The Hebrew title for the Psalter is cepher tehillim, "book of praises." When we consider the fact that more than 20 of these poems have praise for their keynote, and that there are outbursts of thanksgiving in many others, the fitness of the Hebrew title dawns upon us. As Ker well says, "The book begins with benediction, and ends with praise-first, blessing to man, and then glory to God." Hymns of praise, though found in all parts of the Psalter, become far more numerous in Books IV and V, as if the volume of praise would gather itself up into a Hallelujah Chorus at the end. In the Greek version the book is entitled in some manuscripts Psalmoi, in others Psalterion, whence come our English titles "Psalms," and "Psalter." The Greek word psalmos, as well as the Hebrew mizmor, both of which are used in the superscriptions prefixed to many of the separate psalms, indicates a poem sung to the accompaniment of stringed instruments. The title mizmor is found before 57 psalms. The Psalter was the hymnal of the Jewish nation. To individual psalms other titles are sometimes prefixed, such as shir, "song"; tehillah, "praise"; tephillah, "prayer," etc. The Psalter was both prayerbook and hymnal to the Jewish people. It was also a manual for the nurture of the spiritual life in private as well as public worship.

2. Place in the Canon:

The Psalms were placed in the kethubhim or "Writings," the third group of the Hebrew Scriptures. As the chief book of the kethubhim, the Psalter appears first in the great majority of German manuscripts, though the Spanish manuscripts place Psalms after Chronicles, and the Talmud puts Ru before Psalms. There has never been any serious question as to the right of the Psalter to a place in the Canon of Scripture. The book is possibly more highly esteemed among Christians than by the Jews. If Christians were permitted to retain only one book in the Old Testament, they would almost certainly choose Psalms. By 100 BC, and probably at a much earlier date, the Book of Psalms was completed and recognized as part of the Hagiographa, the 3rd division of the Hebrew Bible.

3. Number of Psalms:

According to the Hebrew text, followed by modern VSS, there are 150 separate poems in the Psalter. The Greek version has an additional psalm, in which David describes his victory over Goliath; but this is expressly said to be "outside the number." The Septuagint, followed by Vulgate, combined Psalms 9 and 10, and also 114 and 115, into a single psalm. On the other hand, they divide Psalms 116 and 147 each into two poems. Thus, for the greater part of the Psalter the Hebrew enumeration is one number in advance of that in the Greek and Latin Bibles.

The existing division in the Hebrew text has been called in question at various points. Psalms 42 and 43 are almost certainly one poem (see refrain in 42:5,11; 43:5); and it is probable that Psalms 9 and 10 were originally one, as in Septuagint. On the other hand, it is thought by some that certain psalms were composed of two psalms which were originally separate. We may cite as examples Ps 19:1-6,7-14; 24:1-6,7-10; 27:1-6,7-14; 36:1-4,5-12. It is evident that such combinations of two different poems into one may have taken place, for we have an example in Ps 108, which is composed of portions of two other psalms (57:7-11; 60:5-12).

4. Titles in the Hebrew Text:

(1) Value of the Superscriptions.

It is the fashion among advanced critics to waive the titles of the psalms out of court as wholly worthless and misleading. This method is as thoroughly unscientific as the older procedure of defending the superscriptions as part of an inspired text. These titles are clearly very old, for the Septuagint, in the 2nd century BC, did not understand many of them. The worst that can be said of the superscriptions is that they are guesses of Hebrew editors and scribes of a period long prior to the Greek version. As to many of the musical and liturgical titles, the best learning of Hebrew and Christian scholars is unable to recover the original meaning. The scribes who prefixed the titles had no conceivable reason for writing nonsense into their prayerbook and hymnal. These superscriptions and subscriptions all had a worthy meaning, when they were first placed beside individual psalms. This indisputable fact of the great antiquity of these titles ought forever to make it impossible for scientific research to ignore them. Grant for the sake of argument, that not one of them came from the pen of the writers of the Psalms, but only from editors and compilers of exilic or post-exilic days, it would still be reasonable to give attention to the views of ancient Hebrew scholars, before considering the conjectures of modern critics on questions of authorship and date. Sources of information, both oral and written, to which they had access, have long since perished. In estimating the value of their work, we have a right to use the best critical processes known to us; but it is unscientific to overlook the fact that their proximity to the time of the composition of the Psalms gave them an advantage over the modern scholar. If it be said by objectors that these ancient scribes formed their conclusions by the study of the life of David as portrayed in the historical books of Kings and Chronicles, the reply is ready that several historical notices in the titles cannot be thus explained. Who was Cush? Who was Abimelech? (Psalms 7 and 34). A careful weighing of the facts concerning the superscriptions will make it seem highly improbable that the earliest of these titles does not reach back into pre-exilic times. We almost certainly have in them the results of the labors of Hebrew scribes and compilers stretching over several centuries. Some of the titles may have been appended by the psalmists themselves.

We are far from claiming that the titles are always intelligible to us, or that, when understood, they are always correct. The process of constructing titles indicative of authorship had not ceased in the 2nd century BC, the Septuagint adding many to psalms that were anonymous in the Hebrew. The view expressed nearly 50 years ago by Perowne is eminently sane: "The inscriptions cannot always be relied on. They are sometimes genuine, and really represent the most ancient tradition. At other times, they are due to the caprice of later editors and collectors, the fruits of conjecture, or of dimmer and more uncertain traditions. In short, the inscriptions of the Psalms are like the subscriptions to the Epistles of the New Testament. They are not of any necessary authority, and their value must be weighed and tested by the usual critical processes."

(2) Thirtle's Theory.

J. W. Thirtle (The Titles of the Psalms, 1904) advances the hypothesis that both superscriptions and subscriptions were incorporated in the Psalter, and that in the process of copying the Psalms by hand, the distinction between the superscription of a given psalm and the subscription of the one immediately preceding it was finally lost. When at length the different psalms were separated from one another, as in printed editions, the subscriptions and superscriptions were all set forth as superscriptions. Thus it came about that the musical subscription of a given psalm was prefixed to the literary superscription of the psalm immediately following it. The prayer of Habakkuk (Hab 3) was taken by Thirtle as a model or normal psalm; and in this instance the superscription was literary. "A prayer of Habakkuk the prophet, upon Shigionoth," while the subscription is musical, "For the Chief Musician, on my stringed instruments." The poem of Hezekiah in celebration of his recovery (Isa 38:9-20) seems to support Thirtle's thesis, the superscription stating the authorship and the occasion that gave birth to the psalm, while Isa 38:20 hints at the musical instruments with which the psalm was to be accompanied in public worship. If now the musical notes be separated from the notes of authorship and date that follow them, the musical notes being appended as subscriptions, while the literary notes are kept as real superscriptions, the outcome of the separation is in many instances a more intelligible nexus between title and poem. Thus the subscript to Ps 55, "The dove of the distant terebinths," becomes a pictorial title of 55:6-8 of the psalm. The application of the rule that the expression "for the Chief Musician" is always a subscript removes the difficulty in the title of Ps 88. The superscription of Ps 88, on Thirtle's hypothesis, becomes "Maschil of Heman the Ezrahite." Ps 87 thus has a subscript that repeats the statement of its superscription, but with an addition which harmonizes with the content of the poem. "Mahalath Leannoth," with a slight correction in vocalization, probably means "Dancings with Shoutings," and 87:7 speaks of both singing and dancing. The tone of Ps 87 is exceedingly cheerful; but Ps 88 is the saddest in the entire Psalter. The application of Thirtle's hypothesis also leaves Ps 88 with a consistent literary title, whereas the usual title ascribes the psalm first to the sons of Korah and then to Heman the Ezrahite.

(3) Meaning of the Hebrew Titles.

Scholars have not been able to come to agreement as to the meaning and application of a goodly number of words and phrases found in the titles of the Psalms. We append an alphabetical list, together with hints as to the probable meaning:

(a) ?Ayeleth ha-Shachar (Ps 22) means "the hind of the morning," or possibly "the help of the morning." Many think that the words were the opening line of some familiar song.

(b) ?Alamoth (Ps 46) means "maidens." The common view is that the psalm was to be sung by soprano voices. Some speak of a female choir and compare 1Ch 15:20; Ps 68:11,24 f. According to Thirtle, the title is a subscript to Ps 45, which describes the marriage of a princess, a function at which it would be quite appropriate to have a female choir.

(c) ?Al-tashcheth (Psalms 57-59; 75) means "destroy not;" and is quite suitable as a subscript to Psalms 56-58 and 74 (compare De 9:26). Many think this the first word of a vintage song (compare Isa 65:8).

(d) Ascents, So of" (Psalms 120-184): the Revised Version (British and American) translates the title to 15 psalms "A So of Ascents," where the King James Version has "A So of Degrees." The most probable explanation of the meaning of the expression is that these 15 psalms were sung by bands of pilgrims on their way to the yearly feasts in Jerusalem (Ps 122:4). Psalms 121-123; 125; 127; 128 and 132-134 are well suited for use on such occasions (see, however, Expository Times, XII, 62).

(e) "For the Chief Musician": 55 psalms are dedicated to the precentor or choir leader of the temple. "To the Chief Musician" might mean that the precentor was the author of certain psalms, or that there was a collection of hymns compiled by him for use in temple worship, or that certain psalms were placed in his hands, with suggestions as to the character of the poems and the music which was to accompany them. It is quite likely that there was an official collection of psalms for public worship in the custody of the choir master of the temple.

(f) "Dedication of the House" (Ps 30): The title probably refers to the dedication of Yahweh's house; whether in the days of David, in connection with the removal of the ark to Jerusalem, or in the days of Zerubbabel, or in the time of Judas Maccabeus, it is impossible to say positively. If Ps 39 was used on any one of these widely separated occasions, that fact might account for the insertion of the caption, "a So at the Dedication of the House."

(g) "Degrees": see "Ascents" above.

(h) Gittith (Psalms 8; 81; 84) is commonly supposed to refer to an instrument invented in Gath or to a tune that was used in the Philistine city. Thirtle emends slightly to gittoth, "wine presses," and connects Psalms 7; 80 and 83 with the Feast of Tabernacles.

(i) Higgayon: This word is not strictly a title, but occurs in connection with Celah in Ps 9:16. the Revised Version (British and American) translates the word in Ps 92:3, "a solemn sound," and in Ps 19:14, "meditation." It is probably a musical note equivalent to largo.

(j) Yedhuthun: In the title of Ps 39, Jeduthun might well be identical with the Chief Musician. In Psalms 62 and 77 the Revised Version (British and American) renders "after the manner of Jeduthun." We know from 1Ch 16:41; 25:3 that JEDUTHUN (which see) was a choir leader in the days of David. He perhaps introduced a method of conducting the service of song which ever afterward was associated with his name. (k) Yonath ?elem rechoqim (Ps 56): We have already called attention to the fact that as a subscript to Ps 55 "the dove of the distant terebinths," or "the silent dove of them that are afar off," would have a point of contact with Ps 55:6-8.

(l) Machalath (Ps 53), Machalath le?annoth (Ps 88): Perhaps Thirtle's vocalization of the Hebrew consonants as mecholoth, "dancings," is correct. As a subscript to Ps 87; mecholoth may refer to David's joy at the bringing of the ark to Zion (2Sa 6:14,15).

(m) Maskil (Psalms 32; 42-45; 52-55; 74; 78; 88; 89; 142): The exact meaning of this common term is not clear. Briggs suggests "a meditation," Thirtle and others "a psalm of instruction," Kirkpatrick "a cunning psalm." Some of the 13 psalms bearing this title are plainly didactic, while others are scarcely to be classed as psalms of instruction.

(n) Mikhtam (Psalms 16; 56-60): Following the rabbinical guess, some translate "a golden poem." The exact meaning is unknown.

(o) Muth labben: The title is generally supposed to refer to a composition entitled "Death of the Son." Possibly the melody to which this composition was sung was the tune to which Ps 9 (or 8) was to be sung. Thirtle translates "The Death of the Champion," and regards it as a subscription to Ps 8, in celebration of the victory over Goliath.

(p) On "Neghinoth" occurs 6 times (Psalms 4; 6; 54; 55; 67; 76), and means "with stringed instruments." Neghinath (Ps 61) may be a slightly defective writing for Neghinoth. Perhaps stringed instruments alone were used with psalms having this title. According to Thirtle's hypothesis, the title was originally a subscript to Psalms 3; 5; 53; 54; 60; 66; 75.

(q) Nechiloth (Ps 5), possibly a subscript to Ps 4, is supposed by some to refer to "wind instruments," possibly flutes.

(r) Celah, though not strictly a title, may well be discussed in connection with the superscriptions. It occurs 71 times in the Psalms and 3 times in Habakkuk. It is almost certainly technical term whose meaning was well known to the precentor and the choir in the temple. The Septuagint always, Symmachus and Theodotion generally, render diapsalma, which probably denotes an instrumental interlude. The Targum Aquila and some other ancient versions render "forever." Jerome, following Aquila, translates it "always." Many moderns derive Celah from a root meaning "to raise," and suppose it to be a sign to the musicians to strike up with a louder accompaniment. Possibly the singing ceased for a moment. A few think it is a liturgical direction to the congregation to "lift up" their voices in benediction. It is unwise to dogmatize as to the meaning of this very common word.

(s) Sheminith (Psalms 6; 12), meaning "the eighth," probably denotes the male choir, as distinguished from 'Alamoth, the maidens' choir. That both terms are musical notes is evident from 1Ch 15:19-21.

(t) Shiggayon (Ps 7) is probably a musical note. Some think it denotes "a dithyrambic poem in wild ecstatic wandering rhythms, with corresponding music."

(u) Shoshannim (Psalms 45; 69) means "lilies." Shoshannim 'edhuth (Ps 80) means "lilies, a testimony." Shushah 'edhuth (Ps 60) may be rendered "the lily of testimony." Thirtle represents these titles as subscripts to Psalms 44; 59; 68; 79, and associates them with the spring festival, Passover. Others regard them as indicating the melody to which the various psalms were to be sung.

(v) "So of Loves" (Ps 45) is appropriate as a literary title to a marriage song.

(4) Testimony of the Titles as to Authorship.

(a) Ps 90 is ascribed to Moses.

(b) To David 73 psalms are ascribed, chiefly in Books I and II.

(d) 12 are ascribed to Asaph (Psalms 50; 73-83).

(e) 11 are assigned to the sons of Korah (Psalms 42-49; 84; 85; 87).

(f) Ps 88 is attributed to Heman the Ezrahite.

(g) Ps 89 bears the name of Ethan the Ezrahire.

In most cases it is plain that the editors meant to indicate the authors or writers of the psalms. It is possible that the phrase "to David" may sometimes have been prefixed to certain psalms, merely to indicate that they were found in a collection which contained Davidic psalms. It is also possible that the titles "to Asaph" and' "to the sons of Korah" may have originally meant that the psalms thus designated belonged to a collection in the custody of these temple singers. Ps 72 may also be a prayer for Solomon rather than a psalm by Solomon. At the same time, we must acknowledge, in the light of the titles describing the occasion of composition, that the most natural interpretation of the various superscriptions is that they indicate the supposed authors of the various poems to which they are prefixed. Internal evidence shows conclusively that some of these titles are incorrect. Each superscription should be tested by a careful study of the psalm to which it is appended.

(5) Titles Describing the Occasion of Writing.

There are 13 of these, all bearing the name of David. (a) Psalms 7; 59; 56; 34; 52; 57; 142; 54 are assigned to the period of his persecution by Saul. (b) During the period of his reign over. all Israel, David is credited with Psalms 18; 60; 51; 3; and 63.

II. Authorship and Age of the Psalms.

Ps 90 is ascribed to Moses. It is the fashion now to deny that Moses wrote anything. A careful study of Ps 90 has brought to light nothing inconsistent with Mosaic authorship. The dignity, majesty and pathos of the poem are worthy of the great lawgiver and intercessor.

1. David as a Psalmist:

(1) The Age of David Offered Fruitful Soil for the Growth of Religious Poetry.

(a) The political and religious reforms of Samuel created a new sense of national unity, and kindled the fires of religious patriotism. (b) Music had a large place in the life of the prophetic guilds or schools of the prophets, and was used in public religious exercises (1Sa 10:5 f). (c) The victories of David and the internal expansion of the life of Israel would inevitably stimulate the poetic instinct of men of genius; compare the Elizabethan age and the Victorian era in English literature. (d) The removal of the ark to the new capital and the organization of the Levitical choirs would stimulate poets to compose hymns of praise to Yahweh (2Sa 6; 1Ch 15; 16; 25).

It is the fashion in certain critical circles to blot out the Mosaic era as unhistoric, all accounts of it being considered legendary or mythical. It is easy then to insist on the elimination of all the higher religious teaching attributed to Samuel. This leaves David "a rude king in a semi-barbaric age," or, as Cheyne puts it, "the versatile condottiere, chieftain, and king." It would seem more reasonable to accept as trustworthy the uniform tradition of Israel as to the great leaders, Moses, Samuel and David, than to rewrite Israel's history out of the tiny fragments of historical material that are accepted by skeptical critics as credible. It is often said that late writers read into their accounts of early heroes their own ideas of what would be fitting. James Robertson's remark in reply has great weight: "This habit of explaining the early as the backward projection of the late is always liable to the objection that it leaves the late itself without explanation" (Poetry and Religion of the Psalms, 332).

(2) David's Qualifications for Composing Psalms

(a) He was a skillful musician, with a sense of rhythm and an ear for pleasing sounds (1Sa 16:15-23). He seems to have invented new instruments of music (Am 6:5).

(b) He is recognized by critics of all schools as a poet of no mean ability. The genuineness of his elegy over Saul and Jonathan (2Sa 1:19-27) is commonly accepted; also his lament over Abner (2Sa 3:33 f). In the elegy over Saul and Jonathan, David displays a magnanimity and tenderness that accord with the representations of S as to his treatment of Saul and of Jonathan. No mere rough border chieftain could have composed a poem full of the tenderest sentiment and the most exemplary attitude toward a persecutor. The moral elevation of the elegy has to be accounted for. If the author was a deeply religious man, a man enjoying the friendship of God, it is easy to account for the moral dignity of the poem. Surely it is only a step from the patriotism and magnanimity and devoted friendship of the elegy to the religious fervor of the Psalms. Moreover, the poetic skill displayed in the elegy removes the possible objection that literary art in the days of David had not attained a development equal to the composition of poems such as the Psalms. There is nothing more beautiful and artistic in the entire Psalter.

Radical critics saw the David of the Bible asunder. They contrast the rough border chieftain with the pious Psalmist. Though willing to believe every statement that reflects upon the moral character of David, they consider the references to David as a writer of hymns and the organizer of the temple choirs as the pious imaginings of late chroniclers. Robertson well says: "This habit of refusing to admit complexity in the capacities of Biblical characters is exceedingly hazardous and unsafe, when history is so full of instances of the combination in one person of qualities the most diverse. We not only have poets who can harp upon more than one string, but we have religious leaders who have united the most fervent piety with the exercise of poorly developed virtue, or the practice of very questionable policy. A critic, if he has not a single measure of large enough capacity for a historical character, should not think himself at liberty to measure him out in two halfbushels, making one man of each" (Poetry and Religion of the Psalms, 332). Among kings, Charlemagne and Constantine the Great have been likened to David; and among poets, Robert Burns. There were contradictory elements in the moral characters of all these gifted men. Of Constantine it has been said that he "was by turns the docile believer and the cruel despot, devotee and murderer, patron saint and avenging demon." David was a many-sided man, with a character often at war with itself, a man with conflicting impulses, the flesh lusting against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh. Men of flesh and blood in the midst of life's temptations have no difficulty in understanding the David of the Bible.

(c) David was a man of deep feeling and of imperial imagination. Think of his love for Jonathan, his grateful appreciation of every exploit done in his behalf by his mighty men, his fondness for Absalom. His successful generalship would argue for imagination, as well as the vivid imagery of the elegy.

(d) David was an enthusiastic worshipper of Yahweh. All the records of his life agree in representing him as devoted to Israel's God. In the midst of life's dangers and disappointments, "David strengthened himself in Yahweh his God" (1Sa 30:6). We should have been surprised had no trace of religious poetry come from his pen. It would be difficult to imagine Milton or Cowper or Tennyson as confining himself to secular poetry. "Comus," "John Gilpin," and the "Charge of the Light Brigade" did not exhaust their genius; nor did the elegy over Saul and Jonathan and the lament over Abner relieve David's soul of the poetry that clamored for expression. The known facts of his life and times prepare us for an outburst of psalmody under his leadership. (e) The varied experiences through which David passed were of a character to quicken any latent gifts for poetic expression.

James Robertson states this argument clearly, and yet with becoming caution: "The vicissitudes and situations in David's life presented in these narratives are of such a nature that, though we may not be able to say precisely that such and such a psalm was composed at such and such a time and place, yet we may confidently say, Here is a man who has passed through certain experiences and borne himself in such wise that we are not surprised to hear that, being a poet, he composed this and the other psalms. It is very doubtful whether we should tie down any lyric to a precise set of circumstances, the poet being like a painter who having found a fit landscape, sits down to transfer it to canvas. I do not think it likely that David, finding himself in some great perplexity or sorrow, called for writing materials in order to describe the situation or record his feelings. But I do think it probable that the vicissitudes through which he passed made such an impression on his sensitive heart, and became so inculcated withn an emotional nature, that when he soothed himself in his retirement with his lyre, they came forth spontaneously in the form of a psalm or song or prayer, according as the recollection was sad or joyful, and as his singing mood moved him" (Poetry and Religion of the Psalms, 343 f).

The Biblical writers, both early and late, agree in affirming that the Spirit of Yahweh rested upon David, empowering him for service of the highest order (1Sa 16:13; 2Sa 23:1-3; Mt 22:43; Ac 2:29-31). The gift of prophetic inspiration was bestowed upon Israel's chief musician and poet.

(3) External Evidence for Davidic Psalms

(a) In the New Testament David is named as the author of certain psalms. Thus Ps 110 is ascribed to David by Jesus in His debate with the Pharisees in the Temple (Mt 22:41-45; Mr 12:35-37; Lu 20:41-44). Peter teaches that David prophesied concerning Judas (Ac 1:16), and he also refers Psalms 16 and 110 to David (Ac 2:25-34). The whole company of the disciples in prayer attribute Ps 2 to David (Ac 4:25 f). Paul quotes Psalms 32 and 69 as Davidic (Ro 4:6-8; 11:9 f). The author of He even refers Ps 95 to David, following the Septuagint (Heb 4:7). From the last-named passage many scholars infer that any quotation from the Psalms might be referred to David as the chief author of the Psalms. Possibly this free and easy method of citation, without any attempt at rigorous critical accuracy, was in vogue in the 1st century AD. At the same time, it is evident that the view that David was the chief author of the Psalms was accepted by the New Testament writers.

(b) In 2 Macc 2:13 (the Revised Version), in a letter purporting to have been written by the Jews of Palestine to their brethren in Egypt, about 144 BC, occurs the following: "And the same things were related both in the public archives and in the records that concern Nehemiah; and how he, rounding a library, gathered together the books about the kings and prophets, and the books of David, and letters of kings about sacred gifts." We do not know the exact date of 2 Maccabees, but it was almost certainly in the 1st century BC. The author regards David as the author of books in the sacred library gathered together by Nehemiah.

(c) Jesus the Son of Sirach, who wrote not later than 180 BC, and possibly a good deal earlier, thus describes David's contribution to public worship: "In every work of his he gave thanks to the Holy One Most High with words of glory; with his whole heart he sang praise, and loved him that made him" (Ecclesiasticus 47:8 f the Revised Version (British and American)). David's fame as a psalmist and the organizer of choirs for the sanctuary was well known to Ben Sira at the beginning of the 2nd century BC.

(d) The author of Chronicles, writing not later than 300 BC, and probably much earlier, represents David as making provision for a service of song before the ark of God and in connection with its removal to the city of David (1Ch 15; 16). It seems to be imagined by some scholars that the Chronicler, whose historical accuracy is severely attacked by certain critics, is responsible for the idea that David was a great writer of hymns. On the contrary, he has less to say about David as a poet and psalmist than the author of Samuel. Only in 2Ch 29:30 is there explicit mention of David as the author of praises to Yahweh. The Chronicler speaks repeatedly of the instruments of David and of his organization of the choirs. And so in the kindred books of Ezra and Nehemiah there is mention of the style of worship introduced by David (Ezr 3:10; Ne 12:24,36). The author of the Book of Kings refers repeatedly to David as a model king (1Ki 11:4; 2Ki 14:3; 20:5 f, etc.). He becomes a witness for the high reputation of David for uprightness and religious zeal.

(e) Amos refers incidentally to David's great skill as an inventor of musical instruments (Am 6:5). The same prophet is a witness to the fact that songs were sung in worship at Bethel to the accompaniment of harps or viols (Am 5:23).

(f) The earliest witness, or witnesses, if the narrative be composite, we find in 1 and 2 Samuel. David is described as a wonderful musician and as one on whom the Spirit of Yahweh rested mightily (1Sa 16:13-23). He is credited with the beautiful elegy oyer Saul and Jonathan (2Sa 1:17-27) and the brief lament over Abner (2Sa 3:33 f). He is said to have danced with joy before the ark, and to have brought it up to Jerusalem with shouting and with sound of trumpet (2Sa 6:12 ). He is credited with the pious wish that he might build a temple for Yahweh and the ark, and is said to have poured forth a prayer of thanksgiving to Yahweh for the promise of a perpetual throne (2Sa 7). David dedicated to Yahweh much wealth taken from his enemies. (2Sa 8:11). Both the good and the bad in David's life and character are faithfully set forth in the vivid narrative.

We come next to two statements that would settle the question of David's psalms, if critics would only accept them as the work of an author living within a generation or so of the time of David. Unfortunately 2Sa 21-24 is regarded by most critical scholars as an appendix to the early narrative of David's career. There is no agreement as to the exact date of the composition of these chapters. Naturally the burden of proof is on the critic who tries to disintegrate a document, and suspicion of bias is inevitable, if by the disintegration he is able to escape the force of a disagreeable argument. Happily, we live in a free country, every man having a right to hold and to express his own opinion, for whatever it may be worth. It seems to the present writer that 2Sa 21-24 may well have come from the pen of the early narrator who told the story of David's reign in such a masterly fashion. Even if these chapters were added by a later editor as an appendix, there is no sufficient reason for putting this writer so late as the exile. His statements cannot be set aside as unreliable, simply because they run counter to the current theory as to the date of the Psalms. 2Sa 22 purports to give the words of a song which David spake to Yahweh, when he had been delivered from Saul and from all his enemies. Ps 18 is evidently a different recension of the same poem. The differences between 2Sa 22 and Ps 18 are not much greater than the differences in the various odd of "Rock of Ages." Only the most advanced critics deny that David wrote this glorious song. 2Sa 23:1-7 must not be omitted, for here David claimed prophetic inspiration as the sweet Psalmist of Israel. This original and striking poem is worthy of the brilliant royal bard. (g) The titles of the Psalms are external evidence of real value for determining the date and authorship of the Psalms; and these ascribe 73 to David. A sweeping denial of all the forms of external evidence for Davidic psalms ought to be buttressed by convincing arguments from internal evidence. Unverified conjectures will not answer.

(4) Internal Evidence for Davidic Psalms

The fact that many of the psalms ascribed to David correspond in tone and temper and in historical allusions with incidents in his life, while not in itself convincing proof that David wrote them, certainly re-enforces the external evidence in favor of Davidic psalms. We must refer the reader to the commentaries of Delitzsch, Kirkpatrick, Perowne and others for the evidence discovered in individual psalms. In many psalms the evidence is strongly in favor of the superscriptions, in which David is named as the writer. See especially Psalms 18; 23; 32; 3.

(5) Number of Davidic Psalms

Opinion varies among conservative scholars all the way from 3 or 4 to 44 or 45. It has come to pass that a critic who acknowledges even Ps 18 to be David's is called conservative. In fact, the more radical critics regard a scholar as conservative if he assigns even a small group of psalms to the period before the exile. We must not allow ourselves to be deterred from ascribing to David any psalm that seems to us, on the basis of both external and internal evidence, to come from his pen. Delitzsch and Kirkpatrick are safer guides than Cheyne and Duhm. Maclaren also has made a close and sympathetic study of David's life and character, and accepts the results of sane criticism. W. T. Davison (HDB, IV) speaks out clearly and strongly for Davidic authorship of Psalms 7; 11; 17; 18; 19 (first half), 24 and a few other psalms or parts of psalms, though he makes large concessions to the present tendency to bring the psalms down to a later date. He stands firmly for a large body of pre-exilic psalms. Ewald assigned to David Psalms 3; 4; 7; 8; 11; 18; 19; 24; 29; 32; 101; also 60:8-11 and 68:14-19. Hitzig ascribed to David Psalms 3-19, with the exception of Ps 5; 6 and 14. If one follows the titles in the Hebrew text, except where internal evidence clearly contradicts the superscriptions, it will be easy, to follow Delitzsch in attributing 44 or 45 psalms to David.