: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 Lord, I have heard Thy message,^ 
 
 I have trembled, 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, 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^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^www tejg 
 
 ■^ 
 
 PRINTED 
 
 IN U. S. A. 
 
'^