"the mosaic calrndar." 



163 



contained the word Baal. For this the Tetragrammaton has been 

 substituted. But if the author wrote " the Baal," the view that 

 the passage is an excerpt from a document that used the Tetra- 

 grammaton falls to the ground, and the theory of a J writing becomes 

 impossible. 



As already remarked, in most instances such a substitution could 

 be effected without damage to the sense, but not in all. An example 

 may be given from Kings and Chronicles, where, by the way, we 

 see not merely the contradictory but the contrary of the docu- 

 mentary hypothesis in actual operation. Instead of having a 

 compilation of one book from two sources, a J and an E writing, 

 we find two books reproducing a single writing, the one often 

 adopting a J form (in the received Hebrew), where the other presents 

 E characteristics. In i Kings xxii, ii Chron. xviii, Ahab consults 

 no fewer than four hundred prophets, who return an answer that 

 some deity (Adonai, according to the received Hebrew of i Kings 

 xxii, 5, the Tetragrammaton according to 29 Hebrew MSS. and 

 several ancient versions, Elohim according to Chronicles) "will deliver 

 it into the king's hand." Thereupon Jehoshaphat said : "Is there 

 not here a prophet of the Lord (so Jerome and the best Greek texts ; 

 our Hebrew adds ' besides ') that we might enquire of him ? " 

 This makes no sense if the opinion of four hundred prophets of the 

 Lord had just been given, and accordingly we find that no com- 

 mentator can explain the passage satisfactorily ; but the whole 

 narrative becomes good sense and true to the historical character 

 of Ahab, the baal-worshipper, once we realise that the original 

 document presented " the baal." We see, too, how different 

 substitutions have given varying readings in our authorities. 



I must not trespass further on your kindness, but perhaps I may 

 venture to express the hope that even this very inadequate indication 

 of one of the lines of recent research may serve to confirm your 

 belief in the general soundness of Mr. Maunder's position. 



Eev. Martin Anstey, B.D., M.A. : There are two ways of 

 constructing a calendar. The first is the primaeval Biblical method 

 of direct observation, and the second the modern scientific method 

 of astronomical calculation. The first is the method of Moses in 

 the Old Testament, a method at once simple, untechnical, and 

 incapable of correction because incapable of falling into error. The 



