ISAIAH,
BOOK
OF
theexternalevidenceisscantyandsomeof
it
ambiguous;
and
the
internal
evidence
of
certain
sections
is
differ-ently
interpreted;
it,
as
the
interpretation
of
Duhm
and
Marti
would
require
us
to
infer,
ch.
33
and
ch.
34
f.
were
not
written
tiU
towards
the
middle
of
the
2nd
cent.,
and
chs.
24-27
not
until
after
b.c.
128,
it
is
obvious
that
the
collection
which
contains
these
sections
did
not
attain
its
present
form
and
size
till
some
(possibly
con-siderable)
time
later
than
b.c.
128.
The
most
important
piece
of
external
evidence
is
contained
in
Sir
48^-".
In
this
passage
the
author,
writing
about
B.C.
180,
refers
to
Isaiah
as
one
of
the
godly
men
of
Israel,
worthy
of
praise,
and,
as
afterwards
(498-8)
in
the
case
of
Ezekiel
and
of
Jeremiah,
he
cites,
or
alludes
to,
certain
sections
which
now
stand
in
the
book
that
bears
the
prophet's
name.
Thus
he
says:
v.^"
'For
Hezekiah
did
that
which
was
pleasing
to
the
Lord,
and
was
strong
in
the
ways
of
David
his
father,
which
Isaiah
the
prophet
commanded,
who
was
great
and
faithful
in
his
vision';
v.^s
'In
his
days
the
sun
went
backward;
and
he
added
life
to
the
king';
v.^
'By
a
spirit
of
might
he
saw
the
end,
and
comforted
the
mourners
in
Sion';
v.^s
'For
ever
he
declared
the
things
that
should
be,
and
hidden
things
before
they
came."
Possibly
the
last
clause
of
v.^
refers
to
the
title
'The
vision
of
Isaiah'
(Is
1');
certainly
v.*'
refers
to
the
narrative
of
Is
38
(
=2
K
20),
and
v."'-
shows
familiarity
with
the
recurrent
arguments
from
prophecy
in
Is
44-48
(see
e.g.
4121.24
439
469
48ffl.),
while
v.^^i"
is
somewhat
clearly
reminiscent
of
the
actual
phraseology
of
40'
ei*-
'.
Though
it
would
be
possible
to
invent
somewhat
different
explanations
of
these
facts,
much
the
most
probable
inference
is
that,
by
the
beginning
of
the
2nd
cent,
b.c,
some
(if
not
all)
of
the
prophecies
in
chs.
1-35
had
already
been
brought
into
a
book,
and
to
these
had
been
appended,
not
necessarily
or
even
probably
at
the
same
time,
(a)
chs.
36-39,
(6)
chs.
40-66
(or
the
most
part
thereof),
and
that
the
whole
book
at
this
time
was
attributed
to
Isaiah.
Actual
citations
from
the
Book
of
Isaiah
by
name,
which
would
help
to
prove
the
extent
of
the
book
at
given
periods,
are
not
numerous
before
the
1st
cent,
a.d.,
when
we
find
several
in
the
NT:
1»
is
cited
in
Ro
9";
6"-
in
Mt
IS"'-,
Jn
12",
Ac
282"-;
9"-
in
Mt
4»«';
10«2'-
in
Ro
9"'-;
ll'"
in
Ro
15i«;
29"
in
Mk
7"-;
403-«
in
(Mk
1')
Mt
3';
42'-<
in
Mt
12"-2';
53I-
«•
"■
in
Ro
10",
Mt
8",
Ac
S'"-
>'<■;
6H'-
in
Lk
4"-";
65"-
in
Ro
lO^"'-.
There
are
also
some
twenty-
five
unnamed
citations
in
NT
(Swete,
Introd.
to
OT
in
Greek,
385
f.),
some
of
which,
like
the
unnamed
citations
from
the
Greek
text
of
Is
31"
and
442"
in
Wis
2'^
15'"
(about
B.C.
50),
are,
taken
in
conjunction
with
the
named
citations,
not
without
significance.
Still,
rigorous
proof
that
the
Book
of
Isaiah
contained
all
that
it
now
con-tains
much
before
the
final
close
of
the
Canon
(see
Canon
of
OT),
is
wanting.
The
general
considerations
which,
taken
in
conjunction
with
the
proof
afforded
by
Sir
48i'-26
that
(most
or
all
of)
chs.
40-66
ranked
as
Isaiah's
as
early
as
b.c.
180,
make
it
wisest,
failing
strong
evidence
to
the
contrary,
to
reckon
with
the
probability
that
by
about
that
time
the
book
was
substantially
of
the
same
extent
as
at
present,
are
(a)
the
history
of
the
formation
of
the
Canon
(see
Canon
OF
OT),
and
(6)
the
probabiUty,
created
by
the
allusions
in
the
prologue
(about
b.c.
132)
to
Sirach
to
translations
of
prophecies,
that
our
present
Greek
version
dates
from
before
132.
This
version
appears
to
proceed
from
a
single
age
or
hand,
and
yet
it
is,
apart
from
brief
glosses,
of
the
same
extent
as
the
present
Hebrew
text
of
the
book.
If
we
may
adopt
the
most
natural
inference
from
2
Ch
362"-
=Ezr
1"-,
external
evidence
would
go
far
to
prove
that
chs.
40-66
were
not
included
in
the
Book
of
Isaiah
much
before
the
close
of
the
3rd
cent.
b.c.
For
the
Chronicler
here
attributes
the
prophecy
of
Cyrus,
which
forms
so
conspicuous
a
feature
of
Is
40-48
(see
41i(.
4321-45',
and
esp.
compare
2
Ch
36^
with
Is
432«),
not
to
Isaiah
but
to
Jeremiah,
which
he
would
scarcely
ISAIAH,
BOOK
OF
have
done
if
in
his
time
(not
earUer
than
b.c.
300)
these
anonymous
chapters
were
already
incorporated
in
a
book
entitled
Isaiah.
If
we
reject
this
inference,
we
are
thrown
back
entirely
on
the
evidence
of
the
Book
of
Isaiah
itself
for
the
determination
of
the
earUest
date
at
which
it
can
have
been
compiled.
Turning
then
to
the
internal
evidence,
we
note
first
the
structure
of
the
book:
(a)
chs.
1-35
—
prophecies,
some
of
which
are
attributed
to
Isaiah
(1'
2'
etc.),
interspersed
with
narratives
by
or
about
Isaiah
(chs.
6.
7.
8.
20);
(6)
chs.
36-39
—
historical
narratives
of
the
life
and
times
of
Isaiah,
identical
in
the
main
with
2
K
18-20;
(c)
chs.
40-66
—
anonymous
prophecies.
Com-parison
with
the
Book
of
Jeremiah,
which
concludes
with
a
chapter
(52)
about
the
times
of
Jeremiah
derived
from
2
K
24'*'f-,
suggests
that
our
present
book
has
resulted
from
the
union
of
a
prophetic
volume,
consisting
(in
the
main)
of
prophecies
by
or
attributed
to
Isaiah,
with
an
historical
appendix
and
a
book
of
anonymous
prophecies.
This
union,
as
we
have
seen
above,
took
place
before
B.C.
180:
if
any
parts
of
chs.
1-39
are
later
than
this,
their
presence
in
thebook
is
due
to
subsequent
interpolation.
If
it
were
possible
to
write
a
full
history
of
the
literary
process
which
culminated
in
the
Book
of
Isaiah
as
we
now
have
it,
it
would
be
necessary
to
trace
in
detail
first
the
growth
of
chs.
1-39,
then
that
of
chs.
40-66,
and
lastly
the
causes
which
led
to
the
union
of
the
two.
But
this
is
not
possible;
in
particular,
we
do
not
know
whether
chs.
40-66
were
added
to
chs.
1-39
owing
to
the
triumph
of
an
Isaianic
theory
over
the
Jeremianic
theory
or
tradition
of
the
origin
of
these
chapters
(2
Ch
3622'-;
see
above),
or
whether,
as
some
have
supposed,
they
were
added
to
make
the
Book
of
Isaiah
more
nearly
equal
in
size
to
the
other
prophetic
collections
—
Ezekiel,
Jeremiah,
and
the
Twelve
—
with
the
result
that
as
early
as
B.C.
180
these
chapters
came
to
be
attributed
to
Isaiah;
or
whether
something
else,
which
we
cannot
conjecture,
was
the
real
cause
of
this
union.
But,
apart
from
internal
evidence
pointing
to
the
different
periods
in
which
differ-ent
sections
originated,
certain
indications
of
the
com-plexity
of
the
literary
process
do
exist,
particularly
in
the
case
of
chs.
1-39;
these
we
may
consider.
(1)
The
matter
is
not
arranged
chronologically:
the
call
(cf.
Ezk
1,
Jer
1)
of
Isaiah,
which
naturally
preceded
any
of
his
prophecies,
is
recorded
not
in
ch.
1,
but
in
ch.
6.
Similarly,
in
the
Koran
the
record
of
Mohammed's
call
does
not
occur
till
Sura
96;
in
this
case
the
reason
is
that
the
editors
of
the
Koran
followed
the
rather
mechan-ical
principle
of
arranging
the
suras
according
to
their
size.
The
cause
of
the
order
in
the
case
of
the
Book
of
Isaiah
may
in
part
be
found
in
the
fact
that
(2)
the
occurrence
of
several
titles
and
indications
of
different
principles
of
editorial
arrangement
points
to
the
fact
that
chs.
1-35
(39)
is
a
collection
of
material,
some
of
which
had
pre-viously
acquired
a
fixed
arrangement;
in
other
words,
chs.
1-35
is
a
book
formed
not
entirely,
or
perhaps
even
mainly,
by
the
collection
and
free
re-arrangement
of
prophetic
pieces,
but
rather
by
the
incorporation
whole
of
earlier
and
smaller
books.
Following
these
clues,
we
may
first
divide
these
chapters
thus:
(1)
ch.l
with
title
(v.'),
probably
intended
to
cover
the
larger
collection;
(2)
chs.
2-12
with
title
2';
(3)
chs.
13-23
with
title
13'
naming
Isaiah,
and
corresponding
sub-titles
not
mentioning
Isaiah,
in
15'
17'
19'
21'-
"•
"
22'
23'
(cf.
elsewhere
30«);
(4)
chs.
24-27,
distinguished
from
the
preceding
sections
by
the
absence
of
titles,
and
from
the
following
by
the
absence
of
the
opening
interjection;
(5)
chs.
28-31
(33)
—
a
group
of
woes;
see
28'
29'
(RV
'
Ho
'
represents
the
same
Hebrew
word
that
is
translated
'Woe'
in
28'
etc.)
30'
31'
33';
(6)
chs.
34.
36,
which,
like
chs.
24-27,
are
without
title.
Some
even
of
these
sections
seem
to
have
arisen
from
the
union
of
still
smaller
and
earlier
booklets.
Thus
it
is
reasonable
to
suppose
that
ch.
6
once
formed
the
commencement
of
a
booklet;
again,
chs.
2-4
are
prophecies
of
judgment
enclosed
