Book I. which, though not
in a full sense nature-psalms, have yet more or less mythic
colouring — these are the 18th and the 24th. Let us take the
latter first, because, like Ps. xix., it is composed (as Ewald
pointed out and Delitzsch all but admits) of two fragments-

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 203

of psalms joined together. The mythic element centres in
vv. 7-10, a fragment of a simple and yet sublime triumphal
song. What is its date ? Can it be one of those Davidic
passages in which Wilhelm Vatke was half inclined to believe ?
I do not mind admitting that when David ' danced before
Jehovah with all his might,' and again when he offered sacri
fices before Jehovah, to celebrate the entrance of the ark into
David's city (2 Sam. vi. 14, 17), the voice of song must have
accompanied these ancient rites. But who can believe that
either Ps. ex. or Ps. xxiv. 7-10 (very dissimilar psalms, by the
way) represents the tone of David on this occasion ? That
would indeed be a reconstruction of history as bold as any
thing in the most reckless recent criticism." Let it not be
urged in reply that the titles given to Jehovah in Ps. xxiv. 8,
10, were specially appropriate to the age of David, and that
the king is expressly said (2 Sam. vi. 18) to have blessed ' the
people in the name ' of ' Jehovah [Yahveh] Sabaoth.' uu None
of these divine titles have an exclusive fitness for David's age ;
the grandest of them all occurs virtually fifteen times in
psalms probably of the Persian and the Greek periods." Read
the psalm-fragment with a fresh mind, and you will see that
it simply refers to the return of Jehovah to His sanctuary
after fighting for and delivering His people. The only ques
tion can be, whether the earthly sanctuary is meant (as lxviii.
19, 25) or the heavenly (as perhaps xlvii. 6, cf. Isa. xxxi. 4).
Most probably (as in xlvii. 6) both are intended ; the psalmist,
like a true Semite, rises from the symbol to the thing sym
bolized, and idealizes the former in the light of the latter.
The ' ancient ' or ' everlasting doors ' are chiefly, at any rate,
those of the temple w which Isaiah saw in vision (Isa. vi.), and
of which another psalmist tells us (alluding to Isa. vi. 3) that
' every part of it saith, Glory ' (Ps. xxix. 9). But they are
also those ' gates of righteousness ' on Mount Zion which,
being 'the gate of Jehovah' (Ps. cxviii. 19, 20), cannot be
overcome by the ' gates of Hades.' It is a processional hymn
in the post-Exile manner,1 and reminds us forcibly of that
splendid post-Exile fragment, Isa. lxiii. 1-6, to which, indeed,
it might almost be added as a not less grand finale.
And now suffer me to ask, What have we lost by substi-
• Comp. Pss. cxviii., cxxxii.

204 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.

tuting a positive critical result for a time-honoured but irra
tional tradition ? Has the psalm which we have last considered
become, I will not say less interesting (for on that side the
critic is safe), but less rich in religious suggestiveness ? Mr.
Aubrey de Vere has finely applied vv. 7-10 to the manifesta
tion of the ' entering God — Flashing from star to star,' which
is the recompense of the devout astronomer.1 This he could
not have done, had he been content to rest in the still preva
lent explanation of the 24th psalm. But it is the old church
application about which most of my readers will be chiefly
anxious. If they follow Delitzsch, they may well be anxious.
If, however, they accept the view which has been here main
tained, they will find that the familiar poetry of faith can
without effort be grafted upon it,xx and that for them too those
noble lines were written —
Bright portals of the sky
Emboss'd with sparkling stars ;
Doors of eternity,
With diamantine bars,
Your arras rich uphold ;
Loose all your bolts and springs,
Ope wide your leaves of gold ;
That in your roofs may come the King of kings.2
And seeing the ' high priest of our profession ' seated in royal
glory at God's right hand, they ask themselves, not with
shrinking awe, but with faith in the indwelling Presence,
' Who shall ascend (like my Lord) into Jehovah's mount, and
who shall rise up in his holy place ? ' And the answer is
echoed from within, ' He in whose heart Christ dwelleth by
faith, and who seeketh those things which are above — he shall
be kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation.' 3
Instead of discussing at present the first part of this com
posite psalm, I would ask leave to pass on to Ps. xviii. This
poem, too, or at least the first half of it, is rich in mythic
elements, and is therefore presumably, other things being
equal, either very early or rather late. A very early date,yy
1 See ' The Death of Copernicus,' a poem by Aubrey de Vere, Contemporary
Review, Sept. 1889.
2 Drummond of Hawthornden.
' See Study on Ps. xxiv., Expositor, Dec. 1889.

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 205
however, is excluded by the wide religious and political out
look in vv. 32, 44, 50, by the Deuteronomic view of the
covenant in vv. 21-28 and the Deuteronomic expressions in
vv. 22-24, by the reference to the heavenly temple which
presupposes the existence of an earthly one lz in v. 7, and by
the points of contact between the psalm and the so-called Song
and Blessing of Moses (Deut. xxxii.).1 It has been suggested
that the psalm may contain, as M. Renan says, ' some verses
either David's, or like those which David must often have made.'
But though I am myself tempted to believe that an earlier
poem, containing the theophany, was adopted and completed
by a later writer,aaa I think that the conception that Jehovah
dwells in a ' temple ' or ' palace ' [v. 7, cf. xi. 4) is inconsistent
with Davidic authorship. Pre-Exilic the passage may well
be (observe the non-Babylonian conception of the cherub as a
flying animal bbb), but what is there in it that suggests the his
tory of David ? If we compare Ps. xviii. 8-20 with the lyric
in Hab. iii., we may be inclined to think that the former poem
refers, not to any event in the past, but to a great divine in
terposition hoped for in the near future. This points us
either to the Assyrian or far more probably to the Babylonian
period. Thus, even if the psalm be of dual authorship,
neither part has any claim to a Davidic origin ; indeed, for
our present purpose the unity of the poem may be assumed.
Now, can we hesitate as to its period ? Surely, unless we
think that Hezekiah and his circle had attained to views of
truth not unlike those of Deuteronomy, we are driven to place
the psalm subsequently to the second royal reformation — that
of Josiah. Applying the comparative method consistently, it
is most reasonable to assign it to that blossoming of the
church-historical spirit which relieved the dulness of the
Exile, but which began as early as the age of Deuteronomy.
Just as several great prose writers and poets busied them
selves with reproducing what must have been the last words
of Moses, or what would have been his last words, if he had
lived in their own time, so at least two great poets endeavoured,
so to speak, to think themselves back into the soul of David.
1 Cf. v. 4 (' Rock,' used of God) with Deut. xxxii. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31, 37;
v. 11 with Deut. xxxii. n ; v. 32 (' Eloah ') with Deut. xxxii. 15, 17 ; and same
verse (idea) with Deut. xxxii. 39a. Cf. also w. 10, 11, 32, with Deut. xxxiii. 26.

206 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
One of these poets is the author of the striking poem in
2 Sam. xxiii. 1-7 ; the other is the author of the 18th psalm.1
I do not say that either poet has, from an objective historical
point of view, succeeded. Ps. xviii. 21-46 describes David
(an unfriendly critic might assert) as copying the proud self-
assertion of Assyrian kings, or, as a more sympathetic student
would say, as having inherited the promises, such for instance
as Gen. xv. 18, xxviii. 13, 14, Deut. xi. 24. Upon neither
interpretation can vv. 21-46 correspond to the historical
reality. It is not the true David but an interpreter of pro
phecy who speaks, and who in the language of faith represents
a promise as a virtual possession. To one who can pierce
below the surface he prophesies of future sons of David who
shall raise their kingdom to a height never attained by the
historical David. This is perhaps the view expressed in the
liturgical appendix [v. 5i).cec
And can we fix the date of this interpreter of prophecy
more precisely ? I think that we can, using with due caution
his points of contact with other writers. He would appear
to have lived before the authors of Pss. Ixxxix., cxvi., cxliv.,ddd
and the composite psalm in Jon. ii., and before the great
prophet of Israel's restoration,ese but not before the inven
tion or revival of the divine names 'Elyon and Eloah,fff and, in
spite of Mic vii. 17 (comp. v. 46), not before the publication
of Deuteronomy.ggg The facts point, so far as one can see, to
the happy period, free from what the psalmist calls ' the strifes
of peoples,' hhh between 62 1 and 608. This at any rate is the
earliest possible date. I accept it not without much hesitation,
and cannot complain if some prefer to regard the psalm as an
imaginative work of the Exile.1" As a temple-poem it can
hardly have been written in Josiah's reign ; its advanced ideas
and polished style would not be suitable for the services of
the first temple. May it not have been intended as a literary
illustration of some current life of David ? Its noble and almost
epic™ style well fitted it to serve this purpose. May it not
be a Paralipomenon by the author of 2 Sam. vii. ? (compare
the title of Ps. xviii. with 2 Sam. vii. 1). It was at any rate
adopted into the later liturgical service as in some sense a
1 See my Jeremiah, his Life and Times, pp. 87, 88.

V. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 207
prophecy of a great future Davidic ruler or line of rulers (see
the appended verse).
Next in order let us take Ps. xxxvi., because, though its
contents are not very like those of Ps. xviii., it has the same
short but striking title which originally introduced Ps. xviii.,kkk
and the form of which may have been suggested by Jer.
xxxiii. 21. If titles have any critical value, these two psalms
should be the earliest in the book. One can understand that
as long as only a few psalms were recognized as Davidic the
scribes found leisure to write ' Of the servant of Jehovah, of
David,' but that afterwards a plain I'ddvid seemed enough.
And yet neither of the parts of Ps. xxxvi. (for like Pss. xix.
and xxiv. it is composite) can be Davidic, or even of the later
years of the pre-Exile period. The first part [vv. 2-4) must
be grouped with Pss. xii., xiv., lviii. ; the second [vv. 6-13)
with Ps. Ivii., and other later psalms of the divine lovingkind-
ness.111 The psalm was only thought to be Davidic because
of a single phrase in v. 12 ;mmm it may have been written in
more than one part of the Persian period.

Note a, p. 190.
So Robertson Smith, Bickell, and others. We cannot even be quite
sure that it was the first editor who prefixed I'ddvid to the collection.
The title may conceivably have been added later to distinguish this
collection from others. Note b, p. 190.
Theodore of Mopsuestia, though no rationalist, rejected the
authority of the titles of the psalms. It is to him that Theodoret
alludes in the words, ras eiriypacf>a.<s tSsv if/aXfj,S>v rtj/es dwnKaXtaav
[Prmf. ad Psalmos). I must admit, however, that Theodore swallows
the Davidic origin of the Book of Psalms as a whole. It is only the
compulsory reference of all Davidic psalms to events in the history
of David that he rejects. David often spoke, he thinks, prophetically,
and assumed the character of men yet unborn. This will not
satisfy the Bishop of Cyrus. The Seventy, he says, were inspired to
translate the titles. ToXp.rjpbv olp,ai Kai Xiav Opacrv i//euSas -rauVas
¦rrpoo-ayopeveiv, Kai tovs olkuovs Xoyio-p-ovs tj)s tov LTi/eu/mTos ivepycias
o-o^usripovs viroXapPdvinv. The freedom with which the Septuagint

208 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
translator dealt with the Hebrew titles is unknown to him. On the
ascription of psalms to authors, see further Appendix I., p. 459.
Note °, p. 190.
These two criteria are embodied in Gustav Baur's canon, as
quoted by Schrader (De Wette's Einleitung, § 332). Ewald's fourteen
Davidic psalms or psalm-fragments are xi., vii., xxiv. 7-10, xxiv.
1-6, ci., xxix., xix., viii., Ix. 8-1 1, xviii., xxxii., iii., iv., lxviii. 14-19
(place undetermined). Between xxiv. 1-6 and ci. he inserts xv. (as
an early imitation of xxiv. 1-6), and between viii. and lx. 8-1 1 he
places ex. (as belonging to David's age), and after iv., ii., and cxliv.
12-15 (as proceeding from the first half of the Solomonic period).
Hitzig also assigns fourteen psalms to David, but makes a some
what different selection (comp. my Book of Psalms, Introd., p. xvi.).
He remarks (and Ewald evidently agreed with him) that, though
many psalms might be mistaken for David's, no really Davidic psalm
could possibly be ascribed to a weaker hand. It will be noticed
that all but five of the eighteen Davidic and early Solomonic psalms
specified by Ewald belong to Book I. A few other psalms (e.g.,
xxiii., xxvii., Ixii., Ixiv., exxxviii.), according to this critic, might seem to
be Davidic, but upon a closer examination they do not come up to
the Davidic loftiness of spirit. Let us pass now to the conservative
school. Delitzsch is not always clear in his own mind, and hence the
amount of the Davidic element allowed by him is slightly uncertain.
Strack, however, calculates that he admits 44 psalms as Davidic,
partly on the ground of the headings, partly because of ' their crea
tive originality, their impassioned and predominantly elegiac strain,
their graceful flow of movement, their language antique yet clear '
[The Psalms, by Eaton, i. n). These are, iii. -xix., xxii.-xxiv., xxvi.,
xxviii.-xxx., xxxii., xxxiv., xxxvi.-xxxix., xii., li., hi., liv., lvi. -lxiii., ci.,
ex. He expresses himself doubtfully with regard to xxv., xxvii.
(1-6), xxxi., lv., Ixiv., ciii., cix. The remaining 23^ of the so-called
Davidic psalms are, according to Delitzsch, not David's work. The
latest orthodox commentator (F. W. Schultz, in Strack and Zockler's
series) occupies a position midway between that of Ewald and Hitzig
on the one hand and that of Delitzsch on the other. Only 17 of the
so-called ' Davidic ' psalms must, he thinks, be ascribed to David for
historical reasons, viz., iii., iv., vii., xi., xv. -xviii., xxiii., xxiv., xxvii.,
xxx., xxxii., xxxvi., Ixii., ci., ex. But there are 17 others which there
is no sufficient reason to deny to the poet-king, viz., v., vi., viii., xii.,
xiii., xix.-xxii., xxix., xii., Iii., liv., lvi., Ivii., lxi., lxiii. Pss. ix., x. may
also be defended as Davidic.

V. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 209
Note d, p. 191.
The importance of Kuenen's Religion of Israel (a new and re
vised edition of which is greatly needed) is that it enables one
to see how this eminent scholar's later critical results fall of them
selves into an intelligible picture of Israel's history. I am, of
course, far from undervaluing his Historisch-kritisch Onderzoek, to
which (in spite of its repellent form) some of the best scholars are
under manifold obligations. And I am equally far from being satis
fied with the cold and unsympathetic religious tone of the Religion
of Israel. Yet I must venture to say that the book is in its way a
masterpiece, and that in its method of proceeding from the well
known to the less known it is severely scientific. It is not, in my
opinion, justly censured on the ground of its ' naturalistic ' tend
ency. Surely a true historian cannot help being a ' naturalist ' or
rather a 'psychologist,' so far as the case admits. He need not, how
ever, deny the existence of ' wonders.' ' Every day wonders, easily
verifiable, do take place in the spiritual life ; wonders with which the
historian is not concerned, but which, to a reverent mind, attest the
supernatural in nature. Wonders are reported to have also taken
place within the sphere of external nature, wonders which are not so
easily verifiable as the others, because they [for the most part] depend
on the testimony of men of long past ages. It belongs to the histo
rical critic to study the periods from which these testimonies come,
and to sift the reports which convey them. When he has approached
the facts as nearly as he can, he has to interpret the facts, or his
image of the facts, in accordance with the commonly recognized laws
or principles of nature, if this be possible ; and if it be not possible,
to leave them unexplained.' This, as it appears to me, is what
Kuenen has in general done. He is a psychologist, not merely, as
all scholars of Lightfoot and Westcott, Bruce and Davidson, are in
exegesis, but in criticism. If he rejects this or that tradition of a
wonderful occurrence, it is first because the tradition is not suffi
ciently ancient, and next, because he has a bias in favour of
psychology. The objection urged against F. C. Baur does not meet
Kuenen's case. It does not really meet the case of his eminent prede
cessor Vatke, the Hegelianism of whose Religion des Alten Testaments
is skin-deep ; still less does it meet that either of Kuenen or of his
brilliant junior Wellhausen. (See further my article, ' Reform in
Teaching the Old Testament,' Contemp. Review, August 1889.)
Note e, p. 192.
We may fegard Isaiah as in a certain sense the founder of the
Jewish Church ; at least, the allusions in his discourses to a kind of
P

210 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
guild of disciples (see Isa. viii. 12, 16), combined with his remark
able prophecy of the 'remnant,' show that the idea of a spiritual
society had loomed before his mind. The profoundly spiritual Jere
miah succeeded to Isaiah's ideas, and developed them. In quite
another sense the author of Deuteronomy may deserve the title of
founder nf the Church, imperfectly as he can have defined the idea ;
after him Ezra and his colleagues, and not the least the psalmists.
But church-hymns, like our psalms, cannot be imagined even in the
age of Deuteronomy. I know that Kuenen has said that the origin
both of temple-song and temple-poetry may go back to the time of
Josiah, though song and poetry took a higher flight after the Exile
[Religion of Israel, iii. 23). But this can hardly be meant to justify
putting any considerable part of the Psalter before the Exile. The
style of the temple-singing and the spiritual state of the nation, as
revealed to us in Jeremiah and Habakkuk, forbid such a view. (It
has been already pointed out that Hab. iii. as well as Isa. xxxviii.
10-20, is post-Exile.) I remember too that Delitzsch has called the
prophet Samuel the father of psalm-poetry (Introd. to Ps. 1.). But
the 'great word' in 1 Sam. xv. 22 (to which Delitzsch refers) is as
inconsistent with the primitive story of Samuel as the 'Davidic'
psalms are with the traditional narrative of the life of David.
Note f, p. 192.
Duncker stands almost alone in denying the Davidic authorship
of both these elegies [Hist, of Antiquity, ii. 144, 148) ; Vernes, how
ever, is equally sceptical with regard to the former [Revue de l' histoire
des religions, jan.-fevr. 1889, p. 69). I cannot follow them, least of
all Vernes, whose attempt to bouleverser Old Testament criticism
bodes ill for French study of the Spriptures. See Kuenen's review
in the Theologisch Tijdschrift for 1889, and Piepenbring's in the
Rev. de fhisi. des rel. for 1890. Note «, p. 192.
The Vedic and the Gathic hymns, which were metrical, were also
preserved by oral tradition. So too was the ancient (secular) Arabic
poetry. Every poet had his rdwi or ' vates,' who learned each poem
as it was composed, and transmitted it to others (cf. R. V. of 2 Sam.
i. 18). Solomon, too, spoke his moralizing similitudes (1 Kings iv.
32, 33). But I leave the question of the antiquity of written Hebrew
poetry open. Note h, p. 192.
Alluding perhaps to a popular etymology of ' Israel ' as ^S "lg>*
' God's upright one ' something like that of Asur (Asshur) as ' the

V. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 211
good or righteous (god).' In an early poem, proceeding from a
disciple of the prophets, we find the Israelites referred to as ' upright
ones' (Num. xxiii. 10 ; cf. Ps. cxi. 1), i.e., ' doing that which is right
in the eyes of Jehovah ; ' and somewhat later the artificial synonym for
Israel — 'Jeshurun' euWs, Aq., Symm., Theod.), Deut. xxxii. 15,
xxxiii. 5, 26, cf. Isa. xliv. 2. The ' Book of the Upright ' is mentioned
again in Josh. x. 12, 13, and probably in 1 Kings viii. 12, 13 (rr)s ciS-r/s
in Sept. translates Tg'n, which must be a corruption of "iB^'D ; for the
quotation, see p. 212). It is likely that the songs in this collection
were accompanied by prose narratives, in which the ' upright ' acts
glorified in the songs were set forth in detail. This is at any rate in
harmony with later usage. Note ', p. 193.
Observe that the psalm in 2 Sam. xxii. stands outside the histo
rical framework of the Books or rather Book of Samuel. The same
remark applies to the so-called ' Last Words of David ' in 2 Sam.
xxiii. 1-7. That Ewald should have regarded even this 'dramatic
lyric ' as David's work shows how true Dorner's judgment respecting
him was (see p. 191). How strange that one who has written so
much and so well on the idealizing or transfiguring tendency of later
Hebrew writers on Elijah, should have overlooked this tendency with
regard to David ! He really appears to have thought that the versatile
condottiere, chieftain, and king (whose truly noble qualites I would
not for a moment disparage) became in his advanced age a prophet
[Dichter des A. B. i. a, 145). Would it not be simpler to suppose
that all through his life the ' faculty divine ' of prophecy as well as of
poesy had been David's — the theory so well expressed by Delitzsch
(Introd. to Ps. ex.) ? If we reject this theory, which is solely based
on the tradition current subsequently to the completion of the O. T.
literature, so far as it relates to by far the larger part of David's career,
must we not hesitate to apply it to the closing scene of the mighty
warrior ? Thankfully will we accept the later idealistic view of David
as expressing that secret prophetic meaning which we who come after
can see in his life-work, but we have no right to use it to the preju
dice of the critical study of history. The case of these last words is
parallel to that of the last words of Moses. We have both a psalm
and a prophetic utterance of the legislator, and we find a similar pair
of compositions ascribed to the aged king. In each case the pro
phetic utterance is the harder ; can we be surprised at this ? The
hardness does not prove that it has a better claim than the psalm to
be ascribed to the hero whose name it bears ; it is of the essence of a
prophetic oracle, when undiluted by the prophet's subsequent reflec-

212 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
tion, to be hard. As long as Hebrew was written, it was perfectly
possible to write in a hard style ; Ps. ex. is hard enough. The intro
ductory formula '1J1 in DN3 is evidently based upon Num. xxiv. 3, 4,
15, 16. The description of the covenant in v. 5 points back to
2 Sam. vii. The gnomic or mashalic style of vv. 6, 7 shows the
influence of the early prophetic anthologies. To the age of Hezekiah
or (better) Josiah a critic may soberly refer this beautiful though
difficult poem, as well as the prophecy dramatically put into the
mouth of Nathan. Certainly it is in Josiah alone that the opening
words of the poem were fully realized, and we may fairly say that the
writer idealizes the earlier in the light of his experience of the later
king. Note J, p, 193.
It is to Wellhausen that we are indebted for the virtual discovery
of this song-fragment (see Bleek's Einleitung, ed. 4, p. 236, and cf.
Klostermann's notes on 1 Kings viii. 12). The passage may have
run thus — •$ Sa? rva <iv;q nia
: DW'n ^patt*1? fi3D
Lines b, c, d are given in 1 Kings viii. 12, 13 as a speech of
Solomon's before his benediction. It is clear, however, that v. 14
ought to follow v. 12, and in Sept. we find vv. 12, 13 in a more
complete form (i.e. with the addition of line a), with an introductory
and a closing formula after v. 33 — Tore \XdX-qo-e %oXop.mv inrlp tov
oikov <!)S o"vveTe'Xeo"e tov olKoBo/jirjo-ai avTOv, "HA.10V <zo-rr)o-ev iv ovpavw
Kvpios, Kai eiire tov KaroiKeiv kv yvocfiw Oi/coSoyU/r/o-ov oikov p.ov, einrpeirrj
creavTcp, tov KarotKeiv em KaivonjTos. Ovk iBov avnj yiypairTai i-Ki
fiifiXiov i-r)s iLBrj'i ; I have here followed Lucian, who reads Zo-rqo-ev
for lyviapicrev. In the Hebrew of b, c, and d, however, I have not
tried to correct the text by the Septuagint, feeling with Klostermann
that the received text gives a finer meaning than the Greek (which
in any case requires some emendation). The contrast in a and b is
between the sun in his glorious heavenly mansion and the cloud-
inhabiting Creator. Then in c and d Solomon exclaims that he has
built a lofty house for Yahveh (that men might no longer worship
the sun instead of the Creator), a house eternal as those heavens in
which the sun is fixed (cf. Ps. lxxviii. 69a). KaivoTr\To% of Sept. (in d)
implies that D^O^IB was misread D'p-Pj; (cf. the opposite mistake Ps.
Ixxxix. 8, Isa. liv. 4, Sept.), and rf}s (oS^s=TB'n for "1B>*D. The head
ing of the fragment in Sept. reminds us that Ps. exxvii. was also

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 213
(apparently) interpreted as a speech of Solomon's at the building of
the temple. If this psalm was wrongly so explained, have we any
certainty that the origin given to the fragment by the writer of 1 Kings
viii. 14-66 is correct? When the 'Book of the Upright' was com
piled we do not know ; nor can we be sure that it ascribed the
fragment to Solomon. Still, I venture to hope that the fragment is
Solomonic, just as the elegy on Saul and Jonathan (preserved in the
same song-book) is believed to be Davidic. On the date of 1 Kings
viii., see Wellhausen, loc. cit. Note k, p. 194.
On the ancient Chaldaean hymns preserved by later editors, see
Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, p. 342. Passages from the Veda, in which
a distinction is drawn between old and new hymns, are quoted by
Muir, Ancient Sanskrit Texts, iii. 224-232. The old hymns had the
prestige of age, the new of greater elaborateness and refinement.
According to Holzman private hymns were sometimes adapted by
editors to their own theological conceptions, and old hymns were
worked up to suit the taste of a later generation (Steinthal's Zeit-
schrift, 1884, p. 17). On the Zoroastrian hymns, see De Harlez,
introd. to his translation of the Avesta, p. Ixxiii., and especially Mills,
introd. to the Gathas, Oxford Zendavesta, part iii.
Note m, p. 194.
Why not ? David was the type of a psalmist, Solomon of a wise
man (Targ. on Jer. ix. 22). If Neubauer's translation of Bab a bathra,
14b (' David wrote the Book of Praises with the help of ten ancients,
Adam, Melchizedek, Abraham, Moses, Heman, Jeduthun, Asaph,
and the three sons of Korah ') is correct, the tradition implies that
each of these persons had the same poetic and religious inspiration
as David. Dalman, however, renders H| by 'for,' i.e. 'in the name
of,' comparing Mishna, Baba mez. vii. 9, and Gemara, Gittin, 67b
{Der Gottesname Adonaf, p. 79, note).
Note n, p. 194.
Ordinary singers were not much thought of; Neh. vii. 67 classes
them with slaves. Even the temple singers were not quite equal to
the Levites in Zerubbabel's time (Ezra ii. 4°-42> Neh- vii. 43~45)-
Note °, p. 195.
It would be absurd to maintain that there were no psalms before
the Exile. But it is not absurd to question whether temple-hymns

214 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. LECT.
can have greatly resembled those in the Psalter. There must indeed
have been a common element in them ; and though Jer. xxxiii. has
been touched by more than one editor (see Hitzig), I am disposed to
infer from v. ii the early existence of the rhythmical thanksgiving
formula which we find in Ps. exxxvi. i, and would remind doubters
that the pilgrim's song called the Talbiya, which tradition declares
to be pre-Islamic, contains an analogous formula (see Hughes, Diet.
of Islam, s. v.). A further inference can be drawn from Lamenta
tions, viz. that penitential songs were known before the Exile, though
we cannot be sure that these songs much resembled our Lamenta
tions. That Isaiah and Jeremiah contributed liturgical hymns is not
only in itself improbable, but has been, as I think, disproved. It is true,
however, that the latter prophet was among the first moulders of the
later ' dialect of stated prayer.' His priestly soul delighted to plead
with God in the name of the people (see e.g. Jer. x. 23-25, xiv. 7-9,
19-22). Passages in the later eucharistic style also occur sometimes
embedded in prophecies not post-Exilic (see Isa. xii., xxxviii. 10-20,
Hab. iii., Isa. xiii. 10-12, xliv. 23, xlv. 8). It is probable, however,
that the first three of these passages were inserted subsequently in a
psalm-loving age, like the psalms in the Books of Samuel.
Note p, p. 195.
The absence of a title to Ps. xxxiii. and the affinity between xxxii.
1-1 and xxxiii. 1 have led some to conjecture that Pss. xxxii. and
xxxiii. either form one poem ( Venema) or are at any rate twin psalms
(Hengstenberg). Their difference in form and in contents is however
too marked to justify this view. All that we can say is that xxxii. 10
would naturally suggest placing Ps. xxxiii. next to Ps. xxxii. (Gratz
however makes xxxii. 11 the first verse of Ps. xxxiii.)
Note «, p. 195.
Not earlier therefore than the close of the Assyrian period (see
below, on Pss. ix., x.). Note r, p. 195.
The reference to Jehovah's goodness and wide-reaching Provi
dential care (see on v. 5) points to that deeper conception of the
divine nature which, though it began perhaps in Jeremiah's circle, yet
became much more general during and after the Exile. So, too the
way in which the ideas of creation and of Israel's preservation are
brought into connexion reminds us strongly of the 'Great Unknown '
who glorified the close of the Captivity. As Hengstenberg says, 'The

V. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 215
fundamental note of the psalm is, Fear not, thou worm Jacob, and
thou small people of Israel; ' but the national element in the psalm
is raised and ennobled by a deepened intuition of that which Israel
has in its God. Note s, p. 195.
If the pointing of Ps. xxxiii. 7 be correct there is yet another
parallelism between this psalm and the Maccabaean group referred to
in the text. ' Like a heap ' would be an allusion to Ex. xv. 8 (cf.
the allusion to Moses' Song in Ps. cxviii. 14).
Note *, p. 195.
Notice in this connexion the parallels between Ps. xxxiii. and Pss.
cxlvii., cxlviii. Comp. xxxiii. 1 with cxlvii. 1, xxxiii. 9 with cxlviii. 5,
xxxiii. 12 with cxlvii. 19, 20, xxxiii. 16-18 with cxlvii. 10, 11, and
remember that Pss. cxlvi.-cxlviii. are assigned in Sept. to the prophets
Haggai and Zechariah. Note u, p. 196.
The Hexapla Septuagint title is t<3 AaviS (and so the Cambridge
Sept., following Cod. Vat.). But Origen remarks that the psalm is
dve7riypa<£os in the Hebrew and in Sept., Aq., and Theod. Similarly
Eusebius. But Quinta and Sexta do give the title. Who can dogma
tize here ? Note t, p. 196.
Among other phraseological affinities note that between v. 1 5 and
Job xv. 35, and between v. 1 1 (God, a ' shield ') and Ps. iii. 4, xviii. 3,
31, xxviii. 7, xxxiii. 20, lix. 12, cxix. 114, cxliv. 2 &c.
Note w, p. 196.
' A church psalm in the proper sense of the word.' See note n,
p. 213. From a pardonable conservative impulse I assigned this
psalm in my Commentary to the latter part of the reign of Josiah,
supposing the occasion to be the danger from Neco. But comparing
this with kindred psalms, I see now how improbable this is. The
author is a devout post-Exile poet who, like the writer of Ps. vi.,
loved and copied the prophecies of Jeremiah.
Note *, p. 197.
' Less correct.' The only doubt is with regard to Pss. xiv. 5, 6,
liii. 6. There are three possible views, [a) that in xiv. 5, 6 we have

216 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
the original text which was retouched (liii. 6) to make it refer to the
plague in Sennacherib's army, [b) that liii. 6 had this or a similar re
ference, but not through any interference with the original text, which
in fact it represents, xiv. 5, 6 having arisen from an attempt to make
sense out of a partly illegible MS., [c) that xiv. 5, 6 gives the original
text, liii. 6 being accounted for by ordinary mistakes in transcription.
The third view is advocated in my Commentary.
Note y, p. 197.
So on the verge of this century Paulus, who assigned Ps. xiv. to
Isaiah. This would agree with the view [a) in note w. (I assume
that 'they feared' is the 'prophetic' perfect. Hitzig, however,
who ascribes this psalm to Jeremiah, explains it as a historical
backward glance at Sennacherib.) Note z, p. 197.
Hitzig and Delitzsch both defend the Davidic authorship of the
psalm on the ground of the strikingly poetic (Delitzsch adds, the
somewhat archaic) phraseology. The former also finds an occasion
for the psalm in the life of David ; v. 3a, rightly translated, indicates
that the psalm accompanied the present which David sent from
Ziklag to the elders of Judah (1 Sam. xxx. 26). A weak hypothesis
indeed (see linguistic appendix) ! Delitzsch rejects it, but can
himself only offer the conjecture that David had fallen sick, and,
as the title of the partly parallel (?) 30th psalm suggests, was thereby
hindered from entering his new cedar palace (2 Sam. v. 11, 12).
He also refers to the points of contact between Ps. xvi. and Pss. iv.,
xi., xvii., and early portions of the Pentateuch (Ex. xxiii. 13, xix. 6,
Gen. xlix. 6) ; but from my point of view these are not inconsistent
with a post-Exile date for the psalm. Delitzsch's linguistic evidence
will be noticed in its proper place in the appendix. A pre-Exile
date is, I think, only possible if we confine our view to v. 4, and
connect the ' libations of blood ' [v. 4) with the human sacrifices
put an end to by Josiah (2 Kings xxiii. 10). But is not this
connexion very far-fetched? If I had to defend a pre-Exile date,
I would sooner take ^53 as = Ar. nasika ' a sacrifice,' prop. ' a
pouring out,' and suppose that some Jews had fallen away to a
primitive type of sacrificial worship preserved in Arabia (on which
see W. R. Smith, The Religion of the Semites, pp. 320, 321, and cf.
Nilus quoted in Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, iii. 57). But
there is another and a better view. The religious and literary
affinities of the psalm seem to me post-Exilic. A post-Exilic

V. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 217
prophet describes his abhorrence of the sacrifices, both animal and
cereal, of formal Jehovah-worshippers by treating them as equivalent
to human sacrifices and libations of swine's blood respectively (Isa.
Ixvi. 3) — ' He that slaughtereth an ox is a man-slayer,' . . . 'he that
bringeth a minkhah, it is swine's blood.' This prophet refers, I
suspect, to a revival of Syrian idolatries, but his form of expression
would be equally suitable for a writer in the Hellenistic period.
Ewald strangely infers from v. $a that the writer is one of the exiles.
Baethgen takes the same view of the date of the psalm, but infers
from v. 3 that a part of the exiles had already returned home. He
traces points of contact between v. 3 (corrected by the help of Sept.)
and Isa. xiii. 21, Ixii. 4 ; comp. also v. 3 (iDN) with Isa. xiii. 8,
xlviii. n ; v. 4 with Isa. lxv. 14. At any rate the psalmist has read
2 Isaiah ; but is he therefore a contemporary ? Moreover, Isa. lxv.
is probably post-Exile. Note aa, p. 198.
The representative of faithful Israel, who is the speaker, describes
himself [v. 10) as Tpn, like the author of Ps. lxxxvi., who belongs,
as we have seen, to the early part of the anti-Hellenistic movement.
Note bb, p. 198.
The Targum and some Rabbis (and among the moderns,
Lengerke and Forbes, but not Hengstenberg nor Delitzsch) regard
Ps. xxi. as strictly Messianic (chiefly on account of the grandeur of
the wishes for the king). But Ps. xxi. belongs to the same category
as Pss. xlv., Ixxii., ex., nor can it be separated from Ps. xx. (which
Forbes, indeed, with bold consistency, interprets of the Messiah).
Theodore of Mopsuestia, followed by Theodoret, explains Ps. xx.
by 2 Kings xix. 14. David, he thinks, foresees the danger from
Sennacherib, and shows us the Jewish people joining its prayers with
those of the king. Ps. xxi. he considers to have been written in the
name of the people as its thanksgiving for Hezekiah's restoration to
health. Note cc, p. 198.
Prov. i.-ix. is admittedly later than the main part of our Book of
Proverbs. It is not earlier therefore than the last half century of the
Davidic kingdom. This fits in with the most probable date of
the Book of Job (Exilic). The stage of intellectual development in
' Job ' is more advanced than that in the ' Praise of Wisdom.' In
Prov. viii., moreover, Wisdom offers herself to men, and religion is
but the first part of her teaching ; but in Job xxviii. the divine plan

2i8 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
of the world is beyond human study, and religion is all the wisdom
possible to man. Dillmann, although a pupil of Ewald, takes the same
view, and so Hitzig, Kuenen (?), and Hooykaas. Ewald, Delitzsch,
Riehm, and (in a monograph, 1889) Seyring, reverse the order of
composition ; but they also place Job before the Exile, which is
scarcely a tenable view. It is also, I admit, possible that both Job
and Prov. i.-ix. are post-Exile (see Lect. VIII., p. 365). This is the
view of Stade, who in the personification of Wisdom (Prov. viii.)
detects the influence of Hellenism. But I am now arguing for the
post-Exile date of Pss. xx., xxi. on relatively conservative grounds.
Note dd, p. 199.
Jeremiah, his Life and Times, p. 95 (cf. Theodoret, above). An
earlier king than Hezekiah is at any rate most improbable, if the
comparative principle has any validity in the criticism of the psalms.
Hitzig, who is inclined to explain Pss. xx. and xxi. of Hezekiah,
does not disguise the philological objections to this view (see
appendix). Note ee, p. 199.
Ps. lxi. 6 should probably be corrected from Ps. xxi. 3 (see my
Commentary), the parallelism elsewhere in this psalm being so very
complete. Note ff, p. 199.
The mt3y is not confined to the king, any more than the 1T.J is to
the high priest. Comp. Zech. ix. 16 with Isa. Ixii. 3, and Ex. xxix. 6
with 2 Sam. i. 10. Notice also that in Zech. vi. 11 the word for the
' crowns ' on the head of Joshua (and of Zerubbabel ?) is the plural
of that used in Ps. xxi. 4 (rniDJ?). Note gs, p. 200.
See the quotation in p. 42. I need hardly quote instances of the
wide classical use of pao-iXevs. Comp. however another passage from
Philo's De Vita Mosis (Mangey, ii. 152), LTpos Be Kai KiBapis kcit-
eo-Kevd^eTO. KiSapeis yap 01 twv eaioiv /Jaa-iAeis dvTi Bia8y}p.aTO<s eldOacri
Xprjo-6ai, and this from De Profugis (i. 562), Kai ort ttjv Ke<paXrjv
ovSeTTOTe aTrojAiTpwcrei, to /3acriXeiov ovk diroOrjO'eTai SidBy]fj.o., to
crvp./3oXov tov ovk avTOKpaTopo<s p.ev, v-rrdp^ov Be Kai Oav/JLao-rrj1;
r/yep.ovia's. According to this last passage the high priest occupies a
position such as Mordecai's (Esth. viii. 15); he is the king's alter
ego. It is perfectly true that it was only at the close of the Persian

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 219
or the beginning of the Greek period that the high priesthood
became an object of ambition as a temporal as well as a spiritual
dignity. But Wellhausen appears to me to have shown that the
union of spiritual and temporal power, so noteworthy in the Greek
period, was in full accordance with the theory of the priestly code
[Prolegomena, pp. 155-157). The argument from the colours of
the high priestly vestments in Delitzsch, Pentateuch-kritische Studien,
No. v., is, I fear, of no weight. Note hh, p. 200.
W&Z was the official title of the head of the Sanhedrin. As
used in the O.T., it suggests that the personage referred to has but
moderate importance or authority (see 1 Kings xi. 34, Ezek. xii 10,
and other passages in that book). It is no objection to this that
Ezekiel calls the future Davidic king WW) (Ezek. xxxiv. 24, xxxvii.
25), for this prophet fears to magnify even the Messiah too much,
nor that Abraham is called DTPK N»BO (Gen. xxiii. 6), for the Hittites
are skilled in compliments. TJ3 is^a term of fuller contents. This
title is given to Saul, David, and Solomon in Sam. and Kings, but
still with an implication of humility, which would be out of place in
expressions of the church-nation's loyalty. Hezekiah in his weak
ness is also spoken of as a T'ii (Isa. xx. 5), and the king of Tyre,
with a depreciating reference, in Ezek. xxviii. 2. In Dan xi. 22 the
high priest (Onias III.) is called nna TJf
Note ", p. 200.
It seems bold in Dr. Gratz to say, ' Only a descendant of David,
who would at the same time be the expected Messiah, could, as the
people at that time viewed matters, be a true king ' [Gesch. der Juden,
iii., ed. 4, p. 59). Note JJ, p. 201.
The Jews complained to Pompeius that Hyrcanus II. and Aristo
bulus II. (the rival Asmoneean claimants of the kingdom) ' sought to
change the government of their nation to another form in order to
enslave them ' (Jos., Ant. xiv. 3, 2). Comp. Mommsen's description
of the motives which led Caesar to avoid the title of king, one of
which was the association of the name with Oriental despotism [Hist.
of Rome, iv. 499). It was the bitter experience of Herodian and
subsequently of Roman oppression which led to the frequent intro
duction of the divine title ' our king,' ' king of the world,' into the
Jewish liturgy.

220 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. LECT.

Note kk, p. 201.
It was probably inserted by an afterthought, for Pss. vii. and ix.
are connected, not only by similarity of theme, but by the parallelism
between vii. i8£ and ix. $b. Note u, p. 201.
See Heb. ii. 6-8. The connexion cannot have escaped any student
even in those primitive times. On which side the priority lay, accord
ing to the Christian writer, seems clear from the fact ' that all his
representations of salvation in the early chapters rest on the accounts
of man's primary history contained in Genesis ' (Bruce on Hebrews,
Expositor, 1888, part ii., p. 364).
Note mm, p. 201.
But pre-Maccabaean (cf. v. 4a with cxliv. 5a ; v. 5 with cxliv. 3).
Hitzig and Delitzsch offer but a weak defence of the Davidic author
ship. The former explains Ps. viii. by 1 Sam. xxx. 1, 2. But see
Commentary and linguistic appendix.
Note nn, p. 201.
I follow Gratz in reading 'SD for <JBD (cf. Delitzsch on Prov. xv.
14). Thus Ps. xliv. 17b may be indebted to both members of Ps.
viii. 3. Note 00, p. 202.
This is confirmed by a small point of phraseology. The psalm
begins -lJ^lN niir1. This is a phrase of Nehemiah's, Neh. x. 30 ;
' our Lord ' is also a synonym for Yahveh in Neh. viii. 10, Ps. exxxv.
5, cxlvii. 5. The universal Lordship of Yahveh is a specially post-
Exile belief. Note m, p. 202.
Prof. Robertson Smith connects Ps. viii. with Ps. cxxxiv. as regards
its original liturgical use. Both were, he thinks, psalms of the night-
vigils in the temple (see p. 61). Theophrastus (4th century b.c),
whose attention was attracted by the music of the temple, speaks
(ap. Porphyry, De Abst. ii. 26) of the worshippers as passing the
night in gazing at the stars and calling on God in prayer. Prof. R.
Smith only quotes this, however, as possessing a general illustrative
value, and not as an authority for a detail of the later ritual (art.

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 221

' Psalms,' Enc. Br. xx. 34). I would rather view Ps. viii. as one of
the night-hymns of faithful worshippers at home (see xiii. 9, cxix. 55,
62). Note <w, p. 202.
The phrase is Milton's. Comp. his use of Ps. xix. 6 in Parad.
Lost, vii. 371-375, a sonorous passage, but less antiquely natural
than George Peele's noble lines (1599), —
As when the sun, attir'd in glistering robes,
Comes dancing from his oriental gate,
And bridegroom-like hurls through the gloomy air
His radiant beams.
If our own poets revel in myths, we may pardon the first readers of
the psalms for not understanding that the life-giving sun could itself
be as lifeless as a clod, and those who adopted the popular language
in Gen. i. 16, xxxvii. 9, and especially Josh. x. 12, where Joshua
speaks almost as if he had Ps. xix. 6 in his mind. Even the latest
of the wise men speaks as if the sun were conscious of human doings
(cf. ' under the sun,' 26 times in Ecclesiastes, with ' before the sun,'
2 Sam. xii. 12), a view which we find expressed in Ps. Sol. ii. 13, 14,
Enoch c. 10, civ. 8. As an early instance of mythic symbolism,
observe Isaiah's use of the seraphim (Isa. vi. 2). Hezekiah had
doubtless put down the worship of the brazen serpent, so that such
symbolism was now possible (see my note).
Note rr, p. 202.
Dr. Kay adopts ' ye kindreds of the peoples ' (xcvi. 7) as a correct
paraphrase of wb$. *J3 (which he renders ' sons of the mighty ones '
=' worshippers of the false gods'). This spoils the poetry of xxix.
1, 2. Still the later psalmist does give a part of the earlier 'one's
meaning. According to a popular Israelitish mode of thought, there
was a close connexion between the protective angels (' sons of Elim,'
or 'of Elohim') and the lands or peoples entrusted to them (see on
Ps. lxxxii.). Comp. Ps. xcvii. 7.
Note ss, p. 202.
Naturally enough this glorious psalm (xxix.), with its final assertion
of Jehovah's sovereignty, was appointed for festival use. On the
different traditions, and especially on that embodied in the Septua
gint heading, see Delitzsch, whose explanation is confirmed by a
Syrian exegetical tradition.

222 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect
Note ", p. 203.
Cf. Vatke, Biblische Theologie (1835), pp. 317, 318. In his
posthumous Einleitung (1886), this acute scholar explains Ps. xxiv.
as an aspiration after the rebuilding of the temple, written probably
by the Second Isaiah. Note uu, p. 203.
' Jehovah [Yahveh] Sabaoth ' seems to have been the old name
of the God worshipped at Shiloh (1 Sam. i. 3). By blessing the
people in this name, David intimated that he had succeeded to all
that was most important in the office of Eli.
Note vt, p. 203.
This includes two passages in so-called Davidic psalms (lix. 6,
lxix. 7). But few will defend the Davidic authorship of Ps. lxix.
Notice too that Jehovah is called 'hero ' [gibbor) in lxxviii. 65, and
' a man of war ' in Ex. xv. 3 (both post-Exile passages), and that
M-TJ? ' strong ' occurs again in Isa. xliii. 17, and there only.
Note ww, p. 203.
So the Haggada referred to by Justin [Dial. c. Tryph, e 36 ; cf.
Shabbath 30^, ap. Wiinsche, Talm. i. 124). Nothing in the context
suggests that the gates intended are those of the old Jebusite citadel.
Note xx, p. 204.
I have developed this in the latter part of a Study on Ps. xxiv. in
the Expositor, Dec. 1889. It is true that (as I hope to show further
on) the names ' Jehovah ' and ' Adonai ' cannot legitimately be
applied to Christ. But if St. Paul can call Jesus Christ tov Kvpiov 777s
Sofr/s (1 Cor. ii. 8), and an evangelist can say that Isaiah saw the glory
of Jesus, and spake of Him (John xii. 41), it is surely not too bold at
Ascension- tide to apply the phrase ' Lord [not Jehovah] of Hosts ' in
this- truly inspired psalm to the glorified Messiah. By so doing the
Church affirms the moral significance of a phrase which in our own
poet Wordsworth is still too much connected with human passions
(Ode for Jan. 18, 1816). The deliverance of the weak and oppressed
Jewish Church becomes a type of the deliverance of redeemed
humanity, and the phrase itself is interpreted by Matt, xxviii. 18.
The early Jewish application of Ps. xxiv. equally deserves attention.
In the liturgy of the second temple this was the psalm for Sunday.
Probably vv. 7-10 were interpreted as prophetic of the coming of

V. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 223
Jehovah to judgment (comp. i. 5), which might naturally be assigned
to the first day of the week. Theodoret, as naturally (from his point
of view), explains the Greek heading (rijs //.iSs tov o-afipdTa>v, found,
as he says, ' in some copies, but not in the Hexapla '), of the Lord's
Resurrection. The highly dramatic use of v. 7 in the apocryphal
Descensus Christi can scarcely be viewed as more than a poetical
licence. Note w, p. 204.
I do not argue against the Davidic authorship of Ps. xviii. on
the ground of the mention of David in v. 51. It is true, the Hebrew
poets do not, like the mediasval Germans, name themselves at the
end of their poems. But v. 5 1 is probably a later liturgical addition.
My arguments are exegetical and phraseological. To reply to these
by urging the existence of a second recension of the psalm in 2 Sam.
xxii. is useless (see above, p. 193).
Note zz, p. 205.
It will hardly be contended that the temple of Shiloh was grand
enough to be referred to. Indeed, another psalmist hesitates to call
this sanctuary a temple at all (lxxviii. 60).
Note aaa, p. 205.
I willingly admit that the (supposed) second psalmist has con
nected the two parts of the psalm fairly enough by the four central
distichs in vv. 25-28 ; probably, too, the immediately preceding
verses belong to him. And if any one prefers to suppose that one
versatile poet wrote the whole, I shall not quarrel with him, provided
that he recognizes the dissimilarity of the parts. The first part is
very fine ; the colouring is vivid, the expression energetic and appa
rently original. These epithets are by no means applicable to the
second part, the form of which is by comparison prosaic. On the
other hand, the course of thought in the less poetical portion is
sublime in its absolute idealism. Hupfeld inclines to the theory of
a twofold authorship— i.e., ' the author perhaps expanded the psalm
from a Davidic basis in part i.' This is surely too vague.
Note bbb, p. 205.
It is in Greece that the winged genii, derived from Assyria, first
became actually flying. But I presume that no one would assign
Ps. xviii. to the Greek period. Whether the flying character of the

224 THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS, lect.
cherub is a token of Egyptian affinities (see my note at end of
Isaiah, vol. ii.), or of native Palestinian development, we need not
inquire. Note ccc, p. 206.
'To David and to his seed for ever' implies, 1, that the subject is
not so much David as his family, and, 2, that the deliverances will
continue to increase in grandeur. Note ddd, p. 206.
The despondent cry in Ps. Ixxxix. 50 probably alludes not merely
to Nathan's prophecy but to Ps. xviii. Ps. cxvi. 3 is based on Ps.
xviii. 5, 6. Lastly, Ps. cxliv. imitates Ps. xviii. 3, 10, 15, 17, 35, 44-
49. I may add that Prov. xxx. 5 (post-Exile) copies v. 31, and Hab.
iii. 19 echoes v. 34. Note eee, p. 206.
Isa. xliv. 8 copies v. 32, and Isa. lv. 5 (see note) alludes to v. 45.
Note m, p. 206.
The former occurs in v. 14 ; the latter in v. 32. See linguistic
appendix. Note »««, p. 206.
The consistent application of literary tests compels us to admit,
not only that Mic. vi. and vii. 1-13 belong to a prophet of the reign
of Manasseh (see Micah, in Cambridge Bible, p. 14), but that Mic.
vii. 14-20 consists of two post-Deuteronomic additions (observe the
phraseological affinities). Note hhh, p. 206.
In v. 44, read D'py ; 2 Sam. xxii. has ^py.
Note lii, p. 206.
Among other grounds for some hesitation as to the date of
Ps. xviii. is the use of the term nu# with reference to Jehovah
[v. 36). It is true, the word occurs again in Ps. xlv. 5 (Mas. text,
rmy), Prov. xv. 33, xviii. 12, xxii. 4, Zeph. ii. 3 ; but the conception
of Jehovah's lowliness, or sympathy with the lowly, is more strikingly
post-Exilic than pre-Exilic. The difficulty would be removed if in

v. THE EARLIEST OF THE MINOR PSALTERS. 225
Ps. xviii. 36 we might read, with the second recension (2 Sam. xxii.
36) Tjnjyi, ' and thine answering ' (i.e. ' thy help,' cf. Ps. lxv. 6).
Note i", p. 206.
Epic, alike in its wide view of the subject and in its adoption of
mythological elements (comp. Ewald, History, i. 37). — It may be
asked whether the closing verse forms an integral part of the psalm.
It is not, like the rest of the poem, in trimeters, and was evidently
added for liturgical purposes. But the psalm need not have waited
till post-Exile times for liturgical recognition (notice the reference in
v. 51 to the king). Note kkk, p. 207.
The collector of the ' Davidic ' psalms in Book I. extended the
title of Ps. xviii. by the help of 2 Sam. xxii. It is worth noticing
that Ps. xix. follows Ps. xviii. because of the phrase ' thy servant '
(xix. 14), just as Ps. xxxv. precedes Ps. xxxvi. because of the parallel
ism between 'his servant' [v. 27) and 'Jehovah's servant ' in the
title of the next psalm. The editor therefore found the titles already
in existence ; he was not the inventor of them.
Note m, p. 207.
Notice that the expression ' mountains of God ' (xxxvi. 7) recurs
in 1. 10. A trifle perhaps, and yet not to be neglected as an illus
tration. Note mmm, p. 207.
The phrase ^Ijrri'K has been supposed to allude to David's
wanderings (cf. 1"ti: xi. 1).

PART II.
LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I.
My course to-day has been seemingly irregular, but a little
thought will prove to you that there has been method in the
irregularity. I now turn to the first great group of psalms with
common emotional and phraseological characteristics ; they
are the heart-utterances of the Church amidst some bitter
persecution. The group consists of Pss. iii. -vii., ix.-xiv.,1 xvii.,
though Ps. v. might also be grouped with the Guest-psalms
(which will come before us later). Alike exquisite are its be
ginning and its ending. Mark the tone of calm superiority
to fear and danger in Pss. iii. and iv., and then observe how
in Ps. xvii. the poet rises from the harassing troubles of earth
to a ' faint foreshadowing of the Beatific Vision ' (Kay).
Need I pause to discuss the misleading theory of the Davidic
authorship of the two former psalms ? a All that acuteness
can do, has been done by Hitzig, who rightly felt that if the
theory be correct, there should be some direct or indirect
allusions to David's circumstances. But even Hitzig abandons
the theory for Pss. v. and vi., and explains Pss. iii. and iv. not
(as the title of Ps. iii. suggests) b by the flight from Absalom,
but by that striking scene after the capture of Ziklag, when
' David was greatly distressed, for the people spake of stoning
him, but David strengthened himself in Jehovah his God'
( I Sam. xxx. 6). Search the story of David's life from end to
end, and you will find no situation which corresponds to these
psalms, and for the very good reason that the Jewish Church,
in whose name the psalmist speaks, did not yet exist. The
sources of danger to the spiritual kernel of the nation are,
first, an Israelitish faction openly opposed to the khasidim
iii. 2, 3, 7, iv. 3-6), and, secondly, the many desponding
1 Ps. xiv. has been already considered.

lect. v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS /A BOOK I. 227
friends of the cause of truth, who are discontented at the pro
sperity of the strict Jehovists [v. 7). The comparative method
leaves no doubt as to the period of the psalm. The myriads
of foes that have started up against Israel (iii. 1, 2, 7) corre
spond to the hostile multitudes of whom, as we have seen,
the -unwarlike Church complains in lv. 19, lvi. 3. The love of
prayer, and the 'joy and peace in believing' which are
expressed in iii. 5, iv. 1, 4, 8, 9, form the very atmosphere of
Ps. Ixii., where we also find traces of a personage (comp. ' my
glory,' iv. 2 ; ' his dignity,' Ixii. 5) who is the Church's bul
wark, and seeks to lead rather by persuasion than by
authority." Add to this that both in Ps. iv. and in Ps. Ixii.
the speaker appeals to his enemies (who are a ' loveless nation,'
xliii. 1) on the ground of humanity, and to susceptible
Israelites on that of the union between Jehovah and his
people which needs to be vitalized by trust. Lastly, the
' vanity ' and ' lying ' and the longing for earthly prosperity
which characterize, the one the psalmist's enemies, the other
his despondent friends in iv. 3, 7, correspond exactly to the
description in Ixii. 5, 11. Notice, too, how passages in the
psalm which we have just studied illustrate an obscure verse in
Ps. iv.d (cf. iv. 5, xxxvi. 2, 5). Can we hesitate to refer Pss.
iii. and iv. to the period to which we have already assigned
Pss. vii. and xiv., and many later psalms — the period when
faithful Israelites were so sorely oppressed both by traitors in
their midst and by their Persian tyrants ?
Psalms iii. and iv., however, express the heroic faith of
the few, or that of the Church at large at a time of less
grievous affliction. The prospect soon became darker. The
character and conduct of Israel's enemies are described in
Ps. v. not more favourably than in Pss. xii. and xiv. The
Church's last and best hope is in prayer. The answer for
which she ' looks out ' (Ps. v. 4) is recorded in Ps. xii. 6.
The context of that passage does not tell us where the
revelation came to the psalmist, but Ps. v. 8 informs us — it
was in the sanctuary (cf. Ixxiii. 17). Ps. vi. (with which
compare Ps. lxxxviii.) is in a much more depressed tone ;
death seemed the only prospect for Israel and for its
members ; Ps. xxx. is its complement (see xxx. 10). The
acute Ibn Ezra thought that David spoke prophetically Q2

228 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.

of Israel in exile, which he compared to a sick man ; he
saw that the words did not suit the circumstances of David.e
Taking these psalms by themselves, we might place them
! just before the arrival of Nehemiah, B.C. 445. ' What
do these feeble (sapless) Jews,' says Sanballat (Neh. iii. 34 =
A.V. iv. 1) ; ' Pity me, Jehovah, for I am enfeebled (become
sapless),' says righteous but despondent Israel in Ps. vi. 3/
But it is safer and, as I think, more critical to date them like
the other members of the group.
Pss. ix. and x., like Pss. xiii. and xliii., must be treated
as one poem, or, if you will, as one poem in two parts. In
its original form there was no bifurcation ; it was of simple
alphabetic structure. According to Ewald, it may have re
ferred to the fall of Nineveh (B.C. 607), which the prophet
Nahum so jubilantly anticipated (B.C. 660). Considering
that alphabetic composition is perhaps traceable in Nah. i.
2-10, this view might be admissible, if the tone of the Jewish
nation in 607 corresponded to that of the psalm. History
shows, however, if I read it aright,1 that this was not the case ;
the year 607 was the worst possible time for the composition
of church-hymns. When was the psalm written, then ? s
The expressions used of Jehovah (ix. 3, where note ]V?y, 5, 6,
8, 9, x. 16) and of Israel (seven times D\'JH or D'yiQ on the
one hand, and of the nations on the other (ix. 6, 16, 18, 21,
x. 16), are parallel to those used elsewhere by post-Exile
poets. Notice, too, on the one hand, the command to
' publish God's exploits among the peoples ' [v. 12; cf. xcvi.
3, 10, cv. 1, Isa. xii. 4), which indicates that a time of national
good fortune (the Restoration) is past, and on the other, the
many references to misery such as we know to have existed
in ever deepening degree in the Persian period. The edi
torial changes, of which I have spoken elsewhere, may be
summed up thus.h First, the Daleth and Kaf stanzas were
omitted, but, with this exception, the first part of the original
psalm (Alef to Yod) was kept unaltered, and formed by the
addition of a concluding quatrain (in place of the Kaf
stanza) into an independent psalm. Then the stanzas from
Mem to Cade were omitted, and replaced by six non-
alphabetic stanzas (in our Bibles, x. 3-1 1). Thus a second
1 See Jeremiah, his Life and Times, p. 131.

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 229

psalm was produced, adapted to the circumstances of the
editor, in whose time the oppressors of Israel were, to judge
from the inserted stanzas, degenerate Israelites as well as
foreigners. (Notice the suggestive parallel between x. 8, 9,
and lvi. 7.) No part of Pss. ix. and x. therefore can be
removed very far chronologically from the neighbouring
psalms. As to the date of Pss. xi.-xiii. and Ps. xvii., the exe
getical phenomena collected elsewhere seem to me conclu
sive. Ps. xvii. in particular not only has affinities with the
other psalms of this group and with some other late persecu
tion-psalms (see my note on vv. 9-12), but with the Praise of
the Law1 (Ps. xix. 8-15) and with Pss. xvi. and xlix., and
(see on v. 14) the Books of Job and Ecclesiastes.
To sum up. No member of this group can be much
earlier than the close of the Persian period. The psalms in
which depression, agitation, or embitterment is most visible
(vi., vii., x. 2-1 1, and xvii.) may refer either to the slavery (to
use Josephus's word, Ant. xi. 7, 1) into which the Jews were
brought for seven years by Bagoses, or to that other out
burst of Persian fury under Artaxerxes Ochus (see pp. 53, 61) '
when Jewish captives were carried away to Egypt, Babylonia,
and even Hyrcania. It is no objection to this that in some
of these psalms (vii. and xvii.) a strong consciousness of legal
righteousness is expressed. The high priestly family might
at this time be capable of awful crimes (Jos., Ant. xi. 7, 1),
but the mass of the Jews were doubtless faithful to their
principles (see on Ps. cxxxii.). The 7th psalm indeed, if I
am not much mistaken, gives a hint of its origin in its title
which should probably run thus, ' A Shiggaion of David,
which he sang to Jehovah because of (Mordecai) the son of
Kish,1 a Benjamite'j (see Esther ii. 5). We know from a
Talmudic treatise2 that the psalm was used at the feast
of Purim, and from 2 Mace xv. 36 that one name of this
festival was 97 MapBoxaiKr) r/fispa. The editor who prefixed
the title seems to mean that David, as a prophet, assumed the
character of Mordecai ; this is at least an attestation that the
psalm was very early regarded as a work of the Persian age.
1 There is no root B»-13 in classical Heb. ; in the Talm. '3 = spindle.
2 Massechet Soferim, xviii. 2 (ed. J. Miiller).

230 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.
It was probably the tyranny of Ochus which won admission
for Purim into Judea ; k if so, it was but natural to take a psalm
occasioned by that tyranny as the Purim-psalm.m
Let us now take up the second group of persecution-
psalms (viz., xxii., xxvi., xxvii. 7-13, xxviii., xxxi., xxxv.,
xxxviii., xxxix., xl. 13-18, xii.), and among them let us
give the precedence to Pss. xxii., xxxi., xxxv., and xl. 13— 1811
( = lxx.), with the last of which we may connect Pss. lxix.
and lxxi. These form a group within the group, and most
certainly belong to the same period and the same circle, with
the possible exception of Pss. xxxi., xl. 13-18 (= lxx.),
and lxxi., which have a specially imitative character, and
may therefore be of later date. We will begin with Ps. lxxi.,
which Ewald regards as a work of the old age of the author
of Ps. li. Nothing is gained, I think, by this imaginative
conjecture, but it records the perfectly just impression that the
school which modelled itself upon Jeremiah represents a
decline as compared with that which formed itself upon the
Second Isaiah. Turning to the Septuagint, we find as the
second part of a ' conflate ' title, ' Of the sons [twv vl&v) of
Jonadab, and of the first captives.'0 This is not less fanciful
than Ewald's view. The Rechabites and the first captives
both receive more or less praise from Jeremiah (see Jer.
xxiv., xxxv.), and it seems to be hinted that the psalm was
written by Jeremiah in the reign of Zedekiah, and preserved by
his most faithful adherents. Hitzig and Delitzsch are bolder.
They plainly assert this prophet to be the author of Ps. lxxi.,
to which Hitzig adds Pss. lxix. and lxx. (the latter, a frag
ment of Ps. xl., which the same critic ascribes in its entirety
to Jeremiah). Some critics also refer other members of the
group to the weeping prophet ; Hitzig, for instance, as early
as 1 83 1, pronounced the Jeremian authorship of Ps. xxxi. to be
' certain.' p This fancy for giving authors' names to the name
less psalms is a mark of weakness and not of strength.
Noticing how much Ps. xxxi. in particular has in common
with so-called Davidic psalms of post-Exile origin, we
ought to hesitate to argue from Jeremian affinities to Jere
mian authorship, more especially when the theory of Jere
mian authorship has not satisfied our tests in other cases.
None of these so-called ' doubtful ' psalms has, I submit,

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 231
so clear a historical background as Pss. xxii., xxxv., and
lxix.,q which I call primary members of the group, and
which, being representative or typical psalms, were probably
often imitated. The most original and striking of the three
is Ps. xxii. If I am somewhat brief upon it now, it is that I
may return later to so tempting a theme. Was the psalm
written, as Ewald supposed, during the first of Judah's two
captivities ? This might account for the keen edge of the
sufferings described, and for the expressions in vv. 4b, 23, 26,
which imply the continuance of the temple-services. To me,
however, this view seems scarcely more plausible than the
ascription of Ps. xiii. to Jehoiachin going into exile. Such
ripe fruits of spiritual religion could not, methinks, have been
produced in the miseries and anxieties of that period. Be
sides, the author of Ps. xxii. stands in a close relation, not
only to Job, but, as Calvin already saw, to the Second Isaiah,1
and can we doubt which is the more original ? No ; the
earliest possible date either for this or for any of the parallel
psalms is that which has been proposed for Ps. cii. — the
period which preceded Nehemiah's first journey to Jerusalem,
when, as Hanani told him in Shushan, ' The remnant of the
Golah there in the province are in great affliction and re
proach ' (Neh. i. 3), a sad piece of news indeed after all that
Zerubbabel and his successors had done, and only half ex
plained (see p. 71) by the mysterious statement that 'the wall
of Jerusalem is broken down, and the gates thereof are burned
with fire.' I have mentioned one of the periods in which the
life and fortunes of Jeremiah seemed to be a parable of the
life and fortunes of the Church, and in which the temple-
poets, feeling this, wrote almost like Jeremiah's biographers.
The time which I have just referred to was another such
period. Not indeed to an equal extent. There is no evi
dence that any great world-power was actively hostile to the
Jews at this peried. The Persian court had given full
authority to Ezra to regulate the civil and religious concerns
of his people, and the policy of religious isolation (that is, of
holiness, in the ritual sense) adopted by the great reformer
made it imperative to set aside prophetic idealisms (Zech. ii.
4, 5) and fortify the Holy City. It was no Persian satrap
(the revolt of Megabyzus in Syria absorbed the whole atten-

232 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.
tion of Persia), but probably Sanballat the Horonite, Tobiah
the Ammonite, Geshem the Arabian, and with them the
'army of Samaria' (Neh. ii. 10, iv. 1-8), who broke down
Ezra's walls, just as upon Nehemiah's arrival they united to
oppose the rebuilding of them. There is indeed no reference
to the walls in Ps. xxii., but there may be at least an allusion
to them in lxix. 36, and possibly (see below) xxxi. 22. And
may we not compare the famous ' Roll it on Jehovah ' (Kay's
rendering of xxii. 8) with Neh. iv. 2 (iii. 34 in Heb.), ' What
do these feeble Jews ? will they leave the matter to God ? ' s-
It is as if the author of Ps. xxii. had been present when
Sanballat ' laughed the Jews to scorn, and despised them '
(Neh. ii. 19), and recorded the scene in his deathless poem.
There are the ' many bulls,' the • strong ones of Bashan '
[v. 13), i.e. the Ammonites (who had occupied Gad, Zeph. ii.
8, Jer. xlix. 1). There are the 'lions' [v. 14), i.e. the Arabian
tribes who had displaced the Edomites, and the wild pariah-
' dogs' [vv. 17, 18), i.e. those whom Ben Sira calls the 'foolish
folk that dwelleth in Shechem ' (Ecclus. 1. 26). The explana
tion, which is that of Lagarde,1 though not certain, is plausible ;
it is in the manner of the prophets,2 and I cannot help adding,
of that great student of Scripture, Dante. How much more
poetic are these natural symbols than the symbolic cypher
which an unwise editor has thrust into Jer. xxv. 25, 26 ! The
precise equivalent of the symbols might be forgotten, without
their eternal significance being at all impaired. The Church
in its various troubles can put its own interpretation upon
them, and if any one prefers to think that the psalmist himself
simply meant by a threefold symbol to emphasize the bitter
ness of his enemies, he may refer to another sketch of
(probably) the same scene : —
Aliens whom I know not gather together against me,
And cry out unceasingly (Ps. xxxv. 15).
It is interesting also to find in Ps. xxxv. 1 1 a figurative
description of the false accusation of rebellion, which added
fresh point to Sanballat's taunts (Neh. ii. 19, end), and in vv.
12-15*2 of the false Israelites who had formed the closest of
ties with strangers (Neh. vi. 18).* Nor is the 69th psalm
1 Orientalia, ii. 63, 64. * See my commentary on Jer. v. 6.

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 233
deficient in references to the divisions of the Jews at this
time and the religious ground of the hatred which they en
countered (lxix. 8, 9, 13, 21); and in v. 26 the writer may
even allude to the tent-dwellers among Israel's enemies.
And lastly, is it not possible u that the frustration of San-
ballat's underhand practices and the final completion of the
wall are recorded, not only in the 6th chapter of Nehemiah,
but in these words of Ps. xxxi.,
Thou hidest them in the covert of thy face from slanderers among
men :
Thou treasurest them in a bower against the accusing of tongues.
Blessed be Jehovah !
For he hath made passing great his lovingkindness unto me in a
fenced city.
Six members of the larger group still remain (Pss. xxvi.,
xxvii. 7-14, xxviii., xxxviii., xxxix., xii.); they all belong to the
later persecution-period to which certain psalms have already
been assigned. Pss. xxvi. and xxviii. may be taken together
with Ps. v., the leading petitions of which are similar. The
' anointed ' in xxviii. 8 is the high priest, as in lxxxiv. 10. The
petition in the next verse, ' shepherd them ' [irol/j-avov aliTovs,
Sept.) connects Ps. xxviii. with the Asaphite psalms. Ps. xxvii.
7-13 and Ps. xxxviii. connect themselves, not only with Pss.
v. and vi.1 but with Ps. xxxv. (note the false witnesses) and Ps.
xxxi. (note the friends who stand aloof) respectively. In
other words, both the preceding groups have influenced these
psalms. The exquisite 39th psalm has strong affinities with the
Book of Job, but also with Ps. lxii.,v as you will see by com
paring v. 3 with Ixii. 2 (n»pn), and vv. 5-7 with Ixii. 10, 11.
Notice too the fondness in both psalms for the particle which
introduces the conclusions of victorious faith — ^8, and the
double title ' of Jeduthun ' (' to the charge of Jeduthun ') and
of ' David ' prefixed to both in the Hebrew. Comp. also
v. $b with Ixxxix. 48.w Ps. xxxix. looks more original than
Ps. Ixii., but need not have been written long previously. It
is clearly a persecution-psalm (see vv. 9-12), and so too is Ps.
xii. (putting aside the introductory verses), with which com
pare Pss. vi., xxxv., and xxxviii., and, for v. 10, Ps. lv. 13— iS.x
1 See my Commentary.

234 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.
We have now to strike inland and make for the ordinary
starting-point of voyagers, viz., the first, which, from our
point of view, is the last of the songs of the Psalter. ' How
beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that
bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace.' Such were
the thoughts of the framer of David's song-book when he
included Ps. xl. 1-12 — one of the ' new songs ' of the 'bringers
of good tidings' (see vv. 4, lo).y The 'righteousness' of
which he loves to discourse is the series of national mercies
which culminated in the rebuilding of the temple.2 He loves
the Bible within the Bible — that which speaks of God's free
love to Israel, and of what St. James afterwards called ' the
perfect law of liberty.' There may be, even after the Return,
' arrogant ' men who fall away to the idolatries of Canaan
(Ps. xl. 5 ; cf. Isa. lxv. and Ixvi., also lix. 13 ; all post-Exile
passages) ; but the psalmist will not (like those described in
Mai. iii. 15) call such men happy. He is one of those khasidim
who are worthy of the name, and in his views of sacrifice he
reminds us strongly of the authors of Pss. 1. and li.1 To some
extent parallel ( cf. vv. 2-4 with xxx. 3-5) is Ps. xxx., a song
perhaps (see above, p. 227) of the afflicted ones who had
prayed Ps. vi. on. their unexpected deliverance. In spite of
its title, which connects it with the ' dedication festival,' aa
and in spite of the parallelism between Pss. xxx. 4 and cxviii.
18, and between Pss. xxx. 6, 12 and cxviii. 270, it is not
a Maccabaean psalm. The descriptions are too general, nor
is the tone at all in harmony with the martial spirit of
the khasidim in the time of Judas the Maccabee.bb No ; we
can spare the 11 8th psalm for the Maccabee and the
Huguenots, but Hannington's psalm came from heroes of
another mould. Its very phraseology points us to the pre-
Maccabaean part of the post-Exile period. cc (Cf. v. 4 with Ps.
xxviii. 1, v. 10 with Ps. vi. 6, v. 13, ' my glory,' with Ps. vii. 6,
and v. 6 with Ps. cxxvi. 5, Isa. liv. 7, 8.)
We next come to Ps. xxxvii., a didactic poem, with affini
ties to various post-Exile psalms. Cf. especially v. 1 with
Ixxiii. 3, v. 7 with xxii. 9, v. 21 with cxii. 5. The psalmist
also well knew the Book of Job.dd Like the author of Ps. xci.
he was specially drawn to the first speech of Eliphaz. Recent
1 Cf. Lect. IV., p. 153.

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 235
national mercies seem to have revived the old-fashioned
doctrine of adequate temporal retribution. For in spite of
v. 25 this is a church psalm ; it is the fortunes of righteous
Israel (Jeshurun) which preoccupy the psalmist. Need I say
which those national mercies must be ?
The 37th is an alphabetic psalm, and thus connects itself
with Pss. xxv. and xxxiv.ee It lacks however the curious
irregularity of structure which distinguishes those two psalms,
and its tone, which is throughout didactic, is different. The
Israel of Ps. xxv. is a self-condemned though not despairing
sinner. ' Members of the nation have ' broken their faith ' to
Jehovah [v. 3) ; and it is only too plain from Israel's present
dangers and distresses that God remembers sins which His
people has partly forgotten [v. 7). Still Jehovah remains
' good and upright ; ' He is the great teacher l and redeemer ;
and unto Him the eyes of friendless Israel are directed [vv.
15, 16). Ps. xxxiv. agrees in its leading ideas, but was evi
dently written after an improvement in Israel's circumstances
(comp. vv. 5-7, 23, with xxv. 15-22). The phraseology of
xxxiv. 8 (cf. xxxv. 5, 6) is fully consistent with a reference to
the age of Nehemiah,ff and the proper names in Ezra and
Nehemiah seem to suggest that the phraseology of Ps. xxv.
was frequently on Jewish lips in that period gg (cf. v. 1 5 with
Elyoenai or Elyehoenai, Ezra viii. 4, the name of one of
Ezra's companions, and v. 22 with Pedaiah, Neh. iii. 25, the
name of one of the builders of the wall). And now, to
make up a triad of ' songs of deliverance,' add Ps. xxxii.,
which is more spiritual in tone than Ps. xxxiv., and in so far
is a better counterpart to Ps. xxv. Luther, who loved to
call it a Pauline psalm, grouped it with the 51st, and a
recent German critic, following in the steps of Luther and
Delitzsch, ventures on this comment, that ' one of the com
monest of sins with Oriental despots so shocked David's con
science that he expressed his penitence as no saint has ever
done.' 2 I do not yield to Orelli in admiration of this bright
est of penitential lyrics. But I cannot, at the bidding of a
late and uncritical tradition, convert a David into a Paul.hh
No ; certain features in the description may indeed be drawn
1 Comp. Ps. xxxii., and see Lect. VII.
' Orelli, art. ' David ' in Herzog-Plitt, liealencyclopddie, iii. 519.

236 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.
from private experience, as in some other psalms in which
' the speaker's personality leaps up as it were into his song.' '
Even if so, however, the individual is not a self-seeking
monarch, but a believer, who walks by the soft guidance of
Jehovah's Eye [v. 8). A believer ? Permit me rather to use
his own word khdsid, i.e., a man of love (cf. Prov. xi. 17 Heb.),
to whom Jehovah's lovingkindness is ' better than life itself '
(Ps. lxiii. 3), and whose chief claim to distinction is that he
can express that which thousands feel. Like Daniel, he can
say that he ' confesses his own sin and the sin of his people
Israel ' (Dan. ix. 20). He is indeed in some sense, like Daniel,
a prophet, as being a representative of the Church, which is the
inheritor of the prophetic spirit.11 It is a church-psalm,
and has some affinities not merely with Ps. xxv., but also
with Pss. xxii. and lxix., the date of which we have already
fixed.2 The tone and ideas of the psalm are in harmony
with this view.'"
The transition is an easy one from Ps. xxxii. to what I
may call the Guest-psalms,3 viz., xv., xxiv. 1-6, xxvii. 1-6,
and xxiii. (to which two psalms in a more subdued tone may
be added, which at least allude to the security of Jehovah's
guests, viz., Ps. v. on account of v. %b, and Ps. lxi. on account
of v. 5«). Why is forgiven Israel so joyful? Because it is
delivered from earthly trouble ? Yes ; but chiefly because it
can once more fearlessly enter Jehovah's house. When were
these church-psalms written ? Most who have followed me
thus far will readily admit that they imply the existence of
the second temple. The requirement of moral Tightness in
Jehovah's temple-guests is found again in one of the later
persecution-psalms (see Ps. v. 5-8). The use of ' generation '
| for 'class' (xxiv. 6) reminds us of Ps. xii. 9, xiv. 5, Ixxiii. 15,
cxii. 12, Prov. xxx. 11-14, Deut. xxxii. 5. This is, at any
; rate, against a very early date, while the special sense of
' righteousness ' in Ps. xxiv. 5 is Deutero-Isaianie There is
also an allusion in Ps. xv. 4 to the Priestly Code, which
became the law of the church-nation through Ezra the scribe.kk
1 Ker, The Psalms in History and Biography, p. 3.
Comp. vv. 3/p, 4b with xxii. 2b, 1 6a, lxix. 4 ; v. $a with lxix. 6, and v. 6a
with lxix. 2, 3.
3 See Lect. VIII.

V. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 237
It is, of course, no objection to this view that Pss. xv. and
xxiv. 1-6 are parallel to a fine description of the righteous
citizen in Isa. xxxiii. 15, 16. Isa. xxxiii. has long been
regarded as only in a secondary degree Isaianic, and it has
lately been argued with great force that its composition or
compilation belongs to the post-Exile age11 — to the period of
the final editing of the prophetic writings. If this be correct
(as I believe that it is), the date proposed for these psalms is
strongly confirmed ; but, in any case, church-psalms like
these cannot, as we have seen, be pre-Exilic. Ps. xxvii. 1-6
reminds us of passages in Pss. lxi. and lxiii., which probably
belong to the early Maccabaean period. The originality,
however, lies with Ps. xxvii. 1-6, which obviously describes the
feelings of the Church mm (see v. 6) amid some of the troubles '
of the Persian age ; v. 3 reminds us of iii. 2, 7, iv. 9, and v. 5
of xxxi. 21. Its companion-psalm is the 23rd (comp. v. 6
with xxvii. 4), that sweet expression of resting faith, which
surely belongs to one of the most gifted of the ' Davids ' of
the Psalter. How unlike it is to a last meditation of the
historical David — how unlike even to those ' last words '
which tradition assigns to him ! But how like tho'se two
characteristic psalms of the age of Nehemiah, cxxvii. (see
vv. I, 2), and cxxxiii. (see v. 2), when, too, as we know from
psalms in Books III. and IV, the figure of the divine Shepherd
became specially dear to the church-nation ! nn
The didactic fragment attached to the Song of the Sun in
Ps. xix. alone remains. How delightful, could we vindicate
its pre-Exile origin ! Davidic, indeed, it cannot be ; fancy
the worldly-minded, even though religious, David inditing a
hymn in praise of a rich and varied handbook of spiritual
religion.00 Must one really spend precious moments in dis
pelling this illusion? Read the Decalogue (Ex. xx. 1-17)
and the Book of the Covenant pp (Ex. xx. 23-xxiii.), part of
which at least may, if not must, have been known to David,
and then try to sing :
The law of Jehovah is perfect, restoring the soul,
The testimony of Jehovah is faithful, giving wisdom to the simple,
More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold,
Sweeter also than honey, or the honey-comb (xix. 8-1 1).
But, even if not Davidic, may not this fragment belong to

238 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.
the Josian age — to those halcyon days which followed the
publication of the first Scripture ? This is at least plausible.
If a Josian poet wrote Ps. xviii. 21-24 and 3 i,qq why should he
not have written Ps. xix. 8-1 1 ? Certainly, Deuteronomy is
a ' rich and varied handbook,' not perhaps unworthy even of
such a glowing eulogy. ' It sought to place the whole moral
and spiritual life upon a new basis.' ' Moreover, there is a pas
sage in Deut. iv. 28 which is but a slightly less fervent eulogy
of the new Law-book. The objection is twofold, (1) that the
original Law-book of Josiah did not include the first four
chapters of the later book of Deuteronomy, and no consistent
historical critic can place these chapters before the Exile ;
and (2) that the tremulous conscientiousness which expresses
itself in vv. 13 and 14™" is specially characteristic (read the
119th psalm) of the Persian and the Greek age. The author
was in fact one of the khasidim, who lived under heathen rule,
and who were tempted to the ' great transgression ' of apostasy.
The Davidic collection now lies behind us ; indeed, we have
passed the entire Psalter in review, except Psalms i. and ii.,
which form as it were the double gate of the temple. As I
have already said, I do not think that the second psalm has
a contemporary historical reference. No period can be found
in which even by a poetic exaggeration an Israelitish king
could be described as ruler of the world. If we ask when the
! writer lived, all the internal evidence points us to the post-
Exile period. Like Pss. Ixxxix. and cxxxii., our psalm
presupposes the promises to David in 2 Sam. vii.,ss and, like
the former psalm, it adopts a mode of speaking of the king
which harmonizes better with Egyptian and Babylonian than
with the early Biblical phraseology." Its tone of lofty con-
1 fidence renders it possible that the troubles of the Persian
age may lie behind the writer. Shall we place it before or
after the Maccabaean insurrection ? uu It certainly presents
some points of contact with Pss. lxxxiii. and ex., which are
Maccabaean."' Indeed, if we might connect both v. 2 and
v. 3 with the first oracle in Ps. ex., and v. 5 as well as v. 4
with the second, and might follow the Septuagint rendering of
Ps. ex. 3#,2 the resemblance between these oracles and that in
Ps. ii. 7-9 would be remarkably great. I do not, however,
1 Jeremiah, his Life and Times, p. 63. 2 Vocalizing *pJ37?*.

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I 239
think that the really certain affinities between Ps. ii. and those
Maccabaean psalms are decisive, and the picture presented in
the former is evidently different. In Ps. lxxxiii. the neigh
bouring nations have imperilled the very existence of Israel ;
in Ps. ex. a large but not necessarily world-wide empire is
anticipated for the hero. But in Ps. ii. there is no real danger
to Israel ; ww contrast the feverish anxiety of Ps. lxxxiii. The
king already has a world-wide sovereignty, though the vassal
kings of the earth have risen in revolt. The picture in this
psalm is largely influenced by Jewish eschatology, and has
parallels in Joel and 2 Zechariah,xx both of which are post-Exile
but pre-Maccabaean works. But the psalm is not simply
eschatological. Being a lyric poem, the circumstances which
it describes must have a certain quasi-historical basis. In
other words, the writer throws himself back into a distant
age — shall we say into that of Hezekiah, or into that of David
(or Solomon) ? There is something to be said for the former.
Isaiah's apostrophe to the ' far nations ' in Isa. viii. 9, and the
picture of an attack on Zion in Pss. xlvi. and xlviii. have a
general resemblance to Ps. ii. ; indeed, some expressions in
this pair of lyrics are somewhat parallel to phrases in our
psalm.yy But none of these affinities are decisive. A vivid
poem like Ps. ii. could not but resemble others of its class ;
and the manifest allusion in v. 7 to 2 Sam. vii. 14a (which,
however, is used freely),22 combined with the analogy of
Ps. xviii., compel us to pronounce in favour of the Davidic or
the Solomonic as the assumed age of the writer. In Ps. xviii.
the idealizing poet speaks in the name of David as if the
world's dominion were already his. It was only a step
further for another poet to speak, in the name of the king
(see Ps. ii. 7-9), as if that dominion not only had been won,
but was now being disputed by rebel-kings. Ps. ii. is there- 1
fore the complement of Ps. xviii., but written from a later 1
point of view. Like that psalm, it prophesies of the Messiah,
but only to one who can ' pierce below the surface,' and '
recognize that spirit or tendency which carries a poet beyond
himself, and makes his words symbolically propheticaaa
And why was Psalm ii. placed where it now stands ?
Because the collectors loved to give a prominent position to
psalms of a lofty idealism, and because this psalm in particular

240 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK T lect.
seemed to illustrate the contents of the following ' Davidic '
psalms, in which a leading Israelite complains of his numerous
enemies. Ps. ii. was not, however, called ' Davidic,' because
it was composed after the Davidic hymn-book was complete,
and very possibly as an introduction to it.
We now pass to Ps. i., which, according to a Jewish fancy,
referred to Josiah, as the only king who avoided sinners and fol
lowed the law.bbb More plausibly Hengstenberg and Delitzsch
regard it as an early psalm because imitated, as they assert,
by Jeremiah (cf. v. 3 with Jer. xvii. 8). We must not put
this argument aside on the ground of the difficulty of deciding
which of two parallel passages is the original. No one, I
think, will accuse me of underrating the delicacy of such a
critical process, for it is to my own essay on the subject that
English conservative critics must refer their readers.1 There
are cases in which a dogmatically expressed decision is in
expedient, but sure I am that the case before us is not one of
these. It may seem a slight thing to say that there is nothing
in the psalm corresponding to Jer. xvii. 6, and that the two
pictures in Jer. xvii. 5-8 are much better contrasted than
those in Ps. i. 3, 4. But when we consider further that the
psalmist has added a feature to the description of the happy
man which is not found in Jer. xvii. 5-8, and that this feature
is specially characteristic of the post-Exile period, ought any
critic to doubt that Jeremiah is the source from which a post-
Exile psalmist has drawn ? It were easy to strengthen my
argument by referring to the critical analysis of the Book of
Joshua ; ccc but I forbear. The comparative principle suggests
grouping this psalm with Ps. xix. 8-15 and cxix. (cf. also
Pss. cxi. and cxii.) ; and I am content with having shown
that the parallelism referred to by conservatives does not
hinder us from following the suggestion.
The combination of elements in the character of the
psalmist favours a late date. It is true that the moral class-
names which he employs (' ungodly,' ' righteous,' ' scoffers ' ddd)
are common even in the earlier portions of the Book of
Proverbs. But the authority which he ascribes to the written
Law or Revelation distinguishes him from the older writers
on morality who make no reference to a Scripture,eee and
1 The Prophecies of Isaiah, ed. 3, vol. ii. p. 241, &c. ; cf. p. 234.

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 241
points to a time when the ' wise men ' as a class had accepted
the form of religion established by Ezra. The author of
Ps. i. belonged to a school from which afterwards the wise
son of Sirach proceeded/" His submission to the law was no
feigned or forced one, but that of a child to a parent, and a
disciple to an all-wise teacher. Writing, however, as he does,
not for Rabbis but for ordinary believers (' day and night ' is
surely a ' counsel of perfection,' as in Josh. i. 8), he lays more
stress on the practical importance of study of the Scriptures
than upon those intellectual results which Ben Sira dwells
upon in Ecclus. xiv. 20, 21, xxxix. 1-11.
Whether the psalm was written during the early Hellen
istic movement, cannot be positively determined. It is at
any rate pre-Maccabaean, nor need it have been composed
long after Ps. ii. The parallelism between these two psalms
is obvious (note the catchwords common to both — ' Happy,'
' meditate,' ' the way,' ' perish,' and the common idea of the
judgment), and combined with the circumstance that Ps. ii.
has no title, led many ancient theologians, both Jewish and
Christian, to regard Ps. ii. as the second part of Ps. i.gss This
is clearly a mistake. Nothing in Ps. i. corresponds to the
vivid scene-painting in Ps. ii., and the divine judgment in
Ps. i.hhh is less of a convulsion than in Ps. ii. We cannot
therefore even suppose (with Hengstenberg and Hitzig) that
they are separate works by the same author. But both may
nevertheless be not only of the same period, but of the same
class — that of introductory psalms. If Ps. ii. was the preface
to the ' Davidic ' Psalter, Ps. i. may well have been the intro
duction to a large pre-Maccabaean Book of Psalms which
included that smaller hymnal. Though not necessarily com
posed (any more than Ps. ii. was composed) to be a preface,
it was admirably adapted to become one, both from the sim
plicity with which it inculcates fundamental truths of the
psalmists' religion, and from the parallelisms between it and
the second psalm which brings out another aspect of the
cardinal Messianic doctrine. The final Maccabaean editor
had obviously no reason for displacing this noble pair of
psalms, which by their beatitudes seek to allure disciples to
the purest and best theology of the Jewish Church.

242 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.

Note a, p. 226.
See a singular argument in favour of the headings by Delitzsch
(Luthardt's Zeitschrift, 1882, p. 118), who thinks that Ps. iv. 7b is an
echo of Num. vi. 25, 26. But see on Ps. Ixvii.
Note b, p. 226.
The Ambrosian MS. of the Peshitto supplements the Hebrew
heading of Ps. iv. thus, 'when Saul sent out to slay him in his
house' (1 Sam. xix. 11). Note c, p. 227.
Does not this view do more justice to one's natural impression on
reading Ps. Ixii. than the theory that the Church alone is the speaker ?
Indeed, how could the spiritual Israel have held its ground without
leaders, especially when the high priests were unworthy of their high
position ? Note d, p. 227.
Ps. iv. 5, ' Tremble and sin no more ; ' for hitherto no ' dread of
Elohim ' has been ' before your eyes.' And ' form (good) resolves upon
your bed,' where hitherto ye have ' devised mischief Bredenkamp
takes 'say in your hearts ' to mean 'pray silently' (cf. 1 Sam. i. 13).
But see Ps. x. 6, 11, 13, xiv. 1.
Note e, p. 228.
Delitzsch endeavours to show that both TV3 and ^3»n in Ps. v. 8
can mean the Tabernacle ; see however my note. If the rest of the
psalm were Davidic in tone, we might conjecture that v. 8 was a
later insertion. The only possible pre-Exile date for Pss. v. and vi.
is the age of Jeremiah, to which prophet Hitzig would assign both
psalms (Ps. v. not without some hesitation). Cf. Ps. vi. 1 (xxxviii.
1) with Jer. x. 24, and v. 6a with Jer. xlv. 3 ; also Ps. v. 9 (line 3)
with Jer. v. 16, and the imprecations in Ps. v. 10 with those in Jer.
xii. 3. Hitzig's theory has been dealt with elsewhere. Suffice it to
say that Ps. vi. at any rate belongs to the school of Job. Cf. Ps. vi.
8a with Job xvii. 7 ; Ps. vi. 86 (priv ' senescere ') with Job xxi. 7 ;
and Ps. vi. 6 (in its dread of Shedl) with Job vii. 7-10, x. 20-22,
and (for 'Death' as equivalent to 'Shedl') Job xxviii. 22. The
case of Ps. vi. is in fact precisely similar to that of the ' Song of
Hezekiah' (also uttered by a representative pious mar. note the
alternation of ' I' and 'we' in Isa. xxxviii. 2o\

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 243
Note f, p. 228.
Ps. vi. 2 (see my note) expresses a sense of guilt. But the guilt
is inferred from the misfortunes of Israel. As v. 9 shows, the Church
is no more conscious of deliberate transgression than in Pss. vii. and
xvii. Note s, p. 228.
Delitzsch places our psalm (ix., x.) in the period which followed the
transference of the ark to Mount Zion ; ' to determine the situation
more precisely is impossible.' He argues with much ability for the
early origin of Hebrew alphabetic composition, but, as I think,
disregards the evidence of facts. Hengstenberg thinks that there
was no historical occasion for the psalm, and that David composed
it to be used by the Church in a possible contingency. Forbes, too,
sees that the psalm is altogether a liturgical one [Studies, p. 235).
St. Chrysostom's commentary seems to me a complete though un
conscious refutation of the Davidic theory ; see e.g. his remarks on
David's consummate 'philosophy' in v. 10 (A.V. 9); he compares
xl. 18. Venema, alone among critics, refers the psalm to the
Maccabaean period ; the ' son ' in the heading, he thinks, is Judas
Maccabseus. Note h, p. 228.
Prof. Abbott of Dublin has made a fresh attempt to restore the
alphabetic arrangement where it is defective in the present text (see
Hermathena, 1889, pp. 21-28). Note ', p. 229.
Note the striking expression ' the word of thy lips ' (xvii. 4) for the
Law. Comp. the whole verse with Ps. cxix. 101, 104.
Note J, p. 229.
The Targum concludes the heading of Ps. vii. thus, ' concerning
the destruction of Saul, the son of Kish, a Benjamite.' Hence
Krochmal's correction as above. The liturgy for Purim contains
this sentence on Haman, ' He was proud of his riches, and digged a
pit for himself (comp. Ps. vii. 16).
Note k, p. 230.
The introduction of the feast of Purim was opposed (Talm. Jer.,
Megilla, Jod). In the time of Josephus [Ant. xi. 6, 13) it was already

244 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.
generally observed even in the Diaspora. According to Gratz
[Geschichte, iii. i, p. 171) it was adopted in the interval between the
composition of the two books of Maccabees (see above, p. 55).
Note m, p. 230.
'The enemy' (Ps. vii. 6) and the man who 'does not turn'
[v. 13) were interpreted of 'Haman' (cf. Esther vii. 4, 6), whose
just fate seemed to be alluded to in vv. 16, 17. Theodore of
Mopsuestia did not venture to think of Haman, but made the best
choice possible on the assumption of the Davidic authorship. The
psalm, he says, according to his Syriac epitomator, was ' spoken by
David when he heard that Ahithophel had hanged himself ' (Baethgen,
in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1885, p. 92). The writer must, however, really
have meant the Persians and their leader, whose fate he anticipates.
David, who ' played with lions as with kids ' (Ecclus. xlvii. 3), is not
the man to have written v. 3, and of course his mental horizon was
as unlike as possible to that of our psalmist.
Note n, p. 230.
It was a custom of Oriental editors to join together hymns or
fragments of hymns (see on Ps. xix.). Verse 13 is perhaps a link-verse
to the two originally separate passages united in Ps. xl., introduced
by the editor. This conjecture may or may not be accepted, but
even Delitzsch admits that the composite origin of Ps. xl. is an
obvious hypothesis, and will not venture to reject it.
Note °, p. 230.
Delitzsch argues from the singularity of this title that it must be
based on tradition. Gratz thinks it worth while to hunt up a variant
'HvaSa/?, and correct 'Jonadab' into 'Henadad.' The 'sons of
Henadad ' were among the Levites who superintended the rebuild
ing of the temple (Ezra iii. 9, Neh. iii. 18). Thus he thinks that he
gains an evidence for the exilic date of the psalm. Both critics
assume that the Septuagint translator's Hebrew Psalter really gave a
title for Ps. lxxi. The first part of the Greek heading ascribes the
psalm to David— the aged David [v. 18), who will presently indite
Ps. Ixxii. as his dying prayer for Solomon !
Note p, p. 230.
Hitzig, Begriff der Kritik (1831), p. 71 ; cf. above, note es, p.
134. Kuenen [Onderzoek, ed. 1, iii. 298) and Robertson Smith

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 245
[The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, p. 202) seem nearly con
vinced. Ewald agrees with Hitzig as to Ps. xxxi., but remarks with
regard to xxxiv., xxxv., xl., li., lxix., lxxi., and others, ' These songs
have a certain resemblance to Ps. xxxi., and something might be
said for ascribing them also to Jeremiah. But this resemblance
does not continue throughout. Besides, the opening of Ps. lxxi. is
clearly an adaptation of Ps. xxxi.' Theodore of Mopsuestia virtually
ascribes Ps. xxxv. to Jeremiah, in whose name he says that it was
spoken by David (Baethgen, in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1885, p. 99).
Note «, p. 231.
Of these psalms the first is explained by Theodore of David's
flight from Absalom, the second of the sufferings of Jeremiah, and
the third of the troubles which led to the Maccabaean rising.
Calvin gives up the hope of finding any particular occasion in
David's life, at any rate, for the first and third. Dean Jackson (17th
century) goes further, and doubts the Davidic authorship of Ps.
xxii. ( Works, viii. 138). And justly so, for if no scene in the life of
this brave and bold king justifies such terrors and such complaints,
how can we suppose, with any psychological propriety, that David
was the author of the psalm ? Against Hitzig's view, which assigns
Ps. xxii. to Jeremiah, and Orelli's somewhat similar theory, see my
Commentary, and cf. above, pp. 135, 136.

Note r, p. 231.
In the argument to this psalm Calvin says, ' Ita Psalmus duobus
membris illud vaticinium explicat, E carcere &c.' He refers to Isa.
liii. 8 ; cf. also Isa. xii. 14, xlix. 7, Iii. 14, liii. 2, 3, and see the
commentaries. Note s, p. 232.
Of course, the psalmist's phraseology is modelled on Jer. xi. 20 ;
in their deepest trouble, both he and Nehemiah would remember
their Scriptures. In interpreting the difficult passage of Nehemiah,
one may either follow Ryssel, who quotes atjp ^y (Ps. x. 14), ' on
thee (the helpless) leaves all,' as Kay renders, or better Stade, who cor
rects Dg1? (on the analogy of 2 Sam. iii. 13, Hos. xiii. 2). Sanballat in
Neh. iv. 2 continues, ' Will they sacrifice ? Will they make an end
in a day ? ' As if the Jews thought that by trusting in Jehovah and
propitiating Him by sacrifices they could expect to make the work
fly.

246 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect.

Note*, p. 232.
Among the phraseological indications of date in Ps. xxxv., note
the parallelism between v. 10 (copied in lxxi. 19) and lxxxvi. 8.
' Who is like God ' (Michael) is the great thought of the Church-
nation ; and the proof of the uniqueness of Jehovah is the deliverance
of ' the poor ' (i.e., Israel : Heb. 'an/) from ' a stronger than he ' (i.e.,
a foreign oppressor) ; cf. Ps. lxviii. 5-7, cxlvi. 5-9.

Note u, p. 233.
Ps. xxxi. can only be used with reserve, for the reason men
tioned above. Note y, p. 233.
Ps. Ixii. 12, 13 reminds us of an Elihu-passage (Job xxxiii. 14-16).
That the Elihu-speeches are a late, and indeed a post-Exile addition
to the poem of Job, will by more and more critics be regarded as
certain. Note w, p. 233.
Ps. Ixxxix. (' Ethanite ') belongs to the same guild of singers as
Ps. xxxix., ' Jeduthun ' being an incorrect substitute for ' Ethan,' cf.
1 Chron. ix. 16, xxv. 1, 6, 2 Chron. v. 12, xxxv. 15, Neh. xi. 17.
The third ' Jeduthunite ' psalm is lxxvii.

Note x, p. 233.
(Ps. xii.) How untenable the theory of Davidic authorship is upon
the exegetical data! 'Oh that his name might perish,' say the enemies
of the speaker (xii. 6) i.e., ' Oh that his posterity might be cut off' (see
cix. 13). Who were the malicious friends and neighbours of David
who entertained this wish ? But of* course the date of this psalm
depends on that of others, especially of Ps. lv. The opening verses
[vv. 2-4) seem to have been added by the framer of the collection to
adapt the poem to the use of the Church in his own time. The
original opening must have been different.
Note y, p. 234.
"fea evayyeX%eo-6ai (Sept.) only occurs thrice in the Psalter (xl. 10,
lxviii. 12, and xcvi. 2) ; in 2 Isaiah, it occurs seven times.

LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 247

Note z, p. 234.
On ' thy marvels ' (xl. 6), Apollinarius compares Isa. xxv. 1 (a
striking parallel to those who can see the late date of the prophecy).

Note aa, p. 234.
There is a doubt whether the heading indicates the original
occasion of the psalm or simply the liturgical use which was made of
it. I prefer the latter view (cf. the heading of Ps. xcii.) ; ' house '=
' temple.' That Ps. xxx. was anciently the proper psalm for the
Hanukka festival is certain (see Soferim, xviii. 2, with Joel Miiller's
note). Delitzsch on the other hand (following Ibn Ezra) gives as the
occasion of this psalm and Ps. xvi. a supposed illness of David, which
threatened to postpone the ' dedication of the house ' (=palace).
I have already been forced to reject this theory (see above, p. 216,
note z), which equally with that of Calvin (that the psalm refers to
David's re-dedication of his palace after the death of Absalom) ob
scures the true exegesis of the contents. Indeed, it is only to save the
accuracy of the second title, I'ddvid, that such theories are put forward.

Note bb, p. 234.
This argument, I know, is not conclusive. The khasidim were
only accidentally warriors, and gladly withdrew from the tumult of
the field. But it has a subsidiary value.

Note oc, p. 234.
Lagarde, on the ground of the title, holds Ps. xxx. to have been
written for the original dedication of the second temple under
Darius I. [Mittheilungen, ii. 378). Hitzig, as might be expected,
maintains Jeremiah's authorship, interpreting the imagery realistically
(comp. Jer. xxxvii., xxxviii.), and also indicating points of contact in
expression between our psalm and Jeremiah [v. 3b, cf. Jer. xvii. 1.4 ;
v. 12a, cf. Jer. xxxi. 13 ; these are the best). More useful is his re
mark that Ps. xxxi. seems to allude to Ps. xxx. [v. 7a, cf. xxxi. 23 ;
Delitzsch adds v. 5a, cf. xxxi. 24a). Kuenen in 1865 dated our
psalm within 100 years after Hezekiah's death, on account of the
similarity of the last half to the Song of Hezekiah [Hist. -krit. Onder
zoek, iii. 298). But it is the Song which imitates (see Isaiah, i. 228,
229). The Song is probably post-Exile, as Ps. vi.

248 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS LN BOOK I. lect.
Note dd, p. 234.
See for the parallelisms, Job and Solomon, p. 88. G. H. B. Wright
remarks [Book of Job, 1883, pp. 239-240),— 'Thus the author of Job
selects the main threads from the complete treatise of Ps. xxxvii., and
interweaves them into the highly poetical discourse of Eliphaz.'
Note ce, p. 235.
The position of Ps. xxv. was probably suggested by the phrase in
v. 1 (with which comp. xxiv. 46) ; that of Ps. xxxiv. in relation to
Ps. xxxiii. needs no comment. Note fl, p. 235.
' Those who fear him ' are the Jewish Church, as ciii. 11, 13, 17.
Round about them Jehovah encamps (cf. Zech. ix. 8) ; his represen
tative is the ' angel of Jehovah,' i.e., either the ' prince of Jehovah's
host ' (Josh. v. 14, a late passage, see Kuenen), ' the angel of his face '
(Isa. lxiii. 9), or any one of the angelic host whom God may send.
' This poor man,' however, is not Israel personified (cf. Ps. xxii. 25),
but each faithful Israelite. The heading may be explained like that
of Ps. Iii. and its fellows. Note e«, p. 235.
I have refrained above from quoting Pedahel and Pedahzur, which
occur in the priestly code (Num. i. 10, ii. 20, xxxiv. 28), because it is
obvious that such names would, if genuine, be highly appropriate for
the age of Exodus. But I may observe that they are equally appropriate
for the post- Exile period, to which the priestly code most probably
belongs, and that El and Zur [cur ' rock ') occur as divine appellations
in psalms which we have recognized as post-Exile. — For an ingenious
but too bold conjecture of Lagarde's, see my Commentary, p. 71 (on
Ps. xxv.). It would be strange, as Perowne remarks, that the only
two names of psalmists which have [ex hyp.) in such a very singular
way been preserved, should both be compounds oipdddh.
• Note hh, p. 235.
Theodore of Mopsuestia explained Ps. xxxii. of the pious Heze
kiah. That is at least plausible ; v. 6 might allude to the Assyrian
invasion (cf. Isa. viii. 7, 8). Pss. xxviii. and xii. are explained by
Theodore of the same period. The heading in Pesh. (Walton) makes
David speak of the sin of Adam. That too might pass, if Adam be
a symbolic representative of mankind.

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 249
Note u, p. 236.
Comp. below. It is splendid audacity to infer from such psalms
as this the gradual appearance of a prophetic spirit in David (Ewald,
History, iii. 197). Note JJ, p. 236.
Notice especially the contrite tone and the idea of God as an
educator, both of which are characteristic of the post-Exile author of
the speeches of Elihu (Job xxxiii. 14-30).
Note kk, p. 236.
I lay no stress on this fact. Ewald and Delitzsch admit the
reference to Lev. v. 4, but are not hindered by this from ascribing
the psalm to David, and represent Isa. xxxiii. 13-16 as a variation
upon the same theme. How improbable both views are need hardly
be said. David's poetic style was not didactic, and Isaiah is not
likely to have copied from a work so much below his own poetical
standard. At all ages the ideas of the psalm needed to be enforced,
and not least after the Return (see Zech. vii. 9, 10, viii. 16, 17, and
cf. Ps. ci.). Hitzig, who ascribes Ps. xv. to David, makes no such
claim for Ps. xxiv. 1-6. I wonder that he did not ascribe the former
to Ezra; that would have been at least plausible.
Note u, p. 237.
See Stade, Zeitschr.f. d. alttest. Wiss., 1884, pp. 256-271; Guthe,
Das Zukunftsbild des Jesaia (1885), p. 44; Kuenen, Hist. krit. Onder
zoek, ed. 2, part ii. (1889), pp. 84-88 ; and cf. my own commentary.
Kuenen differs from his predecessors in attaching all the three
sections, Isa. xxxii. 1-8, xxxii. 9-20, and xxxiii. to the late pre-Exile
period (reign of Josiah). I should myself refer at any rate the first and
third to the period when Pss. ii., xlvi., and xlviii. were written. The
points of contact are obvious. The subject well deserves renewed
investigation. [Dillmann's treatment of Isa. xxxii., xxxiii., in his
recent commentary deserves careful attention. He has made some
progress, but hardly enough, beyond Ewald. Perhaps, if I may
speak freely of the greatest member of the school of Ewald, he is
kept back by his conservatism on other points, e.g. on the dates of
the psalms.] Note Jnm, p. 237.
Or, if this be preferred, of some leader of the Church. Only it
must be remembered that the whole Church is to sing it. Jeremiah,

250 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS LN BOOK I. lect,
therefore, to whom Hitzig seems half inclined to ascribe Ps. xxvii.,
will not do, even if we were to allow that one or another psalm might
conceivably have proceeded from his pen. Cf, however, Ball, Jene-
miah, p. n.
Note nn, p. 237.
I have not pressed the argument against the Davidic authorship
derived from the reference to the ' house of Jehovah ' (Ps. xxiii. 6),
though I do not myself see how ' dwelling in the house of Jehovah '
can mean merely 'being once more (spiritually) at home in the taber
nacle ' (see Delitzsch's introduction to this psalm). For it must be
granted that ' house ' (1V3) might conceivably denote the so-called
tabernacle, just as bait in Arabic may be used of a tent. The
argument from ideas and from phraseology seems to me however
absolutely decisive ; comp., among other parallels, vv. 2b, 3b with
xxxi. 4, and v. 5 with xvi. 5, xxii. 26, xxxi. 20. Hitzig thinks that
the plain style and transparence of expression force us to bring down
the psalm to the seventh century, and that it may therefore possibly
proceed from Jeremiah, to whose spiritual character it corresponds,
and who, He thinks, when cast out by his family, found refuge in the
temple (cf. Pss. xxiii. 6, xxvii. 5, Jer. xii. 6, xxxvi. 26). I confess that
Jeremiah does not strike me as having been endowed with such a
happy nature as every line of this psalm reveals. Mr. Ball, however,
adopts Hitzig's suggestion [Jeremiah, vol. i., p. 10).
Note 00, p. 237.
I agree with Delitzsch (article in Luthardt's Zeitschrift, 1882,
p. 118, cf. Genesis, 1887, p. 8) against Kautzsch [Studien und Kriti-
ken, 1889, p. 383) that the expressions of Ps. xix. 8-15 are too lofty
to refer merely to the Decalogue. Note pp, p. 237.
Note that Ex. xxi. begins, ' And these are fixe judgments; ' cf. Ps.
xix. \ob, but also Deut. v. 1, 28, vi. 1 &c
Note *», p. 238.
Note ' Jehovah's ordinances ' in xviii. 33, and xix. 10, and His
' well-tried promise ' in v. 31, cf. xix. \oa. Probably the collector of
the temple Songbook noticed these coincidences, and by them, and
by the parallelism between ' thy servant ' (xix. 14) and ' the Servant of
Jehovah ' in xviii. 1 (title), was led to place these two psalms side by
side.

v. LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 251

Note rr, p. 238.
It is difficult to see how these verses can be a lamentation over
' the obscurity of the light and want of life-inspiring energy to be
found in the law' (Forbes, Studies in the Book of Psalms, p. 254).

Note ss, p. 238.
The horizon of the poet is different indeed from that of the historical
David, to whom Dr. Perowne (comparing 2 Sam. x. 6, referred to already
by Delitzsch) assigns it. It is not less arbitrary to make Solomon in
his early days the author of the psalm (so Ewald, rendering in v. 6
' I have anointed my king '). Gratz prefers Hezekiah (cf. 2 Kings
xviii. 8). This is at any rate more plausible. ' My holy mountain '
implies that the temple had long been the centre of worship. The
other Zion-psalms are all later than Hezekiah, and Ps. ii. is based
upon 2 Sam. vii., which cannot be pre-Hezekian, and was written
probably, like Ps. xviii., in the last happy days of the reign of Josiah
(see p. 128). Kuenen, I am glad to find, accepts this date for
2 Sam. vii. See his Onderzoek, ed. 2, i. 377.

Note u, p. 238.
For the Egyptian and Assyrian analogies, see my note on Ps. ii. 7.
To these analogies add Nebuchadrezzar's phrase for Marduk, ilu
baniya, 'the God my begetter (creator),' and the Phoenician and
Aramaean names in W. R. Smith, The Religion of 'the Semites, pp. 45,
46. The Homeric Greek analogies are well known.

Note uu, p. 238.
Rudinger assigns Ps. ii. to the age of the Seleucidae; Hitzig makes
even later (see on Ps. i.). Note vv, p. 238.
Comp. v. 1 with lxxxiii. 3,
v. 2 „ „ 4, 6a,
v. 5 „ „ 1 8a.
Also vv. 1, 2 (nations, kings) with ex. 5,
v. 7 with ex. 1 a (see note),
v. 9 with ex. 5, 6.

252 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS LN BOOK I. lect.

Note ww, p. 239.
Both in Ps. ii. 3 and Ps. lxxxiii. 5 the enemies of Israel express
the objects of their enterprize in impassioned words. But the dif
ference in the respective objects is significant.

Note **, p. 339.
See my commentary, and as a parallel to Ps. ii. 5a add Zech. ix.
10, 'he shall speak peace to the (hostile) nations.' The Talmud
makes the psalm refer to the destructive war to be waged by the
nations Gog and Magog in the time of the Messiah. See the acute
contrast drawn between Pss. ii. and iii. in Talm. Bab., Berachoth, 7b
(Wiinsche, Der bab. Talmud, i. 21), and cf. Aboda zara, 50.
Note w, p. 239.
Cf. 0>M ltMT, ii. 2, with D'13 l»n, xlvi. 7; 11DU . . . p« »3>D
(Sept., Targ. VWU) ii. 2, with HJJ1J D'o'pDn, xlviii. 5; V&nT, ii. 5,
with l^rQJ, xlviii. 6. Note zr, p. 239.
In the prophecy of Nathan the divine fatherhood is referred to
in connexion with Solomon ; in Ps. ii. (possibly) in connexion with
David. In the former, the phrase ' to be a son to Jehovah ' is used
metaphorically of the beneficent moral discipline which the king will
receive from Jehovah ; in the latter, the words ' Thou art my son ' are
the formula by which the person addressed is inducted into the office
of God's viceroy. In the former, divine sonship is a special privilege
of Solomon; in the latter, if we compare Ps. Ixxxix. 28, it is common
to the king spoken of with all the other kings of the earth.

Note aaa, p. 239.
There is therefore substantial truth in the application, which is
as old as the Psalms of Solomon (xvii. 26), of Ps. ii. to the Messiah.
Mark i. 11 implies the combination of Ps. ii. 7 with Isa. xiii. 1. On
the other New Testament references, see Delitzsch's introduction
[The Psalms, by Eaton, i. 118, 119). On the similar later Jewish
applications see Pick, Hebraica, Apr. 1886, p. 129, and add to his
references Succa, 52a (Wiinsche, Der bab. Talmud, i. 400).

LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. 253

Note bbb, p. 240.
Breviar. 3, quoted by Lagarde [Nova Psalt. Grcec. Ed. Spec, p. n).
The ancient Celtic expositor Columbanus mentions a theory that the
' happy man ' was Jehoash, king of Judah, but only to refute it (see
Prof. Stokes in Expositor, 1889 (2), pp. 142-3). Nicolaus de Lyra
(fi34o) ascribed Ps. i. to Ezra, while Hermann von der Hardt, accord
ing to Carpzov, found some following for his opinion that vv. 1-3
referred to the family of Zerubbabel, and vv. 4, 5 to that of Joshua
the high priest. Perowne goes even further, and names the author,
viz. Solomon, who, 'as appears probable, made a collection of his
father's poetry for the service of the temple.' The somewhat pro
verbial style of the psalm and its general doctrine (compared with
that of the ' Solomonic ' proverbs) seem to him to confirm this view.
Hengstenberg assigns both Ps. i. and Ps. ii. to David ; Hitzig to
Alexander Jannaeus. Note ccc, p. 240.
The psalmist has expressed the new detail (see v. 2, and cf. Josh.
i. 8) in language borrowed from a portion of the Book of Joshua
(chaps, i.— xii.), which critical analysis has proved to belong to the
closing years of the kingdom of Judah.
Note ddd, p. 240.
D'X^ ' scoffers ' occurs nowhere else in the Psalter (cf. Job and
Solomon, p. 120, note 3). Sept. gives Xoip.01 (cf. Sept. Prov. xix. 25,
xxi. 24, xxii. 10, xxiv. 9), a class-name which still survives in 1 Mace
x. 61 (parallel to irapdvopioi), xv. 3, 21.
Note eee, p. 240.
Wherever torah occurs (Prov. xiii. 14, xxviii. 4, 7, 9, xxix. 18), it
simply means moral or religious precept or direction.
Note fff, p. 241.
Ecclus. xiv. 20, 21 is evidently based on Ps. i. 2.
Note ssg, p. 241.
One result of uniting the two psalms was to make the total
number of the psalms that of the years of the patriarch Jacob (147).
To the references for the combination of the psalms in Comm., p. 1,

254 LARGER GROUPS OF PSALMS IN BOOK I. lect. v.
add Megilla, 17b (Wunsche, Der bab. Talmud, i. 531), where the
position of the ninth of the eighteen Benedictions is explained by a
reference to Ps. x. [v. 15), which ' David spoke in the ninth place.'
See also the exhaustive collection of ancient evidence in Lagarde
Nova Psalterii Graci Editionis Specimen (1887), pp. 16-18, noticing
the corrected form of some lines of Apollinarius,
'Eu-iypac^s o xfraXp.b's evpeOn) Bi%a,
'HvaS/uevos Be rots 7rap' 'EySpatots o-rt^ots'
"AAAcos 8' iBevTtpevo-e Aa/3iBov KpoTOVs,
'Hjirel Trap' avTOii eWaros t/aStcu Bc^a.
Note hhh, p. 241.
It is, I believe, the great future Messianic judgment (using the
word ' Messianic' in a general sense) which is meant in Ps. i. 5.

LECTURE VI.
M'here is he that ptit his holy spirit in the midst of them 1-
Isa. lxiii. n (R.V.).

LECTURE VI.
Part I. — Transition to the theological part of these lectures. Reply to
modern Gregories of Nyssa. The critical result from which we start — that the
Psalter is a religious monument of the Jewish Church - is confirmed by a sound
exegesis. The personification theory in the Psalter. Early Jewish and Christian
anticipations of it. The Church felt that it ministered to one of her most sacred
instincts. An insecure theological basis. The objection, ' But did not the
psalmists prophesy of Christ ? ' considered, and the latest form of the old Messianic
theory (that of Delitzsch) criticfced. True significance of the New Testament
quotations from the Psalter. Psychology of the life of Jesus. Superficial treat
ment of the personification theory deprecated. Its application illustrated from
the Greek choruses and the Old Testament. The difficulties of applying it in the
Psalter cannot be greater than in the Second Isaiah. The ' Servant ' passages ;
necessity of a consistent interpretation. The analogy which Isa. liii. furnishes for the
explanation of Ps. xxii. Happy result of recognizing the voice of the community
both here and elsewhere in the Psalter. The theory must not, however, be
pressed to the extent of denying all personal references. Special characteristics
of Books IV. and V. as compared with Books I. -III. The Christian doctrine of
the Church anticipated. — But, granting that the Psalter is a Church record,
can we still look up to it as a religious classic ? Does its religion possess origi
nality? for all the psalms, except the 18th, are post-Exile, and during both
the Exile and the post-Exile period the Jews were in contact with highly-
developed religions. Discussion of the probable extent of Babylonian and Persian
religious influence upon the Jews (excluding for the present the Resurrection belief).
There was a precedent for a cautiously-liberal policy in the Yahvistic story. That
this policy was continued we see from the later literature (Gen. xiv., the Priestly
Narrative, and the Book of Job). No important novel beliefs were borrowed (in
pre-Maccabaean post-Exile times). But where the same or analogous beliefs
existed in Israel and among the Babylonians or the Persians, the development of
these must have been helped forward in Israel by its contact with born adherents
of the other religion. The lofty mysticism of the Psalms, however, is neither of
Persian nor of Babylonian origin (cf. Lect. VIII.).
Part II. — The 'theology' of the Psalter. Anthropomorphisms of the
psalmists no proof of barbarism. Childlike symbols, not even yet fully outgrown,
but not all equally admirable. John Hyrcanus's criticism of Ps. xliv. 24. Evi
dences in the Levitical psalms as edited, and in Job and other books, of a disin
clination to use the divine name Yahveh. How far should we endorse these
criticisms ? Certainly not so far as to give up the name which we commonly pro
nounce Jehovah. It seems that we use the substituted name ' the Lord ' tpo
frequently. ' Jehovah,' rightly interpreted, is a creed in a nutshell, and contains
the answer to our question, Who is the God of the psalmists? True, the psalmists
did not all rise to the highest conception of Jehovah, especially with regard to

ANALYSIS OF LECTURE VI. 257

His relation to the heathen. Their works present two mutually exclusive ideals
of the Servant of Jehovah, the one supported by the only pre-Exile psalm (the
18th), the other by the Second Isaiah (who recasts a passage of Ps. xviii. in a new
spirit). The inconsistency, however, is not complete, and, so far as it is real,
can be psychologically explained, and paralleled from the Iranian Scriptures.
Dr. Drummond quoted in excuse of the harshness of later Jewish writers towards
the heathen. But can we exonerate the Jews for having made so little effort
to warn the nations of their danger ? How far has Israel recognized its function
as the prophet-people ? At first sight not at all. But as we look more closely
we see indications in Isa. lvi. 1-8, in the Book of Jonah, and in Ps. xxii. 24, that
even in the Persian period there were some Jewish preachers of true religion and
some who gave ear to them among the nations. In the Hellenistic period there
are clear evidences of a turning of the heart of the Jew to that of the Gentile.
References to Sirach, to Daniel, to the psalms of this period (including even the
Maccabaean psalms), and to the Maccabaean history. The ' duality ' of later
Judaism already conspicuously marked.
Principal Notes. — Part I. : Modifications of view on the 'Servant of
Jehovah,' and on the apologetic use of the Psalms. — Babylonian influence on the
Jehovist (Yahvist). — Nebuchadrezzar, Cyrus, and Darius compared. — Persian
influence on Jewish beliefs. — Views of critics on Zoroastrian theism.
Part II. ; The meaning of the divine name Adonai, and the growing prefer
ence of the Jews for it. — The divine fatherhood.

PART I.
THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF THE PSALTER NOT
BORROWED.
IN the preceding lectures I have attempted by the use of the
comparative method to throw some fresh light on the dates
of the psalms. It is more than possible, however, that some
hearers have inwardly uttered the judgment of Gregory of
Nyssa,1 that ' He who by means of them (the Psalms)
" fashioneth our hearts," careth not for these things.' To me
• this appears a dangerous misunderstanding of the historical
character of our religion, and of the tender regard which the
Divine Spirit ever pays to the laws of mental development.
And to the authority of Gregory I may oppose that of two
vastly greater interpreters, Theodore of Mopsuestia and his
friend Chrysostom, who were the first to set an example —
though but on a small scale— of the hallowing of criticism.
Should any one still ask, What has the historical origin of the
Psalter to do with the defence of Christian truth ? I need only
reply, How could we possibly use the Book of Psalms as a
record of Church theology until we had critically proved that
it belonged to the period of the Jewish Church ? Now that
this proof has been given (the 1 8th being, as it would seem,
the only possible pre-Exile psalm — and even this late enough
to be called in a certain sense a Church composition), we can
venture to say that it is the consciousness of the Church, or of
some leading members of the Church, which finds a voice in
every part of the Psalter.
This dictum is, in my opinion, confirmed by a sound
critical exegesis. It can be shown that in most cases, even
when the psalmist uses the first person singular, the speaker
is really either the Church or a typical pious Israelite. This
1 Commentarius duplex in Psalmos (Ingolstadt, 1600), p. 196.

lect. vi. THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF THE PSALTER 259
is sometimes represented as a very modern theory ; it was
not, however, by any means unknown to the ancient inter
preters. Among the rabbis, Rashi, the exponent of tradition,
is its chief supporter ; but the germs of it are to be found
in the Targum and even in the Septuagint.a From the
Synagogue it passed to the Christian Church, where it found
a congenial home. The Old Testament Scriptures, being at
first the only religious authority besides the words of Christ,
and even afterwards retaining an equal importance with the
purely Christian Scriptures, had to be Christianized, both for
the purpose of edification and for that of the defence of the
faith. Hence the Saviour of the world was regarded as not
only the goal but the centre of the Hebrew Scriptures, and
since the union of Christ and the Church was a leading
Christian idea, to say that a psalm was spoken by Christ was
equivalent to declaring it to be, at least in parts, a prayer of
the Church. St. Augustine, who so long reigned supreme in
the exegesis of the psalms, says that ' Christ is the whole
Body of Christ ; and whatsoever good Christians that now
are, and that have been before us, and that after us are to be,
are an whole Christ.' And again : ' Scarce is it possible in
the Psalms to find any voices but those of Christ and the
Church, or of Christ only, or of the Church only.' b It was
only indirectly and unconsciously, however, that the personi
fication theory was for the most part applied. Bound by the
titles of the psalms in the Hebrew and Greek Bibles, the
Church expositors, following the earliest writers, were com
pelled to assume the Davidic authorship of more than half
the psalms. How then could the Christian instinct be justi
fied and David be proved to have spoken of Christ and His
Church ? Only by the consistent application of the principle
that the psalmists spoke ' by the Spirit,' i.e. were prophets or
foretellers. He ' on whose head are many crowns ' (Rev. xix.
12) must have this glory among the rest, that before His
coming He, as it were, absorbed the personalities of the
psalmists into His own. Hence all that is too extravagant
in expression for himself the prophet David wrote, or was
bidden to write, for his unseen Lord, and for that Church in
which the incarnation of the Word was to be, so to speak,
prolonged.

260 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect
I am bound in honesty to say that the theological doctrine
of the union of Christ and His Church is a very insecure
basis for the personification theory. If the psalmists did not,
in the strictest sense of the word, prophesy of Christ, how can
they have prophesied of the Church ? But did they not pro- ,
phesy of Christ ? Has not the greatest of living interpreters,
of whom the present lecturer has repeatedly expressed his
admiration,1 arrived at the conclusion that they did ? To
postpone my answer to the question, Did not the psalmists
prophesy of Christ ? would hamper the subsequent course of
these lectures. Let me then, with all gentleness, touch on
the logical inconsistency from which even this father of the
modern Church has not escaped. No one has more distinctly
accepted the psychological method of exegesis than Franz
Delitzsch ; but has he been faithful to it in dealing with the
so-called Messianic psalms ? Can we be satisfied with his
slight modernization of the typical theory of the Bishop of
Mopsuestia ? Listen to this sentence : ' David is aware in all
his psalms that his destiny, and that of his enemies, stand,
according to the divine decree, in causal connexion with the
final result of human history, and prophesies concerning the
Messiah, not as an objective person of the future, but as
represented by himself, since he regards himself sub specie
Christi.' 2 No less a man than Hengstenberg long ago pro
nounced similar views unpsychological. How does Delitzsch
meet the objection ? He thinks it enough to identify the
mystery of the consciousness of David with the mystery of
all poetry. ' The genuine lyric poet does not,' he says, ' give
a mere copy of the impressions of his empirical Ego.' 3 Most
true. It is the mystery of human life, recognized not less by
Browning the poet than by Kant the philosopher —
God be thanked, the meanest of His creatures
Boasts two soul-sides.
But, we may ask, would not the two soul-sides be seen to be
related if we knew them ? And, granting that David, like
other poets, might idealize himself, how could he work into
1 Last of all in my In Memoriam sketch in The Guardian, April 9, 1890.
2 Messianic Prophecy, by Curtiss, p. 47 ; cf. Hengstenberg, The Psalms, i. 363.
3 The Psalms, by Eaton, i. 93.

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 261
his poetry thoughts and experiences which had no root in his
own inner and outer life ?
Could Delitzsch only have seen his way to assign more of
his Messianic psalms to Jeremiah, he might have somewhat
strengthened his position ; for the inner and outer life of
Jeremiah has obviously more affinity to that of our Lord
than David's has. Of course I do not blame Delitzsch, whose
poetic taste rebelled against the realistic interpretations of
Hitzig. Nor do I, in rejecting the old Messianic theory even
in its latest form, mean in the least to disparage the quota
tions from the Psalter in the New Testament. We are all
conscious sometimes of moods when the past is nearer to us
than the present, and when such quotations, imaginatively
viewed, suggest a ' pre-established harmony ' between sacred
poetry and not less sacred facts.0 The New Testament
applications of the Psalter may not indeed be proofs either
of doctrine or of facts, but they do prove the transforming
power of the Gospel, which could turn the valley of Baca into
a place of fountains, and they suggest deep speculative trains
of thought. And in following up these suggestions, we shall
find out another and still closer connexion between Christ
and the Psalter. If, as we may justifiably hold, the history
of Israel is a preparation for the Advent, its religious litera
ture, which is so closely related to that history, must partake
of this character. The devout musings and anticipations of
the noblest Israelites embodied in the psalms must have
helped to produce the spiritual atmosphere in which alone
the Messiah could draw His breath. The Scriptures, and not
least the Psalter, must have contributed to form His chosen
ones for the Christ, and the Christ for His chosen.
But I must forbear to dilate on this high theme, which
belongs, if I may say so, to the psychology of the life of
Jesus. There is a connexion between the true Messiah and
the Psalter, but it is not one that explains the seeming ex
travagances of the psalmists. And if my readers persist in
seeking an explanation of such expressions, they need ask for
. no better one than this, that the psalmists speak in general,
not as individuals but in the name of the Church-nation. We
are, in short, driven by the necessities of scientific exegesis to
a large extension of the personification theory.

262 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.

I venture to lay so much stress on this theory because it
has hitherto received a somewhat superficial consideration. I
am myself not free from blame, for it is only within the last
ten years that I have at all adequately recognized its claims.
Strange that it should be so uncongenial to English students,
whose road to Jerusalem begins at Athens, and who know
alike their Sophocles and their Isaiah. Take almost any of
those choruses, snatches of which soothed the last moments of
that noble type of the old Oxford theologian Bishop Moberly
— that fine one, for instance, in the ' CEdipus at Colonus,' which
contains the words —
I know not, but my mind
Presageth me that soon
The spoiler shall give back
The maiden sorely tried, sorely by kinsman vexed.
To-day, to-day, some great thing Zeus shall do :
I prophesy the triumph of the right.
Oh that I were a dove, that I might wing the wind
With pinion swift and strong,
And from some airy pinnacle of cloud
Content mine eyes with gazing on the fray.d
Can there be any doubt as to the best explanation of this
passage ? Is it not the chorus personified which is the
speaker ? And then turn to the work of the great poet-
prophet, called the Second Isaiah. What theological student
questions that the ' Servant of Jehovah,' who again and again
here speaks or is spoken of, is in some sense the people of
Israel ? For what right have we to apply different theories in
the explanation of closely related passages ? It is frequently
obvious at first sight that the reference is either to the people
of Israel or to the Church within the people.1 How, then,
can we doubt that somehow or other the meaning is the same
in the other passages ? I admit that it is often found difficult
to satisfy the student that this is the case. There is a felt
want of a connecting link between the two classes of passages
derived from the spiritual furniture of Jewish minds. True ;
but has not the missing link been discovered ? Have we not
by this time learned that the Jews, equally with their neigh
bours, believed in the supersensible existence of ideals (see
1 The Prophecies of Isaiah, ed. 3, ii. 214.

vi. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 263
Dan. vii. 13), such as Wisdom, Israel, Jerusalem, which could
from time to time become visible ? If so, it becomes at once
plain that even in that strikingly individualistic description, Isa.
Iii. 13-liii. 12, the writer may refer to the people of Israel, the
heavenly ideal of which, 'formed' (Isa. xliv. 21) from eternity
by Jehovah, is personalized by vivid imagination.6
Now, if the difficulties in the application of this theory
have been overcome in the Second Isaiah, why should they
much longer prove obstinate in the Psalter ? Let us then
courageously face them. In those parts of the Psalter which
sound most distinctly individualistic let us recognize the voice
sometimes of the suffering and sin-conscious or jubilant and
forgiven people of Israel, sometimes of the self-forgetting
poet, who accepts his share of the experiences of his people.
And as for that difficult psalm, the 22nd, let us place it beside
Isa. liii., and explain it accordingly of the Genius of Israel as
embodied either in those prophetic teachers in whom, to the
eye of faith, it preached and suffered and, in spite of appear
ances, overcame, or in an individual Israelite, the flower of his
race, whom the writer conceives so vividly that he anticipates
the future and represents as a historical personage. Which
of these alternatives is to be preferred for Ps. xxii. ? The
second is naturally delightful to a Christian, but is there any
analogy for it in the Psalter ? The answer is Yes, at least to
a certain extent, if in Ps. ii. the poet projects himself into the
still future Messianic age ; but No, if you agree with me that
the psalm Quare fremuerunt is rather an idealization of the
long-past Davidic age.f In the latter case, this is the position
which you must, I think, take up. The complaints of Ps. xxii.
are uttered by the faithful of Jerusalem, who are the kernel of
the restored nation, and in whom the Genius of Israel is most
adequately represented. They are not indeed perfect (comp.
Ps. lxix.), but the Genius which inspires them is perfect, and
it is in virtue of this that they will prevail ; sv tovtw vUa.
For a time they are persecuted, and Israel, as Jehovah's
Servant, seems at death's door. Their sufferings are intensi
fied by the thought that Israel was created to make known
God's name to the nations, and that His work therefore is
cut short and His kingdom delayed. But while the speaker
prays the assurance comes to him [v. 22) that salvation is at

264 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.
hand, and that his wonderful deliverance will supply him with
a potent argument in his missionary preaching. In vv. 23
and 26 the personality of the psalmist is for a moment visible ;
but elsewhere it is the personalized Genius of Israel who
speaks, or more precisely the followers of Nehemiah, includ
ing the large-hearted psalmist. For no mere genius in the
modern sense can possibly be meant. The Jewish Church
worshipped abstractions no more than the Christian. She
could not indeed quite have said, ' I believe in Abraham,' g as
the Christian says, ' I believe in Jesus Christ,' but the lives of
spiritual heroes like Abraham, Moses, Jeremiah, had the
effect of making the Genius of Israel objectively real to
Israelitish hearts.
Many of my readers will, I think, notice how strongly
the resemblance between Ps. xxii. 7 and Isa. xlix. 7, liii. 3,
confirms the view that in Isa. liii. likewise it is the Genius of
Israel as personified, not in one historic personage alone, but
in the Israel Kwra irvsvp.a which speaks. And they will
perhaps readily accept the conjecture that to the author of
Ps. xxii. the condition of the Jewish Church in his own time
was partly foreshadowed in Isa. liii. 2-9, and that that passage
with its context was the sacramental sign used by God for
the revival of his faith.h Nor will it be denied that Pss.
lxix. and cii., which are akin to Ps. xxii., are to be explained
analogously, though the features of Israel's Genius are here
less perfectly reproduced in the imagined speaker.1
To apply the nation-theory to the 22nd psalm is a severe
test. In most cases we need not have recourse to the Genius
of Israel : it is the actual struggling and sinning church-
nation which is the speaker. But even in the case of Ps. xxii.
I ask confidently, Has the interest of the psalm been lessened
in the process ? Surely not. Both here and everywhere the
Psalter becomes more and not less human when regarded as
the utterance of the nation.k We may perhaps have to con
fess with Bishop Alexander, that English church-poetry is
' fair, angel-fair, but frozen ; ' l but we cannot truthfully say
so of Jewish, and we know the reason. The religious poetry
of Israel was fervent, just because its writers spoke for the
community, having absorbed that passionate love of God and
1 Poems, p. 67.

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 265
country which glowed in each of its members. The Psalter
(at any rate Books I.— III.) reminds one of that mystic eagle
in Paradise, composed of interwoven ruby-souls, glowing with
the rays of the divine sun, whose beak Dante heard ' utter
with its voice both I and My, when in conception it was We
and Our!1 Never were there such prayers and praises as
those of Israel, precisely because in the psalmists as such the
individual consciousness was all but lost in the corporate.™ I
say ' all but lost,' because it ought not to be denied that the
personality of a psalmist does now and then start into view n
(see p. 319). Indeed, I see no objection to recognizing in some
psalms both a personal and a national reference ; this appears
to me to heighten the poetry and enrich the meaning, where
the two references can be combined. But that there are
many passages in which the person who speaks or is spoken
of is simply and solely the nation,0 is becoming evident, and
if we read the rest of the Old Testament with this in our
mind, we shall perhaps be surprised at the number of parallels
which it presents.5
The Psalter then is a monument of Church-consciousness ;
exegesis fully confirms the voice of criticism. If this can be
shown even from Books I.— III., still more easily can it from
Books IV. and V., most of the psalms in which are self-
evidently congregational utterances.11 One might illustrate
the combination of ' I- ' and ' We- ' psalms by parallels from
the Greek choruses. But the phenomena of Books IV. and V.
are perhaps best explained thus. The instinctive personifica
tion of the Church-people in the ' I '-psalms was a survival — ¦
an inheritance from antiquity. It was natural that later
religious poets should begin to look upon their nation in a
more modern light as an organization of individualities. They
did not indeed go so far as those modern hymnists who have
half filled the popular hymnals with lyrics of a strongly per
sonal tone.1 Rarely do the Hebrew psalmists disclose their
personality. They had, indeed, their private joys and sorrows,
but they did not make these the theme of song. The indi
vidual consciousness was not sufficiently developed for this,
and so an unselfish religion was easier for them than it is for
us. But the later ' We '-psalms, though not less national than
1 Paradise, xix. II, 12 (Longfellow).

266 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.

the others, indicate a perception that, as Kingsley has said,
' communities are for the divine sake of individual life, for the
sake of the love and truth that is in each heart, and is not
cumulative — cannot be in two as one result.' And surely
here is another anticipation of Christianity, if at least I rightly
interpret Eph. iv. 12-16 as an exposition of the true doctrine
of the Christian Church, which is personified in this passage
as a constantly growing man (' the Israel of God,' Gal. vi. 16),
not as a mere collective, but as the organic unity of the indi
vidual believing members. So that the highest doctrine of
the Church in both Testaments gives us the reconciliation of
the opposing theories of individualism and socialism.
I now pass on. Do not regard the preceding inquiry as
a digression. Without it I could not have justified the use
of the Psalter as a handbook of Church theology. To have
shown that as a rule the psalms were written in the name
of the church-nation, makes the Psalter equal in value to the
great church-prophecy of the Second Isaiah. But we have
now to ask, If, as we have seen, all the psalms except the 18th
are post-Exile, can we still look up to the Psalter as not only
a poetic, but a religious classic ? Can we still depend upon
the purity and originality of its ideas? For the so-called
Captivity was no seclusion. It brought the exiles face to face
with a higher and yet a kindred civilization, and a kindred
and not in all respects a lower religion. Jeremiah himself
had bidden his brethren in Babylon acclimatize themselves
(Jer. xxix. 4-7), and it is certain that some departments of
their life must have been profoundly affected by their new
surroundings. If even Ezekiel received such a strong imagina
tive stimulus from Babylonian art, how much more must
younger and more inquisitive minds have felt that inspiriting
shock of strangeness, by which elsewhere such wondrous
intellectual results have been produced. From one of these
minds we have received the original part of the Book of Job — ¦
a poem too broadly human in its scope to owe much to any
single teacher, but which has several mythic descriptions
reminding us of Babylonia.1 To others it has been some
times held that we are indebted for those parts of the Genesis-
narratives which approach most nearly to the parallel cuneiform
1 See Job and Solomon, pp. 76-78.

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 267
narratives.1 And if we admit that Chaldaean mythic stories
have influenced the form of the Hebrew narratives, can we
think it impossible that new forms of religious belief may
have been adopted into the Jewish system on Babylonian
soil ? 2
This is not a point to be decided offhand. The reception
of the view to which I have just referred would involve some
grave consequences. For even granting that the exiles
thoroughly assimilated the new elements, what in this case
becomes of the originality which has been thought to give a
normative value to the religious teaching of the Old Testa
ment? Can we still speak of the Israelites as in a special
sense the chosen people ? Does not their religion become
somewhat dangerously composite, and if we still accept it as
the basis of our own, must we not admit the Babylonians,
and presently perhaps the Persians, to an absolute religious
equality with the Israelites ? I do not say that this result
would be fatal to Christianity, but only that it would be
serious for Christian theology. And yet we must not refuse
to weigh certain facts and considerations which may seem to
lead on to this very result. From of old Israel was a recep
tive nation. That Abraham learned from Accadian and
Moses from Egyptian hymns, is, I presume, an uncritical
fancy, but this question seems fair enough, Why, if the-
Canaanites could poison Israelitish religion, should not the
Chaldaeans have contributed to purify it ? That there is an
affinity between the later Hebrew and the best later Chaldaean
religion is certain ; and there may be a dim perception of this
in that fine confession imaginatively ascribed to Nebuchad
rezzar (Dan. iv. 31-33), which offended the narrow orthodoxy
of a Talmudic doctor.s I know that some have represented
the Babylonian hymns as ' colourless, declamatory, and
unspiritual,'* and I suppose that Nebuchadrezzar's prayers
would not be judged too favourably. But we must not let
ourselves be carried away by Christian prejudice. Half the
sympathy which we bring to the Psalter would reveal un-
1 Friedr. Delitzsch, Wo lag das Parodies ? p. 94 ; Haupt, Der keilinschriftliche
Sintfluthbericht, p. 20 ; Sayce, Theological Review, 1873, pp. 375-377 ; cf.
Goldziher, Hebrew Mythology, pp. 317-326.
2 See Goldziher, I.e.; Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, pp. 39, 40.

268 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.
suspected beauties in the much older sacred songs of Chaldaea.
Nor can these beauties be explained as mere survivals from a
primitive revelation, forms of speech from which all spiritual
life has departed. ' What stirs us in these hymns is no
reminiscence of ancient truths. . . . There were men behind
those psalms who remembered — no things, but God, and when
any man remembers God in the vital Biblical sense, God
Himself is at hand.' u If the lost psalms of pre-Exile Hebrew
poetry were equal in depth of feeling to the early Babylonian
hymns, the psalmists had no cause to blush for their pre
decessors. These later poets, who shine like stars in the
firmament, had entered into the labours of God's noblest
interpreters. Had the teaching and purifying agency of the
'goodly fellowship of the prophets' been granted to Babylon,
it is conceivable that its later hymns might have rivalled
those of the Hebrew Psalter.
There was a time when everything Babylonian was over
rated. We heard much of a Chaldaean Genesis, and of a divine
personage Ilu, ' the god par excellence, the absolute god, who
crowns the ladder of the divine hierarchy.' It is no disrespect
to Francois Lenormant if we now take a somewhat more
moderate view of Babylonian attainments. Certainly that
lamented scholar seems to have exaggerated the mono
theistic tendency in Babylon under Nebuchadrezzar.1 An
eminent authority assures us that it was never so strong in
Babylonia as in Assyria ; 2 it is, at any rate, certain that it
was not less clearly marked in the latter. The god Assur
was supreme among the gods, as his royal vicegerent was
supreme among men. We even find an Assyrian name,
Mannu-ki-ilu-rabu,3 ' Who is like the great God ?' — which
reminds us of the monotheistic Hebrew name Michael. In
the neo-Babylonian empire the priestly class had such an all-
pervading influence that the supreme divine power was divided
between two gods, Marduk (whose attributes marked him out as
specially the royal god) and Nabu (who, as the god of revealed
knowledge, was closely allied to the priestly order). But, as
1 La divination, &c, pp. 214-216.
2 Sayce, 'Polytheism in Primitive Israel,' Jewish Quarterly Review, ii. 32 ;
cf. Hibbert Lectures, p. 122.
3 Schrader, Die ass. -bab. Keilinschriften, p. 147.

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 269

these gods were father and son, it might be reasonably main
tained that in the highest sense the unity of the supreme
Godhead was unbroken. Hence Nebuchadrezzar, whose name
placed him under the direct protection of Nabu, felt it no
detriment to the divine monarchy to devote himself chiefly to
the service of Marduk. Under this name especially the
divine power and goodness were eulogized by him with a
purity and depth of feeling which even Tiele finds worthy of
the Hebrew psalmists." It is, however, to the hymns that we
must turn for a full account of the religious conceptions of the
age of Nebuchadrezzar, for though mostly of very ancient
date, they received the sanction of the later priests, by whom
they were edited (p. 213), if necessary, in such a way as to suit
a more advanced period. Do we find in these hymns any near
approach to a moral conception of God as the ruler of the
universe, all-powerful and all-wise, just and yet compassionate,
to a moral view of sin, to a belief in the ' life everlasting ' ?
We do' ; all these ideas are genuinely Babylonian. But it is
also certain that the two former are characteristic of Jewish
religion from the Exile onwards ; the only doubt can be as to
the time of the appearance of the third. Were they borrowed
by the Jews from Babylon ? There are some difficulties,
distinct from those which I have mentioned already, in the
way of an affirmative answer. For although these ideas
are for the most part very clearly expressed by the Second
Isaiah, yet this same prophet exults w over the expected fall
of the very god who is specifically the god of resurrection (Isa.
xlvi.), and utters a protest against Babylonian dualism (Isa.
xlv. 7). And if we turn to the hymns of the post-Exile
Church, we observe that when a kind reference is made to
Babylon it is on the assumption that she steps from her throne
and enters the federation of the new Israel (Ps. Ixxxvii.). Can
we suppose that the exiles themselves were more inclined to
accept any vitally important religious novelties from Babylon ?
The view that I am criticizing seems to me to ignore the
principle of historical development. We ought never to
assume that ideas of an advanced religion have been altogether
borrowed, until we have done our best to discover any germs
of them in the native religious literature. It has been shown
by critical exegesis that the chief ideas of the later religion

270 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.
are germinally present in the earlier Hebrew writings. The
only question is whether the germs are sufficient to account
altogether for the later developments. In my opinion they
are not ; we may and must make some concessions to the
new view. The Old Testament religion, unlike Islam, but
like Christianity, is a religion of historical development. To
a certain extent the authorities of the Jewish Church were
not unwilling that their religion should be influenced from
without. A precedent had been already set by one of the
undoubtedly pre-Exile Hexateuchal writers : — I allude to the
fact that the Yahvistic story, as we now have it, has been
enriched from Babylonian traditions." It was no small proof
of moral stability, and of a higher spiritual guidance, that a
wise and pious man. whose 'name is written in heaven,' could
effect this without detriment to religion, and it must have
encouraged the later church-authorities to continue the same
cautiously liberal policy. The proof of this is apparent in the
later Hebrew literature. Not only did the author of the
Priestly Code (whom I venture at this point to refer to the
early post-Exilic period) work up fresh material derived from
Babylonian sources, while another learned writer did the same
in that remarkable and unique passage Gen. xiv., but thinkers
and poets (see the Book of Job) deliberately threw themselves
into what may quite innocently be called a mythic revival.
The leaders of the Church permitted this ; they were content
to moderate and turn to wholesome uses a tendency which
they could not extinguish. Only where the fundamentals of
religion were concerned they stood firm, and if we notice a
parallelism even in these between Israel's religion and Baby
lon's, the coincidence proves, not that Israel borrowed from
Babylon, but that the same Spirit of holiness had been train
ing His disciples on the banks of the Euphrates and of the
Jordan. But when fellow-disciples come together, may they
not confirm each other in the truths which they hold in com
mon ? May we not reverently think that Israel was brought
to Babylon partly at least to strengthen its hold on lately
acquired truths, just as ' Magi from the East,' according to a
Jewish-Christian tradition, were led by a star to Bethlehem to
do willing homage to the infant Christ ? And may I not add
that Nebuchadrezzar and Darius, and their wise men, were

vi. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 271

not only, like Epimenides (Tit. i. 12), prophets relatively to
heathendom, but also in some degree at least relatively to
the central people of revelation ? x
For you will readily admit that whatever ' excellent
things are spoken ' of Nebuchadrezzar belong also to Jeho
vah's other ' servants,' Cyrus the Great y and Darius — noble
representatives of an svOsov s6vos,z which could not, under
favourable circumstances, help attracting the attention of the
Israelites. A Magian rite is probably referred to in Ezek.
viii. 17, though only as a superstitious usage adopted by
heathenish Jews. Such evidence proves nothing as to the
influence of genuine Mazdeism upon the higher Israelitish
religion, and though the Second Isaiah betrays his sympathy
with the religion of Cyrus, yet, as Babylon was not yet
actually overthrown, we cannot suppose the religious influence
of Persia upon Israel to have been thus far considerable.1"1
Sublime indeed are the confessions of faith in the inscriptions
of the Achaemenian kings, and a description of the ' Lord
Omniscient ' (Ahura Mazda), the founder of the ' Righteous
Order ' (Asha), compiled from the Avesta, would be found to
differ but little from those given of Jehovah by the Hebrew
prophets and psalmists.bb And yet not even from Zarathustra
and his nameless successors did the Second Isaiah derive his
faith in the creatorship and all-wisdom of the Most High God.
Nor can it be shown that that poetic masterpiece of the Exile,
the Book of Job, presents any undoubtedly Iranian affinities.
If anything there has been borrowed, it has been so Hebraized
as to be undistinguishable from genuine Hebrew material.
Let us pass, then, to the period of the Return. Here we
may expect to find traces of Persian influence, but also to find
the Church-leaders refusing any belief which would affect the
purity of Israelitish religion. Otherwise they would be less
earnest than Zarathustra himself, by whom, as Mills remarks,
' no trifling with any form of evil, least of all with a foreign creed,
was to be tolerated.' One of the earliest of the Jewish Bene
dictions, probably of pre-Maccabaean origin, contradicts a funda
mental Persian doctrine, viz. the antithesis of the kingdoms of
light and darkness, and whether or not we hold that the cosmo-
1 The hostility of 2 Isaiah towards Babylon on the eve of restoration is not
•conclusive against this view.

272 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.
gony in Gen. i. has been partly modelled on the Persian,00 we
may agree that its tendency is opposed to all forms of dualism.
It is only on such secondary points as the time of the first
prayer,4'1 the number and personality of angels, and the exis
tence of demons or evil spirits that we can imagine Jewish
believers to have been directly and absolutely indebted to
their new lords. To say that the lofty mysticism of the
psalms is of Persian origin is only a few degrees less rash than
to derive it from Babylonia.ee They may indeed present affini
ties to the most spiritual parts of Zoroastrianism (see Lect.
VIII.), and even allude here and there to popular beliefs of
partly Persian origin. But the spirit of the Psalter is as pure
and original as that of the Gathas. The other Scriptures of the
post-Exile period may not be all equally lofty, but in none of
them does the purity of Israel's religion suffer any serious
obscuration. That the guides of the Church-nation watched
over this, and in the performance of their task looked up to
Him who had ' placed his holy spirit within ' his people,1
cannot be doubted. And it is because the psalmists evidently
claim to rank among these spiritual guides that they speak
at times in the authoritative language of the prophets ff as the
appointed representatives of the prophetically gifted ' Servant
of Jehovah.'

Note a, p. 259.
See the titles of Pss. xxxviii. and lvi., and the text of Pss. xxiii.,
lxix., lxxxviii. (which last, however, is given rather as a prayer for
Israel than of Israel), as paraphrased in the Targum. Notice how
'the Lord is my shepherd' (xxiii. 1) becomes 'the Lord fed His
people in the wilderness.' Also the Septuagint titles of Pss. v., lv.,
and (in many MSS.) Ixiv. A Talmudic passage records a difference
(at the end of the 1st century a.d.) between two rabbis. ' R. Eliezer
said, David said all the psalms on his account ; R. Joshua said, On
account of the congregation. The wise men (i.e. the majority of the
school) made a compromise, saying, " Some of them are said on his
own account, and others on account of the congregation '" [Pesachim,
1 1 7a, ap. Neubauer, Studia Biblica, ii. 7). But the grounds of the
compromise were very weak. See also Pesachim, \\8b, where Raba
explains Ps. cxvi. as spoken by Israel.
1 Isa. lxiii. n.

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED.

273

Note b, p. 259.
St. Augustine on Ps. lix. 2 and title of Ps. Ix. (Oxford translation,
1849). Cf. Tertullian, Adv. Prax., 'Omnes paene psalmi Christi
personam sustinent' [Opera, ed. 1634, p. 642). As specimens of an
incomplete and unconscious application of the nationalistic theory,,
take Eusebius's description of Ps. xiii. as a ' supplication of the
prophets over the rejection of the Jewish people,' and of Ps. cxxx. as
the ' prayer of the martyrs.' The latter psalm is the De Profundis^
which, with the other six penitential psalms, the Church has con
stantly interpreted of its own spiritual wants. St. Chrysostom, too7
remarks on Ps. li. 1 [v. 3 in the Hebrew) that the words are equally
applicable to David, and to the captive people of Israel, and also to
Christians under a sense of guilt. See also Theodoret on Ps. lxxvii.
and some other psalms. Note °, p. 261.
Comp. my Prophecies of Isaiah, ii. 194-198. The views there
expressed differ from those of Theodore of Mopsuestia (ap. Swete,
Diet, of Christian Biography, iv. 946), in that they leave room for
the action of the natural law of development ; and also from those of
Delitzsch's friend Hofmann of Erlangen, in that no attempt is made
to sketch out a system of typical Old Testament history, the basis of
the theory being that pious faith in early foreshadowings described
in my quotation from Stanley. Obviously, the traditional account
of ancient Israel being only in part historical, we cannot go beyond
quasi-poetical speculations, which have their own justification, but
which must not form part of the diroXoyia recommended in 1 Pet.
iii. 15. Note d, p. 262.
Soph. OSd. Col. 1076-1084, in Whitelaw's translation. Smend
refers with the same object to Soph. OSd. Rex, 1086, 1095 ; Electra,
479, 492; Horat. Carm. Sec. 72, and to the odes of Pindar (Stade's
Zeitschrift, 1888, p. 60). Let me add that, just as in the Greek
choruses, though for a different reason, the later Israelites sometimes
personified their people as a woman. So in Rev. xii. 4, where the
woman is the heavenly Israel (Spitta) ; so, too, Shulamith in the
Song of Songs was interpreted in the Targum and Midrash of the
htiTW nM3, and the greatest of the ' Servant ' passages in 2 Isaiah is
enclosed by sections which describe the Jewish people as a hand
maid (Isa. Iii., liv.). Cf. Ps. Ixxxvii. 16, cxvi. 16, ' the son of thj
handmaid.' T

274 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.

Note e, p. 263.
' We Aryans of the West are accustomed to draw a hard and fast
line between the ideal and the real ; but the unphilosophical Israelite
made no such distinction. The kingdom of God he regarded as
really in heaven, waiting to be revealed; and so the ideal of Israel
was to an Israelite really in heaven, in the super-sensible world,
waiting for its manifestation.' It would carry us too far away to
collect all the ancient parallels for such a belief (both Egypt, Baby
lonia, and Persia supply them in abundance). Let me only refer to
the wonderful personification of Wisdom in the Wisdom of Solomon
and to the more recent parallels in the works of Boethius and Dante.
This imperious craving for personification has abated in modern
times, but poets like Wordsworth remind us that it is not dead. So
that the Second Isaiah did nothing strange in personifying, not
merely as a fiction but as the representation of a fact, the ideal of
Israel. In order to be real, this ideal had to be personal. But when
it took flesh could it retain its ideal purity ? Looking at the noblest
representatives of the ideal from a little distance it might seem that
this was possible (see Ps. xxii., Isa. xiii. 1-7, xlix. 1-9, 1. 4-9, Iii. 13-
liii. 12). But more often, when a psalmist becomes the mouthpiece
of the Church-nation, he admits the power of the real world to
obscure the ideal by introducing into his description features alien to
the true Genius of Israel (see Ps. lxix.). Let me add that the Second
Isaiah gives an objective existence, not merely to the ideal Israel but
to the ideal Jerusalem (Isa. xl. 9, xlix. 14-19, Iii. 7-9, Ixii. 6), and that
in the New Testament and in the Talmud (see p. 450) we also find
these ideal or heavenly figures (see for the one Rev. xii. 4, and for
the other Rev. iii. 12, xxi. 2, 10 ; cf. Gal. iv. 26, Phil. iii. 20, Heb.
xi. 10, xii. 22, xiii. 4), which evidently belong to the same circle of
images as the Platonic iSe'ai and their Egyptian and Iranian analogues.
But into how lofty a service have these conceptions been pressed by
the Jewish writers ! Note f, p. 263.
I must therefore modify my statement in Isaiah (ed. 3), ii. 202-
204, and in my Commentary, reasonable as I still consider it to be.
Those who prefer a more nearly orthodox view will at any rate
agree with Theodore of Mopsuestia, Calvin, and Hofmann [Schrift-
beweis), that the psalmist's experiences do not accord in all points
with those of Jesus Christ. St. Augustine's view of the predictive
character of Ps. xxii. (see his comment on the title of Ps. Ixxxv.) is
of course impossible.

THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 275

Note e, p. 264.
The well-known late Jewish belief in the merits of ' the fathers '
{cf. Targum on Pss. Ix. 6, 7, lxxxiv. 11) might, it is true, almost have
justified the phrase. Cf. Ex. ix. 6, Deut. iv. 37, x. 15, Rom. xi. 28.
And who should this leader — this root of the new Israel — be but
He who was also the flower of the old ?
Note h, p. 264.
I have returned, as the reader will see, to the view expressed in
The Book of Isaiah Chronologically Arranged (1870), pp. 191-193
cf. 155. The individualizing features of Isa. liii. are no doubt un
usually strong,1 but not more so than those of the poetic portrait of
Job, who is a symbol of humanity, and especially of Israel. I have
also been impressed by the fact that the Messianic interpretation of
the ' Servant ' passages cannot be traced earlier than the Psalter of
Solomon (b.c. 63-48), if it can be traced even in this book (cf. Ps.
Sol. xvii. 30 with Isa. xlix. 6, and xvii. 42, 43 with Isa. xiii. 4a),
while Dan. vii. 13, 14, cf. 22, 27, looks like an early interpretation of
Isa. Iii. 13-15, liii. 12 (first clause). Need I add that I have also
been greatly moved by my renewed study of the phenomena of the
psalms ? This ' return ' does not, of course, mean that I renounce
the Christian application of Isa. liii. ; for is not Jesus Christ the
flower of the old and the root of the new Israel ? — nor that I dis
parage those who are still contented with the interpretation given by
Delitzsch. In any case, it must be admitted that the theory of the
adaptation by the Second Isaiah of an older prophetic fragment (see
my Isaiah, ii. 39) is not unplausible. Was not Job himself an indi
vidual before he became a symbol ? It also supplies an additional
justification for the application of Isa. liii. to the Christian Messiah.
If an individual prophet, Jeremiah for instance, by his faithfulness
unto death so largely realized the ideal of the Servant of Jehovah
that a prophetic dirge upon him could be utilized in a portrait of the
personalized Genius of Israel, much more may we apply that touch
ing description to Him whom we regard as our perfect Teacher and
Example. Note *, p. 264.
In other words, these psalmists think less of the ideal and more
of the actual Israel ; or we may say that they speak for the handful
1 Chap, liv., referred to by Giesebrecht (Beitrdge zur Jesaiakritik, p. 184), is
not a complete parallel, for here the allegoric intention is apparent. The adap
tation-theory (see above) seems to me to lighten the difficulty of the ordinary
reader.

276 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.
of earnest Israelites, whose number we may hope that they under
estimate. Note k, p. 264.
The psalms lose nothing in interest through being assigned in
the main to the Church-nation. What is necessary to preserve for
them the affections of Christendom is a historical background.
Whether we seek this in the life of David and his successors, or in
the larger life of the Church-nation, seems, from the point of view of
mere dramatic interest, unimportant. But let no one give up the one
background unless he is prepared to adopt the other. The eighteenth-
century critics could not appreciate Samson Agonistes because they
judged it by a purely artistic standard ; those of the nineteenth cen
tury, reading it as a contemporary record, as the expression of a.
heroic soul, can admire it. It would be sad to enjoy Milton's
tragedy more than those lyrics which to our forefathers seemed more
intense than any others because of the story which underlay them.
As mere academical exercises by not merely unnamed but unknown
individuals, the psalms will neither greatly edify the Church nor
charm the literary student. But if we can show that in losing one
David we have gained a succession of still sweeter psalmists, and that
though we know not their names we partly know their history, and
can follow them in their changing moods and experiences, we shall
more than compensate the educated reader for the temporary and
unintentional pain to which our criticism may have subjected him.
Note m, p. 265.
Compare the saying of Abaje, ' In prayer a man should always
unite himself with the community' [Berachoth, 2gb). Especially in
festival prayers the wants of the individual (TIT OIX) were to be
forgotten, said the teachers, in view of common blessings.
Note n, p. 265.
Even then, however, except in Ps. xlv. and perhaps in Ps. cvi.
4, 5, the psalmist does not'speak merely as an individual ; he repre
sents either a class within the Church-nation or the whole of the
faithful community. See e.g. (besides Ps. xxii.) Pss. xix. 12-15,
xxxii., xxxix., xiii. and xliii., lv., lxi., Ixvi., Ixxiii., lxxvii., cxxi., cxxii.,
cxxix.-cxxxi. On Ps. cvi. 4, 5, comp. Binnie, The Psalms, their
History, &c, p. 291. Of course, it is possible that if we knew more
of the post-Exile developments of Hebrew poetry and * wisdom,' we
might find that here too there was an individualistic reaction against
the Church-movement of Ezra.

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 277

Note °, p. 265.
' There are not many [of the seemingly personal] psalms,' says
Hoekstra, ' in which you cannot imagine the collective servant of
God as the subject throughout' [Theol. Tijdschrift, 1871, p. 4). Simi
larly, Smend, in his essay ' Ueber das Ich der Psalmen ' (Stade's
Zeitschrift, 1888, pp. 49-147); cf. his review of Nowack in Theol.
Lit.-zeitung, Nov. 2, 1889, which is, I fear, less conciliatory than the
-essay. Both writers exaggerate, but have done good service, notably
Smend, by forcing attention to a neglected principle. Stekhoven, in
his reply to Smend (Stade's Zt, 1889, pp. 131-134), admits that a
number of psalms (e.g. liv., Ix., lxxix., cxxix.) are unintelligible upon
the individualistic theory. His own theory is that not a few songs
which originally expressed the feelings of an individual have been
•converted into Church- hymns by the addition of some couplets, by
fusion with other songs, or by other editorial processes. To me this
seems only admissible within very narrow limits. At any rate we are
bound to dispense with it as often as we can. In most cases the
supposition that the original psalmist sometimes speaks as any pious
Israelite, who shares the joys and sorrows of his nation, would speak,
is sufficient. To say that Pss. vi., cii., cxxx., cxxxix. must have been
materially altered from their original form, seems to me an arbitrary
and needless hypothesis. In justice to myself I should add that the
views on this subject expressed here and in my commentary have been
formed independently of Smend, but that I have been helped much
by Olshausen. Note p, p. 265.
See e.g. the priestly blessing (Num. vi. 23-26), the Decalogue, many
parts of the exhortations in Deuteronomy, the fine monologue of the
true Israel in Micah vii., Hos. iv. 4, 5 (the priestly caste), vii. 8, 9,
Isa. xii. 1, 2, xxv., xxvi., parts of 2 Isaiah, and Lam. i., iii. (see my
Introd. to Lamentations in the Pulpit Commentary, p. iii.). Comp.
also some of the so-called Psalms of Solomon (see esp. Ps. Sol. i.,
where Israel speaks, not however Ps. Sol. xvi., which is the utterance
¦of an individual), and a beautiful hymn in the Atonement Day
.Service [Festival Prayers, by De Sola, iv. 250).
Note 1, p. 265.
This observation has also been made by Mr. Lock in one of his
¦excellent contributions to a volume of Keble College Sermons (1889)-
It appears to him that a thoughtful even if not critical study of the
structure of the Psalter will promote the growth of a less purely
individualistic and in a good sense more churchly religious senti-

278 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.
ment. 'The psalms,' he says, 'are the hymnbook of the Jewish
Church, and they are a hymnbook composed by putting together
several previous hymnbooks ; ' and ' in the main you will find that
throughout the whole there is a gradual growth of the thought which
seems to take a new departure with each book.' Thus in Book L
the psalms, we are told, are nearly all individual, personal. In
Books II. and III., side by side with some of the most personal
psalms, there are many with a strongly national element. In Book IV.,,
the tone is predominantly national; indeed, sometimes more than
national. In Book V., there are still many national and historical
psalms, and yet there is also a deep personal tone (e.g. Pss. cxix.
and cxxxix.); 'but at last we come to that wonderful closing group,
where all that is personal passes away,' and ' the very words "I" and
" mine " are nowhere found ' — it is the great Hallelujah group.
This theory has the merit of presupposing no critical knowledge in
the student. It may, I hope, prepare some students for a not less
edifying but perhaps more critical and therefore more satisfying
view of the Psalter. Note r, p. 265.
It is not enough to reply with Dr. Binnie that Christian hymn-
books, the Olney collection for instance, contain a number of lyrics
which were originally composed simply for the comfort and edifica
tion of the writers ( The Psalms, their History, Teaching, and Use,.
p. 11); for who would dream of including one of our hymnbooks
among the primary sources of Christian theology ?
Note 5, p. 267.
Rab imputes to the Babylonian king the arrogant intention of
surpassing all the psalms and hymns composed by David, and states
that an angel cut the heathen king short by giving him a violent
blow on the mouth. Daniel himself took too favourable a view of
Nebuchadrezzar in Dan. iv. 24 (27), according to Baba bathra, 4a,
a criticism which accounts for the divergent view of the text in the
Septuagint. Note ', p. 267.
Edersheim, Prophecy and History, p. 26 ; E. Meyer and Zim-
mern also take an unfavourable view of these hymns, but unjustly.
They are not of course monotheistic ; other gods are mentioned
besides that one who is invoked as the highest. True; but such
gods only appear as mediators, and these hymns were written long
before Nebuchadrezzar. Zimmern himself admits the Biblical turn

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 279
of the phraseology in parts of the Chaldaean hymns. Comp. my com
mentary on Pss. lxxxvi. and cxlv., which, even if of post-Exile origin,
may yet carry on a movement begun during the Exile. That the
Chaldaean hymns were sometimes used as spells, need not surprise us ;
so too were the Vedic hymns and even the Hebrew psalms (the
shimmush t'hillim describes the various magic uses of the latter).
Note u, p. 268.
Prof. Francis Brown, Presbyterian Review, Jan. 1888, p. 85 ; cf.
Ragozin, Story of Chaldaa, pp. 333, 334. There is a suggestive
Assyrian word for prayer — 'ikribu, 'a drawing near' (31p).
Note t, p. 269.
See the India House Inscription, especially the passages quoted
by Sayce; Hibbert Lectures, p. 97, with whom Tiele agrees, Bab. -ass.
Gesch., p. 553. The same pure note, however, is struck in the words
of that Assyrian prefect who, about 707, attempted to introduce
into Assyria the worship of Nabu as the highest if not the only god —
' Place thy confidence in Nabu, and thou wilt give it to no other
god' (Tiele, Bab.-ass. Gesch., pp. 207, 212).
Note w, p. 269.
Cyrus, however, did not realize the Second Isaiah's expectation
(see the Cyrus cylinder-inscription). Such liberality as his was from
a prophet's point of view dangerous. Nor did his theism develope
as Isa. xii. 25 may be intended to suggest.
Note x, p. 270.
It is not a tenable view that the early Yahvistic narratives are
independent of the Babylonian. The old view of Sayce, Friedrich
Delitzsch, and Haupt, that they were compiled from cuneiform
sources by a Jewish monotheist during the Exile, is inconsistent
with the surest results of Hexateuchal criticism. It is also unnecessary,
since from the time of Ahaz there were opportunities enough of
communication between Palestine and Babylon. The embassy of
Merodach-Baladan to Hezekiah is well attested (Isa. xxxix., 2 Kings
xx. 13-19), and if Schrader is correct in accepting the fact of the
Babylonian captivity of Manasseh (2 Chron. xxxiii. n-13), this event
too may have facilitated the introduction of Jewish scholars to the
Chaldaean traditions. Budde has well pointed out that this does not
involve bringing down the original Yahvist as late as Ahaz, Hezekiah,
or Manasseh, and Kuenen now thinks that the early Yahvistic

280 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.
narratives received additions from a Babylonian source in the reign
¦of Manasseh or even later [Theol. Tijdschrift, 1884, p. 168; Hexa-
ieuch, p. 248; cf. Budde, Urgeschichte, pp. 515-518). These additions
•of course are thoroughly Hebraized in their religious tendency. The
same remark may be made of the cosmogony in Gen. i. i-ii. 4a. The
Chaldaean myth of Creation was never harmonized with the noble
religion of Nebuchadrezzar ; the Creator was not the younger but the
¦elder Bel, and the story is full of polytheism. The corresponding
Hebrew story, however, is in complete accordance with the purest
prophetic religion. Note y, p. 271.
Nebuchadrezzar — Cyrus — Darius. It would be difficult to find
greater men in the ancient world than these — great, for what they
were in themselves, and not merely for what they were enabled to
•effect. It was Nebuchadrezzar's to reorganize a kingdom which had
been reduced by constant wars with Assyria to a state almost of
desolation. The hero felt this ; he tells us in his inscriptions, not of
his successful wars, but of the honour that he paid to religion and
of the grandeur of his buildings. With regard to Cyrus, the Persians,
the Jews, and the Greeks vie with one another in extolling the nobility
of his character. Noldeke, alone among recent critics [Aufsdtze,
1887), disputes this view, and considers Cyrus to be only a wild
conqueror. But the permanence of the empire which Cyrus founded
and the details of his cylinder-inscription seem to me, as well as to
E. Meyer, to be strongly opposed to such an estimate. This great
conqueror was also, like Nebuchadrezzar, an able organizer, and what
is more, the spring of his energy was a religious enthusiasm, which
shines with a gentler glow in him than in any Semitic conqueror.
Cyrus was a pious Mazdayasnian (this is the secret of his great cha
racter), and being such, it was no effort to him to spare the religious
feelings of his subjects. Whatever be the date of those passages of the
Avesta which commemorate the pious men of all countries, the prin
ciple is not too refined for any of the earlier stages of Mazdeism. Nor
can we give inferior praise to Darius Hystaspis, faithful alike to the
* Great God ' and to his people, eminent alike in war and in peace, and
in his friendly consideration for the religious feelings of his subjects,
the true successor of Cyrus. If Cyrus liberated the Jews, Darius
caused their temple to be rebuilt, and if he also built a temple to
Amen the Egyptian sun-god, we need not question that he justified
this step on religious as well as political grounds. (See Wiedemann,
Gesch. Aegyptens, &c, 1880, p. 239, &c. ; Birch, Egypt, pp. 177, 178.)
It was the Sassanian kings who entered upon the fatal course of
religious exclusivism.

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 281

Note z, p. 271.
So Celsus calls the Persians (Orig. c. Cels. vi. 80). Hyde, one
-of the glories of old Oxford, remarks on the ' peculiar love of God
for the Persian people,' shown especially in His revelation of Christ
to the Magi, and caused by the survival of so large a part of the
primaeval knowledge of God in Persia [Hist, relig. vet. Persarum,
1700, p. 379). In this sentence, however, he overlooks the fact that
the narrative in Matt. ii. 1-12 does honour not less to Babylon than
to Persia. I should add that, according to Hyde, the first lawgiver
of the Persians was Abraham !
Note aa, p. 271.
A popular French writer comes to this conclusion — 'that Judaism
¦essaying in the Achaemenid epoch to speak of a law, a prophet, an
Exodus, and one only God, in the very countries in which Mazdeism
developed, must have found in Mazdeism a powerful helper,' and
adds that we must regard Judaism as a religion 'constamment imita-
trice de la persane' (Bellange, Le judaisme et I' histoire du peuple juif,
1889, pp. 281, 282). This is a manifest exaggeration. We must not
attach too much weight even to really striking coincidences, if the
phenomenon to be illustrated can be sufficiently accounted for in the
natural course of development. I have myself mentioned some such
coincidences, but do not regard all of them as proving the historical
indebtedness either of Israel to Persia or of Persia to Israel. Persian
influence upon Jewish belief was, I admit, most real, and it evidently
increased as time went on (read the Apocalypse from this point of
view, not to mention the Talmudic literature). But during a great
part of the Persian period the relations between Israel in Palestine and
the satraps were not such as to predispose the former to become the
conscious imitator of Persia. Indirectly Persia must have influenced
the Jews throughout her vast empire, but directly not so much the
Jews in Palestine as the large Israelitish colonies on the east of the
Euphrates and the Tigris, which, however, must have transmitted
the results to the Jews in Palestine. We may thus account for any
Iranian elements which criticism can allow in the historico-legislative
work known as the ' priestly code ' and in the other Hebrew books
presumably of the Persian period. And may not this be the real
meaning or implication of the Talmudic saying, ' The angels came
up with the Jews from Babylon'? At any rate the mention of
' Babylon ' does not forbid us to think likewise of the vast spirit-
world of Iran (for even if the Iranian belief in spirits be to some
extent historically connected with the Babylonian, it came before the

282 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF lect.

Jews as an independent doctrine). It is true that the Babylonian
God Marduk is described as the ' lord of the angel-hosts of heaven
and earth ' (Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, p. 99), and this is no isolated
expression. But how much more stress is laid in the later Avesta on
the fravashis (to whom we shall return) by whose countless and irre
sistible hosts Ahura Mazda Himself is in some sense helped, and
through whose brightness He maintains the sky [Farvardin Vast,
§ 1) ! Whether the Satan-belief in Job, or even in Chronicles, is
materially affected by Iranian doctrine, is a matter for argument.
But who can fail to see that the Satan of the Book of Revelation is
the fellow of Ahriman ? Later Jews even adopted the name Ahriman
in the corrupt form of Armilos ¦ (see Isaiah, ii. 218) for that N5W>
/car' egoxyv who was to be the last and greatest oppressor of the faithful,
and a synonym of Ahriman (Aeshma-deva, ' the raving fiend ') in the
form of Asmodai. And whether or no Lagarde's particular explana
tion of Purim be correct, it is very probable that the festival has really
a Persian origin [Encycl. Brit., art. ' Esther '). Several other traces
of direct or indirect Persian influence will be pointed out later. On
these questions compare, besides commentators on the Avesta,
Spiegel, Eranische Alterthumskunde, Bd. ii. (1873) ; Darmesteter,
Ormazd et Ahriman (1877) ; Kuenen, Religion of Israel, ii. 156,
iii. 32-34 ; Ewald, Old and New Test. Theology, pp. 72-78 ; Gratz,
Gesch. der Juden, ii. 2, pp. 409-419 ; Goldziher, Hebrew Mythology,
pp. 326-329 ; Kohut, ' The Zendavesta and Gen. i.-xi.,' Jewish
Quarterly Review, April 1890 (Kohut's articles are learned but
somewhat uncritical), his Antiparsische Ausspriiche im Deuterojesaias,
Morgenland. Zeitschr., part xxx., and his Ueb. d. jiid. Angelologie u.
Demonologie in ihrer Abhangigkeit vom Parsismus ; Fuller, On Angel-
ology, &c. [Speaker's Comm. on O. T. vi. 348, &c, and On Apocrypha^
i. 171 &c); C. de Harlez, Proc. of Soc. of Bibl. Archceology, ix. 368 ;
Cheyne,Job and Solomon, pp. 79, 80; Lagarde, Purim, &c. (1887).
Note bb, p. 271.
An uncritical reader of the Avesta may question the spirituality of
the God of Zoroastrianism, just as an uncritical reader of the Bible
may question the spirituality of the God of the Bible. Dr. Murray
Mitchell, formerly of Bombay, denies that Ahura Mazda is a purely
spiritual being ( The Zendavesta, &c, Rel. Tract Soc, p. 13). M. de
Harlez however remarks, ' Tel qu'il parait generalement dans l'Avesta,
il est le Dieu unique, spirituel, tout puissant, omniscient, createur ; ses
caracteres principaux sont Pactivit^, l'intelligence, lasaintet£' (Introd.
to Avesta, p. lxxviii.). Prof. De la Saussaye more cautiously affirms,
1 As a Persian name, however, Ahriman becomes ppTinX, corresponding to
I'pi.irij Sanhedrin, 39a.

VI. THE PSALTER NOT BORROWED. 283
'No people ever came nearer to monotheism than the Persians/
' (Ahura Mazda) was not only the highest god ; he has some [? the
principal] features which belong to the one God' [Lehrbuch der
Religionsgeschichte, ii. 32). These differences of statement are
caused by the inconsistencies of the Avesta, which are greater even
than those of the Bible. The resemblance of Ahura to the Jehovah
of the most advanced Hebrew writers is greatest in the Gathas, in
which dualism is not so prominent as in the Vendidad, while poly
theism which is prominent in the rest of the Avesta is here almost if
not altogether absent. From the parallelism between Ahura and
Jehovah the veteran Zend scholar Spiegel infers that the conception
of the former (=Sanskr. Asura, 'he who is') has been influenced by
that of Yahveh [Eran. Alt. ii. 26). Biblical criticism, however, in its
present advanced stage negatives this, and in his latest essay, though he
still dwells much on foreign influences on Iranian ideas, Spiegel admits
that ' in the principal points the Iranian ideas came forth of them
selves from the ancient Aryan ideas' [Le Muskon, Nov. 1887, p. 623).
Certainly the title or name Ahura, (which means (1) spirit, (2) God,
(3) lord, divine or human) stands in no historical relation either to
Yahveh or to Adonai. Nor can a prophet like Zarathustra, which
ever of the current dates we accept, have borrowed a name for God
from a people so inconspicuous and religiously so backward as the
pre-Exile Israelites. Note cc, p. 272.
Lagarde, Gott. gel. Anzeigen, 1870, p. 1551, &c. ; Purim, 1887,
p. 44 ; D'Eichthal, Mem. sur le texte primitif du ier recit de la Crea
tion, 1875, pp. 26-31. But though Dr. Caland has improved the
statement of the case for an Iranian original of Gen. i.-ii. 4a [Theol.
Tijdschrift, March 1889), can it be denied that the affinities of this
document are primarily with the Babylonian cosmogonies in Berosus
and in G. Smith's tablets? See my art. ' Cosmogony,' Encyc. Brit.,
1876. Note dd, p. 272.
The Sh'ma and the blessing TIN "IXV were to be said at dawn in
the temple (see Gratz, Geschichte, ii. 2, p. 419). This was not im
probably suggested by the Zoroastrian usage of praying at daybreak,
which is of course much more ancient than the forms of prayer given
in the Khorda Avesta. We shall return to the subject in connexion
with the Essenes. Note ee, p. 272.
A Persian origin is claimed for the mysticism of the psalms
by Reville, Revue des deux mondes, 1 mars 1872, and by Gustave

284 THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF THE PSALTER, lect. vi.
d'Eichthal, Mhnoire sur le texte primitif &c. (1875), p. 55 ; a Baby
lonian, as it seems, by Goldziher, Hebrew Mythology, pp. 318, 319.
Note ff, p. 272.
The adoption of prophetic language by the psalmists can be
paralleled from the Gathas. It was Zarathustra's belief that through
prayer the right words were revealed to him for the liturgical chants
(Yasna, xxviii. 7, xlviii. 8). The Iranian poet-prophet, however, lays
more stress upon this than the Hebrew psalmists. He has to form
or re-form a Church ; the psalmists do but take up the work begun
by prophets and scribes. Zarathustra's confident belief that his
hymns were in some not altogether unspiritual sense revealed to him
helped to produce the later practice of invoking the sacred ' Gathas, '
which acquired (see p. 396) a sacrificial character. In course of time
even the truly spiritual Hebrew psalms were converted into spells
.(' carmina '). This was in the sad period of Jewish ignorance, and
had no official sanction. But the predictive character of the psalms
was no doubt recognized by high authority, and at the rise of Chris
tianity was practically unquestioned. In Matt. xiii. 35 (xxvii. 35)
' psalmist '=' prophet; ' see also Tertullian, Resurr. Carnis, c. 20,
and cf. Neubauer, Studia Biblica, ii. 7, 8. Compare also the growth
of the belief in the inspiration of the Vedic hymns (Max Miiller,
Hibbert Lectures, p. 137; Muir, Ancient Sanskrit Texts, iii. 232-
238).

PART II.
WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER f
Let us now with fitting reverence approach the religious ideas
of these children of the prophets, or, in other words, the
theology of the Psalter — a phrase which I only use on the
express condition that we do not confound the religious kernel
with its theological integument. Accurate and systematic
thinking is no characteristic of the ancient Semites, and least
of all of the psalmists. But though we may decline to regard
Korah or Asaph any more than Zarathustra as a scientific
theologian, we may well take the holy psalmists as guides
in religion, and long to repeat some at least of those deep
experiences which psalm-theology embodies. No man can
communicate these to another, but it is possible to help
one's neighbour by showing him where they are most vividly
described. ' What men most of all need,' says Hengstenberg,
' is that the blanched image of God should again be freshened
up in them. The more closely we connect ourselves with the
psalms, the more will God cease to be to us a shadowy form
which can neither hear, nor help, nor judge us, and to which
we can present no supplication.' l
Who, then, is the God of the Psalter, regarding the book
in the light of the preceding researches ? Mistaken inferences
have often been drawn from its anthropomorphisms. From
the time of the first Deists onwards it has been asserted that
the religion of the psalmists was still half-barbarous. And
doubtless the expressions referred to are akin to those which
anthropology indicates as characteristic of savage tribes.
Rightly viewed, however, they are no proof of barbarism, but
rather of Israel's complete emergence from barbarism. The
freedom with which the psalmists use anthropomorphic, or
1 Quoted in Ker, The Psalms in History and Biography, p. 188.

286 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect.
let us say at once mythic expressions, is a consequence of the
sense of religious security which animates them. They have
no expectation of being taken literally ; they know that each
member of the Church has the key to their meaning. Israel
in Babylon has put away its childish religion, but retains a
childlike love of mythic phrases." Now that these have been
emptied of their superstition they may do go@d service as
religious symbols. And why should they not ? Can we find
better ones ourselves ? How vivid they are ! How near they
bring God to the^heart, and God's children in all ages and of
all religions to each other ! From the earliest psalm — the
epic of the Davidic family (the 18th) — to that most striking,
theologically, of the latest psalms (the 139th), how ineffaceable
are the traces of the mythic element ! What was it that made
the psalms, and the Scriptures in general, the classics of the
Jewish Church ? The inspiration of their authors ? Yes,
partly, but also this, that, as the Talmud says of the Torah,
they spoke ' the tongue of the children of men.' b
Thy wisdom plays with us as with a child ;
Who playing learns his Father, loves him well.
But shall we, in our reaction against the Deists, praise all
the mythic symbols that we find, and set them down as
equally classical in the theology of the psalms ? Surely not.
Herder did not live in vain ; the key which ancient Israel
possessed has been recovered by Christian scholarship. The
Scriptures are the annals of a society more familiar with the
extremes of woe than any other. Illusions born of sorrow
impaired the purity of the idea of God. Instead of growing
in all points into God's likeness, the psalmists did sometimes
as it were transform God into their own.
The first express criticism of a psalmist's idea of God
proceeded from John Hyrcanus. With reference to the
passage, ' Awake, why sleepest thou, Jehovah ' (Ps. xliv. 24),
he said, ' Doth God then sleep ? Hath not the Scripture
said, Behold, the keeper of Israel neither slumbereth nor
sleepeth?' — and he forbade the liturgical recitation of those
too thrilling, too passionate words.1 But even before his
time the frequent change of Yahveh (Jehovah) into Elohim
1 Sota, 48a (cf. iii. p. 8).

VI. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? 287

in the Levitical psalms (see above, pp. 90, 101), and notice a
similar phenomenon in Prov. xxx. 5, cf. Ps. xviii. 31, and in
Hab. iii. 3, cf. Deut. xxxiii. 2), and the fact that the writers
of certain books ° (Job, Koheleth, Esther, Daniel) almost or
altogether avoid the word ' Jehovah,' prove the sense of the
inadequacy of any personal name for Him who is ' far above
•every name that is named.' Possibly, too, the same feeling
dictated that obscure question of Agur, who will not even
•call God ' Elohim ' (he prefers ' Qedoshim,' i.e. ' the All-
Holy '), and asks, ' What is his name, and what is his son's
name, if thou knowest ? ' (Prov. xxx. 4). I inquire now,
Must we not partly sympathize with Hyrcanus and his pre
decessors ? The agonized cry, ' Why sleepest thou,' can of
course be excused, not indeed on the ground of a ' sacred
elpcovsla,' but of a too limited conception of God ; and yet
to Christian readers it needs correction in the spirit of ' Not
as I will, but as thou wilt.' d The theory which underlies the
prayers of the Psalter is, that men should pour out their whole
complaint to Jehovah (Ps. cxiii. 3, cf. Ixii. 9), but should not rest
content till they have emerged from the ' straits ' of anguish
into the 'wealthy place' of full trust in God (Ps. cxviii. 5).
Then they can ' look out ' (Ps. v. 4) in the full assurance of
faith, and the divine Spirit conveys to them an answer of
peace (Ps. Ixxxv. 9). This theory has the force of a law, and
¦on the rare occasions when (as in Pss. xliv. and lxxxviii.) it
is broken, the devout worshipper cannot but feel with Hyrcanus
that criticism and correction are called for — that criticism
and correction which would have been silently applied by the
writer himself, had he completed his psalm in a more trustful
spirit.e Next, with regard to the early dissatisfaction with
the name ' Jehovah.' Though declining to regard this name
as a mere badge of particularism, inconsistent with a Catholic
ideal of the Church, one may heartily admit that it should
only be used by those who habitually interpret it in the spirit
of the Second Isaiah and the 102nd psalm/
Perhaps this may appear to some to require explanation.
It is our duty to enter into the feelings of those who in
certain passages changed ' Yahveh ' (Jehovah) into ' Elohim '
(God), and of those who afterwards by degrees substituted
" Adonai ' (the Lord) for ' Yahveh.' Considering the probable

288 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect..
mythic origin of the name ' Yahveh,' and the difficulty and
importance of holding up the standard of spiritual mono
theism, the good effects of these measures (upon the latter
of which I must hope to speak at length elsewhere) g might
be fairly held to preponderate over the evil.1 I ask, however,
Do these considerations retain their force, and is it well, now
that circumstances have changed, to restrict ourselves to-
' God ' and to ' Lord ' in addressing Him in whom we ' live
and move and have our being ' ?
Let me not be thought to depreciate the title ' Lord '
which we have received from the later Jewish Church. To a
thoughtful believer it suggests much more than it expresses, for
with the true God sovereign power cannot be dissociated
from wisdom and love. The Zoroastrian Church felt this
when it said,2 ' We worship Him for His sovereign power and
His greatness, beneficent (as they are),' and again, ' We wor
ship Him under His name as Lord, to Mazda dear, the most
beneficent (of names).' And the Jewish Church expresses
the same idea in the words, ' I say (i.e. confess) unto Jehovah,
Thou art Adonai ; my welfare is nought without Thee ' (Ps. xvi.
2), i.e. to be Thy servant is perfect happiness. We cannot
indeed identify the feeling with which the restored exiles
pronounced the name Adonai with that with which the
Christian Church remembers that it was 'bought (by the
Lord Jesus) with a price ; ' and yet there is a real affinity
between the cases. The virgin daughter of Babylon has
none to redeem her, but ' as for our Goel,' cries the prophet,
' Jehovah Sabaoth is his name ' (Isa. xlvii. 4). To be the
servant of such a Lord was equivalent to being His son
(Mai. iii. 17) ; only the humility of the Jewish Church was
content with the lower title. All this may be granted, and
yet from a Western point of view it may be inexpedient to-
use the term ' Lord ' too constantly. To Gentile Christians
those words of St. Paul have an especial force, ' Ye did not
receive the spirit of bondage (leading) back unto fear, but the
Spirit of adoption, wherein we cry, Abba, Father ' (Rom.
viii. 15). The conception of God as Lord is therefore not to
1 Upon the evil effects, see Ewald, History, v. 199.
2 Oxford Zendavesta, iii. 286. In the Gathas Mazda (omniscient) seems to be
preferred to Ahura (Lord). See note •, p. 435.

vi. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? 289

be the fundamental one in our religion. Philo, too, from his
Greek point of view, remarks that the name Kvpios does not
of itself convey more than the idea of supreme authority and
power, which does not satisfy all the legitimate cravings of
the religious nature.11 These hints however produced no effect
on too many Western theologians, by whom the idea of the
divine Lordship was so grasped as to obscure the proportions
of truth, and to provoke an irreligious reaction.1 That sad
time is nearly over, but we still need all available helps
in deepening our conception of God, and one of these is
the intelligent use of the hallowed name Jehovah. I have
nothing to do here with the primitive meaning of the word
Yahveh j (as the Israelites doubtless pronounced it). The
distance between Yahveh the storm-god and Yahveh the
Holy One of Israel is as great as that between the less
developed sky-gods of the Veda and the Ahura Mazda of the
Avesta.1 The name Jehovah is a relatively complete symbol
of truth, summing up all the ideas and intuitions of the
Jewish Church respecting its God. It signifies not only (in
Palestine) the Eternal and (in Alexandria) the Self-existent,
but still more the God who in His lovingkindness stepped
out of His unchangeable repose, and revealed Himself to
men ; it is in fact the seal of a covenant made with Israel
for the sake of humanity, ' ordered,' as a poet says, ' in all
things, and sure' (2 Sam. xxiii. 5). And this is why so
much is said about the name of Jehovah from the earliest to
the latest psalms. The writers do not indeed mean primarily
the word ' Jehovah,' but that ' wonderful ' name (Judg. xiii. 18),
which represents at once the known and the unknown, the
actual and the possible manifestations of the divine nature.
They tell us respecting this name, sometimes that it is ' holy
and reverend ' (cxi. 9, cf. xcix. 3), sometimes that it is ' good '
(liv. 8) and ' pleasant ' (exxxv. 3), and that God's saints
'love' it (v. 12, lxix. 37). Never do they dream that it can
be shut up in a single word or formula. The doctrine of the
divine namelessness may be specially Alexandrine,k but it is
not contrary to the spirit of the religion of Palestine, for it
presupposes, not at all the unreality, but merely the imperfec-
1 The ' holy ' deity Varuna (see p. 357) might have developed into Ahura
Mazda. Such however was not the actual course of history. U

290 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect.
tion of the believer's knowledge of God. As a Hebrew poet
who avoids the name Jehovah says,
Lo, these are the ends of his ways ;
But what a mere murmur we hear,
And the roar of his great strength who knows ? '
Still a fervent Theist cannot wholly dispense with a name
for the Being to whom he prays. A name is a creed in a
nutshell ; by addressing God as Jehovah the Jewish Church
'held fast the confession' of its faith. Imperfect as every
human name for God must be, the psalmists will not, cannot
give up the covenant-name. They love to pronounce it, not
'with bated breath and whispering humbleness ' m — for that
were heathenish — nor yet with the light-hearted freedom
of antiquity, but with the manly reverence due to a spiritual
Deity. And why should not we too pronounce it in
this spirit, and confess that we have met together to-day to
worship Jehovah ? Why should we not give this practical
expression to the truth expressed in John iv. 22 — that 'salva
tion is of the Jews,' in fact, that our religion has a history,
and a right noble one ? More especially in reading the
psalms, why should we not substitute, either orally or men
tally, the old covenant-name for that conventional symbol
(' the Lord '), which, even in Moslem theology,2 is but an
ismu sifah or attribute, not the ' exalted name ' itself ?
Philosophy can offer no objection to this. It is of the
nature-gods and their changing names that our own
philosophic historian of religion says that 'they vanish by
one thought like the mist of the morning.'3 Christian
orthodoxy is equally unaggrieved. The 'Jehovah' of pro
phetic religion represents to some extent the truths summed
up in the Nicene doctrine of the Father and the Son, and
praying to Jehovah may be taken as an expression of the
belief that the Father and the Son are one." Nor can a
really sound Jewish theology object, if at least I am right in
preferring the warm and living practical theology of the
Book of Job to the cold, sceptical philosophy of Ecclesiastes.
1 Job xxvi. 14 in Gilbert's version (1886), which seeks to reproduce the
original rhythm.
2 See Hughes, Dictionary of Islam, pp. 141, 142.
s Max Miiller, Hibbert Lectures, p. 234.

VI. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER?

291

The author of the latter refuses to name God, but the pro
found thinker who has sketched the phases of his inner
history in Job comes back to the name ' Jehovah,' and the
philosophic singer of Ps. cxxxix. has never abandoned it.
One of those noble writers who refutes the saying that there
is no nature-poetry in the Old Testament, expressly adopts
the compound title ' Yahveh AdSnenu ' (Jehovah our Lord)
to describe the God of all the families of the earth (Ps. viii. 2).
Yes ; the Jehovah of the psalms is ' the God ' ( 1 Kings xviii.
39), in the full sense of the word, as the self-revealer, the just
but loving Father," not only of Israel but of the world, not
only of Hezekiah and Josiah but of Nebuchadrezzar and (if I
may venture to say so) the foreign king of Pss. xlv. and Ixxii.
True, the universal love of God (that is, His will that all
nations should be brought by persuasion into His flock) was
not understood by all, nor adequately realized by any of the
psalmists. Essential as this characteristic is to a thoroughly
satisfactory conception of Jehovah, it was beyond the mental
range of some religious poets. Turn to the 18th psalm,
written perhaps in Josiah's reign, while as yet there were but
a few hearty converts to the spiritual religion of Deutero
nomy. The writer has no doubt a high moral conception
of the Deity [vv. 21-32), and as a consequence believes in
monotheism. He pictures with delight the great future
Davidic empire of the world in which he believes as if it were
present. But how is this empire won ? Listen to the words
of the imaginary David : —
I pursued mine enemies and overtook them,
And turned not again till I had consumed them [v. 38) ;
They cried, but there was none to save,
Unto Jehovah, but he answered them not [v. 42) ;
Thou didst set me to be head of the nations,
People whom I knew not served me.
As soon as they heard, they were obsequious unto me ;
Aliens came cringing unto me [vv. 44, 45).
Now contrast the brief recast of this section in a book
which powerfully impressed many of the psalmists — the
Second Isaiah. The prophet is speaking of David, and
alludes to this psalm : ' Behold, for a witness to the peoples
I appointed him, a ruler and commander of the peoples.

292 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? LECT.
Behold, people that thou knowest not 'shalt thou call, and
people that have not known thee shall run unto thee, because
of Jehovah thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel, inas
much as he hath glorified thee ' (Isa. lv. 4, 5). What does
the poet-prophet mean ? This — that David's appointed work
of bringing together the peoples into a single righteous king
dom could only be effected by a witness or preacher of the
truth, and that this witness or preacher was to be Jehovah's
Servant, the regenerate people of Israel. Need I repeat that
well-known passage (Isa. xiii. 1-4) in which the same truth
is so nobly set forth ? But it is not only" here that we find it.
The Psalter itself contains recognitions enough of Israel's
missionary function. Is it not clearly implied in Ps. xxii., in
which the deliverance of the sufferer is brought into such
close connexion with the setting up of God's kingdom in the
world ? There are also other psalms, of less massive ore, but
equally precious as the lyric utterances of the newly organized
Church. Israel, as it would seem from these,1 has but to
- rehearse God's glory among the nations,' to call forth they-
liveliest joy at having Jehovah for their king, somewhat as
St. Augustine longed to recite the psalms in all lands to
subdue the pride of the human race. The force of truth,
then, is the motive relied upon for the spiritual subjugation
of the world. And this is equally implied in Pss. lxv. and
lxvii. (of the Persian age), the second of which might be
correctly headed, ' Veni, redemptor gentium ! ' They are the
psalms which contain these fine verses : —
Let the peoples rejoice and shout for joy :
Because thou wilt judge the nations rightly,
And wilt guide the peoples upon earth (Ps. lxvii. 5).
O thou that hearest prayer,
Unto thee may all flesh come (Ps. lxv. 3).
Already had the same noble thought been expressed by Zara
thustra, and a later writer in the Avesta (but not later pro
bably than our psalmist) had declared in the spirit of Mai.
i. 1 1 that there were holy men in all countries.? But alas !
this great hope did not always shine thus brightly, and
Persia herself is responsible for its obscuration among the Jews.
Under the second and third Artaxerxes (reactionary kings,
1 See Pss. xcvi. 3, 4, 13, xcvii. 1, 2, xcviii. 9, xcix. 1-3, ,_. 1, xlvii. 2, 3, 10.

vi. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? 293
who compromised the purity of Mazda-worship) Israel seemed
almost crushed by oppression ; again and again he speaks as
if his very name will soon be blotted out. He knows indeed
that he can call himself the great Jehovah's servant (Ixxxix.
51), but he takes no delight in recalling the Second Isaiah's
noble promise. His ideal has been ' not to fail or be dis
couraged till he shall have set ' true religion ' in the earth '
(Isa. xiii. 4). His present practice is to complain, ' How
many are the days of thy servant ? when wilt thou execute
judgment on my persecutors ? ' (cxix. 84, cf. Ixxxix. 46, 48).
He thinks, too often at least, not of the new but of the old
ideal, of an ever-fortunate king, and shattered enemies.
And even later than this, in spite of the teachings of Provi
dence, the same worn-out ideal of Josiah's reign attracted
the prophetic author of the 2nd psalm (see vv. 8, 9).
The two forms of representation are obviously contradic
tory. The Church is in a period of transition. The old
ideal of the servant of Jehovah was that of the warlike king,
the new is that of the teaching prophet. The Church cannot
all at once reject the old language, and sometimes falls into
vehement expressions which warn us that the Christ has yet
to come. Still the contradiction is not as complete as it may
seem. If the psalmists could theorize on the. state of the
non-Jewish world, they would probably say that it was com
posed of two classes — those who were ' forgetful of God '
{Ps. ix. i8),q and those who, as the Second Isaiah said, were
* waiting for his law' (Isa. xiii. 4, comp. li. 5). That the
former should be most in the minds of the psalmists, is but
natural. They were the larger class, and were more dan
gerous than words could describe. In spite of the nobler
elements in Persian religion, there was abundant superstition
to counterbalance these, and the nations more immediately in
contact with Palestine were immoral polytheists. The Jews
honestly believed that the deposit of true religion was with
them, and that to crush Israel was equivalent to the darken
ing of the world. It is not therefore a mere grasping national
ism which leads so many of the psalmists to identify the
righteous with Israel and the unrighteous with the Gentiles.1
1 See my note on Ps. iii. 8, and comp. St. Paul in Gal. ii. 8, ' We being Jews
by nature and not o^o/>tw\o1 of the nations.'

294 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect.
As Dr. Drummond says,1 ' the actual coincidences between
the presumed election of God and the ethical appearances
of the world,' go far to account for such a mental attitude.
Similar phenomena moreover are not wanting in the Gathas
of Zarathustra, whose vehemence towards the members of
the Daeva-party does not prevent him from praying for
their conversion.2
Still the question must arise within us, and may with
unfeigned reverence for the psalmists be uttered, Are these
doomed nations wholly responsible for their ungodliness ? r
What friend has warned them of their danger, and adjured
them to feel after God if haply they may find him ? To
Israel of old Jehovah sent 'all his servants the prophets,
rising up early and sending them ' (Jer. xxv. 4), filling up a
long day, like the householder in the parable, with calling his
labourers. But where have been the prophets to the
heathen ? A call has indeed been sent to the prophet-
people. But what has been its reception ? Something no
doubt has been done. A profession of God's unity has been
made, and a nation has been built up on what may with
some truth be called a theocratic basis. This is at once a
claim and a prophecy of gigantic magnitude. In addition to
this, the glory of the true God, that is, His wonderful guidance
of His people Israel, has to some extent been ' rehearsed ' as
the psalmist bade, ' among the nations ' (Ps. xcvi. 3). So much
we cannot help assuming, if we would not reduce a statement
of frequent occurrence in the Psalter to a mere barren
formula. And I think that the assumption is to some extent
confirmed by two Old Testament documents.
The first is a short discourse complete in itself (Isa. lvi.
1-8), directed against the Jewish pride of race, and although
imbedded in the Babylonian Isaiah, most probably composed
in the legalistic age of Nehemiah. It refers apparently to
certain foreign converts and (Israelitish) eunuchs at Babylon
who desired to join the community at Jerusalem, but feared
an unfriendly reception.3 The second is the exquisite Book
of Jonah, which, though seemingly a pre-Exile history, is
1 Philo Judaus, i. 208.
2 See, in the Oxf. Zendavesta, Yasna xxxiii. 2, liii. 5 (cf. Mills' commentary).
3 See my art. ' Isaiah,' Encyc. Brit. ; and cf. art. in Expositor, Feb. 189 1.

295

vi. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER?
really a sermon to the next generation after Ezra.3 The
author belongs to that freer and more catholic school, which
protested against a too legalistic spirit, and he fully recog
nizes (see Jonah iv. 2) that the doctrine of Joel ii. 12 applies
not merely to Israel but to all nations. He is aware too
that Israel (typified by Jonah 'the dove') cannot evade
its missionary duty, and that its preaching should be alike
of mercy and of justice. I do not indeed think that the
Israelites can often have secured an audience for their
preaching in the Persian period. It is but in a figure that
Jonah penetrated to the court of the Assyrian king, and a
psalmist can only declare that he (i.e. Israel) would gladly
speak of God's admonitions before kings, if he might be
visited with a fresh salvation (Ps. cxix. 41-46), while another,
in his revulsion against heathen ungodliness, would rather be
the humblest of the guests of Jehovah than dwell in heathen
dom (Ps. lxxxiv. II). Once, and only once, do we find a
reference to proselytes in the psalms of this period. ' Ye
that fear Jehovah, praise him ' (Ps. xxii. 24) is an expression
which certainly includes the spiritual as well as the natural
seed of Israel (see note on Ps. cxv. 1 2). But how few prose
lytes can there have been when Ps. xxii. was indited amidst
the bitter taunts of Sanballat ! Hence it is a part of a con
temporary poet's plea for God's help in the rebuilding of the
walls of Jerusalem that this great mercy to ' destitute ' Israel
will attract the nations to fear Jehovah's name (Ps. cii. 16-
18). So then, without any fault of Israel, the mission of the
Servant of Jehovah is still unfulfilled.1 This cannot justify
the harsh expressions of the psalmists, but it does help to
account for them. Israel could neither love the heathen nor
be a missionary to them so long as they imperilled its very
existence. A persuasive presentation of true religion only
became possible in the Hellenistic age. It was the ' heaven
sent reconciler and pacificator of the world ' (such was Alex
ander's view of his function •) who turned the heart of the
Jew to the Gentile, and the heart of the Gentile to the Jew.
We have seen how natural it was at this period that the Jews
should dream of an approaching union of nations. Even
1 Stanley, Jewish Church, iii. 213 (cf. Plutarch, Alex. Fort. i. 6).

296 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect.
the somewhat unprogressive son of Sirach makes wisdom
personified declare,
In the waves of the sea, and in all the earth,
And in every people and nation, I got a possession.
(Ecclus. xxiv. 6.)
And still more definite are the visions of the psalmists. It
is in psalms not improbably of the early Greek period that
we find those pure expressions of catholicity — Ps. lxxxvi. 5,
9, 10, and above all Ps. Ixxxvii., and if I may venture to
assume no improbable hypothesis, the admission of a righ
teous foreign king among the number of the friends of Jeho
vah (Pss. xlv. and Ixxii.).
Turn lastly to the Book of Daniel and to the psalms
which are probably almost contemporary with that wonderful
book. The former, though written in the heat of the Macca
baean struggle, is not without signs, at any rate in the pictures
of Nebuchadrezzar and Darius, of a hopeful disposition
towards non-Israelites. In the latter it must of course be
admitted that violent expressions are not wanting. We may
excuse them as modern Rabbis excuse the fierce self-
isolation of the Jews of a later age,u and we can add that
neither Syrian nor Roman oppression could extinguish the
spirit of friendliness, not indeed towards polytheism, but
towards polytheists.1 Already we can say that there is a
wonderful ' duality ' in Judaism, exclusiveness and liberality
coexisting in the same church and people — a phenomenon
which constantly strikes us in later history. It is in a Mac
cabaean psalm that the object of Israel's restored life is thus
defined, — I shall not die, but live,
And tell out the works of Jehovah v (Ps. cxviii. 1 7) ;
and that ' those that fear Jehovah ' are called upon to con
fess Jehovah's lovingkindness and to continue to put their
trust in him (Ps. cxv. 1 1, cxviii. 4), which suggests that
an influx of proselytes had taken place in the early Greek
period (see on Ps. Ixxxvii.) ; while in another passage Jeho
vah is described as ' righteous in all his ways, and loving
[(piXdvdpooiros) in all his works' (Ps. cxlv. 17, cf. 8, 9). And
1 Cf. Joel, Blicke in die Religionsgeschichte, i. (1880), p. vi.

vi. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? 297
the recorded facts of history fully bear out the natural
inferences from these passages. Think of the Maccabees
allying themselves with Rome and Sparta ] (some historical
basis there must surely be for the precise narratives in
1 Mace, viii., xii.), and above all of the great effort to reconcile
Judaism with the highest ethnic philosophy which opens so
important a chapter in Jewish history.

Note a, p. 286.
(Israel's spiritual change in Babylon.) I do not deny that the old
heathenish tendencies may for a time have reappeared among the
restored exiles (see Isa. lxv. 3-5, 11, and cf. Neh. vi. 17-19). But they
must have been checked and extinguished by the vigour of the
reformers. — For 'mythic' conservative theologians may substitute
'metaphorical;' cf. Jeremy Taylor, Ductor Dubitantium, p. 256. I
have defended the accuracy of the former phrase in Expositor,
1888 (1), p. 60, &c. Note b, p. 286.
Berachoth, 31b. Hermann Schultz in 1869 described the anthro
pomorphic passages of the O. T. as ' the noblest part of its utterances
upon God ' [Alttest. Theologie, ed. 1, i. 276). The view of the divine
nature which they presuppose is certainly nobler than that of more
abstract forms of Theism, and it is far more vividly represented by
these popular expressions than it could be by a mere list of divine
attributes. Even ' Onkelos,' who is sometimes said to have objected
to anthropomorphism on principle, leaves expressions like the ' eye '
and the ' hand ' of God unaltered. No theological theorizing could
extinguish the anthropomorphic tendency. Read the fine ' Hymn of
Glory,' which closes the daily prayerbook of the Synagogue (Vallen-
tine's ed., pp. 344-345). Note c, p. 287.
mrv only occurs twice in in the speeches of Job and his friends
(Job xii. 9, xxviii. 28). We must remember that these monuments
¦of Jewish wisdom were written during the Exile, and represent the
' thoughts of many hearts ' at a time when God seemed to have cast
off His people, and consequently, according to an old popular belief,
' it was forbidden to make mention of the name of Jehovah ' (Am.
vi. 10). The poet himself however had fought his way to a recon-
1 Note the phrase a$eXtp6Tt)Ta, Kai <pi\iav avavedaaaSai, 1 Mace. xii. 10.

298 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect.
ciling faith, and in token of this employs the much-loved name, not
only in the prose narrative (if that be his work), but twice in the
speeches. The author of Koheleth is less happy in his Theism. He
has lost the sense of the love of God ; how then should he venture
to use His name ? The Book of Esther is a greater puzzle. Is it
from reverence, or because the book was originally meant merely
for recreation, that the writer avoids even the use of DWN ? (Cf.
my art. 'Esther,' Encycl. Britannica.) In this extreme reserve he-
reminds us of the author of i Maccabees, who out of pure reverence
suppresses all divine names, substituting either ' heaven ' or a simple
pronoun. In Canticles we have a popular cantata, brought into its
present shape perhaps after the Exile. We need not therefore be
surprised that the name nirT1 has not been allowed to enter; we do
however find n*rnrv?B> ' a divinely sent flame ' (Cant. viii. 6). Partly
reverence, partly a sense of dramatic propriety, will account for the
fact that the sacred name occurs but seven times in Daniel, and that
in a single chapter (Dan. ix.). It may be added that the compiler
of Chronicles, though he frequently uses niiT1, shows a tendency to
prefer DWK (cf. 2 Chron. x. 15 with 1 Kings xii. 15 ; for other pas
sages, see Driver, Sunday School Lessons, 1887, p. 82 note).
Note a, p. 287.
We must not, with some eminent churchmen, explain Ps. xliv.
and Job ii. as specimens of irony. The ' holy men ' who ' speak as
if God were hard and unjust upon them ' do not ' all the while feel
the fullest and most penetrating conviction of His goodness,' as a
writer quoted with approval by Dr. Hannah [Bampton Lectures, 1863,
p. 313) supposes. The author of Ps. xxii. may no doubt have had
such a conviction (see vv. 22-32), but Ps. xliv. contains nothing to
justify the hypothesis. Is not the striking Church-hymn, 'Come,
Lord, and tarry not,' also somewhat too impatient in tone?
Note e, p. 287.
Of course, however, we cannot account in this way for all the
cases of questionable anthropomorphism in the Psalms.
Note f, p. 287.
See note on Ps. cii. 26-28. That there are other instructive
names of God in the Psalter, is not denied. We have, e.g., Shaddai,
Elyon, El Elyon, Yahve Elyon, Yahve Cebaoth, Adonai Yahve,
Yahve Elohim, and even El Elohim Yahve (1. 1.), and perhaps we
may add Qadosh (xxii. 4, xcix. 3, 5). On these names comp.

VI. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? 299
Schultz, Alttestamentliche Theologie, and Ewald, Old and New Test.
Theology, chap. vii. For the later Jewish names of God see Talm.
Bab., Soferim, c. 4, and Dukes, Rabbinische Blumenlese, p. 228.
Note «, p. 288.
The object of this change is to draw away men's minds from any
special divine manifestation to the Deity Himself. In a Phoenician
inscription found at the Piraeus (line 6) we .find ]'1V?J?2 D?K 'the
divinity Baal-Sidon,' where, as Renan has pointed out, 'elim is used
as a singular, precisely as the Hebrew 'elohim [Revue archeologique,
1881, p. 7 ; cf. G. Hoffmann, Ueber einige phonik. Inschriften, 1889,
p. 17, where other instances are given).
That ' Adonai ' is not a shortened form of ' Adonainu,' as Ewald
thought [Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott, § 230 ; or, Old and New Tes
tament Theology, p. 98), seems to be clear from the passages in which
its natural meaning is neither ' our Lord ' nor ' the Lord,' but ' my
Lord' (Pss. xvi. 2, xxxv. 23, and probably xliv. 23, lxxvii. 8, Isa. xlix.
14, Gen. xviii. 3 if in this last passage we should not rather read
"?'1S). 'j'lfit must therefore have been equivalent originally to ^'IN.
' my lords,' which is the ' plural of majesty,' and so an appropriate
title for the great King (cf. 'j'ts: 'my lord'=the king, Ps. ex. i.). To
guide the reader when the heavenly King and not any earthly lord,
however great, is meant, the points give *— , and not »— , in the final
syllable of ' Adonai.' The alternative offered by Lagarde ( Ueber sicht
iiber die Bildung der Nomina, 1889, p. 188) — to consider »J'l&< as an
Aramaism of late introduction, meaning ' lordly ' (like Syr. malkby
' regal ') — seems to require some further explanation. At any rate,
the name or title 'Adonai' has no direct connexion with 'Adonis,'
the termination of which is probably Greek ; cf. BaaXr-ts and
Herodotus's KaoVr-is, i.e. ri^Hi?. We have now to ask, How far can
the substitution of ' Adonai ' for ' Yahveh ' be traced ? From the
fact that the Sept. (the beginnings of which may go back to 250 B.C.)
gives Kvpios for the Hebrew 'Yahveh,' Dalman infers, but with some
hesitation, that this substitution became the usage at some point in
the period between Ezra and Ptolemy Philadelphus. I think that
he does well to hesitate, though he might have given a better reason
for his hesitation than the fact that, according to Origen (on Ps. ii.)
and Jerome (Ep. 136 ad Marcellam), the older copies of the Sept. had
not Kvpios, but the Tetragrammaton itself.1 For surely it is not pro
bable that, if niiV had ever been pronounced in the Greek Scriptures,
1 Dalman, Der Gottesname Adonaj und seine Geschichte, p. 42 (cf. p. 36) ;
Ewald, Old and New Testament Theology, p. 100.

300 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? LECT.
Philo would not have given some obscure hint of this. So far from
doing this, he distinctly asserts that, not as a mere modern innova
tion, but as a part of the Mosaic law, none might either speak or hear
the most sacred name save in the holy places with ears and tongue
purified by wisdom,1 i.e. he ascribes to Moses the well-known tradi
tional precept that the Tetragrammaton was never to be used 'in the
borders ' (i.e. outside the sanctuary), and in the temple to be used
only by the priests in the daily benediction, and by the high priest
ten times on the Day of Atonement.2 He is wrong no doubt, but
could he have fallen into such an error if nin1' had ever been pro
nounced in Egypt in the Greek period ? Even if the earliest Greek
copies reproduced the Tetragrammaton in some form it was npt
pronounced, but read as Kvpios. There is however clearly a
difference between the substitution of Kvpios for nilV in a Greek
version of the Scriptures, and consequently also in Hellenistic Jewish
society, and that of "OIK for ^1^, in the Hebrew original and in
Palestinian-Jewish society. The former was a far less arbitrary act
than the latter, and likely to be ventured upon at a much earlier
period. Dalman might therefore more reasonably have hesitated on
this ground to propose so early a date as 300 b.c for the substitution
of ' Adonai ' for ' Yahveh.'
There are also some facts, partly disputed (I believe), partly mis
interpreted by Dalman, which cannot be reconciled with the date
which he proposes. There is first a passage in Sirach which implies
that the name 'Yahveh' might still with due reverence be pro
nounced.3 It was doubtless inexpedient to ' name the Holy One '
frequently in conversation ; substitutes like ' heaven,' or ' the name,'
or ' the Holy One,' would generally meet every need.4 But there
1 Philo, De Vitd Mosis, Bk. iii. (Mangey, vi. 152), XPV,!0"V ^ veraKov
uffavel CTTetpavos eSrjfxiovpye^TO, TeTTapas e"xov yXv(pas bv6[xaTos, o p.6vois tqis SiTa
Kai yXSiTTav irotpia KeKaQapfievois Befits aKobeiv Kai Xeyeiv kv aylois, aXXcp 5e ovdevl
to irapdirav ovSafxov.
2 Sifre on Num. vi. 23-27 ; Yoma, 39^.
3 Ecclus. xxiii. 9, "OpKtp /J.^ edlo-ris to ffT6p.a ffov, Kai bvofiaffia tov ayiov ju^
crmeBicrdfis. According to Dalman, the wise man dissuades from causelessly
referring to God by any name. I would rather interpret him in accordance with
Lev. xxiv. 16 (Sept.).
¦* The Laudian professor of Arabic (Mr. Margoliouth), in his essays towards
the retranslation of Sirach into Hebrew, makes use of the names n* and niiT1'
This has called forth some criticism, but may, it would seem, be defended by a
reference to Proverbs, which must to a great extent (greater than this writer is
disposed to admit) have been Sirach's model. Of the substitutes mentioned above,
the first is frequent in 1 Maccabees. The second occurs in the present Hebrew
text of Lev. xxiv. 11. A later scribe (surely not the original writer) sought by
substituting DiS'B f°r nin* to avoid an unpleasant collocation. Possibly, too, he
is responsible for the insertion of Qg» before nin' in v. 16. Bickell's supposed

vi. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? 301
were times which the reverent mind would determine — reading the
Scriptures would be one of these — when it was natural and right to
utter the word ' Yahveh.' The wise man grants this, but exhorts to
caution. Secondly, there is the occurrence of nirP or rv in the
Maccabaean psalms (see especially Pss. ex. and cxviii.1), which, to
many students at least, refutes the view that even in the temple the
Tetragrammaton was only pronounced in the cases mentioned by
later tradition. And if the existence of Maccabaean psalms should
be disputed, yet few will now deny that the Book of Daniel is a work
of the early Maccabaean period, and when we examine that remark
able chapter which contains Daniel's prayer and confession (Dan. ix.)
we find that the name ' Yahveh ' occurs no less than seven times. It
is true that 'Adonai' occurs eleven times, which is not the proportion
we should have expected from a study of the Psalms. But it is not
possible to give any reason for the relative frequency of ' Yahveh '
and ' Adonai ' either here or in the different parts of the Psalter.2
Next, how can this striking inclination to use ' Adonai ' be
accounted for? Ezekiel (in whose book run' >3*1K3 occurs 227 times,
and 'O'lN alone 5 times) with his intense supernaturalism prepared
the way, and Ezekiel did but give a purified expression to the
common feeling of the Jews after the recent catastrophe. ' Jehovah *
became, to adopt a phrase interpolated into a passage of Deuteronomy
after the Return,4 a ' glorious and fearful name,' too ' glorious and
fearful ' to be pronounced with the frank simplicity of earlier days.
Later on, the manifold oppression, culminating in a fresh captivity,
which saddened the last century of the Persian rule, may have indis
posed many of the Jews to pronounce the dear old familiar name of
their God (cf. Am. vi. 10). There is a passage of a psalm, in which
discovery of Dg>n in Ps. xiv. (which he thinks an acrostic psalm) has been well
criticized by Delitzsch. The third occurs four times in Sirach.
1 On the absorption of n* (Jah) implied in Sept.'s rend, of Ps. cxviii. 5, and
(for the pre-Massoretic text) by the absence of the suffix in rilOT, Ps. cxviii. 14,
see Church Quarterly Rev., April 1889, p. 131. This singular expedient of
reverence may have arisen in the second part of the Maccabaean period.
2 There are 55 instances of yiK in the Psalter, including 4 of nlJT' "OIK and
4 of iJ-IK mn*. Of these, 46 are in Pss. i.-lxxxix, and 9 in Pss. xc.-cl. This
is difficult to account for on any purely chronological theory. Probably the
difference in the tone of Books IV. and V. will account for the rarity of *:1K.
National and missionary psalms are here specially frequent, and fresh themes of
praise are constantly sought for. It is remarkable, too, that 29 of the instances
of yns °ccur in the Elohistic psalms. This riddle, however, seems to me to
baffle conjecture. How far, I wonder, is its existence due to the scribes ?
3 Qn this name of God in Ezekiel, see Cornill's excursus in his Ezekiel,
pp. I72-I75-
4 Deut. xxviii. 58 (see Dillmann); cf. Pss. xcix. 3, cxi. 9.

302 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect.
one might almost think that the original reading had been changed
by a later editor, so much more smoothly does it run if we read ^'"IN
for mrv,
' Behold, as the eyes of servants are upon the hand of their lord,
As the eyes of a handmaid are upon the hand of her mistress,
So our eyes are upon the Lord our God
Until he have pity upon us.
Have pity upon us, O Lord, have pity upon us,
For we are full enough of contempt.' '
The conjecture would however be mistaken.2 We may indeed
read between the lines of the passage that a strong current is carrying
men away from the old name of God. But must we not also read
that the psalmist seeks to moderate this tendency, and by the intro
duction of a title which destroys the parallelism reminds believers
that their God is no mere despot but (cf. Eph. iii. 15) a personal
friend with a personal, family name? He cannot however have
hoped, nor (being himself a child of his age) have wished to turn the
current back. He would have had against him the growing class of
teachers and expositors of the Law, among whom a literalistic principle
of interpretation had long been gaining ground. Now there were
three passages of the Pentateuch3 which certainly discouraged a
thoughtless use of the sacred name, and might be so interpreted as
almost to forbid its being used at all, viz.,
' Thou shalt not pronounce the name of Jehovah (Yahveh) thy
God for vanity' (Ex. xx. 7).
' Ye shall not profane my holy name ' (Lev. xxii. 32).
' So shall they put my name upon the children of Israel ; and I
will bless them' (Num. vi. 27).
1 Ps. cxxiii. 2, 3. In Isa. xxvi. 13 we might be tempted to make the same
substitution; cf. Ps. lxxxvi. 15, 16 (where 'Adonai' naturally introduces 'thy
servant '). But love for the name Jehovah is too marked in Isa. xxvi. to justify
this. 2 The probability that an editor or a scribe would alter nin11 into >j*jk is
almost infinitely greater than that he would take the reverse course. The Tar-
gums, it is true, may seem to take this course. But the truth is that (except in
cases like Pss. xvi. 2, xxxv. 23, where the suffix in *jix has its proper force) they
recognize no distinction between nin* and ^ix. Both words in the Aramaic
text are represented by rniVi which, however, was undoubtedly read *31K.
3 Some would add Lev. xxiv. 16 (see Kalisch), but Dalman has shown
(pp. 44-49) that the entire Jewish tradition is in favour of interpreting upj 'he
that blasphemeth.' The readings of Sept. and Targ. Onk. have been misunder
stood. It is not merely uttering the name of God, but uttering it in a curse
which the translators understood to be referred to. Comp. Prov. xxx. 9 ' Lest
I become poor and steal, and grasp at the name of my God ' (cursing Him as the
author of my misfortune ; see Delitzsch).

VI. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER?

3°3

How was any one to be quite sure in ordinary life that he had suffi
cient cause to use the most sacred name, especially as the only instance
in which the Law gave an express sanction for its use was the case of
the priests reciting the daily blessing ? How natural it was in that
age of growing scrupulosity, when the Pharisees first come before us
as the trusted guides of the people, to ' make a hedge around the
Law,' and forbid the pronunciation of ' Jehovah ' altogether !
It is worth noticing (1) that even in the earlier period there are
perhaps signs of a scrupulousness in the pronunciation of the divine
name. I allude to such shortened forms of theophoric personal
names as Ahaz for Jehoahaz, Nathan for Jehonathan, with which
compare Abdi for Abdijah after the Return, the Egyptian abbrevia
tion Petu for Petuosor ' the gift of Osiris ' (Revillout), and the
Moslem name Abduh ' his servant ' for Abdullah ' servant of Allah '
(observe that the name of Allah itself is not thought to be profaned
by frequent repetition). And (2) that Adonai itself, in the religious
syncretisms of the East and especially of Egypt, acquired some of the
sanctity of the Tetragrammaton. This we see from the so-called
Abrasax-gems (used as amulets), and from Egyptian magical papyri,
on one of which (found by M. Groff) storms are said to be calmed
by pronouncing the name Adonai.
[Compare the lucid statement of a writer in the Church Quarterly
Review, April 1889, pp. 123-125. I am glad to find that he is
equally opposed with myself to the surrender of the name 'Jehovah.'
Compare also Geiger's learned and acute researches in his Urschrift
(pp. 261-278), and the more sober and cautious treatise of Dalman
referred to above.] Note h, 289.
See e.g. Quis Rer. Div. Heres, Mangey, i. 476 ; Kvpios Trapa to
xvpos is Philo's phrase. Note also his fine saying, Ilapp-qo-ia Be cfaiXias
<rvyyevis ' eirei irpbs Tiva dv tis 17 irpos tov eavrov <f>iXov irapprjo-ida-aiTO ;
Philo does not indeed retain the traditional Hebrew name of God, nor
was this either possible or expedient then ; but his saying justifies us
in doing so. See also De Sacrificantibus, Mangey, ii. 258 (as bene
ficent, the Self-Existent One is called ®€o's; as punitive, Kvpios); cf.
De Abr. (ii. 19). I know of course that 'abd ('servant,' 'slave') in
Hebrew, Phoenician, and Arabic, when compounded with the name
of God or of a god, can be used as a title of honour. It is a very
subtle idiom in Arabic, by which one of the plurals of 'abd [Hbad in
Hbad Allah) describes faithful Moslems, and another ['abid) all man
kind, as the creatures of God. Even non-Moslems are not mamdlik
or ' bondslaves ' of Allah ; while Moslems, though His servants, are
not, as such, worse off than sons. The argument in the text assumes,

304 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect.
not the Semitic but conventional Western ideas of lordship and ser
vitude, and is directed against a too exclusive use of the phrase ' the
Lord' for the God of Revelation. Even interpreted from a Semitic
point of view, this title, too exclusively used, would be open to ex
ception. It favours a too supernaturalistic view of God, like that
which Mohammed borrowed from the Judaism of his time, and which
in borrowing he exaggerated. Note ', p. 289.
Cf. Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, Preface, p. xi. ; Boyd Carpenter,
Bampton Lectures for 1887, p. 309. Dalman surely forgets this when
he commits himself so unreservedly to the title ' the Lord ' as opposed
to ' Jehovah ' [Studien, p. 81), and equally so does a far less reverent
scholar, Renan, when he speaks of Yahveh or Jehovah as ' le nom
d'un dieu barbare et etranger,' ' un dieu particulier, le dieu d'une
famille humaine et d'un pays ' [Histoire d' Israel, i. 86), against which
we may quote the statement from the same author's Hibbert Lectures
(p. 16), that 'the worship which Rome has spread abroad in the
world is the worship of Jehovah.' Note J, p. 289.
See Prof. Driver's paper Studia Biblica, i. 1-20. The objections
to ' Jehovah ' already urged by Genebrard (16th century) are — (1) that
it is an impossible form of modern origin, and (2) that it suggests
comparison with 'Jove' (see Delitzsch, Isaiah, E. T., 1890, i. 51).
There was some cause for Genebrard's opposition. ' Jehovah ' was
sometimes Latinized as ' Jova,' and in a 'Psalme of Sion' (1593) we
have ' Jehova's throne on hie,' and also 'To Jove, the God of love.'
But to English ears Jehovah is more euphonious and now more
familiar than Yahveh, and ' Jove ' (for ' Jupiter ') is not now much in
use. I do not defend the use of Jehovah in altogether technical,
philological books. Note k, p. 289.
See Drummond, Philo Judaus, ii. 20-22, cf. p. 63. Thinkers in
all ages have taught this doctrine. Not to quote Lao-tze, the great
Egyptian hymn to Amen-Ra says, ' Whose name is hidden from his
creatures ; in his name which is Amen ' (i.e., hidden). Records of the
Past, ii. 132. Ewald calls the teaching of Philo a ' fundamental error '
(Geschichte, vi. 256). But Hooker nobly says, 'Whom although to
know be life, and joy to make mention of his name, yet . . . our
safest eloquence concerning him is our silence ' [Eccl. Pol. i. 2, 3),

vi. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? 305

Note m, p. 290.
A mysterious and fatal power was attributed by the Babylonians
to the names of their gods (cf. Laurie, Bibliotheca Sacra, July 1888).
Even in the (later) Avesta the recitation of the twenty names of
Ahura is represented as the surest protection against evil and the
evil one [Oxford Z. A. ii. 21). Mohammed, too, according to tradi
tion, opened Paradise to those who should recite the 99 ' excellent
names ' of God. Note n, p. 290.
This does not justify popular writers in speaking of the Lord
Jesus Christ as Jehovah, which no Jewish Christian could ever have
done. Bishop Pearson indeed appeals to Midrash Tillim on Ps. xxi.
and Echa rabati on Lam. i. 6 [Exposition of the Creed, 1676, p. 148);
very poor authorities ! 'El gibbor' in Isa. ix. 5 (6) is not a synonym
for Jehovah, and Kvpios in Lukeii. 11, Phil. ii. 11 is JHSn (Delitzsch),
not 'i'lS, if we should not in the former passage rather read Kvpiov (as
in Luke ii. 26, ix. 26) ; cf. Lam. iv. 20 (Sept.), Psalm. Sol. xvii. 36,
where the same correction is required.
Note °, p. 291.
This expression may be criticized. Only once are believers in
general called Jehovah's 'sons' (Ps. Ixxiii. 15), and only once is
Jehovah compared to a father (Ps. ciii. 13). Twice the privilege of
divine sonship is accorded to the king (Pss. ii. 7, Ixxxix. 27, 28). But
the conception at any rate pervades the tender and more universa-
listic passages of the Psalter. When one of the psalmists says, 'Thou
wilt lead the nations upon earth' (lxvii. 5), and another describes
Jehovah as ' He that nurtureth the nations' (xciv. 10), they implicitly
recognize the divine fatherhood. That the word 'father' is so seldom
applied to God by the Biblical writers (see Jer. iii. 4, Isa. lxiii. 16,
Mai. i. 6, ii. 10), is significant. Like another divine title—' Sun '
(which the three versions Sept., Pesh., and Targ. carefully avoid
translating at Ps. lxxxiv. 12)— it may have had too strong a flavour of
nature-religion. Yet Hosea had long since accepted it, in the spirit
of the ' Our Father,' as the symbol of moral affinity between the true
God and His worshippers (see my note on Hos. i. 10).
Note p, p. 292.
See Yasna xxxi. 3, and Farvardin Yast, § 143 (Spiegel and De
Harlez agree with the Oxford translators). That the priority in the
X

306 WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? lect.
utterance of this universalism belongs to Zoroastrianism, need not
surprise us. The truth that God is the God of the individual, and
not of this or that people, was recognized in the Iranian before it
became the common property of the Jewish Church. Later Parsism
anticipated not merely conversion as the result of missionary effort,
but universal restoration by an inherent cosmic necessity. That the
germ of this doctrine lay in the mind of Zarathustra, can hardly
perhaps be affirmed. Note % p. 293.
So in Ps. xxii. 28 ' turning to Jehovah ' is represented as a ' remem
bering.' Both expressions imply that Jehovah speaks even to the
Gentiles through the conscience (cf. Rom. i. 19-21). Comp. the
phrase ' He that admonishes the nations ' (Ps. xciv. 10). There may,
however, also be an allusion to the covenant with Noah (Gen. ix.
1-17), as in Isa. xxiv. 5, where the 'commandments ' and 'statutes '
broken by the inhabitants of the earth must be more than the 'dictates
of conscience.' Later Judaism taught that the heathen deliberately
rejected even the 'seven commandments of Noah,' and consequently
neither had the knowledge of God nor were subject to the influence
of His Spirit. See a singular passage in Aboda zara, 2, 3 (cf. Wunsche,
Der bab. Talmud, ii. 2, pp. 300, 301).
Note r, p. 294.
The reply of later Judaism was unfavourable to the goyim, but
was based on the figment of the rejection of the Torah by the heathen
world. Note s, p. 295.
The Book of Ruth, too, which is post-Deuteronomic, because it
presupposes the need of an explanation of the ' levirate,' is most easily
explained on the analogy of Jonah, which, as Delitzsch remarks, is
'a justification of the God of Israel against the misapprehension that
He is exclusively the national God of the Jews.' Cf. Bleek's Ein
leitung, ed. Wellhausen (1878), pp. 204, 205 ; Kuenen ,Religion of
Israel, ii. 242-244. Note *, p. 295.
Long afterwards we find St. Paul, in an early Christian record,
representing himself and Barnabas as the first preachers of spiritual
Theism to ' the nations,' whom in time past God had ' suffered to
walk in their own ways ' (i.e. in self-chosen forms of religion), Acts xiv.
15, 16, cf. xvii. 30.

vi. WHO IS THE GOD OF THE PSALTER? 307
Note u, p. 296.
Among these we ought hardly to include Ps. lxxix. 6, 7, which is
certainly a quotation, and possibly an interpolation (see my note). The
idea is that Israel's calamities imply a degree of anger on Jehovah's
part which would more naturally be called forth by the heathen.
Note t, p. 296.
Ps. cxviii. 17 reminds us of the psalm-like passage in Tob. xiii.
(written perhaps somewhat later), which contains the words, ' Confess
him before the nations, ye sons of Israel, for he hath scattered us
among them. There declare his greatness, extol him before all that
lives ' [vv. 3, 4 ; cf. v. 6). The Book of Tobit, says Ewald, ' is an
energetic summons to glorify the true God among the heathen.'
This critic dates the book in the age of Ezra ; it can, however, hardly
be earlier than the Maccabaean period, if only because of its doctrinal
teaching. (Jewish opinion inclines to makes it even post-Christian.
See Neubauer's Book of Tobit.) The Jews of the Dispersion formed
a natural bridge between the mother-Church and the heathen nations
(cf. H. Schultz, A. T. Theologie, ed. 4, p. 386).

X2

LECTURE VII.

Give ear, O Shepherd of Israel, thou that leadest Joseph like a flock ;
thou that sittest upon the cherubim, shine forth. — Ps. Ixxx. i (R. V.)

LECTURE VII
Part I. — Reassertion of the purity of the religious ideas of the Psalter,
which are also the germ-ideas of Christianity. Later on, Greek thought may
have contributed to their development, but not in the psalmists' period. ' Germ-
ideas ' they were ; but not in the sense that they must necessarily have deve
loped into Christianity. A new fertilizing principle was needed, and as a fact
such a principle entered the world with Jesus Christ. Instances of its work
ing. Resuming the subject of the last lecture, it is asked, I. Within what
sphere does the Lord Jehovah work ? The mythic view. Moderation of the
psalmists' concessions to it. The conception of heaven begins to be spiritualized.
The range of Jehovah's working is universal ; but in a more special sense Israel
is ' his dominion. ' But the relation between Israel and its God is no longer a
purely natural one. How the connexion between them was constantly renewed.
The sacramentalism of the post-Exile Church studied both from the outside and
from the inside. Help derived from the psalmists. Explanation of Pss. xiii. 7,
xlviii. 3. Ps. xlviii. valuable (especially if a pilgrim song) as proving the enthu
siasm of the Jewish Church for the temple. But is it only within the nation that
Jehovah's working is manifest ? No ; the Psalter itself proves this. The indivi
dual can look up to Jehovah as his God, though he turns towards the temple in
doing so. — II. By what agency does Jehovah work? Change produced in
Jewish Theism by the Exile. Ezekiel's supernaturalism. Emergence of a new
problem, how to reconcile the transcendence and the immanence of God. Practi
cal, imaginative solutions of the psalmists. The divine agents, such as the word,
or words, of God ; his Spirit ; the divine Wisdom (and the like) ; the ' hosts ' or
' ministers ' of God, whether quasi-personal, or (as we should say) impersonal.
Why angels are so rarely mentioned, and why mentioned at all. Even those
names of heavenly beings which are of mythic origin are turned to noble account.
Contrast between the policy of the psalmists and that of modern missionaries.
Misplaced repugnance to finding mythology in the Bible. Permanent value of
mythic symbols.
Part II.- — One of the agencies by which Jehovah works still remains — the
Messianic. Need of a wider explanation of the term ' Messiah.' It is applied
(either expressly or virtually) to six persons and classes in the Psalter. The Mes
sianic psalms, and the idea which underlies them, reduced to its simplest form. —
III. How does Jehovah work, and with what results ? I. By ruling. His reign
over Israel (the centre in some sense of His dominion) goes back to the conquest
of Canaan. A new accession however dated from Israel's second Exodus (that
from Egypt), and the conception of the theocracy became correspondingly deeper.
But the jubilant tone of Ps. xciii. &c. could not be maintained. The keynote of
the later age was, 'Jehovah shall become king.' What, then, must Jehovah's royal
policy in Israel be ? He must reveal His perfect sympathy and educate His people
in His ways. Figure of the Shepherd, which corresponds to the deeper conception

ANALYSIS OF LECTURE VII. 311
of God formed in post-Exile times. Explanation of ' thy lowliness,' Ps. xviii. 36.
It was a part of Jehovah's ' glory ' to abide at once in the highest heaven and in
the individual souls. Literal theophanies were no longer expected ; those writers
who do introduce appearances of Jehovah use the language symbolically. Israel
is learning the spiritual presence of God, and the moral purpose of its election. —
The idea of the covenant, spiritualized by Jeremiah, and presupposed in the
Psalter. Pss. xviii., xxv., xxxii. considered. The last-mentioned reveals a
pathetic imperfection in the psalmists' theology but also gives fresh testimony to
the view of Jehovah as an educator. And how does He educate His people ?
By drawing out the spiritual contents of the Scriptures. Schools and teachers
were necessary instruments, but their efficacy came from a. higher Teacher.
Difference between the soferim (represented by Ps. cxix. ) and the ' wise men '
(represented by the kernel of the Book of Proverbs). The true symbol of the
covenant not so much the temple as the Scripture. No .absolute distinction
between the Law and the other Scriptures. The Law has become much more
than a collection of ordinances. It is educational, and works by moral means.
It is Jehovah's best gift to Israel.
Princpal Notes. — Part I.: On Jehovah's holiness. — On angelology.
Part II. . On Ps. xc. — On the psalmists' conception of sin.

PART I.
JEHOVAH S SPHERE OF WORKING AND HIS AGENCIES.
WE are warned by these intensely Palestinian words ¦ to resist
the fascinations which at the close of the last Lecture Alex
andria presented to our view. It was not in the time of the
psalmists that Hellenic thought knocked for admittance into
the Jewish Church. In replying to the question, Who is the
God of the Psalter ? — illustrations may be drawn from Baby
lon and from Persia, but not from Hellas. The substitution
of the Greek for the Persian rule promoted the ends of the
Spirit of revelation, but not at first to any appreciable extent
through the infiltration of Greek ideas. It is to Palestine,
let me rather say to Jerusalem, aided in some respects by
Babylon and Persia, that we are, historically speaking, in
debted for the anticipations of Christianity in the Psalter.
Those deep conceptions of the meaning of Jehovah's name,
of His ' coming to judge the earth ' and to ' lead the nations,'
and of that Catholic Church in which there is neither Egypt,
nor Babylon, nor even Israel,2 belong to pure Palestinian
theology. I do not say either that they were all equally
recognized by the Jewish Church, or that they must neces
sarily have developed into Christianity. Certainly the last of
them is but a lightning-flash which illumines the distant
summits — the intuition of an individual or at most of a
school — of that school which has imbibed Job's universalism,
but harmonized it with churchly feeling. And even those
conceptions which were the common property of the later
writers are by no means as prominent in Talmudic Judaism
as on evolutionary grounds we might expect.3. It would
seem as if a new fertilizing principle was required to develop
1 See the text (Ps. Ixxx. I, R.V.). 2 See above, p. 118.

lect. vii. JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING 313

adequately the germs of spiritual religion. And whence,
if not from the East, nor yet from the West, could this
new life-giving element come? Is it not a fact that it is
due to the creative originality of Jesus Christ, who gave a
development to those germ-ideas which amounts sometimes
to transfiguration ?
Take for instance the great foundation-truths to which I
have already referred. The personal responsive God may
have ceased to be called Jehovah, but in lieu of this another
name or title, avoided by the psalmists ' from its naturalistic
associations, has been restored to use with enriched meaning.
' 0 Father ... I have manifested thy name unto the men
which thou gavest me'b (John xvii. 5, 6). The name of
' Father ' henceforth symbolizes in their application both to
humanity and to the individual all those truths which hitherto
have had too predominant a reference to Israel.0 So too the
conceptions of the divine ' holiness ' and of the kingly rule
and final judgment of Jehovah have been deepened in the
Gospels till we hardly perhaps recognize their Old Testament
ancestry. And lastly, St. Paul has taken up the obscure
hints of the He"brew prophet and psalmist, and developed
them into a theory of Catholicity which is startling to a large
section of the Church of his time. I will simply quote that
noble saying, which illustrates several fine psalm-passages,
' There is no distinction between the Jew and the Greek ; for
they all have one Lord, who is rich (in goodness) unto all
that call upon him ' (Rom. x. 12).
I will not excuse myself for reasserting from a critical
point of view the intimate relation between the two parts of
our Bible. ' The Old Testament religion is not simply one
of the great religions of the world ; it is the one out of which
Christianity was born —the only one out of which it could
have come ; ' and one of our best warrants for accepting the
authority of the New Testament is the capacity of its writers
for apprehending and developing the highest religious ele
ments in the Old.4 The connexion between the germ-ideas
and the Christian developments is a study which urgently
calls for candid labourers. When will some English adherent
of critical views first map out the field with more science than
1 See p. 305, note °.

314 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
Ewald, and then claim the honour of beginning some part of
the work ? Returning from this digression, I have to ask,
first, Within what sphere does the Lord Jehovah act, accord
ing to the psalms ; next, through what organs ; and lastly,
how, and with what results ?
I. Within what sphere? The mythic view was that God
literally dwelt in heaven (hence the title El Elyon, God Most
High), and its influence upon popular speech can be traced
throughout the Psalter (see e.g. Pss. ii. 4, xi. 4, xiv. 2, xviii. J,
xx. 7, xxix. 9, cii. 20, civ. 3, cxxiii. 1, cl. 1 e). Still we never
find the psalmists condescending to popular weakness by
descriptions of heaven, such as we find in Enoch xiv. 9-23 (a
fine passage, however, in its own style, which of course is not
the liturgical). The tendency of the psalmists, somewhat
like that of Zarathustra in his hymns, is to spiritualize the
conception of heaven, just as we shall see that they are being
led to spiritualize the conception of the temple. In the
Maccabaean age a psalmist writes, ' As for our God, he
is in heaven ; all that he pleaseth, he worketh out ; ' the
second statement is the corollary of the first (Ps. cxv. 3, cf.
exxxv. 6, 2 Chron. xx. 6). The word ' heaven ' is becoming
a symbol for the reservoir of divine powers, or, more shortly,
the beyond, the spiritual world. ' Exalt thyself above the
heavens ' (the physical heavens), says a somewhat earlier
psalmist (Ivii. 6, 12) ; that is, rectify the moral balance by a
fresh display of almighty righteousness. In fact, being the
unexhausted source of life, and the incalculable Disposer of
events, Jehovah must be in some sense ' a God that hideth
himself (Isa. xlv. 15), yet, being the Creator1 and Preserver
of the world, He must fill it with His presence and operation.
' Do not I fill heaven and earth, saith Jehovah ' (Jer. xxiii. 24) ?
Within what sphere doth Jehovah not work ? is therefore
the question which the devout reason sanctions. He even
' bringeth down to Sheol and bringeth up,' according to a psalm
not included in the Psalter (1 Sam. ii. 6 ; cf. Deut. xxxii. 39,
Ps. lxviii. 21). How then can any part of the ' land f of the
living' (Ps. cxvi. 9) be excepted from His direct and constant
supervision ? He is irafifiacriXsvs in the Greek Sirach (Ecclus.
1. 15), and whatever the popular belief or the later Rabbinic
1 On Jehovah as the Creator, see p. 322.

VII. AND HIS AGENCIES. 315
doctrine may have been, the greater psalmists undoubtedly
held that all nations were under Jehovah's hand.1 Still there
was a special sense in which Israel was the sphere of His
working. Upon this people His ' name had been called ' B —
a phrase which signifies that Jehovah had claimed Israel as
His property, and guaranteed to it His protection. Freely
and unconditionally ? No. The post-Exile Church did not
believe that it had a natural and indefeasible right to Jehovah's
patronage. The figures of sonship and wifeship were no
longer adequate to express Israel's relation to its Lord. The
church-nation had constantly to renew its connexion with
Jehovah in the place which He had ' chosen to place his
name there ' h by right and acceptable acts of worship (cf. Ps.
li. 21, and perhaps iv. 6). And correspondingly it was one
of the highest privileges of the priest to lift up his hands over
the congregation, and lay the name of Jehovah upon it (Num.
vii. 22-27, cf- Lev. ix. 22, 23, Deut. x. 8, xxi. 5).
This solemn rite was not of a magical but of a sacramental
nature. A more or less conscious sacramentalism followed
necessarily from the loss of that temple within the temple —
that ^ JV3 or ' house of God ' in the strictest sense of the
phrase, the ark. Need I justify this description of the ark ?
Not only to the Philistines (1 Sam. iv. 7), but according to
Num. x. 35 to Moses himself the ark was clothed with divinity,
because inherent in it was the wondrous power (the numen)
of ' the God of the armies of Israel ' (1 Sam. xvii. 45), and
hence in the narrative books the name ' Jehovah Sabaoth '
can be accurately paraphrased ' the God of the ark.' £ Jere
miah indeed had higher intuitions. He looked forward to a
worship which would be independent not only of the ark but
of any ' house of God ' in an exclusive sense ; the whole of
Jerusalem would become Jehovah's throne (Jer. iii. 16, 17).
He evidently felt that the name of God could not be shut up
either in a word or in a building. Even to use the old lan
guage and the old forms of thought in a sacramental sense
was to fall short of the ideal of spiritual religion. If he still
recognized the sanctity of Jerusalem, it was because this city
was to be, according to the old prophecy (Isa. ii. 2, 3), the
centre of missionary activity and religious instruction. But
1 See e. g. Pss. xxii. 29, xlvii. 9.

3<6 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
the evangelical prophet (as Jeremiah has the best claim to be
entitled) was far in advance both of his own j and of the next
generation. The idealism of which he was the first exponent
was beyond the horizon both of Ezekiel and of Ezra, who
felt that the new Jewish Church had educational functions to
discharge, and conceived that a ritual system centred in a
material sanctuary could not in their time be dispensed with.
And yet how different in all respects was the theory of the
temple realized in the post-Exile Church from that against
which Jeremiah preached ! Let us first regard this theory
from the outside. In the earlier period, the land of Canaan
was Jehovah's house in a primary, and the temple at Jerusa
lem only in a secondary sense.1' In the later the relative
positions were reversed."1 This change may be attributed to
the deep impression produced upon the most religious minds
by two great events — the retreat of the army of Sennacherib
and the Babylonian Exile. The local worships made a stout
resistance, but their power was waning long before Jehovah,
as it was thought, deserted His land ; and no serious attempt
was ever made to revive them," the restored exiles being pro
nounced adherents of the Deuteronomic law. Henceforth
that mystic union with God, which was the original object of
sacrifices, could only be obtained by bodily or mental presence
in the one temple at Jerusalem. Some of the psalmists, no
doubt, reached the confines of a higher region of thought.1
We marvel at their attainments, but recognize their limita
tions. They could not know ' the liberty wherewith Christ
hath made us free.'
And now let us consider the post-Exile theory of the
temple from the inside. In doing so we shall rely entirely on
the authority of the psalmists. These temple-poets retain the
old mythic language. ' Make melody to Jehovah who dwelleth
in Zion ' (Ps. ix. 12), says a psalm of the early Persian period,
while a psalm of the Greek age speaks of ' the mount which
God hath desired to dwell in' (Ps. lxviii. 17). Other moun
tains may be grander. The Bashan range may in a Semitic ,
nature-religion be regarded as a ' mountain of Elohim ' (Ps.
lxviii. 16). But to the God who is spirit (for do not the
psalmists virtually confess this truth ?) a humbler elevation
1 See Lecture VIII., p. 3S7.

vii. AND HIS AGENCIES. 317
supplies a more fitting sanctuary. Therefore, ' when my soul
droopeth within (lit., upon) me, from the land of mighty Her-
mon, I think upon thee, thou little mountain ; ' such, according
to Hitzig's striking explanation, was the thought of a captive
psalmist in the Greek period 1 (Ps. xiii. 7). He drew com
fort from the thought that, just because Jehovah's mountain
was naturally so insignificant, its God might be trusted to in
terpose in supernatural majesty. In Ps. xlviii. 3, if the text
be right, there is a still more remarkable use of mythic phra
seology. In commenting upon the words rendered in the
Revised Version —
Beautiful in elevation, the joy of the whole earth,
Is mount Zion, (on) the sides of the north,
The city of the great King,
the conservative critic, Hengstenberg, makes this remark,
' The only legitimate exposition is that which is derived from
a comparison of Isa. xiv. 13, 14.' You remember the pas
sage. The King of Babylon looks forward to as proud a pre
eminence after death as he has enjoyed in life. He will
become like the most High, and enthrone himself above the
stars on the sacred mountain, on whose summit the divine
beings dwell.0 The psalmist may be thinking of the same
myth, and says, ' We have a better Olympus than that of any
of the nations; it is Mount Zioh, the dwelling-place of
Jehovah.' Those who object to emending the text cannot
help accepting this view. But even if we take another course,
it is certain that the psalmists regarded Mount Zion as a
symbol of ' heaven's high steep,' the invisible ' mountain of
Elohim ' spoken of by Ezekiel (xxviii. I4)-P It is once (if I
understand Ps. Ixxxvii. 5 aright) actually called Jivy, a word
which is often applied to God Himself; " the expression was
probably suggested by 1 Kings viii. 8, where we should sup
ply !v!?V. K$ 1B>8 from 2 Chron. vii. 21. We can understand
therefore that sometimes there is a doubt whether the earthly
or the heavenly dwelling-place of Jehovah is intended (e.g.
Pss. vii. 8, xlvii. 6, lxviii. 6, 19)- Also that the permanence
of the earthly should seem guaranteed by that of the heavenly
sanctuary (Pss. lxviii. 17, lxxviii. 69, cxxxii. 14, cf. xciii.
1 See Lecture III., p. "5-

3i 8 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
2, 4, 5). The second temple is in fact in a certain sense that
which the ark was of old to the Israelites.
They that trust in Jehovah are like Mount Zion,
Which cannot be shaken, but is seated for ever.
Jerusalem — mountains are round about her ;
Jehovah too is round about his people
From henceforth even for ever (Ps. cxxv- i, 2).
I say, in a certain sense, for we must remember the symboliz
ing, sacramental tendency of the Jewish Church. Israel's
true protector is Jehovah Himself. This intuition, which be
fore the Exile was confined to the great prophets and their
disciples (see Isa. xxviii. 16, Jer. xvii. 13 — much misunder
stood passages r), is now the common property of the Church.
Her teachers may speak of Zion, as they also speak of heaven,
as Jehovah's dwelling-place, but what they more or less con
sciously mean by both words is the store of those hidden
spiritual forces, the manifestation of which constitutes the
' glory of Jehovah.' At any moment the Church can appeal
to the God ' who dwelleth in Zion ' to uncover this latent
glory (Pss. iv. 7, Ixxx. 4). The answer may be delayed, but
the pain of suspense is balanced by the pleasure of trust.
Even in the darkness faithful Israel can say —
Our soul waiteth for Jehovah :
He is our help and our shield.
For our heart shall rejoice in him,
Because we have trusted in his holy name.
(Ps. xxxiii. 20, 21.)
And looking back at a time of peace upon the national
history, a psalmist can exclaim,
There is a river, whose streams make glad the city of God,
The holy place of the dwelling of the most High.
God is in the midst of her ; she cannot be moved ;
God doth help her, and that right early (Ps. xlvi. 5, 6).
Thus Jehovah — the true Jehovah — was sacramentally pre
sent in the temple to all faithful worshippers,1 and the sense
of security which this presence gave was the characteristic
blessing of Zion,
1 Supplement the above by the statements in Lect. VIII. on the Guest-psalms.

vn. AND HIS AGENCIES.

319

For there Jehovah appointed the blessing,
Even life for evermore (Ps. cxxxiii. 3),
which has to be explained by Ps. cii. 29 —
The children of thy servants shall abide,
And their seed shall be established before thee.
Can we wonder that so precious a possession as the temple
excited such enthusiasm in the Jewish community, both at
home and abroad ? Upon some of the expressions of this I
shall have to comment later ; suffice it now to refer to
Ps. xlviii., a pilgrim song, if I am not mistaken, and parallel
therefore to Ps. cxxii.
Walk about Zion and encompass her,
Number her towers ;
Mark ye well her rampart,
Note thoughtfully her fortresses ;
That ye may tell the generation following,
That this God is our God for ever and alway ;
It is he that will guide us evermore. (Ps. xlviii. 13-15, De Witt.)
But is it only within the sphere of the nation, whose
spiritual centre is the temple, that Jehovah works ? Is there
not a divine plan for the individual's as well as for the nation's
life? Cannot each and every Israelite pour out his own
private griefs and joys before Him who 'fashioneth hearts'
(xxxiii. 15)? And does not Jehovah reward such confidence,
and, directly or indirectly, punish the want of it ? Certainly
if the individual had been left to himself so far as sensible
proofs of Jehovah's interest in him personally were concerned,
he would have sought in magic the satisfaction of his irrepres
sible cravings. But such was not the case, as even the Psal
ter sufficiently shows. It is not the Church but an individual
who tells us in the 139th psalm that sleeping or waking he
is ever busy with the thought of God [v. 18), and an indi
vidual who in the 73rd so trustfully alludes to the plan by
which his God leads him [v. 24). Nor can the lovely 23rd
psalm have merely a national reference, as some theorists have
persuaded themselves,3 unless indeed the allegory in John x.
can have a similarly restricted meaning. Which of us, even
if we be critics, can believe that the writers of these psalms do

320 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect
not pray in their own behalf? Yet we must with all empha
sis affirm that the individual never felt himself standing
alone — instinctively he connected his personal joys and griefs
with those of the Church-nation. A sign of this (necessary
to those who had not attained to the exalted idealism of
Jeremiah *) was the custom of turning in the act of prayer to
the holy mount, which was as it were the starting-point of
the desired answer to his supplication (see Pss. iii. 5, v. 8, xxviii.
2, cxxxviii. 2, and cf. 1 Kings viii. 29, 30, Dan. vi. 11). And
hence the blessing pronounced on the God-fearing man runs
thus, the most unselfish boon being placed first,
Jehovah bless thee out of Zion !
Behold thou the prosperity of Jerusalem
All the days of thy life ;
Yea, behold thou thy children's children.
Peace be upon Israel. (Ps. cxxviii. 5, 6, De Witt.)
2. We have next to inquire by what agency Jehovah works,
according to the psalmists. A great change has passed in
their time upon Israelitish Theism, which expresses itself with
singular clearness in certain forms of language. Notice for in
stance the fondness of Palestinian Jewish writers for the divine
title El Elyon" (or its Aramaic equivalent, see Dan. iii. 26, Sec),
and in connexion with this a strange reluctance in some
quarters to employ the venerable name Jehovah. The God
who, as antiquity delighted to believe, had once appeared to
men in bodily form, now seemed to have retired to an infinite
distance from created things." This was the first result of
prophetic thought upon the recent national judgments.
How shall I behold the face
Henceforth of God or angel, erst with joy
And rapture so oft beheld ?
Nowhere is this intensified supernaturalism (the beginnings of
wlyich can be traced in Isaiah) more strikingly exhibited than
in Ezekiel — one of the greatest of those reformers who have
recognized the importance to popular religion of the transcen
dental element in the conception of God, or, in Hebrew
phrase, of God's ' holiness ' and ' glory.' w There were those
however in the post-Exile period who misused this super
natural Theism. Some of them extracted from it an areu-

vii. AND HIS AGENCIES. 321
ment for immorality (like the ' fool ' who said in his heart,
' There is no God,' ' i.e., none but an inactive Deity), others
(like the author of Ecclesiastes) for a low-toned estimate of
human life. Others again may have recoiled from it into a
critical agnosticism (Prov. xxx. 1-4), and others, though
they did not ' restrain devotion ' (Job xv. 4), yet could fall
into the complaint that God had ' hidden his face ' (Pss.
xliv. 25, lxxxviii. 15). No doubt there were also wise men in
Israel who sought to correct these evils and (if I may employ
modern terms) to solve the problem of reconciling God's
transcendence with His immanence. Ezekiel was the first of
these, but Ezekiel was not the man to devise sufficiently sym
pathetic modes of meeting the difficulty.
Did the psalmists succeed better ? A practical, imagina
tive solution of the problem is of course all that we can
expect from them ; logic and metaphysics were not the
natural domain of the Jewish intellect. They appear to have
conceived of God in a way at once profound and popular as
surrounded by a number of ideas and ideals, of plans for the
race, for the nation, and even for individuals, and of forces
both natural and spiritual, some of which they personalized,
not arbitrarily, but on the basis of primitive beliefs, and some
they did not. God's words, for instance, they imagined as
standing near Him, ready to express and carry out His
thoughts or ideas (see Pss. xxxiii. 6, cvii. 20, cxlvii. 15, 18,
and cf. Isa. lv. II, Wisd. xviii. 1 S).x Or we may quite correctly
say that His words are at once His spoken and His as yet
unspoken thoughts ; a "O^ may be that which God says in
(more strictly, to) His heart or mind.2 To think or plan is
with God to create, but His thoughts need outward expres-
sior. His 'word' is said to come to a prophet (Jer. ii. 1),
and to alight upon a nation (Isa. ix. 8).y This divine, super
natural word may also be translated into human speech, and
handed down to succeeding generations. In this case, how
ever, an ' uncovering of the eyes,' or, as we may also say, an
' opening ' of the divine words themselves, is indispensable for
him who would comprehend them (Ps. cxix. 18, 130). This
idea of the 'word' of God gave a light and comfort to
1 Pss. xiv. 1 ; cf. x. 4, 11, 13, Ixxiii. 11, Job xxii. 13, 14.
2 Gen. viii. 21 (cf. xxiv. 45, xxvii. 41).

322 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
believers which no merely supernatural God could convey.
' Of God do I boast, even of his word,' z says Israel in the
midst of sore trouble (Ps. lvi. 5, 11), for of the preservation
of Israel not less than of the creation and preservation of the
world, it is true to say ' He spake, and it was done ' (Ps.
xxxiii. 9, cf. 10 and 11).
The conception of Jehovah's word is closely connected
(as is plain from Gen. i. 2, 3) with that of His spirit, — a con
nexion which is specially characteristic of the Old Testament.aa
It was no blind force inherent in nature which produced this
beautiful world, but a divine Thinker. The spirit represents
the universal life-giving principle which is communicated by
a ' word,' or, as Ps. xxxiii. 6 says, ' by the breath of God's
mouth.' A mythic origin is here too obvious to be disputed.
It was this that invested the term with the popularity which
commended it to religious writers, though less to the psalmists
than to others. ' Spirit of Jehovah,' or a similar phrase, occurs
four times in the Psalter, viz., in li. 13, civ. 30, cxxxix. 7,
cxliii. 10. Of these passages, the first represents the Spirit
as the energizing principle of ' holiness ' (i.e. in this context,
of devotion to the covenant between Israel and Jehovah) bb ;
the second, of creation or re-creation ; the third, of the divine
action in its totality ; and the fourth, of providential guidance.
The third is doctrinally the most interesting, because it sug
gests more distinctly than the rest the personality of the
Divine Spirit.00
Twice only do we find a certain half-independence ascribed
to the divine creative wisdom or understanding (civ. 24,
cxx'xvi. 5),dd, and we may ascribe this to the influence pf
Prov. viii. 22-31, at least if we accept the pre-Exile date of
this noblest of cosmogonies ee (cf. note oc, p. 217). Thrice, too,
is a quasi-personal existence given to God's ' truth ' or ' truth
fulness ' (xliii. 3, Ivii. 4, lxi. 8), twice to His ' lovingkindness '
(Ivii. 4, lxi. 8), and once to His ' light ' (xliii. 3) as the agencies
or agents of deliverance. All these expressions are suggested
by the unconscious idealistic philosophy of early ages, and
find their parallels both in Zoroastrian and in Talmudic
theology .ff Nor are these the only ISsai (if I may apply the
term) which encircle the Creator's throne. There are cosmic
as well as ethical Bvvdp,sis through which the God of nature

vii. AND HIS AGENCIES.

323

works. The ' hosts ' and ' ministers ' (Sept. Bwdfisis, XsiTovpyoi)
in Ps. ciii. 21 include, not only personal or partly personalized,
but even altogether impersonal agents, such as the storm-
wind (mythicized sometimes as the cherub),gg and the lightning-
flame (civ. 4), and the sun; the moon, and the stars, which are
still regarded as not wholly inanimate (see on Ps. xxiv. 6):
And hence the phrase ' Jehovah Sabaoth,' i.e. ' Jehovah the
God of hosts,' means in the psalms (except perhaps in Ps.
xxiv.) not merely the God of the armies of Israel, but more
especially (somewhat as the similar Babylonian title ') the God
of the manifold spiritual and physical powers which He can
employ for His people.2 ' Angels ' is a term which can be
applied to any of these ' hosts ' of God ; twice (xxxiv. 8,
xxxv. 5) we even find ' the angel of Jehovah,' who may be
either a direct embodiment of Jehovah Himself, as in the early
narratives, or the particular angel who has been selected from
the myriad members of his class either, as in xxxv. 5, to
punish, or, as in xxxiv. 8, to protect. In xci. 1 1 ' angels ' in
general are spoken of as defending the believer ; the sense,
however, is the same as in the two former passages. No
recognition is given either to the existence of a personal evil
principle (though Sin, or Apostasy, is once personified as a
quasi-divine power in xxxvi. 2, comp. Zech. v. 8 3), or to the
names of evil angels, or to the attaching of a special angel
or angels to an individual.1111 And delightful as the psalm
ists' references to angels are, they are comparatively so
few in number as to suggest11 that a doctrine of angels
lay as yet outside the programme of the leaders of Jewish
thought.-" What, then, may be presumed to have been the psalmists'
object in their occasional mention of angels? The same
as that of the great narrators who adopt certain popular
myths and legends, not with a historical object (for what we
call history was not yet born), but to fill them with a new and
purer spirit. The psalmists' object was, not merely to regu-
1 See Schrader, Cuneiform Inscriptions, ii. 105 ; Sayce, Hibbert Lectures,
p. 217. 2 So even in Ps. lix. 6 ; cf. Isa. xxix. 6.
a Cf. Enoch xiii. 1-3 (where Wisdom and Unrighteousness are opposed, as in
Proverbs Wisdom and Folly).

324 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
late, but so far as possible to render subservient to edification
a dangerous popular tendency which had been strengthened
by Babylonian and Persian influences. Much reference to
the spirit-world would have been worse than useless. The
people understood well enough who the angels were,
and what they did, though probably they preferred to call
them by other names. Some of these the psalmists them
selves have now and then employed for the sake of variety.
Thus we see from Ixxxix. 6, 8,1 that the angels were also
called the ' holy,' i.e. the superhuman, supersensible ones,
while in ciii. 20 2 they are mentioned as the ' heroes,' and in
lxxviii. 25 kk as the ' mighty.' Who can help admiring the
beautiful tact with which the two latter titles are introduced ?
' To the nation whose romantic history it enriched,' the
phrase, ' the bread of the mighty,' became, as Dr. Martineau
observes, ' the favourite emblem of the providing care of
God.' 3 And if the angels, with whose worship the Church
associates her own, are ' heroic in strength,' it is only, accord
ing to the psalmist, that they may ' perform His word ' — the
word of Him who has said, ' Upon all their host do I lay
commands' (Isa. xlv. 12). Thus their glory lies in their
emptiness of self-hood. To all who would exalt the angels
above measure, the psalmists, like the first great Christian
commentator on their words, would reprovingly exclaim,
' Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service ? '
(Heb. i. 14 R.V.)
There were also other names of angels of more doubtful
sound, because associated with myths uncongenial to the
higher religion. I refer to the phrases ' the gods ' [elim 4 or
elohim 5), ' the sons of the gods ' [b'ne elim? b'ne elohim, or
b'ne ha-elohim 7), and the sons of the most High 8 [b'ne 'elyon),
which describe certain ' principalities and powers ' of which a
secondary divinity is predicated, and which together form the
' council ' of Jehovah.11 I have said so much elsewhere on
these mythic phrases mm that I must be brief now. Suffice it
to say that, in spite of their avoidance of the divine name
1 Cf. Job v. 1, xv. 15, Zech. xiv. 5. " Cf. Joel iv. 11, and see Targum
3 Hours of Thought, i. 164. 4 Ps. lviii. 2.
5 Ps. lxxxii. 1, 6. ° Pss. xxix. I, Ixxxix. 7.
' Gen. vi. 2, 4, Job i. 6, ii. 1, xxxviii. 7. 8 Ps. lxxxii. 6.

VII. AND HIS AGENCIES. 325
' Father,' the psalmists have not refused to employ these, as
we cannot help thinking, strange titles. But to what noble
purpose have they turned them ! Nothing, for instance, will
more heighten our respect for the Hebrew Scriptures than a
careful study of Psalms xxix., lviii., and lxxxii. in connexion
with the Prologue of Job, and, to take a still wider range, with
those narratives of Genesis which have sometimes been so
unwisely ridiculed. We at least can see that, though they
scorned not to pick the wayside flowers of mythic imagery,
the Old Testament writers have most deftly interwoven them
with blooms of another clime, that they have in short pressed
popular imagination into the service of religion.
But is this in accordance with modern analogies ? Do we
not find in our foreign mission fields — in Japan, for instance
— that translators of the Bible are obliged to adopt terms of
pronounced mythic origin to express Christian conceptions ?
And yet the well-instructed Christian convert has no thought,
as he reads his Bible, of the old mythic affinities of the terms.
May not the mythic terms in the Hebrew Scriptures have
had their meaning as absolutely transformed as those in the
Japanese Bible ? No ; the cases of ancient Judah and
modern Japan are different. Christianity has interrupted the
natural development of Japanese religion. The prophets of
Israel, however, historically regarded, aimed not at interrupt
ing but at guiding and spiritualizing the inherited religion of
their people. It is not possible to interpret the Old Testa
ment critically upon the same theory as the Japanese Bible,
nor can Biblical exegesis leave out of account the original
meaning of mythic phrases.
Pardon me for insisting upon so obvious a truth. It
appears to me that exegesis is in danger of being led astray
by a misplaced modern repugnance to mythology. For
instance, the view that both in Ps. lxxxii. and in Heb. ii. 5
prince-angels are referred to, is sometimes rejected because it
is opposed to conventional modes of thought."" I venture to
regret this, and sympathize with one of the Oxford missionaries
in Calcutta, who finds comfort in the thought that ' the Angel
of India and his host are more than they that are with them.'
Why should I fear to recognize mythic forms of speech in the
New Testament ? There, or anywhere else, if of the nobler

326 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
kind, they delight, they edify me. The yearning after God
which they imply touches me somewhat as the author of Religia
Medici was touched by the music of the streets. Nor can I see
that anything is gained by rejecting them. You may call them
myths, and declare, with Max Piccolomini in Coleridge's
version of Wallenstein, that ' they live no longer in the faith
of reason.' But myths are not necessarily fables, and are
wholly exempt from the criticism of the lower reason. Some
myths at least were regarded in the early Church as symbols
of truths which could not otherwise be expressed. And can
it be shown that the capacity of man for apprehending super
sensible facts has been materially widened ? Cannot poetry
still enter where dogmatic theology stands without ?
Permit me, then, to hope that some whose lot it is to
speak of the Old Testament will join me in the path which
Herder long since indicated. Thus and thus only can some
of those misconceptions be removed which keep doubters
from us. Thus and thus only will Christian students win the
key to many of their own dearest symbols, and be enabled to
draw honey from the neglected myths of Hebrew antiquity.
Truly said Max Piccolomini, expressing Schiller's own pro
test against the vulgar rationalism, .... a deeper import
Lurks in the legend told my infant years
Than lies upon that truth, we live to learn.
A localized Olympus is useless to us, but the Christian heart
has still its ' mount of God ; ' 00 and since the Church is a
' royal priesthood,' each member thereof may in a true sense
adopt the language even of the King of Babylon.1 Our
angelic visitants have indeed no material mountain to
descend, and when we dream, it is of no ladder like Jacob's ;
and yet, whenever the Christian poet speaks of heaven and of
angels, he uses the imaginative material inherited from the
days when the world was young. How else, truly, can he
express his sense that nature is not a lifeless machine, but
1 full,' as some one has said, ' of eyes which are always gazing
into ours ' ? Those ' eyes ' must be friendly human eyes ; do
we not all prefer the conception of the angel in the patriarchal
1 Isa. xiv. 13, 14.

vii. AND HIS AGENCIES. 327
stories to that of the cherub ? And yet the latter, on which
Jehovah was thought to ride from heaven to earth (Ezek. i.,
x.), is too striking a symbol to be cast aside. The God of the
Christian as well as the Jewish Church is ' high above all
nations' (Ps. cxiii. 4), but the Spirit-taught utterances of
believing hearts can at any moment bring Him nigh. For,
as the elder Church sings, ' Thou, the Holy One, on whom
our fathers trusted, art enthroned (not upon the cherubim of
fancy, but) upon the praises of Israel (Ps. xxii. 4).1

Note a, p. 312.
Weber, Altsyn. Theol., p. 150 (view of name Jehovah) ; Cremer,
Bibl. Theol. Lex., p. 662 (on 'kingdom of heaven,' or 'of God') ;
cf. Edersheim, Prophecy and History, pp. 350, 351. In comparing
Israel's religion with those of other nations, we must therefore not
look too exclusively at its latest phases, as is done by Asmus [Die
indogerman. Religion, ii. 330, &c).
Note b, p. 313.
The passage has, however, a wider meaning. Comp. also Matt.
xi. 27, where a very ancient reading (Origen) is : 'No one knew
(eyvoi) the Father save the Son,' illustrating this by John i. 18.
Note °, p. 313.
One of the finest examples is in Matt. xi. 25, with which cf. Eph.
iii. 15. Ben Sira makes a fine individualizing use of the term in
Ecclus. xxiii. 1-4 ; li. 10 (see Edersheim) is not in point, the Church
being here the speaker. Philo often uses it of God in His relation
both to the world and mankind. In a noble description of the
Divine Kingship [Opera, Mangey, ii. 634, 635), he remarks that
God is no tyrant but a king who uses a gentle and legal sovereignty,
fiao-iXei Be ovk ecni irpoo-prjais oiKeioTepa LTaTpos. In its reference to
the nation, it is common in the Jewish liturgies (see the fifth and
sixth of the Eighteen Benedictions and the prayer called Abinu
Malkenu, ' our Father, our King '). The learned nonjuror Hickes
admits this, but adds that the old Jews, being under a servile
dispensation, never presumed to address themselves unto God by
1 Cf. Expositor, Jan. 1888, p. 29; The Hallowing of Criticism, pp. 109, no.

328 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
that familiar appellation before the times of Christianity, 'when
they saw that the Christians, who reproached them as bondmen
to the Law, came with such freedom to the throne of grace' [The
Spirit of Enthusiasm Exorcised, 1709, p. 35).
Note d, p. 313.
Compare Ritschl's almost too bold expression of this truth in
Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung, ii. 15-17 (ed. 1874).
In the next sentence but one, the reference is to Ewald's last great
work on Biblical Theology [Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott, &c).
Note e, p. 314.
Note also the characteristic phrase ' the God of heaven ' (Ps.
exxxvi. 26), and compare the use-of D*DB* as a kind of ideograph for
God (cf. p. 298, and see Landau, Die dem Raume entnommene
Synonyma fiir Gott in der neuhebr. Liter atur, 1888).
Note f, p. 314.
If we should not, in Ps. cxvi. 9, rather read ' paths ' with Dr.
Weir (see crit. note in my commentary). Note e, p. 315.
See Deut. xxviii. 10, Isa. lxiii. 19, Jer. xiv. 9, vii. 10, 11, xv. 16,
Am. ix. 12, 1 Kings viii. 43, and cf. Isa. iv. 1, 2 Sam. xii. 28. See
also Kautzsch, Zeitschr.f. die alttest. Wiss., 1886, pp. 18, 19.
Note h, p. 315.
See Deut. xii. 5, and cf. Isa. xviii. 7, 1 Kings viii. 17, Tobit xiii.
11. Originally 'the name' in 'the place of the name' and similar
phrases must have meant the ark (cf. the language used of the temple
at Shiloh, Jer. vii. 12, and see next note). But in the higher religion
it meant as certainly ' the God who answers prayer,' ' the God of
revelation ' (cf. Isa. lvi. 7, ' my house shall be called the house of
prayer '). Note l, p. 315.
Comp. the Phoenician inscriptiori of Eshmunazar, lines 16, 17,
where it is the ' very lofty name ' of Astarte or Esmun which dwells
in the god's temple. Spencer [De Legibus Hebrceorum, ii. 892, &c.)

¦VII. AND HIS AGENCIES. 329
fully grasps the original meaning of the ark, quoting the Targum on
Jer. iii. 16 (which adds to the prophet's words, ' neither with it shall
they go to battle '), and Prudentius' description of the ark as ' Deum
circumvagum.' It is unnecessary to read with Klostermann in
2 Sam. vi. 2, ' the ark of God, the name of which was called Yahveh
Cebaoth.' Note J, p. 316.
See Jer. vii. 4. But all Jeremiah's contemporaries were not
formalists. 1 Kings viii. 27-30 is clearly a compromise between
the exalted idealism of Jeremiah and the sweet old religion of holy
places ; and similar conceptions are implied in Pss. v. 8, xxviii. 2
(cf. my Study in Expositor, Jan. 1890). The Prayer of Solomon
was probably written (as Kuenen has shown) not long before the
first captivity. How M. Vernes can think that the view of the
temple which it expresses points rather to the Greek period [Les
resultats de Vexeghe biblique, p. 210), is difficult to understand.
Note k, p. 316. /
' The trumpet to thy mouth ! ' says Jehovah/to His prophet
Hosea ; ' as an eagle he cometh against the house of Jehovah, be
cause they have transgressed my covenant, and trespassed against my
law ' (Hos. viii. 1 ; the opening words of the passage seem in
complete). The 'house' is the land of N. Israel, as in Hos. ix. 15.
Note m, p. 316.
The superiority of Jerusalem to the other 'dwellings of Jacob ' is
recognized in Ps. Ixxxvii. 2. A post-Exile prophet, noticing the un
worthy pride which this superiority nourished at Jerusalem, foretells
the time when such self-exaltation shall cease, Judah and Jerusalem
being equally holy (Zech. xii. 7, xiv. 21). See further Wellhausen,
Prolegomena, p. 22, note. Note n, p. 316.
This statement is correct, whatever be the date of Isa. lxv., Ixvi.
{see pp. 153, 159). Note °, p. 317.
In my note on Isa. xiv. 13 I have remarked that, tempting as it is
to identify the ' mountain of (the divine) assembly ' with the mythic
Babylonian ' mountain of the lands,' we are not bound to follow the
Assyriologists in this point, since the Jews themselves believed in a

33° JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
' holy mountain of Elohim,' on the slopes of which lay the ' garden ' (or
park) of Eden (Ezek. xxviii. 13, 14). It now appears somewhat
doubtful whether the ' mountain of the lands ' was localized anywhere
upon earth. Jensen [Die Kosmologie der Babylonier, pp. 203-209)
thinks that the name belonged to the earth itself, which was regarded
as a mountain. He thinks further (p. 23) that the prophet's "IJ/10 in,,
if it corresponds to a Babylonian belief, may mean the heaven, re
garded as a mountain, for which view he finds points of contact in
the cuneiform texts. He does not however deny that the Iranian
mountain Hara-berezaiti, on which the divinities Mithra and
Rashnu dwelt, and Meru, the Indian mountain of the gods, were
localized on the earth. Note p, p. 317.
We find the same symbolical view of a temple at Babylon and
Nineveh. At the former place the great temple was called 'the
palace [ekal) of heaven and earth ; ' at the latter, ' the house of the
great mountain of the lands.' 'So far as I know,' says Tiele, 'the
name ekal is only given to such metropolitan temples.'
Note 1, p. 317.
The ordinary rendering of Ps. Ixxxvii. 5 according to which
B*-in = jvp.y, is usually supported by a reference to 1 Sam. xx. 29, where
however the Sept. appears to have read otherwise, and some correc
tion is indispensable (see Klostermann and Wellhausen). In Ps. I.e.
I take ffby adverbially, with Geiger [Urschrift, p. 34).
Note r, p. 318.
In the former, the ' stone ' referred to is the whole of Mount Zion
(cf. Isa. iv. 5), including especially the temple, but the object of Israel's
faith is not the rock, but He who founds it, viz., Jehovah. In the
latter, Jeremiah addresses God as ' Thou throne of glory ....
thou hope of Israel, Jehovah.' He means to say that Jehovah who
needs no temple is alone the fitting hope of Israel (contrast the
language of the Jews, Jer. vii. 4).
Note 5, p. 319.
Philo gives the psalm not merely a national but a cosmic refer
ence, and yet even he says that it may also be said by the individual
[De Agric, Mangey, i. 308).

VII. AND, HIS AGENCIES. 331

Note ', p. 320.
After the fall of the temple opinions became divided as to the
necessity of turning towards Jerusalem in prayer. The doctrine of
the omnipresence of the Shekina seemed to many Rabbis to render
this unnecessary [Baba bathra, 25, ap. Wunsche, Talm. ii. 2, p. 158,
&c). It was in fact a remnant of externalism which we too, from
the highest prophetic point of view, may justly criticize. But in
doing so, we must give full credit to pious Israelites for having to so
great an extent thrown off the fair but dangerous religion of local
and material sanctity. For it is clear that the psalm-passages which
I have referred to above presuppose a compromise between the
teaching of Jeremiah and an unenlightened antiquity. Comp. Study
on Psalms xxvi. and xxviii., Expositor, Jan. 1890.
Note u, p. 320.
"Yif/io-Tos, as a name of God, which is found so often in the Greek
version of Sirach, occurs, however, but twice in Wisdom (v. 15, vi. 3),
and Dr. Drummond does not enter it among the divine epithets in
Philo. Yet no Jewish teacher ever felt the ' transcendence ' of God
more strongly than Philo. Note v, p. 320.
As a Midrash pointedly expresses it, the last of the ten descents
(nnn1) of God will take place in the age to come [Pirqe de Rabbi
Eliezer, c. 14, ap. Delitzsch). Note w, p. 320.
Jehovah's holiness and His glory are correlative ideas. In Him
self, as compared with man, He is ' holy,' and His appearance is
glorious. This illustrates Isa. vi. 3 as compared with Ps. xxix. 9.
Both terms have a suggestion of fearfulness, especially in the moral
stage of Jewish religion. Those who are not altogether at peace
with God may well fear one who is raised so high above nature, and
whose vesture is of fiery light. But to those who are friends of
Jehovah, His ' glory ' is a synonym for His ' pleasantness ' (see my
note on Ps. xxvii. 4), and His 'holiness' for His fidelity to His
covenant (Ps. xxii. 4). And so, when in the passage last referred to
the psalmist addresses Jehovah as ' Holy One,' he uses the term not
in the sense of ' One infinitely above the human race,' but ' One
who cares for Israel ' (cf. the Isaianic phrase, ' the Holy One of

332 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
Israel,' which occurs but thrice in the Psalter, lxxi. 22, lxxviii. 41,
Ixxxix. 19). In Ps. xcix. 3 Israel is exhorted to give thanks to
Jehovah as ' the Holy One ; ' His name is no doubt also called ' great
and terrible,' but, as I have shown on Ps. lxv. 6, cxxxix. 14, ' terrible '
is a word of double meaning. And in Ps. xcviii. 1, the help which
Israel has experienced is traced to Jehovah's 'holy arm.' Evidently
the object of Israel's most spiritual teachers at the opening of the
later period was to make the thought of God's ' holiness ' a source of
inspiration and not of overpowering dread. We shall return to this
in Part II. How the sense of the term 'holiness ' was modified in
the N.T. has been well shown by Issel, Der Begriff der Heiligkeit im
N.T. (Leiden, 1887). Note x, p. 321.
This fine symbolism developed in an unlooked-for direction. The
iOD'Ei, or ' Word,' for which in the Palestinian Targum we also find
the synonym HJi^ or H~j2'n, and the fcO'DK*, or 'glorious divine pre
sence,' have a manifest tendency to become quasi-independent organs
of the Most High. Both titles are based upon Biblical passages,
somewhat unduly pressed (see, e.g., for Memra, the above passages,
and for Shekina, Num. ix. 17-22 and Ps. Ixxxv. 10). Both too have
a long history. The Shekina is the later word ; it was coined, as
Landau thinks, by R. Akiba. And while the conception of the
Memra, so far as I can at present see, is independent of foreign
influences, that of the Shekina, which is connected with that of the
light as in some sense the body or the garment of the Lord, must
apparently have been helped forward by the precisely similar Zoroas-
trian belief. The symbolism of light was indeed native to Hebraism,
but was immensely more developed after the Return. Into the develop
ment of the Shekina-belief in Talmudic and Sufic theology I cannot
enter. Note y, p. 321.
Comp. Dan. iv. 31, ' there fell a voice from heaven.' It may be
objected that this is an involuntary allusion to the ' Bath Qol ' (see
note JJ p. 39) of later Jewish religion. True ; but this ' oracular
echo ' is itself a revival of an earlier belief (see 1 Sam. iii. 3, 4,
and on the interpretation put upon unexpected sounds by the ancient
Arabs see Wellhausen, Skizzen, iii. 139).
Note z, p. 322.
My Book of Psalms (1888) gives the ordinary rendering of Ps. lvi.
5, n, 'Through God can I praise his word ' (reading, of course,

vii. AND HIS AGENCIES 333

riiyi in both verses). But it now appears to me that the passages
are not parallel to Ps. Ix. 14, ' Through God (D'nbxa) we shall do
valiantly,' but rather to Isa. xxvi. 13, 'in thee alone can we glory,
even in thy name.' That this is the required meaning in the latter
passage, seems to me required by the context (see Lect. VIII.), and
since the preparation of these lectures this rendering has been
adopted by Dillmann, whose grammatical instinct is keen. The
context favours a similar interpretation in' Ps. lvi. Glorying in God's
promise is synonymous with ' trusting without fear.' For the con
tinued action of the preposition, see Isa. xxviii. 6, and other passages
cited by Ewald, Lehrbuch, § 351 a.
Note aa, p. 322.
Mohammed called our Lord not only ' God's Word ' [kalima)
but 'a spirit from Himself [Koran, Sur. iv. 169). His followers
call Jesus ruhu 'llah, 'Spirit of God.' The uses of ruh in the
Koran betray Jewish influence, which was strong in Arabia.
Note bb, p. 322.
See above, note w, and cf. on Ps. li. 13. Hitzig, who gives the phrase
' holy spirit ' a simple ethical meaning, regards BHp nil as the transla
tion of the Zend (pento-mainyus (the holy Spirit, as opposed to angro-
mainyus, or the evil spirit). This, however, is as groundless as
Hitzig's connexion of Yahveh with Ahura ; nor is cpento etymologi-
cally parallel to B'np (see Spiegel, Avesta, Bd. iii., Einleit. pp. iv., v.).
To the later Jews ' holy spirit ' meant especially ' spirit of prophecy.'
Hence Targ. Jerus. paraphrases Gen. xxx. 25, 'Jacob said by the
holy spirit concerning the house of Joseph, They are to be as a flame
to consume the house of Esau '). More correctly, ' a spirit of
Elohim, ' in Gen. xii. 38, is interpreted by Onkelos (and also Targ.
Jerus.), 'the spirit of prophecy from the Lord.'
Note 00, p. 322.
On Ps. cxliii. 10, see my Commentary, and cf. notes on Isa. xl. 13,
lxiii. 10. In the oldest part of the Avesta (the Gathas) the fpento-
mainyus (see note bb) is spoken of as having personal existence.
Note da, p. 322.
Cf. Jer. x. 12 (Jer. x. 1-16 was written by one of the many ad
mirers and scholars of the Second Isaiah).

334 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.

Note ee, p. 322.
CL Job and Solomon, pp. 160, 161. The striking personification
in Enoch xiii. 1, 2 reminds us strongly of Prov. viii., Job xxviii., and
Ecclus. xxiv., and the Prologue of the Fourth Gospel (John i. n).
In the Zoroastrian Gathas, the personified understanding of Ahura is
synonymous with His Spirit, and in the later Yasna we find the
' heavenly wisdom, Mazda-made,' which in the very late book called
Minokhired is described like o-ocpia in the Book of Wisdom.
Note ff, p. 322.
The personification of divine attributes and gifts pervades the
Gathas. But it is not a mere poetic figure. Zarathustra did not
indeed regard Asha, Sraosha, Aramaiti, as literally persons, but he
probably did assign to them an objective existence. Even Complete
Welfare (Haurvatat) and Immortality (Ameretatat) may, consistently
with primitive philosophy, have been thus objectified. So too in
Talmudic theology God's righteousness, His mercy, His goodness,
His condescension, and even His will or good pleasure (cf. elBoKia,
Luke ii. 14) appear as quasi- independent beings (see Joel, Blicke in
die Religionsgeschickte, i. 114, 115). In this light we can better
understand how the angels can be represented as 'springing forth
new every morning ' (Hymn Akdamuth, sung at Pentecost, Festival
Prayers, ii. 152) ; cf. Lam. iii. 22, 23.
Note rk, p. 323.
Cf. the phrase, ' that is enthroned on the cherubim ' (Pss . Ixxx.
2, xcix. 1, cf. xxii. 4, and my notes on these passages).
Note hh, p. 323.
Evil angels. The primitive Israelites doubtless classified the
divine powers, not as good and evil, but as helpful and hurtful.
There would have been little harm in this, if they had recognized, or
had always recognized, the dependence of both classes of Elohim
upon the supreme God. But they were too prone to worship the
spirits of nature, which had no moral character, and which were
called shedim (cf. Assyrian sidu) ; see Deut. xxxii. 17, Ps. cvi. 37. Pro
bably with many Jews in the Persian period these Baip.6via (as Sept.
calls them) took the place of the ' demons ' of Ahriman's kingdom
in Zoroastrianism ; cf. the later Jewish belief as described by Weber
[System, p. 245). The psalmists, however, would have reckoned

vii. AND HIS AGENCIES. 335
even hurtful angels among the 'angels of service,' and even the
author of Ecclesiastes (close of Persian period) represents the de
stroying angel as the minister of God (Eccles. v. 6 ; see Job and
Solomon, p. 216). For the psalmist's view, see Ps. lxxviii. 49^ (R. V.),
' a band of angels of evil ' (Sept., dyyeXwv irov^pfiv, i.e. ' hurtful angels,'
cf. Qi)pia irovrjpd, Ezek. xiv. 15 ; Symm. ayyeXwv KaKOvvTwv ; Targ.
pt}"3 P^tS). The writer carefully excludes the popular notion by
the word nn?K>p 'a mission ' or 'commissioned band (of),' and insists
that the many destroying angels (the pp'fl? of later Judaism ; see
Targ. on Ps. cvi. 37) are but personifications of God's ' hot anger,
fury, and fervent ire.' The Talmud, however, will have it that
'anger' and 'wrath' are really two angels (Jer., Taanith, ii. 65^ in
Weber, p. 149). Observe that ' Satan,' as a more or less independent
evil spirit, is not once referred to in the Psalms (even in Ps. cix. 6) ;
he is also studiously ignored in Ecclesiasticus (see Job and Solomon,
pp. 79, 188). — Naming of angels. The angels Gabriel and Michael
in the Book of Daniel are probably two of the ' seven holy angels '
referred to in Tobit xii. 15, cf. Rev. i. 4, a detail of angelology which
is clearly of Zoroastrian origin, though modified Hebraistically,
Jehovah not being one of the seven (see Kohut on Angelology, and
Mills, Zendavesta, part iii., p. 145 ; and cf. Ewald, Old and New
Test. Theology, p. 76). Later on, other angels were named, as we see
both from the Book of Enoch and from the Talmud. The Essenes
carefully guarded the names of the angels, doubtless with a view to
supernatural revelations (Jos., War, ii. 8, 7). The early teachers of
the Jewish Church may have been shocked at the invocation of the
fravashis in the contemporary Zoroastrianism, and on this account
have hesitated to give names to angels. — Patron-angels. If there
were patron-angels of nations (see on Ps. lxxxii.), why should there
not be such of individuals? So the later Jews thought, passing
beyond Ps. xci. 11, where a general charge is given to God's angels
to watch over the righteous man (for their interpretation of Ps. I.e.,
see Weber, System, p. 166). Their inference was, however, probably
helped forward by the elaborate Zoroastrian theory of fravashis (see
next Lecture). That there is great religious depth in this conception,
which (as Daya in Lessing's Nathan says) ' Christian, Jew, Mussul
man, agree to own,' and which symbolizes the individuality of the
relation between God and the soul, cannot be denied. See Matt.
xviii. 10, and cf. Acts xii. 15, also Koran, 1. 16.
Note ", p. 323.
Especially in connexion with the fact that the Priestly Code does
not once refer to the angels. The Gathas of Zarathustra, it should

336 JEHOVAH'S SPHERE OF WORKING lect.
be noticed, refer to the Amshaspands (who suggested the archangels),
but mainly as personified abstractions, and not at all to the Fravashis
or the Yazatas. Note JJ, p. 323.
It was otherwise in the subsequent period. In the Book of
Daniel (which, as we have seen, cannot be an Exilic work) there are
already clear tokens of change. Later on, the Scribes, developing
Biblical germs, produced an angelology which is in its main outlines
presupposed both by Jesus and by the New Testament writers. It
was felt that men were not worthy to be the only intelligent and
moral subjects of the divine kingdom, and that the voluntary self-
surrender of the angels to the moral aims of the kingdom was a most
helpful example for poor frail man. Thus the actual reign of God
over the angels became a prophecy of His perfect rule over men in
the day when there shall be no more any partition-wall between
heaven and earth, when the angels shall go in and out among men,
and men shall become IcrdyyeXoi (Matt. xxii. 30, cf. xvi. 27, Enoch
xxxix. 1). And since that which actually is in heaven cannot strictly
speaking arise, and the day towards which history moves is even
now with Jehovah (Isa. ii. 12, 'Jehovah hath a day' &c), the
disciples are taught to pray, ' Thy kingdom come.' But though an
angelology is undoubtedly presupposed in the N.T., it is used popu
larly and with poetic freedom, precisely as the later Jewish doctrine
is used by R. Yehuda Hallevi in his noble hymn [kediishah) for the
Day of Atonement. And it is an important fact that neither in
Christianity nor in Judaism is the doctrine of angels a fundamental
article of faith as it is in Islam.

Note kk, p. 324.
Jerome renders in Ps. lxxviii. 25 'panem fortium ;' Sept., dpTov
ayyeXiav. Note u, p. 324.
Pss. lxxxii 1, Ixxxix. 8. Let no one take offence at the above.
' With whom took he counsel ? ' are the words of the Second Isaiah
(xl. 14). 'He stood in no need of the holy council,' says the sup
posed Enoch (xiv. 22), recognizing the mythic form of speech but
cautioning the reader against misconception. The psalmists evi
dently agree with both. The Book of Daniel, too, though it ventures
on naming two archangels, expresses in the name of one of them the
incommensurableness of Jehovah and any angel (Michael=' who is

vii. AND HIS AGENCIES. 337
like God,' cf. Ps. Ixxxix. 7, 8). This might be a protest against the
inclusion of Ahura Mazda among the seven ' immortal holy ones '
(the Amshaspands), an inconsistency found in some passages of the
Avesta. Note mm, p. 324.
See my Commentary, ^rxAJob and Solomon, pp. 81, 82. I may
add here that 2 Chron. xxviii. 23 furnishes a good illustration of
Ps. lxxxii. It implies that there really were secondary Elohim, but
that they had no jurisdiction over Israel (comp. Deut. xxxii. 8, 9
Sept.), and for an Israelite to worship them would be to his own
ruin. Later on, speculation produced a D^iun ft? or ' prince-patron
of the world,' who is to be distinguished from the heads of the Satans
and of the shedim respectively. He would, of course, be one of the
principal elohim. See Chullin, 60a ; Sanhedrin, 94a (quoted by
Wunsche, Erlduterungen, on John xii. 31).
Note nn, p. 325.
See Dean Perowne's introd. to Ps. lxxxii., Dr. Edersheim's note
on Ecclus. xvii. 17, and Dr. Bruce on Heb. ii. 5 in Expositor, 1882
(2), p. 362, &c. Certainly there is nothing in a reference to 'prince-
angels ' to surprise the student of Jewish theology (see Weber, Alt-
synagog. Pal. Theologie, p. 165). In a yet larger sense, the world was
conceived, by both Jews and Christians, to be subject to ' ministerial
spirits.' On the angels of the elements, and even of human impulses,
see Weber, p. 167; and on the Pagan and Gentile-Christian doctrine
of Baip.oves, see Baur, Church History, ii. 162 ; Bigg, The Christian
Platonists, pp. 258, 259 ; Reville, La Religion a Rome sous les
S'everes, p. 40, &c. Note 00, p. 326.
See Heb. xii. 18, 22. In a lovely terzina of Dante we find the
phrase 'nelF alto Olimpo' [Purg. xxiv. 15).

PART II.
HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, AND WITH WHAT RESULTS..
We have not yet completely answered the question, By
what agency does the Lord Jehovah work ? One special
i agency will have long since suggested itself to the reader, and
must now in the last place be considered — the Messianic.1
The hope to which it appeals has assumed various forms in
the Old Testament, but common to them all is the idea that
God's permanent presence among His people is the supreme
bliss of the future. The belief in a great coming descendant
of David, of ideal character and fortunes, is the form which
ultimately asserted itself most strongly in religious minds (see„
even before the Gospels, the Similitudes of Enoch), but it is
far from being the only one. It is necessary therefore b>
expand the narrow conventional sense of the word Messiah.
The term ' Anointed One ' is either applied or applicable to>
any one who has received from God some unique commission
of a directly or indirectly religious character. Thus David
and each of David's successors were, theoretically rather than
in fact, Messiahs (Ps. xviii.), and a descendant of David, of
ideal character and fortunes, was to be, both in theory and in
fact, a Messiah (see Isa. ix., xi. ; it is implied too of course in
the idealization of David in Ps. xviii.). A non-Israelitish prince
is called ' Jehovah's Anointed ' in Isa. xlv. i (cf. Ps. xlv. 8),,
and the Jewish high priest ' the Anointed ' in Lev. iv. 3, 5
(cf. Ps. lxxxiv. io).a So too (virtually) is the mysterious
Servant of Jehovah, who stands in such close relation to<
Israel, in Isa. lxi. 1 (and is not the same idea implied
in Ps. xxii. ?). Lastly, the actual people of Israel was a
1 Pages 338-340 are not of course meant as a summary of results on the
Messianic idea in the Psalter. They give only what the argument at this stage
requires — an explanation of the term ' Messiah,' and a fundamental idea common
to all the Messianic psalms.

lect. vn. HOW JEHOVAH WORKS. 339

Messiah, both theoretically and to some extent in fact
(Ps. Ixxxix. 39, 52, virtually).11
To each of these six Messianic persons and classes refer
ences expressed or implied occur in the Psalter, and if on some
points of detail students are divided,0 need we be surprised ?
In 1 88 1, in an essay addressed to students of apologetics,
I expressed views on Pss. ii., Ixxii., and ex., which seem to me
now inexact. They were and still are tenable, however,
because they are based, not on mere tradition, but on criti
cism. It is a fact that, even after the royalistic form of the
Messianic conception had become antiquated, sporadic refer
ences to a hoped-for Messiah do occur in the post-Exile
Scriptures, so that there was no a priori absurdity in sup
posing that a few such might be found in the Psalter.d For the
psalmists were deep students of the earlier Scriptures. It was
also more reasonable to hold that there were three such
psalms e than, with Delitzsch, that there was only one (the
1 10th) ; for how should a single writer, without the support
of fellow psalmists, have ventured on so new a path ?
Delitzsch himself, too, admits that no recorded events in his
tory account for the expressions of the 2nd, and he might well
have added, for those of the 72nd psalm. But I have suf
ficiently explained the grounds of my present opinion, which
rests perhaps on a firmer and more consistent application of
the comparative method. Messianic, both the 2nd and the noth
psalms of course remain. The idealization of historical persons
which they present presupposes the belief in an ideal Messianic
monarchy, now or at some later time to be granted to Israel.
The same remark applies to the 18th, the 45th, the 72nd,
the 89th, and the 132nd, and in a less degree to the 20th,
21st, and 101st. If in some cases the ideal kingship has
been ascribed to a non-Davidic Israelite, and in others even
to a foreign prince, this does not alter its close connexion with
the personal Messianic hope ; ' David ' was undoubtedly
becoming a type or symbol.1 I need not say anything here
of the other class of Messianic psalms — those which refer
to the persecuted church-nation — my change of opinion being
less important here than in the former case.2
1 See pp. 22, 25, 37, and comp. The Prophecies of Isaiah, ed. 3, p. 201.
2 See pp. 263, 292.

J40 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.
All these psalms are (let me say it again, for it concerns
modern apologists to be frank) only Messianic in a sense
which is psychologically justifiable. They are, as I have
shown, neither typically, nor in the ordinary sense prophe
tically Messianic. What is the fundamental idea of the
Messianic psalms ? Simply this — that the people of Israel is
to work out the divine purposes in the earth, and to do this
with such utter self-forgetfulness that each of its own successes
shall but add a fresh jewel to Jehovah's crown. Whether a
Iring (past, present, or future), or the people of Israel, is
referred to, makes no difference. The Messianic king is
primarily the representative of the Messianic people. Special
gifts are only granted to him that he may the better lead the
people to the conquest of the nations. And the final aim is
that with or against their will all mankind may be united
under the righteous sway of Jehovah. Even in that grandest
¦of the more strictly Messianic psalms, in which the king
¦enthroned on Zion is called the 'son of Jehovah' Himself
(Ps. ii. 7), the concluding verses point us to the heavenly King
as the true Lord of the nations, and pronounce those alone
happy who take refuge in Him.f
3. How does Jehovah work, and what results flow from
His working? He works, firstly, by ruling wisely, irresistibly,
and for moral ends. Rule, He must ; for how should there be
peace, even in ' His high places ' (Job xxv. 2), if He did not
keep the created ' principalities ' within bounds ? So at least
it seemed to those who, like the poet of Job and one or two
¦of the psalmists, admitted the temporary quasi-independence
of the ' sons of Elohim.' And how should there be peace on
earth, if the ' King of the nations ' l never uttered His royal
judgments upon transgressors ?
He ruleth by his might for ever ;
His eyes observe the nations :
Let not the rebellious exalt themselves (Ps. Ixvi. 7, R.V.)
But one favoured region there is in which Jehovah's rule is
more manifest than elsewhere. As the prologue of the Bless
ing of Moses tells us, ' He became King in Jeshurun when
the heads of the people were gathered, all the tribes of Israel
1 Jer. x. 7 (not earlier than the close of the Exile) ; cf. Rev. xv. 3.

vii. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS.

34 1'

together ' (Deut. xxxiii. 5) ; that is to say, the theophany and
the legislation of Sinai led up to the accession of King
Jehovah (cf. Isa. vi. 5, but not Ps. xx. 10) in the land of the
people of Israel.8 The prophets and psalmists, however, were.
not satisfied l with what I may call the early part of the reign.
of Jehovah, during which the divine rights over Israel were so
often infringed by upstart and idolatrous tyrants (cf. Isa.
xxvi. 13, lxiii. 19), not to speak of the obscuration of the
theocracy (I adopt the later or Church-point of view) by the
institution of the native royalty (1 Sam. viii. 7, cf. 2 Chron.
xxxv. 18). Hence, when the events of history seemed like a
repetition of the Exodus, and of the thunder and lightning of
Sinai, and when, as the crowning mercy, the symbolic dwell
ing-place of God had been rebuilt, they burst into those fine
songs of praise, the accession-psalms (see above, p. 71). Once
more, ' Jehovah had become king.' And what a King ! How
the old conception had become purified, deepened, and
enriched ! All the neighbouring peoples had their theocracies ;h
but compare even the noblest of them with the theocracy con
ceived by the Jewish Church. The Zoroastrian Church alone,
as we partly know and partly divine from the Gathas, can
claim to meet the Jewish on something like equal terms. Still
there is a historical continuity in the records of the Jewish
Church which is wanting in those of the Zoroastrian. We
can, by means of historical criticism, follow the movement
of this grand idea even in the single Book of Psalms. That
first impassioned outburst of praise was half based upon
illusion. The perfected theocracy turned out to be still
future. A psalmist, in his festival mood, had bidden the ' vain
gods ' prove their claim to be alive by recognizing their own
defeat. Shamed are all they that serve graven images,
That make their boast of vain gods ;
Worship him, all ye gods (xcvii. 7).
But alas ! the so-called ' vain gods ' still seemed to mock
Jehovah, and to divide the theocracy among themselves. The
worshippers of Ahura Mazda had deserted the pure moral
precepts of their religion, and become as cruel to Jehovah's
1 See the touching words in which Jehovah Himself complains, Ps. Ixxxi.
12-17.

342 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.
people as the idolaters.1 Many of them, indeed, with an
innovating king (Artaxerxes II.) at their head, had (like some
of the Parsees in India) themselves made concessions to
idolatry. Add to this that not a few Israelites had avowedly
or virtually fallen away, and become godless oppressors of
their people (see commentary on Pss. ix., x., xiv., lv.), and we
cannot be surprised that it sometimes appeared to a psalmist
as if ' the whole (race of man) had turned aside ' (Ps. xiv. 3
cf. xi'. 1, 2) — a fresh illusion, which afterwards became crys
tallized in the general Talmudic doctrine of the conscious
hostility of the heathen world to God.1 It was at any rate a
stern, hard fact that in their relations with the Jews the
heathen were too often a Tpri to 'iii (xliii. 1), a people without
that (piXavdpanrCa, which, though often overlaid with less lovely
elements, had become an essential part of the Israelitish
character.-" They crush thy people, Jehovah,
And afflict thine heritage ;
They slay the widow and the sojourner,
And put the orphans to death (xciv. 6).
And so the author of Ps. lxxxii. has not the heart to take up
the burden of the accession-psalms, lest some doubting philo
sopher, like ' Ecclesiastes,' should hurl back the denial, —
Jehovah reigneth not ; he hath put off his majesty ;
The world is not stablished, but moveth to and fro.2
But, though not jubilant, he will not be disloyal to Jehovah.
Never shall Satan or Ahriman dispossess the true king. In his
closing words he expresses this with a force which explains the
popularity of the psalm in later times.k Jehovah is but waiting
till his hour shall strike (cf. Ps. lxxv. 3). He will yet ' arise '
out of his seeming inactivity [v. 8), or, in other words, will
' become king ' m (Zech. xiv. 9), though at present ' all the
foundations of the earth are out of course' (Ps. lxxxii. 5), and
though, in spite of synagogues and schools, it can already
be seen that ' not all are Israel that are of Israel ' (Rom. ix. 6).n
And now can we not see what direction Jehovah's royal ¦
policy in Israel is bound to take ? For king He assuredly is ;
He has but veiled, not put off, His majesty. How should
1 See Weber, Altsyn. Theol., p. 65. 2 Comp. Ps. xciii. I.

Vii. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS. 343
struggling believers persevere amidst the breaking of their
illusions, if their God did not train them in His providen
tial purposes and reveal His perfect sympathy ? Let us
then regard Jehovah as the sympathetic Friend and all-wise
Teacher, or, to use a term of large compass suggested by
the Asaphite psalms,1 as the Shepherd of Israel. What this
figure meant in Israel's later period, we may learn equally
well from Ps. xxiii. and from John x.° In the olden times
it might have been simply a synonym for ' king,' or even for
' captain ' or ' commander ' (cf. vawv iroifisves, ^Esch., Suppl.
767). But now, plainly enough, all that one can imagine of
strong, patient, watchful, and considerate helpfulness is being
gathered up in the thought of the Shepherd. This half-
Christian transfiguration of the image is one out of many
tokens of a deeper and gentler conception of the divine
character. And parallel to it is the frequent reference, direct
or indirect, of the post-Exile poets to the divine condescen
sion. I am well aware that there is a direct mention of
this attribute (niT3y:) in Ps. xviii. 36, and for this among other
reasons I have doubted (see p. 206) whether this fine poem
may not really be a monument of the Babylonian Exile.
But at any rate in the Persian period it first became a vital
Church-belief that Jehovah dwelt not only ' in the high and
holy place,' but ' with him also that was contrite and humble
in spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the
heart of the contrite ones ' (Isa. Ivii. 15). The conception of
God formed by the Jews during the Exile was oppressive in
its awful grandeur till in their deep depression they ventured
to dream that the same greatness and goodness which filled
the world might by a miracle of love contract itself within a
human heart, or, to speak more accurately, within the hearts
of all those who belonged to the true Israel. And so a new
and peculiar element became visible in the divine glory,2 viz.,
that ' though Jehovah be high, yet hath he respect unto the
lowly ' (Ps. cxxxviii. 6 ; cf. cxiii. 6). Finely and with deep
insight did Rabbi Johanan say, ' Wherever thou findest the
greatness of the Holy One expressed, there wilt thou also find
His lowliness ' p(or, condescension), and the passages which he
1 See p. 148, and note *, p. 158.
2 Cf. note on 'holiness ' and ' glory,' p. 331.

344 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.
quotes (Deut. x. 17, 18, Isa. Ivii. 15, Ps. lxviii. 5, 6) all belong
to the time when idealized poverty had become an Israelitish
characteristic. To lowly Israel Jehovah revealed Himself
anew as in some sense a lowly God. The divine ' andvdh,'
referred to in such a strange connexion in Ps. xviii. 36, is
more than ' gentleness ; ' it is that blessed sympathy which
pleases itself not less with the smallest objects than with the
greatest, not less with poor, weak, ignorant man than with
the cedars of Lebanon or the morning-stars. It as a con
descension which forgets that it has condescended ; say
rather, which neither ' descends ' nor ' condescends,' but raises
up.9 ' Thy humility made me great'
Do not think that I am digressing. The essential part
of deity as well of royalty, such was the Israelitish not less
than the Moabitish belief,1 was ability to help or save. Not
only in the more naive pre-Exile period, but even after the
Church had been formed, a sign-loving people required this
proof of Jehovah's divinity. But Israel in the later period
was well aware of the magnitude of its demand. Help from
such a great and high King was not the same as the help
of the Jehovah of antiquity, who had been popularly supposed
to be in an exclusive sense the God of Israel. It is nothing
short of a divine 'self-emptying,' to use St. Paul's bold
phrase (Phil. ii. 7), for which the Jewish Church craves.
Strange that the Jews could combine so deep an insight into
God's 'holiness,' or supernatural greatness, with so firm a
faith in His perpetual nearness to His people. They looked
of course for no literal theophanies. Without laying any
stress on their non-occurrence in the ' priestly code,' it is clear
from the theophanies of the psalms (see e.g. Pss. xviii., 1.,
xcvii., and cxliv.r) that the old statements of Jehovah's visible
appearance have but a symbolic value. And yet the truth
behind the symbol was never more believed in than now.
Faith had its own miracles, saw angels with the inner eye, and
filled the dry vale of Baca with fountains (Ps. lxxxiv. 7).
Kimchi may be astonished that there is no miracle of bring
ing water out of the rock in the Book of Ezra, and Josephus
may have to seek a parallel to the greatest miracle of the
Exodus in a legend of Alexander. The Pharisaic writer of
1 Cf. 1. 4 in Mesha's inscription.

vii. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS. 345
2 Maccabees may scatter angel appearances and surprising
wonders over his romantic work. But the pious contem
poraries both of Ezra and of the Maccabean brethren were
content with the providential wonders of history. Their cry
was not for a literal repetition of the wonders of antiquity, but
for Him who ' alone doeth great wonders ' (Ps. exxxvi. 4).
' Then Israel remembered the days of old,' says one of the
later prophecies in ' Isaiah ; ' ' where is he that brought them
up out of the sea ?  where is he that placed his holy
spirit within him ' (Isa. lxiii. 11)? Israel was in fact being
educated in God's ways. It was learning the doctrine of the
spiritual presence of God, and the moral purpose of its selec
tion to be Jehovah's people.
And now we are brought face to face with an important
conception which lies at the root of the psalmists' ideas
respecting Israel's relation to Jehovah. The word nn? in
deed is only used fifteen times in the Psalter of this relation ; 1
but the idea of a covenant between Jehovah and Israel (unlike
that supposed one between Chem6sh and Moab, in that it
implies a moral and not a merely natural relation) pervades
the Book of Psalms. It was Jeremiah and the author of
Deuteronomy who first succeeded in impressing it on the
national conscience ; and we find it in a simple, untechnical
form in Ps. xviii., that is, probably, in Josiah's reign. We
there learn that Jehovah's action towards His servants is con
ditioned by a regard to character. To those who are frankly
and earnestly obedient God on his side will be frankly and
earnestly helpful. The poet has no doubt that his king
and people are thus perfect in obedience, and therefore
only alludes in a single line to the possibility of God's
changing towards them ; — ' with the wayward,' he says,
' thou showest thyself wayward ' [v. 27b). But pass on to Ps.
xxv. — the first psalm in which the word nna occurs. Israel,
reflecting on its spiritual position, is a prey to mingled hope
and fear. Whence comes this new self-distrust ? From the
religious influence of Babylon ? No ; from the troubles of the
nation (p. 235). Misfortune and punishment are to the Israelite
synonymous— a mode of thought to which a fatal stability
1 See Pss. xxv. 10, 14, xliv. 18, 1. Si lf>, lxxiv. 20, lxxviii. 10, 37, ciii. 18,
cv. 8, 10, cvi. 45, cxi. S, 9, cxxxii. 12.

346 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.
has been given by his native idiom (see on Pss. xxxi. ii,
cxxx. 8). Let us next study Ps. xxxii., which, though it does
not contain the word ' covenant,' presents the conception in a
very full form. It tells us that God rewards the righteous
and punishes the wicked, but that the ' transgressions ' of the
imperfectly righteous will be ' taken away ' upon their sin
cere confession.5 It also lets us into one of the psalmists'
most pathetic limitations. Even those best of Israelites
could not conceive of trouble as sent to test and purify their
love of God, and so, when trouble came, they often leaped to
the conclusion that God was angry with them.
But the problem of suffering was too complex to be thus
solved, and the half-truth was not without injurious effects.
One of these was the occasional lapse of the psalmists into
those less worthy anthropomorphisms which we have already
noticed. Another was an excessive readiness on the part of
the Church-nation to accuse itself, or else (an evil effect of the
old doctrine of national solidarity) to suppose that God was
remembering the sins of its ancestors.' This subject, I know,
calls for tender handling, for Christianity has ever regarded
a deep sense of sin as a condition of its best blessings. But
is there not in Ps. xxxii. 1-5 and elsewhere a feeling akin to
that of Job that the all-seeing God is looking out for ' secret
faults,' being determined not to hold His people innocent ? '
The compensating beauty of these passages is that the writers
are not, like Job, embittered by such thoughts, because they
know that God will not bring Israel ' into the dust of death,'
or at any rate will not keep it there. I refrain with regret from
supporting this idea by an exposition of some verses of the
90th psalm.u Suffice it for the present to quote a verse from
the prophet Jeremiah, which seems to have become a favourite
with the psalmists, —
Correct me, Jehovah, but with justice,
Not in thine anger, lest thou bring me to nothing.2
Nor have we yet exhausted the lessons of the 32nd psalm.
It supplies a fresh confirmation of that lovely view of Jehovah
as an educator which we lately gained. Generally the
1 See Pss. xix. 13, xc. 8, and cf. Job ix. 28, 29, x. 6.
2 Jer. x. 23 ; cf. Pss. vi. 2, xxxviii. 2.

Vii. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS. 347
psalmist speaks as if all that he desired were forgiveness, i.e.
the removal of his temporal distress and the restoration of
his communion with God. But there is one verse, not logic
ally connected with the rest, which contains a special word
• of promise revealed to the psalmist. (The psalmists, as we
have seen, felt themselves to be half-prophets.)
I will instruct thee, and show theev the way thou art to go ;
I will counsel thee, with mine eye upon thee [v. 8, Kay).
Observe, now that he has been forgiven, the speaker no
longer fears that keen but tender glance. ' The eyes of
servants look upon the hand of their lord,' but friends look
in each other's eyes. And still more prominent is the crav
ing for trustworthy moral guidance in the 25th psalm which I
referred to before.
Direct me in thy truthfulness, and teach me,
For thou art my saviour-God.
Good and upright is Jehovah,
Therefore will he instruct sinners in the way.
The lowly will he direct in that which is right,
Yea, the lowly will he teach his way (Ps. xxv. 5, 8, 9).
And more strikingly still,
The secret (or, intimacy) of Jehovah is for them that fear him,
And his covenant for their instruction (Ps. xxv. 14).
And is not this one of the lessons of the 51st psalm, that
the covenant of the great King with His people includes, not
merely judging them by providential discipline proportioned
to their character, but purifying and deepening their views of
moral and spiritual truth, and giving them, together with a
new conception of sin, which I cannot here pause to examine,w
a more delicate tact in moral practice ?
Behold, thou desirest truth in the inmost parts,
Therefore deep within make me to know wisdom.
Cast me not away from thy presence,
And take not thy holy spirit from me (li. 8, 13),
with which last line compare these words from the great
national confession in Neh. ix., ' Thou gavest also thy good
spirit to instruct them,' and this from Ps. cxliii. 10 : —
Teach me to do thy will, for thou art my God ;
Let thy good spirit lead me in an even path.

348 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.
We see, then, that in post-Exile times God revealed Him
self specially as an educator. The conception was not indeed
new ; the older prophecy could not help developing this aspect
of Jehovah's pastoral character." But it certainly became
deepened, as the meaning of the pastoral figure itself became
deepened, after the Exile. And how does Jehovah guide or
educate His flock ? How does He purify their views of
truth, and refine their moral perceptions ? Listen to a writer
in one of the darker parts of the Persian period.
Happy is the man whom thou nurturest, Jehovah,
And teachest out of thy law (Ps. xciv. 12).
The religion of Israel could never have risen so high, had
it been always under the tutelage even of prophets like Isaiah
(cf. Isa. xxviii. 9, 10, xxx. 21). Unique as it was, Hebrew
prophecy could not last for ever, nor could the class of
humanists or ' wise men ' undertake the anxious charge which
the prophets relinquished. The transition had to be made
from a bookless to a book-religion, but how hard this would
be, the abortive attempt in the reign of Josiah had already
shown. It was felt in the post-Exile period that the higher
truths must be transfused from the written book into the
hearts of the people. Hence the necessity of schools and of
an army of ' teachers ' such as those spoken of in the Book
of Daniel (xi. 33, 35, xii. 3, R.V. marg.), the subject of whose
instruction was to be not moral wisdom in general, but, to
use a phrase in Ezra, ' the wisdom of God that was in their
hand ' y (Ezra vii. 25). In what spirit did these teachers work ?
Did they recognize Jehovah as the true educator ? The
model sofer, or scribe, of the early Greek period, who speaks
in the 119th psalm, will answer us. ' Teach me, Jehovah,' is
the burden of the whole psalm, and though the writer does
not boast like the Talmudists, we soon discover that his
prayer has been heard, and that he is ever learning more and
more of the infinite meaning of the golden book (cf. v. 18).
And so, though some of the soferim may adopt the literary
style of the ' wise men,' the class as a whole is separated from
them by profound differences. The ' lamp ' of the sofer is
not the ' spirit of man ' (Prov. xx. 27), divine as this too
may be, but that brighter ' light ' (Ps. cxix. 105), which in-

349

VII. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS.
eludes the ancient ' wisdom,' as a part of an already varied
and comprehensive Bible.2 Of this treasure-house of divine
truth one of the psalm-editors, without any tinge of the later
superstition (see note w), virtually declares that it is like the
sun in the firmament (see Ps. xix.). Can we wonder that as
the symbol of the covenant /ear' s%oyi)v even the glorious
second temple should early have found serious competitors
in the sacred classics ? 'Happy are they that dwell in thy
house ' (Ps. lxxxiv. 5) expressed no doubt the highest ideal,
but ' Happy is the man who meditates on the law of Jehovah '
(Ps. i. 1, 2), was a more practical one, because alone universally
applicable. The temple was the spiritual centre of the scattered
communities, but the flag for which all good Jews were ready
to die was that of the Scripture. The Maccabaean rising
proved this ; but all pointed in this direction even in pre-
Maccabaean times. As a Jewish historian says, ' the founda
tions of the temple were undermined by the schools before
it had been trampled upon by enemies from without and
desecrated by bloody feuds from within.' x
But it may be asked, Have we a right to speak of the
Scripture as a whole as a means by which Jehovah educated
His people ? Ought we not to have referred to one part of it,
viz. the ' Mosaic ' Law, at an earlier point as an expression of
the will of the divine Governor of Israel ? No ; the Jewish
conception of Law has become transformed. To the early
Israelites a law was an ordinance and nothing more, but to
restored Israel it formed part of a rule of life, divine in its
origin, but human in its exquisite adaptation to the circum
stances of the people. Penalties might give this rule a frown
ing aspect, but only to those who saw not that ' righteousness '
was the one condition both of Israel's continuance and of the
Messianic salvation. It was from the consciousness of this
that more and more the Israelites regarded the Law as the
crowning proof of Jehovah's love.
He declared his word unto Jacob,
His statutes and ordinances unto Israel (Ps. cxlvii. 19),
is the climax of thanksgiving to a contemporary of Simon
the Maccabee ; and one of the oldest prayers in the Jewish
1 Jost, Geschichte des Judenthums, i. 291.

350 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.
liturgy calls upon ' our Father ' and ' our King ' to ' teach us,,
as thou didst teach our fathers statutes of life.' aa

Note a, p. 338.
In Ps. xxviii. 8, and cxxxii. 10, the 'anointed' is also very pro
bably the high priest. Cf. Lev. iv. 3, 5, Dan. ix. 26 (of Onias III.).
Note b, p. 339.
The term ' Jehovah's anointed ' is here applied to the people of
Israel as the heir of the promises made to David. That is, the
psalmist speaks as if a rightful Davidic king still existed, though, as
vv. 41, 42, 46, 52a show, the people of Israel is the real sufferer, and
absorbs all the psalmist's thoughts. So in Ps. xxviii. 8 ' his anointed '"
may possibly mean not the high priest, but the church-nation ; at
least, this view seems favoured by Hab. iii. 13 (in a great post-Exilic
ode). Note °, p. 339.
Rudolf Smend, for instance, who regards the Psalter as a post-
Exilic work, finds as large a Messianic element in it as any of the
older interpreters — a much larger one than I can at present admit..
The effect of this is perhaps a weakening of the poetic effect of the
psalms. To interpret such psalms as xxiv. and xlvii. as merely pro
phetic of the final Messianic sovereignty and judgment seems to me.
extremely hazardous. Note d, p. 339.
The strictly Messianic psalms, or portions of psalms, in the Tar
gum are seven in number, viz. ii., xviii. (second half), xxi. [vv. 2 and'
8), xlv., lxi. [vv. 7, 8), Ixxii., Ixxx. (at least, p in v. 16 is the Messiah)..
Note e, p. 339.
According to Leontius of Byzantium, Theodore only ' referred
three psalms to the Lord.' But from Cosmas Indicopleustes, and
from the Syriac commentary based on Theodore it would appear that
four psalms were referred by Theodore directly to Christ, viz. ii., viii.,
xliv. (xlv.), and cix. (ex.). Kihn thinks that Leontius omitted Ps. viii.
because the fifth GEcumenical Council had censured Theodore's
explanation of this psalm. Theodore also interpreted Pss. xv. (xvi.),

vii. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS. 351
xxi. (xxii.), lxviii. (lxix.) as typically Messianic in his commentary on
the Minor Prophets, a view which the same Council censured. In
his work on the psalms, however, if we may judge from the Syriac
work described by Baethgen, the two typical Messianic psalms are
Ixxxix. and cxvii. (cxviii.). See Kihn, Theodor von Mopsuestia (1880),
p. 454 ; Baethgen, in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1885, pp. 67, 81.

Note f, p. 340.
The harmony of the closing strophe of the psalm is greatly im
proved by correcting 12 lpB>J [v. 12) either as proposed in my critical
note, or, with Lagarde into hp'lD or ilDlD -lptn (the plural form of
the suffix would also be possible). ' Put on (again) his bonds ' makes
a parallel to v. 3. With Kamphausen (review of Nowack's Psalmen
in the Studien und Kritiken, 1888) I would now accept this brilliant
conjecture, which Lagarde fortifies by a palaeographical reference to
the Palmyrene characters [Nova Psalterii Graci Editionis Specimen,
1887, p. 24). Sept. and Targ. both certainly read "1D1D (cf. Gratz).
Note «, p. 341.
The 'gathering' referred to took place, not in Sinai, but in
Canaan. As Ps. lxviii. 18 puts it, Jehovah transferred his throne
from Sinai (originally His central sanctuary, cf. Ex. iii. 1, xviii. 5)
to the holy hill of Zion, i.e. He led His people to the land which
He had destined for them. Without the gift of a land, the Sinaitic
legislation would have been inoperative. As another psalm says,
Jehovah ' gave (Israel) the lands of the nations . . , that they might
keep his statutes and observe his laws ' (Ps. cv. 44, 45). In post-
Biblical times, however, the Jews did not feel that the land of Israel
was essential to Jehovah's sovereignty ; the great dispersion had
destroyed this ancient sentiment. Hence Mechilta 73b says that
Israel at Mount Sinai resolved to take upon itself ' the kingdom of
heaven.' Note h, p. 341.
Cf. Baethgen, Beitrdge zur semit. Religionsgeschichte (1888); Tiele,
Vergelijkende Geschiedenis der oude Godsdiensten (1869); W. R. Smith,
The Religion of the Semites, p. 66, &c. The expression ' theocracy '
is due to Josephus [c. Ap. ii. 17), who coins it to describe the form of
government ordained, as he says, by ' our legislator.' He apologizes
for it with the words, <5>s dv tls et-rroi Biao-dp.evos tov Xoyov. Cf-
Wellhausen, Prolegomena, chap. xi. (beginning).

352 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.
Note \ p. 342.
See p. 292. From our present point of view, the ideal Mazda-
worshipper is Cyrus. The persecution of heresy advocated in parts
of the Avesta, which is contrary to the spirit of Cyrus, may be due to
the dangerous multiplication of sects in Persia in the Sassanid period
(see De Harlez on Vendid&d iv. 142, 149). The Gathas only inveigh
against doctrines which lead to vicious thoughts, words, and deeds ;
the Daeva-worshippers were on moral grounds bitterly hated by
Zarathustra (see Yasna xxxii. 3-5). Cf. however Wilhelm, ' Priester
und Ketzer im alten Eran,' Z.D.M.G., 1890, p. 142, &c.
Note 3, p. 342.
Cf. Wisd. xii. 19, "Oti Set tov BUaiov etvai <fnXdv6ponrov. Josephus
eulogizes Agrippa as tois aXXoeOvio-i cfriXdvOpioTros, but tois o/j.o(J>vXois
o-vp.ira6r]s p.dXXov [Ant. xix. 7, 3) — a fair description of a Jewish
philanthropist. See note on Ps. xliii. 1.
Note k, p. 342.
Ps. lxxxii. was selected as the psalm for Tuesday (see pp. 72, 83).
Note m, p. 342.
Zech. xiv. 9 can hardly be earlier than the latter part of the
Persian rule. 'Jehovah shall reign' occurs again in Ps. cxlvi. 10, but
there it means ' shall go on reigning,' as the following words show.
A Maccabaean psalmist doubtless believed that Jehovah had once
more ' become king,' i.e. had revealed His sovereignty.
Note n, p. 342.
The same distinction between a true and a false Israel is implied
in Pss. xii. 8, xiv. 5, xxiv. 6, Ixxiii. 1, 15, cxii. 2.
Note °, p. 343.
The shepherd's office, in the interpretation of the figure, includes
teaching; 'hear my voice' (John x. 16) means 'hearing a word,
saying, This is the way, walk ye in it' (Isa. xxx. 21). In Eccles.
xii. n 'shepherd' is even a synonym for 'teacher' (cf. Prov. x. 21),
and Ps. xxiii. is interpreted accordingly of Jehovah as a Teacher by
Sept. and Targ. This may account for oSiryiyo-tt eis irdo-av -rqv dA.17-
¦ Oeiav, John xvi. 13 (cf. ofhjylv iLo-ei irpoBaTa, Ps. lxxix. 1, Sept.). The

vii. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS. 353
figure of the shepherd occurs again in Heb. xiii. 20, 1 Pet. ii. 25
(where icoip^v is explained by Ittio-kottos ; cf. Orac. Sib., ' Proem.' 3),
v. 4 [apx"roip.rjv). In the 17th of the Psalms of Solomon the Messiah,
as the leader of the perfected theocracy, is described as iroip,aivo>v t6
iroipviov Kvpiov ev TTio-Tei Kai SiKaioo-vvy. A similar train of thought
suggested the traditional saying of Mohammed that every prophet
must have been for a long time a shepherd.
Note p, p. 343.
The quotation is from Megilla, 31a, and forms part of the even
ing service for the conclusion of Sabbath. See Wunsche, Der bab.
Talmud, i. 546, Note \ p. 344.
Comp. St. Augustine, Conf.VIl. 18. 'Condescending' is too
equivocal a phrase to be applied either to Jehovah or to Christ and
His disciples. He of whom Isa. Ivii. is spoken cannot strictly be
said even to ' descend.' Sympathy makes Jehovah, as, according to
Hebrews, it made the Messiah, like unto common men in their low
liness. St. Paul, too, never meant to say, ' Condescend to things that
are lowly' (Rom. xii. 16 in R. V.), but rather D^DtfDVIK •UnJrjri,
' familiarize yourselves with the lowly ' [o-waTray6p.evoi is to be ex
plained by Semitic rather than by Greek idiom ; in? = to be
accustomed to). See Expositor, Dec. 1883, pp. 469-472.
Note r, p. 344-
It may be objected that the description in Ps. xviii. 9-13 is so
frankly mythological that it may well represent a belief in the possi
bility of a literal theophany. But the expressions in v. 17 are incon
sistent with any but a symbolic view of their meaning. It will be
noticed that in all the passages quoted fire plays a very prominent
part. The pillar of fire is the favourite symbol of the divine presence
in the priestly narrative (see Lev. ix. 4, 6, 23, xvi. 2; Num. ix. 15, 16,
xii. 5, xiv. 10). Note s, p. 346.
Theodoret actually sees here a prophecy of the grace of baptism.!
Note ', p. 346.
See Pss. xxv. 7, xxxviii. 5, lxix. 6, lxxix. 8, 9, cvi. 6, and cf. Ezra
ix. 6, 10-15, Neh. ix. 33, 34. Ezekiel had protested against this
notion, which we find also in hymns to Varuna (Max Miiller, Ancient
Sanskr. Lit., p. 540 ; Hibbert Lectures, p. 285). A A

3S4 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.

Note u, p. 346.
The central part of Ps. xc. contrasts strikingly with the opening
and with the closing verses. Verses 1-4 are in the fullest sense a
classic utterance. In vv. 5, 6 the poet's wings begin to droop, and in
vv. 7-12 his thoughts are ill-connected and from a Christian point of
view sorely in need of correction. As far as v. 7 the psalmist speaks
in the name of the human race, for even v. 1 applies to non-Jewish
as well as Jewish believers. But now he pleads with the Lord
(Adonai, v. 1) for Israel. ' For we are consumed,' he says, 'by thine
anger;' 'all our days have vanished in thy displeasure.' Such is
frequently the language of the psalmists ; when describing the calami
ties of their people, they employ the figures of sickness and death.
But this is not the only peculiarity common to our psalmist with
other temple-poets. In his tenderness of conscience, he accounts
for the national calamities by assuming the existence of great national
sins, and even of sins which no self-examination can discover [v. 8 ;
cf. xix. 13, lxix. 6, and on these passages see pp. 76, 102). Does he
not in this respect remind us of the sweet singer of Ps. xxxii. [vv.
3-5)? Calamity presses heavily upon God's people. The happy
years of the national life have passed as quickly as a sigh. What
remains is but the dregs of life, the ' sere and yellow leaf,' dry summer
herbage which will soon have withered away (comp. cii. 1 2). And this
is because, with all its exertions in the service of Jehovah, Israel has
not obtained the assurance of the forgiveness of his sins (cf. Heb. x.
1, 2). Jehovah has not 'cast their sins behind his back' for ever,
but gazes upon them, yes, even upon ' unobserved sins ' in the bright
' light of his countenance ' [v. 8).
In v. 10 one of those abrupt transitions occurs, with which we
are familiar in the psalms. The psalmist speaks, as in vv. 5 and
6, of the lot of humanity — not of the many Israelites who must have
died before his eyes of a broken heart or of the miseries incident
to the time, but of those who in all countries go down to the grave
in a full age. It cannot, however, be said that the description in
v. 10 is all that one could wish either in thought or in expression.
Certainly it cannot rank with the opening of Job xiv. or with
the fourth verse of this very psalm. In expression, as a literal
translation shows, it falls far below them, and it contains one
clause which to the modern Christian reader is at most a half-truth — I
mean the clause, ' and their pride (or, their boasting) is (but) labour and
sorrow.' It is only in one of the darker periods of Israel's history that
such an estimate either of youth and mature age or of old age could
be given, and the psalmist's form of expression reminds us painfully

Vii. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS. 355
of the author of Ecclesiastes, who, as Eccles. xii. 1 shows, took an
even more pessimistic view of the latter than of the earlier years of
life. Shall we blame the pious psalmist ? No ; he seems to repeat
the pleading entreaty of Job, ' Have pity upon me, O ye my friends '
{Job xix. 21). But how can we pity him till we duly realize his
•circumstances? Briefly, then, his case is this. He holds in his
mind two inconsistent ideas — one an old idea, that calamity is a
proof of God's displeasure, and another a comparatively new one,
that God is eternal and unchangeable (see vv. 1-4), and such is the
bitterness of Israel's present calamity that for the moment he forgets
that the new idea was specially revealed to the later Jewish Church,
nay more, he even allows his estimate of the human lot to be coloured
by his despondent view of the national fortunes. He speaks amiss,
and yet not wholly amiss. For it is perfectly true that what in
1 John ii. 16 is called ' the pride of life ' is by its very nature transi
tory, and that whether or no there is any other human possession
which endures, the longest human life is but a drop compared to
God's eternity. Holding so much truth as our psalmist does, it is
impossible that he should not at last escape from his morbid mood.
But the time is not yet. He is still at a low spiritual level. All that
he can say at present is,
Who knoweth the power of thine anger,
And thy wrath according to thy fear ? [v. 1 1 .)
Taken by themselves, the words may seem wisely and truly said.
But in the context, they must, I fear, be interpreted otherwise. Is
it really all that the psalmist can infer from the troubles of the time
that God is visiting Israel's offences with the rod ? Has he not
heard that ' whom Jehovah loveth, he chasteneth ' ?
The twelfth verse connects itself with the tenth ; the psalmist has
no skill in linking thought to thought. This verse has no special
reference to the fortunes of Israel, but applies to all men, whether
prosperous or not. There is no better practical wisdom than a strict
performance of duty, for on the one hand God ' hateth all workers
of iniquity,' and on the other, ' There is no work, nor device, nor
knowledge, nor wisdom in Shedl whither thou goest.' In the closing
verses the psalmist recovers his equanimity, but to expound them
lies somewhat aside from my present purpose.
Note v, p. 347.
The Hebrew is "0K, which suggests the true meaning of nniFl.
The Torah, whether legal or prophetic, gave direction in the difficult
journey of life (cf. Isa. xxx. 21). See below, p. 357 (note).

356 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS, lect.

Note w, p. 347.
In studying the conception of sin distinctive of the Psalter we
naturally turn first of all to the technical words for sin. In Ps. xxxii.
1, 2, for instance, we have three such words, ys?3, nKDPt, ])V, the first
of which describes sin as a breaking loose, the second as a missing
of the right aim, and the third as perversion or distortion. It will
be seen that all these terms (cf. "1357, p. 466) imply. the idea of law;
but what sort of law is meant, depends upon the stage of religious de
velopment reached by the writer who uses the terms. The rule from
which, according to the original usage, the sinner deviated, was
mainly the unwritten one of divinely sanctioned custom (see Gen.
xx. 9, xxxiv. 7, with Dillmann's notes). The gradual growth of
written collections of laws, and finally the promulgation first of
Deuteronomy and subsequently of the priestly code as the basis
of the national life, profoundly modified the conception of sin. The
transition is visible in Jeremiah (comp. Jeremiah, his Life and Times,
p. 39) ; it is already past in the time of the psalmists. To them a
word like niKEn suggested, not a mere national even though conse
crated custom, but the ' delicate outline ' of that virtue which is.
required by an ' exceeding broad ' commandment (Ps. cxix. 96), the
manifoldness of whose precepts sharpened the moral perceptions.
Had the psalmists what may be called a definite theory of sin >
The reader of these Lectures will not easily believe that they had.
They had indeed made various moral observations, but they had
no complete theory to account for them. Sometimes they take
the gloomiest possible view both of Israel and of the world (see
Pss. xii., xiv.), in which, as in Sodom, it would almost appear
that there were not ten righteous men ; sometimes Israel at least
is acquitted of any serious transgression (see e.g. Ps. xliv.). But
the general tone of the circles in which the psalmists moved is
that of watchfulness (see e.g. Pss. xxxiv. 14, xxxix. 2, cxli. 3)..
There is even in the pious the possibility that doubting thoughts
may arise which may even lead to open apostasy (see Ps. Ixxiii. 2).
These must be striven against, best of all in the sanctuary [ib. v. 17).
Weak as human nature is, it is not impossible to reject evil and
choose good (cf. Ps. Ixxxi. 9-1 1, 14 with Deut. xxx. 15-20), at
least as long as Jehovah's tordh (the precepts enshrined in the
Scriptures) is within the heart, moulding the character, and giving
the man moral insight and an impulse towards goodness (cf.
Pss. xix. 12, xl. 9, li. 8, 14, Deut. vi. 6, Jer. xxxi. 33). But no
watchfulness can prevent those sins of infirmity, which in many cases
no human eye can discern, and which are therefore called ' errors '"
(=lapses) and ' secret things ' (see p. 354). Even these Jehovah in

VII. AND WITH WHAT RESULTS. 357
His severity may sometimes punish ; earnestly therefore does the
Church supplicate Him, in the name of His goodness, not to take
notice of them by a judicial sentence (Ps. xix. 13). One who is
formed of dust cannot always maintain the highest standard (Ps. ciii.
10, 14), especially in the passionate season of youth (cf. Ps. xxv. 7),
or when placed, as Israel has so often been, by divine appointment,
in difficult circumstances (Ps. li. 6 ; cf. Isa. lxiii. 17). The origin of
sin, equally with that of death, the psalmists leave unexplained ;
neither Ps. li. 7 nor Ps. xc. 8 refers to human nature in general.
And now, what are the peculiar merits of the psalmists' treatment
of sin, as compared with that of the Vedic and Gathic hymn-
writers ? First they lay much less stress than the former (see Rig
Veda, vii. 86, 3) on the excuses of sin. They do not even once
refer to Satan or to 'the Satan,' and only once do we find such a
plea as that in Ps. li. 6. In general the post-Exile writers love to
magnify human responsibility, nor is this denied by the agonized
writer of Ps. li. Another point in which the psalmists' treatment of
sin differs widely from that of the Vedic poets is that they do not put
the non-offering of libations on a level with moral offences.
Christian students must not however underrate the morality of
Vedic religion. In other sections it may be ritualistic, but 'with
Varuna it goes down into the depths of the conscience, and realizes
the idea of holiness ' (Barth, Religions of India, p. 1 7). And still more
¦respect is due to Mazdeism. The priestly writers of the Avesta have
not indeed completely disengaged the idea of moral from that of
ceremonial purity. But we remember on the one hand the cere
monialism of Leviticus and on the other passages in the Gathas
which are in perfect accord with Pss. xv. and xxiv. Ahura Mazda
is the God of purity and truth ; how then can it be correct to say
that Mazdeism only knows physical defilement? No psalmist can
¦detest evil more than Zarathustra and his successors, and the three
fold division of sins into those of thought, word, and deed in Ps. xvii.
3-5 is thoroughly Zarathustrian (see e.g. Vendldad viii. 100). For
essays on the Vedic and on the Babylonian conceptions of sin
respectively, see M. Holzman in Steinthal's Zeitschrift, 1884, Heft 1;
G. Evans, Christian Reformer, 1887, pp. 122-128.
Note x, p. 348.
It is disputable whether "rp'TiD in Isa. xxx. 20 is singular or plural.
At any rate, since the tordh of priests and prophets comes from
Jehovah, He might justly be called ' Teacher ' (strictly, ' director ').
J Teaching ' is indeed ascribed to Jehovah in Isa. ii. 3 (Mic. iv. 2),
xxviii. 26. Cf. p. 352, note u.

358 HOW JEHOVAH WORKS. lect. vil
Note y, p. 348.
Comp. also the Jerus. Targ. on Gen. i. 1, 'By wisdom the Lord
created,' where 'wisdom ' means the Torafi or Law, which was in the
period of this Targum considered one of the seven antemundane
things. Precisely so the Zoroastrian Din or Daena, the impersona
tion of the Zoroastrian Law, is said to have come from the heavenly
dwelling, and to be created by Mazda (see the Din-Yast, Oxford Z. A.
ii. 264-269). But there is no historical connexion between the
beliefs. They are natural inferences of the idealistic philosophy
which lies at the root of the ancient Oriental religions.
Note z, p. 349.
That other books besides the Law and the Prophets (e.g. espe
cially Job) early acquired the position of religious classics, could be
easily shown. Note aa, p. 350.
Much has been said (see e.g. Siegfried, Theol. Literaturzeitung,
Oct. 5, 1889 ; W. R. Smith, The Religion of the Semites, p. 418) of
the reactionary character of the Jewish ceremonial system. If there
be a danger that the reformed churches may fall back into a system
in which rites have an inherent value, it is not amiss to speak severely
of Ezra's work. But from a historical point of view, it appears to
me that a milder judgment upon Jewish ceremonialism is called for.
Could the principles of Jeremiah and the Second Isaiah have been
carried out? Was it not all-important to organize the restored
people on a strongly religious basis ? and how could Ezra, under his
circumstances, have acted otherwise than he did, building upon the
sacerdotal traditions with which as a priest he was familiar ? Happily
he was not the only educator granted by Providence to his people.
If Ezra was a sofer of the Law (see Ezra vii. 1 1 Sept.), other men
were equally devoted soferim of the writings of Jeremiah. And even
the Law, side by side with its traditional ' survivals,' contains passages
enough which are full of inspiring and inspired moral earnestness.
In short, Jewish legalism was not without a truly spiritual and even
an evangelical element. The misfortune was that after Christianity
in one way, as Buddhism in another, had taken up what M. Reville,
in his Prolegomena of the History of Religions, calls the ' principle of
redemption,' a fatal logical necessity drove Judaism to identify itself
more and more with a strict and unspiritual legalism. Jewish readers
will understand, however, that I am not so blind as to assert that
this identification has ever been complete. Cf. my article on ' The
Jews and the Gospel,' Expositor, 1885 (1), pp. 401-418.

LECTURE VIII.

God hath spoken once, tivice have I heard this , that power
belongeth unto God. Also unto thee, O Lord, belongeth mercy [Ameri
can revision, lovingkindness] , for thou renderest to every man accord
ing to his work. — Ps. Ixii. 12, 13 (R. V.).

LECTURE VIII.
Part I. — But if the Law is Jehovah's best gift to Israel, how is it that the ritual
system is so seldom referred to by the psalmists ? Two explanations can be given,
one partial, the other more complete ; (i) the framers of the Psalter took thought
for the needs of distant brethren, and (2) the phrase ' the Law ' meant more to
the later Church than it seems to have done to Ezra. — The growth of schools or
sects, a consequence of accepting a ' Law ' of such varied contents. The two
extremes, represented by the promoters and editors of the priestly legislation (cf.
Ps. li. 20, 21) and by Isa. xliii. 23, Ixvi. 3, Pss. xl. 2-12, 1., li. 3-19; the middle
school by Pss. i. and cxix., and by the Books of Joel and Jonah, but scarcely by
Prov. i.-ix. (pre-Exilic), nor by Ps. xix. 8-15 (too legalistic in spirit). We
might, however, perhaps include the Hallelujah psalms in the third group. Was,
then, the great idea of spiritual sacrifices the monopoly of a single school ? No ;
but some Churchmen welcomed it more heartily than others. They found a
Bible within the Bible, from which the spiritual meaning of sacrifice dawned upon
them. Not to ritual sacrifices but to the self-oblation of Jehovah's Servant do
they (like 2 Isaiah) ascribe the full regeneration of Israel. Thus they anticipate
Christian truth (Heb. x. 1-10). Reply to objections. — How is it, then, that the
benefits derived by Israel at large from Jehovah's Servant (the phrase is ex
plained elsewhere) are not more clearly referred to by the psalmists ? Perhaps
they were afraid of too much efficacy being ascribed to the merits of the righteous.
The Servant might indeed prepare the way for Israel's return to its God. But
obedience was still the only acceptable sacrifice. — But how could turning from
evil ways make up for past sins ? An important question, for even those who
were symbolized by the ' Servant of Jehovah ' were sadly imperfect. Of this the
psalmists are for the most part well aware. A keen self-distrust has come upon
the Church-nation. It is felt that obedience can in the first instance only take
the form of repentance. Application of Ps. li. 13, 17, 19. Explanation of the
professions of innocence in Ps. xliv. 18, 19, &c. — And what is it that makes re
pentance possible ? The thought of the divine lovingkindness. Explanation of
khised. It is the characteristic attribute of the two parties to a covenant, such as
that which bound each Israelite to his people, and the people of Israel to its God.
Jehovah's khesed is the one safeguard of erring Israel. Distinction between
' lovingkindness ' and ' mercy,' between historic faith and devotional philosophy.
— But will the lovingkindness of the divine Shepherd never attain its end 1 Must
Israel perpetually alternate between sinning and repenting, suffering oppression,
and receiving deliverance ? No ; the Judgment Day is coming. But we cannot
frame a consistent picture either of the judgment or of the succeeding age. On
this as on other subjects, a study of the Psalter reveals somewhat different schools
of thought. Manifold contrasts (of which specimens are given) and underlying
unity. The psalmists, like the prophets, suppose the Day of Jehovah to be nearer
than it really is. Occupation of the waiting Church.

ANALYSIS OF LECTURE VIII. 361

Part II. — A further question of importance arises. Had the psalmists a
real though vague presentiment of a judgment of individuals after death ? The
author of Ecclesiastes had none, but he was thoroughly out of sympathy with the
psalmists. Considering the variety of views in the post-Exile Church, is it not
probable that opinions like his would provoke a reaction in the opposite direction ?
Can we not understand a bold venture of faith issuing in the presentiment re
ferred to? May not Ps. xlix. 15, 16 be such a venture? — We must start from
a generaL view of Ps. xlix. as a protest against the old Hebrew notion of Sheol,
and must explain vv. 15, 16 in accordance with the ideas of the writer's age.
The surmises of an earlier age on the possibility of escaping death, or at least of
escaping out of the realm of death. Can the post-Exile Church have failed to
meditate on these ? Was it possible that in these latter days Enoch's and
Elijah's happy lot might ;be that of many pious Israelites ? Or, putting this
aside, and accepting Sheol ,as their portion after death, what was the nature
of the life in Sheol ? Might there be a worshipping Church even there ?
To judge from the Psalter there was no unanimity on this subject. On
the one hand we have Pss. vi. 5, 6, xxx. 10, lxxxviii. 11-13, Ixxxix. 49,
and on the other, Pss. xvi., xvii., xlix., Ixxiii. The latter belong to the
class of mystic psalms, which are closely connected with the ' Puritan '
psalms already referred to. Characteristics of the former, especially of the
'guest-psalms.' Note especially the attitudes of the writers towards the temple ;
they seem on the point of dispensing with the visible temple altogether.
Exegetical problems of Ps. xvii. 13-15. Is the writer, who reminds us of
Johannine mysticism, and who represents a class, indifferent to such external
matters as death and the hereafter? — Reasons why some critics reply in the
affirmative. Pfleiderer's interpretation of Ps. Ixxiii. 25 criticized. The author's
conclusion —that Pss. xvii. and Ixxiii. , and probably xvi. , recognize the principle
of, at any rate, moral compensation of the righteous after death. The enigma of
Ps. xlix. 15, 16 too has at any rate been half solved. — We must now devote our
selves to the unexplained part of this enigma. It is only permissible to find in it a
reference to retribution after death, if external evidence warrants us in ascribing
such an idea to the psalmist. Might the Jews have been led to the belief in
Babylon ? Scarcely. Escape from the gloomy Underworld was no doubt pos
sible, according to the Babylonians, but only for kings, and not as the reward
of exceptional goodness. Resurrection, too, was not an unknown idea. Marduk
would not be Marduk if he could not 'make the dead to live.' The stress
which Babylonian religion laid on these conceptions may, or even must, have
stimulated Jewish thinkers to work out their own religious problems more
earnestly and hopefully, but more than this could not be expected. — Let us
now turn to Persia. Is the idea in question a Persian one ? Importance of
the study of Zoroastrianism. What are the spiritual elements in this religion,
by which it must have attracted the most spiritual Jews? We must seek
them in the Gathic hymns, which are the utterances of the founder of the
Zoroastrian Church, though supplementary information may be gained from the
later Avesta, and even from the Bundahis. Study of the Zoroastrian theory of
sacrifice and of morality. The former must be viewed in its highest form ; we
may then compare it with the theory of the Puritan psalmists. Defence of the
Zoroastrian morality. Still greater interest of Zarathustra's conception of the
rewards of righteousness. Heaven and hell, primarily states of the soul ; vision
of God after death ; aTroKaraaTains. These ideas not less prominent in the later
Zoroastrianism.— Can the Jewish Church have been uninfluenced by this congenial

362 ANALYSIS OF LECTURE VIII.

religion ? Surely not. Iran and Israel were predestined fellow-workers in the
cause of religion. Not all Israel's religious writers were prepared to co-operate
with Iran ; only some, both prophets and psalmists, were able to select precisely
what was needed to fill up the Church's theology. Not all selected the same
elements. We must re-read certain Biblical passages in a Persian light to give to
each writer the credit which is his due, and remember that assimilation of Persian
ideas is not at all inconsistent with vagueness and variety of statement. Dogmatic
phrases are of course still in the far distance. The passages are, (a) Isa. xxv. 8,
xxvi. 19, (b) Isa. lxv. 17-22, Ixvi. 22, (c) Dan. xii. 2, (d) Ps. xlix. 15, 16, (e)
Ps. xvii. 15, (/) Ps. xvi. 10, II, (g) Ps. Ixxiii. 24-27, (h) Ps. xxi. 5, (i) Ps. xlv. 3,
(k) Ps. Ixxii. 5, (/) Ps. lxiii. 9, 10, (m) Ps. xi. 7 ; cf. cxi. 14, (n) Ps. xii. 13*, (0)
Ps. xxxvi. 10. — A turning-point has now been reached, and the importance of
the result justifies the lecturer in seeking for some external confirmation of its
soundness. If the Books of Proverbs and Job, which are in the main earlier than
the period of the Psalter, contained either or both of the ideas in question (immor
tality and resurrection), the object would be gained ; for we should certainly have
a right in this case to expect references to the ideas in the Psalter. But neither
of these books can be shown to contain these ideas. We must therefore look
further, and perhaps from the records of the following periods we shall gain the
confirmation which we desire. — Reply to an objection. Let us turn first to the
so-called Psalms of Solomon and the Book of Enoch. Further illustrations from
Justin Martyr, the Fourth Book of Maccabees, the New Testament, and the
Mishna. Last of all, we must consult the Targum and Midrash, and critically
study Josephus's account of the three Jewish 'sects.' Result — that the later
developments of Jewish thought favour the view that the idea of eternal life may
be traced in the Psalter. Immortality, then, is no mere evolution out of the old
Semitic belief in Sheol ; the fostering influence of a more advanced system of
thought was needed for its development. But may not this system have been
Greek philosophy rather than Zoroastrianism ? Reply to this inquiry. Zoroas
trian preceded Hellenic influences, and made the success of these possible. Views
of Dr. Gratz and M. Montet rejected. Conclusion.
Principal Notes. — Part I. : On the anti-sacrificial tendency of later Jewish
religion. — On the meaning of khesed or 'covenant-love.'
Part II. : Meaning of phrase ' guest of Jehovah. ' — Can the Avesta be safely
used by a critical historian ? — Age and mission of Zarathustra. — Is the hope of
immortality traceable in the Wisdom-literature ? — The intermediate state in the
Apocalypse. — The Targum on the Psalms. — The accounts of the Essenes in
Josephus ; present position of moderate conservative criticism. — M. Montet's
views on the history of the doctrine of immortality.

PART I.
HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS.
If the giving of the Law was Jehovah's crowning lovingkind
ness, the question arises, How is it that the psalmists allude so
seldom to the details of the ritual system, and in particular to
sacrifices ? To some extent this may be accounted for by the
destination of the Psalter. Had the various collections of
Hebrew psalms been intended only for the temple, we can
guess from the other ancient Oriental hymnals (the respective
dates of which do not here concern us) what a difference it
would have made in the contents. But the authorities well
knew that the great mass of Israelites frequented, not the
temple, but the synagogues, and would not have enjoyed
hymns full of references to the temple sacrifices. For instance,
Paul and Silas at Philippi would hardly have been so ready
with their prayers and praises (Acts xvi. 25) if the appointed
prayer-book and hymn-book had been tinged on every page
with the sacrificial spirit. That I am not assuming in the
framers of the Psalter too strong a regard for synagogue
worshippers, will be clear, not only from their inclusion of
Ps. xlviii. (see above, p. 164), but from the prominence which
many of the other included psalms give to the duty of praising
God among the nations (see, even in Book I., Ps. ix. 12). And I
think that this sympathy was noticed by the authors of the
Shemoneh Esreh (or Eighteen Benedictions), which were evi
dently designed, not for the temple, but for the synagogues, and
which appear to be largely suggested by passages in the
psalms.1 Still we may reasonably ask for a more complete
explanation than this. May we not, then, say that the
meagre reference of the Psalter to the sacrificial system is to
be accounted for by something like a reaction against the
1 See Isidore Loeb, Revue des etudes juives , xix. (1889), p. 17, &c.

364 HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND lect.
spirit of Ezra ? Great as the authority of this noble reformer
was, he could not mould the Church entirely as, if Ezra vii. 10,
1 1 describes him correctly, he must have wished. And so he,
or at any rate his successors, were led by circumstances to
accept a compromise. It was not possible to erect the
' Mosaic ' Law into an absolute standard of religious truth.
The growing regard in the Church for the records of the old
prophecy protested against it. How could Jeremiah and (the
Second) Isaiah be said to be on a lower level than Moses ?
Hence ' Moses and the prophets ' together were honoured as
the T5rah in the wider sense (see on Ps. i. 2), and were fully
recognized as such in the Sabbath-lessons of the synagogues.
The inevitable result of the variety in the contents of the
Torah was the growth, first of all, of schools of thought,»and
then, other circumstances helping, of societies and sects or
parties. Of the former alone can we find any sure traces in
the Psalter. When the author of Ps. cxix. declares that he
is a "Up or ' associate ' of faithful observers of the Law he
makes no allusion to the "i?p or ' association ' of the Pharisees.
Nor can we venture to infer from the predilection of many
psalmists for the word B*TPB. or ' pious ones ' that this had
already become altogether a party name ; the apparent
parallelism between D'Tpq ?np (Ps. cxlix. 1) and a disputed
phrase in 1 Mace. ii. 42 (see above, p. 56) is no proof to the
contrary. But schools of thought, or definite tendencies
which could not but issue in schools of thought, we cannot
fail to observe in the psalms. And we are warned of their
existence by the different attitude of particular psalmists
towards sacrifices.3- For instance, the sofer who wrote Ps. cxix.
does not under-estimate the ' Mosaic ' Law, and yet even he
[v. 108) beseeches God to 'accept the freewill offerings of his
mouth' (i.e. prayer and praise). Nowhere does he make
mention of any other sacrifice. Still more remarkable are the
expressions of certain psalms (Pss. xl. 2-12, 1., li. 3-i9),b the
work, as it would seem, of an advanced Puritan section within
the Jewish Church, to which ' Malachi ' among others was in
clined (see Mai. iii. 4, and cf. i. 10, n,1 R. V.), and some of
whose members in post-Maccabaean times boldly denounced
both temple and sacrifices as ' unclean.' c The early Jewish
1 See on Ps. lxv. 3. I do not venture to add Hag. ii. 14.

vm, DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS 36j

Church seems in fact to have set an example of comprehen
siveness, It had its two extreme schools of thought (I cannot
say ' parties,' for there was no definite practical antithesis),
viz., the promoters and editors of the priestly legislation (not
indeed mere formalists, but somewhat too near to formalism)
on the one hand (cf. Ps. li. 20, 21) and students of Jeremiah,
like the writers of those three psalms and of passages like
Isa. xliii. 23, Ixvi. 3, on the other.d Midway between the two
stood devout students of Scripture like the writers of Pss. i.
and cxix., and, may I riot add ? the authors of the Books of
Joel and Jonah.e Gladly would I mention other decided
adherents of the respective schools, if there were sufficient
undeniable evidence. Could it be shown, for instance, that
the whole Book of Proverbs was, like the Psalter, the gradual
product of the post-Exile period, I should be able to point
to some striking statements of the all-sufficiency of the fear
of Jehovah (Prov. i. 7, cf. xxviii. 14), and of the superiority ot
prayer and obedience to a ceremonial system (Prov. xv. 8,
xvi. 6, xxi. 3, 27). To this critical theory, however, I am
still opposed. The greater part of the first collection seems
to me almost necessarily pre-Exilic, and I do not see sufficient
grounds for disintegration. My only strong doubt is whether
Prov. i.-ix. should not be included among those parts of the
Book which really are post-Exilic (see above, p. 218). There
is much less objection to the view that great outbursts of
praise, such as the Hallelujah psalms, belong to the inter
mediate school to which I have referred ; of these I shall have
to speak again presently. But I do not venture to include
the Praise of the Law (Ps. xix. 8-15) among the records of
this school, because its author's evXdfteia, reveals a legalism
which has passed the bounds of moderation/ The 'yoke of ordi
nances ' may indeed be mitigated to him by a spiritual love.
Still it is a ' yoke,' and the TaXanrwpos iym dvOpmiros of St.
Paul and the tears of the dying Johanan ' the light of Israel '
are not so very far off. There is a more serene temper in the
three distinctly Puritan psalms. Their authors prize the
temple much (see Ps. 1. 2), both for its associations and as the
most sacred house of prayer, but not less the ' roll of the
book ' (Ps. xl. 8) ; and there is a Bible within this Bible from
which the spiritual meaning of sacrifice — the only symbolism

366 HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND lect.
which can any longer satisfy the soul — has dawned upon
them. They evidently think that sacrificial rites were only
permitted and in some sense enjoined because of the dulness
of men's spiritual sensibilities, and that the essential parts of
the Law are those everlasting ' statutes ' which, as summed
up in the ' tables of the covenant,' are probably already recited
in the daily prayers.8 To them, statements like 'Jehovah
spake unto Moses, This is the law of the burnt offering '
(Lev. vi. 8, 9), appear less accurate than the authoritative
assurances of Jehovah in Jeremiah, ' I spake not unto your
fathers . . . concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices,' ' How
can ye say, We are wise, and Jehovah's law (t5rah, ' direction ')
is with us ! but behold, into a lie the lying pen of the scribes
hath made it,' and ' This was the thing that I commanded
them, Hearken unto my voice, and I will be your God, and
ye shall be my people ' (Jer. vii. 22, viii. 8, vii. 23).11 Yes ;
these psalmists are the true sons of Jeremiah and forerunners
of Christ. The 'right sacrifice' is obedience in those 'weightier
matters ' which formalists are tempted to ' omit ' (see p. 1 50).
Or if there be a second sacrifice, it is like unto the first ; 'open
lips ' are the fitting companions of ' open ears.' i Obedience
and thanksgiving are the true divine service [dprja/csia, James
i. 26), and in the abeyance of such cultus from ' the nations '
Jehovah looks for it to the members of the great spiritual cor
poration. Israel is the priest of the peoples as man is, or
should be, the priest of creation.1
This great truth was of course not the monopoly of a school,
though the adherents of a certain school of thought may have
been the first to welcome it. We can see it in psalms which
became in the highest degree utterances of the worshipping
Church. Passages like ' Bless thou Jehovah ' (thou, at least, in
double measure), ' O my soul ' (Ps. ciii. 22), almost justify the
strong statement of Philo that ' by an excess of fellowship and
goodwill to all men everywhere the Jewish nation performs
prayers and other rites both for itself and for those who have
escaped from the due acts of worship.' 2 For remember that
thanksgiving is the second and nobler half of prayer.3 Some-
1 See Isa. lxi. 6, and cf. Deut. ii. 24.
2 Philonea, ed. Tischendorf, p. 53 ; cf. De Mon. ii. 6 (Mangey, ii. 227).
3 See my note on Ps. xiii. 9.

viii, DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS 367
times the psalmists even speak as if Jehovah could not endure
to be without praise (Ps. vi. 6, Isa. xxxviii. 18). Not that He
is stained with self-love, but being rich in lovingkindness, He
longs for the response of grateful hearts. Moreover, the
declaration of Jehovah's praises is one appointed means of
bringing in the nations to the fold.1
To thinkers of the school of Ezra the views of what I have
called the Puritan school appeared, I will not say erroneous, but
liable to misinterpretation. They were themselves far enough
removed from the old naive view of sacrifices, but they still
gave too prominent a place in their theory to the ritual
system. One of their number was apparently the first editor
of Ps. li., who added vv. 20 and 21 to the original poem. I have
elsewhere protested against a sweeping disparagement of the
Levitical Law,2 which was, teleologically speaking, the provi
dential instrument for preserving the deposit of spiritual
religion. Still, the sympathies of a Christian must be chiefly
drawn to the prophetically minded authors of the Puritan
psalms. They are in fact more than half Christian in the
points referred to, if at least we follow that New Testament
writer who assures us (quoting from a kindred psalm)
that the only efficacious sacrifice is the representative self-
oblation of the perfect Man (Heb. x. 1-10). Does any one
object to my statement, on the ground that the author of
Hebrews does not use such directly anti-sacrificial language
as I have represented these psalmists to have used ? But
this early theologian has a carefully constructed theory, and
the temple poets do but give us the germs of theories. Every
good lyric, according to Goethe, was suggested by an occa
sion, and this is emphatically true of the psalms referred to.
In other circumstances, and with leisure for reflection, the
writer of Ps. 1. might have said that the present will of God
was for the maintenance of sacrifices, and that therefore all
honour ought to be shown to them. He might also for him
self and his school have drawn healthful meanings from the
sacrifices, regarding them, as the Second Isaiah may have
regarded the sin-offering (Isa. liii. 10), as acted parables. So
that this objection at least falls to the ground. Another
1 Comp. Isa. xliii. 21 with : Pet. ii. 9.
2 See above, p. 358 ; Job and Solomon, pp. 3, 4.

368 HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND lect.
objection, from a different point of view, will perhaps be
that the author of Hebrews exaggerates the Gospel element
in psalms like the 40th. To some extent he does, but not so
much as was thought by the elder rationalism. The complex
conception of the Servant of Jehovah includes the idea of the
capacity of the better Israelites to benefit their less advanced
brethren. Not only in the Second Isaiah, but in some of the
noblest psalms,j it is the self-oblation of Jehovah's Servant to
which are either expressly or by implication ascribed the full
regeneration of Israel and the spiritual conquest of the world.
Let me not be thought to speak too dogmatically. The
benefits derived by the Church-nation at large from the more
perfect representatives of Israel's Genius ' are not so clearly
referred to by the psalmists as by their favourite prophet the
Second Isaiah. It is possible that the former were apprehen
sive of the appearance of some such theory to account for
these benefits as was actually put forward by the later Rabbis.
They may have vaguely dreaded that doctrine of the atoning
efficacy of the merits of the righteous in their generation 2
which has contributed to weaken the idea of sin in Talmudic
Judaism. At any rate there can be no doubt as to the intui
tions of the nobler psalmists. All that the Servant of Jehovah
could do, whether for Israel at large or for humanity, was to
prepare the way for a spontaneous movement of sinful souls
towards their God. The Servant might, by teaching, and by
exhibiting the graces of a godlike character, enlighten, soften,
stimulate. But obedience was still the only acceptable sacri
fice, alike for the righteous and for the sinner.
But how could the forsaking of wicked ways (Isa. lv. 7)
make up for a long course of transgression ? The psalmists
provided for this case. Indeed, they drew no hard and fast
line between the righteous and the sinners. They felt (putting
aside Ps. xliv., which needs some excuse) that the actual Ser
vant of Jehovah was at the best sadly imperfect, that the
Genius of Israel never had been perfectly embodied, so that
not even for themselves could the righteous Israelites render
a complete obedience. The very psalmist who says in the
name of Israel that he is khdsid, or pious, appeals, as the
Septuagint finely interprets him, to the divine ItnzUsia^
' See Lect. VI., p. 263. 2 See Weber, Altsyn. Theologie, p. 285, &c.

viii. DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS. 369
(lxxxvi. 5), without which he can neither please God nor
carry on His work in the world. A keen distrust of
himself has come upon Israel, caused, as we have seen,
partly by the long series of national troubles, and partly
by the extreme minuteness of the legal requirements. This
is why, with a spirituality far in advance of the Law,"1 the
true Israelites are introduced in certain psalms voluntarily
assuming the place of the ' chief of sinners,' to whom obedi
ence can only take the form of repentance, or, as Sirach per
haps already expressed it, fshubdh, ' returning' n ' I blot out
as a mist thy transgressions, and as a cloud thy sins ; return
unto me, for I redeem thee' (Isa. xliv. 22). 'In the time
of sins show repentance' (Ecclus. xviii. 21). 'Thou didst
make thy sons to be of good hope because thou givest repent
ance when men have sinned ' (Wisd. xii. 19). And long after
wards, a sweet singer of Israel thus exhorts his people,
The altar of repentance [fshubdh) arise and make,
Bind also upon it thy lusts.1
A very imperfect sacrifice, doubtless ; but — ' a broken and a
crushed heart, O God, thou canst not despise ' (Ps. li. 19). To
return to thee (such is Israel's meaning) is the only obedience
which I can yet render. Thou hast thyself called me ; cast
me not away. Open my lips by forgiving me, and my tongue
shall show thy praise. Take not thy holy spirit from me ;
for without it how can I return, and having returned how
without it can I obey ? And so from its very falls the spiritual
Israel has gained a deeper notion of obedience, and a fuller
consciousness of redeeming love.
Do not suppose me to imply that the psalmists, or the
Church for which they speak, always remained at this high
spiritual level. Long after the period at which we have ven
tured to place Ps. xviii. we find professions of innocence,0
which are at variance with the normal Christian sentiment
(cf. 1 John i. 8). But even if the writers of Pss. vii. 9, 10,
xvii. 3-5, xxvi. 1-5, xliv. 18, 19, seem to claim too much for
themselves or for Israel, it is only fair to remember that their
standard is not the external one of religious or social custom
(see note w, p. 356), but the inward judgment of the unseen
1 R. Yehuda Hallevi. B B

370 HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND lect.
God (cf. Ps. vii. 9, cxxxix. 23). Their professions are, more
over, historically significant. The language of Ps. xxvi. 6a is
not to be attenuated by the remark that the sins disclaimed
by the psalmist are those of oppressors, and not of an
oppressed people. They had once been characteristic of
Israel. Not only its greatest king but its most prominent
and religious citizens had been guilty of the sin of murder
(see on Isa. i. 15, lix. 3), which to pious Israelites seemed to
pollute their land with an indelible stain. The Church in the
51st psalm prays [v. 16) :
Deliver us from blood-guiltiness, Jehovah my Saviour-God.
And my tongue shall sing of thy righteousness.
It was no small thing that Israel had now purged itself
from this awful guilt, and could describe its religious ideal in
the words of Pss. xv. and xxiv 3-6 (cf. Ixxiii. 1 ). Shall I add
that the above views of certain psalms are not really opposed
to Dean Church's finely expressed argument in favour of the
divine guidance of the Israelites ? At least it is with the
letter and not with the spirit of his argument that they con
flict. The psalms may belong to different periods, and the
national character of Israel may have passed through various
phases, and yet they may be of the highest value to the
Christian apologist.
The passages referred to above are at any rate exceptional.
It is upon the whole true that the Jewish Church is deeply
conscious of its imperfections, and that nothing but the thought
of the divine lovingkindness makes repentance sweetly possible
to its members. ' A heavenly psalm of mercy ' is Sir Philip
Sidney's name for Ps. li., and most appropriate it is, at least if
' mercy ' may be taken as a synonym for ' lovingkindness.'
And what is this ' quality of mercy ' to the Jewish Church ?
It is a ' bond of perfectness,' a ' religio,' according to St.
Augustine's derivation of the word, binding fast both the
Israelite to his fellow, and Israel to his God. The khasidim,
of whom we have had to speak so much, are those who love
Jehovah because He first loved Israel (Deut. iv. 37, vii. 8
x. 15), and who show forth their love in action, npn [kh/sed),
it is true, is not simply love. God first had a sympathy with
the righteous Abraham, and then entered into a close moral

viii. DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS. 371
relation with him (Gen. xviii. 19) ; and for the sake of Abra
ham ' my lover ' ('SifK, Isa. xii. 8) He first loved,p and then
formed a moral compact with Israel. The primal love of
Jehovah (ngntf), regulated by this moral compact, and mani
fested in act, became ipp.q This is Israel's safeguard ; for
from the first it has fallen far below the standard of its great
ancestor (Isa. xlviii. 8). Israel's God is righteous, and yet
can love the imperfectly righteous, because, by the ways which
we have studied, the Good Shepherd can bring back His own
sheep to the fold. As the psalmists look back, this is their
view of the mutual relation between Jehovah and His
people, — Their heart was not steadfast towards him,
Neither were they faithful unto his covenant.
But he is full of compassion,
Forgives iniquity and destroys not ;
Yea, many a time takes he back his anger,
And arouses not all his wrath.
So he bethought him that they were but flesh,
And wind that passes away, and comes not again.
(Ps. lxxviii. 37-39.)
Inexhaustible are they in praise of this gracious quality,1,
without which prayer itself, in the highest sense of the word,
could not exist. What is it that glorifies one of the least
poetical of the later psalms (Ps. exxxvi.), and justifies its
liturgical title, the great Hallel ? Simply its exquisite refrain,
' For his lovingkindness endureth for ever.' How should the
faithful worshipper enter the temple save in his God's ' abun
dant lovingkindness ' (Ps. v. 8) ? If God were only ' wise in
heart and mighty in strength ' (Job ix. 4), who could plead
with Him ? But God is not simply the Lord but Jehovah ;
not simply the Most High but the lowly; not simply the
merciful but He who is full of lovingkindness to His
covenant-people. Can you wonder that some scholars regret that the level
ling hand of King James's translators (following those of
Alexandria) has so greatly weakened the distinction between
npn, 'lovingkindness,' and D'pqi 'tender mercies'?8 It is
more than a pedantry of scholarship which is concerned ; it is
the balance of revealed truth. There are no doubt moods in

372 HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND lect.

which even the Christian is almost weighed down by the thought
of the divine omnipotence, and then by a strong reaction of
faith extracts comfort from it, and exclaims, 'O God, who
showest Thine almighty power most chiefly in showing mercy
and pity.' ' This is what I may call the highest devotional
philosophy, nor can we dispense with it. Still an ordinary
work-day religion must base itself not upon theory, but upon
facts ; we must approach God as those whom He has led out
of Egypt, and with whom He has definitely entered into cove
nant. A gifted Israelite of Alexandria says that God, who is
a hsairoTrjs, ' despotizes over his own strength ' for moral
ends.1 But how do we know that God is a moral God ? By
a historic revelation in the past, which, accepted by us, has
become a not less historic revelation in the present. The
psalmists, as the interpreters of Moses and the prophets, un
doubtedly take this ground. They postpone that devotional
philosophy which they too more and more hold, to the good
old historic faith, viz. that God is Jehovah (Ps. cxviii. 27), and
that it is righteous for Him to love and to guide His covenant
people. And the weakness of the psalmists is simply this,
that they have not thoroughly fused the new devotional
philosophy with the old historic faith of the covenant-God.u
Let not this hinder us from restoring mentally to our Psalter
that fine symbolic phrase, of which the Gospel has taught us
the full significance, ' O let Israel say, that his lovingkind
ness endureth for ever ' (Ps. cxviii. 2).
But must the lovingkindness of the Good Shepherd always
take the same form ? Will the divine education of Israel
never be complete ? Must there be a perpetual alternation of
sinning and repenting, wandering and returning ? And this
' deep sighing of the poor,' and this straining look for the
morning, must the one always be met by a call to patience,
and the other by the watchman's neutral report, ' The morn
ing cometh, and also the night ' ? Oh, no ; the Hebrew not
less than the Iranian hymns T are the bearers of good tidings.
The day is at hand which shall close the school-time of God's
people, a day of burning anger and burning love, anger against
all whether within or without Israel who oppose God's gracious
purpose, and of a love which ' reacheth unto the heavens ' to
1 Wisd. xii. 18, cf. 16.

viii. DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS.

373

the upright and to the pure in heart. It would not be safe,
however, to combine the various elements in the Psalter
which may be called Messianic into a single picture either of
the judgment or of the succeeding age. Though the psalmists
all (or all but one) belonged to the post-Exile Church, they
were not without considerable differences, which reflect them
selves, not only in their estimate of the ritual, but even more
distinctly in their hopes for the Church's future.
To select but a few of the manifold contrasts which sug
gest themselves. How different are Pss. i. and 1. from
Pss. Ixxii. and ex. ! In the two former the Messianic judg
ment stands apparently out of relation to ordinary history ;
in the two latter, it seems, as it were, to grow out of the
events happening before the psalmists' eyes. How different
again is Ps. ii., in which (as also in Ps. lxxxii.w) there are
distinct traces of apocalyptic influences ! And how unlike to
all these is the glorious 22nd psalm ! Speaking generally, it
is from a Christian point of view a weakness in the Messianic
parts of the Psalter that so little stress is laid on the moral
preparation of mankind for the final judgment. And yet
who can be surprised at this ? It is only incidentally that we
can expect the psalmists to refer to the mysterious future.
The 22nd psalm is an exception to their general style ; it is
a dramatic monologue somewhat in the manner of the Second
Isaiah, and presupposing his advanced teaching on the mis
sionary functions of the Church. The object of the temple-
poets as a class was not to paint the future — that they left to
the prophets and the apocalyptic writers — but to brighten the
present. Of course they imply the same general view of the
Day of Jehovah, which, like the prophets, they continually
suppose to be nearer than it really is. But they do not
attach their faith to a near irapovo-la in such a way that it
would be imperilled by disillusionment. On this point I may
refer to our previous study of ' the accession-psalms ' (pp. 341,
342). Those who are not of the true Israel may perchance
' slip,' but not those who have fully grasped the meaning of the
' covenant.' When doubting thoughts beset them, they either
go into the 'sanctuary of God' (Ps. Ixxiii. 17) or study
the volume of the Torah (Ps. xciv. 12), the temple and the
Torah being the two pledges of the promised divine indwell-

374 HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND lect.
ing. By the sure word of prophecy, by the earnests or initial
stages of the judgment in history ,x and by the sacramental
sign of the temple,1 they know that ' the needy shall not alway
be forgotten ' (Ps. ix. 19). When Jehovah shall 'find the set
time,' he will 'judge uprightly' (Ps. lxxv. 3). The mighty
one will 'throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat
into the garner,' as the Baptist said (Matt. iii. 12), alluding to
Ps. i. 4. ' Therefore,' as the next verse of Ps. i. continues,
' the wicked shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in
the assembly of the righteous.' What, then, should be the
employment of the waiting Church ? The ' Mosaic ' Law,
according to scholars of Jeremiah, may be far from abso
lute perfection. But the best Israelites are not unsettled
by this. They do not evade any of their religious duties, but
strive constantly to ' fulfil all righteousness,' sustained by the
thought of preparing the way for redemption. Even the
formalists, those tares among the wheat, base upon their own
non-moral obedience a claim to share in the Messianic reward.2

Note a, p. 364.
The chief passages bearing on the question as to the relation of
the psalmists to the Law are : Ps. i. ; iv. 6 ; xv. 4 ; xvii. 4 ; xviii.
23 ; xix. 8-15 ; xx. 4b ; xxii. 27(F) ; xxvii. 6 ; xxxv. 13 ; xl. 7-9 ; 1. ;
li. 9, 8, 19, 21 ; liv. 8 ; lxi. gb ; Ixvi. 13-15 ; lxix. 31, 32 ; lxxviii. 5 ;
Ixxxi. 2-6, 17 ; cv,ii. 22 ; cxvi. 17 ; cxviii. 27 ; cxix. ; cxli. 2.
Note b, p. 364.
These psalms ought to be studied in connexion with the ' mys
tic ' psalms to which I shall refer later, and which presuppose the
sacrificial theory of the more distinctly Puritan school. Pss. v. 4,
cxli. 2, may be added to the group, but scarcely iv. 6, li. 21, though
Vitringa and Waterland interpret these passages of spiritual sacri
fices. Note °, p. 364.
This view of the psalms in question is already suggested by
Theodoret (on Ps. cxv. 8) : am toivw Kai IvTtvOev KaTap.aOe'iv, u>s
Kai tov vop.ov KpaTovvTos, ol TrvevfjiaTiKuyrepov ti3 v6/j.u> Trpoo~eayrjKOTes
' See Ps. Ixxiii. 17 (with my note). 2 See Ps. 1. and cf. Isa. lviii. 2.

viii. DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS. 37s
Tas XoyiKas 6vo~ias tC>v dXoymv irpoeTipiiav 6vp.dT(ov, ttjv Kaivrjv BiaOrjKiqv
o-Kioypa<jjovvTes. The most indubitable record of the 'advanced
Puritan section ' in early Jewish literature is Enoch Ixxxix. 73, 74,
which does not indeed assert in so many words that animal sacrifices
are wrong, but only that the offerings in the second temple are impure.
The writer means, not merely that at different times wicked worship
pers or priests (cf. Hag. ii. 14, Psalms of Sol. ii. 3, 4, viii. 13) have
vitiated the sacrifices (for there is nothing to justify such a limita
tion), but that the temple ought not to have been rebuilt before the
Messianic era, when, of course, according to later Judaism, all sacri
fices but the thankoffering would cease, and sin itself would be no
more. May we compare Isa. Ixvi. 1-3 ? At any rate we may appeal
to Assumpt. Mosis, c. 4 ; see also Hilgenfeld, Die Jiid. Apokalyptik,
p. 120, and Schiirer's review of Lucius on Essenism in Theol. Lit.-
zeitung, 1881, col. 494. The Essenes, too, must be mentioned in
this connexion, if we may accept the account of the attitude of the
Essenes towards the sacrificial system in Jos., Ant. xviii. 1, 5. The
Essenes did not, it is true, according to this passage, reject the
principle of a single national sanctuary, for they sent draf^/xara to
the temple. But they do appear to have gone beyond those psalmists
whose spirit (comp. Ps. xv. with the oath of the Essenes, Jos., War,
ii. 8, 7) they had so thoroughly imbibed, in giving practical expres
sion to their dislike of animal sacrifices. No such were offered by
them (Jos., Ant. I.e.) ' by reason of the superiority of their own puri
fications ' [dyveiai). The ' sacrifices ' which they performed by them
selves [i<j>' aviw) were probably these purifications which were
symbolic (comp. Ps. xxvi. 4-7) of the psalmists' favourite sacrifice of
obedience and praise. Hilgenfeld infers from this that the Essenes
did not possess the ' priestly code ' [Judenthum und Judenchristen-
thum, p. 116); at any rate their Pentateuch must have been different
from that of the orthodox Jews. The later Nazaraeans and Osseni
rejected our Pentateuch though, like the Essenes of Josephus, they
venerated Moses (Epiphan., ed. Oehler, i. 92, 100). "Etpao-Kov yap
¦weirXdo-Oai Tavra to. BiBXia, Kai firjBev TOvroiv vir6 tuiv 7rarep<uv yeyevr\-
o-Oai. Surely a not unnatural inference from Jer. vii. 22, viii. 8.
Note d, p. 365.
See my commentaries, and comp. G. A. Smith, Isaiah, vol. ii.
Note e, p. 365.
See Joel ii. 12, 13, and cf. Isa. lviii. (which is more in the manner
of Ps. 1.). Also Jon. iii. 5-10 (cf. Jon. ii. 10, which has affinities

376- HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND lect.
with Ps. 1. 14, 15, cxix. 108). The remarks on pp. 450, 451 of
Wellhausen's Prolegomena apply especially to the writers of such
passages. If I have rightly represented Zarathustra, it is no dis
paragement to the pious men who formed this school to compare
them to that holy sage, who is inferior to them, however, in his view
of prayer. Note f, p. 365.
This suggests the necessary qualification to a previous remark.
It was only too possible that the fear of unconscious transgressions
might kill the remains of childlike simplicity in religion. The same
fear hung like a pall over the ordinary Babylonian worshipper, at
least if the old hymn (No. 4 in Zimmern's Busspsalmen ; cf. Sayce,
Hibbert Lectures, p. 349, &c), which says so much of ' unknown sins,'
was heartily repeated by the contemporaries of Nebuchadrezzar.
My reference to Rom. vii. 24 may seem too bold to some. But
Theodoret has already explained the transition from v. 12 to p. 13 of
Ps. xix. by virtually paraphrasing Rom. vii. 22, 23.
Note s, p. 366.
See Berachoth, 12, and cf. Tamid, 32b, This old custom was
abolished because the Sadducees asserted that the object of the
recitation was to show that the Decalogue was the essential part of
the Law (Jost, Geschichte, i. 175 ; cf. Biesenthal, Das Trostschreiben
des Ap. Paulus, p. 145, note). Note h, p. 366.
On this prophet's attitude towards a written Law, see Jeremiah,
his Life and Times, pp. 107, 119, 120, 157, and cf. my exposition
in Pulpit Commentary, i. 185, 186. Mr. Ball thinks that Jer. viii. 8
accuses the ' scribes ' of the day of putting false glosses upon the
meaning of the sacred law. This is hardly enough. But he subjoins
this pregnant suggestion, ' It thus appears that conflicting and com
peting versions of the law were current in that age. Has the Pen
tateuch preserved elements of both kinds, or is it homogeneous
throughout?' [Expositor's Bible: Jeremiah, pp. 175, 176).
Note *, p. 366.
See my notes on Pss. xl. 7, 1. 14, lxix. 32, and introduction to
Ps. li. On ' eucharist,' these psalms anticipate Philo [De Plantat.
Noe, Mangey, i. 348). As to Zoroaster, Dr. Mills remarks that the
kind of gifts which are proposed in the hymns called Gathas, ' are

VIII. DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS. 377
not sacrificial beasts or fruits, but the actions of the truly pious
citizen whose soul is intimately united with Righteousness, the
homage of prayer, and the songs of praise' [Oxford Zendavesta,
part iii., p. 80). Note J, p. 368.
See those passages in Pss. xxii., xxxv., xl., and lxix. in which the
sufferer is distinguished from the church-nation as a whole, and
compare especially Ps. xxii. 7 with Isa. xlix. 7, hi. 14, liii. 2, 3.
Note k, p. 368.
Comp. Wisd. xii. 18, 2 Mace. x. 4. Heracleota in Corderius'
Catena on Ps. /. c. objects to the Septuagint's version ; Aquila and
Theodotion give IXao-Trjs. Note m, p. 369.
' No other nation,' says Kalisch, ' had an institution approaching
that of the Day of Atonement in religious depth.' Yet even on this
holy day the people ' were simply enjoined to keep rest and to fast ;
no prayer, no confession of sins, was prescribed for them ' [Leviticus,
ii. 340). Note n, p. 369.
The later Jewish doctrine of repentance (as described by Weber)
is not spiritual enough ; but Jewish hymnody reveals a sound devo
tional sentiment. Comp. the fifth of the eighteen Jewish Benedic
tions. Through a Jewish Arabian channel the term ' to return '=
'to repent' (Ar. tdba) reached Mohammed (see Koran, Sur. ii. 51).
Zoroastrianism too has a similar expression for repentance ; but
how formal is its repentance !
Note °, p. 369.
Among these I do not, of course, include Ps. lxxxvi. 2. St.
Augustine may say, 'Hoc vero . . . nescio utrum potuerit forte
alius dicere, nisi ille qui sine peccato erat in hoc mundo,' but this is
because he adopts Sept.'s mistranslation, followed by Jerome himself
and our A. V. Comp. my Study on Ps. lxxxvi. in Expositor, Oct.
1888. Note p, p. 371.
See Deut. iv. 37, x. 15 ; cf. Rom. xi. 28. mnK, of God's love to
Israel, often occurs in the Jewish liturgies.

378 HUMAN OBEDIENCE AND lect.

Note % p. 371.
Hosea and the psalms have already given me occasion as a com
mentator to speak of ipn ' duteous love,' as shown (1) from God to
man, (2) from man to God, (3) from man to man (especially in
Israel). The first and the third of these applications are the com
monest ; the loci classici for the second are Hos. vi. 4, 6, Jer. ii. 2.
What follows from the slenderness of the evidence for the latter ?
That the use is precarious, and that we should seek to explain it
away ? No ; the use of the common adjective Tpn presupposes the
sense of ' duteous and active love to God ' for "!~n. Put aside, if
you will, Pss. xii. 2, xliii. 1, Mic. vii. 2, where Tpn may mean merely
' trustworthy,' ' upright,' ' humane,' but how many passages remain in
which Jehovah Himself is the object of the implied npn ! The true
inference from the rare occurence of the second application of npn
seems to me to be this — that according to the Hebrew writers we,
can best show forth npn to Jehovah in the persons of our fellow men.
For the deeds of npri which Jehovah demands are, not sacrifice, but
the practice of justice and beneficence. npn, as I have said above,
is not simply, nor even predominantly, a subjective feeling. We
must distinguish it therefore from 'mx nanN. That phrase empha
sizes right feeling towards Jehovah as the root of right action ; ipn,
on the other hand, right action as the flower of right feeling (see
Ps. xcvii. 10, 'Ye that love Jehovah, hate that which is evil;' i.e.
as the next words suggest, show yourselves to be D'TDn). Jehovah
requires both the feeling (Ex. xx. 6, Deut. vii. 9) and the action
(Ps. xviii. 26, Hos. vi. 6). Only once does !"Qn^ appear to follow
instead of preceding npn (Ps. xxxi. 24) ; but there -lini* means
'love Him more warmly and devotedly than ever who gives such
proofs of His fidelity.' There are only two passages besides this
in which '» 3i"lK occurs in the psalms (xcvii. 10, cxlv. 20), though
according to the present text cxvi. 1 is virtually a third. ''> n& artK,
however, occurs three times (v. 12, lxix. 37, cxix. 132) ; '1 Dm once
(xviii. 2), but the text is most doubtful. The former phrase is
valuable as showing (in the light of Ex. xxxiv. 6, 7) the moral
grounds of the good Israelite's preference of Jehovah to other so-
called gods. Our language, unhappily, fails to supply an adequate
equivalent for *lpn ; but considering the comparative rarity of the
phrase '»"DK mnN (and the like), it involves the smallest loss to
translate ^n ' love ' (or, duteous love) and Tpn ' loving one ' (or,.
' duteous loving one '). It was perhaps a similar calculation of gain
and loss which led to the Septuagint's occasional rendering of 'n

viii. DIVINE LOVINGKINDNESS. 379

by 8u<aioo-vvrj (Gen. xix. 19, xxiv. 27). Of course, as the bond of
the covenant 'n must be righteousness, and yet the Jewish doctors
draw distinctions full of insight between 'n and pnx (see Succa 4ga ;
Wunsche, Der bab. Talmud, i. 396).
In the Koran not much is said of love to God. Where it is
mentioned (see Sur. iii. and cf. xix. 96) it means obedience to God
and His apostle. This was not enough for the Sufis, to whom God
was the All-beautiful, and who devoted the sweetest strains to the
raptures of mystic love [Hshq). For a monograph on the O. T.
conception, see G. Winter's art. in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1889, pp.
211-246. Note r, p. 371.
God's covenant-love makes its home upon earth (Ps. Ixxxv. 11) ;
it is built up for ever (Ixxxix. 2) ; it toucheth the heavens (xxxvi. 6).
Each good Israelite can sing to Jehovah as ' the God of my loving
kindness' (Ps. lix. 18; cf. n). But 'all things living' have some
claim on this gracious attribute (Ps. cxlv. 16, 17, where, as in Jer.
iii. 12, Jehovah is called Tpn). Once, only once, does the original
writer of Job speak of the divine ' lovingkindness ' as visiting man
simply because he is God's creature (Job vi. 10) ; the author of
' Elihu ' follows suit (Job xxxvii. 13).
Note s, p. 371.
Of course, it is not denied that the two are closely related (see
Hos. ii. 21). But npn says far more than D'lpqi to those who are in
covenant with God. So the great question is, Who are in such a
covenant ? Note *, p. 372.
One of the later Jewish names for God is K3p£p ' the Merciful,'
whence the two first of the ' good names ' of Allah, rakhm&n and
rakhim, which are not only Islamic but pre-Islamic (see Muir, Life
of Mahomet, ii. 147, 148). Zoroastrianism has a similar epithet for
Ahura Mazda. Note u, p. 372.
See e.g. Pss. c, cxvii., where universalism and nationalism appear
side by side. It was the Gospel which first made it clear that there
were no national distinctions in the covenant.
Note t, p. 372.
Throughout the Gathas the singer is borne up by the expectation
that the end of the present world is not far off.

380 HUMAN OBEDIENCE, ETC. lect. viii.

Note w, p. 373.
Angel-scenes in heaven abound in the Jewish apocalypses ;
can we help comparing Ps. lxxxii. with these ? The rebellion in Ps. ii.
(comp. my note on Ps. xlvi. 8) reminds us of Zech. xiv., Ezek. xxxviii.,
xxxix. The confederate heathen nations, Gog and Magog, were to
commit much havoc in the Messianic age according to the Talmud
(see Berachoth, 7b). Note * p. 374.
' Initial stages of the judgment.' The teaching of history led the
later writers to conceive of the ' Day of Jehovah ' as a connected
series of divine acts. This idea pervades the (post-Exile) Book of
Joel.

PART II.
RISE OF DOCTRINE OF JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH.
A FURTHER question of importance must now be raised,
the answer to which will form a suitable close to these
Lectures. Had any of the psalmists an intuition of a judg
ment of individuals, both good and bad, after death, to be
distinguished from that great world-judgment of which I
have spoken ? Doubtless they were not Egyptian theo
logians ; it would be against their manner to describe such a
judgment in detail. Nor could we expect them to have one
consistent theory, or indeed any logically elaborated theory
at all, on the subject. If, however, a judgment, such as I
have just described, be a postulate of the moral conscious
ness, is it not likely that some of the greater psalmists had
a real even if somewhat vague presentiment of it ? It is pro
bably true that the author of Ecclesiastes, who belonged to the
late Persian period, did not hold this belief ; but how confined,
morally and spiritually, his range of vision was ! and how
natural it would be that low views like his should have stimu
lated devout thinkers, by way of opposition, to some bold
venture of faith ! Why should there not be such a venture in
Ps. xlix. 15, 16, provided that parallel passages in nearly
contemporaneous psalms point in the same direction ? But
before reading these verses, let me briefly describe my view of
Ps. xlix.,a supplementing what has been said already in Lec
ture IV. (pp. 149, 150).
This striking psalm is primarily no doubt, like Ps. Ixxiii.,
a theodicy. But incidentally it is (as can be shown by the
allusions of later writers :) a protest against the old Hebrew
notion of Sheol on the ground that this notion conduces
to the selfish tyranny of the rich by which the psalmist
1 See pp. 412, 413.

382 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect
and many other good Israelites are sufferers. The rich op
pressor does not indeed literally claim to be immortal, but
he acts as if he did. His pulse beats so high, and his
fortunes are so monotonously fair, that the thought of death
but seldom occurs to him (Ps. xliv. 7, 10, cf. Ixxiii. 4, 5, x. 6,
Luke xii. 19). And when it does (for he must of course hew'
out for himself a grand sepulchre) he considers that, in a cer
tain sense, his ' glory ' will ' descend after him ' to that aristo
cratic department of Sheol where sceptred kings enjoy a
majestic repose (Isa. xiv. 9, Job iii. I4).b For neither in the
upper nor in the lower world can he brook the thought of a
judgment. ' How should God know' (Ps. Ixxiii. 11) ? There
is no real distinction either in life or in death save that of
rich and poor, strong and weak. But the psalmist rudely
awakens the man out of his dream. ' He will not take away
all that when he dieth ; his glory will not descend after him.'
He will indeed ' go to the generation of his fathers,' but the
context implies that, rich and strong as they may have been,
their company will not profit him ; in a word, "in in Ps. xlix.
20 has almost as distinctly an ethical reference as in Ps.
Ixxiii. 15. And now we can approach the central passage of
the psalm [vv. 15, 16), which is expressly directed against
this ' self-confident ' abolition of morality. I venture to quote
it in my own translation of a gently corrected text which
leaves the ' enigma ' in line 4 untouched : —
Like sheep, they are folded in Sheol ;
Death is their shepherd, and their frame shall waste away ;
She61 shall be their palace for ever,
And the upright shall trample upon them at dawn.1
Nevertheless God shall set free my soul ;
From the hand of Shedl shall he take me.
Enigmatical lines, are they not ? If we can only explain
them, we shall have solved the psalmist's • riddle ' [v. 5) ;
they will reflect light on the rest of the psalm. They are of
course much harder to us than to the original readers, who
moved in the same circle of ideas as the author. But is it not
1 Kamphausen's correction, "nj?? WW^l ¦)TVI.'I> has been adopted by Prof.
Abbott (Hermathena, 1891, p. 72). It means either, ' And they go down to the
grave smoothly,' or ' . . .justly.' But is either meaning satisfactory ? 'Justly'
spoils the flow of the description ; ' smoothly ' may be supported by the Arabic
yasr and yusr ( ' ease, ' ' gentleness '), but suggests the wrong idea of an euthanasia
(Job xxi. 13).

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 383

possible to reproduce these ideas by a sympathetic study of
contemporary writings, and to prove, following the great
Teacher at a distance, in Aubrey de Vere's words,
that at the core
Of well-known words to reverent Thought
There lurks a mine of unknown lore ?
The words ' I am the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of
Jacob ' were interpreted by our Lord controversially and not
critically in accordance with the devout beliefs of His age.1
The enigma in Ps. xlix. must however be solved by the critic in
harmony with the ideas of the age to which both this and the
parallel psalms belong, viz. the pre-Maccabaean post-Exile
age. For the purposes of the solution we are precluded from
noticing the hopes of a later period. To Daniel, to Enoch, to
the Essenes I must not refer, though at a later point I may
use them in confirmation of my result. But to the surmises
of an earlier age I am not forbidden to appeal, for the sur
mises of one age become the anticipations of the next. Such
surmises are possibly contained in Deut. xxxii. 39, 1 Sam. ii.
6,c and very certainly in Hos. vi. 2 and Ezek. xxxvii. 1-10
(passages which directly refer only to a national resurrection,
but which imply the possibility of the resurrection of indivi
duals), and Isa. xxv. 8, xxvi. 19 (passages in a post-Exile
prophecy, referring to the annihilation of death and to the
resurrection of dead Israelites in connexion with the Messianic
judgment), and with these passages we may group the story
of a resurrection in 2 Kings xiii. 21, and the splendid climax
of the narrative of Elijah in 2 Kings ii. 11, the latter of which
may be illustrated by the account of Enoch in Gen. v. 22.
Both the stories in Kings are no doubt pre-Exile, and even
if that of Enoch be (as I hold that it is) Exilic,2 it is at
any rate pre-Maccabaean, and the idea which underlies both
it and the parallel Elijah-story is genuinely Hebraic. This
we can see from the Hebrew account of Paradise. The story
of the ' tree of life ' (which was probably once supplemented
by a story of ' the fountain of life ' d) attests a belief among
the Israelites as well as in Babylon in the possibility of escap
ing death. It may be objected that Jehovah reserves the use
1 Comp. Mark xii. 26 with R. Simai's proof of the resurrection from Ex. vi. 4
(Sanhedrin, gob).
2 On the Enoch-story, see note ', p. 432.

384 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
of the ' tree of life ' for Himself and the Elohim (or ' sons of the
Elohim '). But unless there was really a prospect that Adam
too, if obedient, might ultimately be allowed to eat of the tree,
why did Jehovah place him in his own garden ? e The same
belief also lies at the root of the expectation of a resurrection.
Death might be — -such was the great surmise — but a temporary
or apparent defeat, which would make the final victory all
the more glorious. ' Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy.'
Now, assuming, as we must, that the thinkers of the post-
Exile Church brooded over these surmises, this was the ques
tion which they must have sought to answer, Can an ordinary
Israelite who is neither an Enoch nor an Elijah, and is but
too apprehensive of ' secret faults/ hope so to walk with God
in perfectness of heart that Sheol shall not finally prevail
against him ? If so, it might be justly said, without imply
ing the Platonic psychology, that, though ' in the eyes of fools
such an one seemed to die,' yet ' his soul was in the hand of
God, where no torment could touch him ' (Wisd. iii. 1, 2). If
on the other hand this be impossible, what, it would be asked,
is the nature of the life in Sheol ? Is it altogether joyless ?
Is the voice of prayer and praise for ever hushed ? Or may
it be said of faithful Israelites that ' all they that have gone
down into the dust ' have the privilege of worship/ so that
the suffering righteous man need not ' let loose his complaint '
like Job, but may ' rest upon his bed ' (Isa. Ivii. 2), whispering
' Even here doth thy hand lead me, and thy right hand doth
guide me ' g (Ps. cxxxix. 10) ? That the thinkers of the Jewish
Church had arrived at unanimity upon the subject, cannot of
course be affirmed ; there are indications of opposite tenden
cies which have to be patiently followed out. Let us take the
gloomier tendency first, and listen to a psalmist who belongs
to a very dark part of the Persian period. He is speaking,
like the authors of Pss. xxxix. 5, 6 and xc. 10, not merely as
an Israelite, but as a man.
Bethink thee (O Jehovah !) how brief my time is,
For what vanity thou hast created all the children of men !
Who is the man that shall live on and not see death,
Or win escape for his soul from the hand of Hades ?
And if we ask how the souls fare in the Israelitish Hades, we
are told in a too perspicuous enigma that they 'dwell in

vm. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 385
Dumah,' i.e. in (the land of) Silence (Ps. xciv. 17 ; cf. cxv.
I7).h And who remembers not those comfortless utterances
in the psalm (for such it clearly is) ascribed to Hezekiah
(Isa. xxxviii. 18), and in Pss. vi. 5, 6, xxx. 10, lxxxviii. 1 1-13,1
which make it, I was going to say, so miraculous that even a
mustard-seed of faith could exist under such conditions ? I
know that according to some critics, the speaker in these
passages is only the nation personified. For my own part, I
do not think so ; but even if they be right, such expressions
could not have been assigned to the nation, if they had not
first been uttered by individuals.
One would have liked to answer the despondent writer of
Ps. Ixxxix. 49 by pointing to Hos. xiii. 14, which declares
that though all the plagues which fill the dark city of Sheol
were let loose upon Israel, they would be incapable of destroy
ing Jehovah's ' son.' 2 If these words were possible in the
olden days when Jehovah's covenant was with the nation,
with equal justice could a psalmist use them (changing
' Israel ' into ' each Israelite '), when the covenant had, ex
plicitly or implicitly, been extended to the individual. And
happily there were some thinkers who began to feel this. They
represent a very different tendency from that just now de
scribed, as their works in the Psalter prove, and if in describing
them I again have recourse to a modern epithet, I hope not to
be misunderstood. So strongly do they realize the hidden and
yet revealed centre of the highest spiritual truth that I venture
to call them the mystical school.3 To them belong the
psalms which are the chief favourites of the Christian, though
passages not less inward occur in several psalms which appear
as wholes to be less attractive. Altogether unlike are these
writers to other mystics — to Babylonian priests with their
litanies of sacred formulae, to God-intoxicated Persian Sufis,1
and even to their devout but fancy-led fellow-countrymen the
later Essenes. Even such high mysticism as that of the
Zoroastrian Gathas is too much intermixed with superstitious
elements to be ranked with theirs. These psalmists are the
1 Comp. Ecclus. xvii. 27 (on v. 30, see Edersheim in Speaker's Comm.).
2 .See my Hosea (Cambridge Bible), p. 124.
3 Cf. C. G. Montefiore's excellent and profound article, ' Mystic Passages in.
the Psalms, 'Jewish Quarterly Review, Jan. 1889, pp. 143-161.
C C

386 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
noblest thinkers of an age when the church-nation was still
happily free from the moral tension of apocalyptic fanaticism.5
They live, not in hermitages, but among their brethren, and
their words, which are the free but fervent expression of
natural feeling, display a chaste simplicity worthy of classic
art. Nor do they represent in Judaism, like the Sufis in
Islam, an alien type of religion. They are the disciples of a
prophet who, though persecuted in his lifetime, acquired after
death not less authority in the Church than Ezra himself. I
have already referred to the Puritan or anti-ritualistic group
of psalmists who derive their origin from Jeremiah. The
mystic school is, I think, equally influenced by the evangelical
prophet. So far from being opposed to that other group, its
members do but give a fuller expression to the underlying
thoughts of those brave Protestants. The author of Ps. 1.
certainly did not mean to assert that obedience and praise
were the sum total of religion. They constituted, according
to him, the ' body ' of true ritual practice [dprjo-tcsla, James i.
27) ; what was its ' informing soul,' he left for other psalmists
to say. How those ' right sacrifices ' (Ps. iv. 6) were to be
offered by imperfect human beings, whose spirit was not
always stable or willing (Ps. li. 14), he did not himself explain.
But honest and devout minds could not remain in darkness.
They believed in the divine Teacher of Israel, whose law was
within their hearts (Ps. xl. 9), and they had the promise of
that clear knowledge which was equivalent to prophetic in
sight (Jer. xxxi. 34 ; cf. Isa. liv. 13, Joel ii. 28). In short,
these holy men, whose monuments are the mystic psalms, had
grasped a newer and deeper conception of life, and this they
owed to the germs of thought contained in the prophecy of
Jeremiah. Too short is the time that we can spare for the study of
these noble singers. Let us at least attempt to enter into
their ideas, and not treat them as mere effervescent enthusiasts.
It is not enough to say with Bishop Butler ' that the ' beatific
vision ' was the object of their hopes. No ; they had in some
sense attained it. They had won the best of all ' portions,'
and ' laid hold upon the life indeed,' k possessing which, they
' desired nothing upon earth.' Or rather, one self-regarding
1 See his 14th sermon.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 387
desire they kept. It was in the temple that they had learned
what true life meant, and they still felt towards it like a child
towards its mother. Its ministers were their leaders and
their friends (Ps. xvi. 3), and their supreme pleasure was to
join in its services of praise (Ps. lxxxiv. 5). Had it been
possible, they would fain have ' dwelt in the house of Jehovah
all the days of their life,' nor was it without a pang that they
found themselves on the confines of a higher region of faith.
That they had been guided thither by the Shepherd who
supplied their wants, is certain. In proof of this, look at the /
Guest-psalms™ (i.e. those which refer to the privilege oft
dwelling with Jehovah), which may be regarded as a group j
within the group of mystic psalms. And first of all take the two
poetic catechisms in Book I. on the qualities of acceptable wor-
shippers (Pss. xv. and xxiv. 1-6). Can it be only the material [
temple of which the psalmists speak ? Then how is it that
sinners do at present ' stand in the congregation of the right
eous ' ? Is Jehovah powerless to drive out the ' guests ' who
have not ' clean hands and a pure heart ' ? No ; a literalistic inter
pretation will not meet the requirements of these psalms. May
we, then, treat them on the analogy of Ps. i. as virtual pro
phecies of the Messianic judgment, when the true Israel will
be separated from the false, and, if there be a temple at all,
its worshippers will be such as God delights in ? No ; this
view not only fails to do justice to the other Guest-psalms,
but is inconsistent with the special object of these two. Pss.
xv. and xxiv. 1-6 are in fact protests against the heathenish
acceptation of the phrase ' Guest of God.' To be the guest of
Baal or Ashtoreth or the false Jehovah was to be a frequent
visitor to the shrine of the god, to be lavish in sacrifices, and
punctual in all ceremonial duties, and the reward of the
' guest ' was to have a share of the sacrificial feasts, and a
mystic connexion with the deity, which ensured supernatural
protection. To be the guest of the true Jehovah was indeed
different from this, but still something to be enjoyed, and not
merely hoped for. It was to have solved the enigma how it
was possible to dwell in Jehovah's house all the days of one's
life ; it was to present spiritual sacrifices in a spiritual temple.
Why should we be surprised at this ? If these psalmists
have formed the conception of a spiritual Israel, why should

388 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
they not advance to that of a spiritual sanctuary ? If they
are followed, as Ps. xxiii. 6 says, by the lovingkindness of
their Shepherd, how should they not pass freely into His
' tent ' ? ' They drank of that spiritual Rock which followed
them,' is in the strictest sense true of these noble singers.
Once more, I fully admit the characteristics which the
mystic psalmists share with less advanced Israelites. In their
keen distress when separated from the temple they are the
children of the past. True ; but in that independence of the
temple which almost against their will they profess, they are
the inheritors of the future. Listen to one of them wrestling
with the new thoughts which lighten the burden of a grave
moral problem. No one, I hope, will suppose that the last
distich refers to the psalmist's usual morning visit to the
temple !
Up, Jehovah, confront him, make him bow down,
Deliver my soul from the wicked by thy sword,
From men of the world,11 whose portion is in life,
And whose belly thou fillest with thy treasure,
Who are full of sons, and leave their abundance to their children.
As for me, I shall behold thy face in righteousness ;
May I be satisfied, when I awake, with thine image. (Ps. xvii. 13-15.)
Must we not recognize here a faint foregleam of the mysticism
of the Gospel and of the First Epistle of St. John ? 1 There is
indeed one obvious difference, viz. that ' life ' in this psalm
means, not life eternal, but the life of the senses. But those
who are not led astray by terminology will see that the religious
theory of the psalmist is the germ of that of the evangelist.
' To see God's face ' means to receive from Himself intuitive
revelations of His nature and character, so far as these con
cern Israel and the individual Israelite ; it is, in short, to
' know ' Him.2 The psalmist would understand and accept
the definition of true life in John xvii. 3, ' to know thee the
only true God,' and if he calls the existence of those who are
both in and of the world ' life,' he thoroughly agrees with two
other psalmists who say that such so-called life is but a
1 See John xv. 18, 19, xvii. 9, 1 John ii. 15, 17, v. 19, &c. (the world) ;
John xvii. 3 (true life) ; 1 John iii. 2 (vision of God).
2 See my note on Ps. xvii. 15. For Smend 's theory, see p. 426, note *.

VIII. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 389
'semblance'' (D2tf, Ps. xxxix. 7, Ixxiii. 20). The question
now arises, Is the psalmist (who, as we know, represents a
class) so absorbed in communion with God that he gives no
thought to death and that which may follow after death, these
being from the highest spiritual point of view mere externals.
A large class of writers reply in the affirmative, either
because they have placed this psalm in a period when the
idea of a judgment of the individual after death seems inad
missible, or because they regard the notion of compensation
in a future life as unworthy of a psalmist. The latter reason
may be thought to have influenced Pfleiderer, who, in a very
striking passage,1 treats Ps. Ixxiii. 25 ° (that noblest of all the
mystical passages in the Psalter) as an expression of indiffer
ence to a future readjustment of circumstances to character.
The psalmist is, if I do not mistake Pfleiderer's meaning,
so absorbed in God that the outward conditions of heaven
itself fail to interest him. But even if individuals can at
this time have soared so high above ordinary humanity, is
it likely that such an expression would have been referred
to in a church-hymnal as a realizable object ? It appears to
me, moreover, that this critic's view would require us to
alter the text of the preceding verse, an attempt which has
in fact been made, but is arbitrary in the extreme. Nor
can I interpret Ps. xvii. 15 from Pfleiderer's point of view.
Take either passage with its context, and the only natural
deduction is surely this, that to a psalmist of the mystic
school the idea of compensation for his afflictions was
altogether alien, but that his experience of that lovingkind
ness, which was better by far than what men call life,
being incomplete, he postulated a fuller communion with
God after death. Even now he could say that ' nearness to
God was his happiness,' but such happiness could not be per
fect till he ' awoke ' from the sleep of life (so let us interpret
Pi??? for the present) to a full vision of the divine glory.?
What he longed for was not material but moral or spiritual
compensation. It is only when he thought of the discords of
sin, that outward circumstances formed an element in his
1 Religionsphilosophie (1878), ii. 717. Cf. Dr. Martineau's criticism, Study
on Religion, ii. 361-363. The statement was modified in Pfleiderer's second
edition.

390 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF, LECT.
view of the future. Not his own outward lot but that of the
wicked in the world or age that was to come became the sub
ject of his prophetic meditation.
I cannot indeed prove that Ps. Ixxiii. 27 refers to a retri
bution in what was afterwards called the 'coming age,'
though, grouping this passage with others, and taking a wide
view of psalm-theology, I believe that it does. But so much,
at least, seems indisputable — that the principle of compensation
after death (even if only in the moral sphere) is recognized by
the authors of Pss. xvii. and Ixxiii., and I claim the right to
interpret the two last verses of Ps. xvi., the meaning of which
is perhaps slightly uncertain,9 in accordance with Pss. xvii.
15 (as interpreted above) and Ixxiii. 24, 25. The enigma
in Ps. xlix. 15, 16 I must still leave without a complete solu
tion, but not without having obtained light on the second
part of it. Verse 16 is altogether parallel to Ps. Ixxiii. 24^,.
inasmuch as it represents departure from this world as an
Enoch-like ' assumption ' to fellowship with God. Ps. xlix.
therefore does contain the idea of the future moral compensa
tion of the good, but we must not affirm as yet that its language
is meant to imply a general readjustment of circumstances
after death.
Nor could we venture to adopt this interpretation simply on
grounds of subjective preference. To justify our finding the
idea of a general retribution after death in psalms composed
between Josiah's time and the end of the Persian age, we
must be able to show, (1) that within this period the Jews.
were subject to influences which must have strongly favoured
its development, and (2) that the subsequent course of Jewish
religious thought can be best understood on the supposition
that this development actually took place. Let us now
approach the first part of our argument, and ask from what
source such influences were likely to proceed. Egypt and
Greece are excluded r because within the period referred to
Israel was not in close relations with these countries.
But that Babylon and Persia may have deeply influenced the
Jewish doctrine of the things after death, will be readily
admitted by those who agree with the results of my Sixth
Lecture (Part I.). It is not probable that the Jews borrowed
such an important idea from a foreign religion, but the germ-

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 391
ideas which, as we have seen, they possessed even before the
Exile, may have been greatly assisted in their development by
Babylonian and Persian influences. Let us now consider
whether there is reason to think that this was actually the
case. From the Paradise-story of the Yahvist to the Talmudic
descriptions of the under-world 9 the Jewish notions of the
world beyond nature (if I may use the phrase, to include
both ' heaven ' and the world of the dead) have a Babylonian
or Assyrio-Babylonian tinge. It is evident that again and
again, under very different circumstances, the older exercised
a fascination over the younger race. To restrict this influence
to the imaginative details of the scenery of the spirit-world is
unreasonable ; the ideas as well as the myths of Babylon
must, with the limitation already mentioned, have attracted
the Jews. I must however hold myself dispensed from con
sidering at length M. HaleVy's theory of the identity of
popular Jewish beliefs with 'those which the Assyrio-
Babylonians professed relatively to the fate of man after
death.' • As I have said elsewhere, ' reserves and qualifications
have to be made all along the course that M. Halevy has
taken.' His conclusions are not without a large element of
truth, but as set forth by him are vitiated by his determination
to exalt the Babylonians at the expense of the Iranians. It is
in the highest degree improbable (see p. 283) that the Persians
borrowed any of their distinctive doctrines from the Semites,
and I will add that it has not yet been proved that retribution
after death was a common Babylonian belief. That there was a
notion of the possibility of escape from death, I do not deny,
and on a former page I have myself referred to this. I know too
that in the Assyrian hymns admission is now and then craved
even for private persons to the divine palace in ' the land of
the silver sky,' but there does not seem to have been much
hope of this boon, nor is it represented as conditional upon
character.2 Professor Sayce, it is true, believes that by the
1 Halevy, ' La croyance a l'immortalite de l'ame chez les Semites,' Memoires
de VAcad. des inscriptions, 1882, p. 210 &c. ; cf. Revue archeologique, juillet
1882, p. 53 &c. In criticism of this paper, see Montet, Revue de Phisl. des
.religions, ix. 319, and my Book of Psalms (1888), p. 41.
2 For a survey of the Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs, see Sayce, Hibbert
Lectures, p. 365 &c; Jeremias, Die bab. -ass. Vorstellungen vom Leben nach

392 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
time of Assurbanipal the doctrine of the immortality of the
conscious soul, and with it that of retribution after death, had
dawned upon the Assyrian and the Babylonian mind. It would
not be surprising if this were really the case. The translation
(if the word can be used) of Sit-napistim * is not indeed de
scribed as the reward of goodness, but we need not assume
that the ancient myths expressed the highest beliefs of those
who repeated and reproduced them. Nebuchadrezzar's belief
in particular was so noble in some respects that we would fain
think that it was equally noble in others, and in the Berosian
form of the Flood-story a voice from above admonishes those
men who are saved but left upon earth to continue in the fear
of God, because for his piety Xisuthrus, with his wife, daugh
ters, and steersman, was taken to dwell with the gods. Still
I do not see that we can venture to affirm that the greatest of
hopes was as yet prevalent, and that Aralu had ceased to be
the ' land from which there is no return.' As Mr. G. A. Smith
remarks, ' most of the kings who pray for an entrance among
the gods do so on the plea that they have been successful
tyrants,' ' and I see no reason to believe that those private per
sons who could not afford costly sacrifices or pronounce the
most powerful formula? might make up for ritual deficiencies
by what the Zoroastrians called ' good thoughts, good words,
good deeds.' So far as the existing evidence goes, the
immortality of the crowd must have been problematic in the
extreme. It was only upon the mountain-tops of society
that the celestial brightness gleamed. The poor and needy,
such as the psalms speak of, must have felt themselves prac
tically shut out. Nevertheless it is highly probable that the
Assyrio-Babylonian belief in the possibility of escaping death
(or, of escaping out of death, for the two ideas were not
sharply distinguished by Semitic minds") did encourage
meditative Jewish saints brooding over the germs of a higher
doctrine in their own religious books. Not to dwell on the
legends of epic poetry, both Adar (or rather Ninib) and
Marduk bear the titles ' the Merciful One, who giveth life, who
maketh the dead to live.' The meaning of these must not be
dem Tode (1887) ; Jensen, Die Kosmologie der Babylonier (1890), pp. 212-234;
and, with caution, Boscawen, Transactions of Soc. of Bib I. Archaeology, iv. 267 &c.
1 The Expositor' s Bible : Book of Isaiah, i. 411.

viii. judgment After death. 393
rated too low. They express a belief, not merely in the
constantly renewed wonders of spring, or in the medical effi
cacy of incantations, but also in the divine power, which could
be set in motion by spells, to restore a dead person to his
interrupted earthly existence (cf. 2 Kings xiii. 21). And
though on this point we desire fresh evidence, it is possible
or even probable that in Nebuchadrezzar's time (i.e. during
the Exile) the titles of Marduk, now the head of the Babylonian
Pantheon, began to acquire a deeper meaning. At any rate,
the emphasis which the Babylonians laid on this attribute of
the supreme God must have stimulated saintly Jewish thinkers
to ponder over the meaning of similar phrases applied by
them to Jehovah. And if, through the impulse derived from
Babylon (as a ' second cause ' of what was ultimately due to
the Divine Spirit) these Jews developed a fuller doctrine of
the future life than was known to the Chaldeans, we need not
be surprised at this. The Sabaeans in S.W. Arabia can be
shown to have done so too. It was from the aristocratic
immortality which they had learned from the Assyrio-
Babylonians that they, alone among the Arabian peoples,
developed a definite belief in a happy life after death under
the protection of the gods, which was not confined to a few
but open to all men/ Why should not the more highly
favoured Jewish Church have made still greater progress, and
why must we suppose that the first signs of this were given in
the year 164 B.C. ?
But plausible as this conjecture may be, does it suffice to
prove our thesis ? Certainly not. A more powerful influence
than the Babylonian was required to develope with certainty
the doctrine of future retribution from the original Jewish
germs. There has been much argument on the absence of a
reference to future rewards and punishments in the ' Books of
Moses.' And remarkable it certainly is that in the so-called
Priestly Code there is no allusion to the doctrine of which we
are in search. I do not say that this could not be plausibly
explained, even on the assumption that that doctrine was
already prevalent in the early part of the Persian period.
But it is certainly a simpler supposition that while Persian
influence was still weak, it failed to win adherents in the
Jewish Church. And now let us turn from Babylon to Persia.

394 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect
Did the Persian religion, which from the Second Isaiah
onwards so greatly interested the Jews, include a belief in
retribution after death, and of what nature was this belief, if
it existed ? The question as to the relation of Iranian to
Babylonian beliefs does not concern us now. For centuries
before the period of the Psalter, Iranian religion had had its
own independent development, and its doctrine of the ' last
things,' as you will probably agree, is peculiarly its own. A
knowledge of this great religion is necessary to the full equip
ment of an Old Testament scholar, and this can only be
gained from a study of the Zoroastrian Scriptures. How
strange it is that these should have been so long neglected
among ourselves ! If Anquetil Duperron could be roused
to a chivalrous self-devotion by a few Zend leaves of the
Vendidad at Paris, why was no English scholar provoked to
rivalry by the complete manuscript of the same Scripture
in the Bodleian Library ? We may now perhaps hope for
better days, so far as Oxford theologians are concerned. It
is no longer excusable to study the Old Testament religion
without comparing Zoroastrianism, for our own university
has given us a trustworthy translation both of the Zend and
of the Pahlavi texts, and illustrative works (both transla
tions and critical researches) by foreign scholars are readily
accessible. And now let me take up again a statement made at the
end of Lecture VI., Part I., to the effect that the psalms may
present affinities to the most spiritual part of Zoroastrianism.
I meant that if Mazdeism, or the Zoroastrian religion, is in any
high degree a spiritual one, the higher teachers of Israel must
have felt an instinctive attraction towards its spiritual
elements. For our present purpose, then, we must put aside
those reactionary revivals of pre-Zoroastrian Mazdeism by
which that noble religion resembled but too closely the cults-
of heathenism, and seek for the precious essence of Zoroas
trianism, that by which it lived and still lives. But where
may this be found ? In the Avesta, for the objections which
may be raised to this are groundless* Not indeed in all
parts of the Avesta in equal purity. Just as the essence of
Mosaism is more clearly seen in the psalms and prophecies
than in the Mishna or even in the Pentateuch, so for the

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 39s
essence of Mazdeism we must refer to the metrical chants of
the Zoroastrian Church which bear the name of Gathas
(' songs '). These are, so far as they go, an authentic record
of the great reformer of Mazdeism, known as Zarathustra or
Zoroaster,* whom the Roman Catholic scholar, M. de Harlez,
suggestively compares with Moses, i.e. with the Moses of
tradition who was psalmist, prophet, and lawgiver in one
(cf. p. 76). Would that the Hebrew psalmists could have
known them ! They would doubtless have recognized their
nobility. But to us at any rate the Gathas are a repertory of
those spiritual elements in Mazdeism, by which this religion
must have specially attracted the psalmists. So lofty and so
pure is their spirit, and, in contrast to the Vedic hymns, so
anti-mythological is their tendency/ that at first one can
hardly believe that they are ancient, and yet the fall in the
tone of the later Avesta makes it still more difficult to be
lieve that they are modern. But granting that Zarathustra
was not merely a reformer like Ezra, but a prophet and a
founder of a Church like Isaiah, can we not understand
the phenomenon ? The Gathas are ' the utterances of
Zarathustra in presence of the assembled Church ' (Geldner),
and naturally represent a high type of religion ; the later
Avesta reveals the adulteration which this noble faith
could not escape as soon as it became popular. Nor
was the founder of this Church entirely without points of
contact with the previous age. The Gathas, even as they
have come down to us, contain a certain number of naive,
childish conceptions, and but for the later editor would pro
bably contain more. That editor appears to have worked in
the true spirit of Zarathustra, and to have represented the
more spiritual school of thinkers in the religion of Mazda.
There were of course other schools, just as we found to have
been the case in Mosaism, and we must not wholly neglect
the records of these in the Avesta. Nor can we venture to
ignore even the very late work called the Bundahis (translated
by West from the Pahlavi in the ' Sacred Books of the East '),
since though in its present form not earlier than A.D. 651, it
contains traditions which must be of very great antiquity.
This was long ago pointed out by Windischmann, and it is
confirmed by the analogy of the results to which Hebrew

396 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
scholars are more and more tending in the criticism of the
Priestly Code. Dr. West (whose authority is indisputable)
speaks still more definitely ; he thinks that it may be either
a translation or an epitome of the Damdad Nask, one of the
twenty-one ancient Zoroastrian Scriptures.
But before referring to the Zoroastrian doctrine of the ' last
things,' I should like to speak of the theory of sacrifice and of
morality, since this has an obvious bearing on a group of
psalms with which the more mystic psalms are closely con
nected — I mean the Puritan. Was there any school of
Zoroastrianism which held the high doctrine of sacrifice
which we find in Ps. 1. ? Certainly the Gathas nowhere sanc
tion the primitive theory of sacrifice denounced in that psalm,
and in Yasna, xxxiii. 14 we find Zarathustra (or a hymn-
writer of his school) offering up his life and all his faculties,
' his obedience to the precepts and all his power,' as the most
acceptable sacrifice to Ahura. We cannot however deny that
the later Avesta sanctions the gross primitive theory,2 though
more prominence is given to another view, which Zarathustra
not improbably sanctioned, and which held the dedication of
a small part of a slaughtered animal to a divinity to be a
symbolical recognition that the vital force of all good
creatures belonged to the good genii. And so far as the
sacrifice was concerned, a sacrificial act was of no value,
unless coupled with ' good words and deeds and thoughts.'1
But, it may be asked, may not the word ' good ' in this phrase
mean simply ' ritually correct ' ? The supposition is not un
natural. For the greatest friends of Mazdeism must admit
that its doctrine of prayer was not nearly as pure as that
which is taught in the psalms. The recitation of the Gathas
and of the Vendidad formed the most essential part of the
sacrificial liturgy.2 We may in fact call it, with de Harlez,
the ' sacrifice of praise : ' — the expression seems to be
justified, even if the liturgy in the Yasna be somewhat
modern. By offering the right prayers and praises it was
believed that both strength and pleasure could be given to
the good genii, and that ' the flesh-devouring fiends ' could be
1 Yasna, xxxiv. 2 ; Gdh, iv. 9 ; Yast, xxii. 14.
z Spiegel, Avesta, Bd. ii., p. lxxvi. ; cf. Bd. iii., p. cxxii. .where the influence
¦of the Christian eucharistic service upon the haoma-liturgy is suspected.

vm. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 397
held off.1 Nor was this altogether a later revival of past
superstitions ; it appears to have had the sanction of
Zarathustra himself. So impossible was it even for this
Elijah-like prophet to make a complete breach with the past.
And yet the supposition referred to just now is erroneous.
The moral element in prayer was only overshadowed, not
extinguished, by the ceremonial. The foundation of good
ness in Mazdeism was, as we shall see, in no artificial sense
of the word ' moral.' All good thoughts, words, and deeds,
remarks Dr. Mills, culminated in the ritual ; ' they were
nourished by it and lost in it.'2 ' L'ordre du monde et du
sacrifice,' says M. Darmesteter, ' s'effaga devant l'ordre de la
loi morale, les "paroles saintes de la priere, rdcitees con-
formdment a la regie," se confondirent avec les "paroles de
ve>ite\" ' 3 Nor can it be denied that the Gathas themselves,
fairly interpreted, contain specimens of free spiritual com
munion between the ' Good Mind ' of Mazda and the human
spirit. The morality of Mazdeism has been lately stigmatized
as superficial,4 and it is true that moral and ceremonial purity
are more closely linked together than a Christian can approve.
No doubt in course of time ceremonial details were so mul
tiplied as to interfere with the due pre-eminence of what we
call moral duties. But upon the whole the ethical standard of
the Avesta is not inferior to that of the Jewish Law and of
psalms like xv., xxiv. 1-6, cxii. ; its regard for the poor is
specially remarkable, and must have commended it to the
best Jewish teachers, even though they may sometimes have
sadly asked why such noble principles were so imperfectly
carried out in the policy of their Persian governors (see p. 341).
And if we are to confess that ceremonialism in Persia did too
often obscure the ' weighter matters of the law,' must we not,
to be historically fair, pass a similar criticism upon the Jewish
legalism ?
Still greater interest will be excited by Zarathustra's pro
found conception of the rewards of righteousness. It is with
some hesitation that I quote isolated expressions from the
Gathas, and I urgently recommend the student to give a con
tinuous perusal to these poems. I am confident that he will
1 Yasna, xxviii. 6; cf. Vend. xix. 10. 2 Oxford Z. A. iii. 213.
* Ormazd et Ahriman,-a. 17. 4 De la Saussaye, Lehrbuch der Ret. -gesch. ii. 42..

398 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
then see that I have not imported into Zarathustra's words
more than they really mean. There can be but one opinion
among those who have thus perused the Gathas, that, in the
midst of a world almost wholly given up to a gross material
eschatology, this ancient Iranian prophet declared the true
rewards and punishments to be spiritual. His teaching is
based on a distinction, which to the Jews came much later,
between the material or bodily life and the mental or
spiritual, the latter of which connects us with ' those veritably
real (eternal) worlds where dwells Ahura ' ( Yasna, xliii. 3).
This distinction did not pass away with Zarathustra ; it per
vades the Avesta. Here is a prayer in the ' middle Avesta ' • —
* And now in these thy dispensations, O Ahura Mazda ! do
thou act wisely for us, and with abundance with thy bounty
and thy tenderness as touching us ; and grant that reward
which thou hast appointed to our souls, O Ahura Mazda !
Of this do thou thyself bestow upon us for this world and
the spiritual ; and now as part thereof (do thou grant) that
we may attain to fellowship with thee, and thy righteousness
for all duration ' ( Yasna, xl. 1). Another of similar character
runs thus, — ' And to thy good kingdom, O Ahura Mazda,
may we attain for ever, and a good King be thou over us ;
and let each man of us, and each woman, thus abide, O thou
most beneficent of beings, and for both the worlds ' ( Yasna,
xii. 2). In short, heaven and hell are not primarily the localities
appointed for souls after death ; the one is ' life,' ' the best
Mental State,' the other is ' life's absence,' ' the worst life,'
— a high doctrine, which is embodied in a very noble allegory
in the Vendidad.aa
But can a religion designed like Zoroastrianism for all
degrees of moral culture be indifferent to the imperfection of
the temporal recompenses of good and evil ? By no means.
This many-sided religion expressly prophesies a readjustment
of circumstances to character, but it views this readjustment
not primarily as a compensation of individuals, but as a con
sequence of that triumph of Ahura which all the powers of
evil cannot avert. The prophet himself indeed had no clear-
cut eschatological theory. He declined to pry into the
' Y. xxxv. -xiii. are placed in the midst of the Gathas, and are next to them
in point of age.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 399
secrets of the future.1* He was content with the assured
prospect of Ahura's triumph, and to him it is owing that,
unlike the Babylonian religion, that of Iran opened immor
tality to poor as well as rich, on the sole condition of their
fighting manfully against evil and the Evil One. And if you
ask what ' immortality ' means to the prophet, it is not merely
deathlessness (the etymological meaning of Ameretdt), but
the perfection of its companion blessing ' welfare ' [Haurvatdt) ;
in other words, it is complete happiness of body and soul,
begun in this life and continued in an exalted degree in the
next. ' To his kingdom,' says Zarathustra, ' belong Haurvatdt
and Ameretdt' aa [Yasna, xlv. 10). With regard to 'the
retribution which has been declared a deceit by the daevas
and (perverse) men' [Yasna, xlviii. 1), what the prophet tells
us is that, when the world was born, Ahura established ' evil
for the evil and happy blessings for the good (to be adjudged)
in the creation's final change '( Yasna, xliii. 5). But this is
not the whole of his doctrine. He also speaks in two places
of the passage of the Judge's Bridge dd (the bridge which joins
the two worlds) as the test of the character of a soul, those
who pass it reaching the ' Song-house,' those who fall from
it (by a mere accident he omits this) attaining as their bourn
the ' house of the Lie ' (cf. Vend. xix. 30). And in complete
accordance with this, we find the question ' Where is the
rewarding ? ' — thus answered by a later writer, ' When the
man is dead, when his time is over ' ( Vend. xix. 27, 28).
There are two judgments therefore, but the first is only an
endorsement of the verdict of conscience, according to that
saying of the Vendidad (v. 62), ' He shall be cast into the
place (destined) for the wicked, into the darkness of dark
ness begotten by darkness. To that world, to the dismal
realm, you are delivered by your own doings, by your own
souls, O sinners.' Conscience, in fact, according to the fine
allegory (see note aa), appears to the soul of the deceased
man, and conducts it to its place.
This first judgment is in a sense private ; the second
judgment is public and general. What happens to the souls
between them? According to Yast, xxii. 15, the righteous
soul passes from the Judge's Bridge by four steps. The first
places him in the Good Thought Paradise, the second in the

400 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
Good Word Paradise, the third in the Good Deed Paradise,
and the fourth in the Endless Lights, where is the ' house of
songs,' l and where, as Zarathustra says, he will ' hear the
praises of Ahura's offering saints, who see His face.' The
soul of the wicked man on the other hand passes successively
into the Evil Thought Hell, the Evil Word Hell, the Evil
Deed Hell, and the Endless Darkness ( Yast, xxii. 33). It
would seem, then, as if nothing were left for that universal
judgment which is to follow the decisive defeat of Angra
Mainyu or Ahriman. This however would be a mistake. A
fragment of the Avesta says, ' Let Angra Mainyu be hid
beneath the earth. Let the daevas likewise disappear. Let
the dead arise (unhindered by their foes), and let bodily life
be sustained in their now mortal bodies.'2 Asha, i.e. the
Righteous Order, demands that, as a proof of Ahura's
triumph, the earth shall be renewed, and the bodies of the
faithful be raised to a happier life.ee After defeating Ahri
man, such was one form of the Zoroastrian belief, Saoshyant
(the great hero-prophet, who reminds us somewhat of Mai.
iv. 5, 6, but has no analogue in the Psalms) and his helpers
shall ' restore the world, which will (thenceforth) never grow
old and never die,' and raise the bodies of the dead, who, if
pure (or, at any rate, after purification), by drinking the juice
of the mythical plant Gaokerena shall attain immortality.ff
One is grieved to notice this last detail in the descrip
tion of ' creation's turning.' If it is to be taken literally,
Zoroastrianism is here inconsistent with its own principles,
and deviates from the lines marked out by Zarathustra. The
spiritual elements in its doctrine must to some extent have
been neutralized by this reactionary concession to a gross
mythology. In Babylonia, indeed, from which the myth of
the tree of life probably came to Iran, the belief in the
magical powers of this tree can have done but little harm,
because it was only a favoured few who could hope to ex
perience them. But in Iran, when Ameretat had been opened
to the peasant as well as to the prince, the retention or revival
of Gaokerena must have been a real hindrance to spiritual
1 In the Gathas, garS-dm&na or dmdna-garb ; elsewhere, Garonmdna. Op
posed to this is dr&jd-dmdna, ' the house of the Lie-demon.'
2 Oxford Z. A. iii. 390, 391.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 401
religion. Still, we must not let this blind us to the moral
value of the Persian doctrine of the Resurrection. The Bun
dahis is thoroughly Zarathustrian in spirit when it states in
a remarkable descriptive chapter (xxx.) that the wicked shall
be raised as well as the righteous.68 Inconsistent as the two
accounts of the fate of the wicked may seem, they agree in
asserting the strict and awful justice of the divine retribution.
And of what sort were the risen bodies of the pure, and
perhaps one may add, of the purified ? The Avesta contains
a remarkable prayer which throws light upon this. It was
the pious worshipper's hope that not only his soul but his
glorified body might ' go openly ' to ' the best world of the
saints,' and that there he might ' come round about God, and
attain to entire companionship with Him 'hh ( Yasna, lx. 11).
No longer then would there be a separation between heaven
and earth. The sun would for ever shine, and the faithful
would enjoy complete and deathless welfare in the fellow
ship of Ahura and his saints.
And now let me ask, Can the Jewish Church have been
uninfluenced by this profound doctrine which came to it from
a religion so congenial in some respects to its own ? If
Babylon stimulated to reflection, must not Persia have sug
gested or confirmed the only adequate solution of the pro
blems of life ? If Talmudic eschatology borrowed something
from the less noble parts of the Persian religion,1 must not
the psalmists, with their fine spiritual tact, have welcomed
the help of its nobler teaching ? Yes, surely. The early
revelation to Iranian thinkers of these high spiritual truths,
the universal lordship of God and His never-ending relation
to the individual, must have had some providential object
beyond itself. And I think that we can now see what that
object was. The appointed time for the blending of the
Aryan and Semitic mind which was to occupy so many cen
turies, had come. Slowly and cautiously had that blending
process to be gone through. Not all the religious writers of
Israel were equally prepared to become its instruments ; not
all clearly saw the task which devolved upon the Church.
Some however there were, both prophets and psalmists, who
1 On the debts of Talmudic eschatology to thetater Zoroastrianism, see Kohut,
Z.D.M.G. 1867, p. 552 &c.
D D

402 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
were able to select precisely what was needed to fill up
the Church's theology. Prophetic writers eagerly assimilated
the belief in a final and complete readjustment of circum
stances to character, and psalmists the hope of a nearer sight
of God after death. The reader will understand what I
mean by assimilation ; I have already explained that no
important belief of the Jewish Church was in the strict sense
borrowed, but that without foreign influence some of its-
greatest beliefs would not, so far as we can see, have been
fully reached. I venture to think that my theory is neither
arbitrary nor improbable. So long as the psalms were ascribed
not to the post-Exile but to the pre-Exile period, when the
spiritual attainments of the Israelites in general were low,,
and they had as yet no contact as a people with the Persians,,
it was natural of two possible interpretations of psalm-
passages to choose the more meagre. But if it be true that
the case has been reversed, it is now equally natural to select
the fuller interpretation. Let us then have the courage to
read certain Biblical passages in a Persian light. Adoption
(in a harmless sense) of Persian ideas there must have been,,
not always indeed equally full, nor of such a kind as to
exclude both vagueness and variety of statement. Such
vagueness and variety we find even in the Zoroastrian Scrip
tures, and are natural in a religion which has not as yet
crystallized into dogmatic formulae." How then should we
be surprised to find them in poetic or semi-poetic utterances
like the prophecies and psalms, which spoke not so much to
the head as to the heart, and whose readers or singers.
brought with them the key to their symbolic phraseology ?
Let us now turn to some of the Biblical passages which re
quire to be re-read. The one which more immediately concerns
us is Ps. xlix. 15, 16, but before returning to this, I would
ask leave to consider certain prophetic utterances, [a) Isa.
xxv. 8, xxvi. 19. The former passage predicts the destruc
tion of death and of the world of death. Instead of swallowing
up, Sheol in the Messianic period shall itself be swallowed
up. And this prospect concerns not merely the church-nation,,
but all of its believing members, and indeed all, whether Jews
or not, who submit to the true King Jehovah (cf. v. 6). Thus
the inference which (p. 385) I regretted that the author of

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 403
Ps. Ixxxix. 49 had not drawn, was to all appearance drawn
by the writer of this prophecy. But was he not helped by
that religion which had ever placed the destruction of death
in the forefront of its system ? The companion passage may
be said to treat of death under two aspects, the one cheerful,
the other depressing. Heathen lords (Nineveh and Babylon)
had infringed upon Jehovah's right of sovereignty, and
tyrannized over Israel. No human helpers can we mention ;
' in thee (Jehovah !) alone can we glory j1 even in thy name '
(cf. Ps. xx. 8). But these enemies — where are they ? ' Dead
men live not again, shades rise not' In the course of nature
there is no resurrection of the dead ; therefore, that there
might be no repetition of this tyranny (Isa. xiv. 29), the
heathen lords have been swept away : ' thou hast made even
their memory to perish' (Ps. ix. 5, 6). Then, after an idealistic
outburst the prophet bethinks him of the sad disappointments
of the Restoration-period, and, merging his own personality
in that of the Church, he utters a grand prayer. Israel's
territory has indeed been widened, but it is not in a state of
full salvation, and above all suffers from insufficient popula
tion. So the Church casts itself upon Jehovah's faithfulness.
There is a well-known prophecy which speaks of the revival
of the dry bones (Ezek. xxxvii. 1-10). Ezekiel meant by
this the revival of the nation (cf. Ps. xxx. 2, 4, and my note),
but the prophetic Church-nation (as represented by this
nameless prophet) infers from Ezekiel's revelation the
resurrection of individuals, not however of all deceased
Israelites,^ but of believers, especially perhaps of those who^
have died for the faith. ' Let thy dead men (Jehovah !) live ;
let my dead bodies (which have been ' given as food to the
birds of heaven,' Ps. lxxix. 2) arise ! ' ' Weighty in the sight
of Jehovah is the death of his pious ones ' (Ps. cxviii. 1 5). Is
it conceivable that those who have been ' faithful unto death '
should miss their earthly reward ? No ; their bodies are a
precious seed, which ' thy dew, O Jehovah,' which is the ' dew
of lights ' can bring to life. They sleep, but at the call from
above will awaken to a new life. ' O might thy dead revive/
is the rendering which in 1870 I adopted from Ewald,2 and I
1 On this rendering, see note ', p. 332.
2 The Book of Isaiah Chronologically Arranged, p. 127. D D 2

404 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.

would now ask leave to return to it. It is not a sudden
revelation of a new truth which comes to the prophet or to
the Church ; rather, the Church, among some of whose mem
bers the Resurrection-hope is already current, bases a sublimely
bold prayer upon this hope. May the Messianic period come,
and Judah, which is Jehovah's central dominion, be repeopled
by the help of its lost but now restored children ! How
Zoroastrian much of this is, even down to the singular phrase
' dew of lights ! 'kk Only the Zoroastrianism has been Hebraized,
or, more strictly, native Hebraism has grown to maturity
under the influence of a congenial though foreign religion.
Light, for instance, was always a symbol of Jehovah (see note
on Isa. x. 17), but in the special emphasis which the post-
Exile writers lay upon this emblem, we may fitly see at once
a recognition of the truth and a protest against the error (or
the half-truth) of the religion of Mazda.
[b) The two passages which we have last studied seem to
give this view of the ' last things ' — that the faithful Israelites
will rise again, and together with those alive in the Mes
sianic period (and the converts from ' all nations ') live for
ever. The next pair of prophetic utterances (Isa. lxv. 17-22,
Ixvi. 22) presents a somewhat different picture. The old
order of things is to pass away, and, to produce a worthier
scenery for the new order, Jehovah will create ' new heavens
and a new earth ' which unlike the old (Isa. li. 6) shall ' stand
perpetually.' But what is the new order to be ? We should
have expected to be told of the destruction of death, and of
the moral regeneration of God's people ; in short, something
like Rev. xxi. 2-4 would correspond better with Isa. lxv. 17
than the verses which actually follow. Who that, ' according
to God's promise, looks for new heavens and a new earth'
(2 Pet. iii. 13), can be satisfied with a mere renewal of the
idyll of Paradise, which, in seeming contradiction to earlier
Messianic promises (Isa. xxxiii. 24, xxxv. 8, cf. Ps. civ. 26),
even speaks of sinners in the new Jerusalem ? The latter
reference is no doubt a slip ; the prophet wished to bring out
the longevity of the Messianic Israelites, and could think of
no better illustrations than those in Isa. lxv. 20b. But what
a strange slip for any one under the influence of Zoroas
trianism to make ! At first sight, therefore, Zoroastrian

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 405
influence seems out of the question, and I still hold, with
Matthes, that to regard the conceptions of Isa. lxv. 17 and,
still more, of Isa. Ixvi. 15 as mere loans from Mazdeism is
uncritical.1 But is it not a striking fact that the first Old
Testament writer to employ the phrase ' new heavens and
a new earth,' and to give the renovation of the universe
a prominent place in his eschatology is this poorly gifted
prophet of the Persian period, followed by a writer in the
Book of Enoch (Enoch xlv. 4, 5), and by another writer in
the not less composite Book of Revelation (Rev. xxi. 1)?
Surely it is the easiest explanation of this to suppose that
the author of Isa. lxv., Ixvi. was stimulated by Zoroas
trianism, which from the Gathas to the Bundahis so con
stantly proclaims this doctrine. It is futile to object that if
he followed this religion in one point, he must have done so
in another ; eclecticism is a characteristic of ages of transi
tion. Certainly in his view of death our prophet is peculiar.
The writer of Isa. xxv. 8 said, in harmony with Zarathustra
death, being an evil, must be abolished. Not so thinks our
prophet. Death, according to him, will still be known upon
the new earth, but will be deprived of its evil character
(Isa. lxv. 20, 22, 23). But how? Not in the sense suggested
by the letter of the prophet's description, which rises no higher
than the epilogue of the Book of Job. At the time when he
probably wrote (see p. 160) the doctrine of rewards and punish
ments after death was already current among the Jews. To
one part of this doctrine he distinctly refers (Isa. Ixvi. 24).
The souls of rebels, he says, will suffer penal tortures as
violent as those which the worm and the fire would cause to
their bodies, if consciousness remained (cf. Isa. 1. 1 1 with the
Septuagint version). The other part we have to supply for
ourselves. Must not the joys of those who rest from their
labours be as intense as these tortures ? Must not everlasting
life (localized, we cannot say how) correspond to everlasting
'abhorrence'? Otherwise the principle of compensation
affirmed in Isa. lxv. 13, 14 will be imperfectly carried out.
Such thoughts as these must have vaguely stirred in the
prophet's mind. Their legitimate and necessary development
1 See Isaiah, ii. 120, 126. Comp. Isa. lxv. 17 with Enoch Ixxii. 1, xci. 15, 16,
v. 20 with Enoch v. 9, and on births in the new earth, Bundahis (West), xxx. 26.

406 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
is found in the Book of Enoch (see e.g. chap. xxii.). [c) Dan.
xii. 2. ' And many of those that sleep in the dust of the
earth (i.e. in Sheol) shall awake, some to everlasting life (the
first occurrence of the phrase), and some to disgrace and
everlasting abhorrence.' Here at last we have a definite doc
trine of resurrection expressed in a way which shows that it
was no novelty. The seeds which Zoroastrianism and some
earlier Jewish writers had sown had sprung up. There shall
be an awaking from sleep. But not for all men — only for
the chosen nation ; for there is no natural immortality. And
the ' awaking ' will not be a boon, even for all Israelites. The
writer goes beyond Isa. xxvi. 19, in which there is no distinct
reference to any but a resurrection of the righteous. But the
difference is only in appearance. The real resurrection is
that of the ' just ' unto ' everlasting life ' l (cf. 2 Mace. vii. 14,
Luke xiv. 14) upon the renewed earth ; the unfaithful Israelites
who cannot 'stand in the judgment' (Ps. i. 5) will return to
the scene of ' everlasting abhorrence ' (cf. Isa. Ixvi. 24).
We now return to the psalm-passages, especially [d) to our
* enigma,' Ps. xlix. 15, 16, which in fact started us on our long
voyage of discovery. How can we be in doubt as to its correct
solution ? The author was not impelled by dread of an untimely,
violent death ; he thought of the things after death. And his
hope was not merely for a moral compensation of piety (though
this ranked highest in his mind), but for a general readjust
ment of outward circumstances. ' The upright,' he says, ' shall
trample upon them (i.e. upon their wasted frames ; see p. 382)
at dawn.' As for the wicked (i.e. especially the oppressors of
the faithful Israelites), ' Sheol is their palace for ever,'2 and
they shall ' for ever be without seeing light' In this last
phrase some may detect an allusion to the new earth — the
only one in the Psalter (for Ps. civ. 30, referred to by Gratz,
has a different meaning). But it is the context, not the
language itself, that suggests this. And what does the
' dawn ' mean ? It is a figure for the opening of the new
1 Cf. Ps. Sol. iii. 13-16, Targ. Jon. on Isa. iv. 3, and the Sept. addition to
Job, all of which imply a partial resurrection. The Talmud still more distinctly
teaches that the resurrection was a privilege of Israel ; even imperfect Israelites
might hope to attain to it after purification in Gehinnom (Weber, System, p. 372,
cf. 329). 2 See my note on Ps-xlix. 15, and cf. Delitzsch.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 407
order of things which later Judaism called ' the coming age.'
Rabbi Meir bases an Haggadic interpretation of Ruth iii. 13
upon it,1 and the Targum of Jerusalem on Ex. xii. 42 says
that the fourth of the extraordinary nights is ' when the end
of the age shall be accomplished.' But before them both this
was doubtless a Zoroastrian image. ' Till the powerful dawn,'
says the Zoroastrian when waiting for each fresh day ; ' till
the powerful frashdkereti ' when longing for the everlasting
light of the renewed earth and for the resurrection.11 [e)
Ps. xvii. 15. We may reasonably hold that the meaning of
this passage is determined by that of [d). The awakening
probably means the passing of the soul into a resurrection-
body. The ' sleep ' from which the soul awakens is, in this case,
not the sleep of life (see pp. 389, 430), but the so-called ' sleep '
of the intermediate state which is not without a quiet and un
earthly bliss, and which is described again and again in sub
sequent literature,™™ and hinted at, not indeed in Ps. cxlix. 5,
but perhaps in Ps. xxii. 30. (/), [g) Pss. xvi. 10, 11, Ixxiii.
24-27. The latter passage is self-evidently of individual appli
cation not less than Ps. xvii. 15. With regard to the former,
it is certainly possible to hold on the ground of parallel pas
sages (vi. 4-7, ix. 14, xxx. 4) that the speaker is the true
Israel. But whatever is said of the true Israel may in some
degree be applied to each true Israelite, and a study of the
spiritual atmosphere of the psalmist's age leaves no doubt in
my mind that Ps. xvi. 10, 11 must have been appropriated
without deduction by faithful Jews. I have now to ask, Do
the writers, in harmony with [d) and [e), assume an inter
mediate state of departed souls ? In this case, they leap
over the ' sleep,' in their eagerness for the ' awakening.' But
in the light of Zoroastrian belief it is permissible to think
that the soul, according to these writers, passes directly from
this world to the Beatific Vision. It would be absurd to
dogmatize on such a point. The latter opinion seems to
tally best with the high mysticism of Pss. xvi. and Ixxiii.,
and, in spite of what has been said above, we may, if we will,
interpret Ps. xvii. on the same theory. How far it is favoured
by the later developments of Jewish belief we must con
sider later. Still there is nothing in the former theory to
1 Talm. Jer., Chagiga, c. 2 (ap. Wunsche, Neue Beitrdge, p. 377).

408 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
which the mystic psalmists might not, in deference to the
majority, have accommodated themselves. The world's great
change was expected so shortly, that the brief waiting-time
might easily be leaped over, and, as we have seen, the in
terval was not one of gloom and distress for the righteous.
The fate of the wicked in both worlds is possibly alluded to
in Pss. xvi. 4a, Ixxiii. 27 ; at any rate, the psalmists must
have known that some of their readers would suppose this.
The expressions of the next passages to be mentioned are
so vague that we cannot assert that the largest interpretation
was that favoured by the author. And yet, considering the
currency of advanced eschatological ideas during the later
Persian period we may presume that the author both antici
pated and permitted the largest view. See, for instance,
[h) Ps. xxi. 5, (z) Ps. xlv. 3, [k) Ps. Ixxii. 5. The expressions
used here may be explained away as mere loyal hyperboles.
I have pleaded however in my commentary for a deeper
meaning. (/) Ps. lxiii. 9, 10. We are not bound to explain
this on the analogy of Ps. Ixxiii. 26, 27, but many of the ear
liest readers must have done so. [m) Ps. xi. 7 (cf. cxi. 14),
where ' beholding ' Jehovah's face may simply mean the
enjoyment of the divine favour, but may also be interpreted
of that fuller communion with God which implies ' everlasting
life.' [n) Ps. xii. i$bc requires a similar comment. [0) Ps.
xxxvi. 10. Here the 'fountain of life' may mean 'the source
of happiness and prosperity' (cf. Jer. ii. 13, xvii. 13), but.
may also be explained, like the ' river of water of life ' in
Rev. xxii. 1 (cf. vii. 17 Revised Version), as one of the mythic
symbols of immortality.1 The psalmist virtually says that
the true fountain of life is not to be localized by mythic
geography, but is with the righteous Jehovah. The phrase
took hold of later writers, as we see from 2 Mace. vii. 36-
(corrected text), ' these our brethren, having endured a short
pain, have now drunk of ever-flowing life.' And similarly the
words of the next line, ' by thy light do (or, shall) we see
light,' may of course mean only ' to thy favour do we owe all
the joys of life ' (cf. ' light ' in Esth. viii. 16), but it may alsa
be interpreted of the crown of joys — the nearer vision of God.
1 Cf. my commentary on the Psalms, p. 100, and add a reference to Enochi
xvii. 4

viii. fUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 409
So the Septuagint translator took it in the next age [tyo/ieda.
(pas), and the psalmist who wrote Ps. Sol. iii. 16. And some
very early readers of the Hebrew psalm may have explained
v. 16 of a Beatific Vision immediately after death.
I have now reached a turning-point in my inquiry. I
have endeavoured to show critically that among the religious.
ideas of the Psalter are those of immortality and resurrection.
This result is at once so important and so different from that
of much previous criticism, that I am tempted to seek for
some external confirmation of its soundness. My search
would be a short one if I could, like some critics, recognize
either or both of these ideas in the Books of Proverbs and Job,
which, with the exception of the three appendices to the
former, and the speeches vof Elihu in the latter, may not un
reasonably be placed before the edict of Cyrus. A belief
must have attained a fair amount of currency to be appealed
to by the ' wise men.' I cannot, however, satisfy myself that
these ideas can be traced either in Proverbs or in Job,nn nor can
I see how, if they possessed such high philosophic authority,.
Sirach (more strictly Ben Sira) and the author of Koheleth,
in the second and fourth centuries respectively, would have
been so reluctant to accept them. For though Gratz is of
opinion that there is a reference to the Resurrection in Ecclus.
xlviii. ii,1 and many scholars have held that Eccles. iii. 17,
xi. 9, xii. 7, 14, postulate retribution after death, yet there is
strong reason to believe that some of these passages have
been manipulated and some inserted by a more orthodox later
writer.2 Delitzsch himself remarks of the author of Koheleth,
and the same remark is true of Sirach, that the belief in a
final judgment is difficult indeed to reconcile with the primi
tive view of the life of the shades in Hades which he so-
strongly and so pathetically expresses. We may assume
therefore that these two latest of the ' wise men ' of Palestine
knew nothing of an early acceptance of these ideas by their
predecessors. In fact, so far from helping us, the ' Wisdom '-
1 Gratz, Geschichte, iii. (ed. 4), 275.
2 Geiger, Z.D.M.G. xii. 536; fob and Solomon, pp. 189, 211, 224, 231..
Comp. the addition of the Syriac version at Ecclus. xiv. 19 (see Edersheim in;
' Speaker '). On the interpolation-theory (Koheleth) see also Driver's criticism,
Expositor, 1887 (2), pp. 78-80.

410 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
literature may be thought to cause us a slight difficulty. If
Ben Sira was such a student of Scripture as he makes out, how
is it that the higher Scriptural teaching had not penetrated to
him ? He does not indeed deny in words that others besides
Enoch and Elijah ' may escape the sad life of She61 ; in
Ecclus. xlix. 14 he only denies (forgetting Elijah) that anyone
besides Enoch was translated in his lifetime, and in Ecclus.
xvii. 30 that man is naturally immortal.00 But the whole
spirit of his book is opposed to the higher doctrines. The
author of Koheleth, too, does not give an absolute contradic
tion to the doctrine of future retribution and of an everlasting
life with God for the good. But what a bitter scoff he utters
against those who do hold it (Eccles. iii. 21)! Some may
infer from this that the existence of any higher Scriptural
teaching is problematical. My own inference is a different
one. It is simply this, that if any of the prophecies and
psalms which suggest this teaching existed in the times of
these writers, they were either not known to them, or, if
known, not interpreted in the fullest and most adequate sense.
One may hope that there were not many sceptics like the
author of Koheleth, who is certainly an abnormal product of
post-Exile Judaism. But many old-fashioned, hesitating
persons there must have been, who could not get further than
Sirach's confident dictum in Ecclus. xvii. 30, and who had this
great justification, that the nobler Palestinian teachers spoke
seldom on the highest subjects, and mostly ev alvvyfiari,*
and that, like Mr. Browning in La Saisiaz, they were some
what less sure of soul than of God.
We must look elsewhere, then, for the wished-for confirma
tion of our result, and I venture to think that the Jewish
writings of the next age will supply it. I can but take a
glance into the large domain which some future lecturer will
perhaps occupy. It is to the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
that we must chiefly refer, but we must not entirely neglect
the Targum and the Midrash, the writings of the New Testa
ment, and the notices which have come down to us respecting
the so-called Jewish ' sects.' The question before us is whether
the theory to which we have been led will not enable us to
1 See Ecclus. xliv. 16, xlviii. 9, xlix. 14.
2 1 Cor. xiii. 12, = rwn3; cf. Ps. xlix. 5, Num. xii. 8.

VIII. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 411
account more easily for the later doctrines of the future life.
I am well aware that the principle of this argument might be
uncritically applied with most unfortunate results. I have no
wish for a wholesale introduction of later Jewish doctrines,
not all of which are sound historical developments, into
Biblical theology. But the essence of my contention is that
having offered critical grounds for our theory, we are entitled
to inquire whether it does not illustrate and help to explain
documents of a later period than the Psalter. And first of all
let us turn to the Apocrypha (in a wide sense), not how
ever to the proverbs of 'Sirach, in which a strong element akin
to Sadducaeanism cannot be overlooked, but to the Psalms of
-Solomon and to the Book of Enoch, the former of which may
be said to represent the views of the more sober, and the latter
those of the more enthusiastic and visionary section of the
Pharisaic party. pp I give the psalms the precedence, precisely
because they are psalms, written by ardent lovers of the
temple and the synagogues (Ps. Sol. ii. 3, xvii. 1 8), who may
be supposed to have in some points an intuitive comprehension
of the older psalmists. ' He falleth,' says one of these writers
(Ps. Sol. iii. 13-16), speaking of the 'sinner,' not without a
side-glance at the Sadducaean aristocracy, ' yea, evil is his fall,
and he shall not rise ' [there is virtually but one resurrection] ;
' the destruction of the sinner is for ever .... But those that
fear the Lord shall rise unto eternal life, and their life shall be
in the light of the Lord, and shall not fail ; ' comp. in the
canonical Psalter, Ps. xxxvi. 10. 'The life of the righteous is
for ever,' says another (Ps. Sol. xiii. 9, 10), 'but sinners shall
be taken away into destruction, and their memorial shall no
more be found.' The Pharisaean psalmist has been speaking
of the khasidim [ocnoi), of those who are in covenant with
•God, and act up to their engagement, and draws the same
inference as the author of our 16th psalm. Those upon whom
¦God bestows such thoughtful discipline (Ps. Sol. xiii. 8 ; cf.
our Ps. xvi. 7a) cannot perish. ' Destruction ' (perhaps
= Abaddon, cf. Ps. lxxxviii. 1 2) and oblivion (cf. Ps. lxxxviii.
13) are for wilful sinners. And whereas 'the Lord's khasidim
shall inherit life in gladness,' ' the inheritance of sinners is
Hades and darkness and destruction ' (Ps. Sol. xiv. 6, 7 ; cf.
xv. 11). For 'the sinners shall perish in the day of the

412 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
judgment of the Lord for ever, .... but those that fear the
Lord shall find mercy in that (day), and shall live by the com
passion of their God' (Ps. Sol. xv. 13, 15). Can we help-
comparing the ' enigma ' in our 49th psalm ? Both psalmists
write as (in a good sense) Ebionites ; they are tyrannized over
by the wicked rich (cf. Ps. Sol. i. 4, 7). Both, too, if I am
not mistaken as to Ps. xlix., have a high view of the soul's
future, which is unshared (cf. Ps. Sol. iii. 11) by the tyrants..
It should also be noticed (1) that these expressions are but a
little more definite than those of our ' mystic psalms ' — so true
it is that dogmatic forms are alien to the best hymn-poetry —
and (2) that, like the older psalmists, the writers of these
psalms avoid mythological symbols, and found their hopes
for the future on the Lord's righteousness and truth. Once
indeed we do find a reference to Paradise and to the tree of
life ; but it is in the very spirit of the older psalmists, and
forms a striking contrast to Enoch xxv. 5 (see p. 439, note ff).
To the Pharissean psalmist, the khasidim are the 'trees of
life ' (cf. Isa. lxi. 3). They 'live for ever,' not from tasting of
ambrosial fruit, but from ' walking in the law which God com
manded us '11 (Ps. Sol. xiv. 1, 2). But to the author of Enoch
the tree of life, planted at the holy place (the temple of' the
Messianic age), is the means of a blessed life to God's elect,
and the same conception is doubtless implied in the gloss
upon ' as the days of the tree ' (Isa. lxv. 22) in the Septuagint
and the Targum.1 Altogether this little Psalter is a fine
specimen of the best Judaism of its time, and shows how
naturally the ideas of the older Psalter developed into
conceptions which some have hastily characterized as new
growths. Let us turn next to the Book of Enoch, which, although
a composite work and not without Christian interpolations, is
in the main, as some good critics think, of pre-Christian origin ;:
the earliest portion of it, at any rate, may go back to the
second half of the second century B.C. That the resurrection-
belief is common to all its writers is certain (see li. 1, 2,
lxi. 5, xci. 10, xcii. 3), though no distinct doctrine as to the
risen body appears anywhere. Let us study the representa-
1 See the explanation given by Maimun ben Joseph (father of Maimonides),,
Jewish Quarterly Review, ii. 97 (Simmons).

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 413
tions of the future life in chaps, xxii., cii., and ciii., which
belong to the oldest portion. From chap. xxii. we learn that
there are four separate departments in the place of departed
souls, two of which seem to be assigned to the righteous, and
two to the wicked. Of one class of righteous souls it is
stated that they have ' a fountain of water and light.' The
wicked, however, those at least who have not been punished
in their lifetime, suffer grievous pain, which after the judgment
will be heightened. This heightening is significantly described
as a putting to death of the souls (Enoch xxii. 13; cf. xcix.
1 1, cviii. 3), and in the Similitudes (liii. 3) we find the torturing
function assigned to the Satan, whom, as we have seen, the
psalmists appear to avoid mentioning. Not less interesting
are chaps, cii., ciii., because in a most vivid style they refute
the same false primitive view of Sheol which seems to be
attacked in Ps. xlix. Compare, for instance, Enoch cii. 8 with
Ps. xlix. 20b ; and again, in the earliest part of the book,
xcviii. 10 with Ps. xlix. 8, 9, and xcviii. 12 with Ps. xlix. 15
(end). It is difficult to avoid thinking that in the too pro
sperous ' sinners ' who ' deny the Lord of spirits, the last
judgment, and the resurrection, we are meant (as in parallel
passages of the Psalms of Solomon) to think of the Sadducees.
Now who can doubt either as to the belief expressed or
implied in these books, or as to the interpretation which their
writers must have put upon our ' enigma '-passage, Ps. xlix. 1 5 ?
The only question is, whether in any of their moods they were
tempted to hope for a foretaste of the Beatific Vision prior to
the judgment. It is possible to hold that the Pharisaean
psalmists had this hope, not only because of the parallelism
between Ps. Sol. iii. 16 and Ps. xxxvi. 10, but also because
somewhat later it was undoubtedly familiar to the Jews. And
it seems to me psychologically probable that the longer the
advent of Jehovah or His king was delayed, the more would
the faith of pious Jews have sought to beautify the interval
between death and the final consummation. But what of the
writer in Enoch ? His tone is not that of the psalmists ; what
we call the mystic sentiment is but weak in him. He seeks
to hasten the day of the Lord, not merely by patient continu
ance in well-doing, but by wilful and fantastic imaginations.
The higher hope is not prominent in the Grundschrift ; but

414 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
neither is it wholly absent. He speaks indeed of the righteous
as having nothing to fear even if they sleep a long sleep (c. 5),,
but ' sleep ' is here and elsewhere only a conventional term,.
which has lost its strict meaning (see p. 441), and in the tem
porary abode of the righteous (which is not in the underworld,
but far away in the west) he places a fountain of water and
light. Now what can these be but a reflexion of those highest
blessings which are similarly described in Ps. xxxvi. 10?
Later on we see that favoured souls, righteous as Enoch
and Elijah were righteous, were permitted to live separately
from the rest in that earthly Paradise where (see Gen. iii. 8)
divine beings ' walked,' and in the enjoyment, equally with
Enoch, of the peace of the ' world which is to be.' J Obscurely
as the writers of Enoch express themselves, one may be sure
that they have entered upon that line of thought, the goal of
which is the expectation of an immediate vision of God by
the departed righteous soul."
Slowly indeed was that goal reached. Justin Martyr
(second cent. A.D.), unconsciously influenced by Judaism,
gives the same view of the intermediate state which we have
found in Enoch, with the qualification that to martyrs the
gates of Paradise were opened directly after death.3' This
picture of the next life does not come up to the intuition
which seems to be vaguely expressed in Pss. xvi., xvii., xxxvi.,
and Ixxiii. Justin does not consider that the martyr-spirit may
belong to those who do not die a martyr's death, and that
the saying, ' What shall a man do to save his life ? Let him
slay himself 2 (i.e. mortify his lusts), indicates a way of being
' faithful unto death ' which has the thorough sanction of St.
Paul. Jewish sentiment, however, partly coincided with
Justin's. Not to quote a Talmudic vision in Baba bathra \ob,
that remarkable homily (see p. 29) which passes as the fourth
Book of Maccabees mentions it as a special privilege of martyrs
like the ' seven brethren ' that they ' live unto God ' (4 Mace.
vii. 17, xvi. 22), and that they ' now stand before the throne of
God and lead the happy life ' " (4 Mace. xvii. 18). On the
1 See (in the Similitudes), Enoch lxi. 12, and cf. in a later passage the
phrase ' the garden of the righteous ' (lx. 13, cf. 8). For Enoch and Elijah, see
Enoch Ixxxvii. 3, Ixxxix. 52, and for the reference to the 'oldm habbd, lxxi. 15.
2 Talm. Bab., Tamid. 32a.

viii. fUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 415
other hand, another Hellenistic work, the second Book of
Maccabees, which approaches much more closely to the
Pharis3ean theology, seems to adjourn even the reward of
martyrs to the resurrection (2 Mace. xii. 43-45). A similar
variety exists in the New Testament, which upon the whole,
by M. Havet's admission, preserves the character of a Hebraic
work. There are five passages which assume that a vision of
God is possible directly after death (Rev. xiii. 6, Acts vii. 59,
2 Cor. v. 1-10, Phil. i. 23, Heb. xii. 23), whereas, according to
Rev. vi. 9-1 1, the souls of the martyred righteous remain ' rest
ing ' (cf. Rev. xiv. 13) in the underworld, till the great judgment
admits them (Rev. vii. 9-17) to the immediate presence of
God.uu The diversity 6f view in a single book (Revelation) is
specially worthy of notice ; the inconsistency of the later
Biblical writers is the natural result of the variations of the
prophets and psalmists. And must not the same remark be
made respecting the Jewish teachers ? x It was universally
admitted that there were two worlds, 'oldm hazzeh and 'oldm
habbd, and that the true life was that of the world to come
[Pirqe A both, iv. 2 1 ; the figure of the vestibule and the banquet-
room), in accordance with the high intuition which, if I am
not mistaken, had visited the mystic psalmists. But to the
question whether the 'oldm habbd begins for each soul directly
after the death of the body, or for all souls together at the
resurrection, different answers are given ; at any rate, this
phrase has sometimes a wider, sometimes a narrower signifi
cance. Properly speaking, of course, the ' coming age ' began
with the resurrection,2 and there are Talmudic passages which,
strange to say, indicate the survival of the old conception of
the shades in relation even to great Rabbis. The moral
consciousness, however, when strongly developed, could not
dispense with a preliminary judgment and recompense (see
Pirqe Aboth, iv. 27), and, though the language used respecting
the latter is by no means always very spiritual, the fact that
an ' earnest of the inheritance ' was craved brings these
1 See Weber, System des Altsyn. Theologie, pp. 158, 326, 327, 331, 373 ; Geiger,
Lesestiicke aus der Mischna, pp. 41-44 5 Castelli, // Messia secondo gli Ebrei,
p. 248, and ' The Future Life in Rabbinical Literature,' art. in Jewish Quarterly
Review, July 1889.
3 I cannot enter into a discussion of the two resurrections.

416 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
teachers into direct relation to the mystic psalms. And
this is sufficient for our present purpose.
I am now compelled to turn to sources of more mixed
value, viz., the Targum and Midrash, and the statements of
Josephus on the aipsosis- That the two former in their
present form are very late is undeniable,vv but having grown
out of a much earlier tradition they may supplement older
and more precious writings. Of course, they have much to
say on the future retribution. Pictures of Paradise and
Gehenna abound ; in one of them we find it said that the
dwellers in Paradise see the face of God. Does the Midrash
in this give such a bad exposition of Ps. xi. 7 ? May it not
be allowed to compensate in part for the crudeness of its
pictures of the underworld (see p. 401) ? And wrong as the
Targum may be in virtually denying that Pss. xv. 1 and
xxiv. 3 refer primarily to communion with God in this life,
must it therefore be mistaken in that which it affirms, viz.,
that these psalms have a reference to the lot of the righteous
in another world ? I admit that it is only here and there that
its paraphrase can be called suggestive, nor can any one
defend the pertinacity with which, like the Targum on Job, it
imports a highly developed eschatology into vague and un-
dogmatic utterances.ww But we have already found the Targum
useful in discussing the national reference of certain psalms,
and we must not be deterred by prejudice from availing our
selves of its help in the present inquiry.
There remains Josephus, by his own fault a suspected
witness, and yet valuable to those who can pierce through
his Graecising phraseology to the underlying Jewish thoughts.
I need not attempt a complete study of his descriptions of
the three Jewish schools, for I only refer to them upon the
special subject of eschatology. First, then, as to the Saddu
cees and Pharisees.1 The former, says Josephus, disbelieve
in future rewards and punishments and deny the continu
ance of the soul. Undoubtedly this is correct ; the protests
against such views expressed in Enoch and the Psalms of
Solomon, and implied in the second of the eighteen Benedic
tions and in the psalm-doxology,2and the notices in the Gospels
1 Jos., War, ii. 8, 14 ; Ant. xiii. 5, 9, xviii. 1, 3, 4.
2 Talm. Jer., Berachoth, ix. 5, 9 ; cf. Derenbourg, Histoire, p. 131, Edersheim,
Jesus the Messiah, i. 315.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 417
and Acts and in the Talmud (see e.g. Rosh ha-shana, 17a ;
Sanhedrin, xi. i=fol. 90a) are decisive. The Sadducees lived
in the visible present and not in an imagined future. They
feared the political unrest which might be produced by a
constant looking for the judgment, and disliked the materi
alism of many Pharisaean descriptions of the future state. In
opposition to this, one of the best of the Sadducees insisted
that men ought to serve God without thought of reward
[Pirqe Aboth, i. 3), and the more the Pharisees extracted by
an unbridled exegesis from psalms and prophecies, the more
their rivals insisted on the significant silence of the written
Law. The Sadducees were not, of course, opposed either
to the psalms or to the prophecies ; the Sadducaean author
of 1 Maccabees evidently loved them both. But as practical
men, the Sadducees considered that vague poetic expressions
should not be treated as dicta probantia for doctrine, and in
particular were slow to accept even the earliest and best of
apocalypses as in the fullest sense a ' holy book.' xx That the
Pharisees on the other hand believed in all that the Saddu
cees doubted or rejected, cannot be questioned. Certainly
Josephus expresses himself rather oddly — dOdvaTov lo-^iiv
tois yjrv^ais triaTis airois slvai. In this Josephus may seem
to Platonize, but really it is only his Greek way of deny
ing that the life after death is a pale semi-consciousness
which no judgment will wake up, just as Josephus's state
ment that the Sadducees ' take away sifiappLivq yy entirely '
merely means that according to them we are not to sit with
our hands folded waiting for the divine judgment, nor yet in
a fury of blind fanaticism to pretend to be its commissioned
agents. Similarly Josephus's description of the Pharisaean
doctrine of the resurrection in War, ii. 8, 14, and that of his
own belief on this point in War, iii. 8, 5 may appear to
point rather to transmigration of souls. But in the latter
passage he tells us himself that he is ' philosophizing,' and
even in Ant. xviii. 1, 3 how lightly he touches on 'living
again ' ! Evidently he is afraid to lay too much stress on
so unphilosophical a doctrine as that of the resurrection of
the body, and uses language susceptible of a twofold inter
pretation. It is more difficult to translate the foreign-sounding E E

41 8 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
account of the Essenes into Jewish terms. Taken as a whole
the description cannot possibly be accurate, and yet some of
its leading features, critically viewed, may well be genuine,
and among these (defending myself for this elsewhere zz) I
must, in spite of Ohle's criticism, provisionally include the
doctrine of the soul. The passages relative to this are im
portant for the illustration both of the mystic and of the
Puritan psalms ; I will quote the principal parts of them.
*EiO-o-7]vois Be. eirl piev ®£<3 KaTaXnreiv <f>iXei to. irdvTa 6 Xoyos.
dOavaTitpvo-i Be Tas ij/v)(as, Trepifud^ryrov rryov/jievoi tov BiKaiov Tr)v
irpocroBov. eis Be to lepbv dva6iqp.aTa o-T&XXovTes, Ovcrias ovk eTrneXovo'i
SiacpopoTtjTi ayveiSiv as vop.it.oiev Kai cY airo elpyop-evoi tov koivov
Teix.evio~p.aTOS e<p' avTU>v Tas 8vcrias e-riTeXovcri.
<S>6apTa p.ev eivai to. cru>p.aTa, Kai ttjv vXr/v oi fj.6vip.ov avrols, Tas Be
l/a^as dOavdrovs del Biap.eveiv, /cat 0-vp.irXeKeo-dai p.ev eK tov XeirTOTarov
</>oiT(oo"as aWepos, Sio-Trep elpKTais tois criop.aaiv Ivyyvi tivi <f>vo~iKrj
KaTacrir<op.evas. eireiBdv Se dveOSso'i tS>v Kara crdpKa 8eo~p.G>v, ofa Br)
paKpas SovXeias aTrrjXXayp.evas TOTe ^aipeiv Kai pieTetopovs <pepeo~0ai.
Kai tois p.ev dyaOais, 6p.o8o£ovvTes iraiarlv 'EAAtJvcdv, dirotpaivovTai ttjv
iirip iiKeavov Biavrav eniKeio-dai, ko.1 )(£>pov, ovTe op.Bpois, ovre vitperois,
ovre Kavp.aai Bapvvop-evov, dXX' bv «f wKeavov Trpavs del £e<f>vpos
eirnrvewv dvaij/vxet. -reus 8c </>auA.cus, toctxaBr] Kai -)(eip.epiov d<f}Opi£ovTai
fjiv^ov, yep.ovTa Tip.o>piwv d8iaXet7rTO)v.aaa
There is nothing improbable in this, rightly understood.
The Essenes were an offshoot of the Pharisees, and carried
the Pharisaean doctrines or tendencies to an extreme. Did
the Pharisees say, in opposition to the Sadducees, that ' cer
tain things, though not all, are [entirely] the work of fate ' (i.e.
providence, or an eternal divine purpose 2) ? The Essenes went
further, and affirmed that ' fate governs all things, and that
nothing befalls men but what is according to its decree.' 3
Did the Pharisees prefer the study of the Law to elaborate
sacrificial rites ? The Essenes kept up only a formal con
nexion with the temple, and restricted themselves to a
purer worship of their own.4 Did the Pharisees hold that
all souls were immortal, but that even the good would have
to wait in the underworld for their reward, viz. the resurrec-
1 Jos., Ant. xviii. I, 5.
2 Zeno, according to Stoba^us, said that we might speak indifferently of
destiny, nature, and providence.
3 Jos., Ant. xiii. 5, 9. 4 Jos., Ant. xviii. 1, 5.

vm. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH.

419

tion of their bodies ? The Essenes are said to have believed
that the spirits of the righteous would no more be burdened
with bodies, but would ' rejoice and mount upwards.' ' But
we must not follow Josephus blindly. He either suppresses,
or but lightly touches upon, one of the most important
Pharisaean doctrines, that which relates to the judgment,
the resurrection, and the ' kingdom of God.' Can we hesitate
to believe that he deals similarly with the Essenes ? There
was nothing in the mere belief in immortality (i.e. in future
rewards and punishments) inconsistent with the expectation
of a grand final judgment, when the soul's happiness or
misery would be intensified, and the fact that John the
Essene was one of the Jewish generals in the Roman war2
proves the members of his sect to have been not mere sec
tarians, but to have shared the popular views on the final or
Messianic judgmentbl>b The acceptance of this belief, if it is
indeed a fact, completely separates the Essenes from thinkers
like Philo and the author of the Wisdom of Solomon, from
whose systems the doctrine of the final judgment is conspicu
ously absent. And if the Essenes accepted the final judgment,
how can we be sure that they did not receive with it some
theory of a glorified body ? If the pre-existent souls entered
into mortal bodies to carry out the first part of the divine
plan, why should they not be ' clothed upon ' with ' spiritual
bodies ' to fulfil their service to their Creator ?
Let me explain this. The Essenian doctrine of the soul
in Josephus, viewed in an Oriental rather than in a Greek
light, combines two elements — a Babylonian and a Persian,
both Hebraized. The Iranian Scriptures know nothing of the
happy island ; this is a part of the tradition of the Assyrio-
Babylonian poets (see p. 432). But the Essenes whom Josephus
describes, being at heart true Israelites, are well aware that
not merely to ' brave men called heroes and demigods ' (or,
in Hebrew style, ' friends of God,' like Abraham) but to
all ' good souls ' this enchanted ground is open, and though
in the apocalyptic style so dear to them they may picture
the land of the blessed as Paradise, yet they mean nothing
1 Jos., War, ii. 8, n. On the attitude of the Essenes towards sacrifices,
see note % p. 374.
2 Ibid., ii. 20, 4; iii. 2, 1. E E 2

420 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
different from that 'better world of the just' which Zoroas
trianism identifies with heaven (see Yasna, xvii. 42-44). On
the other hand, the description of Hades is distinctly Zoroas
trian, and so too is the alternative account which Josephus
gives of the lot of good souls, according to the Essenian
system. We have in fact in the first sentence of Jos., War,
ii. 8, 1 1 a reflexion of the Zoroastrian view respecting the
so-called fravashis, those ' guardian angels ' which were so
linked to men as to form virtually a part of human nature,
and which were practically indistinguishable from souls.000 A
fravashi is the man himself as God destined him to become ;
and without implying the theory of the Mindkhired (xlix.
22, 23) that most of the constellations are 'the guardian
spirits of the worldly existences' (comp. Plato's theory in
the Timceus •), one might accurately say (adopting Josephus's
words) that the fravashis ' keep coming (to earth) from the
most subtle ether,' to which when this life is over they will
return. The only discrepancy between the Zoroastrian theory
in the Bundahis and the Essenian in our Josephus is that,
according to the latter, souls are ' drawn down ' into bodies
' by a certain physical enticement,' whereas the former re
presents the fravashis as voluntarily becoming embodied in
order to fight for God and for goodness against the power of
the evil one. How shall we account for this ? In my opinion,
thus. The writer or editor of Jos., Ant. ii. 8, 11 has misrepre
sented the Essenian belief under the influence of Philo, who
held, as is well known, that souls descended into the body
through being enamoured of corporeal existence. In its present
form, the Essenian theory fails to explain either why the
unbodied soul should have longed to become embodied, or
why, if it instinctively loved the body, it should have rejoiced
to ' mount upwards.' Philo does to some extent explain the
difficulty by his aristocratic division of souls into two classes
— those of the wise (such as Abraham and Moses) and those
of the mass of mankind.2 But this only in part Philonized
Essenism, which knows nothing of Philo's aristocratic theory,
gives not even the shadow of a solution. Admit a Zoroastrian
' See Grote, Plato, iii. 262, and cf. Dante, Parad. iv. 52-63, 'Dice chel' alma
alia sua Stella riede,' &c.
2 Drummond, Philo Judceus, i. 337.

VIII. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 421
influence upon Essenism, and all becomes clear. The fra
vashis voluntarily assumed mortal bodies in order to fight for
God and for goodness against the power of the evil one.1
Similar to this, we may reasonably hold, was the belief of the
Essenes respecting the ' descent ' of the souls — a belief,
dependent for its full development upon Zoroastrianism, but
not without Jewish germs. For predestination was certainly
an old Jewish and indeed Semitic idea (see The Prophecies of
Isaiah, i. 292), and the psalms themselves cannot be under
stood without assuming a belief in the ideal (heavenly) as
well as real (earthly) existence of God's people Israel. Later
on, not only Israel, but Israel's most holy things were repre
sented as pre-existent in heaven ; ddd so alone, it appeared, was
their sanctity inviolable and their permanence ensured. How
edifying the idea of the pre-existence of souls (which became
a part of Talmudic Judaism) could be made, the student will
see from a wonderfully deep poem of Nachmanides freely
rendered into exquisite German verse by Sachs.eee
And what of the final act which I have ventured to postu
late for the Essenian drama of the soul ? Is not that also a
piece of Hebraized Zoroastrianism ? The abolition of the
separation between heaven and earth which was an essential
part of the Zoroastrian eschatology involves the belief in a
transfigured or spiritual body. This, too, is a novelty in
Judaism, but is it not foreshadowed in the fiery chariot which
bore Elijah up to heaven ? And altogether may we not
reasonably hold that the statement of Essenian beliefs in
Jos., War, ii. 8, 1 1 is probably authentic because it is a natural
combination of Hebraized Babylonian and Persian elements ?
I am well content if I have done something to show that,
although perhaps in some of its details too Zoroastrian, the
religious theory of the Essenes was a noble one, and permits
us to regard them as true disciples of the Puritan and mystic
psalmists. But even without the Essenes (twilight figures, per
haps), it seems to me sufficiently clear that the later develop
ments of Jewish thought favour the view that some of the
psalmists had already started in the same direction. But for
the necessity of considering a theory opposed to my own, which
has some powerful support, I might now close these lectures.
1 Bundahis, ii. 10 (West, Pahlavi Texts, i. 14).

452 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
I wish to consider it fairly, but before doing so will sum up
the results which we have lately gained. The doctrine of an
eternal life open to all the righteous, and involving a trans
figuration of the body, is neither a mere evolution out of the
old Semitic belief in Sheol, nor yet a direct importation from
any foreign system of thought. Had it not come into contact
with Zoroastrianism Israel would, historically speaking, have
struggled in vain to satisfy its religious aspirations. And yet
it was not to Persia alone that the Church-nation was in
debted for its greatest religious acquisition. In dealing with
foreign religions the leaders of the Church exercised a fine
discriminating tact, and their followers a singular power of
assimilation ; or, speaking religiously, God watched over His
people, and gave them power to reject any important belief,
the germs of which did not to some extent exist in their
own religion. Now Jewish religion after the Exile was de
monstrably very different in its tendencies from that of the
pre-Babylonian period. An incipient dualism existed within-
it — the dualism of that great antithesis, God and the world,
out of which arose by degrees a second, the spirit (or principle
of conscious individuality) and the body (with the soul). The
first antithesis was clearly recognized by Ezekiel and his.
successors. The second was far more slowly realized (see
Eccles. iii. 21, xii. 7?). We find a distinct expression of it,
however, in one of the finest of the mystic utterances in the
Psalter, Though my flesh and my heart should have wasted away,
God would be the rock of my heart and my portion for ever,1
where the ' heart ' which will survive the old one is the organ
of God-consciousness, or, in St. Paul's phraseology, the
Trvevfia. The 73rd psalm indeed is scarcely older than the last
part of the Persian period (p. 148). But the distinction between
spirit and body must have begun to grow up long before this,,
that Jewish religion might be prepared for the moulding
influence of a more advanced system of thought. Even if the
other mystic psalms were composed as late as the 73rd, they
must have been preceded by others of a similar tendency
which being less noble have not been preserved.
1 Ps. Ixxiii. 26. See note in my commentary.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 423

And what was this more highly developed system ?
Zoroastrianism, if the preceding arguments are well founded ;
but according to a rival theory, Greek philosophy. Con
sciously or unconsciously, it is said, Greek modes of thought
must have begun to modify genuine Judaism from the day
that Alexander the Great conquered at Issus. The conclusion
of this process in Egypt is seen in the Book of Wisdom and
in the works of Philo. That the doctrine of spiritual immor
tality in these writings is neo-Platonic, is generally admitted ;
would it not, say our theorists, be reasonable to suppose that
any approximation to such a doctrine in Palestine has the
same origin ? A Jewish scholar assures us that Platonic or
Pythagorean speculation dominates the Talmudic doctors of
Palestine,1 while both in St. Paul (once Gamaliel's disciple)
and in the school of the Pharisees many Christian writers
have found more or less distinct traces of Hellenistic ideas.
Dillmann, too, is of opinion that the Book of Enoch may
here and there be affected by Greek mythology, though one
of its objects is to counteract the far more dangerous influence
of Greek philosophy. And a much older book, also of
Palestinian origin, that of Ecclesiastes, has been suspected of
containing Stoic and Epicurean doctrines, and references have
even been found in it to the teaching of Heraclitus.
To this I have to reply that the new and distinctive ele
ment in the mental attitude of the later Jews is not so much
Hellenism as a half-reluctant openness to foreign ideas, and
that Israel's debt to Hellas began, both in Egypt and still
more in Palestine, later than is sometimes supposed. Putting
Egypt aside, and without repeating my own very definite
judgment on the ideas of Koheleth, I will refer the reader to
Menzel's painstaking dissertation, Der griechische Einfluss auf
Prediger und Weisheit Salomos (1889), which shows conclu
sively that the author of Ecclesiastes is no more a Hellenizer
than Sirach is afterwards. With regard to Enoch, the de
nunciations in xciv. 5, xcviii. 15, civ. 10 may perfectly well
refer to a native heterodox literature, an early post-Exilic
fragment of which may exist in Prov. xxx. 1-4, and a later
one in the meditations, before they were edited, of Koheleth,
and to which literature there may be a reference in the
1 Joel, Blicke in die Religionsgeschichte, i. 117.

424 RLSE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
epilogue of our Ecclesiastes (Eccles. xii. 12). I see no
necessity for explaining the western situation of Hades in
Enoch xxii. 1 (a passage in the oldest part of the book) by
Greek mythology ; the idea is at home in Egypt, where
Amenti, ' the land of the west,' is the invisible lower hemi
sphere to which the sun appears to descend,1 and as for the
' Titan-legends ' in chaps, liv., lxvii., though Greek influence
is not inconceivable, can we not explain even these from
Palestinian sources ? 2 Of the Pharisees I have spoken above.
The view referred to seems to me not only unnecessary but
opposed to all that we know of the circumstances of the time.
If any one of the three schools had imbibed Greek philo
sophy, you would expect it to be the Sadducees. But though
the Sadducees, like the Hellenizers under Antiochus Epi
phanes, borrowed much from Greek civilization in external
points, they did not, so far as the evidence goes, incur debts
to Hellas, either in religion or in philosophy. What was there
indeed in the early Palestinian Greek life to attract a Jew ? 3
As to the Talmud, I do not doubt that there is truth in the
statement. The opposition of the Rabbis could not perma
nently arrest the extension of Alexandrinism. Still it will
often be difficult to prove a purely Greek origin for Talmudic
ideas. The pre-existence doctrine, for instance, which Joel has
referred to, might conceivably have developed out of purely
Jewish germs, especially when Zoroastrian (not to add, Egyp
tian) ideas were in the air ; the echoes of Platonic psychology
which this scholar mentions are equally Zoroastrian. And
lastly with regard to St. Paul. Granting that he knew cer
tain Greek phrases which could not but be familiar to Greek-
speaking and Greek-reading Jews, does it follow that the
ideas which he associated with them were of purely Greek
origin ? If there was a movement among the Jews towards
a belief in spiritual immortality before and during the Greek
period, fostered by Persian influences, must not St. Paul
have been much more affected by this than by a tincture of
commonplace Greek philosophy ? fff
' See Brugsch, Religion und Mythologie der alten Aegypter, p. 227.
2 Hellenistic Jews were well acquainted with the Greek story of the Titans.
See 2 Sam. v. 18 (Sept.), xxiii. 13 (Sept. Lucian's recension), and cf. Judith,
xvi. 7. But see Griinbaum, Z.D.M.G. xxxi. 237.
* Cf. Morrison, The Jews under Roman Rule, pp. 354-357.

VIII. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 425
When therefore we are told gBg (as by Dr. Gratz in 1 871 and
by M. Montet in 1 884) that the doctrine of the resurrection of
the body comes from Zoroastrianism and that of the immor
tality of the soul from neo-Platonism,1 or (as by M. Montet
in 1 890) that even the former is ' merely a different reading
of the Platonic doctrine of the immortality of the soul,' we
are entitled to ask for a revision of these judgments. And
we may do so with some confidence, (1) because, among the
surprises of the future, it is not likely that we shall see a
general adhesion to M. de Harlez's negation of the antiquity
of the resurrection-doctrine in Zoroastrianism, and (2) because
in asserting that the Jewish belief in immortality comes (in the
sense which I have explained) from Zoroastrianism, we do not
deny that neo-Platonism helped greatly in strengthening this
belief among the Hellenistic Jews. I appeal once more to
'advanced theological students to follow with more interest
the progress of Zoroastrian studies, and as an essential
preliminary to acquaint themselves with what has actually
been done by the combined labours of critics of different
schools. And I think that this interest will be rewarded by
fresh insight, not only into the meaning of the Psalter, but
also into that of works which stand perhaps even nearer to
us Christian theologians, the Pauline and the Johannine
writings.hhh My task is for the present at an end. Should I be spared
to resume it with the advantage of some years of self-criticism
and of helpful intercourse with fellow-workers, I shall doubt
less find much to modify or correct in details. But I trust that
something permanent has been already achieved by the more
consistent application of principles and the fuller combination
of results. If I have been able to show that the Psalter is
really a monument of the best religious ideas of the great
post-Exile Jewish Church, and that from Jeremiah onwards
there has been a continuous development, through the co-opera
tion of some of the noblest non-Jewish races and the unerring
guidance of the adorable Spirit of truth, in the direction which
leads to Christ, I shall feel that I have been privileged to do
something, however imperfect, for the best of masters and the
greatest of causes.
1 Cf. also Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, iv. 149.

426 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.

Note * p. 381.
Are Ps. xlix. and the kindred psalms which will presently be
referred to, spoken in the name of the community, or in that of any
and every pious Israelite ? I have taken the latter view. Smend,
however, while admitting that Ps. xlix. 4, 5 can be understood as
spoken by the poet, claims the rest of the psalm for the church-
nation. Similarly it is the community [Gemeinde) whose eternal
duration and enjoyment of Messianic blessings is believingly antici
pated in Pss. xvi. 10, 11, xvii. 15. On Ps. Ixxiii. Smend's remarks are
brief, and include no exegesis. Possibly, he thinks, in spite of
appearances, it was composed for a liturgical purpose (see vv. 1, 28).
Klostermann's early work, Untersuchungen zur allies f. Theologie (Gotha,
1868) discusses two of these psalms (xlix. and Ixxiii.) and in addition
Ps. cxxxix. It is, however, arbitrary and unsound alike in its criti
cism and its exegesis. More help will be got from chap. xiii. of
Hermann Schultz's Alttest. Theologie (ed. 4), which ably represents a
different theory of interpretation from my own.

Note b, p. 382.
In Isa. xiv. two different Semitic beliefs are mentioned respecting.
the fate of royal personages after death. The king of Babylon
expects to join the gods [v. 13). But the poet has already expressed
the ordinary Israelitish and Phoenician belief, viz. that kings and
heroes have their couches of glory in the underworld, probably apart
from the vulgar herd (cf. Isa. v. 14). Job, too, is made to express
the belief that there are no moral distinctions in the underworld,
tyrant-kings and their oppressed subjects being alike ' cut away from
God's hand ' among the shades. ' Oh that I had died as a newborn
child,' he exclaims, 'and joined the great assembly of mankind. I
should at least have been no worse off than those kings and counsel
lors of the earth, who built the ruined cities of the primaeval world '
(in Job iii. 14 read cb)l for 1E&, and cf. Job xxii. 15, Ezek. xxvi. 20).
For the Phoenician belief, see Inscr. of Eshmunazar, king of the Sido-
nians, 1. 8, ' let him have no couch with the shades ' (33B>D as in Isa-
lvii. 2, ' they rest upon their couches ') ; also Inscr. of Tebneth,
Eshmunazar's son, 1. 8, ' nor (mayest thou have) a couch with the
shades.' The latest monograph on these and other Phoenician
inscriptions is G. Hoffmann's Ueber einige phbnikische Inschriften
(Gottingen, 1889) ; for the inscription of Tebneth comp. Driver,
Samuel, Introd., pp. xxvi.-xxix., who is well aware that it illustrates.
not only the language but the ideas of the Old Testament. It is.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 427
perhaps allowable to infer from Ezek. xxviii. 13, 14 that the Tyrians.
also were at one time attracted by the belief expressed in Isa. xiv. 13
Note °, p. 383.
The question is, whether ' Jehovah killeth and 1 maketh alive
(again) ' in 1 Sam. ii. 6 (cf. Deut. xxxii. 39, 2 Kings v. 7) describes
what is in the abstract possible, or what He has been known to do or
is at least expected to do. I prefer the latter view. In Deut. I.e., ' I
kill and I make alive' is parallel to ' I wound and I heal.' Now the
healing of disease was a real experience ; surely the revival of the
dead must have been regarded as such too. Job ix. 5 may of
course be quoted in favour of the other view, but even here is it
certain that ' which removeth the mountains ' merely describes what
is in the abstract possible ? The phrase may allude to a tradition of
what God had once done or to an expectation of what He would
one day do (cf. Isa. ii. 19). To 'kill and make alive' is also an
attribute of Marduk (see a well-known hymn in Sayce, Hibbert
Lectures, p. 99, but cf. p. 358). Note d, p. 383.
The phrase is found both (see note nn) in Proverbs and in
Ps. xxxvi. 10. Comp. the ' water of life ' in Babylonian and Egyptian
mythology (see next note, and cf. Renouf, Hibbert Lectures, p. 141).
Note e, p. 384.
The Babylonians, like the Iranians, certainly believed that the
ambrosial fruit might, under certain circumstances, be partaken of
by men. The name of the sacred plant in Assyrian shows this ; it
means ' in old age the man becomes young (again).' And when Sit-
napistim (of whom more later) and his wife were placed in the
happy garden and made equal to the gods, it followed that they had
free access to the sacred plant and ' water of life ' (see Jensen, Die
Kosmologie der Babylonier, pp. 227, 383 ; cf. Jeremias, Die bab.-ass..
Vorstellungen, &c, pp. 89-95). The Hebrew narrative, if we had
it in its full form, would probably have made the privilege of eating
the sacred fruit conditional on obedience. How skilfully the narra
tor has given a moral turn to the details of the old story ! Con
trast the Gistubar story, where the hero first takes the sacred plant,
and then loses it to a serpent. If ' serpent ' is correct, here seems
to be the original of the serpent-tempter in Gen. iii., as Jensen
points out. Whether the Babylonians had' begun to allegorize their
myth, must be left undecided from want of evidence. Need I say

428 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
that the 'tree of life' in Gen. ii., iii., has a Babylonian rather than
an Iranian connexion? The Gaokerena (see p. 439) of the Avesta
may itself be ultimately of Babylonian origin.
Note f, p. 384.
Ps. xxii. 30 (note), which shows at any rate that the departed
might be supposed to share in some way in the Messianic hope.
This is one of the germs of the beautiful address of the Messiah to
God in the Yalkut to Isaiah (359), ' Nor let the living only be saved
in my days, but also those who are laid in the dust'
Note e, p. 384.
It is not unpermissible to compare Ps. xxiii. 4 in this connexion.
At any rate, v. 4 must be interpreted not less widely than v. 6 (see
my commentary). Note h, p. 385.
How forced are the uncritical patristic explanations of these pas
sages ! See e.g. St. Cyril [Catechesis, xviii. 7), who remarks on Ps.
cxv. 17 that those who die in their sins will have, not to praise God
for benefits, but to lament ; also St. Chrysostom and St. Jerome on
Ps. vi. 6. Note ', p. 385.
Remember, however, there were both orthodox and heterodox
Sufis. One of the former, Sha'rani, in a work on the Mohammedan
belief, shows that no one can be dispensed from his religious obliga
tions, even if he have reached the high degree of detachment from
the world called al-qurb ('nearness to God,' cf. Ps. Ixxiii. 28).
Note J, p. 386.
The apocalyptic element is weak in psalm-theology (Pss. lviii.
and lxxxii. are exceptional). The dangerousness of heathenism must
be realized still more vividly and appallingly before the Jewish long
ing for a complete mundane revolution can become as intense as in
the later apocalyptic literature (the germs of which, however, cannot
be mistaken in Joel, the second Zechariah, and Isa. xxiv. -xxvii.).
Upon the whole, this is the picture presented by the later psalmists
— an earnest people devoted to the pursuit of righteousness, and not
to be turned aside from it by great difficulties and discouragements.
And, from a Christian point of view, the loveliest feature of it is the
growth of a mystic and yet not separatistic spiritual religion.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 429
Note k, p. 386.
Originally it was Israel which claimed Jehovah for its ' portion '
(Deut. xxxii. 8, Jer. x. 16, li. 19), but in Pss. xvi. 5, Ixxiii. 26 a faith
ful Israelite can make the same high boast (cf. the name Hilkiah).
1 Tim. vi. 19, 'that they may lay hold on the true life,' may be
illustrated from an Egyptian hymn, ' Grant to thy son who loves
thee, life in truth . . . that he may live united with thee in eternity '
(Renouf, Hibbert Lectures, p. 230, also from Kordn, xxix. 64).
Note m, p. 387.
Pss. xv., xxiv. 1-6, xxiii., xxvii. 1-6, which are illustrated by Ps. v.
5 (cf. 12), lxi. 5, xxxi. 20, 21, xxxvi. 8-10, lxv. 5. Within this
group the words ~\\l 'to sojourn as a guest,' "1$ 'a guest' (prop, 'a
protected stranger') only occur thrice (Pss. v. 5, xv. 1, lxi. 5), but
the idea of ' guestship ' is equally expressed in the other passages.
That idea has experienced a noteworthy development. It might
be thought that the ger or ' guest ' of Jehovah would be as fearful
and anxious with regard to his future safety as one of those pro
tected foreigners who are called technically gerim in the O. T. And
certainly we do find in the passage (Isa. xxxiii. 14) which suggested
Pss. xv. and xxiv. 1-6 a speech of certain nominal gerim of Jehovah
who apprehend that the ' hearth of Jehovah ' may to them be no
protection but the reverse. But in the Psalter, putting aside xxxix.
13, cxix. 19, where the state of ' guestship ' is viewed upon its less
favourable side, to be a ger is to have a joyous sense of absolute
security based on the consciousness of a higher and divinely given
life (see my note on Ps. xv. 1). Nor can we, I think, duly appreciate
the use of ~\\ for ' convert ' in new Hebrew (the first beginnings of
which are traceable in the Sept. of Ex. xii. 19, Isa. xiv. 1), if we
suppose this word in the post^Exile period to have suggested the
idea of timidity (see Isa. xiv. 1-3). I venture, therefore, to criticize
Prof. Robertson Smith's reference to the phrase 'ger of Jehovah'
as expressing a timid though earnest legalism [The Rel. of the
Semites, p. 78). It does express this in the two psalm-passages
just referred to (with which comp. 1 Chron. xxix. 1 5), but not in
the other passages, which agree in spirit with the finest utterances
of mystic piety. The true ger of Jehovah knows, it is true, that he
has no natural right to be on terms of intimacy with his God. He
is not like those herdsmen of the desert so graphically described by
Mr. Doughty, who explain their often surprising hospitality with the
words, ' Be we not all guests of Ullah ? ' There is a world of differ
ence between his and their religion. The one is supernatural, the

•4jO RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
other is but natural. Israel was chosen of old by Jehovah with a
moral object, and, having forfeited his standing, has been chosen
anew (cf. Ps. lxv. 5). In his humility he may call himself a ger or
' protected stranger,' but can he be timid or anxious ? Many a psalm
returns the answer, No. He is sure that this ' guestship ' will last
perpetually (Ps. lxi. 5), and sings for joy. And not only faithful
Israel has this confidence, but with increasing clearness each faithful
Israelite of the mystic school. Note n, p. 388.
17(1 in Ps. xvii. 14, see Linguistic Appendix. It corresponds ex
actly to the Arabic dunya. Cf. the saying quoted by Lane (Lexicon,
s.v.),bd'a dunydhu bi-dhiratihi, 'he has purchased his (enjoyments of)
the present world at the expense of his (enjoyments of) the world to
come.' Of course, this use of "i?p does not imply a recognized and
habitual way of speaking. The phrases n-Jtj 07\vn and K3n DTiUn
belong to the Hebrew of the Mishna.
Note °, p. 389.
Wellhausen (followed by Nowack) reads in v. 24^, 'Jni?!? T3 'fpnNI
iSkizzen und Vorarbeiten, i. 94).
Note p, p. 389.
'At the awaking,' Pi?!}?, Ps. xvii. 15, may mean 'when life's short
night is past ; ' cf. J. H. Newman's poem, ' Lead, kindly Light,
through the encircling gloom.' This is not without plausible support
in Ps. xc. 5 (R. V.), ' Thou carriest them away as with a flood,
they are as a sleep,' on which Luther remarks, 'Truly our life is
nothing else than a sleep and a dream: ' — a primitive mystic idea,
as we may see in Clem. Alex., Strom, v., pp. 599D, 600A (comp.
also the Mohammedan saying, 'Man sleeps in life and awakes
in death'). We may then interpret "lj?3?, Ps. xlix. 15, with Card.
Cajetan, ' Mortem justorum appellat mane, quoniam in morte incipit
verus dies rectorum : sicut mortem impiorum appellavit casum in
fovea' [Psalmi Davidici, ed. 2, 1532). If we hold Ps. xvii. to have
been written before the idea of the resurrection became current, this
is perhaps the best explanation (see my commentary). If, however,
we place this group of psalms near the close of the Persian period,
we shall naturally interpret the ' awaking ' of a renewal of the bodily
existence, as Dan. xii. 2, cf. 2 Kings iv. 31. For 'thy form,' ^ru-lDPl,
we might, with Sept., substitute 'thy glory' (cf. Sept., Num. xii. 8).

JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 431

The correctness of this is shown by the use of *ii23=the divine glory
in the parallel passage, Ps. Ixxiii. 24 ; cf. 1 Tim. iii. 16, dveXrjp.$&r\ iv
Sdfjy. ' Face,' ' form,' and ' glory of Jehovah ' are in fact synonymous
expressions for the revealed perfections of God (Ex. xxxiii. 18-20) ;
the ' sight ' or experience of which gives life and happiness. The fine
phrase ' nearness to God ' (Ps. Ixxiii. 28) seems equivalent to ' seeing
God's face.' It occurs naturally to pious mystics in all countries.
The Stiffs often used it [al-aurb) to express that degree of blessed
ness which is only exceeded by intuition (Fleischer, Z. D. M. G. xx.
33, and see above, note se). Note 1, p. 390.
According to Riehm (in his edition of Hupfeld's Psalmen) Ps.
xvi. 10 merely expresses the hope of deliverance from the danger of
death. He thinks that the connexion of this and the preceding
verse requires this, unless we go so far as to suppose that the speaker
looks forward to be taken like Enoch from earth to heaven. But
why not ? To a mystic (cf. St. Paul's p,ep,vrj p.ai) there is no death ;
what seems so is rather 'assumption.' ' Significanter,' as Cardinal
Cajetan says, 'non vocavit earn mortem sed assumptionem ex hac
misera in perpetuam vitam ' (in the work quoted from above). On
Riehm's side it is also urged that in Ps. xxx. 4 (cf. ix. 14) phraseology
like that in Ps. xvi. 10 is used of some great danger to which the
psalmist is exposed. But it is not a personal but a national danger
•of which Ps. xxx. 4 speaks ; and of course it is as a faithful Church
man that the speaker hopes for the highest blessings in Ps. xvi. 10,
n. More on this head later. Note r, p. 390.
The coincidences between Egyptian ideas of the soul and those
¦of some parts of the Old Testament need not be denied. They are
not however sufficient to prove a direct historical connexion between
the religions of Egypt and Judah. Egypt and Babylon may possibly
in primitive times have influenced each other religiously (see Jere-
mias, Die bab.-ass. Vorstellungen, &c, p. 93, note •), but except in a
passage of the Talmud [Nidda, 30b, Giidemann, Religionsgeschichtliche
Studien, p. 7, &c.) Egyptian influence on Jewish ideas of the soul is
not clearly visible. The hope of sharing in the divine glory is the
privilege of the good in all the higher religions. It could not how
ever wear precisely the same aspect in Egypt as in Judah owing to
the fundamental contrast between the pantheism of the one and the
pure Theism of the other. On the Egyptian doctrines of the future

432 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
life, see Renouf, Hibbert Lectures, 1879, pp. 179-191 ; Brugsch,
Religion und Mythologie der alien Aegypter, pp. 178-180 ; Maspero,
Rev. de I'hist. des religions, xviii. 53. Cf. also Lieblein, Egyptian
Religion (Leipz. 1884), pp. 84, 85, where the doctrine of the fiery
tortures of the wicked in hell is represented as distinctively Egyptian.
Of Greek influence upon the Jews, more later on.
Note 9, p. 391.
Among the most widely spread of the later Jewish notions of the
underworld is that of its seven gates, which is undeniably of Baby
lonian origin (there were twelve gates, says Brugsch, to the Egyptian
Hades). The first Jewish mention of these gates (which imply
seven concentric walls, like those of Ecbatana) is in the Sohar ;
Mohammed adopted the notion from the Jews [Kordn, xv. 44).
The Talmud speaks at any rate of seven parts of hell, the names of
which are given in Erubin, 1 ga (cf. Midrash Tillim, xi. 7). Probably
Dante derived his own sevenfold division of the Inferno from his
Jewish friend Immanuel (Manoel Giudeo). On the origin of the
Babylonian belief, see Jensen, Die Kosmologie der Babylonier, p. 175 ;
he connects it with the sevenfold division of the upper world, which
we also find in the Avesta. For the later Jewish notions, see the
Midrash on the Psalms and the Pirqe deRabbi Eliezer, and cf.
Wunsche, Jahrbb. f. prot. Theol, vi. 497 &c, Feuchtzwang, Zt. f.
Assyriologie, 1889, p. 43, Lowy, 'Old Jewish Legends on Hell,'
Proceedings of Soc. of Bibl. Arch., vol. x. (1888). The Mandsean
doctrine of the underworld has also a large Babylonian element.
Note ', p. 392.
Sit-napistim was the name of the hero who with his wife survived
the Deluge, and was 'made like to the gods,' and placed in the
Babylonian and Assyrian Paradise (see above, p. 427). The words
with which the Deluge-story in the Babylonian epic concludes
represent this locality as ' far off at the mouth of the streams ' (the
Euphrates and the Tigris), i.e. probably an island in the Persian
gulf (Jensen, Die Kosmologie der Babylonier, pp. 212, 383). On the
other hand Berosus makes Xisuthrus (the hero of his Flood-story)
disappear from earth to dwell with the gods in heaven. This form
of the mystic tradition seems more recent ; the dwelling of the gods
is no longer localized upon earth. It is also the form to which the
Hebrew Enoch-story approaches most nearly. Xisuthrus is in fact
Noah and Enoch in one, and the story of Enoch is of Exilic origin.
Cf. my own art. 'Deluge,' Ency. Brit., 1877, but see also Delitzsch.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. ' 433

Note u, p. 392.
The virtual equivalence of the two ideas comes out very clearly in
the Old Testament. It was favoured by the twofold meaning of
HID, 1. death, 2. the world of the dead (cf. Hos. xiv. 14).
Note t, p. 393.
Pratorius, Z.D.M.G. 1873, p. 645 &c. On the pre-Islamic view
of death in Arabia, see Wellhausen, Reste arabischen Heidenthumes,
pp. 163, 164 ; Wetzstein, in Delitzsch's Psalms, iii. 436. Tradition
said that Koss, bishop of Najran in Yemen, was ' the first who asserted
the. Resurrection ' (Chenery, Assemblies of Al Hariri, i. 538).
Note v, p. 394.
There are some possible objections to the use here made of the
Avesta. I. It is an undoubted fact that the Avesta, as we now
have it, cannot be historically traced beyond the Sassanidae. The
first king of this line made great endeavours to collect the texts of
the Avesta, and to secure the traditional exegesis. His successors
continued his work, and under Shapvlr II. (a.d. 309-380) the canon
of the Avesta was fixed. It is therefore as impossible to be sure
that the ancient records have come down to us in their integrity
as it is in the case of the pre-Exile portions of the O. T. From
this an objector may argue that to use the Avesta as I have done
is unsafe, especially as Avesta students have not the ample means
of critical analysis which Old Testament critics are fortunate enough
to possess. The course which I have adopted is however per
fectly justifiable. The existence of a progressive critical analysis of
the Avesta cannot be denied. Moreover it is a correct inference
from the notices of the classical authors that the leading ideas of
the Avesta were prevalent before the close of the Achaemenian
period, and if prevalent at all they had doubtless been so for long.
It will also be disputed by few critics that in the main the ideas and
sacred texts of Achaemenian Mazda-worship are reproduced in the
Avesta (see e.g. Oxford Z. A. I., Introd., p. liii.).
II. Another objection may be based on the existence of rival
schools in Avestic philology (cf. Wilhelm, Le Museon, 1886, pp. 334-
358). And obviously there is room for friendly controversy for
many years to come. But I may surely hold that the religion of
the Avesta can be adequately known from the existing translations.
Three of these have lain before me, viz. the recent one in the
F F

434 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
Oxford Z. A. by Darmesteter and Mills, and the earlier ones of
Spiegel (1852-1863) and de Harlez (1881), against even the later of
which (based as it is upon Spiegel) much may be urged, but which
is still if rightly used (with the richer German rendering of Spiegel)
suggestive, and adequate for all but critical students. I quote it
myself for the sake of variety when it does not differ materially from
Mills's version. The only doubt can be, whether the Gathas are
sufficiently well understood to be referred to. Prof. Chantepie de la
Saussaye, a thoroughly well-informed historian, though not a Zend
scholar, states [Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte, ii. 23) that, 'even
after the translation of Mills, it is for the present the wisest course
not to base an investigation of Parsism upon the Gathas, on
account of the uncertainty of the rendering.' If this, be correct, it
will be equally imprudent to use these hymns in illustration of the
Psalter. But to the opinion of this scholar I would oppose that
of a greater authority, also Dutch, Prof. Tiele, who puts his statement
aside as an exaggeration. Some parts of the Gathas are, as he
admits, still very obscure, but entire hymns have been translated
in such a way that the general sense may fairly be regarded as settled
[Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1889, p. 625). Nor does any Zendist think
that the difference between translations prevents our getting a clear
general view of the purport of most of the hymns. The uncertainty
only relates to minute details. I may add that the very passages
which I had marked for quotation in Dr. Mills's volume of the
Oxford Z. A. are for the most part quoted from the original in the
same sense and with a similar object by Dr. Hubschmann (no dilet
tante, but an able specialist) in his important essay in the Jahrbiicher
f. prot. Theologie for 1879. Note *, p. 395.
Much is said of Zarathustra in the Avesta, but legend has for the
most part distorted his historical features, substituting a 'fantastic
demigod' for the 'toiling prophet.' The exception to this is that
part of the Yasna which contains the Gathas (chaps, xxviii. -liii.).
' Let the Zendist study the Gathas well,' says Dr. Mills, ' and then
let him turn to the Yasts or the Vendidad ; he will go from the land
of reality to that of fable.' The observation is just, nor does that
cautious historian, Prof, de la Saussaye, deny that in these songs we
have a faithful and authentic portrait. Thanks to them, we can form
a lively idea of the opposition which Zarathustra's preaching encoun
tered, and of the mighty faith which sustained him under it. Often
the prophet himself is the speaker ; his family name (Spitama) is
mentioned, as well as the names of several of his relations and

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 435
friends. Well may tradition expressly ascribe the Gathas to Zara
thustra. We have next to ask when they were written. To fix the
date of the songs is obviously to fix that of the singer. Shall we
place it in the 14th century b.c with Geldner, or, with cautious
vagueness, between 1500 and 900 b.c with Mills? Or shall we, with
Spiegel, Justi, de Harlez, and Halevy, bring it down to the 8th
century b.c, and suppose a strong Semitic influence on the founder
of Zoroastrianism ? From the point of view of a critical historian of
Israel I must pronounce this to be wildly improbable, and Dr. West
{Journal of Royal Asiatic Soc, April, 1890, pp. 508, 509) has pro
duced a noteworthy argument based on the difference between the
name of God in the Persian cuneiform inscriptions and those used in
the Gathas and in the later Avesta, to show that between Zara
thustra and Darius we must allow a longer period than the Hebrew-
influence hypothesis assumes. 'Thus, in the seventeen hymns of
the Gathas we find Mazda 98 times alone, Ahura 47 times alone,
Mazda Ahura (often separated by intermediate words to suit the
metre) 64 times, and Ahura Mazda (often similarly separated) only
19 times, or ^ of the whole number of occurrences. ... In the
later Avesta we only occasionally find Mazda and Ahura alone, or in
the form Mazda Ahura, because the new form Ahura Mazda greatly
preponderates ; still the two words are always independent and
separately declined. Turning to the Persian cuneiform inscriptions,
we find a further change, as the name of the Supreme Being has
become condensed into the single name Aiiramazda, of which the
former component is indeclinable in about 120 instances. . . There
are (only) two instances in which both components are declined . . .
just sufficient to show that the old form of the name was not yet
quite forgotten.' 'We have to account,' remarks Dr. West, 'for a
change which the Avesta did not venture to make in the course of
three centuries' (the period allowed on the Hebrew-influence
hypothesis for the composition of the Avesta). Dr. Mills's treatment
of the question of date is also well worth considering, though his
exposition is sadly cramped (Introd. to part iii. of Oxford Z.A.).
The interesting result follows — that spiritual prophecy is not peculiar
to the Semites ; Zarathustra was as true and as original a prophet as
Isaiah and Jeremiah. The two latter consciously received a call
from Jehovah ; and so did Zarathustra from the same true God
under his name Ahura [Yasna, xiii.). His special work was the
reformation of the Iranian religion, but he grasped the ideas of his
reform so firmly that we may with almost equal justice call him the
founder of a new religion. There is philological proof that an
organized system of worship had arisen before the separation of the
Indian and Iranian peoples, nor can it be denied that the Indo-

436 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
Iranian religion contained a latent monotheism and an unconscious
dualism.1 The course of thought, however, was different in India
and in Iran. The idea of an all-wise Creator never ripened in India,
and consequently no interest was taken there in the moral problem
of the origin of evil. A similar apathy was doubtless felt in Iran by
the daeva-worshippers whom Zarathustra opposed. The great
Iranian prophet developed, or helped to develope, the germs of a
higher religion in a distinctly moral direction. Darmesteter indeed
holds that Mazdeism pushed this development to an extreme ; but it
is precisely Zarathustra's consistency which entitles him to our
sympathy and admiration. 'His thinking,' remarks Geldner, 'is
conservative, self-restrained, practical, devoid on the whole of all
that might be called fantastic and excessive.' Why a Christian
apologist (Dr. Murray Mitchell) should depreciate the dualism of the
Avesta, I do not understand. Speculatively, it is much stronger2
than the imperfect attempts to grapple with the problem of evil in
the O. T., and ethically the Zarathustrian insistence on the ultimate
triumph of the good principle stands alone for its boldness and
originality. The Gathas enable us to form a lively idea of the
opposition which Zarathustra's preaching had to encounter from. the
daeva-worshippers, and of the mighty faith which sustained him
under it. For further details, I gladly refer the reader to Geldner's
article ' Zoroaster ' in the Encyclopedia Britannica, which is a good
specimen of critical construction vivified by imaginative sympathy.
Note y, p. 395.
Prof, de la Saussaye remarks, 'This religion (Mazdeism) had
risen above the mythological standpoint, but is it on this account
anti-mythological? And if not anti-mythological, must we, with
Darmesteter, regard its doctrines as transformed myths? Both
questions must be answered in the negative ' [Lehrbuch der Religions-
geschichte, ii. 27). This seems substantially correct. It is only when
we look at the two ends of Zoroastrian development, at the Gathas
and. at modern Parsism, that we can say that Mazdeism was anti-
mythological in tendency. Looking at the Avesta apart from the
Gathic hymns, we should hesitate to affirm this. The Gathas
however are anti-mythological in spirit, and in this do they not
remind us of the Psalter ? Mythic forms of expression may some-
1 Oxford Z. A., vol. i., Introd., p. Ivii.
2 See Mills on Yasna, xxx. and xlv. in Oxford Z.A., vol. iii., and cf. West
Pahlavi Texts, vol. i., Introd., p. lxix. It should be mentioned that de Harlez
ascribes Yasna, xxx. and xlv. (xliv.) to 'a poet different from the authors of the
other hymns.' The supposition, however, is unnecessary.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 437
times appear, but that does not prove much. How mythic in sound
are many Christian phrases ! With regard to Darmesteter's view (see
Ormazd et Ahriman, and the Oxford Z. A., part i.) nothing need be
added to what de Harlez and others have said. Probably its gifted
author would now express himself somewhat differently.

Note z, p. 396.
See Darmesteter, Oxford Z.A., part i., p. lxviii., and comp. Spiegel,
Avesta, Bd. ii., p. lxxi. f. ; Eran. Alterthiimer, iii. 570, 578, 590. The
good genii are said to derive strength from the invocation of their
names by men and from 'the offerings of Zaothra (holy water) with
Haoma (the juice of the yellow haoma) and Myazda (cooked flesh); '
see Yast, viii. 1 7 &c. ' Bloody sacrifices are strictly speaking incon
ceivable on the principles of Parsism.' The tongue, and the left eye,
and perhaps the ears, are specified in Yasna, xi. 4 as the parts of
the slaughtered victim which belonged to Haoma. Strabo (xv. 372)
declares that only the soul of the victim belonged to the gods. This
however is inaccurate (cf. Herod, i. 132), but the offering of flesh was
certainly symbolical, as stated in the text. For a clear description of
the parts of the sacrificial service, see de Harlez, Avesta, Introd.,
pp. clxxix., clxxx. With what forms Zarathustra himself sacrificed,
we do not know ; he speaks in the Gathas not as a lawgiver but as a
prophet. That he attached value to sacrifice, is certain ; that the
Gathas themselves as inspired forms of prayer and praise had a
mystic importance in his eyes, is also certain. But he nowhere
sanctions any of the most superstitious ideas respecting sacrifice. It
is a misrepresentation when the later Avesta makes him declare the
Haoma-offering to be the best means of repelling the evil one ;
at least, from Yasna, xlvii. 10 we may infer that Zarathustra opposed
the haoma (or soma) drink of the daeva-worshippers. And if Yasna,
xxxiii. 14 is not by Zarathustra himself, it is all the more valuable as
the record of a school. Note aa, p. 398.
Vend. xix. 27-34; Yast, xxii., cf. Minokhired, ii. 123, 124 [Pah-
lavi Texts, West, ii. 18, 19). The lovely maiden, fifteen years old,
who meets the righteous soul at the end of the third night after
death, can hardly have suggested to Mohammed the idea of the
celestial Huris (Haug). But at any rate, this Zoroastrian allegory
suggested the Talmudic story of the three bands of ministering
angels who meet the soul of the pious man, and the three bands of
wounding angels who meet the bad man when he dies [Ketub 104a).

43S RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.

Note bb, p. 399.
Yasna, xliii. 10, ' Apprends-nous par tes entretiens ce que nous
devons te demander' (de Harlez). Or, 'Ask thou (thyself) our
questions, those which shall be asked by us of thee ' (Mills ; cf. his
commentary). Zarathustra seems, like the psalmists, to avoid giving
scope to the imagination. Nowhere for instance do the Gathas
speak of the Gaokerena tree, or connect the highest of blessings
(immortality) with the drinking of its juice.
Note cc, p. 399.
These words were used in a lower sense afterwards ; cf. Yast, xix.
in fine, Plut., de Iside, 46, 47. But Zarathustra's idea of heaven.
survived in spite of this. Note da, p. 399.
On the Kinvat-bridge, see Vend. xiii. 3, xix. 29 &c, and cf.
Mlndkhired, ii. 123, 124 (a striking description). The term is not
yet a compound in the Gathas, see Yasna, xlv. 10, 1. 13, where Mills
translates ' the Judge's Bridge (lit., ' the bridge of the sorter out ').
We have the same conception in Mohammed's Sirat, and in the
Yorkshireman's ' Brig o' Dread.' Prof. Rhys has pointed out some
Irish parallels [Hibbert Lectures, 1886, pp. 450, 451).
Note ec, p. 400.
For the teaching of Zarathustra see Yasna, xxx. 7-9, xliii. 5. Mills
even thinks that there is a trace of the doctrine of the Resurrection
in the Gathas; In Yasna, xxx. 7 he finds a prayer that ' in the future,
and possibly at the Frashakard, the completion of progress, the
created souls may be restored to a state of sinless happiness, and
provided with bodies, as at the first ' (comp. Yast, xix. 89). But at
any rate Zarathustra did not raise the question, ' With what body do
they come ? ' — nor did he transfer to a hero-prophet (Saoshyant) the
divine act of raising the dead. He may have had a vague con
ception of the revival of bodies, but not a theory. Cf. also de
Harlez, Avesta, Introd., p. clxxxv.
Note ff, p. 400.
In the Gathas, Saoshyanto is a name which indicates ' the apostles
of the law, those who have deserved well of religion ' (de Harlez).
But elsewhere Saoshyant is a hero of the latter days, though we also

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH.

439

find the name in the plural [Yasna, xxiv. 14). See Yast, xiii. 129,
'Whose name will be the victorious Saoshyant, and whose name
will be Astvat-ereta. He will be Saoshyant (the Beneficent One),
because he will benefit the whole bodily world ; he will be Astvat-
ereta (he who makes the bodily creatures rise up), because as a bodily
creature and as a living creature he will stand against the destruction
of the bodily creatures, to withstand the Drug (the Lie-demon) of the
two-footed brood' (Darmesteter). The Bundahis is much more
explicit. In chap, xxx., which probably closed the original work, we
read, ' In the 57 years of Soshyans they prepare all the dead, and all
men stand up ; whoever is righteous and whoever is wicked, every
human creature, they rouse up from the spot where its life departs '
(West's translation). Gaokerena is the Iranian 'tree of life,' a white
haoma plant reckoned among the chief treasures of Ameretat (see
p. 399) ; Yast, ii. 3. It is, so to speak, the I8ea of the earthly haoma
(the Sanskrit soma), used in the sacrifices, which grows on the
mountains ( Yasna, x. 6-10), and has yellow flowers. Note that
Gaokerena is never referred to in the Gathas. Zarathustra would not
attach the highest of blessings to the drinking of this magical juice
(cf. note z, at end). We can, I think, hardly justify the later Avesta
by the analogy of Rev. xxii. 2. The description of which the tree of
life forms a part in Revelation is purely symbolical (as v. 1 7 shows),
and is more in the spirit of the Psalms of Solomon than of the Book
of Enoch (see p. 412), though a still closer parallel is 2 Esdras ii. 12,
cf. viii. 52. Note ee, p. 401.
The two accounts of the lot of the wicked after the resurrection
in Bund. xxx. are as follows. (1) 'Afterwards they set the righteous
man apart from the wicked ; and then the righteous man is for
heaven (garodman), and they cast the wicked back to hell.' (2) 'Then
all men shall pass into that melted metal (of the hills and mountains)
and will become pure. When one is righteous, then it seems to him
as though he walks continually in warm milk ; but when wicked,
then it seems to him in such manner as though, in the world, he
walks continually in melted metal' (West, Pahlavi Texts, i. 124,
126). The second view is presumably the later. We find it again
in the Minokhired, which expressly states that the soul of the wicked
man 'must be in hell until the resurrection and future existence'
(ii. 193), though in another passage the 'destruction and punish
ment of the wicked in hell ' are said to be ' for ever and everlasting '
(xl. 31 ; see however Dr. West's note).

44° RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.

Note hh, p. 401.
Comp. Mills's translation with the more flowing one of de Harlez :
' Afin que nous soyons d'ame sainte, d'esprit heureux ; que nos corps
soient pleins de majesty de I'eclat du monde meilleur ; qu'ils y
viennent, 6 Ahura Mazda, brillant (de I'eclat) de la purete parfaite,
de la purete eminemment belle ; que nous te voyons, que nous par-
venions jusqu'aupres de toi, perpetuellement attaches a toi.' This
passage, though ancient, does not belong to the Gathas.
Note iS, p. 402.
Darmesteter infers from the notices of Zoroastrianism in
Theopompus and elsewhere that dogmatic crystallization had already
taken place by the end of the Achaemenian period. He admits how
ever that the Zoroastrianism of the Avesta' is without a precise
dogmatic form. Note JJ, p. 403.
The Septuagint translator however may have taken a wider view
of Isa. xxvi. 19. He renders, ' ' Kvao-rqcrovTai ol veKpol, Kai eyepOrjcrovTai.
ot iv toIs p.vr)p.eiois. Equally broad is the statement in the Targum
on this passage. Probably however these expressions are not
intended to include non-Israelites (see p. 406).
Note kk, p. 404.
The idea of the supernatural dew is no doubt Palestinian (comp.
Hos. xiv. s«, with Hos. vi. 2). But ' lights ' (rhiK> elsewhere only
2 Kings iv. 39, where it means ' herbs ') reminds us of the Avesta,
where the ' endless lights ' are the highest heaven where Ahura
dwells. Cf. Vend. xix. 118, 119, and cf. Spiegel, Avesta, Bd. iii.,
Einleit, p. xxxix. This Zoroastrian phrase will not however illustrate
the phrase ' father of lights ' in James i. 1 7, on which see the patristic
passages in Suicer, ii. 1480, 1481.
Note n, p. 407.
On this formula, cf. Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman, p. 239.
The term frashokereti means properly the renovation of the world,
but afterwards came to be used of the Resurrection. See the Oxford
Z.A., and cf. de Harlez, Les origines du Zoroastrisme, p. 293, Avesta,
Introd., p. clxxxv.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 441
N0TEmm, p. 407.
' To sleep ' is doubtless a primitive Hebrew phrase for ' to die '
(see Job iii. 13, Ps. xiii. 3, Jer. li. 39, 57, and cf. the use of Koip^divTes
and KeKoipvqp.evoi for the dead in N. T., e.g. Matt, xxvii. 52, Acts vii.
60, 1 Thess. iv. 14, 15). Its more precise shade of meaning depends
on the theological stage of the writer who uses it. It may no doubt
imply a scarcely appreciable degree of consciousness, but when moral
distinctions have been admitted into Hades, it becomes merely a
figure for the state of the soul between the two periods which are
closed respectively by death and by the final judgment, and such
' sleep ' may be accompanied (as ' Enoch ' shows) by great, even
though imperfect, joy or pain. We must not, however, with Canon
Mason, suppose Ps. cxlix. 5 to represent ' the world with all its
political and social forces as helplessly, though unconsciously, en
thralled and swayed by the saints at rest ' ( The Faith of the Gospel,
ed. 1, p. 217). Alas for a doctrine supported by such an exegesis !
Obviously the ' couches ' spoken of by the psalmist are not those of
Hades (as in Isa. Ivii. 2), but either those on which the rejoicing
khasidim reclined at the feast which followed a Maccabaean victory,
or those on which these pious warriors had so often sought in vain
for sleep, and in subdued accents complained to their God. For the
later Jewish views of the ' sleep ' of the departed, see Enoch xxii., and
a remarkable quotation from 4 Ezra in Drummond's Jewish Messiah,
pp. 374-377. A noble Protestant view of the subject is eloquently
expressed by Maclaren, Manchester Sermons (1865), pp. 104-110.
Note nn, p. 409.
The chief reward of righteousness, says Ewald, even in the
earliest part of Proverbs, is ' the divine life, immortality.' ' As among
the Greeks the mysteries encouraged r)Bvo-Tepas iXiriBas,' says Delitzsch,
'so in Israel theKhokma ('Wisdom ') appears pointing the possessor
of wisdom upwards.' Both critics argue from Prov. xv. 24 that Sheol
is in process of becoming Gehenna, and from Prov. xii. 28 that the
faith in a higher life was already so definite that a special word n.)B"^S
'not-death,' 'immortality,' had been compounded to express it.
Accepting this, it would be useless to deny that the phrases in Prov.
ii. 19, v. 6, 'the path (paths) of life' (cf. Prov. x. 17, 'the way of
life '), may at any rate include a reference to life after death, and we
might then compare Ps. xvi. 11. But this is too bold; a mystical
interpretation is not favoured by the contexts. The punishment of
the wicked in Prov. xv, 24 (cf. vii. 27, ix. 18) consists in going
prematurely to what Job calls ' the house of meeting for all living '

442 RISE OF DOCTRINE , OF lect.
(Job xxx. 23). As for the supposed compound, the combination of
7N with a substantive is without a parallel. We might indeed read
nio'jy (cf. Ps. cxxxix. 24), as Aquila may have read in Ps. xlviii. 15
(see Talm. Jer., Moed katon, 83, 2).1 But the els Odvamv of Sept.
undoubtedly gives the better view of the text of Prov. xii. 28 (see
Job and Solomon, p. 123). I will not deny that an account of Paradise
analogous to that in Genesis, with both a tree and a fountain of life,
may have been current when the earliest collection of proverbs was
made (see Prov. x. 11, xi. 30, xiii. 12, 14, xiv. 27, xv. 4, xvi. 22), but
that the ' wise men ' before the Exile based any general theory upon
this tradition, there seems no sufficient reason to suppose. And'
what of the greatest of the ' wise men,' whose horizon had been so
much extended by the experiences of travel, the author of Job?
According to Dr. Gratz, he was acquainted with the new doctrine of
the Resurrection, which he represents Eliphaz and Bildad as adopt
ing, and Job himself as repudiating.2 This again is too bold. All
that can safely be found in Job is the idea of ' a supra-mundane
justice, which will one day pronounce in favour of the righteous
sufferer, not only in this world (xvi. 18, 19, xix. 25, xiii.), so that all
men may recognize his innocence, but also beyond the grave, the
sufferer himself being in some undefined manner brought hack to
life, in the conscious enjoyment of God's favour (xiv. 13-15, and
possibly xix. 26, 27).' 3 This however is an idea which the speaker
caresses, but will not build his faith upon. The famous passage
xix. 26, 27 is too corrupt to justify extracting from it the assured hope
of immortality, which indeed would be in direct contradiction to Job's
own statements in iii. 13-19. Note 00, p. 410.
'AtfavaTos here is probably a paraphrase. It is noteworthy that
in Ecclus. xix. some scribes inserted a passage containing these words
as rendered in the Greek [v. 19), 01 Be iroiovvTes to. dpeo-Ta avTov,
d6avao-ias SevBpov Kapirovvrai, where dOavaaias must surely be a para
phrase of Dv;n 'life.' Note m>, p. 411.
There may also be in parts of Enoch a dash of Essenism. See
p. 449. Note ««, p. 412.
Cf. the inserted passage, Ecclus. xix. 19, already referred to, also
John v. 39 (eternal life in the Scriptures). So too the study of the
1 The Hexaplar Syriac however does not support this Talmudic statement.
' Monatsschrift, 1887, pp. 247-249. 3 Job and Solomon, p. 104.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 443

Law is a surer principle of immortality than the eating of the tree of
life, according to the Targum of Jonathan on Gen. iii. Hellenistic
Jews said the same thing of the practice of the laws of Wisdom
(Wisd. vi. 19). Note rr, p. 414.
But how strange a picture these writers give ! They seem to
imagine a gradual progress of the soul towards beatitude. For even
the final judgment does not bring the righteous man into permanent
bliss. We are told in Enoch xxv. 6 (cf. v. 8, 9) that those who eat
of the tree of life shall (not, live for ever, but) 'live long on the earth.'
This is through the influence of Isa. lxv. 22, which the writer in
Enoch perhaps interprets like the Septuagint and the Targum (notice
the allusion which follows to Isa. lxv. 19). The eternal state, then,,
is still in the future. Note eB, p. 414.
See Justin Martyr, Apol. ii. 2, 6 Be Kai x"P'v dSevai wp.oX6yei,
7rov7]puiV 8eo~7TOT<j>v Tuiv ToiovTOiv dirrjjXXd-^6 ai yiv<vo~K<nv Kai Trpos tov
iraTepa Kai Bao-iXea tuiv oipavuiv TropeveaOai. And for the Other part
of his view, see Dial. c. Tryph., cc. 5, 80.

Note u, p. 414.
Comp. this writer's vvv with the dirdpTi of Rev. xiv. 13. In
4 Mace. xiii. 14 we have a parallel to Luke xvi. 22 (Abraham's
bosom). Nothing that the author says excludes the resurrection
belief ; he speaks as of a privilege of martyrs. But nothing that he
says directly assumes it. Note uu, p. 415.
Rev. xiii. 6. Prof. Spitta has made it clear [Die Offenbarung des
fohannes, 1889, pp. 298,372), that tovs iv tu> oipavw o-K-qvovvTas is an
editorial insertion — a gloss upon ttjv o-Krjvr)v avrov. For the editor
the o-Ktjvri is not the earthly but the heavenly temple, and those who
dwell in it are the martyrs. This however conflicts with the intention
of the minor apocalypse to which (Revelation like Enoch being
composite) Rev. xiii. in the main belongs, and implies a different
eschatological conception from that of the writer of Rev. vi. 9-1 1,
in which (cf. Rev. vii. 9) the souls of the martyred righteous are
under the altar of the earthly temple in one of those ' storehouses '
of which 2 Esdras iv. 41 speaks. That the 'dwellers in heaven' in
Rev. xiii. 6 are the martyrs is clear from Rev. vii. 15, which the

444 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
writer must have had in his mind; cf. also Rev. xii. ir, 12. In
Heb. xii. 23 there may also be a reference to the martyrs of the
Neronian persecution. So at least Renan thinks, but the phrase
BUaioi TereXeiup-evoi may equally well be interpreted like p^V
"WD! 'perfectly righteous,' Kidduschin, 40b (Wunsche, Der bab.
Talmud, ii. 107). Psychologically such reverence for the martyrs is
very intelligible (cf. Isa. xxvi. 19, Dan. xii. 2, 3). But we must not
force allusions to it. Martyrdom may have been in St. Paul's mind
when he wrote Phil. i. 23, but hardly when he wrote 2 Cor. v. 1-10.
' Witness-bearing ' was surely the principal thing.

Note vv, p. 416.
The date of the Targum on the Psalms in its present form is
fixed by its paraphrase of Ps. cviii. n, which explains the 'fenced
city' of 'Rome the wicked,' and 'Edom' of 'Kostantina' (Con
stantinople). The writer lived, therefore, it would seem, before
a.d. 476. The peculiarities of this Targum are the same as those of
the Targum on Job; note 'JWX, dyyeXos (elsewhere only in Targum
sheni on Esther). See Bacher's studies on these Targums, Gratz's
Monatsschrift, 1871, p. 208 &c. (Job); 1872, pp. 408 &c, 463 &c.
(Psalms). Note ww, p. 416.
See e.g. the Targum on Ps. xviii. 29, xlix. 10 &c, 1. 10, lvi. 14,
lxiii. 4, 5, xc. 16, ci. 6, for the recompense of the righteous ; and on
Ps. xlix. 15, 1. 21, lxviii. 15, lxxxiv. 7, cxxv. 5, cxi. 11, for the torments
of the wicked. Is the Targumist altogether wrong in his general
view of Ps. xlix. 15? It need hardly be added that ' life ' is often
interpreted as ' everlasting life ' (a phrase which first occurs in Dan.
xii. 2) ; see Targ. on Pss. xvii. 14, xxi. 5, xxx. 6, Ixvi. 9. Similarly
at Ps. lxi. 7, ' generation and generation ' becomes ' the generations of
this and of the coming age.' Oddly but characteristically in Ps. Ixxxix.
49 ' death ' is paraphrased ' the angel of death.' The dogmatizing
exegesis of this Targum may be contrasted with the faithfulness of
the Septuagint version. Once, in the heading of Ps. lxv. (Ixvi.), it
speaks unnecessarily of the resurrection ; interpreting the ' refresh
ment' [dvaxj/vxr]) of zi. 12 eschatologically. Also at the end of Ps.
xvii. its rendering of "|ri31Dn, rrjv Botjav o-ov seems designed to exclude
a figurative vision of God in the present life. Notice too the nume
rous references to a future life and retribution in the Targum on
Koheleth, designe*d, as it would seem, to neutralize the effect of
Koheleth's pessimistic tendency.

JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 445

Note xx, p. 417.
We may infer this partly from Mark xii. 26 (Matt. xxii. 31, 32),
and its Talmudic parallel (see p. 383, note •), partly from the fact
that the author of 1 Maccabees refers (1 Mace. ii. 59, 60) to the
stories but not to the predictions in the Book of Daniel, the
angelology and eschatology of which were uncongenial to him.
NoTEy-v, p. 417.
It is incredible that the Stoic idea of elp.app.evri was current in any
Jewish school ; even Ecclesiastes does not contain it.
Note zz, p. 418.
The criticism of the accounts of the Essenes in Josephus has
passed into a new phase owing to the researches of Lucius and Ohle,
especially the latter.' Both these critics agree that the treatise
De Vita Contemplativd (a glorification of ' the 'Eo-crmot or ®epawevTai),
which passes as Philo's is spurious, and Ohle thinks moreover that
sections 12 and 13 of Philo's Quod omnis probus liber, which relate
to the Essenes, were interpolated by the same hand which had already
fabricated the former treatise. As to Josephus, very little indeed is
left by this ' vexatious scrutiny ' (to use a phrase of De Quincey's).
Accepting Zeller's view of the essentially neo-Pythagorean character
of the Essenes of Philo and Josephus, Ohle undertakes to show that
the accounts of Essenism in War, ii. 8 and Ant. xviii. 1 are also
spurious. Nothing is left in Josephus but a few scattered notices of
a very simple Essenism, which may be naturally viewed as a develop
ment of Pharisaean piety. Its professors may have formed an n"lj;
nE>np, like that of which Simon ben Menasya was president, and which
devoted one third of the day to the Torah, another to prayer, and
another to manual labour (Bacher, Die Agada der Tannaiten, ii. 489).
Frankel's view, which is rather peremptorily rejected by our lamented
Lightfoot, is therefore substantially correct ; Essenism is an indi-
1 Ohle, ' Die Essener : eine krit. Untersuchung der Angaben des Josephus,'
in Jahrbiicher f prot. Theol., Band xiv. (1888). See also his Beitrdge zur
Kirchengeschichte, Die pseudophilonischen Essder und die Therapeuten (1888) ;
and cf. Lucius, Die Therapettten und ihre Stellung in der Gesch. der Askese
(1880), and his Der Essenismus in seinem Verhdltniss zum Judenthum (1881),
and cf. Schiirer's and Harnack's reviews of these books in the Theol. Lit.zeitung.
Mr. Morrison duly refers to these books at the end of his excellent chapter on
the Essenes in The Jews under Roman Rule (1890). Schiirer's final opinion will
doubtless be given later. Jewish scholars do not seem as yet to have taken notice
of Ohle.

446 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.
genous product, an exaggerated Pharisaism. And if we ask what
was the object of the fabricator and the interpolator whom Ohle
claims to have brought to light, we learn that it was to promote the
interests of a Christian sect or society (De Quincey then was not
wholly wrong), strongly influenced by neo-Pythagoreanism.
All this is very plausible. It explains why there is no distinct
reference to such a striking organization as that of the supposed
Essenes either in the Gospels or in the Talmuds ; it is in harmony
with the fact that a neo-Pythagorean current became stronger and
stronger from Cicero's time onwards, not less than with Zeller's
weighty judgment that the accounts of the Essenes have a neo-
Pythagorean colour. Still I hesitate to accept such a radical criticism
as Ohle's. There is much in Josephus's account of the Essenes
which altogether tallies with our previous expectations, and can be
explained either from native Jewish or from Zoroastrian beliefs.
Josephus may have believed that there was some historical connexion
between Pythagoras and the Essenes [Ant. xv. 10, 4), just as Diodorus
Siculus states (v. 28) that 6 HvOayopov Xoyos prevailed among the
Gauls, and Clement of Alexandria professes to know that Pindar was
a Pythagorean.1 This was perfectly natural for such a philhellenic
writer as Josephus, but it is somewhat less obvious for us. Why
should we refer a theory reported to have been current in Judaea to
Pythagoras or to Plato when this philosopher himself most likely
borrowed it from the East ? Celibacy for instance, which the treatise
Quod omnis probus liber wrongly ascribed to Philo, but not Josephus,
states to have been the Essenian rule,2 and which may perhaps have
been neo-Pythagorean, is certainly not congenial to the Greek nature.
True, it is not congenial to Judaism either ; ' marriage is honourable
in all men ' (Heb. xiii. 4) was a sentence which found an echo in all
Jewish hearts. Still it was a Jewish idea that connubial intercourse
was inconsistent with ceremonial purity (see Ex. xix. 15, 1 Sam. xxi.
4, 5, and cf. 1 Cor. vii. 5, Enoch lxxxiii, 2 3) ; a little extremism among
some of the Essenes and exaggeration in Josephus will account for
the representations of the latter. Remember, too, that Zoroastrianism,
though it has no favour for celibacy, represents the procreation of
children as ceasing in the coming golden age.
1 Strom, lib. v., p. 598B (ed. 1641).
2 Philo, Opera, Mangey, ii. 633, 634 ; cf. Jos., War, ii. 8, 9. The statement
in Jos. l.c. that the Essenes ' neglect wedlock ' is qualified by what is said in § 13.
Remember too that the founder of the Elcesaite sect, who represents perhaps an
Essenian Judseo-Christianity, is said to have ' compelled marriage ' (Epiphanius,
ed. Oehler, i. 96).
* This passage of Enoch is important because it relates to the conditions of
mystic revelations such as were well known among the Essenes.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 447
And above all, the Essenian belief respecting the soul, though it
may look neo-Pythagorean, can be adequately explained without the
help of Zoroaster's pupil, as Clement of Alexandria calls him, Pytha
goras.1 The amount of reference to Greek mythology is striking,
but is of no great significance. The history of the Jewish war was
originally written in Hebrew, and Epaphroditus or some other literary
friend must have assisted Josephus in the work of translation.2 To
him may be due these excursions into such a very unphilosophical
region. It is noteworthy that one of the most characteristic Pytha
gorean doctrines — that of transmigration of souls — is perhaps (see
p. 417) ascribed in Josephus, not to the Essenes, but to the Pharisees.
Lightfoot in his Colossians and Hilgenfeld in his Ketzergeschichte
have argued very ably for a partly Zoroastrian origin of Essenism,
and yet I doubt whether all that the former ascribes to Zoroastrianism
is really Essenian. For instance, was there ever such a thing as
' Essene worship of the sun ' ? Our Josephus states, it is true, that
before sunrise the Essenes utter nothing of a profane character, but
only TtaTpiovs Tivds els avTov (sc. t6v rjXiov) ei)(ds, tao-xep iKerevovTes
dvaTeiXai [ War, ii. 8, 5). This Lightfoot compares with another
passage in the same chapter, which describes how the Essenes care
fully buried polluting substances, ws pit] tols avyas vBpit,oiev tov deov
(§ 9). I admit that by tov 6eov the sun-god is meant, and I will add
that 'iKeTevovTes dvaTelXai vividly expresses the mythic sentiment of
the constantly repeated conflicts between light and darkness, in which
human prayers can aid.3 But surely Lightfoot, who has thoroughly
proved this to be the meaning of the phrase, takes both this and
the other passage too literally. If it is ' vain to speculate ' as to the
original Hebrew of the two passages quoted from the Jewish War,
it is certainly unfair to make Josephus responsible for every detail of
Greek phraseology in the translation (which is probably something
more than a translation). It seems impossible that any genuinely
Jewish sect should have offered worship to the sun even without the
Magian rite referred to in Ezek. viii. 1 7b, or that if it did so there
should be no indignant reference to this in the Gospels and the
Clement of Alexandria describes both Pythagoras and Plato as to ir\er<rTa
xal yevvaiiTtna. tuv Soy/iarai/ ev Pap$dpoiS fj.a86vTas (Strom, i. p. 303c), and
elsewhere reports the tradition that Pythagoras explained the teaching of ' Zoro
aster the Magian, the Persian ' (Strom, i. p. 304B). In accordance with this
view he turns Er, the hero of Plato's famous myth in the Republic (Book x. ), into
Zoroaster. Other writers confound Zoroaster with a Chaldaean wise man, the
instructor of Pythagoras (so e.g. Iamblichus, Vit. Pythag., u. 19). Is it possible
that there is no kernel of truth in these legendary stories, as Zeller would have us
believe ? Orientalists will certainly not think so.
2 See Jos., Ant., Pref. 2.
• See Rhys, Hibbert Lectures (1866), pp. 295, 296.

448 RISE OF DOCTRINE OF LECT.
Talmud. It is useless to quote later heretical sects (see Epiphanius
quoted by Hilgenfeld); we are speaking now of one of the three
recognized Jewish schools. I do not however deny that the Essenes
may have had a custom which was to a certain extent of Zoroas
trian origin. It was a custom which they shared with other Jews,
but had adopted with special zest — I mean that of saying the first
prayer at daybreak (before the sun shone forth, Talm. Jer., Bera
choth, i. 2). No one, I think, who reads the blessing "ON "W1 will fail
to see that it has a reference, partly polemical, to Zoroastrianism ; now
it was this blessing and the Sh'ma which had to be recited at dawn
(see p. 283) Ordinary Jews, though well aware of this religious
duty (see Ps. v. 4, Wisd. xvi. 28), would not be very precise in its
performance (see the curious licence granted to royal princes and the
like in Berachoth, I. c). But the Essenes, from their habits of early
labour, and perhaps (cf. Enoch lxxxiii. n) from having been in
structed in the symbolism of the dawn (see below), would be strict
observers of the custom. It would seem as if Josephus's assistant or
editor turned this innocent practice, which may have been accom
panied by an uplifting of the hands (cf. Ps. xxviii. 2) towards the
first streaks of light, into an act of worship which was doubtless
common in the east as it is said still to be in India. The biographer
of Akbar tells us how his hero ' has been called a Zoroastrian, because
he recognized in the sun the sign of the presence of the Almighty,'
and we all know how in Tertullian's time a familiar Christian custom
received an equally gross misinterpretation.1
There remains of course the possibility that this and some other
details are merely the romantic inventions of an interpolator. This
will have attractions for some readers, but I would warn them not to
carry the hypothesis too far. An interpolator would hardly have
been so bold if there had not been some point d'appui in the genuine
Josephus. Indeed, we want the Essenes to account both for certain
phenomena of the later sects, and also for some parts of the Book of
Enoch and the Book of Jubilees. For the sects, I may refer to
Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzergeschichte des Urchristenthums ; for the Book
of Jubilees to Ronsch's treatise, p. 428. In the Book of Enoch I
may mention passages like chaps, vi. (list of angels), lxix. (list of
angels again,, and a singular passage against written legal declara
tions), lxxxiii. (notice 1, celibacy in connexion with prophecy, and 2,
how Enoch praises the 'Lord of judgment' at the sight of the rising
sun, alluding to the symbolical meaning of the dawn, viz. the great
final judgment, which had probably something to do with the so-
called ' sun-worship ' of the Essenes), xcviii. (repugnance to orna-
1 Malleson, Akbar, p. 163 ; Tylor, Primitive Culture, ii. 387.

viii. JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 449

ments and to places of worldly dignity), and above all cviii. (love of
apocalyptic prophecy, asceticism, Zoroastrianizing phraseology). I
have not quoted Ixxxix. 73, though it certainly points in an Essenian
direction, for a reason indicated already (p. 375). My list of Essenian
or semi-Essenian passages is a cautiously brief one ; Oscar Holtz-
mann, I see, still holds that Essenian passages may be found in
what is generally considered the oldest part of the Book of Enoch
[Theol. Lit.ztg., Oct. 4, 1890, col. 497). Would it not be better to
say, Essenian in tendency? Tideman [Theol. Tifdschrift, 1875,
p. 261 &c.) actually ascribes the whole cf chaps, lxxxiii.-xci. to an
Essene. I cannot myself be so positive. But the small esteem in
which Enoch was held by the later Jews (see Drummond, The Jewish
Messiah, p. 72) seems to suggest that this book was felt to contain
something out of the line of normal Jewish thought. I presume that
Dillmann may be followed in regarding the Ethiopic version, though
not made from the original, as for most purposes sufficiently accurate.
Note aaa, p. 418.
Jos., War, ii. 8, 11. Observe that Enoch too (xxii. 1) places-
Hades beyond the ocean in the west.
Note bbb, p. 419.
The Pharisaic and Essenian belief in the judgment may help to-
account for the ready acceptance of the custom of praying at dawn.
Note occ, p. 420.
This idea is due to Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzergeschichte des Urchris-
tenthums, pp. 146, 147. Very various accounts are given of the
fravashis (or, in the Pahlavi Texts, fravahars). In the later Zoroas
trian theology the soul alone seems to be responsible for the man's
actions, and to be rewarded or punished accordingly. But in the
Avesta (except in the Gathas, where the fravashis are not mentioned)
the ' souls ' and die ' fravashis ' are often evidently identified (see e.g.
the passage from the Yasna cited above), and in Bundahis, ii. 9, 10
it is distinctly implied that assuming a body rendered the fravahars
liable to death. The Bundahis is considered by Dr. West to be a
translation or epitome of one of the twenty-one ancient Zoroastrian
Scriptures ; it would be hypercritical to reject a statement in such
perfect harmony with the idealizing, personifying spirit of Mazdeism.
That the fravashis originally meant the spirits of the dead (Lat. manes),
is certain ; but that this conception early mingled with another—
that of the heavenly prototypes of all beings of the good creation,
G G

4So RISE OF DOCTRINE OF lect.

which were objectified and regarded as the Sabioth or 'heavenly
hosts ' were by the Jews (see p. 282), is equally certain. The con-
¦ ception of prototypes seems to be of Sumero-Accadian origin ; ' my
god,' or 'my goddess' in the Babylonian penitential psalms, is to be
understood of a guardian spirit, equivalent to the worshipper's 'better
self,' or, in other words, of a ' ffavashi ' (Tiele, Bab. ass. Geschichte,
p. 554; cf. Ragozin, Media, in 'Story of the Nations'). On this
. subject see further de Harlez, Avesta, Introd., p. cxix. &c. ; Mills,
Oxford Z. A. iii. 279 ; Casartelli, Philosophy of the Mazdayasnian
Religion under the Sassaihids, p. 137, &c; and cf. Spiegel, Eran.
Alterthumskunde, ii. 93, Geldner, Kuhn's Zeitschr., 1881, p. 522, &c.
Note add, p. 421.
Among the things which the Talmud describes as created before
the world was, i.e. as pre-existent in the divine plan, are the Law
{cf p. 358), the throne of glory, the sanctuary, the patriarchs, Israel,
he Messiah, and repentance. So Tanchuma, Nissa, 1 1, cf. Taanith,
5a, Baba bathra, 75a, on the heavenly Jerusalem (cf. p. 274).
Note eee, p. 421.
Die religiose Poesie der Juden in Spanien, pp. 135-137 (see Hebrew
text at end of volume). The ' treasury ' spoken of is the storehouse
¦of souls («l-ia, see Yebamoth, 62a) finely described in Daniel Deronda,
¦chap, xliii. On the doctrine of pre-existence of souls, cf. Julius
Miiller, The Christian Doctrine of Sin, ii. 76-78, Delitzsch, Biblical
Psychology, p. 44. Some have tried, but in vain, to find an allusion
to the doctrine in Ps. cxxxix. 15. That it appears full-blown in
Wisd. viii. 20 (cf. Farrar's note), and in Philo (cf. Drummond, Philo
Judceus, i. 336-339)— both products of Hellenistic Judaism— is
undeniable. Note fff, p. 424.
St. Paul's use of the words o-Kevos and o-ktjvos for the body, does
not prove him to be a Hellenist ; a strict Palestinian Jew might have
used the same figures. His idea of the future state reminds us rather
of the oldest writer in ' Enoch ' than of the Book of Wisdom. Nor
is there perhaps more than a superficial resemblance between Rom.
vii. 24 and Plato's words in the Phcedo compared by Clement of Alex
andria [Strom, iii. p. 433A). [But cf. Pfleiderer, Urchristenthum, p. 2 99. J
Note ssk, p. 425.
See Gratz, Kohelet ; and cf. Band iii. of his Geschichte.
I think it fair to add some sentences from M. Montet's essay in

viii JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. 451
vol. ix. of the Revue de F histoire des religions (1884) : — 'Apres des
siecles d'une douloureuse experience, je veux dire apres avoir constate
les profonds deficits de la religion, apres avoir exprime' par la voix
de ses penseurs I'angoisse qu'il en ressentait, Israel se trouve en
contact avec deux civilisations, dont l'une lui apporte l'ide'e de la
resurrection des corps, et l'autre celle de l'immortalite' de Tame.
Voila les secrets besoins de son cceur satisfaits. Repoussera-t-il les
solutions qu'on lui propose, parce qu'elles lui viennent de l'&ranger ?
Non ; le besoin de croire l'emportera sur le besoin de hair.'
* Arrivd par les influences e"trangeres qu'il a subies, par l'ide'e maz-
de"enne de la resurrection des corps et la notion grecque de l'immor
talite de l'ame, a la conviction qu'il vivra au dela. le la tombe, il
pense, comme il est chair et qu'a la mort son corps cessera de vivre,
que c'est sa chair qui revivra, que c'est son corps qui ressuscitera.
Ainsi, lorsqu'on lui dit que la vie est £ternelle, il pense au sang qui
renferme cette vie, et qui, comme elle, ne perira point. L'immortalite
•de Fame, a son point de vue, c'est done la revivification du sang, c'est
la resurrection du corps.'
M. Montet apparently held in 1884 that the germs of a belief in
the resurrection deposited in Israel by Persia had to be fertilized by
a doctrine derived from another civilization, viz. that of the immor
tality of the soul, derived from Alexandria. But in 1890, in defer
ence, it would seem, to M. de Harlez, and in opposition not less to
Spiegel than to Geldner, he pronounces the antiquity of the resurrec
tion-doctrine in Zoroastrianism as yet unproven. ' As to the resurrec
tion of the body,' he says, ' it is, if we may so express it, a Greek
thought in Judaic garb  The dogma of the immortality of
the soul is founded on a dualism — the absolute distinction between
the body and the soul — which is quite foreign to the anthropology of
the Semitic races. Plato, and after him Platonic Judaism, conceived
the soul as an immaterial principle, locked up within the body, and
liberated from its prison by the destruction of its mortal envelope.1
The persistence of life, and its unlimited duration, could therefore
only present itself to their minds in the form of the immortality of
the immaterial principle in the human person. But the soul was
inseparable from the body, to the Jew opposed to Hellenism ; for,
though subject in spite of himself — say, unwittingly — to the emanci
pating and liberal action of the Greek philosophy, he retained with
all the force of his will and of his narrow patriotism as much as he
could of the spiritual inheritance of his ancestors. Like the Hebrew
(? as a Hebrew), he believed in the unity of the human being and in
1 Against the view that the notion, common to Philo and Bardesanes, of the
body as the grave of the soul is necessarily derived from Greek speculation, see
Gruppe, Griechische Mythen, i. 664.

452 JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. lect. viii..
the materiality of his soul ; he was convinced of the truth of the
formula of the torah, " The soul of the flesh is in the blood " (Lev.
xvii. ii), "The blood is the soul" (Deut. xii. 23). It is evident that
with such an anthropological conception there could be no question
of the immortality of the soul, except as a resurrection of the entire
individuality, body and soul  Thus the trust in a life to come,
loudly asserted by Greek philosophy, became popular in Israel in
two different but closely related forms, that of the immortality of the
soul, and that of the resurrection of the body ' [Asiatic Quarterly
Review, Oct. 1890, pp. 337, 338). Over against these statements, so*
far as they relate to Greek influence on Palestine, I would place a
sentence from M. Halevy, with whom I am glad to be sometimes
in agreement : — ' Les juifs d'Alexandrie, ne pouvant songer a.
vaincre le paganisme par la force, entreprennent une espece de tran
saction avec l'esprit grec, mais avec l'arriere-pense'e de l'absorber
entierement un jour ; en Palestine personne ne pensa a. transiger : on
£tait ou franchement grec, ou franchement juif Melanges d'epi-
graphie et d'archeologie semitiques (1874), p. 154.
Note hhh, p. 425.
See Preface, p. xxxii. We must remember, too, with regard n>
Hellenistic literature, that the Judaism carried to Egypt under the
early Ptolemies had, according to my theory, been already in some
degree Zoroastrianized. No wonder if there are some traces of
Zoroastrianism in the works of Philo (Siegfried, Philo von Alex-
andrien, p. 141).

APPENDICES.

APPENDIX I.
LAST WORDS ON MACCABAEAN PSALMS AND OTHER:
POINTS.
I. It will be convenient to chronicle here the results of some-
former writers, and then to sum up my own.
The 17 Maccabaean psalms admitted by Theodore are these, —
xliv., xlvii., lv.-lx., Ixii., lxix., lxxiv., lxxix., Ixxx., lxxxiii., cviii., cix.r
cxliv. Rudinger (Melancthon's former colleague) selects these twenty-
four — xliv., xlix., Ivii., Ix., cviii., Ixvi., lxviii., lxxvi., Ixxiii., lxxiv., lxxix.,,
lxxvii., Ixxx., lxxxviii., Ixxxix., xc, cxix., cxx., cxxi., cxxiii., cxxv., cxxix.,
cxxx., cxxxiv. (he leaves it open with regard to xxvi. and xxviii.). Calvin
admits that Pss. xliv. and lxxiv., Vitringa that not only Pss. lxxiv. and
lxxix. but also lxxv., Ixxx., and Ixxxix. are Maccabaean (see Vitringai
on Isa. xxiv.). Let us pass to the too brilliant but keen-eyed Hitzig.
In his first work on the Psalter (1835-36) he lays down that from
Ps. Ixxiii. onwards all the psalms belong to the Maccabaean age. In
his second (1863-65) he explains that some psalms in Book III.
come from the years which preceded the insurrection, and several ini
Book V. from the times of John Hyrcanus, Aristobulus, and Alex
ander Jannaeus. Olshausen goes even further, and refers most of the
psalms even in the earlier books to the Syrian or Maccabaean period
(the latest belonging to the reign of John Hyrcanus).
It were unfair not to add a reference to two of our oldest living
scholars — Reuss and Gratz. The former, who, veteran as he is, has:
this year published a second edition of his Gesch. der heil. Schrif-
ten des A. T., mentions these as Maccabaean psalms, — xliv., liv.—
lvi., lix., Ix., Ixii., Ixiv., lxxi., lxxiv., lxxv. -lxxvii., lxxix., lxxxiii.,
lxxxvi., lxxxviii.-xc, xciv., xcvi.-cii., cxv., cxvi., cxviii., cxxxii.,.
cxxxviii., cxi., cxiii., cxliii., cxliv., cxlviii., cxlix. Gratz in his com
mentary (1882-83) gives the following, — xxx., xliv., lxxiv., lxxxiii.,,
cxv.-cxviii., cxliv., cxlviii.-cl. Post- Maccabaean are, cxxxiv.-cxxxvi.,.
(cf. Psalmen, Einleit, pp. 48-50). Pre-Maccabaean, but Greek, i.,
cxix., cxi., cxli., cxlv. ?
The psalms which I have myself ventured to regard as Macca
baean are these, — xx., xxi., xxxiii., xliv., Ix., lxi., lxiii., lxxiv., lxxix..

456 LAST WORDS ON MACCABAEAN app.
lxxxiii., ci., cviii., cxv.-cxviii., cxxxv.-cxxxviii., cxlv. -cxlvii. ? cxlviii.-
cl. Those which I have referred to the pre-Maccabaean Greek
period are, xvi. ? xiii. and xliii., xlv., lxviii., Ixxii., Ixxiii. ? lxxxvi.
Ixxxvii., cxix., cxxxix. ? cxi. -cxliii. ? cxliv.
The importance of our controversy consists in this. We have
but one first-class authority for the Maccabaean period,1 and if we
can add to this at least twenty-seven contemporary psalms, our
picture of the times will gain greatly in human and religious interest.
I indulge the hope that we may do so, and that Schiirer, in re-editing
his survey of the later Jewish literature of Palestine, will be able to
include more than the four psalms (viz. xliv., lxxiv., lxxix., and lxxxiii.)
on which, when he first wrote, there was ' already a wide-spread con
sensus.' In the scanty space which remains I wish to examine the
external evidence which some have pronounced to make the theory
of Maccabaean psalms impossible, and to meet certain objections
drawn from the Septuagint Psalter.
i. As to the alleged evidence of the Apocrypha, the real or sup
posed points of contact between which and the Psalter have been
collected by Ehrt [Abfassungszeit, &c, pp. 121-132). From the paral
lelisms in Baruch this writer concludes that the Hebrew Psalter,
including Ps. cxvi. (cf. Bar. iv. 20b with Ps. cxvi. 2b) was already in
the hands of the writer (or writers) of Baruch, who lived ' at the close
of the Persian rule,' and from those in Ecclesiasticus that the Hebrew
Psalter, including Pss. xxxiii., cxv., cxi., cxli., was known to the original
writer of the book (i.e. either in 193 or in 173 b.c), and the Greek to
his grandson the translator (i.e. soon after 132 B.C.).2 It is however
in general difficult to show that any particular psalm is referred to,
and Ehrt's list requires sifting. Ecclus. xxii. 27 does perhaps allude
to Ps. cxli. 3, though not to the Sept. version, and this suggests
placing Ps. cxli. before the Maccabaean revolt (cf. p. 66). I am not
convinced, however, that Ecclus. xv. 19 is dependent on Ps. xxxiii. 18.
The phrase ' His eyes are upon them that fear him ' is not at all
original ; the idea is already found in Prov. xv. 3, xxii. 12. Of course
clear allusions to pre-Maccabaean psalms would not surprise me,
but I can only succeed in finding one (or, at most, three ; see note °,
p. 128) in Ecclus. i.-l. ; in li. 1-12 (an artificial psalm ; see p. 127)
there are two. I cannot enter here into the date of Ecclesiasticus
and Baruch. Inadequate as Gifford's treatment of the Book of
Baruch is (Wace's Apocrypha, ii. 251), it is more critical than Ehrt's,
but the latter holds a safer view than Edersheim's [ibid. p. 9) on the
date of Sirach. Nor will I discuss the ' external evidence ' adduced
1 On the obscure Talmudic passages, see Derenbourg, Histoire, pp. 56-59.
2 Against the argument based upon Ecclesiasticus, cf. Frankel, Vorstudien
¦zu der Septuaginta, p. 22 note, Gratz, Psalmen, i. 47.

i. PSALMS AND OTHER POINTS. 457
iby Ehrt from 1 Maccabees, for why should one deny that the
.author of 1 Maccabees can have read the complete Hebrew, and the
translator the complete Greek Psalter? See above, p. 58, note h ;
p. 93, note 2 ; p. 104, note ".
2. As to the argument from 1 Chron. xvi. 36a, which forms part
of the cento of psalm-passages in 1 Chron. xvi. 8-36^:. It is urged
¦by Ewald and others that since v. 36a (=Ps. cvi. 48) is the closing
doxology of Book IV., the fivefold division of the Psalter had already
^been made in the time of the Chronicler, after which no fresh psalms
were added to the collection. But [a) it is not certain that any part
•of Ps. cvi. is quoted in 1 Chron. xvi. ; vv. 34-360; consist of liturgical
formulae, which were no more composed solely for use in Ps. cvi. than
the doxology attached to the Lord's Prayer was originally formulated
¦solely to occupy its present position.1 It is highly probable that a
• doxology was uttered by the congregation at the close of every psalm
used in the temple service,2 and there is no reason why not only the
¦doxology in v. 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, [b) Even were it otherwise, we are
Abound to admit that Simon the Maccabee, as high priest, had power
to deal as he thought best with the provisionally closed temple
hymn-book. 3. The Canon of the Hagiographa (k'thubhim), it is said, was
definitively closed in the time of Nehemiah. In 2 Mace. ii. 13 a tradi
tion is quoted from the ' records ' and from the 'memoirs of Nehemiah '
to the effect that Nehemiah, when founding a library, brought
together in it the books concerning the kings and prophets, and the
works of David (to tov AaBiB). Well, it is possible that the patriotic
.governor, in imitation of the Persian kings, and perhaps remembering
Hezekiah (Prov. xxv. 1), founded a library, in which he placed such
historical and religious documents as he could find. We do not
know that he did so ; the author of 2 Maccabees was most probably
taken in by a mere forgery.3 But in any case Nehemiah did not
thereby ' close the Hebrew Canon,' which was still open in the time
¦of Sirach,4 and some parts of which were still the subject of dis
cussion at the close of the first century a.d. I shall hardly be
1 See Taylor, The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, p. 116.
2 See my commentary, Introd., p. xv., and cf. Gratz, Monatsschrift, 1872,
pp. 482-496.
3 See above, p. 12, and cf. Rawlinson, Speaker's Comm. on the Apocrypha,
ii. 116. 4 This is Dillmann's inference from the Prologue to Sirach. In the book of
Sirach itself, however, he can find no testimony to the Psalter, Proverbs, and
-Chronicles.

45-8 LAST WORDS ON MACCABAEAN app..
expected to discuss seriously the tradition reported by Origen and
Hilary,1 which ascribes the collection and arrangement of the psalms
to Ezra ; for this is simply based upon the fable in 2 (4) Esdras xiv.,
37-5°- More important are the objections drawn from the Septuagint
version of the Psalms. It is asked, 1. How are we to account for
the fact that none of the psalms are ascribed in this version to the
age of the Maccabees ? But of course the Egyptian Jewish com
munity received no information on the subject of Maccabaean psalms.
It was not the interest of the Jerusalem editors to publish the recent
origin of a portion of the psalms. The title of Ps. ex., for instance,
shows that the psalm was regarded as worthy of having been written
in the Davidic age. One thing the Egyptian Jewish translators do
assert, viz. that psalms continued to be composed in the period of
the second temple. They do this by ascribing certain psalms
(exxxviii., cxlvi.-cxlviii.) to Haggai and Zechariah, who, as in the
Talmud (with Malachi), are symbolic representatives of the earlier
period to which they belong.
2. Another Septuagint difficulty is this. How comes it that the
Alexandrine translator (on whose date see pp. 1 2, 83) misunderstands
both headings of and phrases in several of those psalms which (accor
ding to the hypothesis) belong to the Greek age ? Instances of the
former case occur in Pss. xvi. and lvi.-lx., and of the latter in Ps. ex.
Similar objections may be raised to any historical hypothesis, how
ever probable, and thoroughly decisive answers must be wanting.
until some private journal of the actors of history is discovered. I
do not myself feel the objections to be important. As for the titles,
the Jewish scribes themselves may have forgotten their meaning at
the time when the temple with its music was reorganized and the
Psalter re-edited by Simon (see pp. 9, 11). Nor has it been proved
that the complete Greek Psalter was in existence much before the-
Christian era (see p. 12). And as for the mistaken sense of some
passages, how hard it must have been to read Hebrew with accuracy
before the square character became general ! How incorrectly, as
it would seem, even Ben Sira rendered many passages of his own
grandfather's work into Greek ! Can we be surprised, then, at the
occasional ill success of the translator of the psalms, even when he-
was perhaps a contemporary of some of the psalmists ?
Three monographs on Maccabaean psalms may in conclusion be
mentioned. De Jong, Disquisitio de Psalmis Maccabaicis (Lugd. Bat.
1857). Ehrt, Abfassungszeit und Abschluss des Psalters zur Prufung
1 Origen, ii. 524a, Hilary, 6, and other passages, ap. Lagarde, Nova Psalterii
Grceci editionis specimen (1887), p. 7.

PSALMS AND OTHER POINTS. 459

der Frage nach Makkabderpsalmen historisch-kritisch untersuchf
(Leipzig, 1869). Himpel, Ueber angebliche makkabdische Psalmen, in
the Tubinger Quartalschrift, 1870, pp. 403-473.
II. There are still some points of interest upon which, had space
permitted, I would gladly have spoken at length in this Appendix.
For instance, (1) there is the great question of metre. That there is
a tendency to metre in the psalms and in other Biblical books seems
to me very probable indeed, and I venture to express the conviction
that some writers (notably the learned and acute David Giinzburg,
Revue critique, 24 mai, 1880) have gone too far in the opposite
direction to Bickell, whose theory, bold as it may be, has led him to
some very acceptable corrections of the text.1 (2) Then there is the
question of the origin and purpose of the psalm-titles. Dean
Perowne's quotation from a too little known book, Stahelin's Specielle
Einleitung [Psalms, i. 95), would be a good starting-point for an.
inquiry. It was certainly not the custom of Arab poets to inscribe
their names over their songs, as Keil stated ; the songs were trans
mitted, as has been remarked (p. 210, note «). No such institution
as the rdwi appears to have existed in Israel. Still there are points
of contact between Arab and Israelitish song-writing. It is certain
that late Arabic poems were sometimes ascribed to ancient writers
with an object, that interpolations sometimes occur, and that the
text of famous Diwans is sometimes preserved in different recen
sions. ' Dramatic lyrics ' (such as Ps. xviii.) are also by no means
wanting ; ' many a narrator sought to enliven his historical notices
by self-composed passages of poetry, which he put into the mouth
of his heroes ' (Noldeke, Beitrdge zur Kenntniss der Poesie der alien
Araber (1864), p. x). The Vedic hymns are anonymous ; on the
Gafhic, see above, p. 434. (3) Later Jewish traditions on author
ship. See pp. 190, 207, and cf. Neubauer's article in Studia Biblica
et Ecclesiastica (Oxford, 1890), pp. 1-58, the fulness of which makes
me the less regret my scanty space. The traditions clearly have but
the value of conjectures and not very critical ones. With regard to
Neubauer's remark that ' the subject has as yet made inconsiderable
progress,' I venture to hope that its application may be limited to
the study of that part of the psalm-titles which relates to the
technical details of the temple-music and singing. Others before me
have sought to criticize and account for the ascriptions of authorship
in the Hebrew and the Septuagint titles, and I trust that I have
1 The greater simplicity of Julius Ley's system is hardly an evidence that he
has approached nearer to the truth. But students of Hebrew poetry will not in
fairness ignore this scholar's Leitfaden der Metrik der hebr. Poesie, nebst dem
ersten Buche der Psalmen (Halle, 1887), nor yet Budde's thorough and important
article, ' Das hebr. Klagelied,' in Stade's Zeitschrift, 1882, pp. 1-52.

460 LAST WORDS ON MACCABAEAN PSALMS. aw. I.
fruitfully continued their work. Among my predecessors I would
gratefully mention a Jewish scholar, Krochmal, whose explanation of
the mysterious title of Ps. vii. has furnished me with a confirmation of
tmy critical theory (see pp. 229, 243). But the other part of the
psalm-titles is, I admit, not always much more clearly understood
than in the days of the Rabbis. There is an appearance of better
philology in the later theories, but the result remains uncertain.
My argument has not led me to discuss this difficult part of the
psalm-titles. What success would such a discussion have had, if I
.am correct in thinking that Jewish music underwent a revolution in
the early part of the Greek period ? (4) On Asaph, Ethan, Heman,
¦sons of Korah, and other expressions in the psalm-headings (in
cluding rr?np|), see Lagarde, Orientalia, Heft 2, 1880. Lagarde
connects Heb. hallel with Arab, ahalla 'to call, cry out,' which
is accepted by Wellhausen [Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, iii. 107). It is
therefore properly the obligatory shouting of the worshipper on a visit
to the sanctuary ; the Arabic tahlil consists merely in calling out
labbaika, ' at thy service, O Lord ! ' So at least Wellhausen ; the tahlil
is usually said, however, to mean the ejaculation, Id ildha ilia 'Hah,
' there is no deity but God,' and to resemble the talbiyah (see p. 214).
The repetition of labbaika must be a degenerate substitute for a
fuller formula. At any rate, the shouting of the Arabs will help
us to realize 'the humble origin of the Hebrew t'hillah,' and
the ' rough ' character of the original ' singing ' in the temple (see
p. 194). Only by slow degrees did it rise from a shouting like
that of the vintage (D^-^n, Judg. ix. 27, Lev. xix. 24) or of the
bridal night (see my note on Ps. lxxviii. 62). Comp. W. R. Smith,
The Religion of the Semites, p. 411, note 2, where a new and bold
theory is started.

APPENDIX II.
THE LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS.
There is no more delicate problem than to select linguistic-
evidences of the date of a Biblical Hebrew document. Much has-
been done of late years in this department for the Pentateuch, and a
beginning has been made in the critico-linguistic study of some of
the prophets. In Job and the Psalms somewhat less interest has as-
yet been shown, though Budde has given us a careful study of the
Elihu speeches,1 and Giesebrecht a suggestive but too undiscrimi-
nating collection of the linguistic evidence for a late date of the
Psalms.2 It is not likely that in an appendix I should do justice
to so difficult a subject, or escape making some statements for which
scholars will desiderate ampler proof. The reader will see however
that what I offer is my own, and that I have written these pages-
under a sense of the occasional uncertainty of the evidence. I do
not myself think that in the case of the Psalms the linguistic-
argument can be often more than a subsidiary one, and shall be
satisfied (though I hope in some cases to have attained more positive
results) if I have shown that from the point of view of language
no decisive objection can be raised to conclusions based for the
most part upon other grounds. The few remarks which follow
are intended to forestall criticism or at least to prevent misunder
standing. First, I feel bound to take for granted the same critical
results which are presupposed in the preceding lectures and notes.
It cannot, in my opinion, be proved that good Hebrew ceased to
be written either at the return from Babylon or in the time of Ezra
and Nehemiah. But I cast no reflexion on those who may think
otherwise, and who study the Hebrew texts from a more conserva-
1 Beitrdge zur Kritik des Buches Hiob (1876), zweiter Theil.
2 ' Ueber die Abfassungszeit der Psalmen; I. Buch ii.-v.' in Zeitschr. f. d.
alttest. Wissenschaft, 1881, pp. 276-332. See Driver's art., 'On some alleged'
linguistic affinities of the Elohist,' Journal of Philology, xi. 233, and cf. Kuenen,
Hexateuch (by Wicksteed), p. 291. Prof. Driver does not assert that the linguistic
affinities of ' P.C (or the Psalter) are incompatible with a date 'in or near ' the
Exile, but wishes for a more discriminating collection of evidence. As for myself,.
I have never dreamed that language would settle critical problems.

462 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
tively critical point of view. I will not presume to say that there
is but one justifiable method in this or any other branch of Old
Testament criticism. I am sure that I could profit much from a
similar collection of evidence by Delitzsch or Strack, and I encourage
myself with the thought that a scholar like Strack will find some
suggestiveness in my own imperfect work. Secondly, let me warn
the reader that I rely upon his constant and critical attention.
Many necessary or probable inferences I have been compelled
from want of space to omit. May I add that the student will be
well advised to take the psalms in groups, and work his way
backward, as has been done in the lectures ? I may perhaps be
asked why I have not pursued this method here. The reason is
partly that I wished to save space, and partly that it seemed worth
while to show that even the psalms most confidently believed to be
pre-Exilic present some linguistic phenomena difficult to reconcile
with that belief. And next, let me beg the reader to remember
the frequent uncertainty of the text. I have several times referred
to the possibility of corruption,1 and repudiated a seeming
Aramaism as not in the intention of the writer. If I have not often
enough said 'probably' or 'possibly,' let the reader supply this
omission. Lastly, a brief answer may be given, to the question why
some psalms, alleged to be post- Exilic, have so much more literary
merit than others. The first point to emphasize is that the circum
stances of the nation varied greatly at different points of the long
period between the return from exile and the Maccabees. It was
always possible indeed to write psalms in a fairly pure Hebrew style,
but not always to command spontaneity and vigour. True poets
are never numerous, and even these must be depressed by unfavour
able circumstances. The next point is, that among the temple-
singers analogy requires us to assume different poetical schools.
Hymn-writers had to consider both art and popularity ; some
writers put a higher value on the one and some on the other.
There were those who coveted the prize of writing in a style which
David might not have disowned, and who therefore cultivated
pregnancy and condensation, and interspersed with strict moderation a
few archaic forms. There were others in whom a true and deep religious
feeling was much in excess of stylistic dexterity. The psalms of the
first two books contain most of the best work of the former class,
whereas in parts of Books IV. and V. we are conscious that, as
Ewald long ago remarked,2 an 'invasion of popular speech' has
impaired the purity of the idiom. How then can we be surprised
1 Cf. Wellhausen, Prolegomena, German ed.; p. 414.
2 Dichter des alien bundes, i. a, p. 209.

li. LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 463
that some psalmists have a much choicer style than others ? In
the Wisdom-literature there are similar phenomena ; contrast the
roughness of Koheleth with the comparative elegance of the proverbs
•of Ben Sira and the masterly genius revealed in Job. And even
within the same book, Job for instance or Koheleth, can we not
•detect differences in the degree of polish ? J But great as is the
-variety of style among the psalmists, there is one characteristic which
is common to all — a self-abnegation which delights, wherever pos
sible, to adapt the ideas and phraseology of predecessors. If it
be strange that the Elohistic writer of Gen. i. should have written
in so pure and classical a style,2 it is at any rate not strange that
psalmists, trained up in the traditional processes of hymn-writing,
should have composed in a Hebrew which to the uncritical eye
passes as that of David. The conservatism of the temple poets was
of course not less than that of the priestly legislators, allowing for
the difference of their functions ; of them both in their various
•degrees it may be said that they ' came not to be ministered unto
but to minister.'
Ps. ii. Post-Davidic, because of ]yi$. [v. 2), which belongs to the
prophetic literature; and, if the Aramaic "O [v. 12) be genuine,
post- Exile (see Prov. xxxi. 2, which is post-Exile). I confess, how-
«ever, that the correction adopted in note f, p. 340 appears to me
certain ; Sept. and Targ. give evidence in its favour, and sense and
rhythm are both helped by it. Similarly the Aramaic verb j/jn (see
Lagarde, Semitica, i. 22 ff.) may be safely expelled from v. ga ; read
DJHl-1, with Sept. (Pesh. Vulg.) and render, 'Thou mayest shepherd
them with a staff of iron ' (cf. Mic. v. 6a). There still remains the
Aramaizing GWI in v. 1. The noun (masc. and fem.) occurs in lv. 15,
Ixiv. 3 ; the verb nowhere else. Aram. KOTt, Dan. vi. 7, 12, 16.
Wl and its forms, in the Targums on the prophets and on the
Psalms, answers to various Hebrew words, e.g. to HDH in xlvi. 4 and
lxxxiii. 3, and to K>m in lxviii. 8. May we set against this Aramaism
the suffixes of 3 pers. plur. in ID [vv. 3-5, cf. lviii. 7, 8, lix. 12, 13,
lxxxiii. 12), which are undoubtedly primitive in type (Olshausen,
Lehrbuch, § 96a ; Gesenius-Kautzsch, § 32, 7), and which Dillmann
mentions among the tokens of a high (pre-Davidic) antiquity in
Ex. xv. 1-18 ? Not except under the strict compulsion of internal
evidence. These suffixes may be merely employed for rhythmical
effect ; they are not employed throughout the psalm. Cf. on xi. 7.
' Budde, Beitrdge, pp. 158, 159 ; Cheyne, Job and Solomon, pp. 203-206.
2 Driver, Journal of Philology, xi. 232. It must be remembered that similar
difficulties have been felt in admitting the Exilic date of the Second Isaiah. It
takes time to familiarize oneself with facts. It is not enough to admit a critical
result ; you must absorb it.

464 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
Ps. iii. 3 and other passages (see Gesenius-Kautzsch, § 90, 2,
note b). The term ruT'- is not quoted by Dillmann as proving the
early date of Ex. xv. 16 ; nor does it prove anything in the Psalter.
Ps. v. 2. J'jrt or ^Jn. Again in xxxix. 4 ; nowhere else. Is
this an Aramaism ? Certainly a root h'gag exists, by the side of h'go, in
(Eastern) Aramaic, but if the Aramaic usage in the post-Exile period
was the same as in Christian times, the special sense of h'gag was 'to
imagine,' or even ' to see an imaginary form,' and that of h'go ' to
spell, read' (cf. Jewish Aram. KJq, new Heb. ilin). Had the psalmist
no Sprachgefiihl, no sense of difference of usage ? i»jn in the sense
of 'vain appearance,' would be in place in Ps. xc. 9 [n:n), but not
here. There were therefore probably two Heb. stems JJn and n:n
related as JJB' to rut? and &OtJ> (see on xix. 13). Cf. on xlix. 2. —
n. The archaistic suffix in 10 connects this with several other psalms-
(see on ii. 3-5, xi. 7).
Ps. vii. is one of the Elyon psalms (see v. 18), and is therefore
presumably late (see note u, p. 83). Once for all, we may draw the
same inference for Pss. ix., xviii., xxi., xlvi., xlvii., 1., Ivii., Ixxiii.,.
lxxvii., lxxviii., lxxxii., lxxxviii. (?),lxxxix. (allusion), xci., xcii., xcvii., cvii
In v. 10 toi, 'to come to an end' (also, twice, 'to complete'), is.
clearly a word of the silver age. In the Bible it only occurs in
Ps. vii. 10, xii. 2, Ivii. 3 (if the text be correct), lxxvii. 9, cxxxviii. 8 ;
in the Targums and the Talmud it is of frequent occurrence (also>
in Syriac, as an intransitive). In v. 5 the Aramaizing yhn should
give place to frb (see crit. n.).
Ps. viii. 5, ix. 20, 21, x. 18, lvi. 2, Ixvi. 12, xc. 3 (?), ciii. 15, cxliv
3. BM38. here = ' frail (or weak) man ; ' so only in Job, Psalms,
2 Isa. (li. 7, 12), 2 Chron. (xiv. 10). Dillmann and Delitzsch would
thus interpret Enos (Enosh) in Gen. iv. 26 (Yahvistic), but this name
is really only a duplicate of Adam, as Kenan is of Kain ; why sup
pose a ' Nebenbegriff'? 'Man' or ' ordinary men ' is the meaning
of 'H in Isa. (viii. 1, xxxiii. 8), Jer. (xx. 10), Deut. (xxxii. 26), and is
presupposed by the Yahvist in Gen. /. c. But it is also not unrepre
sented in Job (e.g. xxviii. 13), Psalms (see on lv. 14), and the later
parts of Isa. (xiii. 7, 12, xxiv. 6, lvi. 2). These facts on the whole
confirm the late origin of Ps. viii., &c. Had 'X conveyed the idea
of weakness in Isaiah's time, would he not have used it instead of
C5"N in Is, ii. 9, 11, v. 15 ?
Ps. x. 7, lv. 12, Ixxii. 14, T]h or Tjin. Also Prov. xxix. 13 (plur.).
A late word. In Jewish Aram. K3]jl = Heb. E?J.'y, 1. fine ; 2. punish
ment (see the verb in Prov. xvii. 26, xxi. 11). In eastern Aramaic
tuko has, like Wiy, an expanded meaning (' oppression ') ; it is the
rendering of ijn in Pesh.

II. LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 465
Ps. xi. The form nap (with absorbed 1 or ») occurs only in
Ps. xi. 6, xvi. 5, lxiii. 11, 2 Chron. xxxi. 3, 4, Neh. xii. 44, 47, xiii. 10.
Similarly the form nyp (with absorbed 1) is found only in Ex.
xxxvii. 8 (kt), xxxviii. 5, xxxix. 4 (kt), Dan. (repeatedly, both Heb.
and Aram.), Neh. vii. 20, and Ps. lxv. 9. (The first three examples
give the plural.) If for other reasons the late date of the psalms
referred to and of Ex. xxxv.-xl. (in its present form) is probable, the
occurrence of these forms will in a slight degree confirm it. The
favourite early forms are nDD, nsj>. The fact that the latter (with
its plur. nisp) occurs repeatedly in Ex. xxv. -xxix., xxxv.-xl. is no
argument against the view here taken. In xi. 7 we find the suffix 10
of the 3rd pers. sing., as in Job xx. 23, xxvii. 23, xxii. 2, Isa. xliv.
15, liii. 8. All late passages. Cf. on ii. 3-5.
Ps. xii. ")»J [v. 2) and Tvb\ [v. 9) belong to the Aramaizing period
(see above, on vii. 10, and crit. n. on xii. 9). In v. 8 ~m has the
(probably) late meaning of ' class of men,' as xiv. 5, xxiv. 6, Ixxiii.
15, cxii. 2, Deut. xxxii. 5, Prov. xxx. n-14. -IT (for nj.) is only
strange because without an article, in spite of liin (see Ewald, §
293a). Rhythm will account for this, just as the pause accounts for
the old term. J-1 in v. ga (cf. Isa. xxvi. 11). Inz/. 9, rv6? (Baer, rrj.T),
note the abstract term, n-1, and comp. Talmudic srj-lh (crit. n.).
Ps. xiii. 6, bai with Sy (for *?), Aramaizing. So ciii. 10, cxvi. 7,
cxix. 17, cxiii. 8, Joel iv. 4, 2 Chron. xx. 11. All post-Exile pas
sages. That Sd3 has not always the same shade of meaning, does
not diminish the value of the observation (see my Comm. on
Ps. xiii. 6). Not that Ps. vii. 5, cxxxvii. 8, in which different con
structions are found, are on this account alone earlier than Ps. xiii. 6,
&c. Comp. on Ivii. 3.
Ps. xvi. Davidic, says Delitzsch, because of its archaic, peculiar,
and highly poetic phraseology. But let us examine the evidence. 1.
^'IN. If this means ' the Lord ' (absolutely), as Del. assumes, the
psalm is post-Davidic, if not post-Exile. I prefer 'my Lord,' which
is more natural in an appeal for help (cf. xxxi. 15, xci. 2) ; the suffix
has its full force as in xxxv. 23, and prob. elsewhere, see p. 299.— 3a.
All Ewald's instances of b ' quod ' attinet ad' [Lehrbuch der hebr. Spr.,
§3ioa) are from prose- passages, except Ps. xvi. 3, xvii. 4, and one
may fairly add Isa. xxxii. 1. But the third of these is undoubtedly
and the second not improbably corrupt. n&n at any rate is super
fluous in a relative clause. The text as it stands is therefore neither
of the golden nor of the silver age of Hebrew. The two admis
sible emendations (see my own commentary and Nowack's) both
involve placing this psalm in the post-Exile period.— 5. n;D- See
on xi. 6. TP'm is an impossible form> which Del- should not have
H H

466 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
quoted as evidence. — 6. n^n.3 is no peculiarity of the poet, but, like
PntOS in v. i, an involuntary Aramaism of the editor. Read Wm.
But see on lx. 13. by "I3£>, 'to be well pleasing to,' is probably an
Aramaism ; cf. Dan. iv. 12. — 9. 'I'llS. See on vii. 6.
Ps. xvii. David, according to Del, has two styles ; Ps. xvii.
represents the harsh and obscure variety. Hitzig remarks on the
rough style which looks to him archaic. But the roughness is in
tensified by corruption of the text, and the ode in Hab. iii. (post-
Exilic) is more abrupt in style than Ps. xvii. Diversities of style existed
in the silver age of Hebrew. 3. "isy used absolutely for ' to trans
gress.' The sense is no doubt unique, for ' make to transgress,'
which is A.V.'s rend, of the Hifil part, in 1 Sam. ii. 24, will not stand
(Klostermann's correction of the verse is probable). But is it there
fore to be rejected? 1. It is required to bring out the three classes
of sins, 2. we have close by the phrase ' the word of thy lips,' which
at once defines the meaning of "I3J& and 3. IVPS? in Rabbinic means
'a transgressor of the law,' and rmy 'a transgression or sin' (cf.
Yoma, 86a, rmy. lay, ' he committed a sin '). Recollect that after the
promulgation of the Law a technical sense like this is to be expected.
4. 'sh. The rend. ' as for the works,' &c, is most improbable (see
on xvi. 3). Sept. regards the phrase as the object of the verb which
it misreads "IDX' in v. j,b. Rather it is the accus. to >n"!DB\ This is
marked by the preposition, to avoid mistakes, as the verb follows at
some little distance. The accusatival use of ? is Aramaizing, and
is frequent in Exilic and post-Exilic writings (see Driver on 1 Sam.
xxiii. 10 ; Ewald, Grammar, §277^). It occurs elsewhere in the
Psalms (see lxix. 6, Ixxiii. 18, cxxix. 3). D"1X ' (wicked) men,' as cxx. 2.
In Ixxiii. 5, lxxxii. 7 the word has a different nuance. 10. Suffixes.
See on Ps. Ixxiii. 3?0 here and in Ixxiii. 7 is used in a special sense.
Generally it means ' fat ' or ' fat parts,' but here a particular part of
the viscera with the accompanying fat. It is in fact a recondite syno
nym for n'vba (xvi, 7, xxvi. 2), Cyp (xl. 9), 3^ (Ixiv. 7), D^p.
(ciii. 1), all of which, though meaning properly the viscera or some
part of it, have equally with 3?. received an ethical significance.
d|?D must be explained in these two passages by Ar. hilb, which
means either the midriff, or the liver, or the partition between the
heart and the liver (Lane). These parts of the body are regarded
by the Semites as the seats of the passions. In xvii. 10 pity, and in
Ixxiii. 7 wicked lusts are thought of as issuing forth from these inward
parts. It is important both for the lexicon and for psalm-criticism
and psalm-theology to notice the ethical reference which Jeremiah
and his scholars give to terms like these. Notice that H33 (the usual

II. LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 467
Hebrew word for liver) is not a member of this group, unless with
Halevy we too boldly change HUZi in xvi. 10, &c, into H33, justifying
this step by the Sept. of Gen. xlix. 6, comp. on li. 8. The suffixes
in ID and \0- are real or affected archaisms. Since the rest of the
evidence favours a late date, we may call them affectations (as in
Ixxiii. 5-7 and especially lxxxiii. 12). 14. "On. Only here and in
xxxix. 6, xlix. 2, Ixxxix. 48, Job xi. 17, Isa. xxxviii. 11 (Cod. Bab.).
It is probably a good old Hebrew word although poetic, but except in
xxxix. 6 and Ixxxix. 48 (' lifetime ') and in Job xi. 1 7 (' a vigorous old
age,' cf. Arab, huld), the meanings seem to belong to a late stage of
thought. Here e.g. ' worldliness ' is the sense required (and so Gesenius
andKalisch understand Djiy in Eccles. iii. 11) ; and in Ps. xlix. 2 and
Isa. I.e. 'time-world.' But as Orelli remarks, ' it is not the way of
the old Hebraism to view the earth and earthly life as perishable in
contradistinction to an eternal, heavenly world' [Die hebr. Synonyma
der Zeit und Ewigkeit, 1871, p. 45, cf. p. 84). Notice Pesh.'s rend.
of altbv in Eph. ii. 2 'olmoyutho (' worldliness ').
Ps. xviii. 2. The Aramaism Dm 'to love 'is probably a scribe's
error (see crit. n.). If not, the psalm must be very late. — 4. ??[}!?.
The first of a long series of occurrences of 77P,, ' to chant praise to
God.' The only very old passage in which T>r\ has a religious re
ference is Judg. xvi. 24 (of Dagon), and the only pre-Exilic passages
in which it is used of Jehovah are Jer. xx. 13, xxxi. 7 (not counting
Isa. xxxviii. 18). It is common in this sense in Chron., and super
abundant in the Psalter. But only a very mechanical criticism could
make this a proof of the late date of the psalms (see p. 460). — 32.
E'lSs ; again in 1. 22, cxiv. 7 (if correct), cxxxix. 19. If this
reading is correct (2 Sam. xxii. 32, %), the psalm belongs at
earliest to the reign of Josiah, for, as Ewald suggested (see refer
ences in my comm.) and Baethgen has carefully argued,1 mbtf was
probably invented as the singular of DTVPN by the author of
Deut. xxxii. (see vv. 15, 17). It occurs twice in the genuine
Habakkuk, once in the psalm attached to that book (Hab. iii. 3),
forty-one times in Job, once in each of the books of 2 Isa., Prov.
(in a very late part), Chron., and Neh. ; also four times in three suc
cessive verses of Daniel.— 36. nijy. Only here and in xlv. 5 (see
crit. note), Zeph. ii. 3, and Prov. xv. 33, xviii. 12, xxii. 4. The cognate
adjective )$! occurs n or perhaps 13 times in the Psalter, once or
twice in Prov., once in 2 Isa., once in Zeph., once or twice in Amos,
twice or thrice in Isa., once in Job, and once in Numbers (k'thibh).
But these facts have only an indirect bearing on the date of the
1 Beitrdge zur semit. Religionsgeschichte (1888), pp. 296, 297. Lagarde's
¦view that 'X is a broken plural, is difficult.

468 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
psalm. It is the prominence given to the virtue of humility in the
Psalter (whether »3y or ljv be the word used, is not very important)
which creates a presumption (cf. Isa. lxi. i) that most of the psalms
are post-Exilic. This is a historical but not properly a linguistic
argument. — 48. 13T in Hifil, only here and in xlvii. 4, in the unusual
sense ' to subdue.' Is this owing to Aramaic influence ? 13J means
'to lead,' 'govern,' and then [a) 'to guide,' or (b) 'to take,' or
'take away.' Still it is possible that the Heb. Hifil retained a
sense which had been lost in Qal and Piel ; cf. "I3"ip.
Ps. xix. 2, cl. 1. TPT\- Nine times in Gen. i., four times in
Ezek., and once in Dan. But both the idea and root of the word
are good Hebrew. See Dillmann on Gen. i. 6, and Driver, Journal
of Philology, xi. 212. — 13. niK'JC5>, ait. Xey., = niJJK>, 'sins of in
advertence;' HJ3B' occurs seventeen times in P.C. (Lev. Numb.
Josh.), twice in Eccles., but also in 1 Sam. xiv. 24 Sept. (see
Driver ad loc). The latter passage at any rate, if we accept it as
genuine, is pre-Exilic. We may assume, therefore, that both
nlX? and its synonym nS^B* are early. — 15. \Viri, 'meditation,'
again only in xcii. 4 (different sense), Lam. iii. 62, but not there
fore late ; cf. fwn. But see on xlix. 2.
Pss. xx., xxi., lxi., lxiii. Use of ^p. The root- meaning is not 'to
possess ' but ' to give counsel,' 'to decide,' agreeably to the Assyrian
and Aramaic usage.1 ^7G can therefore legitimately be used in a
wide sense for ' prince ' or ' minor king,' as constantly in Assyrian ;
for general (Job xv. 24, Sept. o-TpaTrjyds, cf. Isa. x. 8) ; and for.
'magistrate of the royal house' (Jer. xvii. 19, 20, cf. Jer. xxi.
11, 12). In the post- Exilic period, so largely open to Aramaic
influences, the sense of the original meaning of ipp would become
strengthened (see Neh. v. 7, and cf. Dan. iv. 24), and a psalmist
might all the more naturally apply the term to Simon the Mac
cabee in the good old Semitic sense of 'consul' — Ps. xx. 6. bll
the verb, elsewhere only (in participles) Song of Sol. v. 10, vi. 4, 10 :
the noun, only Cant. ii. 4, and 13 times in Num. i., ii., and x. (a part
of the Priestly Code). We cannot however use these facts (even if
the reading be correct) until the Song of Sol. has been investigated
afresh. — Ps. xx. 9, "O'lynri ; cxlvi. 9, cxlvii. 6 "Oiy. Is it at all pro
bable that the author of the post-Exilic psalms cxlvi. and cxlvii. has
caught up an archaic (?) word from Ps. xx. ? Must not the three
psalms be contemporaneous ?
Ps. xxii. 2. ITD-IT. Only here and in xxxix. 3, Ixii. 2, lxv. 2. That
1 Friedr. Delitzsch, Prolegomena (1886), p. 30; Merx, Chreslomathia Tar-
gumica (1888), p. 230.

Ii. LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 469
the word occurs nowhere in Job, is strange. If genuine, it is probably
a coined word, and bears witness to a period of artificial temple-poetry
which cannot be placed early. But is the word genuine ? I have ac
cepted it in xxii. 2, xxxix. 3, but not without misgivings (see my crit.
note). It is unknown to Sept. and Pesh. in the three latter passages
mentioned above, and even if with Hatch we read els dveiav for els
avoiav in the common text of Sept. of Ps. xxii. 2, yet ' the Egyptian '
recension, followed apparently by Pesh., reads Kai oJ irpoo-exeis p.01
(Baethgen, from Bar Hebraeus). See on xxxix. 3. — 16. rise*. A
colloquial word (2 Kings iv. 38, Ezek. xxiv. 3), not used in poetry or
elevated prophecy, except here and in Isa. xxvi. 12 (in a noble but
awkwardly expressed and probably post-Exile passage).
Ps. xxiv. 8, 10. t-1-ty (again only in Isa. xliii. 17), niS3V nirp.
See pp. 203, 222 (note vv).
Ps. xxvi. 12. D^npp ; Ps. lxviii. 27, Num. xxxiii. 25, 26, nibnpp.
Neither form occurs elsewhere, and both Ps. lxviii. and Num. xxxiii.
in their present form must be admitted to be late. Still the word is
possibly as old as rhythmical temple psalmody. ?n|7 (see xxii.
23, 26, xl. 10) would not have suited the rhythm.
Ps. xxviii. 7. rTjliV, asxlv. 18, Neh. xi. 17; cf. JTBnrV., Ps. cxvi. 6.
The non-syncopation is either an archaism revived under Aramaic
influence, or more probably a pseudo-archaism formed on the
analogy of really old uncontracted forms (see Konig, Lehrgebdude,
pp. 294, 295, and cf. Driver, Samuel, p. 113).
Ps. xxix. 10. b-13P, probably a Hebraized form of abubu, the
Babylonian word for the Flood (properly, a ' destructive storm ') ; in
justification of this see Haupt, in Schrader's K.A.T., p. 66, note 3,
and cf. my crit. note on Ps. xxix. 10. '» occurs elsewhere only in
Gen. vi.-ix. (six times), Gen. x. 1, 32, and Gen. xi. 10. These
passages belong some to the Priestly Code, some to the second
Yahvist, to whom the Hebrew parallelisms to Babylonian stories
are due, and who can hardly be placed earlier than the reign
of Manasseh (see p. 280, top). 'D has no Aramaic affinity ; Targ.
here has WSID (Onk. in Gen. vii., KJSic).
Ps. xxxiii. 14. men 'to look at.' Elsewhere only in Isa. xiv. 16,
Song of Sol. ii. 9. Probably a late word. In Targ. and new Hebrew.
' prospicere,' ' providere.'
Ps. xxxiv. 19. H3% In an ethical sense, only here and in Isa.
Ivii. 3 (alluded to by the psalmist). Cf. n|-p, li. 14- In a physical
sense, only in xc. 3; but cf. n$% 'crushing,' Deut. xxiii. 2. The
root is old Hebrew.
Ps. xxxv. 3. -IJD. If this is the Scythian o-dyapis, the psalm belongs
at earliest to the reign of Josiah, but is possibly enough post-Exile

4?o LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
(see Commentary). Such a loan word would be unique in the psalms,
but there are parallels enough in Song of Sol., Eccles., and Daniel. —
v. 15. y?S 'fall.' So xxxviii. 18, Jer. xx. 10. Nowhere else in this
sense. Ps. xxxvi. 2. DX3. Nowhere else in the Psalter except in ex. 1 (of
a prophetic oracle) ; see note below. The metaphorical use of the
term here favours a late date. — 6. D?ps>n3. This retention of the
article after the prep, is 'mostly late' (Driver, Samuel, page 273,
note '). In the parallel passage, however (Ivii. n), we find 'V 111;
and 'ri3 is probably a corruption.
Ps. xxxix. 3. n'p-n. No sign of date. The word is probably a
gloss which has slipped in from Ixii. 2 (received text). Both rhythm
and sense gain by its excision. See on xxii. 2. — 4. Vin. See on
v. 2. — 12. See on vi. 7.
Ps. xiii., xliii. Here we begin to notice a preference of ' Elohim '
to the divine name ' Yahveh,' and could we be sure that the psalms
which are now Elohistic had not been touched by an editor, we
should be entitled to use this fact as a sign of date. It is certain,
however, that sometimes, if not generally, ' Yahveh ' has been changed
into 'Elohim' by an editor (cf. pp. 90, 101, 287), so that we are
' practically debarred from pressing this point ' (Toy, Journal of Soc.
of Biblical Literature, June and Dec. 1884, p. 86).
Ps. xiii. 5. According to Hitzig, the cohortative n~ has here lost
its significance. This would agree equally well with Ewald's view of
the date and with Hitzig's (for in Jer. iv. 19, 21 both Hitzig and
Driver admit this phenomenon). It is however not necessary to hold
that wherever the cohort, form occurs in a work which on various
grounds is pronounced to be late, it must have lost its meaning (for
this is not the case in Jer. iii. 25 ; cf. Isa. xxxviii. 10). We may, if
we will, render, in xiii. 5, ' let me remember . . . pour out,' though a
parallel passage, lxxvii. 4, 7, seems to me now against this. — rn11! (Piel ;
see my crit. n.) ; cf. Isa. xxxviii. 15, where another Levitical poet
uses the Hithpael. A colloquialism, and probably late. In Jewish
Aramaic it means ' to lead ' or ' pull ' (of children and young
animals) in Pael ; ' to hop ' (of birds), in Ithpaal, and ' to travel
slowly ' (of traders). In new Hebrew, ' to lead ' or ' pull,' in Piel ;
' to hop ' (of birds), in Hithpael (cf. fill) PTJP, ' you may lead or
pull calves,' and rn^p nE>N> ' a mother may lead her child ' — viz.
on the Sabbath, Shabbath, xviii. 2, in Jastrow's Lex.). But of course
there may be a corruption of the text. In the Talmudic treatise
Shabbath, 88b, it is said, 'Read not (inPs. lxviii. 13) yiddbdun "they
flee," but y'daddun, " they lead them." ' A similar view may have been
taken of a word in each of the two Biblical passages ; Bredenkamp

ii. LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 471

in fact emends in Isa. xxxviii. 13 by introducing the root 111. But
the appropriateness of nil to descriptions of religious processions is
against this theory, and we may therefore consider the late date of
Ps. xiii., xliii., and Isa. xxxviii. 10-20 to be favoured by nj"}. Com
pare an analogous colloquialism in Isa. xiv. 23 (Exilic).
Ps. xlv. 2. E*rn, here only. It is probably a colloquialism for
y.'Sn and if we could be sure that Lev. i.-vii. did not contain pre-
Exilic, we might add that it was probably late. DK'rnp, ' a kettle,'
occurs in Lev. ii. 7, vii. 9, and establishes for Hebrew usage the
sense of ' boiling (over).' K><rn is common in Jewish Aramaic as a
synonym of Heb. yip, but not of V21-— "vnp. Only here and in Isa.
xvi. 7, Prov. xxii. 29, Ezra vii. 6. In Isa. I.e. the meaning is ' rapid,'
' prompt ' (of a model judge) ; in the other passages, ' expert ' (in some
art or business). The latter is also the sense in Aramaic. Note that
Prov. xxii. 17-xxiv. 22, according to one theory, was compiled by the
author or editor of Prov. i.-ix. [see Job and Solomon, p. 138), and that
Prov. xxii. 29^ contains a markedly Aramaizing expression (see De
litzsch ad loc). — 5. my. See onxviii. 36. — 9. 'SP. Some critics compare
the Assyrian plural in i and the Syriac in e (emphatic state). But the
parallels in the Old Testament are very doubtful (see Olshausen,
Lehrbuch, §111 c). The sense however may be a borrowed Aramaic
one (' strings ' for ' harp-music ; ' see my Psalms, p. 406, and cf. Payne
Smith, Thes. Syr., s. v. menno), unless the word is corrupt. — 10. 73K>,
only here and in Neh. ii. 6, Dan. v. 2, 3, 23 (Aramaic), unless we
may add by conjecture Judg. v. 30 (for hh&). The verb blW is found
in Jer. iii. 2, Deut. xxviii. 30, Isa. xiii. 16, and Zech. xiv. 2, where there
is a constant euphemistic Q'ri, substituting 33K>. Professor Toy is of
opinion that bl# was borrowed from Aramaic with the sense of ' queen,'
while the native Hebrew verb hljff, having a low colloquial meaning,
became vox inhonesta. It is equally admissible to suppose that
both verb and noun belong to the old Hebrew vocabulary, but that
the Biblical writers deliberately abstain from using the noun of an
Israelitish wife. If so, bl<& is only a guide to the date in so far as it
is a guide to the interpretation of the psalm. We have, in short, to
seek for a non-Israelitish queen of Israel, and Jezebel, the wife of
Ahab, being rejected (see p. 167), we can only find one in the post-
Exile period.— 18. TVi "iV^S. The pleonastic -% elsewhere 'only
in very late passages,' such as Esth. ii. 11, 2 Chron. xi. 12 (Ges.-
Kautzsch, § 123^), to which add Ps. cxlv. 13, Esth. ix. 28. Cf. on
Ixxxvii. 5.
Ps. xlviii. 14. JBS, only here, and, unless corrupt, probably late
Hebrew. For the grounds of this, see crit. note.
Ps. xlix. ' Its antique, bold form,' Del.— 2. "f?n. See on xvii.

472 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
14- — 4- niopri. Regal period ? See Prov. i. 20, [xiv. 1,] ix. 1, xxiv.
7. niM3n, as lxxviii. 72, Prov. xi. 12, xxviii. 16, Job xxxii. 11, Isai
xl. 14. n-IJn. Although the ending n-1 is not incompatible with
a pre-Exilic date (note n-IKj, n-UD, n-1D3, and other classical words,
mostly from verbs rrt), yet the fact that none of the early writers
used this convenient word,1 coupled with the increasing number of
forms in n-1 in the later period (seven or perhaps eight occur in
Ecclesiastes, and there are 'over 100 examples' in Rabbinic2), sug
gests that n is the coinage of a later writer. Altogether the number
of rare words from nin and lin is remarkable. See on v. 2, xix. 15,
xc. 9. — 11. nya. Rare. See xcii. 7, Prov. xii. 1, xxx. 2. — 13, 21.
ii?'. is not un-Hebraic in form (cf. IKE? ). It occurs once in each of
these books— Jer., Ezek., Zech., Job, Prov. The psalmist may have
selected it for a rhythmical reason. Still the word is as common in
Aramaic as 1133 is in Hebrew ; it occurs seven times in the Aram.
parts of Daniel, and (through Aram, influence) ten times in the
late Hebrew Book of Esther. — 12. niOTK-^j;. A 'bold' but hardly
'antique' expression. This plural form occurs here only. — 14.
?93 ' folly ' or ' confidence,' as lxxviii. 7. Twice in Job, once in the
Praise of Wisdom (Prov. iii. 26) ; once in Eccles. A mechanical
critic might infer that this use of '3 was distinctively late ? But how
can it be, when P'P3 ' fool 'is so common in the older parts of
Proverbs ? Cf. n^D3, Ixxxv. 9, Job iv. 6.
Ps. 1. Its late origin is shown by the names of God in v. 1 (see
p. 153) and v. 14 (see above, on Ps. vii.). — 10. in.'n, elsewhere only
in lxxix. 2, civ. 11, 20, Isa. lvi. 9 (twice), Zeph. ii. 14, Gen. i. 24;
cf. iryp, cxiv. 8, and 1J3, Num. xxiv. 3, 15. The old case-ending i
is one of those archaisms which, partly for rhythmical reasons, the
later poets loved. (Cf. on ex. 4.) But if Giesebrecht thinks that it
specially favours a post- Exile date of the psalms in which it occurs,
he is surely mistaken. Isa. lvi. (probably), Zeph. ii., and Num. xxiv.
are all pre-Exilic. — 11. t't. Elsewhere only in Ps. Ixxx. 14 and Isa.
Ixvi. 11. True enough, the root is Aramaic, and from it proceed Tt
'a bough' and ft. 'a beam,' and also 'a worm.' The Biblical and
post-Biblical Hebrew T'T might conceivably be of Aramaic origin.
But what of nj-ltp ' a door-post ' ? Is not this old Hebrew, and does
it not presuppose the same root as the late Hebrew ff 'a beam,'
viz. MT ' to move forward, or backward' (cf. Ass. za'za', 'to move, or
shake ') or (of things without life) ' to project,' which is guaranteed
1 Convenient ; especially because [TJin has two meanings.
2 Siegfried and Strack, Lehrbuch der neuhebr. Sprache, &c. , p. 50.

II. LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 473
in the former sense for Assyrian by passages in Schrader's K. A. T. ?
Note also that the senses in which T<\ is used in the Psalter and in
Isa. Ixvi. respectively are not Aramaizing senses ; the writers have a
full consciousness of the root-meaning of the word, and apply this
meaning each in his own way. In the Psalter, it is best to render
'offspring ;' and in Isaiah, 'udder.' (I have been thus full, because
Delitzsch and Dillmann have both missed the point of my crit. note
on Isa. Ixvi. 11, which is that the sense of 'udder' which the
parallelism certainly suggests, is confirmed by the Ass. ziiz.) — 22.
iTii^N. See on xviii. 32.
Ps. li. HaleVy derives from vv. 4 and ga a twofold argu
ment for the pre-Exile date of the psalm [Revue de I'hist.
des religions, • 1885, 2, p. 36 ; cf. 1886, 2, pp. 190-193).
'131 MD33 [v. 4) is, he thinks, modelled on the Levitical formula
int?1 V^J3 D331. ' Given that D33 means properly " to wash clothes,"
and that the precept of washing clothes in the rite of purification
belongs exclusively to the Priestly Code, must we not see in the
expression of the psalmist a poetic idealization of the Levitical
formula ? ' And in v. 9, 'U1 'JKPnn reminds HaleVy that the same
word is used of these rites of purification in which hyssop plays such
a prominent part (Lev. xiv. 49, Num. xix. 6, 12, &c). Halevy's
only mistake consists in asserting that the phrase pso D3D is peculiar
to Ps. li. 4. We find virtually the same expression in Jer. iv. 14
(cf. ii. 22). But at what period of the higher religion of Israel might
not such ' poetic idealizations ' of old ritual formulae have been used ?
Does not the Second Isaiah use sacrificial phraseology in a figurative
sense in Isa. liii. 5, 6, 10 ?— 8. ninppartic. of WD 'to besmear ' (with
plaster, as in Ezek., or oil, as Talm. Bab. Nidda, 24, ap. Buxtorf).
From the root nD comes probably Aram. ^OP, ?inp, t'holo, tihal,
'the spleen,' or (see Payne Smith, s. v. t'holo) the kidneys, or even
the lungs.1 Both here and in Job xxxviii. 36 ninp means much
the same as !?0P, i.e. the kidneys with their fat (see Lev. iii. 4), or,
better, the complex of fat parts in the viscera, which the Semites
regarded as the seat of emotion. There is nothing remarkable in
this usage ; what is peculiar is the way in which a group of psalmists
pick out a number of words denoting the viscera, to serve as symbols
of the inner or moral nature. This preoccupation about the moral
nature of man is late ; it marks the post-Jeremian age (cf. on xvu.
10). The author of Job (xxxviii. 36) goes beyond the psalmists, and
makes wisdom reside ninp3, which is best rendered iv cppeo-l, 4>pr,v
and <ppives (cf. Lat. renes?) having passed through a similar develop-
' Suggested by Lagarde's remarks in Proverbien, p. 62.

474 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS: APP.
ment to words such as ninp, ^>DP. — 12. X13. On this word (which,
as Barth has made probable, =Ass. banii; cf. Ea-bani='Ea, my
creator,' in the Bab. Deluge-story) see Dillmann's note on Gen. i. 1.
It supplies no criterion of date. — 13. 'p n-n. A post-Exilic phrase
(see Isa. lxiii. 10, n, and above, p. 162). — Ps. liii. 6. See on
lxviii. 31.
Ps. lv. 3, 18. Cohortatives with effaced meaning imply a some
what Me date (see on xiii. 5). — 4. npj>. In the Targum, Xty - Heb.
rnv and pivp. But the reading is probably corrupt. — 6. n-IV^D.
Elsewhere only in Job xxi. 6, Isa. xxi. 4, Ezek. vii. 18. There is no
certain pre-Exilic evidence for the word, but an elegiac poet might
at any time have coined it. Jer. (xlix. 16) uses nv^an, which occurs'
nowhere else in the same sense. — 12. i\F\. See on x. 7, — 14. K*UN,
for an individual, seems late ; see Jer. xx. 10, Job v. 17. D"1X thus
limited is also rare (Prov. iii. 13, Eccles. vii. 28). — 15. &11, see on
ii. 1. — 22. 2ip, Aramaic for nprte, a certain sign of late date. It
occurs also in lxviii. 31 (plur.), lxxviii. 9, cxliv. 1, Zech. xiv. 3,'
Eccles. ix. 18, Job xxxviii. 23, not however in the true text of 2 Sam. '
xvii. 11 (see Driver ad loc). — 23. ^3n.\ The verb 3 rp 'to give'
is common in Aramaic, but has gone out in Hebrew except in the
imperative. K3iV in Targ. of Ps. xi. 6 = Heb. rup, in Talmudic 3iT = '
' burden.' Ps. Ivii. 3. by "IDJ. Verb and construction both late (see on
vii. 10, xiii. 6). — 5. n33&W. See on lv. 3, 18. '>
Ps. lviii. ' Unparalleled boldness of the style ' (Delitzsch). This
however is partly owing to corruption of the text (see crit. notes in
my comm.). In some minute linguistic points the psalm reminds us
of the Song in Ex. xv-. 1-18: — notice the repetition [vv. 8, 10, five
times) of IDS, the suffixes in ID [vv. 7, 8), the full imperfects in vv. 2,
3 (contrast the Chronicler's avoidance of them), the ' defectively '
written plural forms in v. 2 (d^X, which was early misunderstood
both in the psalm and in Ex. xv. 10), and, if my suggestion in crit..'
note [Psalms, p. 390) be followed, PP in v. 10. If the Song is 'almost
certainly post-Exile' (p. 177), it follows that Ps. lviii. is so too. —
5. n-IDT occurs once in Dan., once in Chron., 15 times in Ezekiel
twice in the Priestly Code, twice in the later parts of Isa., once in
Kings. But the root is good Hebrew, and 2 Kings xvi. 10 is pre-1
Exilic. Even Lagarde only urges that the pointing, not that the
word itself, is Aramaic ; for n-lD"1! he would substitute nip'n ( Ueber-
sichl der Nomina, 1889, p. 148). Cf. Driver, Journal of Philology,-
xi. 216. Ps. lix. Archaic or archaizing suffixes in ID, as in Ps. lviii. (see
on ii. 3-5).

LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 475

Ps. Ix. 6. On the reading cf. p. 108. An Aramaizing spelling
proves nothing. — 13. nnry. The archaic form of the fem. (see
Olshausen, § \o8d).
Ps. lxi. 5, lxxvii. 6, cxlv. 13, D'pyiu. Is this plural form the
expression of the enlarged later Jewish conception of time ? Cer
tainly it occurs in the Exilic and post-Exilic passages, Isa. xxvi. 4,
xlv. 17, li. 9, Eccles. i. 10, Dan. ix. 24, and pp?y is frequent in
the Aram, parts of Daniel. But it is also found in 1 Kings viii. 12,
13 (==2 Chron. vi. 1, 2), which is no imaginary speech of Solomon,
produced in the 6th cent. B.C. by an editor, but a fragment of a
genuine Solomonic song (see p. 212), and where the plur. is required
by the rhythm.
Ps. Ixii. 2, lxv. 2. n^p-H, See on xxii. 2, xxxix. 3.— 12. Note
'JIS (see on Ps. ii.). — Ps. lxiii. 4, cxvii. 1, cxlv. 4, cxlvii. 12,
Eccles. viii. 15, nae*, ' to praise.' In Eccles. iv. 2, the same verb
means ' to call happy ; ' in Ps. cvi. 47, 1 Chron. xvi. 35, ' to boast
of (Hithpael). Cf. new Heb. rat? 'praise' [Pirqe Aboth, ii. 8b,
Strack). ' Chaldaica est, atque adeo in Davidico contextu barbara.
Quippe nulla erat Judaeis cum Chaldaica [Aramaica] gente ac lingua,
Davide regnante, societas.' — Houbigant, ad Ps. lxviii. 18. See how
ever 2 Sam. viii. 6. — n. nop, see on xi. 6.
Ps. Ixiv. 3. n£5*:n. See on ii. 1. — Ps. lxv. 9. nilip. See on
xi. 6. — 10. n35, adverbially, as cxx. 6, cxxiii. 4. Also a Syriac usage;
cf. e.g. rebbath 'very,' Ephr. Carm. Nis. iv. 28, v. 139, khayyath 'alive,'
Ps. cxxiii. 3 (Pesh.), and other instances ap. Noldeke, Aland. Gram.,
p. 201, Wright, Comparative Gram., p. 135.
Ps. lxviii. Of the Davidic age, if not by David (Delitzsch). But
what is there in the style which prevents us from accepting the con
clusions based upon non-linguistic evidence ? The argument for a
post-Exilic date derived from the divine names Adonai [vv. 12, 18,
20, 23, 27, 33) and Shaddai [v. 15) has been set forth above (p. 124,
note b). — 7. nilE'ia, Sir. Xey. Cf. kushoro, Pesh. Ecclus. xxxviii. 31 &c,
1&3 occurs only in Esther (viii. 5), and Eccles. (x. 10, xi. 6) ; jhtf'3
only in Eccles. (ii. 10, iv. 4, v. 10). Aramaic and Talmudic— 18.
DJ03"!. 13") and TYai are late Aramaizing forms (cf. Aram. 131., Niai,
rebbu), found elsewhere (sing, or plur.) in Jon. iv. n, 1 Chron. xxix.
7 [bis), Ezra ii. 64, 69, Neh. vii. 66, 71, 72, Dan. vii. 10, xi. 12. We
must not add Hos. viii. 12, where 131 is an intolerable reading (see
Hosea, in Cambr. Bible, ad loc).— 27. ni^npp. See on xxvi. 12.—
31. -I-T3. Only here and in Dan. xi. 24. The ordinary form is "l-JS,
found in Prov. xi. -24, Jer. iii. 13, Joel iv. 2, Ps. liii. 6, Ixxxix. 11, cxii.
9, cxlvii. 16 (Qal, Hifal, and Pual also occurs, but more rarely).

476 LLNGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
Has the initial p been changed into b through the influence of the
Aramaic 133 (which the Targ. gives here) ? Or were there from the
first two distinct though allied words? At any rate, this word
proves nothing. — Dgnnp. 'nn also in Prov. vi. 3 (pre-Exilic?).
DS"! ' to tread ' is Targumic, and occurs also in the Aramaic of Daniel
(vii. 7, 19). t>Si is found twice in Ezek., and once in Hezekiah's
collection of Proverbs ; CJ'SiiD once in Ezek.; E'ST 'mud ' once in 2.
Isaiah. Hardly a sign of date. — n'U'np. See on lv. 22. — 36.
D'BHpp. Probably plur. excellentia for K^pp. So Ixxiii. 17, Ezek.
vii. 24 (point Dr^'t^pD) ; in Ezek. xxi. 7 the reading is doubtful (see
Cornill). — 12. T|n'n (so point) ' thy clans.' A revived archaism ; see
2 Sam. xxiii. 13.
Ps. lxxi. 6. 'lia, either ' he that loosed me ' (as probably Sept.) or
' he that rewardeth me,' in either case an Aramaism ' (for what
reason can there be for resorting to the Arabic jaza 1. 'to divide,'
2. 'to requite,' when the Aramaic sense of Kt| 1. to cut off, 2. to
repay, is well attested?). — 14^. The perf. Hifil of cjOJ. is hardly late
(as Hitzig), for though it occurs elsewhere only in 1 Kings x. 7, 2
Kings xx. 6, Eccles. i. 16, ii. 9, the parallel passage to 1 Kings x. 7
(2 Chron. ix. 6) changes SSDin into nBp\ The Chronicler's altera
tions of early forms and idioms are so frequent that this must
be held decisive. — 15. nilbp, air. Xey. nn'ap, a new formation
for "IBDD; cf. on 3in?, Ixxxvii. 6. — 21. n^3. Elsewhere only in
cxlv. 6, 2 Sam. (twice), 1 Chron. (four times), and Esther (thrice).
The word is uncommon but pre-Exilic (2 Sam. vii. being not later
than the time of Josiah).
Ps. Ixxii. Solomonic (Delitzsch). But where are the traditionally
Solomonic proverbs which have words and phrases like the follow
ing ? — 5. Dy and (so also v. 17) 'J?1? ' as long as (shall exist).' Rashi
points out the late Hebrew affinities of both idioms, comparing for
the former C?pg>n Dy ('as long as the sun shall shine '), Shabbath, 180
(i. 8 in Strack's ed.), and n?3n »JS3 and n.^n \:s?3 t6# (' while the
temple was standing,' ' while the temple was not standing ') phrases
of frequent occurrence in the Mishna (see e.g. Chullin, v. 1).
Comp. also T\\ 11 OS), Dan. iii. 33. It is true, »jg3 is not ij?1?. At
any rate, there is no parallel for the psalmist's use of '3^> in Biblical
Hebrew. — 6. spnt- ' An unique intensive form ' (Delitzsch). Rashi
and Kimchi both quote Yoma, 87a, where the plural occurs. A root
fpt (on which cf. Ewald, Lehrbuch, p. 133, foot) must be assumed
for the Syr. zoriftd=£T#. in Pesh. of Isa. iv. 6, xxv. 4. The first
' See Kohut's Aruch, ii. 260, left; Jastrow, Diet, of the Targ. and Talm.,
p. 229; Payne Smith, Thes. Syr., co!. 696.

II. LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 477
radical is repeated after the second letter as in later Syriac (Noldeke,
Neu-syr. Gramm,, p. 191 ; Mand. Gr., p. 85). The text may how
ever be corrupt (see crit. note). — 13P&, elsewhere only in Ezek.
xxvii. 15. — 9. lxxiv. 14, Isa. xxiii. 13 &c, 'wild beasts.' Post-
Exilic? — 14. 'fin. See on x. 7 ; we cannot with Hitzig infer a
late date from the scriptio plena, for though not common in the
inscriptions of Mesha and Siloam, nor apparently in the MSS. from
which the Sept. was translated, it was evidently not altogether
unknown (see Driver, Samuel, Introd. pp. xxxii.-xxxiv.). — 16. np§.
In spite of the Talmudic ppB ' wooden boards ' and Phcen. PB
' a board ' (quoted by Muhlau and Volck), I cannot think the sense
' expansion,' ' abundance,' made out thereby. The alleged Aramaism
is a corrupt reading. Gratz and Lagarde restore nyBE>, a good pre-
Exilic Heb. word (2 Kings ix. 17 &c), though of Aramaic affinities.
Ps. Ixxiii. An Elyon-psalm [v. 11), and therefore presumably
late ; this is confirmed by the style. 4. ni3^in. A quadriliteral of
a specially Aramaic type (see on Ixxx. 14). 'n occurs only here and
in Isa. lviii. 6 (certainly not pre-Exilic). 5-7. Suffixes. See on
ii. 3, — 6. n*t2>; elsewhere only in Prov. vii. 10. See Noldeke
[D. M. Z., xxxvii. 535), who thinks perhaps n»ts> should be read. —
7. 3^pi. See on xvii. 10. — n'Sbp 'imagination,' as Prov. xviii. n
(Graecus Venetus, 4>avTao-ia).—8. -ip'p;. ppri in Zech. xiv. 12 is 'to
make to consume away.' The sense required here, however, is 'mock,'
which is admittedly an Aramaism. — J?}3. Unidiomatic, as Olshausen
remarks. Probably the exigencies of rhythm produced the phrase
(cf. cxix. 46). — 9. ^nn ; only here and in Ex. ix. 23. In both
cases, for a similar reason, the sharp sound is pictorial (see Konig,
Lehrgeb. § 36, 7a). — 12. •13S5>n. One of the poetic Aramaisms of
the later books. Qal occurs in xcii. 13 and twice in Job ; the Hifil
of XIV, and the adj. K'3B>, also each of them twice in Job. Aram.
W'B> 'once in Ezra, twice in Dan. ; K^t? twelve times in Dan., once
in Ezra.— 17. Q'HpO. See on lxviii. 36.— 18. ID1?. If correct, an Ara
maism (see Ges.-Kautzsch, p. 353). But Bickell reads iS|)W- 21.
The two Hithpaels occur nowhere else. The reflexive and passive
forms Hithpael and Nithpael are frequent in the new Hebrew of the
Mishna. Note also that J»Dn (Pael and Aphel) means 'to cause
pain ' in Targ. on Prov. x. 1, xxviii. 7.
Ps. lxxiv. 6. ^B>3, n'lB?"3 (plur.). For both words, only found
here, the classical Hebrew is D'T?j2. ^?. (?) seems t0 be a weakened
form of Aram, J»3, N3<?-13, comp. b<y. and ^31!?, DD>n and Dpin, Di^JJ
and pVlu. KjaVlS occurs in Targ. of Ps. lxxiv. 5 for niDTp. just as

478 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
tv'tf? is given for the same word in Targ. of Jer. xlvi. 22. That b
and not//z is the third root-letter, is shown by the Arabic kalaba 'to
prick with a spur,' kullab, ' hook, harpoon, spur, saw.' — 8. ?X"Hy.iD,
a term for places of worship or instruction in the Law. In a parallel
poetic description of the desolation of Judah by Nebuchadrezzar the
only tyio spoken of is the temple (Lam. ii. 6). Hence though the
probably Aramaic words in v. 6 would allow us to place the psalm in
the Babylonian period, this phrase in v. 8 points to a later date.
Comp. lyi n»3 in the Mishna [Sota, ix. 15) for a school of the Law.
Ps. lxxvi. 6. •IPTinK'X: Aramaizing, for 'DETi; similar cases occur
in Isa. lxiii. 3, 2 Chron. xx. 35 (both post-Exilic), though in Isa. I.e.
the text may be corrupt (see Ges.-Kautzsch, p. 147, note ¦).
Ps. lxxvii. 4, 7. See on xiii. 5. — 9. ipj, an Aramaism (see on
vii. 10). — Ps. lxxviii. See p. 147, and note that t-lty in v. 4 and in
cxlv. 6 comes from Isa. xiii. 25, and 'b" C'hp in v. 41 from the two
Isaiahs. 3}p [v. 9) and -linn [v. 41) are Aramaisms ; for the former
see above, on lv. 22, and for the latter cf. Syr. k'vb 'to feel vexation
or repentance ' (used in Pael, Pesh. 1 Sam. xxiv. 8).
Ps. Ixxx. 13, 14, 16, 17. Peculiar words favouring a late date.
rnx ' to pluck,' Song of Sol. v. 1 ; in the Mishna also ' to pluck '
(esp. figs). Ethiopic arara. It is characteristic of the later period
that colloquial words, sometimes perhaps old, find their way into
Heb. poetry. Dpn.3 ' to gnaw to pieces ; ' cf. Talm. DP"ip [Peak, ii. 7,
of mice eating off the ears of corn). The insertion of r, in lieu of
dagesh, is in no Semitic language so common as in Aramaic (see
Porges, Ueb. d. Verbalstammbildung, &c, 1875, p. 50). PT. ; see on
1. 11. n33 'shoot' (see my crit. n.). np3 ' to cut down,' an Aramaism,
elsewhere only in Isa. xxxiii. 12 (a late prophecy, at any rate in its
present form). — 18. J'DS 'to fix the choice upon,' as Isa. xliv. 14.
Ps. Ixxxi. 4. np3. ; only here and in Prov. vii. 20 (XD3).
Aramaic. — 6. f|QiiT. An affected archaism. See on xxviii. 7. —
7. ^3P. Again in Neh. iv. 11, 1 Kings xi. 28 (fem. plur. in Exodus).
Ill 'basket,' as Jer. xxiv. 2, 2 Kings x. 7. — 13. n-linL", an Aramaism,
= ' firmness.' Eight times in Jer. ; and once in Deut. (xxix. 19).
Ps. lxxxiii. Note archaistic suffixes in ID [vv. 12, 14), and see on
ii. 4, 5. — The appositional locution in v. 12 is quoted by Giesebrecht
as an Aramaism. But ID ;fW here has probably been introduced by
error from v. 14 ; read n'K\ With regard to the two parallels to the
idiom in the present text in Gesenius-Kautzsch (§ 131, p. 412), Isa.
xxix. 23 has probably been interpolated, and in Job xxix. 3 the
pointing is doubtful. — 2. »pn ' stillness,' as Isa. Ixii. 6, 7 ; cf. Wl,
Isa. xxxviii. 10.

LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 479

Ps. lxxxiv. 4, rhBN. Again in Deut. xxii. 6 (twice), and in Job
xxxix. 30. — 11. e)Bifipn, air. Xey., from f|D ; a colloquialism ? "in=Tls.
an Aramaic and new Hebrew word, found (with the cognate noun)
repeatedly in Daniel, in the Targums, and in the Talmud (see e.g.
Berakhoth 8 a), in in sense of dwelling occurs in Isa. xxxviii. 12
(post-Exilic), and according to De Witt in Ps. xlix. 20 ; cf. new Heb.,
inp (=l'np and Tip, Aram. Daniel).
Ps. Ixxxv. 9, n^P3, as Job iv. 6, see on xlix. n. — Ps lxxxvi. Note
the title ''rtx seven times.— 9. 133 with1? as Dan. xi. 39, see on xvii. 4.
— 5. rr?P, air. Xey. nbo ' to forgive ' is a good N. Semitic word (Hebrew,
western Aramaic, and Assyrian). In Hebrew, certainly, it is only
used in Qal ; the Piel (Pael) form which explains rv?p is found in
the Targums. See, however, on the form Ewald, Lehrbuch, § 155 b
and c, and observe that the ordinary equivalent for Heb. rta in the
Targums is p3S?\ The other derivative of ni>D, viz. niTpp, is admittedly
late (Ryssel quotes ntynB> and nyy from Chron. and Eccles.). Its
form is specially frequent in New Hebrew,1 and the word itself
occurs only in cxxx. 4, Neh. ix. 17 (pi.), Dan. ix. 9 (pi.).— 6.
ni>13np, d-rr. Xey. quoted by Hitzig and Giesebrecht as late. But
rhythm might in any age have led a poet to coin this fem. plur.,
which, with the suffix, gives one more syllable than the corresponding
masculine. Ps. Ixxxvii. Written in a harsh quasi-prophetic style, somewhat as
ps. cx. — l mjiP^ , air. Xey. A late form, according to Giesebrecht, for
the classical form "iiP\ But is this at all necessary ? See on Ixxxv. 6. —
WW "Tina ; so cx. 3 (best reading). Isaiah (xi. 9) only speaks of
the ' holy mountain ' of Jehovah. The range of ' holiness ' is extend
ing; cf. Baudissin, Studien,\\. 129.— 5. B"X) E*K. This locution is only
found elsewhere in Esth. i. 8 (E*NJ e»K), and B"K C'K only perhaps in
Ex. xxxvi. 4, and fourteen times in Lev. and Num. We cannot
argue from this that the ps. must be post-Exilic, for "IHJ i\l occurs
in Deut. xxxii. 7, and Pi' Pi' in Gen. xxxix. lo. But it is a fact that
the connexion of the second word in such phrases by Waw copulat.
is specially common in Chron. and Esther. Dr. Driver gives me the
following list of proof-passages, 1 Chron. xxvi. 13, xxviii. 14, 2 Chron.
viii. 14, xi. 12, xix. 5, xxviii. 25, xxxi. 19, xxxii. 28, xxxiv. 13, xxxv. 15,
• Esth. i. 8, 22 [bis), ii. 11, 12, iii- 4, 12, 14, iv. 3, 8, g, n, 13, 17, «¦
21, 27, 28. See on xlv. 18 and cf. Ges.-Kautzsch, Lehrbuch, p. 383.
— fvW- See on vii. 18.— 6. 3inp. Probably here a collat. form of
3)13 (cf. the phrase in Ezek. xiii. 9), which is a late Heb. formation
1 See Siegfried and Strack, Lehrbuch der neuhebr. Sprache, § 47/5, and cf.
Ryssel, De Elohistce Pentateuchi Sermone (1878), pp. 49, 50.

480 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
(Ezek., Chron., Ezra, Neh., Esth., Dan.) for the classical 3n3D. The
corresponding fem. nana occurs in Lev. xix. 28. Comp. on lxxi. 21.
Ps. lxxxviii. 5. ?$t, air. Xey. See on xxii. 20. The form points to
a late age (Ewald, Lehrbuch, § 153a, 2). — 8. ^>y "]DP 'to lean upon,'
not with the view of getting support, but of causing distress. An
unique sense, for which Nestle quotes Syriac parallels (see Nowack ad
loc). — 13. rW::, air. Xey. Not certainly but probably a late form.
The distinction between ' abstract ' and ' concrete ' ideas cannot be
strictly carried out even in new Hebrew (see e.g. iTVX* in Buxtorf).
' The land of forgetting ' may have been an old name of Shedl, and
a nomen actionis of the form rrj'ag (1 Kings xix. 8) would be the
natural term to employ. See, however, remark on nn^P (note on
lxxxvi. 5). — 17. Qin-iya. Again in Job vi. 4 (Exilic), which may be
alluded to. — *>inpi? (so read). The Piel occurs again only in cxix.
139- Ps. Ixxxix. 9. ppq, air. Xey ; but common in Aramaic [khasinb=
Shaddai in Pesh. of Job). Cf. JPn ; NJpn in Daniel. The root
however is proved to be Hebrew by jipn, Am. ii. 9, Isa. i. 31. — 40.
1K.5, only here and in Lam. ii. 7. — 45. "i|p, in its full Aramaic sense
of 'throwing down' (2 Kings ix. 33 Targ., for niDDE2>). The Qal par
ticiple in Ezek. xxi. 17 means 'delivered up.' — 48. T5n. See on
xvii. 14.
Here let us pause. Bks. I. -III. contain the psalms which are
usually with most confidence assigned to the pre-Exilic period. I
have sought to show that there are numerous linguistic phenomena
which throw some doubt on this theory, and make the opposite one
proportionably more plausible. Had I space, I think that I could
prove that Books IV. and V. contain so many unmistakeable Ara
maisms, and words belonging distinctively to the later literature, that
nothing but the most cogent evidence derived from the ideas could
justify us in assigning any of the psalms in these books to a pre-
Exile period. I trust that I have shown in the Lectures that such
evidence from ideas does not exist. But as a work of supererogation
I will devote such space as I can to an examination of some of the
most interesting psalms which remain.
Ps. xc. Mosaic (Delitzsch). Can this be ? To the phraseological
parallels between Ps. xc. and Deut. xxxii. and (perhaps) xxxiii. I have
referred already Those most commonly adduced are v. 1, jitfD,
'habitation,' used of God, as Deut. xxxiii. 27 (njyp) ; v. 2, ^inni
of the birth-pangs of creation, as Deut. xxxii. 18; v. 13b, same
phrase as in Deut. xxxii. 36a; v. 15, niD*. ni3C>, combined as in Deut.
xxxii. 7 (the former only found in these two passages). Of these the

II. LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 481
only ones which are beyond dispute are the third and fourth. It is
the fourth which gives weight to the third, for the phrase in v. 13b
might, if we did not know that the psalmist had some words of Deut.
xxxii. floating in his memory, be thought to present a purely acci
dental coincidence with the ' Song of Moses.' The first and the
second depend on the correctness of the text, which, with some other
critics, I feel compelled to question. From the fact, however, that
in the headings of Ps. xc. and of Deut. xxxiii. alike Moses receives
the same high- title of 'man of God,' it is not improbable that the
reading fiyp (which is a phraseological link between those two songs,
as they now stand) already existed when the heading of Ps. xc. was
written (see p. 75, foot). Notice in this connexion the old Hebrew verb
Mil [v. 10, Num. xi. 31, and nowhere else); cf. 11, common in Aram, in
the sense 'to pass away,' ' to vanish.' In the same verse the emphatic
but otherwise meaningless cohortative should be observed (see on
xiii. 5); in vv. 3, 9 the rare words $31 (see on xxxiv. 19), n?n (again
in Job xxxvii. 2, Ezek. ii. 10; cf. on xlix. 4); in v. 14 the Piel of V2&
(again in Ezek. vii. 19). Comp. nJri with 'JQ, &^?n, 'speech, medita
tion ' (Targ. and Talm. Jer., ap. Jastrow).
Ps. xci. Of uncertain date (Delitzsch ; Nowack). Note however
the air. Xey. iTin'P [v. 4), a synonym for n|V, from InP in the Aramaic
sense 'to surround.' Also that three striking words in this psalm
occur in Deut. xxxii., xxxiii., viz. \\ty [vv. 1, 9, cf. Deut. xxxii. 8),
3pp [v. 6, cf. Deut. xxxii. 24), and jiyp in connexion with God [v. 9,
cf. Deut. xxxiii. 27). It is true, however, that 'p also occurs in Isa.
xxviii. 2, and that fiyp may be a wrong reading. A much clearer
connexion exists between DK>rj '3 in v. 14 and Deut. vii. 7. Lastly
observe that the divine names 'Elyon [vv. 1, 9), and Shaddai [v. 1)
are mostly used by Exilic or post-Exilic writers (pp. 83, 84).
Ps. ci. To the phraseological evidence (p. 67) one would gladly
join some more specially linguistic. In v. 5 we meet with ¦'ifbip (so to
be pointed), where the linking vowel is an affected archaism, which
justifies us in assuming this psalm to be at earliest a late pre-Exilic
work. The same remark applies to a number of temple-songs (see
cx. 4, cxiii. 5-9, cxiv. 8, cxvi. 1, cxxiii. 1, Lam. iii. 1, and cf. 1. 4, and
the passages quoted in the note above). The verb ]&b (here in Poel)
occurs again only in Prov. xxx. 10 (in Hifil). But though J(^« and
\v)n in partic. forms are used in Targ. and in new Heb. for 'to
slander,' and on this and other much more important grounds Prov.
xxx. is post-Exilic, we cannot argue from this to the post- Exilic date
of Ps. ci. Poel is a stem which does not occur in Aramaic, and
there is an exact parallel to ]^)b, ' to attack with the tongue,' in
I I

482 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. app.
f.liv ' to attack with the eye ' (i Sam. xviii. 9, pre-Exilic). Comp.
the Arabic verb 'ana ' to view with an evil eye,' and lasana ' to de
fame.' Linguistically therefore the psalm may be late pre-Exilic.
Ps. cix. 8. Stade quotes nips 'office' as distinctively a late
sense, which arose in connexion with the newly organized priestly
functions, cf. Num. iii. 32, 36, 2 Chron. xxix. 11 [Zeitschr.f. d. a. t.
Wiss., 1885, p. 282). But TpB=' officer' in Judg. ix. 28. D^yp,
elsewhere only in Eccles. v. 1, does however seem late. 16. nN3
has its analogue in Syriac. It occurs in Nifal only here and in Dan.
xi. 30 ; in Hifil only in Ezek. xiii. 22.
Ps. cx. ' Primitive in its vigour and fulness of thought ' (Ehrt).
Similarly Ewald, who regards it as based upon an oracle of Gad or
Nathan. One could certainly imagine that v. 3b was c borrowed from
some old poem now lost ' (so my commentary admits) ; but then the
text of that clause is liable to suspicion. It is, in fact, the single
obscure passage in the psalm, and the Sept., partly supported by two
other Greek versions, read differently (^ni?? "inB>p PD^D, the second
!P being used pregnantly, cf. Job xi. 17). In my commentary I have
given way to conservative scruples, which in this psalm if anywhere are
justifiable. But approaching Ps. ex., as I do now, from a linguistic point
of view, I cannot but say that both "iriK'P and bp seem to me intolerable.
Till we know something certain about the Hebrew of the Davidic or
pre-Isaianic age, we have no sufficient right to indulge in the conjecture
that ' the whole phrase [in v. 3^] may be borrowed from some old
poem now lost ' (so my commentary). Had there really been such a
word as "inK'P (' the early morning sky ; ' cf. ^E>np ' a dark place,'
lxxiv. 20, &c), should we not have met with it in some of the many
poetical references to the dawn ? Philologically the best reading
seems to be that of Bickell, "^ry-bl ^p "ine>p prgp, i.e. ' from the womb,
from the dawn (of life), thy youthful band is (devoted) unto thee.'
Bickell too has improved the arrangement of vv. 5, 6. The psalm is
free from archaisms except that of the linking-vowel (once no doubt
a case-ending) in ''Tyfl.l [v. 4). Unless the non-linguistic evidence
points decidedly to an early pre-Exilic origin, it must be natural to
view this as the affectation of a late poet (see on ci. 5). Note also
that no old writer employs the fem. form rra'1! (Job v. 8 is the oldest
passage), and that Eccles. is the only book which contains the
phrase ma^py (Eccles. iii. 18, vii. 14, viii. 2), except indeed
Daniel, in the Aram, part of which occurs n m3T7y. In v. 3 we
have n-n?*, which is only found again in Eccles. xi. 9, 10, and as
the equivalent of n^iD in the Targums. All that can be done to
mitigate the force of these facts has been done by Delitzsch (see his

IL LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS. 483
commentary). Note lastly tJ^b-^Tjija (see crit. note in my comm.),
:as in Ixxxvii. 1, the idea underlying which is late. Altogether Ps. cx.
is a more successful imitation of the prophetic style than Ps. lxxxii.,
and worthy of being compared with Ps. ii. Among other points of
resemblance between Pss. ii. and ex., observe that both contain the
post- Davidic divine title Adonai.
Pss. cxi. -cxliii. The three first of these belong, ace. to Ewald,
to the time of Manasseh. He admits, however, that this is far from
•certain. Points of contact with psalms in the first Davidic collection
and (cf. Ps. ci.) with Proverbs cannot of course prove the antiquity of
these compositions. It is not only those psalms which are imitated,
and if Ehrt's list of parallelisms in Proverbs be throughout accepted,
it shows that there was already a Book of Proverbs in the psalmists'
time. D^PpO., which occurs in Ps. cxi. 2, 5, and also in Prov. iv. 17
(and in one of the recensions of our Ps. xviii. ; see 2 Sam. xxii. 49),
belongs, as Delitzsch remarks, to a more recent epoch, when the
plural was substituted poetically for the singular. Note also the
numerous airaf Xey6p.eva in these psalms (cxi. 4, 9, n, 12 ; cxli. 3, 4,
10; cxiii. 8) ; especially nblXip, which must be late.
There are still four psalms of special interest which must not be
altogether passed over, though, with one exception, they could not
be adequately treated except as members of groups, and indeed
of groups which are themselves closely connected by a common
linguistic type ; these are cxviii., exxxvii., cxxxix., and cxliv. In
Ps. cxviii. notice in vv. 10-12 the Hifil (found nowhere else) of
S-1D with uncertain meaning, and the Pual (also unique) of ^ylj, a
rare word of Aramaic affinities, found four times in Job, once in
2 Isa., and twice in the earliest portion of Proverbs. It is doubtful,
however, whether the Massoretic text of v. 12a is correct (see
crit. n.). Observe in passing that psalms belonging to the same
group, and for various reasons held to be contemporaneous, do not
always exhibit a late date with equal distinctness in their language.
In the case of Ps. exxxvii. a post- Exilic date is assured by the Aram.
affix in 'anaT.S [v. 6, cf. ciii. 3, cxvi. 19, &c), and by the thrice
repeated E> [vv. 8, 9). Otherwise the style of the psalm, says
Delitzsch, is ' classical,' especially if the text may here and there be
emended. Ps. cxxxix. on the other hand is famous for its incorrect
ness ; in it, according to the same scholar, ' the Aramaic-Hebrew
idiom of the post-Exile period is taken into the service of poetry.' To
me this appears an exaggeration. I admit that the air. Xey. y.n in v. 2
is an Aramaism, like TAVl: and jVlp (see Delitzsch or Wright on
Eccles. i. 14), and that the mark of the accus. in yi}? is also
Aramaic. But in v. 3 why should we not emend »y3"! into <V31? inn

484 LINGUISTIC AFFINITIES OF THE PSALMS, app. ii.

occurs thrice again, it is true, in Lev. xviii.-xx., and, according tc-
Cornill, in Ezek. xix. 7, but there it has a special sense (cf. Levy's
Chald. Lex. s. v. y3l). It seems to me that 'ly3"!• is quite intolerable
here. And in v. 20 are we not justified in correcting ?jnj| into ^DB*
(see crit. n.)? Comp. Driver on 1 Sam. xxviii. 16, an early passage,
which has not escaped the intrusion of the same pronounced
Aramaism. The student will of course notice in v. 19 the rare form
mhti ; see on xviii. 32. In Ps. cxliv. the linguistic interest centres in
vv. 12-14, which Ewald regards as a pre-Exile fragment (see p. 66).
Here we find, in v. 13, the Aramaizing ]t, which occurs nowhere
else except in 2 Chron. xvi. 14 (plur.), n^t, which meets us again in
Zech. ix. 15, and 1TD, apparently a late word for DPK.

INDICES,

INDICES.

(The numbers with an asterisk prefixed are those of pages in the second or
linguistic appendix. )

I.— NAMES AND SUBJECTS.

ABBOTT
Abbott, T. K., 243, 382
Aben Ezra, (on Ps. vi.) 227; (on title
of Ps. xxx.) 247 ; (on Ps. li. 20, 21)
175
Abraham, (Gen. xiv.) 42; (his religi
ous position) 264, 371 ; (in Paradise)
xxxiii.
Adonai, 124, 287, 288, 299-303, 465
Ahab, 167, 179
Ahriman (angro-mainyus), 282, 333,
400
Ahura, not historically connected with
Adonai, 283
Ahura Mazda, 146, 271, 289, 357, 379,
398 &c.
 his spirituality, 282, 283
Akbar, called a Zoroastrian, 448
Akiba, Rabbi, 83, 332
Alcimus, 27, 56, 93, 94, 123
Alexander, Bishop, 116, 264
— the Great, 156, 169, 344, 423
Allegory, Zoroastrian, 398, 399, 437
Amenti, Egyptian Hades, 424, 432
Amos, Book of, 194
Amshaspands, their connexion with
archangels, 336, 337
Angels, belief in, 120, 157, 272, 281,
282, 323-327, 334-337
Anquetil Duperron, 394
Antiochus Epiphanes, 10, 146, 166
— the Great, 69, 114, 115, 128, 166
— Soter, 182
Apocalypse, Persian influence on the,
281
Apocalyptic element in the Psalms,
373. 386

BAUR
Appleton, C. E. A., xii.
Arab song-writing, 192, 210, 459
Arabia, privilege of guestship in, 429
— view of death in heathen, 433
Aristeas, pseudo-, 144, 181, 183
Aristobulus I., 28, 39, in, 201
— II., 219
Ark, significance of the, 315, 328
Artaxerxes I. , 163
— II., 2Q2, 342
— III. (Ochus), 53, 72, 91, 102, 160,,
175, 229, 292
Asaph, psalms of, 101, 120, 147, 150,
159
Asidseans, 19, 198 (see also khasidim)
Assyrian hymns, 391
Atonement, law of Day of, 161
Augustine, St., 29, 61, 259, 273, 274,
292, 353, 377
Avesta, use of the, 433
— catholic utterance in the, 292, 305
(see also Gathas and Yasna)

Babylonian hymns, 65, 194, 213,,
267, 268, 278, 279, 376
— influences on Judaism, 391 &c.
— inscriptions, late, 183
Baethgen, Friedr., 31, 123, 137, 178,,
217, 244, 467
Ball, C. J., xxiv., 27, 43, 77, 135, 376-
Baruch, Book of, xxx., 456
bath qol, 7, 39, 332
Baudissin, Graf, xx., 42, 83, 132, *479>
Baur, F. C, 209
— Gustav, 208

488

INDICES.

BELLARM1NE
Bellarmine, Card., 85
Benedictions, the Eighteen, 18, 271,
327, 363, 416
Bickell, Gustav, 157, 182, 207, 459,
477, 482
Binnie, W., 278
Bissell, E. C, xxx.
Boethius, 274
Bredenkamp, C. J., 91, 470
Bridge, the Judge's, 399, 438
Briggs, C. A., xxiv., 7, 304
Brown, Francis, 279
Browne, Sir T. , 326
Browning, Robert, 192, 260, 410
Bruce, A. B., 209, 220, 337
Brugsch-Bey, H., 424, 432
Budde, K., 280, 459, *4§i
Buddhism, 358
Bundahis, Zoroastrian Scripture, 395,
401, 405, 420, 421, 439, 449
Butler, Bishop, 386

Cadytis, origin of name, 299
Caiaphas, prophecy of, 25
Cajetan, Cardinal, 430, 431
Calamity, Jewish view of, 345, 354
Calendar, Jewish, 68, 80, 1 84
Caliphs, court-poetry under the, 167
Callimachus, 180
Calvin, 82, 131, 154, 157, 177, 231,
245. 247, 455
Canon, close of Old Testament, 457
Captivity, the third great, 53
Carpzov, J. G., 7, 13
Castelli, David, 53, 415
Cave, A., xxviii.
Chenery, T., 50, 433
Cherub, conception of, 205, 223, 323,
327
Church, germs of doctrine of the, 266,
3"
— consciousness in the Psalter, 258
Church, Dean, 370
— Professor, 92, 142
Chronicles, Books of, 298
— their style, 474, 476
Chrysostom, 5, 29, 36, 64, 76-78, 82,
103, 174, 243, 273, 428
Clement of Alexandria, 430, 446
Code, the Priestly, xvii., xxx., 248,
270, 281, 335, 393, 396, *473
Colenso, Bishop, xvii.
Coleridge, S. T., 141
Columban, 253
Conder, Colonel, 195
Cornill, C. H., 106, 128, 185, 301,
476, 484
Cosmogony, Babylonian, 280, 283

DELITZSCH
Cosmogony, Iranian, 283
— Jewish, 272, 280, 283
Covenant, religious conception of the,
345
Cromwell, Oliver, 19
Curtiss, S. T., 43
Cuthbert, St. (Ps. Ix.), 96
Cyril, St., 21, 428
Cyrus, 169, 172, 182, 183, 279, 280,
352

Dalman, Gustav, 213, 299, 300
Daniel, Book of, 15, 25 (note), 35, 37,
94, 105-107, 156, 287, 296, 336,
417, 445
— name of, 106
— Greek additions to, 30
Dante, 94, 96, 98, 232, 265, 274, 337,
420, 432
Darius Hystaspis, 144, 168, 247, 280
Darmesteter, J., 107, 397, 437, 439, 440
David, character and work of, 190-193,
211, 237, 249
— a second, 194
— symbolic use of name, 22, 25, 37,
339
— imaginary psalms of, 205, 206
— ascription of psalms to, 7, 69, 75,
81, 107, 126, 136, 174, 190
Davidic psalms, criteria of, 190, 208
 relics of genuine, 193
Davidson, A. B. , xxiv., 133, 209
Dawn, a religious symbol, 407, 448
Dedication (or, Hanukka), Feast of,
17, 18, 32, 33, 247
D'Eichthal, Gust., 284
Delitzsch, Franz, his Iris, 153
 his argument from colours, 219
 on Messianic psalms, 260
—  the Book of Daniel, 106
 Ecclesiastes, 409
 Jonah, 306
 immortality in Proverbs, 441
 Samuel as a psalmist, 210
 Davidic psalms, 208
 Messianic psalms, 34, 260
 Pss. xiii., xliii., 126
 xvi., *465
 xvii. , *466
 xliv., lxxiv., lxxix.,. 93 (cf.
103)
 li. 20, 21, ... 175
 Ixxxvii., ... 131
 lxxxviii., Ixxxix., ... 129,
130
 ex., ... 34
 cxxii. , &c. , ... 60 (see also
pp. 197, 244, 250 &c.)

NAMES AND SUBJECTS.

4S9

DELITZSCH
Delitzsch, Friedrich, 279
Demetrius Poliorcetes, 184
De Quincey, Thomas (on Essenism),
445, 446
Derenbourg, J., 40, 80, 132, 416, 456
De Vere, Aubrey, 204, 382
DeWitt, John, 6, 319, 320, '479
Dillmann, Aug., 31, 56, 92, 95, 133,
160, 177, 218, 249, 301, 333, 457,
*463, *464, *46S
Dorner, Aug., 191
Driver, S. R., xvi., xx. , xxi., xxiii.,
xxiv., xxvi., 57, 182, 298, 304, 409,
426, *46i, *463 &c.
Drummond, of Hawthornden, 204
— James, 23, 24, 30, 38, 293, 304,
331, 420, 449
Droysen, 155, 156, 168
Dualism, Jewish, 422
Duncker, Max, 210
Dutt, R. Chunder, xxxiv.

Ecclesiastes, Book of, 55, 287, 290,
298, 321, 381, 423
— date of, 409
— style of, 463, 472
— not Hellenistic, 423
Ecclesiasticus, Book of, 10, 331
— date of, 123, 409, 456
— appendix to, 127
— not Hellenistic, 423
— Sadducean elements in, 41 1
— style of, 300, 463
— incorrectness of Greek rendering of,
458
— references to Psalms in, xxx., 117,
128, 456
Edersheim, A., 36, 127, 128, 278, 327,
456
Egyptian influence on Jews, 431
— inscriptions, &c, 181, 304
— religious ideas, 431, 432
Ehrt, C, 49, 78, 104, 456, 458, 483
Eichhorn, J. G., 117, 129, 176
Elijah, story of, 383, 421
Eliot, George, 450
Elmslie, W. G., 158
Eloah, divine name, 205, 206, 467
Elohistic narrative, the, 272, 283, 463
Elyon, divine title, 26, 27, 41, 51, 73,
83, 121, 164, 206, 314, 464
Enoch, story of, xxxiii., 149, 383, 432
— the Babylonian, 432
— Book of, 22, 412, 423
 Essenian elements in, 448,449
 Messianism in, 1 22
 view of sacrifices in, 375
Epiphany, Feast of, 32, 34, cf. xxxviii.

GOBINEAU
Essenes, connexion of name, 56
— their belief in angels, 335
 view of marriage, 446
 sacrifices, 375
—  the soul, 418-421, 447
 alleged sun-worship, 331, 447,
448
Essenism in Jewish Christianity, 446
Esther, Book of, 287, 298
Eternity of punishment, 439
Eupolemus, Hellenistic writer, 13, 109
Eusebius, 103, 185, 273
Ewald, H., xvi., xviii., 21, 32, 35, 38,
65, 91, 97, 102, 109, 114, 135, 146,
158, 162, 165, 167, 176, 179, 190,
191, 217, 245, 249, 299, 328, 457,
*462
 on Davidic psalms, 208
Ezekiel, 301, 321, 353
Ezra, did he rebuild the walls? 71
— his legalism, 358
— was he a psalmist ? 253
— did he collect (or complete) the
Psalms ? 13, 458
— Fourth Book of, 421

Father, divine title, 291, 305, 313,
327, 328, 35°
Fletcher, Phineas, 54
Flood-story, Babylonian, 392, 432,
469, 474
Forbes, John, 59, 130, 217, 243, 251
Forgiveness, conception of, 54, 347
Frankl, Z., 38, 184, 445, 456
frashSkereti (or frashakard), meaning
of, 4°7, 438, 440
fravashis, the, 282, 335, 420, 449
Freudenthal, 13, 29, 109
Fuller, J. F., 38

Ganneau, Clermont, 181
Gaokerena, 400, 439
Gathas, the, 74, 194, 213, 284, 334,
335, 34i, 352, 372, 379, 385, 395-
398, 436
Geiger, A., 33, 40, 41, 57, 303, 330,
409
Geldner, K., 395, 434-436, 45°
Genesis, origin of, 270, 279
Gen. xiv., date of; see Index II.
ger ('guest'), use of, 429
Gesenius, W., 104
Giesebrecht, Friedr., Ill, 180, 182,
*46i, *472, *478, *479
Gifford, E. H. (on Baruch), 456
Glory, the divine, 331
Gobineau, Count, 13

49°

INDICES.

GOETHE
Goethe, xiv., 367
Goldziher, I., xx., 282, 284
Gore, Charles, ix., xxv., xxviii.
Gratz, H., 13 (Modin), 55 (Purim),
61 (Ps. cxxxiv.), 83 (daily psalms :
date of Sept.), no & 142 (the
'anavim), 125 (Ps. lxviii.), 142 (Ps.
Ixxii.), 159 (Ps. xlix.), 180 (date of
Sept. Pentateuch), 184 (against
Josephus), 219 (Simon the Maccabee),
355 & 455 (Maccabaean psalms), 425
& 442 (on the resurrection-doctrine)
Greek influence on Jews, 9, 10, 14,
66, 313, 423-425
Gregory Nazianzen, 29
— of Nyssa, 258
Grotius, 75, 76, 85, 130, 275
Gruppe (on Greek myths), xxxi., 451
Giinzburg, David, 459
Guthe, H. , 249

Hades, the Egyptian ; see Amenti
 Mandean, 432
Halevy, J., 81, 125, 126, 391, 452,
*467, *473
Hallel, the, 18, 32, 49, 50, 57
— origin of word, 459, 460
Hallevi, R. Yehuda, 336, 369
Hamburger, J. (on Jewish parties), 57
Hammond, H., 6, 7
Hannah, Song of; see Index II.
Hannington, Bishop, 234
Hanukka ; see Dedication
Haoma plant, the, 437, 439 -
Hardt, H. von der, 57-60, 253
Harlez, C. de, 85, 157, 213, 282, 395,
425, 438, 440
Harnack, Th., 31
Harrison, Fred., 19
Hatch, Edwin, 12, 469
Haupt, Paul, 61, 469
Havet, M., xxxii., 415
Hawkins, E., 76
Heart, ethical reference of term, 466,
cf. 473
Heaven, the Assyrian, 153
— spiritualized or symbolic conception
of, 298, 300, 314, 318, 328
Heaven and hell, the Egyptian, 431,
432
— the later Jewish, 391, 416, 432,
444
— the Zoroastrian, 399, 400, 439
Hebrew ; see Language
Heman, guild of, 100, 101
Hengstenberg, E. VV., 60, 61, 131,
164, 177, 214, 240, 260, 285
Herder, J. G., 326

ISRAEL
Hezekiah, did he collect psalms ? 7
— Song of; see Index II.
Hickes, the nonjuror, 327
Hilary, 458
Hildersam, Puritan divine, 174
Hilgenfeld, Ad., 23, 133, 375, 447-
449
Hitzig, Ferd., 60, 68, 114, 116, 134,.
137, 155, 164, 167, 176, 177, 216,
226, 247, 249-251, 333, 470
 on Davidic psalms, 208
 on Maccabaean psalms, 455
Hofmann, of Erlangen, 273, 274
Hoffmann, G. , 299, 426
Holland, H. S., xxxiv.
Holtzman, M., 213, 357
Holtzmann, H., 38
— Oscar, 41, 449
Holy and holiness, use of terms, 324,.
331
Homer, 37, 184, 198
Hooker, 304
Horace, 273
Hort, F. J. A., 182
Hiibschmann, H., Zend scholar, 434
Hupfeld, H., 109, 126, 223
Humility, a note of the true Israel, 98,
no, 171, 468 (top)
Hyde, T., 107, 281
Hyrcanus, John, 13, 24, 25, 39, 93,
96, 143
— II., 26, 146, 154, 219

Ideal (or, heavenly) existence, 274,.
334
Immortality, Babylonian germs of be
lief in, 391-393
— is the idea in the Psalter? 381 &c.
— Greek belief in, xxxiii.
— Persian belief in, 394 &c.
— Sabaean belief in, 393
— in Ps. xxxvi. 9 Sept. , 409
Imra al-Kais, 192
Isaac, St. , of Antioch, 29
Isaiah (Book of), higher criticism of;-
see Index II.
— eschatology of, 402-406
— his literary influence, 162, 164
— was he a psalmist? 214
— founder of Jewish Church, 209
— the Second, his literary influence,
71, 112, 124, 162
Islam, 303, 304, 336, 379
Israel, its receptivity, 267
— late traces of heathenism in, 160,
297
 missionary function, 292 (see also
Judaism)

NAMES AND SUBJECTS.

491

JACKSON
Jackson, Dean, 6, 103, 122, 136, 245
Jaddua, 59
Jah, divine name, 124, 300, 301
Jannseus, Alexander, 24
Japanese mythology, 325
Jasher, Book of, 192, 193, 210
Jeduthun, 101, 246
Jehoshaphat, 177
Jehovah (Yahveh), use of this name in
later books, 214, 297, 298-302
— the name, when not pronounced,
301
— Sabaoth, 20, 203, 222, 315, 323,
329
— unique divinity of, 246
— creatorship of, 214, 314, 322
— as Shepherd and Teacher, 249, 343-
348, 352
— humility ascribed to, 224, 343
— prophetic view of, its relation to
Nicene doctrine, 290
— may the name be applied to Christ ?
222, 305
— objection to Christian use of name,
304
— ; see also Kingdom
Jensen, P. , 330, 392, 427, 432
Jeremiah, his religious influence, 214,
264
— the evangelical prophet, 316, cf.
425
— school of, 135, 231, 365, 466
— was he a psalmist? 122, 134- 136,
230, 242, 247, 250
Jeremias, A., 427
Jeroboam II., 167, 179
Jerome, St., (on Salem) 42, (on anon.
psalms) 85, (on Ps. Ixxii.) 153,
(on old copies of Sept.) 299, (on
Ps. lxxviii.) 336
Jewish hymns, 277, 297, 334, 336, 369
Jezebel, (Ps. xlv.) 167, 471
Job, speeches of, 64, 85
— a symbol of Israel, Il8, 127
— (Book of), its date, 159, 202, 217,
218, 409
 its character, 67, 70, 72, 73,
149, 287
 gives the inner experiences of
its author, 290
 its Babylonian affinities, 266
 its mythology, 202, 270
 its style, 463
 Elihu-section of, 246, 249,
409
 epilogue of, 405
 Sept. addition to, 406 (note)
 monument of a school of
poets, 242

LAGARDE
Joel (Book of), xx., 133, 239, 365,428
— M. , 296, 423
Johannine writings, the, 388, 425
Jonah, Book of, 127, 202, 294, 295,
306, 395
— psalm of, its twin brother, 127
Jonathan, the Maccabee, 8i
Jong, P. de, 102, 104, 458
Joseph, story of, 158
Josiah, reign of, 91, 205, 215
Jost, J. M., 14, 22, 38, 349, 376
Jubilees, Book of, 448
Judaism, ' duality ' of, 296
— later, its view of the heathen, 306
— Egyptian, 423, 452
Judas the Maccabee, 10, 16, 48, 96,,
98, 142, 178, 199
Judgment, doctrine of the, 241, 254,
372-374, 387
— on individuals, 381 &c.
Judith, Book of, 25 (note), 37
Justin Martyr, 35, 153, 154, 222, 414,
443

Kalisch, M. M., 302, 377, 467
Kamphausen, A. H. H., 351
Kant, 260
Kautzsch, E., 250, 328, 463 &c.
Kay, W., 6, go, 134, 221, 226, 245,
347
Kenosis, theological idea, xxv., xxvi.;
cf._344
khasidim, the, 19, 27, 33, 48, 49, 56,
57, 92, 93, 98, 117, "9, 129, 150,
195, 247, 364
khesed, or lovingkindness, meaning of,
«7, 370-372, 378, 379
Kimchi, R. David, (title of Ps. xlv. )-
173, (Ps. li. 20, 21) 175, (Ps. lxv.)
176, (Book of Ezra) 344, (Ps.
Ixxii. 6) *476
King, E. G., 159
— use of term, 468
Kingdom, the divine, 336, 340, 341
Kingsley, C, quoted, 266
Kohut, A., 282, 401
Korah, psalms of, 100, 101 &c.
Koran, referred to, 65, 69, 325, 333,
377, 379, 429, 432
Kremer, A. v., 167
Krochmal, 50, 58, 243
Kuenen, A., xvi., xvii., xix., 133, 157,
159, 179, 191, 209, 247-249, *46i

Lagarde, P. de, 31, 91, 176, 232,
247, 248, 254, 282, 299, 351, 459,,
*467, *473

492

INDICES.

LAMENTATIONS
Lamentations, Book of, ioo, 214
Law, preexistence of the, 358
— imperfection of, recognized, 374
— expansion of meaning, 349, 358
— Levitical, its value, 358, 367
Lazarus, Emma, 18, 104
Leathes, Stanley, 175
Lehrs, K., xxxii., xxxiii.
Lenormant, Francois, 278
Lessing, his Nathan, 335
Ley, Julius, 459
Libations, heathen, 198
Life, Tree of, Babylonian, 400, 427
 Hebrew, 383, 412, 428
 Iranian, 400, 427
— , Water of, 383, 400, 413, 414, 427,
442
Lightfoot, Bishop, xxix., 56, 209, 447
Lights, Feast of; see Epiphany
Linguistic (cf. App. II. ) : —
Value of linguistic argument, xxi.,
130, 461
Is an abrupt style a mark of age?
212, 462, 466
Scriptio plena, argument from, 477
Termination uth, 472
Abstract forms in Hebrew, 472, 479,
480
Aramaisms, presence of, 462, 463,
467, 475, 480 &c.
Assyrian cognate words, 469, 473,
474
'abd, use of, in Arabic, 303
.Supposed Scythian loanword, 469
Elohim, Phoenician linguistic parallel
to Hebrew use of, 299
Lock, Walter, 277
Lord's Prayer, doxology in, 457
Lowth, Bishop, xii., 7
Luther, 235
Lyra, Nic. de, 253

Maccabaean period, greatness of, 1 5
 attitude of Jews in Egypt, 38
Maccabee, meaning of, 43
Maccabees, their descent, 27, 32, 43
 complex characters, 43
 monument, 1 3
 unworthy descendants, 28, 375
— festival of the, 29
¦ — typified by Joshua, 32, 96
 Saul, 37, 97
 David, 22, 25, 37, 67
 Solomon, 37
— first Book of, 56, 298, 300, 417,
456, 457
— second Book of, 38, 39, 56, 137, 345
— fourth Book of, 29

NEUBAUER
Macrobius, 32
Mahdist manifesto, 80
Maimun, 412
Marduk, the god, 282, 392, 393
Margoliouth, D. S., 300
Marriage, Egyptian, with a sister, 183
Martineau, James, 324, 389
Martyrdom, privilege of, 444
Mason, A. J., 441
Mazdeism ; see Zoroastrianism
Megillath Taanith ; see Calendar
Melchizedek, 26, 27, 42, 99
melekh ; see King
Memra, in Jewish theology, 332
Merciful, the divine title, 379
Mercy, use of the term, 371
Merit, later doctrine of, 275, 368
Meru, mount, 330
Messiah, sense of term, 338, 339
— doctrine of, 22, 36, 200, 373
Messiah-Priest, idea of, 22, 36
Metre, Hebrew, 459
Mills, L. H., xxxii., 213, 271, 376,
397, 434, 438, 440
Milne, Bishop, 30
Milton, 108, 221, 276, 320
Minokhired, Zoroastrian Scripture, 334,
420, 438, 439
Mitchell, Murray, 282, 436
Mithra, cult of, 32
Moberly, Bishop, 262
Mohammedanism ; see Islam
Mommsen, Theod., 184, 219
Montefiore, C. G., 385
Montet, E., 391, 451, 452
Moore, G. F., 85
Morrison, W. D., 424, 445
Moses, his historical character, 85
— was he a psalmist ? 74
— Assumption of,[26 (see also Index II. )
Mozley, F. W., 81, 126, 175
Miiller, Max, xxxii., xxxiii., 284, 290,
353
Mythology, literary revival of, 202, 270
Myths in the Psalms, 202, 204, 286
— religious value of, xxiii., 286, 326

Nachmanides, Hebrew poet, 421
Namelessness, the divine, 289, 304
Names, divine, in various religions, 84,
152, 287 &c, 297 &c, 305, 379
Nebuchadrezzar, character of, 27, 142,
172, 280
— type of Antiochus Epiphanes, 37,
105
Nehemiah, 70, 82, 231
Nestle, E., 105, 106, *48o
Neubauer, Ad.; 85, 213, 272, A to

NAMES AND SUBJECTS.

493

NEWMAN
Newman, Cardinal, 430
Nicanor, 48, 55
Nicoll, Prof., 142
Noah, the Babylonian, 432
Noldeke, Theod., xx., 280, 459, 475,
477
Nowack, W., 107, 125, 175

Ohle, R., 418, 445
Olshausen, Justus, 136, 147, 155, 157,
355
Onias, temple of, 12, 14
— II., 127
- HI., 123
- IV., 137
Orelli, C. v., 34, 235, 245, 467
Origen, 215, 299, 327, 457
Ormazd ; see Ahura Mazda
Owen, John, xxxii.
Oxford missionaries in Calcutta, xxxiv. ,
325

Paradise, Babylonian, 329, 330, 427,
432
— Hebrew story of, 383
Paul, St., his catholicity, 313
 missionary claim, 306
 Hellenism and Zoroastrianism in,
424, 450
Paulus, H., 216
Pearson, Bishop, 305
Peele, G., dramatist, 179, 221
Pentateuch, criticism of the, xvii. , 6
Perowne, Bishop, 6, 164, 176, 248,
251, 253, 459
Persians, their religious character, 271
— — religious influence on Judaism,
271, 281, 393 &c
— not civilizing agents in Judah, 9
Personification, 274, 334
Peters, J. P., 103
Petrie, Flinders, 9, 10
Pfleiderer, Otto, xxxiii., 389, 425, 45°,
452
Pharisees, the, 22, 39, 51, 57, 364, 4",
416-418
Philo, pseudo-, on Essenes, 446
— Zoroastrianism in, 452
Phocylides, pseudo-, 183
Phoenician illustrations, 105, 181
(thrice), 299, 328, 426
Pindar, 178, 180, 273, 446
Plato, his view of the soul, 420, 450,
451
 myth of Er, 447
Plumptre, Dean, 61,91, 101, 102, 129,
131. 159

PTOLEMY
Plutarch, 107, 438
Prayer, doctrine of, in Psalms, 64, 287,
396
 Zoroastrianism, 396, 397
Prayers, Zoroastrian, at dawn, 448
Pre-existence of souls, 421, 450
 holiest things, 358, 421, 450
Processional hymns, 17, 203
Proselytes, 19, 33, 119, 131, 295
Proverbs (Book of), its date, 409 (on
that of the several parts, see Index
II.)
— ideas of, 36 5
— imitated by Sirach, 300
— origin of, 483
— date of Tamil, 80
Prudentius, 329
Psalm-writing, its relation to prophecy,
3°
— its long continuance, 30
Psalmody, its humble origin, 194
Psalms, apologetic results of these re
searches, xxxi.
— should be studied by groups, xxxi. ,
9
— alphabetic, 51, 228, 243
— daily temple, 72, 83, 157
— of 'Degrees,' 51, 59, 60
— Elohistic, 90, 100, 101, 301 (note),.
470
— Guest-, 236, 387, 429
— Maccabaean not a priori improbable,.
15
— - non-linguistic criteria of, 16
— linguistic evidence for, 16 (cf. Index
II.)
— divine names in, 301
— lost, 107
— ' ' last words' on, 455-458
— Messianic, 34, 35, 339, 340,35°, 351
— miktam, 198
— mystic, 385-388
— mysticism of, 272, 283
— of the night-vigils, 220
— national, 261-265, 276-278, 319
— individualistic elements in, 265, 319.
— Puritan, 364-367, 386, 396
— early Christian interpretation of, 33,
259
— magic use of, 279, 284
— not intended only for temple, 363
— theology of, 285, &c.
— traditions on authorship, *459, "460
— (see also Davidic), titles of, not autho
ritative, 190, 207, 459
Psalter, stages in the formation of the,
11, 12, 100, 201, 241
Ptolemy Soter (or, Lagi), 114, 170,,
171, 184

494

INDICES.

PTOLEMY
Ptolemy, Philadelphus, 144-146, 156,
168-172, 183
— Euergetes I., 127
— Philometor, 180
Purim, Feast of, 55, 229, 243, 282
Pusey, E. B., 37, 92, 105
Pythagoreanism, 423, 445, 446

Rameses II. , 141
Rashi (Ps. Ixxii.) 476, (Ps. lxxvi.) 178,
(national psalms) 258
Renan, E., 108, 127, 205, 299, 304,
444
Renouf, le Page, 429, 432
Renovation, Zoroastrian doctrine of,
401, 405
Repentance, 369, 377
Resurrection, Jewish belief in, 402,
406, 440, 444
— Zoroastrian belief in, 400, 401, 438,
439
— when first taught in Arabia, 433
Reuss, E., xviii., 37, 107, 155, 355,
455
Reville, Alb., 283, 358
— Jean, 32
Rhys, John, 438, 447
Riehm, E., 64, 431
Ritschl, Alb., 328
Rudinger, E., 251, 455
Ruth (Book of), its date and purpose,
306
Ryssel, V., 245, *479

Saadya, 85
Sachs, M., 421
Sack, Israel, 104
Sacrifices, in Psalms ; see Psalms,
Puritan
— primitive theory of, 216, 396
— in the Avesta, 396, 437
Sadducees, 51, 57 (name), 411, 413,
416
Salem, the name, 42, 165
Samaritans, the, of Shechem, 232
— their hymns, 30
Sanballat, 232, 233
Saoshyant, Zoroastrian name, 400, 438
Satan, belief in the, 282, 323, 335,
357, 413
Saussaye, Chantepie de la, 282, 397,
434, 436
Sayce, A. H., xxiii., 65, 268, 279, 282,
323, 376, 391
Scepticism, early Jewish, 410, 423
Schiller, 326
Schleiermacher, Friedr., xvi.

SONG
Schools, Jewish, 348, 349
Schopenhauer, 174
Schrader, E., 208, 268, 279, 323, 473
Schultz, F. W., 175, 208
— H., 297, 307, 426
Schiirer, E., 10, 13, 38, 56, 375, 456
Scopas, 114, 115
Scythian invasion, 135, ^469
Sennacherib, 165, 216, 217
Septuagint, date of Psalter in, 12, 83
— additional psalm in, 69
— its bearing on the higher criticism,
458
— titles of psalms in, 80, 126, 201,
458 &c.
— view of in Palestine, 172, 184
Serpent, the, in Paradise story, 427
Servant, Semitic use of term, 303
— of Jehovah, 262-264, 275, 292, 293,
368
Shaddai, divine name, 84, 124
Shakespeare, 162
shedim, meaning of, 334
Shekina, or divine presence, 40, 331,
332
Sheol, old view of, 381-385
 protests against, 381, 412,
413
— light in the gloom of, 384, 407
Shulamith, 273
Sibylline Oracles, Book iii., fanatical,
23, 37
Sidney, Sir Philip, 370
Simon the Maccabee, 11, 23, 24, 26,
28, 39, 147, 173, 199, 200, 457,
458
 high priest, 26, 41
 Righteous, 59
Sin, technical words for, 356, 466
— ¦ doctrine of, 356, 357, 368
Sirach ; see Ecclesiasticus
Sit-napistim, 427, 432
Sleep, uses of term, 389, 407, 430, 441
Smend, R., 57, 127, 133, 175, 180,
277, 350, 426
Smith, G. A., xix., xxiv., 375, 392
— W. R., xxiii., 102, 183, 207, 216,
220, 245, 251, 429, 460
Sobieski, John, 19
Solomon, 141, 153, 173, 210
— did he write any of our psalms? 52,
141
— fragment of psalm of, 193, 212, 475
— so-called Psalms of, 15, 30, 33,
277, 411 (see also Index II.)
— Song of, 167, 179, 273 (foot), 298
' Son of God,' use of phrase, 130, 252,
305 (see also Father)
Song-book ; see Jasher

NAMES AND SUBJECTS.

495

SOPHOCLES
Sophocles, 262, 273
Spiegel, Friedr., 282, 283, 396, 434,
440
Spirit, belief in the, 322, 333, 347
 Zoroastrian parallel to, 333
:Spitta, Friedr., 443
Stade, Bernhard, 131, 136, 154, 157,
218, 249, *482
Stanley, Dean, 48, 126, 295
Stanton, V. H., 36, 38, 99
Stoic ideas, 423, 445
Strack, H. L., 208, 462
Sufis, the, 379, 385, 428, 431
Supernaturalism, Jewish, 320, 321
— anti-, charge of, 209
Swete, H. B., 30, 31
Synagogues, 12, 14, 363 (psalmody),
104 (Greek term)
Synesius, 181

TalbIya, meaning of, 214, 455
Targum on Ecclesiastes, 444
 Job and Psalms, 416, 444
 Isaiah, 440
— of Onkelos, 297
— (shenl, ' second ') on Esther, 109,
444
— on Messianic psalms, 350 (see also
Index II.)
Taylor, C, 57, 77, 457
— Jeremy, 297
Tell el-Amarna tablets, 42
Temple, purification of, 10
— music, 9, II, 13
— singers, 101, 213, 246, 462
— singing, 194, 460
— sacramental view of, 315, 318
— spiritual, 387, 388
Tennyson, 174
Tertullian, 35, 273
Theocracy ; see Kingdom
Theocritus, 144, 156, 168, 178, 180,
181, 184
Theodore of Mopsuestia, the 'Inter
preter,' 30, 97
 opinions respecting, 16, 30, 31
—  on prophecy, 273
 psalm- titles, 207
 Maccabaean psalms, 455
 (Ps. ii. ) 350, (Ps. vii. ) 244,
(Ps. viii.) 50, (Ps. xx.) 217, (Ps.
xxii.) 245, 274, 351, (Ps. xxxii.)
248, (Ps. xxxv.) 245, (Ps. xliv.)
103, (Ps. xlv.) 179, 350, (Ps.
xlvii.) 176, (Ps. li.) 162, 174, 175,
(Ps. Hi. -liv.) 134, (Ps. lv.-hx.)
123, (Ps. lv. 14) 137, (Ps- lvl-)
30, (Ps. Ix.), 107, (Ps. lxn.) 123,

WISDOM
(Ps. lxv., Ixvi.) 163, (Ps. lxix.)
245, 351, (Ps. Ixxii.) 153, (Ps.
lxxiv.) 103, (Ps. lxxv.) 178, (Ps.
lxxvi.) no, 178, (Ps. lxxix.) 30,
103, (Ps. Ixxx.) 97, (Ps. lxxxviii.)
129, (Ps. Ixxxix.) 351, (Ps. xc.)
84, (Ps. cix.) 63, (Ps. cx.) 350,
(Ps. cxvi.) 33, (Ps. cxviii.) 32, 351,
(Ps. cxliv.) 67
Theodoret, 33, 58, 77, 79, 85, 103,
107, 129, 134, 136, 175, 178, 181,
207, 217, 223, 273, 274, 353
Theophanies, 156, 344, 353
Thirlwall, Bishop, 156, 185
Tholuck, A., 117, 165, 176
Tiele, C. P., 269, 279, 330, 351, 434,
450
Tiglath-Pileser I., 21
Titan-legends, 424
Tobit, Book of, 30, 307
Torah, meaning of, 355
Toy, C. H, 470, 471
Tradition, poems preserved by, 192,
210

Underworld, the (see Heaven and
Hell and Sheol)
— Babylonian, 432

Varuna, cult of, 289, 353, 357
Vatke, W., 133, 137, 184, 193, 203,
209, 222
Vedic hymns, 82, 194, 213, 279, 357,
395
Vendidad (Avesta), 283, 352, 394, 398,
434 &c.
Venema, 214, 243
Vernes, Maurice, 41, 210, 329
Vitringa, 455

Weber, F., 334, 335, 337, 377, 406
&c.
Weissmann, S., 154, 184
Wellhausen, Jul., xvii., 39, 57, 81,
128, 154, 212, 216, 219, 351, 329,
376, 430, 459
West, E. W., xxxii., 395, 396, 435,
439
Westcott, Bishop, 179, 181, 182, 209
Wette, W. de, 24, 31, 52, 109, 177,
181, 193
Wiedemann, A., 156, 181
Wilhelm, Eug., 352, 433
Wilson, H. B., xxvii.
Windischmann, Fr., 395
Wisdom, Book of, 423

496

INDICES.

WISDOM
Wisdom, the divine, 322, 334, 423
Word, the divine, 321
Wordsworth, 222, 274
World, terms for, and their use, 390,
407, 414, 415, 430, 440, 467
Wunsche, A., 56, 407 (cf. Talmud)
Xerxes, 181

Yahveh ; see Jehovah
Yahvist, the, xvii., xviii., 270, 279,
469
Yasna (Avesta), 305, 401, 437 &c.

ZUNZ
Zarathustra, 192, 376, 395 (cf.
Gathas)
— age and mission of, 107, 434-436
Zechariah, was he a psalmist ? 215
— second part of ; see Index II.
Zeller, E., 445, 447
Zeno, 418
Zerubbabel, 21, 36, 52, 53
Zoroaster ; see Zarathustra
Zoroastrianism, 85, 146, 357, 394 &c-
— Christian influence on later, 396
— names of God in, 288
— modern, 342, 436
Zunz, 55

497

IL— PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES AND OTHER
ANCIENT BOOKS.

For the pages on which the Koran and the Zoroastrian writings are cited, see
Index I.
For Index II. the author is chiefly indebted to the generous help of two friends.

(A) Old Testament.

Genesis.

PAGE
i. . . . .. 70, • lo... ::; -;
i.-ii. 4
.... 283
i. 1 (Tars
,'•) •
• 358
i- 2, 3 .
• 322
i. 16
. 221
ii.
. 428
ii. 14
. 42
iii.
1
127, 428
iii. (Targ
• )¦
¦ 443
iii. 8
¦ 414
iv. 26
.*464
v. 22
• 383
v. 24
. 149
vi. 2, 4
• 324
viii. 21
. 321
ix. 1-17
. 3°6
ix. 25
• 64
xi. 29
. 183
xiv. .
. 270
xiv. 1-17
• 42
xiv. 18 .
. 27
xiv. 18-20
42, 165
xiv. 18-24
. 84
xv. 18 .
. 206
xviii. 3
• 299
xviii. 19
• 371
xix. 19
¦ 379
xix. 20
• "5
xx. 7
• i55
xx. 9
• 356
xxii. 18
. 142
xxiii. 6
. . 219
xxiv. 27
• • 379
xxiv. 45
. . 321
xxvi. 4 .
. . 142
xxvii. 41
. . 321
xxviii. 1
3, '
4
. . 206
Genesis — cont.
xxx. 25 (Targ,
xxxii. 30
xxxiv. 7 .
xxxvii. 9
xxxix. 3 .
xii. 38 (Targ.)
xliii. 14 .
xlviii. 15
xlix. 6 .
xlix. 10 .
xlix. 22 .
xlix. 24 .
xlix. 37 ¦
PAGE
• 333
. 289
• 356
. 221
. 169
• 333
• 84
. 158
. 216
• 36
. 158
. 158
. 64
Exodus.
111. 1 .
iv. 22
vi. 4 .
ix. 6 .
xii. 19 (S
xii. 42
xv. .
xv. 1-3
XV. I-li
XV. 2
xv. 3
xv. 6
xv. 8
xv. 17
xv. 16
xv. 19
XV. 20
XV. 21
xvii. 16
xviii. 5
ept.
82,
¦ 35i
• 130
• 383
. 275
. 429
¦ 407
124, 177 31
i47
, 177
, 124
222 31
,215 31
*464 178 3°31
124
3Si
Exodus — cont.
PAGE
xix. 6
. . . 2l6
xix. 15 •
. . .446
xx. 1-17
• • -237
xx. 6
• • 378
xx. 7
• • -302
xx. 23-xxm
• ¦ • 237
XXI. .
. . . 250
xxm. 1 3 .
. . 2l6
xxix. 6 .
. I99, 2l8
xxxiii. 18-2
0 . . .431
xxxiv. 6, 7
¦ . 378
xxxiv. 24
... 51
XXXIX.
... 60
xxxix. 30
• ¦ -199
Leviticus.
iv. 3, 5 •
v. 4 .
vi. 8, 9 .
ix. 4, 6, 23
ix. 22, 33
xvi. 2
xvii. n .
xix. 17 .
xix. 24 .
xxii. 32 .
xxiv. 1 1 .
xxiv. 16 .
338, 350
• 249366
¦ 353
• 315
¦ 353
¦ 45i
. 196
. 460
. 302
• 300
300, 302
Numbers.
1. 10 . .
ii. 20
v. 11-29
248 248 65
K K
498

INDICES.

Numbers — cont.

vi. 23-27
vi. 23-26
vi. 24, 25
vi. 24-26
vi. 25, 26
vi. 27
vii. 22-27
ix. 15, 16
ix. 17-22
*¦•¦ 35 •
xii. 5
xii. 7
xii. 8 (Sept,
xiv. 10 .
xvii. 16 .
xxiii. 10.
xxiv. 3 .
xxiv. 4 .
xxiv. 7 .
xxiv. 15 .
xxiv. 16 .
xxiv. 1 7 .
xxxiv. 28

124

125

84

84:

300277 124163
242 302
315 353
332 315353 40
43°353 109
211
212 212 36
212212 36
248

Deuteronomy.

11. 24
iv. 28
iv. 37
v. 1, 28
vi. 1 .
vi. 6 .
vii. 8 .
vii. 9.

x. 15.
x. 17, 18
xi. 21
xi. 24
xii. 5 . .
xii. 23 .
xiv. 1
xviii. 18
xix. 19 (Sept.)
xxi. 5
xxviii. 10
xxviii. 56
xxx. 15-20
xxxii. . 75, 84,
xxxii. 4, 18, 30, 31
xxxii. 5 •
xxxii. 8 . . .
xxxii. 8, 9 (Sept.
xxxii. II
xxxii. 15 . .
xxxii. 17 . .
xxxii. 18
xxxii. 30

275,

275,

366
238
370, 377
250250 35637o378
315
370, 377
344 12S
206328
45i 130 40 68
3i5 3283°i356
194, 205
,37- 205236
84, 429 337
¦ • 205
205, 211
205, 334
• • 205
• • 205

Deuteronomy — cont.

xxxii. 31
xxxii. 37
xxxii. 39
xxxiii.xxxiii. I .
xxxiii. 2 .
xxxiii. 5 .
xxxiii. II
xxxiii. 26
xxxiv. 7 .
xxxiv. 10

PAGE
• • -205
. . . 205
314, 383, 427
... 75
... 85
• 159, 287
. 211, 340
. . . 22
. 205, 211
¦ ¦ • 75
... 85

Joshua.

l.-Xll.
i. 8 .

v. 14.
X. I .

X. 12
x. 12-13
xiii. 26 (Sept.)
xiv. 6 . .
xxii. .
xxii. 22 .

• • 253
241, 253
. . 248
. . 42
. . 221
108, 211
. . 105
¦ • 85
. . 152
. . 152

Judges.

iv. 4 ,

y. 13
ix. 27
xiii. 18
xx. 1 (Sept.
xx. 13 .

Ruth.

1. 20, 21
iii. 13 .

30
125 [20
460289 105 68

407

1 Samuel.

i- 3 •
i. 13 •
ii. I-IO
«• 2, 3
ii. 5 .
ii. 6 .
ii. 8 .
ii. 10
ii. 24
ii. 27-36
iii- 3, 4
iv. 7 •
viii. 7 .

242
... 57
... 178
• • • 57
314, 383, 427
... 57 57
. . ."466
... 128
• • -332
• • -315
... 341

1 Samuel — cont.

ix. 6-9 .
x. 5 . .
XV. 22 .
xvi. 14-23
xvii. 45 .
xviii. 18, 23
xix. n .
xix. 20 .
xx. n .
xx. 29 .
xxi. 4, 5
xxx. I, 2
xxx. 6 .
xxx. 26 .

2 Samuel.

1. 10 .
i. 18.
i. 19-27
iii. 3 .
iii. 13
»i- 33, 34
v. n, 12
v. 18 (Sept
vi.
vi. i. . .
vi. 2 .
vi. 5 . .
vi. 13 .
vi. 14, 17
vi. 18 .
vi. 22
vii.

PAGE 8530
210 192
315 61
242 30
192
330
446220226216

. 218
. 210
. 192
. 106
• 245
. 192
. 2l6
¦ 424
. 2020
• 329
192, 194
. 20
20, 203
20, 203
. 6l
60, 117, 206, 212,
238, 251

Vll. I.
vii. 14
viii. 12, 13
viii. 18
x. 6 .
xii. 12
xii. 13
xii. 25
xii. 28
xxii. . 193, 21
xxii. i.
xxii. 36
xxiii. 1
xxiii. 1-7
xxiii. 2-7
xxiii. 5 .
xxiii. 5 ¦
xxiii. 7 .
xxiii. 13 (Sept.)

1 Kings.

206
• 239
. 107
. 21
. 251
. 221
. 161
• 173
. 328
223, 225 185
225
13, 22, 192
34, 206, 211

111. 5-14.

129
289 185
424

154 61

PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

499

i Kings— cont.

iv. 31 .
iv. 32, 33
v. II (iv. 3
viii. . .
viii. 8 .
viii. 12 .
viii. 12-13
viii. 14 .
viii. 14-66
viii. 17 •
viii. 22 .
viii. 27-30
viii. 29-30
viii. 33 .
viii. 41-43
viii. 43
viii. 55
xi. 14-25
xi. 34
xii. 4
xii. 15
xii. 18
xviii. 39
xxii. 17
xxii. 39

PAGE
, 129
, 2IO
. 102
. 213
• 317
. 212
, 212
. 212
• 213
• 328
• 143
• 329
. 320
. 212
¦ 331
. 328
¦ 143
. I4I
. 219
¦ HI
. 298
. 141
. 29I
. 158
. 179

2 Kings.

ii. 11

• • 383

iv. 31

• ¦ 430
iv. 39
• • 440
v. 7 .
. . 427
vi. 5.
. . 177
xiii. 5
. . 167
xm. 21
383-393
xviii. 8
. . 251
xix. 14
. . 217
xix. 35
. . 178
xx. 13-19
. . 279
xxiii. 10
. . . 2l6
1 C
HE
ON
ICLES.
ii. 6
111. 1 .
ix. 16
xii. 27
xiii. 8
xvi. 7
xvi. 7-36
xvi. 8-36
xvi. 34-36
xvi. 36 .
xxiii. 5 .
xxiii. 14
xxv. . .
xxv. 1, 3
129 106
246 101 192 72 50
457
457 457 179 85
in 3°
1 Chronicles— cont. PAGE
xxv. 1, 6 ... . 246
xxviii. 3 .... 191
xxix. 15 .... 429
2 Chronicles.
passim  117
v. 12  246
vi. 40-42 .... 54
vi. 41, 42 . . . 52, 60
vii. 21  317
viii. 14  85
ix. 23  153
x. 15  298
xi. 8  109
xv. 9  131
xx  58, 177
xx. 6  314
xx. 21  59
xxviii. 23 ... . 337
xxix. 30 .... 13
xxx. 6-1 1 .... 131
xxx. 16  85
xxxii. 21 (Sept.) . . 41
xxxii. 32 ... 117
xxxiii. n-13 . . . 279
xxxv. 15 .... 246
xxxv. 18 .... 341
xxxvi. 22, 23 . . . 169
Ezra.
ii. 40-42 .... 213
ii. 63  36
ii. 65  4°
iii. 1-6  16
iii. 2  85
iii. 8-13 .... 16
iii. 9  244
iii. 10, II . . . 58
vi. 10  156
vi. 15-18 .... 16
vi. 16  72
vi. 22 . . • • 76, 109
vii. 6  171
vii. 10, II . . • • 364
vii. 11 (Sept.) . . • 358
vii. 25  348
viii. 4  235
ix  Igl
ix. 6, 10-15 . • -353
Nehemiah.
Nehemiah — cont. PAGE
ii. 10  232
ii. 1 1-20 .... 70
ii. 18  76
ii. 19  232
ii. 20  76
iii. 18  244
iii. 25  235
iii. 34 (iv. 2) . 228, 232
iv  56, 109
iv. 1-8  232
iv. 2  70, 245
iv. 4, 5  78
vi  56, 109
vi. 6, 7  36
vi. 14  I52
vi. 17-19 .... 397
vi. 18  232
vii. 43-45 .... 213
vii. 65 .... 36, 40
vii. 67  213
viii. 10  220
ix  347
ix. 33, 34 • ¦ • ¦ 353
x. 30  220
xi. 17  246
xii. 24  85
xii. 27  5°
xii. 36  179
xiii. 25  78
xiii. 29  I52
Esther.
11. 5 .
ii. 9, 17
iii. i.
vii. 4, 6
viii. 15
viii. 16
. 229
. 181
¦ 97
. 244
. 218
. 408
Job.
i-3
3 ¦
7i
231 160
i. 6 .
ii. ii. 1 .
iii. 13
iii. i3-r9
iii. 14
iv., v.
v. I .
v. 17-23
v. 25
vi. 10
vii. 7-10
vii. 17
ix. 4 .
ix. 5 .
ix. 28, 29
x. 6 . .
¦ 324
78, 298
• 324
¦ 441
• 442
382, 426
234, 248
¦ 324
¦ 73
. 142
• 379
. 242
. 202
• 37i
¦ 427
• 346
• 346
500

INDICES.

Job — cont

x. 20-22
xii. 9
xiii. .
xiii. 3-4
xiii. 4
xiii. 6
xiv. .
xiv. i
xiv. 2
xiv. 13-15
xv. 4 .
xv. 15
xv. 16
xv. 19
xv. 21
xv. 23
xv. 35
xvi. 18, 19 .
xvii. 7 .
xviii. 12
xviii. 1 7- 1 9
xix. 19
xix. 20
xix. 21
xix. 25
xix. 26, 27 .
xx. 12
xxi. 7
xxii. 13, 14.
xxii. 15 .
xxv. 2 .
xxvi. 14 .
xxvii. 14
xxviii.
xxviii. 28
xxix. 12
xxx. 22 .
xxx. 23 .
xxxii. 17
xxxiii. 14-16
xxxiii. 14-30
xxxiii. 22
xxxiv. 2-4
xxxiv. 7 •
xxxv. 10
xxxvi. 2-4
xxxvii. 13
xxxviii. 7
xxxviii. 13
xxxviii. 22
xxxviii. 36
xl. 15 .
xiii. .
xiii. 10

PAGE
. 242
¦ 397
¦ 3°7
¦ 307
¦ 77
¦ 307
¦ 354
. 82
¦ 78
¦ 442
. 321
¦ 324
¦ 7878
7877
215
442 242 77
77
134 82
355
442442 78
242 321
426 340290 77
217, 334
• 397
78, 142
. 82
¦ 442
. 158
. 246
• 249
. 148
. 158
• 78
. 147
• 159
• 379
• 324
• 78
. .242
¦*473
. 15°
• 442
¦ 155

Psalms.

i. -Ixxii.
i. -Ixxii.

Psalms — cont. PAGE
i. -Ixxxix  301
i. . 190, 238, 240, 241,
251, 365, 373, 374,
387, 455
!, 2  349
¦ 1-3  253
2 . . .26, 253, 364
3  240
3, 4  240
4, 5 • • ¦ 253, 374
5 . . . . 223, 406
. 36, 190, 208, 238-
241, 249, 251, 252,
253, 263, 299, 339,
373, 380
11. . *463, *475, *483
ii. i  251
ii. 1 . . . *474, *475
ii. 1-2  251
ii. 2 . 177, 238, 251, 252
11. 3 . . 238, 252, 351
u- 3  *477
ii- 3-5  *474
11. 4 • • • • 123, 314
"• 4, 5  238
ii- 4, 5  *478
ii. 5 ¦ • • • 251, 252
ii. 6  251
ii. 7 . 143, 239, 251, 252
305, 340
ii. 7-9 • ¦ • 238, 239
ii- 8, 9  293
"¦ 9  251
|!: 12.  351
iii.-vii  226
iii  xix  208
iii. . 208, 226-227, 252
iii. 1-2  227
iii. 2, 3  226
iii. 2  237
iii- 3  *464
iii- 4  215
iii. 5 . . . . 227, 320
iii. 7 . . 226, 227, 237
iii. 8  293
iv. no, 208, 216, 226-227
iv. 1  227242227 227226227
227, 242

iv. 1 (Pesh.)
iv. 2 .
iv. 3 . . .
iv. 3-6 . .
iv. 4 . . .
iv. 5 . . .
iv. 6 .
iv. 7 . . .
iv. 8 . . .

315. 374, 386
. 227, 242, 318
. . . . 227
iv. 9 . . . . 227, 237
v. . 134, 135, 208, 226,
227, 233, 242

Psalms— cont. PAGE
, 1 (Sept.) . . .272
2 . . *464, *47o, *472
4 • 64, 227, 287, 374, 448
5 . . . . 236, 429
5-8  236
8 . 227, 242, 320, 329, 37i
9  242
10  242
12. . 289,378,429
• ¦ "8, 134, 135, 208,
215, 226-227, 229,
233, 234, 242, 247, 277
. 1  242
2 . . . . 243, 346

 228

vi. 4-7

 407

vi. 5,6

 385

vi. 6 .

234, 242, 367, 428

vi. 7 •

 *47o

vi. 8 .

vii- - 77, 78, 91, 109, 134,
[96, 208, 220, 227,
229, 243, *464
vn. 3.
 244
vn. 5.
. . .*464, *465
vii. 7-
 133
vii. 8.
vii. 9.
• • • 196, 37o
vn. 9, 10 ... . 36c,
vu. 10
.*464, *474, *478
VII. 10,
11 . . . .196
VII. II
 215
vn. 13
 244
vn. 15
. . . 196, 215
vii. 16
 243
vii. 16,
17 . . . .244
vii. 18
• 27, 83, 84, 196,
220
vii. 18
 *479
Vlll. .
61, 76, 201, 208,
220
vm. 3
. . . 201, 220
vm. 4
 220
viii. 5
. 202, 220, *464
IX.
138, 208, 214, 220
228-229, 342
 226
 '464
ix. 3 .
. . 83, 220, 228
ix. 5, 6
. . . 228, 403
 228
ix. 6, 7
 73
ix. 8, 9
 228
PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

501

Psalms — cont. PAGE
ix. 10  243
ix. 12 . 228, 316, 363
ix. 13  no
ix. 14 . . . 4°7, 431
ix. 16  228
ix. 18 . 150, 228, 293
ix. 19  374
ix. 20, 21 . . . .*464
ix. 21  228
x. . . 134, 190, 208, 214,
228-229, 342
x. 2-1 1  229
*. 3-11  228
x. 4  321
x. 6  242
x. 7 - ."464, *474, *477
x. 8, 9 . . . 133, 229
x. 11. . . . 242, 321
A. 13. . .197,242,321
A. 14  245
x. 15  254
x. 16  228
a. 18  *464
xi.-xiii  229
xi  208, 216
xi. 1  225
xi. 4 . . . . 205, 314
xi. 6 . . . .*465, *475
xi. 6 (Targ.) . . .*474
xi. 7 . . . . 408, 416
xii. . 197, 207, 208, 227,
229, 356
xii. I, 2  342
xii. 2  378
xii. 2. . . .*464, *465
xii. 6  227
xii. 8  352
xii. 8  *465
xii. 9  236
xii. 9  *465
xiii  208, 229
xiii. 3  441
xiii. 6 . . .*465, *474
xiv. . 77, 90, 121, 134,
135, 196, 197, 207,
216, 226-227, 301,
342, 356
xiv. 1 . 197, 242, 321
xiv. 2  314

xiv. 3 ... 197, 342
xiv. 5 . . 197, 239, 352
xiv. 5 .... .*465
xiv. 5, 6 . . 215, 216
xiv. 7 . . . 197, 199
xv. -xviii  208
xv. . 197, 208, 236-237,
249, 357, 37o, 375,
387, 397, 429
xv. 1 . . . . 4l6, 429

Psalms — cont. PAGE
xv. 4. . . . 236, 374
xv. II  411
xvi. . 196-198, 216, 229,
247, 39°, 407, 4",
414, 456, 458
288, 299, 302
198, 216, 217,
387, *46S
198, 216, 217, 408
250, 429, *465
. . . .*466
. . 411, *466
. . . .*466
217, 431, *467
• 407, 426, 431
 441
91, 119, 2l6, 236,
229, 243, 390, 407,
4'4, 430
 *466
• • 357, 369
243, 374, *465
. . . . 229
. .*466, *477
xvii. 13-15 .... 388
xvii. 14 . 229, 430, ^467,
*47i, *48o
xvii. 14 (Targ.) . . 444
xvii. 15 . 388, 389, 390,
407, 426, 430
xvii. 15 (Sept.) . . 444
xviii. . . 67, 70, 79, 107,
136, 142, 185, 193-
194, 202, 204, 206,
207, 208, 223, 224,
225, 239, 251, 258,
286, 291, 338, 339,
344, 345, 350, 369,
459, *464, *483
. 206, 250
79, 378, *467
215, 224

xvi. 2.
xvi. 3 .
xvi. 4
xvi. 5
xvi. 6
xvi. 7
xvi. 9
xvi. 10 .
xvi. io-n
xvi. 11
xvii. .

xvii. 3 .
xvii. 3-5
xvii. 4 .
xvii. 9-12
xvii. 10 .

xviii. I
xviii. 2 .
xviii. 3 .
xviii. 4 .
xviii. 5, 6
xviii. 7 •
xviii. 8-l6
xviii. 8-20
xviii. 9- 1 3
xviii. 10.
xviii. 10-11
xviii. 1 1 .
xviii. 14.
xviii. 15-
xviii. 17 ¦
xviii. 21-24
xviii. 21-28
xviii. 21-32
xviii. 21-46

205, *467
. . 224
205, 314
¦ 159
. 205
• 353
. 224
. 205
• 205
• 83, 224
. 224
224, 353
- 238
. 205
. 291
. 206

Psalms-

-cont.

PAGE
xvm
22-24
205
xvm
23
374
XV1U
. 25-28
223
xvm
. 26 .
378
xvm
• 27 .
345
xvm
• 29 (Targ.
) ¦ ¦
444
xvm
¦ 31 •
21
5, 224, 250
238, 287
xvm
• 32 •
205,
224,
*467,
*473,
*484
xvm
33
250
xvm
34
224
xvm
35
224
xvm
3b
172, 225,
343,
344,
*4°7,
*47i
xvm
38
291
xvm
42
. .
291
xvm
44
205
224
xvm
44, 45
291
xvm
44-49
224
xvm
45
224
xvm
46
206,
*468
xvm
50
180
205
xvm
51
5/
, 206,
223, 224
XIX.-
-XXII.
208
XIX.
• 197,
202, 207,
208,
225, 244
349
XIX.
1-7-
108, 201
-202
XIX.
2
*468
XIX.
2-7.
157
6 .
221
XIX.
8-1 1
237
238
XIX.
8-15 .
229, 237,
240,
250, 365
374
¦250
356
XIX.
12, 13
376
XIX.
12-15
276
XIX.
13 •
76, 3'!6.
354,
357,
*468
XIX.
13, H
238
XIX.
14 .
55, 225
250
XIX.
i5 •
*468,
*472
XX.,
XXI.
24
3«
XX.
• 42
99, "I,
154,
196,
198, 201,
217,
2
18,
339, 455,
*468
XX.
4
374
XX.
5
*468
XX.
7 ¦
199
314
XX.
if
. 199
403
XX.
9
*4b8
XX.
10
34i
xxi. 38, 42, 99, 154, 196,
198-201, 217, 218,
339, 455,*464, *468
xxi. 2 . . . in, 35°
502

INDICES.

Ps alms— cont.

xxi. 3
xxi. 4

xxi. 5 211, 199, 200, 408
• • 444
. . 171
I, 199, 200
83, 199
. 200
• 199
. 208

xxi. 5 (Targ.)
xxi. 6
xxi. 7
xxi. 8
xxi. 10, II
xxi. 14 .
xxii  xxix.
xxii  xli.
xxii,

PAGE
III, 2l8
199, 2l8

• • 134
78, 82, 135, 160,
230-232, 236, 245,
263, 264, 274, 276,
292, 295, 338, 373, 377
xxn. 2 . 236,*468,*47o, *47S
xxn. 2 (Sept.) . . .*469
xxii. 4 231, 298, 327, 331, 334
xxii. 7 . . . 264, 377
xxii. 8 .... 232
xxii. 9  234
xxii. 13  232
xxii. 14  232
xxii. 16 . . . 236,*4§9
xxii. 17, 18 . . . 232
xxii. 20  *48o
xxii. 22  263
xxii. 22-32 .... 298
xxii. 23 . 231, 264^469
xxii. 24  295
xxii. 25  248
xxii. 26 . 231, 250, 264,
?469
xxn. 27  374
xxii. 28  306
xxii. 29  315
xxii. 30 . . . 407, 428
xxiii. . 126, 135, 208,
236-237, 272, 319,
343, 429
xxiii. (Sept. and Targ.) 352
xxm. I  158
xxiii. I (Targ.) . . 272,
xxiii. 2, 3 . . . . 250
xxiii. 4  428
xxiii. 5  250
xxiii. 6 . 237, 388, 428
xxiv. . 83, 202, 204, 207, 208
xxiv. . 222, 230, 323, 350, 357
xxiv. 1-6 . 208, 236-237,
249, 387, 397, 429
xxiv. 3  416

Psalms — cont. PAGE
xxiv. 3-6 .... 370
xxiv. 4  248
xxiv. 5  236
xxiv. 6 . 236, 323, 352,
*465
xxiv. 7-10 . 20, 203-204, 208, 222
xxiv. . . 8, 10, 203,*469
xxv. . 208, 235-236, 248
xxv. 1  248
xxv. 3  235
xxv. 5  347
xxv. 7 . 235, 353, 357
xxv. 8-9 .... 347
xxv. 10  345
xxv. 14 . . . 345, 347
xxv. 15  235
xxv. 15-16 .... 235
'xxv. 15-22 .... 235
XXV. 22  235
xxvi. -xxviii. . . .135
xxvi. . 126, 127, 208, 230,
233, 331, 455
xxvi. 1-5 .... 369
xxvi. 2  *466
xxvi. 4-7 ... . 375
xxvi. 6  370
xxvi. 12 . . . *469,*475
xxvii. . . . 208, 250
xxvii. 1-6 . 208, 236-237, 429
xxvii. 3  237
xxvii. 4 . . . 237, 331
xxvii. 5 . . . 237, 250
xxvii. 6  374
xxvii. 7-13. . 230, 233
xxvii. 7-14. . . . 233
xxviii. -xxx. . . . 208
xxviii. . 127, 230, 233,
248, 331, 455
xxviii. I  234
xxviii. 1-6 . . . .111
xxviii. 2 . 320, 329, 448
xxviii. 6  250
xxviii. 7. 2i5,*469,*478
xxviii. 8. . . 233, 350
xxix. . 201-202, 208, 221, 325
xxix. I . . . 101, 324
xxix. 1-2 . . 202, 221
xxix. 2-10 .... 202
xxix. 9 . 203, 314, 331
xxix. 10  *469
xxx. . 18, 30, 135, 208,
216, 227, 234, 247, 455
xxx. 2, 4  403
xxx. 3  247
xxx. 3-5 .... 234

Psalms — cont. PAGE
xxx. 4 . 234, 407, 431
xxx. 5  247
xxx. 6 . . . 32, 234
xxx. 6 (Targ. ) . . . 444
xxx. 7  247
xxx. 10 . 227, 234, 385
XXX. 12 32, 102, 234, 247
xxx. 13 . . . . . 234
xxxi. . 135, 208, 230, 233,
245, 246, 247
xxxi. 4  250
xxxi. n  346
xxxi. 15  *4<55
xxxi. 20  250
xxxi. 20-21 . . . 429-
xxxi. 21  237
xxxi. 22  232
xxxi. 23  247
xxxi. 24. . . 247, 378-
xxxii. . 208, 214, 235-
236, 276, 346
¦ 356

xxxn. 1, 2
xxxii. 1-5
xxxii. 3-4
xxxii. 3-5
xxxii. 5 .
xxxii. 6 .
xxxii. 8 .
xxxii. 10
xxxii. n
xxxiii.

346
236354
236
236, 248
236, 347
. . 214.
. . 214
190, 195, 201,
214, 215, 248, 455, 456
195, 214, 215
• 79
214
321, 322215
215, 322
• 322
- 215
."469 ¦ 319
195, 199-
215 199
456
195, 215. 318
245, 248235
235, 323356
469,*48i 235
. 78, 82, 122, 135,
225, 230-233, 245, 366
xxxv. 3 . . . ..' .*469>

XXXIII. I .
xxxiii. 2 .
xxxiii. 5 •
xxxiii. 6 .
xxxiii. 7 ¦
xxxiii. 9 .
xxxiii. 10, n
xxxiii. 12
xxxiii. 14
xxxiii. 15
xxxiii. 16, 17 .
xxxiii. 1 6- 1 8 .
xxxiii. 17
xxxiii. 18 .
xxxiii. 20 . 79,
xxxiii. 20, 21 .
208, 235,
5-7

XXXIV.xxxiv.xxxiv.xxxiv.
xxxiv. 19
xxxiv. 23
xxxv.

14

PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

5°3

Psalms— cont. PAGE
• 323
• 235
8l, 246

xxxv. 5 .
xxxv. 5, 6
xxxv. 10
XXXV. II
xxxv. 12-15
xxxv. 13
xxxvi. 15
xxxv. 15
xxxv. 23
xxxv. 27
xxxvi. -xxxix
xxxvi.

232
. 232
• 374
¦ 232
•*47°
299, 302^465 225 208

xxxvi. 2 .
xxxvi. 2-4 ,
xxxvi. 5 .
xxxvi. 6 .
xxxvi. 6-13
xxxvi. 7 ¦
xxxvi. 8-10
xxxvi. 10
xxxvi. 12
xxxvi. 26

207, 208, 225, 414
227, 323/470 . . 207
. . 227
379,*47o . . 207
• ¦ 225
• 429
4n, 4i3,
414, 427
. 207250

xxxvii. 77, 234-235, 248
xxxvii. I 234
xxxvii. 7 . . . 234
xxxvii. 21 . . . . 234
xxxvii. 25 ... . 235
xxxviii. . 135, 230, 233
xxxviii. I . . . . 242
xxxviii. 1 (Targ.) . . 272
xxxviii. 2 . . . . 346
xxxviii. 5 . . . . 353
xxxviii. 18 . . . .*470
xxxix. . 101, no, 134,
135, 158, 230, 233,
246, 276
xxxix. 2  356
xxxix. 3 . 233,*468,*469, *47o, *475
xxxix. 4 .
xxxix. 5 .
xxxix. 5, 6
xxxix. 5-7
xxxix. 6 .
xxxix. 7 •
xxxix. 9-12
xxxix. 12
xxxix. 13

•464, *47Q
• • 233
• ¦ 384
233, 235
. .*467
¦ • 389
¦ • 233
¦ -*47o
• • 429
xl, . 135, 136, 230, 244,
245, 368, 377
xl. 1-12 . . . 153, 234
xl. 2-4  234
xl. 2-12 ... • 364
xl. 4  234
xl. 5  234
xl. 6  247
xl. 7  376

Psalms — cont. PAGE
xl. 7-9  374
xl. 8  365
xl. 9 . . 366, 368, *466
xl. 10 . 234, 246, *469
xl. 13  244
xl. 13-18 .... 230
xl. 14-18 . . 90, 135
xl. 18 . . 81, 101, 243
xii. . 208, 230, 233, 248
xii. 2-4  246
xii. 6  246
xii. 10 . 133, 134, 233
xii. 13  408
xiii. -lxxxiii .... 90
xiii  xlix  90
xiii. -xliii. 276, 456, *470, *47I
xiii. . . 69, 78, 99, no,
114-115, 120, 126,
147, 228, 231, 273
xiii. 2  126
xiii. 4  126
xiii. 5 .114, *47°> "478
xiii. 7 . no, 115, 317
xiii. 8  115
xiii. 9 14, no, 114, 126,
147, 221, 366
xiii. 10  no
xliii. . 69, 114, 228, 239
xliii. I . 227, 342, 352, 378
xliii. 1 (Sept.) ... 126
xliii. 2-3 .... 80
xliii. 3 . no, 126, 128, 322
xliii. 5  101
xliii. 9 '. .... 80
xliv. . 91-93, 95, 96, 98,
102, 103, 287, 298,
356, 368, 455, 456
xliv. 4  32

xlv.

xliv.

6-7

xliv.
7
xliv.
7-8
xliv.
10
xliv.
11-
17
xliv.
16
xliv.
17
xliv.
iS
xliv.
18-
19
xliv.
21-
22
xliv.
21-
23
xliv
22
xliv
23
xliv
24
xliv
25
Psalms — cont. PAGE
25, 62, 147, 155,
156, 166-174, 178,
179, 180, I83, 185,
217, 276, 291, 296,
339, 350, 456
xlv. 1 (Sept.) ... 173
xlv. 2 . 171, 180, *47l
xlv. 3 . 179, 199, 408
xlv. 3-8  180
• • 171, 179
169, 225, *467, *47i
.... 179
.... 171
181, 182, 185
. . 182
169, 171
101, 171, 179,
180, 338
. . 179, *47i
168, 173, 181,
*47i
xlv. 4
xlv. 5
xlv. 5-6.
xlv. 6
xlv. 7
xlv. 7 (Sept.)
xlv. 7-8 . .
xlv. 8
xlv. 9
xlv. 10
, ... 185
. . - ¦ 95
. • 195, 382
, . 92, 108
. 95, 102, 382
. ... 91
. ... 108
102, 103, 201, 220
. . . ¦ 345
. 90, 91, J96, 369
. ... 92
• 90
. . . • 196
. . ¦ ¦ 299
. ... 286
. • 95, 321
xlv. 13
xlv. 14
xlv. 15
xlv. 16
xlv. 17
xlv. 18
180, *469,
171179173 179
169, 180
471 '479
xlvi. . 148, 162, 163-166,
176, 177, 239, 249,
*464
xlvi. 3-4 . . - .162
xlvi. 5 . . . 83, 164
xlvi. 5-6 .... 318
xlvi. 7 . 162, 165, 252
xlvi. 8 . . . 177, 380
xlvi. n . . . 163, 199
xlvi. 12  177
xlvi. 15  80
xlvii. . 71, 158, 163, 176,
177, 35°, 455, *464
xlvii. 2-3 . . . -292
xlvii. 3 . . • • 83, 164
xlvii. 4  *468
xlvii. 4-5 . ¦ • -165
xlvii. 6 176, 203, 317
xlvii. 9  315
xlvii. 10. . . 176, 292
xlvii. (xlviii. ) i4(Sept. ) 1 58
xlviii. . 83, 114, 148,162,
163-166, 176, 177,
249, 319, 363
xlviii. 3 • • • 164, 317
xlviii. 4  *26
xlviii. 5 . • • 165, 252
xlviii. 6  252
xlviii. n .... 164
xlviii. 13-14 • ¦ • l64
504

INDICES.

Psalms — cont. PAGE
xlviii. 13-15 . . .319
xlviii. 14 .*47i
xlviii. 15 . . . . 442
xlix. . 149-150, 158, 198,
229, 381, 383, 390,
412, 413, 426, 455
xlix. 2 *467, *468, *47i
xlix. 2-5 . . . .158
xlix. 4 . . .*472, *4§i
xlix. 4-5 .... 426
xlix. 5- . . . .73, 382
xlix. 8-9 . . . .413
xlix. 8-12 .... 159
xlix. 10 (Targ.) . . 444
xlix. n . . .*472, *479
xlix. 12 . . . .*472
xlix. 13 . . . 149, 150
xlix. 14  *472
xlix. 15 . xxxviii., 413, 430
xlix. 15 (Targ.) . . 444
xlix. 15-16. 381, 382,390, 402, 406
xlix. 16  149
xlix. 20 . 382, 413, *47g
xlix. 21 . . . 149, 150
1. 90, 124, 150-153, 158,
159, 162, 176, 234,
344, 364, 373, 374,
375, 386, 396, *464
1. 1 . 132, 152, 156, 273,
298, *472
1. 2 . . . . 159, 365
1-3  164
1. 4  *48i
1-4-5  159
1. 5 . . . . 150, 345
1-7  159
1. 10 . . . . 225, '472
1. 10 (Targ. ) . . .444
1. n. . 159, *472, *478
1. 14. . . 83, 376, *472
1. 14-15. . . 176, 375
1-16  345
1. 21  444
1. 22 . .152, *467, *473
li  lxx  90
Ii. . 130, 161-162, 173,
174, 175, 208, 230,
234, 235, 245, 370, 376
li. 3-19 . . . 175, 364
li- 4  *473
li. 6 . . . 161, 175, 357
li- 7  357
li. 8 . 347, 356, 374, *467
Ii. 9 • • 162, 374, *473
li. 12  *474
li- 13 ¦ 322, 333, 347, *474
li- 14 • 356, 386, *469

Psalms — cont. . PAGE
• • 370
. . . 162
¦ 369, 374

Hi.Hi.Hi.
Hi.Hi.
Hi. Hi.Hi.
Hi.liii,
liii.
liii.liv.
liv.
liv.
liv. liv. liv.
lv.-lv.-
lv.- lv.

16 .
18-19
19 ¦
19-20
20 20-21

21
-liv.-lv.-lix.

• • 175
. 162, 175
82, 162, 175,
365, 367
• 315, 374
• • -134
... 134
. . . 121

55, 121, 134, 136,
208, 248

1 . . . . 107, 123
3 ¦ ¦ • • 121, 197
4  133
10  133
11  133
. 90, 121, 133, 134,
135, 197
2-3. ... 245
6. . 121, 215, 216,
*474, *475
-lvi  455
. 119, 121, 134, 136,
208, 277
5 ¦ ¦ • 131, 133
6  133
8 - - 133, 289, 374
9  133
-Ivii  121
-lix  123
-lx  455
. 78, 122-123, I26,
133, 135, 136, 208,
246, 276, 342
1 (Sept.) . . . 272
3  *474
4  *474
6  *474
7  134
7-9  137
n  133
12 . 133, 134, *464, *474
13  123
13-15 . 121, 123, 133,
134, 233
14 . . .137, *474
15  *474
16  121
18 . . . 136, *474
19  227
22 . 121, 133, *474, *476
23  *474
(lvi.)  30
-lx. . . . 134, 458
-lxiii  208

Psalms — cont. PAGE
lvi. . 121, 133, 136, 198,
208, 333
lv|- I  134
lvi. I (Targ.) . . . 272
lvi. 2 . . .133, *464
lvi. 3  227
lvi- 5 • 133, 322, 332
lvi- 7 - - - 133, 229
lvi- 8  133
lvi. 10  133
lvi- n . . . 322, 332
lvi. 12  133
lvi. 14 (Targ. ) . . .444
Ivii. . 55, 121, 133, 134,
136, 207, 208, 455,
*464
lvii. 2 . . .133, *464
Ivii. 3 . . 67, 83, *474
lvn. 4 . . 126, 133, 322
lvii. 5 . . .133, *474
lvu. 6 . . . 199, 314
lvii. 8  47
lvii. n  *470
lvii. 12 . .47, 199, 314
lviii. . 78, 120-121, 133,
134, 137, 207, 325,
428, *474
lviii. 2  324
l™i- 5  *474
lviii. 7-10 .... 121
lix. . 121, 132-136, 196,
*474
lix. 2  273
lix- 4  133
lix- 5  133
lix. 6 . 101, 132, 133,
164, 222, 323
lix- 7  133
lix. 8 . . .. 121, 133
lix. 9  123
lix. II . . . 133, 379
lix. 12 . . 121, 123, 215
lix- 13  234
lix- 14  133
lix- 15  133
lix- 18  379
lx- - 93, 95, 97, 98, 99,
100, 102, 107, 194,
198, 277
lx. Z . . • . 107, 273
lx- 3  95
lx. 3-6  96
lx. 6 . . . . 108, *475
lx. 6, 7 (Targ.) . . 275
lx. 7  97
lx. 7-14  47
lx. 8  107
lx. 8-10. , . .96, 108
lx. 8-1 1. ¦ . 108,208

PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

5°5

Psalms —cont. PAGE
lx. II  108
lx. 12 . . . 102, 107
lx. 12-14 .... 95
lx. 13 . . *466, *475
lx. 14  333
lxi. . 99, no, 134, 199,
200, 208, 237, 276,
455, *468
lxi. 1-9  Ill
lxi. 3  1 10
lxi. 3, 4  134
lxi. 4 ... .110
lxi. 5 . 236, 429, 430,
*475
lxi. 6  in
lxi. 6-8 .. . . in
lxi. 6-9  99
lxi. 7 ... 199, 200
lxi. 7 (Targ.) . . .444
lxi. 7, 8. . . in, 350
lxi. 8 ... no, 322
lxi. 9 ... no, 374
lxi. 10  in

Ixii. . 101, no, 121, 123,
134, 208, 227, 233,
242, 455
175, 233, *468,
*470, *475

Ixii. 2

8,9

Ixii. 3
Ixii. 5
Ixii. 7.
Ixii. 8, 9
Ixii. 9
Ixii. 10, 11
Ixii. n .
Ixii. 12 .
Ixii. 12, 13

¦ • 134
. . 227
• • 134
. . no
. 64, 287
¦ • 233
227, *475
• -*475 246

lxiii. . 99, no, 126, 134
199, 200, 208, 237,
455, *468
lxiii. 2  101
lxiii. 3  236
lxiii. 4  *475
lxiii. 4, 5 (Targ.). . 444
lxiii. 5  1 10
lxiii. 7  1 10
lxiii. 9, 10 . . . . 408
lxiii. n  *465
lxiii. 12 . . 99, in, 134, 200
Ixiv. . 78, 121, 208, 455
Ixiv. 3 . . . .*475
Ixiv. 7 • • -*475
. . -134
162, 176, 292
. . . 272
lxv. 2 /175, *468, '475
1XV; 2, 3 .... 176

Ixiv. 10
Ixiv. n
lxv. .
lxv. 1 (Sept.

Psalms — cont. PAGE
lxv. 3 ... 169, 292
lxv. 5 . . . 429, 430
lxv. 6  225
lxv. 8  162
lxv. 9 . . *465, *475
lxv. (Ixvi.) 1 (Sept.) . 444
Ixvi. . 90, 162-163, 177,
276, 455
Ixvi. 1-4 . . . .176
Ixvi. 6  176
Ixvi. 7 ... 163, 340
Ixvi. 8  176
Ixvi. 9 (Targ.). . . 444
Ixvi. 10-12 .... 176
Ixvi. 12 . . . 444, "464
Ixvi. 13-15 . . 176, 374
Ixvi. 18, 19 . . . 176
lxvii. . 90, 124, 162-163, 242, 292
lxvii. 5 . . 292, 305
lxvii. 7  101
lxvii. 12 (Sept.) . . 185
lxviii. . 84, 112, 113-114,
124, 125, 147, 455,
456, *469, *475

lxviii. 2 . . . 126, 135
lxviii. 3, 4 . . . 125
lxviii. 4  124
lxviii. 5 .... 124
lxviii. 5, 6 . . . . 344
lxviii. 5-7 . . . 246
lxviii. 6  3:7
lxviii. 7 . 114, 124, *475
lxviii. 8 . . .125
lxviii. 9  101
lxviii. n .... 125
lxviii. 12 . 125, 246
lxviii. 13 ... .*47°
lxviii. 14 . • • 135
lxviii. 14-19 . ¦ ¦ 208
lxviii. 15 ... • 124
lxviii. 15 (Targ.) . 444
lxviii. 15, 16 . . 116
lxviii. 16 ... ¦ 3r6
lxviii. 17 . 124, 316, 317
lxviii. 18. 125, 351, *475
lxviii. 19 . 124, 163, 203, 317
lxviii. 20 . . 113, I25
lxviii. 20-24 . . .113
lxviii. 20-28 . . -113
lxviii. 21 . 124, 125, 314
lxviii. 22 . - • • I25
lxviii. 25 . . 125, 203
lxviii. 25-28 . . .113
lxviii. 27 . *469, *475
lxviii. 28 . . • .148
lxviii. 28,29 . . .113
lxviii. 29 . • • ¦ I25

Psalms—

cont.

PAGE
lxviii
¦ 30-32
124
lxviii
• 3i •
47,
n.3,
125,
*474,
*475
lxvii
• 34 •
125
lxvii
¦ 36. 1
99,
'476,
*477
lxix.
• 6.5,
17, 78, 82
, 9i,
118,
134,
135,
147,
156,
230,
231
-232,
236,
245,
263,
264,
272,
274
377,
455
lxix.
2, 3
236
lxix.
4 •
236
lxix.
6 .
102,
236,
332,
353
, 354
*45°
lxix.
7 •
222
lxix.
8 .
102
lxix.
8,9
233
lxix.
10 .
102
lxix.
13
233
lxix.
21
233
lxix.
26 .
233
lxix.
31, 32
374
lxix.
32 •
376
lxix.
36 .
232
lxix.
37 ¦
289
, 378
lxx. . 90, 101, 135, 147,
156, 230
lxx. 6  101
lxxi. . 90, 134, 135, 147,
176, 230, 245, 455
lxxi. 6  *47°"
lxxi. 14  *476
lxxi. 18 .... 244
lxxi. 19  246
lxxi. 20 (Sept.) . . 12
lxxi. 21 . . *476, *48o
lxxi. 22  331
lxxi. 24 . ... 156
Ixxii. . 13, 9°, I4I~I47,
156, 168, 173, 180,
184, 185, 217, 244,
291, 296, 339, 350,
373, 456, *476
Ixxii. 1 . • 143, J 44, I56
Ixxii. 2 . 143, H5, 169
Ixxii. 5 . .36, 408, *476
Ixxii. 6 . . . 155, *476
Ixxii. 7 • • ¦ • 36
Ixxii. 8 . 142, 154, 169, 171
Ixxii. 8-1 1 . . • • 145
Ixxii. 8-14 . • • • 155
Ixxii. 9  *477
Ixxii. 11 . • • • 143
Ixxii. 12 . 142, 145
Ixxii. 12-14 . . .143
Ixxii. 14 • 144, *464, *477
Ixxii. 15 . . . 143, 155
Ixxii. 16. 142, 155, *477
X X X X X
X X X X. X.
5" <¦ <¦ < <

xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx

X X X XX X X X X X XX X. X

X X X X X

< < <
NO COM

< < < <
OnUi OJ w

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx2. S. 2. x. x_ X X X. X. g. X. X. X. X.

On ONUn | + *UUMhO«
I I

era

^NO

mW .,

00(i( 1OMO1O

4- '
O H
" o

o -5^j o
4. - COW

* •*¦ r
W\04^
00-M 4* NO

" 4" C^NO *
LnUiy, C0W
00 ON" - »"'

>"o •hi

NO * * , ,
- 4.*w <*> oo
» £ S i* ON 0>» &
. to . . . o • • • • P - ¦ "  —
- « * * *(>J *Oj ******** *
4* 4. w 4» w 4- m - m4>w4n4»=34*CA4»4>4*4*4>4»4*4*W4. M
00ND NO M O « NO NO O^VJMM. Ui."MVS^MMM OMJV4-

NO

»M

UNLnUr 4. 4* W In

M *

Ln

*
4* ONON
* '
4* ON •
M
•
4-NO .
wNO
NO °
-"4-4*w Jo o
tO
• +4
Wtn h
OJ 4* 4=- KJ
<~r\ M On K
On Onj> -
0°-J X
oo-gb- I
M-P* on\9
W M
COCH,_
ONO M
M . *¦
»°° *w •«
4nuiI>
4. W ON- k
><><>( «»h><Sb5bbbdS
XXX
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
5.5.3.5.3.5.5. 5.5. S-5-5-c:s:s
vh NO CO M On4"
XXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxxxx
>-. m NO ON4* WW H
. W N | - .—
I - ¦ -J4. • W
xxxxxxxxx
4 4W » B
¦ 4-4W
. m m m
IOOW4
* * w
*¦ -fe-1-" s? ,
M On^j 4* N
00+- - <-"
*• S 4* —*¦
ONNO ij Onm
4. no - O\0
* * * n* * * *
' ft ft. ft M ft ft ft <-n u,
X X
3. 3
X<
X<
X X X X X
< < < < <
CO OnUi Ui4n w M •-
M
en
' NO •
" M
• HW ¦ •
ON4»
. (AU . .
M NO
On NO
On
>s
MMM4N.MI-(Wt-t4^^j^N>J^H»-<tHH.O0M
OnM o m m on^; "co 5 ^3 ^* ^ OnM M M ON ONLn 6o"ob*- "^ On4>- "J V -»
COLn 00- Ln 004^ « ^^0^ NO Co OOLn CO 00 OOLn lyi Ny\ - - M Co ONNO NJ4NS
w 4- On4n »-i >
ONUnLnLfT O C
Onn^i I UtOiR
'xxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXX
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
X. X. X. X. X.
w ^J ON^yi M
O ¦
SO . 00
X X X X X X X
X X X X X.
vj NO
" NO
OnS
K -°
fi^
•ft^^a^t
O0 On) '
On M 1
to On J
OJ OJ i
W On I
O0 On oooj c.
N 4i- Q ^J-
N - J ¦ - v
*4a. OJ
O0 4> »o 4^
OJ OOqOM
ONOJ >- -
h hvO ChO\ On-P>- W
¦vj^W M « I I
XX too
xxxXXX00J5N ON
X X X X
X X X X
rH M M l-(
On 4^. Oj O-J
X X X X
X X X X
CO ONOn 4^
^P
l-l o
On
4
M -OJ • ¦
O M
O O
XXXXXXXXX X
XXXXXXXXX. X.
^ r*' F R F' F' F' F' F' r1'
NO m w 00 00 ONLn 4^ W M m ii ^
,„c^o- -- 5>0
C^NO
CO.10!.
On13
*5
NO >0
> S
" I js. On CO « n
^ | 4s. ON CO *-i NO ONNO
4. hAOJ >-<4* w+n4nW m4 4. m M -, mWOJlt, hOj^w
ij4.<J^ILn-^TUi^J^rN^ul^J^J4N.u> MW MOJin^J «Cfi^2
00 00 004^ Ml B 0000O MMMOOtl Ol|) 004>. S^ COBW-
— ¦-. L.J — N>J M
4v o w -
>~4(i3U*NO<. N . In) W
PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

5°7

Psalms — cont. PAGE
lxxxiii. 2 . . . .*478
lxxxiii. 3 . . . 97, 251
lxxxiii. 4 . . . 97, 251
lxxxiii. 5 . . . . 252
lxxxiii. 6 . . . .251
lxxxiii. 9 . 109, no, 184
lxxxiii. 10 .... 93
lxxxiii. 10-13 . . . 47
lxxxiii. 12 . .'467, *478
lxxxiii. 14 . . . .*478
lxxxiii. 17 . . . . 98
lxxxiii. 18 ... . 251
lxxxiii. 19 . 83, 98, 121
lxxxiv. -Ixxxix. . . 90
lxxxiv. . 90, 119, 126, 132
lxxxiv. 2-8 . . .120
lxxxiv. 4 . . 11, *479
lxxxiv. 5 . . 349, 387
lxxxiv. 7 . . . . 344
lxxxiv. 7 (Targ.) . . 444
lxxxiv. 8 . . . .120
lxxxiv. 9 . 101, 131, 164
lxxxiv. 9, 10 . . . 132
lxxxiv. 10 . 119, 159, 199,
233, 338
lxxxiv. II . 120, 295, *479
lxxxiv. 11 (Targ.) . 275
lxxxiv. 12 . . 132, 305
Ixxxv. . 90, 102, 119, 126
Ixxxv. 1. . 274
Ixxxv. 6 . . . .*479
Ixxxv. 9 . 119, 159, 199,
287, *472, *479
Ixxxv. 10 ... . 332
Ixxxv. 11 .28, 36, 379
lxxxvi. . 47, 90, 119, 129,
131, 217, 279, 455,
456, *479
lxxxvi. 1 . . 119, 129
lxxxvi. 2 . 117, 119, 377
lxxxvi. 5 . 296, 369, *479
lxxxvi. 6 . . .*479
lxxxvi. 8 . . . . 246
lxxxvi. 9 119, 130, *479
lxxxvi. 9, 10 . . . 296
lxxxvi. 10 ... . 129
lxxxvi. 13 ... . 129
lxxxvi. 14 . . 131, 133
lxxxvi. 15, 16 . . . 302
lxxxvi. 16 ... . 131
Ixxxvii. . 90, 118-119,
131, 269, 296, 456,
*479
Ixxxvii. 1 . *479, *483
Ixxxvii. 2 . . . -3Z9
Ixxxvii. 3 .... 80
Ixxxvii. 5 . 83, 317, 330,
*479
Ixxxvii. 6 . • ¦ -*479

Psalms — cont. PAGE
lxxxviii. . 90, 102, 117,
118, 129, 227, 272,
287, 455, *464
lxxxviii. 3 . . . .129
. . 118
. -*48o
. . 129
. .'480
. . 129
• • 385
. . 411
411, '480
¦ ¦ 32'
129, 273
¦•480

lxxxviii. 4
lxxxviii. 5
lxxxviii. 7
lxxxviii. 8
lxxxviii. 1 1
lxxxviii. 11-13
lxxxviii. 12
lxxxviii. 13
lxxxviii. 15
lxxxviii. 16
lxxxviii. 17.
Ixxxix. . 52, 53, 90, 102,
116-118, 129, 130,
175, 206, 233, 238,
246, 339, 455, *464

Ixxxix. 1
Ixxxix. 2
Ixxxix. 2, 3 .
Ixxxix. 3
Ixxxix. 6
Ixxxix. 6-9 .
Ixxxix. 7
Ixxxix. 7, 8 .
Ixxxix. 8 . 2
Ixxxix. 9
Ixxxix. 10, II
Ixxxix. 11 .
Ixxxix. 18 .
Ixxxix. 19 . 1
Ixxxix. 25 .
Ixxxix. 27, 28
Ixxxix. 28 .
Ixxxix. 30 .
Ixxxix. 39
Ixxxix. 41
Ixxxix. 41, 42
Ixxxix. 45 .
Ixxxix. 46 . 117

IOI
• 67, 379
• 130
. . 128
• ¦ 324
¦ • 130
¦ • 324
• • 337
2, 324, 336

130
475 129
7, 129, 332
. 129
143, 305
83, 130, 252
. . 128
• • 338
• • 130
148, 35o
. .*48o
30, 293, 35°

Ixxxix. 48 . 117, 233, 293,
*467, *48o
Ixxxix. 49 . . 385, 403
Ixxxix. 49 (Targ. ) . . 444
Ixxxix. 50 ... . 224
Ixxxix. 51 . . . .293
Ixxxix. 52 . . 33s, 350
xc.-cl  8, 301
xc. . 47, 63, 69, 73, 74-76>
84, 89, 455, *48o
xc. 1 . • 86, 354, *48i
xc. 1-4 ¦ ¦ • 354, 355
xc. 2  *48o
xc. 3 . .*464, "469, *48i
xc. 5  43°
xc. 5, 6  354

Psalms — cont. PAGE
xc 7  354
xc. 7-12 .... 354
xc. 8 . 76, 346, 354, 357
xc. 9 . '464, *472, *48i
xc. 9, 10 ... . 73
xc. 10. 75, 354,384,*48i
xc. n  355
xc. 13 . . .*48o, *48i
xc. 13-17 .... 76
xc. 14  "481
xc. 15  *48o
xc. 16 (Targ.) . . .444
xc. 16, 17 . . . . 85
xc. 17  76
xci. -xcii  5'
xci.-c  63
xci. . 72, 73-74, 83, 84,
124, 234^464, *48i
. 73, 83, *48o, *48i
• .*465
. .*48i
. .*48i
83, *48i
323, 335
. .*48i
. . 69
72, 73, 76, 83,
158, *464 246 83
79,

XCI.xci.xci.xci. xci.
xci.xci.
xcii.-xcii. xcii.xcii.xcii. xcii.
xcii. xcii.xcii. xcii.xcii.
xcii. xciii.xciii. xciii.xciii. xciv.xciv. xciv.xciv. xciv.
xciv.xciv. xcv.-
xcv. xcv.xcv. xcvi.
xcvi.xcvi.xcvi. xcvi.

I
2
4 •
6 .
9 •
n .
14 .
,-xcviii.

1 .
2 .
4 5-77

^468

.-472
73,93
10, n . . . . 76
12  133
13 ¦ • ' •"477
14  133
. 71-72, 132, 144,
157, 158, 163
1 . . . .' 342
2 2, 4, 5 •
• 72, 123,
4 •

10 .
12 .
17-
22 .
c. .
1
7 •
-cii.

1 (Sept.)
2 . .

3i3i
158, 455
• • • 133
• ¦ -342
305, 3°6
¦ 34§, 373
... 3§5
¦ 72
71, 158, 163
• • 71-72
... 72
... 158
• • -455
. . 71, 202
7i,i95 ¦ 72
. 246

508

INDICES.

Psalms — cont. PAGE
xcvi. 3 . . . 228, 294
xcvi. 3, 4 . . . . 292
xcvi. 7  221
xcvi. 10  228
xcvi. 13  292
xcvii. . 71, 83, 344, *464
xcvii. I, 2 . . . . 292
xcvii. 7 . . . 221, 341
xcvii. 9  83
xcvii. 10 .... 368
xcviii  71
xcviii. 1 . . . 195, 332
xcviii. 9  292
xcix  71
xcix. 1  334
xcix. 1-3 .... 292
xcix. 3 . 289, 298, 301, 332
xcix. 5  298
xcix. 6  83
c  71, 379
ci  292
c 3  151
ci. . 63, 67-69, 208, 249,
339, 456, *483
ci. 1  67
ci. 2  67
ci. 5 . . . .*48i, *482
ci. 6 (Targ.) . . .444
ci- 7  99
ci. 8  68
cii. . . 63, 70-71, 231,
264, 277, 287

cii. 5 •

. . 78

cii. 5, 6 .

. . 78

cii. 6 .

. . 82
en. 7 . .
. . 78
en. 10 .
. . 78
cu. II .
. . 82
Cll. 12 .
¦ 78, 354
cu. 14 .
• • 7i
cii. 16-18
• • 295
cu. 20 .
• • 314
cu. 24 .
. 78, 82
cii. 25-29
. . 78
cii. 26-28
. 82, 298
cii. 28 .
. . 82
cu. 29
• • 3i9
cm. .
, 63, 208
cm. 1
. .*466
cm. 3
• -*483
cm. 10
357, *46S
cm. II
. . 248
cm. 13
248, 305
cm. 14
• • 357
cm. 15
. .*464
ciii. 17
. . 248
ciii. 18
• • 345
cm. 20
• • 324
cm. 21
• ¦ 323
Psalms — cont. PAGE
ciii. 22  366
civ. ... 58, 63, 201
civ. 3  314
civ. 4  323
civ. 11 . . . . -*472
civ. 20  *472
civ. 24  322
civ. 26  404
civ. 30 . . . 322, 406
civ. (cv.)45 (Sept.) . 68
cv.-cvii. . . 63, 147
cv. . . . 50, 58, 157
cv, 1  228
cv. 8  345
cv. 10  345
cv. 16-22 .... 158
cv. 44, 45 • • • ¦ 35i
cvi. . 8, 50, 58, 89, 157, 457
cvi. 4, 5 .... 276
cvi. 6
cvi. 16
cvi. 37
cvi. 45
cvi. 47
cvi. 48
cvii. . 8, 50-51, 58, *464
cvii. 2, 3
cvii. 3
cvii. II
cvii. 20
cvii. 22
cviii. .
cviii. 11
cix. .
• 353
• 83
334, 335345
*475
¦ 457
cix. 2
cix. ^-5 .
cix. 3 .
cix. 6
cix. 6-1 5
cix. 6- 1 9
cix. 6-20
cix. 7
cix. 8
cix. 11
cix. 13
cix. 16
cix. 18
cix. 21
cix. 22
cix. 23
cix. 24
cix. 26-31
cix. 28, 29
cix. 28-31
cx
51
. 150
51,83 . 321
• 374
47, 455, 456
• ¦ -444
47, 63-65, 77, 82,
98, 208
• 77
• 65
• 77
• 335
77, 78
• 77
63, 64, 65
• 78
.*482
77,78
77, 246
. 78
• 78
. 64
¦ 78
• 78
. 78
• 65
• 78 78
20-29, 34, 35, 36,
47, 49, 67, 68, 69,
75, 89, 96, 143,
Psalms — cont. PAGE
200, 203, 208, 217,
238, 239, 301, 339,
373, 458,*479,*482
cx 1. . . 35, 37, 47, 200,
251, 299, 458
cx. 2  26
cx. 3 . 20, 25, 36, 49, 238,
*479, *48a
cx. 4 . 21, 25, 52, 57, 99,
*472, *48l
cx. 5 . . . 49, 212, 251
cx. 5, 6 . . . 251, *482
ex. 5-7  24
ex. 6  28
cx. 6, 7  212
cxi. . . . 50-51, 240
cxi. I  211
cxi. 5  345
cxi. 9 . 289, 301, 345
cxii. . . 50-51, 240, 397
cxii. 2 . . . 352, *465
cxii. 5  234
cxii. 9  *475
cxii. 12  236
cxiii  cxviii. . 18, 19, 49, 50
cxiii  49, 127
cxiii. 3  177
cxiii. 4  327
cxiii. 5-9 . . . .*48i
cxiii. 6  343
cxiii. 7-9 .... 57
cxiii. 9  57
cxiv  49
cxiv. 7  *467
cxiv. 8 . . . 472, 481
cxv.-cxviii. . 32, 47, 49,
455, 456
cxv. . . 18-19, 5°, I3I>
455, 456
cxv. 2 .
cxv. 3 .
cxv. a .
cxv. 9-1 1
cxv. 9- 1 3
cxv. 11 .
CXV. 12 .
cxv. 13 .
cxv. 17 •
cxvi. . .
cxvi. I .
cxvi. 2 .
cxvi. 3 .
cxvi. 6 .
cxvi. 9 .
cxvi. 15 •
cxvi. 16 ,
126
¦ • 3M
• • 374
• • 195
. . 19
. . 296
• ¦ 295
• • 19
385, 428
18-19, 33, 119,
206, 455, 456
82, 378, *465, *48i
. . .456
. . . 224
. . .'469
19, 3H, 328
... 19
¦ 131, 273
PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

509

Psalms — cont. PAGE
cxvi. 17 . . . 374, *46s
cxvi. 19  *483
cxvii. . . 19, 53, 379
cxvii. I  475
cxviii. . 16-18, 22, 33,
50, 131, 203, 234,
3°i, 455
cxviii. 2  372
. . 19
. . 296
287, 301
• • 133
• • 133

cxviii. 2-4
cxviii. 4 .
cxviii. 5 .
cxviii. 6 .
cxviii. 7 •
cxviii. 10
cxviii. 10- 1
cxviii. 14
cxviii. 14, 1
cxviii. 15
cxviii. 15, I
cxviii. 17
cxviii. 18
cxviii. 19
cxviii. 19-20
cxviii. 20
cxviii. 21
cxviii. 21-22
cxviii. 22
cxviii. 25
cxviii. 26
cxviii. 27

17, *483
215, 301
5, 16 . . 31
57, 195, 403
... 17
19, 296, 307
• • 234
¦ • 57
• ¦ 203
•57, 195
• • 17
• • 17
• 17, 61
¦ • 17
¦ • 17
17, 273, 372, 374
cxix. . 51, 202, 240, 278,
348, 364, 3^5, 374,
455, 456

82

cxix. 17
cxix. 18
cxix. 19
cxix. 41-.
cxix. 54
cxix. 55
cxix. 62
cxix. 81
cxix. 84
cxix. 96
cxix. 101
cxix. 104
cxix. 105
cxix. 108
cxix. 113
cxix. 114
cxix. 130
cxix. 132
cxix. 139
cxx.-cxxxiv cxx. .
CXX. 2
cxx. 6
cxxi. .
cxxi. 1

¦*465
321, 348
• 429
¦ 295
• 5'
. 221
. 221
. 150
• 293
• 356
• 243
• 243
¦ 348
364, 375
5i, 55
• 215
¦ 321
¦ 378
.*48o¦ Si
55, 455
.*466
134, *475
54, 276, 455
... 59

Psalms — cont. PAGE
cxxii. . 52, 54, 55, 276, 319
cxxii. (Sept.) ... 60
cxxii. 4, 5 • • • • 60
cxxii. 5  60
cxxiii  55, 455
cxxiii. I . . .314, *48l
cxxiii. 2, 3 . . . . 302
cxxiii. 3 (Pesh.) . .*475
cxxiii. 4  *475
cxxiv.-cxxix. ... 54
cxxiv. . . 52, 54, 176
cxxiv. (Sept.) ... 60
cxxv  54,455 • 318
• 55
• 55
• 444
• 54
.... 54
.... 234
52, 54, 55, 212
• 32, 54, 61,

Cxxv. I, 2 .
cxxv. 3 . . .
cxxv. 5 . . .
cxxv. 5 (Targ.)
cxxvi.
cxxvi. I . . .
cxxvi. 5 .
cxxvii. .
cxxvii. 1

154
¦ • -237
61, 62, 173
• • 54-55
. . . 320
. . .276
54-55, 176, 277, 455
. . .*466
54, i75, 273,
277, 455
... 54
cxxx. 4 . . .*479
cxxx. 7  54
cxxx. 8  346
cxxxi  51, 52
cxxxi. (Sept.) ... 60
cxxxi. 3  54
cxxxii. . 52-54, 60, 72,
102, 117, 203, 229,
238, 339, 455

cxxvii. 1, 2.
cxxvii. 2
cxxviii. .
cxxviii. 5, 6
cxxix  cxxxi
cxxix. cxxix. 3
cxxx. cxxx. 2

cxxxii. 6
cxxxii. 8
cxxxii. 8-10
cxxxii. 9
cxxxii. 10
cxxxii. 12
cxxxii. 1 3- 1
cxxxii. 14
cxxxii. 16
cxxxii. 16, :
cxxxii. 17
cxxxii. 18
cxxxiii. .
cxxxiii. (Sept.)
cxxxiii. 2

52
• 25, 52
52, 54, 60
• • 52
199, 35o
¦ • 345
• • 53
• • 3r7
• • 52
• • 25
. . 60
. . 60
52, 53-54, 55
. 60
. 237

Psalms— cont. PAGE
cxxxiii.. 3 . . v . . 319
cxxxiv. . 53, 61, 220, 455
cxxxiv. I .... 61
exxxv. -cxxxviii. . . 456
exxxv. . 50, 53, 58, 59,
61, 70, 455
exxxv. 2 .... 58
exxxv. 3 .... 289
exxxv. 5 .... 220
exxxv. 6 .... 314
exxxvi. . 50, 53, 58, 59,
61, 70, 371, 455
exxxvi. I . . . . 214
exxxvi. 4 . . 178, 345
exxxvi. 5 . . . . 322
exxxvi. 10-18 . . . 178
exxxvi. 26 ... 328
exxxvii. . 69, 80, 81, 162
exxxvii. 1 (Sept.) . 69, 80
exxxvii. 5 . . . .128
exxxvii. 6 . . . .*483
exxxvii. 8 . . 128, *465
exxxvii. 8, 9 . . . 483
cxxxviii. -cxlv. . 63, 65
cxxxviii. . . 67, 80, 208,
455, 458

cxxxviii. 1 (Sept.)
cxxxviii. 2
cxxxviii. 3
cxxxviii. 6
cxxxviii. 7
cxxxviii. 8

66
320 67
343 79
67, '¦'464

cxxxix. . 67, 72, 89, 123,

277, 278, 286, 291,

426, 456, *483

cxxxix. I . . . .196

cxxxix. 1 (Sept

) . . 66

cxxxix. 2, 3

• ."483

cxxxix. 7

¦ • 322

cxxxix. 10 .

• 79, 384

cxxxix. 14 .

• • 332

cxxxix. 15 .

• 79, 45o

cxxxix. 16 .

• • 79

cxxxix. 18 .

¦ • 319

cxxxix. 19 .

"467, *484

cxxxix. 19, 20

. . 148

cxxxix. 19-21

. . 67

cxxxix. 19-22

• • 79

cxxxix. 23 .

196, 370

cxxxix. 24 .

. . 442

cxi. -cxiii. .

. . 65

cxl.-cxliii. . 66, 69, 456,

*483

cxi. . . 66, 77, 78, 455,

456

cxi. 2  *483

cxi. 4  *483

cxi. 5  *483

cxi. 8 . .

• 66, 79

a n o o ft

nonnonnooooo

oftnftOftnftOftoftoooft

noooftftftoooftnftoopft

o ft a o ft

tH j*. & £L £L x^xx^xxxxxxx^x^x xxxxx^xx^xxx^x^x^x^x^x^x^ >L>L^L>L>^>L>L>^^>L^Lt^tt>LtLtL^ $LH*iL%L£*
<j <j <i < < <T <T <T 5* ? 5* S- <T" 5* 3* <! 5* 5* 5* P? t? *T* P-- *** *v £"• **"• *?• •-:••-:• •-;' *i* •-;¦ *!¦ k- e: e: tf: k: a: j^ P* r" r" f* r" ?*• r* f" t-' r- 

.3. 3. 3

^o ~ 4*
O-l NO
On |
" t/l
OnOOn
on- on
00 *\0

lltOrHWMWrH
0 2 O "--J ONOn4* OJ

<j-i<:<j<j-<<<i<j<^<;<<

O _ 1-1 M H
£L,On N N M
^ II.

NO OOOnon J> OJ

a-

a

4»

h-i COM 4* 4> 4. w OJ to
O I -
Mu, . 4.

K^nJNW WW

 ,^ B*+*ni* B* " m ".ft^vft-f-^Sf « ft 4* to 4- 4* mi-i4>.4.W
cnqUn M NO M M M M ONNO MMUivrNUNM O OOON COno ONM to M ONMMMtnj. +n Ol m In 00 OOUi OOM ON On NO NO 0OUN M
¦ 00 CO ONNO NO no UN ON ON OOUi UN - ONNO 004. ON m UN ONNO O NO 4* UN NO 4* ON- M ONNO UNWMU1WNO ONONOOOCW On4n

4>. * *nr
unCW o coft oo r
ON- COW ft W S

XX XX
„SBh

xxx i

Xt 00 to

l-t .
ON

to

* M '
. 00.
4- J> 4>
4>. 4» 4=-
to m n
to oj4n
OJ OnUn 4.
On to to m
4.. m m 4. w
4* Un no 4». to
N4. O m M
OJ 4n ¦
OJ 4* ¦
. OO M W m
. Onun on^o:
. UN J> Ui -
xxxxxx-<<<<g-t5:
Onmcono
w o a
Q
ino r
o go•z
4^tJH
• O0 On •
* OO
NO
O
. . o . .
w
4> 4^ OJ J> OJ J>
O M On M On O
VO J> N M On NO
i-i m hoj m4^J>.4^
\D M^W N K O ^
sj\0 J>Ui i-h NVOM
ft ft n n
X X X X
ooftooftftnoonftftftftft xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
o ft o o n
x x x x x
X X X X X X
¦ 3. 5. <. <. $. <. <. <, <. <t 5. <. <, <. <, <. <. <, 3. <. <. <. <
£1*0*0 OOONOnOJ N O O
4^ O
4> -4
M Y ¦
NO NO A
On 00TqJ>
L. 3
, 4> to OO OJ J> oo
On^NO NO
- i^NO VO
J> 0\OJ 4* J> >
On1"" ft ft ftft ft ?N'-" ON+- 0>"UNv„Uih4- (OMtOUlMMNONO MUt~UNON S^utoNMONn
OounMNO 00 « NO 4^ UN i" NO NO u. UN- OnUn NO "U. m OunUiNONO O O Un 00 00 -N to OONO 00B
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxc-<<<
. S. b. £. 2. 2. S. x x' x' x" 5. 5. <
X X X X X X X
< < < < 3
.NOU.4- r M
3 ?'¦ r:
»HH
MJ> to
soo <
Bso
ft.,1-? % 8n &ft ,M Vi M ~ *¦ » ft ¦»» M tOW NWW tO M
-N ONW O 00 00 tO UN ONUN ONUN UN  ~ "
UN OJ ONM-°Mt>JtrilJlWJ>MW
ONOJ UN UN W UN OOW 4^4-UN4-tOUNUN — OUNtOONtOtJtOP-
xxx5.5.<

XXXXXXXX.
<' <" 5' <' <'<' <' <

X X X X
« «ft n
-^ On" •

XXXXX

x R- R- R- R- R- R- 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. ?

M Un w ^ COM On OnUn

On

; UN W

• OJ * *

1 1
J> ¦ On

?o

On

crq

•— *

vn.
5
viii. 6 .
viii. 13
5.5. COM
iii. 8 ..
iv.
7 .
iv. 14
v. 13
v.16
0z Cl0
»-t en
w 0
>>X
f0 s
0
to
ft .
ON
NO .
1
mwm4. W4.M w 4* 4" h m k b mmWJNW
M M M O CO >0 tO OOW OOtO 10 OOtO ^Mj-iUnUnWO N
00 « MW4VONM « ON to NO NO 4. 00 ft M 4* 4» 4- 0O4. «
w MWWW m tO M tOWW to N4"W4*-W4>WWW OJ
to 4* W OOJM MWJ>4«W to O WW O S. NWNn HJ>M
00 to Onui KHHOnOOOhuhUOiOON OOM ONM Un to o
mno mm o\mmmmMo £.
no oono ojnonononononoh •
xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
< < < < <
x x x.x.x.x.x.x.x.x.B.B.B.g.B.H x x x x R-5.5.g.
xxxxxXXXXX <! < 3 <
»H Ml
' fc> tO M W tH >H t-t
. 4^ tO UN 4> OJ tO M
- NO On NO NO
nOn I . „
?! w
xxv. I..
xxv.6 ..
xxv.8 .
38
xxvi..
xxvi.
4 .
xxvi. 12..
xxvi. 13.
3c
xxvi. 19.
38
xx.
5 ..
xxii.13.
xxii.15.
xxiii. ..
xxiv.-xxvii.
xxiv.
4- 1
3 .
xxiv.
5 •
xxiv.21-23
xxiv.23.
xviii.
7 •••
xix.
18 ...
xix.
18-25 ..
xix.
21 . .
xix.
23-25 .
.
to w OO
- w . . w Jo . .
: : : :s° 
OJ 4- OJ
• • -"" -M -"*
u H
tO 10 M tO tO
K>Mo2 I? "m NO BOMUB*MM44.J>tOO
5?a> M ft 00 004- £ O £ M M NO NO 00 OONO NO NO NO W 4-
1 OJ OJ >-»
MBiOiWMNnM m
OJ OJ
tO Ui
OJ M
WWW 1-. 4" 4- 0 ^ 4- « N ft 4>; N to « W w
nJNU to 4- 4- on4n 0NBM004-MC0B O W
00 OCW IjnoE - « NO*-MUNl0MMI0O ONW
ft 10 "
too^w
M J>
to
|_C
>-.
r-
00 **oj "-a
NO *-* NO
"-<
O
to
O0*<I N 0
4^ O 00H
^,-Hj-pMHr^ x x x x x x x, x, x, x. * * >L *, *. £L >L * tL £ £ H £1 il 2- & & £ £ £ & & £ ££-.£-.£-. & S: &: & r- r- r- r
,-nono onu, "ft x x x x x x x g!g g:£:r    „ oo*. to . w „ f
o
^3
..XXX.
j_- j- ?— f- j- x x x
xxx
vow
J> OJ <
X X
(0 rH MVQM (T(M
w 4=* 4=* I ~
I NO OJ
On
t 4^ to J> M MM
» O NO O **¦* t" "^ *o
\ 4^ OJ on 4i» "M +>¦ "O
m OJ M 10
M -vj -vj ^i
j> -vi On 4^
ww ;o fv w m to <-> tO M tO M 10 OO OJ OJ m tO m
UWMWWhW»10hWNWNNmMWUNN
- - - h OJ tO ih ON ONOJ n On On M OJ i
HHMMr*
512

Isaiah— cont.

10

Iii. i . .
Hi. 7 . .
Iii. 7-9 .
Iii. 13-liii.
Iii. 14 .
liii. . .
liii. 2-3 .
liii. ^-9 .
liii. 3
liii. 5, 6
liii. 8 .
liii. 10
liv. . .
liv. 1-3 .
liv. 4 (Sept
liv. 7-8
liv. 13
lv. 3 .
lv. 4-5
lv. 5.
lv. 7 .
lv. 11
lvi. 1-8
lvi. 7
lvii. .
lvii. I
lvii. 2
lvii. 7
lvii. 15
lviii. .
lviii. 2
lix. .

264

384:

123, 134,

lix. 3
lix. 14
lx. 14
lxi. 1
lxi. 3
lxi. 6
Ixii. 3
Ixii. 4
Ixii. 6
lxiii. .
lxiii. -Ixvi
lxiii. 1-6
lxiii. 7 .
lxiii. 7-lxiv,

lxiii. 9
lxiii. 10
lxiii. II
lxiii. 16
lxiii. 17
lxiii. 18
lxiii. 19
Ixiv. .
Ixiv. 5
Ixiv. 10
Ixiv. II

118, 160.

130,

. . 80
• • 71
¦ • 274
263, 274
245, 377
273, 275377264264
f473 245 367
273 57
212234386 129
292224
36S321 294
14, 328 353
• 135
426, 441
. . 176
343, 344
127, 375
130, 374
137, 161, 162
• • 370
¦ 133
. . 80
124, 338
171, 412 366 218217274 H7 160
203
130, 175
130, 156,
162, 175
248 333
345
3°5 357 130
34o 161
130 130
103, 130

272

328

lxv.
lxv.lxv.lxv.lxv.lxv.
lxv. lxv.lxv.lxv.lxv.lxv.
lxv.lxv.Ixvi.
Ixvi.
Ixvi. Ixvi.
Ixvi.Ixvi.Ixvi.Ixvi.
Ixvi.Ixvi.Ixvi.Ixvi. Ixvi.

INDICES.

Isaiah— cont. PAGE
• 65, 153, 217, 234,
329, 405

-Ixvi. 3-5-5 •
n .
13-141415 ¦
17 •
17-22
19 .
20 .
22 .
23 •
• 65,
1-2
i-3
3 •
5 •
6 .
6-24 11 .
15 •
17 ¦
21 .
22 .
24 .

159
160, 397
¦ 65
, 397
¦ 405217
¦ 65
404, 405404
443
404, 405
405, 412, 443
... 405
153, 160, 234,
329, 405
, ... 152
¦ ••• 375
153, 160, 217, 365
. . 65
• • 197
¦ • 165
*472, 473
• • 405
. . 160
. . 160
404406

160, 405

Jeremiah.
ii. 1  321
«• 2  378
ii. 13  408
iii- 4  305
iii. 12  379
iii. 16-17 ¦ • • • 315
iii. 16 (Targ.) . . . 329
v. 1  197
v. 6  232
v. 16  242
'•23  197
vii. 4 . . . 329, 330
vii. 10-11 .... 328
vii. 12  328
vii. 22-23 ¦ • 151, 366
viii. 8 . . . 151, 366
viii. 22  313
*• 1-16  333
x- 7  340
x- 12  333
x. 16  429
X. 21  I97
x- 23  346
A. 23-25 .... 214
x. 24  242
*• 25  197

22

Jeremiah-

xi. 15
xi. 20
xii. 3
xii. 6
xiii. 17
xiv. 7-9
xiv. 9
xiv. 19-22
xv. 16
xvii. 5
xvii. 5-8
xvii. 6
xvii. 7-8
xvii. 8
xvii. 10
xvii. 12-
xvii. 13
xvii. 14
xviii. 20.
xx. 12
xxii. 15
xxii. 16
xxiii. 24
xxiv. .
xxv. 4
xxv. 25-26
xxvi. 8, II
xxix. 4-7
xxix. 8
xxx. 19
xxxi. 4
xxxi. 10
xxxi. 13
xxxi. 33
xxxi. 34
xxxiii. 3
xxxiii. 11
xxxiii. 21
xxxv.xxxvii. .
xxxvii. 5
xxxviii. .
xxxviii. 6
xiii. n (Sept.)
xlv. 3
xlix. 1
—li. .
• 19.
i. 19
i- 34
i- 39
i- 57
i. 58
i. 64

cont. PAGE
173, 185
196, 245
. . 242
137, 250
¦ 158
. 214
• 328
. 214
. 328
. 92
. 240
. 240
• 13
. . 240
. . 196
. . 182
318, 408
• 247
. 196
. 196
. 170
. 170
• 3H
¦ 230
• 294
• 232
• 137
. 266
. 116
. 192
. 192
. 158
¦ 247
• 356
• 386
. 64
. 214
. 207
. 230
• 247
. 125,
• 247
. 136
. no
. 242
. 232
. 8
. 15S
• W
. 127
• 44i
• 44i

Lamentations.

277
*47&

PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

5t3

Lamentations — cont. PAGE
ii. 7  194
ii. 15  164
iii. . . 122, 136, 277
iii. 22-23 • • • -334
iii. 35, 38 . . . . 83
iv. 20 (Sept.) . . . 305

Ezekiel.

1. 24 ,

viii. 17

107,

271

94,

x. 5 .
xii. 10
xiv. 14
xiv. 15
xxvi. 7
xxvi. 20
xxviii. 2
xxviii. 3
xxviii. 13-14
xxviii. 14 .
xxxii. 29 (Sept.)
xxxiv. n-16 .
xxxiv. 24 . .
xxxvii. I— 10 .
xxxvii. 25 .
xxxviii. .
xxxix.

327 84
447 326 84
219 106
335 141
426 219
106, 107
330, 427
• • 317
. . no
• • 158
. . 219
383, 403
. . 219
165, 380
165, 380

Daniel.
iii. 26  320
iii. 33 . . . 66, *476
iv. 24 (27) .... 278
iv. 31 . . . 66, 332
iv- 31-33 ...¦ 267
vi. n  320
vii. 7 (Sept.) ... 38
vii. 8, 11 .... 166
vii. 23-24 (Sept.) . 38
vii. 26 ..... 49
ix. . . 161, 298, 301
ix. 16 ..... 104
ix. 20  236
ix. 24  *475
ix. 25  41
ix. 26 . . . 123, 350
ix. 27  i°5
a. 13, 20, 21 . • • 120
xi  34
xi. 14  "4
xi. 22  2I9
xi. 31  IO|
xi. 33, 35 ¦ • ¦ • 348
xii. 2 . 406, 430, 444

Daniel — cont. PAGE
xii. 2-3  444
xii. 3  348
xii. 11  105

Hosea.

1. 10 .
ii. 21
iii. 5 ¦
iv. 4-5
vi. 2
vi. 4, 6
vii. 8-9
viii. 1
viii. 12
ix. 7 •
xi. 1 .
xiii. 2
xiii. 14
xiv. 5
xiv. 14

383

116

3°5
379 128
277
, 440 378277329
475 118 130
245345
440 433

Joel.
i. 15 ...... 84
ii. II  123
ii. 12  295
ii. 12-13 • • • • 375
ii. 28  386
ii. 28-29 .... 40
iii  160
iii. 2  165
iii. II  120
iii. 17  25
iv. II  324
Amos.
iii. 5  179
iii. 7  106
v. 21-23 . . 194, 195
vi. 4  '79
vi. 4-5  167
vi. 5  r92
vi. 10 . . • 297, 301
ix. 11  I28
ix. 12  328
Obadiah.
verse 7  *34
Jonah.
;;  61, 206
ii! 2 (1)  127

Jonah— cont.

11. 2-9
ii. 3 .
ii. 10
iii. 5-10
iv. 2 .

PAGE
. 126
. 127
• 375 375
• 295

Micah.
iv- 2  357
iv. 10  131
vi., vii. 1-13- . . 224
vii  277
vii. 2 . . . 135, 378
vii. 14-20 .... 224
vii. 17  206

Nahum.

I. z-IO .

22S

Habakkuk.
ii. 1  64
iii. 125, 156, 210, 214
iii. I  14
iii. 2  125
iii. 3  287
iii. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 . .125
iii. 12  125
iii. 13 . 125, 175, 350
iii. 14 . . . .125
iii. 19 • • • 157, 224

Zephaniah.

"• 3

Haggai.

11. 7- •
ii. 20-23

Zechariah.

11. 4
ii. 4-5
iii. 8-9
iv. v. 8 .
vi. 9-13
vi. 9-15

225232

21
36

7i
231 36 36
323 21 36

L L

514

INDICES.

Zechariah-

-cont.

PAGE

VI. II

21, 2l8

vi. 13 .

¦ 21, 36
vu. 9-10
• • 249
viii. 16-17
. . 249
vm. 22—23
. . I3I
ix.-xiv. . 7,
133,
154, 239, 428
ix. 8
. . 171
. . 248
ix. 9
143,
171, 179
IX. 10 .
142,
171, 252
ix. 13 .
• • 137
Zechariah— cont. PAGE
ix. 16  218
x- 6  157
xi. 8  158
xii. 7  329
xii. 8  181
xiv  160, 380
xiv. 2  165
xiv. 3  107
xiv. 5  324
xiv. 9 . 82, 169, 342, 352
xiv. 21 . . . 160, 329
2 Zechariah . 239, 428
Malachi. PAGE
i. 6 . . . . 152, 305
i. 10-11 .... 364
i. 11 . . 169, 176, 292
ii. 10  305
iii. 1  67
iii- 3  175
iii- 4  364
iii. 15 . . . 149, 234
iii. 17  288
iv. 5-6  40
(B) New Testament.
s.
Matthew.
S.
John
ii. 1-12 .... 281
i. 11
• ¦ 334
111. 12 . .
374
i. 18
¦ • 327
xi. 21-23 ¦
64
iv. 22
. . 290
xi. 25, 27 .
327
v- 39
¦ 442
xin. 35 . .
284
X.
319, 343
xvi. 27 .
336
x. 16
• 352
xvm. 10
335
X. 22
• 32
xxn. 30 . .
336
xi. 51
¦ 25
xxn. 31, 32
445
xn. 31
¦ 337
xxn. 41 .
34
xn. 41
. 222
xxm. 23
150
, i.S9
xv. 18,
19 .
• 388
xxm. 37, 38
64
xvi. 13
¦ 352
xxvi. 24
<>3
xvn. 3
. 388
xxvi. 30
33
xvii. 5,
6
• 313
xxvii. 35
284
xvn. 9
• 388
xxvii. 52
441
xxviii. 1 8 .
222
Acts.
S. Mark.
ii. 34-36 . .
• • 34
vn. 59
• • 415
m. 5 • •
• 98
vii. 60
• • 44i
xn. 10, II .
• 33
xn. 15
• • 335
• • 383
xiv. 15,
16 .
¦ • 306
xiv. 26 .
• 32, 33
xvi. 25
.
• • 363
S. Luke.
i- 9-n  39
Romans
i. 67 .
30
11. 11
305
1. 19-21
. .
• • 306
11. 14
334
vn. 22,
23
¦ • 376
ii. 26
305
vn. 24
376, 450
ix. 26
305
vm. 15
. . 288
xn. 19
382
ix. 6 .
• • 342
xiv. 14
406
x. 12
• • zn
xvi. 22
443
xi. 28
275, 377
xxn. 25
39
xii. 16
• 353
1 Corinthians.
ii. 8 
222
vii. 5 ....
446
xm. 12 
410
xiv. 26 
3°
xv. 25 
34
2 Corinthians.
v. 1-10 . . . 415, 444
Galatians.
ii- 8  293
iv. 26  274
vi. 16  266
Ephesians.
111. 15 .
iv. 12-16
302, 327
. . 266
Philippians.
i. 23 . . . . 415, 444
"•7  344
"¦n  305
iii. 2  17
iii. 20  274
1 Thessalonians.
iv. 14, 15 ... . 441
1 Timothy.
iii. 16  431
vi- 15  153
vi. 19  429
PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

515

Titus.

PAGE
. 271

Hebrews.

1. 1 -
i. 7,8
i. 8 .
i. 14.
ii. 5 •
v. 6 .
vii. 1-10
vii. 3
vii. 17, 21
x. 1, 2
A. 1-10
x. 13
xi. 10
xi- 34-38
xii. 18
xii. 22
xii. 23
xiii. 4
xiii. 20

, 124
¦ 179
. 182
- 324
325, 337
• 34
. 27
¦ 42
• 34
• 354
¦ 367
• 34
• 274
• 29
• 337
274, 337
415, 444
274, 446
¦ • 353

James.

1. 17.
i. 26 ,
i. 27 .

440 366 3§6

Revelation.

1 Peter.
ii. 9  367
ii- 25  353
iii. 15  273
v. 4  353
2 Peter.
iii. 13  404
1 John.
i. 8  369
ii. 15, 17 ... • 388
ii. 16  355
iii. 2 .  388
v. 19  388

i. 4 .
iii. 12
vi. z .
vi. 9-1 1
vii. 9
vii. 9- 1 7
vii. 15
xii. 4
xii. II, 12
xiii. .
xiii. 6
xiv. 13
xv. 3
xvii. 14
xvii. 17
xix. 12
xix. 16
xxi. I
xxi. 2, 10
xxi. 2-4
xxii. I
xxii. 2 .
xxii. 16 .
xxii. 17 •

415

273

PAGE 335 274 179
443 443 415443 274444 443
415, 443
415, 443 340 153
408 259 153
405 274
404408 439 36
439

111. iv.

Tobit.

xn. 15
xiii. 11

Judith.

xn. 2, 13
xvi. 7

2 Esdras.
2 Esdras, book of .
ii. 12 . . . .
iv. 41 . . . .
viii. 52 ...
xiv- 37-5° • • ¦

(C) Apocrypha and other Ancient Writings
1 Esdras. vi. 3  33 : xliv.-l.xliv. 5
xliv. 16
xlv. I
xlv. 12
xlv. 24
xlv. 26
xlvii. I
xlvii. 3
xlvii. 11
xlvii. 1 4- 1 7
xlvii. 22
xlviii. 9 .
xlviii. 11
xlix. .
xlix. 14 .
1. 15 ¦ ¦
1. 18 . .
1. 24 (Pesh,
1. 26 .
li. 1-12 .
li. 5 • •
li. 6 . .
Ii. 10

Wisdom of Solomon.

111. 1, 2
v. 15

vi. 3 . . .

• • 331

vi. 19 . . .

• ¦ 443

52

vm. 20 . . .

• • 450

52

xii. 16 . . .

• • 372

xii. 18 . . .

372, 377

xii. 19 . . .
352, 369
xiv. 16-20 . .
. . 181
xvi. 12 . . .
. . 321
441
xvi. 28 . . .
• • 448
439
xviii. 15
. . 321
443
439 458
Ecclesia;
TICUS.
i. 13 (Pesh.)
. . 128
xiv. 19 . .
. . 409
xiv. 20, 21 .
. 24I, 253
. . .456
335
xv. 19 • •
328
xvii. 17 . .
xvii. 27 •
. • 337
. • 385
xvii. 30 . .
. 385, 4io
xviii. 21
. . • 369
xix. 19
. ¦ -442
TQ5
xxii. 27 . .
. . 66, 456
424
xxiii. 1-4 ¦
. . .327
xxm. 9 . •
. . .3°°
xxiv.
. • -334
ON.
xxiv. 6 . . .
. . . 296
xxxvi. 15 •
. . . 40
384
xxxvi. 15-16
. . . 25
331
xxxix. I-II
. . . 241
128
. II
. 410
. 76
• 199
• 42
42, 128
. 60
• 244
. 60
¦ 153
. 60
. 410
• 409
• 52
. 410
. 314
• 13
. 128
. 232
. 127
. 127
118, 127
• . 327
Baruch.
1. ii .
iii. 23
iv. 20
156 97
456
5i6

INDICES.

i Maccabees. i Maccabees — cont.
2 Maccabees — cont.
PAGE
PAGE
PAGE
(Syriac)  43
xii  37, 297
XV. 22 . . . . . 178
i. 24
166
xii. 10 .
• • 297
i. 24, 30 .
. . . 94
xiii. 14 .
• 50
i- 33 • •
. . 80
xiii. 27-30
• 14
4 Maccabees.
1- 37 - •
• 93, 104
xiii. 39 .
• 39
i. 57 .
94
xiii. 41-42
. 200
Maccabees, Fourth
ii. 1 . .
• 32
xiii. 42 .
• 39
Book of .... 29
ii. 27
. . 95
xiii. 42-47
• 199
vii. 17 .
• • 4H
ii. 29
• • 57
xiii. 47-50
. 80
xiii. 14 .
• • 443
ii. 42
• 56, 364
xiii. 51 .
. 40
xvi. 22 .
414
ii. 43 .
49
xiii. 51, 52
. 11
xvii. 18 .
• • 4H
11. 44 .
. . 48
xiii. 52 .
. 26
ii. 59, 60
ii. 62
¦ ¦ 445
• • 93
xiv. . .
xiv. .
• 23, 38
• • 23
Enoch.
ii. 63 .
58,93
xiv. 7
• 50
v  .414
iii. 24 .
125
xiv. 8-1 1
. 24
v. 8, 9 .
443
iii. 41
. 98
xiv. 9, 43
• 23
v. 9 . .
. . 405
iii. 45 .
. 18
xiv. 11 .
¦ So
vi.
. . 448
iii. 46-60
94, 95
xiv. 13 .
24, 50
x. .
. . 221
iv. 1
• 199
xiv. 14 .
2i
!, 68, 80
xiv. 9-23
314
iv. 6-1 1
. 104
xiv. 15 .
. 11
xiv. 22 .
• • 336
iv. 28 .
• 199
xiv. 27-46
. 26
xvii. 4 .
408
iv- 30-33
¦ 17
xiv. 36 .
68, 80
xxii. .
40
6, 413, 44i
iv. 3° •
66
xiv. 41 . :
!2,
35,
40, 200
xxii. i.
424, 449
iv- 33 •
. 48
xiv. 47 .
. 26
xxii. 13 .
• ¦ 413
iv. 37-59
16
xiv. 51 .
• 41
xxv. 5
. . 412
iv. 46
22, 40
xv. 3, 21
• 253
xxv. 6 .
• 443
iv. 54 •
. 18
xv. 26 .
. 48
xxxix. 1 .
• 336
v. 1, 2 .
-. 98
xv. 27 .
48,79
xiii. 1, 2
334
v- 35 •
. 105
xiii. 1-3. .
323
vi. 28, 54
• 92
xlv. 4-5 . .
. 40.
vi. 62
¦ 79
2 Maccabees.
li. 1, 2 . .
412
vii.
• 27
liii. 3 . .
413
vii. 9
• 123
i. 1-36
. . f.
liv. . . .
424
vii. 10 .
• 79
1. 9 .
33
lx. 8, 13 .
414
vii. 12, .13
• 56
i. 18 .
32
lxi. 5 . .
412
vii. 14
• 27
ii. 1-18
38
lxi. 12 . .
414
vii. 16-17
• 93
ii. 13.
457
lxvii.
424
vii. 26 .
• 197
ii. 14.
12
lxix. .
44S
vii. 33 •
• 156
iii. 4-7
123
lxxi. 15 . .
414
vii. 34 ¦
166 | iv. 34, 35
123
Ixxii. 1 .
405
vn. 39 ¦
• 98
v. 11-16, 26
94
lxxxiii  xci.
449
vii. 40-43
. 178
vi  vii. .
93
lxxxiii. . .
448
vii. 40-44 .
197
vi. 2 .
105
lxxxiii. 2
446
vii. 49
+'•;
vi. 18
66
lxxxiii. n .
448
viii. . . ,
• 37, 92, 29;
vii.
29
Ixxxvii. 3 .
414
ix. 9-16
> ¦
• 94
vii. 14
406
Ixxxix. 52 .
414
ix. 18 .
• 93
vii. 36
408
Ixxxix. 73 .
449
ix. 19-21
37, 108
ix. 4 .
166
Ixxxix. 73-7
4 •
375
ix. 23 .
68,93
a. 1-7
16
xc. 9 .
24
ix. 26, 28
• 56
x. 4 .
377
xci. 10 .
412
ix. 27
35
, 40, 96
A. 6 .
33
xci. 15, 16 .
405
ix. 73 .
. 68
xii. 35
109
xcii. 3 .
412
X. 21 . .
x. 46. . .
x. 61 . . .
. 68
xn. 37
48
xciv. 5 .
423
• 79
xn. 43-45 .
415
xcviii.
448
• 253
xiii. 13-17 .
93
xcviii. 10, ii
! .
413
xi. 53 • •
xi. 58 . .
• 79
xiv. 6 . .
56
xcviii. 15 .
423
• 23
xv. 12-16 .
96
xcix. n . .
413
xi. 60 . .
. g8
xv. 16
98
c. 5 . . .
414
PASSAGES FROM THE SCRIPTURES, ETC.

517

Enoch — cont.

cu. .
cii. 8
ciii. .
civ. 10
cviii.
cviii. 3

PAGE 413413413423 449413

Sibylline Oracles.

Procem. 3 .
iii. 167-170
- 286, 745
— 300-313
— 396, 397
-613 - •
— 652, 660
xi. 79-92 .
xiii. 151, 164

353 153 3781 3S38
23
153 37

Psalms of Solomon.

i- 4, 7
ii- 3 ¦

"• 3, 4 •
iii. n .
iii. 13-16
iii. 16 .
viii. 13 .
xiii. 8, 9, 10
xiv. 1, 2
xiv. 6, 7
xv. 11 .
xv. 13, 15
xvii. .
xvii. 6-8
xvii. 18 .
xvii. 26 .
xvii. 30 .
xvii. 36 .
xvii. 37 .
xvii. 42, 43

. . 412
. . 411
• • 375
. . 412
406, 411
409, 413
- • 375
. . 4"
. . 412
. . 411
. . 411412
28, 39, 353
¦ • 40
104, 411
. . 252
- • 275
¦ • 305
. . 179
, • 275

Assumption of Moses. PAGE
iv  375
v- 15  39
vi. 17  27
x  30

Descensus Christi
ad Inferos. . . 223

Philo (subjects).
Psalms  12
Sacrifices . . . . 14
Melchizedek ... 27
Philadelphus . 42, 146,
170, 172
Regal dignity . . .181
High-priestly dress 218
Names of God . . . 303
Ps. xxiii  330

Josephus (subjects).

Jeremiah Synagogue ; psalms
' The Lights ' . .
John Hyrcanus
Hyrcanus II. . .
Bagoses .
Jewish martyrdoms
Antiochus III. . 114

10
12 17
24 26 52
61
127, 128
Onias III. . . 123, 136
Onias IV. . . 136, 137
Sacrifices for foreigners 155, 156
Demetrius . . . .181
Early Hellenizing . 198
Theocracy . . • • 351

Josephus — cont. PAGE
Agrippa. . . .352
The three 'sects ' 416-421
And elsewhere

Talmud.
(References are, for bre
vity's sake, confined loPirqe
Abotk. In the body of the
work references to Wunsche,
Der babylonische Talmud,
1886-1889, are often added
to encourage the reader to
familiarize himself a little
with the contents of the
Talmud.)

Pirqe Aboth, i. 2 .

• 59

 1. 3 .

417

 ii. 8^ . .

*475

 iv. 21, 27

• 415

Chief subjects of reference.
Hallel . . ¦ 33
Nicanor  55

Step-psalms

59

Daily psalms . 7:

,83

Names of Messiah

154

Septuagint . . .

1 84

Solomon . . . .

18.S

The torah . . . .

2S6

' Prince of the world '

337

Gog and Magog . .

380

Resurrection .

406

Sadducaeism

416

And elsewhere (see

also Index I. )

Pirqe de Rabbi

Eliezer . . .

432

331
PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
LONDON
3 9002 08844 6571