of Moses and prepare for the succession of Joshua. The time By several distinct headings or superscriptions (some accom- panied by fragments of narrative) as well as by corresponding differences of subject-matter and form, the Book divides itself A. Chs. i. 6—iv. 40. The First Discourse Introductory to the Laws (all deuteronomic in style) divided into- (a) Historical Part, i. 6-iii. 29. Ch. iv. 41-43. Fragment on Cities of Asylum (deutero- 44-49. Special Title (composite) to (a) Prologue, v. (b) Hortatory Part, vi.-xi. but including Ch. xii. 1. Special Title (composite) to C. Chs. xii.-xxvi. The Laws 'The Statutes and Judgements' (mainly deuteronomic in style). For the divisions -xxx. Closing Discourses (deuteronomic) divided (a) Instructions for the Immediate Future, xxvii. E. Chs. xxxi.-xxxiv. Last Days and Discourses of Moses (composite, from all the documents of the Pentateuch, with two poems from unknown sources, xxxii. 1-43, and xxxiii.). It is now generally acknowledged, even by most conservative critics', that this last Division forms a later, editorial supplement to Deuteronomy, belonging less to it than to the Pentateuch as a whole, and designed to connect the Pentateuch with the Book of Joshua. The analysis of these chapters, xxxi.—xxxiv., compiled as they are from pieces of all the Pentateuchal documents, may be left to the notes upon them in the commentary. But chs. i.-xxx.-save for a number of laws, some titles and other fragments—are composed throughout in the same style, one of the most palpable, distinctive and memorable in the Old Testament. No other Hebrew prose, except parts of Isaiah xl.—lv., is so elevated and so sustained or has such a swing and such a sweep. Not only in exhortation but in narrative and even in the statement of single laws (when these are not quoted verbatim from somewhere else) this style is what we call rhetorical. But the rhetoric is its own: rich in resonant words and phrases, many of which do not occur elsewhere, fond of the more emphatic forms of words, lavish in emphasis and absolute statement, and sometimes leaping to hyperbole; now stern, now tender, now exulting, but always urgent and always expansive, accumulating verbs and epithets and especially reiterating a series of formulas, most of them fervent and intimate, which also are peculiar to itself. Some of the frequent repetitions of these formulas which our canonical text presents, are doubtless due to redactors or scribes, as may be seen from a comparison of the Hebrew with the Ancient Versions. But that by far the most of them are original is proved by the fact that neither the same nor a similar reiteration is found in any other prose, upon which the influence of Deuteronomy has not fallen2. Emphasis, accumulation, and re 1 See the striking admission by Professor Orr quoted on p. 332 of this volume. 2 Steuernagel's allegations of merely scribal repetitions, Der Rahmen petition are however not the only marks of this urgent and sonorous style. The religious fervour and the passion to instruct which are its driving forces frequently fall back from their prevailing absolutism in order to explain, refine and qualify. For the Book never forgets its declared purpose to clear up or expound. But this purpose and all these various impulses, forward, backward and aside, are carried upon the same powerful unbroken rhythm— unbroken even when the syntax breaks beneath them-which invests the Book with its singular dignity and charm. The music overwhelms all feeling of redundancy. Deuteronomy is like a flowing tide on a broad beach, the long parallel waves dashing, withdrawing and dashing again. Our more immediate duty is to define the distinctions between this style and those of the other documents of the PentateuchJ, E, P and H. The distinctions are both general and detailed. General because while the other documents are mainly histories with legislation coming in by the way—or as in H a small code and its epilogue only-Deuteronomy i.-xxx. is a discourse or discourses from end to end, the speech of a man face to face with his hearers, dealing with the Law from first to last and recalling, almost exclusively, such events as they have shared with him, which your eyes, which our eyes have seen. Though the other documents are also designed for the people this one is exceedingly more direct and more intimate. Nor has any of the other documents the rhythm of Deuteronomy. J and E have each its own incomparable power of narrative; P its formal, often statistical but generally solemn fashion of statement. But none have the diapason, the long sweeping waves of oratory, which haunt us from Deuteronomy. As for details, Deuteronomy, like its neighbours in the Pentateuch, has a vocabulary and favourite phrases of its own, distinct from theirs. Its names for certain places and things, touched on by all, are different from the names which some of them give. Its characteristic words and formulas are des Deuteronomiums (1894), Die Entstehung des deuteron. Gesetzes (1896) and Deuteronomium-Josua (1898 in Nowack's Handkommentar z. A. T.), are extravagantly numerous. used by them either never or with such infrequency as to offer a marked contrast to their lavish employment in Deuteronomy. In parallel passages Deuteronomy substitutes rarer or more sonorous or more emphatic forms for those with which JE and P are content. All this will become the more significant to us as we perceive how dependent Deuteronomy is, both in its historical reviews and in its code, upon the history and laws of JE, and especially of E. Even when it repeats statements or expressions found in JE it expands these or gives a turn to them in a way that is all its own and tuned to its peculiar rhythm. Common instances are its formal or hortatory additions to some of the laws; but its narratives are full of them. In these it increases the adjectives or turns them into superlatives, replaces a plain phrase by one more concrete and vivid, strikes an emphasis, or lifts a simple statement of fact into a hyperbole. Nothing could more clearly reveal the distinctiveness of the style of Deuteronomy than these, its own, alterations of another style to the accent and rhythm peculiar to itself. As for its particular differences from the style of P, each document has a number of single words never or rarely found beyond it and each has its own characteristic formulas. Whether in general or in particular no two writings, dealing in part with the same material, could offer a more decided contrast to each other in style and language1. It is unnecessary to give a full list of the terms, formulas, and other phrases, which are either confined to Deuteronomy or are otherwise characteristic of its style. They are all pointed out in the notes to the text, and the more marked of them are gathered in the paragraphs of this Introduction which deal with the resemblances and differences among the divisions of the Book itself, §§ 6 and 72. Here let some illustrations suffice. As to 1 A small group of words characteristic of P is found in ch. iv. and will be treated later. 2 Lists will be found in the Introduction to Driver's Deuteronomy, in Appendix IV. to Chapman's Introduction to the Pentateuch (in this series), in Estlin Carpenter and Harford-Battersby's The Hexateuch, 1. 200, and in Holzinger's Einleitung in den Hexateuch, I. (1893). See also Steuernagel's Einleitung' to his Deuteronomium-Josua (cited in 2) for the difference of place-names, Deuteronomy has with E Horeb for the Sinai of J and P (for references see on i. 2), Pisgah for P's Nebo (iii. 17, 27), and with P Kadesh-Barnea (see on the simple Kadesh of the others. Deuteronomy has different names for the same things: with JE shebet, tribe (see on i. 13), for P's matteh (over 140 times in P); yerushah, possession (see on ii. 5), for P's 'ăḥuzzah (about 40 times); kahal, the national assembly or congregation (v. 22, ix. 10, x. 4, xviîî. 16, cp. xxiii. 1,2,3), for P's favourite 'edah (over 100 times), though P occasionally uses also kahal; and tables of the covenant (ix. 9, 11, 15) and ark of the covenant (x. 8) for JE's simple tables of stone and the ark, and P's table of the testimony and ark of the testimony. In the law of the Cities of Refuge P (Nu. xxxv.) uses for accidentally the term bish gagah but Deuteronomy (xix.) the term bibeli da'ath. Deuteronomy's fondness for accumulating epithets and verbs is sufficiently illustrated by these instances: by temptations, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm, and by great terrors (iv. 34); the great God, the mighty and the terrible (x. 17); his charge, and his statutes, and his judgements, and his commandments (xi. 1); to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, to keep the commandments of the LORD and his statutes (x. 12 f.) and similar combinations; thou shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down and when thou risest up (vi. 7); take heed to thyself and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes saw and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life (iv. 9); or the many shorter combinations such as, Remember, forget not (ix. 7), know therefore and lay it to thine heart (iv. 39), observe and do (iv. 6 and 6 other times), fear not neither be dismayed (i. 21, xxxi. 8 and the deuteronomic Josh. viii. 1, x. 25) and dread not neither be afraid (i. 29, xx. 3, the last note but one), § 8, Zur Sprachstatistik des Deuteronomiums,' and Bertholet's brief but judicious remarks in his Deuteronomium, 'Einleitung' IV. |