Page images
PDF
EPUB

critique des livres de l'Ancien Testament, traduite par M. A. Pierson, Paris 1866.] Others confined their critical operations to single books of the Old Testament; these will be noticed later, at the appropriate places.

(7) Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Beiträge z. Einleitung ins Alte Test., 3 vols., Berlin 1831-39. Heinr. And. Christ. Hävernick (Prof. at Königsberg, died 1845), Handbuch der hist. krit. Einl. in d. Alte Testament, vols. i. ii. [historical and prophetical books], in 4 parts; vol. iii. [poetical books, Job chiefly from Hävernick's papers] wrought up by C. Fr. Keil, Erlangen 1836-49; vol. i., pts. 1 and 2, in a 2d improved ed. by Keil, 1854-5. As to special writings by other representatives of this movement, see afterwards on the individual books of the Old Testament. [Bleek, pp. 24–27, gives praise to this class of writers, among whom he reckons also Kleinert, Drechsler, F. II. Ranke, Caspari, Kurtz, Stier, etc., whose influence he considers very healthy; though they have gone to an extreme in attributing the entire critical movement to unbelief, and have erred "in asserting that the Old Testament is an absolute revelation, and in placing it almost or altogether on a level with the New."]

To these works there attach themselves the following writers who belong to the [Roman] Catholic Church :-J. G. Herbst (Prof. at Tübingen, died 1836), hist. krit. Einl. in die heil. Schriften des A. Test., edited by Ben. Welte, vol. i. (General Introd.), vol. ii. in two parts (Special Introd.), and a third part (Special Introd. to the deuterocanonical books) by B. Welte, Karlsruhe u. Freiburg 1840-44. J. M. Augustin Scholz (Prof. at Bonn, died in 1852), Einl. in d. heil. Schriften des Alten u. Neuen Test., 3 vols., Köln 1845-48 (containing only the Introd. to the Old Testament). [Bleek, p. 20, says that "Herbst belonged to the more liberal investigators, but that his sentiments cannot be precisely known, for things have been added and suppressed where too much had been conceded to modern criticism, as entirely on Isaiah, Lamentations, Obadiah, Jonah; and the last part, on the Apocrypha, is wholly from the pen of the editor, who is of the strictest school, but knows how to defend his opinions with learning and acuteness."]

[In this review of leading writers, Bleek attaches much more importance, among Roman Catholic writers, to Movers (died in 1856), who would have written still more important articles than some on Chronicles, Jeremiah, and the Pentateuch, but for a certain timidity in reference to his Church by which he was restrained. Bleek also, pp. 23-4, notices the influence among Protestants of Ewald, and of Hitzig, who belongs to the same school, sufficiently positive in a sense,

but very fanciful and self-confident; agreeing with the more purely negative school of De Wette that Moses is not the author of the Pentateuch, and that Daniel and the latter part of Isaiah did not proceed from the writers whose names they bear.]

Finally, the most widely known Introductory work that has appeared in England is that of Thomas Hartwell Horne (at Cambridge), "An Introd. to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Scriptures," London 1818, 3 vols.; 10th ed. revised, corrected, etc., 1856, 4 vols. The first vol. contains a summary of the evidence for the genuineness, authenticity, uncorrupted preservation, and inspiration of the Holy Scriptures; the second, re-written by Sam. Davidson, D.D., has the separate title, "The Text of the Old Test. Considered, with a treatise on sacred interpretation, and a brief introduction to the Old Testament books and the Apocrypha;" the third contains Biblical geography and antiquities; the fourth is the Introd. to the New Testament. Compare Bleek in the Theol. Studien und Krit. 1856, p. 343 ff. [Another edition of the second volume was soon after published, the editor of which was the Rev. John Ayre, since Dr. Davidson's views on many points were very different from those of Horne, and of many who wished to have the work. Dr. Davidson has since published an Introduction to the Old Testament, 3 vols., London 1862.7

FIRST PART.

ORIGIN AND GENUINENESS OF THE CANONICAL WRITINGS

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

FIRST SECTION.

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT LITERATURE IN GENERAL.

CHAPTER I.

RISE, GROWTH, PRIME, AND DECAY OF THE HEBREW LITERATURE.

§ 4. Beginnings of the Practice of Writing among the Hebrews.

A

LTHOUGH the divine revelations of the Old Testament begin with the call of Abraham and the leadings of the patriarchs, and though Genesis thus commences with the creation and the traditions of the most remote times, yet these times must not be expected to furnish us with any literature. The discovery and first use of the art of writing (1) is certainly at least as old as the times of Abraham (2); yet in the patriarchal age we meet with no absolutely certain traces of its employment by the Hebrews (3). But undoubtedly they made this art their own during their stay in Egypt; for here already we find Israelite officers who derived their name from writing (4). All the more we may assume that Moses, the founder of the theocracy, brought up as he was in the Egyptian court, and instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts vii. 22), not only was acquainted with it, but was so practised in it that he could set down in writing the laws which were given to his people, and so ensure them against that disfiguration which is unavoidable in the case of mere oral tradition (5). Nay, in the time of Moses the art of writing is presupposed, and mentioned as being already well known and in common use among the people (6).

(1) Compare Hengstenb. Beitrr. ii. 415 ff.; IIäv. Einl. i. 1, § 43 ff. Hypotheses as to the origin of writing: Jos. Lev. Saalschütz, Forsch. im Gebiete der hebr. ägypt. Archäol. i., zur Gesch. der Buchstabenschrift, Königsberg 1838. Ferd. Hitzig, d. Erfindung des Alphabets, Zürch 1840, fol. Just. Olshausen, üb. d. Ursprung des Alphabets, Kiel 1841. Heinr. Wuttke, Enstehung u. Beschaffenheit des fönikisch-hebr. Alphabets, in the Zeitschrift der deutsch-morgenl. Gesellschaft, xi. p. 75 ff.

(2) Ewald, ausführl. Lehrbuch der hebr. Sprache, Leipzig 1855, p. 22, "The writing of the Hebrews is from a remote age, and not at all a new creation of Moses and his time." A very high antiquity must also be assigned to the use of writing, in consequence of the fact that the Hindoos obtained their writing from the Shemites,—a fact already suspected by Rich. Lepsius (üb. d. Anordnung u. Verwandtschaft des Semit., Ind., Æthiop., Altpers. u. Alt-ägypt. Alphabets, in d. "Zwei sprachvergl. Abhandlungen," Berlin 1836), but first, a short time ago, based firmly on palæography by A. Weber (üb. den Semit. Ursprung des Indischen Alphabets, in the Zeitschrift d. deutsch-morgenl. Gesellschaft, x. p. 389 ff.).

(3) The signet-ring of Judah (Gen. xxxviii. 18, 25) indubitably presupposes the use of writing (Häv. p. 276; Hengstb. p. 452; Ewald, Geschichte, i. 67; Cäs. v. Lengerke, Kanaan, i. p. xxvi.); and this testimony is not to be set aside by the objection of Ewald and v. Lengerke, that this account is an embellishment of the story which has proceeded from a later writer. Only there is the possibility that Judah bought this signet-ring to be an ornament, and not for actual

use.

(4) Ex. v. 6-19. The fact cannot be contradicted, that originally means "scribe," ypaμμateús (Sept.); compare Häv. p. 277 f., Hengstb. p. 449 ff., Keil on Josh. i. 10.

(5) Compare Hengstb. p. 476 ff.

(6) Ex. xvii. 14, xxiv. 4, xxxiv. 27, 28; Lev. xix. 28; Num. v. 23, xi. 26, xvii. 17, 18, xxxiii. 2; Deut. xxxi. 9, 19, 22, 24. Compare Hengstb. p. 456 ff.; Delitzsch on Genesis, i. p. 22. Even Ewald (Geschichte, i. 68) and v. Lengerke (p. xxxi. f.) acknowledge that in the age of Moses there was "already a widely-diffused knowledge of writing among the more cultivated part of the people."

« PreviousContinue »