of Harischandra,[1] given by Dr. Muir in vol. 1. of his Sanskrit Texts. The resemblance may be slight and superficial, but the sudden ruin of a good man's fortunes is common to both stories. Had we more knowledge of Arabic antiquity, we should doubtless find a more valuable parallels.[2] The story of Job had a special attraction for Mohammed, who enriched it (following the precedent of the Jewish Haggada) with a fresh detail (Korán, xxxviii. 40). To him, as well as to St. James, Job was an example of 'endurance.' The dialogue between Allah and Eblis in Korán, xv. 32-42, may perhaps have been suggested by the Prologue of our poem. 'Did then, Job really live?' That for which we most care comes not from 'Tradition, Time's suspected register,'[3] but from an unnamed poet, who embellished tradition partly from imagination, partly (see next section) from the rich and varied stores of his own experience. 2. The Autobiographical Element in its Bearing on the Purpose of the Poem.
A German critic (Dillmann), in speaking of Job, has well reminded us that 'the idea of a work of art must reveal itself in the development of the piece: it is not to be condensed into a dry formula.' Least of all, surely, is such formulation possible when the work of art is an idealised portraiture of the author himself, and such, I think, to a considerable extent is the Book of Job. Those words of a psalmist,
Come and hear, all ye that fear God,
and I will declare what he hath done for my soul
(Ps. lxvi. 16, R. V.)
might be taken as the motto of Job. In short, the author is
