276 



PROTECTION- PSAI.MS. 



follow eight chapters dated in the reign of Darius. yct| 

 nt distinctly the historical situation of the times 

 of Cuiahnnd Ahar. This would IK- accounted for if we 

 suppose that two independent books have here I*, n 

 arbitrarily joined, or if we suppose that the /cchariah 

 of the times of Darius wrote both. but. in writing ix.- 

 xiv., put himself back to the point of view of the 

 earlier time, or if we suppose that he possessed the 

 earlier work, and edited it into his own book, or very 

 likely in other ways. Among the various possible 

 theories, it is not necessary here to decide; with the 

 facts clearly in mind, the question as to how the facts 

 are to be ai-cnuntcd for is a question that can wait 



The present writer, having in mind the fact that* 

 this article is to be supplementary to those in the Kx- 

 o i i I>I'.*:I>IA BKITANNII'A. h;is regarded it as ordinarily 

 unnecessary to repeat the details that are given, and 

 often admirably given, in those articles. Nor has he 

 regarded it as his duty to controvert every point in 

 which those articles present views different from those 

 held by most American evangelical scholars. Much 

 less has he attempted the limitless task of arguing all 

 such questions. The reader who really desires to get 

 at the truth should carefully look at the evidence for 

 himself, on both sides of these controverted questions. 

 But there is ortc line of statements that requires a brief 

 additional consider.it ion. In regard to nearly every one 

 of the prophetic books the reader will observe that the 

 various writers in the BRITANNIC A make two affirma- 

 tions i: first, that the text is corrupt, containing errors 

 and intcrpi ilat ions, and needing emendation ; secondly, 

 that the book shows marks of having been worked 

 over, changed from its original form by additions, 

 omissions, and the piecing together of parts that orig- 

 inally did not belong together. In the instances where 

 these writers arc cautious and avoid these affirmations. 

 HI me other living writers are less cautious ; there is 

 probably no prophetic book, and indeed no book of 

 the Old Testament, in regard to which a certain class 

 of critics do not confidently assert both that the text is 

 in need of emendation, and that the book has been 

 worked over since it was written. These points are 

 raised in connection with a multitude of instances 

 throughout the prophetic books ; it has been impos- 

 sible to notice the instances separately as they arose, and 

 is now impossible to discuss the points at length. But by 

 nil fair laws of critical reasoning, most of the instances 

 arc mistakes, and. in general, tlieinferenccsdrawn from 

 them are not well drawn. Al. questions of this sort 

 have a right to be examined and decided by the evi- 

 dence. But presumptively, phenomena that charac- 

 terize every part of a literature are to be regarded as 

 the ordinary phenomena of that literature, and not as 

 marks of text-corruption or of complicated redaction. 

 In the books of the prophets, the lair application of 

 this principle will sweep away nearly all the alleged 

 instances of these, 



Literature. Among accessible commentaries that treat of 

 the prophetic liooks, those of the Lange series mid those of 

 tin- Kcil and Delitzxch scries nr full mid valuable. The 

 ive volume* of the Camhi iilijr liililr fur .VA/<o/j are 

 highly pri/.eil. The successive issues of the Old Testament 

 fit mil tit from Jnnuftry, IssS, contain notice* of the prophetic 

 bunks with reference* to the literature ; ami Hie same peri- 

 odical has for some years pnbliKhed ft monthly liM of pub 

 lie. UK. ns concerning the Old Testament, incluilini.', of course, 

 the prophetic part.K o( it. J)r. \V. II linen's book, Main 

 iinil Hi f I'l-ii/ih't*. includes reviews of Hie volumes of Kucucii 

 mi. I of W. koln-rlsoii Smith. Orelli's book on Old Tula- 

 ment I'ruphrey lias altaineil uide celebrity. An c-|N-ciallr 

 valuable compact discussion of the nm-i iniporMnl one .ii.ni- 

 ning Hie prophet* mid prophecy is contained in -ev- 

 er* I of the lectures in The Old nml .\nr Triitunent* in thrir 

 l;eliitii>ni, by the Kcv. Kreileric (iardincr, II. 



froph rcy, "b V the Key. C. A. lirii:i:s, I). II. , in 

 fresh anil brilliant, nml of very treat value for many pur- 



fioor*. The variom liible I>ictionnries and Iteliviiou- l-'.n- 

 rvi'lii|iipi|i.i contain full lines of articles on these 

 with lists of the literature; tin- literary lists in the .V.'/iy/- 

 llenog Lucyclvjxcdiu are esjiecially rich. (W. j. u.; 



ri'.oTKCTKiN. SccFREKTiiAHK. and POLITICAL 



MV. 



I'KOVKIM'.S. I'.iMiKOF. RecSoixi. 



1'llON 'OUST. SVMIT.I. (iTTj-lsl..), l.i.shop of the 

 American Kpiseopal Church, was born in New York 

 city. March II, ITI'J. U-ing of HiiL-iicnot descent. 

 Alter graduating at King's (now Colunihia) College in 

 1758 he went to Kiiirland. i-Iiidied. and L-radnated at 

 Camliridge I 'nivt r.-iiy. and was admitted to orders in 

 ITt'iti. Keturnini; to New York he was m . 

 niinisler of Trinity Church, but in 177O retired t.i a 

 farm in Duchess county. During the Kcvolmion he 

 favored the American cause, but took no active part 

 On the evacuation of New York by the Mritish in I7 V ! 

 he became rector of Trinity Church, and in 17v~> he 

 was chaplain to the Continental Congress. In ]7>i'ln: 

 was elected bishop of New Y'ork. and in company with 

 Dr. William White, who had been elected liishop of 

 Pennsylvania, went to England and was consecrated at 

 I^unlx'th palace, Feb. _4, 17^7. Returning to New 

 York, he continued his work as rector of Trinity 

 Church until'lSiMi, when he resigned on account of Ins 

 infirm health. He also resigned his bishopric in the 

 next year, but the resignation was not accepted, though 

 Rev. Dr. Benjamin Moore was chosen big assistant. 

 Bishop Provoost died Sept. 6, 1815. 



PKYOK, RiHiKit ATKIXSII.N, Confederate general 

 and lawyer, was born near Petersburg, Va. , .July 1'.', 

 isiis. He graduated at Ham|xlen-Sidtiey Collegu 

 in 1>I5, and at the University of Virginia in 1MU. 

 He was admitted to the bar and was also active 

 in journalism in Petersburg, Washington, and Rich- 

 mond. In 1854 he was sent as a special commis- 

 sioner to Greece. In 1857 he wa.s elected to Congress, 

 where he threw all his youthful ardor into the advocacy 

 of extreme Southern claims. A noted incident of his 

 career as representative was his challenge of John F. 

 Potter, of Wisconsin, who selected bowie-knives as the 

 weapons, but no duel was fought. Pryor joined (!en. 

 Itcaurcgard's staff at the attack on Fort Sumtcr. On 

 the secession of Virginia, he was sent as delegate to the 

 Confederate Congress, but he soon entered the army 

 with the rank of colonel. He was promoted brigadier- 

 general in ISCiiI. and led a division in the defence of 

 Richmond against McClellan. He resigned from the 

 army in AU.-.MI-I, iMii. and lieing taken prisoner in 

 November, KS04, was confined for a short time in Fort 

 I /i layette, in New York harbor. Since the close of 

 the war he has been a lawyer in active practice in New 

 York city. 



PSALMS. "As regards the dates and historical 

 v] interpretation of the Psalms, all older 

 * 29 ( 33 di scu8s ' ons i cven those of Kwald, are 

 Am. Rep.). in great measure an(i(|iiatcd l.y recent 



progress in Pentateuch criticism arid 

 the history of the canon. " This statement, taken from 

 the last sentence of Prof W. Koliertson Smith's article 

 on the PSAI.MS in the KNCV< I.HP.WUA HHITANSH \, 

 defines his point of view. The psalms which by their ti- 

 tles, their apparent contents, and external testimony, are 

 attnlnitcd to David and his contemporaries, contain 

 hundreds of allusions to the various parts of the llex- 

 atciich. If any considerable immlicr of the psalms 

 were actually written in the times of David, then the 

 whole Pentateuch had been previously written. Hut if 

 the view of Pcntaleuchal criticism presented in the. 

 :',e volumes of (he HllITAXXICA is correct, then 

 most ot the psalms are not only post- Davidic. but 



Jiost exilic, and the completion Of the Psalter cannot. 

 iave been earlier than the Maecalnvan times. It is 

 well to have this issue sharply presented. Hut unless 

 one assumes that the post exilic origin of the llexalencli 

 is a proven fact, the reasons arc very weak for assiirn- 

 iiii.' a majority of the psalms to a date later than Da- 

 vid, or any of them to a date: later than Neliemiali. 



It is conceded that the contents of a psalm may 

 have more weight, as evidence of its date, than any 

 . \ti raal evidence that can ordinarily be cited. 1's. 



