Page:04.BCOT.KD.PoeticalBooks.vol.4.Writings.djvu/267

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

The terminology of psalm-poesy does not include the word שׁירה, but only שׁיר. This at once shows that the historical portion of the inscription comes from some other source. בּיום is followed, not by the infin. הצּיל: on the day of deliverance, but by the more exactly plusquamperf. הצּיל: on the day (בּיום = at the time, as in Gen 2:4, and frequently) when he had delivered - a genitival (Ges. §116, 3) relative clause, like Psa 138:3; Exo 6:28; Num 3:1, cf. Psa 56:10. מיּד alternates with מכּף in this text without any other design than that of varying the expression. The deliverance out of the hand of Saul is made specially prominent, because the most prominent portion of the Psalm, Psa 18:5, treats of it. The danger in which David the was placed, was of the most personal, the most perilous, and the most protracted kind. This prominence was of great service to the collector, because the preceding Psalm bears the features of this time, the lamentations over which are heard there and further back, and now all find expression in this more extended song of praise.
Only a fondness for doubt can lead any one to doubt the Davidic origin of this Psalm, attested as it is in two works, which are independent of one another. The twofold testimony of tradition is supported by the fact that the Psalm contains nothing that militates against David being the author; even the mention of his own name at the close, is not against it (cf. 1Ki 2:45). We have before us an Israelitish counterpart to the cuneiform monumental inscriptions, in which the kings of worldly monarchies recapitulate the deeds they have done by the help of their gods. The speaker is a king; the author of the Books of Samuel found the song already in existence as a Davidic song; the difference of his text from that which lies before us in the Psalter, shows that at that time it had been transmitted from some earlier period; writers of the later time of the kings here and there use language which is borrowed from it or are echoes of it (comp. Pro 30:5 with Psa 18:31; Hab 3:19 with Psa 18:34); it bears throughout the mark of the classic age of the language and poetry, and “if it be not David's, it must have been written in his name and by some one imbued with his spirit, and who could have been this contemporary