8. The Jews used the initial Hebrew words of each book in the Pentateuch for its name; but this does not occur afterwards. The books of Samuel were one with the older Jews, and so were the books of Kings; but the Greek translators made them the first and second books of the “kingdoms,” and the books of Kings came in course as the third and fourth books, and this is the reason for the additions to the titles in our English Bibles, “otherwise called the first book, the second book, etc., of Kings.”
END OF THE CANONICAL PERIOD.
9. By this term is meant the end of that time whose history is included in the latest of the Old Testament books. Some of these books contain histories which extend to a period nearer the Christian era than do the histories of others, as in the case of the books of the Chronicles, of Esther, of Ezra, and Nehemiah.
10. The books of the Old Testament, which are thirty-nine in number, present the records of events which transpired during the course of more than 3,500 years, or from the creation of Adam to the third century before the Christian era. But we must keep in mind the distinction between the time when events occurred and the time when such events were first recorded. There yet remains another date, namely that of the period when the collator or collators of all these manuscripts produced his or their own work of collecting and arranging them into one history or one volume. Let us suppose a case.
11. A historian undertakes to write a true history of the times of the Norman conquest. In gathering the materials for this history he visits the libraries and collections and finds an old manuscript-history of events written by some one who was on the field at the battle of Hastings, and another written by one who lived in the times soon after and had heard from living witnesses of the exploits of the warrior Hereward in his contests with the Normans.In another manuscript he finds a collection of the ballads of those times commemorating the acts of some brave knight and some reminiscences of that age as communicated by tradition to immediate descendants. With these and other materials he compiles the history desired.
12. Such a history of the Norman conquest of England would be credible, first, if the editor or compiler in his researches truthfully found and wisely used such manuscripts as we have described; and second, if the manuscripts and his other authorities were in themselves trustworthy. But how is this to be tested? We read the new book when finished, and in order to learn something satisfactory upon these two points we now start out upon our examinations. Our question is, Was there ever such an event as the battle of Hastings? How shall we get testimony?
13. The geography of the country, local remains, and other facts may furnish us with evidence for or against. In one chapter of the book it is stated that there was an old castle in which William lodged the night before the battle, and that there is from it no view north, but a fair view towards the south.
We visit Hastings and find the remains of an old castle, and we see high hills on the north and none on the south. Herein we see some corroboration of the history. But now some one shows that there is no evidence that any battle ever was fought atHastings, and the oldest manuscripts sustain the objection, and show that the battle of the conquest was fought at a place called Senlac.
This now throws a doubt upon the whole history. There is contradiction, perhaps error. We go back to the study of the manuscripts and we find that a more recent collator of the history of the conquest, writing with a view to readers of his own times, introduced the new name, “Hastings,” as better understood than another name, Senlac, and all subsequent copyists followed his manuscript.
But the early name, “Senlac,” is found nowhere, while it still remains true that no battle was fought at Hastings. Additional doubt shadows the whole history. But now in a monastery an old manuscript is found, written centuries ago, describing some of the old abbeys, among which one is mentioned named “Battle Abbey,” followed by a short explanation, stating that it is located at the village called “Battle,” quite near Hastings. The last part is an interpolation in the manuscript, and evidently written many years after the writing of the original manuscript, and both authors are unknown.