ascribing the Constitution of the United States and all the elaborate system of Common and Statute law in Great Britain and America, to the Anglo-Saxon tribes who invaded England and established the basis for Anglo-Saxon civilization. It would be no more absurd than to ascribe the elaborate Pentateuchal codes to Israel of the Exodus.

The Hebrew Law is Mosaic in that its essential fundamental laws were derived from Moses, in that he shaped the legal policy of Israel for all times: the institutions are Mosaic because Moses established their essential nucleus. All that was subsequent in the Law and the institutions was but an unfolding of the germs given by Moses. But that development went on in the enlargement of the law, in the expanding of the institutions, in the unfolding of the precepts, in the experience and history of the people, until the cope-stone of Mosaism was laid by Ezra, the second Moses, in rebuilt Jerusalem and restored Israel.

We have in Hebrew literature an unfolding through the centuries of four distinct types: the legal type, beginning with Moses, and continuing through all the ages of priestly legislation until Ezra crowned the work with the completed Law; the prophetic type, beginning with Samuel and continuing through all the centuries until the Maccabean Daniel; the type of psalmody, beginning with David and unfolding until our Psalter was finally edited, late in the age of the Maccabees; and finally, the type of wisdom, beginning with Solomon and extending to Ecclesiastes of the Hebrew Canon, and the Wisdom of Sirach and Wisdom of Solomon of the Greek and Latin Canons.

X. PSEUDONYMOUS HOLY SCRIPTURES

Are there pseudonymous books in the Bible? This is a wellknown and universally recognized literary style which no one should think of identifying with forgery or deceit of any kind. Ancient and modern literature is full of pseudonymes as well as anonymes. One need only look over the bibliographical works devoted to this subject, or have a little familiarity with

1 Barbier, Dictionnaire des Ouvrages anonymes et pseudonymes, 4 tom., Paris, 1872-1878; Halkett and Lang, Dictionary of the Anonymous and Pseudonymous Literature of Great Britain, 4 vols., 1882, seq.

the history of literature, or examine any public library, to settle this question. There is great variety in the use of the pseudonyme. Sometimes the author uses a surname rather than his own proper name, either to conceal himself by it from the public or to introduce himself by a title of honour. Thus Calvin follows the opinion of some of the ancients that the prophecy of Malachi was written by Ezra, who assumed the surname Malachi in connection with it. Then again some descriptive term is used, as by the authors of the celebrated Martin Marprelate tracts. Then a fictitious name is constructed, as in the title of the famous tracts vindicating Presbyterianism against Episcopacy; the authors, Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew Newcommen, and William Spurstow, coined the name Smectymnuus from the initial letters of their names. Among the ancients it was more common to assume the names of ancient worthies. There is an enormous number of these pseudonymes in the Puritan literature of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The descendants of the Puritans are the last ones who should think of any dishonesty or impropriety connected with their use.

Why should the pseudonyme be banished from the Bible? Among the Greeks and Romans they existed in great numbers. Among the Jews we have a long list in extra-canonical books, covering several kinds of literature, e.g. the apocalypses of Enoch, Baruch, Ezra, Assumption of Moses, Ascension of Isaiah, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Psalter of Solomon. Why should there not be some of these in the Old Testament? It is now conceded by scholars that Ecclesiastes is such a pseudonyme, using Solomon's name.1 It is claimed by some that Daniel2 and Deuteronomy 3 are also pseudonymes. If no a priori objection can be taken to the pseudo

1 This is invincibly established by Wright, Book of Koheleth, London, 1883, pp. 79 seq. "Solomon is introduced as the speaker throughout the work in the same way as Cicero in his treatise on 'Old Age,' and on Friendship,' selects Cato the elder as the exponent of his views, or as Plato in his Dialogues brings forward Socrates."

2 See Strack in l.c., pp. 164 seq., and pp. 351 seq. of this vol.

So Riehm, Gesetzgebung Mosis im Lande Moab, 1854, p. 112, represents the Deuteronomic code as a literary fiction. The author lets Moses appear as a prophetic popular orator, and as the first priestly reader of the Law. It is a literary

nyme as inconsistent with divine revelation,-if one pseudonyme, Ecclesiastes, be admitted in the Bible,—then the question whether Daniel and Deuteronomy are pseudonymes must be determined by the Higher Criticism, and it does not touch the question of their inspiration or authority as a part of the Scriptures. All would admit that no forger or forgery could be inspired. But that every one who writes a pseudonyme is a deceiver or forger is absurd. The usage of literature, ancient and modern, has established its propriety. If it claims to be by a particular author, and is said by a critic to be a pseudonyme, then its credibility is attacked, and the question of its inspiration is raised. In the New Testament the Gospel of John was thought by some to be a pseudonyme of the second Christian century, but this has been entirely disproved. Weiss tells us :

"There was certainly in antiquity a pseudonymous literature, which cannot be criticized from the standpoint of the literary customs of our day, or judged as forgery. For it is just the naïveté with which the author strives to find a higher authority for his words by laying them in the mouth of one of the celebrated men of the past, in whose spirit he desires to speak, which justifies this literary form. Quite otherwise is it in this case; the author mentions no name; he only gives it to be understood that it is the unnamed disciple so repeatedly introduced who is writing here from his own personal knowledge; he leaves it to be inferred from the comparison of one passage with another that this eye-witness cannot be any one but John. It was Renan who, in the face of modern criticism, said that it was not a case of pseudonymous authorship such as was known to antiquity, it was either truth or refined forgery-plain deception."1

fiction, as Ecclesiastes is a literary fiction. The latter uses the person of Solomon as the master of wisdom to set forth the lessons of wisdom. The former uses Moses as the great lawgiver, to promulgate divine laws. This is also the view of Nöldeke, Alttest. Literatur, 1868, p. 30; and W. Robertson Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, N.Y., 1881, pp. 384 seq., who uses the term "legal" fiction as a variety of literary fiction. We cannot go with those who regard this as an absurdity, or as involving literary dishonesty. Drs. Riehm and Smith, and others who hold this view, repudiate such a thought with abhorThe style of literary fiction was a familiar and favourite one of the later And there can be no a priori reason why they should not have used it in Bible times.

rence. Jews.

1 Weiss, Life of Jesus, T. & T. Clark, Edin., 1883, I. p. 94.

The authenticity of the Pauline epistles of the imprisonment and the pastoral epistles has been contested in a similar way. The Pauline epistles represent three stages of growth in the experiences and doctrinal teaching of the apostle Paul himself. It is not necessary to think of his disciples as their authors, or to descend into the second century.1 The Apocalypse has been disputed from ancient times. It has been assigned by some of the ancients to a presbyter, John. Recent criticism is more and more against placing it with the pseudonymous apocalypses of Peter and Paul.

XI. COMPILATION IN HOLY SCRIPTURE

3

The historical books of Kings and Chronicles 2 and the Gospel of Luke represent themselves as compilations. They use older documents, which are sometimes mentioned by name. The question then is, how far this compilation has extended; and whether it has been once for all, or has passed through a number of stages. Thus the books of Kings refer to books of Chronicles which are not our books of Chronicles, and our books of Chronicles refer to books of Kings which are not our books of Kings. Both of these historical writers seem to depend upon an ancient book of Chronicles, only our book of Chronicles has used it in its citation in another book of Kings than the one presented to us in the Canon, for it gives material not found therein. The prophetic histories - Judges, Samuel, and Kings-represent a number of writers, earlier and later, who have worked over the story of Israel in the land of Palestine till the exile. Some of these are Ephraimitic writers, some Judaic. The final authors were Deuteronomic. The last touch to this prophetic history was given by a Deuteronomic editor, who reëdited them all in a series, early in the exile, under the influence of the prophet Jeremiah.

1 See Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 1882, pp. 784 seq.; Weiss, Biblical Theology of the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1882, I. p. 285.

21 K. 1141, 1419. 29, 165; 2 K. 118, 823, 2020; 1 Ch. 2929; 2 Ch. 929, 1215, 1322, 1611, 2427, 2622, etc., 3318. 19, 3527; Neh. 1123. 3 11-4.

4 Nöldeke, Alttest. Literatur, Leipzig, 1868, pp. 57 seq.

The narratives of the Chronicler, in Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, which constituted one book, represent the view of the histories taken by a priest centuries later, at the close of the Persian or the beginning of the Greek period. His work is the ecclesiastical chronicle of Jerusalem, rather than a history of the kings or the people. He seems to have used a Midrash of the books of Samuel and Kings, which has been lost, intermediate between the present prophetic histories and the Chronicles. The question arises whether the other historical books are not also compilations. In the New Testament the chief disputes have been as to Matthew and Mark.1

The Gospel of Matthew is a compilation, using the Gospel of Mark and the Logia of Matthew as the chief sources. The Gospel of Luke is a compilation, using the same Gospel of Mark and the Logia of Matthew, and also other Hebraic sources for its gospel of the infancy, and, possibly also, another source for the Perean ministry. The book of Acts is a compilation, using a Hebraic narrative of the early Jerusalem Church, and the "We" narrative of a co-traveller with Paul, and probably other sources. The Gospel of John is also partly a compilation, using an earlier Gospel of John in the Hebrew language, and the Hymn to the Logos in the Prologue.

The Apocalypse is a compilation of a number of apocalypses. of different dates.2 The book of Daniel is a compilation in two parts, the one giving stories relating to Daniel, the other, visions and dreams of Daniel. It is written in two different languages, the Hebrew and the Aramaic.

The two remaining problems of the Higher Criticism cover so much ground that it will be necessary to consider them in several chapters. The literary forms will be considered in the next chapter, on the Biblical Prose Literature, and the four chapters that follow on Biblical Poetical Literature. The question of credibility will be discussed in the chapter on the Credibility of Holy Scripture.

1 Weiss, Leben Jes:, I., 1882, pp. 24 seq., gives the best statement of this discussion and its resu. s.

2 Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles, pp. 284 seq.

8 See pp. 351 seq.