ANALYSIS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. ings, the Pentateuch and the book of Esther will always be preserved by a special providence. [PART V. CHAP. II. tract, whoever he was, wished to make a final appeal to the II. Concerning the author of this book, the opinions of conjecture, we apprehend, will satisfactorily answer the obsource whence he derived it. (x. 2.) This very plausible biblical critics are so greatly divided, that it is difficult to jection that this book contains nothing peculiar to the Israeldetermine by whom it was written. Augustine and some of ites, except Mordecai's genealogy. There is, unquestionably, the fathers of the Christian church ascribe it to Ezra. other writers it is ascribed to the joint labours of the great God, in these memoirs or chronicles of Ahasuerus; and if the By no mention made of Divine Providence, or of the name of synagogue, who, from the time of Ezra to Simon the Just, author of the extract had given it a more Jewish complexion, superintended the edition and canon of Scripture. Philo the-if he had spoken of the God of Israel,-instead of renderJew assigns it to Joachin, the son of Joshua the high-priest, ing his narrative more credible, he would have deprived it who returned with Zerubbabel. Cellérier ascribes it to an of an internal character of truth.3 unknown author, who was contemporary with the facts recorded in this book." Mordecai: and others, again, attribute it to Esther and MorOthers think it was composed by decai jointly. The two latter conjectures are grounded on the following declaration in Esther ix. 20. 23.And Mordecai wrote these things, and sent letters unto all the Jews that were in all the provinces of king Ahasuerus; and the Jews undertook to do as they had begun, and as Mordecai had written unto them. But the context of the passage clearly shows that these words do not relate to the book itself, but to the circular letters which Mordecai sent to the Jews in all the provinces of the Persian empire, announcing the mighty deliverance from their enemies which had been vouchsafed to them, and instituting a perpetual anniversary in commemoration of such deliverance. The institution of this festival, and its continued observance to the present time, is a convincing evidence of the reality of the history of Esther, and of the genuineness of the book which bears her name: since it is impossible, and, in fact, inconceivable, that a nation should institute, and afterwards continue to celebrate, through long succession of ages, this solemn annual festival, merely because a certain man among them had written an agreeable fable or romance. A more probable opinion (and which will enable us satisfactorily to account for the omission of the name of God in this book) is, that it is a translated extract from the memoirs of the reign of the Persian monarch Ahasuerus. The Asiatic sovereigns, it is well known, caused annals of their reigns to be kept: numerous passages in the books of Kings and Chronicles prove that the kings of Israel and Judah had such annals; and the book of Esther itself attests that Ahasuerus had similar historical records. (ii. 23. vi. 1. x. 2.) It was indispensably necessary that the Jews should have a faithful narrative of their history under Queen Esther. Now, from what more certain source could they derive such history than from the memoirs of the king her consort? Either Ezra, or Mordecai, had authority or credit enough to obtain such an extract. In this case, we can better account for the retaining of the Persian word Purim, as well as for the details which we read concerning the empire of Ahasuerus, and (which could otherwise be of no use whatever for the history of Esther) for the exactness with which the names of his ministers and of Haman's sons are recorded. The circumstance of this history being an extract from the Persian annals will also account for the Jews being mentioned only in the third person, and why Esther is so frequently designated by the title of queen, and Mordecai by the epithet of "the Jew." It will also account for those numerous parentheses which interrupt the narrative in order to subjoin the illustrations which were necessary for a Jewish reader; and by the abrupt termination of the narrative by one sentence relative to the power of Ahasuerus, and another concerning Mordecai's greatness. Finally, it is evident that the author of this ex during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah. They commence PART I. The Promotion of Esther; and the essential Service PART II. The Advancement of Haman: his Designs against SECT. 1. The promotion of Haman, and the occasion of which he availed himself to obtain an edict for massacring the Jews. (iii.) SECT. 2. The consequent affliction of the Jews, and the measures pursued by them. (iv.) SECT. 3. The defeat of Haman's particular plot against the life of Mordecai. (v. vi. vii.) SECT. 4. The defeat of his general plot against the Jews. (viii. ix. 1-16.) SECT. 5. The institution of the festival of Purim, to comme- Bibles, there are ten more verses annexed to it, together with 3 Coquerel, Biographie Sacrée, tom. j. pp. 361-363. (Amsterdam, 1825.) of the sacred historian. Scaliger, who has been followed by Jahn, has ad4 Chronologers are greatly divided in opinion who was the Ahasuerus vanced many ingenious arguments to show that it was Xerxes who was Hystaspes. The most probable opinion is that of Dr. Prideaux (Connection, intended; Archbishop Usher supposes to have been Darius the son of ably to the account of Josephus, (Antiq, Jud. lib. xi. c. 6.) of the Septua sub anno 458, vol. 1. pp. 270. et seq.); who, after a very minute discussion, gint version, and of the apocryphal additions to the book of Esther. The maintains that the Ahasuerus of Esther was Artaxerxes Longimanus, agreeopinion of Prideaux is adopted by Bishops Tomline and Gray, and the very Elements, vol. i. p. 93. Dr. Hales's Analysis, vol. ii. book i. p. 524. et seq. We may therefore conclude, that the permission given to Nehemiah to reaccurate chronologer, Dr. Hales. (See Gray's Key, p. 227. Tomline's build the walls of Jerusalem was owing to the influence of Esther and Mor1 Introduction à la Lecture des Livres Saints (Ancien Testament), p. 320. bable that the pious reason, assigned by Artaxerxes (Ezra vii. 23.) for the decai, and that the emancipation of the Jews from the Persian yoke was For an account of this festival, called the feast of Purim, see Vol II.regulations given to Ezra, originated in the correct views of religion which gradually, though silently, effected by the same influence. It is not improPart III. Chap. IV. § VIII. were communicated to him by his queen Esther. CHAPTER III. ON THE POETICAL BOOKS. THOUGH Some of the Sacred Writings, which present themselves to our notice in the present chapter, are anterior in point of date to the Historical Books, yet they are usually classed by themselves under the title of the Poetical Books; because they are almost wholly composed in Hebrew verse. This appellation is of considerable antiquity. Gregory Na zianzen calls them the Five Metrical Books; Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium, in his iambic poem addressed to Seleucus enumerates them, and gives them a similar denomination; as also do Epiphanius and Cyril of Jerusalem. The Poetical Books are five in number, viz. Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Canticles or Song of Solomon: in the Jewish canon of Scripture they are classed among the Hagiographa, or Holy Writings; and in our Bibles they are placed between the Historical and Prophetical Books. SECTION I. ON THE BOOK OF JOB. I. Title of the book.-II. Reality of Job's person.-III. Age in which he lived.-IV. Scene of the poem of Job.-V. Author and canonical authority. VI. Structure of the poem. VII. Argument and scope.-VIII. Spurious addition to this book in the Septuagint Version.-IX. Rules for studying this book to advantage.-X. Synopsis.—XI. Idea of the patriarchal theology, as contained in the book of Job. 1. THIS book has derived its title from the venerable patriarch Job, whose prosperity, afflictions, and restoration from the deepest adversity, are here recorded, together with his exemplary and unequalled patience under all his calamities. No book, perhaps, has more exercised the ingenuity of critics and commentators than this of Job; and though the limits necessarily assigned to this article prevent us from detailing all the various and discordant hypotheses which have been offered concerning it, yet a brief retrospect of the principal opinions that have been entertained respecting this portion of Scripture can at no time be either uninteresting or unimpor tant. II. Although this book professes to treat of a real person, yet the actual existence of the patriarch has been questioned by many eminent critics, who have endeavoured to prove that the whole poem is a mere fictitious narration, intended to instruct through the medium of parable. This opinion was first announced by the celebrated Jewish Rabbi Maimonides, and has since been adopted by Le Clerc, Michaelis, Semler, Bishop Stock, and others. The reality of Job's existence, on the contrary (independently of its being the uniform belief of the Jewish and Christian church), has been maintained with equal ability by Leusden, Calmet, Heidegger, Carpzov, Van Til, Spanheim, Moldenhawer, Schultens, Ilgen, Archbishop Magee, Bishops Patrick, Sherlock, Lowth, Tomline, and Gray, Drs. Kennicott and Hales, Messieurs Peters and Good, Drs. Taylor and Priestley, and, in short, by almost every other modern commentator and critic. The principal arguments commonly urged against the reality of Job's existence are derived from the nature of the exordium in which Satan appears as the accuser of Job; from the temptations and sufferings permitted by the Almighty Governor of the world to befall an upright character; from the artificial regularity of the numbers by which the patriarch's possessions are described, as seven thousand, three thousand, one thousand, five hundred, &c. With regard to the first argument, the incredibility of the conversation which is related to have taken place between the Almighty and Satan, "who is supposed to return with news from the terrestrial regions," an able commentator has remarked, Why should such a conversation be supposed incredible? The attempt at wit in the word news is somewhat out of place; for the interrogation of the Almighty, “Hast 1 Greg. Naz. Carm. 33. v. 16. Op. tom. ii. p. 93. Paris, 1611. EpiphaBius de Pond. et Mens. p. 533. Suicer's Thesaurus, tom. ii. voce σxpe. > Moreh Nevochim, part ii. sect. 22. thou fixed thy view upon my servant Job, a perfect and up right MAN?” (i. 8.) instead of aiming at the acquisition of news, is intended as a severe and most appropriate sarcasm upon the fallen spirit. "Hast THOU,-who, with superior faculties and a more comprehensive knowledge of my will, hast not continued perfect and upright,-fixed thy view upon a subordinate being, far weaker and less informed than thyself, who has continued so?"-"The attendance of the apostate at the tribunal of the Almighty is plainly designed to show us that good and evil angels are equally amenable to him, and equally subject to his authority;—a doctrine common to every part of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, and, except in the mythology of the Parsees, recognised by, perhaps, every ancient system of religion whatever. The part assigned to Satan in the present work is that expressly assigned to him in the case of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, and of our Saviour in the wilderness; and which is assigned to him generally, in regard to mankind at large, by all the evangelists and apostles whose writings have reached us, both in their strictest historical narratives, and closest argumentative inductions. And hence the argument which should induce us to regard all the rest in the same light which should induce us to regard the present passage as fabulous, which would sweep into nothingness a much larger portion are imbued with the same doctrine-a view of the subject of the Bible than, we are confident, M. Michaelis would choose to part with. "The other arguments are, comparatively, of small moment. We want not fable to tell us that good and upright men may occasionally become the victims of accumulated calamities; for it is a living fact, which, in the mystery of Providence, is perpetually occurring in every country: while as to the roundness of the numbers by which the patriarch's possessions are described, nothing could have been more ungraceful or superfluous than for the poet to have descended to units, had even the literal numeration demanded it. And although he is stated to have lived a hundred and forty years after his restoration to prosperity, and in an æra in which the duration of man did not, perhaps, much exceed that of the present day, it should be recollected, that in his person as well as in his property he was specially gifted by the Almighty: that, from various passages, he seems to have been younger than all the interlocutors, except Elihu, and much younger than one or two of them: that his longevity is particularly remarked, as though of more than usual extent: and that, even in the present age of the world, we have well authenticated instances of persons having lived, in different parts of the globe, to the age of a hundred and fifty, a hundred and sixty, and even a hundred and seventy years.3 "It is not necessary for the historical truth of the book of Job, that its language should be a direct transcript of that actually employed by the different characters introduced into it; for in such case we should scarcely have a single book of real history in the world. The Iliad, the Shah Nameh, and the Lusiad, must at once drop all pretensions to such a description; and even the pages of Sallust and Cæsar, of Rollin and Hume, must stand upon very questionable authority. It is enough that the real sentiment be given, and the general style copied and this, in truth, is all that is aimed at, not only in our best reports of parliamentary speeches, but in many instances (which is indeed much more to the purpose), by the writers of the New Testament, in their quotations from the Old." : Independently of these considerations, which we think sufficiently refute the objections adduced against the reality of Job's existence, we may observe, that there is every possible evidence that the book, which bears his name, contains a literal history of the temptations and sufferings of a real character. In the first place, that Job was a real, and not a fictitious See Pantalogia, art. Life; and Encyclopædia Britannica, art. Longevity. xvii. See also Archbishop Magee's Discourses and Dissertations on the Dr. Good's Introductory Dissertation to his version of Job, pp. xv.Atonement, vol. ii. pp. 49-53. Dr. Gregory's translation of Bishop Lowth's Lectures, vol. ii. pp. 358-370. in notes. character, may be inferred from the manner in which he is mentioned in the Scriptures. Thus, the prophet Ezekiel speaks of him :-Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord God. (Ezek. xiv. 14.) In this passage the prophet ranks Noah, Daniel, and Job, together, as powerful intercessors with God; the first for his family; the second for the wise men of Babylon; and the third for his friends: now, since Noah and Daniel were unquestionably real characters, we must conclude the same of Job. Behold, says the apostle James, we count them happy which endure : ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord, that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy. (James v. 11.) It is scarcely to be believed that a divinely inspired apostle would refer to an imaginary character as an example of patience, or in proof of the mercy of God. But, besides the authority of the inspired writers, we have the strongest internal evidence, from the book itself, that Job was a real person: for it expressly specifies the names of persons, places, facts, and other circumstances usually related in true histories. Thus we have the name, country, piety, wealth, &c. of Job described (ch. i.); the names, number, and acts of his children are mentioned; the conduct of his wife is recorded as a fact (ii.); his friends, their names, countries, and discourses with him in his afflictions, are minutely delineated. (ii. 11. &c.) And can we rationally imagine that these were not realities? Further, no reasonable doubt can be entertained respecting the real existence of Job, when we consider that it is proved by the concurrent testimony of all eastern tradition: he is mentioned by the author of the book of Tobit, who lived during the Assyrian captivity; he is also repeatedly mentioned by Mohammed as a real character. The whole of his history, with many fabulous additions, was known among the Syrians and Chaldæans; many of the noblest families among the Arabians are distinguished by his name, and boast of being descended from him. So late even as the end of the fourth century, we are told, that there were many persons who went into Arabia to see Job's dunghill, which, in the nature of things, could not have subsisted through so many ages; but the fact of superstitious persons making pilgrimages to it sufficiently attests the reality of his existence, as also do the traditionary accounts concerning the place of Job's abode." are noticed in Job i. 15. &c.; and others, with Nebuchadnezzar, because the Chaldeans are introduced in Job i. 17. Lastly, some state him to have lived in the time of Jacob, whose daughter Dinah they suppose him to have married: and this conjecture they ground upon the resemblance between the expression in Job ii. 10. (thou speakest like a foolish woman) and that in Gen. xxxiv. 7. (- hath wrought folly in [more correctly against] Israel.)? The puerility of these conjectures sufficiently indicates their weakness; one thing, however, is generally admitted with respect to the age of Job, viz. the remote antiquity of the period when he must have lived. Even those who contend for the late production of the book of Job, are compelled to acquiesce in this particular. Grotius thinks the events of the history are such as cannot be placed later than the sojourning of the Israelites in the Wilderness. Bishop Warburton, in like manner, admits them to bear the marks of high antiquity; and Michaelis confesses the manners to be perfectly Abrahamic, that is, such as were common to all the seed of Abraham, Israelites, Ishmaelites, and Idumæans. The following are the principal circumstances from which the age of Job may be collected and ascertained :")— 1. The Usserian, or Bible chronology, dates the trial of Job about the year 1520 before the Christian æra, twentynine years before the departure of the Israelites from Egypt; and that the book was composed before that event, is evident from its total silence respecting the miracles which accompanied the exode: such as the passage of the Red Sea, the destruction of the Egyptians, the manna in the desert, &c.; all of which happened in the vicinity of Job's country, and were so apposite in the debate concerning the ways of Providence, that some notice could not but have been taken of them, if they had been coval with the poem of Job. 2. That it was composed before Abraham's migration to Canaan may also be inferred, from its silence respecting the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the other cities of the plain, which were still nearer to Idumæa, where the scene is laid. 3. The length of Job's life places him in the patriarchal times. He survived his trial one hundred and forty years (xlii. 16.), and was probably not less than sixty or seventy at that time: for we read that his seven sons were all grown up, and had been settled in their own houses for a considerable time. (i. 4, 5.) He speaks of the "sins of his youth" (xiii. 26.), and of the prosperity of "his youth;" and yet Eliphaz addresses him as a novice:-" With us are both the very aged, much elder than thy father." (xv. 10.) Inquire, I pray thee, of the former age, Assigning as a reason, the comparative shortness of life and (For we are but of yesterday, and know nothing III. Since, then, the book of Job contains the history of a real character, the next point to be considered is the age in which he lived, a question concerning which there is as great a diversity of opinion, as upon any other subject con- 4. That he did not live at an earlier period may be collectnected with this venerable monument of sacred antiquity.ed from an incidental observation of Bildad, who refers Job Thus, some think that he lived in the days of Moses, from a to their forefathers for instruction in wisdom: supposed resemblance between the style of Moses and that of Job; others in the time of the Judges, from an expression in Job xxvii. 12., because at that time all was vanity, and every man did that which was good in his own eyes. Others, again, refer him to the time of Ahasuerus or Artaxerxes Longimanus, on account of the search then made for beautiful women, from whom the monarch might select a consort (Esth. ii. 2. &c.), and because Job's daughters are mentioned (Job xlii. 15.) as being the fairest in the whole land. Some make him to have been contemporary with Solomon and the queen of Sheba, if not Solomon himself, because the Sabeans 1 To evade the strong proof afforded by Ezekiel's express recognition of the reality of Job's person, Jahn remarks that fictitious personages may be brought upon the stage along with real ; as is evident from Luke xvi. 1931., where Abraham is introduced with the fictitious characters Lazarus and the rich man. But there is an evident difference between a parable expressly purporting to be fictitious, and a solemn rebuke or warning to a whole nation. Besides, in Luke, the circumstances predicated of all the characters are fictitious; in Ezekiel they are unquestionably true with relation to Noah and Daniel, and might be reasonably expected to be so in the other instance associated with these two. (Prof. Turner's translation of Jahn, p. 467, note.) 2 Elements of Christian Theology, vol. i. p. 94. 3 Tobit ii. 12. in the Vulgate version, which is supposed to have been executed from a more extended history of Tobit than the original of the Greek version. Sale's Koran, pp. 271. 375. 4to. edit. See also D'Herbelot's Bibliothèque Orientale, voce Aib, tom. i. p. 145. 4to edit. As the father of the celebrated Sultan Saladin (Elmancin, Hist. Saracen. p. 3.); and also Saladin himself, whose dynasty is known in the East by the name of Aiubiah or Jobites. D'Herbelot, tom. i. pp. 146, 147. Chrysostom, ad pop. Antioch. Hom. 5. Op. tom. ii. p. 59. A. Thevenot's Voyage, p. 447. La Roque, Voyages en Syrie, tom. i. p. 239. Staeudlin (a modern German critic, who plainly disbelieves any inspiration of the Old Testament), takes a middle course. Conceiving that he has discovered in the book of Job phrases, sentiments, and pictures of manners which belong to a later date, and that its composition is more elaborate and exquisite than that of the generality of the other Hebrew books, he does not ascribe to it such a remote antiquity as many scholars of the present day suppose: but since it exhibits other indubitable marks of a But the "fathers of the former age," or grandfathers of the present, were the contemporaries of Peleg and Joktan, in the fifth generation after the deluge: and they might easily have learned wisdom from the fountain-head by conversing with Shem, or perhaps with Noah himself; whereas, in the seventh generation, the standard of human life was reduced to about two hundred years, which was a shadow compared with the longevity of Noah and his sons. 5. The general air of antiquity which pervades the manners recorded in the poem, is a further evidence of its remote date. The manners and customs, indeed, critically corres venerable antiquity, he is led to suppose that it was composed by some Hebrew author of a lower age, perhaps by Solomon himself, out of certain very ancient remains of poetry, history, and philosophy, to which that author added some things of his own, and had thrown the whole into its present practical form and arrangement.-Staeudlin's Theol Moralis Hebræorum ante Christum Hist. (Gotting. 1794,) cited in Dr. Smith's Scripture Testimony of the Messiah, vol. i. p. 210. Mercerus, Præf. ad Job. The Bishop of Killala (Dr. Stock), after Bishop Warburton, rofers the time of Job to that of Ezra, whom he supposes to be its author. (Preface to his translation of Job, pp. v. vi.) His arguments are very largely examined and refuted by Archbishop Magee, Discourses, vol. ii. pp. 87-154. See also British Critic, vol. xxix. O. S. pp. 369-372. 10 Grotius, Præf. ad Job. Warburton's Divine Legation, book vi. sect. 2. Michaelis, Notæ et Epimetra in Lowthii Prælectiones, p. 181. Magee, vol. ii. p. 57. These observations are digested from the united remarks of Dr. Hales, in his Analysis of Chronology, vol. ii. book i. pp. 55-59, and of Archbishop Magee, in his Discourses, vol. ii. pp. 58-63. "In A. D. 1808, Aldebaran was in 2 signs, 7 deg. east longitude. But since the date of Job's trial, B. c. 2338, added to 1800, makes 4138 years, the precession of the equinoxes amounted to 1 sign 27 deg. 53 min. which, being subtracted from the former quantity, left Aldebaran in only deg. 7 min. longitude, or distance from the vernal intersection, which, falling within the constellation Taurus, consequently rendered it the cardinal constellation of spring, as Pisces is at present. pond with that early period. Thus, Job speaks of the most ancient kind of writing, by sculpture (xix. 24.): his riches also are reckoned by his cattle. (xlii. 12.) Further, Job acted as high-priest in his family, according to the patriarchal usage (Gen. viii. 20.): for the institution of an established priesthood does not appear to have taken place anywhere until the time of Abraham. Melchizedec king of Salem was a priest of the primitive order (Gen. xiv. 18.): such also was Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, in the vicinity of Idumæa. (Exod. xviii. 12.) The first regular priesthood "In A. D. 1800, Antares was in 8 signs 6 deg. 58 min. east was probably instituted in Egypt, where Joseph was mar-longitude, or 2 signs 6 deg. 58 min. east of the autumnal ried to the daughter of the priest of On. (Gen. xli. 45.) intersection; from which subtracting, as before, the amount of the precession, Antures was left only 9 deg. 5 min. east. Since, then, the autumnal equinox was found within Scorpio, this was then the cardinal constellation of Autumn, as Virgo is at present. The 6. The slavish homage of prostration to princes and great men, which prevailed in Egypt, Persia, and the East in general, and which still subsists there, was unknown in Arabia at that time. Though Job was one of the "greatest men of all the East," we do not find any such adoration paid "Since, then, these calculations critically correspond with to him by his contemporaries, in the zenith of his prosperity, the positions of the equinoxes at the assumed date of Job's among the marks of respect so minutely described in the trial, but disagree with the lower dates of the age of Moses, twenty-ninth chapter. "When the young men saw him, and still more of Ezra, furnishing different cardinal constelthey hid themselves (rather, shrunk back), through respect or lations, we may rest in the assumed date of the trial as corrustic bashfulness; the aged arose and stood up in his Such a combination and coincidence of various rays rect. presence (more correctly, ranged themselves about him), the princes of evidence, derived from widely different sources, history, refrained from talking, and laid their hand upon their mouth; sacred and profane, chronology, and astronomy, and ́all conthe nobles held their peace, and were all attention while he verging to the same common focus, tend strongly to establish spoke." All this was highly respectful indeed, but still it the time of Job's trial as rightly assigned in the year B. c. was manly, and showed no cringing or servile adulation. 2337 (2130 of the common computation), or 818 years after With this description correspond the manners and conduct the deluge; 184 years before the birth of Abraham; 474 of the genuine Arabs of the present day, a majestic race, years before the settlement of Jacob's family in Egypt, and who were never conquered, and who have retained their 689 years before their ecode or departure from thence." primitive customs, features, and character, with scarcely any preceding arguments receive additional weight, from a conalteration. sideration of the manner in which God has vouchsafed to deal with mankind. In Gen. xi. we read that the erection of the tower of Babel for idolatrous purposes had occasioned the dispersion. Idolatry "was gradually encroaching still further on every family, which had not yet lost the knowledge of the true God. Whoever has studied the conduct of Providence, will have observed, that God has never left himself without witnesses in the world, to the truth of his religion. To the old world, Noah was a preacher, and a witness; to the latter times of patriarchism, Abraham and his descendants; to the ages of the Levitical law, Moscs, David, and the Prophets: and to the first ages of Christianity, the apostles and the martyrs were severally witnesses of the truth of God. But we have no account whatever, unless Job be the man, that any faithful confessor of the one true God arose between the dispersion from Babel and the call of Abraham. If it be said, that the family of Shem was the visible church of that age; it will be answered, that it is doubtful whether even this family were not also idolaters: for Joshua tells the Israelites (Josh. xxiv. 2.), that the ancestors of Abraham were worshippers of images. 7. The allusion made by Job to that species of idolatry alone, which by general consent is admitted to have been the most ancient, namely, Zabianism, or the worship of the sun and moon, and also to the exertion of the judicial authority against it (xxxi. 26-28.), is an additional and most complete proof of the high antiquity of the poem, as well as a decisive mark of the patriarchal age.3 8. A further evidence of the remote antiquity of this book is the language of Job and his friends; who, being all Idumeans, or at least Arabians of the adjacent country, yet conversed in Hebrew. This carries us up to an age so early as that in which all the posterity of Abraham, Israelites, Idumeans, and Arabians, yet continued to speak one common language, and had not branched into different dialects.4 9. Lastly, Dr. Hales has adduced a new and more particular proof, drawn from astronomy, which FIXES the time of the patriarch's trial to 184 years before the birth of Abraham: for, by a retrograde calculation, the principal stars referred to in Job, by the names of Chimah and Chesil, or Taurus and Scorpio, are found to have been the cardinal constellations of spring and autumn in the time of Job, of which the chief stars are Aldebaran, the bull's eye, and Antares, the scorpion's heart. Knowing, therefore, the longitudes of these stars at present, the interval of time from thence to the assumed date of Job's trial will give the difference of their longitudes, and ascertain their positions then, with respect to the vernal and autumnal points of intersection of the equinoctial and ecliptic; which difference is one degree in 714 years, according to the usual rate of the precession of the equinoxes, The word keschitah, which is translated a piece of money (xlii. 11.), there is good reason to understand as signifying a lamb. See Archbishop Magee's critical note, Discourses, vol. ii. pp. 59-61. They are thus described by Sir William Jones:-"Their eyes are full of vivacity; their speech voluble and articulate; their deportment manly and dignified; their apprehension quick; their minds always present and attentive; with a spirit of independence appearing in the countenance of the lowest among them. Men will always differ in their ideas of civiliza. tion, each measuring it by the habits and prejudices of their own country; but if courtesy and urbanity, a love of poetry and eloquence, and the prac tice of exalted virtues, be a juster proof of civilized society, we have certain proof that the people of Arabia, both on plains and in cities, in republican and monarchical states, were eminently civilized for many ages before their conquest of Persia." Asiatic Researches, vol. ii. p. 3. or Works, vol. iii. p. Bishop Lowth's Lectures, vol. ii. p. 355. note. Although Sir William Jones could obtain but little accurate information concerning the Zabian faith, yet, he remarks, "This at least is certain, that the people of Yemen (Arabia) very soon fell into the common but fatal error of adoring the sun and the firmament: for even the third in descent from Yoktan, who was 50. Svo. edit. consequently as old as Nahor, took the surname of Abdu-shams, or ser tant of the sun: and his family, we are assured, paid particular honour to that luminary. Other tribes worshipped the planets and fixed stars." Asiatic Researches, vol. ii. p. 8. or Sir William Jones's Works, vol. iii. p. 57. Bishop Lowth, lect. xxxii. vol. ii. pp. 350, 351. ix. 9. xxxviii. 31, 32. For an explanation of this astronomical phenomenon, and its applica fen to chronology, see Dr. Hales's Analysis, vol. i. pp. 185-187. For the "Job, therefore, in the age of error, may be considered as the faithful witness, in his day, to the hope of the Messiah: he professed the true religion, and his belief in the following important truths: the creation of the world by one Supreme Being; the government of that world by the Providence of God; the corruption of man by nature; the necessity of sacrifices, to propitiate the Deity; and the certainty of a future resurrection. These were the doctrines of the patriarchal age, as well as of the Jewish and Christian covenants. They are the fundamental truths of that one system of religion, which is alone acceptable to God, by whatever name it may be distinguished in the several ages of the world." On the evidence above offered respecting the antiquity of the book of Job, the reader will form his own conclusions. At this distance of time, it is, perhaps, difficult to determine its precise date; but topics like these are of comparatively little importance, and do not affect, in any degree, either the sentiments expressed, or the moral inculcated, in this part of the inspired volume. is stated (Job i. 1.) to be the land of Uz, which by some IV. The country, in which the scene of this poem is laid, geographers has been placed in Sandy, and by others in Stony, Arabia. Bochart strenuously advocated the former opinion, in which he has been powerfully supported by Spanheim, Calmet, Carpzov, Heidegger, and some later calculations given in the text, he makes acknowledgments to Dr. Brinkley Andrews, professor of astronomy in the university of Dublin (now Bishop of Cloyne): subsequently to the making of this calculation, Dr. H. discovered that it had been anticipated and published at Paris by M. Ducoutant, in 1765. Townsend's Old Testament arranged in Historical and Chronological Order, vol. i. p. 29. note. writers; Michaelis, Ilgen, and Jahn, place the scene in the valley of Damascus; but Bishop Lowth and Archbishop Magee, Dr. Hales, Dr. Good, and some later critics and philologers, have shown that the scene is laid in Idumæa. That the land of Uz, or Gnutz (Job i. 1.), is evidently Idumæa, appears from Lam. iv. 21. Uz was the grandson of Seir the Horite. (Gen. xxxvi. 20, 21. 28.; 1 Chron. i. 38. 42.) Scir inhabited that mountainous tract which was called by his name antecedent to the time of Abraham, but, his posterity being expelled, it was occupied by the Idumæans. (Deut. ii. 12.) Two other men are mentioned of the name of Uz; one the grandson of Shem, the other the son of Nachor, the brother of Abraham; but whether any district was called after their name is not clear. Idumæa is a part of Arabia Petræa, situate on the southern extremity of the tribe of Judah (Num. xxxiv. 3. Josh. xv. 1. 21.): the land of Uz, therefore, appears to have been between Egypt and Philistia (Jer. xxv. 20.), where the order of the places seems to have been accurately observed in reviewing the different nations from Egypt to Babylon; and the same people seem again to be described in exactly the same situations. (Jer. xlvi.-1.) Nor does the statement of the inspired writer, that Job was the greatest of all the men of the East (Job i. 3.), militate against the situation of the land of Uz. The expressions, men of the East, children of the East, or Eastern people, seems to have been the general appellation for that mingled race of people (as they are called, Jer. xxv. 20.) who inhabited the country between Egypt and the Euphrates, bordering upon Judæa from the south to the east; the Idumæans, the Amalekites, the Midianites, the Moabites, the Ammonites (see Judg. vi. 3. and Isa. xi. 14.); of these the Idumæans and Amalekites certainly possessed the southern parts. (See Num. xxxiv. 3. xiii. 29.; 1 Sam. xxvii. 8. 10.) This appears to be the true state of the case: the whole region between Egypt and the Euphrates was called the East, at first in respect to Egypt (where the learned Joseph Mede thinks the Israelites acquired this mode of speaking), and afterwards absolutely and without any relation to situation or circumstances. Abraham is said to have sent the sons of his concubines, Hagar and Keturah, "eastward to the country which is commonly called the East" (Gen. xxv. 6.), where the name of the region seems to have been derived from the same situation. Solomon is reported "to have excelled in wisdom all the Eastern people, and all Egypt" (1 Kings iv. 30.): that is, all the neighbouring people in that quarter: for there were people beyond the boundaries of Egypt, and bordering on the south of Judæa, who were famous for wisdom, namely, the Idumæans (see Jer. xlix. 7.; Obad. 8.), to whom we may well believe this passage might have some relation. Thus JEHOVAH addresses the Babylonians: "Arise, ascend unto Kedar, and lay waste the children of the East" (Jer. xlix. 28.), notwithstanding these were really situated to the west of Babylon. Although Job, therefore, be accounted one of the Orientals, it by no means follows that his residence must be in Arabia Deserta. In effect, nothing is clearer than that the history of an inhabitant of Idumaa is the subject of the poem which bears the name of Job, and that all the persons introduced into it were Idumæans, dwelling in Idumæa, in other words, Edomite Arabs. These characters are, Job himself, of the land of Uz; Eliphaz of Teman, a district of as much repute as Uz, and which, it appears from the joint testimony of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, and Obadiah,2 formed a principal part of Idumæa; Bildad of Shuah, who is always mentioned in conjunction with Sheba and Dedan, the first of whom was probably named after one of the brothers of Joktan or Kahtan, and the last two from two of his sons, all of them being uniformly placed in the vicinity of Idumæa (Gen. xxv. 2, 3.; Jer. xlix. 8.); Zophar of Naama, a city importing pleasantness, which is also stated by Joshua (xv. 21. 41.) to have been situate in Idumæa, and to have lain in a southern direction towards its coast, on the shores of the Red Sea; and Elihu of Buz, which, as the name of a place, occurs only once in sacred writ (Jer. xxv. 23.), but is there mentioned in conjunction with Teman and Dedan; and hence, necessarily, like them, a border city upon Uz or Idumæa. Allowing this chorography to be correct (and such, upon a fair review of facts, we may conclude it to be), there is no difficulty in conceiving that hordes of nomadic Chaldeans as well as Sabeans, a people addicted to rapine, and roving about at immense distances for the sake of plunder,-should have occasionally infested the defenceless country of Idumæa, and roved from the Euphrates even to Egypt.3 To the preceding considerations we may add, that "the contents of the book, and the customs which it introduces, agree with the opinion, that Idumæa was the country of Job's friends. Idumæa, in the earliest ages, was distinguished for its wise men, and sentences of Arabian wisdom flow from the mouths of Job and his friends. The Jordan is represented as a principal stream, as it was to the Edomites; and chiefs, such as those of Edom, are frequently mentioned. The addition, which is found at the end of the Septuagint version, places Job's residence on the confines of Idumæa and Arabia." V. The different parts of the book of Job are so closely connected together, that they cannot be detached from each other. The exordium prepares the reader for what follows, supplies us with the necessary notices concerning Job and his friends, unfolds the scope, and places the calamities full in our view as an object of attention. The epilogue, or conclusion, again, has reference to the exordium, and relates the happy termination of Job's trials; the dialogues which intervene flow in regular order. Now, if any one of these parts were to be taken away, the poem would be extremely defective. Without the prologue the reader would be ut terly ignorant who Job was, who were his friends, and the cause of his being so grievously afflicted. Without the discourse of Elihu (xxxii.-xxxvii.), there would be a sudden and abrupt transition from the last words of Job, to the address of God, for which Elihu's discourse prépares the reader. And without the epilogue or conclusion, we should remain in ignorance of the subsequent condition of Job. Hence it is evident, that the poem is the composition of a single AUTHOR, but who that was, is a question concerning which the learned are very much divided in their sentiments. Elihu, Job, Moses, Solomon, Isaiah, an anonymous writer in the reign of Manasseh, Ezekiel, and Ezra, have all been contended for. The arguments already adduced respecting the age of Job, prove that it could not be either of the latter persons. Dr. Lightfoot, from an erroneous version of xxxii. 16, 17., has conjectured that it is the production of Elihu: but the correct rendering of that passage refutes this notion. Ilgen ascribes it probably to a descendant of Elihu. Luther, Grotius, and Doederlein, are disposed to regard it as the production of Solomon; Cellerier considers it as the production of an unknown author. Another and more generally received opinion attributes this book to Moses: this conjec ture is founded on some apparently striking coincidences of sentiment, as well as from some marks of later date which are supposed to be discoverable in it. But, independently of the characters of antiquity already referred to, and which place the book of Job very many centuries before the time of Moses, the total absence of every the slightest allusion to the manners, customs, ceremonies, or history of the Israelites, is a direct evidence that the great legislator of the Hebrews was not, and could not have been, the author. To which may be added, that the style of Job (as Bishop Lowth has remarked) is materially different from the poetical style of Moses; for it is much more compact, concise or condensed, more accurate in the poetical conformation of the sentences: as may be observed also in the prophecies of Balaam the Mesopotamian, a foreigner, indeed, with respect to the Israelites, but not unacquainted either with their language or with the worship of the true God. Upon the whole, then, we have sufficient ground to conclude that this book was not the production of Moses, but of some earlier age. Bishop Lowth favours the opinion of Schultens, Peters, and others (which is also adopted by Bishop Lowth's Lectures, vol. ii. pp. 347-351. Good's Introd. Diss. to Job, pp. ii.—xi. 4 See a translation of this addition in pp. 234, 235. note, infra. Prof. Turner's translation of Jahn, p. 471. note. See § III. pp. 228-230. of this volunie. the See Good's translation of Job, in loc. pp. 380, 381. Bishop Lowth, taking this conjecture of Lightfoot's seems at first sight rather countenanced by passage in question as it stands in our English Bibles, observes that the exordium of the first speech of Elihu (xxxii. 15, 16.), in which he seems to assume the character of the author, by continuing the narrative in his own person. But that passage which appears to interrupt the speech of Elihu, and to be a part of the narrative, the Bishop conceives to be nothing more than an apostrophe to Job, or possibly to himself: for it manifestly consists of two distichs; while, on the contrary, it is well known that all the narrative parts-all in which the author himself appears-are certainly written in prose. Lecture xxxii. vol. ii. p. 352. Introduction à la Lecture des Livres Saints (Ancien Testament), p. 499. Dr. Good, who adopts this hypothesis, has collected these seeming coincidences, Introd. Diss. pp. lvi.-Ixii. Archbishop Magee has examined and refuted at considerable length the arguments of Huet, Dr. Kennicott, Heath, Bishop Warburton, and others who have advocated the same notion. Discourses on the Atonement, vol. ii. pp. 63-80. |