incorporated in the Psalter, his name was placed at the head of each Psalm taken from it1.

The case is somewhat different with the Psalms assigned to David in Books IV and V. It is much more probable that some of these titles are due merely to editorial conjecture or inference from the contents. Yet even the compilers of these Books may have found Psalms which are there attributed to David in some earlier collection bearing his name, or assigned to him by current tradition. It is an unwarrantable assumption that all the Davidic Psalms must have been incorporated in earlier collections and inserted in the earlier books.

It is quite possible that imitations of Davidic Psalms, such for example as Ps. lxxxvi, may have been called by his name, without the slightest intention of fraud. In 1 Chr. xvi we find a Psalm compiled from other Psalms suggested as an appropriate thanksgiving for the occasion, though it does not appear to be expressly attributed to David?.

Again, it is possible that Psalms were written by different poets to illustrate particular episodes in the life of David, or to express the thoughts which might be supposed to have been in his mind upon certain occasions. These "dramatic lyrics" might easily have had his name affixed to them, without the slightest intention of passing them off as his for the sake of giving them currency and authority. To this class of Psalm may belong the Psalm of Moses (xc), which can hardly be supposed to have been actually written by him.

While then the titles of the Psalms cannot be supposed to give certain information as to their authors, and many of the Psalms bearing the name of David cannot have been written by him, we are not justified in rejecting the titles as mere arbitrary conjectures. They supply information concerning the earlier stages of the growth of the Psalter; and it is not unreasonable to inquire whether a Psalm taken from a collection which bore David's name may not have been actually composed by him.

In criticising the title of a Psalm and endeavouring to fix its

1 So the general title of the collection is prefixed to each of the Pilgrimage Psalms (cxx-cxxxii).

2 See the R.V. of 1 Chr. xvi. 7.

date by the light of its contents much caution is necessary. The possibility of alterations and additions to the original poem must be taken into account. It is probable that many of the Psalms were not at once committed to writing, but like other oriental poetry, were transmitted orally. The comparison of Ps. xviii with 2 Sam. xxii shews that the text has in some cases suffered from accidental errors of transcription, while in others it appears to bear marks of intentional revision. The comparison of Ps. liii with Ps. xiv, of Ps. lxx with Ps. xl. 13 ff., and of Ps. cviii with Pss. lvii and lx, shews that editors did not scruple to alter earlier Psalms, to divide them, and to combine portions of them, for their own special purposes. The anthem inserted by the chronicler in I Chr. xvi is a notable example of a composite Psalm. Additions seem to have been made with a view of adapting Psalms for liturgical use. Such processes, which can be definitely traced in some instances, have no doubt been in operation elsewhere?.

CHAPTER IV.

THE AUTHORSHIP AND AGE OF THE PSALMS.

IT is obvious from what has been said in the preceding chapter that great uncertainty must necessarily rest upon the authorship of the Psalms. When once it is admitted, as it must be admitted, that the titles cannot be absolutely relied on, we are launched upon a sea of uncertainty. Internal evidence, whether of thought, or style, or language, is a precarious guide. Many Psalms are of a quite general character: the circumstances of one period often resemble those of another: many of

"The

1 Arabic poetry was preserved by the rawis, or reciters. custom of committing verse to writing did not begin till near the end of the first century after the Flight. The whole of the old poetry was preserved by oral tradition only." Lyall's Ancient Arabian Poetry,

p. xxxv.

2 Thus e.g. Pss. xix, xxiv, xxvii, xl, lxxvii, cxliv, have with more or less plausibility been regarded as composite Psalms.

the Psalms have doubtless undergone adaptation and modification, and the date of a Psalm must not always be determined by a single word or phrase1.

Important as it is for the full interpretation of many Psalms to know the circumstances under which they were written, and for the elucidation of the religious history of Israel to determine the age to which they belong, the Psalms as a whole suffer less from this uncertainty than might be expected. Their interest is human and universal. They appeal to the experience of all ages. Still the endeavour must be made to ascertain to what period of the history a Psalm belongs. The question must be considered with reference to each particular Psalm, or group of Psalms, for in those cases in which Psalms are connected by external indications (e.g. by their titles) or by internal resemblances, they must obviously be considered together. The answer must often be non liquet: and even when a Psalm appears to be connected with the circumstances of the life of a particular individual or period, the most that can be said is that the Psalm illustrates, or is illustrated by, that life or that period. Thus it is natural to attribute to Jeremiah2 several Psalms which reflect feelings expressed in his prophecies, or contain language resembling them; and to assign to the age of Ezra and Nehemiah a number of Psalms which seem to have light thrown upon them by the circumstances recorded in their books. But the historical and biographical records of the O.T., if representative, are only fragmentary and partial. Jeremiah was but one of many persecuted saints and prophets. History repeats itself, and circumstances not unlike those described in Ezra and Nehemiah must have recurred in the later period of

1 The question is often asked by the English reader why language does not determine the date of the books of the O.T. within at any rate comparatively definite limits. But (1) the remains of Hebrew literature of which the date is admitted as certain are too scanty to give much material for forming a judgement: (2) the Massoretic vocalisation, while here and there preserving ancient forms, has obscured distinctions under the uniform pronunciation of a later age: (3) the possibility of the imitation of ancient models in a later age must be taken into

account.

2 See the introductions to Pss. xxii, xxxi, xxxv, xxxviii, xl, lv, lxix, lxxi, lxxxviii.

which we know practically nothing. Many Psalms of course contain no indications whatever of their date. But a Psalm gains in point and reality if we can give it a historical or personal background, though it is unreasonable to assert dogmatically that it must necessarily have been composed by that particular author or under those special circumstances.

We have seen (p. xxxiii) that the titles 'A Psalm of David,' 'A Psalm of Asaph,' 'A Psalm of the sons of Korah' probably indicate the collections from which the Psalms bearing them were derived. But they easily came to be regarded as giving authoritative information about the authorship of the Psalms to which they are prefixed. The view was frequently held in the Jewish Church and was adopted by some of the Christian Fathers, that anonymous Psalms were to be attributed to the poet last named1; but in process of time the whole Psalter came to be attributed to David2.

Modern criticism has gone to the opposite extreme, and is disposed to refer the whole Psalter, or at least the greater part of it, to the period after the return from Babylon. Thus Wellhausen (in Bleek's Introduction, p. 507, ed. 1876): “Since the Psalter belongs to the Hagiographa, and is the hymn-book of the congregation of the Second Temple...the question is not whether it contains any post-exilic Psalms, but whether it contains any pre-exilic Psalms." Similarly Reuss (History of the O.T. § 282): "Our doubts do not go so far as to deny the possibility of referring a single one of the poems in the present collection of Synagogue hymns to the period of the kingdom. But we have no decisive proofs for such antiquity." In this country Professor Cheyne in his Bampton Lectures for 1889, on The Origin and Religious Contents of the Psalter in the Light

1 So Jerome (Ep. cxl, ad Cyprianum) attributes Pss. xci to c to Moses, "hanc habente Scriptura sacra consuetudinem, ut omnes Psalmi qui cuius sint titulos non habent his deputentur quorum in prioribus Psalmis nomina continentur."

2 So R. Meir in the Talmud Pesachim 117a; and this view seemed to St Augustine "the more credible" (de Civ. Dei xvii. 14). Theodoret accepted it as the general opinion. Even Theodore of Mopsuestia, when he explained seventeen Psalms to refer to the Maccabaean age, did not question that they were written by David, but supposed that he had foretold the future fortunes of his people.

of Old Testament Criticism and the History of Religions, has maintained that the whole Psalter, with the possible exception of parts of Ps. xviii, is post-exilic, belonging mainly to the later Persian and Greek period, and containing a considerable number of Maccabaean Psalms; and that it was finally edited by Simon the Maccabee, c. B.C. 140. Duhm (1900) goes even further, and not only denies that there is a single Psalm which could induce an unprejudiced critic to regard it as pre-exilic, but thinks that it is open to question whether any Psalms are as old as the Persian period, and assigns the majority of them to the century beginning with the Maccabaean troubles and ending with the death of Alexander Jannaeus, B.C. 170–78. The completion and final publication of the Psalter took place, he holds, about B.C. 70.

It is however difficult to believe that these views represent a just estimate of the evidence. Religious poetry certainly existed before the exile. Ps. cxxxvii1 furnishes explicit evidence that the Israelites carried it with them to Babylon, and that their musical skill was famous there. The 'songs of Zion' which their conquerors bade them sing were 'Jehovah's songs,' sacred songs destined for use in His worship.

The ancient praise-songs of Israel in the Temple are referred to by the prophet of the Exile: "our holy and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised Thee, is burned with fire" (Is. Ixiv. 11).

The Book of Lamentations, which, though probably not written by Jeremiah, "betrays in almost every part so lively a recollection of the closing period of the siege and taking of Jerusalem, that at least the greater portion of it can have been written by no one who was not an eye-witness or a younger contemporary of these events,' is so thoroughly artificial in style

1 Professor Cheyne indeed gets rid of the evidence of Ps. cxxxvii by treating it as a "dramatic lyric" written 400 years after the Return in the time of Simon, and therefore not trustworthy evidence (Origin of the Psalter, p. 69 f.); but if any Psalm bears upon the face of it clear indications of the time at which it was composed, it is this Psalm. The writer and those for whom he speaks are still smarting under the recollection of the sufferings of the Exile.

2 Kautzsch, Literature of the O.T., E.T., p. 92.