1,5, v.9 to G.ix.11,15, v.14 to G.i.29,30, v.19 to G.i.14-cx.4, 'Melchizedek,' to G.xiv.8-20.

(i) viii.4 seems to be parodied in Job vii.17,18, and this psalm is set, by K.III.p.295, 'without hesitation at least a century before the Book of Job'; O.p.53 says that its language has some peculiarities, which seem to point to a comparatively high age; E.p.30 and H1.I.p.40 ascribe it to David, who had in his hands (as we suppose) the Elohistic Narrative, including G.i.26,28.*

(ii) xi is assigned by K.III.p.295 to the 8th century, or, perhaps, the Chaldee period, but by E.p.7, and Hr.I.p.60, to David, during whose reign, as we suppose (V.291), G.xix.1-28,30-38, was written.

(iii) xxix is ascribed by HI.I.p. 163 to the Chaldee period, by E.p.21 to David, while K., O., and Hu. pronounce no judgement on its age: the Davidic origin is consistent with our view as to the age of the Elohistic passage, G.vi.17.

(iv) xxxix belongs to the 8th century,' E.p.84, to the Chaldee period, K.III. p.294, HI.I.p.218, to the Maccabean, O.p.178.

(v) For lxxiv see (562.ii).

(vi) lxxxiii is post-exilic, belonging to Nehemiah's time, E.p.352, is Maccabean, HI.II.p.192, O.p.345, K.III.p.320; and, in fact, most of the nations here named as confederate against Israel, v.6-8, are named also in 1Macc. v.1,&c. as banded against it and conquered one after another by Judas Maccabæus, comp. for Edom, v.3, Moab (?), v.26,36, Hagarenes, v.4,39, Gebal, v.15, Ammon, v.6, Amalek, v.39,65, Philistines, v.66,68, Tyrians, v.15, while the very subordinate part assigned to Asshur in v.8 shows that this word must here be used for 'Syria,' which, no doubt, took part in the general movement against Israel, though not expressly mentioned in 1 Macc.v.

(vii) civ is post-exilic, very late, E.p.396, K.III.p.295,308, Hı.II.p.283, late, HU.IV.p.93, Maccabean, O.p.399.

(viii) cx is due to a later writer, Hu.IV.p.181, is Maccabean, Hr.II.p.319, O.p.420, whereas E.p.56 ascribes it to David, and K.III.p.292 to the age of Uzziah. On our view (V.283), G.xiv was written about the sixteenth or eighteenth year of David's reign,' and might therefore have been referred to by the writer of Ps.cx, even if he lived in the age of David.

564. Whatever doubts may still exist as to the age of most of the psalms, it is certain that many of them must have been

* It is obvious that if viii.4, xxix.10 really refer to the Elohistic Narrative, and if these psalms belong to the Davidic age, we have here a confirmation of our view (VI.554), that the Elohistic passages are the oldest-not, as KUENEN now holds, some of the latest-portions of the Pentateuch. But K. says, H.K.O. p.279, 'the assumption is probably not incorrect that the writer [of Ps.viii] was acquainted with G.i.'; and, since he fixes for its composition B.c.710-20 (531), he practically confirms the correctness of our view.

written after the Captivity, since they refer distinctly to that event as already past, e.g. lxxxv.1-3, cii.14, &c., cvi.40-47, cvii. 10-16, cxxvi, cxxxvii, or contain Aramaisms, e.g. ciii, cxvi, cxxiicxxiv, cxxix, cxxxiii, cxxxv, cxxxvii, cxxxix, cxliv, cxlvi, although some of these last, viz. ciii, cxxii, cxxiv, cxxxiii, cxxxix, cxliv, are by some critics ascribed to David. Most of the post-exilic psalms, according to KUENEN, belong to the Persian age, some to the Greek, and a few to the Maccabean, as xliv, lxxiv (see v.8), lxxix, K.III.p.314, also lxxx, lxxxiii, cxviii, cxlix, and perhaps a few others, p.317. OLSHAUSEN, indeed, assigns the great bulk of the Psalter to the Maccabean age. But KUENEN observes, p.316

If nearly the whole Psalter was the product of the Maccabean age, then the Greek translator must have been a contemporary of most of the Psalmists. How, then, can it be explained that he has made so many and so great mistakes, and especially that the Titles of the Psalms were wholly unintelligible to him? This last fact above all points to a considerable interval between the origin of the LXX and-if not the completion, yet-the preparation of that collection of psalmody of which we now possess the latest edition in the Psalter.

565. KUENEN concludes that the Psalter was closed between 150 and 140 B.C., perhaps even later, since cxviii probably refers, as he thinks, to the purifying of the Temple by Judas Maccabæus, 1 Macc.iv.52, &c., B.C.164, and, at all events, some Maccabean psalms undoubtedly exist in it.

To the above conclusion it may indeed be objected that C in 1 Ch.xvi.8-36 has quoted Ps.xcvi, cv, cvi.1,47,48 (424), including therefore the doxology (cvi.48) at the end of Book IV, which would seem to imply that in his time Book IV was already completed, though Book III contains Maccabean psalms, e.g. lxxiv, lxxix, lxxx, lxxxiii. But KUENEN observes that the doxologies at the end of xli, lxxii, lxxxix, all end with Amen and Amen,' whereas cvi.48 ends with and let all the people say Amen— Hallelu-JAH!' corresponding to cl.6, Let all that hath breath praise JAH-Hallelu-JAH!' which last is manifestly a part of

the psalm to which it is appended; and so, apparently, is also cvi.48, following naturally after v.47, whereas the other three doxologies are quite disconnected from the matter which precedes them. In other words, the whole psalm, cvi.1-48, may have been in existence separately in the time of C, and may have been afterwards chosen to close Book IV, from the accidental circumstance that it ended with a suitable doxology. This would explain the existence of Maccabean psalms in Book III. But, of course, it is quite possible that later, e.g. Maccabean, psalms may have been inserted, when the Psalter, as originally existing, had already been divided into five Books.

483

CHAPTER XXIX.

THE DAVIDIC AND ELOHISTIC PSALMS.

566. We come now to consider more closely Ps.li, Ps.lx, Ps. lxviii, upon which in (II.384–388, 395–399, 404-422) considerable stress was laid, on the supposition that these are really Davidic psalms, as showing that at the time when they were written the name 'JAHVEH' was not as yet used freely by all pious writers, having only been recently introduced by Samuel as the name of the national God of Israel, since in each of them Elohim or Adonai' is employed as the name of the Deity, either exclusively or much more frequently than "Jahveh— viz. li(E.6,J.0), lx(E.5,J.0), lxviii(E.31,A.7,J.4).

6

Bp. BROWNE indeed has said, Elohistic Psalms, p.66—

We may thank Bp. COLENSO for having rested his case so largely on the testimony of the Psalmists.

6

And in (V.App.II.48) I have protested against this unfair and unwarranted statement.' I have not rested my case' at all upon the Psalmists. I have only adduced the very remarkable phenomena in the psalms, with reference to the use of the Divine Name, as a collateral evidence, confirming, so far as it goes, the view as to the later adoption of Jahveh,' as the name of the God of Israel, to which I had been led by entirely different processes of reasoning; and I observed (II.451) that these phenomena

so far from being in any way at variance with the conclusion, to which we had already come on other clear grounds, are on the contrary quite in accordance with it.

567. Referring to Part II, as above, for the argument as derived from these psalms, and to Part V. App.ii for my reply to the criticisms of Bp. BROWNE and Mr. PEROWNE, and also to (90–94) and App.150 in this Part, for further remarks on the age of Ps.lxviii, I will here add some additional observations on each of these three psalms, in reply to the criticisms of Prof. KUENEN (H.K.O.III).

Ps.li. The words in v.4, 'against Thee only have I sinned' can only be reconciled with the superscription in a very forced and unnatural way; and the same holds of the prayer and promise in v.18,19, which suppose a state of Jerusalem, and of religious worship, which did not exist in David's days. Some have regarded these last verses, just because they indicate a later time, as an addition to the genuine Davidic psalm; but this could only be admitted, if it were first certain that David was the writer of v.1-17. Against this, however, may be urged, besides the verses here quoted, the strongest general considerations, p.257.

If it is once for all certain, on the ground of v.4,18,19, that the Title is incorrect, it will be more readily allowed that in this psalm a deep consciousness of sin is expressed, v.1-3,5, and a spiritual view of God's relation to man, v.7,10,11, and of the nature of true worship, v.16,17, which are not in harmony with the known acts of David, and cannot be ascribed to him, without sacrificing the unity of his personality and admitting in him the existence of unaccountable contradictions. p.283.

From the above remarks it follows at once that li may be placed with great probability in the time of the Exile. p.299.

Ans. This Psalm is supposed to have been written by David in the fifty-first year of his life, and the twenty-second of his reign, and under the influence of strong emotions and a deep sense of guiltiness. No doubt, there are fierce acts of David recorded, and much which seems at first sight incongruous with the spirituality of mind which is exhibited in some parts of this psalm. But these are not irreconcilable with the existence of a deep-rooted piety in David's heart, and with a spirituality of mind which may well have uttered itself, under the pressure of sorrowful conviction, in the language of this psalm (558-9). In fact, almost the very words of v.4 are put into David's mouth in 2S.xii.13, I have sinned against Jahveh'; and the historian at any rate saw no incongruity between such a confession and the