exhibits in his text the different narratives which he supposes
to have been combined into the story as we have it; while in his footnotes he gives the main reasons for the discriminating process which has arrived at the result. Much of what he gives may, of course, be found elsewhere, as in Professor Driver's "Introduction to the Old Testament," to mention one of many books dealing with this subject ; but we do not remember to have seen anything quite so complete. The volume, therefore, should be most useful. It is no longer possible for the student, especially if he has to discharge the office of a teacher, to ignore criticism ; and he is under great obligations to a writer who states the case for him so exhaustively. He will do well, however, to use caution in following Professor Kent's guidance. The analytical processes are, we think, employed with a severity, so to speak, which, legitimate with scientific subject-matter, is not justified where so many conditions not admitting of exact knowledge have to be con- sidered. No literature, no history, can stand the tests which are applied to the books of the Old Testament. We will select as an instance, not so much for its intrinsic importance as on account of the ease and brevity with which it can be stated, the story of Deborah and Sisera. Professor Kent thinks that "the details of Sisera's death differ widely." Surely the expression is exaggerated. We might apply it with propriety to the two accounts of the death of Ahaziah of Judah,—that in 2 Kings ix., which represents him as dying at Megiddo, and that in 2 Chronicles xxii., where he is said to have been dragged from his hiding-place in Samaria and slain before the eyes of .Tehu. But the prose and verse narrae tives of Sisera's death would not be said to differ were they found anywhere but where they are. In the Song no mention is made of Sisera's sleep, but it is almost implied. Jael brings him the bowl full of curdled milk ; all the intermediate details are omitted. In the next verse she strikes the fatal blow, the tent- pin in one hand, the hammer in the other (specified as the "right hand"). Is it to be supposed that she fetched these while her guest was drinking ? The next verse, it is true, suggests the Idea that the victim was struck down. "At her feet he bowed, he fell" Possibly the writer wished to slur over the odious details of the act. The oppressor is smitten down by a woman ; that is the point which he wishes to emphasise. Suppose that we had the Latin ante pedes stratus cecidit, would it be necessary to insist that the blow must have been dealt while he was standing ? Professor Kent has given the passages quoted in a translation of his own. We cannot enter on the formidable task of criticising it. He has not avoided the fault of unnecessary change; "he was in a deep sleep and exhausted" is not an improvement on "fast asleep and weary."
Previous page
