Page:04.BCOT.KD.PoeticalBooks.vol.4.Writings.djvu/765

 This last Psalm of the primary collection, united to Ps 71 by community of the prominent word tsdqtk, appears, as we look to the superscription, Psa 72:20, to be said to be a Psalm of David; so that consequently לשׁלמה designates Solomon as the subject, not the author. But the Lamed of לשׁלמה here and in Psa 127:1 cannot have any other meaning than that which the Lamed always has at the head of the Psalms when it is joined to proper names; it is then always the expression denoting that the Psalm belongs to the person named, as its author. Then in style and general character the Psalm has not the least kinship with the Psalms of David. Characteristic of Solomon, on the other hand, are the movement proverb-like, and for the most part distichic, which has less of original freshness and directness than of an artificial, reflective, and almost sluggish manner, the geographic range of view, the richness in figures drawn from nature, and the points of contact with the Book of Job, which belongs incontrovertibly to the circle of the Salomonic literature: these are coincident signs which are decisive in favour of Solomon. But if Solomon is the author, the question arises, who is the subject of the Psalm? According to Hitzig, Ptolemy Philadelphus; but no true Israelite could celebrate him in this manner, and there is no reliable example of carmina of this character having found