Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 3.djvu/657

Rh and Hezekiah (Isa. xxxviii.) But the greater part of the lyrics of the Old Testament remain anonymous, and we can only group the 1 salms in broad masses, distinguished by diversity of historical situation and by varying degrees of freshness and personality. As a rule the older Psalms are the most personal, and are not written for the congre gation, but flow from apresent necessity of individual (though not individualistic) spiritual life. This current of productive psalmody runs apparently from David down to the Exile, losing in the course of centuries something of its original freshness and fire, but gaining a more chastened pathos and a wider range of spiritual sympathy. Psalm li., obviously composed during the desolation of the temple, marks, perhaps, the last phase of this development. The epoch of the return was still not without poetic freshness, as some of the so-called Songs of Degrees (Pilgrim-songs I) prove. But on the whole the Psalms of the second temple are only reflections of old ideas, cast mainly in directly liturgical form, or at least embodying the experience of the nation rather than of the individual. The date of the latest Psalms is much disputed. Most lines of evidence suggest that the collection was complete before the latest books of the canon were written, but many expositors find in in dividual Psalms (44, 74, 79, 83, &amp;lt;fee.) clear traces of the Maccabee age.

Through the whole period of Hebrew lyric, represented not only by the Psalter, but by the Lamentations, traditionally ascribed to Jeremiah, and by various scattered pieces in Prophets (e.g., Isa. xii.) and in historical books (e.g., Num. xxi. 17 ; 1 Sam. ii.), there is little change in form and poetic structure. From first to last the rhythm consists not in a rise and fall of accent or quantity of syllables, but in a pulsation of sense, rising and falling through the parallel, antithetic, or otherwise balanced members of each verse. (So-called Hebrew Parallelism ; better, Sense- rhythm.) Beyond this one law of rhythm, which is itself less an artificial rule than a natural expression of the prin ciple, that all poetic utterance must proceed in harmonious undulation, and not in the spasm of unmodulated passion, the Hebrew poet was subject to no code of art, though strophical arrangements, sometimes marked by a refrain, are not uncommon ; while poems of acrostic structure (alphabetic Psalms) are found not exclusively in the most recent literature (Ps. ix., x. form a single undoubtedly old acrostic). The later are on the whole longer than the earlier poems. But this is due not to increased constructive power, but to a diffuser style, a less vigorous unity of feeling and thought, and a tendency to ring many varia tions on one key. A wider range of artistic power ap pears in the Song of Solomon, a lyrical drama, in which, according to most critics, the pure love of the Shula- mite for her betrothed is exhibited as victorious over the seductions of Solomon and his harem. As the motive of the piece is political as well as ethical, it is most naturally assigned to the early period of the northern kingdom.

The remaining poetical books of the Old Testament belong to a different category. Unfit for abstract speculation, valuing no wisdom that is not practical, and treasuring up such wisdom in sententious rhythmical form, enforced by symbol and metaphor, and warm with the breath of human interest, the Hebrew is a poet even in his philosophy. Side by side with the ode the earliest Hebrew literature shows us the Mashal, or similitude, sometimes in the form of biting epigram (Num. xxi. 27, _/.) or sarcastic parable (Judg. ix. 8,2 Kings xiv. 8), sometimes as the natural vehicle of general moral teaching. The greatest name in the early proverbial wisdom of Israel is that of Solomon (1 Kings iv. 32), and beyond doubt many of his aphorisms are to be found in the book of Proverbs. Yet this book is not all SalomonTc. The last two chapters are ascribed to other names, and part of the collection was not put in shape till the time of Hezekiah (xxv. 1), who can have had no infallible criterion of authorship by Solomon, and must not be credited with critical intentions. In truth, the several sections of the book are varied enough in colour to make it plain that we have before us the essence of the wisdom of centuries, while the introductory address in chapters i.-ix. shows how a later age learned to develop the gnomic style, so as to fit it for longer compositions. The fundamental type of Hebrew philosophy remains, however, unchanged, even in the book of Ecclesiastes, which bears every mark of a very late date, long after the Exile. On the other hand, a fresh and creative development, alike in point of form and of thought, is found in the book of Job, which, in grandly dramatic construction, and with wonderful discrimination of character in the several speakers, sums up the whole range of Hebrew speculation on the burning question of Old Testament religion, the relation of affliction to the justice and goodness of God and to the personal merit and demerit of the sufferer. Like the other noblest parts of the Old Testament, the book of Job has a comparatively early date. It was known to Jeremiah, and may be plausibly referred to the 7th century B.C.

In the book of Job we find poetical invention of incidents, attached for didactic purposes to a name apparently derived from old tradition. There is no valid a priori reason for denying that the Old Testament may contain other examples of the same art. The book of Jonah is generally viewed as a case in point. Esther, too, has been viewed as a fiction by many who are not over sceptical critics ; but on this view a book which finds no recognition in the New Testament, and whose canonicity was long suspected by the Christian as well as by the Jewish Church, must sink to the rank of an apocryphal production.

In the poetical as in the historical books anonymous writing is the rule ; and along with this we observe great freedom on the part of readers and copyists, who not only made verbal changes (cf. Ps. xiv. with Ps. liii.), but composed new poems out of fragments of others (Ps. cviii. with Ivii. and Ix.) In a large part of the Psalter a later hand has systematically substituted Elohim for Jehovah, and an imperfect acrostic, like Ps. ix., x., cannot have proceeded in its present form from the first author. Still more remarkable is the case of the book of Job, in which the speeches of Elihu quite break the connection, and are almost universally assigned to a later hand.

Prophetical Books.—We have already seen that the earliest prophecies of certain date are of the 8th century, activity though there is a probability that Joel flourished in the prophets 9th century, in the reign of Joash of Judah, and that the opening verses of Amos are cited from his book. On the other hand, the old school of prophecy, whose members from Samuel to Elisha were men of action rather than of letters, was not likely to leave behind it any written oracles. The prophets generally spoke under the immediate influence of the Spirit or &quot; hand of Jehovah.&quot; What they wrote was secondary, and was, no doubt, greatly abridged. The most instructive account of the literary activity of a prophet is given in Jer. xxxvi. Jeremiah did not begin to write till he had been more than twenty years a prophet. Some prophetic books, like that of Amos, seem to have been composed at one time and with unity of plan. Other prophets, like Isaiah, published several books summing up portions of their ministry. In one or two cases, especially in that of Ezekiel, the prophet writes oracles which were apparently never spoken. Before the Exile there was circulation of individual prophetic books, and earlier prophets quote from their predecessors. But the task of 