Content:

Since the Bible is divinely inspired, and thus becomes the "written word" of God, many devout souls are averse from handling it as literature. But such a view tends to lose sight of the second causes and human constituents with which, in fact, Holy Scripture has been given to us. The Bible, as a concrete whole, is something definite in make, origin, time, and circumstances, all of which must be taken into account if we desire to reach its true meaning. It is history and it is literature; it lies open consequently to investigation under these lights, and if we neglect them, misconceptions will follow.

The fact that spiritual or supernatural influences have molded phenomena does not withdraw from scientific inquiries anything which is properly amenable to them. "God speaks to mankind," said medieval Jewish commentators, "in the language of the children of men." While this observation justifies verbal criticism, it also points out the way to it. Literature demands a special study; and Hebrew literature, because it is sacred, all the more, inasmuch as the outcome of misunderstandings in regard to it has ever been disaster.

No one can read attentively the poorest version of the Old Testament without feeling how strong a vein of poetry runs through its pages. We need not venture on a definition of what poetry means; it is a peculiar form of imagination and expression which bears witness to itself. Ernest Hello called verse "that rare splendor, born of music and the word"; now assuredly in writings such as many of the Psalms, in the Prophets, the Book of Job, and Proverbs we recognize its presence. On the other hand, from the great collection of documents which we term Chronicles (Paralipomena), Ezra, and Nehemias, this quality is almost entirely absent; matter and style announce that we are dealing with prose. We open the Hebrew Bible, and we find our judgment confirmed by the editors of the Massora — the received and vocalized text. Conspicuously, where the title indicates "songs" (shirim, Ex. 15:1; Num. 21:17), the lines are parted into verse; for instance, Deut. 32, Judges 5, II Kings xxii. But more. As Ginsburg tells us, "In the best M.S.S. the lines are poetically divided and arranged in hemistichs" throughout the Psalter, Proverbs, and Job. And the Synagogue enjoined this.

Yet again, the punctuation by the period (soph pasuk), which marks a complete statement, coincides with a rhythmical pause in nearly all such passages, demonstrating that the ancient redactors between 200 and 600 A.D. agreed as to sense and sound with the moderns who take the same citations for poetry. So emphatic indeed is this impression that, however we print either text or rendering, the disjecta membra poetae will be always visible. Hebrew forms of verse have been much disputed over; but the combination of a lively picturesque meaning with a definite measure is beyond denial in the places alleged. Such are the "Songs of Sion" (Ps. 137:3).

Historians knew and felt this from earliest times. Josephus describes the Hebrew poets as writing in "hexameter" (Antiq. ii, xvi); Blessed Jerome speaks of their "hexameters and pentameters"; while in his own translations he has constantly succeeded in a happy rhythm, not, however, giving verse for verse. He is markedly solemn and musical in the Latin of the Book of Job. The English A.V. abounds in magnificent effects of a similar kind. Given, in short, the original structure, it would be almost impossible not in some degree to reproduce it, even in our Western versions.

But on what system was the poetry of the Old Testament composed? Rabbi Kimchi and Eben Ezra had caught sight of an arrangement which they termed kaful, or doubling of enunciation. But to bring this out as a principle was reserved for Bishop R. Lowth, whose lectures "De sacra poesi Hebraeorum" (1741 begun, finally published 1753) became the starting point of all subsequent inquiries. In his Preface to Isaiah (1778, German 1779) he gave fresh illustrations, which led on to Herder's more philosophical handling of the subject (1782-3). Lowth convinced scholars that Hebrew verse moved on the scheme of parallelism, statement revolving upon statement, by antiphon or return, generally in double members, one of which repeated the other with variations of words or some deflection of meaning. Equal measures, more or less identical sense, these were its component parts. Degrees in likeness, and the contrast which attends on likeness, gave rise, said Lowth, to synonymous, antithetic, or synthetic arrangement of members. Modern research inclines to take the mashal or similitude as a primitive norm for Hebrew verse in general; and Prov. 10 is quoted by way of showing the three varieties indicated by Lowth. Evidently, given a double measure, it admits of combinations ever more subtle and involved. We will speak of other developments later. But the prevailing forms were exhibited in Lowth's "Praelections." Other comparisons of this device with similar structures in Babylonian, Assyrian and Egyptian poetical remains discover its extreme antiquity (see for the first Schrader; for Egypt, W. Max Müller, 1899; and on the whole, C. A. Briggs, "Gen. Introd. to H. Script." 1899).

It might seem fanciful to call the type from which parallelism originates "echo-music," yet nothing is more likely than that the earliest rhythm was a kind of echo, whereby the object of expression became fixed and emphasized. Here we must observe how the logic of feeling, as distinguished from the logic of reasoning, controls the poet's mind. That mind, until a late period, was not individual, but collective; it was the organ of a tribe, a public worship, a national belief; hence, it could shape its ideas only into concrete forms, real yet symbolical; it expressed emotions, not abstractions, and it was altogether concerned with persons, human or superhuman.

Poetry, thus inspired, glances to and fro, is guided by changing moods, darts upon living objects, and describes them from its own center. It is essentially subjective, and a lyrical outcry. It does not argue; it pleads, blames, praises, breaks into cursing or blessing, and is most effective when most excited. To such a temperament repetition becomes a potent weapon, a divine or deadly rhetoric of which the keynote is passion. Its tense is either the present (including the future perceived as though here and now), or a moving past seen while it moves.

Passion and vision — let us take these to be the motive and the method of all such primitive poetry. We may compare II Kings 23:2, David's last words, "The sweet Psalmist of Israel, said 'The spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His word was on my tongue,'" or Ps. 44:2, "My heart bursts out with a goodly matter, my tongue is the pen of a ready writer"; or Job 32:18, "I am full of words, the spirit within constraineth me"; but especially Num. 24:4, "He hath said, the man who heard the words of God, who saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open." These declarations lead up to impassioned metrical utterances, while they betoken the close relation which unites Hebrew poetry with prophecy. Both alike are a pouring forth of feelings too violent to be held in, aroused by contemplation not of the abstract or the general, but of persons and events, in their living power. To this belongs the idea of recurrence. Curtius observes acutely, "The gradual realization and repetition of an action are regarded by language as nearly akin." (Elucidations, 143, quoted by Driver, "Treatise on the Use of Tenses in Hebrew," 15) The whole being moves as the object impresses it; speech, music, dancing, gesture leap out, as it were, to meet the friend or enemy who draws nigh. The Semites term their religious festivals a "hag," i.e. a dance (Ex. 12:14; 32:5-19; Deut. 16:10-12; and frequently), of which the reminiscence is vividly shown in the whirling motion and repeated acclamations practiced by dervishes among Mohammedans to this day. We may thus connect the lyrical drama out of which in due course the Hebrews developed their temple-liturgy and the Psalms, with Greek dithyrambs, the chorus of the Athenian stage, and the anapaestic strophes danced thereon to a lively musical accompaniment. When past or future is caught up after this manner, made present as though seen, and flung into a series of actions, the singer prophesies. For what else is prophecy than the vision of things absent in space or time, or hidden from common eyes? The state of mind corresponding is "trance" ("deep sleep," Gen. 15:12; Job 4:13; Ezech. 8:1).

The literary form, then, in which primitive religion and law, custom and public life, were embodied, implies a poetic heightening of the ordinary mood, with effects in speech that may fall at length under deliberate rules; but as rules multiply, the spirit either evaporates or is diffused pretty equally over an eloquent prose. That all human language was once poetical appears everywhere probable from researches into folk-lore. That repetition of phrase, epithet, sentiment, came earlier than more elaborate meters cannot well be denied. That religion should cleave to ancient forms while policy, law, and social intercourse move down into the "cool element of prose," we understand without difficulty. Why the mediating style belongs to the historian we can also perceive; and how the "epic of gods" is transformed by slow steps into the chronicle and the reasoned narrative.

It does not seem, indeed, that the Israelites ever possessed a true epic poetry, although their kinfolk, the Babylonians, have left us well-known specimens, e.g. in the Gilgamesh tablets. But this extensive form of Assyrian legend has not been imitated in the Old Testament. G. d'Eichthal, a Catholic, first undertook in his "Texte prim. du premier recit de la Creation" (1875) to show that Genesis, 1 was a poem. The same contention was urged by Bishop Clifford ("Dublin Review," 1882), and C. A. Briggs ventures on resolving this narrative into a five-tone measure. Other critics would perceive in the song of Lamech, in the story of the flood and of Babel, fragments of lost heroic poems. It is common knowledge that the so-called "creation-epic" of Assurbanipal is written in four-line stanzas with a caesura to each line. But of this no feature seems really discernible in the Hebrew Genesis (consult Gunkel, "Genesis," and "Schoepfung und Chaos"). There is no distinct meter except an occasional couplet or quatrain in Gen. 1-10. But Ps. 104, on the wonders of God's works; Ps. 105, 106, on His dealings with Israel; Job 38-42, on the mysteries of nature and Providence; Prov. 8:22-32, on creative wisdom, might have been wrought by genius of a different type into the narrative we define as epical. Why did Israel choose another way? Perhaps because it sought after religion and cared hardly at all for cosmogonies. The imagination of Hebrews looked forward, not into abysses of past time. And mythology was condemned by their belief in monotheism.

Psalms are comprehended under two heads, — "Tehillim," hymns of praise, and "Tephilloth," hymns of prayer, arranged for chanting in the Temple-services. They do not include any very ancient folk-songs; but neither can we look on them as private devotional exercises. Somewhat analogous are the historic blessings and curses, of a very old tradition, attributed to Jacob (Gen. 49) and Moses (Deut. 28:32-33). Popular poetry, not connecting itself with priestly ritual, touches life at moments of crisis and pours out its grief over death. Much of all this Holy Scripture has handed down to us. The Book of Lamentations is founded on the Kinah, the wailing chant improvised by women at funerals in a measure curiously broken, one full verse followed by one deficient, which reminded Blessed Jerome of the pentameter. It seems to be aboriginal among Semites (cf. Amos 5:2; Jer. 48:36; Ezech. 19:1; Ps. 19:8-10). Martial songs, of which Judges 5; Num. 21, Jos. 10; I Kings 18 are specimens, formed the lost "Book of the Wars of the Lord." From another lost roll, the "Book of Jashar," i.e. of the Upright or of Israel, we derive the lament of David over Saul and Jonathan, as well as in substance Solomon's prayer at the dedication of the Temple (II Kings 1:3; III Kings 8:53). However we interpret Canticles, it is certainly a round of wedding-songs and is high poetry; Ps. 45 is an epithalamium of the same character. The song of the vineyard may be added to our list (Is. 5:1). Historically, at all events, the Book of Psalms is late and supposes prophecy to have gone before it.

A second stage, the nearest approach in the Hebrew Testament to philosophy, appears when we reach the gnomic or "wisdom" poetry. Proverbs with its two line antitheses gives us the standard, passing into larger descriptions marked by numerals and ending in the acrostic or alphabetical praise of the "valiant," i.e. the "virtuous" woman. Job takes its place among the great meditative poems of the world like "Hamlet" or "Faust," and is by no means of early date, as was once believed. In form it may be assigned to the same type as Prov. 1-10; but it rises almost to the level of drama with its contrasted speakers and the interposition of Jahweh, which serves to it as a denouement. Notwithstanding its often corrupt text and changes consequent on re-editing at later times, it remains unquestionably the highest achievement of inspired Hebrew verse. Ecclesiastes, with its mingled irony and sadness, falls into a purely didactic style; it has traces of an imperfect lyrical mood, but belongs to the prose of reflection quite as much as Seneca or Marcus Aurelius. The Hebrew text of Ben Sira, thus far recovered, is of a loftier kind, or even a prelude to the New Testament.

As regards the Prophets, we can scarcely doubt that oracles were uttered in verse at Shiloh and other ancient shrines, just as at Delphi; or that inspired men and women threw their announcements commonly into that shape for repetition by their disciples, to whom they came as the "word of the Lord." To prophesy was to sing accompanied by an instrument (IV Kings 3:15). The prophetic records, as we now have them, were made up from comparatively brief poems, declaring the mind of Jahweh in messages, "burdens," to those whom the seer admonished. In Amos, Osee, Micheas, Isaias, the original chants may still be separated and the process of joining them together is comparatively slight.

Prophecy at first was preaching; but as it became literature, its forms passed out of verse (which it always handled somewhat freely) into prose. The Book of Ezechiel, though abounding in symbol and imagery, cannot be deemed a poem. Yet from the nature of their mission, the Prophets appealed to that in man's composition, which transcends the finite, and their works constantly lift us to the regions of poetic idealism, however fluctuating the style between a strict or a looser measure of time. Divine oracles given as such fall into verse; expanded or commented on, they flow over into a less regular movement and become a sort of rhythmical prose. Our Latin and English translations often render this effect admirably; but attentive readers will note in the English A. V. many uncon96scious blank verses, sometimes the five foot iambic, and occasionally classic hexameters, e.g. "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" (Is. 14:12). There is likewise in Hebrew a recognized poetical vocabulary, though some critics deny it, and the grammar keeps a few archaic forms. We can distinguish popular unwritten prophecy as lasting from unknown periods down to Amos. From Amos to Esdras the prophets all write still under poetic influences, but their singing has declined into metaphor. The rhapsodists (moshelim) give place more and more to the rabbim. We hear the last echoes of Hebrew sacred poetry in St. Luke's Gospel; for the "Benedictus," the "Magnificat," the "Nunc Dimittis," though in Greek, are songs of Israel, molded on Old Testament reminiscences.

Now we come into a debatable land, where critics dispute endlessly over the essence and make of Biblical versification, beyond the lines drawn by Lowth. What metrical system does Hebrew follow? Take the single line; does it move by quantity, as Latin and Greek, or by accent, as English? If by accent, how is that managed? Should we reckon to each kind of verse a definite number of syllables, or allow an indefinite? Since no Jewish "Poetics" have been preserved from any age of the Bible, we have only the text itself upon which to set up our theories. But if we consider how many fragments of divers periods enter into this literature, and how all alike have been passed through the mill of a late uncritical recension, — we mean the Massora — can we suppose that in every case, or even in general, we enjoy so much evidence as is required for a solid judgment on this matter?

Infinite conjecture is not science. One result of which we may be certain is that Hebrew verse never proceeded by quantity; in this sense it has no metre. A second is that the poetical phrase, be it long or short, is governed by tone or stress, rising and falling naturally with the speaker's emotion. A third would grant in the more antique forms a freedom which the development of schools and the fixedness of liturgy could not but restrain as years went on. At all times, it has been well said by W. Max Müller, "the lost melody was the main thing"; but how little we do know of Hebrew music? Under these complicated difficulties to fix a scale for the lines of verse, beyond the rhythm of passionate utterance, can scarcely be attempted with success.

G. Bickell, from 1879 onwards, undertook in many volumes to reduce the anarchy of Old Testament scansion by applying to it the rules of Syriac, chiefly as found in St. Ephrem. He made the penultimate tonic for syllables, counted them regularly, and held all lines of even syllables to be trochaic, of uneven iambic. On such a Procrustean bed the text was tortured into uniformity, not without ever so many changes in word and sense, while the traditional readings were swept aside though supported by the versions (see his "Metrices biblicae regulae exemplis illustratae," 1879, "Carmina Vet. Test. metrice," 1882; Job, Ecclesiastes, Proverbs). This dealing, at once arbitrary and fanciful, leaves us with so uncertain a text that our problem is utterly transformed, and the outcome is skepticism. Yet Bickell has indicated the true poetic measure by his theory of main accents, such as travelers note in the modern songs of Palestine. Julius Ley constructs a system on the tone-syllable which, preceded by unaccented syllables and followed by one that has "a dying fall," constitutes the meter. His unit is the verse formed by parallel lines; he admits the caesura; with regard to text and vocalization he is conservative ("Grundzüge d. Rhythmus, d. Vers. u. Strophenbau in d. hebr. Poesie," 1875; "Leitfaden d. Metrik der heb. Poesie," 1887). A third writer, Grimme, while not discarding the received vowel-signs, gives them a new value, and combines quantity with accent. Probably, our conclusion should be that none of these ingenious theories will explain all the facts; and that we had better let the text alone, marking only where it seems to be corrupt.

Another amusement of Hebrew scholars has been the discovery and delimitation of "strophes" (Koester, 1831), or of larger units embracing several verses. Bickell and many recent critics allow the four-line combination. Anything more is very doubtful. In Ps. 42:and elsewhere, a sort of refrain occurs, which corresponds to the people's answer in Catholic litanies; but this does not enter into the verse-structure itself. C. A. Briggs, who clings resolutely to the idea of complex Hebrew meter, extravagates on the subject, by taking the "whole of sense" for a rhythmical whole. We must obey the plain law of parallelism, and allow a three-line arrangement where the words themselves demand it. But much of what is now written concerning the hidden links of Old Testament poetry is like the Cabbala, perversely and needlessly wrong.

The lamentation verse lends itself to strophe; and beginnings of it may well exist, provided we do not assimilate this hard and severe language to the gracious flexures which were native in Hellenic composition. There is a species of "canon" or fugue in the fifteen chants called "Songs of Ascent" — our "Gradual" Psalms — an ambiguous title referring perhaps to this feature as well as to the pilgrim journey they denoted. Various poems and especially the great Ps. 118 (Hebrew 119) are arranged alphabetically; so the Book of Lamentations; Prov. 31; Ecclus. 51:13-29. In Talmudic and Rabbinical writings the Psalms 113-118 (Hebrew) are taken as one composition and known as the "Hallel of Egypt," intended to be sung on the feast of Hanukkah or of Machabees (I Mach. 4:59). Ps. 136, Hebrew (Vulgate 135) "Confitemini Domino," is the "Great Hallel," and Ps. 146-148 make up another collection of these "Alleluia" hymns.

In Hebrew poetry when rhymes occur they are accidental; alliteration, assonance, word-play belong to it. We find in it everywhere vehemence of feeling, energetic and abrupt expression, sudden changes of tense, person, and figure, sometimes bordering on the grotesque from a Western point of view. It reveals a fine sense of landscape and abhors the personification familiar to Greeks, whereby things lower than man were deified. In sentiment it is by turns sublime, tender, and exceedingly bitter, full of a yearning after righteousness, which often puts on the garb of hatred and vengeance. "From Nature to God and from God to Nature" has been given by Hebrews themselves as the philosophy which underlies its manifestations. It glorifies the Lord of Israel in His counsels and His deeds. In prophecy it judges; in psalmody it prays; in lamentation it meditates on the sufferings which from of old the chosen people have undergone. Though it composes neither an epic nor a tragedy, it is the voice of a nation that has counted its heroes in every age, and that has lived through vicissitudes unequalled in pathos, in terror, in a never defeated hope. By all these elements Hebrew poetry is human; by something more mysterious, but no less real, breathed into its music from on high, it becomes divine.

One of the books of the Old Testament, and the chief personage in it. In this article it is primarily the book which is treated. As opportunity, however, occurs, and so far as is permissible, Job himself will be considered. We will discuss the subject under the following heads:

1. I. Position of the Book in the Canon;
2. II. Authority;
3. III. The Characters of the Poem;
4. IV. Contents;
5. V. Arrangement of the Main, Poetic Portion of the Book;
6. VI. Design of the Book;
7. VII. Teaching as to the Future Life;
8. VIII. Integrity of the Book;
9. IX. Condition of the Text;
10. X. Technical Skill of the Author and the Meter;
11. XI. Time of its Composition.

In the Hebrew Bible Psalms, Proverbs, and Job are always placed together, the Psalms coming first, while Job is put between the other two or, at times, comes last. The three books form a part of the Hagiographa (Kethubim), having sometimes the first place among the Hagiographa, while again they may be preceded by Ruth, or Paralipomenon, or Paralipomen with, Ruth (cf. lists in Ginsburg, "Introduction to Heb. Bible," London, 1897, 7). In the Greek Bible and the Vulgate Job now stands before Psalms and follows directly after the historical books. The old Greek and the Latin MSS. however, assign it the most varied positions; see, for example, the list of Melito of Sardis, and that of Origen as given by Eusebius, "Hist. Eccle." 4:iv, 26, and 6:25 (in P.G. XX. 398, 582). In the Syriac Bible Job is placed directly after the Pentateuch and before Josue (cf. the lists in Hodius, "De Bibliorum textibus," Oxford, 1705, 644 sqq.; Samuel Berger, "Hist. de la Vulgate," Paris, 1893, 331-39).

Many wrongly look upon the entire contents of the book as a freely invented parable, which is neither historical nor intended to be considered historical; contending that no such man as Job ever lived. Christian commentators, however, almost without exception, hold Job to have actually existed and his personality to have been preserved by popular tradition. Nothing in the text makes it necessary to doubt his historical existence. The Scriptures seem repeatedly to take this for granted (cf. Ezech. 14:14; James, 5:I 1; Tob. 2:12-15, according to the Vulgate — in the Greek text of Tobias there is no mention of Job). All the Fathers considered Job an historical person; some of their testimonies may be found in Knabenbauer, "Zu Job" (Paris, 1886), 12-13. The Martyrology of the Latin Church mentions Job on 10 May, that of the Greek Church on 6 May (cf. Acta SS. 2, May 494). The Book of Job, therefore, has a kernel of fact, with which have been united many imaginative additions that are not strictly historical. What the poet relates in the prose prologue and epilogue is in the main historical: the persons of the hero and his friends; the region where be lived; his good fortune and virtues; the great misfortune that overwhelmed him and the patience with which lie bore it; the restoration of his Prosperity. We also accept that Job and his friends discussed the origin of his sufferings, and that in so doing views were expressed similar to those the poet puts into the mouths of his characters. The details of the execution, the poetic form, and the art shown in the arrangement of the arguments in the dispute are, however, the free creation of the author. The figures expressive of the wealth of Job both before and after his trial are rounded. Also in the narrative of the misfortunes it is impossible not to recognize a poetic conception which need not be considered as strictly historical. The scene in heaven (1:6; 2:1) is plainly an allegory which shows that the Providence of God guides the destiny of man. The manifestation of God (38:1) generally receives a literal interpretation from commentators. St. Thomas, however, remarks that it may also be taken metaphorically as an inner revelation accorded to Job.

The Church teaches that the book was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Thus all that its author gives as historical fact or otherwise guarantees possesses unfailing Divine truth. The question, however, arises, what does the book guarantee? (a) Everything in prologue or epilogue that is the comment of the author is Divine truth; nevertheless, what is perhaps poetic ornament must not be confounded with historical verity or objective dogmatic precepts. The same authority is possessed by the utterances assigned by the poet to God. The like is true of the speeches of Eliu. Some think the speeches of Eliu are to be judged just as are those of Job and his friends. (b) The speeches of Job and his three friends have in themselves no Divine authority, but only such human importance as Job and his three friends are Personally entitled to. They have, however, Divine authority when, and in as far as, they are approved by the author expressly or tacitly. In general, such tacit approbation is to be understood for all points concerning which the disputants agree, unless the author, or God, or Eliu, shows disapproval. Thus the words of Job have in large degree Divine authority, because the view he maintains against the three friends is plainly characterized by the author as the one relatively correct. Yet much that the three friends say is of equal importance, because it is at least tacitly approved. St. Paul argues (I Cor. 3:19) from a speech of Eliphaz (Job 5:13) as from an inspired writing.

Apart from the prologue and epilogue, the Book of Job consists of a succession of speeches assigned to distinct persons. There are six speakers: Yahweh, Eliu, Job, and Job's three friends, Eliphaz, Baldad, and Sophar.

The chief personage is Job.

He is called the "persecuted one," that is, the one tempted by (personified) suffering, the one hard beset, the patient sufferer.

According to the well-founded common assumption, Job lived long before Moses. The great age he attained shows this. He was no longer young when overtaken by his great misfortune (12:12; 30:1); after his restoration he lived one hundred and forty years longer (42:16). His wealth, like that of the Patriarchs, consisted largely in flocks and herds (1:3; 42:12). The kesitah or piece of money mentioned in 42:11, belongs to patriarchal times; the only other places in which the expression occurs are Gen. 33:19, and Jos. 24:32. The musical instruments referred to (21:12; 30:31) are only those mentioned in Genesis (Gen. 4:21; 31:27): organ, harp, and timbrel. Job himself offers sacrifice as the father of the family (1:5), as was also the custom of the Patriarchs. An actual offering for sin in the Mosaic sense he was not acquainted with; the holocaust took its place (1:5; 42:8).

Job evidently did not belong to the chosen people. He lived, indeed, outside of Palestine. He and the other characters betray no knowledge of the specifically Israelitic institutions. Even the name of God peculiar to the chosen people, Yahweh, is carefully avoided by the speakers in the poetic part of the book, and is only found, as if accidentally, in 12:9, and according to some MSS. in 28:28. The sacrifice in 42:8, recalls the sacrifice of Balaam (Num. 23:1), consequently a custom outside of Israel. For the solution of the problem of suffering the revelations made to the Patriarchs or even Moses are never referred to. Nevertheless Job and his friends venerated the one true God. They also knew of the Flood (22:16), and the first man (15:7, and Hebrew, 31:33).

Job belonged to the "people of the East" (1:3). Under this name were included the Arabian (Gen. 25:6) and Aramaean (Num. 33:7) tribes which lived east of the Jordan basin and in the region of the Euphrates (Gen. 29:1). Job seems to have been an Aramaean, for he lived in the land of Hus (1:I; Ausitis). Hus, a man's name in Genesis, is always used there in close connection with Aram and the Aramaean (Gen. 10:23; 22:21; 36:28). His home was certainly not far from Edom where Eliphaz lived, and it must be sought in Eastern Palestine, not too far north, although in the region inhabited by the Aramaeans. It was located on the border of the Syro-Arabian desert, for it was exposed to the attacks of the marauding bands which wandered through this desert: the Chaldeans (1:17) of the lower Euphrates and the Sabeans (1:15), or Arabs. Many. following an old tradition, place the home of Job in the Hauran, in the district of Naiwa (or Neve), which is situated about 36° East of Greenwich and in almost the same latitude as the northern end of Lake Genesareth. The location is possible, but positive proof is lacking. Some seek the home of Job in Idumea, others in the land of the Ausitai, who, according to Ptolemy (Geogr. 5, 19, par. 18, 2), lived in Northern Arabia near the Babylon. The land of Hus is also mentioned in Jer. 25:20, and Lam. 4:21. In the first reference it is used in a general sense for the whole East; in the latter it is said that the Edomites live there.

Job was one of the most important men of the land (1:3; 29:25) and had many bondsmen (31:39). The same is true of the friends who visited him; in the Book of Tobias these are called "kings" (Tob. 2:15, in Vulgate). In the Book of Job also Job seems to be described as a king with many vassals under him (29). That he had brothers and relations is seen in 19 and in the epilogue.

An appendix to the Book of Job in the Septuagint identifies Job with King Jobab of Edom (Gen. 36:33). Nothing in the book shows that Job was ruler of Edom; in Hebrew the two names have nothing in common.

The most important of Job's three friends was Eliphaz of Theman. The name shows him to be an Edomite (Gen. 36:11, 15). The Themanites of Edom were famous for their wisdom (Jer. 49:7; Abd. S; Bar. 3:22 sq.). Eliphaz was one of these sages (15:9). He was far advanced in years (15:10), and much older than the already elderly Job (30:1). The second of Job's friends was Baidad the Suhite, who seems to have belonged to Northern Arabia, for Sue was a son of Abraham by Cetura (Gen. 25:2, 6). He may have been of the same age as Job. The third friend, Sophar, was probably also an Arabian. The Hebrew text calls him a Naamathite. Naama was a small town in the territory belonging to Juda (Jos. 15:41), but Sophar hardly lived there. Perhaps the preferable reading is that of the Septuagint which calls Sophar always a Minaean; the Minaeans were an Arabian tribe. Sophar was far younger than Job (cf. Job's reply to Sophar, 12:11-12; 13:1-2).

Like Job, Eliu the Buzite was an Aramean; at least this is indicated by his native country, Buz, for Buz is closely connected (Gen. 22:21) with Hus. Eliu was much younger than Sophar (32:6).

Besides the speakers a large number of listeners were present at the discussion (34:2, 34); some maintained a neutral position, as did Eliu at first.

The Book of Job consists of (1) a prologue in prose (1-2), (2) a poetic, main division (3-42, 6), and (3) an epilogue also in prose (42:7-17).

(1) The prologue narrates how, with the permission of God, a holy man Job is tried by Satan with severe afflictions, in order to test his virtue. In succession Job bears six great temptations with heroic patience, and without the slightest murmuring against God or wavering in loyalty to him. Then Job's three friends, Eliphaz, Baldad, and Sophar, come to console him. Their visit is to become the seventh and greatest trial.

(2) The poetical, main division of the book presents in a succession of speeches the course of this temptation. The three friends are fully convinced that trouble is always a result of wrongdoing. They consider Job, therefore, a great sinner and stigmatize his assertions of innocence as hypocrisy. Job is hurt by the suspicion of his friends. He protests that he is no evil-doer, that God punishes him against his deserts.

In the course of his speech he fails in reverence towards God, Who appears to him not unrighteous, but more as a severe, hard, and somewhat inconsiderate ruler than as a kind Father. Taking into consideration that the language is poetic, it is true that his expressions cannot be pushed too far, but the sharp reproofs of Eliu (34:1-9, 36-37; 35:16) and of Yahweh (38:2; 40:3-9) leave no doubt of his sin. In answering his friends Job emphasizes that God indeed is accustomed to reward virtue and to punish wickedness (27:7-23; 31). He even threatens his friends with the judgment of God on account of their unfriendly suspicion (6:14; 13:7-12; 17, 4; 19:29). He rightly proves, however violently, that in this world the rule has many exceptions. Almost universally, he says, the wicked triumph and the innocent suffer (9:22-24, 21, 24).

Yet for all this Job, like his friends, regards all suffering as a punishment for personal sins, although he does not, as his friends, consider it a punishment of gross sin. Job looks upon the sufferings of the righteous as an almost unjust severity of God, which he inflicts for the slightest mistakes, and which the most virtuous man cannot escape (7:21; 9:30-21; 10:6, 13-14). The expressions of depression and irreverence uttered by Job are which human beings can never fully avoid. Job himself says that his words are not to be taken too exactly, they are almost the involuntary expression of his pain (6:2-10, 26-27) Many of his utterances the character of temptations in thought which force themselves out almost against the will, rather than of voluntary irreverence towards God, although Job's error was greater than he was willing to acknowledge.

Thus Job bore all the tests triumphantly, even those caused by his friends. No matter how terrible the persecutions of God might be, Job held fast to Him (6:8-10) and drew ever closer to Him (17:9). In the midst of his sufferings he lauds God's power (26:5-14) and wisdom (28). Satan, who had boasted that he could lead Job into sin against God (1:11; 2:5), is discredited. The epilogue testifies expressly to Job's faithfulness (42:7-9). After much discourse (3-22) Job finally succeeds in silencing the three friends, although he is not able to convince them of his innocence. In a series of monologues (23-31), interrupted only by a short speech by Baldad (25), he once more renews his complaints (23-24), extols the greatness of God (26-28), and closes with a forcible appeal to the Almighty to, examine his case and to recognize his innocence (29-31).

At this juncture Eliu, a youth who was one of the company of listeners, is filled by God with the spirit of prophecy (32:18-22; 36:2-4). In a long discourse he solves the problem of suffering, which Job and his friends had failed to explain. He says that suffering, whether severe or light, is not always a result of sin; it is a means by which God tries and promotes virtue (36:1-21), and is thus a proof of God's love for his friends. The sufferings of Job are also such a testing (36:16-21). At the same time Eliu emphasizes the fact that the dispensations of God remain inexplicable and mysterious (36:22; 37:24). Yahweh speaks at the end (38-42:6). He confirms the statements of Eliu, carrying further Eliu's last thought of the inexplicability of the Divine decrees and works by a reference to the wonder of animate and inanimate nature. Job is severely rebuked on account of his irreverence; he confesses briefly his guilt and promises amendment in the future.

(3) In the epilogue Yahweh bears witness in a striking manner to the innocence of His servant, that is to Job's freedom from gross transgression. The three friends are commanded to obtain Job's intercession, otherwise they will be severely punished for their uncharitable complaints against the pious sufferer. Yahweh forgives the three at the entreaty of Job, who is restored to double his former prosperity.

In his lectures on "Babel und Bibel" Delitzsch says that the Book of Job expresses doubt, in language that borders on blasphemy, of even the existence of a just the God. These attacks arise from an extreme view of expressions of despondency. Further, the assertions often heard of late that the book contains many mythological ideas prove to be mere imagination.

(1) The poetic portion of the book may be divided into two sections: chs. 3-22 and 23-42:6. The first section consists of colloquies: the three friends in turn express their views, while to each speech Job makes a rejoinder. In the second section the three friends are silent, for Baldad's interposition (25) is as little a formal discourse as Job's brief comments (39:34-35 and 42:2-6). Job, Eliu, and Yahweh speak successively, and each utters a series of monologues. The length of the two sections is exactly, or almost exactly, the same, namely 510 lines each (cf. Hontheim "Das Buch Job," Freiburg im Br. 1904, 44). The second division begins with the words: "Now also my words are in bitterness" (23:2; A.V.: "Even to-day is my complaint bitter"). This shows not only that with these words a new section opens, but also that the monologues were not uttered on the same day as the colloquies. The first monologue is evidently the opening of a new section, not a rejoinder to the previous speech of Eliphaz (22).

(2) The colloquies are divided into two series: chs. 3-14 and 15-22. In each series Eliphaz, Baldad, and Sophar speak in turn in the order given (4-5, 8, 11, and 15, 18, 20), while Job replies to each of their discourses (6-7, 9-10, 12-14, 16-17, 19, 21). The first series, furthermore, opens with a lament from Job (3), and the second closes with a speech by Eliphaz in which he weakly reproaches Job (22 — it is generally held that this chapter begins a new series), who rightly leaves this address unanswered.

Each series contains seven speeches. In the first the friends try to convince Job of his guilt and of the necessity and good results of amendment. Eliphaz appeals to Revelation (4:12-21), Baldad to the authority of the Fathers 8-10), Sophar to understanding or philosophy (11:5-12). Eliphaz lays weight on the goodness of God (5:9-27), Baldad on His justice (8:2-7), Sophar on His all-seeing power and wisdom, to which Job's most secret sins were plain, even those which Job himself had almost forgotten (11:5-12). In the second series of speeches the friends try to terrify Job: one after the other, and in much the same form of address, they point out the terrible punishment which overtakes hidden sin. During the first series of speeches Job's despondency continually increases, even the thought of the future bringing him no comfort (14:7-22); in the second series the change to improvement has begun, and Job once more feels joy and hope in the thought of God and the future life (16:18-22; 19:23-28).

(3) The monologues may also be divided into two series. The first includes the monologues of Job, seven in number. First Job repeats his complaint to God (23-24), but also asserts in three speeches his unchangeable devotion to God by lauding in brilliant discourse the power (26), justice (27), and wisdom (28) of the Almighty. Finally in three further speeches be lays his case before God, imploring investigation and recognition of his innocence: How happy was I once (29), how unhappy am I now (30), and I am not to blame for this change (31). The second series contains the discourses of Eliu and Yahweh, also seven in number. In three speeches Eliu explains the sufferings which befall men. Trouble is often a Divine instruction, a warning to the godless to reform (32-33:30), thus revealing the goodness of God; it is often simply a punishment of the wicked who are perhaps in no way bettered by it (33:31-35), thus revealing the justice of God.

(4) Finally, troubles can also overtake the just as a trial which purifies and increases their virtue (36-37), thus revealing God's unfathomable wisdom. The following four utterances of Yahweh illustrate the inscrutableness, already touched upon by Eliu, of the Divine wisdom by dwelling upon the wonders of inanimate nature (38:1-38), of the animal world (38:39), and especially by referring to the great monsters of the animal world, the hippopotamus and the crocodile (40:10-41). He then closes with a rebuke to Job for expressing himself too despondently and irreverently concerning his sufferings, upon which Job confesses his guilt and promises amendment (39:31-40, 9 and 42:1-6); it appears that 39:31-40: 9, should be inserted after 41.

The Book of Job is intended to give instruction. What it lays special stress on is that God's wisdom and Providence guide all the events of this world (cf. 28, 38). The main subject of investigation is the problem of evil and its relation to the Providence of God; particularly considered is the suffering of the upright in its bearing on the ends intended in the government of the world. The Book of Job is further intended for edification, for Job is to us an example of patience. It is, finally, a book of consolation for all sufferers. They learn from it that misfortune is not a sign of hatred, but often a proof of special Divine love. For the mystical explanation of the book, especially of Job as a type of Christ, cf. Knabenbauer, "In Job" 28-32.

In his sufferings Job abandoned all hope for the restoration of health and good fortune in this world (17:11-16; xxi). If he were to continue to hold to the hope of reward here Satan would not be defeated. In the complete failure of all his earthly hopes, Job fastens his gaze upon the future. In the argument of the first series of speeches Job in his depression regards the future world only as the end of the present existence. The soul indeed lives on, but all ties with the present world so dear to us are forever broken. Death is not only the end of all earthly suffering (2:13-19), but also of all earthly life (7:6-10), and all earthly joys (10:21-22), with no hope of a return to this world (14:7-22). It is not until the second series that Job's thoughts on the future life grow more hopeful. However, he expects as little as in the first discussion a renewal of the life here, but hopes for a higher life in the next world. As early as chapter xvi (19-22) his hope in the recognition of his virtue in the next world is strengthened. It is, however, in xix (23-28) that Job's inspired hope rises to its greatest height and he utters his famous declaration of the resurrection of the body. Notwithstanding this joyous glimpse into the future, the difficult problem of the present life still remained: "Even for this life how can the wisdom and goodness of God be so hard towards His servants?" Of this the complete solution, so far as such was possible and was included in the plan of the book, does not appear until the discourses of Eliu and Yahweh are given. Great efforts have been made by critics to alter the interpretation of ch. 19:and to remove from it the resurrection of the body; the natural meaning of the words, the argument of the book, and the opinion of all early commentators make this attempt of no avail (cf. commentaries, as those of Knabenbauer, Hontheim, etc.; also the article “Eine neue Uebersetzung von Job 19:25-27” in the “Zeitschrift fьr kath. Theologie," 1907, 376 sqq.).

Prologue and epilogue (1-2; 42:7 sqq.) are regarded by many as not parts of the original work. The prologue, though, is absolutely essential. Without it the colloquies would be unintelligible, nor would the reader know in the end whether to believe the assertion of Job as to his innocence or not. Upon hearing the rebukes of Eliu and Yahweh, he might be exposed to the danger of siding against Job. Without the epilogue the close of the work would be unsatisfactory, an evident humiliation of the righteous.

(2) Many also regard ch. 27:7-23, as a later addition; in this passage Job maintains that the wicked suffer in this world, while elsewhere he has declared the contrary. The answer is: Job teaches that God is accustomed even in this world to reward the good in some measure and to punish the wicked. In other passages he does not deny this rule, but merely says it has many exceptions. Consequently there is no contradiction. Besides it may be conceded that Job is not always logical. At the beginning, when his depression is extreme, he lays too much emphasis on the prosperity of the godless; gradually he becomes more composed and corrects earlier extreme statements. Not everything that Job says is the doctrine of the book.

(3) Many regard ch. 28 as doubtful, because it has no connection with what goes before or follows and is in no way related to the subject-matter of the book. The answer to this is that the poet has to show how the suffering of Job does not separate him from God, but, against the intent of Satan, drives him into closer dependence on God. Consequently he represents Job, after his complaints (23-25), as glorifying God again at once, as in 26-27, in which Job lauds God's power and righteousness. The praise of God is brought to a climax in 28, where Job extols God's power and righteousness. After Job has thus surrendered himself to God, he can with full confidence, in 29-31, lay his sorrowful condition before God for investigation. Consequently, 28 is in its proper place, connects perfectly with what precedes and follows, and harmonizes with the subject matter of the book.

(4) Many regard the description of hippopotamus and crocodile (40:10-41) as later additions, because they lack connection with 39:31-40:9, belonging rather to the description of animals in 39. In reply it may be said that this objection is not without force. Whoever agrees with the present writer in this opinion need only hold that 39:31-40:9, originally followed 41. The difficulty is then settled, and there is no further reason for considering the splendid description of the two animals as a later insertion.

(5) There is much disagreement as to the speeches of Eliu (32-37). With the exception of Budde, nearly all Protestant commentators regard them as a later insertion, while the great majority of more traditional scholars rightly defend them as belonging to the original work. The details of this discussion cannot be entered upon here, and the reader is referred to the commentaries of Budde and Hontheim. The latter sums up his long investigation in these words: "The section containing the speeches of Eliu has been carefully prepared by the poet and is closely and with artistic correctness connected with the previous and following portions. It is united with the rest of the book by countless allusions and relations. It is dominated by the same ideas as the rest of the poem. It makes use also of the same language and the same method of presentation both in general and in detail. All the peculiarities exhibited by the author of the argumentative speeches are reproduced in the addresses of Eliu. The content of this portion is the saving of the honor of Job and is essential as the solution of the subject of discussion. Consequently there is no reason whatever for assuming that it is an interpolation; everything is clearly against this" (Hontheim, op. cit. 20-39. Cf. also Budde, "Beitruge zur Kritik des Buches Hiob," 1876; Knabenbauer, "In Job"). Anyone who desires to consider the speeches of Eliu as a later addition must hold, by the teaching of the Church, that they are inspired.

(6) There is in general no reason whatever for considering any important part of the book either large or small as not belonging to the original text. Equally baseless is the supposition that important portions of the original composition are lost.

The most important means for judging the Massoretic Text are the old translations made directly from the Hebrew: the Targum, Peshito, Vulgate, Septuagint, and the other Greek translations used by Origen to supplement the Septuagint. with the exception of the Septuagint, the original of all these translations was essentially identical with the Massoretic Text; only unimportant differences can be proved. On the other hand, the Septuagint in the form it had before Origen was about four hundred lines, making it one-fifth shorter than the Massoretic Text is. Origen supplied what was lacking in the Septuagint from the Greek translations and marked the additions by asterisks. Copyists generally omitted these critical signs, and only a remnant of them, mixed with many errors, has been reserved in a few manuscripts. Consequently knowledge of the old form of the Septuagint is very imperfect. The best means now of restoring it is the Copto-Sahidic translation which followed the Septuagint and does not contain Origen's additions. This translation was published by Ciasca, "Sacrorum Bibliorum fragments Copto-Sahidica" (2 vols. Rome, 1889), and by Amelineau in "Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archeology," IX (1893), 409-75. Hatch and Bickell claim that the shorter text of the Septuagint is in general the earlier one, consequently that the present Massoretic Text is an expansion of a shorter original. Nearly all other investigators hold the opposite, that the Septuagint was produced by cutting down an original which varied but little from the Massoretic Text. This was also Bickell's view in earlier years, and is the real state of the case. To avoid repetition and discursive statements, the translators of the Septuagint omitted much, especially where the reading seemed doubtful, translation difficult, the content anthropomorphic, unworthy of Job, or otherwise objectionable. In doing this the translation frequently disregards the fundamental principle of Hebrew poetry, the parallelism of the lines. In brief the critical value of the Septuagint is not great; in almost all instances the Massoretic Text is to be preferred. Taken altogether, the Massoretic has preserved the original form of the consonantal text fairly well, and needs but a moderate amount of critical emendation. The punctuation (vowel signs and accents), it is true, frequently requires correction, for the punctuators did not always lightly understand the often difficult text; at times also words are not properly divided.

Chapters 3-42:6, are poetical in form. This part of the book consists of about 1020 lines. The verses, which do not always correspond with the Massoretic verses of our editions, are generally divided into two clauses or lines which are parallel in content. There are also a number of verses, about sixty, of three clauses each, the so-called triplets. It is an unjustifiable violence to the text when a critic by removing one clause changes these triplets into couplets. The verses form the twenty-eight speeches of the book which, as already stated, make four series of seven speeches each. The speeches are divided, not directly into lines, but into strophes. It is most probable that the speeches formed from strophes often, perhaps always follow the law of "choral structure" discovered by Father Zenner. That is, the speeches often or always consist of pairs of strophes, divided by intermediate strophes not in pairs. The two strophes forming a pair are parallel in content and have each the same number of lines. For a further discussion of this subject see Hontheim, op. cit. Investigators are not agreed as to the construction of the line. Some count the syllables, others only the stresses, others again the accented words. It would seem that the last view is the one to be preferred. There are about 2100 lines in the Book of Job, containing generally three, at times two or four, accented words. Besides the commentaries, cf. Gietmann, "Parzival, Faust, Job" (Freiburg im Br. 1887); Baumgartner, "Gesch. d. Weltliteratur," I (Freiburg im Br. 1901), 24 sqq. One peculiarity of the author of Job is his taste for play upon words; for example, ch. xxi contains a continuous double meaning.

The author of the book is unknown, neither can the period in which it was written be exactly determined. Many considered the book the work of Job himself or Moses. It is now universally and correctly held that the book is not earlier than the reign of Solomon. On the other hand it is earlier than Ezechiel (Ezech. 14:1 -20). For it is the natural supposition that the latter gained his knowledge of Job from the Book of Job, and not from other, vanished, sources. It is claimed that allusions to Job have also been found in Isaias, Amos, Lamentations, some of the Psalms, and especially Jeremias. Many Catholic investigators even at the present time assign the book to the reign of Solomon; the masterly poetic form points to this brilliant period of Hebrew poetry. The proofs, however, are not very convincing. Others, especially Protestant investigators, assign the work to the period after Solomon. They support this position largely upon religious historical considerations which do not appear to have much force.

The Psalter, or Book of Psalms, is the first book of the "Writings" (Kethubhim or Hagiographa), i.e. of the third section of the printed Hebrew Bible of to-day. In this section of the Hebrew Bible the canonical order of books has varied greatly; whereas in the first and second sections, that is, in the Law and the Prophets, the books have always been in pretty much the same order. The Talmudic list (Baba Bathra 14 b) gives Ruth precedence to Psalms. Blessed Jerome heads the "Writings" with Psalms, in his "Epistola ad Paulinum" (P.L. 22:547); with Job in his "Prologus Galeatus" (P.L. 28:555). Many Masoretic MSS. especially Spanish, begin the "Writings" with Paralipomena or Chronicles. German Massoretic MSS. have led to the order of book in the Kethubhim of the modern Hebrew Bible. The Septuagint puts Psalms first among the Sapiential Books. These latter books, in "Cod. Alexandrinus," belong to the third section and follow the Prophets. The Clementine Vulgate has Psalms and the Sapiential Books in the second section, and after Job. This article will treat the name of the Psalter, its contents, the authors of the Psalms, their canonicity, text, versions, poetic form, poetic beauty, theological value, and liturgical use.

The Book of Psalms has various names in the Hebrew, Septuagint, and Vulgate texts.

A. The Hebrew name is "praises" (from "to praise"); or "book of praises." This latter name was known to Hippolytus, who wrote Hebraioi periegrapsanten biblon Sephra theleim (ed. Lagarde, 188). There is some doubt in regard to the authenticity of this fragment. There can be no doubt, however, in regard to the transliteration Spharthelleim by Origen (P.G. 12:1084); and "sephar tallim, quod interpretatur volumen hymnorum" by Blessed Jerome (P.L. 28:1124). The name "praises" does not indicate the contents of all the Psalms. Only Ps. 144 (145) is entitled "praise." A synonymous name hallel was, in later Jewish ritual, given to four groups of songs of praise, Pss. 104-107, 111-117, 135-136, 146-150 (Vulg. 103-106, 110-116, 136-138, 145-150). Not only these songs of praise, but the entire collection of psalms made up a manual for temple service — a service chiefly of praise; hence the name "Praises" was given to the manual itself.

B. The Septuagint MSS. of the Book of Psalms read either psalmoi, psalms, or psalterion, psalter. The word psalmos is a translation of which occurs in the titles of fifty-seven psalms. Psalmos in classical Greek meant the twang of the strings of a musical instrument; its Hebrew equivalent (from "to trim") means a poem of "trimmed" and measured form. The two words show us that a psalm was a poem of set structure to be sung to the accompaniment of stringed instruments. The New Testament text uses the names psalmoi (Luke 24:44), biblos psalmon (Luke 20:42; Acts 1:20), and Daveid (Heb. 4:7).

C. The Vulgate follows the Greek text and translates psalmi, liber psalmorum. The Syriac Bible in like manner names the collection Mazmore.

The Book of Psalms contains 150 psalms, divided into five books, together with four doxologies and the titles of most of the psalms.

The printed Hebrew Bible lists 150 psalms. Fewer are given by some Massoretic MSS. The older Septuagint MSS. (Codd. Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrinus) give 151, but expressly state that the last psalm is not canonical: "This psalm was written by David with his own hand and is outside the number," exothen tou arithmou. The Vulgate follows the numeration of the Septuagint but omits Ps. cli. The differences in the numerations of the Hebrew and Vulgate texts may be seen in the following scheme:

Hebrew Septuagint	Vulgate
1-8	1-8
9	9-10
10-112	11-113
113	114-115
114-115	116
116-145	117-146
146-147	147
148-150	148-150

In the course of this article, we shall follow the Hebrew numeration and bracket that of the Septuagint and Vulgate. Each numeration has its defects; neither is preferable to the other. The variance between Massorah and Septuagint texts in this numeration is likely enough due to a gradual neglect of the original poetic form of the Psalms; such neglect was occasioned by liturgical uses and carelessness of copyists.

It is admitted by all that Pss. ix and x were originally a single acrostic poem; they have been wrongly separated by Massorah, rightly united by the Septuagint and Vulgate. On the other hand Ps. 144 (145) is made up of two songs — verses 1-11 and 12-15. Pss. 42 and 43 (41 and 42) are shown by identity of subject (yearning for the house of Jahweh), of metrical structure and of refrain (cf. Heb. Ps. 42:6, 12; 43:5), to be three strophes of one and the same poem.

The Hebrew text is correct in counting as one Ps. 116 (114 + 115) and Ps. 147 (146 + 148). Later liturgical usage would seem to have split up these and not a few other psalms. Zenner ("Die Chorgesange im Buche der Psalmen," II Freiburg im Br. 1896) ingeniously combines into what he deems were the original choral odes: Pss. 1, 2, 3, 4; 6 + 13 (6 + 12); 9 + 10 (9); 19, 20, 21 (20, 21, 22); 46 + 47 (47 + 48); 49 + 50 (50 + 51); 114 + 115 (113); 148, 149, cl.

A choral ode would seem to have been the original form of Pss. 14 + 15 (13 + 14). The two strophes and the epode are Ps. xiv; the two antistrophes are Ps. lxx (cf. Zenner-Wiesmann, "Die Psalmen nach dem Urtext," Munster, 1906, 305). It is noteworthy that, on the breaking up of the original ode, each portion crept twice into the Psalter: Ps. 14 = 53, Ps. 80 = 40:14-18. Other such duplicated psalms are Ps. 108:2-6 (107) = Ps. 57:8-12 (56); Ps. 108:7-14 (57) = Ps. 60:7-14 (59); Ps. 71, 1-3 (70) = Ps. 31:2-4 (30). Some allow that this loss of the original form of some of the psalms is due to liturgical uses, neglect of copyists, or other causes.

The Psalter is divided into five books. Each book, save the last, ends with a doxology. These liturgical forms differ slightly. All agree that the doxologies at the end of the first three books have nothing to do with the original songs to which they have been appended. Some consider that the fourth doxology was always a part of Ps. 106 (105) (cf. Kirkpatrick, "Psalms," 4 and 5, p. 6343). We prefer, with Zenner-Wiesmann (op. cit. 76) to rate it as a doxology pure and simple. The fifth book has no need of an appended doxology. Ps. cl, whether composed as such or not, serves the purpose of a grand doxology which fittingly brings the whole Psalter to its close.

The five books of the Psalter are made up as follows:

• Bk. I: Pss. 1-41 (1-40); doxology, Ps. 41:14.
• Bk. II: Pss. 42-72 (41-71); doxology, Ps. 72:18-20.
• Bk. III: Pss. 73-89 (72-88); doxology, Ps. 89, 53.
• Bk. IV: Pss. 90-106 (89-105); doxology, Ps. 106, 48.
• Bk. V: Pss. 107-150 (106-150); no doxology.

In the Massoretic text, the doxology is immediately followed by an ordinal adjective indicating the number of the succeeding book; not so in the Septuagint and Vulgate. This division of the Psalter into five parts belongs to early Jewish tradition. The Midrash on Ps. i tells us that David gave to the Jews five books of psalms to correspond to the five books of the Law given them by Moses. This tradition was accepted by the early Fathers. Hippolytus, in the doubtful fragment already referred to, calls the Psalter and its five books a second Pentateuch (ed. Lagarde, 193). Blessed Jerome defends the division in his important "Prologus Galeatus" (P.L. 28:553) and in Ep. 140 (P.L. 22:11, 68). Writing to Marcella (P.L. 23:431), he says: "In quinque siquidem volumina psalterium apud Hebraeos divisum est." He, however, contradicts this statement in his letter to Sophronius (P.L. 28:1123): "Nos Hebraeorum auctoritatem secute et maxime apostolorum, qui sempter in Novo Testamento psalmorum librum nominant, unum volumen asserimus."

In the Hebrew Psalter, all the psalms, save thirty-four, have either simple or rather complex titles. The Septuagint and Vulgate supply titles to most of the thirty-four psalms that lack Hebrew titles. These latter, called "orphan psalms" by Jewish tradition, are thus distributed in the five books of the Psalter:

• Bk. I has 4 — Pss. 1, 3, 10, 23 [1, 3, 9 (b), 32]. Of these, Ps. 10 is broken from Ps. 9; Ps. 33 has a title in the Septuagint and Vulgate.
• Bk. II has 2 — Pss. 43, 71 (42, 70). Of these, Ps. 43 is broken from Ps. 43.
• Bk. III has none.
• Bk. IV has 10 — Pss. 91, 93-97, 99, 104-106 (90, 92-96, 98, 103-105). Of these, all have titles in the Septuagint and Vulgate.
• Bk. V has 18 — Pss. 107, 111-119, 135-137, 146-150 (106, 110-118, 124, 125-150). Of these, Ps. cxii has a title in the Vulgate, Ps. 137 in the Septuagint and Vulgate; the quasi-title halleluyah precedes nine (111-113, 135, 146-150); the Greek equivalent Allelouia precedes seven others (107, 114, 116-119, 136). Only Ps. 115 [113 (b)] has no title either in the Hebrew or the Septuagint.

These titles tell us one or more of five things about the psalms: (a) the author, or, perhaps, collection; (b) the historical occasion of the song; (c) its poetic characteristics; (d) its musical setting; (e) its liturgical use.

Bk. I has four anonymous psalms out of the forty-one (Pss. 1, 2, 10, 33). The other thirty-seven are Davidic. Ps. 10 is part of 9; Ps. 33 is Davidic in the Septuagint; and Pss. 1 and 2 are prefatory to the entire collection. — Bk. II has three anonymous psalms out of the thirty-one (Pss. 43, 46, 71). Of these, eight Pss. 42-49 (41-48) are "of the sons of Korah" (libne qorah); Ps. 1 is "of Asaph"; Pss. 51-72 "of the Director" (lamenaççeah) and Ps. 72 "of Solomon." Ps. 43 (42) is part of 42 (41); Pss. 46 and 47 (65 and 66) and Davidic in the Septuagint and Vulgate. — Bk. III has one Davidic psalm, 86 (85); eleven "of Asaph," 73-83 (72-82); four "of the sons of Korah," 84, 85, 87, 88 (83,84, 86, 87); and one "of Ethan," 89 (88). Ps. lxxxviii is likewise assigned to Heman the Ezrahite. — Bk. IV has two Davidic psalms, 101 and 103 (100 and 102), and one "of Moses." Moreover, the Septuagint assigns to David eight others, Pss. 91, 93-97, 94, 104 (90, 92-96, 98, 103). The remainder are anonymous. — Bk. V has twenty-seven anonymous psalms out of forty-four. Pss. 108-110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138-145 (107-109, 121, 123, 130, 132, 137-145) are Davidic. Ps. 127 is "of Solomon." The Septuagint and Vulgate assign Ps. 137 (136) David, Pss.146-148 (145-148) to Aggeus and Zacharias.

Besides these title-names of authors and collections which are clear, there are several such names which are doubtful. — Lamenaççeah (; Septuagint, eis to telos; Vulg. in finem; Douai, "unto the end"; Aquila, to nikopoio, "for the victor"; Blessed Jerome, victori; Symmachus, epinikios, "a song of victory"; Theodotion, eis to nikos, "for the victory") now generally interpreted "of the Director." The Pi'el of the root means, in I Par. 15:22, "to be leader" over the basses in liturgical service of song (cf. Oxford Hebrew Dictionary, 664). The title "of the Director" is probably analogous to "of David," "of Asaph," etc. and indicates a "Director's Collection" of Psalms. This collection would seem to have contained 55 of our canonical psalms, whereof 39 were Davidic, 9 Korahite, 5 Asaphic, and 2 anonymous.

Al-Yeduthun, in Pss. 62 and 77 (61 and 76), where the preposition al might lead one to interpret Yeduthun as a musical instrument or a tune. In the title to Ps. 39 (38), "of the Director, of Yeduthun, a song of David," Yeduthun is without al and seems to be the Director (Menaççeah) just spoken of. That David had such a director is clear from I Par. 16:41.

Thirteen Davidic psalms have such titles. Pss. 7, 18, 34, 52, 54, 56, 57, 59, 143 (7, 17, 33, 51, 53, 55:, 56, 58, 141) are referred to the time of David's persecution by Saul; Ps. 60 (59) to that of the victories in Mesopotamia and Syria; Ps. 51(l) to his sin; Pss. 3 and 63 (62) to his flight from Absalom.

Mizmor (; Septuagint, psalmos; Vulg. psalmus; a psalm), a technical word not used outside the titles of the Psalter; meaning a song set to stringed accompaniment. There are 57 psalms, most of them Davidic, with the title Mizmor.

Shir (; Septuagint, ode; Vulg. Canticum; a song), a generic term used 30 times in the titles (12 times together with Mizmor), and often in the text of the Psalms and of other books. In the Psalms (42:9; 69:31; 28:7) the song is generally sacred; elsewhere it is a lyric lay (Gen. 31:27; Is. 30:29), a love poem (Cant. 1:1.1), or a bacchanalian ballad (Is. 24:9; Eccles. 7:5).

Maskil (; Septuagint, synedeos, or eis synesin; Vulg. intellectus or ad intellectum), an obscure form found in the titles of 13 psalms (32:, 42, 44, 45, 52, 55, 74, 78, 88, 89, 144). (a) Gesenius and others explain "a didactic poem," from Hiph'il of (cf. Ps. 32:8; I pr. 28:19); but only Pss. 32 and 78 are didactic Maskilim. (b) Ewald, Riehm and others suggest "a skilful artistic song," from other uses of the cognate verb (cf. II Par. 30:22; Ps. 47:7); Kirkpatrick thinks "a cunning psalm" will do. It is difficult to see that the Maskil is either more artistic or more cunning than the Mizmor. (c) Delitzch and others interpret "a contemplative poem"; Briggs, "a meditation." This interpretation is warranted by the usage of the cognate verb (cf. Is. 41:20; Job 34:27), and is the only one that suits all Maskilim.

Tephillah (; Septuagint, proseuche; Vulg. oratio; a prayer), the title to five psalms, 17, 86, 90, 102, 142 (16, 45, 89, 101, 141). The same word occurs in the conclusion to Bk. II (cf. Ps. 72: 20), "The prayers of David son of Yishai have been ended." Here the Septuagint hymnoi (Vulg. laudes) points to a better reading, "praise."

Tehillah (; Septuagint, ainesis; Vulg. laudatio; "a song of praise"), is the title only of Ps. 145 (144).

Mikhtam (; Septuagint, stelographia or eis stelographian; Vulg. tituli inscriptio or in tituli inscriptionem), an obscure term in the title of six psalms, 16, 54-60x (15, 55-59), always to "of David." Briggs ("Psalms," 1:lx; New York, 1906) with the Rabbis derives this title from "gold." The Mikhtamim are golden songs, "artistic in form and choice in contents."

Shiggayon (; Septuagint merely psalmos; Vulg. psalmus; Aquila, agnonma; Symmachus and Theodotion, hyper agnoias; Blessed Jerome, ignoratio or pro ignoratione), occurs only in the title to Ps. 7. The root of the word means "to wander," "to reel," hence, according to Ewald, Delitzch, and others, the title means a wild dithyrambic ode with a reeling, wandering rhythm.

Eight titles may indicate the melody of the psalm by citing the opening words of some well-known song:

Nehiloth (; Septuagint and Theodotion, hyper tes kleronomouses; Aquila, apo klerodosion; Symmachus, hyper klerouchion; Blessed Jerome, super haereditatibus; Vulg. pro ea quae haereditatem consequitur), occurs only in Ps. v. The ancient versions rightly derive the title from "to inherit"; Baethgen ("Die Psalmen," 3rd ed. 1904, p. xxxv) thinks Nehiloth was the first word of some ancient song; most critics translate "with wind instruments" wrong assuming that Nehiloth means flutes (, cf. Is. 30:29).

Al-tashheth [; Septuagint, Aquila, Symmachus, peri aphtharsias, except Ps. lxxv, Symmachus, peri aphtharsias; Blessed Jerome, ut non disperdas (David humilem et simplicem); Vulg. ne disperdas or ne corrumpas], in Pss. 57-59, 75 (56-58, 74), meaning "destroy not," may be the beginning of a vintage song referred to in Is. 55:8. Symmachus gives, in title to Ps. 57, peri tou me diaphtheires; and in this wise suggests that originally preceded .

Al-Muth-Labben (; Septuagint, hyper ton kyphion tou yiou; Vulg. pro occultis filii, "concerning the secret sins of the son"; Aquila, hyper akmes tou hiou, "of the youth of the son"; Theodotion, hyper akmes tou hyiou, "concerning the maturity of the son") in Ps. 9, probably means "set to the tune 'Death Whitens'."

Al-ayyeleth hasshahar (; Septuagint, hyper tes antilepseos tes heothines; Vulg. pro susceptione matutina, "for the morning offering"; Aquila, hyper tes elaphou tes orthines; Symmachus, hyper tes boetheias tes orthines, "the help of the morning"; Blessed Jerome, pro cervo matutino), in Ps. 22 (21, very likely means "set to the tune 'The Hind of the Morning'."

Al Shoshannim in Pss. 45 and 69 (44 and 68), Shushan-eduth in Ps. 60 (59), Shoshannim-eduth in Ps. 80 (79) seem to refer to the opening of the same song, "Lilies" or "Lilies of testimony." The preposition is al or el. The Septuagint translates the consonants hyper ton Alloiothesomenon; Vulg. pro iis qui commutabuntur, "for those who shall be changed."

Al Yonath elem rehoqim, in Ps. 56 (55) means "set to 'The dove of the distant terebinth'," or, according to the vowels of Massorah, "set to 'The silent dove of them that are afar'." The Septuagint renders it hyper tou laou tou apo ton hagion memakrymmenou; Vulg. pro populo qui a sanctis longe factus est, "for the folk that are afar from the sanctuary." Baethgen (op. cit. p. 41) explains that the Septuagint understands Israel to be the dove; reads elim for elem, and interprets the word to mean gods or sanctuary.

'Al Mahalath (Ps. 53), Mahalath leannoth (Ps. 88) is transliterated by the Septuagint Maeleth; by Vulg. pro Maeleth. Aquila renders epi choreia, "for the dance"; the same idea is conveyed by Symmachus, Theodotion, Quinta, and Blessed Jerome (pro choro). The word 'Al is proof that the following words indicate some well-known song to the melody of which Pss. 53 and 88 (52 and 87) were sung.

'Al-Haggittith, in titles to Pss. 8, 86, 84 (7, 80, 83). The Septuagint and Symmachus, hyper ton lenon; Vulg. and Blessed Jerome, pro torcularibus, "for the wine-presses." They read gittoth, pl. of gath. The title may mean that these psalms were to be sung to some vintage-melody. The Massoretic title may mean a Gittite instrument (Targ. "the harp brought by David from Gath"), or a Gittite melody. Aquila and Theodotion follow the reading of Masorah and, in Ps. 8 translate the title hyper tes getthitidos; yet this same reading is said by Bellarmine ("Explanatio in Psalmos," Paris, 1889), 1:43) to be meaningless.

One title probably means the kind of musical instrument to be used. Neginoth (; Septuagint, en psalmois, in Ps. 4:en hymnois elsewhere; Vulg. in carminibus; Symmachus, dia psalterion; Blessed Jerome, in psalmis) occurs in Pss. 4, 6, 54, 67, 76 (4, 6, 53, 54, 66, 75). The root of the word means "to play on stringed instruments" (I Kings 16:16-18, 23). The title probably means that these psalms were to be accompanied in cantilation exclusively "with stringed instruments." Ps. 61 (60) has Al Neginath in its title, and was perhaps to be sung with one stringed instrument only.

Two titles seem to refer to pitch. Al-Alamoth (Ps. 46), "set to maidens," i.e. to be sung with a soprano or falsetto voice. The Septuagint renders hyper ton kryphion; Vulg. pro occultis, "for the hidden"; Symmachus, hyper ton aionion, "for the everlasting"; Aquila, epi neanioteton; Blessed Jerome, pro juventutibus, "for youth."

Al-Hassheminith (Pss. 6 and 12), "set to the eighth"; Septuagint, hyper tes ogdoes; Vulg. pro octava. It has been conjectured that "the eighth" means an octave lower, the lower or bass register, in contrast with the upper or soprano register. In I Pr. 15:20-21, Levites are assigned some "with psalteries set to 'Alamoth'" (the upper register), others "with harps set to Sheminith" (the lower register).

Hamma'aloth, in title of Pss. 120-134 (119-133); Septuagint, ode ton anabathmon; Blessed Jerome, canticum graduum, "the song of the steps." The word is used in Ex. 20:26 to denote the steps leading up from the women's to the men's court of the Temple plot. There were fifteen such steps. Some Jewish commentators and Fathers of the Church have taken it that, on each of the fifteen steps, one of these fifteen Gradual Psalms was chanted. Such a theory does not fit in with the content of these psalms; they are not temple-psalms. Another theory, proposed by Gesenius, Delitzsch, and others, refers "the steps" to the stair-like parallelism of the Gradual Psalms. This stair-like parallelism is not found in all the Gradual Psalms; nor is it distinctive of any of them. A third theory is the most probable. Aquila and Symmachus read eis tas anabaseis, "for the goings up"; Theodotion has asma to nanabaseon. These are a Pilgrim Psalter, a collection of pilgrim-songs of those "going up to Jerusalem for the festivals" (I Kings 1:3). Issias tells us the pilgrims went up singing (30:29). The psalms in question would be well suited for pilgrim-song. The phrase "to go up" to Jerusalem (anabainein) seems to refer specially to the pilgrim goings-up (Mark 10:33; Luke 2:42, etc.). This theory is now commonly received. A less likely explanation is that the Gradual Psalms were sung by those "going up" from the Babylonian exile (I Esd. 7:9).

Other liturgical titles are: "For the thank-offering," in Ps. 100 (99); "To bring remembrance," in Pss. 38 and 70 (37-69); "To teach," in Ps. 40 (39); "For the last day or the Feast of Tabernacles," in the Septuagint of Ps. 29 (28), exodiou skenes; Vulg. in consummatione tabernaculi. Psalm 30 (29) is entitled "A Song at the Dedication of the House." The psalm may have been used at the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple, the Encaenia (John 10:22). This feast was instituted by Judas Machabeus (I Mach. 4:59) to commemorate the rededication of the temple after its desecration by Antiochus. Its title shows us that Ps. 92 (91) was to be sung on the Sabbath. The Septuagint entitles Ps. 24 (23) tes mias sabbaton, "for the first day of the week"; Ps. 48 (47) deutera sabbatou, "for the second day of the week"; Ps. 94 (93), tetradi sabbaton, "for the fourth day of the week"; Ps. 93 (92) eis ten hemeran, "for the day before the Sabbath." The Old Latin entitles Ps. 81 (80) quinta sabbati, "the fifth day of the week." The Mishna (Tamid, 7:13) assigns the same psalms for the daily Temple service and tells us that Ps. 82 (81) was for the morning sacrifice of the third day.

Many of the critics have branded these titles as spurious and rejected them as not pertaining to Holy Writ; such critics are de Wette, Cheyne, Olshausen, and Vogel. More recent critical Protestant scholars, such as Briggs, Baethgen, Kirkpatrick, and Fullerton, have followed up the lines of Ewald, Delitzsch, Gesenius, and Koster, and have made much of the titles, so as thereby to learn more and more about the authors, collections, occasions, musical settings, and liturgical purposes of the Psalms.

Christian scholars, while not insisting that the author of the Psalms superscribed the titles thereof, have always considered these titles as an integral part of Holy Writ. St. Thomas (in Ps. 6) assigns the titles to Esdras: "Sciendum est quod tituli ab Esdra facti sunt partim secundum ea quae tune agebantur, et partim secundum ea quae contigerunt." So comprehensive a statement of the case is scarcely to the point; most modern scholars give to the titles a more varied history. Almost all, however, are at one in considering as canonical these at times obscured directions. In this unanimity we carry out Jewish tradition. Pre-Massoretic tradition preserved the titles as Scripture, but lost much of the liturgical and musical meaning, very likely because of changes in the liturgical cantilation of the Psalms. Massoretic tradition has kept carefully whatsoever of the titles it received. It makes the titles to be part of Sacred Scripture, preserving their consonants, vowel-points, and accents with the very same care which is given to the rest of the Jewish Canon.

The Fathers give to the titles that respect and authority which they give to the rest of Scripture. True, the obscurity of the titles often leads the Fathers to mystical and highly fanciful interpretations. St. John Chrysostom ("De Compunctione," 2, 4; P.G. 47, 415) interprets hyper tes ogdoes, "for the eighth day," "the day of rest," "the day of eternity." St. Ambrose (In Lucam, 5:6) sees in this title the same mystical number which he notes in the Eight Beatitudes of St. Matthew, in the eighth day as a fulfilment of our hope, and in eight as a sum of all virtues: "pro octava enim multi inscribuntur psalmi." In this matter of mystical interpretations of the titles, Blessed Augustine is in advance of the generally literal and matter-of-fact Sts. Ambrose and John Chrysostom. Yet when treating the worth and the genuiness of the titles, no Father is more decided and pointed than is Blessed Augustine. To him the titles are inspired Scripture. Commenting on the title to Ps. 51:"of David, when Nathan the Prophet came to him, what time he had gone into Bethsabee," Blessed Augustine (P.L. 36:586) says it is an inspired as is the story of David's fall, told in the Second Book of Kings (11:1-6); "Utraque Scriptura canonica est, utrique sine ulla dubitatione a Christianis fides adhibenda est."

From the agreement we have noted between the titles of Massorah and those of the Septuagint, Vulgate, Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, Blessed Jerome, etc. we see that the titles are older than the Septuagint. They have come down to us, if not from the authors of the Psalms, at least from ancient Jewish tradition, and that, on this account, they may not be called into doubt, unless there be some serious reason against their genuineness. Indeed, the very disagreements which we have noted led us to the same conclusion. By the time the Septuagint was written, the titles must have been exceedingly old; for the tradition of their vocalization was already very much obscured.

(1) Jewish tradition is uncertain as to the authors of the Psalms. Baba Bathra (14 f) mentions ten; Pesachim (10) attributes all the Psalms to David.

(2) Christian tradition is alike uncertain. St. Ambrose, "In Ps. 43i and 47" (P.L. 14,923), makes David to be the sole author. St. Augustine, in "De Civitate Dei," 17,14 (P.L. 41,547), thinks that all the Psalms are Davidic and that the names of Aggeus and Zacharias were superscribed by the poet in prophetic spirit. St. Philastrius, Haer. 130 (P.L. 12,1259), brands the opposite opinion as heretical. On the other hand, plurality of authorship was defended by Origen, "In Ps." (P.G. 12,1066); St. Hilary, "In Ps. Procem. 2) (P.L. 9,233); Eusebius, "In Ps. Procem. In Pss. 41, 72" (P.G. 23,74, 368); and many others. Blessed Jerome, "Ad Cyprianum, Epist. 140, 4 (P.L. 22,1169), says that "they err who deem all the psalms are David's and not the work of those whose names are superscribed."

This disagreement, in matter of authorship of the Psalms, is carried from the Fathers to the theologians. Davidic authorship is defended by many Fathers of the Church.

In summary:

• Neither the wording of the decrees of the councils nor the opinions of certain Fathers have such weight as to determine that David is sole author of the whole Psalter.
• It cannot be prudently denied that David is the chief author of the songs of the Psalter.
• Especially can it not be denied that David is the author of those psalms which, either in the Old or in the New Testament, are clearly cited under the name of David, for instance 2, 16, 18, 32, 69, 110 (2, 15, 17, 31, 68, 109).

In the above decision the Biblical Commission has followed not only Jewish and Christian tradition, but Jewish and Christian Scripture as well. The Old Testament witness to the authorship of the Psalms is chiefly the titles. These seem to attribute various psalms, especially of Books I-III, to David, Asaph, the sons of Korah, Solomon, Moses, and others.

The titles of seventy-three psalms in the Massoretic Text and of many more in the Septuagint seem to single out David as author: cf. Pss. 3-41 (3-40), i.e. all of Bk. I save only 10 and 33; Pss. 51-70 (50-69), except 66 and 67, in Bk. II; Ps. 86 (85) of Bk. III; Ps. 103 (102) in Bk. IV; Pss. 108-110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 135-145 (107-109, 121, 123, 130, 134-144) of Bk. V. The Hebrew title is [symbols didn’t transfer. Ed]. It is now generally held that, in this Hebrew word, the preposition le has the force of a genitive, and that the Septuagint tou David "of David," is a better translation than the Vulgate ipsi David, "unto David himself."

Does this preposition mean authorship? Not in every title; else both David and the Director are the authors of Ps. 19 (18), and all the sons of Korah, together with the Director, are joint authors of the psalms attributed to them. In the case of such composite titles as "of the Director, a psalm of David" (Ps. 19), or "of the Director, of the sons of Korah, a psalm" (Ps.48), we probably have indications not of authorship but of various collections of psalms — the collections entitled "David," "the Director," "the sons of Korah." The New Testament and many Fathers of the Church speak of "David," "the Psalter of David," "the Psalms of David," not in truth to imply that all the psalms are David's, but because he was the psalmist par excellence. So likewise the titles of many psalms assign them not so much to their authors as to their collectors or to the chief author of the collection to which they pertain.

On the other hand, some of the longer titles go to show that "of David" may means authorship. Take an instance: "Of the Director, to the tune 'Destroy not', of David, a chosen piece (Mikhtam), when he fled from the face of Saul into the cave" (Ps. 57). The historical occasion of the Davidic composition of the song, the lyric quality of the song, its inclusion in the early collection "of David" and later in the Director's hymnbook, the tune to which the psalm was either written by David or set by the Director — all these things seem to be indicated by the very composite title under consideration. Of a sort with the Davidic titles is the ending subscribed to the first two books of the Psalms: "Amen, Amen; ended are the phrases of David, son of Yishai" (Ps. 72:20). This subscription is more ancient than the Septuagint; it would be altogether out of place were not David the chief author of the psalms of the two books whereto it is appended.

Further Old-Testament evidence of Davidic authorship of the Psalms, as suggested by the Biblical Commission's recent Decree, are David's natural poetic talent, shown in his song and dirges of II Kings and I Par. together with the fact that it was he who instituted the solemn levitical cantilation of psalms in the presence of the Ark of the Covenant (I Par. 16, 23-25). The songs and dirges attributed to David are significantly alike to the Davidic psalms in spirit and style and wording. Let us examine the opening line of II Kings 22:

"And David spoke to Jahweh the words of this song in the day that Jahweh saved him from the grasp of his foes and out of the hands of Saul, and he said: 2. Jahweh is my Cliff, my Fortress, my Way of Escape, 3. My God, my Rock to Whom I betake me, My Shield, the Horn of my salvation, my Tower. My Refuge, my Savior, from wrong dost Thou save me. 4. Shouting praise, I cry to Jahweh, And from my foe I get salvation."

The two songs are clearly identical, the slight differences being probably due in the main to different liturgical redactions of the Psalter. In the end the writer of II Kings gives "the last words of David" (23:1) — to wit, a short psalm in the Davidic style wherein David speaks of himself as "Israel's sweet singer of songs," "egregius psaltes Israel" (II Kings 23:2). In like manner the Chronicler (I Par. 16:8-36) quotes as Davidic a song made up of Ps. 105:1-13, Ps. 96, and a small portion of Ps. 106. Finally, the Prophet Amos addresses the Samarians: "Ye that sing to the sound of the psaltery; they have thought themselves to have instruments of music like David" (6:5).

The poetic power of David stands out as a characteristic of the Shepherd King. His elegiac plaints at the death of Saul and Jonathan (II Kings 1:19-27) reveal some power, but not that of the Davidic psalms. The above reasons for Davidic authorship are impugned by many who insist on the late redaction of II Kings 21-24 and upon the discrepancies between the passages we have paralleled. The question of late redaction of the Davidic songs in II Kings is not within our scope; nor does such late redaction destroy the force of our appeal to the Old Testament, since that appeal is to the Word of God. In regard to the discrepancies, we have already said that they are explainable by the admission that our Psalter is the result of various liturgical redactions, and does not present all the psalms in the precise form in which they proceeded from their original writers.

Asaph is accredited, by the titles, with twelve psalms, 50, 73-83 (49, 72-82). These psalms are all national in character and pertain to widely-separated periods of Jewish history. Ps. 83 (82), although assigned by Briggs ("Psalms," New York, 1906, p. 67) to the early Persian period, seems to have been written at the time of the havoc wrought by the Assyrian invasion of Tiglath-pileser III in 737 B.C. Ps. 74 (73) was probably written, as Briggs surmises, during the Babylonian Exile, after 586 B.C.

Asaph was a Levite, the son of Barachias (I Par. 6:39), and one of the three chiefs of the Levitical choir (I Par. 15:17). The "sons of Asaph" were set aside "to prophesy with harps and with psalteries and with cymbals" (I Par. 25:1). It is probable that members of this family composed the psalms which later were collected into an Asaph psalter. The features of these Asaph psalms are uniform: frequent allusions to the history of Israel with a didactic purpose; sublimity and vehemence of style; vivid description; an exalted conception of the deity.

The Sons of Korah are named in the titles of eleven psalms — 42-49, 84, 85, 87, 88 (41-48, 83, 84, 86, 87). The Korahim were a family of temple singers (II Par. 20:19). It can scarcely be that each psalm of this group was jointly composed by all the sons of Korah; each was rather composed by some member of the guild of Korah; or, perhaps, all were gathered from the various sources into one liturgical hymnal by the guild of the sons of Korah. At all events, there is a oneness of style to these hymns which is indicative of oneness of Levitical spirit. The features of the Korahite psalms are; a great love for the Holy City; a yearning for the public worship of Israel; a supreme trust in Jahweh; and a poetic form which is simple, elegant, artistic, and well-balanced. From their Messianic ideas and historical allusions, these psalms seem to have been composed between the days of Isaias and the return from exile.

Moses is in the title of Ps. 90 (89). Blessed Augustine (P.L. 37:1141) does not admit Mosaic authorship; Blessed Jerome (P.L. 22:1167) does. The author imitates the songs of Moses in Deut. 32 and 33; this imitation may be the reason of the title.

Solomon is in the titles to Pss. 72 and 127 (71 and 126), probably for a similar reason.

Ethan, in the title of Ps. 89 (88), should probably be Idithun. The Psalter of Idithun, of Yeduthun, contained also Pss. 39, 62, 77 (38, 61, 76).

To Christians, believing as they do fully in the Divinity of Christ and inerrancy of Holy Writ, New Testament citations render Pss. 2, 16, 32, 35, 69, 109, 110 (2, 15, 31, 34, 68, 108, 109) Davidic without the shadow of a doubt. When the Pharisees said that the Christ was the Son of David, Jesus put them the question: "How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying: The Lord said to my Lord" (cf. Matt. 22:43-45; Mark 12:36-37; Luke 20:42-44; Ps. cx, 1). There can be here no question of the name of a collection "of David."

Nor is there question of a collection when St. Peter, on the first Pentecost in Jerusalem, says: "For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord etc." (Acts, 2:34). Davidic authorship is meant by Peter, when he cites Pss. 69 (68), 26, 109 (108), 8, and 2:1-2 as "from the mouth of David" (Acts, 1:16; 4:25). And when St. Peter quoted Ps. 16 (15), 8-11, as the words of David, he explains how these words were intended by the dead patriarch as a prophecy of centuries to come (Acts, 2:25-32). St. Paul's testimony is conclusive, when he (Rom. 4:6; 11:9) assigns to David parts of Pss. 32, 35, and 69 ( 31, 34, 68). A non-Christian might object that St. Paul refers to a collection called "David," especially as such a collection seems clearly meant by "in David," en Daveid of Heb. 4:7. We answer, that this is an evasion: had St. Paul meant a collection, he would have dictated en Daveid in the letter to the Romans.

D. The Critics incline to do away with all question of Davidic authorship. Briggs says: "It is evident from the internal character of these psalms, with a few possible exceptions, that David could not have written them" (Psalms, p. 61). Ewald allows that this internal evidence shows David to have written Pss. 3, 4, 7, 11, 15, 18, first part of 19, 24, 29, 32, 101 (3, 4 7, 11, 14, 17, 23, 28, 31, 100).

A. The Christian Canon of the Psalms presents no difficulty; all Christians admit into their canon the 151 Psalms of the Septuagint.

B. The Jewish Canon presents a vexing problem. How has the Psalter been evolved? The traditional Jewish opinion, generally defended by Catholic scholars, is that not only the Jewish Canon of the Psalms but the entire Palestinian Canon of the Old Testament was practically closed during the time of Esdras. This traditional opinion is probable; for the arguments in its favor, cf. Cornely, "Introductio Generalis in N.T. Libros," I (Paris, 1894), 42.

These arguments are not all admitted by the critics. Says Driver: "For the opinion that the Canon of the Old Testament was closed by Ezra, or his associates, there is no foundation in antiquity whatever" ("Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament," New York, 1892, p. x). In regard to the Psalms Wellhausen says: "Since the Psalter 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" (Bleek's "Introduction," ed. 1876, 507). Hitzig ("Begriff der Kritik," 1831) deems that Books III-V are entirely Machabean (168-135 B.C.). Olshausen ("Die Psalmen," 1853) brings some of these psalms down to the Hasmonaean dynasty, and the reign of John Hyrcanus (135-105 B.C.). Duhm ("Die Psalmen," 1899, p. 21) allows very few pre-Machabean psalms, and assigns Pss. 2, 20, 21, 61, 63, 72, 84 (b), 132 [2, 19, 60, 62, 71, 83 (b), 131] to the reigns of Aristobulus I (105-104 B.C.) and his brother Alexander Jannaus (104-79 B.C.. He considers that the Canon of the Psalter was not closed till 70 B.C. (p. 23).

Such extreme views are not due to arguments of worth. So long as one refuses to accept the force of the traditional argument in favor of the Esdras Canon, one must at all events admit that the Jewish Canon of the Psalms was undoubtedly closed before the date of the Septuagint translation. This date is 285 B.C. if we accept the authority of the Letter of Aristeas; or, at the very latest 132 B.C. the period at which Ben Sirach wrote, in the prologue to Ecclesiasticus, that "the law itself and the prophets and the rest of the books [i.e. the Hagiograha, of which were the Psalms] had been translated into Greek." This is the opinion of Briggs (p. 12), who sets the final redaction of the Psalter in the middle of the second century B.C.

The gradual evolution of the Book of Psalms is now quite generally taken by the critics as a matter of course. Their application of the principles of higher criticism does not result in any uniformity of opinion in regard to the various strata of the Psalter. We shall present these strata as they are indicated by Prof. Briggs, probably the least rash of those who have published what are called "critical editions" of the Psalms. His method of criticism is the usual one; by a rather subjective standard of internal evidence, he carves up some psalms, patches up others, throws out portions of others, and "edits" all. He assigns seven psalms to the early Hebrew monarchy; seven to the middle monarchy; thirteen to the late monarchy; thirteen to the time of exile; thirty-three to the early Persian period; sixteen to the middle Persian period (the times of Nehemias); eleven to the late Persian period; "the great royal advent psalm" (Pss. 93, 96-100) together with eight others to the early Greek period (beginning with Alexander's conquest); forty-two to the late Greek period, and to the Machabean period Pss. 33, 102 (b), 109 (b), 118, 139 (c), 129 of the Pilgrim Psalter and 147, 149 of the Hallels.

Of these psalms and portions of psalms, according to Briggs, thirty-one are "psalms apart," that is, never were incorporated into a Psalter before the present canonical redaction was issued. The rest were edited in two or more of the twelve Psalters which mark the evolution of the Book of Psalms. The earliest collection of psalms was made up of seven Mikhtamim, "golden pieces," of the middle Persian period. In the late Persian period thirteen Maskilim were put together as a collection of meditations. At the same time, seventy-two psalms were edited, as a prayer-book for use in the synagogue, under the name of "David"; of these thirteen have in their titles references to David's life, and are thought to have formed a previous collection by themselves. In the early Greek period in Palestine, eleven psalms were gathered into the minor psalter entitled the "Sons of Korah."

About the same time in Babylonia, twelve psalms were made into a Psalter entitled "Asaph." Not long thereafter, in the same period, the exilic Ps. lxxxviii, together with two orphan Pss. lxvi and lxvii, were edited along with selections from "David," "Sons of Korah," and "Asaph," for public worship of song in the synagogue; the name of this psalter was "Mizmorim." A major psalter, the Elohist, Pss. 42-83 (41-82), is supposed to have been made up, in Babylonia, during the middle Greek period, of selections from "David," "Korah," "Asaph" and "Mizmorim"; the name is due to the use of Elohim and avoidance of Jahweh in these psalms. About the same time, in Palestine, a prayer-book was made up of 54 from "Mizmorim, 16 psalms from "David," 4 from "Korah," and 1 from "Asaph"; this major psalter bore the name of the "Director."

The Hallels, or Alleluiatic songs of praise, were made up into a psalter for temple service in the Greek period. These psalms have halleluyah (Praise ye Yah) either at the beginning (Pss. cxi, cxii), or at the close (Pss. 104, 105, 115, 117), or at both the beginning and close (Pss. 106, 113, 135, 146-150). The Septuagint gives Allelouia also the beginning of Pss. 105, 107, 114, 116, 119, 136. Briggs includes as Hallels all these except 118 and 119, "the former being a triumphal Machabean song, the latter the great alphabetic praise of the law." A like minor psalter of the Greek period was the "Pilgrim Psalter" (Pss. 120-134), a collection of "Songs of Pilgrimage," the "Songs of Ascents," or "Gradual Psalms," which the pilgrims chanted while going up to Jerusalem for the three great feasts.

The Psalms were originally written in Hebrew letters, such as we see only on coins and in a few lapidary inscriptions; the text has come down to us in square Aramaic letters. Only the versions give us any idea of the pre-Massoretic text. Thus far no pre-Massoretic MS. of the Psalms has been discovered. The Massoretic text has been preserved in more than 3400 MSS. of which none is earlier than the ninth century and only nine or ten are earlier than the twelfth. These Massoretic MSS. represent two slightly variant families of one tradition — the texts of Ben Asher and of Ben Naftali. Their variations are of little moment in the interpretation of the Psalms. The study of the rhythmic structure of the Psalms, together with the variations between Massorah and the versions, have made it clear that our Hebrew text is far from perfect, and that its points are often wrong. The efforts of critics to perfect the text are at times due to no more than a shrewd surmise. The metrical mould is chosen; then the psalm is forcibly adapted to it. It were better to leave the text in its imperfect condition than to render it worse by guess-work. The decree of the Biblical Commission is aimed at those to whom the imperfections in the Massoretic Text are an occasion, though no excuse, for countless conjectural emendations, at times wild and fanciful, which nowadays pass current as critical exegesis of the Psalms.

The chief version of the Psalms is the Septuagint. It is preserved to us in Cod. U, Brit. Mus. Pap. 37, seventh century, containing Pss. 10-33; Leipzig Pap. fourth century, containing Pss. 28-54; Cod. Sinaiticus, fourth century, complete; B. Cod. Vaticanus, fourth century, complete, except, Pss. 105:27-137:6; A, Cod. Alexandrinus, fifth century, complete except Pss. 49:19-76:10; 1:Cod. Bodleianus, ninth century, complete; and in many other later MSS. The Septuagint Version is of great value in the exegesis of the Psalms. It provides pre-Massoretic readings which are clearly preferable to those of the Massoretes. It brings us back to a text at least of the second century B.C. In spite of a seeming servility to words and to Hebrew constructions, a servility that probably existed in the Alexandrian Greek of the Jews of the period, the Septuagint translator of psalms shows an excellent knowledge of Hebrew, and fears not to depart from the letter and to give the meaning of his original. The second-century A.D. Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion are extant in only a few fragments; these fragments are witnesses to a text pretty much the same as our Massoretic.

About the middle of the second century the Septuagint Psalter was translated into Latin. Of this Old Latin, or Itala, Version we have only a few MSS. and the citations by the early Latin Fathers. At the request of Pope St. Damasus 1:A.D. 383, Blessed Jerome revised the Itala and brought it back closer to the Septuagint. His revision was soon so distorted that he complained, "plus antiquum errorem quam novam emendationem valere" (P.L. 29, 117). This is Blessed Jerome's "Roman Psalter"; it is used in the recitation of the Office in St. Peter's, Rome, and in the Missal.

The corruption of his first translation led Blessed Jerome to undertake an entirely new translation of the Hexapla edition of the Septuagint. He worked with great care, in Bethlehem, some time before A.D. 392. He indicated by asterisks the parts of the Hebrew text which had been omitted by the Septuagint and were borrowed by him from Theodotion; he marked with the obelus the parts of the Septuagint which were not in the Hebrew. These critical marks came in course of time to be utterly neglected. This translation is the "Gallican Psalter"; it is part of the Vulgate. A third Latin translation of the Psalms, made from the Hebrew Text, with Origen's Hexapla and the other ancient versions in view, was completed by Blessed Jerome about the end of the fourth century at Bethlehem. This version is of great worth in the study of the Psalter. Dr. Briggs says: "Where it differs from H. and G. its evidence is especially valuable as giving the opinion of the best Biblical scholar of ancient times as to the original text, based on the use of a wealth of critical material vastly greater than that in the possession of any other critic, earlier or later" (p. 32).

Parallelism (q. v.) is the principle of balance which is admitted by all to be the most characteristic and essential feature of the poetic form of the Psalms. By synonymous, synthetic, antithetic, emblematic, stair-like, or introverted parallelism, thought is balanced with thought, line with line, couplet with couplet, strophe with antistrophe, in the lyric upbuilding of the poetic picture or imprecation or exhortation.

Is there meter in the Psalms? The Jews of the first century A.D. thought so. Flavius Josephus speaks of the hexameters of Moses (Antiq. 2-16, 4; 4, 8, 44) and the trimeters and tetrameters and manifold meters of the odes and hymns of David (Antiq. 7:xii, 3). Philo says that Moses had learned the "theory of rhythm and harmony" (De vita Mosis, 1:5). Early Christian writers voice the same opinion. Origen (d. 254) says the Psalms are in trimeters and tetrameters (In Ps. cxviii; cf. Card. Pitra, "Analecta Sacra," 2:341); and Eusebius (d. 340), in his "De Praeparatione evangelica," 11:5 (P.G. 21:852), speaks of the same meters of David. Blessed Jerome (420), in "Praef. ad Eusebii chronicon" (P.L. 27, 36), finds iambics, Alcaics, and Sapphics in the psalter; and, writing to Paula (P.L. 22,442), he explains that the acrostic Pss. 111 and 112 (110 and 111) are made up of iambic trimeters, whereas the acrostic Pss. 119 and 145 (118 and 144) are iambic tetrameters.

Modern exegetes do not agree in this matter. For a time many would admit no meter at all in the Psalms. Davison (Hast. "Dict. of the Bible," s. v.) writes: "though meter is not discernible in the Psalms, it does not follow that rhythm is excluded." This rhythm, however, "defies analysis and systematization." Driver ("Introd. to Lit. of O.T." New York, 1892, 339) admits in Hebrew poetry "no meter in the strict sense of the term." Exegetes who find meter in the Psalms are of four schools, according as they explain Hebrew meter by quantity, by the number of syllables, by accent, or by both quantity and accent.

(1) Defenders of the Latin and Greek metrical standard of quantity as applied to Hebrew poetry are Francis Gomarus, in "Davidis lyra," II (Lyons, 1637), 313; Mark Meibom, in "Davidis psalmi X" (Amsterdam, 1690) and in two other works, who claim to have learned his system of Hebrew meter by Divine revelation; William Jones, "Poeseos Asiaticae commentariorum" (Leipzig, 1777), who tried to force Hebrew words into Arabic meters.

(2) The number of syllables was taken as the standard of meter by Hare, "Psalmorum liber in versiculos metrice divisus" (London, 1736); he made all feet dissyllabic, the meter trochaic in a line of an even number of syllables, iambic in a line of an odd number of syllables. The Massoretic system was rejected, the Syriac put in its stead. The opinion found chief defence in the writings of the learned Innsbruck Professor Gustav; and in Bickell's "Metrices biblicae" (Innsbruck, 1879), "Suplementum ad Metr. Bibl." (Innsbruck), "Carimina veteris testamenti metrice" (1882), "Dichtungen der Hebraer" (1882-84). Gerard Gietmann, S. J. "De re mentrica Hebraeorum" (Freiburg im Br. 1880); A. Rohling, "Das Solomonische Spruchbuch" (Mainz, 1879); H. Lesetre, "Le livre des psaumes" (Paris, 1883); J. Knabenbauer, S. J. in "Job" (Paris, 1885), p. 18; F. Vigouroux, "Manuel biblique," 2:203, have all followed in Bickell's footsteps more or less closely. Against this system some patent facts. The quantity of a word is made to vary arbitrarily. Hebrew is treated as Syriac, a late dialect of Aramaic — which it is not; in fact, even early Syriac poetry did not measure its lines by the number of syllables. Lastly the Massorah noted metrical structure by accents; at least soph pasuk and athnah indicate complete lines or two hemistiches.

(3) Accent is the determining principle of Hebrew meter according to C. A. Anton, "Conjectura de metro Hebraeorum" (Leipzig, 1770), "Vindiciae disput. de metr. Hebr." (Leipzig, 1771), "Specimen editionis psalmorum" (Vitebsk, 1780); Leutwein, "Versuch einer richtigen Theorie von der biblischen Verkunst" (1775); Ernst Meier, "Die Form der hebraischen Poesie nachgewiesen" (Tubingen, 1853); Julius Ley, "Die Metrischen Formen der hebraischen Poesie" (Leipzig, 1886); "Ueber die Alliteration im Hebraischen" in "Zeitsch. d. Deutsch. Morgenlandisch. Ges." 20:180; J. K. Zenner, S. J. "Die Chorgesange im Buche der Psalmen" (Freiburg im Br. 1896), and in many contributions to "Zeitsch. fur kathol. Theol." 1891, 690; 1895, 373; 1896, 168, 369, 378, 571, 754; Hontheim, S. J. in "Zeitsch. fur kathol. Theol." 1897, 338, 560, 738; 1898, 172, 404, 749; 1899, 167; Dr. C. A. Briggs, in "The Book of Psalms," in "International Critical Commentary" (New York, 1906), p. 39:and in many other publications therein enumerated; Francis Brown, "Measures of Hebrew Poetry: in "Journal of Biblical Literature," 9:91; C. H. Toy, "Proverbs" in "Internat. Crit. Comm." (1899); W. R. Harper, "Amos and Hosea" in "Internat. Crit. Comm." (1905); Cheyne, "Psalms" (New York), 1892; Duhm, "Die Psalmen" (Freiburg im Br. 1899), p. xxx.

This theory is the best working hypothesis together with the all-essential principle of parallelism; it does far less violence to the Massoretic Text than either of the foregoing theories. It does not force the Massoretic syllables into grooves that are Latin, Greek, Arabic, or Aramaic. It is independent of the shifting of accent; and postulates just one thing, a fixed and harmonious number of accents to the line, regardless of the number of syllables therein. This theory of a tonic and not a syllabic meter has this, too, in its favor that accent is the determining principle in ancient Egyptian, Babylonian, and Assyrian poetry.

(4) Later the pendulum of Hebrew metrical theories swung back upon quantity; the syllabic must not be utterly neglected. Hubert Grimme, in "Grundzuge der Hebraischen Akzent und Volkallehre," Freiburg, 1896, and "Psalmenprobleme" (1902), builds up the meter chiefly upon the tonic principle, at the same time taking into account the morae or pauses due to quantity. Schlogl, "De re metrica veterum Hebraeorum" (Vienna, 1899), defends Grimme's theory. Sievers, in "Metrische Studien" (1901), also takes in the unaccented syllables for metrical consideration; so does Baethgen, "Die Psalmen" (Gottingen, 1904), p. xxvii.

Alliteration and assonance are frequent. Acrostic or alphabetic psalms are 9-10, 25, 34, 37, 111, 112, 119, 145 (9, 24, 33, 36, 110, 111, 118, 144). The letters of the alphabet begin successive lines, couplets, or strophes. In Ps. 119 (118) the same letter begins eight successive lines in each of the twenty-two alphabetic strophes. In Pss. 13:xxix, 62:cxlviii, and cl (12:28:lxi, cxlvii, and cxlix) the same word or words are repeated many times. Rhymes, by repetition of the same suffix, are in Pss. 2, 13, 27, 30, 54, 55, 142, etc. (2, 12, 26, 29, 53, 54, 141, etc.); these rhymes occur at the ends of lines and in caesural pauses. Lines were grouped into strophes and antistrophes, commonly in pairs and triplets, rarely in greater multiples; at times an independent strophe, like the epode of the Greek chorus, was used between one or more strophes and the corresponding antistrophes.

The word Selah almost invariably marks the end of a strophe. The meaning of this word and its purpose is still a moot question. We think it was originally from "to throw", and meant "a throwing down," "a prostration." During the antiphonal cantilation of the Psalms, the priests blew their trumpets to mark the end of a strophe, and at the signal the two choirs or the people or both choirs and people prostrated themselves (cf. Haupt, "Expository Times," May, 1911). The principle of parallelism determined these stophic arrangements of the lines. Koster, in "die Psalmen nach ihrer strophischen Anordnung" (1837), distinguishes various kinds of parallelism in lines and half-lines, synonymous, antithetical, synthetic, identical, introverted. Zenner, S. J. in his "Chorgesange im Buche der Psalmen" (Freiburg im Br. 1896) has very cleverly arranged many of the psalms as choral odes, chanted by two or three choirs. Hermann Wiesmann, S. J. in "Die Psalmen nach dem Urtext" (Munster, 1906), has applied the metrical principles of Zenner, and revised and published the latter's translations and studies of the Psalms. This work takes too great liberty with the Sacred Text, and has lately (1911) been put on the Index.

The extravagant words of Lamartine in "Voyage en Orient" are classic: "Lisez de l'Horace ou du Pindare apres un Psaume! Pour moi, je ne le peux plus." One wonders whether Lamartine ever read a psalm in the original. To criticize the Psalms as literature is very difficult. Their text has reached us with many losses in the matter of poetic form. The authors varied much in style. Their literary beauty should not be judged by comparison with the poetry of Horace and Pindar. It is with the hymns of ancient Egypt, Babylon, and Assyria that we should compare the songs of Israel. Those ancient hymns are crude and rude by the side of the Psalms. Even the imprecatory Pss. 18, 35, 52, 59, 69, 109, 137 (17, 34, 51, 58, 68, 108, 136), national anthems so full of love of Israel and almost startling in their hatred of the foes of Jahweh and of Israel, are sublime, vivid, glowing, enthusiastic, though exaggerated, poetic outbursts if read from the viewpoint of the writers. They provide instances of a "higher seriousness and a higher truthfulness," such as Aristotle never would have found in a song of Babylonia or of Sumeria. Whether their tones are those of praise or blame, of sorrow or of joy, of humiliation or of exaltation, of deep meditation or of didactic dogmatism, ever and everywhere the writers of the Psalms are dignified and grand, true to the ideals of Jahweh's chosen folk, spiritual and devotional. The range of thought is immense. It takes in Jahweh, His temple, cult, priests, creation; man, friend and foe; beasts, birds; all nature, animate and inanimate. The range o