Full text of "A Critical And Exegetical Commentary On The Book Of Job Together With A New Translation Volume I"

127897

A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY

THE BOOK OF JOB

SAMUEL ROLLES DRIVER, D.D.

AND

GEORGE BUCHANAN GRAY, D.Litfc
VOLUME I

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY

A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY

THE BOOK OF JOB

TOGETHER WITH A NEW TRANSLATION

BY THE LATE

SAMUEL ROLLES DRIVER, D.D.

REGIUS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD

HON. D.LITT., CAMBRIDGE AND DUBLIN J HON. D.D,, GLASGOW AND ABERDEEN

FELLOW OF THE BRITISH ACADEMY

AND

GEORGE BUCHANAN GRAY, D.Litt.

rHOFESSOR OF HEBREW AND OLD TESTAMENT EXEGESIS IN MANSFIELD COLLEGE

AND GR INFIELD LECTURER ON THE SEFTUAGINT OXFORD

HON. D.D., ABERDEEN

(IN TWO VOLUMES)

VOLUME I

NEW YORK

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1921

PREFACE

SOME eighteen months before his death In February 1914,
Dr. Driver began the actual writing of the volume on " Job "
for the " International Critical Commentary." In the middle
of January 1914, when the very serious nature of his illness had
became evident, he wrote a short memorandum on the state
of his MS, and suggestions for the completion of his work.
In this he expressed a strong desire that I should complete
what he was compelled to leave incomplete. The task,
I knew at once, would be arduous and absorb much time ;
but not to undertake it, or to do less than my best to dis-
charge it, would have been an ill return for all that I had
long owed to the friendship and scholarship of Dr. Driver.
The time involved has even exceeded my expectations, partly
because what remained to be done proved so much more
than appeared at first Finding that the mass of material
would be very great, and wishing ttiaft the publication of the
commentary should not be unduly delayed, Dr. Driver had
earlier invited Dr. A. H. McNeile to undertake the exegetical
notes and the Introduction, and, under conditions with regard
to the claims of other work, Dr. McNeile had consented. It
was naturally my own very strong desire that this arrange-
ment should stand, and at first Dr. McNeile agreed that it
should, and indeed, in looking through the MS with a view
to his own part of the work, added on the first chapters
some brief notes which, duly initialed, have been retained.
But later the claims of his other work became so pressing
that he wished to withdraw from co-operating in this com-

VI PREFACE

mentary, and, though it was with the greatest regret, I could
but acquiesce in his wish. Thus by far the greater part of
the work, and the final responsibility for the whole of it, has
fallen on me. Of the actual division 6f the work I will speak
further.

In the memorandum to which I have alluded, Dr. Driver
wrote: "I began this in Aug. 1912; and have completed
the first draft of virtually all the philological notes, and
revised them as far as about c. 14: I have also completed
virtually the translation and (fairly completely) the ex-
egetical notes on c. 3-9 and 40-41." When the material
was handed to me, I found that it contained less of the
translation than this might seem to imply : the translation
consisted of a text of the RV. with the very extensive
alterations placed on the margin ; occasionally a choice
between one or two renderings was left open for final judge-
ment. These corrections of the RV. began with c. 3 and
extended (with the exception of ip 25 " 27 ) to c. 28, and again
from 4O 15 -4i 34 . Of these parts, then, the translation in this
volume is Dr. Driver's, except that (i) here and there I have
modified certain renderings of the RV. left uncorrected, out
of regard to other passages or express statements in the
notes; (2) that I have exercised the final judgement as
between alternative renderings ; and (3) that I have through-
out determined how the divisions into lines, distichs, and
tristichs should be represented. The exegetical notes, which
extended only, and that with very varying degrees of com-
pleteness, from 3 2 ~9 10 and 4O 16 -4i 80 , were not in form for
publication : in another part of the memorandum the instruc-
tion runs : " Such exegetical notes as I have written, he [the
editor] can utilize, supplement, or amend, as he likes, I
should naturally like the explanations, etc., of my Job in
the RV. to be, as far as possible, adopted, but I do not
make this a sine qua non? I have accordingly incorpo-
rated much of this material in the commentary on these
parts of the text ; to have distinguished it constantly from
the additions and modifications required would have unduly

PREFACE VII

complicated the notes, but here and there, especially when
my own judgement slightly differed (eg. on 3 3 ), I have
made use of inverted commas to indicate direct quotation.
Broadly, however, it may be said of pp. 31-87 and 354-371
that the notes on individual verses, as distinct from the
introductory and certain longer notes (e.g. on pp. 40 f.,
77 f.), are very largely in substance and largely also in ex-
pression, Dr. Driver's. For the rest the commentary is
mine, though in order to perpetuate Dr. Driver's point of
view, I have frequently cited not only his Book of Job in the
Revised Version, but also his Introduction to the Literature of
the Old Testament^ and occasionally I have transferred to the
commentary, as being more appropriate there, a passage
from the philological notes, distinguishing this matter by
adding " Dr."

With the philological notes I have adopted a different
course. It was to these the greatest attention and the fullest
revision had been given. It seemed desirable then (i) that
they should to the fullest possible extent be reproduced and
their authorship made clear ; yet (2) that these notes should
be as complete and homogeneous as possible. I have, there-
fore, while adding freely, perhaps to the extent of about a
third of the whole, distinguished all my own additions in
substance, except in cc. i. 2. 32 1 ' 6 and 42 7 ' 17 , which are
entirely mine, by placing them in square brackets ; but I
have not thought it necessary unduly to multiply these signs
by using them for the filling in of obvious references left
blank in the MS, nor to distinguish slight formal changes
made In preparing the MS for press, or in proof. As men-
tioned in the passage already cited from the memorandum,
cc. 1-14 had been more fully revised than the rest; some
notes, or parts of notes, were still unwritten even in these
earlier chapters, but the blank spaces in the MS were far
more frequent in the later chapters, and unfortunately
occurred where many of the most important or difficult
passages, such -as I9 25f -, were concerned.

Final responsibility for the whole must, as I have said,

via

PREFACE

under the circumstances rest upon me ; but with this proviso,
the distribution of the work may be thus tabulated :

TRANSLATION.

COMMENTARY.

PHILOLOGICAL

NOTES.

Driver .

3-28

3-910 4 o 35 ~4i 80
(in large part).

I. 2. 9 w ~4o M . 42

3-3T, 32 7 -42 8

(except matter en-
closed in square
brackets).

I. 2. 72 1 ' 6 4.2 7 ' 17

also I9 38 - 27 .

entire, and the
rest in part.

and, in the re-
mainder, matter
enclosed in
square brackets.

For the Introduction I am entirely responsible.

The aim of the philological notes is indicated in these
sentences of the memorandum: "On philological points I
found there was a good deal to say, and I wished the philo-
logical basis of the commentary to be strong, and thought
that many things deserved a fuller discussion than they
generally received in the volumes of the ICC. Notes and
explanations of the principal emendations of Du. and Be.
ought also, I thought, to be given for the use of students
(though I do not believe myself that I in 10 is necessary or
probable), sometimes also the conjectures of BL and others
(though I content myself mostly with merely mentioning
these from time to time, and do not polemize against them).
... I have not thought it necessary to quote exhaustively
authorities for renderings and readings : the principal recent
ones seemed to me sufficient Improbable conjectures I
have also omitted (except sometimes those of Du. and Be K ).
An emendation quoted at the end of a note is not intended
to imply my acceptance of it." " In textual matters I gener-
ally find myself in agreement with Bu, ; but I cannot adopt
his view of the EHhu speeches. I intended to acknowledge
generously in the Preface the great value and help which
Be T had been to me. But I cannot accept many of his

PREFACE ix

emendations; he seems to me often hypercritical and
prosaic.*'

On account of the extent of and the importance attached
to the philological notes, they are printed in the larger type,
and in the American edition issued in a separate volume.

I need not repeat here much that I wrote in the Preface
to Isaiah ; it applies, mutatis mutandis, to the present com-
mentary; but in the matter of transliterations I may observe
that owing to the circumstances under which the present
volume has been prepared there remain, much to my regret,
certain inconsistencies the D, for example, being some-
times transliterated fe, sometimes q ; and similarly different
abbreviations of some names and titles will be found to have
been used; but I trust that neither the one inconsistency
nor the other will occasion any practical inconvenience.

G. BUCHANAN GRAY.

CONTENTS

FAGK

PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS EMPLOYED xiii

INTRODUCTION. ....... xix

1-2. TITLE AND PLACE IN THE CANON . . . xix

3. SUBJECT AND MAIN DIVISIONS xx

4-6. LITERARY FORM ...... xxi

7-3 * ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK OF JOB: POSSIBLE

SOURCES AND ADDITIONS .... xxv

(a) Traditional Elements : Names and Terms . xxvii

(b) The " Babylonian Job " .... xxxi

logue : the Divine Names (19) . - xxxv

(d) Cc. 25-28 ...... xxxviii

(e) Cc. 32-37 : Elihu (see also 41) . . . xl

(a) The Divine Names, 24 . . . xlii

(b) 'JK and ':*, 25 . . . xliii

(d) Other stylistic features, 27-29 . . xlv

(e) Aramaisms, 28 . . . xlvi
(/)Cc. aS^a 6 : The speeches of Yah weh . . xlvih

Table of Original and Later Elements in the

Book : also of Passages absent from QEr . xlix

32-41. PURPOSE AND METHOD OF THE WRITER . . 1

42^-47. THE AGE OF THE BOOK Ixv

(a) External Evidence . . . Ixv

(b) Political and Social Conditions , . . Ixvi

(d) Theological and Religious Ideas . Ixviii
(*) Language ...,.* bcx

Xll CONTENTS

JAGH

48-51. THE TEXT ...... Ixtf

52. THE RHYTHMS ...... htxvii

Part I. TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY . i

ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA.

TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY.

P. 87. For "the chambers of the south "in 9, F. Perles (in
Orient* Studien Frits Hommel . . . gewidmet (1918), ii.
132) suggests "the (stars) surrounding- the south," after
the rendering of 6 *E/3p. in the Hexapla teal ircivra r&
a 50 5 1 n -l

Anon.

AJSL .

Baer .
BDB
Be[er, GJ

Be**-
Bi[ckeii, G.]

Be T .

Boch[art]
Botducius
Bu[dde],

Buhl

Carey, C. P. .

Ch[e[yne, T. K.]

ChWB .

CIS

Cooke, G. A.

Cox, S. .

CP.

Da[v[idson], A. B,

Anonymous Hebrew Commentary, ed. W. A. Wright,
with Eng. tr. by S. A. Hirsch (1905) later than Ibn
Ezra and Qi.

American Journal of Semitic Languages and Litera-
ture.

S. Baer, Liber Jobi, 1875.

See Lex.

(1) Der Text des Buches Jfftob (1897) Be T ,

(2) Notes in R. Kittel, B&L JBTetr.B&*;

(1) Carmina VT -me fricg, 1882, pp. 151-187.

(2) Krit. Bearbeitung des Job-Dialogs, WZKM> 1892,
pp. 137 ff., 241 ff., 327 ff. ; 1893, pp. i ff., 153 ff.
Cp. (3). Das Buck ffiob nach AnleitungderStrophik
u. d. Septuaginta auf seine urspriinglicht Form.
sturiick-gejuhrt u. itn Versmassc des Urtextes fiber-
setzt, 1894.

Opera Omnfa, Lugd. 1712*
Comm. injobum^ 1631,

(1) Beitr&se sur Kritih des B. Htob, 1876.

(2) Das Buck ffiob (in Nowack's,

See G-B.

The Book of Job translated, etc., 1858-

(1) Job and Solomon, 1887.

(2) Job and other contributions to SBL
See Levy.

Corpus fnscriptionum Semiticarum, Paris, iSSi ff,
N[prth] S\emitic\ J\nscription$\> Oxford, 1903.
A Commentary on the Book of Job % 1880.
See Rogers*

(1) A Commentary on the Book of Job p-xiv], 1862,

(2) The Book of Job tn The Canto. Bibltfor Schools,

PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS EMPLOYED

DB . . Dictionary of the Bible, and in particular A Dictionary

of the Bible, ed. James Hastings, 1898*1904.
Delfitzsch, Franz]. Das Buch Hiob in Biblischer Comm. u. d. AT t X i86"4

(Eng-. tr.), 2 i876.
Del[itzsch, Fried.], (i) Assyrisches Handworterbuch, 1896, cited as

HWB.
(2) Das Buch Hiob neu ubersetzt #.

Leipzig, 1902.
Di[llmann, A.] . Hiob (in K\urzgefasstes'\ .

Dr[iver, S. R.] . (j) A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in

Du[hm, B.] .
EBi. . .

Ehrlich, A. B.
ET , .
Ew.

Exp. . .
Forms .
Freyt[ag, G. W.]
G B. . *

Ges[enius, W.]
GGA .
Gi[nsburg, C. D,].

G-K. . . .

Gr[atz, H.] .
Gray, G. B. .

Hafhn, H. A.] .
Hfm, or Hoffhi.
Hi[t z [ig, F.] . .
Hirzel (or Hrz), L.
Honthfcim, J.]

(2) An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testa-
ment (abbreviated LOT), 9 igi^.

(3) The Book of Job in the Revised Version^ 1906.

(4) Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Boohs of Samuel,

Das Buch Hiob erklart in Marti's Kurser Hand-

commentar stum AT, 1897.
Encyclopaedia Biblica, edited by T. K. Cheyne and

J. S, Black, 1899-1903.

Randglossen zur ffebr. Bibel (1913), vi. 180-344.
Expository Times.

(1) Lehrbuch d. JTebr. Sprache.

(2) Die Dichter des Alten Bundes, dritter Tbeii, "1854.
The Expositor.

See Gray, 3.

Lexicon Arabico-Latinum^ 1830.

Wilhelm Gesenius' hebraisches u. aram. Handwor-

terbuch ilber das AT , . bearbeitet von Frants

Buhl, "1915.
Thes\aurus\.

Go'ttingische gelehrte Anseigen*
i npn 'TSD nyanw onry, i,e. The Old Testament in

Hebrew according to MSS and old editions^ 1894.
Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar . . . English edition by

A. Cowley, a i9io (=28th German edition, 1909),
Emendationes in plerosque . . , VT Hbros, 1892.

(1) Studies in Hebrew Proper Names, 1896 (abbre-
viated HPN).

(2) [A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on] Isaiah
[i-xxvii].

(3) [The} Forms [of Hebrew Poetry}^ 1915.
Commentar uber d. B. Hiob, 1850.

Hiob nachj. C. E. Hoffmann, 1891.
Das Buch Hiob ilbersetet u. ausgelegt, 1874,
KEH* (1839), see Di -

Das Buch Hiob als strophisches Kunstwrk nachge*
witsen iibersetxst u. erklart, 1904.

XVI

PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS EMPLOYED

Houbflgant, C. F.]

HPN .

I[bn] E[zra], Aora*
ham (t 1 1 67)

ICC

Isaiah . . .
JBLit. .
Jer[ome] (t 420,;
JDT . .
JPh . . .
JQR * . .
JThS .
KAT* .

Kamph[ausen] *
KB

Ki .

Klo[stermann, A.].
Konpg, E.] .

K6nigsb[erger, B.]
Kue[nen, A.] ,

Lane, E. W, .

Lex . .

Levy, J.

Lidz[barski, M,]

LOT .
Matthes, J. C.
Mefnc, A.] .
Meyer, E.
Mich[aelis, J. H.) .

N61[d[eke, T.]
Nichols, Helen H,,

Notes criticee in universes VTKbros, ii, 155-218 (1777).

See Gray, i.

Hebrew Comm. on Job in Buxtorf s BiUia Rabbinic*.

International Critical Commentary*
See Gray, 2.
Journal of Biblical Literature*

Jahrbucherf. deutsche Theologit.

Journal of Philology.

Jewish Quarterly Review*

Journal of Theological Studies.

Die Keilinschriften u. d. AT, von Eberhard Schrader,

dritte Auflage neu bearbeitet von H. Zimmern u. H.

Winckler, 1903.

In Bunsen's Bibelwerk, Abth. i. Bd. 3, 1865.
Keilinschriftliche BibliotheJt> von E. Schrader, 1889-

1901.
See Qi,

Hiob in PRE viii. 97-126.
Historisch-Kritisches Lehrgebaude der Hebraischen

Sprache, 1881, 1895 : the concluding volume (cited

as K6n, iii. or simply Kon.) appeared in 1897 with

a fresh title, Historisch-comparatiue Syntax d.

Hebr. Sprache.
Hiob Studien, 1896.
Historisch-Kritisch Ondersoek naar het Ontstaan * . .

van de Boeken des Ouden Verbondes^ 3 i865.
An Arabic-English Lexicon^ 1863.
Lexicon, and unless otherwise defined A Hebrew and

English Lexicon of the Old Testament based on the

Thesaurus of Gesenius> by F. Brown, C. A. Briggs,

and S. R. Driver, Oxford, 1906.

(1) ChWB, Le., Chald&isches Worterbuch uber die
Targumim, Leipzig, 1881.

(2) NHWB, \.s.,Neuhebraischesu. Chaldaisches Wor*
terbuch uber die Talmudim u. Midraschim, 1876-*
1889.

(1) Handbuch d. Nordsem. Epigraphik,

(2) Eph[emerisf* sem. Epigraphik], 1900 fE.
See Dr. 2.

Jfet Boekjob vertaalden verklaard, 1865,
Das Gedicht von Hiob t 1871,

[Die] J\sratliten u. ihre] N[achbar} S[tdtnme\ 19061
Annotations in Hagiogr*
See Levy, 2.

Bt!itt[dge #ur sent. Sprachwissenschaft], 1904.
The Composition of the Elihu Speeches (in AJSZ+
vol. xxvii., 1911, and printed separately)*

PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS EMPLOYED

XV11

NSJT .

Ol[sh[ausen, J.] .
Oo[rt, H.] .

P[ayne]S[mith,R.]

Pe[a[ke, A, S ] ,

PEFQuSt

Perles, F.

PL.

PRE .

Qi.

Ratbag .

Ra[shi] .

R[ei]sk[e, J. J.]
REJ *
Renan, E,
Richter, G. ,
Rogers, R. W.
Rosfenmuller]
Saad. .

Schl[ottmann]
Schnurrer .
Schultfens, A.]
S[ie]gf [ried, C.]

Sievers, E. .

Stafde, B.]

St[ick]el.
Strahan, J. .
Stu[der, G. L.]
Stuhl[maim, M. H.
Thomson, W, M.
Tristram, H. B.
TSK .
VoifcfcCLJ .

See Lidz.

See Cooke.

KEH*(iB&)i seeDi.

Textus Hebraici emendationes quibus in VT Neer-

landice vertendo usisunt A. Kuenen aL
Thesaurus SyriacuS) 1900.
The Century Bible : Job y 1905.
Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement.
Analekten zur Textkritik des AT, 1895.
Migne, Paleologia Latino*
Herzog's Real-Encyklopadie f. Protestantische Theo-

logie, 3rd ed. by A. Hauck.
David Qimhi (1*1230).
R[abbi] L[evi] b[en] G[ershon] ^1344) : Heb. Comm.

in Buxtorf s Biblia Rabbinica.
R[abboni] Sh[elomoh] Y[isl>aki] (1040-1105).

Hebrew Commentary on Job in Buxtorf s Bibl.

Rdbbinica.
Revue Bibligue Internationale puUite par Fcole

pratique dtudes Bibliques e'tdblie au convent

Dominicain Saint- tienne de Jerusalem (Paris).
Conjecture injobum et Proverbia, Lips. 1779.
Revue des Jfrtudes Juives.
Le Ivvre dejob, 1860.
Dunkle Stellen im Buche Hiob, 1912.
Quneiform\ Parallels to the Old Testament}.
Jobus, Lips. 1806.
Saadiah (f 942).
See Dr. 4.
Z>. B. Hiob, 1851.

Animad-versiones ad qutedam locajobi t Tub. 1781-2.
Liber Jobi, Lugd. 1737.
The Book of Job, critical edition of the Hebrew Text %

1893-

Metrische Studien in the Abhandlungen der phil.-hist.
classe d. konig* sachsischen Gesellschaft d. Wissen-
schaften, xxi. (1901). The Textproben include Job

3-7-

(1) Lebrbuch d. hebr. Sprache, 1879.

(2) Wra=Siegfried, C. u. Stade, B., Hebr. WSrter*
buch sum A T.

Das Buch Hiob, 1842.

The Book of Job interpreted, 1913.

Das Buch Hiob, 1881.

Hiob, 1804.

The Hand and ihe"\ B[ooK\, 1867.

[The] N\atural"\ H\istory of the} B[ible]> 1867.

Theologische Studien u. Kritiken*

Einige Stellen d. B. Hiob, Lauban, 1895.

XVU1

PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS EMPLOYED

We[JIh.]. . . Wellhausen, J.

Wetz[stein] . , Notes in Del.

Wr[ight, G. H. B ] The Book of Job, 1883.

WZKM , Wiener Zeitschrift d. Kunde des Morgenlandes.

ZA . Zeitschrift /. d Assyriologie.

ZA(T)W . Zeitschrift f. d. AlttestamentUche Wissenschaft.

ZDMG * Zeitschr. d. deutschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft

ZDPV . . Zeitschrift d. deutschen Palasiina- Vemns.

Biblical passag-es are cited according to the Hebrew enumeration of
chapters and verses : -where this differs from the English enumeration, the
reference to the latter has commonly (except in the philological notes; been
added in a parenthesis. In the translation of c. 41, however, it seemed more
convenient to place the English enumeration first.

The sign f, following a series of references, indicates that all examples
of the phrase, word, form or meaning in question, occurring in the OT,
have been cited.

The signs r " enclosing words in the translation (e .#-. 3) indicate depart-
ures from J|j (occasionally also departures even from ffi have been so
indicated). Small print in the translation indicates probable additions, and
unleaded type the longer interpolations of cc. 28. 32-37.

al. =alii (others).

Cp.= Compare.

Ct. Contrast

INTRODUCTION

I. TITLE AND PLACE IN THE CANON.

I. The Book of Job is one of the eleven books which con-
stitute the third of the three parts of which the Hebrew Scrip-
tures, DWO1 0^33 min, consist. In printed Hebrew Bibles it
takes the third place among those eleven books, following Ps.
and Pr. This order goes back to Hebrew MSS, especially
those of German provenance ; but other arrangements occur in
other MSS or Jewish lists, Job preceding Pr, in the Talmudic
list (Baba Bathra^ i4b) and in many MSS, especially the
Spanish, and preceding both Ps. and Pr. in Jer/s list of the third
part of the Hebrew Scriptures. 1 But of Jewish arrangements
it may be said (i) that Job is generally grouped together with
the poetical books Ps. and Pr. ; and (2) that this group gener-
ally stands at the beginning of the Hagiographa (and conse-
quently immediately after the prophets), or preceded by one
book only (Ruth or Ch,)- 2

In ffir and in Greek and Latin lists, owing to the abandon-
ment of the Jewish tripartite division, the different positions

l Prol. Gal. (Pr&f. in tibr. Samuel et Malachim); "Tertius ordo
"A.yt6ypa 32-4*) Jb nas commonly and appropriately been classed
with Pr., Qoh., Sir., and Wisdom as belonging to the

THE BOOK OF JOB [H-

"Wisdom" or reflective literature 1 of the Jews in which
human life is considered broadly without the overruling-
national interest that characterizes most other Hebrew litera-
ture. But in two matters of form Job differs from these other
specimens of Jewish wisdom : (i) in its combination of prose and
poetry, 2 the Prologue and Epilogue being prose, 3 the speeches
poetry: and (2) in its use of dialogue. 4 Something distantly
similar to both these characteristics of the book may be found
in other Hebrew literature ; but the resemblances are partial,
and the book of Job remains unique not only in the " Wisdom,"
but in the entire literature of the Jews. 5

l See, e.g-., C. H. Toy, "Wisdom Literature," in E&i. : Dr. LOT
392-394 ; W. T. Davison, The Wisdom Literature of the O.T. : C. Siegfried,
"Wisdom," in DB.

8 Pr. and Sir. are poetry throughout ; Wisdom written in Greek is
written throughout in a style strongly affected by Hebrew parallelism,
possibly also by Hebrew rhythm; whether on this account it should be
termed poetry or prose may here be left an open question (cp. Forms of
Hebrew Poetry -, 32 f,, 136). Qoh. " is written, as a whole, in prose ; but when
the thought becomes elevated, or sententious, it falls into the poetical form
of rhythmic parallelism " (Dr. LOT 9 465) : yet even though this be so,
the distribution of prose and poetry in Job and Qoh. is entirely different .
in Job the prose parts are prose not passing- into poetry, and the poetry is
sustained poetry not dropping 1 into prose.

B Prose also are the formula introducing- the several speeches (3*' * 4* 6 l
etc.) and the longer introduction to Elihu's speeches (32 I-6fc ). The distinction
between poetry and prose, already mentioned by Jer. (Praf in Lib. Job : PJ*
xxvii. 1081), is imperfectly marked in jfHby the use of two different systems
of accentuation the ordinary system in i 1 -^ and 42 7 " 17 , the system employed
in Pr. and Ps. in 3 S ~42*, including- the prose of 32 1 ' to and the introductory
xormurse*

4 Perhaps we might add as a third difference its sustained treatment of
a single theme* Sin, the work of a single writer, is indeed longer than
Job, but it ranges discursively over a variety of aspects of human life and
conduct ; so does Pr., the work of many writers. Qoh, and Wisdom are con-
siderably shorter than Job. Outside the ' ' Wisdom ' ' literature the historical
compilations are, of course, much longer than Job, but the nearest approach
to the sustained treatment of a theme is to be found in Is. 40-55 and Ezk.
40-48, both of which are shorter. In any case, Job has this interest that no
other single Hebrew poet has left us the same amount of poetry : this
remains true even though a considerable part of Job (28. 32-37. ,3^-41) In-
assigned to different poets.

* Nor is it unique merely as an exotic, which has its own well-defined
class elsewhere. It is, for example, no more similar to a Greek or any
other epic or drama than to other works of Hebrew literature. A drama

5-6.1 LITERARY FORM XXlil

5. Many books of the OT. contain, it is true, both prose
and poetry; but those books are either, like the prophetical
books, which contain both prose memoirs and prophetic poems
(cp. the Introd. to Isaiah), not single works, or, as in the
prose historical books which cite poems, they combine the
styles differently. On the other hand, Job, if the substantial
integrity of the book can be maintained, is a single work
written partly in prose, partly in poetry, the narrative in prose,
the speeches in poetry. For analogies to this we must go beyond
Hebrew literature : e.g. to the Mafydmdt of Hariri in which the
narrative is in rhymed prose, but the (longer) speeches of the
characters are (commonly) metrical poems.

6. Again some analogy to the dialogue, to the response
of two or more speakers to one another, is to be found, for
example, ;n Canticles (e.g. i 7 *- 16f * 2 1 " 8 ) ; but for dialogue as a
means of discussing problems of life, we must again pass for
analogy beyond Jewish literature. Such dialogue 1 until recently
was quite unknown in Babylonian literature ; but certain texts
one of the age of Sargon (722-705 B.C.) have now been
published containing what their editor describes as specimens
of philosophical dialogue. 2 These, however, offer a very distant

in any strict sense it is certainly not ; in the Prologue there is movement
indeed, but the Prologue is narrative, an anticipation of the novel rather
than of the drama, and in the dialogue there is no dramatic movement.
There are in the book, it is true, all the elements that might have
been combined by a Greek into a great drama : the Hebrew writer has
used them differently, and his work was certainly never acted in ancient
Judah. Job has, I am informed, been recently staged in New York, and,
according to my informant, the performance was very impressive ; but
this no more proves that the Hebrew work was a drama than H. G.
Wells' Undying" Fire proves that it was a novel. Reference may also be
made to the judicious criticism by C. G. Montefiore in the Harvard Theo-
logical Review, 1919, 219-224, of The Book of Job as a Greek Tragedy -, in which
the author (H. M. Kallen) seeks to prove that the existing book of Job is
the result of editorial manipulations of what was originally a Hebrew
imitation of a Euripidean tragedy.

1 Dialogue of a different type was known ; and Kim. (JStnl. 410 f.) had
even compared that in the "Descent of Ishtar" (Rogers, CP 121 ff.) with
that in Job, on the ground that both were cases of dialogue introduced into
epic.

a E. Ebcling, Keiliiiscr'ifttexte aus Assur rel. Ink. iii. 193 ; Mitteilungen
dervorderasiatischen Geselhchaft^ 1918*, pp. 50-70 (German translation with

XXIV THE BOOK OF JOB [ 6.

parallel to the dialogue as handled in Job; they are simple,
brief, and exceedingly schematic. In a dozen sections all cast
in the same scheme and some eight lines in length, the advan-
tages and disadvantages of various courses of action are dis-
cussed by a master and his slave. Between the Babylonian
" philosophical dialogue," so far as yet known, and the dialogue
in Job the difference is so great as to render any direct in-
fluence of one over the other altogether improbable. And the
same is true, though in this case the difference is of quite
another kind, of the Greek dialogue. It is curious that the
most famous examples of this were written at probably no great
distance of time from Job, and it is barely possible, though not
probable ( 42-47), that the author of Job wrote later than
Plato ; yet between the dialogue of Job, consisting exclusively
of long set speeches in poetical form, and the prose dialogues
of Plato, with their closely knit analytical argument carried
on by means of much quickly responsive conversation, the
difference is so great that the probability that the Hebrew
writer was influenced by those Greek literary models is so
slight as to be negligible. So long as Job was commonly re-
garded as long anterior to Plato, it was not customary to look
upon Plato as an imitator of Job ; there is just as little reason
now that Job is referred to a later age than formerly to assert
that it is "unquestionably a Hebrew imitation of the philo-
sophical dialogue of Plato." 1 Whence the author derived any
suggestion for the use of dialogue in discussing the problems
of life thus remains quite obscure.

notes). Cp. JSTf 1920, pp. 420-423, where will be found an English
translation of six of the sections, of which one may here serve as an
illustration :

"Slave, attend to me! 'Yes, my lord, yes.*
'I will love a woman/ 'Yes, love, my lord, love!
A man who loves a woman forgets trouble and care/
'No, slave, I will not love a woman/ 'Love not, my lord,

love not.

Woman is a pit, a hole that is dug ;
Woman is an iron dagger, sharp, which cuts a man's throat/"

1 Oscar Holtzmann in Stade's Gesch. des Volkes Israel^ iL 331,

7.] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK XXV

IV. ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK: POSSIBLE
SOURCES AND ADDITIONS.

7- The unique character of the combination of prose and
poetry in the book ( 5) has sometimes been treated as the
result of the origin of the book, of the existing material which
the author utilized. What was this? That the book is a
report of facts of history, the exact record in prose of the actual
fortunes of a particular individual and of the words spoken in
verse by him and others, is a view that was long maintained or
accepted, 1 though not even in earlier times without occasional
suggestions that the book is fiction. 2 It is unnecessary to
repeat here the arguments against a view which has become
entirely antiquated. But if the book is not history, and the
speeches not the ipsissima verba of speeches reported verbatim,
it need not be pure invention ; the story with which it opens
and closes may be, and in part almost certainly is, based on or
derived from popular tradition or literature ; and, indeed, this
is quite certain, if the book is rightly inferred to have been
written after the Exile (see 42 ff.), for Ezk. i4 u - 20 refers to

1 A defence of the strictly historical character of the book may be found
in the learned work of S. Lee, The Book of the Patriarch Job (1837), p. 6ff. :
this was directed especially against Wartmrton, Divine Legation^ Book vi.
sect. 2, in which reasons for regarding 1 the book as in the main at least
not historical are already set forth.

8 rrn WD V unaj K!TJ rrn vh avN is a judgement attributed to an unnamed
contemporary of Samuel b. Nachmani (Bdba Bathra, i5a : Eng. tr., Ryle,
Canon, 276 f.). Similarly in Bereshith jRdbba, 57, a judgement is attributed
to Resh Lakish (3rd cent A. D,) though it is noted that this conflicts with
another judgement assigned to the same Rabbi to the effect that the suffer-
ings of Job are not historical though, had they actually befallen him, he
would have endured them, vbi vn vh KD . . . nvu vb*\ nvr *b avn TDK vy*? rn
jnn moj^ Via' .T71 vby IKS i^wr Vn vhy lanrjj noto vby WJIM* D'Twa rrra. See,
further, Isaac Wiernikowski, Das Buck Hiob nach der Auffassung des
Talmud #. Midrasch (Breslau, 1902), p. 28. Maimonides (Moreh Nebuchim,
iii. 22) says of the book : " its basis is a fiction, conceived for the purpose
of explaining the different opinions which people held on Divine Providence.
You know that some of our sages clearly stated Job never existed, and
was never created, and that he is a poetic fiction. Those who assume that
he existed, and that the book is historical, are unable to determine when
and where Job lived. . . . This difference of opinion supports the assump-
tion that he never existed in reality."

XXVI THE BOOK OF JOB fJ 7-8.

Job 1 along with Noah and Daniel, as a conspicuously righteous
man. Among those and they are all but all who have dis-
cussed the subject who admit that the author has utilized
tradition or popular story, 2 there is, however, wide difference
of judgement as to how much he has derived from thence, some
holding that he owes nothing more to tradition (and that in
the form of popular oral tradition) than that there was once a
righteous man named Job, 8 others that the entire prologue and
epilogue were excerpted by him from a book containing the
popular story (a "Volksbuch"). 4 Between these two extremes
it is possible to hold as a middle view that the fundamental
elements of the story the righteousness of Job, his endurance
under trial, etc. the scene in which it is laid and the names of
the persons are some or all of them derived from tradition ; if
this were so, it might offer some suggestions as to whence the
story came.

8. The scene of the book is outside the land of Israel,
This might be explained as due to the deliberate choice of a
" Wisdom " writer, seeking in this way to enforce the wide
human and not merely national nature of his subject. If this
were the correct explanation, the particular scene chosen by

1 It is quite unnecessary with HaleVy (REJ xiv. 20) to substitute B^K for
3VK in Ezk, I4 14 * *.

8 On the divergence of the book of Job from the popular legend,
whether written or oral, and for the history of the legend independently of
our book of Job, see D. B. Macdonald, "Some External Evidence on the
Original Form of the Legend of Job " (AJSL xiv. (1898) 137-164) and earlier,
JBLit* xiv. 63-71. Macdonald suggests that not only Ezk. but also
James (5**) refers to the legend, not to our book of Job.

8 So Karl Kautzsch, Das sogencurinte Volksbuck Don fiffob (1900), 18 flf., 87.
Rather more traditional basis is postulated by Che. : " Most probably all
that he adopted from legend was (i) the name of the hero and the land in
which he lived ; (2) the fact of Job's close intercourse with God ; and (3)
the surprising circumstance that this most righteous and divinely favoured
of men was attacked by some dread disease such as leprosy, but wu
subsequently heated " (EBi. ii. 2469).

4 Du, (p. vii) ! of the " Volksbuch the opening has been preserved in
cc, r. 2 of the existing book of Job, the conclusion in 42 7 ' 17 and also perhaps
a fragment in 38* ; discussions between Job and the three friends, and a
speech of Yahweh to Job, also formed part of this popular book, but these
have given place to discussions of an entirely opposite character in the ex-
isting book."

8-10.] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK XXVll

the writer would be of little significance, and the reason for the
author's choice withdrawn from us. On the other hand, if the
scene was traditional, it may point to the region whence the
story passed to Israel, just as the scene of the story and its
place of origin are associated in such a story as that of the
Tower of Babel (Babylon). Broadly the scene is clearly fixed
as east of Canaan ; but whether it lay in or about Edom or
farther north, and in particular in the Hauran, is less certain,
the evidence afforded by (i) names and terms ( 9-13), (2)
tradition ( 14), and (3) the nature of the country implied in the
story ( 15) being inconclusive and conflicting.

9. (i) Names and terms. Job himself lived in the land of
f Us, and was, it is implied, one of the "sons of the East " (i 6 ) :
unfortunately the position of the land of us cannot be closely
determined, and the "sons of the East" is a term of wide
application.

The "sons of the East*' (cnp '; cp. 'ampn, Gn. is 19 ) in Jg.
are coupled with Midianites and Amalekites as nomad raiders of Western
Palestine, in Is. n 14 they are opposed to the Philistines on the W., and
mentioned with, but probably as distinguished from, Edom, Moab and
Ammon, and in Ezk. 25*- 10 they are nomads (cp. Jer. 49 28 nomads : H Kedar)
distinguished from, as dwelling E. of, Ammon and Moab. In i K. 5 10 (4 30 )
they are merely mentioned as famed for their wisdom ; on Gn. 29* t see
below. The " land of the East " (Dip pK) lay east of Abraham's settlement
in southern Canaan (Gn. 25*). From Gn. 29 1 it has been inferred that the
" sows of the East " and their land extended also to the far nor/A-east of
Palestine, to beyond the Euphrates ; but this is a precarious inference from
a composite narrative ; the source may rather have intended, as in Gn. 25 s ,
country E. or .>/A-east of Palestine (see Skinner on Gn, 29* ; Meyer, INS
242 ff. ) ; a southern, but not necessarily any far northern, district 5s implied
in an Egyptian reference (about 2000 B.C.) to Kedem. : in this Sinuhe relates
that he passed out of Egypt into the desert, moved thence from place to
place and arrived at Kedem, whence he was invited into Palestine : see W.
Max Miiller, Asien u. Europa, 46; Meyer, I.e. ; Breasted, Ancient Records >

> 493-

10. The name *U$ (py) appears to be brought into connection with
three distinct districts, (a) Northern Mesopotamia : to this district Gn. io- tf
(P)=i Ch. r 17 % 'Us the "son" of Aram is commonly referred: see Skinner,
Genesis, p. 206. But apparently the same 'Us is (Gn 22 al ) brother of Bus.,
who in Jer* 25 s8 is associated with the distinctly Arabian Dedan and Te"ma.
(b) Damascus and the country S. of it : Jos. (Ant. I. vi. 4 ; cp. Jer, Qua>s>t.
in Gen. jo 23 ) states that Otf that Bildad 's home was Sujju on the Euphrates some
weeks' journey from Teman has been withdrawn by Del. himself (fftob t
p- 139)' Sophar the Na'amathite certainly did not come from Na'amah
(Jos. is 41 ) in the Philistine plain (though Ley (Das Buch &idb. 27) is
willing to believe it, and to infer that he was intended io play the r61e of a
representative of the religion of Israel !), nor necessarily from the Calebite
Na'am (i Ch. 4"), so that Sophar also would be an Edomite (&Bi. 5427),
nor from distant Ma in in southern Arabia, or even from the Minaean colony
or trading station at El-Ola which lay some three or four hundred miles
S. of the home of Eliphaz.
also in the same region, "unsatisfying."

12. Some of the personal names are suggestive, or
possibly suggestive, of Edom.

Not Job itself: 3VK is unknown in Hebrew literature except as the name
of the hero of the book, for with av (Gn. 46 : EV. Job), and, in spite of
42" <8r, aav (Gn. jo 29 ), it has nothing to do. The name may, on the
analogy of rtV:, have suggested to Hebrew readers or hearers of the story
the meaning "the object of enmity," though the form Vitop regularly
expresses an active sense; alternatively it has been connected with the

root which gives the Arabic <--* 'j ' (penitent). But the etymology and the
identification with the proper name A-ia-bu (Tel el-Amarna Tablet, 237** 18 )
are alike uncertain. If of foreign origin the name may have been modified
in the course of Hebrew tradition so as to express a meaning. Eliphaz,
on the other hand, is well authenticated as an Edomite name (Gn. 36 lw - =
i Ch. I SM -), though being of a(n early) type that was widely spread, it
must not be assumed that the name was exclusively Edomite. Bildad
(nVa, BaX5a5) is unknown except through the story of Job, though Che.
(EBi. 4495) and Bu. recall the Edomite TD (Gn. 36^) : the first element
perhaps recurs in the Edomite ]n^3, BaXaav (Gn. 36 s7 ), which is also the
name of a Benjamite (i Ch. 7 10 ), and in Dj;!?3 (Ammonite?; Nu. 22 s ) and
j^a (Babylonian-Jewish, Ezr. 2 2 ): the second element occurs in the
Hebrew mta and elsewhere (HPN 60 f). ophar as written in f in n 1
42* (nax : but nsix in 2 n 2O 1 ) is identical with the name of the father of
Balak, king of Moab, as written in Nu. 22 W 23** (n&* ; but iw elsewhere).
In (ffir the name of Job's friend, Sw^ap, Zo^a/>, is always distinguished from
Balak's father 2eir0u/>, 2e occurs in Gn, 36"- a5 (J IBS), i Ch. i 80 ($ BJf) in Edomite genealogies
and in close connection with Eliphaz and Teman. The Palmyrene ias<
(Lidz. NSE 359 ; Eph. i. 347, ii. 293, 312) is Se^^cpa (cp. De Vogu^, Syri*
Centrale* p. 15), and so probably is 'Tflx (Lidz. i. 199, ii. 303). *

13. The references to Sheba (i 15 ) and the " Chaldseans "
(i ir ) as raiding Job have also been invoked in determining
the situation of his home: thus Dhorme (RB> 1911, 105) con-
cludes that "nous sommes amenes au nord-ouest de 1' Arabic
quelque part au sud de Ma e an," i.e. to the frontiers of Edom.
Yet even if the terms are correctly read, such a conclusion
is probably too precise.

XXX THE BOOK OF JOB [13-15.

Or in i 15 has ol alxfiahuretovTe* ( = ratf taken collectively), and in 17 ot
lirrcts, which may be an interpretation of crwa (see phil. n. on i 17 ), or a
translation of a different text of D'BHB (Che. JET viii. 433) rather than of
awi (Nestle, #.) or n^in (Hommel, ib. 378f., 431). Barton (JBLti., 1912,
67) follows <&-. Che. (i#*. 968, 2469) emends D'ira into creo (north-
Arabian) Cushites, and Hommel (l.c.) into D^n, those of Havilah, None of
these suggestions, however, is more probable than J. But what does Jty
mean ? That Job, a great sheikh indeed but not a monarch, was raided
b3 r the forces of two distant and famous kingdoms the Chaldreans of
Babylonia and the Sabasans (see on i w )~ is unlikely even in fiction. Even
if this is the meaning-, which seems highly unlikely, any part of the land of
the children of the E. would have been as likely as any other to receive an
attack from this curious combination. But if onca here and in 2 K. 2<). 2
are nomads E. or S.E. (note the order in 2 K., particularly if tain be read
for D-IK) of Judah (see on i 16 , also Dhorme, RB, 1910, 384; 1911, 105), Job's
home must no doubt be placed not too far north, but whether it is necessary
to place it farther south than the Hauran is questionable. The Shch<*
intended, though not the south Arabian kingdom, certainly lay south of
Edom (i 15 n.).

14. (2) Tradition, Christian (from the 4th cent, A.D.) and
Moslem, persistently connect Job with the Hauran, 1 and more
exactly with the Nukra, "the great plain of the Hauran and
the granary of Syria" (Baedeker, Palestine*, 183), where Dor
'Eyyub, some forty miles S.S. W. of Damascus, perpetuates Job's
name to the present day. Dhorme (RB^ 1911, 103 f.J, however,
explains this tradition as due to a series of confusions, and
finds traces of an early alternative Christian tradition in
Chrysostom on Job 2 8 and "Isho'dad (t c. 850) on Job x 1 , who
speaks of a land of 'LJs still existing 1 in Arabia. However this
may be, still earlier association of Job with Edom is certainly
found in the appendix to ffli, which makes Job a king of Edom.

*5 (s) The nature of the country in which Job's home
lay, if considered by itself, would point strongly to such a
district as the Hauran rather than to Edom. For Job's home
lay in a country of great farms, at once near a town and yet
open to the desert (see on i 1 * 5 , p. 2). But Edom, the home of
Esau, was among the Hebrews proverbially distinguished from
such country as being " away from the fatness of the earth and
from the dew of heaven " (Gn, 27^). Job obviously in habit

1 See Wetzstein's Appendix in Del, ; Clermont-Ganneau, Rec*
fagie Orientate, v. nff. ; Guy Lc Strange, Palatine under the
5*5-

15-16. J ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK XXxi

of life more nearly resembles Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, than
Esau.

Thus a number of small considerations combine to suggest,
though not to prove, that certain elements in the story of Job
came to Israel from or through Edom ; but others, while still
compatible with an Eastern origin, would seem to indicate that
certain features of the story, if originally Edomite, have become
blurred and indistinct or transformed.

l6. More recently quite a different class of evidence from
that already considered has been adduced in order to suggest
that the ultimate source of Job is in Babylonian literature. In
this case it is not the scene and the names, but the substance
of the story, and in particular the speeches of Job, that are
involved. The particular Babylonian poem 1 which has pro-
voked this theory has sometimes been described as the
" Babylonian Job." The hero of the poem a king, as most
have concluded was named Tabi-utul-Bel (Jastrow), or SubSi-
mesri-Nergal (Landersdorfer), Tabi-utul-Bel in the latter case
being another king warned by Ur-bau in a dream to take a
message to Subsi-meSri-NergaL Tabi-utul-Bel is described as
dwelling in Nippur, and the god Marduk is mentioned : other
names of places and persons do not occur.

The poem opens :

I will praise the Lord of Wisdom,

1 It has survived fragtnentarily in several copies of the 7th cent. B.C.,
and a commentary on the poem has also been discovered ; and so we may
infer that, probably itself far older than the 7th cent., the poem was then
still much read and studied. It appears to have extended to four tablets,
containing about 300, or perhaps about 480 lines : of the first tablet only a
few lines survive, of the second the greater part, of the third and fourth less
in all, probably somewhat more or less than a half. The poem is mostly
in 4 : 4 rhythm (Job is in 3:3: see 52). On the history, restoration and
interpretation of the poem, see M. Jastrow, Rel. Bab. u. Assyr. ii. 120-133 ;
/#*"/., 1906, 135-191; Contemporary Review, Dec. 1906, 801-808; S.
Landersdorfer, " Eine babylonische Quelle f. d. B. J. " (Biblische Studien,
xiv. 2), 1911; Martin, " Le juste souffrant," in Journal Asiatique^Ktih series,
xvi. 75-143. See also Zimmern in KA T a 384-386 (where parallelism not
with Job, but with the servant of Yahweh is suggested) ; Rogers, CP 164-
169 (translation of the second tablet) ; R. Campbell Thomson, JPSBA, 1910,
18 ff. Further literature is given by Jastrow and Landersdorfer (pp, 1 1-14),

XXXll THE BOOK OF JOB [16.

presumably for release from the suffering's, which the rest of what survives

of the first tablet describes :

Although a [kin]g, I have become a slave.

The day is filled with groaning, the night with weeping:

The night with howling, the year with mourning (cp. Job T 81 ).

The second tablet opens as follows :

I attained to (long) life, I moved beyond the appointed time;
(Wherever) I turn, (there is) evil, evil ;
Oppression is increased, righteousness I see not ;

and then after recording that he had appealed to his god, his goddess and
various classes of enchanters, etc. (11. 4-9)) he passes on to say that trouble
has overtaken him as though he had been negligent in his religious duties
(12-23), whereas he was only conscious of having been exemplary in his
conduct :

But I myself took thought only for prayers and supplications,

Prayer was my rule, sacrifice my order.

This passage concludes with the lines :
The respect of the king I made of highest power : l
In reverence of the palace I instructed the people :
For I knew that before the god such deeds are in good favour.

This is immediately followed by reflections on the mysterious ways and
judgements of the gods, which are beyond the comprehension of man's short
life and subject to sudden changes of fortune :
That which seemeth good to itself, that is evil with god:
And that which in its heart is rejected, that is good with his god.
Who can understand the counsel of the gods in heaven ?
The plan of the gods full of darkness, who shall establish it ?
How shall pale-faced men understand the way of the god ! (cp. Job 4 17f -),
He who lives in the evening is in the morning dead (cp. Job 34* 27** 4***).
Quickly is he in trouble, suddenly is he smitten ;
In a moment he is singing and playing,
In an instant he is howling like a complainer;
Every moment, so are their thoughts changed.
Now they are hungry, and are like a corpse,
Again they are full, and like unto their god.
If it go well with them, they speak of climbing up to heaven t
If they be in trouble, they talk of going down to hell.

The suffering king now describes his sufferings and the symptoms of
his malady : the particularity of the description and some of the figures
employed recall Job's descriptions of himself; of this long description it
it must suffice to cite a few lines :
With a whip he has beaten me,
With a staff he has pierced me, the point was strong.
All day long doth follow the avenger,

1 Variant ; like a god. Jastrow supposes that the king had sinned in
allowing 1 the people to pay him divine honour.

16-17.] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK XXxili

In the middle of the night he lets me not breathe for a moment (cp.

Jb. f* 30").!

Through tearings my joints are sundered,
My limbs are undone , . .
Upon my couch I passed the night like a bull,
I was covered with my excrement like a sheep.
My symptoms of fever were not clear (?) to the magicians*

He felt himself forsaken, in immediate prospect of death, and already
given up for dead :

The god helped me not, he took me not by the hand ;

My goddess did not pity me, she came not to my side.

The sarcophagus hath opened (cp. Jb. 17*- 1Sf -) . . .

Before I was dead, the death wail was finished.

My whole land cried out, " Alas ! " (or, He is ruined).

Mine enemy heard, his face glowed,

To my female enemy they brought the good tidings, her spirits brightened up.

The opening line of the third tablet, " Heavy was his hand, I could no
more endure it " (cp. Jb. 23* 23 8f * 24 (introductory note).

2 Reference may also be made here to the theory that the scenes in
heaven (i 6 " 11 2 1-7 ) are additions to the original Prologue (so, e.g., Kon. JEinl,
415) : certainly i 13 connects formally in a certain respect (see n. on i 13 ) even
better with i 5 than with i ia , and by reading "And Yahweh smote" in 2 7b
this might attach though rather abruptly to i 23 . But a theory which on
inadequate grounds destroys, as this does, the dramatic effectiveness of the
Prologue is not to be accepted.

THE BOOK OF JOB [21.

(a) Cc. 25-28, the conclusion of the third cycle of speeches ;
(b) Cc. 32-37, Elihu ; (c) Cc. 38 1 -42 6 , the speeches of Yahweh.

(a) Cc. 25-28. 1 Down to 24 the interchange of speeches
has proceeded quite regularly, a speech of one of the friends,
ranging in length from 19 to 34 distichs, receiving in reply a
speech of Job, in every case longer and in the present probably
expanded text of cc. 12-14 much longer. Each of the friends
has spoken twice : Eliphaz has also spoken a third time and
received Job's reply. After c. 28 there follows a speech of Job
(29-31) which, like his opening speech (3), is neither addressed
to, nor takes any account of, the friends, though, unlike 3, it
is in part, though a very small part, addressed to God (3O 20 " 28 ).
Thus the conclusion of the dialogue proper is to be sought in
or within 25-28, or rather 25-27, for 28 is, as a quiet impersonal
description of Wisdom, differing from the Dialogue in its use of
the divine names ( 19) and for various reasons discussed in the
commentary, best regarded as an independent poem, which
formed no part of the original work.

Now 25-27 at present contain a brief speech of Bildad (25 2 ~ e ,
consisting of 5 distichs only as against the 19 distichs of the
shortest of the preceding speeches, viz. Sophar's first speech),
and one longer speech (of about 35 distiches), or rather (cp 27 1 )
of two shorter speeches (of about 13 and 22 distichs respectively),
addressed by Job to Bildad in particular (26 2 **), or, like Job's
previous speeches, to the three friends in common (27 2 ~ 6 ). In
the brevity of Bildad's third speech and the absence of the
attribution of any third speech to Sophar, it has frequently
been held that the poet provided a formal indication that the
friends had exhausted their arguments and thrown up their
case. This explanation might be more favourably entertained,
if everything else in 22-27 containing the third cycle of speeches
were in order ; but this is not so. Even in c, 24, as is pointed
out in the commentary, there is more or less matter that fits
ill in a speech of Job : in 26 f, there is muph more : and indeed
we may analyse 26 f. into (i) matter appropriate to a speech of

1 Cp. G. A, -Barton, "The Composition of Job 24-30," in JJBLit.>
66 ff.

21.] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK XXXl'x

Job's and Inappropriate to a speech of one of the friends
2^2-6. (n) 12 . ^ 2 j ma tter inappropriate (for opinions to the con-
trary, see the commentary) to a speech of Job, but appropriate
to the friends 27 7 ~ 10 - 13 ~ 28 ; and (3) neutral matter, i.e. matter
not inappropriate either in Job or the friends 26 2-4 * 6 ~ u . Now
(2) has been by some (Stu. Bernstein, We. Sgf. Kue.) dismissed
as consisting of interpolations ; but, since so regarded they are
entirely suitable, it is far more probable that these passages
are contributions to the third round of the debate by Bildad
and Sophar. In this case 25-27 should contain in whole or in
part Bildad's third speech and Job's reply to it, and Sophar's
third speech and (unless, as indeed might well be, the mono-
logue in 29-31 takes the place of this) Job's reply to Sophar
in all four or, at least, three speeches. But from the limited
extent of these chapters we must conclude that part only and
not the whole of these four (or three) speeches survive.

The three cc. contain the equivalent of about 40 distichs, whereas four
speeches equalling 1 in length only the shortest of the preceding: speeches
of Job, Bildad and Sophar would amount to about 95, three speeches to
about 70 distichs. By assigning to Job all the neutral in addition to the
positively appropriate matter, 20 distichs can be obtained for him which
would perhaps suffice for one speech (his shortest previous speech ran to
28 distichs) though certainly not for two ; but in this case there remain only
20 distichs to be distributed among Bildad and Sophar which are far too
few. On the other hand, if the neutral matter be assigned to Bildad and
Sophar, even then there is scarcely enough to bring up their speeches to
even approximately normal length ; and the effect is to leave only 7
distichs in all to Job altogether insufficient for his reply to Bildad alone,
even if 29-31 may be regarded as taking the place of any reply to
Sophar.

The probability is great, not that to the third cycle Sophar
contributed nothing and Bildad less than half a dozen distichs,
but that the speeches of the third cycle have through some
accident reached us in a very imperfect form, part of them
having been lost, the remainder dislocated. This single hypo-
thesis of mutilation of the text accounts at once for the whole
of the peculiarities of the existing close of the third cycle the
brevity of Bildad's speech, the absence of Sophar's, the utter-
ance by Job of matter contradicting his own and in harmony
with previous utterances of Bildad and ophar, and the attri-

xl THE BOOK OF JOB [ 21-22.

bution to Job of two formal openings (26 2 ~* 27 2 " 6 ) in reply to a
single speech the brief words of Bildad.

But if there has been serious loss and dislocation of matter,
the data for any complete or certain reconstruction of the third
cycle do not exist. We cannot determine, for example,
whether the loss has affected the speeches of Sophar and Bildad
equally, whether Sophar's speech was wholly lost while most
of Bildad's survives, or whether most of Sophar's but only a
mere fragment of Bildad's has survived. The main point is to
recognize that the passages inappropriate in the mouth of Job
formed no part of his speech in the original poem.

Under these circumstances it may suffice to record, without entering
into particular criticism of them, some of the reconstructions which have
been attempted. Most of those who find any of ophar's speech find it in
27 7 - 28 to which Gratz (Monatsschrift^ 1872, pp. 241-250) adds c. 28 as a
development of Sophar's standpoint in ii 8 ' 10 . Marshall exceptionally
attributes 2 27"-", Ley ; (8) 24** Marshall ; (9)
25. 27 8 ' 10 - 'a- 28 , Bi. (1882) ; but, in 1894, 25 9 * 8 26"- "* 25 4 -.

22. (b) Cc. 3237. Elihtu These cc. consist of a brief
introduction in prose (32 1 "" 6 ), and a long speech or series of
speeches in verse delivered by Elihu. The cc. were obviously
written to occupy their present position in the book: as 32 1 " 6
explains, Elihu speaks when the three friends had ceased to
reply to Job ; and in the speeches Elihu rebukes Job and the
friends alike ; and from Job's previous speeches he cites actual
words, or summarizes statements in them (p. 278), in order to
refute them. But it is scarcely less obvious that the rest of the
book was not written with any knowledge of these speeches ;
and consequently that they formed no part of the original work.
In contrast to Elihu's frequent direct reference to the friends
and to Job, there is no reference, direct or indirect, in any
other part of the book to Elihu ; the Prologue gives the setting
for the debate that follows, and explains how the three

22-23.] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK xll

friends who subsequently take part in it come to be present,
but it says nothing of Elihu, and the special prose introduction
to Elihu's speeches only partially supplies the omission ; it
gives a reason why Elihu speaks, it gives no reason why he is
present. Neither Job nor the friends take the slightest notice
of Elihu's attacks on them, or of his arguments ; his speech is
of greater length than any that have gone before, but no one
interrupts him while he is speaking, no one has a word to say
of or to him when he has done. Job's last speech closes with
an appeal to God to answer him (si 855 *), and Yahweh's reply
opens (38 2 ) with words obviously addressed to the person who
has just finished speaking ; since this cannot be Elihu but must
be Job, Yahweh' s opening admits of no intervening speech of
Elihu. Finally, in the Epilogue Yahweh expresses a judgement
on what Job has said and what the three friends have said, but
makes not the slightest reference to Elihu. Thus this entire
section can be removed from the book without any sense of
loss or imperfection in its construction being created.

But the speeches are not only superfluous, they are also
destructive of the effect of what follows. They are superfluous,
because they add nothing substantial to what the friends have
said except in so far as they anticipate what Yahweh is to say ;
they fail, as those speeches had failed, to meet Job's case.
They repeat arguments, and even words of the friends (see
33 o, 19. 26 34 7.8-n. 21*. 35 5-7 w ifa nn . there). But they also antici-
pate (32 27 37 21 ) in part what Yahweh says (sS 4 ' 38 ) a fact which
is entirely explained, if the writer had before him or in his
mind the whole book, the speech (es) of Yahweh equally with
those of the friends, but most unnaturally if they were the work
of the original author who intended Yahweh's speech to round
off the debate.

23. Further in the style and language of these chapters
there is, in spite of very much that is common to, 1 much that

1 See Bu. Beitrage, 92-123 ; W. Posselt, Der Verfasser d. Elihu Reden
(1909), 67-111. The common features are the natural result of the
familiarity of the writer with the book which he was supplementing- ; so,
e.g., he naturally uses the same names for God, but (see 24) with differing*
relative frequency.

xlii

THE BOOK OF JOB

! 23-24.

is notably different from the rest of the book, alike in the
verbose prose of 32 1 "" 6 as compared with the Prologue, and in
the poetry of the speeches as compared with the other speeches
in the book. Some differentiation in the style and even In
vocabulary (Eliphaz, for example, alone uses ntff in the sense of
religion, 4 6 n.) might be attributed to dramatic differentiation :
and we might seek to explain the prolixity of these speeches as
a dramatist's indication that the speaker is a wise young man
who is conscious of possessing much more wisdom than his
elders, and makes up for lack of real contribution to a discus-
sion by the abundance and violence of his speech ; and yet
such an explanation, however consonant with the impression
made on many readers by Elihu's speeches, is not true to the
writer's own intention (see on 32 6 " 22 ). And in any case there
remains much which cannot be attributed to dramatic differ-
entiation, and which, in the mass, is most reasonably attributed
to diversity of authorship.

24. (i) Elihu shows a marked relative preference for $>N,
using this term more frequently than all other terms for God
together, whereas in the Dialogue n^K is used with the same
frequency, and its? also frequently ( 18).

NaturaUy enough even in the Dialogue the relative frequency of the
three terms differs in different groups of cc. ; but never does the differ-
ence in any six consecutive cc. equal that found in the six cc. of Elihu's
speech ; and the occurrences in Bildad's speeches are too few for a safe
comparison. The following table will serve to bring out the differences ;

OCCURRENCES IN

mV*

*nr

Elihu

Rest of the Book
Job's Speeches down to c. 24
Cc. 26-31 ,
EUphaz's Speeches
Bildad's
ophar's ff
Cc, 3-8 *

7
8

2
5

35
*7
7
6
o

3
8

*5
7
7
7

5
2

24-25.] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK

xliii

The net result of Bu.'s additions and omissions is to reduce the occur-
rences of m^te and ni? by one each. He adds ^ In 32* 33 s7 and omits
33 4 36 s6 containing ^H, 35 4 containing nr, and 37 15 containing m 1 ?* (also 34*
containing D'H^K).

Throughout the Dialogue the three names are used without marked
preference for any one of them, a more frequent use of one of them,
in say a dozen occurrences of all three being balanced by a more frequent
use of the others in the following passage : note these most striking cases :
in cc, 3-7 !?K, T&N, nff occur i, 8, 3 times respectively, in c. 84, o, 2 ; in
cc. 9-111, 5, i in cc. 12-158, 3, 2 ; in c. 223, 2, 5. One considera-
tion governing the choice of the names may be noted : where in each line of
a distich a divine name is used (often the parallelism, if expressed at all, is
expressed by means of a pronoun), a marked preference is shown for H* as
one of the two : this is true of all parts of the book : in Elihu nr occurs
four times in parallelism with another divine term, twice at most not in such
parallelism ; in the rest of the book it occurs 17 times in, 8 times not in
parallelism with another term. On the other hand, ^K occurs in Elihu 15
times not in parallelism against 4 times in parallelism, and in the rest of
the book 23 times not in parallelism against 13 times in parallelism. Thus
the relative infrequency of '"W in Elihu's speeches is but another side of a
difference between those speeches and the rest of the book : in Ehhu a
single divine name with no expressed parallel is a more frequent occurrence
than elsewhere. Finally, when but a single name is used, Elihu shows a
very marked preference for !?K (^K, 15 ; mta, 6), the rest of the book a slight
preference for m^x (to, 23 ; mta, 27).

25. (2) Elihu shows a decidedly increased preference for
rather than "DDK.

The occurrences of the two forms of the ist pers. pronoun in various
parts of the book is as follows :

(=21) 29 w ,butwith equal frequency \33K 9 s5 I2*(^if) z$ v . After particles
(other than ]), while Elihu uses '3K exclusively (JK ]K32 l0b (*tfb) w F w jn 33 6 ,
)K oa 33 8 , ' vhi 34**), the Dialogue uses both (w D^K tf 13*, JK DI 7 U i3 a
*JK 3 is 18 , 'JK vtn I5 6 , *3K WM 19^, and 'DJM 'a ^H 9 14 , OJK DJ i6 4 , ^JKH 2i 4 (?)). In
particular, the contrast is interesting between rroi* D33 >33 DJ i6 4 and '3R jn
M Tso 33 6 - To sum up ; whereas in the Dialogue MK is a frequent alter-
native to w, in Elihu MR occurs only in 33, a reminiscence of 2i 8 , and in
33 9b where 33 is a parallel term to 'in in 33**.

26. (3) Similarly Elihu makes distinctly less use of certain
rarer forms of particles and pronominal suffixes.

No doubt several of these forms occur too infrequently to
have separately much or any significance. But the significance
of the whole group is hardly to be cancelled by the considera-
tion^ which Bu. and Posselt have brought forward. The
usages may be tabulated thus ;

i 86-27.] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK xlv

OCCURRENCES OF

IN ELIHU
(E).

REST OF
JOB (R).

REST OF OT.

(^ (6 s 7 1 nn.) 1 . .

i^ ....
l'7 ....

O
O

2(7*20')

4 a

10 (Isaiah, p. 467)

/"to?

3(4)

4(5)

-JTD5 ....

LlD$> ....

O 5

4 s

'3D 7 ....

*!?3 8 (without prefix) .

T to^ 9 ....

Info'* ....

27. (4) In certain cases E expresses ideas common to
himself and R by different terms : e.g. JT 1 (p. 234)) B^fl (except
in E, only in the probably interpolated v. I2 4 ) in lieu of Dfi
(p. 3), "igb in lieu of Q^3 (p. 250). Cp. also 32* n., 33 1 n., and
the phiL nn. on nay 32 3 , ^J?B 3 6 S (ct. wy 3I* 6 ), jwv 34 12 -
Note also that E always uses 'KW in phrases of the type V?n '
(34 8 * 10 ' ^ M : in 37 7 the text is probably corrupt), whereas
elsewhere in such phrases *np is always employed (n 11 rg 19 22 15

1 The occurrences in Job are in 6 5 7 1 (Qre) 8 s 9 s8 15" i6 15 i8 10 2o 4 29*- * 7
3 g3* 4122 | 33 15 3S 28 . Add perhaps 3i n (L Dn '?). Cp. the occurrences of ^
in the poetical parts of the book: R 48 + 12 (Vjn), E 15 + 1 (Vyi). Note
further in Rnpand ^K always, and l! ?y, except in four cases (i6 15 18 10 29 s - 4 ),
occur before a tone syllable (7 x n.): both cases in E are before toneless
syllables (33 15 36*). iy occurs R 21, E 2 (32 U 34 s6 nw iy) ; VK R 22, E 5.

3 3 M 5 516 I5 32 29 19 .

( 9 ao) 16*- igw | 37 8 , I^ (2S 10 ) 43 1 44 18 * w , Ps- " f -

4 6 15 IO Mbto 12 3 I4 9 J9 22 z8 5 3I 7 ^14 4O 17 ^

8 There would be one occurrence in E, if in 33** we read DVID bj,
27" 2 9 21 38* 40*.

x ,9

M. 28. W

90 , 6 l ,gtT 2Q 4 bU ^gl ^80 3 ,7

a 8 11 24 10 308 3 i 3 8 3 39 ie 4^ 18 42 s I 33 9 34 6 -

9 3 W 6 19 14* I5 28 22 17 * 19 24 16 - 17 30 IS 39 4 . Against these ten occurrences of
10^ there are in E i, in R 4 cases of nrA : Mandelkern, Concord. Minor,
8nf.

w Three (2O 28 22 a 27 s8 : cp. also i8 20 K (Piel to teach> 15* 33^ 35:
Qal to leam, Pr. 22^ : in &S = Heb. TO^, nin (R i, E 4)
iS 17 , 2 ^ 8 (R i, E i) 8 2 , r&D 8 (R 20, E 14)
(R 2 + 1, E i) 8 7 .

Peculiar to R are n>n i3 17 , 2 ? |n, iff* mn 3 6 ,

1 On the Aramaisms in Job, cp. in addition to the works cited above
and those of Bu. and Posselt cited in 23 n., Bernstein, *' Inhalt, Zweck .
gegenwartige Beschaffenheit des B. Hiob,*' in Kcil u, Tzschirner's Analektcn
(1813), i. 3 pp. 49-79 ; Che. Job and Solomon, 293-295, in many respects
modified in EJBi. 2486 f.

* Che. (EBi. 2487) omits *5 17 and t3 17 , thus leaving- the root mn confined
toE.

8 N. 413 claims ^D, nte as *' echt hebr&isch." In Job nV is a synonym
of w and IDK ; it is relatively more frequent in E (nte, 14 j TDK, 4 j *ai : 4 :
R nte, 20; TDK, 6 ; "ni, 12). For the Aramaizing pL (but see N. 413, n* 2)
} V| ?D, E has a preference, using it 7 times against Q'Vo 3 times ; R pta 6,
DVD 7 times.

4 Kautzsch claims 6 occurrences 9 ut I2 l4t 313* 40**; but see 9 W n.,
where Dr. admits at most 9 la 40^ i cp. N. 416.

N.4'5-

28-m] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK

*3*> IP'S glorious 3i 26 , *& (2) so 6 , }&3 (2) s 22 , ?? fr6, therefore
30 24 , ? pD 1 24 24 , nriD, 2 A? descend 2I 13 (i7 16 ), THy 3 39*, pny 2i 7 ,

Pnin^y i2 6 , bp (2) 2 10 , 3ip y 4 aKw 38 23 , nnp i6 19 , PDn^w 4o 16 ,
ipn i4 20 -

Peculiar to E are ? "ira 34*, qn 6 33, *VO 36 2 , 13JHD 34 25 ,
apy ( = aw) 6 37 4 > wn ( = pn) 34 2 S w (2) 36 2e , rw 37 s -

Other words which should also probably be considered
Aramaisms are epK 33 7 , tap I3 15 24 U (" probably Aramaic," N.
417), and mr6&? IS 80 (N. 417) i.e. one word only in E, two only
in R. 3p") in I3 28 , if it meant wine-skin (Be. ; Nestle, ZATW
xx. 172 ; Che. EBi. 2487), would also be an Aramaism, but
Dtt 7 5 , cited by Kautzsch in his doubtful examples, may be
disregarded.

2p. (6) As important as the details which can be statisti-
cally presented is the general impression of the style. " The
style of Elihu . , . is prolix, laboured and somewhat tautologous
^ 2 6end.iob.i7bj : t k e p Ower 3^3 brilliancy which are so con-

spicuous in the poem generally are sensibly missing. The
reader, as he passes from Job and his three friends to Elihu,
is conscious at once that he has before him the work of a
writer, not indeed devoid of literary skill, but certainly inferior
in literary and poetical genius to the author of the rest of the
book. The language is often involved and the thought strained "
(Dr. LOT 429). With this view Bu., who in his Beitrage
offered the most elaborate defence of the identity of style in
cc. 32-37 and the rest of the book, now practically concurs
(Comm. xix. 2 xxvii.) : but he attributes this diversity of style
in the section as a whole to the interpolation of some 30 verses

33*- Wb- 33 340- 10a. 25-28. 29C ^5* gglS. 14. 17. 25. 26. 2. 80

37 18 ' lfi lfl ) and much corruption of the text. Some of the
harshness and obscurity is certainly due to corruption (see on
33 21 34 20 ' 29 ~ 88 S^ 33 )* an d some interpolation there may have

i N. 414. * N. 414 " kann althebrHisch sein."

8 N. 413 perhaps a good Hebrew synonym of MIJB.
4 N. 413 f. : traditional Aramaic punctuation TJJ? not necessarily correct,
N. 415 points out that the meaning required in 33* does not occur in
Aramaic.

8 In addition to the n. on 37*, cp. Rotb**m in ZDMG Ivii. 82.

xlvili THE BOOK OF JOB [ 29-30.

been (e.g., perhaps in 34 25 36 26 - 29 ~ 30 ) here, as elsewhere in the
book ; but it is in general improbable that these chapters have
been more extensively interpolated than the rest, and in par-
ticular there is no sufficient reason for regarding* as inter-
polations most of the passages omitted by Bu, The assumption
again, that the omissions of fflx represent additions to the
original text, is as precarious here as elsewhere (see 50). A
different theory of diversity of authorship within 32-37 is
put forward by Nichols, who distinguishes ^2 ll " w 34. 35 16 - 16
(placed between 34 27 and ^J as the words of a "second wise
man " addressed not at all to Job (34 16 is omitted, and with
ffi 34 28 ~ 38 )> but throughout to the wise; the style of both
authors in 32-37 is held to differ from that of the rest of the
book.

The various reasons already given, independently of con-
siderations adduced in 32ff., suffice to show that cc. 32-37
are the work of another writer than the author of the book.

30. (c) Cc. 38 x -42 6 , the speech(es) of Yahweh.

The only ground for questioning this section as a whole
lies in the nature of the contents which have appeared to some
incapable of reconciliation with the standpoint of the author
of the Dialogue. This will be discussed below ( 38-39),
Apart from this everything is in favour of the main part of the
section having formed part of the original work. The speeches
of Elihu may be removed without causing a tremor to the
structure of the book; but without some speech of Yahweh
the structure falls to pieces. The book as a finished structure
can never have closed with c. 31 (or 37); a speech of Yahweh
is the natural, if not the necessary sequel to Job's closing
soliloquy; and a speech of Yahweh is certainly presupposed
in the opening words of the Epilogue (42*). Thus there are
three alternatives : (i) the speech is authentic ; (2) the original
author left his work unfinished, and a subsequent writer added
the speech of Yahweh ; (3) the present has been substituted
for a speech in the original work. In either of the last two
alternatives we might expect difference of style; but such
difference, if it can be detected at all, does not extend beyond
Cc. 38 f. at least are by general consent un-

30-31.] ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE BOOK. xllX

surpassed for poetical power. On the whole, then, 38. 39
together with 4O 2 " 5 and 42 s " 6 appear to be integral to the book,
but 4O 6 -42 1 for reasons given in the commentary (pp. 348 f.,
351 f.) are probably later additions.

31. The conclusions on the main questions now reached,
and those on minor details indicated in the commentary, may
be tabulated so as to indicate the original structure of the
book and additions which at various times it may have received.
The passages absent from ffi, representing (in the main) a
subsequent abbreviation of the book ( 48 f.), are also given:
as omissions from ffi are reckoned lines absent from 3tt (with
half a dozen exceptions), or (in 39 9 -4o 8 ) asterisked in & H , and
also i7 16 20 s (see 49).

THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND SUBSEQUENT
MODIFICATIONS OF JOB

ORIGINAL ELEMENTS.

ADDITIONS PROB-
ABLE OR POSSIBLE,

OMISSIONS IN - *<*

4 ,8 (14). 7 (16)a. 8 (17)" 14 ()b.

5. Epilogue, 42 7 ' 1 *

42 8d.lflo.iT,

V. THE PURPOSE AND METHOD OF THE WRITER.

32. If we are right in concluding- that a single writer is
responsible for the Prologue, the speeches of Job, of his three
friends and of Yahweh (apart from the passages indicated in
the preceding table as possible additions), and the Epilogue,
what was the purpose of this writer, and what are the dis-
tinctive features of his thought and outlook on life which he
reveals in his work ?

32.] PURPOSE AND METHOD OF THE WRITER H

It would no doubt be as inadequate a description of Job, as,
for example, of Paradise Lost> to call it merely a didactic poem ;
it would be even further from the truth to regard it as a purely
objective dramatic poem in which the author maintains an
interested but quite impartial attitude towards the various
characters which are introduced and the various points of view
which are expressed by them. On the other hand, the author
obviously ranges himself with Yahweh in approving Job as
against his friends ; as passionately -as Job he rejects the inter-
pretation of life maintained by the friends, and as decisively as
Yahweh the estimate of human character (so closely associated
with the friends' outlook on life) that is offered by the Satan. T^ie^
writer's purpose is never so directly formulated as Milton's to

assert Eternal Providence
And justify the ways of God to men ;

nor is it coextensive with it; but it is akin, and not really
concealed^ and the differences of opinion which have prevailed
with regard to the purpose of the book have been due to
seeking from the author more than he was able or intended to
offer. He had no clear-cut theology, like Milton's, enabling him
to say why God acted as He did and thus positively to justify
His ways; but through pain and trial he had discovered in

* ' ^~***-~ u ^ ft ~~ l . t *J? i , ^* M ^ , . , . , ,, ,. <"- ' ''">', ^ 1tmm ^ f t *WW*M* ,,,,, .

his ^gwa, experiejx.ee > that Goodid not abandon the sufferer^ an.d
therefore he was able to assert tKat God did not send sufferings
on men merely for the reasons commonly assigned, and that it
was not necessarily or always true that as an individual suffered
so he had sinned ; and thus, if he could not positively justify
God, he could at least vindicate Him against the ways attributed
to Him by the current opinion of his time, represented in the
poem by the friends. There was also another side to his
experience : he had discovered not only that God did not
abandon the sufferer, but also that suffering and loss had not
detached him from God, that it was possible to serve and love
God not for the outward things He gave, but for what He was
in Himself. The book aims not at solving tfre entire problem
of sufFeriogv^ttt- at- vindicating God and the latent worth of
humar^ nature against certain conclusions drawn from a partial

"^. "*"*"-" "^mmtT,,^ f ^ u,r-y 1 V'*'' ' ''"*" " " ** * "-'" i '

observation of life.

Hi THE BOOK OF JOB [ 83-34.

33- The book opens with the presentation of a perfect
character : Job is so described in the first words of the narrative
(i 1 ), and the truth of the description is endorsed by Yahweh
(i 8 2 3 ) ; the kind of life and character thus described in general
terms is indicated in detail elsewhere in the book (cp. especially
c. 31 : also, e.g., 4 3f - ; and see n. on i 1 ). But the Satan disputes
the inherent worth of this character : Job, he insinuates, had
lived as he had, not simply with the result (i 1 n.) that he had
become outwardly prosperous, but in order that he might
prosper ; he had served God not for God's sake, but to obtain
the handsome price of such service : human nature is incapable
of pure devotion to God, human conduct is not disinterested ;
if the payment for it ceases, or becomes uncertain, man's
service of God will cease, man will no longer address God
reverentially, or affectionately, but blasphemingly ; where love
and trust had seemed to be while such qualities received their
price, there hate and contempt will certainly be when the price
is withdrawn. Such is the issue between Yahweh and the
Satan, Yahweh upholding, the Satan calling in question, the
integrity, the sincerity, the disinterestedness of Job. Such also
had been the issue in the mind of the writer who wrote the
speeches that follow the opening narrative ; he had faced the
same problem of life as Plato in the Republic (Bk. ii.) ; he had
realized that the really perfect man must be prepared to prove
his perfectness by maintaining it even when there befell him

; and such as actually had the effect on the ordinary judge-
ment of men of making hinx seem to have been wicked though
actually he had been good. The very friends of Job, held
by the ^Jogjpa that a man of Broken fortunes cannot have
beenV^ c i^^eV* *iiwu& %oewfc^ufc pwras," infer from Job's
calamities that he must have been wicked, though his own
conscience and God's unerring judgement assert that the life
on which these calamities descended had been free from
blame.

34. Within the Prologue the issue is decided against the
Satan : when the Satan sneeringly says to God, Take away all
the wealth Thou hast given Job, then go and see him, and he

34.] PURPOSE AND METHOD OF THE WRITER llil

will curse Thee, he is obviously contemplating the immediate
result of deprivation on Job ; for when in the second scene in
heaven he is challenged by Yahweh to admit that Job's conduct
and temper under loss have proved the Satan's estimate of him
wrong, he does not plead that the experiment has not had long
enough to work, but claims that it is merely necessary to with-
draw health as well as wealth, and Job will at once cease
blessing and curse. The Satan's estimate is based on weaker
characters, exemplified by Job's wife, who would have Job do
what the Satan had counted on his doing ; but Job himself rejects
the advice of his wife in words which are tantamount to saying :
to curse God now would be to prove that I have served and
blessed Him hitherto not for what He is, but for the good-
fortune which for so long He gave me; now that ill-fortune
has befallen me I can show that I serve Him for what He is.
Thus Job left at last only with bare life, without which he
could be no subject of testing, and his character which had
been called in question, but which he had maintained intact
under the last test that the Satan could suggest, by these words
proves his disinterested attachment to Yahweh, that he had
not served Him for what He gave, and thus finally and com-
pletely puts the Satan in the wrong, and that so obviously that
it is unreasonable, as some have done, to complain that the
writer has not depicted Yahweh pressing home the Satan's
discomfiture, whether by a third scene in heaven, or in the
Epilogue.

Job by his attitude in the Prologue has, unknown to himself,
vindicated Yahweh's against the Satan's estimate of his char-
acter ; but the result of the Satan's experiments, the origin and
purpose of which remain unknown on earth, is to expose Job's
character to attack from another quarter. The Satan in heaven
disputes the integrity of Job's character, because prosperity
had necessarily left it untested : when his prosperity forsakes
Job, his friends on earth dispute his integrity on the ground
that he must have sinned because he no longer prospers. Thus
the Prologue opens up the question of the relation of loss and
suffering to sin : with this question the Dialogue is concerned,
and necessarily (for it is a crucial instance for the theory at

llV THE BOOK OF JOB [34-35.

issue) interwoven with the discussion of it is the attack on
and defence of Job's integrity.

35. Between Job's rebuke of his wife with its implicit
assertion of his own resignation and the opening of the
Dialogue some weeks intervene : in the interval Job's experience
has raised questions in his own mind : why is he, why are men
born to suffer ? The ready answer of his old faith would have
been : men are not born to suffer ; they only suffer if they sin ;
but his experience has proved this false in his own case, and,
as he is now ready to believe, it would also be false in the
case of countless others, but to the bitter question he now finds
no answer. Thus he goes into the following debate con-
vinced that the solution there repeatedly put forward is false,
but with no other theory to oppose to it. To these questionings
of Job his three friends, who being no fair weather friends had
come to him on hearing of his calamities, had listened : they
had brought with them the same old faith as Job's, but not the
direct personal experience which had proved to Job its in-
adequacy. In all friendliness they would recall Job to the faith,
and lead him to the course which that faith indicated humble
acceptance of the discipline of suffering, confession and abandon-
ment of the sin which had brought his suffering upon him, and
return to God. Job cannot accept such advice, for in doing so
he would be false to his conviction of his integrity. The nature
of the Dialogue so different from those of Pluto is thus
determined by the nature of the difference in character of what
the two parties for the three friends constitute a single party
stand for : the friends maintain a theory, Job defends a fact
the reality and truth of his conviction of innocence. The
Dialogue, therefore, is not directed towards reaching a correct
or more adequate theory, but towards emphasizing the certainty
of the fact and the consequent falseness of the prevailing theory.
So far, indeed, is Job from opposing a different theory to the
theory of the friends that his own outlook, and his own inter-
pretation of what has happened, is still largely governed by the
theory which he also had once unquestioningly held ; and which
Is still the only positive theory to hold the field till driven from it
by the vindication of the truth of Job's conviction, which proves

35.] PURPOSE AND METHOD OF THE WRITER Iv

the theory false. Because he has no other theory of suffering
than that of the friends, he can imagine no other just cause for
his own sufferings than sin on his part; since, then, as he
knows directly and for certain that such just cause does not
exist, he infers that his suffering has been unjustly inflicted,
that God the God at least of his own old and the friends' still
cherished theory is unjustly causing his suffering, has changed
without good cause from being his friend into his enemy. In
the early days of his loss, Job was conscious only of his own
unchanged attitude towards God ; as time gives opportunity
for reflection, and more especially as the friends press home the
inference, inevitable under the theory, that because Job greatly
suffers he must have greatly sinned, Job awakes to another
aspect of his strange fortunes ; loss gives him the opportunity
of proving his willingness to receive from God ill-fortune no
less than good fortune ; of remaining, when rewards fail, for
His own sake, the servant, the friend of God ; but loss at the
same time, if the friends and their theory are right, is God's
unambiguous assertion that He has rejected Job and become
his enemy. This is Job's severest trial of all a trial the Satan
failed to think of; and under the stress of it Job says much
that doubtless needs correction, and yet nothing that corresponds
to anything the Satan can have meant by "cursing God to His
face," nothing that reflects back upon Job's previous character
in such a way as to indicate that it lacked the wholeness which
Yahweh claimed for it and the Satan denied. Job nowhere
regrets his previous service of God, and never demands the
restoration of the previous rewards ; what he does seek is God
Himself, God unchanged, still his friend on his side, un-
estranged from him, and not, as the theory assures him He
has now become, his enemy ; and what he seeks he never really
and permanently despairs of finding ; against God, seeming by
the calamities He sends to take away his character, he appeals
to God to vindicate it (iG 18 " 21 n. ly 8 ), and rises to certainty that
He will do so, if not this side death, then beyond (ig 27 ) ; but it
is only for this vindication, for the realization that God really
remains his friend, not for the restoration of good fortune, that
Job contemplates the intervention of God on his behalf.

Ivi THE BOOK OF JOB [36,

36* It is unnecessary to review in detail here all the
speeches of the friends and Job's replies to them : they cover
the same ground again and again. So far as the friends are
concerned it is of the very essence of the writer's purpose that
they should one and all say essentially the same thing : they
are not introduced to represent many existing theories ; but
the three of them, expounding the same theory, represent that
as the unchallenged judgement of ancient and still current
opinion. All the variety that is thus possible in the friends'
speeches is variety of expression, the formulation of different
aspects of the same theory, or different pfroofs of it, such as
the divine origin of it (4 l2ff - Eliphaz), its antiquity (8 5f Bildad,
i5 18f - Eliphaz, 20* Sophar), the impossibility, due to man's
ignorance, of successfully disputing it (ii 6ff - Sophar), or of such
subsidiary theories as had been called in to help it out. Of
these a word or two may be said here. Briefly, the theory
itself is that the righteous prosper, the unrighteous come to
grief, and conversely that suffering implies sin in the individual
sufferer, and prosperity the righteousness of the prosperous.
But the facts of life at any time too obviously challenge this
simplest form of theory ; and these had already led to certain
additional details which accordingly are not represented as
elicited by the debate, but are many of them already expressed
or implied in the very first speech of Eliphaz, Such details are
the suggestions that all men are impure and sinful to some
extent, and that therefore suffering is to some extent due to
all ; that righteous individuals might suffer to some extent
and for a time, and unrighteous individuals might similarly
prosper, but that the unrighteous did and the righteous did
not come to an untimely end (e.g. 4 7 8 16 ~ 19 ) ; that the wicked,
even when seeming to be prosperous, were haunted by
terror of the coming calamity that was their due (i5 20fl ').
Again and here there persists the influence of that strong
sense of the solidarity of the family or clan, with its relative
indifference to the individual, that preceded the increased value
set on the individual, which is the presupposition of the book
of Job it is urged that even if an unrighteous man lives out a
long prosperous life, his children pay the penalty for it (5*

36-87.] PURPOSE AND METHOD OF THE WRITER Ivil

2O 10 ). Or again it is conceded, especially by Eliphaz in his
first speech (S l7ff> : so also Elihu, passim), that suffering 1 need
not be mere penalty, but may have as its end the conviction
and removal of sin, the purification of character ; in other
words, that suffering 1 is not only penal, but may also be dis-
ciplinary. But with all the admissions and concessions that
the current theory allows them to make, the friends in the
development of the debate clearly make plain that the sub-
stance of the theory is that God distributes suffering and
prosperity to the unrighteous and righteous respectively, and
that in proportion to their righteousness or unrighteousness.
Accordingly Eliphaz, who in his first speech introduces the
subject of disciplinary suffering (arguing that since no man is
free from sin, all men must suffer, but that if they rightly accept
suffering due to essential human infirmity, they will ultimately
prosper, whereas if they prove obstinate and greatly suffer they
must greatly have sinned) in his second speech 1 expresses his
conviction that Job must be a peculiarly heinous sinner (rs 14 " 16 ),
and in his third speech invents charges against him of certain
specific sins of great enormity (22 5 ~), thus lying on behalf of
his theory of God. Bildad and Sophar by dwelling in their
second speeches (and Sophar also in his third, if this survives
in 27) almost exclusively on the fate of the wicked depicted
often in colours borrowed from Job's experience indirectly
convey the same judgement that Eliphaz expresses directly.

37. In his replies to the friends, Job insists on his integ-
rity the fact by which their theory is shattered, their advice
rendered nugatory. He agrees with them as to the might of
God, and as to the frailty of human nature, carrying with it
proneness to sin and yielding to temptation in all men, himself
included ; that all should suffer raises a question (3 20 ), which,
however, perplexing as it is, would be relatively intelligible and
endurable; but while all men sin, men differ widely in the
extent to which they sin, and yet it is those who like himself
are relatively free from sin and within the limitations of human
frailty perfect who suffer not invariably, but often ; and it is

1 Cp. in ophar's very first speech, i i e j but the line is probably not
original.

Ivili THE BOOK OF JOB [37-88.

the wicked who prosper not again invariably, but often, so
that it may be said that God sends suffering indifferently on
the perfect and the wicked (g 22 " 24 ). If) then, suffering is always
punishment, God is an unjust judge, inflicting punishment
where it is not due, and failing to secure its infliction where it
is due. Nor again will the plea of the friends do, that Job's
sufferings are sent in kindness by God to deflect him from
his wicked way, and so even yet secure an end of life richer
and more amply blessed than even his earlier life had been :
Job has no wicked way to be deflected from, as his own con-
science attests and God Himself though this, of course, is
unknown to Job and the friends has insisted. Starting from the
same point that all suffering is penal Job and the friends thus
reach different conclusions he, with eyes opened to the facts of
life but himself not yet rid of the theory, concluding that God
js unjust (9 16ff - 19) though mighty (9 2ff - 12 18 ' 26 ), not only letting
Job suffer, but letting the wicked enjoy life to the full and to the
end (c. 21), they, distorting or blind to facts, that God is both
mighty and just. This is a sufficiently clear-cut difference.
But Job is. also at issue with himself. The old theory leads
inevitably to the conclusion that God is unjust, but the old
experience of God still prompts him to trust God as being good
as well as mighty. So long as the theory dominates him, he
can only wish and pray that this mighty unjust God would
leave him alone, cease to think it worth His while to continue
to torment him (717-21 IO 20 ^22) . j^ wnen the old experience
of God (29 2ff ') reasserts its influence, what he longs for is that
*God should again speak to him, recognize him (i4 l5 )> yearn for
him (7 2ld )> admit his innocence and even vindicate it against
(r6 18 17 I9 26 - 27 ) His own charges, made in the language of
misfortune, that he has sinned, and so far from being perfect
is one of the most imperfect and wicked of men.

38. The double issue that of Job with the friends, and
that of Job with himself should be determin


Search: Advanced Search	UploadAnonymous User (login or join us)