THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
TLZ, 1904, p. 255). From this it must be inferred that this version is much older than is generally supposed.
6. The Epistle of Jeremiah: As an addition to the Book of Baruch there is often found the socalled Epistle of Jeremiah (occurring as chap, vi in the Vulgate, in Luther's Bible, and in the English). Originally it had nothing to do with the Book of Baruch, and in older manuscripts is separated from it. But without any valid reason the two were united at a very early period. The letter is addressed to the exiles designated by Nebuchadnezzar to be led to Babylon. In contents it is a somewhat diffusive and rhetorical exhortation, though in good Greek, against the Babylonian deities, together with an ironical description of their nothingness. Its genuineness is out of the question; for the epistle was certainly originally written in Greek. Besides, the duration of the exile (verse 3) is given as lasting seven generations in opposition to Jer. xxix, 10. Many find in II Mace, ii, 1 sqq. direct reference to this epistle. But what is said there has nothing to do with it. Still less can it be regarded as a reference to the epistle, when the fact is taken into account that in one Targum to Jer. x, 11, this Aramaic verse is designated a " copy" from an epistle of Jeremiah (cf. Nestle, Marginalien und Materialien, 1893, pp. 42 sqq.).
7. Tobit: The name of this book and of its hero is read in the Vulgate Tobias ; but in the Greek text Tobit (or Tobith), in the English translation ''Tobit," where "Tobias" is only the name of the son of Tobit. According to the Greek text, in the first part of the book Tobit himself tells his story, speaking in the first person; from iii, 7, the narrator speaks in the third person. Tobit, a son of Tobiel of the tribe of Naphtali belonged to the exiles who were led away to Nineveh into captivity by the Assyrian king Shalmaneser. He lived there also under the kings Sennacherib and Esarhaddon and always distinguished himself by an exemplary piety. Since in spite of this piety he still experienced misfortune, he was derided and ridiculed (i, 1— iii, 6). A similar experience was that of a pious woman named Sara, the daughter of Raguel in Ecbatana (iii, 7-15). Because both prayed to God in their distress, the angel Raphael was sent to deliver both from the sufferings which befell them in their innocence, and to unite Sara and Tobias, the son of Tobit, in marriage (iii, 16-xii, 22). Tobit sang a psalm of praise in honor of God, and lived to be a hundred and forty-eight, and Tobias lived to be a hundred and twenty-seven (xiii, xiv). This is the course of the narrative, which is adorned with many details, exhibits a good talent for composition, and also displays the spirit of the strictly Pharisaic legality. Older theology down to the nineteenth century regarded the story as history; but the narrative is no doubt pure fiction. Its object is obvious; it is to prove that God never forsakes the pious and righteous; on the contrary, he always takes care of them, though they seem to be forsaken; finally that he richly rewards their piety. On this account those who, like Tobit, dwell among the Gentiles should not suffer thempelves by the hardships of their external circumstances to become faithless to God.
The contents being so general, it is impossible to fix the time of composition. But with some probability it may be said that the book originated during the last two centuries b.c. There is no reason to go down to the post- Vespasian time, as Hitzig does (ZWT, 1860, pp. 250 sqq.); for here the case is essentially different from that of Baruch. While it is true that from the standpoint of the Assyrian times the destruction of Jerusalem and, conformably to it, its rebuilding also are prophesied (xiv, 4-5; xiii, 9-10, 16 sqq.), the entire book is by no means intended to comfort the readers for the destruction of Jerusalem. It is true that Hitzig infers, from the fact that the author depicts the rebuilding of city and Temple with more extravagant colors than would apply to the historical building, that he did not live while this historical building stood. But a careful consideration of the principal passage sets us right. Chap, xiv, 5 reads: " And they shall build the house but not like to the former, until the times of that age be fulfilled; and afterward they shall return from the p'aces of their captivity, and build up Jerusalem gloriously, and the house of God shall be built in it forever with a glorious building, even as the prophets spake concerning it." Here two things are plainly distinguished: (a) the historical building of Zerubbabel, which is insignificant (" not like to the former "); and (b) the beautiful building of eternity, which is to follow this at the end of this age, which is still in the future even for the author. The very fact that the writer knew nothing of a repeated catastrophe between the two would indicate that he lived in pre- Vespasian or even in pre-Herodian times. Clear signs of a use of the book are lacking till the second century of the Christian era. Reference is made in xiv, 10 to the legend of Achikar or Achiachar, which is extant in different late recensions (cf. Conybeare, Harris, and Lewis, The Story of Ahikar from the Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Greek, and Slavonic Versions, London, 1898). No Hebrew (or Aramaic) copy of the book was known to Origen and his Jewish advisers (Epist. ad Africanum, xiii: " The Jews neither use Tobit nor Judith, nor do they have them in Hebrew "). It is therefore probable that the extant Semitic texts are late. An Aramaic text was edited by A. Neubauer {The Book of Tobit, a Chaldee Text from a Unique MS. in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 1878; cf. G.Bicknell, in ZK T, 1S7S, pp. 216-222; T. Noldeke, in Monatsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1879, pp. 45-69; and G. H. Dalman, Grammatik des Jiidisch-palastinischen Aramdisch, Leipsic, 1894, pp. 27-29). There exist also two Hebrew compositions generally acknowledged to be of late date (cf. C. D. Ilgen, Die Gcschichte Tobi's, Jena, 1800, exxxviii sqq., ccxvii sqq.; Fritzsche, Exegetisches Handbuch, ii, 5, 9 sqq.. xiv; T. Noldeke, Die Alttestamentliche Litteratur, Leipsic, 1868, pp. 108 sqq.). The Aramaic text has this in common with the Latin revision of Jerome (and with this only), that the story of Tobit is narrated from the beginning in the third person, whereas in all other texts, in i, 1-iii, 6, Tobit speaks in the first person. The Aramaic text is thus perhaps identical with, or at any rate nearly related to, that used by Jerome. Dalman for linguistic