Psalms

VIEW:28 DATA:01-04-2020

PSALMS
1. Title and place in Canon.—The Book of Psalms is a collection of sacred poems, in large part liturgical in character and intended to be sung. The book belongs to the Kethubim or ‘Writings,’ i.e. the third and last group of the Jewish Scriptures. The order of the Writings was much less fixed than the order of the Law and the Prophets, the other two groups of Scriptures; but the Psalms in all cases come near the beginning of this group, and in the modern Hebrew printed Bibles, which follow the great majority of German MSS, they stand first. In placing the Psalms, together with the rest of the Writings, before the (‘Latter’) Prophets, the EV [Note: English Version.] has followed the Greek version; but in the internal arrangement of the Writings, the English and Greek versions differ from one another.
The title of this collection of poems is derived from the Greek version, in which the book is entitled in some MSS Psalmoi, in others Psalterion (in NT ‘Psalms,’ and ‘Book of Psalms,’ Luk_20:42; Luk_24:44, Act_1:20). psalmos in classical Greek signified the twanging of strings, and especially the musical sound produced by plucking the strings of a stringed instrument; as used here it means poems played to the music of (stringed) instruments. The Greek word thus corresponds closely to the Heb. mizmôr, of which it is the tr. [Note: translate or translation.] in the titles of individual Psalms (e.g. Psa_3:1). The Jewish title for the whole book was ‘Book of Praises’: this referred directly to the subject-matter of the poems, and less directly than the Greek title to their musical character. Both titles take into account the majority of the poems rather than the whole; not all the Psalms were sung to musical accompaniment, and not all of them consist of praise.
The Psalter contains, according to the division of the Hebrew text followed by EV [Note: English Version.] , 150 poems; the Greek version contains 151, but the last of these is described as ‘outside the number.’ This number does not exactly correspond with the number of different poems. On the one hand, there are one or two clear cases, and there may be others less clear, of a single Psalm having been wrongly divided into two; thus Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18 are shown by the continuance of the acrostic scheme through the latter Psalm (cf. Acrostic, and see Expositor, Sept. 1906, pp. 233–253) to have once formed, as they still do in the Greek version, a single poem. So Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5 are shown by the recurrence of the same refrain (Psa_42:5; Psa_42:11; Psa_43:5) to be one poem. But the Greek version is scarcely true to the original in making two distinct Psalms out of each of the Psalms numbered 116 and 147 respectively in the Hebrew text and EV [Note: English Version.] . Probably in a larger number of cases, owing to an opposite fortune, two poems originally distinct have been joined together under a single number. A clear instance of this kind is Psa_108:1-13, which consists of two Psalms or fragments of Psalms (viz. Psa_57:7-11; Psa_60:5-12). Among the more generally suspected instances of the same kind are Psa_19:1-14 (= vv. Psa_19:1-6 + Psa_19:7-14) 24 (= Psa_24:1-6 + Psa_24:7-10) 27 (= Psa_27:1-6 + Psa_27:7-14) and 36 (= Psa_36:1-4 + Psa_36:5-12). A very much larger number of such instances are inferred by Dr.Briggs in his Commentary (ICC [Note: CC International Critical Commentary.] ).
The Psalter does not contain quite the whole of what survives of Jewish literature of this type. A few psalms not included in the Psalter are found in other books: see, e.g., 1Sa_2:1-10, Isa_12:1-6; Isa_38:10-20, Hab_3:1-19. And we have another important, though much smaller, collection of psalms in the ‘Psalms of Solomon’ written about b.c. 63. These, with such NT psalms as Luk_1:46-55; Luk_1:68-79, are important as showing that the period of psalm composition extended beyond the close of the OT.
2. Origin and history
(1) Reception into the Canon.—The history of the Psalms and the Psalter is obscure; and many conclusions with regard to it rest, and for lack of other independent evidence must rest, on previous conclusions as to the origin and literary history of other Hebrew and Jewish literature. Conclusive external evidence for the existence of the Psalter in its present extent does not carry us very far back beyond the close of the Jewish Canon (see Canon of OT); but the mode of allusion to the Psalms in the NT renders it very unlikely that the book was still open to additions in the 1st cent. a.d.; and the fact that none of the ‘Psalms of Solomon’ (see § 1, end) gained admission, and that this collection by its title perhaps presupposes the canonical ‘Psalms of David,’ renders it probable that the Psalter was complete, and not open to further additions, some time before b.c. 63. Other evidence (cf. Hastings’ DB [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] iv. 147), such as that derived from the substantial agreement of the Greek version with the Hebrew text, does not carry the proof for the existence of the Psalter in its present extent much further. The net result is that, if not impossible, it is unsafe, to place the completion of the Psalter much below b.c. 100.
(2) Previous history.—Behind that date lies a long history; for the Psalter represents the conclusion of a complex literary growth or development. We may note, first, two things that prove this general fact, that the Psalter is neither a simple edition of the poems of a single man or a single age, nor the first collection of its kind. (1) At the close of Psa_72:1-20 stand the words: ‘The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended.’ This is intelligible if the remark once closed an independent collection, and was taken over with the collection by the compiler of a larger work. But apart from some such hypothesis as this it is not intelligible; for the remark is not true of the Psalter as we have it; the prayers of David are not ended, other Psalms actually entitled ‘prayers’ and described as ‘of David’ are Psa_86:1-17; Psa_142:1-7; and several subsequent Psalms assigned to David are, without being so entitled, actually prayers. (2) The same Psalm is repeated in different parts of the Psalter with slight textual or editorial variations: thus Psa_14:1-7 = Psa_53:1-6; Psa_40:13-17 = Psa_70:1-5; Psa_108:1-13 = Psa_57:7-11 + Psa_60:5-12. The Psalter, then, was composed by drawing on, and in some cases incorporating, earlier collections of Psalms.
Our next questions are: How many collections earlier than the Psalter can be traced? How far can the methods of the editor who drew on or combined these earlier collections be discerned? The first clue to the first question may be found in the titles referring to persons and their distribution; the more significant features of this distribution may be shown thus—
1. Psa_1:1-6; Psa_2:1-12 are without title.
2. Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13 are all entitled ‘of David,’ except Psa_10:1-18, which is a continuation of Psa_9:1-20 (see above), and Psa_33:1-22.
3. Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20 are all entitled ‘of the sons of Korah,’ except Psa_43:1-5, which is a continuation of Psa_42:1-11 (see above).
4. Psa_50:1-23 is entitled ‘of Asaph.’
5. Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20 are all entitled ‘of David,’ except Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20.
6. Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18 are all entitled ‘of Asaph.’
7. Of Psa_84:1-12; Psa_85:1-13; Psa_86:1-17; Psa_87:1-7; Psa_88:1-18; Psa_89:1-52, four (Psa_84:1-12; Psa_85:1-13; Psa_87:1-7; Psa_88:1-18) are entitled ‘of the sons of Korah,’ one (Psa_86:1-17) ‘of David,’ and one (Psa_69:1-36) ‘of Ethan.’
8. Psa_120:1-7; Psa_121:1-8; Psa_122:1-9; Psa_123:1-4; Psa_124:1-8; Psa_125:1-5; Psa_126:1-6; Psa_127:1-5; Psa_128:1-6; Psa_129:1-8; Psa_130:1-8; Psa_131:1-3; Psa_132:1-18; Psa_133:1-3; Psa_134:1-3 are all entitled ‘Songs (so rather than ‘A song’ RV [Note: Revised Version.] ) of Ascent.’
The remaining 46 Psalms (90–119, 135–150) are either without title, or the titles are not the same in any considerable number of consecutive Psalms (but note 108–110 and 138–145 entitled ‘of David’).
Now, if it stood by itself, the statement at the close of Psa_72:1-20 could be explained by a single process—the incorporation of a previous collection consisting of Psa_1:1-6; Psa_2:1-12; Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13; Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20 by an editor who added these to Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18; Psa_84:1-12; Psa_85:1-13; Psa_86:1-17; Psa_87:1-7; Psa_88:1-18; Psa_89:1-52; Psa_90:1-17; Psa_91:1-16; Psa_92:1-15; Psa_93:1-5; Psa_94:1-23; Psa_95:1-11; Psa_96:1-13; Psa_97:1-12; Psa_98:1-9; Psa_99:1-9; Psa_100:1-5; Psa_101:1-8; Psa_102:1-28; Psa_103:1-22; Psa_104:1-35; Psa_105:1-45; Psa_106:1-48; Psa_107:1-43; Psa_108:1-13; Psa_109:1-31; Psa_110:1-7; Psa_111:1-10; Psa_112:1-10; Psa_113:1-9; Psa_114:1-8; Psa_115:1-18; Psa_116:1-19; Psa_117:1-2; Psa_118:1-29; Psa_119:1-176; Psa_120:1-7; Psa_121:1-8; Psa_122:1-9; Psa_123:1-4; Psa_124:1-8; Psa_125:1-5; Psa_126:1-6; Psa_127:1-5; Psa_128:1-6; Psa_129:1-8; Psa_130:1-8; Psa_131:1-3; Psa_132:1-18; Psa_133:1-3; Psa_134:1-3; Psa_135:1-21; Psa_136:1-26; Psa_137:1-9; Psa_138:1-8; Psa_139:1-24; Psa_140:1-13; Psa_141:1-10; Psa_142:1-7; Psa_143:1-12; Psa_144:1-15; Psa_145:1-21; Psa_146:1-10; Psa_147:1-20; Psa_148:1-14; Psa_149:1-9; Psa_150:1-6 derived from other sources. But within Psa_1:1-6; Psa_2:1-12; Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13; Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20 we have two occurrences of the same Psalm (Psa_14:1-7 = Psa_53:1-6), which in itself indicates that in Psa_1:1-6; Psa_2:1-12; Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13; Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20 at least two hymn-books are combined. Again, Psa_53:1-6 differs from Psa_14:1-7 by the entire absence from it of the name ‘Jahweh’ and the use in four places of the name ‘God,’ where Psa_14:1-7 uses ‘Jahweh’ (EV [Note: English Version.] ‘the Lord’). So also in Psa_70:1-5 = Psa_40:13-17 ‘Jahweh’ is twice retained, but thrice it is replaced by ‘God.’ But the editorial activity thus implied proves on examination to have affected the entire group of Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18; for the difference in the use of the names ‘Jahweh’ and ‘God’ between Psa_1:1-6; Psa_2:1-12; Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13 and Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18 is remarkable: in Psa_1:1-6; Psa_2:1-12; Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13 ‘Jahweh’ occurs 272 times, ‘God’ (absolutely) 15 times; in Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18 ‘Jahweh’ 43 times, but ‘God’ 200 times (see Driver, LOT [Note: OT Introd. to the Literature of the Old Testament.] 6 371). Now this Elohistic Psalter, as Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18 are termed on account of the marked preference which is shown in them for the term Elohim = ‘God,’ is one of the earlier collections embodied in our Psalter; but it is itself in turn derived from different sources; for it includes the group of David’s Psalms which closes with the statement that the Prayers of David are ended—a statement which, though not true of the whole Psalter, is true of this earlier Psalter, for between Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18 no prayer of David occurs. It also includes Psalms ‘of the sons of Korah’ and ‘of Asaph.’ Very possibly this Elohistic Psalter has not reached us in its original condition; for (1) the untitled Psalms may have been subsequently inserted; and (2) the Psalms entitled ‘of Asaph’ may have once stood all together: at present Psa_50:1-23 stands isolated from the rest (Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18).
In addition to the occurrences of Psalms in two recensions and the occurrence of similar titles or groups, another feature points to earlier independent books of Psalms: this is the occurrence of a doxology or suitable concluding formula at certain points in the Psalter, viz. Psa_41:13 at the end of the first group of Psalms entitled ‘of David’; Psa_72:18-19 immediately before the statement that the Prayers of David are ended; and Psa_89:52. See also Psa_106:48 and Psa_150:1-6, which last Psalm in its entirety may be taken as an enlarged doxology at the close of the completed Psalter. The doxologies at the end of Psa_41:1-13; Psa_72:1-20 occur at points which we have already found reason for regarding as the close of collections; that at Psa_89:52, however, occurs not at the close of the Elohistic Psalms, but six Psalms later. Now five of these six Psalms are drawn from the same sources as supplied the Elohistic editor, viz. from the ‘prayers of David’ (Psa_86:1-17) and the book ‘of the sons of Korah.’ In Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18; Psa_84:1-12; Psa_85:1-13; Psa_86:1-17; Psa_87:1-7; Psa_88:1-18; Psa_89:1-52 we not improbably have the original Elohistic Psalter (Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18), enlarged by the addition of an appendix (Psa_84:1-12; Psa_85:1-13; Psa_86:1-17; Psa_87:1-7; Psa_88:1-18; Psa_89:1-52), in which the name ‘Jahweh’ was left unchanged, and consequently the form ‘Elohim’ ceases to predominate.
From the evidence thus far considered or suggested (it cannot here be given in greater detail), we may infer some such stages as these in the history of the Psalms before the completion of the Psalter:—
1. Compilation of a book entitled ‘of David’ and including Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13 (except the untitled Psa_33:1-22).
2. Compilation of a second hymn-book entitled ‘of David’ (Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20, with exceptions).
3. Compilation of a book entitled ‘of Asaph’ (Asaph being the name of a guild of singers, Ezr_2:11).
4. Compilation of a book entitled ‘of the sons of Korah’ (also probably a guild of singers; cf. 2Ch_20:19).
5. Compilation of ‘the Elohistic Psalter’ out of Psalms derived from 2, 3, 4 by an editor who generally substituted ‘Elohim’ (‘God’) for ‘Jahweh’ (EV [Note: English Version.] ‘the Lord’).
6. Enlargement of 5 by the addition of Psa_84:1-12; Psa_85:1-13; Psa_86:1-17; Psa_87:1-7; Psa_88:1-18; Psa_89:1-52.
7. Compilation of a book entitled ‘Songs of the Ascents.’
Can we detect the existence of other earlier Psalters? So far we have taken account mainly of titles of one type only and of titles which occur in groups. Dr. Briggs carries the argument from titles to the existence of collections of Psalms further. He infers that there was a collection of Michtams or chosen pieces, whence Psa_16:1-11; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12 and Isa_38:9-20 were drawn; another collection of Maschils or meditations, whence Psa_32:1-11; Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_88:1-18; Psa_89:1-52; Psa_142:1-7 were derived; another collection of Psalms proper, of poems set to music, whence the 57 Psalms described in the titles as Mizmor (EV [Note: English Version.] ‘psalm’) were derived; and yet another collection which bore the name of the musical director or choir master (EV [Note: English Version.] ‘the chief musician’), whence the 55 Psalms so entitled were derived. If this be the case, then the composite titles enable us to see that many Psalms stood successively in two or three collections before they obtained their place in the completed Psalter; e.g. Psa_19:1-14—entitled ‘of (or belonging to) the chief musician, a Psalm, of (or belonging to) David’—had previously been included in three distinct collections; and so also Psa_44:1-26—entitled ‘of the chief musician, of the sons of Korah, Maschil.’ Perhaps the strongest case for these further collections is that of the chief musician’s Psalter; in any case, the English reader must be warned that the preposition prefixed to the ‘chief musician’ is the same as that prefixed to ‘David’ or ‘Asaph’ or ‘the sons of Korah,’ though in the first case RV [Note: Revised Version.] renders ‘for’ and in the latter cases ‘of.’ Consequently, since in many cases it is impossible, owing to intervening words (e.g. in Psa_12:1-8; Psa_45:1-17), to interpret such a combination as ‘of the chief musician, of David,’ ‘of the chief musician, of the sons of Korah’ of joint authorship, we must see in them either conflicting ascriptions of authorship placed side by side, or, far more probably, as just suggested, the titles of collections of Psalms or hymn-books to which they had previously belonged. It is then highly probable that in the first instance such titles as ‘of David,’ ‘of Asaph,’ ‘of the sons of Korah,’ were neither intended nor understood to name the author of the Psalm in question. But if this was so, we can also see that before the final stage in the growth of the Psalter they were misunderstood; for the title ‘of David’ clearly implied authorship to the author(s) of the longer titles in Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9 : it is scarcely less clear that the title implied authorship to the authors of other titles that suggest an historical setting (see, e.g., Psa_3:1-8; Psa_57:1-11).
Titles of the Psalms.—Inasmuch as the terms occurring in the titles to the Psalms are not explained elsewhere in this Dictionary, it will be convenient to give here brief notes on those which have not already been discussed. It may be said in general that great obscurity enshrouds the subject, and that, in spite of the many ingenious speculations to which the terms in question have given rise, it is hazardous to base, on any particular theories of interpretation, far reaching conclusions. With few exceptions the titles of the latter part of the Psalter (Psa_90:1-17; Psa_91:1-16; Psa_92:1-15; Psa_93:1-5; Psa_94:1-23; Psa_95:1-11; Psa_96:1-13; Psa_97:1-12; Psa_98:1-9; Psa_99:1-9; Psa_100:1-5; Psa_101:1-8; Psa_102:1-28; Psa_103:1-22; Psa_104:1-35; Psa_105:1-45; Psa_106:1-48; Psa_107:1-43; Psa_108:1-13; Psa_109:1-31; Psa_110:1-7; Psa_111:1-10; Psa_112:1-10; Psa_113:1-9; Psa_114:1-8; Psa_115:1-18; Psa_116:1-19; Psa_117:1-2; Psa_118:1-29; Psa_119:1-176; Psa_120:1-7; Psa_121:1-8; Psa_122:1-9; Psa_123:1-4; Psa_124:1-8; Psa_125:1-5; Psa_126:1-6; Psa_127:1-5; Psa_128:1-6; Psa_129:1-8; Psa_130:1-8; Psa_131:1-3; Psa_132:1-18; Psa_133:1-3; Psa_134:1-3; Psa_135:1-21; Psa_136:1-26; Psa_137:1-9; Psa_138:1-8; Psa_139:1-24; Psa_140:1-13; Psa_141:1-10; Psa_142:1-7; Psa_143:1-12; Psa_144:1-15; Psa_145:1-21; Psa_146:1-10; Psa_147:1-20; Psa_148:1-14; Psa_149:1-9; Psa_150:1-6) are free from these terms.
Apparently we have in the titles not only notes indicating the source whence the Psalm was derived (see above), but also in some cases notes defining the character of the Psalm (see below, Nos. 12 and 13 and [?) No. 18), or some circumstances of its use. Thus Psa_92:1-15 was to be used on the Sabbath, Psa_30:1-12 at the Feast of the Dedication (1Ma_4:56, Joh_10:22), celebrated from the time of the Maccabees onward; and Pa 100 on the occasion of offering thank-offering; so also ‘to bring to remembrance’ (EV [Note: English Version.] ) in Psa_38:1-22; Psa_70:1-5 may rather mean ‘at the time of making the offering called azkarah’ (RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘memorial,’ e.g. Num_5:26); see also No. 5 (below). This type of note is more frequent in the LXX [Note: Septuagint.] , which assigns Psa_24:1-10 for the use of the first day of the week, Pa 48 for the second, Pa 94 for the third, Psa_93:1-5 for the day before the Sabbath. Other titles, it is supposed, name, by the opening words of songs sung to it or otherwise, the tune to which the Psalm was to be sung (see Aijeleth hash-shahar, Al-tashheth, Jonath-elem-rehokim, Shoshannim; see below), or the instruments which were to accompany the singing of the Psalm (? Nehiloth, Neginoth).
For ease of reference we give the terms in alphabetic order.
1. Aijeleth hash-shahar (Psa_22:1-31) is a transliteration of Heb. words which mean ‘the hind of the morning’; the Heb. consonants might equally well mean ‘the help of the morning.’ These words are preceded by the Heb. preposition ‘al, which, among many others, has the meaning ‘in accordance with,’ and here and in other similar titles not improbably means ‘set to’ (AV [Note: Authorized Version.] ). The whole note, then, may mean that the Psalm was to be sung to the tune to which the song beginning ‘the hind (or ‘the help’) of the morning’ had been accustomed to be sung. The renderings ‘upon Aijeleth Shahar’ (AV [Note: Authorized Version.] ) and ‘concerning Aijeleth hash-shahar’ are also legitimate, but less probable. With this title cf. below Nos. 3, 7, 9, 10, 14, 19 (not all equally probable instances).
2. Alamoth (Psa_46:1-11). This term and Sheminith (Psa_6:1-10; Psa_12:1-8) must be treated together. They are preceded by the same preposition ‘al discussed under No. 1, and accordingly RV [Note: Revised Version.] renders ‘set to the Sheminith,’ etc. But it is hardly likely, in view of 1Ch_15:19-21, that these terms are names of tunes, though they obviously have some reference to the music. The usual meaning of sheminith in Heb. is ‘eighth,’ of ‘alamoth’ ‘young women’; so that the titles run ‘upon’ or ‘according to’ or ‘set to the eighth’ or ‘the maidens.’ ‘The maidens,’ it is conjectured, means ‘the voices of maidens,’ and that, it is further conjectured, stands for ‘the falsetto voice of males’; so that the whole phrase ‘set to the maidens’ would mean ‘to be sung with soprano voices.’ Thence, it is inferred, ‘set to the eighth’ means ‘sung with the bass voice.’ All this, though it has found considerable acceptance and has sometimes been stated with little or no qualification, possesses no more than the value of an unverified and perhaps unverifiable guess.
3. Al-tashheth (Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_75:1-10). The words mean ‘destroy not,’ and may be the beginning of a vintage song cited in Isa_65:8 ‘Destroy it not, for a blessing is in it.’ Then the note presumably directs that the Psalms shall be sung to the tune of this song (cf. No. 1). But the omission of the preposition ‘al used in similar cases is suspicious.
4. The Chief Musician. See preced. column.
5. ‘Ascents’ (RV [Note: Revised Version.] ; ‘degrees’ AV [Note: Authorized Version.] ), a song of (Psa_120:1-7; Psa_121:1-8; Psa_122:1-9; Psa_123:1-4; Psa_124:1-8; Psa_125:1-5; Psa_126:1-6; Psa_127:1-5; Psa_128:1-6; Psa_129:1-8; Psa_130:1-8; Psa_131:1-3; Psa_132:1-18; Psa_133:1-3; Psa_134:1-3). The Heb. may also be the plural of a compound expression, and mean ‘Songs of Ascent.’ In the latter case the title of the whole collection has been prefixed to each Psalm (see above). ‘Songs of Ascent’ might mean ‘Songs of the Ascent’ (cf. Ezr_7:9), from Babylon, but more probably ‘Songs of the Ascent’ to Jerusalem on the occasion of the great yearly festivals. On the supposition that the meaning is ‘A song of Ascents’ (pl.), the phrase has been explained with reference to the 15 ascents’ or ‘steps’ (such is the meaning of the Heb. word in Exo_20:23, 1Ki_10:19 f.), that led from the Women’s Court to that of the men in the Temple area; it has been inferred that one of each of these 15 Psalms was sung on each of the 15 steps. Other ingenious but improbable suggestions have been offered (cf., most lately, J. W. Thirtle, Old Testament Problems).
6. Dedication of the House, i.e. the Temple (Psa_30:1-12). See above and art. Dedication [Feast of the].
7. Gittith (Psa_8:1-9; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_84:1-12). The word is the fem. of the adj. derived from Gath. In the three titles it is preceded by the prep. ‘al (see under No. 1), and the phrase has been supposed to mean that the Psalm was to be sung to the accompaniment of the Gittite instrument (cf. Nos. 15 and? 16), whatever that may have been, or to the Gittite tune (cf. No. 1). If the word was originally pronounced ‘Gittoth’ (pl. of gath, ‘a wine-press’), the note may direct that the Psalms were to be sung to some vintage melody (cf. No. 3).
8. Higgaion.—The word thus transliterated in Psa_9:16 (RV [Note: Revised Version.] ) is translated in Psa_92:3 ‘a solemn sound’ (RV [Note: Revised Version.] ), ‘murmuring sound’ (Driver), and in Psa_19:14. ‘meditation.’ In Psa_9:16 it seems to be a musical note.
9. Jeduthun.—On the analogy of ‘of David,’ etc. (see above), the title in Psa_39:1-13 should run ‘of the sons of Korah, of Jeduthun.’ In Psa_62:1-12; Psa_77:1-20 the preposition prefixed to the term is ‘al (cf. No. 1), and by analogy Jeduthun might be the name of a tune or an instrument. But this is very uncertain; see art. Jeduthun.
10. Jonath-elem-rehokim (Psa_56:1-13). The Heb. consonants are most naturally translated ‘the dove of the distant terebinths’; less probably, but as the tradition embodied in the vocalized Heb. text suggests, ‘the dove of the silence of them that are distant.’ The note is to be explained as No. 1.
11. Mahalath (Psa_53:1-6), Mahalath Leanooth (Psa_88:1-18). The words are very ambiguous and obscure, but the fact that in both Psalms the prep. ‘al precedes, relates these notes to the group of which No. 1 is typical.
12. Maschil (Psa_32:1-11; Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_88:1-18; Psa_89:1-52; Psa_142:1-7). The term describes the character of the poem, but whether its precise meaning is ‘a meditation’ (Briggs) or ‘a cunning Psalm’ (Kirkpatrick), or something else, cannot be determined with certainty. See also p. 771a.
13. Michtam (Psa_16:1-11; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12, also perhaps in the original text of Isa_38:9) is a term like the last, but of still more uncertain meaning. The Rabbinical interpretation—a golden (poem)—though adopted by Briggs, is quite unconvincing.
14. Muth-labben (Psa_9:1-20). The Heb. consonants may mean ‘Death whitens,’ and this may have been the commencement of a song which gave a name to a tune; cf. No. 1. But it is not unreasonable to suspect the text, as many have done.
15. Neginoth (AV [Note: Authorized Version.] in Psa_4:1-8; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_76:1-12) and Neginah (Psa_61:1-8). The words thus, in excess of caution, transliterated by AV [Note: Authorized Version.] , are correctly translated by RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘stringed instruments’ (Psa_61:1-8 ‘song’), and so even by AV [Note: Authorized Version.] in Hab_3:19.
16. Nehiloth (Psa_5:1-12), often supposed to mean ‘wind instruments’ (cf. No. 15). But this is quite doubtful. Uncertain, too, is the view that the word indicates a tune; the preposition (’el) that precedes is not the same as that which generally introduces what appear to be names of tunes elsewhere (cf. No. 1); but cf. No. 19.
17. Sheminith. See No. 2.
18. Shiggaion (Psa_7:1-17). The pl. of this word (Shigionoth) occurs in Hab_3:1, possibly by error for Neginoth (cf. No. 15), which perhaps stood in the text from which the Greek version was made. The root from which the word is derived means ‘to go astray’ or ‘to reel’ (as, e.g., from drunkenness). Hence, since Ewald, many have conjectured that Shiggaion means ‘a wild, passionate song, with rapid changes of rhythm’ (Oxf. Lex.). The meaning really remains entirely uncertain.
19. Shoshannim (Psa_45:1-17; Psa_69:1-36), Shushan-eduth (Psa_60:1-12), and Shoshannim-eduth (Psa_80:1-19) appear to be different ways of citing the same song to the tune of which these Psalms were to be sung. The preposition used before these words is ‘al (cf. No. 1), except in Psa_80:1-19, where it is ’el, which in some cases is used interchangeably with ‘al. It is curious that Psalms so different as 45 and 69 should be set to the same tune. Psa_80:1-19 cites the first two words of the poem, ‘(Like) lilies (or rather anemones) is the Testimony (or Law)’; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_69:1-36 the first word only; and Psa_60:1-12 apparently was variant, ‘(Like) a lily’ (singular for plural), etc.
3. Dates of the various collections.—Is it possible to determine the dates at which any of these collections of Psalms were made? Obviously they are earlier than the completion of the Psalter, i.e. than about b.c. 100 (see above); obviously also the collections were later than the latest Psalm which they originally contained. One or more Psalms in all the collections show more or less generally admitted signs of being post-exilic. The various collections therefore which we have in the Psalter were compiled between the 6th and the 2nd centuries b.c. By arguments which cannot here be reproduced, Robertson Smith (OTJC [Note: TJC The Old Test. in the Jewish Church.] ch. vii.) reached the following conclusions in detail. The first Davidic collection (Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13) was compiled about the time of Ezra and Nehemiah; the second Davidic collection (Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20) in the 4th cent.; the Asaphite (Psa_50:1-23; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18) and Korahite (Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20) collections between b.c. 430 and 330. Dr. Briggs places the Korahitic and Asaphite collections somewhat later—after b.c. 332; the Elohistic Psalter (Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_52:1-9; Psa_53:1-6; Psa_54:1-7; Psa_55:1-23; Psa_56:1-13; Psa_57:1-11; Psa_58:1-11; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_60:1-12; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_64:1-10; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_69:1-36; Psa_70:1-5; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_72:1-20; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_80:1-19; Psa_81:1-16; Psa_82:1-8; Psa_83:1-18) and the chief musician’s collection in the 3rd cent. b.c. But whatever the value of these detailed conclusions, which are not all very secure, one general fact of much importance already stands out: the period between the Exile and the 1st cent. b.c. was marked by much activity in the collection and editing of Psalms; and this, apart from the dates of individual Psalms, is significant for the part played by the Psalms in the religious life of the post-exilic community.
4. Dates of individual Psalms.—From the collections we pass to the difficult and much discussed question of the dates of the individual Psalms. All that will be possible here is to point out certain general lines of evidence, with one or two illustrations in detail. If the detailed conclusions with reference to the collections are sound, a minimum date is fixed for many Psalms: e.g. Psa_3:1-8; Psa_4:1-8; Psa_5:1-12; Psa_6:1-10; Psa_7:1-17; Psa_8:1-9; Psa_9:1-20; Psa_10:1-18; Psa_11:1-7; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_13:1-6; Psa_14:1-7; Psa_15:1-5; Psa_16:1-11; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_19:1-14; Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_23:1-6; Psa_24:1-10; Psa_25:1-22; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_27:1-14; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_30:1-12; Psa_31:1-24; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_34:1-22; Psa_35:1-28; Psa_36:1-12; Psa_37:1-40; Psa_38:1-22; Psa_39:1-13; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_41:1-13 (except the untitled Psa_33:1-22) are not later than about the time of Ezra and Nehemiah; Psa_42:1-11; Psa_43:1-5; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_73:1-28; Psa_83:1-18 not later (on Robertson Smith’s theory) than b.c. 330, and so on. The collections are indeed post-exilic, but in itself that need not prevent even the whole of the Psalms being pre-exilic: the collections might be post-exilic hymn-books composed entirely of ancient hymns. As a matter of fact, not all the Psalms are pre-exilic; many of the individual Psalms are somewhat clearly of post-exilic origin; indeed, there is a fairly general consensus of opinion that the majority, a considerable body of opinion that the great majority, of the Psalms are post-exilic. Signs of exilic or post-exilic origin are: (1) Allusions to the Exile or the desolation of Zion, as a present or past fact, as the case may be: see e.g. Psa_51:18 f., Psa_89:44-51, Psa_102:13; Psa_102:16, Psa_106:47, Psa_107:3 ff., Psa_126:1, Psa_137:1, Psa_147:2. The profanation of the Temple by the heathen alluded to in Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_76:1-12; Psa_77:1-20; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_79:1-13 may refer rather to the events of Maccabæan times (b.c. 165) than to 586. (2) Other allusions to social and political conditions, such as the frequent division of the Jews into religious parties, with the use of terms like ‘the poor,’ ‘the pious’ (Chasîdîm) as party names; but this and other such allusions are differently interpreted and weighed by different scholars. (3) Language such as that of, e.g., Psa_116:1-19; Psa_139:1-24; style and language in many other Psalms is less conclusive though (granted certain previous conclusions) not without weight. (4) Dependence upon exilic and post-exilic writings: e.g. Psa_93:1-5; Psa_96:1-13; Psa_97:1-12; Psa_98:1-9; Psa_99:1-9; Psa_100:1-5 almost certainly, and Psa_57:1-11 most probably, imply familiarity on the part of the writer with much of Isa_40:1-31; Isa_41:1-29; Isa_42:1-25; Isa_43:1-28; Isa_44:1-28; Isa_45:1-25; Isa_46:1-13; Isa_47:1-15; Isa_48:1-22; Isa_49:1-26; Isa_50:1-11; Isa_51:1-23; Isa_52:1-15; Isa_53:1-12; Isa_54:1-17; Isa_55:1-13; Isa_56:1-12; Isa_57:1-21; Isa_58:1-14; Isa_59:1-21; Isa_60:1-22; Isa_61:1-11; Isa_62:1-12; Isa_63:1-19; Isa_64:1-12; Isa_65:1-25; Isa_66:1-24. (5) The presence of certain religious ideas which were not developed till late in the history of Israel’s religion. There is much variety of judgment as to the number of Psalms and the particular Psalms shown by these criteria to be late, but, as previously stated, it is admittedly large. Strictly speaking, indeed, these criteria determine the date of those sections only to which they apply, not necessarily that of the entire Psalm; and if it can be shown that the obviously post-exilic sections in any particular Psalm are interpolations, the rest of the Psalm may be (but, of course, by no means necessarily is) pre-exilic. Dr. Briggs in his Commentary has carried the hypothesis of interpolation far, using as his test certain theories of metre and strophe.
What, then, are the positive criteria for pre-exilic Psalms or pre-exilic elements in Psalms which may show in parts obvious signs of post-exilic origin? Failing such criteria, the Psalms cannot be shown to be considerably earlier than the post-exilic collections in which they have come down to us. The criterion of pre-exilic date most relied on is an allusion to the king; from the fall of Judah in b.c. 586 down to b.c. 105, when Aristobulus i. assumed the title of king, there was no native king of Judah. Now, since in, e.g., Psa_20:1-9; Psa_21:1-13 the allusion to the king cannot satisfactorily be explained of a foreign monarch, and these Psalms cannot be thrown as late as b.c. 105, it appears to follow that they originated before 586. Other Psalms alluding to a king who cannot well be a foreigner, or have lived so late as b.c. 105, are Psa_2:1-12; Psa_18:1-50; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_45:1-17; Psa_61:1-8; Psa_63:1-11; Psa_72:1-20. Yet there still remains a question of interpretation: is the king in these Psalms an actual contemporary individual, or the Messianic king whether regarded as an individual or as the royal people of Israel (cf. JQR [Note: QR Jewish Quarterly Review.] , 1895, p. 658 ff.)? If the latter interpretation is correct (as, e.g., in the case of Psa_2:1-12 at least, it probably is), the value of the allusion as a criterion of pre-exilic date vanishes; for a reference to a king who is not a person of history but an ideal conception is not less probable in a post-exilic than in a pre-exilic poem. Further, a purely proverbial allusion to the king, such as occurs in Psa_33:16, furnishes no valid criterion for pre-exilic origin, nor does an allusion to kings in the plural (e.g. Psa_119:46; Psa_148:11).
If, as the previous remarks should have suggested, it is in most cases only possible to determine whether a Psalm is pre-exilic or post-exilic on evidence somewhat widely applicable, and in many cases impossible to determine even this quite decisively, it should be clear that the attempt to fix the authorship or dates of Psalms very precisely must generally prove fruitless. Are there any that can be referred, even with great probability, to a particular occasion as that of their origin, or to a particular writer? The mere fact that a Psalm may appear to us suitable to a particular occasion, as, e.g., Psa_46:1-11 to the deliverance from Sennacherib in 701, does not necessarily prove that it even refers to it, still less that it was written at the time; the question arises, is the occasion in question the only one to which the terms of the Psalm are applicable, or are those terms sufficiently specific to render it improbable that the Psalm might have fitted other occasions unknown to us, or but partially known? Thus Psa_44:1-26; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_79:1-13; Psa_118:1-29 presuppose conditions which resemble what is known of the period of the Maccabæan revolt (cf. 1 Maccabees), more closely than what is known of any other period, and on that ground they have been assigned by many to the Maccabæan period the question is. Are the descriptions so specific that they might not also correspond to the conditions of the middle of the 4th cent. b.c. (to which other scholars have referred Psa_44:1-26; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_79:1-13) if we were equally well informed with regard to these?
5. The question of Davidic Psalms.—The question of authorship retains an interest only with reference to David. The theory that David was the author of Psalms can be traced back as far as the time (not to be dated very precisely, but centuries at least after David’s time) when the historical notes were added in certain Psalms to the title ‘of David’ (see above). Whether it goes back further (except in the case of Psa_18:1-50 = 2Sa_22:1-51; see below) to the time of the origin of the collection entitled ‘of David’ is less clear, for it is by no means certain that the similar title ‘of the chief musician’ referred to authorship (see above). Still, we may consider the argument which, based on the assumption that it did, is to the effect that if so many Psalms (as 73 in the Hebrew text, more in the Greek text, and all in later Jewish tradition) were attributed to David, some must actually be his, though many so entitled are demonstrably and admittedly not. In a word, where there is much smoke, there must have been some fire. The argument at best does not seem to justify more than a strong probability that David wrote psalms; and possibly the fact that David was a famous poet, even though all his poems more nearly resembled 2Sa_1:19-27 than the Psalms, coupled with his fame as a zealous worshipper of Jahweh, may be the extent of the historical fact underlying the late traditions. But even granted that the evidence were strong enough to justify the statement that some Psalms of David are preserved in the Psalter, the most important problem still remains to be solved, viz. which Psalms in particular are David’s? It will be found on an examination that the positive reasons assigned for regarding any particular Psalm as David’s are inconclusive: they often amount to nothing more than an argument that there is nothing in such and such Psalms which forbids us to ascribe them to David. There are some Psalms which in whole or in part may not be incompatible with what we know of David’s life, but the allusions are too general to enable us to deny that they are equally applicable to many other lives. The Psalm which is most generally claimed for David by those who go beyond the general argument and specify particular Psalms as his, is Psa_18:1-50; but many who hold this to be in the main David’s feel compelled to treat Psa_18:20-27 as later. An external argument in favour of the Davidic authorship of this Psalm has often been sought in the fact that it appears in 2Sa_22:1-51 as well as in the Psalter; but the argument is of little value; it carries us back, indeed, beyond the evidence of the Psalm-titles, but the Books of Samuel were composed long after David’s time, and 2Sa_22:1-51 occurs in a section (2Sa_21:1-22; 2Sa_22:1-51; 2Sa_23:1-39; 2Sa_24:1-25) which shows signs that entitle us to conclude that it was inserted after the main work was complete. We may safely conclude thus: There are Psalms in the Psalter of which, if we may remove certain parts as later interpolations, a residuum remains of which it would be unjustifiable to assert that it was not written by David.
6. Character of the contents: the ‘I’ of the Psalms.—But if we cannot determine the authors of the Psalms, or the particular occasions out of which they sprang, we may yet ask, and ought to ask, What type of persons wrote them, what type of experiences do they embody, with what type of subject do they deal? In order to answer these questions, it will be necessary to discuss briefly an important principle of interpretation.
A considerable proportion of the Psalms describe, from the writer’s standpoint, the experiences or aspirations or the religions faith of the nation or of the religious community—whether this community be co-extensive with the nation or a group or party within it. The Psalms which most obviously belong to this class are those in which the pronoun of the first person plural is used. These are some 27 in number (see Psa_21:1-13; Psa_33:1-22; Psa_46:1-11; Psa_47:1-9; Psa_48:1-14; Psa_50:1-23; Psa_60:1-12, [both vv. 1–4 and 5–12 = 108:6–13] 65. [in v. 3a Vulg. [Note: Vulgate.] and LXX [Note: Septuagint.] read ‘us’ for ‘me’] 67, 79, 80, 81, 90, 95, 98, 99, 100, 105, 113, 115, 117, 124, 126, 132, 136, 144, 147). In another group of 25 Psalms (viz. Psa_8:1-9; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_22:1-31; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_59:1-17; Psa_62:1-12; Psa_66:1-20; Psa_68:1-35; Psa_71:1-24; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_75:1-10; Psa_78:1-72; Psa_84:1-12; Psa_85:1-13; Psa_89:1-52; Psa_94:1-23; Psa_103:1-22; Psa_106:1-48; Psa_116:1-19; Psa_118:1-29; Psa_122:1-9; Psa_135:1-21; Psa_137:1-9; Psa_141:1-10) the personal pronoun is sometimes in the first singular, sometimes in the first plural; this interchange is not perhaps to be always accounted for in the same way; but in some of these Psalms it is obviously the main purpose of the writer to describe the experiences of the nation (cf. e.g., Psa_44:1-26; Psa_74:1-23; Psa_78:1-72). Another group of Psalms, not so easily defined as the two preceding, but including some 22 Psalms at least (Psa_1:1-6; Psa_12:1-8; Psa_14:1-7, (= 53) 15, 19:1–6, 24, 29, 34, 72, 76, 82, 93, 96, 97, 107, 112, 114, 125, 127, 133, 134, 148, 149, 150), are as little limited to individual experience as the first: they are, for example, calls to praise God for His goodness, or descriptions of the character which is pleasing to God. The remainder of the Psalms, about (yet barely) half the whole number, appear superficially, in contrast to the foregoing, to describe the experiences or aspirations of some individual. They are written in the first person singular. But in one Psalm, owing to its peculiar structure, the Psalmist supplies the interpretation of the pronoun of first singular, and in this case the singular pronoun refers, not to an individual, but to the nation (see Psa_129:1). The personification of the nation as an individual which underlies this usage occurs often in Hebrew literature (see Servant of the Lord, § 5). How far does it extend in the Psalter? is the much afflicted subject of other Psalms written in the first person an individual, or, like the much afflicted subject of Psa_129:1-8, Israel? For instance, does the author of the words, ‘Thou wilt not abandon my soul to Sheol, nor suffer thy holy one to see corruption’ (Psa_16:10), express the conviction that he himself will never see death (for it is this and not resurrection that the words imply), or that Israel will never cease to be? Does the author of Psa_51:1-19 make confession of purely personal sins (Psa_51:1-5), and look forward as an individual to a missionary career (Psa_51:13), or, like the authors of Lam_1:18-22, Isa_63:7 to Isa_64:12, does he, identifying himself with his people, make confession of national sins? It is impossible either to discuss this fully here, or to attempt to determine how far the use of ‘I’ = Israel extends beyond Psa_129:1-8. One other feature of the Psalms which superficially appear to describe the experiences of the individual may be noted: many of them break off into perfectly obvious prayers for the nation (e.g. Psa_25:22; Psa_28:9), or into appeals to the community as a whole to participate in the writer’s experience or aspirations (cf. e.g. Psa_30:4 f., Psa_32:11). These departures from the apparently individual tenor of the rest of the Psalm are sometimes treated as glosses; and they may be such. Not all of these Psalms need have the same origin: some may have been originally written as national confessions, some, originally of a more exclusively individual character, may have been fitted for use by the community, by the addition of liturgical verses and the elimination of what was too limited to be of general applicability.
Summary.—The conclusion to be drawn even from this brief survey of the origin of the Psalter and the character of the Psalms may be stated thus:—The Psalms as we have received them are sacred poems that reflect more or less clearly the conditions of the post-exilic Jewish community and express its varying religious feelings and aspirations; in origin some of these Psalms may go back to the pre-exilic period, some may originally have sprung out of circumstances peculiar to an individual; but in consequence of editing by the successive compilers of the post-exilic hymn-books through which the Psalms have come down to us, most of the peculiarly pre-exilic or individual characteristics which may have distinguished them originally have been largely obliterated.
7. Religious value and influence of the Psalter.—Probably no book of the OT has exercised a more profound and extensive influence over succeeding ages than the Psalms. Among the Jews, indeed, the Law has received a more persistent and greater attention; but the place of the Psalms in the history of the Christian Church and in Christian experience is typified by the frequency with which they are quoted in the NT. To trace this influence, or to illustrate it as Mr. Prothero has so excellently done in his volume entitled The Psalms in Human Life, falls outside the scope of this article. All that can be attempted, and even that but very inadequately, is to indicate some of the leading religious ideas, some of the striking religious qualities of the Psalms. And in doing this it is necessary to emphasize clearly the fact that such ideas and qualities are by no means common to all the 150 or more poems which were written by an indefinite number of writers, and were gathered together in our Psalter. What alone is aimed at here is to draw attention to some of the qualities that are at least frequently present, and some of the ideas which frequently or strikingly appear—to the ideas and qualities which have in large measure been the cause of the great and persistent influence which the Psalms have exercised.
(1) The Psalms occupy a peculiar position in the OT literature in consequence of their character. The Law codifies the customs of Israel which had received the approval of Jahweh; the Historical Narratives relate Jahweh’s dealings with Israel; the Prophets deliver Jahweh’s message to Israel, and in the Psalms Israel replies. These distinctions are of course broadly drawn, and we may find, for example, in Jeremiah (e.g. Jer_20:7 ff.) ‘contentions’ with Jahweh that may be somewhat closely paralleled in the Psalms; or, again, the facts that faced the author of the Book of Job are discussed, for example, in Psa_37:1-40; Psa_49:1-20; Psa_73:1-28, though more briefly, and in the case of Psa_37:1-40; Psa_49:1-20 less penetratingly. Yet it is true that in the main the Psalter contains the prayers and praises of Israel, and that they have become classical and stimulating examples for later generations.
(2) But if in the Psalms Israel speaks to God, it speaks as one who has been taught by the Prophets. The Prophets stood alone, or supported by but a small company of disciples, addressing a deaf or gainsaying nation; the Psalmists identify themselves either with their whole people or at least with a numerous, if oppressed, community. The Prophets upbraid the people with forgetting Jahweh, with forsaking Him for other gods; the Psalmists find difficulty in accounting for the calamities that have come upon their nation, which has not forgotten God, but suffers for its very loyalty to Him (e.g. Psa_44:20 [render ‘If we had forgotten,’ etc.]). The prophet of the Exile endeavours to awaken Israel to its destiny as a missionary nation (Isa_40:1-31; Isa_41:1-29; Isa_42:1-25; Isa_43:1-28; Isa_44:1-28; Isa_45:1-25; Isa_46:1-13; Isa_47:1-15; Isa_48:1-22; Isa_49:1-26; Isa_50:1-11; Isa_51:1-23; Isa_52:1-15; Isa_53:1-12; Isa_54:1-17; Isa_55:1-13; cf. art. Servant of the Lord); the Israel of many of the Psalms has accepted the role (e.g. Psa_47:1-9; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_100:1-5). But a full discussion of the manifold influence of the Prophets on the Psalmists is impossible here.
(3) We turn now to the Psalmists’ belief in God: and here it must suffice to draw attention to two features—the breadth of the conception, and the intensity of the consciousness, of God. The early belief of Israel that other gods besides Jahweh existed has left traces in the Psalter, but is probably nowhere present as a living belief. Some of the Psalmists use phrases that originally sprang from a belief in other gods (e.g. Psa_77:13; Psa_95:3), but the mere use of such phrases proves nothing as to the actual belief of a later generation that may continue to employ them; we continue to use them ourselves; and often the Psalmists refer to other gods only in order to emphasize Jahweh’s supremacy (Psa_89:6-8, Psa_96:4), or to imitate the arguments with which the Deutero-Isaiah had ridiculed the gods of the nations out of existence (e.g. Psa_115:1-18; Psa_135:1-21). A deeper effect of the earlier belief may probably be seen in what is in any case a conspicuous and permanently influential feature of the Psalms—the intimacy of the consciousness of God. In Israel the monotheistic idea sprang, not from an abstraction of what was common to many gods previously or still worshipped, but from the expansion of the thought of the same one God whom alone Israel had previously worshipped. While Israel believed the gods of other nations to be real beings set over against Jahweh, it was natural for them to feel a peculiarly close relation to Jahweh, to look upon Him as their possession; the belief in other gods perished, the sense of Jahweh as a close and intimate Personality survived; and not a little of the enduring power of the Psalms is due to the vivid apprehension of God that resulted. Jahweh is the ‘living God’ as opposed to the unrealities that have been taken by other peoples as gods. Supreme in Nature (Psa_8:1-9; Psa_104:1-35; Psa_93:1-5) as in History (and such He is to many at least of the Psalmists), Jahweh nevertheless remembers and visits man (Psa_8:1-9); He abides though all else perishes (e.g. Psa_46:1-11; Psa_102:1-28), and to those who possess Him all else sinks into insignificance (Psa_73:25 ff.).
At times, indeed, this sense of possessing Jahweh obscures for the Psalmists the full meaning of Jahweh as the one and only God of the whole world and of all mankind. Not all the imprecatory Psalms, as they are termed, show a sense of the universality of Jahweh’s relations. But in others the universal note rings clear (see, e.g., Psa_47:1-9; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_67:1-7; Psa_100:1-5).
(4) This brings us to another feature of the Psalms which has contributed to the influence exercised by them—the hope that is in them, their Messianic outlook. They look beyond the present which for the writers is often full of oppression and affliction, to a future which is sometimes described with some fulness (e.g. Psa_72:1-20), but is often merely suggested by the call on God to arise, to awake, to reveal Himself; or by some other brief but pregnant phrase. We cannot here discuss how far the Psalms anticipate a particular Messianic individual; it must suffice to say that the original sense of many passages has been obscured by specific applications to the life of Christ—applications which in some instances have been built on a very questionable Hebrew text or an illegitimate translation, and that in some Psalms (e.g. Psa_2:1-12) the ‘Messiah’ is perhaps rather the nation of Israel, supreme among the nations of the world (cf. Dan_7:1-28), than an individual ruler or deliverer, whether of Israel or of the world. But where fuller expression is given to the hope, it often takes the form of the establishment of the Kingdom of God, without reference to any other king than God Himself; the overruling thought is of the manifestation of His supreme sovereignty and the consequent promotion of righteousness and equity among all people (so pre-eminently Psa_96:1-13; Psa_97:1-12; Psa_98:1-9; Psa_99:1-9; Psa_100:1-5). Even in the broadest form of this thought. it is true that Israel occupies a central position and Zion is to become for the whole world what it has long been for Israel—the centre of religion, the place where Jahweh will be worshipped (cf. esp. Psa_87:1-7). No Psalmist has attained to the standpoint of our Lord’s teaching in Joh_4:21 f.
(5) From the thought of the Psalmists about God and their hope in Him, we may turn to their thought of men, which is for the most part primarily of Israel, and in particular to their sense of sin.
Judged by their attitude towards sin, the Psalms fall into two great groups: the extreme representatives of each group are very different in thought, tone, and temper; the less extreme approximate more or less closely to one another. In the one group the writers claim for themselves, and, so far as they identify themselves with Israel, for their nation, that they are righteous, and in consequence have a claim on God’s righteousness to deliver them from present afflictions (so, e.g., Psa_7:1-17; Psa_17:1-15; Psa_26:1-12; Psa_28:1-9; Psa_44:1-26; Psa_86:1-17). In the other group, confession is made of great iniquity: the appeal for help, if made, can be made to Gods mercy and lovingkindness alone (see Psa_25:1-22; Psa_32:1-11; Psa_40:1-17; Psa_51:1-19; Psa_65:1-13; Psa_85:1-13. etc.). The first group stand far removed from the early Prophets; but they have considerable resemblance in thought to Habakkuk; the second group, again, differ from the early Prophets; for though both recognize the sinfulness of Israel, yet the Prophets complain that Israel does not recognize its sin, whereas these Psalms make confession of sin on behalf of the nation (cf. the late confession in Isa_63:7 to Isa_64:12).
(6) The view taken of sin in both groups of Psalms is best appreciated by noticing how, with all their difference, they are yet related. Some sense of sin is perhaps never altogether absent from the Psalms that lay claim to righteousness, and a strong sense of relative righteousness generally accompanies the most fervent confession of sin. Even in such Psalms as the 32nd and the 51st, where the difference is most clearly felt between God’s standard and man’s performance, the sense is also present of a sharp difference between those who. In spite of sin, yet pursue after righteousness, and those who constitute the class of ‘the wicked’ or the transgressors.’ This attitude towards sin might doubtless without much difficulty become that of the Pharisee in the parable; but it is also closely akin to the highest Christian consciousness, in which the shadow of sin shows darkest in the light of the righteousness and love of God as revealed in Christ, and which leads the truest followers of Christ, with all honesty, to account themselves the chief of sinners. And it is because the ‘penitential’ Psalms are confessions, not so much of grosser sins open to the rebuke of man, but of the subtler sins which are committed in the sight of and against God only, of the sins which stand in the way of the nation called of God fulfilling its missionary destiny, that these Psalms have played so conspicuou
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909

(See DAVID; POETRY.) The Hebrew designation tehillim, "praises" or hymns," occurring only in the title of Psalm 145 and about 30 times in the body of the Psalms, applies only to some not to all the psalms. The glorification of God is the design of them all, even the penitentiary and precatory psalms; but tehilliym applies strictly to praise songs alone, tephillowt to the prayer songs; Psalm 17; Psalm 72 end, closing the second book of Psalms, Psalm 86; 90; 102 title. No one Hebrew title comprehends all.
The Greek Septuagint has given the title "Psalms" (from psalloo "to play an instrument") applied to the whole collection. The Hebrew mizmor designates 65 psalms; in the Syriac version it comprises the whole (from zaamar "to decorate"), psalms of artificial, adorned structure (Hengstenberg). "A rhythmical composition" (Lowth). "Psalms," the designation most applicable to the whole book, means songs accompanied by an instrument, especially the harp (1Ch_16:4-9; 2Ch_5:12-13). Shir, "a joyful thanksgiving song," is prefixed only to some. The various kinds are specified in Eph_5:19; "psalms (accompanied by an instrument), hymns (indirect praise of God), ... spiritual songs (joyous lyric pieces; contrast Amo_8:10)."
TITLES. Their genuineness is confirmed by their antiquity (which is proved by their being unintelligible to the Septuagint translators of the Hebrew into Greek), and by their presence in the greatest number of manuscripts, and in fragments of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. Their obscurity and occasional want of connection with the psalm's contents (as title Psalm 34) are incompatible with their origination from forgers. The orientals, moreover, usually prefix titles to poems (Hab_3:1; Isa_38:9); so David (2Sa_23:1). The enigmatical titles, found only in the psalms of David and of David's singers, accord with Eastern taste. They are too "poetical, spirited, and profound for any later collector" (Hengstenberg). So David's "bow song" (2Sa_1:18), his enigmatical designation for "the song on him expert with the bow" (2Sa_1:22).
The historical hints in some titles give a clue to the dates. If the titles were added by later hands, how is it that they are wanting in those psalms where conjecture could most easily have had place, namely, the non-Davidic psalms of the fourth and fifth books, whereas they appear in the most regular and complete form in David's psalms, next in those of his singers? Now these are just the ones where conjecture is given no room for exercise; for the titles do not apparently illustrate these psalms, but are a memorial of the events which most deeply impressed David's own mind. In the last two books the historical occasions do not occur in the titles, because cycles of psalms mainly compose these books, and among such cycles psalms of an individual reference hardly have place.
DIVISIONS. Davidic basis of the whole. The Psalms form one "book"; so the Lord refers to them (Luk_20:42), so His apostles (Act_1:20). The fathers, Ambrose (on Psalm 40) and Jerome to Cyprian (2:695), describe the Psalms as five books in one volume. Based on and corresponding to the historical Pentateuch, they form a poetical "Pentateuch" (Epiphanius, de Mens., c. 5), extending from Moses to the times of Malachi "the Hebrew history set to music an oratorio in five parts, with Messiah for its subject" (Wordsworth). The Psalms, like the Pentateuch, being used in divine worship, are the people's answer to God's address to them in the law, i.e. the expression of their pious feelings called forth by the word of God. The close of each of the five books is marked by a doxology. The "blessed be the Lord God of Israel" is taken up by Zacharias, as fulfilled in Christ (Lev_1:68-71; Psa_106:48). Book I includes Psalm 1-41; Book II, Psalm 42-72; Book III, Psalm 73-89; Book IV, Psalm 90-106; Book V, Psalm 107-150.
Book I is according to the titles Davidic; accordingly there is no trace of any author hut David. The objection from the "temple" (Psa_5:7) being mentioned is groundless, for in 1Sa_1:9; 1Sa_3:3, it is similarly used for the tabernacle long before Solomon's temple was built. The argument for a post-Babylonian date from the phrase "bring back the captivity" (Psa_14:7) is invalid; it is a Hebraism for reversing one's misfortunes (Job_42:10). Nor does the acrosticism in Psalm 25 prove a late date, for acrosticism appears in psalms acknowledged to be David's (Psalm 9). In Books II and III David's singers have borrowed from David (excepting "a song of the beloved" Psalm 45, and Psalm 46, "upon Alamoth") everything peculiar in his superscriptions; see Psalm 42; 43; 44; 84; 86. "Selah" is restricted to David and his singers; but "hallelujah" is never found in his or their psalms.
So also "to the chief musician," (committing the psalm to the music conductor to prepare for musical performance in the public service: 1Ch_15:21 Hebrew and margin, compare 1Ch_15:22,) is limited to David's and their psalms. The writer of 2 Samuel 22 evidently turned into prose David's poetical superscription (Psalm 18); so the writer of 1Sa_19:11; 1Sa_21:13-14; 1Sa_23:19, had before him the titles of Psalm 34; 54; 59. Hezekiah's "writing" (miktab) alludes probably to David's miktam (a "secret," or "song of deep import"), Psalm 56; 57 titles, for it was he who restored David's psalms to their liturgical use in the temple (2Ch_29:30). This imitation of David's title, and still more the correspondence of his prayer to David's psalms (Psa_102:24; Psa_27:13; Psa_49:1; Psa_6:5; Psa_30:9), is a presumption for the authenticity of David's and his singers' psalms and their titles.
Habakkuk similarly leans upon David's superscriptions, as also upon his psalms. Hab_3:1, "Shiggaion," compare title Psa_7:1, "Son of David"; Hab_3:19, "to the chief musician on my stringed instruments" is derived from the titles Psalm 4; 6. So the "Selah" (Psa_6:9; Psa_6:13) which occurs only in the psalms of David and his singers. The absence of the authors' names from most of the psalms in the fourth and fifth books implies that none of them have an individual and personal character, as the Davidic psalms have. In all such the psalmist represents the community. The later groups of psalms rest on the Davidic, and echo the poetry of David. Even in the psalms of David's singers, the authors, except Asaph (Psalm 1; 74) who was immediately associated with David, do not give their individual names.
PRINCIPLE OF SELECTION. Not all Israel's lyric poetry but only.
(1) such as is directly religious is included in the psalter, therefore not David's dirge over Saul and Jonathan (2Sa_1:17-27). Also
(2) only the psalms applicable to the whole church and therefore suited to the public services of the sanctuary. The individual psalmist represents the religious community whose mouthpiece he is. 2Sa_23:1; David sings in his typical and representative character; no other psalmist in the book has personal references. Hence Hezekiah's prayer (Isaiah 38) and Jonah's thanksgiving are excluded as too personal.
(3) Only such as were composed trader the Holy Spirit's inspiration. The very musicians who founded the sacred music were inspired (1Ch_25:1, "prophesy with harps"), much more the psalmists themselves. Asaph, the writer of some psalms, was a "seer" (2Ch_29:30).
David spoke "in the Spirit." Christ testifies (Mat_22:41-46), He classes" the Psalms," the chief book of the chetubim or hagiographa, with "the law and the prophets" (Luk_24:44). The Messianic prophetic element in David leans on Nathan's prophecy (2 Samuel 7). Subsequent prophets develop David's Messianic predictions. The Psalms draw out of the typical ceremonial of the law its tuner spirit, adapting it to the various requirements of the individual and the congregation. By their help the Israelite could enter into the living spirit of the law, and realizing his need of the promised Saviour look for Him of whom the Psalms testify. They are a treasury from which we can draw the inner experiences of Old Testament saints and express our corresponding feelings, under like circumstances, in their divinely sanctioned language of praise and prayer.
CLASSIFICATION.
(1) Psalms of joy and gratitude, shir, lethodah "for confession" or ascription of praise (Psalm 100), tehillah (Psalm 145).
(2) Psalms under sorrow, giving birth to prayer: tephillah, "prayer song" (Psalm 90), lehazkir "to put God in remembrance" of His people's needs (Psalm 38; 70), leanot "concerning the affliction" (Psalm 88), altaseheeth "destroy not" (Psalm 57; 58; 59).
(3) Didactic and calmly meditative: Psalm 1; 15; 31; 49. The title Maschil is absent from some didactic psalms and present in others, because its design is to mark as didactic only those in which the "instruction" is covert and so might be overlooked. Thirteen are so designated, mostly of David's time. The later, composed in times of national peril, breathe a spirit of too intense feeling to admit of the calm didactic style. Moreover Solomon's proverbs subsequently to David took the place of the didactic psalms. But some maschil psalms still were composed, and these more lyric in tone and less sententious and maxim-like in style than Proverbs.
ORDER. The Holy Spirit doubtless directed the compiler in arranging as well as the writers in composing the psalms. The first psalm begins, as the Sermon on the Mount (Mat_5:3), and the second closes, with "blessed." Thus this pair, announcing the blessedness of the godly and the doom of the ungodly in the coming judgment, fitly prefaces the Psalms as John the Baptist's announcement of the final judgment preludes the gospel (Matthew 3). "A spiritual epitome of all history (Wordsworth); the godly "meditate in the law of the Lord," the ungodly "meditate a vain thing" (Psa_1:2; Psa_2:1). The five dosing the psalter begin and end with "hallelujah." The principle of arrangement is not: wholly chronological, though David's book of psalms is first of the five, and the post captivity book of psalms last; for Moses' psalm (Psalm 90), the oldest of all, begins the fourth book, and some of David's psalms are in the fifth. Also the 15 songs of degrees, i.e. ascents of the pilgrims to the three national feasts at Jerusalem, though written at different times, form one group.
Spiritual affinity and the relation to one another and to the whole modify the chronological arrangement. The arrangement in some instances is so significant as to indicate, it to be the work of the Spirit, not of the collector merely. Thus, Psalm 22 portrays Messiah's death scene, Psalm 23. His rest in paradise, Psalm 24. His ascension (Act_2:25-27; Act_2:37). "At the time the Psalms were written" they were not of such use to those among whom they were written as they are to us, for they were written to prophesy the New Testament among those who lived under the Old Testament" (Augustine on Psalm 101; 1Pe_1:10-12.) The one great theme ultimately meant is Christ, the antitypical David, in respect to His inner life as the Godman, and in His past, present, and future relations to the church and the world (Luk_24:25; Luk_24:27; Luk_24:45-46). The Psalter rightly holds the middle place of the Bible, being the heart of both Old Testament and New Testament.
Other scriptures of the Old Testament have corresponding scriptures in the New Testament The Pentateuch and Old Testament histories answer to the Gospels and Acts; Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the prophets to the epistles; the Song of Solomon and Daniel to Revelation. The Psalms alone have no counterpart in the New Testament, except the songs of the Virgin, Zacharias and Simeon (Luke 1; 2), because the psalter belongs to both Testaments alike, being "the hymnbook of the universal church" (Wordsworth). There is scarcely a place in the Psalms where the voices of Christ and the church are not to be found (Augustine on Psalm 59). Christ's sufferings and conflict, ending in His reign, appear most in Books I, II; Israel's prostration in Book III; the fruits of His victory, the Lord s reign, and Israel's restoration after her past pilgrim state, in Book IV; the songs of degrees, i.e. the church's pilgrim ascents below, "coming up from the wilderness, leaning upon her Beloved," and her everlasting hallelujahs, in Book V.
AUTHORS: David composed 80 of the Psalms, Asaph wrote four, singers of his school (See below) penned eight, the sons of Korah of David's and Solomon's times seven, Solomon two. To Jehoshaphat's time belong Psalm 47; Psalm 48; Psalm 83. (See JEHOSHAPHAT.) The occasion of Psalm 47 was his bloodless victory over Moab, Ammon, Edom, and the Arabians, who combined to drive Judah out of their "inheritance" (Psa_47:4; 2Ch_20:11). The title ascribes the psalm to "the sons of Korah," just as in 2Ch_20:19 the Korahites are in front of the Jews' army "to praise the Lord God of Israel with a loud voice on high"; so Psa_47:5 answers to 2Ch_20:26. Psalm 47 was perhaps sung in the valley of Bernehah (blessing); Psalm 48 in the temple service on their return (compare Psa_47:9). As Jehoshaphat was "in the fore front" of the returning people (2Ch_20:27), so "Jehovah with the sound of a trumpet went up" to His earthly temple (Psa_47:5).
So "the fear of God was on all the kingdoms" (Psa_47:8-9; compare 2Ch_20:28-29). The breaking of Jehoshaphat's Tarshish ships is alluded to Psa_48:7, his ungodly alliance being as great a danger from within as the hostile invasion from without; both alike the grace of God averted. (See JAHAZIEL; BERACHAH.) To the time of the overthrow of Sennacherib's host under Hezekiah belong Psalm 46; Psalm 75; Psalm 76; Psalm 87. (See HEZEKIAH.) To the time of the carrying away of Israel's ten tribes belong Psalm 77; Psalm 80; Psalm 81. Judah intercedes with God for her captive sister; "of Asaph" in the title may mean only that one of his school wrote under his name as the master of the school. The remaining 46, except Moses' Psalm 90, were written just before, during, and after the Babylonian captivity. As the psalms took their rise in the religious awakening under David, so the long times of growing declension subsequently were barren of additions to the psalter. The only times of such additions were those of religious revivals, namely, under Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and Josiah (to whose reign probably belong Psalm 77; Psalm 92; Psalm 100; this series has the common theme, Jehovah's manifestation for His people's comfort and their foes' confusion).
The captivity taught the people a bitter but wholesome lesson; then accordingly psalmody revived. After the last new song sung to the Lord at the completion of the city walls under Nehemiah, no new psalm was composed under inspiration. The written word thenceforth took the place of the inspired speakers of prophecy and song. David gave the tone to all the succeeding psalms, so that, in a sense, he is their author. Recognition of God's retributive righteousness as a preservative against despair (in undesigned coincidence with the history, 1Sa_30:6), and the sudden interposition of divine consolation amidst sorrowful complaints, are characteristic of his psalms. They are more elevated, and abound in rare forms, from whence arises their greater difficulty. He first introduced the alphabetical arrangement; also the grouping of verses with reference to numbers, and the significancy of the recurrence of the names of God; also the combining of psalms in pairs, and in larger cycles. The divine promise to his line in 2 Samuel 7 forms the basis of many of his Messianic prophecies, as Psalm 138-145; compare with Psa_140:1; 2Sa_22:49.
Wordsworth suggests Psalm 41 and Psalm 71, at the close of Books I and II respectively, were written at the time of Adonijah's, Joab's, and Abiathar's conspiracy when David was old and languishing, yet "in the strength of the Lord God" enabled to rise afresh in the person of Solomon his son, whose throne in Messiah is to be everlasting, as Psalm 72 sets forth. Of Asaph's psalms, four are composed by David's chief musician: Psalm 50; Psalm 73; Psalm 78 (warning Ephraim not to rebel against God's transfer of their prerogative to Zion and Judah), Psalm 82; a didactic and prophetic character marks them all. Eight others (Psalm 74-77; Psalm 79-81; Psalm 83), marked by his name, belong to singers in later times, who regarded him as their founder, just as the sons (followers) of Korah regarded Korah. The Hebrew le- before a name in the title designates the author. Psa_74:8 answers to Jer_52:13; Jer_52:17; the psalmist was probably one of the few Jews left by the Chaldaeans "in the land." So also Psa_79:1 alludes to the temple's "defilement" by the Chaldees (Jer_10:25 quotes Psa_79:6).
The psalms of the sons of Korah are fourteen, of which seven belong to David's and Solomon's times, and seven to later times. Psalm 42; Psalm 43; Psalm 84; Psalm 86 (according to Hengstenberg, as occurring in the midst of Korahitic psalms though superscribed with David's name), refer to Absaiom's rebellion; Psalm 44 on the invasion of the Edomites (2Sa_8:13; 1Ch_18:12; 1Ki_11:15-16); Psalm 49 of general import; Psalm 45 on King Messiah's marriage to Israel and the church, in Solomon's time; Psalm 47; Psalm 48; Psalm 83, in Jehoshaphat's time; Psalm 46; Psalm 87, refer to Sennacherib's host overthrown before Jerusalem, in Hezekiah's reign; Psalm 85; Psalm 88; Psalm 89, before the Babylonian captivity.
Neither Heman nor the sons of Heman are named in the superscriptions, but the sons of Korah; perhaps because Heman, though musical and head of the Korahitic singers, was not also poetically gifted as was Asaph; Psalm 88, is gloom throughout, yet the title calls it (shir) a "song" of joy; this can only refer to Psalm 89 which follows being paired with it; it was when the "anointed" of David's throne (Josiah) had his "crown profaned on the ground," being not able to" stand in the battle" (Psa_89:43), and his son Jehoahaz after a three months' reign was carried to Egypt by Pharaoh Necho (2Ch_35:20-25; 2Ch_36:1-4; Psa_89:45); the title, "to the chief musician," shows the temple was standing, Josiah had just before caused a religious revival.
NUMBERS IN ARRANGEMENT. The decalogue has its form determined by number; also the genealogy in Matthew; so the Lord's prayer, and especially the structure of the Apocalypse. So Isaiah 1 represents Israel's revolt in seven, divided into three and four, the four for the sinfulness, and the three for the revolt. And Isa_52:13-53;Isa_52:12; the introduction three verses (Isa_52:13-15) with the concluding two verses (Isa_53:11-12) making up five, the half; the main part comprises ten (Isa_53:1-10), divided into seven for Messiah's humiliation (three of which represent Messiah's sufferings, four their cause, His being our substitute) and three for His glorification (Hengstenberg). Similarly, the form of the several psalms is regulated by numbers, especially seven divided into four and three. The correctness of our division into verses is hence confirmed. The criticism too which would dismember the psalms is proved at least in their case, and in that of whatever Scriptures are arranged by numbers, to be false.
NAMES or GOD. A similar proof of the correctness of the text appears in the fact that the ELOHIM psalms are peculiar to the first three books, those of David, Asaph, and the sons of Korah. So strange had "ELOHIM" become in later times that only the Jehovah psalms of David were inserted in the later books, excepting David's Psalm 108 introductory to Psalm 109 and Psalm 110. The three form a trilogy: Psalm 108 anticipating triumph over the foe, Psalm 109 the foe's condemnation, Psalm 110 Messiah's divine kingly and priestly glory. In the fifth book Elohim occurs only seven times, i.e. six times in Psalm 108 and once in David's Psalm 144. It is an undesigned coincidence and proof of genuineness that in independent sacred history David uses Elohim as a favorite term (2 Samuel 7; 1Ch_28:20; 1Ch_29:1). In Book I "Jehovah" occurs 272 times, Elohim 15 times; in Book II, Elohim 164 times, Jehovah 30 times; in Book III, Jehovah 44 times, Elohim 43 times; in Book IV, Jehovah 103 times, Elohim, not once; in Book V, Jehovah 236 times, Elohim 7 times.
Hengstenberg suggests the reason of David's predilection for "Elohim." The pagan regarded Jehovah as designating the local God of Israel, but not God absolutely, possessing the whole fullness of the Godhead. So David felt it unnecessary to express "Jehovah," because He was unquestionably Israel's God; it was only contested whether He was Elohim. David boldly, in the face of mighty nations, asserts the nullity of their gods and the sole Godhead of Jehovah; compare Psa_18:31, "who is Elohim but Jehovah?" Jehovah is understood before Elohim in Elohim psalms, as the doxology at the end of the second book recognizes, "blessed be Jehovah Elohim" (Psa_72:18). Latterly when the falsely called Elohim of surrounding nations began to be honoured in Israel the term gave place to Jehovah for expressing the true God. Psalm 18 is "a great hallelujah, with which David retires from tide theater of life."
I. The first book (Psalm 1-4) the Davidic-Jehovah psalms.
II. The second book (Psalm 42-72) the Elohim psalms; namely, of David's singers, the sons of Korah (Psalm 42-49), Asaph's (Psalm 1.), then David's Elohim psalms (Psalm 51-71), Solomon's Elohim psalm (Psalm 72).
III. Psalm 73-89, the Jehovah psalms of David's singers; of Asaph (Psalm 73; Psalm 83), of the sons of Korah (Psalm 84-89). Thus in the arrangement the Jehovah psalms (Jehovah being the fundamental name) enclose the Elohim psalms; so the first book doxology begins with Jehovah; the second has, let Jehovah Elohim be praised; the third, let Jehovah be praised.
IV. (Psalm 90-106.) The psalms of David in the last two books are inserted as component parts into the later cycles. The subscription, Psa_72:20, "the prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended," distinguishes the detached from the serial psalms of David; so Job_31:40 is not contradicted by his again speaking in Job 40; Job 42. Moses' Psalm 90 is put after David's and his singers' psalms, because David was so preeminent as the sweet psalmist of Israel. Psalm 91-100 are connected. Then follows David's trilogy, Psalm 101-103, and the trilogy of the captivity (Psalm 104-106).
V. Psalm 107-150 are (excepting David's psalms incorporated) after the return from the captivity. The dodecad Psalm 108-119, is composed of a trilogy of David introducing nine psalms sung at laying the foundation of the second temple. Psalm 119 is the sermon (composed by Ezra) after the Hallel, to urge Israel to regard God's word as her national safeguard. Psalm 120-134, the pilgrim songs ("songs of degrees"), namely, four psalms of David, one of Solomon, and ten nameless ones, are appropriate to the time of the interruption of the temple building. (See EZRA.) Psalm 135-146 (including David's psalms incorporated with the rest) celebrate its happy completion.
Psalm 147-150 were sung at the consecration of the city walls under Nehemiah. J. F. Thrupp (Smith's Bible Dictionary) maintains that as Psalm 73-83 do not all proceed from Asaph, but from members of the choir which he founded, so the psalms in Books III, IV, V, inscribed with the name of David, were written by his royal representatives for the time being (Hezekiah, Josiah, Zerubbabel, etc.), who prefer honouring the name of their ancestor to obtruding their own names. But why then should one of the psalms in question be inscribed with" Solomon" rather than David? The psalms accord with David's circumstances; their containing phrases of David's former psalms is not inconsistent with his authorship, as the sacred authors often repeat their own inspired words. The Chaldaisms of Psalm 139 are due to David's adapting uncommon phrases to a lofty theme.
In 2 Maccabees the collection of David's psalms is attributed to Nehemiah. Jerome, Ep. ad Sophronium, and the Synopsis in Athanasius, ascribe the collection to Ezra, "the priest and ready scribe in the law of Moses" (Ezr_7:6; Neh_8:9). (On SHIGGAION, etc., see the words as they occur.) Finally, if we would "taste the honey of God" we must "have the palate of faith." "Attune thy heart to the psalm. If the psalm prays, pray thou; if it mourns, mourn thou; if it hopes, hope thou; if it fears, fear thou. Everything, in the psalter, is the looking glass of the soul" (Augustine on Psalm 96 and Psalm 30). The heart, the lips, and the life must be in accord with the psalm, to derive the full blessing. "Vita sic canta, ut nunquam sileas." (Augustine on Psalm 146).
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.

The book of Psalms is a collection of hymns, or sacred songs, in praise of God, and consists of poems of various kinds. They are the productions of different persons, but are generally called the Psalms of David, because a great part of them was composed by him, and David himself is distinguished by the name of the Psalmist. We cannot now ascertain all the Psalms written by David, but their number probably exceeds seventy; and much less are we able to discover the authors of the other Psalms, or the occasions upon which they were composed. A few of them were written after the return from the Babylonian captivity. The titles prefixed to them are of very questionable authority; and in many cases they are not intended to denote the writer but refer only to the person who was appointed to set them to music. David first introduced the practice of singing sacred hymns in the public service of God; and it was restored by Ezra. The authority of the Psalms is established not only by their rank among the sacred writings, and by the unvaried testimony of ages, but likewise by many intrinsic proofs of inspiration. Not only do they breathe through every part a divine spirit of eloquence, but they contain numberless illustrious prophecies that were remarkably accomplished, and are frequently appealed to by the evangelical writers. The sacred character of the whole book is established by the testimony of our Saviour and his Apostles, who, in various parts of the New Testament, appropriate the predictions of the Psalms as obviously apposite to the circumstances of their lives, and as intentionally composed to describe them. The veneration for the Psalms has in all ages of the church been considerable. The fathers assure us, that in the earlier times the whole book of Psalms was generally learned by heart; and that the ministers of every gradation were expected to be able to repeat them from memory. These invaluable Scriptures are daily repeated without weariness, though their beauties are often overlooked in familiar and habitual perusal. As hymns immediately addressed to the Deity, they reduce righteousness to practice; and while we acquire the sentiments, we perform the offices of piety; while we supplicate for blessings, we celebrate the memorial of former mercies; and while in the exercise of devotion, faith is enlivened by the display of prophecy. Josephus asserts, and most of the ancient writers maintain, that the Psalms were composed in metre. They have undoubtedly a peculiar conformation of sentences, and a measured distribution of parts. Many of them are elegiac, and most of David's are of the lyric kind. There is no sufficient reason however to believe, as some writers have imagined, that they were written in rhyme, or in any of the Grecian measures. Some of them are acrostic; and though the regulations of the Hebrew measure are now lost, there can be no doubt, from their harmonious modulation, that they were written with some kind of metrical order; and they must have been composed in accommodation to the measure to which they were set. (See Poetry of the Hebrews.) The Hebrew copies and the Septuagint version of this book contain the same number of Psalms; only the Septuagint translators have, for some reason which does not appear, thrown the ninth and tenth into one, as also the one hundred and fourteenth and one hundred and fifteenth, and have divided the one hundred and sixteenth and one hundred and forty-seventh each into two.
It is very justly observed by Dr. Allix, that, “although the sense of near fifty Psalms be fixed and settled by divine authors, yet Christ and his Apostles did not undertake to quote all the Psalms they could, but only to give a key to their hearers, by which they might apply to the same subjects the Psalms of the same composure and expression.” With regard to the Jews, Bishop Chandler very pertinently remarks, that “they must have understood David, their prince, to have been a figure of Messiah. They would not otherwise have made his Psalms part of their daily worship; nor would David have delivered them to the church to be so employed, were it not to instruct and support them in the knowledge and belief of this fundamental article. Were the Messiah not concerned in the Psalms, it would have been absurd to celebrate twice a day, in their public devotions, the events of one man's life, who was deceased so long ago, as to have no relation now to the Jews and the circumstances of their affairs; or to transcribe whole passages from them into their prayers for the coming of the Messiah.” Upon the same principle it is easily seen that the objections, which may seem to lie against the use of Jewish services in Christian congregations, may cease at once. Thus it may be said, Are we concerned with the affairs of David and of Israel? Have we any thing to do with the ark and the temple? They are no more. Are we to go up to Jerusalem, and to worship on Sion? They are desolated, and trodden under foot by the Turks. Are we to sacrifice young bullocks according to the law? The law is abolished, never to be observed again. Do we pray for victory over Moab, Edom, and Philistia; or for deliverance from Babylon? There are no such nations, no such places in the world. What then do we mean, when, taking such expressions into our mouths, we utter them in our own persons, as parts of our devotions, before God? Assuredly we must mean a spiritual Jerusalem and Sion; a spiritual ark and temple; a spiritual law; spiritual sacrifices; and spiritual victories over spiritual enemies; all described under the old names, which are still retained, though “old things are passed away, and all things are become new,” 2Co_5:17. By substituting Messiah for David, the Gospel for the law, the church Christian for that of Israel, and the enemies of the one for those of the other, the Psalms are made our own. Nay, they are with more fulness and propriety applied now to the substance, than they were of old to the “shadow of good things then to come,” Heb_10:1. For let it not pass unobserved, that when, upon the first publication of the Gospel, the Apostles had occasion to utter their transports of joy, on their being counted worthy to suffer for the name of their Lord and Master, which was then opposed by Jew and Gentile, they brake forth into an application of the second Psalm to the transactions then before their eyes, Act_4:25. The Psalms, thus applied, have advantages which no fresh compositions, however finely executed, can possibly have; since, beside their incomparable fitness to express our sentiments, they are at the same time memorials of, and appeals to, former mercies and deliverances; they are acknowledgments of prophecies accomplished; they point out the connection between the old and new dispensations, thereby teaching us to admire and adore the wisdom of God displayed in both, and furnishing while we read or sing them, an inexhaustible variety of the noblest matter that can engage the contemplations of man.
Very few of the Psalms, comparatively, appear to be simply prophetical, and to belong only to Messiah, without the intervention of any other person. Most of them, it is apprehended, have a double sense, which stands upon this ground and foundation, that the ancient patriarchs, prophets, priests, and kings, were typical characters, in their several offices, and in the more remarkable passages of their lives, their extraordinary depressions and miraculous exaltations foreshowing him who was to arise as the head of the holy family, the great prophet, the true priest, the everlasting king. The Israelitish polity, and the law of Moses, were purposely framed after the example and shadow of things spiritual and heavenly; and the events which happened to the ancient people of God were designed to shadow out parallel occurrences, which should afterward take place in the accomplishment of man's redemption, and the rise and progress of the Christian church, (See Prophecy.) For this reason, the Psalms composed for the use of Israel, and by them accordingly used at the time, do admit of an application to us, who are now “the Israel of God,” Gal_6:16, and to our Redeemer, who is the King of this Israel. It would be an arduous and adventurous undertaking to attempt to lay down the rules observed in the conduct of the mystic allegory, so diverse are the modes in which the Holy Spirit has thought proper to communicate his counsels to different persons on different occasions; inspiring and directing the minds of the prophets according to his good pleasure; at one time vouchsafing more full and free discoveries of future events; while, at another, he is more obscure and sparing in his intimations. From hence, of course, arises a great variety in the Scripture usage of this kind of allegory as to the manner in which the spiritual sense is couched under the other. Sometimes it can hardly break forth and show itself at intervals through the literal, which meets the eye as the ruling sense, and seems to have taken entire possession of the words and phrases. On the contrary, it is much oftener the capital figure in the piece, and stands confessed at once by such splendour of language, that the letter, in its turn, is thrown into shade, and almost totally disappears. Sometimes it shines with a constant equable light, and sometimes it darts upon us on a sudden, like a flash of lightning from the clouds. But a composition is never more truly elegant and beautiful, than when the two senses, alike conspicuous, run parallel together through the whole poem, mutually corresponding with and illustrating each other.
Thus the establishment of David upon his throne, notwithstanding the opposition made to it by his enemies, is the subject of the second Psalm. David sustains in it a twofold character, literal and allegorical. If we read over the Psalm first with an eye to the literal David, the meaning is obvious, and put out of all dispute by the sacred history. There is indeed an uncommon glow in the expression, and sublimity in the figures; and the diction is now and then exaggerated, as it were, on purpose to intimate and lead us to the contemplation of higher and more important matters concealed within. In compliance with this admonition, if we take another survey of the Psalm, as relative to the person and concerns of the spiritual David, a nobler series of events instantly rises to view, and the meaning becomes more evident, as well as exalted. The colouring, which may perhaps seem too bold and glaring for the king of Israel, will no longer appear so, when laid upon his great antitype. After we have thus attentively considered the subject apart, let us look at them together, and we shall behold the full beauty and majesty of this most charming poem. We shall perceive the two senses very distinct from each other, yet conspiring in perfect harmony, and bearing a wonderful resemblance in every feature and lineament, while the analogy between them is so exactly preserved, that either may pass for the original, from whence the other was copied. New light is continually cast upon the phraseology, fresh weight and dignity are added to the sentiment, till gradually ascending from things below to things above, from human affairs to those which are divine, they bear the great important theme upward with them, and at length place it in the height and brightness of heaven. What has been observed with regard to this Psalm, may also be applied to the seventy-second; the subject of which is of the same kind, and treated in the same manner. Its title might be, “The Inauguration of Solomon.” The scheme of the allegory is alike in both; but a diversity of matter occasions an alteration in the diction. For whereas one is employed in celebrating the magnificent triumphs of victory, it is the design of the other to draw a pleasing picture of peace, and of that felicity which is her inseparable attendent. The style is therefore of a more even and temperate sort, and more richly ornamented. It abounds not with those sudden changes of the person speaking which dazzle and astonish; but the imagery is borrowed from the delightful scenes with which creation cheers the sight, and the pencil of the divine artist is dipped in the softer colours of nature. And here we may take notice how peculiarly adapted to the genius of this kind of allegory the parabolical style is, on account of that great variety of natural images to be found in it. For as these images are capable of being employed in the illustration of things divine and human, between which there is a certain analogy maintained, so they easily afford that ambiguity which is necessary in this species of composition, where the language is applicable to each sense, and obscure in neither; it comprehends both parts of the allegory, and may be clearly and distinctly referred to one or the other.
On this book Bishop Horsley remarks:—These Psalms go, in general, under the name of the Psalms of David. King David gave a regular and noble form to the musical part of the Jewish service. He was himself a great composer, both in poetry and music, and a munificent patron, no doubt, of arts in which he himself so much delighted and excelled. The Psalms, however, appear to be compositions of various authors, in various ages; some much more ancient than the times of King David, some of a much later age. Of many, David himself was undoubtedly the author; and that those of his composition were prophetic, we have David's own authority, which may be allowed to overpower a host of modern expositors. For thus King David, at the close of his life, describes himself and his sacred songs: “David, the son of Jesse, said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said, The Spirit of Jehovah spake by me, and his word was in my tongue.” It was the word, therefore, of Jehovah's Spirit which was uttered by David's tongue. But it should seem, the Spirit of Jehovah would not be wanting to enable a mere man to make complaint of his own enemies, to describe his own sufferings just as he felt them, and his own escapes just as they happened. But the Spirit of Jehovah described by David's utterance what was known to that Spirit only, and that Spirit only could describe. So that, if David be allowed to have had any knowledge of the true subject of his own compositions, it was nothing in his own life, but something put into his mind by the Holy Spirit of God; and the misapplication of the Psalms to the literal David has done more mischief than the misapplication of any other parts of the Scriptures among those who profess the belief of the Christian religion.
The Psalms are all poems of the lyric kind, that is, adapted to music, but with great variety in the style of composition. Some are simply odes. An ode is a dignified sort of song, narrative of the facts, either of public history or private life, in a highly adorned and figured style. But the figure in the Psalms is that which is peculiar to the Hebrew language, in which the figure gives its meaning with as much perspicuity as the plainest speech.
Some are of the sort called elegiac, which are pathetic compositions upon mournful subjects. Some are ethic, delivering grave maxims of life, or the precepts of religion, in solemn, but for the most part simple, strains. Some are enigmatic, delivering the doctrines of religion in enigmata, contrived to strike the imagination forcibly, and yet easy to be understood. In all these the author delivers the whole matter in his own person. But a very great, I believe the far greater, part are a sort of dramatic ode, consisting of dialogues between persons sustaining certain characters. In these dialogue Psalms the persons are frequently the Psalmist himself, or the chorus of priests and Levites, or the leader of the Levitical band, opening the ode with a proem declarative of the subject, and very often closing the whole with a solemn admonition drawn from what the other persons say. The other persons are Jehovah, sometimes as one, sometimes as another, of the three Persons; Christ in his incarnate state, sometimes before, sometimes after, his resurrection; the human soul of Christ as distinguished from the divine essence. Christ, in his incarnate state, is personated sometimes as a priest, sometimes as a king, sometimes as a conqueror; and in those Psalms in which he is introduced as a conqueror, the resemblance is very remarkable between this conqueror in the book of Psalms and the warrior on the white horse in the book of Revelation, who goes forth with a crown on his head, and a bow in his hand, conquering and to conquer. And the conquest in the Psalms is followed, like the conquest in the Revelation, by the marriage of the conqueror. These are circumstances of similitude which, to any one versed in the prophetic style, prove beyond a doubt that the mystical conqueror is the same personage in both.
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.

FACEBOOK

Participe de nossa rede facebook.com/osreformadoresdasaude

Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores