In the OT ' when any question is addressed to a person or persons whom the reader knows to be present, the formula of replj- is frequently and perhaps generally without proj^er name and with- out pronoun'; cf. Lk 2^". Later in his Gospel Lk. generally uses 6 6e elwev ; but the first chapters have 'a sjtecial OT colouring' (Wordsworth), in view of Avhich Harnack's argument, that ' if in v.'*'" the subject was to be changed, Lk. would have written dwev Se Mapidyu,' falls to the ground. Further, the words fjiaKapLouai fxe Trdcrai at yeueai of v.'**' seem to be a reply to Elisabeth's /juiKapia. ij irurTeixxaaa. On the other hand, it is onlj- fair to point out that Prof. Burkitt seeks to prove that St. Luke was ' re- markably fond of inserting /cat elinv or dirtv Se between the speeches of his characters without a change of speaker.' t (2) Another argument has been based on the words ^ixuv^v 5e 'Slapiajx avv avrr), which are said to make it probable that Elisabeth has been the .speaker, otherwise Lk. would have written Ifxavev 5e M. avv ttj 'E. or e/jifive de (jvv ttj 'E. ' The Peshitta as well as the Sinai Palimpsest renders, "Now Mary remained with Elisabeth.''' But the Greek has retained "the tell-tale ai'T??"' (Burkitt).
In the OT the personality of the singer is, as a rule, sunk in the song, and the name is mentioned at the end as if to pick up the thread (cf. Balaam, Nu 24-5 . Moses, Dt 32« 34^ etc. ). It is true that Hannah's name is not mentioned in 1 S 2'^ but it has been mentioned at the beginning. The name
* Prof. Bnrkitt still adheres to his ^iew, that ' Irenseus resrarfled Eb'sabrfh as a type of the ancient Jewish Ecclesia prophesvinif hv a Hivine Spirit ahont the Christ.'
+ JThSt vii.p. 223.
niarks 'the whole section vv.-*""^ as what we maj- call a " Mary section," ' the Svriac reading being an attempt to clear up ambiguity (WordsA\orth).
On the whole, then, so far as external evidence goes, the balance of probability is in favour of the reading or glo.ss 'Mary.' But the more difficult question of internal evidence remains for dis- cus.sion. Does the Magnificat seem more suitable on the lips of Elisabeth ?
Harnack thinks that it was modelled on the lines of Hannah's song, that it expresses the feeling of a mother from whom has been removed Avhat Jewish women felt as ' the reproach of childless- ne.ss.' Burkitt suggests that 'the A070S airb -Lyri% irpoe\dil)v more corresponds to the htness of things than a burst of premature .song.'
Apart from the question raised bj' Wellhausen whether Hannah's song has been interpolated in 1 S 2, Spitta thinks that it is the song of a warrior rather than a woman, and looks elsewhere for parallels to the Magnifraf. Anj' way, either IMary or Elisabeth woukl regard it as the song of Hannah, which is the main point before us. We cannot do better than quote the text at this point, with Harnack's parallels, to introduce his argu- ment that St. Luke is therebj- i^roved to be the actual author of the liymn which he puts into the mouth of Elisabeth.
(1) 1 S 21 'Ktrr€p£u6x Y, xMphtoi, puiv fk X'jfjiUf u'^uiht xlpa.; fjiAv iv
V\\46. 47 yiiyxy.Cvit Vt '^iJX,y. IMOU
TVS^UU UC'J £Ti TU Biiii Ti»t (rUTV,fH LLOV'
vuiriv T'y;'j hoCy^r.; ecirou' thol/yatp
OCTO ToZ \'JV fJUX-XOCpioZ^iv fJCi
Toitroct Oct yivioci'
(2) 1 S 111 li,, iTi^U-ruv iTi-
/3X;*4'>;? 6Tt
TOLTimCttfft)/
^toCX-^? ff-ov ; Gn 30l>^ uMxtXrpifx. i.yt*i^ OTt LLccxapd^Gita'tv /j.£ Toiyroct Oct yuvoctKi:.
(3) Dt 1021 'oa-rt; ii70iy.ff-sv Iv ao\ ■70C ijciya.\oc. Ps 111^ etyioi xoct
(}0,llp01 TO 6HLC0C OCl/ToZ.
(4) Ps IO3I" TO hi i>.iot ToZ xupiou oc-ro TOV octuyoi xoci zot; Tov oc'iujyos eri toZ; COi2oiiu.iiot/;
OCUTOV.
(5) Ps 89II (TJ iTocTiiiua-oci u;
TpOCVfjCeCTtOCi 'jrTiP'/i^OCVOy, X'jCl it
Tu ^pccx-oyt Tv,~ hvvacuiai; ffou htiffxiiprrktra.: toI; ix^poC; o'ov.
(6) Job 121s hvviLcTec; a\ yr,;
XOCTitTTpV^iV^ .^H TOV TOiOUtTO.
TocTuvolf; iU i'^o;.
(7) 1 S 2" xCpto; TTux'Ui '■"■I TXowTi^s/, TflcTgivOi xeti acnir^ot. Ps 107" ■^!jx;',v TUyoJirocy £ii- trXy.iriy ocyecO^y. Job 1219 i:. ecT0(rT:>J.a)y Upst? ociXf^ocXaiTov;.
(8) Is 4lS (TV h-., 'lo-px-:.?., -roc't; fjLAv, oZ ocyTO^oc^cfjCv.y. Ps 98'^ Ifjcy/.o'^/, TOV kkiov; ecvrou toi *lacxu^.
(9) Mic 72* iuiru . . . iXioy t^ 'A^pocoiUy xocOcTt UUOff'Gt: TOt; rrecTpocs-iy y.UrWy ; 2 S 22^1 xcci Totuty i/.sO; . . . TOJ ^ocvi'th >.oct
TUt O'TiptjCOCTt OC'JTOU iOJ, OttUyOS.
In regard to these parallels Spitta argues with some force that there are nearer iiarallels in the P.salms ; e.g. Ps 33"' ■* ei' tw Kvpiqi eiraLvedri<T€TaL ij '^I'XV /MOV . . . fxeyoKi'vare tov Kvpiov avv efxoi ; 34^ i] 5e i^i'XV /xov dyaWidaeraL ewi t(^ Kvpitfj, Tep(p6rj(r€Tai eni rtfj ff(i3TT]pi<{i avTov ; 34^ = 39^' =69^ d7aXXtdcrai;'ro /cat fv<p- pavdeitjaav eVt croi wavres oi ^rjTovvTes (re Kvpie, Kai eiiraTwaav 5td Travrds, ^leyaXvvdrjTijj 6 KVpios, oi d7a- TTuivres TO (Toyr-qpiov aov.* This is true; but at the same time we cannot doubt that a Jewish woman would turn to Hannali's song as, so to speak, a model, even though tlie phrases of the psalms which she used often in deAotion would come more readily to her lips while working out her idea.
Harnack picks out certain words as having no place in his parallels, and suggests that they are not found in the LXX, and being cliaracteristic of Lk.'s style, prove that lie was really the author of the hymn. Spitta, however, proves that the phrases in question are not only found in the LXX, * He quotes Ps 9H'"- 12-l-B 308 as parallels to v.53.