§ 5. ON CERTAIN '.fifoDERN THEORIES AS TO THE AUTHORSHIP OF THB EXISTING "BooK." A theory was started, towards th~ close of the eighteenth century, by R German writer named Koppe, in his translation of Bishop Lowth'a • Isaiah,' to the effect that Isaiah was not the real author of the prophecies contained in eh. xl.-lxvi. of the work ascribed to him. The work of an entirely different prophet, living towards the close of the Captivity, had, he conjectured, been attached by some accident to the genuine prophecies of the son of Amo2, and had thenceforth passed by his name. The theory thus started was welcomed by other Germans of the rationalistic school, and could shortly boast among its supporters· the names of Doderlin, Eichhorn, Paulus, Baue'r, Rosenmiiller, De W ette, J n-sti, and the great Hebraist GesenillB. It based itself mainly on two grounds:. (1) tha.t the author of eh. xl.-lxvi. takes for his standpoint the time of the Babylonian captivity, a.nd, spea1.-ing as if that were present, from thence looks forward jnto the subsequent fnture; (2) that he has a knowledge of the name and career of Cyrus, which a prophet living two centuries before could, not possibly ha,e had. The theory was subsequently farther supported by alleg~ differences between the style and diction of eh. i.-xx:rix. and eh. :rl.-lxvi., which were declared to necessitate different authors, and to mark eh. :xl.-b::vi aa the production of a later age. The simple theory thus started of two Isaiahs, an earlier 8JiLd a later, one contemporary with Hezekiah, the other with the later Captivity,• whose workB had been accidentally thrown together, has, since its original pro- mulgation, been elaboratea and expanded, chiefly by the labours of Ewald, in a wonderful way. Ewald traces in the Book of Isaiah, as it has come .down to us, the work of at least seven hands.1 . To Isaiah,·the contemporary of Hezekiah, the son of .Amoz, he ascribes thirty chapters only out of· the sixty-six, together with parts of two •others. . To a. second. great prophet, whom he calls "the Great Unnamed," and whom be places 'towards· the close of the Captivity, he assigns eighteen chapters, with parts of four others. A third prophet, wbo lived in the reign of Manasseh, wrote one whole chapter (the priceless fifty-third) and portions of four or five others. A fourth, belonging to the time of Ezekiel, wrote almost the whole of four chapters. Another, perhaps J eremiab, wrote two chapters ; and· two others wrote portions of chapters-one of them the prophecy in eh. xxi. 1-10; and the other. that beginning eh. xiii. 2 and tenµinating eh. xiv. 28. The Book of Isaiah, as it has come down to us, is thus a. patchw:ork of an extraordinary kind. Ewald's theory mAy be thus exhibited in a. tabular form- • Ewald'■ views a.re propounded, partly iD bis • Propheten des Alten Bundes,' but more completely in hill •Biaol'J of llrael,' voL iv, p. 207, eC ffii•; lllld voL T, pp. 15, 4.1-i?, 'l'HE BOOK OF 'rHE PROPHET ISAIAH. 11ix
AUTHOR, DATlli. 'l'I, .,,, Ch. i.-xii . Isafab himself B.C. 759-713 Oh; xiii.-11iv. 23 Unknown author (No. I) 570-560 Oh. xiv. 24-xx. Isaiah himself " 727-710 . Oh. xxi. 1~10 ... Unknown author (No. 2) ,, 570-560 Oh. xxi. 11-xxxiii. Isaiah himself 715-700 . Ch. 111111:iv. and xxxv. J eremi11h (?) 540-538 Ch. xxxvi.-xxxix. Not assigned. " Oh. xl.-lii. 12 ... The Great Unnamed. ,, 550-540 Ch. Iii. i3-liv. 12 Unknown author (No. 3) ,, 690-640 Ch. Uv;I3-lvi. 8 'l'he Great Unnamed 550-540 Oh; lvi; 9.:...1vii. 11 Unknown author (No. 3) 690-640 Oh. !vii. l2c-21.., The Great Unnamed ,," 550-540 Ch. !viii. 1-lix. 20 Unknown author (No. 4) ,, 595-575 • Ch, lix. 21-lllii. The Great Unnamed n 550-540 Oh. !xiii. and !xiv. Qh. !xv.' e.nd !xvi: Unknown author (No. 4) The Great Unnamed . 595-575 ,, 550-540
Nor does it at all appear that with Ewald's theory of a sevenfold authorship .of "Isa.iah" we have reached the final outcome of the separatist hypothesis started, by·Koppe. The latest English writer 1 is of opinion that" Ewald's treatment of the latter part of the Book of Isaiah cannot," at any rate, "be complained of on the score.of excessive analysis." He declares that "it is .becoming more and more certain.(?) that the present form of the prophetic Scriptu.res is due to a literary class (the so-called Sopherim, 'scribes,' or .•' Scripturists·'), whose principal fnnction was collecting and S'ltpplementing the scattered records of prophetic revelation. This function they performed with rare self-abnegation. Of a regard on their part for personal distinc- tion there is not a trace.; self.-consciousness. is swallowed np in the sense of belonging, if only in a .secondary degree, to the company of inspired men. They wrote, they recast, they edited, in the same spirit in which a gifted artist of our own day devoted himself to the glory of modern painters." The result is tha.t the Book of Isa.ia.h, a.s it has come down to us, is a " mosaic," or patchwork, the production of no one knows how many authors, brought gradually into its present condition. Nothing is more certain than that these theories did not originate in any marked differences of style between the portions of the Book of Isaiah whioh are assigned to different authors. They arose entirely from the snbject-me.tter of the prophecies. "The really decisive arguments against the unity of e.uthoi-ship are derived," we a.re told, "(1) from the historical circumst.a.nces implied in the disputed ohapters, and (2) from the originality of .the ideas, or of the forms in "'hich the ideas are expressed."' Under ~ See Mr. Cheyne'a • PrC11pheoie1 of haia.h,' vol. ii., Euay vi. pp. 215-217, • Ohe;rne, ' The Book of Iaaia.h ohronologioally arranged,' p. ui. XX INTRODUOTION TO