Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T18:05:32.934Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Acrostics and Metrics in Hebrew Poetry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

David Noel Freedman
David Noel Freedman
Affiliation:
Studies in Religion, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his search for the key to Hebrew metrics, George Buchanan Gray devoted considerable attention to the acrostic poems of the Old Testament. Since they are by no means typical of Hebrew poetry generally, it may be doubted whether they provide a suitable base on which to formulate principles governing the nature of the metrical systems employed by the biblical poets. Furthermore, the fact that acrostic poems have a rather rigid structure may have encouraged greater independence on the part of the poet in working out internal configurations so that a wider range of variation results, partly from the desire to avoid monotony, than would otherwise be the case. The great virtue of acrostic poems is that lines or stanzas are regularly marked off by words beginning with successive letters of the alphabet. Thus in the Book of Lamentations, the first four chapters are regular acrostics, while the fifth chapter follows the same pattern but without making use of the alphabetic device itself. In the first three chapters, three-line stanzas are the rule; in chapters one and two each stanza begins with a successive letter of the alphabet, whereas in chapter three, each of the three lines of the stanza begins with the same letter of the alphabet. Thus the first word of the first stanza of each of the poems begins with the letter 'ālef; in the case of chapter three, the second and third lines of the stanza also begin with 'ālef. The first word of the second stanza begins with bēt; again in chapter three, the second and third lines also begin with bēt. Chapter four follows the same pattern as chapters one and two, except that the stanzas have two lines instead of three.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 65 , Issue 3 , July 1972 , pp. 367 - 392
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Forms of Hebrew Poetry (London, 1915)Google Scholar, Chaps. III, VII, VIII.

2 Of the five poems in Lamentations, chap. 5 is the most regular from a metrical standpoint; at the same time it is the only one without the alphabetic pattern.

3 See discussion of this problem in Cross, F. M. and Freedman, D. N., Early Hebrew Orthography (New Haven, 1952), 65–68Google Scholar. We use the terms in a specialized sense to distinguish the short and long forms of these elements: e.g., the 2nd m. sing, form in the Kethib is written -t and occasionally -th; the vocalization (i.e., the “Qere”) is uniformly -tā. The same line of reasoning holds for -k and -kh (Kethib), but vocalized -kā (Qere). We must also allow a reasonable margin for uncertainty or error.

4 To remove these lines (1:7 and 2:19) as editorial additions would create an imbalance in the total syllable count between chaps. 1 and 2 on the one hand, and chap. 3 on the other, where none exists now. These extended stanzas are apparently part of the overall scheme, which includes several abbreviated stanzas as well. Similar variations occur in chap. 3. The present correlation in total syllable count, surely not the product of editorial activity, deliberate or accidental, remains a factor of crucial importance in determining principles and procedures.

5 Lam. 4:15 is an exceptional stanza with 35 syllables. The rest are two-line units ranging from 23 (or 24) to 30 syllables in length.

6 Ps. 37, which is also a two-line alphabetic acrostic, has a substantially different structure. See discussion below.

7 A detailed study of the metrical structure of this psalm is to be found in The Structure of Psalm 137, Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright, ed. Goedicke, Hans (Baltimore, 1971), 187–205Google Scholar.

8 The four-syllable pronunciation erūšālēm undoubtedly prevailed during the classical period. The Qere Yerūšālayim is already reflected in the orthography of some of the Dead Sea scrolls, but cannot be traced to an earlier period.

9 The sense of the word is indicated by its association with ʽny cf. Lam. 3:19 and Isa. 58:7.

10 The term is a hapax; it may be that the initial mem should be construed as enclitic with the preceding ʽl. In any case the meaning, “cessation, destruction,” and derivation from šbt seem clear. Cf. McDaniel, T., Philological Studies in Lamentations: I, Biblica 49 (1968), 53Google Scholar.

11 RSV renders:

This is unsatisfactory, since “the days of her affliction” must be taken as the direct object of “remembers.” We note that at 3:19, where the same terms occur in combination, RSV renders correctly: “Remember my affliction.”

12 For mḥmd, cf. 1:10, 11; and for ymy qdm, cf. 2:17.

13 Cf. 2:11–12, where the same terminology occurs, including ʽtp and ʽll. For ḥwṣwt in 2:19, however, we have rḥwbwt in vss. 11 and 12. There are other minor differences as well, showing that there is no question of direct copying.

14 In Prov. 31:10–31, which is an alphabetic acrostic, there is a single tricolon (vs. 15) in an otherwise unbroken sequence of bicola. This phenomenon seems too widespread and patterned to be the coincidental result of changes, accidental or editorial, independently introduced into the several poems.

15 MT has the major pause at nʽw. If we accept this division, we would have a three-line stanza, as follows:

16 With 35 syllables it is about one-third longer than the average. There is approximately the same ratio between the four-line and three-line stanzas in chaps. 1 and 2.

17 We interpret ʽśyt and hb't as precative perfects, in accordance with the context. On the phenomenon in Hebrew poetry, cf. Dahood, , Psalms I (Anchor Bible; New York, 1966)Google Scholar, Index, 328; Psalms II (Anchor Bible; New York, 1968)Google Scholar, Index, 396.

18 Since ymynw is feminine, we interpret n⊡b as the inf. abs. in parallel construction with the perfect dārak.

19 See fn. 17.

20 As already indicated, the major consideration is general consistency. Overall the differences are not significant.

21 There is some confusion in the text, with the he and waw stanzas apparently mixed together. The most widely adopted procedure involves reading w before 'wtk with some Hebrew MSS and the LXX; then that is regarded as the beginning of the waw stanza. The total of 31 (actually 32 with the added w) syllables is appropriate for two stanzas.

22 The waw stanza has been lost. We make our calculations on the basis of 21 stanzas.

23 The nun stanza has fallen out of MT, but can be supplied on the basis of one Hebrew MS, LXX, and other versions. The reading has now been confirmed by 11QPsa (with the exception that the first kl is omitted). Cf. Sanders, J. A., The Psalms Scroll of Qumran Cave 11 (11QPsa) (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965), 38Google Scholar; and The Dead Sea Psalms Scroll (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1967), 66–67Google Scholar.

24 There is an additional verse (22) which does not form part of the alphabetic pattern, though it belongs to the poem.

25 Cf. fn. 24.

26 The added words lʽwlm wʽd belong to the refrain which is preserved in full in 11QPsa. Cf. Sanders, The Psalms Scroll of Qumran Cave 11, 38, and The Dead Sea Psalms Scroll, 66–67.

27 The average is calculated on the basis of 21 lines (cf. fn. 22).

28 The non-alphabetic acrostic, Ps. 38 (cf. Dahood, Psalms I, 234) has a total number of 406 syllables, and may have the same basic structure as Ps. 145.

29 Except for the short poems, Pss. 111 and 112, which have a narrow range of variation.