more than 200 years old) of the wise king. The style of these proverbs makes such a hypothesis even more improbable than in the case of x. 1-xxii. 16. The words with which the heading begins are of course not decisive, especially as the whole verse appears to be due, not to the royal officials who are spoken of, but to the author of the heading in xxiv. 23a (both headings begin with 'these also'). That Hezekiah was the instigator of the compilation, need not however be disputed. Even if not himself an author,[1] he may well have shared his friend Isaiah's interest in literature; and besides, it was at that time one of the glories of a great king to be the founder of a library.[2] The word used in describing the activity of his commissioners means literally 'transferred' (from one place to another), and will equally well apply to the noting down of oral traditions and to the making extracts from existing collections. Among the latter, the 'Proverbs of Solomon' in x. 1-xxii. 16 are of course to be included, though it is not quite certain whether the compilers of the later anthology had the book before them. It is true that nine proverbs are the same in the two books either absolutely (xxv. 24 = xxi. 9, xxvi. 22 = xviii. 8, xxvii. 12 = xxii. 3, xxvii. 13 = xx. 16) or virtually (xxvi. 13 = xxii. 13, xxvi. 15 = xix. 24, xxviii. 6 = xix. 1, xxviii. 19 = xii. 11, xxix. 13 = xxii. 2), besides two which agree in one line (xxvii. 21 = xvii. 3, xxix. 22 = xv. 18; comp. also xxvii. 15, xix. 13). But there still remains the question, Why the collectors took so little and left so much of manifest antiquity, and to this question we cannot expect to find an answer. All that we can say is that their compilation has striking characteristics of its own. In technicalities they admit a greater variety than those of the first anthology. They allow not only distichs but tristichs (xxv. 8, 13, 20, xxvii. 10, 22, xxviii. 10), tetrastichs (xxv. 4, 5, xxv. 9, 10, xxv. 21, 22, xxvi. 18, 19, xxvi. 24, 25, xxvii. 15, 16), and in one case a pentastich[3] (xxv. 6, 7), agreeing in this
- ↑ Cheyne, The Prophecies of Isaiah, i. 228-9 (on Isa. xxxviii. 9).
- ↑ Sayce's ed. of Smith's Chaldean Genesis, pp. 15, 26, 27.
- ↑ Sept., Symm., Pesh., Vulg., however, attach the lost line of ver. 7 to ver. 8 ('Quæ viderunt oculi tui, ne proferas in jurgio cito'), which makes ver. 7 a distich and ver. 8 a tetrastich.
