PSALMS
Now,
since
in,
e.g.,
Pss
20.
21
the
allusion
to
tlie
Ising
cannot
satisfactorily
be
explained
of
a
foreign
monarch,
and
these
Psalms
cannot
be
thrown
as
late
as
B.C.
105,
it
appears
to
follow
that
they
originated
before
586.
Other
Psalms
ajluding
to
a
king
who
cannot
well
be
a
foreigner,
or
have
lived
so
late
as
B.C.
105,
are
Pss
2.
18.
28.
45.
61.
63.
72.
Yet
there
still
remains
a
question
of
interpretation:
Is
the
king
in
these
Psalms
an
actual
contemporary
individual,
or
the
Messianic
king
whether
regarded
aa
an
individual
or
as
the
royal
people
of
Israel
(of.
JQR,
1895,
p.
658
tf.)?
If
the
latter
interpretation
is
correct
(aa,
e.g.,
in
the
case
of
Ps
2
at
least,
it
probably
is),
the
value
of
the
allusion
as
a
criterion
of
pre-exilic
date
vanishes:
for
a
reference
to
a
king
who
is
not
a
person
of
history
but
an
ideal
conception
is
not
less
probable
in
a
post-exilic
than
in
a
pre-exilic
poem.
Further,
a
purely
proverbial
allusion
to
the
king,
such
as
occurs
in
Ps
33i«,
furnishes
no
valid
criterion
for
pre-exilic
origin,
nor
does
an
allusion
to
kings
in
the
plural
(e.g.
Ps
119«
148").
If,
as
the
previous
remarks
should
have
suggested,
it
is
in
most
cases
only
possible
to
determine
whether
a
Psalm
is
pre-exilic
or
post-exilic
on
evidence
somewhat
widely
applicable,
and
in
many
cases
impossible
to
determine
even
this
quite
decisively,
it
should
be
clear
that
the
attempt
to
fix
the
authorship
or
dates
of
Psalms
very
precisely
must
generally
prove
fruitless.
Are
there
any
that
can
be
referred,
even
with
great
probability,
to
a
particular
occasion
as
that
of
their
origin,
or
to
a
par-ticular
writer?
The
mere
fact
that
a
Psalm
may
appear
to
us
suitable
to
a
particular
occasion,
as,
e.g.,
Ps
46
to
the
deliverance
from
Sennacherib
in
701,
does
not
necessarily
prove
that
it
even
refers
to
it,
still
less
that
it
was
written
at
the
time
;
the
question
arises,
Is
the
occasion
in
question
the
cyniv
one
to
which
the
terms
of
the
Psalm
are
applicable,
or
are
those
terms
sufficiently
specific
to
render
it
improbable
that
the
Psalm
might
have
fitted
other
occasions
unknown
to
us,
or
but
partially
known?
Thus
Pss
44.
74.
79.
118
presuppose
conditions
which
resemble
what
is
known
of
the
period
of
the
Maccabsean
revolt
(cf.
1
Maccabees),
more
closely
than
what
is
known
of
any
other
period,
and
on
that
ground
they
have
been
assigned
by
many
to
the
Maccabaean
period;
the
question
is.
Are
the
descriptions
so
specific
that
they
might
not
also
correspond
to
the
conditions
of
the
middle
of
the
4th
cent.
B.e.
(to
which
other
scholars
have
referred
Pss
44.
74.
79)
if
we
were
equally
well
informed
with
regard
to
these?
5.
The
question
of
Davldic
Fsalms.
—
The
question
of
authorship
retains
an
interest
only
with
reference
to
David.
The
theory
that
David
was
the
author
of
Psalms
can
be
traced
back
as
far
as
the
time
(not
to
be
dated
very
precisely,
but
centuries
at
least
after
David's
time)
when
the
historical
notes
were
added
in
certain
Psalms
to
the
title
'of
David'
(see
above).
Whether
it
goes
back
further
(except
in
the
case
of
Ps
18
=
2
S
22;
see
below)
to
the
time
of
the
origin
of
the
collection
entitled
'of
David'
is
less
clear,
for
it
is
by
no
means
certain
that
the
similar
title
'of
the
chief
musician'
referred
to
authorship
(see
above).
Still,
we
may
consider
the
argument
which,
based
on
the
assumption
that
it
did,
is
to
the
effect
that
if
so
many
Psalms
(as
73
in
the
Hebrew
text,
more
in
the
Greek
text,
and
all
in
later
Jewish
tradition)
were
attributed
to
David,
some
must
actually
be
his,
though
many
so
entitled
are
demonstrably
and
admittedly
not.
In
a
word,
where
there
is
much
smoke,
there
must
have
been
some
fire.
The
argument
at
best
does
not
seem
to
justify
more
than
a
strong
probability
that
David
wrote
psalms;
and
possibly
the
fact
that
David
was
a
famous
poet,
even
though
all
his
poems
more
nearly
resembled
2
S
1"-"
than
the
Psalms,
coupled
with
his
fame
as
a
zealous
worshipper
of
Jahweh,
may
be
the
extent
of
the
historical
fact
underlying
the
late
traditions.
But
even
granted
that
the
evidence
were
strong
enough
to
justify
the
statement
that
some
Psalms
of
David
are
preserved
in
the
PSALMS
Psalter,
the
most
important
problem
still
remains
to
be
solved,
viz.
which
Psalms
in
particular
are
David's?
It
will
be
found
on
an
examination
that
the
positive
reasons
assigned
for
regarding
any
particular
Psalm
as
David's
are
inconclusive:
they
often
amount
to
nothing
more
than
an
argument
that
there
ia
nothing
in
such
and
such
Psalms
which
forbids
us
to
ascribe
them
to
David.
There
are
some
Psalms
which
in
whole
or
in
part
may
not
be
incompatible
with
what
we
know
of
David's
life,
but
the
allusions
are
too
general
to
enable
us
to
deny
that
they
are
equally
applicable
to
many
other
lives.
The
Psalm
which
is
most
generally
claimed
for
David
by
those
who
go
beyond
the
general
argument
and
specify
particular
Psalms
as
his,
is
Ps
18;
but
many
who
hold
this
to
be
in
the
main
David's
feel
compelled
to
treat
vv.^"-^'
as
later.
An
external
argument
in
favour
of
the
Davidic
authorship
of
this
Psalm
has
often
been
sought
in
the
fact
that
it
appears
in
2
S
22
as
well
as
in
the
Psalter;
but
the
argument
is
of
little
value;
it
carries
us
back,
indeed,
beyond
the
evidence
of
the
Psalm-titles,
but
the
Books
of
Samuel
were
composed
long
after
David's
time,
and
2
S
22
occurs
in
a
section
(2
S
21-24)
which
shows
signs
that
entitle
us
to
conclude
that
it
was
inserted
after
the
main
work
was
complete.
We
may
safely
conclude
thus:
There
are
Psalms
in
the
Psalter
of
which,
if
we
may
remove
certain
parts
as
later
interpolations,
a
residuum
remains
of
which
it
would
be
unjustifiable
to
assert
that
it
wjis
not
written
by
David.
6.
Character
of
the
contents
:
the
'
I'
of
the
Fsalms.
—
But
if
we
cannot
determine
the
[authors
of
the
Psalms,
or
the
particular
occasions
out
of
which
they
sprang,
we
may
yet
ask,
and
ought
to
ask.
What
type
of
persons
wrote
them,
what
type
of
experiences
do
they
embody,
with
what
type
of
subject
do
they
deal?
In
order
to
answer
these
questions,
it
will
be
necessary
to
discuss
briefly
an
important
principle
of
interpretation.
A
considerable
proportion
of
the
Psalms
describe,
from
the
writer's
standpoint,
the
experiences
or
aspira^
tions
or
the
religious
faith
of
the
nation
or
of
the
religious
community
—
whether
this
community
be
co-extensive
with
the
nation
or
a
grfiup
or
party
within
it.
The
Psalms
which
most
obviously
belong
to
this
class
are
those
in
which
the
pronoun
of
the
first
person
plural
is
used.
These
are
some
27
in
number
(see
Pss
21.
33.
46.
47.
48.
SO.
60.
[both
vv.'-<
and
6-12=
108'-"]
65.
[in
v.''
Vulg.
and
LXX
read
'us'
for
'me']
67.
79.
80.
81.
90.
95.
98.
99.
100.
105.
113.
115.
117.
124.
126.
132.
136.
144.
147).
In
another
group
of
25
Psalms
(viz.
Pss
8.
17.
22.
40.
44.
59.
62.
66.
68.
71.
74.
75.
78.
84.
85.
89.
94.
103.
106,
116,
118.
122.
135.
137.
141)
the
personal
pronoun
is
sometimes
in
the
first
singiilar,
sometimes
in
the
first
plural;
this
interchange
is
not
perhaps
to
be
always
accounted
for
in
the
same
way;
but
in
some
of
these
Psalms
it
is
obviously
the
main
purpose
of
the
writer
to
describe
the
experiences
of
the
nation
(cf.
e.g.,
Pss
44.
74.
78).
Another
group
of
Psalms,
not
so
easily
defined
as
the
two
preceding,
but
including
some
22
Psalms
at
least
(Pss
1.
12.
14.
(
=
53)
15.
19>-«
24.
29.
34.
72.
76.
82.
93.
96.
97.
107.
112.
114.
125.
127.
133.
134.
148.
149.
150),
are
as
little
limited
to
individual
experience
as
the
first:
they
are,
for
example,
calls
to
praise
God
for
His
goodness,
or
de-scriptions
of
the
character
which
is
pleasing
to
God.
The
remainder
of
the
Psalms,
about
(yet
barely)
half
the
whole
number,
appear
superficially,
in
contrast
to
the
foregoing,
to
dfescribe
the
experiences
or
aspirationa
of
some
individual.
They
are
written
in
the
first
person
singular.
But
in
one
Psalm,
owing
to
its
peculiar
struc-ture,
the
Psalmist
supplies
the
interpretation
of
the
pronoun
of
first
singular,
and
in
this
case
the
singular
pronoun
refers,
not
to
an
individual,
but
to
the
nation
(see
Ps
129').
The
personification
of
the
nation
as
an
individual
which
underlies
this
usage
occurs
often
in
Hebrew
literature
(see
Servant
of
the
Lord,
§
5).
How
far
does
it
extend
in
the
Psalter?
Is
the
much
