(2.) The opinion that it is a moral fiction was first thrown out by Luther {Vorrede aufs Buch Tobia [Bi- ble, ed. 1534]), and has since been maintained by Rai- nold {Censur. i, 72G), J. A. Fabricius, Biuldeus {Hist. Ec- cles. ii, 489), Paul Fagius, Eichhorn (Einleit. p. 401 sq.), Bertholdt (Einleit. v, 2477 sq.), De Wette {Einleit. § 309), Gutmann (Die Apokryphen, p. 143), Ewald (Gesch. d. V. J. iv, 233 sq.), Fritszche {Kurzgef. exeget. Handb. z. d. Ajwkryphen, ii, 14 sq.), Davidson (The Text of the 0. T. Considered, p. 1001),yaihinger (in Herzog's Real-En- cyUop. s. V. "'Tobias"), Griitz (Gesch. der Jiiden, iv, 180 [2d ed. 186(5]), etc. In support of this opinion it is
TOBIT, BOOK OF
446
TOBIT, BOOK OF
urged — o. The narrative is completely isolated; and tlidiitfli the events pretend to have occurred before and sliortly after tlie fall of Nineveh (IJ.C G(l(j). no otlicr docinneiit written at a later pcrioil refers to them. It bears a strong likeness to the tales of the 'J'kouMiid iind One Xit//ilx, with the obvious exception that the wTiter has a consideral)le acquaintance and sympathy with the writinijs of the Old Test, He writes in a pleasing style, and with a good deal of power. But he is clearly at variance with the sacred books of the holy nation on itnporlant points both of fact and iirinciple. Tobit's age. Ids wife's, wlio died after him, and that of his son are much beyond the ordinary limit of old age in his day, and bring us back to tlie times of the patriarchs. lie was (ifty-eight years of age when he lost his sight, in the reign of Esar-haddon,anil lived one hundred years after that time. Now, if, according to Rawlinson, Esar- liaddon l)egan to reign B.C. (i80, Tobit must have sur- vived the fall of Nineveh (B.C. 625 or GOG), of which he is made to jirophesy (xiv,4). He also takes no account of Sargoii, who comes in between Shalmaneser and Sen- nacherib. He removes to Elymais, and yet is found at Nineveh (xi, 10), though he does not intimate his re- turn, unless it be in iii, 17, where he speaks of coming liomc. b. The name Tobit does not occur in the Old Test., and belongs to a later age. c. The form, spirit, and tone of tlie narrative sliow that it belongs to a very late period. The doctrine of good and evil spirits (iii, 8; vi, 14; viii, .3; xii, 15), the ascription of human lusts to spiritual beings (vi, 14), the notion of the seven pres- ence-angels bringing the jirayers of the pious before the Divine throne (xii, 12, 15), the marriage instrument (Hjirin), and the legal benediction prononnced over the wedded pair (vii, 13, 14), are of post-Babylonian or- igin. (/. Tlie stories of the angel Kaphael in a human form giving a false account of himself as being a kins- man of Tobit (V, 12), of Tobit becoming blind in both eyes by the falling of some dung of s])arrows (ii, 10), and of the marvellous fish (vi, 2-5) are beyond all mat- ter of fact. The modes of repelling evil spirits and curing blindness betray a superstitious or trifling mind. The angel is made to feign himself a man, a Jew of a family known to Tobit, and to be the voucher for the false charms which are introduced. Altliough the ex- traordinary cliaractcr of the details, as such, is no ob- jection against the reality of the occurrences, yet it may be fairly urged that the character of the alleged miraculous events, when taken together, is alien from the general character of such events in the historical books of Scripture; while there is nothing exceptional in the circumstances of the persons, as in the case of Daniel, which might serve to explain this difference.
(3.) The view that the narrative is based upon a real occurrence preserved by tradition, but poetically embel- lished to suit the spirit of the time in which it was written, is maintained by Arnald, Dereser, Bgen, Keil, etc. The fact that there are different recensions and embellishments of the story, and that the Midrash Tan- chiima (pericope 13'^'Xil) gives an independent version of it, seems to show that it was traditionally handed down from the time when the occurrence took place. It is (piite possil)le that some real occurrences, preserved by tradition, furnished the basis of the narrative, but it <loes not follow l)y any means that the elimination of the extraordinary details will leave behind pure his- tory (so Ilgen). As the book stands it is a distinctly didactic narrative. Its point lies in the moral lesson which it conveys, and not in the incidents. The inci- dents furnish lively pictures of the truth which the au- thor wished 1(1 inculcate, but the lessons themselves are independent of them. Nor can any weight be laid on the minute exactness with which apparently unimpor- tant details are described (e. g. tlie genealogy and dwell- ing-place of Tobit, i, 1, 2 ; the marriage festival, viii, 20 ; xi. 18, 19, quoted by Ilgen and Welte), as prov'ing the reality of the events, for such particularity is character-
istic of Eastern romance, and appears again in the Book of Judith. The writer in composing his story necessa- rily observed the ordinary form of a historical narrative.