ISAIAH,
BOOK
OF
between
Messianic
prophecies
2^-'
and
4'-';
ch.
5
contains
a
brief
group
of
'Woes'
(vv.'-
"•
"•
''■
»•
'').
It
is
impossible
to
enter
into
details
here
as
to
the
dates
when
these
several
booklets
first
appeared,
or
as
to
the
various
processes
of
union
or
re-arrangement
or
interpolation
or
other
modifications.
Merely
to
state
theories
which
have
been
put
forward,
without
adducing
proof
or
offering
criticism,
would
require
more
space
than
is
available.
And
from
the
nature
of
the
case
it
would
be
impossible
to
offer
any
complete
theory
that
would
not
be
in
many
respects
uncertain.
It
is
more
important
to
appreciate
the
general
fact,
which
is
clear,
that
the
Book
of
Isaiah
is
the
result
of
a
long
and
complex
literary
history,
than
to
be
ready
to
subscribe
to
any
particular
theory
of
this
history.
But
two
points
may
be
briefly
touched
on.
(1)
Much
of
the
literary
process
just
referred
to
lies
after
the
Exile.
As
will
be
shown
below,
chs.
40-55
were
not
written
till
the
last
years
of
the
Exile;
chs.
56-66
are
certainly
of
no
earlier,
and
probably
of
later,
origin
.
The
union
of
chs.
1-39
and
40-66
cannot
therefore
fall
before
the
close
of
the
Exile,
and,
as
shown
above,
it
need
not,
so
far
as
the
external
evidence
is
concerned,
fall
much
before
B.C.
180.
But
even
1-39
was
not
a
volume
of
pre-exiUc
origin;
for
the
appendix
36-39
is
derived
from
Kings,
which
was
not
completed
till,
at
the
earliest,
B.C.
661
(cf.
2
K
25"),
or
even
in
what
may
be
regarded
as
Its
first
edition
(cf
.
Driver,
LOT
«,
189)
before
about
B.C.
600.
On
this
ground
alone,
then,
the
completion
of
chs.
1-39,
by
the
inclusion
of
the
appendix
36-39,
cannot
be
placed
earlier
than
the
Exile,
and
should
probably
be
placed
later.
It
must
indeed
be
placed
later,
unless
we
regard
all
the
sections
in
chs.
1-35
which
are
of
post-exilic
origin
(see
below)as
interpolations
rather
than
as
what,
in
many
cases
at
least,
they
probably
are,
original
parts
of
the
booklets
incorporated
in
chs.
1-39.
Thus
chs.
2-12
and
13-23
(apart
from
subsequent
interpolations
or
amplifications)
as
they
lay
before
the
editor
who
united
them,
probably
owed
their
form
to
post-exilic
editors.
(2)
The
earliest
stage
of
this
long
literary
process
falls
in
the
lifetime
of
Isaiah
(c.
B.C.
740-701).
But
even
in
its
earliest
stage
the
literary
process
was
not
uniform.
In
chs.
6
and
8'
-8
we
have
what
there
is
no
reason
to
question
are
pieces
of
Isaiah's
autobiography;
Isaiah
here
speaks
of
himself
in
the
first
person.
Chs.
7
and
20
may
have
the
same
origin,
the
fact
that
Isaiah
is
here
referred
to
in
the
third
person
being
perhaps
in
that
case
due
to
an
editor;
or
these
chapters
may
be
drawn
from
early
biographies
of
the
prophet
by
a
disciple.
Thus
chs.
1.
2-12.
13-23
and
28-33
consist
in
large
part
of
prophetic
poems
or
sayings
of
Isaiah;
many
of
them
were
(presumably)
written
as
well
as
spoken
by
Isaiah
himself,
others
we
not
improbably
owe
to
the
memory
of
his
disciples.
There
is
no
reason
for
believing
that
the
present
arrange-ment
of
this
matter,
even
within
the
several
booklets,
goes
back
to
Isaiah
himself;
the
division
into
chapters
and
verses
is
of
course
of
very
much
later
origin,
and
in
several
cases
does
violence
to
the
original
connexion,
either
by
uniting,
as
in
ch.
5,
originally
quite
distinct
pieces,
or
dividing,
as
in
the
case
of
98-10',
what
formed
an
undivided
whole.
Justice
can
be
done
to
the
prophetic
literature
only
when
the
brevity
of
the
several
pieces
is
recognized,
instead
of
being
obscured
by
treating
several
distinct
pieces
as
a
single
discourse.
Unfortunately,
we
have
not
for
the
teaching
of
Isaiah,
as
for
that
of
Jesus,
a
triple
tradition.
But
the
analogy
of
the
diverse
treatment
of
the
same
sayings
in
the
different
Gospels
may
well
warn
us
that
sayings
which
lie
aide
by
side
(as
e.g.
in
5'-")
in
the
Book
of
Isaiah
were
not
necessarily
spoken
in
immediate
succession.
But
how
far,
if
not
in
the
order
in
which
he
spoke
or
wrote
them,
have
the
words
of
Isaiah
reached
us
substantially
as
he
spoke
them.
The
question
is
not
altogether
easy
to
answer,
particularly
in
one
respect.
Isaiah
was
pre-eminently
a
prophet
of
judgment;
but
intermingled
with
his
warnings
are
many
passages
of
ISAIAH,
BOOK
OF
promise:
see
e.g.
2f-'
and
i'-',
enclosing
2'-4',
9'-'
concluding
the
warnings
of
ch.
8,
and
the
constant
inter-change
of
warning
and
promise
in
chs.
28-31.
Are
these
passages
of
promise
Isaiah's,
or
the
work
of
some
later
writers
with
which
later
editors
sought
to
comfort
as
well
as
to
exhort
their
readers?
These
questions
in
general,
and
in
detail
with
reference
to
each
particular
passage,
are
still
far
from
settled.
The
general
question
of
Messianic
prophecy
in
Isaiah
is
briefly
referred
to
in
preceding
art.;
for
details
see
Cheyne's
Introd.
to
the
Book
of
Isaiah,
or
commentaries
such
as
those
of
Duhm
and
Marti,
or,
on
a
smaller
scale
and
in
English,
of
Whitehouse.
Here
this
alone
can
be
said:
the
period
over
which
and
down
to
which
the
history
of
the
growth
of
the
Book
of
Isaiah
extends,
and
the
complexity
of
that
growth,
would
easily
allow
of
these
passages
being
incorporated
as
suggested
by
the
theory;
and
we
have
the
presump-tion
created,
for
example,
by
the
absence
of
the
last
clause
of
ch.
6
from
the
Greek
text,
that
short
consolatory
annotations
were
still
being
made
as
late
as
the
2nd
cent.
B.C.
Once
the
significance
of
the
complexity
of
the
Book
of
Isaiah
is
grasped,
this
at
least
should
become
clear,
that
the
question.
Is
such
and
such
a
passage
authentic?
meaning.
Was
it
written
by
Isaiah?
proceeds
from
a
wrong
point
of
view.
The
proper
question
is
this:
To
what
period
does
such
and
such
a
passage
in
this
collection
of
prophecies,
made
certainly
after
the
Exile
and
probably
not
much
before
the
close
of
the
3rd
cent.
B.C.,
belong?
The
presence
of
explanatory
annotations
is
now
generally
recognized.
For
example,
in
7^°
Isaiah
speaks
figuratively
of
Jahweh
using
a
razor;
an
editor
added
a
note,
which
has
intruded
into
the
text,
that
by
'razor'
we
are
to
understand
the
king
of
Assyria.
As
to
the
number
of
such
annotations
scholars
differ.
2.
Summary.
—
The
following
summary
of
the
Book
of
Isaiah
and
of
the
periods
at
which
its
several
parts
appear,
or
have
been
supposed,
to
have
been
written,
must
be
used
in
the
light
of
the
foregoing
account
of
the
origin
of
the
book.
In
the
clearer
cases
the
evidence
of
date
is
briefly
indicated;
in
others
one
or
two
theories
are
mentioned.
But
for
the
evidence,
such
as
it
is,
the
reader
must
turn
to
larger
works;
it
would
require
more
space
than
the
scope
of
the
article
allows,
even
to
summarize
it
here.
Again,
in
the
majority
of
cases
no
attempt
is
made
to
indicate
the
smaller
annotations
of
which
an
example
is
given
in
the
preced.
paragraph.
For
a
synthesis
(in
part)
of
those
sections
of
the
book
which
consist
of
Isaiah's
prophecies,
see
Isaiah;
and
in
con-nexion
with
chs.
40-55,
consult
art.
Servant
of
the
Loud.
1'
.
Title.
—
Probably
prefixed
by
an
editor
who
brought
together
a
considerable
collection
of
Isaiah's
prophecies.
'
The
days
of
Uzziah,
Jotham,
Ahaz,
and
Hezeklah'
describe
the
entire
period
of
Isaiah's
activity.
12-31.
Till
comparatively
recently
this
was
generally
regarded
as
a
single
discourse,
constituting,
aa
Ewald
terms
it,
the
'
great
arraignment.*
But
there
was
no
agreement
as
to
the
period
of
Isaiah's
lifetime
to
which
it
belonged,
—
some
scholars
referring
it
to
the
period
of
the
Syro-Ephraimitish
War
(cf.
ch.
7),
almost
at
the
beginning,
othetB
to
the
time
of
Sennacherib's
invasion
at
the
close,
of
Isaiah's
career.
If,
as
is
really
probable,
this
is
not
a
single
discourae,
these
differences
are
in
part
accounted
for.
The
chapter
falls
into
these
sections
—
(a)
w.^-i',
which
may
perhaps
itself
consist
of
two
distinct
pieces,
w.*-^
and
w.*''-":
(6)
w.^^-^"*,
perhaps
consisting
of
distinct
sayings,
namely,
T.^^
and
vY,i9-20j
(c)
vv
.21-28;
(d)
vv.2'-«,
which
again,
as
some
think,
are
two
f
ragmen
ts—v.2"-
and
vv.2»-m
.
Of
these
sections
(a)
and
(c)aredistinctpropheticpoems
of
Isaiah
complete
in
themselves,
(a)
dating
probably
from
701
,
since
the
terms
of
W.8-'
are
better
accounted
for
by
the
Assyrian
invasion
of
that
year
than
by
that
of
the
Syro-Ephraimitish
army
in
735;
(c)
perhaps
from
about
705.
The
short
sayings
of
(Jb)
and
the
fragment
(d)
are
more
difficult
to
date;
(d)has
been
regarded
by
some
&a
a
denunciation
of
the
Northern
Kingdom,
and
therefore
delivered
before
B.C.
722;
by
others
as
a
post-exilic
passage
of
promise
(v.2').
2^
Title
of
a
collection
of
Isaianic
prophecies.
22-4'.
The
main
body
of
this
section,
consisting
of
a
