Skip to main content

Full text of "The psalm of Habakkuk : a revised translation : with exegetical and critical notes on the Hebrew and Greek texts"

See other formats 


:bsil:^5 


3 


Lll 


K 


■I  ■. 


THE  PSALM  OF  HABAKKUK. 


THE 


PSALM  OF  HABAKKUK 


A  KEYISED  TRANSLATION,  WITH  EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL 
NOTES  ON  THE  HEBREW  AND  GREEK  TEXTS, 


BY 


EOBEET  SINKEE,  B.D. 

LIBBAEIAN    OF   TEINITY   COLLEGE,   CAMBEIDGE. 


aramtritiQe : 
DEIGHTON,  BELL  AND   CO. 

LONDON:    GEORGE  BELL  AND   SONS. 
1890. 


CAMBRIDGE 

PRINTED    BY   JONATHAN    PALMER 

ALEXANDRA   STREET 


INTRODUCTION. 

A  certain  amount  of  definiteness  of  view  as  to  the  date 
when  Habakkuk  uttered  his  prophecy  is  essential  to  the  right 
understanding  of  his  utterance.  The  means  for  coming  to  a 
conclusion  are,  it  is  true,  scanty :  external  objective  evidence  is 
altogether  wanting,  but  a  reasonable  clue  is  given  by  the 
prophet  himself.  It  is  necessary  to  refer,  however  briefly,  to 
this  evidence,  inasmuch  as  the  views  to  be  taken  of  the  pro- 
phet's standpoint,  and  especially  in  the  poem  to  which  the 
whole  prophecy  works  up,  will  hinge  largely  on  the  question  of 
the  author's  date. 

The  prophecy,  taken  as  a  whole,  brings  before  us  the  threat 
of  the  Chaldsean  invasion,  the  horrors  that  follow  in  its  train, 
the  overweening  arrogance  of  the  invader,  his  utter  inability  to 
see  that  he  is  in  God's  hands  but  the  rod  of  His  anger,  and  his 
impious  glorifying  of  his  own  power,  the  "axe  boasting  itself 
against  him  that  heweth  with  it."  Through  and  beyond  this 
thunder  cloud,  itself  yet  future,  the  prophet,  with  vision  which 
the  divine  insight  has  rendered  keen,  looks  on,  patiently  and 
undoubtingly,  to  the  day  when  the  Chaldsean  host  itself,  its 
work  done,  falls  beneath  a  mightier  foe. 

With  these  two  feelings  then  filling  his  heart — with  the 
knowledge  that  on  His  people  God's  wrath  is  to  be  poured  out, 
that  a  race  mighty  and  pitiless  is  to  work  His  will  upon  them ; 
but  with  the  fullest  belief  that  beyond  the  storm  of  trouble, 
nay,  amid  it,  God's  purpose  of  mercy  fully  held, — the  Prophet 
breaks  out  in  this  marvellous  Psalm,  in  which  the  twofold 
thoughts  of  the  preceding  chapters  are  wrought  together,  two 
ideas  running  connected  throughout,  till,  in  the  jubilant  strain 
at  the  end,  all  is  forgotten  but  the  full  out-pouring  of  God's  love 
for  His  people. 


2  Introduction. 

Thus  the  whole  prophecy  becomes  one  connected  utterance, 
the  two  thoughts  of  the  suffering  and  the  deliverance,  dwelt  on 
in  the  first  two  chapters,  being  the  underlying  fabric  of  the 
Psalm ;  and  the  repressed  force  of  those  earlier  chapters  breaks 
out  in  the  utterance,  at  once  earnestly  expectant  and  jubilant, 
of  the  conclusion. 

The  perfect  cohesion  of  the  whole  book  forces  one  to  the 
belief  that  we  must  view  it  as  a  perfect  artistic  whole,  pre- 
sumably given  forth  at  one  time. 

It  is  doubtless  impossible  to  fix  that  time  with  exactness, 
but  we  believe  the  choice  to  lie  between  the  concluding  years  of 
Manasseh's  reign  and  the  opening  years  of  that  of  Josiah.  For 
this  conclusion,  two  remarks  of  the  prophet  stand  clearly  out, 
and  the  whole  prophecy  accords  perfectly. 

The  two  remarks  are  both  contained  in  the  same  verse  (i.  5); 
the  horrors  of  the  invasion  were  to  be  within  the  actual  experience 
of  many  of  the  generation  which  the  prophet  addressed,  and  he 
knows  with  what  incredulity  his  words  will  be  received.  After 
the  crushing  defeat  of  the  Egyptian  army  by  the  Chaldseans  at 
Carchemish  (605  B.C.)  incredulity  would  have  been  impossible, 
and  herein  we  find  our  posterior  limit  of  time.  From  this  we 
may  go  back  as  far  as  is  consistent  with  the  words,  "  I  work  a 
work  in  your  days."  It  is  folly  to  inquire  within  what  limits  of 
time  this  phrase  is  used  in  the  Bible,  and  so  in  this  servile  way 
deduce  our  limits  here.  It  is  sufficient  to  note  that  from  the 
death  of  Manasseh  (640  B.C.)  to  the  first  taking  of  Jerusalem  by 
the  Chaldseans  (597  B.C.)  is  43  years,  so  that  if  the  prophecy 
were  delivered  in  the  concluding  years  of  this  king's  life,  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  those  then  living  would  be  surviving  when 
the  terrible  fulfilment  actually  came. 

Further  back  than  to  the  concluding  years  of  Manasseh's 
reign  it  would  be  impossible  to  put  the  prophecy,  not  only 
because  we  should  thus  fail  to  satisfy  the  condition  "in  your 
days,"  but  also  because  the  general  character  of  the  reign  of 
Manasseh,  "  who  filled  Jerusalem  with  blood  from  one  end  to 
another,"  is  that  of  fierce  persecution  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah, 
and  of  idolatry  dominant,  while  the  standpoint  of  Habakkuk  is 


Introduction.  3 

that  of  an  age  of  careless  indifference  and  of  mere  social  wrongs. 
The  prophet  sees  violence  and  oppression,  but  no  hint  is  given 
that  a  religious  cause  underlies  it.  The  law  is  slack  and  dead ; 
evidently  the  zeal  and  the  love  of  the  many  has  waxed  cold. 
In  like  manner  too,  the  short  evil  reign  of  Amon  may  be  passed 
over  as  failing  to  yield  the  necessary  historical  characteristics. 

Again,  how  is  it  possible  to  assign  the  utterance  of  Habakkuk 
to  a  date  later  than  the  early  years  of  Josiah  ?  We  can  hardly 
conceive  the  words  with  which  the  book  opens  to  have  been  put 
forth  when  once  Josiah's  reformation  had  been  set  on  foot. 
Such  words  as  "  the  law  is  slacked  "  could  not  have  been  said 
when  that  single-hearted  king  strove  to  restore  the  service  of 
God. 

That  Habakkuk  prophesied  early  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim, 
would  be  to  make  the  incredulity  of  the  prophet's  hearers 
absurd.  When  the  army  of  so  mighty  a  kingdom  as  Egypt  had 
been  shattered  at  Carchemish  by  the  mighty  young  Titan  of 
Chaldsea,  it  could  not  be  doubted  that  the  conqueror  would  in 
due  time  move  westwards;  and  before  that  fierce  onset  how 
should  Israel  stand  ?  Yet  if  the  writing  is  to  be  placed,  as  some 
would  have  us  place  it,  even  as  late  as  the  time  of  the  first 
appearance  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  armies  in  Palestine  (600  B.C.), 
the  reference  to  the  incredulity  is  either  meaningless,  or  is  put 
in  by  the  prophet  merely  to  antedate  his  utterance. 

That  a  writer  could  indulge  in  an  attempt  of  this  kind  and 
then  close  the  didactic  part  of  his  utterance  with  the  solemn 
words,  "  The  LoKD  is  in  His  holy  temple,  let  all  the  earth  keep 
silence  before  Him,"  would  be  a  piece  of  profane  audacity  which 
seems  incredible — incredible  even  if  we  have  here  but  a  poet 
paying  a  decent  recognition  to  the  current  religious  feeling  of 
his  time.  Yet  on  any  view  of  a  deeper  purpose,  of  an  utterance 
beyond  that  of  poet,  of  a  thing  which  comes  from  no  IS  la  eiriXvatf;, 
how  impossible  any  such  theory  ! 

It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  this  is  really  not  so 
much  a  question  between  inspiration  and  not-inspiration,  as 
between  honesty  of  purpose  and  conscious  dishonesty.  The 
theory  of  the  late  date  of  Habakkuk  would  make  of  his  wondrous 


4  Introduction. 

prophecy  but  a  cunninglj  devised  scheme,  tricked  out  by  poetic 
fancy.  The  prophet  stands  on  his  watch-tower,  not  for  a  re- 
velation sent  from  heaven,  or  even  for  the  self-conjured  ideas  of 
his  own  fancy  as  to  what  the  future  may  bring ;  he  is  simply 
playing  with  what  he  knows. 

We  repeat  then,  the  concluding  years  of  the  reign  of 
Manasseh,  or  the  opening  years  of  that  of  Josiah,  satisfy  the 
two  crucial  conditions  of  i.  5,  and  give  us  a  state  of  things  fully 
in  accordance  with  what  seems  to  be  the  standpoint  of  the 
prophet. 

Like  Bunyan's  pilgrims,  who  could  see  the  streets  of  the 
Golden  City  before  their  feet  had  come  to  the  edge  of  the  Dark 
River,  so  Habakkuk  realises  the  certainty  and  the  glory  of  God's 
deliverance  while  the  doom  itself  is  still  distant.  His  thoughts, 
which  seem  full  of  a  suppressed  force  in  the  earlier  part  of  the 
prophecy,  break  forth  in  free  expression  in  the  Psalm,  an  ex- 
pression of  unwavering  faith  and  trust  that  God  will,  as  of  old, 
bring  His  people  through  the  storm.  The  prophet  sees  in  faith 
"  the  end  of  the  Lord  " ;  the  deliverance  shall  certainly  come  in 
the  appointed  time. 

With  this  certainty  of  the  coming  mercy,  it  is  natural  to 
blend  the  thought  of  the  like  mercies  of  the  past ;  "As  were  Thy 
dealings  of  old,  so  now  wilt  Thou  deal  with  Thy  people."  It  is 
in  the  light  of  this  twofold  truth,  I  am  convinced,  that  much  of 
this  Psalm  is  to  be  understood.  Otherwise,  the  constantly 
fluctuating  tenses,  combined  with  the  most  evident  allusions  to 
the  earlier  history,  leave  us  in  an  unmeaning  chaos.  That,  in 
vv.  3 — 15,  the  continual  shifting  to  and  fro  of  the  tenses  is  to  be 
treated  as  mere  poetic  caprice,  is  both  to  play  fast  and  loose  with 
all  laws  of  language,  and  further,  rob  the  poem  of  much  of  its 
significance.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  these  tenses  are  to  be  dis- 
tinguished, then  we  believe  that  here,  as  in  the  most  parallel 
instance  of  the  Sixty-eighth  Psalm,  the  inspired  writer's  mind 
dwells,  now  on  his  certain  assurance  of  God's  future  mercy,  now 
on  past  manifestations  of  it ;  not  indeed  that  the  proof  for  the 
future  does  but  rest  on  the  evidence  of  the  past,  but  that  no 


Introduction.  5 

believer  can  lose  sight  of  the  past  and  its  call  for  thanksgiving 
in  his  trust  for  the  future. 

In  the  rendering  of  the  Psalm  which  is  now  subjoined, 
an  attempt  is  made  to  represent  this  idea.  It  may  be  well  to 
premise  however,  once  for  all,  that  with  regard  to  the  exact 
translation  in  English  of  vv.  8—15  a  legitimate  difference  of 
view  may  well  exist,  "God  will  come,"  "May  God  come.''^ 
And  yet  the  two  are  one.  The  faith  which  waits  unflinchingly 
will  tell  of  the  coming  deliverance  for  as  certain  a  fact  as  the  past. 
Yet  even  the  faith  which  knows — knows  as  a  certain  truth- 
will  say,  "  So  grant  it,  Lord." 

^  We  might  also,  with  much  fitness,  translate  "cometh,"  remembering 
that  "  cometh  "  would  not  be  a  present  but  a  future,  or  rather  a  future  and 
something  more,  as  e.g.  epxo/xai  in  Joh.  xiv.  18. 


CHAPTER  I. 


The  Psalm  of  Habakkuk. 


I  Lit.  Thy  re- 
port, i.e.  the 
news  of  what 
Thou  wilt  do. 


~  Or,  Cometh. 


3  Or,  Whose 
praise  filled  the 
earth. 


*  Or.measured. 


1  A  Prayer  of  Habakkuk  the  Prophet,  upon  Shigionoth. 

2  0  Lord,  I  have  heard  Thy  message,^ 

I  have  trembled,  0  Lord,  at  Thy  work ; 
In  the  midst  of  years  revive  it, 
In  the  midst  of  years  make  it  known, 
In  wrath  may  est  Thou  remember  mercy. 

3  God  will  come'^  from  Teman, 

And  the  Holy  One  from  Mount  Paran  (Selah), 
He,  Whose  glory  of  old  covered  the  heavens. 
And  with  Whose^  praise  the  earth  was  filled. 

4  And  His  brightness  shall  be  as  the  light, 
Rays  come  forth  from  His  hand  ; 

And  there  is  the  covert  of  His  might. 

5  Pestilence  will  go  before  Him, 
And  lightnings  go  forth  at  His  feet, 

6  Who  of  old  stood  and  shook*  the  earth. 
Who  beheld  and  drove  asunder  the  nations, 
And  the  eternal  mountains  were  scattered, 
The  everlasting  hills  were  bowed — 

His  ways  are  everlasting. 

7  Under  affliction  did  I  behold  the  tents  of  Cushan, 
The  curtains  of  the  land  of  Midian  were  shaken. 

8  Was  it  with  rivers  that  the  Lord  was  angry  ? 
Was  Thy  wrath  against  the  rivers  ? 

Was  Thy  fury  against  the  sea. 

That  Thou  dost  ride  upon  Thy  horses. 

Thy  chariots  of  salvation  ? 


The  Psalm  of  Habakkuh.  7 

9  Thy  bow  is^  made  quite  bare,  5  gee  note.  p.  5. 

Sworn  are  the  punishments  of  the^  solemn  decree  (Selah) :    e  or,  of  Thy 
With  rivers  wilt  Thou  cleave  the  earth.  ^'''*^' 

10  The  mountains  saw  Thee,  they  trembled, 
A  storm  of  waters  passed  by. 

The  deep  gave  forth  his  voice, 

And  lifted  up  his  hands  on  high.'^  ^  or,  The 

11  Sun  and  moon  stood  still  in  their  abode,  up... 
At  the  light  of  Thy  fast-falling  arrows. 

At  the  brightness  of  the  gleam  of  Thy  spear. 

12  In  indignation  wilt  Thou  march  through  the  earth. 
In  anger  wilt  Thou  tread  down  the  nations, 

13  As  when  Thou  wentest  forth  for  the  salvation  of  Thy  people, 

For  the  salvation^  of  Thine  anointed,  8  or,  salvation 

And  didst  dash  the  head  from  the  house  of  the  wicked,  ^^^'" 

Laying  bare  the  foundation  even  to  the  neck  (Selah), 

14  When  Thou  didst  pierce  with  his  own  staves  the  head  of  his 

chieftains,^  9  or,  hordes. 

Who  come  as  a  whirlwind  to  scatter  me. 

Whose  exulting  is  as  though  to  devour  the  poor  in  their  lair, 

15  When  Thou  didst  tread  on  the  sea  with  Thy  horses. 
The  foaming  mass  of  mighty  waters. 

16  I  heard,  and  my  belly  trembled. 
At  the  voice  my  lips  quivered. 

Rottenness  cometh  into  my  bones  and  I  tremble  where  I  stand, 
I,  who  will  wait  peacefully  for  the  day  of  trouble. 
For  the  coming  up  against  the  people  of  him   who  shall 
assail  it. 

17  For  though  the  fig  tree  shall  not  blossom, 
Nor  shall  there  be  fruit  in  the  vines. 

Though  the  labour  of  the  olive  shall  have  failed. 
And  the  fields  shall  have  yielded  no  food, 
Though  the  flock  shall  have  been  cut  off  from  the  fold, 
And  there  be  no  cattle  in  the  stalls, 

18  Yet  will  I  exult  in  the  Lord, 

I  will  be  glad  in  the  God  of  my  salvation. 


8  The  Psalm  of  Habakkuk 

19  Jehovah,  the  Lord,  is  my  strength, 

And  He  hath  made  my  feet  like  hinds'  feet. 

And  on  my  high  places  will  He  make  me  to  walk. 

To  the  Chief  Musician,  on  my  stringed  instruments. 


The  Psalm  may  be  roughly  analysed  as  follows : 

V.  1.  The  heading  with  the  title  of  the  poem,  "  a  Prayer," 
and  the  manner  of  its  music. 

V.  2  is  the  prelude  to  the  main  body  of  the  poem, 
vv.  3 — 15,  the  reverent  supplication  of  the  Prophet, 
awestruck  even  amid  the  faith  which  looks  on  to 
the  end. 

vv.  3—7.  The« looked  for  manifestation  of  God's  presence 
and  glory  as  of  old. 

vv.  8 — 12,  detailed  illustrations  of  the  effect  of  God's  pre- 
sence on  nature,  rivers,  sea,  mountains,  sun,  and 
moon. 

Yet  [vv.  18 — 15)  the  terrors  of  this  appearing  are  not  for 
God's  people,  but  for  the  enemy. 

vv.  16 — 19  form  a  conclusion,  as  though  the  reflections  of 
the  Psalmist  to  himself,  at  the  consideration  of 
such  unspeakable  marvels;  awe,  yet  the  awe  of 
exceeding  joy.  Amid  the  desolation  of  nature  he 
looks  on  to  the  final  deliverance,  and  sees  in  the 
Lord  his  strength. 

Lastly,  a  musical  direction  is  subjoined. 


V.  1.  n  v'pri.  The  Psalm  is  not  indeed  precatory  in /o7;m,  for 
v.'2  is  the  only  part  which  can  directly  and  formally  be  called 
a  prayer.  Still  the  underlying  thought  is  distinctly  precatory 
throughout.  Whether  it  be  the  dwelling  on  God's  wonders  in 
the  past,  the  anticipations  of  like  mercies  in  the  future,  the 


The  PsUlm  of  Habakhuk.  9 

awful  circumstances  attending  the  manifestations  of  His  Power — 
in  all  alike  one  thought  is  present,  the  prayer  that  in  due  time 
God  will  grant  the  deliverance  of  His  people.^ 

The  same  remark,  mutatis  mutandis,  may  in  greater  or  less 
degree  be  applied  to  the  case  of  those  Psalms  (xvii.,  Ixxxvi.,  xc, 
cii.)  which  are  styled  "Prayer"  in  the  heading;  and  with  these 
may  be  compared  the  remark  at  the  end  of  the  Second  Book  of 
Psalms,  "The  prayers  of  David  the  son  of  Jesse  are  ended." 
It  must  be  noticed,  too,  that  it  is  not  simply  "a  Prayer  of 
Habakkuk,"  but  of  "  Habakkuk  the  Prophet " ;  the  Prayer  is 
more  than  the  earnest  struggling  of  a  soul  after  the  Divine 
Light,  it  is  definitely  the  prayer  as  shaped  for  him  by  the 
guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

—  niii^'^tp  hV'  This  expression  has  been  understood  by 
some  to  refer  to  sins  ignorantly  committed.  Thus  the  verse  is 
rendered  in  the  Targum,  "The  prayer  which  Habakkuk  the 
Prophet  prayed  when  it  was  revealed  to  him  concerning  the 
length  of  time  which  He  has  given  to  the  wicked,  that  if  they 
will  turn  to  the  law  with  a  perfect  heart  it  shall  be  forgiven 
them,  and  all  their  trespasses  which  they  have  committed  in 
His  sight  shall  be  like  a  sin  unwittingly  committed."  Or 
again,  it  has  been  explained  {e.g.  Jerome,  in  loc. ;  Rashi,  in 
loc.)  of  the  sins  of  which  the  prophet  was  unwittingly  guilty  in 
his  addresses  to  God  (as  in  i.  2 — 4,  13,  14). 

Still,  in  spite  of  such  authorities,  such  a  view  seems  un- 
tenable when  it  is  considered  that  the  Psalm  contains  no  refer- 
ence to  sins  of  ignorance.  Considering,  too,  the  frequent  use  of 
the  preposition  7J^  in  the  headings  of  the  Psalms,^  and  the  fact 
that  in  that  to  Psalm  vii.  the  word  p^'^tl^  itself  occurs,  where 
such  a  rendering  is  altogether  impossible,  we  can  hardly  doubt 

^  The  assertion  that  vhm  here  is  simply,  in  a  general  sense,  a  hymn  (Ges.) 
requires  proof.  To  attempt  to  justify  it  by  the  use  of  the  verb  in  1  Sam.  ii.  1 
is  to  ignore  the  fact  that,  praise  though  it  is,  prayer  is  the  underlying  basisL  of 
both  Hannah's  song  and  its  close  counterpart,  the  Magnificat. 

2  It  is  true  that  h^  most  often  introduces  the  name  of  the  standard  melody, 
but  sometimes  it  indicates  simply  the  musical  mode  generally,  e.g.  on 
Alamoth. 


10  The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk. 

that  the  phrase  has  reference  to  the  nature  of  the  musical 
accompaniment  to  the  poem. 

From  the  meaning  of  the  root  we  might  render  the  phrase 
"  a  wild,  wandering  strain,"  the  reference  being  to  the  constant 
varying  of  the  melody,  as  it  adapted  itself  to  the  thoughts  of 
the  terrors  of  God's  judgements  wrought  upon  His  enemies,  of 
the  marvels  done  in  the  past,  of  the  deliverances  to  be  wrought 
for  His  people.^ 

The  ancient  versions  seem  all  to  have  taken  the  earlier  view, 
except  the  LXX.,  which  renders  the  phrase  hj  /Jbera  wSt)?.  This 
is  loose  enough,  but  would  seem  to  be  decisive  as  to  their  opinion  ; 
unless  indeed  we  believe  that  the  LXX.  confused  the  word  with 
p^^il,  which  is  rendered  mB'i]  in  Pss.  ix.  17 ;  xcii.  4.^ 

V.  2.  In  every  sense  this  verse  is  a  prelude  to  the  Psalm 
which  follows.  Not  again  till  v.  16,  after  the  close  of  the 
wondrous  Theophany,  is  the  personality  of  the  writer  brought 
before  us.  He  has  heard  the  Divine  Message,  he  trembles  at  the 
thought  of  what  God  is  about  to  work,  even  though  that  work 
will  ultimately  result  in  the  deliverance  of  God's  people.  Yet 
there  is  a  momentary  pause,  as  when  Moses  stands  barefoot  and 
in  silence  before  the  Burning  Bush  on  Horeb.  In  the  hush  we 
seem  to  hear  the  pulsations  of  the  prophet's  heart,  in  which 
trembling  awe  at  the  reception  of  God's  message  and  passionate 
earnestness  of  appeal  are  blended.  Then  suddenly  he  bursts 
forth  into  the  glorious  utterance,  at  once  prophecy  and  prayer, 
which  bridges  over  the  chasm  of  trouble  and  sees  the  deliverance 
effected. 

—  '^^^p'^'  "Thy  message."  The  word  ^}2'\^  is  literally 
"a  hearing,"  whether  the  faculty  of  hearing  or  the  thing  heard. 
Thus  it  will  be  tidings  or  news  about  a  person  or  thing,  and  so 
here,  the  tidings  of  God's  work  which  He  has  given  to  the 
prophet.    We  may  compare  Isa.  Ixvi.  19,  "  the  far-off  isles  which 

^  It  may  be  noticed  that  the  main  thought  of  Psalm  vii.  is  also  that  of 
God's  judgements  on  the  wicked  and  the  deliverance  of  the  righteous. 

'  Their  rendering  of  Shiggaion  in  the  heading  of  Ps.  vii.  is  vfivo^. 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk.  11 

had  not   heard  my  fame  (or,  the  news  of  me)."     Thus   the 
meaning  is  much  the  same  as  "message."^     Cf.  Hos.  vii.  12. 

The  message  in  question  is  clearly  the  whole  of  the  pre- 
ceding part  of  the  prophet's  utterance,  not  merely  i.  5 — 10.  To 
say  that  the  message  of  ch.  ii.  would  arouse  no  fear  in  the  mind 
of  the  prophet  is  surely  to  take  a  very  false  view  of  the  position 
of  the  God-fearing  soul  in  the  direct  presence,  nay,  behind  the 
veil  as  it  were,  of  the  Divine  working.  The  most  steadfast 
servant  of  Jehovah  must  have  felt  his  heart  stand  still,  in  the 
very  fulness  of  his  joy  and  thankfulness,  when  he  saw  the  waters 
of  the  Ked  Sea  "  return  to  their  strength  "  and  the  Egyptians 
dead  upon  the  sea  shore.  Keble  takes  a  truer  view  of  the 
situation  when  he  says,  "  It  was  a  fearful  joy  to  trace  the 
Heathen's  toil."  What  though  there  was  but  chastening  for 
Israel,  and  though  God's  destroying  wrath  was  for  the  enemy, 
yet  to  be  admitted  to  see  the  working  of  God  in  anger,  must 
surely  be  awful  for  all. 

—  ...  '^^l^^']^*^•  I  am  aware  that  the  translation  given  of 
this  clause  is  not  that  ordinarily  taken,  and  I  fully  allow  that 
it  is  not  that  grouping  of  the  words  sanctioned  by  the  Masoretic 
accents.  Still,  I  venture  to  think  that  the  present  translation 
is  defensible. 

For  (1),  if  we  accept  the  rendering,  "  I  trembled,  0  Lord,  at 
Thy  work,"  we  make  the  whole  of  vv.  2 — 6  reducible  to  ternary 
stichi,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  annexed  table : 
u  2.     3     3     3     3     3. 
3. 


v.S. 

3 

3 

3 

V.  4. 

3 

3 

3. 

u5. 

3 

3. 

V.  6. 

3 

3 

3 

3     3. 

In  V.  7  the  rhythm  changes,  but  that  of  the  bulk  of  the  rest  of 
the  Psalm  is  also  in  ternary  stichi.  In  the  ordinary  translation 
the  above  regularity  is  of  course  not  attained. 

^  It  is  true  that  S'QVp  is  rather  news  about  a,  person  than  a  message  sent  bi/ 
a  person,  but  the  conditions  of  the  case  in  Hab.  iii.  2  make  these  two  things 


12  The  Psalm  of  Hahahhuh. 

Again  (2),  if  we  inquire  concerning  the  grammatical  usage 
of  the  verb  ^^1*^  in  the  Bible,  we  find  that  there  are  111  cases 
in  which  it  is  used  absolutely,  as  against  155  cases  where  it  has 
an  objective,  whether  introduced  by  Hb^,  ]?p,  or  the  like.  At 
any  rate,  therefore,  there  is  no  violence  done  to  the  grammar  in 
construing  as  I  have  done. 

It  must  first  be  asked,  however,  what  is  the  hv^  of  God 
here  ?  Clearly  not  that  of  i.  5,  for  that  is  simply  the  chastise- 
ment of  Israel,  which  the  prophet  could  not  conceivably  pray 
for.^  We  cannot  doubt  that  it  is  the  exact  correlative  to  the 
^?2UJ  of  the  preceding  clause.  The  prophet  has  heard  the 
message ;  he  trembles  at  the  work  that  message  foreshadows. 

That  work  we  have  already  defined  as  chastisement  wrought 
upon  Israel  for  its  sins  at  the  hands  of  an  enemy  whose  own 
doom  is  utter  destruction.  But  clearly  if  this  be  so,  the  essence 
of  the  matter  is  the  former  part  of  the  thought.  To  the  Israelite, 
knowing  that  he  had  deserved  God's  discipline,  that  discipline, 
stern  but  loving,  just  yet  overflowing  with  mercy,  was  the  main 
thought.  That  the  rod  of  God's  anger,  its  purpose  done,  should 
be  snapped  in  twain,  mattered  not.^ 

—  ...  1*;))25*  This  phrase,  it  must  be  allowed,  is  somewhat 
obscure.  The  meaning  must,  however,  hinge  mainly  on  the 
verb.  Gesenius  {Thes.  p.  468  a)  gives  for  the  Piel  of  rT^H  three 
meanings  (1)  vivere  jussit,  vivificavit ;  (2)  vivum  servavit ; 
(3)  in  vitam  revocavit.  We  might  reduce  these  three  to  two, 
viz.  (a)  to  call  into  existence  a  thing  not  previously  existent,  or, 
if  once  existent,  dead;  and  (h)  to  maintain  in  life  a  thing 
already  living.     I  must  say  that  I  do  not  think  this  former 


^  To  suppose  that  the  b^b  is  Israel  itself,  because  (Isa.  Ix.  21)  Israel  is 
called  the  "  work  "  (nwn)  of  God's  hands  is  out  of  the  question ;  for  not  only 
should  we  require  some  qualifying  word  instead  of  this  bare  absolute  use,  but 
also  because  while  the  verb  ^tc"!}!  might  thus  have  a  reasonable  meaning, 
»nin  (the  same  object  being  of  course  presupposed)  would  not.  It  should  be 
noted,  however,  that  this  view  is  that  taken  by  Aben  Ezra  and  Kimchi. 

2  A  very  parallel  passage,  which  has  some  striking  coincidences  with  the 
present,  is  Ps.  Ixxvii.  13,  where  the  ^h  of  God  is  clearly  the  whole  course  of 
God's  dealings  with  His  people. 


The  Psalm  of  Habahhuh.  13 

meaning  at  all  established.  It  must  be  remembered  that  the 
Piel  of  rOr\  is  common  in  the  Bible,  occurring  as  it  does  no  less 
than  57  times,  and  in  the  bulk  of  these  the  meaning  is  obvious 
enough.  No  better  illustration  could  be  taken  than  Abraham's 
remark  to  Sarah  (Gen.  xii.  12),  "They  will  kill  me,  but  the}^ 
will  save  thee  alive  (^^ )!*))•" 

It  is  worth  while  taking  in  order  Gesenius's  instances  of  the 
first  of  his  three  meanings :  (1)  Job  xxxiii.  4.  Here  Ges.  renders 
the  second  clause,  "Spiritus  Omnipotentis  vitam  mihi  dedit." 
But  this  is  surely  utterly  to  disregard  the  change  of  tense  from 
past  to  future:  "The  Spirit  of  God  made  me"  (the  actual 
creation),  "  and  the  breath  of  the  Almighty  keepeth  me  in  life." 
One  is  reminded  of  the  change  from  iKriadr]  to  eKTiarai  in 
Col.  i.  15.  The  next  instance  (Gen.  xix.  33,  34)  is  perhaps  more 
doubtful,  yet  even  here  it  would  be  quite  possible  to  explain  the 
phrase  as  meaning  "  to  keep  alive  the  family  line."  Hos.  xiv.  8 
is  also  doubtful,  but  it  seems  hard  to  believe  that  \T\  ^'Tl*'  can 
mean  "  they  shall  grow  crops  of  corn."  Such  a  passage,  how- 
ever, as  Eccl.  vii.  12  ought  to  be  clear  enough,  "  Wisdom  pre- 
serveth  alive"  (not  "calleth  to  life")  "those  that  possess  it." 
So,  too,  Job  xxxvi.  6,  "[God]  preserveth  not  in  life"  (not  "calleth 
to  life  ")  "  a  wicked  man." 

We  need  not  go  through  the  passages  given  under  Gesenius's 
third  head,  but  they  are  as  a  rule  utterly  beside  the  mark. 
Thus  it  is  a  begging  of  the  question  to  make  1  Sam.  ii.  6  mean 
a  "  recalling  to  life " ;  surely  the  clause  is  tantamount  to  the 
statement  that  God  gives  (as  and  when  He  will)  life  and  death 
likewise.  The  call  into  life  therefore  is  only  part  of  the  gift ; 
we  have  to  thank  God  for  "our  creation  and  preservation." 
See  also  Deut.  xxxii.  39,  or  again  Ps.  xxx.  4,  "  Thou  hast  kept 
me  alive,  so  that  I  go  not  down  into  the  pit"  {Kri,  but  the 
Cthiv  is  to  all  intents  and  purposes  much  the  same).  We  need 
not  multiply  instances,  and  the  fact  remains  that  in  the  great 
majority  of  57  instances  there  can  be  no  possible  doubt  as  to 
the  meaning ;  and  even  of  the  remainder  it  may  reasonably  be 
questioned  whether  any  single  one  is  an  undoubted  exception. 

If,  then,  this  view  be  accepted,  Habakkuk's  prayer  is  that 


14  The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk 

God  will  keep  alive  His  work ;  that  work,  I  have  argued,  is  His 
discipline  of  Israel.  Discipline  is  not  punishment,  though  it 
may  involve  it.  Coming  from  God  to  His  people,  there  under- 
lies the  punishment  the  tenderest  love. 

The  remainder  of  the  clause  is  less  obvious.  God  is  asked 
to  keep  alive  and  to  make  known  His  work  of  loving  discipline 
Q^'iti)  ^"i^P?^?  ^  phrase  not  occurring  elsewhere.  It  has  indeed 
by  some  been  understood  of  the  coming  of  Christ  "  in  the  midst 
of  years,"  with  the  ages  of  the  two  dispensations  before  it  and 
after  it.  The  view  in  this  form,  however,  is  clearly  untenable. 
The  Psalm  is  indeed  Messianic  in  its  deeper  sense,  but  not  in 
its  direct  and  primary  one.  Moreover,  l"^p  could  by  no  means 
be  used  of  the  middle  point  of  a  thing;  it  is,  if  I  may  so  speak, 
TO  ecrco  rather  than  to  /neaov. 

As  regards  the  meaning  of  the  phrase,  Gesenius  may  be 
right  in  his  rendering  "intra  (aliquos,  paucos)  annos,"  there 
being,  as  I  have  said,  no  parallel  instance ;  but  I  do  not  think 
he  is.  The  general  sense  resulting  from  his  view  would  be 
"  help  us  speedily."  But  the  '*  work  "  of  God  in  this  passage  is 
not  directly  help,  but  severe  though  loving  chastening.  The 
chastening  is  but  for  a  time,  and  then  God's  wrath  is  to  be 
poured  on  the  Chaldseans.  Thus,  on  the  view  of  Gesenius,  the 
prayer  would  come  to  mean.  Let  us  get  our  punishment  over 
quickly  and  have  done  with  it.  But  further,  if  I  have  been 
successful  in  showing  that  ^n^^Pf  does  not  mean  "  bring  to  life," 
but  "  keep  alive,"  the  meaning  of  speedily  must  obviously  fall 
to  the  ground. 

If  it  then  be  asked  what  translation  of  D*>it2J  l^p5  is  possible 
in  conjunction  with  the  meaning  "  keep  alive,"  it  seems  to  me 
that,  having  regard  to  the  difference  between  3."^j2  and  Ijiri,  we 
might  render  "  in  the  course  of  years,"  "  as  years  roll  on."  In 
other  words.  Be  the  time  of  Thy  working  long  or  short,  yet 
amid  the  on-rolling  years  ever  keep  alive  Thy  mercy  (mercy,  be 
it  remembered,  was  the  essence  of  the  chastening),  amid  the 
wrath  which  we  have  deserved,  mayest  Thou  evermore  remember 
mercy. 


The  Psalm  of  Hahahhuh  15 

Rashi,  who  understands  by  God's  "  work  "  here  His  ancient 
work  when  He  took  vengeance  for  Israel  on  their  enemies, 
explains  the  phrase  now  before  us  by  "  in  the  midst  of  the 
years  of  calamity  in  which  we  are  now  abiding."  Kimchi, 
while  understanding  the  "  work "  as  meaning  the  righteous, 
explains  the  phrase  as  meaning  "  in  the  midst  of  these  long 
years  through  which  they  shall  be  in  captivity." 

V.  3.  The  question  of  the  tenses  (^^il*^,  JlDp)  first  calls  for 
remark.  If  it  be  asked  whether  we  are  to  translate  the  former 
"  [God]  will  come/'  or  "  May  [God]  come,"  we  can  but  repeat 
that  we  believe  both  thoughts  are  wrought  up  together;  we 
have  at  once  the  prayer  of  the  faith  which  knows,  and  the 
declaration  of  the  knowledge  which  God  grants  in  vision.  To 
narrow  the  meaning  to  one  of  these  conjoined  thoughts  would 
be,  I  am  convinced,  to  sacrifice  an  important  element  of  the 
truth. 1 

In  t^il*'  the  prophet  looks  onward,  has  regard  to  God's 
future  mercies,  as  in  7^^'^  he  looks  back  to  the  days  when  God 
wrought  wonderfully  for  His  people.  The  ideas  are  very  ellip- 
tically  expressed,  and  various  turns  in  English  will  be  equally 
true  for  filling  up  the  gap.  We  may  say,  "  God  will  come  .... 
Whose  glory  of  old  covered  .  .  .  .,"  or  "  God  will  come  ....  as  of 
old  when  His  glory  covered  .  .  .  .,"  or  in  other  ways. 

The  Selah  of  this  verse  may  claim  a  passing  remark.  It 
being  assumed  that  the  word  carries  with  it  the  idea  of  an 


^  Prof.  Driver  cites  vv.  3,  7,  of  this  chapter  as  furnishing  cases  of  the 
imperfect  [future]  "  to  represent  an  event  while  nascent  {<^/i<yv6jui6Pov),  and  so, 
by  seizing  upon  it  while  in  movement  rather  than  while  at  rest,  to  picture  it 
with  peculiar  vividness  to  the  mental  eye,"  this  holding  good  specially  "  in  the 
language  of  poetry  or  prophecy  "  {Sehrew  Tenses,  §  26,  27  a;  cf.  also  §  35). 
J  will  refer  to  the  case  of  v.  7  subsequently.  As  regards  v.  3,  I  cannot  but 
say  that  the  above  seems  to  me  (while  of  course  true  for  many  passages)  to  be 
a  totally  untenable  view  as  regards  the  tenses  in  this  verse.  It  treats  siT  and 
rroa  (and  of  course  we  must  add  the  like  cases  in  vv.  5,  6,  and  elsewhere)  as  in 
essence  the  same,  only  differing  in  the  way  in  which  the  action  is  viewed. 
Thus  throughout  the  whole  passage,  vv.  3 — 15,  whether  the  tense  be  past  or 
future  ["  imperfect "],  we  are  on  this  theory  to  view  them  alike  as  simply 
descriptive. 


16  The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk. 

interlude,  and  so  of  a  brief  pause  as  regards  the  singing,  there 
will  often  naturally  be  implied  the  presence  of  a  certain  transi- 
tion of  thought,  and  thus  there  might  reasonably  be  a  change 
of  melody.  In  the  present  passage  the  transition  of  thought 
enters  abruptly,  and,  so  to  speak,  in  the  very  heart  of  the 
rhythm.  With  the  line  of  thought  so  absolutely  shifted  round, 
we  can  well  understand  that  the  music  in  the  two  clauses  would 
be  totally  different.  We  may  find  somewhat  parallel  cases 
below,  V.  10,  and  in  Ps.  Iv.  20. 

With  regard  to  the  reference  to  Teman  and  Paran,  of  which 
I  have  spoken  further  in  the  next  chapter,  it  is  clear  that  we 
must  view  them  in  connection  with  the  parallel  passages,  Deut. 
xxxiii.  2,  Judges  v.  4,  5,  Ps.  Ixviii.  8,  9.  In  the  first  of  these,  we 
find  Sinai,  Seir,  and  Mount  Paran  mentioned  together,  the  last- 
named  being  either  equivalent  to  the  great  desert  of  Paran,  or, 
with  greater  likelihood,  an  individual  mountain  in  the  Sinaitic 
peninsula.  In  the  Song  of  Deborah  we  have  Seir,  Edom,  and 
Sinai  named;  and  in  a  passage  of  the  Sixty-eighth  Psalm, 
evidently  built  on  a  reminiscence  of  the  preceding,  Sinai  alone 
is  named. 

Now,  it  is  clear  that  in  poetry  of  this  kind  it  would  be  quite 
possible  to  aim  at  a  too  excessive  geographical  exactness.  Sinai 
and  Seir  are  by  no  means  near  together,  nor  are  Teman  and 
Mount  Paran.  Moreover,  the  thread  of  association  in  all  four 
passages  is  so  unmistakeable  that  in  any  interpretation  we  are 
bound  to  take  cognizance  of  all. 

The  line  of  thought  seems  to  be  of  this  sort.  The  prophet 
calls  to  mind  the  long  desert  march  in  the  days  of  old,  when 
God,  like  a  mighty  conqueror,  moved  at  the  head  of  His  people, 
displaying  wondrous  manifestations  of  His  power.  His  thoughts 
turn  to  the  wild  and  mysterious  south  land  with  which  the 
associations  of  the  past  were  so  completely  bound  up,  the 
deliverances  amidst  the  perils  of  the  wilderness,  and  the  solemn 
giving  forth  of  the  Law  on  Sinai.  Then  comes  the  prayer,  the 
hope,  the  belief,  that  He,  once  Victor  over  all  foes  for  His  people, 
will  again  be  their  Champion  amid  greater  dangers  and  against 
mightier  foes. 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk.  17 

The  translation  of  I^^T^  by  "  south  "  (as  by  the  Vulgate  "  ab 
Austro  ")  is  rather  a  dilution  of  this  than  a  contradiction.  The 
survey  of  the  paths  trodden  by  the  Israelites  of  old,  following 
where  the  Divine  Leader  pointed  the  way,  guided  the  prophet's 
thoughts. 

V.  4.  Here  the  prophet  dwells  on  the  Manifestations  of  God's 
presence ;  gleaming  brightness  attends  Him,  rays  flash  from  His 
hand,  and  amid  this  splendour,  this  (^w?  airpoanovy  the  Deity 
"  shrouded  in  eternal  brilliance,"  dwells  alone. 

The  dual  D^'^'lp  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  original  idea 
of  the  metaphor.  From  the  primary  meaning  of  "  horn  "  readily 
springs  that  of  a  "  ray  of  light "  (whence  the  denominative  verb 
piP  in  Exod.  xxxiv.  29,  30).  Thus  the  idea  of  duality  naturally 
passes  from  the  primary  to  the  derived  meaning ;  and  so  too  is 
clearly  obtained  the  notion  of  the  sun  as  the  "  hind  of  the 
morning." 

The  change  from  Dll?  to  Dtl?,  as  made  by  the  LXX.  and 
Peshito,  seems  quite  uncalled  for.  Not  only  is  the  existing 
Hebrew  supported  by  two  independent  versions,  the  Targum 
and  Vulgate,  but  DtT  seems  a  tame  and  prosaic  alteration,  arising 
from  the  failure  to  perceive  the  force,  poetic  rather  than  gram- 
matical, of  Dtlj,  '*  amid  the  splendour." 

V,  5.  The  tenses  in  this  verse  make  it  clear  that  the  prophet 
looks  onward.  It  is  the  future  manifestation  of  God's  glory 
that  attracts  his  thoughts ;  but  here  again  the  future  is  pictured 
according  to  the  experience  of  the  known  past,  v.  6  serving  as  a 
historic  basis  on  which  the  prophetic  expectation  of  the  pre- 
ceding verse  rests.  The  two  verses  bear  to  each  other  the  same 
relation  as  do  the  two  hemistichs  of  v.  8.  "  Pestilence  will  go 
before  Him,  and  the  lightnings  go  forth  at  His  feet "  to  work 
God's  wrath  on  the  enemy.  How  impossible  in  such  a  context 
to  avoid  recurring  in  thought  to  the  manifestations  of  Divine 
wrath  on  God's  enemies  of  old;  the  dread  vengeance  yet  to 
come  finds  sufficient  parallels  in  the  past. 

Of  the  "pestilence"  one  example  had  been  given  not  so 
long  before  the  prophet's  own  times,  in  the  destruction  of  the 

2 


18  The  Psalm  of  Habakkuk 

host  of  SeDiiacherib;  or  we  might  take  such  a  case  as  the  dread 
punishment  inflicted  in  older  times  on  the  men  of  Beth-Shemesh. 
It  forms  a  natural  parallel  to  f]tIJ*1,  the  lightning ;  unless  indeed, 
though  this  seems  hardly  necessary,  we  translate  the  latter  by 
"  burning  disease."  ^ 

V.  6.  llb^l.  That  this  word  should  probably  be  translated 
"  shook  "  rather  than  "  measured,"  see  a  note  in  the  following 
chapter. 

—  *^^?1-  ^^  seems  at  any  rate  most  probable,  though  it 
may  not  be  certain,  that  we  have  to  deal  with  two  distinct  roots 
"iDi  in  the  Bible,  starting  respectively  from  the  primary  notions 
of  (1)  leaping,  (2)  dropping,  or  flowing  off. 

Thus  of  (1)  we  have  the  Kal  in  Job  xxxvii.  1,  of  the  heart 
palpitating;  the  Piel  in  Lev.  xi.  21,  of  locusts,  etc.  Thus,  if  our 
present  passage  is  to  be  connected  with  this  root,  we  get  for  the 
Hiphil  "  to  make  to  leap,"  i.e.  to  make  to  tremble. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  have  in  Chaldee  the  root  "^H^  in 
Pehal  with  the  meaning  to  drop  off.  (Cf.  the  following  in 
Targ.  Jon.,  Isa.  xl.  8,  of  a  flower;  Isa.  Ixiv.  6,  of  a  leaf;  Joel  i. 
10,  of  olive-trees;  Nah.  i.  4,  of  cedars;  Jer.  xlviii.  87,  of  hair). 
Thus  in  Aphel  we  have  the  meaning  of  cause  to  drop  off,  shake 
off,  as  in  Dan.  iv.  11  (14  E.  V.). 

In  connection  with  this  latter  root  we  may  place  those 
instances  of  the  Hiphil  in  the  Bible  where  the  sense  is  that  of 
loosening  or  breaking  loose ;  as  of  actual  bonds,  as  in  Isa.  Iviii.  6, 
or,  by  an  easy  transition,  of  those  bound,  Pss.  cv.  20,  cxlvi.  27  (and 
metaph.  Job  vi.  9). 

If,  then,  the  word  now  before  us  is  to  be  referred  to  this 
latter  sense,  we  must  understand  it  of  shaking,  and  so  scattering 
hither  and  thither;  and  hence  we  get  the  drove  asunder  of 
the  E.  V.2 

^  This  is  Kimchi's  view  :  nmpn  'V)n 

-  For  some  remarks  as  to  the  possible  identity  of  the  two  roots,  see  Dr. 
Chance  in  his  Ajypendix  to  his  edition  of  Dr.  Bernard's  Job  (vi.  9).  He 
compares  the  German  springen  and  sprengen. 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk  19 

V.  6.  iS  D^i^  r»'i^''^n.  The  line  of  thought  here  seems  to 
be  this.  Even  the  mountains,  which,  as  generation  after  genera- 
tion of  men  came  and  passed  away,  seemed  to  remain  un- 
changingly, as  though  themselves  eternal,  even  these  mighty 
masses  are  scattered  and  brought  low  before  the  presence  of 
God.  But,  while  applying  such  words  as  1^  and  D7ii^  to  created 
things,  the  prophet  can  but  think  of  One  who  was  eternal  in 
another  sense  than  they — "  His  goings  are  everlasting." 

Ewald  takes  the  words  differently,  and  implies  a  repetition 
of  ^ntp  again  in  the  last  clause,  "  The  ancient  hills  bowed,  the 
ancient  paths  before  him,"  i.e.  the  paths  across  the  hills  used  for 
so  many  generations  of  men.  He  gives,  however,  no  grounds 
why  this  should  be  preferred,  and  we  cannot  but  feel  that  it  is 
much  less  probable  than  the  preceding. 

It  may  be  worth  while  to  examine  the  last  clause  somewhat, 
and  first  we  may  consider  the  versions.  The  LXX.  has  fiovvol 
alcovioi  TTopeia^  al(ovla<i  aurov,  that  is  to  say,  the  eternal  hills  are 
themselves  the  eternal  pathway  of  God.  This  view  has  found 
supporters  in  modern  times,^  but  it  surely  suffices  to  condemn 
it  that  it  makes  the  eternity  of  God  and  of  the  hills  co-ordinate. 
The  Peshito  has  "  His  goings  are  from  eternity."  The  Targum, 
it  is  true,  paraphrases  DID^^TTl,  by  "  might,"  putting  n*!"!!^ 
rr^ T'^'l  t^07^,  but  otherwise  agrees  with  the  current  view. 
Finally  the  Vulgate  ("  ab  itineribus  seternitatis  ejus  "),  though 
not  absolutely  agreeing,  does  not  materially  differ  from  the 
preceding. 

To  recur  now  to  Ewald's  view,  it  may  further  be  objected 
that  TlH^iy  in  Kal  never  occurs  in  the  Bible  with  ^  following,^ 
and  that  as  applied  to  paths,  r^TDD'  is  a  very  curious  verb  to 
have  at  all.  Lastly,  it  may  well  be  doubted  whether  the  word 
]l'^!D'^7n  so  certainly  means  the  via  trita  which  this  view 
requires.  It  only  occurs  in  five  places  in  the  Bible  beside  the 
present.  Of  these,  Ps.  Ixviii.  25  (bis)  refers  in  a  very  special 
sense  to   God,   Job   vi.    19    is   used    of   travelling  companies, 


^  So  e.g.  Hitzig,  "  uralte  Pfade  Gottes.' 
2  Once  indeed  with  'jpb. 


20  The  Psalm  of  Hahahkuk. 

Prov.  xxxi.  27  has  regard  to  the  management  of  a  household,  and 
Nah.  ii.  6  to  the  act  of  going  ("  as  they  go  ").  Considering  the 
close  resemblance  in  many  ways  between  the  two  poems,  Ps. 
Ixviii.  25  is  clearly  a  very  parallel  instance  to  the  present,  and 
here  it  may  be  presumed  that  the  "ways"  are  God's  eternal 
ways  of  working.     See  also  Ps.  Ixxvii.  14. 

V.  7.  Here,  in  the  '^r\''b^*1,  the  prophet  puts  himself  back 
amid  the  scenes  of  the  past,  and  so,  speaking  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  past,  he  dwells  on  the  disasters  which  befell  Israel's 
foes  of  old. 

The  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  itself  calls  for  no  special 
remark :  "  I  saw  the  tents  of  Cushan  beneath  affliction,"  i.e. 
bowed  down  under  calamity;  under  the  outpouring  of  God's 
wrath  Cushan  had  been  overwhelmed,  p^^  is  used  here  in 
much  the  same  sense  as  7^V>  with  which  it  is  parallel  in  Hab. 
i.  3,  Isa.  lix.  4.     See  also  Ps.  Iv.  4. 

The  versions  vary  considerably.  The  Peshito,  while  repre- 
senting the  passage  verbally,  appears  to  have  viewed  p^^  as  a 
proper  name.  The  Targum,  though  amplifying  the  passage,  has 
evidently  caught  the  sense,  "  When  the  house  of  Israel  wor- 
shipped idols,  I  delivered  them  into  the  hand  of  the  wicked 
Cushan  ;  but  when  they  returned  to  observe  the  Law,  1  wrought 
for  them  miracles  and  mighty  deeds,  and  delivered  them  from 
the  hand  of  the  Midianites  by  the  hand  of  Gideon,  the  son  of 
Joash."  That  is  to  say,  the  reference  is  understood  of  the 
catastrophe  befalling  the  ancient  foes  of  the  nation. 

The  LXX.  has  taken  shelter  in  literalness  [clvtI  kottcov  elSov), 
but  it  seems  very  doubtful  what  view,  if  any,  these  words  con- 
veyed to  the  translators.  The  ideas  which  the  authors  of  the 
versions  of  the  LXX.  have  tried  to  convey  will  be  spoken  of  in 
the  following  chapter.     The  Vulgate,  following  on  the  lines  of 

the   LXX.,   has   "  Pro   iniquitate  vidi "      What   Jerome 

himself  understood  by  this  may  be  gathered  from  his  com- 
mentary {in  loc),  and  clearly  cannot  be  taken  seriously.^ 

^  "  ^thiopes  tetri  ....  dsemones  intelliguntur,  quorum  fit  tabernaculum 
quicunque  in  hoc  sseculo  propter  honores  et  divitias  laborarit;  quod  signifi- 
canter  sub  uno  verbo  iniquitatis  ostenditur  .  .  .  ." 


The  Psalm  of  Hahahhuh.  21 

The  reference  to  the  name  Cushan  is  by  no  means  clear. 
The  Targum,  as  is  clearly  shown  by  the  added  epithet,  identifies 
it  with  Cushan  Rishathaim,  and  this  is  the  view  of  the  great 
Rabbinic  commentators,  Rashi/  Aben  Ezra,  and  Kimchi. 

Of  the  other  versions,  the  Peshito  reproduces  the  Hebrew 
verbally,  and  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  treat  W^'2  as  equivalent  to 
tr^^i:),  or  Ethiopia. 

The  objection  urged  against  the  traditional  Palestinian  view 
is  the  lack  of  chronological  arrangement  in  thus  putting  the 
deliverances  wrought  by  Othniel  and  Gideon  before  such  earlier 
incidents  as  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  and  of  the  Jordan  {y.  8). 
Also,  it  is  said,  this  view  involves  a  greater  amount  of  detail 
than  could  be  looked  for  in  such  a  context.  The  second  objec- 
tion looks  too  much  like  a  begging  of  the  question,  but  the  first 
may  be  allowed  to  have  some  weight.  Still,  when  it  is  remem- 
bered how  great  an  impression  the  miraculous  deliverance 
wrought  against  Midian  through  Gideon  made  on  the  Israelite 
mind  (see  Isa.  ix.  4,  x.  26,  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  10),  it  seems  hard,  in 
spite  of  the  chronology,  not  to  accept  this  as  the  meaning  of  the 
second  clause.  But  in  that  case  the  objection  to  Cushan 
Rishathaim  falls  to  the  ground;  and  it  obviously  is  quite 
possible  that  the  deliverance  from  this  oppressor  may  have  been 
attended  with  mightier  signs  of  intervention  than  we  might  be 
led  to  infer  from  the  shortness  of  the  account  in  the  Book  of 
Judges. 

Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  the  identification  of  Cushan  with 
Cush  has  difficulties  of  its  own.  The  former  word  occurs 
nowhere  else  but  here,  so  that  the  actual  evidence  is  narrowed 
to  that  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate,  which  need  not  count  for 
much.  Such  an  argument  as  Hitzig's,  that  Cushan  may  well  be 
the  same  as  Cush,  on  the  analogy  of  Lotan  (one  of  the  "  dukes  " 
of  Edom,  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  36)  for  Lot,  is  to  confound  illustration 
and  demonstration;  and  those  who  hold  this  view  appear  to 
forget  that  while  the  etymology  of  Lot  and  Lotan  is  doubtless 


^  Rashi  does  not  expressly  name  Cushan  Rishathaim,  but  accepts  the 
explanation  given  in  the  Targum. 


22  The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk. 

the  same,  it  by  no  means  follows  thence  that  the  names  are 
interchangeable.^ 

It  might  further  be  urged,  that  by  accepting  this  view  we 
not  only  give  a  good  deal  of  vagueness  to  the  passage,  but  also 
a  certain  bathos  if,  after  reading  of  the  awful  manifestations  of 
V.  6,  we  get  in  v.  7  merely  a  statement  that  two  nations  were 
much  alarmed  thereby;  whereas  on  the  other  view  there  is 
reference  in  v.  7  to  directly  miraculous  intervention. 

Ewald,  who  quite  rejects  the  Cush  theory,  suggests  that 
WID  is  probably  the  same  as  It^p*'  (Gen.  xxv.  2,  3),  viewed 
as  a  tribe  or  a  nation  cognate  with  Midian.  This  is,  however, 
the  merest  guess;  and  one  does  not  see  by  what  legitimate 
modification  of  spelling  the  two  forms  can  be  treated  as 
equivalent.^ 

A  remark  may  perhaps  be  added  as  to  the  tenses  in  this 
verse.  I  can  have  no  doubt  that  the  future  pt5"^*|  is  to  be  seen 
as  under  the  influence  of  the  past  '^il'^^^'^,  as  below  in  v.  10 
(Driver,  Hebrew  Tenses,  §  27,  7).  In  the  present  passage,  how- 
ever, as  I  have  mentioned  above  under  v.  3,  Prof  Driver  explains 
the  tense  as  "representing  the  event  while  nascent"  (§  26,  27,  a). 
I  cannot  see  why  he  should  not  have  included  it  in  his  list  of 
examples  where  an  "imperfect"  [future]  follows  immediately 
after  a  perfect,  indicating  "  the  rapid  or  instantaneous  manner 
in  which  the  second  action  is  conceived  as  following  the  first " 
(ib.  §  27,  7),  amid  which  he  includes  Hab.  iii.  10. 

It  is  true  that  ptj*!*]  does  not  follow  immediately  upon  the 
foregoing  past  tense,  as  in  the  instance  of  v.  10,  but  this  remark 
holds  equally  for  several  of  Prof  Driver's  own  examples  (Exod. 
XV.  12,  14;  Pss.  xlvi.  6,  Ixix.  33,  Ixxiv.  14,  Ixxvii.  17). 

V.  8.  With  this  verse  a  fresh  strophe  of  the  poem  begins, 
and  with  examples  drawn  from  the  period  of  the  Exodus  and  of 

^  Maurer's  suggestion  that  Cush  is  altered  into  Cushan,  so  as  to  give  a 
termination  harmonising  with  that  of  Midian,  has  perhaps  some  plausibility, 
but  lacks  evidence. 

2  Ewald  remarks  that  the  conclusion  of  strophe  2  {vv.  6,  7)  "  has  not  been 
preserved  in  its  full  extent."  This  is  indeed  to  play  the  part  of  "  I  am  Sir 
Oracle  " ;  there  is  not  one  vestige  of  evidence  for  this  reckless  statement. 


The  Psalm  of  Habakkuk.  23 

the  occupation  of  Canaan,  God  is  pictured  as  a  warrior  once 
more  about  to  take  the  field  against  His  foes.  The  change  of 
tense  in  the  verse  has  clearly  to  be  borne  in  mind,  as  intro- 
ducing a  transition  of  thought  like  those  we  have  previously 
considered. 

On  the  view  we  have  already  advocated,  the  general  sense 
of  the  verse  would  be,  "  When  God's  wonders  were  shown  on 
the  Red  Sea  and  the  Jordan,  was  the  Sea  or  the  River  the 
subject  of  God's  wrath  ?  Surely  that  power  manifested  on  Sea 
and  on  River  was  the  outcome  of  God's  wrath  on  Egyptian  and 
on  Canaanite.  So,  too,  again  is  it  now.  Is  it  against  Sea  or 
River  that  Thou  art  wroth,  that  Thou  ridest  as  a  warrior  to  the 
fight  and  for  deliverance  of  Thy  people  ?  No,  for  the  Chaldsean 
is  the  foe." 

I  cannot  but  believe,  in  spite  of  some  objections,  that  in  the 
first  clause  of  the  verse  H^'H^  is  the  nominative  to  H^Jl,  the 
change  from  the  third  person  of  the  first  clause  to  the  second 
person  in  the  second  clause  being  very  characteristic  of  Hebrew. 
We  thus  get  the  translation,  "  Was  it  with  rivers  that  the 
Lord  was  angry  ?  or  against  the  rivers  Thy  wrath  ?  or  against 
the  sea  Thy  fury  ? " 

On  the  other  view,  the  niJl"'  is  a  vocative,  the  nominative  to 
Tl'ytl  being  the  ^Db^  of  the  following  clause.  It  is  sometimes 
said  that  the  ancient  versions,  save  the  Peshito,  do  treat  T^^T^'^ 
as  a  vocative.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  we  have  only 
got  three  other  independent  versions;  that  the  Targum  is,  as 
might  have  been  expected,  too  paraphrastic  to  give  any  clue; 
and  that  the  LXX.,  though  reading  a  vocative,  is  in  no  sense  a 
supporter  of  the  second  rendering,  inasmuch  as  it  treats  each  of 
the  two  ternary  stichi  at  the  beginning  of  the  verse  as  a  com- 
plete sentence,  and  thus  agrees  virtually,  though  not  formally, 
with  the  former  of  the  two  renderings.  Lastly,  the  Vulgate  is 
but  the  echo  of  the  LXX. 

A  more  serious  matter  is  the  fact  that  there  is  no  parallel 
instance  to  the  construction  of  niH  used  in  direct  agreement 
with  a  person.  Still  there  seems  a  much  greater  improbability  in 
having  two  consecutive  clauses,  of  which  the  first  contains  the 


24  The  Psalm  of  Hahakkvk. 

verb  and  the  second  its  nominative,  a  construction  for  which  it 
would  be  well  if  some  exact  parallel  instances  were  brought 
forward. 

V.  9.  The  metaphor  of  the  Divine  Warrior  marching  against 
His  foes  is  continued  in  this  verse  (see  also  vv.  11  h,  12,  etc.). 
The  bow  is  bared,  drawn  forth  from  its  case,  so  as  to  be  ready 
for  action ;  the  noun  H^'^^?.  giving  the  same  kind  of  emphasis 
that  the  presence  of  an  infinitive  absolute  would  have  done.  It 
is  made  quite  bare,  it  is  no  mere  sign  or  threat  of  judgement 
which  may  yet  be  averted,  the  day  of  vengeance  is  indeed 
come. 

The  clause  which  follows  is  one  of  exceeding  difficulty,  and 
the  views  put  forth  concerning  it  differ  very  widely.  I  propose 
simply  to  refer  to  various  views,  only  so  far  as  may  be  necessary 
to  explain  or  defend  the  view  which  seems  to  me  the  most 
probable. 

The  first  word  nl^^ltp  has  been  variously  taken  as  (1)  the 
plural  of  njj^n??  an  oath;  (2)  the  plural  of  J^^ltT;  or  (3)  the 
2nd  participle  Kal  (fem.  pi.)  of  ^ItT. 

Again  nltS^  may  have  the  meaning  of  (1)  a  staff  or  rod,  or 
(2)  a  tribe.  Lastly,  "ipb^  is  a  purely  poetical  word,  which  as  a 
rule  carries  with  it  the  idea  of  a  solemn  promise,  or  utterance 
of  solemn  import.-^ 

As  regards  Jli^^ltp,  I  cannot  but  think  that  the  third 
meaning  is  to  be  preferred  for  several  reasons.  For  (1)  in  this 
way  alone  is  the  second  stichus  of  the  verse  a  co-ordinate  clause 
with  the  preceding,  and  so  is  more  in  harmony  with  the  general 
style  of  the  poem.  Again,  if  with  the  E.  V.  and  the  Jewish 
authorities  generally  we  take  the  meaning  of  "  oaths,"  the  word 
"Ipb^  is  left  awkwardly  stranded,  in  a  way  which  seems  very 
improbable.     It  is  true  that  the  second  view  avoids  this,  but 

^  Thus  we  find  it  used  for  the  solemn  promise  of  God  (Pss.  Ixviii.  12, 
Ixxvii.  9),  and  for  the  "  wondrous  tale  "  which  day  tells  to  day  and  night  to 
night  of  the  Creator's  power  (Ps.  xix.  3,  4).  In  the  one  remaining  place 
where  we  find  it  in  the  Old  Testament,  Job  xxii.  28,  it  is  used  more  generally, 
like  13^. 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk  25 

only  to  introduce  fresh  difficulties  of  its  own.  This  is  the  view 
adopted  by  Ewald,  "  Siebenfache  Geschosse  des  Krieges." 

Against  this,  however,  a  rather  serious  objection  may  be 
urged;  it  is  obtained,  as  we  have  seen,  by  treating  the  word 
under  consideration  as  the  plural  of  y^ltlj,  so  that  the  literal 

translation  would  thus  be  "Heptads  of  darts "     But 

although  this  last  named  word  occurs  twenty  times  in  the 
Bible,  it  is  always  used  to  indicate  a  week,  a  heptad  of  days, 
except  when  (Daniel  ix.  24  sqq.)  it  is  used  for  a  heptad  of  years. 
It  therefore  entirely  begs  the  question  to  assume  that  it  may  be 
used  here  for  bundles  of  seven  darts. 

As  regards  r\itD?2,  the  Jewish  interpreters  (e.g.  Targum, 
Rashi,  Kimchi)  have  as  a  rule  taken  it  as  meaning  the  tribes 
of  Israel.  Aben  Ezra,  as  will  be  mentioned  below,  takes  it 
differently.  The  LXX.,  which  goes  very  far  afield,  will  be  dis- 
cussed in  the  following  chapter;  the  Vulgate  has  "juramenta 
tribubus,"  but  the  Peshito  has  treated  HlV^^lt^  as  though  from 
Vlto,  though  making  nitO^  to  be  ''  darts." 

This  meaning  of  "  rod  "  or  "  staff"  or  "  dart "  is  very  common 
in  the  Bible,  and  in  various  aspects,  whether  of  support  or  of 
attack.  Thus  in  Isa.  x.  5,  xxx.  32,  Mic.  vi.  10,  the  rod  is  that 
of  correction  and  punishment.  Considering  the  special  nature 
of  the  imagery  here,  the  metaphor  of  the  warrior  with  his  bow, 
and  also  the  use  of  the  word  below  in  v.  14, 1  should  be  disposed 
to  think  it  possible  that  the  metaphor  may  be  strictly  pressed, 
and  that  the  7l'^72  is  not  so  much  a  rod  to  strike,  as  a  javelin  or 
dart  to  hurl. 

It  will  have  been  seen  that  it  is  not  easy  to  settle  what  to 
do  with  *^p^^  if  iliV^ltp  be  taken  in  any  way  except  the  last 
named.  I  would  therefore  explain  the  clause,  "Promised  by 
oath  are  the  punishments  which  Thy  foes  are  now  to  undergo, 
and  which  are  pledged  in  Thy  word  to  Thy  people,"  *)ph^  thus 
taking  the  notion  of  "  promise  "  if  seen  from  the  standpoint  of 
Israel,  and  of  "  solemn  decree  "  if  from  that  of  the  foe.  I  would 
point  out  that,  to  say  nothing  of  objections  urged  above  to  the 
other  views,  the  verse  seems  on  this  view  to  cohere  in  a  way 
resembling  that  of  other  parts  of  the  Psalm,  as  though  it  said, 


26  The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk. 

"  Thy  bow  is  utterly  bared,  and  Thou  wilt  indeed  execute  Thy 
vengeance,  for  now  as  of  old  Thy  threats  of  punishment  upon 
Thy  foes  have  been  put  on  solemn  record."  ^ 

As  regards  the  Grammatical  connection  of  the  word  "l^t^  with 
those  before  it,  I  should  prefer  not  to  call  it,  as  some  do,  an 
"adverbial  accusative,"  or  to  supply  a  preposition  before  it,  but  to 
assume  that  nitS??  is  in  construction  with  it.  "The  rod  of  the 
decree"  is  no  more  awkward  than  the  "rod  of  doom"  (or, 
destiny)  in  Isa.  xxx.  32,  where  the  grammar  is  free  from 
ambiguity,  or  than  the  "  rod  (iDlt;?)  of  his  mouth  "  in  Isa.  xi.  4.^ 

The  Selah,  as  before  [v.  3),  breaks  the  strain,  not  as  on  the 
former  occasion  with  a  kind  of  antithesis,  but  as  leading  to  the 
outcome  of  what  had  gone  before,  the  catastrophe  as  it  were. 
I  render  the  clause,  "  With  rivers  Thou  wilt  rend  the  earth,"  i.e. 
the  manifestations  of  God's  power  and  wrath,  the  quaking 
mountains,  the  beating  storm,  the  tossing  waves  of  the  sea,  are 
accompanied  by  the  rending  and  tearing  of  the  earth,  in  which 
torrents  burst  forth  from  the  chasms.  Thus  in  vv.  8,  9a,  we 
have,  as  it  were,  the  storm  of  wrath  in  anticipation ;  from  the 
Selali  onwards  we  have  the  tokens  of  its  outburst. 

The  clause  has  been  rendered  in  several  different  ways,  but 
I  venture  to  think  that  the  above  is  much  to  be  preferred.  I 
would  argue  that  the  verb  is  in  the  second  person  rather  than 

^  The  present  view  is  substantially  that  of  Aben  Ezra,  though,  with  what 
seems  absurdity,  he  understands  the  "bow"  of  the  rain-bow.  He  then 
remarks  "  The  meaning  of  '0'®  has  regard  to  the  arrows,  ....  as  though  the 
darts  were  sworn  to  establish  Thy  word." 

2  A  commentator,  whose  remarks  are  as  a  rule  characterised  both  by  great 
good  sense  and  sound  scholarship,  Maurer,  has  deserted  this  view  which  he 
formerly  held  (1)  as  being  too  artificial,  (2)  because  we  should  expect  a  clause 
conforming  to  the  warlike  metaphor  of  the  preceding,  and  (3)  because  it  would 
be  more  reasonable  to  treat  rxvo  as  in  v.  14.  The  first  point  is  a  purely  sub- 
jective remark ;  but  as  regards  the  other  two,  the  view  I  have  taken  of  sup- 
posing the  general  meaning  of  rod  here  to  assume  the  more  special  meaning 
of  dart  seems  to  meet  the  case.  This  "  too  artificial  "  view  Maurer  gives  up 
for  "  satiatse  sanguine  sunt  hastse,  epinicium,"  i.e.  rhv^iti  is  to  be  changed  into 
ni5?ito  on  the  authority  of  the  Peshito,  and  ipVi  to  be  little  more  than  a  sort  of 
interjection. 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk.  27 

the  third,  because,  besides  the  grammatical  reason,  to  be  men- 
tioned presently,  we  seem  to  need  some  direct  mention  of  the 
Deity,  whether  as  subject  or  object,  when  beginning  the  turn  of 
thought  which  the  Selah  introduces. 

Again,  as  regards  the  verb,  the  Piel  of  ^pl  occurs  twelve 
times  in  the  Bible,  and  in  every  case  but  one  is  followed  by  the 
thing  actually  torn  or  rent  as  a  direct  object,  e.g.  wood  chopped 
up  (1  Sam.  vi.  14),  eggs  hatched  (Isa.  lix.  4),  wild  beasts  rend- 
ing (2  Kings  ii.  24),  of  God's  rending  of  rocks  in  the  desert  (Ps. 
Ixxviii.  15).  The  one  exception  is  Job  xxviii.  10,  where  we 
have  "he  cutteth  out  rivers  in  the  rocks,"  a  curious  difference 
from  the  preceding  passage ;  there  the  accusative  is  D*^*^^!^,  here 
it  is  n'>-)^^'l,  with  ni*im  following. 

Such  a  rendering  as  (1)  "  The  earth  is  rent  (or,  rends  itself) 
into  torrents,"  does  obvious  violence  to  the  grammar;  more 
especially  as  we  have  the  Hithpael  of  this  very  verb  found  in 
this  last  meaning  in  a  very  apposite  passage  (Mic.  i.  6).  Much 
the  same  as  this  is  Maurer's  "  flumina  prorumpere  jubet  terra." 
As  we  have  seen,  there  is  no  reall}^  parallel  instance  in  the  Piel. 
Maurer  might  have  quoted  Isa.  xxxv,  6,  where  the  Niphal  is 
found  of  waters  breaking  forth,  and  Ps.  Ixxiv.  15,  where  the  Kal 
is  used  in  a  corresponding  active  sense,  but  these  do  not  affect 
the  case  of  Piel.  Again  (2)  we  have  Ewald's  explanation,  by 
which  we  get  the  idea, "  Thou  dost  divide  rivers  so  that  there  is 
now  land  where  before  was  water."  He  compares  Ps.  cxiv.  5,  6, 
and  Isa.  xi.  15.  Of  course,  so  far  as  merely  grammatical  con- 
siderations go,  this  stands  on  exactly  the  same  footing  as  the 
translation  I  argue  for :  "  Thou  dividest  the  land  into  rivers," 
and  "Thou  dividest  the  rivers  so  as  to  be  land,"  being  exact 
correlatives.  Still,  I  must  confess  that  for  "dry  land"  as 
opposed  to  water,  I  should  have  expected  HtTS.^  rather  than 

V.  10.  In  this  verse  the  outcome  of  the  Divine  Presence  is 
further  described.  The  mountains,  mightiest  and  most  gigantic 
of  the  things  of  earth,  see  Him  and  tremble  (lit.,  writhe)  in  awe, 
floods  of  rain  pour  down  from  the  skies ;  the  ocean,  as  though  a 


28  The  Psalm  of  HahakJcuk 

being  endued  with  life,  utters  his  voice  aloud,  and  tosses  his 
hands  on  high. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  tense  is  now  past,  after  shifting  to 
the  future  at  the  Ethnakh  of  v.  8,  of  which  change  I  have 
endeavoured  to  bring  out  the  meaning  as  it  presents  itself  to 
my  mind.  Here  again  is  a  change,  the  wonders  of  God's  deal- 
ings in  the  past  are  a  thought  ever  underlying  the  hopes  for  the 
future;  and  ii  v.  11  does  indeed  refer  to  the  miracle  in  the 
Valley  of  Ajalon  (and  it  is  a  view  for  which,  as  I  believe,  there 
is  much  to  be  said),  then  the  general  view  is  confirmed  by  the 
individual  instance.^ 

By  the  word  Q*)5  ^^J  ^®  understood  violent  rain,  and  "^ly 
is  clearly  meant  to  emphasize  its  excessive  and  deluge-like 
character  (c/.  Isa.  viii.  8,  Nah.  i.  8),  as  though  "a  deluge  of 
waters  poured  overwhelmingly."  The  word  is  exclusively 
poetical,  and  save  for  the  present  passage  and  Job  xxiv.  8  is 
found  only  in  Isaiah.^  We  find  it  coupled  with  ^1^72  (iv.  6),  we 
have  a  Q*)t  of  hail  (xxviii.  2),  and  accompanied  by  hail  (xxx.  30). 
It  is  the  violent  downpour  in  the  mountains  upon  the  un- 
sheltered outcasts  (Job  I.  c). 

Ewald  explains  the  clause  differently,  understanding  it  of 
the  overflow  of  the  waters  of  the  Red  Sea,  after  they  had  been 
parted  for  the  passage  of  Israel,  but  now  returning  to  their 
strength  to  engulf  Israel's  foes.  Striking  as  is  this  idea,  I  do 
not  see  how  it  can  fairly  be  reconciled  with  the  meaning  of 
D*)t.  Nor  can  it  be  maintained  that  the  versions  give  any 
colour  to  this  view.  The  LXX.  is  beside  the  mark,  for  it  has 
utterly  misunderstood  the  passage.  The  Targum  (b^"ltD?^  '^'^^V)> 
and  the  Peshito  ("|A.2i_»5l)  are  decided  enough;  and  though  the 
Vulgate  (turbo)  is  not  quite  the  same  as  this,  it  cannot  be  said 
to  be  materially  different.^ 

^  The  tense  of  ibw  is  clearly  influenced  by  the  tense  of  ?pNn,  as  we  have 
said  above  in  the  case  oi  v.  7. 

^  iv.  6,  XXV.  4  bis,  xxviii.  2  his,  xxx.  30,  xxxii.  2. 

^  We  find  turbo  as  the  rendering  of  nnj  in  the  Vulgate  always,  except  in 
laa.  xxviii.  2,  where  it  is  impetus ;  in  xxxii.  2,  where  it  is  tempestas ;  and  in 
Job  {I.  c),  where  it  is  imbres. 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk  29 

The  noun  Dl*1  in  the  final  clause  is  ordinarily  taken  as 
standing  for  an  adverb,  and  this  on  the  whole  is  perhaps  the 
safest.  If  it  be  taken  as  the  nominative  to  t^f^,  "the  height 
lifted  up  its  hands/'  it  does  not  seem  quite  obvioVs  what  we  are 
to  understand  by  the  "height."  It  has  indeed  been  explained 
of  the  mountains,  but  the  idea  of  the  metaphor  in  this  case 
seems  far  less  natural  and  obvious  than  that  of  the  tossing 
crests  of  the  waves. 

It  must  be  allowed,  however,  that  Jewish  authorities  have 
very  generally  taken  Q^^  as  the  nominative.  Thus  the  Targum 
understands  it  of  the  "  powers  of  the  height "  who  stand  still  in 
amaze  (^D);  "^Tir^I^).  Rashi  sees  in  Dinri  and  Di^  the  contrast 
between  earth  and  heaven,  "  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  praised 
Him  ...  the  hosts  of  the  heaven  lauded  Him."  Kimchi  curiously 
explains  it  of  the  volume  of  the  waters  of  the  Jordan  checked 
in  their  passage  to  the  Dead  Sea  and  forming  a  mighty  heap 
(mi:i  nr\t^  1:3).  Aben  Ezra  also  takes  D^ll  as  a  nominative, 
the  antithesis  of  DIJlA 

-y.  ll...tl)Dty.  "Sun  [and]  moon  stood  still  in^  [their] 
abode."  The  ancient  Jewish  interpreters  ordinarily  understood 
this  clause  of  the  miracle  wrought  for  Joshua  at  Gibeon.  Thus 
the  Targum  has  "  when  Thou  didst  work  miracles  for  Joshua  in 
the  Valley  of  Gibeon,  the  sun  and  moon  stood  still  in  their 
habitations."  So  too  it  is  explained  by  Rashi  and  Kimchi.^ 
The  latter  says,  "  In  the  war  of  Joshua  with  the  kings,  when 
the  sun  stood  still  for  them  and  the  moon  likewise,  till  the 
people  should  have  avenged  itself  upon  its  enemies." 

It  may  be  noted  further  that  in  Joshua  x.  13  we  have  this 
same  verb  twice  used,  "And  the  sun  stood  still  (D^^l)  and  the 

moon  stayed  (ip;^) And  the  sun  stood  still  (Ibi??^)  in  the 

midst  of  heaven." 

1  For  this  modified  use  of  the  locative  n,  see  Bottcher,  Ausfuhrliches 
Lehrhuch,  i.  629. 

2  Aben  Ezra  takes  it  differently.  His  view  is  that  the  sun  and  moon 
remained  in  their  abode,  because  there  was  no  need  of  the  sun  by  day,  nor  of 
the  moon  by  night,  for  "  by  the  light  of  Thy  arrows  the  sons  of  men  are  able 
to  go  about." 


so  The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk 

The  fashion  now  prevails  in  Commentaries  of  giving  a 
totally  different  interpretation :  The  sun  and  moon,  so  to  speak, 
stayed  at  home ;  that  is,  either  (1)  they  do  not  come  forth  from 
their  dwelling  (Ps.  xix.  6,  6),  i.e.  do  not  rise ;  or  (2)  while  in  the 
sky  they  grow  pale  before  the  brightness  of  the  Divine  splen- 
dour (Ewald) ;  or  (3)  the  sun  and  moon  are  obscured  by  clouds 
"  tonante  et  fulgurante  coelo  "  (Maurer). 

If  it  be  asked  on  what  grounds  the  old  traditional  interpre- 
tation has  been  forsaken,  it  can  but  be  said  that  a  good  many 
commentators  contemptuously  ignore  it  altogether.  Or  again, 
when  reasons  are  given,  they  do  not  seem  of  a  very  cogent 
character,  e.g.  that  Jl T'lT  "TDV  cannot  possibly  mean  "  stand 
still  in  the  heavens,"  on  which  I  can  only  remark  that  probably 
Rashi  and  Kimchi  were  quite  as  good  judges  of  what  Hebrew 
words  could  mean  as  e.g.  Dr.  Keil.  Or  again,  that  the  "  differ- 
ences which  exist  between  Josh.  x.  and  Hab.  iii.  are  too  great 
for  us  to  be  able  to  allow  that  there  is  a  reminiscence  of  Joshua 
in  Habakkuk,"  which  is  simply  to  beg  the  whole  question. 
When  others  again  tell  us  that  on  this  view  it  is  impossible  to 
find  any  connection  between  the  two  hemistichs  of  v.  11,  it  is 
sufficient  to  answer  that  the  second  hemistich  brings  before  us 
the  imagery  of  a  terrible  storm,  in  connection  (as  the  succeeding 
context  shows)  with  the  idea  of  God  as  a  warrior,  avenging  the 
cause  of  His  people.  Surely  the  words  of  Josh.  x.  11,  "the 
Lord  cast  down  great  stones  from  heaven,"  are  suggestive  of 
much  not  directly  told,  and  might  well  shape  the  poetic  imagery 
of  the  prophet. 

It  is  of  course  entirely  outside  our  province  to  discuss  here 
the  nature  of  the  stupendous  miracle  at  Gibeon ;  the  question  is 
merely  as  to  the  reference  of  Habakkuk.  I  venture  to  think 
that  the  old  interpretation  has  by  no  means  been  disproved. 
In  dwelling  on  the  most  striking  wonders  of  the  early  history  of 
Israel,  in  which  such  miracles  as  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea 
and  the  Jordan  are  confessedly  referred  to,  in  which  again 
individual  incidents  such  as  the  discomfiture  of  Midian  and 
Cushan  (whatever  this  latter  may  be)  are  brought  in,  why  is  it  in 
any  sense  unnatural  that  the  miracle  of  Gibeon  should  be  thus 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk  31 

referred  to  ? — and  the  rather  that  the  victory  in  connection  with 
which  it  was  wrought  was  directly  the  turning-point  in  the 
conquest  of  the  Holy  Land. 

The  verb  too,  used  by  Habakkuk,  is  the  same  as  one  of  the 
two  used  in  Joshua,  and  is  there  applied  both  to  sun  and  moon. 
Nor  can  it  be  said  that  such  an  idea,  e.g.  as  either  that  of  the 
sun  obscured  by  thick  clouds,  or  with  its  brightness  paled  by 
the  presence  of  a  greater  splendour,  can  be  very  naturally 
expressed  by  a  word  meaning  "stood  still." 

-y.  11  .  .  .  "Ilb^?.  The  relative  is  of  course  to  be  understood 
before  ^^^Jl*!,  the  reference  being  to  the  arrows  of  God  which 
fly  abroad.  The  force  of  ^  will  be  "at"  in  the  sense  of 
"  because  of,"  if  the  view  be  taken  of  the  dimming  of  the  light 
of  the  sun  and  moon  before  the  manifestation  of  God's  glory. 
If,  however,  the  reference  to  the  victory  in  Gibeon  be  accepted, 
the  ^  has  more  a  local  force  "  at,"  as  though  "  amid  "  or  "  in  the 
presence  of."  ^  The  reference  to  "arrows"  and  "spear"  gains 
additional  point,  if  Josh.  x.  11  (already  referred  to)  be  taken 
count  of 

We  may  perhaps  attempt  to  represent  the  force  of  the  Piel 
by  translating  "  by  the  light  of  thy  fast-falling  arrows."  ^  The 
Piel  of  the  verb  ipTl,  which  occurs  in  all  24  times  in  the  Bible, 
is,  save  for  one  exception  (1  Kings  xxi.  27),  found  exclusively  in 
the  poetical  books.  The  general  aspect  of  the  Piel  in  these 
cases,  as  indicating  something  more  than  the  Kal,  is  that  of 
permanence  or  continuance,  the  constant  habit  (see  e.g.  Pss. 
Ixxxi.  14,  Ixxxvi.  11,  Ixxxix.  16).  Except  in  Job  xxiv.  10,  this 
sense  of  continuousness  in  some  sort  seems  to  run  more  or  less 
through  all  the  passages  (see  further  Eccl.  iv.  15,  viii.  10).  Thus 
even  in  Lam.  v.  18,  it  suggests  the  unresting  running  to  and 
fro  of  the  foxes  amid  the  ruins  of  Zion.  I  do  not  think  there- 
fore that,  having  regard  to  this  usage,  we  can  treat  the  Piel 
now  before  us  as  suggestive  of  the  swiftness  of  the  lightning ; 

•  So  it  is  rendered  i33  in  a  recent  Rabbinic  commentary. 

2  So  the  writer  referred  to  in  the  preceding  note  remarks,  n^^bnon  n^5?n 


32  The  Psalm  of  Hahahhuh. 

or  that  any  similar  idea  enters  into  Ps.  civ.  3.  That  verse 
seems  to  find  its  parallel  in  Nah.  i.  3,  and  simply  to  mean  that 
the  mightiest  powers  of  nature  are  God's  servants.  Thus  in  the 
present  verse  of  Habakkuk  we  may  understand  the  phrase  of 
the  ceaseless  flashing  of  the  lightning  amid  the  discomfiture  of 
Israel's  foes. 

V.  12.  Here  once  again,  for  the  last  time  in  the  Theophany, 
the  prophet  looks  forward,  and  as  before  rests  his  certain  belief 
of  what  is  to  come  on  the  known  deliverances  of  the  past. 
Here,  however,  for  the  first  time,  the  prophet  dwells  on  the 
purpose  of  the  Divine  manifestation  ;^  it  was  not  merely  for  the 
destruction  of  the  foe,  for  "  Thou  wentest  forth  for  the  salvation 
of  Thy  people." 

The  past  tenses  of  vv.  13 — 15  might  conceivably  be  instances 
of  the  prophetic  perfect,  but  there  is  no  need  so  to  take  them, 
and  the  general  scope  of  our  view  of  the  Theophany  which  ends 
with  v.  15  is  thus  consistently  maintained.  Let  it  be  noted  too 
that  the  Theophany  is  thus  made  to  end  with  a  definite  reference 
to  that  deliverance  of  old  which  was  the  closest  parallel  to  that 
from  the  Chaldseans,  namely  that  from  Egypt.  The  reference  in 
V.  15  to  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  certainly  seems  unmistake- 
able,  and  it  is  so  understood  by  Ewald,  who  sees  a  reference  to 
Pharaoh  and  Egypt  all  through  the  paragraph  vv.  13 — 15. 

V.  13.  "^n^tpp'JniS^.  We  are  faced  here  with  a  twofold  diffi- 
culty, on  which  it  is  well  to  speak  with  caution,  the  meaning  of 
the  particle  and  the  reference  to  the  "Anointed."  If  the  particle 
means  with,  then  the  reference  is  clearly  to  our  Lord,  as  the 
worker  out  of  God's  purposes  of  salvation.  This  view  is  taken 
by  the  Vulgate,  and  by  other  ancient  versions  to  be  subsequently 
referred  to,  and  is  strongly  advocated  by  Dr.  Pusey  (comm.  in 
loc).  He  points  out  with  justice  that  if  the  r\^  be  objective, 
then,  in  face  of  the  foregoing  clause,  it  is  a  superfluity,  and  there 
was  no  reason  for  changing  the  construction.  On  the  other 
hand  we  are  bound  to  admit  that  the  translation  "  with  Thy 

^  That  is,  by  explicit  statement ;  for  we  have  already  had  the  implied  hint 
in  n^'iMJ),  V.  8. 


The  Psalvi  of  Habakkuk  33 

Anointed  "  introduces  a  fresh  thought  in  the  poem,  where  God 
is  directly  brought  before  us  as  the  deliverer  and  avenger. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  particle  be  objective,  it  then 
becomes  a  question  as  to  the  reference  in  "  Thy  Anointed."  It 
may  perhaps  be  the  nation,  that  is,  in  the  higher  sense,  not 
"  Israel  after  the  flesh,"  but  the  "  Israel  of  God  "  ;  or  it  may  be 
understood  in  varying  senses  as  the  Anointed  King  of  Israel. 

On  turning  to  the  ancient  versions,  we  find  that  great 
diversity  of  view  prevails.  The  Targum  and  Peshito,  while 
clearly  taking  the  particle  as  objective,  have  left  the  further 
point  indeterminate.  The  LXX.  again,  while  taking  the  objec- 
tive, has  readings  tov  yjpLo-Tov  and  tou?  ^ptcTov?,  the  latter 
taking  the  Hebrew  word  in  a  collective  sense,  and  presumably 
referring  to  the  people  of  Israel.  Jerome  {comm.  in  loc.)  com- 
ments on  the  renderings  of  the  other  Greek  versions.  We  learn 
that  Aquila  rendered  the  clause  "for  salvation  (i.e.  to  Thy 
people)  with  Thy  Christ "  (sing.).  The  same  is  also  the  render- 
ing of  the  Quinta.  Theodotion  ("  quasi  pauper  Ebionita  ")  and 
Symmachus  ("  ejusdem  dogmatis"),  both  **pauperem  sensum 
secuti,"  render  "  to  save  thy  Christ "  (sing.).  Jerome,  who,  as  I 
have  already  said,  takes  the  il^^  as  meaning  with,  as  Aquila 
does,  expresses  his  surprise,  "  Isti  semichristiani  Judaice  trans- 
tulerunt,  et  Judseus  Aquila  interpretatus  est  ut  Christianus." 
Lastly,  the  Sexta  gives  a  distinctly  Christian  interpretation, 
i^\66<;  TOV  (TOiaai  tov  Xaov  crov  Bta  ^Irjaovu  tov  XpccrTOV  aov. 

Of  Rabbinic  commentaries,  Rashi  explains  the  "  Anointed  " 
of  Saul  and  David,  Aben  Ezra  of  the  King  of  Judah,  and 
Kimchi  of  Messiah  the  Son  of  David. 

If  the  view  be  taken  that  the  particle  is  objective,  it  is  by 
no  means  easy  to  decide  between  the  people  of  Israel,  defined 
as  above,  and  the  King  of  Israel ;  but  I  am  not  convinced  that 
the  arguments  urged  against  the  former  view  are  conclusive. 
Specially  is  it  pointed  out  that  we  never  find  the  people  of 
Israel  called  by  this  name  "Anointed"  in  scripture;  and  cer- 
tainly the  passages  adduced  are  by  no  means  free  from  doubt. 
Still,  to  assert  that  they  all  (Pss.  xxviii.  8,  Ixxxiv.  10,  Ixxxix.  39) 
must  refer  to  the  anointed  king,  and  Ps.  cv.  15  to  the  Patriarchs, 

3 


34  The  Psalm  of  Habakkuk 

comes  very  near  to  begging  the  point  at  issue.  I  confess  that, 
as  regards  the  first  three  passages,  I  should  have  thought  that 
the  question  was  a  very  open  one,  where  either  view  might  very 
fairly  be  maintained.  Now,  in  the  passage  of  Habakkuk,  if 
"  the  Anointed  "  be  a  king,  we  may  ask,  what  king  ?  In  answer, 
we  are  told,  "  Not  this  or  that  historical  king,  Josiah,  Jehoiakim, 
nor  yet  Jehoiachin,  but  the  Davidic  king  absolutely,  including 
the  Messiah,"  the  last  and  most  glorious  of  the  line.  But  to 
this  it  may  fairly  be  answered  that  (1)  it  assumes  as  absolutely 
certain  that  the  past  tense  JHi^!^''  is  a  prophetic  perfect,  which 
anyhow  may  be  considered  as  open  to  doubt ;  (2)  as  regards  the 
former  part  of  the  above  view,  this  notion  of  the  Davidic  king 
is  simply  a  piece  of  vague  idealising,  which,  we  venture  to  think, 
could  have  no  place  in  a  prophecy,  for  God  did  not  save  any  one 
king  of  the  line  of  David  from  the  Chaldseans;  and  (3)  the 
inclusion  of  Him  who  is  the  Messiah  seems  to  introduce  a  very 
questionable  piece  of  theology.  The  ^tL^i2  of  Zech.  ix.  9,  which 
is  quoted  in  support  of  this  view,  may  most  simply  be  translated 
victorious  or  fortunate. 

If,  however,  as  we  believe,  the  past  tenses  of  this  verse  are 
really  past  tenses,  then  the  deliverances  may  easily  find  examples 
drawn  from  the  past  history ;  nor  does  it  matter  very  much 
whether  we  understand  the  "  Anointed  "  of  the  kinof  or  the 

o 

nation,  for  the  former  is  but  the  representative  of  the  latter. 
Further,  we  cannot  afford  too  lightly  to  reject  the  other  view  of 
the  clause,  which  does  not  view  Di^  as  the  objective  prefix.  It 
is  indeed  even  conceivable  that  the  seeming  ambiguity  was 
intentional. 

In  the  second  half  of  the  Verse  we  turn  from  considering 
those  whom  God  defends  to  those  on  whom  He  works  vengeance. 
The  "wicked  one,"  primarily  of  course  the  hostile  king,  as 
representative  of  his  people,  is  doubtless  to  be  understood  of 
every  successive  embodiment  of  evil.  The  metaphor  of  the 
verse  is  that  of  a  stronghold,  where  the  Divine  Power  strikes 
at  once  at  the  summit  and  the  foundation.  The  pinnacle  is 
dashed  off  and  the  foundation  laid  bare  (c/.  Ps.  cxxxvii.  7). 

I  must  confess  to  feeling  not  content  with  the  ordinary  ways 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk  85 

of  explaining  the  last  clause.  Thus  Gesenius  (Thesmirus,  p.  1162) 
renders  the  clause, "  sedificia  ad  hominis  altitudinena  diruuntur." 
But  this  is  not  altogether  fair  treatment  of  the  Hebrew.  To 
"  lay  bare  the  foundations "  is  of  course  tantamount  to  the 
destruction  of  the  building,  but  then  "  to  the  neck "  should 
surely  be  understood  in  a  way  directly  harmonising  with  the 
original  phrase.  Ewald  explains  the  phrase  as  of  the  building 
decapitated,  so  to  speak,  by  the  dashing  off  of  the  head,  so  that 
the  neck  is  laid  bare.  Then  from  this  now  highest  point,  the 
neck,  to  the  very  foundation,  is  the  building  shattered.  This  is 
the  view  taken  in  the  Peshito.  Still,  vivid  as  this  idea  is,  it 
may  be  objected  that  thus  to  treat  the  word  llD"^.  as  to  all  intents 
and  purposes  "from  the  very  foundations"  is  rather  questionable 
grammar. 

Now,  a  comparison  of  Isa.  viii.  8,  xxx.  28,  shows  that  the 
phrase  1^^^!^  "7^  is  used  by  a  metaphor  taken  from  the  human 
body,  to  imply  an  overwhelming  flood  in  which  life  is  in  deadly 
peril ;  the  body  is  well  nigh  entirely  submerged.  Here,  how- 
ever, we  are  not  dealing  with  rising  waters,  but  with  digging 
down  to  the  foundations  of  a  building.  Might  we  then  not 
argue,  by  parity  of  reason,  that  the  foundation  is  laid  bare  to 
the  lowest  stone  thereof 

V.  14.  Here  and  in  v.  15,  with  which  the  Theophany  closes, 
the  thought  is  continued  of  the  mighty  works  done  in  the  time 
of  the  fathers,  culminating  in  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea. 

In  the  first  clause  of  v.  14  we  meet  with  a  word  occurring 
nowhere  else  in  Scripture,  whose  meaning,  though  most  probably 
that  of  "chieftains"  or  "leaders,"  cannot  be  considered  altogether 
free  from  doubt.  The  root-meaning  underlying  this  word 
y\^B  (Vt*lQ  Kri)  is  not  so  completely  established  as  to  settle 
the  matter  satisfactorily.  Parallel  instances,  as  we  have  said, 
there  are  none ;  and  while  we  may  probably  associate  the  word 
with  lit'^D  (Judg.  V.  7,  11),  it  is  impossible  to  allow  that  this 
word  will  settle  the  matter,  in  face  of  the  existence  of  •'tHQ  and 
nt"^Q  in  a  totally  different  sense. 

It  must  be  allowed  that  a  suitable  meaning  is  obtained  from 


36  The  Psalm  of  Habakkuk. 

either  translation,  "  Thou  didst  pierce  with  his^  spears  the  head 
of  his  chieftains/'  or  "the  head  of  his  hordes  (swarms  of  in- 
vaders)"; but  I  cannot  but  think  that  there  is  insufficient 
evidence  for  this  latter  view,  where  the  meaninor  is  deduced 
from  a  word  which  simply  means  an  inhabitant  of  an  unwalled 
town  (pagauus).  Nor  can  it  be  said  that  anything  conclusive 
for  this  view  can  be  obtained  from  the  versions.  The  LXX.  has 
Swdarai,  and  the  Peshito  adopts  the  same  view.  The  Vulgate 
has  hellatores,  and  the  Targum,  which  sees  in  ihis  verse  a  refer- 
ence to  the  discomfiture  of  Pharaoh,  has  n^'l'll^D  "^11!^^^  "^^^^X 
These  last  two,  however,  seem  almost  too  vague  to  prove  very 
much. 

Rashi,  who  understands  the  verse  of  the  invading  army  of 
Sennacherib  and  the  destruction  which  befell  it,  does  indeed 
connect  the  word  with  the  second-named  meaning,  "  the  chiefs 
@f  his  cities  and  his  towns."  Kimchi  also,  who  takes  the  past 
tenses  as  instances  of  the  prophetic  perfect,  sees  a  reference  to 
the  future  wars  of  Gog,  and  explains  the  Vt^Q  as  his  hosts 
(Vm7*^*'n),  which  dwelt  in  the  villages  round  about  Jerusalem. 

Delitzsch  refers  the  word  to  an  absolute  singular  form  t*lD 
or  t^lD,  and,  dealing  as  we  are  with  an  dira^  XeyofjuevoVj  it  is 
clearly  impossible  to  dogmatise  between  these  and  nQ,  the 
form  generally  taken.  He  explains  the  word  "  der  Dorf-  und 
Bauerschaft,"  and  appeals  to  the  Targum,  Rashi,  and  Kimchi  in 
support  of  his  view.  The  two  latter  certainly  held  this  view ; 
the  Targum  seems  to  me  open  to  doubt. 

It  must  be  allowed  that  the  word  ^l^D''  is  a  very  natural 
expression  for  the  fierce  rush  of  invading  hordes,  but  the 
evidence  before  us  seems  perhaps  hardly  sufficient  to  allow  us 
to  accept  without  question  this  rendering.  For  the  present  it 
may  be  well  to  follow  the  advice  of  the  Talmud,  and. ''  teach 
our  tongues  to  say,  we  do  not  know." 

^  The  pronoun  "his"  clearly  refers  to  the  !?^  of  the  foregoing  verse. 
Ewald  would  prefer  to  read  -j^Tcn,  thinking  "his"  awkward  here;  but,  if 
retained,  as  meaning  "spears  destined  for  the  wicked."  I  should  have 
thought  it  might  equally  well  have  been  explained  of  the  foe's  own  spears, 
turned  against  himself.      Cf.  2  Chron.  xx.  23  sqq. 


The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk  37 

Be  the  meaning  of  the  word  what  it  may,  the  imagery 
brings  before  us  the  whirlwind  like  rush  of  the  foes  of  Israel, 
the  future  T)^p^^  presumably  indicating  the  way  in  which  mass 
after  mass  of  invaders  pour  on,  "velut  unda  supervenit 
undam."  These  invaders  in  the  wild  exultation  of  their  onset 
are  like  bandits,  whose  joy  is  to  pillage,  and  as  it  were  devour, 
the  wretched  traveller  whom  they  have  drawn  into  their  secret 
haunts.^ 

The  spears  of  the  enemy  are  turned  against  themselves,  and 
tJhe  onward  rush  is  stayed  by  the  might  of  Israel's  protector. 

V.  15.  With  this  verse  the  Theophany  comes  to  an  end,  and 
that,  as  we  believe,  with  a  reference  to  the  miracle  of  the 
passage  of  the  Red  Sea. 

A  most  striking  parallel  to  this  verse  is  found  in  Ps.  Ixxvii.  20, 
where  the  thought  underlying  the  whole  context  is  very  rele- 
vant to  much  in  the  present  poem,  "  Thy  way  is  in  the  sea  and 
thy  paths  in  mighty  waters,  and  thy  footsteps  are  not  known." 
So  in  Habakkuk  we  read,  "Thou  didst  march  across  the  sea 
with^  thy  horses,  the  foaming  mass  of  mighty  waters."  With  this 
reminiscence  of  the  great  deliverance,  when  the  then  mightiest 
empire  of  earth  was  discomfited  and  forced  to  surrender  its 
captives,  the  prophet  ends.  It  is  an  end  recalling  the  beginning. 
The  God  who  of  old  led  his  people  through  the  desert  like  a 
flock,  and  wrought  mightily  for  them,  was  the  God  of  Israel 
still;  He  would  again  in  anger  tread  the  earth,  and  in  fury 
trample  down  the  nations,  even  He  who  once  subdued  the  pride 
of  the  sea,  and  marched  as  a  conqueror  over  the  foaming  mass^ 
of  mighty  waters. 

^  We  may  note  the  affix  in  ^3i?>pnV,  where  the  prophet  identifies  himself 
with  the  victims  «#  the  invasion. 

^  The  Tj^p^D  is  simply  taken  as  depending  on  an  implied  i,  and  there  is 
clearly  no  need  to  imply  ^d-it  after  it. 

^  This  word  -ipn  does  not  occur  again  in  the  Bible  in  exactly  this  sense, 
though  we  find  it  used  (as  in  Exod.  viii.  10,  Job  xxvii.  16)  for  a  "heap"  in 
other  senses.  Still,  the  use  of  the  verb  -inn  in  Ps.  xlvi.  4  fully  justifies  the 
translation  "  a  foaming  mass  of  waters."  The  Vulgate  gives  lutum,  a  mean- 
ing which,  while  fairly  representing  the  word,  e.g.  in  Gen.  xi.  3,  is  entirely 
out  of  place  here. 


38  The  Psalm  of  Hahakhuk. 

V.  16.  Here,  the  Theophany  ended,  the  prophet  reappears 
more  distinctly  in  his  own  personality,  as  in  v.  2.  The  news  he 
has  to  declare  excites  in  his  own  heart  mingled  feelings  of  awe 
and  thankfulness,  or,  rather  should  we  say,  the  feeling  of  alarm 
and  dread,  called  forth  by  the  thought  of  the  impending  ruin  of 
the  nation,  pales  before  the  knowledge  that  beneath  and  beyond 
all  this  is  the  unchanging  love  of  God  for  His  people.  The 
word  on  which  the  change  of  thought  hinges  is  clearly  H^^^^,  in 
which  we  seem  to  turn  from  the  mere  terror^  of  the  first  clause 
of  the  verse,  to  the  fixed  hope  and  exultation,  in  spite  of  all 
circumstances  of  gloom  and  distress,  which  animate  the  following 
verses. 

The  second  hemistich  of  the  verse  is  not  free  from  gram- 
matical difficulty ;  some  doubt  exists  as  to  the  way  in  which  we 
should  translate  the  word  "^tpSl.  Noldius  (Cone.  Part.  Heb. 
p.  102  a)  renders  it  by  yet  (tamen) ;  for  this  he  gives  no  parallel 
instance  in  Scripture,  and  I  do  not  think  that  this  meaning  can 
be  at  all  substantiated.  Subsequently  (not.  550),  he  enumerates 
several  other  views,  none  of  which  can  be  considered  satis- 
factory.^ Thus  we  have  (1)  qiiamvis,^  for  which  (p.  100)  the 
references  Num.  xii.  11,  Eccl.  viii.  12,*  2  Sam.  iv.  10,  are  given. 
But  in  the  first  of  these  the  "^tlJb^  is  clearly  the  relative,  used  as 
a  cognate  accusative  ;  in  the  second,  the  meaning  of  because  may 
very  reasonably  be  taken ;  and  in  the  third,  lU^Sl  is  certainly  a 
relative,  referring  to  the  messenger. 

^  So  enthralling  is  the  prophet's  terror,  that  it  is  as  though  the  body  itself 
must  dissolve  before  thoughts  so  terrible :  "  Rottenness  begins  to  enter  into 
my  bones,"  the  future  being  used,  as  often,  as  a  true  imperfect. 

^  His  remark,  "  absque  Tsp^?  LXX.  avaTravaofiai"  is  incorrect,  because  in 
some  way  or  other,  the  nw  has  ?)  e^i<s  fiov  underlying  it. 

^  Gesenius  remarks  {Thes.  p.  165  i)  "raro  est  concedeutis;  etsi"  and 
gives  as  his  sole  example  Eccl.  viii.  10. 

*  The  general  sense  of  v.  11  is  clearly  that  sinners,  because  they  sin  with 
impunity,  think  God's  long  suffering  is  simply  indifference  (2  Pet.  iii.  9);  the 
"ittjx  at  the  beginning  of  the  verse  meaning  because.  But  if,  with  Mendelssohn, 
we  take  {v.  12)  the  Tin^jn  of  God,  with  an  ellipsis  of  iEst,  the  same  will  hold 
good  here,  "  Because  a  sinner  sins  a  hundred  times,  yet  God  still  has  long 
sufferinj'  towards  him." 


The  Psalm  of  Habakkuk.  39 

Again  (2)  the  meaning  certe  is  proposed,  though  I  do  not 
think  that  this  would  give  a  very  convenient  sense  to  the 
passage  in  Habakkuk.  The  examples  given  by  Noldius  are  the 
following,  some  of  which  at  any  rate  are  more  than  question- 
able:  (a)  Eccl.  i.  10,  (6)  1  Sam.  xv.  20,  (c)  Zech.  viii.  23,  (cQ 
Job  ix.  15,  (e)  Isa.  v.  28,  (/)  Isa.  viii.  20.  In  (a),  however, 
ItpiSl  is  undoubtedly  a  relative,  whose  antecedent  is  D*^p7'^V, 
the  nominative  with  a  false  concord  to  r\^Tl ;  in  (6)  we  have 
merely  a  sign  which  introduces  an  oratio  recta,  like  on ;  in  (c) 
and  (/)  the  particle  simply  indicates  the  apodosis  of  the  sen- 
tence; in  (e)  certainly,  and  in  (d)  most  probably,  ^'^^  is  a 
relative.  However,  whether  this  last-named  meaning  be  estab- 
lished or  not,  and  this  may  be  doubted,  it  does  not,  as  we  have 
said,  seem  to  fit  well  into  our  present  passage. 

Yet  again  (3)  some  would  take  it  as  utinam\  so  Luther 
(0  dass  ich  ruhen  mochte),  on  which  and  on  others  Noldius 
justly  remarks,  "  Egregie,  si  significationes  illse  sunt  usitatse." 

Another  view,  which  is  perfectly  compatible  with  grammar 
and  which  is  frequently  taken  here,  is  to  take  the  lt!?b^  as  "in 
that,"  "  because."  The  objection  to  this  seems  to  me  to  lie  in  the 
meaning  of  Jl^^b^,  which  is  not  simply  "  to  wait."  If  it  were, 
the  sense  would  be  plain,  "  I  tremble  where  I  stand,  because  I 
must  await,  there  being  no  escape,  the  day  of  calamity  that 
approaches."  Still,  the  root  Hl^  hardly  means  this,  or  rather  it 
means  much  more  ;  it  is  not  the  trembling  waiting  for  an  irrevo- 
cable doom,  but  the  calm,  patient  acceptance  of  that  doom,  the 
courage  which  accepts  the  inevitable,  but  regards  it  with 
peaceful  unruffled  composure.  It  is  the  heroic  calm  of  Gordon 
waiting  for  the  end  at  Khartoum,  or  the  peaceful  composure  of 
Bishop  Ridley,  which  could  enable  him  to  sleep  tranquilly  on 
the  night  before  his  fiery  martyrdom. 

Thus  I  believe  that  "Itp^Jl  may  best  be  taken  as  the  simple 
relative,  "  I  who  will  patiently  and  silently  wait  for  the  day  of 
trouble."!     This  H^!^  Di''   is  then  further  defined;   it  is  the 

T  T 

^  The  general  thought  of  the  expression  reminds  one  of  the  'cjp:  n;nn 
(Ps.  Ixii.  2) ;  and  the  '->  after  m3S!  of  the  similar  construction  Isa.  xli.  1. 


40  The  Psalm  of  Hahakkuk 

invasion  of  the  Chaldsean  foe,  "  even  for  the  coming  up  against 
[the]^  people  of  him  who  shall  invade  him  in  troops  (or  assail 
him)."  The  ^  of  PiwVh  is  parallel  to  and  exegetical  of  that  of 
Qi^^S,  and  DV,  in  spite  of  the  absence  of  the  article,  is  clearly 
equivalent  to  D^H  or  "^7^^.  If  this  be  assumed,  then  the  sub- 
ject of  ^^l^^"),  before  which  we  may  supply  an  *)t)pb^,  will  be  the 
Chaldgeans  pouring  in  with  their  hosts. 

w.  17 — 19.  We  have  said  that  the  word  Vi^^^  gives  the  clue 
to  the  transition  of  thought.  Amid  all  the  calamities  that  will^ 
attend  the  invasion,  amid  devastation  and  havoc,  with  utter 
desolation  where  once  was  a  very  garden  of  Eden,  the  prophet 
will  rest  He  will  rest,  because,  in  spite  of  all,  he  is  able  to 
rejoice  in  God  his  Saviour,  and  knows  that  He  is  his  strength 
and  protection. 

^  The  absence  of  the  article  here,  where  it  would  seem  logically  necessary, 
may  be  paralleled  by  bip"?  in  the  same  verse. 

2  The  future  tense  rrjon  clearly  influences  the  whole  verse;  the  disasters 
are  yet  to  come,  though  in  the  later  verbs  the  undoubted  event  is  viewed  as 
really  come,  and  the  prophet,  like  an  apocalyptic  seer,  gazes  upon  the  actual 
desolation. 


CHAPTER  11. 

The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

It  is  much  to  be  regretted  that  the  amount  of  help  to  be  got 
from  the  Septuagint  for  either  the  criticism  or  exegesis  of  this 
Psalm  is  almost  nil.  The  difficulties  of  the  poem  were  evidently 
far  beyond  the  powers  of  the  translator  to  cope  with  them ;  the 
general  scope  and  drift  of  the  poem  were  certainly  very  faintly 
perceived  by  him,  and  the  subtle  delicacies  of  thought,  in  which, 
in  spite  of  the  exceeding  differences  between  the  two  languages, 
much  might  have  been  achieved  by  a  competent  translator,  are 
as  a  whole  impartially  slurred  over. 

When  to  this  we  must  add  the  existence  of  a  large  crop  of 
absolute  and  palpable  blunders,  and  also  a  perceptible  element 
of  corruption  of  text,  it  is  evident  that  a  translation  with  such  a 
record  is  one  which  can  only  be  used  with  the  utmost  caution  as 
an  exponent  of  the  difficulties  of  the  Psalm. 

The  Masoretic  text  may  not  indeed  be  absolutely  faultless ; 
but,  thanks  to  the  reverent  care  which  has  been  lavished  on  it, 
we  believe  that  we  have  in  all  essentials  (nay  probably  with  but 
the  slightest  imperfections)  the  true  text  of  this  wonderful 
poem;  while  this,  its  most  ancient  translation,  is  but  a  poor 
travesty,  like  a  blundering  schoolboy's  exercise. 

Thus  work  on  the  Greek  text  of  the  Psalm  must  turn  largely 
on  an  examination  of  the  curious  mistranslations  of  which  it  is 
full,  and  of  the  corruptions  of  the  text.  Even  blunders,  how- 
ever, more  than  two  thousand  years  old,  become  venerable ;  and 
all  the  more  when  it  is  remembered  how  almost  entirely  Old 
Testament  exegesis  in  the  early  Christian  Church  rested  upon 
the  Septuagint,  till  Jerome  brought  a  higher  learning  to  bear. 
The  exposition  of  this  Psalm  in  the  de  Civitate  Dei^  of  Augustine 

'  xviii.32. 


42  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psahn. 

furnishes  an  instance  of  eloquent  spiritual  teaching,  where  the 
premises  are  often  absolutely  untenable.^ 

[All  the  readings  cited  from  the  three  great  uncials  have  been 
verified, — in  the  case  of  A  from  the  autotype,  and  in  those  of 
^^B  from  the  editions  of  Tischendorf  and  of  Vercellone  and  Cozza 
respectively.  The  Complutensian  and  Aldine  texts  have  been  cited, 
so  far  as  it  seemed  necessary.  The  evidence  of  the  cursives,  when 
given,  is  taken  from  Holmes  and  Parsons. 

Four  of  these  may  be  specially  referred  to  (Codd.  23,  62,  86, 
147)  as  giving  us  a  totally  different  translation,  which  keeps  on  the 
whole  fairly  close  to  the  Hebrew.'^  One  of  these  (Cod.  86),  a 
Barberini  MS.,  was  known  to  Montfaucon,  who  says  of  it  {Hexapl.  ii. 
377) :  "  Esse  vero  Septimam  Editionem  vix  est  quod  dubitemus,"  and 
cites  it  throughout  the  chapter  as  d\\o<;. 

Two  versions  of  the  LXX.  have  been  steadily  kept  in  view 
throughout,  the  Old  Latin  and  the  Syro-Hexaplaric.  In  cases  of 
citation  from  the  latter,  the  text,  as  given  by  Middeldorpf,  has  been 
verified  by  comparison  with  the  photo-lithographic  reproduction  of 
Dr.  Ceriani. 

The  Latin  has,  however,  in  one  sense,  a  higher  interest  than  the 
Syriac,  quite  apart  from  its  value  as  a  translation,  from  the  way  in 
which  it  entered  both  into  the  theology  and  liturgies  of  the  Western 
Church. 

For  the  Old  Latin  of  this  Psalm,  I  have  mainly  relied  on  the 
text  given  by  Sabatier  (which  is  that  embodied  in  Jerome's  Com- 

'  Take  as  an  example  a  comment  on  v.  2,  "  Montem  umbrosum  atque 
condensum,  quamvis  multis  modis  possit  intelligi,  libentius  acceperim 
Scripturarum  altitudinem  divinarum,  quibus  prophetatus  est  Christus."  Or, 
on  vv.  6.  7,  "  Ingressus  (Bternos  ejus  pro  lahoribus  vidi ;  hoe  est,  non  sine 
mercede  seternitatis  laborem  caritatis  vidi." 

2  This  remark  applies  to  Habakkuk  iii.  only.  Both  in  the  rest  of 
Habakkuk  and  in  the  prophets  generally  the  text  of  the  four  cursives  is  simply 
that  of  the  LXX.  The  last  three  constantly,  but  by  no  means  invariably,  agree 
together  (Cod.  23  often  differing),  and  they  frequently  display,  some  or  all  of 
them,  a  markedly  correct  text.  I  may  take  as  illustrations  the  following  cases, 
where  the  Roman  text  is  certainly  corrupt :  Hos.  iii.  1,  omit  /texa  (23) ;  x.  13, 
apixaat  (all);  xiii.  3,  KUTrvoSoxy^  (23),  (iKpi'Sivv  (the  rest).  Amos  i.  11, 
jLiTjTpav  (86);  viii.  6,  om.  Kalprim.  (62,  147).  Micah  i.  14,  Stvaet^  (all),  16, 
^rjprjaiv,  clearly  an  itacism  for  ^vptjaiu  (all  but  23) :  vi.  7,  x^'^I^^PP^^  (l^'^)* 
Hab.  i.  13,  ov  dvi/rjarj  (or  et),  (all  but  23). 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  43 

mentary  on  Habakkuk),  and  the  readings  cited  by  him.  I  have  also 
had  regard  to  the  text  given  by  Cardinal  Thomasius  in  his 
Fsalterium  cum  Canticis,'^  to  that  contained  in  the  Mozarabic 
Breviary,-  and  to  a  small  portion  found  in  the  Roman  Missal.^  In 
addition  to  these  is  the  text  contained  in  the  exposition  of  Augustine 
referred  to  above. 

Lastly,  an  examination  has  been  made  of  all  citations  of  the 
Psalm  in  the  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  Greek  and  Latin,  though  it 
cannot  be  said  that  anything  of  importance  has  been  yielded 
therefrom.] 

V.  1.  fiera  wS/'}?.  For  this  translation  of  ]VW,  reference  may 
be  made  to  the  preceding  chapter. 

V.  2.  I  believe  the  original  reading  of  the  first  two  clauses 
to  have  been,  Kvpte,  elcraia^Koa  Tr)v  aKoi]v  crov  Kvpte^^  Karevorjaa 
la  epya  aov.  Thus  ^Tlb^'l''  is  treated  as  though  it  were  ^'fl'^b^'J^ ; 
and  the  [/cat]  i(j)ol37]6r]v^  and  [/cat]  i^earriv  are  duplicate  render- 
ings of  ^ri^^"1'^,  with  its  proper  spelling. 

Again,  to  obtain  the  next  two  clauses,  we  must  treat  the 
Hebrew  as  if  it  were  XV^^T}  Q^^tl?  ihpn,  D^^JH  D^^tp  l^j^^l 
The  <yva)adr)(jr)  is  of  course  a  duplicate  with  eiru'yvaiaOrjar),  which 
has  been  put  in  where  it  has  no  business. 

Moreover,  the  clauses  ev  rS  iyjl^etv  ra  errj  e7n<yp(0(T67]arj,  and 
iv  TM  irapelvai  tov  Kaiphv^  dvaSei'x^dtjarj  are  duplicates,  the  second 
being  clearly  the  earlier.  The  Syro-Hexaplaric  obelizes  ev  tS 
irapelvat  ....  rr^v  '^v)(')]v  fxov.^ 

^  pp.  694  sqq. 

2  Here  it  forms  the  Canticle  at  Lauds  on  the  3rd  Sunday  in  Advent. 

^  vv.  2,  3,  occur  as  a  Tractus  on  Good  Friday. 

^  The  second  ^vpie  is  omitted  by  ab.  It  is  found,  however,  in  «,  in  19 
of  Holmes  and  Parsons'  cursives,  in  the  Complutensian  and  Aldine  editions, 
and  in  the  Syro-Hexaplaric  version.  It  is  also  found  in  the  verse  as  cited 
by  Origen  {de  Orat.  Lihellus,  c.  14 ;  Vol.  xvii.  144,  ed.  Lommatzsch)  and 
others,  and  is  manifestly  genuine. 

^  Karauoew  often  stands  for  n«"\,  see  Gen.  xlii.  9;  Exod.  ii.  11,  xix.  21; 
Num.  xxxii.  8,  9  ;  Isa.  v.  12. 

6  evXa^y^Orjv,  Codd.  62,  86,  147. 

7  n:^  is  rendered  by  Kaip6<s  in  Jud.  x.  8  (Cod.  b). 

*  The  whole  is,  however,  cited  by  Irenseus  (iii.  16.  7). 


44  The  Septuagioit  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

In  the  remaining  clause  of  the  verse,  iv  rw  rapa'^OrjvaL  tyjv 
-^vxnv  fJLov  and  iv  opyfj  eXeou?  are  duplicates,  the  former  being 
the  older.  U"^  is  treated  as  though  an  infinitive  construct/  and 
nm  as  though  ^m^.'^ 

It  cannot  be  doubted  that  in  the  mind  of  the  original 
translator,  the  Bvo  ^(oa  of  this  verse  were  the  Cherubim  over- 
shadowing the  Mercy-seat  (see  Exod.  xxv.  22,  Num.  vii.  89),  and 
so  it  is  understood,  e.g.  by  Theodoret  (de  S.  Trin.  Dial,  i.,  Vol. 
V.  943,  ed.  Schulze  and  Noesselt).  Various  other  interpreta- 
tions, however,  have  been  put  forth  by  various  Fathers,  all  alike 
impossible  as  an  exegesis  of  the  true  meaning  of  the  passage. 

Tertullian  {adv.  Marc.  iv.  22)  takes  the  Svo  fwa  to  be  Moses 
and  Elias,  and  sees  in  the  passage  a  reference  to  our  Lord's 
Transfiguration.  Augustine  (de  Civ.  Dei  xviii.  32),  besides  the 
above,  suggests  also  the  two  Testaments  and  the  two  thieves ; 
and  Jerome  (comm.  in  loc.)  adds  yet  other  views. 

One  other  interpretation  may  be  noted  as  curious,  the  view 
which  understands  the  two  animals  of  the  Ox  and  the  Ass 
standing  by  the  manger  in  which  the  Saviour  was  laid.  See 
Tillemont,  Memoires,  i.  447  (Note  5, ''  Sur  le  boeuf  et  Vasne  de 
la  Creche''),  and  the  illustrations  given  in  Smith  and  Cheetham's 
Diet,  of  Christian  Antiquities,  s.  v.  Nativity,  The,  in  Art. 

We  may  remark  lastly  that  certain  Fathers  have  stated,  or 
implied,  that  the  reading  should  be,  not  Suo  ^(i)(ov,  but  hvo  ^comv, 
"two  lives."  (So  Euseb.  Dem.  Ev.  1.  vi.,  c.  15,  §  4;  Cyr.  Hier. 
Cat.  xii.,  c.  20 ;  see  also  Origen,  de  Princi'p.  i.  4,  Vol.  xxi.  75). 
The  "two  lives"  are  explained  (Cyril,  I.e.)  of  our  Lord's  life 
before  His  resurrection  and  after  it,  and  in  other  ways. 

v.  3.  KaTaoKLOv  Baaeo^^  {Sacreoo^;  A^).  It  can  hardly  be 
doubted  that  we  must  view  this  as  a  duplicate  rendering,  or 
rather  pair  of  duplicates,  of  pt^Q.  As  is  not  surprising  in  such 
a  case  of  conflation,  several  texts  omit  different  individual 
renderings.  Thus  fifteen  cursives,  the  Aldine  and  the  Syro- 
Hexaplaric,  and  some  texts  of  the  Old  Latin,  omit  ^apdv,  the 

^  Tapaaaeiv  stands  for  m  in  this  chapter,  v.  16. 
2  See  Gen.  xli.  8 :  Exod.  xxxv.  21. 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  45 

Complutensian  and  three  cursives  omit  haaeo^y  and  three  cur- 
sives^ omit  KaracncLov  Saaeo^i.  Irenseus  (iii.  20.  4)  has  simply 
"  de  monte  Effrem/'  but  the  same  Father  (iv.  33.  11)  "de  monte 
umbroso  et  condenso." 

As  to  the  manner  in  which  this  curious  rendering  has  been 
obtained,  several  suggestions  have  been  made,  which  can  hardly 
be  possible.  Such  are  the  views  that  the  Greek  is  a  corruption 
of  Smcr/ceSacreo)?,  representing  some  noun  derived  from  "I^D  or 
y^Q ;  or  of  i^  opov^  So^t]^,  i.e.  ^^B.  Hardly  more  reasonable  is 
the  view  that  KaraaKiov  and  Ba(Teo<;  are  two  translations  of 
71*^^$  or  n"J^^Q,  read  mistakenly  for  ]*Jb^Q.^ 

I  venture  to  suggest  the  following  as  at  any  rate  possible. 
The  word  KardaKLo^  occurs  elsewhere  three  times :  (1)  for  p^*^ 
(of  a  tree),  Jer.  ii.  20;  (2)  for  rta.V^  (of  trees),  Ezek.  xx.'28; 
(3)  for  nb^!^  (of  mountains),  Zech.  i.  8.*  Again,  Sao-u?  stands 
for  nilj^  (of  trees).  Lev.  xxiii.  40,  Neh.  viii.  15;  for  TM^'IV.  (of 
an  oak),  Ezek.  vi.  13  ;  for  l^y^'^  (of  trees),  Deut.  xii.  2,  Isa.  Ivii.  5  ; 
and  for  ^^V'^  or  ■^;^\2;  (of  a  hairy  man).  Gen.  xxv.  25,  xxvii.  H, 
23 ;  4  Kings  i.  8.  From  the  common  ground  in  all  this,  it  will 
clearly  appear  how  completely  /cardaKLo^  and  Saav^;  are  akin  in 
their  usage. 

Now  if  our  present  passage  be  compared  with  Deut.  xxxiii.  2 
and  Judges  v.  4,  5,  we  find  in  all  alike  the  same  imagery  as  to 
the  Manifestation  of  God's  glory.  In  the  former  of  the  two 
parallels,  Sinai,  Seir,  and  Mount  Paran  are  associated,  and  in 
the  latter,  Seir,  Edom,  and  Sinai.  Yet  all  three  passages  show 
that  we  must  look  for  some  deeper  idea  of  association  than  a 
geographical  one,  for  Seir  and  Sinai  are  far  apart.  Teman  is  a 
district  or  city  of  Edom,  and  therefore  to  be  asssociated  with 
Edom.     Paran,  of  course,  may  be  used  generally  of  the  great 

^  This  is  perhaps  not  strictly  relevant,  as  the  three  cursives  are,  Codd.  62, 
86,  147. 

'^  So  Agellius,  p.  144. 

^  It  is  worth  noting  the  one  other  rendering  of  niiy,  avaKcos  (of  trees) 
Ezek.  vi.  13. 

*  The  Q"'Dnnn  of  the  Heb.  has  been  misread  as  ri'T(r\  in  the  LXX. 


46  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

wilderness  of  Paran,  but  it  is  more  probable  that  it  refers  to  some 
individual  height  in  the  Sinaitic  peninsula.  In  any  case  names 
are  used  in  the  present  passage  which  a  comparison  of  the  two 
other  passages  justifies  us  in  viewing  as  being,  if  not  geographi- 
cally, yet  at  any  rate  in  recognised  poetic  imagery,  cognate  with 
Seir.  The  name  of  this  mountain  means  "  rough  "  or  "  shaggy," 
and,  whatever  may  be  the  case  now,  it  would  be  fitly  applied  to 
hills  covered  with  trees  and  bushes,  rather  than  to  hills  rough 
or  rugged  in  a  more  general  sense.  There  is  also  a  neighbouring 
line  of  hills,  "  Mount  Halak  "  (Josh.  xi.  17),  i.e.  "  smooth  "  or 
"  bare."  The  two  adjectives  Ti^ti^  and  phtl  are  used  to  distin- 
guish Esau  and  Jacob. 

Now  if  Paran  or  Teman  were  viewed  in  poetic  imagery  as 
virtually  the  same  with  Seir,  then,  the  meaning  of  this  last 
name  being  what  it  is,  KardaKto^i  and  Sacrz;?  might  well  have 
been  descriptive  epithets,  possibly  at  first  marginal  remarks, 
ultimately  finding  their  way  into  the  text. 

Before  leaving  this  passage,  it  is  perhaps  worth  noting  a 
curious  translation  of  e/c  Qaifjudv  found  in  some  texts  of  the  Old 
Latin,  a  Lihano.  This  occurs  e.g.  in  the  text  of  Card.  Thomasius, 
and  in  those  contained  in  the  Mozarabic  Breviary  and  the  Roman 
Missal.  So  also  Greg.  Magn.  Moral,  xxxiii.  1.  Thomasius  sug- 
gests that  it  is  an  error  for  a  Libanoto.  Rather  should  it  be 
a  Lihonoto,  i.e.  diro  Xl^ovotov.  There  does  not,  it  is  true,  seem 
to  be  any  trace  of  this  reading,  but  the  three  cursives,  Codd.  62, 
86,  147,  read  diro  \c^6<i. 

V.  3.  dperr).  This  stands  for  I^Tl  also  in  Zech.  vi.  13.  For 
this  our  four  cursives  read  rj  €v7rp67r6La[oYrr]v evir.]  77)986^779  avrov. 

V.  4.  Wero  is  simply  Dtl)  for  DtT.^ 

—  djaTrrjaiv  treats  tViJ^  "  covert "  from  the  root  H!!)!, 
^^in,  as  though  from  lin  or  IHt^.^ 

^  The  reading  of  the  "four  cursives"  eTretnrjpiKTai  [aTreaTyptKrat,  Cod.  23] 
is  presumably  due  to  the  same  cause. 

2  Presumably  the  latter;  for  on  the  one  occurrence  of  the  verb  iin 
(Deut.  xxxiii.  2),  it  is  rendered  ecpetauTo ;  whereas  in  more  than  150  instances 
d<ya7rdio  represents  int<.  Also  in  all  the  seven  instances  where  fh^dTrrjffif 
occurs  in  the  canonical  books,  it  represents  niri!?*. 


V. 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  47 

4.  Kparaiav  is  in  duplicate  with  lax^o^  avrov,  as  though 


V.  5.  X6709  is  of  course  ^yi  in  place  of  ni^l.  Here  the  four 
cursives  read  irrcbai^,  which  represents  the  Masoretic  pointing. 

—  ireSia  is  presumably  due  to  a  different  division  of  the 
letters,  V^:in  I ^DtZ^h  See  e.g.  Deut.  i.  7.  It  has  been  sug- 
gested that  TreSla  represents  "'pUJ,  which  view  has  the  advantage 
of  leaving  the  ^  to  represent  the  Kara ;  but  this  word  is  never 
rendered  TreSla  in  the  LXX.-^ 

The  curious  error  ek  iraihelav  has  entered  into  no  less  than 
seventeen  cursive  MSS.,  besides  the  Aldine  text.  Theodoret 
also  {Int.  in  Psal.  84 ;  Vol.  i.  1208)  has  this  reading,  on  which 
he  comments. 

Some  have  suggested,  most  needlessly,  that  irehia  is  a  cor- 
ruption of  ire-reLvd.  The  four  cursives,  already  mentioned  as 
having  so  individual  a  text,  do  indeed  read  to,  y^kr^iGTa  tmv 
irerebVMv,  but  the  rendering  Treretud  is  simply  due  to  an 
altogether  independent  view  as  to  the  meaning  of  P])^"^,  and 
agrees  with  the  rendering  of  the  Peshito  in  the  present  passage.^ 
So  too  Aquila  appears  to  have  read  iTTrjvov  (volatile,  Jerome), 
and  Symmachus,Theodotion,  and  the  Quinta,  ireT€Lv6v{volucrem, 
id.).  Again,  in  the  well-known  verse  of  Job  (v.  7),  "  Man  is 
born  unto  trouble,  as  the  sparks  fly  upwards,"  the  r|tr")  is  by 
some  authorities  rendered  ''young  birds." ^  We  are  not  now 
concerned  to  discuss  the  correctness  of  this  view ;  it  is  sufficient 
to  say  that  it  was  current.*  It  is  quite  clear,  however,  that  the 
existing  text  of  the  LXX.  has  had  an  altogether  different  origin. 

^  Still,  HQ^:  is  rendered  ire^ivov,  Isa.  xiii.  2. 

2  As  also  in  Job  v.  7,  but  not  in  Ps.  Ixxvii.  48  (Ixxviii.  Heb.). 

^  So  Aquila,  viol  Trrr^vov;  Symmachus,  to.  Teicva  tCov  ireTeivwv;  and  the 
LXX.,  veoaaol  r^viro?.  So  also  in  Psalm  {I.e.),  where,  though  the  LXX.  has 
TTvpi,  Symm.  has  olivpoi^,  and  Aquila,  it  would  seem,  7reTeiuo7<t. 

**  There  seems  no  need  to  appeal  to  Arabic  to  get  the  necessary  root- 
meaning  ;  that  of  "  flash  "  is  sufficient.     We  may  compare  Tennyson's 

"...  the  curlews  call, 
Dreary  gleams  about  the  moorland." 


48  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

V.  6.  iaaXevOrj.  The  derivation  of  *T7P*^  from  I'TO  gives  a 
somewhat  tame  sense  "  he  measured " ;  and  the  view  of  the 
LXX.,  which  implies  a  root  1^'0,  akin  to  IDI^,  seems  to  be  more 
to  the  point.^  It  should  be  noted  that  there  is  no  second  case 
of  the  Poel  of  *no  in  the  Bible.  Further,  the  existence  of  the 
Piel  IID  in  the  sense  of  measuring,  is  an  objection  to  the 
existence  of  the  Poel  in  the  same  sense.  Moreover,  the  Targum, 
which  renders  ^''th^,  takes  the  same  view  as  the  LXX. 

—  8c€Td/ci]  [*)ri^y.  This  is  simply  due  to  a  confusion 
between  *ir\^  and  ^jll     See  Ezek.  xxiv.  11 ;  Nah.  i.  6. 

The  "  four  cursives,"  together  with  the  Complutensian,  read 
here  i^eUacre  (or  i^rjKaae).  It  is  suggested  in  Schleusner's 
Lexicon  {s.v.  i^etKa^o))  that  this  is  an  error  for.efeTTyfe.  I  must 
confess  that  this  does  not  strike  me  as  at  all  probable.  If  there 
were  a  corruption  of  text,  it  would  be  more  reasonable  to  suggest 
e^erlva^e,  which  stands  for  *)ri^  in  2  Sam.  xxii.  33,  Dan.  iv.  11. 
Obviously,  however,  there  has  been  simply  a  confusion  with 
*iri^5,  from  the  root  ^^^\,  "  to  search  out,  or  investigate  " ;  and 
elKa^co  is  found  in  this  sense  in  Jer.  xxvi.  43  [xlvi.  23,  Heb.].*^ 

—  iraKijaav  [^Htt?]-  This  translation  has  doubtless  been 
obtained  through  a  confusion  with  the  Chaldee  root  H^'UJ 
(liquefactus  est).  See  Exod.  xvi.  21  {Targ.  Ps.  Jon.  and 
Jerushalmi).     So  also  in  Syriac,  Wisd.  xvi.  27 ;  2  Pet.  iii.  12. 

—  /3/a  [1^,  perpetuity].  The  simplest  change  is  to  suppose 
a  confusion  with  fy,  taken  adverbially.^ 

—  TTopeia^i  alwvia^  avrov.  This  accusative  must  presumably 
be  understood  as  an  accusative  of  reference,  "in  view  of  His 
goings."^     We  might  compare  the  common  use  of  (f)ol3e2a6ac 

^  The  "  four  cursives,"  which  read  Sie/tieTpyaeu,  refer  the  word  to  the 
former  root. 

^  If  another  suggestion  is  sought,  one  might  propose  e^yraae,  from 
i^erd^aj  in  the  above  sense,  but  this  is  unnecessary. 

'  For  ra  opy,  our  four  cursives  read  al  vdrrai,  which  also  represents  rn?33 
in  Isa.  xl.  12;  see  also  Song  iv.  6  (Symm.). 

**  The  Syro-Hexaplaric  makes  it  simpler  by  prefixing  to  "goings"  the 
preposition  X. 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  49 

with  the  accusative,  which  in  strictness  would  be  "to  feel 
internal  alarm  in  view  of"  this  or  that  object.  Thus  here,  "the 
eternal  hills  melted  before  His- eternal  goings."  iTaKTjaav 
would    thus    bo    a    more    vivid    and    pictorial    equivalent   for 

V.  7.  avrl  KOTToov  {ttoucov  in  the  Complutensian).  What  the 
translators  understood  by  their  own  Greek,  or  whether  indeed 
it  conveyed  any  very  definite  meaning,  may  perhaps  be  doubted, 
and  one  can  readily  understand  the  diversity  of  interpretation 
that  has  arisen.  Jerome's  view  (comm.  in  loc),  which  applies 
alike  to  the  Hebrew  and  the  Greek,  has  been  already  mentioned. 
It  amounts  to  this,  that  men  who  devote  their  lives  to  the 
acquisition  of  gain,  and  to  base  pursuits  become  the  abode  of 
demons  instead  of  being  the  Temples  of  God.  Augustine  (de 
Civ.  Dei,  xviii.  32)  punctuates  the  words  differently,  "  Ingressus 
seternos  eius  pro  laboribus  vidi,"^  and  it  is  worth  noting  that 
Cod.  A  of  the  LXX.  has  the  colon  after  aloovioi,  and  not  at  the 
end  of  the  verse ;  though  of  course,  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
Hebrew,  such  a  grouping  is  impossible.  Augustine's  interpre- 
tation of  the  clause  is  "non  sine  mercede  aeternitatis  laborem 
caritatis  aspexi." 

In  the  Latin  text  of  Jerome  the  iropela^  has  been  viewed  as 
a  genitive  ("  Colles  sseculi  itineris  sempiterni  ejus"),  which 
recalls  Hitzig's  view  as  to  the  Hebrew,  referred  to  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter.  The  form  in  the  Mozarabic  Breviary  goes  more 
widely  afield,  "itinera  ssecularia  ejus  pro  laboribus.  Viderunt . . .," 
though  the  cause  of  the  blunder  is  obvious. 

In  the  Psalter  of  Thomasius  and  other  Latin  texts  we  have 
"prse  (not  pro)  laboribus."  This,  however,  though  giving  a 
striking  sense,  has  been  clearly  altered  from  a  text  which  read 
pro. 

—  Kal  at  aKTjval.  The  kol  al  is  suspicious.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  Hebrew  calling  for  fcal,  and  its  position  after  the 
verb  is  awkward;  also  the  article  before  crKrjval  might  very  well 
be  left  out  according  to  Septuagintal  usage,  due  to  the  Hebrew 

^  So  too  the  Cod.  S.  Germ,  and  others  cited  by  Sabatier. 


50  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

idiom,  and  so  the  aKrjvcofJLaTa  in  the  preceding  clause.  When 
further  we  find  that  thirteen  cursives  and  the  Aldine  omit  the 
alj  one  cursive  the  kol,  and  three  cursives  the  kol  aij  I  think 
that  it  is  quite  possible  that  the  two  words  are  due  to  a  sort  of 
dittographia  with  the  last  syllable  of  the  preceding  word.^ 

V.  9.  eveT€Lva<;.  The  past  tense  is  read  by  Codd.  ^^B,  but 
^^ca,  cb^  Q^Q  other  uncial  MS.  (xii.  of  Holmes  and  Parsons), 
twenty-one  cursives,  and  the  Aldine  read  the  future  evreveh. 
The  latter  reading,  which  is  called  for  by  the  Hebrew,  is  also 
that  of  Origen  {Set.  in  Threnos;  Vol.  xiii.  190). 

The  translation  is  of  course  not  literal,  but  is  a  very  obvious 
Midrash.  The  "baring"  of  the  bow  is  drawing  it  completely 
out  of  its  case,  that  it  may  be  used  in  action.  Thus  ivrelveiv 
stands  ordinarily  for  ^^1  (as  in  Isa.  v.  28) ;  it  also  stands  for 
^ti^D  (3  Kings  xxii.  34,  in  A,  but  not  in  B). 

The  Complutensian  reads  e/cretVa?  iKreveU,  but  to  suggest 
that  this  is  a  likelier  translation  than  the  preceding  is  absurd, 
when  we  find  that  all  the  passages  (about  twenty  in  number) 
where  ivreiveLv  is  used  refer  to  the  bow,  while  of  the  numerous 
instances  of  eKreiveiv  (ordinarily  used  of  the  stretching  out  of 
the  hand)  there  is  not  one. 

—  eirl  o-KrJTTTpa  Xiyec  Kvpio^.  The  Xeyeu  is  of  course  got 
by  reading  *^^t^  for  *^?^j^,  the  Kvpio^  being  an  obvious  Midrashic 
insertion.     It  is  obelized  in  the  Syro-Hexaplaric  text. 

The  rest  of  the  clause  is  not  so  obvious ;  the  following  seems 
to  me  at  least  possible.  First  as  regards  the  reading :  one  uncial 
MS.  (xii.  of  Holmes  and  Parsons),  nine  cursives,  the  Compluten- 
sian, and  Origen  [u.s.)  read  eirl  ra  crKrJTTTpa.  Now,  may  not 
the  iirl  (and  especially  if  with  the  above  we  read  iirl  to)  be  a 
corruption  of  eTrra,  due  to  the  translator's  confusion  of  Jli^l^J 
with  r)V5^  ?  He  may  originally  have  put  eVt  eirTa  aKfjirrpa, 
and  the  iirl  having  somehow  dropped,  the  eiTTa  may  have  been 
emended  into  eVt  ra  and  so  to  eVt.  Thus  the  verse  as  viewed 
by  the  original  translator  would  refer  to  God's  judgements  done 
upon  the  "  seven  nations  "  of  Canaan  (Deut.  vii.  1,  Acts  xiii.  19). 

^  It  should  be  noted  that  the  conjunction  is  given  in  the  Syro-Hexaplaric. 


The  8eptuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  51 

One  is  bound  to  add  that  this  corruption,  if  indeed  it  be  a 
corruption,  must  be  of  exceeding  antiquity.  There  is  practically 
identity  of  text  here  in  all  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  except  in  the 
"four  cursives,"  and  the  variation  in  them  has  no  relevance 
here.  Of  the  versions  of  the  LXX.,  the  Latin  texts  are  unani- 
mous in  reading  sceptra,  so  too  the  Syro-Hexaplaric.  The 
Armenian  renders  the  words  by  upon  power  or  dominion} 

It  remains  to  speak  now  of  the  text  of  the  four  cursives, 
Codd.  23,  62,  86,  147.  The  first  hemistich  runs  in  these, 
o  Trpoe/Srj^i  e^Tj^epOrj  to  to^ou  aov  e'xppraaa^  Ta<;  ^o\i,8a<;  tt;? 
(fiaperpa^  avrov}  The  irpoe^r]^  can  hardly  have  been  anything 
else  but  a  marginal  variant  for  the  ave/Brj^  which  these  four 
MSS.  have  in  the  preceding  clause,  where  the  current  text  has 
iTTL^rjarj.  The  preceding  word  is  given  in  Holmes  and  Parsons 
as  o,  but  it  seems  to  me  best  to  take  it  as  o,  the  sign  for  the 
LXX. ;  and  to  suppose  that  when  the  various  reading  was 
embodied  in  the  text,  it  carried  its  critical  mark  with  it.^ 

Of  the  following  words  which  call  for  remark,  i^rjyepOr]  is 
due  to  a  confusion  between  '^'^^y  and  y\'^ ;  ixoprdcra^  is  got 
from  nl^^tr  misread  as  n^^ltp ;  l3okLSa<;  stands  for  JlltS^,  taken 
in  the  sense  of  "rods,"  the  ideas  of  a  rod,  and  of  a  spear  or 
javelin,  being  sufficiently  cognate.  There  remains  ^a/jerpa?, 
which  must  somehow  be  deduced  from  ^72^-  I  can  propose 
nothing  better  than  that  there  has  been  a  confusion  with  *^!^b«^, 
as  suggested  in  Schleusner  (s.  v.  (paperpa),  the  latter  word 
meaning  not  only  the  collected  treasures,  but  the  containing 
receptacle*  (see  e.g.  Jer.  1.  25,  "armoury"  E.  V.).     Thus  we 

^  I  owe  this  statement  as  to  the  Armenian,  and  also  the  other  references 
to  the  same  version  in  this  chapter,  to  the  kindness  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  S.  C. 
Malan. 

2  Cod.  33  has  avrr)^,  but  this  is,  I  suppose,  a  mere  lapsus  plumaB.  It  also 
omits  the  xas. 

'  It  is  worth  noting  that  one  at  least  of  these  four  cursives  (Cod.  86)  has 
itself  various  readings  in  its  margin  from  Aquila,  Symmachus,  etc.,  so  that  the 
parent  MS.  would  doubtless  also  have  them. 

^  In  1  Chron.  xxviii.  12,  the  LXX.  renders  it  by  aTroOrjKTf. 


52  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

should  be  doing  no  violence  to  language  in  calling  a  quiver  a 
"  store-house  "  of  arrows.^ 

V.  10.  XaoL  This  may  be  due  to  an  actual  confusion  between 
D*^*^n  and  D''?^^,  but  it  is  perhaps  more  likely  a  change  for  a 
supposed  improvement  in  the  sense  (c/.  Exod.  xix.  18).  The 
"  four  cursives  "  have  ra  opr]. 

—  a/cop7rl^(op  vhara  iropela^.  The  first  word^  clearly  pre- 
supposes TV\)  for  'Cr)\,  and  iropeia^  may  be  "^1V>  ^^ere  and  in 
Nah.  i.  8.  In  that  case,  we  can  view  the  D^'P  as  an  instance  of 
an  absolute  form,  where  a  construct  might  be  looked  for. 

As  regards  the  structure  of  the  Greek  sentence,  it  would 
seem  that  we  must  view  o-fcopTrl^cov  as  a  nominative  absolute, 
forming  a  kind  of  apposition  to  the  foregoing  sentence,^  "  Scat- 
tering as  Thou  dost  the  rushing  waters."* 

The  comments  of  Augustine  (de  Civ.  Dei,  I.  c.)  and  Jerome 
(comm.  in  loc.)  show,  at  any  rate,  that  they  took  the  construc- 
tion in  this  way,  though  the  "  hac  atque  hac  dispergis  fluenta 
doctrinse"  of  the  former,  and  the  "Deus  omnes  aquas  quae  a 
perversis  dogmatibus  conculcatse  sunt,  disperget "  of  the  latter 
are  curiously  different.  See  also  "  disperges "  in  Tert.  {adv. 
Marc.  iv.  39). 

—  v'v/ro?  ....  Here  Dl"^  is  treated  as  a  substantive  instead 
of  doing  duty  as  an  adverb ;  and  (fiavTaaia^i  has  been  obtained 
from  TVy^  by  changing  1  into  *^,  and  treating  the  result  as 
some  derivative  of  nt^*^.  The  same  word  occurs  again  in  ii.  18, 
where  it  stands  for  n^i?2,  evidently  read  as  an  equivalent  of 

^  Their  rendering  of  the  last  clause,  Trorafiov^  diaaKeddaei^  kuI  r^^u 
aeiffei^,  is,  I  suppose,  simply  due  to  treating  p.xi  as  yiii),  while  the  two  verbs 
are  two  not  very  exact  paraphrases  of  v^npi,  one  of  them  perhaps  due  to  a  gloss. 

2  The  Complutensian  reads  Siaairepei^. 

^  Winer  {Gramm.  of  N.  T.  Greek,  §  59,  Sa,  86),  speaking  on  the  subject  of 
apposition,  refers  to  instances  of  nominatives,  where  a  diflferent  case  might 
have  been  expected.  He  compares  Jas.  iii.  8,  etc.,  and  also  Mark  vii.  19.  In 
the  latter  case,  there  seems  no  reason  why  the  acceptance  of  the  reading 
KaOapi^oov  should  tie  us  to  treat  the  clause  which  it  introduces  as  necessarily 
the  comment  of  the  Evangelist. 

*  Cf.  Nahum's  Ka^aKkvafio^  iropeca^,  "  rushing  deluge." 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  53 

The  construction  of  the  verse  will  hinge  upon  the  position 
of  the  full  stop  relatively  to  eTrrjpdT),  this  word  being  obtained 
by  pointing  ^XO":  as  though  b^tT'^.  If  the  full  stop  be  made  to 
follow  €7rrjp6r},  in  which  case  the  punctuation  will  agree  with 
that  of  the  Hebrew,  then,  understanding  <j>avTaaia  of  the  visible 
surface  of  the  sea,  we  get  the  idea  as  seen  by  the  Psalmist  of 
the  storm  "  which  lifteth  up  the  waves  thereof." 

Probably,  however,  so  far  as  the  Greek  version  is  concerned, 
the  full  stop  should  not  precede  eirrjpOt] ;  so  that  the  v-v/ro?  .... 
is  governed  by  ehcoKev.  In  support  of  this  it  may  be  noted  that 
Cod.  B  puts  a  colon  before  iinfjpOr) ;  in  Cod.  A,  which  is  dis- 
tinctly stichometrical,  the  stichus  runs,  eTrrjpOr}  6  rfkio<^  koI  rj 
aeXrjvrj  earij.  Cod.  b^  is  perhaps  indeterminate,  though  in  this 
the  line  begins  with  iirTjpOrj.  The  same  punctuation  is  also 
taken  by  the  Old  Latin  and  the  Syro-Hexaplaric,  and  we  may 
probably  accept  it  therefore  as  representing  the  view  of  the 
Greek  translator. 

The  four  cursives,  Codd.  28,  etc.,  translate  ^^b^"^  by  iv  tw 
avTo<t>6a\p.elv  {<je\,  as  though  they  had  TyHib^*)!!.  This  curious 
word  (for  which  see  Wisd.  xii.  14,  Ecclus.  xix.  5,  Acts  xxvii.  15), 
from  the  notion  of  looking  full  in  the  face,  carries  with  it  the 
notion  of  defiance  and  resistance.  The  phrase  D''?:^  Dlt  they 
paraphrase  by  e^ato-to?  ofju/Spo^,^  the  same  adjective  being  also 
used  by  them  for  the  D"^3.^  of  u  15.  Their  rendering  of  the  rest 
of  the  verse  is  somewhat  paraphrastic ;  I  am  inclined  to  think  that 
fjuel^cov  is  meant  to  reproduce  D1*^,  and  ^n*'!''  has  been  somehow 
passed  over.  As  for  eireaxev,  it  is  clearly  intransitive,  "to 
wait"  or  " pause," ^  and  so,  as  here  applied  to  the  sun,  would  be 
equivalent  to  "  remain  high  in  the  heavens."  Perhaps  therefore 
there  has  simply  been  a  confusion  between  b^U?^  and  ij^tZ?^ 

TT  T    • 

V.  12.  oXfc7(W(j6i9.  This  translation  simply  implies  the  change 
of  the  1  of  l^trs  into  *1.     The  verb  ^^^^  only  occurs  in  the 

^  Liddell  and  Scott  [s.  v.  i^alaio^)  cite  this  very  phrase  from  Xeu.  (Ec. 
5.  18. 

2  For  instances  of  this  meaning  in  the  LXX.,  see  Gen.  viii.  10,  12; 
2  Mace.  V,  25. 


54  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

Bible  in  Kal  and  in  an  intransitive  sense ;  we  may  therefore 
assume  that  the  translator  treated  the  verb  as  though  *\''y;^ri. 
Curiously  enough,  though  the  verb  *1V^  occurs  three  times  in 
the  Bible/  in  none  of  these  is  it  rendered  by  oXiyoco.^ 

The  cursive  MSS.  62,  86,  147,  read  er^epOrjaei  [Cod.  23  has 
iy6p6r](;,  i.e.  i^yepdT)^^  but  the  Hebrew  shows  that  this  is  a  simple 
error],  as  though  for  "^^Vri- 

V.  12.  KaTCL^ei^.  This  is  obviously  from  KaTayvv/jii,  not  Kardyco. 
So  it  is  taken  by  the  Syro-Hexaplaric  (]-kkLdZ)  ;  but  it  is 
curious  that  the  Old  Latin  texts  should  be  unanimous  in  taking 
it  from  the  latter,  e.g.  depones  (Tert.),  detrahes  (Jer.),  dejicies 
(Aug.),  etc.  We  find  Kardyw/JLL  standing  for  Jljin  in  2  Kings 
(Sam.)  xxii.  35,  and  for  ^"I^  in  Jer.  xlviii.  25.  In  the  present 
passage,  the  rendering  is  satisfactory  enough,  for  W"T,  besides 
its  special  meaning  of  threshing  corn,  is  used  also  for  crushing 
generally.  See  e.g.  Isa.  xli.  15,  Job  xxxix.  15.  Therefore  there 
is  no  need  to  suppose  that  the  translator  assumed  a  reading 
yi'^ri'l  from  the  root  VT),  for  that  would  be  to  assume  a  simul- 
taneous action  of  eye-mistake  and  ear-mistake,  which  is  hardly 
conceivable.  To  suppose  that  Kard^ec^  is  a  corruption  for 
iraTTjaec';  (cf.  Isa.  xxv.  10)  is  a  guess  as  improbable  as  it  is 
uncalled  for.^ 

V.  18.  Tov  Xpiarov  aov.  A  considerable  amount  of  textual 
authority  exists  for  reading  the  plural  tou?  Xpiaroix;  aov.  It 
stood  in  Jerome's  text,  it  is  read  by  Cod.  A  and  apparently  by 
b^^°,  by  twenty-two  cursives,  the  Complutensian  and  Aldine,  the 
Syro-Hexaplaric,  and  by  all  Old  Latin  texts.  Also  the  cursive 
MS.  23  reads  rou?  eVXe/crou?  aov. 

If  we  accept  the  view  spoken  of  in  the  preceding  chapter, 
according  to  which  the  ''Anointed"  means  the  Jewish  nation, 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  difference  between  the  singular  and 

^  Jer.  XXV.  19,  Zech.  xiii.  7,  Job  xiv.  21. 

^  We  have  it  once,  however,  rendered  oXiyoi  ylyveaOai,  Job  xiv.  21 ; 
"(^^^  by  oXtfyoo-T09  in  Mich.  v.  2;  and  -ix-sd  by  6\i<ya  in  Job  viii.  7,  2  Chron. 
xxiv.  24. 

'  The  four  cursives,  Codd.  23,  etc.,  translate  quite  literally  aXoycrei^. 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  55 

plural  is  apparent  rather  than  real.  Though  the  word  in 
Hebrew  is  singular,  yet  if  the  view  be  right  which  takes  it 
collectively,  the  tov<;  Xpiarov^  gov  is  but  of  the  nature  of  an 
explanation.  Of  the  varying  views  adopted  by  the  other  Greek 
versions,  it  is  not  needful  to  speak  again  here. 

V.  13.  jSaXei^.  The  Hebrew  here  is  in  the  past  tense,  and  so 
not  a  few  MSS.  of  the  Greek,  Codd.  Ab^^^'  «^  one  uncial  (xii.)  and 
twenty-one  cursive  MSS.  of  Holmes  and  Parsons,  and  the  Aldine 
edition  (eTreyLt-i/ra?,  Complutensian).  To  these  may  be  added  the 
Syro-Hexaplaric  (ZuisDjI),  and,  it  would  seem,  all  forms  of  the 
Old  Latin.  Considering,  too,  that  the  other  two  finite  verbs  in 
the  verse  are  past  tenses,  the  /SaXet?  is  at  any  rate  open  to 
considerable  suspicion. 

The  clause  in  the  Greek,  "Thou  wilt  cast  death  on  the 
heads  of  lawless  ones,"  is  curiously  unlike  the  Hebrew,  "  Thou 
didst  wound  (dash  off,  shatter)  the  head  from  the  house  of  the 
wicked  "  ;  yet  the  variations  are  obviously  due  to  mere  mechan- 
ical blunders.  The  word  Vr\72  is  properly  to  split  or  pierce, 
and  is  applied  to  the  head  in  Judges  v.  26  (np*l),  Psalm  Ixviii. 
22  (ti>t^*^).  Thus  paXkeiv  ddvaTov  would  be  to  strike  death  into, 
as  though  death  itself  were  the  destroying  weapon.  The  words 
^\i^*1  n*'!?^  are  clearly  transposed,  and  the  former  word  becomes 
r\yO.  Thus  the  Hebrew  is  treated  as  involving  a  double  accu- 
sative, "  Thou  didst  strike  into  the  head  a  deadly  weapon."  ^ 

The  cursive  MSS.  23,  62,  86,  147,  render  the  latter  half  of 
the  verse,  KaT6T6^6vaa<;'^  Ke<pa\a<;  avdpcoircov  vireprjcpdvcov  [this 
clause  is  omitted  by  Cod.  23],  eoj?  affvaaov  t?)?  6aXdaar)<;  Kaja- 
Bvaovrai,.     I  think  we  can  but  view  this  as  a  loose  paraphrase. 

—  i^7]yeipa<;.  In  Hi*l^,  the  inf.  Pi.  of  r\1^  to  "  lay  bare," 
the  translators  have  seen  the  root  Hl^  to  "wake  up."  They 
may  have  taken  it  as  the  Kal  IT)^,  o^,  as  there  is  only  one 
instance  in  the  Bible  of  the  Kal  being  transitive  (Job  xli.  2,  Kri), 

^  Some  writers  speak  of  /SaXet?  ....  Odvarov  as  being  the  translation  of 
ri^nio,  but  this  would  be  to  pass  over  the  word  n'nn. 

*  So  yno  is  rendered  in  Num.  xxiv.  8, 


56  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

it    may    be    safer    to    say    Hiphil    or    Piel,   presumably    the 
former.^ 

V.  18.  hea^iovfi  [T\0^\  The  1  being  changed  to  a  ^,  we  get  a 
Qoun  derived  from  the  root  "^D'',  the  common  word  for  "chas- 
tening," but  also  largely  overlapping  with  the  root  *^Dt^  "  to 
bind."  Thus  from  the  former  root  is  formed  the  common  Hiphihc 
noun  ^Ip'i?^  "  a  bond  " ;  see  e.g.  Ps.  ii.  3,  where  and  elsewhere  the 
LXX.  renders  it  by  hea^o^. 

—  BidylraXfjia.  This  word,  the  ordinary  representative  of 
Selah  in  the  LXX.  is  omitted  here  by  one  uncial  (xii.  of  Holmes 
and  Parsons)  and  five  cursive  MSS.  In  thirteen  cursives  and 
the  Aldine  text,  however,  as  well  as  in  the  text  of  Jerome, 
Selah  is  rendered  by  ek  TeXo<?^  (ek  to  Te\o<i  in  the  Compluten- 
sian) ;  and  in  Cod.  b^^°,  four  cursives,  and  the  Syro-Hexaplaric 
the  two  are  combined  ek  reXo^;  (]v>\n  m.  *^  Syro-Hexaplaric) 
^cdyfraXfjua. 

The  rendering  et9  riXo^  is  that  frequently  adopted  by  the 
Sexta  in  the  Psalms,^  and  by  Theodotion  in  Hab,  iii.  3.  It  is 
rather  curious  that,  in  the  present  passage,  Jerome  should  only 
have  been  cognisant  of  the  one  reading:  "ipsi  LXX.  rerum 
necessitate  compulsi ;  qui  semper  sela  interpretantur  diapsalma, 
nunc  transtulerunt  in  finem."  This,  it  will  be  noticed,  was 
tantamount  to  his  own  rendering  semper. 

V.  14.  iv  eK<TTdaeL  [VD?21].  In  what  way  this  extraordinary 
translation  has  been  arrived  at  must  be  considered  very 
doubtful. 

It  may  be  asked  first,  whether  there  are  any  good  grounds 
for  doubting  the  correctness  of  the  present  Greek  text.  It  has 
been  suggested  that  we  have  here  a  corruption  for  iv  eKTacrecj 
i.e.  a  stretching  out  of  hand  or  staff  to  deliver  a  blow. 

^  The  verb  i^rjt^eipio  occurs  in  the  Bible  in  the  active  voice  eighteen 
times,  of  which  fourteen  are  for  Hi.  and  four  for  Pi. 

"^  In  Smith's  Bible  Dictionary  {s.  v.  Selah)  the  rendering  eh  reXo's  is 
said  to  be  that  occurring  in  the  Alexandrian  MS.  in  Hab.  iii.  13.  This,  how- 
ever, is  not  so ;  Cod.  a.  reads  simply  hiaylraXima. 

3  See  e.g.  iii.  3,  Ixxvi.  4,  10  (Ixxv.  Gr.)j  cf.  Jer.  Ep.  29  ad  Marcellam, 
§6;  Vol.  I.  138. 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  57 

This  point  may  first  be  considered.  Against  the  theory 
clearly  may  be  urged  the  fact  that  no  such  variant  is  to  be 
found  in  any  Greek  MS.^ ;  that  iv  iKarda-ei-  certainly  underlies 
all  forms  of  the  Old  Latin,^  and  is  the  original  of  the  Syro- 
Hexaplaric  (IZoioAr^),  Armenian/  and  Arabic. 

Next,  it  may  be  asked,  what  evidence  does  the  LXX.  itself 
yield  as  to  the  use  of  a  word  eVracrt?  ?  We  find  it  in  some  MSS., 
including  Cod.  B,  in  Ezek.  xvii.  3  for  *^liS^,  where  the  idea  is  of 
the  long,  outstretched  wings  of  an  eagle.'*  Again,  in  Judg.  v.  22 
(last  clause),  several  MSS.  and  the  Aldine  text  read  ra?  v/Bpec^ 
iKardo-eco^  avrcov,  the  last  two  words  standing  for  V*)*^2l^<^.^  One 
fancies  that  eKTacreco^  should  be  read,  and  that  there  has  been  a 
blunder  between  "l^^t^  and  "^Ib^. 

Yet  once  again,  in  Judg.  xvi.  14,  we  read  in  some  texts 
(including  A  and  the  Complutensian,  but  not  B  and  the  Aldine, 
which  are  altogether  different)  /xera  rij^  iKaTd(T€co<;.  Here  four 
cursives  are  cited  by  Holmes  and  Parsons  as  reading  iKTd(Te(o<;. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  Hebrew  for  either  Greek  word  to  answer 
to.  Montfaucon  {HexapL,  in  loc.)  translates  "  in  ecstasi,"  as 
though  the  reference  was  to  the  deep  sleep  in  which  Samson 
was ;  those  who  advocate  the  latter  reading  understanding  it  of 
the  stretched  thread  of  the  web.^ 

To  these  may  be  added  Isa.  xi.  14,  where  Symmachus  and 
Theodotion  render  ni7tl>?0  by  eicTaoi^ :  "  Moab  shall  be  that  on 
which  they  put  forth  their  hands  "  (eTrl  Mcoa^  ....  Ta<;  %et)3a9 
iTTLffdXovacVj  LXX.),  with  which  may  be  compared  the  ;)^et/3 
eKTerafiePT)  of  Jer.  xxi.  4<J 

^  The  eV  Odfi^ei  of  the  Complutensian  is  the  only  variant  noted  by 
Holmes  and  Parsons. 

2  Thus  we  have  in  stupore  (Jer.),  in  stupore  mentis  (Aug.),  in  pavore 
(Mozarab.  et  al.),  in  alienatione  (Psalt.  Thomasii,  etc.). 

2  Communicated  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Malan. 

**  Cod.  A  has  €K(Trd(Tei,  but  the  other  reading  is  certainly  correct. 

^  Tromm,  copied  by  Biel  and  Schleusner,  wrongly  give  T"i«.  There  is  no 
trace  of  such  a  reading. 

^  I  do  not  find  any  evidence  to  justify  this  meaning. 

7  The  reference  to  eicTaai^  as  a  translation  of  n:DO  is  Judg.  xv.  4,  given  by 
Schleusner  {s.  v.)  is  one  I  entirely  fail  to  solve. 


58  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

The  case  for  iv  eKracrei  is  thus  not  a  very  strong  one.  There 
is  a  total  absence  of  external  evidence  in  its  favour,  and  of  the 
foregoing  references,  that  in  Isa.  xi.  14  alone  is  relevant;  and, 
besides  all  this,  such  a  phrase  as  SLaKoirrecv  iv  eKraaei  is  hardly 
a  probable  one.  We  must  maintain  then  that  sufficient  cause 
has  not  been  shown  against  the  existing  reading. 

If  then  iv  iKardaeb  be  accepted  as  the  true  reading,  it  may 
be  well  to  see  first  in  what  various  meanings  the  word  is  found 
in  the  LXX.,  etc. 
It  occurs  then 
(i)  With  the  meaning  of  fear,  whether 

[a)  The  feeling  or  state  of  fear,  as  for  n^"^n  (Gen.  xxvii. 
83) ;  IHQ  (1  Kings  [Sam.]  xi.  7)  Tn^^np  (2  Chr. 
XV.    5);    nyy).    (2    Chr.    xxix.    8);    n^;^    (Ezek. 
xxvii.  35). 
(h)  The  fear-producing  cause,  as  for  nS.*!  (Num.  xiii. 
33) ;  n?5tf  (Jer.  v.  30). 
(ii)  Y or  trovhle,  flurry,  ^juepLfjiva^  ?i^ior  TXTSn,  (4  Kings  iv. 
13) ;  ten  (Ps.  xxx.  23). 

(iii)  For  stupor  or  trance,  as  for  n?211il  (Gen.  ii.  21) ;  and^ 
in  an  unnamed  translation,^  apparently  for  the  stupor 
of  intoxication  in  Hab.  ii.  15,  where  the  Hebrew  is 

(iv)  For  anger.  It  represents  n?2tOtp?2  in  Hos.  ix.  7,  in 
Aquila  and  Symmachus.  [So  it  may  be  inferred 
from  the  Syro-Hexaplaric,  which  gives  the  rendering 
of  Aquila  and  Symmachus  for  the  last  two  words  of 
the  verse  as  ]5oZ  -  *  .t  <^  Jerome  {in  loc.)  gives 
iyKOTTjaL';  as  Aquila's  rendering,  but  perhaps  there 
was  a  difference  herein  between  the  first  and  second 
edition.]  Here  the  LXX.  has  fiavla.  It  occurs  also 
in  the  LXX.  of  Prov.  xxvi.  10,  due  apparently  to  the 
D'^'^li^  being  treated  as  though  DH'^IV. 

^  "Alibi  translatum  legi  ....  eKaracriu  ox^ov/j-et^rju,  id  est,  amentiam 
turbidam." — Jerome,  in  loc. 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  59 

The  ancient  versions,  I  believe  without  exception,  adopt  the 
rendering  either  of  stupor  or  of  fear,  so  that  the  Greek  would 
thus  be  equivalent  to  "  Thou  didst  pierce  ....  so  that  they  are 
stupified  with  fear."  Perhaps  a  more  natural  prima  facie  view 
of  the  Greek  would  be  to  make  it  mean  "  Thou  didst  pierce  in 
fury  .  .  .  ./'  a  meaning  for  which,  as  we  have  seen,  instances  can 
be  produced  from  Hellenistic  Greek. 

It  is  by  no  means  easy,  however,  to  see  how  either  of  these 
could  be  got  from  the  Hebrew.  The  suggestion  that  there  was 
a  confusion  with  some  derivative  of  the  verb  7172^  would  com- 

-     T 

mend  itself,  if  there  were  more  external  similarity  between  the 
words.  That  the  confusion  was  with  12^72  is  more  plausible,  but 
it  lacks  confirmatory  evidence.  Now  the  LXX.  renders  Jl^tDto 
in  Hos.  ix.  7,  8,  by  fiavia ;  and  It^  ^tOtZ?  in  Ps.  xl.  5  (xxxix.  5, 
LXX.)  by  fjLavia^  yfrevSeli; ;  though  the  former  means  "  provoca- 
tion," and  the  latter  '*  apostate  liars."  By  no  means  improbably 
there  was  a  confusion  in  both  cases  with  the  Chaldee  fc^IOt!?  "  to 

T  : 

be  mad."  Conceivably  the  translators  may  have  run  off  on  this 
word  in  the  passage  now  before  us. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  we  are  to  take  the  meaning  of  "  fury  " 
here,  perhaps  the  confusion  was  with  some  derivative  of  DtOiZ?. 

V.  14.  (TeKrOrjcrovTai,.  The  verb  (Tela)  occurs  most  often  by  far 
as  the  rendering  of  tjj^'l,  but  stands  for  '^^D  in  Amos  i.  14 ;  and 
we  find  o-vcraeia-fjLo^  for  n^i^D  (or  ri^V©  in  4  Kings  ii.  1,  Jer. 
xxiii.  19,  Nah.  i.  3.  We  may  translate  the  Hebrew  verb,  which 
is  in  Kal  in  the  passage  before  us,  "  sweep  on  like  a  tempest." 
The  Kal  is  indeed  intransitive  (see  Isa.  liv.  11,  Jon.  i.  11,  18), 
but  we  had  probably  better  assume  that  the  translators  treated 
the  verb  as  a  Pual  (^^^p*l).     Cf  Hos.  xiii.  3. 

—  iv  avTjj.  That  is,  iv  rfj  eKaTaaet.  This  is  obtained  by 
detaching  the  first  two  letters  of  the  next  word,  and  changing 
the  rn  into  HI  (i.e.  rf!l).  The  Bcavol^ova-i  represents  the 
remainder  of  the  word,  read  as  ^!^Q\  The  verb  TOD  is  trans- 
lated by  BiavouyeLv  also  in  Lam.  ii.  16,  iii.  45 ;  and  by  avo'v^eiv 
seven  times. 


60  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

V.  14.  ')(a\Lvov<^  avTcov.  This  rendering  is  as  puzzling  as  any 
in  the  chapter.  There  appear  to  be  no  good  grounds  for  doubting 
the  correctness  of  the  text.  No  various  reading  occurs  (for  the 
Ta<:  r)vla<;  of  the  Complutensian  cannot  be  considered  really 
different),  and  the  Syro-Hexaplaric  ("J5a^,L.^),  Armenian/  and 
Arabic  versions  agree,  as  well  as  all  the  various  forms  of  the 
Old  Latin.^  Clearly  if  the  text  is  corrupt,  the  corruption  is  a 
decidedly  ancient  one. 

The  Hebrew  word  here,  n^!^*'^;^,  is  indeed  a  air.  Xey.,  but 
the  verb  ^7^  occurs  no  less  than  eight  times,  and  the  cognate 
verb  tT'^  and  its  derivatives  are  still  commoner. 

The  most  reasonable  suggestion  is  to  suppose  a  confusion 
with  ni7^.  This  word,  properly  meaning  "bells,"  is  trans- 
lated ;^aX«^6z/  in  Zech.  xiv.  20,  presumably  from  being  supposed 
to  refer  to  tinkling  ornaments  on  the  harness  of  the  horses. 
Still,  even  if  this  view  be  taken  as  to  the  passage  before  us,  the 
meaning  of  the  Greek  is  far  from  obvious;  but  it  is  possible 
that  ;^a\iwt  may  mean  the  mouth  with  its  bit.  Thus  the  sense 
will  be,  "  They  will  open  their  bitted  mouth  like  a  beggar  eating 
furtively  and  under  difficulties."  Here  may  be  cited  as  relevant 
the  renderings  miorsus  and  ova  of  the  Old  Latin  given  in  the 
preceding  note. 

The  order  of  the  last  three  words  is  awkward,  but  it  may  be 
urged  that  it  follows  that  of  the  Hebrew.  It  is  true  that  the 
reading  tttcoxov  occurs  in  the  Complutensian  (co?  rpcoycop  tttcoxov 
iv  a7roKpv(f)a))  and  in  one  cursive  ;  but,  apart  from  this  exceeding 
scantiness  of  evidence,  it  is  clear  that  there  would  be  every 
temptation  to  alter  the  nominative  into  an  accusative,  and 
none,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  leading  the  other  way.     The  XdOpa 

^  Communicated  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Malan. 

2  The  renderings  in  Jerome  and  Augustine  {II.  cc.)  are  frenos  and  morsus 
respectively.  Thomasius's  Psalter  has  lora,  and  the  Mozarabic  Breviaiy  and 
some  of  the  MSS.  edited  by  Sabatier  have  ora.  This  last  must  be,  I  should 
suppose,  a  corruption  of  lora;  but,  at  any  rate,  it  shows  the  direction  in 
which  an  attempt  to  make  sense  would  proceed.  Sabatier  remarks  on  the 
rendering  in  Thomasius's  Psalter  "  vocem  lora  pro  ora"  but  a  glance  at  the 
Greek  shows  that  this  is  out  of  the  question. 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  61 

seems  quite  unaccountable  on  this  latter  view.  The  Syro- 
Hexaplaric  may  be  cited,  ^1?  U^mk)  *^-.l,  which  is  definite 
enough. 

Other  suggestions  which  have  been  made  seem  strangely 
far  fetched.  For  example/  that  the  translators  confused  the 
word  before  them  with  Jli^^'iVn  (see  Judg.  xiv.  19,  2  Sam.  ii.  21), 
and  that  they  rendered  it  by  '^XatW?,  of  which  ;)^aXtz^ov9  is  a 
corruption.  To  this  it  is  sufficient  to  say,  that  not  only  is  there 
not  the  slightest  trace  of  any  such  reading  having  ever  existed, 
but  that  ni^^^'^rr  means  exuvice,^  spoils  stripped  from  a  con- 
quered foe,  and  so  can  have  no  fitness  in  a  passage  where  the 
sense  would  clearly  be  that  of  opening  their  own  dress.  Or 
again,  to  suppose  that  the  translators,  in  downright  helplessness, 
simply  transliterated  the  Hebrew  word,  and  that  x^^'^^ov^  avjMv 
was  a  bold  attempt  to  educe  sense,  is  surely  incredible.^ 

In  the  four  cursives,  Codd.  23,  62,  86,  147,  the  verse  runs  i 
€^€SLKr]aa<;  fxera  BvvdfjU€co<;  <tov  tov<;  apxvyov^  t^^  a^apTO)\(bv 
7ov<;  ireiroiOoTas  iirl  rfj  avOa^eia  avrcov  eveKev  rov  KaTa4>a<yelp^ 
[roif^]  irTOixov^  XdOpa.  They  have  of  course  taken  i1?)25  ^s 
though  21^)21^  and  hvvajjii^  represents  TWO,  viewed  as  the 
external  symbol  of  power.  The  dfjbaprwXMv  is  less  obvious ;  but 
it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  translator  read  WD  as  D^!J"'"|Q.  This 
word  is,  it  is  true,  never  rendered  by  dfiaprcoXo^  in  the  LXX., 
but  Aquila,  in  his  second  edition,  so  rendered  the  word  in  Ezek. 
xviii.  10.^  The  tov^  TreTrot^ora?  must  represent  some  modifica- 
tion of  y^y/0"^ ;  and  Schleusner  suggests  iniD''.  Still,  ^  and  1 
are  dissimilar  enough;   and  not  only  do  we  never  find  *I1D 

^  So  Bos,  in  his  Prolegomena  to  his  edition  of  the  LXX.  (c.  3,  suhjin.). 

2  In  Judges  [l.  c),  the  LXX.  has  apparently  confused  the  word  with 
niD'brr. 

3  So  Lud.  Cappel.  {Comm.  et  not.  crit.  in  V.  T.  p.  114). 

^  Cod.  23,  by  error,  Ka-racfivr^e'Lv. 

5  The  verb  is  so  rendered  twenty-four  times  in  the  LXX,  besides  still 
more   frequent   instances   of  the  derived   substantives,   which   are  rendered 

^  See  Jerome  {comm.  in  loc.). 


62  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

rendered  as  above,  but  its  meaning  is  rather  that  of  looking 
forward,  or  expecting  ('irpoaSoKap,  iXTrl^eiv,  etc.,  LXX.),  than 
that  of  relying  on,  staying  oneself  on,  as  in  the  Greek  before  us. 
One  would  rather  fancy  the  translator  took  the  word  as  ll^D**. 
This  verb  is  generally  transitive,  but  we  find  it  intransitive  in 
1  Kings  xiii.  7  and  Prov.  xx.  28;  or  indeed  (though  no  case 
occurs  in  the  Bible)  we  might  point  it  as  a  passive  voice.  If 
there  were  sufficient  authority  to  justify  the  change  of  tf  and  D, 
one  would  be  tempted  to  suppose  they  read  ^^^D'',  i.q.  ^^V.tZ^*'. 
This  last  root  is  several  times  rendered  by  TreiroLOore^;  elvai  and 
the  like  [e.g.  Isa.  x.  20,  xxx.  12,  xxxi.  1),  besides  four  cases  in 
which  this  Greek  stands  for  Jl^tl?  (as  in  Isa.  xxxi.  1),  evidently 
confused  with  |^tp.  The  following  word  ^i^^^^iDnb  is  evidently 
omitted,    and    eVt    Trj    avOahela    avrcov    is    probably    simply 

DJn^!^'^7J^.  \h^]  somewhat  freely  interpreted,  the  idea  being 
that  of  arrogant  and  wanton  insolence. 

^'.  15.  eVtyStySa?.  Here  the  Kal  of  ^yi  has  been  treated  as 
identical  with  the  Hiphil,  which  occurs  below,  v.  19. 

—  rapdaaovTa^.  It  is  clear  that  the  translators  have  mis- 
read "^pn  as  though  D'''^?pn.  The  verb  "^?^n  has  been  rendered 
by  Tapdaaeiv  in  Ps.  xlvi.  4  (xlv.  4  Gk.) ;  and,  one  might  even 
add  in  v.  3,  for,  coming  in  such  close  proximity,  the  rendering 
of  ■^'^pn  by  rapdaaeadac  is  quite  suggestive  of  a  blunder 
between  H  and  n.     See  also  Lam.  i.  20,  ii.  11. 

V.  16.  i(f)vXa^d/jir]v.  This  careless  confusion  between  ^721^ 
and  "1?^t^  occurs  also  3  Kings  xi.  38,  Prov.  xix.  37. 

—  Koikia.  The  reading  KapSla  is  supported  by  the  Aldine 
text,  seventeen  of  Holmes  and  Parsons'  cursives,  and  the  Syro- 
Hexaplaric  (|^X),  and  it  may  be  noted  that  ]t^S  is  rendered  by 
Kap^ia  in  Prov.  xxii.  18.  Still  "[tp^  ^s  so  common  a  word,  and 
KoCkia  is  its  so  constant  translation,  that  there  is  no  reason  for 
disturbing  the  common  text. 

—  TTpoaevxv^'  Here  a  noun  comes  in  where  in  the  Hebrew 
is  the  verb  ^77!^.  The  origin  of  the  blunder  is  obvious,  though 
the  resulting  Greek  text  does  not  give  much  sense.     The  trans- 


The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm.  63 

lator  dropped  one  ^,  and  then  read  'h'^,  from  the  Chaldee  root 
^hl^  'Ho  pray"  (see  e.g.  Targ.  Onk.  Gen.  xviii.  22,  Ex.  xvii.  12). 

V.  16.  vTroKCLTcoBev.  The  Hebrew  "^TSHV)  in  this  passage  is 
simply  "where  I  stand,"  ''in  loco  meo."  The  LXX.,  though 
somewhat  too  literal,  clearly  understood  this  sense. 

-^  i^i^  fjiov.     This  is  somehow  got  from  *\?JSl,  but  it  is 

absurd  to  suggest,  as  has  been  done,  that  it  was  a  confusion  with 
*1tpb^,  because  happiness  is  the  basis  of  physical  well-being  I 
Possibly  there  might  have  been  a  confusion  with  I'l^tThJl  or 
'^■^^^tZ^^^,  that  is,  a  course  of  going,  and  so  one's  state.  More 
likely,  however,  is  it  that  something  connected  with  tT]]  was 
thought  of.  Twice  in  the  Bible  (2  Sam.  xiv.  19,  Mic.  vi.  10) 
this  appears  in  a  semi-Aramseanized  form,  ^^,  which  brings  us 
nearer.-^ 

There  does  not  seem  to  be  much  ground  for  doubting  the 
correctness  of  the  text,  though  laxv^  is  found  in  some  autho- 
rities. The  last-named  reading  is  found  in  six  (or  perhaps 
rather  five)  cursives  and  in  the  Complutensian ;  it  was  also  that 
found  in  Jerome's  text.^  On  the  other  hand,  the  great  mass  ©f 
MSS.  read  eft?,^  which  was  also  the  reading  of  Augustine 
Qiahitudo)  as  well  as  that  in  other  Old  Latin  texts^;  and  this 
further  has  the  support  of  the  Syro-Hexaplaric  (IZa^-LT)).^ 

In  Lam.  iv.  7,  Symmachus  renders  W^V  ^tyi^  by  TrvpporepoL 
Tr)v  e^LVj  where  the  Syro-Hexaplaric  has  the  same  word  as  in 
our  present  passage. 

The  four  cursive  MSS.  (23,  62,  86,  147)  have,  as  usual,  a 
totally   different   translation.      The   following   points   may   be 

1  In  face  of  the  other  reading  fVxv?,  it  may  be  worth  remarking  that  the 
noun  from  the  same  root,  n;xpw,  is  translated  /o-xv?  in  Job  xii.  16. 

2  Fortitudo  mea,  sive  ut  alibi  scriptum  reperimus,  r)  e^i^  fiov,  quod  nos 
possumus  dicere,  habitudo  mea;  diversa  quippe  exemplaria  reperiuntur. 
{Comm.  in  loc). 

^  One  cursive  reads  V7r6(naat<s. 

^  The  text  in  the  Mozarabic  Breviary  reads  virtus,  which  occurs  also  in 
Thomasius's  Psalter  and  some  other  texts. 

5  In  the  margin  of  the  Ambrosian  MS.  e^iafx^ov  is  written. 


64  The  Septuagint  Version  of  the  Psalm. 

noted.  We  find  iTa^dfjurjv  in  the  place  of  i(j)v\a^dfjb7)v,  the 
Hebrew  being  presumably  read  as  ''riptl?,^  though  it  is  perhaps 
possible  that  it^  like  the  ordinary  reading,  is  to  be  referred  to 
'V2'^.  The  T^h)^  now  disappears  altogether.  We  haye  Ip*^ 
rendered  by  rpofio^^  which,  the  character  of  the  version  in  these 
four  MSS.  being  considered,  is  probably  a  sort  of  Midrash  ; 
and  we  need  not  suppose  a  confusion  with  Ti?*^,  for  which  or 
n"Ti^*^,  Tp6fjLo<^  stands  six  times  in  the  LXX. 

The  latter  part  of  the  verse  (from  the  Ethnakh  onwards)  in 
these  four  MSS.  runs,  Tama  (j)vXd^rjg  ek  rjfjiipav  (or  iv  rj/jbipa) 
dXlyfreay^i  eTrayayelv  eVl  eOvo^^  TroXe/juovv  rov  Xaov  aov.  How  the 
first  two  words  can  be  got  from  the  Hebrew  I  quite  fail  to  see. 
The  eirayayelv  is  clearly  used  in  a  seemingly  intransitive  sense 
"  to  march  against  a  nation  that  wars  with^  Thy  people."  This, 
viewed  as  a  paraphrase,  can  be  got  from  the  Hebrew. 

V.  16.  TrapoLKLa^.  "  The  people  of  my  sojourning,"  i.e.  "  those 
among  whom  I  am  a  sojourner."  The  LXX.  of  course  saw  here 
in  the  Hebrew  1^11^*',  not  the  root  1^X  but  '^^^ ;  and  perhaps 
doubling  the  final  mem  of  DV>  they  made  the  next  word  into 

V.  17.  ^pco(76(o<;.  The  foregoing  ^pooacv  shows  that  instead 
of  taking  n7DD,  as  it  really  is,  from  the  root  ^h^,  the  translator 
foolishly  referred  it  to  7Db^,  as  though  it  were  nb^^?^  and  a 
feminine  equivalent  of  7D^5t?^. 

After  <^aTi/at9,  Cod.  A  and  one  of  Holmes  and  Parsons' 
uncials  (Cod.  xii.)  and  two  cursives  add  e^iXdaeco^;  avrcjv.  This 
word  only  occurs  elsewhere  in  the  LXX.  in  Num.  xxix.  11,  for 
D^*)Q5.     Clearly,   however,   i^iXdaeo)^   is   a   corruption    for   ef 

^  Taaaiv  stands  for  D"'ir  in  the  LXX.  nearly  forty  times,  including  one 
passage  in  the  present  chapter  {v.  19),  though  there  the  four  cursives  have 
KareaTTjffe. 

^  In  Cod.  23,  for  eV^  eduo^  .  .  .  .,  stands  e(f)evos  TroXejuov,  the  other  three 
reading  as  above.  The  Hebrew  makes  it  plain  that  the  latter  reading  must 
be  a  mere  corruption  of  the  preceding. 

^  The  construction  7ro\efie7v  Tiva  is  very  common  in  the  LXX.  See  e.g. 
Num.  xxi.  26,  Josh.  ix.  2,  and  often. 


The  Septuagiiit  Version  of  the  Psalm.  65 

Idaew^j  which  is  actually  the  reading  of  one  cursive.  This  has 
been  a  second  rendering  of  DT^D"^^,  treated  as  LDn^t^D"^!.  See 
Prov.  iii.  8. 

V.  19.  eh  (TwreXelav  [Di^'^b^S].  The  reading  co?  eXd^wv 
is  fonnd  in  three  cursives,  and  w?  iXdcpov  in  three  cursives,  and 
in  Theodoret  (In  Cant.  Cant.  c.  2 ;  Vol.  ii.  64).  It  is,  however, 
simply  a  conforming  to  the  Hebrew.  The  word  avvreXeia  is  of 
frequent  occurrence  in  the  LXX.,  and  ordinarily  for  some  deri- 
vative of  the  root  n^D ;  perhaps  n^75i!)  (Job  xxvi.  10)  would 
be  the  nearest.  The  meaning  is  doubtless,  "  He  will  set  my 
feet  in  a  state  of  perfect  safety,"  though  "  utter  destruction  "  is 
the  most  ordinary  meaning  in  the  LXX. 

The  four  cursives  (Codd.  23,  etc.)  render  the  word  by 
a(T<^aXet9,  either  from  the  same  general  idea  as  that  of  the 
current  text,  or  by  some  confusion  with  il^^'^Sl. 

—  ra  yy^rfka.  This,  save  for  the  omission  of  the  promo- 
minal  affix,  is  a  literal  translation  of  the  Hebrew.  The  four 
cursives,  Codd.  23,  etc.,  have  the  curious  Midrash  koX  iirl 
Tpa^rjkov^;  rwv  e')(dp(hv  /jlou.  This  same  translation  also  occurs 
in  Deut.  xxxiii.  29. 

—  rod  viKrjaat  [115^^?^ 7].  "That  I  should  prevail."  Con- 
sidering the  great  frequency  of  the  Hebrew  word  in  the  headings 
of  the  Psalms,  it  is  a  little  singular  that  we  should  have  here  a 
different  translation.  Whatever  root-meanings  the  verb  TO^ 
may  include,  the  meaning  of  power  or  innate  strength  is  clearly 
to  be  taken;  see  e.g.  1  Chron.  xxix.  11,  where  we  have  vUt]  for 
TOl  -'-^^  ^^®  ^^^-^^  cursives,  Codd.  23,  etc.,  after  eTTi^L^a  yue, 
stand  the  words  ra-^faa';  [Ka9r](Ta<;^  Cod.  23)  KareTravaaTo.  I 
am  strongly  inclined  to  doubt  whether  these  words  are  to  be 
taken  as  representing  the  Hebrew,  however  disguised.  Some 
have  suggested  that  some  form  from  Hl^  was  taken  for  n-!iwQ, 
but  this  does  not  take  us  very  far;  and  I  prefer  to  consider  the 
words  to  have  originated  as  a  remark  appended  by  some  scribe ; 
the  subject  of  the  verb  being  the  Prophet,  who,  his  task  finished, 
ceases.  This  is  made  more  probable  by  the  clause  not  being 
prefaced  by  any  connecting  particle. 


Date  Due 


^•^^^^ 


i^Ofif. 


^^  vs^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  ^wwwtejg 


■^ 


PRINTED 


IN  U.  S.  A. 


'^