proper place (see Pentateuch). Here it is sufficient to observe that the public authority he conferred on the Law
is the first step in the formation of the canon.After the first collection was made attention was directed to other national documents. Of these the prophetic books were the most conspicuous ; and the order of men from whom they came, or whose names they bore, stood out in a favourable light, when looked back at from the restored theocracy, because many of their predictions had been fulfilled. Exhortations and warnings, which had often fallen upon listless ears, had been verified by experience. A desire to gather together the earlier prophetic writings would naturally accompany or follow the zeal displayed in bringing forth the Pentateuch to public view. Hence the historical books of the nation which described the divine guidance of the people, as well as the kings under whom the earliest prophets lived (Joshua Kings), were first adopted.
This second canon originated with Nehemiah, of whom it is said in the second book of Maccabees, that, when found ing a library, "he gathered together the acts of the kings, and the prophets, and the (Psalms) of David, and the epistles of th 3 kings concerning the holy gifts."[1] These words, though somewhat ambiguous, and admitting different explanations, present an historical statement which should not be sum marily rejected, as it is by Graetz. " The Acts of the Kings" contained the two books of Kings (including those now called after Samuel), with Joshua and Judges, of which last Ruth was the concluding part ; for Joshua was now separate from the Mosaic books, with which it was closely connected at first. This historical portion was the proper continuation of Ezra s canon. The " Prophets " comprehended the four greater and twelve minor ones. Not all the latter, how ever; for Jonah is of subsequent date. Lamentations were united to Jeremiah as one book. The " Psalms of David " also belong to this canon, and may have been almost coex tensive with the first three divisions of the present book. The epistles of the kings concerning the holy gifts are not extant. They appear to have been the documents of heathen (Persian for the most part) kings favourable to the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its temple. Nehemiah s canon was identical to some extent with the second divi sion of the Biblical books. It wanted Jonah, perhaps Malachi, but it had " the Epistles of the kings." It was larger than the second Hebrew division of the Old Testa ment, and had probably been preceded by smaller collec tions of prophetic productions before the captivity. We know that in the captivity itself, and immediately after, older prophecies were edited.
Whether Nehemiah himself collected the books, or whether he merely set the thing on foot and saw that it was carried out by the learned men of the time, can only be conjectured. As he was not a priest or a scribe like Ezra, but a statesman, the latter supposition is the more prob able. This collection was highly esteemed ; though it did not take equal rank with the first. It was not completed before the close of the 4th century B.C., because the book of Jonah was probably not written till that time. The close of the prophetic canon could not have taken place till some period had elapsed after Malachi, a period sufficient for the growth of a general consciousness that the prophetic function had ceased with the youngest of the prophets. Besides the historical books which preceded, there were in it four prophetic ones Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, the twelve minor prophets. Ruth belonged to the book of Judges, and Lamentations to Jeremiah ; but they were afterwards detached and put into the third division or canon. Definite allusions to this prophetic collection do not occur till the 2d century B.C. Daniel speaks of a passage in Jeremiah being in "the books" or "writings;"[2] and Sirach, both in the prologue and the 49th chapter, presupposes its completion. Such was the second or Nehemiah canon, partly gradual in its formation.
The third canon, in which the other books of the Old Testament were included, was not made at once. Its con tents were multifarious, differing widely from one another in age and character poetical, prophetic, didactic, his torical. Such as seemed worthy of preservation, though they had not been included in the second canon, were gathered together during the space of a hundred and fifty years. The oldest part consisted of psalms supposed to belong to David, which were a supplement to those in Nehemiah s collection, perhaps the last two divisions, with some exceptions (books fourth and fifth). Next to the Psalms were Proverbs, Job, Canticles, which, though non- prophetic, and probably excluded on that account from the sacred canon, must have existed before the exile. En riched with the latest additions, they survived the national disasters, and claimed a place next to the Psalms. They were but a portion of the literature current in and after the 5th century B.C., as may be inferred from the epilogue to Ecclesiastes and the Wisdom of Sirach. The historical work compiled by the chronicle-writer was separated, Ezra being put first as the most important part and referring also to the church of the 6th and 5th centuries, whose history had not been written. The Chronicles themselves were placed last, being considered of less value than the first part, as they contained the summary of a period already described, though with numerous adaptations to post-exile times. The youngest portion consisted of the book of Daniel, not written till the Maccabean period (between 170 and 160 B.C.); and probably of several psalms which were inserted in different places of the col lection so as to make the whole number 150. The list continued open, and no stringent principle guided selection. The character of the collection was somewhat indefinite. It was called c tubim, i.e., writings,[3] a general epithet suited to the contents.
The earliest attestation of this third canon is that of the prologue to Jesus Sirach, where not only the law and the prophets are specified, but " the other books of the fathers," or "the rest of the books."[4] No information is given as to its extent, or the particular books included. They may have been for the most part the same as the present ones. The passage does not show that the third list was closed. The better writings of the fathers, such as tended to learn ing and wisdom, are not excluded by the definite article. In like manner, neither Philo nor the New Testament gives exact information as to the contents of the division in ques tion. Indeed, several books (Canticles, Esther, Ecclesi astes), are unnoticed in the latter. The argument drawn from Matthew xxiii. 35, that the Chronicles were then the last book of the canon, is inconclusive, as the Zechariah there named was probably different from the Zechariah in 2 Chronicles xxiv. The third canon is not proved to be closed by any of these witnesses, much less by a passage of 2 Maccabees ii. 14, which is sometimes adduced for the purpose.
by Josephus towards the end of the first century A.D. " For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, .... but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times ; which are justly believed to
be divine. And of them five belong to Moses But
