ss developed,
sometimes in more developed forms, a fact which is conclusive proof of
prolonged historical development. According to the all-pervading law of
evolution, the less complex form must have preceded the more complex.
Still, the book does bear the stamp of one master-mind. Its style is as
easily recognized as that of Deutero-Isaiah, being as remarkable for its
copious diction as for its depths of moral and religious feeling.

The original Deuteronomy, D, read to King Josiah, cannot have been so
large as our present book, for not only could it be read at a single
sitting, but it could be easily read twice in one day. On the day it was
found, Shaphan first read it himself, and then went to the king and read
it aloud to him. But perhaps the most conclusive proof of its brevity is
that it was read publicly to the assembled people immediately before
they, as well as their king, pledged themselves to obey it; and not a
word is said as to the task of reading it aloud, so as to be heard by
such a great multitude, being long or difficult.

The legislative part of D consists of fifteen chapters (xii.-xxvi.),
which, however, contain many later insertions. But the impression made
upon Josiah by what he heard was far too deep to have been produced by
the legislative part alone. The king must have listened to the curses as
well as the blessings in chap, xxviii., and no doubt also to the
exhortations in chaps. v.-xi. Hence we may conclude that the original
book consisted of a central mass of religious, civil and social laws,
preceded by a hortatory introduction and followed by an effective
peroration. The book read to Josiah must therefore have comprised most
of what is found in Deut. v.-xxvi., xxvii. 9, 10 and xxviii. But
something like two centuries elapsed before the book reached its present
form, for in the closing chapter, as well as elsewhere, e.g. i. 41-43
(where the joining is not so deftly done as usual) and xxxii. 48-52,
there are undoubted traces of the Priestly Code, P, which is generally
acknowledged to be post-exilic.

The following is an analysis of the main divisions of the book as we now
have it. There are two introductions, the first i.-iv. 44, more
historical than hortatory; the second v.-xi., more hortatory than
historical. These may at first have been prefixed to separate editions
of the legislative portion, but were eventually combined. Then, before D
was united to P, five appendices of very various da