At Dn 9% we possibly have the word used in that which has come to be its distinctive sense. If so, it is the earliest instance of this.
In the next oldest works which have to be noticed, as probabiy giving indications of the expectation of the Messiah, the title is not used ; but this is explicable from the oracular, apocalyptic character of the writings in question, which favours an allusive or symbolical mode of speech. In the most ancient portion of the Sibylline Oracles (iii. 1. 97 to 1. 807, or according to some critics a little more), composed about B.C. 140, we have (1. 652 ff.) a description of a king whom God should send, who can hardly be other than the Messiah. Again, in one of the older sections of the Book of Enoch, the Vision of Seventy Shepherds, which probably belongs to the reign of Tela Hyrecanus (B.C. 135-
106) [in art. ENOCH, vol. i. p. 707, it is placed some- what earlier], and in which the history and destin
of the Chosen People are symbolically represented, the white bullock, it is generally allowed, denotes
the Messiah. Another portion of the Book of Enoch, the so-called Book of Parables, should be considered at this point, if the period assigned for its composition in art. ENocH, ié., is adopted, and if the chronological order ought to be strictly adhered to. But critics differ widely in respect to its date. The supposed historical allusions in it are of very uncertain import. Even on this ground it would be well to reserve it for separate treatment, when the course of the history of the Messianic Hope, so far as it may be determined by means of evidence of more unquestionable char- acter, has been reviewed asa whole. But there is still stronger reason for doing this. The Messianic doctrine of this book is, by common admission, anlike in important particulars to that found in any other Jewish document. Whatever, there- fore, the time and circumstances of its origin may have been, it seems certain that it did not exer- cise any general influence,
Ve a to the Psalms of Solomon, which con- tain full and clear evidence of the idea of the Messiah and also (Ps-Sol 1755 18° 8) of the use of the title. These psalms were most probably written by one author, and within no very wide limits of time. They contain allusions which can best be explained if the taking of Jerusalem by Pompey (B.C. 63) was still recent when some of them were composed. Though we possess them only in Greek, they were evidently written origin- ally in Hebrew, and there is every reason to regard them as Palestinian. Pss 17 and 18 are some of the most important passages in all Jewish litera-
VOL. I'',—23
MESSIAH 353 ture in connexion with the history of the Messianic Hope. Their thought and language are moulded on the portions of OT which celebrate God’s cove- nant with David. Another fragment of the Sibylline Oracles, which is probably of a little later date than the Psalms of Solomon, contains an allusion to the Messiah (Or. Sid. iii. 46-50).
The comparative scantiness of the indications which we possess of the expectation of the Messiah in the last two or three centuries B.c. cannot be wholly explained by our want of knowledge of the
eriod. The silence of the Apocrypha has already een referred to. The truth would seem to be that, in part owing to changed political circum- stances, in part also to a deeper cause, a move ment of religious feeling, the hope of the restoration of the Davidie monarchy, after it had slumbered for a while, re-awoke gradually, and in some parts of the Jewish world more decidedly than in others, and especially so in Palestine, during the last cent. and a half B.c., and that as it did so, a unique and ideal character was attri- buted to the person and mission of the expected king, such as had not before been, commonly at least, associated with any looked-for occupant of the throne. The fact itself that he would be separated by so long an interval of time from all his predecessors contributed to this, and in addition a deepened sense of the magnitude of the events in connexion with which he would appear, and in which he would bear a part, had begun to enhance the idea of his greatness.
The chief elements in this early conception of the Messiah have become apparent in tracing its history, but it will be well to mark them carefully before proceeding further. He will be a descendant of David; Son of David comes to be used of him as a special appellation (first in Ps—-Sol 17%, in the Gospels Mt 957 etc., and commonly in Rabbinic literature). He will be the ideal king, whose mind and action shall be in entire accord with the will of God, who will be God’s true representa- tive upon earth, in whose days and through whom God will make good all His promises, and who will lead all men to honour the God of Israel and to respect Israel as God’s people. The relation of the ΠΣ ΤᾺ to the actual inauguration of this happy state of things cannot be precisely deter- mined. It is clearly an exaggeration to say with Castelli (2 Messia secondo gli Ebrei, p. 164) and Dalman (Worte Jesu, p. 242) that the Messiah is never according to the original conception himself the deliverer, but only the king of the people after God has wrought deliverance. The writer of Ps 2, and those who took their ideas from it (e.g. Ps— Sol 17%), penny attributed the subjugation of the enemies of God to the agency of the Messiah. It was also evidently possible for writers who con- templated this to use language implying that the deliverance was God’s ἘΔῚΣ The part taken by supernatural and by human agency would be, no doubt, somewhat variously conceived by different minds ; bnt the language of the documents is not full enouga to justify us in defining the views of the several writers with exactness. At the period we are considering, thought upon this subject would be vague. Only through a process of re- flexion, and when it came to be a question of harmonizing diverse representations in the pro- phets, would the place in the succession of events at which the Messiah would appear be deter- mined.