Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 13.djvu/397

 ISAIAH rally admitted to belong to tlie restoration period. A phraseological argument for a post-exile date may at any rate be deduced from the words &quot;the God of Amen&quot; (Ixv. 16), which point to an age in which liturgical forms containing the word Amen were abundant. (i ) Chap. Ixvi. This chapter has peculiar difficulties, and we must take it in two parts, vers. 1-4 (or 1-5) and 5-24 (or 6-24). (1) Verses 1-4 are highly perplexing. Everywhere else in II. Isaiah the existence of a temple is assumed to be a necessity for the highest religious life (see xliv. 28, Ivi. 7, Ix. 7, Ixvi. 20, 21). In these four verses alone the prophet appears to assume a position of hostility both to it and to the sacrificial system. The temple appears to be unbuilt, and the writer to be opposed on principle to its re- erection. It is not at all impossible that a religious Jew should have taken up this position. In the central portion of the book of Enoch the second temple is boldly denounced, and the offerings of those who worshipped in it are called &quot;unclean, &quot;on the ground that the rebuilding ought to have been postponed till the kingdom of Israel had been set up in the ends of the earth (Ixxxix. 73, xci. 13). If, therefore, we follow appearances, we are bound to regard vers. 1-4 as a separate fragment, interpolated by the latest editor. The fatal objection to such an hypothesis comes from ver. 5, which unites two phrases peculiar the one to the section vers. 1-4, the other to the section vers. 6-24. It is evidently a designed link between the two parts of the prophecy in chap. Ixvi., and as evi dently is not the work of a mere manipulating scribe, but of the author. We must therefore interpret vers. 1-4 on the analogy of the famous passage Jer. vii. 22, which seems to discountenance sacrifices altogether, but in reality only condemns them when gone through as mere forms (see Jer. xxxiii. 18). (2) Verses 5-24 con sist, like chap. Ixv., of alternate threatening and promise. The threatening is mainly addressed to the hostile Gentiles, but partly also to the idolatrous Jews ; and the idolatrous practices denounced (ver. 17) are the same as those in Ixv. 4, 5 (initiation into heathen mysteries and eating &quot;unclean&quot; food). The temple has been rebuilt, and the sacrificial system in some form has been restored, ^ such at least appears the most natural interpretation of the allusions in vers. 6, 20, 21. On the whole, we seem to be led to the following conclusions with regard to (g), (h), and (i) : first, that the passage Ixiii. 7-lxiv. is entirely distinct from the prophecies in the midst of which it occurs, and that it was probably written early in the exile by one of the Jews left behind in Palestine ; and, secondly, that the whole of chaps. Ixv. and Ixvi. proceed from one author, though they were certainly not written continuously. A comparison of ver. 6 with Joel iii. 12-16, and also of the contexts of both passages, suggests that chap. Ixvi. (and consequently Ixv. ) was written by a contem porary of Joel (i.e., well on in the Persian period). As the result of our digression, we are enabled to do better justice to what may be called the second book of the prophecy of Israel s restoration. Chap. Iii. 13-liii. is based upon an early work, descrip tive, however, as it would seem, not of the martyrdom of an Isaiah or a Jeremiah, but, even in its original form, of an ideal (or, as orthodoxy holds, ideal and historical) personage, the first sketch as it were (Job, in the poem which bears his name, is another) of the Servant of Jehovah. But it is proper to speak here with great hesi tation. No analysis can be skilful enough to bring out a descrip tion of a mere martyr ; it is simply on linguistic grounds that we assume the existence of this remarkable section in some form or other, but a form not very unlike the present, at a date previous to that of the other portraits of the &quot;Servant.&quot; By omitting it, how ever, we obtain a much improved connexion ; chap. liv. forms the finest of all possible sequels to Iii. 9-12. The transition to the next chapter is, it must be confessed, a little abrupt, and indeed the remainder of the book has the appearance of not having been com pletely worked up ; it was the more natural, therefore, for the Sopherim to insert or append to it prophecies mostly of later origin. But no one can fail to observe how greatly chap. Ix. gains by being read in connexion with Iv. 12, and especially with liv. 1, &c. In chap. Ixi. the &quot;Servant of Jehovah&quot; appears for the last time (if it be not rather the prophet who is the speaker) ; and chap. Ixii. closes the second book of the prophecy of restoration with the wel come summons to depart from Babylon. IV. We have said nothing hitherto, except by way of allusion, of the disputed prophecies scattered up and down the first thirty-nine chapters of the book of Isaiah. It is indeed not absolutely necessary to devote a special survey to them here ; the data which they furnish are found (with important additions) in the second part of the book. There is only one of these prophecies (putting aside xxi. 1-10) which may, with any real plausibility, be referred on exegetical grounds to the age of Isaiah, and that is chaps. xxiv.-xxvii. The apparent grounds are (1) that accord ing to xxv. G the author dwells on Mount Zion ; (2) that Moab is referred to as an enemy (xxv. 1Q) ; and (3) that, at the close of the prophecy, Assyria and Egypt are men tioned as the principal foes of Israel (xxvii. 12, 13). But the explanation was long ago seen by Ewald, viz., that the author, being less richly endowed with the prophetic spirit, has interwoven precious fragments of old prophecies. The tone and spirit of the prophecy as a whole point to the- same late apocalyptic period to which chap, xxxiv. and the book of Joel in a faint degree, and much more strikingly the last chapter (at any rate) of the book of Zechariah, may unhesitatingly be referred. A word or two may perhaps be expected on Isa. xiii., xiv.&amp;gt; and xxxiv., xxxv. (a suggestion has already been offered with regard to the latter prophecy). These two oracles agree in the elaborateness of their description of the fearful fate of the enemies of Jehovah (Babylon and Edom are merely representatives of a class), and also in their view of the deliverance and restoration of Israel as an epoch for the whole human race. There is also an iinrelieved sternness, which pains us by its contrast with Isa. xl.-lxvi. (except passages of this portion which are probably not homo geneous with the bulk of the prophecy). They have also close affinities with Jer. L, li., a prophecy (as Budde has proved on philological grounds) of post-exile origin, but are apparently earlier than that longest and least striking of all the prophecies. The literary characteristics of the acknowledged pro phecies of Isaiah have been thus summed up by Ewald : &quot; The thing of chief importance is, that we are wholly unable to name a special peculiarity and favourite manner of style in the case of Isaiah. He is not the specially lyric, or the specially elegiac, or the specially rhetorical and monitory prophet, as, e.g., Joel, Hosea, Mieah, in whose writings a special manner is predominant ; but every kind of style and every variation of exposition is at his com mand to meet the requirements of his subject ; and this it is which in respect of style constitutes his greatness, as well as generally one of his most prominent excellences. His fundamental peculiarity is only the exalted majestic repose of style, proceeding from the lull and sure command of his subject. This repose by no means requires that the language should never be more violently agitated, and not blaze up where the subject demands it ; but even the most extreme agitation is bridled by this repose in the background, and does not pass beyond its proper limits, and soon returns with higher self- niastery to its regular flow, not again to leave it, ii. 9-iii. 1, xxviii. 11-23, xxix. 9-14.&quot; The Prophets, Eng. trausl., ii. 10, 11. This representation has sometimes been misused in the interests of a party to show that Isaiah s versatility was absolutely unlimited, and that no conceivable prophecy, in which affinities with Isaiah can be traced, may not have proceeded from his pen. But Isaiah, though more versa tile than his predecessors (sovra gli altri come aquila vola), was not unmindful of that &quot; limitation&quot; which, Goethe assures us, is the first sign of mastership. He was not a Proteus, and the characteristics mentioned above by Ewald cannot be transferred without large modifications to the prophecy of Israel s restoration. We sink to a lower level when we pass to the disputed prophecies interspersed in chaps, i.-xxxix., which can not lay claim to a high perfection of style, with, however, one exception, and that such a striking one that it is difficult to believe that the passage always occupied its present position. The ode on the fall of the king of Babylon in chap. xiv. 4-21 is as brilliant with the glow of lyric enthusiasm as the stern prophecy which precedes it is, from the same point of view, deficient ; it is too faint a eulogy which Ewald gives to it in the words, &quot; a poetical and highly finished lyric.&quot; It is in fact worthy to be put by the side of the finest passages of chaps. xl.-lxvi., of those passages which irresistibly rise in the memory when we think of &quot;Isaiah.&quot; But what shall we say what language is adequate to the divine beauty of such passages as Handel linked to music almost as divine : &quot; Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God&quot; ; &quot; He shall feed His flock like a shepherd &quot; ; &quot; He was oppressed, and He