circumstance has also naturally imposed on us the duty of studying the history of this period in

connection with the various prophecies referring to it, to which, accordingly, constant reference

will be found in the present Volume.

Another peculiarity of this period is that its history will be found inseparable from that of the great

empires of the world -especially Assyria and Babylonia. Those who have followed the progress of

Assyriological studies know how often and unexpectedly light has been cast on the history of the

Old Testament by the information derived from the Assyrian monuments. But they equally know

that this science is as yet almost in its infancy; that on some points connected with the Old

Testament, the opinions of Assyriologists differ, or else have undergo ne change, while on others

the information we possess may receive further confirmation, modification, or important addition.

It will be understood that in these circumstances the preparation of the present volume has

required special labor and care. I can only hope that it may serve to make clear the history of a

period which without illustration both from the prophetic writings and the Assyrian records would

be not a little difficult and complicated. Lastly, the twofold Index to the whole series, contributed

by the industry of my daughter, will, it is believed, be helpful to the student.

Thus far as regards the present volume. And now it is with more than the common feelings of

natural regret on bringing to a close a work which has engaged a writer more o r less for a number

of years, and on parting from a circle of readers, whom in the course of time he has come to regard

as friends, that the concluding paragraphs of this Preface are written. The object in beginning this

series was to make a fresh study of Old Testament history from the original text, with such help as

was to be derived from the best criticism and from cognate sciences. And not only was it to follow

the course of the outward history, describing it as accurately and fully as might be, but to reach

beyond this to its spiritual and universal meaning to mark the unity, application, and unfolding of

its underlying idea; and to point to its realization and completion in the kingdom of God. Briefly,

the underlying idea of the Old Testament, in its subjective aspect, is that of "the Servant of the

LORD." The history of the Old Testament in its progress to the New is that of the widening of the

idea of the servant of the LORD into that of the kingdom of God. Lastly, its realization and

completion is in the Christ and the Church of God. Unless, indeed, the Old Testament had this

higher meaning and unity, it could not possess any permanent or universal interest, except from a

historical point of view. It would not permanently concern mankind - no, nor even Israel, at least,

in its present relation to the world. On the other hand, without it the New Testament would want

its historical basis, and the historical Christ offer what would seem an absolutely unintelligible

Such, then, has been the pla n and conception of this Bible History. The readers in view were

teachers, students, and generally the wider, educated and thoughtful public. Throughout, the desire

has been not to ignore nor pass by difficulties or questions that might arise in the course of this

History, but without always specially naming, rather to anticipate and remove or answer them by

what seemed the correct interpretation of the narrative. How far this aim has been attained must be

left to the judgment of others. This only may be truthfully said, that as difficulties have not in any

case been consciously ignored, so their solution has not been sought by inventing an interpretation

simply for the purpose of removing an objection. If it may seem that sometimes suggestions have

been offered rather than positive statements made, it was because caution was felt to be not only in

place but even part of necessary reverence.

But beyond all this there are wider questions connected with the Old Testament, which have,

particularly of late, been prominently brought forward. In a work like the present it seemed

specially desirable to avoid controversial matters, which, in any case, could not here be

satisfactorily dealt with. And yet all reference to them could not be omitted. But on the most

fundamental of them - that of the origin and date of the Pentateuch it may be well here to mark

what appears an essential distinction. There is the widest difference between the question whether

the Pentateuch - legislation is of Mosaic origin, and this other of the precise time when it, or any

special part of it, may have been reduced to writing or redacted. The former is a question of