THE FORMS
OF
HEBREW POETRY
CONSIDERED WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE
TO THE CRITICISM AND
INTERPRETATION
OF THE OLD
TESTAMENT
BY
GEORGE BUCHANAN
GRAY
D.LITT.,
D.D.
PROFESSOR OF
HEBREW AND OLD TESTAMENT EXEGESIS IN
AND SPEAKERS
LECTURER IN BIBLICAL STUDIES IN THE
HODDER AND
MCMXV
PREFACE
IT
is impossible to go far at the present day in
any
serious attempt to interpret the prophetical
books,
or the books commonly called poetical,
or
certain other parts of the Old Testament,
without
being faced by questions relating to the
forms
of Hebrew poetry. I was myself compelled
to
consider these questions more fully than before
when
I came to prepare my commentary on
Isaiah for the
"International Critical Comment-
ary,"
and in the introduction to that commentary
I
briefly indicated the manner in which, as it
seemed
to me, the more important of these ques-
tions
should be answered. But it was impossible
then,
and there to give as full an exposition of the
subject
as it requires. In the present volume I
have
ampler scope. Yet I must guard against a
misunderstanding.
Even here it is not my pur-
pose
to add to the already existing exhaustive,
or
at least voluminous, discussions of Hebrew
metre.
My aim is different: it is rather to
survey
the forms of Hebrew poetry, to consider
them
in relation to one another, and to illustrate
v
vi FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
their
bearing on the criticism and interpretation
of
the Old Testament.
I have no new theory of Hebrew metre
to set
forth
; and I cannot accept in all its details any
theory
that others have elaborated. In my
judgment
some understanding of the laws of
Hebrew
rhythm has been gained: but much
still
remains uncertain. And both of these facts
need
to be constantly borne in mind in determin-
ing
the text or interpreting the contents of
Hebrew
poetry. Perhaps, therefore, the chief
service
which I could expect of the discussion of
Hebrew
metre in this volume is that it may on
the
one hand open up to some the existence and
general
nature of certain metrical principles in
Hebrew
poetry, and that it may on the other
hand
warn others that, in view of our imperfect
knowledge
of the detailed working of these prin-
ciples,
considerable uncertainty really underlies
the
regular symmetrical forms in which certain
scholars
have presented the poetical parts of the
Old
Testament.
The first six chapters of the volume
are an
expansion
of a course of University lectures
delivered
in the spring of 1913. They were
published
in the Expositor of May, June, July,
August,
September, October and December of
the
same year, and are now republished with
some
modifications and very considerable addi-
tions.
The two last chapters, though written
PREFACE vii
earlier,
are' in the present volume rather of the
nature
of an Appendix, being special studies in
the
reconstruction of two mutilated acrostich
poems.
These also originally appeared in the
Expositor,
the former (Chapter VII.) in September
1898,
the latter (Chapter VIII.) in September 1906.
Except
for the omission of a paragraph which
would
have been a needless repetition now that
the
two discussions appear together, and for a
few
slight or verbal alterations, and for additions
which
are clearly indicated,. I have preferred to
republish
these chapters as they were originally
written.
They were both, and more especially
the
former, written before I saw as far, or as
clearly,
as ,I seem to myself at least now to do,
into
the principles of Hebrew metre: but addi-
tional
notes here and there suffice to point out
the
bearing of these more fully appreciated prin-
ciples
on the earlier discussions, which remain
for
the most part, unaffected, largely, I believe,
because
in the first instance I followed primarily
the
leading of parallelism, and parallelism is
likely
for long to remain a safer guide than metre,
though
metre may at times enforce the guidance
of
parallelism, or act as guide over places where
parallelism
will not carry us.
A word of explanation, if not of apology,
is
required
for the regularity with which I have
added
translations to the Hebrew quoted in the
text.
In many cases such translation was the
viii
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
readiest
way of making clear my meaning; in
others
it is for the Hebrew student superfluous,
and
parts of the book can scarcely appeal to
others
than Hebrew students. But a large part
of
the discussions can be followed by those who
are
but little familiar or entirely unfamiliar with
Hebrew.
For the sake of any such who may
read
the book, and to secure the widest and
easiest
use possible for it, I have regularly added
translations,
except in the latter part of Chapter
IV.,
where they would have been not only super-
fluous,
but irritating to Hebrew students, and use-
less
to others.
My last and pleasant duty is to
thank the
Rev.
Allan Gaunt for his kindness in reading the
proofs,
and for offering various suggestions which
I
have been glad to accept.
G.
BUCHANAN GRAY.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I
Page
INTRODUCTORY 3
CHAPTER
II
PARALLELISM
: A RESTATEMENT 37
CHAPTER
III
PARALLELISM
AND RHYTHM IN THE BOOK
OF LAMENTATIONS 87
CHAPTER
IV
THE
ELEMENTS OF HEBREW RHYTHM 123
CHAPTER
V
VARIETIES
OF RHYTHM: THE STROPHE 157
CHAPTER
VI
THE
BEARING OF CERTAIN METRICAL THEORIES
ON CRITICISM AND INTERPRETATION. 201
ix
x FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
CHAPTER VII Page
THE
ALPHABETIC POEM IN NAHUM 243
CHAPTER VIII
THE
ALPHABETIC STRUCTURE OF PSALMS IX.
AND X. 267
ADDITIONAL
NOTE ON THE REPETITION OF THE
SAME TERM IN PARALLEL LINES 295
INDEX I
OF
PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE 297
INDEX II
OF
MATTERS 301
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTORY
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTORY
FAILURE
to perceive what are the formal elements
in
Hebrew poetry has, in the past, frequently led
to
misinterpretation of Scripture. The existence
of
formal elements is now generally recognised;
but
there are still great differences of opinion as
to
the exact nature of some of these, and as to
their
relation to one another and large questions
or
numerous important details of both the lower
and
higher criticism and of the interpretation of
the
Old Testament are involved in these differ-
ences.
An examination of the forms of Hebrew
poetry
thus becomes a valuable, if not indeed a
necessary,
means to the correct appreciation of
its
substance, to an understanding of the thought
expressed
in it, in so far as that may still be
understood,
or, where that is at present no
longer
possible, to a perception of the cause and
extent
of the uncertainty and obscurity.
More especially do the questions
relating to
the
two most important forms of Hebrew poetry
3
4
FORMS OF HEBREW
POETRY
—parallelism
and metre—require to be studied in
close
connexion with one another, and indeed
in
closer connexion than has been customary of
late.
I deliberately speak at this point of the
question
of parallelism and metre; for, on the
one
hand, it has been and may be contended
that
parallelism, though it is a characteristic of
much,
is never a form of any, Hebrew poetry,
and,
on the other ,hand, it has been and still. .is
sometimes
contended that metre is not a form of
Hebrew
poetry, for the simple reason that in
Hebrew
poetry it did not exist. Over a question
of
nomenclature, whether parallelism should be
termed
a form or a characteristic, no words need
be
wasted; the really important question to be
considered
later on is how far the phenomena
covered
by the term parallelism can be classified,
and
how far they conform to laws that can be
defined.
A third form of some Hebrew poetry is
the
strophe. This is of less, but still of considerable
importance,
and will be briefly considered in its
place;
but rhyme, which is not a regular feature
of
Hebrew poetry, and poetical diction need not
for
the purposes of the present survey be more
than
quite briefly and incidentally referred to.
The first systematic treatment of
any of the
formal
elements of Hebrew poetry came from
occupants
of the chair of Poetry in that university
than
Robert Lowth, afterwards Bishop of London,
INTRODUCTORY 5
and
few lectures delivered from that chair have
been
more influential than his De Sacra Poesi
Hebraeorum Praelectiones
Academicae.
These lec-
tures
were published in the same year (1753) as
another
famous volume, to wit, Jean Astruc's
Conjectures sur les
memoires originaux dont it
paroit que Moyse s'est
servi pour composer le
livre de la Genese. It is as true of Astruc
as of
Lowth
that "in theology he clung to the tradi-
tional
orthodoxy";1 yet Astruc was the first
to
apply a stylistic argument in a systematic
attempt
to recover the original sources of a portion
of
the Pentateuch, and Lowth, by his entire
treatment
of his subject, marks the transition
from
the then prevailing dogmatic treatment of
the
Old Testament to that treatment of it which
rests
on the recognition that, whatever else it
may
be, and however sharply distinguished in
its
worth or by its peculiarities from other litera-
tures,
the Old Testament is primarily literature,
demanding
the same critical examination and
appreciation,
alike of form and substance, as
other
literature. Owing to certain actual char-
acteristics
of what survives of ancient Hebrew
literature,
documentary analysis has necessarily
played
an important part in modern criticism of
the
Old Testament; and if, narrowing unduly
the
conception of Old Testament criticism, we
think
in connexion with it mainly or exclusively
1 T. K. Cheyne, Founders of Old Testament Criticism, p.
3.
6
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
of
documentary analysis and questions of origin,
Astruc
may seem a more important founder of
Modern
Criticism than Lowth. But in reality
the
general implications of Lowth's discussion of
Hebrew
poetry, apart from certain special con-
clusions
reached by him to which we shall pass
immediately,
make his lectures of wider signifi-
cance
than even Astruc's acute conjectures ; and
we
may fairly claim that, through Lowth and
his
two principal works, both of which were
translated
into German, the Lectures by Michaelis,
the
Isaiah by Koppe,
the
eighteenth century, contributed to the critical
study
of the Old Testament and the apprecia-
tion
of Hebrew literature in a degree that was
scarcely
equalled till the nineteenth century was
drawing
to its close.
It is a relatively small part of
Lowth's lectures
that
is devoted to those forms or formal char-
acteristics
of Hebrew poetry with which we are
here
concerned: of the thirty-four lectures one
only,
the nineteenth, is primarily devoted to that
form
with which Lowth's name will always be
associated,
though the subject of parallelism was
already
raised in the third lecture. The maturer
and
fuller discussion of this and kindred topics
was
first published in 1778 as a preliminary dis-
sertation
to the translation of Isaiah. Briefly
summed
up, Lowth's contribution to the subject
was
twofold: he for the first time clearly
INTRODUCTORY 7
analysed
and expounded the parallelistic struc-
ture
of Hebrew poetry, and he drew attention to
the
fact that the extent of poetry in the Old
Testament
was much larger than had generally
been
recognised, that in particular it included
the
greater part of the prophetic writings.
The existence and general
characteristics of
parallelism
as claimed by Lowth have never been
questioned
since, nor the importance for interpre-
tation
of recognising these; nor can it be ques-
tioned,
once the nature of parallelism is admitted,
that
parallelism occurs in the Prophets as well
as
in the Psalms, and in many passages of the
Prophets
no less regularly than in many Psalms.
If,
then, on the ground of parallelism, the Psalms
are
judged to be poetry, the prophetic writings
(in
the main) must also be regarded as poetry ;
and,
if, on the ground of parallelism, a translation
of
the Psalms is marked, as is the Revised Version,
by
line divisions corresponding to the parallel
members
of the original, a translation of the
Prophets
should also be so marked; and by
failing
so to mark the prophetic poetry, and
thereby
introducing an unreal distinction between
the
form of the Psalms and the form of the pro-
phetic
writings, the Revised Version conceals
from
those who use it one of the most important
and
one of the surest of the conclusions which
were
reached by Lowth in his discussion of
Hebrew
poetry.
8 FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Whether
after all parallelism is itself a true
differentia
between prose and poetry in Hebrew,
may
be and will be discussed; but it will be useful
before
proceeding to a closer examination either
of
parallelism or of other alleged differentiae
between
prose and poetry, to recall the earlier
scattered
and unsystematic attempts to describe
the
formal elements of Hebrew poetry.
It has always been recognised that
between
mediaeval
Jewish poetry and the poetry of the
Old
Testament there is, so far as form goes, no
connexion
; nor, indeed, any similarity beyond
the
use, especially by the earliest of these
mediaeval
poets such as Jose ibn Jose and
Kaliri,
of acrostic, or alphabetic schemes such as
occur
in Lamentations i.-iv. and some other
poems1
in the Old Testament. The beginnings
of
mediaeval Jewish poetry go back to the ninth
or
tenth century A.D. at least; it arose under the
influence
of Arabic culture, though it may also
have
owed something to Syriac poetry; it
flourished
for some centuries in the West, and
particularly
in
by
metre and rhyme;2 and the metre was quanti-
tative.
The same period was also, and again
owing
to the influence of Arabic culture, an age
1 Enumerated below, p.
244 f.
2 The introduction of
rhyme into Hebrew poetry is attributed to
Jannai;
rhyme was also employed by Kaliri. Both Jannai (probably)
and
Kaliri were Palestinians, and both lived in or before the ninth
century
A.D.: see Graetz, Gesch. des Judenthums,
v. 158, 159.
INTRODUCTORY 9
of
Jewish grammarians and philologists. These
recognised
the difference between the old poetry
and
the new, but contributed little to an under-
standing
of the forms of the older poetry beyond
a
tolerably general acquiescence in the negative
judgment
that that older poetry was not metrical.
In
any case, no living tradition of the laws of the
older
Hebrew poetry, the poetry of the Old Testa-
ment,
survived in the days of the poets Chasdai
(A.D.
915-970), Solomon ibn Gabirol (1021-1058,
or
1070),
grammarians
and philologists, of whom some
were
poets also, Dunash ibn Labrat (c. 920-990),
Menahem
ibn Saruk (c. 910-970), Abu'l-Walid
(eleventh
century), Ibn Ezra, and the Kimlhis
(twelfth
century). The older poetry had long
been
a lost art. Whatever these mediaeval
scholars
say of it has, therefore, merely the value
of
an antiquarian. theory; and however interest-
ing
their theories may be, they need not detain
us
longer now.
But there exist a few far earlier
Jewish state-
ments
on the formal elements of the poetry of
the
Old Testament which run back, not indeed
to
the time of even the latest poems within the
Old
Testament, but to a time when, as will be
pointed
out in detail later on, poetry of the
ancient
Hebrew type was still being written.
Statements
from such a period unquestionably
have
a higher degree of interest than those of the
10
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
mediaeval
Jewish scholars. Whether as a matter
of
fact they point to any discernment of the :real
principles
of that poetry, and whether they do
not
betray at once misconceptions and lack of
perception,
is another question. At all events,
it
is important to observe that while the authors
of
these statements were Jews, the readers with
a
view to whom they wrote were Greeks. So far
as
I am aware, there is no discussion of metre,
or
parallelism, or in general of the formal elements
of
Hebrew poetry, in the Rabbinical writings, that
is
to say in Jewish literature written in Hebrew
or
Aramaic, until after the gradual permeation
of
Jewish by Arabic scholarship from the seventh
or
eighth century A.D. onwards. We owe the
earliest
statements on Hebrew poetical forms to
two
Jews who wrote in Greek—to Philo and to
Josephus.
Philo's evidence is slight and
indirect as to
the
poetry of the Old Testament. In the De
vita
Mosis i. 5 he asserts that Moses was taught
by
the Egyptians " the whole theory of rhythm,
harmony
and metre " (th<n te r[uqmikh>n kai>
a[rmonikh>n
kai> metrikh>n qewri<an); but he nowhere states
that
the
poems attributed to Moses in the Pentateuch
are
metrical. Of Jewish poetry of a later age he
speaks
more definitely, if the De vita contem-
plativa
is correctly attributed to him, and if the
sect
therein described was a Jewish sect. It is
asserted
in this tract (cc. x. xi.) that the thera-
INTRODUCTORY 11
peutae
sang hymns " in many metres and tunes,"
and
in particular in iambic trimeters.
The three statements of Josephus on
the
subject
are much more specific and definite. Of
Moses
he says, in reference to Exodus xv. 2 if.,
that
" he composed a song to God . . . in hexa-
meter
verse" (e]n e[came<tr& to<n&);1 and
again,
in
reference to Deut. xxxii., that Moses read to
the
Israelites "a hexametrical poem" (poi<hsin
e[ca<metron), and left it to them
in the holy book.2
Of
David he says that " he composed songs and
hymns
in various metres ..(me<trou poiki<lou), making
some
trimetrical, others pentametrical."3
These exhaust the direct testimony
of Jews,
who
lived while poetry similar to that in the Old
Testament
was still being written, to the metrical
character
of that poetry. It is possible that we
have
an indirect testimony to more specific
Jewish
statements or theories in certain of the
patristic
writers. It will be sufficient here to
refer
to what is said by Origen and Eusebius and
Jerome;4
all these scholars belong to a period
before
the new style of poetry adopted by the
mediaeval
Jews had begun to be written, though
perhaps
none of them belong quite to the age
when
the older poetry was still practised as a
living
art.
1
4
The
passages, from these and other patristic writers have been
brought
together and discussed by J. D611er (Rhythmics, Metrik and
Strophik
in der bibl.-hebr. Poesie,
12
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Origen's
reference to the subject of Hebrew
metre
is to be found in a scholion on Psalm
cxviii.
1 (LXX). He agrees with Josephus that
Deuteronomy
xxxii. is hexametrical, and that
some
of the Psalms are trimetrical; but as an
alternative
metre used in the Psalter, he gives
not
the pentameter, as Josephus had done, but
the
tetrameter. At the same time he clearly
recognises
that Hebrew verses are different in
character
(e!teroi) from Greek verses. Ley finds
two
further statements in Origen's somewhat
obscure
words: (1) that the metrical unit (den
vollen Vers) in Hebrew consists of
two stichoi, not
of
a single stichos; (2) that Hebrew metre was
measured
by the number of accented syllables.
Eusebius
refers to metre in Hebrew poems as
follows:
"There would also be found among
them
poems
in metre, like the great song of Moses and
David's
118th Psalm, composed in what the
1 The scholion in
question was published by Cardinal Pitra in Ana-
lecta Sacra, ii. 341, and reprinted
thence by Preuschen in the Zeitschrift
fur die AT.
Wissenschaft,
1891, pp. 316, 317; in the same Zeitschrift
for
1892 (pp. 212-217) Julius Ley translated and commented on the
scholion.
The text being still none too well known or accessible, it
may
be well to reproduce it here. The words commented on are
Maka<rioi oi[ a@mwmoi e]n o[d&,
oi[ poreuo<menoi e]n no<m& kuri<ou, and the scholion
runs
as follows:—ou!tw ge sti<xoj e]sti<n: oi[
ga>r par ] [Ebrai<oij sti<xoi,
w[j
e@lege< tij, e@mmetroi< ei]sin:
e]n e[came<tr& me>n h[ e]n t&? Deuteronomi<& &dh<:
e]n trime<tr&
de> kai> tetrame<tr& oi[
yalmoi<. oi[ sti<xoi ou#n, oi[ par ] [Ebrai<oij, e!teroi< ei]sin
para>
tou>j par ] h[mi?n. ]Ea>n qe<lwmen e]nqa<de thrh?sai,
tou>j sti<xouj poiou?men.
“Maka<rioi
oi[ a@mwmoi e]n o[d&?, oi[
poreuo<menoi e]n no<m& kuri<ou.”
Kai> ou@twj a]rxo<meqa deute<rou
[Ebrai<oij sti<xon e]n toiou<toij
du<o (w[j [o[ ] tou?to
a]nti<grafon gra<yaj oi[onei> pepoi<hke
th>n a]rxh>n tou? sti<xou met
] e]kqe<sewj): to>n de>
dokou?ntej deu<teron, mh> o@nta deu<teron,
a]lla> lei?mma tou? prote<rou met
] ai]sqh<sewj: kai> tou?to
pepoi<hken e]pi> o!lou tou?
r[htou?.
INTRODUCTORY 13
Greeks
call heroic metre. At least it is said
(Octal,
(pi-iv) that these are hexameters, consisting
of
sixteen syllables ; also their other composi-
tions
in verse are said to consist of trimeter and
tetrameter
lines according to the sound of their
own
language."1 The reference to Deuteronomy
xxxii.
and Psalm cxviii. (cxix.) and the specific
metres
mentioned are as in Origen; but whether
or
not Origen suspected or asserted measurement
by
accented syllables, Eusebius clearly refers to a
measurement
by syllables, and thereby produces
the
impression that the Hebrew hexameter was
of
the same nature as the Greek: whereas Origen
distinctly
asserts that Hebrew metres are as
compared
with the Greek e!teroi. At the same
time,
the final words in Eusebius have something
of
the character of a saving clause.
Scattered over Jerome's writings are
a larger
number
of specific statements, which may be
summarised
as follows :
1. Job iii. 2-xl. 6 consists of
hexameters ; but
the
verses are varied and irregular.2
2. Job, Proverbs, the songs in
Deuteronomy
(i.e.
Deut. xxxii.) and Isaiah, "Deuteronomy et
Isaiae
Cantica," are all written in hexameters or
1 Praep. Ev. xi. 5. 5 : the translation given above is Gifforci's.
2 "Hexametri versus
sunt, dactylo spondaeoque currentes ; et
propter
linguae idioma crebro recipientes et alios pedes non earumdem
syllabarum,
sed eorumdem temporum. Interdum quoque rhythmus
ipse
dulcis et tinnulus fertur numeris lege metri solutis," Praef. in
Job (Migne, Patr. Lat. xxviii. 1082).
14
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
pentameters.1
Yet elsewhere2 "Deuteronomii
Canticum"
is said to be written in iambic tetra-
meters.
3. Psalms cx. and cxi. are iambic
trimeters.2
4. Psalms cxviii., cxliv. and
Proverbs xxxi.
10-31
are iambic tetrameters.2
5. Lamentations i. ii. are in "
quasi sapphico
metro";
but Lamentations iii. in trimeters.2
6. The prophets, though the text of
them
is
marked off by commas and colons, are not
metrical.3
But these statements, occur in such
connexions,
or
are accompanied by such qualifying phrases,
as
to indicate that Jerome did not intend them
to
be taken too strictly, or as exactly assimilating
Hebrew
poetry in respect of its measurements to
classical
poetry. Thus, the hexameters in Job
are
said to admit other feet in addition to dactyls
and
spondees; the "sapphic metre" of Lamenta-
tions
i. ii. iv. is qualified as "quasi"; and in
forestalling
incredulity, such as the Emperor
Julian
is said to have expressed, as to the existence
of
metre in Hebrew literature, Jerome speaks of
the
Hebrew poems as being "in morem,
nostri
Flacci"--after the manner of Horace.
There is one further important
observation
to
be made with regard to Jerome: the authori-
1 " Quae omnia
hexametris et pentametris versibus . . . apud suos
composita
decurrunt," Praef. in Chron. Eusebii
(Migne xxvii. 36).
2 Ep. xxx. (ad Paulam)
(Migne xxii. 442).
3 Praef. in Isaiam (Migne xxviii. 771).
INTRODUCTORY 15
ties
whom he cites for his statements are not his
own
Hebrew teacher, but Philo, Josephus, Origen,
and
Eusebius,1 to the first two of whom Origen
in
turn may refer indefinitely in his phrase
e@lege< tij.
From this we may with some
probability con-
clude
(1) that Jerome's views of the nature of
Hebrew
poetry do not represent those of Jewish
scholarship
of his day; but (2) that they are a
reproduction
of the statements of Josephus, or
deductions
made by Jerome himself from or in
the
spirit of Josephus' statements. On whom
Eusebius
relied for the statement (fasi> gou?n)
that
the Hebrew hexameter contained sixteen
syllables
we cannot say, but his informants were
scarcely
Jewish contemporaries of his.
If, then, any theory or tradition of
the metrical
character
of the old Hebrew poetry formulated
1 " If it seem
incredible to any one that the Hebrews really have
metres,
and that, whether we consider the Psalter, or the Lamentations
of
Jeremiah, or almost all the songs of Scripture, they bear a resemblance
to
our Flaccus, and the Greek Pindar, and Alcaeus, and Sappho, let
him
read Philo, Josephus, Origen, Eusebius of
aid
of their testimony he will find that I speak the truth: Preface to
the
translation of Job (Fremantle's translation, p..491): Migne xxviii.
1082.
This was written about A.D. 392; but Jerome had expressed
himself
to much the same effect ten years earlier in a passage, partly
cited
already in the original, in his Preface to the Chronicle of Eusebius :
"What
can be more musical than the Psalter? Like the writings of
our
own Flaccus and the Grecian Pindar it now trips along in iambics,
now
flows in sonorous alcaics, now swells into sapphics, now marches
in
half-foot metre. What can be more lovely than the strains of
Deuteronomy
and Isaiah? What more grave than Solomon's words?
What
more finished than Job? All these, as Josephus and Origen tell
us,
were composed in hexameters and pentameters, and so circulated
amongst
their own people."—Fremantle, p. 484: Migne xxvii. 36.
16
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
by
those who actually wrote it still survives, our
primary
source for it is Josephus. But does
what
Josephus says depend on a previously
existing
theory or tradition? In all probability
it
does not. Josephus, in commending Hebrew
poetry
to his Greek readers, followed his usual
practice
of describing things Jewish in terms that
would
make a good impression on them. And
so
he calls Deuteronomy xxxii. hexametrical--a
term
which some modern scholars would still
apply
to it—but he gives his readers no clue to,
even
if he himself had any clear idea of, the
difference
between these hexameters and those
of
Greek and Latin poetry. Neither he nor any
of
the Christian scholars who follow him defines
the
nature of the feet or other units of which six,
five,
four, and three compose the hexameters,
pentameters,
tetrameters, and trimeters respect-
ively
of which they speak ; and, indeed, so loosely
are
these terms used that Jerome describes
Deuteronomy
xxxii. on one occasion as hexa-
meter,
and on another as tetrameter. Some
modern
scholars continue to use these same terms,
but
define more or less precisely what they mean
by
them; and the Hebrew hexameters of the
modern
metrist have far less resemblance to a
Greek
or Latin hexameter than any of the numer-
ous
English hexameters with which English poets
have
at intervals experimented from the age of
INTRODUCTORY 17
reason
for believing that Josephus, Origen, or
Jerome
really detected, or' even thought that
they
detected, any greater similarity; Jerome's
“quasi,"
Origen's e!teroi, cover, as a matter of
fact,
a very high degree of ,difference.
Early Jewish observations on Hebrew
metre
are
neither numerous nor valuable ; but observa-
tions
on the characteristic parallelism of Hebrew
poetry
seem to have been entirely non-existent
earlier
than the time of the mediaeval Jewish
grammarians.
Josephus was stimulated to dis-
cover
or imagine metre in Hebrew poetry by his
desire
to commend it to the Greeks ; he had no
such
stimulus to draw attention to parallelism,
for
that corresponded to n6-thing in the poetry
of
against
the recognition by the Jewish Rabbis of
the
part played by parallelism in Hebrew poetry.
But
before defining this cause it will be convenient
to
record the extent to which Lowth's analysis
of
parallelism was anticipated by the mediaeval
Jews.
Dukes1 drew attention to
the fact that D.
Kimhi
(c. A.D. 1160-1235) in his comment on
Isaiah
xix. 8 calls parallelism "a reduplication of
the
meaning by means of synonymous terms "
(tvnw
tvlmb Nybf lvpk),
and that Levi ben Gershon
had
called it an elegance (tvHc jrd), and also
noted
the fact that the same style was customary
1 Zur Kenntnis der neuhebr. religiosen Poesie (1842), p. 125.
18
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
with
the Arabs. Schmiedl, in 1861,1 drew atten-
tion
to the still earlier use by Ibn Ezra (A.D.
1093-1168)
of these same expressions as well as
of
some others with reference to parallelism. So
far
as I am aware, similar observations in writers
earlier
than Ibn Ezra have never yet been dis-
covered.2
Ibn Ezra's observations mar be sum-
marised
as follows: it is an elegance of style, and
in
particular a characteristic of the', prophetic
style,
to repeat the same thought ,by means
of
synonymous words.3 Whether in regarding
parallelism
as peculiarly characteristic of the
prophetic
style (tvxybnh jrd) Ibn Ezra anticipated
Lowth's
observation that Old Testament pro-
phetic
literature is, in the main, poetical in form,
is
doubtful: for the examples of parallelism
given
by Ibn Ezra are drawn, not from the
prophetical
books, but from the prophetic poems
in
the Pentateuch attributed to Jacob, Moses,
and
Balaam.
Far more important is Ibn Ezra's
insistence
that
parallelism is a form of poetry, and
that
when
a writer repeats his thought by means of
synonymous
terms he is not adding to the sub-
stance,
but merely perfecting the form of what
he
had to say. This represents a reaction against
1 In Monatsschrift fUr Gesch. u. Wissenschaft des Judenthums, p.157.
2 Cardinal Pitra was of
opinion that Origen's scholion given above
(p.
12 n.) recognised parallelism, but this is doubtful:
3 Ibn Ezra cites as
examples Genesis xlix. 6 a, b, Deuteronomy
xxxii.
7 c, d, Numbers xxiii. 8.
INTRODUCTORY 19
a
mode of exegesis that treated such repetition
as
an addition to the substance. It was this
mode
of exegesis, doubtless, that militated against
the
discernment of the real nature of parallelism
by
earlier Jewish scholars. How could inter-
preters
who attributed importance to every letter
and
every external peculiarity of the sacred text
admit
that it was customary in a large part of
Scripture
to express the same thought twice over
by
means of synonymous terms? If the fact
that
RCYYV
in Genesis ii. 7 is written with two
yods,
though it might have been written with
one,
was supposed to express the thought not
only
that God “formed” man, but that He
formed
him with two "formations," or "inclina-
tions,"
to wit, the evil inclination and the good
inclination,
how could two parallel lines convey
no
fuller meaning than one such line standing
by
itself? The influence of this exegetical prin-
ciple
lingers still; at an earlier time it was far-
reaching.
For example, in Lamech's song (Gen.
iv.
23), " the man" and "the young man" came
to
be treated not as what in reality they are,
synonymous
terms with the same reference, but
as
referring to two different individuals, one old
and
one young, who were, then, identified with
the
ancient Cain and the youthful Tubal-Cain.1
Again,
the reduplication of the same thought in
1 See the commentary of
Rashi (eleventh century A.D.) on Gen.
iv.
23.
20
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
two
parallel lines is not recognised in.
Therefore,
the wicked shall not stand in the judgment,
Nor sinners in the congregation of the
righteous (Ps: i. 1).
Rabbi
Nehemiah, a Rabbi of the second century
A.D.,
said "the wicked mean the generation of
the
Flood, and the sinners mean the men of
could
be postulated between two parallel terms
or
lines or other repetitions of a statement, it
was
customary to explain one of the present world
and
the other of the world to come.2 "Day and
night"
is a sufficiently obvious expression for
"continually";
and a poet naturally distributed
the
two terms between two parallel lines without
any
intention that what he speaks of in the one
line
should be understood to be confined to the
day,
and what he speaks of in the second line to
the
night: thus, when a Psalmist says (xcii. 1),
It is a good thing . . .
To declare thy kindness in the
morning
And thy faithfulness in the night,
what
he means is that it is good to declare both
the
kindness and the faithfulness of God at all
times.
Yet even some modern commentators
still
continue to squeeze substance out of form
by
making Psalm xlii. 9 (8)--
By day will Yahweh command his
kindness,
And in the night his song shall be with me--
1 Sanhedrin x. 3.
2 See e.g. Sanhedrin x. 3
for several examples of second-century
exegesis
of this kind.
INTRODUCTORY 21
mean
more than that the Psalmist is the constant
recipient
of God's goodness; and herein these
modern
commentators follow, in misconceiving
the
influence of form, the early Jewish interpreter
Resh
Lakish (third century A.D.) who explained the
verse
thus: "Every one who studieth in the Law
in
this world which is like the night, the Holy One,
blessed
be He, stretches over him the thread of
grace
for the future world which is like the day."
To sum up this part of our
discussion: Jewish
Rabbis
in the second century A.D. misunderstood
the
parallelism that is characteristic of most of
the
poetry of the Old Testament, and, with the
exception
of Philo and Josephus, no Jews appear
to
have given any attention to any metrical laws
that
may also have governed that poetry;2 and
1 Talmud B. Hagigah 12 b ; ed. Streane, p. 64.
Another passage
where
some modern commentators have failed to see how much the
real
range of thought is defined by parallelism is Hos. ii. 5 a, b
Lest I strip her naked,
And set her
as on the day she was born.
These
two lines are entirely synonymous. For the correct understand-
ing
of the second line the most important thing is to recall Job i. 21,
"
Naked came I out of my mother's womb"; the two lines mean simply
this
: Lest I strip her to the skin so that she becomes as naked as a
child
just drawn from the womb. Such a note as Harper's in the Inter-
national Critical
Commentary
(p. 227), which is partly based on Hitzig's,
is
not really interpretation: the lines do not mean that
become
a nomadic people again. Strangely enough, the modern
commentaries
which I have consulted do not give the really pertinent
reference
to Job i. 21: and it was not until I turned to Kimhi that I
found
a commentator who did. He very correctly paraphrases the
second
line: I will cause her to stand naked as on the day of her birth,
and
regards it as repeating the meaning of the first line by synonymous
terms
(nlmu m'7n7 '71:22 1>3sn).
2 It is possible enough
that the practice of distinguishing certain
poems
(viz. those in Ex. xv., Deut. xxxii., Judg. v. and 2 Sam. xxii.)
by
spacing within the lines, a practice still regularly observed in printed
22
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
what
Josephus says on that subject is expressed
in
Greek terms, was written as part of his apology
for
all things Jewish, and appears at most to
imply
that Josephus had some perception of
difference
of rhythm in different Hebrew poems.
The
account he gives wears a rather more learned
air,
but is in reality as vague and insufficient as
the
account given to Dr. Dalman by some of
those
who supplied him with his specimens of
modern
Palestinian poetry.1
editions
of the Hebrew Bible even when other poems such as Psalms
and
Job are not so distinguished, goes back to this period. It is
certainly
vouched for by sayings in both Talmuds (j. Meg. iii. 74, col.
2,
bottom; b. Meg. 716 b; cp. Shabbath, 103 b, bottom), of which the
Jerusalem
Talmud is commonly considered to have been completed
c.
A.D. 350, the Babylonian c. A.D. 500; and by the time that the
tractate
Soferim was written (probably c. A.D. 850), according to state-
ments
therein contained (Soferim, ed. Joel
Muller, xiii. 1, p. xxi), it was
customary
in accurately written MSS. to distinguish Psalms, Proverbs,
and
Job in the same way ; and in some of the earliest existing MSS.
Psalms
and Job as well as the four passages above mentioned are so
distinguished.
But it is difficult, not to say impossible, to derive from
these
facts any theory of the nature of parallelism, or of the rhythm
of
the lines so distinguished : on the contrary, the different divisions
of
these poetical passages in different MSS., the failure to distinguish
at
all such obvious poems as the blessing of Jacob in Gen. xlix., the
poems
attributed to Balaam in Num. xxiii., xxiv., and the blessings of
Moses
in Deut. xxxiiii. (cp. Ginsburg's edition of the Hebrew Bible),
and
the fact that the directions in the Talmud for writing certain
passages
vrcx,yipc;,s group together''the poems in Ex. xv., Deut. xxxii.,
etc.,
and the lists of the kings of
of
Haman in Esth. ix., rather suggest the absence of any clear theory
of
either parallelism or rhythm.
1 "In modern Arabic
folk-poetry the purely rhythmical has begun
to
drive out the quantitative principle so that a distinction may be
drawn
between quantitative and rhythmical poems." . . .
"I have never been able to
discover how the composers of this folk-
poetry
go to work in the composition of these poems. To the question
whether
there was nothing at all in his lines that the poet numbered so
as
to secure regularity (Gleichmass), I received from several different
quarters
the reply, that nothing at all was numbered, that for the folk-
INTRODUCTORY 23
And yet, in the second century A.D.,
Hebrew
poetry
of the type found in the Old Testament
had
not yet become a long obsolete type, as it had
become
when the new art of rhymed, metrical
poems
without parallelism was brought to per-
fection
in the tenth to the twelfth centuries ; con-
temporaries
of Josephus were still employing
parallelism
with as much regularity and skilful
variation
as the best writers of the Old Testament
period
; and in all probability, in many cases at
least,
rhythmical regularity of the same kind, and
as
great, accompanied these parallelistic com-
positions,
as is found in any of the Biblical poems.
But
later than the second century A.D. only
meagre
traces of parallelism of the types found
in
the Old Testament, or of the same kind of
rhythms
as are used there, can be found;
and
certainly, when the new Hebrew poetry
was
created, it dispensed with parallelism—with
parallelism,
at all events, as any constant feature
of
the poems.
Without prejudging the question
whether
parallelism
in Hebrew necessarily constitutes or
implies
poetical form, it will be convenient at
this
point to take a survey of those parts of
ancient
Jewish literature outside the Old Testa-
ment
in which either parallelism is conspicuous,
poetry
there was only one standard (Mass)—absolute caprice. No
doubt
it may be supposed that the individual poet instinctively imitates
the
form of some poem that is known to him."—G. H. Dalman, Paid-
stinischer
Divan, pp. xxii, xxiii.
24
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
or
other features are prominent which distinguish
those
parts of the Old Testament commonly
regarded
as poetry. Most of this literature,
especially
the latest of it, survives only in trans-
lation;
and, with regard to much of it, it is
disputed
whether it actually runs back to a
Hebrew
original at all. The exact date, again,
of
much of it is uncertain, and I shall, therefore,
attempt
no rigid chronological order of mention;
in
general the period in question is from the third
or
second century B.C. to the second century A.D.
Of the apocryphal books it was clear
even
before
the discovery of the Hebrew original that
Ecclesiasticus
(c. 180 B.C.) must have possessed
all
the characteristics of ancient Hebrew poetry ;
and
even the alphabetic structure of li. 13-30 had
been
inferred.1 But Ecclesiasticus may well be
older
than some of the latest poems in the Old
Testament.
The Hebrew original of the first
book of
Maccabees
(c. 90 B.C.) has not yet been recovered:
but,
even through the translations, it is easy to
detect
certain passages to which the use of
parallelism
gives an entirely different character
from
the simple prose narrative of the main body
of
the work. Such passages are the eulogies of
Judas
(iii. 3-9) and Simon (xiv. 6-15) and also
i.
25-28, 36 b-40, ii. 8-11 (13 a). Isolated distichs,
1 By G. A. Bickell in the Zeitschrift fur katholische Theologie,
1882,
pp.
319 ff.
INTRODUCTORY 25
such
as occur in ii. 44 and ix. 41, may be citations
from
now lost poems, as vii. 17 is from a still
extant
Psalm (lxxix. 2, 3). In ix. 20, 21 reference
is
made to an elegy on Judas and the opening
words
are cited. It is possible to infer the Hebrew
original
of these words with practical certainty,
and
to detect in
lxrWy fywvm | rvbgh lpn jyx
How hath the valiant man fallen,
He that delivered
the
opening of a poem constructed after the same
form1
as elegies in the Old Testament.
In the book of Judith, which may
have been
written
about 150, or as some think about 80 B.C.,
we
find a long poem of praise and thanksgiving;
in
part, it is a close imitation of earlier poems in
the
Old Testament; but its parallelistic, as was
also
presumably its rhythmical, regularity is by
no
means least where it is most independent, as,
for
example, in the lines (xvi. 8-10)
She anointed her face with ointment,
And bound her hair in a
tire;
And she took a linen garment to
deceive him,
Her sandal ravished his
eye,
And her beauty took his soul
prisoner,
The scimitar passed
through his neck,
The Persians quaked at her daring,
And the Medes at her
boldness were daunted.
Not only the Apocrypha, but the
Pseudepi-
grapha,
contain much, the New Testament,
1 See below, pp. 96 ff.
26
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
perhaps,
a little, that was originally written in
Hebrew
and was poetical in form. Among these
specimens
of late Hebrew poetry we may certainly
include
the eighteen " Psalms of Solomon " (c.
50
B.C.)1 and perhaps some of the most ancient
elements
of the Jewish liturgy, such as the "Eight-
een
Blessings " (c. A.D. 100), and the blessings
accompanying
the recitation of the Shema’; 2
possibly
also the Magnificat and other New Testa-
ment
Canticles.3 Several of the apocalypses also
include
poems; in those which he has edited
more
recently, Dr. Charles has distinguished the
poetry
from the prose by printing the former in
regular
lines. Without admitting that all parts
thus
distinguished by him or others possessed
1 The parallelistic
structure is indicated in my translation of these
Psalms
in The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of
the Old Testament
(ed.
R. H. Charles), ii. 631-652.
2 The Hebrew text of these and of
the " Eighteen " is conveniently
brought
together in W. Staerk, Altjudische
liturgische Gebete (
1910).
The rhythm is indicated in the notes and German translation
in
P. Fiebig, Berachoth: Der Mischnatractat Gegenspruche, pp,. 26
if.
3 Dr. Burney has recently
argued that the parable of the last Judg-
ment
in Matt. xxv. 31-46 was a Hebrew poem ; and his Hebrew trans-
lation
from the Greek text of the Gospel, his metrical analysis of the
poem
and his English translation, as far as possible in the rhythm of
his
Hebrew reconstruction, deserve careful attention. See the Journal
of Theological Studies for April 1913 (vol.
xiv. 414-424).
Parts, but parts only, of Matt. xxv.
31-46 are thrown into parallel
lines
by Dr. Moffat also in The New Testament : a new translation.
That
parts only are so arranged in this passage is the more noticeable
because
in a considerable number of other, longer or shorter, passages
in
this translation of the New Testament an arrangement in lines is
adopted.
It is, however, tolerably clear that this line arrangement is
not
always intended to imply poetical form. And certainly, even for
example
in the parts of 1 Cor. xiii. which are so arranged, the form is
not
that of Hebrew parallelism; in vv. 1-3 the formal effect is obtained
by
exact repetition of the same phrase ("but if I have no love"), not
by
repetition of the same thought by means of synonymous terms.
INTRODUCTORY 27
poetical
form in the original, I think it may be
safely
said that such apocalypses as the Twelve
Patriarchs,
the Book of Jubilees, the Apocalypse
of
Baruch and IV. Esdras do each contain some
such
passages.
Now of these books or passages which
show
the
same characteristics as the poetry of the Old
Testament,
some at least were written by men
who
were contemporary both with Josephus
and
also with those who after A.D. 70 founded
that
Jewish school at Jamnia of whose methods
of
exegesis (in the second century A.D.) examples
have
been given above. At the very time that
the
Rabbis were examining scripture with eyes
blind
to parallelism, other Jews were still writing
poems
that made all the old use of parallelism.
This
may be proved by reference to the Apocalypse
of
Baruch: for with regard to this book I believe
that
it may be safely asserted1 (1) that it was
written
in Hebrew, (2) that it was written not
earlier
than c. A.D. 50, and therefore (3) that
its
author was in all probability a contempo-
rary,
though perhaps an elder contemporary, of
Josephus
and of the founders of the school of
Jamnia.
But this book contains a long passage
(xlviii.
1-47) that is among the most regular and
sustained
examples of parallelism in the whole
range
of Hebrew literature ; a sufficiently large
portion
of it may be cited here to prove this
1 Cp. R. H. Charles, The Apocalypse of Baruch.
28
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
translation is in the main that of Dr. Charles;
for
the line division, which in one place (v. 14)
involves
an important change of punctuation, I
am
responsible).
2 O my Lord, Thou summonest the
advent of the times, and
they
stand before Thee;
Thou causest the power of the ages
to pass away, and
they
do not resist Thee:
Thou arrangest the method of the
seasons, and they
obey
Thee.
3 Thou alone knowesib the goal of
the generations,
And Thou revealest not
Thy mysteries to many.
4 Thou makest known the multitude of
the fire,
And Thou weighest the
lightness of the wind.
5 Thou explorest the limits of the
heights,
And Thou scrutinisest
the depths of the darkness.
6 Thou carest for the number which
pass away that they
may
be preserved,
And Thou preparest an
abode for those that are to be.
7 Thou rememberest the beginning
which Thou hast made,
And the destruction that
is to be Thou forgettest not.
8 With nods of fear and indignation
Thou givest command-
ment
to the flames,
And they change into
spirits,2
1 The translation,
without line division, referred to above is that in
R.
H. Charles, The Apocalypse of Baruch
(1896). Since the above words
were
written, Dr. Charles has published a revised translation with
division
into parallel lines in The Apocrypha and
Pseudepigrapha of the
Old Testament (
Dr.
Charles has adopted the punctuation in v. 14, given above ; its
correctness,
indeed, becomes obvious so soon as the sustained parallel-
ism
of the passage is recognised. Verse 2 is now divided by Dr. Charles
into
six lines : the division into three, as above, shows the parallelism
more
clearly.
2 I suspect corruption in
v. 8 a, b. In the original text " flames "
was
probably a parallel term to " spirits " (cp. Ps. civ. 4), and not, as
in
the present text of the versions, that which changes into spirits.
Moreover,
the two lines are likely to have been more nearly equal to
one
another in length : the inequality between them presents a striking
contrast
to what is found in the rest of the poem.
INTRODUCTORY 29
And
with a word Thou quickenest that which was not,
And with mighty power Thou .oldest
that which has not
yet
come.
9
Thou instructest created things in the understanding of
Thee,
And Thou makest wise the spheres so
as to minister in
their
orders.
10
Armies innumerable stand before Thee,
And they minister in their orders
quietly at Thy nod.
11
Hear Thy servant,
And give ear to my petition.
12
For in a little time are we born,
And in a little time do we return.
13
But with Thee, hours are as a time (?),
And days as generations.
14
Be not therefore wroth with man; for he is nothing ;
And take not account of our works;
15 for what are we?
For
lo! by Thy gift do we come into the world,
And we depart not of our own will.
16
For we said not to our parents, "Beget us,"
And we sent not to Sheol, saying,
"Receive us."
17
What, then, is our strength that we should bear Thy wrath,
Or what are we that we should endure
Thy judgment?
18
Protect us in Thy compassions,
And in Thy mercy help us.
The Apocalypse of Esdras (IV.
Esdras) was
probably
written shortly after A.D. 100, and
though
it contains nothing quite so regular and
sustained
as the passage just cited from the
Apocalypse
of Baruch, a considerable number of
passages
are printed both by Professor Gunkel
and
Mr. Box 2 as poetry, and, some (e.g. viii.
20-30)
at least, with good. reason.
1 In E. Kautzsch, Die Apokryphen and Pseudepigraphen des AT.,
ii.
352-401 (cp. p. 349).
2 G. H. Box, The Ezra-Apocalypse; and also in The
Apocrypha and
Pseudepigrapha of the
Old Testament
(ed. R. H. Charles), ii. 542-624.
30
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Parallelism, then, certainly
continued into the
second
century A.D. to be a feature in Hebrew
poetry,
or in Hebrew literature written in a form
differing
from ordinary prose. Whether poetry
distinguished
by the sustained use of parallelism
was
still composed after the second century is
doubtful;
but in this connexion two recently re-
covered
documents may be very briefly referred to.
1 Certainly no literary
work that is at present generally admitted
to
be later than the second century is marked by such sustained
parallelism
as we find in parts of the Apocalypse of Baruch, or by any-
thing
approaching it. But the Talmud contains a few snatches of
occasional
poetry one or two of which, at least, are characterised by
parallelism
and by something closely resembling rhythms found in the
Old
Testament. The most pertinent example is that attributed in
Moed Katan 25 b to an elegist (xnrps) on the death of Hanin
who is
described
as hxyWn ybd hyntH, which is interpreted by Levy (Neuheb.
Worterbuch,
ii. 83 a) as meaning that Hanin was a son-in-law of R.
Juda
Nasi. The elegy alludes to the fact that Hanin died on the day
that
his son was born. It runs:--
vqbdn Nvgyv Nvww | hnphn hgvtl hHmw
xnynH dbx vtnynH
tfb | hnxn
vtHmw tfb
This
may be rendered, tl;Lough the last lines are not free from ambiguity
(see
Levy, loc. cit.) :
Joy was turned into weariness,
Gladness and sadness were united;
When his gladness came, he sighed,
When his favour came, he that was favoured, perished.
The
parallelism is obvious; and the rhythm of the first distich is
3:3
(see below, p. 159 f.). Parallelism and rhythm are rather less con-
spicuous
in another elegy cited at the same place, viz.:
rmHk qydc lf | wxr
vfynh Myrmt
Mymyk tylyl Mywm
lf | Mymyk
tvlyl Mywn
The
palm-trees shook their head
Over the righteous that was as a
palm-tree (cp. Ps. xcii. 13).
(So)
let us turn night into day (i.e. weep unremittingly)
Over him who turned night into day
(in the study of the law).
Yet
another elegy cited the same place contains the lines
ryq ybvzx vWfy hm | tbhlw
hlpn Myzrxb Mx
If on the cedars the flame fell,
What can the hyssops on the wall do?
INTRODUCTORY 31
Dr. Charles1 finds a considerable
element of
poetry
in the fragments of a Zadokite work of
which
the Hebrew text was first edited (with
translation
and introduction) by Dr. Schechter2
in
1910. In the opinion of some this work is
considerably
later than IV. Esdras; but Dr.
Charles
has strong reasons for concluding that
it
was written before A.D. 70. Be the date, how-
ever,
what it may, except in quotations from the
Old
Testament, parallelism in this work
is not at
all
conspicuous; whether, therefore, the passages
marked
by Dr. Charles as possessing poetical
form
actually do so, turns on matters which have
to
be considered later. Happily, in this case the
question
can be considered, not through transla-
tions
merely, but with the original text before us.
The Odes of Solomon, of which the
Syriac text
was
first edited by Dr. Rendel Harris3 in 1909,
were
scarcely written before A.D. 70, and they
may
belong to the second century A.D. ; in the
which
recall, though the lines are longer, the ring of Ps. xi. 3. Two
similar
distichs follow. A further example occurs in Hagigah 15 b
vnybr jynpl dmf xl
| Htph rmw vlypx
Even the keeper-of-the-door (of
Gehenna)
Stood not his ground
before thee, 0 our teacher.
As
the sustained parallelism which is so characteristic of much of
the
Old Testament and Jewish literature to the second century A.D.
appears
to run back to origins in the popular poetry of the early
Hebrews,
so parallelism seems to have maintained an existence for
some
time in the occasional poetry of the later Jews, after it had
ceased
to be employed in more formal literature.
1 Fragments of a Zadokite work translated . . . 1912.
2 In Documents of Jewish Sectaries, vol. i.
3 The Odes and Psalms of Solomon published from the Syriac Version,
1909
(ed. 2, 1911).
32
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
opinion
of some they were written even later.
The
original language of these Odes is still un-
determined.
But some of them (e.g. v., vi.,
vii.)
are strongly parallelistic in character, though
Dr.
Harris refrained from distinguishing the
parallel
members in his translation.
It was long ago pointed out by Lowth
that
parallelism
can be retained almost unimpaired
in
a translation; easier still, therefore, was it for
Jews
to reproduce this feature in works written
in
the first instance in some other language than
Hebrew
; and to some extent they did so. The
Book
of Wisdom, which rests on no Hebrew
original,
but was written, as it survives, in Greek,
is
the best proof of this. It is possible that the
author
of Wisdom attempted to imitate other
features
of ancient Hebrew poetry as well as its
parallelism
in his Greek work; but these are
questions
that cannot be pursued now.
There is no other considerable book
originally
written
in Greek which employs parallelism
throughout
; but it has been held with differing
degrees
of conviction and consensus of opinion
that
Tobit's prayer (Tob. xiii.), the Prayer of
Manasses,
the Song of the Three Holy Children,
and
the latter part of Baruch were written in
Greek,
or at least, not in Hebrew; and a Hebrew
original
for the Odes of Solomon was postulated
neither
by their first editor, nor by many who
have
followed him, though more recently Dr.
INTRODUCTORY 33
Abbott1
has adduced some evidence which he
thinks
points to such an original.
The question of the original
language of each
of
these works might, perhaps, with advantage,
be
reconsidered in connexion with the general
question
of the extent to which parallelism was
adopted
in Jewish writings not written in Hebrew.
We
have on the one hand the clear example of
the
use of parallelism in Wisdom, and on the
other
the exceedingly slight use of parallelism,
for
example, in the Sibylline oracles ; and we
may
recall again in this connexion the avoidance
of
parallelism in mediaeval Hebrew poetry. These
avoidances
or absences of parallelism are certainly
worthy
of attention in view of the ease with which
this
feature of Hebrew poetry could have been
reproduced
in Greek works, and even combined,
if
necessary, with the use of Greek metres like the
hexameters
of the Jewish Sibylline books. Was it
merely
due to the fact that the one was writing
in
Hebrew and the other in Greek, that the author
of
the Apocalypse of Baruch in his loftier passages
employs
the form of ancient Hebrew poetry,
whereas
his contemporary,
a
passage as 1 Corinthians xiii.,2 avoids it ? Or
may
we detect here the influences of different
schools
or literary traditions?
1 E. A. Abbott, Light on the Gospel from an Ancient Poet.
2 See above, p. 26, n. 3.
CHAPTER II
PARALLELISM : A RESTATEMENT
35
CHAPTER II
PARALLELISM : A RESTATEMENT
THE
literature of the Old Testament is divided
into
two classes by the presence or absence of
what
since Lowth has been known as paralle-
lismus membrorum, or parallelism. The
occur-
rence
of parallelism characterises the books of
Psalms,
Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes (in part),
Lamentations,
Canticles, the larger part of the
prophetical
books, and certain songs and snatches
that
are cited and a few other passages that occur
in
the historical books. Absence of parallelism
characterises
the remainder of the Old Testament,
i.e.
the Pentateuch and the books of Joshua,
Judges,
Samuel, Kings and Chronicles (with
slight
exceptions in all these books as just in-
dicated),
Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ruth, and
part
of the prophetical books, including most of
Ezekiel,
the biographical parts of Jeremiah, the
book
of Jonah (except the psalm in chapter ii.),
and
some passages in most of the remaining
prophetical
books. It had become customary to
37
38
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
distinguish
these two divisions of Hebrew litera-
ture
as poetry and prose respectively : parallelism
had
come to be regarded as a mark of poetry, its
absence
as a marls of prose; and by the application
of
the same test the non-canonical literature of
the
Jews from the second century B.C. to the
second
century A.D. was likewise coming to be
distinguished
into its prose and poetical elements.
The
validity of parallelism as a test to dis-
tinguish
between prose and poetry in Hebrew
literature
might be, and has been either actually
or
virtually, challenged on two grounds: (1)
that
parallelism actually occurs in prose; and
(2)
that parts of the Old Testament from which
parallelism
is absent are metrical and, therefore,
poetical
in form.
Parallelism is not a feature
peculiar to Hebrew
literature:1
it is characteristic of parts of Baby-
lonian
literature, such as the Epics of Creation
1 Nor even to Semitic
literature. Many interesting illustrations
from
folk-songs and English literature are given by Dr. G. A. Smith in
The Early Poetry of
more
simple repetition without variation of terms than is common in
Hebrew,
and an even more conspicuous difference is the much less sus-
tained
use of parallelism. In view of the great influence of the Old
Testament
on English literature and the ease with which parallelism
can
be used in any language (cp. p. 32 above), it is rather surprising
that
parallelism, and even sustained parallelism, is not more conspicu-
ous
in English. But abundant illustrations of this sustained use may
be
found in the Finnish epic, The Kalevala,
if Mr. Crawford's transla-
tion
keeps in this respect at all close to the original, with which I have
no
acquaintance. Even here there are differences, as for example in
the
absence of the tendency, so marked in Hebrew, for parallelism to
produce
distichs. I cite a sufficiently long passage to illustrate what is
a
frequent, though not a constant, characteristic of the style of The
Kalevala :—
PARALLELISM : A
RESTATEMENT 39
(the
Enuma
and
the hymns to the gods.l It is as apparent
in
translations from Babylonian as in the English
versions
of the Psalms or the prophets ; as ex-
amples
from Babylonian literature it may suffice to
cite
the well-known opening lines of Enuma
elis2--
When above the heaven was not named,
And beneath the earth
bore no name,
And the primeval Apsu, the begetter
of them,
And Mummu and Tiam.at,
the mother of them all--
Listen, bride, to what I
tell thee :
In thy home thou wert a
jewel,
Wert thy father's pride
and pleasure,
‘Moonlight,’ did thy
father call thee,
And thy mother called
thee ‘Sunshine,’
‘Sea-foam’ did thy
brother call thee,
And thy sister called
thee ‘Flower.’
When thou leavest home
and kindred,
Goest to a second
mother,
Often she will give thee
censure,
Never treat thee as her
daughter,
Rarely will she give
thee counsel,
Never will she sound thy
praises.
‘Brush-wood,’ will the
father call thee,
‘Sledge of Rags,’ thy
husband's brother,
‘Flight of Stairs,’ thy
stranger brother,
‘Scare-crow,’ will the
sister call thee,
Sister of thy blacksmith
husband ;
Then wilt think of my
good counsels,
Then wilt wish in tears
and murmurs,
That as steam thou hadst
ascended,
That as smoke thy soul
had risen,
That as sparks thy life
had vanished.
As a bird thou eanst not
wander
From thy nest to circle
homeward,
Canst not fall and die
like leaflets,
As the sparks thou canst
not perish,
Like the smoke thou canst
not vanish."
J. M.
CRAWFORD, The Kalevala, i. 341, 2.
1 A convenient collection
of all of these (transliterated text and trans-
lation)
will be found in R. W. Rogers, Cuneiform
Parallels to the Old
Testament.
2 Cp. Rogers, pp. 3ff.
40
FORMS OF' HEBREW POETRY
and
these lines from a hymn to the god Sin1--
When
Thy word in heaven is proclaimed, the Igigi prostrate
themselves;
When
Thy word on earth is proclaimed, the Anunaki kiss
the
ground.
When
Thy word on high travels like a storm-wind, food and
drink
abound;
When
Thy word on earth settles down, vegetation springs
up.
Thy
word makes fat stall and stable, and multiplies living
creatures;
Thy
word causes truth and righteousness to arise, that
men
may speak the truth.
Whether these passages are prose or
poetry,
and
whether, if poetry, they are such primarily
because
of the presence of parallelism, turns on
the
same considerations as the corresponding
questions
with reference to parallelistic passages
in
Hebrew: and further discussion of these must
be
postponed.
But parallelism is characteristic
not only of
much
in Babylonian and Hebrew literature: it
is
characteristic also of much in Arabic literature,.
And
the use of parallelism in Arabic literature is
such
as to give some, at least apparent, justifica••
tion
to the claim that parallelism is no true
differentia between prose and
poetry ; for parallel--
ism
in Arabic accompanies prose—prose, it
is true,
of
a particular kind, but at all events not poetry,
according
to the general opinion of Arabian
grammarians
and prosodists. Not only is paral-
1 Cp. Rogers, pp. 144,
145.
PARALLELISM: A
RESTATEMENT 41
lelism
present in much Arabic prose: it is
commonly
absent from Arabic poetry, i.e. from
the
rhymed and carefully regulated metrical
poetry
of the Arabs. In illustration of this, two
passages
may be cited from the Makamat of
Hariri.
The translations here given are based
on
Chenery's,l but I have modified them here
and
there in order to bring out more clearly the
regularity
of the parallelism in the original : for
the
same reason I give the translation with line
divisions
corresponding to the parallel members.
The
first passage, which consists of part of the
opening
address of Abu Zayd in the first Makamah,
is
from the prose fabric of Hariri's work; the
second
is one of the many metrical poems which
are
wrought into the prose fabric. The parallel-
ism
of the prose passage, as of innumerable other
passages
which might equally well have served as
examples,
is as regular and as sustained as that
of
any passage in Hebrew or Babylonian litera-
ture,
and indeed in some respects it is even more,
monotonously
regular : it is complex too, for at
times
there is a double parallelism—a parallelism
between
the longer periods, the lines of the trans-
lation,
and also between the parts of each of
these
(the half lines of the translation). This
prose
passage is as follows2:--
1 T. Chenery, The Assemblies of Al Hariri, i. 109 f.
and 192.
2 In order that
parallelism may be better studied I have hyphened
together
word groups in English that correspond to a single word (com-
bined
in some eases with inseparable particles) in Arabic. But I have
42
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
0-thou-reckless
in petulance, trailing the garment of vanity!
0-thou-headstrong in follies,
turning-aside to idle-tales!
How
long wilt-thou-persevere in thine error, and eat-sweetly-
of
the pasture of thy wrong ?
And
how far wilt-thou-be-extreme in thy pride, and not
abstain
from thy wantonness ?
Thou
provokest by-thy-rebellion the Master of thy forelock
And thou goest-boldly
in-the-foulness of thy behaviour
against
the knower of thy secret;
And
thou hidest-thyself from thy neighbour, but thou-art
in
sight of thy watcher
And
thou concealest-thyself from thy slave, but nothing
is-concealed
from thy Ruler.
Thinkest
thou that thy state will-profit-thee when thy
departure
draweth--near?
Or-that
thy wealth will-deliver-thee, when thy deeds
destroy-thee?
Or-that
thy repentance will-suffice for thee when thy foot
slippeth?
Or-that
thy kindred will-lean to thee in-the-day-that thy
judgment-place
gathereth-thee?
How-is-it
thou-hast-walked not in-the-high-road of thy
guidance, and hastened the treatment
of thy disease?
And
blunted the edge of thine iniquity, and restrained
thyself—thy
worst enemy.
Is-not
death thy doom? What-then-is thy preparation?
And
is-not-grey-hair thy warning? What-then-is thy
excuse?
And
is-not-in the grave's-niche thy sleeping-place? What-
then-is
thy speech?
And is-not-to God thy going?
Who-then-is thy defender?
Oft
the time hath-awakened-thee, but-thou-hast-set-thyself-
to-slumber
And
admonition hath-drawn-thee, but-thou-past-strained-
against-it;
And
warnings have-been-manifested to thee, but-thou-hast-
made-thyself-blind
generally
omitted to hyphen the frequently recurring article, “of”
(before
a genitive), pronouns and the copulative particle ("and")
none
of these form separate words in Arabic.
PARALLELISM : A
RESTATEMENT 43
And
truth hath-been-established to thee, but-thou-hast-
disputed-it;
And
death hath-bid-thee-remember, but-thou-hast-sought-
to-forget,
And
it-hath-been-in-thy-power to impart, and thou-
imparted'st
not.
The poem I select as an example is
translated
by
Chenery as follows:--
1
Say to him who riddles questions that I am the discloser
of
the secret which he hides.
Know
that the deceased, in whose case the law preferred
the brother of his
spouse to the son of his father,
Was
a man who, of his free consent, gave his son in marriage
to his own mother-in-law
: nothing strange in it.
Then
the son died, but she was already pregnant by him,
and
gave birth to a son like him :
And
he was the son's son without dispute, and brother of
the grandfather's spouse
without equivocation.
6
But the son of the true-born son is nearer to the grand-
father, and takes precedence in the
inheritance over
the
brother;
And
therefore when he died, the eighth of the inheritance
was adjudged to the wife for her to
take possession;
And
the grandson, who was really her brother by her
mother, took the rest;
And
the full brother was left out of the inheritance, and
we say thou
past only to bewail him.
This
is my decision which every judge who judges will
pattern by, every lawyer.
Nothing could be more prosaic than
this last
passage
: and the only approximation in it to
parallelism
is line 5 ; nevertheless it is, so far as
form
goes, a perfect poem in the original : the
rhymes
are correct, and the well-known metrical
form
called khafif is maintained
throughout.
44
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
So far, then, as Arabic literature
is concerned,
it
is an unquestionable fact that sustained and
regular
parallelism is a frequent characteristic of
prose,
while the absence of parallelism is frequently
characteristic
of metrical poems. And yet this
is
not of course the whole truth even in regard
to
Arabic literature. Most literatures consist of
poetry
and prose: and what in them is not
poetical
in form is prose, and vice versa. But in
Arabic
there are three forms of composition: (1)
nathr; (2) nazm, or si’r; (3) saj’. The usual
English
equivalents for these three Arabic terms
are
(1) prose, (2) poetry, (3) rhymed prose; but
"rhymed
prose" is not, of course, a translation
of
saj’: that word signifies primarily a
cooing
noise
such as is made by a pigeon; and its trans-
ferred
use of a form of literary composition does
not,
as the English equivalent suggests, represent
this
form as a subdivision of prose. We should
perhaps
do more justice to some Arabic discus-
sions
or descriptions of saj’ by terming it
in
English
"unmetrical poetry";1 and in some
respects
this " rhymed prose " or " unmetrical
poetry
" is more sharply marked off from ordinary
1 ”The oldest form of
poetical speech was the saj'. Even
after this
stage
of poetical form had long been surpassed and the metrical schemes
had
already been fully developed, the saj' ranked as a kind of poetical
expression.
Otherwise his opponents would certainly never have called
Mohammed
sa'ir (poet), for he never recited
metrical poems, but only
spoke
sentences of saj'. In a saying
attributed to Mohammed in the
Tradition,
too, it is said: ‘This poetry is saj'.’"—Goldziher,
Abhand-
lungen
zur arabischen Philologie, p. 59.
PARALLELISM A
RESTATEMENT 45
prose
than from the metrical poetry between
which
and itself the simplest form of metrical
verse,
termed rejez,l may be
regarded as a transi-
tional
style.
To the Arabic saj’, as rhymed prose, Hebrew
literature
has, indeed, little or nothing analogous
to
show; to saj’ as unmetrical poetry possibly,
and
certainly in the opinion of some writers it has
much.
For example, if we disregard the rhyme,
such
passages as that cited above from Hariri
have,
in respect of parallelism of terms and the
structure
of the corresponding clauses, much that
is
similar alike in Hebrew psalms and Hebrew
prophecy.
And to some of these we may return.
At this point I raise this question
with reference
to
Hebrew, and a similar question might be raised
with
reference to Babylonian literature : ought
we
to recognise three forms of composition as in
Arabic,
or two only as in most literatures ? Since
rhyme
is so conspicuous in Arabic, and so incon-
spicuous
in Hebrew, this may at first seem a
singularly
ill-considered question : and yet it is
not
; for however prominent rhyme may be in
Arabic
poetry, it is perfectly possible to think
the
rhyme away without affecting the essential
form
of Arabic poetry, or of the Hebrew mediaeval
poetry
that was modelled on it. It would have
been
as easy for an Arabic poet, had he wished
1 " Fundamentally rejez is nothing but rhythmically
disciplined
saj’."
"Many Arabic prosodists do not admit that rejez possesses the
character
of si’r."—Goldziher, ibid. pp. 76, 78.
46
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
it,
as it was for
his
poetry would have remained sufficiently dis-
tinguished
from prose by its rigid obedience to
metrical
laws. So, again, it is possible to think
away
rhyme from the rhymed prose without
reducing
that form of composition to plain prose;
the
parallelism, and a certain balance of the
clauses,
would still remain ; and as a matter of
fact
much early Arabic parallelistic composition
existed
from which regular rhyme was absent.1
Had then the ancient Hebrew three
forms of
composition—metrical
poetry and plain prose,
and
an intermediate type differing from poetry
by
the absence of metre, and from prose by obedi-
ence
to certain laws governing the mutual relations
between
its clauses—a type for which we might
as
makeshifts employ the terms unmetrical poetry
or
parallelistic prose ?
I am not going to answer that
question im-
mediately,
nor, perhaps, at all directly. But it
seems
to me worth formulating, even if no certain
answer
to it can be obtained. It may help to
keep
possibilities before us : and, perhaps, also
to
prevent a fruitless conflict over terms. In the
present
discussion it is not of the first importance
to
determine whether it is an abuse of language
1 Goldziher (op. cit. pp. 62 ff.) argues that rhyme
first began to be
employed
in the formal public discourses or sermons (khutba)
from t;he
third
century of the Hejira onwards. " The rhetorical character of
such
discourses in old time was concerned only with the parallelism of
which
use was made " (p. 64).
PARALLELISM: A
RESTATEMENT 47
to
apply the term poetry to any part of Hebrew
literature
that does not follow well-defined metrical
laws
simply on the ground that it is marked by
parallelism;
what is of importance is to deter-
mine
if possible whether any parts of the Old
Testament
are in the strictest sense of the term
metrical,
and, alike whether that can be deter-
mined
or not, to recognise the real distinction
between
what is parallelistic and what is not, to
determine
so far as possible the laws of this
parallelism,
and to recognise all parts of the
ancient
Hebrew literature that are distinguished
by
parallelism as related to one another in respect
of
form.
It is because I approach the
question thus that
I
treat of parallelism before metre: parallelism
is
unmistakable, metre in Hebrew literature is
obscure:
the laws of Hebrew metre have been
and
are matters of dispute, and at times the very
existence
of metre in the Old Testament has been
questioned.
But let us suppose that Sievers, to
whose
almost overwhelming contributions1 to
this
subject we owe so much, whatever our final
judgment
as to some even of his main conclusions
may
be, is right in detecting metre not only in
what
have commonly been regarded as the
poetical
parts of the Old Testament, but also
throughout
such books as Samuel and Genesis;2
1 See below, pp. 143-154.
2 Ed. Sievers, Metrische Studien, ii. "Die
hebraische Genesis," and
Metrische Studien, iii. “Samuel.”
48
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
even
then the importance and value of the
question
formulated above remains. It is true
that
some questions may require resetting : if
Samuel
and Genesis are metrical throughout, if
even
the genealogies in Genesis v. and xxxvi. are,
so
fare as form goes, no less certainly poems than
the
very prosaic Arabic poem cited above, it will
become
less a question whether the Old Testa-
ment,
contains metrical poems than whether it
contains
any plain prose at all. But the distinc-
tion
between what is parallelism and what is not
will
remain as before: we shall still have to dis-
tinguish
between parallelistic prose and prose
that
is not parallelistic, or, if the entire Old Testa-
ment
be metrical, between parallelistic and non-
parallelistic
poetry.
The general description and the
fundamental
analysis
of parallelism as given by Lowth, and
adopted
by innumerable subsequent writers, are
so
well known that they need not be referred to
at
length here: nor will it be necessary to give
illustrations
of the familiar types of parallelism
known
as synonymous and antithetic. But I
may
recall Lowth's own general statement in the
Preliminary
Dissertation (Isaiah, ed. 3, p. xiv):
"The
correspondence of one verse, or line, with
another,
I call parallelism. When a proposition
is
delivered, and a second is subjoined to it, or
drawn
under it, equivalent, or contrasted with it,
in
sense; or similar to it in the form of gram-
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 49
matical
construction; these I call parallel lines,
and
the words or phrases, answering one to
another
in the corresponding lines, parallel terms.
Parallel
lines may be reduced to three sorts:
parallels
synonymous, parallels antithetic and
parallels
synthetic.”
The vulnerable point in Lowth's
exposition of
parallelism
as the law of Hebrew poetry lies in
what
he found it necessary to comprehend under
the
term synthetic parallelism : his examples
include,
indeed, many couplets to which the term
parallelism
can with complete propriety be ap-
plied
; in such couplets the second line repeats
by
means of one or more synonymous terms part
of
the sense of the first; and by means of one or
more
other terms adds something fresh, to
which
nothing
in the first line is parallel. In virtue of
the
presence of some parallel terms such lines
may
be called parallel, and in virtue of the pre-
sence
of some non-parallel terms they may be
called
synthetic, or in full the lines may be termed
synthetic parallels, and the relation
between them
synthetic parallelism; but more convenient
terms
for
such lines, which are of very frequent occur-
rence,1
and for the relation between them, would
be
incomplete parallels and incomplete
parallelism.
In
any case, term them as we will, such examples
as
these are in reality not distinct from, but mere
subdivisions
of synonymous or antithetic parallel-
1 Many examples are cited
below: see pp. 72-82.
50
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
ism
as the case may be. On the other hand there
are
other examples of what Lowth called syn-
thetic
parallelism in which no term in the second
line
is parallel to any term in the first, but in
which
the second line consists entirely of what is
fresh
and additional to the first; and in some of
these
examples the two lines are not even parallel
to
one another by the correspondence of similar
grammatical
terms. Two such lines as these
may
certainly be called synthetic, but they are
parallel
to one another merely in the way that
the
continuation of the same straight line is
parallel
to its beginning; whereas synonymous
and
antithetic parallelisms, even of the incomplete
kind,
do really correspond to two separate and,
strictly
speaking, parallel lines. Now, if the
term
parallelism, even though it be qualified by
prefixing
the adjective synthetic, be applied to
lines
which, though synthetically related to one
another,
are connected by no parallelism of terms
or
sense, as well as to lines which are connected
by
parallelism of terms or sense, then this term,
(synthetic)
parallelism, will really conceal an all-
important
difference under a mere semblance of
similarity.
And, indeed, Lowth himself seems
to
have been at least half-conscious that he was
making
the term synthetic parallelism cover too
much:
for he admits that “the variety in the
form
of this synthetic parallelism is very great, and
the
degrees of resemblance almost infinite; so that
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 51
sometimes
the scheme of the parallelism is very
subtile
and obscure” (Lectures, ii. 52); he very
fairly
adds in illustration a really test couplet, viz.
I also have anointed my king on
Sion,
The mountain of my
sanctity (Psa. ii. 6).1
He
perceives, though he does not dwell on the
point,
that this couplet marks zero among " the
degrees
of resemblance almost infinite"; for
when
he says, "the general form and nature of
the
Psalm requires that it should be divided into
two
parts or versicles; as if it were,
‘I
also have anointed my king ;
I have anointed him in Sion, the mountain
of my sanctity,'”
he
supplies, by repeating the words, "I have
anointed,"
the one and only point of resemblance
that
exists between the two lines in his own
reconstruction
of a couplet which, in its true
original
form, is really distinguished by the entire
absence
of parallelism between its lines. As in
this
instance, so often, the use of the term syn-
thetic
parallelism has served to conceal the fact
that
couplets of lines entirely non-parallel may
occur
in poems in which most of the couplets are
parallels,
and in which the "general form and
nature
" of the poem suggest a division of the
synthetic
but non-parallel elements" into two
parts
or versicles."
1 The verse is so divided
by Lowth; for reasons which will appear
Iater
it should rather be divided:
I also have anointed my king,
On Sion, the mountain of
my holiness.
52
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Not only did. Lowth thus experience
some
doubt
whether parallelism as analysed by himself
was
the one law of Hebrew poetry, but he ex-
pressly
concludes his discussion of these " subtile
and
obscure " examples of synthetic parallelism
with
a suggestion that behind and accompanying
parallelism
there may be some metrical principle,
though
he judged that principle undiscovered and
probably
undiscoverable.
In spite of the general soundness of
Lowth's
exposition'of
parallelism, then, there is, perhaps,
sufficient
reason for a restatement ; and that I
shall
now attempt.
The extreme simplicity of Hebrew
narrative
has
often been pointed out: the principle of
attaching
clause to clause by means of the "waw
conversive"
construction allows the narrative to
flow
on often for long periods uninterrupted, and,
so
to speak, in one continuous straight line. Now
and
again, and in certain cases more often, the
line
of successive events is broken to admit of
some
circumstance being described; but the same
single
line is quickly resumed. An excellent
example
of this is found in Genesis i.: with the
exception
of verse 2, which describes the condi-
tions
existing at the time of the creative act
mentioned
in verse 1, the narrative runs on in a
single
continuous line down to verse 26; thus
1 2 3 26
__ ____
____________________
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 53
The continuity of a single line of
narrative is
in
parts of Genesis ii. nearly as conspicuous: as
to
other parts of Genesis ii. something will have
to
be said later.1 But if we turn to certain other
descriptions
of creation elsewhere in the Old
Testament,
we immediately discern a difference.
Thus
we read in Psalm xxxiii. 6, 7, 9:
By
the word of Yahweh the heavens were made,
And by the breath of his mouth all
their host.
He
gathered as into a flask the waters of the sea,
He put into treasure-houses the
deeps.
For
he spake and it came to pass,
He commanded and it stood sure;
and
in Isaiah xlv. 12 the words of Yahweh run
as
follows:--
I
made the earth,
And man upon it I created ;
My
hands stretched out the heavens,
And all their host I commanded.
And
again in Proverbs viii. 24-2 9 creation is
described in a series of subordinate
periods :
When
there were no depths . . .
When there were no fountains
abounding with water ;
Before
the mountains were settled,
Before the hills . . .
While
as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields,
Nor the beginning of the dust of the
world ;
When
he established the heavens . . .
When he set a circle upon the face
of the deep ;
When
he made firm the skies above,
When the fountains of the deep
became strong,
When
he gave to the sea its bound,
That the waters should not
transgress his commandment,
When he marked out the foundations
of the earth.
1 See pp. 221 f.
54
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Now whether, as Sievers maintains,
Genesis i.
is
as strictly metrical as Psalms, Proverbs or
Isaiah
xl.-lxvi., or whether, as has been commonly
assumed,
Genesis i. is plain, unadorned and un-
metrical
prose, between Genesis i. on the one
hand
and the passages just cited from Psalm
xxxiii.,
Isaiah xlv. and Proverbs viii. there are
these
differences: (1) whereas Genesis i. is carried
along
a single line of narrative, the other passages
are,
in the main at least, carried forward along
two
lines, parallel to one another in respect of
their
meaning, and of the terms in which that
meaning
is expressed; (2) whereas Genesis i.
consists
in the main of connected clauses so that
the
whole may be represented by a single line
rarely
broken, the other passages consist of a
number
of independent clauses or sentences, so
that
they must be represented by lines constantly
broken,
and at fairly regular intervals, thus--
=== === ===
Stated otherwise, as contrasted with
the
simpler
style of Genesis i., these other passages are
characterised
by the independence of their succes-
sive
clauses or short sentences, and the repetition
of
the same thought or statement by means of
corresponding
terms in successive short clauses or
sections.
Where repetition and what may be
termed
parallelism in its fullest and strictest sense
occur,
a constant breaking of the line of narrative
or
statement is the necessary consequence: a
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 55
thought
is expressed, or a statement made, but
the
writer, instead of proceeding at once to ex-
press
the natural sequel to his thought or the next
statement,
breaks off and harks back in order to
repeat
in a different form the thought or state-
ment
which he has already expressed, and only
after
this break and repetition pursues the line of
his
thought or statement; that is to say, one line
is,
as it were, forsaken to pursue the parallel line
up
to a corresponding point, and then after the
break
the former line is resumed. But the break
in
the line and the independence of clauses may
occur
even where there is no repetition of thought
or
correspondence of terms; just as breaks
necessarily
occur occasionally in such simple
narratives
as that of Genesis i. The differences
between
the two styles here shade off into one
another;
and everything ultimately depends on
the
frequency and regularity with which the
breaks
occur. Where the breaks occur with as
much
regularity as when the successive clauses
are
parallel to one another, we may, even though
parallelisms
of terms or thought between the
clauses
are absent, term the style parallelistic,
as
preserving one of the necessary consequences
of
actual parallelism.
But not only is the question whether
a passage
belongs
to the one style or the other, so far as it
depends
on the recurrence of breaks and the con-
sequent
independence of the clauses, one of degree;
56
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
question whether two such independent lines
are
correspondent or parallel to one another is
also
at times a question both of degree and of
exact
interpretation. To return to the passages
already
cited; when the Psalmist writes :
He gathered as into a flask the
waters of the sea,
and
then adds,
He put into treasure houses the
deeps,
it
is clear that at the end of the first line he breaks
the
straight line of continuous statement: the
second
line adds nothing to the bare sense, and
it
carries the writer no further forward than the
first;
the two sentences thus correspond strictly
to
two equal and parallel lines: where
the first
begins
the second also begins, and where the first
ends
there also the second ends: each line records
exactly
the same fact and the same amount of
fact
by means of different but synonymous terms.
And
the same is true of the two lines,
For he spake and it came to pass,
He commanded and it stood sure.
We
can without difficulty and with perfect pro-.
priety
represent these two couplets thus
=== ===
But
what are we to say of,
I made the earth,
And man upon it I
created ?
This
is certainly not the simplest form of putting
the
thought to be expressed : the terms " made "
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 57
and
"created" are synonymous, and the whole
thought
could have been fully expressed in the
briefer
form, "I made the earth, and man upon
it."
But have we, even so, completely
delimited
substance
and form, the thought to be expressed
and
the art used in its expression ? Probably
not
; the writer continues:
My hands stretched out the heavens,
And all their host I
commanded.
Here
we cannot simply drop a term as in the
previous
lines and leave the sense unimpaired;
but
the correspondence of thought between the
two
sets of statements may yield a clue to the
essential
thought of the whole; as the first two
lines
mean no more than this: I created the earth
and
its inhabitants; so the second means simply
this:
I created the heavens and their inhabitants.
But
have we even yet determined the funda-
mental
thought of the passage? Did the writer
really
mean to express two distinct thoughts in
each
set of lines? Was he thinking of the crea-
tion
of man as something independent of the
creation
of the earth? Did he mean to refer
first
to one creative act and then to a second and
independent
creative act? Or did he regard
the
creation of man as part of the creation of
the
earth, so that his lines are really parallel state-
ments,
a parallelism, to wit, of the part with the
whole,
and not successive statements? This
seems
to me most probable; his thought was:
58
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Yahweh
created the heavens and the earth; but
instead
of expressing this in its simplest form by
a
sentence that would properly be represented by
a
single continuous line, he has artistically ex-
pressed
it in a form that may once again, though
with
less complete propriety, perhaps, than in the
case
of the couplet from Psalm xxxiii., be ex-
pressed
by two groups of parallel and broken
lines:
===== =====
f the thought of man and the host of
heaven
had
a greater independence than this view recog-
nises,
we must still treat the statement (which is
not,
like Genesis i., the continuous statement of
successive
acts) not as a continuous line, but as
a
line broken at very regular intervals, thus
though,
if we wished diagrammatically to bring
out
the similarity in the verbal cast or grammati-
cal
build of the clauses rather than the independ-
ence
of the thought, we might still adopt the
form—
====== =======
efore leaving this diagrammatic
description
I
merely add, without illustrating the statement,
that
a poem rarely proceeds far along two parallel
lines
each broken at the same regular intervals,
thus—
====== ====== ===== ====== ====== =====
Either
the two lines are broken at different points,
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 59
or
one is for the time being followed to the neglect
of
the other, thus—
=====
===== --=== ==-- -----
----- =====
I pass now by a different method to
a more
detailed
examination of parallel lines, and of the
degree
and character of the correspondence
between
them. Irrespective of particles a line
or
section to which another line or section ap-
proximately
corresponds, consists of two, three,
four,
five or six words, very seldom of more.
Complete parallelism may be said to exist
when
every
single term in one line is parallel to a term
in
the other, or when at least every term or
group
of terms in one line is paralleled by a corre-
sponding
term or group of terms in the other.
Incomplete parallelism exists when only some
of
the
terms in each of two corresponding lines are
parallel
to one another, while the remaining
terms
express something which is stated once
only
in the two lines. Incomplete parallelism
is
far more frequent than complete parallelism.
Both
complete parallelism and incomplete paral-
lelism
admit of many varieties ; and this great
variety
and elasticity of parallelism may perhaps
best
be studied by means of symbols, even though
it
is difficult to reduce all the phenomena to
rigidly
constant and unambiguous symbolic
formul.
I have already elsewhere1 suggested
that
the varieties of parallelism may be con-
1 Isaiah
("International Critical Comm."), p. lxvi.
60
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
veniently
described by denoting the terms in the
first
line by letters—a . b . c, etc.—and those in
the
second line by the differentiated letters—
a'
. b' . c', where the terms, without being identical
(in
which case a . b . c would be used for the
second
line as well as for the first), correspond,
or
by fresh letters—d . e . f, where fresh terms
corresponding
to nothing in the first line occur.
The
simplest form of complete parallelism is
represented
by a . b
a'. b'.
here
each line consists of two terms each of which
corresponds
to a term in the corresponding posi-
tion
in the other line. Examples are
bqfyb
MqlHx
lxrWyb
Mcypxv
I-will-divide-them1 in-Jacob,
And-I-will-scatter-them
in-Israel.—Gen. xlix. 7c.d.
tvnlHh-Nm
Hygwm
MykrHh-Nm
Cycm
He-looketh-in at-the-windows,
He-glanceth
through-the-lattice.
Cant.
ii. 9 (the same chapter contains several other examples).
fvmwm
ytyvfn
tvxrm
ytlhbn
I-am-bent-with-pain at-what-I-hear,
I-am-dismayed
at-what-I-see.—Isa. xxi. 3.
1 Where the suffix in one
line corresponds to a noun in the other it
may
sometimes be convenient to represent the suffix by an independent
symbol.
If both suffixes were so represented here the scheme would be
a
.b .c
a'.b
.c'.
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 61
Mhyfwp
vbr yk
Mhytvbwm
vmcf
For
their-transgressions are-many,
Their-backturnings
are-increased.—Jer. v. 6.
Hear Thy-servant,
And-give-ear-to
my-petition.—Apoc. Bar. xlviii. 12.
Complete parallelism between lines
each con-
taining
three terms will be represented by
a . b . c
a' . b' . c'
Examples
are--
Nyym
Mynyf ylylkH
blHm
Mynw Nblv
Red-are his-eyes
with-wine,
And-white-are his-teeth with-milk.—Gen.
xlix. 12.
vdbxy
hvlx tmwnm
vlky
vpx Hvrmv
By-the-breath of-God they-perish,
And-by-the-blast of-his-anger
are-they-consumed. —Job.
iv.
9.
vHlmn
Nwfk Mymw-yk
hlbt
dgbk Crxhv
For the-heavens
like-smoke shall-vanish-away (?),
And-the-earth like-a-garment
shall-wax-old.—Isa. li. 6.
More frequent than the fundamental
scheme
as
given above and just illustrated are variations
upon
it, of which examples will be given below.
Complete parallelism of lines with
four terms
each,
the terms being symmetrically arranged,
will
be represented by
a . b . c . d
a'. b' . c'. d'
62
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
An
example is--
hmH
bywy jr hnfm
Jx
hlfy bcf rbdv
A-soft answer turneth-away wrath,
But-a-grievous word stirreth-up anger.--Prov.:xv. 1.
This scheme occurs not infrequently
in anti-
thetic
proverbs, and Proverbs xv. contains several
other
examples; but it is rare elsewhere. Varia-
tions
on this scheme also will be given below.
Where the parallel sections consist
of more
than
four terms, and sometimes when they con-
tain
as few as four terms, each section tends to
break
up into two of those independent clauses
which
we have seen to be in part the necessary
consequence
of parallelism, and in part a common,
even
when not a necessary, accompaniment of
the
style distinguished from simple narrative.
For
example, Isaiah xlix. 2 is one of the nearest
approximations
to the scheme,
a . b . c
. d . e . f
a' . b' . c' . d' . e' .
f'
but
here the last two terms in each section stand
independent
of the foregoing ; thus:
And-he-made
my-mouth as-a-sharp sword : in-the-shadow
of-his-hand
he-hid-me;
And-he-made-me1
into-a-polished arrow: in-his-quiver he-
concealed-me.
1 The suffix me (b') is
here parallel to the independent term my
mouth
(b); and so is the suffix his in his quiver to the independent term
his
hand: in this case, however, I have represented shadow of his hand
under
the single symbol (e).
PARALLELISM : A
RESTATEMENT 63
Such
a combination of clauses is commonly
termed
"alternate parallelism" and is said to
consist
of four lines, of which the third is parallel
to
the first and the fourth to the second. This
may
be a convenient description: but the main
point
is that, within the main independent
sections
indicated by the parallelism, other
almost
equally independent breaks giving rise
to
subordinate independent clauses occur. This
fact
is emphasised in many specimens of Arabic
"rhymed
prose"; in the passage already cited
on
pp. 42 f. from Hariri, almost all the parallel
sections
fall into two independent clauses; and
it
is these independent, but, from the point of
view
of the parallelism, subordinate, sections that
rhyme
with one another ; that is to say, similarity
of
rhyme connects, while emphasising their dis-
tinction,
the shorter independent clauses which
are
commonly not parallel to one another, and
change
of rhyme marks off the well-defined longer
sections
which are regularly parallel to one
another.
It is interesting to observe that in the
lines
cited from Isaiah xlix. it is the entire parallel
periods
and not the subsections that rhyme with
one
another, though in view of the irregular use
of
rhyme in Hebrew this may be a mere accident-
ynixAybHh vdy lcb
hdH brHk yp Mwyv
ynirAytsh
vtpwxb rvrb CHl ynmywyv
In
the illustrations of parallelism which have
64
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
been
given so far not only has there been com-
plete
correspondence, term by term, between the
parallel
lines, but each corresponding term in
the
second line has occurred in the exactly corre-
sponding
position in the second line. But in any
considerable
passage Hebrew writers introduce
in
various ways great variety of effect, a far
greater
variety, I believe, than was commonly
sought
or obtained by Arabic writers. These
varieties
of parallelism can be readily and con-
veniently
shown by a use such as I have suggested
of
symbols. I proceed to classify and illustrate
some
of the chief classes of variations on the
fundamental
schemes which have been already
described
and illustrated.
I
Variety is attained by varying the
position of
the
corresponding terms in the two lines.
In the simplest form of parallelism,
which
consists
of lines containing two terms only, only
one
variation is possible from the scheme,
a . b
a' .b'
of
which several illustrations have already been
given.
This of course is
a . b
b' . a'
and
this variation occurs very frequently, e.g.—
PARALLELISM: A
RESTATEMENT 65
Jskk
hnwqbt Mx
hnwpHt
MynmFmkv
If thou-seek-her as-silver.
And-as-for-hid-treasures search-for-her.—Prov. ii. 4.
hdWh
yxct-lx
yklt-lx
jrdbv
Go-not-forth into-the-field,
And-by-the-way walk-not.—Jer. vi. 25.
Further
examples will be found, for example,
in
Deuteronomy xxxii. 16, xxxiii. 9 d, e.
As the number of terms increases the
greater
becomes
the possibility of variety and the number
of
actual variations; thus
a . b . c
a' . b' . c'
can
alternate with
a . b . c
a' . c' . b'
or
any of the other four possible permutations.
Of
the variation just given, Proverbs ii. 2 is an
example
jnzx
hmkHl bywqhl
Hnvbtl
jbl hFt
So-that-thou-incline unto-wisdom
thine-ear,
(And-) apply thine-heart to-understanding.
The
same variation of order, but with the repeti-
tion
instead of a variation of the second term of
66
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
first line at the end of the second line (-i.e.
b
instead of b'), occurs in Job xxxii. 17
yqlH
ynx-Jx hnfx
ynx-Jx
yfd hvHx
Will-answer I also my-part,
Will-declare my-knowledge I also.
An example may be found in
Deuteronomy
xxxii.
30 a, b of
a . b . c
b' . a' . c'
Jlx
dHx Jdry hkyx
hbbr
vsyny Mynwv
How should one pursue a-thousand,
Or-two put-to-flight ten-thousand.
The
same poem also contains four examples
(Deuteronomy
xxxii. 3, 18, 23, 38) of the scheme
a . b . c
c' . a' . b'
It
may suffice to cite v. 18 (reading hwt for
ywt)--
hwt
ddly rvc
jllHm
lx Hkwtv
The rock that-bare-thee
thou-wast-unmindful-of,
And-forgattest the God that-gave-thee-birth.
Another example of this scheme may
be found
in
Proverbs v. 5.
The tendency in poetry to give the
verb its
normal
(prose) position at the beginning of the
first
line, but, in order to gain variety, to throw
PARALLELISM: A
RESTATEMENT 67
the
verb to the end of the second line,1 renders
the
two remaining variations of the fundamental
scheme,
viz.--
a . b . c
b' . c' . a'
and
a . b . c
c' . b' . a'
very
frequent, though of course both of these
schemes
may also arise from other causes.2
Examples
of the former of the two schemes just
given
are--
rfym
hyrx Mkh Nk-lf
Mddwy
tvbrf bxz
Therefore shall-slay-them a-lion
out-of-the-forest,
A-wolf of-the-steppes shall-spoil-them.—Jer. v. 6.
jlm
ynpl rdhtt-lx
dmft-lx
Mylvdg Mvqmbv
Glorify-not-thyself in-the-presence
of-the-king,
And-in-the-place of-great-men stand-not.—Prov. xxv. 6.
Four further examples may be found
in
Proverbs
ii. 5, 8, 10, 20. See also e.g. Job iii.
6
b, c; Amos v. 23; Isaiah xi. 6 a, b, lx. 16 a, b;
Judith
xvi. 10 (the last couplet in the passage
cited
above, p. 25).
1 The alternative of
throwing the verb to the end of the first line,
and
giving it the normal (prose) position in the second line, thus bringing
the
two verbs together, is much less frequent. But a good example of
this
is Deut. xxxii. 38 : see also vv. 3 and 18 in the same chapter.
2 As e.g. in Job iv. 17.
68 FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Examples
of
a . b . c
c' . b' . a'
are
Mym
vlfwb ddm-ym
Nkt
trzb Mymwv
Who hath-measured
with-the-hollow-of-his-hand the waters,
Or-the-heavens with-a-span hath-regulated?—Isa. xl. 12.
fbw
Jymsx vxlmyv
vcrpy
Jybqy wvrytv
That thy-barns may-be-filled-with
plenty
And-that With-new-wine thy-vats may-overflow.
—Prov.
iii. 10.
See
also e.g. Isaiah xl. 26 c, d, 27 c, d; Amos v. 7;
Psalm
iii. 8 c, d.
The possible variations on
a . b . c . d
a'. b' . c'.
d'
are
of course much more numerous ; the actual
examples
are far fewer, partly because complete
parallelism
over these longer periods is much
rarer,
partly because these parallelisms in four
terms
occur particularly in Proverbs, and proverbs,
being
complete in themselves, do not call for the
variety
which is naturally enough desired in a
long
continuous passage. It may suffice to refer
to
one variation : when the first line begins with
a
verb and its object, immediately following, is
expressed
by an independent term, and the desire
for
variety throws the corresponding clause to
PARALLELISM: A RESTATEMENT
69
the
end of the second line, the scheme naturally
produced
is
a . b . c .d
c' . d' .a' .b'
as
for example in
vyp
Fbwb Crf1 hkhv
fwr
tymy vytqw Hvrbv
And-he-shall-smite the-violent1
with-the-rod of-his-mouth,
And-with-the-breath of-his-lips shall-he-slay the-wicked.
—Isa.
xi. 4.
II
Another way of obtaining variety is
to use in
the
second line two or more terms which, taken
together,
are parallel in sense to a corresponding
number
of terms in the first line, though the
separate
terms of the one combination are not
parallel
to the separate terms of the other com-
bination.
In its extreme form parallelism of this
variety
consists of two entire lines completely
parallel
in sense but with no two terms taken
separately
parallel to one another.2 Denoting
correspondence
as before by a . a', etc., and the
number
of terms above one in which particular
corresponding
ideas are expressed by a figure
attached
to the letters, the kind of schemes that
occur
are
a2 . b
a'2 . b'
1 Reading Crf for Crx, the earth.
2 See e.g. Gen. xlix. 15
c, d, 20 ; Ps. xxi. 6 ; Job iii. 10, 23, iv. 14.
70
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
For
example
ylvq
Nfmw hlcv hdf
ytrmx
hnzxh jml ywb
Adah and-Sillah, hear my-voice,
Ye-wives of-Lamech give-ear-to my-word.—Gen. iv. 23.
Here, too, further variety may be
obtained
by
varying the position of the corresponding
terms
or groups of terms, so that such schemes
as
a . b2
b'2 . a'
arise;
an example of this is Proverbs ii. 17,
hyrvfn
Jvlx tbzfh
hHkw
hyhlx tyrb txv
Who-forsaketh the-friend
of-her-youth,
And the-covenant of-her-God forgetteth.
And another very effective variation
arises
when
what is expressed by two terms in the first
line
is expressed by one in the second line, which
in
turn has two other terms corresponding to one
in
the first: one such variation is
a2 . b
a' . b'2
which
is exemplified by Genesis xlix. 24,
vrwq
Ntyxb bwtv
vydy
yfrz vzpyv
And-his-bow abode firm,
And-the-arms of-his-hands
were-agile--
where
the two words Ntyxb bwtv, abode firm, taken
PARALLELISM: A
RESTATEMENT 71
together
are parallel to vzotv, were
agile, and the
single
term vtwq,
his-bow, to the two terms yfrz.
vydy, the-arms of-his-hands, taken together.
An example of
a . b . c2
a . c' . b'2
is
afforded by Job iii. 17,
zgr
vldH Mfwr Mw
Hk
yfygy vHvny Mwv
where
vHvny,
are-at-rest, corresponds to to zgr vldH,
cease from raging, and the single term
wicked to
the
phrase Hk yfygy, which is compound in Hebrew,
though
it is represented by the single word weary
in
E.V.
Once more in Deuteronomy xxxii. 11,
vhHqy
vypnk wrpy
vtrbx-lf
vhxwy
He-spread-out his-wings,
he-took-him,
He-lifted-him-up upon-his-pinions,
the
single term vtrbx-lf, upon-his-pinions,
at the
end
of the second line is parallel to the two terms
vypnk wrpy, he-spread-out his-wings, at the beginning
of
the first line, taken together, and the scheme is
a2 . b
b' . a'
Further examples of some of these or
similar
schemes
will be found in Deuteronomy xxxii.
22
c, d, 35 c, d; Psalms ii. 2 a, b, 9, lxviii. 10;
72
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Proverbs
xv. 9; Job iii. 25, iv. 4, xxxiii. 11;
Canticles
ii. 3 c, d, 12.
Occasionally one or other of the compound
parallel
phrases is interrupted by the insertion
of
another parallel term in the midst of it ; so,
for
example, in Psalm vi. 6,
jrcz
tvmb Nyx yk
jl
hdvy ym lvxwb
For there-is in-death
no-remembrance-of-thee;
In-Sheol who shall-praise thee?
death
and Sheol are parallel terms, and the phrase
there
is no remembrance of thee to the interrogative
phrase,
which is equivalent to a negative state-
ment,
who shall praise thee? But in the first
line
the parallel term is inserted bet1 Teen the two
parts
of the parallel phrase.
III
The third main method of introducing
variety
into
parallelism and avoiding the monotonous
repetition
of the same scheme consists in the adop-
tion
of various forms of incomplete parallelism.
The variety of effect rendered
possible by this
method
is immense, except in the shortest
parallels
consisting of two terms only : with
these
the fundamental variations are reduced
to
two, viz.—
PARALLELISM: A
RESTATEMENT 73
and
a . b
a' . c
Examples of these are-
Mykrb
ynvmdq fvdm
qnyx-yk
Mydw hmv
Wherefore did-the-knees receive-me,
And-why the-breasts that I-should-suck (Job iii. 12),
and
yntqzHh
hrc
hdlvyk
lyH
Anguish hath-seized-me,
Pangs as-of-a-woman-in-travail (Jer. vi. 24),
unless
we prefer to treat the former of these
examples
on the ground of the differentiation of
the
interrogative particles as an example of
a . b . c
a'. c' . d
and
the latter example as
a . b
a'2
The latter kind of ambiguity
frequently arises.
Further variety is obtained when
variations
corresponding
to those illustrated under
are
combined with incomplete parallelism : this
frequently
happens, especially when one at least
of
the parallel members contains more than two
terms.
But before giving illustrations of such
variations
it will be convenient to point out that
74
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
incomplete
parallelisms fall into two broad classes
which
may be distinguished as incomplete
parallel-
ism with compensation
and incomplete parallelism
without compensation. If one line contains a
given
number of terms and another line a smaller
number
of terms, the parallelism is generally1
incomplete;
such incomplete parallelism may
be
termed incomplete parallelism without com-
pensation;
but if the two lines contain the same
number
of terms, though only some of the terms
in
the two lines are parallel, the lines may be said
to
constitute incomplete parallelism with com-
pensation.
Thus such schemes as
a . b . c
a' . b'
or
a . b . c
a'2
are
incomplete without compensation ; whereas
such
schemes as
a . b . c
a' . d .c'
are
incomplete parallelism with compensation.
1 Not invariably; for
such schemes as
a2
. b
a'
. b'
give
to the two lines an unequal number of terms, and yet the parallelism
may
be said to be complete. See e.g. Lam. ii. 11, cited below, p. 97.
PARALLELISM: A
RESTATEMENT 75
I
now give illustrations of different schemes
of
both types.
A
Incomplete parallelism without
compensation.
hnwxrbk
jyFpw hbywxv
hlHtbk
jycfyv
I-will-restore thy-judges
as-at-the-first,
And-thy-counsellors as-at-the-beginning (Isa. i. 26),
is
an example of
a
. b . c
b' . c'
and
so are Proverbs ii. 18; Canticles ii. 1, 14;
Numbers
xxiii. 19' c, d, 24 a, b, xxiv. 5 a, b; Psalm
vi.
2; Deuteronomy xxxii. 7 c, d, 21 a, b, 34.1
jrzfb
Mymwb bkr
MyqHw
vtvxgbv
Who-rideth through-the-heavens
as-thy-help,
And-in-his-dignity through-the-skies (Deut. xxxiii. 26),
1 A further example of
this scheme occurs in the present text of
Hos.
vii. 1--
Nvrmw
tvfrv |
Myrpx Nvf hlgnv
Revealed are the
iniquity of Ephraim
And the wickedness of
Samaria.
On
the second of these lines Harper ("International Crit. Comm.")
remarks
: " Here a word is needed to complete the parallelism as well
as
the metre." But this is incorrectly put, unless it can be shown that
incomplete
parallelism is impossible, or improbable in this connexion ;
and
this cannot be done in view of another case of incomplete parallel-
ism
(a . b . c a' . c') in v. 3, which Harper retains. Since the line
quoted
above and v. 3 are possibly not metrically identical (v. 3 being
perhaps
3 : 3), a metrical consideration in favour of supplying a word
in
v. 1 may survive ; but the argument from parallelism is invalid.
76
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
is
an example of
a . b . c
c' . b'
and
so is Isaiah xlii. 23 a, b.
yfcpl
ytgrh wyx
ytrbHl
dlyv
A man have I slain for wounding me,
And a youth for bruising me (Gen. iv. 23),
is
an example of
a .b . c
a' . c'
and
so is Hosea vii. 3.
Mnpg
Mds Npgm yk
hrmf
tmdwmv
For of the vine of Sodom is their
vine,
And of the fields of Gomorrah (Deut. xxxii. 32),
is
an example of
a . b . c
a' . b'
B
Incomplete parallelism with
compensation.
ryfwm
jtxcb hvhy
Mdx
hdWm jdfcb
Yahweh, when-thou-wentest-forth
out-of-Seir,
When-thou-marchedst out-of-the-field of-Edom (Jud. v. 4),
is
an example of
a
. b . c
b’ . c’2
PARALLELISM: A RESTATEMENT
77
and
other examples are Deuteronomy xxxii.
13
c, d, xxxiii. 23 ; Job iii. 11; Isaiah xli. 26 a, b,
lx.
3.
HFb
lxrWy Nkwyv
bqfy
Nyf ddb
And-so-dwelt Israel securely,
By-itself the-fountain of-Jacob (Deut. xxxiii. 28),
is
an example of
a . b . c
c' . b'2
and
other examples are Amos v. 24 ; Proverbs ii.
1,
7 ; Job iii. 20 ; while Isaiah xliii. 3 c, d ex-
emplifies
the scheme
a . b . c
c'2 . b'
In
Judges v. 26,
hnHlwt
dtyl hdy
Mylmf
tvmlhl hnymyv
Her-hand to-the-tent-peg
she-stretched-forth,
And-her-right-hand to-the-workmen's mallet,
will
be found an example of
a .b . c
a'. b'2
and
another example of the same scheme in
Psalm
xxi. 11.
Examples of compensation by means of
a,
fresh
term or terms are--
xb
ynysm hvhy
vml
ryfwm Hrzv
Yahweh from-Sinai came,
And-beamed-forth from-Seir unto-them (Deut. xxxiii. 2),
78
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
which
is an example of
a . b . c
c' . b' .d
and
dvbk
hvhyl vmywy
vdygy
Myyxb vtlhtv
Let-them-ascribe unto-Yahweh glory,
And-his-praise in-the-isles let-them-declare (Isa. xlii. 12),
which
is an example of
a . b . c
c' . d . a'
Examples of distichs in which each
line has
but
one parallel term and two terms non-parallel
are
given below (p. 94), and instances of com-
pensation
by a fresh term in lines containing two
terms
only have already been given above (p. 73).
I will conclude the present
discussion with
two
illustrations of the value of a minuter analysis
of
parallelism than has hitherto been considered
necessary,
and of some such method as I have
been
suggesting of measuring or classifying the
various
types of parallelism.
An effective scheme of parallelism
that occa-
sionally
occurs consists of two lines each contain-
ing
three terms but held together by a single
parallel
term in each line, these parallel terms
standing
one at the end of the first line, and the
other
at the beginning of the second. The scheme
is--
a . b . c
c' . d . e
PARALLELISM: A
RESTATEMENT 79
Now,
if the articulation of the parallelism is not
observed,
couplets of this type are reduced to
ordinary
prose, or even to nonsense, or at best
feeble
repetition ; but if it is properly articulated,
the
couplet is an effective form of "synthetic
parallelism"
as Lowth would have called it, of
incomplete
parallelism with compensation as I
should
term it. Examples of this type occurring
in
Genesis xlix. 9 (cf. Nunn. xxiv. 9) and Deutero-
nomy
xxxiii. 11 are correctly articulated in the
Revised
Version:
He-stooped-down, he-couched
as-a-lion,
And-as-a-lioness: who shall-rouse-him-up?
Smite-through the-loins
of-them-that-rise-up-against-him,
And-of-them-that-hate-him, that they-rise-not-again.
But
if the parallelism is not correctly perceived,
and
the words otherwise articulated, how un-
satisfactory
does the former of these couplets
become!
"He stooped down, he couched as a
lion
and as a lioness: who shall rouse him up?"
This
suggests a comparison with two different
beasts,
whereas the parallelism really expresses
comparison
with the lion-class, which it denotes
by
the use of two synonymous terms. Yet this
very
mistaken articulation is found in Numbers
xxiii.
23, both in the Revised Version and, I
regret
to say, in my commentary on Numbers.
If
we articulate
Now shall it be said of Jacob and
Israel,
What hath God wrought!
80
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
natural suggestion is that Jacob and Israel
are
different entities, which they are not; Jacob
and
Israel are here, as elsewhere in these poems
(Num.
xxiii. 7, 10, 21, 23 ; xxiv. 5, 17., 18 f.),
synonymous
terms belonging to different members
of
the parallelism. The proper articulation of
the
passage is,
Now shall it be said of Jacob,
And of
and
it is interesting to observe that this not very
common
type of parallelism occurs twice (see
also
xxiv. 9) in the oracles of Balaam.
The strongly marked pause in the
middle, and
the
marked independence of the last part, of the
second
line are characteristic of all the distichs
just
cited. If from these observations we turn
immediately
to Hosea iv. 13 c, d, we shall prob-
ably
conclude that the difficulties which have
been
felt with regard to these lines are unreal,
that
the emendations which have been proposed1
wholly
unnecessary, and that, in respect of
parallelism
and structure, the lines closely re-
semble
Numbers xxiii. 23, xxiv. 9, and Deutero-
nomy
xxxiii. 11; in this case the correct articula-
tion
is,
hnblv
Nvlx tHt
hlc
bvF-yk hlxv
Under oak and poplar,
And terebinth: for good is the shade thereof.
1 See e.g. W. R. Harper, Commentary on Amos and Hosea ("
Inter-
national
Critical Commentary"), pp. 260, 261.
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 81
My
second illustration of the advantages of
some
method that enables similarities and dis-
similarities
of parallelism to be easily detected
and
presented is of a different character, and
shows
the bearing of these studies on textual
criticism.
Psalm cxiv. consists of eight
couplets, each of
which,
in the present text at all events, shows
one
form or another of incomplete parallelism,
for
the most part with compensation. The char-
acteristic
incompleteness of the parallelism rings
through
even a translation :
1 When
The house of Jacob from
a barbaric people,
2
3 The sea saw it and fled,
4 The mountains skipped like rams,
The hills like young
sheep.
5 What aileth thee, 0 thou sea, that
thou fleest,
Thou Jordan, that thou
turnest back?
6 Ye mountains that ye skip like
rams,
Ye hills like young
sheep?
7 At the presence of the Lord
tremble, 0 earth,
At the presence of the
God of Jacob,
8 Which turned the rock into a pool
of water,
The flint into a
fountain of water.
The
scheme in the Hebrew is as follows :
1 a . b . c 2
a . b . c
b'2 . c'2 b' . c'
82 FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
3 a . b . c 6 a
. b . c
a’ c’2 a’ c’2
4 a
. b . c 7 a . b .
c . d
a’ c’2 a . b’2
5
a . b
. c 8 a
. b . c2
b’ .
c’2 b’ .
c’2
There seems to me strong ground for
holding
that
this consistent use of incomplete parallelism
was
intentional, or, at any rate, if not intentional,
it
is at least an unconscious expression of the
writer's
general preference—in a word, it is a
stylistic
characteristic ; as such 'it ought not
without
good reason to be obliterated. For this
reason
Dr. Briggs's reconstruction of this Psalm in
the
"International Critical Commentary" is open
to
grave objection. The emendations proposed
by
Dr. Briggs and the effect of them on the paral-
lelism
is as follows: (1) he strikes out as glosses
verses
2 and 8, though both verses show the char-
acteristic
incomplete parallelism; (2) in verse 7
he
deletes ylvH,
tremble; then Nvdx becomes con-
struct
before Crx,
and the expression "Lord of
the
earth" becomes parallel to "God of Jacob,"
and
the verse as a whole an example of complete
parallelism,
a . b . c
a . b’ . c’
(3)
in verses 4 b and 6 b he inserts UlHA (of which
ylvH in verse 7 is supposed to be a misplaced cor-
PARALLELISM:
A RESTATEMENT 83
ruption),
thus again turning incomplete into
regular
complete parallelism,
a . b . c
a' . b' .
c'
Thus merely by a study of the
parallelism this
reconstruction
is rendered improbable quite apart
from
the question whether metre requires any
such
changes, or whether Dr. Briggs's is not a
much
more prosaic poem than that of the Hebrew
text.
In the LXX Psalm cxiv. is united
with Psalm
cxv.
This union has been very generally regarded
as
not representing the original text: in addition
to
the reasons commonly given for holding that
the
division between the two Psalms in the
Hebrew
text is correct, we may now add the differ-
ence
in the type of parallelism. In cxv. 5-7 we
find
three successive examples of complete paral-
lelism,
and although elsewhere in the Psalm there
are
examples of incomplete parallelism, these are
mostly
incomplete parallelisms of a different kind
from
those which occur in Psalm cxiv.
CHAPTER III
PARALLELISM AND RHYTHM
IN
THE BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS
85
CHAPTER III
PARALLELISM
AND RHYTHM IN THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS
THE
Book of Lamentations has played a con-
spicuous
part in the constantly renewed discus-
sions
of the subject of Hebrew rhythm. Apart
from
any analysis of its cause, and without
any
exceptional degree of attention, the reader
of
the Hebrew text, or even indeed of the English
version,
of the Lamentations, perceives some-
thing
in the rhythm or cast of the sentences that
is
common to practically the whole of the first
four
chapters of the book. This same something
that
brings these four poems into a common class,
sharply
marks there off from the fifth chapter or
poem,
and at the same time, too, from the greater
quantity
of the poetry of the Old Testament,
though
careful examination has discovered not
a
little in various books of the Old Testament
that
resembles the first four chapters of Lamenta-
tions
in the peculiarity in question.
But though this striking peculiarity
is common
87
88
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
to
the four poems constituting the first four
chapters
of Lamentations, there are other features
that
distinguish them one from another—the
differing
alphabetic sequences that are followed
by
the initial letters of successive divisions of the
poems
(P
preceding f
in ii., iii., and iv., following
it
in i.), the differing lengths of the divisions,
the
differing degrees of passion, spontaneity and
vividness
with which the subject, common to
them
all, is handled. These differences have
attracted
and received attention; but, so far as
I
am aware, the differences in the use of parallel-
ism
as between the four poems have not yet
been
analysed: and, yet, such differences exist.
Owing
to uncertainties of text and interpreta-
tion,
it does not seem to me easy or even practic-
able
to give exact statistics of these differences;
yet,
by the help of a more accurate measurement
of
parallelism, such as I have suggested in the
previous
chapter, it will, I hope, be possible to
make
manifest the existence and general char-
acter
of the differences ; and, in any case, by an
examination
of these chapters, I hope to carry
further
my line of approach to rhythmical ques-
tions
through parallelism.
Though I cannot undertake any
compre-
hensive
survey of the history of the study of
rhythm
in Lamentations, it will be worth while
to
refer to two discussions of the subject—that
of
Lowth, who was the first to point out and to
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 89
attempt
to analyse the rhythmical peculiarity
of
Lamentations i.-iv., and that of Budde, who,
by
a series of contributions to this subject, begin-.
ping
with his fundamental article in the Zeit-
schrift far die alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft
for
1882,
has profoundly influenced subsequent in-
vestigation
and terminology.
Lowth devoted his 22nd and 23rd
lectures to
the
Hebrew elegy, and he returned to some of
the
points then discussed in the preliminary dis-
sertation
to his Isaiah (vol. i. pp. xxxiv-xliii,
ed.
3). The genius and origin of the Hebrew
elegy,
of the kinah or nehi as the Hebrews called
it
themselves, he traces to their manner of cele-
brating
the funeral rites ; and in particular to
the
employment of professional mourners who
sang
dirges. The natural language of grief, he
remarks,
"consists of a plaintive, intermitted,
concise
form of expression": and as in other
arts,
so in that of the Hebrew elegy, "perfection
consisted
in the exact imitation of nature. The
funereal
dirges were, therefore, composed in
general
upon the model of those complaints
which
flow naturally and spontaneously from
the
afflicted heart: the sentences were abrupt,
mournful,
pathetic, simple and unembellished.
.
. . They consisted of verse and were chanted
to
music."1
Lowth then points out the
peculiarity of the
Lectures
. . . (ed. Lond. 1787), ii. 123, 127.
90
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
first
four poems in Lamentations, and remarks:
"We
are not to suppose this peculiar form of
versification
utterly without design or importance:
on
the contrary, I am persuaded, that the prophet
adopted
this kind of theme as being more diffuse,
more
copious, more tender, in all respects better
adapted
to melancholy subjects. I must add,
that
in all probability the funeral dirges, which
were
sung by mourners, were commonly corm.-
posed
in this kind of verse: for whenever, in the
prophets,
any funereal lamentations occur or any
passages
formed upon that plan, the versification
is,
if I am not mistaken, of this protracted kind.
.
. . However, the same kind of metre is some-
times,
though rarely, employed upon other occa-
sions.
. . . There are, moreover, some poems
manifestly
of the elegiac kind, which are com-
posed
in the usual metre, and not in unconnected
stanzas,
according to the form of a funeral dirge."1
The peculiarities of this elegiac
versification
are
best summarised in the Isaiah, as
follows :
"The
closing pause of each line is generally very
full
and strong: and in each line commonly,
towards
the end, at least beyond the middle of
it,
there is a small rest, or interval, depending on
the
sense and grammatical construction, which
I
would call a half-pause. . . . The conjunction
v . . . seems to be frequently and studiously
omitted
at the half-pause : the remaining clause
1 Lectures, ii. pp. 136,
137.
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 91
being
added, to use a grammatical term, by ap-
position
to some word preceding; or coming in
as
an adjunct, or circumstance depending on the
former
part, and completing the sentence."1
The
parallelism accompanying the versification
of
this kind is, according to Lowth, for the most
part
of the constructive order,2 which is, as we
have
previously seen, Lowth's way of saying that
strict
parallelism is at best incomplete, and is
more
often entirely absent.
There is in the passages just cited
or summar-
ised
a surprising amount of correct and acute
observation
or fruitful suggestion. Some sub-
sequent
scholars neglected this important part of
Lowth's
inquiries, and, in consequence, Ewald,
for
example, never clearly saw, as Lowth had
seen,
the sharp distinction between Lamentations
i.-iv.
and v.
For our present purpose it will
suffice to refer
much
more briefly to Budde's important discus-
sions.
In the main his advance on Lowth con-
sisted
in the detailed working out of two important
points
: (1) the nature of the unequal division of
the
rhythmical periods ; and (2) the extent to
which
the rhythm characteristic of Lamentations
i.-iv.
occurs elsewhere in the Old Testament. As
to
the division of the rhythmical periods, Budde's
position
may be stated thus :—(1) the kinah
rhythm
rests on the division of the rhythmical
1 Isaiah, ed. 3, p.
xxxix. 2
Ibid. p. xxxv.
92
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
period
into two unequal parts of which the longer
part
precedes the shorter part; (2) the normal
length
of the longer part is three words, of the
shorter
two words; (3) but by legitimate varia-
tions
a longer part consisting of four words may
be
followed by a shorter consisting of (a) three,
or
(b) two, words ; (4) the period is never equally
divided;1
if, as sometimes happens, each part
consists
of two words, the two words of the first
part
are heavier and weightier than the two
words
of the second part; (5) between the two
parts
of the verse, there is no strict and constant
rhythmical
relation beyond the fundamental fact
of
inequality of length.
To some of these metrical questions
I shall
return:
meantime I proceed to examine the
parallelism
of the poems, and I will begin with
the
isolated fifth chapter which happens to be
an
excellent storehouse of examples of the types
of
parallelism occurring in poetry that is free
from
the well-marked peculiarities of Lamenta-
tions
i.-iv. By comparison with the more ordinary
parallelism
of Lamentations v., any peculiarities
in
the parallelism of Lamentations i.-iv. may be
the
better discerned.
The majority of the twenty-two
verses of
Lamentations
v. may be treated as containing
six
terms equally divided among the two stichoi
that
compose each verse, i.e. each stichos normally
1 Zeitschr. fur die alttest. Wissenschaft, 1882, pp. 4 f.
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 93
contains
three terms. Seventeen of these dis-
tichs
show strict parallelism between at least one
term
in each stichos; of the remaining five dis-
tichs,
one (v. 5) is too uncertain to classify, and
two
(vv. 8, 16) are best regarded as lacking strict
parallelism.
In the two verses or distichs that
still
remain (vv. 9 and 10) the stichoi are certainly
not
parallel to one another: but these two verses
in
their entirety seem to be (incompletely) parallel
to
one another: for disregarding the first half of
v.
10, which may be corrupt, we may represent
the
parallelism between the two verses thus :
a . b . c . d . e . f
. .
. . d' . e' . f'
If
this parallelism of the last parts of these verses
was
intentional, it is likely enough that such
naturally
parallel terms as vnwpn, our
soul (R.V.
lives), vnrvf, our skin, which occur in the first parts
of
the verses, were originally more really parallel
than
they now are.
Of the twenty-two distichs, then,
contained in
Lamentations
v., seventeen at least show parallel-
ism
between the stichoi. In five, or, on one
interpretation
of v. 12, in six, of these the parallel-
ism
is complete:1 in the remaining twelve (or
eleven)
incomplete. The several examples may
be
classified thus:--
1 For the meaning of the
terms complete and incomplete parallelism
see
above, pp. 59, 74.
94
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
I.
EXAMPLES OF COMPLETE PARALLELISM
Form. Number
of Occurrences. Verses.
a
. b . c 3 4, 13, (17)
a'.
b'. c'
a
. b . c (1) 12 (on one
inter-
b'.
a'. c' pretation)
a
. b2 1 15
a'2
. b'
a
. b 1 22
b'
. c'
II.
EXAMPLES OF INCOMPLETE PARALLELISM
(1)
With compensation.
a
. b . c 4 1, 11, 12
(on one in-
a'2
. b' terpretation), 20
or
similar types
a
. b . c 2 6, 7
a'
. d . e
(2)
Without compensation.
a
. b . c 4 2, 3, 14, 18
a'.
b'
or
similar types
a
. b . c . d 1 19
a' c'2
a
. b . c . d 1 21
a'2
e
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 95
The occurrence in this poem of
incomplete
parallelisms
without compensation raises ques-
tions
that must be considered later.
In turning now to consider
Lamentations i.-iv.
we
are faced with a difficulty of terminology.
Lamentations
iii., as is well known, consists of
sixty-six
Massoretic verses distinguished from one
another
by the occurrence, at the beginning of
each,
of the letter of the alphabet appropriate
to
the alphabetic scheme, so that each of the first
three
verses begins with x each of the next three
with
b,
and so forth. Chapters i. and ii., though
they
number each but twenty-two Massoretic
verses,
contained1 each of them sixty-six sec-
tions
of the same length as the Massoretic verse in
iii.,
and these sections are still easily distinguish-
able,
though the letters of the alphabetic scheme
occur
at the beginning of every fourth section
only.
Chapter iv. consists of forty-four similar
sections.
What is the proper term to apply to
these
sections : are they lines or couplets, stichoi
or
distichs? Are they, as compared with the
stichoi
of chapter v., "protracted lines," as
Lowth
described them, or, as compared with the
distichs
of chapter v., truncated couplets or
distichs,
as Budde considers them? These ques-
1 In the present text,
owing to what is generally recognised as
textual
expansion (in i. 7, ii. 19), the number of sections is sixty-seven
both
in chaps. i. and ii. The R.V. for the most part distinguishes the
sections
correctly, but occasionally so divides the verses (e.g. i. 1, ii. 2,
and
even iv. 22) as to give them the appearance of consisting of four
sections.
96
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
tions
can best be considered later : I will, for the
time
being, use the neutral term section, meaning
by
that a Massoretic verse in chapter iii. and the
equivalent
sections of the remaining chapters, i.e.
the
third of a Massoretic verse in i. and ii., and
the
half of such a verse in iv. Similarly, for the
two
parts of these sections, the longer first and
the
shorter second part, I will use the term sub-
section.
As the normal number of terms in a
verse of
chapter
v. is six, so the normal number of terms
in
each section of chapters i. and iv. is five. It
follows
from this at once that in chapters i.-iv.
the
common form of complete parallelism
a .
b . c
a' . b' . c'
will
not readily1 occur in a normal section, and,
as
a matter of fact, it does not, I think, occur at
all
in any section, whether normal or abnormal.
This,
however, is not equivalent to saying that
complete
parallelism between the subsections is
either
impossible or actually non-existent in
these
poems ; on the other hand complete paral-
lelism
actually occurs, though relatively with
much
less frequency than in chapter v. An
example
is ii. 11:
1 The force of this
qualifying adverb will become clear later. As a
matter
of fact, though a , b , c, // a’ . b’. c’ does not occur, a corresponding type
of
incomplete parallelism with compensation does occur: see iv. 11.
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 97
yfm vrmrmH | ynyf tvfmdb vlk
Consumed
with tears are mine eyes, | in a ferment
are my
bowels.
The scheme is a2 . b | a' . b' ; and
it is prefer-
able
to regard iii. 4,
He
hath worn out my flesh and my skin, | he
hath broken
my
bones,
as
an example of a . b2 | a' . b' rather than of the
scheme
a . b . c | a' . b'.
Other examples of complete
parallelism in
chapters
i.-iv. occurring in sections that are not
perhaps
strictly normal are
vnl vbrx rbdmb | vnqld Myrhh-lf
Upon
the mountains they chased us, | in the
wilderness they
lay
in wait for us.
hnfl ynvrh | Myrvrmb ynfybwh
He
hath filled me with bitterness, | he
hath sated me with
wormwood.
These will be found in iv. 19 and
iii. 15; they
are
both examples of a . b | a' . b', or, if we
prefer
to regard the pronominal suffixes as in-
dependent
terms, of a . b . c | a' . b' . c; another
example
occurs in iv. 13, and there are perhaps
a
few others: but in the 242 sections of chapters
i.-iv.
there are but few, if any, more examples
of
complete parallelism than in the twenty-two
distichs
of chapter v.; or, in other words, com-
plete
parallelism is, relatively, about eleven times
as
frequent in chapter v. as in chapters i.-iv.
98
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
If, however, the section of chapters
i.-iv. be
a
"protracted line," we might expect to find
complete
parallelism occurring as between the
sections
rather than as between the subsections.
As
a matter of fact, incomplete parallelism be-
tween
the sections is not uncommon in chapters
i.-iv.;
it is less common, indeed, than parallelism
between
the stichoi in chapter v.; it is, on the
other
hand, much commoner than parallelism
between
whole verses, of which we noted but one
example,
in chapter v. And yet complete paral-
lelism
between sections is exceedingly rare, and
in
fact, I think, does not once occur. Probably
the
nearest approach to complete parallelism
between
sections is where four of the five terms
correspond,
as in ii. 2 a, b, where the scheme is
a . b . c . d . e
a' . c' . d' . e'2
bqfy
tvxn-lk-tx lmH-xlv yndx flb
hdvhy-tb
yrcbm vtrbfb srh
The-Lord
hath-swallowed-up unpityingly all the-homesteads
of-Jacob,
He-hath-thrown-down
in-his-wrath the-strongholds of-the-
daughter
of-Judah.
A much greater relative amount of
those forms
of
what Lowth called synthetic or constructive
parallelism,
in which there is a complete absence
of
strict parallelism, is another feature of Lament-
ations
i.-iv. which sharply distinguishes these
poems
(with one exception) from Lamentations v.
TIE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 99
Other
differences exist as between one or more
of
these poems and chapter v.; and these will
appear
when we turn, as we must now, to a closer
examination
of the parallelism in chapters i.-iv.,
and
of the differences in this respect to be dis-
cerned
as between these chapters considered
severally.
Budde quotes with approval a remark
of De
Wette's
that in Lamentations " merely rhythmi-
cal
parallelism," another term for Lowth's con-
structive
or synthetic parallelism, is most promi-
nent,
and that parallelism of thought, when it
occurs,
occurs mostly as between the subsections,
i.e.
between the clauses or sentences which con-
sist
alternately of (as a rule) three and two terms,
not
between the sections, which consist, as a rule,
of
five terms; put otherwise, this amounts to
the
assertion that parallelism in these poems is
chiefly
of the general type
a . b . c
a'. b'
not
of the type
a . b . c . d . e
a'. b'. c'. d'. e'
Budde's
only criticism of this is that De Wette
considerably
underrates the extent of this
parallelism
between the subsections, which we
may
briefly term subsectional parallelism. But
neither
De Wette nor Budde carried the analysis
100
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
of
this feature sufficiently far; had they done so
they
would have seen that a general statement
such
as they make cannot be rightly made with
reference
to all the poems indiscriminately. I
hope
to show that the statement that " merely
rhythmical
parallelism " is most prominent is
substantially
true of chapters i. and iii. and
very
misleading in reference to chapter ii., and
in
a less degree in reference to chapter iv.;
and
also that the statement that parallelism,
when
it occurs, occurs mostly between the sub-
sections
is the very opposite of the truth with
regard
to chapter ii., though substantially correct
with
regard to chapter iv.
I will examine chapter iii. first.
In a certain
sense
the whole of the first eighteen verses or
sections
might be said to consist of eighteen
parallel
statements of the fact that Yahweh is
chastening
the speaker; the first person singular
pronoun
appears in each separate verse, and gives
a
certain degree of parallelism to them all; and
similarly
throughout the poem large groups of
sections
express, mainly by a succession of figura-
tive
statements, the same thought: but beyond
this
general repetition of thought there is seldom
any
real parallelism of individual terms or even
of
groups of terms. Moreover, there is a feature
of
this poem that suggests that some even of th.e
apparent
examples of parallel sections are due
more
to accident than design; I refer to the fact
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 101
that
the clearest apparent examples of sectional
parallelism
occur between the last section begin-
ning
with one letter of the alphabet and the first
section
beginning with the next letter;1 thus,
there
are throughout the poem no sections more
parallel
to one another than, and few as much so
as,
the following (vv. 12, 13 ; 48, 49 ; 60, 61),
He
hath bent his bow and set me as a target for his arrow;
He
hath caused to enter into my kidneys the shafts of his
quiver.
In
streams of water my eye runs down for the destruction
of
my people;
My
eye hath poured down unceasingly, because there are no
respites.
Thou
hast seen all the vengeance they took, all their devices
against
me;
Thou
hast heard all their reproaches (of me), 0 Yahweh, all
their
devices against me.
The
first of these couplets consists of the last line
beginning
with d
and the first with h, the second
of
the last line with p and the first with f, the
third
of the last with r and the first with w.
There are not more than about a
dozen2
couplets
of contiguous sections that are as
1 The significance of
this does not seem to me to be affected by the
fact
that in Ps. cxi., cxii. the alphabetic scheme distinguishes each
stichos,
not each distich, by successive letters of the alphabet, and
therefore
regularly and necessarily gives to parallel stichoi different
initial
letters.
2 The sections that may
most reasonably be regarded as more parallel
(though
whether always by the intention of the writer is doubtful) to
one
another than is almost any section of the poem to any other are :
12,
13; 19 (pointing -10, 20 ; 28, 29, 30 (?) ; 34, 35, 36 (?) ; 40, 41 ;
48,
49 ; 60, 61 ; 64, 65. The italicised numbers are cited above.
102
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
parallel
to one another as the foregoing, or
indeed
that are strictly parallel to one another
at
all.
In about one-third of the entire
number of
sections
parallelism more or less clear and con-
spicuous
between subsections ' occurs ; examples
are
vv. 10 (a . b . c2 | a' . b') and 14 (a . b . c
b'
. d).--
Myrtsmb
hyrx | yl
xvh brx bd
As
a bear lying in wait is he unto me, | a lion in secret places.
Mvyh-lk
Mtnygn | Mymf-lkl
qHw ytyyH
I
am become a derision to all peoples, | their song all the day.
Clearly, then, since subsectional
parallelism
occurs
in considerably less than half, and prob-
ably
in not more than a third, of the sixty-six
sections
of the poem, and sectional parallelism,
which
might have occurred thirty-three times,
actually
occurs scarcely a dozen times at most,
"merely
rhythmical parallelism" is more con-
spicuous
here than real parallelism of thought
and
terms; whether subsectional is much or any
more
relatively frequent than sectional parallel-
ism
depends on the view taken as to the reality
of
parallelism in the couplets specified on p. 101
and
as to the character of the more doubtful
examples
of subsectional parallelism given below.1
1 The clearest examples
of subsectional parallelism occur in the
following
fifteen verses : 4, 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, 18, 22, 23, 25, 33, 47, 58,
60,
61. The text of some even of these (e.g. 22, 23, 33) is open to
question:
but probably parallelism existed in the original text. More
doubtful
examples maybe found in vv. 5, 7, 11, 16, 19, 30, 39, 43, 53, 56, 65.
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 103
Chapter
ii. differs greatly from chapter iii.
The
repetition in chapter iii. of the initial letter
before
each of the three sections belonging to it
corresponds
to a real independence, as a general
rule,l
of the sections in that poem. On the other
hand,
the three sections which belong to each
letter
of the alphabet in chapter ii., but of which
the
first section only is distinguished by beginning
with
that letter, are closely connected with one
another
; and this connexion is formally marked
by
the frequency with which the entire
sections
within
the several alphabetic divisions are
parallel
to one another. The exact number of
these
sectional
parallelisms depends on interpretation,
and
in some cases on textual questions: but I
believe
it may be safely asserted that in a large
majority
at all events of the twenty-two alpha-
betic
divisions two at least of the three sections
are
parallel to one another, and in several all
three
sections are so. I should myself put the
number
of parallelisms' between two, if not all
three,
sections as high as eighteen, if not higher.2
Over
against this frequency of sectional paral-
lelism
we have to set the relative infrequency
of
subsectional parallelism : this latter kind of
parallelism,
which might have occurred sixty-six
1 Vv. 34-36 form an
exception.
2 Absence of parallelism
or a near approach to it will be found in
vv.
4, 17, 18, 22, but even this may be partly due to textual corruption.
In
most of the remaining verses parallelism is obvious, in all it was
probably
intended.
104
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
times,
actually occurs only a dozen1 times, more
or
less, according to the view taken of two or
three
doubtful cases.
Thus it is not true of chapter ii.
that "merely
rhythmical
parallelism" is more frequent than
real
parallelism of thought and term, nor is it
true
that parallelism occurs mainly between the
subsections
; quite the reverse: we must, to be
accurate,
put the case thus: In chapter ii. real
(though
incomplete) parallelism is very frequent;
the
fundamental parallelism is between
the sec-
tions;
but this is occasionally reinforced
by an
additional
and secondary parallelism between the
subsections,
much in the same way that the
fundamental
rhymes at the close of the (alternate)
lines
of a quatrain are in some English poems
occasionally
reinforced by an additional rhyme
in
the middle of one or more lines, as often in
Coleridge's
Ancient Mariner, e.g.
The sun came up upon the left,
Out of the sea came he!
And he shone bright, and on the
right
Went down into the sea.
The fact is, parallelism in
Lamentations ii. is
singularly
intricate and skilfully varied. It is
rarely
complete either as between sections or sub-
sections,
but it is generally clear enough and
sufficient
to constitute a real formal connexion
1 See vv. 4 a (?), 5 b, 6
a (?), 7 a, 9 a (read UrB;wu for rbwv dbx), 10 b, 11 a,
(not
13 a: AV.), 15 c (present text), 17 a, c, 18 c, 20 b, 21 e.
TIDE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 105
between
the three sections of the several alpha-
betic
divisions, or at least between two of them,
the
remaining section being sometimes not parallel,
as
is frequently one stiehos of a tristich in other
poems.
Since the nature of the parallelism in
chapter
ii. and, consequently, an important formal
difference
between chapters ii. and iv. have
hitherto
not been clearly observed, I give a few
verses
of this poem with a translation and notes
on
the parallelism:--
Nvyc tb tx | yndx
vpxb byfyh1
hkyx 1
lxrWy trxpt | Crx
Mymwm jylwh
vpx
Mvyb | vylgr
Mvdh rkz xlv
1
How hath the Lord beclouded1 in his anger | the daughter
of Sion!
He hath cast down from heaven to earth | the
ornament of
Israel;
And he hath not remembered his footstool |
in the day of
his
anger.
Here all three sections are
parallel: observe
the daughter of Sion (d 2) || the ornament of Israel
(d'
2) || his footstool (d" 2), and beclouded (a) ||
cast down from heaven to
earth
(a' 3) || hath not
remembered (a"). Moreover, the
unity of the entire
alphabetic
division is emphasised by the addi-
tional
parallelism in his anger (b) || in the day of
his anger (b' 2) in the first and
last sections; a
similar
effect is obtained in v. 12 which opens with
Mtmxl, to their mothers, and closes with Mtmx, their
mothers. Variety is obtained
not only by varying
1 Flatly . . . beclouded:
read byfyh
for byfy,
beclouds.
106
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
number of terms by means of which corre-
sponding
ideas are expressed, but also very effect-
ively
by bringing the object of the verb much
nearer
to the beginning in the third section than
in
the two that precede : a somewhat similar
effect
is obtained in v. 8 (cp. also i. 1).
There, is no subsectional
parallelism in any of
these
three sections.
bqfy tvxn lk tx | lmH
xlv yndx flb
2
hdvhy tb yrcbm | vtrbfb
srh
hyrwv hklmm | llH
Crxl fygh
2
The Lord 'hath destroyed unsparingly | all the homesteads
of
Jacob;
He hath pulled down in his wrath | the
strongholds of
Judah;
He hath brought to the ground, hath
profaned | the realm
and
its princes.
Here, again, all three sections are
parallel, but
in
none is there parallelism between the sub-
sections.
This time all the object-clauses stand
at
the end of their respective sections and, as in
v.
1, the parallel verbs or verbal clauses Crxl fygh
llH (he hath
brought to the ground, hath profaned),
srh (he hath
pulled down), flb (hath
destroyed) at
the
beginning. The additional parallelism of
terms
is not as in v. 1 between the first and
third,
but between the first and second sections
(unsparingly || in his wrath), unless,
indeed, with
Lohr,
we emend by transposing the clauses He
hath brought to the
ground and in his wrath; then,
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 107
as
before, the fuller parallelism will be between
the
first and third sections.
Nvyc tb ynqz | vmdy
Crxl vbwy
10
Myqw vrgH | Mwxr
lf rpf vlfh
Mlwvry tlvtb | Nwxr
Crxl vdyrvh
10
They sat on the ground dumb—| the elders of Sion;
Lifted up dust on their head, | were
girded with sack-
cloth;
They lowered to the ground their head—|
the virgins of
Jerusalem.
Here in the second section we find
subsectional
parallelism;
each clause in it mentions one sign
of
mourning and grief; parallel to each of these
clauses
and to one another are the first clauses of
the
first and third sections, but these sections
contain
no subsectional parallelism : on the other
hand,
the second parts of the first and third
sections
are very strictly parallel to one another
(the elders of Sion || the virgins of Jerusalem). But
there
is still further and in part rather subtle
verbal
parallelism between the sections:
note Crxl
(on (to) the ground) in the first and
third sections ;
Mwxr and Nwxr (their head) in the second and third
respectively;
and the antithesis vlfh (lifted
up)
and
vdyrvh
(lowered) which is emphasised by the
parallelism
in a way which it is impossible to
represent
adequately in translation: what they
lift
up is dust, what they cast down is their heads!
Very
clearly, then, sectional parallelism
is again
primary;
but here it is reinforced by subsectional
parallelism
in one of the three sections.
108
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
A correct appreciation of the main
and. second-
ary
parallelism in this poem may set some ques-
tions
of textual interpretation in a new light.
Verse
3 reads,
lxrWy Nrq lk | Jx
yrHb fdg
byvx ynpm | vnymy
rvHx bywh
bybs
hlkx | hbhl
wxk bqfyb rfbyv
He
hewed off in fierce anger | all the horn of Israel;
He
turned backward his right hand | from the face of the foe;
And
he kindled in Jacob a flaming fire | which devoured
round about.
Whose
is the right hand here referred to, Israel's
or
Yahweh's ? It is commonly taken to be
Yahweh's,
and there is certainly much to be said
for
this view. But the parallelism of the sections,
which
certainly exists in any case, would become
still
clearer and more complete if the right hand
be
Israel's. Then, for the use of the pronoun
only
in the middle section corresponding to the
two
parallel proper names for the nation in the
first
and third sections, there are two exact
parallels
in this poem : see vv. 5 and 10.
In both 4 a and 15 c it is generally
admitted
that
a word or more has intruded. But which
word
or words should we omit? If subsectional
parallelism
was primary, and as frequent as :it is
in
Lamentations iv. and Isaiah xiv., parallelism
would
furnish a strong argument for those 'who
retain
rck,
as a foe (parallel to as an enemy), in
v.
4, and both the clauses perfection of
beauty
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 109
and
joy of the whole earth in v. 15. But,
since
subsectional
parallelism is merely secondary and
not
very frequent in this poem, such an argument
has
little if any weight: and it may certainly be
doubted
whether it is nearly strong enough to
justify
those who omit vrmxyw, with the character-
istic
to in v. 15, in order to retain both the
parallel
clauses at the end of the verse without
at
the same time keeping a section so long as the
existing
text presents.
Verse 8 is also interesting. Had
subsectional
parallelism
been primary, the author would
naturally
have written--
Rampart and wall lament | together
they languish;
but
to gain a closer parallelism with the two pre-
ceding
sections, each of which begins with a
verb
of
which Yahweh is the subject, he avoided what
would
have been a more perfect subsectional
parallelism
and wrote instead--
He
caused to lament rampart and wall; | together they
languish.
By many who refrain from postulating
unity
of
authorship for the Book of Lamentations,
chapters
ii. and iv. at least are attributed to the
same
writer. Be this as it may, there is an
appreciable
difference, though it has hitherto
been
overlooked, in the use of parallelism in the
two
poems, just as there is a difference in the
length
of the alphabetic divisions. In chapter ii.
110
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
sectional
parallelism is fundamental and frequent,
subsectional
parallelism secondary and relatively
rare
: in chapter iv. subsectional parallelism is
relatively
more frequent, perhaps even consider-
ably
more frequent than sectional parallelism,
though
neither type is quite so unmistakably
primary
or quite so persistent as the sectional
parallelism
in chapter ii. Subsectional parallel-
ism
occurs in nearly, if not quite, or even more
than,
a half1 of the sections in chapter iv. as corn-
pared
with a bare fifth in chapter ii.; on the
other
hand, less than half, perhaps scarcely a
third,
of the sections are parallel to one another,2
1 The sections in
Lamentations iv. number 44, of which two (v. 15)
are
through corruption very uncertain. Subsectional parallelism is
clearest
in these 17 sections : 1 a (see below), 2 a, b, 3 a, b, 7 a, b, 8 a, b,
11
a, b, 12 a, 13 a, 16 b, 18 b, 19 b, 21 a. To these should be added the two
similarly
constructed sections, 6 a, 9 a, perhaps also 5 a, b (antithetical
parallels),
G b, 14 a, 15 a, 21 b, 22 a, b. Subsectional parallelism is at all
events
sufficiently frequent to raise the question whether the text of
v.
1 is correct ; subsectional parallelism would indeed be perfect even
in
the present text if we ventured to divide the section equally (cp.
R.V.)
: but rhythm, as we shall see later, forbids this, and if the text
is
sound Dr. Smith (Jerusalem, ii. 270) rightly arranges as follows :
How bedimmed is the gold, how
changed
The best of the gold.
I
suspect, however, that either (1) :.w' is a gloss (Aramaic ?) on evr,
or
(2) that men should be omitted, leaving en: parallel to em as in
Job
xxxi. 24. Then we have either
How bedimmed is the gold,
Even the best fine gold,
or
How bedimmed is the gold,
Changed the fine gold.
2 The most conspicuous
sectional parallelisms will be found in vv.
4,
5, 8, 17, 22 : see also vv. 1, 7, 19, but in these latter verses, as also in
the
antithetical sections of v. 3, the sectional parallelism is much less
conspicuous
than the synonymous subsectional parallelism in one or,
in
most of the verses, in both sections.
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 111
and
there is little or nothing of that subtle linking
of
the sections which occurs in chapter ii.
In Lamentations i., in spite of the
sustained
and
well varied parallelism of the first three
sections,
strict parallelism is decidedly less frequent
than
in either chapter ii. or chapter iv., or even
than
in chapter iii. Subsectional parallelism is
perhaps
rather more frequent1 than in chapter
ii.,
where it is infrequent and secondary: but
sectional
parallelism is very decidedly less
fre-
quent
2 than in chapter ii.: the result is that it
is
difficult to select either type of parallelism as
primary
; and the more important fact is that
the
form of the greater part of this poem is
independent
of strict parallelism.
It is not surprising that the Book
of Lamenta-
tions
has driven even unwilling scholars to the
consideration
or reconsideration of the question
of
metre or rhythm in Hebrew poetry. Budde,
who,
like many others, had in 1874, after an
examination
of existing theories in regard to
Hebrew
metre, rejected them all and expressed
the
most thoroughgoing scepticism with regard
to
any new theories that might arise, found him-
self
eight years later, after a study of Lamenta-
tions,
venturing, to quote his own phrase, "on
1 See vv. 1 (three
antithetical parallels), 2 a, c, 3 a, b, 41), c, 5 a, 7 c, d,
13
c, 16 a, b, 18 b, 20 a, c; possibly also vv. 8 a (omit I Nk-lf?), b (omit yk ?),
c,
9 c, 13 a, 22 a.
2 See vv. 1, 10 a, b, 11
a, b, 12 b, c, 15, 20 a, b: perhaps also 2 b, c,
4a,b,
5a, c, 8.
112
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
dangerous slippery ice"; and it has generally
been
admitted that he skated with considerable
skill
over the corner of the ice to which he confined
himself.
The challenge lies here: there is a
common
and
well-marked peculiarity in the 242 sections
that
make up the first four chapters of Lamenta-
tions
; it is a rhythmical peculiarity, and yet a
rhythmical
peculiarity that cannot be explained
by
the parallelism. In putting it thus, I recog-
nise,
as I think we well may, that parallelism
might
create rhythm, and may even, as a matter
of
fact, in the remote past have created the
dominant
Semitic and Hebrew type of rhythm
in
particular : a habit of expressing a thought
in
a given number of terms, and then repeating
it
by corresponding terms, would necessarily pro-
duce
a certain rhythmical effect: thus, for
example,
the habit of expressing thought in the
mould
symbolised by
a . b . c
a' . b' . c'
would
produce a rhythm which may be
expressed
by
3 : 3 ; and thought expressed in a mould
symbolised
by
a . b . c
a' . b'
would
produce a rhythm that may be expressed
by
3 : 2.
But as soon as parallelism becomes
incomplete,
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 113
and
still more when it becomes merely synthetic,
i.e.,
strictly speaking, disappears, and yet the
lines
retain the same number of words or terms,
obviously
the rhythmical relation between the
lines
is no longer, even if it was originally, merely
secondary
: thus rhythm is no longer a mere
result
of parallelism, but an independent desire
for
rhythm is at least a contributory cause, if
with
a . b . c
a' . b' .
c’
such
schemes as
a . b . c
a'2 . c'
or
a . b . c
a' . d . e
or
a . b . c
d . e . f
constantly
alternate, but schemes such as
a . b . c
a'2 . b' .
c'
or
a . b . c
b' . c' . d
rarely
or never ; or, again, if with schemes such as
a . b . c . d
. e
a'. b'. c' .
d' . e'
114
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
there
alternate schemes such as
a . b . c . d . e
a' . b'2 . d' . e'
but
not such as
a . b . c . d . e
a' . b'2 .
c' . d' . e'
or
with schemes
a . b . c
a’ . b’
schemes
such as
a . b . c
a’2
or
a . b . c
a’2 . b’
but
not such as
a . b . c
a'2 . b'
Now, if my analysis is even
approximately
correct,
what, stated in general terms, are the facts
of
the Book of Lamentations, and the questions,
which,
once the facts are analysed and classified,
almost
necessarily arise? Lamentations iii. con-
tains
sixty-six sections unmistakably marked off
from
one another by the alphabetic scheme: there
is
no complete parallelism between any two suc-
cessive
sections: there is incomplete parallelism
between
perhaps fifteen groups of two sections:
there
is none at all between the rest. Why are
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 115
these
sections nevertheless of equal length, or at
least
even in the present text so closely approxim-
ated
to equality of length? Again, these sections
fall
into subsections : in some twenty sections the
two
subsections are parallel to one another, though
often
only incompletely parallel; why alike in
these
twenty sections and in the remaining forty
odd
sections in which there is no parallelism
between
the subsections does the longer sub-
section
precede the shorter: why is the ratio
between
the two subsections so constant?
Again,
why are the twenty-two alphabetic
divisions
of Lamentations ii. each divided into
three
equal divisions marked off from one another
by
a strongly marked division of sense, each
section
again into subsections by a less strong but
still
clearly marked pause? Why do the sections
so
constantly consist of five terms, the subsections
of
three terms and two terms respectively, the
shorter
regularly following the longer? Why all
this,
though, while many of the sections are
parallel
to one another, complete parallelism
between
sections scarcely, if ever, occurs, and
though
in only about a dozen out of the sixty-six
sections
does even incomplete parallelism occur
between
the subsections?
The answer to all these questions
and the
similar
questions which Lamentations i. (with a
difference)
and Lamentations iv. provoke has
been
increasingly found. by admitting the play
116
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
of
a rhythmical principle ; and what is called
the
Dinah rhythm has accordingly gained recogni-
tion
amongst many who still remain sceptical of
other
Hebrew rhythms.
What, then, is really meant by the
Dinah
rhythm?
A certain ambiguity seems to lurk in
the
'usage of the term. Does it mean five terms
forming
a complete sentence with a well-marked
pause
after the third? or a succession of such
sentences?
If the first sentence of Genesis--
Mymwh-txv Crxh-tx | Myhlx
xrb tywxrb—occurred.
in
any
of the first four chapters of Lamentations,
every
one would accept it as a rhythmically
normal
line. Is, then, the first sentence in
Genesis
an example of kinah rhythm occurring
sporadically
in prose, as hexameters occur spor-
adically
in the Authorised Version? Scarcely, for
it
is probable that those who define kinah
rhythm
as
verse unequally divided by a pause, and
normally
in the ratio 3 : 2, tacitly mean by
kinah rhythm a succession of
such verses. And
certainly
it was the frequent repetition of such
verses
in Lamentations i.-iv. that first drew atten-
tion
to the peculiarity of their style or rhythm.
Five words with a pause after the
third is,
even
in Hebrew prose, too frequently occurring
and
too easily arising a phenomenon to possess
by
itself anything distinctive. An hexameter is
a
noteworthy phenomenon wherever it occurs ;
five
words with a pause after the third are not ;
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 117
on
the other hand, a dozen or twenty repetitions
of
five words with a pause after the third do con-
stitute
something as noteworthy as an hexameter.
Not the sporadic occurrence, but the
regular
recurrence
of a particular type of word-combina-
tion
is apart from, or in addition to, any parallel-
ism
that may accompany it, the peculiarity of
Lamentations
i.-iv. And yet, as soon as we
frame
the conclusion thus, it is necessary, if all
the
facts, especially of chapter i., are to be
recognised,
to add that the particular type of
word-combination
in question falls into two sub-
types;
and as soon as we define the sub-types as
consisting
respectively of combinations of five
words
with a pause occurring after the third, and
combinations
of four words equally divided by
a
pause, we may at first appear to destroy the
whole
theory of a kinah rhythm which we
were
attempting
to formulate. The actual fact is not
quite
so serious as this, for while the normal
section
of five accented words, unequally divided,
may
contract to four words equally divided, it
probably
does not expand to six words equally
divided.
However, whether the facts seriously
weaken
the
theory or not, the main question at present
is
this : is Ludde correct in denying that the
sections
in Lamentations were ever (in the original
text)
equally divided ? And is his attempt to
maintain
the appearance of inequality by calling
118
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
two
words "heavy" as against two others that
are
to be called "light," any better than the
attempt
to cover up the absence of parallelism
between
two lines by speaking of them as synthetic
parallels?
To this question we shall return.
Meantime,
I
will only say that the theory of light and heavy
groups
of words seems to me to suffer shipwreck
on
the very first verse of the book : for it is very
difficult
to believe that if Myvgb ytbr at the end of
the
second section is light, tvnydmb ytrw at the
beginning
of the third is heavy. The truth is
rather
that Lamentations i. 1 b, c are both lines
of
four words equally divided: and Sievers is
probably
not far wrong in finding a full half of
the
entire number of lines in Lamentations i. to
be
of the same nature.1 In any case, Lamenta-
1 The sections treated by
Sievers as containing four accented words
and
as being equally divided by the caesura are 1 b, c, 2 b, 4 c, 5 b, c, 6 a,
c,
7 a (to hyrvrmv), c, 8 b, c, 9 b, 10 a, b, 11 a, 12 c, 13 a, b, c, 14 b, e,
15 a, b,
17
c, 18 b, c, 19 a, b, e, 22 b, c; marked as less certain sections of the same
kind
are 2 c, 3 b, c, 4 b, 15 c. Sections of this kind are far less frequent
in
the remaining poems ; those treated as such by Sievers are : ii.
12
(a, b) c, 14 a, b, c, (19 d) ; iii. 6, 10, 13, 15, 23, 24, 50 (58, 59, 60); iv.
3
b, 5 a, b, 6 b, 13 a, b,14 (a) b, (15 a, b),18 a (b), 20 (a) b, 21(a) b.
References
to
uncertain examples are enclosed in brackets. It is interesting and
instructive
to compare with this classification the examples given by
Budde
(Zeitschr. fur die alttestamentliche
Wissensehaft, 1882: cp. his
commentary
on Lamentations in the Kurzer
Handlcommentar, 1898)
of
the verses in which the first part contains only two words—these
being,
on his theory, " long " or " heavy." Budde cites i. 1 b, c,
4 e,
9
b, 13 c, 14 b,17 c, 18 c, 19 a, b ; ii. 12 b, c ; iii. 15 ; iv. 5 a, 13 b, 17
b.. The
large
number of sections treated by Sievers as evenly divided, but not
treated
by Budde as containing two words only in their first parts,
consists
of lines in which Budde either allows a full word-value to
prepositions
or other particles (e.g. i. 8 c, 10 b, 11 a), or emends the text
(e.g.
in i. 5 b he inserts xvh after hvhy).
THE
BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS 119
tions
i. is of crucial importance in the study of
the
kinah rhythm: any one who has
sufficient
ingenuity
to discover an unequal division in all
its
sections need have little fear of being able to
do
the same for the three succeeding chapters or
any
other passages where the occurrence of some
unequally
divided lines suggests to him the
"kinah" rhythm. If, on the other
hand, the
occurrence
in the present text of Lamentations i.
of
equally divided lines of four terms is too
frequent
to admit of doubt that some such
lines
occurred
in the original text, then we may suspect
that
the same variations also occurred or may
have
occurred in other kinah poems.
And as a matter of fact the
variation is prob-
ably
to be found in one of the earliest kinahs
that
survive.
In Amos v. 2 the prophet's kinah over
the
house of Israel is given: it consists of two dis-
tichs,
or long lines as we may here by preference call
them:
lxrWy tlvtb | Mvq Jsvy-xl hlpn
hmyqm
Nyx | htmdx-lf
hwFn
Fallen
to rise no more is the daughter of Israel,
Stretched out upon the ground with
none to raise her.
The parallelism resembles the
dominant paral-
lelism
in Lamentations ii.: it is between the
long
lines, not between the parts of these, the
scheme
being
a . b2 | c2
a'2 | b'2
120
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
The
first of these two long lines is quite unambigu-
ously
divided into two unequal parts : rhythmic-
ally
it is 3 : 2; but the second can only be forced
into
the same scheme by giving to the preposition
a
full stress. If, however, we find other examples
of
periods in kinahs that cannot be
anything but
2
: 2, we shall certainly do better so to regard the
second
period here and to give htmdx-lf but one
word-accent.
CHAPTER
IV
THE ELEMENTS OF HEBREW
RHYTHM
121
CHAPTER IV
THE ELEMENTS OF HEBREW RHYTHM
THE study of parallelism must lead,
if I have so
far
observed and interpreted correctly, to the
conclusion
that parallelism is but one law or
form
of Hebrew poetry, and that it leaves much
to
be explained by some other law or form.
Complete
and exact correspondence of all the
terms
in two parallel lines necessarily produces
the
effect of exact or approximate rhythmical
balance.
But such complete parallelism is rela-
tively
rare in Hebrew poetry; the parallelism
is
more often incomplete; and, moreover, along
with
lines completely parallel and lines incom-
pletely
parallel there frequently occur, also lines
unconnected
by the presence in them of any
parallel
terms. And yet, alike in the incompletely
parallel,
and in the non-parallel couplets, there
will
often be found, consistently maintained, the
same
kind of rhythm as in those that are com-
pletely
parallel. We are thus driven back behind
parallelism
in search of an independent rhythmi-
123
124
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
cal
principle in Hebrew poetry which will account
for
the presence of balance, or other rhythmical
relation,
as between two lines in which the
parallelism
is not such as necessarily to involve
this
balance or other rhythmical relation.
Some such rhythmical principle,
whether or
not
its nature can ever be exactly and fully ex-
plained,
seems to govern much of the present text
of
the Old Testament, sometimes for long con-
secutive
passages, as for example in Lamentations
and
many parts of Job and Isaiah xl.-lv., some-
times
for a few lines only, and then to be rudely
interrupted
by what neither accommodates itself
to
any rhythmical principle that can be easily
seized,
nor produces any rhythmical impression
that
can be readily or gratefully received.
The
difficulties in the way of discovering and
giving
any clear and full account of this principle
are
considerable. In the first place, as was
pointed
out in the first chapter, no clear tradition
or
account of the rhythmical or other laws of
Hebrew
poetry has descended to us from the age
when
that poetry was still being written. The
remarks
of Josephus are interesting, but in them-
selves
anything but illuminating. Then we are
faced
with serious textual uncertainties in all the
so-called
poetical books and in the prophetical
books,
and in the ancient poems, such as the song
of
Deborah, and the blessing of Jacob, embodied
in
some of the narrative books. Feeling, as in my
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 125
opinion
we ought to do, that much of the poetical
contents
of the Old Testament has suffered serious
textual
corruption, we might well view with sus-
picion
any metrical theory that found all parts
of
the existing text equally metrical ; for though
a
textual corruption may accidentally at times
have
the same metrical value as the original
reading,
this is the kind of accident that cannot
happen
regularly. On the other hand, a metrical
theory
which finds innumerable passages corrupt,
though
they show, metre apart, no sign of corrup-
tion,
has this disadvantage: given the right to
make
an equal number of emendations purely
in
the interests of his theory, another theoriser
might
produce an equally attractive theory; and
we
should be left with the uncertainty of choice
between
two alternatives both of which could not
be
right, but both of which might be wrong. A
sound
metrical theory, then, must neither entirely
fit,
nor too indiscriminately refuse to fit, the
present
text of the Old Testament. A third
serious
difficulty lies in our imperfect knowledge
of
the vowels with which the texts were originally
intended
to be read. This last difficulty may,
perhaps,
always leave a considerable degree of
detail
ambiguous, even if the broader principles
of
rhythm become clear.
In spite of these difficulties, how
far is it
possible
in the first instance to determine the
exact
rhythmical relations between, let us say,
126
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
several examples or types of two sections,
sentences,
lines, call them what we will, that are
associated
with one another by some degree of
parallelism
of terms or at least by some similarity
of
structure, by being, if not parallel, yet paral-
lelistic?
Parallelism both associates and dis-
sociates;
it associates two lines by the corre-
spondence
of ideas which it implies; it dissociates
them
by the differentiation of the terms by means
of
which the corresponding ideas are expressed as
well
as by the fact that the one parallel line is
fundamentally
a repetition of the other. The
effect
of dissociation is a constant occurrence of
breaks
or pauses, or rather a constant recurrence
of
two different types of breaks or pauses: (1)
the
break between the two parallel and corre-
sponding
lines; and (2) the greater break at the
end
of the second line before the thought is
resumed
and carried forward in another combina-
tion
of parallel lines. And even when strict
parallelism
disappears, the regular recurrence of
these
two types of pauses is maintained. Thus
there
are in Hebrew parallelistic poetry no long
flowing
verse-paragraphs as in Shakespearian or
Miltonic
blank verse, but a succession of short
clearly
defined periods as in much English rhymed
verse
and in most pre-Shakespearian blank verse..
Rhyme
in English and parallelism in Hebrew
alike
serve to define the rhythmical periods; but
the
relation between rhyme and sense is much less
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 127
close
than between parallelism and sense, and
consequently
rhyme in English has nothing like
the
same power as parallelism in Hebrew to pro-
duce
coincidence between the rhythmical periods
and
the sense-divisions; accordingly, though
rhyme
very naturally goes with "stopped-line"
verse,
as it is called, it is also compatible with
non-stop
lines; so that non-stop lines and verse-
paragraphs
that disregard the line divisions almost
as
freely as Shakespearian or Miltonic blank verse
are
by no means unknown in English rhymed
poetry.
On the other hand, parallelism is,
broadly
speaking, incompatible with anything
but
"stopped-Line" poetry. Whether or not
there
may be in Hebrew a non-parallelistic poetry
in
which rhythmical and sense divisions do not
coincide
is not, for the moment, the question;
it
is rather this: parallelism, even incomplete
parallelism
in its various types, offers a very
large
number of couplets in which we can be
perfectly
certain of the limits of the constituent
lines;
how strict, how 'constant, of what precise
nature
is the rhythmical relation between these
lines
which are thus so clearly defined? If we
can
determine this question satisfactorily, we
may
obtain a measure to determine whether the
same
rhythmical periods occur elsewhere without
coinciding
with sense-divisions.
I have referred to two types of
English verse;
but
the closest analogy in English to Hebrew
128
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
poetry
is probably to be found neither in blank
verse
nor in rhymed verse, but in the old Anglo-
Saxon
poetry, and its revival (with a difference)
in
Chaucer's contemporary, the author of Piers
Ploughman. That poetry has one
feature which
is
no regular, nor even a particularly common,
feature
of Hebrew poetry, viz. alliteration; but
that
feature, though a most convenient indication
of
the rhythm, is absolutely unessential to it.
Apart
from the references to this alliteration, how
admirably
does Professor Saintsbury's descrip-
tion
of this type of English poetry correspond,
mutatis mutandis, to the rhythmical impressions
left
by many pages of Hebrew psalms or prophecy.
"The
staple line of this verse consists of two halves
or
sections, each containing two ‘long,’ ‘strong,’
‘stressed,’
‘accented’ syllables, these same syl-
lables
being, to the extent of three out of four,
alliterated.
At the first casting of the eye on a
page
of Anglo-Saxon poetry no common resem-
blances
except these seem to emerge. But we see
on
some pages an altogether extraordinary differ-
ence
in the lengths of the lines, or, in other words,
of
the number of ‘short,’ ‘weak,’ ‘unstressed,’
‘unaccented’
syllables which are allowed to
group
themselves round the pivots or posts of
the
rhythm. Yet attempts have been made, not
without
fair success, to divide the sections or half-
lines
into groups or types of rhythm, more or less
capable
of being represented by the ordinary
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 129
marks
of metrical scansion. . . . A sort of mono-
tone
or hum . . . will indeed disengage itself
for
the attentive reader . . . but nothing more
.
. . the sharp and uncompromising section, the
accents,
the alliteration--these are all that the
poet
has to trust to in the way of rules sine
queis
non. But before long the
said careful reader
becomes
aware that there is a ‘lucky license,’
which
is as a rule, and much more also ; and that
this
license . . . concerns the allowance of un-
accented
and unalliterated syllables. The range
of
it is so great that at a single page-opening,
taken
at random, you might find the lines varying
from
nine to fifteen syllables, and, seeking a little
further,
come to a variation between eight and
twenty-one."1
In Piers Ploughman the verse still
consists
of "a pair of sharply-separated halves
which
never on any consideration run syllabically
into
each other, and are much more often than
not
divided by an actual stop, if only a brief one,
of
sense";2 but there is a greater approximation,
though
only an approximation, to regularity in
the
length of the lines: and the first hemistich
(measured
of course syllabically, not by its stressed
syllables,
which are always equal in number) is
generally
longer than the second.3
As between Anglo-Saxon poetry or
Piers
1 G. Saintsbury, A History of English Prosody, i. 13 f.
2 Ibid. i. 182.
3 Cp. ibid. i. 184. Professor Saintsbury gives
the well-known open-
ing
lines of the poem as an illustration. A briefer specimen from else-
130
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Ploughman and Hebrew
parallelistic poetry
these
resemblances are certain: (1) the isolated
verse
in Anglo-Saxon corresponds to the parallel
distich
in Hebrew; (2) the strong internal pause
in
Anglo-Saxon to the end of the first parallel
period
of the Hebrew distich; (3) there is a
correspondingly
great irregularity in the number
of
the syllables in successive lines of Anglo-Saxon,
and
in successive distichs of Hebrew. Yet
whether
the two poetical materials, the Anglo-
Saxon
and the Hebrew, agree in what is after
all
most fundamental in Anglo-Saxon, viz. the
constant
quantity of stressed syllables in a verse,
and
the constant ratio of the stressed syllables
in
the two parts of a verse to one another remains
where
(ed. Wright, i. 6442-6457) may serve for the comparison with
Hebrew
poetry made above.
On Good Friday I fynde • a felon was
y-saved,
That hadde lyvecl al his life with
lesynges and with theftc;
And for he beknede to the Gros, -
and to Christ shrof him,
He was sonner y-saved • than seint
Johan the Baptist;
And or Adam or Ysaye, • or any of
the prophetes,
That hadde y-leyen with Lucifer •
many longe yeres,
A robbere was y-raunsoned • rather
than thei alle,
Withouten any penaunce of
purgatorie, • to perpetuel blisse.
The most famous example in later
English literature of rhythm
resting
on equality in the number of accented syllables accompanied
by
great inequality in the total number of the syllables is Coleridge's
Christabel.
The accented syllables in the lines are always four;
the
total number of syllables commonly varies, as Coleridge himself
puts
it, from seven to twelve, and in the third line of the poem drops
down
to four. For reference I cite the five opening lines--
'Tis the middle of night by the
castle clock,
And the owls have awakened the
crowing cock;
Tu-whit !—Tu-whoo
And hark, again ! the crowing cock,
How drowsily it crew.
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 131
for
consideration; the answer is not immediately
obvious,
for Hebrew does not so unambiguously
and
conveniently indicate what are the stressed
syllables
in a line as does Anglo-Saxon by its
alliterative
system. In many Hebrew lines we
cannot
immediately see for certain either which,
or
how many, are the stressed syllables: what
means
exist for ultimately determining these
uncertainties
in part or entirely I will consider
later.
But first I return to a point already
reached
in the last chapter.
Even parallelism suggests a division
of Hebrew
distichs
into two broad types of rhythm: in one
of
these two types the two parallel lines balance
one
another, whereas in. the other the second
comes
short of and echoes the first. No great
attention
is required in reading Lamentations v.,
or
Job xxviii., or many other passages in Job
or
the Deutero-Isaiah, or many Psalms, such as,
e.g.,
li., in order to become aware of the dominance
and,'
in some cases, of the almost uninterrupted
recurrence
of balance between the successive
couplets
of mostly parallel lines; nor, again, in
reading
Lamentations ii., iii., iv. to become
aware
of the different rhythm produced when a
shorter
line constantly succeeds to a longer one.
So
far we can get without any theory as to the
correct
method, if there be one, whereby these
rhythms
should be more accurately measured
or
described, or as to the best nomenclature
132
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
wherewith
to distinguish these differences when
we
wish to refer to them. But if we get thus far,
it
further becomes clear that, if we admit the
prevalence
in Lamentations iv. of a clearly
defined
rhythm fit to receive a name of its own,
whether
or not the name kinah by which this
rhythm
commonly goes be the best term to
define
it, then Lamentations v. and Job xxviii.
also
have, though a different, yet a no less clearly
defined
rhythm whether we give it a name or
not;
and of course, if we wish to discuss the
subject,
we must find some convenient way of
referring
to this rhythm no less than to the other.
To distinguish these two broad
classes of
clearly
distinguished types of rhythm I have
suggested
the terms balancing rhythm and echoing
rhythm.1 This
terminology seems to me free
from
some of the objections which attach to the
term
kinah as a term for the echoing
rhythm,
even
if we could discover a good companion
term
to kinah to describe the other type.
As I
pointed
out in the last chapter, kinah rhythm
is
really
a rather ambiguous term, meaning either
the
total rhythmical effect of a poem in which a
particular
echoing rhythm is prevalent, or that
particular
echoing rhythm even though it be
confined
to a single line or period. And one
serious
disadvantage of the term kinah rhythm
lies
in the ease with which it obscures the fact
1 Isaiah
("International Critical Commentary"), i. p. lxiii.
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 133
that
within the same elegy (kinah) or
other
rhythmically
similar poem more than one type of
rhythm
as a matter of fact occurs.
But whether even echoing rhythm and balancing
rhythm be a satisfactory
terminology for the two
broad
classes of Hebrew rhythm under which
sub-classes
may be found, this broad fundamental
distinction
itself is nevertheless worth keeping
clear
; it forms a comfortable piece of solid ground
from
which to set out and to which to return
from
excursions into the shaking bog or into the
treacherous
quagmire that certainly needs to be
traversed
before the innermost secrets of Hebrew
metre
can be wrested and laid bare.
In Lamentations v. a balancing
rhythm, in
Lamentations
iv. an echoing rhythm prevails ;
a
rapid reading of the two chapters will suffice
to
verify this general statement. But, if the
reader
will re-read the chapters with closer
attention
to details, he will probably feel that
Lamentations
v. 2--
Myrzl
hkphn vntlHn
Myrknl
vnytb
Our inheritance is turned unto
strangers,
Our houses unto aliens,
differs
not only in respect of its parallelism but
also
of its rhythm from most of the other verses
in
the same chapter, and also that, while it is
rhythmically
unlike most of chap. v., it is
134
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
rhythmically
like most of Lamentations iv.;
it
is, for example, rhythmically unlike Lamenta-
tions
v. 13
vxWn
NvHF MyrvHb
vlwk
Cfb Myrfnv
Young men bare the mill,
And youths stumbled under the wood;
it
is, on the other hand, rhythmically like, e.g.,
Lamentations
iv. 8--
glwm
hyryzn vkz
blHm
vHc
Her nobles were purer than snow,
Whiter than milk.
One
or two other verses in Lamentations v. may
at
first seem ambiguous : are verses 3 and 14,
for
example, in balancing or echoing rhythm?
Again,
in Lamentations iv., where the echo-
ing
rhythm clearly and greatly prevails, a few
verses
disengage themselves as exceptions; e.g.
verse
13
hyxybn
tvxFHm
hynhk
tvnvf
For the sins of her prophets,
The iniquities of her priests,
gives
the impression of balance rather than echo,
though
the entire rhythmical impression is not
quite
that which is left by the balancing rhythm
of
Lamentations v.
Thus, without any more detailed
examination
or
exacter measurement of lines, we reach the
important
conclusion, which a close study of
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 135
Lamentations
i. abundantly confirms, that the
same
poem may contain distichs of different
metrical
character.
But within what limits may or do
these and
other
differences occur within the same poem ?
If
that question is to be answered we must dis-
cover
some principle of measurement which will
enable
us to determine in less simple cases than
those
just cited when the rhythm remains constant
and
when it changes, and how.
Is balance, then, due to (1)
equality in the
number
of syllables in the two lines, and echo to
inequality
in the number of syllables ? If this
be
so, then Lamentations v. 3,
bx
Nyx vnyyh Mymvty
tvnmlxK
vnytvmx
Orphans were we, without father,
(And) our mothers (were) as widows,
is
in balancing rhythm, the number of syllables
in
each line being eight.
Or (2) is balance due to the sum of
the metrical
values
of all syllables in each line being the same,
even
though the number of the syllables differs?
The
number of syllables in a Latin hexameter
varies;
but the sum of the metrical values of
the
syllables must always be equivalent to six
spondees.
If this were the true account of
Hebrew
rhythm, it would become necessary to
determine
what syllables are metrically long,
what
short.
136
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Or (3) is balance due to equality in
the number
of
stressed or accented words or syllables in the
two
lines, echo to the presence of a greater number
of
stressed syllables in the first line, and a smaller
number
in the second? If so, is there no limit
to
the number of unstressed syllables that each
stressed
syllable can carry with it? If there is a
limit,
what is it? Is it no wider than in Christa-
bel?
or is it as wide as, or wider than, in Anglo-
Saxon
poetry?
Of these three possibilities, the
first two seem
to
me to have been ruled out in the course of
discussion
and investigation concerning Hebrew
metre.
I confine myself to some discussion of
the
third.
It is just possible that some of the
ancients
had
analysed the laws of Hebrew poetry suffi-
ciently
to detect the essential character of the
stressed
syllables. The interesting suggestion
has
been thrown out1 that the author of Wisdom,
who
certainly attempted to naturalise parallelism
in
Greek, also attempted a new Greek rhythm
on
the model of the Hebrew by making the
parallel
periods in Greek contain the same
number
of accented syllables. Then, again, in
the
opinion of some the difficult passage in Origen
which
refers to the subject of Hebrew metre
implies
an appreciation of the stressed syllables.2
1 Encyclopaedia Biblica, col. 5344.
2 Origen's scholion has
already been cited above, p. 12 n. The
subject
of the scholion is Psalm cxix. 1—
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 137
Be
this as it may, there has certainly been an
increasing
agreement among modern students of
this
subject, particularly under the influence of
Ley,l
to find in the stressed words or syllables the
"pivots
or posts," to use Professor Saintsbury's
phrase,
of the Hebrew rhythm.
But allowing this, what is the
limit—for there
surely
must be some limit—to the number of
unstressed
syllables that may accompany each
or
any of the stressed syllables? Again, is there
any
law governing the position of the stressed
syllable
in relation to the unstressed syllables
that
go with it?
Taking the first of these two
questions first:--
Does
a single word extending beyond a certain
given
number of syllables necessarily contain more
than
one stress ? or is such a word ambiguous,
capable
of receiving two, but capable also of
receiving
only one stress ? And is the actual
number
of unstressed syllables that may accom-
1 jrk
ymt yrwx
hvhy
trvtb Myklhh
which
contains six fully stressed words and is rendered in the LXX--
Maka<rioi
oi[ a@mwmoi e]n o[d&?,
oi[ poreuo<menoi e]n no<m&
kuri<ou.
which
contains six accents. Ley (Zeitschr. fur
die AT. Wissenschaft,
1892,
pp. 212 ff.) argues that one of the things which Origen is struggling
to
express is that in this particular verse we find the unusual phenome-
non
of text and translation containing the same number of stressed
words
and consequently the same rhythm.
1 Julius Ley, Die metrischen Formen der hebraischen
Poesie, 1866;
Grundzuge der Rhythrnus,
des Vers- and Strophenbaues in der hebraischen
Poesie, 1875 ; Leitfaden der Metrilc der hebraischen Poesie,
1887.
138
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
pany
a stressed syllable neither less nor more
than
the number of syllables in the longest
Hebrew
word with inseparable attachments such
as
a preposition at the beginning and a suffix at
the
close? In other words, is the general
rule :
one
word, one stress, to which words of more than
a
certain number of syllables, say four, so far
form
an exception that they may receive a
second
stress?
Or, to put it otherwise, in such longer
words
may the counter-tone as well as the tone
count
as a full stress ? I incline to the opinion
that
by the rule that words of a certain length
may,
but do not necessarily, receive a double
stress,
we at least approximate closely to an
actual
law of Hebrew rhythm. But there is a
second
question : does every single word receive
a
stress, or, as in several lines of Christabel,
may
we in Hebrew poetry have not only several
syllables
but also more words than one to each
stress?
We obtain some light on both these
questions
from
certain characteristics of the Massoretic
punctuation,
and on the second of them from
Assyrian
analogy also. The effect of makkeph
in
the Massoretie system is to render unaccented
any
word which is thus joined to a succeeding
word.
We may believe that the principle of
the
Massoretic makkeph corresponds to a principle
in
the ancient language without accepting every
particular
use of makkeph in the Massoretic text
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 139
as
corresponding to the intention of the original
writers.
Nothing is more probable than that the
negative
particle xl,
conjunctions liken, and
other
particles were frequently toneless: but
were
they so regularly? If not, and if also we
cannot
unquestioningly follow the Massoretic
punctuation,
then an element of uncertainty
arises
as to the number of stressed syllables in a
given
line; for example, do the two lines in
Isaiah
i. 3,
fdy
xl lxrWy
Nnvbth
xl ymf
Israel cloth not know,
My people doth not perceive,
contain
each three stresses (as in MT), or each
but
two ? We cannot determine this off-hand.
If,
indeed, we lay down the principle that two
stressed
syllables must not immediately follow
one
another, then the two xl's must be mak-
kephed,
for in each line the syllable that precedes
xl is stressed; but it is decidedly dangerous
to
lay this down as a. rigid principle, in spite Of
the
strong tendency in MT to use makkeph
in
order
to avoid such concurrences. Modern Pales-
tinian
popular songs, which have much that is
analogous
to Hebrew poetry, according to the
express
testimony of Dalman,l admit the con-
currence
of two tone-syllables. And the import-
1 "Zuweilen stossen
auch zwei betonte Silben unmittelbar auf
einander,"
Palastinischer Diwan, p. xxiii.
140
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
ance
of xl
(not) in the two lines above cited
(for
the antitheses to the two lines that precede
depend
on it) rather strongly indicates that it
there
received the stress in each line.
But there are other combinations of
words
that
are frequently makkephed in the Massoretic
text
; for example, constructs and genitives.
Again
the question arises : were such combina-
tions
regularly read with a single stress ? if not,
has
the MT always preserved a correct tradition
of
the intention of the original writer ? We are
thus
faced with another group of uncertainties.
These
can perhaps be reduced by observing that
in
MT there is a far greater tendency to makkeph
construct
and genitive if the construct case is
free
from prefixed inseparable particles such as
prepositions
or the copula ; so, e.g., in Lamenta-
tions
iv. 9 we find brH-yllH with, but brh yllHm
without
makkeph.
The Massoretic punctuation rests
partly on
an
ancient tradition, partly on an exegetical
theory,
partly on an accommodation of the text
to
a recent mode of reading it. It is valuable,
therefore,
to have such principles as that the
negative
particles are normally, and construct
cases
often, toneless, supported by Assyrian
analogy.
In the Zeitschrift fir Assyriologie for 1895
(pp.
11 ff.) Zimmern published an interesting
Assyrian
inscription, a poem as it appeared to be,
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 141
though
since, as Dr. Langdon informs me, neither
Zimmern
himself nor any one else has yet
succeeded
in making a consecutive translation,
it
may be in reality a succession of disconnected
verses
written out in illustration of scansion.
In
any case the important point is that here we
seem
to have visualised a mode of scansion that
throws
light on the composition of the feet or
rhythmical
units in Assyrian, for these verses
are
divided by longitudinal lines into four sections,
and
by latitudinal lines into groups of eleven.
The
longitudinal lines mark off into separate
compartments
the four stressed syllables or words
with
their accompanying unstressed syllables,
which
here, as in most Assyrian and Babylonian
poetry,
compose the line.
I will briefly summarise the
statements made
by
Zimmern at the time, based on his first
examination
of this document; these were ampli-
fied
in a later article, to which reference will be
made
below. According to Zimmern, then, the
following
metrical facts are attested by these
scansion
tablets:
(1) Normally there is to one word,
one stress;
but
(2) the relative pronoun (monosyllabic in
Assyrian),
the copula, prepositions, the negative
particles
la and ul, and the optative particle lu
receive
no stress, but go with the following word
to
form a single-stress group of syllables; so
also
(3) the status constructus and the genitive
142
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
generally
receive but one stress — on the other
hand,
if the second substantive has a pronominal
suffix
they receive two; (4) two particles and a
word,
or one particle and a word with a pro-
nominal
suffix, form single-stress groups; (5) two
words
expressing closely related ideas form a
single-stress
group—e.g. abi u banti; (6) a voca-
tive
may be inserted without being reckoned
in
any of the four stress-groups that compose
the
line.
Though we make the most of the
suggestions
from
both sources, the Massoretic punctuation
of
the Hebrew text and the scansion of the
Assyrian
tablets, we shall still be left with a fair
range
of uncertainty, and many lines of Hebrew
poetry
will occur in which, judged by themselves,
the
number of stresses will remain ambiguous.
And
that ambiguity will be still further increased
when
we attempt to determine what single words,
if
any, may receive two stresses; here again some
light
is cast on the possibility of such double
stress
by the Massoretic punctuation; for as
the
effect of makkeph is to bring two or
more
words
under one tone, so the effect of metheg is
to
indicate the presence in the same word of two
tones,
of a counter-tone in addition to the main
tone.
But there is no probability that all the
counter-tones
marked by metheg, such, for example,
as
the first syllable in forms like UlF;qA, really
received
a stress; and for this theory of double-
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 143
stressed
words we receive, I think, no very
helpful
analogy from Assyrian.
The question, then, arises : Can we
discover
a
more accurate method of determining the
limits
of what may accompany a stressed syllable?
It
is the attempt to answer this question that
occupies
in the main the attention of recent
theorisers
on Hebrew metre, and it is in the
attempt
to answer it that they diverge from one
another.
The popularity which for a time was
enjoyed
by
Bickell's1 system has waned in favour of that
of
Sievers, which has the advantage of being very
much
more elaborately and systematically worked
out.
I propose very briefly to summarise some
of
the chief points in Sievers' system, premising
at
the outset that if it could be held to be estab-
lished
it would (1) greatly reduce, though not
entirely
eliminate, lines of ambiguous measure-
ment;
and (2) give for every line, regarded by
itself
independently of its association with any
other
line, a clear rhythmical definition.
In connexion with the present
discussion the
two
fundamental laws of Sievers' system can,
perhaps,
best be stated thus: (1) the number
of
unstressed syllables that may accompany a
1 Gustav Bickell, Metrices biblicae regulae exemplis
illustralae (1879);
Carmina Veteris
Testamenti metrice
(1882); Die Die/dung der Hebrder
(1882).
The English reader will find a useful summary of Bickell's
system
in W. H. Cobb, A Criticism of Systems of
Hebrew Metre, pp.
111-128.
144
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
stressed
syllable must never exceed four, and only
in
a particular type of cases may it exceed three.
Corollary:
every word containing more than
five
syllables must have two stresses. (2) The
stressed
syllable regularly follows the
unstressed
syllables
that accompany it; and more than a
single
unstressed syllable may never, follow the
stressed
syllable that it accompanies.
Using the term anapaest not of
course of a
combination
of two short followed by a long
syllable,
but of two unstressed syllables followed
by
one that is stressed, Sievers claims that the
Hebrew
rhythm rests on an anapaestic basis,
and
that the normal foot is
x x _’_
examples
of such feet being MykirAd;, UlF;q;yi, yneB;-lfa
Possible
variations of the normal foot are--
(1) x x x _’_
(2) x _’_, and
even
(3) _’_
Moreover, since the stress may fall
on a syllable
which
with an additional and secondary short
syllable
corresponds to an original single syllable,
as
in the segholates, further variations are x x
_’_ x,
x
x x _’_ x , etc., an example of such feet being
j`l,m,ha-ynepli.
1 After Sievers had
indicated his theory in outline, Zimmern (Zeit-
schrift fur Assyriologie, xii. 382-392) returned
to the examination of the
scansion
tablets referred to above (p. 140 f.), and found that between
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 145
If this theory be entirely sound, or
even if it
closely
approximate to the truth, it will consider-
ably
diminish the range of uncertainty that must
remain
so long as we leave entirely undetermined
the
limits of the unstressed syllables that may
accompany
a stressed syllable. This may be
illustrated
by an example: how many stressed
syllables
are there in each of these lines in Psalm
i.
1,
dmf
xl MyFH jrdbv
bwy
xl Mycl bwvmbv
The question turns on the treatment
of xl;
was
it stressed or unstressed? The Massoretic
punctuation
leaves the negative in each line
disunited
from the verb and therefore capable at
least
of being stressed; and Dr. Briggs1 in calling
the
lines tetrameters certainly allows a stress
to
each xl.
I think it may be urged against this
two
stressed syllables at least one, generally two, and not rarely three
unstressed
syllables occurred, but never or quite rarely more than
three.
It may be worth while adding here that
Dalman (Palastinischer
Diwan, p. xxiii, with
footnote) has found that, in the modern Palestinian
(Arabic)
poems that follow not a quantitative but an accentual system,
one
to three, and occasionally four, unstressed syllables occur between
the
stressed syllables. The value of these Palestinian analogies lies
in
the fact that we are dealing not with speculations as to how a written
poem
was or could be pronounced, but with the manner in which hither-
to
unwritten poems were actually read to the editor who committed
them
to writing.
1 It so happens that I
have mainly referred to details in Dr. Briggs'
work
with which I disagree ; the more reason, therefore, that I should
recall
the fact that in the subject with which I am now dealing Dr.
Briggs
was a true pioneer, and that he was one of the first writers in
English
to insist on the fundamental importance in Hebrew prosody
of
the stressed syllable.
146
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
that
xl
has nothing like the need of emphasis
and
stress here that it has in the lines previously
cited
from Isaiah i. 3, where fdy xl is antithetic
to
fdy
in the previous distich. I should therefore
think
it most probable that the lines were three-
stressed
and not four-stressed ; but apart from
the'
bearing of the rest of the Psalm on the question
we
cannot determine the point unless we are
justified
in calling in such a theory as that of
Sievers.
Now it is perfectly true that even on
that
system monosyllabic feet are possible, and
that
xl
in particular at times, as in Isaiah i. 3,
stands
by itself as a foot; but if the anapaest is
the
basis of the rhythm, we cannot naturally
divide
each of the two perfectly normal anapaests
fdy-xl and bwy-xl into a monosyllabic and
a
dissyllabic
foot; on Sievers' theory the only
natural
way of reading the two lines is with
three
stresses; they are, to use Dr. Briggs'
terminology,
trimeters, not tetrameters.
Sievers' theory, then, if
established, would
reduce
the number of lines which, measured. with
exclusive
reference to the stressed words or
syllables
only, are ambiguous. Is the theory,
then,
as a matter of fact, so firmly establish ed on
perfectly
certain data that it does actually
diminish
the number of uncertainties that are
left
when we attempt to count stressed syllables
simply
without very closely defining either the
position
which such stressed syllables must
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 147
occupy,
or the number of unstressed syllables
which
may accompany them? I doubt it. I
cannot
here undertake any examination or criti-
cism
of Sievers' long and exhaustive exposition
of
his theory; nor can I examine the arguments,
worthy
as most of them are of the closest atten-
tion,
by which he supports certain theories of
vocalisation
on which his metrical system rests.
But
these theories, however much may be said
for
some of them, are not all of them as yet so
certainly
established as to allow the metrical
system,
which in part suggests them, but which
also
certainly rests upon them, to furnish a
sufficiently
sure instrument for eliminating the
uncertainties
that arise when we measure a
Hebrew
text by the stressed syllables only. The
degree
of uncertainty which the theory would
remove
is largely counterbalanced by the in-
security
of the basis on which it rests.
In illustration of what I have just
said it must
suffice
to refer `to a few classes of the conjectural
vocalisation
adopted by Sievers, all of which are
more
or less essential to the smooth working out
of
his system.
(1) Partly on general phonetic
grounds, partly
from
actual features of the Massoretic vocalisa-
tion,
such as the alternative forms of the type
MykilAm;.la and MykilAm;la, and the complete
abandon-
ment
of the reduplication and also of the following
syllable
in such inflexions as Brijlzu from NroKAzi, tOnyog;wi
148
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
from
NOyGAwi, Sievers infers that regularly when,
owing
to inflexion, the full vowel after a re-
duplicated
consonant is lost, the reduplication
and
also the vowel that followed it were entirely
lost
also; and that, for example, Myklml was
always
pronounced lamlachim in three syllables,
never
lammelachim in four, and yhyv always waihi
in
two syllables (cp. ydeymi not ydey;.mi), and never
wayehi
in three syllables.
(2) Again, the consonantal text of
the Old
Testament
distinguishes two forms of the second
person
perfect alike in the masculine and the
feminine.
The second person masculine is gener-
ally
of the form tlFq, more rarely of the form
htlFq, and again the feminine is generally tlFq,
and
more rarely ytlFq. According to the received
vocalisation,
the masculine, however spelt, was
pronounced
katalta, and the feminine katalt.
Sievers,
however, treats both the rarer forms
htlFq and ytlFq as trisyllabic,
pronouncing them
katalta
and katalti respectively; and he treats the
more
frequent form tlFq, alike whether masculine
or
feminine, as dissyllabic, pronouncing it katalt.
(3) Certain pronominal forms were
originally
pronounced
with a syllable less than in MT ; thus
MT
1.T7, pausal j~d,yA, has replaced j`dAyA; cp. such
forms
in Origen's Hexapla as hxalax = j~l,kAyhe, bax=
j~b;, and in Jerome goolathach = j~t,lA.xuG. And it is
also
argued that the endings hA-,, hA-u were once
monosyllabic.
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 149
It
will be seen from the foregoing examples
that
the tendency of Sievers' vocalisation is to
reduce
the number of syllables below the
number
produced by the received system. Con-
sequently
what I stated as the first funda-
mental
law of his metrical system, viz. that
not
more than four unstressed syllables
may
under
any circumstances accompany one stressed
syllable,
often means not more than five
stressed
syllables
counted according to the received
system.
One other of Sievers' theories with
regard to
the
pronunciation of Hebrew poetry must also
be
noted; it works in an opposite direction, and
is
designed to supply unstressed syllables when
their
absence would be too keenly felt. Sievers
admits
monosyllabic feet, but he abhors the
concurrence
of two stressed syllables; he calls
to
his aid the analogy of singing: as in singing
a
single syllable is sung to more than one note by
virtually
repeating the vowel sound, so Sievers
postulates
that when tone-syllables appear to
follow
one another immediately the long tone-
syllable
was broken up into two in pronuncia-
tion;
e.g. in such circumstances xl was pro-
nounced
not lo, but lo-o, and lvq not kol,
but
ko-ol, and the metrical foot
is in each case not
_’_
but x _’_.
Two things seem to me to gain
probability
from
Sievers' exhaustive discussion, even though
150
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
elaborated system rests on too much that is
still
uncertain or insecure: (1) the natural basis
of
Hebrew rhythm is anapaestic rather than
dactylic;
this is really an obvious corollary from
the
regularity with which the Hebrew accent
falls
on the last syllable of words, and the in-
frequency
of detached monosyllables, and earlier
metrists
also have for the most part detected a
prevalence
of anapaestic or iambic rhythm in
Hebrew;
(2) in the union of two or more words
under
one stress, and in the distribution of long
words
among two stress groups we should be
guided
by the principle that the stress groups
within
the same period are likely to be not too
dissimilar
in size and character; and in general
it
is safer to proceed on the assumption that
particles
like yk,
lf,
etc., rarely receive the stress
unless
for some reason an actual sense-emphasis
falls
upon them.
The sum of the whole matter is that
we are
left
with an instrument for the measurement of
rhythm
capable of doing some service, but much
less
delicately accurate, or much less clearly
read,
than we could wish. With this instrument
we
must work at the difficult question, which I
have
so far merely indicated, but which I shall
examine
more closely in the next chapter: What
limits,
if any, are set to the number of different
rhythms
that may be introduced into the same
poem?
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 151
In concluding the present chapter I
will
consider
one further possible, and even probable,
service
which it appears to me that parallelism
may
render in reducing the element of uncertainty
in
determining the rhythm of particular lines.
In
Anglo-Saxon, alliteration clearly distinguishes
three
of the stressed syllables in a line, leav-
ing
only the fourth outwardly undistinguished;
Hebrew
has no such outward indication of this
all-important
element in the rhythm; in par-
ticular
all particles, all construct cases, and
some
other types of words are rhythmically
ambiguous;
in any given line they may be
stressed
or they may not. What I suggest is
that
parallel terms tended at least to receive the
same
treatment in respect of stress or non-stress.
I
will give one or two illustrations of the value
of
this law if its probability be admitted. If we
take
by itself the line (Isa. i. 10),
Mds
ynycq hvhy rbd vfmw
Hear the word of Yahweh, ye judges
of Sodom,
we
may certainly be in doubt whether hvhy rbd
received
one stress or two, and whether the whole
line
was read with four stresses or five. Sievers
gives
it but four, and thereby in its context, as
I
believe, treats it wrongly. I suggest that rbd
(word)
ought to receive the same metrical value
as
its parallel term trvt (law) in the completely
and
symmetrically parallel line or period that
152
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
follows,
and that we should read both periods
alike
with five stresses
Mds
ynycq hvhy rbd vfmw
hdmf
Mf vnyhlx trvt vnyzxh
Hear the-word of-Yahweh, judges
of-Sodom,
Give-ear-to the-law of-our-God,
people of-Gomorrah„
xFvH
yvg yvh
Nvf
dbk Mf
Ah! sinful nation,
People laden with
iniquity.
This
Sievers reads thus-
xFvH-yvg
yvh
Nvf
dbk-Mf
and
so far observes the rule which I am suggesting
that
he leaves both the parallel terms yvg and Mf
unstressed;
on the other hand, Nn1rr and its
parallel
Nvf dbk do not receive the same treat-
ment,
though they are quite capable of so doing.
A
more probable reading of the lines will be
either
xFvH
yvg-yvh
Nvf-dbk
Mf
or
xFvH
yvg | yvh
Nvf-dbk
Mf
I
take as a last example an apparent
exception
to
the law. Lamentations i. 1 reads—
ELEMENTS
OF HEBREW RHYTHM 153
Mf ytbr ryfh | ddb hbwy hkyx
Myvgb ytbr | hnmlxk htyh
sml
htyh | tvnydmb ytrw
How
cloth she sit solitary, |—the city (once) great in popula-
tion!
She
is become like a widow, | she that was great among the
nations:
She
that was mistress over provinces, | she hath been (set)
to
forced labour.
Budde suspected ryfh, the city, in the first
line
on the ground that at present the second
half
of the first line contains three stresses,
whereas
it should only contain two. Sievers
removes
the ground for suspicion by treating
Mf-ytbr, great
in population, together as a single
stress.
At first this seems, by making ytbr,
great,
unstressed, to give a term in the first
line
a metrically different character from that;
of
corresponding terms, ytbr and ytrw, mistress,
in
the second and third lines. But the parallelism
of
in the first line with ytbr in the second
and
ytrw
in the third is, as a matter of fact, not
complete;
the real parallel in the first line to
ytbr, great, in the second line and ytrw, mistress,
in
the third is not ytbr by itself but Nf ttbr, great
in
population, i.e. populous, which, so taken
together,
is also an antithetic parallel to the
single-stressed
word ddb,
solitary, in the first half
of
the line; it is only when taken together
that
the words Mf ytbr express the idea in the
mind
of the writer, viz. the populousness of the
154
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
city,
whereas ytbr
in the second and irnm in the
third
line sufficiently express by themselves the
ideas
of the "great lady" (in antithesis to "the
widow.")
and "the princess"; Myvgb, among the
nations, and tvnydmb, over provinces, respectively
serve
merely to amplify the two ideas. The
distinction
between Mf ytbr and Myvgb ytbr is
shown
grammatically by the difference in con-
struction;
and the writer probably allowed him-
self
to repeat the same word 'inn in the two lines
instead
of using two different and synonymous
terms
on the same kind of principle as that of
the
well-known law of Arabic poetry that the
same
word may be repeated in the course of a
poem
as the rhyme word, provided that the word
is
used on the two occasions with some difference
of
meaning.
Thus, perhaps, a close examination
of Lamenta-
tions
i. 1 confirms, rather than reveals an excep-
tion
to, the law which I have suggested, and
incidentally
shows that ryfh is not merely metric-
ally
possible, which Budde had denied and which
is
all that Sievers claimed, but metrically required.
CHAPTER V
VARIETES OF RHYTHM : THE
STROPHE
155
CHAPTER V
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM: THE STROPHE
HEBREW
rhythms fall into two broad classes
according
as the second line of the successive
distichs
is equal in rhythmical quantity to, and
therefore
balances, the first line, or is less in
quantity
than, and so forms a kind of rhythmical
echo
of, the first line. Distichs in which a shorter
first
line is followed by a longer second line are
relatively
speaking so rare1 that in a first broad
division
they may well be neglected; and we
may
classify the great majority of rhythms not
merely
as distichs consisting of equal or unequal
lines,
but, so as to bring out the regular and more
striking
difference between them, as balancing
and
echoing rhythms respectively.
But before we can discuss the
question of the
extent
to which, or the sense in which, strophe
may
be said to be either a regular or an occasional
form
of Hebrew poetry, it becomes necessary to
subdivide
these two broad classes of rhythms
1 Examples are given
below, pp. 176-182.
158
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
which
have hitherto mainly engaged our attention,
and
then to consider to what extent different
rhythms
may enter into one and the same poem.
This
subdivision must be carried through by
applying
a measure which, as I have pointed
out
in the previous chapter (p. 150), is less
accurate
than we could desire, and leaves us with
corresponding
uncertainties which must not be
forgotten.
Even when we may be certain of the
general
class into which a particular distich may
fall
we may remain uncertain of its exact measure-
ment;
for example
fdy
xl lxrWy
Nnvbth
xl ymf
a
distich which occurs in Isaiah i. 3, is certainly
a
distich of equal lines (balancing rhythm) : but
whether
each line contains three or only two
stressed
words is, as we have already seen (p. 139),
in
some measure uncertain.
Whether the unit in Hebrew poetry is
the line
or
the distich has been much discussed; regarded
from
the standpoint of parallelism, it is obviously
the
distich that is the unit; the single line in this
case
is nothing; it is incapable of revealing its
character
as a parallelism. On the other hand,
it
is rhythmically just as easy to measure a single
line
as to measure a distich ; and at times it is
necessary
so to do: for, as there alternate with
distichs
that consist of parallel lines distichs that
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 159
contain
no parallelism, so occasionally there
alternate
with these distichs single lines or mono-
stichs,
and also tristichs in which one of the three
lines
may or may not be parallel to the other
two.
For these non-parallel isolated stichoi, or
the
third stichoi of tristichs, measurement of the
line
becomes necessary.
At the same time, unless an
anapaestic rhythm
such
as Sievers claims to discover, or other
rhythm
equally well defined, can be shown to
prevail
within the lines, these isolated stichoi
owe
their rhythmical character, so far at least
as
we can discern or measure it, to the fact that
they
contain the same number of stressed syllables
as
the halves of the distichs among which they
occur.
Thus in any case the distich remains
so char-
acteristic
of Hebrew poetry that it is better, so
far
as possible, even in a rhythmical classifica-
tion,
to measure and classify by distich rather
than
stichos: though the stichos when isolated
will
of course call for measurement too.
Distichs consist of (i.) those in
which the lines
are
equal; and (ii.) those in which one line
(generally
the second) is shorter than the other.
The first class of distichs
subdivides into
(a)
distichs with two stresses in each line, for
which
we may use the formula 2 : 2 ; (b) distichs
with
three stresses in each line (3 : 3) ; and (c)
distichs
with four stresses in each line (4:4).
160
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Of
these three types of balancing rhythm the first
and
third are intimately connected: for four-
stress
lines are commonly divided into two equal
parts
by a caesura, and the pause at the caesura
is
often strong enough to justify, regard being
had
to rhythmical grounds alone, treating each
period
of four stresses as a distich of two-stress
lines.
Any isolated group of two periods of four
stresses
is best classified as a single distich of
four-stress
lines, or two distichs of two-stress
lines,
according as parallelism occurs between the
clauses
or sentences of two stresses or of four
stresses.
But in view of this intimate connexion
it
is not surprising that combinations of two
two-stress
clauses or sentences, and combinations
of
two four-stress sentences, occur in the same
poem.
Such a mixture of rhythms, if in such
case
we are right in speaking of a mixture of
rhythms
at all, exactly corresponds to the fact
that,
in the same kinah or elegy, parallelism
sometimes
occurs between the two unequal
sections
of three and two stresses respectively,
and
sometimes does not; in the latter case we
may,
if we will, speak of a line of five stresses, and
in
the former of a distich in which a two-stress
line
follows a three-stress line; but the line in
the
one case and the distich in the other are
rhythmically
identical, since each contains five
stresses
; there is no real change in the rhythm,
though
the change in the parallelism introduces
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 161
a
markedly different effect 1 which it is well to
render
as manifest as possible.
If, at least where parallelism
commonly takes
place
between sections of three and two stresses
respectively,
we more properly speak of a distich
of
unequal lines than of a line of five stresses,
then
clear examples of distichs of two-stress lines
are
those which interchange with the 3 : 2 distichs
in
Lamentations i., iii., iv. : as, for example,
Myrvrmb
ynfybwh
hnfl
ynvrh
He hath filled me with bitterness,
He hath sated me with wormwood.
However we choose to term them,
combinations
of
parallel clauses of two stresses do, as a matter of
fact,
interchange within the same poem with dis-
tichs
of four-stress parallel lines : so, for example,
in
2 Samuel i. 22--
MyllH
Mdm
Myrbg
blHm
rvHx
gvwn-xl Ntnvhy twq
Mqyr
bvwt-xl lvxw brHv
From the blood of the slain,
From the fat of the mighty,
The bow of Jonathan turned not back,
And the swore of Saul returned not empty.
For
are we not forced by the parallelism to place
a
much greater pause between the first two sets
1 Cp. e.g. Isaiah i. 10
f., 18-20, 21-26, and see Isaiah
(" International
Critical
Commentary "), p. Ixvi (Introduction, § 54) ; see also ibid.
pp.
4 f., 26, 31.
162
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
of
two words than between the next two sets, at
the
end of the first of these four lines than in the
middle
of the third or fourth line? And are not
the
two short parallel periods really separated
by
almost as strong a pause as the two longer
ones
that follow? If we call the two longer ones
a
distich of four-stress lines, why not the two
shorter
ones a distich of two-stress lines? Does
not
the passage really consist of two distichs
rather
than of a single tristich (cp. R.V.) of three
four-stress
lines ?
For another example of this
combination we
may
turn to Isaiah xxi. 3—1
hlHlH
yntm vxlm Nk-lf
hdlvy
yryck ynvzHx Myryc
fmwm
ytyvfn
tvxrm
ytlhbn
Therefore filled arc my loins with
writhing,
Pangs have seized me as of a woman in travail.
I am bent (with pain) at what I
hear,
I am dismayed at what I see.
Here
the first two periods must be regarded as a
distich
of four-stress lines : the lines cannot be
subdivided
into distichs of two-stress lines as
which
so much of the rest of the poem may be,
and,
indeed, is best read.2
1 Cp. Isaiah, pp. 348 f.;
also my article, "The Strophic Division of
Isaiah
xxi. 1-10, and xi. 1-8," in the Zeitschr.
fur die AT. Wissenschaft,
1912,
pp. 190 if.
2 The existence of
two-stress lines in Isa. xxi. 1-10 is, indeed, denied
by
Lohmann. In the Zeitschr. fur die AT.
Wissenschaft, 1912, pp.
49-55,
he had urged, and in reply to my criticism (contained in the
article
mentioned in the previous footnote) he maintains (in the same
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 163
Which is the best way to divide the
Hebrew
text,
or even an English. translation, though this
at
least should as far as possible be divided
according
to the parallelism, often becomes a
delicate
question. For example, does
tvklmm
vFm Myvg vmh
(Ps. xlvi. 7) Crx
gvmt vlvqb Ntn
consist
of one distich of four-stress lines incom-
pletely
parallel to one another (so R.V., v. 6)? or
of
two distichs of two-stress lines, the lines in the
first
distich being completely parallel, the lines
in
the second not parallel at all? Thus--
Nations were in tumult,
Kingdoms were moved;
He uttered his voice,
The earth melted.
If Psalm xlvi. 7 be treated as a
single distich,
then
the first line of the distich is marked by an
internal
and secondary parallelism; and it is
journal,
1913, pp. 262-264), that the whole of this poem except vv. b
and
9 originally consisted of four-stress periods, and that vv. 8 and 9
consisted
of five six-stress periods, each equally divided by a double
caesura
into three two-stress sections. But this theory rests on textual
emendations
that appear to me to lack support independent of the
theory
itself. I should not very confidently maintain that v. 10 must
be
in its original form; but it is surely very precarious criticism to
argue
that because the words n'rsrr nos are absent from the LXX
in
v. 5, therefore two other words in the same verse, viz. hvtw
lvbx,
were
absent from the original text., and that the words absent from the
LXX
were present in the original text. Nor again can the words,
"eating,
drinking" be dismissed as "trivial." It is distinctly more
probable
that the princes were bidden to rise after the banquet had
begun
rather than while the tables were still being laid. But while in
this
detail I differ from Lohmann, I repeat what I said in my article,
that
his discussion is in the main a valuable criticism of Duhm's mis-
taken
treatment of Isa. xxi. 1-10.
164
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
to
be observed generally that the well-defined
caesura
which regularly occurs in four-stress
periods
renders it particularly easy for the halves
to
receive such secondary parallelism, and so to
assume,
when isolated, an appearance of greater
independence.
Whatever view we take of par-
ticular
examples, whether we break them up
into
distichs of two-stress lines or distichs of
four-stress
lines, the rhythm remains essentially
the
same, and our only problem is how best to
do
justice to other formal elements in the poem
which
differentiate what are, in the last resort,
rhythmically
identical periods. There is nothing
that
is peculiar to Hebrew poetry in this particular
kind
of uncertainty which is produced when,
within
a rhythm that remains constant, another
poetical
form is irregularly followed. A popular
metre
with English poets in the sixteenth century
was
the " poulter's " measure, in which lines
of
twelve syllables alternate with lines of a
“poulter's”
dozen, i.e. of fourteen syllables;
these
long but unequal lines rhymed.l Divide
the
twelve-syllable line of the poulter's measure
in
half, and the fourteen-syllable line into lines
of
eight and six syllables respectively, supply the
four
short lines thus produced with two sets of
1 Four lines of Grimald
in Tottel's Miscellany (ed. Arber, p.
110)
may
serve as an example :
Of all the heavenly gifts that
mortal men commend,
What trusty treasure in the world can countervail a friend?
Our helth is soon decayed; goods,
casual, light and vain;
Broke have we seen the force of power, and honour suffer pain.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 165
rhymes
instead of one so that they rhyme alter-
nately,
and the form of the typical short metre
of
our hymn-books is the result. But in some
cases
the origin of short metre asserts itself, and
within
the same hymn the first and third lines
sometimes
rhyme and sometimes do not; as,
for
example, in these two consecutive verses of
Wesley's
translation of Gerhardt's hymn
Give to the winds thy fears,
Hope and be undismayed;
God hears thy sighs, and counts thy
tears,
God shall lift up thy head.
Through waves and clouds and storms
He gently clears thy way:
Wait thou His time; so shall that
night
Soon end in joyous day--
and
so throughout the hymn, though in no
regular
alternation, we may observe rhymed and
unrhymed
first and third lines. Rhythmically
the
two long lines of the old poulter's measure
and
the four short lines of modern short metre
'are
identical: where rhymes regularly mark off
the
shorter periods, it is obviously convenient
to
make this prominent by dividing into four
lines
; but where the first and third sections
only
occasionally rhyme, either course might be
adopted
: and so with a Hebrew poem in which
parallelism
sometimes, but not invariably or
even
predominantly, exists between the halves
of
successive periods of four stresses.
Yet, clearly allied as 2 : 2 and 4 :
4 are, at
166
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
times
it makes some difference whether we treat
the
passage as in the one form or the other;
the
main difference lies here, that in ambiguous
cases
we shall naturally give to the separate lines
of
what we regard as a distich of two-stress lines
a
greater independence than if we were to regard
these
two-stress clauses as merely parts of a
single
four-stress line. I take as an example
Psalm
xlviii. There are in this Psalm, as is
well
known, some difficult phrases and some
doubtful
text, but the presence of several short
parallel
clauses, enough, I think, to be charac-
teristic
of the poem, is certain: on the other
hand,
in the present text there is no single clear
case
of parallelism between four-stress periods.
This
being so, verse 4 (RN., v. 3) ought, I believe,
to
be taken not as a single four-stress line (R.V.),
but
as a distich 2 : 2; it consists of two independ-
ent
parallel lines--
hytvnmrxb
Myhlx
bgwml
fdvg
God is in her palaces;
He hath made himself known as a high retreat.1
1 If—and it surely is--it
is a good thing to preserve, when this can
be
done without detriment to the sense or to English idiom, as much
as
may be of the swing and rhythm of the original, the Prayer-Book
version
of Psalm xlviii. is not happy, and A.V. ruins the first verse
by
omitting a comma. On the other hand, R.V. in vv. 1, 2 (Hebrew
2,
3) is very happy, and only goes astray with the crucial verse 3 (Hebrew
4).
Its rendering, which does not differ here essentially from P.B.V.
and
A.V., might pass if the rhythm of the original were 4 : 4, but is
improbable
if the rhythm in the previous verses is, as taken, and
correctly
taken, as I believe, by R.V. to be, 2 : 2. Dr. Briggs, on the
other
hand, by the help of some emendations, reduces the whole of
verses
1-3 (2-4) to 4 : 4 and renders as follows :—
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 167
The latter part of verse 3 (2) of
the same
Psalm
offers, if the text is correct, an example
of
a tristich of two-stress lines. Clearer examples
of
the way in which the rhythm produced by a
succession
of two-stress parallel lines or clauses
may
expand not only into four-stress periods
with
a caesura, but also at times into six-stress
periods
with a double caesura, may be found in
Isaiah
iv. and xxi. 1-10: I have already cited
two-stress
and four-stress distichs from the latter
passage
; the six-stress passage occurs in verse 8--
Mmvy
dymt | dmf yknx | yndx hpcm-lf
tvlylh
lk | bcn
yknx | ytrmwm
lfv
Upon
a watch tower, 0 Lord, | am I standing I continually
by
day,
And
upon my guard-post am I stationed all the nights.
Great and highly to be praised in
the city is our God.
His Holy Mount is beautiful in
elevation, the joy of the whole earth.
Mount Zion on the northern ridge is
a royal city.
Yahweh cloth strive in her citadels,
is known for a high tower.
Apart from the validity of the
emendations presupposed, this
treatment
of the passage seems to me to have against it the fact that
it
gives an aesthetically inferior result. Some corruption of the text
there
may be, and in particular the tristich in verse 3 is questionable,
but
substantially we may, I think, reproduce the sense and rhythm
of
the original as follows:
Great is Yahweh,
And highly to be
praised,
In the city of our God,
The mountain of his
holiness.
Fair in elevation,
The joy of the whole
earth,
Is the mountain of Sion,
The recesses of the
North,
The City of the Great
King.
God is in her palaces;
He hath made Himself
known as a high retreat.
168
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
The importance of this expansion of
2 : 2 into
4
: 4 or 6 : 6, as the case may be, will appear
later.
Of the balanced rhythm, produced by
the
union
of three-stress lines (3 : 3), it is unnecessary
to
say much at the present point. These lines
may, but rarely do, admit a
caesura;1 and this
may
occur after the first or the second stress:
it
may be somewhat strongly marked, as in
vnmyqy
ym | xyblkv
And as a lioness--who shall rouse
him up?
(Num.
xxiv. 9)
or
slighter as in both lines of Psalm li. 9—
rhFxv
| bvzxb
ynxFHt
Nyblx
glwmv | ynsbkt
Unsin me with hyssop, | and I shall
be clean;
Wash me, | and I shall be whiter than snow.
While,
therefore, 3 : 3 differs from 2 `: 2 owing to
its
greater fullness, it differs from 4 : 4 not only
1 If Vetter's theory of
caesura, as propounded in his Metrilc des
Buches
Job (1897), were correct, caesura in 3 : 3 would, indeed, be
common
enough. For 3 : 3 is common in the Book of Job, and Vetter
argues
that every line of that poem contains a caesura, and thereby
differs
from Lam. i.-iv. where the longer line (of the 3 :2 distichs)
alone
contains a caesura, the shorter being without one. But, according
to
Vetter's own primary statistical analysis, in only 577 lines out of a
total
of over 2000 is the caesura immediately obvious ; and of these
577
lines not a few are four-stress lines. In many of the three-stress
lines
among the 577 there is certainly a caesura, though perhaps not
actually
in all ; and Vetter's attempt to prove that there is a real
caesura
in the 1500 odd lines in which it is not immediately obvious,
breaks
down : see especially Konig's careful criticism in his Stylistik,
pp.
323-330. Incidentally Vetter's book contains a large amount of
carefully
classified and valuable observation.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 169
owing
to its less fullness, but also owing to this
general
absence of caesura, which is almost
constantly
present in 4 : 4; or, if caesura is
present
in 3 : 3, this rhythm still differs markedly
from
4 : 4 owing to the fact that in the one case
the
caesura necessarily creates an unequal divi-
sion
of the line, whereas in the other it regularly
creates
an equal division of the line. In either
case
the difference between 3:3 and 4:4 is
more
than a mere difference of fullness, and the
effect
is strikingly dissimilar.
We come now to consider distichs of
which
the
two lines are not of equal length, or, as we
may
prefer to regard some of the examples, lines
of
which the two parts separated by a caesura
are
not of equal length. With reference to what
is
in any case the normal echoing rhythm, viz.
3
: 2, it is unnecessary to add anything to what
has
been already said above. But, as legitimate
variations
of 3 : 2, Budde, as we have seen (p. 92),
admitted
in addition to 2 : 2, which by his theory
of
heavy words he endeavoured to equate with
3
: 2, distichs of the type 4 : 2 and 4 : 3. Whether
either
4 : 2 or 4 : 3 ever really produces the echo
that
is characteristic of 3 : 2 is doubtful; for in
most
cases at all events the longer line of 4 : 2
and
4 : 3 is itself divided into two equal parts
by
a caesura ; so that 4 : 2, so far from producing
the
echo which this arithmetical symbol might
suggest,
often closely approximates in rhythmical
170
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
character
to a tristich of two-stress lines (2 : 2 : 2),
i.e.
to a balancing rhythm; and in the same way
4
: 3 tends to approximate to 2 : 2 : 3, where
also
the effect of echo may be and sometimes
certainly
is lost. Be this, however, as it may,
neither
4 : 2 nor 4 : 3 is, as a matter of fact, at
all
a frequent variation of 3 : 2, though, unless
we
correct the existing text simply in order to
eliminate
them, it cannot be denied that such
variations
do occasionally occur in poems where
the
dominant rhythm is unmistakably 3 : 2.
Such
a poem is Isaiah xiv. 4-21, and the present
text
contains two 4 : 2 distichs—in v. 51 and
v.
16 c, d. These read--
Mylwm
Fbw || Myfwr
hFm | hvhy
rbw
Yahweh hath broken | the staff of
the wicked,
The rod of the rulers;
and
tvklmm wyfrm || Crxh
zygrm | wyxh
hzh
Is this the man who made the earth
tremble,
Who made kingdoms quake?
In both these examples the caesura
dividing
the
longer line into two equal halves is obvious;
and
the effect produced is an approximation of
the
whole of each complete period to a tristich
in
balanced measure (2 : 2 : 2). True, in these
particular
examples owing to the shorter line
1 Sievers' attempt to
read this verse (which, to be sure, he pronounces
to
be a " sehr fragliche Vers ") even in the present text as 3 : 2 by
treating
Myfwr-hFm as one stress, and its parallel Mylwm
Fbw as two,
violates the
law
discussed at the end of the last chapter.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 171
being
exactly and completely parallel to the
latter
half of the longer line, there is a sense
echo,
which we may represent in symbols thus—
a.
b . c .| d c' d'. But if we wish to reduce the
lines
to 3 : 2, so as to obtain the characteristic
rhythmical
echo, we must omit mm in the one
case
and wyxh
in the other : this leaves admir-
able
distichs--
Broken is the staff of the wicked,
The rod of the rulers;
and
Is this who made earth tremble,
Who made kingdoms quake?
but
for these omissions the only really strong
reason
would be the theory, the validity of which
is
in question, that 4 : 2 may never occur in a
poem
mainly consisting of 3 : 2.
Even apparent examples of 4 : 2 in
Lamenta-
tions
i.-iv. are very few. Perhaps the only 1 actual
example
is iv. 20-
MtvtyHwb dkln || hvhy
Hywm | vnqx
Hvr
The breath of our nostril, the
anointed of Yahweh,
Is taken, in their pits.
But
this is an actual example, for it could not be
satisfactorily
reduced to 3 : 2 by makkephing one
1 It is very improbable
that iv. 18 b was really another, as it appears
to
be in the existing text--
nvcq
xb-yk vnymy vxlm vncq brq
The
first vncq is
almost certainly incorrect, and perhaps, as has
been
suggested, the two words usp nnp stand where there was originally
the
one word vrcq.
Budde cites also, as examples of 4 : 2 in Lam. i.-iv.,
ii.
13 a and iii. 56 ; but ii. 13 a can be read, as in MT, as 3 : 2, and in
iii.
56 the text is doubtful.
172
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
and
one only of the two pairs of words that
constitute
the first line. Here again the caesura
in
the longer line is obvious; and in this instance
there
is no sense echo even; the real parallelism
is
between the two halves of the longer line; the
parallel
scheme is a . b | a'. b' | c . d, and
the
approximation
to a balanced tristich 2 : 2 : 2
strikingly
close.
Whether either 4 : 2 or 4 : 3 ever
acquired the
same
independence as 2 : 2, 3 : 3, 4 : 4, or 3 : 2
is
doubtful; neither ever seems to constitute
the
dominant rhythm of a poem of any length,
still
less to prevail throughout such a poem.
But
neither 4 : 2 nor 4 : 3 is a mere variant of
3
: 2; as such the occurrence of these rhythms
is
at most very infrequent. On the other hand,
the
existence certainly of 4 : 2, and probably of
4
: 3, apart from poems in which the dominant
rhythm
is 3 : 2, is well established. Sievers
was,
I believe, the first to claim clearly that 4 : 3
was,
so to speak, a rhythm in its own right,
that,
at all events, it was not only a mere variant
of
3 : 2; he thereby made it possible to regard
certain
poems as more regular than they had
previously
appeared to be. In his earlier work1
1 Metrische Studien, i. 102, 117, 569-571. In his Text-proben he
found,
in addition to many examples in Ps. ix., x. discussed above,
several
doubtful examples of 4 : 3 in Ps. iv., and six or seven examples
in
Mal. i. 10-73. A few other examples selected from his Text-proben
or
his collection in the appendix (570 f.) are : Judg. v. 4 c, d ; Ps. i.
5,
6, xii. 4 ; Job iii. 6 (to hnw), iv. 10, 11 ; Prov. i.
5, 8 ; Isa. xl. 12 c, d.
An
example not cited by Sievers may be found in the present text
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 173
Sievers
himself regarded this rhythm as rare,
though
in an appendix he briefly stated, what
he
has since endeavoured to work out, that,
though
rare in those parts of the Old Testament
which
have commonly been understood to be
poetry,
it was the regular rhythm of those
Hebrew
narratives which, though they have
commonly
been regarded as prose, are in reality
metrical.
The one poem among those first
studied
by Sievers in which 4 : 3 seemed to him
to
be frequent, was Psalms ix. and x. In some
respects
this is obviously a bad specimen to be
obliged
to work from, for the destruction in parts
of
it of the alphabetic scheme gives us a fair
warning
that the text is corrupt.1 Still, making
all
allowance for this, Sievers seems to me to
make
out a tolerably safe case for 4 : 3 as an
independent
rhythm, though, unless he is right
in
finding it prevalent in narratives commonly
regarded
as prose, it was nothing like so frequent
as
2 : 2, 3 : 3, 4 : 4, and 3 : 2.
Some years ago, before I had
familiarised
myself
with Sievers' work, and, I think, before I
had
ever even looked into his book, I attempted
a
reconstruction of Psalms ix., x.2 In so doing
of
Hos. viii. 4; but this may originally have been 3 : 3, for Mh may
well
be a mere dittograph of the first two letters of the following word
vkylmh. See also Job i. 21.
1 See below, Chapter
VIII.
2 In an article in the Expositor (Sept. 1906, pp. 233-253):
this now
appears
as Chapter VIII. of the present work.
174
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
I
remarked: "The lines throughout the poem
are
of equal or approximately equal length, the
normal
length being three or four accented words.
Of
the eighty-three lines into which the Revised
Version
divides the two Psalms, fifteen are
abnormally
long or short, i.e. they contain more
than
four or less than three accented words."
But
as I then proceeded to show, these fifteen
exceptionally
long or short lines in the Revised
Version
mostly vanish when even the present
Hebrew
text is correctly divided and punctuated.
The
poem, then, consisted almost, if not quite,
entirely
of lines of three or four accents. This
conclusion
was, of course, consistent with some
or
all of the distichs being 4 : 3; but Dr. Cheyne,
who
had a short time before devoted a careful
study1
to the metre as well as to other aspects
of
the poem, excluded this possibility, for he
found
in the fact that the poem was partly
trimeters,
partly tetrameters, an indication either
of
the imperfect skill of the Psalmist in the manage-
ment
of his metre, or of the interference of a second
writer
with the original. Dr. Briggs's view2
seems
to be similar. But if it was the intention
of
the writer to use some 4 : 3 distichs, it is that
intention
and neither lack of skill nor subsequent
1 In the Book of Psalms (1904), i. 27 f.
2 In the "
International Critical Commentary," p. 70, and the notes,
pp.
72 and 74, on the g and F strophes: he rejects
these strophes in their
entirety
because they appear to him to consist of four-stress lines, and
according
to his theory the poem was originally exclusively 3 : 3.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 175
alteration
of the poem that is the real reason why
the
poem contains both trimeter and tetrameter
lines. Dr. Cheyne's criticism
is tantamount to a
denial
of the existence of a rhythm 4 : 3, just
as
it would be tantamount to a denial of 3 : 2
to
complain that Lamentations i.-iv. consists
partly
of trimeters and partly of dimeters.
Of the forty distichs measured by
Sievers in
Psalms
ix., x. he regards twelve1 as clear examples
and
twenty-two others as probable examples of
4
: 3; the latter and larger group depend on
assuming
some textual corruption, and a few,
or
perhaps even most, of the smaller group are
in
some degree ambiguous; but, even if we had
no
other evidence than that of Psalms ix., x., it
would
seem to me unsafe to deny the probability
of
the actual existence of 4 : 3 distichs. We
shall
have to examine some interesting examples
of
these in the next chapter (p. 234); meantime,
I
give two of the clearest examples in Psalms
ix.,
x., viz. x. 16 and ix. 9:
dfv
Mlvf jlm hvhy2
vcrxm
Myvg vdbx
Yahweh2 hath become king
for ever and ever,
Perished
are the nations out of his land.
1 Viz. ix. 9, 10, 12, 13,
20; x. 1, 2 (to vbwH), 13, 14 a, b and c, d,
15,
16.
2 Briggs reduces this to
3 : 3 by omitting hvhy: he is then compelled
to
treat hvhy
as a vocative and to render,
0 King, for ever and
ever.
176
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
qdcb
lbt Fpwy xvhv1
Myrwymb
Mymxl Nydy
And 'tis He1 will judge
the world in righteousness,
He will pass sentence on the peoples in equity.
Before we pass to a further
consideration of
4
: 2 rhythm it will be convenient to refer briefly
to
what might in the abstract appear to be
natural
variations of 4 : 3 and 3 : 2, viz. 3 : 4 and
2
: 3; as a matter of fact both these last-named
rhythms
are exceedingly rare. Nor is this diffi-
cult
to understand, if the desire that was satisfied
by
4 : 3 and 3 : 2 was a desire for an echoing
effect
: for 3 : 2 produces a rhythmical echo,
2
: 3 does not; whether 4 : 3 commonly produced
such
an echo is more doubtful, and certainly the
proportion
of apparent examples of 3 : 4 to
4
: 3 distichs is much greater than that of 2 : 3
to
3 : 2. The unambiguous examples of 2 : 3 are
so
few that some scholars, even where nothing
but
rhythmical considerations suggest it, would
simply
convert 2 : 3 into 3 : 2 by transposing the
longer
and shorter lines. As good an example
of
2 : 3 as any may be found in the first of the
two
following long and incompletely parallel lines
from
Isaiah xxxvii. 26:
ytyWf
htvx qvHrml |
tfmw xlh
hytxbh
htf | hytrcyv
Mdq ymym
Hast thou not heard? 1 Long ago I
wrought it;
In days of old I formed it; I now I have brought it to pass.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 177
The position of the caesura in the
first line
here
is unmistakable and equally unmistakable
is
the greater length of the second than of the
first
part of the line. But unless rhythm demands
it,
there is no ground for transposing the two
parts,
though sense would clearly admit of
such
transposition.1
Another clear case of the shorter
preceding the
longer
section is Isaiah i. 23 (from Mvty) if, as
the
dominant rhythm suggests, this is a five-
stress
rather than a six-stress period.2 Again
1 The transposition was
suggested by Haupt and adopted by Cheyne
in
his critical Hebrew text in Haupt's edition of The Sacred Books
of the Old Testament ("The Polychrome
Bible"). Stade in his edition
of
the Books of Kings for the same work, which was published later,
declined
to admit the transposition ; but Haupt still maintained his
opinion,
and remarked that, if the transposition were made, the first
hemistich
of the first line became parallel to the first hemistich of the
second
line. This remark is correct, but if it is intended as an argument,
it
is precarious: the parallelism between the two lines in the existing
text
may be represented thus
a . b | c . d2
c'2 . d' | e . f
Adopting
the transposition, it becomes
a . b2 | c . d
a'2 . b' | e . f
But in view of what has been said in
Chapter II., and especially on
pp.
64 ff., the former of these schemes cannot be regarded as abnormal,
though
it is of a less frequent type than the second. As a matter of
fact
Lam. i. 11 a, b, 20 a, b present two schemes similar to that of the
existing
text of Isa. xxxvii. 26. The 1 transposition was suggested
afresh
by Sievers (Metrische Studien, p.
441): some considerations
against
it are offered by Stade (op. cit. p. 280).
2 Sievers treats the line as 2 : 2 :
2, for which (or rather for 2 : 4) in
another
connexion there would be much to be said. Should we per-
chance
read UbriyA for Mhylx xvby? The LXX does not
clearly correspond
to
the present Hebrew text. If we read UbriyA the line is unmistakably
2
: 3—unless we transpose its parts.
178
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Lam.
iii. 27 is clearly a five-stress period, and seems
most
naturally read as 2 : 3; and so with ii. 8 b-
flbm
vdy bywh-xl |
vq hFn
He stretched out the line, | he withdrew
not his hand from
destroying.
But
is it so certain, as it might seem to be at
first
sight, that in the following four cases the
main
pause was meant to be placed after the
second
and not after the third word?
ywpn
ylf hywtv rczt rvkz
(a)
Surely remembereth and is bowed down
upon me my soul.
(Lam.
iii. 20.)
ywpn
ylf hkpwxv hvkzx hlx
(b)
These I remember and pour out upon
me my soul.
(Ps.
xlii. 5.)
br
fwpm ytypnv Mtyx zx
(c)
Then shall I be perfect and innocent
from the great trans-
gression.—(Ps.
xix. 14.)
vnylf
trkh hlfy-xl tbkw zxm
(d)
Since thou hast lain down, the
feller cometh not up against us.
(Isa.
xiv. 8.)
It is worth while to consider these
in the
light
of seven consecutive lines of five stresses
which
occur in Isaiah xli. 11-13
jb
MyrHnh-lk vmlkyv vwby Nh
jbyr
ywnx vdbxyv Nyxk vyhy
jtcm
ywnx Mxcmt xlv Mwqbt
jtmHlm
ywnx spxkv Nyxk vyhy
jnymy
qyzHm jyhlx hvhy ynx-yk
jytrf
ynx xryt-lx jl rmxh
lxrWy
ytm bqfy tflvt yxryt-lx
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 179
which
may be translated thus, so as to preserve
the
order of the Hebrew clauses--
Behold,
they shall be ashamed and confounded—all that
were
enraged at thee;
They
shall become nought and perish—the men who con-
tended
with thee
Thou
shalt seek them and not find them—the men who
strove
with thee
They
shall become nought and nothing—the men who
warred
with thee
For
I am Yahweh, thy God, who holdeth fast thy right hand;
Who
saith to thee, Fear not; I have helped thee;
Fear
not, thou worm Jacob, ye men of Israel.
The last three lines are very
obvious examples
of
the rhythm 3 : 2; and that the four previous
lines
are to be read in the same way is scarcely
less
certain; the last clauses in each of these
four
lines consist of two words, and they are
parallel
to one another; in the third line the
last
clause is in apposition to, or a detached
expansion
of, the object (M . . ) of the sentence
which
forms the longer half of the line—"them—
the
men who strove with thee"; in the remaining
three
lines the last clauses could be
regarded as
the
subjects of the verbs in the longer parts of
the
lines, though the normal position for them in
this
case would be immediately after the (first)
verb,
viz. 1tva, in the first, vyhy in the second,
and
vyhy
in the fourth line; in view of the
parallelism
of these clauses in the first, second,
and
fourth lines with the necessarily detached
clause
at the end of the third line, it is more
180
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
probable
that they were treated by the writer as
detached
amplifications of the subject implicit
in
the verbal forms vmlkyv vwby, vdbxyv
. . vyhy and vyhy
respectively;
in other words, if we would preserve
in
translation the structure of the sentences in-
tended
by the writer, we must translate as above
and
not as the sentences are translated, for
example,
in the Revised Version.
If now we return to the four
examples given on
p.
178, we may feel that in (a) the writer intended
the
nominative clause ywpn ylf to be preceded
by
a pause, the two verbs with the common
subject
being taken rapidly together; in any
case
the sentence is constructed with some
artifice,
for the normal position of ,mnn would
be
after the first clause. Example (b) but for
the
reminiscence of (a) certainly looks like a
genuine
2 : 3, for ywpn ylf in its entirety belongs
to
hkpwxv
and not at all to hrkzx. But
in (c)
is
br fwpm intended to be taken with the second
verb
only? Finally, in (d) are not the con-
trasted
verbs to be closely associated, hlfy,
sufficiently
completing the sentence for the
moment
and then being reinforced by the
nominative
sentence which follows, but which
was
intended to be pronounced after a pause?
If
this view be correct we may translate, not
as
above, but--
Since thou hast lain down, there
cometh not up
The feller against us.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 181
Though
several apparent instances1 of 2 : 3
are
found on examination to be open to suspicion,
it
is probable that this rhythm was actually
used
though with extreme infrequency. In-
stances,
at least apparent instances, of 3 : 4 are
actually
rather more numerous than those of
2
: 3, and consequently the proportion of 3 : 4
to
4 3, itself a rare rhythm, is much greater than
that
of 2 : 3 to 3 : 2. One or two illustrations
may
suffice here : in Exodus xv. 14 we have
twlp ybwy zHx lyH2
| Nvzgry
Mymf vfmw
The peoples heard, they trembled;
Pangs took hold on the inhabitants of Philistia.
Another;
example may be found in Psalm iv. 8—
vbr Mwvrytv Mngd
tfm | yblb
hHmW httn
Thou hast put gladness in my heart
Greater than when their corn and new wine increase.
In addition to seven3 examples
of 3 : 4 which
he
regards, whether rightly or wrongly, as incon-
testable,
Sievers (pp. 113 f.) examines thirty-one
possible
examples, including Numbers xxiv. 3,
1 In addition to those
given above Sievers (p. 111) gives as possible,
but
not all of them probable, examples, Isa. i. 19, v. 1 (to
Ps.
v. 11 (to Mhytvcfmm), all of which might perhaps be 2 : 2 Jonah ii.
5,
Jer. ii. 28 (from rpsm-yk); Isa. xl. 4 (but ? read lpwy
rh-lkv and
so
obtain
a ditich 2 : 2). The two consecutive examples of 2 : 3 at the
end
of Jonah i. 7 occur in a passage commonly treated as prose, but by
Sievers
as poetry.
2 But if zHx
lyH (|| to Nvzgry) be makkephed, even
this example becomes
3.3.
3 Jer. ii. 20 (to rvgfx), 24 (to Hvr), Ezek. ii. 1, xv. 7
(to Mlkxt),
Hos. ii.
4,
7 (from yntn),
Prov. iii. 7.
182
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Judges
v. 2, 2 Samuel xxiii. 1, Isaiah v. 5, 17, 25,
Psalm
iv. 8, Job iv. 12, 20, but he finds these
almost
all open to doubt: either the text1 is
doubtful,
or it is not clear that the periods in
question
must be read as 3 : 4.
The rare occurrence of 4 : 2 as a
variant of
3
: 2 has already been considered (pp. 169-172):
there
remains for consideration the use of this
rhythm
in other connexions. A full period of six
stresses
admits of several modes of division, and
these
actually occur, (1) 2 : 2 : 2, which, if the
sections
are marked by parallelism, or are other-
wise
strikingly independent, may be termed a
tristich
of two-stress lines; (2) 3 : 3, the com-
monest
of all divisions of the six-stress period;2
and
finally (3) 4 : 2 and 2 : 4. In these last there
may
be, and commonly is, a slight pause in the
longer
part of the period, but it is so much less
strong
than the pause that divides the entire six-
stress
period into the two unequal divisions that
1 The influence of
textual corruption in the production of apparent
examples
of 3 : 4 can be observed by comparing the two texts of Ps.
xviii.=2
Sam. xxii. The text of the Psalm presents three fairly clear
examples
of this rhythm: see vv. 7 (from fmwy), 29, 35; but in the
text
of 2 Sam. the line in v. 7 is 3 : 2 (it was, perhaps, originally 3 : 3),
and
v. 29 is 3 : 3. The Hebrew text of v. 35 is rhythmically identical
in
the Psalm and 2 Sam., but the Lucianic text of the LXX suggests
a
text which is 3 : 3.
2 Six-stress periods
divided now into two equal parts (3 : 3) by a
single
caesura, now into three equal parts (2 : 2 : 2) by a double caesura,
may
occur in the same poem (e.g. Isa. xxvi.) ; Sievers has compared
the
alternation of hexameters with a single and a double caesura as
in
the first two lines of the Iliad
Mh?nin a!eide,
qea<, ||
Phlhia<dew
]Axilh?oj
ou]lome<nhn
| h{
muri< ] ]Axaioi?j | a@lge
] e@qhken
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 183
the
difference between 4 : 2 and 2 : 4 on the one
hand
and 2 : 2 : 2 on the other is clear. The
rhythms
4 : 2 and 2 : 4 occur, mainly at all events,
as
alternatives to 3 : 3. Thus the long poem in
Isaiah
ix. 7-x. 4, in which 3 : 3 clearly pre-
dominates,
opens with a 4 : 2 distich-
bqfyb yndx Hlw rbd
lxrWyb
lpnv
The Lord hath sent a word against
Jacob,
And it shall fall upon Israel.
And
we may probably find an example of 2 : 4
preceding
3 : 3 in Psalm i. 1--
wyxh
yrwx
Myfwr
tcfb jlh-xl rwx
dmf-xl
MyxFH jrdbv
bwy-xl
Mycl bwvmbv
Happy is the man
Who hath not walked in the counsel of the wicked;
Nor stood in the way of sinners,
Nor sat in the company of scorners.
The interest of these rhythms, 4 : 2
and 2 : 4,
is
considerable; though, rhythmically, a distich
appears
to be the union of two lines, so that the
line
rather than the distich might be regarded
as
the rhythmical unit, the practice, which is not,
to
be sure, very frequent, of equating two periods
of
six stresses, though in one the two sections
produced
by the caesura are equal, in the other
unequal,
indicates that the unity of the six-stress
period
was strongly felt—a fact which is further
184
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
indicated
by the occasional parallelism of com-
plete
periods of six stresses.1 Moreover, if we
can
trust 2 the text in Psalm cxii. 6
Fvmy-xl
Mlvfl-yk
qydc
hyhy Mlvf rkzl
For never can he be moved,
An everlasting remembrance shah the righteous be
we
have, as Sievers has pointed out, yet another
indication
that the division of a six-stress period
into
two unequal sections was considered as
legitimate
as the division into two (or three)
equal
sections, and the two unequal parts in
the
one case were regarded as each possessing
the
same degree of independence and complete-
ness
as each of the equal parts in other cases
for
Psalm cxii. is an alphabetic psalm in which
the
alphabetic scheme marks off not successive
six-stress
periods, but sections of such periods.
I have now indicated, and given a
few typical
or
more secure examples of, certain kinds of
differences
that may occur within the same
poem.
I will now briefly resume two or three
of
the more important points: (1) The typical
echoing
rhythm is 3 : 2 ; with this 2 : 2 alternates,
sometimes
occasionally, sometimes, as in Lament-
ations
i., frequently; other distichs of unequal
lines,
4 : 3 or 4 : 2, are at best much rarer alterna-
1 E.g. in Lam. v. 9, 10 :
see above, p. 93.
2 But it is obviously not
improbable that qydc has shifted down
from
the first into the second line.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 185
tives.
(2) Of the fundamental balancing rhythms
2
: 2 and 4 : 4 are closely allied and interchange,
and
by expansion a further natural and occasional
variant
is 2 : 2 : 2. (3) But this
last-mentioned
alternative
to 2: 2 or 4 : 4 constitutes a link
with
the third fundamental balanced rhythm,
viz.
3 : 3 ; for 3 : 3 and 2 : 2 : 2 are but different
ways
of dividing the same higher unity, viz. the
six-stress
period, which may yet again divide
into
4 : 2 or 2 : 4. But (4) in respect of these
possible
variants poems differ much: some poems
contain
almost or quite exclusively 3 : 2 distichs,
not
even admitting the variant 2 : 2, and simi-
larly
3 : 3 is maintained without any break
through
entire poems or long passages in the
book
of Job; in other poems, the alternatives,
clear
or ambiguous, are so numerous that even
what
is the basal or dominant rhythm remains
doubtful.1
1 In many of these cases
where parallelism or other features indicate
that
we have to do with a poem, but the metrical irregularity or am-
biguity
is so great that we cannot even determine what is the dominant
rhythm,
the question of interpolation almost necessarily arises, unless
indeed
we assume that a Hebrew poet mingled not only distichs of
different
types, but with these also entirely unrhythmical periods.
For
this we should find an analogy in Babylonian, if we may accept
a
recent assertion of Dr. Langdon's that "Babylonian poets felt them-
selves
at liberty to insert prose lines at any juncture" in a poem.
This
assertion occurs in a note (Proceedings
of the Society of Biblical
Archaeology, xxxiv. (1912), p. 77,
n. 32) on a transcription and transla-
tion
of a recently published Assyrian text in which some lines are
divided
into hemistichs by a space in the middle of the line, and others
are
not. The tablet certainly seems to contain lines that fit with
difficulty
into the rhythm 2 : 2 (or 4 : 4); but some of the lines without
a
space in the middle seem as clearly rhythmical as those which have
the
space. Thus of lines 6 and 7—
186
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
I am perhaps leaving too much
insecure for it
to
be wise to advance further; but the question
of
the strophe towards which I have been work-
ing
in this chapter I will briefly discuss—briefly,
because
what can be safely said here does not
require
many words to state it, and what has
been
both unsafely and erroneously asserted has
already
received, perhaps, sufficient refutation
from
other writers.
Variations in rhythm would be very
readily
explained
if it could be shown that the poems
in
which they are found fall into sections in which
the
same variations recur regularly and in the
same
manner. But even the alleged evidence of
this
is slight. Sievers (pp. 121 f.) suggests that
originally
in Lamentations i. each alphabetic
section
consisted of one five-stress line (or 3 : 2
distich)
followed by two four-stress lines (or 2 : 2
distichs);
and that the same rhythmical variation
5
: 4 : 4 was thus repeated originally twenty-two
times.
Unfortunately, this rhythmical scheme
can
only be imposed upon the poem by much
Saru la tabu it-ta-bak u-ri-e-a
me-hu-u dannu kakkadi ut-ti-ik,
the
former lacks and the latter shows the space; but the former is as
clearly
a four-stress line as the latter, and they are closely parallel to
one
another, as we may see from Dr. Langdon's translation--
An evil wind is blown upon my roof,
A mighty deluge passes over my head.
The
use of the space to mark the hemistich is not of course peculiar to
this
tablet; it is found in some of the texts of the Creation Epic (see
Zimmern
in Gunkel's Schopfung u. Chaos, p.
401 n.; King, Seven
Tablets of Creation, i.).
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 187
quite
arbitrary textual emendation. Again, in
Canticles
i. 4 Sievers finds two strophes each
containing
two distiehs 3 : 3 followed by a
two-stress
monostich. But at best such cases
seem
too rare to point to any strophic system
in
Hebrew based on this principle.
There are, however, one or two
obvious
features
of certain Hebrew poems that have
frequently
been admitted to prove the existence
of
strophes in Hebrew poetry; and rightly, if
we
use the term strophe in no too restricted
sense.
The first of these features is the alphabetic
scheme
in certain poems. It does not seem to
me
a sound criticism of the argument from that
feature
to say that the alphabetic scheme cannot
point
to a strophic division because in Psalms
cxi.,
cxii. it marks off single stichoi. All that
follows
is that in this instance the units of which
the
succession is marked by their initial letters
being
the successive letters of the alphabet is
the
stichos; and so in Nahum i. and Psalm xxv.
it
is the distich. It is 'perfectly possible that,
when
the alphabetic sections are more than a
distich
long, these sections may have something
more
characteristic of them than that they
consist
of so many distiehs or lines. And as a
matter
of fact in Lamentations i., ii., and iv., and
very
conspicuously in ii., the groups of 3:2
(or
2 : 2) distichs form real verse - paragraphs,
for
which we may conveniently use the term
188
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
strophe
the clear but slight sense-pause within
the
distich, and the greater sense-pause at the
end
of each distich, are matched by a regularly
recurring
still greater sense-division at the end
of
every third distich in Lamentations i. and ii.,
of
every second in Lamentations iv.; and for
this
reason a single use of the alphabetic letter
at
the beginning of each group of distichs suffices,
for
the sense holds the group together and gives
it
a unity. On the other hand, in Lamentations
iii.,
and, I think, the same may be said of Psalm
cxix.,
the distichs united under the same letter
have
no regular close sense-connexion with one
another,
or sense-separation from the distichs
united
under the neighbouring letters of the
alphabet;
and indeed in Lamentations iii., it
will
be remembered, the best examples of distichs
parallel
to one another, and, therefore, closely
related
to one another in sense, are distichs
belonging
to different alphabetic groups.1 Now
it
is remarkable that precisely in this poem, where
the
successive distichs of an alphabetic section
are
not welded together by sense-connexion and
so
form no organic unity, their union is secured
by
the purely external device of repeating the
same
initial letter at the beginning of each
distich
of the alphabetic section; and so in
Psalm
cxix. Lamentations i., ii., and iv. each
consists
of twenty-two equal verse-paragraphs
1 See above, p. 141.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 189
which
coincide with the alphabetic sections of
the
poems; Lamentations iii. consists of sixty-six
distichs,
three consecutive distichs throughout
having
the same initial letter, but the poem
contains
no regular system of verse-paragraphs,1
and
where something approaching a verse-para-
graph
emerges it as often as not does not coincide
with
an alphabetic section.
The real conclusion suggested by the
alpha-
betic
poems of the Old Testament, then, appears
to
be this: some Hebrew poems were divided
into
larger sense-divisions consisting of the same
number
of distichs throughout the poem, and
some
were not.
The other feature of some Hebrew
poems that
has
often been regarded as pointing to a strophic
division
is the occurrence of refrains. This,
again,
does clearly mark off successive sections
of
a poem from one another, and more directly
and
naturally than an alphabetic scheme leads
to
a division of the poem into sections corre-
sponding
to the greater sense-divisions of the
poems.
In some of these poems the refrain
occurs
at equal, or approximately equal, intervals
(e.g.
Isa. ix. 7-x. 4, Ps. xlii.-xliii.), in others at
irregular
intervals (Ps. xlix.). I am, of course,
referring
to the intervals in the present Hebrew
text,
or of that text as it may be emended by
1 The spaces in the R.V.
of Lamentations iii. and the lack of spaces
in
Lamentations i., ii., and iv. suggest the exact opposite of the actual
facts.
190
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
help of the ancient versions; I am not for
the
moment considering whether the practice of
some
modern scholars in making conjectural
deletions
from the text so that the refrain shall
always
occur at exactly equal intervals is
sound
or
not.
Some Hebrew poems consist largely or
even
entirely
of a succession of very loosely connected
lines
or distichs; now and again one or two
distiehs
may be more closely connected than the
rest,
but for the most part we cannot speak of
greater
sense-divisions in such poems at all;
and
then nothing that can with any degree of
propriety
be termed a strophe disengages itself.
But
other poems do develop a theme in such a
manner
that greater sense-divisions necessarily
result
; in this case it seems to me convenient
in
a translation to distinguish the verse-para-
graphs
resulting from these greater sense-divisions
by
spacing between them: otherwise we fail
to
mark externally, though we should do so in
prose,
the distinction between paragraph and
paragraph.
This, however, is merely a question
of
translation, and has nothing to do with any
intention
of the writer to give to the expression
of
his thought any further artistic form beyond
the
distich with its rhythm and parallelism.
But
we may fairly detect the intention of the
writer
to submit to such further artistic form,
if
we find, though his poem contains no refrain
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 191
and
is fitted to no alphabetic scheme, that the
greater
sense-divisions occur throughout the poem
at
regular intervals. But this raises the further
important
question: What are regular intervals?
How
ought the paragraphs to be measured? By
lines?
or by distichs? How are tristichs to be
treated
if they interchange irregularly with
distichs?
In discussions of strophe, Psalm ii.
has
often been selected as a clear example of
regular
strophic structure; and so it is, if we
count
by Massoretic verses. The articulation of
the
poem is perfectly clear; the greater sense-
divisions
occur, and are correctly indicated in
the
Revised Version by the spacing, at the end
of
every third verse. But the author of Psalm ii.
was
certainly innocent of the Massoretic verse-
division,
and of this mode of counting. Now,
if
we count by lines the four parts are not equal,
for
while the first, third, and fourth parts contain
each
seven lines, the second contains only six.
If
we count by distichs and assume that a tristich
was
a legitimate substitute for a distich, the poem
falls
into four well-marked sense-divisions, each
containing
three distichs (or tristichs).
I will not here examine this aspect
of the
question
in further detail, but merely record my
opinion
that groups of two, three, four, and
occasionally,
as in Isaiah ix. 7-x. 4, of a larger
number
of distichs, occur in many poems with
such
exact or approximate regularity as to make
192
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
it
probable that the writer deliberately planned
and
carried out this division into equal verse-
paragraphs
or strophes.
But if a writer might deliberately
distribute
his
poem into equal strophes, might he not also
distribute
it into unequal strophes? The occur-
rence
in some poems of a refrain at unequal
intervals
might seem to indicate that he did.
Yet
even this is doubtful: the regular recurrence
of
equal sections in any considerable
poem
cannot
easily be attributed to accident; on the
other
hand, sections of unequal length are
precisely
what would naturally result from a
writer
expressing his thought free from any
further
restraint beyond that imposed by the
distich:
unless, therefore, we can detect some
method
in the irregularity, poems in which the
greater
sense-divisions, though well marked, con-
sist
of a varying number of distichs must be
considered
to have been written free from the
restraint
of any strophic law; in this case, if
we
use the term strophe, it must mean simply
a
verse-paragraph of indeterminate length un-
controlled
by any formal artistic scheme.
Attempts have from time to time been
made,
however,
to discover method in the irregularity
of
poems divided into unequal paragraphs, and
so
to make good the claim that strophe is as
constant
as parallelism. Koster, in the year
1831,
first offered an elaborate examination of
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 193
the
Hebrew strophe;1 he reached the conclusion
that
parallelism of verses is as regular as parallel-
ism
of lines, and consequently that all Hebrew
poetry
is more or less strophic in nature. The
6G
more or less " is an important saving clause;
but
a still more important one follows, and this
secures
Koster's accuracy of observation at the
expense
of his theory ; he claims that no one
can
point to any poetical passage of the Old
Testament
which does not, within the same degree
of license that is
permitted in parallelism within
the distich, follow to some extent
a symmetrical
plan.
But since Koster has previously admitted
that
the parallelism between verse-groups is
generally
synthetic, and since, as I have main-
tained,
synthetic parallelism is really not parallel-
ism,
all that Koster succeeds in maintaining is
that
in every Hebrew poem there is between
verse-groups
a parallelism that is generally of the
type
that is, strictly speaking, not parallelism at
all.
And this is only a roundabout way of saying
that
in Hebrew poems there are greater sense-
divisions
than those of the successive single
distichs;
and this, as I have suggested above,
though
scarcely true of all, is true of very many
Hebrew
poems.
One other point in Koster's
discussion may be
briefly
indicated : in some of his specimens he
1 "Die Strophen,
oder der Parallelismus der Verse der hebraischen
Poesie
untersucht " in Theologische Studien and Kritiken, Vol. iv.
194
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
claims
that the sense-divisions, though not equal,
are
regularly or symmetrically unequal he
claims,
for example, that Psalm xxvii. divided
according
to the main sense-divisions falls into
two
groups of three (Massoretic) verses each,
followed
by two groups of four verses each, the
scheme
being accordingly 3 +3 + 4 +4. This kind
of
hypothetically intentional scheme was later
discovered
everywhere by D. H. Miller, who is
the
author of perhaps the most extensive work
on
the strophe in Hebrew poetry;1 Miller also
claimed
to be able to find not only symmetrical
inequality
in the verse-groups, but also repetition
of
the same words in corresponding positions of
such
verse-groups, as, for example, in the second
lines
of the first and fourth verse-groups, or in the
first
and last lines of the same verse-group. Such
symmetrical
arrangements and correspondences
would
remain as impressive as are the remarkable
arithmetical
formulae by means of which Muller
claimed
to represent them, if on examination
these
formulae proved to rest on any exact and
probable
basis of calculation. What is all-im-
portant
for such schemes to be anything more
than
the self-delusions of a modern student is
that
the unit of reckoning should be clearly
defined
and consistently maintained; and this
neither
with Koster nor Milner is the case. The
1 Die Propheten in ihrer ursprunglichen Form (1895); Strophenbau
and Responsion (1898). For a severe
criticism of Miller's and kindred
theories,
see Ed. Kiinig, Stilistik, Rhetorik,
Poetik, pp. 347 ff.
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 195
Massoretic
verse not only rests on a division of
the
text made long subsequent to the composition
and
writing of the poems, but it is anything but
a
clear and consistent unit, for it consists some-
times
of a single line, oftenest of a single distich
or
tristich, but not infrequently of two or more
distichs.
Yet the Massoretic verse is made the
basis
of Roster's reckoning, with the result that
the
symmetrical formulae 3 +3 + 4 + 4 can have
no
relation to any intention of the author of
Psalm
xxvii.; and any scheme based either on
the
line or on the distich as the unit would
give
a different and much less remarkable
result.
Muller avoids the error of making
the Mas-
soretic
verse the unit of reckoning, but he is not
constant
to any single real unit. Konig 1 has
sufficiently
criticised Muller's strophic division
of
Amos i. 2-ii. 5. I select here as another
example
of the arithmetical symmetry of Muller's
formulae
and the unreality which they express
his
treatment of Amos iv. According to Muller
this
chapter opens and closes with a strophe of
8
lines; between the initial and final strophes
are
strophes consisting successively of 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
lines,
and the arithmetical formula given for
the
whole poem is 8 + (8 x 2) +8. This looks
symmetrical
enough, but how is it obtained ?
Muller
divides the chapter as follows :
1 Stilistik, p. 348.
196
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
vv. 1-3 said to contain 8 lines.
4-6 “
5 lines and a refrain.
7-8 “ 4 “ “
10 “ 3 “ “
9 “ 2 “ “
11 “ 1 “ “
12, 13 “ 8 lines.
It will be observed (1) that vv. 10
and 9 are
transposed
to secure the exact arithmetical pro-
gression;
(2) that 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 +1 only amount
to
15, while if we add to this all five occurrences
of
the refrain the sum is 20; but neither 15 nor
20
is a multiple of eight; so the symmetrical
figure
16 =8 x 2 is obtained by reckoning five
occurrences
of the refrain as one line only! But
this
is only part of the capriciousness that under-
lies
the formula. When we examine the "lines”
we
find some to be true lines, while others are a
large
number of Hebrew words constituting, or
consisting
of a quantity equivalent to, at least
a
distich. In verse 9,
Nvqryv
Nvpdwb Mktx ytykh
I have smitten you with blasting and
mildew,
is
reckoned a single line, but in verse 11, which
the
arithmetical progression requires shall contain
one
line and no more, this single
"line" consists
of
vyhtv hrmf txv Mds tx Myhlx tkphmk Mkb ytkph
Hprwm lcvm dyxk, “I have overthrown
some among
you
as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah,
VARIETIES OF RHYTHM 197
and
ye were as a brand plucked out of the burn-
ing,"
which is somewhat more in quantity than
MkynHm wxb hlfxv Mkysvs ybw Mf MyrvHb
brHb ytgrh
Mkpxbv, "I have slain your young men with
the
sword
together with your captive horses, and I
have
made the stink of your camps to come up
into
your nostrils" (v. 10), which counts, and with
good
reason, as two lines!
With the breakdown of the
arithmetical part
of
Muller's scheme there breaks down also the
significance
of the correspondences. In strictly
measured
sections it might be significant of
intention
if the same word should occur, say, in
the
first line and the last of two corresponding
sections
; but as soon as the measurement ceases
to
be exact the mere recurrence within a few lines
of
such frequently recurring words as Yahweh
becomes
entirely insignificant.
There may be here and there a
certain artifice
in
the repetition at given intervals of particular
words,
and to such an artifice is probably to be
attributed
the almost regular recurrence, even
in
the present text of Psalm cxix., of the same
eight
different words for law; but such artifices
are
scarcely more frequent than the use of
alphabetic
schemes, and have just as little power
to
create real strophes or verse-paragraphs.
CHAPTER VI
THE BEARING OF CERTAIN
METRICAL
THEORIES ON CRITICISM AND
INTERPRETATION
199
CHAPTER VI
THE BEARING OF CERTAIN
METRICAL
THEORIES ON CRITICISM AND
INTERPRETATION
HITHERTO
our discussion has been confined to
the
forms of parallelistic poetry. I have en-
deavoured
to keep, as they should be kept,
distinct,
the two forms, parallelism and rhythm,
while
pointing out the intimate connexion that
often
exists between them. Yet that connexion
is
not so intimate but that either form may exist
apart,
even in literatures that employ both.
Arabic
"rhymed prose," which is not bound by
the
strict laws of Arabic metre, often employs
parallelism
as freely as any Hebrew poem;1 on
the
other hand much of the strictly metrical
Arabic
poetry is totally lacking or exceedingly
deficient
in parallelism,) and few Hebrew poems
maintain
complete parallelism throughout.2 If
it
is customary, as it certainly seems to be, for
non-parallel
couplets in a Hebrew poem to fall
into
the same rhythm as the parallel couplets,
1
See
above, pp. 40-43. 2 See above,
pp. 59 if.
201
202
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
can
a Hebrew poem entirely dispense with strict
parallelism?
We cannot rule this out as im-
possible,
nor should we be wise to treat it as very
improbable;
but, even if parallelism were entirely
absent,
a very essential characteristic of the
poetry
would still remain, if it continued to be
parallelistic,
throughout, in spite of the total
absence
of parallelism of terms.
But the question has recently been
forced to
the
front: Is there a Hebrew rhythmical poetry
that
dispenses not only with parallelism, but also
with
the parallelistic structure that is an essential
characteristic
of all the Hebrew poetry of which
we
have yet taken account?
Lowth, by his analysis of
parallelism, brought
to
light the fact that this parallelism was as
conspicuous
in much of the prophetic writings
as
in Psalms or Job: he thus extended the then
recognised
boundaries of what is poetry in the
Old
Testament. By his analysis of rhythm
Sievers
claims to have carried this extension of
the
still generally recognised boundaries of Old
Testament
poetry very much further: what,
till
the publication of his first work on Hebrew
metre,l
had been universally regarded as prose
has
under his hands come to wear the appearance
of
regular metrical composition; he has detected
1 E. Sievers, "
Metrische Studien," " Studien zur beb raischen
Metrik
" in the Abhandlungen der
phil.-hist. Classe der kanigtich
sachsischen Gesellschaft
der Wissenschaften,
xxi. (1901). See especially
ch.
x. pp. 371 ff.
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 203
in
it some of the same types of rhythm (yet with
a
difference) that occur in books or passages of
the
Old Testament generally recognised to be
poetry,
and also some types or rather some
combinations
of types of rhythm that are not
found
there, but are yet no less strictly rhythmical
than
the rest.
Lowth's discovery that the prophetic
writings
were
in large part poems could not but have had,
and
has actually had, a very considerable effect
on
the criticism, in the broadest sense of that
term,
of those writings, on our conceptions of
their
inspiration, origin, composition, and inter-
pretation.
Just as little, if they succeed in
establishing
themselves, can Sievers' theories of
the
rhythmical forms of. the books of Genesis and
Samuel,
two books which he has subjected to an
exhaustive
metrical analysis,l fail to affect the
criticism
of these books and others of the same
general
character. For this reason I propose to
give
some account of Sievers' theory of the metres
of
Genesis, to suggest certain objections, and to
indicate
one possible result that follows. After
that
I will return to the consideration of the
parallelistic
poetry and consider the legitimacy
of
certain theories of its rhythm. I refer more
particularly
to Duhm's theories, which have
exercised
very considerable influence not only
1 E. Sievers, " Metrische
Studien," ii. " Die hebraische Genesis";
iii.
" Samuel " (Abhandlungen .
. . , xxiii.).
204
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
in
Germany but also in this country, where the
results
of the theories are beginning to be pre-
sented
uncriticised even in books intended for
popular
use.1 Sievers' developed theory of the
metrical
character of the texts commonly sup-
posed
to be prose has not, I think, yet commanded
much
assent,2 but this working out of his theory
must
obviously affect in some measure any
judgment
as to the soundness of its fundamental
principles.
An examination of these two in-.
fluential,
or potentially influential, theories, will
furnish
a number of illustrations of the way in
which
theories with regard to the forms of
Hebrew
poetry may affect the criticism and.
interpretation
of Hebrew literature.
In his first volume (pp. 397 ff.)
Sievers, in.
order
to test the rhythmical character of simple
narrative
style, examined the inscription of
1 See e.g. M. G.
Glazebrook, Studies in the Book of Isaiah;
B. Duhm,
The Minor Prophets
translated in the Rhythms of the Original (English
translation
by A. Duff).
2 O. Proksch, however, in
his recently published commentary,
Die Genesis ubersetzt u.
erklart,
1913, gives a general adherence to Sievers'
theory,
though frequently and greatly differing from him in the detailed
application
of it. In illustration of these differences, I quote a sentence
or
two from my review of the commentary in the Review
of Theology
and Philosophy, ix. 200-204:
"Prokseh divides Gen. iii. 1-19 into
32
metrical units, all seven-stress lines: Sievers divides the same
passage
into 33 metrical units, of which 27 are seven-stress lines, the
others
examples of various rhythms. Considerably less than half of
Proksch's
‘sevens’ are identical with Sievers' ‘sevens’: to be
exact,
12 of Proksch's lines are identical with Sievers', and 20 are not.
Even
more remarkable is the difference in xxix. 2-14 a. Here both
Proksch
and Sievers agree that we have a continuous use of ` sevens
throughout
the passage; nevertheless not a single one of Proksch's
first
fifteen lines is identical with one of Sievers'."
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 205
Mesha,
selecting this as an ancient text that had
not
been subjected to accidents of transcription.
He
analysed it into 37 rhythmical periods, claim-
ing
that " the metrical structure " of this poem
was
all the easier to seize, and the better secured,
by
the fact that the ends of the verses were
marked
by a vertical line, which was but rarely
used
to indicate a mere pause within the verse.
If
it were certain that the vertical line used in
Mesha's
inscription was really intended to mark
off
metrical periods, the fact would be
of the
utmost
importance; for, if the Moabite king
recorded
his exploits in metre, and used this
line
to make the metre clear, a strong presumption
would
be created that Judges, Samuel, and Kings,
large
parts of which closely resemble the Moabite
inscription
in style, were also originally in large
part
metrical ; and the use of this line might be
expected
to cast even more direct light on Hebrew
than
the marking of the scansion in the Assyrian
inscription
to which I have previously referred.1
But
that the vertical line in Mesha's inscription
has
a metrical significance is anything but clear:
what
is certain is that it occurs at places where
punctuation is required, generally
a full stop,
more
rarely a semicolon, or a comma. Thus the
line
occurs twenty-five times at points where Dr.
Cooke2
in his translation punctuates with a full
1 See above, pp. 140 if.
2 G. A. Cooke, A Text-book of North Semitic Inscriptions,
pp. 2-4.
206
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
stop,
five times where he punctuates with a
semicolon,
three times where he punctuates with
a
comma. In three other places the line occurs
where
the inscription cannot be clearly read.
Even
in the three cases where the line corresponds
to
a comma, the pause is considerable, e.g. in
line
7, "I saw my desire upon him ,and upon his
house,
and all Israel perished utterly for ever."
We
may compare with this the relation of the
line
to Sievers' metrical periods: it, occurs at the
end
of twenty-eight out of thirty-seven of these,
and
thrice in the middle of one of them. Inas-
much
as Sievers' periods are made to end with a
real
pause in the sense and are not “run on”
lines,
it would be inevitable that a mark of
punctuation
should generally stand at the end
of
them; but the absence of the mark at the
end
of nine of his periods is much more unfavour-
able
to the theory that the mark has a metrical
significance
than its presence at the end of
twenty-eight
is favourable for there may well
have
been difference of opinion among Moabite,
as
there notoriously is among English, writers
as
to the frequency with which punctuation
should
be expressed; there could have been
none
as to the point at which a metrical period
ended.
It is also to be observed that according
to
Sievers' metrical analysis, the metrical periods
in
the inscription are of five different lengths----
of
three, four, five, six, and seven stresses and
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 207
that
more than two successive periods of the
same
length never occur, and often immediately
contiguous
periods are of different lengths.
We
pass now to the consideration of Sievers'
Hebrew Genesis
Rhythmically Arranged
(1904--
1905).
As compared with his analysis, contained
in
the first volume of his metrical studies, of
Mesha's
inscription and a few specimens of
Hebrew
narratives, viz. Genesis ii., xli., Judges
ix.,
Ruth i., Job i., ii., Sievers' treatment of
Genesis
shows two prominent differences: (1) he
has
abandoned the attempt to make the metrical
periods
and the sense-periods coincide: if he is
correct
in regarding Genesis as metrical, then the
distinguishing
feature of this narrative poetry
is
,that it largely consists of “run-on” lines;
(2)
the same metre is discovered running un-
interruptedly
through long consecutive passages.
The
rhythms alleged to be of most frequent
occurrence
are (1) the six-stress period; (2) the
seven-stress
period—the rhythm which, as we
have
seen (pp. 173 ff.), probably occurs in Psalms
ix.,
x., but is rare in what have commonly been
regarded
as the poetical parts of the Old Testa-
ment.
With these two simple rhythms, as we
may
call them, though the term is not employed
by
Sievers himself, there alternate the more
complex
rhythms produced by the constant alter-
nation
with one of these of a shorter period, viz.
(3)
sevens alternating with a short verse of three
208
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
or
four stresses : e.g. Genesis ix. 1-4 (P), xxvi.
1-13;
(4) sixes alternating with a short verse
of
three or four stresses: e.g. Genesis xxvi. 14, 15.
Of
these rhythms the simple sevens is by far
the
most frequent: long passages in which
Sievers
discovers it are, for example, Genesis i.,
i.e.
P's account of creation; xi. 1-9, J's account
of
the building of the tower of Babel; xxiv.,
J's
account of Eliezer's mission to find Isaac a
wife.
The same rhythm, it will be seen,
occurs in
more
than one of the main sources discovered
by
literary criticism. This is not regarded by
Sievers
as an argument against the general
validity
of that criticism ; quite the reverse:
he
finds his metrical analysis constantly confirm-.
ing
it, and also furnishing a clue through a
labyrinth
with which criticism was already
familiar,
but through which it had hitherto
failed
to find a way. The compositeness of
J,
E, and P has been very commonly admitted,
but
the attempt to analyse these sources into yet
earlier
sources has hitherto led to but relatively
meagre
or insecure results. Sievers claims
through
metre to lead us to a detailed and secure
analysis
of these sources of J, E, and P. As this
promise
of valuable assistance in the analysis of
sources
is made not by some amateur in the
study
of metre, but by a great and recognised
master
of the subject, Sievers' Genesis, if
for no
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 209
other
reason, might well claim the attention of
critical
students of the Old Testament.
Briefly stated Sievers' conclusions
with refer-
ence
to the sources are these: J, E, and P were
not
derived direct from free oral tradition, but
one
and all from earlier literary sources which were
metrical.
These earlier sources can be recovered
by
observing the changes of metre within the
present
text. J rests on four principal sources,
a
source written in seven-stress periods, another
in
six-stress periods, another in seven-stress
periods
alternating with a short verse, and a
fourth
in six-stress periods alternating with a
short
verse. J also contains fragments of a
source
written in four-stress periods. E rests
on
three main sources, one written in sevens,
one
in sixes, and one in sixes alternating with a
short
verse. P is analysed into six sources ; the
main
source is written in sevens ; the other
sources
include one written in sixes, one in sevens
alternating
with a ' short verse, and another in
which
every two seven-stress periods are followed
by
a short verse. The main source in simple
sevens
admitted of an occasional short
verse.
It is difficult to judge of this
complicated
theory
from passages where there is much mixture
of
J, E, and P, or of Sievers' sources of these
sources.
It is better to take what appears even
to
Sievers to be a long continuous passage from
a
single source, and to see by what means and
210
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
with
what results the theory is carried through.
Genesis
xxiii., which Sievers with every one else
refers
to P, and he in particular to his "sevens"
source
of P, may serve as the first illustration.
In this chapter Sievers discovers
twenty-eight
periods
of seven stresses and three short verses
of
three stresses. The three latter are obtained,
without
any textual change from the present
Hebrew
text; of the twenty-eight longer periods,
sixteen
are obtained from the present text, the
remaining
twelve rest on alterations of the Hebrew
text
which, it is claimed, remove transcriptional
error
and the results of the more frequent disturb-
ing
activity of editors who both changed and
added
words. In three of these twelve cases the
LXX
more or less clearly supports the change;
in
another Sievers makes both an addition and an
omission
which metrically cancel one another.
More
or less can doubtless be said for several of
the
alterations1 requisite to reduce the remaining
eight
lines to regularity; but that all the changes
are
required by anything but the exigencies of
the
metrical theory will seem to most who
examine
them improbable.
In Genesis xxiv. 1-52 (J) Sievers
finds eighty
seven-stress
periods interrupted by eight glosses
1 In v. 6 Sievers omits
n,nm, regarding Myhlx xywn as an editorial
amplification
of xywn:
at the end of v. 7 he omits tH ynbl, and in v. 8
ynplm; in v. 9 he substitutes hrfmh for vl
rwx hlpkmh trfm;
in v. 15 he
omits
Crx
(with LXX) and lqw; in v. 16 lqw and rhsl; in v. 17 the clause it
xrmm ynpl rwx hlpkmb rwx Nvrpf; in v. 19 he omits Mhrbx,inserts rwx
Nvrpf, and alters hlpkmh
to hlpkmb.
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 211
of
from three to nine words, and another line
of
different rhythm. Of the eighty seven-stress
lines,
twenty-two depend on departures from the
present
text; but several consecutive seven-stress
lines1
are discovered without any alteration of
the
Hebrew text.
As a last example of Sievers'
metrical analysis
I
select Genesis i. on account of the peculiar
interest
of the reconstruction of the text involved
in
it : at the same time it is right to add that
Sievers
expressly states that his analysis of this
particular
chapter is one of the most uncertain
and
tentative of his results. According to the
analysis
the chapter contained forty-nine seven-
stress
periods interrupted by one line (in v. 20)
of
three stresses and by what is regarded as a
gloss
of two lines in v. 16. Of the forty-nine
seven-stress
periods no fewer than thirty-two
rest
on textual alteration—a far larger proportion
than
in either of the previous examples that have
been
given here. But a large number of the
textual
changes are of one type: in order to
obtain
rhythmical regularity Sievers found that,
in
every case where Myhlx, God, occurred, rhythm
required
either one word less or one word
more:
in the former case he omits Myhlx in,
the
latter he prefixes hvhy, Yahweh; so that in
respect
of the use of the divine names, Genesis i.
1 E.g. eight such lines
occur in v. 42 (from jwy Mx) to v. 46 (to htw);
seven
such lines in v. 47 (from ym-tb) to v. 51.
212
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
would
agree with the present text of Genesis ii.,
iii.,
though not, according to Sievers, with the
original
text of all the sources incorporated in
ii.
and iii.
It would be unwise to condemn the
whole of
Sievers'
analysis of Genesis on account of the
improbably
large amount of conjectural emenda-
tion
needed to carry through the rhythmical
reconstruction
in Genesis i. and some other
passages:
the strength of his case is seen rather
in
such facts as that, for example, in chapter xxiv.
eight
consecutive similar rhythmical periods may
be
found in the present text.
Nevertheless Sievers' results in
general seem
to
me insecure, and their insecurity due to these
considerations:
(1) the vocalisation on which
they
depend is, as I have pointed out in a previous
chapter,1
hypothetical, some elements in it being
probable,
others most uncertain; (2) the number
of
conjectural emendations required solely in the
interests
of the theory is very large; (3) the
analysis
of narratives in Genesis and Samuel
requires
a constant recurrence of "non-stop"
lines
and enjambed clauses. Not only are the
lines
"non-stopped," so that, e.g., a verb may
stand
at the end of one, its accusative at the
beginning
of the next line, but the well-marked
caesuras
within the lines, so prominent in the
parallelistic
poetry, frequently disappear, while
1 See above, pp. 147-149.
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 213
in
others a full-stop may appear at the caesura
and
virtually no stop at all at the end of the line.
Sievers,
it is true, still points his " sevens " with
spaces
for the two caesuras, but the space fre-
quently
divides construct and genitive, or other
words
as closely connected with one another.
Two
lines at the beginning of Genesis xxiii. may
serve
as examples of the points just referred to ;
I
add a translation to bring out the striking
difference
between this kind of metrical com-
position,
if it be such, and parallelistic poems :
hnw Myrwfv hxm hrw yyH ynw vyhyv
xyh fbrx tyrqb hrw tmtv Mynw fbwv
NvrbH
And
were there years of the life of
Sarah one hundred and
twenty years
And
seven years. And Sarah
died in Kirjath-Arba,
which
is Hebron.
And
in the following lines from Genesis i., as
reconstructed
by Sievers, a full-stop occurs in
the
middle of the first line, though the same line
ends
with a verb the accusative to which begins
the
second line:
Myhlx
hvhy xryv rvx yhyv rvx yhy
jwHh-Nybv rvxh-Nyb Myhlx hvhy ldbyv
bvF-Yk rvxh-tx
Let
there be light: and there was light. And Yahweh
Elohim
saw
The
light that it And divided Yahweh Elohim between
was good. the
light and
the
darkness.
Now no doubt there can be found
analogies
214
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
to
most of these phenomena in English blank
verse:
but there remains this surely relevant
and
fundamental difference between English and
Hebrew
poetry: the foot in Hebrew, according
to
Sievers' theory, is much more elastic than the
foot
in English blank verse: the Hebrew foot., it
will
be remembered, consists, according to the
theory,
of a stressed syllable either by itself, or
preceded
by one to three unstressed syllables,
and
in certain cases followed by one but not more
than
one unstressed syllable; briefly, whereas
the
foot in English blank verse is dissyllabic, or
by
resolution trisyllabic, the foot in Hebrew
may
consist of one, two, three, four, or five
syllables.
There is a further point: Hebrew, as
contrasted
with English, has far fewer preposi-
tions,
conjunctions, and other short independent
words
unlikely to be stressed: the consequence
is
that any passage in Hebrew must consist most
largely
of words that can quite appropriately
receive
a stress: if then a rhythmical line consists
of
so many stressed syllables combined with a
very
elastic number of unstressed syllables, and
is
subject to no other law such as that of the
stopped
lines and the distich, it becomes almost
impossible
for any passage not to be rhythmical.
For
the number of the words in any or almost
any
passage will divide either by 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7
with,
if necessary, a few words at the end, to
appear
as a broken line. To what other law,
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 215
then,
does Sievers conceive his lines to be sub-
jected?
It is difficult to discover any, though
it
is obvious that he still prefers that his caesuras
and
line-ends should coincide with some sense-
pause
if possible, and this apparently is why he
distributes
his texts among several metres, though
if
we utterly disregard sense-pauses, and allow
ourselves
an equal liberty of textual emendation,
most
of the lines could be redivided into blocks
of
a different number of feet. It appears to me,
therefore,
that the analogy of English blank
verse
with its freedom from line-bondage is a
bad
ground for assuming a similar free epic
or
narrative verse in Hebrew: the analogy of
Semitic
poetry is against the assumption: and
we
seem driven back on to the stopped line and
the
distich as the normal basis of Hebrew poetry
of
all kinds.
There remains one further
consideration: it
is
brought forward by Sievers himself, and he
attempts
to turn the force of it: the redactors
and
interpolators who often, by, their additions,
destroyed
the metre of their sources, themselves
wrote
in metre; the glosses attributed to them
are
for the most part "metrical." "I cannot,"
writes
Sievers,' "otherwise account for this
than
by the supposition that in a period not yet
accustomed
to free prose the tendency to bring
everything
that had to be said into verse form
1 Die hebraische Genesis, p, 216.
216
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
may
have been' so strong that such redactors in-
voluntarily
composed verses when the extent and
substance
of what they wanted to say in any way
permitted
of this. At the same time they had so
little
artistic intelligence or experience that they
thrust
their own products of a moment unconcerned
into
the older texts without troubling much about
the
mess (Unheil) they thus made of
them."
In view of the various
considerations which
I
have now brought forward I am not prepared,
on
the one hand, to admit the metrical analysis
of
Genesis as confirming the analysis into J, E,
and
P, nor, on the other hand, out of regard
for
hypothetical metrical requirements, to insert
Yahweh
in Genesis i., and thereby abandon. the
well-grounded
conclusion that P made no use
of
the divine name Yahweh in his narrative, till
he
reached the point at which he records the
revelation
of the name to Moses.
But though the theory that the whole
of
Genesis
is derived from metrical sources must be
dismissed
as unproved, the question yet remains
whether,
in addition to such obvious poems as
Lamech's
song (Gen. iv. 23, 24) and Jacob's
Blessing
(xlix. 1-27), traces can still be discerned,
within
or behind the narratives, of any metrical
passages
or sources. And here we may first
observe
that certain speeches introduced into the
narratives
differ in style from the prose of the
narratives
themselves, in virtue of some use of
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 217
parallelism
or some approximation, even in the
present
stage of the text, to rhythms familiar
from
their occurrence in what are generally
recognised
to be poems. Such speeches are the
curses
pronounced by Yahweh on Adam and
Eve
and the serpent (Gen. iii. 14-19), the blessings
pronounced
by Isaac on Jacob and Esau (xxvii.
27-29,
39, 40), and Jacob's speech to Laban
(xxxi.
36-42). To justify the statement that
these
show some use of parallelism and some
approximation
to metre, let it suffice to point out
that
the closing words of the curse on the serpent
form,
as a matter of fact, an unmistakable
distich
3 : 3, the lines of which are completely
parallel
to one another (a . b . c ( a' . b' . c'); that
Isaac's
blessing on Jacob closes with three
distichs
in each of which the lines are completely
parallel
to one another, the schemes being
a
. b j a' . b', a2 . b a'. b'2, and a . b I a'. b'; and
that
xxxi. 38 b, c is a perfectly clear example of
a
distich 3 : 3 with the lines completely parallel
to
one another (a2 . b a'2 . b'). Yet in none of
the
passages quoted is it possible to discern in the
present
text metrical regularity. Such metrical
regularity
can be obtained with least alteration
of
the present text in the curse on the serpent.
If
we omit in v. 14 the words v
hmhbh lkm, of all
cattle and —an omission which was
originally
suggested
by Stade1 quite irrespective of metrical
1 In the Zeitschr. fur die alttestantentliehe
Wissenschaft, xvii. 200.
218
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
considerations—and
in v. 15 the words jfrz Nybv,
and
between thy seed,1 and if, with Sievers, we are
prepared
to include tywx hbyxv under a single
accent,
we have left four successive six-stress
periods,
the first three being divided into three
two-stress
lines, the last into two three-stress
lines,
a method of varying the treatment of
six-stress
periods within the same poem that has
already
been referred to (p. 182, n. 2). With the
two
omissions just defined the Hebrew text
and
English translation read as follows :
hdWh tyH-klm | htx
rvrx | txz
tyWf-yk
jyyH
ymy-lk | lkxt rpfv | jlt jnHg lf
hfrz
Nybv | hwxh nybv | jnyb tywx-hbyxv
bqf
nvpvwt htxv |
wxr jpvwy xvh
Because thou hast done this,
Cursed art thou
Above all the beasts of
the field;
On thy belly shalt thou go,
And dust shalt thou eat,
All the days of thy
life;
And enmity will I put between thee
And between the woman,
And between her seed:
He shall crush thee on the head,
And thou shalt crush him
on the heel.
1 For the omission of
these words there is little, if anything, to be
urged
apart from metrical considerations. It is true that the last lines
contrast
the woman's seed and " thee,” i.e. the serpent, and take no
account
of " thy seed": but per contra
they refer only to the woman's
seed
and do not mention the woman independently. With the threefold
repetition
of in the emended text, cp. Gen. xvii. 7, ytyrb tx ytmyqhv
rfrz Nybv jnybv ynyb; but in this passage
the addition of yfrz Nybv to ynyb would
of
course have been impossible.
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 219
We seem to be left, then, with these
alterna-
tives—that
certain speeches, especially curses and
blessings,
were originally metrical, but that their
metrical
character has been destroyed or obscured
by
additions and alterations, or that the
speeches
in question, while differentiated from.
the
simplicity of the prose of ordinary narrative,
were
not subjected to regular metrical form. In.
favour
of the first alternative, so far at least as
the
curses and blessings are concerned, is the:
fact
that the blessings of Jacob (Gen. xlix.),
Moses
(Deut. xxxiii.), Balaam (Num. xxiii.,
xxiv.)
are all unmistakable poems, and that an
important
function of the early Arab poets was
to
compose and recite curses). At the same time
most
of the passages cited are in their present
form
considerably removed from metrical regu-
larity.
Even if, however, we admit that the
speeches
referred
to in the last paragraph are metrical,
they
could reasonably be explained as instances
of
the same Writer passing from the prose of
narrative
to poetical form in the speeches of the
persons
of his story—a transition which is clearly
1 See particularly I.
Goldziher, Abhandlungen zur arabischen
Philo-
logie," Uber die
Vorgeschichte der Hip' Poesie," referred to and briefly
described
in my note on Num. xxii. 6 (Commentary on
Numbers, p. 328).
See
further G. Holscher, Die Profeten
(1914), pp. 92 ff., 120 f., where
examples
are given. It must be observed, however, that many of
these
early curses are not composed in the classical Arabic metres,
but
in saf (see above, p. 44 f.); an example of a curse in this " rhymed
prose
" is Sura cxi. of the Kur'an.
220
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
marked
and obvious in the book of Job, unless
prologue
and speeches are there referred to
different
writers.
But a rather different question arises
when
we
turn to the narratives of Creation; for here
we
shall find ourselves dealing not with differences
between
narrative and speeches, but with a
question
of differences between different parts
of
what is alike narrative. The question we
have
to put here is this: Are these narratives
in
their present form, or do they rest on Hebrew
sources
that were, entirely prose? or are there
sufficient
traces of rhythm even now left to
suggest
that these narratives rest in part at least
on
Hebrew sources that were written in poetical
form?
If the narratives are prose, and if the
sources
on which they rested were also all prose,
then,
although the Hebrew story of Creation
shows
the well-known resemblances to the Baby-
lonian
story, the literary form given to the
story
by
the Hebrews was at all times different: it
was
prose, whereas the Babylonian story was
told
in verse. And even if Sievers were right,
and
the whole of the Creation narratives in
Genesis
were metrical, there would still be a
difference;
the Babylonian poems are cast in
the
old parallelistic 4 : 4 rhythm, the Hebrew
narratives,
according to the hypothesis, mainly
in
Sievers' non-parallelistic "sevens." But
Sievers
has also drawn attention, and this time
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 221
I
think rightly, to the appearance in small
quantity
of the 4 : 4 rhythm in Genesis ii.: he
recognised
more of it in the first volume of his
metrical
studies than in Die hebraische Genesis,
and
his earlier is perhaps preferable to his later
view.
Delete the superfluous Myhlx after hvhy
in
Genesis ii. 4 b, and it is a fact that ii. 4 b-6 can
easily,
and most of it must, be read as periods
of
four stresses equally divided by a slight
caesura,
as follows:
Mymwv Crx hvhy-tvWf
Mvyb
Crxb-hyhy
MrF hdWh-Hyw klv
Hmcy
MrF hdWh-bwf lkv
Crxh-lf
hvhy ryFmh xl-yk
Hmdxh-tx
dbfl Nyx Mdxv
In
the day when Yahweh made heaven
and earth,
No
plant of the field was yet in the earth,
And
no herb of the field had yet sprung up;
For
Yahweh had not sent rain upon the earth,
And
man there was none to till the ground.
Not
only is this possibly metrical, but (1) the
second
and third, and in some measure the
fourth
and fifth lines, are certainly parallels;
(2)
the hypothetically metrical periods are cer-
tainly
sense - periods; (3) the anarthrous Crx
Mymwv without tx stands in striking
contrast to
the
Crxh txv Mymwh tx of Genesis i. 1. Not only,
then,
have the lines of the Hebrew,
No plant of the field was yet in the
earth,
And no herb of the field had yet
sprung up,
222
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
a
close material parallel in the Babylonian,
No reed had sprung up, no tree had
been created,
but
the rhythm of the Hebrew, if correctly seized
as
4 : 4 (= 2 + 2 : 2 + 2), is identical with the rhythm
of
the Babylonian.
I cannot here pursue the remaining
traces,
for
the most part less clear, of the same rhythm
in
subsequent parts of the chapter, and still less
the
various interesting questions which are raised
by
this apparent formal as well as material
resemblance
of some'' of the Hebrew with some
of
the Babylonian stories of Creation; but the
probability
that behind Genesis ii. lay at least
one
Hebrew metrical story of Creation seems to
me
sufficiently strong to be worth consideration.
If
Genesis ii. 4 b-6 is metrical, it is an example
not
of the hypothetical non-parallelistic metrical
poetry
which Sievers finds everywhere in Genesis
and
Samuel, but of that same parallelistic poetry
which
has so long been recognised in Psalms and.
Job
and much of the prophetical books. But
if
Sievers' theory that the narratives of Genesis
are
metrical is rightly judged to be unproven and.
improbable,
ought we at this end of our discussion.
to
question the metrical character even of parallel-
istic
poetry ; was Hebrew poetry of any kind.
subject
to metrical laws? Have we a right to
adopt
such a system as Sievers' to explain the
metre
of parallelistic poetry, and then to deny
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 223
the
soundness of his application of his system
to
Hebrew narratives ?
It must suffice at this point to
recall some
positions
previously reached: in parallelistic
poetry
the lines are in general well defined, and
where
there is much parallelism of terms the
limits
of the lines are certain; to secure a
rhythmical
balance, or other relation, which
would
be immediately perceived between these
parallel
lines, a far greater elasticity could safely
be
given to the rhythmical foot than if a really
perceptible
rhythm were to be imparted to a
long
passage in which there were no regularly
recurring
pauses. Even after an examination
of
'Sievers' attempt to extend so greatly the
amount
of metrical composition in the Old Tes-
tament,
it seems to me possible and useful to
return
to parallelistic poetry and to insist (1) that
this
consists primarily of distichs; (2) that these
distichs
fall into two broad classes according as
the
second line balances or echoes the first;
and
(3) that the lines of these distichs can also
be
more accurately classified according to the
number
of the stressed words that they contain.
The uncertainties in dealing with
parallelistie
poetry
arise rather when we raise these questions :
Must
a single type of distich be maintained
throughout
the same poem? if not, what types
and
what extent of variation are permitted?
Again,
are all poems strophically arranged, and
224
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
are
all strophes of equal length? I have already
given
my reasons for answering these questions
in
the sense that the laws of Hebrew poetry did
not
require either that a single type of distich
must
be used throughout the same poem, or that
all
poems must be divided into equal strophes:
and
that as a matter of fact some Hebrew poems
are
perfectly, or nearly, consistent in the use of
a
single type of distich and strophes of the same
length,
and that others are not. But the contrary
opinion
is held and enforced with far-reaching
critical
results: single words are rejected. from
lines
in order to reduce all the distichs to a single
type,
and whole distichs in order to reduce all
the
strophes to the same length. More rarely
equality
is restored or invented by addition of
words
or distichs. Dr. Briggs in his commentary
on
the Psalms so emended the text that most
of
the Psalms divide into exactly equal strophes,
strophes
that each contain exactly the same
number
of lines, distichs, or tristichs as the
case
may be. Duhm has done much the same
for
Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the Twelve Prophets,
not
to speak of his work on Psalms and job.
I
am, of course, far from maintaining that either
these
scholars, or others with the same devotion
to
regularity, have failed to put forward many
valuable
suggestions: if some poems, though not
all,
were regular, a scholar who attempts to
make
all regular may succeed in divining the real
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 225
regularity
of those that were regular at the
same
time that he is imposing an unreal regu-
larity
on a poem that never was actually
regular.
In illustration of the far-reaching
effects of
the
determination to impose regularity at all
hazards
on all poems, I will now confine myself
to
some examples of Duhm's methods and
results.
I premise that there is a far stronger
prima
facie case for questioning the originality
of
the text of the books with which Duhm deals
than
that of the book of Genesis; and that there
is
far more reason in the case of these books
than
in Samuel for suspecting that even the LXX
fails
as a sufficient corrective of the Hebrew
text;
so far then an editor of the prophets or of
Job
or of many of the Psalms ought to suspect
more
corruption which must be treated, if
treated
at all, by conjecture, than an editor of
Genesis
or Samuel. But there is need for the
greatest
possible caution in using a metrical
theory
as the sole reason for emendation; for
one
Hebrew metre can be changed into another
with
fatal ease; drop the verb, or some other
parallel
term that the sense will spare from the
second
line of a 3 : 3 distich, and the result is
the
very dissimilar 3 : 2; and, conversely, in a
3
: 2 distich prefix 'an infinitive absolute to the
verb
of the second line, and a distich 3 : 3 is
the
result. For example Isaiah xiii. 11 c, d,
226
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Mydz
Nyxg ytbwhv
lypwx
Mycyrf tvxgv
And
I will make the pride of the presumptuous cease,
And the haughtiness of the awe-inspiring
will I bring low,
is
as it stands an excellent 3 : 3 distich of com-
pletely
parallel lines; it can be very simply
reduced
to a distich of 3 : 2 lines incompletely
parallel
by omitting, with Duhm, the overlined
word.
But what is the probability that the
conversion
of one metre into another would
take
place accidentally several times in, the same
poem
without affecting the sense? Or, what
the
probability
that a scribe would intentionally
convert
3 : 2 into 3 : 3 by such additions in some
distichs
of the poem, while leaving others in the
original
3 : 2?
If the ease with which every Hebrew
text can
in
some manner be adapted to Sievers', anapaestic
system
should make us slow to accept such
applications
of it as his metrical analysis of
Genesis,
the ease with which, if we treat the
rhythm
merely as so many stresses to a line,
one
metre can be converted to another should
warn
us against the seductive regularity which
Duhm
places, for example, upon Isaiah xiii.
This
chapter, says Mr. Box, who, in common
with
some other English scholars, reproduces
Duhm's
assertions, consists of seven-lined strophes
in
the rhythm of the Hebrew dirge ; and in this
resembles
the poem in chap. xiv. Yet it is
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 227
really
difficult to believe that any one could have
reached
this conclusion except under the domin-
ance
of a theory of regularity or the spell of a
great
master; and the false conclusion here
happens
to be of some critical significance, for,
if
Isaiah xiii. consists of six seven-lined strophes
in
i inah rhythm, and chapter xiv. contains a
poem
consisting of five exactly similar strophes,
confidence
in the unity of xiii. and xiv. may
receive
an utterly untrustworthy support. The
actual
fact with regard to Isaiah xiii., as I have
shown
elsewhere,1 is that the Icinah rhythm is all
but
confined to the first eight verses of the
chapter,
and in the remaining fourteen verses,
which
contain twenty-five distichs, there are
but
three or four distichs at most of the kinah
type:
the rest are 3 : 3; Duhm reduces these
3
: 3 distichs to 3 : 2 by two exceedingly simple
devices:
either a word is arbitrarily dropped
from
the second line of the distich, or, if this is
not
convenient, it is assumed that the second
and
shorter line of a 3 : 2 distich has dropped out.
Corruptions
of both kinds certainly occur; but
it
is exceedingly improbable that accidents of the
same
kind happened several times over within
a
few verses and yet so as to leave excellent 3 : 3
rhythm.
Another passage where difficult
critical ques-
tions
arise has been similarly treated by Duhm.
1 Isaiah, pp. 234 if.
228
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
He
asserts that in Isaiah xxxiv., xxxv. the same
metre
is maintained throughout, and he repre-
sents
the whole as disposed in four-lined strophes;
but
he also makes this significant remark: "The
text
has suffered a remarkable number of mutila-
tions,
especially at the ends of the stichoi."
Yet
as
a matter of fact the metre is not the same
throughout
: some of the distichs are certainly
3
: 2, most are certainly 3 : 3, but, just as in
xiii.,
xiv., the 3 : 2 distichs are massed together;
they
are, almost confined to xxxiv. 1-10. A
difference
between the rhythm of xxxiv. 1-10
and
11-17 is, I believe, certain: and, if so, it is
critically
important; for the arguments which
have
led many scholars to abandon the earlier
view
that Isaiah xxxiv. and xxxv. were written
in
the exilic period in favour of the view that
they
are a late post-exilic prophecy rest mainly
on
xxxiv. 11-17—which is metrically different
from
xxxiv. 1-10. The critical questions are
complicated
and difficult, and cannot be discussed
here:
but Duhm's judgment on these chapters
seems
to me to illustrate a second unfortunate
result
of the theory that Hebrew poetry was
absolutely
regular: on the one hand it leads to
much
unnecessary correction of the text; and,
on
the other, to a certain obtuseness to real
difference
of rhythm. The 3 : 2 distich is some-
thing
really different from a 3 : 3 distich, even
though
both occur in the same poem: and if one
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 229
type
of distich is exclusively used or dominant
in
one part of a passage, and another in another,
a
question may always arise whether the two
parts
are of the same origin : that even such a
change
as this necessarily implies difference of
origin
in all cases I am not prepared to assert:
as
a matter of fact, though I pointed out the
difference
of rhythm between Isaiah xiii. 1-8 and
9-22,
which Duhm and others had attempted
to
conceal by groundless emendations, I refrained
from
asserting that the two parts in question
were
of different origin.
But it is in his criticism of the
Book of Jeremiah
that
Duhm's rhythmical principles have proved
most
dangerous here, as is well known, he
works
with the principle not only of regularity
of
distich and strophe, but also of one man, one
metre.
Though we owe to Duhm himself one
of
the warmest appreciations of Jeremiah as
prophet
and poet, we are yet asked to believe
that
this great prophet and poet confined himself
throughout
his long career to one metre! Work-
ing
on this principle Duhm not only rejects the
larger
part of the poems attributed to Jeremiah,
but
he violates parallelism and shows obtuse-
ness
to rhythmical differences in order to re-
tain
much even of what he does retain, but
which,
if his critical theory that Jeremiah
wrote
only in "kinah" rhythm were
correct,
ought
to be rejected. I have shown else-
230
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
where
1 with what violence, and even with what
ridiculous
results at times, as in his strophic
division
of Isaiah xi. 1-8, Duhm tears asunder
the
things that parallelism most evidently in-
tended
to be kept together. I must here confine
myself
to two examples of Duhm's treatment
of
the text of Jeremiah. The first example is
Jeremiah
iv. 3, 4: the present Hebrew text reads,
and
may be divided, as follows:
Mywvrylv hdvhy wyxl | hvhy rmx
hk-yk
Mycq-lx
vfrzt lxv | ryn Mkl
vryb
Mkbbl
tlrf vryshv |
hvhyl vlmh
Mlwvry ybwyv
| hdvhy
wyx
hbkm
Nyxv hrfbv | ytmH wxk xct-Np
If
we approach this passage without a theoretical
prejudice,
is it not obvious that the marked
tendency
of the clauses is to balance one
another,
not to echo one another, as, accord-
ing
to Duhm, if genuine, they should do ? A
further
feature of the passage is the prominence
of
parallelism:--
For thus saith Yahweh
To the men of Judah and
Jerusalem,
Break up your fallow ground,
And sow not among thorns
;
Circumcise yourselves to Yahweh,
And take away the
foreskin of your heart,
1 Isaiah, pp. 211 if.,
and Zeitschrift fiir die AT. Wissenschaft,
1912,
pp.
193-198.
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 231
Men of
And inhabitants of
Jerusalem;
Lest my fury go forth like fire,
And burn with none to
quench it.
The
rhythm for the most part is actually 3 : 3;
I
will not stay to inquire what grounds there may
be
for believing that that rhythm was originally
maintained
throughout : what I have to do is
note
how Duhm turns it into 3 : 2 and with what
results:
(1) He rejects the words "to
the men of
translation)
and also the similar words (lines 7
and
8 above) of v. 4 ; the latter omission is,
perhaps,
right.
(2) Having rejected line 2 above, he
has to
tear
asunder lines 3 and 4 which are most obvi-
ously
parallel to one another: line 3 is tacked
on
to line 1 to form a distich, and it is then
assumed
that the first line of the distich, of which
line
4 above is the second line, has disappeared.
(3) Very interesting and specious is
the treat-
ment
of the first part of v. 4: Duhm divides as
follows:
Mkbbl
tlrf | vryshv hvhyl vlmh
Circumcise yourselves to Yahweh, and
take away
The foreskin of your heart.
Now
there is no doubt that the object of a verb
may
form the second part of a 3 : 2 line (or
distich):
I recall as examples two lines in
Lamentations
ii. 6:—
232
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
tbwv dfvm
| Nvycb hvhy Hkw
Nhkv
jlm | vpx Mfzb Cxbyv
Yahweh hath caused to be forgotten
in Sion
Festal meeting and
Sabbath;
And hath spurned in the indignation
of his anger
King and priest.
Judge
the line from a grammatical point of view
only,
and Duhm's division of Jeremiah iv. 4
seems
to be at least a legitimate alternative to
the
division of the line after hvhy; but once
the
sense and parallelism are considered, how
improbable
does such a division appear. vlmh
and
tlrf vrsh together are parallel terms, a
clause
of two terms being parallel to a single
term,
according to a practice which I have
abundantly
illustrated in a previous chapter:1
what
Duhm does is to chop this second parallel
into
two, giving one half to the line that has
already
expressed the whole idea, and leaving
to
the second line a mere lifeless fragment.
My other example of Duhm's methods
is taken
from
the fine apocalyptic vision in Jeremiah iv.
23-26.
I give it first exactly as it stands in the
Hebrew
text, the divisions of the text being of
course
my own:
Mrvx Nyxv Mymwh lxv | vhbv vht
hnhv |
Crxh tx
ytyxr 23
vlqlqth tvfbgh lkv | Mywfr hnhv
| Myrhh ytyxr
24
vddn Mymwh Jvf lkv | Mdxh
Nyx |
hnhv ytyxr 25
hvhy ynpm vctn vyrf lkv | rbdmh lmrkh |
hnhv ytyxr 26
1 See above, pp. 70-82
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 233
In
translating these lines I adopt two emendations
noted
in the next paragraph, and for convenience
of
printing throw the sections of the long Hebrew
lines
into separate lines:
23
I beheld the earth,
And, lo, 'twas formless and empty;
And the heavens, and they had no
light.
24
I beheld the mountains,
And, lo, they were trembling,
And all the hills moved to and fro.
25
I beheld [the ground],
And, lo, there was no man,
And all the birds of the heaven were
fled.
26
I beheld the garden-land,
And, lo, 'twas wilderness,
And all the cities thereof were
broken down before
Yahweh.
Two emendations suggested by Duhm
and
essential
to his rhythmical scheme, though they
are
not essential to what I believe to be the
correct
view of the rhythm of the passage, seem.
to
me probable: he reads hmdxh after ytyxr in
v.
25, and transposes hnhv and lmrkh in v. 26:
this
gives an exact similarity of structure to all
four
verses.
Once again, if any one will read
these verses,
whether
emended as just suggested or not, with-
out
any prepossession as to what metre Jeremiah
must
have used, or as to the general desirability
of
attaching the term kinah to as much prophetic
poetry
as possible, he cannot, I believe, feel that
they
have any real rhythmical resemblance to
234
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
the
prevailing rhythm in Lamentations i.-iv.:
these
four similar periods are neither four
lines of
kinah-like character as
Cornill'- describes them,
nor
eight lines of alternately three and
two
stresses,
i.e. strict kinah lines, as Duhm will
have
it
: they are four periods of the rarer rhythm
4
: 3.2 What Cornill says is worth quoting:
"
The metre here assumes a somewhat different
form.
The characteristic of the kinah
strophe,
the
short second member, to be sure remains;
but
the whole is weightier and tends more towards
the
gigantic: the first members have mostly
four,
the second three full stresses." The last
remark
is correct so far as it goes, but omits the
very
important additional fact that the first
members
are equally divided by a strongly
marked
caesura: this caesura gives to the entire
period
the rhythmical value 2 : 2 : 3 rather than
4
: 3, and an effect which is the very
opposite of
the kinah: there is no rhythmical
echo, but two
short
balanced clauses are rounded off with a
longer
clause ; the period swells out to its close
instead
of echoing off.
Thus Cornill's remarks seem to me an
apt
illustration
of the disadvantages and the risk
of
confusion involved in working with too re-
stricted
a rhythmical nomenclature.
Instead of trying to compress the
four periods
1 Das Buch Jeremia, p. 53. Cf. the note in The Century Commentary
(A.
S. Peake) on Jeremiah. 2
See above, pp. 171-176.
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 235
into
four kinah lines or distichs, Duhm goes to
the
opposite extreme and endeavours to squeeze
eight
kinah lines (or distichs) out of the present
text
amplified by a few additions which are
really
far too slight for the purpose. It is a
question
whether here the textual changes, or
the
rhythmical results, due to the necessity of
making
everything attributed to Jeremiah kinah
rhythm,
are the more improbable; of the kinah
(!)
lines
that result this is one:1
vlqlqth | tvfbgh lk tx
and
the additions to the text, besides that already
mentioned
(hmdxh
in v. 25), are these: four
times
over, in order to convert two stresses into
three,
Duhm inserts tx! and that in a poetical
passage!2
and in another place (v. 25) he resorts
to
the favourite device of inserting an infinitive
absolute--dvdb. These five changes
represent a
hypothetical
loss of eleven letters: how often
1 To judge how far Duhm's
lines resemble' real 3 : 2, or Ifinah, lines,
it
is best, however, to read them entire. Duhm's lines are as follows :
vht
hnhv Crxh tx ytyxr
Mrvx
Nyxv Mymwh
lx hnpv
Mywfr
hnhv Myrhh tx ytyxr
vlqlqth tvfbgh lk txv
Mrxh
Nyx hnhv hmdxh tx ytyxr
vddn
dvdn Mymwh Jvf lkv
rbdm
hnhv lmrkh tx ytyxr
hvhy
ynpm vctn Myrhh lkv
2 In the present text tx occurs but once (in v.
23), and may there
be
an error for lx (so Rothstein in Kittel's Biblia Hebraica): note St
in
the clause, also dependent on ytyxr, at the end of the
verse, and the
girl
of the Greek version (= lf).
236
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
does
the text of a short passage accidentally lose
in
transcription eleven letters distributed over
five
places without the sense being in the slightest
degree
affected?
It is by such methods as these,
which could be
illustrated
by an abundance of other examples,
that
Duhm succeeds in imposing regularity of
line
and strophe on Old Testament poetry. And
it
is on results so obtained that Duhm and others
build
up far-reaching critical and exegetical
conclusions.
I will in conclusion briefly
summarise some
of
the facts and some of the inferences drawn
from
them to which I have endeavoured to draw
attention
in these discussions, and briefly refer
to
one or two points which it has not been my
purpose
to discuss more fully.
The main forms of Hebrew poetry are
two--
parallelism
and rhythm, to which, as a third
and
occasional form, we may add strophe.
Rhyme,
so common in many languages, and a
constant
and necessary form of all strictly
metrical
poetry in Arabic, as well as a character-
istic
of that other type of composition in Arabic
known
as saj’ ("rhymed prose"),
is in Hebrew,
as
in Assyrian, merely occasional. Curiously
enough
it is conspicuous in one of the earliest
existing
fragments of Hebrew poetry, the song
of
Lamech (Gen. iv. 23, 24), and yet it never
CRITICISM
AND INTERPRETATION 237
developed
into a form1 of Hebrew poetry till
poetry
of the Old Testament, or parallelistic,
type
had long become extinct, and there came,
under
the influence of the Moslem culture and
Arabic
poetry, a renascence of Hebrew poetry
in
the Middle Ages.
Of the two main forms of Hebrew
poetry,
parallelism
and rhythm, parallelism is most
intimately
associated with the sense, and can
and
should be represented in translation. In its
broader
aspects and general differences of types
it
was analysed once for all by Lowth: but a
more
accurate and detailed measurement of
parallelism
is required. Such a more exact
measurement
of parallelism enables us more
readily
to classify actual differences in different
poems
and different writers; and in particular
to
disentangle the very different types of in-
complete
parallelisms and merely parallelistic
distichs
grouped by Lowth under the single term
"synthetic
parallelism." A study, more especi-
ally
of the different incomplete parallelisms, also
affords
an opportunity of watching the intimate
connexion
between parallelism and at least a
certain
approximation to rhythm.
Merely judged from the standpoint of
parallel-
1 For examples of rhyme
in Hebrew, as also for evidence that it was
too
occasional and irregular to constitute a form of Hebrew poetry,
see
E. Konig, Stilistik, 355-357 ; G. A.
Smith, The Early Poetry of
Israel, 24 f. ; C. F. Burney,
"Rhyme in the Song of Songs" in the
Journal of Theological
Studies,
x. 554-557.
238
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
ism,
rhythms fall into the two broad classes of
balancing
and echoing rhythms. Further metrical
analysis
is in detail frequently most uncertain:
but
while recognising this uncertainty, it is
important,
in order to avoid confusion, to adopt
a
method of measurement that is capable of
giving
us a clear and sufficient nomenclature.
This
is to be found in defining lines or distichs
by
the number of the stressed syllables in them.
The
exact number of unstressed syllables that
may
accompany a stressed syllable may be un-
certain,
but is certainly not unlimited.
A single rhythm need not be
maintained
throughout
a poem, though there were probably
limits
to the degree of mixture that was tolerated.
But
in particular the elegy, though it commonly
consisted
of 3 : 2 distichs, was not limited to
these
: it certainly admitted along with these
in
the same poem 2 : 2. Mere change from a
longer
to a shorter distich of the same class, or
even
occasionally from a balancing to an echoing
rhythm,
is no conclusive evidence, and in many
poems
(for poems differ in the degree to which
they
are regular) is scarcely even a ground for
suspecting
corruption of text or change of source.
On
the other hand, a change in the dominant
rhythm
should raise a question whether or not
a
new poem has begun.
Finally the question remains
whether, though
parallelism
in Hebrew seems commonly to have
CRITICISM
AND INTER,PR.ETATION 239
concurred
with certain rhythmical forms, it may
not
in some cases, as in the Arabic saj’,
have
been
used in a freer style more closely allied
to
ordinary prose.
Of the history of parallelism and
rhythm I
have
been able to say little. Did parallelism in
Hebrew
create rhythm, or was it added to an
existing
type of rhythm? This is an interesting
if
an obscure question of origins. As to the
lifetime
of parallelism, we saw that it runs back
to
the earliest poetry preserved in the Old Testa-
ment,
and that it was still a form of Hebrew
poetry
in the second century A.D., but was not
to
be clearly traced later: nor did it wake to
new
life with the revival of Hebrew poetry in
the
Middle Ages. An interesting episode is the
transference
of Hebrew parallelism to poetry
composed
by Jews in Greek, as e.g. in the Book
of
Wisdom.
If we speculate as to the historical
develop-
ment
of rhythms, we shall perhaps most safely
select
as the earliest the 4 : 4 (or 2 : 2) rhythm,
which
Hebrew has in common with Assyrian, but
which
at a later time in Hebrew was outstripped
by
3:3 and 3:2.
The best service to the future of
Old Testament
studies,
so far as these can be affected by the
examination
of those formal elements with which
alone
these discussions have attempted to deal,
will
be rendered, I believe, by those who combine
240
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
with
that further study of Hebrew metre which
is
certainly needed, for it is a subject which still
presents
many obscurities and uncertainties, an
unswerving
loyalty to the demands of that other
and
more obvious form or characteristic of
Hebrew
poetry which is known as parallelism.
CHAPTER
VII
THE ALPHABETIC POEM IN
NAHUM
241
CHAPTER VII
THE ALPHABETIC POEM IN NAHUM
[The following discussion first
appeared in the
Expositor
for September 1898. It was written to estab-
lish
a position which has since been generally conceded,
viz.
that Nahum i. contains at least part of an alphabetic
poem,
or acrostich. But once this position is conceded
it
is reasonable enough to endeavour to rediscover the
whole
acrostich ; and since 1898 fresh attempts have
been
made in this direction. But it still remains true
that
the argument that the whole acrostich and not
merely
part of it lies latent in Nahum i., ii. is much less
cogent
than the argument that chapter i. contains the
first
half of such a poem ; it is also true that the emenda-
tions
necessary to restore the last half of the poem are
altogether
more speculative and uncertain than those
required
to restore the first half. For this reason, and
because
the recognition' of the fact that at least part
of
an alphabetic poem is present in Nahum i. has a
very
important bearing on the criticism of the Book
of
Nahum, I here reproduce what I wrote, without
substantial
alterations beyond additions which are
inserted
in square brackets, and the omission of a
paragraph
on Psalms ix. and x., which is rendered super-
fluous
by the fuller discussion of those Psalms in the
next
chapter.
To have discussed all that has been
written on this
poem
since 1898 would have been alien to the purpose
243
244
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
of
this discussion: it would also be unnecessary; for
the
history of the criticism of Nahum i. and the many
suggestions
that have been made with a view to restoring
the
original text are very fully and admirably reviewed
by
Dr. J. M. Powis Smith in the International Critical
Commentary
" on Nahum.]
THE Old Testament contains a number
of
acrostich
poems. The two laws of such acrostichs
are
that the initial letters of the several sections
should
follow the order of the alphabet, and that
the
sections devoted to each letter should be of
(at
least approximately) the same length. Dif-
ferent
poems differ in the length of the section,
but
within the same poem the length must be
the
same. Thus in Psalm cxix. the length of
each
section is sixteen lines,1 in Psalm xxxvii.
four
lines, in Lamentations cc. i., ii., iii.2 three
long
("kinah" 3) lines, in
Lamentations c. iv.
two
"kinah" lines, in Psalms
xxv., xxxiv., cxlv.
[Prov.
xxxi. 10-31, Ecclus. li. 13-30] two lines,
in
Psalms cxi., cxii. one line. Slight deviations
from
each of these two laws occur in the present
text
of the poems. In some cases the deviation
1 In this example every
other line [i.e. every distich] within each
section
begins with the same letter. The verse in English most fre-
quently
contains two lines of the original; but as it sometimes contains
more,
sometimes less, the relation between different acrostichs can
only
be satisfactorily described by reckoning lines. The English
reader
will find the structure of the acrostich Psalms indicated by
marginal
letters in the recently issued English translation of the Book
of
Psalms (Sacred Books of the Old Testament) by Wellhausen and
Furness
[1898].
2 In Lamentations c. iii.
each of the three lines of the several sections
begins
with the same letter.
3 Cf. Driver,
Introduction6 [9], pp. 457 f. [See, now, pp.116-120 above.]
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 245
is
clearly due to textual corruption. As a
generally
recognised instance of this, the absence
of
a word beginning with v in Psalm xxxvii. 27 c
may
be instanced. Whether the absence of the
verse
in Psalm xxv., of the D verse in Psalm
cxlv.,
or the fact that in Psalm xxv. only a single
line
is devoted to R be original or the result
of
transcriptional error cannot be said with
certainty.
But even if the originality of the
irregularities
in question be admitted, the few
exceptions
simply serve to prove the two general
laws
already stated.l [More difficult and com-
plicated
questions of text in relation to a
partially
obvious alphabetic scheme arise in
connexion
with Psalms ix. and x., which are
made
the subject of special study in the next
chapter.]
It is a matter of more recent observation,
and
at
least in England [it was down to 1898 2 a
1 [A special study of
alphabetic poems—" Alphabetische and alpha-
betisierende
Lieder im Alten Testaments," by Max Lbhr—will be found
in
the Zeitschr. fur die AT. Wissenschaft,
1905, pp. 173-198.]
2 [But since 1898 the
situation has entirely changed. Dr. Driver
subsequently
admitted more decisively than he had done previously
that
Nahum i. rested in part on an alphabetic poem (see below, p. 247 n.).
And
several scholars who have written since, both in England and
America,
have recognised parts of an acrostich in this chapter: see e.g.
A.
R. S. Kennedy, "Nahum" in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, iii.
475
; Karl Budde, "Nahum" in Encyc.
Biblica, 3261 ; Paul Haupt,
"
The Book of Nahum " in The Journal
of Biblical Literature, xxvi.
(1907),
1-53 ; w. R. Arnold, "The Composition of Nahum i. 1-ii. 3"
in
the Zeitschr. fur die AT. Wissenschaft,
xxi. 225-265 ; C. F. Kent, The
Sermons, Epistles, and
Apocalypses of Israel's Prophets (1910), 155-157;
J.
M. Powis Smith, "International Critical Commentary," 287-297. The
sceptical
judgment of A. B. Davidson referred to in the text has found
no
recent support.]
246
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
matter]
of much less general recognition that the
Book
of Nahum, like Psalms ix., x., contains in
whole
or in part a mutilated acrostich. Following
up
earlier suggestions by a German pastor of
the
name of Frohnmeyer and by Franz Delitzsch,
Bickell1
and Gunkel2 have ventured to recon-
struct
out of Nahum i. 1-ii. 3 a complete acrostich
in
which each stanza consists of two lines; and
Nowack,
in his excellent commentary on the
Minor
Prophets published last year [i.e. in 1897],
has
indicated the structure of the poem in his
translation,
and defended the requisite emenda-
tions
in his notes. Three of the leading Old
Testament
scholars in our own country have
recently
[i.e. within the years 1896-1898] had
occasion
to refer to the subject. It has received
at
once the fullest and the most sceptical discus-
sion
from Dr. Davidson,3 who appears to doubt
the
existence of any intentional alphabetic ar-
rangement
in Nahum c. i., and certainly dis-
countenances
any attempt to restore the latent
acrostich,
if such exist. Dr. Driver's judgment
is
expressed as follows in the last [i.e. the 6th]
edition
of his Introduction [1897] : "
In Nahum.
1 In the Zeitschr. d. Deutschcn Morgenlandisehen
Gesellsch., 1880,
pp.
559 f. Carmina Vet. Test. metrice
(1882), p. 212 f.; and "Beitrage
zur
sem. Metrik" in the Sitzungsberichte
of the Vienna Academy (Phil.
Hist.
Series), vol. 131, Abhandlung V. (1890).
2 In the Zeitschr. pr die AT. Wissensehaft, 1893,
pp. 223-244, and
Schopfung and Chaos (1895), pp. 102 f.
3 Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah (Camb. Bible for Schools),
1896,
pp. 18-20.
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 247
i.
2-ii. 2 . . . traces of an acrostich . . . seem
to
be discernible." In a subsequent review of
Nowack's
commentary he has expressed himself
somewhat
more fully, but not more approvingly.
After
admitting that "undoubtedly there
are
traces
of an alphabetic arrangement in the
successive
half verses," he expresses great doubts
"whether
this was ever intended to be carried
systematically
through, or whether it is due to
anything
more than the fact that the author
allowed
himself here and there, perhaps half
accidentally,
to follow the alphabetical order."1
Dr.
G. A. Smith,2 while agreeing with the two
scholars
whose views have been just cited that
much
of the reconstruction of Bickell and Gunkel
is
arbitrary, quite decisively admits that the
traces
of an acrostich are real. To cite his own
words:
"The text of chapters i.-ii. 4 has been
badly
mauled, and is clamant for reconstruction
of
some kind. As it lies, there are traces of an
alphabetical
arrangement as far as the beginning
of
ver. 9" (p. 82). At the same time Dr. Smith
minimises,
as it appears to me, the force of the
1 Expository Times, Dec. 1897, p. 119. Compare also Introd.,6 p. xxi.
[But
in the Addenda (p. xxii f.) to the 7th ed. of the Introduction the
originally
acrostich form of Nah. i. 2-9 is definitely admitted. In the
last
edition of the Introduction (1913)
the note (p. 337) runs : " In
Nah.
i. 2-ii. 2 (Heb. 3) traces of an acrostich are discernible which,
though
the restoration of the whole can be effected only with great
violence,
can be recovered with probability for v. 2-9 " ; and reference
is
made to the discussion which is now republished here, and to his
own
further discussion of the subject in the Century Bible: Minor
Prophets, ii. (1906), pp.
25.28.]
2 Book of the Twelve Prophets, vol. ii. (1898), pp. 81-84.
248
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
evidence
and fails to take full account of what
he
himself admits.
Under these circumstances a fresh
discussion
of
the subject will hardly be considered uncalled
for.
It may be true of the last part of the poem
that
the restoration of the acrostich "can never
be
more than an academic exercise" (Davidson);
but
the establishment of the fact, if fact it be,
that
parts or the whole of a regularly and con-
sciously
constructed acrostich poem lie latent
in
the Book of Nahum cannot remain without
effect
on the exegesis of the passage and on
certain
not unimportant critical problems.
Where too much is attempted it
frequently
happens
that too little gains recognition. Both
Bickell
and Gunkel have attempted to reconstruct
an
entire acrostich. Much of the detail is of
necessity
uncertain. The consequence is that,
as
we have seen, it is still [i.e. in 1898] doubted
whether
the chapter contains even any fragments
of
an acrostich. We must therefore distinguish
between
the proof that Nahum contains traces
of
an acrostich, which, when the evidence is duly
presented,
is cogent, and certain details of re-
construction,
which are requisite if an entire
acrostich
is to be restored, but for which the
evidence
is in one or two cases strong, in many
slight,
and in some nil.
The proof that Nahum contains at
least parts
of
an acrostich must be based on the phenomena
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 249
presented
by the Hebrew text and the versions
of
the first nine verses of chapter i. Any one
who
is unconvinced by these will remain un-
convinced
by the much less conspicuous and
significant
phenomena of the following verses.
The
influence of the two laws of the acrostich-
alphabetical
succession of initial letters and
equal
lengths of the several verses or sections—
can
best be made clear to those unfamiliar with
Hebrew
by a translation arranged in parallel
lines.
Variations from the Hebrew consonantal
text
are printed in italics. The initial letters
are
printed on the left hand together with a
numeral
indicating the position of the letter in
the
Hebrew alphabet; and these are inserted
in
brackets when they are only gained by re-
arrangement
of the order of words or lines. For
convenience
of reference in the subsequent dis-
cussion,
the number of the lines of the trans-
lation
are placed on the right hand. [The verse
numbers
are indicated by superior figures in
the
text.]
1.
x
2 A God jealous and avenging
is Yahweh,
Yahweh
taketh vengeance and is full of wrath;1
1 [There can be no
question that the dominant rhythm of this poem
is
3 : 3; but the first distich is 4 : 4. The occurrence of 4 : 4 in a
poem
mainly consisting of 3 : 3 is not impossible ; nevertheless this
distich
was probably not 4 : 4 in its original form. For, (1) except by
unnaturally
dividing it, so that it should be rendered, God is jealous,
and
Yahweh is avenging, the first line does not fall into two equal
divisions
as is commonly the case in 4 : 4 rhythm (see pp. 168 f.); (2) the
use
of the same term avenging in both lines is improbable; (3) the Greek
version
appears to rest on a text that had only six words (i.e. 3 : 3
250
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
[Yahweh taketh vengeance on his
adversaries,
And retaineth anger for
his enemies.
3 Yahweh is longsuffering
and great in strength, 5
But1 Yahweh
will not wholly acquit.]
2.
b In whirlwind and storm
is his way,
And clouds are the dust
of his feet.
3.
g 4 He rebuketh the sea and
drieth it up,
And parcheth all the
rivers. 10
(4.
d) Bashan and Carmel languish,2
And the growth of
Lebanon withers.
5.
h 5 Mountains quake because of
him,
And all the hills melt.
6. So the earth becomes desolate3
before him, 15
The world and all that
dwell therein.
(7.
z) 6 Before his indignation who can
stand?
And who can endure the
heat of his anger ?
8.
H His wrath pours out like fire,
And rocks are kindled4
by him. 20
9.
F 7 Good is Yahweh to those who
wait for him,5
A stronghold in the day
of distress.
rhythm).
The exact form of the original may remain a matter of some
uncertainty;
most probably it was:
A jealous God is Yahweh,
One that avengeth, and
is full of wrath.
Powis
Smith prefers, A jealous and avenging God is Yahweh, and filled
with
wrath : and it is true that the period of six accents may divide
into
4 : 2 (see p. 182 f.) ; but in that case, too, the four-stress section is
generally
divided by a secondary caesura into two equal parts (p. 182),
whereas
the longer line in the verse as taken by Powis Smith does not
so
divide.]
1 I follow the Syriac in
connecting Yahweh with this line; cf. LXX
as
punctuated in Swete's edition: MT., and consequently E.V., connect
it
with the following line.
2 See below [where lld is suggested in place
of llmx].
3 Point xwtv (the word used of
desolate cities in Isa. vi. 11) instead of
xWtv. The R.V. rendering of the latter word is
hazardous. In favour of
the
emendation, cf. Targ. tbvrHv. Vulg. contremuit is at least no support
of
MT.
4 MT. 11,12 means "
are thrown down," not " are broken asunder "
(R.V.)
; by a transposition of the second and third letters we get
vtcn=are kindled.
5 LXX toi?j
u[pome<nousin au]to<n =vyvql (cf. e.g. Isa. xlix. 23). It has
sometimes
been supposed that vyvql is a simple misreading of Nvfml
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 251
(10.
y) He
knoweth those who trust in him,
1 And in the
overflowing flood delivers them.1
(11.
k) An utter end he maketh of them that
rise against
him,2
25
And he thrusts3
his enemies into the darkness.
(12.
l) 4a
Not twice does he take vengeance on his adversaries,4
9b An utter end he
maketh.
(13.
m)
9a Why do ye plan against Yahweh?5
The foregoing translation represents
to the
eye
the original structure of the poem, which is
quite
obscured by the unoriginal and indeed
very
late verse division found in E.V. The fact
that
any of the alphabetic letters occurs in the
middle
of a verse is a matter of entire indifference
to
our argument. The question is: How fre-
quently
and with what regularity do they occur
at
the beginning of lines? The main and
indisputable
facts can be seen by a glance at the
marginal
letters accompanying the translation.
Before
discussing some of the more ambiguous
phenomena
it will be well to point out that the
lines
are, for Hebrew poetry, remarkably regular
in
length. The case for the reality of metre in
(Hebrew
text) or vice versa. But this is
unlikely. The individual
letters
are not very similar. More probably the present Hebrew and
Greek
texts have each arisen by the intentional or accidental omission
of
one of the two words. The Targum is too free to afford convincing
evidence
; but the translation would be easily explained by the text
assumed
above. It runs thus: "Good is Yahweh to Israel that
they
may stay themselves upon him in time of distress"—Israel =vyvql;
that
they may stay themselves upon him=Nvfml.
1 Supply Mleyciya. 2
[Reading vymqb for
hmvqm.]
3 Reading rpm, for Tin, ;
cf. Job xviii. 18.
4 Reading elp, and rise
for elpn and no, after LXX e]kdikh<sei, e]n qli<yei.
5 The order of these [three] lines is
different in MT. Otherwise the
text
is unchanged except as indicated in n. 4.
252
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Hebrew
poetry does not appear to me to be
made
out.1 But there is no
question that in
many
poems the lines consist of approximately
the
same number of words. This is the case
with
the present passage. The regular length
of
the line is three or four2 independent words.
In
one case only (1. 14) the number of words is
only
two.3 In line 5, which, as we
shall see
below,
is probably part of a gloss, the number
is
five. Unless the emendations adopted in
lines
122, 25 be accepted, two other lines also
extended
to five words.4 The effect of
the
emendations
is in each case to make out of a
single
line of five words two lines of three words
(11.
21, 22 ; 24, 25). With the exceptions men-
tioned
the emendations adopted do not effect
the
length of the lines. Even in the Hebrew
text
as it stands, out of twenty-seven lines all
but
four consist either of three or four independent
1 [This statement is now,
of course, to be modified in accordance
with
Chapters I.-VI. of the present work.]
2 [The lines, except as
indicated above, regularly consist of three
stressed
words : the only examples, even in the present text, of lines
clearly
containing four stresses are v. 2 a, b ; and these also, as pointed
out
above (p. 249, n. 1), were both originally lines of three stresses.]
3 I.e. in the Hebrew text. In the translation I have adopted
Gunkel's
suggestion. He inserts lk before tvfbgh (cf. Ps. cxlviii. 9;
Jer.
iv.
24; Amos ix. 13). [Though line 23 contains three words, it is
most
naturally read as a line of two stresses,
vb ysh
falling under a
single
stress. Probably enough, therefore, a word has fallen out,
though
whether that word was Yahweh and we
ought, as many think,
to
read Yahweh knoweth for He knoweth is uncertain. The repetition
of
Yahweh so soon after line 21 is not required.]
4 The dissimilarity in
length of these lines to the others appears in
Prof.
Smith's translation, Book of the Twelve,
ii. p. 93, 4th and 2nd
lines
from bottom.
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 253
words.
A great tendency to approximate regu-
larity
of length must therefore be admitted.
Turning
now to the occurrence and position
of
the acrostich letters, it will again be well to
proceed
from the certain to the uncertain.
As the Hebrew text stands apart from
any,
even
the slightest emendation, the 2nd, 3rd, 5th,
6th,
8th, and 9th letters of the Hebrew alphabet
stand
at the beginning of the 7th, 9th, 13th,
15th,
19th, and 21st lines respectively ; in other
words,
they stand separated from one another
by
precisely the same constant interval which
would
separate them in an acrostich poem so
constructed
that two lines should be given to
each
successive letter; actual instances of simi-
larly
constructed and virtually unmutilated poems
are,
as we have seen, Psalms xxv., xxxiv., cxlv.,
and
Proverbs xxxi. 10-31. This single fact,
when
duly considered, appears to me to neces-
sitate
the conclusion that we have in this passage
the
result of fully conscious design, and in these
lines,
as in those that intervene, parts of an
acrostich.
Previous1 English presentations of
this
subject, so far as known to me, have not
brought
into sufficient relief the evidence of the
influence
of both laws of the acrostich — the
occurrence
of the letters of the alphabet in regular
succession
at regular intervals.
In the Hebrew text as it now stands
the 11th
1 [Previous, that is to
say, to 1898.]
254
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
and
17th lines do not begin with d and z respect-
ively,
as they should do if they formed part of
an
acrostich. Nor, again, does the 23rd line
begin
with y,
as it should do if the acrostich or
the
fragment thereof extended so far. Is there
anything
apart from the acrostich theory which
suggests
that at these points the Hebrew text
is
corrupt? Or failing that, can the acrostich
theory
be satisfied by simple and probable
conjectural
emendation? If this should be so,
the
evidence of the uncorrected Hebrew text,
in
itself so strong as to be almost irresistible,
receives
some further support.
In the case of what should be the daleth verse
(11.
11, 12), but which in our present text begins
with
an aleph, the versions are certainly
interest-
ing
and suggestive. In the two parallel lines
(11,
12) the Hebrew text has the same verb
(llmx); in all the early versions (LXX, Syr.,
Targ.,
Vulg.), the verbs in the two lines are
different.l
Thus the double occurrence of the
same
word in the two parallel lines is on
grounds
of textual criticism open to grave
suspicion.2
On the same grounds, however, it
1 LXX, o]ligw<qh
. . . e]ce<lipen;
Syr., XXXXX... XXXXX;. Targ.,
yrc . . . vrtn; Vulg.,
"Infirmatus est . . . elanguit." This cannot
well
be attributed to a mere desire for variation, for just below, in lines
17,
18, both Syr. and LXX translate different Hebrew words by the
same
Greek (o]rgh<) or Syriac (XXXXX).
2 I question whether the
mere fact of the repetition of the same
word
in the second line could reasonably be regarded as suspicious.
There
are too many similar instances in our present Hebrew text for
it
to be safely assumed that a Hebrew poet never used the same verb
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 255
must
be admitted that all these versions read
llmx with initial aleph at the beginning of the
former
of the two lines,1 where the acrostich re-
quires
a word beginning with daleth. This is a fact
which
ought to be frankly faced and duly con-
sidered
in deciding to what extent Nahum i. 1-
ii.
2 preserves an acrostich poem. But it must be
noted
further that the verbs used by the LXX
and
Syriac versions in the second line of the same
parallel
(1. 12 in the above translation) never
occur
elsewhere as translations of llmx, although
in
each of these versions several equivalents of
llmx are found one of which might have been
in
two parallel lines. [Such repetitions as occur in the Hebrew text
here
do, however, appear to me now to be in themselves open to some
suspicion,
though not of course to be certainly due to textual corruption.
Some
may be original; others, like the repetition of llmx here, are
due
to the accidental repetition of the term in the first line of a distich
driving
out the parallel, but different, term in the second line. Other
more
or less certain examples of such accidents may be found in Isa. xi.
5,
xvi. 7, xxvi. 7, and are pointed out in the notes on those passages
in
the " International Critical Commentary." See further, below,
pp.
295 f.]
1 In each case the words, used by
the versions in this place, occur
elsewhere
as translations of llmx: thus o]ligou?n in Joel i. 10, 12; XXXX
in
the Pesch. of Isaiah xxiv. 4, 7, Jeremiah xv. 9, Hosea iv. 3; ydc
(in
the Targums as printed in Walton's Polyglot) in Isaiah xix. 8,
xxiv.
4, Jeremiah xv. 9 (cf. 1 Sam. ii. 5; and the Pesch. use of XXXXX in
1
Sam. ii. 5, Jer. xiv. 2, Lam. ii. 8); infirmatus
(or infirmus) est in the
Vulgate
of 1 Samuel ii. 5, Isaiah xxiv. 4 (bis), 7, Jeremiah xv. 9, Hosea
iv.
3, Psalm vi. 3.
2 In addition to the words mentioned
in the last note but two, the
LXX
uses a]sqenh<j (or verb) Psalm vi. 3, Lamentations ii. 8, 1
Samuel
ii.
5; penqei?n Isaiah xvi. 8, xix. 8, xxiv. 4, 7, xxxiii. 9 (?); kenou?sqai
Jeremiah
xiv. 2, xv. 9; mikru<nesqai Hosea iv. 3; and the
Syriac uses
XXXXX,
1 Samuel ii. 5, Jeremiah xiv. 2, Lamentations ii. 8 (cf. also the
usage
of ydc
in the Targ.—see preceding note); XXXXX Psalm vi. 3
and
(Ethpeel of verb) Isaiah xix. 8; XXXXX, Joel i. 10, 12, Isaiah xvi. 8 .
256
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
used
had the translators merely desired variant
renderings
in the two lines of the same verb.
It is, therefore, improbable that llmx stood
in
the Hebrew text of line 12 at the times when
the
LXX and Syriac versions were made.1 On
the
other hand there is reason for believing that
the
actual reading of the Hebrew text which
lay
before at least the Greek translators was
lld (dalal).
For (1) this verb is translated by
the
same Greek word that is found in line 12 in
Isaiah
xxxviii. 14, and probably also in Isaiah
xix.
6; compare also Isaiah xvii. 4; (2) the two
final
letters of lld are the same as of llmx;
this
would have facilitated an accidental copying
of
the verb of the previous line. The chief
question
that remains is whether the verb lld
would
be appropriate. Certainly there is no
other
instance of its being used of foliage, but in
Isaiah
xxxviii. 14 it is used of languishing eyes,
in
Isaiah xvii. 4 (Niphal) of the glory of Jacob,
and
in Post-Biblical Hebrew (Hiphil) of thinning
out
vines or olives.2
But beyond this not unimportant
suggestion
the
versions do not help us. Already when they
were
made lines 11, 17, 23 began with other
1 It is less improbable
that the Targ. and Vulg. read llmx here
as
well as in the preceding line, though of course the difference in the
translations
still constitutes a considerable [?] presumption against
identity
in the original. But both words used in Targ. and Vulg. also
appear
elsewhere as translations of llmx. On ydc and infirmatus est
see
preceding note; for rtn cf. Joel i. 10, 12, and for elanguit Joel i.
10,
12, Isa. xxxiii. 9. 2 See Peak. iii. 3, vii. 5; Shebi'ith iv. 4.
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 257
letters
than those required by the acrostich.
In
line 23, however, the initial word is fdyv;
the
acrostich is at once satisfied by the simple
omission
of v,
which leaves fdy. That v was
constantly
added through dittography or over-
looked
before another v or y with which latter
letter
it is frequently confused, becomes clear
from
a comparison of the LXX and Hebrew
texts.
In assuming then that the v at the
beginning
of line 23 is intrusive, we are simply
assuming
what we know for certain frequently
happened
in similar cases.
The recovery of the initial d and z requires us
to
assume two1 cases of transposition of words
in
the course of the transcription of the Hebrew
text
prior to the Greek translation. Once again
no
one questions that transpositions have taken
place
in the course of transcription. That the
three
initial letters wanting in the present text
1 In lines 11, 12 we must
assume that the verbs of the two lines
became
transposed [see p. 296] and that the original Hebrew ran Nwb
lld
llmx Nvnbl Hrpv lmrkv. In line 17 the fourth
word of the line (vynpl) became
transposed
(having lost its final letter) to the beginning ; for the present
text
rmfy ym vmfv ynpl read therefore nynpl rmfy
ym vmfz.
The sense remains the
same,
but the Hebrew becomes more idiomatic ; cf. Driver, Tenses,
§§
196 f. [The last clause is an overstatement. I should have said :
the
sense remains the same, and the Hebrew quite grammatical. The
order
of the emended text is rather, as Driver puts it (Minor Prophets,
p.
26, n., 7), " less easy and natural than the existing order." The
author
of the acrostich adopted a possible, though less easy, order for
his
words in the interests of his alphabetic scheme, just as the author
of
Ps. cxix. uses htx in v. 4, and places 1,pn-rx at the beginning of
v. 8,
to
satisfy the conditions of his alphabetic scheme rather than because
he
wished to express any real emphasis. An objection taken to the
emendation
by Arnold is entirely lacking in force, and is completely
answered
by Powis Smith.]
258
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
reappear
by means of such comparatively simple
emendations,
thus giving us nine successive
letters
of the alphabet as initial letters at re-
markably
constant intervals, turns a prior great
probability
into virtual certainty.
If then the case is made out that
lines 7-24 are
nine
successive stanzas of an acrostich poem
which
has suffered in three cases at the beginning
of
lines, and at least three or four times elsewhere
from
transcriptional error, how much may we
infer
with regard to the rest of this poem, of
which
at least this considerable fragment has
survived
without serious mutilation? Is the
rest
of the poem to be found in the remainder
of
the passage? Has it also suffered merely
from
the chances and accidents of transcription?
Or
has it been in parts obliterated, in parts
interpolated?
That it has received some
interpolation no one
will
question. The prophetic formula, "Thus
saith
Yahweh " (v. 12), never formed part of an
acrostich
poem; and its presence can hardly
help
suggesting that the latter part of the poem,
even
if it survive in the main, has been to some
extent
recast by the inserter of these words.
We
have then to reckon with the probability of
intentional
as well as transcriptional changes
in
such parts of the poem as may be discovered
after
these words.
As it is the purpose of the present
chapter to
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 259
distinguish
what is certain or very probable
from
details which are uncertain and only gain
what
varying degrees of probability they may
severally
possess in the light of that which is
more
certain, it will be sufficient from this point
on
to make brief notes on some of the more
uncertain
details and some of the questions
which
a careful study of Nahum i. 1--ii. 3 must
necessarily
raise.
(1) In the translation I have
ventured to
indicate
the acrostich letters of the next three
stanzas
to those already discussed. Their restora-
tion
involves greater assumptions than did the
restoration
of the initial d, z, and y. But the
emendation
which gives the stanza (11. 25, 26)
seems
to me very probable, and the transposition
that
places the l stanza (11. 27, 28) in its right
place
and gives us a first line of the m stanza
(1.
29) probable. The k stanza immediately
appears
if we assume that a single word (Mlycy=
he
delivers them) has dropped out after the
words
" with an overflowing flood." Not only
so
; the same emendation gives us two parallel
lines
of three words each instead of a single line
of
five words--a length which we have seen
above
in itself raises suspicion. The l stanza
and
the first line of the m stanza reappear on a
mere
rearrangement of lines. Lines 27, 28, 29
in
the above translation stand in the Hebrew
text
in the order 29, 28, 27. On exegetical
260
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
grounds
the rearrangement appears to me an
improvement,
and thus far gains independent
support.1
(2) From the first line of then
stanza onwards
the
acrostich can only be restored by much more
radical
alterations, and any particular suggestion
can
be regarded as little more than a possibility.
At
the same time the general fact that at least
parts
of the remainder of the poem lie embedded
in
the following verses appears probable. It is
just
in this part of the passage that the text is
frequently
so corrupt as to be unintelligible.
It
is, for instance, difficult to believe that any
one
can seriously consider v. 10 in its present form
to
have been written by an intelligent Hebrew.2
Of
details, the most probable appears to me that
the
s stanza
began with the Myrys of v. 10. In
v.
12 the sense almost requires us to' omit the
v of jtnfv, so that we may
translate "I have
afflicted
thee, but will afflict thee no more";
jynf might then be considered the commence-
ment
of the f
stanza. Transpositions and omis-
sions
can seldom be dismissed as impossible
for
apart from any acrostich theory it is very
1 The translation adopted
by Dr. G. A. Smith and Prof. Nowack
of
line 29, " What think ye of Yahweh?" is, to say the least,
hazardous--
more
especially if with the former scholar we regard v. 11 as genuine.
Partly
on this ground, partly on others, I am not inclined to follow
Prof.
Nowack in transposing lines 3, 5, 4 so that they follow line 29,
and
form the answer to the question.
2 "These [? read there] are parts of Nahum i. (as
vv. 10-12) in which
the
text is desperately corrupt" (Driver, Expos.
Times, p. 119, footnote).
Cf.
also Davidson's notes on i. 10, 12, 15.
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 261
difficult
to believe that the sudden transitions
from
dressed
in i. 8, 15 (Heb. i. 8, ii. 1) is original.
Professor
G. A. Smith, who never suffers himself
to
be controlled by the acrostich theory, never-
theless
finds it necessary to " disentangle " i. 13,
ii.
1-3, from the rest, and print these verses by
themselves
as an address to
(3) The first line of the
translation begins in
the
Hebrew, as it should do, with an aleph;
it
and the following line constituted the first
section
of the poem. But as the section must
not
exceed two lines, lines 3-6 cannot be original—
at
least in their present position. I have little
doubt
myself that Gunkel is right in regarding
them
as a gloss intended to limit explicitly the
absolute
assertion of the preceding lines.' It is
worth
noticing that line 5 is suspiciously long,
consisting
as it does of five words.
(4) Lines 1, 2, and 7-29 thus
constitute the
first
25 lines or the first 121 sections of an
acrostich
poem of 44 lines or 22 sections; some
of
the remaining 17 lines may survive mutilated
and
in disorder in chapters i. 10-ii. 3. The
translation
as given above (with the omission
of
11. 3-6) in all probability approximates very
1 "This is not
obvious, and would hardly have been alleged apart
from
the needs of the alphabetic scheme " (G. A. Smith, p. 83). Per-
fectly
true; but if the alphabetical scheme in parts be independently
proved
a reality, the view of v. 1 taken above, though not immediately
obvious,
becomes the most probable.
262
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
closely
to the sense and form of the first half of
the
original poem.
(5) Nahum i. 1-ii. 3 is at most only
in part the
work
of the prophet Nahum. The main alter-
natives
are these: (a) Nahum recast and in
places
expanded an existing acrostich poem.
(b)
Nahum composed an acrostich poem which
has
suffered much in transcription and has been
in
places expanded by some subsequent editor.
(c)
Some fragments of Nahum (? part of i. 11-
ii.
3) have been combined with parts of an
acrostich
poem. (d) An acrostich poem which,
either
before or after, suffered transcriptional
corruption
and interpolation has been incorpor-
ated
in the book of Nahum by an editor, just as
a
short psalm (Isa. xii.) was incorporated in the
book
of Isaiah, and a longer psalm in the book
of
Habakkuk (c. iii.). Alternative (a) is very
improbable;
nor is (b) likely. But if either of
these
be adopted, this poem would be the earliest
Hebrew
acrostich of certain date, the next
earliest
being chapters i.-iv. of Lamentations.
(6) In view of the doubt that
attaches to the
chapter,
evidence for the date of Nahum drawn
from
chapters ii. and iii. should be allowed to
outweigh
any counter evidence in chapter i.
The
effect of this is to strengthen the strong
arguments
which have induced recent writers1
1 Davidson, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, pp.
13-18 ; G. A.
Smith,
Book of the Twelve Prophets, ii. pp.
85-88. Cf. Driver, Introduc-
tion, p. 335 f.
ALPHABETIC
POEM IN NAHUM 263
to
assign the prophecy to the year 608 rather
than
circa 660 or 623.
The present discussion contains, I
am well
aware,
comparatively little that will be new to
those
who are acquainted with the German
discussions
to which I have referred, and to
which
I have throughout been greatly indebted,
although
I hope that my suggestion, based as
it
is on the evidence of the LXX, that the verb
of
the daleth stanza is lld, may find acceptance.1
But
I shall have achieved my purpose if I have
succeeded
in proving that it must henceforth be
accepted
as a fixed point for the criticism and
interpretation
of Nahum that the position of
certain
initial letters in the first chapter is not
fortuitous,
but the result of a fully conscious
design
; and, therefore, that this chapter contains
at
least considerable parts of an acrostich poem.
1 [Among those who have
accepted 55~ are Driver, Duhm (Zeitschr,
fur die AT.
.Wissenschaft,
1911p. 101), and Powis Smith ("International
Critical
Commentary"). It is not obvious that those who still prefer one
of
the alternative emendations (bxd or vxkd) have fully considered
the
evidence
of the versions as given above.]
CHAPTER
VIII
THE ALPHABETIC STRUCTURE
OF PSALMS
IX. AND X.
265
CHAPTER VIII
THE
ALPHABETIC STRUCTURE OF PSALMS IX. AND X.
[The following discussion first
appeared in the
Expositor
for September 1906. It is here republished
substantially
unchanged except by the addition of one
long
note on Ps. ix. 6-9 (pp. 271 f.), and a few words or
shorter
notes elsewhere. These additions are enclosed
in
square brackets.]
SOME few years since1 I
attempted to prove
afresh
(for at the time it was not generally
admitted
by English scholars) the existence in
the
first chapter of Nahum of part of an alphabetic
poem;
in recoil from certain over-elaborate and
inconclusive
attempts to prove that an entire
alphabetic
poem lay concealed there, several
writers
had expressed scepticism of the existence
of
even a part of such a poem, for which neverthe-
less
the evidence, rightly considered, was really,
and
is now more generally admitted to be;
irresistible.
I here propose to rediscuss the
question of the
1 The Expositor, 1898 (Sept.), pp. 207-220. [Now appearing as
Chapter
VII. of the present work.]
267
268
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
alphabetic
structure of Psalms ix. and x. In
this
case it is agreed that we have to do with
parts
of an alphabetic poem (or of two); but
opinion
remains divided as to the extent of these
parts.
In the interests alike of the criticism of
the
Psalter, the history of the Hebrew text, and
the
interpretation of the particular psalm (or
psalms),
it is important to narrow down the
legitimate
differences of opinion to the utmost.
In
the present Hebrew text, and consequently
in
modern versions, Psalms ix. and x. form two
distinct
poems. On the other hand, in the
Septuagint,
probably also in the later Greek
versions
of Aquila, Syrnmachus, and Theodotion,
certainly
also in Jerome's version, which was
made
direct from the Hebrew, Psalms ix. and x.
formed
a single undivided whole). Is the unity
of
the poem as presented in the versions accidental
or
fictitious? or does the division into two
psalms
in the Hebrew text correspond to original
diversity
of origin? These questions, which are
of
first importance for the interpretation of the
poem
(or poems), are intimately connected with
the
question of the alphabetic structure.
The unity of the two psalms has been
main-
tained
chiefly by those who also hold that the
incompleteness
of the alphabetic scheme, which
marks
the text in its present condition, is mainly
due
to textual corruption. This theory has been
1 See Baethgen, Psalmen,3 p. 22.
PSALMS IX. AND X. 269
presented
(with many differences in detail) by
Bickell,
by Dr. T. K. Abbot, whose valuable
article,1
dependent in the main on Bickell, but
with
important independent suggestions, seems
to
have exercised less influence than it deserved,
by
Dr. Cheyne in the second edition of his Book
of Psalms, and by Duhm. It is, I
believe, sub-
stantially
correct, and its failure to gain more
general
support from English writers is probably
due
to the numerous and, in some cases, neces-
sarily
uncertain conjectures with which its
presentation
has been connected. My more
particular
purpose is to show that the alphabetic
arrangement
certainly extends further than has
been
generally admitted except by those who
have
argued that it extended throughout. If
this
can be established, it will invalidate the most
attractive
of the theories that deny the unity of
the
poem, that of Baethgen, which I shall describe
below,
and it will establish at the least a consider-
able
presumption that the alphabetic arrange-
ment,
where it now fails to appear or appears
less
clearly, once existed, and consequently that
the
two psalms are a unity whose integrity has
been
impaired mainly, if not exclusively, by the
ordinary
accidents of textual transmission.
To facilitate the discussion I give
first a
translation
with some notes on the text, chiefly
1 In Hermathena, 1889, pp. 21-28; also in Essays chiefly on the
Original Texts of the
Old and New Testaments, pp. 200-207.
270
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
on
those parts of the text which are of importance
in
the present examination. In order to con-
centrate
attention on my main point, I have
left
unadopted, and generally, too, unnoticed,
many
emendations suggested more especially
by
Dr. Cheyne and Duhm which otherwise would
unquestionably
deserve attention, if not accept-
ance.
But the result of my examination, as I
point
out at the close, appears to me to render
certain
types of these emendations improbable.
In the translation all departures
from the
Hebrew
consonantal text, whether justified by
the
ancient versions or not, are printed in italics.
Words
which are unintelligible (either in them-
selves
or in their context), and yet cannot be
satisfactorily
emended, are left untranslated and
represented
by . . . in some cases where a
lacuna
may be suspected I have used the signs
+
+ +. Words or letters omitted are repre-
sented
by ∩. So far as the alphabetic strophes
are
clear, I have printed them as strophes with
the
initial letter at the head, following the method
adopted
in the Authorised Version and Revised
Version
of Psalm cxix. and by Dr. G. A. Smith
in
his translation of Lamentations ii. and iv.
[which
appeared first] in the Expositor for
April
1906,
pp. 327-336, [and subsequently in Jerusalem
from the Earliest Times, ii. pp. 274-283]. Those
initial
letters which do not occur in the present
Hebrew
text I have given in brackets alongside
PSALMS IX. AND X. 271
of
the immediately preceding initial, at the
head
of a section extending (without subdivision
into
strophes) down to the next initial occurring
in
the text. In this way I hope that I may
bring
the problem presented by the present
state
of the text somewhat clearly before the
reader's
eye. In Psalm ix. the verses are
numbered
according to the Hebrew enumeration,
which,
beginning with 2, is one in advance of
the
English throughout. In Psalm x. the Hebrew
and
English enumerations agree.
x
IX.
2 I will give thanks unto Thee,
Yahweh, with my
whole
heart,
I will recount all Thy wonders;
3 I will rejoice and exult in Thee,
I will make melody to Thy Name, 0
Most High.
b
4 Because mine enemies shall
turn backward,
Shall stumble and perish at Thy
presence;
5 For Thou hast maintained my
right and my cause,
Hast sat upon the throne as a
righteous judge.
g, (d), (h)
6 Thou hast rebuked the nations
+ + +,
Thou hast destroyed the wicked + + +
;
2a Thee with LXX (i.e. jrvx
for hrvx of the Hebrew text),
and in
agreement
with the address to Yahweh in the following verses.
6-9 [These verses should
contain what survives of the three
strophes
which began with the letters g, d, and h. Of these initials
only
g
appears in the present text. In spite of the loss of its initial
letter,
h,
the third of these strophes seems still to be almost complete;
for
yhyv
(v. 10), the beginning of the v strophe, is preceded by
two
distichs,
with lines parallel to one another and of normal length, which
272
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Thou
bast wiped out their name for ever and aye,
7 The enemy (?) + + + .
Silent (?) are the ruins for
ever,
And the cities Thou didst
uproot—perished is their memory.
are
closely connected with one another in thought: Yahweh is on the
point
of giving judgment (v. 8), which he will give in justice and
righteousness
(v. 9). In the first line of v. 8, which should begin with
the
initial h,
the term bwy,
is parallel to the three terms of the second
line,
and the two words Mlvfl hvhyv are non-parallel terms
(cp. p. 76 f.):
of
these hvhy
seems the more needed; Mlvfl may or may not be
original;
if the distich was, as some of the distichs in this poem
certainly
appear to be, 4 : 3 (p. 173-176), the original may perhaps be
recovered
by simply substituting hvhy hnh for hvhyv; if the distich was
3
: 3, by making this substitution and omitting Mlvfl.
Verses 6 and 7 contain only about
one line, or at most four or five
words,
more than the normal length of one strophe, whereas two
strophes,
beginning with a and i respectively, must originally have
stood
here. Is the loss of between two and four lines, or, say, six to
ten
words, spread evenly over the two strophes, or has the d strophe
wholly
dropped out in the same way that whole strophes have dis-
appeared
from Ps. xxv. and cxly. (see p. 245)? In the latter case
v.
6 might be the first distich, and v. 7 a corrupt and slightly expanded
form
of the second distich of the i strophe ; and what is printed above
as
two mutilated lines in v. 6 was in reality a single line with secondary
parallelism
(cp. p. 104) between its two clauses—a feature which appears
elsewhere
in this poem (see ix. 14 a ; x. 11 b, 12 a, 17 b). Be this as
it
may, I am, on the whole, inclined now to think that dfv
Mlvfl at
the
end of v. 6 and Hcnl in v. 7 a were originally parallel terms in
the
final distich of the a strophe; I suspect that this distich was 4 : 3,
that
vmtbyvxh conceals a noun with the 3rd pl. masc. suffix parallel to
Mmw, and tvbrH a 2nd sing. pf. form of
a vb. parallel to rrnn. Instead of
the
last line of v. 6 and the first two of v. 7 given above, I should now
suggest
:
Thou hast wiped out their name for
ever and aye,
Their . . . hast thou . . . for
evermore.
If
this view be correct all that survives of the d strophe is dbx
twtn Myrfv
hmh Mrcz, of which the last word may be a corrupt
form of the first word
of
the h
strophe ; i.e. of twelve to sixteen words of the d strophe, but
four
or five survive: under these circumstances to guess what the
initial
word was seems to me fruitless.]
6ab Duhm, perhaps rightly, sees here
fragments of two parallel
lines
(for the thought is certainly parallel) rather than the whole of a
single
line (R.V. and most). [But see preceding note.]
7-8 These verses are certainly
corrupt, but the above emendations
(like
others that have been proposed) are little more than makeshifts.
Silent . reading vmd
for vmt; [yet this is very
doubtful; see the
PSALMS IX. AND X. 273
Behold (?) 8 Yahweh sitteth (enthroned)
for ever,
He hath established His throne for
judgment;
9 And 'tis He will judge the world in
righteousness,
He will pass sentence on the peoples
with equity.
v
10 So may Yahweh be a high retreat for the
crushed,
A high retreat in seasons of
extremity;
11 And let them that know Thy Name trust in
Thee,
For Thou hast not forsaken them that
seek Thee,
0
Yahweh.
z
12 Make melody unto Yahweh, who sitteth
(enthroned)
in
Sion,
Declare among the peoples His doings
;
13 For he that requireth blood hath
remembered A,
He hath not forgotten the cry of the
afflicted.
H
14 Be gracious to me, Yahweh, behold my
affliction A ,
0 Thou who raisest me up from the
gates of Death;
15 In order that I may recount all Thy
praises,
(And) in the gates of Sion's
daughter exult in Thy
salvation.
discussion
on vv. 6-9]. The Authorised Version (=R.V. marg.) is
sufficiently
criticised by Kirkpatrick, but the Revised Version is also
very
questionable; literally the Hebrew text runs, The enemy (singular)
are
(plural) ruins for ever.
Behold: reading hvhy
hnH for hvhyv
hmh of the
Hebrew text. The
Revised
Version again substitutes for a wrong translation of the
Authorised
Version a wrong one of its own. In rendering their very
memorial
has perished, it emphasises memorial which the Hebrew text
does
not, and omits the emphasis which (doubtless owing to textual
corruption)
actually falls on the pronoun. The only correct rendering
of
the present text is their memorial, even theirs, has perished.
13a Remembered: Hebrew
text adds them; but the position of the
pronoun
is suspicious.
14a Affliction: Hebrew
text adds 'Klan which the Revised Version
renders,
(which I suffer) of them that hate me. But the construction is
274
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
16 The nations have sunk down in the pit
they made,
In the net they hid their own foot
has been caught;
17 Yahweh hath made Himself known in the
execution
of
justice,
The wicked has been trapped in the
work of his
own
hands.
y
18 The wicked shall return unto Sheol,
(Even) all the nations that forget
God ;
k
19 For the poor shall not be forgotten for
ever,
(Nor) the hope of the afflicted
perish for aye.
20 Arise, Yahweh, let not frail man be
strong,
Let the nations be judged before Thy
face ;
21 Appoint terror for them, 0 Yahweh,
Let the nations know they are frail
men.
l
(m )
X
1 Wherefore, Yahweh, standest
Thou afar off,
Hidest Thou (Thine eyes) in seasons
of extremity?
2 In arrogance the wicked hotly
pursues the afflicted;
Let them be caught in the devices
they have
imagined.
3 For the wicked praiseth his desire;
The greedy getter blesseth his appetite.
harsh,
and the presence of the word overloads the line. Not improbably
yxnwm has arisen from yxwnm, the participle
originally used in the next
line,
which was subsequently explained by the synonymous ymmvrm (so
Lagarde,
and many since).
3 The last two words of
the Hebrew text of this verse belong to
verse
4: see next note. After their removal, there remains :
vwpn
tvxt lf fwr llh-yk
jrb
fcbv
These
lines are obviously ill-balanced ; yw, SSn in the first is parallel
to
-inn vs: in the second, but the object in the first line consists of two
PSALMS IX. AND X. 275
n
(s)
4 The wicked 3 contemneth Yahweh
(saying)
4 " According to His
full anger He will not punish";
"There is no God" is the sum of his
thoughts;
5 Stable are his ways at all
times.
words
parallel in sense, while the second contains no object at all.
Apparently,
then, the missing object of the second line has accidentally
shifted
up to the line above. If so, tvxt once immediately
preceded
fcbv; by a wrong division of words the v appears to have become
detached
from an original imxn and prefixed to fcbv. In line one
the
is probably derived from an original 5 by reading the final f
of
the preceding word twice. The two lines now balance and parallel
one
another perfectly. For the phrase to bless one's own soul or appetite,
used
of the godless, cf. xlix. 19. This is Duhm's emendation, and, to
quote
his words, the thought is: "The godless man praises not God,
but
his own belly (cf. Luke xii. 19)"; cf. also Phil. iii. 19. The lines,
thus
restored, read as follows:--
vtvxtl fwr llh-yk
vwpn jrb fcbv
4
In the Hebrew text the last line of v. 3 and the first of v. 4 stand
thus:--
hvhy
Cxn jrb fcbv
wrdy-lb
vpx hbnk fwr
But
the citation from this verse in v. 13 (Myhlx fwr Cxn hm
lf, Wherefore
"hath the wicked,
contemned God")
clearly shows that fwr hvhy Cxn
originally
stood here as an independent sentence ; and so it does
stand
in the earliest form of the text, to wit, in the LXX. Con-
sequently,
what precedes Cxn belongs to v. 3; what follows yen begins
a
new line and a new sentence. These positive reasons for the division
of
sentences adopted above are supported by strong negative considera-
tions,
viz. that the last line of v. 3 as it stands in the Hebrew text and
R.V.
admits of no satisfactory and natural explanation, and that
those
who follow the Hebrew sentence-division are driven to a highly
questionable
translation of the words vpx hbgk—the pride of his
countenance
(R.V.), or the loftiness of his looks; but countenance in
Hebrew
is Mynp,
not Jx.
Jx means nostril, nose,
and then, metaphoric-
ally,
anger; that in Hebrew (or Arabic) it ever acquired the sense face is,
to
say the least, unproven. It is customary (and idiomatically correct)
to
render hcrx Mypx--with the face to the earth; but there is no reason
to
question that the Hebrew thought of the nose, rather than the whole
face,
touching the ground.
276
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
In the height (?) are Thy judgments from
before him;
As for all his adversaries, he
puffeth at them;
6 He saith in his heart, "I
shall never be shaken,"
5b
In the height : questionable, but, if correct, to be paraphrased
as
in R.V. Abbot happily suggests Inc for ^nn, and renders, Removed
are
Thy judgments from before him.
6 This verse originally
included the first word of v. 7 (see next note).
The
smooth translation of the R.V., with its excellent parallels, com-
pletely
conceals the really desperate character of the Hebrew text.
Presumably
the Revisers treated rwx as = o!ti recitative, and there-
fore
left it untranslated. This is a rare usage, but sufficiently estab-
lished
to justify invoking it, if rwx really introduced the speech here ;
but
it does not: it stands nearly at the end of the words spoken (after
all generations) ! The A.V., He hath said in his heart, I shall not be
moved : for (I shall)
never (be) in adversity, is, perhaps, a less illegitimate
translation,
but the sense is self-condemnatory—I shall not be moved,
because
I shall not be moved. Tautologous, too, is Dr. Driver's
translation
(Parallel Psalter), " I shall
not be moved, I who to all genera-
tions
shall not be in adversity." Other attempts have been made to
render
and explain the verse as it stands, but these may suffice to show
that
the present text is really impossible. We might, indeed, render--
He hath said in his
heart, I shall never be moved who is not in adversity,
i.e.
He who is now prosperous is confident that his prosperity will
continue,
but for three considerations: (1) The two lines would be
exceedingly
ill-balanced ; (2) the order would be as awkward in Hebrew
as
I have intentionally made it in English; and (3) it takes no account
of
hlx
which has to be included from v. 7.
Duhm's treatment of the words frb
xl rwx,
together with hlx of
v.
7, may be in the right direction, but it is not free from some of the
objections
urged against the present text. He points hlx of v. 7 h lxu
(=Olxu Gesenius-Kautzsch's Grammar, 91 e), the word found in a
similar
context in lxxiii. 4 (wrongly rendered in R.V.), and renders,
He whose paunch is not
ill ( fed),
i.e. the godless "in fair round belly with
good
capon lined" forgets God, and is quite happy about his own fate.
7 Again the R.V. conceals the
strange order of the Hebrew text as
at
present divided. To visualise the argument for the division adopted
above,
I give the R.V. altered only in so far as to restore the Hebrew
order:--
Cursing | his mouth is full of | and | deceit and oppression,
Under his tongue is | mischief and
iniquity.
A
mere glance at the lines suggests the strong probability that the words
cursing and and in the first line are intrusive, and
have spoilt a very
fine
and perfect parallelism. But, further: (1) The position of hlx,
cursing, before the verb throws
on it a strong emphasis, for which,
nevertheless,
no reason can be discovered, and the real object consisting
PSALMS IX. AND X. 277
p
His mouth is full of deceits and
oppression,
Under his tongue is mischief and
trouble ;
8 He sitteth in places of ambush
in the villages,
In secret places he slayeth the
innocent.
f (c)
His eyes watch privily for the hapless,
9 He lieth in ambush in a secret place as a
lion in
his
covert;
He lieth in ambush to snatch away the
afflicted,
He snatcheth away the afflicted,
dragging him off
in
his net.
10 [The righteous] . . . sinketh down,
And the hapless fall by his strong
ones (?).
11 He saith in his heart, "God has forgotten,
He hath hidden His face (and) seeth
nevermore."
like
its parallel, in the next line of a pair
of qualities, comes limping
awkwardly
in at the end as an afterthought. Why is there a stress
on
cursing? Why, so much more stress on cursing than on deceit or
oppression?
Why, perhaps we may further ask, is cursing somewhat
incongruously
coupled with " deceit and oppression"? These are
questions
which commentators who follow the traditional division of
the
text have never answered, if they have even considered them.
(2)
The inclusion of hlx in the first line would overload it, giving it
five
word-accents against the four of its parallel: this lack of balance
is
only aggravated when Baethgen removes rwx from v. 6 and prefixes
it
to v. 7!
Read, then, in 7a jtv
tvmrm xlm vhyp,
i.e. omit the v before tvmrm
(necessarily
introduced when hlx had been connected with v. 7), or
less
probably the waw of mnnni may have shifted from an original
vxlm, lit. Deceit
and oppression fill his mouth.
9 In a secret place: The omission of these words, which may have
been
accidentally repeated from 8 b, improves the vigour and rhythm
of
the line.
10 Again, the attempt to
render the existing Hebrew text has
reduced
commentators to the most desperate straits. R.V. renders,
He croucheth, he boweth
down,
And the
helpless fall by his strong ones.
But
to whom does the pronoun refer? Many, since Ewald, have
278
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
q
12 Arise, Yahweh, 0 God, lift up Thine
hand:
Forget not the cry of the afflicted;
13 Wherefore hath the wicked contemned
Yahweh?
Hath he said in his heart,
"Thou wilt not punish"?
14 Thou past seen A A mischief and
vexation,
Thou lookest (upon them) to place
them in Thy hand;
The hapless committeth his cause unto
Thee,
Thou hast been the helper of the
orphan.
referred
it to the lion, and have quite gratuitously explained "his strong
ones"
to mean his claws. But this involves the extremely improbable
supposition
that the pronoun refers to a subject introduced allusively
three
lines before (9 a) and dismissed, for 9 b, c cannot refer to the lion,
since
the lion does not hunt with a net, nor insist that his meal shall
consist
in particular of the poor. As the text stands, the subject of
9
b, c, that is, the wicked man, can alone be reasonably regarded as the
subject
of 10 a. But, then, why should the wicked man be described
as
crushed? for this, and not to crouch
(R.V.), is the sense of hkd. As
a
matter of fact, 10 a must be interpreted by its parallel 10 b; both
lines
must refer to the poor: but, then, a term referring to the poor
is
as badly needed in 10 a as in 10 b—indeed, more so. Thus exegetical
considerations
point strongly to the loss in 10 a of a term parallel to
Myxklh in 10 b. Rhythmical considerations point
strongly in the
same
direction. For (1) 10 a (two words) is shorter than its parallel
(three
words); and (2) it is abnormally short in relation to the entire
poem:
it is the only real and unambiguous case (even in the present
text)
of a line of two words. The obscure hkd (or hkdy k`re) I have
left
untranslated above, but to bring out the sense I have tenta-
tively
made good the loss of the term parallel to hapless
in 10 b.
Whether
that term was righteous or one of a
dozen others must be
determined,
if determined it can be, by other arguments [see page
283]
than those here adduced to prove that some
word, be it what it
may,
has fallen out of the text at this point.
12ab The lines are
ill-balanced; perhaps lx (0 God) in a is an
editor's
substitute for Yahweh : in line b tqfc has been supplied in
accordance
with ix. 13.
14a The Hebrew text is
scarcely tolerable. Duhm (followed above)
omits
nnN,n as a corrupt duplication of nru r. Even so perhaps the original
text
is not exactly recovered.
PSALMS IX. AND X. 279
w
15 Break the arm of the wicked and evil,
Though ∩ wickedness be sought
for, it shall not
be
found;
16 Yahweh is King for ever and aye,
The nations are perished out of His
land.
t
17 Thou, Yahweh, bast heard the desire of
the humble,
Thou directest their heart, makest
Thine ear
attentive;
18 To do justice to the orphan and the
crushed,
That frail man of the earth may
terrorize no more.
The two laws of an alphabetic poem
are (1)
that
the initials of successive strophes follow the
order
of the alphabet, and (2) that these initials
should
follow one another at regular intervals.
This
regular interval in Psalms ix. and x. is four
lines,
as may be seen by a glance at the strophes
beginning
with x,
b,
v,
z,
F,
q,
r,
w,
t,
not at present
to
refer to others.
The lines throughout the poem are of
equal
or
approximately equal length, the normal length
being
three or four accented words.l Of
the
eighty-three
lines into which the Revised Version
15a The LXX, which
connects the wicked and the evil, is preferable to
the
Massoretic interpretation of the Hebrew text, which begins a fresh
sentence
with the second term (so R.V.).
15b The meaning is clear
: Exterminate wickedness ; but how
precisely
this was expressed is uncertain. I have read ,-tyre, for iy'7,
and
both verbs as Niphals.
18b The line is over
long. Duhm omits the last three words, and
renders,
that they may be in dread no more.
1 [That some of the lines
contain three, some four stresses is due
to
the fact that the author makes use of 4 : 3 rhythm: see pp. 171-176.]
280
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
divides
the two Psalms, fifteen are abnormally
long
or short, i.e. they contain more than four
or
less than three accented words. Of these,
eight
in the Hebrew text contain only two
accented
words, six contain five, and one contains
seven.
But the line of seven words (x. 14 a)
should
certainly be read as two lines (and probably
of
three words each, one word being dittographic)
as
in the above translation, x. 14 a, b. On the
other
hand, the Revised Version wrongly makes
two
lines (each of two accents) out of one in the
case
of ix. 14 b, c =ix. 15 b in the above translation.
In
this case the mis-division of the Revised
Version
spoils the parallelism. The case is
similar,
though less obvious, with ix. 13 a, b
(R.V.)
=ix. 14 a above (one line of four accents;
see
note above). With this corrected division
of
lines the H
strophe, like the nine strophes
enumerated
above, contains four lines, each of
normal
length, instead of four abnormally short
lines
and two normal lines, giving in all, in the
Revised
Version, six lines to the strophe which
would
be altogether abnormal.
We have still to consider five lines
each
containing
in the Massoretic text two word
accents,
and six lines each containing five. Of
the
five lines of two accents, four become of the
normal
length of three accents, if we simply
delete
the makkeph: these are ix. 2 b, 4 a, 14 b,
x.
12 b ; in the last case, however, the shortness
PSALMS IX. AND X. 281
is
more probably caused by the loss of a word
(see
note above). The only remaining instance
of
a line of two accents is x. 10 a, and there, as
I
have shown above, there are very strong
exegetical
reasons for suspecting the loss of a
word.
Two of the lines of five accents
contain a word
which
there are strong reasons (already given),
apart
from rhythmic considerations, for trans-
posing
in the one case (ix. 7 b) to the following,
and
in the other (x. 7 a) to the preceding line.
With
the removal of the intrusive words these
lines
become of the normal length of four words.
If
in x. 6 a rdv rdl, be makkephed, as in Psalm
cxxxv.
13, and in ix. 19 a hcnl xl, as in Psalm
ciii.
9, these lines also are of normal length.
There
remain x. 12 a and x. 18 b, where reasons,
other
than rhythmical, for reducing the length
of
the lines are less cogent.
This survey may suffice to show that
the text
of
lines containing less than three or more than
four
accents is open to grave suspicion.
The most crucial question in dealing
with the
structure
of Psalms ix. and x. is this: How far
back
from the end of the Psalm does the alpha-
betic
arrangement extend? It is generally said
that
the strophes beginning with the last four
letters
(t,
w,
r,
q)
remain; but it is also com-
monly
stated or implied that the immediately
preceding
strophes have been lost and their place
282
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
taken
by others, or that these strophes, though
as
they stand they are original, were never
brought
into the alphabetic scheme. But what
are
the facts? I turn first to the twelve lines
immediately
preceding the p strophe, for here
are
facts which have been overlooked or not
appreciated.
1. The eighth line (x. 8 c) before
the p strophe
begins
with f,
i.e. f
occurs as an initial letter
at
the exact interval from q at which it should
occur
in an alphabetic poem following the order
observed
in Lamentations ii., iii., iv.l where the p
strophe
precedes the f.
Even if this fact stood by itself
and so might
possibly
be due to accident, it ought to be taken
account
of; but it does not stand alone, for
2. If we read back three lines and
four words
(i.e.
the normal length of a line), in all therefore
four
lines, from the point where the initial f
occurs,
we find the word vhyp: i.e. p stands
at the exact interval from p and f at which it should
stand
by the well-established laws of this poem.
I
have stated the fact thus, for thus stated it is
indisputable.
It is true that according to the
traditional
verse division vhyp does not stand at
the
beginning of the line, but I have shown in
the
note on the passage above that there are the
1 The same order (f before p) was found by the Greek
translators in
their
Hebrew text of Prov. xxxi. It was probably also found in the
original
form of Ps. xxxiv., for sense seems to require the transposition
of
vv. 16 and 17 (=15, 16 R.V.).
PSALMS IX. AND X. 283
strongest
reasons (entirely independent of alpha-
betic
considerations) for holding that the line
originally
began with this word, and that the
traditional
division of the text gives bad sense,
bad
rhythm, and bad parallelism.
3. Although the fourth line (x. 10
a) before the
initial
q
does not begin with c, there are, as I
have
already shown, the strongest independent
reasons
for believing that this abnormally short
line
has lost a word in the course of textual
transmission.
I submit that this combination of
facts—the
abnormal
shortness and strangeness of the fourth
line
before initial q, the occurrence of initial f
at
the beginning of the eighth and of initial p at
the
beginning of the twelfth line—is not acci-
dental,
but is due to the fact that Psalm x.
concludes
not merely with the last four but
with
the last seven strophes of an alphabetic
poem.
Working back afresh from the initial
q
in
x.
12 we find at the beginning of the twentieth
line
before it the letter n (in x. 3 b),1 i.e. n
stands
at
the exact interval before q at which it should
stand
in an alphabetic poem of four-lined strophes.
On
the other hand, if we count downwards from
the
initial in ix. 18, or the l in x. 1, it occurs
two
lines too soon. Moreover the initial m,
1 For the justification
of following the Greek as against the Hebrew
tradition
in beginning the line with Cxn, see note above, p.
275.
284
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
which
should precede it, and the s, which should
follow,
are not found in the present text. Having
regard
to these facts alone, we might consider
the
position of n in relation to q accidental. But
when
we connect this with our previous conclu-
sion,
such an explanation becomes difficult ; for
n occurs at the correct interval before not only
q but also before p and f. I recall further at
this
point that the fifth line after the n (x. 5 b),
where
initial n should stand, is suspicious, though
perhaps
not impossible, in style, and that the
substitution
of ''a similar word beginning with s
appears
to be a considerable improvement. The
case
of the missing initial n may be taken with a
consideration
of the first part of the poem; and
this
may be brief, for opinion differs less seriously
here.
Of late it has never been seriously
questioned
that
Psalm ix. was originally alphabetic, and this
being
so it is unnecessary to discuss at length
whether
the d
and h strophes
were shorter than
the
rest in the original poem. No reason or sound
analogy
can be given for such abbreviation, and
we
have not the slightest ground for assuming
that
the author was such a bungler as without
reason
to have failed in the very simple art of
writing
an alphabetic poem. It follows that the
equivalent
of about four lines has fallen out of
the
text between ix. 6 and ix. 10.
But if this has certainly happened
at one point
PSALMS IX. AND X. 285
in
the poem, it is not improbable that it has
happened
elsewhere. If, therefore, the alpha-
betic
structure can be traced down to the l
strophe
and from the n strophe to the end, the
most
probable explanation of the facts that in
the
present text six lines only instead of eight
stand
between initial l and initial n and that
initial
m
is absent must surely be that two lines
have
fallen out of the text, one of which contained
the
missing initial.
The only strophes now left for
consideration
are
those with the initials y and k. The y
strophe
clearly
begins with ix. 18, for the initial y occurs
here
and at the correct interval after F; but
where
did it end? The data appear to me
somewhat
ambiguous. But the question is obvi-
ously
connected with another: Does the original
occur
in the present text; if so, where? One
suggestion
may be decisively dismissed, for it
too
implicitly charges the author with bungling.
It
has been said that the q with which ix. 20
begins
was intentionally substituted for k because
the
two letters had some resemblance in sound!
This
is as if the composer of an English acrostic
should
find it beyond his powers to discover a
suitable
word beginning with C and should use
instead
a word beginning with G!
If the original survives, it most
probably
survives
in the first word of ix. 19; then the
present
text would present a y strophe of two
286
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
followed
by a k
strophe of six lines. In that
case
we must suppose that a couplet has shifted
from
the y
into the k strophe,
and we may, with
Duhm,
place ix. 21 immediately after ix. 18.
But
this, though a possible, and indeed a not
improbable
solution, is not certain, for though
ix.
21 follows ix. 18 well enough, its connexion
with
ix. 18 is by no means obviously better than
with
ix. 20.
Others have suggested that ix. 20,
21 do not
belong
to the original alphabetic poem but are
an
independent close to Psalm ix. This theory
would
be more probable if the verses were absent
from
the Greek text; but they are not, and the
theory
requires the assumption that verses in-
tended
to form an independent close to Psalm
ix.
after it had been separated from Psalm x.
are
present in a text which still treats Psalms ix.
and
x. as continuous.
One curious fact must not be
concealed.
Psalm
ix. 20 begins with q and the third line
following
(ix. 21 a) with w. In this sequence
Baethgen
detects the continuation, after a gap
of
several strophes, of ix. 19. He also assumes
the
loss of two lines after ix. 20. This particular
assumption
is invalidated, if it be shown that the
original
q
strophe really occurs in Psalm x. It
is
just possible, however, that, if ix. 20, 21 are
intrusive,
they were derived from an alphabetic
poem
of two-lined strophes; but the sequence
PSALMS IX. AND X. 287
may
quite well be accidental; to be sure of
alphabetic
structure we need a sequence of at
least
three letters, for only so can we determine
the
fixed interval between the letters which
gives
the sequence its significance.
I conclude my discussion with a
brief criticism
of
certain theories as to the literary and textual
history
of Psalms ix. and x.
Professor Kirkpatrick's ultimate
conclusion
is
that Psalm ix. "appears to be complete in
itself,
and it seems preferable to regard Psalm x. as
a
companion piece rather than as part of a
continuous
whole." This appears to me highly
improbable,
and it certainly does nothing to
alleviate
the grave exegetical difficulties which
Baethgen
attempts to remove; but I will not
discuss
it here, for it does not depend on any
conclusion
as to the completeness of the alpha-
betic
structure, since it would not be safe to
deny
that a writer may have chosen to compose
two
separate poems, one following the alphabetic
scheme
to the eleventh letter, the other front the
twelfth
to the twenty-second and last.
Some other theories which deny the
unity
of
Psalms ix. and x. have proceeded from the
assumption
that parts of the two Psalms are
alphabetic,
and parts non-alphabetic; and that
x.
1-11 or x. 3-11 are the non-alphabetic part,
which
is of different origin from the rest. Now
such
theories must be so modified as to be scarcely
288
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
worth
maintaining if my argument that even
in
the present text the alphabetic structure can
be
clearly traced back to x. 7 is sound; and
they
fall completely to the ground if my further
argument
that the original initial survives in
its
original position in x. 3 is also admitted.
Baethgen's theory may be considered
at
greater
length, for it is based on weighty exegetical
considerations.
I will cite his remarks somewhat
fully.
After indicating the reasons for consider-
ing
that Psalms ix. and x. were originally con-
nected,
he continues: "The reason for the
division
adopted by the Massoretes lies in the
difference
of subject; but the conclusion of
Psalm
x. refers to the same circumstances that
form
the subject of Psalm ix.; moreover the
alphabetic
scheme does not reach its close till
the
end of Psalm x. Psalm ix. is a song of
thanksgiving
and triumph over the defeat of
heathen
foes. . . . With x. 1 ff. there begin
bitter
complaints about the absence (Ausbleiben)
of
divine help. But the oppressors are not the
same
as in Psalm ix.; they are not heathen,
but
godless Israelites. . . . Corresponding to this
remarkable
change from triumph to bitter com-
plaint
and to the entirely different historic
background
which is presupposed is a break
in
the alphabetic arrangement." Baethgen then
points
out, as I have already done, how the
alphabetic
scheme survives down to the strophe
PSALMS IX. AND X. 289
in
ix. 19 and then continues, "After this every-
thing
is lost till p ix. 20, w ix. 21. In x. 1-11 there
is
no alphabetic arrangement. In x. 12, 13 again
q, in x. 14 r, in x. 15 f. w, and x. 17, 18 t. Since
x.
16-18 agree most excellently with the beginning,
and
indeed with the entire contents of Psalm ix.,
but
not in the slightest with the rest of Psalm x.,
the
conjecture that x. 1-15 formed no original
part
of the poem cannot be dismissed. The
verses
x. 12-15 follow, it is true, an alphabetic
arrangement,
but their subject matter and lan-
guage
connect them with x. 1-11; cf. x. 13 with
x.
3, 4, 11, x. 14 with x. 8-10 (hklH), x. 15 with
x.
4. The language of x. 1-15 is harder and more
peculiar
than that of ix. 1-21, x. 16-18 ; yet
between
both parts there are links, cf. x. 1
and
ix. 10 (hrcb tvtfl): x. 12 with ix. 13, 19.
It
is no longer possible to explain satisfactorily
all
these remarkable phenomena. The interpola-
tion
of x. 1-15 and the loss of the strophes from
to
between ix. 19 and ix. 20 may have been
accidental
and perhaps due to a leaf getting
misplaced
in binding. . . . But it is just as likely
that
a later editor intentionally gave the Psalm
its
present form by removing a section and
substituting
another for it."
Certainly Baethgen's strongest
argument is
drawn
from the apparent difference of subject
in
the present text—in ix. and x. 16-18 the
nations,
in x. 1-15 the wicked. Both Dr. Cheyne
290
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
and
Duhm, who maintain the substantial unity
of
the whole, feel this so strongly that they
assimilate
ix. and x. 16-18 to x. 1-15 by reading
where
the term nations (Myvg) occurs either the
treacherous
(Mydgb;
so Cheyne) or the proud
(Myxg; so Duhm).
Baethgen's argument from difference
of style
I
believe to be fallacious ; the style of x. 1-15
only
appears harder when we treat what has
suffered
corruption and become unintelligible as
the
original style of the writer. Doubtless parts
of
x. 1-15, particularly x. 6-10, are in the present
text
harder than most of Psalm ix. ; but they
are
corrupt; and in turn ix. 6, 7, which are also
corrupt,
are harder than, for example, x. 1, 2 or
x.
7 (after hlx)
to x. 9.
But the theory breaks down owing to
the
improbabilities
which it implies in connexion
with
the alphabetic sequence. It will be suffi-
cient
to consider what Baethgen, in common
with
every one else, admits, that x. 12-18
constitute
a perfect sequence of four alpha-
betic
strophes (t,
w,
r,
q).
Yet on Baethgen''s
theory
this perfect sequence is the result of
accident.
The last strophe and a half belonged
to
one poem, the remaining two and a half to
another;
in binding, a leaf fell out of place arid
with
it the original alphabetic order was broken,
and
yet, marvellous to relate, the leaf which
accidentally
took its place contained part of
PSALMS IX. AND X. 291
another
alphabetic poem of precisely the same
structure
which exactly dovetailed into the end
of
the poem. The last lines of the lost leaf
should
have contained the four lines of a q strophe,
followed
by four lines of a r strophe, followed by
two
lines of a m strophe : the leaf which on the
hypothesis
was accidentally substituted for it
actually
contained four lines of a q strophe,
followed
by four lines of a w strophe, followed
by
two lines of a to strophe. Moreover the
accidentally
substituted leaf so well dovetails
into
the leaf that preceded that it commences
with
l
at the exact and correct interval of eight
lines
from the initial y.
The case is scarcely better if we
accept Baeth-
gen's
alternative suggestion that x. 1-15 were
intentionally substituted for a
section of the
original
alphabetic poem. For are we to suppose
that
the editor selected these verses in particular
because
he noticed that they contained the
suitable
sequence w,
r,
q?
Are we to suppose
that
in the passage thus chosen (x. 1-15) this
sequence
of these three letters at the same fixed
interval
was mere accident? The latter sup-
position
becomes even more improbable, impos-
sible
indeed, when account is taken of the further
sequence
p,
f,
which connects, as shown above,
with
the sequence w, r, q.
The only modification of Baethgen's
theory
which
seems to me tenable is that x. 1-15 was
292
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
throughout
alphabetic, and was deliberately
written
to be interpolated between ix. 21 and x.
16
by a later editor, who for some reason found
the
verses thus replaced unsuitable. This would
account
for the admitted sequence w, r, q, for the
further
traces of alphabetic structure, for the
exact
dovetailing of the inserted section, and for,
the
points of connexion in thought and style
between
x. 1-15 and ix. + x. 16-18. But in this
form
the theory cannot of course derive any'
argument
from the present alphabetic phenomena.
It
must depend on the difference, apparent
certainly
if not original, of subject. But why
should
an editor, who thought it necessary to
interpolate
a long section, have failed to make
the
further slight changes necessary to assimilate
the
subject throughout?
Several of those who attribute the
present
incompleteness
of the alphabetic structure to
textual
corruption have sought to restore the
original
text by transpositions. Some of these
transpositions
are certainly questionable. For
the
remnants of the alphabetic structure testify
not
only to the fact of textual corruption,
but
also to certain
limitations within which that corrup-
tion has occurred; they must therefore be
treated
as
regulating factors in any reconstruction of
the
text. Thus treated, they go far to invalidate
not
only theories of large interpolation of foreign
matter,
but also theories of extensive transposi-
PSALMS IX. AND X. 293
tion
and omission. In so far, therefore, as they
involve
such transpositions I find the theories
of
Bickell, Cheyne, and, in a less degree, of Duhm,
improbable.
For example, on Bickell's theory,
among
the textual corruptions are the following :
(1)
ix. 20, 21 have been added to the original
poem
; (2) the original strophe consisted of
x.
3 (now somewhat expanded) + x. 4 + x. 5 a,
and
has shifted from its original position so as
to
follow the 5 strophe, x. 1, 2; (3) the n and s
strophes
have fallen out clean after x. 5 b (from
Mvrm), x. 6 which constitute the original m
strophe.
But all this involves this rather im-
probable
combination of accidents: (1) the posi-
tion
of initial n in the present text at the correct
distance
before initial twrqfp is pure accident,
for
on the theory it is not the original initial;
(2)
the l
of x. 1 is the original initial, but it has
only
retained its position at the correct interval
after
initial y
by a lucky combination of changes:
the
assumed interpolation of ix. 20, 21 would
have
removed it four lines too far from initial
but
this was neutralised by four lines exactly
of
the strophe getting misplaced after the l
strophe;
(3) by accident eight consecutive lines
(the
n and
s
strophes) drop out between x. 6 and 7
without
any such break in the sense as would
indicate
so considerable a loss.
Dr. Cheyne's reconstruction assumes
frequent
expansion
of the text through the intrusion of
294
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
variant
readings of the same line and correspond-
ing
losses of lines. With regard to the addition
of
ix. 20, 21, the transpositions at the beginning
of
Psalm x., and the loss of exactly the eight lines
of
the n
and s
strophes he nearly agrees with
Bickell.
But further, on his theory, the occur-
rence
of initial p and q at the correct interval
before
the initial q is due to a lucky combination,
within
the twelve lines concerned, of addition and
omission;
two lines have fallen out between
x.
10 and x. 11, but just this quantity of matter
by
a curious freak of fortune has been added
within
the same section by the expansion of two
original
lines into the four lines 9 b and 10 a, d
of
the present text.
The text of Psalms ix. and x. has
certainly
suffered
corruption. The LXX contains a few
more
correct readings than the Hebrew text, and
preserves
the correct division of lines in one case
where
the Massoretic text has destroyed it. But
even
conjectural emendation is justified and
indeed
demanded, and that to a somewhat greater
extent
than I have admitted in the provisional
translation
given above for purposes of this
discussion.
Exegesis that fails to take account
of
this, that insists on interpreting everything in
the
present text as the actual words of the author,
must
go wrong. In addition to this general con-
clusion,
the results, briefly summarised, which.
an
examination of the structure of the poem
ADDITIONAL NOTE 295
appears
to me to offer as the starting-point of
sound
exegesis, are these: Psalms ix. and x.
are
a single poem; the original poem consisted
of
eighty-eight lines of three or four accented
words
; the equivalent of four or five of these
lines
has been lost—the equivalent of two or
three
between ix. 6 and ix. 10, two lines exactly
between
x. 1 and x. 4. On the other hand, at
no
point between ix. 2-5 or ix. 10-17 or x. 6-18
has
the text received addition or suffered loss
to
the extent of more than a word or two, but
several
such small losses or additions or corrup-
tions
of words are indicated by the abnormal
length
of the lines or the impossibility of the
style.
ADDITIONAL
NOTE ON THE REPETITION OF
TERMS IN PARALLEL LINES
[See page 254, note 2.]
The
clearest proof that some instances at least of repetition (in
the
present Hebrew text) of the same term in the two parallel
lines
of a distich are due to scribal error is furnished by the
double
text of Psalm xviii. = 2 Samuel xxii. Thus in v. 7 in
Samuel
the verb xrqx,
I call, occurs in both lines ; but
the
second
xrqx is
an error, and probably a relatively late error, for
the
LXX in Samuel has different verbs—e]pikale<somai in the
first,
boh<somai in the second line. The original Hebrew text is
preserved
in the Psalm, which has xrqx, I call, in the first, fvwx, I cry
for
help, in the second line. Similarly in v. 32 ydflbm, save, occurs
in
Samuel in both lines, in the Psalm in the first line only, ytlvz,
except,
being used in the second line. Here the LXX has plh>n
296
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
both
in the Psalm and Samuel in both lines; nevertheless the
Hebrew
text of the Psalm, with different prepositions in the
two
lines, is the original text. A somewhat similar error to the
two
just considered occurs in v. 47: here the Psalm has in the two
lines
as synonymous terms yrvc, my rock, and yfwy yhlx, the God of
my
salvation: through erroneous repetition of the term of the first
line
Samuel agrees with the Psalm in the first line, but in the
second
line has the conflate phrase, the God of the rock of my
salvation.
In v. 29 Samuel has Yahweh in both lines; the Psalm,
Yahweh
in the first, and my God in the second line: the text of
Samuel
is wrong, but is perhaps not due to mere extrusion of a
differentiated
term by a repetition of the same term. Somewhat
different,
too, but worthy of consideration in this connexion, is
the
loss of the undoubtedly correct yrbwm, billows, of 2 Samuel
xxii.
5 in the Psalm through the substitution for it in the latter
passage
of ylbH,
snares, which occurs in the next distich.
At times parallel terms in parallel
lines suffered transposition :
where
accidents of this kind have taken place, they cannot
generally
be detected. It has been suggested that such an
accident
befell the text of Nahum i. 4 (see p. 257, n. 1) ;
and
there is one certain example of such an accident in the
poem
that occurs both in Isaiah ii. 2-4 and Micah i. 1-4: in
Isaiah
ii. 2 e, 3 a = Micah iv. 1 e, 2 a the parallel terms, Myvg, nations,
and
Mymf,
peoples, occur in this order in
Isaiah, in the reverse
order
in Micah.
A few further examples may be given
of repetitions in the
present
Hebrew text which there is some reason to suspect was
not
in as original fact. In Job ix. 10 Nyx-df occurs in both verses;
but
in the earlier occurrence of the verse in v. 9 we find the versa-
tion
Nyxdf
. . Nyxv.
In Job xii. 23 Myvgl is repeated, but five
MSS.
give
Mymxl
the second line. In xiii. 7 1-unn is repeated, but the
LXp
has lalei?te . . fqe<ggesqe; the letters v b never renders rdd
except
perhaps in Eccles. xiii. 22, but it renders fybh Ps. Ixxvii.
2,
lxxiii. 4 : or should perhaps read vfybt for the second vrbdt.
Similarly
the repeated tvfy in Job viii. 3, rw in Amos v. 9, vtvmy in
Jer.
xi. 22 are all represented by different words in the LXp.
INDEX I
OF PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE
[The
references are according to the enumeration of the Hebrew text :
in one or two cases the different
English enumeration is given in
brackets; in the Psalms, the English
enumeration is generally one
verse behind the Hebrew.]
Genesis Numbers
i. 52-55, 211-213, xxiii.,
xxiv. 22n.,
219
216 xxiii. 8 18 h. 3
ii.
53 19c, d 75
4-6 221 23 79
7 19 24 75
iii.
1-19 204 n.2 xxiv. 3 181 n.3
14-19 217
f. 5 75
iv.
23, 24 19, 70, 76, 216 9 79
f., 168
236
v. 48 Deuteronomy
ix.
1-14 208 xxxii. 11-14, 16, 21
xi.
1-9 208 n.2
xxiii. 210, 213 3 66,
67 n.
xxiv. 208, 210 f. 7 18
n. 3, 75
xxvi. 1-13 208
11 71
14, 15 208
13 77
xxvii.
27-29, 39f 217 16 65
xxix.
2-14 204 n. 2 18 66, 67 n.
xxxi.
36-42 217 21 75
xxxvi. 48
22 71
xlix. 21 n. 2, 216, 219 23 66
6a, b 18
n. 3
30 66
7c, d 60
32 76
9 79
34 75
12 61
35 71
15 c, d 69
38 66, 67 n.
20 69
n. 2 xxxiii. 22 n., 219
24
70 f. 2 77
9 65
Exodus 11 79
xv.
2ff. 11, 21 n.2 23 77
14 181
26 75
28 77
297a
INDEX I
xxix.
2-14 204 n. 2 18 66, 67 n.
xxxi.
36-42 217 21 75
xxxvi. 48 22 71
xlix. 21
n. 2, 216, 219 23 66
6 a, b 18n.3 30 66
7 c, d 60 32 76
9 79 34 75
12 61 35 71
15 c, d 69 38 66, 67 n.
20 69 n. 2 xxxiii. 22 n., 219
24 70
f. 2 77
9 65
Exodus 11 79
23 77
xv.
2 ff. 11, 21 n. 2 26 75
14 181 28 77
297b
298
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Joshua ix. 9 175
xx.
9-24 22 n. x. 16 175
xviii. 7, 29, 35 182
n. 1
Judges xviii. 7, 32 295
v. 21
n. 2 29, 47 296
2 182 xix. 14 178-180
4 76 xxi. 6 69
26 77 11 77
xxv. 157, 244 f.
2 Samuel xxvii. 194
i.
22 161 xxxiii. 6, 7, 9 53-56
xxii. 21
n. 2: see xxxiv. 244,
282 n.
also
Ps. xviii. xxxvii. 244 f.
xxiii.
1 182 xlii.,
xliii. 189
Esther xlii. 5 178
9 20
ix. 22
n. xlvi. 7 163
xlviii.
1, 2 166 n.
Job 4 166
f.
i.
21 21 n. 1, 172 n. xlix. 189
iii.
6 67,
172 n. li. 131
10 69 9 168
11 77 lxviii. 10 71
12 73 lxxiii. 4 296
17 71 lxxvii. 2 296
20 77 xcii.
1 20
23 69 civ. 4 28
n. 2
25 72 cxi., cxii. 14,101 n.
2, 187,
iv.
4 72 241
9
61 cxii. 6 184
10, 11 172
n. cxv. 83
12 182 cxix.
(= cxviii. 12-14, 188, 197,
14 69 in LXX) 241
17 67 1 12, 136 n. 2
20 182 4 257 n.
v.
9 296 8 257 n.
viii.
3 296 cxliv. 14
ix.
10 296 cxlv. 244
f.
xii.
23 296 xiii.
7 296
Proverbs
xxviii. 131 i. 5, 8 172
n.
xxxii.
17 66 ii. 1 77
xxxiii.
11 72
2 65
4 65
Psalms 5 67
i.
1 20, 145, 183 7 77
ii. 191 8 67
2 71
10 68
6 51 17 70
9 71
18 75
iii.
8 68
20 67
iv. 172
n. iii. 7 181
n. 3
8 181 v. 5 66
v.11 181n.1 viii.
24-29 53 f.
vi.2 75 xv.
1 62
INDEX OF PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE 299
6 72 9 72
ix.,
x. 173 -176, 207, xxv.
6 67
ch. viii. xxxi. 10-31 14, 244
Song of Songs Jeremiah
i.
4 187 ii. 20, 24 181 n. 3
ii.
1 75 28 181
n. 1
ii.
3 72 3, 4 230-232
9 60 iv.
23-26 232-236
12 72 v.
6 61, 67
14 75 vi.24 73
25 65
xi. 22 296
Isaiah Lamentations
i.
3 139, 146, 158 i.-iv.
90f.,
95-102,
4 152 112, 117
10 151 i 14, 111 f.,
184-
19 181 n. 1 187
23 177
26 75 1 95 n., 106, 118,
ii.
2 296
152, 154
iv. 167 7 95 n.
v.
1 181
n. 1
8 111 n. 1
5, 17,
25 182 11 177
n.
ix.
7-x. 4 183, 189 20 177 n.
xi.
1-8 162
n., 230 ii. 14, 103-111, 115,
4 69
119, 187 f.
5 255 n. 1 105
6 67
2 95 n., 98, 106
xiii. 226
f.
3, 4, 5 108
11 225 f. 6 231
xiv.
4-21 105, 170, 226 8 106
f., 109, 178
5 170
f.
9 104n.
8 178-180 10 107
f.
16 170
f. 11 74 n., 96 f.
xvi.
7 255
n.
12 105
xix.
8 17
13 171 n.
xxi.
1-10 162 an., 167 15 108 f.
3 60, 162 19 95 n.
5 162 n. 2, 167 iii. 14, 100-102,
8 167
114f., 187-189
8,
9 162 n.
4 97
10 162 n. 2 10 102
xxvi. 162
n. 2 12, 13 101
8 255 n. 14 102
xxxiv.,
xxxv. 228 15 97, 161
xxxvii.
26 176 f. 20 178-180
xl.
4 181
n. 1 27 178
12 68, 172 n. 34-36 103 n.
26, 27 68 48, 49 101
xli.
11-13 178 f. 56 171 n.
26 77
60, 61 101
xlii.
12 78 iv. 109-111, 187 f.
23 76 1 110 n.
300
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
xliii.
3, 6 77 8 134
x1v.
12 53
f., 56-58 13 97, 134
xlix.
2 62 f. 18 171 n.
li.
6 61
19 97
lx.
3 77
20 171
16 67
22 95 n.
v. 97,
91-99, 131 Malachi
2 133 i.
10-13 172n
3 134 f.
8 93 Matthew
v.
9, 10 93,
184 n. 1 xxv.
13-46 26 n.3
12 93
13 134 1
Corinthians
14 134 xiiii.
26 n.3, 33
16 93
Ezekiel
ii.
1 181
n. 3
Apocrypha
xv.
7 181
n. 3 2 Esdras viii. 20-30 29
Hosea Tobit
xiii. 32
ii.
4, 7 (2, 5) 181 n. 3 Judith
xvi. 8-10 25, 67
5 (3) 21 n. 1 Ecclesiasticus li. 13-30 24, 244
iv.
13 80 1
Maccabees i. 25-28 24
vii.
1 75
n. 36-40 24
3 75 n., 76 ii.8-11 24
viii.
4 172 n. 44 25
Amos iii.3-9 24
iv. 195-197 ix. 20, 21, 41 25
v.
2 119
f.
7 68 Pseudepigraphical
and Rabbinic
9 296 Literature
23 67 Apoc.
of Baruch xlviii. 1-47 27-29
24 77 8 28 n. 2
Jonah 12
61
i.
7 and ii. 5 181 n. 1 Odes of
Solomon v., vi., vii. 32
Nahum Sanhedrin
x. 3 20
i. 187,
ch. vii. Moed
Katan 25b 30 n.
4 250 n., 254-256, Talmud B. Hagigah 12b 21
257 n., 263, 296 15b 31
n.
11 260 n. j. Meg. iii. 74 22 n.
INDEX II
OF MATTERS
Abu'l-Walid,
9 Duhm's
theories of metre and
Acrostich.
See Alphabetic poems strophe,
203 f., 225-236
Alliteration,
128 Dunash
ibn Labrat, 9
Alphabetic
poems, 8, 24, 88, 187-
189, chh. vii., viii. Echo,
169, 171, 176, 234 (see also
Alternate
parallelism, 63 Balance)
Anapaests,
144, 150 sense
and rhythmical, 171 f.
Antithetic
parallelism, 49 " Eighteen Blessings,"
the, 26
Assyrian,
rhythmical unit in, 141 Elegies,
25, 89, 133
scansion
in, 141, 144 n., 205 i n
the Talmud, 30 n. 1
Astruc,
5 f. Emendations,
textual, in the light
of parallelism, 75 n., S0, 82 f.,
105, 110 n., 153 f., 274 f. n.,
Eusebius,
11-13, 15
276 n. (see also Repetition), 296
Babylonian.
See Assyrian, Poetry Genesis,
Sievers' theory of metre
Balance,
rhythmical echo and, 131- in,
47 f., 54, 203 f., 207-222
136, 157, 160, 169 f., 223 Sievers' theories of
metrical
Baruch,
Apocalypse of, 27, 33 sources
of J, E, P in, 209 f.
Blessings
and curses, metrical, 219 Hariri,
111-akdamdt of, 41 if., 45, 63
Budde's
theory of kinah, 91 f.,
117 f., 118 n. Ibn
Ezra, 9, 1S
Caesura
in 3 : 3 rhythm rare, 168 f. Incomplete
parallelism, 49, 91, 98 f.,
in 4 : 4 rhythm, 160, 164, 169
104, 112, 123, 127
in 4 :3 and 4:2 rhythm, 169 f., defined, 59
234 examples of, 72-82, 94
in kinah, cp. 90 f. with compensation, defined, 74
Chasdai,
9 examples of, 76-79
Complete
parallelism, defined, 49, without compensation, defined,
59 74
examples of, 60-72, 94 examples of, 75
f., 94
in Lam. i.-iv. rare, 96-95, 115 Interpolations, 185 n.,
255, 261 f.,
Constructive
parallelism=Synthe- 292
tic parallelism (q.v.)
Creation,
rhythm in Babylonian Jamnia,
Jewish school of, 27
and Hebrew narratives of, 222 Jannai, 8
Curses.
See Blessings Jeremiah,
Duhm's theory of metre
of, 229 if.
Dirges,
90 (see also Kinah, Elegies)
Distich,
the unit in parallelism,
158 f.
301
302
FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY
Job,
caesura in lines of, 168 n. Particles,
commonly toneless, 139-
Jose
ibn Jose, 8 142,
145 f., 1.50 f.
Josephus,
11, 1.5-17, 21-23, 27 Philo,
10, 15 n.
Judah
hal-Levi, 9
Piers Ploughman, 128 f.
Poetry,
extent of, in Old Testa-
Kaliri,
8 ment, 7, 202 f.
Kimbi,
9, 17, 21 n. 1 mediaeval Jewish, S, 23, 33, 45
Kinah,
89, 116 f., 119 f., 132 f., Anglo-Saxon, 128-131, 136, 151
160, 227, 229, 234 f. Arabic (classical), 8, 41, 43, 45
Koster's
theory of strophe, 192- modern Palestinian (Arabic), 22
195 n.
1, 139, 145 n
Babylonian (Assyrian), 39 f., 141,
Lamentations,
Book of, ch. iii. 185
n., 220
formal differences between chh. Syriac,
8
ii. and iv., 100, 105, 109 f. Prophetical
writings, poetical form
2 :2 rhythm in chh. i.-iv., 118 n. of, 7, 14, 1S (see also Index I.
rarity of 4 : 2 rhythm in, 171 under Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc.)
Lowth,
4 if., 17, 32, 48-52, 8S-91, Proverbs,
types of parallelism in, 68
202 f. Psalms
of Solomon, 26
Magnificat,
the, 26 Rabbinic
interpretation, 19-21
Makkeph,
13S-140 Refrains,
189, 196
Menahem
ibn Saruk, 9 Rejez,
45
Mesha,
inscription of, 205 if. Repetition
of terms in parallel lines,
Metheg,
142 65
f., 153 f., 254 n. 2, 295 f.
Metre,
4, 8-17, 21, 26 n. 3, 47, 111
(cp. 26 n. 3)
(see
also Rhythm) Revised
Version, 7, 79 f., 95 n.,
Metrical
unit. See Unit 110
n., 166, 174, 189 n., 191,
250
nn. 3 and 4, 273 n., 275 n.,
Nahum,
interpolations in, 262 276
n., 277 n., 279 f.
Nehi,
89 Rhyme,
in Hebrew, 4, 8, 45, 63,
New
Testament, Hebrew poems in, 236
f.
26, 26 n. 3 in Arabic, 41, 43, 45, 63
"Non-stop
" lines. See Run-on " Rhymed
prose (saj'), 44 f., 219 n.
lines Rhythm,
earliest, 239
differences of, within the same
poem, 134 f., 15S, 160, 182 n. 2,
Odes
of Solomon, 31-33 223 f., 228 f., 238
Origen,
11-13, 15, 17, 1S n. 2, 136 Rhythms--
2 : 2, 120, 159 if., 165, 169, 184 f.
Parallelism,
chh. i.-iii. (cp. 118 n.)
in Babylonian, 38-40, 186 n. 2 :3, 176-183
in English, 38 2 : 4, 182 f.
in Finnish, 3S n. 3:2, 112, 120,
161, 169 f., 171,
in Arabic " rhymed prose," 40- 175 f., 179, 185, 225 if. (see
43, 46, 63 f. also Kinah)
in Jewish Greek, 32 f. 3 : 3, 30 n., 112, 159 f., 168 f., 182
absence of, in Arabic poetry, 41, n. 2,185, 225 if., 249 n. (cp. 92
f.)
44 3 : 4, 176, 181 f.
INDEX OF MATTERS 302b
in relation to textual criticism. 4 : 4, 159, 165, 166 n., 16S f., 185,
220-222,
249 D.
See Ernendations 4:3, 169 f., 171-176, 184, 234,
influence of, on rhythm, 112 f., 272
n., 279 n.
123, 126 f., 131, 239 4 : 2, 169 f., 171 f., 176, 182-184
See further under Alternate, 5 :
5. See 3 : 2 and Kinah
Antithetic, Complete, Incom- 6 : 6, 168 (cp. 182-184)
plete, Secondary, Sectional, Sievers' "sevens," 207-211, 213
f.,
Subsectional, Synonymous, 220
Synthetic
INDEX OF MATTERS 303
Rhythmical
parallelism= Synthetic Strophe,
4, 186-197
parallelism (q.v.), 99 Subsectional
parallelism, 99, 102 n.,
“Run-on"
or "Non-stop" lines, 103 f., 107 f., 111, 115
127, 207, 212 Synonymous
parallelism, 49
Synthetic
parallelism, 49-52, 98,
Saf.
See Rhymed prose 118,
193
Samuel,
Sievers' metrical theory of Text
and metre, 32, 1S2 n. 1
the Books of, 47 f., 203 Tristichs, 105,
159, 162, 167, 182,
Scansion
in Assyrian, 141, 144 n., 191
205
Secondary
parallelism, 104, 163 f.,
272 n.
Sectional
parallelism in Lamenta-
tions, 101-103 Unit, rhythmical, 12,
16, 141, 158 f.,
Sibylline
oracles, 33 183
f.
Sievers'
theory of Hebrew metre, of parallelism, 158 f
47, 143-154, 184, 202-.216
Soferim,
22 n.
Solomon
ibn Gabirol, 9 Verse-paragraphs,
126 f., 190-192
Stichometry,
21 n. 2 Vetter's
theory of caesura, 168 n.
Stichos,
stichoi, 12, 95, 15S f. Vocalisation,
Sievers' theory of
"Stopped-line
" verse, 127 147-149
Stressed
syllable, words without, in Origen's Hexapla, 148
138-142, 145 f., 150 f, in Jerome, 148
words with more than one, 137 f.,
142-144
concurrence of two, 139, 149 Wisdom, Book of, 32, 33,
136
THE
END
Please report any errors to Ted
Hildebrandt at:
Printed
in Great Britain by R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, Edinburgh.