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