is summoning them to see the crimes of Samaria, and to avenge them. Admitting the verbal doubtfulness of some renderings in this part, iii. 1, &c., I entertain a strong conviction that such is the connexion of the Prophet's thought, and lament that our division into chapters (which yet I least of all in Amos pretend to make perfect) should have so obscured the sense. Indeed no Prophet is more poetically systematical, or more logically coherent as a whole, than Amos, if we read him connectedly. My method of arrangement is a compromise with our familiarly sacred chapter and verse, (which is far better than the eyepedantry of printing in lines,) and though inferior to the massed paragraphs of some foreign translations, I hope it may subserve rather than impede intelligence of the meaning. It may fairly be objected, that a chapter should end at v. 11, where the poetry breaks off; but the succeeding visions are connected, as the narrative justificatory of the preceding song; and the reader who notices the coherence will find himself led naturally to the crash, heralded in the last chapter by Jehovah's standing over the profane altar, and spreading ruin from temple to home. It is a great mistake to transfer this last to the temple at Jerusalem. The title of "The words which Amos saw upon Israel," remains true throughout, so that we may say with Jerome, "Nescio quid volentes LXX interpretati sint, Pro Hierusalem." The clue which gives unity to the whole is the fervent Shepherd's aversion to the oversymbolized worship of Bethel, and to the social harshnesses which it failed to check, while a sense of the unslumbering justice of God awakens his observation to all possibilities of ruin in a rotten realm. Yet after singing the final dirge of Samaria, and in human passion making the Almighty swear never again to relent, the Prophet's heart softens into reluctance to see his people perish. Thus in ch. vii. 7, 8, (A. V. ix. 9, 10) he contemplates

the people as surviving Jeroboam's dynasty, and shaken among the nations, until its offenders perish, yet retaining a kernel of life; and then, unless the Book of Amos originally ended here, he proceeds in the two closing paragraphs to anticipate a restoration of David's dynasty, as the legitimate line of monarchs, and the devastations of Egypt and Ashdod repaired by a restored people in an united realm.

Here arises a grave critical question, on which I will avoid nothing, and exaggerate nothing. There are scattered at the end of several Scriptures, both in the Psalms and Prophetical books, little pieces, not always accordant with the main theme, but singularly appropriate to the exile or the return from Babylon. Thus in Psalm li. after a disparagement of animal victims in respect of what God calls sacrifice, the consecration of our mind, the two last verses pray for the walls of Jerusalem to be restored, and promise bullocks upon the altar. Long before German criticism had awakened, and even before Reginald Pecock had revived for England the creed of Sophocles, Cicero, and St. Paul, that God's word is written in men's heart and conscience, a learned Spanish Jew is mentioned by Aben Ezra, as conjecturing that these two verses were added in the exile to the original Psalms. The reader who has his attention called to this hint, will find many instances to which he may apply it. Thus the 14th Psalm ends, "When the Lord bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice," &c. The 53rd Psalm has the same ending. The 69th Psalm is only a less striking instance, because it may be questioned whether it did not arise as a whole, during the exile. The 106th Psalm is a clear instance of either origination during the exile, or adaptation. On turning from the Psalms to the Prophets, we find many passages which stand out from the context, and ask the reader to

distinguish them. Thus in Hosea, three verses at the end of the first chapter, and beginning of the second, are not only a promise interrupting a denunciation, but by the colour of the diction are peculiar, the phrase living God, being unknown to Hosea, but familiar to later Prophets. So in Obadiah, though marked on the whole by internal evidence, no less than by his place in the canon, as one of the elder Prophets, there comes at the end what seems most naturally interpreted as an allotment of the country (in idea or reality) upon the Return. A far more splendid instance of amplification will be found hereafter in the grand addition to Isaiah. Even in Joel, the first of our Prophets, there is a suggestion hardly strong enough to urge much, of Judah's dwelling for ever, as if for a time she had not dwelt in her land. In Amos the question is more fairly raised. Do the two closing paragraphs imply the Shepherd-preacher's hope that the downfall of Jehu's line will be followed by the restoration of David's, or were they inserted by such a prophet as Zechariah or Haggai, or whoever aided Ezra in editing the older books? An impartial answer to this question is, that we have no such evidence of the former state of the books as would render such addition impossible; nor yet proof of its having actually taken place. We shall never quite know, how far the labours of Ezra, or of those to whom his name has been given, extended in arranging as well as editing the canon. If it be too much to say with Irenæus (C. Hæres. iii. 25) that Ezra restored or re-arranged by inspiration the Prophetical writings, as well as the law of the Scriptures, which that orthodox Father supposes destroyed under Nebuchadnezzar, at least a period of three hundred years elapsed (from B.C. 458 to about B.c. 160), at the beginning and the end of which such additions may have seemed desirable, as at any stage they were possible, and at no

We are

stage are likely to have been thought wrong. therefore thrown upon the internal evidence, which must be tried by our verifying faculties. The result is, that the same class of arguments which lead us to admit the genuineness of most of the Prophets on the whole, compel us to suspect particular passages, such as the one now under discussion. The spite against Edom is very like the 137th Psalm, which certainly belongs to the return from Babylon. The promise of planting and building would be more suitable in the mouth of Zechariah addressing returned exiles, than from the Shepherd of the desert to a nation not yet displanted. Yet such arguments have not the force of demonstration on either side, and I should be sorry to dogmatise on a question of probability. Those who admit the idea of addition, may conceive it to commence-" In that day will I raise up," or "Behold the days come," or with more apparent necessity, at the words, " And I will bring again the captivity, &c." I might incline to an original termination at the close of verse 8 (A. V. ix. 10). But no preference can be certain.

It remains to ask, how far was the denunciation of Amos fulfilled? Not in the reign of Jeroboam, against whose house no sword came from abroad until domestic conspiracy overthrew his son. Nor was the quarter in which the destruction originated either Egypt or Ashdod, the quarters (unless against evidence we read Assur) to which human sagacity had pointed. An empire hardly yet known in Israel, that of Nineveh on the Tigris, (which we may distinguish as the empire of Pul, from the dim shadows of far more ancient powers,) was preparing to absorb the little kingdom of Israel, to which Judah would have been added, if the revolt of great provinces had not preserved it for the subsequent sway of Babylon. Here we see the limits of Prophecy. It is not a delegation of the Divine omniscience, but a foreboding from trust in

the Divine justice, tinged possibly by passion, limited certainly by circumstance. This profound presentiment is something far nobler than mere fits of nervous agitation, or tricks of physical clairvoyance, which, even if occasionally associated with its practice, have not I think left traces on the record of Hebrew Prophecy. A sort of parallel appears in George Fox's judgment upon a woman's prophesying the return of Charles II. He says, "I saw her prophecy was true, and that a great stroke "must come upon them in power, for they that had then "got possession were so exceedingly high, and such great persecution was acted by them." Journal, year 1658. Such prescient inferences from faith in the moral order of God's world have often come true. So the great Reformation of the Church and the Revolution of France were felt due, long before they came. Thus Amos's denunciation was fulfilled, though neither in the time nor by the instruments which he expected. Let us thank God, that in all ages he gives men light enough for their guidance, and not a written memory in the dark of a light once bright, but quenched.

Of the later days of Amos, and whether he survived his mission by more than two years, is not known. His words retain their life of passion, and the power which a Breathing higher than mere human passion has given them.