Calvin Theological
Journal 9.1 (1974)
: 15-30.
Copyright © 1974 by Calvin
Theological Seminary. Cited with permission.
THE STYLISTICS OF HEBREW
POETRY
A
(Re)New(ed) Focus of Study
by JOHN H. STEK
THE
STUDY of Hebrew (OT) poetry as an art form—its
prosody, rhetoric (including rhetorical
conventions), and
architectonic forms—has had a
checkered history. No doubt this
has been due, on the one hand, to overriding
devotional, homi-
letical, theological and
religious (history of religions, compara-
tive religions) interests in
this literature; and, on the other
hand, to the fact that professional students of the
OT texts,
while receiving (more or less adequate) training in
languages,
history, theology, and religion, have not been
trained in the
aesthetic aspect of OT literature—or any
literature, for that
matter. Even Gunkel's work
on the Psalms (Formgeschichte:
investigation into the
inter-relationship of content, form and
function), which has had such revolutionary
effect on biblical
studies (New Testament as well as Old), failed
to spark that
general interest in the aesthetic dimension that
it ought to have.
Investigations
remained sporadic, the hobby of a few; and areas
of investigation have remained fragmentary. A
recent survey of
work done in this area in the modern period ends on
the dis-
consolate note: "General
agreement on the structure of Hebrew
poetry is little more advanced than it was two or
three cen-
turies ago."1
This is to be greatly regretted
since the OT documents do
not present us with mere words strung together in
dull syntac-
tical relationships, but with
the greatest literature the ancient
(only Semitic?) world produced. In
its sophistication, subtlety,
beauty and power it rivals the best literature of any
people at
any time. The Hebrews were not artists with the
brush, the
chisel, or the architects' tools, but their masters
knew how to
narrate a tale, compose a poem or fashion a
proverb. They did
it with an amazing mastery of language—and economy
of words
1 Donald Broadribb, "Historical Review of Studies of Hebrew
Poetry,"
Abr-Nahraim,
13 (1972-73) 66-87.
15
16 CALVIN
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
—together
with an exquisite union of form and content that
has rarely been matched and perhaps never
surpassed. And,
as with all great works of art, the reader or
student of this
literature (especially its poetry) who fails to
understand its
forms and their function will stumble at the very
threshold of
understanding the content—a sad fact
to which many a ser-
mon and many a learned
commentary and monograph alike
bear witness.
Happily there are now signs of a
reawakened interest, at
least in some quarters. During the last twenty-five
years a
growing list of studies has appeared in the
journals dealing
with various aspects of this many-faceted subject.
As evidence
I
point to the article of Broadribb referred to in note
1 (above),
to the recent reprint of George Buchanan Gray's The Forms of
Hebrew Poetry, significantly updated
by a "Prolegomenon"
from the pen of D. N. Freedman2—a student
of Albright who
has long interested himself in these matters—to the
appearance
of Nic. H. Ridderbos' Die Psalmen: Stilistische Verfahren and
Aufbau, mit besonderer Berucksichtigung von
Ps 1-41,3 and to
the useful bibliographies listed in all three.
Broadribb's
lament that these studies remain badly frag-
mented clearly antedates his
acquaintance with Ridderbos'
work (which he does not list in his bibliography).
This last is
one of the most detailed and exhaustive analyses of
stylistic
phenomena in the Psalms ever to be
published—including an
introductory classification of the
phenomena, followed by an
analysis of the stylistics of each of the first
41 psalms. Dr. Rid-
derbos does not make use of
syllable counting in his analysis
of poetic lines, a tool of investigation shown to
be of great use-
fulness by a number of scholars
trained in
is little else that he has missed. Unhappily his
work on the
aesthetics of the psalter
has itself about as much aesthetic
quality as a Hebrew grammar—to be studied and
consulted,
not to be enjoyed. But more to be regretted is the
fact that it
was translated into German before publication,
rather than
2
1915.)
3 Beiheft
zur Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche
THE STYLISTICS OF HEBREW
POETRY 17
into English, in defiance (?) of the fact that
English is rapidly
replacing German as the international language for
publication
in biblical scholarship (which, as I have learned
since coming
to
cost of publishing theological works on the
continent for the
continental market is becoming astronomical).
To attempt a systematic description
of all the aspects of He-
brew poetic stylistics which have come to light
would go far
beyond the purpose of this brief article—which is only
to
inform the reader of one of the newer areas in O.T
studies,
and to stimulate interest in a much-neglected, but
fascinating
important field of investigation. It will suffice
to illustrate,
somewhat at random, a few of the more interesting
phenomena,
some long noted, others but recently recognized.
Anyone who has read in the Hebrew
poetry of the OT will
have observed that, although it does not manifest a
pattern of
rhyming, the poets of ancient
When
Jeremiah (in the name of Yahweh) appealed to his way-
ward brothers Shubu banim shobabim 'erpah meshuboteykem
(Return
0 sons of apostasy, I will heal your apostasies—3:22a),
he was playing (in all seriousness) with sounds
precisely as the
Israelites
had learned to expect from their poets. And so was
the author of Ps. 22 when he penned the words of vss. 4-5:
"In you (Beka) our fathers
trusted; (batehu)
They trusted, (batehu) and you
delivered them (√ plt).
To you they cried, and were saved; (√
mlt)
In you (beka)
they trusted (batehu),
and were not
disappointed."
And when one hears this same poet complain:
Yabesh kaheresh hoki
(emended from kohi)
(My mouth has dried up like a
potsherd)
he hears the harsh, brittle echoes of sherd fragments rattling and
cracking under dusty feet. Poets and public alike
were intensely
sensitive to sound.
Also repetition was for the biblical
poets (and the whole lit-
erary tradition in which they
stood) a particularly common
device. Sometimes it served passion, as in the Eli, eli
(My God,
my God) of Ps. 22:1, the four-fold ‘ad—'anah (How
long? of
Ps.
13:lf., or the lament of Isaiah (24:16):
18 CALVIN
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Razi li,
razi li, ‘oy li.
Bogedim bagadu, ubeged bogedim bagadu.
(I pine away, I pine away, woe is me!
Treacherous, they deal
treacherously; treacherous of the
treacherous, they deal treacherously.)
Sometimes urgency, as in Jud. 5:12:
"Awake,
awake, Deborah!
Awake, awake, utter a song!" (Cpr. Is. 51:9; 52:1); or in
Is.
40:1:
"Comfort, comfort my people . . .."
Sometimes
emphasis and concentration, as in S of S 1:15:
"Behold, how beautiful you are,
my love;
behold, how beautiful . . .."
or in the three-fold 'eyn in I Sam. 2:2:
"There is none holy like
Yahweh,
there is none besides you;
there is no rock like our God."
(Cf.
also the repetition in Ps. 22:4-5—cited above; and in Is.
24:16—also
cited above.)
Related to this last, but serving a
larger and more complex
function within the body of a composition, is the
extensive use
of key—or motif-words—a device that concentrates
attention
on primary themes and weaves the whole into an
artistic as well
as thematic unity. A clear and uncomplicated
example can be
found in Ps. 11.
Within this short composition of 9 poetic lines,
four words sound on the ear again and again:
"Yahweh" 5 t.—
vss. 1:42, 5, 7), "'righteous" (3 t.—vss. 3, 5, 7; also "righteous-
ness, vs. 7), "wicked" (3 t.—vss. 2, 5, 6), and "upright" (2 t.—
vss. 2,
7).
These very words highlight the central theme of the
psalm.
Martin Buber
has done perhaps more than any other scholar
to focus attention on this important phenomenon in
Hebrew
poetry. In an article devoted to Psalms 34 and 145, L.
J. Lieb-
reich lifts a significant
quotation from one of Buber's English
works (Good and
Evil; New York, 1953):
"The recurrence of the key-words is a basic law of com-
position in
the Psalms. This law has a poetic significance—
rhythmical
correspondence of sound values—as well as a
hermeneutical
one: the Psalm provides its own interpre-
THE STYLISTICS OF HEBREW
POETRY 19
tation, by repetition of what is essential to its
understand-
ing," p. 52.4
Careful attention to the use of
words by the Hebrew poets bears
out Buber's contention.
It also has critical value, not infrequently
establishing literary unity where
scholars for various reasons have
posited disunity. A striking example of this has
been offered by
James
Ward in his study of Ps. 89.5
A special use of repetition is that
which has come to be termed
"inclusion" (or the Latin inclusio), otherwise known as the
"envelope figure."6 By this is meant the
repetition at or near
the end of a poetic composition of key words (or
phrases, or
clauses, or concepts) employed at the beginning.
Liebreich7 ar-
gues that this device is
utilized in "half of the Book of Psalms."
Not
all his examples are convincing, but even so, its occurrence
is frequent. A good example is afforded by Ps. 12
where the
bene 'adam of vs. 1 is repeated at
the very end of vs. 8. In Ps.
8
the repetition is more extensive. Here the whole poetic line
with which the psalm begins is repeated to form the
conclusion.
Often the poets employed inclusion
to wrap an "envelope"
around a subsection within a larger composition, as in
Ps. 32:
1-5,
where pesha' (rebellious act), hata'ah (sin), and ‘awon
(iniquity), which are used in the first two poetic lines, are
re-
peated in vs. 5; or Ps.
18:20-24, where "according to my righ-
teousness, according to the
cleanness of my hands" appears as
the central phrase of the beginning and closing
lines of a poetic
"paragraph." See also Ps. 30:9-11, which begins and ends
with
a two-fold "Yahweh," in the vocative.
Repetition sometimes is but an echo
of liturgical usage, as in
Pss. 135,
136, 150, and also in 96:7-8; 118:2-4; 114:12; etc.
But
there are times when it is clearly subjected to a numerical
principle that contributes its own significant
dimension of mean-
ing. Perhaps this is
nowhere clearer than in Ps. 29, which beyond
4
Words,"
5 James M. Ward,
"The Literary Form and Liturgical Background of
Ps.
LXXXIX," Vetus Testamentum
XI (1961) 321-339.
6 A name coined by R. G.
Moulton in his The Literary Study of the
Bible (
7 In the article cited in
note 4.
20 CALVIN
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
much doubt includes a powerful polemic against the Tyrian Baal.
The
whole poem is enclosed in the "envelope figure," with the
name Yahweh repeated precisely four times in both
introduction
and conclusion. But even more significantly, within
the body of
the psalm "the voice of Yahweh" (allusion
to thunder) is
sounded seven
times, and "Yahweh" is named ten times. These
numbers are not coincidental. In Ps. 30, a psalm
of praise, "Yah-
weh" is named seven times, twice he is called
"Yahweh my
God"
(vss. 2a, 12b-inclusion), and once "Adonay"--for a total
of ten references. In Ps. 19, a praise offering,
"Yahweh" occurs
also precisely seven times. In Ps. 15, a seven-fold lo’ (negative
particle) is employed in description of the one
who is acceptable
at Yahweh's sanctuary.8
A still different form of repetition
widely employed by the
Hebrew poets is the piling up of
synonyms (or near synonyms).
This
device has been widely recognized even by those who read
the OT only somewhat superficially, especially in Pss. 1; 19: 7-
9; and 119. Out of the many available, two
additional examples
must suffice. Ps. 5 begins
with the repetitive cry:
"Give ear to my words . . ;
give heed to my groaning.
Hearken to the sound of my cry . . .
."
The
author of Ps. 22 elaborates on the theme of deliverance by
means of no less than four distinct verbal roots: plt, mlt, ntsl,
and ys'.9
Since the discovery of a large body
of Phoenician docu-
ments,10 comparative study of this treasure of
Canaanite (to use
the term loosely) poetry with that of the OT has
alerted stu-
8 The most common form of
repetition is the triplet, but this appears
often to be controlled by the demands of Hebrew
poetic rhythm. It oc-
curs most often in couplet lines in which the
repeated element appears
in three of the four hemistichs,
but yields to a variation in the fourth
(or one of the four). For examples of this pattern see Ps.
29:1f. (cf.
96:7-9),
and Ps. 22:3-5; vs. 24; 5:4f.
9 Much of this discussion
of repetition has been based on the work of
Ridderbos cited above, and an article by James Muilenburg, "A Study
in Hebrew Rhetoric: Repetition and Style," Vetus Testamentum: Suppl.
I
(1953) 97-111.
10 Generally known as the
Ras Shamra Tablets; brought
to light since
1929.
THE STYLISTICS OF HEBREW
POETRY 21
dents of the OT to certain other interesting devices
widely em-
ployed within this shared
poetic tradition. The scope of this
article will permit mention of only three of the
most common.
It has long been recognized that
Hebrew poetry is far more
elliptical than Hebrew prose, and more elliptical
than accept-
able English style will tolerate. It is now known
that ellipsis was
employed even more frequently than was supposed,
but that
the obscurities this creates are often eased by the
associated
device of "double-duty." A few examples will
clarify. In Ps. 9:18
the Hebrew seems literally to say:
"For the needy shall not always
be forgotten,
and the hope of the lowly shall perish
forever."
This
involves a manifest contradiction--until it is recognized
that the second hemistich is elliptical, with the
negative particle
lo'
in the first hemistich doing "double-duty" for both half-lines
(rightly recognized by RSV). Ps. 38 appears
to begin:
"0 Yahweh, do not rebuke me in
your anger,
but (the conj. is ambiguous) in your wrath
chastise me."
But
once again the second half-line is elliptical and the negative
particle 'al
serves "double-duty" ("and do not chastise me in
your wrath," as RSV has recognized). RSV
renders 25:9:
"He leads the humble in what is
right,
and teaches the humble his way."
But
it is better to recognize with Dahood that the first
hemistich
is elliptical and that the personal pronoun of the
second hemi-
stich serves
"double-duty," and should be understood as quali-
fying bammishpat; thus:
"He leads the humble in his
just manner;
and he teaches the humble his way." (Cpr. vs. 5.)
Similarly,
RSV's traditional rendering of 17:8:
"Keep me as the apple of the
eye;
hide me in the shadow of your wings...."
is improved by the recognition in NAB11
that the possessive
pronoun of the second hemistich is to be read
with the elliptical
first hemistich:
"Keep me as the apple of your
eye."
11 The New American Bible: Sponsored by The
Bishops' Committee of
the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine;
Sons, 1970.
22 CALVIN
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Examples could be multiplied. In his
"The Grammar of the
Psalter"
(appendix to the Third Volume of his commentary),12
Dahood lists no fewer than 275 passages in the Psalter
alone
where he finds ellipsis and "double-duty."
Perhaps upwards of
half of his proposals may be challenged by various
scholars, but
most will acknowledge that the recognition of this
poetic device
has put the study of ellipsis in Hebrew poetry on a
new basis.
A second device newly recognized to
be employed by the
poets of the OT is the use of conventional pairs of
synonyms
within the framework of poetic
"parallelism." That is to say,
certain synonyms had come to be conventionally
paired in the
poetic tradition in which the OT poets stood, so that
when they
used one of these, convention readily supplied the
other for use
in the parallel line or line-segment. For example,
if a poet had
occasion to refer to his (blood-) brother(s) in
one line, con-
vention supplied him the
synonymous expression "son (s) of my
mother" for the parallel component (cf. Ps.
50:20; 69:8; cpr.
S
of S 1:6). Similar pairs are "foe"//"the one hating" (Ps.
21:8;
106:10; 18:40; 68:2); "to judge," shpt//"to
judge," din
(Ps.
9:8, cpr. 7:8-9; 140:12; 9:5; 76:8-9), "good"//"pleasant"
(Ps.
135:3; 147:1), "days"//"years" (Ps. 61:6; 77:5; 78:33),
"sea"//"stream" (24:2; 66:6; 89:25; cpr. 72:8). Again the ex-
amples could be multiplied. Of
special interest is the fact that
many of the same pairs (all of the above) occur in
the Ras
Shamra tablets as well as in the OT—demonstrating that
the
poets of ancient
tablets antedate the OT document by some
centuries) and rather
widely dispersed (Ras Shamra was located near later
poetic tradition. Some scholars place the number of
such pairs
in common to both literatures at more than a
hundred. Dahood
cites 157 pairs,13 but by no means all of
these are convincing.
A third device of the Hebrew poets
discovered first in the
Ras Shamra tablets is the
breakup of stereotype phrases and the
distribution of their components
between two parallel lines or
12 Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms
(The Anchor Bible), Garden City,
N.Y.,
Doubleday & Company, Inc., Vol. I, 1966; Vol, II:, 1968; Vol.
III, 1970.
13 Psalms III, pp. 445-456.
THE STYLISTICS OF HEBREW
POETRY 23
line segments. A few illustrations will make the
matter clear.
There
can be little doubt that "friendship and faithfulness"
(hsd w'mt) is a
very common stereotyped phrase in the OT
(cf.
Ps. 25:10; 40:11; 61:7; 85:10; 86:15; 89:14), yet in a
number of places the phrase is divided and its
components dis-
tributed between two parallel hemistichs or lines, as in Ps. 36:5:
"Your friendship, 0 Yahweh,
extends to the heavens,
your faithfulness to the clouds."
(cf.
also Ps. 26:3; 57:10; 40:10; 108:5; 117.2.) "Day and
night," in the sense of “continuously,” is
another common
phrase (Ps. 1:2; 32:4; 42:3; 55:10). It too appears
frequently
in distribution, as in Ps. 22:2:
"0 my God, I cry by day, but
you do not answer;
and by night, but get no relief."
This
is the poet's way of saying: Day and night I cry to you to
no avail. (cf. 42:8; 91:5f.;
121:6.) So when the author of Ps.
11
writes: Yhwh beheykal qsodsho/Yhwh bashshamayim kise'o
(vs. Aab), parallelism strongly
suggests that godsho (his holy) is
to be understood as modifying kise'o (his throne), rather than
heykal (temple--so Dahood, contra modern English versions.
(Cpr. Ps. 47:8.) Interpreters of Hebrew poetry must now keep
a
keen eye for similar instances.
A special application of this device
is the breakup and dis-
tribution of the components of
compound divine names. The
compound name 'el
‘elyon is attested in Gen. 14:18-20 and Ps.
78:35,
but in Ps. 73:11; 77:9-10; 78:17-18; 107:11 the two
components are distributed. Yhwh `elyon occurs
in Ps 7:17b
and 47:2, but its components are distributed in Ps.
18:13
21:7;
91:9; 92:1. "Yahweh my (our) God" was a common way
of referring to the deity in ancient
18:28;
30:2, 12; etc.), and this phrase too is frequently dis-
tributed, as in 18:6:
"In my distress I called upon
Yahweh
to my God I cried for help."
(cf.
also vss. 21, 31; Ps. 25:lf.;
38:21; 48:8; etc.) It is gen-
erally recognized that Dahood has pushed the possibilities of this
device much too far in his search for new compound
names for
God
in the Psalms, but the phenomenon is there and must be
reckoned with in the study of all OT poetry.
24 CALVIN
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Chiasmus as a rhetorical device has
long been recognized as a
particular favorite of Hebrew poets. This involves
a reversal of
the order of components in parallel literary units.
The most com-
mon is that found within a
single poetic line:
"The heavens tell the glory of
God;
and proclaims his handiwork, the
firmament" (Ps. 19:1);
or in a couplet:
"Indeed, you are the one who
drew me from the belly;
you made me secure on my mother's breasts.
I was cast on you from the womb;
from the belly of my mother you have been my
God."
(Ps.
22:9f.)
Notice
how lines A and D both contain emphatic "you" re-
ferring to Yahweh, and the
expression "from the belly," while
lines B and C are built around the "on"
phrases. Such construc-
tions are frequent within
couplets (the above example repre-
sents two lines of Hebrew
poetry).
Such instances are rather obvious to
even the casual reader
of the Hebrew text. But scholars are becoming
increasingly con-
vinced that chiasmus was also
employed in the composition of
larger units. It seems clear enough (and has often
been noted)
that the hostile figures in the prayer of Ps.
22:20f. (sword, dog,
lion, wild oxen) are a precise repetition in
chiastic order of those
mentioned in the lament of vss.
12-18. But often overlooked is
the chiasmus in Ps. 18:33-36 (which details the
theme of vs. 32),
where the motif development follows the order:
feet/hands/
hands/feet. Similarly in vss.
20-24 there is to be observed an a-
b-c-b-a ordering in the theme development. See
also Ps. 9:11-14
where the pattern is: praise—motive/motive—praise.
Sometimes
whole compositions have been constructed on the
chiasmus pat-
tern. Ps. 1, for example, progresses thematically
(by verses) in
the order of a-b-c-c'-a'-b'. Ps. 2, which is obviously composed
of four "paragraphs," reflects the
pattern: a-b-b'-a'. The inter-
preter of Hebrew poetry
clearly must be alert to similar patterns
elsewhere.14
14 Ridderbos
discusses a number of other instances in the first book
of the Psalter, op cit., pp. 61-62.
THE STYLISTICS OF HEBREW
POETRY 25
An unusual application of chiasmus
was discovered by Albert
Condamin
already early in this century. It involves the chiastic
ordering of key-words in a long lament poem (Lam.
1) :
rbt in vss. 1 and 22
'yn mnhm in
vss. 2 and 21
tsr in vss. 3 and 20
khn in vss. 4 and 19
hlk shby in vss. 5 and 18
tsywn in vss. 6 and 17
prsh in vss. 10 and 13
r'h nbt in vss. 11 and 1215
It
is to be observed that this last example bespeaks also a
highly developed sense of symmetry. Symmetry is
further evi-
denced by the number and rich
variety of examples that have
come to light. Although Hebrew poetry was not
controlled by a
rigid metrical construction of lines—all attempts to
scan Hebrew
poetry on this principle have failed—Hebrew poets
would some-
times fashion a couplet in which each of the four hemistichs
was composed of precisely the same number of
syllables, as in
Ps.
22:4f. (9 + 9/9 + 9), or even a "paragraph" of three lines
in which each line has precisely 17 syllables (Ps.
22:6-8).
In a series of articles,
Hans-Kosmala16 has called attention to
yet another kind of symmetry evident in Hebrew
poetry.17
Analyzing
poetic lines by counting the number of significant
sense units within each line, he discovered certain
interesting
symmetrical series. He found in Is. 5:1f., for example, the pat-
tern: 5 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 5; in 7:7-9 the pattern: 4 | 7
| 7 | 7 | 4; and in
30:29-31
the pattern: 6 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 4 | 6. Although he was
sometimes compelled to resort to emendations (not
in the ex-
amples given here) in order to
"discover" his patterns, he might
in one instance have extended his pattern, if he
had not done so.
15 Journal of Theological Studies 7 (1906) 137-140. Cited by both
Muilenburg and Broadribb,
see notes 8 and 1 respectively. For a some-
what similar pattern in Ps. 139 see Jan Holman,
"The Structure of
Psalm
CXXXIX, Vetus Testamentum
XXI (1971) 298-310.
16 "Form and
Structure in Ancient Hebrew Poetry (A New Ap-
proach)," Vetus Testamentum
XIV (1964) 432-445; XVI (1966) 152-
180.
17 His examples are all
taken from Isaiah.
26 CALVIN
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Accepting
the Masoretic text as it has been preserved for us in
the tradition, and scanning the poetic lines
according to
mala's principles, the pattern
for the whole "vineyard song" in Is.
5:1-7
proves to be: 5 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 5—5 | 4 | 7—6 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 6—
5 | 4 | 7.
Symmetry is to be observed also in
the structural pattern (ar-
chitectonic form) of many Hebrew
poems. Ps. 110 is made up of
two precisely balanced divisions: Each contains
exactly 74 syl-
lables (or 73, depending on
the analysis of certain words).18
Although
there is general agreement that Hebrew poetry does
not commonly employ a strict strophic (stanza) structure
after
the manner of classical poetry in our western
tradition, some
poems in the OT do reflect a symmetrical
"strophic" structure.
Good
examples are the alphabetic acrostics, especially those that
are regularly built up of two-line (Ps. 10-11; 37),
three-line
(Lam. 3), or eight-line (Ps. 119) units. Although not acrostics,
Lam.
1 and 2 are each constructed of 22 (the number of letters
of the alphabet) three-line units, and ch. 4 of 22 two-line units.19
All
of these, however (together with those cited in note 18),
appear to be controlled by an extraneous pattern (the
number
of letters in the alphabet). There are those not
so controlled and
yet they manifest a symmetrical structure. Ps. 114
is constructed
of four couplets; Ps. 57 has two subdivisions of 7
lines, each fol-
lowed by a recurring refrain (vss.
5 and 11).
Of even greater interest is the
pattern of such a poem as Ps.
48.
When properly scanned (RSV has badly jumbled the lines
at both beginning and end), the thematic
development is seen
to be built on the symmetrical line pattern: 2 | 3
| 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2.
Ps.
82 has an equally interesting architectonic structure.
With
one introductory and one concluding line, the
remaining seven
lines divide into two subdivisions of three lines
each, with a
central compact line in which the kernel of the
indictment
against the gods is set forth with great
concentration:
"Not do they know,
and not do they understand!"
18 Noted first by D. N.
Freedman, cited by Dahood: Psalms III, p.
113.
19 Lam. 5 (not acrostic)
is similarly patterned, with precisely 22 lines,
as is also Ps. 33 (not acrostic).
THE STYLISTICS OF HEBREW
POETRY 27
But
even further: Each of the three-line units has an intro-
ductory line (vs. 2ab; 5cd),
followed by a two-line elaboration
(vss. 3f. and 6f., resp.). To cite but one more example, Ps. 137,
an emotional recollection of the Babylonian
captivity, manifests
a symmetry unexpected in a prayer-song of such
passion. Count-
ing line segments (instead
of full lines) the theme pattern is
5
| 4 | 8 | 4 | 5
— the first line of both introduction and conclu-
sion is a tristich.20
The abrupt and surprising reference to
in the fourth division is more understandable in
view of the
deliberate structure of the psalm as a whole.
Psalm 44 also has a marked (and
remarkable) pattern to its
structure. Composed of 28 poetic lines, it
develops its theme in
a steady progression of a decreasing number of
lines as it ad-
vances toward its climax—an
urgent prayer for deliverance. At-
tention to content discloses
the pattern: 10 | 8 | 6 | 4. Ridderbos
has likened it to a Mesopotamian ziggurat
(step-pyramid with
sanctuary on the summit). He observes that the
poet seems to
be mounting up to God on praise (vss. 1-8), lament (vss. 9-16),
and confession of worthiness (vss.
17-22), before urging his pe-
tition in the presence of God.21
The symmetry is carried even
further, however, since each
"step" in the "ziggurat" configuration is
constructed of two
equal layers (5 + 5 / 4 + 4 / 3 + 3), while the
prayer itself
manifests a chiastic pattern: prayer -- lament —
lament —
prayer.
Overlooked in the various studies on
Hebrew poetic forms is
the fact that a similar pyramidal structure is to
be found in the
second half of Ps. 19. Scanning vss.
7-12 according to the sys-
tem of Kosmala (referred
to above) , and observing the limits of
the
sense units, the pattern emerges: 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3
3 | 2 | 2. What is equally striking for this psalm,
the unity of
which has so often been impugned, is that this
"pyramid" is
built up of precisely the same number 1:48) of
"building stones"
as the first half of the psalm. Moreover, the
first half has its own
20 Notice the triple
"if"-clause in the center section—concentration
and emphasis by reiteration.
21 Nic.
H. Ridderbos, De
Psalmen (Korte Verklaring), Kampen, J. H.
Kok, Deel I: Pss. 1-41, 1962, p. 42.
28 CALVIN
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
peculiar "hourglass" form. By lines it
counts 8 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 8 | 8.
(Perhaps
the 6 |6 lines should be counted as 7 | 7?)
As a final example of poetic devices
employed by the OT
poets I call attention to a recent suggestion
proposed by D. N.
Freedman.22
Noting the fact that, when speaking of
impending exile, Hosea often links
constructions (cf. 7:11; 9:3; 11:5,
11; 12:2), he observes that
the line segment in 8:9 which speaks of
a line segment that speaks of
it also lacks a parallel. His bold suggestion is
that we have here
a "form of inclusion (or envelope
construction) " in which
parallel segments have been deliberately
separated by interven-
ing elaborating material.
This is a surprising phenomenon, if
its presence can be dem-
onstrated. But I am convinced
that Freedman's suggestion must
be taken seriously. I had independently (and
somewhat hesi-
tantly) come to the same
conclusion in regard to the difficulties
encountered by interpreters in Amos 5:10-13. These
difficulties
evaporate if it be recognized that vs. 13
constitutes the sense
continuation of vs. 10, with vss. 11f. intervening as
elaborating
material.
Recognition of this phenomenon may
also provide the solution
to the problems created by the unbalanced line
segments in Ps.
29:3b,
7ab and 9c.23 It is even possible that Ps. 19:5c and 7c
constitute an "envelope" around the
elaborating material in vss.
6-7ab." If so, the sense of
this recovered "line" would be:
22 In his
"Prolegomenon" to the reprint of Gray's The Forms of He-
brew Poetry, pp. XXXVI - XXXVII; see note 2, above.
23 Freedman has promised
an article on Ps. 29 in the light of his
suggestion, but to my knowledge it has not yet
appeared. For an attrac-
tive alternative suggestion
for the troublesome lines in Ps. 29 see already
Kemper
Fullerton„ "The Strophe in Hebrew Poetry and Psalm 29,"
Journal of Biblical
Literature,
48 (1929) 274-290. Ernst Vogt's attempt
to solve the problem of these unbalanced line
segments is much too- radi-
cal to be convincing. Among other emendations he
transposes 3b and
7ab
to a position between 9b and c.
position: 3b to follow immediately after 4b. The Jerusalem Bible trans-
poses 3b to a position between 9b and c.
29 THE STYLISTICS OF HEBREW POETRY
"In them he has set a tent for
the sun,
. . . .
. . . .
and nothing
is hid from its heat."
Kissane
has suggested that Ps. 50:21c has possibly become
misplaced from an original position immediately
following vs.
16a.24
It would be better to account for 16a25 and
21c as yet
another example of Freedman's suggested
inclusion construction.
The
"line" then reads:
"But to the wicked God says,
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
‘I will reprove you and lay the
charge before you.’"
The
intervening lines then detail the elements of Yahweh's
rebuke.
In my judgment Freedman's suggestion
holds promise for un-
raveling difficulties in other passages as well.
A new day appears to be dawning for
what Muilenburg has
somewhere called "rhetorical criticism"
(perhaps better named
more broadly "stylistics criticism"). If
so, it must be welcomed.
they were more) employed more than mere words linked
in
grammatical relationships in order to speak the word
of Yahweh
to
literary and rhetorical conventions lay ready to
hand in their
literary workshops, and their own considerable
powers of literary
creativity were put under tribute in the
composition of their
inspired writings. Adequate and responsible
interpretation of
those writings demands full appreciation for and
understanding
of their literary
quality. Biblical scholarship may no longer
24 Edward J. Kissane, The Book of Psalms,
Ltd.; vol I, (Ps.
1-72) 1953, p. 223.
25 Often questioned as a
possible gloss.
30 CALVIN
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
neglect this task. And ministers who are largely
dependent on
commentaries for exegetical
assistance may expect and must de-
mand that the newer
commentaries they use do full justice to
this dimension.
After the type had already been set
for this article, the study of Ps. 29
referred to in note 23, above, came into my hand:
D.N. Freedman and
C.F.
Hyland, "Psalm 29: A Structural Analysis," Harvard Theological
Review,
66 (1973), 237-256. For a good example of the kinds of inves-
tigation into Hebrew poetic
stylistics currently being pursued by Ameri-
can scholars, this article should now be consulted.
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
Calvin Theological Seminary
Grand Rapids
www.calvinseminary.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at: