Then the figure changes to Death as a reaper:--

There fall the corpses of men

Upon the face of the field,

Like sheaves behind the reaper

Which none gathers up.

ix. 21, 22.

The book appropriately opens with the call of Jeremiah, and

represents him as divinely preordained to his great and cheerless

task before his birth. In two visions he sees prefigured the coming

doom (i.) and the prophecies that immediately follow, though but

loosely connected, appear to come from an early stage of his

ministry, and to be elicited, in part, by the inroads of the

Scythians--the enemy from the north.

False to the love she bore Jehovah in the olden time, Israel has

turned for help to Egypt, to Assyria, and to the impotent Baals with

their licentious worship, ii, 1-iii. 5; but[1]if in her despair and

misery she yet turns with a penitent heart to Jehovah, the prophet

assures her of His readiness to receive her, iii. 19-iv. 4. The rest

of ch. iv. contains several poems of remarkable power. The Scythians

are coming swiftly from the north, and Jeremiah's patriotic soul is

deeply moved. He sees the desolation they will work, and counsels

the people to gather in the fortified cities. The scene changes in

v. and vi. to the capital, where Jeremiah's tender and unsuspecting

heart has been harrowed by the lack of public and private

conscience; and again the land is threatened with invasion from the

swift wild Scythian hordes.

[Footnote 1: Ch. iii. 6-18 contains much that is altogether worthy

of Jeremiah, especially the great conception in v. 16 of a religion

which can dispense with its most cherished material symbols. It

interrupts the connection, however, between vv. 5 and 19, and

curiously regards Israel as the northern kingdom, distinct from

Judah, whereas in the surrounding context, ii. 3, iii. 23, Israel

stands for Judah. The difference is suspicious. Again, v. 18 would

appear to presuppose that Judah is in exile or on the verge of it,

which would make the passage among the latest in the book. If it is

Jeremiah's, it must be much later than its context.]

The following chapter (vii.) introduces us to the reign of

Jehoiakim.[1] The prophet strenuously combats the confidence falsely

reposed in the temple and the ritual: the former is but a den of

robbers, the latter had never been commanded by Jehovah, and neither

will save them. With sorrowful eyes Jeremiah sees the coming

disaster, and he sings of it in elegies unspeakably touching (viii.-x.:

cf. viii. 18-22, ix. 21, 22).[2]

[Footnote 1: The scene in ch. vii. is very similar to, if not

identical with that in ch. xxvi., which is expressly assigned to the

beginning of Jehoiakim's reign (608).]

[Footnote 2: Ch. ix. 22 is directly continued by x. 17. Of the three

passages intervening, ix. 23, 24 (the true and false objects of

confidence) and ix. 25, 26 (punishment of those uncircumcised in

heart or flesh) are both in the spirit of Jeremiah, but they cannot

belong to this context. Ch. x. 1-16, on the other hand, can hardly

be Jeremiah's. Its theme is the impotence of idols and the

omnipotence of Jehovah--a favourite theme of Deutero-Isaiah (cf. Is.

xl.), and it is elaborated in the spirit of Is. xliv. 9-20. The

warning not to fear the idols is much more natural if addressed to

an exilic audience than to Jeremiah's contemporaries. It may be

taken for granted that the passage is later than Jeremiah.]

In ch. xi. Jeremiah is divinely impelled to undertake an itinerant

mission throughout Judah in support of the Deuteronomic legislation,

but he is warned that, for their disobedience, the people will be

overtaken by disaster, which he must not intercede to avert, xi. 1-17.

A cruel conspiracy formed against him by his own townsmen raises

perplexities in his mind touching the moral order, but he is

reminded that still harder things are in store, xi. l8-xii. 6. Then

follows a poem, xii. 7-13, lamenting the desolation of the land,

though who the aggressors are it is hard to say; but, in vv. 14-17,

a passage possibly much later, there is an ultimate possibility of

restoration both for Judah and her ravaged neighbours, if they adopt

the religion of Judah. In ch. xiii. which possibly belongs to

Jehoiachin's short reign, 597 B.C. (cf. v. 18 with 2 Kings xxiv. 8),

the utter and incurable corruption of the people is symbolically

indicated to Jeremiah, who announces the speedy fall of the throne

and the sorrows of exile.

The elements that make up chs. xiv.-xvii. are very loosely

connected. Generally speaking, the situation of the people is

desperate. The doom--already inaugurated in the form of a drought-is

hastening on; no excuse will be accepted and no intercession can avail.

In a bold and striking poem, xv. 10-21, Jeremiah complains of his

bitter and lonely fate, and is reassured of the divine support. In view

of the impending misery he is forbidden to marry, and more and more he

is thrown back upon Jehovah as his absolute and only hope.[1]

[Footnote 1: Ch. xvii. 19-27 is almost certainly post-exilic, and

probably belongs to Nehemiah's time (about 450). Jeremiah nowhere else

emphasizes the Sabbath, and it would be very unlike him to represent

the future prosperity of Judah as conditional upon the people's

observance of a single law, especially one not distinctively ethical.

Such emphasis on the Sabbath suggests the post-exilic church

(cf. Neh. xiii.; Is. lviii.).]

Chs. xviii.-xx. A chance sight of a potter refashioning a spoiled

vessel suggests to Jeremiah the conditional nature of prophecy. But

as Judah remains obstinate, the threat must be irretrievably

fulfilled. The proclamation of this truth in the temple court led to

his imprisonment. On his release he distinctly and deliberately

announces the exile to Babylon, and then breaks out into a

passionate cry, which rings with an almost unparalleled sincerity,

over the misery of his life, especially of that prophetic life to

which he had been mysteriously but irresistibly impelled.

Ch. xxi. 1-10, one of the latest pieces in the book, contains

Jeremiah's answer to the question of Zedekiah relative to the issue

of the siege of Jerusalem, which had already begun (588). Then

follow two sections, one dealing with kings, xxi. 11-xxiii. 8, the

other with prophets, xxiii. 9-40. The former, after an introduction

which emphasizes the specific functions of the king, deals

successively with Jehoahaz (=Shallum), Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin,

Jehoiakim's oppressive methods being pointedly contrasted with the

beneficent regime of his father Josiah; and against the present

incompetence of the rulers and misery of the monarchy is thrown up a

picture of the true king and the Messianic days, xxiii. 5-8. The

latter section, xxiii. 9-40, denounces the prophets for their

immorality, their easy optimism and their lack of independence.

In ch. xxiv., which falls in Zedekiah's reign, after the first

deportation (about 596 B.C.), it is symbolically suggested to

Jeremiah that the exiles are much better than those who were allowed

to remain in the land, and their ultimate fate would be infinitely

happier. The battle of Carchemish in 605 showed that Babylonian

supremacy was ultimately inevitable; to this year belongs ch. xxv.,

in which Jeremiah definitely announces the duration of the exile as

seventy years. Many lands beside Judah would be included in the

doom, and finally Babylon itself would be punished.

Chs. i.-xxv. represent in the main the words of Jeremiah; we now

come to a group of narratives by Baruch, xxvi.-xxix. Ch. xxvi.

relates how a courageous sermon of Jeremiah's (608 B.C.) provoked

the hostility of the professional clergy, and nearly cost him his

life. Chs. xxvii.-xxix. show how the calm wisdom of Jeremiah met the

ambitions and hopes cherished by his countrymen at home and in exile

during the reign of Zedekiah.[1] In view of a coalition that was

forming against Babylon in Western Asia, he announces that the

supremacy of Nebuchadrezzar is divinely ordained, and any such

coalition is doomed to failure (xxvii.). That supremacy will last

for many a day; and a strange fate overtakes the shallow prophet who

supposes that it will be over in two years (xxviii.). The exiles are

therefore advised by Jeremiah in a letter to settle down contentedly

in their adopted land, though the letter naturally rouses the

resentment and opposition of the superficial prophets among the

exiles (xxix.).

[Footnote 1: In ch. xxvii. 1, for "Jehoiakim" read "Zedekiah," cf.

_vv_. 3, 12. ]

The next four chapters, xxx.-xxxiii., are full of promise: they look

out upon the restoration, in which, despite the seeming hopelessness

of the prospect, Jeremiah never ceased to believe. It is a voice

from the dark days of the siege of Jerusalem, 587 (xxxii. 1ff.); but

the present sorrow is to be followed by a period of joy, when the

city will be rebuilt, and the mighty love of Jehovah will express

itself in the restoration not only of Judah but of Israel, a love to

which there will be a glad spontaneous response from men who have

the divine law written in their hearts. This prophecy of the new

covenant is one of the noblest and most daring conceptions in the

Old Testament, very naturally appropriated by our Lord and the

author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (xxx., xxxi.). So confident was

Jeremiah in the divine assurance that Palestine would one day be

freed from the Babylonian yoke that, even during the siege of the

city, he purchased fields belonging to a kinsman, and took measures

to preserve the title deeds (xxxii.). Ch. xxxiii. still further

confirms the assurance of restoration.

There can be no doubt that Jeremiah both believed in and announced

the restoration: the very straightforward story in ch. xxxii., which,

by the way, throws considerable light on the psychology of prophecy,

is proof enough of that. But there can be equally little doubt that

the section xxx.-xxxiii. did not come, as it stands, from the hand

of Jeremiah. Many verses have no doubt been needlessly suspected:

the attitude to northern Israel in ch. xxxi., especially vv. 4, 5,

practically forbids a reference of these verses to post-exilic

times. But xxxi. 7-l4--the glad return--is exactly in the spirit of

Deutero-Isaiah, and appears to be dependent upon him. Whatever doubt,

however, may be attached to these sections, it is practically certain

that the concluding section, xxxiii. 14-26, which has a special word

of promise, not only for the house of David, but for the Levitical

priests, is not Jeremiah's. The verses are wanting in the Septuagint,

and so were not in the Hebrew copy from which that translation was

made; but more fatal still to their authenticity is their attitude to

the priests and offerings. The religion advocated by Jeremiah was a

purely spiritual one, which could dispense with temple and sacrifice

(ch. vii.). "To the false prophets," as Robertson Smith has said, "and

the people who followed them, the ark, the temple, the holy vessels,

were all in all. To Jeremiah they were less than nothing, and their

restoration was no part of his hope of salvation." It is very significant

in this connection that the Septuagint omits the restoration of the holy

vessels in xxvii. 22.

From the ideal pictures of the last group, ch. xxxiv. flings us back

into the stern reality. The city and the king alike are doomed, and

their fate is thoroughly justified by the treachery displayed

towards the Hebrew slaves, who were compelled by their masters to

return to the bondage from which, in the stress of siege, they had

emancipated them.

The next chapter, xxxv., carries us back to the reign of Jehoiakim,

and, in an interesting and important passage, contrasts the

faithfulness of the Rechabites to the commands of their ancestor

Jonathan with the popular disregard of Jehovah.

The long section which follows (xxxvi.-xlv.) is almost purely

historical. It comes in the main from Baruch, but it has been

expanded here and there by subsequent writers; e.g. xxxix. 4-13 is

not found in the Septuagint; the importance of Jeremiah is

heightened in this passage by his being the object of the special

care of Nebuchadrezzar, vv. 11ff., whereas in all probability his

fate was decided, not by the king, but by his officers (ci. 3, 13,

14). But after making every deduction, these chapters remain as a

historical source of the first rank. The section begins by revealing

the reckless impiety of Jehoiakim in burning the prophecies of

Jeremiah in 605 B.C., but the other chapters gather round the siege

of Jerusalem, eighteen years later, and the events that followed it.

They describe the cruel and successive imprisonments of the prophet

for his fearless and seemingly unpatriotic proclamation of the

Babylonian triumph, the pitiful vacillation of the king, the final

capture of the city, the appointment of Gedaliah as governor of

Judah, his assassination and the attempt to avenge it, the

consequent departure of many Jews to Egypt against the advice of

Jeremiah, who was forced to accompany them, the prophet's

denunciation of the idolatry practised in Egypt and announcement of

the conquest of that land by Nebuchadrezzar. The section closes

(xlv.) with a word of meagre consolation to Baruch, whose courage

was giving way beneath the strain of the times.

The interest attaching to the oracles against the foreign nations

(xlvi.-li.) is not very great, as, for good reasons, the

authenticity of much--some say all--of the section may be disputed,

and with the exception of the oracle against Egypt, they are

lacking, as a whole, not only in distinctness of situation, but also

in that emotion and originality so characteristic of Jeremiah.

The whole group (except the oracle against Elam, xlix. 34-39, which

is expressly assigned to Zedekiah's reign) is suggested by

reflection on the decisive influence which the battle of Carchemish

was bound to have on the fortunes of Western Asia, xlvi. 2.

Nebuchadrezzar is alluded to, either expressly, xlix. 30, or

figuratively, xlviii. 40, as the instrument of the divine vengeance.

In the Septuagint, this group of oracles appears between xxv. 13 and

xxv. 15, a chapter likewise assigned to the year of the battle of

Carchemish, xxv. 1. Ch. xlvi. contains two oracles against Egypt,

the first of which, at least vv. 1-12, is graphic and powerful, and

the second, _vv._ 13-26, announces the conquest of Egypt by

Nebuchadrezzar, which took place in 568 B.C. The vengeance upon

Egypt, _v._ 10, in which the writer evidently exults, may be

vengeance for the defeat of Josiah at Megiddo.[1] A certain vigour

also characterizes the oracle against the Philistines (xlvii.), and

the conception of the enemy "out of the north," _v._ 2, is a

familiar one in Jeremiah.

[Footnote 1: Ch. xlvi. 27, 28, hardly in place here, were borrowed

from xxx. 10f. and doubtless added later.]

Even if, however, these oracles could be rescued for Jeremiah, those

that follow are, in all probability, nothing but later literary

compilations resting upon a close study of the earlier prophetical

literature. The oracle against Moab (xlviii.) besides being

unpardonably diffuse, is essentially an imitation of the old oracle

preserved in Isaiah xv., xvi. The oracle against Ammon, xlix. 1-6,

is followed by another against Edom, _vv._ 7-22, which again

borrows very largely from Obadiah. Doom is further pronounced on

Damascus, _vv._ 23-27, Kedar and Hazor, _vv._ 28-33, and,

about seven years later, on Elam, _vv._ 34-39. It is not,

indeed, impossible that Jeremiah should have uttered a prophetic

word concerning at least some of these nations--witness his reply to

the ambassadors of the neighbouring kings in ch. xxvii.--though the

relevance of Elam in such a connection is hard to see; but it is

very improbable that a writer and thinker so independent as Jeremiah

should have borrowed in the wholesale fashion which characterizes

the bulk of this group of oracles. The oracle against Egypt might be

his, not impossibly the oracle against the Philistines also; but the

group as a whole, consisting of seven oracles--omitting the oracle

against Elam, which, by its date, falls outside--appears to be a

later artificial composition, utilizing the more familiar names in

xxv. 19-26, and expanding the hint in vv. 15-17 that the nations

would be compelled to drink of the cup of the fury of Jehovah.

The climax of the foreign oracles is that against Babylon (l.-li.

58). This prophecy is written with great vigour and intensity and

characterized by a tone of triumphant scorn. A nation from the

north, l. 3, explicitly designated as the Medes, li. 11, is to

assail Babylon and reduce her to a desolation. Jehovah's people are

urged to leave the doomed city; with sins forgiven they will be led

back by Jehovah to their own land, and the poet contemplates with

glowing satisfaction the day when Babylon the destroyer will be

herself destroyed.

This oracle purports to be a message which Jeremiah sent with an

officer Seraiah, who accompanied King Zedekiah to Babylon (li. 59).

There is no probability, however, that the oracle was written by

Jeremiah. Doubtless the prophet foretold the destruction of Babylon,

xxv. 10, but his attitude to that great power in this oracle is

altogether different from what we know it to have been, judging by

other authentic oracles of this period (xxvii.-xxix.). There he

counsels patience--it is the false prophets who hope for a speedy

deliverance--here there is an eager expectancy which amounts to

impatience. But the contents of the oracle show that it cannot

belong to the year to which it is assigned. The temple is already

destroyed, l. 28, li. 11, so that the exile is presupposed, and

indeed the Medes are definitely named as the executors of vengeance

upon Babylon. All this carries us down to the conquests of Cyrus and

the close of the exile, indeed to the time of Isaiah xl.-lv. The

oracle bears a striking resemblance both in spirit and expression to

Isaiah xiii., and might well come from the same time (about 540). It

may, however, be later. Not only is it diffuse in expression and

slipshod in arrangement, but it borrows extensively from other

exilic or post-exilic parts of the book of Jeremiah (cf. li. 15-19

with x. 12-16, l. 44-46 with xlix. 19-21), late exilic parts of

Isaiah (cf. Jer. l. 39ff, with Isa. xiii. 19-22), and from Ezekiel

(cf. Jer. li. 25 with Ezek. xxxv. 3). Besides, the author appears to

have no clear conception of the actual situation, as he seems to

regard Israel and Judah as living side by side in Babylon, l. 4, 33.

In all probability the oracle against Babylon is a post-exilic

production inspired by the yearning to see the ancient oppressors

not only humbled, but destroyed.

The oracle just discussed is supposed to be an expansion of the

message given by Jeremiah, in writing, to Seraiah, li. 60a, when he

went with the king to Babylon. But though this narrative, li. 59-64,

possibly rests on a basis of fact, it cannot have come, in its

present form, from Jeremiah, for it presupposes the preceding oracle

against Babylon, which has just been shown not to be authentic.

With the composition of ch. lii., which narrates the capture of

Jerusalem and the exile of the people, Jeremiah had nothing whatever

to do. The chapter, except _vv._ 28-30, which is additional, is

simply taken bodily from 2 Kings xxiv. 18-xxv. 30, with the omission

of the account of the appointment and assassination of Gedaliah (2

Kings xxv. 22-26) as that story had already been fully told in

Jeremiah xl.-xliii.

The Greek version of Jeremiah is of more than usual interest and

importance. It is about 2,700 words, or one-eighth of the whole,

shorter than the Hebrew text, though it has about 100 words or so

not found in the Hebrew. The order, too, is occasionally different,

notably in the oracles against the foreign nations (xlvi.-li.),

which in the Septuagint are placed between xxv. 13 and xxv. 15

(verse 14 being omitted). After making every deduction for the usual

number of mistakes due to incompetence and badly written

manuscripts, it has to be admitted that, in certain respects, the

Greek text is superior to the Hebrew. This is especially plain if we

examine its omissions. Considering the later tendency to expand, its

relative brevity is a point in its favour; but, when we examine

particular cases, the superiority of the Septuagint, with its

omissions, is evident at once.

Ch. xxvii., e.g., is considerably longer in the Hebrew than in the

Greek text; but the additions in the Hebrew text represent Jeremiah

as interested in the temple vessels and prophesying their

restoration to the temple when the exile was over, in a way that is

utterly unlike what we know of Jeremiah's general attitude to the

material symbols of religion. Similarly, xxxiii. 14-26, which

promises, among other things, that there would never be lacking a

Levitical priest to offer burnt offerings, is wanting in the

Septuagint; here again the Greek must be regarded as more truly

representing Jeremiah's attitude to sacrifice (vii. 22). It would,

of course, be unfair to infer from this that the briefer readings of

the Septuagint were invariably superior to the longer readings of

the Massoretic text, for it can be shown that the Greek translators

often omitted or passed lightly over what they did not understand;

nevertheless, their omissions often indicate a better and more

original text.

With regard to the oracles against the foreign nations, there can be

little doubt that their position in the Hebrew text is to be

preferred to that of the Greek. A certain plausibility attaches to

the Greek text which places them after xxv. 13, the last clause of

which--"that which Jeremiah prophesied against all the nations"--is

taken as a title; but, besides completely breaking up the

surrounding context, whose theme is altogether Judah, the Greek

position of the oracles is exceedingly clumsy, preceding as it does

the enumeration in xxv. 15-29, which it might indeed follow, but

could not reasonably precede. Further the Hebrew arrangement of the

oracles within this group is much more probable than the Greek. The

former appropriately reserves the oracle against Babylon to the end,

the latter places it third, i.e. among the nations which are to be

punished by Babylon herself, xxv. 9.

We possess some direct information about the composition of the book

of Jeremiah, but the present arrangement is marked by considerable

confusion, and can in no case be original. A glance at the contents

of consecutive chapters is enough to show that the order is not

rigorously chronological. Ch. xxv., e.g., falls in 605 B.C., whereas

the preceding chapter is at least eight years later (cf. xxiv. 1,

8). Ch. xxi. 1-10, which reflects the period of the siege of

Jerusalem, is one of the latest passages in the book (587 B.C.).

There are occasional traces of a topical order: e.g. chs.

xviii., xix., give lessons from the potter, xxi. 9-xxiii. 8 is a

series of prophecies concerning kings, xxiii. 9-40 another

concerning prophets. Chs. xxx.-xxxiii. gather up the prophecies

concerning the restoration. Chs. xxxvii.-xliv. constitute a

narrative dealing with the siege of the city and events immediately

subsequent to it. Here we touch one of the striking peculiarities of

the book of Jeremiah that much of it is purely narrative. Again, in

the narrative portion, sometimes the prophet speaks himself in the

first person, as in the account of his call (i.), sometimes he is

spoken of in the third, xxviii. 5.

This suggests that some passages are more directly traceable to

Jeremiah than others, and the clue to this fact is to be found in

the interesting story told in ch. xxxvi. There we are informed that

Jeremiah dictated to his disciple Baruch the scribe the messages of

his ministry since his call twenty-one years before. After being

read before the public gathering at the temple, and then before the

court, they were destroyed by the king, Jehoiakim; but the messages

were rewritten by Baruch, and many similar words, we are told, were

added, xxxvi. 32. It is clear that the book written by Baruch to

Jeremiah's dictation cannot have been very long, as it could be read

three times in one day, but it is impossible to say what precisely

were its constituent elements. Roughly speaking, they must be

confined to chs. i.-xxv., as the following chapters (except xlvi.-li.)

are either narrative, like xxvi.-xxix., xxxvii.-xliv., or, if

prophetic words of Jeremiah, come from a later date (cf. xxx.-xxxiii.,

xxxii. 1). But the book cannot have included all of i.-xxv., for,

as we have seen, parts of this section are later than 605, when the

book was first dictated (cf. xxiv., xxi. 1-10), and some are very

late (cf. x. 1-16, exilic at the earliest, and xvii. 19-27, post-exilic).

The difficulty of determining the constituents is increased by the

fact that several of the chapters are undated (e.g. xiv. 1-xvii. 18).

No doubt most of chs. i.-xii. and much of xiii.-xxv. were included

within the original book dictated.

It is further important to note that the book was dictated; that is

to say, it was not written by Jeremiah's own hand, and it was

dictated from memory, though very possibly on the basis of notes.

Obviously we cannot in any case have in these few chapters more than

a summary of the words spoken during a ministry which at that time

had already covered twenty-one years. The strong personal feeling

which animates so much of Jeremiah's early prophecies, especially

the poetry, we owe directly to his own dictation. The narrative

sections, in which he is spoken of in the third person, but most of

which obviously came from some one who was thoroughly conversant

with the prophet's life, we owe, no doubt, to the faithful Baruch,

who clearly held the prophet's words not only in respect, but in

reverence, xxxvi. 24. The biography, which, in its earlier chapters,

assumes a somewhat annalistic form, xxvi. i, xxviii. i, xxix. i,

develops an easy and flowing style when it comes to deal with the

siege of Jerusalem (xxxvii.-xliv.). Speaking very generally, the

biography covers chs. xxvi.-xlv. (except xxx., xxxi., xxxiii.).

But long after Baruch was in his grave, the book of Jeremiah

continued to receive additions. Some of these, from exilic and

post-exilic times, we have already seen (of, 1., li.). A relatively

large literature grew up around the book of Jeremiah: 2 Chron. xxxvi. 21

even quotes as Jeremiah's a prophecy which does not occur in our

canonical book at all. (cf. Lev. xxvi. 34f). Often those who added

to the book had no clear imagination of the historical situation

whatever; one of them represents Jeremiah as addressing the

_kings_ of Judah--as if they had all lived at the same time--on

the question of the Sabbath day (xvii. 20, cf. xix. 3). The extent

of these additions has already been illustrated by comparison with

the Septuagint, and very often the passages which are not supported

by the Greek text are historically the least trustworthy, cf. xxxix.

11, 12. These different recensions of the original text attest the

wide popularity of the book; an Aramaic gloss in x. 11 shows the

liberties which transcribers took with the text, the integrity of

which suffered much from its very popularity. The interest of the

later scribes was rather in homiletics than in history, and very

probably most of the writing that seems tedious and diffuse in the

book of Jeremiah is to be set down to the count of these teaching

scribes. Jeremiah was a very gifted poet, with unusual powers of

emotional expression, and it is greatly to be regretted that his own

message has been so inextricably involved in the inferior work of a

later age.

Introduction to the Old Testament · 第 66 / 92 题